Are the physical forms of God real?

[Terese]

Like Mahavishnu, his blue form with disc, conch, lotus and mace, is this physical form real? Likewise Shiva, Brahma and all other gods. Or are they images to focus on our devotion to God? Are their lokas real? i mean no offence. just a question i'd like to be answered.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What is real and what is unreal? As George-Ananda will say, only Brahman is real.

 

[Terese]

Your answers are always lovely and full of wisdom Aup

 

[George-ananda]

Got to love Aup's answer.

Like Mahavishnu, his blue form with disc, conch, lotus and mace, is this physical form real?

Well, to give you a more direct answer I would say that is awash in symbolism that all have meaning.

Likewise Shiva, Brahma and all other gods. Or are they images to focus on our devotion to God?

I think the answer is that they are images to focus on our devotion to God as you say. God responds to all his names and forms so it is not important which god you revere.

Are their lokas real?

Lokas I take as spiritual planes that are real where beings reside. We reside on the astral plane for awhile after we die.

 

[Aupmanyav]

As they say here 'I did not get my white hair by sitting in the sun' (Dhoop mein bal safed nahin kiye hain).

 

[Terese]

Got to love Aup's answer.


Well, to give you a more direct answer I would say that is awash in symbolism that all have meaning.


I think the answer is that they are images to focus on our devotion to God as you say. God responds to all his names and forms so it is not important which god you revere.


Lokas I take as spiritual planes that are real where beings reside. We reside on the astral plane for awhile after we die.

What beings? like devas?

 

[psychoslice]

Myself I feel that they are metaphorical, wonderful stories, but still metaphorical, and whatever you get from the stories is up to you, its your level of consciousness that see's what is.

 

[George-ananda]

What beings? like devas?

That would be the idea. I was getting at places where all non-physical beings reside; like us after death even. But devas are on a higher plane/loka than most of us.

 

[Valjean]

I'd say, Devas are real if you choose to realise them, but they are not Real. As Aup said, only Brahman is (objectively) Real.

Waking-state is a dream level. In this level the whole of our reality is an illusion created in our own minds.
If you believed in a blue, four-armed Vishnu -- or any other deity -- as you believe in cars and trees, He would be as real, to you, as said car or tree.

 

[Terese]

I'd say, Devas are real if you choose to realise them, but they are not Real. As Aup said, only Brahman is (objectively) Real.

Waking-state is a dream level. In this level the whole of our reality is an illusion created in our own minds.
If you believed in a blue, four-armed Vishnu -- or any other deity -- as you believe in cars and trees, He would be as real, to you, as said car or tree.

I have a Vishisht-advaita viewpoint to reality. I don't agree with the first sentence. Second makes sense to me though, and i agree.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Terese ji

Like Mahavishnu, his blue form with disc, conch, lotus and mace, is this physical form real? Likewise Shiva, Brahma and all other gods. Or are they images to focus on our devotion to God? Are their lokas real? i mean no offence. just a question i'd like to be answered.

here you pose the most difficult question to answer , ...because you use the term ''real'' .....''is this physical form real ?''

first we have to realise that our understandig of reality is very limited , we think in terms of physical matter bound by time , Mahavisnu is beyond such limitations however that does not make him unreal , firstly we know from shastra that he can manifest at will , whilst symultaniously he pervades all space and time , it is only through such manifestations that we can begin to understand his unlimited nature , so if one were asking is this or any one manifestation the reality , the answer would have to be no , as each manifestation is but a minute portion of his true splendor but that does not render that manifestation unreal ,

just recently we discussed the universal form displayed by Krsna to Arjuna on the battle feild of Kurukshetra, ...chapter 11 of the Bhagavad Gita , ...here Arjuna asks Krsna to display his universal form , which Krsna does , but inorder for Arjuna to see this divine form he grants Arjuna divine sight , ...even with this boon of divine sight Arjuna is still overwhelmed by this divine form , .....

so to the question of is this form real , ...the answer must be yes , but the understanding must be that this form is just a partial manifestation of the supreme , ..... and are the Lokas real ? , ....of course , ...but again we must streach our comprehension a little to even begin to understand the existance of these Lokas , as due to our limited human form we think only in terms of destinations , of physical places being here or there , ....we find it hard to think that prehaps these Lokas too are not bound by space and time , ....as they like the supreme are eternal , self existing and all pervasive , .....
just as we our selves can reside in numerous states of mind , but just because we canot see a state of mind , can we say that it exists or does not exist ?

many schools of Dharmic thought vew this (physisal relm) that we think real to be illusuory , therefore all in their own ways explore the self existing , the eternal , the unborn , ...but none in this conditioned state can fully comprehend the true nature of the absolute , ....it is only through contemplation and devotion that we begin to depart from this physical relm and catch glimpses of true reality , ...(that is what makes a devotee a devotee , ....)

 

[Valjean]

Now you've got me confused, Terese. You're first post seems to indicate that you believe the Gods are real, but if you're an advaiti, then you believe the Gods and all the rest of the visible world are illusions.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram valjean ji

I'd say, Devas are real if you choose to realise them, but they are not Real. As Aup said, only Brahman is (objectively) Real.
.

it could of course be the other way arround , .....Devas only appear to be unreal when we choose to blind ourselves to their existance , this we do by overly focusing upon the self , ....

 

[Terese]

Now you've got me confused, Terese. You're first post seems to indicate that you believe the Gods are real, but if you're an advaiti, then you believe the Gods and all the rest of the visible world are illusions.

I'm very sure that the world is very real, God's manifestation, not an illusion, as per Ramanuja proposed.

 

[Terese]

namaskaram Terese ji



here you pose the most difficult question to answer , ...because you use the term ''real'' .....''is this physical form real ?''

first we have to realise that our understandig of reality is very limited , we think in terms of physical matter bound by time , Mahavisnu is beyond such limitations however that does not make him unreal , firstly we know from shastra that he can manifest at will , whilst symultaniously he pervades all space and time , it is only through such manifestations that we can begin to understand his unlimited nature , so if one were asking is this or any one manifestation the reality , the answer would have to be no , as each manifestation is but a minute portion of his true splendor but that does not render that manifestation unreal ,

just recently we discussed the universal form displayed by Krsna to Arjuna on the battle feild of Kurukshetra, ...chapter 11 of the Bhagavad Gita , ...here Arjuna asks Krsna to display his universal form , which Krsna does , but inorder for Arjuna to see this divine form he grants Arjuna divine sight , ...even with this boon of divine sight Arjuna is still overwhelmed by this divine form , .....

so to the question of is this form real , ...the answer must be yes , but the understanding must be that this form is just a partial manifestation of the supreme , ..... and are the Lokas real ? , ....of course , ...but again we must streach our comprehension a little to even begin to understand the existance of these Lokas , as due to our limited human form we think only in terms of destinations , of physical places being here or there , ....we find it hard to think that prehaps these Lokas too are not bound by space and time , ....as they like the supreme are eternal , self existing and all pervasive , .....
just as we our selves can reside in numerous states of mind , but just because we canot see a state of mind , can we say that it exists or does not exist ?

many schools of Dharmic thought vew this (physisal relm) that we think real to be illusuory , therefore all in their own ways explore the self existing , the eternal , the unborn , ...but none in this conditioned state can fully comprehend the true nature of the absolute , ....it is only through contemplation and devotion that we begin to depart from this physical relm and catch glimpses of true reality , ...(that is what makes a devotee a devotee , ....)

Thank you for your answer.

 

[ratikala]

I'm very sure that the world is very real, God's manifestation, not an illusion, as per Ramanuja proposed.

Jai Jai Ramanujacharya ji

 

[Aupmanyav]

I have a Vishisht-advaita viewpoint to reality. I don't agree with the first sentence. Second makes sense to me though, and i agree.

But Terese, Lord Vishnu/Lord Krishna/Lord Rama is Brahman. I do not see where the problem is?

 

[Terese]

But Terese, Lord Vishnu/Lord Krishna/Lord Rama is Brahman. I do not see where the problem is?

I know Aup. I think there is confusion here. ''Waking-state is a dream level. In this level the whole of our reality is an illusion created in our own minds.''. This is what i disagree with. that reality is an illusion. If you mean the actual first sentence of Valjean's post, yes, i agree.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You are right, Terese. If Brahman is at the back of the perceived, then the perceived should be real (because we take Brahman as real). The only problem is about the form in which it is perceived. Take out the form and it is all Brahman.

1. Yatha, saumya, ekena mrut-pindena sarvam mrunmayam vijnatam syat vacarambhanam vikaro nama-dheyam, mruttiketi eva satyam.

"If you know what earth is made of, you also know at the same time what anything that is made of earth also is made of, because all the articles that are manufactured out of earth are constituted of earth essentially. So, I give you an example of how many things can be known by the knowledge of one thing. Pot, tumbler, plate, etc., and various articlesof this kind manufactured out of clay are clay only, in reality. So, if you know what clay is, you know what a clay tumbler is, a clay plate is, a clay glass is, etc. Do you understand what I say? Yes! Because they are only shapes taken by that substance called clay. And, what you mean by an earthen pot is only a name that you have given to a shape taken by the earth."

1. Yatha, saumya, ekena loha-manina sarvam lohamayam vijnatam syat, vacarambhanam vikaro nama-dheyam lohamiti eva satyam.
2. Yatha, saumya, ekena nakha-nikruntanena sarvam karsnayasam vijnatam syat, vacarambhanam vikaro namadheyam karsnayasam iti eva satyam, evam, saumya, sa adeso bhavatiti.

"So is the case with certain other things. You take a nugget of gold, and you know a nugget of gold can be cast into various shapes of ornaments. It can be a necklace; it can be a ring; it can be anything. Now, if you know what gold is really, what gold is made of essentially, you will also know what a gold necklace is made of, what a gold ring is made of, etc., because the gold ring, gold necklace and the like are gold only in their essence. These are only shapes, forms taken by the essence which is the substance, gold.

"If you take a pair of scissors, for instance, made of iron, you know what it is made of. It is made of iron. Then you would also know what anything else made of iron is. It may be a hammer; it may be a nail; it may be an axe; it does not matter what it is, all these things are the shapes taken by the same iron which is in the pair of scissors.
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/chhand/ch_2.html

 

[Terese]

What i'm trying to say is are the physical forms of God real? I know Brahman is everything. But just want to know the opinions of other Hindus.