vishnulakshmi
Member
who is dhumavati ???
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where did you hear this name?who is dhumavati ???
some india say she is unlucky goddess kali demon wife and i see in googleWhere did you hear this name?
She must be Parvati the tamasic devi deity by a local name.some india say she is unlucky goddess kali demon wife and i see in google
also know aalakshmiShe must be Parvati the tamasic devi deity by a local name.
Who is aalakshmi?also know aalakshmi
Who is aalakshmi?
There is no scientific basis for the existence in reality of anti-god or anti-goddess. All gods and goddesses must exit in the guna conscioiusness triad of sattvic, rajasic and tamasic triangular entity. So if there is a fearsome aspect to a god or goddess it can only exist on its own as a highly tamasic deity.Alakshmi ("not Lakshmi") is the opposite of Lakshmi. She is everything Lakshmi is not. They cannot and do not remain in the same place.
Alakshmi - Wikipedia
There is no scientific basis for the existence in reality of anti-god or anti-goddess. All gods and goddesses must exit in the guna conscioiusness triad of sattvic, rajasic and tamasic triangular entity. So if there is a fearsome aspect to a god or goddess it can only exist on its own as a highly tamasic deity.
My reasoning is that if God is the Creator and Preserver, he would not create an anti God or antigod to destroy what He has created because that would defeat the purpose of Creation quite evidently.I didn't make the belief, I only report.
My reasoning is that if God is the Creator and Preserver, he would not create an anti God or antigod to destroy what He has created because that would defeat the purpose of Creation quite evidently.
That is a reasonable proposition, my point was there is no need to invent the concept of anti-God (Satan) or anti-god for the lesser gods and goddesses in Hinduism. The satanic concept is Abrahamic in aetiology. In Hinduism we explain everything (bar the Supreme God) on the gunas in Nature.I think what it is, is a metaphor for opposites. For example, you can't have good fortune and riches (material and spiritual) where there is poverty and misery. Likewise, when you have good fortune and are not poor you're probably not miserable and unhappy. Misfortune and misery cannot exist where there is good fortune and joy. So this morphed into two goddesses of opposite traits.
I've read the myth that Lakshmi and Saraswati "fight" and cannot be together. The reasoning is that when one has a great deal of wealth, wisdom usually goes out the window, or at the very least, one no longer cares for learning; when one is artistic, one is usually poor. That may have been true 2,500 years ago but I don't think it's true today. Maybe I'll put pictures or statues of Maa Saraswati and Maa Lakshmi together and see what happens. Maybe I'll learn how to invest wisely. Seriously, I think it's a matter of one's perspective. Say what you will about Donald Trump, but the man has the knowledge of making money.
That is a reasonable proposition, my point was there is no need to invent the concept of anti-God (Satan) or anti-god for the lesser gods and goddesses in Hinduism. The satanic concept is Abrahamic in aetiology. In Hinduism we explain everything (bar the Supreme God) on the gunas in Nature.
In that case, there is no need to manufacture a God too, but for you Krishna is the Paramatman. Hindus have various beliefs and every Hindu should respect the belief of other Hindus. Even atheist Hindus like me must do that. That is the Hindu rule to avoid strife. One may have any personal belief (within the limits).That is a reasonable proposition, my point was there is no need to invent the concept of anti-God (Satan) or anti-god for the lesser gods and goddesses in Hinduism. The satanic concept is Abrahamic in aetiology. In Hinduism we explain everything (bar the Supreme God) on the gunas in Nature.
There is no need to manufacture something that does not exist: God exists for me.In that case, there is no need to manufacture a God too, but for you Krishna is the Paramatman. Hindus have various beliefs and every Hindu should respect the belief of other Hindus. Even atheist Hindus like me must do that. That is the Hindu rule to avoid strife. One may have any personal belief (within the limits).
i know
In that case, there is no need to manufacture a God too, but for you Krishna is the Paramatman. Hindus have various beliefs and every Hindu should respect the belief of other Hindus. Even atheist Hindus like me must do that. That is the Hindu rule to avoid strife. One may have any personal belief (within the limits).