Who is our True God? (Hinduism)

[Riverwolf]

The truth is in the Adithya Hridyam, the eternal esoteric secret of Sanatana Dharma.

Eshhah brahmaa cha vishhnushcha shivah skandah prajaapati. Mahendro dhanadah kaalo yamah somo hyapaam pati. 8

He is Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Skanda, Prajapati. He is also Mahendra, kubera, kala, yama, soma and varuna.

He is all our true God. From the traditional point of view there is no contradiction with the Vedas and the Adithya Hridhyam.

This is the truth.

Again, that's a Smriti text, so it's no more authoritative than other Smriti texts that say Surya is subordinate to other Gods.

And, again, that earlier verse seems to be referring to an "eternal secret", not an "esoteric secret of Sanatana Dharma." You still haven't addressed that.

That's the difference between the traditional scholars and western scholars outside the tradition. Soma is a god of the pleroma, a ray of Savithru mandala.

If western scholars wants to study the Vedas study it in its own milieu and not by misrepresenting it. Yes it belongs to the people of the world but if you people misrepresent things in the tradition we will not tolerate it.

It's what's observed. Nothing more. There is no, and there has never been, deliberate misrepresentation by scholars.

Just mere linguistics is not enough to understand the Vedas and hence therefore we don't have a common ground for our arguments. I told you I am coming from the numinous metaphysical thinking and not your linguistic way of understanding the Vedas.

You guys will never understand it if you study it only from a linguistic perspective, that's why no one takes the Vedas seriously and no one knows the true wisdom hidden in it.

Linguistic understanding can lead to further insights, which contradict what you have said. This means, what you have is no more the end-all Truth than the idea that only Aditi is the True God.

You have presumed that Humans are not divine, We are divine, Upanishads say we can know the truth, we all are Brahman. Revelations gives you esoteric knowledge something which scholars outside the tradition do not have and hence they do not understand the Vedas completely.

I never said humans are not divine. Have you seen my signature, my Lord?

That's your opinion. To which god of Hindu I have shown disrespect. The traditional scholars have revived Hinduism to a much firmer ground.

You have not disrespected Gods; you have disrespected the other traditions.

Fixing means adding knowledge and making it more coherent and not dividing it like you are trying to do. We all are One.

I am not dividing anything. I have observed.

Fixing means finding problems and solving them.

Making them more coherent is what led to Puranic literature, which you are not interested in.

Anyone cannot talk about Brahman like that. We have methods to falsify and see the gods of the Vedas with our own epistemological approaches. This is the kind of misinformation and disorganisation that has creeped into hinduism and no one takes it seriously. Its time to fix it. Our claims should be based on tradition and not on our own individual opinions.

There is no disorganization; it's simply complex. My beliefs are not based only on my individual opinion (which all beliefs are based on, BTW), but also on what the Sages have taught. Simply by virtue of being tradition does not automatically make something correct: that's another logical fallacy: argument from tradition.

If you have methods, please share them.

 

[Vinayaka]

You might know that but what about the common man.

Who is this common man you speak of? Where can I meet him? Or is he a myth, like 'they'? You know, 'they' don't know anything. Personally, I have found as much ignorance some days in the 'learned' man as the common man.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

Can anyone provide a list of words which are used to mean god in Vedas.

 

[Pleroma]

Simply by virtue of being tradition does not automatically make something correct: that's another logical fallacy: argument from tradition.

Its not argument from tradition, its argument from authority and its highly unlikely that it is wrong.

The scholar is Devudu Narasimha Shastry.

Devudu Narasimha Shastry (1896-1962) was a colourful personality and a polymath. He was a thinker and writer of unusual and extraordinary merit. A forceful speaker, he was equally a persuasive writer, and an indefatigable enthusiast for reformation and revolution within the ambit of tradition. He was chosen for the honour of being ‘worshipped’ in the ceremonial way, as one among the hundred traditional scholars, by the first president of India, Babu Rajendra Prasad, in the sacred Varanasi. He hailed from a family of royal priests in Mysore, but the stature that he had as a traditional scholar was acquired by him as a result of his systematic study of the shastras for 20 years.

Popularly known by his pen name ‘Devudu’, was not merely a great writer but like the seers who had the Vedas in vision, he gave visual shape to the Upanishadic verses in his transcendental work.

These are his ideas and his works are Mahadarshana, Mahabrahmana, Mahakshtriya. He has also written a complete treatise on Yoga Vashishta.

Next time when you make arguments just be careful. This is tradition and this is what defines Hinduism.

Please don't waste my time like saying I'm disrespecting other traditions.

Didn't Krishna said in Bhagvad Gita that even if you worship other gods it reaches me in the end?

stop making silly arguments and stop requesting me to define such simple self evident words like Sanatana Dharma. What is your point exactly? Don't waste my time by just trolling please.

 

[Riverwolf]

Can anyone provide a list of words which are used to mean god in Vedas.

Typically, the word is Deva, which literally translates to "Shining One." The prefix "Maha" can be added to create "Mahadeva", which means "Great God."

There's also groups of Gods.

Adityas = Sons of Aditi. Aditi is the Great Mother of the Vedic pantheon.
Aswins = Twin Gods of Medicine.
Maruts = Storm Gods, often associated or identified with
Rudras = Followers of Rudra. Rudra is one of the eminent Storm Gods of the Vedas (distinct from Indra, King of the Gods), who is legendary not only for his kindness, but also his wrath. He later became identified with the God Shiva.

I should also point out the word Asura. While nowadays this word refers almost exclusively to demons, originally the word referred to another type of Deity. Lord Varuna, for example, is an Asura. I'm honestly not entirely sure what the distinction between the Asuras and the Devas originally was, but I think the idea was that the Devas dealt with matters of nature, while Asuras dealt with matters of humanity. Don't take my word on that, though; you should research the matter yourself.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Also the Vasus. Yajurveda Samhita says that there are 33 gods; 11 in each of the three layers of reality. Brahmanas & Upanishads mention 8 or 12 Vasus, 12 Adityas, 11 Rudras + Indra & Prajapati. Also the two Ashwins.

 

[Riverwolf]

Its not argument from tradition, its argument from authority and its highly unlikely that it is wrong.

Actually, that's also a logical fallacy.

The scholar is Devudu Narasimha Shastry.

Never heard of him.

These are his ideas and his works are Mahadarshana, Mahabrahmana, Mahakshtriya. He has also written a complete treatise on Yoga Vashishta.

Next time when you make arguments just be careful. This is tradition and this is what defines Hinduism.

Except that it goes against the definitions provided by tons of others. I am generally careful in my arguments.

Please don't waste my time like saying I'm disrespecting other traditions.

Didn't Krishna said in Bhagvad Gita that even if you worship other gods it reaches me in the end?

But He didn't say that there was one True God, as opposed to others. If you're calling a God a True God, then by extension, you're calling other Gods false. That is how the English word "true" works.

If that is not your intention (as is evident at this point), then use a different term. The one you're using is confusing.

stop making silly arguments and stop requesting me to define such simple self evident words like Sanatana Dharma. What is your point exactly?

I know what Sanatana Dharma means. What I want to know is how you derived that from that verse, because the word "Dharma" is not even in the verse, let alone connected with the incidence of "Sanatana."

 

[Riverwolf]

Also the Vasus. Yajurveda Samhita says that there are 33 gods; 11 in each of the three spheres layers of reality. Brahmanas & Upanishads mention 8 or 12 Vasus, 12 Adityas, 11 Rudras + Indra & Prajapati. Also the two Ashwins.

Ah, yes, I forgot about them. (Honestly, I shouldn't have; Vasudeva, anyone?)

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

Typically, the word is Deva, which literally translates to "Shining One." The prefix "Maha" can be added to create "Mahadeva", which means "Great God."

There's also groups of Gods.

Adityas = Sons of Aditi. Aditi is the Great Mother of the Vedic pantheon.
Aswins = Twin Gods of Medicine.
Maruts = Storm Gods, often associated or identified with
Rudras = Followers of Rudra. Rudra is one of the eminent Storm Gods of the Vedas (distinct from Indra, King of the Gods), who is legendary not only for his kindness, but also his wrath. He later became identified with the God Shiva.

I should also point out the word Asura. While nowadays this word refers almost exclusively to demons, originally the word referred to another type of Deity. Lord Varuna, for example, is an Asura. I'm honestly not entirely sure what the distinction between the Asuras and the Devas originally was, but I think the idea was that the Devas dealt with matters of nature, while Asuras dealt with matters of humanity. Don't take my word on that, though; you should research the matter yourself.

I know some of what you've written. Shouldn't Mahadeva mean "great shining one"? 'Asura' is the opposite of 'Sura' and means "not drunk or swallowed" or something like that(you might know this from the myth of churning of the milky ocean). Actually no thing is clearly called god in Vedas, this whole problem is because of wrong translation of the word 'deva'.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

We're trafficking in translations anyway. Some Gods are clearly called out as the Supreme Being, or close to it.

 

[Pleroma]

Actually, that's also a logical fallacy.

I said its more likely that it is correct and not a fact as though we should abandon everything and start following this. Its left to the individuals to decide. You do realize that I don't accept anything without testifying it first.

Never heard of him.

That's why Hindus don't see Hiranyagarbha and don't take him seriously.

But He didn't say that there was one True God, as opposed to others. If you're calling a God a True God, then by extension, you're calling other Gods false. That is how the English word "true" works.

Nothing exists apart from the Agnishoma mandala and its connection with the unity. Got it?

If that is not your intention (as I suspect it may not be at this point), then use a different term. The one you're using is confusing.

That was not my intention, my previous statement is my main intention.

I know what Sanatana Dharma means. What I want to know is how you derived that from that verse, because the word "Dharma" is not even in the verse, let alone connected with the incidence of "Sanatana."

I think we both are using different definitions of Sanatana Dharma.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

A test:

What are the agni mandala, the surya mandala, and the chandra(soma) mandala? Who are their presiding deities? How are the deities arranged in each? What is their union? What is their meaning?

Through which class of hymns are they invoked? Who performs this?

What is the relation between the 7 tongues of agni, the 7 meters, the 7 svargas, the 7 pranas, 7 paridhi, the 7 horses of Surya, the 7 rivers, the aswins/ushas and the 49 fires?

What is the pravargya of the taittirya aranyaka?


Why is the chandra mandala also called as the indu mandala? What is the twofold significance of this?

How are these mandalas effected by the individual practitioner?

What is the sarvamedha?

What is the inner meaning of the yajna?

Please answer these concisely as soon as possible so as to avoid the appearance of looking overmuch outside your own knowledge.

Based on your responses, I, and perhaps others, can decide how much is my 'incredulity' in having difficulties with your claims and how much is just an egotrip based on a little bit of knowledge, viewed from a particular angle on the Vedas rather than taken as a whole.


Admittedly, you have good insight on some topics which are valuable to this forum:

• Deities as rays proceeding from the bindu at the heart of the mandala.
• The essential union of agni & soma, very much related to this concept of bindu
• Gayatri as the female form of Purush (but go further!)

I would like to see you post more on Vedic insights, but without the preachiness and arrogance.

 

[Pleroma]

A test:

What are the agni mandala, the surya mandala, and the chandra(soma) mandala? Who are their presiding deities? How are the deities arranged in each? What is their union? What is their meaning?

Through which class of hymns are they invoked? Who performs this?

What is the relation between the 7 tongues of agni, the 7 meters, the 7 svargas, the 7 pranas, 7 paridhi, the 7 horses of Surya, the 7 rivers, the aswins/ushas and the 49 fires?

What is the pravargya of the taittirya aranyaka?


Why is the chandra mandala also called as the indu mandala? What is the twofold significance of this?

How are these mandalas effected by the individual practitioner?

What is the sarvamedha?

What is the inner meaning of the yajna?

Please answer these concisely as soon as possible so as to avoid the appearance of looking overmuch outside your own knowledge.

Based on your responses, I, and perhaps others, can decide how much is my 'incredulity' in having difficulties with your claims and how much is just an egotrip based on a little bit of knowledge, viewed from a particular angle on the Vedas rather than taken as a whole.

I am a student like everyone and I have told you that I am a layman like everyone in the beginning itself. I don't have a guru if I had a guru like you people have then even I would had a formal study like you people. Everyone cannot know about everything. Gosh I don't even know complete Sanskrit.

I have even told you that these are not my ideas and given the name of the scholar.

I did performed Sun Salutations for one year and I am researching it and I think there is some truth in it.

The main aim of this thread was not to show that I have more personal knowledge than everyone, the aim of this thread is to stimulate intense research into our ancient Wisdom.

Your request for the taittirya aranyaka can be found here.
http://rnarayanaswami.net/yogapdf/SURYANAMASKAR.pdf

I did only Akhanda Upasana means to worship the Agnisoma Mandala in the holistic form and not as individual mandalas because I am only interested in Brahman not in the manifested or the unmanifested. We should conquer both.

I very well know what I am talking about and I have made a sincere effort to understand it.

As to the idea of Hiranyagarbha being the master of Agnishoma Mandala that is not my idea, that's the idea of Devudu Narasimha Shastry and perhaps you people should read his books instead of piling a series of tests on me, failing these tests doesn't mean Hiranyagarbha is not our true God.

Admittedly, you have good insight on some topics which are valuable to this forum:

• Deities as rays proceeding from the bindu at the heart of the mandala.
• The essential union of agni & soma, very much related to this concept of bindu
• Gayatri as the female form of Purush (but go further!)

I would like to see you post more on Vedic insights, but without the preachiness and arrogance.

Yes, that's all what I have, insights. That shows I'm in the right track, thank you very much.

 

[En'me]

I have a question.

Are you suggesting that above demi-gods such as Indra, Vishnu, Shiva, Bramha, Surya, Yama&Yami, etc. are gods such as Narayana, Purusha, etc, above which is Hiranyagarbha, the one true god?

 

[Riverwolf]

I know some of what you've written. Shouldn't Mahadeva mean "great shining one"? 'Asura' is the opposite of 'Sura' and means "not drank or swallowed" or something like that(you might know this from the myth of churning of the milky ocean). Actually no thing is clearly called god in Vedas, this whole problem is because of wrong translation of the word 'deva'.

Indeed.

Heck, the word "God" is often not even attributed to any of the Gods in the various religions' native tongues.

Heck, it could probably be argued that the "Devas" (Shining Ones) originally referred to the stars.

 

[Riverwolf]

I said its more likely that it is correct and not a fact as though we should abandon everything and start following this. Its left to the individuals to decide. You do realize that I don't accept anything without testifying it first.

I'd hope so.

No authority is perfect. I've read many Sages in my studies, and I have great respect for nearly all of them. However, they still end up saying things I disagree with.

That's why Hindus don't see Hiranyagarbha and don't take him seriously.

The teachings of one man are not enough for me to change my entire belief system, just on the merit that he said so. I imagine the same is true of most Hindus.

Nothing exists apart from the Agnishoma mandala and its connection with the unity. Got it?

That was not my intention, my previous statement is my main intention.

Okay.

Now, what is the Agnisoma Mandala, and what is its relation to the Vedas? Also, why is there nothing on the internet about it?

I think we both are using different definitions of Sanatana Dharma.

...no, we're not. The term "Sanatana Dharma" does not appear in that verse.

Here's how the translation I read gave the verse:

Hey rama, Hey dear Rama,, be pleased to hear,
That which is secret and perennial,
By reciting which, son,
You would be victorious in war.

 

[Riverwolf]

As to the idea of Hiranyagarbha being the master of Agnishoma Mandala that is not my idea, that's the idea of Devudu Narasimha Shastry and perhaps you people should read his books instead of piling a series of tests on me

Who is he to us?

 

[Pleroma]

I have a question.

Are you suggesting that above demi-gods such as Indra, Vishnu, Shiva, Bramha, Surya, Yama&Yami, etc. are gods such as Narayana, Purusha, etc, above which is Hiranyagarbha, the one true god?

Indra, Rudra, Brahma, Yama etc etc are REAL GODS, they exist. Hiranyagarbha is not above or below, he is in everything, he is in these gods and yet they don't see him. All gods worship him because he is the God of the Gods.

 

[Pleroma]

I'd hope so.

No authority is perfect. I've read many Sages in my studies, and I have great respect for nearly all of them. However, they still end up saying things I disagree with.

If you had respect for them you wouldn't disagree with what they had to say, you would see the common esoteric essence in their preachings. We all are One, we have no contradictions. Its you who is showing double standards.

The teachings of one man are not enough for me to change my entire belief system, just on the merit that he said so. I imagine the same is true of most Hindus.

That's not the teaching of One man, that's the teaching of all the sages who were part of the Vedas and the Upanishads.

Vashishta, Vishwamithra, Agasthya, Yajnavalkya, Gargi, Valmiki etc etc.

Devudu Narasimha Shastry.

This is the main teaching of all the Vedas and the Upanishads. Something which you don't want to see and want to hold on to your preconceived notions and beliefs without even studying what they actually are saying.

Now, what is the Agnisoma Mandala, and what is its relation to the Vedas? Also, why is there nothing on the internet about it?

Its esoteric, its secret knowledge, that's why there is nothing on the internet. Only the people from the tradition know what it is.

Agnishoma Mandala is the Soul of the Universe it includes everything in it and nothing exists apart from it.

...no, we're not. The term "Sanatana Dharma" does not appear in that verse.

Here's how the translation I read gave the verse:

Hey rama, Hey dear Rama,, be pleased to hear,
That which is secret and perennial,
By reciting which, son,
You would be victorious in war.

Sanatana Dhrama is a new word which includes all the teachings of Vedic and the Upanishads seers used by modern spiritual leaders so obviously you won't find them in that verse but that doesn't change the fact that it is a eternal esoteric secret which you guys are not seeing it. Only the more spiritually matured ones see it.

It proves beyond any doubt that Sun God is our true God.

Hindus are Sun Worshippers something which no one sees it because they are not seeing the same esoteric essence in all its teachings. Once they see it one will realize that it is the Sun God who is our true God.

 

[Pleroma]

Heck, it could probably be argued that the "Devas" (Shining Ones) originally referred to the stars.

That's the interpretation of the Western Scholars who have got no idea as to what Vedas are actually talking about. If they had clearly understood the wisdom in it, the world would have been a better place than it is now.

Our ancient seers had knowledge about the Ultimate reality.

Shuddhasattva has put it nicely for you people-

Devas or Dieties are rays in the mandala.


Devas are anthropomorphic gods not stars in the sky. Just because you can't understand the deep meaning in it that doesn't mean its not correct. Your linguistic skills is not enough, one needs revelations too. That's my main point.