|
Add to Interest Profile
Edit Interest Profile
Email This Message
Search
| Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh 'Khalsa Ji', I recieved the following historical accounts on the contradictory styles of belief structure found in hinduism. The articles have direct relationship to the topic we were discussing, and they have links to the proper hindu sites the information is obtained from. The following is not an attack on hindu beliefs by anyone but hindus. I appreciate the Sewa done by the person who has obtained the following information for the learning purposes of the Sangat. It was not I. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Brahma also known as Prajapati is the creator, the foremost of the Hindu trinity. Brahma is also the first and the most ancient God, who is known in the Rg Veda (the oldest of the Vedas) by various epithets. He is the dhata (the one who gives), the Vidhata (the Supreme). He is also called Brhaspathi and Brahmanaspati. Brahma is referred to in many texts as Swayambhu (self-born) or aja (unborn). Nobody created him, he is self existent, the first cause of all and existing by his own intrinsic powers. If Brahma is self-born then how can he be ?derived? from OM. Further, according to Vamapurana Brahma lay within an egg and when he woke, he cut the egg open. From it the Omkara or the sacred syllable Om emanated. The first sound was bhuh, the second bhuvaha and the third svaha. So they came to be known as Bhurbhuvaha svaha, with the sun emerging from the egg, in the centre of which was the creator Brahma. you can read the entire text below. http://www.indiaprofile.com/religion-culture/brahma.htm Yet another Purana titled the Devi Purana says Brahma came form the navel of Lord Vishnu. It is said that Lord Vishnu was lying on a banyan leaf, cuddling as a child. He lay wondering who he was and who had created him. What had he been created for and what was his work were some the other questions plaguing him. And then the story unfolded before his eyes where divine inspiration came to him saying that it was but a pattern of the world that each time creation was to begin, Lord Vishnu had to be born again. And this time form his navel, Lord Brahma was to emerge. Accordingly, it is believed that from his navel a golden coloured lotus grew and on the lotus was seated Brahma. This episode is also called the padma vidhi or the lotus way. Lets see what Upanishads have to say. We should know that Upanishads came after the Vedas. Upanishads were not meant to be studied by all. It was only for a select few disciples. In the Mundaka Upanishad it is the Saunaka approaches Angiras, coming in the lineage of Brahma himself. The question he puts is ``What is that knowing which everything becomes known?'' Angiras, in turn, explains the difference between ``para vidya,'' the transcendental wisdom and ``apara vidya'', the relative knowledge which includes even the Vedas. The ``para'' takes the aspirant to the ``akshara'', the Eternal, while the ``apara'' leads him to the ``kshara'', the transient. The ``sreyas'' and ``preyas'' of the Katha become the ``para'' and ``apara'' in the Mundaka. Here occurs the famous Upanishadic dictum that the Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman. Sikhism rejects this theory. Man can never be the Creator. Both are distinct. The Kenopanishad relates that out of His compassion, the Supreme One enabled the Devas to gain success over the Asuras but due to their self-conceit the Devas felt it to be their victory. So Paramatma decided to teach them a lesson. He appeared in the form of a huge Yaksha before the Devas and on beholding the strange creature were curious to know about him. So after mutual consultations they chose Agni (god of fire) to find out the truth of this unusual being. Agni approached the Yaksha who asked him his identity, to which he replied that he was the god of fire. Paramatma to further test him, asked him what he excelled in. ' I can burn anything to ashes.' said Agni. Placing a bit of straw before the god of fire, the Para matma told him to burn it. Agni tried his utmost but failed and went away ashamed of himself. Devas then deputed Vayu (god of air) to find out about the Yaksha. He put the same question to Vayu and asked him to show his prowess by blowing the same piece of straw. Vayu put forth all his efforts but could not even stir it, thus sharing the same fate as Agni. Finally the Devas requested Indra to fulfil the task and when he reached the spot, the Yaksha vanished. Indra stood agast not knowing what to do, and since he stood firm in his resolve to know about the Yaksha without going away, Uma (in the form of Knowledge of Brahman) appeared before him and enlightened him that the Yaksha was none other than Para Brahman and it was because of His grace they secured victory over the Asuras and hence all their glory rightly belonged to the Supreme. The Saandilya Upanishad declares that Lord Dattatreya is the Supreme Reality and is the cause of everything that is created. It states, "The Supreme Brahman performed penance which was of the nature of knowledge (jnyana), and desiring to become many, assumed the form of Dattatreya. From that form came out the three letters A, U, M; the three mystical names Bhuh, Bhuvah and Svah; the three-lined Gayatri; the three Vedas Rig, Yajur and Sama; the three Gods Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara; the three castes Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vysya; and the three fires Gaarhapatya, Ashavaneeya and Dakshina. Maybe khalsa ji can tell us which Upanishad to follow and which to reject. Also which Veda and Purana should be followed and what needs to be rejected. I think this is the first step before we can proceed further. Delighted with Anusuya's (wife of Hindu sage Atri) efforts to save the world, the Deva's granted her three boons. She asked for (a) her liberation, (b) her husband's liberation and (c) that the Trinity - Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva be born as her children. The wishes being granted and a light emanated from Sage Atri's eyes which impregnated his wife Anusuya resulting in the birth of three divine sons - Soma, Durvasa, and Datta (partial incarnations of Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu, respectively). Birth of Soma: The sky seized the white-lustre form of Brahma which fell all around in the form of Soma, characterized by passion (Rajas Guna). That light from the mind of (Prajapati) Atri, the mental Soma was begotten in Anasuya as the life and possessor of every excellence. He is forever the plant and animal kingdoms to grow with his cool rays. He abode is the Svarga. Birth of Datta: From the predominant satwa Guna (goodness) of Vishnu, Dattatreya the Brahmin incarnated. He is forever protecting the good and causing its dominance and protects offsprings from destruction by the Daitya (Asura's as the sons of Diti). Birth of Durvasa: Enraged on seeing the haughty king of the Haihayas offending Maharishi Atri, Durvasa, the partial incarnation of Shiva issued from the womb of Anusuya. The predominant Tamas Guna made him angry and desire to burn up the Haihaya. He assumed a haughty look and speech and destroys scorners. Do the three heads of Lord Dattatreya also depict the ?unity? in trinity. How is Lord Dattatreya different from the Hindu Ultimate Reality? I don?t think there is any difference. Brahma/Shiva/Vishnu are ?derived? from the Hindu Ultimate Reality. Similarly Lord Dattatreya?s three heads also derive/represent the trinity of these three deities. Sikhism does not have any place for such mythology. http://sanjayrath.tripod.com/Hindu/dattatreya.htm I wonder where does Khalsa ji see any sembelance to Sikh philosophy here. This is mythological stories and nothing else. Khalsa ji wrote that, ?It represents that Trinity is Derived from Unity.? First everything is derived from the Creator. This is the Sikh belief. Whether it is animals or plants or Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva. Going a step further even lower castes have the same divinity as everyone else since there is no high and low. This too is Sikh belief. If the ?Hindu Unity in Trinity? is to be believed then why do Hindus consider that lower castes were born from a different body part of Brahma? Obviously the Hindu Ultimate Reality (of khalsa ji) must have consented to this discrimination. After all, Brahma was ?derived? from Him. This sort of discriminating God is rejected in Sikhism. Why would God knowingly discriminate? Unless the Hindu Ultimate Reality is ignorant of Brhma. In such a case what kind of Ultimate Reality is He anyways. I have had a similar discussion on Sikhnet before. Vedas and Discrimination http://sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.nsf/3d8d6eacce83bad8872564280070c2b3/7dfb7686b9e62a788725696900510037!OpenDocument&Highlight=0 Re: Caste and Vedas http://sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.nsf/All+by+Date/08C48582D324D47187256965006FAA7F?OpenDocument and Distinctiveness of Sikh Philosophy http://www.sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.nsf/3d8d6eacce83bad8872564280070c2b3/21676b5a5c666ec5872569b9005232f4!OpenDocument&Highlight=0 Creator in Different Religions http://sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion.nsf/All+by+Date/CF303CFEB7669EA887256AB400741F3D?OpenDocument |
 | Contradictions of hindu b... (Manjinder A Singh - 29.May.02) |
