Explaining how Brahman, Allah, YHWH is the same only one God.

Forums Forums Vedic Philosophy Explaining how Brahman, Allah, YHWH is the same only one God.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #13930
    River Sea
    Participant

    Ashish, I need your help in my fb group, explaining how Brahman, Allah, YHWH is the same only one God. Can you help me  with your knowledge in my fb group, please

    Exodus: Jews from Indus Valley India travel to Israel

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/267580128854014

     

    #13931
    Ashish Dalela
    Keymaster

    It is not necessary to establish that. Just like a king is seen in one way by his wife, in another way by his children, in yet another way by his courtiers, and in a totally different way by the citizens, similarly, God can also be understood in many ways. All these understandings pertain to the same person, and yet they are different understandings of the same person based on how close they are to the person. The important thing is that they love and serve the person. They can love and serve the same person in different ways.

    God is cruel, and God is kind. God is beautiful and God is ugly. God is weak and God is strong. God is sweet and God is bitter. God is big and God is small. Depending on who you are, God will reveal a different facet to you. Others will not see the same aspect. So, there is no need to say that they are all the same.

    The question is: Do you want to see the kind and beautiful side of God? Or do you want to see the harsh and ugly side of God? You have to change yourself accordingly. If you are harsh and ugly, then God is the harshest and ugliest of all. If you are kind, then God is the kindest of all. He is the limit of everything.

    Based on the type of people there are in the world, there are many different conceptions of God. We simply say that Krishna is the most beautiful and kind understanding of God. But it is not that Krishna cannot be harsh and ugly. He can be that too. But He prefers to be beautiful and kind, although our nature forces Him to sometimes become harsh and ugly. So, we have to change our nature. However we can do that, is okay. It is a long journey. As long as we are moving in the right direction, every religion is a good thing.

    #13935
    River Sea
    Participant

    I apricate your response., about what side of God do we want to see.  Can I add your response that it came from you in my fb group and you’re welcome to join too., I’m learning and I do appreciate your knowledge about this, thank you. I allow light in me and in all of us teach me., and as you ask what side of God do I want to see, white light I want to see from within people flood within them outward, whitelight, fire burn in spirit heart, however mostly I only am fed fire burn, I’ve seen white light and that side is true time and that side, would then be side of light in people then, I think that’s where I can come out of my shell., however I don’t know this word Krishna as so far, I learn about Krishna is Moses from Indus valley India if I understand correctly., however I notice others also use this word Krishna online as well you use this word Krishna, are they all and including you saying Moses then? What is this word Krishna? so thinking of it, what I want to see of God is true time a relationship with true time allow to learn from true time

    #13936
    Ashish Dalela
    Keymaster

    Yes, you can post in your group if you like. I don’t like to join groups.

    Krishna means all-attractive. We noted earlier that God is the limit of everything. And now we can say that the limit of everything is also all-attractive. For example, if you love knowledge, then Krishna is the limit of knowledge, and therefore, you can be attracted to Krishna because He knows everything. In this world, if you are interested in knowledge, you admire people who know more than you. You follow those who know more than you. You also want to get to know those you admire. And if they ask you to do something, you will do it willingly for them. Knowledge is the starting point–it is the basis of attraction, but it culminates in proximity and service. God is the limit of knowing. So, if you love knowledge, then you can admire God because He knows everthing. Then, you can come closer to God and serve Him.

    Likewise, if you love power, then Krishna is the limit of power, and therefore, you can be attracted to Krishna because He is the most powerful. In this world, if you are interested in power, you admire people who have a lot of power. But God is the limit of power. So, you can admire God because He is most powerful.

    In this way, there are millions of attributes of God, and because God is the limit of everything, therefore, He is the most attractive. He is the most admirable. He is the most lovable. And He is the most served.

    God is also light, but He is not just light. Light is required to see, but too much light is blinding, under which you cannot see. So, when you see light, you are blinded and cannot see anything else. Hence, seeing light is also seeing God, but seeing God is not seeing light alone. Seeing light is a progressive step toward seeing God. By light you can assess that there is something out there. But what it is, you don’t know yet.

    Seeing light is seeing God’s influence, rather than the God’s person itself. Just like in the morning, you can see light coming through the window, but that is not the same as seeing the Sun. Rather, light is an effect of the Sun. Light coming through the window seems to have no form, but the Sun has a form. So when you see the formless, you are seeing an effect. And if you see the form, then you are seeing the cause of that effect.

    Actually even light is not formless. It is very tiny particles each of which has a different form. But we are unable to see those forms. What we see is a collection of a lot of particles, we disregard their individual forms, and we get the impression of formless, which is actually trillions of minute forms. That impression is not reality. But because we can have that impression, therefore, it is said that you can see light.

    Brahman is such a type of light, which is actually infinite number of minute particles with form. When we cannot see the forms of the particles, and we merge all the particles into one big sea of light, that is called seeing light. But Brahman is not a field of light. It is rather infinite number of particles of light. Then, these infinite particles of light are emanating from a Sun–namely, God–as the cause of the effect. So, the first step to seeing God is to go beyond the vision of light field, to the vision of light particles. Then, from the light particles you go to the vision of the cause of the light particles, namely, the source called God.

    #13994
    Sri Vasudeva Das
    Participant

    Hare Krishna Rishiraj prabhuji

    With respect to the above, in approaching God it all seems fine. But especially when we talk about the apara dharma what is the consequence when people follow their own version of religion which is not Vedic. I mean to say that religions like islam do allow for meat eating and as far as I know cow killing also which is very sinful as per Vedic injunctions. What happens to them?

    The matter is further complicated in 5.26.15 of Bhagavatam where Srila Prabhupad writes “An atheist, or nästika, is one who does not believe in the Vedas. However, even if one takes up a different system of religion, according to this verse he must follow the religious principles he has accepted. Whether one is a Hindu, or a Mohammedan or a Christian, he should follow his own religious principles.”

    #14012
    Ashish Dalela
    Keymaster

    There are two ideas of dharma. First, there is an absolute sense of right and wrong, that defines what we must do and not do. Second, many people cannot follow these restrictions, hence, some leeway is given. This leeway is the relative definition of dharma, which is not ideal dharma but a social definition of behaviors.

    • Kshatriyas were permitted animal hunting in the forest, although any unnecessary violence is abhorred. This is because Kshatriyas have violent tendencies. If they don’t exercise it on animals, they will exercise it on humans. So, they are given leeway. That doesn’t make it right. It is known that each person will suffer according to their deeds. But if those deeds are done on animals, then human suffering will be minimized. Hence, if you have violent tendencies, some leeway is given to accomodate them outside human society.
    • Sudras were permitted prostitution. This is also against dharma. However, if someone is addicted to sex, they will either overindulge in sex in their marriage, or try to marry many times although they cannot support the resulting children, or go after chaste women in the mainstream society. All these are worse outcomes than prostitution. Hence, considering the consequences of the alternative, prostitution was permitted to reduce the adverse results.

    These are two examples of how adharma was allowed even in a Vedic society to preempt a worse adharma. That acceptance of adharma doesn’t mean the deed is righteous or the doer is exempted from suffering. He or she has to accept the consequences of their actions. But all other courses of action are worse. Therefore, by the principle of least bad or greatest perfection in a situation, these things were permitted. The rulers who permitted them were not involved in adharma on the principle that (a) the doers bear the consequences, and (b) there is no better course of action. It is dharma for the king because it is the best course of action. It is adharma for the doer, so s/he will suffer, but without it, the situation will be worse.

    As society becomes sinful, many such things are permitted because the alternative is worse. That doesn’t mean they are righteous, or the doers are moral. And yet, forbidding them is worse. For example, Christian priests consume alcohol, but it is forbidden in the Vedic system. Likewise, because Christian priests were forbidden sex, they started molesting children. This is a clear sign that the Church should recognize that rules can make the situation more sinful. In Islam, clerics are allowed four marriages, because it is understood that the alternative is worse.

    Now, you have to understand the two perspectives: (a) that of the person who prescribed such rules, and (b) that of the followers. The person who prescribed these rules realized the fallen state of people and presented some rules as the least bad option for a certain society. Hence, he was following dharma. The person who follows these rules saves himself from worse adharma and can be called following “dharma” although he could suffer in many ways due to his deeds.

    For example, animal killing leads to wars. It doesn’t matter if you follow Christianity or Islam or Hinduism. If you exhibit cruelty to animals, then other men will kill you in a war. Therefore, obedience to rules and regulations of Christianity or Islam does not prevent frequent wars. Even those who follow a religion thus suffer, which leads to the problem of evil, or theodicy: Why do bad things happen to good people? The answer is that these “good people” are not entirely good; they have performed sinful deeds in the past. However, if they persist in their religion, they will get progressively purified. To encourage their purification, their religion is encouraged.

    Hence, there is dharma to liberate people. There is dharma to make life materially better. And there is dharma to prevent something worse. All these are not on the same level, or equal. In each of these religions, there is some conception of God. However, when religion is meant to prevent something worse, then the conception of God is also harsh and retaliatory. That is because one has to put “the fear of God” in people. But if people are better, then there is a need to put “the love of God” in people. So, a terrifying God and a loving God are different aspects of God.

    These religions are meant for different kinds of people. If someone fears God, then they will have some respect for societal rules and regulations. That fear of God transforms into respect for rules, then it transforms into respect for other individuals, then it transforms into a respect for all life, then it transforms into the respect for the source of life in God, and that respect becomes the love of God. This is the progressive path of God-realization. It begins in fear, then becomes respect, and then becomes love. If we remove fear, then later stages will not appear.

    Hence, all religions are not equal, and yet, all religions are accepted because a certain class of people cannot follow the best path, but removing their current religion will make the situation worse. The goal is progressive advancement. It is not finality, exceptionalism, or exclusivism. This tolerant attitude toward other religions is not secularism, the equality of all religions, or even a disinterest in religion. It is based on the realization that perfection is far, but one has to progress. Therefore, whatever will help people progress, and prevent degradation, is encouraged.

    #14013
    Sri Vasudeva Das
    Participant

    Wonderful explanation. Thank you.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)