Related Posts

Posted by

Understanding the concept of God- Part 1

I readA conversation with my aunt. It brought tears in my eyes out of Joy.The author have understood very clearly and had written it rightly.When such things are well understood it makes the person happy.

One  thing I want to make it clear further about God is not the Universal energy alone. ( Read the article “A conversation with my aunt, for additional aspects of God and life discussed” )

If the energy is God, then a question arises, how the energy came into existence.The answer simply is from Space.Will anybody accept it?It could be simply understood without any preconceptuous idea.

So far what we have understood is that space is something which has nothing.It is not so , it is something which has everything inherent.Space has 3 qualities and they are “Totality – Poornam”, “Vivekam – Consciousness” and “Force – speed”. It is the force that made Consciousness to emerge as an energy particle.I’ll give a clear definition for space given by Vethathiri Maharishi .It is otherwise called as Gravity by Vethathiri.

Gravity is absolute space which is everlasting, singular, almighty,all penetrative, highly transparent,imperceptible, dark, fluid matter which has a self compressive surrounding pressure force which makes it to emerge as an energy particle”.

Thus the energy particle, the fundamental building block of the Universe emerges. So the force within, separates itself from the Space.Now where is the space in the energy particle?With space in the centre of the particle it keeps rotating.Energy means it should have some functioning & the functioning is its rotation.It is a whirling wave.when anything rotates in the centre a vacuum is created.This is a scientific fact.

So if the universe is filled with the energy then there is also the space within it.Which means there is Vekam – speed, & vivekam-Conscious through out the universe..This together forms the universe.The energy which is otherwise called Akash is the first one formed,then the same akash takes it’s transformation into air,fire,water & finally earth.

This is how the evolution starts.So there is the + ve (positive) force, Siva and  energy is the – ve (negative)  force Sakthi .Together is the Arthanareeswar.

( In Hinduism , Ardhanari or Ardhanarishvara is an androgynous deity composed of Shiva and his consort Shakti, representing the synthesis of masculine and feminine energies. The Ardhanari form also illustrates how the female principle of God, Shakti, is inseparable from the male principle of God, Shiva. Ardhanari in iconography is depicted as half-male and half-female, split down the middle.)

Arthanareeshwara

So space is through out the Universe & outside endlessly without any boundary.So the universe is floating in space, that’s why it is Almighty as it bears the vast Universe.

So far I’ve explained in my simple words, what is God? Again so many things has to be explained about the bio-magnetism & universal magnetism which also will helps us to know the secrets of this Universe. We will discuss those aspects in further articles.

 

This article is written by Radha Chandran. She is a disciple of Vethathri Maharishi and Jaggi Vasudev.

0 20 August, 2009 Hinduism - my take August 20, 2009

28 comments

  1. Ambi

    Sorry if I come across as being blunt… this is the most confusing explanation I have seen for explaining God… force, gravity, rotation… mixing religious and scientific mumbo-jumbo.

    Moreover, trying to explain that something came from nothing is like trying to fill water in a bottomless bucket.

    Can we have some authoritative proof for what you are saying in this article?

    Reply
  2. Lakshmi Rajan

    @ Ambi:

    I would ask the author herself to explain your doubts. As far as confusing explanation ,we are trying to understand the concept of God and there can be no simple explanation for explaining the Supreme concept. The topic we are covering is a series of topics. Understanding the concept of God would be a series of post that would try to unravel the concept of God. Let me also add that religion and science should not be viewed as separate entity. Religion and science can mix and overlap in fundamental concepts.

    Keep reading the further series in this topic by author Radha Chandran , Do share your valued comments and doubts , as it would enrich all of us reading the topic. Positive discussion helps in enrichment of knowledge.

    Reply
  3. Ambi

    When one says that he/ she is trying to understand the concept of God, they have already decided that “God” is just another ‘concept’ which can be understood by human speculation, limited by the . This methodology has its flaws since it is deeply rooted in the reductionistic approach taken by modern science. (check out http://achupichu.wordpress.com/2006/07/25/ockhams-razor-can-it-cut-everything-recycled/)

    I still stand by my question… a bit rephrased… “By what siddhanta or authority is the explanation given in terms of gravity, force, energy and rotation considered as authentic?”

    Reply
  4. Lakshmi Rajan

    @ Ambi:
    When someone says understanding , It necessarily does not have to be universal. My understanding of the world could be different from yours. so is the concept of God. I agree the concept of God is something very complex but that does not need to refrain a human from making an effort to comprehend it. Only if you search , only if you question , only if you analyze , only if you start the process of “search” , you will understand things. I did read your link , your analyze “There are things that escape human comprehension… things that are subtle enough to dazzle the most brilliant scientist and shield its truth from us” should stop us from making an effort to understand those things that escape human comprehension .We need to keep evolving , keep searching , keep questioning , keep finding to understand certain things ..

    The topic we are going to cover in this series of “Understanding the concept of God” is an effort on the path of seeking the truth . As i stated in the begining “My understanding of the truth could be different from yours” and better understanding is acheived by debating and learning from each other. so you are welcome with your inputs and thoughts , it would open up new dimensions .

    Reply
  5. RadhaChandran

    @ Ambi:
    Ambi , i like the spirit in you.I went through some of the matters you had shared in your blog & i did comment on one about ‘Are all atheiests intellectuals?

    “Blessings & best wishes for a happy married life.

    Then coming to my article, I had already stated that to understand the concept of God one’s mind should be relaxed..which i said as Alpha level.I know you are a very aggressive person & that’s why i said i like the spirit in you.

    I don’t know if you are doing any spiritual sadhana.you must have commented soon after reading the article.Go through it when you feel you are in a relaxed mood.I’m sure you will understand it better.

    As Lakshmi Rajan has said my Guru wanted to bring science & religion together.In those days people were innocent & they didn’t question & they had faith in whatever was said about God.

    Science has taken a high place in people’s mind these days & there is always the questioning & they need for a proof.The only proof i can suggest is you find out for yourself following any yoga.

    Firstly one should understand the concept or may be it’s the teachings about God & then practice sadhana to realize it.This siddhantha is”Yoga for Human Excellence”taught by our Guru Vethathiri Maharishi.In Tamil it is said as “arivusaarntha aanmeeka kalvi”

    I know, you will not be satisfied with my reply & my work is not to make you accept to my views.Just keep reading the topics & give your valuable comments.Once again my Blessings.

    Reply
  6. Ambi

    @RC:

    “In those days people were innocent & they didn’t question & they had faith in whatever was said about God.”

    I don’t think this sweeping generalization is true. We just tell this to ourselves to satisfy ourselves that we are being very scientific and our ancestors were just simple minded folks. If you take up dialogues recorded from the great Acharyas of the past, you can easily understand that people at that time were much more diligent in their quest for truth.

    As for the proof I ask for, it is not in terms of experiment and result or empirical evidence. I ask for bona-fide references from the vedic scriptures that put forth such an explanation. I would not ask for something like this if I had no knowledge and practice in such things.

    “I know, you will not be satisfied with my reply & my work is not to make you accept to my views.”

    Nor do I intend to impose my views on you. Call it an open discussion, if you will… each one to his/ her own decision.

    @LR:

    “My understanding of the truth could be different from yours”

    Exactly. The truth remains as is.

    So, one who shows us the truth as it is, and not how we want to see it, is a Guru.

    Reply
  7. RadhaChandran

    Whatever is taught by my guru is all from the vedic scriptures & it is being explained in an easier way.What was said by the 18 siddhars of Tamilnadu is also not something against the vedic scriptures.Do you say it is different?

    “Aham Brahmasmi’ is that Brahmam is within us.The explanation i’ve given is that Brahmam Or Siva is the space.The words one uses might be different.

    ‘Tatvamasi” IS “neeye athuvaga irukirai” or “Thou art That”.That’s what has been again the space. IT IS Up to one’s understanding whether the truth is He or That.To a realized person everything is the same.Aren’t these famous quotes from vedas?

    sure it is an open discussion.

    You must have known Thaumanavar from Tamilnad.Sure you know that poem, ‘Angingenata badi enkum prakasamai anantha poorthiagi arulodunirainthathu ethu?
    Than arulvelikule akilanda kodi ellam thangumbadi ichaivaithathu ethu/
    Manamvakinil thatammal nirainthathu ethu….Again it is all about the space & the Universal energy.

    Understanding is definitely different as the writer or speaker will not be in the same frequency as the listener or the reader.

    Yes the truth is all the same.When one realizes it there is no difference.

    Don’t come to conclusions.Ther are more to come in series.Visit vethathiri.org

    Reply
  8. Pingback: Understanding the concept of God – Part 2 | Ginger Chai

  9. Ambi

    “Whatever is taught by my guru is all from the vedic scriptures & it is being explained in an easier way.”

    That still no reference to where this teaching is found in the vedas.

    “The explanation i’ve given is that Brahmam Or Siva is the space” –

    I disagree. Freely mixing the personal and impersonal aspects of the different manifestations of God simply adds to the confusion.

    “Yes the truth is all the same.When one realizes it there is no difference.”

    Again, I disagree. There IS a difference. Absolute truth remains the same, but the each one realizes it based on one’s material and spiritual dispositions.

    “To a realized person everything is the same.Aren’t these famous quotes from vedas?”

    Please quote it. In summary, if you believe that self realization means realizing that the self and God are non-different and ultimately this is all just empty space, then we differ in the fundamental understanding of the Self and God as well as the vedas!

    Reply
  10. Radhachandran

    The quote i referred to it was “Aham Brahmasmi’&”Tat wam asi”.Aren’t they from Vedic scriptures?How do you intrepret it?Don’t you see It within.

    Don’t say empty space as nothing.It is the conscious & intelligence within you & everywhere.

    Absolute truth remains the same,but each one realizes it based on one’s material &spiritual dispositions.

    The truth which is the same is realized by any person whichever path one follows.

    What is your fundamental understanding of the self & God?

    Reply
  11. Radhachandran

    Radhachandran wrote:

    The quote i referred to it was “Aham Brahmasmi’&”Tat wam asi”.Aren’t they from Vedic scriptures?How do you intrepret it?Don’t you see It within.
    Don’t say empty space as nothing.It is the conscious & intelligence within you & everywhere.
    Absolute truth remains the same,but each one realizes it based on one’s material &spiritual dispositions.
    The truth which is the same is realized by any person whichever path one follows.
    What is your fundamental understanding of the self & God?

    Reply
  12. Ambi

    “The quote i referred to it was “Aham Brahmasmi’&”Tat wam asi”.Aren’t they from Vedic scriptures?How do you intrepret it?Don’t you see It within.”

    What you are quoting are just 2 phrases from the vast literature of vedas. And asking questions like “Don’t you see it within?” and such… it just makes the discussion look like a sentimental argument!

    “Don’t say empty space as nothing. It is the conscious & intelligence within you & everywhere.”

    That is just your viewpoint, ma’am. My opinion is that such things just sound mystical, and for many ‘bhagavans’ and ‘babajis’, it helps to get some ooh-la-la from people, if I may add. Saying nothing is everything and everything came from nothing, we are nothing but we are God… is merely word play.

    “The truth which is the same is realized by any person whichever path one follows.”

    I disagree. At the very least, this is illogical.

    Reply
  13. Radhachandran

    Ambi, aren’t those 2 phrases a very important one which tells us about that God exists within us.
    I think you have a great aversion if a man raises to that level of God.
    How do you put this?
    Gurur Brahma Gurur Vishnu Gurur Devo Maheshvaraa
    Gurur Sakshat parabrahmam thasmi sreekuraveh namaha

    Isn’t the Guru considered as God, a human?

    One cannot simply say I’m God understanding that God is within me & everywhere.He has to do sadhanas for his sublimation to clear off his karmic imprints, until then he is just like any other human(social animal)

    Reply
  14. Ambi

    1) There are statements in vedic scriptures also show the difference between jivatma, Paramatma clearly. How come people always stick to ‘aham brahmasmi’ and ‘Tat tvam asi’ mostly?

    2)No aversion. I simply state this: Man can *never* become God.

    3) Guru is a human and a bonafide Guru is considered ‘as good as God’… but he *cannot* become God and will never proclaim himself or anyone else to be God. And any Guru who claims himself to be God or tells someone else that they are God *is* bogus.

    Feel free to disagree with the above statements.

    Reply
  15. Radhachandran

    @ Ambi:
    Ambi I’ll also expain the difference between jeevatma & paramatma in my article after a few chapters are over.Don’t you know that jeevatma can merge with the paramatma”Do tou think it is possible only after death?

    IF you cannot see God anywhere, where is he then?

    Reply
  16. Radhachandran

    @ Ambi:
    It’s very difficult to wake a person who pretends to sleep.Ambi,if you have decided to argue with whatever i say then i can’t help it.Sorry.

    Reply
  17. Ambi

    LR/ Madam,

    Do not be judgemental. You already did it once by terming as aggressive… I let it go. But with all due respect, I don’t have to agree to whatever you say nor should you expect it!

    I requested for references from the vedic scriptures which give information on this whole bio-magnetism, universal magnetism, force, shakti, spinning, gravity, alpha level, beta level and stuff like that I have been seeing in the three articles that have been put up. I was not given any. And “I learnt it from my Gurus” won’t be sufficient, because I believe you are repeating what you learnt and hence my questions still hold good then.

    In the responses, I see that the focus is jumping from some very commonly (ab)used phrases from the vedas, to teachings of tamil siddhas and then on to a phase where I am being questioned “Don’t you know this, Do you not feel this…?”.

    So, as I said earlier, we differ in our fundamentals:

    1) God is not some empty, formless space or some dumb energy, spinning and rolling about.

    2) The soul (jivatma) is co-eternal with God and IS qualitatively same as God but quantitatively infinitesimal. The soul never had creation nor will it have destruction. The jiva and God(in his aspect as the brahman or paramatma or Bhagavan) are different and remain separate.

    3) As a result of 2), Man can *never* become God. That position is already filled up. So any attempt (meditation, karma, yoga, sadhana etc.) directed in trying to find one’s own self as Godly is in vain.

    4) The position of a Guru is an exalted one and is not to be considered as that of a mere guide to some ‘higher’ state.

    5) I did not get the impression that you were familiar with at least some vedic scriptures… hence I don’t see a point in quoting references for my standpoints.

    Given all the above, I felt our view points would be irreconcilable… so I didn’t find any value in elaborating it here.

    I may lack the age or experience you have and there may be people who may find your articles on this topic to be very inspiring, ma’am… but I did not find any authoritative source for the information you have given nor do I have any reason to believe this school of thought is bonafide.

    But, after all, this is your blog and your views… *shrug*

    Reply
  18. Lakshmi Rajan

    @ Ambi:
    I don’t think any one was judgemental here. I did mention one can agree to disagree and also mentioned in one my earlier comments that one’s analysis of the world can be different from another. So there is no question of anybody asking you to agree with the concepts mentioned here.

    The beauty of Hinduism is it does not force upon you a rigid single rule of path. It leaves you to explore , implore and derive your own path to achieve self-realization. So if you disagree with what Radha Chandran says , you are feel free to.

    If you are quoting a set of belief , feel free to quote as you seem to be bend on taking reference to Quotes. Do quote your reference as you demand for references. It will be indeed a productive debate if you substantiate your belief with references from vedic. I love healthy discussions and I would like to see your references with your thoughts.

    The streams of sprituality are different and varied. Radha Chandran is talking about a stream which she has realized in her spiritual journey with help of various rishis. Even if my path could be different , I respect her for her thoughts , viewpoints and understanding of the spiritual nectar. Many would identify with her thoughts while many may not identify like you find. The basic essence of the spirituality does not hold an universal path. Path may vary, some people could walk in this path , some may find other path but people walk towards an ultimate destination in spiritual path.

    So if you don’t agree with Radha Chandran’s understanding of the concpet of God , It’s your spirtual right to do so. Since you find yourself with fundamental differences clashing with the concepts mentioned here, i don’t see any middle point over here. Good luck with your spiritual quest.

    Reply
  19. Ambi

    LR:

    It is not a matter of whether I agree with RC or not. And I don’t think I came across as being disrespectful of their views. I am merely being frank in my opinion.

    It is merely that I wished to know how RC’s statements are substantiated. I am ‘bent’ on this because I consider spirituality to be an exact discipline which has no room for sentimental attachment or blind reverence or a ‘do-as-you-please’ marathon.

    Anyway, people can and do have their own set of beliefs but when it posted in a public forum, such as this blog, one has to be able to defend their standpoint!

    Reply
  20. Lakshmi Rajan

    @ Ambi:
    You are welcome to be frank in your opinion. Since you are ‘bent’ on your opinion and quoting reference from vedas. How do you substantiate your view points ? You disagree with RC ? Fine enough. Can you substantiate and argue with your points of disagreement without just simply disagreeing ? Can you quote from vedas for your argument ? Theoritically a third person can always come n argue how is vedas substantiated ? So how do one substantiate vedas ? or even how do one substantiate even the existence of God ?

    So what comes in substantiating each one’s understanding is his or her own experience with truth. The author of this series has arrived at her concpets based on her experience with her truth which she is sharing with world. She is not forcing anyone to accept that It is THE truth and Only truth anywhere. It is her understanding of the concept of God from her experiences in her spiritual journey.

    If you are ‘bend’ on countering it or disgreeing it , you can feel free to but do substantiate your view points with the same references that you are bend upon disagreeing with RC. This article is based on the experiences of the author and what she has journeyed in her quest.

    Reply
  21. Radhachandran

    @ Ambi:
    Yes Ambi , i accept that i haven’t read Vedic scriptures & one thing that is true is, that if any words from any enlightened master comes it is Vedic scriptures.So to me whatever my guru has said is vedas.
    With that in mind & with the experiences I had in meditation i’m sharing it.

    Following a path of any guru if it raises one spiritually is what one needs.That way i ‘m lucky to get many gurus who have lifted me up.

    Reply
  22. Ambi

    @LR:

    “Theoritically a third person can always come n argue how is vedas substantiated ? So how do one substantiate vedas ? or even how do one substantiate even the existence of God?”

    I did expect this. If one does not believe in vedas as an authority, no matter what I quote, there will never be a concurrence with that person on any issue. Also, if the other person does not have familiarity in the vedas, as RC has accepted, what is the use of quoting scriptures?

    @RC:

    Ma’am, you do not need to be a expert scholar on the scriptures to be able to understand the essence of what is said in them. That is why one needs a Guru.

    It is said that based on our nature, certain things appeal to us and certain things don’t. It is not for me to pass judgment on what you are doing is correct or not… but what is true is that it is only by your desire and faith that you have chosen your Gurus and the spiritual line you try to follow.

    May your faith serve you well.

    Reply
  23. Lakshmi Rajan

    @ Ambi:
    What is the use of quoting ? It will always be nice to know another viewpoint ? so you can share your views. It would definitely make a good analysis. I for sure would like you substantiate with your viewpoints with references from vedas.

    See agreeing and disagreeing is part of a discussion. So you can put forward your analysis with references , I would appreciate it.

    Reply
  24. Ambi

    LR:

    I have already shared my views. If you want me to substantiate, that would take up a whole lot of time and writing space here… I will probably start putting out an article on my blog (I have already provided the link to this discussion as a post).

    But since you wish to analyze, what is your exposure to the vedic scriptures?

    Reply
  25. Lakshmi Rajan

    @ Ambi:
    I would definitely look forward to your view.

    and its not the question of what my exposure to the vedic scriptures. I have a fair idea to comprehend things , even otherwise , since this site is observed by many readers , you could always provide your views and analysis with reference to vedic scriptures.

    Reply
  26. Ambi

    Lakshmi Rajan:

    Knowing the exposure level will allow me to put forth the details at such a level, as it was explained to me, to the best of my ability. That is all.

    So, if you would please just answer this question, I will know how to start off:

    “Who are you?”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Facebook Comments

Show us your like!