Hinduism and Hindu Gods (Wikipedia)

[vignesh2014]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

[h=2]Introduction[edit][/h]Hinduism has many deities that are worshipped by all and thousands of local deities whose worship is confined to a particular group or region. The practice of polytheism does not disallow the monotheist worship of one God. Hinduism encompasses the belief that all manifestations of God are of one cosmic reality (Brahmam). Christianity has a similar ideology in the divinity of Jesus; the Son of God placed upon the Earth to guide and instruct. The belief in Christ accepts the duality of divinity; the quality of the physical manifestation of God's will which is in direct concordance with the singular principle of God's absolute being. A common factor in polytheist and monotheist rituals is the assigning of spiritual properties to a person whose role was divinely ordained but who themselves are not a manifestation of a singular God. The Christian's view of Christ's mother, Mary, has this quality. Mary is the mother of the Son of God but Christians accept that she is the wife of Joseph and not the wife of God. In Italy and Spain the worship of Mary forms a cultural definition that is not found in other European countries; for example the United Kingdom. This is also true of the vast Indian sub-continent where language, custom and region may determine the primacy of a deity. Hinduism can be described as a religion with polytheist rituals and beliefs that can be reconciled to a wider underlying monotheist principle.
In Hinduism 'you have liberty to choose your favoirite god/goddess to pray' similarly How you are choosing right hat for your head . So Hindu leaves for ever. In other releigions you have no way to choose your favourite god and to adjest with what ever god avaialble.
[h=2]Vishnu[edit][/h]Vishnu is one of the supreme deities that Hindus worship. The early Aryan religion mentions Vishnu as a God related to the Sun but he was not a major figure in the early Vedic period. It is through the stories of the Mahābhārata that Vishnu came to be seen as a major God within Hinduism. Vishnu is believed to manifest himself in other forms when he is called upon to fight evil. The most famous avatars of Vishnu are Rama and Krishna. Vishnu is one of the Trimurti along with Shiva and Brahma. These three deities are considered to maintain the cosmos: Brahma is the creator, Vishnu the maintainer or preserver, and Shiva the destroyer or transformer.Even Lord Budhha is considered to be the ninth avtaar of Lord Vishnu
[h=2]Shiva[edit][/h]

A statue of Shiva and Parvarti (British Museum)​

Shiva is a supreme deity of opposites. The destroyer and creator; a God of exemplary kindness whose anger knows no bounds; the master of inner reflection and outward focus. In Hindu art Shiva is sometimes depicted with a third eye, which when turned inwards in meditation illuminates his thoughts and actions. Shiva is the Hindu name for the Vedic God, Rudra, who is first mentioned in the Rig-Veda. The word Shiva is first used to represent an aspect of Rudra but eventually changed to encompass the whole essence of Rudra. This ancient lineage can be traced in Hindu civilization for thousands of years and Shiva's power to entrance the mind has never diminished. Shiva's many forms: beggar, yogi, dancing - have been a source of continuous inspiration for Hindu artists. Rudra is the protector of morals, conduct and law in the Vedic scriptures and in this role commands that each Hindu must live their life according to dharma.
[h=2]Brahma[edit][/h]Brahma is a deity that is associated with the creation of the earth. Brahma is one of the oldest gods in Hindu theology. His role as creator places him before Vishnu (the preserver) and Shiva (the destroyer). In Ancient India during the early Vedic period, Hindus placed Brahma at the pinnacle of the Trimurti and he was accorded a higher status than Shiva or Vishnu. As Indian civilization progressed; Brahma worship diminished and the importance of Shiva and Vishnu increased. In India today, only a few temples are dedicated to his worship. Hindu iconography shows Brahma with four heads and four arms. This extension of form is typical of Hindu religious art and is a representation of the multiple themes that a deity may embody. The four heads of Brahma eternally give forth the four Vedas (Rigveda, Samaveda, Atharvaveda and Yajurveda) which are the earliest sacred texts in Hinduism. The four arms each hold a religious object:

• The Vedas - the knowledge
• Kamandalu - a jar made of metal or coconut shell, containing water; symbolic of the first element from which creation started.
• Akshamālā - a string of prayer beads which he uses to keep track of the Universe's time
• Ladle - used in religious rituals for the pouring of oil.

Category:

• Hinduism

​

 

[vignesh2014]

The views expressed by this article is not the view of mine.I just want to elaborate on the points made on them. our Purusha suktham says about Naryana and rudram talks about lord shiva. There is a view that sri suktham is devoted to Goddess Lakshmi..others view that as Ambal or Devi...Therefore lot of controversies are there in veda mentioning god since some of the sects like brahmakumari samaj considers rudra different from Shiva...Shiva is Mangalkari while rudra is destroyer..worship of linga is shiva..rudra is worshipped in ferocious form.Vishnu is considered as Brother of Indra or Upendra according to Veda...Therefore we are not very clear whether narayana and vishnu are same. Whether previous worship of surya, hiranya karba, agni, indra related to later god worship of sun, Brahma, Agni (Shiva is also worshipped in the form of Agni), Indra (is this vishnu or narayana or indra itself )....Brhama is not considered god because his age is limited and brahma post is given to different , different persons just like Indra post. Even Anjaneya is said to be next brahma after kali yuga (til Kali Yuga he is Chiranjeevi)...Some feel i'm doing mischief and some feel i'm doing confusion...Really I want to have clarity on all these things...from exponents of veda, upanishad and puranas..that's why i'm writing all these.Kindly don't mistake me for writing some controversial articles because whatever i express is not my views only....If anyone is affected by these views, i really apologise for the same.

 

[rsnrishi]

Dear Vignesh,

I understand your predicament about the who and what of Hindu literature. But, before proceeding with all these queries, ask a question to yourself. "Am I asking these things to entirely satisfy myself about my religion? or to explain such details to whomsoever that has raised these questions or may be in future?"

 

[sangom]

The views expressed by this article is not the view of mine.I just want to elaborate on the points made on them. our Purusha suktham says about Naryana and rudram talks about lord shiva. There is a view that sri suktham is devoted to Goddess Lakshmi..others view that as Ambal or Devi...Therefore lot of controversies are there in veda mentioning god since some of the sects like brahmakumari samaj considers rudra different from Shiva...Shiva is Mangalkari while rudra is destroyer..worship of linga is shiva..rudra is worshipped in ferocious form.Vishnu is considered as Brother of Indra or Upendra according to Veda...Therefore we are not very clear whether narayana and vishnu are same. Whether previous worship of surya, hiranya karba, agni, indra related to later god worship of sun, Brahma, Agni (Shiva is also worshipped in the form of Agni), Indra (is this vishnu or narayana or indra itself )....Brhama is not considered god because his age is limited and brahma post is given to different , different persons just like Indra post. Even Anjaneya is said to be next brahma after kali yuga (til Kali Yuga he is Chiranjeevi)...Some feel i'm doing mischief and some feel i'm doing confusion...Really I want to have clarity on all these things...from exponents of veda, upanishad and puranas..that's why i'm writing all these.Kindly don't mistake me for writing some controversial articles because whatever i express is not my views only....If anyone is affected by these views, i really apologise for the same.

Dear Shri Vignesh,

I have spent some years reading about various aspects of Hindu religion. Though I am far from being an exponent of vedas, upanishads or puranas, I felt like giving whatever little I have understood about Hindu religion. My views may continue beyond a single post, by the way.

First of all, it will be better to approach Hinduism with the clear view that it is not "a religion" as is the case with Christianity, Judaism, etc.; hinduism is a mixture of many 'belief systems' of diverse populations spread over eons of time, and the changes which have come about in many of these (component) belief systems also have been adsorbed (please note, it is not 'absorbed') into the umbrella system called Hindu religion. To put it differently, Hinduism is like a modern "Shopping Mall" or "Hypermarket" which has outlets fashioned from the very ancient (before Christ) periods to the latest fashions!

Accordingly, our Gods & Goddesses also are of very many different kinds and qualities, and one may/can choose whatever is to one's liking, temperament, and affordability (just as when you purchase from the Malls).

This should very well satisfy the religious/philosophical requirements of the vast majority among the Hindus, and it is so. They do not generally get the type of confusion/vexation which has come over you now (at least that is what your OP appears to me as).

For people who have become restless with the apparent contradictions of the vast panaroma of Hinduism, the way lies in choosing and meticulously adhering to either the Visishtadvaitha philosophy or the Dwaitha Philosophy. I am not qualified to expand on either of the above two; but, to put matters simply, in Visishtadvaitha - which is also known as Vaishnavism - Vishnu or Narayana is the Most Supreme godhead and Vaishnavism grew, in the historical period, with a great amount of rejection/hatred of the other godhead Siva. Even today, rejection of Siva is considered a healthy sign of a devout Vaishnava, although many people (Vaishnavas) are slowly moving away from this attitude to one of benign avoidance of Siva and saivite matters.
Dwaitha holds Vishnu/Narayana/Krishna as the highest godhead and they also do not support or promote Saivism.

If a peson is still uncomfortable with the above two, then the third alternative is Advaitha. You will find enough and more resources to read and study all these three systems in the internet itself today; additionally, you can also approach any reliable Acharya/Guru to learn about these three systems.

Coming back to your first post and the specific points raised in post # 2, my views are given below:—

1. our Purusha suktham says about Naryana and rudram talks about lord shiva.

Purusha sooktham is part of the last (tenth and final) book of Rigveda. In the wgole of Rigveda, there is no reference to the caste system (Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaisya & Soodra) except in this Purushasooktham. By pronouncing that these four castes originated from the mouth (countenance), arms, thighs and feet of the sacrificed Purusha, the soooktham was able to send a very categorical message that the four castes occupied the four echelons of society, with Brahmanas at the top. Purusha is neither Siva nor Vishnu nor Brahma; but all the sects and schisms incorporated this sooktham, because it helped every schism to abide by the overarching caste system as also the brahmin superiority.


Rudram forms part of the Yajurveda (Black Yajurveda). Rudra has been depicted, in the Rigveda, as a happy-go-lucky deva, always fully inebriated, and always followed by his band of followers, howling and creating destruction on his path and generally inhabiting the bhuvarloka (mountain sides of the mighty Himalayas, as per one section of Rigvedic scholars). But by the time we come to the Rudraprasna in the Black Yajurveda, Rudra has evolved much beyond his Rigvedic personality and appears to be the Supreme Godhead, capable of bestowing all worldly riches and gains to the worshipper (if we carefully read the Chamakaprasna). Nevertheless, the underlying tone of Rudra Prasna is one of depicting Rudra as an angry God, since the mantra starts with the words, नमस्ते रुद्रमन्यवे... namaste rudramanyave... (Prostrations unto you Rudra! who is anger).

It is quite possible that the old rigvedic followers, while spreading into the Indian sub-continent, came increasingly in contact with populations worshipping Siva as their god (Saivites) and merged their Rigvedic Rudra with the new-found Siva; the central place given to the words, नमः शिवायच शिवतराय च namaḥ śivāyaca śivatarāya ca within the Rudraprasnam is evidence for this conclusion; there was no Siva in the Rigveda.

2. There is a view that sri suktham is devoted to Goddess Lakshmi..others view that as Ambal or Devi...

It is a settled fact that Sree Sooktham is about goddess Lakshmi and not Ambal or Devi. Durgaa Sooktham, which claims to be about Goddess Durga, but is, in truth, composed of Riks praising the fire-god Agni, is considered as the sooktham for Ambal or Devi.

3. brahmakumari samaj considers rudra different from Shiva...

The Brahmakumaris is a very dubious kind of movement, although, it now has great money power and appeals to women. The beliefs of the Brahmakumaris cannot be considered as part of Hindu religious scriptural beliefs. We had one "Yaagava munivar" some years ago in Tamil Nadu. There have been very many such dissenting schisms and movements in India and floated by Hindus; but it is not correct to interpret such beliefs as part of Hindu religion. Kindly read the following:
Dada Lekhraj - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sarang]

It is better to learn about our matham from our sources to understand the basics and intricacies. Any concepts learned from west and non sampradayic sources will lead to misunderstanding and wrong interpretation of the scriptures including vedas, suktams and puranas. Our acharyas and forefathers have provided several parallel paths and appropriate links to learn, understand and practice the path. Sleazy interpretations will only cause delusion and irreverence, and will not lead one to the goals indicated.

 

[sangom]

Shri Vignesh,

If you propose to follow the "great" advice contained in the post above, please let me know. I will continue my post depending on your answer.

 

[prasad1]

Shri Vignesh,

If you propose to follow the "great" advice contained in the post above, please let me know. I will continue my post depending on your answer.

I do not know about Vigneshji,
I would like your post very much.

 

[sangom]

Shri Vignesh,

It appears as though you have not seen the discussions in this thread. Even so, for the sake of replying to all of your doubts raised in the OP, I give below my views on the remaining points.

Vishnu is considered as Brother of Indra or Upendra according to Veda...Therefore we are not very clear whether narayana and vishnu are same.

I have already stated how "viṣṇu" appears in the ṛgveda as the sidekick of Indra, or as 'upendra'; AFAIK, there is no mention, in the ṛgveda, of viṣṇu being brother of Indra.

The dictionary gives several meanings for the word 'nārāyaṇa', as under:—

(from nara, q.v.; sometimes derived fr. nara + ayana), ' son of Nara or the original man,' patronymic of the personified Purusha or first living being, author of the Purusha hymn ; he is often associated with Nara or the original man, and identified with Brahma (in Manu I. 9, n) and with Vishnu or Krishna; in Hari-vamsa 4601 Urvasi is described as springing from his thigh ; elsewhere he is regarded as a Kāsyapa or Angirasa , chief of the Sādhyas ; the eighth of the nine black Vāsu-devas (with Jainas) ; and so on.

It will be seen that while the puruṣasūktaṃ hymn of the ṛgveda stopped with naming the first living being as simply "puruṣa", it appears that in the later days when schisms grew within the hindu religion, this puruṣa came to be identified with nārāyaṇa (and not with śiva or rudra) and there was alround agreement of various schisms in this matter. From that period onwards, nārāyaṇa and viṣṇu became one. The concept of "anantaśayanam", the god in eternal sleep on the serpent-bed in the ocean of milk, which depicts, prima facie, a state of complete inaction and hence of a non-changing
state, possibly represents the nārāyaṇa concept since that word also means naḥ + ayana (ṇa) = nārāyaṇa or the unchanging.

Whether previous worship of surya, hiranya karba, agni, indra related to later god worship of sun, Brahma, Agni (Shiva is also worshipped in the form of Agni), Indra (is this vishnu or narayana or indra itself )....Brhama is not considered god because his age is limited and brahma post is given to different , different persons just like Indra post. Even Anjaneya is said to be next brahma after kali yuga (til Kali Yuga he is Chiranjeevi)

The worship of the sun or sun-god was chiefly confined to the morning and evening prayers to that god, or sandhyāvandana (which was mandatory for all the Dwija people). But this worship was based on the notion that the setting sun may not rise again (attributed to āsuric powers waging a constant war against the sun and destroying Him!). In later times the sun-god was made the protector of the eastern side of (obviously a Flat) earth and so, it became customary to offer oblation to sūrya as part of almost every homa. Whether this had any organic linkage to the later-day sun worship is not clear.

Brahma-worship probably never existed. When the Trinity concept (the trimūrtis — brahma, viṣṇu and śiva) was introduced - may be to bring in a sense of parity between the warring schisms beholden to viṣṇu and śiva - a story was also introduced, in the purāṇa to explain why brahma the creator came to be non-worshippable. This has nothing to do with whether Brahma has a specified age, etc., because according to the belief system all the gods including śiva will be destroyed at the end of each mahāpraḷaya. So, if fixed life-period is the criterion then only the bālamukunda floating on a peepal leaf, after the mahāpraḷaya is worship-worthy and all other gods and goddesses must be avoided!

The vedic mode of worship was uniformly through fire or agni by means of offering oblations to various "devas" (and not gods as we view the gods of today). hiraṇyagarbha was not a deva in the vedic period. hiraṇya in Sanskrit means unwrought gold and silver. hiraṇyagarbha is another name of Brahma, so called since He was considered to have been born from a golden egg supposed to have been formed out of the seed deposited in the waters when they were produced as the first creation of the Self-existent or Parabrahman according to current notions. According to Manu I. 9. this seed became a golden egg, resplendent as the sun, in which the Self-existent Brahma was born as Brahma, the creator of the worlds, (according to Kulluka, a celebrated scholiast on Manu) as Hiranya-garbha, who is therefore regarded as a manifestation of the Paramātman or supreme Soul ; in Rig-veda X. 1 2 1, it is said hiraṇyagarbha arose in the beginning ; he was the one lord of existing things ; he established the earth and the sky, etc.).

Thus, after identifying hiraṇyagarbha as the sun-god, the latter was worshipped by the name hiraṇyagarbha.

Worship of agni during the vedic times has been an integral part of worship itself because there was no worship except through fire-sacrifices or homas, yajnas and yāgas. Today also the hindus worship agni mainly through this mode; I am not aware of any temple (other than one in a remote tribal area of Karnataka) in which fire is kindled in the sanctum sanctorum and worshipped. Hence, there is hardly any "later worship" of agni.

śiva is considered, as per śaivism to be the primary principle in each of the five elements or pañcabhūta. Hence we have temples dedicated to śiva in each of these five forms. But even in this 'agni-kshetra' our forefathers were smart enough not to light a fire in the sanctum sanctorum (but only once

annually on the Thirukkarthikai day, and that too atop the hill, in the non-vedic method of lighting a match-stick and setting a huge ball of cloth dipped in ghee!).

Indra-worship practically ceased after the advent of Krishnaism and Vaishnavism in a prominent way. I don't think you can find today any Indra-worship except in the one oblation offering in most homas, saying "indrāya svāhā".

 

[VMSGEN]

So, if fixed life-period is the criterion then only the bālamukunda floating on a peepal leaf, after the mahāpraḷaya is worship-worthy and all other gods and goddesses must be avoided!

Dear Sir,
I disagree to some part. when you discuss about Vedas why confusing with Puranas. When we depict a God as Balaka, then that itself is the fact that is limited to time concept. A balaka can not remain balaka for ever. And also the leaf and water all are immortal then right? Also going by your post I understand that u subscribe to Dwaitha or Visishtadvaitha belief. I believe in Advaitham