• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

The dance of Shiva..

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thebigthinkg

0
Background

If Shiva is Energy, Why is Shiva (Energy) said to be dancing..?


The Names and Faces of Brahma

Brahma’s other names are Hiranyagarbah and KAncha.

Hiranyagarbha means one that has inert interior or inert uterus. Hiranya is interpreted as Gold as Gold is inert. Hiranya means the property of Gold, its inertness.

‘Brh’ma means one that is very large. Science says Gravity has the longest range (almost inifinite). Gravity is indeed Brhma (very large). In Vishnu Purana, Sage Parasara says the word Brahma is derived from root 'Vriha' which means increasing as it is infinite in reach.

Ka-Ancha means ‘Who bends/inclines’.


HiranyaGarbha - Four dimensional spacetime curvature


HiranyaGarbha, which means inert Uterus, is curved all along (egg-shaped). It is actually the four dimensional spacetime inside which the Universe evolves. Four dimensional spacetime is like the Uterus for the Universe.

If HiranyGarbha is spacetime, Brahma is Gravity, how do these two match..?

Gravity is a force-field. Force-fields are Rudras. But Brahma is not a Rudra.

Einstein actually showed that warping or bending of spacetime curvature (HiranyaGarbha) appears as Gravity (Brahma) and Gravity is not a true force-field (Rudra) at all. This is exactly what the Vedas and Puanas say too..


Ka-Ancha - Bending of spacetime curvature


kA-ancha means one who bends or inclines. Puranas say Brahma or Hiranyagarbha bends before Shiva and Shakti. Shiva is Energy and Shakti is Momentum.

Science says spacetime curvature 'warps' due to momentum (shakti) of Energy or Massive objects (mAyA).

Einstein showed that this spacetime geometry (Hiranyagarbha) of spacetime bending (kA-Ancha) due to energy and momentum is what manifests as Gravity (Brahma).


Brahma creates Vamadeva Rudra


If Brahma the Gravitational force-field is only a manifestation of the bending of spacetime curvature, can Brahma be looked at as a force-field or Rudra..?

Yes Gravity (Brahma) can be looked at as a force-field (Rudra) also, as in the newtonian view, as a sub-class of spacetime geometry (Hiranyagarbha).

This view is seen in Puranas also.

Puranas say Brahma creates a Rudra, when Brahma sees the creation is not going ahead with the manasaputras. Brahma is said to create Vamadeva Rudra. Incidentally I had mapped Vamadeva Rudra to a Gravitational force-field in my blog on Eleven Rudras - Eleven force fields.

Thus the bending (ka-ancha) of spacetime curvature (egg shaped Hiranyagarbha) causes the Vamadeva Rudra (Gravitational force field).


Dance of Shiva (Shiva Thandava)


Movement of Energy (momentum/acceleration) affects spacetime curvature. Spacetime curvature’s warping affects movement of Energy in turn.

They are in a continuous dance with each other. We can look at movement of energy (Shiva) in spacetime as a continuous dance.

This is the Shiva TAndava that leads to everything. All matter and beings evolve due to the Thandava (dance) of Shiva (Energy) inside the Hiranyagarbha (Spacetime) (arch of flames around Shiva).


Hamsa Vahana - The Gravitational waves

Like a swan/goose that moves in water producing silent waves around, when the bending of spacetime happens due to energy, it produces waves in the spacetime. These are called Gravitational waves. Hence Gravity or Brahma is pictured as mounted on a Swan.

More on this here..
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=30403&p=334872#post334872http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=30403&p=334872#post334872

As energetic objects (Shiva) dance in (accelerate/move in) the Hiranyagarbha (spacetime) affecting each other, ‘Brahma (Gravity) keeps moving in a swan’. It means gravitational waves keep travelling across all around due to movement of energy (and the bending caused).

This movement is also similar to the picturization of "Brahma in a swan trying to find the start or end of Shiva and not finding it', as spacetime is filled with gravitational waves all over.


Symbolism in the Nataraja

While the dance (Thandava) of Shiva (Energy) in spacetime being a fundamental pattern of our evolution is a scientific fact, the depiction of this pattern in an idol of Nataraja is philosophical.

Philosophies in general indicate a pattern based on science, but do not refer to specific facts.


  • Creation (Srshti) is indicated by the serpent around the waist that is said to represent kundalini.
  • Stabilization (Sthithi) is indicated by the steady foot on the Apsmara.
  • Contraction/Destruction (saMhAra) is indicated by the raised left foot that is bent/contracted.
  • Disappearance after contraction (tirobhAva) is indicated by the left hand pointing to the raised left foot.
  • Facilitation/promotion to next levels (anugraha) is indicated by the right hand.

The waves of hair spreading out (probably) from behind the head of Nataraja probably symbolizes the gravitational waves produced by this dance. (can be taken as so..)

In this dance of energy (Shiva), force-fields (Rudras) of Vibrations (drum) are produced, transfer of Energy/exchange of forces are produced (Agni).

This dance of Shiva (Energy) happens on apasmara, who looks downwards. Apa-smara means off-memory or memory loss or loss of remembrance. We can call it our ignorance. But it just means ‘beings’ lose their remembrance on the Thandava (dance) of Shiva (Energy), from which they came and keep looking downwards. They cannot look up and understand this dance of energy in the spacetime.

Thus the whole cycle of evolution (Brahman) is due to this dance of Energy (shiva) in the spacetime.

-TBT
 
renuka said:
Narayana!
Click to expand...

From that blog:

Shakti is Momentum, mass is mAyA, Vishnu is the 'inertia' expressed in that mAyA.

Mass (mAyA) is measurable while Inertia (Vishnu) is not measurable. Inertia (Vishnu) is a property of mass (mAyA). Hence Vishnu is pictured as brother of mAyA.

Vishnu (Inertia) is pictured as Male as it does not undergo changes itself.

mAyA (mass) and shakti (momentum) are pictured as Females as they undergo changes taking in Energy (Shiva).
That Vishnu the property of inertia in Energy (Shiva) and Mass (mAyA), is an expression of that 'Supreme Consciousness', the 'Atma'. Vishnu Sahasra Nama says Vishnu is the 'Atma' that creates all matter/beings and resides in them.

Since Inertia resides in all the Energy and Mass observed in the Universe, Vishnu is Nara+ayana.

-TBT
 
Last edited:
thebigthinkg said:
From that blog:

Shakti is Momentum, mass is mAyA, Vishnu is the 'inertia' expressed in that mAyA.

Mass (mAyA) is measurable while Inertia (Vishnu) is not measurable. Inertia (Vishnu) is a property of mass (mAyA). Hence Vishnu is pictured as brother of mAyA.

Vishnu (Inertia) is pictured as Male as it does not undergo changes itself.

mAyA (mass) and shakti (momentum) are pictured as Females as they undergo changes taking in Energy (Shiva).
That Vishnu the property of inertia in Energy (Shiva) and Mass (mAyA), is an expression of that 'Supreme Consciousness', the 'Atma'. Vishnu Sahasra Nama says Vishnu is the 'Atma' that creates all matter/beings and resides in them.

Since Inertia resides in all the Energy and Mass observed in the Universe, Vishnu is Nara+ayana.

-TBT
Click to expand...


Bhagavane! Narayana!

How can Vishnu be inertia when His abode Vaikunta means Without Inertia?
 
Dear Renuka,

I am only in slight disagreement with what Shri.TBT says. It is more in the understanding of the terminology.

Resistance to change can be seen as negative as when we talk of inertia or positive as when we talk of spiritual energy. It is the binding forces in a mass that in my view causes the inertia. Binding forces are holistic in nature and so when viewed in a positive perspective, inertia can be thought of as caused by such forces. They sustain evolution as evolution happens with more and more synthesis.
 
renuka said:
Bhagavane! Narayana!

How can Vishnu be inertia when His abode Vaikunta means Without Inertia?
Click to expand...

Inertia means both Idle (systems at rest continue to be at rest) and Ever Active (those that move continue to move).

Vaikuntha comes from Vi+Kuntha. Kuntha means inert/idle/dull. Vi-Kuntha could mean the opposite Active/Sharp etc.. But vi prefix in sanskrit is similar to dis/de in English. It negates at time (dis-appear), specifies at times (vi-jnana, disseminate) and intensifies (dis-gruntled) at times. So Vi-Kuntha could mean inert/dull also.

Thus it is both Active and Inert, which is what is Inertia. That's why Vishnu is mAdhava (Madhu) and madhu-sudhana both.

-TBT
 
Last edited:
thebigthinkg said:
Inertia means both Idle (systems at rest continue to be at rest) and Ever Active (those that move continue to move).

Vaikuntha comes from Vi+Kuntha. Kuntha means inert/idle/dull. Vi-Kuntha could mean the opposite Active/Sharp etc.. But vi prefix in sanskrit is similar to dis/de in English. It negates at time (dis-appear), specifies at times (vi-jnana, disseminate) and intensifies (dis-gruntled) at times. So Vi-Kuntha could mean inert/dull also.

Thus it is both Active and Inert, which is what is Inertia. That's why Vishnu is mAdhava (Madhu) and madhu-sudhana both.

-TBT
Click to expand...

I will have to seriously beg to differ with the above explanation.

BTW I hope you dont mind me saying this but sometimes when we have pre conceived notions we either try to alter facts to fit into the scope of the notion we already have in our mind..so that way the final outcome is neither scientific nor philosophical.
 
sravna said:
Dear Renuka,

I am only in slight disagreement with what Shri.TBT says. It is more in the understanding of the terminology.

Resistance to change can be seen as negative as when we talk of inertia or positive as when we talk of spiritual energy. It is the binding forces in a mass that in my view causes the inertia. Binding forces are holistic in nature and so when viewed in a positive perspective, inertia can be thought of as caused by such forces. They sustain evolution as evolution happens with more and more synthesis.
Click to expand...

Dear Sravna,

I do not know if I can actually say the same..But I have my doubts to agree with a theory that Brahma could be Gravity.

As we all know Brahma is the Generation Principle.

Gravity alone does not denote creative or generative forces.

Creation is much more than gravity alone.

Gravity is an attractive force between 2 masses.

F = Gm1m2/r2

F = gravitational force of attraction (N) m1, m2 are the interacting masses (kg) r is the separation of the masses (m)




BigthinkJi feels Brahma is Gravity..so what are the interacting masses here?
 
renuka said:
I will have to seriously beg to differ with the above explanation.

BTW I hope you dont mind me saying this but sometimes when we have pre conceived notions we either try to alter facts to fit into the scope of the notion we already have in our mind..so that way the final outcome is neither scientific nor philosophical.
Click to expand...

Dear Renuka,

That is what science too does . It starts with a theory which is a preconceived notion of truth and tests for its correctness. As long as you are able to defend your theory in a logically consistent manner, I think it is your opponent who is not willing to accept it based on his beliefs of reality.
 
renuka said:
Dear Sravna,

I do not know if I can actually say the same..But I have my doubts to agree with a theory that Brahma could be Gravity.

As we all know Brahma is the Generation Principle.

Gravity alone does not denote creative or generative forces.

Creation is much more than gravity alone.

Gravity is an attractive force between 2 masses.

F = Gm1m2/r2

F = gravitational force of attraction (N) m1, m2 are the interacting masses (kg) r is the separation of the masses (m)




BigthinkJi feels Brahma is Gravity..so what are the interacting masses here?
Click to expand...

Dear Renuka,

I understand your point of view. But I do not want to comment without really understanding what Shri.TBT says. I will get back on this.
 
thebigthinkg said:
Thus it is both Active and Inert, which is what is Inertia. That's why Vishnu is mAdhava (Madhu) and madhu-sudhana both.

-TBT
Click to expand...

mAdhava means Husband of mA..that means husband of Lakshmi.

Madhusudana I think we all know... the slayer of Madhu.

So how are these 2 situations related as you claim?
 
My take on this is:

The trinity of Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva represent one reality. As Brahma the projection of brahman as force and energy happens.

Since Shiva and Vishnu are the same , force and energy are also in essence the same. When you are not able to perceive the whole you experience force. Shiva is the destructive physical and mental force. Such a force destroys everything except what is spiritual and so abets one towards being spiritual, that is , it abets evolution. The actual process of evolution is done by the harmonising spiritual energy which represents the sustenance aspect of the trinity i.e., Vishnu.

The Brahma aspect of trinity creates maya, Shiva aspect of the trinity uses maya and the Vishnu aspect dispels maya.

May be the nature of the consorts of the trinity may be related to what each in the trinity does.
 
renuka said:
Dear Sravna,

I do not know if I can actually say the same..But I have my doubts to agree with a theory that Brahma could be Gravity.

As we all know Brahma is the Generation Principle.

Gravity alone does not denote creative or generative forces.

Creation is much more than gravity alone.

Gravity is an attractive force between 2 masses.

F = Gm1m2/r2

F = gravitational force of attraction (N) m1, m2 are the interacting masses (kg) r is the separation of the masses (m)




BigthinkJi feels Brahma is Gravity..so what are the interacting masses here?
Click to expand...

What you are talking of is a Newtonian view of Gravity.

From the blog here
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=30403&p=334872#post334872


  1. Brahma’s other names are Hiranyagarbah and KAncha.
  2. Spacetime is called Hiranyagarbha because spacetime is the inert uterus in which all the Universe evolves. Four dimensional spacetime is like the Uterus for the Universe.
  3. Hiranyagarbha (spacetime) is curved at all points. Hence it is called egg-shaped.
  4. Hiranyagarbha means one that has inert/Golden interior or inert uterus. Hiranya is interpreted as Gold as Gold is inert. Hiranya means the property of Gold, its inertness. (It could be seen as Golden Uterus also).
  5. ‘Brh’ma means one that is very large. Science says Gravity has the longest range (almost inifinite). Gravity is indeed Brhma (very large).
  6. In Vishnu Purana, Sage Parasara says the word Brahma is derived from root 'Vriha' which means increasing as it is infinite in reach.
  7. kA-ancha means one who bends or inclines. Puranas say Brahma or Hiranyagarbha bends before Shiva and Shakti and hence called ka-Ancha. Shiva is Energy and Shakti is Momentum.
  8. Science says spacetime curvature 'warps' due to momentum (shakti) of Energy or Massive objects (mAyA).
  9. If HiranyGarbha is spacetime, Brahma is Gravity, how do these two match..? Gravity is a force-field. Force-fields are Rudras. But Brahma is not a Rudra.
  10. Einstein actually showed that warping or bending of spacetime curvature (HiranyaGarbha) appears as Gravity (Brahma) and Gravity is not a true force-field (Rudra) at all. Gravity is not a true force-field as Einstein showed, as well as Vedas showed (in my mapping as both Hiranyagarbha and Brahma are names of same entity).
  11. If Brahma the Gravitational force-field is only a manifestation of the bending of spacetime curvature, how come Brahma becomes a force-field or Rudra..?
  12. Puranas say Brahma created a Rudra called the Vamadeva Rudra when he saw that his manasaputras are not progressing on creation.
  13. Science says this bending of spacetime geometry can be modelled as a force-field of Gravity which is a sub-class of Einstein's view of Gravity as spacetime geometry.
  14. Thus the bending (ka-ancha) of spacetime curvature (egg shaped Hiranyagarbha) causes the Vamadeva Rudra (Gravity).
  15. The bending of spacetime due to energy and momentum (massive bodies) manifests as an attracting force between these bodies, as it changes the path of movement of these bodies.
  16. Since Brahma, the Gravity which is caused due to bending of Hiranyagarbha, can be visualized as a force-field that runs between bodies having momentum, Brahma is said to produce a Rudra called Vamadeva Rudra.
  17. Brahma the Gravity or the bending of Hiranyagarbha to Shiva/Shakti travels like a ‘Hamsa’. Like a Swan that travels in a pond producing silent waves, Brahma, the Gravity silently produces waves on the Hiranyagarbha (spacetime), as it warps the spacetime (Hiranyagarbha) and the ‘pull’ travels from one point to another.
  18. This swan-like (Hamsa) wave movement of the Gravity (Brahma) affects all particles including the photons as photons travel along the ‘wave’ produced by the Hamsa.
  19. This ‘Swan-like’ (Hamsa) wave movement of Gravity (Brahma) may not affect gluons or carrier of Strong force (Soma) as gluons are massless, but confined in hadrons and cannot travel freely.
  20. Thus the Hamsa is said to separate the Soma (Strong force of Gluons) from the floods/Apa (EM force of Photons). In short, Hamsa represent a 'wave' or a 'gravitational wave' depending on how it is used.

-TBT

PS: I CCP'ed from another blog. It is not allowing me to remove the 'bold'ness in some of these lines.. Apologies for it.
 
Last edited:
Now it gets even more confusing...there are massive bodies..attraction..bending in front of them etc...starting to sound very 50 shady shades of Gravity!
 
thebigthinkg said:
Brahma the Gravity or the bending of Hiranyagarbha to Shiva/Shakti travels like a ‘Hamsa’. Like a Swan that travels in a pond producing silent waves, Brahma, the Gravity silently produces waves on the Hiranyagarbha (spacetime), as it warps the spacetime (Hiranyagarbha) and the ‘pull’ travels from one point to another.
Click to expand...

Are there really any silent waves?

Everything has a frequency right?

So what is the frequency of the barely audible waves produced by Brahma on Hiranyagarbha?

How many Hertz?
 
renuka said:
Yes..I know Gravitational waves have been detected.. I read that recently in some other thread here.

But my question is what is the Brahma -Hiranyagarbha waves frequency?
Click to expand...

From anywhere between 10^-7 to 10^11 hz is the estimation of waves produced when Brahma moves like a swan or Hiranyagarbha bends/oscillates. It depends on momentum (shakti) /energy (shiva) of the accelerating object.

-TBT
 
thebigthinkg said:
From anywhere between 10^-7 to 10^11 hz is the estimation of waves produced when Brahma moves like a swan or Hiranyagarbha bends/oscillates. It depends on momentum (shakti) /energy (shiva) of the accelerating object.

-TBT
Click to expand...


Can you let me know how you arrived to this value.

Formula please.
 
Going by all the efforts to link science and vedas, shouldn't we, indians (or vedics) have invented everything that is to be invented within this "spacetime", since we seem to have covered all the concepts in the vedas?

For all their intelligence, the seers (like as, r and m) who had thoroughly (apparently) examined the vedas did not talk about gravity, mass, inertia and momentum, but rather chose to dwell solely on the divine aspects.

Strange.
 
Coming to visit this site after a long time. But this thread is kind of a turn off.
Is there any science in any of this? Are there knowledgeable members that can comment on this?

My feeling is that there is no science in this thread and it is probably mockery of Indian philosophy. If someone who is a science expert comments on this thread positively I will withdraw my comment and even apologize to the author of the thread.

Somehow it seems one can write anything in this General Section - just dreaming up nonsense.

And there are followers. I never thought Mr auh would be joining the club of followers.
 
a-TB said:
And there are followers. I never thought Mr auh would be joining the club of followers.
Click to expand...


Dear a-TB ji,


Some of us have been participating in this thread and have been posing some questions too...that does not make any one of us "followers".


When anyone comes up with a new theory or a new speculation..there is absolutely no harm reading it and also pose a few questions if we have the interest.

To call something nonsense right away is not the style of everyone.

I personally do not agree with most views in this thread but nevertheless it made me think from a different point of view..read up a bit more on physics etc to re-enforce why I do not agree with the views expressed by the OP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top