Avinash

Hi sand1p, As you know English is not a phonetic language; we use Roman scripts for English and the same symbol can be pronounced differently. But Sanskrit (for which the script is Devanagiri) is phonetic. Therefore, if we write any Sanskrit verse using Roman alphabets, then it will be difficult to understand the correct pronunciation. So, it is important that you decide on phonetic symbols that you are familiar with. For example, are you familiar with iTrans? Or, any other transliteration scheme?

Correct Not only the concept of demigods but many concepts in any religion are not directly known through our physical and observable experiences. The very concept of God is one of these. That is why, there are many people who do not believe in God. But, what is important is that the concept should not be inconsistent with what is known to be a fact. As far I understand, the concept of demigods is not inconsistent with any known fact. Though, of course, if somebody does not believe in demigods, then his belief also will not be inconsistent with any known fact. Likewise, gods are also not to be held as perfect. As I mentioned above, there are many things (including the very concept of God) in any religion which do not fall within the scope of our observation. Testing beings could be one possible reason, though, it may be that there are other reasons as well. However, let us concentrate on this particular reason. It is true that, just as God can test other beings, he tests demigods also. The same demigod is not given a particular post for ever. Consider Indra, the god of rain. The word Indra is a post. Something like prime minister. Rightnow, somebody is the prime minister of a particular country. But, he did not always hold that post and also he will not always hold that post. Likewise, there have been and will be many Indra's. A demigod is given some authority depending on his earlier conduct. But, depending on his conduct during the time he was holding that authority and also depending on the conducts of some others, somebody else can be given that authority i.e. made as the demigod for that position. There are also stories in Puranas in which some human being became more powerful than a demigod because of his conduct. The concept of demigods will be difficult to understand if you put them in a group together with God. Think of them as beings the way there are many other beings. All beings are given some power. Demigods also have some power. No being is perfect. Demigods are also not perfect. God does not require us to believe that demigods can never be wrong. But, just as we request some human beings in power for some favours even though we know that they may not grant those favours, we worship (in the sense of praying or requesting) demigods. The word devotion towards demigods is to be understood in this sense. So far love is concerned, we are required to have love towards demigods the way we should have love towards other beings.

To same extent I have found many people basing their opinions on something other than scriptures. Some of them outright refuse to believe in what scriptures say. Of course, they should not be called as Hindus. However, there are some who want to believe in scriptures but, on some particular topic, they are not sure what scriptures say and they get answer to that based on their personal belief. I would not outright consider them as non-Hindus, but I would say that their belief is not exactly as per the scriptures of Hinduism. I am myself not very much clear about this. I have read some stories in which somebody had to take the form of a tree till a particular time because of some bad action that he had performed earlier. After the expiry of that period, he was back in his earlier form. These stories do not talk about good and evil done by trees. But both tree-life and also the life after that were due to something that happened before the tree-life. But, I am not very clear about what scriptures say about good and bad done by trees. I will wait for sometime for somebody else to post answers. If nobody posts, then I will assume that those knowing the answers may not have read this post of mine and I will start a different thread on this topic. I am not sure what should be considered as basic moral values. Could you give any example of what you could consider as basic moral value. The example need not be as per Hinduism. It could be based on your belief. Then I will answer what Hinduism says about that. Many would consider telling lies as bad. But, depending on situation, telling lies can be better than telling the truth.

Because of our limitations, we cannot know all the reasons. But, there is nothing wrong in trying to know the reasons (at least some of those). Example: One reason known to us for Nrisimha incarnation was, as mentioned in a previous post, to check the evil of Hiranyakashipu.

In general, yes. However, in order to be precise, I would just add that God can make anything happen without the help of any demigod. So, if God wants to make it rain, either he can cause that Himself or ask some demigod to do so. He could do that or cause rain himself. No, he does not have any such authoity. If he does that, then he is acting against what he has been authorised. God may decide to punish him or to show him what mistake he is making. Yes. Not only gods but even we humans are God's creations. We suffer from ego and greed. We lack in wisdom and power. But still we have been given decision making abilities. We may not have as much authority as gods have but we do have some authorities. Our sphere of authority is smaller than that of gods, but even this sphere is a part of God's creation. So, in order to get the answer to your question, it is good to consider the wider question: Why did God create any being (not only gods but humans and other life forms as well) who are not perfect? Why did God give any power to any such being? Whatever is the reason God allows humans to be incharge of some affairs even though human may make mistakes is the reason that God has made gods as incharges of some affairs. Before describing this in more detail, I would like to know if I have understood your question correctly and then we can discuss this in more detail.

That is right. He had no acadmic basic in rejecting Puranas. He rejected them because he did not like many things which Puranas contain. For example, according to his personal belief, God never incarnated but Puranas contain many incarnation stories. Of course he gave some interpretations of Vedas and showed that we could not treat Puranas as divine if we assumed Vedas as divine. Some may consider this as academic basis. But, in reality, the basis is not really academic. Puranas did not match his personal belief, and therefore he interpreted Vedas in such a way that some of the contents of Puranas could be shown to be wrong. On that basis, he claimed that Puranas were not of divine origin. So, irrespective of whatever method he chose to show that Puranas should be rejected, the basis was his personal belief. Scriptures say that, because of our limitations i.e. lack of perfect knowledge, we do not know all the reasons why God does something. A single incarnation may server many purposes. So, it is possible that Nrisimha incarnation was for other reasons as well. However, if you consider the main reason known to man, then the reason was what you mentioned, viz., keeping the evil of Hiranyakashipu in check. Of course, it was also good for devotee Prahlad in the sense that he could see God (though in the form of man-lion).

Yes. Agnideva is the god of fire. It is because of him that fire works. Indra is the lord of rain. it is because of the grace of Indra that there is rain. Correct. Yes, it is true that because of their ignorance they may make mistakes. Also, they sometime make mistakes because of ego or greed. However, even these (i.e. ego and greed) can be considered as corollary to not being perfectly knowledgeable because perfect knowledge would tell us that ego and greed are not good. So, you are in right in saying that they make mistakes because of the lack of perfect knowledge and power. Yes, that is correct. Supreme God (often referred as God with uppercase 'g') is perfect and never makes any mistake.

While I do not consider the question as wrong, it is difficult to answer. Arya Samaj was founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswati in 1875. He did not like what many Hindus of that time were doing. He did not like untouchability and deplorable condition of women, which were quite common in those days. He did not like worship of statues. He did not believe in the concept of incarnation. He started Arya Samaj as a reformist movement. He believed strongly in Vedas (scriptures of Hinduism) and considered them as divine and hence faultless. But he did not believe in Puranas (another set of scriptures of Hinduism), because Puranas contain stories of various incarnations; some Puranas contain various methods of statue-worship and they contain many other things which Dayanand Saraswati did not believe in. He said that the stories in Puranas were later additions by man and were not divine. In this sense, Arya Samaj is an offshoot of Hinduism. But their beliefs are radically different from what is commonly considered as beliefs of Hinduism. For example, it is well known that Hindus go to temples, which contain statues. Arya Samajis do not believe in statue worship. In that sense, we can say that they are not Hindus. By saying this, we do not cause any disrespect to them because even they believe that they are not hindus (at least the way hindus are commonly believed to be). So, I feel that while tryng to understand Hinduism, you can safely assume that Arya Samajis are not Hindus. If you want to learn Arya Samaj, then that should be done separately. There are many incarnations. Let me take the example of Nrisimha. There was a teenager named Prahlad. His father was king Hiranyakashipu. Hiranyakashipu said that he was God and everybody should worship him. He tortured and even killed those who did not. Out of fear, many started worshipping him as God. But his own son Prahlad did not agree with him. He showed respect to his father but did not consider him as God. Hiranyakashipu tried to convince Prahlad in many ways:- by talking lovingly, by giving arguments, through threats. When nothing worked, he tried to kill Prahlad. But, because of blessings of God, Prahlad always escaped. One day Hiranyakashipu angrily asked Prahlad, "Where is your God?" Prahlad: "Everywhere." Hiranyakashipu (pointing to a pillar): "Then he should be in this pillar too. If so, then let him come out of the pillar." Saying this, Hiranyakashipu hit that pillar. Out came Lord Nrisimha (a man-lion incarnation). His form was partly man and partly lion. He killed Hiranyakashipu. Hiranyakashipu had a boon that he could not be killed either on land or in sky, either in fire or in water, either during daytime or during nighttime, either by humans or gods or birds or animals or any other species found in the world, either inside his house or outside. Note: I have used and henceforth will be using god (lowercase 'g') to mean demigod and God (uppercase 'g') to mean supreme God. Lord Nrisimha, being God Himself, did not belong to any of the species found in the world. He killed Hiranyakashipu in the evening, thus neither day nor night. To hill Hiranyakashipu, Lord Nrisimha put him on His lap, thus neither on land, nor in sky; neither in fire nor in water. Hiranyakashipu also had a boon that he could be killed neither inside his house nor outside. Lord Nrisimha took him to the entrance of his palace and killed him there.

That is approximately Earth's age, not the age of the universe.

Dear viswa cheda, I have a request. I have the same request to renju sd, rajit nair and Sridhar Babu. When responding to a post, rather than starting a new thread, please post your responses in the same thread unless you want to discuss a different topic. That way, we will get a post and all its related responses in the same thread.

There are many scriptures of Hinduism. Puranas are included in these. Some people (e.g. those belonging to Arya Samaj) do not believe in the stories written in Puranas (at least not literally). But that is their personal belief. If we go by what Puranas say, then God has incarnated many times in various forms. So, according to the scriptures of Hinduism, incarnation is an essential belief. Different incarnations were for different reasons. If you mention any specific incarnation, then I will try to tell some of the reasons why that incarnation happened.

When various Hindus respond to questions on Hinduism, their responses differ. Some differences are because of differences of understanding. However, there is another reason for the differences. The reason is that they do not always respond based on their understanding of scriptures. They combine that understanding with the understanding that they have from other sources e.g. from whatever they have studies in Science and in some cases, their personal beliefs. Since their understandings from other sources differ, their responses differ. Hinduism says that even tress have soul. So, they can possess the choice of good and evil.Request to other posters: Could somebody please give the answer to this question in more detail? Yes, exactly.

I could not post my reply earlier because of forum downtime. The answer depends on what you will take as 'creating'. I may build a car and thus I am the creator of that car. In that sense demigods also can create many things. Of course, they can and do create many things which I may not even be able to imagine.But if I build a car then I have to use many materials which are not created by me. Likewise, when demigods create something, then they use many things which are not created by them. If you are asking about the ultimate creator i.e. who has created things without using things created by somebody else, then the answer is 'the one Supreme'. Demigods are not ultimate creators in this sense. I guess when you used the word 'creator', you meant in this second sense. But I just wanted my answer the clear and that is why considered both meanings. It is mostly democratic in the sense that supreme God has given authorities to them within their spheres of authority. However, He does exercise control from time to time when need arises. He has full control. If supreme God asks them to do something, then they have to do it. But the same thing can be done in various ways. to select one of those ways, the demigods may take their own decisions.One more things. Some demigods in some situations may not directly interact with supreme God. They may interact with somebody above them but below the supreme. Yes, He is alone the one who is omnipotent and omniscient. Demigods may be very powerful and knowledgeable but they have some limitations. To a large extent but in some cases, even within their sphere of responsibility they may make some mistakes.

They are creations of Supreme God the way everything (including us) is His creation. I can give you an analogy of government. If you get some work done from the government of your country, then there are different ministers for different purposes but none has the power to grant everything. Different demigods are incharges of different things. They have different powers. Because of whatever powers they have, they can grant different kinds of boons. But none of them is really omnipotent and omniscient the way supreme is. No matter how powerful they are, they are subservient to the supreme.

Hi, You have written that you have found Leela but not Leila. Could you tell how you pronounce your name Leila?

Yes, all species can perform good/bad actions. Of course no species has beings who can perform whatever actions they like; there are limitations. Moreover what is good and what is bad changes from specie to species. It also changes from individual to individual for individuals of the same species depending on the situation they are in.

There are few people who call themselves as Hindus but do not believe in rebirth. However, they are very few. Moreover, all of our scriptures talk about rebirth. So, if you go by the teachings of the scriptures of Hinduism, then rebirth is a very fundamental belief.

Well, there are 8.4 million species. It is not necessary for any being to go through all these species. How many species one goes through before becoming human depends on the actions one performs. Depending on one's actions, one can even move from human species to another. There is not a single thing that one does to attain human form. What form one has in one life depends on the aggregate of actions performed in the last birth and, in some cases, many previous births. Yes, provided you do not restrict yourself only to the life forms on this Earth. You have to count all including those present in heaven and hell. When one becomes free from the cycle of birth and death, then one attains supreme abode. That world is spiritual. Till then one is enjoying the material world.

Hi Imranhasan, You have asked how one becomes a Hindu. The same question can be asked about some other religion. For example, one may ask how one becomes a Muslim. Many Muslims will answer that one who follows the teachings of Quran is a Muslim. But often, this definition is not strictly followed. In government records many are mentioned as Muslims because they belong to Muslim families even if they may violate some of the teachings of Quran. As you can see, irrespective of whatever definition you may prefer for the word 'Muslim', in practice, more definitions than one are used. The same is the case with 'Hindu'. Often a person is called a Hindu because he belongs to a Hindu family even if his beliefs may be vastly different from those of the other members of the same family. So, rather than going into how to define 'Hindu', let me tell what beliefs comprise Hinduism. As one poster has mentioned, Hinduism can be considered as a collection of religions. This is because there are many groups within Hinduism. If you want, I or somebody else here can talk (as per our knowledge) about some specific group. But in this post I will only mention the beliefs common across those groups. Again, let me take parallel with Islam. If we ask one book which contains the teachings of Islam, then the name is 'Quran'. If we ask who gave those teachings, then the answer is Prophet Muhammed. (I understand that many may object to this saying that the teachings originally came from Allah. However, to the common folks on Earth, the teachings were given by Prophet Muhammed even if he, in turn, got those teachings from Allah). But, in case of Hinduism, we cannot pinpoint a single book or a single teacher. It is believed that ages ago, many sages gathered spiritual knowledge. They passed on this knowledge to others. At present, that knowledge is distributed across various books: Vedas, Puransas, Itihasa, Ramayana (a poetry) etc. So, you can say that Hindus believe in the teachings of these books (though not all Hindus interprete these teachings the same way). Now, what are these beliefs? 1. One supreme God:- Hindus believe in a single supreme God with many demigods and demigoddesses (who are not supreme). Not all sects of Hinduism agree on who this supreme is, but it is common belief across all sects that there is one Supreme. 2. Eternal soul:- One's body dies but his soul is eternal. 3. Rebirth after death:- The soul accepts a new body. What kind of body one is reborn depends on what good and bad actions he performed in previous birth(s). Based one one's good deeds, one may become so spiritually advanced that he is not reborn again i.e. he becomes liberated from the cycle of birth and death. Then, it is said that he has attained 'moksha'. 4. Law of Karma i.e. 'as you sow, so shall you reap':- Your good and bad actions always affect you even if you may not know what actions of yours are affecting you in what way or even if you forget those actions. You experience the results of some of those actions in the same birth and the remaining in future births in case a single birth is not sufficient for the results of all the actions. 5. Heaven and hell:- Going to heaven or hell is a corollary of the law of karma. You do good and after death you go to heaven. Do bad and you go to hell. If you do some good actions and some bad, therefore, after death, some part of time you will spend in heaven and some in hell. You are in heaven/hell only death and rebirth. The time spent in heaven/hell may not be sufficient to take care of all your accumulated karma. You have experience the results of remaining karma in future births as mentioned in (4) above. If you attain moksha (as explained in (3)), then you go to supreme abode (or highest heaven). These are some of the beliefs of Hinduism I could think of now.

Please write as shown in the attached image.

>>Have ever thought about the consequences of forcing women to carry unwanted babies to term. Some of those women could be pushed to suicide or try obtain an back alley abortion.<< If a woman becomes pregnant due to rape, then why should she try to commit suicide or hide her preganancy from the society by opting for abortion? She does this because she feels that society would consider her responsible (at least partially) for her pregnancy. And her feelings are right. This is one of the things that I really hate about society. If a woman is forcibly made pregnant, then it is no fault of hers. Rather, it is the fault of the man committing the rape. If such things are understood, then I do not see any harm in raising the children. Some people may argue that even if the woman is not blamed, she may not like to raise the child because she did not want that child. Fine, she did not want the child. But that does not mean that she should not take care of the child. Often it happens that we get responsibilities, which we did not want and, in some cases, did not even anticipate. But we have to shoulder those responsibilities.

There was a time when 'unangry' was a word in dictionary. It meant, as is obvious, 'not angry'. The word is obsolete now. However there are plentiful obsolete English words ending in 'gry'.

When I said Ramayana, I meant "Valmiki Ramayana". It is true that the discourse is given by sage Vasistha to Rama before sage Viswamitra takes Rama to the forest. But as far I am aware the discourse is not written in Valmiki Ramayana. It is in some other Ramayana which is a part of a Purana. I am not sure about the name, but perhaps it is Adhyatma Ramayana. May be you did not mean only Valimki Ramayana by 'Ramayana'. Then I stand corrected.

Gita is a part of Mahabharata but Yoga Vasistha is not a part of Ramayana.

Yes, that is correct. andhatamas has no stress on any syllable.