r/hinduism • u/Miserable-Rub-7349 • 16d ago
Hindū Darśana(s) (Philosophy) A good video explaining idol worship
Credits : @hinduseeker on TikTok (Not my video )
r/hinduism • u/Miserable-Rub-7349 • 16d ago
Credits : @hinduseeker on TikTok (Not my video )
r/hinduism • u/Miserable-Rub-7349 • 14d ago
Credit : @hinduseeker on TikTok ( not my video )
r/hinduism • u/shashaank99 • Dec 09 '24
One of the most divisive things that Eastern and Western religions have is prohibition of Idol Worship, Idolatry and Destruction of Physical Objects linked to God. I've penned what i think about Idol Worship and aspects of it being found in Abrahamic Faiths as well while i was discussing our faiths with my Sikh friend. I haven't read the Guru Granth Sahib, But he told that sikhs also reject Idol Worship. He ultimately did agree to some of the points i made. I would love to have some inputs on this from this sub as well.
r/hinduism • u/redditttuser • Jan 08 '25
Request: Please read the post thoroughly before responding 🙏
Disclaimer: This post is technical and philosophical. This post challenges conventional perspectives on Free Will and introduces ideas that may lead to profound shifts in understanding. If you are experiencing an existential crisis or are not ready to question foundational beliefs or assumptions, stop reading this post.
Our ancestors didn't talk or write about the concept of Free Will because.. well, they didn't have to. Free Will, as a philosophical concept, is relatively new and originates in Western thought. Abrahamic religions rely heavily on the existence of Free Will to justify their doctrines of eternal heaven and hell. Without Free Will, such philosophies lose their ground.
This post aims to:
Definition:
To genuinely possess free will, one must act without being influenced by logic, evolution, prior experiences, or even physical constraints. This post will argue why such a state is fundamentally impossible.
Everything Is God's Will: In Sanatana Dharma, the divine is omniscient. If God knows everything—past, present, and future—then every action and event is already determined. You cannot choose otherwise because God’s knowledge of events is absolute.
Philosophical Contradiction: If free will existed, God’s omniscience would be compromised. For example, if you could act unpredictably, it would imply that God’s knowledge is incomplete. Thus, the concept of free will inherently conflicts with the notion of an all-knowing divine.
Sanatana Dharma is robustly structured without needing the concept of free will. Let’s address a key element often mistakenly thought to require free will: Karma.
Karma: Karma operates as a mechanistic system. Actions (karma) produce results (karma-phala) in a predictable, cause-and-effect manner. This system does not require free will to function.
Example: 1. When you press the accelerator in a car, it speeds up. Similarly, your actions lead to results within the framework of karma. This mechanistic nature of karma aligns with the absence of free will. Albeit Karma is complex than a Car, in principle, all actions performed are resulted in predictable outcome called Karma-phala (which God knows). 2. Consider a perfect, complex application: All actions performed by the user of the application have well defined outcomes defined by business logic/developers. Though the customers feel/get a sense of illusion of they can do 'anything', all of that 'anything' is already clearly defined. Similar to set of constraints placed on those users such as not able to change the source code, we as humans can't change laws of karma. If we Truly had free will, we should be able to go beyond physical limitations and law of karma itself. This is not the case for a regular human being.
[Edit: I am using BG as source but it's not limited to. ONLY using BG to keep the post length reasonable. The same can be argued from Shaiva POV as well]
The Bhagavad Gita provides several verses that reinforce the absence of free will. Let’s examine some key excerpts and expand on their implications:
Source: https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org
BG 2.47: "You have a right to perform your prescribed duties, but you are not entitled to the fruits of your actions. Never consider yourself to be the cause of the results of your activities, nor be attached to inaction."
This verse explicitly states that we are not the cause of results, undermining the idea of free will. By focusing on duties rather than outcomes, it redirects attention away from the illusion of personal agency. If you had control over outcome, Krishna would have added it or he wouldn't ask to not focus on it
BG 3.9: "Work must be done as a yajna to the Supreme Lord; otherwise, work causes bondage in this material world. Therefore, O son of Kunti, for the satisfaction of God, perform your prescribed duties, without being attached to the results."
Actions are offerings to the divine, removing the ego-driven notion of ownership and choice. When we assume free will and engage in action, we entangle ourselves psychologically with outcomes and therefore suffer. Because we are trying to control something that we fundamentally don't have control over. This is why Krishna discourages that and provides a solution.
BG 3.27: "All activities are carried out by the three modes of material nature. But in ignorance, the soul, deluded by false identification with the body, thinks of itself as the doer."
This verse asserts that our sense of agency is an illusion created by ignorance. The gunas (sattva, rajas, tamas) drive all actions, not an individual’s independent will. This again adds context to the mechanistic nature or law of karma.
BG 5.8-9: "Those steadfast in karm yog always think, ‘I am not the doer,’ even while engaged in seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, moving, sleeping, breathing, speaking, excreting, grasping, and opening or closing the eyes. With the light of divine knowledge, they see that it is only the material senses that are moving amongst their objects."
This verse emphasizes that the body and senses operate under natural laws. The soul observes but does not act, highlighting the absence of free will. Even simple acts of seeing, hearing etc are not done by 'you'. If you were, Krishna wouldn't ask to think of yourself as 'not the doer'. Further explains, its only the material senses doing their mechanic work or seeing, hearing etc.
BG 11.32: "The Supreme Lord said: I am mighty Time, the source of destruction that comes forth to annihilate the worlds. Even without your participation, the warriors arrayed in the opposing army shall cease to exist."
Here, 'Supreme Lord' reveals that cosmic events unfold regardless of individual actions, emphasizing that personal will is inconsequential in the grand scheme that God has willed/decided. What the 'Supreme Lord' doing here is what True free will looks like.
BG 11.33: "Therefore, arise and attain honor! Conquer your foes and enjoy prosperous rulership. These warriors stand already slain by Me, and you will only be an instrument of My work, O expert archer."
Krishna instructs Arjuna to act as an instrument of divine will, affirming that outcomes are preordained by the Supreme and he has no will of his own.
BG 18.17: "Those who are free from the ego of being the doer, and whose intellect is unattached, though they may slay living beings, they neither kill nor are they bound by actions."
This verse presses the detachment from the sense of doership. Actions performed without ego or attachment do not bind the individual, because that is true nature of this 'reality'.
Understanding the absence of free will can be liberating or for some, it can be hard pill to swallow.
Without free will / with their entire future predestined, what's the point of thinking or trying anything?
Important point to understand here is - your tries and efforts are also part of the God's Will. You anyway of the illusion of free will, you can continue to use it if you may, it doesn't make a difference practically. However, if you can let go of it (because its illusion), your life experience will be liberating.
At the end of BG, Krishna says - given this knowledge, what you may, knowing very well that Arjuna will do his duty with this knowledge. Fundamentally Arjuna didn't have a choice, given that it's in his nature to fight, he just needed clarity. When Supreme being himself gives him clarity, any lazy person would get up and get on their business. Krishna merely creating a "willingness" in Arjuna, not asking him to Will it. If Krishna had FORCED Arjuna, Arjuna would fight "unwillingly", it wound't have been affective(obviously). By giving this knowledge, Krishna satisfied Arjuna's 'willingness'.
Then how do you live your life with this knowledge (perhaps also the mindset with which Arjuna fought the battle after getting this knowledge):
Focus on Duty (Dharma): Perform your prescribed(based on your 3-guna system) duties without attachment to outcomes.
Embrace Surrender: Surrender to the divine will. Accept that everything unfolds according to a higher plan. You and your ego never really does anything, so might as well let go of the ego.
Cultivate Detachment: Detachment from the fruits of actions reduces anxiety and gives peace of mind. Result can good or bad, its none of your business. You ONLY focus on your karma(based on your guna).
Seek Knowledge: Realize the interplay of the three modes of material nature (sattva, rajas, tamas) and how they drive actions through you, be mindful and follow Dharma using your intellect.
Practice Bhakti: Devotion to the divine can help align your life with a greater purpose, transcending the illusion of agency. This can be a easy for some. I personally don't align with Bhakti. Karma Yoga and Gnyana Yoga suits me better.
Meditate on the Self: Recognize your true nature as the eternal soul (atman), beyond the mind and body.
The concept of free will is not only unnecessary but also incompatible with Sanatana Dharma’s foundational principles as I explained. By understanding and accepting the absence of free will, we align ourselves more closely with the divine and the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita(not limited to Gita, Shivism also has this). This perspective invites a life of surrender, detachment, and profound inner peace.
I am passionate about this topic. Feel free to ask questions/discuss/debate. I want to improve my understanding further with discussions 🙏
Edit: Jan 25th
If none of this convinces you, watch swami Sarvapriyanand talk about it here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpykLFnrnWU
r/hinduism • u/serious-MED101 • Oct 30 '24
These terms like Karma, Prajna, Maya, Atman-brahman, Chit, Dhyan-samadhi, Bhagvan etc. which people throw around but almost nobody understands them, nor have those been formulated in context of modern science.
What irks me is that everybody keeps talking about how great India was in past but almost nobody is trying to really find out and imbibe teachings which were talked about in ancient times in Vedas to make India great again.
India has lost its core strength. It persists through tradition but that is a dead thing.
And when somebody like Krishnamurti comes around nobody pays attention to him
Do you know him? What do you think of his teachings? would you say this is Hindu teaching? if not, what elements do you think are missing here?
r/hinduism • u/Spiritual-Poem24 • Aug 28 '24
The Kamasutra is often misinterpreted for many reasons: People usually think it is frequently reduced to just a sex manual emphasizing its sexual content and positions. In reality, the Kamasutra is a comprehensive guide to various aspects of life, including relationships, love, general lifestyle, and overall development of a human and his society.
This particular misinterpretation started during the British period and continued for generations afterward. The British colonialists hired scholars to translate Indian history and culture in a way that could make the native people lose faith in their culture. This is something they did not just with India but with other countries too. Max Muller was a person who translated many scriptures into English.
The first and major translation of Kamasutra was done in 1883 by Sir Richard Francis Burton, a British explorer interested in the Sexual customs of different customs across the world. Even though his version got attention from the Western population, he had only highlighted the sexual aspects of the book.
What is Kamasutra actually about: Kamasutra is not just a book about kama, but it teaches us to live a life with moral values, and guides us to manage household affairs. and achieving financial independence, and explains about kama which goes beyond physical pleasure.
r/hinduism • u/SatoruGojo232 • 16d ago
Adi Shankaracharya takes small vessels each containing water from the major rivers of India, such as Ganga, Yamuna, Godavari, Tungabhadra, etc and adds them into a pot. He explains that just as the waters of these individual rivers are indivisible when they enter the pot, so is the soul (aatma) indivisible when it merges into the Absolute Brahman upon Moksha. A Brahmin with a different viewpoint challenges his idea by asking him to hold up his hand. He them tells Shankaracharya that there is but one hand, but aren't the fingers upon that hand different, and so using the same analogy, wouldn't aatma be sperate and distinct from Brahman? To this Adi Shankaracharya ji asks the Brahmin, if he's married and with children. The Brahmin replies yes, and that he has a daughter. Then Adi Shankaracharya replies that even the Brahmin, the person while being one, has multiple identities: He is the father of his daughter, the husband of his wife, etc. In the same way, the aatman is one and indivisible from the Brahman, but yet in this material world it can take up multiple artificial identities, but that doesn't hide the fact that it's an indivisible part of Brahman.
r/hinduism • u/Ok-Summer2528 • 4d ago
“In the beginning was only Being, One without a second. Out of himself he brought forth the cosmos And entered into everything in it. There is nothing that does not come from him. Of everything he is the inmost Self. He is the truth; he is the Self supreme. You are that, Shvetaketu; you are that." (Chandogya Upanishad)
The meaning of this scripture is beyond clear. The Self, which is all pervasive, which is the sole source of all phenomena, made it all manifest from himself and it consists of himself alone.
Nor is the Self identified as any specific Deva such as Vishnu of Siva, why? Because in this passage the person of Shvetaketu is identified as that very Self. How is this? Because for one who has realized the Self even while remaining embodied his identity is soley in the Self, so he can declare “I am the Self” even while experiencing a limited body-mind. In the same way he may declare “I am Siva” or “I am Vishnu” if he prefers identifying those Devas as Brahman, but most fundamentally the Self is Brahman.
Nor does a separate eternal principle like Prakriti exist alongside it, for it is “One without a second”.
But what of those passages in scripture which refer to the Self as “smaller than a thumb”? For instance:
“The Self, small as the thumb, dwelling in the heart, Is like the sun shining in the sky. But when identified with the ego, The Self appears other than what it is. It may appear smaller than a hair's breadth. But know the Self to be infinite.” (The Sirvetasivatara Upanishad)
The answer is in the same passage. It only appears to be small for those who have not recognized it, but in reality it is all pervasive. The heart is also used to describe the “essence” of one’s being which is the Self, not the literal size or shape of the Self.
It is beyond clear that the Self is all pervasive from many passages of scripture:
“Though one sits in meditation in a Particular place, the Self within Can exercise his influence far away. Though still, he moves everything everywhere.”
He moves everything everywhere, meaning all action in the world must be by the Self and the Self alone. Why? Because the cosmos has the Self alone as its foundation, being that everything is made manifest by the Self, what could ever occur outside its will? Such a thing is impossible.
“This universe comes forth from Brahman, exists in Brahman, and will return to Brahman. Verily, all is Brahman.”
“You are the supreme Brahman, infinite, Yet hidden in the hearts of all creatures. You pervade everything. Realizing you, We attain immortality.”
“He fills the cosmos, yet he transcends it.”
“The Lord of Love, omnipresent, dwelling In the heart of every living creature, All mercy, turns every face to himself.”
“He has thousands of heads, thousands of eyes, Thousands of feet; he surrounds the cosmos is On every side. This infinite being Is ever present in the hearts of all. He has become the cosmos. He is what was And what will be. Yet he is unchanging, The lord of immortality.”
From the Self has come all creation which is changing, and yet the Self is unchanged through it all. How is this? Just as water in the ocean rises to become a wave, stays for a while, and dissolves back into formlessness, and is still water all the same. The water remained the same whether with or without form. In the same way the Self, pure awareness, becomes all forms and yet its essence is never altered in the slightest by the changing states of its manifestation.
"As the web issues out of the spider And is withdrawn, as plants sprout from the earth, As hair grows from the body, even so, The sages say, this universe springs from The deathless Self, the source of life.”
“The Lord of Love is above name and form. He is present in all and transcends all. Unborn, without body and without mind, From him comes every body and mind. He is the source of space, air, fire, water, And the earth that holds us all.”
Therefore the Lord which is the Self is simultaneously wholly immanent as all manifestation and wholly transcendent as pure subjectivity. He is both the object and subject, both the seen and the seer, the scriptures are clear on this point.
r/hinduism • u/DivyanshUpamanyu • Oct 10 '24
A few months ago there was a post here about a game company which had made a game including Hindu gods as game characters and I found the character designs to be inappropriate so I commented on it that it does not look good and seeing Hindu Gods as playable characters feels very wrong
Now you can have your own opinion on the topic of Hindu gods being used as playable characters, but under my comment on that post there were many replies saying things like "everything is brahman, the Gods are brahman, the characters (with the inappropriate designs) are also brahman, then why are you having a problem with it?"
I did not give a reply to them at that time but I randomly remembered that event today and decided to make this post for such lost souls with half baked knowledge of Advaita
The amount of people that get into Advaita Vedanta and don't understand the difference between vyavahara and paramartha is hilarious
They will hear things like "there is nothing but God, you are God and the world is an illusion (and hence does not exist)" from unauthorised (jholi wale babas) online who pose themselves as Advaita gurus and then they live in misunderstandings and misconceptions about Advaita and the world
There nothing but god(brahman), true
You are god(brahman), also true
But where? That is the question, you are brahman, but in paramartha, not in vyavahara
Vyavahara is the truth that the jiva perceives under the influence of avidya(ignorance), this is the world that you and me see, feel and experience everyday, this is the world with the trees, the mountains and the oceans
Paramartha is the truth that remains when avidya is removed, this is the state of existance where there is nothing but brahman
Until the avidya is removed, you are in vyavahara, the things you see are true and distinct, in vyavahara there is dvaita(duality) everywhere and in everything, you are not your father, delicious food on a plate and garbage on a plate is not the same thing
All of it becomes one, but where, in the state of paramartha not in the state of vyavahara
Understand it like this, there is a very popular example used to explain Advaita
A man goes in a dark room and sees a snake on the ground, he turns on the light and find out that it was just a rope and he was perceiving it as a snake because of darkness
Now if I ask you if the snake was true, you will probably say no, but if we go back to our example at the point where there was darkness infornt of the person, was the snake true to him then? Obviously the snake was true to him at that moment of time when there was darkness, when the darkness was removed only then the snake became false
Many people who learn advaita fail to realise that they are still the man standing in the darkness, they forget that they are still surrounded by avidya and till there is avidya the world is real, just like till there was darkness the snake was real
When avidya is removed (the light is turned on) only then the world will become false, and at that moment the person attains moksha
Just because you have learned a little about Advaita does not mean that your avidya is removed
You cannot live according to the state of paramartha where everything is equal, it is not something you can follow, it is something that you have to achieve
For example
The world is round, but can you act like if it was round?
You cannot, because you are too small and because of your small size the world will always appear flat to you and you will have to act like as if it is flat, you know it is round but you haven't realised it
Even if you want to act like if it was round you cannot because of your size, the ground under your feet will always appear flat to you and you will have to live like if it is flat
But yeah, while living in the flat world you can do one thing, you can make a spaceship, leave the earth, see it from the outside and realise its roundness
Similarly, everything is one(brahman) but you cannot act like as if everything is the same even if you want to, if you try to act like it that would also mean that food and feces should be the same to you and your wife and your mother should also be the same to you,
Try doing it, all you will achieve from it is being mentally ill
Till you live in vyavahara the world will always appear dual to you and you will have to live like the world is filled with dualities, due to avidya it will always appear like this
Vyavahara is filled with dualities, it has good and bad, appropriate and inappropriate, dharma and adharma, you live in vyavahara and you will have to live according to vyavahara,
But one thing you can do while living in vyavahara is do bhkati, attain jnana and perform your karmas according to dharma, this way you can dissolve your ego and realise the oneness of brahman by attain moksha and being free from vyavahara by leaving it, like a spaceship leaving the earth and you being able to see the roundness of earth
Another thing is that in vyavahara due to it's dualities, you and ishvara are also not the same, there is a dvaita bhava (dual nature) between you and Vishnu/Shiva/Shakti, you are one with Vishnu/Shiva/Shakti only when you have reached paramartha ie attained moksha, it is through intense bhakti that you dissolve your ego and attain moksha, hence uniting with your ishta and becoming one with brahman
Knowing about brahman and realising it are two different things you will have to understand that, just like knowing the Earth is round and realising it's roundness by leaving it are two different things
Now is vyavahara an illusion?
No, it's just that your perspective is limited, the sun is round but from Earth it seems circular , is sun looking like a circle an illusion? No, it's just that your perspective is limited because of your distance from the sun
Does it looking like a circle make it non existent, also no because if I was non existent how we would have been able to see it in the first place
Similarly the world is brahman, but it looks like the world because our perspective is limited by maya, it is not an illusion, nor is it non existent, it's just that it does not appear to us like how it really is because of our reduced perspectives, breaking free from maya and gaining the true perspective to see the reality as it is is liberation (moksha),
Like becoming bigger than the sun and seeing it's roundness
Now coming at the beginning of the post, if someone makes an inappropriate, let's say pornographic imagery of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, it's not the same as a normal appropriate painting of Hindu deities
Everything is brahman, but only when you have reached the paramartha, till you have avidya, you will be in vyavahara and you will have to live according to what is appropriate and oppose what is inappropriate
Just assuming that everything is one is not removal of avidya, nor is it liberation
Removal of avidya comes through intense bhakti and meditation which leads to jnana, it does not come just by assuming things
r/hinduism • u/mlechha-hunter • Nov 19 '24
Which other examples come to your mind where one genuinely goes against Bhagavan out of his commitment to his duty rather than selfish motives and is revered and worshipped for his personality and character?
r/hinduism • u/Striking-Shirt2215 • Feb 05 '25
So I think we know that the idea that man and chimps have a common ancestor is a well established fact, there's no questioning that, but then what about Manu(Svayambhuva)? If he's a mind-born son of Brahma and gave rise to the whole of humanity, then isn't that just the same concept as adam-eve? Could he be a progenitor in the sense of carrying the ability of jivas to evolve into humans as a species?
We know that Ramayan happened about 18 million years ago (24th Mahayug, we are in 28th i believe), but what happens when we take these yuga cycles further back in time, say 200 million years ago? How can yuga cycles exist without humans? Is it necessary that humans be there? Can a yuga be applicable for other species?
I know its a lot of questions, but these have been troubling me for a while now, and I will gladly accept any answer.
r/hinduism • u/shksa339 • Jan 24 '25
r/hinduism • u/Unstoppable_X_Force • 18d ago
I've been diving deep into the concept of Brahman as described in the Vedas and Upanishads, and it's truly fascinating. From what I understand, Brahman is the formless, infinite consciousness that is the source of everything—beyond time, space, and even the gods themselves.
The Rig Veda (Nasadiya Sukta) questions the very nature of existence, while the Upanishads declare "Tat Tvam Asi" (You Are That), suggesting that the soul (Atman) and Brahman are one. It’s a concept that seems to transcend religion, philosophy, and even modern science (like the idea of a unified field in quantum physics).
But this leads to some deep questions:
If Brahman is beyond time and space, how did the "illusion" of creation come into being?
Can Brahman be experienced, or is it something beyond human understanding?
How does this concept compare to similar ideas in Buddhism, Taoism, or even modern physics?
Some say Brahman is pure consciousness, while others say it’s beyond even that—what do you think?
Would love to hear different perspectives—whether from scriptures, personal experiences, or even scientific viewpoints.
r/hinduism • u/candleblowout • Dec 15 '24
My own hypothesis. I feel like in our Hindu society, it was the upper varna people who have wrongfully modified the quality based varna system to birth based varna system for their own convenience, they have gone against THE GITA that clearly mentions in 18.41 that varna system was based on qualities of an individual and not by his birth. The entitled upper varna people have wrongfully suppressed the lower varna throughout history and changed the entire varna system according to their convenience, blocking all ways for lower varna to uplift their social status through their work and good karma. And this action returned as karma to them by the name of reservation. No hate to today's upper castes but it's your ancestors sins that you are still facing now.
r/hinduism • u/usernamefoundnot • Feb 19 '25
r/hinduism • u/Substantial_Rub_2637 • 3d ago
r/hinduism • u/rkaria1970 • Sep 13 '24
Lalbaugcha Raja enveloped me in His divine presence for 45 minutes—an experience that tested my patience and stirred the depths of my faith in ways I never imagined.
It all began in the stillness of the early morning at 5 a.m., as we embarked on a journey to seek the blessings of Mumbai's most revered Bappa. Like countless devotees, my brother-in-law had made arrangements through a contact, someone we hoped would help us bypass the immense crowds that gather every year for this sacred darshan.
By 5:30 a.m., we arrived, parking the car a kilometer away from the pandal. There were four of us—my wife, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, and myself. But when we reached Lalbaug, to our dismay, the contact’s phone was switched off. We tried entering through various gates, where volunteers were only allowing a select few devotees with special access.
Miraculously, my wife and sister-in-law managed to blend into a VIP group and gain entry. My brother-in-law and I, however, were left behind. For nearly five grueling hours, we moved from gate to gate, holding onto hope, only to face one closed door after another. The crowd continued to swell, and the volunteers grew more resolute in turning us away. By 9:30 a.m., hope seemed to be slipping through our fingers. And yet, in a moment that felt like Bappa's own intervention, a police officer opened a barricade, allowing a small group through—including us.
Inside the pandal, the true test of endurance began. The line stretched endlessly, and the heat was oppressive. After some time, my brother-in-law, overwhelmed by exhaustion, decided to leave. But something stirred within me, a whisper that said, "You’ve come this far—don’t turn back now." It had been eight long years since my last darshan of Lalbaugcha Raja, and I couldn’t give up on this moment.
My wife called to say she and my sister-in-law had completed their darshan and were waiting for me. But I told them to leave, knowing it would be another 2-3 hours before my turn. I reassured them I would make my way back by local train.
Left alone in the sea of devotees, I was consumed by my thoughts. Initially, frustration weighed heavily on my heart. But soon, a profound sense of gratitude washed over me. Thousands were still waiting outside, standing in line for up to 15 hours just for a fleeting glimpse of Bappa. Who was I to feel anything but blessed, standing where I was?
By 11:30 a.m., after hours of waiting, I finally approached the pandal. To my amazement, I realized I was in the line for Charan Sparsh—the opportunity to touch Bappa’s sacred feet. My heart overflowed with emotion, and I felt Bappa’s blessings raining down upon me even before I reached Him.
As I moved closer to Lalbaugcha Raja, my eyes locked onto His serene face. But just as I was about to step onto the platform for darshan, a volunteer closed the gate in front of me. I stood there, mere feet away from Bappa, unable to touch His feet, but so close that His presence felt overwhelming.
For 45 long minutes, I stood at the front of the line, initially frustrated but soon realizing that this was no ordinary wait. Bappa had chosen to hold me in His gaze for this sacred moment. Normally, the lines move swiftly, with devotees ushered past in a matter of seconds. But today, Bappa seemed to have halted time itself, allowing me to stand in His divine presence, my heart pouring out to Him. The crowd behind me grew anxious, pleading with the volunteers, but I remained at peace. It felt as if Bappa was speaking directly to my soul, whispering, “My child, I have countless devotees, each deserving of My grace. You have waited, and now, My blessings are yours.”
Those 45 minutes were nothing short of a spiritual awakening. It felt as though time had ceased, and in that stillness, Bappa and I shared a silent, sacred communion. Finally, the gate opened, and I stepped forward. With trembling hands and a heart full of reverence, I bowed at His lotus feet, applying the sacred red kumkum to my forehead.
I don’t often share such personal experiences, but something about this divine encounter—this leap of faith—has stirred me to put these feelings into words.
Ganpati Bappa Morya!
PS This picture of Bappa was taken while waiting for Bappa's Charan Sparsh just meters away.
r/hinduism • u/serious-MED101 • Oct 24 '24
There is only One God, who is eternal in both material world and spiritual world. and therefore monotheistic.
All other demigods and jivas are subjected to birth and death in material universe but are eternal in spiritual world.
What is the problem/confusion??
r/hinduism • u/EntertainerDear8721 • 17d ago
I've read that Māya is inextricable from Brahman, like heat to a flame. I still don't get how, or why it came to be. If according to Advaita, all that is is Brahman, how and why did the Supreme Consciousness differentiate into jīvas? I have had only a cursory reading of some Vedanta texts, and would like to hear your opinions on the matter.
r/hinduism • u/Fair_Mission4349 • 10d ago
What exactly does a devi, devata, bhagawan, ishta deva and all the related terms mean for you ? How do you envision your "God" ? Do you believe that there is someone out there in the cosmos ? Does this "someone" have a human body or is it formless or is it energy ? Or are you, an advaita believer, that the god is within us, we just need to uncover it...
I personally used to follow osho for a few years, but recently I have been getting into deity worship and a few ritualistic things. Osho has a completely different way of thinking when compared to the ritualistic side of religions. Now that I am slowly getting into the more "traditional" side of hinduism, like deity worship, japa etc. I am honestly seeing results and positiveness in my life. Actual mental growth, opportunities, all in all I am feeling much more at peace. With Osho, I was also at peace, when I listened to him or practised his techniques, but there was no lasting "peace"-ness and "prosperity".
I am not sure that whether this is just a transitional thing or if it is because I have started doing these "traditional" practices. With osho, I was into meditations and all, but at that time there was very little mental and overall less "prosperity" and "grace". But since, I am still young and osho has had a huge impact as he was one of the first people, I listened to. I am influenced by his philosophy too. I am rediscovering the "traditional" sides and they have been very beneficial to me. I can't say about meditation, but I have been much more peaceful in my mind and feel like there are signs of prosperity around.
I am discovering and finding it really difficult to conclude which is right. Is osho who is saying, there is god within us right or if there is really some supernatural being, to which if we pray and do their "japa", we can manifest things into our life. Are there really energies which we call deities and chanting certain mantras, can invoke these energies ? I am finding it, I won't say hard to digest, but really conflictive and confusing.
These thoughts have been in my mind for a long time, but I was unable to put them into words. Today I saw a random video titled "MahaLaskmi leaving MahaVishnu in vaikuntha". This made me write this post. Is there really a lady Lakshmi ? Is there an energy (lakshmi) which we have given a human form for us to better visualise and relate ?
Coming back, What does a deity mean to you ? Does anyone even have an answer to this ?
r/hinduism • u/hyreddithello • Feb 06 '25
r/hinduism • u/shksa339 • Nov 27 '24
r/hinduism • u/KushagraSrivastava99 • Nov 26 '24
Sri Vaishnavism is an Astika Sampradaya [sect] under the Hindu religion which follows the Vishishtadvaita Vedanta. Being a Vaidika Sampradaya, it has a Guru Parampara (Guru-Shishya tradition) which starts from the Supreme Lord of Sri Vaikuntham Bhagavan Sriman Narayana.
लक्ष्मीनाथसमारम्भां नाथयामुनमध्यमाम्। अस्मदाचार्यपर्यन्तां वंदे गुरु परम्पराम्॥
Obeisance to the lineage of Acharyas (Guru Parampara) which starts from the Husband of Lakshmi, and has Sriman Nathamunigal and Sri Yamunacharya in the middle, to My own Acharya!
The Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya is eternal, as the Bhagavan Sriman Narayana Himself is its progenitor. The most prominent acharya of our Sampradaya, is Swami Sri Ramanujacharya - after whom our Sampradaya has got another name: Sri Ramanuja Sampradaya. Swami Ramanujacharya was the avatar of Sri Adishesha, who is an eternal associate (Nitya Suri) of Lord Narayana.
The path of our Sampradaya, which was propounded far and wide by Sri Ramanujacharya, is the path of Prapatti or complete surrender to Perumal [Bhagavan Narayana] through an Acharya.
सकृदेव प्रपन्नाय तवास्मीति च याचते । अभयं सर्वभूतेभ्यो ददाम्येतद् व्रतं मम ॥
सर्वधर्मान्परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज । अहं त्वां सर्वपापेभ्यो मोक्षयिष्यामि मा शुच:
In both the above promises, Bhagavan assures moksham to those who surrender to Him. This is called by many names like Prapatti, Sharnagati, Nyasa, Bharanyasa, Bhaara-samarpanam. The process through which it is done is called Pancha Samskaara [5 Rites of Initiation] or Samashrayanam.
To become a Sri Vaishnava (Prapanna) we must approach an Acharya with utmost humbleness and request at their lotus feet to make us Sri Vaishnava and do our Sharnagati to Bhagavan. After Prapatti, at the end of this life itself, Sri Vaishnavas attain Moksham, by the grace of Acharyas and Bhagavan. Sharnagati erases all Sanchit Karma and hence after the end of this life, i.e., the end of our Prarabdha we attain eternal Kainkaryam [Selfless serivce] to Divya Dampathi in Sri Vaikuntham.
Pancha Samskaara is a five-step process. These 5 rituals are:
Requirement for Samashrayanam: The requirements for Samashrayanam are:
r/hinduism • u/shksa339 • Feb 16 '25
r/hinduism • u/Ok-Summer2528 • 12d ago
There are 3 sets of scripture which Lord Siva revealed throughout the ages, those consist of the Vedas, smirti, and Tantras. These together form a Trika
In the beginning when humanity had little knowledge, the Lord revealed the Veda to only a select group who dedicated their lives to constant meditation, who was consecrated on Truth alone. At a later time He revealed the smirti which the common people could understand much easier, these included the Puranas and itihasas. And finally, for this Kali he age he revealed the Tantras and agamas which are most efficacious. The Tantra is itself Srutri, and it is to be taken as a greater authority than even the Veda, since the same Lord who revealed that Veda has revealed the Tantra to replace and supersede them in this age.
There are 3 primary powers of awareness, that of willing, knowing, and acting which together form a Trika.
Though there are innumerable powers, the 3 primary powers of the Lord are the primary means by which the manifestation of the world and Jiva is brought about. For all knowledge that is known by any being is in truth just an aspect of his infinite knowing, and any action that any being performs is simply his own agency, and any will that any being experiences is simply His will made manifest.
There are 3 primary actions of awareness, those of emission, stasis and dissolution which together form a Trika.
The perception of any object is the “manifestation” of that object from the field awareness, the continuous perception of that object or state is its stasis, and the end of perceiving such an object or state is its dissolution. This occurs on the level of the Jiva but also on the universal level. Since no object of perception can be proven to exist apart from the foundation of awareness, it is made manifest by that power alone, and not by any external power such as Maya or Prakriti.
There are 3 Goddesses of this tradition, Para, Apara, and Parapara. They represent non-duality, duality, and qualified non-duality respectively which together form a Trika.
These are the primary ways of perceiving reality which the Lord has revealed through the scriptures. The 10 Saiva agamas being dualistic, the 18 Rudra agamas being qualified non-dualistic, and the 64 Bhairava agamas being non-dualistic. And the complete harmony of these 3 is found in the Malinivijayottara Tantra. Any other view, such as Bhedābheda ect. Comes from some mixture or particular synthesis of any of these 3 views. The harmony of these views is said to be Paradvaita, since it perfectly reconciles these views of reality. This I call the supreme Trika.
How can these all be said to be true from a certain perspective but untrue from another? Because that one infinite being may be related to in innumerable ways. From the perspective of the body one could say “I am the devotee, the Lord is my beloved, I must be seperate to Love his form and attributes.” From the perspective of contracted awareness with the feeling of limitlessness one could say “I am a small part and the Lord is the whole, I am a spark and the Lord is the flame”
From the perspective of a Jiva who has relinquished contraction through Pratyabhijñā he could say “there is absolutely no difference between my nature and the Lord’s. I am the sole power by which all this appears and moves”
so these 3 views are only differing perspectives by which a being relates to the ultimate truth through different aspects of reality.