Hindu concept of God

Yes, you are correct. I am speculating that Saguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman are same as Isometric contraction and relaxation of our entire skeletal muscular system acting as a single unit. I have never claimed that it is mentioned any where.
1. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1. 4. 10 says that 'I am Brahman'. We know that 'I' is directly under our control. We also know that our skeletal muscular system is the one and only system in our body that is under our control. We can't feel or control our Brain. Thus, we can conclude that 'I' must be something to do with our skeletal muscular system.
2. Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 says, 'Self is Brahman'. Self is not under our control. Thus, 'Self'', like skeletal muscular system, can be involuntary.
3. Mandukya Upanishad 3.1.1 compares Brahman to two birds of the same name, one eating fruits of divergent tastes (Saguna Brahman?) and the other just sitting (Nirguna Brahman?).
4. Aitreya Upanishad 3.3 says, 'Consciousness is Brahman'. Consciousness can 't be due to isotonic contraction, that brings about movement. It must be isometric contraction only. Greater the isometric contraction greater would be our consciousness.
From these we can easily conclude that in Hinduism Brahman is isometric contraction.
No, its not an easy conclusion ... its a wild speculation born of vague definitions taken out of the context of the vedic literature that they appear in
 
Last edited:
No, its not an easy conclusion ... its a wild speculation born of vague definitions taken out of the context of the vedic literature that they appear in

Such speculations are typical for people from Bharatavarsa!

thomas1930a.jpg
 
A bad poet?

Good call!


But at least those yogis make for good inspiration for jokes -
Tectonic plates shift. After many millions of years of ardent meditation, two impersonalist yogis are now facing eachother, though their transcendentally inclined vision is slightly blurred from the aeons of settling dust and lice-ridden scruffy hair. Angried by the competition, each picks up a rock and has a go at the other. As one's skull is softer than the other's, one yogi prevails, exclaiming "I am the impersonalist!"
Here's to another millions of years!
 
rscswc:

Just curious. What's your opinion of the famous Hindu philosopher, Samkara and his "theology" (if one may use that word in a non-Western context)?
 
The human personality is composed of neural firmware, which define what is referred to as human nature. These firmware are empty at birth and progress through our lives, being populated by data collectd from individual experience. This dual programming effects makes us unique, while also being collective, via our common human nature.

A visual analogy is a pepper seed that becomes a large pepper plant. The DNA in the seed progresses the pepper plant through its stages of growth all the way to making fruit. Our conscious mind and sensory systems are analogous to the sun and the soil. These things add energy and nutrients (data) to assist the genetic unfolding. Hinduism is about optimizing the growing conditions for these firmware gods.

Like a plant that is growing via genetic unfolding, it dynamically sucks in water and nutrients via osmosis. The natural learning potential of the human brain makes use of an analogous neural osmotic dynamics where the genetically unfolding firmware help populate itself with data. These firmware were given god status, because they can drive consciousness with compusion for data collection. Oneneeds to learn to work with the gods, since you can not control the gods. The firmware have been around as long as evolution itself; DNA= the ancient ones.

Hindu, although projecting the firmware, has an excellent handle on the firmware mapping. You just need to read between the lines. They also know how to get some additional firmware tricks out of the firmware.

At the center of the firmware, is what is called the inner self. The various firmware are like the songs in the jukebox of the inner self; its many sub-gods. These are the many masks of the inner self. When a need or a firmware time cycle appears, a quarter is placed in the jukebox and a sub-god of genetic unfolding appears, which is the inner self wearing a specfic firmware mask.

One of the features of some of the firmware is a cross programming feature. The easiest example to see are spontanoeus male-female interactions. Each provide output data to help cross program the firmware in the other. When couples fight and get all full of irrational animation, this compulsion is the firmware inducing the urge so it can cross programming.

There are male and female Hindu gods because there are male and female firmware in both males and females. We are composed of male and female genes with the predominant genes deciding sex. But that does not mean the other 49% of the genes are dead. They are expressed via cross gender firmware. The female side of a male learns via cross programming coming from firmware in females;mother. While the overly protective mother can alter the firmware, so further growth is a little odd for the next women to help program.
 
got any references for these absurd claims made in the name of vedic literature?

Then you are quite obviously grossly speculating in the name of vedic literature when you attribute terms (such as nir/sa/guna) to your claims.

It is not gross speculation. What all I mean is that Saguna Brahman is same as isometric contraction and Nirguna Brahman, same as isometric relaxation.
 
It is not gross speculation. What all I mean is that Saguna Brahman is same as isometric contraction and Nirguna Brahman, same as isometric relaxation.

I guess arriving at such identifications are the potential ills of adhunika vada ...

See, LG, this above is an example of a person trying to make use of concepts from a self-referential closed system outside of that system.
It tends to get silly and smell of parapsychology.
 
I guess arriving at such identifications are the potential ills of adhunika vada ...

See, LG, this above is an example of a person trying to make use of concepts from a self-referential closed system outside of that system.
It tends to get silly and smell of parapsychology.
I don't see how subjecting one knowledge base to the authority of another (to the point of defying the terms and definitions of the former) suddenly makes it objective.

For instance suppose I had four dogs and called them hydrogen, oxygen, carbon and potassium. If I started making propositions on chemical theory based on their behavior, have I really pursued anything valid in terms of chemistry?
 
I don't see how subjecting one knowledge base to the authority of another (to the point of defying the terms and definitions of the former) suddenly makes it objective.

I never suggested it did.


For instance suppose I had four dogs and called them hydrogen, oxygen, carbon and potassium. If I started making propositions on chemical theory based on their behavior, have I really pursued anything valid in terms of chemistry?

Usually, we'd say you haven't.

Your example with the dogs with chemistry names just further proves my point that trying to make use of concepts from a self-referential closed system outside of that system brings us into absurdities.
 
Hi, I haven't have any concept of Hindu concept of God. Now I have known a lot. Thanks for your knowledge.
 
I never suggested it did.
You mean you have retracted your whole "problems of objectivity" from "self referential systems" thing?
:eek:




Usually, we'd say you haven't.

Your example with the dogs with chemistry names just further proves my point that trying to make use of concepts from a self-referential closed system outside of that system brings us into absurdities.
errr .. so what's your problem with self referential systems again?
 
Back
Top