'Nothing comes out of nothing' - means without pre-existence of material cause, nothing can be produced or created. This is a very simple truth to apprehend.
You have asked: "'what was there before the Big Bang?". Scientists have been doing research on this, but I would say here that whatever may be the scientists settled view on this, one thing is sure that the basic material cause of the universe (primordial matter = mool prakriti) was pre-existent. Because from absence nothing can be created. God acted on that material-cause and created this most-scientific and wonderful universe.
To your question - "What is God and who created God?" - I would like to state that: God is a universal spirit Who permeates the whole universe, Who is a true personification of Existence, Consciousness and Bliss; Whose nature, attributes and characteristics are Holy; Who is Omniscient, Formless, All-pervading, Unborn, Infinite, Almighty, Just and Merciful; Who is the author of the universe and sustains and dissolves it: Who awards all souls the fruits of their deeds in strict accordance with the requirements of absolute justice and possessed of the like attributes.
God is eternal, He is not created or made out of something at some point of time. He is eternally existing and will continue to exist for ever. There has been no cause of Him.
God is not a creation of human mind, but all creatures (only bodies - not souls) and entire universe have been created by Him.
I find Swami Dayananda's theory (originally Vedic teachings - Vedas are revealed knowledge of God) most rational and convincing. That is why I quote his name wherever I find it necessary. He was a person who restated the eternal Vedic truths in modern times.
For better understanding I request you to read Dayananda's Satyarth-Prakash.
= Bhavesh Merja
[Quoted text hidden]
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Saturday, July 12, 2008
ART OF LIVING FOUNDTIONCLAIMS TO BE NOT HINDU:
Subject: Fw: Art of Living Foundation in Dallas claims to be not Hindu
Is this news true? How can true Hindus understand and accept this?
====================================================
--- On Sat, 7/12/08, Naresh Khanna wrote:
From: Naresh Khanna
Subject: Art of Living Foundation in Dallas claims to be not Hindu
To: "Rana Kumar"
Date: Saturday, July 12, 2008, 10:57 AM
Ajay Nair and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar... A comparison
If Ajay Nair at Columbia University, called the honor killing an aberration on otherwise peaceful
South Asian families, thereby completely obfuscating the disctinction between Hindus and Muslims;
thereby failing entirely to acknoledge that honor killing is a frequent Muslim occurrence, and
has nothing to do with Hinduism; thereby selling out the Hindus to the South Asian identity - here
is another embarrassment.
Today, the Art of Living Foundation in Dallas is holding an event in Dallas, where Rishi Nithya
Pragya is being featured. When we asked for permission from them to distribute the Hindu Unity
Day Flyer to the audience at that event, we were refused permission based on the fact that
"The Art of Living" is not a Hindu Religion based organization.
Such is the state of our people - They take the word "Rishi", "Nithya" and "Pragya"; They do
"Sudarshan Kriya"; sing "Bhajans" and "Kirtans" praising "Rama" and "Krishna" and then
they turn around and say "They are not a Hindu organization". Hinduism gives and gives, and
allows anyone to take anything from it - Thus it is possible for anyone to take "Some Yoga;
Some Philosophy; Some Pranayama: some Karma Yoga" and rebrand it as "Jeevan
Mukti Yoga" or "Transcendental Meditation" etc. and give it a new sounding name, and on top
of it simply refuse to acknowledge where they got it from - i.e. and say that they are not a Hindu
based group at all.
May be it is a marketing gimmick - May be it is a way of attracting non-Hindus to the Art of Living;
May be it is a way of bringing people into something without the Hindu word associated with it;
But I would prefer that they had the guts to invite non-Hindus to Hindu Dharma; and not take
things from Hindu Dharma and resell it as something else.
It is at this point that I am torn between my love and admiration for Sri Sri Ravishankar, my pride
and regard for all that he has accomplished and my pain at their inability to acknowledge
that this too is Hinduism; This too is Sanatana Dharma; This too is knowledge that came to
us from the Rishis.
Let's contrast this with Bhagwan Shri Krishna in the Bhagvad Gita, who says, candidly to Arjuna,
"I am not teaching you anything new - It has always been part of a tradition".
Sri Sri Ravishankar has a responsibility to clean up the image of Hinduism - Not avoid it, and take
everything from it and repackage it and resell it as something else. In the process he may attract
many foreigners to the Art of Living, but he also creates numerous Hindus who get even more
confused about their own "Hindu-ness".
I would like to know why Sri Sri Ravishankar believes that the Art of Living is not a Hindu based
organization. I want him to define what indeed is the Hinduism that he so wants to avoid ? How
is this Hinduism different from Sanatana Dharma ? Or is he now teaching something that is even
outside the pale of Sanatana Dharma itself ?
It is a pipedream - that people think they can attain some kind of spiritual growth, and even attain to
Moksha without first attending to Dharma. No amount of breathing, bhajans and kirtans will help
us attain to Moksha, until we discover Dharma in our lives. And part of our Dharma is to protect
that Dharma itself. Merely doing Pujas, and singing Bhajans and chanting something is not enough.
I wish I could do something about this too. I am afraid we have a long way to go.
Kalyan Viswanathan
614-668-1668 (cell)
Is this news true? How can true Hindus understand and accept this?
====================================================
--- On Sat, 7/12/08, Naresh Khanna
From: Naresh Khanna
Subject: Art of Living Foundation in Dallas claims to be not Hindu
To: "Rana Kumar"
Date: Saturday, July 12, 2008, 10:57 AM
Ajay Nair and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar... A comparison
If Ajay Nair at Columbia University, called the honor killing an aberration on otherwise peaceful
South Asian families, thereby completely obfuscating the disctinction between Hindus and Muslims;
thereby failing entirely to acknoledge that honor killing is a frequent Muslim occurrence, and
has nothing to do with Hinduism; thereby selling out the Hindus to the South Asian identity - here
is another embarrassment.
Today, the Art of Living Foundation in Dallas is holding an event in Dallas, where Rishi Nithya
Pragya is being featured. When we asked for permission from them to distribute the Hindu Unity
Day Flyer to the audience at that event, we were refused permission based on the fact that
"The Art of Living" is not a Hindu Religion based organization.
Such is the state of our people - They take the word "Rishi", "Nithya" and "Pragya"; They do
"Sudarshan Kriya"; sing "Bhajans" and "Kirtans" praising "Rama" and "Krishna" and then
they turn around and say "They are not a Hindu organization". Hinduism gives and gives, and
allows anyone to take anything from it - Thus it is possible for anyone to take "Some Yoga;
Some Philosophy; Some Pranayama: some Karma Yoga" and rebrand it as "Jeevan
Mukti Yoga" or "Transcendental Meditation" etc. and give it a new sounding name, and on top
of it simply refuse to acknowledge where they got it from - i.e. and say that they are not a Hindu
based group at all.
May be it is a marketing gimmick - May be it is a way of attracting non-Hindus to the Art of Living;
May be it is a way of bringing people into something without the Hindu word associated with it;
But I would prefer that they had the guts to invite non-Hindus to Hindu Dharma; and not take
things from Hindu Dharma and resell it as something else.
It is at this point that I am torn between my love and admiration for Sri Sri Ravishankar, my pride
and regard for all that he has accomplished and my pain at their inability to acknowledge
that this too is Hinduism; This too is Sanatana Dharma; This too is knowledge that came to
us from the Rishis.
Let's contrast this with Bhagwan Shri Krishna in the Bhagvad Gita, who says, candidly to Arjuna,
"I am not teaching you anything new - It has always been part of a tradition".
Sri Sri Ravishankar has a responsibility to clean up the image of Hinduism - Not avoid it, and take
everything from it and repackage it and resell it as something else. In the process he may attract
many foreigners to the Art of Living, but he also creates numerous Hindus who get even more
confused about their own "Hindu-ness".
I would like to know why Sri Sri Ravishankar believes that the Art of Living is not a Hindu based
organization. I want him to define what indeed is the Hinduism that he so wants to avoid ? How
is this Hinduism different from Sanatana Dharma ? Or is he now teaching something that is even
outside the pale of Sanatana Dharma itself ?
It is a pipedream - that people think they can attain some kind of spiritual growth, and even attain to
Moksha without first attending to Dharma. No amount of breathing, bhajans and kirtans will help
us attain to Moksha, until we discover Dharma in our lives. And part of our Dharma is to protect
that Dharma itself. Merely doing Pujas, and singing Bhajans and chanting something is not enough.
I wish I could do something about this too. I am afraid we have a long way to go.
Kalyan Viswanathan
614-668-1668 (cell)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)