Hanuman

[Guest guest]

HANUMAN

Hanuman originated in a Dravidian past and was accepted into the Aryan age. He

is also known as Maruti, Pavanaputra and Anjaneya. In the Ramayana, India’s

second epic written by Valmiki in the 3rd century BC, we meet Hanuman as a

Commander in Chief, of the army of King Sugriva (a Monkey King).

The son of a wind god Vayu, Hanuman uses his ancestry and his ape like agility

to help Rama win the war against Ravana.

Rama and Hanuman had first met when they had fought as fellow warriors for King

Sugriva. They restored Sugriva to his kingdom. An ever grateful Sugriva offered

Rama the services of Hanuman to help find Rama’s wife, Sita. Sita had been

abducted by Ravana. Rama had been unable to find her and sought Hanuman’s help.

 

Sita was imprisoned in Lanka, Ravana’s kingdom an island off the southern tip of

India. Brandishing his mace, Hanuman took a single leap across the gulf

separating the two countries and located Sita. The demons of Lanka tried to

trick Hanuman. They set fire to his tail, hoping to distract him, Hanuman

turned his tail on the city and set Lanka on fire, burning the demons to

cinders.

During the battle, General Hanuman swung the war in Rama’s favour. When

Lakshmana was wounded, Hanuman flew to the Himalayas for the medicinal herb

Sanjeevani. Unable to identify the Sanjeevani, he wrested the entire mountain

from the land and carried it to Lakshmana.

Today people celebrate his strength, and agility in temples consecrated to Hanuman.

RELATED LINKS :

| Hanuman Jayanti |

| Back to Gods Overview |

Would you like to to a friend anywhere in India or worldwide, NOW...

http://timepiece.shubhkaamna.com/gods.htmDo You ?

Send your FREE holiday greetings online at Greetings.

[Guest guest]

Photos Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

[Guest guest]

Namaskar and thank you for your message.........am suggesting that you go to

Temple and ask Temple Priest this same question as this makes no sense to

me........ANY Temple Priest will tell you that many Hindu Mandirs and Temples

have a day of worship for Lord Hanuman..........so am suggesting you get the

true facts from the ones who conduct the community Pujas and Ceremonies in

honor of Lord Hanuman.............Lord Hanuman doesnt only live in the

Himalayas...........Lord Hanuman is liveing wherever he is needed.......all

that needs be done to attract his energy field to your life is to wear his

spiritual holy items and chant his Mantra.........What you describe as Demi

Gods are all a part of the One Almighty God and there are three main energy

levels of great power that are again part of the One Almighty God and the are

Lord Siva Lord Visnu and Lord Brahma

If this is understandable best suggestion I can give you is for you and your

friend to speak with Temple Priest in your area about this...........you might

be able to find closest Temple by going to www.hindumandir.com and they will

give you good information

There is also a book on Amazon.com that might help answering many of your

questions named Healing Mantras by Thomas Ashley Farrand

hope this helps

Wishing you and Family the Best

Rudra Center America

DharmaDev Arya

In a message dated 1/17/2006 9:13:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, suthakaran32 writes:

Dear Sir / madam,

One question on Lord Hanuman, a friend of mine told that Lord is a Demi God

and is still alive in Himalayas, and also said that we should not really pray

to Demi Gods coz you will get whatever we wish for fast but might not really

good for us.So the best is to Shiva or Vishnu.What like to get more opinion for

the learned ones.

Thank You,

Aum Namah Shivaya

Photos

Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

To send an email to:

[Guest guest]

Namaskar and thank you for a most detailed history of Knowledge regarding Lord

Hanuman and Sanatan Dharma in general........this is really an exceptional

posting and we all thank you for shareing this Knowledge with us

Aum NamaSivaya Sivaya Nama Aum

Dhanyavaad cha Pranams

DD

In a message dated 1/18/2006 7:51:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, anand_nortel (AT) (DOT) co.uk writes:

I give you two versions one a quick short sharp one and the other elaborate but

boring theological one. You can choose to read one or the other or

both..........

1. Short and sweet.......

Hanuman is a manifestation of Siva himself. He is recognised by ancient texts

as the 11th Rudra. He is born but through his actions became beyond death. He

is the only one of the two who are not barred in religion from going anywhere

with his physical body, be it physical/meta-physical/or Ethereal worlds. He is

the only exception in a religion that has everything explained to the nth degree

of philosophical clarity. Now if someone can think of such pure and exceptional

form of deity to be a demi-god, then they ought to change their religion and

become something other than following Hinduism as they have simply wasted their

philosophical prowess and should refrain from commenting on this religion

(pardon the strong words....).

2. A long winded one..........

I think this idea of demi-gods/gods/super gods and supreme gods is born out of

the tries to explain Hinduism to western cultures. The problem with the two

distinct theologies is that they have grown a little apart.

The traditional western theology is based around the realization that there is

only one God and that He is all powerful and He is the one that everyone must

meditate on all of the time. Now we can argue till we are blue in our faces as

to who or what name should be given to 'that' one God. Some may call Him Allah,

some others The father, yet others Siva or Krishna and so on and so forth. But

the fundamental fact is that one version of Theology has set up stall that

there is 'one' God.

However the traditional Indian (or more specific the theology that is commonly

known as Sanatan Dharm or transliterated to the Ancient Religion) theology is a

bit more subtle about the definition of 'God' and His relationship with physical

world. The fundamental of this theology is also that there is 'One' God. But

it goes on to describe various forms of that God. Some forms are astral forms

to control a specific aspect of physical or ethereal worlds. Some aspects are

said to be rooted to certain specific spots that may have formed some sort of

'gateway' between the physical and ethereal worlds. Some aspects control

fundamental elements. Yet others form a necessary function of keeping the

creation in balance and intervene when the balance between good and evil is

disturbed. There are yet other forms that simply check and give out the

justice to physical manifestations i.e. living beings according to our actions.

There are yet more that are manifestations of the 'God' that have been

communally accepted as the incarnations of God. These manifestations generally

have a specific purpose in the physical world and once they have completed that

purpose, they went back to their original form. Then there is an

extra-polation of this fact that if 'God' can manifest in physical form, then

why not the different forms of deities manifesting themselves to 'correct'

their specific tasks and hence we get to hear manifestations of Vishnu, of

Rudra, of other deities that maybe not universally known. Then these

manifestations can be of varying degrees as to how much ot the 'astral' being

of the form was actually contained in a singular physical body. This is where

Krishna is thought to be the 'only' manifestation of Vishnu where he had all of

the sixteen astral senses in-tact in his physical body.

Nowhwere is the Ancient texts it says that 'one' form of 'God' is better or

superior to the 'other'. The texts talk along a great deal of detail about the

prime deity in that context but it is later interpretation that just because one

form of the 'God' is given a particular place in a particular story/verse; it

proves beyond doubt that that story/verse says that particular form of God is

superior and hence a negative interpretation that the rest are lesser 'God'.

This problem has it's roots in the social integration of the two distinct

theologies that mankind has grown up with. One believing in a singular and

straightforward 'mega-super supreme being called God and nothing else between

Him and man' and that all will be judged only once in human lifetime whenever

the end of mankind comes & the other a little subtler saying yes there is 'God'

but that God is what is holding all of the creation together and that we humans

are ever changing and evolving beings utilizing different 'physical' bodies

according to our needs/requirements/Karma.

People who have tried to rationalize the two similar but distinct theologies

have not done a good enough job and have rationalized it from the

economically/politically dominant social view-point which happened to be of a

singular 'God' entity.

To explain the reason of all these other forms of 'God' to people understanding

'One God' they have had to created an 'order among Gods' thus creating better

and lesser 'Gods'. It is a problem with the explanation and not the theology

itself.

If the scriptures are read correctly there are only two forms in the astral

world; the ones that do justice & live harmoniously & if they have done

injustice accept their punishment and the ones that do as they please when they

please &are generally thinking of getting away with the lot. When you strip

away the elaborate beautification in verses and stories, this is what good and

evil is all about. What is starking in Indialn traditional theology however is

that both good and evil are made up from the same building blocks of creation

and moreover that evil can turn out to be good eventually and good can turn out

to be fallible.

To wrap up, this message of higher and lesser gods has only come out of the need

to explain to a section of mankind that has traditionally grown up with the idea

of singularity of 'God'. God is God and that is all there is to it. If anyone

tries to define any further, it can lead to all sorts of interpretations and

these are better left for the professionals who obviously don't necessarily do

a good enough job every single time.

Kind regards

Anand

 

 

[] On Behalf Of SUTHA KARAN

18 January 2006 02:32

 

Cc: RudraCentre (AT) hotmail (DOT) com

Re: RBSC : Hanuman

Dear Sir / madam,

One question on Lord Hanuman, a friend of mine told that Lord is a Demi God

and is still alive in Himalayas, and also said that we should not really pray

to Demi Gods coz you will get whatever we wish for fast but might not really

good for us.So the best is to Shiva or Vishnu.What like to get more opinion for

the learned ones.

Thank You,

Aum Namah Shivaya

Photos

Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

To send an email to:

 

[Guest guest]

I give you two versions one a quick short sharp one and the other elaborate but

boring theological one. You can choose to read one or the other or

both..........

 

1. Short and sweet.......

 

Hanuman is a manifestation of Siva himself. He is recognised by ancient texts

as the 11th Rudra. He is born but through his actions became beyond death. He

is the only one of the two who are not barred in religion from going anywhere

with his physical body, be it physical/meta-physical/or Ethereal worlds. He is

the only exception in a religion that has everything explained to the nth degree

of philosophical clarity. Now if someone can think of such pure and exceptional

form of deity to be a demi-god, then they ought to change their religion and

become something other than following Hinduism as they have simply wasted their

philosophical prowess and should refrain from commenting on this religion

(pardon the strong words....).

 

2. A long winded one..........

 

I think this idea of demi-gods/gods/super gods and supreme gods is born out of

the tries to explain Hinduism to western cultures. The problem with the two

distinct theologies is that they have grown a little apart.

 

The traditional western theology is based around the realization that there is

only one God and that He is all powerful and He is the one that everyone must

meditate on all of the time. Now we can argue till we are blue in our faces as

to who or what name should be given to 'that' one God. Some may call Him Allah,

some others The father, yet others Siva or Krishna and so on and so forth. But

the fundamental fact is that one version of Theology has set up stall that

there is 'one' God.

 

However the traditional Indian (or more specific the theology that is commonly

known as Sanatan Dharm or transliterated to the Ancient Religion) theology is a

bit more subtle about the definition of 'God' and His relationship with physical

world. The fundamental of this theology is also that there is 'One' God. But

it goes on to describe various forms of that God. Some forms are astral forms

to control a specific aspect of physical or ethereal worlds. Some aspects are

said to be rooted to certain specific spots that may have formed some sort of

'gateway' between the physical and ethereal worlds. Some aspects control

fundamental elements. Yet others form a necessary function of keeping the

creation in balance and intervene when the balance between good and evil is

disturbed. There are yet other forms that simply check and give out the

justice to physical manifestations i.e. living beings according to our actions.

There are yet more that are manifestations of the 'God' that have been

communally accepted as the incarnations of God. These manifestations generally

have a specific purpose in the physical world and once they have completed that

purpose, they went back to their original form. Then there is an

extra-polation of this fact that if 'God' can manifest in physical form, then

why not the different forms of deities manifesting themselves to 'correct'

their specific tasks and hence we get to hear manifestations of Vishnu, of

Rudra, of other deities that maybe not universally known. Then these

manifestations can be of varying degrees as to how much ot the 'astral' being

of the form was actually contained in a singular physical body. This is where

Krishna is thought to be the 'only' manifestation of Vishnu where he had all of

the sixteen astral senses in-tact in his physical body.

 

Nowhwere is the Ancient texts it says that 'one' form of 'God' is better or

superior to the 'other'. The texts talk along a great deal of detail about the

prime deity in that context but it is later interpretation that just because one

form of the 'God' is given a particular place in a particular story/verse; it

proves beyond doubt that that story/verse says that particular form of God is

superior and hence a negative interpretation that the rest are lesser 'God'.

 

This problem has it's roots in the social integration of the two distinct

theologies that mankind has grown up with. One believing in a singular and

straightforward 'mega-super supreme being called God and nothing else between

Him and man' and that all will be judged only once in human lifetime whenever

the end of mankind comes & the other a little subtler saying yes there is 'God'

but that God is what is holding all of the creation together and that we humans

are ever changing and evolving beings utilizing different 'physical' bodies

according to our needs/requirements/Karma.

 

People who have tried to rationalize the two similar but distinct theologies

have not done a good enough job and have rationalized it from the

economically/politically dominant social view-point which happened to be of a

singular 'God' entity.

 

To explain the reason of all these other forms of 'God' to people understanding

'One God' they have had to created an 'order among Gods' thus creating better

and lesser 'Gods'. It is a problem with the explanation and not the theology

itself.

 

If the scriptures are read correctly there are only two forms in the astral

world; the ones that do justice & live harmoniously & if they have done

injustice accept their punishment and the ones that do as they please when they

please & are generally thinking of getting away with the lot. When you strip

away the elaborate beautification in verses and stories, this is what good and

evil is all about. What is starking in Indialn traditional theology however is

that both good and evil are made up from the same building blocks of creation

and moreover that evil can turn out to be good eventually and good can turn out

to be fallible.

 

To wrap up, this message of higher and lesser gods has only come out of the need

to explain to a section of mankind that has traditionally grown up with the idea

of singularity of 'God'. God is God and that is all there is to it. If anyone

tries to define any further, it can lead to all sorts of interpretations and

these are better left for the professionals who obviously don't necessarily do

a good enough job every single time.

 

Kind regards

 

Anand

 

[] On Behalf Of SUTHA

KARAN18 January 2006 02:32To:

Cc: RudraCentre (AT) hotmail (DOT) comSubject:

Re: RBSC : Hanuman

Dear Sir / madam,

One question on Lord Hanuman, a friend of mine told that Lord is a Demi God and

is still alive in Himalayas, and also said that we should not really pray to

Demi Gods coz you will get whatever we wish for fast but might not really good

for us.So the best is to Shiva or Vishnu.What like to get more opinion for the

learned ones.

Thank You,

Aum Namah Shivaya

PhotosRing in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

[Guest guest]

First of all, you need to be clear as to if "GOD is always alive or dead"..you

might say

what a rubbish question..but then Hanuman is the only person who rejected Moksha

in favour of Bhakti and is immortal..

 

you would like to worship those who live in present or those who lived in past ?

 

In present time..if one only remembers the doha..shri guru charan saroj

raj..from

Hanuman Chalisa booklet..and request Hanuman Ji to accept one as disciple..then

there is nothing to be sought..all paths will be shown by him..

 

regards

anil

, SUTHA KARAN

<suthakaran32> wrote:

>

> Dear Sir / madam,

> One question on Lord Hanuman, a friend of mine told that Lord is a Demi God

and

is still alive in Himalayas, and also said that we should not really pray to

Demi Gods

coz you will get whatever we wish for fast but might not really good for us.So

the

best is to Shiva or Vishnu.What like to get more opinion for the learned ones.

> Thank You,

> Aum Namah Shivaya

>

>

>

>

>

> Photos

> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,

whatever.

>

[Guest guest]

Friend

 

First of all I agree with you that Hanuman is the manifestation of the divine

that religious texts explain that even though having taken birth, through his

actions and devotion, has become beyond death. He is 'the only' manifestation

that lives on in his physical body not ageing at all through all of these

changes of times. He reveals himself only to the purest forms on this earth.

The rest of the divine can only be viewed through the third or fifth eye which

are senses beyond the reach of most humans on this earth. It is only Hanuman

that one can actually see with the regular two eyes given two things really.

One thing required is a pure and clear mind and second thing required is an

utmost flawless devotion to one's aims (in this case the desire to see Him).

 

However after reading a few sentences of your message got the gist of where you

were going.

 

What you are writing is based upon the common western belief that Vaishnava

strand of Hinduism and especially the works done by Krishna movements over the

years (be it Hare Krishna or Krishna Consciousness or countless others) in the

west are a more accurate depictions of Hinduism.

 

It's roots may be either in the fact that from elaborate ritualistic point of

view, the traditional Vaishnava strands are richer than the other strands of

Hinduism, or it may simply be that Vaishnava strand of Hinduism is particularly

highlighted by a succession of religious preachers in the west.

 

However true 'Hindutva' or Sanatan Dharm goes way beyond what the Vaishnava

strands have depicted. In fact you really have to look beyond any particular

strand of philosophy in Hinduism to get to the real fundamentals.

 

Don't get me wrong, I worship all forms of Lord Vishnu. Vishnu along with

Brahma and Siva in Rudra form are the basics of how Hinduism has explained life

and building blocks of life. In such way of explanation, Brahma is the creator,

Vishnu beholder and Siva in Rudra form the destroyer. And as we humans being

driven by the family and physical needs, tend to find it easier to understand

the actions of a beholder and hence are more ready to accept that the beholder

is probably greater (moreover this form of philosophical thinking is more in

tune with the western thinking of one supreme god and the rest). However the

philosophical basics of Sanatan Dharm go beyond this simplistic form of

thinking.

 

The real message is always that there is only Siva and Sakti living in a

singularity until they decide to create the universe. At the time of creation,

Siva manifests as matter or physical and Sakti as the the name suggests the

energy, from this basic of matter and energy, manifests three entities, Brahma,

Vishnu and Siva in Rudra form. From these three building blocks the whole

creation, from it's atomic particles to the most complex living and conscious

organisms, take form. Similarly at the end of all of the creation, the whole

process reverses and ultimately only Siva and Sakti remain and all the rest

gets re-absorbed into the singularity.

 

What happens is that people view the whole philosophical basics according to

their orientation of the particular strand of philosophy that they follow and

hence the views that are more commonly accepted than what I am writing.

 

I do not have any vested interests in who follows what religion let alone who

follows what strand of what religion. I do not even find this discussion

interesting as I know what path I want to follow and I will carry on that path.

Similarly I am sure that you would be happy on the path that you think is right

for you.

 

However when it comes to interpreting the ancient texts, it ought to be

referenced from a variety of sources rather than opinion based upon a singular

strand. Just for argument's sake, if you view the whole thing from traditional

Saivite point of view, they would readily reject the whole notion of Vaishnava

being the supreme. There would be equally strong points put forward by the

Saivites that it is Siva that is the supreme and all the rest are demigods.

Then there are Saktiks. They can put forward equally forceful arguments that

it is Sakti that we ought to be worshipping as the ultimate force and all the

rest are below Her. Then there are naturalists that would say that it is the

Sun, Moon, Planets and stars that are at the heart of all that happens to us

human beings , they are what ought to be worshipped all of the time thus giving

one day each to each one of the then known planets and one day to Sun and Moon.

Then there would be the ones following the five basic elements and would reason

equally forcefully that it is these elements that can explain the whole

creation. Then there are few remaining that would put Brahma at the centre and

argue equally forcefully that it is the Creator that ought to be at the heart of

creation and not the beholder and certainly not the destroyer.

 

These are viewpoints, all valid at their standing, but viewpoints. It is this

richness in philosophical diversity that ultimately explains the reasons why

Hinduism is the only religion that has survived whereas all the other

contemporary religions are long put into the history books.

 

One must look beyond one particular strand of Hinduism to fully appreciate the

philosophical granularity with which the fundamental questions have been

answered. It is this granularity which most religious preachers do not pass

onto the masses. It may very well be that masses are not developed enough to

understand this complex yet simple basics of creation. But still if someone is

true to the written truth itself and nothing else, then they ought to speak up

what is the sum-total of a philosophical discourse and not run after and give

air to the populist viewpoints. It is a shame but it is totally

understandable. I am sure it is not as easy being the giver of knowledge as it

is being the seeker of the knowledge because seekers can make a million mistakes

and still plead ignorance whereas the giver has no such luxury. Maybe the

teacher can only give what the student is able to understand and sustain. But

Hindutva is much more than any particular strand of it. It is not to say that

what you have written is wrong. It is just that if you are trying to explain

it from Hinduisms point of view, it may not be verifiable with various sources

of information as the ultimate truth prescribed in the religious texts.

 

This kind of discussion never has any winners as this is only interpretation and

unless one has a complete knowledge of all of the texts that form this complex

religion, there would in-evitably be conflicting writings if viewed on their

own or out of context. For example in your writings you suggest that once

Vishnu took the form of Rama to establish the way of living for us humans, a

part of Vishnu permanently detached itself and is still living on as Rama on a

separate plane of existence and then there is Vishnu in Vaikunth. Well what

happened to the humanity before Rama took the human form? were we all bad-bad

societies that could not live according to the prescribed methods? There are

many stories of contemporaries of Rama that are setting examples for society in

their own ways. Why did the 'God' have to take form to explain the way of living

at all? Why did He not simply will it such that all humans and their

consciousness changes from being bad to being good? And then there was a

Satyug before the birth of Rama in Treta Yuga where everything was perfect all

of the time? And if Rama took the human form to explain a way of living, what

is the reason that He who sets all the rules governing life and death would

choose to break them so that His physical form does not have to die? Is death

not part and parcel of living? Should He not have shown the way of death to us

humans as well by giving up His physical form? You see suddenly where the whole

discussion can go?

 

I am not writing to contradict you or your beliefs but to suggest that maybe

there is a bigger picture than what we humans can actually comprehend today.

That is why I suggested in my original e-mail that we are meant to only

understand what is humanly possible and are not really qualified to categorize

the Divine. Our forefathers may have done a brilliant job at explaining some

of the fundamental questions of life and the beyond. But unless we reach those

heights of consciousness are we not treading on dangerous paths if we are to

contradict each other merely because my teacher explained to me in one way and

your teacher told you another?

 

Anyhow you are welcome to your understanding of Hinduism as I believe I am

entitled to my views. This being a forum for discussion, there maybe many

view-points of the same fact and as such it ought to be the responsibility of

the person asking question to decide what interpretations of the religion are

more in tune with their own inclination and beliefs and hence them following

that particular path.

 

Hope this puts an end to a discussion that would not necessarily lead to

anywhere and moreover would probably help in souring the atmosphere of this

discussion forum.

 

With kind regards

 

Anand

 

 

 

 

[] On Behalf Of SvarupaSent:

28 January 2006 15:56Subject:

RBSC : RE: Hanuman

Dear Group members abd Anand,

 

I do not know wher you, Anand have studied but jou at best mix facts with

nonsence and therby mislead the questionair. I do not want to give a complete

analisys of the subject but have to reply to this as it is said that advice is

given which are so misleading and full of miscomception.

 

In brieve:

 

There are three catogories of living entities perscribed in Shastra:

I-Vishnu-tattva, II-Shiva-tattava and III-Jiva Tattava.

 

Vishnu-tattva is the catogory God and all His expansions and partial expansions,

Like Nrisingha, Matsya, Kurma, Vishnu, Narayana, Krishna, Rama, Buddha, etc.,

etc.. These forem are all eternal and manifetated in their respective Vikuntha

plannets. For our benifut from time to time they manifest into this material

worl which is onle1/4 of the total creation of God. This 1/4 the materia; world

consists of biliions and billions of Universes and is manifested and retracted

in a cycle of for us unemaginable time. The 3/4 of creation the eternal

Spritual world, aslo know as Vaikuntha dhama is eternal as are all inhabitants

on the enoumerable spiritual; planets.

 

Lord Rama, which is Maryada-Purushottma meaning "The Ultimale Person (GOD) who

gives the example" receides there Eternally with His consort Sita and their

eternal devotees. In Treta-Yuga (about 1.2 milion years back) Lord Rama

manifested His Lila on this planet fro our benifit to attract us to The Supreme

Blisfull eternal Spiritual world. At that Time as always when The Suprme Lord

Comes all His consorts, fami;ly members friends, devtess, servant etc also

manifest to serve him in his Human Like lila in the Material world. Lord Shiva

being the reated serfant of The Supreme Lord also manifested as Hanuman. We

should not think howetver that both Hanuman and the Lord are born like us and

have died like us. Their appearance and disappearance are only lila for the

general populkas who can not fanthom the etrenal excitance of the Lord in his

enoumarable manifestations. Hanumanji is an eternal servant of Lorf Rama and

although said to be born as the son of Vayu (the God of Wind) and a heavanly

apsara he eteranlay existant.

 

When Lord Rama was about to unmanifest His appearance from this mortal world He

pleaded with Hanuman to saty here to help the fallen souls who have no cleu of

their trough identity and purpose in life. T teach them bhakti and in

particular dasya bhakti.

 

The pupose of life is tpo develope pure unaloyed transcendental love for one

Ishta deav, the lord of our Heart. These can only be Vishnu Tattva acoourding

to all reveal scriptures. Pure ans sincere attachment to Shiva Tatva or Jiva

Tattva entities like the Demigods will bring us to their Ishta Deva's that are

Vishnu-tattva and are therefore only a stepping stone. I can quote numerous

shastric effidence to support this as I've partly done in previos writnings to

our group.

 

Hanuman still remains on our palnet and those who are interested to develope

pure bhakyi and in dasya bhakkti inparticular can take his blessings and help

to reach the ultimate goal of live. He will only refeal himselve though to the

sincere and deserving like he did to Arjuna and the pandva's 5000 years ago. He

even took the position on Aryuna flag of his chariot at the request of Lord

Krishna. He also reveakled Himselfe to Tulsi dasa the grate narotor of the

ramayan for the general populace of the midle ages.

 

The other tatvas I've explained in earlier writings and because of time

restrainds I want to leave it here.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Bhaktardj

I give you two versions one a quick short sharp one and the other elaborate but

boring theological one. You can choose to read one or the other or

both..........

 

1. Short and sweet.......

 

Hanuman is a manifestation of Siva himself. He is recognised by ancient texts

as the 11th Rudra. He is born but through his actions became beyond death. He

is the only one of the two who are not barred in religion from going anywhere

with his physical body, be it physical/meta-physical/or Ethereal worlds. He is

the only exception in a religion that has everything explained to the nth degree

of philosophical clarity. Now if someone can think of such pure and exceptional

form of deity to be a demi-god, then they ought to change their religion and

become something other than following Hinduism as they have simply wasted their

philosophical prowess and should refrain from commenting on this religion

(pardon the strong words....).

 

2. A long winded one..........

 

I think this idea of demi-gods/gods/super gods and supreme gods is born out of

the tries to explain Hinduism to western cultures. The problem with the two

distinct theologies is that they have grown a little apart.

 

The traditional western theology is based around the realization that there is

only one God and that He is all powerful and He is the one that everyone must

meditate on all of the time. Now we can argue till we are blue in our faces as

to who or what name should be given to 'that' one God. Some may call Him Allah,

some others The father, yet others Siva or Krishna and so on and so forth. But

the fundamental fact is that one version of Theology has set up stall that

there is 'one' God.

 

However the traditional Indian (or more specific the theology that is commonly

known as Sanatan Dharm or transliterated to the Ancient Religion) theology is a

bit more subtle about the definition of 'God' and His relationship with physical

world. The fundamental of this theology is also that there is 'One' God. But

it goes on to describe various forms of that God. Some forms are astral forms

to control a specific aspect of physical or ethereal worlds. Some aspects are

said to be rooted to certain specific spots that may have formed some sort of

'gateway' between the physical and ethereal worlds. Some aspects control

fundamental elements. Yet others form a necessary function of keeping the

creation in balance and intervene when the balance between good and evil is

disturbed. There are yet other forms that simply check and give out the

justice to physical manifestations i.e. living beings according to our actions.

There are yet more that are manifestations of the 'God' that have been

communally accepted as the incarnations of God. These manifestations generally

have a specific purpose in the physical world and once they have completed that

purpose, they went back to their original form. Then there is an

extra-polation of this fact that if 'God' can manifest in physical form, then

why not the different forms of deities manifesting themselves to 'correct'

their specific tasks and hence we get to hear manifestations of Vishnu, of

Rudra, of other deities that maybe not universally known. Then these

manifestations can be of varying degrees as to how much ot the 'astral' being

of the form was actually contained in a singular physical body. This is where

Krishna is thought to be the 'only' manifestation of Vishnu where he had all of

the sixteen astral senses in-tact in his physical body.

 

Nowhwere is the Ancient texts it says that 'one' form of 'God' is better or

superior to the 'other'. The texts talk along a great deal of detail about the

prime deity in that context but it is later interpretation that just because one

form of the 'God' is given a particular place in a particular story/verse; it

proves beyond doubt that that story/verse says that particular form of God is

superior and hence a negative interpretation that the rest are lesser 'God'.

 

This problem has it's roots in the social integration of the two distinct

theologies that mankind has grown up with. One believing in a singular and

straightforward 'mega-super supreme being called God and nothing else between

Him and man' and that all will be judged only once in human lifetime whenever

the end of mankind comes & the other a little subtler saying yes there is 'God'

but that God is what is holding all of the creation together and that we humans

are ever changing and evolving beings utilizing different 'physical' bodies

according to our needs/requirements/Karma.

 

People who have tried to rationalize the two similar but distinct theologies

have not done a good enough job and have rationalized it from the

economically/politically dominant social view-point which happened to be of a

singular 'God' entity.

 

To explain the reason of all these other forms of 'God' to people understanding

'One God' they have had to created an 'order among Gods' thus creating better

and lesser 'Gods'. It is a problem with the explanation and not the theology

itself.

 

If the scriptures are read correctly there are only two forms in the astral

world; the ones that do justice & live harmoniously & if they have done

injustice accept their punishment and the ones that do as they please when they

please & are generally thinking of getting away with the lot. When you strip

away the elaborate beautification in verses and stories, this is what good and

evil is all about. What is starking in Indialn traditional theology however is

that both good and evil are made up from the same building blocks of creation

and moreover that evil can turn out to be good eventually and good can turn out

to be fallible.

 

To wrap up, this message of higher and lesser gods has only come out of the need

to explain to a section of mankind that has traditionally grown up with the idea

of singularity of 'God'. God is God and that is all there is to it. If anyone

tries to define any further, it can lead to all sorts of interpretations and

these are better left for the professionals who obviously don't necessarily do

a good enough job every single time.

 

Kind regards

 

Anand

 

[] On Behalf Of SUTHA

KARAN18 January 2006 02:32To:

Cc: RudraCentre (AT) hotmail (DOT) comSubject:

Re: RBSC : Hanuman

Dear Sir / madam,

One question on Lord Hanuman, a friend of mine told that Lord is a Demi God and

is still alive in Himalayas, and also said that we should not really pray to

Demi Gods coz you will get whatever we wish for fast but might not really good

for us.So the best is to Shiva or Vishnu.What like to get more opinion for the

learned ones.

Thank You,

Aum Namah Shivaya

PhotosRing in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

 

Visit your group "" on the web.

 

-->

Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with . Enter now.