If God has no Rupam as per Vedas how can He engage Himself in a Language debate with Nakeerar?

Question

If God has no Rupam as per Vedas how can He engage Himself in a Language debate with Nakeerar?

Answer 1

As the purpose of the question is fulfilled by the answer of Shivam sir, I have no comment to make here.



But to clarify my position I have given my submission with my insignificant knowledge.



Hinduism is a belief of apparent contradictions. It has Abheda, Bheda and Gataka srutis.

It has Nirguna Brahman and Saguna Brahman.



The Vedic Gods:



Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad, Book 3, Chapter 9, Verse 2:



“Ete trayastrimsatvena Devaa iti, katame te trayastrimsat iti, ashtou Vasavah ekaadasa Rudraah dvaadasa Aadityaah te ekatrimsat Indraschaiva Prajaapatischa trayastrimsou iti”.



( https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20091117075210AAawPLI )



Vedic gods are those devas who are mentioned in the four Vedas. The principal Vedic gods are said to be 33 in number, namely eight Vasus, eleven Rudras, twelve Adityas, Indra and Prajapathi Brahma.



God's Rupam:



Purusha sukta (Rig Veda, 10.90) Verse Twenty-four



'hrishcha te lakshmishcha patnyau

ahoratre parshve

nakshatrani rupam

ashvinau vyattam

ishtam manishana

amun manishana

sarvam manishana

Om shanti shanti shantihi'



'O Purusha! The goddesses Hri (modesty) and Sri (Lakshmi, wealth) are Your consorts. Day and night are Your lateral limbs. The stars are Your form. The Ashvins are your widely opened (mouth). (O Purusha) fulfill our desire for self-knowledge as also our desire for the enjoyments of this world (like longevity, cows, and horses). Give us all that we need. Om, let there be peace, peace, peace.'



Hinduism, the Sanatana Dharma, is like a tree. The roots are Vedas. The trunk is Upanishads. Main branches are Smirities. Medium sized branches are ithikas and Dharma Sastras. Other branches are primary Puranas and Secondary Puranas.



The fruits are with different shapes and tastes. The fruits are given to us by Adi Chankaracharya Ramanujacharya, Madhvacharya, Caitanya, Bhakth Meera and so on.



I have got one such fruit which may be different from the possession by others.



The earlier question was in connection with a secondary Purana and answer was given according to that Purana. This need not be accepted by others, here and elsewhere.



It has a Sthala Purana like 108 Vishnu temples, Dwadasa jyotir lingas ,51 Shakti Peethas and like many many in length and breadth of Akanda Bharath.



The Gnana Yoga of formless God was suitable in Sathya Yuga. But the Bhakthi Yoga path is easy and the only path which is suitable for me with my meager knowledge.

Answer 2

Even if the God is name and form less He can assume any form if the need arises if He so wish. Besides, God can communicate without any medium too, He is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient. Vedas are the revelation in the minds of the great rishis/sages the truth ushered in by Him



Many gods are the personification of different qualities of the same one God.

Answer 3

You guys can never change

mine and yours

my thought your thought

my god your god

my language your language.

Everyone knows that in Sanatana Dharma there is no shape for God

So for the use of common man in Geeta Krishna said both the ways which ever suits you is good to reach me (either Aakara or Nirakara)

There ends the problem

Stop poking each other and act like more matured

Answer 4

While I do agree that God is Truth in both formless and in form. It is the OM/Turiya/Brahmm who manifests as Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh, but they are not human like and some puranas and cultures have made their own stories to further explain them. That may be true for an illiterate farmer to understand Shiva or Vishnu, BUT they are the biggest fairy tales for a learned Hindu. A wise man like Rajagopalan might have used this view in context of Q, not as absolute hindu philosophy, I am sure.





As far as the portion of shiva discussing with poet Nakeerar, where nakiraar refused to accept the poem on following grounds :



women's hair can not be fragrant naturally

The poem is beyond logical verses



and people dont even know that SHIVA is a name of supreme consciousness and He would not burn an idiot who does not know basic rules of poety, depicting Shiva as full of jealousy and full of caste /creed notions







This is surely a myth spread by vaishvanites to insult SHIVA, and should not be taken seriously

=================================



Now some musings as additional information



Shri Narayan himself told in Padam Puran :



सौराश्च शैवगाणेशा वैष्णवा: शक्तिपूजका:

मामेव ते प्रपद्यन्ते वर्षाम्भ: सागरं यथा:



Like the rain water from all sides finally reaches the ocean, similarly worshipper of Ganesha, vishnu, shiv and shakti all reach me finally.



and when some vishnu Bhakta calls other bhakta idiot, showing him some Tamil proverb...will you accept the Padam Puran or Tamil proverb??



What a particular culture says about Religions has no logical value. Tamil literature is not more important than Vedas and Upanishadas.



In Haryana, there are folk songs of Shiva fighitng with Parvati to prepare Bhang (an intoxicating herb) for him and she scolds Shiva and threatens him that she will go to her parents.



Think of Shiva the supreme consciousness and Shakti the eternal energy shown in such a cheap and unrealistic way. And believe me, in our Haryana most of the people believe it.



In my opinion, Tamilians' idea about god is not less child-like than a Haryanvi thought !!!



Puranas created more rifts among hindus, than any other scriptures, A shaiva hating vishnu and a vaishvanite hating shaivas.



All such stories are man made and I do not think there is any truth in them. One can show 1000s proofs from a particular Sangam or literature, BUT that remains an idea of that area only.



It is high time we understand Our religion from Vedas, Upanishadas, and geeta and leave the fairy tales produced by various sangams OTHERWISE we have to learn hinduism from muslim trolls, which they are trying to teach us here on YA.



Each culture has its own fairy tale of God. Recently a sikh gentleman with a punjabi book of his religion tried to prove to me that Narsimha Avtar was actually Guru Gobind singh. He had all the written proofs for that in that tiny book.



Should i belive him ?



And a hindu proving that Vishnu is greatest or Shiva is greatest is not lesser fool than that sardarji. Where is the difference ?



I have no respect for any culture any sangam or any literature which goes against the Upanishadas.



EDIT; MANGALAMBIKA You have again accused me of tamil hater without reading my answer properly.



Since the Q itself is based on a Tamil example, how can we reply to it without quoting tamil literature ??



I refuted claims of all regional cultures for giving their own examples about god and that included Haryana, Punjab and tamil literature.



But since your eyes are red with hate towards me, you only saw it against Tamil. I simply mean to say, take help of tamil literature to understand Hindusim, BUT dont misrepresent Hinduism with help of your literature. Tamil literature may be great but not greater than the Hindu Philosophy, written in Sanskrit



STOP THIS REGIONAL ATTITUDE AND COME WITH OPEN EYES ALL OF YOU. GIVING ME THUMBS DOWNS BY LTTE MEMBERS WILL NOT STOP MY VOICE.



EDIT ; VEERS ! sir read my additional comments to mangalambhika AGAIN.



I have not written anything against tamil literature, but general defects in all literatures. In fact i have written worse comments against my own state Haryana, if you read my answer properly



Prejudiced people will find my answer anti-tamil. ask a 3rd neutral person, if my comments are actually against tamil?



EDIT ALLUNGA : I have seen your reply to Bull's Question A person who Insults Sanskrit language, the eternal language and that too just to promote a regional language, has no right to comment on others.



If you people are out to prove that Tamil is above sanskrit and if tamil literature is above Geeta or Veda, then I AM GOING TO BOIL !!!



I am against Khalistan and I am against Tamilistan too.



EDIT ALLUNGA AGAIN - Besides having a funny name you are ignorant too



Why did you spoil my question with your hateful remarks against me ??



Ravan like you kidnap the Sita of good thoughts and are finally destroyed !!



Dont think yrself as the sole idiot on earth. There are many muslim trolls like you spreading wrong info about hinduism and abusing good hindus



EDIT ; MANGAL : That is reply to Allunga not you !!. Tamilistan is when someone thinks Sanskrit, Veda, Upanishadas and Geeta are inferior to tamil literature. when Some tamils write bad comments against Non-tamilians and when you ask - What Shivam (a non-tamil) is doing in our questions, and when people like Allunga write hateful comments in my Q.



what is the difference between sikh separatists and you people if you behave like them. They also hated me when I said their book is not superior than Geeta ?



I dont have any problem with your love for your Language and scriptures. BUT DONT FORCE ME TO BELIEVE IT. I will take good things from it and reject others



YA is not your personal property. If you wish I do not reply, tell all your friends to block me.



If i come, i will write what i feel good.

Answer 5

I am a south indian, but not tamilian and I see no insult to tamils by Shivam sir.



I find ALLUNGA's comments against sanskrit language more insulting when in Bull sir's question he wrote " For a long time, Sanskrit tries to prove that it is the best and tries to make people believe that Tamil has copied from it. But, It is not true.



Tamil originated much before Sanskrit"



THIS IS HEIGHT OF NONSENCE AND STUPIDITY

Answer 6

The Essence of Hinduism is Yoga (Raja yoga Meditation). To see the truth, there is only one way, "looking inside". It is unscientific to say that there are different ways. There are different interpretations in Hinduism according to each persons taste. People like Sivam and Rajagopal can say that all the ways will lead to the truth. This is because they are born and brought up in Agraharams and are not able to think further.

In human body, there are 9 holes. But we can eat only through our mouth. Similarly, there is only one way to reach the Truth.

I know, you are not going to give me best answer award as you are already selected the favorite one. Why can't you accept your own quoting, "Na tasya pratima asthi" instead of asking this question to Hindus born with poonool, kudumi and salagramam?

Answer 7

God is without form



He can assume any form at any time, because he is not under Prakriti, but prakriti is under him



MR KHAN : Dont try to take advantage of hindus' divisions. No one is going to report any hindu

Answer 8

Yes, Vedas never told any lie, its humans who do!!



The first mandala of the Rig Veda brings out this idea most beautifully:

‘They (the men of wisdom) call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is the heavenly, noble-winged Garutman. The Reality is one, but sages call it by many names; they call it Agni, Yama, Matarishvan (and so on).’ (1.164.46)



Great Rishi Vasistha said: That he could see some beautiful rays, but can't find where they begin and end, those rays are Shiva's effulgence!



When you put sugar in milk, why does milk get sweeter, while you put salt it curdles. In other words, it forms clumps that separate out into a top layer leaving a watery fluid at the bottom. Why does salt have this effect? There are no reason for some things, you have to believe in HIM!



"As the sun appears in the morning and gradually rises to the meridian and then again sets in one hemisphere while simultaneously rising in the other, so Lord Krsna's disappearance in one universe and the beginning of His different pastimes in another take place simultaneously. As soon as one pastime is finished here, it is manifested in another universe. And thus His nitya-lila, or eternal pastimes, are going on without ending."



God can't be seen with naked eyes, we need Knowledge which is beyond our ego, in deep darkness! You can't get pure knowledge, when you lose this ego, and start believing in god, but when you doubt HIM, he will be far away you won't know Him! A devotee can be in a relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead in one of five different ways:



in a passive state (neutrality)

in an active state (servitorship)

as a friend (friendship)

as a parent (parental affection)

as a conjugal lover (amorous)



"In the spiritual world there are five kinds of relationships with the Supreme Lord--santa, dasya, sakhya, vatsalya and madhurya. "



"This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, all-pervading, unchangeable, immovable and eternally the same. It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable, immutable, and unchangeable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body."

Answer 9

Dear Revathy madam,

so, you are pulling me..very glad. when you float a question, it is starred immediately by me and actually i want to answer. But, the things go in another shape of compelling me to answer by your good remarks..

“i will give you evidence that veda told in a place that God has rupams...also veda did not took sides ''irukkunnum sollavillai, illai endrum sollavillai, ore idathil rupam vundu en irukku.”

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…



Not going to close this in a hurry, as rani madam did immediately after receiving Sri.Vidya sir’s answer.

Some float questions thinking as they can choose the best answer, and attribute some answerer as an atheist and so on; we are here only for exchange knowledge only.''



After giving all remarks like TC, you say it is an exchange of knowldge ONLY. so, you would have sleepless nights until posting this question. However, i have only poor knowledge, i myself thinking that i am capable in asking questions, but i know well that i am not capable to answer. i will try as per knowledge available in my mind.



Him who destroyed the three cities,

Him who is first among every thing,

Him who has all seeing three eyes,

Him who carries the weight of matted lock,

With eminence great,

Him who wears the moving snake as necklace,

Him who holds the jumping deer in his hand,

Him who is greatest among devas,

Him who shines with glitter,



what is the meaning to this lines ?

Him who destroyed the three cities, Him who has all seeing three eyes,

Him who wears the moving snake as necklace,

Him who holds the jumping deer in his hand, ganga & chandra on head.

Without a form how can one destroy thripura ? how can karthikeya born ?

where from the neela kandam comes to his throat..



Be it in a human form,

Be it in the form of Gods,

Be it in the form of animal,

That wanders the forests and hills,

Be it in the form of mosquito,

Be it in the form of a domestic animal,

Be it in the form of a worm,

Be it in the form of flying birds,

Or be it in any form whatsoever,



we find from ramayana, the great epic that God shiva gave his danush...pl read....'' Shiva Dhanush in Hindu mythology, was the divine bow of Lord Shiva gifted to King Janaka by Sage Parashurama for safe-keeping while the sage performed penances. It was gifted to Parashurama by Lord Shiva for being a great disciple '' (from revathy's question additional detail) it is a proof that God has rupa..that too was found in the great epic ramayana.

Answer 10

wov! We believe in TV can show you something away from us with wireless remote connections, we believe Radio can make you hear things similarly where as we suspect the power of God to communicate with us wirelessly. God is the essense of all the technology behind us which make us talk, hear, think, cognize etc. God is formless form and can achieve any form at Will. In Tejabindoupanishad Parameshwara replied to Kumara : I am the form of transcendent Brahman, I am the form of absolute knowledge, I am the form of exquisite tranquilised being; I am the form of absolute eternal being; I am the form of absolute goodness; I am the form of Absolute Turya; I am always of the form of consciousness; I am of the form of eternal aspect; I am always of the form of detachment; I am of the form of boundless bliss; I am of the form of existence and transcended bliss;

I am of the form of what lies in the core of core;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (I am beyond the reach of speech and mind; and that is what we all are attempt to reach here) God is always of formless form and can manifest in any form God wishes. God is Nirguna. God speaks in Ashareeri, wireless communication, without body without equipments. Don't we hear a voice in a telephone and recognize the person without telling who is on the other side. Same faculty enables Nakeerar to engage in debate with Parameshwara and would know, if God Wills, that with whom he is talking to without having seen the origin. And if God wills, God can manifest infront of him in any form which would give realization to the interlocutor who he is speaking to. Irukkunnum sollavillai, illai endrum sollavillai, ore idathil rupam vundu enirukku. should not be taken in the literal meaning it conveys. Literally it conveys only "If there is a form anywhere, Neither it says exist nor it says do not exist"

As far as the image aspect is concerned. Image should not be mistook for a "pratima" which is more or less an idol. The fundamental difference between God and Human being is that God is the Cosmic Consciousness the first Gross element Ether which is formless and can take any form at Will, whereas Gods image is in the human beings as spirit, the cognitive, thinking, sentience in human beings, while these Godliness in true nature are entrapped in the fifth metamorphosed form of Ether in the form of Earth which is the flesh and body and entrapped in the fourth metamorphised form of Ether (Eshwar), which is water which gives form to human body, Since Water, and Earth has differentiated from Ether, God contains all those and therefore, God if God Wills, can take the shape with flesh and body. Upanishads and Vedas should not be tried to be interpreted with a finite answer. It will be a great folly to do that, because according to the purification of the mind or the Ether (Eshwar) in us to pure souls on our travel back to Source, each line of Vedas and Upanishads will give us a new and new and new meaning. We are trying to explain the indescribable through inadequate equipment called Words. Words are always subject to varying meaning according to the level of spiritual emancipation. Shruti is always direct communication and smriti is its interpretation.

Answer 11

To my understanding Vedas are saying thre is no rupam for God and He is only one. Your references also said so.



There were different forms of God being worshipped by individual groups as per thier wish. And people not realised that they are worshipping same god with different names and started saying ONLY their god is Supreme. slowly some myths are also came in probably for the benefit of individual or groups.



The Puranams (Ramayanam, Mahabharatham, Thiruvilayadal Puranam etc...) are came in much later to make the people follow certain norms/rule for good living giving references of Gods and avatar. Otherwise people would not folllow them.



there are evidences that Samanar hurt Saivar and vice versa just to ensure their supremacy. When they can get the trust of the kings it become very simple for them. then new stories started build up to support their belief.



Just an Example from the question you refered , How the secret spreads. Do you think the same message would reach without an alteration after passing through x number of people..thaere is well proven fact that same message would not reach passing through x number of people.



That also happend to be part fun activity for learning the principles of effective communication at college days. Now that is part of many corporates activities..



it is like this ..in a Closed Hall the presenter communicate verbally a statement to a person in one corner . he/she has to pass the message to next person .. and so .. on. and finaly when whole round of communication ends , the presenter ask the other corner person to come on to stage and tell the statement. obiviously there will be much alterations to the original statement.



if you pick the 5 th person, 10th person and so on will able to notice the difference.



This principle applies for the several generation old myths and believes.



Have you read the different explanation by different authors of Thirukural ? due to bad memory I will not able to provide the reference Exactly.

One of author explains , during Thiruvallur period their lifestyle and usage of certain words was probably like so and so hence he wrote this. there was a asumption comes in.

Another author comfortably forget this.. go on explaining as he thinks.



Which one you understand rightly ? many words used in thirukural may not be day to day life today.How you get real meaning for it.

Answer 12

In the vedas and puranas we find pancha bhoothas such as land, water, fire, air, akash are the creations of God. Out of the five, the land also a creation of God. The land gives us food in the form of grains. so, in gratitude of Him, we are doing offerings say Nyvedya and this is only a thanks in the form of gratitude. we have many examples to this.Sri Pandarinatha accepted the food offered by Namadeva. The God Ganesa took food in person the food offered by Tirunaraiyur Nambiandan Nambi. Indians make an offering of food to the Lord and later partake of it as Prasaada - a holy gift from the Lord. In our daily ritualistic worship (pooja) too we offer Naivedyam (food) to the Lord. The Lord is omnipotent and omniscient. Man is a part, while the Lord is the totality. All that we do is by His strength and knowledge alone. Hence what we receive in life as a result of our actions is really His alone. We acknowledge this through the act of offering food to Him. This is exemplified by the Hindi words "Tera Tujko Arpan"- I offer what is Yours to You. Thereafter it is akin to His gift to us, graced by His divine touch. Knowing this, our entire attitude to food and the act of eating changes. The food offered will naturally be pure and the best. We share what we get with others before consuming it. We do not demand, complain or criticise the quality of the food we get.

Answer 13

Please do not get confused so much. The only meaning is that GOD - the supreme power does not has HIS own shape. HE is omnipresent everywhere in everything. He takes shape as per the requirement. When HE has to help you in difficulty HE might be present to you in shape of your wife/husband or friend or a doctor. The all the RUPAMs of HIM are as and when needed for the benefit of society.

Answer 14

My dear friend am not good in theory part and i don't know much about theory so let me tell you what i feel.

Its true that God has no rupam and it is mentioned in vedas.... but it doesn't say he can't take whatever rupam he wants to so it should be understood or rather realized....i don't mean to offend you but you can't come over god by questioning only.

God is omnipresent who is the manifested and unmanifested universe.....

this is just my humble opinion,there is no use in reading all the vedas when you can't realize god by yourself.....vedas can be used as an aid for your understanding or to get intrested but i don't think one will be enlightened just by reading vedas am not against vedas so something like that sort....

Answer 15

Only the realised souls know that the Ultimate Reality is Non-dual and Nirguna.For all practical purposes,we need a form and so we have Ultimate reality as Saguna. To purify our mind we need certain factors that help us in our path towards God-realisation.A person who has the self-knowledge is a Jivanmukta who lives for the sake of the world. Once he sheds the physical body, he attains videhamukti. So we need personified God to attain self-realisation. We need the form and the divine qualities to purify our mind.

Answer 16

Concept Of God In Vedas

Answer 17

in universe there are three kinds of energy i.e spritual energy( mentioned as para prakrity in Gita) and mental physical energy( mentioned as apera prakrity in Gita). all three forms emerged from the God that form which is beyond human mind & intelligence. this apera prakrity happens to be sagun sakar form of God. we can understand this in the way As light & heat emerge from Sun .

Answer 18

Simple logical deduction :)



One can identify a person with some specific qualities, called the essential nature of the person.

If I say that 'pink, wide floating flower' is the Lotus, then those 'Pink, wide, floating' becomes the Guansa/Nature/Qualities. Isn't it? Like that Vedas/Upa. say this : 'That Only ONE which is Satyam (Ultiamte Realtiy), Gnanam (Infinite Cons.), Bliss(Pure) is BrahmaN', what do these 3 qualities (dharma) refer? That refers to the Specific Gunas/NAture of BrahmaN. Thus BrahmaN is already with Gunas as 3 Qualitites. He cannot be without Guna.



How can a formless BrahmaN suddenly come with Forms among the devotees? E.G. Wood or Inflammable Gas may create "Flames" when comes in contact with Fire. Samkara would have thought Fire/Wood are Nirguna BrahmaN and out of Maya/Illusory effects, the Fire/wood came into Flames when contact with Fire. How is this tenable/possible? The Wood/Gas already had those Qualities/potential of Fire, when manifested it showed the forms. Can a Non-Flammable material catch Fire, if the Fire qualities are not inherently present? How can a formless BrahmaN suddenly come up with qualtiies of Grace, Affection, justice etc.? There are no two brahmaNs in the vedas. How can a formless God, exhibit power in the Creation of Evolution of Universes from Primal matter? Doesnt this suggest the BrahmaN is already Powerful (SagunA) to execute the cosmic function? Otherwise the Isa. Upa. verse 'Poornam Poornaidha... ' verse makes not much sense, if He has all the Whole lot of best , powerful Qualities/Nature and His Universal Creation doesnt have to illusory and is very Real.



Actually, Sri sankara came up with the explanations of Nirguna, Nirvishesha BrahmaN basically from Svetasvatara Upa.



I just wind up for lack of time and also for other better answers.



To Shivam,

Firstly, Vedas have both the Nirguna and Saguna strutis. Since they both describe the BrahmaN, they cannot referto two diffferent person, They should be understood in each other's context.

Secondly, The logical/critical thinking has nothing to with tamil or any region. Sankara, Ramanuja were both shastris (iyers of south India), why should they differ if they are from the same region? In fact, Ramanuja was a telugu shastri and his guru was a advaitin. Why should tamils follow teachings of Telugu and keralite saints?

Thirdly, your response is out of context. The discussion is about whether BrahmaN is Nirguna or Saguna? not about Vishnu or Siva, which was an older question?

Fourthly, the different philosophies are based on the Prasthana Trayams, which were only philosophical verses not stories or puranas. The 'Bhasyas' are philosophical debates not stories.

Answer 19

Dear Revathy Madam



COMMON CONCEPT OF GOD IN HINDUISM



Hinduism or Sanatana

Dharma is the only religion which teaches

us that the first stage in spiritual life is

worship of images, the next higher stage is

worshipping god in heaven. The third stage

is to see God within the heart. The final

stage is to see God everywhere.





If you ask some lay persons who are Hindus that how many gods do they believe in, some may say three, some may say thirty-three, some may say a thousand, while some may say thirty-three crores i.e. 330 million. But if you ask this question to a learned Hindu who is well versed with the Hindu Scriptures, he will reply that the Hindus should actually believe and worship only one God.









UPANISHAD:



Upanishads are one of the sacred Scriptures of the Hindus.

Chandogya Upanishad Chapter 6 Section 2 verse 1



“Ekam Evadvitiyam”

“He is one only without a second.”



(The Principal Upanishad by S. Radhakrishnan pg. 447 & 448)

(Sacred Books of the East Volume 1, the Upanishads Part I Page 93)

Shwetashvatara Upanishad Chapter 6 verse 9



“Nacasya kascij janita na cadhipah”

“Of Him there are neither parents nor Lord.”



(The Principal Upanishad by S. Radhakrishnan pg. 745)

(and in Sacred books of the East volume 15, the Upanishads Part II Page 263)

Shwetashvatara Upanishad Chapter 4 verse 19



“Na tasya pratima asti”

“There is no likeness of Him”.



(The Principal Upanishad by S. Radhakrishnan pg 736 & 737 )

(and in Sacred books of the East Volume 15, the Upanishads part II, Page no. 253)

Shwetashvatara Upanishad Chapter 4 verse 20



“na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam”.

“His form cannot be seen, no one sees Him with the eye”.



(The Principal Upanishad by S. Radhakrishnan pg. 737)

(And in Sacred books of the East Volume 15, the Upanishad part II, Page no. 253)







BHAGWAD GEETA



The most popular amongst all the Hindu Scriptures is the Bhagwad Geeta.



Bhagwad Geeta mentions

“Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires worship demigods” that is “Those who are materialistic, they worship demigods” i.e. others as deities besides the True God.

(Bhagwad Geeta 7:20)



It is mentioned in Bhagavad Gita

“He who knows Me as the unborn, as the beginning-less, as the Supreme Lord of all the worlds…”

(Bhagwad Geeta 10:3)







YAJURVEDAVedas are the most sacred amongst all the Hindu Scriptures. There are principally 4 Vedas: Rig Ved, Yajur Ved, Sam Ved, and Atharva Veda.

Yajurveda Chapter 32, Verse 3



“na tasya pratima asti”

“There is no image of Him”



It further says,

“as He is unborn, He deserves our worship”.

(Yajurveda 32:3)

(The Yajurveda by Devi Chand M.A. pg. 377)

Yajurveda Chapter 40 Verse 8



“He is bodiless and pure”.

(Yajurveda 40:8)

(Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph I. H. Griffith pg. 538)

Yajurved Chapter 40 Verse 9



“Andhatma pravishanti ye assambhuti mupaste”

“They enter darkness, those who worship natural things.”

E.g. worship of natural elements air, water, fire, etc.

(Yajurveda 40:9)



It further continues and says

“They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti i.e. created things”

E.g. created things such as table, chair, idols, etc.

(Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Griffith pg. 538)







ATHARVA VEDA



Atharva Veda book 20 hymn (chapter) 58 verse 3



It is mentioned in Atharva Veda

“Dev Maha Osi”

“God is Verily Great.”

(Atharva Veda 20:58:3)

(Atharvaveda Samhita Vol. 2, William Duright Whitney pg. 910)







RIGVEDA



The oldest and most sacred amongst all the Vedas is the Rigveda.

Rigveda Book no. 1, Hymn No. 164, verse 46



It is mentioned in Rigveda Book no. 1, hymn No. 164 verse 46

“Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti”

“Sages (learned Priests) call one God by many names”.

(Rigveda 1:164:46)



Truth is one, God is one, sages call it by various names.





This what Vedas Says about God.



http://hasnain.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/concept-of-god-in-hinduism-islam/



God is a principle which has no name, no form, no likes, and no dislikes. Principles do not behave erratically; if they do so, they would not remain Principles.



This is the first step in Realization of Self. Though the Reality has no Name and Form, worshipping names/Forms (various Gods), leads one gradually to the realization that these names and forms do not really exist and that they are only one of the many processes to realize the Ultimate Principle.



One may ask-why believe in something, which we are going to find out to be irrelevant at a later time? For any journey ,first step must be taken. After reaching the Destination, the First step may seem irrelevant. But it is essential. After attaining PhD, nursery class seems to be irrelevant. But without nursery class, one would not have obtained PhD.



In a Nut-shell, God does not have Name and Form.



But we need to have name and Form to Realize the Reality. So, different forms and names are best left to individuals as they know best what they like.

Answer 20

god is only one.but it will take many form.no one is understand him.if you take soil.you will make many form of idol.but soil is same.god is everywhere.but he is only one.

siva om siva

Answer 21

very nice question, thought provoking, rupam is a concept

Answer 22

Revathy, It is stated in all religious quoted you entioned that God has no Rupam, but nowhere it has been stated that He cannot come in a "Rupam" to give Darshan or enlighten His devotees.



In the case of not only Nakkeeran, but to Adi Sankaracharya (Whom, we consider as an Avatar of Lord Shiva) He appeared as a Chandaala with four dogs and enlighten Him.



@Edit :---Sharmili, in a sense, is correct. When you have floated a question, you have to go through all the answers. If you require Sri Vidya Rajagopalanji's answer to enlighten you, then why can't you ask this question through an e-mail and obtain his reply? Then there is no need to float this question publicly.



It is my humble submission and I know you ""learned ones"" won't create a controversy out of my above contents.



I also request you like Mathangi & Sharmili to extend this question and not close it once you receive Sri Vidyaji's reply and see what are their further opinions in this regard.

Answer 23

while thanking for the opportunity, i don't want to throw mud on every opportunity. if there is something, that should not be misused is my policy. we are not here to oppose every thing. i ask you those except sharmili, is this new to this forum asking by a theist ? revathy floated a question and asked only to enlighten it and she did not come to a conclusion. i too some times hinted in another question slightly, but she did not understand my answer. what can i do for it ?



Before i am giving an answer, i ask that self styled man bulls...will you ask every question to anyone before floating a question ? have revathy no right to float a question which is better than cine actress questions. This veers uncle a good only a month before, but the circumstances and situations making him to compel to float such a harsh words. Don't think ...i tell you all that revathy an ordinary one, she drank cauvery water and grown in pucca tamilnadu...she knows to come from kolam from the mat..



please see a question as question and should not see who floated a question..i too say or critisized her in an gentle manner. we should not appreciate one's talents, but should brand the one to something, which i hate. i will oppose openly and never indirectly or waiting for an opportunity.



coming to the question, she generally asked a question ..'' when god has no forms, how was the god entered into argument with the sangam nakkeeran, a famous poet '' .. we find it a long time, this kind of debates are there, and continuing. is it new ? has no one asked ? who is that Allunga ? do you come here to answer or to scold mr shivam ? Though, i don't agree shivam's view, a lonely man from other part should not be targetted and he also have the same freedom to express his opinion and that does not mean he is against tamils or tamil literature. i throw a challenge.. will any one dare to tell me as against tamil ? if anyone comes forward, i will also have the same talent to tarnish the images....my namaskarams to srividya ji. The answers of udaya, prince, sharmili, even rani maha rani and jp seems good. sharmili too shaked the asker..in a very gentle way but no enmighty with her answer. what mr odampully, when i am respecting your knowledge, i hate your unwanted words..do you think all are having ''kudumi'' and please know many shaivats too are having ''poonul'' and many vaishnavits too have ''poonul'' and mind it mr odampull, that the ''poonal'' is not related to brahmin alone..o you know that agraharams now shifted from village to towns and cities and even it gone abroad because you people unable to respect and recognize the wisdom and talents of agraharamas..mind your words..it is not a loss to poonuls, kudumis, and saligrams, it is a loss to the people who has none to hear dharma, righteous to hear...sometimes, the high knowledge too go to low-profile. so, don't argue as if you alone know fully...



coming to her question...



yes, God is formless..no rupa in vedic period, but later it got rupa. i will come and explain..yes, shiva entered into argument with sangam poet nakkeeran, the famous one and it is true. shiva has forms and that also i will explain..



@ Asker...why so many thumbs down and why shivam alone got highest thumbs up ? is his answer a great one ? mr shivam sir, what is this ? who is that so much knowledgeable idiot doing this nasty works ? Those who thumbs down will certainly have two or more fathers. Those who do thumbs up after fully reading the answer will have only one father.

Answer 24

All of you should REPORT Shivam and get him suspended.



He is writing bad against Islam also

Answer 25

Revathy madam question seems nice but the speed of the question finds challenging nature instead of knowing the truth. so, it needs debate, because question is debatable. may i right revathy madam ? i think and believe that this is a continuation of her leftover argument from a question floated by rani.



How can God shiva entered in a language debate with poet nakkeeran when God has no rupams ? this is the argument type question put before us for an answer. Revathy madam cites vedas in support of her arguments.



Veda is common all. if you pull it will come and give hand to you, and it will also help us in another angle. if you enter home from front door, we too can enter by another door.



Many are talking about prameyam without proper study or no

study of the pramanam. Or prejudices play a role here. As a result of

this, there arises many deviations and contradictions. Not only today we

find this trend, but also in olden days, such a trend was present very much.

For example, the Adi Sankara's Advaita is an example for

irrational anti-vedic & invalid pramyam, which has been termed as prachchanna

bowdham. This is not to offend some one but nirvisesha chin

matram vadam if done by us is nothing but "nirastha samastha

visesham prathyagabhinnam chinmathram";

1. nirastha samastha visesham is a form of Sowgatha bowdha vadam

2. prathyagabhinnam is a form of charvaka vadam

3. chinmathram is a form of sankya vadam.

All the three are against Shastra and nyaya, therefore, "sankya sowgatha

charvaka sankarachchankarodaya:" - the mixture of these three

Veda-Shastra-virudhda-nyaya-virudhda atheist mathams is Advaita of

people like Gaudapada, Sankara etc., which is therefore surely a

Veda-Shastra-virudhda-nyaya-virudhda-matham. These are not emmotional points;

but when studied with a calm mind without prejudices, one can understand the

fact - only the Visishtadvaita prameyam is the truth.



The quoted so-called proclamation "impersonal God" also seems to be

the result of lack of scholarly study of the Shastra or no study of Shastra

or should be a personal opinion. If it was a personal opinion, then

no comments. Do you agree this ?



The SarIraka-Shastra consist of 20 chapters;

Frist 12 chapters state that SrIman Narayana: is worshiped by all karmas jaimini sage gave sutras.



Next 4 chapters state that Sriman Narayana: grants the results of all karmas

who is the antharyami of all devathas (kasakrutsna sutras)

Last 4 chapters clearly explain the swarupa, rupa, guna, vibhuthi iswaryams of

SrIman Narayana who is known by the name Brahman in upanishads (veda vyasa)



Thus the entire Veda has clearly explained that the one and only God is SrIman

Narayana: who is the Lord of LakshmI; All the sentitent and insentient

entities are his body(form), mode and attributes. Therefore the impersonal

aspect of God in Shastra is shattered to pieces. The God according to the

Shastra is always with

form. This has been ascertained in the Shastra. But please note the following

points where God shiva has a form (rupa) and how he entered with argument with poet

nakkeern.

i don't understand calling srividya rajagopalan in particular, when we are all here to answer and for a simple question. it shows that you are challenging srividya sir.



i feel sorry for taking your good time. thanks for allowing me to take time...



That the form of God is not material but fully spiritual, there is no denying of the fact. In Sanskrit, that form of the Deity is called Sri-Vigraha. Sri-Vigraha is therefore the personality or individuality of the Deity. It may also be styled as the grand particularity of God. The property of a thing which distinguishes it from another thing is called In Sanskrit the Visesa, or its peculiarity. Sri-Vigraha is therefore the Visesa of the Almighty. The person of the Deity exhibits six great attributes which constitute the principle of Bhaga, and He who owns it is styled Bhagavan. These attributes are: 1. Majesty (aisvarya); 2. Might (virya); 3. Glory (yasa); 4. Beauty (sri); 5. Intelligence (jnana); and 6. Liberty (vairagya). These attributes, beautifully reconciled to each other under the rule of one of them, i.e. Beauty, constitute the form or the Sri-Vigraha of Bhagavan. Don't admit the eternal form of God and you will lay the foundation of atheism. God without a form or personality is nothing but a rule or law which creates and keeps the universe in order.

Our object is not to argue with the atheist, but to establish that the eternal spiritual form of the Deity is an essential element in the science of Theology. If we admit a formless Deity, we must in the end believe that everything is God and that there is no distinction between Godhead and the creature. The Sanyavada of the Buddhists, the nonentity of Godhead of the atheist, and the identity of Brahma and the soul of the Aduaita-uadis are admitted as the truth. Hence great men with a strong sentiment to God have all along accepted the truth advanced by Smrti, Sruti, and healthy reasoning that the form of the Deity is subject, of His own free-will, to the four cognitions mentioned above.



It has been argued that the Omni-presence, Omniscience, and the Omnipotence of the Deity can hardly be maintained if a form can be ascribed to Him. Asserting, as we have done, that the form of the Deity is spiritual and the ideas of magnitude have been derived from matter, space, and time, there is no difficulty to believe that the Divine form is Omni-present in all fullness of beauty, Omniscient while engaged in associations of affections in relations to others, and Omnipotent while existing in a serene and cool appearance.



Certain puerile arguments have repeatedly been advanced against the spiritual form of the Deity. It would take much space and time to repeat them all one by one. i feel it is not necessary now since i gave full details.



From the above, i proved within my knowledge and belief that God has rupa (Form) as per veda, upanishad, ithihasas, puranas. it is vague argument as mr veers told that not to bring avatars. The avatars are the first hand information to prove and if you say '' no '' to it, what is the use of answering your question, and any way, i tried my level best to furnish an answer. When i proved that God has a form (rupa), it is not necessary for me to prove that God shiva engaged in an argument or debate with poet nakkeera, since it will be easy for all to prove. if i say '' this is east side '' because i have some proof, but if you say to prove without pointing sun or star, i can do nothing leaving a good '' smile '' towards you.



while thanking you for the good opportunity, i request you please to avoid controvertial arguments, debates by which you will not win instead getting adverse effects only. you can come with similar questions, and by god's grace we can meet you and answer you. No problem. i again request you to pardon me if my words are harsh or hurt, or if anything you find exceeding my limitations and this will be a guidance for me to be more careful in future.

Answer 26

Well!!!!



If some sound is heard, what will you do? Think!!!



Just speak back???? No...

You will be scared... right?



If you ever hear some voice alone, will you think that it is from God? No. Our mind will immediately think of ghost!!!



Have you seen advertisments? They will tell that "Made Especially for you". Do they advertise specially for you (No others are also seeing!). This concept is similar



If some body calls you, you are speaking to them without them being in front of you. How? You are just assuming as if they are in front of you. Thus, the telephone acts as a medium between you and the caller.



One more example. Suppose you hear a song in radio. The radio acts as a medium here. No one is singing before you, just for you.



Similarly, GOD, instead of speaking alone, shows himself in some form before you to converse with you.



Again, if some dog (other than your pet) barks at you, Will you try to understand what it tells? No. Instead if it talks to you in Tamil "என்னங்க நல்லா இருக்கிங்களா?" (Hey!! Are you fine?)... Will you reply? You will rather scream!!



Hence, he has to reveal himself in a form acceptable by humans.... Human being is the only form now... That is his rupam...



Got it?



Nakeerar (நக்கீரர்) said "நெற்றிக் கண் திறப்பினும் குற்றம் குற்றமே!"

A mistake made is always a mistake!!



My kind request to Shri. ΨShivamΨ.You are from Haryana... I suppose.



If I stand as a neutral person, I find your answer correct. But, I studied almost most of your answers and hence, telling you:



Please dont insult other cultures. The question may be based on tamil. Still, you dont have any rights to tease a language.

Sanskrit and Tamil are very old languages. They have their own culture and perception of God.



When nobody speaks ill of Sanskrit , why are you always writing like an anti-Tamil?



Let us not divide by religion or region. lets be INDIANS

Answer 27

Thanks for Question. so many best answers for self realization.

Jay.

Answer 28

Generally some people to get popularity float questions with half baked knowledge and make fun of Great Religious subjects. Irony is that some people utilize the opportunity to further damage the sentiments.



As rightly pointed out by BULL if the questioner needs an explanation for Shri.C.Srividya Rajagoplan Sir’s postings, it can be directly sought from him as making a controversial question



There are many good answers. Actually Udaya has posted views similar to what I wanted post here.



Science has already wondered everything in this cosmos reduced to sub-atomic level it behaves dual nature, the wave – particle duality! Everything we see in form is nothing but a formless energy wave. The formless energy wave at its ‘will’ manifest itself it to any form of its choice.





When we are trying to send a photo to a person in other end of our planet by mail, the photo is taking formless avatar and travel through atmosphere and it manifest in the form of photo to the other person’s computer for taking print out instantly. How do you dispute that God Shiva did not possess that capability to appear before Nakkeeran in the Sabha?



As rightly pointed out by Shri.C.Srividya Rajagoplan Sir, the Vedas are of different Yuga and doesn’t require forms of God to interact. But for the Kali Yuga form of God is needed and the Omnipotent, Omniscient & Omnipresent God Himself manifest in form for the Bakthas. Need of the hour!





https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20091117075210AAawPLI



So raising funny questions without updating knowledge is dangerous to the religion!



(I call this as funny question as the questioner admits “Pl do not bring Avatars in your argument/ answers as Avatars are only a direct decent from God Himself, i accept Sri.Rama, Sri.Krishna, and other Avatars as true. I particularly invite Sri.Vidaya Sir, to enlighten me.”)





Mr.Shivam is always in the habit of commenting badly on Tamil & Tamil literature. It is unwarranted.



The values of works done by 18 Saivite Siththars like Thirumoolar, Thaayumaanavar, Pattinathtaar, Siva Vakkiyar, Vallalaar, 63 Nayanmaars & 12 Vaishnavite Alwars works etc cannot be matched to any other literature to glorify Hinduism. Please refrain from making any further comments against Tamils & Tamil Literature!



@Tender Coconut:



You have advised the answerer as follows:



“please see a question as question and should not see who floated a question.”



Yes Dear tender Coconut,



You also see the question properly. The question states that as per Vedas there is no form to God and How come Lord Shiva Appeared in Sabha in front of Nakkeeran when God is formless.



But the questioner accepts Lord Rama & Lord Krishna! Is it not throwing mud on Tamils that God appeared in the form of Lord Rama & Lord Krishna are acceptable as it was originally told in Sanskrit, But cannot accept Lord Shiva’s appearance since it was told in Tamil. This is racism! I think you Tender Coconut nowadays became indifferent for the sake of making only controversies!



Discrimination by racism, region, language, birth, etc is discouraged by Sanatana Dharma! We came from the lands of Nakkeeran and we have courage to point out the mistake!



Your comments on AALUNGA clearly exhibits your indifference!

Answer 29

Dear Revathy,



what is your question ? Do you need an answer whether the God has forms (rupa) or not. ? or how Shiva discussed tamil language poetries with the great tamil poet nakkeeran ? i don't find any logic behind your question. what is the purpose of linking Nakkeeran, the sangam poet with God's rupa ?



you are quoting this...

Concept of Gods in Hinduism

Upanishads

"Na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam."

"His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye."

(Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:20)

Yajurveda

The following verses from the Yajurveda echo a similar concept of God:

"shudhama poapvidham"

"He is bodyless and pure."

(Yajurveda 40:8)

Atharvaveda

The Atharvaveda praises God in Book 20, hymn 58 and verse 3:

"Dev maha osi"

"God is verily great"

(Atharvaveda 20:58:3)

Rigveda

"Na tasya Pratima asti"

"There is no image of Him."

(Yajurveda 32:3)



so, as per your ref you decide yourself that God has no Forms (rupa). If you wish to confirm with elders, you would have asked whether God has rupa or not.



why you link rani with this ? so, in your view you think rani is so highly talented and knowkedgeavke in religious. is it not ? what was the details furnished by rani ?

This following was her details....

'' Revathy.. while thanking you for the answer, how can i know that you will fill with a fresh answer ? Atleast, you can leave it with an information ..i thought you removed the entire answer. i thank you for the participation, and i will give you evidence that veda told in a place that God has rupams...also veda did not took sides ''irukkunnum sollavillai, illai endrum sollavillai, ore idathil rupam vundu en irukku. i will come..please see this question again. thanks.''



so, rani's answer was cited as an evidence. From the above also where from nakkeeran comes ?

i agree with miss sharmili...she said initially that your question was in challenging nature...she gave

this answer within 2 hours after floating this question. it is clear that you floated this question based on rani's answer cited above. what she know she answered. Then you put a hit on her head saying that ''rani closed her question after receipt of srividya sir's answer. yes, a questioner has got every right to close a question floated ..how can we ask them. may be rani satisfied with srividya's answer. moreover, you did not leave any message for coming back. so, please don't find fault on others. i am not supporting rani. i gave evidences for my sayings.



i know you are a knowledgeable one. it is seen that you floated this question for shivam sir alone, since he again drags the tamil literature in his answer. i wish to say shri shivam sir that tamil literature is an ancient one and no language in the world match with it. i am not saying this as a tamilian, but many many researchers from foreign countries told this after several years research.



i agree with rani answer, since she cited God's '' neela kandam '', the poison in his throat, also said about karthikeya.



@shivam sir..what is the meaning to the following ?

If you people are out to prove that Tamil is above sanskrit and if tamil literature is above Geeta or Veda, then I AM GOING TO BOIL !!!



I am against Khalistan and I am against Tamilistan too.



is the above comments are good in taste ? is it the culture you learnt ? A debate should be a debate...The tamil is my mother tongue. i praise it. you praise your mother tongue, we never cross, but why do you interfere in our answers is my question.



where is tamilstan mr shivam ? it is not right to argue with a man who did not know anything about a language, rich traditions, cultures etc.,we never undermine sanskrit, since tamil and sanskrit is two eyes for us. we never hate a language whether telugu, malayalam, kannada or marathi etc.,we praise our language and what hits you ? TC asks an answerer ''what for you come here,''? i am now asking you mr shivam and also TC, ''what for you come here''? The R & S section going to the worst. i am controlling myself from some words because i am giving respects to all ...yes..tamil members..srividyaji etc.,

@TC..i agree some points, but do you justify shivam's action?

he says tamilstan etc., what will be your reaction now ? i am waiting for your answer.

@veers.. i understand your feelings. But, some people who are coming here is purely to disturb and taking their weapons to fight against an ancient language because of glory of that language and getting jealous, ego.. now, i say ''please don't waste your time in answering to them because, they are not the persons to hear good words and also they will not realize their wrong approach.

@asker..sorry, we miss the main agenda and we divert our attention to something worthless.. you please take sportively whether it is favoring or against.