Idol is away to project the presence of God so that it is easy to focus. There are stories built aroud that diety which makes you attached to God in that form. This practice has survived for thousands of years. Idol worship is similar to our reverence to a national flag. Nobody says it is just a peice of cloth. WE project our nation on to the flag.
I am not very much religiously inclined but however compeletely disagree with idol worhsip. If you go by idol worship - man created god, better worship the man who created the idol, than the idol created by that man. Tell me which was the first idol of mankind and why it was created?? Was it sent by god??
RE:@Kris Iyer
by Kris iyer on Jun 05, 2008 02:00 PM Permalink
I tried to respond last evening. But rediff.com kept swallowing up my messages. There was even a "Reported for abuse" notice!! I can understand some individuals unable to accept "idol" worship. You can be a pious person without ever worshipping an idol. Many Indian "Sanyasis" do not pray at a temple daily. Even with Hindus, one cannot produce any "idol" of a male figure in a dhoti or a female one in a saree or a child and ask them to worship them. Every Hindu "idol" has a long tradition of appearance (the Siva, Vishnu, Ganesh, Krishna figures must be recognisable as such) narrations, stories, qualities about each "Vigraha" = "Established victorious owner of this House (temple)". It is only that BACKGROUND to each "Vigraha" (idol) that Hindu worshippers think of. ORIGIN OF IDOL WORSHIP: Earliest humans could not understand "death". They thought that the dead-person had "gone to another place". Food and drinks were left for the dead near the burial place. IDOLS WERE ALSO MADE OF THEM, to "guide them" !! I should imagine, those would have been the very first idols. Archaeologists say early humans worshipped a Mother Goddess, sometimes called a "Fertility Goddess". Childless couples, even now, pray at Devi or Santhoshi Ma or Amman temples. In France, they dug out an "idol" of this Goddess, dating it around 2,000 B.C. What is unjust is to accuse "idol worshippers" of worshipping the "Devil" and NOT GOD. That is both wrong and untrue.
RE:RE:@Kris Iyer
by JGN on Jun 08, 2008 08:10 PM Permalink
Mr.Kris iyer, there is no need to write reams and reams justifying idol worship. The ancient Sages of our Country believed that the Universe originated from a single primal principle called "SAT" and in whatever way we (Pl don't include me in this category)worship, the same ultimately reaches the said Primal Principle (SAT). That is the reason for the religious tolerance of the majority in our Country. Worshipping Jesus or Allah is also another form of worship for them.
The natives of India did not attack those who came to our shores for propagating their religion but allowed them to freely practice their religion.
RE:@Kris Iyer
by RightSaid Fred on Jun 06, 2008 11:57 AM Permalink
Just because an idol from 2000 BC was found, it does not justify Idol worship. Hindus must follow the ideals of Swami Dayanand Saraswati, who rightly rejected idols and talked sense.
RE:@Kris Iyer
by Kris iyer on Jun 06, 2008 06:40 PM Permalink
Rightsaid Fred, One can see your preference. Arya Samajists and Sikhs avoided "idol" worship after centuries of hearing Islamic criticisms against idol worship. That is fine. I was answering the question by lakubo above, "When was the first idol used or the first idol of mankind?" The French find may interest him, I thought. Majority of Hindus are not going to give up "Idol worship". You wd see this as a mistake. But, majority of Hindus would continue to lead good lives, become leading businessmen and businesswomen, get Ph.Ds and so on, although they continue with Idol worship at home or at a Mandhir. That is NOT going to hold them back. Idol worship is NOT turning them into stones!! As I have explained, it is not as negative as you guys think it is. What is it to you? You can carry on without idols, face an empty wall or the symbold "AUM", Hindus do not mind. They are NOT telling you, "You should worship idols, like us". They leave you alone, you should do the same with them.
RE:@Kris Iyer
by Cricket s on Jun 06, 2008 11:14 PM Permalink
How does it matter if one sees God thru an idol or one sees a God without an idol? Your way is not the ONLY way...just remember. Let people have freedom on how they want to pray and worship.
Re: RE:@Kris Iyer
by Calspadeaspade on Jan 09, 2009 07:29 PM Permalink
Whty should anybody justify any mode of worship if it does not harm any one. I can understand if you are critisising animal sacrifice which is barbaric. What is wrong with an idol. It makes worshipping a pleasant activity.It is easy for people to concentrate theirdevotion to God.
Re: @Kris Iyer
by Calspadeaspade on Jan 09, 2009 07:26 PM Permalink
What is the big deal about not worshipping idol. It is like revering a flag that represents a country. The same way God is projected on to the idol.
RE:@Kris Iyer
by JGN on Jun 08, 2008 08:14 PM Permalink
Lakubo, pl download and read "The Necessity of Atheism" by Dr. D.M. Brooks available freely at "Project Gutenberg" to know more about the "noble deeds" of those who do not wroship idols!!
RE:@Kris Iyer
by Krishnan Hariharan on Jun 05, 2008 03:08 AM Permalink
There are different aspects to mental energy (i am separating them for the sake of clarity)
1. Emotional 2. Spiritual 3. Psychological
In the idols there are many varieties. The Emotional variety is the one that is prayed to by the Hare Krsna movement. The object reminds the *seer* of God. God is not stone, God is represented by the stone. It is a focal point, like the target for the arrow.
Spiritual variety is like that manifested by the Shiva Lingas, Saligramas, precious stones and such objects. These have vibrations of a very very subtle frequency and energised by some potent beings (or Siddhas) which harmonize with the energies inside the individual and elevate them. The lingam shape or form stores this energy for many millennia (YUGAS)
The psychological variety is those that are installed for welfare of people and often are accompanied by social service.
In all the cases, it is not to *insult God* that these are installed, but to *elevate the individual* to higher realms of the mind. So if one spends time talking, gossipping, looking at ladies etc. in the temple it is simply wastage of subtle energies. That is SIN. Because u can do these things outside the temple right?
But now, in India, a lot of people are asking us questions about idol worship. This is bad. Who gave them the moral right? It is our land. They have no business to come here and question our practices. If they are irritated seeing temples (which we consider holy), they can SCRAM!
RE:@Kris Iyer
by JGN on Jun 08, 2008 08:00 PM Permalink
Lakubo, put the words "animal worship" in any internet search engine and read the result to know how the system of worship originatedf.
Paraphrasing a sentence in the Bible, we could safely say that "man created god in his own image".
Who does not worship idols? The Christians worship the idols of Jesus on Cross, Mother Mary with infnat jesus in her hands, Mother Mary with infant jesus in hand with Joseph, numerous saints, etc. The Muslims worhsip the photograph of Kaaba and also at various Dargahs, the Sikhs worship their holy book (Gurugrandh Saheb), for the Buddhists who really do not beleive in any god, Gautama the Buddha himself has now become their god. Each and every religion in the world (at present there are more than 2000 the word over) indulge in some sort of Idol worship. If you detest idol worship, some others detest worship in any form. So it is the individuals choice.
The Indian gods are not as jealous as the West Asian gods (Yaveh, Jeshus and Allah) each telling the respective believers not to worship any other god. The Indian gods are more democratic and have no problem when some other gods (even the jealous West Asian ones) are worshipped!!!!!!
RE:@Kris Iyer
by Kris iyer on Jun 09, 2008 07:24 AM Permalink
Dear JGN, I admit my posts here turned out to be long - it is like an essay. Most of the posts are short and abusive!!! You are one of the exceptions!! BUT I have dealt with THREE major criticisms that missionaries of the two middle-east religions use against Hinduism. Your reference to "SATH" is correct. That being the only Truth, it simply IS. The rest being impermanent - "Maya". The concern over conversion is about "change of culture" along with religion. New converts move away from Indian culture in a number of small ways. In one case I heard about, a young Tamil girl was learning "Bharata Natyam". Due to some marital problems between her parents, the father converted to Christianity. He forced his minor daughter to give up on learning "Hindu Natyam", forbade her to sing "Hindu songs" and the use of Bindhi on her forehead. Needless-to-say he changed her original Hindu name also. His motive might have been to annoy his wife and all her relations - all traditional Hindus.
But, you see cultural allegiances change with change of religion. V.S. Naipaul says in his book, "Journey Amongst the Believers" [ an account of Pakistani society ] that although the Indian sub-continent has so many magnificent mountains, rivers and pilgrimage centres, along with so many Rishis, Sages and their profound teachings, to the muslims of the sub-continent, the "desert sands of distant Arabia alone are sacred" !! A telling remark.
Below, I have mentioned the three major criticisms Islamists and Christian missionaries use, while seeking conversion of Hindus to their religion. I have dealt with two of these criticisms. On the second on "idolatory", I have made points below. Hindus wd say that "idolatory" is inherent in many categories, labels, words, even architecture we use to indicate each religion. The way we dress to show our religion is also a form of idolatory and cannot be separated from worshipping a "statue". An "idol" is no more distracting than all the other "formalities" of dress, language in which we pray, the architecture of our place of worship. Hindus wd say, "We worship a symbol, a concept, a great Puranic story behind that idol and not the "form" of the idol. For non-Hindus the idol is meaningless. Just as an Arabic prayer on the door of a muslim's house is meaningless to Hindus. Lots of criss-crossing lines. 3) The third criticism is the most unjust and misleading of the three. No where in the Puranas or Agamas, have I heard it mentioned that the ShivaLingam is a phallic symbol. I have not read ALL the puranas but I have read one or two, listened to many, many Swamijis and Katha teaching the Puranas. Never have I heard that Hindu Scriptures describe the ShivaLingam as a Phallic symbol. When Western missionaries came to India, they were the first ones to say, "This is a phallic symbol". Our "Macaulay Hindus" and Nehruvites bought this story from the Missionaries".
RE:Three major criticisms of Hinduism used by Missionaries
by Kris iyer on Jun 03, 2008 06:13 PM Permalink
Cont'd: Here is what I have gathered on the origin of the cylindrical shape of the SivaLingam. Those familiar with ancient Hindu practices would know that "Sacred Pillars" were very common. Even today, if you visit remote villages, you wd find them on the shores of rivers. These pillars, about four feet, max., installed with much ceremony (In Tam.Nadu it is called "Kambam Naduthal = Pitching or Burying the Pillar) marked "Shiva Sthan(am)" or the sacred spot of Shiva. This practice probably goes back to the Indus Valley Civilisation. They found free-standing pillars, not part of any house or so, in some Indus sites. Ashoka used these "sacred pillars" to spread Buddhism. He knew that the people of India already regarded the pillars as sacred. The iron pillar at the Kutub Minar in Delhi, I feel, is one such "Shiva Sthambam". It may have been part of a temple complex which was destroyed to make way for the Kutub Tower. You can see the temples pillars also there. The iron pillar was too heavy to be removed. The Shiva Sthamba received all the poojas. There were no temples. But once temples were built, the Shiva sthamba was miniaturiesed to fit into the Sannithi of the temple. The surrounding platform was added to gather the "abhishek water" and milk. Take the word "Lingam". I consulted a Sanskrit Pandit. He said it comes from the root "Lru" (Only Sanskrit has a letter for this sound) meaning a line or mark. From this comes, "Lekha", "Rekha" ("Laxman Rekha")and Lingam.
RE:Three major criticisms of Hinduism used by Missionaries
by RightSaid Fred on Jun 06, 2008 11:59 AM Permalink
Iyer, sorry. All you explanation is meaningless. It does not hold water. Please preach somewhere else.
RE:Three major criticisms of Hinduism used by Missionaries
by Kris iyer on Jun 07, 2008 09:55 AM Permalink
RightSaid Fred, If I wanted to preach, I would have called myself, "RightSaid Kris" or somesuch pompous name. Since you are such a suspicious person, I will be frank. I am not happy for the Reverend.Freds of this world, coming around to my village, re-naming JayaRaman as James, ParamaSivam as Patrick, promising them jobs, school places for their children, telling them that their religion is rubbish, telling them that Devil has entered the "idol" of Kamakshi Amman that they have worshipped for generations. All that is a form of violence, destroying ancient cultures.
I have the same right as you have to post messages here. If you don't like my posts, go somewhere else. Your views on my posts do not hold water. Normally, I ignore such messages as yours - which only show "instant irritation". You are lucky to get a reply.
RE:Three major criticisms of Hinduism used by Missionaries
by JGN on Jun 08, 2008 08:19 PM Permalink
Mr.Kris iyer, conversion to christianity is a multi-billion dollar business. Recently I came to know that every new convert in India is given a letter by the Church which they can present to any other church of the same sect in the world and a they will arrange a job for the neo-convert!
The second major criticism of Hinduism is that it is full of "Idolatory". What is the meaning of Idolatory? According to the Arab view of it, We DISTRACT ourselves from the ONE GOD by making an idol of HIM or His Prophet. It belittles GOD. Very orthodox muslims do not buy toys for their children or celebrate "birthdays" or "mothers day" on this fear of idolatory. I wonder how they can wash and polish their cars though! Or, salute a national flag! The Christian view is somewhat different. No objection to showing Jesus and the crucifix but they do not want GOD to be represented as a human figure. See the Hindus, as always, go into this issue to a much DEEPER level. The Sastra says, "Buddhir cha Indriyaneem cha Nama-roopa-vakyadheenam idham prabhanjam" = This Universe we KNOW is made up of our Buddhi or Intellect, the five senses, the Nama, the names we give to things and phenomena, the roopa, the shape we give to them and "Vakyadheenam", the description or words we use for them. That is how we KNOW. Eliminate any one of these, your knowledge will be INCOMPLETE. So, in the Hindu definition, idolatory is INHERENT IN OUR UNDERSTANDING OR KNOWLEDGE OF THE UNIVERSE. For instance if you use a particular term for GOD, Yahova, Allaluiya, Allah or Bhagwan, you are imprisoning your GOD in that word, in that sound. If you build your place of worship in a specific shape, it is an idol already. If you turn to a particular direction to pray, that is also a form of idolatory. Get it?
RE:Justice for a Meaningful Panth devised by our Ancestors.
by edge on Jun 03, 2008 01:12 PM Permalink
I do not make any clear distinction between mind and God. God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension. God may be either a world-soul or a collection of world-souls. So I am thinking that atoms and humans and God may have minds that differ in degree but not in kind.
RE:RE:Justice for a Meaningful Panth devised by our Ancestors.
by Kris iyer on Jun 03, 2008 04:45 PM Permalink
Edge, You make your point very well. It takes mature thought and a great insight. Advaita Philosophy and Patanjali's views on Yoga, emphasise that ultimately "Brahmam" and our "mind" become ONE and the SAME. So, GOD is an experience of the highest kind. As you say, that experience cannot be fully described in ordinary words. But an extraordinary peace and courage is the result of this experience - so we are told by "Kena Upanishad" and "Swetasvatara Upanishad". You have come a long way in gaining an important insight. After you have attended to your work and so on, you should read around Hindu philosophy, you will find it highly absorbing.
RE:Justice for a Meaningful Panth devised by our Ancestors.
by JGN on Jun 08, 2008 08:05 PM Permalink
>>>>So, GOD is an experience of the highest kind.....or is it halucination? Pl read the book, "The Secret" to know how such beliefs affect us.
After 700 years of unrelenting conversion, Hinduism has retreated from Gandhara (Kandahar, now in Afghanistan), Paras(Ram)pura (Peshawar), Moolasthan (Multan, used to have a large Surya Temple- the main deity had the biggest rubies ever known so far- taken by Md. of Gazni) and Lava-hoor (Lahore, named after Sri Rama's son Lava. As Saudi money and American evangelical money is now pouring into India, obtaining around 1000 conversions every week (according to one estimate), the question to raise is: What is the future for Hinduism in India, especially,since the UPA govt., and the media are so anti-Hindu? I think minority religions in India have a critical and aggressive stance towards Hinduism. One option for Hindus is to reply to the criticisms, patiently. To convince Hindus, in general, that Hinduism is changing for the better all the time for the better. That the freedom of thought and worship Hinduism offers is the best of all religions.
THREE MAJOR criticisms are made against Hinduism by the missionaries of Islam and Xanity: 1) Hinduism is a religion of millions of "Gods".
2) "Idolatory" in this old "primitive" religion is such that Hindus worship stone, wood and animals. They do not worship GOD.
3) Shiva Lingam worship is "primitive" because it is a "phallic symbol".
"Therefore, come over to our religion, which is very "rational" and you will come to GOD's notice right away. Our prophet X loves you more than Sri.Krishna or Sri.Rama have done- To Continue
RE:Future of Hinduism in India - Justice for a Way of Life
by Kris iyer on Jun 03, 2008 11:47 AM Permalink
Cont'd: "Come over to our religion because our Prophet is the last one to be send down by GOD. So the last is always correct." So, such sales pitches are made to get conversion. I would like to try and answer some of these criticisms. But I welcome, informed [ NOT ABUSIVE ] contributions from readers. Please do not attack any religion. Just focus only on the points. 1) The Rig Veda (3,500 B.C. based on the disappearance of River Saraswathi) says: "AEKO DEVO BAHUTA VADHANTHI VIPRAHA" = GOD is ONE the learned commentators speak of this GOD in a variety of ways". The Easovasya Upanishad says, "Easo Avasyam Idham Sarvam, Eth kincha Jagathyam Jagath" = There is only ONE GOD that pervades every little space of this Universe". Hindus as the sons and daughters of the Great VEDA (it was divided into FOUR by Vyasa Muni for ease of memorising), believe in only ONE GOD. But they believe it is right to get to know this GOD through DEVATAS each of whom EMBODIES the Kalyana, Mangala GUNAS, infinite and inexhaustible ATTRIBUTES OF THIS ONE GOD. Otherwise, it is difficult to get CLOSURE TO GOD. Hindus believe that we have to use ALL THE EASTHETIC senses we have to get closrue to the ONE GOD - through conceptualisation of a GOD of Creation, of Protection, of Destruction of Evil-doers, of Music and the arts, God as Mother, God as a Child, God as Handsome young man of Divine attraction. So, Hindus have many DEVATAS each of whom is imagined as representing the whole of GOD.
RE:RE:Future of Hinduism in India - Justice for a Way of Life
by Kris iyer on Jun 03, 2008 12:11 PM Permalink
Cont'd: --If you do not have "focus points", Hindus think GOD remains very remote, stays a "Great Caliph" in the Sky, a "Great Father in Heaven", but we do not have the warmth of affection for him. Hindus want to SEE some earthly representation of HIM, however, inadequate it may be. They want to know how GOD relates to them through people and events they can witness with their own eyes. Sri Rama is an "AVATAR" of God - He came down to earth to achieve certain aims and goals BUT He wanted to do it in as near a Human way as He could. Hindus learnt from Him, what it means to face adversities, means to be a dutiful son, a Prince born to luxury but living a hard life to keep His father's promises, Sri Krishna, the lovely child who grew into a handsome man of Great Charm, removed the tyrant Kamsa, brought down the Kaurava Empire, went through life with all its difficultues. The two MahaKavyas of Ramayana and Mahabharata show Hindus how GOD can relate to this world and to people. What happens to powerful dynasties such as that of the Ravana Clan in Lanka or the Kauravas in Hastinapura. There is the beautiful SARASWATHI, the Goddess of Learning. What is wrong in personifying learning? What is wrong in personifying Lakshmi, the Goddess of Wealth? GOD alone gives Learning and Wealth. Hindus know that. But it is helpful to have a focus on a Devata that embodies the spirit of Learning, the spirt and joy of Prosperity. Hindus know the "idol" { Vigraha } is NOT GOD but only a SYMBOL.
RE:Future of Hinduism in India - Justice for a Way of Life
by edge on Jun 03, 2008 12:33 PM Permalink
I think that in about twenty-five years almost all religions will have evolved into very different phenomena, so much so that in most quarters religion will no longer command the awe it does today. Of course many people–perhaps a majority of people in the world–will still cling to their religion with the sort of passion that can fuel violence and other intolerant and reprehensible behavior. But the rest of the world will see this behavior for what it is, and learn to work around it until it subsides, as it surely will. That’s the good news. The bad news is that we will need every morsel of this reasonable attitude to deal with such complex global problems as climate change, fresh water, and economic inequality in an effective way.
RE:Future of Hinduism in India - Justice for a Way of Life
by Krishnan Hariharan on Jun 05, 2008 02:55 AM Permalink
Please considering posting your thoughts in a blog... its tough to read the trail of thoughts in this way
RE:Future of Hinduism in India - Justice for a Way of Life
by Kris iyer on Jun 05, 2008 09:39 PM Permalink
Hari Krishnan, Thanks for your suggestion. I am not that savvy with computers. But I can get some help. At first, I did not think, I had much to say. I did try hard to edit, to keep them short. Apologies to all readers if they find my posts too long. I also appreciate your remarks above about the three different approaches to our Vigrahas and other symbols, Rudhraksha, Shaligramams, Conches and even certain semi-precious stones. As you know the "Nava Dhanyas" have always been part of Hindu ceremonies. Remember the small Turmeric Mound in the Pooja plate being regarded as "Pillaiyar" or Ganesh!! As a child that amused me a lot. I kept staring at that little Mound, wondering when Ganesh would peek out of it, to take a look at the proceedings !! May be it was a child's fascination, but I found the Homa Flames very interesting. The combination of well-pronounced Sanskrit Mantras and the flames, oh boy, that was electrifying. That was in a village. It was special. Perhaps, young children now-a-days do not have the same experience that I had with our Homas or Yajnas!! Pity. Blame the TV. Hindus and Zoarastrians are, of course, fire-worshippers from the ancient world. Have you ever heard slokas from their Holy Book, Zend Avesta? It is so close to Sanskrit, it is amazing. You can make out several words. I enjoyed this experience at a Parsi Temple in Mumbai. The Vedic people and the Persians were cousins at one time, probably well before 5000 B.C..
RE:Future of Hinduism in India - Justice for a Way of Life
by JGN on Jun 08, 2008 08:29 PM Permalink
Mr. Iyer, the ancient civilizations were in awe of "fire". The Yajur veda deals with worshipping (mainly Agni). As time passed, people started worshipping various other forms also and some people started cliaming that they are sent by some "supreme creator".
Pl read "Volga to Ganga" by Rahul Samkrityan to know how migration from Volga started and ended up in the vicinity of Ganga (with some information upto the 1942 quit India movement).
