What is Hinduism?

What, in the first place, has Hinduism to say about God and His attributes, and what kind of worship does it teach mankind?

At the very threshold, we are met with the formidable difficulty that Hinduism is not one religion but many religions jumbled together under a single name. It is a hodge-podge or conglomeration of many mutually conflicting religions, and is not the child, so to say, of any one father. Those who practice it differ very much from one another in their faith and practice. Hinduism includes in it Vedism, Brahmanism, Sivaism, Vishnuism, Polytheism, Pantheism, Idolatory in is greatest forms, Tree-Worship, Serpent-Worship, Demon-Worship and so on.

It is not easy therefore to give a definition of Hinduism,  "Hinduism and its gods," says Sir Alfred Lyall, "are a troubled sea, without shore or visible horizon, driven to and fro by the winds of boundless credulity and grotesque invention. A tangled jungle of disorderly superstitions, ghosts and demons, demi-gods and deified saints, household gods, tribe gods, local gods, universal gods, with their countless shrines and temples, and din of their disordent rites, deities who abhor a fly's death, those who delight still in human victims, and those who would not either sacrifice or make offerings, such religious chaos". ^[1]

The Authoritative Books not one but many

A further difficulty regarding Hinduism lies in the fact that all its professors have no common sacred Book or Books to depend upon for their doctrines. Some refer to Vedas as the basis of their faith. Others rest their faith on the Shrutis, a term which includes not only the four Vedas but their Brahmanas and Upanishads as well. The Mahabharata styles itself as the fifth Veda, containing the quintessense of all the rest. Other Hindus agains follow the teachings of the Puranas. The present day educated Hindus are mainly depending upon the Bhagavad Gita, a philosophical treatise, for their guidance in matters of faith. We shall therefore briefly inquire into the contents of all these books to see what they teach about God and the way in which man should worship Him.

The Religion of the Vedas

(a) Nature Worship

Vedism, or the Religion of the Vedas, teaches the worship of the deified forces or phenomenon of Nature, such as Fire, the Sun, Wnd and Rain. Here is the opening verse of the Rigveda, the oldest Veda, of which the others are mere repetitions and borrowing:

अग्निमीळे पुरोहितं यज्ञस्य देवं रत्वीजम |  होतारं रत्नधातमम || 

 

"I Laud Agni, the great high priest, god, minister of sacrifice, the herald, lavishest of wealth." [Rigveda Mandal 1: Sookt 1: Mantra 1]

 

The whole of the Veda goes on in this strain throughout in the hymns collected for different purposes. The contrast between the opening  verse of the Rigveda which teaches Polytheism, and that of the Jewish Bible and of the Holy Qur'an which teach Monotheism, cannot fail to be noted even by the most superficial reader. Thus the Jewish Pentateuch begins,

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ׃

 

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." [Genesis 1:1]

 

The Holy Qur'an strikes the key note of its whole teaching in a still more profound manner, unparalleled in other religions:

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَـنِ الرَّحِيمِ - الْحَمْدُ للَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَـلَمِينَ - الرَّحْمَـنِ الرَّحِيمِ - مَـلِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ

 

"In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. All Praise is due to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. Master of the Day of Judgement."[Surah Al-Fatiha 1:1-4]

Thus Vedism teaches the worship of the powers of Nature.

(b) Polytheism

That it teaches polytheism is also evident from the expression used in the same verse and in all the succeeding verses as well:

अग्निः पूर्वेभिर्र्षिभिरीड्यो नूतनैरुत | स देवानेह वक्षति ||

 

"He (Agni) shall bring hitherward the gods." [Rigveda 1:1:2]

 

अग्ने यं यज्ञमध्वरं विश्वतः परिभूरसि | स इद्देवेषु गछति ||

 

"Verily goes to the gods."[verse 4]

 

अग्निर्होता कविक्रतुः सत्यश्चित्रश्रवस्तमः | देवो देवेभिरा गमत ||

 

"May Agni, priest, the god, come hither with the gods." [verse 5]

 

The number of gods in Hindu Pantheon is given as 33 in one place (Rigveda 1:34:11), which says,

आ नासत्या तरिभिर एकादशैर इह देवेभिर यातम मधुपेयम अश्विना | परायुस तारिष्टं नी रपांसि मर्क्षतं सेधतं दवेषो भवतं सचाभुवा ||

 

"Come, O Nasatyas, with the thrice-eleven Gods; come, O ye Asvins, to the drinking of the meath. Make long our days of life, and wipe out all our sins: ward off our enemies; be with us evermore."

 

Similarly it is mentioned in Rigveda 8:30:2,

इति सतुतासो असथा रिशादसो ये सथ तरयश्च तरिंशच्च | मनोर्देवा यज्ञियासः ||

 

"Thus be ye lauded, ye destroyers of the foe, ye Three-and-Thirty Deities, The Gods of man, the Holy Ones."

 

In Rigeveda 10:52:6 the number is 3,339. It says,

तरीणि शता तरी सहस्राण्यग्निं तरिंशच्च देवा नवचासपर्यन | औक्षन घर्तैरस्त्र्णन बर्हिरस्मा आदिद्धोतारं नयसादयन्त ||

 

"The Deities three thousand, three hundred and thirty-nine, have served and honoured Agni, Strewn sacred grass, anointed him with butter, and seated him as Priest, the Gods' Invoker."

 

Later Hinduism has gone still further by saying that there are no less than 33 crores of them.

(c) Pantheism

Why not then say that everything is God, and God is everything? The Purusha Sukta (Rigveda 10:90) which every orthodox Brahmin is expected even now to recite daily in his prayers shows that Pantheism is also taught in the later portions of the Vedas:

पुरुष एवेदं सर्वं यद भूतं यच्च भव्यम | उताम्र्तत्वस्येशानो यदन्नेनातिरोहति ||

 

"This Purusha(i.e. Brahma or God) is all that yet has been and all that is to be." [verse 2]

 

The caste system which has proved the curse of India is likewise taught in the same hymn:

बराह्मणो.अस्य मुखमासीद बाहू राजन्यः कर्तः | ऊरूतदस्य यद वैश्यः पद्भ्यां शूद्रो अजायत ||

 

"The Brahmana was his (Purusha's) mouth. Of both his arms was the Kshatriya made. His thighs became the Vaishya. From his feet the Sudra produced."[verse 12]

 

Religion of the Upanishads

The Upanishads reject the Karma, Kanda or Salvation by means of sacrifices and other rituals taught in the four Vedas and Brahmanas, and advocate the Gnana-Kanda or the theory of Salvation by knowledge. Hence they consist of speculations about the individual souls (atma) and the Supreme soul (Param-atma), and about the relationship subsisting between them, their aim being to get rid of man's earthly existence by absorption of the individual soul into the World Soul through correct or true knowledge. They teach that the Universe or Nature (Prakriti) is unreal or Maaya, that is to say, it does not really exist but it only an illusion of the mind. What really exists in the Supreme Soul or Brahman, and the individual souls are all emanations from Him and identical with Him. Only they do not know it, as Brahman has invested Himself/Itself with the Maaya, and they also are under the influence of the same mystic power. The individual souls can be disillusioned only by means of Correct knowledge, and as soon as this consummation is reached, they know themselves to be Brahman, and get absorbed into Him. The famous formula referring to this theory is 'Tat tvam asi'तत् त्वम् असि meaning 'That art thou', whoever knows this 'becomes the All'. Even the gods are not able to prevent him from becoming it. For he becomes their self. [Brihadaranyak Upanishad 1:4:6]

This theory is known as the Vedanta, the essence of the teaching of the Vedas, and has taken an immense hold on the minds of the people and lent a deeper colour to all subsequent literature. A Christian missionary asked a Brahmin, "Who and where is Brahman?" "He is talking to you," was the prompt reply.

A Vedantist once began to dilate upon the truth of his belief in the presence of a king and vehemently maintained that the whole world was Mithya or unreal, imaginary: whereupon an elephant was ordered to be brought quite near to him and the man fled in terror. "Why do you run away for your life? The elephant is Mithya" said the king. But the Vedantist proved himself equal to the occasion and without a moment's hesistation replied that the running away too was Mithya.

Such is the fool's paradise in which most of the misguided Hindus live. The expression that is often heard on their lips, and which has unfortunately recently been made famous by Dr. Zakir Naik through his televised public talks:

EKAM EVA ADVITIYAM

meaning 'One only without a second'

It does not mean that they believe in the 'Only One True God' but it is the Vedantic or Pantheistic formula which asserts that the only real existence of the World Soul and the identity of the individual souls within it, totally denying the existence of the phenomenal world.

Religion of the Puranas

The characteristic of popular Hinduism of today is the belief in Divine incarnations, idolatory and caste. Popular Hinduism believes in the doctrine of Trimurti or Hindu Trinity as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, in their characteristic of the Creator, Preserver and Destroyer of the Universe.

Vishnu-Worship

The distinct feature of Vishnu worship is the incarnation of God. When wickedness in the world increases Vishnu is said to take upon himself the form of an animal or man in order to be able to protect the good and to punish the bad. The principle incarnations He is said to have so far assumed are those of (1) a fish, (2) a tortoise, (3) a Boar, (4) a man-lion (5) a Dwarf, (6) a Brahmin hero called Parasu Ram, (7) a Kshatriya Prince, the hero of Ramayana, (8) a shepherd Prince Krishna and (9) a Kshatriya heretic, Buddha.

Krishna declares:

 

"On an occasion of marriage, or of enjoying a woman, or when life is in danger, or when one's entire property is about to be taken away, or for the sake of a Brahmin, falsehood may be uttered. These five kinds of falsehood have been declared to be sinless. On these occasions falsehood would become truth and truth would become falsehood." [Mahabharata Book 8; Karna Parva; Section 69]

 

Cow Worship

It is natural for Indians to set a high value upon the cow on account of its utility, but the worship the Hindus pay to it is irrational and absurd to a degree. It is considered to be the most sacred of all animals. Every part of its body is considered to be inhabited by some deity or other. Even its excreta are considered to be most sacred. Its urine is looked upon as the best of all holy waters; a sin destroying liquid which sanctifies everything it touches, while nothing purifies like cow-dung. The ashes of its dung sprinkled over a sinner are able to convert him into a saint.

Veneration of cow in Hindu culture

Present day Hindu culture is pivoted solely on the cow. Its material and spiritual concepts are both engulfed in cow worship. Such an animal worship is known as zoolatry. This is a vestide of animistic cultures among whom the worship of monkeys, sheep, elephants, cows and even snakes was prevalent. Animal worship culminated in the taking of human beings for gods so that the silhouettes were stamped on the coins and painted on the flags, and upon their honour depended the glory and honour of their realms.

Among cultivators cow worship is not a strange thing. In many countries, notably, India, Iran and Egypt, it was prevalent. Among Hindus veneration of the cow is referred to in the Vedas as Puranas and in Hindu Jurisprudence and folklore. In the Vedas several verses refer to saluting and prostrating before the cow as the following sections illustrate:

 

"Prajapati and Parameshthin are the two horns, Indra is the head, Agni the forehead, Yama the joint of the neck. King Soma is the brain, Sky is the upper jaw, Earth is the lower jaw... All worlds and all the gods are as the cow from head to foot." [Atharvaved Kaand 9: Sookt 7]

"You are being created and have been created for salutations and prostrations. Salutations and prostration to you, O image of God, to your hair, to your hooves." [Atharva 10:10]

 

Curiously enough, the Vedic Rishis likened the chanting of their mantras (hymn) to the lowing of the cows:

अभि विप्रा अनूषत गावो वत्सं न मातरः | इन्द्रं सोमस्य पीतये ||

 

"As the cows moo in the presence of their calves so do Brahmins recite their mantras while drinking the soma juice in the presence of Indra devta." [Rigveda 9:12:2]

 

In old Vedic timesthe pious people picked out the grain from the cow-dung, and then ate it. They also squeezed out its water and drank it (Mahabharata). Its urine was considered a source of redemption of sins and a means of cow-dung bathed with water extracted thus. Krishna Ji revered the bull by stroking its back before mounting it. In short, in Hindu religion the cow in venerated to an extent which gods and godesses and even God Himself does not merit.

Cow-Worship and the humiliation of man

It is to be noted that the sacredness of the cow as compared with the scant regard for human life has come to this that Swami Dayanand Saraswati in accordance with the Vedas, opines that the blood of thousands or hundreds of thousands of humans, may be shed to please these animals; (See his translation of Yajurveda 33:14 and Rigveda 1:121:10)

In Vedic times, there lived an untouchable people in a village named Kikat, in todays Bihar. The used to rear cattle. Obviously to the Aryans this was a crime. So they invoked their god Indra to wage war against them and loot their cows.

 

"O Indra, what do the cows make for you among the Kikatas. They neither yield milk for your offerings, nor do they warm the vessel of libation. Bring to us these cows, bring to us also the wealth of Pramagand (their King). O Brave one, grant us the possessions of the people of low status." [Rigveda 3:53:14]

 

On the basis of this clear prnouncement, non-Aryans and untouchables have no right to keep cows. Aryans and Brahmins whenever they wish can kill them and appropriate their possessions. Hindu culture thus becomes the culture of the progress, civilization and welfare of the Aryan people alone.

Status of the cow

The fact remains that Hindu culture is based on the cow. Actually it is cow-worship as may be inferred from the discussion so far. As the Noble Qur'an states,

 

"And their hearts absorbed (the worship of) the calf because of their disbelief." [Surah Baqarah 2:93]

 

The cow is also called mother and this is a relic of the age of ignorance. In primitive times when the mother of a young child died, the child too would die of malnutrition after two or three days. The father did not know how to save the child's life as a substitute for the mother's milk was not known. By chance, some wise person thought of the idea of giving goat's milk to the child. As the goat was easier to control and milk than the cow, goat's milk was used to save the infant's life. Later on the cow was tamed for this purpose. From then on the polytheists began to call the cow 'mata' i.e. mother. But other animals as well, such as goats, sheep, camels, supply milk as substitute for mother's milk; yet they are never called 'mother'. Strangely enough, in this age of science when so many baby-foods have been invented, none of these is called 'mother', yet wealthy and educated Hindus still apply this epithet to the cow alone.

The nation which cannot differentiate between a cow's tail and a man's head, lives in an extreme abyss of culture. The cow is at the utmost an animal, while even the most degraded man, being still a human being, is yet far superior to a cow.

Religion of the Gita

Since Mahabharata fails to serve as a handy and useful book of the essence of Hinduism, the present day educated Hindus are adopting the Bhagvat Gita as their guide.

Like all the other scriptures this famous poem too fails to teach True Religion to mankind. It is a highly Philosophic poem just as ill-suited to teach Religion as Berkley's Principle of Human Knowledge or Milton's Paradise Lost can be. The principle of its composition is Eclecticism and tries to combine Sankhya, Yoga, and Vedanta teaching into one whole to support the Vaishnava theory of Krishna's deification.But is does promote ideas like Polytheism and Caste. Krishna claims to be the author of the caste system in India:

 

"The four Castes were created by me according to the appointment of qualities and works." [Gita 4:13]

 

The Gita does not insist on the worship of the One and Only True God but promotes belief in polytheism:

 

"Those who worship gods go to the gods" [9:25]

 

 

"Worship the gods thereby; The gods shall yield thee grace." [3:3]

 

That there are inconsistencies in the Bhagvad Gita is admitted today even by Hindu scholars. For example at Chapter 9, stanza 29 Krishna declares that 'none is hateful to me, none dear.' And yet the remarkable verses at the close of Chapter 12 contradict it, 'Linked by no ties to earth, steadfast in Me, That man I love'. At Gita Chapter 5, stanza 15 it is said, that 'the Lord receives the sin and merit of none.' Yet at Chapter 5, stanza 29, and again at Chapter 9, stanza 24, Krishna calls himself 'the Lord and enjoyer' of all sacrifices and penances. How, it may well be asked, can the Supreme Being 'enjoy' that which he does not even 'receive'?

The doctrine of transmigration is the basis from which the argument of Bhagvad Gita takes its start. Matter and spirit are without beginning (13:20). God (Krishna-Vishnu) is eternal, almighty, unborn, without beginning, the great Lord of the World (10:3). He is different not only from the fleeting world, but also from the changeless and indestructible energy of all beings. Vishnu is born from age to age (4:6-8). Krishna-Vishnu is wholly distinct from Brahma and Brahman is distinctly a lower deity than Krishna (11:15,37). In 12:1-7, the two classes, those who believe in a personal God Krishna-Vishnu, i.e. theists, and those who believe in Brahma ,i.e. pantheists are contrasted, and preference is given to former. In other words, final bliss is difficult of attainment for those who follow the Vedas and seek the heaven of Brahma. All external observances and duties prescribed by the Vedas are held to be mischievous and thrown overboard (7:20; 18:34,66). The Vedas and the works enjoined by them cannot win one the vision of the Divine (11:48,53). What a contempt is expressed for the Vedas in the following words: "Steady understanding does not belong to those, whose minds are drawn by that flowery talk (i.e. Vedas) which is full of ordinances of specific acts for the attainment of pleasures and power, and which promises birth as the fruit of acts- that flowery talk which those unwise ones utter, who are enamoure of Vedic words, who say there is nothing else, who are full of desires, an whose goal is heaven. The Vedas merely relate to the effects of the three qualities; do you, O Arjuna! rise above those effects of the three qualities." (2:42-45). Thus the Vedas are being spoken of in very disparaging terms and the followers of Krishna were inimical to the Vedas.

This was in brief about Hinduism and in our future articles all the topics discussed here would be dealt with in detail separately.

---

REFERENCES

[1] Asiatic Studies, Vol 1, pp 2, 3

Brahma, Saraswati and Symbolism

There are lots of prevalent confusions about Hindu gods and goddesses. A majority of those are confusions because absurd interpretations have been repeated for centuries now; while the corrections are few and muted. The righteous becomes introvert; while the empty-vessels keep making sounds – is one eternal law of nature. And when we have had centuries of stagnation, when research on ancient Indian epics became a work for foreign researchers alone while Indians fought to keep ends met, there are bound to be some digressions. These thoughts are coming to me because the topic I have chosen for this post is the relationship between Brahma and Saraswati.  

According to a version of the myth, it is said that Brahma, the God of Creation, created Saraswati from his own body and then fell in love with her and also married her. According to many, it amounted to marrying one’s ‘daughter’ and hence this story is made as a point to ridicule our gods. Very plainly, this confusion is because we take our gods like other human beings, with bodies like us, and with passions like us. Much of the philosophy of Sanatan Dharma was explained in Symbolism. We gave our gods human characteristics and wrote stories around them – the purpose was to send the right message to the masses who needed simpler lessons to use in day to day life and not serious philosophies to ponder over. All the confusions happen when we take gods as characters and judge them on our standards, forgetting the symbolism and purpose why the legend was shared. It is the same case with Krishna, it is the same with Indra and in this case, it is the same with Brahma and Saraswati.  

I just read a very good article titled “Symbolism and Literalism”, which explains the real symbolism behind the relationship between Brahma and Saraswati. I am presenting a portion of it here:  

Brahma is (the name of creative aspect of the Divine) the God of Creation. As Creator, Brahma brought to life Existence itself. Which logically means, he thought of creating the physical world that we perceive through our sense organs and our mind. If you talk about the physical world of shapes and forms you need to give it a definition, or a name or label. This is known as the world of Rupa (Form/Shape) and Nama (Name), both inseparable from each other. In plain language, you look at a tree and your mind can’t be satisfied unless it finds a word (nama) to define it clearly so that when you say “tree” you know exactly what it is without having to actually look at it with your eyes. And this process of defining the physical world lies in the realm of thought. Thought then is expressed through speech. 

What follows from this is rather simple. The shapes and forms that Brahma gave to his thoughts became the physical world. When he expressed it in language, it became speech. Which is Saraswathi, his daughter. And which is perfectly in line with Saraswathi worshipped as the Goddess of Speech (or vaak), language, and learning. However, we’re yet to hear of a word which has no meaning at all. As someone said, every word is an idea – it represents something: a thought, an object, anything. In other words, a word cannot be divorced from its meaning. Even in case of names of people – if I say out the name of a person, it conjures up an image or some sort of memory or association related to that person. This meaning is again Saraswathi, now donning the role of Brahma’s wife. As the meaning of the word, Saraswathi is Brahma’s wife just like a wife who stays with her husband for life through good and bad times. This symbolism is pretty much true of all Gods and their wives. As the wife of Vishnu the Preserver of the world, Lakshmi is the Goddess of Wealth. You cannot hope to attain peace and order in the world without prosperity. This then is the symbolism behind Saraswathi as both Brahma’s daughter and wife. 

Read full article here: http://www.sandeepweb.com/2010/03/16/symbolism-and-literalism/  

So the confusion ends if we understand the symbolism. I think if we take Brahma’s thoughts on creation and then Saraswati as Speech – she is his daughter. But if we take or Saraswati as meaning/knowledge – she is his wife and consort, because they both always go together.  

Here is another explanation:  

Brahma is the Lord of creation. The creator must necessarily possess the knowledge to create. Without knowledge no creation is possible. Hence Brahma is said to be wedded to the goddess of knowledge, Saraswati. Brahma and his consort Saraswati, represent the vedas, their spirit and meaning. 

Taken from: http://veda.wikidot.com/brahma  

Let us also look at the symbolism of both Saraswati and Brahma:  

Symbolism of Saraswati 

Saraswati represents intelligence, consciousness, cosmic knowledge, creativity, education, enlightenment, music, the arts, eloquence and power. According to Vedanta she is considered to be the feminine energy and knowledge aspect (Shakti) of Brahman, as one of many aspects of Adi Shakti. 

• Goddess Saraswati is often depicted as a beautiful woman dressed in pure white often seated on a white lotus, which symbolizes that she is founded in the experience of the Absolute Truth. She is mainly associated with the color white, which signifies the purity of true knowledge.  


• She is not adorned heavily with jewels and gold, unlike the goddess Lakshmi, but is dressed modestly — representing her preference of knowledge over worldly material things. 


• She is generally shown to have four arms, which represent the four aspects of human personality in learning: mind, intellect, alertness, and ego. Alternatively, these four arms also represent the 4 Vedas, the primary sacred books for Hindus.  


• She is shown to hold the following in her hands:




• A book, which is the sacred Vedas, representing the universal, divine, eternal, and true knowledge as well as her perfection of the sciences and the scriptures.


• A mālā (rosary) of crystals, representing the power of meditation and spirituality.


• A pot of sacred water, representing creative and purification powers.


• The vina, a musical instrument that represents her perfection of all arts and sciences. 


• Saraswati is also associated with anurāga, the love for and rhythm of music which represents all emotions and feelings expressed in speech or music. 


• A hansa or swan is often located next to her feet. The sacred bird, if offered a mixture of milk and water, is said to be able to drink the milk alone. It thus symbolizes discrimination between the good and the bad or the eternal and the evanescent.  


• Sometimes a peacock is shown beside the goddess. The peacock represents arrogance and pride over its beauty, and by having a peacock as her mount, the Goddess teaches not to be concerned with external appearance and to be wise regarding the eternal truth.

Taken mainly from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraswati 

How wonderful is the symbolism in Saraswati’s representation! All is created to give us a message. If her picture has a peacock besides her or the colour of her saree is white – both mean something serious and enlightening. If we have knowledge of these facts, it would be wonderful, but even if we don’t have knowledge of true symbolism, still we can follow the lessons if we try to follow her.  

Now let us see the symbolism behind Lord Brahma:  

Symbolism behind Lord Brahma 

• Lord Brahma is shown with four hands: Brahmā’s four arms represent the four cardinal directions: east, south, west, and north. Also, the back right hand represents mind, the back left hand represents intellect, the front right hand is ego, and the front left hand is self-confidence. 


• He is shown to carry a mala or prayer beads. This symbolizes the substances used in the process of creation. It also symbolises meditation.  


• He is shown carrying a kamandalu, which represents sanyasa and renunciation (kamandalu is water pot used by sanyasis, men of renunciation).  


• He is shown as carrying a book. The book symbolizes the universal, divine, eternal, and true knowledge as well as perfection of the scriptures. 


• The Gold. Brahma’s symbol is golden egg or aura. Gold symbolizes activity; the golden face of Brahmā indicates that He is actively involved in the process of creating the Universe. 


• The Swan - Brahmā uses the swan as his vāhana, or his carrier or vehicle. The swan is the symbol of grace and discernment. It symbolizes discrimination between the good and the bad or the eternal and the evanescent. 


• The Lotus - The lotus represents the reality. Brahma sitting on the lotus indicates that he is ever-rooted in the infinite reality. Reality is the foundation on which his personality rests. 


• The Beard - Brahmā’s black or white beard denotes wisdom and the eternal process of creation. 


• The four faces of Brahma represent the four Vedas. They also symbolise the functioning of the inner personality which consists of thoughts. They are the mind (manas), the intellect (buddhi), ego (ahamkara) and conditioned consciousness (chitta). They represent the four ways in which thoughts function.  


• Brahma is also shown riding a chariot drawn by seven swans, representing the seven worlds. 

Taken from many websites including:

http://www.iloveulove.com/spirituality/hindu/hindudeities.htm

http://singaporehindutemples.com/hindugod/lordbrahma/lordbrahma.html 

There is another confusion. There are not many temples of Brahma on this earth. This has given rise to many myths. Some one says it was because the Asuras (demons) had started worshiping Brahma and hence to mislead them Devs (gods) stopped the practice of Brahma worship and the demons followed it. There can be many others. But the symbolism behind this is as follows: 

Why Brahma is not worshipped? 

Here is one good explanation:  

As creation is the work of the mind and the intellect, Lord Brahma symbolizes the Universal Mind. From the standpoint of an individual, Brahma symbolizes one’s own mind and intellect. Since an individual is naturally gifted with the mind and intellect, he or she may be said to have already realized Brahma. For this reason the worship of Brahma is not very popular among all Hindus. He is, however, worshipped by seekers of knowledge, such as students, teachers, scholars and scientists.  

Taken from: http://www.iloveulove.com/spirituality/hindu/hindudeities.htm  

Another wonderful way of putting it is in the below text:  

The true philosophical reason why Brahma is not worshiped like the other deities is as under: Worship involves faith and faith to certain degree means accepting supremacy of someone without questioning. Brahma, on the other hand, represents true knowledge. The knowledge and faith are philosophically antithetical concepts. Knowledge blooms in self-doubt, constant questioning, criticism and discussions and it lapses in faith. Ichnographically,  Brahma  is shown sitting on a blue lotus flower (Pushkara in Sanskrit). Anyone who is familiar with lotus will know that they bloom through a complicated network of root system submerged in the soft mud. This muddy foundation of the Lotus flower is an artists pictogram of  intellectual ferment. 

Ritualistic  worship of Brahma who is an embodiment of the true knowledge, would have been a philosophical contradiction. 

Read the full article here:

http://surinusgaonkarsays.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/01/why-lord-brahma-is-not-worshiped-.htm 

I will again borrow Sandeep’s words to put the purpose of symbolism in Hinduism:  

There is a reason symbols and myths in Hinduism have an enduring quality about them: they make highly abstract philosophies and concepts readily accessible to us by making them part of our daily life. It’s easier telling a child about the importance of learning by narrating the importance of worshipping Saraswathi than it is to threaten it to “study or else!” Equally, it is easier to explain abstract concepts of thought, words and meanings to a layman using a story than conduct an academic session/seminar. 

I think now is the time when we should stop taking things as they are told to us and should go deep and apply our thinking. As I read in one of the above web-links:  

Sage Aniruddha in his digest Vrutti (1.26) says: 

na hy aaptavacanaan nabhasonipatanti mahaasuraaH |

yuktimad vacanam graahyam mayaanyaishca bhavadvidhaiH || 

(Huge giants do not drop from the skies simply because a competent person/s says so. Only sayings which are supported by reason should be accepted by me and others like yourselves.) 

Let us learn lessons from our worship of Goddess Saraswati. Let us learn from meaning of symbolism of Lord Brahma. Let us all be warriors on the path of knowledge and enlightenment…  

- Rahul

Why are So Many Modern British Career Women Converting to Islam?

Why are So Many Modern British Career Women Converting to Islam?

Tony Blair’s sister-in-law announced her conversion to Islam last weekend. Journalist Lauren Booth embraced the faith after what she describes as a ‘holy experience’ in Iran. 

She is just one of a growing number of modern British career women to do so. Here, writer EVE AHMED, who was raised as a Muslim before rejecting the faith, explores the reasons why.

Rejecting her faith: Writer Eve Ahmed was raised a Muslim

Much of my childhood was spent trying to escape ­Islam. 

Born in London to an English mother and a ­Pakistani Muslim father, I was brought up to follow my father’s faith without question. 

But, privately, I hated it. The minute I left home for university at the age of 18, I abandoned it altogether. 

As far as I was concerned, being a Muslim meant hearing the word ‘No’ over and over again. 

Girls from my background were barred from so many of the things my English friends took for granted. Indeed, it seemed to me that almost anything fun was haram, or forbidden, to girls like me. 

There were so many random, petty rules. No whistling. No chewing of gum. No riding bikes. No watching Top Of The Pops. No wearing make-up or clothes which revealed the shape of the body. 

No eating in the street or putting my hands in my pockets. No cutting my hair or painting my nails. No asking questions or answering back. No keeping dogs as pets, (they were unclean). 

And, of course, no sitting next to men, shaking their hands or even making eye contact with them.

These ground rules were imposed by my father and I, therefore, assumed they must be an integral part of being a good Muslim. 

Small wonder, then, that as soon as I was old enough to exert my independence, I rejected the whole package and turned my back on Islam. After all, what modern, liberated British woman would choose to live such a life? 

Well, quite a lot, it turns out, including Islam’s latest surprise convert, Tony Blair’s sister-in-law Lauren Booth. And after my own break with my past, I’ve followed with fascination the growing trend of Western women choosing to convert to Islam. 

Broadcaster and journalist Booth, 43, says she now wears a hijab head covering whenever she leaves home, prays five times a day and visits her local mosque ‘when I can’.

She decided to become a Muslim six weeks ago after visiting the shrine of Fatima al-Masumeh in the city of Qom, and says: ‘It was a Tuesday evening, and I sat down and felt this shot of spiritual morphine, just absolute bliss and joy.’ 

Before her awakening in Iran, she had been ‘sympathetic’ to Islam and has spent considerable time working in Palestine. ‘I was always impressed with the strength and comfort it gave,’ she says. 

How, I wondered, could women be drawn to a religion which I felt had kept me in such a lowly, submissive place? How could their experiences of Islam be so very different to mine? 

Convert: Lauren Booth, who is Cherie Blair's half sister, decided to convert to Islam after what she described as a holy experience in Iran

According to Kevin Brice from ­Swansea University, who has specialised in studying white conversion to Islam, these women are part of an intriguing trend. 

He explains: ‘They seek spirituality, a higher meaning, and tend to be deep thinkers. The other type of women who turn to Islam are what I call “converts of convenience”. They’ll assume the trappings of the religion to please their Muslim husband and his family, but won’t necessarily attend mosque, pray or fast.’

I spoke to a diverse selection of white Western converts in a bid to re-examine the faith I had rejected.

Women like Kristiane Backer, 43, a London-based former MTV presenter who had led the kind of liberal Western-style life that I yearned for as a teenager, yet who turned her back on it and embraced Islam instead. Her reason? The ‘anything goes’ permissive society that I coveted had proved to be a superficial void.

Changing values: Camilla Leyland, 32, pictured in Western and Muslim dress, converted to Islam in her mid-20s for 'intellectual and feminist reasons'

The turning point for Kristiane came when she met and briefly dated the former Pakistani cricketer and Muslim Imran Khan in 1992 during the height of her career. He took her to Pakistan where she says she was immediately touched by spirituality and the warmth of the people.

Kristiane says: ‘Though our relationship didn’t last, I began to study the Muslim faith and eventually converted. Because of the nature of my job, I’d been out interviewing rock stars, travelling all over the world and following every trend, yet I’d felt empty inside. Now, at last, I had contentment because Islam had given me a purpose in life.’

‘In the West, we are stressed for super­ficial reasons, like what clothes to wear. In Islam, everyone looks to a higher goal. Everything is done to please God. It was a completely different value system. 

'In the West, we are stressed for super­ficial reasons, like what clothes to wear. In Islam, everyone looks to a higher goal. Everything is done to please God'

'Despite my lifestyle, I felt empty inside and realised how liberating it was to be a Muslim. To follow only one god makes life purer. You are not chasing every fad.

‘I grew up in Germany in a not very religious Protestant family. I drank and I partied, but I realised that we need to behave well now so we have a good after-life. We are responsible for our own actions.’ 

For a significant amount of women, their first contact with Islam comes from ­dating a Muslim boyfriend. Lynne Ali, 31, from Dagenham in Essex, freely admits to having been ‘a typical white hard-partying teenager’. 

She says: ‘I would go out and get drunk with friends, wear tight and revealing clothing and date boys.

‘I also worked part-time as a DJ, so I was really into the club scene. I used to pray a bit as a Christian, but I used God as a sort of doctor, to fix things in my life. If anyone asked, I would’ve said that, generally, I was happy living life in the fast lane.’ 

But when she met her boyfriend, Zahid, at university, something dramatic happened. 

She says: ‘His sister started talking to me about Islam, and it was as if ­everything in my life fitted into place. I think, underneath it all, I must have been searching for something, and I wasn’t feeling fulfilled by my hard-drinking party lifestyle.’

Liberating: Kristiane Backer says being a Muslim makes her life purer

Lynne converted aged 19. ‘From that day, I started wearing the hijab,’ she explains, ‘and I now never show my hair in public. At home, I’ll dress in normal Western clothes in front of my husband, but never out of the house.’

With a recent YouGov survey ­concluding that more than half the ­British public believe Islam to be a negative influence that encourages extremism, the repression of women and inequality, one might ask why any of them would choose such a direction for themselves. 

Yet statistics suggest Islamic conversion is not a mere flash in the pan but a significant development. Islam is, after all, the world’s fastest growing religion, and white adopters are an important part of that story. 

‘Evidence suggests that the ratio of Western women converts to male could be as high as 2:1,’ says Kevin Brice. 

Moreover, he says, often these female ­converts are eager to display the ­visible signs of their faith — in particular the hijab — whereas many Muslim girls brought up in the faith choose not to. 

‘Perhaps as a result of these actions, which tend to draw attention, white Muslims often report greater amounts of discrimination against them than do born Muslims,’ adds Brice, which is what happened to Kristiane Backer.

She says: ‘In Germany, there is Islamophobia. I lost my job when I converted. There was a Press campaign against me with insinuations about all Muslims supporting ­terrorists — I was vilified. Now, I am a ­presenter on NBC Europe. 

‘I call myself a European Muslim, which is different to the ‘born’ Muslim. I was ­married to one, a Moroccan, but it didn’t work because he placed restrictions on me because of how he’d been brought up. As a European Muslim, I question ­everything — I don’t accept blindly.

‘But what I love is the hospitality and the warmth of the Muslim community. London is the best place in Europe for Muslims, there is wonderful Islamic ­culture here and I am very happy.’ 

For some converts, Islam represents a celebration of old-fashioned family values.

Ex-MTV Presenter Kristiane Backer with Mick Jagger in the late Eighties

‘Some are drawn to the sense of belonging and of community — values which have eroded in the West,’ says Haifaa Jawad, a senior lecturer at the University of Birmingham, who has studied the white conversion phenomenon.

‘Many people, from all walks of life, mourn the loss in today’s society of traditional respect for the elderly and for women, for example. These are values which are enshrined in the Koran, which Muslims have to live by,’ adds Brice.

It is values like these which drew Camilla Leyland, 32, a yoga teacher who lives in Cornwall, to Islam. A single mother to daughter, Inaya, two, she converted in her mid-20s for ‘intellectual and feminist reasons’.

She explains: ‘I know people will be surprised to hear the words ­“feminism” and “Islam” in the same breath, but in fact, the teachings of the Koran give equality to women, and at the time the religion was born, the teachings went against the grain of a misogynistic society.

Escape route: Former DJ Lynne Ali is happy to pray five times a day

‘The big mistake people make is by confusing culture with religion. Yes, there are Muslim cultures which do not allow women individual freedom, yet when I was growing up, I felt more oppressed by Western society.’

She talks of the pressure on women to act like men by drinking and ­having casual sex. ‘There was no real meaning to it all. In Islam, if you begin a relationship, that is a ­commitment of intent.’

Growing up in Southampton — her father was the director of Southampton Institute of Education and her mother a home economics teacher — Camilla’s interest in Islam began at school.

She went to university and later took a Masters degree in Middle East Studies. But it was while living and working in Syria that she had a spiritual epiphany. Reflecting on what she’d read in the Koran, she realised she wanted to convert.

Her decision was met with bemusement by friends and family. 

‘People found it so hard to believe that an educated, middle-class white woman would choose to become Muslim,’ she says. 

While Camilla’s faith remains strong, she no longer wears the hijab in public. But several of the women I spoke to said strict Islamic dress was something they found empowering and liberating.  

Lynne Ali remembers the night this hit home for her. ‘I went to an old friend’s 21st birthday party in a bar,’ she reveals. ‘I walked in, wearing my hijab and modest clothing, and saw how ­everyone else had so much flesh on display. They were drunk, slurring their words and dancing provocatively.

‘For the first time, I could see my former life with an outsider’s eyes, and I knew I could never go back to that.

‘I am so grateful I found my escape route. This is the real me — I am happy to pray five times a day and take classes at the mosque. I am no longer a slave to a broken society and its expectations.’ 

Kristiane Backer, who has written a book on her own spiritual journey, called From MTV To Mecca, believes the new breed of modern, independent Muslims can band together to show the world that Islam is not the faith I grew up in — one that stamps on the rights of women. 

She says: ‘I know women born Muslims who became disillusioned an d rebelled against it. When you dig deeper, it’s not the faith they turned against, but the culture. 

'Rules like marrying within the same sect or caste and education being less important for girls, as they should get married anyway —– where does it say that in the Koran? It doesn’t. 

‘Many young Muslims have abandoned the “fire and brimstone” version they were born into have re-discovered a more spiritual and intellectual approach, that’s free from the cultural dogmas of the older generation. That’s how I intend to spend my life, showing the world the beauty of the true Islam.’ 

While I don’t agree with their sentiments, I admire and respect the women I interviewed for this piece. 

They were all bright and educated, and have thought long and hard before choosing to convert to Islam — and now feel passionately about their adopted religion. Good luck to them. And good luck to Lauren Booth. But it’s that word that sums up the difference between their experience and mine — choice.

Perhaps if I’d felt in control rather than controlled, if I’d felt empowered rather than stifled, I would still be practising the religion I was born into, and would not carry the burden of guilt that I do about rejecting my father’s faith.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1324039/Like-Lauren-Booth-ARE-modern-British-career-women-converting-Islam.html#ixzz2gJ15KTt9