Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"theory of creation" in Hinduism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    "theory of creation" in Hinduism

    It seems like there are several "theories" in Hinduism about creationism.

    Can all Hindus on this forum agree to provide "authentic" theory of creationism in Hinduism?

    ------------------
    May Allah SWT guide us all towards right and help us follow the right

    #2

    trouble here is, everyone tries to validate hinduism by comparing it with things in islam. islam has a theory on creation, so where is yours? if you dont have one, it means you are not good enough. to each his own.

    hinduism is liberated in many ways (while being horribly tight-assed in many others). one admirable aspect is there usually is no objection against scientific theories. if they dont match scriptures, following science wouldnt be an issue. most hindus who have been to school would stick with the big bang theory. which is good, IMO.

    it was a similar revolution of free thought that released the western world from the clutches of the church, leading to developments in science and technology. they did use knowledge from the arabs as a spring board, but free thought was the real catalyst that lead to the rise of the western civlization, which we are witnessing even today.

    cheers,
    queer
    Simple ain't easy.

    Comment


      #3
      queer..

      as they say.. knowledge is a good thing but little knowledge is a very dangerous thing..

      religion isn't there to validate the scientific principles.. though scietific principles are sometimes mentioned in religions to show that it is not created by any avg joe and there is some divine influence there.

      Theory of creation doesn't matter too much from religious point of view.. as religion was instituted to cater for the spiritual side of the mind not the scientific part.

      all that matters in religion is that we know that we are the created beings.. and whatever level- spiritual/ analytical/ scientific - we may attain .. we will always be the created ones. (humbling thought) .. we will not be creating new laws of the universe... just understanding them.

      In Islam it is simple that god said be.. and it was.. simple.. while not contradicting anything else..

      explain where it needs to.. and not where it would serve no purpose.

      Comment


        #4
        Ok Here goes. I am giving Nasadiya Sukta, the Hymn of Creation from Rig Veda.
        http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~wldciv/worl.../rig_veda.html

        If you look at...
        >>The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. <<

        You have to note that Vedic Gods are like Gods in Greek Mythology. They have emotions, jealousies and interact with Humans.

        The whole thing is remarkable for it's Rational and Sceptical approach to the question of Creation!!

        It is one of my favourites. It really is not REligious, isn't it!!!

        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Of the several Vedic texts, the Rig Veda is most fundamental to Indian thought, the others dealing with more particular matters such as the sacrificial formulas, melodies, and magic. Composed over a long period of time and coming into their present form between 1500 and 1000 b.c.e., the Vedic hymns were eventually attributed to the divine breath or to a vision of the seers.


        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Creation Hymn
        A time is envisioned when the world was not, only a watery chaos (the dark, "indistinguishable sea") and a warm cosmic breath, which could give an impetus of life. Notice how thought gives rise to desire (when something is thought of it can then be desired) and desire links non-being to being (we desire what is not but then try to bring it about that it is). Yet the whole process is shrouded in mystery.


        Where do the gods fit in this creation scheme?


        The non-existent was not; the existent was not at that time. The atmosphere was not nor the heavens which are beyond. What was concealed? Where? In whose protection? Was it water? An unfathomable abyss?

        There was neither death nor immortality then. There was not distinction of day or night. That alone breathed windless by its own power. Other than that there was not anything else.

        Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning. All this was an indistinguishable sea. That which becomes, that which was enveloped by the void, that alone was born through the power of heat.

        Upon that desire arose in the beginning. This was the first discharge of thought. Sages discovered this link of the existent to the nonexistent, having searched in the heart with wisdom.

        Their line [of vision] was extended across; what was below, what was above? There were impregnators, there were powers: inherent power below, impulses above.

        Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being?

        Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Andhra:


          Refer to the other thread I opened and see you guys adjusting their Dhotis and claiming incest was OK for Adam's kids but not for us!!

          Andhra.. i have one answer from a genetic point of view..

          the reason you and I are different is that we have mutations within our DNA which dictate how we look to what disease we will have.

          this is also the reason that if you inbreed/intermarry now.. these mutations can manifest themselves as diseases.

          Now if we believe Torah/Bible/Quran (or any other religion which believes in Adam) Adam was the perfect being.. he had the perfect DNA.. i.e. no mutations. therefore his immediate progeny would not have any mutations.. or have minimal mutations.

          in that case it would not matter if it was someone very closely genetically related to you as the same problems would not arise.

          most of the rules of the society now are due to problems that came about so a law was made to prevent it from happening again.

          so in any case.. the same of law did not apply to them.. for who else would they have sexual relations with..donkeys.. monkeys? now wouldn't that be more wrong?

          Comment


            #6
            blackzero,

            you raise valid points.

            1. religion isn't there to validate the scientific principles..

            2. religion was instituted to cater for the spiritual side of the mind not the scientific part.

            regarding the rest, about us being created, and not being able to change rules of the universe, your beliefs dont match mine. but it hardly is something that should lead to strife in daily life. as they say, to each his own.

            -queer-
            Simple ain't easy.

            Comment


              #7
              Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being?

              Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.

              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              very rational view considering that period.
              even it sounds rational at present time.



              [This message has been edited by rvikz (edited March 21, 2002).]

              Comment


                #8
                Ibrahim says; Foe those who want to know hat these sukta says..........

                NASADIYA SUKTA - RigVeda 10.129

                At first was neither Being nor Nonbeing.
                There was not air nor yet sky beyond.
                What was wrapping? Where? In whose protection?
                Was Water there, unfathomable deep?
                There was no death then, nor yet deathlessness;
                of night or day there was not any sign.
                The One breathed without breath by its own impulse.
                Other than that was nothing at all.
                Darkness was there, all wrapped around by darkness,
                and all was Water indiscriminate, Then
                that which was hidden by Void, that One, emerging,
                stirring, through power of Ardor, came to be.
                In the beginning Love arose,
                which was primal germ cell of mind.
                The Seers, searching in their hearts with wisdom,
                discovered the connection of Being in Nonbeing.
                A crosswise line cut Being from Nonbeing.
                What was described above it, what below?
                Bearers of seed there were and mighty forces,
                thrust from below and forward move above.
                Who really knows? Who can presume to tell it?
                Whence was it born? Whence issued this creation?
                Even the Gods came after its emergence.
                Then who can tell from whence it came to be?
                That out of which creation has arisen,
                whether it held it firm or it did not,
                He who surveys it in the highest heaven,
                He surely knows - or maybe He does not!


                compare with...........


                HINDUISM'S VIEW OF WORLD'S CREATION (VEDAS -- UPANISADS)

                "In the beginning this world was simply what is non-existing; and what is existing was that. It then developed and formed into an egg. It lay there for a full year and then it hatched, splitting in two, one half becoming silver and the other half gold. The silver half is this earth, while the golden half is the sky. The outer membrane is the mountains, the inner membrane, the clouds and the mist; the veins, the rivers; and the amniotic fluid, the ocean. Now, the hatchling that was born was the sun up there. And as it was being born, cries of joy and loud cheers rose up in celebration, as did all beings and all desires. Therefore, every time the sun rises and every time it returns, cries of joy and loud cheers rise up in celebration, as do all beings and all their hopes. When someone knows this and venerates brahman as the sun, he can certainly expect that the pleasing sound of cheering will reach his ears and delight him." -- Chandogya Upanisad 3:19:1-4.


                HINDUISM'S VIEW OF HOW CREATURES WERE CREATED (VEDAS -- UPANISADS)

                "That first being (Prajapati) became afraid; therefore one becomes afraid when one is alone. Then he thought to himself: 'Of what should I be afraid, when there is no one but me?' So his fear left him, for what was he going to be afraid of? One is, after all, afraid of another. He found no pleasure at all; so one finds no pleasure when one is alone. He wanted to have a companion. Now he was as large as a man and a woman in close embrace. So he split his body into two, giving rise to husband (pati) and wife (patni). ... He (Prajapati) copulated with her, and from their union human beings were born. She then thought to herself: 'After begetting me from his own body, how could he copulate with me? I know -- I'll hide myself.' So she became a cow. But he became a bull and copulated with her. From their union cattle were born. Then she became a mare, and he a stallion; she became a female donkey, and he, a male donkey. And again he copulated with her, and from their union one-hoofed animals were born. Then she became a female goat, and he, a male goat; she became an ewe, and he, a ram. And again he copulated with her, and from their union goats and sheep were born. In this way he created every male and female pair that exists, down to the very ants. ... Then he churned like this and, using his hands, produced fire from his mouth as from a vagina. As a result the inner sides of both these -- the hands and the mouth -- are without hair, for the inside of the vagina is without hair." -- Brhadaranyaka Upanisad 1:4:2-6.


                HINDUISM'S VIEW OF CREATION (VEDAS -- SATAPATHA BRAHMANA)
                In the beginning this universe was just water....and then an egg hatched:

                "Verily, in the beginning this (universe) was water, nothing but a sea of water. The waters desired, 'How can we be reproduced?' They toiled and became heated (with fervid devotion), when they were becoming heated, a golden egg was produced. The year, indeed, was not then in existence: this golden egg floated about for as long as the space of a year. In a year's time a man, this Prajapati, was produced therefrom; and hence a woman, a cow, or a mare brings forth within the space of a year; for Prajapati was born in a year. He broke open this golden egg. There was then, indeed, no resting-place: only this golden egg, bearing him, floated about for as long as the space of a year." -- Satapatha Brahmana 11:1:6:1-2.


                Comment


                  #9
                  The philosophy of Hinduism doesn't care about creation!

                  Only religions that have a need to demonstrate the omnipotence of their supreme entity, preach and believe in such concepts.

                  Nasadiya suktha is a Hindu theory. That is all. If you think it is rubbish, your belief is as valid as the one that idolizes it.

                  No Hindu will try to substantitate that it is right or it has to be right, unlike many muslims who are compelled to prove that Islamic concepts, however screwed up they are have to be right!

                  My only comment about the credibility of Nasadiya sukta is, it could have been a verily accepted theroy when it was written, that is 5000 years ago.

                  Hinduism, which readily accepts change and evolves with time doesn't make attempts to subtantiate it or practice it.

                  [This message has been edited by kumarakn (edited March 22, 2002).]

                  Comment


                    #10
                    with science outpacing religen it looks like we should constantly reevaluate our beliefs
                    and adapt to new condtions.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by rvikz:
                      Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being?

                      Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.

                      Rvikz...

                      the point is interesting... whence creation came into being..

                      but the one thats bugs me at night is...

                      why creation came into being?

                      whence with time we may be able to understand..

                      there has already been the M-theory proposed which has aptly explained how big bang happened... and why gravity is the least powerful of the forces of nature.

                      but ... WHY creation came into being..

                      I guess the only way we will find that out... is that we talk to the creator .. if there is one to begin with(forgive me for my blasphemy!) but I have to cater for the atheist point of view as well.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Blackzero!!!
                        &gt;&gt;why creation came into being? &lt;&lt;

                        You raised such a good point!!!
                        You know one of the standard complaints about Philosophers was that they didn't come up with the Big Bang theory on their own by inductive reasoning.
                        It is called 'The Drak Night Mystery' or something.

                        I will tell you about it.

                        The 'Thought' you got is one of the bugs for Astronomers. They can explain HOW the Universe came into being, but not WHY!!

                        The explanation in Physics is that thereis an Anamoly in the first momemnts of creation that triggered an expanding Universe!!

                        Good lateral thinking!!!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          does it really matter if we dont know?

                          Comment


                            #14
                            of course it does..

                            human beings do everything for a reason a purpose.. One does not do anything without a purpose, a reason..

                            either you like to do it.. so there is personally satisfactory
                            or you have to do it as it gived you something.. like job.

                            so unless you know why you are here.. you would not know whether the things you are doing have a purpose.

                            Comment


                              #15

                              So what we are seeing is that no Hindu can give the theory of Creation, but is quick to jump on the bandwagon of Islam Bashing!

                              Even if you don't have a plausible answer, at least make a vain attempt.

                              Right about now, even 'Alice in Wonderland' will do, in order to save face for your sakes!!


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X