Interview:Swami Dayananda Saraswati
Swami Dayananda Saraswati is a well-known Swami of the Advaita-Vedanta tradition. Being highly articulate in several languages, including English, he has been able to reach out to hundreds of thousands of people through his writings and speeches and personal leadership. He has founded the Arsha Vidya Gurukulam as well as several charitable institutions around the world. Hindu Voice UK caught up with Swamiji on his recent trip to the UK.
August 21st, 2006 at 4:00 am
All hindus, certainly swamis and sadhus, should work hard to remove boundaries beween dalits and nondalit hindus. Inspite of the work of our leaders like Gandhi, even today, hindus practice the cast system. Hindus should reform and join hands with Buddhist practiceners, to counter conversion.
August 24th, 2006 at 5:20 pm
NAMASKAR,
SWAMI DAYANANDA SARASWATHI IS DOING YEMON SERVIE TO OUR SOCIETY. HIS WORK THROUGH HIS DISCIPLES WOULD DEFNITELY KEEP OUR MORALITY AND ETHICS ABOVE OUR MATERIAL PURSUITS. THE VALUES WE HAVE INHERITED IS IN OUR DNA AND IT CANNOT BE ERODED BY WESTERN MATERIALISM. WE ARE NOT AGAINST MATERILISM. IT IS IN OUR COUNTRY TO HAVE EVERTHING IN BALANCE. THAT IS THE REASON WHY OUR PSHYCIC DOCTORS HAVE LESS WORK TO DO IN INDIA. SPIRITUALITY IS NOT AGAINST MATERIALISM.
August 25th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
Swami Dayanand’s comment “I consider everybody to be a Hindu until they say they are not” is an example of the problem with the Hindu fundamentalist/universalist. Consider the arrogance and literally, ignor-ance of one who said the same simply inserting the words “Christian” or “Muslim” in place of “Hindu.”
Ironically, the Swami has non-Hindus teaching so-called “yoga.” At his ashram, many say they are studying Vedanta but NOT Hinduism! These misquided “universalists” constantly misuse “Yoga” as well as “God” and “Lord” which are really not part of Hindu Dharma.
August 25th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
^^^ Swami Param, you need to grab a dictionary, and check the meaning of ‘fundamentalist’.
By any meaning of fundamentalist, Swam Dayananda is NOT one, promoting an intelligent, introspective and sometimes non-literalistic interpretation of sacred texts. Neither does he believe you casn only be ’saved’ by being a Hindu.
August 28th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
It is not, Dangerous, to think–a prerequisite to insight.
August 31st, 2006 at 8:25 pm
Krishna says 1/1000 people tread the path of superconsciuosness. Of these 1/1000 succeed. -> 1/1,000,000 persons. Wouldn’t it be great to get the 6000 or so such people together? Would they agree? Would they argue? Would the christo-islamic group launch a military attack?
If a system is only 1/1,000,000 correct would that system be considered perfect? Or perhaps that group is not the point - its all of us people that are still trying that are really the point - ie Karma and the struggle of atma; not necessarily the conquest.
To HVK - thanks for these interviews, keep getting those guys to guide us.
hariaum
September 2nd, 2006 at 10:27 am
Sir,
So nice of you to have published the interview of Sw Dayanandaji. I do not understand what Sw Param is trying to express. Instead of being expressing something with meaning which ordinary people do not understand, it would have been nice to express - point by point.
Sw Param says” consider the arrogance or literally ignorance of one who said the same replacing the word Hindu with muslim or christian…”
When Sw Dayanandaji says in his interview…” God is the only reality…which can be invoked in any NAME AND FORM…
If only the other religionists look at their books and see how and where their understanding is different , then most likely they too will arrive at the same thing. Then there is no confrontation. Is there anything that is without a name or form?
Also, if the modern educated people have a mind to study, look at meanings of the statements in scritptures - what actually it means - does it stand to normal reasoning? etc…may be we will all endup in understanding things better- with no confrontation.
And again, Sw Param is concerned about “non hindus” teaching yoga..and the confusion about GOD and LORD…….VEDANTA….and he goes on stating that is not as per Hindu Dharma…..
Why not Sw Param express more clearly what he has in mind and discuss? after all there is no violence here…only knowledge…and knowledge along…
Have the courage …express what u have to say with no fear…but should sound meaningful…..not just belief…
I am a very ordinarly person and i think Sw Dayanandaji’s Ashram is one of the totally open place for people who would like to know, learn, understand VEDANTA..
Wish we have more detailed interviews and more often…
as only KNOWLEDGE CAN REMOVE THE IGNORANCE AND THRU THAT THE VIOLENCE.
thanks and best wishes in your wonderful efforts
September 4th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
“Clearly,” Hindus do not worship “God,” or “Lord” nor are Hindus monotheists. Remember “Theos” applies to “God.” When Hindus speak of “God” and “Lord” they are insulting both Christians and Hindus. Many Christians have expressed concern over this abuse. Many other Christians have basically said: “Though the Hindus do not mean the God that we mean, at least we have them using our name!.” (Of course, to further confuse the issue, a small “g” is often used for these “other gods.”) Should one wonder why it is an easy transition for many Hindus to be converted?
Of course there are also Hindu fundamentalists who (when pressed) will admit that the “God” they speak of is really Vishnu/Krishna or perhaps Siva. Just as the Christian notion of a One, Male Supreme Being (n.) is unprovable, so too, is any Hindu reference to a One, Male Being (n.) that created all things. This attitude is very different than the wisdom of a Hindu having their Ishta Devata as well as the wisdom of Being (v.); i.e., Satchidananda. Hindus, of course, may also purely worship the female Shakti forms which is totally contrary to the “God” theory.
When the word “yoga” is (mis)used, it is generally means Hatha Yoga. Since there is also Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, Raja Yoga and Jnana Yoga, to name few, this misuse causes confusion. It is also factual that all of the Yogas are the many, progressive religious/spiritual disciplines of Hindu Dharma. As in any other religion, the various Yogas can only be taught by qualified Hindus. It should go without saying that Hindus are recognized (among other things) by their Sanskrit names.
Swami Dayananda and many others not only misuse the Christian terms “God” and “Lord” but also use “yoga” to mean what should be called “Hatha Yoga; ” and these “Swamis” (they are suppose to protect the Dharma) hire non-Hindus to teach this “yoga.” Because of these misrepresentations by many Hindus we have the yoga non-sense of today; i.e., simply an exercise business taught “certified yoga teachers.” These “teachers” are of course not Hindus (many are openly against any religion) and they take a rather short course and claim to be authorities (”certified”). Interestingly, these bogus “yoga teachers” often get their anti-religion attitude from “Hindus” who further confuse the issue by saying “Hinduism is not a religion but a lifestyle.” Just reflect on that statement which may seek to make Hinduism/Sanatan Dharma the “original way” (tell that to the Aboriginals, for example) and also to make an incorrect assumption about other religious lifestyles.
Please understand that many of us are simply working to clarify our precious Hindu Dharma. There are reasons why Hindus do not often get respect. Let us love our Hindu/Yogic Dharma and truly respect other religions by not (mis)using their terminology.
At this year’s Ganesha Chaturthi (a festival for all Hindus, yet many do not seem to give it much relevance?) the message for our small group was M.U.D. and not M.U.G. More Use Deva and not More Use God. Again, Hindus have been “mugged” throughout history, why?
In Dharma
September 4th, 2006 at 8:28 pm
Hindus have been mugged throughout history because the invaders have always been in want. Their own religions are insufficient to meet their needs of being human.
We do need a basic understanding of Hindu but we are already brought past that by the Gita et al that tell us not to get too bogged down in names and words and scriptures. It is hard to do as the Isha Upanishad says - to walk both paths of the transcendental and imminanent world.
Many in the west know that a fatherly bearded white guy in the sky is nonsense. Many in the west know that Yahweh was a cruel demon not a god. Many know that christo-islamic history is one of hate not peace.
A word is then defined by what you make of it in a context of history. We can appropriate the word of God to mean Tat Sat. Eventually they or their religion will be forced to the truth.
But Sanatana Dharma is eternal truth. No one is outside of that truth. Thus fundamentalism is a political statement, less so a religious one. If you look at the orthodoxy of the other religions you will find cowards afraid to face the dynamic truth of satcitananda. Our religion does not accept such self centered fear. We are not allowed to be fundamentalists because we are required to embrace Satva. To the extent we can’t we are guided by the supreme forward, to the extent we can, jai Ram.
hariaum
September 5th, 2006 at 11:17 am
Sir,
I am a bit surprised to read the latest posting of Swami Param. I am no Swami and i am only a student. I would have loved to know more about Swami Param and would have loved to read what he has written - either commentaries or explanations or discourses or lectures etc to know and understand what he is trying to tell.
Swami Param writes about small “g” big G , lord, god etc.. Oh my…Who is bothered about small g and big G, Lord and God, Allah and Jesus…
Surely, Hindus ( if they are Hindus ) cannot hurt any one let alone Christians or Muslims as a real Hindu has no ulterior motive. A real Hindu is not interested in telling others that ” our religion is superior to theirs”.
But a real Hindu is not one who is just born to Hindu parents…A real Hindu is one who is learning the Veda, Vedanta and tries to follow Sanatana Dharma. One may falter, and that is why we have the theory of Karma etc to understand, study, discuss etc.
Vishnu, Shiva, or any name is only a small part of our process of study. But, many of us decide to put a fulstop with that…like a lot of muslims decide that Qran is the end, or christians decide that Bible is the last word.
Yet, all these also go and listen to what the Mullas, Muftis, Fathers in church discuss, explain….FORGETTING THAT EVEN THEY BEING ORDINARY HUMAN BEINGS CAN MAKE MISTAKES AND THEIR EXPLANATIONS MAY BE NOT CORRECT.
This is where the education plays and important role. Education - not literacy. This why when one hear a thing, when one read a note, one need to try and look at that, logically, if it stands to reasonings.
There could be so many debatable points in discussions, but the debatable points - if one looks at that, how does it stand to reasonings? This is important.
For Hindus, a christian or a muslim is no problem. Hindus do not say do not worship Lord or Allah . because FOR HINDUS GOD IS REALITY…THERE IS ONLY GOD….
The story of Hiranya Kashipu and Prahlada is a wonderful example for us to understand. This is why Hinduism exhorts the need of a good Guru..
And that is why unlike in most of the other religions, Hinduism has gives such importance to Guru….As a matter of fact we learn the ‘GURU PARAMPARA’
And Hinduism gives full freedom to every one to either accept, reject, study and modify and change etc…no problem at all…because finally, when u use your freewill, you are deciding to accept the result what ever it be.
I am afraid, the problem may be with people who do not have an open mind. They wish to confine Hinduism with in some boundaries like the other religions. But Hinduism cannot be like that.
Also, I wonder how could “Swami” Param could feel not confortable about non Hindus ( foreigners) teaching yoga…and Swami Param says that it is “hata yoga” . I wonder from where Swami Param gets this sort of information. I am afraid that Swami Param most probably would not have either heard or read Swami Dayanandaji or seen what is happening at the Aashrams there. Else it is very difficult for some one who is also supposed to be a respectable “Swami” keeps a closed mind ( and may be closed eyes too) and say something which seems to be totally incorrect.
People - let me repeat- we are very ordinary people- like me are taken by surprise when we are lead to the indeapth meanings of the UPANISHADS and VEDANANTA and Great Souls like Swami Dayanandaji spending all their life only to bring these to the attention every one for the benefit of only the listeners…
I wish people like Swami Param spend more time in making the temples in and around - any part of the world- temples of learning by having libraries, discussions ( satssangs) - Gita Study etc even for children- and these activities will help our children to become more Strong Willed citizen and help all- help the self and any one around the self - because- understanding the SELF is the most important and most ignored subject
and that is the reason for all the problems.
WE THINK WE KNOW WHO ‘ ‘ I AM ‘’ - but if we are asked to write in 200 words, then we can see the fun…
Please, help and not discourage good things that are happening around!!!
September 5th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Interestingly enough, at his talk this weekend in London, Koenraad Elst was also bemoaning modern-day Hinduism’s obssession with the idea of ‘God’, claiming that this a belief that is not supported by Vedic texts. The whole issue is a tad overly academic for my limited theological understanding, but it’s an interesting point for thought.
September 5th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
I was at the talk too (which in my opinion was so-so). At a meeting with Koenraad in the evening, somebody took this point up with Koenraad. He was quite adamant, and stated that he once started writing a paper titled something like ‘God: a Degenerative Phase of Hinduism’ or something like that. Listening to him was interesting, but it seemed to me that it was more that HE personally didn’t like the idea of God than that such a concept is not present in Vedic texts, albeit in a very different form to that of Abrahamic theism (God in the sky). The word God can be vested with different meanings, not necessarily just the Abrahamic concept. Therefore there is nothing particularly wrong with using ‘God’, provided that the concept is explained in Hindu terms. In fact, the term may actually be necessary to convey an idea to other Hindus or to non-Hindus wishin to learn more about Hinduism,
September 6th, 2006 at 2:36 pm
Like I said, this is all a bit too much dry theology for me, and therefore beyond my understanding; from my own limited appreciation of these things though, I’d agree, a great deal of this does appear to be down to semantics - as such, I think it’s possible to make far too much of what is really a non-issue. Purely for interest, from an interview with the late Sita Ram Goel:
[Begin extract]
Having been a student of Hinduism, I find that our tradition knows no God or Goddess as the creator and controller of the Cosmos. The Vedas know no god or goddess in that sense, nor the Upanishads, nor the six systems of philosophy, nor Buddhism, nor Jainism. It is the Puranas which speaks for the first time of a paramatman (Highest Self), or a purushottama (Highest Persona). But that is not the extra-cosmic and blood-thirsty tyrant of the Bible and the Quran. We do have in Hinduism the concept of ishtadeva, the highest symbol of a person’s spiritual aspiration.
[End abstract]
The full interview is at:
http://sitaramgoel.voiceofdharma.com/interview.html
September 6th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
I have often heard people passing comments like ” muslims go to mosque every friday ; christians go to church every sunday…but Hindus need not go any particularly day like that…we have no rules, that is the curse of Hinduism…
Some of the statements by personalities like Swami Param make a lay man like me think that even they want Hinduism to be a religion of faith like islam or christianity. They are more worried about using the word Lord and God, having non indians or non Hindus teaching yoga etc..
I am no teacher to debate on what is Hinduism nor I have the capability to discuss in detail if God was stated in Veda etc…Well, i would prefer that be debated by the teachers like Swami Param with Swami Dayanandaji or such learned elders.
But it does not matter since for me what is important is to know what or who I am…and i think Vedananta is leading us towards that understanding.
And Sanatana Dharma…is it limited to hinduism? If we knew that term in Sanskrit, or in any of the Indian languages, ( since almost all Indian languages have 30 to 70% sanskrit words in that) how does that matter? Is it that the language important or the value that is stated is important?
The beauty of Hinduism is that as long as knowledge is there, the Hinduism will be there, may be in some language it may be stated in some other way…whatever be the language, the idea stated by Sanatana Dharma is universal and so it is beyond any religion. So Hinduism has no conflict with any thing.
Hinduism tells that prayer in any form is good. let it be Islamic or Christian or any other religion.
I also wonder if Swami Param knows that atleast Christianity has started using widely the Sanskrit terminology - probably - to misguide people to think that the people with such names and institutions with such names are - may be Hindu - and so people need not worry about listening to them. They have many churches and prayer halls built in similar styles as the Hindu / Indian architecture, they have hordings reading something like yesuwe namaha…in local languages….even in a city like bangalore. There is nothing new in this as we have read about a western missionary writing that ” give indians Christianity in Hindu Cup”
Interprettations could be different. The reasonf for that is likely to be the knowledge of Sanskrit. Same word has so many meanings and unless one has a thorough knowledge of the language, one is likely to understand not fully correct or misunderstand and so misinterpret. That is why our learned Sadhus talk to people who are interested to discuss, but not argue. they debate, but not denegregate the other. They are not interested in winning the arguement, but in explaining their views in a logical and meaningful way.( even in this there is a debate that Aadi Shankara was one who argued for winning…we forget that what we call arguements were at that time debates…and once the opponent felt that the in the debate one has explained his stand well and there is no way to contradict , then they used to accept the leadership …that is all…it was not slavery..
There is a lot to learn if one need to be a real Hindu. Hinduism is not mere Advaita or Dvaita or not merely about Vishnu or Ganesha etc…
But as one learn , one read, one hear , one will start seeing the beauty in everything around. That can be known only by oneself… Others cannot force this or inject this into.
Fortunately, now there are too many TV channels telecasting discourses by different Swamijis and Swaminis. It is worth listening to them…not necessary to agree with. But that will open the mind…and then one will be tempted to read more, listen more, and slowly understanding will develop.
Then all the darkness of misunderstanding, all the darkeness of feelings of Hurt and Guilt , feelings of Ommissions and Commissions will start disappearing, and step by step one will get into the track of knowing the “SELF”.
Hinduism tells that the knowledge of SELF may be understood in this birth or in some births later…but whatever one studies now will not go in vain..( even this could be debatable..but doesnt it sound a little meaningful when one is working on understanding a SELF which is supposed to be infinite etc..
the dicussions can go on and on…
September 7th, 2006 at 2:30 pm
Sadly humourous comments that only go to demonstrate why, for example, Hindu/Sanskrit terms like: “Swastika,” “Aryan,” “Yoga,” “Guru” and “Mantra” have been twisted to non-recognition. Speaking of weak Hindus, Swami Vivekananda said long ago that he was waiting for Hindus to become men.
“If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.”
September 7th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
When we debate a point, we need to focus on the issue.
Hinduism is the subject and what Swami Param has commented in his first comment is about ” fundamentalist/universalist”
In the next para Swami Param complains about non Hindus teaching “yoga” and studying Vedanta and not Hinduism.
Honestly I am shocked and cannot understand how a person with title “Swami” ( assuming that Swami Paramji is a Sanyasi) can be thinking and making statements that ” many say” ..etc. Does it mean Swami has no first hand information and making this sort of statments on hearsay?
And in his latest posting Swami Param quotes Swami Vivekananda…
How we quote some very meaningful statment out of contest? This is exactly what is happening to our politics in India. Mahatma Gandhiji introduced ” satyagraha” for freedom struggle and today for all adharmik actions every tom dick and harry is using the same tool, holding the country to ransom.
It will take a little time for me to open the books of Swami Vivekananda and then I can quote any number of statements which probably will make Swami Param that Vivekananda was always talking of Human beings and Sanathana Dharma….I have no doubt Swami Paramji too would have read Swami Vivekananda’s speeches on Law of Karma, Bhakthi yoga, jnana yoga etc.. But then mere reading will not be enough. That is why Vedananta teaching one and all, who is interested in that, the Shravanam, Mananam, Nidhidhyasanam etc…
Hinduism will last as long as knowledge is there. And what is knowledge? For us Hindus, any knowledge- vidya- is sacred.
quote…because we are then looking into the order that is Isvara. We call knowledge as Goddess Saraswavti. In vidya in any knowledge there is ananda - a joy. That joy is really brahmananda because you are one with Isvara at that time. The total and individual coalesce. The difference is consumed in the flame of knowldege. ..unquote.
It is not difficult to understand Hinduism..but then one need to work for that. Hinduism is not story of Rama and Krishna or Shiva and Parvati…But all the stories are meant to teach us…move us up the ladder in understanding.
We have a sense, that is common to all of us. In terms of others behavior towards me, I am very clear and you are also very clear. We do not want others to hurt us. Then this is universal. From Alaska to Australia one can ask any one a few questions…” do you want to get hurt?” do u approve some one cheating you? Do u want to be lied to? Do u want to be taken advantage of when u are in a weak situation?..This question could be asked to a theologician or an engineer or a scientist or a labourer ..any one …wny where in the world…every one will answer ” NO”
There for how do we want others to behave to us?
We want every one to be giving, very friendly, very compassionate, etc…
Fortunately or unfortunately, the same is expected of us also by others. This is Dharma..
It does not change with place, with colour, cast, nationality, religion.
We may not know all about gravitation, but we all sense graitation. It is one force which defies everybody’s thinking. It is amazing and it is the thing that holds the whole universe together. NBut very little is understood about it. 32 feet per second per second is only on this earth. that is not everything about gravitation. It is the most elusive force. But we all know gravitation, there fore we are careful. Every bird and every other animal knows. Although nocody has seen gravitation, we all sense its force. So too nobdody has seen Dharma, but we asense dharma, becasue it is there. The sense of Dharma is common to all of us because it is universal. EVEry heart senses it because Isvara is manifest in the form of Dharma in our hearts…
One who knows Hinduism is not afraid of anything. And just because one is born to parents who are Hindus’ by birth does not mean a thing, unless and until he has the vidya…knowledge…
And once we have the knowledge, where is the question of “fall” ?
what is stated above is from some of the talks by Swami Dayanandaji. I have no doubt that what we need to do is to convert our temples also a place of learning besides worship.
Today, most of the Hindus are interested only in the first part of the life…that is to fullfill the desires and for that they are willing to perform rituals. But instead of stopping at that, we need to continue the study of Veda and Vedanta…and that …only that will help us in moving forward ..in understanding of SELF…
once one gets the taste of this knowledge, then one will work on that simply because, it is so beautiful that one would not like to part with that.
Swami Paramji could spare a little time to read and hear a few books of Swami Dayanandaji and Swami Chinmayanandaji , Sudhanshu Mahrajji, Gurumaa, Sw Sukhbodhanandaji,..the list is too long.
Swami Paramji could also visit the www.arshavidya…sites..there are several of them and it will also provide an insight to the VEDANTA LEARNING.
There is a wonderful yahoo groups…” advaitins” and if you become a memeber, you can be very lucky to be participating in an ” esatsang”.
This life is beautiful one….let us not look at it with blurred eyes.. Let us help everyone to make it more beautiful..
and in transactional life, where there are problems, with this background when we try to face them, the Grace will help us to reduce the intensity and pressure …
the last line of our GAYATRI
” DHIYO YO NAHA PRACHODAYAT ”
WE PRAY FOR CLARITY OF VISION…
can there be a better prayer???
September 7th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
No one knows or will know everything but the ONE.
We are all ignorant. And thus to argue who is more or less ignorant is not useful.
We need each others partial understanding to further our own understanding. But let’s not make judgements about people we’ve never met for making judgements of people we know is often wrong.
But this discussion brings up another, sublter point. Not just what is a Hindu and what isn’t but: how do Hindus who diagree work together to create more good Karma leading hopefully to dharma…?
How well do hindu organizations work together and is there a way to make them work together better in a non-monolithic, pluralistic, multicultrual advaitic tradtion?
It seems that you in the UK have been working on this.
hariaum
September 8th, 2006 at 2:09 am
Yes, our knowledge is up to one more question. But the quest should continue. I will not become more knowledgable by trying to show the other as less knowledgable- since ” more ” also is limited. The discussions are meant only to OPEN our minds to look at things dispassionately, try to see what else is there which ” i ” didnt understand or misunderstood etc.
Yes, we need each others partial knowledge..that is SATSANG…that is discussions…that is why we were taught the story of 4or 5 blind men talking about elephant. Unless we hear others, and then think over that we could as well end up as frogs in the well.
Navinji, I am not from UK, but off late, we have been seeing activity - good activity- taking place in many parts of the world. And in this direction the role played by many Aashrams in Hrishikesh needs to be appreciated.
And there are many Hindu Institutions doing wonderful job for the upliftment of the community. But Hindus as such are very poor in MARKETING. Added to this the politics in India has caused great harm to the Hindu community. The ruling party and and BJP-RSS…both are harming the interests of REAL HINDUISM.
But it does not matter…the silent ones are plenty and they go on doing their bit and that will continue.
Another interesting and noteworthy point is that the SANATANA DHARMA is spreading at its own pace now outside India…without any inducement, without any violence, without any force….absolutely by FREE WILL.
And the reason for that is ‘ KNOWLEDGE’…vidya.
That is why, with VIDYA…the darkness of IGNORANCE just disappear.
Now coming to working together….yes, Swami Dayanandaji has been working to bring all AACHARYAS to one table and now they have formed a group to discuss problems and find solutions.
Finally, when Hinduism ask us to know the SELF, tell us to understand and assimilate ‘ aham brahmasmi’ etc…it is not just to repeat those words as ‘MANTRA’, but to realise that. But since we are humanbeings and the transactional situations do cause problems and pressures and even for moments we forget our true nature and perform actions which invariably has to follow the ‘ LAW OF KARMA’ .
We Hindus need to study VEDANTA…and students if they start studying it from the age of 11 or 12 for sure will develop a better analytical mind and would be less prone to stress and pressure when they grow to the age group of 16-18 and will be able to handle life in a better way.
We Hindus need to tell others that the solution to the problems that the world is facing today are not in either economy or in one religion. Even if all the people of the world are converted to Islam, the problem of terror will continue - else there is no reason to have ‘ FRIDAY SHOOTINGS ‘ in the mosques in pakistan..etc.
The solutions to the problems lay in making every one understand that
BEAUTY OF CREATION IS IN ITS DIVERSITY. If one looks around, one can see only things which are diverse. Once we start appreciating the beauty of DIVERSITY, there is no need for conversion, there is no need for violence etc.
Think of the day when mideast/arab countries have lost all the oil wealth they have. will they be then able to sustain the support they provide to the violence and conversion ( by force and inducement?).
If the world community agrees to live with the DIVERSITY…all that they need to say is that help will be provided to any human being who is suffering…and help is decided not by the place where is he born, nor by the community to which he is born, not by his relationship to some one who is in high position etc…but purely and merely on the basis of his suffering.
Think what happens then????
some one is going to ask…who is to bell the cat???
;-))
September 8th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
we are.
hariaum
September 10th, 2006 at 9:42 pm
Pairamblr -
Thanks for your participation in the discussion. Just a word of caution please keep your messages SHORT and to the point. Otherwise they will be moderated down is size, because a newcomer would find the discussion hard to follow with such long tracts of text.
Regards, Sejal
September 11th, 2006 at 1:29 am
thanks a lot. Sure I will try my best.
Also, where you need to moderate, not publish etc, kindly feel free as i know that every one has their duty to perform and I may not know the specs of the others..
I would also like to bring to this elite section one more bit of info to think over.
Teachings of Hinduism is now available in many languages…however I am afraid that it is not available in ARABIC and that is one section which has its belief with in a shell that is hardest to crack. The only way to make that section think is to have small books of Sw Chinmayananda and Sw Dayanandaji etc in Arabic. Even then one may not be in a postiion to publish it in those countries..But alteast if books are available, then the Arabs who are not in those countries may come across the teachings for them to think - NOT CONVERT- but to think.
And sadly most of Indians - non muslims- who are working in arab countries and have their children in the schools their ignore learning this language forgetting that learning one more langage is very benficial and help in bringing those people nearer to us.
Suggest your institution also take some initiative in this direction.
namaskaram
September 11th, 2006 at 6:48 pm
I saw an old new real showing the west berliners sending newspapers by baloon to the east Berliners so that they could get better news (plus propaganda about freedom’s benefits).
It seems to me that that is a reasonable approach to a government (or religion) set on blocking the development of its people. Of course now we have the internet and I’m sure that the so called open minded nations of the “islamic block” block such information. Ergo - we need hackers that can defeat those blocks and send daily quotes from the Gita or the Upanishads to at the least the educated ones then move foreward from there.
I am convinced that terrorism will not stop until a concerted effort to open the mind of the islamic block is not made. That is how you fight an ideology.
hariaum
September 18th, 2006 at 6:15 pm
Swami Dayananaji is a revered Swamiji who has been enlightening the masses with the treasures in Vedhas, Upanishads and the one and only Srimath Bagwadh Geetha which contains the eternal truth open to all.
People like “Swami Param” should understand this and not to cause dissentions to this great yagna by a great soul. Ishta Devatas are only the tools to realise the ultimate and not the ultimate itself. They have more inner meanings of manifestations of the infinite Brahman. While electricity is all pervading, one needs the switch to apply the same or draw the energy. That does not mean the switches are the source of energy. It is high time that people like Swami Param realises this.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
Following is from a web site which states the concept of God in the Gita.www.geocities.com/neovedanta/gitac.html
I am reproducing it hoping to get some response how it differ from what Dipakji states..
We encounter three concepts of God in the Gita:
1. Absolute Self, bound to individual ego - mind stuff, called Jivatman
2. Absolute Self, associated with its non-manifest Primal Power - Maya, called Ishwara
3. Absolute Self, independent of any power or adjutant, called Brahman
Initially Arjuna sees Sri Krishna as Jivatman. Therefore, when Sri Krishna says to Arjuna that, in ancient time, He had given the Knowledge of Yoga to the Sun, etc., Arjuna is perplexed and replies: How can it be! “O Krishna, Your birth is recent, while the sun was born many ages before; therefore, how am I to know or believe that at the dawn of creation - many eons earlier - you had told this Yoga to the sun?” The Gita; Ch. IV: 4
However, this misconception about the birth of Avatara is natural to ordinary soul like us. We see all others as best as Jivatman, including the God Incarnate! We cannot understand the reality of Incarnation of God easily. Even Sri Krishna himself tells that due to lack of discrimination, and because of the limitations of human intellect, it is not easy to understand Incarnation of God. Thus, “The ignorant people who do not know my Divine Nature, inadvertently, think me to be an ordinary Jivatman. They take me as any other human being subjected to the pain and pleasures of body and mind - having birth and death.” The Gita; Ch. IX: 11
Later Sri Krishna tries to explain his nature as Ishwara - Brahman associated with his Maya Shakti. Sri Krishna expounds the concept of Divine Incarnation in many verses in the Gita. For instance, chapter IV: 6 clearly states that although God is Unborn and Eternal, still by taking the help of His Prakriti (Maya) He incarnates as Ishwara, and is the essence of all beings. In the next two verses, the Lord elaborates the purpose and the necessity of incarnation. Decline in dharma and consequent plight of the pious and sincere seekers after the Truth (sadhakas and sadhus) stimulates Brahman to incarnate as Ishwara. This omniscient, omnipotent, and all-powerful Ishwara is the cause of annihilation of the wicked and wickedness that come in way of sadhakas engaged in the spiritual disciplines to realize God. The Gita; chapter IV: 7,8
In chapters IX (verses 4, 5, 13) and XV (verses 16, 17, and 18), Sri Krishna presents Himself as Brahman, the Absolute. Here he says: “All this world is pervaded by Me in my unmanifested form; all beings exist in Me, but I do not (exclusively) dwell in any one of them.” And “Nor do beings exist in Me (in reality), behold My Divine Yoga! Bringing forth and supporting the beings, My Self does not dwell in them.” And still further in chapter XV, the Lord says: “As I transcend the perishable (Jivatman) and am above even the imperishable (Non-manifest Maya), therefore, am I, in the world, and in the Vedas, celebrated as Purushottama, the highest Purusha.”
Thus, all the three currents of Vedanta viz. Dvaita, Vishisthadvaita, and Advaita are incorporated in the Gita. All the three are correct in their own places; it is up to us - the sadhakas - to elevate ourselves to see Absolute Monism preached in the Gita.
Finally, in the last chapter (XVIII; 66) Sri Krishna guides Arjuna: “O Arjuna, Give up all the Dharmas and surrender yourself to me (or take refuge in me, or come under my shelter). I will free you of all the sins (ignorance). Do not grieve.” Here Sri Krishna assures us that if we want to go beyond all Dharmas (actions and endeavours to become Free), the desire that springs from the sattvik guna of Prakriti, the only recourse left to us is to seek God without the adjunct of Maya. This is Advaita, pure monism!
Since, however, the concept of Absolute Monism can never be put in words, without reducing it to qualified Monism, many sincere sadhakas and students of the Gita get confused about the real appeal contained in it. Is it Dvaita, Vishisthadvaita, or Advaita? The answer is clear one; the Gita preaches the ultimate Truth of Nirguna and Nirakara Brahman. However, to reach this state one has to start with the concept of God with Form, as clearly explained in chapter XII, verse 5.
The important point to remember here is that as a concept, Sri Krishna preaches only Advaita, but as method - Yoga - to reach that level of Absolute Consciousness, to realize the Highest Truth in principle (the Tattva of it) one has to start with the worship of God with adjuncts of Maya -the personal God or Ishwara.
In chapter VII Sri Krishna elucidates the nature of Maya or Prakriti. He, as the Absolute Principle, is the controller of Maya, but can never be controlled by it. The universe is the aggregate of eightfold constituent (five elements, intellect, mind, and ego) known as Apara Maya lower Prakriti, while ‘Absolute Consciousness is My real Nature’, says Sri Krishna. In fact, the whole Maya, and its reflection as the universe, comes to light and becomes manifest only because of Absolute Consciousness. (As one of the Upanishads says: Brahman is the eye of the eye, ear of the ear, etc.) Like the single thread holding various flowers in a garland, Absolute Consciousness pervades every sentient and insentient aspect of Maya. The Maya appears bewitchingly live and tempting only because of its association with ever-sentient Pure Consciousness or Brahman. Sri Krishna says, ‘I am that support - the Para Prakriti.’ Here the word Para Prakriti is used to emphasize Sri Krishna’s real nature that is qualitatively different and higher than Apara Prakriti, the Maya.
May 9th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Great Interview !
May 10th, 2007 at 2:45 am
We must bring cohesiveness and order in Hindu society and all pure Hindu Heads must unite. True Rishis like Vashista, Vishwamitra, Vyas, Sandipani
and modern Rishis like Dayananda and Kripaluji (Barsanadham) must train political leaders to truly define and unite Dharm and service, strength and prosprity, justice and inspirational living.
May 10th, 2007 at 6:00 am
I am a hindu by birth and so are the many hindu relatives and friends that I have. Most of us enjoy reading this column about our great religion as we get plenty of knowledge pertaining to our belief’s. Hope more gurus and swamijis will participate here to deciminate more knowledge about the beauty of the one and only religion we love. Keep it up you honourable HINDUS for HINDUS who yearn for knowledge. Jai Hind
June 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Whoever this swami param is, he obviously does not know what he is taking about.Why waste time and energy reading his comments.
July 15th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
I am not getting the direction in which “Swami Param” is moving…it would help the audience if he can state what his agenda is
October 1st, 2007 at 3:31 pm
swami dayanandji is a very famous swamiji. i just wanted to tel that v r inspired by your teachings.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:43 am
Swami Param, Why not see if your vision needs to be corrected, your hearing tested and your understanding questioned. This would be the Vendantic thing to do. Unfortunately you are the one to do all these things. You seem to see, hear and understand things about Swami Dayananda that I have not been able to verify with others in my own experience. You may be quite surprised to find you have committed an indescretion similar to stepping on a book. To investigate further if you are not sure would be the action of a Swami rather than to continue a debate that seems to lack proper researh about others. Not to do so would be similar killing my best friend to win an argument. What you may or may not gain is not worth what you are losing. Look again.
January 19th, 2008 at 8:37 am
Here the word Hindu is inferred by Swami Dayananda Sarawati as Self and his or her choice later to defer ( convert ) or to call themself as somthing else is possible and if care to investigate this word Hindu and all words or thoughts is God as a subtance only Swami Param concern is valued may we question and realise that as this and love all RS
January 19th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Oh my! How many can divert from the issues. Fact: Visit any so-called “yoga site.” Are they teaching Hinduism? Are the teachers Hindus? No. Visit Arsha Vidya Gurukulam: Is the “yoga teacher” (Hatha Yoga is the proper title) a Hindu? No. Visit any Christian Church. Do they speak of Vishnu? Siva? Duruga? No.
If you do not care for your Dharma, why call yourself a Hindu?
January 19th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Dear Swami Param Hindu is just a name of a river which was very much in love for sentimental reason the sages call their teaching as Hinduism or what ever meaning teaching of Egoless Self nothing wrong if anyone is call Hindu or lover of egoless self Dharma is universal itself as per the vision of Gita which see all as same yet you call your self as Swami and see in a funny ways for me a rapist to good man is a Hindu if you disagree then Gita needs to be rewritten by your good self your well wisher
Hara Hari Shakti AUM RS
January 20th, 2008 at 1:14 am
Swami Param’s problem - as I understand or misunderstand is that
Hinduism need to be taught only by “born Hindus ” meaning people who are born to Hindu parentage. ( probably he also think like “insider and outsider” etc like our friend Satya )
I do not know what to say, but , Swami Param ‘reveals’ a lot - that there is a lot to be dis-covered , there is a thick sheet of ignorance covering the knowledge and so he cannot see thru much.
By the way, will Swami Param take a little trouble and enlighten us, readers, with his views as to how Hinduism need to be taught ? not a one line reply, but an answer , which will explain, what and why and how of Swami Param’s perception.
thanks
January 20th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
As per Swami Param, only Hindus by parentage can be Hindus!
Swami Param should visit Arsha Vidya Gurukulam and see for himself, how many foreigners are reading, writing, reciting explaining Vedanta after learning Sanskrit. I doubt if Swami Param has spent much time in AVG. But I know a few hundred by now ( for the last 3 years I have been spending one month each year at AVG) from japan, USA, UK, Brazil, Iran, Maritius, France, Singapore, Malaysia, and so many other countries. Also, during our camps, we had ” Iyengar yoga ” training too. I do not know if Iyengar yoga is part of Hindu yoga.
I feel sad that people like Swami Param, { I really do not know how and why they use the title ‘ swami ‘ at all } think of dividing the humanity instead of trying to bring them together.
It will be nice if Swami Param explains the meaning of the word Vishnu etc so that we will know what the word means.
The process of Hinduism is trying to make the seeker aware the he is not limited, ” Tat Tvam Asi ” ; Aham Brahma Asmi etc… do we need to think that Aham Brahman Asmi but the Brahma I consider is minus Christianity or Islam etc??
we need to grow to maturity
and that is possible only by removing the cover of Ignorance
enjoy
February 25th, 2008 at 11:02 am
SWAMY pARAM DOES NOT MEET SWAMY DAYANANDA AND NOT LISTENING HIS TEACHINGS.THAT IS WHY HE IS BLUFFING. IGNORE HIM PLEASE.
March 18th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
I don’t think Swami Param has any problem with converted Hindus, but his only point is that Swami Saraswati’s universalism is a problem for Hindus - that is, anyone and everyone is a Hindu. This radical universalism is not logically sound, but let me first expound upon what I think Swami Param is trying to say.
These yoga places do not teach Hinduism - they are teaching “hatha yoga” and the majority of the time (someone confirm or deny this based on experience) it is a diluted form, that is, exercise without the religion. Most Westerners do not want people teaching them religion, since many people these days are not that religious to begin with.
Swami Param just wants yoga to be Hindu (or Buddhist) and not secular, that’s all.
Also, the “radical universalism” part. To say that everyone is a Hindu is just common sense wrong. Everyone is divine, is the proper statement here, but not everyone is Hindu.
You cannot logically (in most sects) be a Hindu Christian or Hindu Muslim or a Hinjew (kudos for anyone who gets the reference). Even with Advaita Vedanta, Christians and Muslims do not consider a the mystical experience of self-realization and oneness with Brahman to be salvation.
It simply doesn’t work, people.
March 19th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
St John of the cross, Theresa of Avilla, Khaballah, sufis, Freemasons, hermitics… numerous groups all over the world understand that the realization of Brahman is the ultimate goal of spiritual awakening and then action in that spirit is the goal of life. Truth is universal. If Hinduism is not the worship of truth, then what is it? If someone says I do not worship truth, then what are they saying?
I agree that the historical-tribal construct of Hinduism is a finite sociocultural agglomeration of distinct character from other sociocultural agglomerations (much like americanism is different than europenism). But if we are of the religion of eternals (dharma sanatana) and Tat Sat is Brahman which is beyond name and characterization, who does not worship this in some form or another?
“radical universalism” asks the question: how do you limit the worship of your idea of Brahman? If you do not limit Brahman and the ways to worship Brahman, what is the boundary of not-Hindu?
hariaum
March 20th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Keshav has demonstrated a sound insight. Please, others, do no put words into my mouth. Never have I said that only born Hindus can be Hindus. Anyone who so desires and then learns can formally become a Hindu. True to any religion, being a Hindu is the vital pre-requisite to teach Hinduism and its Yoga teachings and practices.
Again, all one has to do is look at Arsha Vidya’s program guide. In this catalog, Hindu/Hinduism is not mentioned once. Non-Hindus are advertised as so-called “yoga teachers.”
Dear fellow Hindus, Wake-up and look at the past and the present. Your sacred teachings, terms and practices have been and are divorced from Hindu Dharma by those with ego-centric and monetary motives.
Look to Ganesha. Stand-up for the Dharma; protect your Mata even in the face of great obstacles–humbly remove them. Everyone will benefit from such noble courage.
March 23rd, 2008 at 1:01 am
Navin-
Yes, it is true that no one can limit the worship of Brahman but…
Hinduism is not about the worship of Brahman, it is about the realization of Brahman.
Christianity and Islam do not recognize Self-Realization as a valid path to God, only worship of one form of Saguna Brahman. This is not Sanatana Dharma.
Radical Universalism. If Hindus interpret the phrase “Truth is one but the wise call it by many names” to mean “All religions are true”, you’re lying to yourself.
This can only work if all other religions say the same thing. If even one dissents, then it falls apart, and many do. If Christians and Muslims say that there’s is the only path and you say “No, truth is many but the wise call it by many names”, then by default, you disagree with them, thus saying that your pluralism is more right than their exclusivism.
See how it works?
There is nothing in Christianity and Islam in terms of ideology that Sanatana Dharma does not already have.
March 24th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
I think we agree. What you call radical universalism is simply idiocy - not your idiocy, rather the idiocy of the belief system you point out. In a sense you are describing a radical misunderstanding of what hinduism is. And this misunderstanding is based on the construct that hinduism is like other religions in that there is a specific doctrine, creed, name… to be worshiped. This sense of what a religion is is very concrete and suited for the tamasic believer. When the rajasic believer embraces such a simplistic construct we get jihadis, missionaries, and other kinds. It is only when dharma is directed towards the sanatana, the Brahman, that religion is satvic. Thus my construct of “radical” hinduism is to apply it fully. I do not need a new category - way of life - but rather I can include the simplistic thinker and the advanced being within the construct of hinduism - Brahman.
What you describe is a radical outward vision that the other is us (all religions are true). What I believe is a radical inward vision that we are like all the other (all yog are within us).
There is no doubt that a simplistic thinker wants their god concrete, simple, direct, easy… There is no doubt that a simpleton faced with a far greater truth will be bewildered and deny it at first (until they are brought about to realization of the greater truth). Thus there is no doubt that someone who is a monothinker - christian, muslim, buddhist, or hindu - is simply not going to get to the satvic dharma, at first. And there is no doubt that the christo-islamists don’t want people to have a satvic dharma as they enjoy their power. But we have all of those elements within ourselves. The truly radical universalist, engages in radical adherance to buddhi, realizes Tat, radically embraces the totality of Tat Sat, the totality of Brahman; recognizes the divinity of the spiritual child and the shroud of maya that envelopes them and brings them AUM (home).
So I believe that we agree except that I consider radical universalism a little differently.
hariaum
March 26th, 2008 at 4:26 am
Navin-
There is no concept of “sattvic” or “sattvic dharma” in Abrahamic religions with a few exceptions. There is no concept of the universal Brahman in Abrahamic religions, no concept of “embracing the totality of Tat Sat” in Abrahamic religions.
Either they give up their exclusivist ideologies for dharmic ones, or they don’t.
Thus, I am justified in stating that there can be no Hindu Christians or Hindu Muslims.
April 5th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
It is interesting how the universalist becomes much like some interpertations of fundamentalism. It is worthy to note that the term “fundamentalist (ism)” refers to Christianity and its exclusivity (which seeks to invalidate other religions). Fundamentalism is also loosely used to denote the denial of the validity of “other” religions–which is exactly what universalism seeks! It is also worthy to note that the definition of universalism also links to Christianity.
A fundamentalist is also “one who adheres to a strict set of moral standards” which is not necessarily a bad thing. Interesting that the antonym, in this case, would be “a deviant!” So, those universalists who thoughtlessly call all those who simply claim to have a religion, fundamentalist, are they to be deemed deviants/perverts? With the sexual and monetary scandals the have pervaded much of the universalist yoga movement it would seem so.
April 6th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
hello all,
I wonder if any one says that there is a Hindu Christian or Hindu Muslim.
Could it be that we do not understand exactly what is meant by ” I believe every one is a Hindu until one says he is not” ?
For this we will have to first say, what makes one a Hindu. Do we have a clear definition for Hindu?
When one study Veda and Vedanta, one is lead to dis-cover that Aham Brahma Asmi. I am that Brahman - which is the ” whole ” - the limitless totality. But then I do not know that because of the cover of Ignorance which can be removed only by learning.
If one looks at this, does it not make sense - when one reads the statement that ” every one is a Hindu” ….?
All the terminology of universal radicalism, Hindu yoga etc are creation of
“limited minds” or frogs in the well who think that the world is only that much as they know or equal to the well. For a mind which is open, there is good opportunity to see that there is no difference between any two beings.
If you happen to read ” Sanat Sujatiya ” you will read of a very interesting discussion between Dhrutarashtra and Sanat Kumara where in Sanat Kumara finally explains to Dhrutarashtra why and how they are after all not different.
But then these things could be understood only if one spends a little time to know what is “Vyavaharika = transactional ” / Paramarthika = absolute and Prathibhasika etc.
there is no disease worse than poverty,
there is no poverty worse than IGNORANCE.
enjoy
May 14th, 2008 at 7:25 am
What does it mean to be a Hindu?
To be a Hindu is: Love truth, look upon the world as Isvara. All forms of prayer are valid. You are responsible for your action, for your lot. You can change your destiny. You have a free will. God is not love, God is everything. He is in the form of order. He is not partial to anybody. God is not judgmental; so don’t make God, also, judgmental. Don’t say there will be judgment day and God will sit in judgment and send you to Hell. God is not judgmental. He doesn’t make judgment. You ask for it; you get it. You get it or you had it, both.
Atma nitya suddhah. This is one step further. You can invoke the Lord in any form, in any language. There is a big spectrum. Being a Hindu is all these. Finally, the Veda is a means of knowledge in the areas which I cannot objectify. Certain areas are very useful to me. Certain things that are told by the Veda are very useful to me. And the one thing is the main thing. That is, you are the whole; you are the reality. This is not going to be improved upon by anybody. This is final. You are the whole and you can’t become better than whole. Therefore, nobody is going to improve this. So, it has the last word. One who recognizes that is a Hindu. Even if you don’t recognize it, if you say everything is Isvara or everything is Isvara’s. That interpretation, also, we have got. Everything belongs to Isvara or everything is Isvara, both are there. I’m talking final. All this we will allow. All these are allowed because you can invoke Isvara in many ways. It’s okay; you’ll get some result. We accept that. Finally, if you want, you are the only reality. That makes you a Hindu. If you miss it in this life, you’ll get a chance again. Until you solve this problem, you’ll be reborn, don’t worry. So, that makes you a Hindu.
There are a lot of things. In fact, all these mean being a Hindu. But anything irrational is not acceptable. Anything above reason, you can believe if you are interested in it. If somebody says above reason it is, and if you are interested in it, you can believe in it, you can follow, because you cannot dismiss it. Like a heaven. You can’t dismiss it; you can’t prove it. It’s okay. But if somebody says that is the answer, it is irrational. We can dismiss it. That is not the answer. Any trip is not an answer. A trip is a trip. You can’t promote tourism and call it a religion.
– Swami Dayananda Saraswati.
(Answering the ‘Satsang Question’ at the Arsha Vidya Gurukulam, Saylorsburg, PA)
May 14th, 2008 at 7:33 am
The “one God” of the theological simpletons vis-à-vis the “only God” of the Hindus
Hindus do not believe that there is only one God. Hindus believe that God is One (the only God, or rather God only is), i.e. a unity inclusive of all things manifest and unmanifest. This is quite different from saying there is only one God (though Westernized sloppy thinkers may not agree). To say that there is only one God is to reduce God to a single unit, to the lowest common denominator. This is what monotheists do. For them God is a unit, not a Unity.
Hindus are not monotheists and Hindus are not polytheists. Hindus are panentheists, i.e. they believe that God is in all things and that all things are in God (God is everything, God is in everything, and everything is in God only). They believe the whole of creation is the body (actually, the manifestation) of God (Who is the One Infinite-Eternal-Existence) and cannot be separated from God.
Monotheists believe God exists “someplace” outside of his creation. (To them God is formless but has a location and that he is male! But to Hindus God is not only the efficient cause but also the material cause of the entire creation and He transcends everything, seen and unseen, and as such He is the Ishwara. The English word ‘God” can not convey all this. So it is better to use the word ‘Ishwara’ than ‘God’ which conveys an anthropomorphic view).
The great marvel of Hindu panentheism is that it allows the devotee to raise his or her favorite name and form of God or Goddess to an absolute position. Therefore, for the devotee of Ganesha, Ganesha is the Supreme Lord (the Godhead) of All, and for the devotee of Devi, Devi is the Supreme Lady (the Divine Mother) of All, and for the devotee of Krishna, Krishna is the Supreme Lord (the Godhead) of All, and for the devotee of Shiva, Shiva is the Supreme Lord (the Godhead) of All, and so on for the other Divine manifestations: Gods and Goddesses. (Thus God, for the Hindus, can be adored not only as the father and the mother, but the friend and the beloved as well).
All names and forms are of the One only, (i.e. the one without a second, advaita). By definition, the One must include the “one God” of the monotheists, though the One is much more than the “one God” of these theological simpletons who seem to think that his one and the only occupation was creation (sitting as he was, the judgmental and the silvery bearded one, far off, somewhere behind and beyond the clouds, not easily accessible to the poor mortals, and promoting heaven-going tourism for them after their one and the only earthly sojourn).
(God is in fact nirguna–attributeless, and nirvikara–immutable, in his static aspect as the Pure Consciousness which is the One Infinite-Eternal-Existence, or Sat-Chit-Ananda: Existence-Knowledge-Bliss Absolute. And in his dynamic aspect He is the shakti, the infinite Power, inherent in all names and forms. And in His immanent aspect He alone has become everything, manifest or unmanifest, and He also transcends everything, while at the same time being the indwelling spirit or consciousness in all names and forms, and therefore each soul being potentially divine. And He reveals Himself to the one who chooses Him with a firm conviction, endowed with steadfastness, unflinching devotion and burning aspiration. And as such, no intermediary or an agent, like a prophet or saviour is necessary except the guru, the guide, who is also His manifestation, who helps just as a signpost does.)