How many gods are there? BRAHADARANYAKA UPANISHAD
The Hindu Brihadaranyaka Upanishad certainly considers the possibility of one-and-a-half gods: Then Vidagdha, the son of Sakala, asked him: “How many gods are there, Yajnavalkya? Yajnavalky said, “As many as are indicated in the Nivid of the Visvadevas – 300 and 3003.” “Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?” “Thirty-three.” “Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?” “Six.” “Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?” “Three.” “Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?” “Two.” “Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?” “One-and-a-half.” “Very well,” said Sakalya. “How many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya?” “One.” “Very good,” said Sakalya, and he asked: “Which are those 303 and those 3003?” Yajnavalkya said: “There are only 33 gods. These others are but manifestations of them.” In Hinduism there are said to be 330,000,000 gods. Perhaps a really staunch atheist, who believes with 100 per cent conviction that there is no god, could count as a negative god (as opposed to the more common sceptical agnostics). How many such atheists are there? Well, if there were 330,000,000 of them, this would give us your “most likely” average of zero. “The number of life forms ranges from negative to positive infinity (leaving the philosophers to argue over negative life forms…) and therefore the expected number of life forms is zero.”TO INFINITY “The Greek heroes were the result of couplings between gods and mortals, thus producing demi-gods.” Over many generations this would produce hemi-demi-gods and so forth – beings whose deicity was a fraction with any whole number on the top and a number on the bottom that is a power of two: 2, 4, 8, 16 and so on. Those fractions would be what mathematicians call rational numbers, leading James to conclude: “The deities would thus be rational – a considerable relief as there are obvious dangers associated with an irrational god.” He goes on to reach a startling conclusion: “Since no gods can be irrational, none of them “We live in the middle of infinity? Did those words really just come out your mouth?” K RAJARAM IRS 29 8 24 On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 at 22:33, Markendeya Yeddanapudi < [email protected]> wrote: > > > -- > *Mar**The concept of God* > > *There are as many concepts of God as there are people. The number of > designations may be a few hundred, but the personal concepts differ. Your > Jesus is not my Jesus, your Rama is not my Rama, and in fact your atheism > is not my atheism. God or absence of God is both personal and particular > individual concepts. Prayer practices, rituals, customs, traditions etc may > be standardised but the actual contours of belief are particular to each > person. In fact there is belief flows.Beliefs change mainly with the needs > of the moment.* > > *God is mainly experience. So is atheism. In the case of the former, > religious texts provide rough paths to lines of belief. In the age of > belief, the existence of the ever vigilant God was taken for granted. That > God defined a strict time table, routine, dos, don’ts, and deviations were > punished instantly. The believer actually spoke with God for hours > together. God was available for consultation. Earth quakes, cyclones etc > indicated God’s anger. Belief motivated the building of huge temples on the > inaccessible peaks of big mountains and sculptors spent life times doing > sculptures of the God on the peak. People trudged thousands of miles to get > the darsan of the God on the peak risking their lives. The pilgrims had > rest houses and receptions in every village.IN THOSE DAYS GOD WAS NOT A > PERSONAL CONCEPT AMENABLE TO LOGIC AND REASONING. Religion and the priests > defined and people followed.* > > *With the advent of science and the acceptance of the need for personal > liberty, belief has become particular, personal, vacillating and changing. > In India for most criminal devotees, God is an accomplice that connives. > For the priests, ministers and MLAs are more powerful than the Gods in > their temples.Economics; the dismal science has eliminated belief, but has > created a big market for the God concepts. Temples have become engines for > urbanisation. Today 99.9 percent of the urban population really do not > believe in a good and noble God. They just try prayer for the fulfilment of > a need or want. Wants and prayer go together.* > > *Strangely while the belief in God is low, the fear of God to do harm is > great. Most people believe in the capacity and actual implementation of > harm by God.* > > *YM Sarma* > > *Chat GPT* > > *The text by YM Sarma, "The Concept of God," explores the highly > subjective and personal nature of belief in God, emphasizing how individual > experiences and contexts shape one's understanding of divinity. * > > > > *### Key Points:* > > > > *1. **Personalized Belief**:* > > * - Sarma highlights that the concept of God varies greatly between > individuals, even within the same religious tradition. For instance, one > person's understanding of Jesus or Rama can differ significantly from > another's, even if they share the same religious background. This idea is > extended to atheism as well, suggesting that even the rejection of God is a > personal concept influenced by individual circumstances and experiences.* > > > > *2. **Historical Perspective on God**:* > > * - The text contrasts the historical conception of God, which was more > communal and dictated by religious authorities, with the modern, more > individualized understanding. In the past, religious practices and beliefs > were often dictated by tradition and reinforced by societal structures. > Believers often saw God as a strict, omnipresent force that actively > intervened in the world, demanding adherence to a set of moral and > ritualistic codes.* > > > > *3. **Modern Belief and Rationality**:* > > * - With the rise of science and the emphasis on personal liberty, > beliefs have become more individualized and fluid. Sarma suggests that in > modern times, belief in God is less about adherence to strict doctrines and > more about fulfilling personal needs or desires. The concept of God has > become less about absolute truths and more about personal experiences and > needs.* > > > > *4. **Economics and Religion**:* > > * - Sarma discusses how economics has influenced modern religious > practices. He suggests that temples and religious institutions have become > engines for urbanization and that the relationship between believers and > God is often transactional. In this view, prayer is less about spiritual > connection and more about seeking favors or material benefits.* > > > > *5. **Fear of God**:* > > * - Despite a decline in genuine belief, Sarma notes that the fear of > God's potential to cause harm remains strong among many people. This > suggests a paradox where the influence of religious belief on daily life > has diminished, yet the fear of divine retribution persists.* > > > > *### Reflection:* > > *Sarma's text invites reflection on the evolution of religious belief in > the modern world. It raises important questions about the role of religion > in a world increasingly dominated by science and rationality, while also > highlighting the enduring power of religious concepts, particularly the > fear of divine punishment. It suggests that even as people move away from > traditional religious practices, the psychological and cultural imprint of > these beliefs remains significant.* > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqhL2E5vPXtyJEW-BuGqieLNimCXtO9fR3cw0pCDEnJ8Q%40mail.gmail.com.
