Badshah ji,
I had said that I will not poke my nose into discussions where I come in as an outsider with little or no knowledge and/or standing against views reflecting the Sikh perspective, given also that the intentions are far from pure. I did initiate a discussion however, one which was meant to avoid this situation and aimed at reputing an outlook, not peculiar to any religion, but one held by all people including those influenced by science. I must confess that I am somewhat angry and disappointed that the two members who asked me to elaborate on my ideas have not yet given any response. But of course this is all about ‘me’ and ‘my expectations’. Still, after some deliberation, I’ve decided that in spite of the self-serving intentions, what I have in mind may nevertheless be useful for some people reading in.
You wrote:
Since Sikhism mentions all these gods and goddesses especially in Dasam Granth about goddess Durga, does that mean the gods/goddesses actually existed with ten heads, ten arms etc etc?
C: It is fair that you ask why they are mentioned and I think Ambersaria ji’s explanation to you may actually reflect the truth of the situation. What I think and would like to add is this; the concept of a creator God, the way I’ve seen expressed here, must be incompatible with that of “gods” as conceived of by Hinduism. You can’t have that which controls and permeate all that exists and goes on, expecting humans to come to ‘realize’ this, and believe in the roles and powers of such entities as Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, Durga, Indra etc. at the same time.
As for me, I don’t believe in any of these gods. My reason however is this; any being in any form must exist from a cause, and when the cause exists no more, so too that ‘being’. In other words, if Siva must exist, he must have been born and must age and finally die. This being born is due to force of Karma and so too the continuation of the life however short or long, and finally the death. And because the karma never runs out given the accumulating nature of volitional actions, death must in fact be followed by rebirth, immediately.
The existence of gods as believed in by the Hindus, as far as I know; do not follow such kind of law. Likewise the powers attributed upon those gods that must necessarily conflict with these same laws. This leads me to conclude that they must therefore be a product of people’s imaginations, ones driven by ignorance and craving.
On the other hand however, when it comes to beings with many arms for instance, this I have absolutely no reason not to believe. After all, I can imagine for example, given my sense about mass and weight of metal 2000 years ago, and lacking necessary scientific facts, I’d never believe in airplanes, rockets and guided missiles. Or if I perceived only bipeds all my life, it would be hard for me to accept the possibility of there being animals with no legs or with four and more of them. And all this is within the “known” world!
Indeed I have no reason to reject planes of existence, labeled for example, heaven and hell. And although I do tend to conceive of the beings residing there as human-like whenever I must think about these things, this is only because any other form would only be pure imagination. Of course I do not believe that they would have human form, but having an existence outside of my limited perceptions, this I most definitely will not reject, given also that they have been pointed out as existing by those I consider enlightened.
But heaven or hell, these and the beings living there, all are subjected to laws of cause - effect and conditionality; such that they come into existence, maintain the state and fall away only to condition other such states on and on. Material existence goes by one set of laws and mental ones by other set of laws. And this is what we all need to understand with reference to our own lives *now*, else we just go around accepting one thing and denying another without any basis whatsoever. And we continue arguing with those who we disagree, without any good coming out of it all.
In other words, that someone denies the existence of gods from a scientific viewpoint does not mean that he must be on the right track. After all this is not from any understanding of the way things are, but rather to do with preference for one set of beliefs over another, although it no doubt appears logical and reasonable to the ‘believer’.
I had a few more things to say, but have forgotten. Did not have a good sleep last night after having had a gastroendoscopy earlier yesterday, so please excuse any incoherence of thought.
