Why are the so-called Gods so wary of Idol worship?

Very True, Cannibal. The Vedas do not belittle Idol Worship either. But if you only are to read the Kenopanishad, the couplets therein gently goad you to rise above Idolatry. They time and again reiterate, you to look for the Infinite and Indescribable Parabrahman, and not be confined to the use of Images and Icons. The way of The Veda in general, or for that matter as you have rightly pointed out B and J too do not insist or truly did not start anywhere near Idolatry. In fact the position of The Buddha is so great: He does not want Him to be venerated either! Such self effacemnt is possible only from saomeone who is [B]Brahma-ghana[/B] = Dense with That One! IMO the Prophets of Abrahamic Religions uniformly chose to condemn Idolatry as a pernicious practice because they wanted to rid the people of incorrect and inadequate conceptualization of God. You must have read Prophet Moses' life in the OT or Muhammad(PBUH)strong condemnation of the veneration of the Pharaoh, or any Living Embodied person or image as God. This point is variously emphasized in the choice of time for the Muslim Prayer, so that even by error one is "prevented" from venerating Natural Objects = like the Sun for example, as God. Further, Islam forbids [I]sajda[/I] to anyone but God Almighty. The strong words in which both invalidated Idol Worship, more from the point of view of bringing home to the millions the Greatness of God, has gone on to such an extent that - it almost has become synonymous with intolerance- more so among the Muslims- the extremists among whom the Taliban is to be counted had blasted the Images of The Bamian Buddhas, disregarding the pleas of the International Community to at least leave them in tact as a World Heritage Monuments! Such is the Intolerance that strong Scriptural postures can breed! Contrast it with the way the Keopanishad brings home the same point!!! It is not without reason that India is acknowledged as Jagadguru = Teacher of the World! This one is for you, Cannibal. Do you know that The Vedas acknowledge Atheism = No God also as equally redeeming? Three of the Six syatems of Vedic Philosophy have NO GOD/Brahman posited!!! Yet there is a moral fibre running through, an acknowledgement of the incomprehensibility of the scheme of the Universes and Human[and thence by implication other Finite Intelligences'] Existence. You msut also be knowing that the Vedic Rishis were jeered by the so called Charvakas, but still they(the Charvakas: some refer to a personage by name Charvaka as a Rishi!] were given a place of pride among the Intellectuals, as a sort of a counter-balance for an excessive display of Faith in dry Scriptural Reasoning! The Jain Tirthankara Adinatha has been honorably mentioned in The Vedas. This very idea of the no-necessity of a Super-Ordinate Being for Redemption from the [B]Samsara-bija[/B]= the seed of causation, was well orchestrated by Buddha and Mahavira and the other Tirthankaras. Only that without the mediation of a Super-Ordinate, Benevolent, Omniscient,Omnipotent and Omnipresent God the "task" of self-redemption became an extremely arduous one.

"Brilliant" is all what I can say! Not because you're agreeing with me. I appreciate your profound knowledge and balancing of logic and constructive criticism. Tolerance is the strongest reason I'm so fond of SD. Apparently, SD is the only one which rightly recognizes the need to cater to various needs and preferences of the devotees. Besides, as an atheist/agnostic, which according to me is the most natural and primitive form of thinking, I can find refuge only in SD. Other religions would throw me to hell! That the Vedas accomodate my way of thinking too is an icing on the cake. I've always known vaguely that SD accomodates atheism too, (Many sites, including non-Hindu ones claim so) but thanks to you for telling me that precisely. I just hope you continue sharing your vast knowledge, which is unplumbed for me!

GS Your knowledge on the concept of religion is profound, I must say. I understand that the Vedic Religion does not insist on idols. The expalanation for the origin of the pracice seems absolutely flawless. But if you notice, (and as far as I know)the Vedas do not even condemn the practice. That's what real freedom is! Neither do Buddhism and Jainism do it too blatantly. Although the Buddha and Mahavira were opposed to it, they did not ask their followers to abolish the idols and their worshippers. This means that anyone who found the Buddhist/Jain wisdom acceptable was welcome; and those who didn't approve, it wasn't much of a hue and cry. Ditto with Swami Dayananda. All these depict the tolerance and freedom of the concerned modes of faith. The troubles only arrive when the Semetic Religions are brought to picture. They consider it a huge sin and call it unpardonable. Now this is over-reaction! So therefore the question is, why can't we expect the Semitic ones to be as accomodating as SD, which considers idolatory a choice? Does it not explain the cause of the rifts between the different religions, even in today's scientific age?

Andhatama pravishanti ye asambhuti mupaste They enter darkness, those who worship the natural elements (Air, Water, Fire, etc.). They sink deeper in darkness, those who worship sambhuti. [Yajurveda 40:9]7 Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol, etc. What message does the above verse give ?

Hello, come back. How am I supposed to know that? I told you about KenoPanishad and someone else recently told me about tolerance for atheism. That is very much sufficient. I'm no expert at the said religion.

First, let me re-clarify my position. I'm no idol-worshipper per se. But I found logic in the practice; the advantages of which I've mentioned. Anyway, your questions I reckon I can answer: Um... I've just been enlightened that the Vedic religion, the oldest in the scheme of things although does not recommend idol worship; it does not condemn it either. Right, essence of religion is realization of higher power. If you look at the previous page, the Kenopanishad describes how you drift away from the idols towards the actual spiritual power. Now that is perfect self-realization, at least for some people. To understand the essence of the said Kenopanishad, let me draw an analogy: Have you ever found your eyes with tears after watching an emotional movie? Or devilish when your favorite villian fights in it? Similarly, the idols which are essentially of virtous God/manifestations of God lead you easily to the Higher power. Pretty on the lines of meditation. Energy of the idols is unseen; it's just experienced. You can call the energy illusional since the actual energy is of your own mind, but then there's no harm in it. It's basically all mind games, or psychology. This was strictly according to my knowledge.

Hi Sudipta As of me, I was born a Hindu, but considering the liberty of SD, I was never forced to believe in it. It was then I turned to an atheist. But atheism is real hollow I'm sure you'll agree with me! That's when I revisited SD (especially its practices) from a truly scientific angle, and needless to say I apparently found gold! That's why I say, SD is pure science. I understand the Vedic God is single, but the different forms are actually manifestations of the same single God. (Correct me if I'm wrong) Whatever it is, the Vedas do not speak harsh against idols and idol worshippers. I'm told that even if you use an idol for worship and may be, meditate or something, you do shift to the real singular God as you advance. (Some experts say so. I don't know which but it's a common Hindu assertion) Now the Abrahamic religions simply over-react when they talk of idol worship. That's what I'm not in much favor of. If you for a while neglect the spiritual perspective, idolatory does not become such a huge sin scientifically. That's what the atheist take tells you. Buddhism and Jainism too might be against it, but they do it in a far subtle manner. They insist on self-realization. That is creditable. I agree on the point of exploitation of the priestly class, but it can be ignored for a while considering the advantages idol worship has to offer. And are you sure the exploitation can be easily curbed by anti-idolatory? May be tomorrow I could come up with a new religion claiming and theatrically proving to be God-sent. You never know, some religions might be like that in the past! I know all this is sounding cynical and absurd, but all I want to put forth is that exploitation is easily possible anyway. All in all, nobody knows the actual truth. Everyone must be given a choice as to which amongst the two is more comfy for him. Besides, you never know, which of the two methods might be right! So why does one have to speak so harshly against the other?

May be tomorrow I could come up with a new religion claiming and theatrically proving to be God-sent. Yeah, do it and you will end up in a Madhouse, What will you do If you were asked to prove your prophethood ? Will you bend down, put your head between your legs and kiss your a$$ ?

I accept what cannibal told. I am also the once favoring that thing. Yes, Santana Dharma is very much scientific if you look at its base. Needless to say, Buddhism is also very much scientific. The results of quantum physics seems more on the favor of Buddhism, about what Buddha said and also the Hinduism. Hinduism and Buddhism shares many common things in the scientific aspects. And I also agree in the point of cannibal saying that no one actually knows the truth. And that's why rather than taking the path of belief and ending the query, it is better to search the truth or take the path of inquiry. I believe human mind is very much powerful, but the mind itself has won us. Now the game is that win the mind then you will win the world. Many of the mysteries will come up clear....

Actually, the more you write, the more I'm convinced you're lost in your own understanding/interpretation of this issue. When you cite so-called advantages to idol worship or anything else for that matter, you have to have infallible proof of it. Where are your sources? Do you have, at the very least, peer-reviewed and -accepted documentation agreeing with YOUR own conclusions? As well, I find it really odd that someone who confesses to be an idol worshipper could dare to make value judgments on someone who isn't. Regarding the right method by which to share my beliefs, who are you to say that a "subtle convincing" way will work for everyone? People have different motivations and level of understanding, some believe easily & quietly, others seem to need a loudspeaker to finally get the message. Also, you need to re-read my post. You should see I've not even come close to cursing you and your fellow idol worshippers. It is simply one of a myriad of sins out there. I've never condemned anyone to hell, as that's not my job nor do I have power to do so. Your comment reeled me in, not merely because of the empty rhetoric in it, but by the incredibly self-righteous and proud attitude behind it.

Just adding, I referred to you as an idol worshipper despite identifying yourself as an atheist/agnostic, because I think your real belief system is closer to it than to the belief in the absence of a God. I haven't yet met a true atheist who would defend someone who believes in any deity.

Anti-God rhetoric? Seems you're too averse to reading complete stuff. If you notice, I didn't criticise all religions. (Read all Gods) I'm only against those religions (those Gods) who speak vociferously against me, my atheist community and the idol worshipping communities. Since your religions (if it's one of the above) ignited the hatred against me and the others mentioned, I've got every single right in this world to say all what I have. Instead of asking me to get smarter, go for a self introspection yourself. Just look at the way you look at idol worshippers. Who on this earth proved out to you that it is incorrect? Did God personally come to you and say so? I've shown you a glimpse of the scientific and psychological perspective. (The advantages) It's still surprising that you still hold idol worshippers as the ones under devil influence. Who proved your religion, whichever, to be the perfect one? Even if your religion has somehow managed to convince you that atheism and idolatory are sins, you and your religion ought to express your views in a subtle convincing way; not cursing us all and influencing the followers of your religions that we're pre-destined to reach hell et al. So it's you who are ignorant and disrespecting of others' beliefs and ways.

Hmmm, I have noticed that. There is too much of religious indoctrination on this thread. It is difficult to have a healthy debate with people belonging to Abrahamic religions. A good debate is possible with atheists, agnostics, hindus, buddhists, taoists etc..- not because they are perfect, but bcoz they are sensible enough to think.

Yup Fred, that's what I've been saying here. But some of them are so obsessed with their religions that they hate to think beyond them. If you check the responses, many of them are personal attacks and comparisons with other religions. That's why I won't be replying to them unless they come up with a really valid point. I ain't an idol-worshipper myself, but I really could not stand the stiff senseless opposition. Thanks for putting it out boldly.

That's an apt question from you, but don't you think these questions I've raised should be addressed? After all, this all lead to the establishment of various religions and subsequently the tiffs between each of them. So it's high time we ask what caused the drift from one religion to another and whether that/those reasons is/are apt or not! Thanks for responding and reminding me too :-)

Forgive me please, but isn't it interesting that you accused me of giving a "flip answer" and yet you posed no answers to these genuine questions... My answer was not flippant, I am a teacher and I would rather provoke thought and have one come to thier own conclusions rather than simply spoon feeding my answers to the questions and the questioner still being in a confused state.

Spark.. you are right... mostly. I like the "cute" way your version says no "false" gods before me.. any god other than God is false... it actually says "no other gods".. period. My opinion is anything, including our own religion can be a god if it is more important than God. K - you do get more with honey than venegar. I am afraid most.. please understand, not ALL, but most religious Christians come off a long ways from love. The Bible says in several different places that those who seek Him will find Him.. if one is a true seeker of truth (which is Christ) they will find HIm. I do not have to stand and preach at people trying to get them to see it my way... they will find Him who seek Him... my duty is to love God and people and demonstrate the kingdom of God with my life...just like Jesus did.

Thanks for your positive response. May you find the answers you seek. We are living in confusing time and some things in life make it more confusing. Blessings

You're right; it shouldn't bother me. But don't you feel that would be an escapist approach? I can't, and no one should be blind to the effects of such approaches by the particular religions. The reason why I'm questioning the anti-idol approach is that somewhere down the line, stands like these have sown the seeds of animosities between various religions. And btw, it's just that I don't believe in THOSE Gods. I'd always advocate the idea of a personal God as defined by other religions.

Thanks for the reply... It just seemed that you were inferring the presence of an idol was a neccessary element for all religions, so I apologise for misunderstanding your initial post

Jime It seems you've totally caught me on the wrong foot. I never said idols are absolutely necessary for communication to God. All I'm saying is that it can be a possibility and cannot be ruled out, the way some religions are doing. So why can't these religions adopt a liberal policy of allowing both? The Vedic and Dharmic religions I've mentioned allow both, without conflicts! I repeat, I completely agree that idols, or even religion for that matter is not absolutely necessary to believe in a diety or God. It's never necessary to be religious to be a nice person. But do you see the fierce opposition those faiths offer, if you opine so?

Jealousy in my opinion is not a positive thing, if god is perfect he cannot be jealous. There must be another explanation evidently.

I cannot justify my religion with my religion because you don't believe in my religion? Well, then, just say there is no God and be done with it! You are questioning why God doesn't want us worshiping idols. I told you that my God does not want us worshiping idols because we are to worship only him, an eternal presence that is not contained in any physical manifestation. My God cannot be contained in any object. You can talk to him wherever you are. You can feel him wherever you are. To try to contain him in an idol would be foolish because he is huge and marvelous and any attempt to construct a physical manifestation of him would simply be an insult. My God has no shape or form and you could never capture his essence. Also, the analogy does work, because love is a universal concept that even God feels, except he feels it in the most perfect form. You can understand how God loves us by examining how you feel love yourself. If you are going to nitpick at my God, then you have to use the definition of my God. You cannot say, "Well, I don't really believe God is like that. I believe he's like this" when you don't even believe in God to begin with! If you are going to start finding fault with the idea of God, you have to use an idea of God that people actually believe in, otherwise you are just finding fault with something that no one believes, and what is the sense in that?

One, the analogy of me and God itself does not make any sense. Still, I get the gist and I'll assume the analogy to be applicable. I would be narrow-minded, stern, envious....... only if I get mad at her for a really insignificant reason. For God, even if it the reason is insignificant, (which is definitely not so. Idol worshippers are actually worshipping the manifestations of God, with God or His manifestation in mind, not the stone) He should be tolerant enough to excuse you; something which some religions do not approve of. Things could be understandable if the worshipper had God's enemy (if at all one exists) in mind while worshipping; but that is clearly not the case! Besides, how do you know that God only wants us to acknowledge Him in his true form? The scriptures of the concerned religion/s cannot be used to justify this, because basically it's the same stuff we're questioning.

Yes people have really nice feelings on the matter of worshipping god. They really have the deep respect. If you look at the history, some interesting things happen. Sometimes, some precious stones are found somewhere and then people don't understand what the stone actually is and they start worshipping it has the god rather than investigation. Well there are also these cases. The good thing in this case is that the control is not by fear. Hinduism has lot of liberation in making idols for our own. In fact various hindu people prefer various idols as their path shower. And there are people who remember various god at various occasions. Even Lord Buddha is worshiped as a God in the Hinduism. They also think Buddha as the reincarnation of Lord Krishna. The basic concept is that, the good things we do give us good things in return and the bad things bring up bad things. You may exactly call it Karmic effects.

Exactly nzalheart, that's what I've been saying all along. If you notice, the Abrahamic religions are there only there to control people by fear. Neutral and rational people would definitely find loads of holes in this stand of the concerned religions. Please just check what all I've spoken of the Vedic religion, Jainism and Buddhism in this regard above. The original forms of these three and some other eastern religions too are monotheistic, but nowhere do they use fear tactics. But when you talk about stone-worship in the Hindu society, I don't quite feel that the stone is involved. The feelings of the worshipper are essentially directed towards Gods or His manifestations; and the feelings are the ones that are more important. Anyway, I'd stepped into the idolators' shoes only because of the mindless and stern opposition of them by the Abrahamic religions. I totally agree with you on spirituality by meditation and IMO the foolish acts of the Hindus are much better than the arrogant and violent ones of their counterparts in the context.