Extracting Brahman's Satya from Brahma's Maya (Part 1): The Truth about the Hindu Trimuti (and plenty more)

Before we get started, let me say that in no way do I consider myself an expert on Hinduism. On the contrary, the  deeper I wade into the Makara-infested waters of that religion's multi-headed dogma, the more I wish I'd stayed on the beach. Why didn't I? Because Jesus urged me to go in -- and to keep moving forward, however treacherous the undertow might seem. Presumably, it's one of those Workbook Lesson 25 things, as in: I don't need to know the purpose; I just need to trust that my sojourn into Hinduism, confounding and labyrinthian as it feels at times, will prove fruitful in the long run.

With that said, do fasten your seatbelt, because we're going to cover a lot of ground very quickly in this post. Let's start by shooting down what is probably the BIGGEST misnomer attached to Hinduism: the widely held FALSE belief that it is a polytheistic and, therefore, "heathen" religion. In actuality, what appears to be an extensive and complex pantheon of "deities" is simply various personified aspects and attributes of TWO creative thought-forces. One of these forces is divine and helpful to humans, while the other is deceptive and harmful. The divine force is called BRAHMAN or PARAM-BRAHMAN, while the deceptive force is called BRAHMA.

An unworshipped "god" in Hinduism, Brahma represents the maya-manifesting Ego Mind

The image above depicts Brahma in typical fashion, as a four-headed man riding a Hamsa -- a mythical swan-like bird with the miraculous ability to separate milk from water when the two liquids are mixed together. Symbolically, the milk and water represent cognition. The milk is the desirable Holy Thought the God Mind shares with the Christ Mind, while the water is the "unholy" or fear-based thoughts generated by the Ego Mind. Thus, Brahma riding the Hamsa symbolically communicates that, even with the Ego Mind's parasitical infection, our minds still possess the power to choose the "milk" of Higher Truth over the water of oblivion.

Maa Sarasvati, the milk-supplying deva of Transcendental Awareness

Significantly, the same symbolic Hamsa is associated with Sarasvati, the alleged goddess of music and higher learning. Why "alleged"? Because Sarasvati is the "mother" of intuitive perception, Higher Reason, or Transcendental Awareness. Rightly understood, she is the "spirit," "lamp," or "shakti" whose ego-stripping "song" makes us increasingly aware of the Great Stream, Ocean of Milk, or Upper Waters of Higher Thought flowing underneath the material illusion. Expressed another way, Sarasvati supplies the "music" of Higher Reason that frees the Hamsa from Brahma's lock-down mentality of spiritual denial. Hindus call this dream-imprisoning mindset "Brahma's Granthi." It is, in fact, the first of three "psychic knots" we must undo along the path to awakening.

The Granthis are three significant perceptual "knots" we must untie as we tread the Royal Road toward enlightenment. We untie those knots by making the right choice at critical stages. Those three knots and the choices they represent are: 1) Brahma Granthi = the choice between material and spiritual values; 2) the Vishnu Granthi = the choice between the ego-body self-concept and the Soul Self-Concept); and 3) the Rudra Granthi = the choice between the individual Soul Self-Concept and the unified Christ Self-Concept.

As I see it, the Hamsa associated with both Brahma and Sarasvati represents the part of the human mind capable of learning Higher Truth. That part is referred to in various wisdom-schools as the Buddhi, Witness, Decider, and/or Higher Manas. In the Course, Jesus simply calls this part of the mind "reason." Whatever we call it, that reasoning aspect of the intellect makes liberation from ego-enslavement possible. The Buddhi cannot, however, make the leap from understanding to knowing or from sensing to being. Our reasoning capabilities must, therefore, be laid down before we can experience the higher levels of restored Self-Knowing.

Maa Sarasvati, liberating the Buddhi with the heavenly music of her veena.

We'll talk more about Maa Sarasvati and her fellow "mothers" later in the series. For now, let's stick with Brahma, the presumed head honcho of the Hindu Trimuti. What is the Trimuti? The perceived Holy Trinity of Hinduism, basically. The three "gods" making up that triune unit -- and their cryptic and extraordinarily MISLEADING designations -- are:

Brahma = the creator
Shiva = the destroyer and rebuilder
Vishnu = the all pervasive preserver

To understand what these three INTERNAL forces are and do, we must accurately apprehend what Brahma creates, what Shiva destroys and rebuilds, and what Vishnu pervades and preserves. Most explanations I’ve read are off-base because they erroneously presume Param-Brahman either created or authorized the creation of the material universe for His own egoic purposes. And, as in most other ego-distorted religious teachings, that gaffe knocks everything else on its ear. So, to clarify the functions of these three “powers,” I’ve expanded their designations as follows:

Brahma = the creator of Brahmanda, the illusory realm of material existence
Shiva = the destroyer of Prakriti (illusion) and restorer of Riti (Divine Law and Order)
Vishnu = the all-pervasive Purusha or Cosmic Being whose presence preserves the Brahma-deluded Son of God's Holy Relationship with the other parts of its Self

As Hinduism rightly teaches, Brahmanda or "Brahma's Egg" is the subjective reality, illusion, or "maya" each person constructs through their defective lower-mind programming and prejudices -- all the chitta-baggage and karmic markers, basically, we've acquired in this and past lives. What we take in through our senses is objective enough, Hinduism correctly espouses, but we then contaminate or distort that data with our ingrained biases and judgments, both positive and negative. These encoded preferences can arise from individual, familial, or societal attitudes and influences (all the modes of worldly learning we must "undo" to awaken). Whatever their source, this chitta-conditioning distorts everything we observe, think, experience, remember, dream, and do in Brahmanda.

Brahma's Egg, with Vishnu floating inside with the tools needed for liberation

Because each of us constructs our own chitta-tinted version of reality, we are all complicit with Brahma in making Brahmanda. We are all, in fact, Brahmas ourselves, because we, too, are mis-creators of MAYA (the projected material illusion). Understanding this explains why the names Brahman and Brahma are so similar -- and also why Brahma is an unworshipped god in Hinduism. Their names may be alike, but the creative functions of Brahman and Brahma are as different (quite literally) as Day (Yin) and Night (Yang).

In a nutshell:

Brahman = Son of God as Perfect Co-Creator through the shared extension of Love
Brahma = Son of God as deluded miscreator through the separate projection of fear and guilt

The contrived Hindu Trimurti, composed of (from left) Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva

When considered in this light, we begin to see that the Trimuti represents the three facets of the Christ or Purusha Self we experience in the dream-realm: Brahma, who perceives the I and Thou as separate sinful selves pursuing their own interests; Vishnu, who perceives the I and Thou as separate Holy Selves pursuing related interests (healing separation-mindedness); and Shiva, who perceives the I and Thou as ONE Holy Self pursuing a single shared interest with God (Perfect Creation).

Clearly, the Hindu Trimuti is NOT analogous with the Christian Trinity. Attempts to liken the two are, therefore, an egoic exercise in futility. A more accurate synthesis of the chief powers of Hinduism and Christianity would look something like this:

Param-Brahman = God the Father in Heaven
Brahma = The Evil One or Satan deceiving us on earth
Shiva = The Son of God as Good Shepherd and Savior
Vishnu = The Holy Spirit as pervasive guide, comforter, and teacher

Although a vast improvement, this assimilation is still a case of two wrongs merging to make another muddled wrong, because neither the Hindu nor Christian trinities portrays what's really going on. Why? Because the at-one-ment process is all about SELF knowledge, which we restore or remember at graduating levels of perception as we advance through the curriculum. And Christianity, which erroneously insists Jesus is the ONLY Son of God, misses this point entirely. Hinduism sort of gets it -- or did once upon a time -- BUT, like everything else Brahma touches, the baseline Satya got buried over the ages under a slagheap of deception.

And, just to be clear, this happens to all religious and spiritual teachings. In most cases, the Truth is still there, but perverted beyond recognition by egoic obscuration. To exhume that core Truth, we have to dig through all the rubbish Brahma and his interfering agents introduced to cover it over. We must, in other words, question everything we presume to be true -- because it probably isn't. We then must return to the original scriptural source of the Truth under investigation. Because the Ego Mind adulterates all Higher Truth over time, the original source of anything of a spiritual nature will generally be the purest and most reliable. That's why I rely on the URText of the Course and the first English translation of the Holy Bible -- with the original Greek and Hebrew concordances as vital accuracy checkers.

Four ancient texts of varying ages comprise the Holy Vedas of Hinduism. Those four sacred texts are the Rig Veda, Sama Veda, Yajur Veda, and Atharva Veda.

What are the earliest -- and, therefore, most trustworthy -- scriptural texts of the Hindu religion? The short answer is: the four Vedas. The longer answer might be: the body of texts grouped under the heading Shruti -- a Sanskrit word meaning "that which is heard."  As the term implies, the Shruti corpus was passed down through word-of-mouth for many centuries before being written down. Originally revealed to "seers," "sages," or "rishis" as far back as 1250 BCE, those Shruti texts include the Vedas (Rig, Sama, Yajur, and Atharva) and their embedded post-Vedic or "Vedantic" collections: the early Upanishads, the Samhitas, the Brahmanas, and the Aranyakas.

I won't go into what those auxiliary collections contain at this time. What I will say is that, if compared to the Course, the Vedas would be the Text and auxiliary Song of Prayer, the Upanishads would be the Workbook for Students, and the Brahmanas would be the Manual for Teachers and Clarification of Terms.

As the earliest and most authoritative of the Shruti texts, the Vedas make up the foundational canon of Hindu theology. And, within that canon, the Rig Veda is universally regarded as the most ancient and sacred of the four. Despite this well-earned distinction, the Rig Veda is not the most widely studied among the Hindu scriptures. Why? For two reasons, in my estimation. The first is that it was composed in ancient Sanskrit, which (like Aramaic and Latin) is a "dead" language. The second is that, like most TRUE scriptural texts, the Rig Veda employs highly figurative language.

And when I say highly figurative, I mean symbolic language that makes the Old Testament read like Dick and Jane. 

Thus, only the very few who've studied Sanskrit and/or have the gift of illumination stand any chance of correctly interpreting the original Rig Vedic hymns or suktas. The rest have to make do with error-riddled translations and, if they're wise, a trustworthy Sanskrit dictionary or lexicon. And this largely explains why the slightly newer and marginally less reliable Upanishads have surpassed the Vedas as influencers of Hindu thought and tradition.

Of the 108 known Upanishads, the first twelve or so are considered the most important. These Mukhya or main Upanishadic texts are found mostly in the concluding sections of the Brahmanas and Aranyakas. For centuries, each generation memorized and passed down these teachings orally.

Yes, this is pretty dry stuff, so I'm keeping it brief. BUT my quick-and-dirty overview of the Hindu scriptures would be incomplete without at least a cursory mention of the secondary canon. That younger group of texts is categorized as Smriti -- or "that which is remembered." The major difference, apart from age, is that this body of texts is attributed to particular authors -- rather than anonymous rishis. The Smriti corpus includes the two great epics -- the Mahabharata (which contains the Bhagavad Gita) and the Ramayana -- as well as the Puranas. The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali are, I believe, also part of the Smriti corpus.

Although widely available in English, accurate translations of the Bhagavad Gita are hard to come by, as you'll discover later in this post.

Okay, so ... why am I boring you with all this academic stuff? For a couple of reasons. The first is that it will provide some context when I rattle off the names of these texts in this and future posts. The second and more immediate reason is that Brahma isn't mentioned in the Vedas -- and neither is the Trimurti. Both are, therefore, later contrivances -- inspired, no doubt, by the Great Deceiver himself (in his tireless campaign to replace Brahman as supreme "creator").

The earliest references to the Trimurti occur in the Mahabharata epic and the Maitreyan Upanishad -- a medieval addition to the Vedantic body of literature. In both cases, the word is mentioned only once. And, as a related footnote, the Maitreyan Upanishad also is the earliest Hindu text to mention Brahma by name.

Later perhaps we'll explore what the Maitreyan Upanishad says about Brahma; for now, I want you to open your mind to the indisputable FACT that both Brahma and the Trimurti are latter-day constructions that were shimmed into Hindu theology in the medieval period. And, from that day to this, that pesky little wedge has slanted everything else.

So, to square things up again, let's take with a grain of salt everything Hinduism professes about Brahma and the Trimurti. Yes, it's a tall order, but a necessary one in our ruthless quest for Satya. And if the Trimurti are suspect -- as they certainly are -- then so are their "consorts" or "wives."

In modern Hinduism, the three "wives" or "consorts" of the Trimuti "gods" are known collectively as the Tridevi. Individually, they are (from left) Lakshmi, Parvati, and Sarasvati.

Before we begin to scrape the Evil One's scales off the Hindu devi, let me state again that I do NOT profess to be an expert. I simply intuit what I intuit -- or rather, I recognize Satya shining through egoic conflation and trickery in whatever I'm guided to study.

When the Trimurti and Tridevi are paired as husbands and wives, Brahma is typically partnered with Sarasvati, Shiva with Parvati, and Vishnu with Lakshmi. Except that, confoundingly, Vishnu is also sometimes "married" to Sarasvati instead of Lakshmi, or to yet another devi named Mohini (who is, in fact, the personification of egoic desires).

So, what gives?

What gives, in part, is that the whole matchmaking exercise is a monumental fail because Brahma isn't a helpful deva. And having this imposter in the mix creates two major problems. The first is that it excludes Indra, the Hindu version of the Aleph or Father's Will aspect of Elohim. The second is that it forces an incompatible partnership between the Evil One and Sarasvati. If Brahma imprisons the Hamsa and Sarasvati helps free it, how can they rightly co-exist in marital bliss?

Sarasvati and Brahma, as sometimes partnered in Hinduism

When paired with Brahma, Sarasvati’s four arms are said to “mirror” her husband's four heads. In these ego-infected tales, Brahma’s role as “creator” is conflated with Brahman’s. What the Great Deceiver's four heads ACTUALLY represent are 1) conscious lower-mind thought and sensory perception (Manas); 2) the intellect's reasoning capacity (Buddhi or Higher Manas); 3) the unconscious part of the lower-mind storing our wrong-minded impressions, resentments, conditioning, judgments, and experiences (Chitta); and 4) the ego-body self-concept and individual sense of “I-am-ness” (Ahamkara).

As the Vedanta schools (those based on the Upanishads, rather than the Vedas) correctly profess, these four "veils" of the false self-concept must be released or dissolved as we cross, climb, or build the Bridge or Antahkarana between "heaven" and "earth."  As these wisdom schools also get right, that channel houses the chakras. How these teachings typically characterize the chakras is not, however, consistent with my understanding of these at-one-ment devices. As I understand them, the chakras are the metaphorical "windows" or "eyes" through which we see the world. If we look outward, through the Ego Mind's two eyes, we perceive a physical world plagued by war, famine, pestilence, and death. To see the world as the Soul-saving academy it actually is, we have to open the Spiritual Eye of the Christ Self. And that symbolic "single eye" looks inward, into the Temple of the Holy Spirit -- the shared Mind of the Atonement.

That seven-lidded "eye" restores our Holy Vision. But to reclaim that natural attribute of the Soul, we first have to dissolve the seven veils the Ego Mind manufactured to render that "single eye" sightless. And that is the function the chakras serve as we cross, climb, or build the Antahkarana.

The chakras are also, I strongly suspect, the eye-covered Tetrahedrons seen and described by the Hebrew prophet Ezekiel. Those wheels act like clockwork gears to turn the Dharmachakra, the Wheel of Earthly Existence. The outer rings (I believe) turn the wheel forward (clockwise), while the inner wheels turn the wheel backward (counterclockwise). I might be wrong about this, but I don't think so.

The specific meaning of the word Antahkarana is described somewhat differently in various dictionaries and schools of Hinduism. Based on my studies, the term refers to the inner organ or instrument via which the Soul returns to the Heart of its Being and True Purpose. And, just so we're clear, the Soul's True Purpose in the world is two-fold: First, it must forgive all the parts of its Greater Self for choosing separation and deception over Wholeness and Satya, and then it must join with those forgiven fragments to restore its Greater Self to Wholeness and Satya.

Does Jesus mention the Antahkarana in the Course? He does indeed -- BUT he calls it the "Bridge to the Real World," the "Bridge to Eternity," and the "Bridge of the Return." As the channel along which the chakras are supposedly set like gemstones, that same ethereal "Bridge" is what Yoga schools call the Sushumna "nadi." According to these teachings, that "nadi" forms the "spiritual spine" up which the mind-purifying "liquid-fire" (Kundalini) uncoils in serpentine fashion.

Kundalini is formed, I believe, when the Blood and Water Rays mix together or "marry" inside the Sushumna. 

In the Shandilya Upanishad, one of the Yoga Upanishads attached to the Atharva Veda, this same channel or Bridge is called the "Raja Path" or "Royal Road." More interesting still, the word "taro," as in Tarot, is a compound of the Egyptian words "tar" (road) and "ro" (royal). Thus (as I've said all along), the Tarot is meant to help us follow the Royal Road leading back to Self-Knowledge. This is affirmed by the appearance of the word "Taro" on the WHEEL OF FORTUNE card in the Rider-Waite deck. Rightly understood, that wheel symbolizes the Antahkarana.

THE WHEEL OF FORTUNE

And so does the Temple Menorah, whose central channel is the Bridge along which the first four chakras lie more or less in the manner shown below:

Moving forward, we'll discuss how the Menorah functions in much more detail.

So essentially, Brahma's heads represent the four levels of consciousness we must rise above to liberate ourselves from his "Cosmic Egg." The objects Sarasvati holds in her four hands aren't, therefore, intended to "mirror" Brahma's four heads; they're meant to lop them clean off. More to the point, the objects associated with Sarasvati represent the four "pillars" or "legs" of Dharma -- the righteous path we must follow in our quest for the Holy Grail of Self-Knowledge.

Like Sarasvati's objects, Nandi, the white-bull "vahana" of Lord Shiva, represents the four "pillars" or "legs" of dharma.

In the Rig Veda, dharma is also (allegedly) anthropomorphized as a cow that provides the "milk" of Transcendental Awareness our Souls require for liberation.

In many Hindu texts, including the Rig Veda, dharma is equated with a bull or cow who stands on four legs. Which four virtues those legs represent varies between sects. Generally, they are said to be 1) Austerity or Simplicity, 2) Cleanliness or Purity (especially sexual purity), 3) Truthfulness, and 4) Kindness. For Course students, the ideological legs upon which we tread the Royal Path are probably the first four characteristics of Advanced Teachers of God, as listed and described in the Manual for Teachers. Those four characteristics are (in order) Trust, Honesty, Tolerance, and Gentleness.

At another time, we'll explore the nuances of these dharmic "modes of being." For now, be aware that Hinduism encourages the development of these same four qualities. They are not, however, tidily grouped together anywhere I looked. So, it took some rooting around to find the best-fit terms and practices. The correspondences below might not be bang-on, but they should be pretty close:

Trust = Sraddha (total faith in God, the scriptures, and our intuitive guidance)
Honesty = Satya (complete authenticity in thought, word, and deed)
Tolerance = Samata (equanimity and non-judgment toward all beings)
Gentleness = Ahimsa (harmlessness or non-injury toward all beings in thought, word, and deed)

 

Indra, the Hindu "king of the gods," astride his white-elephant "vahana," Airavata.

Let move on to the god Brahma usurped when he appointed himself to the made-up Trimuti. As mentioned earlier, that god is Lord Indra, who the Rig Veda (allegedly) praises as the highest god in no fewer than 250 hymns. So, he must be pretty important, right? -- and, therefore, a major threat to Brahma's power over us (hence the Great Deceiver's deliberate erosion of Indra's importance over time).

If there were a Trimurti in the dream-realm, Indra would be the top dog -- hence, his designation as "king of the gods" in the Holy Vedas. He is not, however, the chief Atonement Power in the dream-universe. In the Hindu pantheon, that distinction belongs to Surya, the so-called "sun god." As already explained (I think), Surya represents the Greater Light of God, making him the Hindu equivalent of Elohim. Thus, Indra is to Surya what Aleph is to Elohim. We'll explore what the Rig Veda says about Surya and Indra in the future. For now, let's stick with the Trimuti, which would look like this, if such a patriarchal trio existed in the make-believe universe:

Indra = Aleph 

Shiva = Lamed 

Vishnu = Hey 

 

But wait -- because this contrived ensemble actually represents the three higher stages of restored Self-Awareness all Souls pass through on the Royal Road back to Heaven proper (Knowledge or Superconsciousness). And, working together on our behalf, these three "devas" of our own Higher Self produce the Living Water that progressively uncovers the Truth of our Being. As I currently envision the system, those threer "devas" of increasingly purified Self-Knowing and their Elohim equivalents are:

Indra = Aleph = God-Realization (we are one in God)

Shiva = Lamed = Christ-Realization (we are one Christ-Soul)

Vishnu = Hey = Vishvedeva-Realization (we are connected to the Souls in each other through Christ)

Below these three "deva-selves" are three evolving egoic "modes of being," which the Hindu scriptures refer to as "Gunas." To avoid total derailment, we'll talk about the Gunas in more depth at another time. For the sake of our current discussion, think of the Gunas thusly: 

Sattva = Discipleship or Vigilant Devotion to Satya Dharma (Piety)
Rajas = Initiation into Satya Dharma (Desire for Betterment)
Tamas = Rejection of Satya Dharma (Total Ignorance/Spiritual Denial)

 

Not sure how accurate this is in terms of where the Gunas fall on the wheel. What resonates is Lord Krishna playing the Call to Awaken on his flute and the snake-eating peacock peeking out from behind the wheel. 

Let's now plug the chakras into our evolving paradigm. As I presently perceive the framework, the correspondences are these:

Indra/Aleph Self-Knowing = Sahasrara or Crown Chakra
Shiva/Lamed Self-Knowing = Ajna or Brow Chakra
Vishnu/Hey Self-Knowing = Vishuddha or Throat Chakra
Yama/Yod Self-Knowing = Anahata or Heart Chakra
Sattva Guna = Manipura or Solar Plexus Chakra
Rajas Guna = Svadhishthana or Sacral Chakra
Tamas Guna = Muladhara or Root Chakra

Let's now check this line-up against the Holy Vedas. Do they support my conjectures? The short answer is: Sort of. Of the four, only the Atharva Veda mentions the Gunas by name (tribhir guebhi in transliterated Sanskrit), but this is good enough for now. What that Holy Text says in this regard is actually quite interesting:

There is a nine-gated lotus, covered under three bands of Gunas, in which lives the Spirit with the Atman within, that the Veda-knowers know.

Allow me to explain: The nine-gated lotus is also the nine-gated city mentioned in other Hindu scriptures. Presumably, that lotus or city is the Temple's Inner Altar, Fire Altar, or Holy of Holies, wherein dwell the Holy Spirit of the Christ Self and its dreaming Soul-fragments (the Atman). We know that the Divine Spark resides at the center of that Altar because Jesus says so in the Course. As the Atharva Veda explains, that Holy Place is "covered under" by the three Gunas, which encase it in the manner of bands or rings. Jesus describes something similar in the Course, without using the term Gunas. And finally, that "the Veda-knowers know" means that only those who sincerely seek Veda or (Self) Knowledge will know this Holy Place is within them.

What the nine gates represent is a discussion for another time (as I've only just come across this intriguing little rabbit hole). What the Atharva Veda says about the Gunas does, however, confirm that my conceptual framework is reasonably accurate. How so? Because those bands surrounding the lotus are almost certainly the gaps between the arms of the Temple Menorah (as the image below indicates). 

As "modes of being," the Gunas presumably span the distance between their foundational chakra and the one above. The Sattva Guna, for example, reaches from the Manipura to the Anahata Chakra, wherein the Buddhi and the Soul reportedly battle for domination.

A few paragraphs back, I split the seven levels of restored Self-Knowing between Devas and Gunas. That is not, however, the order presented in the Rig Veda. In that Holy Text, the dream-world is divided into three spheres, which are:

Upper Realm or World (Sky or Heaven)
Middle Realm or World (Atmosphere or Ether)
Lower Realm or World (Earth)

Before I attempt to diagram where the chakras fall on the Menorah, I should point out that our symbolic lampstand represents only the lower half or southern hemisphere of the actual Inner Instrument. In totality, the Spiritual Body's skeletal structure looks something like this:

  

Now we can better see how the Gunas encircle the Anahata or Heart Chakra in the manner of bands or rings (the gray spaces). We can also detect the cross formed by the chakra-bearing Bridge and the Seven Lamps. The black circles, meanwhile, represent the channels or "rivers" through which the Living Water travels around this at-one-ment apparatus. When viewed on a horizontal plane, this wheel or disc supports the Inner Altar, which descends inward from the center, like an inverted pyramid. The overshooting base of each Menorah forms the northern and southern points of the six-pointed Shaktona, Seal of Solomon, or Star of David, as shown below:

When viewed as a three-dimensional object, the Shaktona becomes a Merkabah -- a Hebrew word with Egyptian roots meaning "chariot." So, the chariots described in the various scriptures are in fact Merkabahs rather than actual animal-drawn vehicles. In the Old Testament, the word "chariot" was, in fact, an English replacement for the Hebrew word Merkabah. Thus, even the Chariot Throne of God is a Merkabah.

In this Merkabah rendering, we see the upside-down Prakriti triangle, the right-side up Purusha triangle, and the pyramidical Inner Altar jutting out of the center of the Purusha triangle. What we don't see is the skeletal double-menorah underneath -- or its mechanical lamps and chakras.

We'll talk more about these inner-space double-wheeled "chariots" in future posts. For now, be aware that the three syllables of Merkabah are said to break down as Light (Mer), Spirit (Ka), and Body (Bah). To be clear, Merkabah refers to the Spirit's Light Body, not anything physical. And, as I understand it, our Souls inhabit those traveling Light Bodies in-between physical incarnations (not all of which take place on earth).

With all that potentially new information crackling in your synapses, let's quickly survey a few other ways our "double-menorah" wheel is commonly portrayed.

In many schools of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, the same structure is the twelve-spoked Dharmachakra -- the Wheel of Right-Minded Living

The Bhavacakra -- a pictorial depiction of the teachings of Buddhism -- bears a remarkable resemblance to our double-menorah (with much more detailed symbolism)

In the Vedanta schools of Hinduism, the Antahkarana is sometimes depicted as a wheel.

In some areas of India, the various devas are assigned positions on Surya's Wheel in the manner depicted above.

Pretty interesting, right? And that's just a small sample.

Before closing today's discussion, I want to share something from the Bhagavad Gita allegedly referring to this revolving Dharmachakra -- and also interpret the surrounding verses with more acumen than can be readily found on the internet. This might get a bit tedious, so please bear with me.

In Chapter 3, verse 14, Krishna says to Prince Arjuna (in transliterated Sanskrit): Annat bhavanti bhutani parjanyat anna sambhava yanjnat bhavati parjanyo karma-samudbhavah.

Generally, this is translated more or less as follows:

All living beings subsist on food, and food is produced by rains. Rains come from the performance of sacrifice [yajna], and sacrifice is produced by the performance of prescribed duties.

Before I disclose what Krishna ACTUALLY said, let me ask this: Why would the Holy Spirit of the Christ Self (meaningfully assuming the form of Krishna as "charioteer") bother to explain to Arjuna that rains produce the grains we eat? I mean, honestly. Isn't that pretty mundane worldly intelligence? Furthermore, how is it even remotely helpful to a Soul preparing to battle the Ego Mind for dominance?

The answer is: it isn't the least bit useful because Krishna said nothing of the kind. Based on my own investigation, what he says in Bg 3:14 is more along these lines:

From purest minds [annat] in the present moment [bhavanti], all beings created by God [bhutani] offer a rainlike vibration [parjanyat] generated through thought-offerings [yajnas]. From these thought-offerings comes into being [bhavati] and makes possible [samudbhavam] the activity [karma] of Yanjnat (Lord Vishnu, the water-director or Holy Spirit).

The rain or, rather, rainlike vibration to which Krishna refers is, of course, the Om vibration, NOT physical rain -- which the next line bears out, when interpreted correctly. That line (Bg 3:15) reads: karma brahmodhavam viddhi brahm-akshara-samudbhavam tasmat sarva-gatam brahma nityam yagne pratishthitam.

This verse is commonly mistranslated as something akin to this:

The duties for human beings are described in the Vedas, and the Vedas are manifested by God Himself. Therefore, the all-pervading Lord is eternally present in acts of sacrifice.

The prevailing misapprehension that Brahma is the creator-god has seriously clouded the minds of most Gita translators -- even those purporting to be advanced swamis. So has the light-blocking idea that God demands sacrifices from those seeking divine assistance. Nothing is, in fact, further from the Truth because God only gives, in accordance with His own Holy Law of Giving and Receiving. To receive, we must give what we desire. And the egoic idea of sacrifice casts God in the unholy role of taker -- a role our Heavenly Father is utterly incapable of assuming. In my next post, I'll expand on my reasons for changing yajna from sacrifice (as commonly misinterpreted) to "thought-gift" (as the word actually means)

For now just be aware that this verse, in point of fact, says nothing whatsoever about sacrifice or the Vedas. Bringing the Vedas into the picture is the result of two major errors in understanding. The first of these is the presumption that brahmodhavam is a marriage between the words "Brahma" and "udbhavam," which means "produced or generated by or from." The second colossal faux pas is equating Brahma with the Vedas, when the two are, in fact, like oil and water. In the context of Hindu thought, Brahma rightly means "error, mistake, illusion, confusion, or perplexity" in reference to the fallibility of human perception. In Sanskrit, the word or name is a marriage of "brah" (solid form) and "ma" (to produce or create). So, Brahma refers to the wrong-minded thinking that produces solid form.  Veda, meanwhile, means "Knowledge."

And, when it comes to perverting the Bhagavad Gita's meaning, this is only the tip of Brahma's iceberg of deception.

In actuality, brahmodhavam isn't traceable as a Sanskrit word. So, the author of the Gita probably used some archaic form of Brahmodya, which refers to a Vedic ritual in which priests question their disciples to test their knowledge of the scriptures. Literally translated, Brahmodya means "to be spoken about Brahman." So, Brahmodhavam could mean "to speak about, praise, or invoke Brahman." Brahm-akshara, meanwhile, refers to the sacred syllable Om -- NOT to the divine sourcing of the Vedas. 

So, what Krishna actually says in Bg 3:15 is something closer to this:

Through the action [karma] of praising God [brahmodhavam] do we come to know [viddhi] the sacred syllable Om [Brahm-akshara]; and from that all-pervading [sarva-gatam] and eternal [nityam] thought-offering [yajna] everything is established in truth [pratishthitam].

The non-word brahmodhavam might also be an earlier spelling of brahmotsavam, which is a marriage of the words "brahm" and "otsavam." In this context, "brahm" means "grand," while "otsavam" translates as "special occasion" or "festival." And brahmotsavam is indeed the name given the major multi-day celebrations held on various special occasions at Hindu temples. Owing to Brahma's Truth-blocking cunning, the word is wrongly presumed to mean "Festival of Brahma." Brahma is not, however, the object of worship at these festivals. Typically, they are characterized as "cleansing ceremonies" honoring Lord Vishnu.

A statue of Vishnu astride Garuda being carried through the streets during a brahmotsavam procession in India.

If the word in verse 3:15 is indeed brahmotsavam, the passage would read: 

Through the action [karma] of the celebratory and cleansing Temple ceremonies [brahmotsavam] do we come to know [viddhi] the sacred syllable Om [Brahm-akshara]; and from that all-pervading [sarva-gatam] and eternal [nityam] thought-offering [yajna] everything is established in truth [pratishthitam]. 

And brahmotsavams are, of course, physical re-enactments of the Golden Circle "meetings" we hold in the Temples of our Higher Mind, wherein we give and receive the Holy Spirit's mind-purifying Living Water. And it is surely those "meetings" to which this verse refers, rather than their physical reflections. 

This brings us to verse 3:16 -- the one about the Dharmachakra. In transliterated Sanskrit, that passage reads: Evam pravartitam chakram anu-varta-yati ya aghayar indri-yar-amo mogham partha sa jivati. 

Below are two different but similar translations of this verse found on Bhavagad Gita websites hosted by swamis who, if truly enlightened, would know better:

O Parth, those who do not accept their responsibility in the cycle of sacrifice established by the Vedas are sinful. They live only for the delight of their senses; indeed their lives are in vain.

My dear Arjuna, a man who does not follow this prescribed Vedic system of sacrifice certainly leads a life of sin, for a person delighting only in the senses lives in vain.

How anyone came up with these outrageous misinterpretations is nothing short of astonishing. How the verse reads, word-by-word, is closer to this: Evam [thus] pravartitam [causing to turn] chakram [wheel] anu-varti [the obedient follower or fettered Soul exchanges] yati [through airborne extension or amplification] aghavar [the choice for fear, sin, pain, misery] indri [the five senses] yar [choice] amo [pleasure] mogham [uncertainty] partha [Arjuna] sa [all-pervading divinity, truth, and eternity] jivati [to return to the sustaining source of life].

When the syntax is polished a bit, Bg 3:16 reads more or less like this:

Thus, Arjuna, the fettered Soul causes the wheel to turn by exchanging, through airborne extension, the choice for fear, misery, sensual pleasures, and uncertainty, for the choice to return to the all-pervading, eternal, and divine source of its being.  

Big difference, right? And let this serve as a lesson in how grossly and widely scripture can be distorted by ego-duped interpreters, including those professing to be learned or enlightened. Or, as Jesus cautions us in the Gospel of Matthew, "Beware of false prophets" (7:15) because "if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a ditch" (15:14).

And on that salient note, let me end this long and meandering post with a passage from the Course that echoes Lord Krishna's teachings in Bg 3:14-16. The citation is from Workbook Lesson 49: God's Voice speaks to me all through the day. For greater clarification, I've added some parenthetical notations:

It is quite possible to listen to God's Voice [the Om vibration] all through the day without interrupting your regular activities in any way. The part of your mind in which truth abides [the higher, spirit part inside the Temple] is in constant communication with God, whether you are aware of it or not. It is the other part of your mind [the lower, ego part] that functions in the world and obeys the world's laws. It is this part which is constantly distracted, disorganized, and highly uncertain.

The part that is listening to the Voice of God is calm, always at rest, and wholly certain. It is really the only part there is. The other part is a wild illusion, frantic and distraught, but without reality of any kind. Try today not to listen to it. Try to identify with the part of your mind where stillness and peace reign forever. Try to hear God's Voice call to you lovingly, reminding you that your Creator has not forgotten His Son.

 A few paragraphs later, Jesus provides an exercise to help us hear the Om/Aum. If you don't yet hear the unstruck sound, I suggest you give it a try.

Listen in deep silence. Be very still, and open your mind. Go past all the raucous shrieks and sick imaginings that cover your real thoughts and obscure your eternal link with God. Sink deep into the peace that waits for you beyond the frantic, riotous thoughts and sounds and sights of this insane world. You do not live there. We are trying to reach your real home. We are trying to reach the place where you are truly welcome. We are trying to read God.

While attempting this exercise, you might also try repeating to yourself (as a Japa) the name we share with God (as per Workbook Lesson 183: I call upon God's name and on my own). What is that name? There are several; but the most powerful (in my experience) are Jesus Christ, Om or Aum, Sat Nam, or Om Tat Sat. Repeating the popular Hindu mantra "Om namah Shivaya," which essentially combines both Om and Christ, also works. And, just so you know, Om and Aum are both pronounced "O." And the grammatical rules of Sanskrit confirm my internal guidance on that score. So take with a grain of salt teachings that emphasize the "m" sound or instruct you to annunciate the three syllables A-U-M. As Sri Patanjali, Paramahansa Yogananda, Lord Krishna, and Master Jesus all tell us, the "prayer that contains all possible prayers" should be chanted in the mind rather than aloud. As anyone who hears the Om/Aum will confirm, there is no "m" sound present.

I hope you find my exploratory ramblings helpful. As we move forward, I'll endeavor to scrape Brahma's barnacles off a spate of other Hindu gods, including Agni, Rudra, Indra, Surya, the Ashvins, and the Maruts. Until then, Om Shanti Om, Namaste, and God Bless.