Could you expand on that? I've sort of wondered the same thing. I think that is where, for instance, people are getting Brahma mixed up with Brahman, though I know that doesn't make sense.
There is only one Supreme Being, God. God manifests as many deities but all these deities are the same Personality. In addition to those direct manifestations, there are what we call gods. These gods are personifications of the infinite aspects and energies of the One God. This means that even every planet, every element, every river etc. has it's own 'soul' or personification.
So when people think that Hinduism has millions of Gods, they are heavily misunderstanding the belief system. These 'gods' are just as created by God as you and I are.
Aside from that, What are your thoughts on the validity of Hari Krishna, do you think it is a false system or just different?
I assume you mean the Hare Krishna movement. The actual term is Gaudiya Vaishnavism. It is a tradition that began in the 1400s in north east India. I think this movement is highly valid.
But what you and most people in the world are familiar with is the particular Gaudiya Vaishnava institution called ISKCON, which was founded in the 1900s. The founder is responsible for translating many scriptures into English and bringing knowledge of Vaishnavism to the world.
The problem that I have with this particular institution is that it is quite extreme, literal and dualistic. I think this is why it was so successful actually, in the West. In many respects, it was palpable to Christians and Jews where other more major forms of Hindu philosophy may not have been.
Gaudiya Vaishnavism is formed on the idea that God is also his Creation. But unlike monistic beliefs, it also holds that creation is distinct. That means, for example, that while you are part of God's own self, you are also eternally distinct (as opposed to separate).
Prabhupada, founder of ISKCON, was highly dualistic. Dualism in Hinduism is comparatively recent in history and I personally believe dualistic philosophy exists in Hinduism only as an influence from Islam. This dualistic philosophy posits that God and his creation are completely separate, just like Christians and Muslims believe.
Therefore, where Prabhuapada strays from the rest of Hinduism with his literalism, extremism and dualism, I believe is where there is no validity. But when you get passed his commentaries and into the deep philosophies of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, I think there is great validity.
