does Hinduism provide that?

[Gaura Priya]

excuse my ignorance about Hinduism, but how many deities provided by Hinduism?

do you consider them all are gods "universe creator" or what? are all powered equally or someone is more powered than others

thanks for your patience.

Different groups of Hinduism will give you different beliefs. Some believe in one form of God, and some believe in the different forms of the same God. Hinduism is so vast to understand, but it takes a little polish to bring out the glitter!

In Vaishnava Hinduism we believe in One God (Vishnu), and all the other gods are angels. However, there are many different ideas in different sects of Hinduism, from Shaivism, to Shaktism, to Vaishnavism, to Arya Samaj!

 

[haribol]

[FONT=&quot]Let us forget divisive religious beliefs. Religion is politics and what we need is not a religion and what is in it. What is in it also always unimportant and we have to sieve through them or else we will be siding with the ridiculous and irrational part of it like Hitler. Let us get into the core values of religion not its surface [/FONT]

 

[Vinayaka]

*edit*

Sorry, Sir, but all religions are not the same. Who is Yahweh? I've never heard of him. Which state in India is he commonly worshipped?

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

hello every body.

i don't know anything about Hinduism, Just the name, but i found some comments of people here saying it's too spiritual believe

so, i'd like to ask in Hinduism, when your soul is close and there's a lot of troubles you are facing, and you really feel that no refuge and no way for your problems and troubles to be solved what you do?

when i'm facing that indeed i just pray to Allah and asking him to support me and not to let me alone in that trouble, maybe i cried but usually i feel better after that conversation and in many cases my requests were answered, could Hinduism provide that? or what you are doing ?

What you are doing is indeed the best thing to do. Hinduism has it's own version or something similar to your practice, it is spiritual only to people who strictly follow it, I'm sure all religions of the world are equally spiritual and no religion is more superior than the other.

Although most of the posts of this thread have gone off topic, they have added some valuable information, to get relief you may incorporate some mental exercises from Hinduism and Buddhism, which don't violate your present religion. Like focusing on your breath. Or mentally repeating 'Allah' for 15 minutes in the morning and evening, if you don't do namaaz.

In Hinduism, there is only one ultimate reality, that is what most of intellectually enlightened Hindus call God, it is wrong to say God is named 'Brahamn' in Hinduism, this term is more of a pointer or concept. There are three primary deities who are worshiped depending on the temperament of the individual. It is widely accepted within Hinduism that these forms are just accessible forms of the one ultimate reality. Main aim of Hinduism is 'Moksha' i.e liberation from this cycle of life, universe, heaven and hell and uniting with God. 'Moksha' is the ultimate goal/objective.

 

[spiritualhitchhiker]

Sorry, Sir, but all religions are not the same. Who is Yahweh? I've never heard of him. Which state in India is he commonly worshipped?

'Yahweh' is a misspelling of the God who spoke with Moses, who is worshiped in Abrahamic religions.

 

[Omkara]

Sorry, Sir, but all religions are not the same. Who is Yahweh? I've never heard of him. Which state in India is he commonly worshipped?

It is so refreshing to see posts like this. Universalism reduces everything to the Loweat Common Denominator.

 

[Sumit]

Universalism reduces everything to the Loweat Common Denominator.

True, But the word 'Yahweh' here promotes Christianity and not Universalism.

 

[chinu]

hello every body.

i don't know anything about Hinduism, Just the name, but i found some comments of people here saying it's too spiritual believe

so, i'd like to ask in Hinduism, when your soul is close and there's a lot of troubles you are facing, and you really feel that no refuge and no way for your problems and troubles to be solved what you do?

when i'm facing that indeed i just pray to Allah and asking him to support me and not to let me alone in that trouble, maybe i cried but usually i feel better after that conversation and in many cases my requests were answered, could Hinduism provide that? or what you are doing ?

There's only one God who works for all, only the praying methods are differnt.

 

[Jainarayan]

I wish people would learn to discriminate between the meanings of the words universalism and syncretization. Universalism means what Chinu has pointed out. Hinduism does accept universalism in that it is accepting as valid, all beliefs for those who follow those beliefs. Judaism is valid for a Jew, Buddhism is right for a Buddhist, Hinduism is right for a Hindu. Hinduism accepts this universalism, used in its proper meaning. Syncretization is the blending and melding of different ideas and religions, which is what people get a wedgie over.

 

[Omkara]

I wish people would learn to discriminate between the meanings of the words universalism and syncretization. Universalism means what Chinu has pointed out. Hinduism does accept universalism in that it is accepting as valid, all beliefs for those who follow those beliefs. Judaism is valid for a Jew, Buddhism is right for a Buddhist, Hinduism is right for a Hindu. Hinduism accepts this universalism, used in its proper meaning. Syncretization is the blending and melding of different ideas and religions, which is what people get a wedgie over.

Oh come on, both syncretism and universalism are new age phenomena that are to be condemned. At least syncretism has some history in Hindu practices,though not in sxripture. Universalism has none. The neo-hindu idea of all ideas being correct is moronic and intellectually dysfunctional. The world can either be real or an illusion. There is eithet eternal hell or there is'nt. Two contradictory beleifs cannot be true at the same time. Neither is reality malleable by the personal whims and fancies of a person.

 

[Jainarayan]

The neo-hindu idea of all ideas being correct is moronic and intellectually dysfunctional.

Sources?

I'll give you one word that refutes your "neo-" (another hackneyed term)... Gandhi. Read what he said about universalism. Neo, huh?

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Oh come on, both syncretism and universalism are new age phenomena that are to be condemned.

I feel no need to condemn anyone. I am not an enlightened master who am I to condemn others. I am still searching for the truth.

At least syncretism has some history in Hindu practices,though not in sxripture. Universalism has none. The neo-hindu idea of all ideas being correct is moronic and intellectually dysfunctional.

I know of no Hindu Saint or tradition that teaches all Idea's are correct. I do know of people accusing others of believing this. I believe this is a straw man argument put forward by some.

The world can either be real or an illusion.

This is way to simplistic. Even Sankara said that there are three ways of looking at existence (satta):

-vyavaharika
-paramarthika
-pratibhasika

There is eithet eternal hell or there is'nt. Two contradictory beleifs cannot be true at the same time. Neither is reality malleable by the personal whims and fancies of a person.

Madhavacharya believed in an eternal Hell. Are you saying he is not a Hindu? Hinduism is a very big tent, You find all kinds of idea's taking shelter under this tent.

 

[Omkara]

Madhavacharya believed in an eternal Hell. Are you saying he is not a Hindu? Hinduism is a very big tent, You find all kinds of idea's taking shelter under this tent.

I know. Madhvacharya is my favourite among the three major acharyas, and I have read his works extensively, though I do not agrer with all of his ideas, and certainly not the concept of eternal hell. Madhvacharya's concept of eternal hell is very different from the abrahamic hell, by the way.

In any case, my point was not that either belief is right or wrong, but that the existence and non existence of an eternal hell are mutually contradictory suppositions that cannot be reconciled. Only one of them can be an accurate description of reality at a time, since one presupposes the non-existence of the other.

 

[Omkara]

Sources?

I'll give you one word that refutes your "neo-" (another hackneyed term)... Gandhi. Read what he said about universalism. Neo, huh?

Gandhi is a neo by even the most narrow definition of the term.

Please enlighten us how the doctrine of beginningless karma and reincarnation and that of created souls and one life can be both correct at the same time.

 

[Omkara]

This is way to simplistic. Even Sankara said that there are three ways of looking at existence (satta):

-vyavaharika
-paramarthika
-pratibhasika

Correction- ONLY shankara said this. And what you are saying here is essentially a misunderstanding of Shankara's words. Saying that the world is real from a vyavharika point of view is like saying that dream objects are real from the point of virw of the dream. It would be more accurate to say that dream objects arecunreal objects that appear real in the illusory construct of the dream. It is stupid to say the world is real from a vyavharika perspective, as the state itself is an illusion.

 

[Maya3]

Oh come on, both syncretism and universalism are new age phenomena that are to be condemned. At least syncretism has some history in Hindu practices,though not in sxripture. Universalism has none. The neo-hindu idea of all ideas being correct is moronic and intellectually dysfunctional. The world can either be real or an illusion. There is eithet eternal hell or there is'nt. Two contradictory beleifs cannot be true at the same time. Neither is reality malleable by the personal whims and fancies of a person.

We try to be polite to each other in this community and usually don't call other peoples comments moronic and dysfunctional.

Actually if you do believe that God is everything, than all people who practice a religion IS worshiping God. That is it. It has nothing to do with New Hinduism, it's a logical conclusion.

You are right that all theology cannot be correct at the same time, especially if there are contradictory explanations on what is going on.
BUT that just means that some people have a less direct route to God, or a muddier window to see God through.
All religions are trying their best to reach God.
Hinduism has a better understanding of this than say a fundamentalist Christian that tells people that they have to do it THIS way or they will burn in Hell forever.
It is a GOOD thing that our dharma is more open minded and understanding, not a bad thing.

Maya

 

[Jainarayan]

Gandhi is a neo by even the most narrow definition of the term.

Please enlighten us how the doctrine of beginningless karma and reincarnation and that of created souls and one life can be both correct at the same time.

To answer your question: "how the doctrine of beginningless karma and reincarnation and that of created souls and one life can be both correct at the same time"... created souls and one life have nothing to do with devotion to God and striving to reach him. Whether one life or 114 billion lives, you live a life the best you can, as if it were your only life. So don't strawman.

Now, ordinarily I wouldn't do this publically, but I'm going to say it publically as a heads-up to the other regular long time posters here: Don't start your one-upmanship word games and snotty little attitude that you pull(ed) at the "other site" before being banned. You won't engage me in conversation anymore, because I know you and your way, in other words "I got your number".

Shubhamastu.

 

[Jainarayan]

...some people have a less direct route to God, or a muddier window to see God through.
All religions are trying their best to reach God.
Hinduism has a better understanding of this than say a fundamentalist Christian that tells people that they have to do it THIS way or they will burn in Hell forever.
It is a GOOD thing that our dharma is more open minded and understanding, not a bad thin.

Maya

And there you have it.

There is another site I frequent, a weightlifting site where of all places this would be discussed. There is one regular poster who is a die-hard bible literalist and actually stated publically that everyone will burn in hell if they don't accept Jesus as the Lord, God, and Savior. I quoted passages from the Bhagavad Gita, namely 18.65 and a few others citing that God does not ask for much. I'm sure I'll get ripped on there too. Meh, it's my karma. People just don't like me.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

And what you are saying here is essentially a misunderstanding of Shankara's words.

I disagree. I have covered this subject at least 3 times in the past. So I will try reframe my idea from a different point of view. ( This is because I know I tend to repeat my self to much )

Sankara also traveled all over India installing the Sri Yantra in Mother Temples. Then he wrote one of the great pieces of devotional literature the world has ever seen the Saundarya Lahari or "Waves Of Beauty" ( How the worshiper is inundated with divine splendour). Is that name for Bhaktas or what? This text is also a commentary on the Sri Yantra. Since this scripture is used by folks who follow Advaita and Shakta schools ( mostly by Samatva but also used by the Kaula school) The Shakta see the world as not only real but a manifestation of God Herself. So it would seem that Sankara contradicted himself on this. As we study his Philosophy and devotional literature it becomes clear that both are true and all the commentators I have read agree with this. This includes the great Sankaracarya Pujyasri Candrasekharendra Sarasvarti Swami that both views are workable from different points of view.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Correction- ONLY shankara said this.

In his commentaries, Adi Sankara talks about 99 different predecessors of his Sampraday. So he was not the only one. Just the best thats why he lasted and the others did not.