Does it matter if the Devi/Devas are real?

[Sha'irullah]

This is sort of a big issue with some Hindus but I am not overly familiar with Indian history (at all) so sorry if my question seems ignorant.

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?
The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

 

[Poeticus]

This is sort of a big issue with some Hindus but I am not overly familiar with Indian history (at all) so sorry if my question seems ignorant.

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?
The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

Namaste,

The answers are so varied like the millions of different snowflake shapes.
You will never get a definitive answer as primordial. Especially not from a Vedicist like me, whose sole foundation is based off of the Holy Shri Shruti Rig Veda. Maybe you can be more specific with this question, dear Archer-ji? It would be easier for me to gift you an answer.

M.V.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Namaste,

The answers are so varied like the millions of different snowflake shapes.
You will never get a definitive answer as primordial. Especially not from a Vedicist like me, whose sole foundation is based off of the Holy Shri Shruti Rig Veda. Maybe you can be more specific with this question, dear Archer-ji? It would be easier for me to gift you an answer.

M.V.

Well I love variation in opinions, life would be boring without it.

But what I wish to know is that if you found out that a certain event or person in the texts were unhistorical would this affect you.

Imagine you are a devout Krishna devotee. Would it destroy your faith if you found out that Krishna was not a historical person as the Bhagvad Gita dictates. What if all of the events found within it were just mythological in nature, would this effect your opinion.

 

[Poeticus]

Well I love variation in opinions, life would be boring without it.

But what I wish to know is that if you found out that a certain event or person in the texts were unhistorical would this affect you.

Imagine you are a devout Krishna devotee. Would it destroy your faith if you found out that Krishna was not a historical person as the Bhagvad Gita dictates. What if all of the events found within it were just mythological in nature, would this effect your opinion.

Namaste,

Dear Archer-ji, would it destroy your faith if you found out that Muhammad was not a historical person as the Holy Quran dictates? What if there is no God named Allah? What then, dear sir?

M.V.

 

[Twilight]

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?

Namaste :namaste

It depends if you have a stronger faith in that which is true, or untrue.

The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

I don't think the 'validity' of the religion would be affected either way. Beliefs within Sanatana dharma are so diverse it is more the effect that can be measured as the religion, rather than the cause.

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

Being devout does not necessarily equate to being more spiritually advanced. I think the worship of something real is more productive than something unreal. If you think of people who worship celebrities what are they worshiping? They are worshiping a persona and an image that is given to them in an complete idealised package... this 'worship' is easy. The 'person' that they worship doesn't exist.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Namaste,

Dear Archer-ji, would it destroy your faith if you found out that Muhammad was not a historical person as the Holy Quran dictates? What if there is no God named Allah? What then, dear sir?

M.V.

It would not effect me at all. I know for a fact nothing is as it seems and nothing is entirely accurate. I am not that great of a Muslim to begin with to be honest, I have not the slightest idea of why I even try

 

[Vinayaka]

This is sort of a big issue with some Hindus but I am not overly familiar with Indian history (at all) so sorry if my question seems ignorant.

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?
The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

Personally, I have never viewed the Gods as historical or human-like at all. That is only man's creation to enable some sort of feeling about them. That sort of history is irrelevant to me, because we here and now is the time. God and gods are real, but not in that sense. I pray to an energy, often depicted in human form, but quite often not as well. (the Siva Lingam comes to mind.)

History is important, your personal; history, because I need to remember the lessons that Siva granted me.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

=Sterling Archer;3427386]This is sort of a big issue with some Hindus but I am not overly familiar with Indian history (at all) so sorry if my question seems ignorant.

Your excused..lol

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?

Well personally if the Historical things that are recorded in Mahabharata were not true, i would actually not be too worried, as long as it teaches us something worth while (which it does) it would not bother me. Indian History is vary old and long, and there is bound to be some misinformation. As for other spiritual texts I think most of them have truth in them already.

The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

Not for me, i am not much of a fan of the Puranas, i respect them and i believe there are some truths in them, again its the same thing, it is what these stories teach us that matters is what i think.

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

I believe Krishna was a Historical figure (although not 100% sure) and a Yogi, which is clear from the Gita (this I'm sure of), i still consider myself a Hindu.

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

Namaste,

Very interesting question.

It wouldn't destroy my faith because my faith doesn't depend on their physical existence to begin with. Is it nice to think that Krishna existed at one point? Sure. The romantic in me would love that. But I think what matters more is what we take from the stories of the Devas "lives". The Stories from the Mahabharata don't have to have actually have happened for the meanings behind them to speak some kind of truth. Sometimes, through story and fable it is easier for people to grasp. I came to Hinduism by way of the Ramayana. I recognized it as a tremendous achievement on a narrative level - part of that came from the fact that so many thought provoking issues were handled in an artful and relate-able way. That is the magic of using story to teach.

Lakshmi's existence has always been more abstract than physical for me. I am fond of the image of her, and am drawn to depictions of her, but I have never been fooled into thinking that "This image is Lakshmi - this must be what she looks like". Did she walk this earth a a physical being? No more or less than you and I walk it as fragments of the divine right now. In that sense the devas are very "real".


:camp:

 

[Jainarayan]

Legend and myth (used as 'story', not 'fantasy') are usually based in fact. I think many of the characters in the stories are based on historical figures, e.g. Krishna, and perhaps even Rama. Someone who was at my house one time saw a picture of Lord Ganesha on the wall and asked if people believed such a being ever really walked the earth. I said I did not believe there were many, if any, who do. These are representations of the attributes and powers of the deities. For all we know, Maa Durga or Maa Kali could have been a particularly fierce and skilled warrior. Think of Boudica. Maa Saraswati could have been a famous teacher and artist. The puranas are morality tales, imo. One has to look very deeply, but there is usually a moral to the stories.

 

[StarryNightshade]

This might be because I'm a western Hindu, but here is my opinion:

It is 100% irrelevant if the Devas are real or not. I personally don't think they are literally real, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. They are the many faces of an otherwise infinite reality and we gave them personalities to help us connect with God easier. Ganesha is there when I need wisdom and guidance. Shiva is there to remind me not to be taken over by my ego. Krishna is there when I'm feeling down and need a pick-me-up.

It isn't the physical body or appearance of a Deva that counts. It is how they help us and their intangible characteristics that do.

 

[Vinayaka]

There are devas and Mahadevas, God, and gods. I believe they are all real. But whether or not a person believes in them is irrelevant to their existence.

 

[Luke Morningstar]

I myself debate what are Gods every day. In one conversation, Gods might be the compassion in my heart. In another, Gods might be the unknown force that began the observable universe. In another, God might be a trickster getting into nothing but trouble.

Whether I call them God, gods, devas, devis, Jesu, Yahweh, Quan Yin, Allah, Maa, The Force, Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any other words only matters to me. Words point to things. No need to get stuck on them.

If anyone thinks that the concept of Ganesha refers to an elephant headed being somewhere in the universe, that influences our lives, I have some bad news. But if the concept of Ganesha helps you find wisdom, feel protected, or find the strength up all those painful emotions and digest them in your big powerful belly (all belly's are big and powerful when Ganesh is near) into healing light and art, then I say, "welcome to the cosmic party."

It's the same with every single being in every story ever told, whether they are called devas, Gods, or Fictional Characters. Worship the ones that bring you happiness.

"Truth has nothing to do with words. Truth can be likened to the bright moon in the sky. Words, in this case, can be likened to a finger. The finger can point to the moon's location. However, the finger is not the moon. To look at the moon, it is necessary to gaze beyond the finger, right?" - Zen traditional.

It doesn't matter what our fingers look like or how "well" they point. We just need to agree that we're pointing at anything. Then we can start talking about what we're pointing at.

 

[Sb1995]

They're real.

 

[Kalidas]

Would it matter? Not particularly. Would change the religion? I don't think by much. the best way I can explain this is by a comparison. In Christianity Jesus is 100% necessary to exist for the religion to survive. Hinduism though is not reliant on a person or even for God to exist(I think) because Hinduism is about dharma. It's all in HOW you live and not WHY you live. Do I believe Kali Maa ever slayed some scary demon and then got drunk on his blood and almost killed all of mankind? Nope. Do I believe the story has significance in teaching a good lesson? Yep. Did she exist physically on the planet? Nope. Does she exist in my head and my heart and helps me become a better person? Yep.

Even if I were to become an atheist I think Hinduism would still be a big part of my life.

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

This is sort of a big issue with some Hindus but I am not overly familiar with Indian history (at all) so sorry if my question seems ignorant.

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?
The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

I know that this was posted a while ago, but perhaps you should read Smaraṇam's post from HDF on this topic, it's quite thorough and provides another perspective...

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

This is sort of a big issue with some Hindus but I am not overly familiar with Indian history (at all) so sorry if my question seems ignorant.

Does it matter if the events told in the Mahabharata or other scriptural texts are true or not?
The existence of Krishna, Shiva or Lakshmi for example. Whether the deeds or existence of these individuals is true or not would this change the validity of the religion?

I have known Hindus who do not believe that Krishna is a real historical figure but they are devout Hindus nonetheless. They only view such stories as contemplative for focusing on god.

It all depends on what you mean by 'true' as the depth of meaning is reflected within your own soul.

The 'tales' all have a personal significance and I also believe they were composed for that intent, based (or partly based) on actual historical events.

Sometimes, they are little more than parables, other times they are ethical/moral dilemmas, mostly, God is represented as a triumph of the human spirit over adversity or evil and the establishment of Dharma resulting.

So, whatever level you read/study these holy texts from, depends on how open/advanced and awakened you are spiritually.

In the end, it doesn't matter if they are true (Advaitin) when one is totally immersed in the teachings of Adi Shankara, but yes, they are very important, significant and true and I wouldn't be a Hindu if I said otherwise - and now, I am being openly and totally facetious.

Om Namah Shivaya.

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

BTW, why does the thread title say "Does it matter if the Devi/Devas are real?" when "devI/deviH" (goddess) and "devas/devaH" (god) are both singular whereas "are" is plural? Perhaps you mean to write, "does it matter if the devyaH/devaaH are real" instead.

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

BTW, why does the thread title say "Does it matter if the Devi/Devas are real?" when "devI/deviH" (goddess) and "devas/devaH" (god) are both singular whereas "are" is plural? Perhaps you mean to write, "does it matter if the devyaH/devaaH are real" instead.

Does it matter that I didn't understand a word of that?

Om Namah Shivay

 

[Poeticus]

Hehe. Done.