Hindu Monotheism

[Marcion]

I know that many people expect to find an objective or at least explicit truth about such matters in doctrine. I just don't think that Hinduism will be very compliant to such an expectation, although it is likely that very specific sects might.

But if you declare such sects or denominations that go against this as non-hindu or behaving non-hindu like, then you are doing exactly what they themselves do, i.e. declare themselves non-hindu.
Personally I think this whole distinction between so-called hinduism and so-called other faiths makes no sense. For the sake of sorting things the label is given, but it is no more than that, a label.

 

[LuisDantas]

But if you declare such sects or denominations that go against this as non-hindu or behaving non-hindu like, then you are doing exactly what they themselves do, i.e. declare themselves non-hindu.
Personally I think this whole distinction between so-called hinduism and so-called other faiths makes no sense. For the sake of sorting things the label is given, but it is no more than that, a label.

Did I give the impression that I would declare them non-Hindu? Sorry if I did. I did not mean to.

 

[Marcion]

Perhaps Duvduv could be more clear how or where he perceives certain hindu sects to be polytheistic.

 

[Vinayaka]

This is from the book by Dayanand Saraswati quoting the Vedas. I can say that about 98% of these quotes are fully compatible with the teachings of Judaism including the Ten Commandments. To me it is rather astonishing.

"By One Supreme Ruler is this universe pervaded, eve every world in the whole
circle of nature, He is the true God. Know Him, O man! and covet not unjustly the
wealth of any creature existing. Renounce all that is unjust and enjoy pure delight
- true spiritual happiness - by the practice of justice and righteousness which is
another name for true religion.YAJUR VEDA 40:1

"God teaches in the Veda "I, O men, lived before the whole universe came into
being, I am Lord of all, I am the eternal cause of the whole creation. I am the
source and giver of all wealth. Let all men look up to me alone as children do to
their parents. I have appointed different foods and drinks for all creatures to give
them sustenance so that they may live in happiness." RIG VEDA 10: 48, 5.

" I am God Almighty, I am the Light of the world like the sun. Neither defeat, nor
death, can ever approach me. I am the controller of the universe, know me alone
as the Creator of all. Strive ye diligently for the acquisition of power and wealth
such ( as true knowledge). Ask ye of me. May ye never lose my friendship. I give
true knowledge, which is real wealth, unto men who are truthful. I am the revealer
of Vedas which declare my true nature. It is through the Vedas that I advance the
knowledge of all. I am the prompter of the good and true. I reward those who
devote themselves to the good of humanity. I am the cause, I am the support of
all that exists in this universe. May ye never turn away from me. May ye never
accept another God in my place, nor worship him." RIG VEDA, 10:48, 5.

"God, O men existed in the beginning of the Creation. He is the Creator, Support
and Sustainer of the sun and other luminous worlds, He was the Lord of the past
Creation. He is the Lord of the present. He will be the Lord of the unborn
universe. He created the whole world, and he sustains it. He is Eternal Bliss. May
ye all praise and adore Him as we do." YAJUR VEDA, 13:4

So you found one quote from one sect that supports your ideas. That doesn't mean much. If you wear an ugly shirt, and walk out onto the street, asking people what they think of your shirt, in some time somebody will say it's beautiful. It's meaningless.

If you take all the philosophy of all the sects of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism together, it would be far less diverse than what's termed Hinduism. In other words, 95% of Hindus who aren't Arya Samaj, or aren't the sect you're quoting, would disagree.

Sure, some people agree. But that doesn't mean much in the grand scheme.

 

[Kirran]

If you're determined to find something, you will find it somewhere in Hinduism.

 

[duvduv]

So you found one quote from one sect that supports your ideas. That doesn't mean much. If you wear an ugly shirt, and walk out onto the street, asking people what they think of your shirt, in some time somebody will say it's beautiful. It's meaningless.

If you take all the philosophy of all the sects of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism together, it would be far less diverse than what's termed Hinduism. In other words, 95% of Hindus who aren't Arya Samaj, or aren't the sect you're quoting, would disagree.

Sure, some people agree. But that doesn't mean much in the grand scheme.

What you are saying is irrelevant. I wasn't quoting from some sect. The reference was to the Vedas themselves, which is quite different from what is called now Hinduism.

 

[duvduv]

So what? I was pointing out direct statements from the Rig Veda. Why is that a problem?

 

[LuisDantas]

What you are saying is irrelevant. I wasn't quoting from some sect. The reference was to the Vedas themselves, which is quite different from what is called now Hinduism.

That is exactly the kind of attitude that has never helped the Abrahamics and is not likely to be missed in Hinduism either.

 

[Marcion]

But don't Hindus accept the story of the Ramayana and of Krishna to be historical events?

My sect (although not strictly Hindu) do consider Krishna as wel as Shiva to be historical personalities and the Mahabharata as a more or less historical account. However we see the much older Ramayana (as well as the god hero Rama) as only partly historical but mostly mythical.

Krishna and Shiva being godlike Guru's or Masters does not make them literally the same entity as Ishvara in their historical physical form because God or Ishvara is beyond time and space and those Guru's took a physical body within a specific space and time. But in a mysterious way They do represent Ishvara by their expressions in the past.

So since Ishvara has no form (He is all forms as well as beyond form), we worship or serve Him in the form He took as Guru in the past as it is too difficult to have a devotional relationship with Ishvara in His absolute (true) state. But we know that He is actually formless and omnipresent at the same time. Many Hindus believe you can progress much faster spiritually via a devotional relationship with Ishvara in the form of your choice, in the form of your Guru or Ishta Deva.

What one believes to be a true historical expression(s) of Ishvara differs per sect.
So the actual physical body of the Guru or Ishta Deva is not seen as Ishavara but His personality and expression (including His teachings) is seen as connected to or heavily associated with Ishvara and therefore a bridge to the Goal in life.

Perhaps it is a bit like the relationship Christians have with Jesus or for some even with their Bible (and Sikhs with their gurus and Holy Book).
In some monotheist sects it is a taboo to associate God with any great teacher but especially in tantric sects this is seen as normal, the Guru is considered as God, eventhough we know that the expression of the Guru is not His absolute reality as He is beyond form and time.

 

[von bek]

Was this a teaching in the Vedas regstfinr Kali as Brahman/Ishwara?

The Devisukta, found in the Rig Veda, is presented with Mahadevi speaking in the first person. I hesitate to even mention this as I am not trying to engage in sectarian polemics, but I think you need to see that your sources are omitting much that is important and thus giving you an incomplete picture of the Vedas.

Devīsūkta - Wikipedia

 

[duvduv]

Has anyone read any of the chapters, especially 7-9 of the book by Dayanand Saraswati on these types of matters. Very interesting, and the book is available online in pdf in English of course.

 

[Marcion]

Has anyone read any of the chapters, especially 7-9 of the book by Dayanand Saraswati on these types of matters. Very interesting, and the book is available online in pdf in English of course.

Not yet, but i would like to read it. Do you have a link to it?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So what? I was pointing out direct statements from the Rig Veda. Why is that a problem?

Many Hindus are not Scripture based.

Peace be with you

 

[sayak83]

Has anyone read any of the chapters, especially 7-9 of the book by Dayanand Saraswati on these types of matters. Very interesting, and the book is available online in pdf in English of course.

Here's a plan. Read the Vedas.
Holy Rig Veda : Book 03 Part 02

 

[duvduv]

Not yet, but i would like to read it. Do you have a link to it?

I downloaded this one: http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org/download/satyarth_prakash_eng.pdf

 

[Marcion]

I downloaded this one: http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org/download/satyarth_prakash_eng.pdf

Thanks!

 

[SomeRandom]

So what? I was pointing out direct statements from the Rig Veda. Why is that a problem?

Because you might as well be quoting Dante's Inferno for all some care. I mean it's fun and all. And you gotta feel for poor fake Virgil having to drag his embarrassing perpetual fainting fanboy fake Dante through the 9 circles. But not all are even interested. My Hindu family, for example, have never once read any Scriptures. They are still highly sincere devoted Hindus all the same. And have been for generations upon generations.

 

[Vinayaka]

Because you might as well be quoting Dante's Inferno for all some care. I mean it's fun and all. And you gotta feel for poor fake Virgil having to drag his embarrassing perpetual fainting fanboy fake Dante through the 9 circles. But not all are even interested. My Hindu family, for example, have never once read any Scriptures. They are still highly sincere devoted Hindus all the same. And have been for generations upon generations.

I don't think that fact (that it's true for maybe 90% of all Hindus) has sunk in, gotten past the conscious to the subconscious. That will take some doing.

 

[SomeRandom]

I don't think that fact (that it's true for maybe 90% of all Hindus) has sunk in, gotten past the conscious to the subconscious. That will take some doing.

 

[LuisDantas]

Hmm, maybe that is a good reason to state that Hinduism is not a revealed religion.

It may well be that a revealed religion would have more of a central role for scripture.