I think we should proudly accept that Hindus are pagans. What's wrong with that?
Pagans and Hindus Together: One Billion Strong
Pagans and Hindus Together: One Billion Strong
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Hindus are all pagans
- Thread starter Pleroma
- Start date
[youtube]OOdvE9yvs9M[/youtube]
Facts about Paganism - YouTube
I think Hinduism does share similar beliefs and religious values. We are Pagans.
Facts about Paganism - YouTube
I think Hinduism does share similar beliefs and religious values. We are Pagans.
Don't you know that the proto Indo-Iranian religions branched off from the proto Indo-European traditions?
Irrelevant; they weren't European any more than Indo-Iranians.
The Proto-Indo-Europeans were thought to live somewhere around the Black Sea.
Me Myself
Back to my username
Honestly I do associate paganism with hinduism, but it is true that paganism basically means "not christian" pretty much.
Though both the term Hindu and pagan are very wide and undefined xD
Both two were originally pejorative if I am not mistaken.
In any case, I do feel a connection.
The term is so loose, that it is truly subjective indeed.
MD
qualiaphile
Who wasn't any more European than the Indo-Iranians?
Me Myself
Back to my username
The hindu europeans part you are wanting to integrate it unnecessarily:
"Pagan" and "Heathen" redirect here. For other usages, see Pagan (disambiguation) and Heathen (disambiguation)
Sculpture of the goddess Venus of Arles, late 1st century BCE.
Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "country dweller", "rustic"[1]) is a blanket term, typically used to refer to religious traditions which are polytheistic or indigenous.
It is primarily used in a historical context, referring to Greco-Roman polytheism as well as the polytheistic traditions of Europe and North Africa before Christianization. In a wider sense, extended to contemporary religions, it includes most of the Eastern religions and the indigenous traditions of the Americas, Central Asia, Australia and Africa; as well as non-Abrahamic folk religion in general. More narrow definitions will not include any of the world religions and restrict the term to local or rural currents not organized as civil religions. Characteristic of Pagan traditions is the absence of proselytism and the presence of a living mythology, which informs religious practice.
The Proto-Indo-Europeans.
ratikala
Istha gosthi
I would have to go with the opinion that pagan is a title bestowed on all manner of spirit or earth worshiping non christian traditions and has been aplied where ever the christians have troden .
here in england the original pagans werein many parts druid , which makes the more recently termed title pagan to be an umbrella term covering many simmilar traditions .
but yes , where hinduism encompases a reverence for elemental spirits or gods it could be said to relate to pagan thought , I have freinds here who are practicing pagans , and I would say that there is a common ground on some beleifs , it is also easy for them to understand and accept many hindu gods and it would appear that paganism has become rather eclectic in that many are hapy to adopt any god which appeals regardless of local culture , however there are stricter traditions who uphold very local more druidical principles . bit both seem to live in harmony with respect for each others individual choices of practice ,much like the majority of hindus .
here in england the original pagans werein many parts druid , which makes the more recently termed title pagan to be an umbrella term covering many simmilar traditions .
but yes , where hinduism encompases a reverence for elemental spirits or gods it could be said to relate to pagan thought , I have freinds here who are practicing pagans , and I would say that there is a common ground on some beleifs , it is also easy for them to understand and accept many hindu gods and it would appear that paganism has become rather eclectic in that many are hapy to adopt any god which appeals regardless of local culture , however there are stricter traditions who uphold very local more druidical principles . bit both seem to live in harmony with respect for each others individual choices of practice ,much like the majority of hindus .
Surya Deva
Well-Known Member
Of course Paganism does not have to mean something which is non-Christian. Paganism generally means a polytheistic religion, and the term is sometimes used to refer to the pre- Islamic arabic religions. The original Vedic people were pagan people, much like the rest of the Indo-Europeans. The original Semitic people were also pagan. In fact pretty much every religion in the world was pagan. Monotheism is a late development and seems to arise only in urban and organized societies.
Surya Deva
Well-Known Member
To add: The claim that the Vedic people were always monotheistic is a historical anachronism, because no religion in any part of the world in around 2000BCE was monotheistic. The Indo-European people were all polytheistic and they share similar pantheon of gods, and the Vedic people are part of IE people, and we can surely enough see that they share the same gods and other cultural commonalities like common myths, common social orders, common religious practices. This is clearly evidenced in the earlier hymns of the Vedas which are clearly polytheistic, it is only in later hymns do we find an attempt to unify the deities into one, such as in the Purusha Suktam, Nasadiya Suktam. It is very similar to how the Semitic people initially had many gods(Elohim) and then reduced their number of gods to one(yaweh) and this is justified with the religious doctrine of a jealous god, meaning a god that wants no other gods before him. Similarly, the same happens in the middle East in the early middle ages, the many Arabic pagan gods are reduced to the worship of only one of those gods, Allah, originally a moon god.
In many ways monotheism can be seen as the need of an urban and organized society. It is very difficult to organize a society that is polytheistic, because it is fragmented into various groups with different deities, hence the need arises to only one have one god and one overarching religious order. The Abrahamic religions have been then most successful in creating true monotheistic religions. In order to differentiate their monotheism from the older polytheistic religions they coined the pejorative term "pagan"
Hinduism is a weird one, because it consists of several different religions(Vaishnavism, Shiavism, Shaktism, Smartism, Brahmanisn, Tribalism.) There is a general sense in Puranic Hinduism that there is only one God, and every other God is just a manifestation of that one God(an idea that is rooted itself in later Vedic people) but depending on which tradition you belong to that one God could be Vishnu/Krishna, and all other god's manifestations or Shiva and the other god's its manifestations. Thus Puranic Hinduism is more accurately henotheism rather than true monotheism.
Brahmanism, which is a minority in Hinduism today and only practiced by higher caste Brahmins is very similar to the old Purva Mimassa tradition, doing rituals to many gods, but animal and human sacrifices are obviously not done anymore. For the Brahmanical Hindus there really is no one supreme god, but many devas(agni, indra eetc). Brahmanical Hinduism is more accurately polytheism.
Smartism which is used to refer to the Shankara Vedanta tradition is a much smaller part of Hinduism but forms the philosophical core of Hinduism. Vedantic Hinduism is based on the Jnana tradition and stems from the Upanishads. The entire Jnana tradition covers the Gamut of the Darsanas. Jnana Hinduism is mostly atheistic, for out of the 6 classical Darsanas, only 2 are clearly theistic(Vaiseshika and Nyaya) Samkhya is atheistic, Yoga is pragmatic theism, but in character atheistic; Uttra Mimassa and Purva Mimassa are atheistic. Even in the case of Nyaya-Vaieshika which accept a supreme creator god, this god is still more like Aristotles prime-mover god, and Nyaya-Vaieshika do not prescribe worship of this god. Hence the Jnana tradition in general is atheistic. Out of all these schools only Vedanta(Uttara Mimassa) has survived. Thus Smartism is best described as monistic.
Tribal Hinduism simply refers to many of the indigenous tribal cultures, probably going back to the times of the early Indus Valley civilization, which is very similar to Shamanism. Thus it is best described as Shamanism.
Thus Hinduism is a mixture of henotheism, polytheism, monism and shamanism. It would be incorrect then to say all Hindus are pagan, if pagan is understood to mean polytheistic. In fact the term "Hinduism" to designate a common religion is a fallacy(See same faith debate forum: The fallacy of 'Hinduism'.)
The only true dharmic monotheistic religion is Sikhism.
In many ways monotheism can be seen as the need of an urban and organized society. It is very difficult to organize a society that is polytheistic, because it is fragmented into various groups with different deities, hence the need arises to only one have one god and one overarching religious order. The Abrahamic religions have been then most successful in creating true monotheistic religions. In order to differentiate their monotheism from the older polytheistic religions they coined the pejorative term "pagan"
Hinduism is a weird one, because it consists of several different religions(Vaishnavism, Shiavism, Shaktism, Smartism, Brahmanisn, Tribalism.) There is a general sense in Puranic Hinduism that there is only one God, and every other God is just a manifestation of that one God(an idea that is rooted itself in later Vedic people) but depending on which tradition you belong to that one God could be Vishnu/Krishna, and all other god's manifestations or Shiva and the other god's its manifestations. Thus Puranic Hinduism is more accurately henotheism rather than true monotheism.
Brahmanism, which is a minority in Hinduism today and only practiced by higher caste Brahmins is very similar to the old Purva Mimassa tradition, doing rituals to many gods, but animal and human sacrifices are obviously not done anymore. For the Brahmanical Hindus there really is no one supreme god, but many devas(agni, indra eetc). Brahmanical Hinduism is more accurately polytheism.
Smartism which is used to refer to the Shankara Vedanta tradition is a much smaller part of Hinduism but forms the philosophical core of Hinduism. Vedantic Hinduism is based on the Jnana tradition and stems from the Upanishads. The entire Jnana tradition covers the Gamut of the Darsanas. Jnana Hinduism is mostly atheistic, for out of the 6 classical Darsanas, only 2 are clearly theistic(Vaiseshika and Nyaya) Samkhya is atheistic, Yoga is pragmatic theism, but in character atheistic; Uttra Mimassa and Purva Mimassa are atheistic. Even in the case of Nyaya-Vaieshika which accept a supreme creator god, this god is still more like Aristotles prime-mover god, and Nyaya-Vaieshika do not prescribe worship of this god. Hence the Jnana tradition in general is atheistic. Out of all these schools only Vedanta(Uttara Mimassa) has survived. Thus Smartism is best described as monistic.
Tribal Hinduism simply refers to many of the indigenous tribal cultures, probably going back to the times of the early Indus Valley civilization, which is very similar to Shamanism. Thus it is best described as Shamanism.
Thus Hinduism is a mixture of henotheism, polytheism, monism and shamanism. It would be incorrect then to say all Hindus are pagan, if pagan is understood to mean polytheistic. In fact the term "Hinduism" to designate a common religion is a fallacy(See same faith debate forum: The fallacy of 'Hinduism'.)
The only true dharmic monotheistic religion is Sikhism.
Last edited:
Maya3
Well-Known Member
That is how I understand it too. The people living in Europe before Christianity came and pushed their religion on everyone. They had their own, like Druidism and I assume that there were several others too? In Sweden they had Norse for example.
Pagans are what the Christians called those who didn't convert. (though I'm not sure how old the word Pagan itself is, they may have been called something else with the same meaning).
From what I understand now, some people are Pagan and some are Wiccan, but Wiccanism is a newer religion based on Pagan beliefs?
Maya
MochaRadha
Member
Pagan comes from paganus which actually means farmer or country dweller. It does not mean non christian. Or polytheism
Then I was a pagan, but got reformed by moving to the city.
But really, we should could care less what someone calls us: Idiot, Bent on Getting to Hell, Pagan, Joe, Mac, Dimwit, Flock of Foolish Followers. In the meantime, I'll just call myself Hindu of the Saiva variety. It won't change the inner core of Being either way.
MochaRadha
Member
i can see the point of using the term pagan for people who use nature in their practices,but thats it. i see god in nature so i kinda identify as neo pagan i guess
Starsurfer93
Soul-Searcher
Wicca is based of female equality and kinda mixes with Paganism but the thing is it is just really meant for female superiority and has more politics in it then theology. I personally know some Wiccans and it is like Shakti but focuses on the female being superior to the male. That is it basically, more of a parody religion
Actually, from what I understand that isn't true. Wicca was started in England during the first half of the 20th century. It was popularized by Gerald Gardner (a man) in the 1950s and focuses on reverence toward the Divine Feminine (Moon Goddess) AND the Divine Masculine (Horned God) as well and the complementary polarity they create. It's like they're each two halves of a larger whole, one being unable to exist without the other, as well as neither half being superior. So there isn't really any feminine superiority, at least not within the core teachings of what is considered Wicca.
Now there are theological beliefs within the Wiccan community that vary from traditions emphasizing pantheism, to polytheism, to even (which I think is the type of Wicca you may be referring to) Monotheistic goddess worship upheld by Dainic Feminist witches. At the same time though, most don't consider these groupings to be exclusive of one another, so people who adhere to Wicca often move between these ideas and sometimes combine ideas from the various sects
Basically Wicca can be a rather broad term. You can't really label it a religion based on Female Superiority, especially since it has such a great deal of diversity.
Starsurfer93
Soul-Searcher
I certainly would. While it was used for a long time by Christian expansionists to describe "anything that isn't Christianity", it has since, both in recent past and current day been confined to a less broad definition. In fact, I feel that with such a vast array of significant differences between Religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto and what is currently considered Pagan, it could even be considered totally false to classify all Non-Abrahamic religions as Pagan.
I think it's a meaningless term as it has no real definition beyond non-Abrahamic.