Is Hindu monotheism incompatible with Abrahamic monotheism?

[Martin]

The majority of Jews see Christian theism as incompatible with Judaism. Based on the majority opinion should we accept Jews and Christians believe in the same God? The majority of the world’s inhabitants do not follow the Christian Faith. Should the Christian Faith be rejected in the court of majority opinion?

Obviously not. But likewise, should we accept that Abrahamics and Hindus believe in the same "God", based on monotheistic misconceptions?
Should we ignore the fact that Hinduism is a Dharmic tradition, and not an Abrahamic tradition?

 

[Vinayaka]

Obviously not. But likewise, should we accept that Abrahamics and Hindus believe in the same "God", based on monotheistic misconceptions?
Should we ignore the fact that Hinduism is a Dharmic tradition, and not an Abrahamic tradition?

No we shouldn't. But many do, and that's exactly why they say 'all same, all same'.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't believe there such a thing as Hinduism monotheism. Some Hinduism may believe in a main God who they worship, but usually also worship other Gods on specific days. For instance most Vaishnavites (Vishnu or Krishna worshipers) will also celebrate Shivaratri (day for Shiva).. And all Hindus worship Ganesh. There are no real monotheists (although some may call themselves that).

They only call themselves that because they're not interested enough in the topic to have heard of henotheism, or they nod their heads in agreement in discussions, just to get through the discussion, and back to worship, which is far more about God, than an intellectual discussion of its nature.

Edited to add ... If it''s true that there is no such thing as Hindu monotheism that that makes the OP moot. One can't have any realistic discussion about something that doesn't exist.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Okay. Thats how "you do not view". Thanks for that. Just that I dont see that in post Vedic doctrine. But I suppose everyone has their prerogative to follow what they think.

This is not my view that I state because I am not qualified in the least to make "my view". I am just stating the post-vedic view. Maybe this image I attach will be better than me saying things. Anyway, I explained that the duality of Brahman has so many aspects, this way and that way. You have taken Nirguna as your primary or highest aspect. View attachment 47308

Where are you finding differences between this quote and what I said?

Yet. What do you mean by "attributes" of the Abrahamic God. Please explain. I would like to understand what you have in mind.

I listed them in my first post in this thread, post #2, I think. But to expand on what I said there, I mean attributes or qualities such as emotion, omnipotence, desire, attachment, etc.

 

[firedragon]

Where are you finding differences between this quote and what I said?

You said that Nirguna Brahman is primary. So the conflict.

I listed them in my first post in this thread, post #2, I think. But to expand on what I said there, I mean attributes or qualities such as emotion, omnipotence, desire, attachment, etc.

Can you show me which scripture you are referring to? Specifically!

 

[SalixIncendium]

Your answer is balanced. You do note two sides of this issue. I am tempted to ask.

Would you also agree that there are great differences in conception of God in Madhavacarya’s dvaita and Shankaracharya’s advaita?

I am asking this question to @Vinayaka too.

Spoiler: Gaudpaada’s Mandukya Karika on dvaita advaita relationship

From Mandukya Karika

Dvaitinah, the dualists - who follow the views of Kapila, Kanada, Buddha, Arhat,1 and others; nis- citah, are firmly rooted; svasiddhanta-vyavasthasu, in the methodologies leading to their own conclusions. Thinking, `The supreme Reality is this alone, and not any other', they remain affiliated to those points of view, and finding anyone opposed to them, they become hateful of him. Thus being swayed by likes and dislikes, consequent on the adherence to their own conclusions, parasparam virudhyante, they stand arrayed against one another. As one is not at conflict with one's own hands and feet, so also, just because of non-difference from all, ayam, this, this Vedic view of ours consisting in seeing the same Self in everyone; na viru- dhyate, is not opposed; taih, to them, who are mutually at conflict. Thus the idea sought to be conveyed is that the perfect view consists in realizing the Self as one, for this is not subject to the drawbacks of love and hatred.

I don't know much about Madhva, and would have to do a bit more homework before I can answer this intelligently. I'll make it a point to do this when I have a bit more time.

However, I do see a difference in the views of God between dvaita and advaita.

 

[SalixIncendium]

You said that Nirguna Brahman is primary. So the conflict.

The snip you posted reinforces this. It states that Nirguna Brahman is the higher aspect, and Saguna Brahman is the lower aspect. I don't see a conflict.

Can you show me which scripture you are referring to? Specifically!

I probably could, but quite honestly, I think it could be a waste of time debating over interpretation of scripture.

Are you denying that these attributes and qualities exist in the generally accepted view of the Abrahamic God? Because in my experience as an upbringing as Catholic, I can assure you that this is what I was taught in mass and in CCD.

 

[firedragon]

Where are you finding differences between this quote and what I said?

Oh I see. What you meant is Brahman is the highest, but Nirguna is the higher of two between Nirguna and Saguna. Okay I get it. But still, Nirguna and Saguna are both two aspects of Brahman right? Thats the whole point.

I probably could, but quite honestly, I think it could be a waste of time debating over interpretation of scripture.

Thanks.

That ends it brother.

Peace.

 

[atanu]

I don't know much about Madhva, and would have to do a bit more homework before I can answer this intelligently. I'll make it a point to do this when I have a bit more time.

However, I do see a difference in the views of God between dvaita and advaita.

I have written on it in a subsequent post. You may wish to begin from that point.

...

 

[SalixIncendium]

Oh I see. What you meant is Brahman is the highest, but Nirguna is the higher of two between Nirguna and Saguna. Okay I get it. But still, Nirguna and Saguna are both two aspects of Brahman right? Thats the whole point.

From a human's ability to perceive Brahman, yes, there appear to be two aspects. But in ultimate or absolute reality, there is only one.

 

[atanu]

I don't believe there such a thing as Hinduism monotheism. Some Hinduism may believe in a main God who they worship, but usually also worship other Gods on specific days. For instance most Vaishnavites (Vishnu or Krishna worshipers) will also celebrate Shivaratri (day for Shiva).. And all Hindus worship Ganesh. There are no real monotheists (although some may call themselves that).

That is due to influence of Shankaracharya’s ‘smarta’ tradition wherein five deities are worshipped equal as the Brahman.

Smarta tradition follows the Vedic methods enshrined in Upanishads such as Mahanarayana.

But Madhava Vaisnavas and Veera Shaivas too are primarily monotheists. Furthermore, if the definition of monotheism is worship of one God, most of Hinduism is that —- albeit in a very different form from the monotheism of the Abrahamic religions.

...

 

[soulsurvivor]

But Madhava Vaisnavas and Veera Shaivas too are primarily monotheists.

I have never witnessed at a single Hindu ritual where Ganesh has not been invoked and worshipped first!

Are you saying Madhava Vaisnavas and Veera Shaivas don't involve Ganesh in any of their rituals?

 

[atanu]

I have never witnessed at a single Hindu ritual where Ganesh has not been invoked and worshipped first!

Are you saying Madhava Vaisnavas and Veera Shaivas don't involve Ganesh in any of their rituals?

I edited my previous post a bit. Please see that.

Usually Iyengars and Iskonites will not prescribe worship of any other deity. But as I said, the influence of Smarta tradition has penetrated even the traditional Iyengars.

...

 

[soulsurvivor]

I edited my previous post a bit. Please see that.

Usually Iyengars and Iskonites will not prescribe worship of any other deity. But as I said, the influence of Smarta tradition has penetrated even the traditional Iyengars.

...

You did not answer my question - do Iyengar's invoke Ganesh at any of their rituals or not?

I have personally been at a Shivaratri celebration and puja at a major ISKCON temple! Perhaps you have not been around much?

Maha Shivaratri 2020 | The Night of Lord Shiva (from ISKCON)

 

[Vinayaka]

You did not answer my question - do Iyengar's invoke Ganesh at any of their rituals or not?

I have personally been at a Shivaratri celebration and puja at a major ISKCON temple! Perhaps you have not been around much?

Maha Shivaratri 2020 | The Night of Lord Shiva (from ISKCON)

Not just that, but it could be easily debated that Radha is worshipped separately sometimes. God and Goddess. (that's still 2, a last count) Not sure I've ever seen a temple where Krishna stands alone.

Edited ... Temple History | Sri Sri Radha Radhanath Temple

 

[metis]

Of all the major religions, Hinduism is by far the most variable, even to the point whereas it's darn near impossible to define. One Hindu theologian I read a few decades ago said that probably the only definition that works is that it is a religion that first developed in the Hindus Valley.

My reason for posting this is that if one Hindu says "Hinduism is...", they'll likely run across other Hindu's who will not agree. Some may see this as a weakness, but I tend to perceive it as a strength since I am of the belief that no religion nor branch of a religion has a monopoly on the Truth.

 

[Martin]

The snip you posted reinforces this. It states that Nirguna Brahman is the higher aspect, and Saguna Brahman is the lower aspect. I don't see a conflict.



I probably could, but quite honestly, I think it could be a waste of time debating over interpretation of scripture.

Are you denying that these attributes and qualities exist in the generally accepted view of the Abrahamic God? Because in my experience as an upbringing as Catholic, I can assure you that this is what I was taught in mass and in CCD.

I was raised as a Catholic too, and if I'd thought Brahman was like the Abrahamic God then I would have kept my distance. Particularly after so many years as an "atheist" Buddhist.
Discussions like this are interesting, but ultimately academic. I think you have to experience different traditions first hand, in some depth, to really understand them.

 

[Martin]

Of all the major religions, Hinduism is by far the most variable, even to the point whereas it's darn near impossible to define. One Hindu theologian I read a few decades ago said that probably the only definition that works is that it is a religion that first developed in the Hindus Valley.

My reason for posting this is that if one Hindu says "Hinduism is...", they'll likely run across other Hindu's who will not agree. Some may see this as a weakness, but I tend to perceive it as a strength since I am of the belief that no religion nor branch of a religion has a monopoly on the Truth.

Hinduism is certainly the most diverse and pluralistic "religion" I've encountered. But in the end, you need to make a choice about where you're going to dig your well.

 

[metis]

Hinduism is certainly the most diverse and pluralistic "religion" I've encountered. But in the end, you need to make a choice about where you're going to dig your well.

Well, well, well.

The name I give my well is "I Don't Know" because I don't know, but I have dug it as close as I can to the two wells named Truth and Love.

 

[Martin]

Well, well, well.

The name I give my well is "I Don't Know" because I don't know, but I have dug it as close as I can to the two wells named Truth and Love.

Not a bad choice. Though for me these are things you find on the journey, sometimes more by luck than design. The destination is something else. Maybe it's just a need to keep exploring.