Something that I didn't like about Hinduism

[Antibush5]

Was that the gods were aspects of Brahman, it made them seem more like paintings, rather then dieties. It strips them of personality, makes them appear very hollow.
Kind of turned me off Hinduism.
Also, the complete none violence, I mean I am all for talking things through, but sometimes you need to fight.
Does anybody get what I am saying?

 

[Andal]

Was that the gods were aspects of Brahman, it made them seem more like paintings, rather then dieties. It strips them of personality, makes them appear very hollow.
Kind of turned me off Hinduism.
Also, the complete none violence, I mean I am all for talking things through, but sometimes you need to fight.
Does anybody get what I am saying?

Namaste Antibush,

I think your problems with Hinduism are based on misunderstandings. To address your first problem, only Advaita Vedanta maintains that deities are aspects of Brahman. There are a number of other Vedanta philosophies who do not believe this. I fall under Acintya Bhedabheda and we believe that Krishna is the supreme lord and Brahman is related to his energy. If you read the Srimad Bhagavatam you will see that Sri Krishna is most definitely anything but hollow.

Hindus aren't completely non-violence. If you read the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna advises Arjuna to fight because that is his duty. Arjuna wanted to go the way of complete non violence but Krishna urged him to follow his duty. Krishna himself destroyed many demons. We are not completely non violent, we just believe that violence has a specific place and time.

Hope this helps.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Antibush5]

Namaste Antibush,

I think your problems with Hinduism are based on misunderstandings. To address your first problem, only Advaita Vedanta maintains that deities are aspects of Brahman. There are a number of other Vedanta philosophies who do not believe this. I fall under Acintya Bhedabheda and we believe that Krishna is the supreme lord and Brahman is related to his energy. If you read the Srimad Bhagavatam you will see that Sri Krishna is most definitely anything but hollow.

Hindus aren't completely non-violence. If you read the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna advises Arjuna to fight because that is his duty. Arjuna wanted to go the way of complete non violence but Krishna urged him to follow his duty. Krishna himself destroyed many demons. We are not completely non violent, we just believe that violence has a specific place and time.

Hope this helps.

Aum Hari Aum!

Please tell me of these philosophies? Or give me their names so I can study them myself.
I might actually convert back, though I have kind of been effected by my short time away from Hinduism.

 

[Madhuri]

Was that the gods were aspects of Brahman, it made them seem more like paintings, rather then dieties. It strips them of personality, makes them appear very hollow.
Kind of turned me off Hinduism.
Also, the complete none violence, I mean I am all for talking things through, but sometimes you need to fight.
Does anybody get what I am saying?

Not really...everything is an aspect of Brahman. You and I are too. We are still individual beings with personality and uniqueness.

Also, what do you mean about not being able to fight? I don't think that's true...

 

[Andal]

Research Dvaita, Dvaitadvaita, Vishishtadvaita, Shuddhadvaita, and Acintya Bhedabheda. All of these schools have different understandings of one's relationship with Brahman. As Madhuri pointed out we are aspects of Brahman however that doesn't make it supreme. Think of it more as an energy. All of these schools will have different philosophies on the topic and maybe you'll find one you're comfortable with. If you're not, that's ok too.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Antibush5]

Not really...everything is an aspect of Brahman. You and I are too. We are still individual beings with personality and uniqueness.

Also, what do you mean about not being able to fight? I don't think that's true...

Now you made me feel a bit down now, I feel like I am not an individuel at all.
It would be better, if we were manifestations, made, but not actually part of it.
It just seems so, mind-hive like, if you get my meaning.
Also, by not fighting I mean non-violence.

On a different note, I found a religious practice, that I feel I can really connect too, offering my own blood to the gods, sure it seems a bit grissly and some might say stupid. But that seems to touch something deep in my soul. But I guess Hinduism wouldn't exactly approve of that.

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe a reasonably orthodox Hindu would say that you shouldn't expect aspects of a deity to be much alike your understanding of a painting. Hindu Gods tend to be very artistically represented and to leave very strong impressions.

As for the second matter, I suggest you research a bit on the Bhagavad Gita; besides being a very popular Hindu religious text, its main theme is very related to your worry. Suffice to say for now that you're likely to find agreement among Hindus on that.

Edit: Ninja'ed by Hindus. Thay aree tekin aur jewbs!

 

[Madhuri]

Now you made me feel a bit down now, I feel like I am not an individuel at all.
It would be better, if we were manifestations, made, but not actually part of it.
It just seems so, mind-hive like, if you get my meaning.
Also, by not fighting I mean non-violence.

These are dualistic school of Hinduism too that fit the profile you like.
But I have to say, I don't understand your feeling. Just because we are all connected doesn't mean we have no self. We are eternal individuals, manifest of a particular energy of God. So how do you get 'not an individual' from that?

As for non-violence, it is certainly recommended. But as long as you believe in karma, you have to realise that any act of violence committed will come back to you. A person who is wise, mature probably wouldn't desire to commit violence anyhow.

 

[Madhuri]

Also, Taosim seems a strange religion to convert to if you enjoy committing violent acts...?

 

[Antibush5]

These are dualistic school of Hinduism too that fit the profile you like.
But I have to say, I don't understand your feeling. Just because we are all connected doesn't mean we have no self. We are eternal individuals, manifest of a particular energy of God. So how do you get 'not an individual' from that?

As for non-violence, it is certainly recommended. But as long as you believe in karma, you have to realise that any act of violence committed will come back to you. A person who is wise, mature probably wouldn't desire to commit violence anyhow.

Well isn't the goal of Hinduism for you to rejoin with the eternal Brahman? The ultimate goal seems to be to abandon the self and join with god, essentially abandoning all your individuelity.
But what you say makes sense, but it dosn't feel right for some reason.

I also agree that mature people don't desire to commit violence, but I was really reffering to self-defensce.

 

[Andal]

Well isn't the goal of Hinduism for you to rejoin with the eternal Brahman? The ultimate goal seems to be to abandon the self and join with god, essentially abandoning all your individuelity.
But what you say makes sense, but it dosn't feel right for some reason.

I also agree that mature people don't desire to commit violence, but I was really reffering to self-defensce.

That's not my goal at all. My goal is to enter Goloka and spend eternity with Krishna in divine lila. The self isn't abandoned. We are all aspects of Krishna, think of Krishna as the sun and we are the tiny rays. Each of us is individual but also the same. Brahman is what unites us all but it isn't the final aspect. All of us are reflections of different aspects of Krishna and we don't just disappear into void at that conclusion of the path, we re-enter Krishna's spiritual world. We go back home.

Self defense is allowed in Hinduism as well as serving in the military. Acts of unwarranted aggression however are not.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Madhuri]

Well isn't the goal of Hinduism for you to rejoin with the eternal Brahman? The ultimate goal seems to be to abandon the self and join with god, essentially abandoning all your individuelity.
But what you say makes sense, but it dosn't feel right for some reason.

I also agree that mature people don't desire to commit violence, but I was really reffering to self-defensce.

You have to go with what feels right to you. So if Hinduism is not your path then of course that is fine. But I do think that perhaps you may be misunderstanding some concepts.
You are right about the idea of merging with Brahman, but there are varieties of beliefs within Hinduism. Particularly dualistic school of thought in Hinduism do not believe in this merging. They tend to believe in a more Abrahamic scenario of heaven and hell.

And of course self-defence is ok. You can't not defend yourself! There's nothing against that.

 

[Metempsychosis]

I might actually convert back, though I have kind of been effected by my short time away from Hinduism.

Lol...You don't need to convert back..Taoism is fair enough.Tao te ching is more than impressive (for me) .

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Well isn't the goal of Hinduism for you to rejoin with the eternal Brahman? The ultimate goal seems to be to abandon the self and join with god, essentially abandoning all your individuelity.
But what you say makes sense, but it dosn't feel right for some reason.

I see know reason to covert back to Hinduism with that said.

Your goal is what you want it to be. There are no forced goals in Hinduism.

The four Goals of life, Dharma (Good behavior), Artha(wealth), kama (desire/love), and moksha (liberation).

Any of the above goals are ok. The one mandatory goal is Dharma. Everything must paired with that.
The one thing is, Moksha is the only goal that in the long term reduces suffering.

Moksha is looked at different ways. In Advaita Vedanta, most sects Shivaism, and most Shaktis, liberation is merging with the divine at this very life. To others Vishnavas (most not all) It is heaven after death. To me they still attack suffering head on do there being lost in the love of Krishna.

Some Adviatans also have the same view that the lovers of Vishnu have. They want to taste the sugar not become the sugar. They want to keep their identity and love god not merge into Him.

Some even go between the two all the time.

If you want to become rich and have a Hot wife and have sex all day long. If you are honest and a good citizen you can go for it. This is an acceptable goal. The only thing is in the long run. Hindu philosophy teaches that this will not reduce your suffering or increase you knowledge of how to live in the world.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I am somewhat influenced by Tantra. Am I allowed to give my 2 cents here? Brahman is only the collective of all life, that doesn't make the gods or any other life non-complex with their own personalities. Brahman has millions, unlimited attributes. Creator, sustainer, destroyer, etc. Now if you see that all the gods are different, and these are all aspects of Brahman, it doesn't make them mundane at all. Brahman IS.

 

[kaisersose]

Well isn't the goal of Hinduism for you to rejoin with the eternal Brahman? The ultimate goal seems to be to abandon the self and join with god, essentially abandoning all your individuelity.
But what you say makes sense, but it dosn't feel right for some reason.

That is Advaita which is only one belief system, among several.

Anyway, your self as you know it, ends with the death of the body. If you believe in reincarnation, you have already lived through several bodies - which you cannot recall. Similarly, when this present brain goes, all memory ends and the self as you know it, does not exist anymore.

In short, the Advaita position of losing identity is not something to pull you down.

 

[Antibush5]

In short, the Advaita position of losing identity is not something to pull you down.

You make a good point.

 

[Riverwolf]

Was that the gods were aspects of Brahman, it made them seem more like paintings, rather then dieties. It strips them of personality, makes them appear very hollow.

Only as hollow as we are, who are also aspects of Brahman.

Also, the complete none violence, I mean I am all for talking things through, but sometimes you need to fight.
Does anybody get what I am saying?

Of course. It's why Rama used violence to save Sita and fight off other demons, and why Krishna and the Pandavas finally resorted to violence when the Kauravas declared war.