The Eternal Covenant of God: Does it exist within Hinduism and Buddhism?

[SalixIncendium]

Dharma has different meanings for each of us. You would need to explain what it means to you if I’m to properly understand it, and even then I may not.

Dharma for me might begin with the Words of Arjuna as he speaks to Lord Krishna while contemplating the moral dilemma of fighting against his relatives and the nature of his personal dharma as a warrior under such challenging circumstances:

On destruction of the family, the perennial family dharmas perish. When dharma perishes, adharma [the opposite of dharma] overwhelms the entire family. From the predominance of adharma, O Krishna, the family women are polluted. When the women are polluted, O Varshneya, a confusion of social orders arises. This confusion leads only to hell both for the destroyers of families and for the family. Certainly the forefathers fall [from heaven] since the ritual offerings of food and water are suspended. By these crimes of the family killers, who propagate a confusion of social classes, community dharmas and the everlasting family dharmas are devastated. We have always heard, O Janardana, that those men who devastate family dharmas have their residence fixed in hell.
BG:1.39-43

So we have a narrative in Hinduism that at least superficially resembles the Abrahamic narrative of reward and punishment based on consequences of actions.

Reward and punishment are products of judgment. In my experience, this is exclusively an Abrahamic concept. The Hindu narrative as I see it, and I dare not speak for all Hindus, is a product of causality.

Dharma, at least my dharma, is the right way of living in accordance with Ṛta, the responsibility for universal order of duties with regard to morals, ethics, virtues, and conduct. There is no judgment, as there is nothing to judge but one's ego, which is a result to ignorance to sattva (truth/virtuousness). Karma is a natural and direct result of our actions.

If I get angry and throw a chair at my window in the wintertime, the window breaks, and the result of my action is that I'm cold. The cold leads to suffering. I'm not suffering because of an overseer thinks I should be punished. I'm suffering because I was irresponsible and lost my temper. My suffering is a result of my actions, not a God that feels I should be punished.

Conversely, if I work hard, I get promoted and get paid more. My promotion and pay increase are not a result of a God thinking I did a good job and should be rewarded. They are a direct result of my actions.

 

[crossfire]

Perhaps I’ve missed the point entirely. However Bhikkhu Bodhi opines the Kalama Sutta is neither an endorsement of radical skepticism, nor unreasonable personal truth:

On the basis of a single passage, quoted out of context, the Buddha has been made out to be a pragmatic empiricist who dismisses all doctrine and faith, and whose Dhamma is simply a freethinker's kit to truth which invites each one to accept and reject whatever he likes.

Kalama Sutta: The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry

Well, the message of the Kalama Sutta is to reject doctrines that preach and propagate greed, hatred, and delusion as leading to long term harm, no matter how much pretzel logic (verse 4) is used to try to justify the greed, hatred, or delusion (verses 5-9.) Likewise, doctrines that teach the benefits of an absense of greed, hatred, and delusion lead to long-term benefit, and should be accepted (verses 10-15.) When the mind is purified of the poisons of greed, hatred, and delusion, then the four sublime states (the bramavihara, the "abodes of brahma") can shine through (verse 16.) Finally, verse 17 describes the 4 solaces, which is like an earlier, Buddhist version of Pascal's wager, which takes the idea of god or an afterlife out of the equation (see the pretzel logic referred to in verses 4) of the benefits of purifying ones mind of the poisons of greed, hatred, or delusion.

As others have stated elsewhere on the forum, the Kalama Sutta is like an earlier and more specific version of Okkam's Razor.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Right, it's not necessarily karma. Not all actions generate other actions as a direct result.

As much as it annoys me it's something I can't control and have to live with. People are adopting and co-opting all sorts of things from other languages and cultures and changing their meanings or use. I mean, today anyone who works in a coffee shop is a barrista. First, barrista is female, barristo is male. And then of course we have people who are learning to "open and balance their shockras" and "release their kundalini".

Is it good or bad? I really don't know.

As ‘ the Covenant’ is inextricably interwoven into the narrative of Abrahamic Faiths with no equivalent word in Sanskrit or Pali so too are narratives of dharma and karma uniquely part of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikh. There are no direct English translations for either dharma or karma. So a Westerner use of these words will seem clumsy, foreign and just plain wrong. However we do experience the same ultimate reality, albeit through our different cultural filters. As long as parties on either side of the fence are sincere in trying to understand each other, I see no harm.

 

[crossfire]

As ‘ the Covenant’ is inextricably interwoven into the narrative of Abrahamic Faiths with no equivalent word in Sanskrit or Pali so too are narratives of dharma and karma uniquely part of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikh. There are no direct English translations for either dharma or karma. So a Westerner use of these words will seem clumsy, foreign and just plain wrong. However we do experience the same ultimate reality, albeit through our different cultural filters. As long as parties on either side of the fence are sincere in trying to understand each other, I see no harm.

Is "ultimate reality" objective or subjective, in your view?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Is "ultimate reality" objective or subjective, in your view?

Any understanding we have of ultimate reality is subjective and all truth is relative.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

However, Hinduism and Buddhism have developed parallel and usually seperate from their Abrahamic sister Faiths.

What? Dharmic and Abrahamic religions are unrelated to each other. My religion has more in common with Vedic Hinduism as both are Indo-European.

Anyway, talk of "covenants" and such is an Abrahamic thing.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The Eternal Covenant of God is an enormously important part of the Abrahamic Faiths whether it be Judaism, Christianity, Islam or the Baha’i Faith. At its heart is a binding agreement between God and man. God asks man to recognise His Great Spiritual Teachers and follow Their Teachings. In return God promises to protect and care for man and to bless Him. Various Covenants are recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures through Noah, Abraham, Moses and David. Similar narratives are at work through Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh. Conceptually the Covenants are well established and progress through each Revelation.

However, Hinduism and Buddhism have developed parallel and usually seperate from their Abrahamic sister Faiths. Their narrative evolved over thousands of years is quite different. Yet Buddhism emerged from Hinduism as did Christianity from Judaism and the Baha’i Faith from Islam. Societal laws and those for spiritual development have successfully been put into practice and evolved over centuries or even Millenia. So in that sense there are clear parallels.

How about the Eternal Covenant of God that is so well established in the Abrahamic Faiths? Are there parallels in Buddhism and Hinduism? Perhaps the traditions based on the Dharmic Faiths have diverged so far from Abrahamic Faiths the concept of an Eternal Covenant is rendered meaningless. Is the Eternal Covenant of God uniquely Abrahamic or is it more Universal and applicable to both Hinduism and Buddhism?

Comments or questions as you will.

Too much baggage.

 

[SomeRandom]

The Eternal Covenant of God is an enormously important part of the Abrahamic Faiths whether it be Judaism, Christianity, Islam or the Baha’i Faith. At its heart is a binding agreement between God and man. God asks man to recognise His Great Spiritual Teachers and follow Their Teachings. In return God promises to protect and care for man and to bless Him. Various Covenants are recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures through Noah, Abraham, Moses and David. Similar narratives are at work through Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh. Conceptually the Covenants are well established and progress through each Revelation.

However, Hinduism and Buddhism have developed parallel and usually seperate from their Abrahamic sister Faiths. Their narrative evolved over thousands of years is quite different. Yet Buddhism emerged from Hinduism as did Christianity from Judaism and the Baha’i Faith from Islam. Societal laws and those for spiritual development have successfully been put into practice and evolved over centuries or even Millenia. So in that sense there are clear parallels.

How about the Eternal Covenant of God that is so well established in the Abrahamic Faiths? Are there parallels in Buddhism and Hinduism? Perhaps the traditions based on the Dharmic Faiths have diverged so far from Abrahamic Faiths the concept of an Eternal Covenant is rendered meaningless. Is the Eternal Covenant of God uniquely Abrahamic or is it more Universal and applicable to both Hinduism and Buddhism?

Comments or questions as you will.

*note. I speak only for myself. Not all Hindus*

Hinduism needs no covenant because God (or the cosmos or the eternal energy, whatever one wishes to call the divine) is intrinsically inside each being.
It does not ask for anything, it requires nothing, it is all. What could we possibly even offer it anyway?

Religion, much like the folklore of old, arose to answer questions that humanity has asked since the time we could think of the concepts.

Existentialism. Are we alone? What’s the point? Why do we see suffering? Why do bad people not always face punishment? Etc

Hindus argue that each person has an innate desire to return to the supreme energy. Thus we came up with philosophies and rituals in order to try to achieve this end. One not even believe in a God, necessarily.

For a Dharmic religion is more a matter of tradition, honour, respect and duty. But spirituality is a private affair. One that a person must be free to look into for themselves. If a person feels the need to strike up a deal with God, they might be inclined towards the Abrahamic faiths. Which is fine, their choice is their choice.

I find myself largely falling away from religion as a whole. My logical side often argues with my more philosophical/artsy side, anyway.

As for karma or indeed dharma. I believe humanity has an innate desire for justice, which likely arose from our tribal instincts. Thus elaborate reward and punishment systems were developed, when our justice system on this plane of existence failed us.

 

[Twilight Hue]

One could ask from a Buddhist perspective who exactly are you making a covenant with?

And now, you know the rest of the story.

 

[crossfire]

One could ask from a Buddhist perspective who exactly are you making a covenant with?

And now, you know the rest of the story.

Mara?

 

[Jainarayan]

As ‘ the Covenant’ is inextricably interwoven into the narrative of Abrahamic Faiths with no equivalent word in Sanskrit or Pali so too are narratives of dharma and karma uniquely part of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikh. There are no direct English translations for either dharma or karma. So a Westerner use of these words will seem clumsy, foreign and just plain wrong.

You're right maybe not for the reason you think.

Sanskrit is blessed (or cursed if you're just learning it) with a stupidly inoooordinate number of synonyms, and meanings for a single word. Dharma itself can mean (Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit):

mark
virtue
moral merit
peculiarity
law of Northern Buddhism
custom
to become
righteousness
religion
ninth mansion
law or doctrine of Buddhism
right
practice
particular ceremony
religious merit
ethical precepts of Buddhism
upaniSad
associating with the virtuous
law
that which is established or firm
good works
Law or Justice personified
statute
observance
propriety of conduct
peculiar condition or essential quality
ordinance
thing
customary observance or prescribed conduct
justice
property
steadfast decree
duty
religious abstraction
morality
bow
devotion
usage
character

See what I mean? So context is everything.

However we do experience the same ultimate reality, albeit through our different cultural filters. As long as parties on either side of the fence are sincere in trying to understand each other, I see no harm.

No doubt at all.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It sounds similar to the God of Abraham who is an unknowable essence transcendent above all human virtue.

The difference is that the Nirguna Brahman will not send any authorized advertisers, promoters or commission agents.

I’m not sure what you mean by that or if it’s even possible.

I thought you would understand. Such a simple thing. 'Each person is responsible for his/her actions and their effects on society'. You are a part of society, fulfill the duties that the society expects from you.

What god(s) are important to you if you don’t mind me asking?

I have not read Jai's reply to your query. As for me and as you very well know, I do not believe in existence of Gods or Goddesses. To me, they are imagination, falsehood.

 

[Aupmanyav]

After all the mind is harder to control than the wind. (BG 6:34)

Krishna gives the clue in the very next verse.

"abhyāsena tu, Kaunteya, vairāgyeṇa ca gṛihyate." (BG 6:35)
abhyāsena - by practice; tu - but; kaunteya - O son of Kuntī; vairāgyeṇa - by detachment; ca - also; gṛihyate - can be controlled.
".. but, O Son of Kunti, by practice and by detachment also, it can be controlled."

Note that It does not require the grace of any God or Goddess.

I see people die and suffer from the result of their own actions. Cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption are obvious examples. I wouldn’t call it karma though, perhaps out of respect for the language and concepts of the Dharmic Faiths I don’t properly understand.

None-the-less it is 'karma'. Karma simply means whatever we do, our action. If they smoke, then they, as well as others in the house will suffer the consequences. That is why I go outside the house, if I want a smoke.

So we have a narrative in Hinduism that at least superficially resembles the Abrahamic narrative of reward and punishment based on consequences of actions.

Consequences of actions are always there, involve God/Gods/Goddesses or not.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Perhaps I’ve missed the point entirely. However Bhikkhu Bodhi opines the Kalama Sutta is neither an endorsement of radical skepticism, nor unreasonable personal truth:

Which does not mean that she has negated the points mentioned by Buddha.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I see creation has been set up for us to find and live what is good over the choice of what is not good.

If there is creation (which I reject), it is not set up for anything. Even Lions, hyenas, wolves prosper by hunting in a pack. Humans too survived by living in a pack - society. It would have been difficult without it big fangs or claws, and ancient homo species were mostly smaller than modern humans.

As long as parties on either side of the fence are sincere in trying to understand each other, I see no harm.

Only do not try to jump across the fence.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Reward and punishment are products of judgment. In my experience, this is exclusively an Abrahamic concept. The Hindu narrative as I see it, and I dare not speak for all Hindus, is a product of causality.

Reward and punishment simply reflects causation, either positive or negative. The anthropomorphic narrative of the Abrahamic Faiths can be taken as allegory to facilitate better understanding how the universe works. For example one of the first stories in the Hebrew Bible concerns Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. It’s not a literal story.

The preceding story is the creation of earth in six days leading to the first man, presumably Adam.

In his classic essay ‘The Lonely Man of Faith’ Rabbi Soloveitchik a Jewish scholar explores These first two chapters of Book of Genesis as offering two images of Adam which are, in many ways, at odds with one another. The first Adam, or "majestic man," employs his creative faculties in order to master his environment as mandated by God; the second image of Adam is a distinctly different contractual man who surrenders himself to the will of God. Soloveitchik describes how the man of faith must integrate both of these ideas as he seeks to follow God's will.

The Lonely Man of Faith - Wikipedia

Basically it’s a mystical work that explores the journey for each of us as we discover how best to live and respond to life’s challenges.

Dharma, at least my dharma, is the right way of living in accordance with Ṛta, the responsibility for universal order of duties with regard to morals, ethics, virtues, and conduct. There is no judgment, as there is nothing to judge but one's ego, which is a result to ignorance to sattva (truth/virtuousness). Karma is a natural and direct result of our actions.

It’s easy to comprehend the universe having inherent laws both physical and moral. The natural order is Dharma and the law of cause and affect karma. Interestingly the way Rta is expressed in Vedic literature concerns cosmic retribution.

While the concept of Ṛta as an abstract, universal principle generally remained resistant to the anthropomorphic tendencies of the Vedic period, it became increasingly associated with the actions of individual deities, in particular with those of the god Varuna as the omniscient, all-encompassing sky.

Ṛta - Wikipedia

It sounds a little like the Abrahamic narrative, don’t you think?

If I get angry and throw a chair at my window in the wintertime, the window breaks, and the result of my action is that I'm cold. The cold leads to suffering. I'm not suffering because of an overseer thinks I should be punished. I'm suffering because I was irresponsible and lost my temper. My suffering is a result of my actions, not a God that feels I should be punished.

Conversely, if I work hard, I get promoted and get paid more. My promotion and pay increase are not a result of a God thinking I did a good job and should be rewarded. They are a direct result of my actions.

Very clear examples, thanks. It does appear within some Hinduism there’s the possibility of God or gods intervening just as the natural moral laws may unfold in a mechanistic way without God’s interventions in the Abrahamic Faiths.

 

[Dawnofhope]

No, not really. Remember, they own everything. We make offerings out of devotion, we think of them as honored guests at home and royalty in temple, their home, and as friends and parents. There is a prayer from the Mahabharata (Queen Gandhari to Krishna) that goes:

twameva mātā cha pitā twameva *
twameva bandhus cha sakhā twameva
twameva vidyā dravinam twameva
twameva sarvam mama deva deva

You are indeed mother and father to me, indeed you are.
You are indeed kindred and friend to me, indeed you are.
You are indeed knowledge and wealth [everything of value] to me, indeed you are.
You are indeed everything my God of Gods.

* Sanskrit doesn't use upper case, so neither do I. And it's completely free word order

Our personal pujas (worship), even a 5 minute one has elements of how you would welcome a guest.

So that's how we see them.



At temple I go to all the shrines and give namaskar (respectful greeting). I'm primarily Vaishnava (devotee of Vishnu/Krishna) but I go to any deity's puja at temple. The deities I feel closest to and/or I ionclude in my shrine for one reason or another (usually because they reflect some aspect of my life) are

• Vishnu and his avatars (Krishna, Rama, Narasimha).
• Shiva.
• Devi (in her forms Lakshmi, Saraswati, Durga, Gayatri). I include Kali in my shrine because she's so awesome.
• Hanuman.
• Ayyappa and Kartikeya (aka Subramanya/Murugan), sons of Shiva, who are spiritual warriors and heroes.
• Ganesha of course. For all undertakings, trips, worship, projects etc he is worshiped/invoked first, to remove any obstacles.
• Kubera (Lord of Wealth and treasurer of the gods). My finances are somewhat in disrepair, so I'm trying to suck up to him.

Thank you. You have many deities! If I were a Hindu I might worship Vishnu and Krishna. I could read the Bhagavad Gita as my sacred scripture and even aspire to purity in my devotion.

Those who worship the demigods will take birth among the demigods; those who worship ghosts and spirits will take birth among such beings; those who worship ancestors go to the ancestors; and those who worship Me will live with Me.
BG 9:25

I kinda like that you’re a Vaishnava.

 

[sayak83]

Dharma has different meanings for each of us. You would need to explain what it means to you if I’m to properly understand it, and even then I may not.

Dharma for me might begin with the Words of Arjuna as he speaks to Lord Krishna while contemplating the moral dilemma of fighting against his relatives and the nature of his personal dharma as a warrior under such challenging circumstances:

On destruction of the family, the perennial family dharmas perish. When dharma perishes, adharma [the opposite of dharma] overwhelms the entire family. From the predominance of adharma, O Krishna, the family women are polluted. When the women are polluted, O Varshneya, a confusion of social orders arises. This confusion leads only to hell both for the destroyers of families and for the family. Certainly the forefathers fall [from heaven] since the ritual offerings of food and water are suspended. By these crimes of the family killers, who propagate a confusion of social classes, community dharmas and the everlasting family dharmas are devastated. We have always heard, O Janardana, that those men who devastate family dharmas have their residence fixed in hell.
BG:1.39-43

So we have a narrative in Hinduism that at least superficially resembles the Abrahamic narrative of reward and punishment based on consequences of actions.

Krishna corrects this view about dharma as he talks with Arjuna over the next chapters.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If there is creation (which I reject), it is not set up for anything. Even Lions, hyenas, wolves prosper by hunting in a pack. Humans too survived by living in a pack - society. It would have been difficult without it with no big fangs or claws, and ancient homo species were mostly smaller than modern humans.

Except we have a rational soul. We can make a choice and are not bound by nature.

One can choose to be a pack animal, or worse.

Or we can choose love and service to all people.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

What? Dharmic and Abrahamic religions are unrelated to each other. My religion has more in common with Vedic Hinduism as both are Indo-European.

Anyway, talk of "covenants" and such is an Abrahamic thing.

If your religion works for you and brings you closer to Hinduism then they are two positives on your spiritual path.