What is the Difference?

[Brian2]

Why?

I am not a member of the Hindu DIR

 

[sayak83]

I am not a member of the Hindu DIR

You can ask a question. As long as you do not comment further, there is no issue.

 

[sayak83]

You can ask a question. As long as you do not comment further, there is no issue.

Or you can ask here
About the Religions Q&A Subforum

 

[Ponder This]

Between the Abrahamic (usually dualistic) and Eastern (like Advaita or Buddhist or Dao) religions? I was discussing this in another thread and came upon the following. Sharing this for feedback and debate/discussion.

The Abrahamic religions are fundamentally dualistic tradition in which there is a God and a distinct world created by Him that does not share His essence. That is why a distance can grow between the world and God, and God's purpose for the world can get frustrated. This is the reason why God has to communicate through messengers, or that the messengers get rejected, or that the message gets corrupted with time. I see a lot of wordplay, but these ideas do not make sense unless there is a world that is distinct from God which has somehow turned away from Him so that His purpose for the world is being frustrated and He is trying (with limited success) in making this right through messengers etc. All of this then goes to eschatology that there will be some sort of "final solution" to this persistent problem with an "end-time" decisive action from His end that will transform everything as we know it. This is the key idea in every Abrahamic religions and some of the dualistic Indian traditions as well.
These ideas are fundamentally incompatible with a monistic understanding of the Absolute where the World and the transcendent is One Absolute only and that everything (including the God(s)) is the creative manifestation of this One Absolute and hence share the same essence and same innate perfection that is simply being actualized through the various action-reaction processes that constitute the worlds and the heavens. Because of this fact, all that is required of a person is to actually viscerally "see" this unity and thus be able to play a more proactive role in this creative process from a position of knowledge (the state of bliss) rather than a reactive role from a position of ignorance (the state of suffering). And because you yourself is that "unity", the ability to see this is also innately present in you. All that is needed is a catalyst that get the process of comprehension going. And that catalyst can, frankly, be anything (like just seeing suffering as happened with Buddha) but may including following a religious tradition or meditative path as well created by religious founders who were able to gain a clearer understanding of this unity and were able to teach it in an effective manner to other people. But this remains optional and many equivalently effective ways of doing this can exist simultaneously.
All these Abrahamic ideas are doing...the world is alienated from God or there is an active force of evil (like Satan), and there is going to be prophets, incarnations or a final eschatological event etc. are trying to provide ontological explanations of suffering and the way out of it from their dualist perspective while Eastern monism (this includes several forms of Hinduism, Buddhism and Daoism also) is eliminating all such ontology and is providing an epistemological explanation of suffering and the way out of it.

Now which of them is true? That is for everyone to decide. But the Abrahamic model requires you to believe in external saviors and the reliability of their words and deeds from history and a promised future. The monistic epistemological model requires you to believe in yourself and your own experiences as you embark (through some guidance) on the journey to transform the way you know the world and yourself.

What do you think?

Yes. I know that there are many differences between the traditions that I have not included here within each of these broad categories as well, and calling something Eastern or Abrahamic is also quite inaccurate. But as a first pass, how much truth is there in these musings?

I did not see much truth in what you wrote.
For example, ontological refers to the metaphysics of the nature of being and epistemological refers to the theory of knowledge especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Both Abrahamic and Eastern religions have both ontology and epistemology. The nature of suffering and the way out of it is both ontological and epistemic in each case.
Also your descriptions of the traditions as fundamentally dualistic or monistic is not truly accurate either. For example, you describe the dualistic positions of knowledge and ignorance in your "monistic understanding of the Absolute". And you say that there is a distance between the world and God when, in fact, the common understanding is that God is omnipresent working through the universe as opposed to being absent.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Hmm. Whilst I generally agree.
I don’t know if the Christian interpretation is necessarily the same as the Jewish one

Now I dare not speak on anyone else’s behalf, this is merely based on what I learnt from various Jewish folks I know/knew through the years.
Do forgive me if I’m mistaken or misunderstood the lessons I was given. This might just be “translation wonk”

Satan is sometimes interpreted as a tester or Heavenly prosecutor. Someone who advises God to truly test the faith of His servants (Job.)
He is therefore not always interpreted as the embodiment of evil like a lot of Christian traditions.
More like an adversary. Sometimes even taken to be necessary for testing one’s true faith and morality.
In that sense he could be translated as a sort of Yang to God’s Yin. (Or vice versa)
Something the Dharmic traditions have as well in their teachings (depending on the tradition, of course.)
But again I could be completely wrong. This is mainly second hand information for me. I haven’t studied the Jewish Sacred Texts

Judaism and Christianity sometimes are miles apart, even though Jesus was a Jew.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Not escaping. Eliminating suffering. And it is the main point of Christianity.
Why is there evil, old age, disease, violence and death in the world(all various forms of suffering). Because of sin which is disobedience of God's will. How to eliminate sin. Through repentance and coming to Jesus Christ who has opened a way such that the consequences of sin can be negated by forgiveness and reconciliation with God. What happens then? Resurrection in a new perfected body in a new world where God is ever present and where there is no suffering (of the type above).
Where have I said Christian God created suffering for trivial reasons?

Eastern religions try to make things better in this life. Christianity finds a way to put up with suffering here so you can enjoy heaven for eternity.

 

[PearlSeeker]

God did not create evil, just a potential for evil by giving moral beings a free will.
Much suffering is a result of that.
The rest of suffering I don't know.

Never heard of "natural evil"?

Who is responsible for the earthquake in Turkey for example?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Eastern religions try to make things better in this life. Christianity finds a way to put up with suffering here so you can enjoy heaven for eternity.

I see all faith inspired by a higher power of Love, is to demonstrate that both this life and life after death have a purpose based in Love.

No need to separate East and West, as we are one planet, with one people, the human race.

Regards Tony

 

[Sand Dancer]

I see all faith inspired by a higher power of Love, is to demonstrate that both this life and life after death have a purpose based in Love.

No need to separate East and West, as we are one planet, with one people, the human race.

Regards Tony

Well, there are some big differences, so it's just worth noting. I agree with us being one people. I wish more of us acted like it.

 

[Brian2]

Eastern religions try to make things better in this life. Christianity finds a way to put up with suffering here so you can enjoy heaven for eternity.

I think Christianity is very good at trying to make things better in this life for people. Loving others is what true Christianity is meant to be. But there is always suffering that cannot be eliminated.

 

[Brian2]

Never heard of "natural evil"?

Who is responsible for the earthquake in Turkey for example?

Do you know who is responsible?
Certainly God made and earth where earthquakes happen and where disease happens. In this respect God is responsible for everything, but should we accuse God of evil be being responsible in this way?
Some people will accuse God of being evil, and there is no doubt in their mind about it, but I give God the benefit of the doubt I see in it.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Do you know who is responsible?
Certainly God made and earth where earthquakes happen and where disease happens. In this respect God is responsible for everything, but should we accuse God of evil be being responsible in this way?
Some people will accuse God of being evil, and there is no doubt in their mind about it, but I give God the benefit of the doubt I see in it.

Some evil just happens as a natural process but if (omnibenevolent and omnipotent) God exists, it is certainly within His power to prevent such things. Why isn't He?

 

[Sand Dancer]

I think Christianity is very good at trying to make things better in this life for people. Loving others is what true Christianity is meant to be. But there is always suffering that cannot be eliminated.

I do agree, but often it's not lived out that way. People are scared into it instead of loved into it.

 

[JustGeorge]

I do agree, but often it's not lived out that way. People are scared into it instead of loved into it.

That was always my dad's style... Scare the kids with the fear of Hell rather than draw them in with the love of Christ...

 

[Brian2]

Some evil just happens as a natural process but if (omnibenevolent and omnipotent) God exists, it is certainly within His power to prevent such things. Why isn't He?

There might be a variety of reasons. The Bible tells of a God who has set up a time for evil to be finished with completely and for judgement to happen and to set up His Kingdom on earth. So it is not that God has no plan to do anything, things are heading that way.
God seems to step in at times when asked but He does not seem to want to do that all the time now, the judgement etc are coming.
There is a time for every purpose under heaven. Ecclesiastes 3

 

[Brian2]

I do agree, but often it's not lived out that way. People are scared into it instead of loved into it.

Yes I think that is true and no doubt would still be true even if Christianity stood out as the group who loved each other and others.
The judgement is true but there are always going to be people who preach hell fire instead of love.
Actually our little church seems to love each other but these days people aren't turning up to find out.

 

[PearlSeeker]

There might be a variety of reasons. The Bible tells of a God who has set up a time for evil to be finished with completely and for judgement to happen and to set up His Kingdom on earth. So it is not that God has no plan to do anything, things are heading that way.
God seems to step in at times when asked but He does not seem to want to do that all the time now, the judgement etc are coming.
There is a time for every purpose under heaven. Ecclesiastes 3

Yes, in a deistic universe there i a time for everything - also babies and children suffering and dying in natural disasters...

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The Abrahamic religions are fundamentally dualistic

Judaism is not dualistic. Satan is not "the god of this world." He is not even God's adversary in Judaism. He is an angel who can only do as God commands.

 

[sayak83]

Judaism is not dualistic. Satan is not "the god of this world." He is not even God's adversary in Judaism. He is an angel who can only do as God commands.

Dualism in this context means that God and the World are two distinct entities sharing a Creator-Created relationship. This in contrast to monism where there exists only one essence and the distinction of God and the World is not ultimately real.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Dualism in this context means that God and the World are two distinct entities sharing a Creator-Created relationship. This in contrast to monism where there exists only one essence and the distinction of God and the World is not ultimately real.

ah, I see. Different meaning of the word dualism. Got it.