Hindu deities=1 God?

[Hindu Guru]

its true i must say many misinterpret their scriptures and i cannot say that Hindus do not either. Everybody has their own views and nobody can change that.

[bhaktajan]

Everybody has their own views and nobody can change that.

There is a well known philosophical maxim regarding the "absolute-ness of absolute Truth" ---it goes, The question is: "How do you know who your real father is?" to which the answer is "Ask your mother" ---this is a reference to sastra's absolute revelation of Sattva-tattva.

Do you view that the Absolute-truth is a singular Absolute as revealed in sastra?

[salishan]

Originally Posted by Hindu Guru

But are not all gods personal gods? ...
From my experiences across the religious world, each person has different views and beliefs about their god. It seems, that in any religion, God appears to depicted in the imagination of an individual; each individual sees them in a different light. The way in which one person views God is, in my opinion, a symbol of their personality and character, their true self. Theoretically, this could be what brahmins and gurus talk about when they talk about the atman, the inner self as being a part of Brahman. This could be an expression of this personal view of God.

Hindu Guru
exquisite creature

i struggle with the idea of over-personalizing Gyd

the tradition i grow up in
(a heretical tradition 3.5 centuries ago)
favors a very individualized view of the Divine
an "Inner Light" within each person

this Light Within can produce intense spirituality
& an aggressive moral fervor against contemporary social ills

but (& here is the question)
can it (can any new sense of the Sacred) produce a Religion which
will span centuries , millennia ?
(and do so , without the inevitable ecumenical compromises
to prevent unending fissures within the faith ? )

Rodney Stark remarks that individual spirituality does not a religion make
it isn't a "religion" unless u can pass it along
(in some way , shape or form)

but (& this is a painful question)
what is lost when u must turn to a metaphor
as the means to
explain u'r sacred experience to others ?

& (what is lost) 100 years from now
when followers lose touch with this particular "experience"
& start worshipping the metaphor ?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

all religions do this to greater or lesser degrees

the post-Polytheistic religions , each
recycle "songs of praise" & "wisdom literature"
"ritualized dress & diet" , "cosmogonic speculations"
derived (refined some , but mostly untransformed) from their Polytheistic usage
(the very usage , old metaphors which
each modern religion originally targets to rebel against)

how do u separate Scripture's modern components from its ancient ?
how do u extol Amos's prophetic critique while ignoring the folk-legend of Exodus-Numbers-Joshua ?
how do u embrace the Upanishads while shrugging off the Vedas ?

with most established religions , it's
here's the whole package
take it or leave it

(yes
it's all great literature , but
the ancient aspects of this literature always
point back to Polytheism
not to the future
not to a new way of living in the world)

Gyd is not a relic of the dead & dying past
Gyd is the present moment , stepping into the future
(within u'r life & mine)

Gyd acts
in the world

(it's time , i think
to throw away the metaphors
to abandon all Polytheisms)

(but how ? )

[donnann]

Originally Posted by salishan

Hindu Guru
exquisite creature

i struggle with the idea of over-personalizing Gyd

the tradition i grow up in
(a heretical tradition 3.5 centuries ago)
favors a very individualized view of the Divine
an "Inner Light" within each person

this Light Within can produce intense spirituality
& an aggressive moral fervor against contemporary social ills

but (& here is the question)
can it (can any new sense of the Sacred) produce a Religion which
will span centuries , millennia ?
(and do so , without the inevitable ecumenical compromises
to prevent unending fissures within the faith ? )

Rodney Stark remarks that individual spirituality does not a religion make
it isn't a "religion" unless u can pass it along
(in some way , shape or form)

but (& this is a painful question)
what is lost when u must turn to a metaphor
as the means to
explain u'r sacred experience to others ?

& (what is lost) 100 years from now
when followers lose touch with this particular "experience"
& start worshipping the metaphor ?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

all religions do this to greater or lesser degrees

the post-Polytheistic religions , each
recycle "songs of praise" & "wisdom literature"
"ritualized dress & diet" , "cosmogonic speculations"
derived (refined some , but mostly untransformed) from their Polytheistic usage
(the very usage , old metaphors which
each modern religion originally targets to rebel against)

how do u separate Scripture's modern components from its ancient ?
how do u extol Amos's prophetic critique while ignoring the folk-legend of Exodus-Numbers-Joshua ?
how do u embrace the Upanishads while shrugging off the Vedas ?

with most established religions , it's
here's the whole package
take it or leave it

(yes
it's all great literature , but
the ancient aspects of this literature always
point back to Polytheism
not to the future
not to a new way of living in the world)

Gyd is not a relic of the dead & dying past
Gyd is the present moment , stepping into the future
(within u'r life & mine)

Gyd acts
in the world

(it's time , i think
to throw away the metaphors
to abandon all Polytheisms)

(but how ? )

Acts of Kindness is the way.

[Hindu Guru]

Originally Posted by salishan

Hindu Guru
exquisite creature

i struggle with the idea of over-personalizing Gyd

the tradition i grow up in
(a heretical tradition 3.5 centuries ago)
favors a very individualized view of the Divine
an "Inner Light" within each person

this Light Within can produce intense spirituality
& an aggressive moral fervor against contemporary social ills

but (& here is the question)
can it (can any new sense of the Sacred) produce a Religion which
will span centuries , millennia ?
(and do so , without the inevitable ecumenical compromises
to prevent unending fissures within the faith ? )

Rodney Stark remarks that individual spirituality does not a religion make
it isn't a "religion" unless u can pass it along
(in some way , shape or form)

but (& this is a painful question)
what is lost when u must turn to a metaphor
as the means to
explain u'r sacred experience to others ?

& (what is lost) 100 years from now
when followers lose touch with this particular "experience"
& start worshipping the metaphor ?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

all religions do this to greater or lesser degrees

the post-Polytheistic religions , each
recycle "songs of praise" & "wisdom literature"
"ritualized dress & diet" , "cosmogonic speculations"
derived (refined some , but mostly untransformed) from their Polytheistic usage
(the very usage , old metaphors which
each modern religion originally targets to rebel against)

how do u separate Scripture's modern components from its ancient ?
how do u extol Amos's prophetic critique while ignoring the folk-legend of Exodus-Numbers-Joshua ?
how do u embrace the Upanishads while shrugging off the Vedas ?

with most established religions , it's
here's the whole package
take it or leave it

(yes
it's all great literature , but
the ancient aspects of this literature always
point back to Polytheism
not to the future
not to a new way of living in the world)

Gyd is not a relic of the dead & dying past
Gyd is the present moment , stepping into the future
(within u'r life & mine)

Gyd acts
in the world

(it's time , i think
to throw away the metaphors
to abandon all Polytheisms)

(but how ? )

You ask the question wether religion can span over millenia, but do not take in the fact that like all culture and societies, religion evolves and the people of the orgiginal HIndu religion were to see it in its current form would not recognize it and say that it is another religion outright.

Furthermore how can one 'take it or leave it' for an entire religion. if one is to take or leave the whole package, one must surely therefore be able to understand the whole package. One would have to know all that there is to know and that my friend is an imposiible goal. As religion elvolves, it widens and spreads and so more and more of the religion becomes uknown to others who supposedly follow the same religion.

Lastly, you say that all polytheism should be abandoned. Why do you feel that it is your right to tell others what to believe? I dont know where your from, but where i live there is such a thing as freedom of thought.

My regards,

Hindu Guru

[Hindu Guru]

salishan, u say that with all established religions, one must either take it or leave. I cannot stress how much i disagree with you on that point. For instance, Christianity, i'm sure you will agree is one of sed established religions. Yet their are over 33,000 denominations if Christianity which have different views on the nature of God.

AS to 'how do u embrace the Upanishads while shrugging off the Vedas?' - you pretty much c

[Hindu Guru]

woops accidentally cut myself off there. so:

AS to 'how do u embrace the Upanishads while shrugging off the Vedas?' - you pretty much can't because the whole purpose, if you look into it, of the Upanishads is to explain the meaning of the Vedas. It is (of sorts) similar to disregarding the entire old testament and embracing the new testament. Th old testament forms the basis of Jesus' parabels and teachings.

[donnann]

Originally Posted by Hindu Guru

woops accidentally cut myself off there. so:

AS to 'how do u embrace the Upanishads while shrugging off the Vedas?' - you pretty much can't because the whole purpose, if you look into it, of the Upanishads is to explain the meaning of the Vedas. It is (of sorts) similar to disregarding the entire old testament and embracing the new testament. Th old testament forms the basis of Jesus' parabels and teachings.

The old and new testament are really the same knowledge. Jesus never denied it.

[salishan]

Originally Posted by Hindu Guru

the whole purpose, if you look into it, of the Upanishads is to explain the meaning of the Vedas.

Hindu Guru
exquisite creature

literary critic Harold Bloom (Anxiety of Influence) calls this process
"misprision"
(the Strong Poet will aggressively "misinterpret" the past
in order to bend the cultural tradition , to
make it go the direction she or he wants it to go)

that (too) is what Jesus did with the Hebrew scriptures
his parables bend these ancient tales to serve new uses , his uses
(& Gyd's uses)

(i should probably be more circumspect , &
not so casually reveal to u my current theological quandaries)
i'm sorry , Hindu Guru
that u think i am dogmatically telling people "what to believe"
to me , it is more how than what

my sense of the Divine is that
Gyd leads , not follows

[salishan]

to "follow Gyd"
does not mean "to follow a religious tradition"
(to me) it means just the opposite

it means
(with Gyd) to lead a religious tradition

to see the world new
(with "new eyes") & to lead u'r tradition forward
(with a heartening show of confidence
which is part real & part bluster) into

the (ever uncertain) future

[radarmark]

I do not see the continuity here. G!d is inspiring hindu guru one way, salishan another. If they are good, what is the real difference?

[Sam Albion]

some hindu's believe in a million Gods, some believe in just one. I liked Will's story -- spot on, I think. Why not let Jesus be your guru? Why not also be able, be free, to acknowledge Buddha as a guru, and, if it suits you, Rudolph Steiner, or the prophet Mohammed.

I don't think God minds...

For me, there is only one ultimate God. There are many different faces God wears, to suit us, to suit our individual backgrounds, our cultures, our psychological types. Ultimately, God is just "one" -- the supreme personality -- the Daddio of energies, the top dog...

Currently, for me, God is Indra -- lavicious, carousing on Soma, full of lightening energy and millions of eyes (lol), but... God is also Brahma; widsom, Sarasvati - intelligence, Krsna; love... etc... etc...

[donnann]

Originally Posted by Sam Albion

some hindu's believe in a million Gods, some believe in just one. I liked Will's story -- spot on, I think. Why not let Jesus be your guru? Why not also be able, be free, to acknowledge Buddha as a guru, and, if it suits you, Rudolph Steiner, or the prophet Mohammed.

I don't think God minds...

For me, there is only one ultimate God. There are many different faces God wears, to suit us, to suit our individual backgrounds, our cultures, our psychological types. Ultimately, God is just "one" -- the supreme personality -- the Daddio of energies, the top dog...

Currently, for me, God is Indra -- lavicious, carousing on Soma, full of lightening energy and millions of eyes (lol), but... God is also Brahma; widsom, Sarasvati - intelligence, Krsna; love... etc... etc...

The whole universe to include all the beings that live in the whole universe was created in the image of the heavenly universe so thats probably what they mean by millions of gods and goddesses.

[Sam Albion]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Andrew,

I see you have used the word nirmanakaya several times recently. I thought it would be good to let everyone know what it means, A nirmanakaya is a person who has achieved enlightenment and has earned the right to enter a blissful nirvana, but chooses not to. Instead, they happliy sacrifice their own happiness, keep reincarnating here on earth, and supply greatly needed help to those of us who are still struggling to achieve enlightenment.

I can't agree that this is truth, Nick!!!!

The nirmanakaya is NOT a saint; a person; the nirmana-kaya is more like... an outer layer of the self; a spiritual... aura, almost... a bliss, sure, but not a being; it's the... trancendental body, the third body of the three bodies of the Buddha... as opposed to the...

dharma-kaya, the doctrine-body (the texts), the first body....

the sambhogakaya (the complete enjoyment body), the second body- the body that buzzes with energies and enlightenments, the "psychic type body",

and the nirmanakaya is the... third layer of the spiritual onion. A nirmanakaya is not a body -- it's more like a soul.

And, it's not dissimiliar to the... ruach/nefresh/neshimah of the kabbalists... I think...

I think, maybe, Nick, you're confusing the idea of the three bodies of the buddha with "the three types of buddhist" theory, and those are:

we have sravakas: hearers, people who sit and listen to the teachings (of buddhism),
we have the pratyekabuddhas - the people who reach enlightnement and are content with that and have no desire to tell other people about it or join buddhist cults, and the third type
the... nutters, whose descriptor currently escapes my mind, who want to preach, and teach, and lead others to buddhism because they think it's the coolest career in the world.

No shame in that, of course... but, I'm rambling now... so shall dash off, not wanting to hijack somebody else's thread...

[bhaktajan]

some hindu's believe in a million Gods, some believe in just one.

It depends on wheater the Hindu is educated or just a blue-collar worker.

In the world's prisons, are the inmates there because they were capitalist entrepanuers? Or just theives?


Know what the Laws says. Get your information from those learned and educated to know pricisely what it says in the Hindu's Vedic Literatures.

Hindu God is One.

Hindu pantheon of the generations of celestial descendants of Brahma are known as the Family Tree of Brahma's offspring ---that is what is explained in the Vedas.

The multiple epic-like stories and similar installments of extended events among the distant cousins aka, the Demigods within this Brahmanda who are all the great great grand children of the firsat born person, Lord Brahma, the first progenitor of Human Beings ---these Human Beings range in level of civic importance and civic prominance as per their works.

Want to be a saint?
Want to be a Millionaire?
Want to be a demi-god?
Want to get some "Nudge-Nudge-Know-what-I-mean"?

There is an absolute path to get where ever one's free-will imagines.

Take a lesson from revealed scriptures . . . and a lot of possible paths become ruled out by deduction.

Krishna's one-on-one chasticing lecture and pep-rally speech to his Cousin Arjuna left no doubt about the nature of Godhead as the One Supreme Personality of God's Person-hood . . . and the quagmire of the Souls in the material tabernacal of samsara.

The demigod in the celestial Planets with in the Brahmanda are spirit-souls with administrative duties that are above and beyond the daily activites of us Earthlings struggling to live the "Good-Life" birth after birth since time immemorial.

Recognise the instructions of a Guru --understand that the Guru's lessons are limited to the level of the students abilities.