polytheism

[RadheyRadhey108]

Yeah... I must agree with shvu. Hinduism is unique. It doesn't fit into a specific category b/c it is eternal.

[theist]

 

Yeah... I must agree with shvu. Hinduism is unique. It doesn't fit into a specific category b/c it is eternal.

 

Are you sure about this statement Radhey?

[Dark Warrior]

Some Hare Christnas believe that it is wrong to even worship Rama, Narasimha and Trivikrama. Thus, they give Krishna a unique 'monotheistic' identity which in reality is not Vaishnavism at all.

 

They also equate archa murtis of Vishnu with christian 'icons', but this is again a wrong comparison. The archa murti is not a representation of Vishnu. Once consecrated by proper agamic rules, the archa form is Vishnu Himself, who is amongst us, and even more accessible than the avatars themselves.

 

Vaishnavism is worship of Vishnu, or as the Gaudiyas do, worship of Krishna with the knowledge that He is identical to Vishnu. Christians like cBrahma and Theist, however, maintain an exclusive 'christian bhakti' to Krishna, which denies them the opportunity of delving into the Lord's ananta kalyana gunas.

 

The real issue with cBrahma here is that, he sees 'polytheism' as something unnatural. Typical christian behaviour.

 

That's the way I see it. Even Srila Prabhupada probably knew this would happen, but of course, he believed that the name of Krishna would gradually make these people see the light.

[Amlesh]

 

Some Hare Christnas believe that it is wrong to even worship Rama, Narasimha and Trivikrama. Thus, they give Krishna a unique 'monotheistic' identity which in reality is not Vaishnavism at all.

 

 

Yes, unluckily I've seen that also among many Vaishnavas.

 

A proper Vaishnav sees all different Forms of the Lord equally auspicious.

 

However, a devotee has an attachment towards a Particular Deity.

[theist]

I see by the quote in Amlesh's post that Dark Warrior doesn't yet understand monotheistism or Vaisnavism and even uses the term 'monotheism' as a derogatory.

 

Vaisnavism is 100% monotheistic.

 

Here is the Gaudiya Vaisnava view on Krishna in relationship to His other incarnations.

 

All forms of the Lord are present in Krishna. He is the original candle that all has lit all the other candles.

 

-----

TRANSLATION SB1.3.28

All of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord Sri Krishna is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on planets whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists. The Lord incarnates to protect the theists.

 

PURPORT

In this particular stanza Lord Sri Krishna, the Personality of Godhead, is distinguished from other incarnations. He is counted amongst the avataras (incarnations) because out of His causeless mercy the Lord descends from His transcendental abode. Avatara means "one who descends." All the incarnations of the Lord, including the Lord Himself, descend on the different planets of the material world as also in different species of life to fulfill particular missions. Sometimes He comes Himself, and sometimes His different plenary portions or parts of the plenary portions, or His differentiated portions directly or indirectly empowered by Him, descend on this material world to execute certain specific functions. Originally the Lord is full of all opulences, all prowess, all fame, all beauty, all knowledge and all renunciation. When they are partly manifested through the plenary portions or parts of the plenary portions, it should be noted that certain manifestations of His different powers are required for those particular functions. When in the room small electric bulbs are displayed, it does not mean that the electric powerhouse is limited by the small bulbs. The same powerhouse can supply power to operate large-scale industrial dynamos with greater volts. Similarly, the incarnations of the Lord display limited powers because so much power is needed at that particular time.

For example, Lord Parasurama and Lord Nrisimha displayed unusual opulence by killing the disobedient kshatriyas twenty-one times and killing the greatly powerful atheist Hiranyakasipu. Hiranyakasipu was so powerful that even the demigods in other planets would tremble simply by the unfavorable raising of his eyebrow. The demigods in the higher level of material existence many, many times excel the most well-to-do human beings, in duration of life, beauty, wealth, paraphernalia, and in all other respects. Still they were afraid of Hiranyakasipu. Thus we can simply imagine how powerful Hiranyakasipu was in this material world. But even Hiranyakasipu was cut into small pieces by the nails of Lord Nrisimha. This means that anyone materially powerful cannot stand the strength of the Lord's nails. Similarly, Jamadagnya displayed the Lord's power to kill all the disobedient kings powerfully situated in their respective states. The Lord's empowered incarnation Narada and plenary incarnation Varaha, as well as indirectly empowered Lord Buddha, created faith in the mass of people. The incarnations of Rama and Dhanvantari displayed His fame, and Balarama, Mohini and Vamana exhibited His beauty. Dattatreya, Matsya, Kumara and Kapila exhibited His transcendental knowledge. Nara and Narayana Rishis exhibited His renunciation. So all the different incarnations of the Lord indirectly or directly manifested different features, but Lord Krishna, the primeval Lord, exhibited the complete features of Godhead, and thus it is confirmed that He is the source of all other incarnations. And the most extraordinary feature exhibited by Lord Sri Krishna was His internal energetic manifestation of His pastimes with the cowherd girls. His pastimes with the gopis are all displays of transcendental existence, bliss and knowledge, although these are manifested apparently as sex love. The specific attraction of His pastimes with the gopis should never be misunderstood. The Bhagavatam relates these transcendental pastimes in the Tenth Canto. And in order to reach the position to understand the transcendental nature of Lord Krishna's pastimes with the gopis, the Bhagavatam promotes the student gradually in nine other cantos.

According to Srila Jiva Gosvami's statement, in accordance with authoritative sources, Lord Krishna is the source of all other incarnations. It is not that Lord Krishna has any source of incarnation. All the symptoms of the Supreme Truth in full are present in the person of Lord Sri Krishna, and in the Bhagavad-gita the Lord emphatically declares that there is no truth greater than or equal to Himself. In this stanza the word svayam is particularly mentioned to confirm that Lord Krishna has no other source than Himself. Although in other places the incarnations are described as bhagavan because of their specific functions, nowhere are they declared to be the Supreme Personality. In this stanza the word svayam signifies the supremacy as the summum bonum.

The summum bonum Krishna is one without a second. He Himself has expanded Himself in various parts, portions and particles as svayam-rupa, svayam-prakasa, tad-ekatma, prabhava, vaibhava, vilasa, avatara, avesa, and jivas, all provided with innumerable energies just suitable to the respective persons and personalities. Learned scholars in transcendental subjects have carefully analyzed the summum bonum Krishna to have sixty-four principal attributes. All the expansions or categories of the Lord possess only some percentages of these attributes. But Sri Krishna is the possessor of the attributes cent percent. And His personal expansions such as svayam-prakasa, tad-ekatma up to the categories of the avataras who are all vishnu-tattva, possess up to ninety-three percent of these transcendental attributes. Lord Siva, who is neither avatara nor avesa nor in between them, possesses almost eighty-four percent of the attributes. But the jivas, or the individual living beings in different statuses of life, possess up to the limit of seventy-eight percent of the attributes. In the conditioned state of material existence, the living being possesses these attributes in very minute quantity, varying in terms of the pious life of the living being. The most perfect of living beings is Brahma, the supreme administrator of one universe. He possesses seventy-eight percent of the attributes in full. All other demigods have the same attributes in less quantity, whereas human beings possess the attributes in very minute quantity. The standard of perfection for a human being is to develop the attributes up to seventy-eight percent in full. The living being can never possess attributes like Siva, Vishnu or Lord Krishna. A living being can become godly by developing the seventy-eight-percent transcendental attributes in fullness, but he can never become a God like Siva, Vishnu or Krishna. He can become a Brahma in due course. The godly living beings who are all residents of the planets in the spiritual sky are eternal associates of God in different spiritual planets called Hari-dhama and Mahesa-dhama. The abode of Lord Krishna above all spiritual planets is called Krishnaloka or Goloka Vrindavana, and the perfected living being, by developing seventy-eight percent of the above attributes in fullness, can enter the planet of Krishnaloka after leaving the present material body.

[Dark Warrior]

Say, do we have 10% of His attributes? I will trade you 5% if you give me your 2%.

 

Now, Do I really need to explain this again? cBrahma has already done this in the other thread, and Theist apparently couldn't read any of my posts.

 

These Hare Christnas are stuck in a major rut.

[cbrahma]

 

Iconism - The formation of a figure, representation, or semblance; a delineation or description.

Polytheism - belief in or worship of more than one god

Monotheism - the doctrine or belief that there is only one God

Theism - belief in the existence of a god or gods

Impersonalism - the practice of maintaining impersonal relations with individuals or groups

Impersonal - having no personality; devoid of human character or traits.

Pantheism - any religious belief or philosophical doctrine that identifies God with the universe.

 

The above is from www.dictionary.com

 

Unfortunately there does not exist a single english word which will take into account the Hindu concept of many Gods woven into the fabric of a single God.

 

You are using words or concepts which were formed to distinguish Christianity from other religions prevalent during its rise in the Middle East area, which are simply not enough to capture the intricate nature of common Hindu beliefs.

 

In short, Polytheism as is commonly understood just does not apply to Hinduism.

 

Cheers

These theological concepts are not so easily dispatched by a dictionary which only gives a minimal clue to their meaning.

Is Vaisnavism so mystical as to defy logical analysis? I thought it was scientific. It's too easy to say that about any religion or mode of thought.

'It transcends categories of thought'. No doubt God is beyond our comprehension but the belief system can certainly be understood to pick out one God over many. This is impossible?

[cbrahma]

 

Yeah... I must agree with shvu. Hinduism is unique. It doesn't fit into a specific category b/c it is eternal.

Monotheistic theology understands God and his attributes to be eternal. That is hardly the issue.

[cbrahma]

 

Some Hare Christnas believe that it is wrong to even worship Rama, Narasimha and Trivikrama. Thus, they give Krishna a unique 'monotheistic' identity which in reality is not Vaishnavism at all.

 

They also equate archa murtis of Vishnu with christian 'icons', but this is again a wrong comparison. The archa murti is not a representation of Vishnu. Once consecrated by proper agamic rules, the archa form is Vishnu Himself, who is amongst us, and even more accessible than the avatars themselves.

 

Vaishnavism is worship of Vishnu, or as the Gaudiyas do, worship of Krishna with the knowledge that He is identical to Vishnu. Christians like cBrahma and Theist, however, maintain an exclusive 'christian bhakti' to Krishna, which denies them the opportunity of delving into the Lord's ananta kalyana gunas.

 

The real issue with cBrahma here is that, he sees 'polytheism' as something unnatural. Typical christian behaviour.

 

That's the way I see it. Even Srila Prabhupada probably knew this would happen, but of course, he believed that the name of Krishna would gradually make these people see the light.

Apparently DW has made a full study of this particular sect called Hare Christians. They are totally off topic of course. The issue of polytheism must be addressed by any theology regardless of the labeling.

[cbrahma]

 

Christians like cBrahma and Theist, however, maintain an exclusive 'christian bhakti' to Krishna, which denies them the opportunity of delving into the Lord's ananta kalyana gunas.

 

The real issue with cBrahma here is that, he sees 'polytheism' as something unnatural. Typical christian behaviour.

 

 

This is not a Christian issue as much as you would like to dismiss it as such, since Christianity as I have pointed out before is not the only monotheistic religion. Nor are you an authority on my belief system. You are not speaking to the topic but rather evading with the use of 'ad hominem' labels as usual since you don't have the knowledge to address it.

 

 

 

 

<CENTER>Chapter 7. Knowledge of the Absolute</CENTER>

 

TEXT 23

 

 

 

 

 

antavat tu phalam tesam

tad bhavaty alpa-medhasam

devan deva-yajo yanti

mad-bhakta yanti mam api

SYNONYMS

 

anta-vat tu--limited and temporary; phalam--fruits; tesam--their; tat--that; bhavati--becomes; alpa-medhasam--of those of small intelligence; devan--demigods' planets; deva-yajah--worshipers of demigods; yanti--achieve; mat--My; bhaktah--devotees; yanti--attain; mam--to Me; api--surely.

 

 

TRANSLATION

 

Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet.

 

 

"Western culture is monotheistic, but Westerners are being misled by impersonal Indian speculation. The young people of the West are frustrated because they are not diligently taught about monotheism. They are not satisfied with this process of teaching and understanding. The Krsna consciousness movement is a boon to them, because they are being really trained to understand Western monotheism under the authoritative Vedic system. We do not simply theoretically discuss; rather, we learn by the prescribed method of Vedic regulations."A.C. Bhakivedanata Swami Prabhupada

01-30-70 Letter to Professor J.F. Staal

 

 

 

Those who are less intelligent want to worship different demigods for some material gain rather than worship Krsna. But here it is stated that a devotee who is always engaged in offering prayers to the Lord is worshipable even by the demigods themselves. The pure devotees have nothing to ask from any demigod; rather, the demigods are anxious to offer prayers to the pure devotees.

In the Nrsimha Purana it is stated, "Any person who comes before the Deity of Lord Krsna and begins to chant different prayers is immediately relieved from all the reactions of sinful activities and becomes eligible, without any doubt, to enter into the Vaikunthaloka."

Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 9

 

 

[shvu]

 

These theological concepts are not so easily dispatched by a dictionary which only gives a minimal clue to their meaning.

Is Vaisnavism so mystical as to defy logical analysis? I thought it was scientific. It's too easy to say that about any religion or mode of thought.

'It transcends categories of thought'. No doubt God is beyond our comprehension but the belief system can certainly be understood to pick out one God over many. This is impossible?

 

Should be possible. But the point is english words like polytheism, etc., do not adequately address these philosophies.

 

Perhaps sticking to sanskrit words like Deva, paramatma, Brahman, etc., may make it easier to communicate.

 

Cheers

[cbrahma]

 

Should be possible. But the point is english words like polytheism, etc., do not adequately address these philosophies.

 

Perhaps sticking to sanskrit words like Deva, paramatma, Brahman, etc., may make it easier to communicate.

 

Cheers

Prabhupada, an educated bhrahmin, had no such concerns. He used the term a number of times.

 

 

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>"Western culture is monotheistic, but Westerners are being misled by impersonal Indian speculation. The young people of the West are frustrated because they are not diligently taught about monotheism. They are not satisfied with this process of teaching and understanding. The Krsna consciousness movement is a boon to them, because they are being really trained to understand Western monotheism under the authoritative Vedic system. We do not simply theoretically discuss; rather, we learn by the prescribed method of Vedic regulations."A.C. Bhakivedanata Swami Prabhupada

01-30-70 Letter to Professor J.F. Staal

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[matarisvan]

 

Prabhupada, an educated bhrahmin, had no such concerns. He used the term a number of times.

 

You mean the educated Brahmin who called the moon a star?

 

OK.

[cbrahma]

 

You mean the educated Brahmin who called the moon a star?

 

OK.

Sorry. I forgot your hostility to Prabhupada. I didn't mean to bring out your puffed up offensiveness.

[matarisvan]

 

Sorry. I forgot your hostility to Prabhupada. I didn't mean to bring out your puffed up offensiveness.

 

Yeah....point out a flaw in your argument and that makes me a hostile person. Iskcon double standard are still in style.

[cbrahma]

 

Yeah....point out a flaw in your argument and that makes me a hostile person. Iskcon double standard are still in style.

Your primitive labelling doesn't even deserve a response.

ISKCON is not what it was, since it doesn't conform to Prabhupada's instructions and I am not about to hi-jack this thread to launch on another topic. Your disagreement with Prabhupada on a single point doesn't disqualify his brahminical status.

[matarisvan]

 

Your primitive labelling doesn't even deserve a response.

 

But you responded anyway and avoided admitting your flaw. Double standards.

 

 

Your disagreement with Prabhupada on a single point doesn't disqualify his brahminical status.

 

My disagreement? The entire world knows the moon is not a star. It shows Prabhupada made mistakes and his word cannot be used as authority.

 

I have no problems saying Hinduism is polytheistic.

[cbrahma]

 

But you responded anyway and avoided admitting your flaw. Double standards.

 

 

 

My disagreement? The entire world knows the moon is not a star. It shows Prabhupada made mistakes and his word cannot be used as authority.

 

I have no problems saying Hinduism is polytheistic.

So I gave you more than you deserve so don't complain. Hardly a double standard. The entire world is hardly an authority on Vedanta.

[bhaktajan]

Happy Birthdays to:

There are at least 563 Slokas in the Srimad Bhagavatam that enumerates a family tree of approx. 2, 500 persons and their wives from Soma and Surya Paramparas.

Both lineages start with Brahma, who is the "First Born Person in this Brahmanda", the "Engineer of the Planetary Systems", and, the "Progenitor and Great-Grand-Father of the Devas" — thus all the demigods descend from Brahma.

These persons are considered "Demigods" (ergo: Polytheism) in the same way that mundane powerful people are in-accessible and possess the insider knowledge of how to get things done and can arrange favors for those who could lobby their requests.

Demigods exist and thus polytheism is a reality that refers to real-life celestial personalities.

These Demigod-personalities are supremely pious souls who have been entrusted with the Cosmo's universal management —just as every Civic enterprise is supervised by a living person.

If I may adapt a verse from the Gita (Bg2.29):

Some look on the soul [the Demigods] as amazing,

some describe him [the Demigods] as amazing,

and some hear of him [the Demigods] as amazing,

while others,

even after hearing about him [the Demigods],

cannot understand him [the Demigods] at all.

Remember that Juvenile Delinquents neglect the idea that their graffiti and vandalism and public littering will be remedied with others expense & time

—and such youthful indiscretions are actually considered by them to be their privilege and an asset to their civic sanga

—yet the Juvenile Delinquent is under the supervision of higher authorities to whom they are beholding. And with good parenting such Delinquents may be reformed and arise to the status of "A pillar of Society".

[cbrahma]

 

Happy Birthdays to:

There are at least 563 Slokas in the Srimad Bhagavatam that enumerates a family tree of approx. 2, 500 persons and their wives from Soma and Surya Paramparas.

Both lineages start with Brahma, who is the "First Born Person in this Brahmanda", the "Engineer of the Planetary Systems", and, the "Progenitor and Great-Grand-Father of the Devas" — thus all the demigods descend from Brahma.

These persons are considered "Demigods" (ergo: Polytheism) in the same way that mundane powerful people are in-accessible and possess the insider knowledge of how to get things done and can arrange favors for those who could lobby their requests.

Demigods exist and thus polytheism is a reality that refers to real-life celestial personalities.

These Demigod-personalities are supremely pious souls who have been entrusted with the Cosmo's universal management —just as every Civic enterprise is supervised by a living person.

If I may adapt a verse from the Gita (Bg2.29):

Some look on the soul [the Demigods] as amazing,

some describe him [the Demigods] as amazing,

and some hear of him [the Demigods] as amazing,

while others,

even after hearing about him [the Demigods],

cannot understand him [the Demigods] at all.

Remember that Juvenile Delinquents neglect the idea that their graffiti and vandalism and public littering will be remedied with others expense & time

—and such youthful indiscretions are actually considered by them to be their privilege and an asset to their civic sanga

—yet the Juvenile Delinquent is under the supervision of higher authorities to whom they are beholding. And with good parenting such Delinquents may be reformed and arise to the status of "A pillar of Society".

It's debatable whether the presence of demigods qualifies as polytheism. After all monotheists recognize other types of supernatural beings besides God, such as angels. Not sure what the Birthday greetings are all about.

[bhaktajan]

 

It's debatable whether the presence of demigods qualifies as polytheism. After all monotheists recognize other types of supernatural beings besides God, such as angels. Not sure what the Birthday greetings are all about.

 

"debatable whether the presence of demigods qualifies as polytheism" --what happened here? Evidently you left your comment truncated.

 

How do we discuss 'polytheism' with out there being 'the presence of demigods' --I assure you, we don't.

 

Happy Birthday refers to all the devas who were born and now live and will pass --they have all taken birth from their demigod mother and fathers.

 

Next question at your convenience,

Bhaktajan

[cbrahma]

 

"debatable whether the presence of demigods qualifies as polytheism" --what happened here? Evidently you left your comment truncated.

 

How do we discuss 'polytheism' with out there being 'the presence of demigods' --I assure you, we don't.

 

Happy Birthday refers to all the devas who were born and now live and will pass --they have all taken birth from their demigod mother and fathers.

 

Next question at your convenience,

Bhaktajan

You give my complete quote and then a incomplete quote:confused:

Demigods are not God. They are limited subordinate creatures just as angels would be.

[bhaktajan]

"demigods qualifies as polytheism?"

 

If not, so then who are the freaking Gods of "Polytheism"?

 

What are 'we' talking about?

Who's on First? You don't know is on second?

[lokeshvara]

i'm not quite sure i understand the issue here. why is polytheism bad? the original post whether consciously or not takes the stance that polytheism is bad in light of western culture. well what makes western culture the be all and end all? the traditional monotheistic faiths= judaism, christianity, and islam all state it is bad. (i don't include zorastrianism because it isn't straight monotheism and antonism failed) well lets look at these three traditions, judaism has a strict understanding of monotheism but it wasn't always that way. and even as it appears today there are plenty of jew who take impersional and even borderline atheistic points of view so why are you concerned about what they think. next we have christianity, in it's oldest still existant form we have catholicism (western and eastern rites) and they are anything but monotheism. god has three divine persons in the form of the father, the son, and the holy spirit. next they also have the veneration of Mary, angels, and saints. You can pray to mary and worship her to get special blessings. this is not monotheism. if you want to look at some protestant movements ie: evangelicals and what not who deny worship of mary and the saints they still give just as much power to the devil as they give to god even though they don't worship the devil (kind of reminds me of zorastrianism) next we islam. this is probably the closest thing we have to pure monotheism today. and yet some shi'as worship saints and martyrs. furthermore have you read the Qur'an ? if that is monotheism at its best, no thanks. Now we move onto Bahai since someone mentioned it. this is not strict monotheism either because all of the "messangers" of all the other faiths and the gods get sucked up into one divine presense. it sounds more monistic to me.

 

so, what does all this mean? western standards of religiousity are not the cornerstone or measuring stick of good religious practice. who really cares if some hindus practice monotheism and some polytheism. hinduism is the oldest living tradition tradition in the world and it takes on various colors, shapes, and forms to suit the needs of the adherents. if people want to be down on hinduism because they think it's polytheism, let them. it doesn't take away from your own practice.

 

just my thoughts.

 

Jai Shree Vishnu!!!

[theist]

 

Important topic. I don't think it can escape the definition of polytheistic if left at that stage. It becomes impersonialism when the Brahman is seen as the ultimate source and reality behind these demigods or universal gods if some people prefer. Or it becomes theism when the Supreme Pesonality of Godhead is recognized as being beyond both the demigods and Brahmajyoti as well.

 

The theist is in the proper position accepting all and at the same time realizing where the Supremacy lies.

 

Polytheism is not well developed when it tries to stand alone.

 

Polytheism is not recognizing the Supreme Lord Who rules over the demigods and assuming these demigods are highest.

 

Their existence itself is not in question. Demons also exist.