PDA

View Full Version : Is hinduism pluralistic?



wcrow
22 February 2010, 11:31 AM
I have read in several places that Hinduism is pluralistic - that all religions are in some way a "path to god" - even if most would say that hinduism presents the best or clearest picture. I have even heard that some have a picture of Jesus on thier altar or as an Ishta-deva. Is this true? Does hinduism in general see other religions as valid paths? Or others gods as valid representations of the divine?

coolbodhi
22 February 2010, 12:45 PM
Read this post http://www.interfaith.org/forum/40377-post2.html

sanjaya
22 February 2010, 03:43 PM
You're going to find a diversity of opinions here. A lot of Hindus believe that "all religions are equally valid." Others, as you say, view all religions as valid paths to God, with the provision that Hinduism is the best path. Personally I believe that other religions, particularly the Abrahamic ones, are just plain wrong. But since I also believe that God cares about your deeds and not your theology, religious accuracy isn't particlarly important. A Christian or a Muslim who lives an honest live and does good is far better, in my opinion, than an orthodox Hindu who does regular pujas and treats his fellow man poorly.

sambya
22 February 2010, 09:27 PM
hinduism since the turn of the last century saw a major developement in one of its philosophies -- the idea that all religions are equally valid . however this thought was already present in hinduism as an expansion of the idea of advaita vedanta -- the universal nirguna brahman assuming form for devotees .

secondly hinduism being a overtly tolerant religion had this concept of swadharma where each being has his own code of conduct according to his position in the society . dharma or path was not considered universally applicable . likewise a mleccha also had his mleccha dharma . the buddhists who denounced vedas were also counted as a 'dharma' .

all these thoughts became more prominent in the last centuries and led to the solidification of the idea of universal religion .

however as sanjaya puts it , they also believe hinduism is the best path .

Ramakrishna
23 February 2010, 12:02 AM
While I don't believe that all religions are equally true, since that just wouldn't make sense, I do believe that most religions have degrees of truth to them.

"Ekam Sat, Vipra Bahudha Vadanti" translates to "The Truth is one, but there are many paths". I believe that Hinduism is the only religion that is 100% true with a full grasp of the Truth, but other religions also have validity to them and they ultimately may lead to salvation.

The thing about Hinduism is that there is no one major figure who basically said "No one attains salvation but through me." In Hinduism, God is in many forms, and people everywhere strive to reach God. I believe that Christianity at it's core has a high degree of truth to it. If people live the way Christ lived and try their hardest to be like him, then God will be pleased. However, over the centuries Christianity has strayed from it's core, become more inclusive, and oftentimes seeks to convert people more than anything else.

Anyway, yes, Hinduism is a pluralistic religion because it believes that there are many paths to reach God. People everywhere seek God, and they follow many different paths. I believe that Hinduism is the best path to reach God, but I definitely do no rule out other paths.

sanjaya
23 February 2010, 12:19 AM
While I don't believe that all religions are equally true, since that just wouldn't make sense, I do believe that most religions have degrees of truth to them.

I think this is a far better way to put it than the "all religions are equally valid" claim. Evangelical Christians (rightly) object to this, and say that all religions can't be true because they teach contradictory claims. It's far better, as you have said, to acknowledge that all religions have elements of truth. I hope this idea will replace Hindu universalism, which I think is self-destructive.


The thing about Hinduism is that there is no one major figure who basically said "No one attains salvation but through me." In Hinduism, God is in many forms, and people everywhere strive to reach God. I believe that Christianity at it's core has a high degree of truth to it. If people live the way Christ lived and try their hardest to be like him, then God will be pleased. However, over the centuries Christianity has strayed from it's core, become more inclusive, and oftentimes seeks to convert people more than anything else.

Heh, you seem to have quite a bit more faith in Christianity than I do. But then, what would Hinduism be without differences of opinion?

wcrow
23 February 2010, 02:31 PM
Thankyou for all of your replies. I have enjoyed reading all of them.

It seems that many of you would say that hinduism provides the best path - do you agree that this view could be a product of your Karma, or bias toward your own religion?
Personally, I have always felt it eisier to say that the divine manifests itself to each society, even each person in different ways - and that it is wrong to say one view of god is better than another, even if you feel other aspects of other religions are wrong, for example ethics, or view of the afterlife. But I am not a hindu.

sanjaya
23 February 2010, 06:10 PM
Thankyou for all of your replies. I have enjoyed reading all of them.

It seems that many of you would say that hinduism provides the best path - do you agree that this view could be a product of your Karma, or bias toward your own religion?
Personally, I have always felt it eisier to say that the divine manifests itself to each society, even each person in different ways - and that it is wrong to say one view of god is better than another, even if you feel other aspects of other religions are wrong, for example ethics, or view of the afterlife. But I am not a hindu.

As per my understanding of the Gita, it is true that one's karma is correlated with his spiritual awareness, so our view of Hinduism as the best path may be in part due to this. And I'm sure that most of us have a bias in favor of our Hindu religion. However, I believe that religion should not be exempt from scrutiny and critical examination (though unlike the atheists, I deny that critical examination will lead to a rejection of theism). So while biases may exist, we can overcome them through discussion with people who hold different viewpoints. Hinduism itself provides enough diversity of opinion to have these discussions, though I'm not entirely opposed to interfaith dialog as well.

It is a common view that to claim one view of God superior to another is elitism, and that exposing flaws in other religious views is wrong. But (and I mean no offense to you by my disagreement), this view ultimately cannot prevail. After all, if it's wrong to call other religious views wrong, then it is even wrong to say that exclusivist religions are wrong. If someone comes along and says that his religion is the only true faith, then we can't criticize that view without violating our own standard.

I do agree with you that God manifests himself differently to different societies. But much of organized religion is also the work of man, and so God's manifestation is obfuscated by man-made religious doctrines. I believe that by using logic and reason, we can slowly chip away these man-made dogmas. And some religious views will turn out to be more wrong than others.

But as you said, I have a bias, which is why I feel that I can gain by discussing my views with people who don't agree with me.

ScottMalaysia
23 February 2010, 09:14 PM
I have read in several places that Hinduism is pluralistic - that all religions are in some way a "path to god" - even if most would say that hinduism presents the best or clearest picture. I have even heard that some have a picture of Jesus on thier altar or as an Ishta-deva. Is this true? Does hinduism in general see other religions as valid paths? Or others gods as valid representations of the divine?

Hinduism believes in One God who appears in different forms. The Bhagavad-Gita states: "Whatever and whichever way men approach Me, even so do I accept them; whatever paths they may choose finally lead to Me, O Arjuna!" (4:11) Hindu writer Ed Viswanathan states that Jesus Christ is an avatar of God. I accept the Virgin Mary as a form of the Holy Mother, and when my wife and I get our own place and I set up an altar, I'll be putting a statue of the Virgin Mary on it alongside the pictures of the Hindu Gods.

[quote=sanjaya;40112]I think this is a far better way to put it than the "all religions are equally valid" claim. Evangelical Christians (rightly) object to this, and say that all religions can't be true because they teach contradictory claims. It's far better, as you have said, to acknowledge that all religions have elements of truth. I hope this idea will replace Hindu universalism, which I think is self-destructive.

The essence of world religions is pretty much the same. Most world religions would agree on the following teachings:

1) God is one and love of God
2) Obedience to God's laws
3) Service to God
4) Return to the Kingdom of God
5) Sin no more and live a righteous life
6) Glory of the Holy Names of God
7) Approach a spiritual teacher

Islam does not agree with this last one, but most other world religions do:
8) Sacrifice and renunciation of material pleasure

So the essence of religion is the same throughout Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. But the way they are taught is different because the audience for each religion was different. You don't teach complex calculus and algebra to elementary school students, do you? And you wouldn't teach PhD students in mathematics that 2 + 2 = 4. God has taught the people at each time what they needed to know for spiritual realisation. If you go to a doctor, he will give you what you personally need to get well. He won't give you a lecture on different kinds of medicine - he will give you what you need. Likewise, God wasn't going to tell the 7th century Arabs about His rasa-lila - they wouldn't have understood it and would most likely have acted out a perverse rasa-lila themselves. Instead he taught them to pray to Him five times a day and to stay away from alcohol. He didn't give them the full message because they weren't ready for it. Jesus Christ said "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." (John 16:12) He was acknowledging that He could have said much more about Himself and His spiritual pastimes, but that His disciples weren't ready for such knowledge.

I will finish off with a quote from the Bible.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16)

proudhindu
23 February 2010, 10:16 PM
Hinduism believes in One God who appears in different forms. ..

it is true but it doesnt teach God(s) are jealous like the abrahamic (and islamic) god.


The essence of world religions is pretty much the same. Most world religions would agree on the following teachings:

I guess you know it is not true.



I will finish off with a quote from the Bible.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16)

That statement of John(2 Timothy 3:16), "All Scripture refers to christian scriptures and Old testament.

wcrow
24 February 2010, 11:00 AM
So the essence of religion is the same throughout Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. But the way they are taught is different because the audience for each religion was different. You don't teach complex calculus and algebra to elementary school students, do you? And you wouldn't teach PhD students in mathematics that 2 + 2 = 4. God has taught the people at each time what they needed to know for spiritual realisation. If you go to a doctor, he will give you what you personally need to get well. He won't give you a lecture on different kinds of medicine - he will give you what you need. Likewise, God wasn't going to tell the 7th century Arabs about His rasa-lila - they wouldn't have understood it and would most likely have acted out a perverse rasa-lila themselves. Instead he taught them to pray to Him five times a day and to stay away from alcohol. He didn't give them the full message because they weren't ready for it. Jesus Christ said "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." (John 16:12) He was acknowledging that He could have said much more about Himself and His spiritual pastimes, but that His disciples weren't ready for such knowledge.


That actually makes a lot of sense. And I agree - after reading the Bhagavad and the Devi gitas it makes alot of sense to me.

Ramakrishna
24 February 2010, 10:02 PM
. ..
That statement of John(2 Timothy 3:16), "All Scripture refers to christian scriptures and Old testament.

Yes, that is correct. "Scripture" in that sense refers to the Bible, not the texts of other religions. I wish it would refer to the texts of other religions, but unfortunately a lot of Christians seem to only care about what the Bible says and nothing else.

sanjaya
25 February 2010, 01:45 AM
Just a small correction: the book of 2 Timothy was written by Paul, not John.

I also agree that the author of that passage was referring to Christian scripture. Specifically he meant the Old Testament, since the New Testament wasn't canonized yet. But back to the main issue. I'm not denying that God has revealed wisdom to other cultures via the many world religions, including Christianity and Islam. But it's worth noting that these religions do teach many things that are contrary to Hinduism. We can't simply parrot "all religions are equally valid," since mutually contradictory beliefs can't be simultaneously true. Hinduism contains a lot of wisdom that disagrees with the Bible. A cursory examination of the Bhagavad Gita uncovers a philosophy that doesn't concur with the ideals of Western civilization. Here in the West, the idea that it's better to do your duty poorly than to do another person's duty well would be scoffed at. In verse 2:11, Sri Krishna advises against wasting one's scruples on the undeserving, and says that "the wise grieve neither for the living nor for the dead." Elsewhere in Mahabharatha, he tells Arjuna to kill his brother Karna via dishonorable battle tactics, because Karna's means of killing Abimanyu was equally dishonorable. Such teaching disagrees quite strongly with the Christian standards of absolute commandments which may not be interpreted according to the context of specfic situations. How can we say, in good conscience, that Christian teachings are equally valid with these?

I think that Scott has correctly pointed out some important similarities between various religions of the world. But I have a question about point number 2. All religions teach obedience to God's laws, but can we agree on what those laws are? This is a very important point, because Christian morality is very different from Hindu teaching.

Yes, all religions teach some good. But some religions seem to have more truth than others. I believe that religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism contain teachings that are superior to those of Christianity and Islam. Others, including those in the latter two faiths, will obviously disagree with me. But I believe we have to face up to the fact that all religions can't be reconciled. And these irreconciliable differences aren't limited to theology about the nature of God and other esoteric things. Some pertain to matters of morality, as what I described above. Differences in moral teaching are why Christians send out missionaries to destroy other cultures, and we don't. It's important, I think, for us to appreciate these differences.

proudhindu
25 February 2010, 04:19 AM
. We can't simply parrot "all religions are equally valid," since mutually contradictory beliefs can't be simultaneously true.

Let us see what they are


Elsewhere in Mahabharatha, he tells Arjuna to kill his brother Karna via dishonorable battle tactics, because Karna's means of killing Abimanyu was equally dishonorable. Such teaching disagrees quite strongly with the Christian standards of absolute commandments

There is of course a strong point made that you dont follow dharmic fighting rules when the opponent has no intention to follow them himself.

This lesson was remembered by the hindu warriors and king when they were faced with Masud Ghazni.They didnt pardon him.

Alas the later hindu king Prithviraj Chauhan didnt remmeber this lesson and pardoned Muhammad gori.Well, everbody knows what the pardoned Ghori did later on.
ref:http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html

Now coming to the Biblical commands (since you mentioned them).
Thou shall not murder doesnt apply to war.

BIBLICAL RULES OF WAR:
Deuteronomy 20:13-18:
When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, PUT TO THE SWORD ALL THE MEN IN IT.

As for the WOMEN, THE CHILDREN, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as PLUNDER for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies.


This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive ANYTHING THAT BREATHES.

Completely destroy them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the LORD your God has commanded you.

(THE REASON-)

Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping THEIR GODS, and you will sin against the LORD your God.

Bible is comparatively kind towards captured women compared to islam.The jews/Christians can marry the captive girl and leave her after a month (if they are not pleased) but cannot sell them.

In islam everything is game as far as captives are concerned.

Deuteronomy 21:10-14
When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful WOMAN and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife.
f you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.



Noncombatants were never attacked in hindu code of Dharmayuddha(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharmayuddha)

TatTvamAsi
25 February 2010, 03:39 PM
"Is Hinduism pluralistic?"

Is the sky blue?

That is a trick question! Figure it out and you'll figure out the answer to your original question. ;)

sanjaya
25 February 2010, 10:11 PM
Let us see what they are



There is of course a strong point made that you dont follow dharmic fighting rules when the opponent has no intention to follow them himself.

This lesson was remembered by the hindu warriors and king when they were faced with Masud Ghazni.They didnt pardon him.

Alas the later hindu king Prithviraj Chauhan didnt remmeber this lesson and pardoned Muhammad gori.Well, everbody knows what the pardoned Ghori did later on.
ref:http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html

Now coming to the Biblical commands (since you mentioned them).
Thou shall not murder doesnt apply to war.

You are of course correct Proudhindu, I suppose I could have articulated myself better.

It's true that murder is recognized by Christians as being different from other forms of killing. My point was simply that Christian commandments leave no flexibility for reason. For example, I have been told by Christians that it is sinful to lie even in order to save one's life from an enemy. Obviously Christians rarely obey their own commandments, but they would likely disagree with the Hindu teaching that dishonorable enemies should be treated dishonorably. This is why in medieval Europe, people gave their kings absolute power (because of the commandment in Romans 13 to obey secular leaders) and refused to question even an evil sovereign's laws. Paradoxically, Christian absolutism leaves no room for mercy.

rcscwc
27 February 2010, 08:34 PM
The thing about Hinduism is that there is no one major figure who basically said "No one attains salvation but through me." In Hinduism, God is in many forms, and people everywhere strive to reach God. I believe that Christianity at it's core has a high degree of truth to it. If people live the way Christ lived and try their hardest to be like him, then God will be pleased. However, over the centuries Christianity has strayed from it's core, become more inclusive, and oftentimes seeks to convert people more than anything else.



That salvation quote is at the core of xianity. Is it true? If yes, then Rama, you are headed for hell. This single quote is enough to negate all your popous beliefs.

How did Jesus live? Drinking his host dry?

Sending demons into innocent pigs?

Going on a rampage in the jewish temple? Sure xians are on record as having gone on a rampage against Hindu temples.

Abusing and calling names of those who do not believe him?


While insulting the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus calls an entire generation a "generation of vipers." John 3:7
Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12
Me and you and all other non xians beware.
Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14
Are you excluded from the "most"?

Cities that neither "receive" the disciples nor "hear" their words will be destroyed by God. It will be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorrah. And you know what God supposedly did to those poor folks (see Gen.19:24). 10:14-15

Since biblegod has left off the practice, the office has beeb adequately done by his followers.

Thank God, xians are no longer emulating Jesus 100%.

ScottMalaysia
27 February 2010, 09:20 PM
I think that Scott has correctly pointed out some important similarities between various religions of the world. But I have a question about point number 2. All religions teach obedience to God's laws, but can we agree on what those laws are? This is a very important point, because Christian morality is very different from Hindu teaching.

Most religions would agree that things like murder, theft, lying, adultery, etc are wrong. I remember our instructor at our ISKCON Gita class saying that Islamic scriptures contain prohibitions against adultery, incest and pre-marital sex because it was necessary at the time that Muhammad was given the message of the Qur'an. Such prohibitions do not exist in the Hindu Scriptures because they were not needed. Arjuna understood the Hindu teaching that any woman who is not your wife is treated as your mother. If I may use an analogy - you don't tell an adult not to play with fire, because they already know that it's dangerous. However, children are more at risk of doing such an act, so they need to be warned that it is wrong.


Yes, all religions teach some good. But some religions seem to have more truth than others. I believe that religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism contain teachings that are superior to those of Christianity and Islam. Others, including those in the latter two faiths, will obviously disagree with me. But I believe we have to face up to the fact that all religions can't be reconciled. And these irreconciliable differences aren't limited to theology about the nature of God and other esoteric things. Some pertain to matters of morality, as what I described above. Differences in moral teaching are why Christians send out missionaries to destroy other cultures, and we don't. It's important, I think, for us to appreciate these differences.

Personally, I would place Buddhism at the bottom of your list. I see it as essentially a pre-theistic message - "do good to others and strive to be the best possible person you can". Hinduism is better than Buddhism in my opinion as it teaches belief in God where as Buddhism doesn't (although many Buddhists worship gods from their various cultures). Judaism is better than Christianity as it is not exclusive and doesn't restrict salvation to Jews only. It doesn't say a lot about the afterlife and some Jews believe in reincarnation. Most importantly it teaches a personal God with whom one can have a peresonal relationship.



For example, I have been told by Christians that it is sinful to lie even in order to save one's life from an enemy.

There are varying views. Catholics believe that it is permissible to withhold information from those who are not entitled to it. For example, if you were hiding Jews in your house in WWII and Nazis knocked on your door and asked you if you had any Jews in your house, you were permitted to say no because they weren't entitled to that information.


Paradoxically, Christian absolutism leaves no room for mercy.

And Christians have the cheek to say that there is no mercy in Hinduism?!

I've seen Christian sites and literature that says that the Hindu doctrine of Karma leaves no room for mercy. I read from some Christian source that Hindus believe that if you help someone who is suffering, you are interfering with their karma. Mata Amritanandamayi (Amma) said that if it is someone's karma to suffer, it is her dharma to help them.

proudhindu
27 February 2010, 11:15 PM
SM,

I would rather consult islamic sources to learn about islam rather than listen to iskcon or some radical hindu universalist.

Ruling on having intercourse with a slave woman when one has a wife

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/10382

What is a “right hand servant”? Does the owner of a “right hand servant” have to be married?

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/12562

Ramakrishna
28 February 2010, 02:38 AM
That salvation quote is at the core of xianity. Is it true? If yes, then Rama, you are headed for hell. This single quote is enough to negate all your popous beliefs.

How did Jesus live? Drinking his host dry?

Sending demons into innocent pigs?

Going on a rampage in the jewish temple? Sure xians are on record as having gone on a rampage against Hindu temples.

Abusing and calling names of those who do not believe him?


While insulting the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus calls an entire generation a "generation of vipers." John 3:7
Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12
Me and you and all other non xians beware.
Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14
Are you excluded from the "most"?

Cities that neither "receive" the disciples nor "hear" their words will be destroyed by God. It will be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorrah. And you know what God supposedly did to those poor folks (see Gen.19:24). 10:14-15

Since biblegod has left off the practice, the office has beeb adequately done by his followers.

Thank God, xians are no longer emulating Jesus 100%.

Well I never said that Christianity was 100% true. But you must recognize the truth that is in it. It's very easy to mention the Bible verses you did, but you forget about the teachings of Jesus such as:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are they who mourn,
for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek,
for they shall inherit the earth.

Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they shall be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure of heart,
for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called children of God.

Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."


"Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."


"Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who persecute you."


"Do not judge, or you too will be judged."


Once again, I never said that Christianity was a 100% fully true and righteous religion. But I think it's safe to say that if someone follows these teachings then they are on a pretty good path.

rcscwc
28 February 2010, 03:50 AM
Well I never said that Christianity was 100% true. But you must recognize the truth that is in it. It's very easy to mention the Bible verses you did, but you forget about the teachings of Jesus such as:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Sure. Those africans, S. indians, Australian aborigines fit the bill. They are poor, hungry and wracked by diseases. BUT they will get heaven!!! Great.


Blessed are they who mourn,

for they shall be comforted.
what a gem!! Don't Hindus too mourn?


Blessed are the meek,

for they shall inherit the earth.
You mean white xian peoples built their empires by meekness? Or arrogance?


Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,

for they shall be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure of heart,
for they shall see God.

Need bible for it?


Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called children of God.

Like Joshuas, Abrahams, inquisitors. Like the one who said: Don't think I come in peace. I come with a sword. From now on families will be torn apart etc.


Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Good. Hindus fulfill this criterion.


"Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
They teach that to non xians. They can do anything, but seek to protect themselves from retaliation. I am expected to turn my other cheek, so they can strike again.

They judge my religion, day in and day out.





Once again, I never said that Christianity was a 100% fully true and righteous religion. But I think it's safe to say that if someone follows these teachings then they are on a pretty good path.



Hinduism has better teachings on these things.