|
Post by clusium on Mar 15, 2017 23:49:42 GMT
Of those I think it has to be Vishnu or Shiva. - Jesus is part of a Trinitarian godhead and so is limited. He is also supposedly separate from the world. - Ganesha is generally not considered the Supreme, even by people who worship him. Within mythology he is often subordinate to Shiva. Within Smarta, he is considered no greater than the other 4 gods. - HaShem/Allah - both are considered to be separate entities from the material world - The Buddha - technically not a god - Krishna is an avatar of Vishnu - Ahura Mazda is not all powerful since Ahriman is his equal and opposite - Admittedly I don't know much about Manitou With Shiva and Vishnu, depending on what kind of Hindu you talk to, they are often identified with Brahman which is the ultimate reality. The Abrahamic religions suppose there is reality that is dependent on but separate from God which to me makes the Abrahamic god lesser than Brahman. I will say that Vishnu is considered same as Brahman but not in sense as how Advaita vedanta defines Brahman. Only Shiva is considered Brahman in that sense. Of the two major forms of Vaishnavism, 1. In Vishishtadvaita Vedanta of Sri Ramanujacharya , Goddess Lakshmi is also considered an unborn entity so that would hinder Vishnu from being the only reality. Yes, you could say that Vishnu is greatest in the sense that goddess Lakshmi is not considered flawless entity and can't provide Moskha to souls. 2. In Dwaita school of Vedanta, Vishnu is inherently different from all the rest of entities. Vishnu does not create the other entities. The other entities or Atmans are also eternal. It's just that they need Vishnu for liberation and to get away from suffering. According to Dvaita vedanta of Madhvacharya, there are infinite atmans and they don't become Vishnu after moksha but merely share some of his characteristics but not all of his characteristics. That is in contrast to Advaita or pure Shaivism that states there is only one Brahman/Soul/Shiva that exists. The souls are ultimately Brahman but they just don't realise that until they are under the influence of Maya. Apart from Advaita Vedanta, only the Kashmir Shavism and Nath school of Shaivism maintain that Shiva and Brahman are same and ultimately everyone becomes Shiva. Vaishnavite school never fully equate others souls with Vishnu. PS - The Hare krishna school considers Krishna as the ultimate god and Vishnu as being his avatar. I know it defies all the main texts of Hinduism but that is how it is. That is what a sect is - break away from the main division of a particular religion, because its own religious views runs heresy towards the doctrines of the mainline religion, but, not far away in doctrine or dogma to fully grow into its own religion.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 15, 2017 23:57:39 GMT
I will say that Vishnu is considered same as Brahman but not in sense as how Advaita vedanta defines Brahman. Only Shiva is considered Brahman in that sense. Of the two major forms of Vaishnavism, 1. In Vishishtadvaita Vedanta of Sri Ramanujacharya , Goddess Lakshmi is also considered an unborn entity so that would hinder Vishnu from being the only reality. Yes, you could say that Vishnu is greatest in the sense that goddess Lakshmi is not considered flawless entity and can't provide Moskha to souls. 2. In Dwaita school of Vedanta, Vishnu is inherently different from all the rest of entities. Vishnu does not create the other entities. The other entities or Atmans are also eternal. It's just that they need Vishnu for liberation and to get away from suffering. According to Dvaita vedanta of Madhvacharya, there are infinite atmans and they don't become Vishnu after moksha but merely share some of his characteristics but not all of his characteristics. That is in contrast to Advaita or pure Shaivism that states there is only one Brahman/Soul/Shiva that exists. The souls are ultimately Brahman but they just don't realise that until they are under the influence of Maya. Apart from Advaita Vedanta, only the Kashmir Shavism and Nath school of Shaivism maintain that Shiva and Brahman are same and ultimately everyone becomes Shiva. Vaishnavite school never fully equate others souls with Vishnu. PS - The Hare krishna school considers Krishna as the ultimate god and Vishnu as being his avatar. I know it defies all the main texts of Hinduism but that is how it is. That is what a sect is - break away from the main division of a particular religion, because its own religious views runs heresy towards the doctrines of the mainline religion, but, not far away in doctrine or dogma to fully grow into its own religion. That is true. Sects may often diverge from religions though sometimes they stay within the main principles or pillars of the religion. But some schools such as Hare krishna significantly diverge from the mother religion.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 16, 2017 0:28:51 GMT
Actually he is. Allah is simply the Arabic word for God, used by Lebanese Christians for example. Just as Dio is the Italian word and Dieu the French word. Allah is more than a word. He is a concept adopted by Muslim teaching which I do not follow.
The big problem is the notion that God is a proper name when it's not and thus it's hard to understand the notion that Allah as followed by Islam is not Yahweh/Jehovah that is followed by Christians & Jews.
That's not a knock on Muslims since I would be surprised if they didn't agree that Islam is different from Judaism or Christianity.
If God & Allah equate to the same thing grammatically, they certainly don't contextually.
No, that is not all Allah is, by any means! It's not what Allah means to Arabic-speaking Christians! No, not grammatically, I mean linguistically, which is why I brought up Dio, Dieu, Gott etc.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 16, 2017 4:25:52 GMT
That is what a sect is - break away from the main division of a particular religion, because its own religious views runs heresy towards the doctrines of the mainline religion, but, not far away in doctrine or dogma to fully grow into its own religion. That is true. Sects may often diverge from religions though sometimes they say within the main principles or pillars of the religion. But some schools such as Hare krishna significantly diverge from the mother religion. Yes. The same with a lot of religions & their various splinter-sects. Eg: The Jehovah's Witnesses significantly diverge from the mother religion too. That is what is meant by "Heresy."
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 16, 2017 10:48:08 GMT
Allah is more than a word. He is a concept adopted by Muslim teaching which I do not follow.
The big problem is the notion that God is a proper name when it's not and thus it's hard to understand the notion that Allah as followed by Islam is not Yahweh/Jehovah that is followed by Christians & Jews.
That's not a knock on Muslims since I would be surprised if they didn't agree that Islam is different from Judaism or Christianity.
If God & Allah equate to the same thing grammatically, they certainly don't contextually.
No, that is not all Allah is, by any means! It's not what Allah means to Arabic-speaking Christians! No, not grammatically, I mean linguistically, which is why I brought up Dio, Dieu, Gott etc.
The poll is based on English
I cannot answer as an Arab speaking Christian since I am not one. This is why I said contextually. I'm not concerned with linguistics. If everyone else sees the name Allah and thinks Christianity then my apologies. Since I link the name to Islam I would not think to choose it.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 16, 2017 10:56:19 GMT
Again, the notion that all of these different generic names for God indicates that there should be a proper name for God.
We all know the proper names for God since they are specifically mentioned in most Bibles. Islam has several names for Allah as well and many of the gods on this list.
Proper names rules.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,677
Likes: 1,302
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 16, 2017 14:07:54 GMT
I will say that Vishnu is considered same as Brahman but not in sense as how Advaita vedanta defines Brahman. Only Shiva is considered Brahman in that sense. That's interesting. My understanding was Advaita Vedanta said all 5 deities of the Smarta Panchayatana puja were equal and all represented Brahman? Is that wrong? (Although if I'm gonna take that tack, Ganesha is on a par with Shiva and Vishnu) From what I can tell (and I could be way off here!), the advaitic sects of Vaishnavism tends to lean more towards panentheism - that the universe is contained within Vishnu but there is more to Vishnu than just the universe. While as Advaita Vedanta and those schools of Shaivism, as you say tend to say Brahman=Atman=universe. It seems to me then that Vishnu under Vaishnavism would arguably be greater than Shiva under Shaivism as there is more to Vishnu than just the universe. But either way both represent the totality of reality, where the two sects differ is more where they assign the limits of reality. Or so it seems to me anyway, I bow to your much greater knowledge on the subject!
Of course once you bring the dualistic denominations into the debate it becomes even more confusing!
Yeah, I find the ISKCON stance a bit confusing. I spoke to an ISKCON follower for a bit and he used Vishnu and Krishna interchangeably. From what I can work out, Krishna walked the earth so in that sense he is like an avatar but then unlike other avatars he is supposedly unaltered from the Godhead. Vishnu seems to be a form he can display himself as. I must say I love all the diversity in Hindu thought.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 16, 2017 15:09:40 GMT
The Lost One said: Yes, you are correct. Advaita does indeed say that all those 5 deities are equal and represent Brahman with attributes. But I was trying to differentiate between Vaishnavism and Shaivism schools. What I intended to say was that Vaishnavism is much more different from Advaita than Shavism is from Advaita. I was trying to compare Vishnu of Vaishnavism and Shiva of Shaivism and not the Shiva and Vishnu of Advaita. At least two schools of Shaivism are very close to Advaita Vendanta . As per those schools every jivatma (sentient being) completely (100%) attains the state of Shiva after Moksha. Just as in Advaita every sentient being (and not just the 5 deities you mentioned) attains the state of Brahman after moksha. But none of the Vaishnavite schools say that living beings completely attain the state of Vishnu after Moksha. Vishishtadviata school of Vaishnavism says that a soul is a part of Vishnu but not 100% Vishnu. Davita school of Vaishnavism says that there is eternal differences in nature of Vishnu and souls. Vishnu is the greatest in the sense that only he can provide moksha to souls but my contention is that as long as there is dualism at any level, a god is not in complete control of everything. In Advaita and some schools of Shaivism, only one partless Brahman/Shiva exists. Because Kiera is only Kiera as long as she is under the influence of maya, in the long term Kiera won't exist. Now lets check the definition of 'reality' and 'infinity' according to Hinduism. Reality or infinity is what always exists. Whatever exists for a limited time is not real. Shiva or Brahman is what always exists and any other entity has no real existence. Thus, Brahman/Shiva is greatest simply because another entity cannot exist and Brahman/Shiva is in complete command of itself. That state is represented by Sat, Chit and Ananda. Sat means existence, Chit means Consciousness and Ananda means blissful state. But in the universe of Vaishnavism's Vishnu, Sat Chit Ananda is not a permanent state. P.S - According to Advaita, all those 5 deities are Brahman with attributes, but once you get moksha, all those 5 deities vanish because the ultimate reality is Brahman without attributes. So all those 5 deities as well as apparent universe are all ultimately fake. I know it sounds absurd but the core teaching of Advaita is that ultimate reality is Brahman only and gods are fictitious just as universe. However those 5 gods have very high significance because devotion is considered the first step to enlightenment and probably because Shankara would have realised that he couldn't establish a Hindu school without including the main deities of his time . But advanced spiritual seekers of Advaita ignore the worship of those 5 deities and see knowledge (jnana) alone as valid path to Moksha. The inclusion of 5 deities as manifestation of Brahman was just an effort to establish a more inclusive school or a result of social/political pressure. The deeper teachings of Shankara completely reject gods as having any real existence (including those 5 deities). However, his followers and his school further solidified the position of those 5 deities in last 1200 years. I might start a thread on discussing what might be little differences between Advaita and Kashmir Shavism which are very similar philosophies but do differ on some things. Problem with ISKCON is that it is not based on Veda/Upanishad but mainly on two texts - Bhagavata Purana and biased translation of Bhagavad Gita - Krishna happens to be in those 2 books and thus they call him as God and others as demi-god.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on Mar 16, 2017 15:29:54 GMT
My cat is the greatest god of all time. Just spend 10 minutes with her before feeding time.....you'll see!
|
|
|
Post by looking4klingons on Mar 16, 2017 16:18:15 GMT
You don't have the God of the Jews on here! The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, and King David!
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 16, 2017 17:21:02 GMT
You don't have the God of the Jews on here! The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, and King David! Yes I do. HaShem Is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, etc. Because Jewish people are very reverent when it comes to talking about God, they usually call Him 'HaShem,' which is Hebrew for 'The Name.' In addition, whenever they spell God, they usually spell as 'G-D.'
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,677
Likes: 1,302
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 16, 2017 19:19:26 GMT
Thus, Brahman/Shiva is greatest simply because another entity cannot exist and Brahman/Shiva is in complete command of itself. I can see why that would be true when comparing Shiva of Shaivism to the Vishnu of the dvaita schools of Vaishnavism but it seems the vishishadwaita ones imply nothing existing outside of Vishnu, though nothing that exists is equal to Vishnu. Interesting. I have heard subscribers to Advaita Vedanta saying they didn't believe in personal gods but I didn't realise it was so explicit in Shankara's thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Mar 16, 2017 23:07:20 GMT
No, that is not all Allah is, by any means! It's not what Allah means to Arabic-speaking Christians! No, not grammatically, I mean linguistically, which is why I brought up Dio, Dieu, Gott etc.
The poll is based on English
I cannot answer as an Arab speaking Christian since I am not one. This is why I said contextually. I'm not concerned with linguistics. If everyone else sees the name Allah and thinks Christianity then my apologies. Since I link the name to Islam I would not think t o choose it. Well obviously not everyone seeing the name Allah will think Christianity but there are 100s of 1000s of Arabic-speaking Christians around the world.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 16, 2017 23:24:28 GMT
The Lost One said: It is true that that nothing outside of God exists according to Vishistadvaita. But Vishnu alone does not constitute Brahman. Consider this note from Wikipedia article on Vishishtadvaita Historically, Vishishtadvaita (and whole of Ramanuja's school) has been called as "Sri Vaishnavism". Sri is another name of Goddess Lakshmi. It is only recently that Sri Vaishnavites have started stressing on inseparability of Vishnu and Lakshmi. Ramanuja initially differentiated a lot between them and even today philosophers of Vishishtadvaita agree that Vishnu and Lakshmi are two different entities even if inseparable. Yeah, I find it very interesting and I actually like the fact that those 5 deities have been given a high position even if they are ultimately considered as fake as any other soul. I think Shankara saw the need for devotion and theistic worship. Not every one has capability to seek the path of knowledge. Devotion is a more simpler form of seeking liberation. Notice that Advaita doesn't say that one can get moksha from worship of gods. But it does say that worship of gods purifies a soul and prepares the soul for seeking liberation through jnana (knowledge).
|
|
romad
Sophomore
@romad
Posts: 173
Likes: 40
|
Post by romad on Mar 16, 2017 23:40:52 GMT
Thou art God, and I am God and all that groks is God.” ―Robert A. Heinlein
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,677
Likes: 1,302
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 17, 2017 0:25:31 GMT
It is true that that nothing outside of God exists according to Vishistadvaita. But Vishnu alone does not constitute Brahman. Consider this note from Wikipedia article on Vishishtadvaita Historically, Vishishtadvaita (and whole of Ramanuja's school) has been called as "Sri Vaishnavism". Sri is another name of Goddess Lakshmi. It is only recently that Sri Vaishnavites have started stressing on inseparability Vishnu and Lakshmi. Ramanuja initially differentiated a lot between them and even today philosophers of Vishishtadvaita agree that Vishnu and Lakshmi are two different entities even if inseparable. Fair point. I guess Shiva wins! Personally I think it might be a case of different strokes for different folks, whether contemplation or devotion help you feel closer to the transcendent (or for Shaktis I guess more esoteric practices) there's no right or wrong answer. Whether Shankara would have agreed I'm not sure!
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 17, 2017 0:38:01 GMT
Can't agree more. Knowledge, devotion, yoga, esoteric practises and other paths are all valid as far as I am concerned. Though just like you I can't say what Shankara thought of it. Shankara did indeed create poems about various deities and in some of those poems he raised a particular deity above the other 4 and asked people to worship him/her exclusively. Though it had been tradition for many Indians that when they praise a particular deity in a poem, they raise that particular deity's position above all others. But when I was posting on one Advaita forum they said that devotion is only a valid path initially and all Advaitins have to eventually leave devotion as clinging to idea of gods means clinging to unreal. So ultimately, advanced seekers of Advaita only concentrate on contemplation.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Mar 17, 2017 8:24:31 GMT
The Lost OneThat said, in a way Vishnu can also be called greatest because in the universe of Shiva only Shiva exists. So there is only one then he is greatest against what?
|
|
|
Post by looking4klingons on Mar 17, 2017 8:32:46 GMT
You don't have the God of the Jews on here! The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, and King David! Yes I do. HaShem Is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, etc. Because Jewish people are very reverent when it comes to talking about God, they usually call Him 'HaShem,' which is Hebrew for 'The Name.' In addition, whenever they spell God, they usually spell as 'G-D.' Oh, ok. I understand.
|
|