Is Hinduism the eldest of Islam and Christianity and budism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter excaliber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is an official Satan religion (aka Yazidis religion) which is older than all religions on this earth:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=293841
No, it’s not. It probably derives from ancient Gnosticism. And it’s not really an “official Satan religion.” I know that’s what Muslims think, which is why there have been instances of Muslims murdering Yazidis in Iraq (it’s always cool to define people in such a way as to let you kill them, isn’t it?). But they do not worship a being whom they believe to be evil, which is what “official Satan religion” would mean.

Edwin
 
Well, it depends upon how one defines “trinity”. If a “trinity” is a group of three Sacred Objects/Persons, then one may argue that Hinduism, as well as Buddhism and other traditions, do have trinities. That those trinities are different from the Christian form of trinity goes without saying.
The Hindu “Trinity” is not Siva Vishnu Brahma as some web sites depict.

The Hindu Trinity that is theologically more closely related to Catholic teaching is the Bhagavan Baladeva Paramatma Trinity.

That is, the first person God the Father is Bhagavan (Hari). The Son or second person is BalaYahu or Baladeva also having the form of Mahavishnu.

The Third Person is Paramatma, the supersoul of God as witness who resides in the heart of every living entity.
 
Yes it is older than those. It is debatable, however, if Judaism or Hinduism is older (By Judaism I mean beginning with Abraham).

Hinduism has of course claimed miracles, just as any other religion. But as far as fruits go I think one needs to consider India. It is a very impoverished country with a rigid caste system. Some Hindu’s are actively committing violence against the Church. Hindu “gurus” con the poor out of their money, etc.
Just wanted to comment on this. From what I have learned Hinduism is older than judaism since Abraham was originally a hindu.
 
Many Hindus see Jesus as an Avatar.

It is interesting that Jesus’ name in Arabic (“Issa”) is similar to a Sanskrit term for deity (“Isha”).
Yes. More than interested. Definitely related. The Isa Upanishad differs in style and philosophy than many of the other Upanishads.

The vedic hymns relating to a personal God often use Isha and Iswara. (a Divine Person, rather than supreme impersonal “Self”)

This is a VERY important point to understand.
 
The Hindu “Trinity” is not Siva Vishnu Brahma as some web sites depict.

The Hindu Trinity that is theologically more closely related to Catholic teaching is the Bhagavan Baladeva Paramatma Trinity.

That is, the first person God the Father is Bhagavan (Hari). The Son or second person is BalaYahu or Baladeva also having the form of Mahavishnu.

The Third Person is Paramatma, the supersoul of God as witness who resides in the heart of every living entity.
And some Shaivas (those who worship Shiva as God) see Lord Shiva in Three Perfections:
God Siva is a one being, yet we understand Him in three perfections: Absolute Reality, Pure Consciousness and Primal Soul.
 
Yes. More than interested. Definitely related. The Isa Upanishad differs in style and philosophy than many of the other Upanishads.

The vedic hymns relating to a personal God often use Isha and Iswara. (a Divine Person, rather than supreme impersonal “Self”)

This is a VERY important point to understand.
True.

The belief that ultimate reality is only “impersonal” is an aspect of Advaita Vedanta. And many, if not most, Hindus are not Advaita Vedantists. Most Hindus, I would say, believe in God as a Person.
 
I know what a denomination is, I am from one.
And how do you know Hinduism canot deliver?

Its interesting that the denomination I am from dose not GIVE you anything but a belief. Many people with good jobs among Jehovahs witnesses Got them BEFORE joining the faith…the faith itself deliverd nothing. How do “I” know? I worked at there world headquarters one of the highest privledges they can give you. And all the faith could do is have people work for free LOL.

It will be easy to test the faith.
Can there God give there followers anything? Abraham was rich…abrahams son was second only to pharoh…David was king…solomon was given great wisdom!
Moses split the read sea. The Apostles performed miracles. Sacred scripture makes it clear that there is a huge distinction between a follower of the True God and a pagan.

I am guessing that in other holy books of different faiths, the Presence of God is just as evident.

God dose not change, so it is evident today.
You are misreading the Old Testament. Try the book of Job for starters. Or, if you prefer, read sections 10-12 of Calvin’s Institutes, Book 2, chap. 10. (I don’t go as far as Calvin in arguing that the Old Testament saints explicitly believed in eternal life, but I do think that their misfortunes show that their relationship with God wasn’t just based on a calculation of worldly prosperity.)

A faith that is based on worldly prosperity is a rotten faith and worth nothing. You would do much better to become an atheist and practice virtue for its own sake than to serve God in such a craven spirit.

Hinduism does recognize artha, or material prosperity and social status, as one of the four legitimate purposes of life. And many Hindus worship the gods in order to gain prosperity. But Hinduism recognizes that this is not the noblest purpose of life, and that to seek true liberation you must despise worldly gain and devote yourself wholeheartedly to God.

Edwin
 
Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda would, of course, disagree with you here.🙂
Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda are of Advaitist (non dual) school.

Catholicism more closely resembles VishIshtAdvaita.

For Catholics, heaven is personal, eternal association with God, angels and saints.

Therefore we resemble the “devotees” of Saivite and Vaishnavite sects, more than we resemble the Advaitists.

However, many Catholic saints writings reflect Advaita realization as well.

Still, theologically, VishIshtAdvaita is more “catholic”.

It is also the recommendation of Bhagavad Gita because Arjuna asks Krsna to see His universal form. When Krsna grants this, Arjuna cannot handle it and asks that the vision of the Universal Omnipresent form of God be removed.

After this, Krsna says, “it is best if you think of Me as a Person”.
 
The book of Job is interesting
Even in sacred scripture it was obvious that a servant of The True God would benefit from doing so.
That is why Job was blamed for wrong doing. That is why Job defended his reputation…that is why Job did not understand why evil was happening to him.

Satan who was behind it, staged the whole event BECAUSE he knew
it was not normal for a man to be Godly and have nothing to show for it. That is why what happened to job was not normal. He was not being persecuted for his faith…THEN his suffering would be normal…it was not just a normal phisical ailment…Then his suffering would be normal.
The text is in agreement with my thinking. Keep in mind that after his test God blessed him more then he was before. He did not have to wait untill he was dead to find out if he was following the true God
But he explicitly said that he would trust in God even if God killed him.

The point of God allowing Satan’s “test” was to prove that true piety is not dependent on the worldly rewards that sometimes follow it.

At any rate, at the very most your argument can only apply to the Old Testament. (I don’t think it’s a good argument even there.) In the New Testament we are clearly called to follow Jesus to the Cross. It doesn’t sound to me as if you are really interested in being a Christian at all.

Edwin
 
Hinduism canot fairly be judged based of what a different faith says is right or wrong.

Christians were involved in a simular system called slavery.
Although slavery mostly withered away in Europe during the Middle Ages, and the race-based slavery you have in mind flourished only after the weakening of the Church’s hold on society.
And it took a war to end it, not christianity itself…LOL you would think christians would have been bleesed with atleast enugh wisdom to know that was wrong.
Many were. Slavery was never a universally accepted feature of Christianity the way the caste system has been of Hinduism. And the moral impulse to reject slavery came from within Christianity–Hindus only began to question the caste system under outside pressure.
Its hard to get information because I don’t know even one hindu.
There are plenty of good books. And probably there are Hindus in your area if you look hard enough.

Edwin
 
And some Shaivas (those who worship Shiva as God) see Lord Shiva in Three Perfections:
Yes. It is interesting to note that the Lord Shiva manifestation or forms are related to “sacrifice”.

Do you know the myth story about the great tumult in heaven when the demons and angels were battling so furiously that the “heavens churned” and instead of “cream coming to the top” … “hala hala” came to the top. The “hala hala” were the sins of the entire cosmic manifestation. When it came forth, it terrified both angel and demon alike because it was going to poison the whole creation.

“hala hala” also means “vinegar” in sanskrit!

Then, as the myth goes, Shiva comes forth and says (i am paraphrasing) … “I will save you and drink the hala hala” … and he does!

Siva drinks the sins of the world but he doesn’t swallow them … he holds them in his throat and this is why Siva is seen with a tikma (stigmata mark) on his throat in pictures.

I don’t remember the rest of the story but I think he makes a promise in the form of a prophecy

So, Jesus, the Servitor Lord and Savior, sacrifices Himself on the Cross and drinks vinegar, taken from a branch of Hyssop which is the plant known as Tulsi which can only be offered to Vishnu and He drinks it!

Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world!

Praise be to Lord Jesus Christ, Savior of this world and every world, in this universe and beyond!
 
Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda are of Advaitist (non dual) school.
If by “Advaita” you mean the position that the impermanent world is best seen as “maya”, then Sri Ramakrishna was not an Advaitan. He certainly knew about Advaita, but he did not consider it the “core” teaching of Dharma.
Thakur [Sri Ramakrishna] does not consider this world as a dream. If that be so, it will “lose weight”. [The world] is not mayavada%between%; it is Vishishtadvaitavada. This is because [Sri Ramakrishna] does not consider the jiva and the world as imaginary. He doesn’t think them to be an illusion. God is real, so are men and the world. Brahman is qualified with jiva and the world. You cannot get the whole of the bel fruit if you take away seeds and its shell.
 
Hinduism is polytheistic.
Not in the sense of positing more than one ultimate Being. Only in the sense that they say that this ultimate Reality is known under many forms. Based purely on natural reason, there is nothing wrong with this that I can see. But as Christians we believe that God has revealed Himself uniquely and finally in Jesus.

Edwin
 
I thought they believed that Hinduism reflects a universal truth that is found in some form in all religions. I would have thought that they were *less *likely than other Hindus to claim for Hinduism the kind of revelation that Christians claim. But perhaps I misunderstand their thought.

Edwin
You mentioned Hinduism lacking a notion of a “decisive, sovereign divine intervention”. That would be true, if Hinduism were pantheistic. Since Hinduism is not pantheistic, and instead is panentheistic, God intruding into the world thus becomes a recognized activity.

Sri Krishna is seen by His devotees as the “fullest” divine Incarnation-Avatar of all time. Other Avatars, like Rama, did not demonstrate such “fullness”, or give such a full Revelation.

And Sri Ramakrishna described his birth as an intentional intervention from the Divine.
 
If by “Advaita” you mean the position that the impermanent world is best seen as “maya”, then Sri Ramakrishna was not an Advaitan. He certainly knew about Advaita, but he did not consider it the “core” teaching of Dharma.
Oops. I was confusing Ramakrishna with Ramana Mararshi (brain cramp).

Yes. Ramakrishna had personal realizations of God, including with Jesus as I recall.
 
Well, Buddhism did not “come” from Hinduism (Hinduism is also known as the Vedic, or Brahmin, tradition). Buddhism came from the Sramana tradition, which is a tradition that is just as old, if not older, than Hinduism.
It depends on what we mean by “Hinduism.” Much of classic Hinduism was probably a response to the challenge of Buddhism and the other Sramana groups (such as the Jains). But I know of no evidence that the sramana tradition is older than the Vedic/Brahmin tradition. That seems extremely unlikely–the sramana movements look like ascetic, reformist reactions to Brahmin religion (what we normally call “Hinduism,” although as I said much of what we think of as typically Hindu belief and practice came later).

Edwin
 
If by “Advaita” you mean the position that the impermanent world is best seen as “maya”, then Sri Ramakrishna was not an Advaitan. He certainly knew about Advaita, but he did not consider it the “core” teaching of Dharma.
Vivekananda on the other hand … I’ve got a Vivekananda translation of the Svetasvatara Upanishad … not very personal, yet that particular Upanishad is very “personal God” centric
 
You mentioned Hinduism lacking a notion of a “decisive, sovereign divine intervention”. That would be true, if Hinduism were pantheistic. Since Hinduism is not pantheistic, and instead is panentheistic, God intruding into the world thus becomes a recognized activity.
Hence my use of the word “decisive.” As I understand it, divine incarnation is something that happens periodically in Vaishnava belief. Furthermore, this kind of divine intervention is not the basis of Hinduism as a whole. Perhaps I am wrong, but generally don’t Hindus see themselves as part of a tradition that goes back to the Vedas (even if their actual beliefs and practices don’t seem to have too much to do with the Vedas)? Isn’t this where Hindus would usually go when asked what the origin of their religion is?
Sri Krishna is seen by His devotees as the “fullest” divine Incarnation-Avatar of all time. Other Avatars, like Rama, did not demonstrate such “fullness”, or give such a full Revelation.
I recognize the difficulty of generalizing about Hindus. I have no doubt that some worshipers of Krishna do take this view. But generally isn’t it believed that there will be another avatar of Vishnu in the future? And how does the belief you describe fit with the cyclical understanding of the universe?

I was not claiming that Hindus don’t believe in a God who intervenes in history. I am aware that many/most of them do. I was claiming that Hindus don’t base their faith on a particular once-for-all act of sovereign divine revelation, but on what they see to be the insights of ancient sages into cosmic reality.

We believe that Jesus changed the nature of reality by the Incarnation. Something that was not true about God’s relationship to the world became true in this one act. I don’t think Hindus have a similar concept, but I am willing to be shown wrong.
And Sri Ramakrishna described his birth as an intentional intervention from the Divine.
That was not the kind of divine intervention I was saying that Hindus denied. Ramakrishna didn’t claim to be founding Hinduism but only to be one more guru proclaiming an eternal truth.

Edwin
 
I’m not sure I’d put it that way. But anyway, the cases are different. Our faith rests on Jesus Christ as the decisive revelation of God in history, and on His promise to incorporate us into His body. That being the case, any Christian faith worthy of the name must be able to trace itself credibly to Jesus through the past 2000 years of history. Hence any “Reformational” Christianity has a huge credibility problem from the outset. (Note that I remain a Protestant of sorts in spite of this, which is a subject for another thread.)

Christianity does not claim to be the most ancient religious tradition in the world. That is not the basis of faith in Christianity in the first place, so the fact that Hinduism is older is no reason to become a Hindu.

A good case can be made that Hinduism is a natural development of the human religious impulse. While it claims divine inspiration of a sort, this is more of an insight into the nature of reality than the kind of decisive, sovereign divine intervention that the Abrahamic religious claim when they speak of revelation.

Remember that “religion” is really an equivocal term. There aren’t a lot of things called “religions,” all basically the same and making the same claims. Christianity rests on completely different grounds from Hinduism. If God has ever decisively revealed Himself to humans in a universally relevant way, then basically there are two games in town: Christianity and Islam (of course there are some other contenders, and we can talk about them if you want, but it seems to me that these are clearly the two main ones). Hinduism and Buddhism are different things altogether. If God has not revealed Himself to humans in this decisive way, then something like Hinduism or Buddhism is likely to be true, although the cultural specificity of Hinduism has to be taken into account in any kind of Western appropriation.

So you can’t just compare the ages of different “religions.” You have to ask what kind of religion you think likely to be true in the first place.

I would recommend the work of Bede Griffiths (especially The Cosmic Revelation: The Hindu Way to God) for a consideration of the relationship between Catholicism and Hinduism, though there are a number of Catholics who have written about this. I should warn you that many folks here think of Bede Griffiths as one of those evil liberal heretics!

Edwin
According to The Book of Enoch, it was fallen angels that taught the beginning roots of pagan religions that later developed into Hinduism:

The Book of Enoch 7: 1-15

1It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful.

2And when the angels, (3) the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

3Then their leader Samyaza said to them; I fear that you may perhaps be indisposed to the performance of this enterprise;

4And that I alone shall suffer for so grievous a crime.

5But they answered him and said; We all swear;

6And bind ourselves by mutual execrations, that we will not change our intention, but execute our projected undertaking.

7Then they swore all together, and all bound themselves by mutual execrations. Their whole number was two hundred, who descended upon Ardis, (4) which is the top of mount Armon.

8That mountain therefore was called Armon, because they had sworn upon it, (5) and bound themselves by mutual execrations.

9These are the names of their chiefs: Samyaza, who was their leader, Urakabarameel, Akibeel, Tamiel, Ramuel, Danel, Azkeel, Saraknyal, Asael, Armers, Batraal, Anane, Zavebe, Samsaveel, Ertael, Turel, Yomyael, Arazyal. These were the prefects of the two hundred angels, and the remainder were all with them. (6)

10Then they took wives, each choosing for himself; whom they began to approach, and with whom they cohabited; teaching them sorcery, incantations, and the dividing of roots and trees.

11And the women conceiving brought forth giants, (7)

12Whose stature was each three hundred cubits. These devoured all which the labor of men produced; until it became impossible to feed them;

13When they turned themselves against men, in order to devour them;

14And began to injure birds, beasts, reptiles, and fishes, to eat their flesh one after another, (8) and to drink their blood.

15Then the earth reproved the unrighteous.

Chapter 8

1Moreover Azazyel taught men to make swords, knives, shields, breastplates, the fabrication of mirrors, and the workmanship of bracelets and ornaments, the use of paint, the beautifying of the eyebrows, the use of stones of every valuable and select kind, and all sorts of dyes, so that the world became altered.

2Impiety increased; fornication multiplied; and they transgressed and corrupted all their ways.

3Amazarak taught all the sorcerers, and dividers of roots:

4Armers taught the solution of sorcery;

5Barkayal taught the observers of the stars, (9)

6Akibeel taught signs;

7Tamiel taught astronomy;

8And Asaradel taught the motion of the moon,

9And men, being destroyed, cried out; and their voice reached to heaven.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top