The Origin of Hinduism

[archistrage]

This is a theory I’ve been working on for a while. I admit that I don’t know that I’m still beginning to understand Hinduism. However I have a basic understanding of it.

To put it simply, I believe that the Hindus are the descendants of Cain. I’m not saying this in a bad sense. I’m not judging the Hindus based off their ancestors, just putting forth a theory. Please remember that, this is a theory.

Here are my reason:

A) Hinduism is known as the religion without a beginning. This is not so much simply a statement of the fact that we don’t know who started, that’s actually one of their beliefs.

B) Now, with Cain. To understand this part, we much take a look at the geography of Genesis. Most Biblical scholars place the Garden of Eden somewhere between the Mediterranean Sea, and the eastern edge of Mesopotamia. So let’s say that’s where it was. After the fall of Adam and Eve, Genesis says that they moved east of the Garden. Visualize this, they’re going towards the Orient. After Cain killed Abel, and God banished him, Genesis again says that Cain moved east. Once again, towards the Orient. What’s more, it says that Cain will become a “restless wanderer.” So he keeps moving. I think we can settle on the fact that he will keep moving east, for these reasons

1. He can’t move west. Genesis says that he, Cain, must now avoid the place of his parents.
2. It’s unlikely he’ll move north. North in that region means cold, and Cain is used to the warmer climates of Mesopotamia, so odds are he’ll stay where it’s more comfortable. NOTE: I’m not saying it’s impossible he moved north, just unlikely.
3. Towards the south is the sea. So he can’t go that way.

So that’s why I think he kept moving east.

Now, there’s another part to this I would like to discuss, and that is the Mark of Cain. This is what originally gave me this whole idea. I think the Mark of Cain is what has come to be known as the Tilaka. It’s the red dot on the foreheads of the Hindus. Now with the Hindus, it is something they place their themselves, and I think this could be the same as it was for Cain, but it also could be that God placed a physical red mark on his forehead.

The reason I think this is the Mark of Cain, is because it keeps in step with what was happening in that time. Look at the way that God interacts with the people in the Pentateuch. He is instituting cultural and behavioral changes. By making Cain and his descendants have to wear that red dot as a part of their culture, as something they must do to survive, it ensure that it will continue on in tradition, much the same way that the Jews have survived thousands of years of turmoil, by clinging to their beliefs.

The next thing would be the similarities between our beliefs and those of the Hindus. There are actually several. For instance, in Hinduism, they their three main Gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. The Creator, the Preserver, and the Destroyer, respectively. These three Gods are also served by the thousands of lesser Gods. Hindu scholars themselves have said that it is a fair to look at Hindu’s three Gods compared to the Holy Trinity, and the thousands of lesser Gods compared to the Angels. I think therefore, it is possible to conclude that Cain’s knowledge of God was, how shall I say, perverted by misinterpretations, pagan practices, and so on.

One of the biggest arguments I’ve heard against this point, is that no where in the Old Testament does it say that Cain knew about the Trinity. Well that’s true, but in that same argument, no where does it say that anyone else knew about the Trinity, yet nevertheless we know it to be true. Looking at it from that perspective is sola scriptura, and is a mistake that often causes grave errors. For one thing, the Bible says that in the Garden of Eden God walked with man. Who is to say in what capacity he did so? In the Old Testament we see God the Father communicate with Moses as a friend does with a friend, face to face. Or rather, Moses’s face to God the Father’s back, seeing as how he says that Moses would die should he see his Glory. In the New Testament, Christ is incarnated in the form of a man, to come amongst humans. In the same Testament, the Holy Spirit descends on Christ in the form like a dove. In all three of those, the Trinity comes to Earth in some Tangible form, capable of being perceived by humans with our five senses. Perceived, but not understood. So who’s to say that the Holy Trinity did not directly interact with Adam and Even in all three persons.

Now please understand, these things are my theory. I’m not trying to push to get everyone to believe in them. I welcome any criticism you can offer, however before you call me an idiot, I ask you to remember to Hinduism is the religion without any known origin, and no one knows for sure what did happen to the rest of Cain and his family.

Archistrage

 

[TheosisM]

It is important to realize that Hinduism is not a monolithic religion. It is actually a group of varying belief systems. Not all Hindu sects accept the Trimurti (as you put it, the three “main” gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva). In fact, the largest sect, Vaishnavism, does not recognize the Trimurti theology.

Also, Vedic theology (which is the precursor of the more “recent” “Hinduism”) does not include the Trimurti. Shiva and Brahma are not Vedic deities.

 

[archistrage]

Hmm, interesting. Well, like I said, I’m still learning. Odds are I’m wrong.
But of course, I still think my theory has some merit.

But does anyone know anything about the history of the Tilaka (red dot)? Like I said, that was what originally gave me that idea, that it was the mark of Cain. I’ve been unable to uncover much history about it. A lot of people have proposed other theories, saying it was a much more formal descendant of the full body painting. Like I said though, it’s a theory, which means it has just as much standing as my own.

Archistrage

 

[Mvrk]

Hmm… interesting Tilaka theory, it makes sense.
*i love conspiracy like this, i don’t care it’s right or wrong, just for fun

but i think, your theory about Trinity and the “Heavenly” hierarchy still not too fit if you want to make it’s equivalent. Because the other Pantheon from another tradition also can be analogized like your opinion.

Remember Nordic mithology with it’s Valkrie? It’s reminds me with an Angel with white wings.

 

[archistrage]

True, I’ll give you that. But then again, we must also remember that God is God, and man is man. He is perfect, and we aren’t. We can’t rule out that God revealed himself in some way to other races and cultures, to give them the chance to fix any wrongdoings in their own beliefs.

For instance, there’s a supposed apparition, where Mary revealed herself to a polytheistic tribe in South America. She told them who she was, and all about Christ. Then when the apparitions ceased, the tribes added her and Jesus to their list of Gods to be worshiped.

I know that things like this happen to people today, where God gives them that chance to come to him, and people misinterpret what he wants or says, and go about doing things the wrong way. I can completely believe that God would possibly reveal himself to other cultures to give them that chance.

There’s also the stories surrounding what happened to Jesus during the years of his life between the finding in the temple, and his ministry. One of the theories is called The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, which purports that Jesus traveled to the Orient during that time, and taught there, as well as learned. For instance, the Golden Rule, Buddha had said it 500 years before Christ.

I think that some parts of the theory hold merit, but not all. For instance one of the parts hold that some people believe that Jesus survived the Crucifixion, and he and his mother Mary traveled back to the Orient where both of them died and are buried in a tomb there. I find this total BS, however I can understand how they might arrive at that belief. If he had told them during his travels that he would die then rise again, the Buddhists and Hindus, who believe in Reincarnation, would naturally assume that’s what he was speaking about. I think that the people they believed were Jesus who had survived the crucifixion were actually disciples of Christ. Do you remember how during the early part of Jesus’ ministry, how people kept say he was Moses or Elijah? I can see the people of the Orient making the same mistake for the followers of Christ, believing them to be him, especially if they started preaching and converting people there. To the mistaken ear, much of what is preached in the New Testament could easily be mistaken for his disciples being him. For instance the Eucharist, how we are now Brothers and Sisters in Christ.

Anyways, one of the reasons I can believe that Jesus went over there, was that during the time of Christ in India, a new form of Buddhism arose, one which preached Faith and Goodwill are equals with meditation and yoga in the path for enlightenment. Much of what this group believes appears to have an outside influence.

Now again, those are all theories. However seeing as how there’s little to no evidence to the contrary, we cannot rule it out.

Archistrage

 

[John7]

I believe that the Hindus are the descendants of Cain.

How did the Hindus survive the flood? see Genesis 6-9

 

[aspirant]

Hinduism is known as the religion without a beginning. This is not so much simply a statement of the fact that we don’t know who started, that’s actually one of their beliefs.

Hinduism is often called Sanātana Dharma, the eternal dharma. The point is not that we don’t know its founder (as you said) nor that it’s very very ancient (as your Cain theory suggests). It’s really believed to be eternal, timeless reality, without beginning or end.

Buddhists believe the same of their dharma, that it is the timeless truth anyone can discover or experience (and they believe many have). From what I know of Taoism, much the same is believed of Tao.

I think the Mark of Cain is what has come to be known as the Tilaka. It’s the red dot on the foreheads of the Hindus.

No offense, but I think not.

It is important to realize that Hinduism is not a monolithic religion. It is actually a group of varying belief systems.

Agreed. Most of what I know about Hinduism is shaped by the ideas of specific sects, and I have to keep reminding myself that not everyone views it the same way.

does anyone know anything about the history of the Tilaka (red dot)?

I don’t know much about historical origins, nor would I reckon most people do, but these markings take different forms in different sects. Saivites, for example, usually make three horizontal lines across the forehead. Vaishnavites tend to make a long U shape. Etc.

 

[wwolverine]

There are some references in the Holy BIble in relation to Asherah poles. When I first read them, my mind switched to some of the habits of Hindus, where they too use such poles ( dont know what they call them) when they go on pilgrimages.

Exodus 34:13( NIV) Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherah poles.

Deuteronomy 16:21, (NIV) “Do not set up any wooden Asherah pole beside the altar you build to the Lord your God”

 

[corinne333]

i love stuff like this!!! Catholicism is the one true faith, so it is natural to see some varients of it in other relgions (not the full faith, but partial truths).

i have noticed the same thing in aztec, native american, nordic, aferican, and chinese relgions!

i am not crazy! yeah!

by the way: has any one studied anicent russian relgions and seen some-what of the forshadowing of russia’s conversion to the Immaculate Heart?

 

[IanCorrigan]

**This is a theory I’ve been working on for a while. I admit that I don’t know that I’m still beginning to understand Hinduism. However I have a basic understanding of it.
To put it simply, I believe that the Hindus are the descendants of Cain. I’m not saying this in a bad sense. I’m not judging the Hindus based off their ancestors, just putting forth a theory. Please remember that, this is a theory. **

While I don’t mean to be harsh, this just seems so silly to me. The Old Testament, especially the early books, are mythological, not historical. Efforts to try to reconcile real history with bible-stories inevitably result in foolishness like British Israelites and the 6,000 year-old-earth.

Does the Roman Church even teach literalism in biblical interpretation? Would a Catholic really expect the Genesis accounts to be related in some objective way to work history?

 

[archistrage]

You’re on a Catholic forum. I’ve no doubt you can look at any number of posts and get the answer to that question.

However, I’ll go ahead an say it. Yes. The Church teaches you can look at the Bible (the ENTIRE Bible), from a physical, historical P.O.V., and from, essentially a spiritual P.O.V. (I’m a little rusty in the exact terms, if someone else wants to elaborate on that, be my guest).

Scholars, regardless of their religious belief, almost all treat the Old Testament as an historical account (ignoring the mentions of God where they will).

If you’re referring to the 7 days of creation, the Church is always a little iffy in that area (which we all should be, considering NONE OF US WERE ALIVE). Even now, when Pope Benedict has declared that the Big Bang and Evolution probably had a hand in our existence, the Church always remain cautious.

Even Catholic who believe in the Big Bang theory, constantly debate what was meant when it said 7 days. Was it referring to a day being a longer period of time? Similar to in the New Testament, where Paul says that to God a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a day. Did it mean that one solar day went by, and then several eons passed by, which God then continued telling the story from.

I would like to tell you the same thing I tell others who do believe in taking Genesis in a literal sense.
Do you believe in atoms? Do you believe that there are subatomic particles, moving at speeds no human eye could see, that all exist in a nanoscopic world? Then tell me where in Genesis God mentions any of those? He doesn’t, and that’s because he knows who he’s telling these things too. These are a nomadic people, not even farmers. They raise sheep, guarding them from wolves and such. Can you imagine God trying to explain Nuclear Physics to these people? No, and I’ve no doubt that they would have turned away from him should he have tried.
Instead, God told them a story, essentially a Parable, much the same way Jesus taught the Jews morals with. But he had the more difficult task of explaining a science. It’s been what 5, 6 thousand years since the time of Adam and Eve? And it’s only been within the last century that we have begun to explore the realms of Creation from a scientific point of view.

God told the people the truth; that the Earth and the Cosmos were brought into existence, the land, the air, and the sea. Then the lords of each of those elements, the animals, the fish, and the birds. Then how man came into being, how we were like God, sentient and self aware, and how we have dominion over all of Creation, not as it’s Master to rule it, but as it’s Stewards to care for it, and to live with it in peace.

Any of you, point out to me how any of that contradicts what science says. That the Earth and Space was created, that animals began to fill in the available niches in Nature, and how we are the Stewards of Creation, that we care for it (although some do attempt to rule it).

Archistrage

Archistrage

 

[gabrielhal]

Hinduism is the world’s oldest extant religion, with a billion followers, which makes it the world’s third largest religion. Hinduism is a conglomeration of religious, philosophical, and cultural ideas and practices that originated in India, characterized by the belief in reincarnation, one absolute being of multiple manifestations, the law of cause and effect, following the path of righteousness, and the desire for liberation from the cycle of births and deaths.