V
Vico
Guest
Trimurti means three forms. In Saivism, Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra are not deities different from Shiva, but rather are forms of Shiva. Brahma form creates, Vishnu form preserves, Rudra form dissolves.
- Status
S
Servant19
Guest
While Vico has kindly offered you one source (thankyou Vico) I see you are still keen to hear the EXACT Christian theology repeated in Hinduism.
Unfortunately you will not see that. The Trinitarian concept in Hinduism is very much embryonic. Christianity has elaborated upon it much, much further. But please note that I am referring to the CONCEPT being present in Hinduism. This is why I suggested you research a little into the concept “Sat Tat Om” which refers to the Trinity and classifies it as “the Being, the Thatness or immanence and the Word or holy spirit.”
(in other words, God, the Prophet and the Holy Spirit)
.
S
Starwarsfan2
Guest
That’s modalistic not Trinitarian
S
Starwarsfan2
Guest
Hinduism did not influence Christianity , it’s theology at best is modalistic , at worst is polytheistic.
S
Servant19
Guest
Hi starwarsfan. No one ever said it did. They are two independent religions but the CONCEPT of a Trinity predates Christianity…
.
M
MartinJordan
Guest
V
Vico
Guest
If Modalism, applied here, means that Siva is a single person who is revealed in three forms, then trimurti is not modalism. That would be because Siva is impersonal, and without quality (nirguna). Similar is Plotinus The Six Enneads. One could probably say that the saguna aspect is modalistic, but it would be incomplete without nirguna.
In Christianity, God is simple and one with three persons because the relations of opposition do not import composition, but are still a real difference. That is one reason why I posted that It is not equivalent to the Trinity.
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
A concept should have a recognizable shape. Trinitarian thought has it’s recognizable shape in the definition of Nicaea and Constantinople. What you are doing is arguing common theistic ideas equate to a trinity and that is not the case. Vico has said that Shiva is an impersonal force and I have yet to see any primary hindu documents produced to demonstrate a conception of anything like a hindu trinity.
I am not going to deny that hinduism might have some truth when it comes to talking about the divine. Even the greek philosophers had that, but does that make it a trinity? That makes it a theism, but not a trinity. Again, why is the definition of trinity all of a sudden so loose that it basically looses its essential meaning? The only reason it is loose is so you as a bahai may project onto this conversation.
So again, instead of just claiming, please show me from a early pre Christian hindu philosopher or theologian a trinitarian concept. Show me that they understood this interpretation of hinduism that you have. Also please explain how we must use the Christian word trinity and attach it to the hindu concept when they seem like two distinct and seperate ideas.
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
How is this a trinity? Are these three one in the same essence? Are they one in the same God? you mentioned before that Shiva is impersonal. Part of the trinity is that we see a community of persons, Father, Son and Spirit, who are personal, can interact and indeed even love each other.
A collection of Gods arranged into three with three separate functions does not in my mind indicate a trinity. It indicates a triad.
S
Servant19
Guest
Please remember Hinduism began a long time before Christianity.
The definition is loose and primordial/embryonic BECAUSE humanity’s understanding of Divinity was primordial and embryonic. The evidence is clear of humanity’s primitiveness during Krishna’s time since what was essentially a monotheistic religion which He started evolved into what was effectively a form of polytheism. Blatant human immaturity and meddling…
Everything was embryonic at that stage Ignatian.
You make me laugh when I see you expecting the somewhat advanced Christian expositions on Trinity in the Hindu Scriptures. You are completely ignoring the spiritual awareness and understanding of the population at that time…
Time and education are critically married together, yet many seem to miss this essential pre-requisite to Divine Teaching…
.
M
MartinJordan
Guest
Re Hinduism trinity concept pre-existing:
I wonder if knowing that Hinduism having a type of Trinity that pre-existed before Christianity actually help understanding the Christian Trinity.
Frankly I think it will likely vex those who are struggling with the One Essence, Three Persons Trinity.
MJ
I wonder if knowing that Hinduism having a type of Trinity that pre-existed before Christianity actually help understanding the Christian Trinity.
Frankly I think it will likely vex those who are struggling with the One Essence, Three Persons Trinity.
MJ
S
Servant19
Guest
This is effectively the same as asking me to show you the Jewish Scripture that clearly indicates and explores fully Original Sin.
They only know what they were given Ignatian.
If man could extrapolate primitive divine teachings to advance the understanding of a theology such a level as to be the same as a future Divine Revelation then …there would be no point in Jesus, because Jewish scholars/priests would have already taught it all…
There is a reason why new major religions are born every few centuries…
.
V
Vico
Guest
One Being.
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
Again, why is this to be called a specifically trinitarian concept and not just a theological concept in general? Why do you laugh at me expecting in the term trinity being applied to something it historically has not been applied to? Again, can i take the islamic doctrine of tauwhid, the absolute oneness of God in essence and person and just redefine it to a trinitarian understanding in my attempts to convince Muslims?
Can I make the argument that theirs was a primitive understanding that needed enhancement by the gospel, that we Christians are truly the ones who believe in Tauwhid? Only if I were dishonest with words. Only if words have no real meaning.
You have essentially admitted the hindu concept of trinity is nothing like the Christian concept of trinity. So how is it they are both called trinity? Is it because they are three? Are we to call Zeus, Hades and Poseidon a trinity? Zeus being the father, Hades being the destroyer and Poseidon being the preserver? Again, what you are calling a trinity is a triad.
When asked about understanding the trinity, did the Op have in mind a totally foreign conception which in no way relates to the Christian idea? A Christian idea I might remind you which has dominated the use of the word trinity for centuries? I doubt it.
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
One being what? The hindu gods? Are they alone one being or in the hindu sources are all gods, not just those three, one being?
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
If I can produce Christian trinitarian reflection in the persons of Origen, St Augustine, St Athanasius, St Gregory Palamas, St Basil the Great, St Gregory of Nyssa and the list goes on. How is it you find it so difficult to find a clear expositor of hindu trinity in the hindu tradition? You tell me that its true, you seem to almost consider me foolish for denying it. Yet you seemingly haven’t done the very homework you expected me to do.
Sorry, i don’t buy claims like that.
T
TonyBS
Guest
Would not Love at the Fullest mean sacrificing all for GodAt the most simplest, The Trinity is Love at its Fullest.
MJ
I would applaud all those who gave their life for Christ as those who know what True Love at the fullest is.
Also all that Justly gave their lives for God prior to and after a “Trinity Doctrine” also know what Love to the Fullest is.
The rest of us on this planet but work little by little day by day to try to work towards the understand and the Love they Had, let alone what the Fullest Love is.
Regards Tony
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
The Love of the trinity is God dying for us. Not what we do for God. This is the love which you deny.Would not Love at the Fullest mean sacrificing all for God
I would applaud all those who gave their life for Christ as those who know what True Love at the fullest is.
Also all that Justly gave their lives for God prior to and after a “Trinity Doctrine” also know what Love to the Fullest is.
The rest of us on this planet but work little by little day by day to try to work towards the understand and the Love they Had, let alone what the Fullest Love is.
Regards Tony
T
TonyBS
Guest
The difference between the thought I believe “God is One” and thus look for God in all and the thought I believe God is One "but" He is in no other religion but what I believe, is the issue here.
You will note Servant is Expounding “God Is ONE”, thus lets look how this can be so. Lets look at the complexities of the religious scriptures and see if they can be harmonized.
On the other hand others will pull that apart to make exclusive of a certain vision of “God is One”.
It is interesting that it is God that Created all that is, gave it Diversity and then put us amongst it with also much diversity, Gave Man exclusively Free Will to Grow and mature in the Love of the One God.
Since mankind has started this Journey, they have never excepted the next step God has given us in the path of this Love. The world, now, is as it is as we still can not accept such a simple Truth and thus alienate all that do not share our own view.
God, Holy Spirit, Messenger recipient of the Gift, Man.
Jews do not accept Christ and up the line, Christians do not accept Muhammad and up the line, Muslims do not accept the Bab and Baha’u’llah the future yet to unfold.
Interestingly the Other way around the Jews accept all gone before (limited scope), as do the Christians (limited scope), the Muslims (fuller scope) and the Bahai’s (All embracing scope).
Must be that we have to Reverse think to forward think
Strange creatures we are and to continue on this path is each persons choice. The ability to now look for the “One God”, is, Has now as we speak, dawned upon mankind and we can awake and greet the dawn, or choose to sleep.
God Bless and Regards Tony
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
None of this justifies calling a non trinitarian theology trinitarian.The difference between the thought I believe “God is One” and thus look for God in all and the thought I believe God is One "but" He is in no other religion but what I believe, is the issue here.
You will note Servant is Expounding “God Is ONE”, thus lets look how this can be so. Lets look at the complexities of the religious scriptures and see if they can be harmonized.
On the other hand others will pull that apart to make exclusive of a certain vision of “God is One”.
It is interesting that it is God that Created all that is, gave it Diversity and then put us amongst it with also much diversity, Gave Man exclusively Free Will to Grow and mature in the Love of the One God.
Since mankind has started this Journey, they have never excepted the next step God has given us in the path of this Love. The world, now, is as it is as we still can not accept such a simple Truth and thus alienate all that do not share our own view.
God, Holy Spirit, Messenger recipient of the Gift, Man.
Jews do not accept Christ and up the line, Christians do not accept Muhammad and up the line, Muslims do not accept the Bab and Baha’u’llah the future yet to unfold.
Interestingly the Other way around the Jews accept all gone before (limited scope), as do the Christians (limited scope), the Muslims (fuller scope) and the Bahai’s (All embracing scope).
Must be that we have to Reverse think to forward think
Strange creatures we are and to continue on this path is each persons choice. The ability to now look for the “One God”, is, Has now as we speak, dawned upon mankind and we can awake and greet the dawn, or choose to sleep.
God Bless and Regards Tony
- Status