He/She does not have full understanding of Hinduism, that is why he/she has asked these questions.
Which is very obvious. Precisely why I answered. It is also obvious that he is looking for One Source but he cannot see it in Hinduism because he has not studied it, just "looked" culturally from outside.
Therefore, the focus was on what will benefit the OP to the maximum, showing the One Brahman' that
became BramhA VishNu Mahesh and Devi exactly what he needs out of Hinduism. He does not need the rest.
I was replying to the OP, not writing an essay to please everyone
, especially atheists.
My reply to him/her is the same as to you. Hinduism ranges from atheism to polytheism, and Brahman can be a considered a God or not considered a God. All permutations and combinations are possible in Hinduism. Dvaita, Dvaita-Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, Suddhadvaita, Bhedabhedadvaita, Acintya Bhedabheda or Gaudapada's and Sankara's Advaita. No one view holds for all of Hinduism except for the concept of 'dharma'. All the rest is open to personal views.
So it seems you did not read this :
MahA-NArAyaNa Upanishad is one among many that describe the transcendental Supreme Reality in such a way that it makes a single Source undeniable, and makes any form-formlessness argument moot, any argument to call the Supreme Reality NArAyaNa or SadAshiv or Rudra or anything else moot, and make the Person-Impersonal, nirvishesha Vs infinite kalyAN guNa argument moot..
It is clear you do not know what I am , and cannot presume that I am any <fill in the blank>theist or presume that I am quoting from A C Bhaktivedanta PrabhupAd (like you thought a few months ago) becs I don't. Nor was the post showing just monotheism, rather, it was showing
One Brahman' as the Ultimate Reality.
I had written more. Had I not deleted it (thanks to a sarcastic thread that sprung up elsewhere on RF, calling it fairy tales and childishness - the usual story), you would have no need to explain all this.
I had said that
it is possible to see the reality as a spectrum, with Dvaita on one end and Keval-advaita on the other. I find no contradiction between Dvaita, VishishTAdvaita, all VaishNav flavors of (achintya bhedAbhed, dvaitAdvaita, shuddhAdvaita,) and kevalAdvaita on the far end. They are gradations / aspects / angles of the kaleidoscopic truth.
If in KRshNa avatar, PrabhU can be Rama for Hanuman and TulsiDas, He is too generous and allows for all angles - Henotheism, Polytheism (to those who look on surface only), Monotheism, Monism, even Monolatry.
At the same time PrabhU wants people to dive deeper, contemplate. not simply say "anything goes"
-------
One Brahman is a common thread to the mainstream Hinduism.
When someone says they find the truth in Sikhism, I am simply showing the same truth in their own Hinduism - One Brahman.
It appears that instead of allowing for relevant knowledge to coexist,
someone wants to police and reduce the DIR to this:
"Hi Hello How are you?"
"Happy <festival name>"
"How do you make ghee lamps / dhoop " ?
"Do you have an Ekadashi calendar?"
"What happened to Pandavas?"
etc.
Please carry on.
Happy Hinduism.