Brahman and Monotheism

[PearlSeeker]

Brahman is visualized in Hinduism in many ways.
1. As a God separate from his creations (that is monotheism, dvaita, dualism);
2. as different but still the same (qualified sameness, there are a whole lot of views of this kind which you can find here: Vedanta - Wikipedia) and
3. one in which Brahman is not considered a God but the entity which constitutes everything in the universe. Substrate of all things but still not a God.

In Christian theology God is transcendent. God is eternal and unchanging. God and creation is not the same. This is difference but not separation. There is a bond. A bond of love. God is in personal relationship, deeply involved, immanent, present everywhere - outside and within... One but not the same.

Strict dualism would be deism or gnosticism.

 

[atanu]

In Christian theology God is transcendent. God is eternal and unchanging. God and creation is not the same. This is difference but not separation. There is a bond. A bond of love. God is in personal relationship, deeply involved, immanent, present everywhere - outside and within... One but not the same.

Strict dualism would be deism or gnosticism.

If God has intention/s and is a creator who creates real universe/s with real souls, then the problem of evil can never be explained. That I think is the problem of exoteric monotheism. God comes out as jealous, ego-centric, dictator. etc..

The non-dual monism, on the other hand, has no such problem since the creator God, the Universe/s and the souls (jiva-s) all are temporary products of the non-dual Immutable. The non-duality does not reject monotheism but accords the unchanging Brahman and the creator God different status. The creator God, the whole of the universe, and all the souls are essentially Brahman -- even as diverse gold ornaments are all gold only. So, the Vedanta teaches "You That Art". And the seeker realises "I am that".

We understand the saying of Jesus "I am the way" as universal teaching -- applicable to all religions. Brahman is found inside the "I Am" awareness.

...

 

[Aupmanyav]

God is in personal relationship, deeply involved, immanent, present everywhere - outside and within .. One but not the same.

Yeah, I know. However, Brahman in my world view does not nurtutre personal relationships. One and the same, so with whom to have a relationship?

 

[PearlSeeker]

If God has intention/s and is a creator who creates real universe/s with real souls, then the problem of evil can never be explained. That I think is the problem of exoteric monotheism. God comes out as jealous, ego-centric, dictator. etc..

Why would there be such problem?

 

[PearlSeeker]

Yeah, I know. However, Brahman in my world view does not nurtutre personal relationships. One and the same, so with whom to have a relationship?

That's the problem - love is not possible.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Where there is love, there is hate too; where there is day, there is a night too. Brahman has none, neither love nor hate.

 

[atanu]

Why would there be such problem?

That's the problem - love is not possible.

Truth is the Goal. God is the best teacher who teaches about that. It is ultimately all about love. Why not?

 

[uloMartin]

Brahman By an Eccentric Notion as the Reality of All Things; Ultimate Reality of the Universe, Devices Neither Good Nor Love; But Content ; That it Might Fuel, That Which is For Mankind the Reality of Hope, Grace and The Reality of Love. Due to the Notion Of Namaste: ie. to Love Your Neighbor as Yourself; as a Borrowed Judea-Christianic Faith Stated; The Condition of Humanity in the Scent of the Greater Law; to Love Thy Lord - Your G-d W/ All Your Might; Mind Soul and Strength - Heart; So to Conduct Oneself in the Reality Whi[ch] Brahman Already Has Succeeded As Reality of [All] Things: Al-Haq حقّ‎. Brahman is The Essence:Quinessence That No Longer i[ S] The Essence that Perceive's of Such Relevance in It'[self]. Henceby Arrived of the Notion of Ātman.

The Conclusion of [Thi]s Found is to Aknowledge Āstika; "That Which is; and That Which Exists" as a Notion Whereby One is to Live Their Live's By in the Reality of the Content of the Things of Former Heavenly of Skies. By Notion The Concept of Brahman is No Different: Then the Sea Which Comes Within the Cloud's; It Ever Persists on the Formula; ie. Formulation of Bringing Reality -Come About. HereBy a Con[[cept of the Heavenly Hinduistic Thought: أل حق Al-Haq. Monotheism is the Concept That Bind's One Reality Bound. The Definition Whereby to Consent is the Fraction of one's Need; Hence-Theirfore is "لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِيَ دِينِ LaKum' deeNuKumwa Liya DeEnI" Ie. Your Consent of Your Understanding; Towards You, and Mine Unto Me. The Fraction of the Condition Wherein it is Written, is to Consent of the Reality Underlying the Reality of Heavenly Things; the Realm Wherein You Walk in is the Depth By Which You Perceive. HenceForth is the Destruction of Cause By the Reality of Untruth it Face'[es].

Brahman is No G!d then El is No Virtue; Every Destination towards GoD comes by the Definition of ʾIlāh.

He is Allah, the One and Only!
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begettet[]h not nor is He begotten.
And there is none like 'nunto Him.

All is Brahman.
― Chandogya Upanishad 3.14.1 / al-Ikhlās Qul: bismillāh a'ir-rahmān A'ir-rahīm

I realize that Hinduism ha[ve] many different sects][. Some would say that its actually more than one religion. So [] not trying to oversimplify Hinduism and make it seem like all Hindus are into what [] about. I know that many are polytheistic][. I know that many are henatheistic. Some emphasize the three gods [of] Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. Others have only the god of ]thei[r family.

I would like to talk about the form of Hinduism that believes that Brahman is the source underlying the universe, and that all the other gods are but his/[it's] masks, so to speak. (I realize this can get pretty complicated, but I don't want to write a book). To me []this looks extremely close to [mono]theism, and in fact could very well be said to be a form o[]f monotheism, if not a proto-monotheism.

I'd like to hear [your] thoughts about this from Hindus who are into this form.

Thanks.

W/ Rendition of ulo/Minart Youn

 

[PearlSeeker]

Where there is love, there is hate too; where there is day, there is a night too. Brahman has none, neither love nor hate.

As I understand advaita school there is Brahman without form and Brahman with form.

No. Where is love, there is no hate. Prerequisite is free will. That means there is a possibility of love/hate to choose.

If only Brahman without form is real then no love is possible. Not even between people because there is no "you and I". Love requires real persons.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, you are right. Some schools (plural and not singular) of Hinduism understand 'advaita' in that way. But that is not my way.
Brahman with form exists only at the level of the world of 'maya', illusion, Vyavaharika - so said the First Sankaracharya.

 

[Baroodi]

Yes as regard religion. Very simple curriculum. ABCs and 1+1= 2. who passes win and await a laureate. And who fails await God judging.

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is for believers. No God, self-judging for unbelievers (al-Kafirun).

 

[Kevin Fitzgerald]

Where there is love, there is hate too; where there is day, there is a night too. Brahman has none, neither love nor hate.

If Brahman has neither love or hate, does he have any emotions?

 

[Kevin Fitzgerald]

As someone who is trying to learn more about Hinduism, what is or does Hinduism believe in sin or penalty for trespasses against God or a deity?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Always welcome.
None. Do electricity or heat have emotions?
Brahman is addressed as 'it' in Hinduism, since it is genderless. It is not human, so no 'he'.

 

[Kevin Fitzgerald]

So if Brahman has absolutely no emotions how as a human can I relate to him? Is that a possibility?

 

[Kevin Fitzgerald]

Maybe I can clarify my question. In Christianity God is both transcendent and immanent. He is both creator and unstained by human fraility and sin and yet he is immanent because he came as a human in Jesus Christ. Thus he says he understands our humanity because he himself became man. Is there any ability to know Brahman like that?

 

[Kevin Fitzgerald]

I am sorry for all the questions! I am trying to learn. Thank you for your answers and your patience with me!

 

[Aupmanyav]

As someone who is trying to learn more about Hinduism, what is or does Hinduism believe in sin or penalty for trespasses against God or a deity?

Hinduism does not have one answer for questions, it always has many. You must have heard about diverse philosophies in Hinduism. So, different people will believe in different ways. And that is perfectly acceptable in Hinduism.

So, if you ask a theist Hindu, the answer may be similar to what a Christian or a Muslim will say. Some one judges (in Hinduism, the duty devolves to the Lord of Death, Yama, and his staffers, an accountant who keeps the record of the deeds of humans and his messengers to bring souls whose time of life is up). There are a few differences. 1. Not worshiping a God is not a sin. Not doing one's duty or harming others is a sin. If you are worshiping God/Goddess A instead of God/Goddess B, or none, that is perfectly OK. But you must be fulfilling your duties ('dharma'). That is most important. 2. The punishment is mostly 'not eternal'. After a corrective period, the souls go back to earth to hopefully lead a better life. Eternal punishment is reserved for the most heinous crimes. For example, being a traitor to one's country is a heinous crime. There is no appeal after that.

For an atheist Hindu like me, the question of trespass of a God/deity/Goddess does not arise, since I do not believe in Gods/Goddesses. I believe in existence of Brahman, but Brahman is not a God for me. It is the stuff that constitutes all things in the universe (edited: without any exception whatsoever).

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. and yet he is immanent because he came as a human in Jesus Christ. Thus he says he understands our humanity because he himself became man. Is there any ability to know Brahman like that?

I understand your question. That is possible for theist Hindus. That is what 'avataras' are. Gods taking human form and going through knowing the emotions of a human.

And that is not possible for an atheist Hindu who believes in Brahman not being a God. Like my electricity and heat, energy simile, Brahman is something very different from humans. It has no apparatus to have emotions, no need to know what is happening in the world. How does it matter to an electron or a photon, if you hurt your head while going through a low door? It will not make a difference to Brahman, even if Andromeda galaxy smashes into Milky Way galaxy. Brahman possibly has 80 billion galaxies.