Hindu website

[Martin]

Is this a good place to research Hinduism?
Hindu Website, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Self-Development and Spiritualism

Any other recommendations?
Thanks.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, as there are many schools of philosophy within Hinduism. I'll leave the online recommendations to my more scholarly counterparts.

However, this website has blurb...sort of a Hinduism 101 as well as Hindu Scripture that can be downloaded in e-book format (HTML or PDF) in both English and Sanskrit.

 

[Martin]

I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, as there are many schools of philosophy within Hinduism. I'll leave the online recommendations to my more scholarly counterparts.

However, this website has blurb...sort of a Hinduism 101 as well as Hindu Scripture that can be downloaded in e-book format (HTML or PDF) in both English and Sanskrit.

Yes, those downloads are useful. I have the Upanishads and Gita in book form, but wouldn't mind reading more widely.
I'm not sure what I'm looking for exactly, I suppose wanting to understand some of the key terminology better, and explore the basic differences between the 6 schools (duality, non-duality, etc). And of course the different approaches to practice.

I've also looked at some of the Wiki articles, this for example: Samkhya - Wikipedia

I visited this Hindu temple in London recently, an interesting experience. BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir, London (Neasden Temple)

 

[Vinayaka]

Is this a good place to research Hinduism?
Hindu Website, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Self-Development and Spiritualism

Any other recommendations?
Thanks.

There are lots of websites, and none will cover everything, or all perspectives. I say just go explore, and enjoy it. So too with temples. I'd definitely recommend going to 3 or 4 of different varieties. They can differ a ton.

 

[ameyAtmA]

Is this a good place to research Hinduism?
Hindu Website, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Self-Development and Spiritualism

Any other recommendations?
Thanks.

Yes, good website giving a broad view of Hinduism, and especially articles by Jayaram V. are well thought out, balanced and helpful to understand Hinduism.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would rather suggest (sort of strongly) that you to discuss things in this forum first to get a hold of what you are looking for. Wikipedia articles on 'Darshanas' (philosophies) and 'Vedanta' (duality/non-duality) are good places to begin. Why? Because we can keep you clear of biases. That is important.

 

[Martin]

I would rather suggest (sort of strongly) that you to discuss things in this forum first to get a hold of what you are looking for. Wikipedia articles on 'Darshanas' (philosophies) and 'Vedanta' (duality/non-duality) are good places to begin. Why? Because we can keep you clear of biases. That is important.

Sure, though I feel like a need a basic understanding in order to ask sensible questions.

 

[Vinayaka]

Sure, though I feel like a need a basic understanding in order to ask sensible questions.

I'd recommend 'What is Hinduism?" by the monks of Himalayan Academy. But I'm biased.

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is always the problem. I am not biased. When I discuss philosophies and sects, I do it as a perfectly neutral person and respect them (though may differ with them).

 

[Martin]

For the dualist schools, what is the duality? Is it between Atman and Brahman? Jiva and Atman? Consciousness and matter? Something else?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Between Atman and Brahman (Self and Universal Self - One of the meanings of 'Brahma' is the universe, please note that the third God of Hindu trinity is Brahmā, the word is pronounced with an elongated 'a' at the end), there are various levels of difference and non-difference in Hinduism. From purest of pure 'duality' to purest of pure 'non-duality' which does not even accept the existence of God (i.e., yours faithfully). The Multiplicity of Madhvacharya, the in-between nature of Ramanuja's Vishishta Advaita, Nimbarkacharya's Dvaita-Advaita, Chaitanya's Bheda-Abheda Advaita, to the non-duality of Gaudapada and Sankaracharya. Acharya is one who knows the subject well and can teach. So, it is one's choice what to accept.

Jiva means two things, a living organism or soul. Atman can mean soul but it can also mean the Supreme Soul, depends on the context.The distance in most Hindu philosophies between the two is not as great or stark, as between God and humans in Abrahamic religions. Again, the believers take consciousness as something that survives the physical body after death. And the Consciousness with a capital 'C' indicates eternal Universal Consciousness. At times same, at other times different. Other members of the forum are welcome to correct me if my post needs improvement.

 

[Vinayaka]

That is always the problem. I am not biased. When I discuss philosophies and sects, I do it as a perfectly neutral person and respect them (though may differ with them).

If you make a recommendation (as I did) you're biased. Bias does not mean you hate, or that it's a negative thing. More just personal preference, like which translation of the Gita you prefer.

 

[Martin]

If you make a recommendation (as I did) you're biased. Bias does not mean you hate, or that it's a negative thing. More just personal preference, like which translation of the Gita you prefer.

Sure, we all have preferences, and gaps in understanding, but I don't think it's a problem unless people are being dogmatic or sectarian. I find I tend to investigate the stuff that appeals to me more thoroughly than the stuff that doesn't.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If you make a recommendation (as I did) you're biased. Bias does not mean you hate, or that it's a negative thing. More just personal preference, like which translation of the Gita you prefer.

Vinayaka, you recommended a particular site associated with your venerable sect. I did not. If Meerkat visits a Hare-Krishna site, they will tell him something different. A Madhva or Sri Vaishnav site will differ from both. That is what I am advising about. Hinduism is a many-splendoured religion.I am not alone in this forum. Other people will all say various things. For example, there is at least one thing inviolable in Christianity that Jesus is the son of God. There is nothing inviolable in Hinduism except 'dharma'. One could be a polytheist, a monotheist or an atheist. There is hardly any 'ism' which is not available in Hinduism.

 

[Vinayaka]

Vinayaka, you recommended a particular site associated with your venerable sect. I did not. If Meerkat visits a Hare-Krishna site, they will tell him something different. A Madhva or Sri Vaishnav site will differ from both. That is what I am advising about. Hinduism is a many-splendoured religion.I am not alone in this forum. Other people will all say various things. For example, there is at least one thing inviolable in Christianity that Jesus is the son of God. There is nothing inviolable in Hinduism except 'dharma'. One could be a polytheist, a monotheist or an atheist. There is hardly any 'ism' which is not available in Hinduism.

But the thing is, in my sampradaya, as a service to all of Hinduism, and in the spirit of Hindu Solidarity, a unity in diversity, we write articles and publish generalist books for the entire Hindu world. The magazine Hinduism Today, from which 'What is Hinduism?' was made from selected articles, it is indeed representative of all of Hinduism. In contrast, ISKCON's back to Godhead magazine is about Gaudiya Vaishnavism alone. Perhaps you weren't aware of that service we do.

Take a look at any table of contents of the on-line version of Hinduism Today some time and you''ll understand what I mean.

 

[Vinayaka]

Sure, we all have preferences, and gaps in understanding, but I don't think it's a problem unless people are being dogmatic or sectarian. I find I tend to investigate the stuff that appeals to me more thoroughly than the stuff that doesn't.

And that's why generalist books are the best places to start, with the full understanding that this is a vast and varied faith we're in. Then you can narrow it down.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

For the dualist schools, what is the duality? Is it between Atman and Brahman? Jiva and Atman? Consciousness and matter? Something else?

Dualism is found in Sankhya (Purusha/Prakriti). It is also used (imperfectly) to categorize Dvaita in contrast with the older Advaita.

Dvaita posits clear distinctions (the five differences) between Ishwara, multiple Jivas and Jada (insentient matter). These differences are real and permanent.

Non-dualism is most commonly applied to Advaita, but logically, Advaita is pseudo non-dualistic as it is practically identical with the more common system of oneness-difference. Though Advaita claims to be absolute non-dualism as in, it allows no difference between Atman and Paramatman, it contradicts this premise by accepting -

1) the reality of multiple souls in bondage
2) the reality of liberation and
3) the reality of multiple, liberated souls.

There is nothing non-dual about any of the above. Hence, though it claims to be non-dual, Advaita is not non-dual - an outcome of confusion arising from attempting to tie too many diverse beliefs together. More specifically, the confusion comes from attempting to link Buddhist ideas with Vedantic ideas and the two are not aligned.

 

[Martin]

Dualism is found in Sankhya (Purusha/Prakriti). It is also used (imperfectly) to categorize Dvaita in contrast with the older Advaita.

Dvaita posits clear distinctions (the five differences) between Ishwara, multiple Jivas and Jada (insentient matter). These differences are real and permanent.

Non-dualism is most commonly applied to Advaita, but logically, Advaita is pseudo non-dualistic as it is practically identical with the more common system of oneness-difference. Though Advaita claims to be absolute non-dualism as in, it allows no difference between Atman and Paramatman, it contradicts this premise by accepting -

1) the reality of multiple souls in bondage
2) the reality of liberation and
3) the reality of multiple, liberated souls.

There is nothing non-dual about any of the above. Hence, though it claims to be non-dual, Advaita is not non-dual - an outcome of confusion arising from attempting to tie too many diverse beliefs together. More specifically, the confusion comes from attempting to link Buddhist ideas with Vedantic ideas and the two are not aligned.

I'm still trying to understand the different ideas about what Atman really is.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Dualism is found in Sankhya (Purusha/Prakriti). It is also used (imperfectly) to categorize Dvaita in contrast with the older Advaita.

Dvaita posits clear distinctions (the five differences) between Ishwara, multiple Jivas and Jada (insentient matter). These differences are real and permanent.

Non-dualism is most commonly applied to Advaita, but logically, Advaita is pseudo non-dualistic as it is practically identical with the more common system of oneness-difference. Though Advaita claims to be absolute non-dualism as in, it allows no difference between Atman and Paramatman, it contradicts this premise by accepting -

1) the reality of multiple souls in bondage
2) the reality of liberation and
3) the reality of multiple, liberated souls.

There is nothing non-dual about any of the above. Hence, though it claims to be non-dual, Advaita is not non-dual - an outcome of confusion arising from attempting to tie too many diverse beliefs together. More specifically, the confusion comes from attempting to link Buddhist ideas with Vedantic ideas and the two are not aligned.

Let's us not use this thread to promote your agenda to prove Advaita is not nondualism, okay?

I accept none the three things you posit above.

If you want to debate whether or not Advaita is nondual, create your own thread in Same Faith Debates. Do not derail this one.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Let's us not use this thread to promote your agenda to prove Advaita is not nondualism, okay?

I accept none the three things you posit above.

If you want to debate whether or not Advaita is nondual, create your own thread in Same Faith Debates. Do not derail this one.

Inappropriate and in poor taste.

My statements are not up for debate (I have not challenged anyone). Besides, with due respect, I have seen your posts on Advaita and you do not have the depth to hold a logical debate on what Advaita is and/or is not.