Krishna - Historical or mythological?

[Dawnofhope]

@Arian who/what is god that correlates to Hindu "and" abrahamic belief when you say there is no proof he is an incarnation of god (in another one of your posts)?

The Supreme Deity for many Hindus is one or all of the Trimurti: Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva. I believe these are different manifestations of the Supreme Being.

If you don't know what god is, how would you recognize and acknowledge there is no proof for what you can't define?

The is no absolute proofs but there are evidences of the Divine. They are the Teacher, the Teachings and the influences on those whom they inspire.

Unless you're going off read and oral opinions and beliefs, it would make sense to go off your own experiences to explain answers to people's questions?

I’m comfortable with Hindus and Hinduism.

Then how do you know? ...

For conversation rather than yes/no answers.

How do I know it is Krishna I’ve experienced. How do you know when you are in love?

Are you basing your view soley on some groups of Hindus mostly who believe one thing over another? (Not study)

Where I live, over two percent of our population are Hindus. There are higher proportions that work in the health care setting where I work.

t seems like when we say "Hinduism is this" you say "but..not all Hindus do," that sounds more like dodging what Hinduism and your interpretation by the fact that Hinduism is diverse rather than fixed. Varied interpretation all comes from the same unredefined source regardless who believes in it and how strong it is.

What is more much important than specific religious beliefs are our shared humanity.

Hinduism can be culturally or ethnically defined without the need for strong spiritual beliefs.... but there needs to be spiritual believes regardless, right (regardless how strong or weak it is to a person or whether the person believes that particular interpretation of those/that spiritual belief/s)?

That an from what I gather, Hinduism does not have a life after death abrahamic scenario. Even @Aupmanyav mentioned Hindus believe in reincarnation (not life after death) though he personally doesn't believe in it.

So how many Hindus do you suppose are atheists like Aup?

 

[Aupmanyav]

A reproduction of atoms in different forms?

No production, nothing new. Dispersion, scattering, entering new combinations, living and non-living - my bones will form part of a sediment after the my ashes are immersed in a River Yamuna. After 500 million years, they may be a part of a metamorphic rock if they undergo a baptism in the inner layers of earth. Why are people so afraid of that truth?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Both "Parashurama" and "Krishna" were said to be the avatar's of lord "Vishnu", and they both existed in real history at one same time during Mahabharata.

Now, the more interesting question here is.. How come both "Parashurama" and "Krishna", two avatars of lord Vishnu, possible at the one same time ?

The only difference between "Parashurama" and "Krishna" is that.. "Krishna" was having this "Energy" / "Rank" by birth (Similarly like any child is born with a certain skill). Whereas, "Parashurama" attained this "Energy" / "Rank" by doing Sadhana (Practice)

Only a face to face meeting with a person who has attained such powers can be the evidence. Rest everything is unsatisfactory.

As per the myth and FYI, Parashurama never merged back in Lord Vishnu like Rama and Krishna did. He is still around in India. Parashurama was there even in Rama's time.

Not just Parashurama, even Rama and Krishna studied with Gurus, Vashishtha and Sandeepani. They were in human form, born as any other human, experienced the joys and sorrows like all other humans.

That is no problem for an 'Advaitist', Chinu. Yourself and me, we are both nothing other than Brahman. Actually every thing in the universe is Brahman only (Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma), Adrian too. But remember, in my belief Brahman is not God, it is the sole underlying stuff which constitutes all things in the universe.

 

[Vinayaka]

As per the myth and FYI, Parashurama never merged back in Lord Vishnu like Rama and Krishna did. He is still around in India. Parashurama was there even in Rama's time.

Not just Parashurama, even Rama and Krishna studied with Gurus, Vashishtha and Sandeepani. They were in human form, born as any other human, experienced the joys and sorrows like all other humans.

That is no problem for an 'Advaitist', Chinu. Yourself and me, we are both nothing other than Brahman. Actually every thing in the universe is Brahman only (Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma), Adrian too. But remember, in my belief Brahman is not God, it is the sole underlying stuff which constitutes all things in the universe.

It's been probably 3 years since I pointed this out, but many Hindus do call this Brahman God. Not because it is anything close to Abrahamic God, but because it was a poor translation to God many centuries ago when the Europeans mistranslated so much stuff. It's similar to why we call ourselves Hindus rather than Sanatana Dharmists.

On another note, just to counter some other misinformation in this thread spread by non-Hindus, the 3 Supremes in modern day Hinduism, aren't that encyclopedia (written by westerners, most likely looking for some comparison to their trilogy concept) false information of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, but are actually Vishnu, Shiva, and Shakti. Last time I researched it, there were only 1 or 2 Brahma temples in all of India. Vishnu, Shakti, and Shiva probably have over a million each. But hey that's what you get when you read encyclopedias instead of asking Hindus, and then actually listening to what they have to say.

Aup, I have no wish to debate you again, but felt compelled to put that out there since I hadn't for awhile. Perhaps there are some new folks, or others who had simply forgotten.

 

[chinu]

As per the myth and FYI, Parashurama never merged back in Lord Vishnu like Rama and Krishna did. He is still around in India.

Still around in India ? where ?

As far as I understand, its NOT the body that merge back. Its the "Energy" that merge back in "Energy". Whereas body belongs to dust and merge back in dust.

Parashurama was there even in Rama's time.

During those times many people were able to control their age by the way of "Sadhanas" (Practices)

Not just Parashurama, even Rama and Krishna studied with Gurus, Vashishtha and Sandeepani. They were in human form, born as any other human, experienced the joys and sorrows like all other humans.

Guru Vashishtha already knew everything about Rama well before his birth.

Rama and Krishna studied with Gurus in order to leave the correct message for others. Otherwise, nobody would have given respect to Guru's. But, in real they doesn't required any teaching. Both Guru-Student were familiar with this truth.

Yes, we can say they did this drama all knowingly.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No production, nothing new. Dispersion, scattering, entering new combinations, living and non-living - my bones will form part of a sediment after the my ashes are immersed in a River Yamuna. After 500 million years, they may be a part of a metamorphic rock if they undergo a baptism in the inner layers of earth. Why are people so afraid of that truth?

Shrugs. They believe our identity, our soul, will live forever-the me doesn't die. Even if I felt that were true, I don't follow any religion to make confirm it. I'm more inclined to believe we, our identity, are alive by the people we knew etc and so forth. Aura metamorphosis rather than just physical.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Aup, I have no wish to debate you again, but felt compelled to put that out there since I hadn't for awhile. Perhaps there are some new folks, or others who had simply forgotten.

Nothing to debate. As you said Vishnu, Shiva and Mother Goddess (Shakti - Power) are the main and most popular deities in present-day Hinduism (followed by many others).

I'm more inclined to believe we, our identity, are alive by the people we knew etc and so forth. Aura metamorphosis rather than just physical.

While I agree to your first sentence, but what is Now Aura Metamorphosis

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Nothing to debate. As you said Vishnu, Shiva and Mother Goddess (Shakti - Power) are the main and most popular deities in present-day Hinduism (followed by many others). While I agree to your first sentence, but what is Now Aura Metamorphosis

My atheistic attempt to use mystic language. You know how you can feel a presence in a empty room and you turn around and someone was in that room? The heat (and other things) that your body senses to let you (the brain and mind) know who that person is, threat to you, relationship, and so forth. That aura (as people call it) isn't owned by that person (not an individual soul). It's not a thing. It's just life. Energy. So it exists (rather than existed or will exist) before, now, and after as it doesn't go anywhere. (It is a bad word)

You have life. I have life. Plants. All living and non-living have energy. Probably why people see and feel auras etc. I can't say it's god or anything near that because it's not a thing, noun, and definitely can't dictate who, what, and there is no person who loves or anything similar.

As for the metamorphosis, first word that came to mind. I guess auras can be a process of transformation (as per dictionary) depending on "how" that energy is present in that person and through his or her behavior, it manifests.

I'm all western so I don't know what words to use that's not part of the abrahamic mojo. But you kinda get it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The Supreme Deity for many Hindus is one or all of the Trimurti: Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva. I believe these are different manifestations of the Supreme Being.

Not sure of the definition of supreme being unfortunately. An entity?? (I haven't heard here the supreme being mentioned as a person or entity in Hinduism)

The is no absolute proofs but there are evidences of the Divine. They are the Teacher, the Teachings and the influences on those whom they inspire.

Hmm. The proof/evidence argument. I'd just say how I see it. The proof is your evidence. So you gave me proof of the divine by showing evidence of teachings and influences on those whom they expire. As for it being evidence I would understand, not from teachings. I tried that but it became more superficial and/or just study and interest. So, maybe the evidence isn't all from teachings. Maybe you can experience the proof of divine without these things? Maybe?

I’m comfortable with Hindus and Hinduism.

Doesn't answer my question though....

How do I know it is Krishna I’ve experienced. How do you know when you are in love?

Question with a question?

I'm actually curious. My past experiences and life made my experiences of love (which in many cases where lack of) not really ones associated with what others routinely call the love experience. Maybe other values as I get older but not love.

But I get what you mean behind the question. Since my answer isn't yours, what is your experience?

Where I live, over two percent of our population are Hindus. There are higher proportions that work in the health care setting where I work.

So there is an influence? There isn't?

What is more much important than specific religious beliefs are our shared humanity.

Kinda hard to talk about this with generalized statements. I remember you telling me this.

Is your experience with Hinduism an interpretation of their teachings as they have varied interpretations (so your views are justified by the diversity) or?

So how many Hindus do you suppose are atheists like Aup?

Not sure. I only know of Hindus on RF who don't believe in life after death.

This does have a kinda overlap with Buddhism when it comes to life without death and without an "after". But what you're asking is a question with a question again.

Not the same as an answer or comment to my question.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'm all western so I don't know what words to use that's not part of the abrahamic mojo. But you kinda get it?

I am sure that there are many words for it in Hinduism, but I keep away from all mysticism and like to keep things straight. One wrong word and one lands up in what they term as 'Quagmire' (with all respect to our Mod here).

 

[Aupmanyav]

The Supreme Deity for many Hindus is one or all of the Trimurti: Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva. I believe these are different manifestations of the Supreme Being.

They are the Teacher, the Teachings and the influences on those whom they inspire. I’m comfortable with Hindus and Hinduism.How do I know it is Krishna I’ve experienced. How do you know when you are in love? What is more much important than specific religious beliefs are our shared humanity.

So how many Hindus do you suppose are atheists like Aup?

Brahma lost his importance nearly 4 millenniums ago when Orion ceased to be the constellation in which the sun rose on the day of vernal equinox in the original homeland of Indo-Europeans. Indians never took up Brahma as a major power. He created the universe at the behest of one of the other three, Vishnu, Shiva or Shakti, the Mother Goddess. Same with Indra. The indigenous people accepted his existence and gave him supremacy in his heaven of lesser Gods, but never considered him at par with the major indigenous deities.

There is no love lost between Hindus and Bahais. Like in a jungle there are large predators, lions, tigers; and there are small predators like jackals and foxes. In the religious scene, Christianity and Islam are the large predators while Bahais are the small predators. All this talk of 'shared humanity' is just what it is, a veneer, a strategy to fool the gullible.

I do not think there are many Hindus like Aupmanyav. He is sort of an exception.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Shri Krishna is NOT the avatar of supreme God. Rather, "He" is the avatar of one out of the very few major God's (Energies) ranked below the supreme God.

According to Wikipedia Vishnu is described as:

is one of the principal deities of Hinduism. The "preserver" in the Hindu triad (Trimurti), Vishnu is revered as the supreme being in Vaishnavism[5][6] as identical to the metaphysical concept of Brahman (Atman, the self, or unchanging ultimate reality), and is notable for adopting various incarnations (such avatars as Rama and Krishna) to preserve and protect dharmic principles whenever the world is threatened with evil, chaos, and destructive forces.[7] In the Smarta Tradition of Hinduism, Vishnu is also one of the five equivalent deities worshipped in Panchayatana puja

Further:

Particularly in Vaishnavism, the so-called Trimurti (also known as the Hindu Triad or Great Trinity) represents the three fundamental forces (guṇas) through which the universe is created, maintained, and destroyed in cyclic succession. Each of these forces is represented by a Hindu deity:

• Brahma: represents Rajas (passion, creation)
• Vishnu: represents Sattva (goodness, preservation)
• Shiva: represents Tamas (darkness, destruction)

In Hindu tradition, the trio is often to as Brahma-Vishnu-Mahesh. All have the same meaning of three in One; different forms or manifestations of One person the Supreme Being.

Vishnu - Wikipedia

Yes "Shri Krishna" existed in the real history.

Agreed.

Another interesting thing I would like to add here is that.. Both "Parashurama" and "Krishna" were said to be the avatar's of lord "Vishnu", and they both existed in real history at one same time during Mahabharata.

Now, the more interesting question here is.. How come both "Parashurama" and "Krishna", two avatars of lord Vishnu, possible at the one same time ?

There's need to understand the term "Vishnu' to understand this puzzle.
"Vishnu" is NOT a living person, Its the "Rank" given to a certain "Energy" in Hinduism.

The only difference between "Parashurama" and "Krishna" is that.. "Krishna" was having this "Energy" / "Rank" by birth (Similarly like any child is born with a certain skill)

Whereas, "Parashurama" attained this "Energy" / "Rank" by doing Sadhana (Practice)

But, both were equal in powers.

I wasn't aware of that about Parashurama and Krishna.

Only a face to face meeting with a person who has attained such powers can be the evidence. Rest everything is unsatisfactory.

Agreed.

 

[CG Didymus]

We can prove an incarnation of God, Jesus, existed two thousand years ago. Of course we can't prove He was an incarnation of God but that is implied through the Gospels. We can neither prove Krishna existed as an historic character, nor that He was an incarnation of God. However the Hindu Writings imply he was an incarnation of God. It needs to emphasised that lack of evidence for someone's existence five thousand years ago, can't possibly mean they didn't exist. Just because ancient writings (eg Bhagavad Gita and Gospels) imply an historic character was an incarnation of God, doesn't mean He was.

There was a time I believed the stories about Jesus. I thought, why would they lie. Now I'm beginning to think more and more that Adam through Abraham and maybe several others weren't necessarily based on real people. And, even if they were, the stories were greatly embellished to tell us a story about the God of Israel.

There was a time when I thought the Baha'i explanation about the manifestations of the different major religions made a lot of sense. The more I learned about the other religions, the less I believed that, and the less I believed in progressive revelation.

We're all learning and listening to Hindus much more than we were a couple of years ago, but, still, there's so little that I know and I think you'd feel the same about what you know about Hinduism. We went from Krishna being the founder of Hinduism to him being only one of many avatars and not the founder of Hinduism. And that Hinduism is just a very general term, an umbrella term, to put most of the religions of India into. We rarely, if ever talk about the Jains or the more recent Sikhs. We never talk about the other Holy Books of Hinduism like the Vedas or Upanishads. Years and years ago I read the Ramayana, but all I remember is the Hanuman jumped from India to Sri Lanka and saved or help saved Sita from some evil guy. But now I've heard that Rama is also an incarnation of Vishnu? There's so little I know. But I doubt that once we learn more about Hinduism, the harder it's going to be to easily fit them into how Baha'i's put them into a progression with all the other major religions.

The Baha'i progression only recognizes one avatar, Krishna. What is it going to do with the others? We're trying to figure out if Krishna was historical or not. Then what about the others? I think enough Hindus believe in reincarnation to find out why? What are the teachings that talk about it and who was it that brought those teachings? I know most all Christians and probably people in several other religions could care less. At least Baha'is do... sort of. But at least you do and are honestly showing a true interest in learning from Hindus what and why they believe. And thanks to you, I'm learning also.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Not sure of the definition of supreme being unfortunately. An entity?? (I haven't heard here the supreme being mentioned as a person or entity in Hinduism)



Hmm. The proof/evidence argument. I'd just say how I see it. The proof is your evidence. So you gave me proof of the divine by showing evidence of teachings and influences on those whom they expire. As for it being evidence I would understand, not from teachings. I tried that but it became more superficial and/or just study and interest. So, maybe the evidence isn't all from teachings. Maybe you can experience the proof of divine without these things? Maybe?



Doesn't answer my question though....



Question with a question?

I'm actually curious. My past experiences and life made my experiences of love (which in many cases where lack of) not really ones associated with what others routinely call the love experience. Maybe other values as I get older but not love.

But I get what you mean behind the question. Since my answer isn't yours, what is your experience?



So there is an influence? There isn't?



Kinda hard to talk about this with generalized statements. I remember you telling me this.

Is your experience with Hinduism an interpretation of their teachings as they have varied interpretations (so your views are justified by the diversity) or?

Not sure. I only know of Hindus on RF who don't believe in life after death.

This does have a kinda overlap with Buddhism when it comes to life without death and without an "after". But what you're asking is a question with a question again.

Not the same as an answer or comment to my question.

I believe there are huge limitations to what we can understand about the nature of the spiritual world and the world of spirits and deities. Words really fail to capture the reality of God and I'm convinced if there is any benefit in trying to use reason to convince an atheist to become a theist. Best to accept people as they are.

I was looking over a thread I started a couple of years back about Krishna...

Who was Krishna in your tradition?

...and noticed you were one of the most active participants.

I know you don't identify as being a Hindu in any way. Why is about these threads that interests you?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Brahma lost his importance nearly 4 millenniums ago when Orion ceased to be the constellation in which the sun rose on the day of vernal equinox in the original homeland of Indo-Europeans. Indians never took up Brahma as a major power. He created the universe at the behest of one of the other three, Vishnu, Shiva or Shakti, the Mother Goddess. Same with Indra. The indigenous people accepted his existence and gave him supremacy in his heaven of lesser Gods, but never considered him at par with the major indigenous deities.

I know Wikipedia isn't the authority of all knowledge when it comes to Hinduism. However in regards Brahma:

Brahma is the creator god in Hinduism. He is also known as Svayambhu (self-born), Vāgīśa (Lord of Speech), and the creator of the four Vedas, one from each of his mouths. Brahma is consort of Saraswati and he is the father of Four Kumaras, Narada, Daksha, Marichi and many more. Brahma is synonymous with the Vedic god Prajapati, he is also known as Vedanatha (god of Vedas), Gyaneshwara (god of Knowledge), Chaturmukha (having Four Faces) Svayambhu (self born), etc, as well as linked to Kama and Hiranyagarbha (the cosmic egg). He is more prominently mentioned in the post-Vedic Hindu epics and the mythologies in the Puranas. In the epics, he is conflated with Purusha.[3] Although Brahma is part of the Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva Trimurti, ancient Hindu scriptures mention multiple other trinities of gods or goddesses which do not include Brahma

Brahma - Wikipedia

There is no love lost between Hindus and Bahais. Like in a jungle there are large predators, lions, tigers; and there are small predators like jackals and foxes. In the religious scene, Christianity and Islam are the large predators while Bahais are the small predators. All this talk of 'shared humanity' is just what it is, a veneer, a strategy to fool the gullible.

The majority of Hindus I come across don't feel that way. I had never met Hindus who were vehemently anti-Baha'i and anti-Abrahamic until I came on RF.

I do not think there are many Hindus like Aupmanyav. He is sort of an exception.

I have a sense that about 10 - 20% of Hindus are agnostic and atheistic to some extent. You are a strong atheist as are some of my friends.

About half of New Zealand's population are not affiliated with any religion at all. There are quite a few strong atheists in that group. Christianity is our largest religion, about 37% of our population and there are quite a few atheist or cultural Christians. Hinduism is actually the second largest religion in NZ with just over 2% of our population. 1.5% are Buddhist and 1.1% Muslim.

 

[Dawnofhope]

There was a time I believed the stories about Jesus. I thought, why would they lie. Now I'm beginning to think more and more that Adam through Abraham and maybe several others weren't necessarily based on real people. And, even if they were, the stories were greatly embellished to tell us a story about the God of Israel.

I see Adam through to Abraham in the Bible and Quran as largely embellished stories. We can't know whether or not they were real characters anymore than we can know for certain if Krishna was real.

There was a time when I thought the Baha'i explanation about the manifestations of the different major religions made a lot of sense. The more I learned about the other religions, the less I believed that, and the less I believed in progressive revelation.

We've discussed this at length. I'm inclined to agree the model of progressive revelation that was taught by Baha'is throughout the seventies doesn't reflect the reality of world history. Then again, it doesn't actually reflect what Baha'u'llah taught either.

We're all learning and listening to Hindus much more than we were a couple of years ago, but, still, there's so little that I know and I think you'd feel the same about what you know about Hinduism. We went from Krishna being the founder of Hinduism to him being only one of many avatars and not the founder of Hinduism. And that Hinduism is just a very general term, an umbrella term, to put most of the religions of India into. We rarely, if ever talk about the Jains or the more recent Sikhs. We never talk about the other Holy Books of Hinduism like the Vedas or Upanishads. Years and years ago I read the Ramayana, but all I remember is the Hanuman jumped from India to Sri Lanka and saved or help saved Sita from some evil guy. But now I've heard that Rama is also an incarnation of Vishnu? There's so little I know. But I doubt that once we learn more about Hinduism, the harder it's going to be to easily fit them into how Baha'i's put them into a progression with all the other major religions.

As I've said repeatedly, the Baha'i writings have very little to say about Hinduism, Krishna or the Hindu sacred writings. Its largely an open book left for students of religion to explore. That's where I'm at. I'm not trying to make Hinduism fit an outdated and limited concept of progressive revelation. Instead I'm trying to better understand both Hinduism from Hindus and the Baha'i Faith first hand from the writings.

It would be good to learn more about the Jains. I talked to a Sikh on RF recently. It didn't go well unfortunately. I'd like to explore the Hindu sacred writings in some more detail. Finding the time is the biggest barrier.

The Baha'i progression only recognizes one avatar, Krishna. What is it going to do with the others? We're trying to figure out if Krishna was historical or not. Then what about the others? I think enough Hindus believe in reincarnation to find out why? What are the teachings that talk about it and who was it that brought those teachings? I know most all Christians and probably people in several other religions could care less. At least Baha'is do... sort of. But at least you do and are honestly showing a true interest in learning from Hindus what and why they believe. And thanks to you, I'm learning also.

The Baha'i Faith recognises two Avatars of Vishnu, Krishnu the eight Avatar and Buddha the ninth Avatar. Shoghi Effendi equates Baha'u'llah with the tenth Avatar or Yuga Kalki. We don't deny there were earlier Avatars.

The origins of the Hindu belief in reincarnation is an interesting question and likely to be the main focus of another thread.

I agree Christians on the whole couldn't care less about what Hindus believe and the absence of their participation from RF threads about Hinduism reflects that disinterest.

Its good to have participants on RF such as yourself who are genuinely interested in other faiths including Hinduism. The main focus for me on RF has been about education and learning through friendly conversation with people's of differing faiths. Thanks again for dropping by.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If that is it, then why do we not have many temples of Brahma or Indra? They are deprecated deities, though Brahma is still considered the creator of the universe and writer of fate of all living beings (yeah, even of an ant ) - Vidhata.
Brahma is not eternal, there is a new Brahma in every cycle of creation which happens after every 311 trillion years.
The interregnum between two creations is of 1,728,000 years.
Indraship is a rotating chair (like Chairpersons in an organization) and lasts for only 306,702,000 years, i.e., one manavantara.
Each manavantara has a new Indra, a new Manu (Hindu Adam), and a new set of seven sages. We have it all figured out.
Manvantara - Wikipedia

 

[Aupmanyav]

Years and years ago I read the Ramayana, but all I remember is the Hanuman jumped from India to Sri Lanka and saved or help saved Sita from some evil guy. But now I've heard that Rama is also an incarnation of Vishnu?

I think enough Hindus believe in reincarnation to find out why? What are the teachings that talk about it and who was it that brought those teachings?

Nice. Do you remember the name of the evil guy? Now the Hindus may tell you that he was not really an evil guy!

Hinduism is a pagan religion. It came up from soil. It cannot be ascribed to any person. It was the combined product of many indigenous societies, every one contributed to some extent. In its journey, it assimilated the religion of in-coming Aryans.

 

[chinu]

According to Wikipedia Vishnu is described as:

is one of the principal deities of Hinduism. The "preserver" in the Hindu triad (Trimurti), Vishnu is revered as the supreme being in Vaishnavism[5][6] as identical to the metaphysical concept of Brahman (Atman, the self, or unchanging ultimate reality), and is notable for adopting various incarnations (such avatars as Rama and Krishna) to preserve and protect dharmic principles whenever the world is threatened with evil, chaos, and destructive forces.[7] In the Smarta Tradition of Hinduism, Vishnu is also one of the five equivalent deities worshipped in Panchayatana puja

Further:

Particularly in Vaishnavism, the so-called Trimurti (also known as the Hindu Triad or Great Trinity) represents the three fundamental forces (guṇas) through which the universe is created, maintained, and destroyed in cyclic succession. Each of these forces is represented by a Hindu deity:

• Brahma: represents Rajas (passion, creation)
• Vishnu: represents Sattva (goodness, preservation)
• Shiva: represents Tamas (darkness, destruction)

In Hindu tradition, the trio is often to as Brahma-Vishnu-Mahesh. All have the same meaning of three in One; different forms or manifestations of One person the Supreme Being.

I searched this on internet for you to read. Hope you will find this interesting.

Source: Who is fit to be called as Satguru or Sadhguru? - Soul Prajna

There are many energy centres in the body called Chakras and a parallel can be drawn between the space between chakras and the trinities namely Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

The Vedas say that absolute knowledge is ‘Brahman’. ‘Brahman’ is different from Brahma. Brahman is our inner wisdom. There is a great difference between knowledge and wisdom. A single drop as well as the entire ocean is considered to be water but they are totally different.

The span between Sahasrara and Vishuddhi chakra is considered to be the area of Brahma. The guru in the form of Brahman is our inner wisdom, and that wisdom can be realized between Vishuddhi and Sahasrara i.e. in the Ajna Chakra. Ajna Chakra is the seat of Brahma – the personification of knowledge.

Vishuddhi to Manipura is the realm of Vishnu, Vishnu personifies love and devotion. Love and devotion emerge from the heart and the heart chakra is called ‘Anahata’.
Manipura to Muladhara is the realm of Shiva.

“Satyam Shivam Sundaram”, this means Shiva is the embodiment of truth and beauty. What is truth? Truth is ’that’, which doesn’t change with time – past, present or future. My surroundings and I were not like at the present a hundred years ago, and what they will be ten years hence, no one knows. Is there nothing called ‘Truth’? Creation is truth, because creation, was, is and will be there. Living and non-living things are mere manifestations of creation.

Living beings procreate through Swadisthana Chakra. Shiva’s symbol is the symbol of creation. Without truth and creation there can be no self-realization.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I searched this on internet for you to read. Hope you will find this interesting.

I do not believe in such esoteric stuff. For me, it is trash. I wish people will not consider this as Hinduism. We too have snake-oil sellers.