One God, Many Paths

muhammad_isa said:
..nor do I..
I wasn't quoting a 'rule' .. I'm not saying I think it is forbidden to pray for worldly wealth.
..but the greatest wealth is religious knowledge, and a strong faith.
Click to expand...
We (my wife and myself) many a times see videos of Iran nomads. The general impression I get is that Allah accepts prayers for well-being of others and guidance for self..
 
TheLightWithin said:
Which religions are RHP? Which are LHP? Which have both? Is there a source which explains this?
Click to expand...
The Right Hand Path is the path of union with a Universal Reality (God/Absolute/Supreme Being etc.).
The Eastern Left Hand Path refuses the final step to union with a Universal Reality but recognizes there is one.
The Western Left Hand Path is an antinomian process of externalizing one's Greater Self. You write your own scripture. You become your own GodSelf. There are no external deities, no Universal Reality to absolve into.
 
muhammad_isa said:
..sounds more like being a poet, to me..
Click to expand...
Scripture is, authoritative, and often believed to be divinely revealed, forming the foundation of a religious belief.
Poetry is personal and artistic, born from human inspiration. Unlike exoteric religions, the WLHP emphasizes the Self as the sole authority. Thus, poetry becomes a mirror of one’s transformation.
 
Aupmanyav said:
The problem with Eastern LHP is that there are many and not just one, so any generalization is incorrect. You can have one of your own.
Click to expand...
Can you provide examples of Eastern LHPs that do not include some form of Union with a Universal Reality?
 
Alif Balaam Yashin said:
Can you provide examples of Eastern LHPs that do not include some form of Union with a Universal Reality?
Click to expand...
Shakta and Vaishnava (Pancaratra) LHPs. Merging with the deity is more of a Shaiva tradition.
Hindu tantra is very complicated with all kinds of views. For more info, kindly visit Tantra - Wikipedia
Alif Balaam Yashin said:
Scripture is, authoritative, and often believed to be divinely revealed, forming the foundation of a religious belief.
Click to expand...
Not so in Hinduism. You are allowed to have your own views. That is how the diversity came about.
Hinduism is not "contained" in just Vedas or BhagawadGita. There is a lot beyond that.
 
Last edited:
Aupmanyav said:
Shakta and Vaishnava (Pancaratra) LHPs. Merging with the deity is more of a Shaiva tradition.
Hindu tantra is very complicated with all kinds of views. For more info, kindly visit Tantra - Wikipedia

Not so in Hinduism. You are allowed to have your own views. That is how the diversity came about.
Hinduism is not "contained" in just Vedas or BhagawadGita. There is a lot beyond that.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Vedic Apologetics to me . . . LOL
 
Alif Balaam Yashin said:
Sounds like Vedic Apologetics to me . . . LOL
Click to expand...
I do not make any apology. What is there is there. If it is complicated, it is complicated.
RigVeda is a herder's book of prayers, no apology required.
As for myself, I am a strong atheist. I neither believe in Gods nor in souls.
>> That too, is Hinduism.
 
The "Creation" hymn of RigVeda denied prior-existence of Gods in clear-cut terms 3,000 years ago:

"The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?"

Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation.

Rig Veda, tr. by Ralph T.H. Griffith, [1896], full text etext at sacred-texts.com
sacred-texts.com
 
As a matter of interest – how do you read the last couplet?

"He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not."

I understand that might well be an impossible question – or rather the text can only be properly understood within the context of the Rig-Veda, rather than by a theist like me jumping up with an "ahHa!" 🤣
 
Thomas said:
"He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not."

I understand that might well be an impossible question – or rather the text can only be properly understood within the context of the Rig-Veda, rather than by a theist like me jumping up with an "ahHa!" 🤣
Click to expand...
Since the poet has already denied Gods, 'He' should be understood as 'What exists' (something like Brahman which is not God, but the sole constituent of all things in the universe, the substrate/substance of the universe), that is how I take it.
 
Aupmanyav said:
Since the poet has already denied Gods
Click to expand...

Well, it is denying familiar gods, but this text also discusses an uncaused cause. Sounds like God to me.

It does not say anything about the ultimate source behind the gods does not exist (“That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature: apart from it was nothing whatsoever”); it only says it is beyond human comprehension.
 
Ahanu said:
Sounds like God to me.
It does not say anything about the ultimate source behind the gods does not exist (“That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature: apart from it was nothing whatsoever”); it only says it is beyond human comprehension.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sounds somewhat like God, but is not a God.
Again, yes, beyond human comprehension in his time, but who knows if for future too?
 
Ahanu said:
I haven't seen yet how it is not God.
Click to expand...
It is totally different from the normal concept of God.

1. It does not create the universe and its denizens.
2. It does not demand submission or prayer.
3. It does not judge humans after death. Has no heaven or hell.
4. It does not give rules for humans to follow.
5. It does not promise ever-lasting life or re-birth.
6. It does not send a son, prophets, messengers, manifestations, mahdis to the world.
7. It does not help in any way if one is in problems.
8. It is neither loving nor cruel. It is indifferent to what is happening in the world.

This is "Brahman" of Advaita (non-dual) Hinduism that I believe in.
I think this should be enough to show how it differs from what people believe about God.
 
Last edited:
Aupmanyav said:
It is totally different from the normal concept of God.

1. It does not create the universe and its denizens.
2. It does not demand submission or prayer.
3. It does not judge humans after death. Has no heaven or hell.
4. It does not give rules for humans to follow.
5. It does not promise ever-lasting life or re-birth.
6. It does not send a son, prophets, messengers, manifestations, mahdis to the world.
7. It does not help in any way if one is in problems.
8. It is nei

This is "Brahman" of Advaita (non-dual) Hinduism that I believe in.
I think this should be enough to show how it differs from what people believe about God.
Click to expand...
"He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not."

..perhaps .. and perhaps not. :)
..so not that different .. more a case of uncertainty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top