Home
Donate!
Articles
CHAT!
Shop
|
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.
We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.
|
10-01-2016, 10:38 PM
|
Deactivated Account
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,271
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinayaka
Astika schools.
I'm no scholar, so if you google it you'll get far better answers than I can give. Some Hindus I know say they're atheist, but mainly they're atheist to the Abrahamic God of form, distinct from Brahman. In this case, advaita Vedanta is atheistic. So in many cases it becomes a definition of God as much as true atheism.
Then there is the term 'Hindu' itself, which can mean a cultural Hindu only, not defined as religious. They can be 'non-practicing' etc.
So yeah, basically its a complicated issue, and gets debated by scholars, which I'm not. Best wishes in discovering something.
|
Thanks for the response Vinayaka...
Some might consider me an 'atheist' as I do not subscribe to nor identify with the notion of a separate, anthropomorphic 'god/deity/creator'... So I know what you mean about about being 'atheist to a god of form'... Pandeist (relating to pantheism) would be a more accurate term to describe my perceptual orientation...
I would imagine for some that when your state of awareness is such that you intimately understand the connection/relationship between the conceptualizations of 'atman' and 'brahman' - there is no longer any sense of or perception of separateness (separation) remaining, and this would not leave room for identification with a 'god of form' that resides outside of oneself.
|
11-01-2016, 01:34 AM
|
Guide
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 537
|
|
|
|
The differing paradigms sometimes make words like 'God' difficult. I'm personally at both levels simultaneously, form in this level of reality, but formless at an ultimate level. So out of 'nothing' comes something. Still, the anthropomorphised version is 'that' (Brahman with form) of Nataraja, and is vastly different than the Abrahamic God, at least from my very limited perspective. Mainly this is due to a difference between emanation, and creation, amongst a few other things like modus operandi.
|
20-01-2016, 04:33 AM
|
Knower
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 105
|
|
|
|
I think that many hindu gods and goddesses are something like angels and other lower spiritual beings in christianity. What about Apsaras, Gandharvas and many others.
|
21-01-2016, 01:10 AM
|
Guide
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 537
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpino
I think that many hindu gods and goddesses are something like angels and other lower spiritual beings in christianity. What about Apsaras, Gandharvas and many others.
|
That could be. I've heard people who were trying to explain the word 'deva' say that it's basically the same as 'angel' in Christianity. I personally have no idea.
|
23-01-2016, 04:58 AM
|
Suspended
Experiencer
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 5
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't Romans use to worship a lot of Gods as well? They even worshipped Cats?
|
24-01-2016, 01:04 AM
|
Guide
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 537
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chesterking
Didn't Romans use to worship a lot of Gods as well? They even worshipped Cats?
|
I believe they did, although history always leaves something out or puts something in. Still, there is one very major difference between Hindus and Romans.
|
24-01-2016, 02:50 PM
|
Master
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 1,016
|
|
|
|
What is the major difference?
|
24-01-2016, 05:20 PM
|
Guide
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 537
|
|
|
|
One is a living tradition with about a billion practitioners today. The other ... perhaps a few revivalists, perhaps ... I don't about that know actually. I'd say that's a major difference.
|
24-01-2016, 05:40 PM
|
Knower
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 117
|
|
|
|
If Roman religion ended, it was because it was persecuted out of existence. It's hard to practice a religion when it's been made illegal and the temples have been closed. Actually, I recently read that theres a continuous tradition of pagan worship in a village in the hills of Abruzzo.
|
24-01-2016, 06:42 PM
|
Guide
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 537
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann
If Roman religion ended, it was because it was persecuted out of existence. It's hard to practice a religion when it's been made illegal and the temples have been closed. Actually, I recently read that theres a continuous tradition of pagan worship in a village in the hills of Abruzzo.
|
I'm not up on it via reading of history, but I think much European paganism was persecuted out of existence, sadly. We've (speaking for Hindus here) managed to survive mostly because of sheer numbers. We did have 100 000 temples raised by conquerors, and still survived. The level of inhumanity in persecution has waned substantially so we (and others) should be able to survive from ere on out.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:02 AM.
|