For Hindus out there - are you monotheistic?

As slready averred by some practicing and by birth Hindus[I would prefer the word SD, yet for simplicity and ease of expression shall continue to use the term Hindus/Hinduism], it is [B]impossible[/B] to classify Hinduism into whether it is {B]Monistic[/B], [B]Monotheistic[B], [B]Polytheistic[/B] or a [b]Panthestic[/B] (why even one could absorb Atheism into Hinduism) religion. This is because Hinduism does not have [B]single founder[/B]. There is not a [B]Only One[/B] chosen messenger of God,and in this Hinduism is perjhaps unique, who would claim to know everything about God and His bidding. We call our Enlightened people RiShis.By definition the RiShis are the "Seers" of the Mantras. The collection of their utterances/intuitions are called THE VEDAS. A RiShi is one to whom THAT ONE has revealed the Truth. Roughly about 106 RiShis are known. The nearest word one could come up as equivalent to the RiShi is a Prophet. Though going strictly by the word to prophesy some doom(if you don't follow the religion as outlined) or a great life much above others is [B]definitley not[/B] the message of The Vedas. The very fact that if you take the utterances in The Vedas by their literal meanings you will end up in utter confusion. You need to be initiated by a trained Guru, to sift between the seeming contradictions to extract the right menaing of the utterances. Further theoretically at least THe Vedas are available to [B]one and all[/B] in their original form! Since attainment of RiShihood [B]by self effort{/B] calls for superhuman effort from the individual, the shorter route of approaching a Guru, supplicating to him in all humility is the Step One in The Vedas. Only a superficial understanding is obtained by a person who puts all his intellectual capacity, and reads the various commentaries to understand The Vedas. Even the greatest and reverred commentators of The Vedas, have very humbly declared that they have attempted to bring just one facet of The Vedas, by their efforts. Not a single Interpreter calims that he alone is knowledgeable! In essence The Vedas are the Breath of God hence are identiacal to God. The appearance of the Secondary, Tertiary and Level 4 Scriptures in Hinduism is only to explicate The content of The Vedas in simpler and simpler terms so that even the unlettered country bumpkin can understand their import.So you have the Secondary "Smritis" [[I]from the Memory[/I]], the Tertiary "Puranas" [[I]purA api navaM [/I], which means- Ever new even though very Old. Then there are the Level Four Scriptures called the Dharma-Shastras = these are the regulatory writings of knowledgeable later-day intellectuals that concern with Behavioral Propriety that could lead one to a Divine Life.

In Hinduism there is no supreme authority, so one can't say cast iron that a particular frame of thought represents the whole religion. In fact it is a collection of belief systems that ironically includes atheism too! The different Gods which are worshiped these days by a majority of Hindus these days gives an impression that it is a polytheistic religion. However, most of these people are generally the followers of the scriptures called 'Puranas' which are regarded as tertiary scriptures and were written much later after the religion was 'formed'. But generally, such followers too acknowledge that those 'Gods' are manifestations of the supreme soul ('Parmatma') However, followers of the Vedas which are considered the primary scriptures are essentially monotheistic. The difference with this monotheism compared to other religions is that it is non-dualistic and the 'God' is omnipresent. However, the Vedas are extremely difficult to understand. They are in classical Sanskrit language and hence followed by a minuscule minority. But the Puranas and the Upanishads (Secondary scriptures) too, I reckon, acknowledge that the Vedas are the scriptures with the highest authority. Personally, I'm a quasi-atheist and I've just started exploring and favoring the monistic mode of Hinduism which is rooted in the Vedanta, Upanishads and to some extent in the Bhagawad Gita. And according to this philosophy, not just the 'Gods' but even humans, animals, plants, stones, air and everything is a manifestation of the Absolute Consciousness. (Brahman) This concept is said to be highly similar to the Buddhist philosophies.

I am a Hindu by birth and for me at least, this is a bit more complicated than a simple yes or no. One of the fundamentals of Hinduism is to respect life and nature and all the beautiful creations of man. Being brought up with this belief, it would be difficult for me to say that I can just walk into a temple and break the idol to pieces…no, I could never do that, I could never ever destroy a brick of a mosque or a church even…no, my religion has taught me to be tolerant and unbiased towards other people’s belief. In the same note, I would not be able to destroy any of the millions of images of gods and goddesses dotting India…I am just impervious to them all. I am a firm believer of monotheism…for me, my religion begins and ends with the concept of omnipotent God who is never confined to any idol and who has to be realized more than worshipped. I have never visited any temple to worship any idol…my house does not have any image or idol of any gods or goddesses. But again I reiterate, I would not be able to destroy any idol just because I don’t believe in them…maybe some people would confuse this with thinking that I am polytheist but I am not. Its just that my religion and understanding of it does not urge me to disown other people’s beliefs and practices and faith.

I am an Indian, but I am a follower of Jesus Christ. However, I don't have problem calling myself a Hindu since the term is applied to those living on the other side of river Indus as well. I must, however, admit that I don't accept the authority of the Vedas like Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs etc and so I am not a follower of Vedic religion. I studied Indian Philosophy in my Bachelors and Masters and I think I've fairly understood this religion. Yet I can't quite grasp how a belief system like Samkhya, which is atheistic, can be a valid interpretation of the sacred texts as much as Nyaya, which is theistic, is valid. How can one say that atheistic and theistic and even pantheistic interpretations are all equally valid? This I simply cannot understand. When I first joined Philosophy class for Bachelors Degree we had Logic, and in that we are taught Law of Non-Contradiction (that says that two opposite statements cannot both be true in the same sense in the same time). When I reached Masters degree I told my professor that when we apply this law to the different interpretations it seems to me that atheistic and theistic interpretations cannot both be true. To that he said that "we" don't accept this Law of non-contradiction. I was amazed because all these years of my Philosophy in University of Delhi I was taught this Law; and now in Masters Degree in the same university I was told that this law is not accepted. I still cannot understand how this is possible.I don't think those who accept the authority of Vedas can have one consensus answer tn your question. They may give thousand answers and they may say all of them are equally valid. That's my way of understanding... but I admit I still don't understand.

Hello murderistic, I'm not a Hindu myself, but I know that the easiest thing people used to do is to claim that they are monotheistic, or claim that their religion was originally monotheistic, but they don't practice monotheism in their day to day life. this usually done by Hindus and Christians. Best regards!