|

Part 3: Essay donated by Chintamani RathGods and Goddesses in Hinduism.
The presence of evil in religions.
Sponsored link.

Gods/Goddesses/Manifestations:It may now be pertinent revert to a question
cited early in this section, viz., why have so many gods and goddesses or
"manifestations" of the Almighty? Is Hinduism really monotheistic or is it
essentially polytheistic?
The answer is: Hinduism is certainly monotheistic. The Hindu Texts say: the
Supreme Being ("Brahman") is formless, nameless and also without attributes of
any kind. In the Texts, the Supreme Being is referred to as "It" or "That".
Because this is an abstract concept, it has been made easier to understand for
those who cannot easily think in abstract terms by speaking of different
manifestations of "It" or "That". This has been done by deifying or
personalizing different forces as "manifestations" of the Almighty.
There is more. Hinduism is so catholic a religion that it actually gives the
authority to everybody to create his or her own "manifestation" of the
Formless and Nameless Almighty. If someone said he was happy to consider a
piece of stone or a tree or a lump of clay or anything else to be his
preferred form or manifestation of the Almighty, Hinduism permits it without
calling it sacrilege or blasphemy. Every person is free to worship according
to his own particular set of values, conditionings and beliefs. If I worship a
piece of stone as the Almighty, I am actually worshipping the Almighty itself
in the form in which I find it easy to comprehend the Incomprehensible, the
Formless, the Nameless, the Attributeless, the Infinite. I believe in the Yama
principles set out above, I believe in the law of Karma and rebirth and I use
my finite mind-intellect equipment to fix itself on the Infinite by means of a
symbol (or, if I can be comfortable with an abstract and undefined concept, I
transcend the requirement for a symbol). Ergo, I am a Hindu. It is as easy as
that.
A well-known Sanskrit excerpt from our Scriptures says:
"Ekaiva Shaktihi Parameshvarasya
Bhinnaa Chaturdhaa Viniyoga Kale
Bhoge Bhavaani Purushaseshu Vishnu
Kope cha Kaali Samarecha Durgaa"
[Rough transliteration: "The one and indeed one only Force of the Supreme
Being manifests Itself in four ways according to circumstances: During peace
and prosperity, It is Bhavani, in Its Male Form, It is Vishnu, in Anger It is
Kaali and in War It is Durga"]
The festivals of Durga Puja and Kali Puja - alluded to at the start of this
article - merely signify, inter alia, the victory of good over evil. Yes, Kali
is fierce and Durga, the Mother Goddess, is victorious in war: we bow to the
forces of good that the beasts and demons in us be destroyed. Surely the
reverend father who attacked Kali and Durga would have known this (having been
an Indian in India), but, after all, being a convert to Christianity, it is
likely he would have been more staunch a Christian (in a bigoted sense) than
one born of an old Christian lineage in another country.....
The Christians have a cross as a symbol. The Muslims (who swear by a Formless
Being) have a crescent moon and star as a symbol. Muslims keep a picture of
the Kabah in Mecca in front of them when they direct their minds towards the
Absolute. Others have other symbols. Even "extreme" Christians like the
Jehovah?s Witnesses who profess to be against what
they call "Churchianism" refer to the Infinite Power as "the Creator". I have
the Pranava and other things as symbols. What problem does the reverend priest
or the Muslim colleague have with that? Why must they embark upon a crusade of
converting people into Christianity or Islam? More, on what authority do they
so embark?
As a Hindu, I recognize the Absolute everywhere and in everything. As one of
our great Texts -- the Chhandogya Upanishad -- says: "Sarvam Khalvidam Bramha
Tajjalan Iti Shanta Upaseeta". This means as follows:
Sarvam = all; Khalu = indeed; Idam = this; [Khalvidam = Khalu + Idam] Bramha =
the Absolute; Tat = That (meaning from and into That); Ja = is born; Lan =
merges into; [Tajjalan = Tat + Ja + Lan] Iti = this (or such); Shanta =
calmly; Upaseeta = contemplate.
[Transliteration: "All this (that we perceive through the ten senses* and the
mind-intellect-memory-emotion equipment) is indeed the Absolute from Which all
this is born and into Which all this merges; contemplate upon this (principle)
with a calm mind"] 
The presence of evil in religions:So Hinduism is a very humanistic religion. It permits the individual enormous
liberties, within a few rational and humane boundaries. As a result, many
schools of philosophy have blossomed within its benevolent fold. Hinduism is
therefore essentially a convenient word or a convenient concept to denote
diverse ways of life that are all good, noble, pure and morally and
spiritually elevating. Yes, there have been corrupt and sinful practices by
people calling themselves Hindus -- practices that have been quickly and
gleefully pounced upon by various Christian missionary sects to disparage the
religion itself. If these evil practices (and admittedly there have been many
through the course of Hinduism?s long, long history) are proofs that Hinduism
itself is evil, cannot the same be said of Christianity or Islam, for there
have been many equally corrupt and sinful practices perpetrated by people
calling themselves Christians and Muslims?
The Christians may say: "These evil people are not actually Christians". The
Muslims may say: "These evil people are not actually Muslims". Well, I too can
say "These evil people are not actually Hindus". The Christians can say "If
all were to follow the Bible the world would be a happy and problem-free
place". The Muslims can say: "If all were to follow the Quran the world would
be a happy and problem-free place". Well, I too can say: "If all were to
follow the Bhagvad Geeta (or one of several great Books from the Hindu
Scriptures) the world would be a happy and problem-free place". Is this
something to quarrel about?
If those who seek to push, willy-nilly, their own Book would but study, with
an open mind, that of the person whom they are trying to win over to their
fold, and, thus understanding the greatness of that Book too, would but assist
that person to follow his own Book rather than convert to the missionary?s
belief system, the world would be a better place. Is it too much to ask the
missionaries with the "altruistic" material handouts they so kindly dish out
to those who will convert to their belief system to make the handout truly
altruistic by assisting the recipient be a better person by properly
understanding and following the recipient?s own religious tenets? Alas, I fear
as things stand today, it perhaps is.
If I were a philanthropist with the resources to better the conditions of,
say, a Christian in need, I would assist the Christian, saying to him, "Your
own religion is a great one. Understand it properly and live by the Bible." I
would do more: having read and understood the Bible (as I have) I would help
him understand the Bible. This mindset makes me a Hindu. I am glad and humbly
grateful I am one. 
* Note: In Hindu thought, "senses" are subtle organs -- represented in the physical
world by corresponding physical organs -- through which:
 |
Perceptions are
gained from the external world, and |
 |
Impacts are made upon the external world, |
They are:
 |
Five "perception" senses (sight, audition, smell, taste, and touch) and |
 |
Five "action" senses (speech, hands, feet, reproduction and excretion).
Very often the mind itself is referred to as the eleventh sense. This is for
a sound reason, but a discussion of that is beyond the ambit of this
article. |

Site navigation: 
Copyright © Chintamani Rath. Contact Dr Rath for
permission to use.
Initial posting: 2009-SEP-30
Latest update: 2009-SEP-30
Author: Chintamani Rath 
Sponsored link


| |