Yogi Baba Prem Yogacharya
By Yogi Baba Prem Yogacharya, Veda Visharada
There has been a growing tendency amongst practitioners of Hinduism and globally amongst people to say that in essence all the religions are the same. But is this the reality? To answer this question, one must examine key teachings within each of the systems and see exactly how the theology of these two systems relates to one another.
An excellent place to begin our investigation would be with the Christian term salvation. Commonly the Sanskrit term moksha is translated literally to mean salvation, but this an incorrect translation and reflects an influence of western academics and religious views of western academics dating back to the 1800s. Moksha literally means liberation, and there are considerable differences in the theology of liberation verses salvation. As an example, salvation requires a savior, which does not exist within Hinduism and is not associated with the Hindu concept of liberation. Likewise, salvation requires the belief that one is born ‘in sin’ and requires someone to serve as a vehicle for release from this sin in order to enter into heaven. Hinduism does not have a concept of a savior, nor does it have sin in the Christian sense; though the Sanskrit term papa is commonly translated as sin, though it is not sin in a Christian sense. Additionally, one is not born ‘in sin’ within the Hindu teachings.
The concept of heaven is quite different between the two systems as well. Within Hinduism, heaven or Dyauh is one of the three Vedic worlds and is associated fundamentally with consciousness. Christianity does have a concept of heaven, but it is quite different from the Hindu view of consciousness; within Hinduism this (heaven) is more a representation of consciousness, whereas in Christianity heaven is more of a physical destination. The highest Hindu view of consciousness is represented by the 4th state or world of being called Turiya or pure consciousness. This view of consciousness is not found within the Christian teachings at all. While the term heaven is commonly found within the Christian teachings, it is a literal destination, as there are only two destinations within protestant Christianity: Heaven and Hell and there is the addition of limbo within Catholicism, though there are some that argue that modern Catholicism has rejected the concept of limbo. Heaven within Christianity is more akin to the term loka within Hinduism, as a loka is an astral world within the greater field of consciousness. But within Hinduism, there is no eternal hell or damnation, nor judgment that is central to Christian theology. Rather than hell within Hinduism, reincarnation is a central teaching and may include difficult incarnations due to past actions, but this is quite different from the Christian concept of hell.
Both Hinduism and Christianity use the word ‘soul’, but within Christianity, the belief is that one is a living soul, meaning the soul exists while physically living, but does not exist when not living in physical form. Likewise, the soul is not seen as consciousness, except that it is conscious while living. This view is in striking contrast with Hinduism, as the soul is seen as consciousness, exists beyond the body and continues to exist once the body is shed. It is within Hinduism one finds the most extensive writings and teachings regarding the nature, form and function of the soul, with a variety of terms to clearly discern different qualities or aspects, manifestations if you will, of the soul including terms such as Purusha, Atman and Jiva to name but a few. Within some forms of Hinduism and yoga, the goal is to realize the Self or soul. It is a journey for the ego (ahamkara) to recognize it true essence-soul or Atman. Christianity has no belief in this teaching.
The concept of Karma further illustrates important differences between the theologies of the two religions, as Christianity does not recognize karma, yet within Hinduism karma is a central teaching found within many of the different systems that comprise the broader spectrum of Hinduism. One might argue that the ‘Golden Rule’ of Christianity is similar to karma, but in reality they are quite different; as karma is a universal principle or force throughout the human consciousness. Karma serves to provide opportunities to resolve conflicts from previous actions, to learn lessons and come into greater realization of our true identity.
While Christianity is primarily dualistic with its theology, Hinduism recognizes three primary relationships with Divinity:
1: Advaita (Nondualism)
2. Dualism (separation from Divinity)
3. Advaitdvaita (Qualified Nondualism)
More notably, the founding of the religions is significantly different. While Christianity was founded by an individual or on the teachings of a man, there is no founder of Hinduism. Rather Hinduism is based on the concept of Dharma giving way to the ancient term Sanatana Dharma as a name for modern Hinduism, meaning that modern Hinduism is based on the ancient teachings of Sanatana Dharma or the eternal tradition; and this Dharma is based on an understanding of the unfolding of consciousness from Divinity. While the Christian view of God is largely dualistic, it is also limited to what would be called Saguna Brahman within Hinduism, meaning Divinity with attributes. While Hinduism does recognize saguna Brahman, it also goes further offering the most abstract reality which is Nirguna Brahman or Divinity without attributes.
While we have only scratched the surface of numerous differences in the theology between Hinduism and Christianity, one can clearly see a significant difference in a brief examination of only 4 terms:
- Moksha and salvation
- Dyauh and Heaven
- Atman and soul
- Brahman and God
This does not indicate some sort of superiority of one religion over another; rather it is intended to introduce the reader and student of spirituality to significant differences in terms, beliefs and theology between different religions. This is an important area of study, as the modern trend is to assign one’s own meaning to words, which often limits the actual understanding of the word. While we have only examined Hinduism and Christianity, a similar approach could be applied between Hinduism and the other Abraham based religions. This analysis can offer significant comparisons and contrasts between the world’s major religions, and more importantly provide important insight into the actual meanings of important spiritual and religious terms.
Ashok says
July 1, 2013 at 7:10 pmNow I shall list a few of the incorrect (and totally unsubstanciated) assumptions made about the transcendental divine by God monopolists. Incorrect assumption #1. The divine source cannot give diverse spritual experience to humans. Why cant he do so…? When he gives diverse experiences in other subjective matters such as Music, Arts, Philosphy..why cant he give diverse experiences in spritiual matters ? Obviously he can and he does !. Incorrect Assumption #2. The divine reveals the spiritual nature of the Universe only via the framework of one religion. LOL, why should that be true ? When the divine is revealing its most insightful and elegant physical laws via people of all religions (Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs) and even no-religion (Athesists, agnostics etc)..why the heck should we assume that the revealation of spiritual nature is restricted to people of one religion only ? More next time..
Nahar Varma says
July 2, 2013 at 4:51 amThe Divine CAN give diverse spiritual experiences to different people. That is what every religious scripture claims to be: the record of spiritual experiences given to a particular person or persons. But if so, then these scriptures should not be contradicting each other. However, they do. That is why they can’t all be from God. In fact, one might as well consider the possibility that none of them are from God. Moreover, spirituality, being the science of the spirit, cannot be subjective. Art, philosophy and music are not revelations by God, but creations of man. Neither are physical laws. They’re also discoveries of men. In matters of science, the religion one follows does not matter, nor does any other thing like language. All it takes is a logical and inquisitive mind. But even in science, one sees the effect of tradition. For instance, take the ancient Greek scientists. Archimedes was not a separate phenomenon by himself, but part of a tradition of scientific inquiry. Similarly Arab scientists or Galileo among the pioneers of modern science. Here it might be asked, why were the ancient scientists mostly Greeks? Why were post-15th century AD scientists mostly European? The answer is that the later scientists stood on the shoulders of the earlier ones. In other words, tradition played a major role in what they achieved.
To take another analogy, let us take a hypothetical world where many groups of a species of creatures dwell. Let us say that most of them think that their world is a flat disc around which their sun revolves. However, one group knows that it is the opposite. A few centuries later, where do you think most of the scientific advances in that world would take place? To summarize, tradition is very important.
Now the Judeo-Christian tradition is built up by many prophets. While commonly it is held to have started with Abraham (hence the name ‘Abrahamic religion’), what is not known by most is that Abraham had a precursor, Melkitsedeq or Melkizedek as English translations incorrectly transliterate the Hebrew original. Of Melkitsedeq the Bible says little save that he was the King of Salem (over which Jerusalem was later built), and that he was also “priest of the Most High God”. The New Testament also says that he was greater than Abraham. In other words, Abraham was part of a millenia-older tradition. Judeo-Christian belief is that in the beginning, all peoples knew of God, but later most corrupted that knowledge by idolatry. Only Melkitsedeq and Abraham continued the old tradition.
In other words, it is not necessarily incorrect to believe that God has given knowledge about himself only through one religious tradition, or that only one or fewer such traditions can be truly from God.
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 6:21 am>> That is what every religious scripture claims to be: the record of spiritual experiences given to a particular person or persons. But if so, then these scriptures should not be contradicting each other. << The world at any moment in time is exactly as what the all powerful God wants it to be. So open your eyes and look around to see how the world is at this moment in time ..tens of relgions..athesism, agnostism etc etc. Thats what God wants right now…thats what he got. The all powerful God will get the world exactly as he wants it to at every instant. To believe the world is not what God wants is to believe God is not all powerful. Its his drama..his play…the world dances to his tune and nobody's else.
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 6:29 am>> In matters of science, the religion one follows does not matter, nor does any other thing like language << As usual youmiss the larger point. When all the hand waving is done..the fact of the matter is that if God did not have any qualks to reveal the deepest of scientifc secrets via people of all faiths and non-faiths…to believe all valid spiritual insights should only come from people of Abhamic faiths is laughable to say the least.
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 6:37 am>> In other words, it is not necessarily incorrect to believe that God has given knowledge about himself only through one religious tradition, << This belief contradicts what God has revealed about himself in thousands of experiences he provides humans like me. I would rather go by the evidence of diversity God has provided to me directly rather than trust claims written in your ancient book.
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 6:38 amand that is the end of disucssion. I have said all that I wanted to,
Nahar Varma says
July 2, 2013 at 9:18 amE Let me say it again: God himself does not reveal scientific facts to people, they discover it themselves. Religion does not matter here because God has given intelligence to all men. Which religion they may or may not follow has nothing to do with this. You are comparing two completely different things. Let me give another analogy: Let us say we’re living in the ancient world. There are two scientists among us. One says that the earth is round, the other says it is flat. Now both can paint equally well. So shall we assume that both viewpoints are valid, and to harmonize the two, claim that the earth is a hemisphere on whose round side we live? Such a conclusion would be logical if I were to say that since God has gifted both scientists equal painting abilities, and according to you scientific truths are also revealed by God, therefore both theories by these two scientists are true. However, such a conclusion would be laughable. Painting abilities have little to do with arriving at the right concept. Similarly, religions can be seen as theories. Not all these theories can be right. It might even be that all of them are wrong. But even according to Judeo-Christian belief, all religions may have some things right, because according to Genesis all nations descended from Noah. But that doesn’t mean all religions are true. Even so, according to the Bible, all will eventually come to God. That is what matters.
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 2:00 pmNahar, do you understand what is a strawman ? I never stated the the theology of religions are true..I just stated that God wants diversity in religious beliefs…if the all powerful God did not want that, how could such diversity exist ? Is there someone more powerful than God to make such diversity in religious belief exists ?
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 2:05 pmFixing typo and reposting….
Nahar, do you understand what is a strawman ? I never stated that the theology of all religions are true..I just stated that God wants diversity in religious beliefs…if the all powerful God did not want that, how could such diversity exist ? Is there someone more powerful than God to make such diversity in religious belief exists and overrule God’s will ? In summary the world IS what it IS because God wants it this way (insipite what your ancient book may claim)….and right now we all know that religious diversity exists, because God wants it to exist. How else could it be otherwise ?
Nahar Varma says
July 2, 2013 at 4:35 pmApologies if you thought I was making straw man arguments. My view is that God may not want diversity in views, just as He would not want evil to be there (I’m in no way implying that diversity of beliefs is evil) but just as He allows evil to exist, He allows false doctrines to exist too. It does not mean that He is powerless, just that He respects the free will of His creatures. So far I have spoken of different religious traditions, but as for experiences of God, the Bible does speak of people other than Jews or Christians having them. The Book of Numbers speaks of Balaam the Midianite, one of a people indulging in idolatry, but God spoke to him. Similarly in the Book of Acts, the Apostle Paul in speaking to the Athenians at the Areopagus tells them of an altar in the city not associated with any temple or idol, on which was inscribed ‘To the Unknown God’. He told them that this very God they worshipped without an idol or a temple was the Creator. So Biblically speaking, one cannot claim that only the followers of the Abrahamic religions can have experiences of God.
Ashok says
July 2, 2013 at 4:43 pm>> He respects the free will of His creatures. << Your basic fundamentals are wrong. A created entity cannot have free-will. Humans are created entities. Only the uncreated can have free-will. U may feel like you have free will..but you dont: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will