Talk:Problem of evil in Hinduism/Archive 1

This article doesn't give any information!

Agreed. Accordingly, I have made the article redirect to Karma in Hinduism. --goethean ॐ 17:00, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I merged into 'Problem of Evil' itself?

I support merging this with the Problem of evil article, but that article would have to be revised as well to give a better balance to the two viewpoints. What better way to compare and contract varying philosophical perspectives? Perhaps a reworked introduction could summarize the basic perspectives, followed by the Western philosophy of religion point of view (which it is), and close with the Hindu point of view, making the merger of these two separate articles more NPOV. — RDF ^talk 03:03, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

This doesn't say much except for 'possibly karma', whereas Karma in Hinduism asserts a much more strong role - indeed it states that for Hinduism, Karma's doctrinal purpose is to answer the problem of evil.

I think that there is an article to be made here - though possibly wrapped into the main POE article - which is that Hindus are claiming to have another POE to the classical christian one. However, there is no supporting history of that given so far (20040302 09:42, 23 November 2005 (UTC))

hmmmmmm=

"In most Hindu traditions, the existence of evil is not incompatible with a benevolent Brahman – supreme cosmic spirit – since the jīvas (selves) and prakruti (nature) are eternally existent, and hence not a creation of Brahman."

Praktruti (and one of it's ofsprings, jivas) are definatley not eternally existent, it emerges from Brahman creates everything and then eventually disolves into Brahman.Sethie 15:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

1. You state this as though there's one Hindu tradition with one view of the matter; can you prvide a source for your view?
2. The same applies to the new section that you've added. Also, it covers some of the same ground as what preceded it, but instead of making it part of the article you've tacked it onto the end; it needs to be properly incorporated. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't have a source handy, though if you can find one that says Prakruti IS eternal, I would definatley do the legwork to show that this is a minority, minority view.

I did take into consideration the idea of different schools view of the self in writing the last section. To my knowledge there is concensus- the Self is Sat-Chit-Ananda- forever free, forever unbound. It is my understanding that where the different schools diverge is around what relationship of the Self to God, not around what is the nature of the Self.

As for incorporation, it sounds good to me. Sethie 22:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I also take issue with avidya being called "beginingless," I have never heard that before.... not sure if you put that in there, if you did, do you have a source for it? Sethie 04:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sethie,

1. you are talking from the non-dualistic point of view of Sankaracharya. However, Hinduism also includes Samkhya, qualified non-dualism and dualism.
2. Even in non-dualism (that you talk about), Avidya is considered an aspect of Brahman which is beginingless. Manas 05:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply.

I do lean heavily towards advaita, however am somewhat well versed in other schools, especially Samkhya. I am asking for a quote or refference which says avidya is of Purusha and not Prakriti; or Brahman, and not Maya; of Shiva, not Shakti.Sethie 14:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for missing the point. Avidya is ignorance and by definition does not exist. It is a subjective thing and is destroyed by knowledge (as per Sankara). Removed the word beginingless. Manas 07:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure that I fully understand. If everything is Brahman and Brahman includes Avidya then does that mean that that it is impossible to become enlightened? I thought that gaining Moksha involved realising that your true nature was Brahman - but if Avidya is an aspect of Brahman then wouldn't you still suffer from ignorance? -- Q Chris 21:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Sources

The main source seems to be false. I can't find it anywhere in any library search, or through the ol' Google. Hoaxity hoax? -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Article NOT a hoax!

This article is most definitely NOT a hoax. The book and references are real and available in mainstream Hindu bookstores.

The ISBN number may not be exactly right (I'll verify it within a few days), but here is the ASIN number from amazon.com: ASIN: B000ETJJMM

The book is available from the publisher at http://www.sriramakrishnamath.org/books/elist.asp?ProductType=MA11

"BRAHMA SUTRA BHASHYA (English) By Swami Gambhirananda pages xxii+922 ISBN 02419 Rs.170.00"