Are they like Prophets or God incarnated as human-beings?
I read that there is also a concept similar to trinity in Hinduism . Three Gods… Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Only Vishnu got autars. Is it true and what is the reason behind it?
Also who was ‘Maha-dev’? Are all the three Gods are referred as Mahadev or anyone of them is referred as so.
so no avtaars for other Gods? I read that Devis also got avtar and Sita was avtar of vishnu's wife.
You asked the same question I was going to ask. I wanted to know that if the trinity is masculine, then ate the goddesses completely different from them or are they avatars of the males that make up the trinity. So, shiva is the destroyer, then is kaali his avatar or connected to him?
And how is one judged? By just one diety of the trinity or all three?
You asked the same question I was going to ask. I wanted to know that if the trinity is masculine, then ate the goddesses completely different from them or are they avatars of the males that make up the trinity. So, shiva is the destroyer, then is kaali his avatar or connected to him?
And how is one judged? By just one diety of the trinity or all three?
I read whenever Gods appear as avtaar, their wives (devis) also appear with them as female avtar of devi. So, when Vishnu appeared as Rama, his wife Lakshmi devi appeared as Sita.
Interesting to know that Gautam Budha has been categorised as ninth avtar of Vishnu, though basic teachings of Budha denied existence of any diety.
I didn’t say Avatar was an English word … I said autar is spelt AVATAR in English …
They are currently viewed as a personification of a deity … by the Hindu culture … But my statement is that I feel the origins of these figures were not as gods but as representatives of God
…
I’m not reinventing either … It is a way to consolidate two cultures - the approach is to find common ground not difference … Let me see what I can find in the way of references.
That's interesting. So, on what basis was Budha made the ninth avatar of vishnu then? And apart from Budha, were any other figures thus categorized?
King Asoka was strong enough to promote and spread Buddhism across India. This period last for 4 centuries. In those four centuries the region became vegetarian (as this was preached by Budha) and as we see different depiction of Budhas life in form of sculpture, etc at Taxila, Hinduism got influence to make murtis during that era. As per some historians, before Buddha there were no murtis of Hindu Gods and first temples in India were of Buddhism.
Interestingly, one of the most influential religious personality of India (Buddha) has been portrayed as negative avtar of Vishnu, who came to spread evil and Vishnu will now appear as tenth avtar in the form of Kalki avtar to eradicate these evils. It is rather interesting that this tenth avtar Kalki has been connected with Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by some scholars.
I think concept of avtar in Hinduism is near Christian concept of Jesus (God incarnated) than Muslims concept of Prophet / Khalifa (representative).
I have been through this confusion to consider them as representative. Interestingly, when Ismaili started preaching in India they came with the concept of avtars as representative. One of popular book from that era is ‘Dus avtar’ where Prophets and companions of the Prophet have been called avtaar.
I agree with you, but I think this is a modern take … Even Christianity took time to turn Isa (AS) in to an incarnation … before that as you believe Isa (AS) never claimed to be God …
The Hindu trinity is nothing like the Christian trinity except for sharing the name 'trinity'.It is actually called Trimurthi which is the manifestation of the Brahman into 3 forms - Creator, Destroyer and Sustainer. An avatar is the Physical human/part-human manifestation of God. Nothing at all like Prophets. Prophets are not a manifestation of incarnation of God. They are more like sages and saints.
Yes. All the trimurthi have avatars not just Lord vishnu. Buddha was incorpoared into the avatar fold to be incusive to Buddhists. Orthodox hindus do not consider Buddha as avatar. They consider Balarama as the avatar in his place.
could it be that the whole angel reciting divine words could be a metaphor? dude, come on - you want to radically reinterpret other people’s faiths but will write essays on how god makes humans with clay and animals with water.