What is difference between saguna Brahman and Abrahamic religion gods like Jehovah , Allah.

  • It would be better to call the other religions mleccha dharma/ nastika dharma rather adharma.
    – vidyarthi
    Jul 10 at 8:12
  • Nastika means atheist right?@vidyarthi Also,ISCKON considers Christ as a sort of guru figure..
    – Amethyst
    Jul 10 at 9:15
  • It is better to call other religions non-dharmas rather than adharmic religions. Jul 10 at 11:19

God in Hinduism is both the material and the instrumental cause of the universe. That means God created the universe and is also the source of the fabric of the universe. For example, we find this famous verse in the Mundaka Upanishad (one of the principal Upanishads) -

"As a spider emits and draws in [its thread], as herbs arise on the earth, as the hairs of the head and body from a living person, so from the Imperishable arises everything here." Mundaka Upanishad - I.1.7

Chhandogya Upanishad (one of the principal Upanishads) says -

"In the beginning, my dear, the world was just Being (sat), one only, without a second." Chandogya Upanishad - VI.2.1

"It thought. May I be many, may I grow forth." - Chandogya Upanishad VI.2.3

Thus, you see that the Saguna Brahman is the instrumental cause and the material cause. In simpler words, he becomes the universe.

However, according to the Abrahamic religions, God is like a King who created the universe (instrumental cause). But their God is not the material cause of the universe.

Hindus are critical of this view. Because, as we know from our daily experiences, if you want to create something, you need a person (the creator) and the material. If you say the material was there apart from God, then God is not the ultimate source of everything!

  • "God in Hinduism is both the material and the instrumental cause of the universe."" This is a purely advaita view. Dvaita clearly states that Brahman can not be the material cause. Madhva denies that he is the material cause, for God cannot have created the world by splitting himself nor in any other way, since that militates against the doctrine that God is unalterable; in addition, it is blasphemous to accept that a perfect God changes himself into an imperfect world. Unfortunately, you can not just quote advaitic philosophies and say it represents hinduism.
    Jul 20 at 4:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .