Satan vs. Hiranyakisipu

[AncientMariner 0]

What is the difference between the two. I hear Hindus say all the time Satan is a myth created by westerners but Hiranyakisipu is more than an allegorical figure. I do accept that Vedic literature is actual history and I rarely struggle with the allegorical aspect of it but I don't think this necessarily makes Satan a mythological figure. If Hiranyakasipu is the incarnation of material desire I don't see how that differs with Satan. It almost seems to me Hindus(except Prabhupada) want to discredit the Bible as being Vedic literature and this minimizes the position of the pure devotee Jesus Christ. Jesus was clearly tempted by the personification of material desire and he defeated that foe and is respected the world over as a Saint clearly on the level of the great Vedic spritual masters.

[theist 1]

History or allegory, either way one can see the similarities.

[jagatpurush 0]

> What is the difference between the two.

 

Hiranyakasipu was one ordinary soul who attained a lot of power and exemplified all the demoniac/ materialistic qualities. the idea of Satan however (at least, the version of it that Prabhupada did not accept) is that he is a rival power of God's, of equal or near equal stature.

 

so that idea does not match our theism. if anyone is to be of near or equal status to Visnu, it should be Siva, who is a devotee of Visnu. not some common demon like Hiranyakasipu who attained temporary material power.

 

i read on Suhotra Prabhu's site that actually the religion of Zoroastrianism started as a split of certain brahmanas who wanted to follow this doctrine of dualism, that there is equal Satan and God:

 

"At one point, though, something that India rejected took hold in the West. This something accounts for the major differences between Western and Vedic theology. This something is Zoroastrianism. It is at once the tie that binds the Western religious heritage and Vedic dharma, and the point at which they departed from one another.

Zoroastrianism is an ancient doctrine of "theological dualism" propagated in Persia at some unknown date by the prophet Zarathushtra. Theological dualism means any religious doctrine in which God is thought to have a rival in the person of an anti-God like Satan. As a religious faith Zoroastrianism is almost extinct. But its dualism lives on to a recognizable degree in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The teachings of Zarathushtra were not unknown in ancient India. He is named Jarutha in several passages of the Rg Veda . However, these references are not flattering. Rg Veda 7.9.6 indicates that Jarutha's theology was opposed by the sage Vasistha."

 

[AncientMariner 0]

There are different accounts of the fall of Satan but the one I was educated in is that Satan was an angel of God who became jealous of God's power and wanted to become God so God cast him out of heaven and now his only mission is to destroy God and the Children of God but by the almighty power of Jesus and God, Satan is already defeated so there is no question of Satan being of equal or near equal stature. This version is remarkably similar to Indian Vedic literature in the fact that when the jiva wants to imitate God it is cast out into material nature so I still don't see how Hiranyakisipu and Satan are that much different characters. I guess where they differ is that Hiranyakisipu was a doorman in the Vaikuntha planets and got sent to Earth because he offended one of the sons of Brahma whereas Satan got sent to Earth because he became jealous of God. There are lots of Hiranyakisipu's and Satan's running around to this day. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Kulapavana 0]

the current concept of Satan is basically a folklore thing. even Christian scholars have vastly different ideas in this field. ancient (pre-biblical) societies and beliefs were very different than most people think due to biblical brainwashing.

[AncientMariner 0]

Prabhupada accepted Jesus as a pure devotee, so Jesus must have been tempted by maya in some form biblical brainwashing or not.

[theist 1]

I see the temptation of Christ while fasting and praying to be exemplary for us. If we see his life as the example of what we must do it is instructive in nature. Not that he was really tempted by some etheral demon whispering in his ear but more like that which devotees must overcome in the form of maya offering various siddhis for enhanced material enjoyment. Or the temptation that comes from having gained much wealth etc.

 

So I simply take the devil to be one's own temptation to enjoy in world apart from the service of the Lord. In that we also see the basic marginal nature of the jiva and the fight to overcome the enjoying spirit. It really takes place all within oneself.

 

Don't devotees also tend to blame maya for this and that? "Maya made me do it." I also see similarities there.

[Kulapavana 0]

the only true fact here is that SP accepted Jesus of Nazareth as a pure devotee. his temptation (and a lot of other things in the biblical record) may or may not be a fact. a lot of what passes as contemporary or historical christianity is not based on facts - you will see that if you study this subject matter even from christian masters

[krsna 3]

 

/images/graemlins/blush.gif

[muralidhar_das 0]

According to the Ethiopian book of Enoch, which is part of the Ethiopian Bible, demons are reborn again and again through reincarnation, and they come to tempt and trouble humans.

 

This book is not in the Western Bible, but it has been found among the dead sea scrolls. It is an authentic scripture from prior the time of Jesus.

 

So, perhaps Jesus was tempted by a "re-manifest" form of Satan, who used to be an angel but fell down.

 

According to Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, the idea of "two gods", one good god and a bad god caled satan, is a myth. A myth created by Zoaraster. But that is not to say that demons don't exist. The real issue is that they believe in an "anti-god" who has supernatural powers to cause disturbance in the world. Whereas Hiranyakasipu was simply an individual person, not a satanic force. He was not "the dark side of the force".

 

There is only one force, according to the Vedas. Brahman (the all pervading power of visnu). The idea that there are two forces, or a dark side of the force, is a myth.

 

 

[muralidhar_das 0]

Ezekiel's vision:

 

"As I looked, behold, a storm wind came out of the north, and a great cloud, with brightness around about it, and fire flashing forth continually, and in the midst of the fire, as it were gleaming bronze. And from the midst of it came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance: they had the form of men, but each had four faces, and each had four wings. Their legs were straight, and the soles of their feet were like the sole of a calves foot; and they sparkled like burnished bronze. Under their wings on their four sides they had human hands. And the four had their faces and their wings thus: their wings touched one another; they went everyone straight forward without turning as they went. As for the likeness of their faces, each had the face of a man in front; the four had the face of a lion on the right side; the four had the face of an ox on the left side, and the four had the face of an eagle at the back. Such were their faces. And their wings were spread out above; each creature had two wings, each of which touched the wings of another, while two covered their bodies. And each went straight forward, wherever the spirit would go they went, without turning as they went.

 

"In the midst of the living creatures there was something that looked like burning coals of fire, like torches moving to and fro among the living creatures; and the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning. And the living creatures darted to and fro like a flash of lightning. Now as I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel upon the earth beside the living creatures, one for each of the four of them. As for the appearance of the wheels and their construction: their appearance was like the gleaming of a chrysolite; and the four had the same likeness, their construction being as it were a wheel within a wheel. When these went they went in any of their four directions without turning as they went. The four wheels had rims and they had spokes; and their rims were full of eyes round about. And when the living creatures went, the wheels went beside them; and when the living creatures rose from the earth, the wheels rose. Wherever the spirit would go, they went, and the wheels rose along with them; for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. When those went, these went, and when those stood, these stood; and when those rose from the earth, the wheels rose along with them, for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.

 

"Over the heads of the living creatures there was the likeness of a firmament shining like crystal, spread out over the heads. And under the firmament their wings were stretched out straight, one toward another; and each creature had two wings covering its body. And when they went, I heard the sound of their wings like the sound of many waters, like the thunder of the Almighty, a sound of tumult like the sound of a host; when they stood still they let down their wings. And there came a voice from the firmament over their heads; when they stood still, they let down their wings. And above the firmament over their heads there was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like sapphire, and seated about the likeness of a throne was as it were the likeness of a human form. And upward from what had the appearance of his loins I saw as it were gleaming bronze, like the appearance of fire round about; and downward from what had the appearance of his loins I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and there was brightness around about him. Like the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud on the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord." (Ezekiel 1:4-28, see also Chapter 10)

 

 

 

[muralidhar_das 0]

Numbers, Chapter 21

 

5 And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.

 

6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.

 

7 Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.

 

8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

 

9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

 

 

.........

 

 

2 Kings, 18

 

 

1 Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign.

 

2 Twenty and five years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Abi, the daughter of Zachariah.

 

3 And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did.

 

4 He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.

 

 

 

 

<hr>

 

 

But.... Moses had installed this idol of the serpent, so was it wrong to destroy it?

 

 

 

[AncientMariner 0]

No doubt there are different accounts of what happened with Jesus life and I am no biblical scholar so I don't really know the story. I am under the impression that Jesus had a disciplic succession and his disciples had their different interpretation of events so it is not astonishing that there are different accounts. I had never heard the myth of Satan being a God equal to God, that is a new interpretation to me and obviously that one is a load of sh*t. The one I have always heard is that Satan was an angel who became jealous of God and was cast out of heaven and obviously if he was cast out of heaven he couldn't be equal to God. It is amazing how similar the myth of Satan is to the historical life of Hiranyakisipu at least in the aspect of how the rebelious soul is cast into material nature. Maybe Satan got his supernatural powers because he was madder about being kicked out of heaven then a celestial bellhop who was instructed to play the part of a demon. Just kidding. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[muralidhar_das 0]

Zoroaster is the person who dreamed up the idea that two gods are fighting in the world, and that men are pawns in this cosmic battle. See:

 

http://www.zoroaster.com/

 

The link between jews and zoarastrians is explained here

http://www.vohuman.org/Article/Zoroastrianism%20and%20Judaism.htm

[AncientMariner 0]

Maybe that is where the Mormons and all these other various masonic Christian cults got their B.S. from.

[theist 1]

We see such battles also in the SB, Hiranyaksa and Hiranyakasipu for example.

 

Isn't there some similarities? But the Christians really see this Satan as having access to the deepest levels of our minds.

 

I tend to see all the struggle between good and evil as something that takes place within. I am my own Satan. Nobody else left to blame.

[AncientMariner 0]

Maybe it is a combination of both. God gives bodies to individuals who are under the influence of maya and they can create quite a botheration to someone who is trying to transcend the boundaries of birth and death. But you are right ultimately the battle is within and the only way to overcome these influences is to fix the mind on God and remain steadfast in determination.

[theist 1]

I don't mean to say that because there is some internal meaning for us that it something didn't happen outside of ourselves at the same time. I do agree with your idea of both being true in many cases.

 

Sometimes I wonder if we had the vision would we see everything external to ourselves as having and inner meaning that related to our spiritual advancement? Almost like the whole of material experience is the Lord's parable to the jiva. I don't know, just wondering out loud.

[AncientMariner 0]

"Sometimes I wonder if we had the vision would we see everything external to ourselves as having an inner meaning that related to our spiritual advancement? Almost like the whole of material experience is the Lord's parable to the jiva."

 

Yep, I would agree with that and when a person reaches that stage then they have truely passed the test of maya so to speak and noone truly is an enemy with that kind of vision. That is the kind of vision that gave Jesus the power to ask God to forgive those who had tortured and murdered him. Hopefully it wasn't just a myth that Jesus did that. I am sure there is some scholar out there that says Jesus didn't forgive his torturers and the thieves and all that. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Guest guest]

Yes that is the vision needed to enter Gods Kingdom. To see no enemy, that the enemy is in the mind. In the highest vision only Krsnas' grace is to be traced everywhere in every atom. But that is a very high position to take as we may be willed to play the highest sacrifice, that is giving up this body even, to enter His will 100%. So how much are we prepared to sacrifice for Krsna to have His company?

Mahaprabhu also taught this in Siksastakam "No matter how you treat me Lord... kindly or harshly still you will be My Lord unconditionally, birth after birth, eternally"

 

I'm sure the illusionary energy, call it Maya or Satan can be condensed into a particular peronality as to be taken as an anti-Christ or Krsna to such a degree that it appears as the enemy of all souls. And at the same time that may resonate in many souls, so as to affiliate to its rebellious cause.

 

Even Lord Shiva who has many similarities and qualities to Krsna has taken on the role of opposition party to Krsna, along with His servitors and followers. But it is all to enhance and vindicate the supremacy of the Lord.

[Guest guest]

Another interesting angle to this is that from some Christian perspectives, they see Krsna as the devil or anti Christ represented as false religion. He fits their bill with his beautiful slick looks, and cunning ways, immoral conduct etc. He's a smooth operator capable of stealing young vulnerable girls minds and hearts away, and that He does.

If only we could be so fortunate. Instead of clinging to all our doubts and mental speculations.

[theist 1]

That is why I rarely mention Krsna to them and talk only of God or Absolute Truth who is personal etc. Otherwise it's just too dangerous.

[AncientMariner 0]

The Lord always remains supreme and even the radical Christians refer to God as the Lord Almighty.