Good God, I'm not saying they're very similar. That's my whole point! They're different religions because they have SOME different beliefs, but there are also SOME similar beliefs, just as in Vedism there are SOME different beliefs, and SOME similar beliefs to Hinduism. Do you see the point now?
Look, the nature of Monotheism and Hinduism are fundamentally different.
In Hinduism, change is gradual, and very accomodative of new streams of thought.
in Monotheism, change occurs suddenly, with the arrival of a prophet, and the new religion removes all traces of the old one.
Here is a nice quote:
With the coming of the Muslims, the peoples of India encountered for the
first time a large-scale influx of bearers of a civilization as sophisticated,
if not as ancient, as their own. They were also confronted by a religious
system that was in many ways the very opposite of their own. Hinduism (the
predominant Indian religion at that time) was open, tolerant, and inclusive of
widely varying forms of religious devotion - from idol worship to meditation -
in search of union with the supernatural source of all creation. Islam was
doctrinaire, proselytizing, and committed to the exclusive worship of a
single, transcendent God.
Islam, The Coming Of Islam To South Asia
Christianity is not a pagan religion, but Islam just is not Christianity because there are a different set of beliefs. Vedism is not Hindusm because there are a different set of core beliefs. Look at it like this if you want to consider "religious evolution".
Look, you have already made your first mistake by defining Hinduism on the lines of a rigid monotheism.
Hinduism isn't like that. Its a compilation of varied beliefs.
I didn't say that Christianity is a pagan religion, I'm saying that it has borrowed a lot of stuff from the preexisting pagan religions.
Now, Hinduism doesn't even have a set of core beliefs. You name a belief, and I"ll name a sect which doesn't follow it.
The fact is that Classical Hinduism evolved from Vedism gradually, over a long period of time. Some beliefs/rituals were retained and some were forgotten, and some new ones were added.
Similarly, Classical hinduism changed its form several times before arriving at its present state.
I quoted two major changes earlier...the Adi Shankaracharya and the Bhakti Movement.
The more recent changes are the reform movements of the 18th century.
Until and Unless Hinduism uniformly discards the Rigveda as "un-hindu", all interpretations of the Rigveda, past and present, must be considered hindu.
Islam + Original Christianity = Same
Which original christianity? I'm not sure...could you be more specific?
Original Christianity evolves into modern Christianity.
Modern Christianity (evolved) + Islam = Different religions now.
As far as I am concerned, Islam was created by Muhammed who claimed to be a prophet. He modified the bible and added some new material.
Then, he named his religion Islam.
Now, Islam and Christianity are different because they choose to be different.
They have a different history, and have influenced different parts of the world.
On the other hand, Hinduism is just an evolved form of the original Vedism. There is no conflict between the two, and even today, some isolated communities of the original have survived.
The holy books used are exactly same...with little or no modification.
Evolution that changes a religion makes it into a different religion, when the doctrines presented in those religions begin to contradict the other one, or the basic tenets differ. This has happened for Hinduism and Vedism.
Which basic tenets? Hinduism has no basic tenets.
Here's a quote from wikipedia:
Hinduism is an extremely diverse religion. Although some tenets of the faith are accepted by most Hindus, scholars have found it difficult to identify any doctrines with universal acceptance among all denominations.[12] Prominent themes in Hindu beliefs include Dharma (ethics/duties), Samsāra (The continuing cycle of birth, life, death and rebirth), Karma (action and subsequent reaction), Moksha (liberation from samsara), and the various Yogas (paths or practices).
The very nature of Hinduism is to absorb contradictory beliefs.
What I mean is, that Hinduism rarely has prophets. It more often has gurus, who persuade people to change their beliefs by convincing them.
On the other hand, Monotheism always needs a prophet, who then denounces and denies that his religion had any roots in earlier beliefs.
The new religion becomes the only religion, and the true religion.
Try telling a devout Christian that Christmas was celebrated by his pagan ancestors in a similar fashion. He will refuse to accept it.
But a devout Hindu will acknowledge that his religion has changed.
This is because Hinduism is a bottom-up approach. It is man's effort to understand the universe.
Whereas Christianity/Islam is top-down: God himself came and said "this is who I am and that is my religion".
Each of your books was written by a sage.
A sage mind you, not a prophet.
Even so, most books haven't changed.
What has changed is their interpretation. Men have interpreted these books differently. Thats all.
I don't think you understand the logic of what you're proposing here. You're saying that any belief system in history can be classified as Hinduism.
I am saying that the Vedic religion is nothing but an early form of Hinduism.
This is nonsense. There is only one way to describe a belief system..Either as a belief system or as a religion. You cannot call it Hinduism, because Hinduism is a set of beliefs as written down in the Mahabharata and various books. For example, a Hindu must believe that the sons of Pandu and Dhrishtrava battled it out for Bharat at the City of Elephants. These are Hindu beliefs, none of which are Islamic beliefs or Christian beliefs. Therefore you cannot apply Hinduism to just any religion. There is a boundary. The obvious boundary that Hinduism crosses is when Indra becomes relegated to a defeated God, at the mercy of the Dravidian Gods, when he reigned supreme under Vedic beliefs. If one religion has an all powerful God, how can this be the same as another set of beliefs that has him being beaten by other Gods? Obviously he is not not all powerful. This is because Vedism and Hinduism are separate religions.
Dude, if you place an Indra statue in front of a hindu today, he will pray to it.
On the other hand, if you place a Christ statue in front of a muslim, he won't pray to it.
That is the difference.
Indra is still regarded as a hindu god, even though he is not popular for worship.
Indian traditional dances/art forms still depict Indra.
Rigvedic Hyms that invoke indra are still chanted in rituals.
Here are photos of Indra idols in Hindu temples:
Lord Indra at Baroda:
Indra and his consort, the elephant:
Indra at Pushkar:
Gods defeat other gods in Hinduism all the time!! Try reading up on various other god-on-god battles.
Different gods are more powerful or less powerful depending on your hindu sect.
What about Vishnu? Isn't Vishnu still worshipped, even though he is in the Rigveda?
What about Saraswati?
Only if the Hindu Gods became irrelevant.
...its not just about which gods you worship....there are innumerable details involved.
The Vedas are only Hindu by name according to the priests. They form a separate religion. The Rig Veda especially.
Then why are Rigvedic mantras still so popular if they are part of a different religion?
Do Christians recite the quran?
