Dharmic Exposition and Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by Singh, May 14, 2015.

  1. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
  2.  
  3. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Please tag other members too
     
  4. Sakal Gharelu Ustad

    Sakal Gharelu Ustad Detests Jholawalas Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,678
    Likes Received:
    6,652
    @Singh- May be you can merge the "Karna's grasp of Dharma" here. It had some nice points and ideas.
     
  5. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    We can use this thread for various Dharmic treatises/practices and that one only for Karna ?
    Waiting for you to set alight that thread and this one ;)
     
  6. Sakal Gharelu Ustad

    Sakal Gharelu Ustad Detests Jholawalas Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,678
    Likes Received:
    6,652
    Ok, lets keep that for Karna and other Maharathis.
     
    Singh likes this.
  7. Rowdy

    Rowdy Co ja kurwa czytam! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    3,256
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Location:
    Milky Bar
    I need to be drunk before I turn all Philosoraptor .
     
    jackprince and Alien like this.
  8. Vishwarupa

    Vishwarupa Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    2,206


    Nicely explained by Jay Lakhani..watch it
     
    sydsnyper likes this.
  9. Alien

    Alien Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    392
    What Hindus can and should be proud of
    Those who care for the future of the religion should valorise the work of reformers who rid an ancient, ossified faith of its divisions, prejudices, and closed-mindedness
    A bhadralok friend of mine is of the view that the Government of India should celebrate every December 16 as Vijay Diwas, Victory Day, to mark the surrender in 1971 of the Pakistani forces in Dhaka to the advancing Indian Army. My friend argues that such a celebration would take Indians in general, and Hindus in particular, out of the pacifist, defeatist mindset that he claims has so crippled them. The triumph in Dhaka represents for him the finest moment in a millenia otherwise characterised by Indian (and more specifically Hindu) humiliation at the hands of foreigners.

    I was reminded of my friend’s fond fantasy when reading about the posters in Mumbai recently put up by members of the Bharatiya Janata Party. These carry portraits of a prominent BJP leader, with two accompanying slogans: ‘I AM A HINDU NATIONALIST,’ in English, and ‘Garv sé Kaho Ham Hindu Hain’, in Hindi. The latter slogan needs perhaps to be translated for south Indian readers, and set in context for younger ones. ‘Proudly Proclaim Our Hindu-Ness’, would be a faithful rendition. The slogan originates in the Ram Janmabhoomi campaign of the 1980s and 1990s, when it was used by the VHP, RSS, BJP, and Bajrang Dal cadres to mobilise men and materials in the drive to demolish a 16th century mosque in Ayodhya believed by many to be sited on the birthplace of the (mythical) God Ram.

    Victory in Dhaka

    Should Hindus be proud of the Indian Army’s victory in Dhaka in 1971? Perhaps as Indians, but not specifically as Hindus. The war had its basis in the savage repression of Bengalis in East Pakistan by the West Pakistan Army. The refugees who came to India were both Hindus and Muslims. The help rendered to them by the Government of India did not discriminate according to their faith. As for the Indian military campaign, the chief commander in the field was a Jew, his immediate superior a Sikh. A Parsi served as Chief of Army Staff. His own superior, the Prime Minister of India, had notoriously been disallowed from entering the Jagannath temple in Puri because she had not married a Hindu.

    To be sure, many soldiers and officers in the Indian Army were of Hindu origin. Yet they never saw themselves in narrowly communal terms. In our armed forces, then and now, Hindu and Muslim, Christian and Sikh, Parsi and Jew, lived, laboured and struggled together.

    Hindu in intent and content

    Unlike the military campaign in East Pakistan in 1971, the campaign to build a temple in Ayodha was unquestionably Hindu in intent and content. No Muslims or Sikhs or Parsis or Jews or Christians participated in it. But should Hindus have been proud of it? I rather think not. In a society where so many are without access to adequate education, health care and housing, where malnutrition is rife and where safety and environmental standards are violated every minute, to invest so much political energy and human capital in the demolition of a mosque and its replacement with a brand-new temple seemed wildly foolish, if not downright Machiavellian. As it turned out, the Ram Janmabhoomi campaign led to two decades of strife across northern and western India, with thousands of people losing their lives and hundreds of thousands their homes and livelihoods.

    The war of 1971 was not a Hindu war, and the destruction of the Babri Masjid was not something that could fill Hindus with pride. What then, should Hindus be proud of? The answer is that rather than seek for one defining moment, one heroic triumph, Hindus who care for the fate and future of Hinduism should instead valorise the quiet, persistent work of reformers down the centuries to rid an ancient, ossified faith of its divisions, its prejudices, and its closed-mindedness.

    The story of Hindu pride that I wish to tell also begins with Bengal, not with the surrender of the Pakistani Army in 1971, but with the work in the early 19th century of Rammohun Roy, who was unarguably the first great Indian modernist. Rammohun campaigned for the abolition of sati, for greater rights for women more generally, for the embrace of modern scientific education and for a liberal spirit of free enquiry and intellectual debate. His example was carried forward by other Bengali reformers, among them Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar and Swami Vivekananda, who focussed on, among other things, education for women and the abolition of caste distinctions.

    Epicentre of radical thinking

    The torch first lit in Bengal was taken over, and made even brighter, in Maharashtra, which in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was the epicentre of reformist and radical thinking in India. The pernicious practice of ‘untouchability’ was attacked from below by Jotirau Phule and from above by Gopal Krishna Gokhale. Maharashtra also gave birth to India’s first home-grown feminists, such as Tarabai Shinde and Pandita Ramabai, who wrote searing tracts against patriarchal practices and motivated young girls to emancipate themselves through modern education.

    In 1915, Mohandas K. Gandhi came back to India after two decades in the diaspora. Living in South Africa, he had been seized of the need to build harmonious, mutually beneficial, relations between Hindus and Muslims. This commitment to religious pluralism he now renewed and reaffirmed. Meanwhile, he progressively became more critical of caste discrimination. To begin with, he attacked ‘untouchability’ while upholding the ancient ideal of varnashramadharma. Then he began advocating inter-mixing and inter-dining, and eventually, inter-marriage itself.

    Gandhi was pushed to take more radical positions by B.R. Ambedkar, the outstanding lawyer-scholar who was of ‘Untouchable’ origins himself. A modernist and rationalist, Dr. Ambedkar believed that for Dalits to escape from oppression, they had to not look for favours from guilt-ridden reformers but themselves ‘educate, agitate and organise’ their way to emancipation. He remains an inspirational figure, whose work and legacy remain relevant for Dalit and Suvarna alike.

    When India became independent in 1947, a central question the new nation faced was the relation of faith to state. There was a strong movement to create India as a ‘Hindu Rashtra’, a mirror-image of the Islamic nation that was Pakistan. The person who stood most firmly against this idea was the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. In a letter written to Chief Ministers on October 15, 1947, he reminded them that “we have a Muslim minority who are so large in numbers that they cannot, even if they want to, go anywhere else. They have got to live in India. This is a basic fact about which there can be no argument. Whatever the provocation from Pakistan and whatever the indignities and horrors inflicted on non-Muslims there, we have got to deal with this minority in a civilised manner. We must give them security and the rights of citizens in a democratic State.”

    Gandhi was a heterodox Hindu, who was detested by the priestly orthodoxy; so much so that the Sankaracharyas once even organised a signature campaign that asked the British to declare Gandhi a non-Hindu. Nehru was a lapsed Hindu, who never entered a temple in adult life. He too was intensely disliked by the sants and shakha heads who arrogate to themselves the right to speak for Hindus. Ambedkar was a renegade Hindu, who was born into the faith yet decided in the end to leave it, through a dramatic conversion ceremony weeks before his death.

    For all their lapses and departures from orthodoxy — or perhaps because of them — Gandhi, Ambedkar, and Nehru were the three 20th century figures who did most to rid Hinduism of its ills and excesses, who worked most heroically to nurture the spirit of equal citizenship that the Laws of Manu so explicitly deny. The work that they, and the equally remarkable reformers who preceded them, did, are what Hindus should be most proud of.

    Entrenched prejudices

    That said, Hindus still have much to be ashamed about. As the recent spate of attacks on Dalits and women shows, deep-rooted caste and patriarchal prejudices remain entrenched in many parts of India. Meanwhile, in countries that neighbour ours, Islamic fundamentalism is on the rise, giving ammunition to parties in India who represent the most sectarian and exclusive aspects of Hinduism themselves. The battles inaugurated by the likes of Rammohun Roy and Jotirau Phule, and carried forward by Ambedkar and Nehru and company, have now to be fought afresh. The abolition of caste prejudices; the elimination of gender hierarchies; the promotion of religious pluralism — these remain the elusive ideals of those who wish (proudly or otherwise) to call themselves Hindu and Indian.

    (Ramachandra Guha’s books include Makers of Modern India. He can be reached at [email protected])


    http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/what-hindus-can-and-should-be-proud-of/article4941930.ece
     
    Singh likes this.
  10. jus

    jus Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Location:
    Universe
    Hindus: How many 'hindus' felt offended by the movie Troy? Or should I say, if the movie was about Indian medivial history and had scenes about muslim invaders and destruction of temples?

    Gunveer Kaur

    I haven't watched the movie but looking at the details of your question, I think I have a pretty good idea what you are talking about. The way you narrated it makes sense if you think it from the Achilles point of view or, should I say, the point of view of the invader(like Ghaznavi). From your question, I also conclude that you have no idea, whatsoever, about Hindu philosophy and beliefs except that Hinduism permits idol worship.

    The basic flaw in your argument: Destruction of Idols demoralized Hindus.

    Before I can answer your question, there are certain basic things you must know about Hinduism if you desire to know our version of story.

    Do you know how truly does an idol represent the God in Hinduism? - As much as your wrist watch represents the TIME. If I ask you what is the time, you may look at your watch and tell me the time as 10:00 am but if I ask you to tell me something about Time, will you still answer me 10:00 am?

    What effect does the destruction of idols have on Hindu Gods?- Same that you would experience if I take your photograph, tear it, scribble on it, stamp on it, jump on it or burn it away i.e. no injury at all.

    Idols are not God in Hinduism, they are merely representations of what a Hindu believes the God "might" look like. Hinduism gives freedom to its believers to visualise God in any way they like.


    Hindu 1: God is the creator and HE might look like this:

    [​IMG]
    (Lord Brahma)

    Hindu 2: God is the preserver and HE might look like this:
    (Lord Vishnu)

    Hindu 3: God is the destroyer of all evils and HE might look like this:
    [​IMG]
    (Lord Shiva)

    Hindu 4: God is a motherly figure: has created you, nurtures you and protects you and can be best represented as this:
    [​IMG]
    (Maa Shakti)

    Hindu 5: God is not just male or female, HE is both:
    [​IMG]
    (Lord Ardhnarishwar)

    Hindu 6: Gyaan[1] is God and can be represented as this:

    (Maa Saraswati)

    Hindu 7: 'Love' represents the God best, so it must be represented like this:
    [​IMG]
    (Radha Krishan)

    Hindu 8: 'Strength and power accompanied by humility and devotion' represents the God best, so HE must look like this:
    [​IMG]
    (Lord Hanuman)

    Hindu 9: The feeling of Vatsalya[2] represents the God best, so God must be like this:
    [​IMG]
    (The child form of Lord Krishna)

    Hindu 10: God is formless but HIS presence can be realized through natural forces:
    [​IMG]
    (The Nature becomes the God)


    We can actually go on and on like this and yet never know what God exactly looks like. All of the above are not different Gods, they are representation of same God visualised by various people in different manners. (So you may realize now that there are no 33 crores of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, but they are, infact, 33 crore representations of same God.)

    Under Hinduism, one has freedom to visualise any form that he thinks represents God and join his hands before that form and can connect to the Almighty God through the prayer. If you have faith in HIM, God will connect back to you to in any form that you desire HIM to be. Yes, to reach HIS believers God will not hesitate to take any form, be it animals, trees and even stones(Idols).

    Do you realize the most important fact about Hinduism? A true Hindu will never negate someone else interpretation of God because he knows God is everywhere and will reveal HIMSELF to different people in different forms. A true Hindu will always feel obliged to respect all forms of God. (explains the secular aspect of Hinduism)

    Now coming back to your original question:

    No, when the invaders destroyed our temples and idols, we weren't demoralized thinking that our God has been dethroned. Infact, we were enraged because they had insulted our religion and our faith in God by calling us Kafirs (non believers in God). We have no respect for Ghaznavi and his brigade because they disrespected our version of God by saying his version was superior and our version was no version at all.

    He successfully destroyed temples and killed Hindus, but he couldn't destroy Hinduism. What makes you think he was successful? Just because a few of our people left their own interpretation of God in favour of a new interpretation in Arabic, doesn't mean Hinduism was defeated. As far as a person believes in God (whatever form), Hinduism lives. Islam just added on to our perspectives of God, it dint replace our beliefs.

    Hence, Ghaznavi dint establish himself as superior or something else. He was a plunderer who came, looted us of our wealth, disrespected our women, killed the innocents, showed disrespect to our faith and then returned back. He was a murderer, plunderer and the actual Kafir. Infact, we are amazed that people in Pakistan often regard him as their hero. The person who once dragged our mothers[3] by their hair is a respectable person in their society.

    More than a thousand of years have passed since Ghaznavi attacked our lands, we haven't still forgiven him for that. And never will ! But that doesn't mean we will avenge it by killing his descendants or people of his faith. Our faith in our God ensures us that God Himself will take care of Ghaznavi and his likes for all the sins they commit. Under Hinduism, we pray everyday
    ॐ असतो मा सद्गमय ।
    तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय ।
    मृत्योर्मा अमृतं गमय ।
    ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥
    Dear God,
    Lead us from Unreality to the Reality,
    Lead us from the Darkness to the Light,
    Lead us from the Fear of Death to the Knowledge of Immortality.
    Let there be Peace, Peace, Peace.


    Unlike Ghaznavi and his likes, we don't think we will be granted special favours by God if we convert others to our faith and kill those who refuse to do that. As Hindus (and persons of other Dharmic religions) our spiritual progress is guided by the following principles:
    1. Sattvam: Purity of mind and body .
    2. Sama / Dhama: Self Control / discipline over ourselves .
    3. Vairagyam: Detachment over worldly issues .
    4. Satyam: Truth in thought, word and deed .
    5. Ahimsa: Non Violence towards all .

    I hope you would have atleast some idea by now that what offends Hindus and what not?
    If you say you don't believe in idolism, Hindus won't be offended. However, if you commit most heinous of crimes and proclaim that you are acting on behalf of God, Hindus will, definitely, be offended.

     
    Last edited: May 21, 2015
    Srinivas_K, sydsnyper and jackprince like this.
  11. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    What just happened in this post ???????????????????????????????????????????
     
    Rowdy likes this.
  12. jus

    jus Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Location:
    Universe
    Singh ji Ask her..... .....Gunveer Kaur

    :balleballe:
     
  13. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Err.. What just happened in that post and why did you post it ? What was the relevance of it and how was it applicable here ?
     
  14. jus

    jus Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Location:
    Universe
    Did you asked same questions to those poster who posted before me

    'What Hindus can and should be proud of'

    'The answer to all Hindu bashers'


    Come to the point .... Hindu way of life/culture (not religion) is mother tree and Jain/Buddha/Sikh are branches.Only by knowing roots of Hinduism we can save our way of life/culture.

    AFAIK my post very relevant in 'dharmic exposition and discussion' thread.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2015
  15. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011


    You should ask the member. Atleast that would be a great point to start a debate on. Like I did with you.



    Explain yourself.

    I seriously doubt that that particular post was relevant.

    How is Troy offensive to Hindus ? fo real ?
     
  16. jus

    jus Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Location:
    Universe
    @Singh

    You should ask the member. Atleast that would be a great point to start a debate on. Like I did with you.

    That is none of my business.You are mod&op, I simply asked why u pointed out me by leaving those 2 guys


    Explain yourself.

    you want me to explain an explanation


    I seriously doubt that that particular post was relevant.

    How is Troy offensive to Hindus ? for real ?

    Read it again,Gunveer Kaur explained everything except Troy :rofl:
     
  17. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Stop colouring your posts, its childish.

    I didn't ask you as a moderator but as a participant in this thread.

    Expound on your explanation.

    I have no idea on what context the answer was made in another site. It asks me to login and I don't have time to make an account.

    Suffice it to say the question was how is Troy offensive to Hindus and this female came up with a CBSE worthy answer. More paragraphs less substance.

    Destroying religious places of the enemy is a very valid and effective military strategy.
     
  18. genius

    genius Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    117
    Location:
    India
    Hinduism is basically a pagan faith with multiple gods, rituals, and superstition. It has nothing of substance, which is why Buddha came along and introduced a new system. Instead of acknowledging that, hindus started claiming Buddha as their own. How nice!
     
  19. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    For your info. Abrhamic religions beliefs/ traditions came from Babylonian Pagan traditions. Except that Abrhamic religions are simple and highly organized.

    You can check the Yazidi faith and you can find similarities of Adam, Eve story (originated in Babylonia), one GOD etc...etc..., Yazaidis are classified as Pagans.

    Hinduism lacks this organization and simplicity.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2015
  20. jus

    jus Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Location:
    Universe
    WTF how many Mosques destroyed by Hindu Kings :rofl:From 1000 years we are fighting those filthy barbarians we still don't get it.We are fighting fu*** Ideology aka ISIS.
    See my thread Islam is ISIS,ISIS is islam.
    Do you have a problem with CBSE worthy answer or from that women:laugh:
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2015
  21. genius

    genius Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    117
    Location:
    India
    Abrahamic faiths are based on the "ONE GOD" concept. Pagan faiths have multiple gods. In Abrahamic faiths, there is only one way to god. This is not the case in pagan faiths. Nature is something to be exploited in Abrahamic faiths. Nature is seen as god in many pagan faiths. There is no goddess in Abrahmic faiths. Goddess is a very popular concept in almost all pagan faiths.

    Etc. etc.
     
    Srinivas_K likes this.

Share This Page