Please hindus, don't say: "All Religions are the Same"

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by Vishwarupa, Nov 14, 2015.

  1. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,454
    Likes Received:
    7,616
    Location:
    Gujarat

    The terror manual teaches to boycott all good things. It deny every civilized thing and preaches those desert rituals and customs of 1500 years back in dark age of desert. As Tarek fatah told to a mullah that it is not mandatory to look ugly to be a Muslim. These people tries to live a 4th century life in 21st century. A complete disregard and wastage of Human life.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2016
    Batfan likes this.
  2. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    5,454
    Likes Received:
    7,616
    Location:
    Gujarat
    According to Hinduism, Dharma is something which is for whole humanity. Abrhmic and other religions are for cast , creeds and people of particular geographical area or believers. These so called religions have a very narrow outlook and made for certain group. Hinduism has a holistic outlook and look at the humanity as a whole.
     
    Nuvneet Kundu likes this.
  3. Kharavela

    Kharavela Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2013
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    550
    Location:
    Odisha, India
    Nuvneet Kundu likes this.
  4. Ancient Indian

    Ancient Indian p = np :) Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2014
    Messages:
    3,406
    Likes Received:
    4,179
    Location:
    Everywhere
  5. OneGrimPilgrim

    OneGrimPilgrim Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    5,238
    Likes Received:
    6,770
    Location:
    whr invaders hv been eulogised, heroes binned!!
    'compromise at different levels'. should've asked her about level MINORITY & the compromises she expects the pampered lot of this country to make in order for peace to prevail 'constantly'.
     
  6. Ancient Indian

    Ancient Indian p = np :) Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2014
    Messages:
    3,406
    Likes Received:
    4,179
    Location:
    Everywhere
    Lack of pride can make one compromise at different levels.
    Ask some village woman the same question, You will get jadu(sweeper) on your back.

    Our education can make people so much peace loving.
     
  7. garg_bharat

    garg_bharat Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2015
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    3,760
    The current Hinduism is no different from Christianity or Islam. It has so many falsehoods.

    Vedic "dharm" is against idol worship. Vedas clearly say there is only one God that never takes birth. God according to Veda is formless (means is not made of matter) and is "jyoti-swaroop" means like bright shining light.
     
  8. garg_bharat

    garg_bharat Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2015
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    3,760
    Hinduism can never be a uniting force, as it is a mish-mash of beliefs with no central well defined core, which can hold.
     
  9. garg_bharat

    garg_bharat Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2015
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    3,760
    The current secular structure of India is proving to be a much greater political force than Hindu religion. So let us keep it this way.
     
  10. Ancient Indian

    Ancient Indian p = np :) Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2014
    Messages:
    3,406
    Likes Received:
    4,179
    Location:
    Everywhere
    Vadic Dharm is not against idol worship.

    Idol is tool to keep the presence of Brahman. So that they can get connected with it.
     
  11. Vishwarupa

    Vishwarupa Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    3,543
    Another one from Maria:

    Article by Maria Wirth

    Though I have lived in India for a long time, there are still issues here that I find hard to understand. For example, why do so many educated Indians become agitated when India is referred to as a Hindu country? The majority of Indians are Hindus. India is special because of its ancient Hindu tradition. Westerners are drawn to India because of Hinduism. Why then is there this resistance by many Indians to acknowledge the Hindu roots of their country? Why do some people even give the impression that an India which valued those roots would be dangerous? Don’t they know better?

    This attitude is strange for two reasons. First, those educated Indians seem to have a problem only with “Hindu” India, but not with “Muslim” or “Christian” countries. Germany, for example, is a secular country, and only 59 percent of the population are registered with the two big Christian churches (Protestant and Catholic). Nevertheless, the country is bracketed under “Christian countries” and no one objects. Angela Merkel, the Chancellor, stressed recently the Christian roots of Germany and urged the population “to go back to Christian values.” In 2012 she postponed her trip to the G-8 summit to make a public address on Katholikentag, “Catholics Day.” Two major political parties carry Christian in their name, including Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union.

    Germans are not agitated that Germany is called a Christian country, though I actually would understand if they were. After all, the history of the Church is appalling. The so-called success story of Christianity depended greatly on tyranny. “Convert or die” were the options given—not only some five hundred years ago to the indigenous population in America, but also in Germany, 1,200 years ago, when the emperor Karl the Great ordered the death sentence for refusal of baptism in his newly conquered realms. This provoked his advisor Alkuin to comment: “One can force them to baptism, but how to force them to believe?”

    Those times, when one’s life was in danger for dissenting with the dogmas of Christianity, are thankfully over. Today many in the West do dissent and are leaving the Church in a steady stream. They are disgusted with the less-than-holy behavior of Church officials and they also can’t believe in the dogmas, for example that “Jesus is the only way” and that God sends all those who don’t accept this to hell.

    The second reason why I can’t understand the resistance to associate India with Hinduism is that Hinduism is in a different category from the Abrahamic religions. Its history, compared to Christianity and Islam, was undoubtedly the least violent as it spread in ancient times by convincing arguments and not by force. It is not a belief system that demands blind acceptance of dogmas and the suspension of one’s intelligence. On the contrary, Hinduism encourages using one’s intelligence to the hilt. It is an enquiry into truth based on a refined character and intellect. It comprises a huge body of ancient literature, not only regarding dharma and philosophy, but also regarding music, architecture, dance, science, astronomy, economics, politics, etc. If Germany or any other Western country had this kind of literary treasure, it would be so proud and highlight its greatness on every occasion. When I discovered the Upanishads, for example, I was stunned. Here was expressed in clear terms what I intuitively had felt to be true, but could not have expressed clearly. Brahman is not partial; it is the invisible, indivisible essence in everything. Everyone gets again and again a chance to discover the ultimate truth and is free to choose his way back to it. Helpful hints are given but not imposed.

    In my early days in India I thought every Indian knew and valued his tradition. Slowly I realized I was wrong. The British colonial masters had been successful in not only weaning away many of the elite from their ancient tradition but even making them despise it. It helped that the British-educated class could no longer read the original Sanskrit texts and believed what the British told them. This lack of knowledge and the brainwashing by the British education may be the reason why many so-called “modern” Indians are against anything Hindu. They don’t realize the difference between Western religions that have to be believed (or at least professed) blindly, and which discourage, if not forbid, their adherents to think on their own, and the multi-layered Hindu Dharma which gives freedom and encourages using one’s intelligence.

    Many of the Indian educated class do not realize that those who dream of imposing Christianity or Islam on this vast country will applaud them for denigrating Hindu Dharma, because this creates a vacuum where Western ideas can easier gain a foothold. At the same time, many Westerners, including staunch Christians, know the value of Hindu culture and surreptitiously appropriate insights from the vast Indian knowledge system, drop the original Hindu source and present it either as their own or make it look as if these insights had already been known in the West. As the West appropriates valuable and exclusive Hindu assets, what it leaves behind is deemed inferior. Unwittingly, these Indians are helping what Rajiv Malhotra of Infinity Foundation calls the digestion of Dharma civilization into Western universalism. That which is being digested, a deer for example, in this case Hindu Dharma, disappears whereas the digester (a tiger) becomes stronger.

    If only missionaries denigrated Hindu Dharma, it would not be so bad, as they clearly have an agenda which discerning Indians would detect. But sadly, Indians with Hindu names assist them because they wrongly believe Hinduism is inferior to Western religions. They belittle everything Hindu instead of getting thorough knowledge. As a rule, they know little about their tradition except what the British have told them, i.e., that the major features are the caste system and idol worship. They don’t realize that India would gain, not lose, if it solidly backed its profound and all-inclusive Hindu tradition. The Dalai Lama said some time ago that, as a youth in Lhasa, he had been deeply impressed by the richness of Indian thought. “India has great potential to help the world,” he added.

    When will the Westernized Indian elite realize it?

    ~ Maria Wirth (freelance writer who has lived in India for the past 33 years)
     
  12. OneGrimPilgrim

    OneGrimPilgrim Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    5,238
    Likes Received:
    6,770
    Location:
    whr invaders hv been eulogised, heroes binned!!
    this tendency goes long back. as i had mentioned in another thread, there were some buggers then too when BHU was being set-up, who had objected to the name 'Hindu' & pressurised the people at the helm to drop it.
    call it the effect of a colonial education system.
     
  13. Nuvneet Kundu

    Nuvneet Kundu Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    2,599
    Slight nuance there. The act of setting up of the BHU itself was a part of the colonial plan. On one side the Britishers gave moral and material support to setting up of overtly Hindu institutions and on the other hand they also gave funds and encouragement to Aligarh Muslim University. These were set up exclusively to harp on the Hinduness of Hindus and muslimness of muslims. This was done to avoid another united Hindu-muslim alliance of that kind which shook the British empire in 1857. Eventually the idea that came out of this AMU was the seed that grew into a big tree and led to the partition.

    They were both established in ~1916, and ~1918. This was by design.
     
    Sakal Gharelu Ustad likes this.
  14. Sakal Gharelu Ustad

    Sakal Gharelu Ustad Detests Jholawalas Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,119
    Likes Received:
    7,717
    1857 unity is another part of fake history. They were all local kings fighting for their life+ largely jihad by Muslims.

    The British retribution post 1857 was targeted specifically at Muslims. All able bodied muslim men in the north were hunted down and hanged. That is why unlike Hindus, Muslim morale was completely shattered post 1857 for at least half a century before British cultivated new generation of muslim leaders.
     
    maomao, Vishwarupa and Nuvneet Kundu like this.
  15. saty

    saty Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2015
    Messages:
    1,112
    Likes Received:
    1,363
    @Sakal Gharelu Ustad

    That is too much conspiracy and exaggeration, everything done by British !!

    Many Indians(90% Hindus 10% Muz+Sikh etc) studied in convents for higher studies they went to Europe,obviously some intellectuals thought 'Why not we start a University here in India?'.

    Actually 1916 was too late then muzzies started AMU as a reactionary (This may be brit ploy generally very few muzzies were degree holders in old or now).

    2.1857 revolt was mostly about 'cow' (our sickulars teach pig fat was used but muzzies don't need a reasons to hate kafir british/Hindu any political leader scream 'Islam khatremy hai' JIHAD they start their arson,loot&rape.

    3.
     
  16. OneGrimPilgrim

    OneGrimPilgrim Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    5,238
    Likes Received:
    6,770
    Location:
    whr invaders hv been eulogised, heroes binned!!
    dont know to what extent the erstwhile british govt. had contributed to the funding for it; am only aware of the movement to collect funds for it from the general public. resolution to start a university had taken almost half a decade earlier than its establishment, and an amount of 1.5cr Rupees was decided to be raised before starting the process of establishment (of which atleast 50 lakhs were collected from the public; about the rest am not aware). however given the fact that how later the british started giving the idea their patronage & support (funds, passing of the BHUniversity Act, presence of govt. nominees in the governing body, etc.), am inclined to think that its entirely plausible that the british govt. started scheming to hijack the plan for their nefarious designs after its conception.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016
  17. OneGrimPilgrim

    OneGrimPilgrim Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    5,238
    Likes Received:
    6,770
    Location:
    whr invaders hv been eulogised, heroes binned!!
    the whole theatre of the battle(s) seems more like the stark animation of the proverb 'enemy's enemy is a friend'. it wouldn't be far-fetched i guess to think that once the enemy would've gone, the friendship would've gone.
     
  18. Nuvneet Kundu

    Nuvneet Kundu Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    2,599
    It appears like you are disagreeing over something but I am not able to make out which specific fact you are trying to refute?

    Not all blames are unwarranted. If the accused has actually committed the crime then the blame is totally legitimate. Is it not a known fact that the concept of AMU as an exclusively muslim entity was set up in ~1918? the building of AMU already existed from 1877 as a Christian university known as Anglo-Oriental college. It is this deliberate act of transforming an existing Anglo Saxon university into a muslim university in 1918 immediately after BHU was set up in 1917 which adds to the credence of the claims that the British had nefarious plans.

    As to the 1857 revolt, you are only concentrating on the trigger. Rebellions are complicated things that are a manifestation of a long term fostering of indignation and the corresponding outbursts are a little more nuanced than the trigger that sets them off. The trigger that leads to a rebellion is just the tip of the iceberg. It's very childish to dismiss an entire revolution against the British by claiming that it was 'because of a cow'. Had it not been for the cow, we would have found another excuse but the rebellion would have still happened.

    @OneGrimPilgrim "once the enemy would've gone, the friendship would've gone."

    But the enemy never went. They left behind their puppet to continue the British policies on their behalf. I don't know why Indians shy away from owning up to this obvious truth. Just look at the current news, all the democratically elected leaders that the west has installed in Iraq and Afghanistan are puppets, everyone knows it. It's just that it wont be mentioned in their respective text books. When the coming generations of Afghans read their nation's history, they wouldn't know the fact that Ashraf Ghani was actually a puppet. It's the same with Nehru. Whenever a superpower vacates a former colony, it always installs a puppet government. In fact the cultivation of such a leadership is a top most priority for any waning colonial power. The Congress was cultivated by the British in a way, to make sure that the government that succeeds them wont resort to vehement anti-British foreign policies and educational policies. It was their way of retaining power despite relinquishing physical presence. But people like @saty refuse to give credit to British treachery and exclusively pin all the blame on Hindus. The current secularism nurtured over the years by the Congress is actually just a polished form of British 'divide and rule' policy.

    What saty is saying is akin to "The British might have stabbed you but that's not important; How dare you bleed?"

    Is it possible for anyone to set up a university with an independent agenda in a country under colonial rule without the blessings of the colonial power? They allowed Hindus to set up institutions to use it as an excuse to provoke muslims to take counter-measures. This is also symptomatic of how they endorsed the formation of a largely Hindu Congress to provoke the muslims to start a separate muslim league. The puppets who caused the partition might be muslims but the सूत्रधार who was stage-managing it was the British crown.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016
  19. Sakal Gharelu Ustad

    Sakal Gharelu Ustad Detests Jholawalas Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,119
    Likes Received:
    7,717
    Post 1857 defeat, Muslims started Deoband, a radical and go back to the roots style org.

    AMU was out and out British gameplan, carried out by local Muslim coolies.
     
  20. Nuvneet Kundu

    Nuvneet Kundu Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    2,599
    Doval calls Deoband a nationalist organization. I'm not even kidding. He claims that this institution breeds 'fundamentalist muslim nationalists'.

     

Share This Page