Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 07:48

This topic is attracting some attention now, and I thought that I would start a new thread - starting with my own vews and opinions cross posted from the OIT thread where they are OT.

But instated of starting with them - I did a brief Gogal search for Western Universalism, found the first few links to Rajiv Malhotra, but I thought I would simply quote from a non Indian/non-Rajiv source for a start, before I start putting my views.. However this link has a great quote although I would argue with a lot of other things in the article as superficial and lacking insight about the nature of non western cultures and confusing appearance with agreement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/peopl ... lect.shtml
A Yugoslav from Montenegro once taught an African from Mombasa, Kenya, at Oxford University. Among the lessons which the professor from Montenegro taught the young African was a simple proposition:

"The sins of the powerful acquire some of the prestige of power."

The Yugoslav was John Plamenatz who was at the time a distinguished Fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford, and who later became a professor of political theory at Oxford. The student was Ali Mazrui.

In that simple proposition John Plamenatz captured the importance of power in universalizing the culture of the powerful. Even the very vices of Western culture are acquiring worldwide prestige. Muslim societies which once refrained from alcohol are now manifesting increasing alcoholism. Chinese elites are capitulating to Kentucky Fried Chicken and MacDonald hamburgers. And Mahatma Gandhi's country has decided to go nuclear.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 07:49

A_Gupta wrote:In that dialog, the Christians are saying - something cannot be valid unless it is universally applicable. Therefore your practices/beliefs are invalid. The Brahmins reply, sorry, that things are only locally applicable does not make them invalid.

Very interesting. I never knew that an absolutely brainless concept called "universalism" could give rise to so much debate.

What would be a universally valid rule for a car manufacturer? For example, would left hand drive be universal? Would "engine in front" be universal? Would four wheels be universal? Would two passengers be universal? Would internal combustion engines be universal?

Applying logic for a few milliseconds, an act that people who attempt to impose rigid concepts of universalism on others do not seem capable of doing, it is clear that none of the above concepts are universal. Every one of those features is modified on local conditions. But the vehicles made are still cars.

Apply universalism to lifestyle and holidays. Is it universalism to say that people should have one day off in a week like God did? Then why do people get two days off? Why are doctors, policemen, firemen, soldiers often called upon to get less than one day off per week. Again, the amount of free time between acts of performing one's duty is not universal. If one day off per week is declared universal then two days off is invalid.

There are certain concepts that have crept in from both Christianity and Islam that have been insinuated into the mindsets of a large proportion of people in some societies. The concept of "universalism" seems to be a concept that tries to reduce everything to one - a single God, single root cause, single rule, single belief. Not only is this absurd, but it is astounding how deep this absurdity has sunk in - to affect life in ways that most people do not even realize, although there have been others who have always spoken up against such unifying unitary absurdity.

The imposition of "One God" or "One belief" has extended to search for "single causes"

For example "western" medicine has always searched for "single root causes" - assuming pinpoint origins for diseases or pinpoint single solutions. This works only "locally" in instances where the cause or cure really is single. Where it is multi-factorial, it fails. I will not bother quoting examples of diseases and drugs where the concept of a universal unitary cause or effect fails.

Another favourite "single root" concept is about Lucy the African female skeleton who is widely quoted as the ancestor of every human on earth. But wait. Dig a little deeper and it appears that humans have genes from at least a couple of non human groups - Neanderthal and "Denisovian" and perhaps others. it cannot be proven that a single proto-human line split into several minor variations that intermingled leaving behind the fact that there may be no single human ancestor.

Unversalism is "cut off marks" that says anything to the left or right of these lines on this bell curve is not universal and everything that lies within the bell curve but outside my lines is invalid. It is one thing if someone tries is to push this idiocy as universal. Worse is for others to believe it and unthinkingly accept it as true.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10588
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 07 Jul 2014 08:07

Thanks, Shiv, I wanted a discussion of Western Universalism because I think it will shed light not only on our common misunderstanding of the West, but also our misunderstanding of our own culture.

Let's take the left-hand or right-hand drive automobile. From a Western viewpoint, why is having both not a violation of universalism, whereas say, Sandhya Vandanam, that has to be done standing in a river (say), that cannot be done in cold climates (e.g., when the river is frozen), is a violation of universalism? (Yes, I'm aware Sandhya Vandanam need not be done standing in a river; but let's assume so for argument's sake.)

I'll answer it as follows:

Someone asked a question somewhere, perhaps rhetorical, perhaps deep - what makes "Hinduism" into a religion, rather than, say, a proto-science? Anyway, "by consensus", Sandhya Vandanam is a religious ritual. The Western idea is that religious actions are undertaken because of belief; beliefs are either true or false; truth is a universal thing; whatever belief is driving a Hindu to do Sandhya Vandanam must be false, because it cannot be universal (e.g., can't do it when the river is frozen).

The left- or right- hand drive automobile does not arise out of belief and therefore there is no true/false status to it, it is merely more or less convenient or following convention.

The Westerner would say the same thing about the Scotman's kilt - wearing a skirt-like thing is a matter of tradition, not of belief. There is no matter of true/false here.

But is Sandhya Vandanam performed as a matter of tradition or a matter of belief that can be determined to be either true or false?

Anyway, my goal is to ask - what makes Hinduism into a religion (for Hindus, if they insist on that term)? Is it the same thing that makes Christianity into a religion for Europeans? (The answer brings in universalism, don't fear.)

That question, "what makes "Hinduism" into a religion, rather than, say, a proto-science?" is meant to gnaw away at your buddhi, till jnana results. :) :) :)

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 08:13

Arun can you answer this - because this is where I get stuck

What is religion?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 08:27

What is religion, was my question.

To expand on my doubts and to try and reassure anyone who tries to answer that it is not a trick question, let me state that the word "religion" is a word that we have been told, from the time we started our education, consists of examples like Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, etc

So we start with the assumption that all are religions.

But I would like to go back to say 300 BC when Alexander types were coming into India. Look at the Greek writings and you find no description of a separate "religion". Gods are mentioned and in some Greek works the Gods are assumed common.

Describing Indians as having a separate "religion" came after the self anointing and self description of Christianity and islam as "religions". What is it about Christianity and Islam that recognizes non Christians or non-Muslims as following a different "religion"? Anyone who believes in a "superhuman controlling power" (as per dictionary) is said to believe in a religion.

But what if someone does not believe in a superhuman controlling power. They are atheists. They have no religion.

Can atheists and the people who have religion (religionists) agree with each other and coexist?

They certainly could and did in India, under an ancient philosophical agreement that stated that it mattered little whether you follow or do not follow a God.

Where else can atheists and religionists coexist? The co exist under the aegis of modern western society under the much tomtommed title "Universalism" brought about by egalitarian laws and equal rights of secularism.

What is the difference between the two?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 08:44

A_Gupta wrote:Let's take the left-hand or right-hand drive automobile. From a Western viewpoint, why is having both not a violation of universalism, whereas say, Sandhya Vandanam, that has to be done standing in a river (say), that cannot be done in cold climates (e.g., when the river is frozen), is a violation of universalism? (Yes, I'm aware Sandhya Vandanam need not be done standing in a river; but let's assume so for argument's sake.)


I think your example (from the other thread) is
1. Certainly an illustrative example of the questions that arise on the issue or Universalism
2. But also constitutes a stupid answer given by ignorant Brahmins who probably had not even been up to the Himalayas and gave a stupid answer that then went down in history as a "Hindu belief"

I have quoted someone above who said:
"The sins of the powerful acquire some of the prestige of power."


In this case the "powerful" were the brahmins, whose words and actions were considered by the Brahmins themselves and by society at large as being the desirable norm exactly in the way in which western norms are being touted as needing to be followed as "universalism"

Reaching the Brahmins status was the desirable goal and all the west had to do was to pull down the Brahmins (who were as stupid as anyone else) to show up the rot within Indian society. Brahmins to this day have a mixed reputation. Interestingly examples of both appear from Pakistan. One side respects the Brahmin for his knowledge and integrity and status in society. Brahmin converts of Pakistan retain their pride and privileges over the aljaf. On the other hand the Brahmin is equally derided for his racism and discrimination and for maintaining that status as a holy entitlement, as opposed to the great egalitarianism that the "religion" Islam and Christianity brought.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50394
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby ramana » 07 Jul 2014 09:04

Western universalism is Christianity. Hegel calls it leinear march of history. Hitler described it in even more forceful language. Will find the pdf where he describes the ideaIn post modern Hegelian world secularism has taken over this theme. Jimmy Carter codified these in Helsinki Agreements.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 09:06

Is there an Indian word for religion?

I often hear the word "Dharma" or "Dharm" in the context of Hindus.

But I have never heard anyone say "Kristu-dharma" or "Islami dharma"

On the other hand (and I am no great scholar here) it appears that "bhakti" is a closer approximation to Christianity and Islam

But Hindus have bhakti and Dharma. Either or both are adequate for the Hindu to reach his goal of moksha ("Hindu-heaven"?)

If Hindu blindly accept the labelling of Hindu Dharma as "Hindu religion", they are equating the bhakti aspect of Hindu dharma as representing the whole. I suspect that this Hindu miscommunication has Macaualayism as its genesis.

There is no separate concept of "Dharma" in Christianity or Islam although aspects of Dharma are bundled along with the religion in both. For example the Ten commandments could be classifed as Christian definitions of Dharma. But in Christianity Dharma does not exist separately from the religion.

For Hindus, Dharma is a standalone concept. Even Gods have to conform with Dharma.

rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 292
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby rajpa » 07 Jul 2014 10:37

The US constitution as created by the founding fathers of that nation is generally believed to be a good example of "universalism".

Right to worship, ownership of property, freedom of expression etc.

Universalism in the US is certainly not about Christianity.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 13:34

The US constitution being universalism is an example of someone being "World famous all over Bangalore". The US constitution does not benefit anyone other than US citizens. As an alien in the US I will not have the rights that US citizens enjoy. That is hardly "universalism". It may be universalism in thought, but not in intent or practice.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1422
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Pulikeshi » 07 Jul 2014 14:01

^^^^this thread is at least useful to clarify - "global citizhen" w/ Injun Passport and YUMrican citizhen w/ universal claims and other such conpfusing phenomenon found in the India thinking! :rotfl:

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Atri » 07 Jul 2014 14:02

This Chart thinks it Explains Every Culture In The World

Image

On the y-axis, traditional values emphasize the importance of religion, parent-child relationships, and authority, according to WVS. People who embrace these tend to reject divorce, abortion, euthanasia, and suicide. These societies usually exhibit high levels of nationalism and national pride, too. In the U.S., these values would likely align more with conservative ideologies. Oppositely, secular-rational values represent the other extreme and tend to relate to liberal ways of thinking.

On the x-axis, survival values revere economic and physical security and safety and are linked to low levels of trust and tolerance. On the other side, self-expression values give high priority to protecting the environment, promoting gender equality, and tolerating foreigners and gays and lesbians.


An example of western Universalism. Although I find this nice visual representation of our concept of dharma.

India, despite its difficult history in past 1000 years has managed to stay near zero, if the study is to be believed. going close to zero and staying there is something that we should strive for. We have done it before and we can do it again. interesting way of visualizing things.

the point of zero represents "dharma"..

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1422
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Pulikeshi » 07 Jul 2014 14:49

shiv wrote:On the other hand (and I am no great scholar here) it appears that "bhakti" is a closer approximation to Christianity and Islam


Christianity and Islam are both universal truth claims by their founders and followers.
A quick survey of sects and localised specialisations put paid to their claims to Universality!

Zoroastrian, Buddhism and Jainism also made these claims earlier... These were defeated by the Dharma followers using the schools of evidence inherent in Dharma system.
Christianity and Islam are weaker theological base, but a more organised and well researched scholars.
Intellectually, what is more threatening to the Dharma system is not Christianity or Islam, IMVHO, but truth claims of Christianity's secular cousin - Western Universalism (WU).
(On the ground Dharma system is indeed threatened due to superior organisation and proselytisation, but that is not in scope for my point.)

Reason for this is as follows - (WU) had its origins in Christianity - that is both are truth claims of belief.
Therefore, the belief is central in dictating human actions & social acceptability and interactions.
Worse it also inherited the idea of exclusivity. For now the key is Belief ----> Govern Human Actions.

Western Capitalism on the other hand is not based on belief, rather it struggles with empirically understanding Human Actions (quite literally the name of Mises' work for example...), but it's success in governing human actions is rather limited even if it tries to do so constantly. Perhaps, the weakness occurred when it detached itself from normative values, but that is for another day...

Dharma is inherently a system that has successfully combined the empirical understanding of Human Actions (further even group actions) and provided us with a mechanism of enabling localisation, while still maintaining an abstract Universal claim. Therefore it is inherently a threat to all exclusive Universal truth claims.

All that said, in its current form, the lack of awareness from the followers of Dharma perhaps pose even greater danger than those outside it... If it's is foolish to not understand Western Universal truth claims, it is criminal for an adherent of Dharma to not understand or appreciate Indian Universalism which uniquely allows localisation, in fact celebrates it!

My two paisa - discuss Indian Universalism and why it's a threat to Western Universalism.
Similar to OIT instead of AIT.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10588
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 07 Jul 2014 16:36

shiv wrote:
I think your example (from the other thread) is
1. Certainly an illustrative example of the questions that arise on the issue or Universalism
2. But also constitutes a stupid answer given by ignorant Brahmins who probably had not even been up to the Himalayas and gave a stupid answer that then went down in history as a "Hindu belief"


The only real stupidity is that they did not bother to understand the culture of the Westerners who were questioning them. And even today, because we've read some books and speak English doesn't mean we've understood the West - we may also be stupid.

Anand K
BRFite
Posts: 1115
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 11:31
Location: Out.

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Anand K » 07 Jul 2014 17:52

World-systems Approach

IMO the above kind of defines the broader contours of the exceptionalism/dominance dimension of historiography - I had skimmed through Wallerstein's "European Exceptionalism" and couple of other works some time back - a pal told me he actually makes more sense than Chomsky [or Fergusson from the other end of the spectrum] when it comes to big narratives - and I tend to concur. He doesn't go VERY deep into the Christian element although his book "Historical capitalism" has apparently outlined the Christian faith elements. Anybody familiar with that?

PS: I remember old Ramanujan [Remember him? The Serengeti migrations fight and all? :) ] discuss this - but that was more from the pure Jared Diamond AoA. The Core-Periphery thingie has been touched upon a couple of times here too. Anyway, apparently the in-thing now is a synthesis of the classical Wallerstein view and the social/environmental view of Jared Diamond.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 18:37

A_Gupta wrote:The only real stupidity is that they did not bother to understand the culture of the Westerners who were questioning them. And even today, because we've read some books and speak English doesn't mean we've understood the West - we may also be stupid.


Actually I personally dislike too much self flagellation - wrong or right. The west certainly did not bother to understand India before they set about doing whatever they wanted. Whatever "understanding" the west did was a superficial scratching of the surface and a reductionist analysis to reach conclusions that suited them. Understanding is a problem that Indians dwell too much upon methinks. There is no need for too much understanding. Simple bigotry and an arrogant assumption of one's own "rightness" along with the clout to impose one's own view as right is all that is needed. Understanding and justification is for us nerds on BRF as time pass

See how Pakis behave.. It is respected. Even Khap panchayat leaders get respect for holding on to their views and if they could back that up with military clout their views might even be admired. When we sink into our need for depths of understanding we see all that is wrong with western methods but don't have the clout to oppose some things. Some things are definitely imposed by military (initially) and later (nowadays) economic clout. Not righteousness or rightness.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2237
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Rony » 07 Jul 2014 19:05

shiv wrote:
Actually I personally dislike too much self flagellation - wrong or right. The west certainly did not bother to understand India before they set about doing whatever they wanted. Whatever "understanding" the west did was a superficial scratching of the surface and a reductionist analysis to reach conclusions that suited them. Understanding is a problem that Indians dwell too much upon methinks. There is no need for too much understanding. Simple bigotry and an arrogant assumption of one's own "rightness" along with the clout to impose one's own view as right is all that is needed. Understanding and justification is for us nerds on BRF as time pass

See how Pakis behave.. It is respected. Even Khap panchayat leaders get respect for holding on to their views and if they could back that up with military clout their views might even be admired. When we sink into our need for depths of understanding we see all that is wrong with western methods but don't have the clout to oppose some things. Some things are definitely imposed by military (initially) and later (nowadays) economic clout. Not righteousness or rightness.


Exactly ! That is how Mohammed imposed Islam on Arabs and Arabs imposed Islam on Persia, Afghanistan and Central Asia and those 3 imposed Islam on parts of India. This is also how Christianity was imposed on Europe and Europeans inturn imposed it on Americas, Africa and parts of Asia. This is also how Mao and Stalin imposed Communism on China and Russia. Self righteousness backed up with superior military (now a days add economic) force.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 19:33

I had a classmate - alas now no more. He was a tribal Seventh Day Adventist from Bihar (now Jharkhand). For fun, we would argue with him on various subjects - he was very good natured, as we were too. One argument was the dimensions of Noah's Ark and a calculation of whether all animal species would actually fit in (they will not). He was, of course, studying medicine with us an was perfectly understanding of the logic we were using. He did not disagree with the dimensions or numbers. But when we came to the inevitable conclusion that the Ark was simply not big enough, he would shake his head and laugh and say that the animals were all accommodated in there.

The point is that logic and reasoning have no role here. We Indians are taught to accept logic and reasoning - but then again our philosophy has some real unshakeable logic in it and plenty of people are able to make those cogent arguments so we accept that. There is also a Hindu tradition that scholars would debate and the person who lost the debate would have to accept and take up the viewpoint of the person who defeated him in debate. true or false, this is the legend.

People of other belief systems are not constrained by such civil/highbrow activities. If a person believes in Western Universalism, it is a waste of time trying to convince him of anything else no matter how right you might be and how powerful your argument. There is no point arguing. In fact tit for tat is the best.

"You say your system is better. Balls, It is not. Mine is"


The social, economic and military clout to say that is all that counts.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 896
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby symontk » 07 Jul 2014 19:37

shiv wrote:There is no separate concept of "Dharma" in Christianity or Islam although aspects of Dharma are bundled along with the religion in both. For example the Ten commandments could be classifed as Christian definitions of Dharma. But in Christianity Dharma does not exist separately from the religion.

For Hindus, Dharma is a standalone concept. Even Gods have to conform with Dharma.


Ten commandments are not just for people, it applies for God too. That is the whole point of Jesus coming to earth

shiv wrote:Describing Indians as having a separate "religion" came after the self anointing and self description of Christianity and islam as "religions". What is it about Christianity and Islam that recognizes non Christians or non-Muslims as following a different "religion"? Anyone who believes in a "superhuman controlling power" (as per dictionary) is said to believe in a religion.


There are "supermans" and "superwomans" in other religions too other then Christianity. Ironically Islam doesn't have one. PBUH was a human only in all the sense

I still didn't understand why Western Universalism has to be understood. If India doesn't have one, create one, why deride others?

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby johneeG » 07 Jul 2014 19:40

shiv wrote:
Actually I personally dislike too much self flagellation - wrong or right. The west certainly did not bother to understand India before they set about doing whatever they wanted. Whatever "understanding" the west did was a superficial scratching of the surface and a reductionist analysis to reach conclusions that suited them. Understanding is a problem that Indians dwell too much upon methinks. There is no need for too much understanding. Simple bigotry and an arrogant assumption of one's own "rightness" along with the clout to impose one's own view as right is all that is needed. Understanding and justification is for us nerds on BRF as time pass

See how Pakis behave.. It is respected. Even Khap panchayat leaders get respect for holding on to their views and if they could back that up with military clout their views might even be admired. When we sink into our need for depths of understanding we see all that is wrong with western methods but don't have the clout to oppose some things. Some things are definitely imposed by military (initially) and later (nowadays) economic clout. Not righteousness or rightness.


True. Money and Military seem to be the bottomline. Of course, propaganda and deception would go hand in hand with it.

----
It seems to me that Bhestern Universalism is not X-ism. If Bhestern Universalism is same as X-ism, then it does not explain the decline of X-ism in Bhest. Moreover, Bhestern Universalism came to fore by replacing the absolute power of X-ism. Infact, one can say that Bhestern Universalism is an enemy of X-ism.

It seems to me that Bhestern Universalism is to X-ism what Seckularism is to Hindhuism. From an outsider's perspective(say a Baki), dheshi Seckularism will seem as similar to Hindhuism. Many Hindhus may also think that Seckularism and Hindhuism are similar. However, many rightwing Hindhus may feel that Seckularism is the enemy of Hindhuism and the long term goal of Seckularism is to weaken/eliminate Hindhuism.

Similarly, from a non-Bhestern person's perspective, Bhestern universalism would be same as X-ism. But, from a rightwing X-ian's perspective, there may be many elements in Bhestern Universalism which are hurting X-ism. Infact, some believe it as a conspiracy to eliminate/weaken X-ism.

Infact, one could say that dheshi seckularism is part and parcel of Bhestern universalism. This would seem contradictory. Because dheshi seckularism helps X-ism(and other such creeds) and squeezes/hurts Hindhuism. While, Bhestern universalism squeezes X-ism. How can dheshi seckularism be part of Bhestern universalism?

The similarity is: in both cases, the dominant religion is being weakened using other 'minority' creeds. Or even other non-religious ideologies like Science, communism, socialism, ...etc.

So, Bhestern universalism, Seckularism, Socialism, Communism and even modern science all agree that the dominant religion has to be weakened or eliminated. For this purpose, the support of the 'minority' creeds is taken.

The difference seems to be that the weakening of X-ism has helped Europeans enormously. It allowed them to come out of Dark ages. So, they have seen their own experience and believe that this is universally true. They have become the ardent supporters of weakening the dominant religion in every country just as X-ism was weakened in Europe.

This is similar to the idea that if Bhaarath adopts Hindhuism as state religion, then Bhaarath will become a Hindhu Bakisthan. The inherent idea in this line of thinking is that Hindhuism is same as Islam.

Similarly, non-X-ist Oiropeans start with the view that Hindhuism is same as X-ism. Infact, they seem to assume that all religions are similar to X-ism. Oirope was benefited from renaissance and other reform movements within in X-ism. Similarly, Oiropeans assume that other countries will also benefit from following the same path and weakening of their dominant religions and adopting the lifestyle of the Oirope. This seems to be the thinking of common non-X-ist European.

For a X-ist, Bhestern domination allows them to peddle X-ism in rest of the world. They advertize that Bhest's domination is due to X-ism. So, they use Bhestern universalism for their own purpose.

However, these seem to be at lower level. At a higher level, dominant religion of a region seems to be the opponent. This seems to be a jostle for the mindspace of the people... a sort of soft power.

Soft power needs hard power to establish itself.

Soft power == propaganda and deception.
Hard power == might and money.

The Hard Power of Bhestern universalism was born with opium and slave trade.
The Soft Power of Bhestern universalism was born with renaissance.

It seems to me that this is not same as X-ism. X-ism is a different beast altogether. X-ism and Bhestern universalism seem to have same goals in non-Bhest. They both want to weaken the dominant oriental religions. However, they seem to have opposite goals in Bhest.

Bhestern universalism supports Vivekananda in Amirkhan and Oirope. But, it opposes Hindhuism in dhesh.
Bhestern universalism supports X-ism in Dhesh. But, it opposes X-ism in Oirope and Amirkhan.

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2782
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby prahaar » 07 Jul 2014 19:48

symontk wrote:
shiv wrote:There is no separate concept of "Dharma" in Christianity or Islam although aspects of Dharma are bundled along with the religion in both. For example the Ten commandments could be classifed as Christian definitions of Dharma. But in Christianity Dharma does not exist separately from the religion.
For Hindus, Dharma is a standalone concept. Even Gods have to conform with Dharma.

Ten commandments are not just for people, it applies for God too. That is the whole point of Jesus coming to earth


Can you please elaborate on the part in bold?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 19:58

symontk wrote:Ten commandments are not just for people, it applies for God too. That is the whole point of Jesus coming to earth


Sorry symontk, you will have to rework that statement. Would you be able to explain how the following commandment applies to God?
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife


Who is Gods' neighbour and does he have a wife that God might covet.

More seriously those are "commandments" given to man by God.


symontk wrote:I still didn't understand why Western Universalism has to be understood. If India doesn't have one, create one, why deride others?


You are talking like an Indian. How about simply deriding the other guy to show that mine is better? That is a well used rule. People following "false Gods" need a course correction or a threat that God will not save them. What is the need for any religion to deride another by describing the other's God as "false" or the other's belief as wrong? I put it to you that deriding the other and coercing the other are directly hard coded into Islam and the Roman version of Christianity that now rules the world. It may not be hard coded into "Universalism" but Universalism in the west has been pre defined to simply agree with western values.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 896
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby symontk » 07 Jul 2014 20:27

There are several covenants signed by God and Man according to Bible. Its conditions are applicable to both parties

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant_(biblical)

Regarding question of neighbour's wife, God considers his followers as persons of his own stature. So someone's wife will be God's neighbours wife too

If the covenants are broken a price needs to be paid. Jesus is the price that was paid in his blood, that is why he came to earth

NB: I have several links anyway I am not posting since I consider this as an OT to the topic

Regarding Universalism and Christianity you are confused and incoherent. You have not given arguments why India can't have its own Universalism

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby shiv » 07 Jul 2014 20:37

symontk wrote:
Regarding question of neighbour's wife, God considers his followers as persons of his own stature. So someone's wife will be God's neighbours wife too


Then the commandments are a bit like a "To do" list for God because he has to follow them? Thanks for the information but it sounds like a bad rationalization to me. Interesting stuff. But certainly not well known. Never have I heard anyone say that the Ten Commandments are for God to follow. Why does God kill people then? Why are some deaths called acts of God. Looks like God does not have to follow the command "Thou shalt not kill"


symontk wrote:Regarding Universalism and Christianity you are confused and incoherent. You have not given arguments why India can't have its own Universalism

Boss the state of my mind is peripheral to the discussion and does not help any case you might be trying to make. It is OK for you to be angry with what I say - you certainly sound angry but I think you need to re read my original post. The question I asked, and was trying to answer was what is religion.

Nowhere have I stated that India does not have a universalism of its own.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9526
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby UlanBatori » 07 Jul 2014 20:50

The ancient fable from the PanchaTantra describes the Frog In The Well.

The legend is that there was this old frog (NOT anywhere near the English Channel!!) who lived inside a deep well. He had of course been there all his life. He looked around, and saw other frogs. They admired him because he was big. No frog claimed to be bigger. There were no other species to be seen inside the well, that came anywhere close in size. He was very satisfied that therefore, he was the biggest in the Whole Universe, and he thus became de facto Presidente of the frogs in the well.

One day a young frog (YF) happened to be looking up at the small bright circle of blue that constituted their Light Source. Into that circle came this HUUUUUGE Face. The young frog was terrified, and immediately dived. Went before the Big Frog and said:
I saw this HUUUUUUUGE creature. Just its face seemed to cover the whole sky!

The old frog (OF) went :rotfl:
OF: Was it as big as ME?
YF: Yes. Bigger.
OF: Puffing himself up with water: How about NOW?
YF: Bigger.
OF: Puffing himself even more: How about NOW?
YF: Bigger.
And OF tried puffing himself more and more until he burst, and YF became the new Presidente. He established the New Religion of BigFace, and demanded that all other frogs bow before him because He Had Seen The Big Face.

So from what I gather,

Universalism = OF mentality. aka FIDWism.


It occurs wherever people have not thought about their own superstitions.
Localization Specialization = YF mentality.

Demands worship because the YF is the Chosen One, having Seen The Big Face. aka Cow-Worshippers, because the Big Face was that of a cow. 8)

About the automobile analogy. Let's say that there was this tribe on an island, living peacefully by fishing and by catching and eating occasional travelers. One day a band of Aliens came by, in a huge white canoe that made a Noise of A Thousand F*rts. They brought it right to the shore, and off it came a rather ugly and HUUUGE Boxy Tortoise that Moved By Itself, also generating a Noise like 500 F*rts. A band of brave islanders went up and started shooting arrows at it. The arrows bounced off the shell of this Boxy Tortoise. A small, shiny tree-trunk swiveled to point at them, several loud F*rts came out, and all but one of the Braves fell down dead, bleeding from different parts of the body.

One Brave was left. He fell down and prostrated himself before this OmniPotent Boxy Tortoise, describing it in his mind as the F*rtFort. He closed his eyes tight shut in terror. He felt himself being lifted, and then he was suddenly inside the F*rtFort. His hands were tied behind him and a cloth was tied around his eyes, but he could see a little bit through a hole. There was a human sitting in front of him, doing Worship with his hands and feet. The F*rtFort thundered in rage but moved at great speed, faster than any Brave could run. After some time, the brave was thrown out with his hands untied. When he opened his eyes, he could not see or hear anything.

He came back and related the story. It was clear that he was a Chosen One. He had Seen The F*rtFort, the All-Powerful Boxy Tortoise. Thus they made him the King. He declared that all should worship the Boxy Tortoise. They made the appropriate ritual: a ring of palm fibers with a hub that had a shiny cross on it, and three wide spokes. Two small rocks to place under the feet of the High Priest. The Priest would sit with feet on these, and turn the round Worship Circle round, a little bit this way, a little that way. The Priest's Chorus would utter loud noises like a hundred F*arts.

Thus was invented the Local Specialization of TortoiseIsm. The crucial aspect of this Philosophy was the Ritual Of The Spoked Circle Of the F*rtFort. They simply called it "The Wheel of Steering Destiny". It had to be done exactly right, by people trained for 20 years to get those Sounds of the Five Hundred F*rts exactly right in tone, rhythm and timing. Or else the Great Power of the Boxy Tortoise would not be propitiated. Even today, even small children all over the known Universe can be seen sitting down and trying to emulate The Sound and moving their hands with the fists closed, as if they were turning The Wheel Of Power.
Last edited by UlanBatori on 07 Jul 2014 21:08, edited 2 times in total.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 896
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby symontk » 07 Jul 2014 20:54

I am not angry :). I was confused with thread title

Regarding killing, I am not aware of God personally killing anyone. "called acts of God", called is the key word. They are attributed to God without any rhyme or reason. Mostly are natural calamities and in communities where nature worship is / was prevalent, it is "called as Acts of God"

However there are few instances where God commanded to kill in Bible. Those are considered as Judgement. We actually dont know what communication happened between God and those communities. For example, if you take Sodom and Gomorrah destruction, God did try to communicate to those people in different ways before the destruction

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 896
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby symontk » 07 Jul 2014 20:56

What I wanted to convey was that the Christianity and Western Universalism are different. If you look at the same sex marriages, despite Christianity beign against it, I believe Western Universalism support. There are other examples too. And so to consider both as similar is a fallacy

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19592
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Philip » 07 Jul 2014 21:03

WU is the sinister utopian global socio-eco-religious policies espoused by the West under the leadership of Uncle Sam,that its sinister semi-secret organisations like the Bilderberg Group,Bohemian Grove and CFR thrash out in their secret conclaves.Every institution of public and private hue is networked and tasked with the goal of global domination through the muscling of lesser nations to accept Yanqui diktat,a "Pax Americana",actually an Orwellian nightmare of continuous global conflict where friends become enemies and enemies become friends in never ending cycles that profit the military-industrial complexes of the West (that none other than Pres.Eisenhower warned us against)and "Big Oil" in particular.

There are only 3 nations on the globe that can counter this insidious neo-imperilaist,neo-colonialist,latter-day slaver attitude of the West.Russia,China and India.Each of these three independent nations have intensely rich linguistic,artistic,cultural,philosophic and religious traditions,that are strong enough to withstand any amount of brainwashing by firang mesmerists. These three nations also possess large populations,land mass and are generally rich in mineral wealth.If these three nations cooperate,then the strengths of each compensate of the weaknesses of each.India's brainpower,Russia's unlimited energy resources and scientific wealth and China's work ethic and productivity.All three are also N-powers,space powers, with very large men in uniform too. The West will do their utmost to see that these three nations do not converge in common interests,especially in the strategic/military sphere and replace the US/West as the dominant military and economic bloc on the planet.

Brazil and S.Africa though not as strong as these 3,are excellent associates,as the BRICS grouping has proven.Japan and SoKo and the ASEAN bloc have their unique strengths,but unfortunately are too compromised in their independence in strategic,foreign and economic policies.They eventually kowtow to Uncle Sam and cannot get rid of the shackles that have bound them post WW2. Thus these three nations are the brake that is resisting Western Universalism. However,there is a forth force-not a nation but a force that is making the West tremble in their supposedly safe lands.Islamic fundamentalism and extremism,displayed today but an even more toxic strain than Al Qaeda by the emergence of ISIS. This force that collectively though its networks of terror (Pak too) and global ambition of establishing a new Muslim Caliphate,is even more lethal than any of the 3 dissenting powers.The "Islamic State" has through Muslim immigrants into European nations,have the potential to seriously undermine them from within.Britain estimates that 500+ Brits are fighting in Syria and Iraq.Just a handful of such brainwashed fanatics can cause utter mayhem in the western lands,as we've seen since 9/11,nd the irony is that it is the US and the West that has been responsible for this monumental blowback.

The "big deal" of universalism and globalism stands fully exposed by the catastrophic failure of US foreign policy,the so-called "war on terror" where it has been soundly defeated by desert and mountain tribals,as did the peasants of Vietnam during the last century.The emergence of such terrifying Islamist extremism now threatens to engulf the entire MEast/WAsia region with extreme global ramifications,that is sending the goal of western universalism,"democracy" and other snake-oil remedies into the dustbin of history.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby johneeG » 07 Jul 2014 21:37

symontk wrote:
shiv wrote:There is no separate concept of "Dharma" in Christianity or Islam although aspects of Dharma are bundled along with the religion in both. For example the Ten commandments could be classifed as Christian definitions of Dharma. But in Christianity Dharma does not exist separately from the religion.

For Hindus, Dharma is a standalone concept. Even Gods have to conform with Dharma.


Ten commandments are not just for people, it applies for God too. That is the whole point of Jesus coming to earth


symontk wrote:There are several covenants signed by God and Man according to Bible. Its conditions are applicable to both parties

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant_(biblical)

Regarding question of neighbour's wife, God considers his followers as persons of his own stature. So someone's wife will be God's neighbours wife too

If the covenants are broken a price needs to be paid. Jesus is the price that was paid in his blood, that is why he came to earth

NB: I have several links anyway I am not posting since I consider this as an OT to the topic

Regarding Universalism and Christianity you are confused and incoherent. You have not given arguments why India can't have its own Universalism


This is very interesting opinion. But, it seems that 'god' did violate most of these commandments according to X-ism.

Image

If people(followers) are the neighbours of 'god', then it seems that the 'god' himself brags about killing many of them as punishment for not adhering to his words. So, the commandment of 'thou shall not kill' is broken. If one says that these acts of killing are merely 'judgements', then the question will rise: it was never said in the commandments that one could kill in certain situations. The commandment seems to be simply saying 'don't kill'. Of course, Moses himself supposedly killed people for praying to an idol of golden calf immediately after obtaining these commandments. So, Moses and 'god' both violated the injunction 'not to kill'. Every soldier violates this commandment.

Similarly, according to the X-ism myth, 'god' had affair with wife of somebody else and jesus was born. This is against two commandments:
thou shall not desire the wife of your neighbour.
thou shall not commit adultery.

By the way, according to OT, Abraham pimped his own wife to pharaoh of Egypt. When Pharaoh thought she was Abraham's sister(Abraham misrepresented it). So, Pharaoh was furious when he came to know the truth and returned the wife of Abraham to him. So, Abraham's wife violated the commandment of 'adultery'. There is also a hint of incest here.

If killing of jesus (Yashas) was an act of 'god', then again he violated the command of 'not killing'.

Jesus himself has supposedly said that he was here to break the families. It seems that disregarded his family and mother according to New Testament. So, this goes against the commandment of 'thou shall honour your father and mother'.

And all people(including X-ists) make images and idols. So, this goes against the commandment of 'thou shall not make graven images'. Perhaps, Zorasthrians are the only ones who don't make any image and pray only to fire. But, all other groups make some images or idols to venerate them.

Link to criticism of theology

BTW, do you notice that dying of jesus is very similar to the concept of human sacrifice. It seems that X-ists opposed the human sacrifice because jesus was already sacrificed. Basically, they were not opposed to the idea of human sacrifice. Their point was the ultimate sacrifice was already made.

Anyway, this whole idea of some other life being sacrificed for benefit of another set is highly abhorrent. Somebody else being killed for my sake or your sake is wrong. No one should be killed for the mistakes of another.

Of course, one can be punished for one's own mistakes. Thats the theory of Karma.

In this theory, if jesus was the son of 'god' and he suffered, then his suffering must be due to his own doing.
----
Philip saar,
Rus, Cheen, dhesh and Amirkhan are the big 4. Amirkhan is in tightgrip, but there may be a chance of it freeing itself. Cheen is in a meiji restoration phase. Dhesh is tightly in the grip. But, Modi may be glimmer of hope. Rus seems to be the only opponent.

But, the problem is that if Bhestern universalism declines, then X-ism and Jihaadhis will rise.

However, all three seem to have common power structure: oil.

If an alternate source of energy is found, it would hamper the power structure of jihaadhis and bhest.

----
For OIT proponents:
Notice, the first commandment: "I am the 'Lord', thy god".

Generally, one introduces oneself by saying one's name. For example, one would say,"I am johnee, poster in BRF." Similarly, here the announcement is "I am 'Lord', thy god".

So, the word 'Lord' is the name of this particular being. What is the Vaidhik word for 'Lord'? Ans: Indhra.

So, the narrative seems to be that this commandments were given by Indhra. The setting of these commandments also makes it quite clear. He goes to the top of the mountain and there are thunders and clouds. Indhra's connection with thunders and clouds is also typical. Indhra's vehicle is Airavatha which is a white elephant. This white elephant symbolizes the white cloud while Indhra's weapon is Vajra(thunderbolt). So, the setting and the name make the connection with Indhra.

Moses worship of fire god is seen when a bush catches fire.

There is also a hint that people used to worship cows and calfs at that time. The story says that Moses killed all those who worshipped the images of calf after obtaining the commandments.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1422
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Pulikeshi » 07 Jul 2014 22:15

I submit WU is not a big deal (title of this thread) as Indians have repeatedly defeated themselves by useless religious debates :mrgreen:

Meanwhile Ornab was berating the chaps who still thought Sharia was universal...
Fat-was mere opinions? but SC lacks the proverbial testimonials to ban the kangaroo courts,
Like they did Khap (tl;dr thwarting intrinsic localisation efforts, instead of guiding them)

Perhaps the solution is to set up Anti-Fat-was - that is issue opinions on Sania's skirt being too long.
Or the Supremes beard or wig being too short :shock:
Absolutely benis worthy I tell u!

If the Universalist is self-righteous, the Injun's external grasp is ridiculous!

</sarc never off>

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby RamaY » 07 Jul 2014 23:03

JohneeG garu,

Bhestern Universalism doesn't squeeze X-ism. It just squeezes (if at all) the institution of Church; because there is a new institution called Govt has been created (king has to rule, you know...).

shudh-desi Sikularism squeezes Yinduism; not just yindu institution called ????; there is no church equivalent in pagan-yinduism. In yindustan, the king always rules...

So, Bhestern universalism, Seckularism, Socialism, Communism and even modern science all agree that the dominant religion has to be weakened or eliminated. For this purpose, the support of the 'minority' creeds is taken.


this is factually wrong. None of these social ideologies have any fight with X-ism per se. The X-ism has issues with 'modern' science because it disagrees with Xism in some aspects.
Last edited by RamaY on 07 Jul 2014 23:29, edited 1 time in total.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9526
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby UlanBatori » 07 Jul 2014 23:22

IMO the reason why "western XXXXism" is a big deal, fill in any of many things into the XXX, is that yindoos have been traditionally unable or unwilling to give a clear, coherent answer to the questions:

1. What are your core beliefs/values?
2. What is the hierarchy of your literature that I can go look up to learn more about these?

The answer usually degenerates into
1. The Question is Improper!
2. It is wrong to even THINK of Core Beliefs or Values, those are WESTERN concepts!
3. Our literature starts with the Vedas (sorry, it is blasphemy to speak of the Vedas as literature onlee), Ramayana (no that is not Vedas), BG (no, that is not Vedas),Puranas (obviously not)..
4. But my Core Belief is that if I don't dunk my skull into this pond, facing to the East and holding my nose and/or my ears, before 7AM every day, the whole Universe may go down the tubes. Rain or shine. If you try this in a land where the pond is frozen, well, that is your fault for cross the seas. Brasht onlee!

This is why XXXX Universalism and all other nonsense run riot in yindoostan, not to mention every where else. So develop clear answers. Or frame new questions that anyone can ask and get clear answers, that define SD/Hinduism/ whatever u call it.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby RamaY » 07 Jul 2014 23:33

Batorji...

You sound right in a rhetorical sense but not in reality.

All those you attribute to Yinduism is plain wrong... you are (by mistake or intention) confusing yinduism with bramminical "life style" in some agraharam in S.TN. That brammin taking in a dip in local pond every morning hail or rain is his dharma. The same brammin doesn't recommend the same routine to his neighbor kshatriya/vaisya/sudra even though all of them are evil-yindooos

Yes, yinduism has core values (some may appear beliefs because they span multiple lives). Secondly to think literature needs some hierarchy is (ironically) a western thinking... If you have necessary purushartha nischaya, you can learn vedas directly like many do by going to Vedic school at the age of 7/8.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10588
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 08 Jul 2014 02:00

shiv wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:The only real stupidity is that they did not bother to understand the culture of the Westerners who were questioning them. And even today, because we've read some books and speak English doesn't mean we've understood the West - we may also be stupid.


Actually I personally dislike too much self flagellation - wrong or right. The west certainly did not bother to understand India before they set about doing whatever they wanted. Whatever "understanding" the west did was a superficial scratching of the surface and a reductionist analysis to reach conclusions that suited them. Understanding is a problem that Indians dwell too much upon methinks. There is no need for too much understanding. Simple bigotry and an arrogant assumption of one's own "rightness" along with the clout to impose one's own view as right is all that is needed. Understanding and justification is for us nerds on BRF as time pass


Yes, but the net result is that we have adopted their understanding of us as our own, and that is what we're now passing off as "an arrogant assumption of our rightness". That is the death knell of our culture. The OIT thread is just one (feeble) attempt to throw out this "colonial consciousness".

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10588
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 08 Jul 2014 02:11

1. What are your core beliefs/values?


Is this meant to be "beliefs or values"? Is there an implication that values arise from beliefs? etc.

Anyway, I will give an answer to move the conversation along:

The four goals of human existence are dharma, artha, kama, moksha. The latter three are to be pursued in accordance with dharma. This is the core of Hindu life. You tell me if these are "core beliefs/values".

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10588
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby A_Gupta » 08 Jul 2014 02:13

4. But my Core Belief is that if I don't dunk my skull into this pond, facing to the East and holding my nose and/or my ears, before 7AM every day, the whole Universe may go down the tubes. Rain or shine. If you try this in a land where the pond is frozen, well, that is your fault for cross the seas. Brasht onlee!


Bullshit! Find me one recorded dialog of Brahmin and European in which that was said.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9526
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby UlanBatori » 08 Jul 2014 02:42

:mrgreen:

1.
The four goals of human existence are dharma, artha, kama, moksha. The latter three are to be pursued in accordance with dharma. This is the core of Hindu life. You tell me if these are "core beliefs/values".


Excellent. Those would qualify as core beliefs. The values associated with "dharma" and "in accordance" need to be elucidated as well.

2. I am merely paraphrasing the quotes that someone presented on the other thread, rather nastily of course. Of course the Believer would not call it that, but an unkind observer might..

RamaY:
No no no no yaar, that is all misunderstood onlee

is a standard response from "our kind" (not picking on u! Just read the OIT thread and you will see this soooo many times). People assume that others have "misunderstood" without thinking what they might actually have understood. And whether they themselves actually understand anything or have thought about their own "beliefs".

May I point out that you went through your post without providing any usable answer? That unfortunately is what happens when most ppl ask those questions, and that turns ppl off. It is soo much easier to hear and "believe" what someone from other Belief Systems articulate. However improbable it may sound, the point is that they BELIEVE and they are "sure" of it, and it is something E-Z.

I have kept asking those two questions for 1,700,000,000 posts, it seems like. Very few answers: maybe 2? 3?

In fact, Karma, Dharma etc are also easy concepts unless they are needlessly complicated by this and that Ritual Requirement. And we should, I think, quit doing that when ppl ask us about our beliefs.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20873
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby Prem » 08 Jul 2014 03:21

1.
The four goals of human existence are dharma, artha, kama, moksha. The latter three are to be pursued in accordance with dharma. This is the core of Hindu life. You tell me if these are "core beliefs/values".


Shimply Sublime ,Superb, Secular, Sarvbyapak, Saaddha Satyam and Scientific Standalone Selfevident Vaaks . Lets remove the word belief and use the word Values, Principles only.People of Knowledge/ Gyan with recorded experiences over Yugas do not require raw brainish Belief/s to "deene"grade themseleves.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 896
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby symontk » 08 Jul 2014 06:05

If one says that these acts of killing are merely 'judgements', then the question will rise: it was never said in the commandments that one could kill in certain situations.

>> Yes it is correct. Try to understand Christian Trinity and Dual nature of Christ

The commandment seems to be simply saying 'don't kill'. Of course, Moses himself supposedly killed people for praying to an idol of golden calf immediately after obtaining these commandments. So, Moses and 'god' both violated the injunction 'not to kill'. Every soldier violates this commandment.

>> If anyone (Moses or soldier) violates the commandments, price have to paid. I explained the God's part earlier

Similarly, according to the X-ism myth, 'god' had affair with wife of somebody else and jesus was born. This is against two commandments:
thou shall not desire the wife of your neighbor.
thou shall not commit adultery.

>> wrong, Mother Mary was pregnant before marriage

By the way, according to OT, Abraham pimped his own wife to pharaoh of Egypt. When Pharaoh thought she was Abraham's sister(Abraham misrepresented it). So, Pharaoh was furious when he came to know the truth and returned the wife of Abraham to him. So, Abraham's wife violated the commandment of 'adultery'. There is also a hint of incest here.

>> Yes its correct and commandment do apply. BTW it was Abraham's decision and not God's to do like that

If killing of jesus (Yashas) was an act of 'god', then again he violated the command of 'not killing'.

>> Wrong, Killing of Jesus was done by people not by God

Jesus himself has supposedly said that he was here to break the families. It seems that disregarded his family and mother according to New Testament. So, this goes against the commandment of 'thou shall honour your father and mother'.

>> Jesus didnt tell that, he told that by believing in Jesus your family members would hate you. he was warning his followers about the challenges ahead

And all people(including X-ists) make images and idols. So, this goes against the commandment of 'thou shall not make graven images'. Perhaps, Zorasthrians are the only ones who don't make any image and pray only to fire. But, all other groups make some images or idols to venerate them.

>> Yes correct, its against commandments

Anyway, this whole idea of some other life being sacrificed for benefit of another set is highly abhorrent. Somebody else being killed for my sake or your sake is wrong. No one should be killed for the mistakes of another.

Of course, one can be punished for one's own mistakes. Thats the theory of Karma.

In this theory, if jesus was the son of 'god' and he suffered, then his suffering must be due to his own doing.

>> I dont think Jesus follows Karma, but why you say that others cannot be sacrificed for your mistakes? It may be abhorrent but why it is wrong

Anyway OT to the topic

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15946
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

Postby SwamyG » 08 Jul 2014 06:21

shiv wrote:So we start with the assumption that all are religions.

But I would like to go back to say 300 BC when Alexander types were coming into India. Look at the Greek writings and you find no description of a separate "religion". Gods are mentioned and in some Greek works the Gods are assumed common.

......
Anyone who believes in a "superhuman controlling power" (as per dictionary) is said to believe in a religion.

.......
What is the difference between the two?

The then Greeks or Indians, believed in gods who were superhumans and influenced the human lives. So if different people believed in super humans intervening in lives, why cannot they be compared?


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], VishalJ and 29 guests