Religion Thread 1

Locked
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

TSJones wrote:Certainly Alok, no more jokes from me, but I don't think you have been up front with everybody because I distinctly remember you stating you were an atheist on one of your messages a long time ago. If you say you are not atheist, then I guess we have to accept that at face value but it certainly goes against my memory of what you have written.
I believe I said agnostic ... at least that is what I always say ... not sure which instance you are remembering ...

besides, you are welcome to make jokes about me ... :) I was complaining about references to temples in New Jersey etc ...
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by TSJones »

I was only referencing temples in New Jersey because Eddy hides out at Princeton.
Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Post by Sanjay M »

Kumar wrote:
Sanjay M wrote:Kumar, atheism is not faith, it is a rational economy of belief. Occam's Razor, if you will.
Sanjay,
In absence of any proof that god doesn't exist, atheism is faith. If you prefer Occam's razor, it is better to stick with agnosticism.
No, agnosticism is not Occam's Razor, because agnosticism gives equal weight to the idea of God existing or not existing. Occam's Razor would not give equal weight to both, but would rather side with God not existing. Atheism is economy of belief, as is Occam's Razor.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

ok, I'll take a break ...

but before I do that, I would like to point out why I believe that this discussion of countering religion is very relevant to this thread and to the threat of EJ etc ...

someone said that "protecting Hinduism is equivalent to protecting India" ... several others agreed with this ... what is the real point here? ... if Hinduism is a "way of life" in India, then it makes perfect sense that a civilization would want to protect its traditions ... at the same time, Hinduism is a body of Thought which is a precious part of that tradition ... does that not need protecting as well?

I submit that an "us versus them", in terms of Hindus versus EJ, is precisely the anti-thesis of Hindu Thought ...

IMO, gods and godesses were invented as Thought Lite, i.e., as a technique for explaining complex concepts and cosmology ... protecting these symbols of the Thought while letting the Thought itself decay is not a wise course of action ...

in other words, EJ is not the threat to the survival of the Thought, rather Hindus clinging to symbols is the real threat ...

further, IMO, the best way to protect the Thought and ensure its continuity, is to invent new symbols ...

in todays age, the best and most readily available symbols are provided by science ... one can completely recast Hindu Thought in scientific terms and not lose any of its essence ...

more on this later, but here is a point to ponder ... Hindu Thought introduced the concept of shunya which is generally regarded to mean "zero" ... a more important meaning of shunya is vacuum ... and vacuum is the number one problem of science today ...
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Post by Sumeet »

Someone brought this to my attention:

Nazi General Himmler uses Gita to facilitate Killings of Jews
There was a further "ethical problem" for Himmler: how to make sure that the executioners, while performing these terrible acts, remained human and dignified. His answer was Krishna's message to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-Gita (Himmler always had in his pocket a leather-bound edition): act with inner distance; do not get fully involved.

Therein also resides the lie of 24: that it is not only possible to retain human dignity in performing acts of terror, but that if an honest person performs such an act as a grave duty, it confers on him a tragic-ethical grandeur. The parallel between the agents' and the terrorists' behaviour serves this lie.

But what if such a distance is possible? What if people do commit terrible acts as part of their job while being loving husbands, good parents and close friends? As Arendt says, the fact that they are able to retain any normality while committing such acts is the ultimate confirmation of moral depravity.

Is this even true ? Have read about Nazis, especially hitler a lot but never realized/read they had misused Gita to perpetrate such heinous acts.
Jaylal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 28 May 2005 00:11

Post by Jaylal »

Sanjay M wrote:
Jaylal wrote:Sanjay,

Now we can endlessly debate whether it is more important to have faith in God or in science, but either way, it is a matter of faith. You have the utmost faith in what you call science, though it continually proves itself wrong and rebuilds itself in the wake of that rubble. While I on the other hand, have faith in the scientific process... one that has led me to, by way of my personal education, to an understanding that Vedic Philosophy is less art than it is based in sound scientific principles. Principles that have developed over 1000's of years, in what would constitute some of the largest sample sizes known to man. That is the reason why Ayurveda is largely effective, and at times... very effective. Its based in scientific principles man. Of all people, Indians should at least recognize that (not that you have to accept them). I'm not afraid to think outside the box and I'm of the belief that all we see and all we measure is not the end of the scientific process, but only one dimension to it. Using all our senses, all our powers of observation, and all our collective understandings of the universe and its amorphous self, is more of a science than to stick a thermometer in a guy's butt and read his temperature. Thats the only way for humans to make big discoveries, as history has shown time and time again.
This again just ethnic narcissism. We all want to live vicariously through the perceived achievements of ancestors, which helps to compensate for our less-than-glorious present. I say that we should focus on bringing glory/accomplishment/etc to our present, rather than wallowing in imagining how our ancestors were hopefully the first to climb Everest.

Just my rationalist point of view.
You seem to act as if reinventing the wheel is the only truly worthwhile act that an individual could be proud of. When I'm talking about taking a cue from our ancestors and building upon it, you seem to be stuck in an Atheists' stubborness in refusing to equate two circumstances that are similar. After all, the visible and tangible triumph of science has come from its documentation and development over time, and I will argue that the triumph of Vedic Philosophy is all the same. You may not see it that way, and this definitely your perrogative. There are people, such as my self, that wish that each and every individual would find the power within theirselves by acknowledging that they are intimately connected into the fabric of everything, a so called "self-God". This builds upon the ideas of generations past, and I would like to help it find some relevance into today's circumstances, instead of regurgitating, as you insinuated, established ideas. That is my take on it... but I sure don't think that my way is the Right way with a capital "R".

On a further note, one of the great paradoxes in religious discussions today is that of the "Rationalist Atheist." I don't get how so called "Rationalists" are any where close to rational. After all, if you have no evidence to prove that God does NOT exist, it is a fundamental principle of rational and scientific thought that you cannot invalidate that it idea. It HAS to remain a possibility. That is why Atheism, or any form of identification that makes a hard-line stance on abstracts, cannot possibly be the fountains of wisdom they so seem to enjoy pampering themselves with. It really is an unjustified that my way is the right way, just the same as religious fanatics.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Jaylal wrote:After all, if you have no evidence to prove that God does NOT exist, it is a fundamental principle of rational and scientific thought that you cannot invalidate that it idea. It HAS to remain a possibility.
Jaylal,

very briefly, I posted this in a reply to Kumar also ... if a god can be defined via his attributes, such a god can be refuted by refuting the attributes ... (this would be a known unknown) ...

what remains is a god with no attributes (unknown unknown) ...

if everyone agrees to a god with no attributes, there would be no argument to begin with ... :)
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Post by sivab »

There are no atheists according to Sanathana Dharma. Everybody believes in Self. Self is all there is. Ayam Atma Brahma (This Self is Brahma); Soham Asmi (I am That); Sarvam Kalvidam Brahma (Everything is Brahma); Isavasyam Idam Sarvam (Isa is all this) etc. There are equivalent statements in Tamil Veda's that are not translation, but directly by sages from their own experience. Spirituatlity is direct experience. We can argue all we want, but will not get any experience.

How is this different from "The kingdom of God is within you". I have also heard that JC said 1. I am servant of God 2. I am son of God and 3. I and my Father are one. How is that different from 1. dwaitha (duality) 2. vishistadwaitha (qualified duality) 3. adwaitha (non-duality) of Sanathana Dharma. Other religions probably have similar sayings. Again we can argue about this all life long and still will not get any experience.

Only way to get experience is to live it. If we do get experience we won't be arguing. So lets not argue about religions.

The problem is EJ. Lets argue about it to death. JMHO.
Jaylal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 28 May 2005 00:11

Post by Jaylal »

Alok_N wrote:ok, I'll take a break ...

but before I do that, I would like to point out why I believe that this discussion of countering religion is very relevant to this thread and to the threat of EJ etc ...

someone said that "protecting Hinduism is equivalent to protecting India" ... several others agreed with this ... what is the real point here? ... if Hinduism is a "way of life" in India, then it makes perfect sense that a civilization would want to protect its traditions ... at the same time, Hinduism is a body of Thought which is a precious part of that tradition ... does that not need protecting as well?

I submit that an "us versus them", in terms of Hindus versus EJ, is precisely the anti-thesis of Hindu Thought ...

IMO, gods and godesses were invented as Thought Lite, i.e., as a technique for explaining complex concepts and cosmology ... protecting these symbols of the Thought while letting the Thought itself decay is not a wise course of action ...

in other words, EJ is not the threat to the survival of the Thought, rather Hindus clinging to symbols is the real threat ...

further, IMO, the best way to protect the Thought and ensure its continuity, is to invent new symbols ...

in todays age, the best and most readily available symbols are provided by science ... one can completely recast Hindu Thought in scientific terms and not lose any of its essence ...

more on this later, but here is a point to ponder ... Hindu Thought introduced the concept of shunya which is generally regarded to mean "zero" ... a more important meaning of shunya is vacuum ... and vacuum is the number one problem of science today ...
I agree. The continual exchange of ideas and open dialogue in Hinduism hit a lengthy pause during the foreign conquests in India. The key to Hinduism's relevance in the modern context is in the flow of ideas and critques of its core substance. People SHOULD ask why and what. That is the only way the traditions of past will have any weight on the generations of today. My generation could care less about doing an Aarti because everyone else does it... but if it makes sense in an intellectual way, then it becomes a part of one's lifestyle. And for it to make sense to us in an intellectual way, ideas and traditions need to express themselves in a language appropriate to the time. This is how you "fight" conversion and strengthen the foundations in one fell swoop.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Sanjay M wrote:
Kumar wrote: Sanjay,
In absence of any proof that god doesn't exist, atheism is faith. If you prefer Occam's razor, it is better to stick with agnosticism.
No, agnosticism is not Occam's Razor, because agnosticism gives equal weight to the idea of God existing or not existing. Occam's Razor would not give equal weight to both, but would rather side with God not existing. Atheism is economy of belief, as is Occam's Razor.
Sanjay,
Atheism is a faith is obvious since their is no proof for non-existence of god.

Whether Occam's razor applies to this is debatable. You may claim that everything in the world can be explained without God, others may claim otherwise. In fact going by absolute numbers atheists may be the minority in the world. For all those believers, a lot in the world cannot be explained without God. I think Johann's earlier post is relevant here. In that sense Occam's razor can cut either way depending upon whether you talk to an atheist or a believer.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

Alok,
Hinduism do have the concept of Nirgun Parbrahm which is not Deity or God in traditional sense.
We can safely claim this kind of atheism as a branch of Hinduism.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Alok_N wrote: IMO, gods and godesses were invented as Thought Lite, i.e., as a technique for explaining complex concepts and cosmology ... protecting these symbols of the Thought while letting the Thought itself decay is not a wise course of action ...
in other words, EJ is not the threat to the survival of the Thought, rather Hindus clinging to symbols is the real threat ...
Alok, IMHO this your personal opinion based on thought, not on experience. On the contrary yogis keep on finding Gods and Goddeses in their experiences. They are not "thoughts" for them. For example Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo, Mata Amritanandamayi all had experiences of Maha-Kali. For them she was not a "thought", but a real being although universal in scope and power.

On one side are some intellectuals who may prefer to think of Gods/Goddesses as thoughts, ideas, idealizations etc, and on the other side are these great sages who a priori don't appear to me to gain anything by misrepresenting their experiences. I choose to trust the latter, since they claim to be talking from experience, not just thinking.

The question still remains which side hindus in general would choose, or should choose. I submit that the core of hinduism is experience based, not thought based, and for the good health of hinduism it is best to side with the sages. None of them have opposed scientific method in any way, so whenever science can begin to unravel those mysteries we will have to submit to the truth, whichever way it shows up. But until science has made that inroad, IMHO let the sages' experiences guide hinduism.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Hah
This is a key question?

Who are these Hindus who need protection? Where are they?
SRoy wrote: My question is who defines what needs to be protected? What are the criteria?
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Post by Bade »

If Hinduism or Hinduity is an individual experience and not needing any support of rational communication of the experience I submit that it needs no protection. A hindu can be converted a million times to other lesser experiences and still be able to experience the 'divine'. Case closed. We can all go home and not get so worked up about any EJ threat in the religious/spiritual/philosophical context. :eek:
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

If I convert to Christianity tomorrow - but then continue to pray to a bunch of Hindu Gods and continue to celebrate Diwali and Dussera, what has Hinduism lost?

Haven't I got me "freedom to worship the way I want"?

Have Hindus agreed upon what is core Hinduism that needs protection?

Had Hindus agreed upon that two thousand years ago? Is the Hinduism we are trying to protect today the same as the Hindusism that existed two thousand years ago?

Can Hinduism evolve and add new thoughts to its knowledge base or is it the last word like the Quran?

Is Hinduism a flexible way of thought? Is it flexible enough to take on concepts from Christianity and Islam to start spreading its knowledge actively and actively start pulling in members?

What is the point in beating one's breast and lamenting for Hindus if one says in the same breath that Hinduism is syncretic and then saying that this syncretism does not extend to taking on the most threatening characteristics of Christianity and Islam - that of incessant spread?
Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Post by Tilak »

Bade wrote:If Hinduism or Hinduity is an individual experience and not needing any support of rational communication of the experience I submit that it needs no protection. A hindu can be converted a million times to other lesser experiences and still be able to experience the 'divine'. Case closed. We can all go home and not get so worked up about any EJ threat in the religious/spiritual/philosophical context. :eek:
How true !! :eek:

Can't wait for the Mullah's to cite Islam is the "Religion" of the majority, in India. [ Courtesy Mr. Gajendragadkar]. :rotfl:
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

folks, I agree that atheism is a distraction ...
Kumar wrote:
Alok_N wrote: IMO, gods and godesses were invented as Thought Lite, i.e., as a technique for explaining complex concepts and cosmology ... protecting these symbols of the Thought while letting the Thought itself decay is not a wise course of action ...
in other words, EJ is not the threat to the survival of the Thought, rather Hindus clinging to symbols is the real threat ...
Alok, IMHO this your personal opinion based on thought, not on experience.
kumar, if you notice the paragraph starts with a big IMO ...

secondly, this game can be continued to another level ... what you have posted is your thought based on what others have written and is not your experience either ...

I have done the ping ... you are welcome to pong ... or, we can get away from this line of debate ...

what a Yogi does or does not see after a long disciplined session of meditation is not the issue ... btw, if a yogi spends his life, say, worshipping Shiva and then one day he has a darshan of Shiva, my first guess would be that he went through some form of auto-suggestive hallucination ... why would that be a wrong guess?
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Let me try adding another approach to asking questions.

If Iran is under threat from the US should Iran attempt to destroy the US singlehandedly or is it better for Iran to shore up it's own defences?

Similarly, if Hindus and Hinduism are under threat, should people spend all their time demonizing Christianity and Islam or should they spend at least a little while in seeing what is valuable that all Hindus want to defend and start defending that?

I see the protectors of Hindus protecting whatever they feel is correct without being able to reach at some core tactic that would appeal to all. By this the self proclaimed protectors of Hindus are making more enemies than friends.

What is it about Christanity and islam that would appeal to a simple family man - say an Indian carpenter? What can be shown to him as appealing about Hinduism?

There is little use in howling that Christianity and Islam are bad and that Hindusism is good and under threat?

What is "good" about Hinduism? What is its USP that can be sold to a person with an IQ of 80-110?

I do not see the BJP, RSS, or any other pro Hindu group - including many forum members doing anything to address the question in this manner. All that I can see them doing is saying "Christian bad. Sonia bad. Muslim bad. Muslim murderous. Hindus good. need protection"

What the hell does this mean

To my IQ of 90 it sounds as though these people are selling snake oil. What is good about Hindusism that I should cherish? What makes the BJP or RSS right?
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Alok_N wrote: secondly, this game can be continued to another level ... what you have posted is your thought based on what others have written and is not your experience either ...
Alok, My personal spiritual experiences are of no value to the forum here as I am nobody in this field. But other great sages' experience has the value of their reputation. This is not to say that all my passion about this arises from blind faith, as I mentioned earlier too, it doesn't...
what a Yogi does or does not see after a long disciplined session of meditation is not the issue ... btw, if a yogi spends his life, say, worshipping Shiva and then one day he has a darshan of Shiva, my first guess would be that he went through some form of auto-suggestive hallucination ... why would that be a wrong guess?
These are also presumptions. Great sages like Ramakrishna, Aurobindo, Ramana and Mata Amritanandamayi gain a permanent state called "sahaja samadhi" where they can be in constant yoga while living normally in the world. Great tapasya, practices, meditation, chanting etc are the intial prepatory stages which are no more needed after sahaja-samadhi is gained. And for them experiences with deities is not merely a one-time affair..., but in some cases it is an all-time affair.... If you may, that is the true meaning of an "Avatara" when the consciousness is in constant contact with that particular deity.

Sri Aurobindo was definitely not a temple goer, worshipper type, or a Krishna devotee in the usual sense, when he had the "Krishna Experience". He had no interest in temples and he met a yogi for the first time more than a decade after he returned to India, as he was not much into yoga/meditation in the beginning. That meeting with the yogi was somewhat of a turning point, as within a mere few days of trying Sri Aurobindo had the experience of Brahman as the one sole reality where rest of the world appeared as a photographic mirage. He took up yoga only after that, but still wasn't a temple goer religious type.

Auto-suggestions/hallucinations have relevance for the concerned person only they don't have any imapct on rest of the world. A real contact with a real deity may cause a real world impact. And with these great sages that was/is often the case. There is a reason I am sticking with these great souls and not any two-bit yogis. That is precisely to fend such criticisms.

In the end no amount of words can convince, they can only raise the curiosity perhaps for some personal exploration. Frankly speaking, 10 years ago I probably wouldn't have convinced myself of what I am writing today...
Abhijit
BRFite
Posts: 530
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Bay Area - US

Post by Abhijit »

Shiv, this is the real question that I am trying to answer. I cited one example in the previous page - Hindu kids having to recite bible and hymns because they study in convents. And I also acknowledged that it is a political decline of Hindu Dharma. Most of the whine of Hindu decline is because of the decline in the political sphere.
If you (as per your example) convert tomorrow and still continue to worship Durga and Kali, that is still a decline of Hindu Dharma - because with the conversion it is now doubtful if you will cast your political lot with the rest of the (still) hindus when and if push comes to shove. Let's take my above cited example. If hypothetically tomorrow a GoI makes a law that it is illegal to preach Christianity in a school (in US it IS illegal to preach Christianity in the public schools) if the school is funded by non-indigenous sources and/or takes GoI grant money then with your conversion the Hindus are not sure if you will vote for such a law (I am mixing the political process with RM's administrative process but the gist is the same). You may ask what is wrong with Hindu kids learning bible and hymns - you may ask that without conversion too (in fact I expect many BRFites to ask this question if only they read what I write :D which they probably don't). The problem with that is that kids are at an impressionable age where they might not listen to the bible critically and you never know what interpretation of the bible is being taught in the convents - the Christian Coalition one or the San Francisco/Euro variety). Also there is no equal time given to the teaching of the Hindu faith, plus it is a forced learning plus a bunch of other reasons. I will take this thought process further later.
saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 377
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Post by saumitra_j »

To my IQ of 90 it sounds as though these people are selling snake oil. What is good about Hindusism that I should cherish? What makes the BJP or RSS right?
Shivji just to quote an example of what RSS does in which I have been personally involved:

In Pune, there are these slums without any amenity that you can think of in a normal city including electricity / water in the same area where our Su30s reside) which are under constant attack by EJs - every Sunday truckloads of EJs pop by, pick up the people and convert them exploiting the fact that these people don't have much hope anyways. It is interesting to note that the composition of these people includes both Hindus and Muslims and they all have the same problems - lack of electricity, water and essentially no hope what so ever of getting education etc - easy meat for the EJs.

Now I know this bunch of RSS folks who are actually working with these folks to
a) Give them a chance to educate themselves
b) Protect them from the EJs
c) Make them save some money through what are called as"Bachat Gat" in Marathi
The folks who do this: people like most of us with regular day jobs in MnCs etc (including IT/Vity types) - they work late evenings in running night schools and training the smart types to run the schools themselves
They also host cultural programs - and during Ganesh Chaturthi last year, the programs also had Muslims participating in the Aarti.

What's bad with the EJs "converting" these poor souls if they help them in any case? It has more to do with the fundamental concept in the religion that says it's JC or nothing (or its Mohamed or nothing) - it's got to do with making them forget their Diwali and Dusshera ....

I would request people to not brand RSS in the same category as the BJP and lumpen elements like VHP .

I should be back in Pune from Massa land in July and would be happy to take any interested BRFite on the ground to show all the good work being done.....

What's good about Hinduism to be proud of? Lots and lots but the immediate ones that come to mind are the concept of "Vasudeva Kutumbakam", and the philosophy that comes from the Bhagwad Gita....


cheers

Saumitra

PS: I am not a member of the Sangh and at times I do not like some of their concepts but the work they are doing is fantastic but it is mostly unsung.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Kumar, I am not sure what your point is ...

you started with an attack on "narcissitic scientists" with a lot of smilies etc ... I have responded to several of the points you made which you have not acknowledged ...

secondly, you inserted this whole "atheist" angle ... I was only arguing science, not atheism ... is that not a strawman?

now, your arguments are reduced to great sages and their experiences ... I have no doubt that they had extraordinary experiences that they then tried to explain to others ... the point of question is whether they experienced god or not ... science has barely scratched the surface of how the human brain operates ... so, experiencing god is only one out of a multitude of possible answers to what the sages saw ...
Kumar wrote: Frankly speaking, 10 years ago I probably wouldn't have convinced myself of what I am writing today...
boss, all that says to me is that 10 years hence you may change your mind again ...

and (only to lay this matter to rest), please do also entertain the possibility that others may have also visited and trained with yogis etc ... in my youth I was a regular at an ashram where I studied yoga ... upon graduating from college, I proceeded to intern with aghoris in varanasi ... (I assume you are familiar with their intense approach -- this experience was very short-lived) ... later on I was attracted to meditation training in Rishikesh ... in the US, I trained under a Dao teacher ... in short, we have all had some experiences ...

I chose the path of science because in the end it was the most promising ...
Sadler
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 30 Oct 2005 10:26
Location: USA-ISRAEL

Post by Sadler »

TSJones wrote:

Let me be clear about this, to Christians, following the Old Testament will not necessarily get anybody salvation. You can follow the Ten Commandments to the very letter but it won't necessarily get you salvation either. To a Christian, there is only one way to salvation that is through Christ alone.

So you can call Christians thieves of Jewish history, or "Abrahamics" whatever that is, or don't call us anything at all, but Christians acknowledge only one way to salvation: through Christ. Abraham won't get the job done. Paul was very clear about this in bringing the Gentiles to Christ.


From all posts so far, i think we practically agree on everything except this. For what its worth.

It is not us (jews) who call christianism or islamism "abrahamic" faiths. It is christians and moslems. The faith of the Jews is THE Abrahamic faith.

Two, Abraham gets the job done for us.

Three, if the so-called "Old" Testament is so useless, kindly tell your fellow christians to remove it from all public and religious places in the US. We'll gladly restrict it to synagogues.

Paul does not do it for us. Neither does Jesus. Or Matthew or any of the so-called gospels. Those which were accepted as THE gospels by the Council of Nicaea and those that were not as well.

BTW, jews did not have to vote on the divinity of our prophets unlike JC, who was a run of the mill prophet until the Council of Nicaea.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Shiv,

I am on the verge of being labelled an ES, so let me take a shot at answering your question about who and what needs protecting ...

as I have noted earlier, the keepers of Hindu Thought implemented outreach techniques to make their knowledge available to the masses ... [Kumar etc will doubt this ... if Valkan were here he would drown them in Sanskrit and quote from the scriptures about why this is precisely what happened ...]

these great thinkers were likely of the view that explaining their concepts using symbols was a great idea ... in retrospect, it may not have been fool proof ... why?

well, they probably did not figure on assault of other religions ... hence, they were propbably comfortable in their role as keepers and did not fear that one day they may be conquered and subjugated ... they did not realize that they had created an organism that will take on its own life and evolve on its own without their supervision ...

so, fast forward to today ... we now have a situation where the keepers of the Thought (my grandfather was one) are nobodies in society and are reduced to having discourses which are attended by noone but themselves ... [as an aside, I doubt that even the most virile defenders of Hinduism here have ever attended a debate conducted purely in Sanskrit ... these are the dinosaurs I grew up with ...]

so, who needs to be protected? ... answer: each and every Hindu who has lost touch with the tradition of Thought (ok, Gyaan, if you will) and is now adrift with only a set of beliefs that he holds sacred ... he is vulnerable to snake oil from others ... the fact that he lost touch with Indian spiritual tradition is not his fault but an outcome of history ...

why, you may ask, does he need to be protected? ... my answer is that as a civilization we did bad unto him ... he was fed stories, not protected from invaders, and then left on his own devices even in the modern era ...

finally, how, you may ask, do we protect him? ... IMO, it is too late to put the genie back in the bottle and rewind the proliferation of gods and goddesses ... we need to educate the masses in Hindu Thought ... psecs will scream bloody murder, but it will not be Hinduism Studies ... it needs to be in the context of cultural studies that we teach our heritage, the most precious component of which is the gems of wisdom contained in our Thought ...

I agree that BJP clowns did not address it adequately at all ... all their attempts were so sloppy that they deserved derision ...

a more balanced approach would be to teach the Thought in a secular fashion ... there should be no reason not to be able to teach the rational components and apply them equally well to a variety of symbols ... muslims and christians and followers of any other religion should be able to relate the lessons to their own theology ...

I suspect that I am ahead of my times ... :shock:
Last edited by Alok_N on 15 Mar 2007 08:55, edited 3 times in total.
Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 13 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by Kumar »

Alok,

I knew from your chosen user name "Alok Niranjan", the sanskrit version of popular hindi phrase Alakh-Niranjan, that you must have had some yoga connection. :)

Good to know that you had that connection.

Gurudev,

My first post was general and addressed to no one in particular. I am not sure why you latched onto "narcissistic-scientists" as a personal epithet. It meant precisely what I said, i.e. scientists who think of science as the end all be all. I had put the smilies there, to show that I meant it to be funny. My rest of the arguments support this, as I kept on mentioning that truths exist outside of science too. Narcissism was meant as this llimiting self-absorbed and self-praising attitude towards itself that science sometimes shows at the cost of other disciplines.

Please read first few pages of this thread and see how many times "atheism" was mentioned by others. And since my first post was not directed towards one single postor, it included athiests too.
Alok_N wrote:
Kumar wrote: Frankly speaking, 10 years ago I probably wouldn't have convinced myself of what I am writing today...
boss, all that says to me is that 10 years hence you may change your mind again ...
Prabhu, what are you doing?? :) Playing ping-pong as you said earlier? OK, I surrender.
Sadler
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 30 Oct 2005 10:26
Location: USA-ISRAEL

Post by Sadler »

Arun_S wrote:
Sadler: For the text that I marked blue I say in Hindi & Sanskrit "Sadhu, Sadhu!" Roughly translated as Righteous / Gentlemanly. Thank you.
Thank you. I have had a love affair with India for a long time. Most of my adult life. Its now, towards the twilight of my existence on earth that i am able to disill, however clumsily, my own life experiences and thoughts.

To me, it is a privilege to be able to post on BRF. An honor, really to share my thoughts with my fellow hindus. I said fellow because i truly feel a kinship with an Indian hindu or sikh or even Buddhist (never met a Jain before) that i do not feel with anyone else. Sometimes even fellow Jews. When i interact with a member of an Indian faith or even a Farsi, i feel like we talk to each other. That we each have our own space and we share thoughts, ideas and feelings. I never get that with a follower of christianism or islamism. With them, sooner rather than later, its always in your face kind of talk. They have the monopoly on salvation and everyone else is a savage or a heathen or a pagan.

Respectfully, JMT.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Before the power cut (which, as per the government is non existent in Bangalore and does not occur at all) disrupted the power supply, I was going to ask yet another question.

To the people who say that Hindus/Hinduism needs protection I ask:

Are you calling for protection merely because one was born into the faith?

Or are you calling for protection if there is something to protect?

Being born into the faith is not a good enough reason to hold people. Islam and Christianity got pastthis hurdle long ago. Islam said we will kill you. Christianity said "You will be screwed forever"

So if there are any reasons to protect Hinduism - can you put down the most tempting reasons in a manner that can be understood by a child who might as "What is there to protect in Hinduism"?

Alok N perhaps begins to address. but not answer that question when he says:
we need to educate the masses in Hindu Thought ... psecs will scream bloody murder, but it will not be Hinduism Studies ... it needs to be in the context of cultural studies that we teach our heritage, the most precious component of which is the gems of wisdom contained in our Thought ...
Which one of our stalwart Hindu groups has the brainpower to do that?

The RSS may do a lot of good work. Hey but so do I. I don;t ask for recognition and neither does the RSS.

But if you wish to protect something you must ask for recognition of what there is to be protected. The RSS is wrong in that sense. It is easy to make the RSS==with Jamaat ud Dawa because those jokers do things in Pakistan. No use getting angry with the == here. The JuD is very clear about what it wants to protect.

That clarity is non existent among Hindus who seek to protect.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Kumar,

peace ... I know your heart is in the right place and your criticism of self-absorbed scientists is also spot on ... if I had a big danda, I would cut the scientist population by half ... :)

but, I entreat you, to pay some unbiased attention to why I believe that scientific re-invention of Hinuism is in the best interest India, Hinduism and the whole freakin' world ...

I have not even yet touched upon the subject itself because I am busy debating the distractions ... I will compose some long posts on the topic ...

boss, all I have is words ... if I can convince folks through words, fine ... I do not intend to be an EvanScientist ... I have no miracles to perform and no snake oil to sell ...

Cheers.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Shiv,

fair enough on the lack of clarity among Hindus about what it is that needs to be protected ...

I answered your question with my "IMO" but you picked on me, correctly so, on the proposed implementation ...

I agree that I do not see our worthies as being able to protect our heritage ... especially, not the dudes who think that burning Valentine's Day cards is a heroic act ...

this is a depressing reality ... I will carry on the family tradition and teach two california chicks into this tradition ... but, in the larger picture, it may well be true that the battle is lost ... :(
Jaylal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 28 May 2005 00:11

Post by Jaylal »

Alok_N wrote:
Jaylal wrote:After all, if you have no evidence to prove that God does NOT exist, it is a fundamental principle of rational and scientific thought that you cannot invalidate that it idea. It HAS to remain a possibility.
Jaylal,

very briefly, I posted this in a reply to Kumar also ... if a god can be defined via his attributes, such a god can be refuted by refuting the attributes ... (this would be a known unknown) ...

what remains is a god with no attributes (unknown unknown) ...

if everyone agrees to a god with no attributes, there would be no argument to begin with ... :)
I agree. NO attributes or ALL attributes. And in the great rational paradoxes of Hinduism, this stated over and over... with my favorite being that existance is both finite and infinite. IMO its all about perspectives, and that is the practical application of Vedic Philosophy. The first and most important thing that people take away from Hinduism is that there are many paths and not just one Path. This can be confirmed by experience, history and observation. Now THAT to me, and many others, is science of the first degree.

Any one who believes that anything is a clear cut idea/thing/concept with only one angle to it (even saying that the value of gravity is 9.8 m/s^2), can be proven wrong. That is a modern pitfall of modern science. Things are definite for only a fleeting moment. After all, the value of Gravity changes every day (in the smallest of units of course). So the only definite is that there is no definite. And that is an idea ahead of its time, though first concieved a long time ago and disseminated all over the East.

For me, that does much to stimulate my logic centers.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Post by Bade »

narcissistic scientists == narcissistic sages :)

moments of discovery in science == yogic/spiritual experience

methodology of science(repeatable) == paths to divinity (not repeatable)
Walker
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 29 Apr 2005 22:35
Location: Houston, Texas

Post by Walker »

Sadler wrote:They have the monopoly on salvation and everyone else is a savage or a heathen or a pagan.
How is that different from your beliefs that the Moshiach will gather all the Jews in Israel and bring everlasting joy for them? Is it not required for the gentiles? And what about the smashing of idols? How does that promote kinship with Hindus?
Sadler
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 30 Oct 2005 10:26
Location: USA-ISRAEL

Post by Sadler »

Sumeet wrote:Someone brought this to my attention:

Nazi General Himmler uses Gita to facilitate Killings of Jews
This is the first i have heard of Himmler carrying a copy of the Holy Gita. The nazis are known for perverting the Hindu Swastika, but the Holy Gita connection is news to me. It would not surprise me, though. The nazis perverted virtually everything decent that they touched.

When in doubt, i google. Or in this case, PAGING JOHANN (LOL).
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

Jaylal wrote:I agree. NO attributes or ALL attributes. And in the great rational paradoxes of Hinduism, this stated over and over... with my favorite being that existance is both finite and infinite.
Jaylal,

you see, this is where comparitive religion enters the picture ...

you may agree in the context of Hinduism ... however, other gods put forth by other religions have definite attributes ... examples: omnipresent, merciful, loving etc etc ... these can be refuted ...

heck, on this very thread, several proponents of Hindu gods are not willing to give up attributes ... "by god, brahma has 4 arms" etc ...

the problem, as I see it, is that a god with no attributes is so secular that he ain't worth fighting about ... :)
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Post by shiv »

Correct me if you think I am wrong - but isn't the Hindu concept of God very simple - and one that is followed by people everywhere?

That is "God is everywhere, all around you and in all forms. That tree outside has God within, you have God wthin yourself and that rock there has God in it"

God is formless and yet has all these forms.

Is this so difficult to agree with? Is it so difficult to teach?

(As an aside: The much maligned : "Idol worship" stems from this. people are not worshipping a penis or a rock. It only means that God can be accessed anywhere anytime, in any form. For the same reason Jehovah and Allah are equally valid as God)
Jaylal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 28 May 2005 00:11

Post by Jaylal »

Alok_N wrote: I agree that I do not see our worthies as being able to protect our heritage ... especially, not the dudes who think that burning Valentine's Day cards is a heroic act ...

this is a depressing reality ... I will carry on the family tradition and teach two california chicks into this tradition ... but, in the larger picture, it may well be true that the battle is lost ... :(
Not quite so. I think the answer may lie in the views and proficiencies of my generation and yours.

The first and most important influence on my generation, even though it has been condemned by religious zealots for its corrupting influences, is the power of film. We need some really good, thought provoking movies about Vedic characters and events, or even allusionary tales and referrences to it. I'm talking Cannes quality movies or major Film Festival level documentaries, that will get a message across to a large audience that would never have had any exposure. Something that is visually stunning to watch (to get laymen interested) but also full of factuality (to hold on to the inteelectuals). I know that I was raised by film, and that some of the greatest things I have learned as a person were experienced vicariously through a character on the silver screen.

Books are also great. What needs to be done is to bring humor, modern culture or current events into the literary discussion about Hinduism. One really funny, but bitingly true book about Hinduism and the modern Indian, would get children from gradeschool to adults in retirement to VOLUNTARILY expose themselves to information about Vedic ideas... Who knows how many people of different nationalities and faiths, like Sadler, may find MUCH in common with the Hindu way of thought. Hinduism's only exposure to the world, currently, is through the Western media and education, which in my intimate experience is pretty biased, ignorant and offensive.

These works can be created by one man, not an army. They can be thought provoking and moving, but not sermonizing. Not dogmatic, but stimulating. We need to jumpstart our national discussion again, and then there will be multitudes of people coming out of the woodworks that would carry forward the work you are trying to describe. Have faith in people... but do help them unleash theur potential or least set the ball rolling so they can pick it up. You may not even realize how many Government Sarkars have spent their lives reading scriptures waiting for some sort of higher calling in life. This is about giving those that are interested an opportunity to join the cause, a grassroots revolution! ;) Okay... maybe not that far.

I can go on and on about this, but I hope you get my drift. If people all around the world can know Harry Potter, there is surely a comparable potential in a book that draws its inspiration from Hinduism?
Jaylal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 28 May 2005 00:11

Post by Jaylal »

shiv wrote:Correct me if you think I am wrong - but isn't the Hindu concept of God very simple - and one that is followed by people everywhere?

That is "God is everywhere, all around you and in all forms. That tree outside has God within, you have God wthin yourself and that rock there has God in it"

God is formless and yet has all these forms.

Is this so difficult to agree with? Is it so difficult to teach?

(As an aside: The much maligned : "Idol worship" stems from this. people are not worshipping a penis or a rock. It only means that God can be accessed anywhere anytime, in any form. For the same reason Jehovah and Allah are equally valid as God)
Bingo. This is what needs to be taught to the new generation! Simple, logical, elegant and universal.

We need to show the world that this idea of god IS more Hindu than our respect for cows or our festivals. And that Hinduism is really more than Yoga and Rituals.

Instead of being super ambitious, we can start with this small idea. Its not so hard to get an idea like this out to the world. Just one little movie :) . I have faith that others will gladly take the ball from there.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Post by SaiK »

jee.. you guys are trying to attribute something unknown for definitions.. Hinduism tells stories, avatar after avatars about God being undefinable. for definitions sake, if we consider Lords(unknown knowns) are different from God (unknown unknown), then we can think attributes 4 legs, 3 eyes etc.

There used to be lightnings and thunders during ice age melt eras.. many avatars happened then.. kids got only delighted with topings on their icecream, hence the Lords came, and to make "the known".

Shiv, attack on hinduism and protecting hinduism is happening since buddha, christ, and various acharyas have taken routes to protect. as you said very clearly, what are we trying to protect by EJs letting their attacks on the vulnerable population of a particular religion.

modern hinduism should evolve not to protect 2000 yr old practice, but what is practised today, corruptionism, lalusim, ammaism, goondaism, thakerism, etc. all these are tribalistism that took shelter under hindutva, because, of the fact it can evolve.. no containment rules or laws laid, how isms could be spread. now its time for sai and a-nandmayi et al trying to get their share of the ism populated. we have enough people to jump into ideas, means the very fact we are eager to evolve.

evolve from bad to good.. thats by removing all social evil, that is not just being in hinduism, but the infrastructre given by hinduism to house such isms, should be banned.

i wish, we can come up with a "set of new rules" every day, for the evolution to take place.
Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Post by Murugan »

Yes. Do not compare Vivekananda. Political parties after Independence are distorted version of the national movements and have no resemblance.

Shiv Sena are more a reaction to changes happening due to stagnation in the critical years of 70s-80s.

Debates of socialism, nationalism did not change much due to single party rule of 70s-80s.

BT has started Shivsena on divisive ideology. First he wanted to drive away south indians. Then he saw something in hindus as a votebank as a whole and started hindu movement (he became hindu hriday samrat). Then he wanted to drive away Gujaratis from Maharashtra because they were voting for congress. Then he though to drive away north Indians 'cause NCP started getting their votes.

Whatsoever hindu sympathy he had, he lost in divisive politics. when he had a chance to leap ahead with a lable of protector of Hindu, he started son of the soil movment. Today he has his family divided.

So much for Hindu Protection.
Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Post by Alok_N »

shiv wrote:Correct me if you think I am wrong - but isn't the Hindu concept of God very simple - and one that is followed by people everywhere?

That is "God is everywhere, all around you and in all forms. That tree outside has God within, you have God wthin yourself and that rock there has God in it"

God is formless and yet has all these forms.
Shiv, I agree with you that the concept is simple ... however, I do not agree that is is easy to teach ...

you may recall the question asked of Vivekananda whether he believed that his god resided in a piece of rock, and the subsequent guffawing that followed when the answer was "yes" ...

one has to be aware of the opposition which has its agenda of denigration ... there are several ways to mock this truth that you and I consider to be simple ...

which is why I advocate invocation of science into the discourse ... the point is that the the guffowing crowd will run the risk of being considered anti-science morons ...

in summary, this is what is unique about Hinduism ... it admits a scientific discourse, something that other religions shy away from ...

Jaylal's ideas are well placed ... I, for my own part, have offered to write an article abouit how ancient Indian Thought is in consonance with modern scientiific thought ... whether it can be converted into movies etc is up to the creative juices of those involved ...
Locked