Religion Thread - 6
Posted: 30 Mar 2007 06:40
The older threads are archived here
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
SBajwa wrote:Thanks S.Valkan.by Kumar
Re: the sikh priest "JS Vedanti", every time I saw his name in the news, I used to wonder whether people realize the inner similarities, especially during the 80s.
People do! but economics do not. Punjab in 80's was never a religious issue., but an economic one. Did you see the current issue over SYL canal between Haryana (Ruled by Congress) and Punjab (Akalis and BJP)?
Valkan wrote:Actually the words Anantam and Anandam are identical,- Anantam Eva Anandam.
'Unhappiness' is caused by some limitations imposed upon you.
If only you were not limited by money and resources, you could obtain all the goodies that would make you happy.
If only you were not limited physically by space-time, you could do all the things that would make you happy anywhere anytime.
So, Anantam is Anandam.
Again, please do not mistake me. I am neither attacking the swamis nor denigrating the role of Gurus in the Indian traditions. I just want you to start reflecting critically about your own answers and suggest that our problems do not know of easy solutions. We need hard labor today to even make sense of why we need Gurus or who can qualify for this. The Gurus of the twenty-first century world will not be mere 'Sanyasins', who know Sanskrit or have studied the Upanishads all their lives. We need a new breed that is at home in the modern world and has used the best scientific theories in the market place to make the Indian traditions their own. Such is the requirement for keeping our traditions alive and vibrant today.
shiv wrote: too many Hindus are unable to say why they are doing what they are doing. The loss of reason and the loss of rationale in the mists of time is a loss that must be stemmed and it can only be stemmed by those of us who miss it.
The vast majority do not miss it and continue to do it "because our elders did it". But while they do it they come under adverse criticism for junk knowledge as illustrated in the article.
Sanjay M wrote:Sikhs Dropping the Turban
rongsheng wrote:christian god's character is very interesting. Christian god's sons including Satan and christian god have similar tastes. Example :--
job 1.6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... version=9;
Hmmm I thought christian god only had one son. I guess not.
shiv wrote:Is the dropping of turbans by Sikhs a loss?
Similarly, is the dropping of some customs by Hindus to reflect life today a loss?
After all, look at what we ask of Islamists. We ask them to change out of their fossilized belief. We ask them to drop their silly demand for women to wear port-a tents. We ask Evanjihadis to "eschew" their core beliefs.
How can we then start getting anxious about the very movement and evolution that we ask others to embrace?
Could it actually be that the success of islamism and the faith of Evanjihadis lies in their fossilization? Their resistance to change and their dogged refusal to move with times?
If that is the case - the fault does not lie with them for succeeding, but the fault lies among Hindus and Sikhs for a failure of their belief.
Would people who see a threat to Hindus please answer these questions.
If he, for example, asks someone - why is the food placed in this particular order and served in that order on the plantain leaf at a Hindu ceremonial meal and repeatedly gets a dismissable answer like "it is our tradition" he is likely to reject it as rubbish and relegate to history one more hallmark of Hindu tradition.
btw, just reminded me of thali.. in the old days we were served sitting on the floor made out of cow-dung.. dried, redone periodically. Once this old SD man came to me and said.. do you know why we did (some do even now without knowing) circle water around the leaf (banana leaf - i guess i am talking South Indian tradition.. i am not sure about this in NI) that is filled with food.
I said, religious practice. He said, you are partly true.. but there is science behind it. Answer: dried cow-dung, when sprinkled with water gives rise to methane.. and it wards off ants and insects away from the leaf served with food.
I said .. wow!~.. perhaps we have more wows, and that we need to search and identify before we drop traditions and customs. as long as we document it, and we do symbolize such traditions is good enough. may be it is not necessary to do that if one sits on a chair & dining table.
He said.. if we lose that tradition, how are we to highlight our past.. our culture is full of practices like this.. we have lost at least 70% of it already. hence, many people resort to do this blindly, without reasoning.. since they don't have time, or forgotten to get enlightened.
shiv wrote:If he, for example, asks someone - why is the food placed in this particular order and served in that order on the plantain leaf at a Hindu ceremonial meal and repeatedly gets a dismissable answer like "it is our tradition" he is likely to reject it as rubbish and relegate to history one more hallmark of Hindu tradition.
S.Valkan wrote:Like I said many times before, if you feel my proofs are "irrational", I would love to see a refutation LOGICALLY.
S.Valkan wrote:I did not make the claim that idols were "dumb", or that they didn't have "breath" in them, while simultaneously upholding the claim of a "living God" in the Christian tradition. You quoted it as part of your scriptural claims as to why idolatry is "wrong". In a logical discourse, if you claim something/someone as "living" while castigating the other as "dead", there has to be a logical justification. Since you accept that neither you, nor your scripture can provide sufficient proof of "breath" by the Judeo-Christian "God", the biblical argument of why idolatry is wrong is itself refuted.
S.Valkan wrote:It makes a statement with NO qualifications whatsoever, correct?
S.Valkan wrote: Romans 11:36 â€œFor of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen." Please read that sentence again. It is YOUR scripture. Surely "all things" does include urine, excreta, saliva, semen, blood and drugs. So, urine and excreta are OF (ORIGINATES FROM) your "God". And they are sustained BY your "God". Also, they return TO your "God". Surely one can't deny that millions of species have been passing urine and excreta for the last so many millions of years( or about a few thousand years if you stick to the literal words of the Bible). All that urine and excreta must have originated from your "God" and must have returned to your "God", and form part of your "God" by now. So, YOUR scripture itself sustains the view that excreta and urine are part of your "God". So, why should "God" being present in urine and excreta seem irrational to you ?
disha wrote:shiv wrote:If he, for example, asks someone - why is the food placed in this particular order and served in that order on the plantain leaf at a Hindu ceremonial meal and repeatedly gets a dismissable answer like "it is our tradition" he is likely to reject it as rubbish and relegate to history one more hallmark of Hindu tradition.
If a person cannot explain a tradition, is it the fault of the tradition or is it a problem with the person explaining it?
Rakesh wrote:The shoe did originate from the shoemaker, but the shoemaker does not live within the shoe
ramana wrote:Shiv, What you are rebelling against is mimamsa or ritualistic practices.If he, for example, asks someone - why is the food placed in this particular order and served in that order on the plantain leaf at a Hindu ceremonial meal and repeatedly gets a dismissable answer like "it is our tradition" he is likely to reject it as rubbish and relegate to history one more hallmark of Hindu tradition.
BTW there is a definite pattern to the way the Thali is arranged. I need to look up books on Hindu food customs.
shiv wrote:Is it possible at all that the inexorable movement, change and flexibility that Hindu society displays is perceived as "deterioration"?
disha wrote:With all due respects - you are absolutely wrong. Look at the choos [shoes] from Jimmy Choos. Because of the shoemaker which lives in every shoe that makes it priceless! Just like some people see divinity in hair, blood and bones.
disha wrote:Just like some people see divinity in hair, blood and bones. Just like that in shoes. Just like some people see divinity in shrouds, same for shoes.
shiv wrote:I am lamenting what has already occurred and pointing out an urgent need to refuel knowledge banks about why Hindus live their lives the way they do. I learned from my parents and grandparents. Will your grandchildren learn from their grandparents? Will they learn mindless ritual that they cannot defend, or will they learn understanding of those same rituals and be in a position to impart wisdom?
shiv wrote:Without meaning to hurt you - I would like to point out that I will not accept this as an answer because the probem is worse than you imagine.
shiv wrote:By all means validate what I have said and gain your own experience. But I fear that my own experience is unlikely to be very far wrong.
Richard Dawkins believes that the world will be better off without religion. The Wiki link you provided does say that. If Christianity is nonsense to Richard Dawkins, then I am sure he feels the same about Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, etc. Thus all religions are just a bunch of crap and a waste of time. How many takers do we have on the forum, who are willing to support Mr Dawkins on this?
Rakesh wrote:So can Jimmy Choo shoes laugh, cry, be sad, get angry just like Jimmy Choo? Come on, be realistic But Â£300 for a pair of shoes? That is extortion! I guess wealth is all relative.
Rakesh wrote:People see divinity in many things, but that does not make it divine.
SRoy wrote:Shiv, you'll be surprised to know I sat down in the marriage pandal in a Western suit. Nobody could give me a convincing reason as why I need to wear uncut/unsitched garments (Most Hindus of north India are not aware of this custom....though I found some folks from Himachal and Uttrakhand aware of it and following it.). It was a sort of public scene.
disha wrote:Ofcourse in a modern age, I would not want to wear say a dhoti. Not because I am ashamed of it, but I do not want to put others to shame when the dhoti I wear will fall apart because of my lack of experience. And the cycle repeats. Though I have heard that nowadays they have dhoti-pants - should try that one.
Rakesh wrote:People see divinity in many things, but that does not make it divine. In Exodus 32, the Israelites made a molten calf and then began worshipping it. Now we all know what happened to them. It is ironic, that what did not have a form destroyed a so-called diety that did have a form. The molten calf could not save the people that worshipped it, from the real God.
SRoy wrote:They simply have no case to comment. It is our custom. We exercise enough judgment and freedom to follow whatever suits us. Period.