Bharat Rakshak

Alok_N wrote: Shiv is trying to bring it back to the original premise, i.e., is EJ a threat?

True.

But shiv also said:

shiv wrote:What needs protection? Who needs protection? Can you protect what has already been lost? When it appears that so many educated forum members do not seem to have a clue about the Hindu dharma they claim to stand for, why the lament about loss.

Surely a lack of awareness and knowledge of what one claims is one's own heritage should not be continuously blamed on extraneous forces. By blaming extraneous forces in this day and age one of the major problems among Hindus is being "buck-passed" on to evanjehadis and Islamists.

The evenjihadis and islamists are merely reaping what Hindu decadence has sown.

Maybe the ongoing discussions do help stem the tide ?

But, that being said, let's get back on track.

Here's the question that needs a response:

shiv wrote:If expansionism is OK as an individual right, then does individual right bestow upon someone the right to declare that someone else's belief is wrong? Even if that right is allowed, is it wrong for the IWH to resist that.

The classic problem is that freedom of practising one's religion has been - because of the evangelical heritage of Christianity - is automatically ASSUMED to include freedom of propagating one's religion.

This basic assumption is the problem.

I should be free to choose my religion that I wish to practice, or even choose NOT to practice any.

But what gives others the RIGHT to propagate what they believe in ?

At best, it is a PRIVILEGE that each individual ( or a collective ) can grant to another.

The ongoing tussle is because the evangelical faiths - even if it is accepted that their intentions are purely good-natured ( trying to save fellow beings from utter damnation ) - abuse this IMPLICIT privilege, and take it for granted that "freedom of religion" includes the freedom to propagate BY ANY MEANS necessary.

As long as they are NOT disabused of this notion, there will be no change in the ground situation.

Let the discussions begin on HOW the IWH collective can achieve this turn of events.

Well thanks for remembering that the threads must have some purpose to justify their presence on the Strat forum on BRF.

However it can be argued that greater understanding can lead to a better handle on who is a threat to whom and how.

The content of these threads is itself revealing in some ways.

One fact of course is a "ho hum predictable" one. I have known all along that a religion thread will get rapidly filled up with the complexity of Hindu thought. (Experience from other fora) This is why I was always rabidly against letting even the slightest chink open to allow a discussion of Hindu thought on the Islamism threads. I used to cut that short a soon as I detected it because it immediately took the focus away from Islamism, a discussion about which was suppressed almost anywhere (outside of BRF as well) due to centuries old dhimmtude from the respect (out of fear) that Islam had gained.

But when I saw the content of the Evanjihadism threads - I began to feel that they were reaching a dead end. Accusations and fears were being posted - but a lot of things were unclear.

Particularly interesting to me was the easy platform that the evanjihadism threads provided to bash Christianity - but statistically Christians (not all evanjihadis) make up only about 4 percent of India. This figure was disputed, but what struck me was that the Islamism and evanjihad threads seemed to show up Hindus as such pushovers and their faith such a useless one that held little attraction to anyone - so that Hindus were (by all accounts) not only being "pushed back" by demography and militant Islam but also by the smaller numbers of evanjihadis using methods unlike Islam.

The only common factor I could see was "fear and paranoia" from Hindus and it seemed that virtually any method to convert/remove/"take out" Hindus seemed to work, and seemed to be working quite well, thank you (at least by accounts on those threads).

Now maybe that is true. Maybe that is not true. That remains to be seen. But the level of weakness of Hinduism as a faith and the level of suicidal sidelining of their own way of life by Hindus cannot be examined without allowing a discussion of Hindus and Hinduism.

It also occured to me ( a nagging thought that I have had for years) that the Hindu narrative is totally unknown outside the four walls of a Hindu house. That needs to be set right.

That is the raisin dieter for these threads on here.

Shiv, Are you turning fundoo? Enquiring minds want to know!

this is work in progress and I supect that there is much more left to be discovered ... however, the realization that the vacuum is the crux of the matter (no pun), is a powerful leap in western world's thinking ...

"Space is somethin' it's not nothin'"

Uh, that wud be 40 vs. 00

S.Valkan wrote:

shiv wrote:If expansionism is OK as an individual right, then does individual right bestow upon someone the right to declare that someone else's belief is wrong? Even if that right is allowed, is it wrong for the IWH to resist that.

The classic problem is that freedom of practising one's religion has been - because of the evangelical heritage of Christianity - is automatically ASSUMED to include freedom of propagating one's religion.

This basic assumption is the problem.

Absolutely.

This is precisely what I mean when I speak of a comfortable monotheistic Christian biased worldview that is present almost everywhere - including India.

That worldview assumes that Hindus will not speak up about other faiths - and effectively means that they need not speak up and if they do it is almost sedition.

This is a patent injustice that has not been mandated by law but exists as a "nudge nudge" feeling in any Hindu-non Hindu interaction in India that involves the rights assumed by Christianity and Islam. It is galling to note that Hindus and Hinduism have nothing against these faiths, but the dogma of these faiths consider everyone else, including Hindus as wrong. By an extension of this - anything that a Hindu says that questions or cause discomforts within these faiths is automatically dubbed wrong, even if it is not "wrong" by a long shot.

It is high time that this attitude is put through the same microscopic examination that all other thoughts are put through in India.

S.Valkan wrote:I should be free to choose my religion that I wish to practice, or even choose NOT to practice any.

But what gives others the RIGHT to propagate what they believe in ?

At best, it is a PRIVILEGE that each individual ( or a collective ) can grant to another.

The ongoing tussle is because the evangelical faiths - even if it is accepted that their intentions are purely good-natured ( trying to save fellow beings from utter damnation ) - abuse this IMPLICIT privilege, and take it for granted that "freedom of religion" includes the freedom to propagate BY ANY MEANS necessary.

As long as they are NOT disabused of this notion, there will be no change in the ground situation.

Let the discussions begin on HOW the IWH collective can achieve this turn of events.

For starters I believe one needs to know and describe oneself accurately and honestly

I suggest the institutionalization of the term "IWH" - the Idol Worshipping Hindu.

It is galling to note that Hindus and Hinduism have nothing against these faiths, but the dogma of these faiths consider everyone else, including Hindus as wrong.

I thought the word mleccha is used to describe followers of these foreign faiths.

Also arent there non-IWHs? The A's and the B's?

ramana wrote:Shiv, Are you turning fundoo? Enquiring minds want to know!

The answer to that question depends on whether the question is a serious one or asked in jest.

ramana wrote:

It is galling to note that Hindus and Hinduism have nothing against these faiths, but the dogma of these faiths consider everyone else, including Hindus as wrong.

I thought the word mleccha is used to describe followers of these foreign faiths.

mleccha : Applied to many peoples, INCLUDING but BUT NOT LIMITED to Christians and Muslims.

[quote] “The biggest weapon wielded and actually daily unleashed … is the culture bomb. The effect of a cultural bomb is to annihilate a people's belief in their names, in their languages, in their environment, in their heritage of struggle, in their unity, in their capacities and ultimately in themselves. It makes them see their past as one wasteland of non-achievement and it makes them want to distance themselves from that wasteland. It makes them want to identify with that which is furthest removed from themselves; for instance, with other people's languages than their own.

Ngugi WaThiong'o “Decolonizing the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literatureâ€

Shiv, I asked in jest. But suggest you give the serious answer too.

ramana wrote:

It is galling to note that Hindus and Hinduism have nothing against these faiths, but the dogma of these faiths consider everyone else, including Hindus as wrong.

I thought the word mleccha is used to describe followers of these foreign faiths.

Also arent there non-IWHs? The A's and the B's?

ramana - the term mlechcca is no longer in vogue. I have not heard it being used wrt to Christians or Muslims at all, and the only person I have heard using the word is my now dead grandmother who used it to describe someone about 30 years ago, and I believe that is part of the self critical change that is occurring in Hindu society in reaction to all the criticism it has faced.

Now I am asking, it it possible that we can expect some other changes in attitudes toward Hindus? Starting with a reduction in the number of times Hindus are accused of considering others "mlecchas" and of being ruled by caste, and of burning brides. Or of being fundamentalists (or fundoos?) if they ask questions about other faiths.

If you get movement from one side, one expects equal movement from the other side. Hinduism is able to move. But will other faiths do the same. If they don't and Hindus are threatened, is the ability to change the real weakness?

Should Hindus revert to all the undesirable things that they have been accused of inventing? Are Hindus really that undesirable, or is that a relative question?

Until you asked this question, the only references that I had that accused Hindus of considering people mlecchas were Paki sites and literature.

Mleccha means outcaste, and is of course a derogatory term. But it is no worse than what the Japanese thought of foreigners and no worse that apartheid. Are you in any way suggesting that Hindus are perpetuating xenophobia/racism that the Japanese and South Africans have given up. Is there any basis for that accusation.

Apart from all this, whether Christians are mlecchas or not, the faith has been allowed to survive and thrive. So I am not technically wrong in what I stated.

I suggest the institutionalization of the term "IWH" - the Idol Worshipping Hindu.

May I make a few suggestions?

1. Have a universal set of principles stated in a short, easily understood sentences.

2. Send your children once a week to a school where stories are told about these principles and why they are important.

3. Have a concordance where when a situation comes up, you can easily look up a similar situation in scripture.

4. Do your priests preach? If not, why not? I can't tell you how valuable it is to have someone trained in theology to expound on various aspects of the scripture. You guys are in rapture when Valkan does it. I see a serious need here that goes unsaid among you.

Who wants to hear a physicist wax about space time? Only other physicists, that's who. People want to hear the passion, the glory of their religion and how they should follow it as their lives progress.

5. I don't understand the aspect of having a living guru or swami and making him holy. Yeah, it's done with the Pope to a certain degree but then there is a reason why I am not a Catholic. I'll let you guys work that out.

Just my thoughts.

shiv wrote:But the level of weakness of Hinduism as a faith and the level of suicidal sidelining of their own way of life by Hindus cannot be examined without allowing a discussion of Hindus and Hinduism.

You have touched two topics:

1) Level of weakness of Hinduism as a faith

2) level of suicidal sidelining of their own way of life by Hindus


Let's discuss each on its own merit.

1) Hinduism was not designed to be a "faith" in the Vedic era.

It was designed to be heard about ( Shruti ), logically understood/clarified ( Yukti ) and then finally grasped with Intuition ( Anubhuti ) at a personal level.

This was to be one of the four goals of life, this being the only one exclusively personal.

The other goals - discharging one's duties at various stations of life (Dharma), earning to maintain the family ( Artha ) and deriving the pleasures that human life offered ( Kama ) - involved the participation of one or more people along the way, the spouse( Saha-Dharmini ) being the most important.

The methodology to achieve this personal goal ( Atmana Mokshartham ) was described as Shravana(hearing from a competent teacher), Manana(mental contemplation), and Nidhidhyasana(daily reflection until slowly imbibed).

This was fine for those who had the time, or the inclination, and obviously the competence.

But what about the vast masses who had no time to do any of that ?

The Itihasas, Puranas and other Smriti came along to help them digest the material in easily comprehensible fashion, through anthropomorphic stories with some enlightening insights and morals.

Over time, with Sanskrit falling into disuse, and the foreign invasions stopping state patronage, the "priests" had little incentive to disseminate "knowledge" and more incentive to feed the "faith" pill, and get monthly allowances for interceding with the Puranic deities in the temples, on behalf of the "yajman" ( householders).

Thus the sublime, lofty Hinduism became dependent on poor, rickety crutches of "faith".

Although some revivalism took place from time to time, it was never successful in enlightening the Hindus in entirety.

And this is the weakness the Evanjihadis exploit.

shiv wrote: If you get movement from one side, one expects equal movement from the other side. Hinduism is able to move. But will other faiths do the same. If they don't and Hindus are threatened, is the ability to change the real weakness?

Should Hindus revert to all the undesirable things that they have been accused of inventing? Are Hindus really that undesirable, or is that a relative question?

One cannot expect any movement from the others even if Hinduism moves because one faith believes it is God revealed and is unchangable and the other is an instrument of Western Dominance theory and has long ago lost its Eastern origins after the conference at Nicea.

If Hindus adopt non-Hindu methods and discourse they will no longer be Hindus and become like their detractors.

One approach should be to understand what makes Hinduism unique and make it available to protect its adherents -

dharmo rakshati rakshitah - Manusmriti.
Dharma would save you, if you save it.

TSJones wrote:I don't understand the aspect of having a living guru or swami and making him holy.

If you have been following the discussions here, the ultimate enlightenment in Hinduism is "I am God".

I know your Christian faith won't let this "blasphemy" be acceptable for anyone except when Jesus says this.

But, bear with it, if you wish to understand the significance of making a living Guru "holy".

In Hinduism, a true "Guru" ( and not money-hankering charlatans ) is one who takes you out of darkness/ignorance, and brings you to light/knowledge :

Akhanda Mandalakaram Vyaptam Yena Characharam
Tat Padam Darshitam Yena Tasmayi Shri Gurave Namah

Ajnana Timirandhyasya Jnananjana Shalakaya
Chakshur Unmilitam Yena Tasmayi Shri Gurave Namah

Gurur Brahma, Gurur Vishnu Gurur Deva Maheshwara
Gurur sakshat ParaBrahman Tasmayi Shri Gurave Namah

It is not without reason that the Guru is exalted in Hinduism.

Now, don't go overboard and think that self-styled charlatans charging $35 per Nirvana experience or selling con-books like "Do-it-yourself-Moksha-in-21-days" are the people deserving the exalted status.

But, unfortunately, there are gullible people everywhere.

TSJones wrote:
Just my thoughts.

Thanks TSJ. It's past bedtime for me - but I'm hanging on.

Your suggestions would not be off the mark if it could be shown that Hindus are generally under threat. Some of the things that you suggest are already in existence anyway

Since you have taken the trouble to write all that let me say what I think might be the real issue.

It is NOT that Hindus are generally under threat in India. I wonder of the story that Hindus are under threat all over India is a bogey that is a self goal of sorts by the people who are saying that. They might, sadly, be crying "wolf" and diverting attention from real issues.

There is an ongoing demographic invasion of people from Bangladesh into eastern India. While endless discussions on this forum have shown that Islam is a problem faith and any connection with Pakistan means trouble, the issue is probably less one of "faith vs faith" and more of a political issue. By calling a religion bogey and trying to save a religion when there is a political problem - people may end up barking up the wrong tree.

Secondly - I am not at all sure that the issue of Evanjihadism is as deadly as people are making it out to be. I just suspect that Hindus living in the US see the power and money of the Church and see a sort of revival after Dubya came to power - and they may be applying their fears to the land they left behind.

But I want to give them a chance to show how and why Hinduism is under such great threat when Hindus seem to be happier, richer, noisier and gaudier than ever before within India itself.

I have observed that all Indians who emigrate take with them a "time capsule" of Indian culture as it was when they left. (with 50% of my relatives in the US - i have seen this time and time again). They preserve that well, but it turns out that India moves on and changes. I don't mean to hurt anyone when I say that. I think India and its culture give a very deep sense of identity and belonging that, for example, the blacks who were taken to the US unfortunately never had. So there is a complex emotional interaction that people have with regard to events in India. I am not sayingthat there are no threats, but in my view, threats need to be defined accurately, or you will never know what you are supposed to fight.

Thus the sublime, lofty Hinduism became dependent on poor, rickety crutches of "faith".

there is more to it than the religion itself.. where people at the C, D levels think magic will happen, and God will make them rich/contented enough devoid of basic problems.

since, the larger section of the people (poverty line), and the Ds, where they have already disregarded hindusim in the larger interest of faith, are mainly cause of mental assurances given to them by such EJ orgs that the savior is JC and none, and they consistently go behind the C, Ds and ensure that each and every success they achieve, is attributed to Christ.

Sope, its just not faith onleee.. something more, in the implementation of religion or "the ways of life", that we have to actually evolve.. think EJs are hinderence, but use their methods as interferences.. and evolve those methods.

We have such a distributed system of thought, that such evolution would have to have a pattern that is generally accepted by the chiefs of hinduism. this is where the problems are also, each of these chiefs have become thiefs (or tending to become, from a social role point of view).

Just curious Valkan, is there any mention of Vaikuntam in Advaitam?

Thus the sublime, lofty Hinduism became dependent on poor, rickety crutches of "faith".

Then so be it. It may be argued (and is argued) that Christianity and Islam were also probably not meant to be the soul and body harvesting businesses that they are today. But the EJ's profess christianity and the jihadis profess Islam and until and unless there are a billion Rakesh's and APJ Kalam's that reality is not going to change.
If the political moksha of Hindu Dharma lies in glorifying the rituals and 'faith' then let the God's will be done. Let there be a million Navratris and Ganesh festivals and Diwalis and let no EJ or paki cast an evil eye upon the rapture (albeit nurtured by commerce) of Hindus in these festivals.

Aditya Vikrams wrote:Just curious Valkan, is there any mention of Vaikuntam in Advaitam?

I am not sure what you mean by 'mention in Advaitam'.

In Advaita, terms like Gokula and Vaikuntha are symbolic.

They hold far greater significance for those that believe in a gradient in liberation like Salokya, Samipya, Sayujya etc.

Alok_N wrote:continuing with vacuum ...

it is essentially "Nirguna" as in, all its quantum numbers are ZERO ...

however, through a series of steps too complicated to go into, but basically known as "spontaneous symmetry breaking", physical vacuum generates attributes, i.e., it gives masses to various particles ...

the broken vacuum could be considered "Saguna", but it is the same vacuum ...

this is work in progress and I supect that there is much more left to be discovered ... however, the realization that the vacuum is the crux of the matter (no pun), is a powerful leap in western world's thinking ...

Sort of Hrinyagrabha ?

TSJones wrote:
I suggest the institutionalization of the term "IWH" - the Idol Worshipping Hindu.

May I make a few suggestions?

------------------

Just my thoughts.

This is one of the rare few times on this forum when I have to say:

I agree with TSJ.

Abhijit wrote:Let there be a million Navratris and Ganesh festivals and Diwalis and let no EJ or paki cast an evil eye upon the rapture (albeit nurtured by commerce) of Hindus in these festivals.

You missed the point entirely.

What is it that are you worshipping in Navratri, or Durga Puja or Deepavali ?

It is not merely a "festival of lights" or "triumph over evil" or some such mass-market slogan.

It has now become either a commercial festival (like Christmas/Thanksgiving in the US) or a matter of routine faith in the Panchangam.

When, after a few generations, folks begin to ask "why are we doing this?", what will the response be other than "I don't know. I do it because my forefathers did" ?

And then the EJ will step in with a smile and say "Still following that shameful practice of the uncivilised barbarians of yesteryears ?Leave that pagan ritual and that monstrous idol alone. I can show you a better and modern way".

shiv wrote:

TSJones wrote:
Just my thoughts.

Thanks TSJ. It's past bedtime for me - but I'm hanging on.

Your suggestions would not be off the mark if it could be shown that Hindus are generally under threat. Some of the things that you suggest are already in existence anyway

Since you have taken the trouble to write all that let me say what I think might be the real issue.

It is NOT that Hindus are generally under threat in India. I wonder of the story that Hindus are under threat all over India is a bogey that is a self goal of sorts by the people who are saying that. They might, sadly, be crying "wolf" and diverting attention from real issues.

There is an ongoing demographic invasion of people from Bangladesh into eastern India. While endless discussions on this forum have shown that Islam is a problem faith and any connection with Pakistan means trouble, the issue is probably less one of "faith vs faith" and more of a political issue. By calling a religion bogey and trying to save a religion when there is a political problem - people may end up barking up the wrong tree.

Secondly - I am not at all sure that the issue of Evanjihadism is as deadly as people are making it out to be. I just suspect that Hindus living in the US see the power and money of the Church and see a sort of revival after Dubya came to power - and they may be applying their fears to the land they left behind.

But I want to give them a chance to show how and why Hinduism is under such great threat when Hindus seem to be happier, richer, noisier and gaudier than ever before within India itself.

I have observed that all Indians who emigrate take with them a "time capsule" of Indian culture as it was when they left. (with 50% of my relatives in the US - i have seen this time and time again). They preserve that well, but it turns out that India moves on and changes. I don't mean to hurt anyone when I say that. I think India and its culture give a very deep sense of identity and belonging that, for example, the blacks who were taken to the US unfortunately never had. So there is a complex emotional interaction that people have with regard to events in India. I am not sayingthat there are no threats, but in my view, threats need to be defined accurately, or you will never know what you are supposed to fight.

Shiv, we are on the same wave length. Seriously.

I don't think hardly *any* practicing Hindus are susceptible to Christian conversion. Many of these guys were educated in Christian schools and it was like water off of a duck's back.

OTOH, who would be susceptible in India? The primitives and the down and outers. They are looking for some kind of help and a better way of life than they are currently living. Thus, the perceived threat of evangelism by the guys on this forum. That is where the base of the problem is. It's not their personal beliefs that are in question, it is the potential that the Christian tribals and dalits may decrease Hindu influence in India.

When, after a few generations, folks begin to ask "why are we doing this", what will the response be other than "I don't know. I do it because my forefathers did".

And then the EJ will step in with a smile and say "Leave that pagan ritual and that monstrous idol alone. I can show you a better way"

I disagree with this assertion. The festivals have been celebrated for millenia and people have never been in doubt about why we do it. We do it because that is our way of worship. There have been very few conversions from those who have celebrated these festivals 'faith'fully. The fervor of these festivals has only increased over the years and with the introduction of commerce the faith has become stronger. America has celebrated halloween for decades and the celebrations have become stronger in spite of shrill cries by the born again folks that it is a pagan ritual.

OTOH, who would be susceptible in India? The primitives and the down and outers. They are looking for some kind of help and a better way of life than they are currently living. Thus, the perceived threat of evangelism by the guys on this forum. That is where the base of the problem is. It's not their personal beliefs that are in question, it is the potential that the Christian tribals and dalits may decrease Hindu influence in India.

This is where you show what you make of this forum and your own POV comes in, wherein you are simply unable to accept that evangelicals show extreme contempt for other religious faiths and belief structures. What you describe as "Hindu influence" is exactly how they phrase it- they dont want these born again Christians to even show a basic level of tolerance vis a vis their peers who dont convert. But whats more hilarious, is your professed response- one wonders how you would react if there were hundreds of wahhabis who converted your neighbours and then proceeded to engage in hate filled screed on the !@#$$ Christ etc irrespective of how much leeway you give them. Lets see your concerns then...heck y'all cant even stand catholic mexicans in the good old US..!

All you demonstrate and continue to do so is how sanctimonious you can be when it comes to the valid issues that affect other nations and civilizations..for they can never be judged by the same standards you apply to your own.

It comes out in your speech, in your depictions, in your attempts to "communicate"..

Abhijit wrote:The festivals have been celebrated for millenia and people have never been in doubt about why we do it. We do it because that is our way of worship. There have been very few conversions from those who have celebrated these festivals 'faith'fully.

Once again you missed the point.

Those who have unflinching faith are at the least risk of conversion.

The problem is with those who question the ritual, and find no answer other than "that is our way of worship".

I will make a digression, and rake up an example of someone from THIS forum,- Vick.

He claims he has a Hindu mother, and a Christian father, and he chose Christianity over Hinduism.

There could be several reasons for his decision, but the one most likely is that - as a child - his mother could NOT satisfactorily answer his questions about Hindu deities and rituals, while his Christian father ( or the church leaders ) could about theirs.

America has celebrated halloween for decades and the celebrations have become stronger in spite of shrill cries by the born again folks that it is a pagan ritual.

In case you didn't realise it, Halloween is a cultural phenomenon, not a religious one.

There is a world of difference between a fervour in celebrating Basant or Pongal and worshipping elephant-headed or 10-armed idols.

I can show you a better and modern way..

its already happening.. subliminally within many within the contexts of accepting something "foreign" blindly.

reasoning is most important aspect that hinduism followers needs, and this is not required for "blind faith"...
hence we are at pole apart in trying to link something that are not on the same plane of reference.

Re festivals, I think HH had made a suggestion that a renameing of Feb 14 Valentine's day may give lot of peace to shiv-sainiks.

Afterall "madanotsav" and "vasantotsva" were part of hindu cultural tradition. There will just be a new addition to Vasant-Panchami as saraswati puja and Holi as color festival. Although this new festival will be based on Julian calndar date of Feb 14 instead of Indian calendar. But hindus adapt.

S.Valkan.

Is advata same as vedanta? (both look the same). Do you know that Jathedar (leader) of Sikhs (there are five Takhts and Akal Takht at Amritsar is supreme) goes by name "Joginder Singh Vedanti"., meaning he considers himself as a VEDANTI. What you have describe above is so close to Sikhi of Guru Nanak dev., Self Realization of a Nirankar God.

Sandeep

He claims he has a Hindu mother, and a Christian father, and he chose Christianity over Hinduism.

There could be several reasons for his decision, but the one most likely is that - as a child - his mother could NOT satisfactorily answer his questions about Hindu deities and rituals, while his Christian father ( or the church leaders ) could about theirs.

I fear you are making an assumption here, even though you yourself provided an answer earlier on. The simple fact is that Hinduism is a very live and let live religion, where it takes a conservative household to have a child consciously aware of and be engaged in religion. In such a clime, one does not even need to know the "why" then, as long as one is just engaged in the act of worshipping, and feels that it suffices.

The answer that you provided earlier on is correct- people led a life in stages and worship and religion was left to the individual to determine and this attitude has remained intact. It is not uncommon to see middle aged men in Hinduism to suddenly "discover" the Gita, whereas the rest of their life was spent in going to the temple only when the missus dragged them.

Same as in the good old days after "retirement", off one goes to the forest and meditates. The flip side of the story is that in the modern world, with a mother and father who are similarly "laissez faire" when it comes to religion, it becomes very easy for a Hindu to declare that he is an atheist or become fashionably secular- in the misuse of the word (not in terms of giving respect to all creeds etc etc).

After all- in many Christian households, church on Friday. In educated Muslim households even- madrassas and mosque classes for theology. In Hindu well to do families- nobody bothers.

While this is also a feature of "live and let live" and everyone must discover their own path, it also has its cons. The biggest one being that kids have no idea of let alone interest in religion.

TSJones wrote:Who wants to hear a physicist wax about space time? Only other physicists, that's who. People want to hear the passion, the glory of their religion and how they should follow it as their lives progress.

that's because the context of this thread is different ...

physicists are capable of EvanPhysics too ... if you were to give me an hour, I would convert you ...

I have "saved" many from religion, including SHQ ...

there you go.. why not accept lunar calendar as well in the schools? why only solar? even village schools have now gone to solar.. thus losing implementations of our prides. btw, that is just one.

while metric and english system can co-exists and learned by all, why not hindu panchang and solar calender co-exists in school learnings.. a few questions on the test papers is enough for the kids to learn.

impl starts in the young age.. many have pointed out that parents mistake in not inculcating religious values, since they have no clue.

PS:
I wish archiving of good threads alone is not important.. we should let reviewers reopen it and summarize it.. what i am expecting is that the thread should end up in something like "10 commandments or N commandments".. that prevents EJs to infiltrate.

SaiK,

Indian calendar is not only lunar, it is luni-solar. Months are lunar, but years with periodic adjustments are solar, as any agrarian society must have, since seasons depend upon the Sun.

This official acceptance of saka-calendar along with Julian calendar by the GOI is same in spirit as the phrase "India that is Bharat". No one other than religious panchanga users and astrologers use the Indian calendar. Even the govt publications mention the Saka calendar dates only as an obligation.

I do not see why vikram or saka calendar couldn't be used in India. But after the independence, Nehru's vision dominated the scene and he was an apologetic hindu.

The problem is with those who question the ritual, and find no answer other than "that is our way of worship".

Agreed. My contention is that the rituals instill an unflinching faith in 99 % of the people. How else would you explain adherence to bible by a billion people when there are a thousand logical inconsistencies in the book? EJ's using logic to counter the appeal of Hindu Dharma is the most unbelievable argument IMHO. EJ's can use enticements, disenchantments and other societal fissures to drive a wedge but they can't fight based on logic and they can't fight based on faith.

I guess BR is seized about the issue at the right time! SBN addresses many of the points raised in these 5 threads. Valkan you are not incognito SBN right?

SBajwa wrote:Is advata same as vedanta? (both look the same). Do you know that Jathedar (leader) of Sikhs (there are five Takhts and Akal Takht at Amritsar is supreme) goes by name "Joginder Singh Vedanti"., meaning he considers himself as a VEDANTI. What you have describe above is so close to Sikhi of Guru Nanak dev., Self Realization of a Nirankar God.

Typically, by Vedanta, one means Advaita Vedanta. They are synonymous.

But, some theistic interpretations of Vedanta like Vishistadvaita, Dvaita , Dvaitadvaita and Achintya-Bhedabheda have emerged in the last millenia.

They have their own place in the sun as well, and serve a bigger purpose.

As for Sikhism, it only differs from Vedanta in the concept of Vivarta.

Guru Nanak taught that Ik Onkar transformed itself into the world,- ie the change is real and irreversible, much like how milk gets transformed into yogurt.

Vedanta ( drawing from the Upanishads ) follows the doctrine of Vivarta, ie apparent transfiguration. The change is false,- neither real, nor unreal.

It is best explained with the Ocean-Wave-Water analogy.

Waves rise and fall back into the ocean of water.

Has there really been any change in the water ? No.

But, from the standpoint of each "wave", the waves are different from each other, and from the Ocean as a whole.

If you delve deeply, where does each wave begin, and where does each wave end, and the other begin ?

This "apparent" notion of a division, where NONE exist, is what is called Vivarta in Vedanta.

It is not real change, because water remains as water, and there is no change in essence.

But there is a change in terms of "form", and so it is not really unreal like Square Circle.

This doctrine of falsity is difficult to grasp, and Guru Nanak understood it.

He was troubled by the growth of Islam, and the complete degeneration of the Hindus into ignorant worshipping, and so he and his disciples did what they felt would help Hindus revive.

In the process, Guru Govind Singh created the Khalsa Panth, and Sikhism was born.

All dharmic religions (hinduism, sikhism, buddhism, jainism) have a strong similarity in the core, even though exteriors show variations.

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.

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)?