What is Hinduism? A Personal View

Salim # 294
(There is nothing wrong with the words "Allah" and "Hafiz" I used them both a lot and quite separately. But "Khuda Hafiz" was working fine and I just don't like dictators changing our language just to please their foreign masters)

Reminds me of Crown Prince of Jordan who is married to a Pakistani lady. He often travels to Pakistan.

When he heard PIA Airhostess saying `Allah Hafiz', he inquired why it has changed from `Khuda Hafiz'. She replied because it is an Arabic word.

He said that God can understand Persian as well.

Allah is a pre-islamic Arabic word for God/Ishwar.

NHK

#359 Posted by rahul_capri:

Rahul,

How is the retirement scheme in Goa going? :)

1. Elections. Like everywhere else. Though the issue of reservation is bound to crop up. Already, in both Pakistan and India one has around 30% reservation for women. This may be good or bad. A (perhaps unpublished) paper by Ester Duflo (see her web-page MIT Econ.) claims that it has helped development.

2. There are reasons to believe that it may perpetuate local power structures. At least in the short run. But they exist even today, so one cannot be worse off. However, if power in the states were to flow from panchayats, then there is every reason to see electoral competition in the panchayats. This in turn may weaken dominant elites. We have already seen such processes at the state level in several states and it is trues that power in the centre flows through states today. So we may expect the same to happen between panchayats and states.

Re: # 356
even in islamic literature, inner jihad is considered superior to outer jihad.

Ans: What ever Mo had practised is outer jihad ( according to you, something called inner jihad is also there) and that tradition followed. Suddenly, if you try to invent inner jihad, that does not work.

GT:
How do you propose to elect the office bearers of the panchayat? In an autonomous set-up,Don't you think they will derive from the local power structure and enable to perpetuate it?
The thing I like about it is that it will increase civic interaction between everyone.

Definition of Hinduism as BG Tilak gave was " means or ways to salvation are diverse."

What Dost is saying is not to far from it. I tend to agree with it.

Asfand Siddiqui

HP

Militaries cannot win against a determined populace; if seven years of aggression of 37 states on Afghanistan does not prove that then what does. But situation in Pakistan is different than Afghanistan in the sense that Pakistan is not under occupation of a foreign aggression- it is the citizens that have rose up against their own army almost everywhere on the west bank of river Indus (and pressure cooker is about to burst at seams on East bank too). That has been happening for years now and despite Americans spending billions to kill pakistani citizens the situation has only got worst. Baluchistan is a case where militancy has been going on since 50s and military cannot stop it. Military could not stop East pakistan from turning into a foreign country. It is just plain and simple madness to keep doing the same thing while expecting different results. We should give politics a chance. Politics always wins over militancy. A sovereign parliament, an independent judiciary, and an accountable state machinery is the only option we have left short of firing squads and guilotine parks. Army should be sent back to the kennels.

Look, I know people like you are still licking your wounds that your former patron saint USSR suffered but times have changed. I belive that you people at the end of the day would want to live in Pakistan, and whom you are suggesting to kill now very well where you live.

#353

pakistan should go for "inner jihad" NOT "outer jihad"
infact the principle applies to all humanbeings at both individual & collective levels

even in islamic literature, inner jihad is considered superior to outer jihad.

I really like this article. It helped me to understand the coherence of Hinduism with other religions. You highlighted it without hurting any feelings of any religion.

There are some suggestions:
"OM" is more used then "Aum"

Formatting can be improved. Maybe there is some technical mistake or you might have done the formatting in this way by yourself. If you are putting something word to word use italics or you can still rephrase it. The whole bottom part in bold seems not the perfect way to format.

Great Article!!
-Raheel Lakhani

Naqshbandi,

How did u find http://www.themystic.org/ .. this is Hinduism in action. This kind of practice created people like Vivekanand, Sri. Sri. Ravishankar, Swami Chinmayanand, Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan, Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya, Gandhi, Buddha, Saibabas (both) and many saints. If peek in successful Hindu household (Mukesh Ambani for example)you would see this in practice.

For a modern man Patanjali Yoga Sutra and Bhagwad Geeta is real Hinduism. Rituals, icons and idols are for Dharana ie concentration. Islam might have similar things. It has also produced great personalities and yogis. The core might be same as Hinduism.

346 Posted by HP

Pakistan must NOT and should NOT quit the WOT. What Pak can quit and should really quit is following the US line in the war.

Err ... and how does Pakistan do one while not doing the other ???

#350 Posted by harish_hyd,

wasn't it you who not too long ago wanted Chowk to be made a paid site

Sure. But what convinced me what exactly chowk owners wanted was when they put google ads instead. So now when someone says "Gan*oo", google promptly serves up ads for 'Men seeking Men'!

It may please be noted by all researchers and scholars of this board that spellings of cow's urine are "gomutra" and not "gaomutra"

---Thanks

#324 by zeemax

I wish you would say something similar to your ill-informed c/p artists who have nothing better to offer. I would welcome them if they did.

I would, if they were as anguished as you are (or at least seemed to) about Chowk's slide.

And no, I don't want it to become a better place. I have no such inclination. Chowk is a gutter and will remain so because that's what it's owners want it to be.

Zee bhai, wasn't it you who not too long ago wanted Chowk to be made a paid site so only serious interactors stay and the rest are just filtered out?

Re: # 312
In India, Muslims have made a compromise, they are willing to accept a non-sharia criminal law as long as they are allowed to govern their personal lives according to sharia.

Ans: This is kind of freedom provided by Constitution of India to all the groups. Customs vary in different states and regions. So, personal laws are kept different. Marriage is one aspect, which Govt. has no role. It will be good to abolish polygamy and compulsory registration of marriage.

Re: # 312
In India, Muslims have made a compromise, they are willing to accept a non-sharia criminal law as long as they are allowed to govern their personal lives according to sharia.

Ans: This is kind of freedom provided by Constitution of India to all the groups. Customs vary in different states and regions. So, personal laws are kept different. Marriage is one aspect, which Govt. has no role. It will be good to abolish polygamy and compulsory registration of marriage.

Re: # 312
In India, Muslims have made a compromise, they are willing to accept a non-sharia criminal law as long as they are allowed to govern their personal lives according to sharia.

Ans: This is kind of freedom provided by Constitution of India to all the groups. Customs vary in different states and regions. So, personal laws are kept different. Marriage is one aspect, which Govt. has no role. It will be good to abolish polygamy and compulsory registration of marriage.

#340 Posted by Urstruly

Paksistan must NOT and should NOT quit the WOT. What Pak can quit and should really quit is following the US line in the war.

This is a war the will define the future of Pakistan and which way the Pakistani society is headed. Provinding free hands to the Jihadi militants would be commiting national suicide.
What we have to determine whether we need to follow the US line which is often in conflict with Pakistani National interst or create a policy which reflects more the situation in Pakistan.

Unfortunately, with the Pak army at the helm, there are no chances or it is unliekly that we will have a national policy to deal with this issue. The army would always follow the US line. SO in that respect I think the army is acting against the Pakistan national interest and it is pretty much a traitor to Pakistan and the Pakistani people.

We should really be ready deal with the army as we would deal with any traitor or the RAW agent if caught!

Re: # 340
Pakistan must quit the so called WOT....

Ans: Pakistan is fighting its own battle of survival and US is providing arms,ammunition and aid for this. From the midea report, it is evident that Islamists are gaining control of most part of the country. Once, it is fully Islamised, USA can any time bomb it from any of the aircraft carriers in Arabian sea. That option was there with USA long time back (2001). Whatever economic growth Pakistan is seeing is after 9/11/2001; it is result of co-operation with USA on WOT. If Mush had not agreed that time, Pakistan would have been in different postion now (economically dilapilated, bombed by USA/NATO and Islamists controlling most part of it...a complete chaos. I am not sure, whether USA will be able to prevent future doom of Pakistan, but they are trying). IRAQ was much stable country than Pakistan before it was attacked.

##43 ... cont.

"I do not have statistics, but have personally heard of many Muslims, as well as Hindus, being punished."

These punishments are not necessarily for religious offences. But the methods of punishment are the same across offences. I do not know how serious cases like rape etc. are adjudicated.

Dear Khurram,

You set me a difficult task. But I shall oblige with ONE example. Please note that "there is no one rule". Furthermore, I do not posit that there will be no problems. In fact, in the beginning there will be several problems, more than what we have now. But I believe that things will become better exponentially.

Barna is a village in Rajasthan dominated by the Meo "caste/biradiri". They are Muslims. But you have both Hindus and Sikhs in the village. The panchayat there meets whenever it is called. Men dominate the proceedings and women look on from roof-tops. The panchayat has participants from all religions. Disputes are resolved through extensive debates and the panchayat has "sub-councils". Most people are illeterate. There are no rules per se and judgements are highly subjective. Most inter-religious disputes have to do with "marriage/sex" and "disrespect to religious institutions and rituals". Though such cases are rare, the punishment meted out takes the form of banishment from the village/biradiri, fines and at times hookah/pani "bandh" for the family elder. I do not have statistics, but have personally heard of many Muslims, as well as Hindus, being punished. (also see Erin Moore's article in the Journal of American Folklore on Barna). Simple judgements and no blowing up of issues.

The communists in Kerala and Bengal have a totally different way of dealing with inter-religious issues at the panchayat level. The fundamentalists ways, mostly in the cow-belt, are different. Nothing is without conflict. The point is to resolve them locally.

sadly, instead of an intellectual discussion on hindu theology this has descended as usual into the typical braggadacio Indo-Pak slugging match by people--the majority of whom--don't even live in those countries!

If anyone can recommend some good books on the topic i'd be appreciative.

#339 Posted by khurram,

Well Pak army should know better. It must withdraw from its stand on WOT because it's a fake war created as a facade for US imperial interests and everyone knows that. It has no credibility in Pakistan.

And, believe me no one will bomb Pakistan to stone age. That was a bluff (if it was said in the first place which was denied by the ones who're supposed to have said it). The consequences will merely be economic sanctions which Pakistan withstood throughout nineties despite a much weaker external economy than now, and still tested nukes in the face of stiff american opposition.

Someone must have courage. Otherwise civil war and disintegration will be unavoidable.

Re: # 339

Pakistan must quit the so called WOT. If Americans along with 36 other nations cannot defeat Taliban in 7 years then Pakistan kis khait ki mooli hay. The possibility of Taliban taking over a city like Peshawar, Kohat, or Bannu is written on the wall. Just the destruction of bridge at attock will cripple fouj in a devastating way. If that happens fouj would not even be able to protect no garrison, no cantonment on the west bank. Fouj should stop haramkhori and reject the $950 million military aid package, not a single dollar of which can be spent on Pakistani populaion. Fouj may be the uncontested champions of haramkhors and free loaders in Pakistan, but at the end of the day they will have to live in Pakistan. Their generals may escape to bahamas or istanbul at the first hint of a revolution but rest of the fouj still has to live in pakistan. And as it is evident from RA bazar incident yesterday, people know where they live. Fouj must be forced not to bring the situtaion to the point of no return vis a vis people of pakistan for their own good.

zeemax,

Since the Pakistani Taliban support the Afghan Talibans, US makes the Pak Army fight them and they fight back.

So, what can be done to avoid a civil war?

#337 Posted by sattar2,

LoL Euros? So I guess Dollar has 'finally' lost it's reserve currency status! In that case I shall reconsider :~)

zee (#334),

Then perhaps you'll carry “it� out in Afghanistan; word has it that they are offering euros to the families of the momins for their final act.

… and events in Pakistan can turn on a dime. I’ll leave the Rolodex “as is�!

#335 by GT,
"They will have to work something out, won't they?"

Like how? An example of this is what I was looking for earlier.

#333 Posted by khurram:

Thanks for the reference. I do not see the article as a negative. 2001-2008 is a pretty short time, and already the article notes "positives". Furthermore, it suggests more reforms and "corrections". This is a part and parcel of the process. It should not be abandoned.

"How does all of this fit in with religious groups living with each other?"

They will have to work something out, won't they? And importantly, it does not have to be "one rule fits all". Also, groups can learn from the experiences of a larger set of actors.

#330 Posted by sattar2,

Sattar Bhai, welcome Back.

BTW, I believe the payback for Jamia Hafsa has been sufficiently extracted, so I have officially withdrawn my services from the bomber corps! In fact, after Benazir's assassination, I have become a peacenik :)

So kindly update your Rolodex!

(P.S. Since this point is always misunderstood, I will clarify in advance. I TOTALLY support Taliban's war against Nato in Afghanistan and the Pakistani Taliban's support to them, but I do not wish a civil war in Pakistan which I did earlier. The cost of that is just too great)

Re: #328 GT,

How does all of this fit in with religious groups living with each other?

Btw, have you come acros this,
http://www.dawn.com/2008/01/27/top18.htm

Re: # 259

'khuda' is a Persian desination for a deity that smells of Zoroastrian influence, much like in Greek mythological where ancestors became gods and goddesses and were worshipped.

Allah is THE proper name with many attributes. Eli, El, Elah, Elohim, are variations. Even Hallelujah ('praise ye the Lord'] is from Ya-Allah-Hu! Surprised?

The deviant saints obscured things beyond recognition, and instead of worshipping the One who created all, men were fooled into becoming trinitarians, dualists, polytheists etc.

Shanti now.

Re: # 252

Mr. M2,

Do you know what the name Hamid means? Or is it a cover? If it is, drop it then.

Now go sing praises of Laat, Mannat, Uzzah etc. while I pray for some concession for your damned soul.

Shanti.

Urstruly (#327),

… and then there is another kind of hell, right here on earth. It starts with the mindset that … I have nothing to live for; so I’ll blow myself up and take a few infidels with me. Tick, tick, boom.

Look, zeemax here would be happy to pull the string for you. My only suggestion is that you do it when there is no one else around. I hope this is not too much to ask for.

#328 ... cont.

Khurram,

I thought that I might add one more piece of information that is hardly ever discussed in chowk. You may have heard about the naxal movement in parts of Andhra, Bihar, Orissa, Jharkhand and Bengal. Well, it can be said that, they are fighting for a panchayat raj. But who are they fighting against? Landlords? No! The region hardly has big farmers, except for a very few in Telengana and Orissa. Even these guys are more intereseted in selling their lands as the families have moved into cities (and yes, with sons educated in the US who may glance over chowk once in a while). The basic fight is with the "contractors" who have procured licenses to collect "forest products" from these areas (And hence, as if by divine rights bestowed upon them by the govts. they are also involved in illegal mining and land grabbing). These naxals, just like the Satnamis and Vaishnavites of the past, are setting up their own powerful panchayats.

p.s. The Satnami panth was set up by what would today be known as dalits. The Vaishnavites on the other hand, were very educated relative to those in power.

#300 Posted by khurram:

Khurram,

Nice to hear from you after a long time. Hope you have been fine. You have asked me for examples and I have none but ones which are hypothetical. I remember having talked about curricula being regulated by panchayats a long time back in chowk, but cutting and pasting is beyond me. If you are interested in ideas you may choose to read on.

1. I started getting interested in local governance because of government taxes and revenues. You see in India farmers do not pay taxes. The biggest beneficiaries of this are big farmers who are very rich. Plus they get subsidized electricity, water and credit. You will note immediately that electricity, water and credit cannot be controlled at a local level their domains are large. Furthermore, big landowning is geographically concentrated even within districts. Most villages DO NOT HAVE large landlords. So landlords have typically enriched themselves by controlling the whole state. Moving a sizeable proportion of the tax-subsidy-investment policies back to panchayats and municipalities would usher in competition and break the monopolistic clutches of the landlords. I have to quickly add that today in India this monopoly is being challenged by industrialists and that is good. But we need to bring in a larger set of players.

1 a. (I had mentioned this earlier in chowk). As an example of 1, take investment in infrastructure. The federal govt. allocates a chunk and the rest is transferred to the states. In most cases these transfers are tied up to federally sanctioned projects. A part of it is left to the discretion of the states. What is amazing is that the rate of growth of infrastructural spendings is less than the rate of growth of govt. revenues, even when everyone agrees that infrastructure is extremely important for growth! The problem is that the marginal return (in terms of votes) to investment spending is very low given the bureaucracy involved in its disbursement. If such funds can bypass the bureaucracy directly to panchayats then the marginal return would increase! But the problem is that state goverments, under the clutches of the landed gentry, oppose such a move.

1 b. (Another example). A lot of the increase in educational spending is due to the mid-day meals program. Yet, most schools have one or two teachers. They end up cooking this food rather than teaching! Allocations cannot change because of the "one rule has to fit all" policy. Here is a situation where nobody would oppose a change. Yet changes have not come forth because of a small group of "suppliers" in Delhi who have held it hostage inspite of questions regularly being asked in the state assemblies.

2. Given the economic problems highlighted above it seems rational to shift some budgetary policy making back to local governments. In this context, I thought, why not give the panchayats more civil power. I should hasten to add that there is no credible documentation of panchayats EVER having such autonomy, be it under the Mughals or the Brits. I have seen evidence of such powers been TAKEN by the Satnamis from the Muslim/Maratha powers in the Chattisgarh region and by a Vashnavite sect in the North East corner of India just before the advent of the British. I would love to know about more examples. However, these examples might not fit the bill because the groups involved were very homogenous.

Regards.

Re: # 296 SR

I do not see any contradiction in these verses. It only shows that the menu in hell is not large and contains mainly three items i.e. Dhari (Dried throny twigs/grass), puss, and Zaqoom (which is usually compared to Saguaro cactus whose three branches silgouhette like demons in dark).

We also know that hell is described to have different levels; it is quite possible that the patrons at each level get only one menu item.

Another explanation could be that that from the description of it Dhari (dried grass) sound like relatively more delectible than zaqoom and puss. But try feeding a human quorma or roasted chicken three times a day every day for couple of months, I think by second month he will definitely at least yearn to check out the puss or zaqoom just for the change of taste. But the taste of the later too would repulse him back to Dhari. Now put yourself in the shoes of a condemend, facing that situation, would you not say that "There is no goddamned thing to eat here but Dhari". This is what the hell is all about. Wouldn't you try your damndest to avoid that?

=============

Please keep in mind that the three things Dhari, Zaqoom, and puss are the things that are in the realm of Unknown. No one has seen or tasted them. But in order to explain it to humans God must make reference to things that are in our realm of Known. If we find these things so repilsive and disguting in this world just by looking at them, then imagine a world where these are the only food. Oh and don't forget the boiling water, to wash it all down you throat.

why do not = why do

#322 Posted by laddu,

Yaar chup! Go to faithfreedom.org and have an orgasm.

In fact, I have often wondered why do not people like you, hamidm, arjun, mohar11, SR, jayP, nkg, humsab and some others come here at all?

I mean it would be quite pleasurable for you folks to have circle jerks with like-minded people at the forums on faithfreedom, because you scarcely know anything beyond that anyway.

Now Shoo!

#321 Posted by harish_hyd,

I wish you would say something similar to your ill-informed c/p artists who have nothing better to offer. I would welcome them if they did.

And no, I don't want it to become a better place. I have no such inclination. Chowk is a gutter and will remain so because that's what it's owners want it to be.

Hope this helps!

Hinduism is Sanatan Dharma. Dharma is to be practiced at individual level. One can make analogy to the rocket with its boosters. Kama and Artha are the two boosters. But they are fueled and regulated by Natural or Societal Dharma. The journey and the destination is Moksha.

This is a good reflection of Sanatan Dharma in action reflected off a western mind and expressed in western language. http://www.themystic.org/

See how he is expressing Dharana, Dhyan and Samadhi here
http://www.themystic.org/transcendental/index.htm
Idol is for Dharana. For a scientist it could be puzzle obsereved in the nature. For an entrepreneur it could be the product or service he is bringing to the market.

When Societal Dharma is in danger ie when Gurus are butchered in Delhi a Guru (Gobind) is sent with sword in hand. When this societal or natural (ecology) dharma is in bad condition Moksha is not possible for many therefore Avataars appear.

By writing this I cleared my mind.

Re: # 320

Zee Bhai,

Aap to sarvopari hain.

Aapke "Diya al Din" ke saamne hum mushriq kuch bhi nahin keh sakte.

Allahu!!!

#320 by zeemax

Zee bhai, on the one hand you complain Chowk has become a cesspool; OTOH you remain an active contributor to its slide into the gutter. For your complaint to be taken seriously, you need to be above board - this way, you'll only be laughed off as a hypocrite. Sad, but true!

I accept I have contributed my bit to this slide, which is why I don't even try to preach civility. I'm trying to curb this instinct to respond to abuse word for word, and I'd like to think I've succeeded to some extent.

There will be provocations, there will be abuse all around but if you want to really make this a better place, you will have to curb this urge to retaliate.

The alternative is to live with it.

Wow ... I have never seen cockroaches so worked up.

Swarm around cockroaches. Then head for the drains.

laddu ji Maharaj
Pranaam
Great logic in #314. It seems since nature lover does not have any logical arguement, he is now on this trip of diverting the issue.
Keep it up.
regards

Re: # 315
Not a single person in this world follow you but 1.5 billion love and follow prophet of Islam... why..?? think about it..

Ans: Only couple of thousands of people were honoured with Noble, but billions of people smoke tobaco.
So tobaco smoking is reasonable and winning Noble prize is crap!!!!
See the effect of Islam on humanity (similar to tobaco smoking on human health) (Pakistan, Afghanisthan, India, Bangladesh, Sudan...).

Re: # 267 Urstruly,
The Christians in Middle East use "Allah" to refer to God.

Re: # 262
" have asked this one question probably a dozen times, at least, without EVER getting an answer. WHAT political settlement would have been simultaneously satsifactory to both Muslims and Hindus in 1947?".

Kaal Sahib,
I think this question is improperly framed, for the obvious
answer to it is "NONE". Had there been such a settlement, and had it been acceptable to both, it would have been implemented. Is that not self-evident?

A more realistic question to ask is whether there were political settlement(s) possible that could have avoided the partitioning of India? And the answer to that is empatically, "yes there were". The only problem is that the solution acceptable to the Muslims was not acceptable to the Hindus, and vice-versa.

Re # 314:

Laddu..., it is so obvious that You are projecting your own hatred, your own doubts about existence of God and darkness of your own soul on the prophet of Islam...

Not a single person in this world follow you but 1.5 billion love and follow prophet of Islam... why..?? think about it..

Re: # 255

"Being "formless" is just one of the attributes of God. So one may ask question as if God is Absolute, then how can He be so helpless to have form; conversely if God is formless then he cannot be Absolute, since being formless means that God should be constrained by devoid of having form."

'Formlessness' as "attribute" - this is like saying that "Truly Saheb does not exist" means "non-existence" is an attribute. The statement that "God is formless" seen as a subject and predicate statement is wrong. It means that no predicate is good enough to attribute to god- but Mohammad took this concept of God and is infinite attributes to reify HIS OWN personal ego to the level of that Allah.
Now , whatever Mohammad did became the attribute of God. Mohammad was a split personality and created Allah as his alter ego to justify all those murders and rapes ans loots.
He created Allah as Hitchcock's "Psycho" created that stuffed mother in order to justify his own abominations.
Every psychopath amongst muslims uses that dummy Allah to justify his own abominations and criminal actions and intents.
That is the reality of Mohammad's Allah - it is not a 'spiritual' God but a spin of a criminal who created that cult of murder and loot.
Coming to your argument - if God is absolute then what stops him from having a form!!! If he CANNOT take a form then he is not absolute!!! QED

"See the point is that while interacting with humans God must "speak the language" that humans understand."

Such a statement makes us appear as if God is some Alien. God has already implanted the faculties of language and intelligence. These are hard coded and wired in our brains - if God wants to "communicate" then he could implant his directions in the brains and we would bow down to him like robots.


" God is free of human constraints - He never sleeps; He never eats or drinks; He never gets tired; He has no children; He is begotten by none because "He is Absolute". "

Again to imagine the Absolute in the Anthropomorhic representations and experiences of "sleeps", "anger" , "wrath" , "jelous" , "speak" , "wills" is completely wrong. How can an "Absolute" God and that also a "formless" have these anthropomorphic emotions and attribute. Actually, it was Mohammad's reified ego that speaks like the absolute God.

"Absolute" or "Formless" God cannot be even IMAGINED. It cannot be even prayed. It cannot be even thought. Trying to write treatises regarding absolute God is all nonsensical act of an inflated human ego.
It can only be experienced in Samadhi. (what sufis calls as Fanaa).

#309 Posted by slyder,

LoL, Ali Pai, with the competition being these bhindidicks, the alphabetical disadvantage has never been a problem for your humble servant!

GT:

I will try to answer the question you posed.

I do not see any problem of Hindus and Muslims living together under an Islamic rule. Hindus lived and prospered quite well under many centuries of Muslim rule in India. One could even say that Hindus would make for perfect dhimmies because they were allowed to do even those things that were quite abhorrent to a Muslim as long as they were willing to accept a subservient position. And this, to me, is the key. It is a myth to say that all religions are treated as equal under an Islamic rule; the supremacy of Islam is paramount, especially when it comes to relations between Muslims and Non-Muslims. If someone has any doubts, they should see what is happening in the most liberal Islamic state, Malaysia.

I am less certain of what happens if Muslims are not the rulers. In India, Muslims have made a compromise, they are willing to accept a non-sharia criminal law as long as they are allowed to govern their personal lives according to sharia. This compromise seems to have come under severe pressure because more and more Hindus seem to be uncomfortable with this compromise and would want the constitutional provisions of equality of all individuals to override the Muslims' rights to govern their personal lives according to sharia. While the jury is still out on this, I am pessimistic.

And GT, can one be truly liberal and also accept that individual rights should take a second place to group rights? To me, this is the common element in both Islamic laws and Indian constitution.

Re: # 309
Polyandry is practised in some part of North Eastern region, China, Tibbet and Mongolia ( some part and within some tribes).
It should not be bad. At least it does not encourage barbarism. Ant, Bee etc. society is highly disciplined and organised. Where as polygamy (like Islam) encourages barbarism, destruction etc. Polygamy is root of large number of social evil.

In Sanskrit, there was no symbols representing numbers. After the advent of Devnagari/Brahmi, symbols representing number has evolved.

Is there any punishment in Islam for bluffing/telling lie? Or it is treated as common human nature. I see Islam full of bluff/lies, starting with Mo...

Urstruly:

Some corrections on your earlier post.

Hindus do not consider Brahma, Vishnu or Shiv to be avtars; they are eternal. Vishnu alone comes to earth in one form or another (not necessarily human)from time to time - he is supposed to have done so nine times - starting as fish and ending with Buddha - and the final avtar is yet to happen. When on earth, Vishnu is bound by the same rules that apply to the form he takes, whether as fish or as human.

As regards the Absolute, you have used a quranic benchmark to choose and accept from the Hindu literature what you think is valid. This is quite valid from an Islamic viewpoint; in my opinion, this is also valid from a Hindu viewpoint; the difference being that the Hindu viewpoint would also allow as valid someone who thinks that Ram is the human manifestation of God and worshipping him is the same as worshipping God. An individual Hindu can be quite certain about the absolute faith in his deity, it is the system (Religion, if you will) that denies that certitude.

Zee:
Thanks!

Another Hingbooism question: How do you guys manage polyandry? Do you guys draw numbers or just go alphabetically? (Zeemax pai would be the last if he was a Hingboo)

Re: # 305
Please stop Islam bashing. Let us all live in peace.

Ans: Are you serious? Will Islam let people leave in peace?

Re: # 302
This is definitely very ugly thinking. Gujrat situation is worsening. But, similar situation exists in Mumbai,UK, France etc. also.
I don't see similar problem between christians and indians (so called hindus).

Dear Arjun,

Please stop Islam bashing. Let us all live in peace.

For the true nature of the beast please refer to links in #202.
Read all the juicy details.

Then come back to Chowk if you still dare....

Dear Arjun,

Please stop Islam bashing. Let us all live in peace.

For the true nature of the beast please refer to links in #202.
Read all the juicy details.

Then come back to Chowk if you still dare....

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

khurram bhai, that's the situation in India, already. This would seem absurd to many but Urstruly is right.

Indian 'secularism' (with Gujrat and such delights) has been possible by the majority Hindus agreeing to craft an almost perfectly Islamic state.

But that is not enough. Over time, Chowdhary Rahmat Ali Plan as suggested by GT may be something that Hindus and Muslims might need to look into.

"I had proposed that they should be able to implement their own "social laws" and even have their own enforcement structure - i.e. police force."

GT, so long as Hindus can create protected but practically autonomous Hindu enclaves within a Muslim dominated state (such as Pakistan), or Muslims can create protected but practically autonomous Muslim enclaves within a Hindu dominated state, separation between Hindus and Muslims as groups, along the lines recommended by Chowdhry Rahmat Ali has been achieved. That should work.

Not what I would recommend for India, but given changing demographics in many parts of India, we may be there pretty soon, whether Hindus and Muslims like it or not. So that's an idea that India and Pakistan might want to pursue.

(Of course, the last sentence is a joke. When it came to understanding and protecting their communal interests Iqbal/Mr. Jinnah were miles ahead of Gandhi/Nehru. Hats off to the former for their clarity of thought on this issue.)

Re: #295 GT, ".... the three dominant religions - Hinduism, Islam and Liberalism..."

Why not have the 3 dominant religious communities (and others) make their own laws as much as possible. Let the State act as a 'community of communities' and restrict itself to spheres where communities have to act together.

I think this problem is best discussed through concrete examples. So, please share some specific examples that you may have in mind.

Urstruly (#293),

It is like the ummah continuously humoring us about “last prophet�. This is what you believe … and I get it. Now can I have the #*%king passport?

(I hope you see the irnoy ...)

#297 Posted by SR:

SR sahib,

Since you are having fun, let me join in. I assert that I can be kind to you without loving you ar being your friend. I do not see any contradiction :)

Addendum to # 296

Re: # 241 Urstruly wrote: ["... So if one part of the religious text ... (says "X") ... and the other ... in the same breath, ...(says "Y")... then obviously either the text has been corrupted or it has never been Divine.

Divine ... has to be simple and non-contrdictory so that the mere mortals, for whom it is meant, could understand it. ..."]

This is another good one:

[QUOTE]
On the one hand, the Quran commands all Muslims to show kindness to their parents, even if they are disbelievers [17:23-24, 31:14-15, 29:8, etc.]. On the other hand, it demands not to show any love or friendship to those who oppose Muhammad, even if they are their parents [9:23, 58:22].
[END QUOTE]

Re: # 241 Urstruly wrote: ["... So if one part of the religious text ... (says "X") ... and the other ... in the same breath, ...(says "Y")... then obviously either the text has been corrupted or it has never been Divine.

Divine ... has to be simple and non-contrdictory so that the mere mortals, for whom it is meant, could understand it. ..."]

Very well said. Exactly my sentiments also.

Now let's take a look at some samples from a critical source:

surely it is biased as all criticism is, by definition... but let us do some private study and contemplate if there is any merit in these claims about the contradictions in Quran.)

[Quote]
The Qur'an makes the following statements regarding the food that unbelievers will have in hell:

No food will there be for them but a bitter Dhari S. 88:6 Y. Ali

Nor hath he any food except the foul pus from the washing of wounds, S. 69:36 Y. Ali

In a footnote, Yusuf Ali gives the following explanation for Dhari:

It is a plant, bitter and thorny, loathsome in smell and appearance, which will neither give fattening nourishment to the body nor in any way satisfy the burning pangs of hunger. ...

Other translators render the term as "bitter thorn-fruit" (Pickthall) "dry, bitter and thorny herbage" (Sher Ali), "cactus thorn" (Arberry), "the foul thorn" (Palmer).

Obviously, both kinds of ‘food’ are chosen to evoke a feeling of horror when thinking about Hell. However, the contradiction is in the double claim that this or that will be the only food, i.e.

No food except Dhari (88:6).
No food except foul pus (69:36).
There is yet another passage that is relevant to this discussion:

Is that the better entertainment or the Tree of Zaqqum?
For We have truly made it (as) a trial for the wrong-doers.
For it is a tree that springs out of the bottom of Hell-Fire:
The shoots of its fruit-stalks are like the heads of devils:
Truly they will eat thereof and fill their bellies therewith.
Then on top of that they will be given a mixture made of boiling water.
Then shall their return be to the (Blazing) Fire. S. 37:62-68 Y. Ali; cf. 56:52

Thus, regarding this one topic alone, the Qur'an contains three contradictions:

"Eating of the tree of Zaqqum" (37:66) contradicts "eating only Dhari" (88:6).
"Eating of the tree of Zaqqum" (37:66) contradicts "eating only foul pus" (69:36).
"Eating only Dhari" (88:6) contradicts "eating only foul pus" (69:36).

[END QUOTE]
Taken from this cursed source:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/#internal

See many more ... some are a bit frivilous

...SR

PS: Those who live in glass houses should not cast stones at others.

Urstruly:

Thanks for your thoughts. You write:

"This is not possible where society has serious religious leanings."

It has taken me quite sometime to understand this, especially when one (like me) puts a higher priority on democracy vis-a-vis "secularism" as it is today understood or mis-understood.

You see, our religions bring along with it a culture and history. Some of it is good and some bad for what we perceive to be "development". In the 50s and 60s, Mao deceided that most of it was bad for China and so he unleashed the "cultural revolution". Perhaps what we see in China today would not have been possible without this "revolution".

While "development" is important, participation in the process of development and having a say in the process is perhaps equally, if not more, important. Otherwise, there is little to differentiate between humans and machines (or should I say animals). Since South Asians are "religious" per se, people are bound to bring in religious guidance in choosing the path/process of development. In a democracy, such phenomena should not be checked.

However, and here I agree with Kaal, Echo and Zeemax that, the three dominant religions - Hinduism, Islam and Liberalism - in the sub-continent do not intersect to propose a common set of guidance to the process or definition of "development". So what should be done?

Since, the problem is more stark in India let me narrow down my proposal to India. We need empowerment at the local levels - panchayats and municipalities. I had proposed that they should be able to implement their own "social laws" and even have their own enforcement structure - i.e. police force. As pointed out by others, this may not be fully feasible. I agree. But it could at least be used to start the debate.

What are your thoughts?

Regards.

#277 Eklavya {"salim bhai, many of my Lucknowi Shia friends have refused to make the change. :)"}

Kaal Bhayya,
Neither have I. :) There is nothing wrong with the words "Allah" and "Hafiz" I used them both a lot and quite separately. But "Khuda Hafiz" was working fine and I just don't like dictators changing our language just to please their foreign masters.

So, I bid you "Khuda Hafiz" my brother. :)

Re: # 292

"For the remaining, who live in their private enclaves, at either end of the spectrum, this whole theo-cosmological politics is uninterresting and irrelevent."

Why do every atheist or so called agnostic have to write this disclaimer at the end of their attempt at humor. Lets admit it that you atheists are as adamant and dedicated to promote your religious un-beliefs as the rest of us.

Re: # 241 Urstruly wrote: ["... This concept has evolved into about 30 million gods that are currently being worshipped in Hinduism. ..."]

while we have only one absolute God

And that is as it should be. You see, there is a fundamental difference between our cosmic thology and that of those lungi clad, smelly folk across the Radcliff Line.

Theirs is a parliamentary cosmic theology while ours is a presidential one.

Their Big Boy is the prime minister in a parliament full of petty gods. Our Big Daddy, on the other hand, is an absolute and powerful President.

Our God President dissolved parliament and declared martial law 1,400 years ago. He is also the wielder of the Big Fire Stick. His word is absolute law.

Instead of working with and through his parliamentarians and cabinet minister gods as does that PM of gods, the Hindi Big Boy (or is it Girl?), our Big Daddy has His bidding carried out by an army of sycophantic Angel secretaries, whose powers are every bit as much as those of the petty gods of Hing. Four secretary generals head our bureaucracy of angels: Gabriel, Mikhail, Israfeel and Izraeel.

Don't insist on the superiority of one system over the other. Both systems of faith can deliver added value for a certain proportion of the population.

For the remaining, who live in their private enclaves, at either end of the spectrum, this whole theo-cosmological politics is uninterresting and irrelevent.

...SR

Re: # 288 GT

My answer is "yes", given that the "common socio-political" system is that of constitutional parity. This is possible despite historical, colonial, and post-colonial baggage.

The usual guess of a common reader would be that it would be possible under a secular socio-poitical order, of European nature, but the fact of the matter is that an European sesular system would drive a wedge between the communities because secularism by nature does not give religious freedoms but it takes them away from public sphere. This is not possible where society has serious religious leanings. In other words secularism imposes the religion of atheists upon all using state power.

On the other hand Islam proposes a true secular state where religious freedoms are guranteed through constitutional parities by providing autonomous legislature, judiciary, and other institutions that are needed by humans in public sphere.

Before everyone's jaws drop with awe, I must tell everyone reading this that I am not talking about a idealist religious utopia; I am actually talking about a real system that has been in practice until 80 years ago in Ottoman Turkey. The system was called the "Millet system" which provided jews and christians autonomous judiciary and the penal and civil law. The constitution of today's India is almost there with a provision for Mulsim Civil and Inheritence Laws. An autonoumous legislative body would have made it a true Islamic state with a Hindu majority- whatdoya know.

#289 Posted by GT,

Oh I see.

Both Echoboom and Kaal are right. The answer is a clear and unmitigated NO!

Zee:

Please note that echo's answer to my question (just like kaal's) was: NO.

Zee:

My question preceeded the Khuda/Allah discussion. I reproduce my earler post once again:


Dear Dost, Urstruly, Eklavya etc.

While you have dealt with God/Spirituality etc. embodied in Hinduism and Islam, you haven't dealt much with the socio-political structures implied by these two religions.

Can devout Hindus and Muslims "choose" (when faced with no constraints on choice) to live under the same socio-political structure?

#285/6 Posted by GT,

But community laws was not the discussion, was it? I thought it was the significance of the change from Khuda to Allah.

Somewhere else, I had proposed a panchayat raj with a lot of power invested in panchayats, as a possible solution (in lines with echo's thoughts). But this, as pointed out by many, is not without problems.

Zee:

"And what did Echoboom say?"

His take was as follows: (a) No laws should interfere with the laws of each and every community, i.e. community specific laws; (b) the role of the government was to see that no violence occured between the communities.

But the problem is that community laws are hardly community specific. They often regulate on how other communities should act. Herein, is the conflict. To understand this clearly, think of "elites/liberaloons" as a community and you will understand the problem immediately.

(Just so that you do not forget, I belong to the community of liberaloons).

#282 Posted by GT,

And what did Echoboom say?

To our great misfortune echoboom is no longer on Chowk.

"the only person who has somewhat answered this question is echo" .... I should add kaal too.

Zee:

"But people don't have to know how fundamental it is."

No, they would be better off if they did. Unlike kaal, I am a liberal and I believe in compromise. But like kaal, I believe that people would be much better off if ALL knew what they and their "opponents" are compromising.

... the only person who has somewhat answered this question is echo. But he is no longer here, ...or is he?

Zee, when things are done correctly, they happen. When they are done incorrectly, in total ignorance, one is constantly pushing a gigantic boulder uphill.

One should research how much opposition ZAB had when he pronounced Mirzais non-Muslims. I would suspect not much. Nor would you find a Niagara of scholarsly Islamic support in Pakistan or worldwide for declaring them Muslims today.

Now, liberals have their own problems which cannot be fixed easily.

#268 Posted by GT

This question?

I would like to get the opinions of others too. I like you, have come to believe that this is an important (if not fundamental) issue.

Looks like my friends would like to drag me into this subject, despite my kicking and screaming :)

Yes, it is fundamental. But people don't have to know how fundamental it is. They took it up anyway so that's fine.

Now please don't accuse me of being cryptic!

#269 Posted by Eklavya

how very common Khuda was and how deeply ingrained the word was in Muslim (and Hindu) minds, what has happened is not short of miraculous.

Interesting you should have noticed this. Yes, it is indeed miraculous. People latched on to it like fish to water. It is natural. Now you rarely find any people who say 'Khuda Hafiz' in Pakistan. The term is extinct. It is the appeal of just the term 'Allah'.

Remember once we had a conversation about how the words of Qura'an move people even though they don't know what it's saying in Arabic? Just the tones of it work miracles.

Salim is right. Zia introduced the change, but he certainly didn't have to work hard at it. People just made the change themselves, and never went back to 'Khuda Hafiz' even though everyone hates Zia.

#205 hamidumdum2 {"astray from what ?! ..... the sirat-ul-mustaqeem established by an anbsolutist, hateful, arrogant and vengeful god who is so insecure and unsure of his godliness that he has to threaten people with fire and brimstone and castration if they don't 'believe' in him and pay homage to his mserable soul ! "]

Hamidumdum Sahib,
Sirat-ul-Mustaqeem is the straight path, but of course it requires a person who has the balance and sobriety to walk straight even under duress - say, for example, at the direction of the State Trooper to walk in a straight line while touching one's nose with the index finger of the right hand and counting backwards from 100 to 1, using only the odd numbers divisible by 7. :)

salim bhai, many of my Lucknowi Shia friends have refused to make the change. :)

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

Urstruly, IMHO, since you have the correct understanding of Allah, those deviations are probably less important for you than they would be for an unsuspecting novice.

It's like sufism. It's for those who actually know and accept Islam, not for every charasi. :)

But zee,

would you like to answer my question?

#266 Zeemax {"'Rabb ul Aalameen' is the attribute, not the name"}

Zee Bhai,
You are right about this distinction. Rabb, Maalek, Maula, Rahman, and Raheem are all attributes and not THE NAME.

#269, Kaal Bhayya,
In fact, another word we have used is Maalik, meaning Owner or Lord. This is also Arabic as in Maalik-e-Yom-Iddin or Owner of the Day of Judgment.

The distinction between Khuda and Allah did not materialize, at the expense of Khuda, during Zia'S reign in Pakistan, when he invented the non-existent "Allah Haafiz." This was done to please the Saudis who cannot stand anything Persian - thus the change from Persian Gulf to Arabian Gulf, even though there is already an Arabian Sea.

"Khuda Haafiz" was the actual Urdu for "Good bye." Nobody ever used "Allah Haafiz" before Zia's Nizam-e-Mustafa.

Re: # 269

I've seen it but I find it unconvincing and without merit. I still call Him Khuda and my salutations remain Khuda Hafiz etc.

#268 Posted by GT,

Kaal is using Eklavya for some reason which he refuses to tell :) But I second your motion!

Re: # 264 zeemax

I agree. The word Allah is the proper noun, while 99 other names only represent the attributes of the One who is Allah.

I wish there were an etymologist here who could correct me but I think the words, God, Khuda, Bhagwan are also proper nouns.

#252 hamidumdum2 sahib,

Looks like you took my advice about discussing the topic with Urstruly Sahib over a couple of Stroh's. But why did you have to get started so early and at least you could have waited for Urstruly before you became three sheets to the wind. Now all you can think of are the three bint-e-Ilahi - have you seen any pink elephants yet?

Salim bhai, of course! Certainly, for centuries we (that includes Hindus too!) used the two words interchangeably. And zee is perfectly right about the essence argument.

But there is a difference, without which change from Khuda to Allah would never had the momentum and the power it did. Given both you and I know how very common Khuda was and how deeply ingrained the word was in Muslim (and Hindu) minds, what has happened is not short of miraculous.

It has happened because there is a real Islamic argument behind it. I am surprised Urstruly, of all people, is not see it.

Eklavya,

Actually, I like Kaal better and you should revert. In any case, thanks for the clear answer. I would like to get the opinions of others too. I like you, have come to believe that this is an important (if not fundamental) issue.

Re: # 263 Salim

I am inclined to agree. mostly sikhs use this word among non Muslims; probably Guru Nanak picked it up while his stay in Medina for 13 years. Alternatively, it is quite possible that Muslim influence on punjab for about 700 years at least prior to Guru must have cause the word Rabb to enter into Punjabi lexicon.

Eklavya;

What is basis of your disagreement.

Salim_Chauhan,

Correction bro. 'Rabb ul Aalameen' is the attribute, not the name. The name is 'Allah'.

But thanks for mentioning this. It further clarifies my point in #264.

Eklavya #259 {"Urstruly, is Allah exactly the same as Khuda?"}

Kaal Bhayya,
As you know very well yourself, for people whose mother tongue is Urdu, both Khuda and Allah are interchangeable. The first is of Farsi origin while the latter is Arabic. Ya Khuda or Ya Allah are equally used.

Eklavya, Urstruly,

This is just one of the small differences I have with our much respected Urstruly. Allah is not the same as Khuda, or Rabb. Allah cannot be called by any name other than perhaqps the 99 attributes given in Qura'an. As per strict interpretation of Ikhlas, Allah is incomparable, nor likened to anything, hence cannot even be translated in any language.

But then perhaps it is a technical issue and not really material as long as one understands the essence.

#261 Urstruly {"Rabb is Panjabi word for God (probably borrowed from Arabic in turn). "}

Urs,
Not probably borrowed, but definitely borrowed. Rabb is Arabic as in Rabb il Aalameen. :) or Muslim names like Abdur Rabb,

Urstruly, I disagree. Hope we won't accuse all those sincere Muslims who have given up on Khuda in favor of Allah to be fools, or brainwashed.

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

GT, if they really care for their traditions and their beliefs, then they can live together only if they are blind as bats with sonar missing, as Gandhi-Nehru were.

I have asked this one question probably a dozen times, at least, without EVER getting an answer. WHAT political settlement would have been simultaneously satsifactory to both Muslims and Hindus in 1947?

Slightly different topic, but sociopolitical issues are as religious as personal ones - probably more.

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

If they are aware of themselves, then Hindus and Muslims, as large groups, can 'live together' only so long as one large group totally, overwhelmingly dominates the other, or both large groups are dominated by a third party.

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

There is absolutely no such limitation on individuals, or just a handful of individuals.

Re: # 259

yes, "Khuda" is the persian word for God just like Rabb is Panjabi word for God (probably borrowed from Arabic in turn). Persian usually use the phrase "Khuda-e-YazdaN", which means Eternal God. Urdu borrows it from Persian.

Dear Dost, Urstruly, Eklavya etc.

While you have dealt with God/Spirituality etc. embodied in Hinduism and Islam, you haven't dealt much with the socio-political structures implied by these two religions.

Can devout Hindus and Muslims "choose" (when faced with no constraints on choice) to live under the same socio-political structure?

"Allah is but one Arabic name of what in english is God."

Urstruly, is Allah exactly the same as Khuda?

Re: # 256

"Urstruly, those Hindus texts are speaking of a very different thing.One can't start with those texts and arrive at Allah and the Quran, or vice versa, either by logic and through faith."

And what thing exactly those texts are talking about then? I am not trying to arrive at Allah or Qura'n, I am trying top arrive at One Absolute God, Allah is but one Arabic name of what in english is God.

Re: # 256

"Urstruly, those Hindus texts are speaking of a very different thing.One can't start with those texts and arrive at Allah and the Quran, or vice versa, either by logic and through faith."

And what thing exactly those texts are talking about then? I am not trying to arrive at Allah or Qura'n, I am trying top arrive at One Absolute God, Allah is but one Arabic name of what in english is God.

Urstruly, those Hindus texts are speaking of a very different thing. One can't start with those texts and arrive at Allah and the Quran, or vice versa, either by logic and through faith.

Which is just fine. A variety of thinking exists in this world. Zakir Naik aside, few in these hundreds and hundreds of years have taken the two to be the same, or seen them referring to same things (except for Gandhi-Nehru who for all their greatness did not know religion from coffe). I hope you would agree with the difference. Let's not get caught up with that 'absolute' word.

Re: # 230 Laddu

Being "formless" is just one of the attributes of God. So one may ask question as if God is Absolute, then how can He be so helpless to have form; conversely if God is formless then he cannot be Absolute, since being formless means that God should be constrained by devoid of having form.

A similar argument can be formulated for the dieties that have form.

See the point is that while interacting with humans God must "speak the language" that humans understand. Otherwise how would you explain the taste of a mango who has never seen or tasted a mango. Islam divides the knowledge, therefore, into the realm of known and unknown. God having a form or not falls into the realm of unknown. God stresses not on having form or not but stress on the fact that God is free of human constraints - He never sleeps; He never eats or drinks; He never gets tired; He has no children; He is begotten by none because "He is Absolute". So being Absolute is the umbrella that sheds God from having any human or other attribute that our limited intellect can imagine.

The references that I have quoted from Hindu religious texts in #215 allude only to this attribute, that He is Absolute.


Eklavya # 251.

Thank you. That is quite accurate. But what I am saying is not necessarily an islamic concept of God. This in fact is the common sense concept of One God, which is etched in our genes. Every human being knows it by nature.

If one rationize his own thoughts about polytheism he will find out in no time that every diety other than One True God is a human construct. we worship Ram because we chose to AND we saw our parents and society do that. But Cocept of One Creator comes naturally.

yeah, simplistic, zee! LOL

#251 Posted by Eklavya,

Thanks Kaal. I never lost 'faith' in fairies. They always deliver what they promise!

Yaar this discussion is too hard for me. I have very simplistic views as you know ...

and what about al-lah's daughters ?

..... i appeal to all muslims on chowk to continue worshiping al-lah mian's daughters even though muhammad revised the koran to disown them ..... it was a mistake and we should repent ........ let us restore al-lat, al-uzza and manat to their rightful place in the islamic pantheon ...... as a matter of fact, i would like to make sure that we rebuild their shrines near mecca and make them part of the hajj ......

......... it is a shame that we have been misled for all these centuries and ignored the three divine daughters .......... may al-lah forgive muhammad and his people for this horrible transgression against his beloved daughters .... amen

Zee boss. This afternoon! Have specifically set aside time for that. Meanwhile welcome back from the fairyland.

-----------

If we ignore urstruly's references to the Buddha and to Hinduism, he is presenting the Islamic view quite succinctly.

To see Urstruly's point, Hindus should remember that Islamic "God" - Allah - is not the meaninglessly "loving" Christian God (of the New Testament). Allah is much more 'neutral' from a human pov. To any real unbeliever Allah would appear just as "evil" as "good."

This God - Allah - is not obsessed with 'loving' humans. Rather, it is the duty of all believers - Muslims - to love Allah and Allah's prophet. More than life, more than parents, anything in their own past, more than anything else.

Where there is such uncompromising human love, 'jealousy' and opposition to those who oppose the object of love are nothing short of natural (human) duties in a natural plan.

(We might notice that the most ardent defenders of Allah's Message and good honor of Allah's Prophet are Sufis, even if that defense takes forms that appear irreconcilable with unbelievers' own notions of sufism. Love without the duty to defend (or without the promise of golden ultimate victory) is meaningless. It can exist (as we know from the bhakti movement) but it won't amount to much in natural and material terms.
-------

'The 'neutral' property of Allah shouldn't be confused with the 'nirgun' concept of the Ultimate Reality that Indic thought refers to. Allah has wishes and characteristics but those wishes and characteristics are not accountable/bound from human point of view.

#248 Posted by dost_mittar,

Dost, it is a great article. Very well thought out, honest, and precise. Thanks for taking out the time to write it.

#243 Posted by tahir,

... sigh ... Tahir Saheb this is an anti-religion site. If you attack homos or lesbians, you'll be promptly banned, but insulting prophets or Sita or whatever (I myself have posted paintings of Hanuman sodomising Sita with its tail) is just fine.

You would do better by just ignoring these low-lifes, which are in abundance over here. I call them cockroaches.

zeemax#242:

I see that you are reading the interacts on this Board. Have you read the article? Any comments?

Re: # 233
What value are you referring to Fisrt Officer NHK?
Your name sounds sooooo Muslim, yet you say thanks to all these insulting interacts.

Urstruly#241:

The point I was making was that there is no ban on making idols; of course some Hindus do make such a deduction, as you did, and they don't indulge in idol worship.

As regards the corruption of original message of One God, all I can say is that the concept of multiple gods is in the most ancient Hindu book, the Rigveda, while the formless God is mentioned in the later Upnishadas. I would be more inclined to think that the thinking of the Hindu sages evolved from worshipping elements of nature in Rigveda to a more abstract God in the upanishadas.

As regards the Hindu Trinity, modern Hindu reformers have interpreted it in the way you have mentioned, namely, that it is really the three manifestations of the attributes of God.

tahir#243:

You may not have noticed but I did appeal to at least one person to spare this board of his hateful cut-and-paste, but with little effect.

P.S. I don't know what Jehangir era grudges you are referring to.

Re: # 197

Surprising you directly or indirectly worship dudes, not gods or godesses?

Reply to 179 & 180:

Please refrain from attacking persons who are very dear to over a billion Muslims.

How would you like an assault on Raam/Sita and the rest?

Please don't show that you've had poor training at home and bad education at school. Why expose yourself thinking that you're earning a reward for bad-mouthing a Prophet?

I strongly condemn the attitude of the CHOWK editors for acting like agents provocateur.

And Dost Mittar, wake up, don't keep grudges of Jehangir's era. Rise and defend. This is your article's interact; you must ask these agents to go serve humanity instead of being thorns in its side.

May all who bad-mouth Islam one day realise what a grave mistake they are making.

Shanti.

#240 Posted by Urstruly,

You would jealously guard your imaan (faith).

I'm surprised you still haven't understood SR Saheb jealously guards faithfreedom.org, not 'Faith'.

Just thought I would take a swipe :)

Re: # 223 Dost

I am quite surprised at your response. All the verses that I have quoted in my #215 from Hindu religious text clearly points out that He cannot be likened (or equated) to another. Now as I understand it one of the core Hindu belief of Hinduism is the concept of Awatar. The first tier of Awatars is the three gods the Creator, the Destroyer, and the Maintainer (Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva). As long as the concept would have been limited to the idea that these three are the Attributes of an Absolute Ishwar everything would have been just fine and consistent with the religious text. But on the other hand these three gentlemen are considered gods themeselves with their independent and unique personalities; which renders all of them including Ishwar as a non-absolute dieties. This open up the labyrinth of deceit that if three gods are below Ishwar then why cant there be 10 gods above Ishwar. This concept has evolved into about 30 million gods that are currently being worshipped in Hinduism. Every year new gods emerge, like Sai Baba for one, and die like all all mortals leading humans astray from the righteous path.

So if one part of the religious text commands for a formless Absolute God and the other part commands, in the same breath, a multiple diety system then obviously either the text has been corrupted or it has never been Divine.

Divine path has to be simple and non-contrdictory so that the mere mortals, for whom it is meant, could understand it.

------

I am currently not in Pakistan, and thank God for that.

Re: # 231 SR

You are elaborating the concept of jealousy in human terms i.e. how we feel. God is not just another human. He is God. He is Absolute; which makes Him above the feelings of love, hate, anger, jealousy and so on and so forth. As a matter of fact God does not even need our devotion, worship and love. It is us who need His blessing, His compassion, and His mercy.

But since God communicates with us, whom He has created with limited attributes and an ever evolving intellect He speaks to us in the terms that we would understand. We do not relate to Absoluteness very well because our limited intellect (at a certain point of time) cannot over come the paradoxes that it encounters; yet we can relate very well to concepts of love, hate, anger etc. This is our limitation and hence God is above that.

Look, in the bigger scheme of things the Divine Plan is quite simple. The plan is that that this world is like an examination center where man has to pass tests every step of the way. This is an open book test where all the right answers and wrong answers have already been given to man and he is given the choice to chose between right answer and wrong answer.

The Divine Plan or Divine Test has to be very simple so that even the lowest common denominator would understand it. What I said above does not need a philosopher, a brahmin, a sufi, or an Einstein to undersatnd. It is so very simple. Even an agnostic like Buddha understood it very well. An atheist understand sit very well when he talks about the consequences of actions. So that was my point all along that if you consider God to be Absolute you would never ever even imagine to think about likeness of Him. You would jealously guard your imaan (faith).

Hinduism being a “evolved� religion as opposed to the “created� nature of the abrahamic religions, will survive these religions. The worst of the times for Hinduism is over.

It will be the turn of these Abrahamic religions to face free flow of information now. Abrahamic religions being dogmatic , will find it tough evolve with time.. because it is against their nature.

I am surprised to see muslims talking about formless, omnipresent God.
Why then you need to pray heading towards specific location, if God is formless. Does the direction of sitiing matters?
Why you need to go to pilgrimage and furthermore to throw stone only (not for any constructive activity)?

Need some enlightment...

""The Hindus never built any holy city or temple or regarded any river in the current Pakistan sacred.

Ans: Entire area has rich indian heritage. Panini, the sanskrit scholar was from Taxila. He is from pre-budhdhist era. Whereever islam enters, they destryos in such extent that, it is very difficult to find trace of civilisation. In entire north India and gangetic plane, you will not find large temple. Does that imply, there were no trace of indian culture (hindu) before british left?
Baluchistan had rich heritage of Devi ( Goddess worshipping) puja. During british period, Hinglaj ( one of the Shakti Peethas) was frequented by pilgrims.

Re: # 221
It was brought out by some people.
As per my knowledge, human pollutes more than any other animal. Animals are at most vectors.
Temple animals are kept with utmost care and generally people keep Elephant, Peacock, snake etc.. Beauty of this philosophy, is, it preserves flora and fauna properly. Barbaric islam may not recognize it. One person had given me one funda- Apart from pork allah has created all other animals and birds as to feed human beeing.

"In the 7th century, Multan was conquered along with Sindh by the army of Muhammad bin Qasim, following bin Qasim's conquest, the city was securely under Muslim rule, although it was in effect an independent state.The city was attacked twice by Mahmud of Ghazni who destroyed the Sun Temple and broke its giant Idol. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multan

""The Hindus never built any holy city or temple or regarded any river in the current Pakistan sacred.

Hmm, how come the temples of Ketas Raj exist then? This ofcourse dispite an attempt to destroy / deface them after Pakistan came in to being. I know that Hindu influence over what constitutes Pakistan now is anathema. Fact is that the Punjab had a significant Hindu and Sikh populace which was ethnically cleansed in 1947.

Laddu, Nangapir & nkg

Thanks for adding value to this discussion.

NHK

If muslims were to reject Mohammad and accept the "formless" Nirvikara Brahman or Allah then the entire issue of mullah Islam would be solved and we would have an entire muslm community reformed of its current problem of hatred towards others!

Re: # 216 Urstruly wrote: ["... He wants us to be jealous.

If you in a true love with your beloved, it is you who will get jealous if someone tries to tell you that there is another one who is better than your beloved.

This is the test of your devotion. ..."]

Smart and eloquent as you are, you also have a great talent to stick your foot in your mouth rom time to time. This is one of those times.

Your concept of what it means to be jealous in a lover-beloved context, is the most bizzare one that I've come across. You have either not been in love or never experienced jealousy.

If someone tells me that there is another who is more worthy of love to him than my beloved, my reaction will be one of relief... not jealousy.

Thank God, I'll think to myself, he's also not after my beloved.

On the other hand, if he were also seeking the love of my beloved and there was a risk that he would also be favoured by my beloved, yes, THEN I would be jealous. This is how jealousy works.

As far as my beloved being jealous is concerned, that will happen when I start showing fondness for another. That is when I can expect my beloved to be jealous. This is what DM meant I am sure.

You, by contrast, said something that is utterly convoluted. According to you, it is my beloved who would expect me to feel jealous if this other guy (who also claims loves my beloved) is showing affection for an outside third party instead of being totally devoted to my beloved?????

From where do you come up with these absurdities?

What you could reasonably claim is something different altogether.

If you said that my beloved expects me to be incensed, outraged, or pissed off (but not jealous) at this other guy who goes out and sings the praise of some other beloved and claims that this other beloved of his is better than the one I love. Okay, that will make sense. Such an act could upset and irritate me because to my mind, obviously, no one can be better than my own beloved and anybody who makes that assertion would be worthy of my contempt, but I will have no jealousy against him.

It's all in the meaning of the word "jealous" ... perhaps you just made a typo.

...SR

Re: # 204

"Now given the choice, every Hindu choses, will refuse to follow One Straight Path to One Absolute God, but instead will chose the paths that lead them astray. If it is not arrogance then what is it? If it is not mutiny against One Supreme God then what is it? Just like the Third Commandment of Moses (pbuh) every Hindu is forbidden to make the idols or "likeness" of Him yet Hindu will do it knowingly?"

Truely Saheb,

Islam may talk about "formless" God - but it could never show the way to attain it . Only the sufis could attain it to some extent- but that was mainly by rejecting Mohammad as showing the way to 'formless' God.
Formless God by very definition is DEVOID of predicates - to say "this formless this is ____ " is abolutely false.
Mohammad misused the concept of formless God and has led muslims to the false path.
If intelligent muslims like you love "formless" Allah then they have to reject Mohammad's description of that deity and accept the Upanishadic 'indicator' of "Neti-Neti".
Only then can muslims attain peace of heart , otherwise they would aways be full of hatred - which is a sure way to lead to the path of regression into their karmic hells!!
I hope you understand that "formless" deity can only be "experienced" and not talked about like mullahs do all the time!! (and like Mohammad used to do)

Re: # 206

"Another aspect of paganism that baffles civilized people is the pagan's penile fascination. "

Infact , Islam and Abrahmic religions have a penile fascination - the first sign of covenant is implanted by mutilating the penis!!

And one's faith is measured by the existence of that penile mutilation!!
I remember Zee Bhai mocking SR and asking him to get his son circumsized first before he can claim to speak about him!!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Any one trying to descrie formless Brahman is an idiot and a charlatan!!

Nirvikaara Brahman cannot even be described.

Re: # 223

Only a SAKAARA Brahman with positive qualities can be worshipped- Shri Ramanujacharya has so clearly stated in his Vishista-Advaita Vedanta. Nirvikaara cannot be worshipped - that is why there is NO (I repeat - NOOOOOO) idol of formless Brahman.
Nirvikara can only be attained in formless or nirvikalpa samadhi - after that there is no return for that realized soul on the mrtyu loka!!

Re: # 223

DMji,
"Formless" God or any deity can NEVER be even "thought" of , let alone some body try to ascribe human like 'intentions, , 'motives' , ''jealosies' and other predicates to it.
That is why Islamic notion of a "formless" God is a CONTRADICTION!!!
"Formless" God can even NOT be 'worshipped' because it has no predicates - it can only be negated as it is rightly done in Upanishads -neti neti'!!!
Islam has got it ALL wrong- it is this mis-contruel of the nature of formless brahman that segregates the ASURA view from the Sura view!!! This is clear in Chandogya-Upanishad where even the Asuras mistook the formless Brahman for something it is not -same with Islam - it ascribes all human qualities of jealousy, hatred etc. to that "formless" Allah!!

QED!

Urstruly#215:

Rig Veda praises Indra and other gods and has invocations to them. Upnashidas, also known as vedanta or the end of vedas, do describe God as formless but you have not provided any example of any scripture banning idol worship. At the same time, you would be right if you said that no Hindu mandir has any idols of Om, Ishwar. Bhagwan, Parmeshwar or any other name by which the absolute is known in the Hindu literature.

You have provided an intersting definition of jealousy. If I understand you correctly, God does not hate me for shirk but you are supposed to hate me for doing so because my worshipping any other god is unacceptable to you. Am I correct?

[Are you in Pakistan these days?]

Proly, Upanishads represent only one of the schools of thought. Heterodoxy has been the forte of India. As DM rightly showed that Hinduism encompasses varying schools of thought including agnostic and atheist ideas.

Nkg,

(The pet animals in the temple are maintained in healthy state. )

I presume you are referring to the rats at Karni Mata mandir in Deshnkok, Rajasthan?

Regards

Re: # 215
Idol worshipping was basically part local/dravidian culture and has started post vedic era.
The nice example of the mixture of both Vedic and post vedic culture is pujas performed in most of the regions include both "HOMA- burning fire and offering" as well as creating MURTI and prasing in front of the MURTY.

Re: # 212
On the negative side the worship of rats leads to plague not to speak of score of other things.

Ans: The pet animals in the temple are maintained in healthy state. Temple animal is so far not a source of any epidemic. Please enlighten me, if you know of such circumstance.

#207
If The Creator can be worshipped then what is wrong in worshipping The Instrument that is used to create?
Regards

Re: # 212
"The original people were Arians, Nagas and Draver."

History of South Asian region is very old as all the historians agree. So 'original' 'Aboriginal' or 'Indegenous' were not Aryan but linguistically they were Autro-Asiatic, Munda, Dravidians and then Aryans.

One more thing, if Sind 'becomes' 'hind' (linguistic change)then why "Shah" "Salam" "Sultan" and "Satan" did not change to "Hah" "Halam" "Hultan" and "Hatan"? Just curious to know.

Re: # 213 Dost

As far as your comment regarding the "jealous god" is concerned, I hope you were only joking. It is not our Lord who gets jealous but He wants us to be jealous. This is a delicate point. If you in a true love with your beloved, it is you who will get jealous if someone tries to tell you that there is another one who is better than your beloved. This is the test of your devotion.

Re: # 213 Dost

"This is new to me. Where did you read that a Hindu is forbidden to make idols or likeness of Him? "

I can quote many many more references but the following should suffice:

"O friends, do not worship anybody but Him, the Divine One. Praise Him alone."

[Rigveda 8:1:1]

"There is no image of Him."
[Yajurveda 32:3]

"Lead us to the good path and remove the sin that makes us stray and wander."

[Yajurveda 40:16]

"He is bodyless and pure."
[Yajurveda 40:8]

"There is no image of Him."
[Yajurveda 32:3]

"Of Him there are neither parents nor lord."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9]

"He is One only without a second."
[Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1]

"His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:20]

NangaPir:

Thanks for adding some new bits of information, esp. regarding the use of Hind in Arabia.

Urstruly#204:

Most, not all, Hindus may believe in an Absolute God, which they may call by several names but their God is not jealous and does not mind them worshipping other deities, in other words, the Hindu God has no problem with 'shirk'.

"Just like the Third Commandment of Moses (pbuh) every Hindu is forbidden to make the idols or "likeness" of Him yet Hindu will do it knowingly:

This is new to me. Where did you read that a Hindu is forbidden to make idols or likeness of Him?

The word Hindu attributed to sub continental people is somewhat misleading. The original people were Arians, Nagas and Draver. Then over 500 invaders brought different races to produce a complete mongrels race. The word Hindu came from Arabic. Muhammad's aunt name was Hinda. But a son from his wife's former marriage was named Hindu. Some people say it means black which is not correct. In Arabic Aswad (hijrey aswad or black stone) or Sudan derived from black. The river Sindu which was land of Irfan was misnamed by Arabs as Hindu as they were used to this name. The word is misnomer but in common use - to stay around till the galaxy spirals into Nothing. Hinduism as a religion or myth is in fact a common human heritage which depicts the evolutionary stage of primate consciousness. It is a hotch potch of beliefs where you can create your own god. Everything is revered. It leads to a lot of clumsiness in this competing world. However, the values in Hinduism which are based on respect for elders, joint family system and conservation are great. On the negative side the worship of rats leads to plague not to speak of score of other things. That is why a lot more religions outgrew from it and still has a great potential for missionaries to taper this raw resource

Re: # 206
Why is Shivalingam the top Valentine's Day gift in Bangalore?
Ans: This is new to me. Can you please provide the source? I am staying in Bangalore since 2001.

Re: # 204
Now given the choice, every Hindu choses, will refuse to follow One Straight Path to One Absolute God, but instead will chose the paths that lead them astray
Ans: The matter is not like that. Every one will have some form of supreme god. But that may differ from person to person. For Sivaities, Lord Shiva and for Vaisnabhs, lord Vishnu is the ultimate God. There are difference of opinion, but people don't resort to violence. Rather respect other's opinion.
The nice example is West Bengal and Orissa. People of West Bengal mostly prays Goddess Kali or one of it's forms, where as for Oriya people Lord Jagganatha is supreme god. Now, if they have started Jihad/Crusade for this then there would not have both of these cultures alive.
This is the stark difference between Indian culture and Islam or Roman Catholicism. To respect others and learn from others, is civilisation.
Astray!!! What astray? Are people directionless? Absolutely no. India is functioning far better than any other christian/moslem country, though it has more than 30 dominant culture/religious groups.

http://www.clubmobile.org/trips/patan_lingam.html


http://picasaweb.google.c om/eperov/Durbar/photo#5116550748411595666

These pix tell us why Lord Siva is also known as the god of fertility.

Ali's spiky posts are needed as a comic relief.

Sivalingam is not just Sivalingam but also the lower part (I dont know the Sanskrit name but they call it Panavattam in Telugu) which is the female sexual organ representing Parvati, the consort of Lord Siva. The sexual act of Lord Siva and Parvati is known as the ultimate union of male and female. For the modern man this topic is a no-go subject therefore there's not much literature on the Net abt the complete description of this eternal symbol (Lingam+Panavattam).

It's the sexual act that's worshipped not just male organ symbolised by Sivalingam. Ancient Indian prolly saw it as the central act that brought this mankind into being.

Of all the temples, Ellora cave temple (Kailsanatha Temple) had this as the main deity(?!). One can see the Sivalingam and Panavattam (Yoni) in the Kailasanatha Temple at Ellora at this site:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kailash-shiva-linga.jpg

I dunno if Sivalingam is the top Valentine's day gift. Perhaps the lingam symbolizes the Heart&Arrow. Penis has been an object of intense study in almost all places of the world. The profile of penis could be a fundamental one. Now, can we say that the design engineers of missiles, rockets, aircrafts drew inspiration from the profile of penis?

Perhaps lingam is a multivalent.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 204

urstruly,

..... you are one arrogant son of islam ! "Now given the choice, every Hindu choses, will refuse to follow One Straight Path to One Absolute God, but instead will chose the paths that lead them astray." ..........

........ astray from what ?! ..... the sirat-ul-mustaqeem established by an anbsolutist, hateful, arrogant and vengeful god who is so insecure and unsure of his godliness that he has to threaten people with fire and brimstone and castration if they don't 'believe' in him and pay homage to his mserable soul !

.......... hindoos ! .... carry on, you are on the right path ...... urstruly's camel path leads to death either by homicide or suicide ..........

Re: # 191 Dost

I have been following the interacts closely. One thing I am certain of now is that each and every Hindu recognizes that there is One Supreme God but have doubts on Him being Absolute. Once you doubt thhis attribute, that is being Absolute of God, you face a labyrinth of a maze. Every path on this maze leads you elsewhere but to God; every path demands a justification; so when we justify treading on a certain path gods started having children, and father, and wives, and consorts, and friends, and enemies who can render them ineffective. It is my undersatnding that each and every Hindu understands that too.

Now given the choice, every Hindu choses, will refuse to follow One Straight Path to One Absolute God, but instead will chose the paths that lead them astray. If it is not arrogance then what is it? If it is not mutiny against One Supreme God then what is it? Just like the Third Commandment of Moses (pbuh) every Hindu is forbidden to make the idols or "likeness" of Him yet Hindu will do it knowingly?

Re: #200

This post is also as irrelevant as your post . This doctor claims "Doctors don't have germs"

Jayant Mukundray Patel (born April 10, 1950) is a surgeon who found himself at the centre of a scandal in early 2005 when he was accused of gross incompetence while working at Bundaberg Base Hospital in Queensland, Australia. He has been nicknamed "Doctor Death" in Australian media, particularly newspapers such as News Ltd's The Courier-Mail.
Patel was born in Jamnagar in Gujarat, India. Whilst the vast majority of his training was conducted from within the US, he first trained at the M.P. Shah Medical College at Saurashtra University, and obtained a master's degree in surgery. After graduation he moved to the United States where he received further surgical training at the University of Rochester School of Medicine as a surgical intern and resident of surgery. Patel first began to raise alarm bells in 1984 at a hospital in the city of Buffalo where New York health officials cited Patel for failing to examine patients before surgery. Patel was fined US$5,000 and was placed on three years' clinical probation. In 1989, Patel moved to Oregon and began working for Kaiser Permanente Hospital in Portland. Medical staff alleged that he would often turn up, even on his days off, and perform surgery on patients that were not even his responsibility. In some cases, surgery was not even required, and caused serious injuries or death to the patient.
After a review, Kaiser restricted Patel's practice in 1998, banning him from doing liver and pancreatic surgeries and requiring him to seek second opinions before performing other surgeries. Further, after reviewing four cases in which three patients died, the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners made Patel's restriction statewide in September 2000, and New York State health officials forced him to surrender his license in April 2001.
After this, Patel decided to leave Oregon for Queensland, Australia. Queensland Health employed him without conducting any due diligence (regarding his qualifications and experience) and allowed him to become director of surgery at Bundaberg Base Hospital in 2003, under the "area of need" program, which hires overseas trained doctors for regional areas. His unprofessional behaviour continued, with his surgical work being described as "antiquated" and "sloppy", and some nurses even claimed that they hid their patients from him when they knew that he was in the hospital. He was referred to as "Dr. E. coli".[1]
Patel is also alleged to have shown a poor regard for hygiene with claims that he responded to a nurse's concern over his unwashed hands with "doctors don't have germs". Overall, Patel is linked to at least 87 deaths out of the 1,202 patients he treated between 2003 to early 2005, 30 of whom died while under his care in Bundaberg. Hospital staff have also accused Patel of altering medical records to hide mistakes.
On March 22, 2005 Stuart Copeland, the Queensland Shadow Minister for Health, first raised the issue of Patel's clinical practices during Question Time in the Queensland Parliament. Two days later, Rob Messenger, the National Party Member of Parliament for Burnett also raised the matter of Patel's alleged incompetence in a speech to the Legislative Assembly and called for his suspension.
Journalist Hedley Thomas of The Courier-Mail, who won a Walkley Award for his part in uncovering Patel's past,[2] gave attention to these allegations, and soon the newspaper and other media outlets were flooded with patient claims of incompetence, injury and death caused by Patel's poor clinical standards.
Patel soon left Australia using a business-class air fare paid for by Queensland Health[3] and returned to his luxury home in Portland, Oregon, where he has recently[when?] been filmed by the Nine Network's current affairs program, 60 Minutes.
A warrant for Jayant Patel's extradition is being sought following his escape to the United States. A magistrate was asked on 22 November 2006 to issue a warrant for Dr Patel's arrest. It is likely that he will be charged with three charges of manslaughter, five charges of causing grievous bodily harm, four of negligent acts causing harm and eight charges of fraud. If issued, the warrant will allow the Federal Attorney-General's office to consider if extradition is appropriate

Mian Arjun,

Before you embark on your cut & paste routines, visit the following sites.

Get your facts before you proceed to twist & distort them.

http://jawaharlalnehru.rediffblogs.com/


http://in.answers.yahoo.co m/question/index?qid=20080121154502AAqH0ww



On the second site you may have to click on "read more" for the juicy details.

And now, kambakht, STOP Islam bashing. Let us all live in peace....

Re: #200

Your post is as irrelevant as this

TORONTO: Amit Kumar, the alleged kingpin in the massive kidney racket, had been leading a lavish life while posing as a heart surgeon in Canada and had told his neighbours that he wanted to migrate to the country after winding up his "business" in India.

Kumar, against whom an Interpol red corner notice was issued after his illegal kidney selling network was unearthed, his "wife" Poonam Ameet, and their two sons, 5 and 4, moved into their Brampton home last April and the children attend a local private school, his neighbours said.

Except Kumar, the rest of the family remains barricaded behind security doors at their home, Toronto Star reported on Sunday. The couple bought the four-bedroom home in the predominantly Indian neighbourhood of Bovaird Dr. and Airport Rd. in April 2007 for USD 610,000, it said adding the kidney scandal had shocked the quiet neighbourhood.

Kumar reportedly told neighbours that he was a cardiovascular surgeon with clients around the world, but he never once mentioned anything about kidneys, it said.

Kumar, who Indian police say is not a surgeon, was last seen in Brampton before Christmas driving a leased USD 65,000 Lexus 350 SUV. While some found him "standoffish," others said he seemed to be upfront and candid.

"I'm absolutely in shock," said the neighbour, calling Kumar a "gem of guy" who brought him gifts from his trips to India. "This is strange. I'm baffled. I feel so let down."

Kumar told him he was going back to India to wind up his businesses, which he said included a hotel, a hospital and several clinics.

Kumar planned to open a hotel in Canada upon his return and was going to live and work here permanently, he said.

Interpol last week issued a rarely used "red notice" warrant for his arrest.

islamofascism...

Female Muslim medics 'disobey hygiene rules'

By Julie Henry and Laura Donnelly
Last Updated: 2:36am GMT 03/02/2008

Muslim medical students are refusing to obey hygiene rules brought in to stop the spread of deadly superbugs, because they say it is against their religion.

Women training in several hospitals in England have raised objections to removing their arm coverings in theatre and to rolling up their sleeves when washing their hands, because it is regarded as immodest in Islam.
advertisement

Universities and NHS trusts fear many more will refuse to co-operate with new Department of Health guidance, introduced this month, which stipulates that all doctors must be "bare below the elbow".

The measure is deemed necessary to stop the spread of infections such as MRSA and Clostridium difficile, which have killed hundreds.

Minutes of a clinical academics' meeting at Liverpool University revealed that female Muslim students at Alder Hey children's hospital had objected to rolling up their sleeves to wear gowns.

Similar concerns have been raised at Leicester University. Minutes from a medical school committee said that "a number of Muslim females had difficulty in complying with the procedures to roll up sleeves to the elbow for appropriate handwashing".

Sheffield University also reported a case of a Muslim medic who refused to "scrub" as this left her forearms exposed.

Documents from Birmingham University reveal that some students would prefer to quit the course rather than expose their arms, and warn that it could leave trusts open to legal action.

Hygiene experts said last night that no exceptions should be made on religious grounds.

Dr Mark Enright, professor of microbiology at Imperial College London, said: "To wash your hands properly, and reduce the risks of MRSA and C.difficile, you have to be able to wash the whole area around the wrist.

"I don't think it would be right to make an exemption for people on any grounds. The policy of bare below the elbows has to be applied universally."

Dr Charles Tannock, a Conservative MEP and former hospital consultant, said: "These students are being trained using taxpayers' money and they have a duty of care to their patients not to put their health at risk.

"Perhaps these women should not be choosing medicine as a career if they feel unable to abide by the guidelines that everyone else has to follow."

But the Islamic Medical Association insisted that covering all the body in public, except the face and hands, was a basic tenet of Islam.

"No practising Muslim woman - doctor, medical student, nurse or patient - should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow," it said.

Dr Majid Katme, the association spokesman, said: "Exposed arms can pick up germs and there is a lot of evidence to suggest skin is safer to the patient if covered. One idea might be to produce long, sterile, disposable gloves which go up to the elbows."

#198 Posted by Kamath on February 3, 2008 6:30:54 am

I offered to meet anyone who wants to meet me at a public place...the pakis all chickened out..typical..

Re: # 179 Maha Arjun:

After publication of these cartoons, be careful about your life! You are in the Cross-Hairs of some Jihadist.
Change your name, get away from town or do something change your identity or visit a plastic surgeeon to get things done. You are doomed my friend. No one will you protect at this rate.

Kamath

Re: # 187 urstruly
[...I am still clueless as to what Hinduism as a religion is...]

that's a pity, particularly one claims to be a "suryavanshi"... but if it's any consolation, i have no clue waht islam is either, in particular - why young and able people killing themselves and others over it...

But let's first address your problem. here is hinud 101 for you:

Hinduism has 3 gods in the sky, unlike one allah for you. The holy trinity: Brahma, the creator, Shiva the destroyer, Vishnu, for lack of a better english word, the keeper of entire living world, humans and animals included.

Now - Brahma dude is never worshipped directly, he made some mistake and somebody cursed him [yes, in hinudism, mere mortals can curse their creator,literally]...he has four heads, so that he can have a 360 degree view - suppose that helps the creator - helps to have a FULL picture,so to speak. He has one wife.

Shiva - he is the destroyer of bad and evil. He moves around with a snake around his neck, with a trishul(pitchfork)in his hand, he is literally homeless... he gave up all his worldly possessions to somebody - that's a long story. But the dude is kind, supposed to be handsome, favourite with lady worshippers even though he is penniless. He is a very interesting character. we can talk days on his bullsh!t... He has one wife.

Now the main guy - Vishnu, he is the president of the trinity. He has two wives and lives in an island in the middle of the ocean - yeah, he has an ocean in the sky... He has a big snake, an anaconda with a million heads to protect him...

Now this dude has a lot of work, he keeps an eye on the state of the creation... when he feels Dharma of the creation going astray, there is too much sin down here, he makes a trip down here, in form of a messenger, a prohpet if you will.we call it an Avatar.

so far - he has taken 10 avatars... Ram and Krishna - they are his two most famous and worshipped ones. Ram's story is mentioned in Ramayan. Krishna's story is given in Mahabharat. Krishna also narrated a big lecture on his philosophy in Gita, that's one of the holy books.

Does it make some sense now?

in those days..

Chittagong,

Names undergo changes & so does connotations. Hindu in those means just Indian but now Hindu mean diff things to diff ppl.

Gandhi and Godse are both Hindus but their appraoch to religon is totally opposite.

If we can make a comparison, there cud be a religion by name Chinese. Like in India, China use to have multitude of gods, mode of worship is common across China. Unfortunately no foreginer called it a Chinese religion.

Hindu by definiton as a 'way of life' is utterly meaningless (& I still dont understand how Supreme Court gave such verdict), coz every religion & culture (other than Hindu) also had a way of life.

RSS always say that Hindu is not a religon but they always think & act as if Hinduism is a religion.

Who is a Hindu?

To understand the concept of ‘Hindu Rashtra’, we first need to understand the meaning of the two words contained in it, ‘Hindu’ and ‘Rashtra’. We begin by understanding the meaning of the word ‘Hindu’.

The origin of the word ‘Hindu’ is purely geographical. The name Sapta-Sindhu is found in the oldest records of the world itself - the Rig-Veda- as an epithet applied to Vedic India. It is well known that the syllable ‘S’ in Sanskrit is at times changed to ‘H’ in some of the Prakrit languages and even in European languages. The ancient Persians referred to the people inhabiting Vedic India as Hapta-Hindus and later on the word ‘Hindu’ was used for the same purpose by all nations flourishing at that time.

As we can see, the word Hindu has a geographical history and does not mean a religious faith like Islam or Christianity. There are some instances which illustrate the use of the word Hindu.

When the Shahi Imam of Jama of Delhi went to Mecca on a pilgrimage, a local resident asked him, “Are you a Hindu?� The Imam was startled by this question and replied, “No, I am a Muslim.� When Imam Saheb asked him the reason for calling him a Hindu, he replied that all Hindustanis were called Hindu there.
Late Sri Mohammed Carrim Chagla, the former Chief Justice of Bombay High Court and Education Minister in the Central cabinet wrote that he is a Muslim only by religion but by culture and race he is a Hindu and all Muslims of this country are Hindus.
The word Hindusthan and Hindu are often used with a national connotation only. For example, the first nationalist daily from Chennai, started in the last century, was named ‘The Hindu’. Many public sector industrial units are named Hindusthan Aeronautics, Hindusthan Photo films, Hindusthan Machine Tools, etc. The sea to the south of our country is called Hind Mahasagar.
Mohammed Iqbal, the famous Urdu poet has sung Sare Jahan Se Achha, Hindostan Hamara — Note Hamara Hindusthan, i.e., Our Hindusthan.
The word Hindu thus connotes not a particular sect, a religion or a faith, but the people, the culture, the tradition, the way of life of the people inhabiting this part of the world from times immemorial. Before the advent of the British, Bharat was known as Hindusthan and all the nationals as Hindus. Only the British gave the new name India and the word Indian came to be used in place of Hindu.

http://www.hinduyuva.org/tattva-blog/2008/02/hindu-rashtra-explained/




http://mutiny.in/2008/02/02/what-about-the-indian-rashtra/

Very interesting points of discussion. I agree I’m a Hindu by culture, Hinduism to me is a way of life. I never considered it ‘Hindu’ but the way we live our lives. If this Hindu Rashtra concept really necessary to keep our country united? Isn’t our current constitution enough?

I don’t have a problem with that - but - I consider myself more an citizen of the Republic of India than the RSS’s definition of the Hindu Rashtra. Does that make me less Hindu or Indian? To me there was no India before 1947. I was a subject of the Royal Kingdom of Travancore. To me it’s the Indian constitution that keeps us together.

So why Shobhit, force an RSS idea on us? Especially from far away Seattle? Does ones Hindu-ness make you more or less an Indian?

Urstruly,

The fundamental problem with hindu conversion, the so called defining features of any religion, is problematic for hinduism, what will be the caste of the convert.

Ary samaj, that formalised the conversion ceremony, calls the new hindus caste as " arya samay" caste/

Urstruly,

Hinduism as a religion can only be understood through the religious conversion rituals.
If I recall it was only in the 1890s that an organisation ( I forgot the name ) that came up with a conversion ritual so that people of other religions can become hindus.

Urstruly#187:

Perhaps, you might like to look into the definition provided by kamath in his post#155.

When castes were perceived to be a top-down approach , it created chaos.

Perhaps Hinduism deviated from dharma, when it condoned its followers while they were busy condemning less stronger people to menial tasks. Perhaps it should have told everybody has to be all of the varnas. Perhaps it should have told that your personal hygiene cannot be others business.

Ironically it failed miserably when Hinduism tried to define who should do what.

When castes were perceived to be a top-down approach , it created chaos.

Perhaps Hinduism deviated from dharma, when it condoned its followers while they were busy condemning less stronger people to menial tasks. Perhaps it should have told everybody has to be all of the varnas. Perhaps it should have told that your personal hygiene cannot be others business.

Ironically it failed miserably when Hinduism tried to define who should do what.

Urstruly,
Rather than bother DM Sahib, I suggest that you take up Hamidumdum Sahib's offer of a couple of Stroh's to clear up the mind about religion once and for all. :) Can you join him in Hamtramck?

DM

Despite your best efforts to explain it and mine to understand it, I am still clueless as to what Hinduism as a religion is.

NHK #133 {"Two main theories got propounded - Dharmic & Abrahamic.
Dharmic followers (Hindues, Jains, Budhists, Sihks) believed in re-incarnation. Add Karma to it.
Abrahamic followers(Judaism, Christianiy, Islam) believed in heaven & hell & day of judgement. Add Satan to it."}

Khan Sahib,
The Abrahamic faiths and Hinduism have much in common. It's possible that Islam is the aberration and possibly unique.

Let's see:

God has His Chosen People - the Jews (even the Christians believe that)
Brahma has His Chosen People - the Brahmin (came from the head)
Allah has no Chosen People - not even Muslims

The Holy Trinity where 1+1+1=1, All for One and One for All.
Iswar is One but there are many representation of the one - in diversity there is true unity.
Allah is One and Indivisible - Neither does He beget nor is He begotten"

Even though the First Commandment says "I am the Lord, thy God, Thou shalt not have any graven images before Me," it's kosher to have statues of Jesus, Mary, and various holy men and women, including David with his little weewee.

Hindus may believe in the unity of Ishwar, but are allowed to worship all forms of moortis, objects, animals, from rocks to monkeys, to rats, to snakes - even phallic symbols.

Muslims don't allow any graven images, but prostrate themselves in front of a meteorite in Mecca.

God, Allah, Yahveh, and Ishwar are the lord of all creation, but somehow there are still pagans, protestants, catholics, kaffirs, Mirzaees, gentiles, Palestinians, and untouchables

Hamidumdum Sahib #5, #6, #39, #69, #85, #88

Shaabash Janab Shaabash....I have been following your satanic posts from the inception of this article...you are trying your best to taunt Urstruly Sahib and Madani Sahib into action ... and if they show up, you will only have to blame yourself for the excessive bar bill when you go south to Windsor to drink the Molson camel extract...Not only are you inviting a fat fatwa from the Smith brothers, you may even have some horrible hindoos on your tail because of your irreverent and irrelevant posts concerning the complexities of hunumaniyan philosophy. Did you know that the great Mughal Emperor Humayun was himself a reincarnation of Hanuman, that Abraham was sent to earth by Brahma, and that Ather Veda was inspired by Maulana Ather Kazmi?

Regard #168 {"Best perfumes are known to have excreta components. "}

Regard,
No Shit! I mean "Holy Shit"
Regards,
Salim

Also #179, Arjun Payee,
I always had a feeling that Our Holy Prophet (PBUH) was a tree-hugger long before Al Gore ever invented the Internet. Now, don't tell me that mominas are going to start marrying trees?

Dear arjun_5:

A request:

Please spare this board of this type of cut-and-paste.
MANY THANKS!

#179, Arjun Payee,
Next you are going to tell me that camel urine tastes just like Sam Adams and that I was on the right track all along. LOL :)

Re: # 179

Ouch... that must hurt paki feelings big time... :)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#176 Posted by Salim_Chauhan on February 2, 2008 6:14:55 pm


You see, sir, Fatwas are about as meaningful to Islam


did someone tell rushdie...or more importantly, did someone tell the muslims out to kill him?

what next? islam is a religion of peace?

Salim_Chauhan#175:

"Does the hindi word "Sankhi" meaning idiosyncrastic have any connection to Sankhya?"

LOL! One can always bank on you for finding something funny everywhere. I think that the relationship between "sanaki" and sankhya is similar to that between cynic and sankhya.

Regard #172 {"Only thing good in ‘Hinduism’s inclusiveness is that, such beef-eaters could live in peace without being hunted by Fatwas. "}

Dear Regard,
Many of us, including several ardent Muslims, are trying to understand Hinduism, its variations, schools, and foundations. With a stupid comment like "hunted by Fatwas," you are distracting the discussion from DM Sahib's original intention of educating readers. You see, sir, Fatwas are about as meaningful to Islam as are the proclamations of BJP/RSS/VHP/JS/BD/SS/SP goons regarding St. Valentine's Day, Christmas, or Mushaairas. Please don't use the unfortunate existence of aberrations to define the original.

{"I am not sure that I fully understand the subtle differences between the various schools, but they vary from the almost agnostic Sankhya to the bhakti flavour, which is part of the Yoga school."}

DM Sahib,
A very informative and straightforward article to educate those of us who truly want to understand Hinduism as it has evolved over the millenia.

One question and I hope that I don't offend anyone. Does the hindi word "Sankhi" meaning idiosyncrastic have any connection to Sankhya? Thanks.

nature_lover#170:

Hindus do waste a lot of ghee in their havans and maybe other rituals. Although I have not personally witnessed, I have no problem in believing that some people wash the feet of their guru and drink it and other such practices which appear as backward to me and most of us. The same may also be true of cow-urine if you have witnessed it, but I can tell you that if an announcement is made in any congregation that the food contains a sprinkling of gau-mutra, most Hindus in the congregation would leave without tasting any food.

Ranjit#162:

I am quite a fan of Aitzaz Ahsan. I have not read enough about the common and distinguishing features of what he calls Indus-Valley and Gangetic civilizations to know whether or not it can stand closer scrutiny. I like it from a Pakistani perspective as it tries to build a national identity based on civilizational instead of a purely religious identity. Even if it is partly a myth, myths can be used as a motivating factor; a momin may not be equal to ten kafirs but the notion can be used to motivate soldiers to fight a bigger enemy; Guru Gobind Singh also used a similar motivator when he said one khalsa was equal to sawa-laakh non-khalsas.

Anyway, this article is about religion and not civilization and so let's not digress into it too much.

#170 nature_lover
I’m not trying to defend Hinduism. My point is that drinking cow urine is not a common Hindu religious practice. But it is used for perfectly valid therapeutic reasons.

If Pakistani friends need issues against Hindu religious practices, there are aplenty and much more serious: caste system, dowry, lack of social responsibility by the rich. Only in India you’ll find such shameless billionaires as Lakshmi Mittal, Azim Premji, Mukesh Ambani, Anil Ambani … and the list is long who are capable of wasting a few hundred million dollars on family events surrounded by jhuggis of homeless millions. To my mind, this is closely linked to the caste system, which made us so cruel and insensitive to those around us. Hindus are probably the most self-centred and individually egocentrics today. Nothing in common with Islamic community affiliation.

Though Hindu zealots will blow their tops on the subject but beef was probably a part of the regular diet in Vedic times. Only thing good in ‘Hinduism’s inclusiveness is that, such beef-eaters could live in peace without being hunted by Fatwas.

regard, to most people, who have not personally shared your experience - including myself - that sounds like faith at work. That's not a knock on your beliefs since 'faith' of all sorts plays such a big role in people's lives.

As more information accumulates, more people might agree or disagree with what you wrote. Until then, neither side should have a problem agreeing to disagree. Is that fair?

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

HP, Ranjit

This may be relevant:

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=94180

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

nature_lover, cow urine (along with cow dung) is a very important topic. Investigating it in depth should enhance both our love of nature and our understanding of natural religion.

Hope to read more as you develop greater insights through serious research.

Dear Dost Mittar, Shore sahib, regard and others..

I never mentioned about openly drinking of cow's urine or gomutra in temples ...my point was about sprinkling of religious foods with a spoon full of cow's urine or gomutra...

I also observed that one priest was in a trance kind of state and he was burning perfectly healthy and edible coconuts and other fruits in fire...there was smoke and pollution in the air and food was being burnt in order to make fire godess happy ...where people were starving on the streets..??

I saw another priest who produced a bottle out of his pocket and sprinkled a spoon full of gomutra or cow's urine over the food which was being cooked for public and devotees ..

Dried powder kind of Cow's dung is also sprinkled during high profile occassions

In Amreeka,.. little bottle of Gomutra is available at the cost of 10 dollars..

Moreover feet of high priest were being washed with milk and fruit juices and what came out was being gathered and mixed in the drinks for spiritual reasons..??

Indian governments of some provinces are officially promoting "gomutra" or cow's urine and they are exporting it to devotees of North America and Europe ..

readers are more than welcome to do google search about gomutra, washed feet etc..

Regards,

regard, if your brother had mixed camel mutra with gao mutra, results would have been even better...who knows he could have turned into Einstein or like.:-)

it is ok to do something for the sake of ritual or tradition but actually believe in that bullshit is mind boggling.

#158 slyder It is certainly not psychological. My brother was a toddler and no auto suggestion or placebo works at this age.

I’m not an Ayurvedic or Unani doctor and can’t go in details. But it is known that urine is highly antiseptic and can be used as such under certain circumstances. The bacterial life in the digestive system of a cow is similar to that of human. Besides we were asked to use urine of a cow, which had given birth recently. This is the time of high presence of some hormones, which even give immunity to a child during first few months of his life. I can’t elaborate further lest I commit a factual error. But I’m sure some doctor can throw light at it.

Please check if you're also not using some medication where some body fluids have not been used- cod liver oil, blood extracts. Best perfumes are known to have excreta components.

Ranjit,
Your reply is emotionally laden. Nothing serious to reject what Aitzaz wrote! The point was only to inform people that Sangh parivar can only lie and the chief Sanghi's research is selective.

Re:HP 122-129

HP, you seemed to be quite influenced by Aitzaz Ahsan and his book - "The Indus Saga". He makes virtually the same points and quotes the same references that you have quoted. Basically it is an attempt to establish a cleavage in culture and civilization between India and Pakistan that stretches to ancient times, way beyond the hindu-muslim issues, so that Pakistan can take pride in its pre-islamic past without feeling guilty of somehow supporting India inadvertently.

In my opinion this is a naive and superficial interpretation of history. The subcontinent has a cultural continuum that stretches across the length and breadth of the land, even as we see mind boggling diversity. If Sindh has cultural similarity to Baluchistan, it has similarity to Rajasthan and Gujarat as well. Sindh and Punjab have as much similarity, as say Rajasthan and Punjab or Punjab and NWFP. So it is kind of silly to look at the international border today and say that anything east of it is a different civilization than anything west of it.

Secondly the hindu caste system is universal across the subcontinent and still exists in full force everywhere including Pakistan. Even after a thousand years, it is common to see Pakistanis proudly claiming Rajput, Jat, Arain, Gujar and other caste affiliations. This includes matrimonial relations as well. In addition, we know quite well that just before the arrival of the muslims, there was entrenched upper caste hindu rule in the areas of Pakistan. Punjab and Afghanistan had HinduShahi rule. Hindushahis were blue blooded khsatriyas such as Janjuas who are descended from the Pandavas in Mahabharat and still hold a highly respected position in Pakistani social hierarchy. Similarly Sindh was ruled by Raja Dahir who was a brahmin. His father Chach established the clan of Chibbers, who are known as Punjabi brahmins now.

So it is naive to say that the Indo-Gangetic plains followed the caste hindu system while the Yavanas and Vangas were outside the scope of hinduism. It was one giant kichchri across the subcontinent and it remains that way. The cultural affinity of entire north india is quite evident given very similar interests in music, arts, culture and of course, bollywood. Heck the entire place looks the same to people who have traveled to both sides in spite of all the walls separating them....

Re: # 139

Ah! Mr. NKG himself!

Your comment: "Islam is very harmful to humanity" does indicate that you've watched too much television. Read the Quran instead. Which devilish humanity are you siding with?

Islam only hurts the 'santaan of rakhshas' that has been destabilising the world for a long time now. Do visit http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm#Table

Happy reading.

Re: # 139

Ah!Mr. NKG himself!

Your comment: "Islam is very harmful to humanity" does indicate that you've watched too much television. Read the Quran instead. Which devilish humanity are you siding with?

Islam only hurts the 'santaan of rakhshas' that has been destabilising the world for a long time now. Do visit http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm#Table

Happy reading.

Kamath#155:
"As far I am concerned, let me quote a well known author whose name I do not recall at this time,He said,that Hinduism is a religious Super Bazar!. It has everything in it. Profound, esoteric, intellectual,spiritual, exortation to followers to live an ethical and moral life and so on etc. and also plenty of ugly things like caste system, anything you want!

Take whaterver you want and don't bother with the rest.."

Kamath saheb:

I must be badly lacking in communications skills because this is precisely my view also of Hinduism; indeed, I have often used the word 'smorgsbord' to describe the Hindu religion.

"That is enough about Hinduism. Time to have cup of Tea!"

...and for me, it's time to go to bed!

"

mohar11#148, eklavya#154:

It was never my intent to show Hinduism to be better or worse religion than others; the attempt was to describe Hinduism as I saw it. Whether you consider Hinduism to be better or worse than Abrahmic religions depends upon your own value system; for instance, do you find certitude in matters of faith to be a good or bad thing? if you do, then you shouldn't find Hinduism to be 'good', if you don't, then Hinduism is for you. You would notice that most Muslims have, in fact, liked the article and did not find it offensive or derogatory to their faith. Except for this reference to 'certitude', there is no mention in the article to any Abrahmic faith.

Mohar, I do not think that religion is a universal phenomenon. I think that you are confusing religion with faith which, I would agree, is a universal phenomenon.

Eklavya, this article actually grew out of the discussions on Unplugged. There were so many threads on Hinduism that I thought that there was a need for a full blown discussion on the topic on FP.

Regard#138:

You have made some pertinent comments. BTW that post was by nature_lover and not shoresaheb.

nkg#136:

"Karachi is the dirtiest city on earth..."

Have you been to Karachi? It's not the cleanest city in Pakistan but it is certainly no dirtier than most Indian cities. You can take my word for it.

Nazar Saheb:

Thanks for reading and commenting on the article.
"Modernity has automatically killed some distateful ancient cultural or ritualistic aspects assciated with Hinduism - like sati, caste system etc."

The caste system is firmly entrenched; while its original rigid association with occupations has been somewhat diluted, it is now part of political identity and every party plays caste card or cards in electoral politics.

Sati is gone but its place has been taken by dowry burning and female infanticide; they may not have the religious sanction that sati had, but they are no less injurious to the society.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Was Aurengzeb as bad as they say he was???
He is a very controversial figure when it comes to the Mughal History and the relationship between the Muslims and the Hindus ... check this out:
http://dilsenomad.wordpress.com/2008/02/02/re-revisiting-aurangzeb/

Dost Mittar:

I for one like Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan's explanation of Hinduism.
Kamath

Re: # 111 Dost Mittar:

I am glad you said ,"..Personal View..".
As far I am concerned, let me quote a well known author whose name I do not recall at this time,He said,that Hinduism is a religious Super Bazar!. It has everything in it. Profound, esoteric, intellectual,spiritual, exortation to followers to live an ethical and moral life and so on etc. and also plenty of ugly things like caste system, anything you want!

Take whaterver you want and don't bother with the rest.."
That is enough about Hinduism. Time to have cup of Tea!

Kamath

mohar, speaking of this article, I too didn't like DM's clear attempt to prove that Hinduism is/was a better religion than others, or that Hinduism was the only true/first/last religion/way to God.

Such religious bigotry would be unbecoming of any Indian/Indian nationalist.

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

vengatramanan

Undoubetedly, the returns are huge. It's not for nothing that despite paying all those costs historically, we still maintain some strengths.

At the end of the day, vengat, one has to agree with you, and with others who assert that one can't define Hinduism (positively) without killing it. Very much as the Indian belief that if you have to limit/define 'God' then you aren't really speaking of 'God' at all....

aslam bhai, Hindus don't see themselves as a 'nation.' So there can't be any such thing as Hindu nationalism.

Re: # 151

true... nationalism was separate from hinduism from a long time, until '90s... then pendulum swung to the right... it will swing again... that's the nature of politics...

we have seen such swings happening in US too...

Like most religions Hinduism hobbles ambition and progress. I believe at one time it really degenerated into rituals and stigmas until reformers came along, it is much easier to reform than islam. The big challenge now is the political hindus, separate Hinduism from nationalism.

...and ekanth...has anyone read a book published a long time ago..like 10 years ago or soemthing called, "India Treasures"?

ana

kashmir is dead, for now atleast... so we are back to hinud-muslim religions... I mean - one is a religion, the other is something else that DostMitter is still trying to figure out... :)

DM

I don't know what's sanskrit for Mazhab or whatever bedouin word you have come up with... I am sure there are words and concepts in sanskrit and hinduism which has no direct equivalent in other languages and religions...

It doesn't matter... like I said - religion is an universal phenomenon, it's NOT confined to a arabic or latin definition... hinduism serves the same purpose for hindus as Islam does for muslims, christianism for christians, buddhism for buddhists... so on and so forth...

It's all mumbo-jumbo anyway - a bunch of rituals promising a pie from a man living in the sky... and here you are, splitting hairs on "comparative religions"... at best, this is just academic... at worst, it unncessarily incites religious passions - the eternal "my bullsh@t is better than yours" fight that has gone too long already...

get over it...

Re: # 144

"It's a tragedy that we did not lean the distinctions that became necessary later on. What was our greatest strength also imposed upon the largest possible cost."

Eklavya,

Proly, we are not able to cognize or appreciate the
returns we have had on the cost. Or they are all intangibles?

Perhaps the distinctions were too difficult to observe or our elders' didn't have much faith in reductionism.

Its better to let uncertainty prevail.

ana, nobody is arguing about Indus Valley Civilization (or "chattisgarh civilization" that mahmood mahmood bhai has dug up, or "Punjab Civlization" that some others have discovered in their respective backyards). Those are strictly Pakistani obsessions, and Pakistanis do have a sovereign right to keep discovering civilizations till they find one they can all be comfortable with.

Hai, hai, it's bloody bad enough that we argue about Kashmir and Partition and what not, but now we're arguing about the Indus Valley Civilization?! What's next?

"Nobody gets bewildered on why you would have to worship two people of different religious affiliations."

Vengatramanan, in India - in and around Sindh, and in and around Punjab, exactly like in and around Andhra, Kerala, and Tamilnadu - we never had the practise of exclusive "religions" until Islam brought that kind of thinking in from the outside. So following one path, two paths, and all at the same time, all made perfect sense. If you look at India's basic ideas, that is the only way it could be.

It's a tragedy that we did not lean the distinctions that became necessary later on. What was our greatest strength also imposed upon the largest possible cost.

If any of the Christians feel left out, then just visit Velankanni's Mother Mary Church. You will find Hindus in majority.

Re: # 141
Disclaimer:

The post should not be used to construe that I subscribe to the idea of humongous pilgrimages. Actually I believe, the very act could have psychological problems as the cause.

In short, the pilgrimage destination is polluted by humans to a level that it beomes extremely dangerous for the place's fauna and flora. The devotees pollute the water bodies a lot :(

The people of this land, I believe either didn't try to differentiate or weren't aware that they were practicing a religion. Some of the south indian temple festivals require Muslim's to be given the 'first respect'. They would have to kick start the celebration.

For instance, pilgrimage to Iyappan require the devotees to offer their respect to a Muslim, before visiting the protoganist himself.

Nobody gets bewildered on why you would have to worship two people of different religious affiliations.

Hinduism has never said 'quintessentialism' is the only way to live.

Re: # 19
I take the Abrahmic faiths' definition of religion because the concept itself is Abrahmic, in my opinion.
Why must Hindus insist upon theirs being A Religion?

Ans: Foreign rulers has started this and Congress has tried to institutionalise it.

Re: # 3
Laddu, NKG and anti-Islam others; why are you silent NOW?

Ans: I have nothing against any faith ( that is the beauty of Indians. I stay in a place, which follows rituals totally different from our side. With curiosity, I try to learn that and ask people, what is the reason/story behind such rituals).
Islam is very harmful to humanity. You should learn from the problem Islam has created in Afghanisthan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Thailand, Philipines, Spain,UK, France...
Jihad/Crusade is living proof of how dangerous Islam and Roman Catholicism is?
Please read the following link http://www.caip.rutgers.edu/~kanth/jwz/mbm/sv/svindex.html

#117 &132 DM Saheb, You’re very gracious in accepting others’ opinions, however insignificant. So I permit myself to contradict you on Shoresheb’s comment: "I wonder why India failed to adopt more simple, evolved and practical message of Sikhism and why approx 1 billion people of this earth follow very complicated Hinduism..??"

Religions were always social laws, invented, or ‘communiacted by God’ to respond to a situation where the existing laws were not judged sufficient by some free thinker of the time. To make them acceptable by general public as Vatsyayan says – ‘ Mahajano yen gatah se panthah’, they were given a divine sheen.

Mohammed saheb, a peace preacher in earlier part of his life became a warrior, much like Krishna, when he did not succeed peacefully. Sikhism and Guru Nanak and other gurus who followed were no exception. Heteroclitic society of Buddhists and then later Bhaktiyogis were buckling under the organized aggressivity of Invaders. Society of that time naturally threw up sikhism,copying some of the traits and rituals of agressors to face them; like a divine book….which can bind together locals.

If the society today is not folowing Sikhism, it is probably because Kripan, Kara, .. etc are no more required. If one could live without making clans, then individual free thinking takes over after a while.

Earlier Advait Vedanta of Shankar was also invented to face off monotheistic faiths and it adopted some of their traits. One indication may be that Shankar and other such Advaitis were born and active on the Malabar coast of India which we having regular exchange commerce and … Ideas across arabian sea with M. east.

Re: # 27
"You mean you did a head count?? What about the certitude of millions who walk all the way to Tirupati or Vaishno Devi??'

Ans: Most of the tamples constructued in mediaval age (post islamic/barbaric invsastion) are on the hill top not to be looted/destructed by barbaric moslems. The temples, which were constructed in areas like Orissa and South India are mostly in crowded locality (where barbarism/islam was not able to reach). The story of Thirupati Balaji is written in the temple itself. ( to avoid descretion by barbarians/moslems, it was shifted to the current location and the seven hill area is property of TTD board.
After the british had kicked out moslems, people started constructing temples on crwded localities closed to pond or river or some form of waterbody.

Re: # 82
Karachi is the dirtiest city on earth...
Moslems are despised by Indians for being dirty ( mlechha)...

Re: # 133
Modernity has automatically killed some distateful ancient cultural or ritualistic aspects assciated with Hinduism - like sati, caste system etc.

Ans: First of all, there is nothing called religion, what Indians follow. There is nothing like holy book. Nothing like prophet.
Dharma means 'duty'. It should not be mixed with religion.
BTW, there is nowhere in Indian classical books, the terms "Hindu " is written.
Somebody was talking about sati, cow urine etc... These are rituals and varies with time and place. These rituals, which we are supposed to follow from Rigveda and Sumveda is not followed properly.

The most important thing of how you to define a Hindu:

You can say "Oye Bagwana tu phuddu hai, painchoo ha etc".

Late on u can say sorry and then say "Boss sorry, shraab vadh ho gai si".

Sikhs and esp Khalsa are no longer full Hindus as they cannot say this.

One who is not Muslai, Isai, Parsi or Jew is Hindu.

Sanatani

Dear Dost

I liked it and am fascinated with the subject. I guess the belief in ancient times was considered a personal affairs & was never defined. The scietific age brought in the need to define everything.

Beauty of Hinduism is in its simplicity, universality, vagueness, acceptance of other beliefs & its total voluntary aspect. You may believe in a Diety or you may not. You may pray or you may not pray. But it provides plenty of stories & tales to emphasise the good & evil - and a guidance to coalse within a society & live a peaceful life.

Modernity has automatically killed some distateful ancient cultural or ritualistic aspects assciated with Hinduism - like sati, caste system etc.

Since ages, the ignorant & confused man looked towards the nature & tried to find an answer to all this.

Two main theories got propounded - Dharmic & Abrahamic.

Dharmic followers (Hindues, Jains, Budhists, Sihks) believed in re-incarnation. Add Karma to it.

Abrahamic followers(Judaism, Christianiy, Islam) believed in heaven & hell & day of judgement. Add Satan to it.

Rest all was local variations, reformations, additions, changes by followers as the time passed. In most cases, the
belief was made more miserable for the followers.

Though muslim by Birth, Dharmic faiths strongly appeal me. My forefathers may have been poor, uncultured or uncooth but they were not dogmatic.

regards

NHK

nature_lover#117:

I agree with you entirely about the Sikh religion.

"I wonder why India failed to adopt more simple, evolved and practical message of Sikhism and why approx 1 billion people of this earth follow very complicated Hinduism..??"

I believe the answer would be that Sikhism is not an actively prosleytising religion, although it is willing to accept anyone in its fold.

The Sikh gurus preached their message in Punjab and that's where it had its impact. And their impact is larger than the number of Sikhs in Punjab. Most Punjabi Hindus hold Sikh gurus and scriptures in great reverence. I am in Delhi these days and there are more TV channels broadcasting Sikh shabads and gurbani than even Hindu bhajans. And in every Punjabi village, you will find Hindus more likely to visit a gurudwara than a mandir.

Yes, it is a pity that more Hindus did not follow the Sikh religion; it retains all of the nice features of Hinduism but none of its negative features.

As far cow urine, like Shoresaheb, I do not know any Hindu who imbibes cow urine. However, I understand that it is used in some ayurvedic medicines.

nature_lover#117:

I agree with you entirely about the Sikh religion.

"I wonder why India failed to adopt more simple, evolved and practical message of Sikhism and why approx 1 billion people of this earth follow very complicated Hinduism..??"

I believe the answer would be that Sikhism is not an actively prosleytising religion, although it is willing to accept anyone in its fold.

The Sikh gurus preached their message in Punjab and that's where it had its impact. And their impact is larger than the number of Sikhs in Punjab. Most Punjabi Hindus hold Sikh gurus and scriptures in great reverence. I am in Delhi these days and there are more TV channels broadcasting Sikh shabads and gurbani than even Hindu bhajans. And in every Punjabi village, you will find Hindus more likely to visit a gurudwara than a mandir.

Yes, it is a pity that more Hindus did not follow the Sikh religion; it retains all of the nice features of Hinduism but none of its negative features.

As far cow urine, like Shoresaheb, I do not know any Hindu who imbibes cow urine. However, I understand that it is used in some ayurvedic medicines.

HP,

Have you never heard of Multhanaspura or the Saraswati River?

"Kautilya, the Hindu Machiavelli, spoke of the "thousand Yojanas (leagues) of land that stretch from the Himalayas to the sea" as "the proper domain of chakravartia patha (a single universal emperor)". This north-south (vertical) lay-out of the land of Bharata has been well summed up in the famous aphorism: Himalachala stu paryantum, i.e. from Himalayas to the end of land (Rameswaram). Vishnu Purana (11. 127-9) gives the geo-political reason for the vertical lay-out of Bharat; it states:

On the east of Bharata dwell the Kiratas (the barbarians); on the west, the Yavanas (the outlandish Greeks/ Bactrians); in the centre reside Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishayas and Sudras.

To protect the blue-blooded Aryans from the contamination of the 'demonaic' (Ashuras), 'wild' and 'carrion-eating' (Paisachas) and outlandish (Yavana)--people of the western wing and the 'barbaric' and 'boorish' Kirates, Pundras and Vangas of the eastern marginal land, the Hindu shastras laid down strict rules. The Dharma Sutra (II, 1.2.2) of Baudhayana states:

Who visits the country of the Arattas (the Punjab), or of the Pundras and Vangas (Northern and Eastern Bengal) must perform a purificatory sacrifice. "

These aholes now have a claim on Indus civilization!

"The Hindus never built any holy city or temple or regarded any river in the current Pakistan sacred. The Punjab Gaztteer Vol. XX says that "the Punjab can show but few Hindu antiquities." It may be noted that the remains of pre-Vedic (Indus Valley Civilization) and Buddhist periods are found in Pakistan but not of the Hindu period which came between the two and again appeared to a limited extent after the fall of Buddhism."

#117, #118
As this cow urine drinking story is thrown up every once in a while, let us put it in right perspective. Hindus don’t drink cow urine as a religious practice. But it constitutes a part of the Ayurveda – Indian natural medicine of which many muslims and christians are also adept.

Urine of a cow, which has recently given birth is considered having great medicinal value for various liver & other digestive ailments. It is given after purification and not more than a spoonful. My own brother was brought back to life when he was 2 years old and doctors had given up on him only on cow urine as medication combined with some herbs.

#124 Double post. Sorr, dunno how it got there.

"The Jat's spirit of freedom and equality refused to submit to Brahminical Hinduism and in its turn drew the censure of the privileged Brahmins of the Gangetic plain who pronounced that 'No Aryan should stay in the Punjab for even two days because the Punjabis refused to obey the priests (A History of Sikhs, by Kushwant Singh).

The inroads of those foreigners blotted out the memory of the memory of the Aryan immigration from the North-West (i.e. Pakistan) which is not traceable either in the popular puranic literature or in the oral traditions of the people. To the east of Sutlej (i.e. India) the Aryans were usually safe from foreign invasions and free to work out their own way of life undisturbed. They proceeded to do so and thus to create Hinduism with its inseparable institution of caste (Oxford History of India, by VA Smith, 3rd edition, edited by Percival Spear).

It is noteworthy that according to the Bandayana Dharma Shastra the Indus Valley was considered impure and outside the limits of Aryandom proper. Any one who went there had to perform sacrifices of purification on return. (Tribes in Ancient India, by BC Law) "

"The Brhat-Samhita mentions Vokkana country as situated in the western region of Indian subcontinent (Pakistan). In chapter XVI, V.35, Varaha Mihira includes the Vokkana among those belonging to Rahu, together with barbarians, evil-doers and the like (Roruka: was it Moenjodaro? by Pranavitana, Studies in asian History: Proceedings of the Asian History Congress held at New Delhi in 1961).

In later vedic literature there are references to confederation of un-Aryan tribes living in the north-east and north-west of the sub-continent in the first half of the 1st millennium B.C. Pundra and Vanga in Bengal, Madra in the Ravi-Chenab Doab (The Peoples of Pakistan, by Yu Gankovsky).

While the Aryans by now expanded far into India their old home in the Punjab and the north-west was practically forgotten. Later Vedic literature mentions it rarely and then usually with disparagement and contempt, as an impure land where the Vedic sacrifices are not performed (The Wonder that was India, by AL Basham).

Both Buddhism and Jainism flourished in Sind and it had revolted against the superiority of Brahmins. They ignored their Gods and denied the Vedas (Sindhi Culture, by UT Thakur). "

HP,

They say that the inhabitants of the indus valley were dravidians?

#121 Posted by vengatramanan
"They say that the inhabitants of the indus valley were dravidians?"

yes. Some were. They still live in Dadu district and in tharparkar and along the coast! I am not sure whether the Aryan and Dravidian distinction strictly apply in Sindh!

"Almost all the religious books of the Hindus, particularly the Dharma Shastras regarded Sakas and Yavanas, the inhabitants of Pakistan in those days, as M'leechas (impure). The Atharva-veda regarded Pakistan as outlandish. Similarly they were unanimous in considering Vangals i.e., Bengalees, as barbarous, outside the pale of Aryans--outscastes, outsiders. Further, they were all termed dasyus (slaves) and rakashas (devils). According to a passage in the Mahabharata, Yavanas and Gandharas (people of Pakistan), and Vangals (Bangladeshis) are sinful creatures in earth. They did not respect the Brahmins and their religion; did not follow their laws, spoke different language and were therefore detested and despised by the Aryan high castes. Inter-mixture with them was prohibited. Patanjali speaks of Yavanas and Sakas as sudras and relegates them outside Aryavarta (A History of Indian Culture, by Radhakumad Mukherjee).

The strange fact is that the basin of the Indus and the Punjab West of Sutlej came to be regarded as impure land by the Brahmins of interior India at quite an early date. Orthodox Hindus are still unwilling to cross the Indus, and the whole of West Punjab between that river and the Sutlej is condemned as unholy ground, unfit for the residence of strict votaries of Dharma (Oxford History of India, by VA Smith, 3rd edition, edited by Percival Spear)."

HP,

They say that the inhabitants of the indus valley were dravidians?

I know I will probably be lynched by the sangh parivar on this site or they will send Modi and his goons on my trail and since the The Guru of the Sangh parivar failed to even mention this in his screed about the hindu religion.

I hope this helps some bigots to learn that Sindh and Hind were always two different countries and They have no claim whatsoever over the Indus civilization so save your breath!

The whole of Pakistan, Kashmir and East Afghanistan as Sapta Sindhu -- the land of seven rivers. In Rigveda it is referred to as Sapta Sindhva, while India is named Bharat Varsa (the land of the sons of Bharat, a legendary Emperor).Thus, there were two countries in this sub-continent: Sapta Sindhva and Bharat Varsa. The Assyrians in the 7th century B.C. knew the north-western part of the sub-continent as Sinda. However, when India began to be called Hind by Persians and Arabs, and Ind by Greeks and Romans, the local people continued to call their land, Sind. This distinction continued for centuries. Arab geographers, historians and travelers also called the entire area from the Arabian Sea to the range of Kashmir mountains Sind. As such, there were always two countries in the sub-continent -- Sind and Hind. The present Pakistan (including Kashmir and a major portion of Afghanistan) constituting one country, and India, another.

Here is a little note about the population composition post#114 by the Parivar chief!

"As regards the composition of the population of Sind Province (before Partition) the two main stocks that inhabit Sind are related to, and common, one with the Punjab and another with Baluchistan. The majority stock is that of Rajputs and Jats who are the descendants of Sakas, Kushans and Huns who also constitute the majority of the population the Punjab. During Kalhora rule a number of Jat tribes such as the Sials, Joyas and Khawars came from the Punjab and settled in Sind. They are called Sirai i.e., men from the north and speak Siraiki language.

Two main Rajput tribes of Sind are: the Samma, a branch of the Yadav Rajputs who inhabit the eastern and lower Sind and Bahawalpur; and the Sumra who, according to the 1907 edition of the Gazetteer are a branch of the Parwar Rajputs. Among others are the Bhuttos, Bhattis, Lakha, Sahetas, Lohanas, Mohano, Dahars, Indhar, Chachar, Dhareja, Rathors, Dakhan, Langah etc. The Mohano tribe is spread over Makran, Sind and southern Punjab. They are also identified with the 'Mallah' of the Punjab and both have in common a sub-section called Manjari. All these, old Sindhi tribes are known under the common nomenclature of Sammat.

The smaller stock is that of Baluchi tribes settled in various parts of Sind mostly during the last five hundred years or so Since they were martial people and ruled over Sind for some time before the arrival of the British, they acquired vast lands in the province with the result that a large number of present-day Sindhi landlords are of Baluch origin. According to the 1941 census, which was the last one held before Partition Baluchis formed 23% of the total Muslim population of Sind. Among the Baluchi tribes inhabiting Sind are the Rind, Dombki, Jakhrani, Leghari, Lashari, Chandio, Karmati, Korai, Jatoi, Burdi, Khosa, Jamali, Umrani, Bugti, Marri, Mazari, Talpur, Brohi, Nizamani, Buledhi, Karrani, Bozdar, Nukharni, Magsi etc. These tribes are spread over Baluchistan, Sind and the south-western districts of the Punjab.

Yet a third stock of Sindhi population comprises of the descendants of Muslim conquerors, administrators and missionaries who were mostly Arabs, Persians, Turks or Mughals. They are a small minority settled in cities and towns but so deeply absorbed and blended with the other components of the population that all the three together have evolved a distinct language and culture. Of this third element Arabs have contributed most to the development of Sindhi language and literature and to the advancement of its intellectual and cultural activities."

Perhaps Hinduism's appeal lies in accepting that there is not a single truth. It also believes in equal and opposite truths.

Perhaps the appeal lies in being not very certain. It undrestands, the followers afterall are human beings where a single set of rules might not fit everybody. Its ability to not to issue a fatwa on a Hindu like me could also be a plus.

Nature Lover,

I have been to many Hindu temples and I have heard of nor seen people putting cow urine in food items.

All the hindus I know have never comsumed Cow Urine.

Dear Dost Mittar,

Thanks for sharing your wonderful article with us.

Hinduism looks more like a cultural thing and I talked to few newly converted western Hindus and they told me that worship and love of Hindu gods and deities gave them freedom from painful realities and un answered questions of real life..

Just like most of the religions Hinduism act as an escape from harsh failures like death and lack of true love etc., so ultimately humans start loving their imaginary "beloveds" and hand carved deities ...

Music , devotional songs and never ending rituals keep minds of people occupied and happy..

One sided talk with hand carved deities can be called as a collective neurosis of mankind..??

I also figured out that Sikhism is much simple, very profound and practical philosophy which asks to reach God through serving others..

Hindus burn lot of wood and expensive food items, Ghee etc. during rituals where as Sikhism is more pragmatic and it asks to properly use the "common wealth" of community through utilization of spiritual and physical food in resource centres of temples..

In contrary to various gods and caste system of Hinduism, we find that Sikhism is the latest religious philosophy which talks about oneness of God and equality of all living creatures...

I also noted that Sikh holy book Granth Sahib contains poetry of Muslim mystics...

I wonder why India failed to adopt more simple, evolved and practical message of Sikhism and why approx 1 billion people of this earth follow very complicated Hinduism..??

I also have a question to ask about use of cow's urine by Hindus..do they put "gomutra" or cow's urine and cow's dung in all holy foods served in their homes and temples..??

Is there any law in the modern world which stop them from doing like this..??

#114:

correction:
"most of Sindhi are, I think, relatively recent migrants from Punjab" should read
most of the Sindhi Hindus, I think, relatively recent migrants from Punjab.

#114:

correction:
"most of Sindhi are, I think, relatively recent migrants from Punjab" should read
most of the Sindhi Hindus, I think, relatively recent migrants from Punjab.

Ranjit#87:

How do you explain the large scale conversion of Bengal?

I do not know enough about the conversion process in Sindh and Punjab. Someone more knowledgeable may throw some light on these. My guess is that the conversion in Sindh was almost wholesale and probably was the result of forcible conversion following the defeat of the local king; most of Sindhi are, I think, relatively recent migrants from Punjab (notice their love for the Sikh scriptures even though there is no record of any Sikh gurus going there. Most of the Punjab conversions, I believe, were rajput and jat converts who emraced the new religion to join the ruling class.

arjunm#89:

"of course it's not a religion..it's a cult"

Why not a congregation of cults?

hamidm:

"i think i will look into kabala judaism"

I am sorry to break it to you but the new high priestess of kabala judaism, Madonna, was searching for her salvation in the Rajasthan temples of Ek Nath and other pagan mandirs. So, how about Church of Scientology?

kamath#72:

This is why I call it "my definition" and not "the definition". But I will take your advice and see a shrink.:)

Shoresaheb#67:

Thank you for your comments. You are what the RSS people would call a Mohammedan Hindu. It seems from chowk that there are more of them than one would have thought.

Regard#s various:

You seem to know a lot more about the subject than I do. Please keep posting. I am all ears!

masadi#61,62:
"The problem with your misunderstanding is that you are taking things written over a vast period of time and mixing them together to come up with your definition of Hinduism"

You are right but isn't what Hinduism is all about? a mix of philosophies, rituals, societal organization, etc. that developed on the subcontinent?

On your other point, there is no review window after you submit an article, so I could not be certain whether the error was mine or that of the chowk staff; so I considered it was proper for me to apologize for the error.

masadi#61,62:
"The problem with your misunderstanding is that you are taking things written over a vast period of time and mixing them together to come up with your definition of Hinduism"

You are right but isn't what Hinduism is all about? a mix of philosophies, rituals, societal organization, etc. that developed on the subcontinent?

On your other point, there is no review window after you submit an article, so I could not be certain whether the error was mine or that of the chowk staff; so I considered it was proper for me to apologize for the error.

Mantolives#54:

Thanks for your appreciation.

Naqshbandi#51:
"where does the whole caste system come into it? How is Manu related to Hinduism? These are serious qs."

Thanks for your kind remarks.

I did touch upon the possible sources of caste system in my write-up. Do you have a specific question? As regards Manu, he is supposed to be the author of a dharmashastra, a treatise which describes the laws applicable to a particular time. Manu's smriti is supposed to be for Sat Yuga and not for the current period, which the Hindus call Kal Yuga, which is supposed to have started with the end of the Mahabharata phase.

hamidm#39:

I googled under 'hinduism for dummies' and got several entries, including this one from amazon.com entitled "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Hinduism' by Linda Johnson. Here is the editorial comment from Amazon.com:
"Hinduism is such a vast, complex, and exotic topic that to boil it down to a few hundred pages--and make it fun--must be the work of a true avatar, in this case Linda Johnsen. In The Complete Idiot's Guide to Hinduism, Johnsen covers the history, philosophy, devotions, gods, and traditions of this timeless religion. She takes pains to not only make the material easy to read and understand but to get inside the minds of Hindus, themselves, to make sense of what they believe and why. This sympathetic view is balanced by objective and concrete reporting. For example, she presents discussions of the Aryan Invasion theory, whether Jesus visited India, and a well-documented case of modern-day reincarnation. In addition to introducing each of the different strains of Hinduism and their beliefs, she also gives an overview of the classic Hindu myths. Exotic, yes, but Johnsen succeeds in bringing Hinduism closer to home. --Brian Bruya "

I would avoid heavy books by Hindu writers, such as Radha Krishnan, which are standard university texts. In my opinion, Hindu reformists, starting with Raja Ram Mohan Roy, were awed by the monotheism of Christianity and tried to search for the same in their religion and ignored other streams of thoughts/practices in their belief system.

eklavya#34:

As I said to laddu, I am trying to differentiate between the certitude of an individual and the certitude that comes from the faith-system. Maybe this is a wrong distinction but that's what I have in mind.

eklavya#34:

As I said to laddu, I am trying to differentiate between the certitude of an individual and the certitude that comes from the faith-system. Maybe this is a wrong distinction but that's what I have in mind.

#93masanamuthu NO. Earliest known reference of atheistic current goes back to 9th century BC by Vrahaspati. The period of 4th BC till 6th AD saw birth of most of the major currents of philosophies in India.

Some great nastik (kind of atheistic) philosophers such as Kumar Giri left a very strong impact. As you rightly said in your last sentence, such people were always attacked by those who may lose their living. There were many attempts on Kumar Giri’s life. When he walked away after being thrown from a cliff, his detractors attributed it to divine protection and qualities in him. While he himself steadfastly ridiculed such crdulous attempts.

mohar11#33:

If I am creating a strawman, could you please tell us if there is a Hindi/Sanskrit equivalent of Mazhab?

laddu#31,35:

You are not alone; many Hindus do have the certitude that you have; I was talking here about the belief system. Are there any bounds that a Hindu cannot cross without crossing the boundaries of his or her faith?

As regards scenic hillspots of temples, I was in fact admiring the aesthetics of Hindus and did not mean to mock the religion

Maharana#30

Thanks for your kind words and pointing out the difference between Bhagwat Gita and Puran. I am not a scholar of Hinduism and cannot answer your question. Hopefully, someone else can.

Dost Mittar,

Who are we kidding? The only reason Islam didnt spread all over India is because Punjabi muslims (and Sindhi Muslims) didnt have the missionary zeal to spread the religion eastwards. Typically Islam was spread by each newly converted group taking the message to their neighbors and the chain continuing forward e.g. Arabs to Persians, Persians and Arabs to Turks, Turks to Afghans and East Europeans, Afghans to Punjabis etc. This is understandable because people dont usually care about people who are far removed geographically.

Somehow this daisy chain halted at Punjabis and Sindhis. The latter converted in large numbers but didnt bother to spread it further. In fact, I dont beleive there is even one instance of a Punjabi or Sindhi mullah going to the rest of India to convert people. Whatever conversions happened in rest of North India were done by Turk and Mughals, and they were interested in power rather than conversions. I dont know why Punjabis and Sindhi muslims didnt have the missionary zeal. Maybe they were reluctant converts at first? In any case, it is only after 1947 that some of them have caught the jihadi bug, especially in Punjab. However, for 1000 years, they didnt care which is why Islam never spread in the rest of India.

dost Mittar Saheb did a great service of explaining Hinduism. This is to supplement what he rightly pointed out - lack of information on Indian atheistic philosophies: Charvak or Lokayat. Reasons are twofold.
1. As freethinking individuals, they could not come together as a school. They also did not attack/hate others belief systems as they considered it part of individual liberty. As always attacks and battles are remembered and not logical explanantions.
2. Whatever information we have on atheistic current are from their objectors – pundits of cults, who made a living as Kings or Priests. They tried to destroy all philosophical treatises and generate such a psychosis that nobody dares calling himself an atheist. This is true to this day.

However some of what atheists said has survived as an example of ‘Don’t do’s’ in theistic literature. Only one text seems to have come down as authentic writing by Charvaks themselves. Tatvopaplavasimha questions severely all theistic schools of Indian thought. Please sample
“If a beast slain in the Jyothishtoma rite will itself go to heaven, Why then does not the sacrificer (yajamana) forthwith offers his own father?�

A treatise on all schools of thought- Sarvadarsanasamgraha also elaborates Charvak thoughts as reference. However the best manifestations are allegoric in nature in dramas of several authors. One example is Prabodha-candrodaya – Knowledge of Rising moon.

Charvaks propounded that theistic thought and concept of God became Maïa (illusion or Saitan) themselves. They misled in investigation of truth by creating ‘faith’ diversions.

khurram#28:

"I was talking about millions who are not 'true believers' in anything. They are often referred to as 'seculars' , 'humanists', 'free-lance monotheists' or some such term. What has that got to do with hinduism? yet they would fit your definition."

That's a valid observation. My answer is that a Hindu does not need any such label, it is built into the system (not necessarily 'humanist'). It has often been said by Hindu nationalists and even the Christian Sonia Gandhi that India is secular because it is Hindu. Another cliche often used is the sanskrit expression "sarva dharma sambhav" roughly meaning that all religions are the same.

slyder#24:

"Hingboos are the last remaining major pagan"

The question you should ask is, why? India is not an obscure corner of the world which was undiscovered by people of so-called enlightened religions. There was no dearth of zealot Muslim rulers or equally zealot Christian missionaries who tried to redeem these souls from their "jahaliat". Even today, there are television channels beaming messages from Christian missionaries and Maulanas on Indian Television, alongwith several others beaming Hindu and Sikh preachings. Why was this pagan religion able to withstand the onslaught of these two prosleytising religions, which overwhelmed other pagan and even non-pagan religions?

One reason, of course, is that all of us are brainwashed into our belief systems before we are able to think for ourselves. Another is that there are substantial psychic and social costs of leaving one's family and community which are tied to one's religious faith. But that reason would have applied equally to other pagan religions which were overwhelmed by proselytising religions.

I think that the answer lies in the bewildering complexity and variety of this belief system. Whatever these other religions brought, the natives could find the seeds of it in the smorgsbord of their own scriptures and sacred books.

To the extent conversions took place, they were for reasons other than the theological attractions of the newer religions. Some coverted to curry favour with the religion of the new rulers and hoped to gain from joining the ruling class by doing so; others joined because the message of the sufis which was tailored to the needs of the locals to such an extent that to some it became indistinguishable from their own bhakti cults and they did not think that they were embracing a new faith; yet others converted to escape the opression faced by them by the religiously sanctioned rigid social hierarchy from which they did not see escape either for themselves or their progeny without moving out of that social order altogether. But others who were not at the bottom of the social order did not and do not find any attraction in other religions and stayed put.

Before Amartya sen wrote about this, I'm sure no on knew about Charvaka or his atheistic philosophy. And now there are attempts to Hinduise atheism.

It is a safe guess to assume that people 2000 years back had the same doubt and beliefs the people have now.

There are religious nutcases / atheists / agnostics / prophet lovers etc.. even then and even now.

it is better not to define Hinduism as a religion or any such dogma lest that people start killing the blasphemers. :-)

Re: # 75

Sindhu sharma ji,

During partition there were a number of reversions back to hinduism - many of them adapted Brahminhood - and there were hardly any issues. Any one is free to take a Brahmin name- you do not require a certificate from me or any one else.

Re: # 57

"Hinduism does not need statues at all... God is Omnipresent... you don't need statues in temples or mosques... Some people want to have idols which is fine too..."

Mohar Bhai,

We survived despite demolition of thousands of our temples. We survived depite all those lootings, beheadings and rapes. We survived despite taking our family members, women and little children as slaves back to Arabic lands. We survived because the resilience the spirituality of our faith in our literature, music and language. It would even survive the modern times by merging and adapting with modern cultural practices of Yoga Studios and Art of living. They broke our temples and idols , but they could never destroy our spiritual heritage!!!

Very decent presentation on such a complex religion.

It's impossible to encapsulate all aspects of Hinduism as ther'd be something unsaid abt it even after writing a longest article.

I think it's Lokayata (...such as Buddhism, Jainism and Lokayukta). English translation of Sanskrit names is needed for Pakistanis (not to Shorey), I guess.

Never mind. I am happy that this article is is appreciated by Pakistanis.

of course it's not a religion..it's a cult...like all religions are


cult: small unpopular religion(see mormonism)
religion: large popular cult(see hinduism, islam, catholicism)

Re: # 86

eklavya,

tahmed is an apspiring prophet of islam like mirza ghulam ahmed and akbar before him ...... let's hope he does better than those two ...... i am ready to follow him

Hamidm,
Your salvation was so near...you missed it!

I will check back with you in 15 days. I am headed to Karachi on Sunday to ensure free and fair elections and power transfer to the true reps(awami Numainday)...you and me!

hamdim, now that you mentioned tahmed ji, I would raise a question that always came to mind.

Tahmedji is a true gentleman, knowledgeable, and a real universalist. But I have never met another person (Muslim or non-Muslim) who shares(shared) his understanding/interpretation of Islam and/or the Quran. Yet his enthusiasm for his understanding/interpretation has neither dimmed nor wavered in years.

Is that a true miracle of faith, or are there lots of others who actually do share his views (such as the Quran being the Arabic Quran and others), and one just doesn't see them around much?

(tahmed ji, please ignore this. It is not meant to offend you. If anything, I am very impressed that one person could have such courage of convictions and the strength of character needed to maintain that.)

hp,

...... i would like to retract my offer to revert to grandpa's gopinath's religion ...... based on the interactions by bonafide hinoos on this board i have come to the conclusion that hindooism is not all that dost-mittar would have us believe ....... like tahmed he seems to be a spin-meister :) ...... i think i will look into kabala judaism ...... alas, my search continues .......

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

allah ji, there may be something to that, but we can't be much enthused/worried about what ali_1 bhai believes, particularly in this context. He made a reasonable point. I take that on face value and leave the rest.

Eklavya,

It is like a Pakistani pointing to Christian attacks in india.
Yes there are attacks on Missionaries because right-wing doesn't like their conversion activities. But what fate the Christian Missionaries will face if they open up their shop in Pakistan?
Will they be allowed to preach the message of Christ and allow peaceful conversion of poor Muslims to Christianity for a loaf of bread?

Eklavya:

I inadvertently flagged your post. Didn't mean to.

Eklavya,

A person who sees a hate-monger as a messenger of peace is having problems with what others are seeing? Hello.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

HP

Its too late. Save ourself, join the Church of Scientology.
Tom Cruise is the next messiah.

Yeah Laddu may have promised Brahminhood because getting a "achoot" certificate is not that easy.

#73
I am willing to do everything for the good of Hindu religion. I wanna make it a paak saaf religion unlike what it is now.
Btw,
Pundit Laddu Maharaj promised me Brahaminhood and I know a great Hindu leader and a Pundit like him won't lie!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Any one who dares to define what Hinduism is, will be in trouble. He has to get his head examined first.

Kamath

#67 Posted by ShoreSahib
“That very fact makes me a Hindu for I am too a person who was born on the east side of the River Sindhu, in the land of Sapt-Sindhu!�

You can shout to your heart’s content but you will still not be a hindu until you accept Hindu faith on the hands of Pundit Laddu Maharaj bombai wala.

Since I have completed the ritual and am accepted by the Pundit, I am really a hindu now! This is a unique honor that Pundit Laddu Maharaj bestowed on me and not on you!

You will remain a fake Hindu no matter what your Christian Professor said to you.
Only Pundit Laddu Maharaj can declare you a hindu.

Anyway, going by your features alone, you are hindu!

Hamidm,

I invite you to join the Hindu faith and take advantage of the Pundit Laddu maharaj's presence on this board!

agreed 100% Hamidm. I don't know one hinjew that has seen an elephant riding a rat...or a musala..who has seen a winged horse go to heaven...but I have heard of hinjews marrying their kids off to a tree or a dog...and musalas banging 6 yr old kids.

thomas jefferson said :

“Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear…

Do not be frightened from this enquiry by any fear of its consequences. If it ends in a belief that there is no god, you will find incitement to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise, and the love of others which it will procure you. If you find reason to believe there is a god, [then] a consciousness that you are acting under his eye, and that he approves you, will be a vast additional incitement…

I repeat that you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and neither believe nor reject any thing because any other person, or description of persons, have rejected or believed it. Your own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven…�


...... now, if you want to believe in flying monkeys rescuing damsels in distress, winged creatures talking to men in dark caves, men in sandals walking on water and other such nonsense, it is your business ...... just make sure you slap the fool when you look in the mirror ......

I really do not know why all of the interactors are so bent upon abusing each other's religon.....
I am not religous but at the same time I do feel that religous fervour is only intensified when one's religon is abused....
No matter how much we like to disown....
Religon is one of the things which does form our identity....
Even Einstien despite being an Athiest started calling himself a jew when jews were being abused.....
Religon always has a reactionary element...
You abuse someone's religon or even give "logical" criticism...
It will always intensify the fervor....

Dost Mittar Sahib,

Great article!

You are to be commended!

As a scholar of Religious Studies, you have presented a very scholarly article on Hinduism and explained its belief system and history very well.

The points contained within your essay are shared by the foremost scholars of religion in the world.

Thank you

I was born a Muslim. I consider myself to be both a Muslim and a Hindu. My Hinduism professor Gail Sutherland told me once that she perceived me to be more of a Hindu than a Muslim. I think she was right.

I am not an arab or an Iranian.

I am first and foremost a person of Indian cultural ethnicity.

That very fact makes me a Hindu for I am too a person who was born on the east side of the River Sindhu, in the land of Sapt-Sindhu!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

In #60 read "Were you to combing Judaism, Christianity and Islam into one " as
"Were you to combine Judaism, Christianity and Islam into one

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Amartya Sen California Magazine; July-August2006 University of California at Berkeley : "In some ways people had got used to the idea that India was spiritual and religion-oriented. That gave a leg up to the religious interpretation of India, despite the fact that Sanskrit had a larger atheistic literature than exists in any other classical language. Even within the Hindu tradition, there are many people who were atheist. Madhava Acharya, the remarkable 14th century philosopher, wrote this rather great book called Sarvadarshansamgraha, which discussed all the religious schools of thought within the Hindu structure. The first chapter is "Atheism" - a very strong presentation of the argument in favor of atheism and materialism."

The author writes "So, Who is a Hindu?

I will conclude by giving my own definition of a Hindu: In my understanding, a Hindu is someone who may believe in one or more gods or goddesses or not believe in any god at all, but he does not claim to have a monopoly over the Absolute Truth and is willing to give the same respect to the validity of others’ beliefs as to his own. In other words, Hinduism lacks the certitude of the three Abrahmic faiths, namely, Judaism, Christianity and Islam and, maybe, also of Sikhism."

Come on man, this is not how it works. A religion does not have to define itself as a "religion" to be a "religion" first and foremost and what you recognize as non-religion has sociological characteristics that classify it as a religion for example the sacred and the profane, rituals, and a common group solidarity enhancing symbols and definitions and so on. The problem with your misunderstanding is that you are taking things written over a vast period of time and mixing them together to come up with your definition of Hinduism- i.e. anything and everything goes as long as I can make money and proclaim an IT miracle- that is however not the case except for a small percent of morons that form a large percent of the Hindu chowk population....Were you to combing Judaism, Christianity and Islam into one and do a similar read, you would conclude with the same definition, more or less, of what you come up with regarding Hindusim but that is certainly not true about any of them; truth is not as variable as you might like it to be, neither is an easy attitutde about it any sign of maturity or open mindedness, and finally RELIGION is not a bad word....

mohar, if I understand you right, you are willing to accept Islam as a sect of Hinduism. Or, you have something else in mind?


--------

no probs, chalta. These are interesting issues :)

Kaal, you want the truth? You can't handle the truth..


Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns and intellect and capital(NOT scripture). Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Mohar? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Muslims and hinjews and you curse the Secularoon. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: That religions's death, while tragic, will probably save lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at mosques and temples, you want me on that wall. You need me there. We use words like honor, code, loyalty, universality and TRUTH...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline . I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I'd prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to.



:) sorry kaal...couldn't resist when you go a bit overboard with your muddled thoughts.

Re: # 49 kaal
[...let's not rush to installing statues in mosques so soon.
...]

Once again - another strawman argument...

Hinduism does not need statues at all... God is Omnipresent... you don't need statues in temples or mosques... Some people want to have idols which is fine too...

There is no need to have statues in mosque

hamidm2

hindooism seems to be a complex religion for thinking folks (arjun being the exception)

being the equal opportunity religion trasher that you are :), if memory serves me correctly, arjun does not claim to be either hindu or christian - being a product of both. So he cannot be the exception.

furthermore bhai saheb, whatever heaven or hell is, merely accepting jesus christ as the son of god and personal savior does not get you a ticket to heaven. I know dubya hopes it will. :)

"Hingboos have been civilized to some extent by the Mughal and British rules. The missionaries are doing a good job now."

HAHAHA. Mughal = Civilized? A political system where brothers killed brothers, fathers killed sons and vice versa, people were bricked alive? Mughal Rule belongs, along with Nazism, in the dustbin of history.

An excellent summation of a complex and fascinating belief system.


Thanks dost-mittar.

"Indian thought lacks that drive. So we can call the former 'universal' truths and Indian thought 'Indian.' But I suspect that is not quite right."

eklavya, it right right that you are not right. But you know that. I urge you to try to understand concepts like "universal" and "truths" etc.. before using them. Idnian views vs. outsiders views has the same universality as outsiders view and indian view. spreading doesn't make it either truth or universal.

Re: # 51

Hi wolfy,

How is your sunnat?

interesting write up dost-mittar sahib----enjoyed it. thanks.
it is a pity that many hindus nowadays don't understand hinduism as you do in your concluding paragraph...
where does the whole caste system come into it? How is Manu related to Hinduism? These are serious qs.

khurram, the only connection I see to India is that this view, or rather approach to understanding the reality around us, has been best and most consistently been developed in India, and by its own inner logic, has no inherent drive to convince others (mostly non-Indians) of its 'truth.' It just doesn't approach 'truth' in those terms.

There was a gentleman on chowk sometime back who wrote beautifully on that important point. He described in detail why a semitic religion 'had to' spread out because its own inner nature.

Indian thought lacks that drive. So we can call the former 'universal' truths and Indian thought 'Indian.' But I suspect that is not quite right.

Mohar, there is definitely a "oneness" best articulated by my friend thinkingstorm, who is a good Muslim/Hindu/human being.

Since it can be argued that everything - Hindus, Muslims, man, dog, pig, fish, mountains, galaxy, and anti-matter- came from some one source, they are all basically the same, and we need not worry about separating them.

This kind of "oneness" comes naturally to Hindus since it is part and parcel of our core beliefs. Still, let's not rush to installing statues in mosques so soon.

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

laddu bhai, ok. Perhaps we will have occasion to pursue an understanding of sufism sometime.

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

khurram, yes, I was actually astonished to see the same point of view expressed by cobra, our rss friend. The focus there is exclusively on geographical identity, not on any principles or ways of thinking. So, for instance, cobra does not consider Bali Hindus Hindu at all (Bali Hinduism has no overwhelming connection now to India. It makes all local references.)

I am not sure if I fully comprehend that view.

Eklayva,
All pagans are not hindus. Hindus have a connection to a body of Indian thought - no matter how vaguely defined. This is missing from DM's definition in the last paragraph.

Re: # 45

Eklaya ji,

I think you got it all wrong..........you would probably NOT find a sufi heading a mosque!!
And there is already a Vishnu in Mashhad Masjid in Iran.

Re: # 43

Eklavya Bhai Saheb,

Sufism's summum bonnum is "Fanaa" which is like ascetic goal of "Samadhi" - so it is very much part of hindu ascetic orders!!!

LOL, you may be right, after all, mohar bhai. Still, for the sake of peace and preservation of life, I would advise my Hindu friends to not want to intall a statue of Vishnu in any mosque anytime soon, even if it is a mosque headed by Indian "sufis". :)

Re: # 37kaal

dude - it's the same thing - religion, dharma, faith... you and DM - you guys just raising strawmen out of nowhere and then stomping on it and creating a big hoopla about nothing...

I am not sure what's the reason for this hair-spliting excercise, this urge to define and re-define ancient concepts... you guys have studied abrahmic faiths and may be got too "close" to it... you guys are getting too narrow and one-dimensional in your thinking... :)

Vishnu has a thousand names and 10 different manifestations, but He is One... religion, faith, dharma - it may be a dozen different words, it's the same thing...

Come on - do i really have to teach you the basics?

laddu bhai, unfortunately, that is a suicidal path for Hinduism, but for reaching that conclusion we need to figure out what sufism exactly is. If that is ok with you, let's leave that for another time.

For now, all I would submit is, sufims is NOT hinduism, it has nothing to do with Hinduism. It is not Islam either, not by a long shot, but merely one of the many tools towards the larger unit/unity of Islam.

That is perfectly fine and respectable, but it is just different. Probably that is not convincing enough, for which, I apologize.

Re: # 39

"appeals to stupid people"

Are you saying pitamah Gopinath was stupid?
Is that why you guys deny your hinju past
and go all the way to Bagdad or Basara
or somewhere there?

"laddu, tragically, Islamic sufis and Hindus go to dargahs for totally different reasons. For that reason alone, Hindus should totally stop patronizing any of these places. That must be a political move, not a religious one."

why should hindus stop going to dargahs? sufis are considered to be outside traditional Islam indulging in kufr and bidda. We consider sufis to be part of the sadhu parampara

Re: # 25 and #24

why are you being so cruel to yourself? self-immolation is a crime slyder, and worse is a sin far greater than coveting someone else arse....

Anyway enjoy what allah said he would give you in #36

dost,

....can you recommend a book on hindooism - something like "hindooism for idiots" which can explain my grandpa's faith to me ..........

....... unlike islam which is a simple religion for simpletons, hindooism seems to be a complex religion for thinking folks (arjun being the exception) ...... at first reading it is obvious that islam and other abrahamic faiths were thought up by uneducated and ignorant sheep-herders, wheras hindooism is the product of brainy intellectuals over many centuries ...... maybe that is why christianity and islam appeals to stupid people - you accept jesus christ as the son of god and you get a ticket to heaven; you kill an infidel and you get to cavort with seventy virgins in heaven ......... simple and easy to understand ! ....... who has the time to figure out the process of reincarnation and all that other 'heavy' stuff .........

........why can't i become a hindoo by simply saying, " there is no god but ishwar and ram is his prophet" ?

Re: # 34

"Laddu, the anubhava that creates Indian 'cetitude' is a reflection of our own inherent/inner godhood, or to put it in terms of semitic faiths - each person's inalienable right to be his or her own 'Prophet' or son or daughter of "God."

That realization - what Indians have for ages called atma gyam (or even brahma gyan) creates 'certitude,' without reading any books. Books become another, temporary, reflection of certitude of some people at certain time and place."

well said.!!!

lol, mohar, I refer to semitic religions and the rest of our deligions, so we can differentiate between things that only look the same but are not the same at all.

Just as we don't have religion, semiticists don't have dharma (although sufis might desecend upon us again to protest). What's more, it's hard for each side to see the possiblity or the wisdom of the other, without being accused of 'selling out' and destroying the 'essence.'

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 27

"...the Hindu deities do occupy scenic places at hilltops!.."

See you try to mock my sacred places...yes indeed divinity descends on the hill tops .....you actually have only a bookish understanding of hindu way of life............

Am not qualified to comment much here, but DM ji, laddu raises a rather important point. The resolution of that apparently complex issue is simplicity itself, if as always, we go to the basics of all Indian thought (Hinduism or not, one couldn't care less). And that Indian point has been articulated, amazingly, by Faruk!

Laddu, the anubhava that creates Indian 'cetitude' is a reflection of our own inherent/inner godhood, or to put it in terms of semitic faiths - each person's inalienable right to be his or her own 'Prophet' or son or daughter of "God."

That realization - what Indians have for ages called atma gyam (or even brahma gyan) creates 'certitude,' without reading any books. Books become another, temporary, reflection of certitude of some people at certain time and place.

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

khurram, you should see the bitterness with which many 'fundamentalist' christians/scholars accuse these 'liberals' or 'new agers' of being Hindus and pagans. Of course, the liberals or new agers don't accept that, and that is perfectly ok for "Hindus" for whom labels tend to be meaningless (which is a big problem in political terms)....
---------------

laddu, tragically, Islamic sufis and Hindus go to dargahs for totally different reasons. For that reason alone, Hindus should totally stop patronizing any of these places. That must be a political move, not a religious one.
-------------------

Anyways, would rather read and learn from others here. Thanks for the opportunity, DM ji.

Re: # 19 dm
[... Why must Hindus insist upon theirs being A Religion?...]

Well, you are the one who wrote the article making the comparison and hair-splitting distinction!!!... :)

For most hindus religion, faith, dharma - it's the same thing... .it has been there among humans for ages, in one form or the other... the concept of god and religion is NOT abrahamic, it's universal...

You are basically creating a strawman and stumping on it...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 27

DM ji ,

The issue was about "certitude" . I am saying I have certitude about my faith...I say those millions who walk all the way to tirupati and vaishnodevi have "certitude" about their deities.

Yet you prefer to ignore that and talk about dargahs.
Try to understand that dargahs are like "samadhis" of Nath munis and of various Sadhus of different ascetic panths.
Also , these sufis are considered munafiqoons by the traditional muslims- going to dargah does not mean that hindus have a dhimmized reverence for the Allah!!

It is quite rare to find an article on Hinduism written with as much objectivity as possible by a Hindu or an outsider for that matter. I can say that most Hindus' sentiments on their religion/way of life will be echoed by this write up.
On Sankhya Yoga though, I think Bhagvad Puraan and not Bhagvad Gita gives a better description of being thesitic as opposed to athestic. There is some confusion regarding Kapila muni. There were two different ones perhaps. But the Sankhya philosophy mentioned in Bhagvad Puraan is somewhat as follows:
The universe is made up of 25 different qualities. Of these 24 are static and only the 25th i.e. time is dynamic and creates a dynamic and ever changing universe. The 24 qualities include consciousness, matter etc.
I don't remember Gita speaking about Sankhya philosophy in this vein though.
Anybody volunteer to dispell this confusion?

Adios

Faruk#23:

I do agree with that way of thinking. This is similar to what J. Krishnamurti used to say.

DM,

I was talking about millions who are not 'true believers' in anything. They are often referred to as 'seculars' , 'humanists', 'free-lance monotheists' or some such term. What has that got to do with hinduism? yet they would fit your definition.

laddu#22:

"You mean you did a head count?? What about the certitude of millions who walk all the way to Tirupati or Vaishno Devi??'

I obviously do not ask people of their religion. But as you know, it is possible to guess our people's faiths, esp. for women, by their dress, etc.

I do know of the multitudes who go to Tirupati and Vaishno Devi (I have been to both these places, the Hindu deities do occupy scenic places at hilltops!). I also know that many of the same people would also go to the dargah of Nizamuddin.

And while I do not have an isht-devta to pray to, I have immense admiration for the philosophies expounded by Hindu sages and I do listen to and enjoy bhajjans and shabad-kirtans.

allah, philosopher:

You might want to exchange your "pleasantries" on Unplugged. Thanks.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: article
Dost,
One of my dad’s friends describes Hinduism as “Your search for your God�. According to him there are the religious books are there to help you along the way. But what you believe in is up to you. Quite like doing a PHD, there is a lot prior work in the field i.e. the religious books. But your thesis has to work for you.

Your thoughts!

Regards,

Faruk

Re: # 16

" do not think that your certitude is shared by your coreligionists. Go to any dargah in India on a Thursday and you would find that the majority of those praying at those dargahs are not Muslims but Hindus."

You mean you did a head count?? What about the certitude of millions who walk all the way to Tirupati or Vaishno Devi?? You have a poor understanding of their faith my dear!! I think your understanding of contemporary hinduism is very much dhimmized which appears to emphasise 'superiority' of "formless" form of God (as in Sikhism). You must read more of Visistadvaita or even Dwaita paramparas in order to appreciate the issues regarding Nirvikara and Sakara Brahman!!
If possible try to understand and also perform Shodapochar Pujan on some idols of your Ishta Deva/devi!! Perhaps then you would understand that "certitude" does not come from reading books but from "parokshanubhava"!!!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

khurram#18:

I would call them "hinduised". A true believer in Judaism, Christianity and Islam would believe his religion to be the Absolute Truth. There is a lot of openmindedness these days, especially in the West, with respect to new ideas even in matters metaphysical.

mohar11:

I take the Abrahmic faiths' definition of religion because the concept itself is Abrahmic, in my opinion. Why must Hindus insist upon theirs being A Religion? I think that it is perhaps more accurate to call it as a convenient term that encompasses a number of faiths.

Having said that, I would add that most of these faiths do have some common threads, the most common being a belief in the concepts of reincarnation and moksha.

The good thing about this amorphous nature of Hinduism is that it lets a thousand flowers bloom; the negative side is that it lacks the discipline of a single faith, so you have people worshipping snakes and temples devoted to rats, not to mention that mushrooming of con-artists masquerading as swamis and "godmen".

DM,
Your 'definition' in the last paragraph may describe most hindus. But it is not sufficient as a definition because it does not exclude Non-hindus.
Many westerners would desribe themselves this way without identifying themselves as Hindu.

laddu#7,8:

"DM talks about "certitude" and ignores the certitude of idolator like me who considers that the formless can only be attained through the worship of idols depicting the positive qualities of the Sakaara Brahman."

I do not think that your certitude is shared by your coreligionists. Go to any dargah in India on a Thursday and you would find that the majority of those praying at those dargahs are not Muslims but Hindus.

Thank for your other comments. Re. Charvak, I agree that he is materialistic and I included him among Sankhya people because he is non-theistic. Charvak fascinates me but I could find very little on him on the Internet.

laddu#7,8:

"DM talks about "certitude" and ignores the certitude of idolator like me who considers that the formless can only be attained through the worship of idols depicting the positive qualities of the Sakaara Brahman."

I do not think that your certitude is shared by your coreligionists. Go to any dargah in India on a Thursday and you would find that the majority of those praying at those dargahs are not Muslims but Hindus.

Thank for your other comments. Re. Charvak, I agree that he is materialistic and I included him among Sankhya people because he is non-theistic. Charvak fascinates me but I could find very little on him on the Internet.

Re: # 10 DM

HP has no clue... the five-dal is rich in nutrients from five different sources... he may not like the taste, but that's the point... the primitives don't understand the rich diversity...

DM

One god,one book, one prophet - while this is good for simple folks - it's actually a step behind in human evolution... evolution of the thought process... it's tribalistic and primitive... those who take these "religions" too seriously end up being primitive... I mean look at the bedouins...

You are looking at an ocean here... and you are wondering why it's not pond... well, why bother about the little ponds, little poodles of stagnant water where nothing gets in or gets out? which is guarded by zealous primitives who call it their "religion"...

While your attempt to get a "personal view" is commendable - you are viewing it from a wrong side of the prism... turn around and look it from the other side - then you will see all the colors... Religion is what hinduism is - one-book faiths are mere sects... they have yet to grow into a real religion...

hamidm2#5:

Don't knock grandpa gopinath. You owe your good looks to his decision. And but for him, you would still be eating the heeng-laced daal.

jayp#2:

My concept is similar to that of the Kerala high court. Several hindus on chowk have declared themselves to be agnostic or atheists. Are they non-hindus, as Vivekanand's definition would suggest?

Re: # 6 hamid muttar


''this sounds like something you too should look into ... it is time people like you and i went back to our roots''

The roots where there is ''gao-muttar and and goaber khaad(fertilizer)'' that help your roots grow to the new spirtual and intellectual heights. ''aa ab loat chalain''.
hamdid...along with that you will have to aviod messing up devta toilet bowl ji with non vegetarian filth as well.

Muttar knows better

HP#1


If religion is food, to use your terminology, then a Hindu would say that each daal is a food and so you can eat whatever daal or daals you like. If you like to worship Shiva alone, if you think that Sai Baba is a bhagwan, that's your choice and if you want to worship both of them, that is your choice, too.

As regards the reaction of other hindus, let's see if I am greeted with the same kind of reaction that you got. In essence I agree with you sans your ridicule.

DM
[...it’s not a Religion in the sense most people think of religions, yet, one cannot say that it is not a religion...]

well - let's frame this "in the sense most people view religion":

1. there should be one god. checked - Ishwar is one and only and formless, omnipresent etc etc.
2. there should be prophets. checked - we got avatars - krishna, ram, a number of them.
3. there should be scriptures. checked - gita,vedas etc...

Important thing here is that it's doesn't stop there... it goes beyond that narrow definition [who defined that anyway?] of religion... it's a superset of that narrow definition of religion as understood by "most people", read people of abrahmic "faiths"...

It has transcended the narrowness: one god,one book,one prophet confinement... it seeks to take people beyond that, it has expanded the horizon... which is why it confounds "most people", because it's rich in diversity, rich philosophies, rich in ideas that "most people" have not come to understand it yet...

it's an insult to the faith to try to cast this into abrahmic definitions, to dumb it down to that level... there is no blasphemy in hinduism, but this comes closest to it...

Hinduism is ahead of the time...

"One of the great proponents of the Sankhya school was Charvak, a contemporary/adversary of Buddha. "

Correction - Charvakas were materialists and not proponents of Samkhya school which believed in dualism of Purusha and Prakriti.
Charvakas only believed in Prakriti .

Re: # 3

I just saw this article- and my quick reaction to it-

1.Hindu thought, in contradistinction to the Abrahmic thought, share similar metaphysical notions about Atman, The world as a Samsara, Concept of individual Karma and the notion of liberation.

2. Hinduism is NOT like Abrahmic "religion" requiring persons called the 'prophet' as the radio receiver to some 'formless' God's communication. Every person is capable of communicating with the divine and become the "seer". There is no rationing on the number of "seers" in the life span of the world - and hence no finality on a "Prophet".

3. The notion of "Self" -
Darshanas are not merely theoretical and metaphysical books but have a practical component and share an very important common thread of 'Sadhanas' that aim at segregation of the soul from the non-soul (Vedanta), the Sadhanas for separation of the Purusha from the Prakriti (as in Samkhya) or the meditation on difference between the 'Anus' (Atom) , the matter (Nyaya-Vasiheshikha)and the soul . These finer points are not understood just by reading Radhakrishnan's "Introduction to Indian Philosophy" but by interacting with those who turned these darshanas into Sadhanas. The crux of all these Sadhanas is the understanding of the true nature of the "Atman" or the self and it's relation to the material world.

4. The notion of "Ishwara"-
"God", to the extent it is the first cause of the world (and not as the wrathful Abrahmic deity) is the "Ishwara" and has an important place in Yoga-Samkhya, Vaisheshika and even Vedanta. He can bestow knowledge of Atman and hence be the cause of mukti from the samsara.

5. Karma versus destiny- Man as a karmic being can gain any position (including that of an 'AApta' or a Prophet ) in the 'mrtyu loka' or even the highest state of 'Indra' (the lord of Gods) by doing penance and Sadhana.
Any person on the 'mrtyu-loka' can also become a "Prajapati" through karmas.

6. Hierarchy of Lokas (world)and transmigration -
There is a hierarchy of 'Lokas'. The souls move from the world of Devas to the 'Mrtyu -loka' to 'Naraka' as per the karmas.


DM talks about "certitude" and ignores the certitude of idolator like me who considers that the formless can only be attained through the worship of idols depicting the positive qualities of the Sakaara Brahman.
.
Let me read on!!

hp,

........ this sounds like something you too should look into ... it is time people like you and i went back to our roots - to be honest, i am getting tired of being a cultural muslim ....... hindooism sounds like a lot more fun with all those women in skimpy saris running around in the rain throwing paint at each other .....eid is just a day when you feel bloated and suffer from heartburn ........

dost-mittar,

........ damn! ... why didn't you tell me all this before ! ....... i guess, by your definition, i am a hindoo too! .

what the heck was grandpa gopinath thinking when he left such a benign and wonderful non-religion to join the ranks of fanatical true believers who have caused so much pain and suffering on earth ? ....... maybe, this sunday, i will go to the local hindoo temple and light a candle for his tormented soul ..... and as long as i can eat meat and don't have to wear that silly dot on my forehead, i am okay with being a hindoo ......... maybe i will change my name to gopinath ......

Dear Reader:

I apologise for the inadvertant capitalization of the last part of the article.

Dear Friend (dost-mittar),

"... is willing to give the same respect to the validity of others’ beliefs as to his own."

"... Hinduism lacks the certitude of the three Abrahmic faiths, namely, Judaism, Christianity and Islam and, maybe, also of Sikhism."

Interesting thesis there DM.

Laddu, NKG and anti-Islam others; why are you silent NOW?

Sat Siri Akaal.

Dost,

I recall that vivekananda has defined a hindu.

He has to believe in god, and also believe that the vedas are given by god.

Then there is the legal interpretation, as per the high court of kerala in the jesudas Vs NSS case ( circa 1972).

A statement " I believe in hinduism also" was found adequate in the context of entry into hindu temples, to recognise the person as a hindu.

In Karachi I used to go to a friend's house after school and they sometime used to have some thing called punchmeri daal(Close to what I remember). They would mix five types of daal and serve that as food.

I guess by DM's description Hindu religion is like puchmeri daal. You mix every daal you find in the kitchen and call it food!

I remember sometimes ago I posted that hinduism is no religion at all and it is mishmash of different faiths and believes that came together after Muslims invaded India.The whole sangh parivar on this site descended to abuse me.

Now I see that the guru of the sangh parivar himself agrees that Hinduism is no religion.

I am sure some 2000 years ago, north Indians barely knew some people existed in South India. So the religion of both south and the North India could not possibly be one at that time!