What is Hinduism? A Personal View

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.

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.

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.

Re: # 51

Hi wolfy,

How is your sunnat?

"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.

An excellent summation of a complex and fascinating belief system.


Thanks dost-mittar.

"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.

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. :)

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

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.

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 :)

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....

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."

=== 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