The Problem Of Pain In European History

I think this article reads more like a few flights of fancy are taking place simultaneously – all heading into different directions and yet occurring at the same time – so the end result is one does not get anywhere! Also, once you get into the mood, you start liking the sound of your own words and there is no stopping you – the lines between the reflection and the rant gets crossed again and again.

And there are some really long, s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d connections here! For example, despotic rulers – usually monarchs – have demanded absolute subservience from their masses for ever – it is a universal trait and has little to do with Europe. In fact the sub continental rulers – from the past and the present ones – were and are little different.

You ignore the very basic fact that Christianity actually did not originate in Europe.

Re: # 4:
What do you mean ``nothing else makes sense`` to you?

Of course, as Saad has said that no system can exist entirely on rationality. I wonder why Buddhism continued to include faith in rebirth and karma theory even though it essentially repudiated the entire set of Hindu Scriptures.

We need someone well versed in Budhistic philosophy and history to shed light on this. I would also like to learn more about the practical disappearance of Buddhism prior to Islamic invasion of Sindh which I think happened around 700 AD. How violet was the transition from Buddhism back to Hinduism?

Holy moly, Saad Anis! Please don`t overlook us, the hoi polloi :(

---

Inquirer

Nothing else makes sense (to me). IMHO, you are highlighting Indic tradition`s distinguishing and central feature.

That`s why Plato and Jesus sound so very much like our philosophers, and why we have very few, if any, problems in reconciling science and religion.

For instance, can you even imagine any one quarrelling over whether evolution should be taught in schools, or how old the earth is, or the usefulness of stem-cell research?

An interesting fundamental analysis accomplished through a reference to a non-specific situation in Europe. Actually, the statements are generally true for all lands. However, the ``rebellious`` concepts were clearly formulated by Marx and Engels first in the rational context hence the example of Europe is acceptable.

Let us, Hindus particularly, not forget that this wakening up had occurred in India long before Marx and Engels. Actually, the revolution in Hindu Faith led by Gautam Buddha is really an emancipation declaration of humanity. But this emancipation is really ``edeification.`` Therefore the ``edeification`` should be really thought of as freeing of humans from the conception of divine.

Buddha operated, however, two thousand years ago and could not separate religion from sociology in a water tight fashion. So, really Buddha was the first revolutionary of the world. Within your framework he refused to sacrifice his principles in the pursuit of the daily low level gains and thus he could not formulate the development of an exploitative state machinery. As a consequence, the later resurgence of Hindus against Buddhism and the violent Islamic attacks left the Buddhists very vulnerable resulting in disappearnce of Buddhism.

It was a pleasure considering your abstract and deep article.

Oddly enough, the Kingdom of Man bore a striking resemblance to the Kingdom of God of yore.

once we deconstruct these two polarities we can have a kingdom of normal beer drinking white collared guy ..........forget about the afterlife.......... we need not even ask for houries and river of milk and honey on the earth

Excellent stuff man.

Good to see you in full force.