ANTICS OF ANTI-HINDU MEDIA
The problem with the Indian media is its inferiority complex when it comes to white skin. So anything that reeks of Hinduism deserves to be sneered while anything from Western masters should be revered.
The following are the antics of the great Indian media which delights in raping news to suit its own end:
1. Always blame Hindus for communal violence ignoring the mass of evidence against Islamic and Christian perpetrators.
2. During communal violence, don’t send your cameras to the scene of minority violence, focus the archlight on majority violence only (read Modi and Bajrang Dal).
3. When Hindus react, give them generous advice like preserving peace and brotherhood — Two wrongs do not make a right.
4. When Muslims attack for any flimsy reason, give a direct apology as in the case of Muslim attack on Hindu and Deccan Herald.
5. Project the Hindu Gurus in a bad light and project them like villains even when there is not even a shred of evidence against them — Read the Shankaracharya.
6. Ignore the criminal charges against priests and missionaries – Read Graham Staines and the Church.
7. Ridicule Hindu emotions as superstitions while project the same superstitions as personal faith when it comes to the minorities.
8. Rave over Islamic superstars like Aamir Khan and Shahruk Khan while going low on Hindu heroes like Akshay Kumar and Hrithik Roshan.
9. Always make it a point to undermine all that which makes Hindus proud of Indian tradition.
10. Make it a point to throw the spotlight on dark side of Hinduism only like caste, sati, untouchability et al.
There are more. Do point it out to me. My next book is on Exposing Indian Media and its anti-Hindu bias.
-----Email: greathindu@in.com
Fascist Trends in Indian Media
January 14th, 2009 at 3:07 am
>>>>>very true. Now that they have given golden globe award to not an indian but a muslim giving scant respect to anu malik who is a hindu>>
Once again reflecting Varnashama follower’s white skin inferiority complex…
ie, Longing for White Man’s certificate!!
January 14th, 2009 at 4:48 am
>>>>According to you, whats the definition of God? And can you substantiate your definition with nature of gods based upon hindu gods history..
A hindu God won’t push the disbelievers into hell..
A hindu God won’t talk about false gods..
A hindu God won’t threaten his followers to worship him.
A hindu God will not hate you even if you hate him/her..
And most importantly Hindu Gods won’t send stupid prophets to instruct mankind what to do in their life, because hindu gods have given a thing called brain to his followers to decide what is right and what is wrong…
Thanks…
January 14th, 2009 at 5:13 am
To my Christian friends,
I welcome your criticisms about caste system.
A society automatically degenerates into different classes. Throughout the history identify one society that functioned without class discrimination . Without any gradients a society will not function. I partially agree with Marx when he says the whole of history of mankind is nothing but ‘class struggle’. History of humanity is actually history of very few elites. The masses will follow elites like sheep. Whether you like it or not this is the truth of all civilizations.
The only difference between the conventional class system of all societies and Hindu’s Caste system is that Hindu version is birth based class system. There were reasons for that. I won’t go into detail now. (If you want to read more about Hindus caste system, I would suggest Neitszhe)
But now Hindus have clearly realized that it won’t work now, and there is no more birth based system now. But it will take time for completely get rid of caste discrimination because it runs deep into the roots of our civilization.
Now that is all from me about caste system. I welcome your comments.
And about Christianity being the most perfect religion to the mankind, I would not agree with you and will post my criticisms in the subsequent posts.
Before that I want to know what is the stand on Christianity on other religions like paganism?, I mean theologically.
Thanks..
January 14th, 2009 at 7:48 am
Vijay>>I want to know what is the stand on Christianity on other religions like paganism?, I mean theologically.>>>
Except alone for Christianity, most of the religions like Islam/Buddhism/Hinduism/Jain etc has accepted other religions also a path to reach God.
But Christ claimed, that ‘He is the Light and only way’ and there is no other way for salvation. Now if Christ is right, then rest of the religions would become false, and rest of religions are right, christianity could also be right to be considered as yet another path.
Now you may why Christ alone could be the only path? Cos, in my view, he Christ commands the better moral standards/teaching when compared to other religious teachings, and hence he could be right.
If every religion could reach to god, then there are some gods which advocates stealing (eg Kallar caste god in T.N).. There are some gods which suggests followers to reach him through sex..And some religion assures heaven for those kill the infidels.. In this light, I can safely conclude there can not be may ways, and could only one way to reach GOD.. And its up to us to choose the right path.
Now, you may ask me, is it just a Christian tag, one needs to get salvation.. Its NO.. No.. NO…. To reach God, we should lead a good sinless life, as taught by Christ, not just by becoming a member of Church or just by getting converted..
January 14th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Vijay>>A hindu God won’t push the disbelievers into hell..>>
Punishment for our sins, is advocated by every religion. Hinduism punishes to sinners to be reborn as untouchable or animal, and christianity puts them to Hell, with an option of repend/forgivness of sins..What exactly the difference you found hard?
>>>A hindu God won’t talk about false gods..>>
As you claim already it as ‘ false’, then false should be highlighted and Truth should be maintained. Thats Dharma right!!..
Lets take a typical eg of Kallar caste god, who is the prime deity for thiefs and guard them during robbery.. Do you call this be a true God? Whats would be your reaction to this?
>>>A hindu God won’t threaten his followers to worship him.>>>
If God is our creator, then he would command respect right.. Like how parents demand respect from their children..
>>>>A hindu God will not hate you even if you hate him/her..
What about the killing/raping/cutting nose/slitting throat done by gods..
Anyways, according to christian view, God is All loving , but he punishes those who sin against him, cos he is the creator of all of us.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:55 am
Vijay your post is very intelligent and to the point. Thanks. Let us forget about casteim as a “mistake” from the past. After all forgiving is supposed to be a virtue. But, as along as the “twice born” brahmin stays as the care taker of this old religion, things are not going to change much. What are you going to do with all those verses in the Puranas and Smrithis? I will let you deal with that.
One thing I noticed about your post on Hindu God is that every point was about what the God is not, ie you are just trying to show that Hindu Gods are not “bigoted’like Hebrew god or Allah. So if He is none of these, what is He? I am sure you don’t have answer. You Think that He “should n’t be” like a Hebrew God as given in OT, right? Your thinking is OK. But there are many sides to it. For one thing, if you examine Hindu Puranas and Vedas you can find many gods who has shown the same types of personality where they “demand” or “become pleased with” personal worship? You can see bigotry as well. So, basically you are just trying to hit the Hebrew God with the same questions Western athesist always uses. If you use the same parameters, Hindu Gods do not have a chance at all.
Later.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:13 am
and Vijay, you being a Neitszhe reader, I will have to preemptively say something about the mad man. His philosophy helped bring nazism. That says it all. Did that bring any good to man kind? Evil begets evil and Holiness begets virtue. So now, go ahead we are waiting for your criticism of Christianity, hoping to correct atleast some, if any, misinformation we may come through.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Theological stand on Paganism. My version.
I cannot claim to be a Christian theologian. But what I know is that Jesus came as the “light of the world”. He is for everybody contrary to the theory that he was a Jewish Messiah only. We are nobody to know God’s plan and the Church itself can only base their dogmas on already written Word. Even new theories Christian theologians are supposed to take to test through the scripture for validity.
Nobody really know what is God’s plan for people who could never have known Jesus. But people already had a chance to learn about Jesus and refuse to accept – should be left on for the final judgement as per scriptures. It is for God to judge them, not us, not the Bishop or Pope. Pretending to know anything about these things need to be considered a sin in itself. So how does He Judge? For example, from reading Bible (correct me if I am wrong) what I understand is that Jews who refused his Messiahship will be “judged based on their own Laws”. So will Hindus be judges based on their own Laws? But see there is the point. Hindus have associated themselves this constant recycling of life and a Dharma based on birth status itself. If you beleive that everything is unreal and only real thing is the Lord, you may be judged because still you like to worship Creations of the Maya itself!, no? To worship Creations (even if you say that it is one with Creator) is a very bad sin as per Judaic religion. This will be the effect of “centralizing” the universe on yourself as per Budhist philosophy as well.
So let us leave the final judgement to the almighty. I hope you understand something regarding the Christian view from this. Jesus is the embodiment of ultimate forgiveness and self sacrifice which cannot be compared to any other religious figures. But to come to him th egod himself may have to open your eyes sometimes.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
I am sorry, being an outsider, I should have given you some explantion of “judgement”.
Forget about sin and fall from grace. Sin is nothing for God since as we saw Jesus was able to get everybody saved with his blood. But as you know we all think about life after death and sometimes think what happens to our eternal soul.
Interestingly (probably unknown to great Atheists who suck up to Eastern Philosophy), the whole idea of Judgement and life after death in Christianity came from the East. The ideas of judgement and Messiah came to Judaism after their contact with Persian empire. As you know the Avestan religion originated from a Vedic background. Before the Babylonian exile of the Hebrews, their idea about God was like ‘The big war Lord in the Sky” who will lead them to victories and a peaceful life in the Promised land. That was it. Further troubles like the Exile and contact with Persians brought the idea of the Messiah and a new kingdom under God.
For lack of time, let me say whatever happened and discribed in Old Testament is only a prelude to the miracle called Jesus of Nazareth. He is there to lift up the burdens of these redundant Laws created by the priests. He is there to lift up your Yoke. There is no judgement for person who walks with him. Others, as I said, will be judged – probably based on their own laws. So mind it Christian does not care about his next birth.
Finally there wer upteen number of Pagan Gods and religions in the world wiped out by the Monotheistic religions. The life styles of those people did not worsen. The gods did not curse. No plagues came. Do you think some thing happened in India when some turned into Christianity other than Brahmins lost some of their Toilet Cleaners?
January 14th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
>>>>So, basically you are just trying to hit the Hebrew God with the same questions Western athesist always uses. If you use the same parameters, Hindu Gods do not have a chance at all.>>>
That was one of the finest thoughts of Emmarcee..
Most of the debates I had with hindu scholars, I also have felt the same, ie, they nose dive to aetheism in order to (just) oppose Christian worldview.. Some hindus even claim that its acceptable to them if someone says that there is no God…some time, they say, Indian is ok, and some times, an aetheist non-believer is also Ok.. bit of confusion.. and finally, amidst this confusion, people like Deepak Kamat resorts to Hindu fundamentalism, and moderate likes of Easwar resorts to Indian Nationalism.. Confused lot!!! If someone seriously debates with Hindu scholar, one can see, hinduism falling to the traps of aetheists..Thats one reason, the Catholic church has always ferociously debated with aetheists, than hindus/budhists/Islam, cos the church is clear that its the aetheists are those who are contrary to chruch, but not the hindus….
It makes me to safely conclude, Hinduism lacks clarity.. Thats one reason, most of the city born learned people are shifting to Christianity.. to be frank, not to Catholism, which I belong, but then to Born-again Christians…
Finally, they all one, cos they all agree with the teaching of Jesus Christ.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Simon, Christ is the only path not only because of his higher morals, He is the predistined solution for the salvation. You can check each and every religion in the world, conform to their laws and rituals, lead the perfectly moral life, adhere to agnostic threories and try to get self realization – None of these paths will lead into the final reconciliation with the Divine no matter what you claim. Thes claims of Realization happens from two reasons, some see a transient vision of the Divine and think that they have acheived everything. Some are just plain cheated by their own mind and or the evil forces.
There is a reason for God himself being the salvation.. This is the other side of the question all Christian-Bashers always use, “why did God create everything, including sorrows and calamities”. The point is that if there are problems in the created world (may it be Maya), only the “Creator” himself can fix it. The Creation cannot and CANNOT help himself out of the misery. We can help each other in material world. But to get back to the Divine what you need is God himself and his Grace and Mercy.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Emmarcee, that was indeed an impressively well thought about stunning point..
January 14th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
I spent fourteen years of my childhood years in a christian missionary school. Bible came to my hands before Vedanta. I loved the character of Jesus Christ and relished on his teachings. He was a man of values but I also do understand that he was talking to a different set of audience.
Now why should you guys build a theology around his beautiful teachings? Is that needed? Don’t you look back and see the history of Europe? Will you ask me to prove If I say that church alone kept the Europe in darkness for thousand of years’? What happened to Galileo and other intellectuals of his period?
Church was ready to kill any revelations that was against Bible.
From, where did this fanaticism come?
I guess, Mr.Simon’s post has the answer..
” Christ claimed, that ‘He is the Light and only way’ and there is no other way for salvation. ”
I am not saying for sure. But I am really curious to know. To narrow down the debate, please address the following questions..
1. How the church was more fanatical when it was built on the foundations of beautiful teachings of Jesus Christ? Is it because of the Judeo-christian theology that clouded the Christ’s teachings? Or the Christ’s teachings itself has the poison?
2. Why the Christian God created sin? Who is more cunning ? one who commits sin or the one who created it?
Many of the biblical claims naturally makes no sense. Anyway, there have been lots of debates about it and I don’t want to make it as an usual atheist-creationist debate.
I will come to the issue of Gods in Hinduism and atheism in my subsequent posts.
I agree I was sarcastic in my post about gods but that was not intended deliberately to hurt you guys or to show a superiority, but to make it clear that an Abrahamic God makes no sense to us.Anyway take it lightly..
Regards.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Vijay>>If I say that church alone kept the Europe in darkness for thousand of years’? What happened to Galileo and other intellectuals of his period?>>
Vijay,thats a general one pointer all aethists talk about Galileo,by carefully skipping the facts..
Its was the Church monastries and the monks who gave the modern science. Most of the early scientific inventions like Sea navigation by stars, Genetics, Chemistry.. look in to the old scientists, most of them were monks or the one patronised by church. The oldest observatory is in Vatican.
Coming to the issue of Galileo, it was the Jesuit priests who were funding him. There were contradiction in terms of Mathematics against copernican, which Galileo was not interested in proving it (though he was right). Then Galileo had signed an agreement, that he would not propound it, unless he proves it, and theologians are also were working on it in line with Biblical tems. It was just the breach of trust,, which landed him in jail, but not science… Please read through history..
If church was against science, why 90% of inventions are from Christian countries esp Europe, and by that time, why not a single Hindu wasnt there.. Who were are the most Noble prize winners? Do you know, the previous ISRO chairmas is the current member for Vatican’s Astronomy Dept.!! Havent you heard of Jesuit Priests highest contribution to modern science..
January 14th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Vijay, having asked , I can tell you, its the Hinduism which was against education and science.
Its has deprive the majority (1/4th) of the worlds population to touch books in the name of Varnashrama. Thats one reason, even at the moment , 850Mn people couldnt contribute to any considerable modern science or Olympics (at the moment)…
Forget science,… why not even in Sports…. Yes Yekalyva story stands self explanatory..
>>>but to make it clear that an Abrahamic God makes no sense to us.>>
Who are you talk on behalf of others , and who has given you that right… claiming it as US…
You have your freedom to reject Christ’s teachings, and Im perfectly OK with that. But will you respects others freedom of choosing religion and his personal faith.. Im sure you would not go along with RSS/Bajrangi’s in suppressing an individuals freedom of choosing his own faith and God.. Lets respect religious freedom in this country
January 14th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
No problem. To know ease to alleviate the anxiety of the unknown.
I suggest you to go through my and (simon and sapr)’s postings again. Many answers were given already and we are getting tired. But if some good comes out of it…
It is very easy to “love the Character of Jesus”. To walk in his way is the difficult part, of course for myself too. Even Gandhi. the Greatest Hindu killed by Hindus, liked him. he said “But I don’t like you Christians”. Actually your answer is in his words. A Christian is supposed to “conform” to the image of Jesus. But we don’t do that. Most of us are “nominal” Christians and hope that just the ‘ritual” of getting Baptized as Christian will save us.
Again I am not a theologian to give a discourse on sin. You may have to contact a real scholar. I am not even sure where the idea of “sin” came from. Only thing I am sure about is that a normal human being like me or you is nothing comapred to the supreme divine person who is the reason for our being. I believe in a First Cause for the Existence. Some hindus call it a Maya. I really don’t mind till the point that they say that their Gods are also a part of the Maya.
In the beginning of the blog I wrote this: that I (or anybody) don’t really know about what really happened in the beginning of the universe, before the bigbang? repeated fluctuations of energy? Like Jaina teaching. But anyway the truth is that these creative work has resulted in existence of you and me. Why? we don’t know. As per Christian Theology it is all for his glory. We are created to be with him. He created us in his image. So it is predetermined. But as we see it, we are not even good enough to stand in the shadow of God. He is the embodiment of truth and righteousness. Who are we? So there is something separating us from God. Whatever causes this separation is “sin”.
In the “stories” of Genesis, you can always see the separation of man from God is brought about by some kind of self realization of doing something wrong and consequent “guilt” feeling. (Adam and Eve, Caine). Sometimes this guilt is brought on by our own mind or through the rules of the society. This is why still common man does not see killing in the war as a “sin”. To a third party who believes that any killing is immoral will be shocked at this “sin”.
What Jesus brought to us is liberation and hope in revival of your own spirit. Then why don’t you consider him just a Guru? I don’t want to go there. But you can see from Jesus story and all the miracles recorded by many people that he was the prophesied Messiah who is the “only begotten God” who is one with God in the essential. God in Human Flesh so his own sacrifice will bring about deliverance.
So it is not his speeches that were great, but his person himself was the supreme. The words were only a part of it and all his teaching are not even recorded. Well among Apostolic priests there are “secrets” passed over at the time of consecration. (unlike Brahmins it is not a birthright, but these secrets are not usually shared with commin people). Apostolic means succession from the Apostoles – desciples of Jesus). I confirmed about this with couple of priests and they said this is right information.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
whatever happened to Church is because man’s idea of building God’s kingdom is so different from God’s idea. But again sometimes somethings happen for greater good. The writer of gita could be right. Nothing happens without God knowing. I think you have to agree if you believe in any such entity.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
O! There are so many assertions. I don’t have much time to counter all of your points.
Hinduism have six schools of thought. Of them, only two are theistic schools where other four are atheistic.
First you should understand one thing. A personal God is always the God of masses, not the elites. All along the history Hindu elites was always atheistic or sceptical about God. Even if they use the word ‘God’ that necessarily means an all prevading energy of the universe not the ‘creator’ of the universe.
Going by this definition, every dust falls under the definition of ‘God’ of Hindus. (let alone killing,raping,nose cutting,throat slitting Gods).
Kindly Google and find out what is vedanta and advaita. I cannot write everything as I don’t have much time..
Now after the fall of the socio-religious caste system, our religion confines to the belief in vedantic ideas.. Now what we call Hinduism is Vedanta and it should reach every Hindu irrespective of varnas..( FYI, you guys are talking to a ‘Shudra’)
You may now ask a question about the worship. It is a starting point of meditation. Other than that it don’t have any value.
And Idols
Part of Indian mysticism..
Simon
Whatever may be the controversy surrounding the Galileo, he was obviously opposed for saying something that was against bible.
Having said that, let me ask you a question..
How would Christians will face a scientific fact that would refute any of the biblical claim? Would they welcome it?
*us**
You are looking too much in my statements. I meant many of the Hindus (at least vedantins) agrees with my view..
emmarcee
I am new to this site..You can post the link where you have addressed the issue I raised..
Thanks
January 14th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Our debate is scattered, Let me narrow down..
To put it in a nutshell, prominent points I want to make..
1. Hindus believe skeptical research, skeptical investigation is true religious process. That is true religion..
2. The real glory of our civilisation is that it succeeded in creating real sceptics. Neither atheists nor believers. both have concluded already and so there will be no progress..
Thanks..
January 14th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
q1. All your choices looks like your own preferred answers. Reading Bible in the correct persepective He does not seem to have any “clouding”. He was not a ‘raving fanatic” or Bin Laden” of his time. When you read the story of the stoning of sinner what do you see? a very cool level headed person disarming his criticizers with one liners. (let him cast the first stone.. then Give to Casear which belongs). It was those people blinded by adherence to the Hebrew Laws who gave him away to the Romans for killing. Another side he was shown to be a common man who cries at the site of his friends death.
In the last post I wrote that organized church can only be blamed for their own problems. This is common in any religion or movement where you give too much power into the priest’s hand. Historically they always play politics and there is no religion above these human follies. The Roman Church (called Catholic) built on Paul’s teaching and Peter’s throne, became the seat of power as Christianity became the religion of empire in 4th century. But you should understand few important things. This will be the last time I will be detailing it.
The Christian followers had to undergo persecution untold in history till then beacuse they adhered to their promise of god’s kingdom. They never cared for their life and were willing to be martyres. They were persecuted by Jews, Romans and Persians. Once Romans became Christians, Persians (Zorastrian) started persecuting Christians. This is one reason the old Syrian/Persian Church grew separate of Roman church. Then came division of Roman empre, Byzantine and ofcourse the onslaught of the Arab armies. Arabs took over the holiland and came quickly to Byzantine. Zorastrian and Eastern Christians were converted to Islam.
From all these incidents, where do you start seeing the “overhelming” bad influence of the Church called Catholic Church of Rome?
I proposed this previously. The dark ages of Europe” is a myth. This is concocted to hide the fact that Early Western Europe did not have anything signifant to show for cultural antiquity. They claimed Roman culture as their own whereas Roman culture itself was an extention of Greek culture, very Eastern. Between the fall of Rome and subsequent rise of more Western Europe there is a gap and the European scholars called it the dark ages.
Well I just checked weekipedia. Scholars don’t even use the term Dark Ages any more. Som e say it was politically dynamic but without a lot of literature. When the kingdoms went down and became less pwerful the Roman Church became more and more powerful. With unlimite dpwer comes all evils.
On the other side, it took crusades to bring out the western Europeans into touch with the Cultured East. Without the powerful Roman Church and Pope they would not have set up on Crusades. If they did not the whole world would have been Islamic by now. How many more centuries would it have taken for the world to get out of that darkness? So there is something good in eveything.
The so called dark ages were “Golden ages” for the Byzantine and eastern Christianity till the Islamic Forces hit them. In fact the formation of protestantism itself caused the catholic dominant ages to be called Dark Ages by Protestants who hated Catholic Church and its ways.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Vijay, looks like I spent an awful amount of time for a person who does not have “time” for it. So probably your questions were selfanswering. I will leave it at that and will not venture answering. Most of you assertion about Hindusim are your own ideas and some cooked up by New Age People who wants to attract the Modern Atheists and Agnostics of Western origin. Everyone knows where the money is! But even though sticking with the straight and narrow path is difficult we will keep to it. We don’t want to show “six” faces and ask the “consumers” to pick and choose what you want. I didn’t know the truth comes in 6 bottles. Growing up among Hindus in Kerala I did not relaize that 4 out of 6 of them, especially teh educated were Atheists. Good going. Have a nice day.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
Vijay>>Kindly Google and find out what is vedanta and advaita>>
So what’s your response to those hindu’s who dont follow Vedanta & Advaita? Based upon our previous discussion, on what basis you are going to accomodate/reject those?
>>>How would Christians will face a scientific fact that would refute any of the biblical claim? Would they welcome it?>>
In his book D D’souza says, Scientists scale mountain,bite snow and painfully treak long the whole , and finally the reach the Summit (Invention), only to find the theologians were already sitting there few centuries ago….Here I stress the word ‘THEOLOGY’, and that will answer it all.
Its natural that, Science and religions should walk each other, though both pursue differnt goals. A scientist can tell the temperature of the Coffee in kettle, but the purpose of making coffee cannot be explained by science..Its just an eg..
January 15th, 2009 at 2:34 am
>>>So what’s your response to those hindu’s who dont follow Vedanta & Advaita? Based upon our previous discussion, on what basis you are going to accomodate/reject those?
Again, you are conditioned in a way to stick to an ideology and reject anything that contradict you.
Religion is not logical system like mathematics… Even I would be interested in a person who rejects vedanta or the whole tradition. Hindus do..
A recent example is UG Krishnamurti.. Did Hindus killed him? NO.
The sole pupose of Hinduism is spiritual awakening. It experiments in different ways to achieve it and it is still experimenting.
Human beings are naturally different. That is the reason Hinduism allowed different ideas even contradicting ideas to evolve.
Emmarcee..
Kindly point out what are cooked up ideas. Or learn Hinduism from atleast Wikipedia.. I have before mentioned elites were always few in a society. So, it’s highly unlikely that 4 out of your 6 Hindus may be atheists. That would not refute my statement.
I have just told the truth about this civilization. It’s my own original research. If you want to challenge, challenge my points specifically.
And please stop preaching Christianity to me. As I said before bible came to my hands before Upanishads. I know my relation with Jesus christ and his teachings. I’m not egoistic here. But your preachings scatters our debate.
Regards..
January 15th, 2009 at 2:37 am
Simon
You haven’t answered my question. Just face the question courageously. Perhaps I should have used the word ‘IF’ clause.
What if science finds out something that contradicts bible?
How would Christians will face a scientific fact that would refute any of the biblical claim? Would they welcome it?
Thanks..
January 15th, 2009 at 3:30 am
If you want to check in terms of number count, check the orkut communities.. You will find more members in swami ‘Vivekananda and Vedanta’ community than the ‘Hinduism’ community..
I guess that prove my assertions about Hinduism..
I don’t hate Christianity or Christians. It would be very unjust If i say because Christ’s teachings played an important role in shaping me into a good human.
But I reject Christianity as a religion, because of many discrepancies.. I firmly believe, even the son of nazreth will endorse me on this point..
I rest my case with this quote of Neitczhe
‘There was only one christian in the history and he died in a cross..’
Thanks..
January 15th, 2009 at 9:57 am
As if there are no discrepecies in Hinduism!. Vijay you are just as one sided as anybody else. I am just stopping debating because you post these selfserving questions and don’t even care to read our detailed answers. Sapr don’t waste your time. It could even be Kamath himself trying to increase his web content.
A final short answer to your silly question is that even in Christians there are people with different thoughts and ideas. It is not as black and white as you see. Only some fundamentalist churches (just like Hindutwa scholar Rajaram) who would claim everything written in bible happened lierally verbatim. Even Roman church has accepted different theories about timelines in genesis.
AND ABOUT THE QUESTION ABOUT THE COOKED UP IDEA. well, if you care, try to go through this blog and others in Kamath’s site. You will understand that may be we probably know better than you about the history of India and about so- framed Sanatana Dharama. Your assertion that 4 out of 6 Hindus follow atheism will work only with some white guy brought up in a god-hating society looking for “spirituality” without the encumberance of divinity and morality. We are from India and know exactly what Hindusim is all about. It may not be your fault to think like that, but could be some idea you picked up from websites. But think about it? is it really the truth? Come on.
I will comeback tomorrow, well unless I change my mind.
January 15th, 2009 at 10:09 am
I was having a discourse with Simon, not trying to proselytize to anybody. I am not a missionary but a wanna be apolegetic for my own sake or my community’s sake. Sometimes your superficial knowledge about Jesus as a Guru may get benefitted if you read more. A lot of your assertions about Christianity starts from partial knowledge.
Please get back to us only if you read some of our old posts including those in the blog on conversions. I promise you that I will never ask anybody to change your faith.
January 15th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
>>>As if there are no discrepecies in Hinduism!.
I never said Hinduism is a perfect religion or it contains no discrepancies.. But we differ in our capability to accept the discrepancies and rectify it.
>>>our assertion that 4 out of 6 Hindus follow atheism will work only with some white guy brought up in a god-hating society looking for “spirituality” without the encumberance of divinity and morality.
Are you reading my posts? I have no reason to lie to you friend. I stand with the truth how bitter it may be.
6 schools I referred to.
Dvaida
Visishtadvaitha
Advaitha
Bhuddism
Jainsim
Chavarka
First two are theistic and remaining four are either atheistic or agnostic. Most of the Hindus will fall under dvaidis or visishtadvaidis and a minority will fall under the other categories.
Now thanks to spritual renaissance that happened in the last century many Hindus learnt the meaning of religion in a new perspective and Vedanta which was monopoly of elites is reaching now to the last hindu..
People who were the cause of renaissance I mentioned…
Swami vivekanada, ramana maharishi, Arabindo, theosophists, J krishnamurti, rajneesh and lot more..
I am not ready to take up a faith, that’s why I said I reject christianity. I have no intention to hurt you..
Hinduism is not mere faith. It is being and becoming divine as Swami Vivekananda said..
I am not Deepak kamath. Won’t you think for a moment how much such statements will hurt me??
Anyhow thanks for spending time with me. I have made the points I wanted to make.
Regards..
Vijay..
kvskmech@gmail.com This is my email Id, in case if you want to say anything to me.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
well, I have a friend who believes that Iswar comes in the form of Rum. I think we should add him to another school of Dualism. He thinks when this comes inside we get filled with Spirit.
Just one mentions of Naastikans some where and it becomes one school of thought for Hindusim. Good!
and from Vedanta to sankara a 1200 years and Sankara to Ramanuja a span of 1600 years!
I liked Ramanujas metaphysical theories than Sankaras. But neither of them was not able to break free of the established Dharma belief and Birth problem.
Jainas preceded Vedic religion and Budha urged people to discard the Vedic Brahmin religion. Counting the Jaina, Budhas and nastiks I get only 3.
So the question is what are you calling Hinduism? If you say Hinduism includes everything that originated in Indian Bhoomi, Brahminism should be considered an outsider absolutely. Please read our earlier postings.
I hope you continue to do your searching, good luck.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
sorry Vedanta- upanishads to ramanuja 1200- to 1600?
January 15th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
My salute to Vikramatunge the Brave Srilankan journalist who was shot dead in Srilanka. If in India, he would have been a number one enemy for the Hindutwa Naazis. His last note quotes a German poem:
“In his rendition of the poem, Wickrematunga wrote: “First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
Wickrematunga pronounces his pride in his profession’s attempt to chronicle life in a country at war and his paper’s work to bravely represent all people — “Sinhalese, Tamil, Muslim, low-caste, homosexual, dissident or disabled.” He casts the paper as an independent organ that faithfully records events. He said the paper lacks a political agenda and wants to see Sri Lanka as a “transparent, secular, liberal democracy.”
Kamath, looks like your type of guy!
January 15th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Vijay>>You haven’t answered my question. Just face the question courageously. Perhaps I should have used the word ‘IF’ clause.
What if science finds out something that contradicts bible?>>>
Vijay,I was not ducking your answers..I thought you would have understood the real meaning of THEOLOGY..Thats why i answered it in little higher note.
In nut shell, the theologian will work on the basis of Reasoning/Logics to draw parallels with the proven scientific laws (not theories).
For eg, the issue during Galileo was not just flat world..Theologican could easily interpret it as old Biblical langauge and notion of that time line or even could interpret it as typographical error, as long as it doesnt contradicts the reasons over core dogma/doctrine. The issue with gallileo was ‘Finite/Infinite’..Hindu philosophy metaphysically claim about Infinite, where as Christian view is all about ‘Finite”… This is where the recent Big Bang theory seems to tred in line with Bible. This is the theologians job. In this light, theologians/bible have no issues with 7 days creation(varying time line) or even Darwinism.
Thats why I said a anecdote of theologian sitting in summit before scientists reaches, cos, even before Dawin theory becomes law, theologians are working on Finite Vs Infinite to answer bigbang & darwinism.
Please feel free to ask me in case of clarifications.. seems to be an interesting topic
PS: infinite/finite is a deep philosophical subject, which was used to define the nature of God… Possibly u may google to study about it.
January 15th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Vijay>>I never said Hinduism is a perfect religion or it contains no discrepancies.. >>
Look, you and are not aetheist and are on the pursuit of God and on the mission of exploring the ‘Ultimate truth about God’, cos God is not a ‘Matter’ to be defined by science or to be quantified as the object.
Since the evolution of mankind, they are all on the job of pursuit of God, while finding the answers for “Cause of our existence in this world” , “after life”, Purpose of our life on this earth, etc etc etc.. Many a religions formed and died in the process, when further higher level of truths were explored by another religion, and seeems to be convincing to the mankinds ability within limits of his Reasoning.
So, its not an adviceable idea to stick to a particular ideology, which means you are obstructing your thought power in exploring the “Higher level of Truth’ and seek for it.
Thats one reason, the modern philosophers, are strictly against ‘Anti Conversion Laws’ esp, instilled by Islamic Kingdoms.. Lets respect religious freedom, and let the mankind explore the ‘Higher level of Truth”
January 15th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Vijay>>>It would be very unjust If i say because Christ’s teachings played an important role in shaping me into a good human. >>But I reject Christianity as a religion, because of many discrepancies>>
Vijay,If a human can choose his own goodness from each religion, then , given a chance, I would choose to be Brahmin of Hinduism, and Practise the Polygamy and quick divorce of Islam, and would even take a teaching from split-away christian mormonism and indulge in family polygamy/incest, worship Kallar God and make a quick wealth by stealing… Am I right in doing this??
Its absolutely not necessary to be a member of Church or Carry a Christian tag.. But do you fully follow Jesus Christ’s teaching..Yes its difficult, as Christ said, following him is a difficult path, and entering God’s kindom is so difficult like a ‘Camel entering the eye of needle..
Just curious to ask you… Do you believe in Christ’s teaching of God’s (any god u name it) Fogiveness, Good Samaritan, Punishment of sins, our Loving relationship/communion with God, life after death without any continious rebirths…..
if not you are choosing something of your convenince… Even hitler followed some of Christ’s teachings, but also followed Race Supremacy swastika teachings of Aryan- Varnaism from Hinduism, for Hitler’s own political agenda…What can we say about this kind of pick&choose parts of religious traits??
January 16th, 2009 at 2:07 am
Emmarcee.
Yes, I should have mentioned that as schools of Indian philosophy. I personally associate myself to all the thoughts that born in this land not specifically to vedic ones.
simon.
Religion is not about morality.. It’s more than that. It is my view.
The aim of debate is not to change the opinion of others to yours.
This kind of debates will continue endlessly. I guess I have made my points honestly and also learnt from your arguments. Let us stop here.
Regards
January 16th, 2009 at 4:36 am
Vijay>> Religion is not about morality.. It’s more than that. It is my view.>>
I agree with you. So where are the missing points?
>>I guess I have made my points honestly and also learnt from your arguments>>
I enjoyed debating with you and also appreciate your healthy/balanced/open hearted posts.
January 16th, 2009 at 9:37 am
“In his rendition of the poem, Wickrematunga wrote: “First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
Any comments Mr.Kamath?
January 16th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Fist they say they are against Pakistan.
Then they come for the Muslim.
Then they fight the leftists.
Then they say they are against missionaries.
Then then come for Christians
Then they turn to Budhists
Then they attack investigators of Hindu terrorism like Karkare
Then they attack the journalists
When they come for you there would n’t be anyone to speak out for you.
Death to Fascists and Nazis.
January 16th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Emmarcee, chronologically the poem goes this way..
First they came for demons (Black Dravidians) in the name of mythology.
Then they came on Buddhists and wiped them out.
Then came on dalits.
Then on Gandhi..
Then came on Moslems
Then on Christians…
Thanks to democracy, they are countered. But still they pursue their goals with swastik Kakhi trousers and lati.. Dont mistake him as a cop, he is indeed a respected member of RSS..
January 16th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
I can understand reason behind your anger and hatred now..
Let us talk about politics now..
Hinduism was always seen as a politically failed religion. Hindus are trying to rectify it now..
Two sets of questions to you guys.
1. What is your stand on state religion? Many nations have recognized Christianity as the state religion and also there many Islamic nations? Will you oppose such nations and will support any move to change their constitution to secular?
If you don’t have any problem with a state having a official religion, will you agree if Hinduism is recognized as India’s state religion?
2. Why do you oppose Hindu nationalism? Isn’t their fundamental right to have their organization until their ideologies are hate filled?
Hindus are not naturally organized like Muslims. That is the reason for rise of such organizations like RSS, VHP etc particularly to resist Muslims., This is my view.
Regarding Muslims, every sane person irrespective of religion has to talk against Islam..Because Islam is not a religion. There have been a lot of debates around it.. I don’t want to go into all that now.
January 16th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
I can see a general trend in Christians friends postings..
“A superiority complex about Christianity and reducing Hinduism to a tribal religion synonymous with Brahmanism.”
You have every right to speak against political Hindus, my erudite friends, but ridiculing total Hinduism as a demonic religion is totally uncalled for. That is not going to help. That will turn secular, honest Hindus like me to be really honest.
Ok let’s start the blood bath of words..
Is Christianity really superior??
Even to my limited knowledge, it is not so..
No christian as far as I know, have refuted Neitszche and Russell.
Please read Antichrist by Neitszche . I tried to refute him out of my passion towards christ, but failed.
Could any one refute his beautiful arguments which clearly show Christianity as fundamentally ‘barbaric’?
He was the only christian who understood the son of Nazareth, IMO. Though he claimed that he has extreme hate towards that Jewish carpenter, he actually loved him..
Otherwise he would not have stated this.
‘There was only one christian in the history and he died in the cross’..
Simon you may not like this post. But I can’t help. you guys are making me to start with this.. And neitszhe stays, till he is refuted.
Try it, for church sake..
Christianity is not what the son of Mary really wanted to have in this world..If he comes now, he would destroy Christianity. These are my assertions.
Regards.
January 16th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Vijay>>> but ridiculing total Hinduism as a demonic religion is totally uncalled for>>>
Vijay, please note, this site is not hosted by any such christians, to ridicule hinduism, but by a Konkanasta manuwadi Brahmin… Its only when Deepak Kamat hosted the picture of Pope Benedict asking him to apologize for Laksmananda killing,things got exploded and Deepak Kamat had his foot on his mouth. And he started deleting many a posts too..
Since then Im here.. Now, guess who wanted to ridicule whoom, and who is initiating it all? Ideally speaking, you should address this issue to the owner of this site Deepak Kamat.. Someone said, People sitting in glass house should not throw stones..
>>No christian as far as I know, have refuted Neitszche and Russell.>>
I think you have limited info about Nietzsche’s writing.. His writing has been countered well by lots of philosphers, and it has no value in the modern philosophy. If you are really serious about it, please put forward here some of his points, and sure I will attempt to answer it.. Btw, most of the hindus cherish Nietsche, cos he countered Christianity(being a majority religion), failing to understand that his sole objective was to refute Existence of God.. He didnt write about hinduism, cos , there will be no takes for his book or he has not bothered to consider Hinduism or Islam..
>>>Could any one refute his beautiful arguments which clearly show Christianity as fundamentally ‘barbaric’?>>
Contrarily, another author D’souza in his top chart book , has convincingly explained/quantified, that highest barbarism was done by aetheists and its ideologic followers..If you are not agreeing to this, I can refer his data and furnish, for which I may need some time.
>>Simon you may not like this post.>>
In the context of debate, I still enjoy and like your posts.. No bad feelings..
PS: You have an interesting question in the previous post about State Religion/Nationalism.. Little busy now, will respond in detail soon..
January 16th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Vijay my friend, your first post is very good with very sharp point. But your second one.. falls below standard. Nobody was able to repudiate Neitzhe and Russell? Listen I have n’t read their essays entirely and even so this little me is enough to repudiate them. (may be not in rhetoric but in points!) Vijay, you just have to search to see how many people have already shown that these Old Lords of Atheism were ignorant or had twisted of a lot of historic and theological facts and their rhetoric was rather “selfserving” (the correctest word). Msotly their rhetoric fitted their life style. (Russell’s wife got pregnant from another man two times while being his wife) Actually I see Hindus using these names most often in all the blogs. I think it came from our old English Teachers. My father’s library had a compilation of Russell’s essays as well. He was the literary superstar at the time I think, going from place to place giving lectures!. These early liberals brought both good and bad. They opened the society in a way I would like Indian society needs to be opened. But you can see how the western and American society has gone down in morality with liberalism. It is good to be somehwere in between.
and most importantly Neitzhe’s work (with his support of the class system) was a favorite of the Nazis. Why should I read this type of junk which does not bring any good in the world? he himself died as a mad man. Karma? Tertiary Syphilis?
January 16th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
My friend, you can run with a crazy rhetoric like “there was only one Christian” but for people who think realisticaly based on facts, it is clear that it is just a brilliant untruth. Jesus was not “Christian”. There was no “Christian”. Jesus was a jew and his followers were called Nazarenes. Later even when they turned “Christians” they were willing to die for him because they wanted to be “confoemed” to him. If that is not being Christian, I am not sure what is.
Truth is that bothe these scholars use European history trying to draw nail into Jesus coffin. They did not, deliberately want to give any credit to the better things the religion called Christianity brought. They never looked into early church history. They were disgusted that they have to follow some “moral code” the church created. In Neitzhes opinion Jesu was probably a lunatic, right? In a previous post I clearly showed that was not the case. You can either take the witness’s words or discard it. But to take the words and then twist it does not bring any good. That will alway be self serving. Look who really turned lunatic?
January 16th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
nazarani, I am not sure about Nazarene now.. confused.
January 16th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
I am not the one to claim that Christianity is “superior”. But since you asked. Forget about theology. Christianity brought a lot of good to the world. This was the first religion which proclaimed every believer is a brother in Christ. There was no real big guy or small guy. When you read the epistles (50 to 100 AD), these “Christian” desciples always trying to be humble even in their little spiritual victories.
You know what, I cannot really enlist all those good aspects – I think there is a recent book. Simon , please help me out- detailing how world would have been if Europe did not turn Christian.
It i sbad timing. Friday.
January 16th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
About the first, post – very sharp. You are right and wrong. There are all kinds of countries in the world, including Godbanning to God endorsing.. . I was surprised to see the names of Argentina and Greece in the list. They are big countries.. to have this kind of stupidity going on. I can guess Argentina is probably overhwelmingly Catholic and it doe snot matter what they do, the church should be everywhere. Still I don’t think they persecute any other religion. Same with Greece, 95 percent Greek Orthodox. I think may be Greek orthodox being one of a kind church and Byzantine being wiped out by Islam in their history they are being more assertive. Srilankans endorses Theravada Budhism. I think Indonesia’s plan is good that it endorses all religions.
How about India? Contaray to the dream of a lot of Hindutwavaadi Nazis, India was not made as a Hindu Country. There is a reason to it. India beacme modren Republic of India only in 1950. You guys conveniently forget how India was prior to this. India has never been under one Hindu emperor after 400 or 500. India is made up of multiple tribes, castes?, religions, races and political believes. You cannot form an organization promising something and switch the plate after 10 years, once you get them into one umbrella. Hindutwawaada itself is a modern form of Nazi Pangermanism. This is just part of fascism. From our long discussions it must be clear to you even religiously India is not one. Even hinduism is not one as yourself claim.
SEe you next week.
January 16th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
and don’t forget that till right around the golden age of Sanskrit India was a Budhist and jaina country.
January 16th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Vijay I ahve to give it to you. Your state religion question was very good.
January 17th, 2009 at 1:00 am
Vijay/EmmarceeTo those who take shelter under aethism, click on this debate on video… by Dinesh D’souza. its worth watching an hour debate, if you have a broad band .. Michael Shermer debates Dinesh D’Souza – ‘Is Christianity Good for the World?’ (video)..
Remeber modern philosophers have already countered Nietzche/Betrand Russel.. I suggest Vijay come out of 19th century, and start reading Richard Dawkins also, and see how the debators/philosophers and thinkers are countering this new generation biologist/philosopher/aetheist…
VIDEO LINK OF DEBATE
http://thinking-critically.blogspot.com/2007/10/michael-shermer-debates-dinesh-dsouza.html