Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. After reading the above thread I went to the britannica website and was shocked at the biased and mis-informed article on Hinduism.This is my email to them: I think the author still has superiority issues and is very biased and uninformed. There were people living and practising "religion" in India before the "Aryan invaders" theory. The word Hindu is actually of Persian origin.Hindus never professed to have a formal religion with a formal name. It was a way of life - respecting the supreme creator and nature.It was people like yourselves who needed to classify and box all humans and beliefs that gave a name to it. The Greeks and Vikings came much later and they copied us not the other way round.The Hindu belief system is the oldest. Christianity and Islam have brought the most amount of killing and destruction in their quest to convert and prove that there is only one god.Who has definite prove that there is a god,one god or many gods and what difference does it make.Every story in the Bible is copied from earlier civilizations e.g.. Mother and baby concept from the Egyptians.Hindu beliefs varied from one part of India to the other. There was never one book or one set of dictates like the other religions.So stop trying to make it conform to your standards.The beauty of the religion is its diversity and not expecting everyone to practice it in the same way. There are now over one hundred different sects in Christianity and the different Muslim sects are killing each other so what is the point of having one book and one god when the followers are fighting among themselves. "Krishna was worshipped with his adulterous consort, Radha. Strange syncretic gods had appeared, such as Harihara, a combination of Vishnu and Shiva, and Ardhanarishvara, a synthesis of Shiva and his consort Shakti." I have a major problem with the above line. It is very disrespectful and degrading. Their relationship should not be compared to the current day relationships between men and women.Sex and lust did not define relationships in that era. Their relationship was a spiritual and pure one. And it was definitely not adulterous as both of them were single when they had their relationship. You need to first get your facts right before you write about it.You need to look at a dictionary for the meaning of adultery and finally have some respect for others beliefs. And this was their response: Thank you for your e-mails. We have determined that the Hinduism article is in need of revision, and we are currently working to identify a Hindu scholar to lead that revision. We hope to commission the work very soon and have him or her start immediately. We will include your e-mails in the material that is forwarded to the reviewer. Thank you again for your comments. We appreciate your interest in Britannica. Sincerely, Britannica Editors
  • Create New...