Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
etataje

ISKCON (and) Hinduisim

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

<< If you follow Vedas you are Aryan? >>

 

yes,

and that and that only makes one an aryan,

per the vedic literature.

hindu is just a new name of aryan dharma

or sanatana dharma.

 

that is as much truth as a statement

"the sun rises in the east."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

(--i call it an attempt to put together for political purposes many incompatible ideas.. ....)

I have no political agenda, many ideas incompatible or not were there followed by people of this land, call it what you like, i call this Hindu Dharma.

___may ideas are relatively recent and some others were seen as blaspheme in the original sanatana dharma.. so the reasons you putting something together and calling it hindu dharma is obscure. I suggest to put in hindu dharma also islamism and your number will increase so much that you will not care any more of vaishnavas

 

(--so what is? if it is nothing why follow?)

dont take my choice away.

___but why follow?

 

That is because dharma of the soul is more complex.how can you define desires of an individual free soul?

___1)so if it is not possible to define why create a group on it?.... 2)the groups that you put together in hinduism give different and opposite answers on this, so what's the meaning of this union?

 

What ever one choose is a position, so what? it does not mean avoiding to go deeper.

__no one says this.. there's positions choosen by deep thinking and careful and honest considering and others not.. both are positions, i like to deal with the first ones

 

It is neither useless nor avoiding to go deeper, this is your opinion only

___of course opinion ... so having me this opinion of superficiality and you have an opposite one, why unite?

 

go take a dip the ocean is vast.

___another demonstration on how deep is your idea... the ocean....

 

They do not consider themselves anything, precisely what i mean no group, there message and mercy is for everyone

___so why this hindu group?

 

There identification is with the Lord.

___so why identificate them as hindu?

 

(---so why promote hinduism? even if it is a non-group? )

Am i? Protecting yes Pratcing yes Imposing NO

___but promoting yes.. otherwise why are you writing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

"hindu is just a new name of aryan dharma

or sanatana dharma."

 

it's a lie.... you cannot demonstrate it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(___may ideas are relatively recent and some others were seen as blaspheme in the original sanatana dharma.. so the reasons you putting something together and calling it hindu dharma is obscure.

 

Ideas come and go. Some others seen as blaspheme, that’s the operative word, and salman rusdie got a fathva for having an opinion, I would like to think Sanatan (Hindu) dharma is much more than your idea of closed book.

 

Re

(I suggest to put in hindu dharma also islamism and your number will increase so much that you will not care any more of vaishnavas)

 

First let me tell you this is not about number game, it may be in your organization

Hindu does not seek conversion; you are welcome to practice it though. Not caring for Vaishnava that is very hurtful statement made.

 

 

Re

(dont take my choice away.

___but why follow?)

 

I will ignore this.

 

 

Re

(___1)so if it is not possible to define why create a group on it?)

 

I have not created any group, it exists.

 

Re

(.... 2)the groups that you put together in hinduism give different and opposite answers on this, so what's the meaning of this union?)

None to you may be, but we are all traveling together with different taste.

 

 

Re

(__no one says this.. there's positions choosen by deep thinking and careful and honest considering and others not.. both are positions, i like to deal with the first ones)

 

So who is stopping you, go at the pace that suits you, others will catch up ever heard of story of tortoise and hare?

 

 

Re

(___of course opinion ... so having me this opinion of superficiality and you have an opposite one, why unite?)

 

 

You have created this opposition in your mind, if I want to unite with the lord and you want to do the same, our path may be different our aim is the same. You may argue our concept of the lord is different; my answer is we will find out when we reach the summit. You may say we are going on opposite direction, my answer is we are using the same guide book we will get there in the end..

 

 

Re

(___another demonstration on how deep is your idea... the ocean.... )

 

And you are demonstrating your superiority an example of mine you take as absolute.

 

Re

(They do not consider themselves anything, precisely what i mean no group, there message and mercy is for everyone

___so why this hindu group?

 

There identification is with the Lord.

___so why identificate them as hindu?

 

(---so why promote hinduism? even if it is a non-group? )

 

 

 

I have said many times Hindu is not a religion, it is a way of life; some choose the fast track some middle some slow track, but the aim is the same.

I have not identified the sadhus as any group, read my statement no group, they are for everyone.

An enlightened person looks at a learned and humble Braahmana, an outcast, even a cow, an elephant, or a dog with an equal eye. (5.18)

How can they belong to any one group?

 

((Am I? Protecting yes, Practicing yes, Imposing NO))

Re

(___but promoting yes.. otherwise why are you writing? )

 

If you call defending is promoting ok no problem

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Ideas come and go.

--so why all this effort for hindu idea?

 

I would like to think Sanatan dharma is much more than your idea of closed book.

--sanatana dharma is an idea.. idea means at least a little explanation... if you haven't and if you cannot explain why sanatana dharma is identical to hindu dharma on wich basis you are sustaining it? on imagination? on like and dislike?

 

First let me tell you this is not about number game

--so why all this effort to unite?

 

it may be in your organization

--if you do not like my organization why you want union?

 

Hindu does not seek conversion

--so why this conversion of all different indian religions in hinduism?

 

I have not created any group, it exists.

--so give a definition

 

we are all traveling together with different taste.

--so make a group of all the world, because everyone is travelling and everyone has different taste... i agree completely, dharma is property of everyone

 

You have created this opposition in your mind, if I want to unite with the lord and you want to do the same, our path may be different our aim is the same

--hinduism or not hinduism is a tecnical definition, if you have a different conception on what's the path or on who's and what's the lord we have in common only that we are human

 

You may argue our concept of the lord is different; my answer is we will find out when we reach the summit.

--so let us make unions on what we are at the moment, if you say that we both will change idea when we will be realized, maybe i will be in favor of hinduism and you will be against... who knows?

 

my answer is we are using the same guide book we will get there in the end..

--of what "there" you are speaking? if it is the same "there" we belong to the same group

 

I have said many times Hindu is not a religion, it is a way of life; some choose the fast track some middle some slow track, but the aim is the same.

I have not identified the sadhus as any group, read my statement no group, they are for everyone.

--as i have said the words "religions", "way of life", "dharma", "path" etc. in some sense are synonims... so it is not important to define what's hinduism and what's vaishnavism.. give them the names you like but if you say that they coincide tell the common features... this is my original point

 

An enlightened person looks at a learned and humble Braahmana, an outcast, even a cow, an elephant, or a dog with an equal eye. (5.18)

How can they belong to any one group?

--so why create a hindu group?

 

((Am I? Protecting yes, Practicing yes, Imposing NO))

Re

(___but promoting yes.. otherwise why are you writing? )

If you call defending is promoting ok no problem

--and you do not need to defend hinduism by me.. i like india and hindus, i want only to say (agreeing with my acharyas) that vaishnavism is not hinduism, that's all

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jai Ganesh

 

 

Re

(--so why all this effort for hindu idea?)

 

Because it has stood the test of time

 

 

Re

(--sanatana dharma is an idea.. idea means at least a little explanation... if you haven't and if you cannot explain why sanatana dharma is identical to hindu dharma on wich basis you are sustaining it? on imagination? on like and dislike?)

 

Many examples have been given, you either ignore tham or call them basic and i keep saying without the basic foundation the whole structure fall apart.

 

Re

(--so why all this effort to unite?)

 

number game was your question therefor your question is out of context.

 

 

Re

(--if you do not like my organization why you want union?)

 

I never said i do not like your organization, concept of Vaisnava is well established in Hindu dharma.we may differ in practice, that is well known.

 

 

Re

(--so why this conversion of all different indian religions in hinduism?)

 

No coversion different concept of the same lord exists, i am just confirming that.

 

 

Re

(--so give a definition)

 

What defination of various groups? it will take me a life time.

 

 

Re

(--so make a group of all the world, because everyone is travelling and everyone has different taste... i agree completely, dharma is property of everyone)

 

Dharma is for everyone, here we have complete agreement, choice is for people to become fellow travellors.

 

 

Re

(--hinduism or not hinduism is a tecnical definition, if you have a different conception on what's the path or on who's and what's the lord we have in common only that we are human)

 

And that is sometimes people forget, something very basic fact that we are all children of god.

 

Re

(You may argue our concept of the lord is different; my answer is we will find out when we reach the summit.

--so let us make unions on what we are at the moment, if you say that we both will change idea when we will be realized, maybe i will be in favor of hinduism and you will be against... who knows?)

 

No when we meet our maker all the doubts disappears.

 

 

Re

(--of what "there" you are speaking? if it is the same "there" we belong to the same group)

 

Of the same Lord the wise know him/her by many names.

 

 

 

Re

(--as i have said the words "religions", "way of life", "dharma", "path" etc. in some sense are synonims... so it is not important to define what's hinduism and what's vaishnavism.. give them the names you like but if you say that they coincide tell the common features... this is my original point)

 

It is imposible for me to quntify all this it will depand if we are talking of everyday mundane activity, from duty of parents, duty of a child duty of a teacher, how to behave in society, how to respect life in general,dharma arath kama moksa. it is not as if i now know the goal of my life therefor i jump at the deepend forgeting i did not learn how to swim.

 

 

An enlightened person looks at a learned and humble Braahmana, an outcast, even a cow, an elephant, or a dog with an equal eye. (5.18)

How can they belong to any one group?

 

Re

(--so why create a hindu group?)

 

It is here, not creating

 

 

Re

 

--and you do not need to defend hinduism by me.. i like india and hindus, i want only to say (agreeing with my acharyas) that vaishnavism is not hinduism, that's all

 

 

You have a fine way of showing it.

 

Your nishtha with your guru is commandable

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

(--so why all this effort for hindu idea?)

Because it has stood the test of time

--do not make confusion.. many do not agree that hindu is the original eternal sanatana dharma. Your are also not giving any valid definition of hinduism, so with no definition what is the thing who has stood the test of time? nothing

 

Many examples have been given, you either ignore tham or call them basic and i keep saying without the basic foundation the whole structure fall apart.

--yes, there's an opinion difference between you and vaishnavas and gaudya vaishnavas.. what you judge enough to give a common ground to be united in a denomination it is judged not sufficient by us.. so all is falling apart and let us stay peacefully different

 

I never said i do not like your organization, concept of Vaisnava is well established in Hindu dharma

--it is so estabilished that in every hindu forum or vaishnava forum this subject arises and the average conclusion is that vaishnavas or gaudya vaishnavas are not considered hindu

 

(--hinduism or not hinduism is a tecnical definition, if you have a different conception on what's the path or on who's and what's the lord we have in common only that we are human)

And that is sometimes people forget, something very basic fact that we are all children of god.

--to be all children of god it is sufficient to say that we are living beings, to unite ourselves in a definition we must have the same concept of who is really our father

So we have something in common and something different... hinduism is not in common

 

No when we meet our maker all the doubts diappears.

--so let's wait to meet krsna.... until this moment i am not hindu

 

It is imposible for me quntify all this it will depand if we are talking of everyday mundane activity, from duty of parents, duty of a child duty of a teacher, how to behave in society, how to respect life in general,dharma arath kama moksa

--everything external , marginal... you cannot unite under a spiritual denomination people who (perhaps) have similar concept on marginal things and opposite opinion of god.. you believe that brahman is the ultimate reality, that god's forms are material manifestations of brahman, that vishnu and krsna body is human, that our goal is to merge and lose individuality

my beliefs are that brahman is teh effulgence of god's body and that realization of brahman is not the definitive solution, that god's body is transcendental and it is the ultimate reality, that our goal is to be different persons from god and to unite with him in a relationships of love. We are different and i am not hindu at all.. who cares if me and you can wear a dhoti and make some bath in the ganga?

 

You have a fine way of showing it.

--thanks... it is not so difficult

 

hari bol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

--do not make confusion.. many do not agree that hindu is the original eternal sanatana dharma. Your are also not giving any valid definition of hinduism, so with no definition what is the thing who has stood the test of time? nothing)

 

Good it is nice to know you like Hindus.

 

 

Re

(--yes, there's an opinion difference between you and vaishnavas and gaudya vaishnavas.. what you judge enough to give a common ground to be united in a denomination it is judged not sufficient by us.. so all is falling apart and let us stay peacefully different)

 

Do not worry about staying peacefully different it is well engraved in Hindu mind set except you have not been listening.

 

 

Re

(--it is so estabilished that in every hindu forum or vaishnava forum this subject arises and the average conclusion is that vaishnavas or gaudya vaishnavas are not considered hindu)

 

And whose fault is it? you have said yourself "my acharya has said we are not Hindu" you cant have your cake and eat it.

 

 

Re

 

(No when we meet our maker all the doubts diappears.

--so let's wait to meet krsna.... until this moment i am not hindu)

 

Fine

 

 

Re

(--everything external , marginal... you cannot unite under a spiritual denomination people who (perhaps) have similar concept on marginal things and opposite opinion of god..)

 

As i keep saying marginal, basic are important without which all structure falls apart opinions are opinion we will find out.

 

 

Re

(you believe that brahman is the ultimate reality, that god's forms are material manifestations of brahman, that vishnu and krsna body is human, that our goal is to merge and lose individuality)

 

You are so expert that you know what i beleive.

 

 

Re

(my beliefs are that brahman is teh effulgence of god's body and that realization of brahman is not the definitive solution, that god's body is transcendental and it is the ultimate reality, that our goal is to be different persons from god and to unite with him in a relationships of love.

 

 

My problem is in not what you beleive, but what you judge of others, everyone has a right to aproach god as they have learnt.I have not discussed any concept with you and yet you have made your mind up.

 

Re

( We are different and i am not hindu at all.. who cares if me and you can wear a dhoti and make some bath in the ganga?)

 

 

Now you would not say about maa Ganga like this, after all you say Ganga maa ki Jai everyday, do you not beleive in her mercy?

 

 

hari bol.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

(--it is so estabilished that in every hindu forum or vaishnava forum this subject arises and the average conclusion is that vaishnavas or gaudya vaishnavas are not considered hindu)

And whose fault is it? you have said yourself "my acharya has said we are not Hindu" you cant have your cake and eat it.

--for me there's no problem... i do not say to be hindu, many says that i am not hindu, my opinion is that hindu means simply indian, and it is limiting for any spiritual path mainly practiced in this country and an obstacle for any not indian newcomer

 

(you believe that brahman is the ultimate reality, that god's forms are material manifestations of brahman, that vishnu and krsna body is human, that our goal is to merge and lose individuality)

You are so expert that you know what i beleive.

--the average hinduism is some light advaitism

 

My problem is in not what you beleive, but what you judge of others, everyone has a right to aproach god as they have learnt

--i agree completely, and i do not have any need to be grouped with people with opposite beliefs to live peacefully.. let us remain honestly different and friends

 

Now you would not say about maa Ganga like this, after all you say Ganga maa ki Jai everyday, do you not beleive in her mercy?

--i do not believe, i am sure... but what makes a real group is the meaning beyond the act of bathing, who is sri ganga and what mercy she gives to us

 

haribol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

 

(--for me there's no problem... i do not say to be hindu, many says that i am not hindu, my opinion is that hindu means simply indian, and it is limiting for any spiritual path mainly practiced in this country and an obstacle for any not indian newcomer)

 

I do not understand you I answer to your objection, then you change the point, now you are saying indians are obstacle to newcomers,why are we so bad?

 

 

Re

(--the average hinduism is some light advaitism)

 

Not that i agree with you on your speculation, still that is no reason to assume my position.

 

Re

(--i agree completely, and i do not have any need to be grouped with people with opposite beliefs to live peacefully.. let us remain honestly different and friends)

 

I have no problem with that

 

 

Re

(--i do not believe, i am sure... but what makes a real group is the meaning beyond the act of bathing, who is sri ganga and what mercy she gives to us)

 

So if you are so sure, do not doubt, she will give same mercy to you and me regardless of what we know.

Bhagirath maharaj brought the Ganga down so she can purify sagar putras,who were not even alive, what did they know?

 

 

 

haribol

Jai Shree Krishna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

now you are saying indians are obstacle to newcomers,why are we so bad?

-not indians, indians are good and bad like any other people, the identification with india is not useful for anything who spreads and has to be spreaded all over the world

 

So if you are so sure, do not doubt, she will give same mercy to you and me regardless of what we know.

--what we know and how we interprete it makes us belonging to a group or another

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Hey iskcon, what's your definition of hindu? You sure use the word alot and deny you are it but never give a definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Jai Ganesh

 

 

Re

(-not indians, indians are good and bad like any other people, the identification with india is not useful for anything who spreads and has to be spreaded all over the world)

 

To spread love of God, people of India are not the obstacle.to deny the people of india their heritage is a shame, it is like saying people of india do not love god anymore.

 

Re

(--what we know and how we interprete it makes us belonging to a group or another)

 

it is not about forming a group. it is about receiving mercy from Maa Ganga it is there for everyone.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Many iskon followers are former judeo-xians and are sympathetic and the like to xianity.

 

 

"<< many hindus are less close to vaishnavas than the western religions >>

...true... a vaishnava beleves in a personal god, a christian believes in a personal god, an advaitin does not believe in a personal god"

 

 

You base this on one point of agreement? How many places does xianity disagree with vaishnavism? More or less places than advaita?

 

Are you aware that there are impersonal xian and jewish sects? The Koran is as personal if not more than bible, why not mention Islam?

 

Even in the many persoanl xian sects the bible is interpreted differently. Because of different interpretation the sects aren't xian?

 

Don't all 'hindus' take the same vedas but interpret differently? Mleccha dharma (xianity) is close to vaishnava dharma only in fundamentals like faith and love.

 

Gaudiya Matha disagrees with iskon on points of siddhanta, does that make it not gaudiya? Orthodox gaudiyas disagree with gaudiya matha and iskon on points of siddhanta, does that make them non gaudiya etc etc....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Hey iskcon, what's your definition of hindu?

--hey boy.. read all the thread and, if you like, give me your definition of hindu if you want that i unite with

 

To spread love of God, people of India are not the obstacle

--the obstacle is to call something "indian(=hindu)" when there's no need and it is not true and to make confusion with people with opposite belief.... you have surely understood the meaning, it is useless to try to demonstrate that i despise indians or that i say that indians do not love god

 

You base this on one point of agreement? How many places does xianity disagree with vaishnavism? More or less places than advaita?

--so vaishnavas are not christian for some reasons and not advaita for other reasons... there's no need to stretch the meaning of a simple example

 

Gaudiya Matha disagrees with iskon on points of siddhanta, does that make it not gaudiya?

--every guru in gaudya vaishnavism have some difference on practical application, it is natural, but not on the main siddhanta (i have grown up in iskcon, i am initiated by a prabhupada's godbrother and nothing has changed)... iskcon is a gaudya organization

 

the variety among gaudya vaishnavas cannot be compared in any way to the huge differences between vaishnavism and advaitism

 

and there's no problem... only there's no need to be under the same flag

...

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

"three people with an answer"

 

Where? Maybe i need glasses. I didn't see it yet.

 

"--hey boy.. read all the thread and, if you like, give me your definition of hindu"

 

I read. You guessed correctly, I'm a boy. I don't really like using the word 'hindu', but my definition is all the sampradyas that use Vedic literatures to establish their thought.

 

"--so vaishnavas are not christian for some reasons and not advaita for other reasons... there's no need to stretch the meaning of a simple example"

 

There was no need for your inaccurate simple example.

 

"the variety among gaudya vaishnavas cannot be compared in any way to the huge differences between vaishnavism and advaitism"

 

And the huge differences between vaishnava and mleccha dharma....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Why do you want to cling to a name the muslim invaders gave you? There is nowhere in the vedic lituratures, the name hindu. You no longer call Madras, Madras. You no longer call Bombay, Bombay. You have shaken off these British names. Someday you may even call India, Bharat. When will you stop calling yourselves the name the muslim invaders gave you "hindu" which they called you because you lived on the other side of some river boundry. You are becoming free from the foreign British labels you were given, but still keep this word "hindu" that the muslim invaders gave you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

but my definition is all the sampradyas that use Vedic literatures to establish their thought.

--but with opposite interpretation... so being meanings are more important than the sources, i think that this is not enough to unite

 

"--so vaishnavas are not christian for some reasons and not advaita for other reasons... there's no need to stretch the meaning of a simple example"

There was no need for your inaccurate simple example.

--no there was need... a denomination, a dharma, a group has to have a common ground between the ones inside the group and differences from the outsiders. In this case, especially for the fundamental truths, we see the opposite ...

 

And the huge differences between vaishnava and mleccha dharma....

--when the pope will ask to me if i are christian i will remember you

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

except for the Hk's

i have not met any sanatana dharmi

who said he/she is not a hindu.

nor have i heard from hindu friends and relatives.

 

lies do not help me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<< If you follow Vedas you are Aryan? >>

 

yes,

and that and that only makes one an aryan,

per the vedic literature.

hindu is just a new name of aryan dharma

or sanatana dharma.

 

that is as much truth as a statement

"the sun rises in the east."

 

sure the muslims gave the name,

and the world accepted it,

and the sanatana dharmis chose to live with it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

except for the Hk's

i have not met any sanatana dharmi

who said he/she is not a hindu.

 

translation:

 

except for the gaudya vaishnavas

i have not met any other religion based in india

who said he/she is not a hindu.

-------

Every one calls himself a sanatana dharmi, but the meaning is, for each one, extremely different

 

so there's not a common concept of sanatana dharma that you can use for a common ground for everyone

 

----

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

<< If you follow Vedas you are Aryan? >>

yes,

and that and that only makes one an aryan,

per the vedic literature.

 

--no aryan have common concepts and beliefs, to read the same book is not so important if the meaning we accept are opposite

 

exactly like the concept of aryanism

 

hitler called himself an aryan and it is very possible thet he had some rigveda or bhagavad gita in the bookshelf

 

is he a real aryan or a hindu?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

"--but with opposite interpretation"

 

I pointed that out earlier. Different xian sects interpret bibble differently, are they not biblical sects because of this?

 

"so being meanings are more important than the sources, i think that this is not enough to unite"

 

Sorry, what?

 

"a group has to have a common ground between the ones inside the group and differences from the outsiders. In this case, especially for the fundamental truths, we see the opposite ..."

 

Are you finally starting to define 'hindu'? Part of your definition is you see it as a group? Its still not clear to me what your definition is.

 

"--when the pope will ask to me if i are christian i will remember you"

 

You do that.

 

 

I agree with guest:

 

"Why do you want to cling to a name the muslim invaders gave you? There is nowhere in the vedic lituratures, the name hindu. You no longer call Madras, Madras. You no longer call Bombay, Bombay. You have shaken off these British names. Someday you may even call India, Bharat. When will you stop calling yourselves the name the muslim invaders gave you "hindu" which they called you because you lived on the other side of some river boundry."

 

"You are becoming free from the foreign British labels you were given, but still keep this word "hindu" that the muslim invaders gave you."

 

 

Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Different xian sects interpret bibble differently, are they not biblical sects because of this?

--if they call them christians they have much more in common with other calling themselves christian than vaishnavas or saivas with mayavadi and advaitins.... and in fundamental parts of doctrine, for example on who's god, not in marginal ones

 

"so being meanings are more important than the sources, i think that this is not enough to unite"

Sorry, what?

--the fact that is me and you are reading the same book is not so important if from this book we get opposite meanings

 

Are you finally starting to define 'hindu'?

--hindu is simply a territorial definition... someone puts the religions belonging to india under a denomination hindu (the root of the word is the same, the name that muslims gave to the land beyond the river (s)(h)indu). The motivation is never religious or spiritual, the demonstration is that no one can give a consistent definition of hinduism if not telling that there's a common concept of sanatana dharma accepted by all indian religions... and it is not true at all. For an advaitin the sanatana dharma concept of a vaishnava is maya and for a vaishnava the sanatana dharma as explained by advaita is blasphemy

 

Part of your definition is you see it as a group?

--call it group, flag, brand, denomination, way of life, way to reach the absolute, religion, style, culture, sect, school.. it is not important, the important thing is where's the common features to put some people under it

 

Its still not clear to me what your definition is.

--exactly like the muslims.... everything (not muslim) is practiced beyond the river sindhu... and obviously i do not consider it a serious definition or something to struggle for. Add to this that in any vedic scripture or interpretation of it there's never the concept that reaching god is a fact of race and nation. So the paradox could be that the only thing the unite hinduism is that it means nothing and it has no value.

 

"You are becoming free from the foreign British labels you were given, but still keep this word "hindu" that the muslim invaders gave you."

Why is that?

--politic and politicians who wants to use religious fanaticism to subjugate people.. exactly like talibans, bin laden and so on

(all the hindu advocates of this forum start speaking of religion, then, when they cannot give serious explanation, reveal the real nature of hinduism.. politics, fanaticism, revenge, separatism, nationalism.... and they have the right to think in this way, but be sincere and do not mix spirituality with mundane reasons)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...