reasons to believe

[Samkhya]

What are the objective reasons supporting hindu faith?

[maadhav]

what is your objective reason to ask this?

 

if you want to talk about sankhya of kapil bhagavan, do so.

we would listen.

 

if you want to talk about the atheist kapil,

we have no interest.

 

 

[Samkhya]

Sâmkhya philosophy is in agreement with modern science in his statement that «mind», «consciousness» and «self» are modes of matter (prakriti), instead of qualities of soul (Purusha).

[Guest guest]

"Sâmkhya philosophy is in agreement with modern science in his statement that «mind», «consciousness» and «self» are modes of matter (prakriti), instead of qualities of soul (Purusha)."

 

Science isn't supporting anything. All it is, is an objective approach to things. There is no scientific fact stating that mind, consciousness, and self are modes of matter and not purusha.

 

Just because science treats the investigations of these topics as the same way that Samkhya philosophy does, does not mean that there is HARD EVIDENCE indicating this. Scientists have only begun to explore the nature of consciousness. What they are investigating will take them only so far, before they'll hit the proverbial brick wall, which will prove to be insurmountable.

 

Of course, that last statement is my assumption, but that's exactly my point. Science is treating consciousness, mind, and self as modes of matter, but it is an assumption. One that they have to explore for the sake of being intellectually honest. Science works in this manner: make an assumption, explore the implications of that assumption as far as it can go, collect evidence to support or undermine that assumption, and either provide a conclusion or form a new assumption. All science is doing right now is the first two. And so far, while they've uncovered evidence that something actually happens in our brains to cause us to perceive differently (a mere statement of the obvious but now confirmed by hard evidence), they are making new assumptions. Eventually, they will have to refine their assumptions and of course change them as they go deeper into the nature of consciousness, mind and self.

 

 

[maadhav]

sorry, i do not think any krishna devotee would have interest in this sankhya.

 

thanks.

 

[Samkhya]

I will state my question otherwise:

 

Why is hinduism a more sensible stance than another religion?

[maadhav]

<< Why is hinduism a more sensible stance than another religion? >>

 

sensible to you and other thinkrer with open mind.

to the muslim and xian world it is the greatest challange or greatest oppertunity to convert or plunder, because hinduism is not organized as they are, so far.

 

why sensible, becuse it has everything good the other religons have; and it has uniqie things that no religion has.

 

it is most scientific, and it gives maximum freedom of thought and action. it is inherently secular and therefore we do not need the western concept of secularism in india. its processes are proven valid since milleniums.

 

a hindu fails only when he does not live by dharma.

 

now let me give a stark difference between xianity and hinduism with the example of pope. he just died.

 

the vedic people know sanyaas asram, and vairagya.

they know this is not the best world to live in.

a hindu is willing to give up everything (except god or sadhana) when time comes with a serene smile on face and heart. xianity does not have it. look at the pope. he was suffering old age ( and jesus did not save him, how can he save others,) and still he did not give up his position, he was more interested to show up to the public and wave his hands rather than go in meditation and conteplatation on god and aatma. for xians this world is the goal, all in all; for us it is not. similary no muslim gives up power or property he gets till he dies. check all the muslim kings of the world in the whole islam history. their own nearest kins will kill them and take over the thrones, but they will not give up power till they die.

 

in contrast, a hindu saint/swami/aachary or even a grihasthi prepares for his death. he welcomes it and embraces it with great honor a dignity. bhishma chose his time of death. even in the last kumbha mela a pious person chose to give up his body, and he hand predicted that he would do so.

 

this however does not mean a hindu does not care for the world. he cares utmost, and his life work is for that, but he know that when time comes, he is ready to give up everything.

 

vaanaprastha ashrma is retired life living out of town in jungle/ashram. now a days one can live in city ashrams and do dharma karma for the benefit of the society.

 

the org. of pope is in the business of converting the whole world. they already have determined that theirs is the only way. they like to hold monopoly on everything. they only must have the nuclear bombs, and non else. they only can take you to god and none else. they only can forgive your sins and none else. this we hindus do not have. we know that god is for every one. we never talk "your god, my god". they do. vice and virtue are no one's monopoly.

 

we know our sadhana, and care less what other's religon is as long as it does not bother us. that is our spiritual secularism. all can follow their own path, but without bothering or disrespecting the other in any way. in contrast, the western secularism forces one to become an atheist. not hinduism, not vedic secularism. this also means that we cannot allow in india the ideologies that are hostile to hinduism on the vedic land.

 

for non hindus, hinduism is not easy to understand.

while other religions are a set of beliefs, hinduism is not.

it is the science of the spirituality. it needs saints and sadhus to make one undersand what it is.

however, one with an open mind can learn a lot from just studying gita. it is for all mankind.