Why I Am Not A Hindu ?- Book Review

[malgova.mango]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

now you are with me!

as an individual, we all have the right to action, to decide or not... and whether we do it as a group or not, it is OUR DECISION that matters...

this is the essence of karma...

thanks, i would be simply redundant if i were to drag this anymore...

a group of individual can collectively decide on one issue and act on it.
ofocurse the role of individual is not denied. what is added is individual can gel together and act as a unison.

haven't u heard the story of all the birds flying with the net - that caught them.

any group is made of individuals...so i agree that individual decision is a must.

5 individual fingers makes a hand. here finger is like individual - hand is a collection of individual....

 

[s007bala]

re

5 individual fingers makes a hand. here finger is like individual - hand is a collection of individual....

individual fingers are uniely different,each one identified as thumb,index finger forefinger,ring finger,pinky finger=despite being called as fingers they are unique=so fingers are not individual as thay are not the same in any way.

its easy to club or group as 'collective karma' as a figure of speech,but eventually one needs to analyse it as individual only.even though it was a minority of white who discriminated against blacks,but the blame got shifted to entire white people worldover,thereby bringing the downfall of white people.

sb

 

[palindrome]

i disagree... the mahabharatha itself is a classic example... duryodhana refused to give even one village (he went on to say that he cannot spare land equal to the tip of a needle) to the pandavas... and that is adharmic...

the resulting war is a dharmic war...

mahmud's islamic war was an invasion... an invasion is different from defence... is invasion itself is their dharma? if yes, it simply is a misconception....

to understand this, one must know the purport of dharma - "that which sustains all beings"

putting forth views in your very own favorite redundant term - "perception":

1) duryodhana had his reasons and he "perceived" that as his dharma. to him, he was fighting for his rights and his position.

the pandavs cud very well have established an other kingdom, given their abilities, but that wud make the story kaput and the story wud not have moved forward to become what is became (fate).

krishna therefore did not judge, he gave away his yadava army / vrishni clan to the kauravas and became a military adviser of sorts to the pandavas and charioteer to arjun.

2) muhammad "perceived" propagation of his own dharma as his right and his own dharma. till date the muslims "perceive" so-called 'lack of respect' for islam as enuf reason to fight for their rights, for their dharma.

3) in ramayana, ram went to war to save sita. but ravana had his reasons for abducting sita, as a retaliation for surpanakha's physical violence in cutting off the nose. so to ravana, he was doing his dharma of seeking revenge for his sister's mutilation.

in war there is only killing for self-propagation or self-protection.

"perceiving" one as dharma and the other as adharmic is merely "perception" for a cognitive judgemental stand.
[[and this too you will possibly pass over saying 'logic is perception' and/or it is 'your perception that you think so'..if only logic cud be reduced to perception, if only the understanding of cognitive development were that simple...]]

 

[palindrome]

guru is kavacham.i need guru even now and my gurus stand by me.'jo bhi ho raha hai tumhare baley ke liye hi hora raha hai==whatever is happening for you ,its happenning for your own good only=sathya sai baba.

there is a crime case where the daughter of a staunch satya sai devotee was raped.

if everything is happening for good, then why do such things happen?

 

[palindrome]

assuming that the brahman itself manifested, to perceive itself in different forms and levels, using a certain intelligence (logic), then the knowledge of its transformation is inherently present in each form - known (manifest) or unknown (latent)... existence is but an experience...

and that was exactly why the vedic brahmin lived his non-possessiveness...he was not even attached to the cows given to him as daanams...he had manifest his existence in the known latent..and therefore, he had no needs.

and he was so unlike the later day so-called military self-designated 'brahmin'...that judged, fought, and decided how the scriptures shd be...

 

[s007bala]

re

there is a crime case where the daughter of a staunch satya sai devotee was raped.

if everything is happening for good, then why do such things happen?

look at it from the law and order situation,so that rape victims as well rape culprits are given due diligence of law.prolly there is lawlessness in india,wherein the judiciary is a pawn of legislative branch,as appointees are politically chosen.

sathya sai baba is an avataram of dattatreya.in his previous body he was called as shirdi sai baba.and in the future 2030 he will be called mandya baba in a different body.

why do many things happen?becoz there is a cause and therefore an effect,.

sb

p.s.so many gods ,so many religions,but still very bad people do very bad things from time immemorial.=karma vasanas.

 

[s007bala]

and that was exactly why the vedic brahmin lived his non-possessiveness...he was not even attached to the cows given to him as daanams...he had manifest his existence in the known latent..and therefore, he had no needs.

and he was so unlike the later day so-called military self-designated 'brahmin'...that judged, fought, and decided how the scriptures shd be...

lol .

sb

 

[s007bala]

re

putting forth views in your very own favorite redundant term - "perception":

1) duryodhana had his reasons and he "perceived" that as his dharma. to him, he was fighting for his rights and his position.

the pandavs cud very well have established an other kingdom, given their abilities, but that wud make the story kaput and the story wud not have moved forward to become what is became (fate).

pandavas did establish their own kingdom,which usurped by kauravas on a game of rigged dice.

krishna therefore did not judge, he gave his army to the kauravas and became a military adviser of sorts to the pandavas and charioteer to arjun.

krishna allowed duryodhana and yudishtrar to choose,either him or his military.since duryodhana sat strategically so that krishnas eyes falls on him after he awakes from his sleep,duryodhana wanted the military not krishna.

2) muhammad "perceived" propagation of his own dharma as his right and his own dharma.

mohd is the most used and abused proph right now in the world,unfortunately.

3) in ramayana, ram went to war to save sita. but ravana had his reasons for abducting sita, as a retaliation for surpanakha's physical violence in cutting off the nose. so to ravana, he was doing his dharma of seeking revenge for his sister's mutilation.

rama avatared for a purpose,to show the world as a role model for humanaity.its all bhagavans leelas,which is portrayed for us humans to be a saathvic person and attain moksham.

in war there is only killing for self-propagation or self-protection.

"perceiving" one as dharma and the other as adharmic is merely "perception" for a cognitive judgemental stand.

krishna urges arjuna to pick up his arms and fight for dharma.you are purely putting'perception' as check mate for s s.

sb

 

[palindrome]

look at it from the law and order situation,so that rape victims as well rape culprits are given due diligence of law.prolly there is lawlessness in india,wherein the judiciary is a pawn of legislative branch,as appointees are politically chosen.

sathya sai baba is an avataram of dattatreya.in his previous body he was called as shirdi sai baba.and in the future 2030 he will be called mandya baba in a different body.

why do many things happen?becoz there is a cause and therefore an effect,.

sb

p.s.so many gods ,so many religions,but still very bad people do very bad things from time immemorial.=karma vasanas.

if satya sai is avataram, if he is god and if he protects, and he says 'everything is happening for good', then why do we need a law and order situation. cud he not nullify the cause and the effect?

 

[sapr333]

p.s.so many gods ,so many religions,but still very bad people do very bad things from time immemorial.=karma vasanas.

This is what I was talking about 'Free Will'. If every thing is God's role play, god would have made every one goody-goody boys, and with a stroke of button, world could be forced to follow one religion, one country, no killing,etc etc. If every thing is god's role play, then why god wants war,rape & murder..Why god wants adharmic people..

In my view, humans are not just 'Role Players', rather, they are given 'Freewill' , to an extend ,even they can they reject Brahma with that free-will.

 

[palindrome]

bala,

pandavas did establish their own kingdom,which usurped by kauravas on a game of rigged dice.

if my sis likes something i bought and does not give me a chance to say anything, and instead she says she likes it and so she takes it home..it is equivalent to usurping for me (i seek my sister's forgiveness if she reads this ). shd i fight with her to seize it back or shd i simply go back to the shop and buy an other piece ? the pandavas cud very well have still established their own kingdom, far away from the territories that lay in the vicinity of hastinapur. And avoided the "proximity" to duryodhana's areas, which he "perceived" as a threat...

krishna allowed duryodhana and yudishtrar to choose,either him or his military.since duryodhana sat strategically so that krishnas eyes falls on him after he awakes from his sleep,duryodhana wanted the military not krishna.

its one of the reasons given. if krishna had judged, he wud have fought himself. if he had judged, he cud have stopped the war instead. if he had judged, he need not have allowed the vrishnis to fight on the side of the kauravas (since he knew they will be loosing the war)...in short, krishna did not judge..to Him, not judging was dharma (righteousness)..and hence the gita explanation of doing duty without the intension of expecting its fruits..


mohd is the most used and abused proph right now in the world,unfortunately.

to you. to the hindus. to the christians. to the sunnis, muhammad is the only last prophet and it is their dharma to spread his word, his law, his teachings..

rama avatared for a purpose,to show the world as a role model for humanaity.its all bhagavans leelas,which is portrayed for us humans to be a saathvic person and attain moksham.

this is beside the discussion of dharma.

ravana did his dharma as much as ram. both fought to protect what each had to. both played their designated role. both fought their own dharmic war.

as an aside, are you a saathvic person? you pray to ram, but have you learnt from the role modelling? if yes (to you), others cud "perceive" it as no. if no (to you), then why pray to ram at all...

krishna urges arjuna to pick up his arms and fight for dharma.you are purely putting'perception' as check mate for s s.

again, i too can say "it is your perception that i am putting 'perception' as a check-mate for anything"...so does merely reducing everything to perception solve everything..

sb

 

[palindrome]

This is what I was talking about 'Free Will'. If every thing is God's role play, god would have made every one goody-goody boys, and with a stroke of button, world could be forced to follow one religion, one country, no killing,etc etc. If every thing is god's role play, then why god wants war,rape & murder..Why god wants adharmic people..

In my view, humans are not just 'Role Players', rather, they are given 'Freewill' , to an extend ,even they can they reject Brahma with that free-will.

free will is a very large topic...the monks (hindu and buddhist) offer very interesting explanations too...dharma and adharma cud come across as judgemental terms...i really wish we cud talk in person

 

[s007bala]

re

if satya sai is avataram, if he is god and if he protects, and he says 'everything is happening for good', then why do we need a law and order situation. cud he not nullify the cause and the effect?

which god or which atheist,has stopped events happening in the world from time immemorial,then we can discuss about a avatara purushan like sathya sai baba.

shirdi sai baba was ridiculed by grocers and did not give him oil to burn for the mosque lamp.Baba simply drew water and lighted the wick,he transmuted water to oil.present avataram has done so many miracles,this lifetime is just not enuff for me to sing his glory and supremacy.

sb

 

[s007bala]

re

This is what I was talking about 'Free Will'. If every thing is God's role play, god would have made every one goody-goody boys, and with a stroke of button, world could be forced to follow one religion, one country, no killing,etc etc. If every thing is god's role play, then why god wants war,rape & murder..Why god wants adharmic people..

In my view, humans are not just 'Role Players', rather, they are given 'Freewill' , to an extend ,even they can they reject Brahma with that free-will.

adarmic have to exist for god to show how dharma is superior.one cannot purely exist with dharma alone,this is deiveega nibhandanai.

sb

 

[palindrome]

which god or which atheist,has stopped events happening in the world from time immemorial,then we can discuss about a avatara purushan like sathya sai baba.

shirdi sai baba was ridiculed by grocers and did not give him oil to burn for the mosque lamp.Baba simply drew water and lighted the wick,he transmuted water to oil.present avataram has done so many miracles,this lifetime is just not enuff for me to sing his glory and supremacy.

sb

nobody is stopping you from singing glories and supremacy in anything...

i ask you the same thing:

which god has stopped events from happening in the world.

if yes, then does such an act of stopping or starting anything make one god?

if no, then why are they considered god?

 

[palindrome]

adarmic have to exist for god to show how dharma is superior.one cannot purely exist with dharma alone,this is deiveega nibhandanai.

sb

how do you know to pinpoint which is "adharma"?

why does something become "perceived" as adharma to you when it is "perceived" as dharma to the other party?

if adharma is bad, then why does it have to exist? is god a judgemental maniac guy who wants to show his "superiority" by creating adharma for you, putting you in distress and then coming to save you?

 

[s007bala]

re

if my sis likes something i bought and does not give me a chance to say anything, and instead she says she likes it and so she takes it home..it is equivalent to usurping for me (i seek my sister's forgiveness if she reads this ). shd i fight with her to seize it back or shd i simply go back to the shop and buy an other piece ? the pandavas cud very well have still established their own kingdom, far away from the territories that lay in the vicinity of hastinapur. And avoided the "proximity" to duryodhana's areas, which he "perceived" as a threat...

lots of things could be wished and questioned-does all these enquiries serve a purpose?

its one of the reasons given. if krishna had judged, he wud have fought himself. if he had judged, he cud have stopped the war instead. if he had judged, he need not have allowed the vrishnis to fight on the side of the kauravas (since he knew they will be loosing the war)...in short, krishna did not judge..to Him, not judging was dharma (righteousness)..and hence the gita explanation of doing duty without the intension of expecting its fruits..

krishna is avataram.you and i just have to listen to him.thats all.not pass platitudes about krishna qualities,which are sampoornam in nature.

to you. to the hindus. to the christians. to the sunnis, muhammad is the only last prophet and it is their dharma to spread his word, his law, his teachings..

so,....???whats tickling you?

this is beside the discussion of dharma.

ravana did his dharma as much as ram. both fought to protect what each had to. both played their designated role. both fought their own dharmic war.

as an aside, are you a saathvic person? you pray to ram, but have you learnt from the role modelling? if yes (to you), others cud "perceive" it as no. if no (to you), then why pray to ram at all...

total crap you write here,not worth responding,plz excuse.

again, i too can say "it is your perception that i am putting 'perception' as a check-mate for anything"...so does merely reducing everything to perception solve everything..

perception is one of the most important reality,if not the reality itself in todays world.as to how this perception is manipulated to ones advantage is whats going about,which is contrary to truth.

sb

 

[s007bala]

re

nobody is stopping you from singing glories and supremacy in anything...

i ask you the same thing:

which god has stopped events from happening in the world.

if yes, then does such an act of stopping or starting anything make one god?

if no, then why are they considered god?

i am so sorry to tell you,that i am not god,but only a divine spark of the whole god.lol all of us said this will be our last post in this thread,and like a proverbial bad penny,all of us are returning and posting again=sheesh ,what a dingbat i am!!:frusty:

sb

 

[sapr333]

dharma and adharma cud come across as judgemental terms..

This has been a major topic of debate, since Aristotle. Its called 'Euthyphro's dilemma', and since ages the atheists are sticking on to it, until theists refuted philosophically.Though it shares a contrary view,it gives a good kick-start, for these kind of discussions..

In this Euthyphro faces a trial in the same court where Aristotle was standing trial. In the court room,Euthyphro' justifies his killing,cos, his uncle did some thing bad against God of Greek, and hence he killed him. There, Aristotle throws 2 horns , ie Whats good/Bad or What Dharma and Adharma, on what basis we can judge actions? and put him in a confusion, which is called famous Euthyphros Dilemma.

Plato's famous question : whether a thing is good because God says it is good, or does God say it's good because it is already been good, God only picked it up, and handed it over to you

Btw, this could be a intitial start-up to understand about right/wrong..In later days, many a philosophers have logically refuted Plato on this.

You may google it to get more interesting info on this.

 

[s007bala]

re

free will is a very large topic...the monks (hindu and buddhist) offer very interesting explanations too...dharma and adharma cud come across as judgemental terms...i really wish we cud talk in person

i dont think sapr 333 is staying in delhi

sb

 

[palindrome]

bala,

lots of things could be wished and questioned-does all these enquiries serve a purpose?

yes they do. to possibly understand dharma to one is adharma to another..and to understand that possibly there is nothing called dharma as a judgemental stand as some wish to see it or twist it to be..

krishna is avataram.you and i just have to listen to him.thats all.not pass platitudes about krishna qualities,which are sampoornam in nature.

have we listened to him? have you lived the way he has wanted you to? if no, then why do you say you have listened to him? we are not talking abt krishna's qualities. we are talking abt dharma.

so,....???whats tickling you?

what an answer. i too can ask you, if muhammad's followers are spreading their dharma, what is tickling any hindu or anyone..

total crap you write here,not worth responding,plz excuse.

in a similar vein, what you write may be right to you anc crap to others...which part is crap to you..that idea of ravana and ram both playing their role in fighting "their own dharmic war" is crap or the fact that i asked you 'if you are a saathvic person' is crap? do not respond if you do not wish to.

perception is one of the most important reality,if not the reality itself in todays world.as to how this perception is manipulated to ones advantage is whats going about,which is contrary to truth.

really? then what is the truth?

 

[s007bala]

re

how do you know to pinpoint which is "adharma"?

why does something become "perceived" as adharma to you when it is "perceived" as dharma to the other party?

if adharma is bad, then why does it have to exist? is god a judgemental maniac guy who wants to show his "superiority" by creating adharma for you, putting you in distress and then coming to save you?

pinpointing is also gods inference only,acting thru humans as mediums.

perception varies,becoz mentality is different.

everything in the world is for gods own consumption,we too are gods property.to attain this state of sath chid ananda swaroopam,is all about tapas.

you do not know how to judge your 'self' first by yourself,and then only questioning of gods supremacy?

sb

 

[palindrome]

i dont think sapr 333 is staying in delhi

sb

??

explain please.

 

[palindrome]

bala

pinpointing is also gods inference only,acting thru humans as mediums.

how do you know pinpointing is "god's inference" ?

perception varies,becoz mentality is different.

so, if one's perception can be different from the other coz mentality is different, does it not mean that dharma to one is adharma to another?

and both see themselves in the role of dharma, and the other's role as adharmic? so 'dharma' wud merely mean a judgemental term?

everything in the world is for gods own consumption,we too are gods property.to attain this state of sath chid ananda swaroopam,is all about tapas.

what has this got to do with dharma?

how and why do you think 'everything' is for god's own consumption'?

you do not know how to judge your 'self' first by yourself,and then only questioning of gods supremacy?

how and why do you think i do not know to judge myself? and how and why do you think i am questioning any supremacy?

 

[s007bala]

re

yes they do. to possibly understand dharma to one is adharma to another..and to understand that possibly there is nothing called dharma as a judgemental stand as some wish to see it or twist it to be..

well you seem to questioning everything,do continue on this mode,eventually you will realise.

have we listened to him? have you lived the way he has wanted you to? if no, then why do you say you have listened to him? we are not talking abt krishna's qualities. we are talking abt dharma.

i have never seen chacha nehru,but read about him.but i believe,that nehru existed and liberated our country for us as a freedom fighter.similiarly about krishna=its a matter of faith.dharma is also a angam of nambikkai only.

what an answer. i too can ask you, if muhammad's followers are spreading their dharma, what is tickling any hindu or anyone..

i accept proh.mohd and sing bhajans praying to allah,yaeshu,yahway,rama ,krishna,.....all religions in this world,as thats how my avatar sathya sai baba has taught me.

in a similar vein, what you write may be right to you anc crap to others...which part is crap to you..that idea of ravana and ram both playing their role in fighting "their own dharmic war" is crap or the fact that i asked you 'if you are a saathvic person' is crap? do not respond if you do not wish to.

plz excuse,not worth my response.

really? then what is the truth?

its for you to explore and experiance .if i tell you sugar candy is sweet,unless untill you taste the experiance yourself,you will not know,what is sweet.

sb