Why I Am Not A Hindu ?- Book Review

[sapr333]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Bala, I have cited 3 instances in various religions about Act of Faith Vs Reasoning/Critical examining. And you have answered in line with my point.

You had a 'sense of reasoning' to reject islamic 72 virgin for a suicide bomber. With that reasoning sense only you could say, that they have wrongly interpreted Koran.

Regarding Polygamy, YOUR resoning still couldnt contest it.

And you are yet to share your view on "Kallars"...

Lets critically examine these three instances of Faith & reason it out...

Palindrome: I seek your comments on this topic too.Thanks

 

[s007bala]

sapr333

And you are yet to share your view on "Kallars"...

kallars are also praying,so that they can rob successfully,as thats their profession.so,it boils down to whose dharma is ferociusly enforced and acted upon,will yield successful results.

i am not understanding your query regarding polygamy again.its there in society.i know it exists in chennai,it exists in usa.mormons do practice polygamous marriages.

sb

 

[sapr333]

bala007 ,its all about what clout they have in society.whats truth for one maybe un-truth to another and vice versa.

Please go through my earlier posts about MORALS addressed to seshadri/palindrome...

Are we not going to condemn Hitler/Stalin, just because their society liked them and supported to the core, for their own societies Political/Economical/Racial advantage?


PS: Hitler gassed all the handicapped/bed ridden seniles/mentally challenged Germans(not alone Jews), just because he felt they are a burden to the economy of Germany..

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

sapr333, let us be clear on one thing first...

what is the aspect of hinduism that we are discussing? is it the interpretation? is it the actual practice? is it the actual text? is it the social setup and its aspects? or a permutation of all the above?

and what are the yardsticks? and how does other "isms" fare with it? do we first agree on the yardsticks?

what are the pre-requisites to understand spirituality? is it just a debate, the kind one does to prove observational facts, that would solve the question of god? or of religion?

is it necessary that the earth should be homogenized by a particular line of thought - whether it be religion, culture or any other? is not diversity, as evidenced by the myriad of things we see around us, a fact?

what is it that you are really trying to convey/debate here? is it specific to hinduism, or related to all religions?

to have a meaningful discussion, it is necessary that the points above are clarified, lest our thoughts become aimless...

thanks,

 

[palindrome]

Sapr333,

The Islamist who believe, that those blast and die of bomb against the infidels are assured of heaven+72 virgins after death. There is a sect among christians called mormons Joseph Smith, who claims that Christ certified polygamy. And there are Madurai/Dharapuram based Kallar caste, who adors 'God of Thief" and pray and give offering to god for better bounty and loot... And all of them, achieve what they want through the act of faith..Sheer faith..

Now, the basic question is... Should we leave them as such as "just another act of faith, or debate with them, and critically examin that faith.

to me...leave that alone..no one can stop a tiger from hunting..its in the very nature of some beings..those that want to save themselves can take all measures to protect themselves...but they cannot stop an other from attacking..

Critically examining any faith is neither going to stop it from being what it is. Everything has come to exist for a reason..nothing lasts..It will play its role on earth and be gone.

Jiddu Krishnamurthy, a philosopher, never believed in protectionism..please do try to read abt it...

>>It wud be akin to judging an other man’s belief>>

Doest matter.. Let the 'Truth Triumph'... Thats what Adi Shankara too did with that great winning debate, right!!

Lets put it this way...what applies to Adi Shankara may not apply to you..what is truth to one may not be truth to the others...this does not mean either you or i disrespect any guru..we just move on..its fate (we can speak on fate after we are done with maya ...and again, lets put it this way...this is on a personal stance..lets say i rever all gurus but my nature in spiritualism so far has been to move on when the going gets dull...so am not a follower..

However this may not work for someone else...he may wish to be a follower and not beleive in changes...so we debate..like we do here...i can influence him, but i cannot change him..similarly he can influence me but cannot change me...like train tracks they move parallel for a long time....this part is their own role...but suddenly one day the train-tracks cross paths, did the two player do it consciously? Or was something else at work like a 'third factor'?

was writing in my diary yesterday satyam....upajivati (may truth in all forms live on in peace)...

 

[sapr333]

sapr333, let us be clear on one thing first...

what is it that you are really trying to convey/debate here? is it specific to hinduism, or related to all religions?

to have a meaningful discussion, it is necessary that the points above are clarified, lest our thoughts become aimless...

thanks,

Seshadri, I agree with you, that this discussion is bit not-on the track.. My objective here was to evaluate Kancha's book.. But the discussion went bit stray, from social issues to religious issues.

I felt, Kancha had some good points to share in terms of Social Context, and most of the debators had a feeling, that, his points lacked the knowledge about religion... esp, Varna.. Thats where the discussion moved on to scriptural kind...and Im sticking on to it, though its gone for away from the core theme of discussion.

Actually, I though I would add support to kancha,keeping my premises based on Hinduism.. But debate moved far away.. Let me try to drag the discussion back to Kancha, though, I'm pretty much impressed with the way its going on.. Yes, Its fuels my quest to know about 'True God'

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

Seshadri, I agree with you, that this discussion is bit not-on the track.. My objective here was to evaluate Kancha's book.. But the discussion went bit stray, from social issues to religious issues.

I felt, Kancha had some good points to share in terms of Social Context, and most of the debators had a feeling, that, his points lacked the knowledge about religion... esp, Varna.. Thats where the discussion moved on to scriptural kind...and Im sticking on to it, though its gone for away from the core theme of discussion.

Actually, I though I would add support to kancha,keeping my premises based on Hinduism.. But debate moved far away.. Let me try to drag the discussion back to Kancha, though, I'm pretty much impressed with the way its going on.. Yes, Its fuels my quest to know about 'True God'

I am not talking about kancha...

About "God"...

Is it something that should be learnt through experience or through a discussion? of course, a discussion, by itself, is an experience... but not of the kind which one learns through other techniques, say meditation...

I still await your responses on these points:

what is the aspect of hinduism that we are discussing? is it the interpretation? is it the actual practice? is it the actual text? is it the social setup and its aspects? or a permutation of all the above?

and what are the yardsticks? and how does other "isms" fare with it? do we first agree on the yardsticks?

what are the pre-requisites to understand spirituality? is it just a debate, the kind one does to prove observational facts, that would solve the question of god? or of religion?

is it necessary that the earth should be homogenized by a particular line of thought - whether it be religion, culture or any other? is not diversity, as evidenced by the myriad of things we see around us, a fact?

what is it that you are really trying to convey/debate here? is it specific to hinduism, or related to all religions?

 

[sapr333]

PAlindrome

leave that alone..no one can stop a tiger from hunting..its in the very nature of some beings..those that want to save themselves can take all measures to protect themselves...but they cannot stop an other from attacking

So far, we are only debating with the first parah of your prime post. What infers me is..

1) YOu are not open to critically examine anything and you wish to be close minded (dont take it as a personal, Please).. And hence you avoided to share your comments about Kallar/72 virgins/Christian polygamy..Wanna be blind-folded like padded horse?

2) Let them be like that attitude!! Its similar to our great Indian ideology "Im a good person, cos I strongly believe in Live & Let Live"... But he fails to understand,that he is portraying himself as an ex-arrogant man, and he is only letting him live, because of his mercy.. Jungle law!!!.. Above all, this ideology fails to address the still better 'higher moral standard', which says, 'Reach out to him, and help him to make a better Living"...

>>>i can influence him, but i cannot change him.>>>

This is again a closed mindset.. Possibly, this attitude could be one reason, why the ancient hindu philosophy has not spread out of india. Or it could be a selfish thought, that , one dont wanted to share the greatness of ancient culture to others. If you find something great, please reach out the hands and make him understand. With this attitude, science would not have reached to others... As a kid, we were forced to learn alphabets,science and Maths, not impressed to learn them!! Right..

 

[sapr333]

I am not talking about kancha...

About "God"...

Is it something that should be learnt through experience or through a discussion? of course, a discussion, by itself, is an experience... but not of the kind which one learns through other techniques, say meditation...

I still await your responses on these points:

I agree with you Seshadri..I agree God could be experienced through learning/introspection/interest to seek God/discussion/experience/prayers/rituals or even meditation.. Each one chooses their own path..

My point here is, one should critically examine and evaluate the true path to reach God... and I have cited 3 eg from 3 different religions, how people could go wrong, if they dont self introspect and critically examine the path.

 

[sapr333]

Palindrome>>>>>>>what applies to Adi Shankara may not apply to you..what is truth to one may not be truth to the others...this does not mean either you or i disrespect any guru..we just move on..its fate (we can speak on fate after we are done with maya ..>>>

Truth about God is Universal and One.. Thats not dependent on Time,culture,Adi sankara/mohamed/Christ/buddha.

The confusion once again here is, even while on the job of exploring Truth, you are attributing the confusion about exploring truth , to MAYA... In that context, I may be surprised if someone tells here, 'Truth itself is a MAYA'

 

[sapr333]

Palindrome..

was writing in my diary yesterday satyam....upajivati (may truth in all forms live on in peace)

Truth in all forms, ie multiple forms is Theory, as Seshadri was sharing his view about Darwinian Evolution as just a THEORY.Even Light Theory could be added as an eg..

But when TRUTH is explored it becomes a LAW, and its single! and only one mode.

 

[palindrome]

Sapr333,

Bala, I have cited 3 instances in various religions about Act of Faith Vs Reasoning/Critical examining. And you have answered in line with my point.

You had a 'sense of reasoning' to reject islamic 72 virgin for a suicide bomber. With that reasoning sense only you could say, that they have wrongly interpreted Koran.

There is nothing called rejection in reality...one may reject something but it does not cease to exist...therefore, am not inclined to reject anything per se..

As mentioned earlier, everything plays its role before its gone...dinosaurs played their role before they were gone..but are they truly extinct...isn't it possible a similar life form exists as perhaps a lizard somewhere hidden in the amazon...so can we say dinos are still alive but in a different form in a different time ? Has nature then really rejected dinos?

Things only appear as being disappeared...but have they truly?

I may think well who knows if tehre really are 72 virgins or not...so why do i care to bother...i do not reject it, i merely do not care..its a matter of interest..it does not interest me...

All religions are fear-based or reward-based...that's another reason i prefer faith over religion...religions expects you must believe, faith puts forward no such demands...the requirement of having to stick to beliefs rigidly without questioning it or rigidity in any form does not go well with me..atleast islam beleives in "you to your faith and me to mine" but christianity does no such things, its only "be saved or be damned"...and i really cudn't care about such demands from a god or a prophet or my mother...no interest...

Regarding Polygamy, YOUR resoning still couldnt contest it.

And you are yet to share your view on "Kallars"...

Lets critically examine these three instances of Faith & reason it out...

Palindrome: I seek your comments on this topic too.Thanks

Polygamy: i have nothing against polygamy or polyandry...the old world was like that...morality was not judged...its each one's life..their choice..as long as nobody is feeling hurt, its all fine i suppose...i cudn't imagine any such thing myself...but then who am i to judge someone else for their life and their choice?

Kallar God: in this case the dacoits bring distress upon ppl...its a socially unacceptable way of earning an (dis)honest income alright but then again ppl cannot stop them from being what they are..otehrs can only protect themselves against any onslaught.

Faith & Reason: I have already shared my views on it.

 

[palindrome]

Palindrome..

Truth in all forms, ie multiple forms is Theory, as Seshadri was sharing his view about Darwinian Evolution as just a THEORY.Even Light Theory could be added as an eg..

But when TRUTH is explored it becomes a LAW, and its single! and only one mode.

Truth need not become a law when explored. If one seeks to explore it to make it a law, then it is not a truth at all..since it does not give place to other truths..

Theory is only for religion. Sorry i beleive in no religion. Nobody has come back from the dead to tell me if a heaven or hell exists, if doctrinal theories work or any such thing. To me religion is crap.

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

I agree with you Seshadri..I agree God could be experienced through learning/introspection/interest to seek God/discussion/experience/prayers/rituals or even meditation.. Each one chooses their own path..

My point here is, one should critically examine and evaluate the true path to reach God... and I have cited 3 eg from 3 different religions, how people could go wrong, if they dont self introspect and critically examine the path.

I overlook the silence to my other queries...

True path - what is truth? relative or absolute? how shall one decide that?

 

[palindrome]

In brown

PAlindrome

So far, we are only debating with the first parah of your prime post. What infers me is..

1) YOu are not open to critically examine anything and you wish to be close minded (dont take it as a personal, Please).. And hence you avoided to share your comments about Kallar/72 virgins/Christian polygamy..Wanna be blind-folded like padded horse?

There are so many posts...i cannot go thru all of them and post at a time ..and this is not straight either...its a 5-way conversation...some posts will be missed...i knwo your stance is that of a critique but hope you do not jump to judge others before the conversation in the thread is complete...


2) Let them be like that attitude!! Its similar to our great Indian ideology "Im a good person, cos I strongly believe in Live & Let Live"... But he fails to understand,that he is portraying himself as an ex-arrogant man, and he is only letting him live, because of his mercy.. Jungle law!!!.. Above all, this ideology fails to address the still better 'higher moral standard', which says, 'Reach out to him, and help him to make a better Living"...

hindu faith too is about reaching out to help a man in trouble...you didn't watch velgudi swamy's video posted by sesh?

if a hindu man wishes to twist around the shastras to fit his own smug attitude, are you gonna balme the shastras or the man?

>>>i can influence him, but i cannot change him.>>>

This is again a closed mindset.. Possibly, this attitude could be one reason, why the ancient hindu philosophy has not spread out of india. Or it could be a selfish thought, that , one dont wanted to share the greatness of ancient culture to others. If you find something great, please reach out the hands and make him understand. With this attitude, science would not have reached to others... As a kid, we were forced to learn alphabets,science and Maths, not impressed to learn them!! Right..

on the contrary, i think ancient hindu philosophies have been propagated across the world....christ was repeating a few teachings of buddha...buddha was teaching advaita minus ritualism...but we do not go door to door selling religion like sales representatives of christianity do...we do not buy souls with money...nor do we enforce sunnat with the fear of the sword...people have come to hindusim on their own...have heard of mahesh yogi, chinmayananda, nityananda, yogananda, prabhupada, etc...the west is de-baptizing itself, coming to the east in search of its wisdom, but we do not have sufficient teachers....there are vaishnavas teachers who go and reach out to others to this day, but not enuf in numbers...

again, am not really into 'critical examination' coz its a deal more for those minds that already have a stance of a critique to criticize no matter what they come across...perhaps to fulfill a preexisting stance..

 

[palindrome]

Palindrome>>>>>>>what applies to Adi Shankara may not apply to you..what is truth to one may not be truth to the others...this does not mean either you or i disrespect any guru..we just move on..its fate (we can speak on fate after we are done with maya ..>>>

Truth about God is Universal and One.. Thats not dependent on Time,culture,Adi sankara/mohamed/Christ/buddha.

The confusion once again here is, even while on the job of exploring Truth, you are attributing the confusion about exploring truth , to MAYA... In that context, I may be surprised if someone tells here, 'Truth itself is a MAYA'

who is attributing any confusion on exploring truth...

true, truth is not dependent on the gurus who come to show us the path...gurus will come and go, but time goes on...

truth is not maya...what is not maya is the truth...please read the brahma sutra links provided...it is you that appears confused about maya...

 

[palindrome]

PALINDROME>>Spar33,
this is another factor you might want to take into consideration...if there is a god with certain "good" qualities, then am far from it..and one of the reasons why its not my cup of tea is this very disussion of creationism versus evolution b/w sesh and me....how wud anyone define creationism of "good" qualities...behaviour can be explained using evolutionary models but is not conclusive again (sometimes it is conclusive but not considered as such bcoz science keeps room for growth, change and divergence..unlike religious doctrines that expects acceptance without questioning with no room for change or growth)...>>>

Palindrome, he is an interesting anecdote...When Darwin theory was published in news paper, an Amercian devout Christian mother said' Oh God, let this not be true.. Even if, let this be kept secret" I think Seshadri, also thinks this way, ie, This should be false!! Let me not expore further. Though Seshadri has a valid point 'Claiming it as 'Theory..Just a Theory', but then we should also explore ways to bridge it with religion if its proved as 'LAW''.

You may even see, majority of the Christian mass, talk the same way like Mr.Seshadri.. There is noting wrong,and we need to respect their faith.. On the other side, during that time, some of the great Christian philosophers/thinkers in Vatican worked hard to bridge this with Darwinism. And they succeeded only when Big Bang theory came in..Thats the point I was driving in my previous post.

For eg,If I say to Sesh, that, Old Purana's are just mythology, Im sure he is not going to accept based upon his blind faith. But Christian philsophers (not the mass populace) has already set a definition for 'MYTHOLOGY'... Mythology is the earlier form of God's communion with people on earth, though meaningful story.. "Mythology is something that never existed, but exist in our day to day life, to give us the perspective about God'

Adam-Eve could be a mythology, cos it dont have any historical/Archaic value. Matter of fact, Bible could be historically/archeologically validated only up to Moses. Similarly Rahu and Kedu could be mythology.. But it all drives us the basic important point 'God as the creator and supreme and God punishes the wrong doers" etc etc..

How do we know mythology is any form of god's communion with people?

Are you sure God punishes? Has someone come back from the world of the dead or risen from a coffin to tell anyone that god punishes the wrong doers...how can anyone be sure that god punishes?

And how did great Christian philosophers/thinkers in Vatican bridge anything with Darwinism ? And they succeeded only when Big Bang theory came in ? Please elaborate. Who are the so-called christian philosophers who did that...

There is no such thing as a 'christian philosopher' since christianity beleives in no philosophy only theology. There may be christian thinkers...some allege that christianity easily copies and then turns it around to fit into its doctrinal views and the so-called thinkers actually do that...no idea if its true...

 

[srikrish85]

Err... Seshadriji, Jainism or Sharmana Tradition was founded by Adhi Nath a.k.a Rishabh Deva not Mahaveera

 

[srikrish85]

We say our scriptures are superior. But, In Valmiki Ramayan, it is said that Rama killed a Shudra while the latter was doing a penance(Uttar Kaand). Just can't judge? I'm in a great Dilemma. Pl. help me out.

 

[s007bala]

re

palin.....,

Theory is only for religion. Sorry i beleive in no religion. Nobody has come back from the dead to tell me if a heaven or hell exists, if doctrinal theories work or any such thing. To me religion is crap.

I have belief in spirits,seances,mediums...par-normal phenomena..etc as i have personally experianced and sort of a medium myself.But this part of my personality,i engulfed it with bhakthi totally to my lord.what you think of religion is your opinion,which you are entitled to.There are people like you from time immemorial,tell me something new,eh!.

sb

 

[s007bala]

sapr 333

Please go through my earlier posts about MORALS addressed to seshadri/palindrome...

Are we not going to condemn Hitler/Stalin, just because their society liked them and supported to the core, for their own societies Political/Economical/Racial advantage?

i think hitler/stalin got what they deserved and so did deutchlanders/russians.life brings on people like these personalities,so that a moral lesson is learned.

PS: Hitler gassed all the handicapped/bed ridden seniles/mentally challenged Germans(not alone Jews), just because he felt they are a burden to the economy of Germany..

pyschopaths like hitler got caught and condemned.what about those who are scot free in society today?and justifying their acts!!of psychopathic,mentally-deranged wars!!all for oil,christ,allah!!=madness.Hinduism is way ahead of all this nonsense when compared.!!ultimately no system is perfect,but we can strive towards perfection.

sb

 

[palindrome]

sapr333,
I have belief in spirits,seances,mediums...par-normal phenomena..etc as i have personally experianced and sort of a medium myself.But this part of my personality,i engulfed it with bhakthi totally to my lord.what you think of religion is your opinion,which you are entitled to.There are people like you from time immemorial,tell me something new,eh!.
sb

Bala,

You were responding to my post..that was not written by sapr333

yep me believes in the existence of the spirit too, its just (a form of) energy..in each one of us...for hindus spirit usually means 'aatma" and there are aatmas like praytatmas..the world of the dead as described by so many is interesting, isn't it..as welll as those of NDEs or near death experience....yogis talk abt deathless death but i have yet to come across any regular mortal getting up from the funeral pyre or a coffin to tell me what they actually saw...have you met anyone like that so far? or someone to relate a NDE so far?

its funny that one can know their past life thru regression sessions, but what happens in that split second after you lost that old body and saw yourself in the new? and why is that split second not really considered just seconds in terms of time travel of the yogis? interesting right?

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

The title of the book was is a modification of the famous book "Why I am not a Christian? " By Betrand Russel the famous Philosopher.

http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

BTW None of the famous Philosophers are classified as Christian. There is nothing called Christian Philosophy.

The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

As with any fusion of religion and philosophy, the attempt to reconcile Christianity with certain philosophies is difficult. Classical philosophers start with no preconditions for which conclusions they must reach in their investigation. Classical religious believers have a set of religious principles of faith that they hold one must believe. Because of these divergent goals and views, some hold that one cannot simultaneously be a philosopher and a true adherent of a revealed religion. In this view, all attempts at synthesis ultimately fail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_philosophy

You can not be a Philosopher and a Christian. The hounding by Christianity of Philosophers is well known.

It is only in Hinduism that Religion is based on Philosophy.

Sakya Muni Buddha was totally opposed to any sort of Philosophy. He was very clear about that. Of course his followers came out with a lot of Philosophy. But that is another matter.

 

[sapr333]

The title of the book was is a modification of the famous book "Why I am not a Christian? " By Betrand Russel the famous Philosopher.

BTW None of the famous Philosophers are classified as Christian. There is nothing called Christian Philosophy.

You can not be a Philosopher and a Christian. The hounding by Christianity of Philosophers is well known.

It is only in Hinduism that Religion is based on Philosophy.

Sakya Muni Buddha was totally opposed to any sort of Philosophy. He was very clear about that. Of course his followers came out with a lot of Philosophy. But that is another matter.

Betrand Russel's "Why Im not a Christian is indeed an interesting book. Every one should read it.

Recently I hv read an interesting book "Philosophy and Religion' (From Plato to Post modernism by Max Charlesworth. He analyses all religious views (including Adi Sankara,which he admires) and explains how philosophy has helped religions to overcome the hurdles. He says, Philosophy and religion are two seperate entities,but religion needs the support of philosophy to substantiate its claims. Thats why most of the philosophers dwell on Religion/faith, trying to reject/prove the faith.

For,eg, Faith/religion tells us, God created every thing..One way is to accept it blindly. But Aristotle attributed tread in line saying 'God could be the first cause, or first primemover'..Thats logic.

Faith says , God is All Powerful. Platonians extend that further to Absolute Holiness.. ie GOOD..

All the religions accepts philosophy except Islam..Next to Plato, most of the modern day philosophers drive quotes from St.Augustine and St.Thomas Aquinas, which disagrees with the claim of Christinity being against philosophy.

Having said that, in my view, religion itself cannot be a philosophy.

 

[sapr333]

Bala,

You were responding to my post..that was not written by sapr333

its funny that one can know their past life thru regression sessions, but what happens in that split second after you lost that old body and saw yourself in the new? and why is that split second not really considered just seconds in terms of time travel of the yogis? interesting right?

Instead, one should go through all the possible religious scriptures in the world, and explore answers for 'Life After Death".. Various religions gives different answers. Lets critically examine all, use the power of reasoning/freewill given by God, and choose the right one.