Are we too soft? (religion, Hinduism)

[Atman]

Originally Posted by penguino

Shivaji's sword.

I fail to see what Shivaji's sword being in the hands of the British government has to do with India, or Hindus being overly pacifist. That being said, I'd be quiet happy to see it returned to India.

[Don Penguinoini]

Originally Posted by Atman

I fail to see what Shivaji's sword being in the hands of the British government has to do with India, or Hindus being overly pacifist. That being said, I'd be quiet happy to see it returned to India.

...

Just imagine if India had the crown jewels, the UK would get back in seconds. But when India need to get back Shivaji's sword, they need to go through all sorts of things, im not sure if they have got it yet.

[Atman]

Just imagine if India had the crown jewels, the UK would get back in seconds. But when India need to get back Shivaji's sword, they need to go through all sorts of things, im not sure if they have got it yet.

Okay, and what do you think should be done about it.

[Don Penguinoini]

Originally Posted by Atman

Okay, and what do you think should be done about it.

India show their power and demand it be returned, its nothing different to what the UK would do.

[Moses the God Archetype*]

There's no need to be worryed that india can not hold its own..........bhagavan himself lord shri krsna insured india's future a long time ago, and for good measure returned again as shri chaitanya so therefore it cannot be taken away from it roots as it were......now if india does suffer some form of calamity it is because of its collective karma good or bad it must play out .

[Don Penguinoini]

Very true, very nice post.

[Pariah]

If you're truly interested in reading about India's history, you'll find that the traditional Western and Marxist viewpoints of India's history are quite wrong. There are many Britishers even, who have remarked on the view that "Hindus could not defend themselves, they were weak, the Muslims took over easily" as blatantly false. Muslims did not control the entire sub-continent very easily, and while its true that Hindus rarely worked together (then, there was no concept of Hindu - only Vaishnavite, Shaivite, etc.), it does not change the fact that Hindu kings were not overly pacifist.

Looking at ancient India, with Porus (who fought Alexander), Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka, Chanakya, and Vikramaditya we find a very different type of people from the current stock of Indians and Hindus.

Read here:
Rajput

That said, Hindus traditionally are not religious in the right ways. They seem to harp on vegetarianism and only that - ask the average Hindu about the Vedas, the Upanishads, or the glorious military history of Hindus throughout the ages and all of them will shrug their shoulders.

Hindu Voice UK - Home

You should read the articles here. Many Hindu youth have many of the problems you do and ask the same questions you do.

EDIT:
If Aupmanyav were here, he'd back me up.

[Pariah]

Originally Posted by Moses the God Archetype*

now if india does suffer some form of calamity it is because of its collective karma good or bad it must play out .

This is the type of fatalism that needs to be purged from Santana Dharma ASAP. India is suffering and has been for quite some time - from the first successful invasion of Muslims by Mohammed Ghazni continuing on to the British.

Bharat rarely attacked other countries and had no concept of slavery (assuming that the caste system was not institutionalized slavery). Before the West, it practiced "freedom of religion" and had "freedom of speech". India deserved none of it and to say that it is a reaction of karmic forces is to allow it again.

Karma is not fate and to believe so, is tamasic behavior.

[Moses the God Archetype*]

Originally Posted by Pariah

This is the type of fatalism that needs to be purged from Santana Dharma ASAP. India is suffering and has been for quite some time - from the first successful invasion of Muslims by Mohammed Ghazni continuing on to the British.

Bharat rarely attacked other countries and had no concept of slavery (assuming that the caste system was not institutionalized slavery). Before the West, it practiced "freedom of religion" and had "freedom of speech". India deserved none of it and to say that it is a reaction of karmic forces is to allow it again.

Karma is not fate and to believe so, is tamasic behavior.

Hahahahahaha........estatic laughter, is this your means to deride me, i very much know the history of my spiritual home in all facets and the various invasions it is not nice at all ,nor do i like the condition that india is in, but also i do remember lord krsna chaitanya standing up to the muslims of HIS time period and was succesful in that endeavor, also if you've ever read the bhagavad gita you would know that karma can be change by the person or the collective therefore it is NOT written in stone..............sooooo my thought form is not tamasic for it is known that that guna should be avoided.

[michaelm]

Hinduism as a religion is more widespread that ever before, thanks to many great teachers coming to the West to spread the spiritual message. Many westerners (myself included) could hold a decent conversation on the Gita and various Upanishads etc. Of course very many people call themsleves Hindu when they really only mean culturally - not knowing the scriptures etc, but that is very true of many other faiths.

Culturally India is such a vast melting pot of cultures, ethnic groups, languages, it will always be in a state of change, sometimes seemingly chaotically so, but somehow it is too great an entity to be damaged, changed perhaps, but not damaged. Did tea and cricket damage Indian society or improve it? OK, probably not great examples, but I wouldnt like to be the one trying to stop cricket being played in India as it is not part of Hindu culture!! India has absorbed much of what it liked and rejected most of what it didnt like and is the stronger for it.

There is a great danger in blaming 'outsiders' for any problems a nation, culture, religion faces.