Atman
Member
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.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are we too soft?
- Thread starter Don Penguinoini
- Start date
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
...
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.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
India show their power and demand it be returned, its nothing different to what the UK would do.
Moses the God Archetype*
Active Member
m: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:meditate:......now if india does suffer some form of calamity it is because of its collective karma good or bad it must play out .:namaste
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Very true, very nice post.
Pariah
Let go
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.
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
Let go
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*
Active Member
m: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.:namasteHinduism 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.
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.
Pariah
Let go
I don't blame the Britishers. It's a fact that colonialism coupled with several hundred years of Muslim occupation of played havoc with the Hindu mindset, it's conception of history, and the pride with which every country has its basis. The current lot of Hindus are the ones to blame.
As an Indian, Hinduism plays a large role in the culture of the sub-continent. Unlike America which was founded on secular values and now has a secular culture, India is not the same.
What pride can one have in a mass of land?
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
India's problems lie within itself. It's the hindus themselves who are being idiots. You see a strong muslim unity, but never strong hindu unity, or not at the same level. Among others, that is what we could learn from muslims.
Hema
Sweet n Spicy
Yes I think that Hindus are too soft. We love to pray a lot and follow Ahimsa but God also taught us that when we have no other choice, we must stand up for what we believe in and fight if we have to. This was how Shri Krishna and Shri Ram lived their lives. In the Ramayana, Shri Ram did not even want war. He sent a messenger to peacefully discuss matters with Ravana, but Ravana refused leaving Shri Ram no choice.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Take a logical guess.
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Don Penguinoini ,
First of all you are saying *WE* and then saying *Hindus*
When there is nothing called Hindus how can anyone be a hindu?
This is the misconception which is carrying on till date and so we have people killing each other in the name of religion.
During Vedic times there were no me, we, I etc. and if you have read the post by Venugopal where he mentioned about some ashrams in Kerala where they live freely and they even do not own there children except breast feeding them till they are young.
Those times everyone lived as ordinary beings and shared all that existence has to offer.
The culture then was that every being maybe new to this place are equal and welcome as nobody owns anything in REAl they maybe a custodian for name sake. And this very aspect was misused by all your invaders till AKHBAR came to the scenme and he understood the culture to a great extent to accpet / unite /merge with the society as one.
The whole objective of life is to surrender the EGO / I / WE / etc. and in that surrender does one realises god and so this land here is the best and so it has been able to assimmilate so many cultues, languages, etc. So many differences but still living as ONE. There is no land where this has happened. Beides noone can take anything. The Moguls ruled for 7 generations and what is the fate of their present generation? just about hand to mouth. Like wise what is on this earth will remian here, humans will come and go. Only those who realise themselves may not come back.
So, kindly understand what you say and only in the understanding that you grow.
Love & rgds
First of all you are saying *WE* and then saying *Hindus*
When there is nothing called Hindus how can anyone be a hindu?
This is the misconception which is carrying on till date and so we have people killing each other in the name of religion.
During Vedic times there were no me, we, I etc. and if you have read the post by Venugopal where he mentioned about some ashrams in Kerala where they live freely and they even do not own there children except breast feeding them till they are young.
Those times everyone lived as ordinary beings and shared all that existence has to offer.
The culture then was that every being maybe new to this place are equal and welcome as nobody owns anything in REAl they maybe a custodian for name sake. And this very aspect was misused by all your invaders till AKHBAR came to the scenme and he understood the culture to a great extent to accpet / unite /merge with the society as one.
The whole objective of life is to surrender the EGO / I / WE / etc. and in that surrender does one realises god and so this land here is the best and so it has been able to assimmilate so many cultues, languages, etc. So many differences but still living as ONE. There is no land where this has happened. Beides noone can take anything. The Moguls ruled for 7 generations and what is the fate of their present generation? just about hand to mouth. Like wise what is on this earth will remian here, humans will come and go. Only those who realise themselves may not come back.
So, kindly understand what you say and only in the understanding that you grow.
Love & rgds
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Stop worrying about India. It is happy even with the bourses down 33%, inflation at 11%, and oil at $146 per barrel. Poet Mohammad Iqbal said:
'Kuchh baat hai ki hasti mitati nahi hamaari;
sadiyon raha hai dushman, daure jahan hamaara.'
(There sure is something that our might is never destroyed,
though times have been against us for centuries.)
'Kuchh baat hai ki hasti mitati nahi hamaari;
sadiyon raha hai dushman, daure jahan hamaara.'
(There sure is something that our might is never destroyed,
though times have been against us for centuries.)
I am saddened by the ego expressed here.
"We" are too soft? There is no "we."
"too soft?" You think that is a bad thing?
But mostly, then, the defensive Nationalist comments.
This is a silly view. No one should ever take pride in their nation: you did not build it. It isn't yours. Nationalism is a childish and terrible egotism. Anyone's nationalism. It's like being proud of your race or ethnicity. Such things are accidents of birth, not accomplishments.
Once you understand how silly it is to be proud of your race or your ethnicity (and the OP is talking about Hindus as an ethnic group, I hope, not a religion), then you understand how equally silly it is to ever feel shame about it.
OP seems to have shame in being Hindu. Responding posters try to counter that view with statements of pride. Both approaches are futile and show no understanding.
"We" are too soft? There is no "we."
"too soft?" You think that is a bad thing?
But mostly, then, the defensive Nationalist comments.
This is a silly view. No one should ever take pride in their nation: you did not build it. It isn't yours. Nationalism is a childish and terrible egotism. Anyone's nationalism. It's like being proud of your race or ethnicity. Such things are accidents of birth, not accomplishments.
Once you understand how silly it is to be proud of your race or your ethnicity (and the OP is talking about Hindus as an ethnic group, I hope, not a religion), then you understand how equally silly it is to ever feel shame about it.
OP seems to have shame in being Hindu. Responding posters try to counter that view with statements of pride. Both approaches are futile and show no understanding.
"Good job?" Better than some, worst than others. But even if we were the never- conquered Americans (I can't think of anyone else who has never been conquered), where is the pride? Understand: when a nation is conquered wrongfully (as opposed to when there is simply a battle between kings or dictators, neither of whom has a moral claim), then it is the conquering people who should feel shame, not the victim. In truth, most victors are only guilty of winning, of doing to others what the others would gladly do to them.
"India is one of the oldest countries in the world" No, India is very young, as a nation, beginning only after the English left. Even the culture isn't old. Parts of it are. But parts are very modern. Film is hugely important to Indian culture. How old is that aspect of culture? And how borrowed?
And please, let us not come forward with the tired egotism of "Hinduism is the oldest religion we know of." First, you mean oldest religion still somewhat practiced in the old way. We are very aware of ancient religions long faded. But even still, what difference does it make that Hinduism is old? Horse and carriage is an old form of transport. The age doesn't make it better than a car. The Vedas age is irrelevant to it's truth and it's truth irrelevant to it's age.
And mostly, please, understand that to be either proud or ashamed of your religion is to fail to understand the essence of spirituality.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
***MOD ADVISORY***
Please remember that this is a Hindu forum. If you don't consider yourself a Hindu, please limit your posts to polite questions.
Please remember that this is a Hindu forum. If you don't consider yourself a Hindu, please limit your posts to polite questions.