• 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!

Politicized Hinduism and the Media

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I have long back ..

Score
Economic Left/Right: -7.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67.

Far left of center as far as economics go and centrist as far as social values go.

Politics and religion have always been bedfellows .. from time immemorial .. but to pick up and parade a particular questionable score sheet from an unknown western organization .. saying we are 130th in press freedom seems unpatriotic and uncharitable.

You forgot to mention that -

"The so-called report claims to be based entirely on so-called ‘sting operations,’ but it is actually a case of doctoring of content and falsification, as no media organisations named in it agreed to any illegal or immoral activity and no contracts were signed."

Cobrapost's sting on media groups based on doctored content and falsification - Times of India

Some media houses were willing in principle to push an ideology is all that the sting claims ..

Doesn't one of the world's most watched tv news networks push uber liberal ideology .. with two gay anchors dominating three - five hour prime time? Crying their hearts out about criminal El Salvadoreans being deported back? Is that not dangerous bias .. for a news channel to show sympathy for criminals who are deported back to country of origin?

News is always biased .. what is new about it ..

namaste

Amani_Bhava
Odd of you to put Times Now, one of the very media organizations who fared the worse in the taped video, as the source of the counter-narrative. What do you expect them to say..seriously!
You caricatured some news network. Not sure which one though...

I am not even certain what your objection to my post is actually. Do you think politicization of religion and its broadcasting by media paid for that purpose a good thing?? What that has to do with immigration or El Salvadore...I have no idea.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
Odd of you to put Times Now, one of the very media organizations who fared the worse in the taped video, as the source of the counter-narrative. What do you expect them to say..seriously!
You caricatured some news network. Not sure which one though...

I am not even certain what your objection to my post is actually. Do you think politicization of religion and its broadcasting by media paid for that purpose a good thing?? What that has to do with immigration or El Salvadore...I have no idea.

Okay.

My points are -

A ) Why are you quoting an unknown watchdog which says out press freedom in India is 130th in the world ? Why not the better known IFJ Journalists & media staff killed list in 2018 - Safety of Journalists

This year only two journos have died in India .. one of whom was investigating sand mafia in Madhya Pradesh. Both deaths were hit and run. There are so many hit and run deaths in India that is impossible to ascribe their deaths to anybody's mal-intention.

B ) Politicization of religion. What exactly do you mean by it? Why are you saying it now .. why did you not say it back in 2011 when our then PM Manmohan Singh flew to Puttaparthi to pay last respects to Sai Baba.
Is it necessarily wrong to bring most Indian Hindus under umbrella of one political party? If kings could sponsor a religion (e.g Ashok and Buddhism, Constantine and Christianity) why cannot political parties?

At least this way we can give a jaw breaking reply to Pakistan in case of another Mumbai 26/11.

C ) The Cobrapost sting .. like most stings prove really nothing other than that some media houses are guilty of paid news. Big deal!! And .. was Cobrapost able to get a paid contract .. or just get an editor to say few weird things on hidden camera ..

D ) If being liberal is an ideology .. then is not the world's largest news network pushing forth one too .. with two gay anchors in prime time bashing Trump for five hours .. the same news channel is crying buckets over El Salvadoreans caught and deported back to their home country (under the Obama law that undocumented aliens found breaking the law will be deported back)

All news outlets promote an ideology .. what is so new or crazy about it? Did you for one minute believe that journalists are objective?

namaste

Amani_Bhava
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Okay.

My points are -

A ) Why are you quoting an unknown watchdog which says out press freedom in India is 130th in the world ? Why not the better known IFJ Journalists & media staff killed list in 2018 - Safety of Journalists

This year only two journos have died in India .. one of whom was investigating sand mafia in Madhya Pradesh. Both deaths were hit and run. There are so many hit and run deaths in India that is impossible to ascribe their deaths to anybody's mal-intention.

B ) Politicization of religion. What exactly do you mean by it? Why are you saying it now .. why did you not say it back in 2011 when our then PM Manmohan Singh flew to Puttaparthi to pay last respects to Sai Baba.
Is it necessarily wrong to bring most Indian Hindus under umbrella of one political party? If kings could sponsor a religion (e.g Ashok and Buddhism, Constantine and Christianity) why cannot political parties?

At least this way we can give a jaw breaking reply to Pakistan in case of another Mumbai 26/11.

C ) The Cobrapost sting .. like most stings prove really nothing other than that some media houses are guilty of paid news. Big deal!! And .. was Cobrapost able to get a paid contract .. or just get an editor to say few weird things on hidden camera ..

D ) If being liberal is an ideology .. then is not the world's largest news network pushing forth one too .. with two gay anchors in prime time bashing Trump for five hours .. the same news channel is crying buckets over El Salvadoreans caught and deported back to their home country (under the Obama law that undocumented aliens found breaking the law will be deported back)

All news outlets promote an ideology .. what is so new or crazy about it? Did you for one minute believe that journalists are objective?

namaste

Amani_Bhava
A) Safety is a different thing from press freedom. The question here is does the corporate groups that own the media channels and newspapers direct or influence what the journalists write there. What laws exist in India that guarantees that a journalist can write independent of pressure from those who own the newspapers?

B) How do you know what I did or did not think or write in 2011? The government of a pluralist nation should show no favoritism to one religion or ideology. It should be sympathetic and supportive of all religious and secular groups, hearing all people's concern with empathy and alleviating all groups' and all faiths' concerns.

Asoka did not promote Buddhism. He promoted Dhamma, which was common to all Indic religions of the day . He defines Dhamma in

Rock Edict 11

Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, speaks thus:[20] There is no gift like the gift of the Dhamma,[21] (no acquaintance like) acquaintance with Dhamma, (no distribution like) distribution of Dhamma, and (no kinship like) kinship through Dhamma. And it consists of this: proper behavior towards servants and employees, respect for mother and father, generosity to friends, companions, relations, Brahmans and ascetics, and not killing living beings. Therefore a father, a son, a brother, a master, a friend, a companion or a neighbor should say: "This is good, this should be done." One benefits in this world and gains great merit in the next by giving the gift of the Dhamma.


Here he what he said about religion in

Rock edict 12,

Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, honors both ascetics and the householders of all religions, and he honors them with gifts and honors of various kinds.[22] But Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, does not value gifts and honors as much as he values this -- that there should be growth in the essentials of all religions.[23] Growth in essentials can be done in different ways, but all of them have as their root restraint in speech, that is, not praising one's own religion, or condemning the religion of others without good cause. And if there is cause for criticism, it should be done in a mild way. But it is better to honor other religions for this reason. By so doing, one's own religion benefits, and so do other religions, while doing otherwise harms one's own religion and the religions of others. Whoever praises his own religion, due to excessive devotion, and condemns others with the thought "Let me glorify my own religion," only harms his own religion. Therefore contact (between religions) is good.[24] One should listen to and respect the doctrines professed by others. Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, desires that all should be well-learned in the good doctrines of other religions.


I would be happy indeed if principles of Asoka became the actual (and not merely symbolic) pillar of the Indian political parties and institutions.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
A) Safety is a different thing from press freedom. The question here is does the corporate groups that own the media channels and newspapers direct or influence what the journalists write there. What laws exist in India that guarantees that a journalist can write independent of pressure from those who own the newspapers?

Asoka did not promote Buddhism. He promoted Dhamma, which was common to all Indic religions of the day . He defines Dhamma in

I do not know which cuckoo land (or is it fruitopia .. your fantasy you choose the place) you live in where a journalist is independent of editorial board which is independent of owners .. I cannot even believe you said that.

Ashoka was more interested in spread of Buddhism (due to guilt conscience) than any real understanding of Dhamma .. why else would he murder 18,000 Ajivikas (because they poked fun at Buddha in a painting). That does not sound like action of a person who understands the Dhamma.

namaste

Amani_Bhava
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I do not know which cuckoo land (or is it fruitopia .. your fantasy you choose the place) you live in where a journalist is independent of editorial board which is independent of owners .. I cannot even believe you said that.

Ashoka was more interested in spread of Buddhism (due to guilt conscience) than any real understanding of Dhamma .. why else would he murder 18,000 Ajivikas (because they poked fun at Buddha in a painting). That does not sound like action of a person who understands the Dhamma.

namaste

Amani_Bhava
The historicity of the events around Asoka are highly debated as all sources, friendly or hostile, are centuries later. But that is beside the point, the principles espoused in the edict are timeless and remains the foundation of an ethical government regardless of how well Asoka was able to actualize it in his reign.

I say what needs to be so that it can be actualized by human effort. Media and journalists need to be independent from corporate control and strong laws that protect their independence is the need of the day. Your cynicism is disappointing. Can't see Tagore approving of such an attitude.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
The historicity of the events around Asoka are highly debated as all sources, friendly or hostile, are centuries later. But that is beside the point, the principles espoused in the edict are timeless and remains the foundation of an ethical government regardless of how well Asoka was able to actualize it in his reign.

I say what needs to be so that it can be actualized by human effort. Media and journalists need to be independent from corporate control and strong laws that protect their independence is the need of the day. Your cynicism is disappointing. Can't see Tagore approving of such an attitude.

You find my cynicism disappointing and I find your naivete amusing. Have you never heard of the phrase media moguls and newspaper barons? Why are they called moguls and barons? Media shapes how we interpret and observe information.

Inform yourself young Padawan Rupert Murdoch’s influence in the US could be much worse—just ask Australians

Lose idealism .. look what happened to Naxals .. btw I think we should not bore the good people here to death with this dialogue any further

namaste

Amani_Bhava
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
You find my cynicism disappointing and I find your naivete amusing. Have you never heard of the phrase media moguls and newspaper barons? Why are they called moguls and barons? Media shapes how we interpret and observe information.

Inform yourself young Padawan Rupert Murdoch’s influence in the US could be much worse—just ask Australians

Lose idealism .. look what happened to Naxals .. btw I think we should not bore the good people here to death with this dialogue any further

namaste

Amani_Bhava
Once again, I am saying what needs to be brought in. Laws protecting journalistic independence and requirement to display any sponsored news as such.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
Once again, I am saying what needs to be brought in. Laws protecting journalistic independence and requirement to display any sponsored news as such.

And who will guard the guards themselves may I ask? What if the guards are compromised ..

More laws do not mean better life for you and me .. it means more money for lawyers.

namaste

A_B
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
@sayak83

You seem to believe that a just human society is possible (something out of Star Trek maybe)

It is not. Thieves, cheats, liars, crooks and murderers rule this world .. always have .. always will.

If you want peace .. retreat like I have .. retreat to a forest (real or metaphorical) .. have few wise friends .. interact with this world as little as possible.

Watch the video of the bhikkhu in New England forest .. he has a reason .. try to understand his reason .. try to understand why Ramana Maharshi lived on top of a hill and never came down.

namaste

A_B
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
@sayak83

You seem to believe that a just human society is possible (something out of Star Trek maybe)

It is not. Thieves, cheats, liars, crooks and murderers rule this world .. always have .. always will.

If you want peace .. retreat like I have .. retreat to a forest (real or metaphorical) .. have few wise friends .. interact with this world as little as possible.

Watch the video of the bhikkhu in New England forest .. he has a reason .. try to understand his reason .. try to understand why Ramana Maharshi went up a hill and never came down.

namaste

A_B
Not only is a far far better society possible, it's very likely to take shape over the centuries and millenia that is before us humans in this universe. Even religion wise, Hinduism guarantees that it will happen, as all beings are one with Brahman, and all will realize this and attain enlightened liberation... some early and some late. Thus, what you see as evil and corrupt is but a small perturbations on the road to goodness, wisdom and liberation. That is the truth. Every being, every particle of this world is a spark of the ultimate Self manifesting itself before me so that I can connect with it, and gain insight are into my own Self from it. The good and the bad, the joy and suffering. Every experiential moment is That. That is the Truth. Did you not know?

I am at peace. You should introspect as to why you are not at peace surrounded by Brahman manifested as the world around you? Your journey is not complete.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
Not only is a far far better society possible, it's very likely to take shape over the centuries and millenia that is before us humans in this universe. Even religion wise, Hinduism guarantees that it will happen, as all beings are one with Brahman, and all will realize this and attain enlightened liberation... some early and some late. Thus, what you see as evil and corrupt is but a small perturbations on the road to goodness, wisdom and liberation. That is the truth. Every being, every particle of this world is a spark of the ultimate Self manifesting itself before me so that I can connect with it, and gain insight are into my own Self from it. The good and the bad, the joy and suffering. Every experiential moment is That. That is the Truth. Did you not know?

I am at peace. You should introspect as to why you are not at peace surrounded by Brahman manifested as the world around you? Your journey is not complete.

If you are indeed able to see Brahman in all things .. then why do you have a problem with dishonest media houses .. they are also Brahman

namaste

A_B
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
If you are indeed able to see Brahman in all things .. then why do you have a problem with dishonest media houses .. they are also Brahman

namaste

A_B
Because it increases suffering by leading the people astray regarding religion.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
Because it increases suffering by leading the people astray regarding religion.

So you are trying to lessen their suffering .. what if they ask you a simple question .. are we free after 200 years of British rule or 800 years of Muslim rule followed by 200 years of British rule .. what will you answer?

I would strongly suggest you move this topic to a general debate sub-forum.

namaste

A_B
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
So you are trying to lessen their suffering .. what if they ask you a simple question .. are we free after 200 years of British rule or 800 years of Muslim rule followed by 200 years of British rule .. what will you answer?

I would strongly suggest you move this topic to a general debate sub-forum.

namaste

A_B
Free from what? Its one's own samskara-s that bind a person. As a person who has read the Buddha, you should know that.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
Free from what? Its one's own samskara-s that bind a person. As a person who has read the Buddha, you should know that.

If you intentionally do not answer but veer around to another point of view .. nothing can be done.

It is a Hindu country (though for some unknown reason the constitution states we are secular) with Hindu majority .. there is nothing wrong with some sections of the media taking a pro-Hindu stance (whether paid or for free)

Our media is more open minded and more tolerant than that of France .. they do not publish caricature of prophet from another religion .. for me that is good enough.

If you have a different opinion then you are welcome to it but please do not circulate so called facts from little known watchdogs to bolster your claim.

I understand it is very appealing to you to show all the westerners in this forum how progressive, tolerant and liberal you are (in spite of being brown) .. all these brown folk back home .. what would they do without your guidance and conscience (since you are back from an US university and learned how to be "liberal" from them) .. fine I get it .. we often delude ourselves into believing things ..

but while doing that state what is provable and not take help of fake news and rumours.

This nation has not become free after 200 years but a 1,000 .. and we are going to press home that fact .. if you do not like it .. gulp it

This is viewpoint of a reasonably well educated and tolerant non-Hindu .. imagine what actual Hindus feel like and calibrate your actions accordingly

namaste

A_B
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
If you intentionally do not answer but veer around to another point of view .. nothing can be done.

It is a Hindu country (though for some unknown reason the constitution states we are secular) with Hindu majority .. there is nothing wrong with some sections of the media taking a pro-Hindu stance (whether paid or for free)

Our media is more open minded and more tolerant than that of France .. they do not publish caricature of prophet from another religion .. for me that is good enough.

If you have a different opinion then you are welcome to it but please do not circulate so called facts from little known watchdogs to bolster your claim.

I understand it is very appealing to you to show all the westerners in this forum how progressive, tolerant and liberal you are (in spite of being brown) .. all these brown folk back home .. what would they do without your guidance and conscience (since you are back from an US university and learned how to be "liberal" from them) .. fine I get it .. we often delude ourselves into believing things ..

but while doing that state what is provable and not take help of fake news and rumours.

This nation has not become free after 200 years but a 1,000 .. and we are going to press home that fact .. if you do not like it .. gulp it

This is viewpoint of a reasonably well educated and tolerant non-Hindu .. imagine what actual Hindus feel like and calibrate your actions accordingly

namaste

A_B
Actually you are quite far right of most Indians, Hindu or otherwise, that I have interacted with over time. You know that yourself, being in Bengal where very few people have such views. I am more conservative than most Bengalis, actually. But I have understood your stance. You are sympathetic to politicized nationalist Hindu ideology as the centerpiece of India. A form of Hindu Zionism. I am completely against that and consider it a sinister and delusion-caused distortion of Hinduism, a form of adharma. This Asuric view needs to be resisted and extirpated from Hindu and other dharmic religions completely, and it will be.

I hope you see the error of your ways, as it will give you nothing but bitterness and alienation from the world and from that which is spiritual. But that is your call to make.

Regarding your original question, the Indian nation had been politically unfree for about 70 years or so, between 1880s and 1947. Since before that, the concept of a political state and the idea that the ordinary people can be the joint rulers through a voting based representative system was nonexistent. The claim that a nation that did not exist was somehow politically enslaved for a 1000 years before the concept of a representative republic was ever there... is just rubbish.

The only thing you have done so far is to attribute odd intents about what I write while failing badly to argue for your positions. That does not look good.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
Actually you are quite far right of most Indians, Hindu or otherwise, that I have interacted with over time. You know that yourself, being in Bengal where very few people have such views. I am more conservative than most Bengalis, actually. But I have understood your stance. You are sympathetic to politicized nationalist Hindu ideology as the centerpiece of India. A form of Hindu Zionism. I am completely against that and consider it a sinister and delusion-caused distortion of Hinduism, a form of adharma.

I am quite a bit to the left of every Indian I have met. Probably you have to meet more Indians.

This Asuric view needs to be resisted and extirpated from Hindu and other dharmic religions completely, and it will be. I hope you see the error of your ways, as it will give you nothing but bitterness and alienation from the world and from that which is spiritual.

I am not being bitter or sweet .. I am being realistic

Now read this and tell me if in your view Swami Vivekananda was "asuric" .. he certainly uses stronger words than me ..

"Now, some Mohammedans are the crudest in this respect, and the most sectarian. Their watch-word is: "There is one God, and Mohammed is His Prophet." Everything beyond that not only is bad, but must be destroyed forthwith, at a moment’s notice, every man or woman who does not exactly believe in that must be killed; everything that does not belong to this worship must be immediately broken; every book that teaches anything else must be burnt. From the Pacific to the Atlantic, for five hundred years blood ran all over the world. That is Mohammedanism. Nevertheless, among these Mohammedans, wherever there has a philosophic man, he was sure to protest against these cruelties. In that he showed the touch of the Divine and realised a fragment of the truth; he was not playing with his religion; for it was not his father's religion he was talking, but spoke the truth direct like a man.

The more selfish a man, the more immoral he is. And so also with the race. That race which is bound down to itself has been the most cruel and the most wicked in the whole world. There has not been a religion that has clung to this dualism more than that founded by the Prophet of Arabia, and there has not been a religion, which has shed so much blood and been so cruel to other men. In the Koran there is the doctrine that a man who does not believe these teachings should be killed, it is a mercy to kill him! And the surest way to get to heaven, where there are beautiful houris and all sorts of sense enjoyments, is by killing these unbelievers. Think of the bloodshed there has been in consequence of such beliefs!

Why religions should claim that they are not bound to abide by the standpoint of reason, no one knows. If one does not take the standard of reason, there cannot be any true judgment, even in the case of religions. One religion may ordain something very hideous. For instance, the Mohammedan religion allows Mohammedans to kill all who are not of their religion. It is clearly stated in the Koran, Kill the infidels if they do not become Mohammedans. They must be put to fire and sword. Now if we tell a Mohammedan that this is wrong, he will naturally ask, "How do you know that? How do you know it is not good? My book says it is." The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Volume II and IV

The founder of neo-Vedanta had this opinion .. you are not an iota of the man he was .. not in learning nor in spirit.

Regarding your original question, the Indian nation had been politically unfree for about 70 years or so, between 1880s and 1947. Since before that, the concept of a political state and the idea that the ordinary people can be the joint rulers through a voting based representative system was nonexistent. The claim that a nation that did not exist was somehow politically enslaved for a 1000 years before the concept of a representative republic was ever there... is just rubbish.

The only thing you have done so far is to attribute odd intents about what I write while failing badly to argue for your positions. That does not look good.

When I said the nation had become free after 1,000 years I meant the people had become free after 1,000 years. That is the plain truth. Muslims tortured us, looted from us, raped our wives and daughters. That is not boiler plate rhetoric .. it happened as recently as 1947 and you know it well.

If you wish to argue further .. it is foolishness .. but go ahead and indulge in it ..

namaste

A_B
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I am quite a bit to the left of every Indian I have met. Probably you have to meet more Indians.



I am not being bitter or sweet .. I am being realistic

Now read this and tell me if in your view Swami Vivekananda was "asuric" .. he certainly uses stronger words than me ..

"Now, some Mohammedans are the crudest in this respect, and the most sectarian. Their watch-word is: "There is one God, and Mohammed is His Prophet." Everything beyond that not only is bad, but must be destroyed forthwith, at a moment’s notice, every man or woman who does not exactly believe in that must be killed; everything that does not belong to this worship must be immediately broken; every book that teaches anything else must be burnt. From the Pacific to the Atlantic, for five hundred years blood ran all over the world. That is Mohammedanism. Nevertheless, among these Mohammedans, wherever there has a philosophic man, he was sure to protest against these cruelties. In that he showed the touch of the Divine and realised a fragment of the truth; he was not playing with his religion; for it was not his father's religion he was talking, but spoke the truth direct like a man.

The more selfish a man, the more immoral he is. And so also with the race. That race which is bound down to itself has been the most cruel and the most wicked in the whole world. There has not been a religion that has clung to this dualism more than that founded by the Prophet of Arabia, and there has not been a religion, which has shed so much blood and been so cruel to other men. In the Koran there is the doctrine that a man who does not believe these teachings should be killed, it is a mercy to kill him! And the surest way to get to heaven, where there are beautiful houris and all sorts of sense enjoyments, is by killing these unbelievers. Think of the bloodshed there has been in consequence of such beliefs!

Why religions should claim that they are not bound to abide by the standpoint of reason, no one knows. If one does not take the standard of reason, there cannot be any true judgment, even in the case of religions. One religion may ordain something very hideous. For instance, the Mohammedan religion allows Mohammedans to kill all who are not of their religion. It is clearly stated in the Koran, Kill the infidels if they do not become Mohammedans. They must be put to fire and sword. Now if we tell a Mohammedan that this is wrong, he will naturally ask, "How do you know that? How do you know it is not good? My book says it is." The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Volume II and IV

The founder of neo-Advaita had this opinion .. you are not an iota of the man he was .. not in learning nor in spirit.

You are a weak coward who hides behind secularism.



When I said the nation had become free after 1,000 years I meant the people had become free after 1,000 years. That is the plain truth. Muslims tortured us, looted from us, raped our wives and daughters. That is not boiler plate rhetoric .. it happened as recently as 1947 and you know it well.

If you wish to argue further .. it is foolishness .. but go ahead and indulge in it ..

namaste

A_B
What do you wish to argue about? 70 years ago millions of Germans and millions of British butchered each other. Are you suggesting their children and grandchildren today continue to do so today?

1.Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.

2. Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow.

3. "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.

4. "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.

5. Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.

6. There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die. But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.


- Dhammapada.


I consider Quran to be extremely vulnerable to sectarian reading. There is a danger that those who follow it to be led astray into hostility against nonbelievers and thus create suffering for all. This has happened before and is happening now, particularly in the Middle East. All of that is true.. though irrelevant to this thread. You are not a Muslim, so no praise or blame falls on you regarding its practices and traditions. So why bother talking about it?

I do not think you understand Vivekananda at all. This is what he said.

Mohammed

Mohammed began to have dreams and visions. Gabriel appeared to him in a dream and told him that he was the messenger of truth. He told him that the message of Jesus, of Moses, and all the prophets would be lost and asked him to go and preach. Seeing the Christians preaching politics in the name of Jesus, seeing the Persians preaching dualism, Mohammed said: "Our God is one God. He is the Lord of all that exists. There is no comparison between Him and any other."

God is God. There is no philosophy, no complicated code of ethics. "Our God is one without a second, and Mohammed is the Prophet." ... Mohammed began to preach it in the streets of Mecca. ... They began to persecute him, and he fled into the city of [Medina]. He began to fight, and the whole race became united. [Mohammedanism] deluged the world in the name of the Lord. The tremendous conquering power! ...

You ... people have very hard ideas and are so superstitious and prejudiced! These messengers must have come from God, else how could they have been so great? You look at every defect. Each one of us has his defects. Who hasn't? I can point out many defects in the Jews. The wicked are always looking for defects. ... Flies come and seek for the [ulcer], and bees come only for the honey in the flower. Do not follow the way of the fly but that of the bee....

Mohammed married quite a number of wives afterwards. Great men may marry two hundred wives each. "Giants" like you, I would not allow to marry one wife. The characters of the great souls are mysterious, their methods past our finding out. We must not judge them. Christ may judge Mohammed. Who are you and I? Little babies. What do we understand of these great souls? ...

These old people were all messengers of God. I fall down and worship them; I take the dust of their feet. But they are dead! ... And we are alive. We must go ahead! ... Religion is not an imitation of Jesus or Mohammed. Even if an imitation is good, it is never genuine. Be not an imitation of Jesus, but be Jesus, You are quite as great as Jesus, Buddha, or anybody else. If we are not ... we must struggle and be. I would not be exactly like Jesus. It is unnecessary that I should be born a Jew. ...

The greatest religion is to be true to your own nature. Have faith in yourselves! If you do not exist, how can God exist, or anybody else? Wherever you are, it is this mind that perceives even the Infinite. I see God, therefore He exists. If I cannot think of God, He does not exist [for me]. This is the grand march of our human progress.


He also said this,

The great teachers of the world
And then comes Mohammed, the Messenger of equality. You ask, "What good can there be in his religion?" If there were no good, how could it live? The good alone lives, that alone survives; because the good alone is strong, therefore it survives. How long is the life of an impure man, even in this life? Is not the life of the pure man much longer? Without doubt, for purity is strength, goodness is strength. How could Mohammedanism have lived, had there been nothing good in its teaching? There is much good. Mohammed was the Prophet of equality, of the brotherhood of man, the brotherhood of all Mussulmans.

Mohammed by his life showed that amongst Mohammedans there should be perfect equality and brotherhood. There was no question of race, caste, creed, colour, or sex. The Sultan of Turkey may buy a Negro from the mart of Africa, and bring him in chains to Turkey; but should he become a Mohammedan and have sufficient merit and abilities, he might even marry the daughter of the Sultan. Compare this with the way in which the Negroes and the American Indians are treated in this country! And what do Hindus do? If one of your missionaries chance to touch the food of an orthodox person, he would throw it away. Notwithstanding our grand philosophy, you note our weakness in practice; but there You see the greatness of the Mohammedan beyond other races, showing itself in equality, perfect equality regardless of race or colour.


Now what? Vivekananda praised and criticized all religions equally, because he was not driven by any emotion of hate or anger or resentment. So he saw clearly, and told it dispassionately. Karma Yoga... action without attachment.. remember? You won't be able to fit Him in those little boxes of yours.
 

Amani_Bhava

Member
What do you wish to argue about? 70 years ago millions of Germans and millions of British butchered each other. Are you suggesting their children and grandchildren today continue to do so today?

I do not wish to argue about anything. All I objected to was that you gave a bad name to your country in this thread. Bad name it does not deserve.

Most sections of Indian media are fair. Few are biased and we know which are biased. Abroad too some media outlets are biased .. some rage against blacks and Hispanics and some push the uber liberal agenda.

If you portray my country in poor light without reason I will protest.

namaste

A_B
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I do not wish to argue about anything. All I objected to was that you gave a bad name to your country in this thread. Bad name it does not deserve.

Most sections of Indian media are fair. Few are biased and we know which are biased. Abroad too some media outlets are biased .. some rage against blacks and Hispanics and some push the uber liberal agenda.

If you portray my country in poor light without reason I will protest.

namaste

A_B
Its a false perception of yours that my post had any detrimental effect on the perception of India. Anyways, I will publicly praise or criticize the institutions of my country as I see fit. As a citizen of a free nation that is both my right and my duty.
 
Top