-
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!
Hinduism Debate
- Thread starter atanu
- Start date
chinu
chinu
I don't see it as 'this' or 'that' . There are just POVs. My personal POV narrows 'Hinduism' down a lot. I don't include atheists or radical universalists, for example. But that is just my personal POV. Each Hindu will have a different line to cross for Hindu to not-Hindu. It's a constantly shifting border. Although I definitely don't accept other POVs into my own, I maintain that everyone has the right to their opinion. That includes those people who don't think I'm a Hindu.
There was quite the discussion, as I recall. Perhaps not everyone saw it. http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/hinduism-dir/131243-what-makes-hindu-hindu.html
Sumit
Sanatana Dharma
May be because today if someone says I am ...... and I want to be Hindu, We will say yes because .... scripture of Hinduism says ....... , so everyone is welcomed to express their views
NobodyYouKnow
Misanthropist
1. Because it's not easy (as Kermit would say):
[youtube]DbCI68eSNsA[/youtube]
Kermit-It's Not Easy Being Green - YouTube
2. Some of the early scriptures like Rig Veda (it has been years since I read it so don't quote me) don't put any emphasis on Ishwara. They are all about Indra, Rudra, doing Homa and all that stuff.
2 1/2. None that I know of, but Advaita Vedanta doesn't condone the worship of a 'personal God'. I see it as a stepping stone and many others do too, but not all schools of Advaitic thought do. I cannot quote any scripture, but the main thought is 'Thou Art That' not 'Thou Worship That'.
3. None that I know of, unless, of course by 'chance' you mean 'karma'.
4. Of course, as long as they don't try and proselytize, discourage and push their atheist views on others...like it or not, they are still Hindu by definition. I have noticed some becoming more tolerant lately and this is a good sign.
5.
Om Namah Shivay
[youtube]DbCI68eSNsA[/youtube]
Kermit-It's Not Easy Being Green - YouTube
2. Some of the early scriptures like Rig Veda (it has been years since I read it so don't quote me) don't put any emphasis on Ishwara. They are all about Indra, Rudra, doing Homa and all that stuff.
2 1/2. None that I know of, but Advaita Vedanta doesn't condone the worship of a 'personal God'. I see it as a stepping stone and many others do too, but not all schools of Advaitic thought do. I cannot quote any scripture, but the main thought is 'Thou Art That' not 'Thou Worship That'.
3. None that I know of, unless, of course by 'chance' you mean 'karma'.
4. Of course, as long as they don't try and proselytize, discourage and push their atheist views on others...like it or not, they are still Hindu by definition. I have noticed some becoming more tolerant lately and this is a good sign.
5.
Because I say so and nobody can argue with my 'say so'.
Om Namah Shivay
Last edited:
Sumit
Sanatana Dharma
And I always believed Rigveda as the foundation scripture of Hinduism that explains Iswara in depth than any other scripture. :sad4:
Last edited:
NobodyYouKnow
Misanthropist
Like I said, it's been years.
So we'll just say that no Scripture denies Ishwara then, because if Rig Veda does not, then nothing else does. Happy?
Om Namah Shivay
Sumit
Sanatana Dharma
yup, I'm celebrating
Satyamavejayanti
Well-Known Member
I do think that Dharmah is not bound by religious affiliation, A mothers Dharmah does not change because she/he is atheist or theist male or female, Dharmah to me is duty eternal which sees no boundaries.
I don't think there is in any of the Veda the denial of Ishvar nor is there strong proclamation of Ishvar, I don't think the Vedas teach theism nor does it teach atheism, I think the Sad Darshans are core of what we term Hinduism today and i don't think there is any atheism or theism in them. This is my personal view.
(All this is taking the modern and popularly understood meanings of theism and atheism).
Of course its the attitude of some atheist that sometimes shows their ignorance and narrow mindedness, just because someone is atheist does not make them the know all and be all in any topic, not just religion.
Most of the time the atheist who post in the Hindu Dir are vary respectful, so i don't see the problem there.
I guess they should be allowed as no one can give an agreed upon definition of who is a Hindu. So, I'd say if we err, let's err on the side of free speech.
If someone in good faith calls them-self a Hindu, then join our DIR.
Just as a point of information, the mods did have a poll about this. I voted blue, as did a few others, but the majority went for green.
Sorry. We've been down that road before. I and others made a 'fuss', and I will certainly go make a 'fuss' again. There absolutely is a limit to what one can term 'Hindu', as per 99% of definitions.
:bow:
I guess I missed that 'fuss' (probably thankfully).
I'm curious what those limits are to the use of the term 'Hindu' applying to someone. If it can't be summarized rather briefly then don't worry about it.
I guess I missed that 'fuss' (probably thankfully
).I'm curious what those limits are to the use of the term 'Hindu' applying to someone. If it can't be summarized rather briefly then don't worry about it.
:bow:
I guess I missed that 'fuss' (probably thankfully
I'm curious what those limits are to the use of the term 'Hindu' applying to someone. If it can't be summarized rather briefly then don't worry about it.
I'm curious about where you went in South India. Which temples?
The 'limits' thing generally comes up (for me) when other religions are made out to be part of Hinduism. Radical universalists can easily say, "I'm a Hindu, I'm a Buddhist, I'm a Christian" etc. AND get away with it because that is their belief. It's never the discussion itself that I take issue with, but just it's placement in the Hindu DIR, when I feel it should be in comparative or general discussion - just somewhere more suitable than in the Hindu DIR. Often the moderators do move things around (for all of us).
Last edited:
Poeticus
| abhyAvartin |
To be categorized as "Hindu" in the most simplest sense (not in the geo-political, semantical digression of "beyond the river Sindhu"), putting aside even the most orthodox approaches in answering this troubling and often times confusing and overlapping question...
...one must hold the Vedas as either infallible and/or authoritative, disregarding any other scriptures of other religions as authoritative; ....while other scriptures can be seen or held in skepticism, the Vedas cannot.
...This would categorize the individual as astika, making him/her a Hindu by default, since he or she does not or would not hold the Vedas in skepticism, rather seeing them as highly authoritative in spiritualism, mysticism, and religious identification.
Well my main interest was visiting the Ashram of Satya Sai Baba. I got sick and couldn't get help with the logistics of the place so I bolted for a big city hotel in Bangalore after only about three days (sick and depressed). I did have large group darshan of Sai Baba while there (a few months before his death) and believe I truly felt a spiritual wave from the experience (but of course I doubt myself some now).
From Bangalore I took the escorted van tour of South India..yes, probably all the 'touristy' places which included some temples whose names I cannot tell you much about from memory; sorry to disappoint you there. The temple visiting part of Hinduism never interested me much.
You and I are incredibly different then.
(Other than the fact we both got sick.) I only go for one reason ... Hindu temples, and the ridiculously strong shakti of the Gods. Nothing else interests me.
You and I are incredibly different then.
I wonder why I could not just feel the same strong shakti in my own living room if God is everywhere.
But I do think you are probably onto something I'm missing with super-physical vibrations.