Why are Hindus fanatical?

[Riverwolf]

Anyway, all I am saying is even if missionaries do the things you mention, we should not react in any way. Ahimsa is central to our teaching. We must keep forgiving people. God will be the judge.

From the Swami to the snake:
"I forbade you only to bite. I did not forbid you to hiss!"
-From the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna.

Ahimsa does not forbid standing up for what is right. It just means doing it in a way that, to the best of one's ability and knowledge, does not directly harm the other party.

We can forgive them while at the same time resisting. The forgiving part is meant to keep us from hating and resenting them.

Mahatma Gandhi, after all, DID resist. Martin Luther King, Jr. resisted. They just resisted in a way that followed Ahimsa.

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

From the Swami to the snake:
"I forbade you only to bite. I did not forbid you to hiss!"
-From the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna.

Ahimsa does not forbid standing up for what is right. It just means doing it in a way that, to the best of one's ability and knowledge, does not directly harm the other party.

We can forgive them while at the same time resisting. The forgiving part is meant to keep us from hating and resenting them.

Mahatma Gandhi, after all, DID resist. Martin Luther King, Jr. resisted. They just resisted in a way that followed Ahimsa.

Agreed, but this resistance has to be totally nonviolent. That's all I am saying. By 'not reacting' I mean not reacting violently or with hate.

 

[Satsangi]

Agreed, but this resistance has to be totally nonviolent. That's all I am saying. By 'not reacting' I mean not reacting violently or with hate.

Yes, do not react with hate, just give "tough love."

Regards,

 

[nameless]

I fail to see how missionaries are a problem. If they wish to convert people, why can't they? Religious freedom is important, isn't it?

nothing wrong in converting people, but what those missionaries are doing are just ridiculous.
To receive any help from missionaries one should convert, once converted it is not possible to revert. They have maoist terrorists as partners to carry their mission safely. They murdered lakshmananda when his activities disturbed their mission, these could only happen in india !!

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

nothing wrong in converting people, but what those missionaries are doing are just ridiculous.
To receive any help from missionaries one should convert, once converted it is not possible to revert. They have maoist terrorists as partners to carry their mission safely. They murdered lakshmananda when his activities disturbed their mission, these could only happen in india !!

I think we're going in circles here. You yourself admit that all this is possible only because of a corrupt govt. Would it not be better to do satyagraha against a corrupt govt., then? Why take it out on innocent Christians?

 

[nameless]

Why take it out on innocent Christians?

already told that, those christians (missionary people) were not innocent( they killed swami lakshmananda), but they did not deserved such a brutal response. The natives all are illiterate, a dead government, and terrorist missionary group, such horrible counter-attack is to be expected....

You yourself admit that all this is possible only because of a corrupt govt. Would it not be better to do satyagraha against a corrupt govt., then?

another typical MG crap .....

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

Just the other day, I was reading on another Hindu forum that the Taj Mahal was a Hindu temple. Seems like fanaticism has spread to the academia as well.

 

[Madhuri]

Just the other day, I was reading on another Hindu forum that the Taj Mahal was a Hindu temple. Seems like fanaticism has spread to the academia as well.

That sounds like ignorance, not fanaticism.

Do you know what fanaticism is?

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

That sounds like ignorance, not fanaticism.

Do you know what fanaticism is?

I do. But apparently, you don't. Only a religious fanatic would claim that everything belongs to his religion. This has nothing to do with ignorance. It is a willful distortion of facts, which only fanatics are capable of.

 

[Madhuri]

I do. But apparently, you don't. Only a religious fanatic would claim that everything belongs to his religion. This has nothing to do with ignorance. It is a willful distortion of facts, which only fanatics are capable of.

Or maybe that person has no idea. Some people are actually that uninformed.

I know a number of westerners who would assume that the Taj Mahal is a Hindu temple. And they aren't Hindu at all. They simply don't know.

 

[nameless]

Just the other day, I was reading on another Hindu forum that the Taj Mahal was a Hindu temple. Seems like fanaticism has spread to the academia as well.

kindly provide those links ....

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

Or maybe that person has no idea. Some people are actually that uninformed.

I know a number of westerners who would assume that the Taj Mahal is a Hindu temple. And they aren't Hindu at all. They simply don't know.

If I say that the sun revolves around the earth, that's ignorance. If I maintain my position despite evidence to the contrary, is it still ignorance? Or is it something else?

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

kindly provide those links ....

Hindu dharma forums. You couldn't miss it. Also I believe many 'Hindu' historians like Oak have written a lot about this. So it's not merely an internet chat thing, if you know what I am saying.

 

[Riverwolf]

If I say that the sun revolves around the earth, that's ignorance. If I maintain my position despite evidence to the contrary, is it still ignorance? Or is it something else?

Was contrary evidence provided?

BTW, yes, it's still ignorance. The difference is that "willful" is added as an adjective.

That's caused not by fanaticism, but simple pride. Fanaticism is when people start committing acts of terrorism.

 

[Madhuri]

That's caused not by fanaticism, but simple pride. Fanaticism is when people start committing acts of terrorism.

Actually that isn't true!
In fact, MG could be right about this person being a fanatic. But it is impossible to judge at this point without knowing the context, or full picture. For all we know, that person could just be very ignorant.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Just the other day, I was reading on another Hindu forum that the Taj Mahal was a Hindu temple. Seems like fanaticism has spread to the academia as well.

Please show me were any academic said that Taj Mahal is a Hindu Temple.

 

[nameless]

Hindu dharma forums. You couldn't miss it. Also I believe many 'Hindu' historians like Oak have written a lot about this. So it's not merely an internet chat thing, if you know what I am saying.

a lots of topics discussed there, it is not easy to find. Kindly share exact links ...

also would like to know your explanations to disprove their claim (you said they are fanatics)......

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

I do. But apparently, you don't. Only a religious fanatic would claim that everything belongs to his religion. This has nothing to do with ignorance. It is a willful distortion of facts, which only fanatics are capable of.

Sorry but Madhuri is a kind person who I respect even though I am on completely on the opposite side of the Hindu philosophical spectrum. She has the liked by most people on RF. She is reasonable in her comments even when I completely disagree with her. I have read her comments on the Islamic Dir she is respectful. You come on the Hindu Dir even Muslims and others feel the need to contradict you. I think this says a lot about the intolerance of the views you attempt to pass of as nonviolent.

 

[Mahatma Gandhi]

Was contrary evidence provided?

BTW, yes, it's still ignorance. The difference is that "willful" is added as an adjective.

That's caused not by fanaticism, but simple pride. Fanaticism is when people start committing acts of terrorism.

So ideas don't qualify, only actions? Even so, actions are born of ideas.

Anyway, take a look at this. These are some of the comments made by 'Hindu' members in response to a level-headed suggestion made by one of their more peaceful Hindu members:
Hindu Dharma Forums - View Single Post - Was TAJ MAHAL a temple called TEJO MAHALAYA?
Hindu Dharma Forums - View Single Post - Was TAJ MAHAL a temple called TEJO MAHALAYA?

Makes me ashamed to be a Hindu.

 

[Madhuri]

So ideas don't qualify, only actions? Even so, actions are born of ideas.

Anyway, take a look at this. These are some of the comments made by 'Hindu' members in response to a level-headed suggestion made by one of their more peaceful Hindu members:
Hindu Dharma Forums - View Single Post - Was TAJ MAHAL a temple called TEJO MAHALAYA?
Hindu Dharma Forums - View Single Post - Was TAJ MAHAL a temple called TEJO MAHALAYA?

Makes me ashamed to be a Hindu.

The first link doesn't make me think that they are fanatical. Maybe previous comments would, but not the one you linked to.

As for the second, I guess it depends on the truthfulness. There are a lot of sources that say the Taj replaced a Shiva temple. I personally wouldn't know. The statements would be fanatical if they had no foundation. But perhaps they do after all.