Why Hinduism

[firedragon]

I believe if that is all you have it is better than nothing but Christianity is much better. Hinduism will not obtain a person eternal life.

Peace.

 

[firedragon]

Good luck finding one.

Encyclopedia of Hinduism - Wikipedia
Hindustan Times - Archive News | Hindustan Times

Brother. Each person may have a different idea about which book to read. But you are right. There is definitely no one book. But at least one could go deep into one when someone recommends. That is basically the idea of Hinduism. You walk a mile in one path rather than one metre in 1625 different paths. Maybe thats a better approach to have less sectarian strife, though people dont practice it.

 

[Muffled]

Peace.

John 14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.

 

[firedragon]

John 14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.

John 14 is not from the dharmic scripture so its irrelevant. But thanks.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think of them as sister religions, not unlike sister dialects of a language.

After the British took over, the term Hindu was applied to non-Muslim and non-Christian.

From the 19th Century, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs were considered non-Hindus. But for legal purposes, Jains and Buddhists are still considered Hindu.

Thanks, there seems to be more of an acceptance to people having different beliefs, or more like people taking a different path to get to the same destination.

Many of us knew little about Hinduism when we joined the forum

Yes, I'm learning a lot. Thanks for being so open to listening and learning from the Hindus here.

 

[CG Didymus]

Because their adherents want it that way, and we honor what they say. It is basically politics. To many like me, it does not matter. All Indic religions are mine, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism. We love and honor those who established them, we have no difference with them apart of technicalities, as for Buddha, most Hindus consider him as the ninth and the latest avatara of Lord Vishnu.

Yes, I'm beginning to see the difference in ways of seeing things. That other way of looking at religions, sometimes called Abrahamic, lends itself to dividing and focusing on the differences. They often see themselves as being the only ones right. It is so refreshing to start to see a glimpse beyond that way of thinking... And seeing how the differences are on such a low, mundane level.

Hey Adrian, maybe all religions are one. But in how the Hindus are saying. Like getting above it all and seeing how all the blind religious people are touching a different part of the elephant and calling that the truth rather than seeing the whole elephant?

 

[firedragon]

Buddhism

To me, Buddhism is a great walk down a philosophy, but Hinduism is a thousand walks down a thousand philosophies for a thousand years. They are poles apart.

 

[Vinayaka]

Brother. Each person may have a different idea about which book to read. But you are right. There is definitely no one book. But at least one could go deep into one when someone recommends. That is basically the idea of Hinduism. You walk a mile in one path rather than one metre in 1625 different paths. Maybe thats a better approach to have less sectarian strife, though people dont practice it.

Another analogy is to dig one well 50 feet deep, or 50 wells one foot deep. In order to get a whole lot out of any religion or sect, beyond surface stuff, one has to dive deep into the entire thing.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, I'm beginning to see the difference in ways of seeing things. That other way of looking at religions, sometimes called Abrahamic, lends itself to dividing and focusing on the differences. They often see themselves as being the only ones right. It is so refreshing to start to see a glimpse beyond that way of thinking... And seeing how the differences are on such a low, mundane level.

One can see differences without thinking one is right and the other wrong. That's just non-judgemental observation.

 

[firedragon]

Another analogy is to dig one well 50 feet deep, or 50 wells one foot deep. In order to get a whole lot out of any religion or sect, beyond surface stuff, one has to dive deep into the entire thing.

I agree. I will never use that "well" analogy again because it is getting hacked like a highway.

Thanks brother. You are right.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Obviously I disagree. You focus on the similarities, ignoring the differences. Here's a quick list, and of course there are exceptions by individuals on both sides, more on the Hindu side, as it's larger and more diverse

Very very very differnet paradigms

Need I continue?

Thank you for your analysis about the differences between the Hindu and Baha’i religions. I see the Baha’i Faith as much more similar to Hinduism than different. I could argue each of your points but see no value in doing so. We know where each other stands after several years of discussion and so let’s live and let live. Its excellent a thread has been started about Hinduism and its a valuable opportunity to learn about a diverse and beautiful religion.

 

[Dawnofhope]

That is no reason to accept the existence of Don Quixote de La Mancha or his servant, Sancho Panza.
Vishnu is another name for Brahman, but as I have already stated, Brahman is not a being, not a God. Vishnu is the sum total of all existence. That is why he took the Nrisimha avatar out of a stone pillar (as the story goes).
Name the historian.
Most Hindus like all other people, including Bahais, are ignorant and afraid of death. That is why they believe in 'other world' fairy tales.
Humans are not tables. They have gotten to know so many things. It is not the fault of science that you still want to remain in 7th Century talking of Allah and his prophets \ sons \ messengers \ manifestations \ mahdis, Adam being made from mud and Eve from his rib, and the flood covering the whole Earth including the top of Mount Everest. Absolutely silly.

According to Guy Beck most scholars of Hinduism and Indian history accept the historicity of Krishna.

According to Guy Beck, "most scholars of Hinduism and Indian history accept the historicity of Krishna—that he was a real male person, whether human or divine, who lived on Indian soil by at least 1000 BCE and interacted with many other historical persons within the cycles of the epic and puranic histories." Yet, Beck also notes that there is an "enormous number of contradictions and discrepancies surrounding the chronology of Krishna's life as depicted in the Sanskrit canon."

Lanvanya Vemsani states that Krishna can be inferred to have lived between 3227 BCE – 3102 BCE from the Puranas. A number of scholars, such as A. K. Bansal, B. V. Raman places Krishna's birth year as 3228 BCE. A paper presented in a conference in 2004 by a group of archaeologists, religious scholars and astronomers from Somnath Trust of Gujarat, which was organised at Prabhas Patan, the supposed location of the where Krishna spent his last moments, fixes the death of Sri Krishna on 18 February 3102 BC at the age of 125 years and 7 months.

Krishna - Wikipedia

 

[Vinayaka]

Thank you for your analysis about the differences between the Hindu and Baha’i religions. I see the Baha’i Faith as much more similar to Hinduism than different. I could argue each of your points but see no value in doing so. We know where each other stands after several years of discussion and so let’s live and let live. Its excellent a thread has been started about Hinduism and its a valuable opportunity to learn about a diverse and beautiful religion.

Indeed you are free to hold your opinion. Non-Hindus knowing little about Hinduism do say such things from time to time, even despite admitting to knowing little. Fortunately it hasn't yet gotten to the point of one Bede Griffiths.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hey Adrian, maybe all religions are one. But in how the Hindus are saying. Like getting above it all and seeing how all the blind religious people are touching a different part of the elephant and calling that the truth rather than seeing the whole elephant?

Yeah, remove Bahaullah and Bahai, Islam, Christianity, Judaism can be (not necessarily are) as good as Hinduism or Buddhism. What will remain is just being humane, or following one's 'dharma', i.e., do what is humane to do in any situation. That is why we concentrate on what was said rather than who said it.

For us, who said it is unimportant. One does not need any God's or Allah's authority to say a good thing. If Buddha said don't waste your life in discussing how the universe came about, that was nice. If Mahavira said be careful not to harm other creatures, that was good. If Guru Nanak said he does not belong to any religion, that was good. It is the authorized \ anointed prophets \ sons \ messengers \ manifestations \ mahdis, who create all the problems.

 

[Aupmanyav]

According to Guy Beck, ..
Lavanya Vesani states ..

Is that history or belief? People believe in so many things including the Maid of Heaven's visit to Bahaullah, Mohammad's visit to heaven on Burraq, or resurrection of Jesus, or Mose's parting of the sea, of alien visits to earth, and that the unicorn is pink. There is no end to beliefs.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Is that history or belief? People believe in son many things including the Maid of Heaven's visit to Bahaullah, Mohammad's visit to heaven on Burraq, or resurrection of Jesus, or Mose's parting of the sea, of alien visits to earth, and that the unicorn is pink. There is no end to beliefs.

Wikipedia is actually just as good as most encyclopaedias in regards providing fair and balanced commentary in a scholarly yet accessible manner.

Check out some of the references who believe Krishna to be historical.

Guy L. Beck is a scholar, author, musician, educator, historian of religions, and musicologist. A Fulbright-Nehru Senior Research Fellow and Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies (Oxford University, UK), he is Lecturer in Philosophy, Religious Studies and Asian Studies at Tulane University, and Adjunct Professor of Religious Studies at Loyola University New Orleans.

Prof. Guy Beck

Lavanya Vemsani, is a scholar and professor of History specializing in Indian History and Religions, in the department of Social Sciences at Shawnee State University, Portsmouth, Ohio.[1] She researches and publishes on subjects of ancient Indian history and religions as well as current history of India.

Lavanya Vemsani - Wikipedia

You should be pleased that Hinduism is not all based on mythology as some Christians claim.

What is Hinduism and what do Hindus believe? | GotQuestions.org

 

[firedragon]

Wikipedia is actually just as good as most encyclopaedias in regards providing fair and balanced commentary in a scholarly yet accessible manner.

Check out some of the references who believe Krishna to be historical.

Guy L. Beck is a scholar, author, musician, educator, historian of religions, and musicologist. A Fulbright-Nehru Senior Research Fellow and Visiting Fellow at the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies (Oxford University, UK), he is Lecturer in Philosophy, Religious Studies and Asian Studies at Tulane University, and Adjunct Professor of Religious Studies at Loyola University New Orleans.

Prof. Guy Beck

Lavanya Vemsani, is a scholar and professor of History specializing in Indian History and Religions, in the department of Social Sciences at Shawnee State University, Portsmouth, Ohio.[1] She researches and publishes on subjects of ancient Indian history and religions as well as current history of India.

Lavanya Vemsani - Wikipedia

You should be pleased that Hinduism is not all based on mythology as some Christians claim.

What is Hinduism and what do Hindus believe? | GotQuestions.org

May i ask you whats your ultimate point? Is it that Krishna was a historical figure?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Indeed you are free to hold your opinion. Non-Hindus knowing little about Hinduism do say such things from time to time, even despite admitting to knowing little. Fortunately it hasn't yet gotten to the point of one Bede Griffiths.

Interesting guy Bede Griffiths representing the Christian Ashram Movement of the Catholic Church.

Here’s what the Catholic Church at the second Vatican Council have to say about Hinduism:

The Second Vatican Council, in its Declaration on Non-Christian Religions, said that "the Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions". In Christian sannyasa, Hindu holy texts such as the Mahabharata and the Puranas are considered to be gifts from God. Brother John Martin Sahajananda summarizes this Roman Catholic teaching as, "All the sacred scriptures are a gift of God to humanity.”

Christian Ashram Movement - Wikipedia

I’m sure there are many in Hinduism who have likewise embraced their Abrahamic cousins in a similar manner eschewing division and tribalism.

 

[Dawnofhope]

May i ask you whats your ultimate point? Is it that Krishna was a historical figure?

Yes. @Aupmanyav is a strong atheist who sees the religious traditions of his fellow Hindu as being largely mythological. I’m arguing that Krishna, arguably the most widely and revered Deity in Hinduism was in fact an historical figure, a great man who has been mythologised as many religious leaders are.

For example Krishna is seen as being the literal incarnation of Vishnu in much the same way as Christ is seen by many Christians as being literally God.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You should be pleased that Hinduism is not all based on mythology as some Christians claim.

I do not need false claims to validate Hinduism. As I have already said, no divine agency is involved in creation of Hinduism, because there is no divine agency. Hinduism was created by the assimilation of various beliefs of the people of India as it suited their societies and the Vedic Aryans who came from Central Asia bringing us the Vedas and Sanskrit. Only false religions need false claims and testimonies. As for mythologies, these stories show various situations, actions of people and the result of their actions. Mahabharata is a very good example of that.