After lifetime with the poor, Mother Teresa speeds to sainthood

[somebozo]

 

[footmarks]

Jainism's highest watermark was not during reign of Changdragupta Maurya, but during middle ages and is cognate with rise of Indo-Roman trade. If never depended on Kings, but was a religion favored by merchants.

Buddhism is even more removed from Ashoka. The highest subscriber of Buddhism were during Kanishka's and Kushan reign. It too was a religion preferred by merchants. It started decline in middle of first century CE.

When you say that "praja" adopts King's religion ,you are absolutely wrong. This view is an example of hold of western constructs over us. In west where King's power were unbounded, and he acted as leader of a large tribe, this people following their sovereign was common. In India, where King was bound by religious and caste laws, and where kingship was considered as a caste duty by general population, King had no hold over spirituality of people. There are no instances of mass conversion ,due to kings converting, in Indian history, like there are in danish history.

See, there are always 2 versions of history, or maybe more. My point was more to do with religious theology. Kings in India were also seen as demigods. There were many kings in hindu mythology, termed asuras, who were brutal and evil. And the populace under them was in their full control. They may not have converted them, since back then, there was a single religion. And no, even forced conversions are never absolute. You cannot convert 100%. For that, one has to eraae all history and symbols. Something mughals tried. The sheer size of subcontinent and the fact that the hindu philosophy is never attached firmly to symbols and single entity, made sure that hindu line of philosophy survived.

 

[VivasvatManu]

See, there are always 2 versions of history, or maybe more. My point was more to do with religious theology. Kings in India were also seen as demigods. There were many kings in hindu mythology, termed asuras, who were brutal and evil. And the populace under them was in their full control. They may not have converted them, since back then, there was a single religion. And no, even forced conversions are never absolute. You cannot convert 100%. For that, one has to eraae all history and symbols. Something mughals tried. The sheer size of subcontinent and the fact that the hindu philosophy is never attached firmly to symbols and single entity, made sure that hindu line of philosophy survived.

Its naive to assign Hindu survival in the face of incredible odds to mere lac of symbolism.

There can never be 2 version of history, there can be "2 theories" or even "5 theories" but history can have only 1 version and that version should reconcile ALL know facts.

When the know Facts do not reconcile, its PROPAGANDA. Not "version of history".

 

[footmarks]

Its naive to assign Hindu survival in the face of incredible odds to mere lac of symbolism.

There can never be 2 version of history, there can be "2 theories" or even "5 theories" but history can have only 1 version and that version should reconcile ALL know facts.

When the know Facts do not reconcile, its PROPAGANDA. Not "version of history".

In fact there are multiple versions of history. Multiverse philosophy was mentioned in puranas. Kakabhusundi, a creature free of worldly mayajaal, once told one rishi (exact name i dont remember, might b vasisshtha) that he has seen mahabharata 12 times in different worlds, each with a different outcome... It depends on what you and me believe

 

[VivasvatManu]

In fact there are multiple versions of history. Multiverse philosophy was mentioned in puranas. Kakabhusundi, a creature free of worldly mayajaal, once told one rishi (exact name i dont remember, might b vasisshtha) that he has seen mahabharata 12 times in different worlds, each with a different outcome... It depends on what you and me believe

Kak Basuindi story as in the Ramcharitra manas is that the Vishnu avatar is born multiple time and each time there is a battle among good and evil in many different ages.

its not "multivers" theory, but a long line of avatars born for human guidance and especially for his devote who was only next to hanuman in his devotion .

Kaka Basundi was a Crow (Kaka is crow).

 

[A_Poster]

See, there are always 2 versions of history, or maybe more. My point was more to do with religious theology. Kings in India were also seen as demigods. There were many kings in hindu mythology, termed asuras, who were brutal and evil. And the populace under them was in their full control. They may not have converted them, since back then, there was a single religion. And no, even forced conversions are never absolute. You cannot convert 100%. For that, one has to eraae all history and symbols. Something mughals tried. The sheer size of subcontinent and the fact that the hindu philosophy is never attached firmly to symbols and single entity, made sure that hindu line of philosophy survived.

There is no need to talk of hypothetical because concrete trends exist. In India history ,secular or religious, conversion of king to a religion has never been followed by conversion of his subjects, unlike in danish history.

Also religions that are not firmly attached to symbols and single entity are animists and has exactly zero survival rate against Semitic religions. Hinduism is much more organized than animism, and this organization along with caste system is a reson why it survived.

 

[VivasvatManu]

There is no need to talk of hypothetical because concrete trends exist. In India history ,secular or religious, conversion of king to a religion has never been followed by his conversion of his subjects, unlike in danish history.

Also religions that are not firmly attached to symbols and single entity are animists and has exactly zero survival rate against Semitic religions. Hinduism is much more organized than animism, and this organization along with caste system is a reson why it survived.

You know Hinduism did not have 'caste' system. It had "Varna" and "Jaathi".

Its the Hindu "Jaathi" which protected the individual from external forces. As long as the family remained in the 'Jaathi', they remained safe.

When thrown out of the "jaathi' they became Dalits.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

You know Hinduism did not have 'caste' system. It had "Varna" and "Jaathi".

Its the Hindu "Jaathi" which protected the individual from external forces. As long as the family remained in the 'Jaathi', they remained safe.

When thrown out of the "jaathi' they became Dalits.

Lord Manvan.

 

[A_Poster]

You know Hinduism did not have 'caste' system. It had "Varna" and "Jaathi".

Its the Hindu "Jaathi" which protected the individual from external forces. As long as the family remained in the 'Jaathi', they remained safe.

When thrown out of the "jaathi' they became Dalits.

I know.

I have extensively posted on history forums before. I do not delve in details on this forum as I do not have time to compose large posts.

 

[gslv]

Lord Manvan.

It took so long to you to realize.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

It took so long to you to realize.

No. I did not bother before.

ID number???

 

[Grevion]

Lord Manvan.

We have a new righty in the forum.
Too bad joe is not here anymore or else we would have enjoyed a furious yet very informative debate.

 

[VivasvatManu]

We have a new righty in the forum.
Too bad joe is not here anymore or else we would have enjoyed a furious yet very informative debate.

The Naivety of the people on pdf never ceases to amaze me.

 

[Grevion]

The Naivety of the people on pdf never ceases to amaze me.

So you are not a right winger?
Man that is disappointing.

 

[VivasvatManu]

So you are not a right winger?
Man that is disappointing.

Labels....... Certificates....... labels.