BJP chief claims English bad for India, triggers outrage

[Bang Galore]

That is what Bangalore fails to understand and that is what I meant by saying 'view Hindu scriptures with christian eyes' .

There you go again, presuming to understand what I think. I stuck with the Rg veda specifically to combat a point made by you, unlike you, I went nowhere else. There is no viewing anything with any eyes, if that is all that you take away from this, you have a bigger problem to worry about than my understanding.....

 

[sankranti]

once again belief is one thing, research and study is another thing. a believer could simply a believer as well as a researcher, a scholar could be believer or a non believer..faith is not a necessity in studying religion, in fact faith sometimes takes a scholar away from facts or logical conclusion.

Dharmic religions are not so much about belief's but more about understanding the nature of self, nature of the world and nature of the cosmos. All three is God and is part of god.

Various schools of thoughts have different paths to realizing this truth.

Hinduism is a scholarly attempt to realize the truth. Various techniques are used along with various methods. All of them can be used and even one of them can be used.

1. Tantric practices.
2. Yogic practices
- Karma yoga
- Raja Yoga
- Bakti Yoga
- Jnana Yoga
3. Vendanta i.e. Vedic practices
4. Vaisheshika i.e. study of science and soul
5. Mimasa i.e. realiszatoin through action (This is what the Jain's also practice)
6. Nyaya (Awareness through debate and discussions)
- pramāṇa (valid means of knowledge)
- prameya (objects of valid knowledge),
- saṁśaya (doubt),
- prayojana (aim),
- dṛṣṭānta (example),
- siddhānta (conclusion),
- avayava (members of syllogism),
- tarka (hypothetical reasoning),
- nirṇaya (settlement),
- vāda (discussion),
- jalpa (wrangling),
- vitaṇḍā (cavilling),
- hetvābhāsa (fallacy),
- chala (quibbling),
- jāti (sophisticated refutation)
- nigrahasthāna (point of defeat).
7. Sankhya i.e a combination of mediation and teachings (This is what the Buddhists practice)

 

[Indianpatriot1]

The difference is I am not interpreting anything, interpretations are given by various eminent scholars, it is up on each person to read and understand each of them and decide for himself that which interpretation is more suitable, more likely, more accepted by scholars, etc

once again belief is one thing, research and study is another thing. a believer could simply a believer as well as a researcher, a scholar could be believer or a non believer..faith is not a necessity in studying religion, in fact faith sometimes takes a scholar away from facts or logical conclusion.

Logic can only take you so far. Religion is beyond logic. It is in the realm of metaphysics on whose axioms logic works.

Dharmic religions are not so much about belief's but more about understanding the nature of self, nature of the world and nature of the cosmos. All three is God and is part of god.

Various schools of thoughts have different paths to realizing this truth.

Hinduism is a scholarly attempt to realize the truth. Various techniques are used along with various methods. All of them can be used and even one of them can be used.

1. Tantric practices.
2. Yogic practices
- Karma yoga
- Raja Yoga
- Bakti Yoga
- Jnana Yoga
3. Vendanta i.e. Vedic practices
4. Vaisheshika i.e. study of science and soul
5. Mimasa i.e. realiszatoin through action (This is what the Jain's also practice)
6. Nyaya (Awareness through debate and discussions)
- pramāṇa (valid means of knowledge)
- prameya (objects of valid knowledge),
- saṁśaya (doubt),
- prayojana (aim),
- dṛṣṭānta (example),
- siddhānta (conclusion),
- avayava (members of syllogism),
- tarka (hypothetical reasoning),
- nirṇaya (settlement),
- vāda (discussion),
- jalpa (wrangling),
- vitaṇḍā (cavilling),
- hetvābhāsa (fallacy),
- chala (quibbling),
- jāti (sophisticated refutation)
- nigrahasthāna (point of defeat).
7. Sankhya i.e a combination of mediation and teachings (This is what the Buddhists practice)

You can plant a tree only when a soil is right. In my opinion, there is no point arguing with persons whose minds are not yet ready. Spiritual awakening comes only with Prabhu Kripa.

 

[sankranti]

There you go again, presuming to understand what I think. I stuck with the Rg veda specifically to combat a point made by you, unlike you, I went nowhere else. There is no viewing anything with any eyes, if that is all that you take away from this, you have a bigger problem to worry about than my understanding.....

You were attempting to explain Viswamitra only through his reference in the Rig Veda.

My assumptions were based on you postings.

My point was about why sanskrit is relevant to Hinduism and how it was not something that was manufactured by 'ignorant brahmins' who are painted as supremacists in modern recitals. No one denies wreaking of the Hindu social structure but to discard huge library of knowledge by claiming it as 'Brahmin conspiracy' is what I was advising against.

What was you point again ?

 

[anonymus]

Dharmic religions are not so much about belief's but more about understanding the nature of self, nature of the world and nature of the cosmos. All three is God and is part of god.

Various schools of thoughts have different paths to realizing this truth.

Hinduism is a scholarly attempt to realize the truth. Various techniques are used along with various methods. All of them can be used and even one of them can be used.

1. Tantric practices.
2. Yogic practices
- Karma yoga
- Raja Yoga
- Bakti Yoga
- Jnana Yoga
3. Vendanta i.e. Vedic practices
4. Vaisheshika i.e. study of science and soul
5. Mimasa i.e. realiszatoin through action (This is what the Jain's also practice)
6. Nyaya (Awareness through debate and discussions)
- pramāṇa (valid means of knowledge)
- prameya (objects of valid knowledge),
- saṁśaya (doubt),
- prayojana (aim),
- dṛṣṭānta (example),
- siddhānta (conclusion),
- avayava (members of syllogism),
- tarka (hypothetical reasoning),
- nirṇaya (settlement),
- vāda (discussion),
- jalpa (wrangling),
- vitaṇḍā (cavilling),
- hetvābhāsa (fallacy),
- chala (quibbling),
- jāti (sophisticated refutation)
- nigrahasthāna (point of defeat).
7. Sankhya i.e a combination of mediation and teachings (This is what the Buddhists practice)

Isn't samakhya, an atheist school of thought which comes under the preview of Vedas while Buddhist followers are considered nastik (Veda-Nasti).

 

[sankranti]

In't samakhya, an atheist school of thought which comes under the preview of Vedas while Buddhist followers are considered nastik (Veda-Nasti).

Atheism is also a valid school of though in Hinduism. All these schools have further divisions ........Buddhism is one of them.

 

[Bang Galore]

You were attempting to explain Viswamitra only through his reference in the Rig Veda.

Not only that, it was to point out how a story can go all over the place. It allows for certain understanding of Hindu practices and their evolution. My more general point was that just because we see something in a particular manner, it doesn't mean it was always like that and there is no reason to assume that the evolution needs to stop. History does not begin where it is conducive to one's argument.

My point was about why sanskrit is relevant to Hinduism and how it was not something that was manufactured by 'ignorant brahmins' who are painted as supremacists in modern recitals. No one denies wreaking of the Hindu social structure but to discard huge library of knowledge by claiming it as 'Brahmin conspiracy' is what I was advising against.

Don't believe I have ever argued that, certainly not in absolute terms. Nor is it something that holds my interest. My view would vary depending on what specifically was being discussed. I tend to take a very nuanced view, more Hindu if you will , shades of grey, not black & white.

 

[anonymus]

Atheism is also a valid school of though in Hinduism.

All these schools have further divisions ........Buddhism is one of them.

Buddhism is not considered a school of thought in Hinduism. There are six school of thoughts in hinduism: Samakhya, yoga, nyaya, vaishashika, mimasa and vedanta.

Of these samakhya is a school of thought which is atheist in it's character as it believes in purush and prakarati.

These are astik schools which in context of India means veda-asti ie believing in infalliability of vedas.

Of these vedanta school is the one which provides philosophical underpinning of Hinduism.


Astik in Indian sense does not mean believing in god but believing in infallibility of vedas.

Buddhist, Jains and Charvak's belong to nastik school of thought.They are philosophically not part of hinduism.

 

[Bang Galore]

Atheism is also a valid school of though in Hinduism. All these schools have further divisions ........Buddhism is one of them.

Aah...good to see you mellowing down, seem to remember you going hammer & tongs against atheists......

Buddhism is not considered a school of thought in Hinduism. There are six school of thoughts in hinduism: Samakhya, yoga, nyaya, vaishashika, mimasa and vedanta.

Of these samakhya is a school of thought which is atheist in it's character as it believes in purush and prakarati.

These are astik schools which in context of India means veda-asti ie believing in infalliability of vedas.

Of these vedanta school is the one which provides philosophical underpinning of Hinduism.


Astik in Indian sense does not mean believing in god but believing in infallibility of vedas.

Buddhist, Jains and Charvak's belong to nastik school of thought.They are philosophically not part of hinduism.

Depends, Hinduism is stretchable and over the years allowed for their accommodation into its ranks. Sure there are hardliners but the religion cannot be defined as narrowly, certainly not very easily.

 

[sankranti]

Buddhism is not considered a school of thought in Hinduism. There are six school of thoughts in hinduism: Samakhya, yoga, nyaya, vaishashika, mimasa and vedanta.

Of these samakhya is a school of thought which is atheist in it's character as it believes in purush and prakarati.

These are astik schools which in context of India means veda-asti ie believing in infalliability of vedas.

Of these vedanta school is the one which provides philosophical underpinning of Hinduism.


Astik in Indian sense does not mean believing in god but believing in infallibility of vedas.

Buddhist, Jains and Charvak's belong to nastik school of thought.They are philosophically not part of hinduism.

1. How and where is Buddhism not considered part of Hinduism ?

2. Where is nastik school of thought rejected in Hinduism ?

3. Are you claiming Tantrism is not a school of thought for Hinduism ?

 

[anonymus]

Aah...good to see you mellowing down, seem to remember you going hammer & tongs against atheists......





Depends, Hinduism is stretchable and over the years allowed for their accommodation into its ranks. Sure there are hardliners but the religion cannot be defined as narrowly, certainly not very easily.

There has been very little philosophical development outside the ambit of these school of thoughts. There was also an aajevika sect but it has gone extinct in 200 BC.

The accommodation that has taken place has been on religious level. Underlying philosophical base has mostly remained same.

For example: Bhakti movement has philosophical underpinning in Advaita subdivision of Vedanta school of thought.

 

[sankranti]

Aah...good to see you mellowing down, seem to remember you going hammer & tongs against atheists......

That only means you are prejudiced and see only what you wish to see. Maybe its you who should take off those glasses.

I go hammer and tongs against atheists only when they claim some nonsense against Hinduism. I would rather have them admit they are atheists and they know nothing of Hinduism than serve us their half baked idea of what hinduism should look like.

 

[Bang Galore]

There has been very little philosophical development outside the ambit of these school of thoughts. There was also an aajevika sect but it has gone extinct in 200 BC.

The accommodation that has taken place has been on religious level. Underlying philosophical base has mostly remained same.

For example: Bhakti movement has philosophical underpinning in Advaita subdivision of Vedanta school of thought.

If you can have advaita and dvaita and allow for both to be within Hindu philosophical thought, it is not much of a leap.....

 

[Indianpatriot1]

There has been very little philosophical development outside the ambit of these school of thoughts. There was also an aajevika sect but it has gone extinct in 200 BC.

The accommodation that has taken place has been on religious level. Underlying philosophical base has mostly remained same.

For example: Bhakti movement has philosophical underpinning in Advaita subdivision of Vedanta school of thought.

For practical purposes, only Vedanta survives today.

 

[Bang Galore]

I go hammer and tongs against atheists only when they claim some nonsense against Hinduism. I would rather have them admit they are atheists and they know nothing of Hinduism than serve us their half baked idea of what hinduism should look like.

Why shouldn't atheists know anything about Hinduism? Why should people wearing tinted glasses be given a free pass.......? Maybe they are the ones with half baked ideas.....