Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
i hate people insult religun for god sake please please respect the religun of any one.we are s.asians pure religus humens on planet.whats going on this thread is shamefull for us.
Sorry if anybody is offended. Some parts of my responses were directed only at the posters I was replying to.
Imagine there is no religion. only laws.
the paintings at the outside of the temple depicts lust and the sins of mankind including busts of murder, carnal sex, theft etc. it inscribes that which is forbidden and implores that you leave that outside before you enter the mandhil. Krsna's removing of the clothes of the ladies is a an act which was symbolic. remove all your material wants including symbolically your clothes and your skin and bow before the Lord with your soul and then shall your prayers be answered. there is much more to hindu depictions than we see. the nude paintings by the artist was offensive to hindus. he should just have apologised and gotten over with it
Nudity is not the problem, please see the pictures posted by toxic plus - paintings by mf hussain - and then comment. Nude is one thing, sexually suggestive depiction of hindu mythology characters (like nude sita riding hanuman's tail, nude lakshmi sitting on ganesha's elephant head) is another.
And those famous figures from khajuraho, they are an exception. Nobody creates such temples anymore. besides, they do not depict our deities.
The vast majority of the temples have no sensual imagery at all, and in the exception that we know of, the murals are only outside, not inside. If the intention had been to encourage sensual thoughts, the murals would have been inside!!That is plain wrong. Show me anywhere in the Vedas or Hindu texts which say that murals carved on temple walls means that you leave such 'thoughts' outside?
Why not? There is a lot of symbolism in Indian epics, many things things are not to be taken literally.Krishna's stealing of ladies clothes was symbolic?
Jeez, spare us.Where did you get that from? In a RSS shaka? How ridiculous!
Krishna was and is considered a supreme lover. He was naughty and he did steal bathing ladies clothes to tease them!!
Perhaps you should consider the possibility that it is your understanding that may be deficient?Removal of clothes and "skin" before praying? Geez, you are a follower of Hindusim and dont even understand the concept of this religion? Pity. ... Its such a pity that followers of Hinduism don't understand the concepts or basic tenets of Hinduism.
Such people are no better than those rabid terrorist morons who twist the revered pillars of Islam to suit their own nefarious ideologies.
Nudity is not "celebrated" in Sanatan Dharma!! In fact, in Sanatan Dharma, you want to transcend the physical body. You do need to take care of your body, so that you can concentrate on attaining Self-realization. But "celebrating" the physical body would be Avidya, ignorance. You should not focus on that which is perishable!Nudity is celebrated in Hinduism as in other so called "pagan" religions.
A healthy body and mind is definitely good ... and sex is not wrong ... but Sanatan Dharma is not obsessed with sex. In fact, many of the greatest philosophers and saints have been celibate Swamis.For peace of body and soul, you have to have a healthy body with a healthy mind and sex forms a big part of that process.
The "learned scholars" you relied on were not very learned. I have given the significance a few posts back.Why do you think childless couples, especially the females worship the Lingum? Ask any learned scholar, he will tell you what that signifies.
You people have it all wrong. Its so unfortunate that many Hindus are ignorant of Hinduism's core concepts, they are no better than those maulvis and talitubbies who give forth a twisted interpretation of Islam to justify their atrocious behaviors.
...
People become spokespersons of a faith without understanding their faith thoroughly!
Nudity is celebrated in Hinduism as in other so called "pagan" religions.
So morality lies at the threshold of a temple?If the intention had been to encourage sensual thoughts, the murals would have been inside!!
Symbolism? C'mon now, twisting religious concepts to suit your own prudish pov? Now where do we hear that daily?Why not? There is a lot of symbolism in Indian epics, many things things are not to be taken literally.
Oh, so what does supreme lover mean? And what about his numerous wives or the description of him being very handsome or those odes to him about his attractiveness? Now what does that symbolically mean?Supreme lover yes, but not in the way you are imagining.
Of course, my understanding is limited, I never claimed to be a scholar, but a prudish interpretation of Hinduism's concepts are contrary to the very idea of being a Hindu.Perhaps you should consider the possibility that it is your understanding that may be deficient?
My dear fellow ... Person A does not agree with your (perhaps half-baked) ideas ... whereas person B wants to blow your legs off. How can you equate them?
You did not answer the questions .... if the intention at Khajurao had been to promote sensual thoughts, then why are not those images on the inside. Also, why don't we see those images in many more temples.So morality lies at the threshold of a temple?
Symbolism? C'mon now, twisting religious concepts to suit your own prudish pov? Now where do we hear that daily?
Supreme lover means something other than having sex ... it is unconditional, unselfish, complete love ... not for sensual gratification.Oh, so what does supreme lover mean? And what about his numerous wives or the description of him being very handsome or those odes to him about his attractiveness? Now what does that symbolically mean?
Speaking of symbolically interpreting, Lord Krishna playing his flute can be interpreted in many ways given his reputation of being a ladies man. What do you have to say for that?
You are pushing for a hyper-sexualized interpretation, which is not the correct way of understanding Sanatan Dharma.Of course, my understanding is limited, I never claimed to be a scholar, but a prudish interpretation of Hinduism's concepts are contrary to the very idea of being a Hindu.
Sex is not wrong .. it is an essential part of Maya (delusion) ... but Sanatan Dharma is not obsessed with it, as I said.Hinduism worships nature and all that forms part of it. Sex is a means of procreation and hence an important part of nature and teh concept behind Hinduism.
The difference is that one wants to blow your legs off, whereas the only "fault" of the other is happening to have views different from your own.See there you go again. I equate those people because both these groups twist the core concepts and ideals of both their faiths to justify their perverted outlook. Period. Now tell me how is that different? Please do explain.
As to my ideas being half-baked, maybe, but then from what I know and understand, being prudish is not a part of Hinduism (it not like pseudo-morality being peddled in those EEEEEktaaa serials where pre-and extramarital affairs are alright and happen because of 'accidents' but the fall of a pallu instantly brands a woman as a loose character!).