@Avatar
Many are not, but there are those that are (just as there are Muslims who want to commit barbarity just for the sake of it). And that's who I was referring to.
Yes, definitely. As humanity develops better standards for itself I hope violent protests will be universally accepted as ineffective and unnecessarily destructive behaviors that seldom achieve anything.
This is something that I've always found intriguing, why wouldn't you want to spread what you believe to be true and a superior way of life?
It is because Hinduism does not force its beliefs on anyone. The Sindhu people who lived in ancient India universally accepted the common threads of what we know as Hinduism today. It is perhaps because of foreign religions coming into India that Hinduism came to have this name.. Our texts dont have this word "Hindu" anywhere. We just know about "Dharma", which is simply "The law".. and it is only the law of cause and effect that is central to the teachings. Every lesson teaches cause and effect and encourages humans to cultivate the right causes for the desired effects. The reason why there are no conversions is because we cannot really convert anyone - the conversion is only from suffering to happiness by accepting a philosophy in life that gives a deeper meaning to every interaction in life. Conversion is just like wearing an additional layer of clothing - I dress so and so, I read namaaz 5 times and this makes me a Muslim? Well, we all bleed the same, we all become angry the same, this does not solve anything and after we die - who knows what will happen?
Personally, I am a huge fan of some of the Sufi Mystics such as Rumi, Hafez and Kabir. These saints speak with the universally understood language of love and their words penetrate deep into the hearts of the most stubborn men, change people for good without any forceful compulsion or conversion. The ones who truly know would never force their knowledge upon anyone, because truth does not need enforcement, only patience and openness for discovery.
Right, and the fact that it is so loose means that a variety of views on matters such as this can develop (and have).
Yeah, you can pretty much do anything and still call yourself a Hindu. The majority follow the Bhakti/Devotion path but there are ways of seeking knowledge or refinement of the senses without any blind faith, believing only what you personally experience.
I don't think causing pain is universally seen as wrong in all circumstances given the existence of Kshatriyas, and I disagree with the notion that Muslims were entirely treated positively. There were cases of positive as well as negative treatment, even from the beginning (the latter of which was used to justify subsequent invasions, e.g Indian pirates kidnapping Muslim women).
The existence of Kshatriyas are an unavoidable consequence of human nature. Our communities have always fought with each other for greed or power, and these warrior clans were the ones who did the dirty work of fighting. Hindu philosophy tried to make them feel better about choosing this way and accept their fate with dignity. If you read the Bhagwat Gita, you'll see that it deals with all the reluctance that a warrior encounters before the great battle.
The negative treatment that you're referring to is probably not due to bad intentions of the Hindu ruler, but as a rule of thumb Hindus and Muslims got along fine until they started fighting each other. I am very happy to see that at least you are acknowledging some parts of history that I thought were largely ommited in your education.
Most people who turn towards violence are victims of poverty more than almost anything else, but there are those for whom this is not the case. Take a look at, say, the communal tensions within the US that persist despite a much higher standard of living than much of the world. I don't think India becoming wealthier will fully resolve the matter.
Yes, I agree with this. In US, society is becoming more expressive and radicalized with their views and this is a huge problem. I think it stems from excessive freedoms and liberties without a strong grounding, which confuses some people and makes them act too rashly. The lone gunman mass shooters are a phenomena I haven't been able to process yet other than some kind of suicidal ouburts.
But this is the problem, you can't control this. You're not even in India. Whilst such niceties are indeed soothing to the ear, no matter what you and I might want for each other and within our own countries, things like this just don't seem realistic. Which is perhaps the most depressing matter of all.
To be honest, I dont know what to do about it. There are so many elements involved in this problem that its difficult to imagine any useful intervention. We have to let the forces play out their agenda and hope that better sense prevails (which does among more people than you would expect)..every time Muslims are in threat in prominent areas of India, you'll see their Hindu brothers and sisters form a human chain to protect them. A lot of Indians are feeling very sick of the excessive presence of RSS idealogy in mainstream. For my own role - I try to calm the fires wherever I can be of help.
If you see the situation inside Pakistan today, its probably not what Jinnah dreamed of.. More than anything it is our British Colonizers lack of initiative and poor planning that lead to the violent partition of India whose scars have still not healed fully. I dont know if partition was the right thing to do.
They can be largely mitigated in various ways, with further partitioning being (imo) one of them.
Is Pakistan really better off? Had India and Pakistan not invested so heavily into fighting each other, brewing negative sentiments and hatred among their populations, using religion as a tool, I am sure we'd be happier even if we were still a poor nation. Undivided India was big enough for all of us.
