Two Pakistani British Girls Marry Each Other

[janon]

Yes , it does . The Bible is not uniform , it has several different versions .

The personal matter should remain personal , live and let live , it shouldn't be judged by the people unless it concerns them , something people must understand .

I am not sure if most other religions ask their followers to judge others , does Hinduism ?

I'm not talking of the different versions of the bible. Whichever version you use, actively encourages you to judge others. There are lots of things that mandates capital punishment. How do you punish somebody unless you judge their actions?

Hinduism is not a single religion, like islam or christianity. It is a collective name that the British gave, to all the religious practices of India. You won't find the word "hindu" or "hinduism" in any of the "hindu" scriptures. They were just written for people. The religious practices of a rajput and a tamilian would be very different.

And hinduism doesn't really prohibit anything or lay down rules, that's not what it is about. Mostly it is philosophy, and mythology, and rituals. Some peoplee only care for philosophy (there are at least 8 different philosophical systems, and several different philosophies), some only for the mythologies (stories, epics, poetry, some of the finest that humans have written), and some only for rituals (prayers, worshipping, ceremonies) etc.

You can't really think of it as a "religion" in the same sense that the abrahamic religions are religions.

So a question like "does hinduism ask their followers to..." doesn't really make sense. How would I answer that? To muslims, it would be whether the quran or hadits ask you to do so. But what about hindus? They don't have any central authority or text. They have thousands of books on philosophical musings, and hundreds of thousands of books of epics and stories. Written across a span of thousands of years. Nobody "sanctions" or "condemns" anything in hinduism.

Notice earlier that @hinduguy wrote about a hindu religious guy on TV arguing against homosexuality, saying that it is "against our culture". The wordiing is very crucial. He can't say it is against hinduism, for there is no such concept as "against hinduism". There are no codified laws, no central authority or central text. It's a free for all.

Hindus are even allowed to (and do) make fun of their gods. A lot of poetry has been written, amking fun of the gods in their sillier moments. Some of the favorite stories that parents tell little children when putting them to sleep are about Krishna and his adventures of stealing butter.

It's very difficult for people used to the abrahamic religions to get a picture of all this. It's very different, is all I can say, and that questions like "does hindusim ask you to..." is completely invalid. (I wish I could make it clearer. Maybe @hinduguy can, since that's his username!)

 

[baqai]

Scrolled through 11 pages and could not find any pictures? WTH? Webby yeh sarasur na insaafi hai

AFAIK concerned they are not muslims (Allah knows better) as it is not allowed in our religion.

 

[janon]

judgement has nothing to with religion or religious people. Atheists or non religious also judge others because of their actions or words. we all do judgement on daily basis If someone start abusing me then i think i will also judge his attitude, acts or words

Yes, right. We all judge. How can we not? So it is hypocritical for Jesus to say "Judge not...", and for christians to claim it as one of the best lines in their scripture. If we don't judge, we cannot survive as a society. Laws and courts exist for a reason. Everybody judges.

 

[livingdead]

I know , no need to get serious on that .

Well , we have a universal definition for Muslims , mate .

see how you chickened out, suddenly lets judge others against an universal definition of muslim...
am not serious...

 

[Secur]

see how you chickened out, suddenly lets judge others against an universal definition of muslim...
am not serious...

How exactly ?

The requirements for being " Muslim " is well defined , they can consider themselves Muslims , it just happens that we do not accept it .

 

[livingdead]

Scrolled through 11 pages and could not find any pictures? WTH? Webby yeh sarasur na insaafi hai

AFAIK concerned they are not muslims (Allah knows better) as it is not allowed in our religion.

right... till now others were saying the act was unislamic... now they are not muslims?
which is right @Raja.Pakistani

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Hinduism is not a single religion, like islam or christianity. It is a collective name that the British gave, to all the religious practices of India. You won't find the word "hindu" or "hinduism" in any of the "hindu" scriptures. They were just written for people. The religious practices of a rajput and a tamilian would be very different.

What about those who attribute word "Hindu" to only those people belong to religion originated in India(i.e Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism or Sikhism)

And hinduism doesn't really prohibit anything or lay down rules, that's not what it is about. Mostly it is philosophy, and mythology, and rituals. Some peoplee only care for philosophy (there are at least 8 different philosophical systems, and several different philosophies), some only for the mythologies (stories, epics, poetry, some of the finest that humans have written), and some only for rituals (prayers, worshipping, ceremonies) etc.

So a question like "does hinduism ask their followers to..." doesn't really make sense. How would I answer that? To muslims, it would be whether the quran or hadits ask you to do so. But what about hindus? They don't have any central authority or text. They have thousands of books on philosophical musings, and hundreds of thousands of books of epics and stories. Written across a span of thousands of years. Nobody "sanctions" or "condemns" anything in hinduism.

Why many Indian states felt the need to bans the slaughter of cow if Hinduism don't prohibit anything or if people are less sensitive about hindu rituals or beliefs. I think you have extremist , moderate and liberal people in every religion not just in Hinduism

 

[Secur]

You can't really think of it as a "religion" in the same sense that the abrahamic religions are religions.

I appreciate the effort you put in that post , mate . I was trying to get a general idea of your religion and its influences .

But I do not understand how and what people follow if there exists no Central authority . There are many controversial practices too in your religion .

I mean two things cant be right at once , are they ?

Leave the punishment thing aside .

 

[livingdead]

How exactly ?

The requirements for being " Muslim " is well defined , they can consider themselves Muslims , it just happens that we do not accept it .

man its the same principle. You judge them as non muslims based on certain criteria in islam.
Others are judging homosexuals as non muslim using some other criteria in islam. How is one wrong in principle and other right?
I am talking principle of judging others, whether the argument(and supporting evidence in form of verses) is valid or not is different.

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Yes, right. We all judge. How can we not? So it is hypocritical for Jesus to say "Judge not...", and for christians to claim it as one of the best lines in their scripture. If we don't judge, we cannot survive as a society. Laws and courts exist for a reason. Everybody judges.

true and we judge others based on our concept of right or wrong or based on our understanding of morality or ethics

right... till now others were saying the act was unislamic... now they are not muslims?
which is right @Raja.Pakistani

If doing one non Islamic act make u non Muslim then i think it will be very hard to find any Muslim because at some point we all would have done something unislamic

I personally avoid this discussion who is muslim, who is pious and who is evil etc

I talk about acts not individuals

 

[janon]

What about those who attribute word "Hindu" to only those people belong to religion originated in India(i.e Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism or Sikhism)



Why many Indian states felt the need to bans the slaughter of cow if Hinduism don't prohibit anything or if people are less sensitive about hindu rituals or beliefs. I think you have extremist , moderate and liberal people in every religion not just in Hinduism

I knew somebody would bring up cow slaughter! The answer is, because many hindus living in those regions had a social stigma against slaughtering cows, during the days when cows and milk products formed the backbone of their economy. Then they incorporated it into their religious duty, that they should protect cows.

In other parts of the country, such a thing is unheard of. (Or was, until it became a political issue.) In the south Indian states, beef items are a common food, and most hindus eat it too. (Check out beef curry recipies on google.)

Once it becomes a political question, and indentity politics is played around it, it becomes part of religion in that area.

Yes, there are extremists/moderates/liberals in hinduism too, but these are political, social terms. An extremist hindu in one part of India would be practising his or her religion in a very different manner to an equally extremist hindu in another region. Different prayers, different rituals, different beliefs, different gods. And none of that would matter to them. People in madurai might worship meenakshi, while people in UP would not have heard of that godess. And that wouldnt really matter to them if they meet each other - as far as they are concerned, those are not really different beliefs.

Brahmins in TN would have a set of rituals before touching food. Brahmins in gujarat wont, or will have different rituals. And so on.

 

[livingdead]

true and we judge others based on our concept of right or wrong or based on our understanding of morality or ethics



If doing one non Islamic act make u non Muslim then i think it will be very hard to find any Muslim because at some point we all would have done something unislamic

i personally avoid this discussion who is muslim, who is pious and who is evil etc

I talk about acts not individuals

yes, you avoid it, but what does islam say about it.(their status). A few posts ago, you were saying its not your view but what is sanctioned in islam that you speak about.(post #163)

 

[baqai]

right... till now others were saying the act was unislamic... now they are not muslims?
which is right @Raja.Pakistani

Like i said, As far as i know they committed a sin of highest order and they would need to recite Kalma again and say tobah to be considered muslims again, Please do correct me as if i am wrong. Allah knows best.

Edit: Doosray ku kaafir kehnay wala khod sab sai bara kaafir hai ... i have also heard that so again i am not being judgmental here just passing what i have heard, i personally like to stay clear of religious discussions

 

[Secur]

I am talking principle of judging others, whether the argument(and supporting evidence in form of verses) is valid or not is different.

Because in all practicality , we have to judge somehow and somewhere for we live not in utopia-an ideal world , mate

Just not resort to violence to enforce your beliefs on others or start punishing them . Consider them bad and good , it hardly matters then .

 

[janon]

I appreciate the effort you put in that post , mate . I was trying to get a general idea of your religion and its influences .

But I do not understand how and what people follow if there exists no Central authority . There are many controversial practices too in your religion .

I mean two things cant be right at once , are they ?

Leave the punishment thing aside .

Mostly, it's not about "right and "wrong". And mostly it's not about worldly actions. If hindus have debated among each other, it was about philosophical systems, not about right and wrong of actions in the world. Shankaracharya brought about the Advaita school of hindu thought (that humans and god and everything else are all the same reality, but appear different due to our own delusions). This thought was derived from the Upanishads of 1500 BC or earlier. (This fellow lived in the 8th century AD). He had several debates across the subcontinent with proponents of Dvaita, that god and the rest of the world are different. And so on.

So all the literature and debates among hindus have been about which philospohical system is right or wrong, not about which actions are right or wrong. What actions we should do in our day to day lives was way beneath them, they were all preoccupied with the nature of reality or the nature of god and so on.

In a land that is so preoccupied with eternity and the nature of things, questions like "is homosexuality evil", or "is drinking OK" were too mundane!

"Right" and "Wrong", "heaven" and "hell" are alien to most indegenous hindu schools of thought. They only entered later, after the influence of western religions.

Read a few lines from any ancient hindu scripture, and you might get an idea of what I'm talking about. To understand what I'm saying, about the concerns of hinduism being very different from the concerns of abrahamic religions.