Hinduism/Vedic religion/Sanatana dharma

Spirituality Religion
#11

Earlier dates are possible. Why discuss BILLIONS of years??? Even millions of years is ludicrous.

Again, I am stating a fact that traditional records report extreme antiquity for the Vedas. The reason I am not accepting these dates is because of the lack of historical evidence. I do not accept what scripture says as evidence, but only as a possibility. A possibility only becomes an actuality if there is evidence to back it up.

The only reason you would even post such ridiculous statements as million or billion year old Vedic scriptures was if you were pushing some kind of silly mythology. Just because some centuries ago Jyotish astrologers figured out where stars are, were, & will be, that doesn’t mean that the Vedas are now in competition with the fossil record in matters of antiquity.

I think what theseeker said is true, you would disagree with me even if I said 1+1 = 2 :smiley:

Yeah, keep telling yourself that. :rolleyes:
(though you’re such a wackjob that you may be using completely different referents that I am)
Even more limp insults attempting at intellectual superiority. Look, just because you’re Indian that doesn’t mean you’re better than white people…

#12

Why discuss BILLIONS of years??? Even millions of years is ludicrous.

Why is it? Were you around millions or billions of years ago to know what was going on, on this planet? What makes you so cocksure that civilisation has only been around for the last 10,000 years? Just because that is what official history says? Do you accept everything that authorities say? There are in fact fossils going back millions of years found in strata that is millions of years old, a dinosaur footprint next to a human footprint being one of them. Check out the documentary, “Mysterious Origins of Man” I posted in ancient nuclear war and technology thread and you will find several mentions of fossils and artefacts we have found which indicate modern humans and civilisation has been around much longer than the current anthropologists tell us. It shows clearly how older fossil records and artefacts are suppressed by mainstream science, simply because it contadicts the theory of evolution.

For the record, the objective reader will note, I am not exactly endorsing these extreme figures for human antiquity am I? I said I accept the 7000BCE figure for now, and only consider the extreme human antiquity suggested by Hindu pundits to be a possibility, but more evidence must be furnished before we accept it.

The objective reader will also note that you are an obvious troll :wink:

#13

Just because some centuries ago Jyotish astrologers figured out where stars are, were, & will be, that doesn’t mean that the Vedas are now in competition with the fossil record in matters of antiquity.

That is impossible without modern computers. It requires knowing various astronomical constants, knowing advanced calculus and being able to compute many variables at once which only a computer can do. The astronomical positions that are described in the Vedas are only possible by naked eye observation. This method of time recording is highly accurate and even today it continues when somebody is born the exact positions of the stars are observed, and because jyotisha accounts for the precision of the equinox, the positions recorded thousands of years and today are accurate.

I still think you are an obvious troll by the way. So do others, who have personally told me, “That Indra Deva is a troll”

Look, just because you’re Indian that doesn’t mean you’re better than white people…

You’re flame baiting, troll. Now, remind me again, but why did I not put you on my ignore list?

You have turned it into a habit to post in every thread, no matter what the topic, to flame and spam. Try actually
contributing for once and making the religion forum a more interesting place. I know you are more intelligent, than you
let on.

#14

Resources on Hinduism

A vast collection of articles on Hinduism on a vast range of subjects:

http://www.hinduism.co.za/
http://www.hindunet.org/

A compilation of scholarly literature and scholarly quotes on Hinduism across a vast multitude of subjects:

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/

Free e-books and online courses on Hinduism explaining Hinduism in easy to understand language, multimedia, Q and A and highly detailed spiritual insights into Hinduism, a site run by Hindu monks from a Sivaite Hindu monestary in Hawai:

http://www.himalayanacademy.com/

Academic:

Oxford Centre for Hindu studies:

http://ochs.org.uk/

Hindu academy, coordinators of GSCE Hinduism, A level Hinduism and soon MA in Hinduism in schools, colleges and universities across the UK. Offer online resources on Hinduism(beliefs, practices, philosophy etc) and multimedia:

http://www.hinduacademy.org/

Voice of dharma, critical and independent Hindu thinkers, loads of publications, articles and books to read:

http://www.voiceofdharma.com/

#15

Youtube of Hinduism

It is always better to watch videos clips than read, here are some of my favourite clips on Hinduism on youtube.

A 5 part basic introduction to Hinduism, by Hinduism Today:





A 3 part documentary on the scientific verification of Hinduism:



#16

Thank you for this wonderful thread SD. It compartmentalizes all the arguments you and I have ever made about Hinduism. People wishing to debate about this matter can come here, instead of bringing it up in divergent paths within other threads.

#17

You weren’t there either, shut the $#%& up.

What makes you so cocksure that civilisation has only been around for the last 10,000 years? Just because that is what official history says? Do you accept everything that authorities say? There are in fact fossils going back millions of years found in strata that is millions of years old, a dinosaur footprint next to a human footprint being one of them.

If you don’t understand how fossils form in various environments (which you obviously don’t), you should just shut your mouth.

Check out the documentary, “Mysterious Origins of Man” I posted in ancient nuclear war and technology thread and you will find several mentions of fossils and artefacts we have found which indicate modern humans and civilisation has been around much longer than the current anthropologists tell us. It shows clearly how older fossil records and artefacts are suppressed by mainstream science, simply because it contadicts the theory of evolution.

Why would you look at some ridiculously rare unexplained fringe examples when the massive corroborating body of evidence says otherwise? You’re just like a conspiracy theorist.
& I’ve seen that crap documentary, trying to get science to validate your religion is instant fail. & I’ve read all the fringe Anthro crap, “Human De-Evolution” crap.

For the record, the objective reader will note, I am not exactly endorsing these extreme figures for human antiquity am I? I said I accept the 7000BCE figure for now, and only consider the extreme human antiquity suggested by Hindu pundits to be a possibility, but more evidence must be furnished before we accept it.

But you believe that crap, right? Because you can’t exactly think that they’re lying, right?

The objective reader will also note that you are an obvious troll :wink:

Your mom’s a troll. Who cares? You & your Hindutva buddies run trolling clinics, you have no business talking about it at all. As far as I’m concerned, you can believe whatever religious crap you want but don’t expect people to tolerate your perverted pseudo-science.

#18

SD
I also want to thank you for posting this. It is nice to read something of worth in the religions forum that is not all about who is right or wrong. Very informative with many objective view points. And the perk…
the occasional troll.

#19

If Indra Deva is a troll, then we all are.

He’s not doing anything differently than anyone else. Certainly his posts are no more troll-like than of those who accuse him of it.

#20

[QUOTE=thomas;50418]If Indra Deva is a troll, then we all are.

He’s not doing anything differently than anyone else. Certainly his posts are no more troll-like than of those who accuse him of it.[/QUOTE]

And yet, we don’t go around posting derogatory pictures, engaging in relentless personal attacks, and what not. At least the other members have the courtesy to argue the points made within specific posts and threads, strongly and passionately within reason. This is not the case with ID.

#21

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;50441]And yet, we don’t go around posting derogatory pictures, engaging in relentless personal attacks, and what not. At least the other members have the courtesy to argue the points made within specific posts and threads, strongly and passionately within reason. This is not the case with ID.[/QUOTE]

Certainly, and we don’t say things like this, “Your mom’s a troll. Who cares?” because we are not juvenile. ID is an idiot, through and through. I have decided to put him on my ignore list now, because while others I have disagreements with, including Asuri still say things that are interesting to read, ID has never said anything that is interesting to read. It is always either spam or insults. I have better things to do than entertain idiots.

#22

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;50498]Certainly, and we don’t say things like this, “Your mom’s a troll. Who cares?” because we are not juvenile. ID is an idiot, through and through. I have decided to put him on my ignore list now, because while others I have disagreements with, including Asuri still say things that are interesting to read, ID has never said anything that is interesting to read. It is always either spam or insults. I have better things to do than entertain idiots.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. I admit, I may have made comments that seem harsh or insulting but at least I keep try to keep it part of the ongoing debate or specific point. This is not the case with ID. He may have read a lot of religious or philosophical scriptures but in the end, he has nothing to show for it. That much is obvious in the post where he said he screw too many of hot Indian women he knew.

#23

[QUOTE=TeeA;50415]SD
I also want to thank you for posting this. It is nice to read something of worth in the religions forum that is not all about who is right or wrong. Very informative with many objective view points. And the perk…
the occasional troll.[/QUOTE]

Thank you TeeA.

#24

Concept of God in Hinduism

The concept of god(Brahman) in Hinduism is as diverse as everything else in Hinduism, and is also the most sophisticated philosophy of god of all world religions. There are impersonal concepts of god(Nirguna Brahman) and personal concepts of god(Saguna Brahman) Historically, the impersonal concept of god was in vogue during the Vedic period(7000BCE at the earliest) The impersonal concept of god has variously been referred to in the Vedas as the ONE, Ultimate being, Ultimate truth, Ultimate reality, True Self, Eternal laws. The Vedas describe how this ONE manifests as MANY powers throughout nature, and have been reveered in the Vedas as devas(shining ones) The devas are powers that govern natural phenomenas(fire, earth, air, water, sound, mind, time, space) and hence why in Hinduism nature is considered divine and sacred.

As nature is also pervaded by the divine the worship of devas can also lead to the divine, however the divine is then realised it its phenomenal form. So if you worshipped Surya Deva, you would realise the divinity undelying the sun in the phenomenal form. The devas are also sometimes classified as masculine and feminine, so while fire(Agni deva) is described masculine, water(Saraswati devi) is described as feminine.

In order to realise god in its pure form one must realise the inner self through the practice of meditation. Around 500BCE the personal concept of god came into vogue during the Bhakti period. This is when Hinduism split into many sects: Vaishavaism, Shivaism, Shaktism and finally Smartism, each one worshipped a personal god as the one ultimate reality. This lead to each sect creating myths and legends around that personal god, specific rituals and specific scriptures(puranas) and built temples to that god. This did not mean the impersonal god concept was abandoned, but rather people in that time felt it was too abstract to relate to, so they created a more colourful and human concept, with the understanding it was only an imagining of god and not god actually.

Thus, the impersonal concept of god is actually the true concept of god in Hinduism. Here are some quotes on the impersonal concept of god by modern Hindu scholars:

…The Maitri Upanishad mentions two aspects of Brahman, the higher and the lower. The higher Brahman being the unmanifest Supreme Reality which is soundless and totally quiescent and restful, the lower being the Shabda-Brahman which manifests itself into the everchanging restless cosmos through the medium of sound vibrations. The Upanishad says that "Two Brahmans there are to be known: One as sound and the other as Brahman Supreme.” The process of manifestation is from soundless to sound, from noumenality to phenomenality, from perfect quiescence of “being” to the restlessness of “becoming”… ’ (Sudhakar S.D, 1988. P83)

The Universe is Brahman, the One that underlies and make possible all the multiplicity; the universal consciousness that is the soul of all existence.
It is the primordial no-thingness from which all things arise, the one reality whose oneness is all-inclusive; and includes all that is, or shall be. It is Brahman; the source of the entire cosmos and all cosmic activities relating to the emergence, existence and dissolution of the terrestrial phenomena that form the cosmic rhythm. ‘Brahman is the unborn (aja) in whom all existing things abide.’ And this ultimate reality is One- absolute and indeterminable. ‘The One manifests as the many, the formless putting on forms.’ (Sudhakar S.D, 1988. P3 (Rig Veda)

At the base of Gandhi’s system of beliefs is his view of the nature of ultimate reality. This he refers to not as Brahman (as is usual in advaitism) but as Satya (S: Truth), a term derived from sat, or Being, Satya or Truth alone can truly be said to be real:
It is That which alone is, which constitutes the stuff of which all things are made, which subsists by virtue of its own power, which is not supported by anything else but supports everything that exists. Truth alone is eternal, everything else is momentary. (Collinson, Plant and Wilkinson, 2000. p150 (Gandhi)

Reality or Brahman is a unity, oneness or absolute, changeless, eternal, and such that no predicates can apply to it: in the Absolute there is neither time, space nor causation. The idea of time cannot be there, seeing that there is no mind, no thought. The idea of space cannot be there, seeing that there is no eternal change. What you call motion and causation cannot exist where there is only one. (Vivekananda, Collinson, Plant, Wilkinson, 2000

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Hinduism-Hindu.htm

The difference between the Abrahamic concept of god and the Hindu concept of god is the abrahamic god is anthromorphic and the Hindu god is cosmological. The Abrahamic god is a person, male and a father and monarch who lives in a place called heaven, who creates the earth and places humans on it and occasionally intervenes in the affairs of humans by sending prophets to make them return to him, or punishes them by sending plagues and floods or orders his prophets to kill the infidels. One day the Abrahamic god will judge everybody and punish/reward accordingly. This god, like human beings, has a wide range of emotions: anger, love, fear, lust.

The Hindu concept of god is an abstract philosophical notion ultimate and absolute reality or truth that is beyond time and space. Infinite, formless, absolute, perfect, bliss. It is therefore far more grande and lofty and more rooted in philosophical thought(as opposed to myth and faith)

Some differences:

Hindu God vs Abrahamic god

Infinite vs finite
Unchanging and pure consciousness vs constantly changing mind
Untouched by emotions and impartial vs jealous, angry, vengeful, partial
Beyond time, space and causation vs living in a place in heaven with a heirarchy of angels and souls

#25

Whoops, sorry for posting in the middle! We didn’t know you wanted to continue. We will forever look retarded now…

#26

Hindu God vs Abrahamic god

Infinite vs finite
Unchanging and pure consciousness vs constantly changing mind
Untouched by emotions and impartial vs jealous, angry, vengeful, partial
Beyond time, space and causation vs living in a place in heaven with a heirarchy of angels and souls

NOTE: ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY ARE NOT THE SAME RELIGION!!!

God is infinite and eternal.

He does not change. He lacks nothing. He has no need of his Creation, though Creation is entirely dependent upon him. There is nothing new and nothing old for God. There are no surprises. He already knows the punch line to any of our jokes.

The Bible uses anthropomorphisms to understand aspects of God, but God is neither male nor female, does not have a body, and is not subject to any “mood swings.” Someone who misunderstands Christianity and has an extremely shallow understanding, and possibly willful ignorance of it, might deduce these things, but Catholics know better.

God does not live “in” a place. God is immaterial and transcends space and time. All things are “within” God.

Seems like the God of Christianity is not at all like your make-believe strawman God, SD. (Your misrepresentations, and your playing fast and loose with the truth is very annoying, to say the least).

#27

Islam and Christianity are officially recognised as being part of the same family of religions: Abrahamic religions. Just as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are recognised as being part of the same family of religions: Dharmic religions.

The Abrahamic god is not infinite, because the Abrahamic god actually lives in a place called “heaven” where a hierarchy of angels live. This means that the Abrahamic god is limited to one place and is not everywhere at once. The Hindu god, on the other hand, because it is the same as existence, it is therefore everything in existence. So there is nowhere the Hindu god is not. There is therefore no limitation on the Hindu god.

The Abrahamic god does change if we go by the OT and NT. In the OT he constantly changes his mind, experiences emotions like anger and jealousy. He even forgets things. He obviously does not have knowledge of the future, because otherwise he would know adam and eve were going to go against his wishes and eat the forbidden fruit. There are several such accounts in the bible which shows the Abrahamic god is ignorant of what is going to happen in the future. In the NT we see a complete turn around from an angry and vengeful god to benevolent and forgiving god.

The Abrahamic god obviously lacks many things, because otherwise there would be no need for creating anything. If the Abrahamic god is perfect, there is no need for creating anything, because he is already everything. In the OT the Abrahamic god thrists for blood sacrifices. On the other hand, the Hindu god being perfect has no need to create, but rather we say the universe has projected from god, but this projection is unreal and illusory and we must return to god by realising it unreal nature. Hence the famous Sanskrit couplet: Take me from ignorance to truth; take me from darkness to light; take me from death to life.

The Abrahamic god is indeed male and this is why he is described as “he” throughout the bible and “father”. He is not never described as “she” or “mother”. On the other hand, the Hindu god is described as father, mother, son, lover, as earth, fire, air, water, ether, as intellect, architect, smith etc etc. Hindus realise all descriptions are just man trying to relate to the abstract god.

Seems like the God of Christianity is not at all like your make-believe strawman God, SD

Rather, it is your interpretation of god that is nothing like the Abrahamic or Christian god as described in the bible. Your god is closer to the Hindu god, perhaps you are Hindu after all :wink:

#28

Islam and Christianity are officially recognised as being part of the same family of religions: Abrahamic religions. Just as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are recognised as being part of the same family of religions: Dharmic religions.

Official?..okay, did you see the documents declaring that they are the same? Or did you hear such a thing from hundreds of people’s mouth? Although I sympathize with your view and the candid points you have made about christianity, the way you lump things into together is rash …

Surya,

Your writing lacks a dependable literature review and balanced summary of those religious notions sufficient to merit such a deep critique and is likely to alienate the very seekers of knowledge you hope to influence.

Even though retaining to be argumentative, you assume too much on certain occasions such as Hinduism is the religion of the world, while you also presume that Hinduism is not a religion at all. You need to elaborate these points without being drifted in a stream of conciousness, which influences the presentation of your ideas, and partially, the kind of flaming you are inclined to demonstrate either toward concepts or the members of these forums.

I think Surya, you are dwelling too much in the past. Instead of wasting your spirit on digging up mounts of “dubious” data of the history of Vedic philosophy, why don’t you embark on discovering your own ideas, for you seemingly and incessantly advocate spiritual development, but at the same time, yourself, unable to get out of linguistic catch-alls and symbolism? >.> For if this is not the path for you, then I suggest that you should embark on an academic historical study with a supervisor who thoroughly knows his/her literature…

A little bit to think about…

#29

Ummmm…

Wiki:

Abrahamic religions are the monotheistic faiths emphasizing and tracing their common origin to Abraham[1] or recognizing a spiritual tradition identified with Abraham.[2][3][4] They are one of the three major divisions in comparative religion, along with Indian religions (Dharmic) and East Asian religions (Taoic).

The three major Abrahamic religions are, in order of appearance, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Judaism regards itself as the religion of the descendants of Jacob, the grandson of Abraham. Christianity began as a sect of Judaism in the 1st century CE (known as Jewish Christianity) and evolved into a separate religion with distinctive beliefs and practices, notably its replacement of the Jewish idea of an exclusive ethnic religious community (a common notion which is not entirely correct, see Bnei Noah and Conversion to Judaism) with an inclusive, universal community, the Christian Church. It replaced the idea of simple monotheism with a Triune God who is simultaneously one and three (different branches of Christianity have different interpretations). Islam was founded by Muhammad in the 7th century CE upon the teachings in the Qur’an. It retained the inclusiveness of Christianity, but reverted to simple monotheism with a central, but not divine, prophet.

#30

I always thought that Islam is the successor of Judaism. They worship the same god, and today, the reason why there is a lot of conflict in Middle-East dates back to this successorship problem between Jews and Muslims. Jews believe that they are the chosen society, the gifted sons of Israel. Muslims believe that the time of Jews is over, that’s why they don’t want Israel in Middle-east. However, both religions are cultural religions - the desert culture, combination of many tribes that is eventually named as Arabs.

[It is of course unbelievable that this successorship stupidity is literally soaked up in people’s brains and changed the entire desert culture.]

However, christianity is a bit different. Perhaps, because it incorporates humanistic elements (okay I will accept dharmic here), which eventually allowed the flourishing of science and humanism, and became less psychologically oppressive. Christianity is not a cultural religion, except only to the extent that it is predominant in the alleged European culture. I do not advocate christianity here; yet all I am saying is, christiandom has become a progressive ideology, and did not become stagnant. And yes perhaps it owes this to the influence of eastern religions. However, judaism and, particularly islam, are literally dormant in a progressive sense, and people actually believe in the historical bullshits they currently indoctrinate… they need to be severely challenged, and for doing it, I also admire your enthusiasm…

Christiandom has beautiful aspects. It is because of this ideology, we are able to enjoy Bach and Mozart, and Nietzsche and Goethe (they invoke a sense of criticism in a way). Even the negative aspects of christianity have proved to be fruitful, due to the simple fact that it has become a progressive religion. It had been so extreme in the past that people challenged it and reformed it… whereas the other two religions are literally unchallenged - they are quite political and thus far more dangerous…

So think about the merits christianity has before condemning it entirely, altogether…