Is Yoga Hinduism?

Spirituality Religion
#841

[QUOTE=thomas;46005]From a Catholic perspective, and this is the largest “sect” of Christianity by far, and from our perspective, THE CHurch established by Christ, to Whom all are called, NOBODY is predestined to Hell.

EVERYONE can find salvation. And it’s beyond ridiculous that an illegetimate child or the child of a rape would be hell-bound. There is nothing like that in Catholicism.

And yes, in our history some bad Catholics have done some bad things. We are aware of that and we condemn that, and we wish they had followed Catholic teachings instead.

And those things don’t justify you making careless and untrue posts about it, or qualify you to say that OT deeds that did happen are things Chritians should do. You are not a Christian authority, and the more you try to be, the less credible you seem as a Hindu authority.[/QUOTE]

Some bad things? More like A LOT of bad things. It is good that you are aware of it and it is good that you condemn it.

Catholic teachings? The truth is, those people WERE following Catholic/Christian teachings. The truth is, the reason they are condemned now by deceitful Christians is because of the pressure to conform to secular/humanistic ideals. The truth is, Abrahamic religions are as inflexible as bricks when it comes to adapting to new eras and ages and that is why they become ridiculous when you attempt to mix these modern ideals with these religions and their sects. You need to recognize that the religion you claim is supposedly about love/blahblah is only so because of the people/groups who promoted ideals antithetical to Christianity; when the rest of the world followed, these religions had no choice but to adapt to these ideals for the sake of their existence. The result is double edged; fools, which are comparatively larger in numbers, now feel better about following what they believe is “actual” Christianity (which is just Christianity + secularism/humanism which is NOT Christianity as laid down throughout history and as is indirectly promoted in the Bible) and go around ignoring their own history and citing the poverty and ignorance of other countries as reasons why the religions of those countries are inferior (in addition to claiming the wealth, human rights records, modernization/industrialization of Western countries as reasons why Christianity is superior). The wiser people, however, see it is ridiculous either way, more so because of the blatant hypocrisy. At least back then, Christians were honest in their actions and cited the Bible as reasons for their deeds. Now, it is vastly more difficult to discern these wolves in sheep’s clothing.

Take yourself for example; you deny the content of certain verses and passages and say that it is impossible for it to mean this and that or that we are wrong. This is because you are mixing in modern ideals in with the facts. Separate them from the religion of Christianity and you will see the truth (and perhaps become a better “Christian”; but the fetters of the organized religion of Christianity will fall and whether you can be considered a Christian or not is a matter of semantics).

#842

I deny that beastiality is condoned in the Bible, as claimed.

I deny that OT stories about war and conquering, etc., are examples for us to follow, but were accounts pertaining to circumstances at the time.

No Christian can use an OT story as a justification to conquer, kill, steal, destroy religious symbols or places of worship, etc.

I know what Christianity teaches me to do. I know I fall short, but I know that it requires me to love and forgive my enemies, to be sorry for my sins and strive to do better, to help those in need. Without my faith to remind me of this, I would be a worse person than I am. There is nothing in Christianty that tempts or leads me to do anything that would harm another, but rather the reverse, and that I should make personal sacrifices to help others.

#843

Thomas, why do you constantly feel you have to defend your religion to this jackass?

#844

[QUOTE=thomas;46009]I deny that beastiality is condoned in the Bible, as claimed.

I deny that OT stories about war and conquering, etc., are examples for us to follow, but were accounts pertaining to circumstances at the time.

No Christian can use an OT story as a justification to conquer, kill, steal, destroy religious symbols or places of worship, etc.

I know what Christianity teaches me to do. I know I fall short, but I know that it requires me to love and forgive my enemies, to be sorry for my sins and strive to do better, to help those in need. Without my faith to remind me of this, I would be a worse person than I am. There is nothing in Christianty that tempts or leads me to do anything that would harm another, but rather the reverse, and that I should make personal sacrifices to help others.[/QUOTE]

  1. I agree. Bible condemns bestiality very strongly.
    2-3. I disagree.
  2. It is often the case with those who convert because they take their faith less for granted than those who are born into it and derive more meaning from their teachings accordingly; however, most Christian converts still go around defaming their previous religions and others as well. You are unique among them, not just as a convert but as a Catholic and a Christian. If there was some measurement for ignorance and the ignorance of Christians was measured by a normal statistical distribution, you are one of those who fall outside 3 standard deviations. But I will still disagree with you on the semantics of the word Christianity and what its teachings include, regardless of the emotional well-being followers like you (followers influenced by ideals outside of Christianity) may derive from it (and so will you on what I have to say). The true reflection of a religion comes from what followers already of that faith (for a long period of time) are like (all societal dogma aside) and what the scriptures themselves say (all societal dogma aside once again).

However, I can readily say that despite my strong views on most Christians and Christianity in general, if every Christian was like you, the world would have been much better off. :wink:

FlexPenguin, there is no need to resort to such language. Your using such expletives proves that my posts have undoubtedly touched a nerve…but how and why? The reasons are obvious to me.

#845

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;46013] The reasons are obvious to me.[/QUOTE]

I look forward to your windy explanation.

#846

[QUOTE=FlexPenguin;46014]I look forward to your windy explanation.[/QUOTE]

There is nothing to say about cursing, other than the fact that it is the product of a lack of vocabulary and an uncontrolled mind. And you do Yoga? :rolleyes:

#847

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;46016]There is nothing to say about cursing, other than the fact that it is the product of a lack of vocabulary and an uncontrolled mind. And you do Yoga? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

I did not curse. I simply compared you to a jackass, which is evident to any sane person by your bigotry and braying. Your condemnation and hatred of humanity oozes out of every one of your posts - none of which , to this point, referred to, nor adhered to, any yoga doctrine, practice, or philosophy.

But I suppose I should be dismissed as just another western, hindu hating christian. :cool:

#848

[QUOTE=FlexPenguin;46020]I did not curse. I simply compared you to a jackass, which is evident to any sane person by your bigotry and braying. Your condemnation and hatred of humanity oozes out of every one of your posts - none of which , to this point, referred to, nor adhered to, any yoga doctrine, practice, or philosophy.

But I suppose I should be dismissed as just another western, hindu hating christian. :cool:[/QUOTE]

I guess I too can use similar vulgar language and say it was a metaphor as an excuse. Here you go, (re)defining what is cursing and what is not to prove your point. I would have expected you to gain more maturity from practicing Yoga.

Yes. Bigotry against those Christians, Muslims, and Westerners who seek to destroy our culture. “Braying” against propaganda and misinformation.

Find me the exact post where I condemned all of humanity. The only groups I have ever condemned are Christians, and Muslims (and those Westerners that have Christian biases). I have mentioned a few times I have respect for all religions, philosophies, and cultures with the exception of Christianity and Islam. Since when did humanity become just Christians, Muslims, and Westerners?

Actually, it makes you a Westerner with Christian biases, which is quite different from what you stated. It is the heritage of most people on this forum. Most of you are Westerners and most Westerners, even if they are not Christian, grew up in the part of the world influenced by Christian dogma, beliefs, and so forth (I and others have already expounded on its nature). Then theres the Western tradition of rationalization, humanism, and secularism which brings with it varying degrees of scorn for other “primitive” traditions and cultures, and slight vestiges of white superiority. These unconscious biases, combined with information from the erroneous Western media can produce unsatisfactory results.

It is these negative influences I am strongly against, which creates misinformation, ignorance, propaganda, and so forth. You may not realize it and you may think it is harmless, but the whole word has seen what can happen when these feelings ferment in the minds of Westerners.

Can these influences be fought? Yes. Reforming of Christianity and elimination of Christian dogma is a major step. Another is helping those nations/cultures that have experienced stagnation caused by imperialism/colonization, so they can assert their place in the world and thus, eliminate any misconceptions. And such help includes:

  1. Stop sending missionaries
  2. Realizing that people of a certain culture know their cultures/traditions/teachings the best, so let them translate their own works, and let them be the ultimate authority on matters regarding their religion and culture. For example, much harm has been done to India’s cultural heritage when our sacred texts fell into the hands of Christians and Muslims and when they wrote our history to match their bigoted agendas.
  3. Fix your media. Enough said.
  4. Removing any forms of cultural bias in Western education systems (and those influenced by it, like the education system in India). Sticking to what Western academics teaches without any additional research makes it seem that only Westerners did this, invented that, etc.
  5. Letting those nations do what they wish to do, provided it is just, and not what the West thinks will help it maintain its status quo.
#849

[QUOTE=FlexPenguin;46020]I did not curse. I simply compared you to a jackass, which is evident to any sane person by your bigotry and braying. Your condemnation and hatred of humanity oozes out of every one of your posts - none of which , to this point, referred to, nor adhered to, any yoga doctrine, practice, or philosophy.

But I suppose I should be dismissed as just another western, hindu hating christian. :cool:[/QUOTE]

This is what he stands for, he supports all religions except for Christianity and Islam, and he condemns Christians, Muslims, and Christian-biased Westerners. So he condemns not only the beliefs but also the morality & views of well over 3.6 billion people on the planet…
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
If 3.5 - 4 billion of these people signed onto yogaforums and disagreed with him and his little tag team buddy, they would all be anti-Hindu racists, all of them. On the other hand, they posit that sometimes in the next century the U.S. will “become Hindu” simply because Americans may do yoga (whatever form it may be), or believe in reincarnation or karma (“you reap what you sow”)…
Meanwhile, westerners should “stop sending missionaries” (as if “we” are doing it), and “we” should actively seek to dismantle and destroy “Christian dogma”, and end any cultural influence anywhere else in the world… see the bias? “We” shouldn’t influence anyone else’s culture, in fact we should seek to undermine or destroy our own cultural norms because we are “evil”, meanwhile “they” can influence Western culture and it’s all good… :slight_smile:

#850

[QUOTE=reaswaran;45697]Let me give my thoughts. There is only ONE basic tenet in Hinduism. And that is that all of us are Paramatman. It is only that due to our identification with the body, we are unable to see it. Break the identification and you realise you are Paramatman.

Yada Naham Tada Moksho,
Yada Aham, Bandhanam Tada.

That being so- all scriptures, Patanjali etc etc are subsidiary - these are only tools. Let us not confuse the road with the destination.[/QUOTE]

:stuck_out_tongue:

All right super soul make a planet. NO. Better yet Make a Universe you paramatman guy.

I waiting.

#851

@Indra Deva. Perhaps you are correct. Comparisons to a donkey is an insult to donkeys everywhere. More like a mule, I think. Barren and impotent, the work animal made to perform the labours of his master. I wonder if the master will have the courage to show himself.

Now, back to the yogic path. I’ve strayed a bit, I think. I can’t seem to deny myself the occasional indulgence. :slight_smile:

#852

[QUOTE=FlexPenguin;46044]@Indra Deva. Perhaps you are correct. Comparisons to a donkey is an insult to donkeys everywhere. More like a mule, I think. Barren and impotent, the work animal made to perform the labours of his master. I wonder if the master will have the courage to show himself.

Now, back to the yogic path. I’ve strayed a bit, I think. I can’t seem to deny myself the occasional indulgence. :)[/QUOTE]

Exactly. See this?

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;36237] I must repeat, that yoga did not originate in Hinduism. This isn?t a debating point, since no one to my knowledge has ever claimed that Hinduism came before yoga.[/QUOTE]

The thread was over at this point.

#853

Now, back to the yogic path.

You were never on a Yoga path to begin with :wink:

#854

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;46057]You were never on a Yoga path to begin with ;)[/QUOTE]

& you would know? :wink:

Sooner or later you’re going to realize, just as I did, that there’s a difference between knowing the path and [B][I]walking[/I][/B] the path.

#855

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;46002]To be fair, we also had Sati and Caste System. As for the Caste system, we have made it clear that it is more of a societal system. As for Sati, I have no idea where this popped out of. I have never seen one verse sanctioning this practice and no mention is given on how extensively it was practiced. Strangely enough, it seems to have been rampant during Muslim Mughal rule and very infrequent and uncommon in pre-Islamic rule. More evidence of the religious stagnation foreign empires created in India.[/QUOTE]

Prior to British rule in India there is absolutely no evidence of the caste system of modern times. In fact on the contrary the historical evidence from even the 19th century suggests that the castes socialised with one another, studied at school together and ironically out of all the castes it was the Brahmins who were the poorest. This is consistent with ancient historical record such as Kautaliyas’s arthshastra which shows the Brahmins were the poorest caste and were also also held to the highest standards of moral conduct and would be punished more severely for a crime.

The practice of Sati gained prominence in the Mughal period as honour suicide by Hindu women who did not want to be raped. Similarly, the Purdha custom where women would cover themselves and child marriages were reactions to Mughal rules and a result of Islamic influence on India. There is no evidence these practices took place in India prior to mughal rule as endemic problems.

India experienced a dark age which started in 10AD and ended in 19AD where barely no progress was made in science, industry and technology due to the invasions by the Mughals and then the British. It progressively became a poorer and poorer country. From 1AD to 10AD it had a constant share of 33% of the world GDP. In 1600AD its share fell to 17%. In the 19AD it fell to under 5%. This will give you an idea of how much India has been raped for 1000 years.

Mughal rule was not as bad as British rule was. This is because while the Mughals did indeed export India’s wealth back their homeland, they had settled in India and continued its traditional industries. Also they failed to completely conquer India, especially the south, which were still under Hindu rule but progress was still marred by constant fighting going on between Hindu kings and Muslim kings. The British were dastardly though, they exploited the fighting between Hindu kings and Muslims kings by providing financial and diplomatic support to both sides(duplicity) and making inroads by buying land in India. As soon as the British took hold of India they simply started raping it, sending all its wealth back to Britain(this allowed the industrial revolution to happen) They allowed the country to become impoverished and during their rule India had several famines which kills tens of millions of India. All Indian states experienced depopulation and atophied. It was systematic economic genocide.

The poverty in India today is primarily the result of the British. When the left India in 1947 India had about 90%+ people living in dire poverty. Today we are arriving at a situation where 50% by 2025 will be middle class. We have made massive progress. The next step is to throw away the foreign systems of education, government and science and revert back to our own in harmony with modern technology.

#856

Can one ever know the path unless one is walking it ?

:confused:

[QUOTE=Indra Deva;46060]& you would know? :wink:

Sooner or later you’re going to realize, just as I did, that there’s a difference between knowing the path and [B][I]walking[/I][/B] the path.[/QUOTE]

#857

I can know a path without walking it. One does not need to walk a path to know a path. I know roughly how to get from here to Paris from maps, but I have never walked to Paris.

#858

Your knowledge of the path from here to Paris is based on what has been written by someone else. That is “his” knowledge not yours. It will be "your knowledge " when you have walked all the way to Paris.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;46073]I can know a path without walking it. One does not need to walk a path to know a path. I know roughly how to get from here to Paris from maps, but I have never walked to Paris.[/QUOTE]

#859

More precise language here would be to say it will be my experience when I walk to Paris, but not my knowledge. I already knew the path to Paris thanks to maps that have been created, and more recently the wonderful navigation technology called GPS and Google Earth :smiley:

I know a lot of things I have not experienced. I know about the existence of atoms, electromagnetic fields, nebulas and planets and galaxies. There is so much I have not experienced, that I know.

#860

Surya,

You are speaking of “acquired Knowledge”. Acquired knowledge is based on the preposition that it was realised or experienced knowledge of someone else. Perhaps it would be correct to say that “acquired knowledge” is in the genre of information, while experienced or realised knowledge is the nature of knowledge. Dont know if this makes sense. Perhaps a question of perception only. :stuck_out_tongue:

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;46076]More precise language here would be to say it will be my experience when I walk to Paris, but not my knowledge. I already knew the path to Paris thanks to maps that have been created, and more recently the wonderful navigation technology called GPS and Google Earth :smiley:

I know a lot of things I have not experienced. I know about the existence of atoms, electromagnetic fields, nebulas and planets and galaxies. There is so much I have not experienced, that I know.[/QUOTE]