Jump to content

The New Hanuman Poster and militant hindutva


ravishingravi

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, sarcastic said:

@Audiophile, nothing to disagree with you but what has your statement to do with what @Stradlater and others are discussing here. 
Within the realms of common sense, a monkey cannot talk and do all those things but here no body is talking about common sense.

The posters here and a lot of others have Hanumanji image  in their mind and what his character is like.  That is what is described here and others agreeing with it. 

For all of them, Hanumanji is real... Just like for some, a super man is real. If you tell me a man cannot fly in the air with a cape, you are indeed correct.  That does not mean that people does not have the right to think superman is real and he has so and so characteristics. You have every right to think it as a mere fiction. They have every right to think it as real.  

Unless someone pokes you to accept their belief as real, there is no need for you to poke them what is real or not. 

By that logic, we should not tell kids that Santa is not real. Let's everyone live in la-la-land and believe in fiction and it is up to them to decide when to come out of their illusions. So in the same vein, let's not tell the non-violent Muslims that their Holy book has lot of disinformations, and when they die they will not get 72 vrigins to phuck! :rofl:

Edited by Audiophile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By that logic, we should not tell kids that Santa is not real. Let's everyone live in la-la-land and believe in fiction and it is up to them to decide when to come out of their illusions. So in the same vein, let's not tell the non-violent Muslims that their Holy book has lot of disinformations, and when they die they will not get 72 vrigins to phuck! :rofl:
Only difference, do that in a temple, people will get annoyed and kick you out of the temple. Do that in a mosque, people will get mildly annoyed and kick you out of this blue marble.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nikred said:

Only difference, do that in a temple, people will get annoyed and kick you out of the temple. Do that in a mosque, people will get mildly annoyed and kick you out of this blue marble.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
 

I won’t disagree with you on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/25/2019 at 3:43 AM, Gollum said:

The umbrella of Hinduism accommodates your atheist beliefs :thumbsup:, that is the greatness of our religion. I tend to believe that most of our epics, deities, bhakti songs, hymns, shlokas, rituals etc aren't literal in their meaning but allegories which teach us how to lead better lives after exercising some brain cells :om:.

 

My grandpa was an expert at that, he would draw parallels of most of our childhood bedtime stories with things in our immediate environment. For instance I remember him explaining the deva-asura tug of war for amrit and linking it to how the human digestive system works. I don't remember much now but was stunned when I first heard him using that episode to teach science behind how the human body functions.

 

Unfortunately we are losing the wisdom of that generation, in these matters we aren't as well read or inquisitive so more scope for literal translation which is the Abrahamic way of interpreting scriptures. 

What exactly is the Abrahamic way of interpreting scriptures? 

Serious question, no troll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mariyam said:

What exactly is the Abrahamic way of interpreting scriptures? 

Serious question, no troll.

I think he meant taking the scriptures word for word, i.e. verbatim. I have met several Evangelical Christians here who think the Bible was literally written by God himself. Not godly people/saints, but God himself wrote it with pen on paper. They believe the contents verbatim. i.e. in Genesis earth was created in 6 days and on the 7th day God rested. Also the fact that there is only one way to go to heaven, i.e. through Jesus Christ. Quran and Tora has similar verses, but you get the picture. 

 

Now all devoted Christians do not do that. I have also met several ones who read between the lines and figure out why it was written the way it was written. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mariyam said:

What exactly is the Abrahamic way of interpreting scriptures? 

Serious question, no troll.

From what I understand, Abrahamic way is like following scriptures to a tee, no scope for any adjustments or flexibility, a proper definition of heaven and hell and means to get there. 
 

No philosophical debates or flexibility to challenge and ask questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Audiophile said:

I think he meant taking the scriptures word for word, i.e. verbatim. I have met several Evangelical Christians here who think the Bible was literally written by God himself. Not godly people/saints, but God himself wrote it with pen on paper. They believe the contents verbatim. i.e. in Genesis earth was created in 6 days and on the 7th day God rested. Also the fact that there is only one way to go to heaven, i.e. through Jesus Christ. Quran and Tora has similar verses, but you get the picture. 

Now all devoted Christians do not do that. I have also met several ones who read between the lines and figure out why it was written the way it was written. 

Thing is , all Abrahamic revelations/ holy books aren't the same. The holy Quran is not in a chronological order and most people rely on interpretations to get to a meaning. It is not possible to take it word for word and two different Quranic scholars can and do make two different interpretations of certain passages. Plus you have the entire issue of certain verses called naksh which deal with abrogating earlier verses (many a times contradictory verses).

Point is, it is a difficult book to take word for word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Thing is , all Abrahamic revelations/ holy books aren't the same. The holy Quran is not in a chronological order and most people rely on interpretations to get to a meaning. It is not possible to take it word for word and two different Quranic scholars can and do make two different interpretations of certain passages. Plus you have the entire issue of certain verses called naksh which deal with abrogating earlier verses (many a times contradictory verses).

Point is, it is a difficult book to take word for word.

Throughout history humans have interpreted the holy books to either justify a good cause or something abhorrent. There was a time until the mid 60s, the Bible was used to justify racial segregation. I am sure same goes with Quran.

Edited by Audiophile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...