Moochad Posted June 23, 2018 Share Posted June 23, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, Alam_dar said: When you accept there is discrimination and human humiliation in the sacred religious texts, then I wonder how could you still follow the religion? Please try to understand, the DIVINE system works upon 100% PERFECTION. There is no 99.99% thing, while even this 0.0001% imperfection makes them human and not divine. While we have here human humiliation of that level which was not even present in Islamic slavery. The proven facts of discrimination and humiliation of Dalits is proof enough that these sacred religious texts are not divine, but from humans who were full of faults. The discussion should already end here with this. And I have already stated, I am no one. Right you decided beforehand and yet continue to quote people without evidence. Neither do you understand how Hindus view divinity, you are projecting your islamic view of religion and philosophy onto a different civilization. 10 hours ago, Alam_dar said: This has already become non-Issue with already proven discrimination. You are sticking to this issue while you are only targeting me now. I don't know when the Dalit person existed. While it seems that caste system was not so strong till around 2500 years ago. And Shudra Kings was a political thing where they had the powers and I don't think this could eliminate the discrimination in the sacred religious texts. As expected nothing to back up your original claim that they were exceptions. Why don't you admit you just made that statement while lacking any sources to back that up. 10 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Again you are making a non-issue a crises here. If killing of Dalit was equal to killing the frog or dog, then indeed Brahmans didn't consider Dalits as equal Human Beings, but something lower that this. You could keep on making it a crises, but I just hope you could come out of this mindset. Shifting goalposts, first you stated that they didn't view them as human beings, then you realized you were caught on the wrong foot, so you shifted to equal human beings. Make a claim, when you can't prove it, claim it is a non-issue so you can avoid proving it. 10 hours ago, Alam_dar said: There are multiple incidents of prohibition of Dalits entering in the Mandirs which have been reported in the newspapers. The reason for this hatred and humiliation again lies fully in the sacred texts. Otherwise please tell us why High caste Hindus prohibiting Dalits from entering these mandirs? No one said otherwise, you claimed it was commonplace for 2400 years, prove it Cite a sacred text which says dalits are banned from entering temples and show that it was applied uniformly over India for the 2400 years you claimed. 10 hours ago, Alam_dar said: The answer us given in Brahma Sutras by Badrayana Vyasa. It's said that Purificatory ceremonies like Upanayana etc. are declared by the scriptures to be a necessary condition of the study of all kinds of knowledge or Vidyâ; but these are meant only for the higher castes. Their absence in the case of the Sudras. So they are not allowed to read vedas. संस्कारपरामर्शात् तदभावाभिलापाच्च ॥ 1.3.36 ॥ saṃskāraparāmarśāt tadabhāvābhilāpācca || 36|| 36. Because purificatory ceremonies are mentioned (in the case of the twice-born) and their absence are declared (in the case of the Sudras). Not only they are allowed to read vedas but it's even said that a shudra should not even listen to vedas while they being recited. श्रवणाध्ययनार्थप्रतिषेधात् स्मृतेश्च ॥ 1.3.38 ॥ śravaṇādhyayanārthapratiṣedhāt smṛteśca || 38 || And because of the prohibition in the Smriti of hearing and studying (the Vedas) and knowing their meaning and performing Vedic rites (to Sudras, they are not entitled to the knowledge of Brahman). So it's because the Upanayana ceremony or the samskaras which is not performed in case of Shudra ,they are not allowed to read , listen or to study veda. And that's why it's not allowed in smiritis. === If this is true, then I could also understand why some temples are not letting enter the Shudars, while Vedas are recited in these temples, while Dalits are not allowed to even listen them. this is cherry picking From the same page you linked to, this is said: https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras/d/doc62931.html Sutras 34-38 disqualify the Sudra for the knowledge of Brahman through the study of the Vedas. But it is possible for them to attain that knowledge through the Purânas and the epics (Râmâyana and Mahâbhârata). On the other hand, the Yajur Veda itself states, referring to the Vedas: You are basically claiming that one 'scripture' is followed while the other is not You are also implying that temples, which are dedicated to Ram, Krishna, etc who are the subjects of the Ramayana, Mahabharata are closed off to Sudras(and Dalits and Tribals ) who together form about 80% of the total population of Hindus, despite your own link stating that they are authorized by that text to study it... 10 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Once again, I am no one. If I have made any wrong claim according to you, then I simply take it back. For me, the discussion already became over when the first instance of discrimination by the 100% perfect Hindu gods was established. For you too, it should have ended long time ago. Please change your religious mindset and start thinking like Buddha did, where he gave preference to humanity upon religion and traditions. Then let us end it here... It is also a myth that Buddha severed himself from religion and traditions ( Hinduism), but whatever... Edited June 24, 2018 by Moochad Switchblade and Tibarn 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibarn Posted June 23, 2018 Share Posted June 23, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Yes, Buddah hoped for ending of slavery and caste system. And his followers succeeded in it. Are you sure the Buddha worked to abolish the "Caste system"? Here is something which suggests otherwise! https://www.jstor.org/stable/29757366?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents and Here also something that suggests that wasn't a concern of Buddhists https://www.docdroid.net/ymyp/india-in-japanese-literature-a-case-study-of-hirata-atsutane.pdf Quote And then again slavery was abolished from whole world in the 20th century. Unfortunately, slavery still exists today! https://www.freetheslaves.net/about-slavery/slavery-today/ Spoiler Researchers estimate that 40 million are enslaved worldwide, generating $150 billion each year in illicit profits for traffickers. Labor Slavery. About 50 percent toil in forced labor slavery in industries where manual labor is needed—such as farming, ranching, logging, mining, fishing, and brick making—and in service industries working as dish washers, janitors, gardeners, and maids. Sex Slavery. About 12.5 percent are trapped in forced prostitution sex slavery. Forced Marriage Slavery. About 37.5 percent are trapped in forced marriages. Child Slavery. About 25 percent of today’s slaves are children. Quote Dreams do become true, if one has true heart and intentions and when indeed consider slavery and caste system as evils which should be eliminated one day or another. Who told you not to dream? Of course, there are a lot of people with a lot of different dreams, many directly in conflict, ie a certain group of people you may be familiar with want to wipe out all non-believers from existence! 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Shudras are in huge numbers. If due to some political reasons the teachings of Manusmriti were not successfully implemented, then it does not mean that there is no discrimination in the Hindu Sacred texts. Dalits are even in worse state than the Shudras. Where did someone say there aren't texts with discrimination? Discrimination written in a book doesn't equal that it was implemented at a scale large enough to claim certain things which were said in this thread. 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: You are whole heartedly welcome to criticize the atheism and genocides it did. We could make this world only better through open criticism and then reform. We have already reformed ourselves a lot as human being and have become much more civilized than before. Problem with religion is this that there is no space of REFORM in religion. Thus millions of slaves and Dalits faced humiliation for centuries at hands of religion, and it was only the non-religious Secular Europe which broke the chains of religious slavery and also defeated the caste system to such extent that Indian Constitution is now free of this evil of caste system. I am not talking about the right to criticize or not criticize others, atheists, Hindus, etc. I am talking assuming some behavior to be true of all. You are assuming 1 text of countless(of various levels of importance) represents the entirety of Hinduism, but are you willing to concede the same if I judge the entirety of atheists for the actions of the most powerful atheists? You are framing your view of Hinduism based on what you know of Islam. You are comparing a mango and a lemon and saying they are the same shape/taste because they are a fruit. Hinduism reforms itself continuously and isn't limited to texts; don't impose your Islamic/Abrahamic interpretation of reality on us. Neither is the Indian constitution "secular" nor is it free of caste. Different people have different rights based on religion and based on caste. By your own logic, you earlier stated, both the Indian constitution and country should be thrown on the scrap heap because it discriminates against people based on religion/caste. 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: How is it discrimination when Muslims themselves agree that (due to Humanity in them) that slavery was against the Humanity and Hindus too agree that caste system is against Humanity? Reality is this that humanity within Muslims and Hindus has already guided them these things are evils, but still they were unable to get rid of them due to the religious brainwashing and religious fears. The discrimination was that you are assuming things about "nationalism" and "religion" your post Quote I still hope that one day Humanity comes first, and even if nationalism (Chauvinism) and religion survive at the hands of science and knowledge, then still they become weaker enough to cause any harm to the humanity. You just stated that religion and nationalism are in direct confrontation with humanity, and they are in direct opposition with "science." Unfortunately for you, there are likely numerous people who are actually trained in "science" who are also "nationalists" and "religious." Are you the thekedar of "science" and/or "humanity" to judge what is or isn't in contention with them? This attitude of yours against nationalists and the religious fits the definition of discrimination https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discrimination Quote Definition of discrimination 1a : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment racial discrimination b : the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually So it is okay for you to make discriminatory statements, but others can not! When people of a similar ideological background as you actually implement documented mass murders of people, as they have already in the past, why you are not asking for that to be thrown into the dust bin! 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: If you don't believe in humanity, then you could also never believe in presence of LOVE and it would also become meaningless for you just like humanity. But reality is this you could feel the both, the love and the humanity. I asked you to explain to me where exactly is humanity? Do you think everyone believes "humanity" is the same thing, or are you the sole thekedar of what is and isn't "humanity." Do you have some objective, quantifiable measure by which someone can understand "humanity" or do you concede that what you consider "humanity" is just your opinion? 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Can you quantify love? Humanity within us guiding us what is right and what is wrong. What is justice and what is oppression (like Sati of women was oppression, but religious brainwashing overpowered the humanity and thus this evil practice continued for centuries and religion is fully responsible for this crime). If "love" and "humanity" aren't objective/quantifiable/measurable how do you know what you say is "humanity" is correct and not what al-Baghdadi views as "humanity" and "love"? Quote This humanity helped us to form the Secular systems where all human beings are free of slavery and getting equal human rights. We are still far from being perfect on the practical level, but we could still dream for the best as we know what is the right path. "Secular systems" are themselves derived from religious beliefs, not opposite of them. This is clear to anyone who actually knows their history of the Enlightenment where modern conceptions of human rights were conceived, and Ancient Rome where the religious-secular distinction first came to light. 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Off course. Indian constitution is not based upon the religious sacred texts which legalise and implement caste system and slavery system. I don't know why you doubt about Indian Constitution being Secular and based upon equal Human Rights. There is no doubt, that is a fact. The Indian constitution gives different rights to different people based on caste and religion, so how can it be based on "equal" human rights? Where do human rights come from? 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Again you are trying to make "exceptional case" as crises, which it is not. So are you conceding that there are unequal rights in the Indian constitution, yet you aren't willing to abandon the whole thing and making excuses like "exceptional cases" to justify inequality? There is nothing exceptional about constitutionally ordained discrimination against certain castes and religions. It infects many significant parts of India as a society. 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Not a single answer to direct reference of Manusmriti. And it is also not possible while today religious brainwashing has gone back a long way and not possible to defend the evils of caste system openly today. False, you refused to even have the integrity to provide direct references to what @Moochad asked until your most recent post to him, and now you are pretending that he was avoiding answering! The truth is you bit off far more than you could chew and did not have any reference to back your bold claims! Either way, that is between you and him! 9 hours ago, Alam_dar said: I am no one and not interested in such games. Reality is very clear. You need not to be bona fide Scholar of Hindu religious texts in order to see the plight of the Dalits at the hands of the high caste Hindus for the centuries. As expected, the moment I ask even the most basic, simple question on Hindu philosophy, you refuse to answer. What's funny is you were also "no one" when you first started to evangelize others based on little knowledge, yet only now you are refusing to participate. If you are truly "no one" and have no need to understand even the basics, then do us a favor and stop evangelizing. Edited June 24, 2018 by Tibarn Moochad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alam_dar Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 14 hours ago, Moochad said: Neither do you understand how Hindus view divinity, you are projecting your islamic view of religion and philosophy onto a different civilization. You have a misunderstanding here. It is not an Islamic View, but it is "UNIVERSAL" view that Divine deities should be Perfect and free from human weaknesses, faults and mistakes. But if the divine deities are indulging in mistakes, sins and crimes and having relationships with milkmaids, and indulging in opium and drugs, then this is not god, but a fraud. If you would not born in a Hindu family and were able of doing freethinking independently, then you would have also blamed it to be a fraud. That is why the very base of Hindu Religion is vague. And they still don't know exactly who is the god, or if there was really another god, if there exists a god of gods? It is clear, whoever invented the initial stories of Hindu Religion, he was himself unable to answer all the questions which arose from his model of god's system. You are telling me that I am asking these questions while I think in Islamic way. And I tell you to ask the humanity within you, and you will also come to these same questions yourself. 14 hours ago, Moochad said: From the same page you linked to, this is said: https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras/d/doc62931.html Sutras 34-38 disqualify the Sudra for the knowledge of Brahman through the study of the Vedas. But it is possible for them to attain that knowledge through the Purânas and the epics (Râmâyana and Mahâbhârata). This is a lame excuse from the commentator of Manusmriti. The clever Brahmin cut away the direct connection of god and Shudra and placed himself between them, telling them that they were so impure by birth that they are not even allowed to hear the divine words. For this they put lead in their ears. And for that Ram kills Shambuka simply because he was performing tapasya (ascetic exercises) which he was not supposed to do as he was a Shudra by birth. How could you still believe that it is a true Divine Justice? Yes, they were compelled to tell them the Brahmin made fantasy stories, while they had to "Mentally Enslave" the Shudras, which was not possible other than telling them that gods have made them impure and gods had ordered their humiliation and thus they should FEAR the gods and accept their humiliation willingly. 14 hours ago, Moochad said: On the other hand, the Yajur Veda itself states, referring to the Vedas: You are basically claiming that one 'scripture' is followed while the other is not These CONTRADICTIONS in the sacred scriptures themselves proof enough that all these were the man made Dramas and nothing was divine. Muslims VS Hindus ... The Mental Blockage: Humanity within Muslims guide them clearly that killing in name of changing religion, or making women/children slaves etc. are all evils and against the Humanity. But then they have been brainwashed that these are the orders of supreme God, who created this universe, so how dare you to challenge the divine Justice? Exactly same is true for the Hindus. The Humanity within Hindus is clearly guiding them that this discrimination and humiliation is wrong and a crime against Humanity and against any divine justice. But since they also have been brainwashed that gods have great powers, and they have to fear these gods while only they could bring good luck and bad luck to them, therefore they shut their humanity off and don't dare to challenge this divine oppression. Till the time this Mental Blockage is present in name of fearing the Mighty gods, till that time they will keep on strangling the voice of humanity in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alam_dar Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: Are you sure the Buddha worked to abolish the "Caste system"? Here is something which suggests otherwise! https://www.jstor.org/stable/29757366?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents and Here also something that suggests that wasn't a concern of Buddhists https://www.docdroid.net/ymyp/india-in-japanese-literature-a-case-study-of-hirata-atsutane.pdf This is only one sided view. While majority of Buddhists state contrary to it where Buddha indeed challenged the caste system and prohibited it. According to them Buddha ridiculed the priests claims to be superior, he criticised the theological basis of the system and he welcomed into the Sangha people of all castes, including outcasts. His most famous saying on the subject is : " Birth does not make one a priest or an outcaste. Behaviour makes one either a priest or an outcaste". Even during the time when Buddhism was decaying in India and Tantrayana had adopted many aspects of Hinduism, it continued to welcome all castes and some of the greatest Tantric adepts were low castes or outcastes. https://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/dharmadata/fdd53.htm And I do agree with them, while contrary to the Hindus, we indeed see Buddhists hating the caste system and it is almost non-existent. And where it exists, these are only the areas which were heavily influenced by the Hindu religion and it's caste system. Therefore, no wonder that later teachings of Buddha were corrupted too by some groups. If Buddha had really supported and taught the caste system, then it should have been present among Buddhists at the same level as in Hindus. But it is not, but we see clear rebellion against it. It is a proof enough that Buddha has been wrongfully accused of supporting caste system by few groups. And even if somehow it is proved that Buddha supported caste system, then Buddha also becomes criminal like all those others who support this system. We don't worship Buddha. We only respect Buddha for his teachings for humanity. And if his teachings go against humanity, then they are thrown in the dustbin. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: Unfortunately, slavery still exists today! https://www.freetheslaves.net/about-slavery/slavery-today/ World is not 100'% perfect place. But it is thousands of times better place than the earlier centuries where humanity was severely suffering from the open oppression of slavery. The modern civilized world with all humans having equal rights is much much better for the humanity than any kind of slavery or oppression of caste system. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: Reveal hidden contents Researchers estimate that 40 million are enslaved worldwide, generating $150 billion each year in illicit profits for traffickers. Labor Slavery. About 50 percent toil in forced labor slavery in industries where manual labor is needed—such as farming, ranching, logging, mining, fishing, and brick making—and in service industries working as dish washers, janitors, gardeners, and maids. Sex Slavery. About 12.5 percent are trapped in forced prostitution sex slavery. Forced Marriage Slavery. About 37.5 percent are trapped in forced marriages. Child Slavery. About 25 percent of today’s slaves are children. Who told you not to dream? Of course, there are a lot of people with a lot of different dreams, many directly in conflict, ie a certain group of people you may be familiar with want to wipe out all non-believers from existence! It is unfair from you to compare our dream of Humanity to the dream of Muslims Extremists who want to impose their system through sword. How do you feel if we compare your Hindu Dream of Caste System, which you want to impose forcefully by replacing the present Secular Constitution of India to the dream of Extremist Muslims who also don't want Equal Human Rights and want to enslave the non-believers? Actually your dream of caste system and Muslim dream of slavery are very much related and similar, while our dreams of Humanity has nothing to do with both of you. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: Where did someone say there aren't texts with discrimination? Same problem which I stated above. Humanity within you guides you that this discrimination by the Hindu gods is bad and an evil against the humanity. But still there is a mental blockage due to the fear of Hindu gods, and thus this discrimination is also taken as divine and thus both hindu gods and discrimination still defended in one way or the other. While Humanity has been telling you clearly that discrimination means all this a drama of faulty human mind, and there is no divine deity behind it. Quote Discrimination written in a book doesn't equal that it was implemented at a scale large enough to claim certain things which were said in this thread. I already told you that this excuse could not clear the sacred texts from this charge of discrimination and humiliation. It was the political situation, where Shudras were in extreme majority and Brahmins in minority. And these sacred texts were full of so much discrimination to such great EXTENT that it made almost impossible to implement it practically. Therefore, please don't bring the excuse of practical implementation in order to make sacred texts free of this crime. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: I am not talking about the right to criticize or not criticize others, atheists, Hindus, etc. I am talking assuming some behavior to be true of all. You are assuming 1 text of countless(of various levels of importance) represents the entirety of Hinduism, but are you willing to concede the same if I judge the entirety of atheists for the actions of the most powerful atheists? Sir, your opinion is not correct here. Atheism is not a system like Hinduism. Nor atheism has any sacred texts like Hinduism. Please see the difference: * If any atheists has done any Crime (like Stalin), then in no way atheists are going to defend him. For us he is a criminal for all these crimes against the Humanity. * But it is not true for the religion. Humanity is telling you that such discrimination is making hindu gods and hindu sacred texts criminals. But instead of leaving them and blaming them to be criminal, hindus had to defend them and still stick to them and act upon them. I just hope that you could see this big difference in the approach and behaviour of the religious person and an atheist. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: You are framing your view of Hinduism based on what you know of Islam. You are comparing a mango and a lemon and saying they are the same shape/taste because they are a fruit. Hinduism reforms itself continuously and isn't limited to texts; don't impose your Islamic/Abrahamic interpretation of reality on us. Good. But reality is this that this is more of an "apologetic" behaviour than reform. Even Muslims also have this same behaviour where they blame others for not understanding Islam, then brining new interpretation of Quran and Hadiths and thus making Islam compatible with modern Challenges of Science and Morals. Even one group of Muslims have totally denied to accept the Hadiths (Prophetic Traditions) and they are know as "Quranists" today. Same is true with the Jews/Christian apologists too. They also claim of the reformation and thus denying many things in the Bible (even more than what Hindus deny today of their sacred texts). But question always stays the same, why all these religions showed this behaviour of reform only when they came under the external pressures? If these religions were really true and from a divine deity, then they didn't even need any reform, while this reform itself means a human weakness/fault which has to be corrected later. All these religions claim their gods to be All-Wise. But what type of Wise deities were they, when they revealed their sayings in such vague and insufficient and unwise way that millions of Humans had to suffer for thousands of years due to this foolishness? No religion answers this basic question, and they keep on boosting about the so called reforms, which were too late and too little to safe the humanity. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: Neither is the Indian constitution "secular" nor is it free of caste. Different people have different rights based on religion and based on caste. By your own logic, you earlier stated, both the Indian constitution and country should be thrown on the scrap heap because it discriminates against people based on religion/caste. Off course Indian constitution is Secular and free of evils of caste. Indian constitution brings Equal criminal rights to all people irrespective of their race and religion. And this is totally different than the Hindu Sacred laws which discriminated in the criminal laws, where Brahmins could have killed the Dalits and it was considered as killing of a frog. While if Dalit/Shudra even tell the Brahmins of their religious duties, then he should have been killed for that. And if Indian Constitution gives quota to the Dalits today, then it is again not the fault of Indian Constitution but it is the fault of Sacred Hindu Texts too which still making the high caste Hindus blind and still make them to hate the Dalits. And since these high caste Hindus are on the high posts, and still discriminate the Dalits, so in order to make sure that they are not discriminated, Indian Constitution was compelled to introduce the quota system. In ideal situation, Indian constitution is against any quota system. So please again blame the Hindu religious texts for the introduction of this quota system. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: The discrimination was that you are assuming things about "nationalism" and "religion" How it is discriminatory when such things are indeed written in the Hindu sacred Texts? If any Hindu does not follow the discrimination that is written in Manusmriti or blame Ram to be a criminal for killing the Shudra for doing tappasiya, then I have absolutely no problems with such Hindu. My problem is only with those people who believe in such caste system and such sacred texts. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: your post You just stated that religion and nationalism are in direct confrontation with humanity, and they are in direct opposition with "science." Unfortunately for you, there are likely numerous people who are actually trained in "science" who are also "nationalists" and "religious." Are you the thekedar of "science" and/or "humanity" to judge what is or isn't in contention with them? Nationalism becomes a problem when it become Chauvinism, which is against humanity. And religion becomes a problem too when it goes against the humanity and makes it's follower blind enough that they could not even see the open scientific errors in the sacred texts. There are even Scientists which are believing Muslims, but still you blame Islam and Qruan for having the scientific errors. But when we point out the same scientific errors in Hindu religion, then you come up with an excuse that there are scientists which are Hindus. Are you able to see the double standards here? If the presence of Muslim scientists does not save Islam from scientific errors, then the presence of Hindu scientists also does not save the Hindu sacred texts for scientific errors. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: So it is okay for you to make discriminatory statements, but others can not! When people of a similar ideological background as you actually implement documented mass murders of people, as they have already in the past, why you are not asking for that to be thrown into the dust bin! It is unfortunate that you are still using my Muslim past in order to discredit my opinion. And I have already asked for throwing away the Muslim religious texts into the dustbin while they are going against Humanity. And as a result Muslims are searching me in order to kill me. I just hope you are not so much blinded as Muslims and don't join the Muslim ranks in search of me in order to kill me. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: I asked you to explain to me where exactly is humanity? Do you think everyone believes "humanity" is the same thing, or are you the sole thekedar of what is and isn't "humanity." Do you have some objective, quantifiable measure by which someone can understand "humanity" or do you concede that what you consider "humanity" is just your opinion? If "love" and "humanity" aren't objective/quantifiable/measurable how do you know what you say is "humanity" is correct and not what al-Baghdadi views as "humanity" and "love"? How could I be sole thekaydar of humanity when I am always asking you to hear the voice of humanity within your ownself? Are you really unable to differentiate between the positive feelings of love and Humanity from the evil feelings of hate and jealousy If you tell me that you could not differentiate between them, then I leave you here as there is no more point in discussing further. And off course humanity is guiding ALL to the same conclusion of what is right and what is wrong and what is justice and what is oppression. Even humanity in al-Baghdadi is also telling him the same thing that slaughtering human beings is ZULM and tyranny. Only difference is this that al-baghdadi has strangled the voice of humanity in himself in name of All-Wise Allah commands slaughtering the people and if he does not do as Allah is telling him, then the All-Mighty Allah is going to throw him in the fires of hell forever. Different religions have succeeded in strangling the voice of humanity to different levels through religious brainwashing. Even the humanity in the gao rakhshaks is also telling them that lynching in name of cow is wrong. But still religious brainwashing make them to strangle the humanity within them and compel them to commit these crimes as mark of Honour. This is the same honour which al-Baghdadi feels while slaughtering humans. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: "Secular systems" are themselves derived from religious beliefs, not opposite of them. This is clear to anyone who actually knows their history of the Enlightenment where modern conceptions of human rights were conceived, and Ancient Rome where the religious-secular distinction first came to light. I respectfully disagree. It were the Humans who derived gods and religions and not opposite of it. And Chinese civilization is much more ancient than Rome. And this Chinese civilization was almost always atheist and followed the non religious teachings of Confucius or Taoism, and later Buddha. And all these non-religious teachings were full of humanity and equal human rights. And later Secular Systems of Buddha in India, and system of Democracy in Europe were "REBELLION" against the religious systems of India and Europe, and they were absolutely not derived from the religious systems, but they were contrary an in rebellion to the religious systems. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: There is no doubt, that is a fact. The Indian constitution gives different rights to different people based on caste and religion, so how can it be based on "equal" human rights? Already explained above. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: Where do human rights come from? From independent freethinking, which was based upon the humanity. Buddah is an excellent example of it. He was an atheist and didn't accept any Creator deity. He was a freethinker. He followed the voice of humanity. And all this resulted in his beautiful non-religious Teachings, which may be not 100% perfect, but still much much better than the discriminatory teachings of the religion, which were also human made, but got the stamp of god in order to make people to blindly follow them. 9 hours ago, Tibarn said: As expected, the moment I ask even the most basic, simple question on Hindu philosophy, you refuse to answer. Yes, I refuse to answer it while these are only the tactics of deviating the topic and discredit the opinion of the other person. If I have written anything wrong about Hindu religion during discussion, then you could prove me wrong by brining your proofs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adi B Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 On 6/23/2018 at 3:31 AM, Moochad said: yaar I'm not responding to all that, you are writing too much to respond to deflecting from the fact that you have not provided sources for your original claims you specifically replied to a post where I said there was no evidence of Hindus murdering and raping dalits for 2000 years, which means you were either 1) specifically contradicting that or 2) just giving an unsolicited lecture if the 1st you failed to provide evidence, to support that stand if the 2nd then you are just lecturing me unsolicited, just like an Islamist you haven't proven this series of claims: Prove it, I and @Tibarn have listed numerous Dalits and Shudras who achieved the highest position: Shivaji (Shudra) Surajmal (Shudra) Maharaja Suheldev Pasi (Dalit) Chandragupta Maurya (Shudra) Prolaya Vema Reddy (Shudra) Sant Ravidas(Dalit) Sage Valmiki(Dalit or Shudra, there is debate) Where is the evidence that Brahmins didn't consider Dalits human beings? You have only given references to Shudras, and saying someone is unequal doesn't mean you don't think they are human beings that is your extrapolation. Prove it. Prove it, give a source where they say Dalits are not humans, if you can't quit spamming the thread with your propaganda. Seeing someone unequal does not mean you don't see someone as human. Do you have proof that Dalits were never allowed in temples? Do you have a textual reference which prohibits them from temples across all of India, in all 4 major forms of Hinduism: Vedic/Shaivite/Vaishnavite/Mata-derived? Source that no Dalit was even allowed in any Mandir over the 5-8000 year history of Hinduism? Again, I want a source which said Dalits weren't allowed to read Holy books of Hindus. I already gave examples of Dalits: Sant Ravidas a Dalit who was considered the Guru of Shivaji and was honored by the Brahmins of Banaras and bowed down to by them. There is also Sage Valmiki who wrote the definitive version of the Ramayana Regarding one thing you stated, Brahmins have indeed supported Shudras to become kings, 2 examples The Mauryan dynasty and Chandragupta and the Marathas under Shivaji were both supported by Brahmins No there is an entire book called Myth of Beef in Vedas by an organization called Agniveer. I read the agniveer blogs as well ,very well versed and an eye opener really . I believe in arya samaji thought process ,it's ideal Moochad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MechEng Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 Damn @Tibarn! Thanks for sharing the link on Buddha's views on Indian caste system. All these years I hear from Buddhist/Jain monks on tv on how they don't believe in the evil caste system and the link you've shared shows how he supported it without supporting the domination of castes over one another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibarn Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: This is only one sided view. While majority of Buddhists state contrary to it where Buddha indeed challenged the caste system and prohibited it. According to them Buddha ridiculed the priests claims to be superior, he criticised the theological basis of the system and he welcomed into the Sangha people of all castes, including outcasts. His most famous saying on the subject is : " Birth does not make one a priest or an outcaste. Behaviour makes one either a priest or an outcaste". Even during the time when Buddhism was decaying in India and Tantrayana had adopted many aspects of Hinduism, it continued to welcome all castes and some of the greatest Tantric adepts were low castes or outcastes. https://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/dharmadata/fdd53.htm And I do agree with them, while contrary to the Hindus, we indeed see Buddhists hating the caste system and it is almost non-existent. And where it exists, these are only the areas which were heavily influenced by the Hindu religion and it's caste system. Therefore, no wonder that later teachings of Buddha were corrupted too by some groups. If Buddha had really supported and taught the caste system, then it should have been present among Buddhists at the same level as in Hindus. But it is not, but we see clear rebellion against it. It is a proof enough that Buddha has been wrongfully accused of supporting caste system by few groups. And even if somehow it is proved that Buddha supported caste system, then Buddha also becomes criminal like all those others who support this system. We don't worship Buddha. We only respect Buddha for his teachings for humanity. And if his teachings go against humanity, then they are thrown in the dustbin. Have you surveyed the majority of Buddhists and seen that they don't support caste? Have you surveyed the majority of upper castes and seen that they supported discrimination against shudras/dalits? You have obviously done neither, yet are pushing your prejudiced views of both groups on the issue on both. I have given historical evidence that Buddhists aren't opposed to the caste system, right from the Buddha himself, using a scholarly research paper, the rest all is mental gymnastics. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: World is not 100'% perfect place. But it is thousands of times better place than the earlier centuries where humanity was severely suffering from the open oppression of slavery. The modern civilized world with all humans having equal rights is much much better for the humanity than any kind of slavery or oppression of caste system. Do you have proof it is better because of what you consider humanity, and not obvious things like technological advancement? Neither do all humans have equal rights in the world, or do you have evidence for that? First you said this(saying that there is no more slavery) Quote And then again slavery was abolished from whole world in the 20th century. now you say the world isn't perfect. I'm sorry to say, but you are mentally stuck on your idea of an utopia, which will never exist. Just like al-Baghdadi's dream of the entire world ruled by sharia. That is his utopia. Your's may be better (or worse) but they are both dreams/utopias in both your eyes. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: It is unfair from you to compare our dream of Humanity to the dream of Muslims Extremists who want to impose their system through sword. How do you feel if we compare your Hindu Dream of Caste System, which you want to impose forcefully by replacing the present Secular Constitution of India to the dream of Extremist Muslims who also don't want Equal Human Rights and want to enslave the non-believers? Actually your dream of caste system and Muslim dream of slavery are very much related and similar, while our dreams of Humanity has nothing to do with both of you. It is not unfair, you possibly will try to impose your dream through violence, if you see how few people comparatively care for your dream. That is what many people do, think humans are flawed when they fail to achieve what they. Your dreams partly come from Abrahamic thought, who also view a world of no borders(no more nationalism), people ruled under a single type of law(in your case what you consider human rights, in their case Biblical or Sharia law), etc. I am still asking you to prove that the Indian constitution is secular when it gives different rights to people of different religions? I am wondering why you can't answer that? Nice strawman saying I support the caste system, don't lie or misrepresent what I said. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Same problem which I stated above. Humanity within you guides you that this discrimination by the Hindu gods is bad and an evil against the humanity. But still there is a mental blockage due to the fear of Hindu gods, and thus this discrimination is also taken as divine and thus both hindu gods and discrimination still defended in one way or the other. While Humanity has been telling you clearly that discrimination means all this a drama of faulty human mind, and there is no divine deity behind it. Now you are repeating yourself adding nothing of value. Prove that the human mind is faulty. Maybe you are faulty, humans are what they are. How do you know that humanity is against discrimination? Animals discriminate as well. Are humans not animals? Have you surveyed everyone's view to know what "humanity" views as right or wrong regarding discrimination? If most humans view discrimination as good, do you acknowledge that you are trying to enforce your views on others, or that you are faulty and not the "human mind"? 2 of 6 orthodox schools of Hinduism are atheist/agnostic, do people of those schools of thought also do things for fear of gods they don't even believe/know to exist? 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Sir, your opinion is not correct here. Atheism is not a system like Hinduism. Nor atheism has any sacred texts like Hinduism. Please see the difference: * If any atheists has done any Crime (like Stalin), then in no way atheists are going to defend him. For us he is a criminal for all these crimes against the Humanity. * But it is not true for the religion. Humanity is telling you that such discrimination is making hindu gods and hindu sacred texts criminals. But instead of leaving them and blaming them to be criminal, hindus had to defend them and still stick to them and act upon them. I just hope that you could see this big difference in the approach and behaviour of the religious person and an atheist. This is an excuse atheists use all the time, which doesn't work beyond a superficial level, sorry. The necessary logical consequence of atheism is one of 3 things: nihilism, moral relativism, or morality based on biological processes/systems. Everything else would be irrational. None of those 3 things are averse to large scale violence, discrimination, or even genocide. Neither have you surveyed all atheists where you can speak for them, saying that all atheists view xyz crimes as crimes against humanity. Many of the same atheists participated in crimes against humanity or deny their co-travellers did them. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Even Muslims also have this same behaviour where they blame others for not understanding Islam, then brining new interpretation of Quran and Hadiths and thus making Islam compatible with modern Challenges of Science and Morals. Even one group of Muslims have totally denied to accept the Hadiths (Prophetic Traditions) and they are know as "Quranists" today. Same is true with the Jews/Christian apologists too. They also claim of the reformation and thus denying many things in the Bible (even more than what Hindus deny today of their sacred texts). Islam is clear, Koran + Sunnah + Hadiths are the corpus and are the basis of it. Any serious Muslim scholar knows that. As are what is considered Jewish/Christian traditions, neither do I care about any of the three. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: But question always stays the same, why all these religions showed this behaviour of reform only when they came under the external pressures? Do you have proof of this with regards to Hinduism or are you just making things up again? Why should systems not change when they get access to new information? You want systems to be closed minded (like Islam)? That is how natural systems work, when new stimuli arrive, they adapt. Just because that makes it harder for you to criticize, doesn't make it a flaw of that system. It makes it a flaw of yours that you expect others to be as rigid as those from your experience with your Islamic heritage. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: If these religions were really true and from a divine deity, then they didn't even need any reform, while this reform itself means a human weakness/fault which has to be corrected later. False, that is Islamic/Abrahamic view of divinity, not a Hindu one. You are also ignorant here as well, Smritis aren't divinely originated. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: All these religions claim their gods to be All-Wise. But what type of Wise deities were they, when they revealed their sayings in such vague and insufficient and unwise way that millions of Humans had to suffer for thousands of years due to this foolishness? Are you a comparative religions scholar that you can make such a blanket statement? Do you have proof that humans suffered for thousands of years because of religion and not simply due to a lack of technology? Why do you think suffering will ever end when plants and other animals also suffer. Maybe suffering is a natural state of life, human or otherwise? 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Off course Indian constitution is Secular and free of evils of caste. Indian constitution brings Equal criminal rights to all people irrespective of their race and religion. And this is totally different than the Hindu Sacred laws which discriminated in the criminal laws, where Brahmins could have killed the Dalits and it was considered as killing of a frog. While if Dalit/Shudra even tell the Brahmins of their religious duties, then he should have been killed for that. And if Indian Constitution gives quota to the Dalits today, then it is again not the fault of Indian Constitution but it is the fault of Sacred Hindu Texts too which still making the high caste Hindus blind and still make them to hate the Dalits. And since these high caste Hindus are on the high posts, and still discriminate the Dalits, so in order to make sure that they are not discriminated, Indian Constitution was compelled to introduce the quota system. In ideal situation, Indian constitution is against any quota system. So please again blame the Hindu religious texts for the introduction of this quota system. Now you are making excuses for discrimination: first you said any system which condones discrimination is anti-humanity and should be thrown into the dustbin, now you are justifying discrimination against others because their ancestors discriminated in the past? Should I advocate your jailing for crimes your ancestors likely committed(as part of the Islamic invasion of India)? Which is it: Is discrimination wrong or is it okay in cases when you want to defend something you like? Neither do all shudras get reservation/quota: my jati doesn't, neither do Jatts or Marathas or Patels for example. You must also justify why there is religious discrimination, constitutionally validated, against certain groups based on their religion. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: How it is discriminatory when such things are indeed written in the Hindu sacred Texts? If any Hindu does not follow the discrimination that is written in Manusmriti or blame Ram to be a criminal for killing the Shudra for doing tappasiya, then I have absolutely no problems with such Hindu. My problem is only with those people who believe in such caste system and such sacred texts. You said something along the lines of religion/nationalism are standing in the way of humanity. Unless you can objectively define what is or isn't good/bad for humanity, by some quantifiable measure, that is discrimination. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Nationalism becomes a problem when it become Chauvinism, which is against humanity. And religion becomes a problem too when it goes against the humanity and makes it's follower blind enough that they could not even see the open scientific errors in the sacred texts. There are even Scientists which are believing Muslims, but still you blame Islam and Qruan for having the scientific errors. But when we point out the same scientific errors in Hindu religion, then you come up with an excuse that there are scientists which are Hindus. Are you able to see the double standards here? If the presence of Muslim scientists does not save Islam from scientific errors, then the presence of Hindu scientists also does not save the Hindu sacred texts for scientific errors. Chauvinism may very well be part of "humanity", people have always been tribal; chimps are also tribal. What if it is in our DNA? I don't spend time criticizing Muslims on "science" in the Koran or the lack thereof. Anyone can criticize whatever is not scientific in Koran, Hinduism, whatever else. However, criticizing something on science and then use vague, meaningless terms like "humanity" is ironic on your part. Are you holding your concept of humanity to the standards of "science" as well? 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: It is unfortunate that you are still using my Muslim past in order to discredit my opinion. And I have already asked for throwing away the Muslim religious texts into the dustbin while they are going against Humanity. And as a result Muslims are searching me in order to kill me. I just hope you are not so much blinded as Muslims and don't join the Muslim ranks in search of me in order to kill me. I was not talking of your Muslim past, but your Atheist present. Atheists oftentimes cause mass destruction, going by recent history only. Should I judge atheists by their checkered history when they actually get power? You are far more likely to try to kill me, than I you. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: How could I be sole thekaydar of humanity when I am always asking you to hear the voice of humanity within your ownself? Are you really unable to differentiate between the positive feelings of love and Humanity from the evil feelings of hate and jealousy If you tell me that you could not differentiate between them, then I leave you here as there is no more point in discussing further. And off course humanity is guiding ALL to the same conclusion of what is right and what is wrong and what is justice and what is oppression. Even humanity in al-Baghdadi is also telling him the same thing that slaughtering human beings is ZULM and tyranny. Only difference is this that al-baghdadi has strangled the voice of humanity in himself in name of All-Wise Allah commands slaughtering the people and if he does not do as Allah is telling him, then the All-Mighty Allah is going to throw him in the fires of hell forever. Different religions have succeeded in strangling the voice of humanity to different levels through religious brainwashing. You are assuming what you think is good and bad is the same as for others. You are assuming love is good and hate is bad: if I hate a rapist, is it bad? If I love a murderer, is it good? Hate and love are just one of a myriad of human feelings and emotions, positive and negative depends on the situation. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Even the humanity in the gao rakhshaks is also telling them that lynching in name of cow is wrong. But still religious brainwashing make them to strangle the humanity within them and compel them to commit these crimes as mark of Honour. This is the same honour which al-Baghdadi feels while slaughtering humans. What if some people view gau as part of their family? Are you allowed to murder and eat the members of another's family because you do not view them as family? If someone tries to abduct and eat a member of your family, and the only way to save that member is violence, is that violence justified or not? What if gau are property of people, but certain other people feel it is their right to steal others property? Are you allowed to defend your property, especially if police prove incapable? What if certain people believe that harming gau is part of their religious duty, while others view protecting them as it? Is the love of another creature wrong and negative, while the desire to hate it and murder/consume it positive? 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: I respectfully disagree. It were the Humans who derived gods and religions and not opposite of it. And Chinese civilization is much more ancient than Rome. And this Chinese civilization was almost always atheist and followed the non religious teachings of Confucius or Taoism, and later Buddha. And all these non-religious teachings were full of humanity and equal human rights. And later Secular Systems of Buddha in India, and system of Democracy in Europe were "REBELLION" against the religious systems of India and Europe, and they were absolutely not derived from the religious systems, but they were contrary an in rebellion to the religious systems. Neither does Atheism remove one from "religion": 2 of 6 orthodox schools of Hinduism are unsure of/don't believe in gods; A prominent example from recent history is Veer Savarkar who some consider the founder of Hindutva, was himself an Atheist. You can disagree respectfully or disrespectfully, the reality doesn't change. The concept of Secularism itself is derived from Roman-Christian conflicts in ancient Rome. The concept of what are or aren't human rights are similarly derived Christianity. If you want book recommendations which trace this lineage, I will give them to you. 4 hours ago, Alam_dar said: From independent freethinking, which was based upon the humanity. What if free thinking/free will don't exist, then what is humanity based on? Edited June 24, 2018 by Tibarn Moochad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibarn Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 2 hours ago, MechEng said: Damn @Tibarn! Thanks for sharing the link on Buddha's views on Indian caste system. All these years I hear from Buddhist/Jain monks on tv on how they don't believe in the evil caste system and the link you've shared shows how he supported it without supporting the domination of castes over one another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moochad Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 3 hours ago, adi B said: I read the agniveer blogs as well ,very well versed and an eye opener really . I believe in arya samaji thought process ,it's ideal Yes, i agree, I still need to read their published books though. Have you read any of those? I am looking for some reviews before I buy. Switchblade 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moochad Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Alam_dar said: You have a misunderstanding here. It is not an Islamic View, but it is "UNIVERSAL" view that Divine deities should be Perfect and free from human weaknesses, faults and mistakes. But if the divine deities are indulging in mistakes, sins and crimes and having relationships with milkmaids, and indulging in opium and drugs, then this is not god, but a fraud. If you would not born in a Hindu family and were able of doing freethinking independently, then you would have also blamed it to be a fraud. That is why the very base of Hindu Religion is vague. And they still don't know exactly who is the god, or if there was really another god, if there exists a god of gods? It is clear, whoever invented the initial stories of Hindu Religion, he was himself unable to answer all the questions which arose from his model of god's system. You are telling me that I am asking these questions while I think in Islamic way. And I tell you to ask the humanity within you, and you will also come to these same questions yourself. No, it is not a universal view. You yourself admitted you know little of Hinduism, yet now you are making broad sweeping statements in this regard! 6 hours ago, Alam_dar said: This is a lame excuse from the commentator of Manusmriti. The clever Brahmin cut away the direct connection of god and Shudra and placed himself between them, telling them that they were so impure by birth that they are not even allowed to hear the divine words. For this they put lead in their ears. And for that Ram kills Shambuka simply because he was performing tapasya (ascetic exercises) which he was not supposed to do as he was a Shudra by birth. How could you still believe that it is a true Divine Justice? Yes, they were compelled to tell them the Brahmin made fantasy stories, while they had to "Mentally Enslave" the Shudras, which was not possible other than telling them that gods have made them impure and gods had ordered their humiliation and thus they should FEAR the gods and accept their humiliation willingly. There is no excuse, you are upset that you were caught there. Much of Hinduism is very much taught through the interpretation of Gurus. It isn't like Islam or Christianity where people are expected to read such a text as Koran or Bible themselves and follow it. The importance of Gurus/teachers is paramount. That this commentator doesn't take a view that fits with your preconceived notions doesn't invalidate him, it invalidates your flawed criticism, which you only earlier admitted comes with a self-admitted ignorance of Hindu texts. That commentator opinion has more validity than yours. I have already shown in the Vedas themselves, anyone, even non-Hindus can hear them. The story of Shambuka is inconsistent between the numerous interpretations of Ramayan. Some he doesn't even exist. Ram also killed numerous Brahmins and Kshatriyas in the span of the text(s). Are we to believe that they were all killed for their caste? The oldest version of the Ramayan was written by a Valmiki(equivalent to a Dalit). Edit: It seems Agniveer has also disproven the Shambuka myth Your seem to have a subtle hatred of Brahmins, that one phrase seems to border on Nazi-like hatred of "clever" Jews. 6 hours ago, Alam_dar said: These CONTRADICTIONS in the sacred scriptures themselves proof enough that all these were the man made Dramas and nothing was divine. You just compared Vedas and Manu Smriti as if they are of similar importance. That is wrong. Edited June 24, 2018 by Moochad Switchblade and Tibarn 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibarn Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 (edited) Chal, last post in this thread so since my question wasn't answered, I will answer it myself, Shruti texts are "those which are heard" those which are closer to the idea of divine texts. These include ie Vedas, the Upanishads, etc Smriti are works with specific authors, referred to as something like, what is remembered. They are essentially most other texts ie law texts based on interpretations, Gita, Mahabharat, texts on art, some even involve otherwise "secular" matters such as even agriculture. Even texts that encompass ecnomics, spying, law, etc like Arthashastra, written by Chanakya, are considered Smriti. The thing about Smritis is that they are open to interpretation, and are constantly revised by learned people. There is nothing in Hinduism that binds us to not reinterpreting them, should me have the requisite knowledge. Even notorious indologists like Sheldon Pollock and Wendy Doniger have noted the fluid nature of them as well: open to change and open to interpretation. There are at least 18+ smriti law texts alone, (I think these are referred to as Dharmashastras, someone correct me if I am wrong, but are essentially law books) some are: Vishnu, Daksha, Samvarta, Vyasa, Harita, Satatapa, Vashishtha, Yama, Apastamba, Gautama, Devala, Sankha-Likhita, Usana, Atri, Manu, Saunaka, Yajnavalkya, Parasara, Nitisara Some of these were written earlier, some later, some likely developed on a previous one, others contradict each other. Some are written in different parts of the country, ie Nitisara was from Telugu lands and written in Telugu if I remember correctly. The Manu Smriti, is estimated to be by some as ~2,000 years old, yet we are supposed to believe that only it, of many different comparable texts has left any sort of imprint on Hindu society over the thousands of years we have existed? We are supposed to believe that only it has been applied throughout our continent sized nation. A number of these 18 Dharmashastras were composed after Manu Smriti, along with other law texts such as the aforementioned Arthashastra, yet we are to believe that Hindu society stopped with a 2,000 year old text and ignored the later composed Dharmashastras in favor of Manu only For example the Yajnavalkya and Nitisara both came after Manu Smriti and Arthashastra. The Yajnavalkya along with the Arthashastra are considered part of the law in the Gupta Empire to Maratha Empire period. By the end of the Maratha period, we can see the slow take over of India by the British. The British Era is when the Manu Smriti suddenly comes back into popular consciousness. The British in Bengal were looking to codify law for their subjects to minimize resistance from the native population. They used the Koran as the basis of Muslim personal law, but there wasn't a comparable text for Hindus. They eventually found that the Manu Smriti was one such book of laws, and used it as part of establishing Hindu personal law. Later on Ambedkar viewed it as a source of castism in Hindu society and burned it. It was also used by others such as Periyarist as proof of some Aryan scheme of suppressing native Shudras. No one with serious knowledge of Hinduism even considers it as anything resembling as a definitive, define, final source on anything. It is no more divine or definitive as say if we started implementing any legal aspects from the Arthashastra. There is also nothing stopping us from creating a new, modern Dharmashastra which removes aspects of caste discrimination that indeed still ails Hindu society(or some other way). Edited June 24, 2018 by Tibarn Moochad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moochad Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 (edited) Legend lock the thread up Edited June 24, 2018 by Moochad Tibarn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alam_dar Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Have you surveyed the majority of Buddhists and seen that they don't support caste? Have you surveyed the majority of upper castes and seen that they supported discrimination against shudras/dalits? You have obviously done neither, yet are pushing your prejudiced views of both groups on the issue on both. I have given historical evidence that Buddhists aren't opposed to the caste system, right from the Buddha himself, using a scholarly research paper, the rest all is mental gymnastics. It is so much clear that no one even needs a survey to find out that cast system exists negligibly among Buddhists as compared to Hinduism. No Buddhist Schools are teaching caste system and discrimination. But we have Manusmriti and Ramayan which are taught in Hindu religious schools, which are full of caste and hatred against them. Government of India made commissions to make surveys of impact of caste system in India. And all these commissions reported huge level of impact and discrimination against the low castes, and recommended quota system to save the rights of the low castes. Now I am afraid that you will try to discredit these commissions and their surveys. And not only these surveys by commissions, but all those surveys will be discredited which gives the results contrary to your opinion. I just hope that I am wrong about this attitude. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Do you have proof it is better because of what you consider humanity, and not obvious things like technological advancement? 100% Humanity. And it has nothing to do with technology. Buddhists learnt the lesson of humanity from Buddha. Thus Ashoka was the first who abolished the BAZARS of slavery from India . And later coming Buddhist Governments totally abolished the system of slavery by replacing it with the system of Serfdom. It was the first time in the history of mankind that slavery was totally abolished. While the Europe/West erased it 2nd time in the history of mankind. And they succeeded in doing it while they already broken the chains of the Church and became Secularists and they introduced the non-religious state laws. Also remember that this was the time of "Industrial Revolution", and SLAVES were heavily needed for work during that Industrial Revolution (i.e. technology). But despite this demand of slaves as labourers (as they were many times cheaper than free Labourer), still the Secular West abolished it in the name of Humanity. Yes the Secular Europe is not free of problems. Yes, the extremist Muslims backstabbed the Secular Human Loving Europe, but despite all these problems abolishment of slavery was a great achievement of the Secular Europe. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Neither do all humans have equal rights in the world, or do you have evidence for that? The situation of human rights is much better today as compared to the past centuries. Not only the slaves and the low caste people, but also the Women have such human rights today, which are unprecedented in the history of mankind. Even the animals are also getting their rights today. Yes, not all is 100% perfect, but we have made a remarkable progress in this regards. And I think my dreams came from Buddha and freethinking. Borders or nationalism or religion or whatever, but the basic rule for me is, Humanity is above all of them. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: I am still asking you to prove that the Indian constitution is secular when it gives different rights to people of different religions? I am wondering why you can't answer that? Nice strawman saying I support the caste system, don't lie or misrepresent what I said. Now you are repeating yourself adding nothing of value. Prove that the human mind is faulty. Maybe you are faulty, humans are what they are. How do you know that humanity is against discrimination? Animals discriminate as well. Are humans not animals? Yes, animals discriminate too. But this is Humanity which differentiate us from the other animals. Without humanity we also become animals, or perhaps even worse than animals in some cases. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Have you surveyed everyone's view to know what "humanity" views as right or wrong regarding discrimination? If most humans view discrimination as good, do you acknowledge that you are trying to enforce your views on others, or that you are faulty and not the "human mind"? Humanity does not work on the bases of "Numbers of People/Majority". In case of Muslims you will yourself blame them to be religiously brainwashed and loosing humanity, although they are in majority in Muslim lands. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: 2 of 6 orthodox schools of Hinduism are atheist/agnostic, do people of those schools of thought also do things for fear of gods they don't even believe/know to exist? Did these 2 atheist/agnostic orthodox schools of Hinduism also taught the caste system along with all of it's evils? 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: This is an excuse atheists use all the time, which doesn't work beyond a superficial level, sorry. For me it is neither an excuse nor superficial, but the very essence of my Belief. If any atheist (like Stalin as you mentioned) has killed the people, then such atheist has ZERO respect from me for his crimes. What to talk about Stalin, even if it is proved that Buddha really preached for oppressive caste system, then No respect for Buddha and he will be considered a criminal for this crime. It is totally different behaviour than of the religious people, where they have to bear the burden of the wrong-doings of the religion and have to defend the religion even against the voice of humanity in them. While I am free of any such burdens. Humanity has set me free. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: The necessary logical consequence of atheism is one of 3 things: nihilism, moral relativism, or morality based on biological processes/systems. It is your opinion. While my opinion is I follow the Freethinking and Humanity, as Buddah did. All my morals come from this source. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Everything else would be irrational. None of those 3 things are averse to large scale violence, discrimination, or even genocide. I don't think Buddha's teachings could lead to discrimination or violence or genocides. Yes, the kings of China were also Buddhists. But they didn't follow the teachings of Buddah completely, but followed their own interests. Now, in the modern world, we have come over the evils of Kingdom and family rule, which caused a lot of damages in the past. In the next step, it is our duty to make UN much more stronger than today, so that the disputes are resolved through UN and not through wars. It may be a dream at moment, but I am hopeful that we carry on our journey towards this target. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Islam is clear, Koran + Sunnah + Hadiths are the corpus and are the basis of it. Any serious Muslim scholar knows that. As are what is considered Jewish/Christian traditions, neither do I care about any of the three. No, Islam is absolutely not clear. Muslim apologists make many times more excuses as compared to Hinduism by using the excuse of Interpretation of Quran, Sunnah/Hadith being not Sahih (authentic), history is distorted if it does not suits the Muslims, and at end there is group known as Quranists, which declared all Sunnah/Hadith to be weak. You will come to know it once you start discussing with the Muslims. Basic question is, why the religious system was not correct right from the beginning? When the gods could reveal the comprehensive sacred texts and give a complete system, why then they could not clearly state the system in it? Why should the religious texts so incomplete, or so vague that simple person could not follow it and every one is interpreting it according to his own wishes and even introducing the evils like caste systems? And why does it need the human reformation? Why cant the gods again divinely reveal the reforms as they first time revealed the religious texts? Reforms have been made under the foreign pressures. The tradition of Satti was even followed till 17th century. Brahmins got more than 2000 years for the reforms and denying Manusmriti by declaring it evil. But nothing happened till this century when they are under tremendous pressure not only from the foreign world, but also low caste Hindus are at the verge of rebel against the Hindu religion. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: You are also ignorant here as well, Smritis aren't divinely originated. Yes, but if I am not mistaken then Smriti were also the divine words and later remembered and authored by the Rishies and they are the next thing to Vedas. For example: Difference between Shruti & Smriti (Link): Shruti is “that which has been heard” and is canonical, consisting of revelation and unquestionable truth, and is considered eternal. It refers mainly to the Vedas themselves. Smriti is “that which has been remembered” supplementary and may change over time. It is authoritative only to the extent that it conforms to the bedrock of Shruti. It’s worth note that, there is not a distinct divide between Shruti and Smriti. Both Shruti and Smriti can be represented as a continuum, with some texts more canonical than others. While Manusmriti is considered the word of Brahma. From wikipedia: The text presents itself as a discourse given by Manu, the progenitor of mankind, to a group of seers, or rishis, who beseech him to tell them the "law of all the social classes" (1.2). Manu became the standard point of reference for all future Dharmaśāstras that followed it. According to Hindu tradition, the Manu smriti records the words of Brahma.[2] Therefore, if not directly divine originated, but still they are indirectly DERIVED from Divine Words and thus religious Hindus followed them. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Do you have proof that humans suffered for thousands of years because of religion and not simply due to a lack of technology? Technology has little to do with the human rights. Buddha achieved this goal to large extent in the era without technology. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Why do you think suffering will ever end when plants and other animals also suffer. Maybe suffering is a natural state of life, human or otherwise? There is difference in the suffering of humans and animals and plants. Humans have to suffer a lot in presence of religion, while humanity based freethinking brings lot less sufferings for the human beings. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Now you are making excuses for discrimination: first you said any system which condones discrimination is anti-humanity and should be thrown into the dustbin, now you are justifying discrimination against others because their ancestors discriminated in the past? No, it is not only the PAST issue only, but also the "Present" Issue. It is said while high caste Hindus are at the high posts and leading all the offices, and the HATRED against the lower castes still exist, thus making impossible for the lower castes to get the jobs without discrimination, thus quota system is the best way to make sure the rights of the lower castes. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Neither do all shudras get reservation/quota: my jati doesn't, neither do Jatts or Marathas or Patels for example. While these jatis are already doing well and not discriminated on that scale as the Dalits are discriminated. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: Chauvinism may very well be part of "humanity", people have always been tribal; chimps are also tribal. What if it is in our DNA? By this logic (i.e. humans were always tribal in the past) then NATIONALISM and Chauvinism should also be banned. And all the countries should be disintegrated into tribes. And nations on bases of religion should also be banned as there was no religion during the stone ages (at least no Hinduism or Abrahamic religions). For me, humans went through a lot of changes due to the ability of thinking. Our DNA is based on this thinking and making new systems for us. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: You are assuming love is good and hate is bad: if I hate a rapist, is it bad? If I love a murderer, is it good? I have enough rationale mind to know which things I have to love and which things I have to hate. Humanity is guiding us correctly and telling us what is right and what is wrong. The deviation comes only due to the Religious Mental Blockages. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: What if some people view gau as part of their family? Are you allowed to murder and eat the members of another's family because you do not view them as family? Considering cow as family member (instead of source of food) also comes due to the religious mental blockage/religious brainwashing. 3 hours ago, Tibarn said: What if gau are property of people, but certain other people feel it is their right to steal others property? Are you allowed to defend your property, especially if police prove incapable? Humanity tells very clearly that stealing is wrong. But there are people who strangle this voice of humanity for their personal gains and benefits. GoldenSun 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alam_dar Posted June 24, 2018 Share Posted June 24, 2018 Am I an Atheist or am I a Humanist? Many people have misunderstandings here. Atheism does not automatically means Humanist. Humanity stands above all, even above atheism. I left Islam and became Atheist after study of many years, and lot of discussions and guidance from other people. But humanity was present in me since beginning when I started understanding the life. I needed no study to understand the humanity. I needed no discussions and no guidance from others to feel this humanity. I was Humanist many many years before becoming atheist. === Since childhood, I felt the pain of poor children of that poor women who worked in our home. She was unable to give good and tasty food to her children. Therefore, when our family ate tasty food, those poor children saw at us. Thus, it was the rule that those children were expelled from the room/house when we started eating. I asked my grandmother why those children were driven out. And she told me that poor children are the cause of "Bad Eye" (Nazar-e-Bad in Islamic Terminology). And really I was unable to take the food in presence of those children, but it was not due to any "Islamic Bad Eye", but it was due to the hungry eyes of those poor children which did not let me swallow the food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted May 19, 2020 Author Share Posted May 19, 2020 NBC's Blindspot joins the list, boycott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Cliff Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 4 hours ago, Gollum said: NBC's Blindspot joins the list, boycott. This is all about setting the stage for Hindu genocide. Mahaul banaya jaa raha hai. MSM, Brothelwood, the loony left across the world, online Islamist propaganda machine are all on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted May 19, 2020 Share Posted May 19, 2020 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said: This is all about setting the stage for Hindu genocide. Mahaul banaya jaa raha hai. MSM, Brothelwood, the loony left across the world, online Islamist propaganda machine are all on it. Uganda like scenario developing in Guyana, where elections might decide the fate of Indian origin citizzens living there for 100+ years. Such TV narrative will be used to call them terrorists or traitors or whatever. CAA should include all Hindus persecuted world over. There was oil discovered off the coast of Guyana, coincided with the marred election results, not a coincidence wit Exxon gaining a lot from whoever wins the election. Edited May 19, 2020 by coffee_rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 On 5/19/2020 at 4:09 PM, Gollum said: NBC's Blindspot joins the list, boycott. @ Gollum I don't know anything about these shows and my comment below is devoid of that context. Having said that, what she is saying had happened during the Bombay Riots. Muslim businesses and homes were marked out by the Shiv Sena and burnt down. Shiv Sena got these records from the BMC and other arms of the administrative machinery. All of this is mentioned as a part of the findings of the Shree Krishna Commission. Needless to say, no action has been taken against the 30+ police who aided the rioters or the Shiv Sena leader Madhukar Sarpotdar who had instigated and according to some testimonies armed rioters. He was later elected to the Lok Sabha and didn't spend a day in jail. https://www.sabrang.com/srikrish/sri main.htm http://www.unipune.ac.in/snc/cssh/HumanRights/04 COMMUNAL RIOTS/A - ANTI-MUSLIM RIOTS/06 - MAHARASHTRA/n.pdf Even for years after the riots, many small scale businesses owned by Muslims were harassed by the Shiv Sena government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 5 hours ago, Mariyam said: @ Gollum I don't know anything about these shows and my comment below is devoid of that context. Having said that, what she is saying had happened during the Bombay Riots. Muslim businesses and homes were marked out by the Shiv Sena and burnt down. Shiv Sena got these records from the BMC and other arms of the administrative machinery. All of this is mentioned as a part of the findings of the Shree Krishna Commission. Needless to say, no action has been taken against the 30+ police who aided the rioters or the Shiv Sena leader Madhukar Sarpotdar who had instigated and according to some testimonies armed rioters. He was later elected to the Lok Sabha and didn't spend a day in jail. https://www.sabrang.com/srikrish/sri main.htm http://www.unipune.ac.in/snc/cssh/HumanRights/04 COMMUNAL RIOTS/A - ANTI-MUSLIM RIOTS/06 - MAHARASHTRA/n.pdf Even for years after the riots, many small scale businesses owned by Muslims were harassed by the Shiv Sena government. The point is not that what is depicted didn’t happen, but it was not one-sided. It all started with Dec6 Babri Masjid demolition, unprecedented so far in India, Muslims in Bombay took it upon themselves to safeguard their position, were instigated in Mosques and went on a rampage and killed policemen, using guns, choppers, knives, etc, lynched many of them. They even vandalized temples, it was When policemen were killed, local ShivSena workers were given a free hand to correct course. Shree Krishna Commission Report has recorded all these, even after the free hand, both Hindus and Muslims are killed in proportionate numbers, but then the narrative for media is that it was an anti-Muslim pogrom. The same modus operandi for all riots in India, even the recent Delhi riots. That is what is wrong in those depicted images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted May 21, 2020 Share Posted May 21, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, coffee_rules said: The point is not that what is depicted didn’t happen, but it was not one-sided. It all started with Dec6 Babri Masjid demolition, unprecedented so far in India, Muslims in Bombay took it upon themselves to safeguard their position, were instigated in Mosques and went on a rampage and killed policemen, using guns, choppers, knives, etc, lynched many of them. They even vandalized temples, it was When policemen were killed, local ShivSena workers were given a free hand to correct course. Shree Krishna Commission Report has recorded all these, even after the free hand, both Hindus and Muslims are killed in proportionate numbers, but then the narrative for media is that it was an anti-Muslim pogrom. The same modus operandi for all riots in India, even the recent Delhi riots. That is what is wrong in those depicted images. What you so callously call as "course correction" is nothing short of sections of the State aiding the attacks on Muslim establishments. Most of this "correction" involved butchering the weak and burning business establishments. No one has claimed that this was a one sided riot. That is not being contested at all. In riot like situations, I don't like to do the entire "he started/she started" arguement. Everybody involved, regardless of who started it, is guilty and is deserving of punishment. But your recollection of events is simply wrong/incomplete. The Shree Krishna Commission is a two volume report. Volume I has to do with the preliminary findings of the commission re local politicians and the police before and during the the riots and Volume II with the evidence . The report is mainly focused on the partisan approach of the Mumbai police wrt the entire episode. From July 1992, 6 months before the Babri Masjid was demolished, the SS and VHP combine held rallies across parts of Mumbai urging their followers to break the Masjid. Some of these rallies were in Muslim/mixed areas. Many of these rallies were disallowed by the then state government, but they took no action to stop the rallies. There were reports of damage/destruction of Muslim property and the police did nothing to stop the proceedings, even when the mobs went on rampage. All this while, the police were spectators. Sometime egging on the crowds and in some rare instances they fired tear gas at the mobs. Even on the 6th of December, the *first* rioting happened in Dharavi when a SS started a celebration in a mixed neighbourhood. Quote But at 2.30 p.m. on December 6, 1992, the first communal incident that took place in Mumbai after the demolition of the mosque at Ayodhya was in Dharavi, where it was not angry Muslims but rampaging Shiv Sainiks led by Sena leaders Baburao Mane and Ramkrishna Keni who caused the first provocation. The local police allowed Shiv Sainiks to conduct a cycle rally of 200–300 persons. The rally passed through several communally–sensitive, Muslim–dominated areas in Dharavi and terminated at Kala Killa, where a meeting was held and addressed by the local activists of the Shiv Sena. Provocative speeches were made at this meeting. (Pgs. 7, 94 & 197) The subsequent rioting was in two phases and you can read about it in the report in my earlier post. The Commission points out clearly the double standard of the police when dealing with Muslim rioters vis a vis Hindu rioters. The Commission also points out the role of the Shiv Sena and its various leaders in the phase 2 of the riots. None of these guys have been tried. Some have been elected to the LS: Gajanan Kirtikar and Madhukar Sarpotdar. The 'Supremo' got a 21 gun salute during his state funeral for his efforts instead! The entire episode isn't as black and white as you are making it out to be. Edited May 21, 2020 by Mariyam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts