Pew's survey on religious tolerance and segregation in India

[Real McCoy]

5 hours ago, Mariyam said:

When the constitution was drafted and tabled in 1948, PM Nehru insisted that the word secular be dropped from the preamble, much to the surprise of Dr Ambedkar and the others.. It was Indira Gandhi who had it added to the preamble during the emergency .

Whoever added it had did it was either misguided or acting in the interests of a foreign force. In ancient Hindu law, gowhatya means death penalty. In all actuality the last Hindu king is actually a Sikh as @coffee_rules said. That tells you about how pathetic modern hindus are. According to hindu custom, a true king should provide safety for all living beings especially cows within his kingdom. So living in a hindu majority land, other religions should respect this. That is the easiest way to avoid quarrel and trouble. Anyway, prophet muhammad said cow is halal but he didn't say it MUST be eaten. And there were no cows in Arabia. even for religious cermonies only a goat sacrifice is required.

[zen]

As an animal lover, I have no issues with cows having a protected status (even in the name of religion). However, cows have nothing to do with religion per se. In ancient times, people used to rely on animal and natural products for medicines. Cows were considered to have antibacterial properties. It also provided milk and so on. Considering this, it had an elevated status among Hindus. 

 

Similarly, River Ganga. It does not wash away any sins. Nor does conducting last rite at Ganges, gives your soul any special privileges. Only way to go to heaven is through good karma. 

 

In ancient times, since science as it is taught now was not available in school and info was spread through stories, anecdotes, etc. (word of mouth), and because religion has the power to make ppl follow certain points, many things were said in the name of religion. 

 

 

We do not want to turn ourselves into folks in the video below. This is not Hinduism. Such things make a great religion, whose key points are relevant to live a good life, appear like a relic. Over the years, Hinduism has been turned into something it is not supposed to be. 

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by zen

[zen]

"Go Corona Go" was one of the dumbest initiative every taken ... If you make an attempt to understand religious epics, you would realise that even Gods do not turn their diseases/injuries (or destiny/karma) around. 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by zen

[coffee_rules]

5 hours ago, zen said:

As an animal lover, I have no issues with cows having a protected status (even in the name of religion). However, cows have nothing to do with religion per se. In ancient times, people used to rely on animal and natural products for medicines. Cows were considered to have antibacterial properties. It also provided milk and so on. Considering this, it had an elevated status among Hindus. 

 

 

The elevated status was given from our texts, Vedas and smritis, it is not just Hindus, but Jains, Sikhs also believe that cows are sacred. In Persian accounts, Islamists were puzzled why Hindus when converted , would go back to being Hindus. To prevent that reconversion , they would forcibly make them eat beef. Which is the ultimate sin and would not be irreversible. 
 

5 hours ago, zen said:

Similarly, River Ganga. It does not wash away any sins. Nor does conducting last rite at Ganges, gives your soul any special privileges. Only way to go to heaven is through good karma. 

 

 

Belief is a funny thing You believe that good karma would get your arms to heaven. A rational person thinks your beliefs laughable Others believe in something else that you consider irrational. It is futile to compare beliefs. 
 

5 hours ago, zen said:

In ancient times, since science as it is taught now was not available in school and info was spread through stories, anecdotes, etc. (word of mouth), and because religion has the power to make ppl follow certain points, many things were said in the name of religion. 

 

 

We do not want to turn ourselves into folks in the video below. This is not Hinduism. Such things make a great religion, whose key points are relevant to live a good life, appear like a relic. Over the years, Hinduism has been turned into something it is not supposed to be. 

 

 

 

 

There was never a rime where people laid out the postulates of what Hinduism was supposed to be. You believe in something, let others believe in their sh1t. That group that believes in cow dung or urine curing Corona is minuscule to affect your faith

[zen]

20 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

The elevated status was given from our texts, Vedas and smritis, it is not just Hindus, but Jains, Sikhs also believe that cows are sacred.

 

I have highlighted reasons for that ... in ancient times, projecting something as holy not only protects it relatively  but also highlights its good qualities 

 

 

Quote

In Persian accounts, Islamists were puzzled why Hindus when converted , would go back to being Hindus. To prevent that reconversion , they would forcibly make them eat beef. Which is the ultimate sin and would not be irreversible. 

 

If people do not understand their religion, they will be taken advantage of (even through cows) 

 

 

20 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Belief is a funny thing You believe that good karma would get your arms to heaven. A rational person thinks your beliefs laughable Others believe in something else that you consider irrational. It is futile to compare beliefs. 

 

Good karma is the foundation of any religion ... Rituals are not ... Ganga does not wash away sins 

 

 

20 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

There was never a rime where people laid out the postulates of what Hinduism was supposed to be. You believe in something, let others believe in their sh1t. That group that believes in cow dung or urine curing Corona is minuscule to affect your faith

 

Ppl cannot misuse a great religion  ... Religion is not democratic 

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by zen

[EnterTheVoid]

5 hours ago, zen said:

Similarly, River Ganga. It does not wash away any sins. Nor does conducting last rite at Ganges, gives your soul any special privileges. Only way to go to heaven is through good karma. 

 

There are some incredible scenes in the Web series "Pataal Lok" where, this one character who claims to champion the cause of the lower castes, he carries around jerry cans of water from the Ganga wherever he goes.

 

Basically, he commits every sin in the book. Says a prayer here, a bathe from water in the Ganga there. And thinks all his sins are absolved.

[zen]

15 minutes ago, EnterTheVoid said:

 

There are some incredible scenes in the Web series "Pataal Lok" where, this one character who claims to champion the cause of the lower castes, he carries around jerry cans of water from the Ganga wherever he goes.

 

Basically, he commits every sin in the book. Says a prayer here, a bathe from water in the Ganga there. And thinks all his sins are absolved.

 

I have not seen the series but sounds like a sarcastic take  

 

Gangaji's holiness comes from its role in supporting various ecosystems found over its 2,500 kms length (life supporting characteristic) and pure/healthy water quality considering where it originates from  ... Its holiness is supposed to protect it ... However, Hindus interpreted its holiness as something that wipes off sin (even used to perform last rites), harming the great ecosystem supporting river itself  

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by zen

[coffee_rules]

12 minutes ago, zen said:

 

I have highlighted reasons for that ... in ancient times, projecting something as holy not only protects it relatively  but also highlights its good qualities 

 

 

 

If people do not understand their religion, they will be taken advantage of (even through cows) 

 

 

 

Good karma is the foundation of any religion ... Rituals are not ... Ganga does not wash away sins 

 

 

Going to a temple is also ritualistic. You believe in some rituals, you don’t get to question somebody’s ritual. We believe in pilgrimage of holy sites. A person who calls himself a Dharmic, has to make a Kashi yatra, not to wash away sins, but to fulfill the purpose of his birth and existence. Also, we are supposed to leave one of your vices back in Kashi, like Anger, or eating your fav sweet etc. 

12 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Ppl cannot misuse a great religion  ... Religion is not democratic 

 

It is plural, not dogmatic. What you are proposing is my way or Highway. That is how Christians killed heretics in medieval times and also Shiites and Sunnis are killing each other now. It is a great religion because of its inclusive nature and giving space to every belief. Somewhere it lost its true nature by making a jaathi by birth and not by karma. 

[zen]

19 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Going to a temple is also ritualistic. You believe in some rituals, you don’t get to question somebody’s ritual. We believe in pilgrimage of holy sites.

 

A temple is not a ritual. As you would go to a house, you would go to a temple ... There can be various rituals conducted inside a temple. Many of these rituals need to change too  

 

Quote

A person who calls himself a Dharmic, has to make a Kashi yatra, not to wash away sins, but to fulfill the purpose of his birth and existence. Also, we are supposed to leave one of your vices back in Kashi, like Anger, or eating your fav sweet etc. 

 

Not required from a religious PoV 

 

 

19 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

It is plural, not dogmatic. What you are proposing is my way or Highway. That is how Christians killed heretics in medieval times and also Shiites and Sunnis are killing each other now. It is a great religion because of its inclusive nature and giving space to every belief. Somewhere it lost its true nature by making a jaathi by birth and not by karma. 

 

In the name of democratic use of a religion, one cannot be misusing a religion ... Many of Hinduism concepts come from ignorant priests 

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by zen

[coffee_rules]

13 hours ago, Mariyam said:

@coffee_rules

 

You are missing the point. Closure of an abattoir down the road from a mandir is understandable. I am with you on that. Muslims abattoir owners need to vacate and set shop further away. In good faith.

But in a 5km radius? Arbitrary number no? Is this even possible in highly packed cities?

Who compensates for the loss of income in such cases?

 

I am aware of the safeguards that the cows ( milch and draught cattle actually) have in the Indian constitution. There is no debate there.

Its not for you, or the SC to decide if a mosque holds any sanctity in Islam. My point was to do with precedent.

 

You are claiming that the presence of a beef eating locality ( that's funny terminology actually) within 5 kms of a mandir offends you. Fair.

Can this judgement be used the other way too? What if some people were similarly offended by idols in a 5km radius of a mosque? Surely, other have the right to take offence too. 

This kind of inane legislation creates more problems than it solves.

This bill will be very hard to implement. Basically, to convince that Muslims or other minorities that eat Beef should respect the cultures and traditions peacefully. This kind of state interventional reform was needed for Hindu reform to get rid of its ills like untouchability and caste dogma. His interview is interesting, Assam has issues with cattle smuggling into BD and other states This was in their manifesto and people vote for the manifesto. 
 

Beef will not be allowed in most urban centres in Assam: Himanta Biswa Sarma

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, zen said:

 

A temple is not a ritual. As you would go to a house, you would go to a temple ... There can be various rituals conducted inside a temple. Many of these rituals need to change too  

 

 

You are a modern day Hindu , with no knowledge of aagama shastras, where temple worship, murti pooja are described. Agni Purana specifies how temples are to be constructed, with outer prakaara and girbha griha. Not specified by priests like you claim. You can’t pick and choose what you like and claim that is Hinduism. There are sampradayas and rituals that define certain identities and practices that are part of Hinduism. Don’t redefine for others. 

1 hour ago, zen said:

 

Not required from a religious PoV 

 

Idiotic. Nobody decides what is required. 

1 hour ago, zen said:

 

 

In the name of democratic use of a religion, one cannot be misusing a religion ... Many of Hinduism concepts come from ignorant priests 

 

 

[coffee_rules]

15 hours ago, Mariyam said:

When the constitution was drafted and tabled in 1948, PM Nehru insisted that the word secular be dropped from the preamble, much to the surprise of Dr Ambedkar and the others.. It was Indira Gandhi who had it added to the preamble during the emergency .

Nehru was well read and an atheist. His opposition to secular in the preamble was basically coming from how the state can’t intervene to reform Hindu society if we declare to be secular. He was an idealist to believe that if we declare ourselves a secular nation, we can’t appease minorities or have sections where religious education can only be imparted to minorities and not to majority in state run schools.
 

See, minorities can do it in Freedom of religion article of constitution, while majority can’t do it because we are a socialist democracy where majority has to uplift minorities 
 

Ambedkar was religious and wanted to reform Hindus by state intervention, hence he opposed calling India secular. 
 

Reading the constituent assembly debates gives a lot of insight into why we are like this and how. 

[zen]

1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

You are a modern day Hindu , with no knowledge of aagama shastras, where temple worship, murti pooja are described. Agni Purana specifies how temples are to be constructed, with outer prakaara and girbha griha. Not specified by priests like you claim. You can’t pick and choose what you like and claim that is Hinduism. There are sampradayas and rituals that define certain identities and practices that are part of Hinduism. Don’t redefine for others. 

 

I have no issues with how people construct temples, which I drew parallels with houses (of God) ... On rituals, I mentioned - "There can be various rituals conducted inside a temple. Many of these rituals need to change too". Rituals inside the temples including those designed to make money are an issue 

 

In ancient times, lot of things were done/said to benefit people or something in the name of religion as people understood that language better. Continuing to harp about those irrelevant things means zilch

 

If pollution in Ganga were an issue like it is now, the ancients would have preached "polluting Ganga is a sin" to make people keep Ganga "pure"  

 

 

 

1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Idiotic. Nobody decides what is required. 

 

In fact what you wrote earlier below is inaccurate:

 

Quote

"A person who calls himself a Dharmic, has to make a Kashi yatra, not to wash away sins, but to fulfill the purpose of his birth and existence. Also, we are supposed to leave one of your vices back in Kashi, like Anger, or eating your fav sweet etc. " 

 

No one needs to go to Kashi to be called a Dharmic ... Anger can be left even at your home ... You do not need to stop eating your favorite sweets (do you consider eating sweets a vice?)

 

Even a poor man with no means to go to Kashi can be a Dharmic 

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by zen

[Real McCoy]

@zen can you remove that video please. You could type the same without publishing videos or images. THat looks

[coffee_rules]

9 hours ago, zen said:

 

I have no issues with how people construct temples, which I drew parallels with houses (of God) ... On rituals, I mentioned - "There can be various rituals conducted inside a temple. Many of these rituals need to change too". Rituals inside the temples including those designed to make money are an issue 

 

In ancient times, lot of things were done/said to benefit people or something in the name of religion as people understood that language better. Continuing to harp about those irrelevant things means zilch

 

If pollution in Ganga were an issue like it is now, the ancients would have preached "polluting Ganga is a sin" to make people keep Ganga "pure"  

 

 

 

 

In fact what you wrote earlier below is inaccurate:

 

 

No one needs to go to Kashi to be called a Dharmic ... Anger can be left even at your home ... You do not need to stop eating your favorite sweets (do you consider eating sweets a vice?)

 

Even a poor man with no means to go to Kashi can be a Dharmic 

 

 

You have no issues with temples built on the basis of shastras, but selectively censor worship based on the same shastras. You are akin to a woke Hindu, who finds meditation, yoga, vegetarianism, spirituality etc cool, but hate the mantras and bhajans and say Hinduism can do away those. Agree that some of the temple practices have become corrupt. But one has to pick the good parts, about sthala purana, the significance of worship and cut out the noise.

 

I was only showing how Ganga and Kashi are important to some beliefs, not just taking a dip in Ganga and be done with sin counting.

 

Too much of eating sweets like a glutton is a vice and leads to his demise.  Giving up and cutting down sugar leads to a healthy lifestyle. 

[zen]

50 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

You have no issues with temples built on the basis of shastras, but selectively censor worship based on the same shastras. You are akin to a woke Hindu, who finds meditation, yoga, vegetarianism, spirituality etc cool, but hate the mantras and bhajans and say Hinduism can do away those. Agree that some of the temple practices have become corrupt. But one has to pick the good parts, about sthala purana, the significance of worship and cut out the noise.

There are a lot of assumptions in your posts.
 

An ancient religion would have said 1000 of things to achieve various goals over the centuries, many of which would be applicable to different periods. One cannot be taking everything at face value or literally. 

 

50 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

I was only showing how Ganga and Kashi are important to some beliefs, not just taking a dip in Ganga and be done with sin counting.

 

A statement such as one calling himself Dharmic HAS to go to Kashi is misinformation on Hinduism 

The accurate way to say that is “Kashi is an important pilgrimage city. Many Hindus like to visit it once in their lifetime.”

 

50 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

Too much of eating sweets like a glutton is a vice and leads to his demise.  Giving up and cutting down sugar leads to a healthy lifestyle. 

Your point was on giving up your favorite sweet, which implies that you can eat other sweets apart from your favorite

 

There are various parts to a meal. Most things in excess, not just sweets, can cause trouble. Too much mirchi and you can feel heartburn 

These things do not fall into the domain of religion, which is primarily about connecting with God and managing your birth cycles 

Edited July 15, 2021 by zen

[coffee_rules]

10 minutes ago, zen said:

There is a lot of assumptions in your posts.
 

An ancient religion would have said 1000 of things over the centuries, many of which would be applicable for different periods. You can’t be taking everything at face value or literally. 

 

 

A statement such as one calling himself Dharmatma HAS to go to Kashi is misinformation on Hinduism 

You are not the sole custodian of "Hinduism" which is not even a word for Dharma. There are multiple belief systems peacefully co-existing in this eco-system.

 

10 minutes ago, zen said:

Your point was on giving up your favorite sweet, which implies that you can eat other sweets apart from your favorite

 

There are various parts to a meal. Most things in excess not just sweet can cause trouble. Too much mirchi and you can feel heartburn 

These things do not fall into the domain of religion, which is primarily about connecting with God and managing your birth cycles 

 

Your point of people going to "Ganga to take a dip to wash away sins" is reductionist thought. There are other beliefs associated with Ganga/Kashi is the point. You don't get to say what falls under the domain of the religion. Worship of god and ways of it is also part of it.  

[Real McCoy]

@coffee_rules I agree on the holy sites in kasi and ganga being a holy river. but we have to do something about not burning corpses near the river. In the South, water bodies are also considered holy but we don't cremate the dead near the rivers and throw them there. We only throw the ashes in the waters which is a better way to go.

[zen]

11 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

You are not the sole custodian of "Hinduism" which is not even a word for Dharma. There are multiple belief systems peacefully co-existing in this eco-system.

As a true Hindu, one cannot allow the misuse of the great religion in the name of democratic use of it … Religion is not a costume party 

 

11 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Your point of people going to "Ganga to take a dip to wash away sins" is reductionist thought. There are other beliefs associated with Ganga/Kashi is the point. You don't get to say what falls under the domain of the religion. Worship of god and ways of it is also part of it.  

Misinterpretations should not be presented as beliefs. I am focused on “washing away the sins”, along with the “cremation”, part which is inaccurate and gives a false impression that you can do whatever sins you like but Ganga will wash the sins away 

Rivers are holy because of purity of water  and their role in maintaining ecosystems. Not to take ppl to heaven or serve as a sins washing machine 

Edited July 15, 2021 by zen

[coffee_rules]

5 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

@coffee_rules I agree on the holy sites in kasi and ganga being a holy river. but we have to do something about not burning corpses near the river. In the South, water bodies are also considered holy but we don't cremate the dead near the rivers and throw them there. We only throw the ashes in the waters which is a better way to go.

That is not even point of debate, I agree the pollution of ganga is totally man-made. Regulation and state intervention is part of it. My point was only to not dismiss anything as not part of religion. Hinduism is anything but dogmatic. Self-realization is ingrained it.  But some harmless beliefs need not be ridiculed based on scientific evidence. That way, there is no scientific proof of rebirth. It is a belief.