CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts It takes training but is doable by all ( a claim which i am unable to personally verify as of yet mind you). Yes, but it isn't natural :hic: Touche! :hmph: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts To put it simply wouldnt it have been better for someone to have confronted the Islami haramis at the outset using whatever means even if it meant bending some tenets of Hinduism and Buddhism ? __ Well hindus were kinda far away to nip Islam in the bud but the Persians/Byzantines/Arabs tried and failed. Isnt it much better and logical to implement preventive measures so that you dont get to that situation ? Yes it is when in a purely defensive capacity- i am not faulting those rulers like PR Chauhan who tried to defend their territorry from muslim invasion. I am arguing against the fundamental concept of ' not fighting adharm = sin'. That equates to vigilante/crusader mentality where you grab a sword/gun and storm off to whereever in the world there is adharm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts for the simple reason that without country there is no you and not the other way round. huh ? So how is there no 'me' if today Canada or India ceased to exist as a political entity ? No one is talking about taking india out of the map and making a huge hole in the earth's crust where india is. I mean, sure, i may die if Canada/India is invaded but its not like every single person is gonna die so my death is not garanteed under an invasion(particularly since at the first sign of trouble, i'll be heading into the BC interior to a nice and desolate valley with a friend or two).But shifting borders - what difference does it make ? its just a piece of land. What matters is our culture. If our culture survives, it doesnt matter if the mountain under which i am living is Kanchenjunga or Mt. Fuji....both are made of rock.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
varun Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts As far as i am concerned, Bharat Rashtra is meaningless Having lower priority I can understand, but being totally meaningless is also an extreme that you shouldn't go to. It goes back to the concept of community that I was talking about earlier. Say you were an Indian living in Kashmir, and you encounter injustices being done to your family. This affects you personally, and you would hope that you get some help from the community (in the form of law-and-order, etc). If you don't expect any help, then that would make you unsociable, and a renegade (a minority, since man is by "nature" a social animal). Similarly, if there were some injustices being done to your community, or state, you would expect help from the country. This is what being part of a community entails, and this is what provides strength and protection in being part of a community rather than being an individual. It is through community interaction that technology progresses, thoughts and ideas are exchanged (like this MB :hic: ), and peace is kept. You owe it to the community to fight injustices not just against you, but against others in the community too, and against the community as a whole as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts because of the very reason that you chose to run away from motherland ... If you couldnt sustain your "way of life" in the birth place of it ... there is a fat chance you will be able to do so in Argentina or wherever the heck you go to. Ironically, i am having a much easier time to keep my culture alive in Canada than i'd in India, considering that if i were in India, i'd be working 10 hours/week for 6 days a week and not have any time left for culture..... Live examples are offsprings of Indians settled in America, UK , Canada wherever ... millions of them ... how many are as Indian as the "pure ones" ( copyright amits lol) ... in about a few generations pretty much all the Indian ness is gone ... I am not disputing this fact but i think the causes are different. Its not because we cant keep our culture alive - its because in cultural terms, size does matter. The early immigrants to US/Canada were few and far in between in numbers and they got readily assimilated. However, as immigration increases, 'indianisation' of the west also increases. There was an article in BBC on how UK is becomming more and more indian and that is possible now because of the growing Indian population there. In future,America/Canada too will become more indian as more and more people migrate there. And if anything, Indian culture will thrive, considering that America or Canada by itself has little or no culture of its own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts Having lower priority I can understand, but being totally meaningless is also an extreme that you shouldn't go to. It goes back to the concept of community that I was talking about earlier. But my community is the people- not the land. Essentially, i am trying to say is that geography is irrelevant to me. If 1 billion Indians move to Russia tomorrow, my 'India' will be in the steppes of Russia - the land of Ganga and Himalaya would cease to have any more relevance than the land of Nile or Yangtse. You owe it to the community to fight injustices not just against you, but against others in the community too, and against the community as a whole as well. I am very wary of that line of thought simply because that is a slippery slope to crusades - bear in mind, the crusaders were very pious christians and they went down to middle east to 'correct the wrongs and injustices against humanity'. Its a line of thought i eschew because you cant just draw a line and say 'okay, its good to go this far but not any further' while contemplating this line of thought and vigilante action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumble_rocks Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts Jesus , where is this thread heading to ! D_R , I have humbly posted my rebuttal to your well articulated posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts BTW explain why the Dalai Lama is fighting for his mother land if it was just a piece of Land and didnt mean anything as per Buddhist philosophy ? He isn't fighting for the independence of Tibet- he has no problems with Tibet being a part of China so long as China recognises Tibetan culture and gives Tibet autonomy in its own affairs. Also shouldnt he just let the Chinese be as they want since they are on the side of 'Adharma' and that there is no need to "fight" adharma ... He isn't fighting adharma - he hasnt called for any sort of insurgency or taking the fight to the chinese- infact he's worked hard to keep tibetan nationalism at check. And when I say fighting I mean politically and not militarily. Well that is fine then. Normally when one uses the word 'fight', it tends to invoke pictures of AK47s and not a conference table. If by 'fighting adharma' you mean through dialogue and politics alone, i am fine with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
varun Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts But my community is the people- not the land. Essentially, i am trying to say is that geography is irrelevant to me. If 1 billion Indians move to Russia tomorrow, my 'India' will be in the steppes of Russia - the land of Ganga and Himalaya would cease to have any more relevance than the land of Nile or Yangtse. Agreed. I never mentioned land. Only the people of the community. If people of the community are suffering because they don't have a place to live however, land does come into the equation at some time. I am very wary of that line of thought simply because that is a slippery slope to crusades - bear in mind, the crusaders were very pious christians and they went down to middle east to 'correct the wrongs and injustices against humanity'. Its a line of thought i eschew because you cant just draw a line and say 'okay, its good to go this far but not any further' while contemplating this line of thought and vigilante action. That's why in Hinduism, the warrior class rarely took decisions on their own. The educated ones, or the scholars (brahmins) who understood the implications of violence took the decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumble_rocks Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts BTW explain why the Dalai Lama is fighting for his mother land if it was just a piece of Land and didnt mean anything as per Buddhist philosophy ? He isn't fighting for the independence of Tibet- he has no problems with Tibet being a part of China so long as China recognises Tibetan culture and gives Tibet autonomy in its own affairs. That's not true. Dalai Lama is leader/active articipant of the Free Tibet movement which wants the three kingdoms Amdo, Kham, and ?-Tsang to be independent of China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts That's not true. Dalai Lama is leader/active articipant of the Free Tibet movement which wants to the three kingdoms Amdo, Kham, and ?-Tsang to be independent of China. That was in the past- his current position is that too much time has gone by and it'd be unfair to the chinese people in Tibet today for tibet to break away. He's settled for autonomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts Agreed. I never mentioned land. Only the people of the community. If people of the community are suffering because they don't have a place to live however, land does come into the equation at some time. I suppose i was losing track of the convo since i am talking to you and Bheem at the same time and Bheem seems to be very geography oriented with the continuous talk about how much land we've lost and stuff. That's why in Hinduism, the warrior class rarely took decisions on their own. The educated ones, or the scholars (brahmins) who understood the implications of violence took the decisions. I doubt this was the case except really really long time ago perhaps. Throughout our recorded history, our rulers were no less interested than warfare than any other - they just kept it on the battlefield and didnt continue the bloodbaths on to the cities and villages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts Not just defensive but offensive too because you are dutibound and owe it to your future generations to take out the adharmi. No, you are not dutibound to take out the adharmi. You are dutibound only to limit his/her influence. Read the scriptures again please. And what you are advocating is crusades/jihads. Which is why in the past i've accused you of thinking identically as the muslim fundamentalists you oppose so passionately. because they are on the wrong side of our version of Dharma If you believe in your dharma to be the one true way, then there is no need to step into other people's land(and yes, it is other people's land TODAY) and enforce this. For your dharma will win. If you see this merely as 'our version vs their version' then you dont actually think your version to be more reflective of the truth and therefore are fighting solely for the sake of the ego. else we will just disintegrate if not in our lifetimes then definitely in the lifetime of our children or grand children. And that is precisely what i am saying won't happen !!! We didn't disintegrate under the much much harsher rule of the muslims for 800 years and even harsher rule of the british for 200, did we ? You think we didn't disintegrate because of a few token hindu warriors but tell me this - how come the Gangetic plain retained its large hindu core ? this area had mostly hindus living in them(with some patches of muslim concentration) for most of the last 1000 years - and these areas have been firmly and utterly under muslim control for almost 700 years straight. Hinduism lasted not because it fought for its survival but because it is more natural than its adversary. If you really believe that our culture is more natural and reflective of the universe then we don't need to protect it - it will never die, for that which is natural cannot be eliminated permanently. If you really are nervous about protecting our culture and want to pre-empt and all that, it indicates that you dont really think our culture is 'more in harmony' with the natural order of things and it will perish. In which case, you are simply fighting for the ego for if you dont have confidence in our culture's ability to survive, then there is no reason for you to fight for its survival either! Only that which is weak requires a bodyguard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts Well as per your version of things he should just ask his countrymen to move out from Tibet isnt it ? He actually said that if the way out of Tibet was less perilous ( forget the border guards who are on 'shoot on sight' orders, the routes itself are extremely dangerous and the terrain claims 1 outta 3 people attempting to cross over) then he'd recommend that Tibetans leave for India and then if India doesn't want them, to a place that'll accept them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts Then why is he putting political pressure on China thru a third party when that is not recommended as per Buddhist scriptures ? It is fine to put political pressure. I think i already clarified that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts The whole point of Bhagwat Gita ... right there ... for a much lesser cause as compared to todays dire situation I might add. The whole point of Bhagwat Gita is to enforce the idea that your actions have consequences and that fighting the adharmi (as in warfare) is only the last resort- never in a pre-empted manner. This is clearly outlined in the karma yoga chapter. Well then Sri Krishna was wrong (atleast as per your take on things )to step into a War in which not only did he have no business with but also when the agreived parties had said they were more than happy to live in the jungle. Yes, yes he was. You'll find that Krishna's character is far from spotless in the Gita and his actions are in several cases, pulling a 'I am a God so rules are different to me' card to interfere in business he shouldn't have. Balaram too took an exception to Krishna's unethical behaviour. Krishna justified his unethical behaviour by essentially going 'well he did it first' - which is precisely what i disagree with. As i said, i am no longer a hindu and it was not something i decieded at the spur of the moment. You will also find that Krishna's actions are often questioned in hindu intellectual circles on whether it was really dharmic for him to suggest/resort to unethical means. Suffice to say, i dont consider the gita or any other book to be perfect- this is precisely an area where the Gita is weak and it is a topic of debate in hindu intellectual circles as well. And if you believe that the gita is 'saat-pratishaad shudhh' then i am afraid your view is no different than that of the muslims or christians. The Gita is not meant to be taken literally but as a whole. Factually incorrect ... because these states saw the largest migration of Muslims to current day Pak/BD... which is why you see a Hindu majority ... but even then there is large population % wise as compared to the rest of the country. A grand total of 11 million muslims from ALL of India crossed into PAK/BD. Even looking at 1940s population, total muslim population of the gangetic plain was less than 50% which is why India retained most of the gangetic plains ! Yet, this gangetic plains were the bastion to islamic sultanates in India. All the stuff Shivaji or Vijayanagara or the rajputs did didnt affect the gangetic plains which remained under muslim control throughout till the british arrived. And hinduism still survived there as the majority religion. Which indicates that Hinduism's survival was not due to military resistance to islam but being simply more harmonious with nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts You might not know this but the Maratha kingdom extended right from current day north Karnataka right upto current day Lahore For a very brief period. Maratha domination up to Lahore happened only after Aurangzeb died in the end of 1600s. And even then, the Maratha dominion was mostly out of the gangetic plains - more like extending through rajasthan and into punjab. Gangetic plain was dominated by the decreasing mughal emire, oudh and bengal. That only lasted less than 100 years too as the British promptly consolidated power in India by late 1700s. Before the rise of Maratha power under shivaji ( and Shivaji didnt have an independent kingdom- he started operating in mughal grounds as maratha kingdom was part of mughal empire by then) the last hindu power of north India was Prithvi Raj Chauhan. So for a 600 year period hinduism in the ganges valley was exclusively under Muslim domination and it still survived in more than 50% cases. The reason for that, my friend, is hinduism's survival had nothing to do with force or fighting for the survival of the religion/philosophy. It survived because it is more natural and harmonious with the universe. The gangetic valley example i think is pertinent to this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts whether you agree or not is your prerogative but the whole point is to tell you that what I am saying is totally within the scriptures of Hinduism and the shying away from duties towards restoring Dharma is the biggest sin ... and you can do whatever it takes to restore Dharma ... as explained to Parth when he refused to take up arms against his family members. Most hindu scholars you'll find argue that 'anything to restore dharma' is not meant to be taken literally by the common populace. You are forgetting that during the eve of battle, the Pandavas and their allies were (according to the story) the last line of defence. If 'anything to restore dharma' and 'pre-empting' the opposition was okay in hinduism, you wouldn't have the mahabharata. You'd just have the matter settled right then and there during Draupadi's cheer-haran. Mahabharata as a tale exists because there was no 'pre-empt' this stuff. Besides, i am saying that one shouldn't follow the scriptures blindly or you will end up with no difference between muslims and christians and us. Do you not see how what you are advocating is what essentially the christian crusaders and muslim jihadists advocate ? Their right to destroy/fight 'adharm' anywhere on the planet by pre-empting it ? As Neitzche said : " dont stare into the abyss too long for then you will become what you hate" This principle exists in buddhism also as well as hinduism. I am sorry but 'defend the dharma by pre-empting' is something that is not supported by any hindu scriptures except for that small part of the Gita- which in itself is considered contentious by most hindu scholars. Our biggest strength as a culture has been never to take any written document too seriously and word-for-word literally. I think we should accept the fact that the Gita is not unfallable and neither is any book for it is natural for discrepancies to creep in through the passage of time. And thousands of years is a lot of time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts if this doesnt enlighten people, ........................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Re: Why Hinduism doesn't seek converts here you go CC http://voiceofdharma.org/books/siii/ch8.htm My point is very simple and it is not disproved byt he above article : Hinduism managed to survive NOT because of armed resistance but because of the inherent nature of the faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts