what about the hindus?

Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Paganism, Taoism etc.

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: what about the hindus?

#61  Postby SpeedOfSound » Jul 16, 2011 10:14 am

Spearthrower wrote:
My mate Dave, who I can personally vouch for as being an honest, intelligent, and generally nice guy, says that Brahman doesn't exist. Now we have two secondary sources of assertions we can appeal to - how do we judge between them?


Before jumping to conclusions about serious issues like non-existence maybe you can tell me what Brahman is and in what manner it doesn't exist?
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32079
Age: 69
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: what about the hindus?

#62  Postby Spearthrower » Jul 16, 2011 10:16 am

Oh, and incidentally Shiv, I've read the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita, and quite a few of the aphorisms from the Brahma sutras, although I have never sat down and systematically read through the latter.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27415
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#63  Postby Spearthrower » Jul 16, 2011 10:17 am

SpeedOfSound wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
My mate Dave, who I can personally vouch for as being an honest, intelligent, and generally nice guy, says that Brahman doesn't exist. Now we have two secondary sources of assertions we can appeal to - how do we judge between them?


Before jumping to conclusions about serious issues like non-existence maybe you can tell me what Brahman is and in what manner it doesn't exist?



That would indeed be a good starting point. I did nod to that earlier with respect to whatever characteristics were to also be inferred in this entity.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27415
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#64  Postby Myst » Jul 16, 2011 10:17 am

Shiv wrote:
cavarka9 wrote:As far as the issue of comparing hindus with the present standards, I atleast am comparing them to the standards of buddhists and jains, samkhya, yogis and the nasthikas of the same time period and lived amongst Hindus and well, hindus dont stand up that well, One could atleast claim that since christians and muslims didnt live besides these people and hence may not have known better(I disagree, but for the sake of the argument). But the hindus did live besides these people, did hear what they had to say and still did not do better?.


:(

If these people are others, who else is Hindu?


Define what makes a person Hindu. Belief in the authority of Vedas? To be born in place beyond Indus?
"Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way."
- Christopher Hitchens
User avatar
Myst
 
Posts: 20
Age: 28

India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#65  Postby cavarka9 » Jul 16, 2011 10:18 am

Shiv wrote:
cavarka9 wrote:As far as the issue of comparing hindus with the present standards, I atleast am comparing them to the standards of buddhists and jains, samkhya, yogis and the nasthikas of the same time period and lived amongst Hindus and well, hindus dont stand up that well, One could atleast claim that since christians and muslims didnt live besides these people and hence may not have known better(I disagree, but for the sake of the argument). But the hindus did live besides these people, did hear what they had to say and still did not do better?.


:(

If these people are others, who else is Hindu?


Agreed with yogis and samkhya (new), they are theists, but samkhya (old) and nasthikas were not hindus. Neither are buddhists or jains.
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#66  Postby GenesForLife » Jul 16, 2011 10:20 am

Shiv wrote:
GenesForLife wrote:Let me simplify things for you, Shiv, is the relationship between the Atman and the Brahman correctly represented by the Dvaita, advaita or vishistadvaita schools of thought? ;)


Well, I follow the Advaita school. I would consider Dvaita to be the first step and Advaita, the final one, with Vishistadvaita in the middle.


That didn't answer my question, I did not ask what school you follow, I asked you which one is correct. (Hint - they are all incompatible to some extent at least, and if you cannot differentiate between them, you will have to hold all three as correct, which would make it absurd to claim it as objective truth)
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#67  Postby cavarka9 » Jul 16, 2011 10:25 am

GenesForLife wrote:
Shiv wrote:
GenesForLife wrote:Let me simplify things for you, Shiv, is the relationship between the Atman and the Brahman correctly represented by the Dvaita, advaita or vishistadvaita schools of thought? ;)


Well, I follow the Advaita school. I would consider Dvaita to be the first step and Advaita, the final one, with Vishistadvaita in the middle.


That didn't answer my question, I did not ask what school you follow, I asked you which one is correct. (Hint - they are all incompatible to some extent at least, and if you cannot differentiate between them, you will have to hold all three as correct, which would make it absurd to claim it as objective truth)



Not true if the said entity does not care, which is what is the hope that the three Abrahamic faiths might no longer get fussy over the differences in their texts.
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: what about the hindus?

#68  Postby Shiv » Jul 16, 2011 10:25 am

cavarka9 wrote:Well, it was you who jumped in and posted this before reading through to begin with to see for yourself the 'standard' of discussions we have here, so it was you who made it here and began, we are just replying to what you said. I suggest you to read around a bit first.


I guess you are true buddy.

Trying to answer your questions helps me read more, know more and crystallize all these thoughts. So I dont mind. If i cant answer today, may be tomorrow I can :)

cavarka9 wrote:
I could have laughed at it if it were not so heinous a thought. Manu smriti which claims to put hot mercury down the ears of those lower castes if they hear vedas, or burning of women because their husbands died before them. Or the punishment of a brahmin when he rapes a lower caste women is to have a blindfold but if a lower caste person were to rape an upper caste women, their eyes would be...


From your above statement, I gather that you have not read the Manu Smriti in the original or at least a reliable translation. (I am open to correction though)

Manu Smriti is one of the most abused texts in the entire world, with the fact that there have been quite a few translations especially done by both self-serving British and Indian translators, not helping it's case at all.

I too have not read the Manu Smriti in its entirety. But I have had the opportunity to read some reliable discussions on the controversial parts and have also heard other people who have read it.

As far as Sati is concerned - Manu Smriti, more importantly the Veda do NOT sanction Sati. The Rg Veda has this to say.

The eighth richa (X 18.8) specifically commands a Hindu widow to return alive to her home. H. H. Wilson translates: "Rise woman, and go to the world of living beings; come, this man near whom you sleep is lifeless; you have enjoyed this state of being the wife of your husband, the suitor who took you by the hand." Here again, it is confirmed that X 18.8 actually commands a Hindu widow to return to the world of living beings. Also, this very richa confers upon her full right on the house of her deceased husband (apne putradi aur ghar).


(From Hindu Wisdom: Sati, the much-highlighted face of Hinduism)

There are however other Smritis (Smritis are books written or compiled as commentaries/derivatives of the Veda) that say the widow should enter the funeral pyre. But none of them were as popular as Manu Smriti. These are just rule books/law books that provide guidelines for the effective functioning of the society. It is not necessary that they should be regarded at all times, especially if there is enough reason to NOT do so.
User avatar
Shiv
 
Name: Shivsankar
Posts: 31
Age: 34
Male

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#69  Postby GenesForLife » Jul 16, 2011 10:29 am

cavarka9 wrote:
GenesForLife wrote:
Shiv wrote:

Well, I follow the Advaita school. I would consider Dvaita to be the first step and Advaita, the final one, with Vishistadvaita in the middle.


That didn't answer my question, I did not ask what school you follow, I asked you which one is correct. (Hint - they are all incompatible to some extent at least, and if you cannot differentiate between them, you will have to hold all three as correct, which would make it absurd to claim it as objective truth)



Not true if the said entity does not care, which is what is the hope that the three Abrahamic faiths might no longer get fussy over the differences in their texts.


lol, what?

If incompatible positions X,Y,Z exist, and one of them is objectively true, the others would have to be false, and to identify which one is objectively true you need evidence. If you cannot show that one of them is objectively true you have to accept that all systems have an equal probability of being true, and in this case you cannot make objective truth claims because you cannot go from a may be true ---> definitely is true without conceding that a may be false ----> definitely is false.

Next?
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#70  Postby Spearthrower » Jul 16, 2011 10:30 am

There are too many threads in this conversation, so I will duck out.

I will leave one last passing shot across the bows though....

Words like 'objective', 'verifiable', or 'reproducible' seem to be in direct contradiction with the Upanisads which seem to quite categorically state that the Brahman cannot be known by empirical means; in fact, it would be a category error to claim so.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27415
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#71  Postby GenesForLife » Jul 16, 2011 10:33 am

Spearthrower wrote:There are too many threads in this conversation, so I will duck out.

I will leave one last passing shot across the bows though....

Words like 'objective', 'verifiable', or 'reproducible' seem to be in direct contradiction with the Upanisads which seem to quite categorically state that the Brahman cannot be known by empirical means; in fact, it would be a category error to claim so.


Absolutely, and to claim that which cannot be established as objective is objective is absurd.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#72  Postby cavarka9 » Jul 16, 2011 10:37 am

Shiv wrote:
cavarka9 wrote:Well, it was you who jumped in and posted this before reading through to begin with to see for yourself the 'standard' of discussions we have here, so it was you who made it here and began, we are just replying to what you said. I suggest you to read around a bit first.


I guess you are true buddy.

Trying to answer your questions helps me read more, know more and crystallize all these thoughts. So I dont mind. If i cant answer today, may be tomorrow I can :)

cavarka9 wrote:
I could have laughed at it if it were not so heinous a thought. Manu smriti which claims to put hot mercury down the ears of those lower castes if they hear vedas, or burning of women because their husbands died before them. Or the punishment of a brahmin when he rapes a lower caste women is to have a blindfold but if a lower caste person were to rape an upper caste women, their eyes would be...


From your above statement, I gather that you have not read the Manu Smriti in the original or at least a reliable translation. (I am open to correction though)

Manu Smriti is one of the most abused texts in the entire world, with the fact that there have been quite a few translations especially done by both self-serving British and Indian translators, not helping it's case at all.

I too have not read the Manu Smriti in its entirety. But I have had the opportunity to read some reliable discussions on the controversial parts and have also heard other people who have read it.

As far as Sati is concerned - Manu Smriti, more importantly the Veda do NOT sanction Sati. The Rg Veda has this to say.

The eighth richa (X 18.8) specifically commands a Hindu widow to return alive to her home. H. H. Wilson translates: "Rise woman, and go to the world of living beings; come, this man near whom you sleep is lifeless; you have enjoyed this state of being the wife of your husband, the suitor who took you by the hand." Here again, it is confirmed that X 18.8 actually commands a Hindu widow to return to the world of living beings. Also, this very richa confers upon her full right on the house of her deceased husband (apne putradi aur ghar).


(From Hindu Wisdom: Sati, the much-highlighted face of Hinduism)

There are however other Smritis (Smritis are books written or compiled as commentaries/derivatives of the Veda) that say the widow should enter the funeral pyre. But none of them were as popular as Manu Smriti. These are just rule books/law books that provide guidelines for the effective functioning of the society. It is not necessary that they should be regarded at all times, especially if there is enough reason to NOT do so.


Actually I did read the controversial parts, translations of course, in any case it is indefensible. Even if you were to show that some of the translations were biased, I do not believe that you would be able to clear up all the filth. Second, yes, laws do change in Hinduism and perhaps need not be followed, but before and after the independence there were people who supported manu smriti, even Gandhi sometimes spoke in favour of varna system (perhaps out of political expediency).
After independence, there was a big opposition to bring change to the hindu code bill, there were people who wanted to debate on this issue, that the new laws were not in accordance with hinduism. Finally, we still have 2 critical issues, one on caste, the other on widow remarriage. These 2 are morally indefensible and I hope for your sake that you do not try to defend these.
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#73  Postby cavarka9 » Jul 16, 2011 10:44 am

GenesForLife wrote:
cavarka9 wrote:
GenesForLife wrote:

That didn't answer my question, I did not ask what school you follow, I asked you which one is correct. (Hint - they are all incompatible to some extent at least, and if you cannot differentiate between them, you will have to hold all three as correct, which would make it absurd to claim it as objective truth)



Not true if the said entity does not care, which is what is the hope that the three Abrahamic faiths might no longer get fussy over the differences in their texts.


lol, what?

If incompatible positions X,Y,Z exist, and one of them is objectively true, the others would have to be false, and to identify which one is objectively true you need evidence. If you cannot show that one of them is objectively true you have to accept that all systems have an equal probability of being true, and in this case you cannot make objective truth claims because you cannot go from a may be true ---> definitely is true without conceding that a may be false ----> definitely is false.

Next?

I am saying that one could claim that god does not care too much on the texts, which is what the more enlightened of theists say and such an approach in my opinion is better conducive for a better world. I atleast do not believe in merely defeating people in debate, I infact wish to debate in a manner that even if they do not agree with you which they most definitely may not, they might atleast agree to better ways in terms on morality. Which is of higher concern.
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#74  Postby GenesForLife » Jul 16, 2011 10:47 am

I am saying that one could claim that god does not care too much on the texts, which is what the more enlightened of theists say and such an approach in my opinion is better conducive for a better world. I atleast do not believe in merely defeating people in debate, I infact wish to debate in a manner that even if they do not agree with you which they most definitely may not, they might atleast agree to better ways in terms on morality. Which is of higher concern.


Sure, whatever floats your boat, but this has no bearing on whether objective truth claims are absurd or not.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#75  Postby SpeedOfSound » Jul 16, 2011 10:52 am

I'm still trying to grasp what the claim is.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32079
Age: 69
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: what about the hindus?

#76  Postby cavarka9 » Jul 16, 2011 10:56 am

SpeedOfSound wrote:I'm still trying to grasp what the claim is.

could you say about the quote below, whom did you quote earlier without their permission?. That seems mighty interesting, also about Kazakhstan, never really noticed earlier. :)
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#77  Postby SpeedOfSound » Jul 16, 2011 10:59 am

cavarka9 wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:I'm still trying to grasp what the claim is.

could you say about the quote below, whom did you quote earlier without their permission?. That seems mighty interesting, also about Kazakhstan, never really noticed earlier. :)


All of that is a jab at Little Idiot who had quoted me I think after I quoted him and so on. I just preferred that he removed the out of context quote. I need to get a new quote now. :scratch: It will take some time. My first one at RDF was "Daddy, why did god make YECS?"
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32079
Age: 69
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#78  Postby Shiv » Jul 16, 2011 12:34 pm

Spearthrower wrote:There are too many threads in this conversation, so I will duck out.

I will leave one last passing shot across the bows though....

Words like 'objective', 'verifiable', or 'reproducible' seem to be in direct contradiction with the Upanisads which seem to quite categorically state that the Brahman cannot be known by empirical means; in fact, it would be a category error to claim so.


Yeah. Thanks for sparing me the trouble :-P

You obviously are better read than I am. May be some other day, after I get to know some more, we can have another discussion.

To everyone,

I'm not going to answer anymore questions - at least for today. I'll go around asking some first :D

Enjoy your weekend! :)
User avatar
Shiv
 
Name: Shivsankar
Posts: 31
Age: 34
Male

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#79  Postby cavarka9 » Jul 16, 2011 1:58 pm

Shiv wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:There are too many threads in this conversation, so I will duck out.

I will leave one last passing shot across the bows though....

Words like 'objective', 'verifiable', or 'reproducible' seem to be in direct contradiction with the Upanisads which seem to quite categorically state that the Brahman cannot be known by empirical means; in fact, it would be a category error to claim so.


Yeah. Thanks for sparing me the trouble :-P

You obviously are better read than I am. May be some other day, after I get to know some more, we can have another discussion.

To everyone,

I'm not going to answer anymore questions - at least for today. I'll go around asking some first :D

Enjoy your weekend! :)


Enjoy your weekend too. :)
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: what about the hindus?

#80  Postby andyx1205 » Jul 20, 2011 5:30 am

Just to plug something in, Amartya Sen believes that his agnosticism is compatible with Hinduism:

In some ways people had got used to the idea that India was spiritual and religion-oriented. That gave a leg up to the religious interpretation of India, despite the fact that Sanskrit had a larger atheistic literature than what exists in any other classical language. Madhava Acharya, the remarkable 14th century philosopher, wrote this rather great book called Sarvadarshansamgraha, which discussed all the religious schools of thought within the Hindu structure. The first chapter is "Atheism" – a very strong presentation of the argument in favor of atheism and materialism.


Hinduism is not a religion, it's simply a name given to a bunch of different religious beliefs/schools in India. Eastern religions are definitely different from Western religions. For example, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are centralized in that the literal interpretation of the text concludes that that particular religion is the only right one and all others are either blasphemous or only partially correct (so in the Koran, Christians and Jews are respected as people of the book but they are not following the correct religion...which is the one and only Islam according to the text).
“I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full.” - Trotsky
User avatar
andyx1205
 
Name: Andy
Posts: 6651
Age: 30
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Other Religions & Belief Systems

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest