This is what the thread is all about and NOTHING else:
“I am not comparing religions.
I am just asking why is there such a contrast in East and West Bengalis”
I provided the answer way back because unlike other fellow muslims I do not have to put on my blinkers because the truth is glaring out there for all to see.
Muslims are backward because Orthodox Islam suppresses free thought and persuit of education.
seems like u’v got ur own feet in ur own trap here!! all ur buddies have already chickened out - faceup might be busy counting those millions of religious prostitutes whom you are so shameful of, wouldn’t even include them as the “achievments” of hinduism - why is that??
) how many religious books/scriptures you guys have and which of them are still valid enough to be quoted from. Also, if you know about any good Hindu site, which is easy to understand as well, (I’m not so smart) I’d like to see the URL, plz.
Btw. Just a few days ago, we were asking about how we could control the religious insults guess we never agreed upon respecting every religion in the world. What Xtreme had said, about opening a Hinduism Vs. Islam thread was a reply to constant attacks on Islam, and they were not even provoked, so what are you trying to prove here? I’m sure you already know that we, Muslims or Pakistanis in general don’t really spend time mailing other ppl’s contributions to our friends as our own, that is a tiny little reason for not having a list of our scientific achievements. Anyway good luck
well.. what is valid and what is not is highly debatable. take any characteristic and you can find a hindu sect that does not believe in it.. it is also a continually changing religion.. the deities in vedic times are no longer worshipped.. it is not very well defined religion. it is not organized religion either. if there was no constant influx of outsider muslims, there is a good chance that hinduism would have absorbed islam within it calling mohammad one more incarnation of lord vishnu.
ZZ : Post your reply in the jokes section.
Hinduism absorbing Islam......hahahahah
then you say that it(Hinduism) was constantly interfered by Islam otherwise....are you blowing smoke up my a$$. So Hinduism was'nt strong enough to stand up to Islam....Well that was expected since you yourself claim that Hinduism is not a well defined religion.
I would suggest that you review your posts for sanity checks before posting it on this thread.
Tell us about Hinduism instead of insinuating pot shots at Islam which the usual style of your debating.
zman, u perhaps can read things that are not written anywhere. where are potshots against islam in my post? in fact, there is nothing against islam in my post.
well.. what is valid and what is not is highly debatable
Yup. Even the existence of God is debatable in Hinduism!
Yes Andhra, but look what you said earlier:
[quote] There has always been only one definition for a Brahmin.A brahmin is one who speaks the Truth.
[/quote]
One definition. One does not =2, 3, 4 agreed?
So if there is one definition of a Brahmin (in your own words) although the existence of God is debatable, it seems that the definition of a Brahmin as 'one who speaks the truth' is beyond debate!
No wonder faceup is able to attack muslims but shows shudra-like reverence for the Brahmin master!!
Brahmn means one who understand brhaman, i.e. creator literally.
the way code of conduct is dealt in hindus now has nothing to do with smritis and they have not become less hindu. in fact, mnusmriti was not a very prominent one evenm in old times. yajnwalk smriti was used to settle disputes.
[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited August 08, 2000).]
Well it seems that the hindus are denying their own teachings, even though Brahmins always speak the truth (except in their books apparently). well if you don't like Brahmin teachings of Manusmriti, how about the Baghavat Gita?
There is ample justification in the Gita alone to maintain caste divisions & oppressions; here are Lord Krsna's words:
=============================================
"It is far better to perform one's svadharma (prescribed duties), even though faultily, than another's duties perfectly. Destruction in the course of performing one's own duty is better than engaging in another's duties, for to follow another's path is dangerous." -- Bhagavad-Gita 3:35.
"According to the three modes of material nature (goodness, passion, ignorance) and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society (Brahmin/Ksatriya/Vaisya/Sudra) are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable." -- Bhagavad-Gita 4:13.
"It is better to engage in one's own svadharma (occupation), even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one's nature are never affected by sinful reactions." -- Bhagavad-Gita 18:47.
Lord Rama (who, like Lord Krsna, is an Avatar of Lord Visnu) would be in complete accord with the above quotes; afterall, he killed an innocent Sudra, Sambuka, only because he was performing austerities which were not prescribed duties for low-castes(ref. Ramayana 7:88-89).
The word 'dharma' in sanskrit is used in various ways, though it has been recently used as translation of english word 'religion'.It is not a correct translation. translation of 'dharama' as ocuupation done above is plain ignorant.
Bhagwdgita talks of 'chaturwranyamaya srishti gunakarmavibhagashah', emphasize the word 'gunakaram' which is gun meaning virtues and krama means works, there is no mention of birth based divisions by god.
shambuka was continuoing his tapas in a tantrik manner. in fact, the writer of 'ramayana' is a sudra.
and essentially one has to understand that nothing is 'patthar ki lakir' in hinduism. things have changed, customs have changed, are changing. on one hand u have medievial times when women could nit get out of house and in vedic times they could debate with men on vbarious issues including philosophy. in fact, parts of vedas wre written by women.
[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited August 08, 2000).]
As far as I could make out of this post, the best post which says it all so far is from Andhra which is reproduced above. On the one hand Xtreme, Mundyaa and the likes keep on beating their chests about moghuls and ghories being able to rule hindus because they were muslims on the other hand they deny any correlation between religion and achievement.
Make up your mind.
Reg. things about cast system, devadaasi, etc. we all agree that it is an evil and should not exist and a sizeable hindu community now does not believe in these things. You have to come to India to see this. Only some illiterates or some vested interests, in this case Brahmins, keep on continuing the tradition and are taking time to change. But people have started condemning it and in the course of time it will be wiped out. Reg. dowry deaths, it is not only the hindu religion, a good number of muslims also get caught because of dowry deaths, and in some cases the name used is not dowry but the story is the same. But thanks to a flexible religion, things are changing and changing fast.
[quote]
Originally posted by Mr Xtreme:
**"It is far better to perform one's svadharma (prescribed duties), even though faultily, than another's duties perfectly. Destruction in the course of performing one's own duty is better than engaging in another's duties, for to follow another's path is dangerous." -- Bhagavad-Gita 3:35.
"According to the three modes of material nature (goodness, passion, ignorance) and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society (Brahmin/Ksatriya/Vaisya/Sudra) are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable." -- Bhagavad-Gita 4:13.
"It is better to engage in one's own svadharma (occupation), even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one's nature are never affected by sinful reactions." -- Bhagavad-Gita 18:47.
Lord Rama (who, like Lord Krsna, is an Avatar of Lord Visnu) would be in complete accord with the above quotes; afterall, he killed an innocent Sudra, Sambuka, only because he was performing austerities which were not prescribed duties for low-castes(ref. Ramayana 7:88-89).
**
[/quote]
Extreme, I am sorry, but I couldn't find the quotes that you are mentioning about Gita in The Gita. Can you post me the URL which gives these, so that I may clarify.
And have you read Ramayana or do you know the context in which Rama killed Sambuca.
Moderator seeing that the topic of the thread is successfully sidetracked can you close the thread ?
I am going to start a new thread in ‘General’ forum
U'll really think that religion makes U smarter?! it might make u a better person, it sure as hell does not make U smart. U earn what U work for. that's it, plain and simple.
Einstien didn't read the torah day and night, yet he still made that theory, Isaac Newton didn't give much of a damn about the church yet he made all that. and Dr. Abdul Kadeer khan I'm sure doesn't sit at the mosque day and night, he's in his lab experimenting, just like the rest of the scientists, bankers, and all that who are properous.
Latez
"There as many ideas in the minds of men and women as there are stars in the sky, it is your job to hold on to one and make it come true"
Anonymous
Such is the abject state of degradation of women in Hinduism that even the most basic rights are taken away. These include the right to read, and even the right to live. Thus, women and Sudras were declared to be unfit for study of the Vedas as per the Holy Hindu scriptures :
Bhag.Pur. I.4.25 : " And as women, Sudras and the inferior members of the twice-borne classes were unfitted for hearing the Veda, and were infatuated in desiring the blessings, arising from the ceremonies, the muni, with a vision to their felicity, in his kindness composed the narrative called the Mahabharata."
– Bhag.Pur. I.4.25 ] Muir III,p.42 ]
The terms like avarodhika', avarodhavadhu’, which are frequently applied to women in Indo-Aryan literature show that women were not given any social freedom at all 1200, p.71 ] Sis. XII.20.7 ]. Vachaspati speaks of a kulavadhu', another synonym for woman’, as meaning `invisible to the Sun; Vach. p.73 ] 1200 p.71 ]. These metaphors indicate that Hindu women were essentially prisoners permanently locked up at home.
Also Madhava Acharya stated that " they women and Sudras ] are debarred … from being competent students of the Veda" Vedarthaprakasha of Madhava Acharyya on the Taittriya Yajur Veda, quoted in Muir III,p.66 ] **This clearly shows that Hindu women cannot, by any long shot, study the Vedas. Those who think otherwise are under delusion. **
I don’t think the religion is flexible, just that the texts have been changed or hidden from general consumption. You can make hinduism whatever you want to today but the original texts don’t lie. Gloss them over however you wish.
Andhra, this topic was sidetracked only by you. We have stuck quite faithfully to your topic. I’ll see you in the General Forum about your new thread, which in itself is an admission that you got this one badly wrong
As I mentioned things changed and vedas perts of which were writeen by women got banned to women.
However, thing changed again and women are free.
The extent of freedom could be judged from the fact that when Mandanmisra and Shankarachrya had debate, the referee was Mandanmishra's wife. So she was seen qualified enough to be a referee in religious debate. Shankaracharya won the debate.
P.S. xtreme ur sita agarwal translates 'kulwadhu' as invisible to sun. How stupid? Which madarassa did she learn sanskrit from?
[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited August 08, 2000).]
xtreme ur sita agarwal translates 'kulwadhu' as invisible to sun. How stupid? Which madarassa did she learn sanskrit from?
Sita Agarwal sounds like a hindu name to me. The article appears on a Dalit website. Dalits are the untouchables of India who aren't supposed to exist according to Indians here who are claiming all is funky and groovy in modern day India.
I put the link up quite clearly, so why you need to morph Sita Agarwal into a muslim is beyond me. It's not the muslims who introduced the caste system which, according to Dalits, they are still suffering from today.
[quote]
Originally posted by Mr Xtreme: >>xtreme ur sita agarwal translates 'kulwadhu' as invisible to sun. How stupid? Which madarassa did she learn sanskrit from?
Sita Agarwal sounds like a hindu name to me. The article appears on a Dalit website. Dalits are the untouchables of India who aren't supposed to exist according to Indians here who are claiming all is funky and groovy in modern day India.
I put the link up quite clearly, so why you need to morph Sita Agarwal into a muslim is beyond me. It's not the muslims who introduced the caste system which, according to Dalits, they are still suffering from today.
[/quote]
It is a stupid or deliberately dishonest translation. Kul means khandan, lineage. 'raghu-kul' e.g. will mean raghu's khandan. 'wadhu' means bride. now when u translate 'kulwadhu' as 'invisible to sun' it smells ignorance or dishonesty or both. given that, even name could be fake.