it is only some extremist pakistani muslims who want to create conflict of islam vs india.
they are afraid secular democracy may
succeed .
i am not ridiculing any thing and if i came across as that i apologize. however i do contradict indian culture and hindu culture are two different things. if you go back in history buddha was not happy with purely hindu society precisely what drove him away. no problem with akbar i think he was the one who stopped satti process more like he had a great impact on hindu society though he himself was not very well educated with his religion.
and india now is not exactly practising religion either more like religion reformation everywhere and same with hindus. " i think" hinduism in itself is not very welcoming of new ideas
an average hindu will ask for the same things as an average muslim. just the way of approach and how u pray is different. and as far as i know. hinduism is far more ancient than any religion of the world, it wasnt "invented" i think it just "evolved" over the years.
Dear Wise one,
Hindu and Indian culture are not two different things. The subcontinent on the eastern side of Indus (Hindu, or sindh) was called Hind, India, or Hindustan. This pattern started sometime in 13th or 14th century. Earlier we find name ‘Bharat’ in different historical scriptures.
One thing is very clear that Hindu religion was never known as Hindu religion, may be this terminology takes place from 17 or 18th century, to keep a division between Muslims and the people following native religions.
Is it not interesting that people living in India, or Hindustan never objected to this brand name ‘Hindu’ religion? And today we call ourselves ‘Hindu’ without objection.
What else you need to know that Hindus are not against new thoughts?
Akbar issued a law against Sati custom? Did Hindus shout that Akbar was interfering in Hindu personal law?
There was a minor protest, but later people accepted the change. (By the way Sati was not existing till 12th century Ad, it started with the invasion of foreigners from west of India.)
Did Hindus or Brahmin throw away Buddha? Did Brahmins torture Buddhists in ancient India?
This is a wrong concept. If it is true how the contemporary Buddha stoops, and temples are left intact? Why Hindus did not destroy those temples in 2nd or 3rd century AD?
So, why Buddhism lost roots in India? This is a debatable issue. Buddha was an atheist, and Buddhism is an atheist religion, and may be the Hindu society was not ready to compromise with Ram and Krishna.
You are welcome with more questions, though I am not a scholar of Hindu religion.
DearChalnaji, I am very anxious to know of God who will react if insulted. Kindly enlighten me.