The real cause of Islamic terrorism - the yogic perspective

[bananabrain]

whatever, niranjan, india is super, brilliant and fantastic and we should all just be totally impressed. well done there.

as it happens, i am in fact an indian jew, of iraqi extraction. my mother is from mumbai. all i am saying is that what you are saying is, in theory, quite correct, but the reality leaves much to be desired. ask the punjabis. i don't think there's any country in the world that has got this right - i'm not singling india out for criticism, but nor am i saying that it is necessarily a paragon as you seem to want everyone to know. stop banging your patriotic drum - we're here to talk, not lecture each other in a self-aggrandising way.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[niranjan]

whatever, niranjan, india is super, brilliant and fantastic and we should all just be totally impressed. well done there.

as it happens, i am in fact an indian jew, of iraqi extraction. my mother is from mumbai. all i am saying is that what you are saying is, in theory, quite correct, but the reality leaves much to be desired. ask the punjabis.

And what about the punjabis . As you yourself state that you are an Indian(and conveniently ignores the fact that India is the only country in the world that has not persecuted the jews) you should be knowing that the ISI was behind the training and equipping of misguided sikh youth. And stil sikh militancy was crushed by the sikhs themselves.

In fact we are ourselves having a sikh punjabi prime minister. And the BJP and their allies the Akalis had a thumping victory in Punjab in the recent elections and are ruling punjab now.

I myself have seen many sikhs in the BJP , and many hindu spiritual organisations all over India. And punjabi sikhs are spread all over India, including south India where I come from.

We hindus ourselves see the sikh gurus as our gurus and visit the gurudwaras and worship there.

i don't think there's any country in the world that has got this right - i'm not singling india out for criticism, but nor am i saying that it is necessarily a paragon as you seem to want everyone to know. stop banging your patriotic drum - we're here to talk, not lecture each other in a self-aggrandising way.

I am not drumming a patriotic drum, just stating facts in order to support my argument , which is obvious to all.

And I must say that even though you are an Indian jew, you still criticize India, without mentioning what India has done for the jews.

You must understand that if we wanted, we could have easily denied your ancestors refuge, or freedom of worship in India, but thats not our style.

We are not asking you to show gratitude to India, we didnt give refuge to the jews for gratitude or anything.

In fact I know of jews who barge into the hindu forums and accuse us of polytheism, animal worship and other crap , and state that they are superior.

And we also put them in their place, without even mentioning that India is the only country in the world that has not persecuted its jewish refugees.

As I said before, we are not asking for gratitude or anything, but at least if possible, defend your fatherland and highlight its positives, instead of merely criticizing it.

 

[bananabrain]

ahem - i'm not an indian (although i do kind of look like one) and although i have no beef with india (if you'll pardon the expression) i can certainly state that this:

India is the only country in the world that has not persecuted the jews

is quite simply not the case, however praiseworthy india may be. and if subhas chandra bhose or whatever his name was had had his way, that certainly wouldn't have lasted. my family and most of the rest of the mumbai community left in the 50s because it was made pretty clear to them that they were going to be affected by "positive discrimination" under the congress party.

you should be knowing that the ISI was behind the training and equipping of misguided sikh youth. And stil sikh militancy was crushed by the sikhs themselves.

ah, yes, why not blame the pakistanis for everything, that'll help.

basically, niranjan, you're way, way too aggressive about islam. it's not going to make you any friends here any more than my pointing out the shortcomings of the BJP (or the akali dal) is going to endear me to you.

I am not drumming a patriotic drum, just stating facts in order to support my argument , which is obvious to all.

excuse *me*. you are quoting other assertions which support your opinion. something is not a fact unless everyone concerned agrees. and i certainly don't agree with your take on islam. and as for it being "obvious to all", i don't see anyone else agreeing with you - particularly muslimwoman.

In fact I know of jews who barge into the hindu forums and accuse us of polytheism, animal worship and other crap, and state that they are superior.

not on my watch they don't. i don't put up with that sort of thing; there are idiots and ignoramuses in all religions - including hinduism.

at least if possible, defend your fatherland and highlight its positives, instead of merely criticizing it.

it's not my "fatherland". this is just jingoistic nonsense. i am *reacting* to *your* overly aggressive and tendentious statements about islam, which have no place on an interfaith *dialogue* board. your overweening arrogance about the political marvelousness of india is quite breathtaking and in my opinion quite unbecoming. i don't bang the drum for any nation-state - none of them are perfect and frankly i find uncritical, rose-tinted patriotism quite nauseating. might i invite you over to a more political and less restrained blog, Pickled Politics where the various indians, pakistanis, bangladeshis, hindus, sikhs, muslims and buddhists will provide a far more literate criticism of your position than i can supply. you'll get very little joy here at CR with your attitude.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[niranjan]

ahem - i'm not an indian (although i do kind of look like one) and although i have no beef with india (if you'll pardon the expression) i can certainly state that this:

Well, you did say that your mom is from mumbai, which means you belongs to the jews who fled to India from the roman tyranny.

and if subhas chandra bhose or whatever his name was had had his way, that certainly wouldn't have lasted. :

And where have Bose stated that he was anti-semitic. In fact if you care to check, he was the only man who publicly criticized Hitler in Germany.

my family and most of the rest of the mumbai community left in the 50s because it was made pretty clear to them that they were going to be affected by "positive discrimination" under the congress party.:

So when you were living in India all these centuries , you had no problems whatsoever.

When some rumours came up that the congress party is going to discriminate or something, which they have not because of their constant emphasis on secularism, you found it convenient to leave the land that had sheltered you for centuries.

And as for jews in India, there is clearly a strong jewish population in Mumbai and rest of India, including south India. Wonder why they have not left like you. I myself have a jewish friend from Mumbai, Raymond, with whom I had enjoyed life with, and he himself stated that there are lots of jews in India.
He is also a patriot and very keen on the indian cricket games, as he was always hooked on the transistor. While he is intensely proud of his heritage and his roots, he is also devoted to hinduism and practices meditation. In fact we met in an ashram. We used to talk about Israel and the Israeli-arab wars and stuff and museums in Israel containing soaps made of human beings and other stuff. Really hurt me a lot, just as I was traumatised by reading the book on Anne Frank.

ah, yes, why not blame the pakistanis for everything, that'll help.:

And why not, captured sikh terrorists themselves have stated the ISI is helping them. Where else do you think these guys got all the sophisticated weapons and training from!

Also terrorists in Kashmir have also targetted Israelis visiting there. Just for the sake of information.

basically, niranjan, you're way, way too aggressive about islam. it's not going to make you any friends here any more than my pointing out the shortcomings of the BJP (or the akali dal) is going to endear me to you.
.:

I am only pointing out islamic terrorism and its roots as shown by our prophet. I am only aggressive against islamic terrorism , not Islam, which I have stated before.

excuse *me*. you are quoting other assertions which support your opinion. something is not a fact unless everyone concerned agrees. and i certainly don't agree with your take on islam. and as for it being "obvious to all", i don't see anyone else agreeing with you - particularly muslimwoman.
.:

And why do you think Tao supported 'most of my views' . Also I had got appreciation from others as well on this, and I thank them for this, though I would have continued even if they appreciated me or not.

not on my watch they don't. i don't put up with that sort of thing; there are idiots and ignoramuses in all religions - including hinduism..:

And where are hindus who criticize judaism, if you don't mind.

it's not my "fatherland". this is just jingoistic nonsense. ..:

It is indeed your fatherland, as it is the land that gave your persecuted ancestors refuge and freedom of worship , and never persecuted your people , even if every other country did so.

your overweening arrogance about the political marvelousness of india is quite breathtaking and in my opinion quite unbecoming.

And why don't you state the otherwise, and how the Indians persecuted the jews, zoroastrians, bahais , tibetan buddhists, syrian christians, and that we don't have a muslim president, or a sikh prime minister, or a christian lady who is the leader of the ruling party in India.

i don't bang the drum for any nation-state - none of them are perfect and frankly i find uncritical, rose-tinted patriotism quite nauseating.

Well, none of them is perfect, especially Israel, but I believe India comes closer to perfection.

might i invite you over to a more political and less restrained blog, Pickled Politics where the various indians, pakistanis, bangladeshis, hindus, sikhs, muslims and buddhists will provide a far more literate criticism of your position than i can supply. you'll get very little joy here at CR with your attitude.

I have already been in very unrestrained blogs and forums and all the time , I had indeed put all of them in place.

When I have the time , I will indeed come to the blog you mention, and I wish to thank you for it as well. I love challenges.

 

[Snoopy]

From all this , you can see that India is indeed in a position to be held up of a paragon or exemplar of how to run a multicultural society.

Well India is a country that I am interested in visiting but I'm not sure about being a paragon. There seems to be a part of the establishment that wants to limit religious freedom: specifically from Hinduism to Buddhism and Christianity, going by what I read here:

…Hindus from the former Untouchable castes are converting to Buddhism in protest at the continuing discrimination they face.
Conversion is a highly charged political issue. Several states have passed laws this year making it harder to convert, and the mass ceremonies will infuriate Hindu nationalist parties that have been campaigning to stop lower caste Hindus changing their religion.
But for many Dalits, as Untouchables are now known, conversion is the only way to escape the oppression they still face in Hindu society.
Gujarat, home to some of the most hardline Hindu groups, has introduced a more controversial law under which Buddhism is considered part of Hinduism.

from:http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/conversion-to-escape-discrimination-7035.html

s.

 

[Snoopy]

I might be old but I'm not that bloody old!!!!

So, just for the record, how old are you?

s.

 

[niranjan]

Well India is a country that I am interested in visiting but I'm not sure about being a paragon. There seems to be a part of the establishment that wants to limit religious freedom: specifically from Hinduism to Buddhism and Christianity, going by what I read here:.

The so-called establishment has made it clear that it opposes missionary groups that uses fraudulent methods to convert, like anti-hindu propaganda, fear of hell and stuff,bribery and coercion.

Other non-prosleytising christian sects in India have also condemned these missionaries, for stealing their own flock from their sects to their sects.

And as for the buddhists, the so-called establishment is not bothered about them, as buddhism is a part of hindu and dharmic culture, ( it is considered a dharmic religion), and they themselves worship the buddha and have extended support to the dalai lama.

But for many Dalits, as Untouchables are now known, conversion is the only way to escape the oppression they still face in Hindu society.
Gujarat, home to some of the most hardline Hindu groups, has introduced a more controversial law under which Buddhism is considered part of Hinduism.:.

I also wish to state that it is only a few dalits who are converting to other religions, and most of the time , they have come back to their religion on their own or through the efforts of hindu spiritual organisations.

Also wish to state that the caste system or untouchability has no santion in the vedas. Krishna and Buddha and other enlightened masters have stated that it is the karma or aptitude or inclination that determines the caste and not birth.

Parashurama, who was born as a brahmana, became a kshatriya when he fought against injustice with martial deeds.

Both Buddha and Vishwamitra and Guru Nanak , who were born as Kshatriyas, became Brahmanas, through contemplation of the Divine and meditation and wisdom.


The caste system was originally based on this, but later it became corrupted to the birth based system. It is akin to the feudal system that was there in Europe and Japan.

Our masters from medieval times itself have condemned caste discrimination, which includes mirabai,dhyaneshwar,eknath, tulsidas,narsi mehta, ramananda,ramanuja,tukaram, all of whom belonged to the upper castes.


There are also numerous enlightened masters that came from the shudra castes, who can be seen as the true representatives of Hinduism as seen by Sree Narayana Guru, Chattampi Swamigal, Tiruvalluvar, Guru RAvi Das,Swami Chinmayananda, Bogar,Nammalvar,Dadu,Gorobha Kumbhar,Janabai, Kabir,Phule,Namdev,Nataraja Guru, and many others.

And enlightened masters of the shudras along with the others have indeed worked to eradicate caste discrimination in India.


And incessant efforts are going on now as well by all hindu spiritual organisations to eradicate whatever is left of caste discrimination.


Anyway the caste system , like the feudal system elsewhere, have been banned in India 60 years back, and anyone practicing caste discrimination is arrested and prosecuted.

The arya samaj , founded by Swami Dayananda Saraswati and strictly based on the vedas, promotes inter-caste marriages, and as a result , intercaste marriages are rampant in India.

In fact, most of the rishis, belonged to the lower economic groups. Valmiki and Vyasa, who composed the epics ramayana and mahabharatha, were shudras as well.



I myself belong to the shudra and so-called 'untouchable' caste of Sree Narayana Guru , the famous hindu enlightened master of south India.

We also have a female hindu enlightened master from the dalit caste, Mata Amritanandamayi , who is world famous as the hugging saint, and it is a common sight to see upper caste people falling at her feet in reverence and devotion and calling her Mother.

 

[Snoopy]

The quote and my information come from The Independent, a reliable newspaper I would say; I am not basing my post on any agenda that I have. Sections of the establishment are clearly “bothered” or they wouldn’t be attempting to prevent conversion by bringing in laws to ban it. Buddhism may be a dharmic religion but it is clearly being targeted to prevent people moving away from Hinduism, according to this article and an interview I have read elsewhere. Buddhism is distinct from Hinduism in fundamental ways, or else people would not bother to convert. My understanding is that it is not just a “few” converting. I have read of this phenomenon on several occasions and seen it reported on TV, that of “mass” conversions taking place, not just a few here and there. The caste system may be banned but just from my own experience in the UK I am aware that it is still unfortunately very much “alive and well.”

s.

 

[niranjan]

Buddhism may be a dharmic religion but it is clearly being targeted to prevent people moving away from Hinduism, according to this article and an interview I have read elsewhere..

And as I say it is not being targetted at all. The sangh parivar themselves have the pictures of buddha, and they don't mind hindus converting to buddhism, but not to other religions.

Buddhism is distinct from Hinduism in fundamental ways, or else people would not bother to convert. My understanding is that it is not just a “few” converting. ..

Buddhism is distinct in the sense that it does not have the social institution of caste system, which as I stated is condemned by hindu enlightened masters as well.

The buddha himself is a sannyasin and a jnana yogi.

The dalai lama himself has said that buddhism is very similar to hinduism, and both can be considered as sister religions.

Vivekananda and Gandhi, state that buddhists are hindus themselves. And this view is echoed by scholars themselves that buddhism is the reformed version of Hinduism.

I have read of this phenomenon on several occasions and seen it reported on TV, that of “mass” conversions taking place, not just a few here and there. The caste system may be banned but just from my own experience in the UK I am aware that it is still unfortunately very much “alive and well.”

s.

There indeed are thousands who have converted to Buddhism as a political protest, but again many of them returned back to hinduism as I stated before ,adopting the teachings of the buddha as well, i hope.


And you have to understand that India is a land of 1 billion 200 million , about one-fith of humanity, and its population is greater than that of eurasia itself.

There will be a few cases here and there, just as you can find cases of racism in Europe and Russia, which if brought together will be magnified.

There are 150 million dalits , but you only find some thousands converting and most of them coming back as well.

Caste discrimination is indeed eradicated to a very large extent, which I myself as a shudra and so-called untouchable knows, though it may be practiced in certain rural areas, outside the jurisdiction of law and order.
And the government is indeed focussing in these areas which are also highlighted by the media. The hindu spiritual organisations are also working on this on a war footing.


Also due to the rapidly growing economy of India, we will indeed see modernised police forces every where and a good judiciary as well to cope with it.

It is only a matter of time, before the remnants of it are wiped out as well.

 

[Snoopy]

And as I say it is not being targetted at all. The sangh parivar themselves have the pictures of buddha, and they don't mind hindus converting to buddhism, but not to other religions.

A person should be free to convert to whatever religion they want.

Buddhism is distinct in the sense that it does not have the social institution of caste system, which as I stated is condemned by hindu enlightened masters as well.

Buddhism is clearly distinct in many other fundamental ways as well.

The dalai lama himself has said that buddhism is very similar to hinduism, and both can be considered as sister religions.

Vivekananda and Gandhi, state that buddhists are hindus themselves. And this view is echoed by scholars themselves that buddhism is the reformed version of Hinduism.

Yes, the Buddha was born in India so there is a relationship between them, maybe call them sister religions then. However, I think most people who call themselves Buddhist would not also call themselves Hindu.

s.

 

[niranjan]

A person should be free to convert to whatever religion they want.

Yes , I agree with that. But not through coercion or bribery and propaganda against other religions.

Buddhism is clearly distinct in many other fundamental ways as well..

And what ways if you care to explain.

Yes, the Buddha was born in India so there is a relationship between them, maybe call them sister religions then. However, I think most people who call themselves Buddhist would not also call themselves Hindu.

s.

Some buddhists in India,do call themselves hindu, and one friend of mine chants the gayatri mantra.

We don't care whether the buddhists call themselves hindu or not. Its not our problem, though they themselves keep stating that hinduism is very similar to buddhism.

As far as our prophet Vivekananda and Gandhi and other spiritual masters are concerned , they are hindu. However we are not interested in enforcing this belief in the buddhists. They are free to believe what they want.

The Buddhists too revere OM, which you must know is Hindu . Om Mani Padme Hum is a very important prayer of the buddhists. In fact it is said that all the teachings of the buddha is contained in this mantra.

Also the Buddhists believe in reincarnation , the theory of karma, and salvation from the cycle of birth and rebirth , vegetarianism , nirvana, like the hindus and which are the original beliefs of the hindus.

They also stress meditation like the hindus and also chastity, humility, sannyasa like the hindus. They also shave their heads and wear orange robes like hindu monks.

You can clearly see meditation postures of the Buddha in yogic poses, like Shiva and others.

And both the hindus and buddhists believe that nirvana or enlightenment is the goal of human life.

The vaishnavas, probably awed by the superhuman feats of the buddha incorporated him as the 9th avatar of Vishnu, (which I don't believe.)

The Ramakrishna mission, has the tradition of initiating monks before the statue of the Buddha, which was started by Vivekananda.

You can see the statues and pictures of the Buddha in many hindu institutions and many hindu spiritual masters quote his teachings .

 

[Snoopy]

Perhaps I should make clear I find appellations restrictive, as this exchange is beginning to demonstrate to me. I know little of Hinduism other than it seems to involve a great many deities. I know a little of Buddhism and do not believe in deities. Like the dalai lama, I don’t think the world needs religion right now. My interest in Buddhism and what it means to me is derived from the truths I see in it and it not being a “religion” to me.

And what ways if you care to explain.

Crumbs. I think a cursory look around the internet or any decent books will show an interested person the differences. Buddhism to me is essentially a psychological toolkit, a means to improve our psychological health and (perhaps) those around us. It is concerned with the mind, not essentially with worshipping and praying to deities.

The Buddhists too revere OM, which you must know is Hindu . Om Mani Padme Hum is a very important prayer of the buddhists. In fact it is said that all the teachings of the buddha is contained in this mantra.

Also the Buddhists believe in reincarnation , the theory of karma, and salvation from the cycle of birth and rebirth , vegetarianism , nirvana, like the hindus and which are the original beliefs of the hindus.

They also stress meditation like the hindus and also chastity, humility, sannyasa like the hindus. They also shave their heads and wear orange robes like hindu monks.

As I say I can only speak of Buddhism in the way it is of “use” to me and I do not describe myself as a Buddhist (and never will) but:
Om is not important to me, I do not pray, I do not believe in reincarnation (of the soul; no-one calling themselves a Buddhist will because there is no “soul” to a Buddhist) and I am a vegetarian but not because of Buddhism, Buddhism per se does not promote vegetarianism. Monks may shave their heads and wear particular clothes but what makes you a Buddhist (or not) is what one thinks and does, not ones appearance. Even if I was to call myself a Buddhist there are great differences between traditions and schools, making comparisons to Hinduism difficult. Also, similar terms in Hinduism and Buddhism do not I understand always mean the same.

s.

 

[iBrian]

niranjan, I think calling Buddhists as Hindus sounds like calling Christians as Jews.

Perhaps one of our Buddhist friends would care to enlighten us on the distinction?

 

[niranjan]

Perhaps I should make clear I find appellations restrictive, as this exchange is beginning to demonstrate to me. I know little of Hinduism other than it seems to involve a great many deities. I know a little of Buddhism and do not believe in deities. .

There are deities in Hinduism including the trinity, but it is also stated that all these deities are the manifestation of the supreme impersonal being Brahman.

Also in Hinduism too, you don't have to believe in deities to achieve nirvana, and a study of Ramana Maharhi, or J.Krishnamurthi or Jnana Yoga or raja yoga or karma yoga is enough to understand this.

Like the dalai lama, I don’t think the world needs religion right now. My interest in Buddhism and what it means to me is derived from the truths I see in it and it not being a “religion” to me. .

Fine, you are free to believe what you want to believe. What matters is whether you are a good human being or not and achieve enlightenment.

Crumbs. I think a cursory look around the internet or any decent books will show an interested person the differences. Buddhism to me is essentially a psychological toolkit, a means to improve our psychological health and (perhaps) those around us. It is concerned with the mind, not essentially with worshipping and praying to deities. .

So you know more than the dalai lama and Vivekananda who are experts in dharmic culture!

Anyway , any so-called interested person can also by going through the internet or good books will indeed find similarities between hinduism and buddhism, and there are many of them. Both the ultimate goal of hinduism and buddhism itself is nirvana or enlightenment. Do you wish to argue with that !!!!!!!!!

And Buddhism according to westerners may be about psychological health and stuff, but its ultimate aim and most important teaching of the Buddha is indeed nirvana or enlightenment.

As I say I can only speak of Buddhism in the way it is of “use” to me and I do not describe myself as a Buddhist (and never will) but:
Om is not important to me, I do not pray, I do not believe in reincarnation (of the soul; no-one calling themselves a Buddhist will because there is no “soul” to a Buddhist) and I am a vegetarian but not because of Buddhism, Buddhism per se does not promote vegetarianism. Monks may shave their heads and wear particular clothes but what makes you a Buddhist (or not) is what one thinks and does, not ones appearance. Even if I was to call myself a Buddhist there are great differences between traditions and schools, making comparisons to Hinduism difficult. Also, similar terms in Hinduism and Buddhism do not I understand always mean the same.

s.

And why are you saying all this stuff to me. Did I ask you about your personal beliefs. I don't think so. You are free to believe what you want to believe.There is no problem in it. As our prophet Vivekananda himself said, organised religion is bad for spiritual health.

Follow your own intuitions and logic and thereby you will tune yourself to the divine and will find your way and path.

 

[niranjan]

niranjan, I think calling Buddhists as Hindus sounds like calling Christians as Jews.

As I said before, this is the perspective of hinduism and the hindu prophets and enlightened masters and leaders, but we are not interested in imposing this belief on others. That is not our concern.


And about jews and christians, the jews , from what i know , do not believe in christ or accept him as a messiah or prophet.

They believe that those who follow the teachings of judaism and moses will go to heaven.

On the other hand the christians believe that only those who accept Christ will go to heaven, and the rest will go to hell, no matter how noble or good they are, they are still losers because they do not know or accept christ, and this includes the jews as well.


On the other hand hinduism and buddhism maintains that it is character that is most important and even an atheist of good character, will attain heaven or enligtenment.

According to hinduism , a good buddhist, rather than a bad hindu , will go to heaven or attain enlightenment.

The most important goal in hinduism and buddhism is nirvana or enlightenment .

And if a hindu decides to follow the buddhist path to attain nirvana, he does not cease to be a hindu, as he is only following the teaching of hinduism to pursue nirvana through whichever goal he finds suitable.


You must understand that the philosophy and metaphysics of the dharmic religions hinduism and buddhism is not in the same class as that of the abrahamic religions.

 

[bananabrain]

Well, you did say that your mom is from mumbai, which means you belongs to the jews who fled to India from the roman tyranny.

on the contrary - although some communities, like the cochinis and the bene yisra'el of mumbai, could possibly be argued to derive from the second Temple exile, the likelihood is that they were either converted or derive from the even earlier first Temple exile, or as they themselves claim, from the "ten lost tribes" deported by the assyrians in the destruction of the northern kingdom of israel in 722 BCE. the largest mumbai community, from which i come, was that of the baghdadis who, as their name suggests, were from iraq, where they had lived as long as since 586 BCE when the first Temple was destroyed by the babylonians. in fact, the baghdadis were economic migrants, not refugees - my own family came with the british, or so i'm told. in fact, my grandfather was born in karachi, so you could just as well argue that my "fatherland" is pakistan, it would be just as logical.

And where have Bose stated that he was anti-semitic. In fact if you care to check, he was the only man who publicly criticized Hitler in Germany.

oh, well, that's all right then. i suppose that makes up for him collaborating with the nazis and setting up the azad hind legion, which was attached to the waffen ss! i'm not sure these principles of his would have lasted very long if hitler had said to him "hand over the jews and i'll invade india for you". that's my point.

So when you were living in India all these centuries, you had no problems whatsoever.

gosh, that's not a generalised statement, is it? turn it round for a moment: "so, when we were living in india all those centuries, we experienced all sorts of problems all the time" - both are equally meaningless. i think you're missing my point here, which is that a) *india's* treatment of jews is neither here nor there, we're not the ones getting it in the neck and b) although india does not, as i am happy to say, have a track record of anti-semitism, it has never been a completely happy ship on the multicultural front, for all that gandhi (for whom i have great respect) attempted to build it into the political structure at source, there were great failures (partition being rather the case in point) which i am sure you will happily blame on the muslims alone, but this is my whole point - you are being completely, completely one-sided and starting the whole thing off from the position that muslims need to justify terrorism to you. i'm not turning round to you and demanding that you take responsibility for the many stupid statements that have come out of the various parts of the RSS, am i?

When some rumours came up that the congress party is going to discriminate or something, which they have not because of their constant emphasis on secularism, you found it convenient to leave the land that had sheltered you for centuries.

how quick you are to play that card....

Also terrorists in Kashmir have also targetted Israelis visiting there. Just for the sake of information.

i know all this stuff. i've not got anything against india - as i've already said, i feel you're being way too "have you quit beating your wife?" about islam, which, imo, is not conducive to productive dialogue here - i'm advising you to dial it down or you're no doubt going to turn into one of those people who post tracts and tracts of argument but nobody else wants to talk to because they're so aggressive.

am only aggressive against islamic terrorism , not Islam, which I have stated before.

i must say i failed to pick up on the fine distinction when you started trying to support your argument with quotes from the Qur'an while refusing to accept any contextual interpretation of them from people who clearly understood them better than you.

Also I had got appreciation from others as well on this, and I thank them for this, though I would have continued even if they appreciated me or not.

gosh, you must be in demand for dinner parties.

And where are hindus who criticize judaism, if you don't mind.

where are muslims who criticise australian aboriginal beliefs? do me a favour. you can perfectly easily be a complete git without having a go at the jews, as should be obvious.

It is indeed your fatherland, as it is the land that gave your persecuted ancestors refuge and freedom of worship, and never persecuted your people , even if every other country did so.

see, this is the sort of self-serving hot air that gets right up my nose. stop blowing your own trumpet and you'll get a bt of respect.

I have already been in very unrestrained blogs and forums and all the time , I had indeed put all of them in place.

gosh, well, i can't wait for you to put the picklers in their place. i'm sure it'll take no time at all.

The caste system was originally based on this, but later it became corrupted to the birth based system. It is akin to the feudal system that was there in Europe and Japan.

well, i don't know about japan, but in europe you could certainly escape from your birth-class by joining the church or by being ennobled on the battlefield, or by becoming someone's mistress. it's not exactly the same as upward mobility, but i'm not sure the caste system allowed for even such.

As our prophet Vivekananda himself said, organised religion is bad for spiritual health.

harrumph - and is that a categorical statement, because if it's meant to apply to judaism (to say nothing of christianity and islam) it's rather on the triumphalist side.

perhaps we could draw a line under this rather unproductive discussion and open a separate discussion on caste, which you seem to know a fair bit about. or how about something about how "hinduism" is defined - i for one would be very interested to hear your point of view on whether hinduism can be understood as one religion at all, or as a vast spectrum of different beliefs. this has a great bearing on my own perspective, because, as you know, we have a problem with "idolatry" and many less educated jews consider "hinduism" to be "idolatrous". i myself do not, partly because i don't consider there to really be such a thing as "hinduism" per se and partly because i have rarely seen such a thing as an "idolatrous act" committed by hindus, although there have been some things which have given me pause for thought.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Muslimwoman]

So, just for the record, how old are you?

s.

Didn't your Mummy teach you it is rude to ask a lady such a question? Only kidding, I am a mere 42 years old and it is true that when you reach 40 you start to have some clue as to who you are, so life really does begin at 40.

Salaam

 

[bananabrain]

They believe that those who follow the teachings of judaism and moses will go to heaven.

ahem - this is not the way we think. as i have said elsewhere, we believe that "the righteous amongst the nations have a portion in the World to Come" - so it's not just us. get your facts right, mate.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[niranjan]

on the contrary - although some communities, like the cochinis and the bene yisra'el of mumbai, could possibly be argued to derive from the second Temple exile, the likelihood is that they were either converted or derive from the even earlier first Temple exile, or as they themselves claim, from the "ten lost tribes" deported by the assyrians in the destruction of the northern kingdom of israel in 722 BCE. the largest mumbai community, from which i come, was that of the baghdadis who, as their name suggests, were from iraq, where they had lived as long as since 586 BCE when the first Temple was destroyed by the babylonians. in fact, the baghdadis were economic migrants, not refugees - my own family came with the british, or so i'm told.

Whatever that may be, you and the persecuted jews still lived in India,due to the refuge and fredom of worship provided by hindus. That is what matters.

in fact, my grandfather was born in karachi, so you could just as well argue that my "fatherland" is pakistan, it would be just as logical..

Well ,there was no pakistan before 1947. Also it was India and the hindus that provided your persecuted ancestors refuge and full freedom of worship. I am not sure what the muslims would have done. Most of the muslims in India hate the jews intensely from what I have seen. When it comes to the jews , they seem to be foaming@ the mouth, which was very evident when the Israeli president visited India.

oh, well, that's all right then. i suppose that makes up for him collaborating with the nazis and setting up the azad hind legion, which was attached to the waffen ss! i'm not sure these principles of his would have lasted very long if hitler had said to him "hand over the jews and i'll invade india for you". ..that's my point...

Bose indeed had collaborated with the nazis , strictly for the independence of India and nothing else. He was the only man in Germany who had the courage to publicly criticize Hitler for his treatment of the jews, the destruction of democratic institutions in Germany, and the invasion of Russia by Germany.

Probably because of this, the humiliated Hitler wasn't very keen on Bose, and it is for this that Bose went to Japan to organise the India Prisoners of war to form the Indian National Army, which played a crucial role in India's independence movement.

gosh, that's not a generalised statement, is it? turn it round for a moment: "so, when we were living in india all those centuries, we experienced all sorts of problems all the time" - both are equally meaningless. i think you're missing my point here, which is that a) *india's* treatment of jews is neither here nor there, we're not the ones getting it in the neck and b) although india does not, as i am happy to say, have a track record of anti-semitism, it has never been a completely happy ship on the multicultural front, for all that gandhi (for whom i have great respect) attempted to build it into the political structure at source, there were great failures...

I think your name is very appropriate. I like it.

Coming to the topic, and what are the great failures on the multicultural front!!!!!!!!! Is it the fact that we had given shelter to the jews who fled from Israel and came to India seeking refuge and shelter.

Is it the fact that the zoroastrians were given shelter , refuge and freedom of worship by the hindus, and that the zoroastrian culture ,religion and heritage is intact to the whole world .

Is it the fact that the syrian christians were given shelter, refuge and freedom of worship by the hindus, and they are living in India even now with no problems whatsoever.

Is it the fact that the bahais were given refuge and freedom of worship in India by the hindus, and that India has the largest number of bahais in the world.

Is it the fact that the tibetan buddhists headed by dalai lama were given refuge and freedom of worship by the Hindus in India and we have a thriving tibetan buddhist population.

Or is it the fact that even after the bloody partition and all the atrocities committed by the Islamic terrorists, such as Direct Action Day riots and the partition riots, the hindus still allowed millions of muslims to live in India.

Or is it the fact that we had two muslim presidents before and our present president is also a muslim, and we have a sikh prime minister and a christian lady who is the ruling leader of the governing party of India.

Or are you suggesting that India should also be like Israel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(partition being rather the case in point) which i am sure you will happily blame on the muslims alone, but this is my whole point - you are being completely, completely one-sided and starting the whole thing off from the position that muslims need to justify terrorism to you. i'm not turning round to you and demanding that you take responsibility for the many stupid statements that have come out of the various parts of the RSS, am i?
...

If there is anything evil anywhere , it should be criticized. And I had only yesterday criticized the VHP along with a friend of mine ( from the RSS), who think that the VHP's criticism of Valentines Day is idiotic.

how quick you are to play that card....
...

And why don't you explain why there is still a substantial jewish population in India,who has not left , and why Raymond , my young Indian jewish friend who loves India ( and Israel too) has not left India,unlike other spineless jews.

i know all this stuff. i've not got anything against india ...

Yeah , I know that very well.

- as i've already said, i feel you're being way too "have you quit beating your wife?" about islam, which, imo, is not conducive to productive dialogue here - i'm advising you to dial it down or you're no doubt going to turn into one of those people who post tracts and tracts of argument but nobody else wants to talk to because they're so aggressive....

I believe I have indeed engaged others in debate, and I am willing to do so as well again, if needed.

i must say i failed to pick up on the fine distinction when you started trying to support your argument with quotes from the Qur'an while refusing to accept any contextual interpretation of them from people who clearly understood them better than you.....

So are you saying that you too believe there is nothing wrong with verses that state the believer to chop the fingers and limbs of the unbeliever, crucify him, take his women as captive slaves and have sex with these traumatised ladies, and the verse which states that it will never be accepted of any one to accept a religion other than Islam.

I know that you yourself know this is immoral, but is just putting them over here for the sake of disengenuos argument.

Go and check the jewish forums, that in www.about.com as well, and see what the jews themselves have to say with respect to these verses.

And I must say that none of them , had gone through my matter that is there in this thread.

gosh, you must be in demand for dinner parties.

Well, I have been praised lavishly but not been extended an invitation yet, but if given , I will go for it. I love parties.

where are muslims who criticise australian aboriginal beliefs? do me a favour. you can perfectly easily be a complete git without having a go at the jews, as should be obvious..

Well, for the sake of information, I had criticized the atrocities britishers have committed against the australian aborginals in an another forum , and again I was praised for this by an american with native Indian blood. However I didn't do this for anyones praise.

Any way why don't you answer my question which I posed to you. Do you know of hindus who have criticized judaism.

see, this is the sort of self-serving hot air that gets right up my nose. stop blowing your own trumpet and you'll get a bt of respect...

And why not. I believe I have every right to say this, as we were the ones who gave your persecuted ancestors refuge and freedom of worship, and have never harmed your people, even though every other country has done so.And I am sure there will be grateful and patriotic jews in India , that will acknowledge this. And I have already seen one.

gosh, well, i can't wait for you to put the picklers in their place. i'm sure it'll take no time at all....

And why do you have to wait for me . Have you become an another fan of me ! If you are, I don't mind though I might charge for autographs. And as for the picklers, I will do it on my own time and pleasure.

 

[niranjan]

well, i don't know about japan, but in europe you could certainly escape from your birth-class by joining the church or by being ennobled on the battlefield, or by becoming someone's mistress. it's not exactly the same as upward mobility, but i'm not sure the caste system allowed for even such.
....

Well ,from what I know , the british knights and aristocrats especially, marry among themselves in the past, and they do the same in the present as well, with respect to the aristocrats. They do not marry among the lower classes.
They also do not marry among the Indians or asians or blacks as well.

And I had heard from a jewish friend and an another friend of mine,that there is a class system in Israel as well. Don't know much about it.

However I do know that black jews cannot intermarry with the white jews and are discriminated. And I have seen this in newspapers as well. If I dig up on it, I can present some interesting material over here.

As for the Indian caste system, perhaps you should understand that most of the rishis themselves who have written the vedas are from the lower economic groups.

The original caste system was based on karma and aptitude, but later it corrupted to become the birth based system, which is now dismantled.

Even then , many of different castes have gone to the other castes as well.

Parashurama, who was born a brahmin , became a kshatriya through his martial deeds fighting against injustice.

Vishwamitra, who was born a kshatriya, became a brahmin through his spiritual efforts. Same with the Buddha who was born as a kshatriya.

Valmiki, who was a shudra, became a brahmin through his spiritual efforts, and he composed the Ramayana.

Same with Vyasa, who was a shudra, and who composed the mahabharatha.

And there have been numerous others as well.

Sree Narayana Guru, the hindu enlightened master from the lower untouchable caste, became a brahmin through his spiritual efforts.

The mahabharatha and other scriptures too says that it is conduct that determines the caste and not just birth.

And many brahmins and kshatriyas , who failed in their conduct were relegated to the lower castes.

Shankaracharya himself, raised fishermen to the position of brahmins and baluchis to the position of kshatriyas.

harrumph - and is that a categorical statement, because if it's meant to apply to judaism (to say nothing of christianity and islam) it's rather on the triumphalist side.....

Nice to see that you are eagerly going through my posts, even though it is addressed to others.

Anyway, I didn't or Vivekananda didn't emphasize that everyone should abandon organised religion. He only pointed out its defects, and to avoid it if possible. It is not an order or something. And the same thing was said by J.Krishnamurthy, and Devamrutha , a recent enlightened master of modern India.

You can follow it if you find it good and worthwhile.

perhaps we could draw a line under this rather unproductive discussion and open a separate discussion on caste, which you seem to know a fair bit about. or how about something about how "hinduism" is defined - i for one would be very interested to hear your point of view on whether hinduism can be understood as one religion at all, or as a vast spectrum of different beliefs.

Well, Hinduism is a religion all right, and its ultimate goal itself is nirvana or enlightenment , through the paths of jnana yoga(the yoga of the intellect), raja yoga( the yoga of mysticism or conquest of the internal nature), karma yoga ( the yoga of action) and bhakti yoga( the yoga of love).

You can choose one or more or all of these , depending on your aptitude and inclinations and strive for enlightenment.

I also wish to say that there are more than 1 billion hindus as opposed, to the jews who have never crossed the 20 million mark. Just for the sake of information.

this has a great bearing on my own perspective, because, as you know, we have a problem with "idolatry" and many less educated jews consider "hinduism" to be "idolatrous".

To tell the truth , we really don't care what the jews have to say. We are more interested in spiritual growth and character and attaining nirvana.

Also so-called idolatry is a part of Bhakti Yoga, not the other yogas.
And even in bhakti yoga, idolatry is considered as the kindergarten of spirituality. After some time one outgrows it.

Perhaps these words of our prophet Vivekananda will put things in perspective...........


Descend we now from the aspirations of philosophy to the religion of the ignorant. At the very outset, I may tell you that there is no polytheism in India. In every temple, if one stands by and listens , one will find the worshippers applying all the attributes of God, including omnipresence of God, to the images. It is not polytheism, nor would the name henotheism explain the situation. 'The rose , called by any other name, would smell as sweet.'Names are not explanations.
I remember , as a boy, hearing a Christian missionary preach to a crowd in India. Among other sweet things he was telling them was that if he gave a blow to their idol with his stick, what could it do ? One of his hearers sharply answered , ' If I abuse your God, what can He do?' 'You would be punished,' said the preacher, 'when you die.' 'So my idol will punish you when you die,' retorted the Hindu.
The tree is known by its fruits. When I have seen amongst them that are called idolaters, men , the like of whom, in morality and spirituality and love I have never seen anywhere, I stop and ask myself, 'CAn sin beget holiness?'

Superstition is a great enemy of man, but bigotry is worse. Why does a Christian go to church? Why is the cross holy ? Why is the face turned toward the sky in prayer? Why are there so many images in the Catholic church ?Why are there so many images in the minds of Protestants when they pray ? My brethren, we can no more think about anything without a mental image than we can live without breathing. By the law of association the material image calls up the mental idea and vice versa. This is why the hindu uses an external symbol when he worships . He will tell you, it helps to keep his mind fixed on the Being to whom he prays. He knows as well as you do that the image is not God, is not omnipresent. After all, how much does omnipresence mean to almost the whole world ? It stands merely as a word , a symbol. Has God superficial area ? If not, when we repeat that word 'omnipresent', we think of the extended sky or of space, that is all.


As we find that somehow or other, by the laws of our mental constitution, we have to associate our ideas of infinity with the image of the blue sky, or of the sea, so we naturally connect our idea of holiness with the image of a church, a mosque, or a cross. The hindus have associated the ideas of holiness , purity , truth , omnipresence, and such other ideas, with different images and forms. But with this difference that while some people devote their whole lives to their idol of a church and never rise higher, because with them religion means an intellectual assent ot certain doctrines and doing good to their fellows, the whole religion of the Hindu is centred in realization. Man is to become divine by realizing the divine. Idols or temples or churches or books are the supports, the helps, of his spiritual childhood ; but on and on he must progress.
He must not stop anywhere. ' External worship, material worship, ' say the scriptures, ' is the lowest stage; struggling to rise high, mental prayer is the next stage, but the highest stage is when the Lord has been realized.' Mark , the same earnest man who is kneeling before the idol tells you, 'Him the sun cannot express, nor the moon, nor the stars, the lightning cannot express Him, nor what we speak of as fire; through Him they shine.' But he does not abuse anyone's idol or call its worship sin. He recognizes in it a necessary stage of life. 'The child is father of the man. 'Would it be right for an old man to say that childhood is a sin or youth a sin ?

If a man can realize his divine nature with the help of an image, would it be right to call that a sin ? Nor, even when he has passed that stage should he call it an error . To the Hindu, man is not travelling from error to truth, but from truth to truth, from lower to higher truth. To him all the religions, from the lowest fetishism to the highest absolutism,mean so many attempts of the human soul to grasp and realize the Infinite, each determined by the conditions of its birth and association, and each of these marks a stage of progress; and every soul is a young eagle soaring higher and higher, gathering more and more strength, till it reaches the Glorious Sun.

Unity in variety is the plan of nature, and the Hindu has recognized it. Every other religion lays down certain fixed dogmas, and tries to force society to adopt them. It places before society only one coat which must fit Jack and John and Henry, all alike. If it does not fit John or Henry, he must go without a coat to cover his body. The Hindus have discovered that the absolute can only be realized , or thought of, or stated, through the relative, and the images, crosses, and crescents are simply so many symbols-- so many pegs to hang spiritual ideas on. It is not that this help is necessary for everyone, but those that do not need it have no right to say that it is wrong.Nor is it compulsory in Hinduism.

-----Swami Vivekananda
(paper on hinduism, 19 september 1893)