04-05-2009, 01:26 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Your comment equating me to a provincial governor of the Neo-Roman Empire (Catholic Church) is meaningless.
*
That's not what I did. What I said is that the catholic cardinal will agree with you (he will). This can only be superficially, since it is the wording that will make him leap at the chance.
Christianism plays with words and uses it to appropriate and destroy. It therefore likes it when heathens give them an opening with unguarded wording.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Catholic's try to play games to include local traditions. I read about a Jesuit Missionary who went to China 400 years ago, he acted, dressed and spoke like a local Chinese, even took part in Chinese Religious rituals. In the end these games don't work anymore, we all know what they are up to. With Hinduism especially it can easily backfire for them in this area. Hinduism will end up swallowing them rather than the other way around.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In reality, Hinduism and Religion are Abhrahamic inventions I never agreed with the christian scholarship that claimed that the British invented 'Hinduism'. And this is a point of contention I have with Balagangadhara's saying something similar.
Whatever Hellenismos, Shinto, Tao and the rest are is what Hindu Dharma is. (It is not what christianism and islamism are, of course.)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The term "Hindu" was invented by the Islamic invaders?, but that doesn't matter now, we can use whatever word to describe ourselves, Hindu works just fine.
Actually, the British never wanted a united Hindu identity, they tried to divide everybody as was their strategy. Gandhi successfully outmaneuvered them and got all the tribes, SC's etc included.
In this discussion we need to separate the Abrahamic's religions out. When dealing with them we are a religion in opposition and that religion is Hinduism. When dealing with other Neo-Pagans, Shinto, New Age, Taoist etc we are all together.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I'd say
1. Hindu civilisation is analogous to the Hellenic civilisation
2. It includes more besides Vedic.
3. There's far more to it than only philosophy (am supposing the term is meant in the Greek sense)
Again: there's more than Vedic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if there is more, then Hinduism is more than just a simple Religion, it includes a lot of other things.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But western atheism and agnosticism are not at all the same as the atheist schools in Dharmic tradition (including the Jaina and Indian Bauddha tradition).
Western atheists denounce all religion. They
- are specifically opposed to the idea of any spirituality (including concepts like aatman, anything special about nature) and also
- deny any use/meaning in <i>philosophy</i> (IIRC, this is discussed in internet infidels). While I've never been inclined to adopt others' philosophies for myself (aren't we all capable of answering life's questions for ourselves?), I respect the right of others to pursue established philosophical paths like the Greek ones.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree Western Atheists are militant. I usually call them Evangelical Atheists, that usually shuts them up. I also tell them there are Hindu atheists, and distinguish them from Western militant Atheists. The Westernized Indian Atheist is a Macaulyte who adopted Western Evangelical Atheism as a pose to Christianity, but still Westernized and not Hindu Atheists.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Above all it was he who started and propagated the holding of cosmopolitan dinners of pork and beef as a means of eradicating the evil of caste prejudices and religious taboos of certain food. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ofcourse Animals are being unnecessarily harmed to prove their point.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Whereas such christo-conditioned western-patterned atheism in India is the result not of Hindu Dharma but of contact with the modern west.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree about Western Militant Missionary Atheism.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In real life, many of my friends tend to be atheists and agnostics and they get along very well with me too (although, since they don't ask, they continue to assume I am an atheist like them <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> Of course, <i>I</i> know what <i>they</i> are and accept <i>them</i> without reservations.) They think open-mindedness and 'tolerance' is purely an atheist quality because they're only used to christianism and know of islamism. (In contrast, E Asians, being traditionalists themselves, immediately assess me correctly as a traditionalist too. They are no less open-minded than us Hindus. Feel truly at home with them. Interesting that whereas I'm not guarded about what my affiliation is - if asked about it - they are though: Taoists for instance will not answer questions on what they are depending on who is asking.)
Am comfortable with western atheists. But <i>modern</i> Indian atheist movements worry me. Indians have not lost all of their tradition the way the west has, so they have the option of choosing a traditional Hindu atheistic path; or alternatively, they can be completely like *non-missionary* western atheists: individual atheists completely detached from all religion. However, modern Indian atheist movements nevertheless tend to be particularly anti-Hindu (though they may not approve of christianism/islamism either). The missionary atheist movements generally take it out on the majority religion in any part of the world and on first consideration, that would be Hindu Dharma in India. But that doesn't quite make sense in our situation since - unlike the west which was terrorised by christianism - Dharmic society is not generally interested in pursuing atheists or being intolerant of others' path.
If Bharatam may not remain Hindu, I would prefer it to become atheist in the fashion of what much of Japan is, rather than anything else (let alone christoislamic). Japanese atheists are not anti-Shinto or anti-Bauddha, even though their atheism is not not derived from a mental evolution born of Shinto or Buddhism but due to external events in recent Japanese history. Whereas, in Bharatam, everything that is a result of christo-influence is anti-Hindu.
Actually, a non-Hindu atheistic Bharatam like that in Japan would not bother me at all. It is enough if christoislamicommunazi memes are no more in the world (missionising memes that are intolerant of others' ways of life and personal beliefs, and can't bear that someone *somewhere* holds different private views). Then I'd not really mind what Bharatam becomes. I know it can never be what it was, and that the christian world has left its indelible imprint despite everything, and has installed breakage/christowestern thought patterns already. Since change we must and already have, I hope we go the way of Nippon. But christoislamicommunism will never allow that of course. Just as christoism has its sights on Japan and even communism has been launching repeated failed attempts on the country.
For true freedom to exist in the world, terrorist memes must be destroyed forever. After that, what happens is up to a free humanity. Of course, I'd dearly have at least one Natural Tradition survive and live a full, uncompromised life. My money is on Hellenismos or Taoism.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indian Atheism if it grows will end up like Japan, a non-militant one where people just don't bother. I don't think that will happen because Hinduism has a lot of in-depth explanations and a lot more substance that it will always happen a significant appeal. But Hindu Agnosticism could steadily increase in % (and probably will) but it won't become the overwhelming philosophy like it is in Japan.
Also unlike the Japanese, Hindu civilization is in a front line battle zone with Islamists and Christo terrorists.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[QUOTE][CODE][QUOTE]
*
That's not what I did. What I said is that the catholic cardinal will agree with you (he will). This can only be superficially, since it is the wording that will make him leap at the chance.
Christianism plays with words and uses it to appropriate and destroy. It therefore likes it when heathens give them an opening with unguarded wording.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Catholic's try to play games to include local traditions. I read about a Jesuit Missionary who went to China 400 years ago, he acted, dressed and spoke like a local Chinese, even took part in Chinese Religious rituals. In the end these games don't work anymore, we all know what they are up to. With Hinduism especially it can easily backfire for them in this area. Hinduism will end up swallowing them rather than the other way around.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In reality, Hinduism and Religion are Abhrahamic inventions I never agreed with the christian scholarship that claimed that the British invented 'Hinduism'. And this is a point of contention I have with Balagangadhara's saying something similar.
Whatever Hellenismos, Shinto, Tao and the rest are is what Hindu Dharma is. (It is not what christianism and islamism are, of course.)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The term "Hindu" was invented by the Islamic invaders?, but that doesn't matter now, we can use whatever word to describe ourselves, Hindu works just fine.
Actually, the British never wanted a united Hindu identity, they tried to divide everybody as was their strategy. Gandhi successfully outmaneuvered them and got all the tribes, SC's etc included.
In this discussion we need to separate the Abrahamic's religions out. When dealing with them we are a religion in opposition and that religion is Hinduism. When dealing with other Neo-Pagans, Shinto, New Age, Taoist etc we are all together.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I'd say
1. Hindu civilisation is analogous to the Hellenic civilisation
2. It includes more besides Vedic.
3. There's far more to it than only philosophy (am supposing the term is meant in the Greek sense)
Again: there's more than Vedic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if there is more, then Hinduism is more than just a simple Religion, it includes a lot of other things.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But western atheism and agnosticism are not at all the same as the atheist schools in Dharmic tradition (including the Jaina and Indian Bauddha tradition).
Western atheists denounce all religion. They
- are specifically opposed to the idea of any spirituality (including concepts like aatman, anything special about nature) and also
- deny any use/meaning in <i>philosophy</i> (IIRC, this is discussed in internet infidels). While I've never been inclined to adopt others' philosophies for myself (aren't we all capable of answering life's questions for ourselves?), I respect the right of others to pursue established philosophical paths like the Greek ones.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree Western Atheists are militant. I usually call them Evangelical Atheists, that usually shuts them up. I also tell them there are Hindu atheists, and distinguish them from Western militant Atheists. The Westernized Indian Atheist is a Macaulyte who adopted Western Evangelical Atheism as a pose to Christianity, but still Westernized and not Hindu Atheists.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Above all it was he who started and propagated the holding of cosmopolitan dinners of pork and beef as a means of eradicating the evil of caste prejudices and religious taboos of certain food. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ofcourse Animals are being unnecessarily harmed to prove their point.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Whereas such christo-conditioned western-patterned atheism in India is the result not of Hindu Dharma but of contact with the modern west.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree about Western Militant Missionary Atheism.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In real life, many of my friends tend to be atheists and agnostics and they get along very well with me too (although, since they don't ask, they continue to assume I am an atheist like them <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> Of course, <i>I</i> know what <i>they</i> are and accept <i>them</i> without reservations.) They think open-mindedness and 'tolerance' is purely an atheist quality because they're only used to christianism and know of islamism. (In contrast, E Asians, being traditionalists themselves, immediately assess me correctly as a traditionalist too. They are no less open-minded than us Hindus. Feel truly at home with them. Interesting that whereas I'm not guarded about what my affiliation is - if asked about it - they are though: Taoists for instance will not answer questions on what they are depending on who is asking.)
Am comfortable with western atheists. But <i>modern</i> Indian atheist movements worry me. Indians have not lost all of their tradition the way the west has, so they have the option of choosing a traditional Hindu atheistic path; or alternatively, they can be completely like *non-missionary* western atheists: individual atheists completely detached from all religion. However, modern Indian atheist movements nevertheless tend to be particularly anti-Hindu (though they may not approve of christianism/islamism either). The missionary atheist movements generally take it out on the majority religion in any part of the world and on first consideration, that would be Hindu Dharma in India. But that doesn't quite make sense in our situation since - unlike the west which was terrorised by christianism - Dharmic society is not generally interested in pursuing atheists or being intolerant of others' path.
If Bharatam may not remain Hindu, I would prefer it to become atheist in the fashion of what much of Japan is, rather than anything else (let alone christoislamic). Japanese atheists are not anti-Shinto or anti-Bauddha, even though their atheism is not not derived from a mental evolution born of Shinto or Buddhism but due to external events in recent Japanese history. Whereas, in Bharatam, everything that is a result of christo-influence is anti-Hindu.
Actually, a non-Hindu atheistic Bharatam like that in Japan would not bother me at all. It is enough if christoislamicommunazi memes are no more in the world (missionising memes that are intolerant of others' ways of life and personal beliefs, and can't bear that someone *somewhere* holds different private views). Then I'd not really mind what Bharatam becomes. I know it can never be what it was, and that the christian world has left its indelible imprint despite everything, and has installed breakage/christowestern thought patterns already. Since change we must and already have, I hope we go the way of Nippon. But christoislamicommunism will never allow that of course. Just as christoism has its sights on Japan and even communism has been launching repeated failed attempts on the country.
For true freedom to exist in the world, terrorist memes must be destroyed forever. After that, what happens is up to a free humanity. Of course, I'd dearly have at least one Natural Tradition survive and live a full, uncompromised life. My money is on Hellenismos or Taoism.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indian Atheism if it grows will end up like Japan, a non-militant one where people just don't bother. I don't think that will happen because Hinduism has a lot of in-depth explanations and a lot more substance that it will always happen a significant appeal. But Hindu Agnosticism could steadily increase in % (and probably will) but it won't become the overwhelming philosophy like it is in Japan.
Also unlike the Japanese, Hindu civilization is in a front line battle zone with Islamists and Christo terrorists.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[QUOTE][CODE][QUOTE]