Ravish,
In addition to Vishwas' comment,
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->traditional values are getting left behind, and religious rituals are getting extinct or modified to such an extent that nothing is left of its originality.
....
Unlike Islam, the Hindu religion is somewhat docile in its character. The preachers and holy men generally advocate the observance of the religious rituals through persuasion.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is "originality"? Hindu is a living religion, continuousely evolving over time. It never "originated" at any given moment in history. There is no "originality". Unlike Christians and Muslims, we see time - not as a straight line but a circle. So with time, rituals keep changing, though values remain same. Krishna came and left his mark on Hinduism, Buddha and Mahaveer came, modified it. Shankar modified it and, so did Madhvacharya. Numerous Bhakta-Saints of middle ages left their imprint on Hindu religion too.
Cows keep changing, milk remains the same. Pot in which you milch the cow keeps changing - but milk remains the same.
So, the point is: Hindu is a living and learning religion. It knows how to adopt to the outer norms of changing soceity, times and tendencies. Norms are only the shell which carries the essence. Essence remains the same. Dont worry about changing shape, colour, size of shell.
And by the way, this flexible nature of Hinduism, I think, is its unique strength. Which is stronger - flowing water or rigid stone? Stone gives way to flowing water.
You mentioned 'constant' Islam. Sufi sects, especially Kadari, Chishti and Nakshbandi, wanted and tried their best to modify the outer norms to suit the era and land. But Islam did not allow change to the outer norm. See how they are clinging on to it, and making their religion so much fundamentalist. You consider that 'strength'?
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->However, this change has been much profound amongst the Hindus rather than the Muslims of India. Amongst Christians, particularly in Europe there has been excessive in fact, even in Roman Catholic countries, the attendance in Churches have declined sharply.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, as I said, western religions consider the moments of time to be "frozen". They don't change, thereby becoming extinct and irrelevant as time moves on. As soon as people become free to chose, they liberate themselves away from the deadbody of the so called religion. See this happening in Europe. And to avoid that is why Islamic world is so much under tight control of mullas. Just allow free thinking and see how many muslims are left.
On the contrary, Hindu is a changing religion. Knows to change itself as per the outer changes.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the Hindu religion, there are several interpretations to each of the major provisions. Some scholars are of the view that Hindus should be strictly vegetarian and while some others give a different ruling.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which 'provisions' are you talking about? There is no 'code of conduct' indoctrinated for "Hindus". Depending upon one's spriritual orientation, one must decide one's lifestyle. There are variuos lifestyles feasible depending upon what kind of spiritual path you chose. There is on one size fits all standard. Of course there are social morals one has to live by. But those morals are attributes of soceity, and change by time.
The tribes of Arunachal Pradesh and NE, eat beef, because no other source of nutrition was available to them. Makes sense for them.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->With regarding to the eating of beef also some scholars challenge that there is no specific provision under Hindu religious text that bans it while many other are of the view that its consumption is banned.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is no specific "provision" for cannibalism too, neither in Hindu, Islam, or even Christian books. Eating human flesh is ok, then? To be left with just a personal choice of an individual's eating habits?
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Now what is the remedy to this gradual decline in the traditional Hindu values and customs? As time is changing, it is inevitable that the traditional values and customs will also get modified to suit the prevailing social conditions.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you suggest? What about you yourself? Are you living upto the ideals you think soceity should be following? What are those ideals you think should be there? What are you personally doing to make Hindu culture or soceity better, and move towards those ideals?
In addition to Vishwas' comment,
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->traditional values are getting left behind, and religious rituals are getting extinct or modified to such an extent that nothing is left of its originality.
....
Unlike Islam, the Hindu religion is somewhat docile in its character. The preachers and holy men generally advocate the observance of the religious rituals through persuasion.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is "originality"? Hindu is a living religion, continuousely evolving over time. It never "originated" at any given moment in history. There is no "originality". Unlike Christians and Muslims, we see time - not as a straight line but a circle. So with time, rituals keep changing, though values remain same. Krishna came and left his mark on Hinduism, Buddha and Mahaveer came, modified it. Shankar modified it and, so did Madhvacharya. Numerous Bhakta-Saints of middle ages left their imprint on Hindu religion too.
Cows keep changing, milk remains the same. Pot in which you milch the cow keeps changing - but milk remains the same.
So, the point is: Hindu is a living and learning religion. It knows how to adopt to the outer norms of changing soceity, times and tendencies. Norms are only the shell which carries the essence. Essence remains the same. Dont worry about changing shape, colour, size of shell.
And by the way, this flexible nature of Hinduism, I think, is its unique strength. Which is stronger - flowing water or rigid stone? Stone gives way to flowing water.
You mentioned 'constant' Islam. Sufi sects, especially Kadari, Chishti and Nakshbandi, wanted and tried their best to modify the outer norms to suit the era and land. But Islam did not allow change to the outer norm. See how they are clinging on to it, and making their religion so much fundamentalist. You consider that 'strength'?
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->However, this change has been much profound amongst the Hindus rather than the Muslims of India. Amongst Christians, particularly in Europe there has been excessive in fact, even in Roman Catholic countries, the attendance in Churches have declined sharply.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, as I said, western religions consider the moments of time to be "frozen". They don't change, thereby becoming extinct and irrelevant as time moves on. As soon as people become free to chose, they liberate themselves away from the deadbody of the so called religion. See this happening in Europe. And to avoid that is why Islamic world is so much under tight control of mullas. Just allow free thinking and see how many muslims are left.
On the contrary, Hindu is a changing religion. Knows to change itself as per the outer changes.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the Hindu religion, there are several interpretations to each of the major provisions. Some scholars are of the view that Hindus should be strictly vegetarian and while some others give a different ruling.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which 'provisions' are you talking about? There is no 'code of conduct' indoctrinated for "Hindus". Depending upon one's spriritual orientation, one must decide one's lifestyle. There are variuos lifestyles feasible depending upon what kind of spiritual path you chose. There is on one size fits all standard. Of course there are social morals one has to live by. But those morals are attributes of soceity, and change by time.
The tribes of Arunachal Pradesh and NE, eat beef, because no other source of nutrition was available to them. Makes sense for them.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->With regarding to the eating of beef also some scholars challenge that there is no specific provision under Hindu religious text that bans it while many other are of the view that its consumption is banned.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is no specific "provision" for cannibalism too, neither in Hindu, Islam, or even Christian books. Eating human flesh is ok, then? To be left with just a personal choice of an individual's eating habits?
<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 28 2006, 11:24 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Now what is the remedy to this gradual decline in the traditional Hindu values and customs? As time is changing, it is inevitable that the traditional values and customs will also get modified to suit the prevailing social conditions.
[right][snapback]58105[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you suggest? What about you yourself? Are you living upto the ideals you think soceity should be following? What are those ideals you think should be there? What are you personally doing to make Hindu culture or soceity better, and move towards those ideals?