12-15-2005, 08:52 PM
sometimes diplomacy doesnt work - so here goes.
You begin your post mentioning the two categories of belief systems. They are - as you call it- the formula types and bell curve types. I usually classify them as Semitic and Dharmic. The reason I mention this classification is that I will be using them interchangeably in this post. (i.e. formula = Semitic, and bell = Dharmic.)
fine
Both the Semitic and Dharmic religions prescribe rules and regulations. The Manu Smrithi and other Smrithis lay down a PATH, or a way of life to be followed.
so far i am concerned hindu-ISM ends with the upanishads.
Nitya Karma (day to day duties) as well as "kamya-karma" (optional category) are prescribed. While Kamya-Karma is optional, Nitya-Karma is mandatory.
i disagree with you that hinduism has anything mandatory.
if it does, i dont want to be hindu. me being me should make me hindu.
i want a religion where the people define the religion (by being who they are) and not the other way round.
Like Sandhya Vandanam, Agnihotram, Aupasanam etc. Thus, laying down of rules, and 'way of life' is not the proprietary property of Semitic sects.
it certainly isnt.
also hinduism does not lay down rules. it isnt semetic.
way of life is the characteristic of the way-of-life religions or bell curve religions.
these religions are of the people by the people and for the people.
In this case, The Great Manu is the "Law Giver" (even though He is more than that.) equivalent to the Prophet who gives the Laws.
i'd like to know how many lower caste people think manu smriti is a great book.
While the idea is noble, I would like to say that in case of the Dharmic Religion, atleast for Sanathana Dharma, the "Religion" existed well befor the 'bell curve crystallized'.
i agree with you.
people had many other religious beliefs apart from the veds.... the final filtered (and crystallised - ie. gotten accepted) part of those religious beliefs is collected in the vedas.
Thus the semblance of a Religion befits Semitic sects rather than the Dharmic fold.
precisely.
meanwhile the semblance of a way of life befits dharmic (as you call them) or pagan religions/sects rather than the prophetic/semetic fold.
Secondly, Vedas (pronunciation "Vedaa:") is not a snapshot at a point in time (even if it was 10,000 years ago.)
it is.
if the vedas were written say 2000 years before they were - then other religious beliefs - ie,. the religious beliefs doing the rounds (amongst the people living on the eastern side of the sindhu river), 2000 years b4 the vedas were actually penned down, would have gotten chronicled.
meanwhile if they had waited some more years, say 1000more b4 writting(er... crystallizing) the vedas, then i am sure there'd have been some additions, subtractions and alterations.
peoples religious beliefs dont stay stagnant, not in bell curve religions that is.
But Vedas are a reflection of Truth that is Eternal.
very flattering indeed.
vedas are a reflection of truth thats eternal AS THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THE VEDAS SAW THEM (ie. saw those truths to be).
another set of people (say the zulus) in another time and place, i am sure would have had a totally different version of whats eternal truth or a reflection thereof.
A snapshot is stagnant and is timebound.
yes.
vedas do not change over the years do they?? so stagnant it is. and it gives us a snapshot of exactly what the state of religious belief of the peoples living on the eastern side of the sindhu river was, AT THE TIME THE VEDS WERE CHRONICLED.
now if you are talking about stuff like - sky is blue and day follows night being recorded in the vedas, well yes those are eternal.
Vedas are definitely not stagnant nor timebound. (I am not infering stagnancy from your post, but am throwing it in to support my argument.)
sky is blue is not timebound.
its impoprtant to spash horse cum on your wife's butt before mating with her, as the yajur veda postulates (if i havent mistaken) - is better off as a timebound notion, which has by now thankfully been done away with.
Finally, if Dharmic Religions were taken as area specific, then China and most of South East Asia cannot benefit from Buddhism.
yes they cannot.
buddhism is not of chinese construct.
its not of the chinese, by the chinese and for the chinese.
buddhism suits them - as much as christianity suits us.
the saving grace is that, just like the romans incorporated a lot of mithraistic and germanic religious stuff into christianity - the chinese, japs, vietnamese, burmese etc all have sort of superimposed buddhism on their existing beliefs (which were of indegenous manufacture).
thats why tibetan buddhism is nothing like thai buddhism. and both are different from buddha's buddhism.
Even Sanathana Dharma is transcendental to Space, Time and Creation.
er.. come again
The common mistake even Hindus make is to equate the Vedas with the books. This is unconsciously mimicing the Semitic concept of Book = Religion formula.
yes. i just found a very good example of one such hindu - you.
you think the manu smriti is some formula we should all live by and if we dont we arnt hindus. thats what muslims say - if you pray 4.324 times a day or have nonhalal chicken you are no longer a muslim.
Vedas are Apaurusheya (not man made) and are said to be existing even before Creation (of the material Universe.)
yeah right.
about the only time i agreed with nehru was when he said in discovery of india, that its an insult to the writters of the vedas to suggest that the vedas are not man made.
see... sky was blue even befoe some one recorded it in a book. and had he/she not recorded it, sky still would have been blue. the way all physics always existed, a lot before we discovered them and would have existed even if we had not managed to discover them.
the vedas are shruti or smriti - either comes out of the seers head (shruti) or comes down from some other previous sage/thjinker/seer (smriti).
which dont make the vedas "DELIVERED".
whats said - apaurusheya - is out of reverence . or just to mean that skys arenot blue just cos some man wrote that it was blue. its blue regardless. and yes, then its not man made.
As mentioned above, Dharmic Religion has do's and donâts.
no cumpulsions in hinduism. dont insult the frest religion of the world.
you are equally free not to follow a single one of them.
the charas smoking feces eating sadhus follow precious little of the vedas. yet they are as hindu as you me and the ver sexy preety zinta.
Shankaracharya's Sadhana Panchakam for example will highlight these. i havent the foggiest idea what that is - though i will never consider that book to be hinduism - just a book ON/OFF hinduism.
The Bhagavad Geetha too tells of actions that leads to Hell, Heaven, or Liberation.
revered as it may be, the bhagavad gita isnt a book of hinduism per se.
there are 4 reasons why its revered and placed alobg with none less the vedas and often above them.
1- it was advice comming from krishna
2- the wisdom dispensed is of very high quality
3- its accepted that the teachings of the geeta existed long before the mahabharat was written
4- the gita is in spirit, like the upanishads - a book of advice.
remember hindus were doing just fine, in the time interval betwen the vedas and gita being written.
Thus, while one is free to heed or reject the advise, these Dos and Don'ts are very well defined in Dharmic religion.
means??
i eat beef - i cease to be hindu??
i dont splash my (future) wife's butt with horse cum - i'm not hindu??
The only difference is, Hindus now a days have chosen to reject most of the Dos and Don'ts owing to ignorance, arrogance, self-image, social-limitations, or simply laziness.
really??
and back in the day everything was followed to the word??
and if so - then how is hinduism a way of life, individualistic, personal god-ish, for the people-of the people-by the people religion??
how the hell is it different from islam - save that the set of rules or dos and dont are different??
hinduism is not dictatorial.
its free.
you dont follow hinduism.
hinduism follows you - or rather the interpretation of the vedas/upanishad you come up with and choose to live your life by.
They could not have done it even if they wanted to. If they did, it would not be called Vedaah but will be called VedaHA (killer of Vedas).
what you have been posting isnt any better to my mind.
you yourself concede that if they came up with a formula it would hve been diagonally opposite everything hinduism is and would have killed the vedas - but before that you posted about the non existant rules and tenets of hinduism??
hinduism has rules and yet they - the writters of the vedas did nt come up with a formula??? i am sorry, you lost me there.
The Vedas are not mental creations of the Rishis.
hahaha.
These are documentation of the Revelations
so hinduism is a revealed religion??
someone spoke to rishis from behind burning bushes/corpses and revealed the tenets of hinduism???
now dont ask me why i laughed my ass off.
of the Universal Truths which are unshakable.
really??? what about the 100 indian post vedic followers who have come up with interpretations of the vedas which are al their own?? they should have been guillotined isnt it??
When defining Gravity or Blackholes, one cannot put in irrational concoctions and call it an unbiased Truth.
vedas difine gravity and black holes??
Similarly Vedaah are Eternal Truths which were orally taught, and later documented for human convenience.
i explained the eternal bit of the truth in the previous part of the post
The concoction part thus does not even figure when discussing Vedas.
what conconction??
This is what happened when different Darshanas came up. They took a different view point of the Vedas. But each school (or Darshana) was trying to prove how ONLY their view point is right. Badharayana's Vedanta Sutras ultimately took the high ground. It is not appropriate to say Vedas are open to interpretation any-which-way.
yes any which way.
cos the aghori interpretation of vedas and the prescribed vedic way of life, is beyond ANY which way.
It has to confirm to a Parampara (tradition.)
would that be the 4th commandent of hinduism??
Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita, Tantra, Yoga, Samkhya, Mimamsa, Vaisheshika etc can be adapted and given up any time as long as the Vedas themselves are taken to be Pramaanas (Authority).
this being the 5th ??
One cannot disregard Vedas and still attain the results like Liberation.
what makes you so sure??
this is narrow minded monotheistic talk!!
my way is the highway. your way is all wrong.
are you hindu even??
Bauddha, Jaina, and Charvaka are also called Darshanas.
ok
They are Nastika Darshanas not because they reject God, but as they reject Vedic Authority.
whts wrong with rejecting vedic authority??
whatever floats your boat.
Samkhya is Asthika Darshana - even though it does not accept Ishwara - as it accepts Vedic Authority.
ty for that very imp piece of info <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Thus, people cannot ignore or pick and choose indiscriminately.
can.
It has to be part of Parampara which again is sanctioned by the Vedas.
vedas sanction people the right to be free to live their lives in any frigging way they please.
[/quote]
You begin your post mentioning the two categories of belief systems. They are - as you call it- the formula types and bell curve types. I usually classify them as Semitic and Dharmic. The reason I mention this classification is that I will be using them interchangeably in this post. (i.e. formula = Semitic, and bell = Dharmic.)
fine
Both the Semitic and Dharmic religions prescribe rules and regulations. The Manu Smrithi and other Smrithis lay down a PATH, or a way of life to be followed.
so far i am concerned hindu-ISM ends with the upanishads.
Nitya Karma (day to day duties) as well as "kamya-karma" (optional category) are prescribed. While Kamya-Karma is optional, Nitya-Karma is mandatory.
i disagree with you that hinduism has anything mandatory.
if it does, i dont want to be hindu. me being me should make me hindu.
i want a religion where the people define the religion (by being who they are) and not the other way round.
Like Sandhya Vandanam, Agnihotram, Aupasanam etc. Thus, laying down of rules, and 'way of life' is not the proprietary property of Semitic sects.
it certainly isnt.
also hinduism does not lay down rules. it isnt semetic.
way of life is the characteristic of the way-of-life religions or bell curve religions.
these religions are of the people by the people and for the people.
In this case, The Great Manu is the "Law Giver" (even though He is more than that.) equivalent to the Prophet who gives the Laws.
i'd like to know how many lower caste people think manu smriti is a great book.
While the idea is noble, I would like to say that in case of the Dharmic Religion, atleast for Sanathana Dharma, the "Religion" existed well befor the 'bell curve crystallized'.
i agree with you.
people had many other religious beliefs apart from the veds.... the final filtered (and crystallised - ie. gotten accepted) part of those religious beliefs is collected in the vedas.
Thus the semblance of a Religion befits Semitic sects rather than the Dharmic fold.
precisely.
meanwhile the semblance of a way of life befits dharmic (as you call them) or pagan religions/sects rather than the prophetic/semetic fold.
Secondly, Vedas (pronunciation "Vedaa:") is not a snapshot at a point in time (even if it was 10,000 years ago.)
it is.
if the vedas were written say 2000 years before they were - then other religious beliefs - ie,. the religious beliefs doing the rounds (amongst the people living on the eastern side of the sindhu river), 2000 years b4 the vedas were actually penned down, would have gotten chronicled.
meanwhile if they had waited some more years, say 1000more b4 writting(er... crystallizing) the vedas, then i am sure there'd have been some additions, subtractions and alterations.
peoples religious beliefs dont stay stagnant, not in bell curve religions that is.
But Vedas are a reflection of Truth that is Eternal.
very flattering indeed.
vedas are a reflection of truth thats eternal AS THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THE VEDAS SAW THEM (ie. saw those truths to be).
another set of people (say the zulus) in another time and place, i am sure would have had a totally different version of whats eternal truth or a reflection thereof.
A snapshot is stagnant and is timebound.
yes.
vedas do not change over the years do they?? so stagnant it is. and it gives us a snapshot of exactly what the state of religious belief of the peoples living on the eastern side of the sindhu river was, AT THE TIME THE VEDS WERE CHRONICLED.
now if you are talking about stuff like - sky is blue and day follows night being recorded in the vedas, well yes those are eternal.
Vedas are definitely not stagnant nor timebound. (I am not infering stagnancy from your post, but am throwing it in to support my argument.)
sky is blue is not timebound.
its impoprtant to spash horse cum on your wife's butt before mating with her, as the yajur veda postulates (if i havent mistaken) - is better off as a timebound notion, which has by now thankfully been done away with.
Finally, if Dharmic Religions were taken as area specific, then China and most of South East Asia cannot benefit from Buddhism.
yes they cannot.
buddhism is not of chinese construct.
its not of the chinese, by the chinese and for the chinese.
buddhism suits them - as much as christianity suits us.
the saving grace is that, just like the romans incorporated a lot of mithraistic and germanic religious stuff into christianity - the chinese, japs, vietnamese, burmese etc all have sort of superimposed buddhism on their existing beliefs (which were of indegenous manufacture).
thats why tibetan buddhism is nothing like thai buddhism. and both are different from buddha's buddhism.
Even Sanathana Dharma is transcendental to Space, Time and Creation.
er.. come again
The common mistake even Hindus make is to equate the Vedas with the books. This is unconsciously mimicing the Semitic concept of Book = Religion formula.
yes. i just found a very good example of one such hindu - you.
you think the manu smriti is some formula we should all live by and if we dont we arnt hindus. thats what muslims say - if you pray 4.324 times a day or have nonhalal chicken you are no longer a muslim.
Vedas are Apaurusheya (not man made) and are said to be existing even before Creation (of the material Universe.)
yeah right.
about the only time i agreed with nehru was when he said in discovery of india, that its an insult to the writters of the vedas to suggest that the vedas are not man made.
see... sky was blue even befoe some one recorded it in a book. and had he/she not recorded it, sky still would have been blue. the way all physics always existed, a lot before we discovered them and would have existed even if we had not managed to discover them.
the vedas are shruti or smriti - either comes out of the seers head (shruti) or comes down from some other previous sage/thjinker/seer (smriti).
which dont make the vedas "DELIVERED".
whats said - apaurusheya - is out of reverence . or just to mean that skys arenot blue just cos some man wrote that it was blue. its blue regardless. and yes, then its not man made.
As mentioned above, Dharmic Religion has do's and donâts.
no cumpulsions in hinduism. dont insult the frest religion of the world.
you are equally free not to follow a single one of them.
the charas smoking feces eating sadhus follow precious little of the vedas. yet they are as hindu as you me and the ver sexy preety zinta.
Shankaracharya's Sadhana Panchakam for example will highlight these. i havent the foggiest idea what that is - though i will never consider that book to be hinduism - just a book ON/OFF hinduism.
The Bhagavad Geetha too tells of actions that leads to Hell, Heaven, or Liberation.
revered as it may be, the bhagavad gita isnt a book of hinduism per se.
there are 4 reasons why its revered and placed alobg with none less the vedas and often above them.
1- it was advice comming from krishna
2- the wisdom dispensed is of very high quality
3- its accepted that the teachings of the geeta existed long before the mahabharat was written
4- the gita is in spirit, like the upanishads - a book of advice.
remember hindus were doing just fine, in the time interval betwen the vedas and gita being written.
Thus, while one is free to heed or reject the advise, these Dos and Don'ts are very well defined in Dharmic religion.
means??
i eat beef - i cease to be hindu??
i dont splash my (future) wife's butt with horse cum - i'm not hindu??
The only difference is, Hindus now a days have chosen to reject most of the Dos and Don'ts owing to ignorance, arrogance, self-image, social-limitations, or simply laziness.
really??
and back in the day everything was followed to the word??
and if so - then how is hinduism a way of life, individualistic, personal god-ish, for the people-of the people-by the people religion??
how the hell is it different from islam - save that the set of rules or dos and dont are different??
hinduism is not dictatorial.
its free.
you dont follow hinduism.
hinduism follows you - or rather the interpretation of the vedas/upanishad you come up with and choose to live your life by.
Quote:the writers of the vedas could easily have put their foot down and concocted a "formula" or prescription from the vedas and asked every one to live like that.
They could not have done it even if they wanted to. If they did, it would not be called Vedaah but will be called VedaHA (killer of Vedas).
what you have been posting isnt any better to my mind.
you yourself concede that if they came up with a formula it would hve been diagonally opposite everything hinduism is and would have killed the vedas - but before that you posted about the non existant rules and tenets of hinduism??
hinduism has rules and yet they - the writters of the vedas did nt come up with a formula??? i am sorry, you lost me there.
The Vedas are not mental creations of the Rishis.
hahaha.
These are documentation of the Revelations
so hinduism is a revealed religion??
someone spoke to rishis from behind burning bushes/corpses and revealed the tenets of hinduism???
now dont ask me why i laughed my ass off.
of the Universal Truths which are unshakable.
really??? what about the 100 indian post vedic followers who have come up with interpretations of the vedas which are al their own?? they should have been guillotined isnt it??
When defining Gravity or Blackholes, one cannot put in irrational concoctions and call it an unbiased Truth.
vedas difine gravity and black holes??
Similarly Vedaah are Eternal Truths which were orally taught, and later documented for human convenience.
i explained the eternal bit of the truth in the previous part of the post
The concoction part thus does not even figure when discussing Vedas.
what conconction??
Quote:people are free to interpret the advice in any way, or ignore them or pick and choose from amongst it or follow it to the word.
This is what happened when different Darshanas came up. They took a different view point of the Vedas. But each school (or Darshana) was trying to prove how ONLY their view point is right. Badharayana's Vedanta Sutras ultimately took the high ground. It is not appropriate to say Vedas are open to interpretation any-which-way.
yes any which way.
cos the aghori interpretation of vedas and the prescribed vedic way of life, is beyond ANY which way.
It has to confirm to a Parampara (tradition.)
would that be the 4th commandent of hinduism??
Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita, Tantra, Yoga, Samkhya, Mimamsa, Vaisheshika etc can be adapted and given up any time as long as the Vedas themselves are taken to be Pramaanas (Authority).
this being the 5th ??
One cannot disregard Vedas and still attain the results like Liberation.
what makes you so sure??
this is narrow minded monotheistic talk!!
my way is the highway. your way is all wrong.
are you hindu even??
Bauddha, Jaina, and Charvaka are also called Darshanas.
ok
They are Nastika Darshanas not because they reject God, but as they reject Vedic Authority.
whts wrong with rejecting vedic authority??
whatever floats your boat.
Samkhya is Asthika Darshana - even though it does not accept Ishwara - as it accepts Vedic Authority.
ty for that very imp piece of info <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->Thus, people cannot ignore or pick and choose indiscriminately.
can.
It has to be part of Parampara which again is sanctioned by the Vedas.
vedas sanction people the right to be free to live their lives in any frigging way they please.
[/quote]