Don't the Hinduism (Dharmic) people need a concise Scripture?

[Satyamavejayanti]

"paarsurrey, post: 4831776, member: 37462"

Namaste,

Every Hindu sect could make its own Concise or Compressed Scriptures

They already have their own.

on the same pattern and lines as we will suggest so that everybody of their sect benefits from it.

Why should Hindus consider your suggestion?

Reading it will strengthen them in their faith and religion in totality will become stronger than having no-faith altogether. Right? Please

There is nothing wrong with having no faith, I for one don't agree that compressed or reduced version of any texts is useful, it is like you want to have summaries of all texts in a library and then getting rid of the Library. Makes no sense having only One book, it is counter productive and distructive to only have one view or sidhanta for all different peoples.

Dhanyavad

 

[LuisDantas]

One is simply wrong.
The revealed religions don't have to believe anything blindly.

That is arguable.

Did Buddha believe anything blindly? I don't agree with one:

Buddhism, fortunately, is not a revealed religion either.

[25:72] And those who repent and do good deeds, indeed turn to Allah with true repentance;
[25:73] And those who bear not false witness, and when they pass by anything vain, they pass on with dignity;
[25:74] And those who, when they are reminded of the Signs* of their Lord, fall not deaf and blind thereat;
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=25&verse=73
*verses

One must be talking about the non-believing people. Right? Please
Regards

Truth be told, I don't think that makes much sense whoever it may be talking about.

 

[LuisDantas]

Aren't the "Sacred Texts" done by the Western-Orientalists so beneficial and popular?

What would those texts be? I don't know which you are talking about.

 

[paarsurrey]

I remember in one of the posts @Aupmanyav appreciated translation work of a Hinduism Veda done by the Western scholars in another thread, if my memory is not wrong.
Regards http://www.religiousforums.com/members/aupmanyav.11823/

 

[Vinayaka]

I remember in one of the posts @Aupmanyav appreciated translation work of a Hinduism Veda done by the Western scholars in another thread, if my memory is not wrong.
Regards

There have been many translations of our ancient texts. The Reverend Pope, for example, translated the Tiruvacagam, a Tamil Saiva scripture) because he figured Hindus would be far more likely to read the Christian Bible translated into Tamil, if he did that. Not all of them are bad, and each has to be judged on it's own merit. Of course all these translations just add to the already extremely vast collection. Can't imagine reading the Vedas at all, let alone 50 different translations.

 

[LuisDantas]

I remember in one of the posts @Aupmanyav appreciated translation work of a Hinduism Veda done by the Western scholars in another thread, if my memory is not wrong.
Regards

Oh, right. I thought you meant something else. Translations and interpretations are valid, but they must be judged on their own merits - as should the scriptures themselves, of course.

 

[SomeRandom]

Scripture is very important in every revealed religion. Hinduism people believe that Vedas, in its pure and un-corrupted form, are from G-d:

Genesis of the Vedas.

Vedas are the Word of God, revealed in the beginning of creation
for the moral, spiritual and physical guidance and uplift of humanity.
They are replete with eternal truths and throw a flood of light on the
various aspects of life to make a man perfect and ideal. God out of His
infinite source of knowledge reveals in the beginning of creation a
part of it adequate for the requirements of the soul, its spiritual satisfaction,
fulfillment of its thirst for truth and making its journey of lifesuccessful.
INTRODUCTION (of the Vedas) by DEVI CHAND, M.A.
https://archive.org/stream/yajurveda029670mbp/yajurveda029670mbp_djvu.txt​

Regards

Scripture isn't the be all end all in Hinduism. Hell one can freely reject verses if one believes them to be outdated and not relevant to today's reality. Respect them sure. But we don't view Scripture like the Abrahamics do.

We have multiple texts because why just restrict yourself to just one version or one lesson. All texts offer something but not all are universally accepted and that's perfectly fine. It's what works for us.

And you can do whatever the hell you want just don't expect Hindus to accept your condensed version of the Vedas. I for one hate condensed versions of texts. I didn't even like the abridged versions as a kid. It dilutes the flavour the personality and the overall affect of the original.
There are no real obligations to follow a particular translation in Hinduism. We are free to follow and interpret text ourselves. Kindly don't put these weird restrictions upon us like this. It tends to suffocate us.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I definitely do not accept Vedas as the word of any God since I do not believe in existence of God/Gods/Goddesses. Like SomeRandom said, I accept what seems to be true to me in scriptures, respect even if I do not believe in others. I value scriptures, particularly Vedas, as one of the two most important sources of ancient Aryan history, the other being Zoroastrian Avesta.

 

[paarsurrey]

Scripture isn't the be all end all in Hinduism. Hell one can freely reject verses if one believes them to be outdated and not relevant to today's reality. Respect them sure. But we don't view Scripture like the Abrahamics do.
We have multiple texts because why just restrict yourself to just one version or one lesson. All texts offer something but not all are universally accepted and that's perfectly fine. It's what works for us.
And you can do whatever the hell you want just don't expect Hindus to accept your condensed version of the Vedas. I for one hate condensed versions of texts. I didn't even like the abridged versions as a kid. It dilutes the flavour the personality and the overall affect of the original.
There are no real obligations to follow a particular translation in Hinduism. We are free to follow and interpret text ourselves. Kindly don't put these weird restrictions upon us like this. It tends to suffocate us.

I agree to an aspect of the point mentioned by one in lines colored by me in magenta. It is for this that we always like to give G-d's latest Word in the Arabic Text while we may give its translation in any language side by side or below the original text in Arabic.
I appreciate your point. Translation is never exact and is limited to the understanding of the translator of the scripture.
Have a nice day, please.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I definitely do not accept Vedas as the word of any God since I do not believe in existence of God/Gods/Goddesses. Like SomeRandom said, I accept what seems to be true to me in scriptures, respect even if I do not believe in others. I value scriptures, particularly Vedas, as one of the two most important sources of ancient Aryan history, the other being Zoroastrian Avesta.

Nevertheless, one mentioned in one of one's posts in another thread that one's teacher/father best understood the Vedas and now, after his death, one understand them best than anybody else, something like that . Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks for your input in the thread. Please
Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

I do not know which post are you referring to. It depends on the person. My grandfather's views were not the same as mine. So what?

 

[paarsurrey]

Nevertheless, one mentioned in one of one's posts in another thread that one's teacher/father best understood the Vedas and now, after his death, one understand them best than anybody else, something like that . Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks for your input in the thread. Please
Regards

I do not know which post are you referring to. It depends on the person. My grandfather's views were not the same as mine. So what?

I get it, it is post #19,If I correctly understood it.
Regards

 

[buddhist]

One is simply wrong.
The revealed religions don't have to believe anything blindly. Did Buddha believe anything blindly? I don't agree with one:

[25:72] And those who repent and do good deeds, indeed turn to Allah with true repentance;
[25:73] And those who bear not false witness, and when they pass by anything vain, they pass on with dignity;
[25:74] And those who, when they are reminded of the Signs* of their Lord, fall not deaf and blind thereat;
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=25&verse=73
*verses

One must be talking about the non-believing people. Right? Please
Regards

Do you believe this quote from the Koran blindly, or have you personally seen "the Signs* of the Lord"?

 

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said: ↑
One is simply wrong.
The revealed religions don't have to believe anything blindly. Did Buddha believe anything blindly? I don't agree with one:

[25:72] And those who repent and do good deeds, indeed turn to Allah with true repentance;
[25:73] And those who bear not false witness, and when they pass by anything vain, they pass on with dignity;
[25:74] And those who, when they are reminded of the Signs* of their Lord, fall not deaf and blind thereat;
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=25&verse=73
*verses

One must be talking about the non-believing people. Right? Please

Do you believe this quote from the Koran blindly, or have you personally seen "the Signs* of the Lord"?

Quranic verses are also called as Ayats or Signs from G-d.
Yes, one can read them in Quran and can see them or understand them.
Even you could do that, Just open a Quran and be blessed to see them. Right? Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Your premises are all wrong.
The Dharmic religions are not - at their core - faith-based religions, where texts are to be blindly believed, and (in result), a concise text would be highly valued.
The Dharmic scriptures are instead only starting points, to be worked out by the disciple, for personal realization.
When you can understand this, you might begin to see why a "concise text" might actually be contrary to our religions.

One is simply wrong.
The revealed religions don't have to believe anything blindly. Did Buddha believe anything blindly? I don't agree with one:

[17:37] And follow not that of which thou hast no knowledge. Verily, the ear and the eye and the heart — all these shall be called to account.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=17&verse=36​

Quran enjoins one not to believe the verse/s of Quran blindly, one is guided to believe them after due diligence by using one's ear, eye/insight and the heart/intellect . If one is not convinced by them heart and soul, how could one make others to understand them? Please
Regards

 

[buddhist]

Quranic verses are also called as Ayats or Signs from G-d.
Yes, one can read them in Quran and can see them or understand them.
Even you could do that, Just open a Quran and be blessed to see them. Right? Please
Regards

That's like saying the Bible is from god because it says it's from god.

Does not compute.

 

[Vinayaka]

Seems to me you think the Koran would be fine for us as a concise scripture that has everything the Vedas have and more. Paarsurrey, it that what you're actually saying? It seems like it.

 

[paarsurrey]

#249

Every Hindu sect could make its own Concise or Compressed Scriptures, if they like, on the same pattern and lines as we will suggest so that everybody of their sect benefits from it. Reading it will strengthen them in their faith and religion in totality will become stronger than having no-faith altogether. Right? Please

They already have their own.

Some Hinduism people mentioned in these forums that one cannot read the Hinduism scripture in one's life, that prompted me to start the topic of the thread. Right? Please
I have great regards for the "Sanatana Dharmah" people, for a reason?
Regards

 

[Jainarayan]

Some Hinduism people mentioned in these forums that one cannot read the Hinduism scripture in one's life

And we've pointed out ad nauseum and ad infinitum that it's not necessary for Hindus to read any scriptures at all.

This woman may not even know how to read, but she worships.

 

[paarsurrey]

And we've pointed out ad nauseum and ad infinitum that it's not necessary for Hindus to read any scriptures at all.

This woman may not even know how to read, but she worships.

Now, please don't tell me that Vedas are superficial? Are they? Is that what you mean? Please
Regards