Hinduism

[Aupmanyav]

Thanks, so basically they have no special powers like raising the dead.

Well, many sages (Rishis) are supposed to have had such powers, not different from that of any God. They had, sort of, attained Godhood. Even Gods would not alter what they said. An angry Narada made Lord Rama take the help of 'Vanaras' (Monkeys, not the exact translation).

Sage Narada became infatuated with the beauty of a princess and wanted to marry her. He requested Lord Vishnu to give him his form. Vishnu, instead, gave him the form of a 'Vanara'. The princess laughed when Narada faced her. Narada came back and cursed Lord Vishnu that only 'Vanaras' (the tribe of Lord Hanuman) will rescue him when he appeared on earth as Lord Rama. And that is exactly what happened.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But when it comes to other religions, such as Islam, it is amazing how incredibly intolerant Hindus can be.

Hindu tolerance will depend on what other people do. For example, how do we treat people who placed a gas cylinder or a 70 kg block of cement on a rail track so that it will get derailed and cause the death of many people (two incidents in the past month)? Or stone every Hindu religious procession? Or when Pakistan sends terrorists to kill hundreds of people, or when they put 27 bombs in the city? Or attack the Indian parliament, temples, etc.?
To what extent a Hindu should be tolerant?

List of terrorist incidents in India - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[IndigoChild5559]

(A) Your example was lacking in brevity

It was literally only two sentences long. Sheesh.

(B) Your example seemed full of pretence

"Pretense" refers to a false appearance or claim that is made to hide the true nature of something. It involves pretending or giving a misleading impression to deceive others.

There was absolutely no ulterior motive or attempt to deceive going on. You were implying that it is Patriarchal cultures that are violent and not Matriarchal ones. I very clearly and openly disagreed and gave an example to the contrary. Far from being being "full of pretense," my example was meant to expose the true nature of things.

If you continue to make these sort of spurious accusations against me, I'm simply going to pick up my toys and go home. You'll have to find someone else to play with.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Hindu tolerance will depend on what other people do.

Hindus and Muslims have been at each other's throats forever. You guys so hated each other that you partitioned the land into two separate nations, Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India. How sad that Ghandi's hope for peaceful relations was never realized. I've been following Indian newspapers for a long time now. There is more than enough hatred on both sides to go around.

 

[GoodAttention]

I never said India was the only hot spot of religious hatred. Only that it WAS one, since the conversation was about Hindus, and the suggestion was given that Hindus were OVERLY tolerant, which is obviously NOT the case.

What just happened in the quote above is called deflection -- trying to cast the bad light off one's self by pointing out the flaws of others. It's like when my kids were little and my son would say to his sister "You're mean! I'm not a baby!" and his sister would reply, "Well you always call me annoying and that's mean too." It was her manipulative way of avoiding responsibility for calling him a baby.

Not at all, perhaps my idea of a person who is “flabbergasted” is different to you.

Note I use the words “imagine”, and “could mean”, in my, it seems, ultimately failed attempt to provide perspective.

In any case, perhaps you are flabbergasted at the thought of an over-tolerant Hindu generalisation, rather than the violence itself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes I also find this interesting, Hindus tolerate Christians and Jews far more than they do Muslims.

Hindus do not hate anyone. Jews have been in India for 2,500 years, Christians and Muslims since the time their religions came up. Zoroastrians too have been here since Islam came to Iran. None were ever harmed for centuries. The current tensions are because of Christian evangelism and the attempt of Muslims to dominate over Hindus. Other than the trouble makers, normal Muslims and Christians are living happily in India with no discrimination.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In any case, perhaps you are flabbergasted at the thought of an over-tolerant Hindu generalisation, rather than the violence itself.

I am flabbergasted that anyone would suggest that Hindus in India are "overly tolerant" of other religions, when the evidence is overwhelming that this is clearly not the case.

I'm moving on. If you want to send of yet another post sticking to your guns, you have that right. But I won't be responding further.

 

[GoodAttention]

There was absolutely no ulterior motive or attempt to deceive going on. You were implying that it is Patriarchal cultures that are violent and not Matriarchal ones. I very clearly and openly disagreed and gave an example to the contrary.

My point is you didn’t. You said their warriors were considered fierce, that’s it.

The truth of the Navajo history goes so much further, and in opposition to your claim that matriarchal societies were also violent, which is what I pointed out.

They were literally marched out of their homeland, by a patriarchal society. The only reason there was no violence was because the Navajo accepted this, NOT because they were “fierce warriors”.

Far from being being "full of pretense," my example was meant to expose the true nature of things.

If you continue to make these sort of spurious accusations against me, I'm simply going to pick up my toys and go home. You'll have to find someone else to play with.

Shalom.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh no doubt the Muslims in India are giving it as much as they are taking it. SMH

Are you following the violence in Manipur?

And the trouble makers are getting it because of that. Hindus will not tolerate Islamic terrorism any more. Peaceful Muslims are not at all affected. They are getting all facilities that the Hindus get.

Manipur unrest is because the Christian Kukis do not want the Hindu Metei (both tribals) to enjoy the same benefits as they do.
Ask me about anything you want to know about India. Do not spread false lies, on your own, or what you read from biased media.
I will be happy to discuss it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Possessing a cowherds body is a slight against Krishna and Vaishnavism, but yes it isn’t right to focus on such triviality.

Krishna is not at all involved in the Thirumoolar story.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Hindus do not hate anyone.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom found that the conflict in Manipur has a religious dimension, with more than 500 churches and two synagogues destroyed, and over 70,000 people displaced.

Let's talk about the 2002 Gujarat riots in India. It all started with the burning of a train in Godhra, which was blamed on a Muslim mob. Maybe they did it, and maybe they didn't. The rioting was widespread across Gujarat. They lasted for several months and resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,000 to 2,000 people, with the majority being Muslims. We are talking communal attacks, including killings, rapes, and arson. There were widespread accusations of state and police complicity and inaction.

How about the 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots in Uttar Pradesh, India. It all began when a group of Muslim men were accused of harassing a Hindu woman (perhaps it happened, and perhaps it didn't). The violence spread rapidly, and resulted in the deaths of over 60 people and the displacement of more than 50,000 individuals. We are talking about large-scale communal violence, including arson, attacks on homes, and loss of property. Instead of quieting things down, local authorities just made things worse.

Had enough or shall I mention more?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Unfortunately such people, if they ever existed, do no longer.

The tribes of Meghalaya state in India are matriarchal and Christian - Khasi, Garo.

Perhaps many believed it to be a return to what “Hinduism” was originally, which in my opinion was closer to monotheism.

That, unfortunately, is a myth created by Christian and Muslim evangelists.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Manipur unrest is because the Christian Kukis do not want the Hindu Metei (both tribals) to enjoy the same benefits as they do.

How does this explain that it is the Christian churches being burned down, and not the Hindu temples?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hindus and Muslims have been at each other's throats forever. You guys so hated each other that you partitioned the land into two separate nations, Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India. How sad that Ghandi's hope for peaceful relations was never realized. I've been following Indian newspapers for a long time now. There is more than enough hatred on both sides to go around.

That is correct. In their 1,000 year rule they destroyed millions of temples and killed millions of people. Hindus did not ask for partition, Jinnah and Muslims league did. Till the last moment Gandhi was trying to avoid it. He even proposed that Jinnah be made Prime Minister of India. But Jinnah wanted 'partition' and nothing else. Jinnah did not know that he had just 13 months to live (Governor-General of Pakistan from August 14 1947 to September 11, 1948).
Good that partition came about, at whatever cost. Otherwise, we would have been a part of the Pakistan and Bangladesh madness.
India still is a home to 170 million Muslims.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I am flabbergasted that anyone would suggest that Hindus in India are "overly tolerant" of other religions, when the evidence is overwhelming that this is clearly not the case.

Have you ever visited India? Check with someone who has been to India.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That is correct. In their 1,000 year rule they destroyed millions of temples and killed millions of people. Hindus did not ask for partition, Jinnah and Muslims league did.

Dude, you really aren't doing yourself a favor with these remarks.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Sure, as long as these variations occur within the boundaries of Hinduism. But when it comes to other religions, such as Islam, it is amazing how incredibly intolerant Hindus can be.

Thanks for dropping by to derail the thread with your assertion that Hindus are intolerant of Islam.

Now...do you have anything to offer here that is actually relevant to the thread's topic?

 

[Vinayaka]

And the trouble makers are getting it because of that. Hindus will not tolerate Islamic terrorism any more. Peaceful Muslims are not at all affected. They are getting all facilities that the Hindus get.

Manipur unrest is because the Christian Kukis do not want the Hindu Metei (both tribals) to enjoy the same benefits as they do.
Ask me about anything you want to know about India. Do not spread false lies, on your own, or what you read from biased media.
I will be happy to discuss it.

You live in India, I've been to India, and yet outsiders insist they know more about it. I believe this is due to western press demonizing Hinduism and India, and folks falling for the bait. Sad but true. When the Dalai Lama had to flee his homeland because of Chinese oppression, he most certainly didn't go to Pakistan, or the west. He returned to the Mother.

Not much we can do about it though. Let history take it's course, and I do believe, in my small time on this planet in this body, that I've seen anti-Hindu sentiment decrease. Perhaps that's due to emigration.

It's difficult to relate to that anti sentiment when the person can't even bother to learn how to spell Gandhi's name.

 

[Vinayaka]

India still is a home to 170 million Muslims.

And both Pakistan and increasingly, Bangladesh have seen the Hindu numbers drop. The goal, of course, is extinction, as the current genocide in Bangladesh confirms.

 

[Vinayaka]

Thanks for dropping by to derail the thread with your assertion that Hindus are intolerant of Islam.

Now...do you have anything to offer here that is actually relevant to the thread's topic?

Sorry i got caught up in that as well. The OP had an actual question, for a change.