POLL - To Make HinduDIR BLUE

[Jainarayan]

While I don't fully identify as Hindu; in fact, the only Hindu part of me left is an advaitic leaning (without the maya part... I can't get my head wrapped around that) with Brahman being the substrate of all existence; belief in, and reverence and love for the deities; and the Bhagavad Gita.

That said, in my opinion and view, the Hinduism DIR has become closed-minded, overly sensitive, defensive, argumentative, dogmatic and pontifical even among its Hindu members. It's beginning to resemble another site that people have fled, including yours truly. The infighting among this forum's members is sad, especially for a religion that prides itself on its diversity.

I think that at least for a time it should be "blued" to filter out any perceived trolls. There is of course the Report button, but I think the claim of trolls is overblown. Most of the baiting and arguing is among the Hindu members. In fact, one of the most orthodox Hindu members has caused so much consternation and strife as to now be restricted.

I see this infighting more clearly, not participating as I did, just reading. It remains to be seen just how cohesive and educational it becomes, or doesn't if it becomes blue. I predict that without the more intelligent exchanges between Hindus and non-Hindus seeking to learn, the Hinduism DIR will become a barren wasteland and/or a same-faith debates forum, the direction it has begun to head in.

Therefore I voted that it become Hinduism DIR, at least as a test.

 

[Asha]

Namaste, Asha:

Namaste,

As you can see for yourself, this thread, along with countless other threads of the HinduDIR, have been hijacked and digressed into completely off topic conversations. I can't say that I am surprised.

Unfortunately people these days have very short attention spans so they easily forget the topic and answers quickly default to what is goiong on in their heads. so every post ends up the same!

Another symptom of having a short attention span is that they forget that any other person exists, it is a me, me, mine existance.
Me who is the only one who knows anything, Me who of course has the only opinion, and you can be my freind, that is of course providing that you never dissagree with anything I say!

I am afraid that filtering out all of these unrelated posts will not occur nor be seriously observed unless this DIR becomes blue, after which the long-standing and contributing members that have lowered their posting rates (such as Vinayaka, NYK, ShivaFan [even though SF chose "no"], Ratiben, JS, JayaB, and a couple more) will return and help bring the HinduDIR back to the footing where contributive, non-debate-like but rather informative and bhaktic-like, posts will blossom once more.

Humility is a beautifull word, Namaste to you and to all absent God brothers and sisters, humility salutes the God within each and every one.
And humility is willing to learn.

I look forward to more Bhaktic like posts.

Once again, I would like to express how I appreciate your support and how you have maintained a positive and contributive and on-topic attitude. Since you posted that you would like the HinduDIR to become blue, may you be kind as to vote "yes" in the poll so your poll-input would reflect what you mentioned/desired in your post quoted above? Thank you, once again.

And, thank you full-heartedly for staying on topic.

At your service Prabhu ji :bow:

Jai shree Krishna

 

[Shântoham]

Namaskāram

I voted Yes.
Advaita Vedānta Siddhānta. Śrī Ādi Śaṅkarācārya Paramparā.

Pranāms

 

[Makaranda]

Is a 'member' defined as one who affiliates with the religion of the particular DIR?


@Jainarayan

in my opinion and view, the Hinduism DIR has become closed-minded, overly sensitive, defensive, argumentative, dogmatic and pontifical even among its Hindu members. It's beginning to resemble another site that people have fled, including yours truly. The infighting among this forum's members is sad, especially for a religion that prides itself on its diversity.

I think that at least for a time it should be "blued" to filter out any perceived trolls. There is of course the Report button, but I think the claim of trolls is overblown. Most of the baiting and arguing is among the Hindu members. In fact, one of the most orthodox Hindu members has caused so much consternation and strife as to now be restricted.

It definitely seems like there is tension in this online community; I've only been a forum member for a few days and I find myself drawn in to bickering over differing views already. Another forum I frequented briefly a while ago was like that so I left pretty quickly. Perhaps if I don't let myself get carried away that won't happen here I've not really seen any non-Hindus coming here to start trouble yet but maybe I've come during a lull.

 

[Jainarayan]

I've not really seen any non-Hindus coming here to start trouble yet but maybe I've come during a lull.

As one who no longer identifies as Hindu and has a different perspective, I don't see it either. At least not on a regular basis as these posts suggest. Of course it happens occasionally... that's the nature of the internet.

 

[Ravi500]

I would say that a Hindu , intelligent, well-versed in scriptures, having spent some time under a good Guru, and following the traditional line of Hinduism as interpreted by established sages,saints and authorised Hindu scholars should be added as a moderator over here.

This can help reduce the chaos over here to a very large extent , and create an orderly forum showcasing precise knowledge on each subject for the benefit of the readers.

 

[Asha]

Namaste,

Is a 'member' defined as one who affiliates with the religion of the particular DIR?

I have been reading here since December, it still seems a little confusing?
There are a lot of people who Identify as Hindu because they like some of the principles or some of the philpsophy which is realy great, but there are problems with this approach. We see the same thing happen in the Temple, there is a sort of honeymoon period when people meet with a tradition and they realy fall in love with some of the aspects of Hinduism, but it takes years to fully understand it. It also takes a lot of sacrafice. now this dosent just affect weterners who are new to Hinduism it happens to Indian born Hindus too, It is a typical human problem, we take on what we find attractive and we leave out the rest.

Even with the best the intention the more commited Hindu suffers from this problem to some extent as he takes on the principles that he understands and leaves the rest.

So we must all be cautious that we do not fall into this trap. We need to carefully examine what we mean when we say we identify as Hindu.

It definitely seems like there is tension in this online community; I've only been a forum member for a few days and I find myself drawn in to bickering over differing views already. Another forum I frequented briefly a while ago was like that so I left pretty quickly. Perhaps if I don't let myself get carried away that won't happen here I've not really seen any non-Hindus coming here to start trouble yet but maybe I've come during a lull.

This is very off putting I havent found any conversations just recently that I feel are worth getting into, I think we have to sort out this confusion then we can get going again.

Personaly I think a little humility would do the trick.

All we have to do is clearly state ''this is only my personal opinion'', ''this is only the opinion of my Sampradaya'', then at least we can explore how and why such opinions or veiws came into being.



Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Shântoham]

I've only been a forum member for a few days and I find myself drawn in to bickering over differing views already.

Namaskāram

Asking you to clarify some of your more perplexing statements is not bickering – it is helping (you to clarify some of your more perplexing statements). On the other hand, ignoring someone is definitely rude. Naturally, it is perfectly fine if you are unable or unwilling to clarify your statements. It was not my intention to put you on the spot by highlighting your lack of competence. For that I apologize wholeheartedly. Welcome to the forums. I will enjoy reading your posts.

Pranāms

 

[Makaranda]

Namaskāram

Asking you to clarify some of your more perplexing statements is not bickering – it is helping (you to clarify some of your more perplexing statements). On the other hand, ignoring someone is definitely rude. Naturally, it is perfectly fine if you are unable or unwilling to clarify your statements. It was not my intention to put you on the spot by highlighting your lack of competence. For that I apologize wholeheartedly. Welcome to the forums. I will enjoy reading your posts.

Pranāms

Hello Shântoham,

I wasn't actually referring to any posts you may have adressed to me ( was actually referring to Hinduism<3Krishna and Aupmanyav) though I do apologize if I've not gotten round to clarifying some of my views. OTOH I'm not making any claims about myself nor do I represent any views but my own so I'm not going to be making any fuss over minutiae or getting into arguments (if I can help it!) about the rightness or wrongness of what anybody says. We're all learning here I think, and I don't think that kind of thing is very helpful here. That's another thing I'm learning.

Thanks for the welcome

 

[Shântoham]

Hello Shântoham...

Namask&#257;ram

Makaranda wrote: I wasn't actually referring to any posts you may have addressed to me…

I know. But how else am I going to elicit a response from someone who ignores me?

Makaranda wrote: Though I do apologize if I've not gotten round to clarifying some of my views…

You still haven’t.

Makaranda wrote: OTOH I'm not making any claims about myself nor do I represent any views but my own…

That is not entirely true, is it? You quote Scriptures, you employ the technical terminology of traditional Advaita Ved&#257;nta, you mentioned your studies… therefore, implicitly you present yourself as a traditional Ved&#257;ntin. As such your sole aim should be the faithful representation of the Advaita Ved&#257;nta Siddh&#257;nta. But you don’t represent the Siddh&#257;nta faithfully. What kind of traditional Ved&#257;ntin would place his own views above Guru-&#346;&#257;stra Upade&#347;a – since it is the very core of the Siddh&#257;nta and the sole key to Mok&#7779;a? I simply pointed out your misrepresentations.

Makaranda wrote: So I'm not going to be making any fuss over minutiae…

Minutiae? I would not call them minutiae. You made perplexing statements regarding the very nature of Brahman and enlightenment (whatever that is). And you declared that those perplexing statements are the words of the Scriptures and of Ved&#257;nta – you did not claim that those were your words.

Makaranda wrote: Or getting into arguments (if I can help it!) about the rightness or wrongness of what anybody says...

Very wise policy. I can guarantee you that you will not get any argument from me. Only straightforward observations. I have no personal agenda at stake.

Makaranda wrote: We're all learning here I think…

Learning from a discussion forum is very unlikely – since the focus is on discussing – and there is no one here teaching. Also, spiritual learning is a sattvic activity and this – by its very nature – is a rajasic place. The best we can do – for those who are so inclined – is to gather tidbits of somewhat useful information to add to our growing collection of somewhat useful information. Of course, this is only an observation, your opinion is perfectly valid.

Makaranda wrote: And I don't think that kind of thing is very helpful here…

Yet you have extensively questioned some members of the DIR. You have asked some members to clarify their positions. And you have corrected their statement when they did not satisfy you. Shall we treat you any different?

Makaranda wrote: That's another thing I'm learning…

And I am glad for you. :clap

Makaranda wrote: Thanks for the welcome…

Don’t mention it.

Pran&#257;ms

 

[Makaranda]

Hello Shântoham,

You quote Scriptures, you employ the technical terminology of traditional Advaita Ved&#257;nta, you mentioned your studies&#8230; therefore, implicitly you present yourself as a traditional Ved&#257;ntin.

I'm not a traditional Vedantin, or, atleast, I don't identify with your paramparA. I don't believe there is a monopoly of a certain way of teaching, and nor do I believe I should conform to what you or those you claim to represent teach. I'm equally amendable to mysticism, for example, expressed in a variety of religious traditions (and before you say it, I know traditional Vedanta is not mysticism). This is an anonymous forum for people to share, discuss, and (sometimes) debate their views, I don't see a hegemony, and I'm under no obligation to justify or change any of my beliefs (and nor is anybody else). If I disagree with people here, or critique their views, or seek clarification, I am not trying to change what they believe, not trying to impose anything (perhaps just make them think!)- I don't think mutual disagreement is a fruitless result of discussions, since with every conversation I learn a little more about how other people think. So I disagree with you that learning is unlikely here. Maybe there is no Vedanta teaching here, but that is okay with me. So far I have learned that some people mix scientific concepts with Vedanta ones (Aupmanyav) and that some people take casteism to extremes (Hinduism<3Krishna), and even though I disagree with both of those people, that is okay with me.

Learning from a discussion forum is very unlikely &#8211; since the focus is on discussing &#8211; and there is no one here teaching. Also, spiritual learning is a sattvic activity and this &#8211; by its very nature &#8211; is a rajasic place.

Then, may I ask, why are you here?

Yet you have extensively questioned some members of the DIR. You have asked some members to clarify their positions. And you have corrected their statement when they did not satisfy you. Shall we treat you any different?

Yes, I admitted I fall into bickering quite easily; I am trying to change that bad habit into something more constructive.

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

I'm not a traditional Vedantin, or, atleast, I don't identify with your paramparA. I don't believe there is a monopoly of a certain way of teaching, and nor do I believe I should conform to what you or those you claim to represent teach. I'm equally amendable to mysticism, for example, expressed in a variety of religious traditions (and before you say it, I know traditional Vedanta is not mysticism).

I consider myself a vedAntI and I agree with your claim that brahma has a consciousness. Unfortunately, some Hindu-s (like shAnto'ham) seem to view kevalAdvaita, as taught by sha~Nkara, as the only form of vedAnta.

Maybe there is no Vedanta teaching here, but that is okay with me. So far I have learned that some people mix scientific concepts with Vedanta ones (Aupmanyav) and that some people take casteism to extremes (Hinduism<3Krishna), and even though I disagree with both of those people, that is okay with me.

LOL, I can't blame you if you have a problem with H(heart)K, nor can I blame you if you disagree with aupamanyav; the former is indeed casteist (and, to an extent, sexist), and the latter is a "Hindu atheist."

 

[Makaranda]

I consider myself a vedAntI and I agree with your claim that brahma has a consciousness. Unfortunately, some Hindu-s (like shAnto'ham) view kevalAdvaita, as taught by sha~Nkara, as the only form of vedAnta.

LOL, I can't blame you if you have a problem with H(heart)K, nor can I blame you if you disagree with aupamanyav; the former is indeed casteist (and, to an extent, sexist), and the latter is a "Hindu atheist."

Hi Jaskaran,

I think there is something deeply sinister in the implication that only one way of teaching only one viewpoint is the only correct way of getting at truth or freedom. It seems like an archaic way of preserving something that just isn't worth preserving, since it forces you to cut off all other forms, methods, and varieties of religious understanding and introspection and become very defensive. It's insular, in my view. I consider myself an Advaitin, but I am not going to police other people to make sure their understanding of Advaita is in line with my understanding, or in line with the understanding of those I claim to descend from/represent (despite my bickering, I can agree to disagree). That's a narrow path I simply won't tread, and really it seems at odds with the spirit and proliferation of traditions like Hinduism.

 

[Poeticus]

Namaste Recent Posters,

Can I kindly interest you to perhaps transfer these recent conversations onto another thread if all of you (Makaranda, Shantoham, and JS) may be kindly willing? I do not mean to intrude; sorry. However, if you would like to talk about the OP, you are all more than welcomed - by all means. Thank you for your consideration and kind regards.

 

[Makaranda]

Well for my part I'm content to end the digression here, &#2350;&#2376;&#2340;&#2381;&#2352;&#2366;&#2357;&#2352;&#2369;&#2339;&#2367;, I apologise for the disruption.

On topic: I haven't seen many non-Hindu members causing a ruckus in the Hindu DIR, so my first thought would be to say 'NO' to making the DIR, blue. However, as I'm totally new here my opinion isn't worth much so I defer to the better judgement of long term members.

 

[Poeticus]

Well for my part I'm content to end the digression here, &#2350;&#2376;&#2340;&#2381;&#2352;&#2366;&#2357;&#2352;&#2369;&#2339;&#2367;, I apologise for the disruption.

On topic: I haven't seen many non-Hindu members causing a ruckus in the Hindu DIR, so my first thought would be to say 'NO' to making the DIR, blue. However, as I'm totally new here my opinion isn't worth much so I defer to the better judgement of long term members.

I feel obligated to ask: do you identify yourself as a Hindu?

 

[Makaranda]

I feel obligated to ask: do you identify yourself as a Hindu?

Yes


(with Cynical leanings)

 

[Poeticus]

Yes

Please kindly feel welcomed to the HinduDIR.

(with Cynical leanings)

May you be kind as to explain what ^that means to you?

 

[Makaranda]

Please kindly feel welcomed to the HinduDIR.



May you be kind as to explain what ^that means to you?

Thanks

I have a soft spot for some ancient greek philosophy. The Cynics in particular, but also the Stoics (and Epicureans). I was mostly just being silly though

 

[Shântoham]

Hello Shântoham...

Namask&#257;ram

Please, my friend, calm down… I did not mean to hurt your feelings and make you cry… take a deep breath… it’s going to be all-right. Here have a glass of water.. You see, you even got a fruball for your trouble. Is not that bad, is it?
It’s OK. It was just a honest exchange of opinions. You spoke your mind and I did speak mine. I guess it’s all part of the discussion bit in the discussion forum. But if I rubbed you the wrong way, I sincerely apologize.

May I ask which Parampar&#257; you identify with? And who are those I claim to represent?

Makaranda wrote: Then, may I ask, why are you here?

I am only here to properly present the Advaita Ved&#257;nta Siddh&#257;nta when needed. Which is not very often, in case you wonder. And I was asked to be here by a few members – which prefer to speak to me privately.

Makaranda wrote: Yes, I admitted I fall into bickering quite easily; I am trying to change that bad habit into something more constructive.

You have my sympathy. I hope you can find it within your heart to forgive me for provoking such a strong reaction in you.

Pran&#257;ms