Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 
Top Members

Aspects of Hinduism

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
abu mohammed
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
2,656
Brother
3,401
Maripat's avatar
#1 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 06:07
Vedas and Rigveda


Casteism is the foundation stone of Hinduism and any other stream is a deviation designed to deflect the onslaught of the modern thought brought in by Islam and Muslims first and colonial rulers.

Casteism is based on the Varna System of Manu Smriti:

Brahmins are born of Brahma's head.

The Kshtriyas, the warrior class, is born of his torso.

The Vaishyas were born of his thighs.

The Shudras were born of his feet.

Hindus call their religion Vedic - religion of the Vedas.

Out of four Vedas the first one is the most respected of all - the Rig Veda.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+4 -0Winner x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#2 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 11:02

Maripat wrote:
View original post

Sanskrit Question?

Sorry Professor Saheb,

Its Manusmṛiti i.e. Manus (Insaan) + mriti (Bhai-chara) i.e. human brotherhood (literally) but it is a sinister concept as you have rightly elaborated.

How have you spelled it as Manu Smriti?

Jzk

P.S: I have seen many Hindus pronouncing it on youtube because they don't know Sanskrit (probably) but in your opinion what is this word?


 
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
abuzayd2k's avatar
Offline
Hindustan
1,057
Brother
164
abuzayd2k's avatar
#3 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 12:29
10
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post

If I may,

Manu - Hindu sage (first man)
Smriti - text (of law)

Manusmriti - Law of Man
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
ssaad's avatar
Offline
India
1,463
Brother
383
ssaad's avatar
#4 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 12:33
Sorry I retract. Edited
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
ssaad's avatar
Offline
India
1,463
Brother
383
ssaad's avatar
#5 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 12:47
My friend was saying that there is no motivation for serving the weak, honesty in business and jobs etc. They quote sayings of saints. There is no harm in rejecting sayings of saints.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#6 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 12:52

abuzayd2k wrote:
View original post

My Sanskrit expert is still giving the meaning which I indicated but yours also makes sense.

Jzk


 
report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Like x 3
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
2,656
Brother
3,401
Maripat's avatar
#7 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 13:23
Manu in Manusmriti is the man Manu, the sage. The correct translation is usually taken as the Law of Manu (not man). Smriti is memory. (And do not tell me you have not heard of this feminine name.) Thus even more literal translation would be Memoirs of Manu. This is the codification of Hindu Law. This law is so overpowering and debilitating that there is no escape from it. The Jats have defected over to Swami Dayanand' Arya Samaj and the Goojars, a caste similar to Jats, call them irreligious.

In case your source of Sanskrit is a Hindu then you have a problem at your hand and not a solution.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+5 -0Like x 1Winner x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#8 [Permalink] Posted on 14th March 2020 19:14

Maripat wrote:
View original post

I will be speaking to Maulana about this :)


 
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
2,656
Brother
3,401
Maripat's avatar
#9 [Permalink] Posted on 16th June 2020 04:39
Koenraad Elst is Important for Hindutva


Hindu religion today stands hijacked by the Saffron who have laid most assertive claims for the essence of Hinduism - Hindutva.

The Saffron movement is most strong in the political and social realm but its academic front is no weakling and in deed the crafty Leftist paradigm itself has proven to be no match for it.

Sadly we too have missed battling a part of the saffron narrative.

That concerns, for example, the western supporters of Hindutva.

Like Koenraad Elst.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
153
Brother
114
#10 [Permalink] Posted on 16th June 2020 05:21
Maripat wrote:
View original post


Copied from FB page ,

A Critique of Hindutva: Modern Hindutva is very different to the Vedic-era religion:

Hindutva depicts itself as “Sanatan Dharma”, or the “eternal way”: a cultural religion that claims to have always existed. It sees itself as the combined cultural and spiritual will of the “Dharmic” faiths of the Indian subcontinent. It is a movement that sees no difference between a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Sikh or a Jain, despite the obvious religious, historical and civilizational differences between each faith.
It makes very little sense to say that Sikhs, who believe in a single god, and a Buddhist, who neither believe in a god nor the same concept of the soul as any other faith, are the same.
In the same light, it makes little sense for the modern followers of Hindutva to claim they follow the religion of the Vedic period. By extension, it makes even less sense that they claimed this religion and way of life always existed.
There could not be more differences between modern Hindutva and the practices of the Vedic-era civilizations. For instance, the Vedic religion of the Vedic period (1500 BC – 500 BC) had a distinct belief in an afterlife, as opposed to the modern Hindu concepts of reincarnation and moksha.
Adherents to the Vedic-era religion did not believe in karma. Instead, they were steeped in animism, shaman-like ancestor-worship and lived in a syncretic Indo-European and Indo-Iranian culture.
The followers of the Vedic-era religion would sacrifice horses, cows, consume beef and even immolate cows every year, beliefs and practices that would anger Hindutva’s proponents today.
Hindutva apologists would claim that the events of the Mahābhārata were factual and took place after the late Vedic-period and before the first Indian empire. This is a claim that makes little historical sense against the backdrop of the historical information available about the Vedic period, as well as the information available about the various cults and religions practiced at that time. For instance, the historicity of the Kurukshetra War within the epic poem is unclear to historians, as are many of its characters due to the scarcity of archaeological evidence.
The narrative of the war in the Mahābhārata borrows from the mythological Rigveda story of the Battle of Ten Kings. He states that the Mahābhārata expanded and modified this mythology, making the factual historicity of the Mahābhārata even more dubious.
The Hindutva re-telling of the “Ramayana” as a factual account of human history follows a similar line of reasoning, with the historical epic occurring in what is known as the “Treta Yuga” period said to have been over 500,000 years ago, creating another questionable historical timeline.

Hindutva is Brahmanism:
Indeed, the Hindutva that exists in modern India shares a greater similarity with Brahmanism that developed as the Vedic period came to its end, which existed in the north-western region of India and further developed into the Gangetic plains.
While it was not completely identical to modern Hinduism, this ancient religion birthed the priestly class of Hinduism, the “Brahmins.”
What can be coherently stated is that the religions and cults of the Vedic and pre-Vedic era were ineffably distinct from modern Hinduism and Hindutva.
Hindutva provides no room for the nuances that exist between the Indic religions it groups together under its umbrella and inflates its own history with literalism tied to questionable historical events.
Hindutva seeks the domination of all non-Hindutva proponents, the establishment of a “Hindu Rashtra” extending as far as Western-most Afghanistan and combines a Hero-worship of Adolf Hitler with the movement’s various political leaders, including the incumbent Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi.
One of the foundational texts of Hindutva, a “Bunch of Thoughts”, was published in 1966 by M.S. Golwalkar. In “Part two: the nation and its problems”, Golwalkar listed the “internal threats” to India and they are as follows: the Muslims, the Christians, and the Communists. These hateful sentiments are still held by many within India’s political classes.
Adolf Hitler had his “Fatherland” and Golwalkar had his “Motherland” – deifying the nation-state of India in the image of a Hindu idol.
Golwalkar and the proponents of Hindu Nationalism promote historical falsehood and a politics of hate; they provide no nuance to the individual beliefs of India’s religions, and view Muslims and non-Hindutva proponents as second-class citizens.
Hindutva proponents share very few beliefs and practices with the Vedic era religions and conflate their national identity with a wholly inaccurate reading of South and Central Asia’s ancient history.

-- Bharath Syal
report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
153
Brother
114
#11 [Permalink] Posted on 16th June 2020 05:23



Hindutva and Nazism:

Bose’s sympathies with the Nazi’s are still held by the proponents of Hindutva, and Adolf Hitler is still popular as ever in India.
In 2004, when Narendra Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat, school textbooks published by the Gujarat State Board portrayed Adolf Hitler as a hero, and glorified Nazi fascism. The social studies textbook for 15-to-16-year olds had chapters entitled “Hitler, the Supremo,” and “Internal Achievements of Nazism.”
The social studies textbook, published by the state of Tamil Nadu in 2011 includes chapters glorifying Hitler, praising his “inspiring leadership,” “achievements” and how the Nazis “glorified the German state” so, “to maintain a German race with Nordic elements, [Hitler] ordered the Jews to be persecuted.”
This glorification of Hitler is a direct attribute of Hindutva, and it is something that many Indian politicians have politically gained from – none other than Bose and Thackeray. “

Views of Bal Thackeray:

It is a Hitler that is needed in India today,” said Bal Thackeray, the then-leader of the Hindu extremist outfit Shiv Sena, in 1967.“
There is nothing wrong,” he said in his 1993 interview with Time magazine, “if Muslims are treated as Jews were in Nazi Germany.” He then went on to apply fascist ideology in the context of India. “If you take Mein Kampf and if you remove the word ‘Jew’ and put in the word ‘Muslim’, that is what I believe in,” he said.
With sentiments such as these popular among many in India pre- and post-Independence, the violence waged by Hindu Nationalism in the 21st century should come at no surprise to anyone.

-- Bharath Syal
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
153
Brother
114
#12 [Permalink] Posted on 16th June 2020 05:46
Demonization of Aurangzeb:
Islamophobic bigotry is projected backwards against the backdrop of India’s Mughal history, in which Mughal emperors, namely Aurangzeb, were purported to have governed solely to tyrannize India’s Hindu majority.
Historian Audrey Truschke claims that the British created the modern legacy of Aurangzeb as a cartoonish bigot to highlight Aurangzeb’s alleged hatred of his majority-Hindu populace.

Humiliation breeds nationalist sentiments:
Truschke states that Hindu Nationalists are embarrassed upon reflecting on how India was ruled for so long by a Muslim minority, which is a phenomenon that can often precede the rise of ethnonationalist politics.
The Treaty of Versailles humiliated Germany after the first world war. Economic distress and resentment with the treaty in Germany helped fuel ultra-nationalist sentiments that led to the rise of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party.

Hindutva and “Mlechhas” in Nepal:
While the politics of Hindutva, the RSS, and the BJP reflect 20th century ethnonationalism, the history of Hindu Nationalism itself is slightly older and expressed itself in numerous ways.
The Nepalese King Maharajadhiraja Shah of the 18th century declared Nepal as the “pure land of the Hindus” and described Mughal-ruled India detestably as Mughlan (“country of Mughals”).
The Hinduisation of Nepal led to the creation of the Nepali civil code, the Muluki Ain. The civil code was rooted in what was considered traditional Hindu ideas and social practices, and categorized its society on the following ethnic-caste-grounds: “sacred thread bearers”, “enslavable and non-enslavable liquor drinkers” and the “untouchables.”
Slavery was a key feature of this legal compendium, as all of those who belonged to castes outside of the “sacred thread bearers” and the “non-enslaveable liquor drinkers” could be enslaved under the law.
Under the Muluki Ain, Muslims (and Europeans) were classed among the impure lower castes and were described as “mlechha” (defined as “non-Vedic” or “barbarian”). They had few rights under the law.
The term “mlechha” has ancient scriptural and sociological roots to the early-mid Vedic period, and was used by Indo-Aryans to designate foreign or “inferior” people such as Indo-Greeks , etc.

Revival of Hinduism:
As the 19th century passed, “Hindu Renaissance” took place. Groups such as the Arya Samaj grew in popularity. The Arya Samaj rejected idolatry, caste repression, child marriage and attributed these phenomena as consequences of “Brahmanism.” However, despite Vivekananda’s “monotheism”, his spirituality was still aimed at revitalizing a Hindu Nation.

Hindu-Raj in Kashmir Under Dogras:
A policy of “Hindu Raj” went on to be implemented upon the inhabitants of the Muslim-majority region of Kashmir under 20th century Dogra rule. Muslims were dealt with harshly by the Dogras simply for being Muslim.
For instance, until 1934, the slaughter of a cow was a capital offense. A person convicted of killing a cow was “boiled in oil and then hung from a hook which was fixed on to a pole [impaled] in a public place.”
The Dogra rulers implemented laws that permitted Kashmiri Muslims to inherit property and enjoy rights of guardianship over their children only if they converted to Hinduism. If a Hindu converted to Islam, they would automatically lose these rights.
Dogra rulers taxed Muslims for every marriage that occurred within their families, and even converted many historical Kashmiri mosques and shrines into granaries and ammunition storehouses for the State.
Hindu Dogra rule in Kashmir was so inept, discriminatory and vile that it prompted then-British Viceroy Lord Lytton to write to then-Secretary of State Lord Cranbrook with the following:
I consider that time has come when we must decisively intervene for the rescue of a perishing [Kashmiri Muslim] population, on whose behalf we certainly contracted moral obligations and responsibilities when we handed them over to the rule of a power alien to them in race and creed, and representing no civilization higher than theirs.
-- Bharath Syal
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
2,656
Brother
3,401
Maripat's avatar
#13 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd March 2021 08:29
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
2,656
Brother
3,401
Maripat's avatar
#14 [Permalink] Posted on 16th March 2021 15:34
Contribution of Dr Zakir Naik


In our relation with non-Muslims the focus must be on Islam.

Dr Zakir Naik brought it to the fore in India.

And paid a price - he had to leave his beloved country.

There is a lesson for those of us in India today. To keep the focus on the same issue that Dr Zakir Naik sought to bring to the world.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
ssaad's avatar
Offline
India
1,463
Brother
383
ssaad's avatar
#15 [Permalink] Posted on 16th March 2021 15:51
Maripat wrote:
View original post


This is based what inputs I have received.

Regarding Dr Zakir Naik's debate with Shri Ravi Shankar;

1. He was invited for inter faith dialog, not for debate.
2. Ravi Shankar is not a debater, like, peer zulfikhar sab db or Maulana Tariq Jameel db can't debate, Maulana Ilyas Ghuman db and Maulana Tahir Gayavi DB can. Dr Zakir Naik is a debater. Debater vs a non-debater is not a level playing field.
3. On stage, the dialogue was changed to a debate and Ravi Shankar was not prepared for it.
4. Present government is supporter of Ravi Shankar. And they used their power.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top