Guest guest Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 This will make Sreenadh happy- After my request to all of you, to send your mail for support to my private id, I feel sad that not a single mail has arrived, showing your support for initiating action against this man. This is what is expected from the lot of Hindus. They have never been united, and as one member has pointed out, we ourselves are the cause of our own downfall. This man has been impudent enough not to apologise, and neither has he removed the controversial article from his Forum. But I will fight this batttle alone. The big talkers of this Forum, I have seen their big talks and their letharginess to lift a finger. What blessings can they hope to recieve from their Gods , this Diwali after this show of Non action against sacrilege utterances to their Lord ? Next time you people sit in front of the Pooja or go in a temple to receive blessings, remember that You are not worthy enough to recieve them. I am just waiting for my Father to return to good health, and some important assignments to complete, and will go on the battlefield alone. Better not have eunuchs on my side, but Lords power is enough to deal with such a parasite and weed of society.. Dont expect to hear from me anymore now. I better not talk sense or any type of astrology with you lot. A very much aggrieved, Bhaskar. , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear Shri Sunilji, > > If at all you are associated in anyway with the Ownership of > the group, then please disassociate yourself immediately > from the same, because I am in process of taking a very strong > step against the owner and Sreenadh for their utterances and > allowance of this gory article. And I do not wish you > to be involved in this, in any manner. > > This fellow has not apologized, and invited trouble now. > > Those members who wish to support me, may write to me > on my private email- > rajiventerprises > > regards, > Bhaskar. > > > > > > -- In , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > Even I was told some time back on e mail by > > Shri Nairji, that he is not the owner there, > > and from today onwards not even the Moderator. > > Which is why I addressed him with selected usage > > of language, cause I was unsure, and could not > > believe that he could be a witness to such > > type of abuse on a Incarnation of God. > > > > Yet the members who are respectful, will have > > to remove themselves from this Forum > > if it is Sreenadhs, because either attack and > > confront the abuser, or else get out of the assembly, > > is what every good person should do. > > > > I have been also told that Sreenadh is a good > > friend of Shri Nairji, and I hope knowing > > his religious attitude and nature, that Shri > > Nairji would now cut across slowly from association > > of such person who talk in a most derogatory manner > > about our Gods and their mothers. > > > > Paapi ka sang bahut bura, > > kanchan sone ko bhi bana > > dega pathar ka chura. > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > sunil nair > > > > > > dear group , > > > > > > just now after my talk with sunil nair i came to know that he is not a > > > party in discussion in ancint astrology grp and he is like a memebr of > > > the grp only . > > > > > > so i wanted to make clear that all my allegations was from a > > > misunderstanding . > > > > > > lalit mishra > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Bhaskar Ji, This srinadh is a kind of convertion case, he is close to buddhism, following Osho Rajneesh, so keping a kind of fanatism in his mind, somehow he learnt some astrology. So, by abusing hindu gods he gets a mental satisfaction, but, he never reveals that he has changed his faith, he poses himself as a learned hindu astrologer only. he is 34 yr old, works in delhi with a small softare company, he is in testing division. regards, Lalit. , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > This will make Sreenadh happy- > > After my request to all of you, to send your mail for > support to my private id, I feel sad that not a single > mail has arrived, showing your support for > initiating action against this man. This is what is > expected from the lot of Hindus. They have never > been united, and as one member has pointed out, > we ourselves are the cause of our own downfall. > > This man has been impudent enough not to > apologise, and neither has he removed the > controversial article from his Forum. > > But I will fight this batttle alone. The big talkers of > this Forum, I have seen their big talks and their > letharginess to lift a finger. What blessings can they > hope to recieve from their Gods , this Diwali > after this show of Non action against sacrilege > utterances to their Lord ? Next time you > people sit in front of the Pooja or go in a temple > to receive blessings, remember that You > are not worthy enough to recieve them. > > I am just waiting for my Father to return to good > health, and some important assignments to complete, > and will go on the battlefield alone. Better not have > eunuchs on my side, but Lords power is enough > to deal with such a parasite and weed of society.. > > Dont expect to hear from me anymore now. > I better not talk sense or any type > of astrology with you lot. > > A very much aggrieved, > Bhaskar. > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Shri Sunilji, > > > > If at all you are associated in anyway with the Ownership of > > the group, then please disassociate yourself immediately > > from the same, because I am in process of taking a very strong > > step against the owner and Sreenadh for their utterances and > > allowance of this gory article. And I do not wish you > > to be involved in this, in any manner. > > > > This fellow has not apologized, and invited trouble now. > > > > Those members who wish to support me, may write to me > > on my private email- > > rajiventerprises@ > > > > regards, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- In , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > Even I was told some time back on e mail by > > > Shri Nairji, that he is not the owner there, > > > and from today onwards not even the Moderator. > > > Which is why I addressed him with selected usage > > > of language, cause I was unsure, and could not > > > believe that he could be a witness to such > > > type of abuse on a Incarnation of God. > > > > > > Yet the members who are respectful, will have > > > to remove themselves from this Forum > > > if it is Sreenadhs, because either attack and > > > confront the abuser, or else get out of the assembly, > > > is what every good person should do. > > > > > > I have been also told that Sreenadh is a good > > > friend of Shri Nairji, and I hope knowing > > > his religious attitude and nature, that Shri > > > Nairji would now cut across slowly from association > > > of such person who talk in a most derogatory manner > > > about our Gods and their mothers. > > > > > > Paapi ka sang bahut bura, > > > kanchan sone ko bhi bana > > > dega pathar ka chura. > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > sunil nair > > > > > > > > dear group , > > > > > > > > just now after my talk with sunil nair i came to know that he is > not a > > > > party in discussion in ancint astrology grp and he is like a > memebr of > > > > the grp only . > > > > > > > > so i wanted to make clear that all my allegations was from a > > > > misunderstanding . > > > > > > > > lalit mishra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Lalitji, Yes he has to be a convert or mixed blood. No sane Hindu even after drinking a full bottle of Scotch could ever even think like this in his most corrupted moments or imaginations too, forget penning such thoughts down. I have already put my initial steps in implementation and would not rest easy, whatever maybe the outcome. The perversion is seen through his writings, the hate is also felt through these, and I sensed this long back when I happened to read one of his translations, on which I had commented earlier too, on this Forum. He is acting exactly like a missionary who are given money to convert poor innocent people, and they prepare articles which tend to hit soft targets, the undeveloped minds who would then see problems, fallacies and inconsistencies in their own religions, and thus convert to others. I am waiting for some time, when I would be able to create a 1000 Narendra Modis in India, which is a promise, from my side.These will deal with the dirty perpetrators who spring up anywhere in India. We all have to die anyway. At least I would die after some cleaning up. regards, Bhaskar. , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar Ji, > > This srinadh is a kind of convertion case, he is close to buddhism, > following Osho Rajneesh, so keping a kind of fanatism in his mind, > somehow he learnt some astrology. > > So, by abusing hindu gods he gets a mental satisfaction, but, he > never reveals that he has changed his faith, he poses himself as a > learned hindu astrologer only. > > he is 34 yr old, works in delhi with a small softare company, he is > in testing division. > > regards, > Lalit. > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > This will make Sreenadh happy- > > > > After my request to all of you, to send your mail for > > support to my private id, I feel sad that not a single > > mail has arrived, showing your support for > > initiating action against this man. This is what is > > expected from the lot of Hindus. They have never > > been united, and as one member has pointed out, > > we ourselves are the cause of our own downfall. > > > > This man has been impudent enough not to > > apologise, and neither has he removed the > > controversial article from his Forum. > > > > But I will fight this batttle alone. The big talkers of > > this Forum, I have seen their big talks and their > > letharginess to lift a finger. What blessings can they > > hope to recieve from their Gods , this Diwali > > after this show of Non action against sacrilege > > utterances to their Lord ? Next time you > > people sit in front of the Pooja or go in a temple > > to receive blessings, remember that You > > are not worthy enough to recieve them. > > > > I am just waiting for my Father to return to good > > health, and some important assignments to complete, > > and will go on the battlefield alone. Better not have > > eunuchs on my side, but Lords power is enough > > to deal with such a parasite and weed of society.. > > > > Dont expect to hear from me anymore now. > > I better not talk sense or any type > > of astrology with you lot. > > > > A very much aggrieved, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Shri Sunilji, > > > > > > If at all you are associated in anyway with the Ownership of > > > the group, then please disassociate yourself immediately > > > from the same, because I am in process of taking a very strong > > > step against the owner and Sreenadh for their utterances and > > > allowance of this gory article. And I do not wish you > > > to be involved in this, in any manner. > > > > > > This fellow has not apologized, and invited trouble now. > > > > > > Those members who wish to support me, may write to me > > > on my private email- > > > rajiventerprises@ > > > > > > regards, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- In , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Even I was told some time back on e mail by > > > > Shri Nairji, that he is not the owner there, > > > > and from today onwards not even the Moderator. > > > > Which is why I addressed him with selected usage > > > > of language, cause I was unsure, and could not > > > > believe that he could be a witness to such > > > > type of abuse on a Incarnation of God. > > > > > > > > Yet the members who are respectful, will have > > > > to remove themselves from this Forum > > > > if it is Sreenadhs, because either attack and > > > > confront the abuser, or else get out of the assembly, > > > > is what every good person should do. > > > > > > > > I have been also told that Sreenadh is a good > > > > friend of Shri Nairji, and I hope knowing > > > > his religious attitude and nature, that Shri > > > > Nairji would now cut across slowly from association > > > > of such person who talk in a most derogatory manner > > > > about our Gods and their mothers. > > > > > > > > Paapi ka sang bahut bura, > > > > kanchan sone ko bhi bana > > > > dega pathar ka chura. > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > sunil nair > > > > > > > > > > dear group , > > > > > > > > > > just now after my talk with sunil nair i came to know that he > is > > not a > > > > > party in discussion in ancint astrology grp and he is like a > > memebr of > > > > > the grp only . > > > > > > > > > > so i wanted to make clear that all my allegations was from a > > > > > misunderstanding . > > > > > > > > > > lalit mishra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 There is an inherent problem in Hinduism: . It does not encourage blind following unlike other religions. Because of this, every and any body , in their immense wisdom ontained mostly by reading one or two books by biased westerners, can pass their own judgements on this religion. As per these pesudo intellectuals, Rama and Krishna are just mythical figures created out of wild imagination of evil chuavanists of ancient india. first sort out this problem that only knowledgeable can discuss or rationalize the religion. All others can only follow the religion, If they do not like to follow, they can as well quit. Kishore patnaik 98492 70729 On 10/26/07, Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear Lalitji, > > Yes he has to be a convert or mixed blood. > No sane Hindu even after drinking a full bottle > of Scotch could ever even think like this > in his most corrupted moments or imaginations too, > forget penning such thoughts down. I have > already put my initial steps in implementation > and would not rest easy, whatever maybe the > outcome. > The perversion is seen through his writings, the > hate is also felt through these, and I sensed this > long back when I happened to read one of his translations, > on which I had commented earlier too, on this Forum. > > He is acting exactly like a missionary who are given > money to convert poor innocent people, and they prepare > articles which tend to hit soft targets, the undeveloped > minds who would then see problems, fallacies and > inconsistencies in their own religions, and thus convert > to others. > > I am waiting for some time, when I would be able to > create a 1000 Narendra Modis in India, which is a promise, > from my side.These will deal with the dirty perpetrators > who spring up anywhere in India. > > We all have to die anyway. > At least I would die after some cleaning up. > > regards, > Bhaskar. > > <%40>, > " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > > > Dear Bhaskar Ji, > > > > This srinadh is a kind of convertion case, he is close to buddhism, > > following Osho Rajneesh, so keping a kind of fanatism in his mind, > > somehow he learnt some astrology. > > > > So, by abusing hindu gods he gets a mental satisfaction, but, he > > never reveals that he has changed his faith, he poses himself as a > > learned hindu astrologer only. > > > > he is 34 yr old, works in delhi with a small softare company, he is > > in testing division. > > > > regards, > > Lalit. > > > > <%40>, > " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > This will make Sreenadh happy- > > > > > > After my request to all of you, to send your mail for > > > support to my private id, I feel sad that not a single > > > mail has arrived, showing your support for > > > initiating action against this man. This is what is > > > expected from the lot of Hindus. They have never > > > been united, and as one member has pointed out, > > > we ourselves are the cause of our own downfall. > > > > > > This man has been impudent enough not to > > > apologise, and neither has he removed the > > > controversial article from his Forum. > > > > > > But I will fight this batttle alone. The big talkers of > > > this Forum, I have seen their big talks and their > > > letharginess to lift a finger. What blessings can they > > > hope to recieve from their Gods , this Diwali > > > after this show of Non action against sacrilege > > > utterances to their Lord ? Next time you > > > people sit in front of the Pooja or go in a temple > > > to receive blessings, remember that You > > > are not worthy enough to recieve them. > > > > > > I am just waiting for my Father to return to good > > > health, and some important assignments to complete, > > > and will go on the battlefield alone. Better not have > > > eunuchs on my side, but Lords power is enough > > > to deal with such a parasite and weed of society.. > > > > > > Dont expect to hear from me anymore now. > > > I better not talk sense or any type > > > of astrology with you lot. > > > > > > A very much aggrieved, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>, > " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Sunilji, > > > > > > > > If at all you are associated in anyway with the Ownership of > > > > the group, then please disassociate yourself immediately > > > > from the same, because I am in process of taking a very strong > > > > step against the owner and Sreenadh for their utterances and > > > > allowance of this gory article. And I do not wish you > > > > to be involved in this, in any manner. > > > > > > > > This fellow has not apologized, and invited trouble now. > > > > > > > > Those members who wish to support me, may write to me > > > > on my private email- > > > > rajiventerprises@ > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- In <%40>, > " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Even I was told some time back on e mail by > > > > > Shri Nairji, that he is not the owner there, > > > > > and from today onwards not even the Moderator. > > > > > Which is why I addressed him with selected usage > > > > > of language, cause I was unsure, and could not > > > > > believe that he could be a witness to such > > > > > type of abuse on a Incarnation of God. > > > > > > > > > > Yet the members who are respectful, will have > > > > > to remove themselves from this Forum > > > > > if it is Sreenadhs, because either attack and > > > > > confront the abuser, or else get out of the assembly, > > > > > is what every good person should do. > > > > > > > > > > I have been also told that Sreenadh is a good > > > > > friend of Shri Nairji, and I hope knowing > > > > > his religious attitude and nature, that Shri > > > > > Nairji would now cut across slowly from association > > > > > of such person who talk in a most derogatory manner > > > > > about our Gods and their mothers. > > > > > > > > > > Paapi ka sang bahut bura, > > > > > kanchan sone ko bhi bana > > > > > dega pathar ka chura. > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>, > " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > sunil nair > > > > > > > > > > > > dear group , > > > > > > > > > > > > just now after my talk with sunil nair i came to know that he > > is > > > not a > > > > > > party in discussion in ancint astrology grp and he is like a > > > memebr of > > > > > > the grp only . > > > > > > > > > > > > so i wanted to make clear that all my allegations was from a > > > > > > misunderstanding . > > > > > > > > > > > > lalit mishra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. How many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not know the end of Lord Krishna. Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, and rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in Jainism. No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into being in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of others believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess that they identified the sanctity of their belief. The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. No, there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know many things, yet. What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two or three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, how many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I have a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in any of these volumes) I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. I hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the benefits of other Hindus. First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am running out of my patience. Regards to all Pathi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear venkatachala pathi, I have no interest to slung mud on anyone , much less on you. I have only pointed to the salient feature of the day. I have several friends who criticize many of our customs and call them irrational. I ask why they feel it is irrational and more often than not, they have no answer or worse, they would try to give some half baked reply. In other religions, things are blindly followed which is good for the religion as such. I have only spread my experience before you. You might have had a different experience and you have every right to differ with me.... kishore patnaik On 10/26/07, venkatachala pathi <pathiav wrote: > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to others in > other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. How many Hindus are > aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious epics, while they claim they > are staunch Hindus? Many would not know the end of Lord Krishna. > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a > personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, and rituals. > In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in Jainism. > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are schooled to > a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into being in that religion. > Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is super 'dot' embodiment of Godly > powers, then you will find many worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, > custom, etc. is their privilege in which their faith falls upon, either > follower of others believed to have known more on that, or they themselves > profess that they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will claim that > religion is superior to all religions in this world. No, there could be > equally glorious addition in spirituality in other religions too. Others in > other religions are not fools. You being follower of another religion may > differ, but they gather together. > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know many things, > yet. > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two or three > books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, how many books > many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I have a library of 657 > Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, collected over 38 years and I > have not gone into them complete in any of these volumes) > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. I hope they > stop this and respect each other. If you opine in difference to the > contents, the best thing is to neglect such contents. Otherwise bring out > more authoritative guide lines for emancipating the commentator, and let > that contribution be to the benefits of other Hindus. > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, equip with > absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the other comment. I am > sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am running out of my patience. > > Regards to all > > Pathi > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Mr. Pati, Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a fully developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's theories, what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha religion only, there are clear contradictions. It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like science, religions also evolve over the period and present their theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more eolved than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is altogather different. regards, Lalit. , venkatachala pathi <pathiav wrote: > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. How many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not know the end of Lord Krishna. > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, and rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in Jainism. > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into being in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of others believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess that they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. No, there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know many things, yet. > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two or three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, how many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I have a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in any of these volumes) > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. I hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the benefits of other Hindus. > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am running out of my patience. > > Regards to all > > Pathi > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Friends, Let us not divide ourselves , if we cannot unite. And little differences of opinions does not matter,as long as they do not create division between us, which is why Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism were formed. They are all branches from the same Great Banyan Tree - One single religion which is Hinduism. Let us not argue much Shri Pathiji who is the oldest member of this Forum. I would like to add that though all Hindus are not expected to know the Upanishads,Vedas or the religious scriptures, but at least every Hindu astrologer who claims to be one, and is looking for glory from Hindu astrology, should at least not talk about Shri Rama, the way it was done. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are the authentic epics which clearly prove through the contentes therein, that the Hindus knew and practiced astrology in those days, and every astrologer worth his salt should respect the Heroes of these great epics and not talk in a derogatory manner whatsover about them. This Forum is not used for mudslinging, but on the contrary is proving the best example for Unity of Hindus, where most of the recent views from the posters point out. their respect for our religion and Gods. Bravo. Keep it up. But please see that no differences are created anymore. regards, Bhaskar. , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a fully > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's theories, > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha religion > only, there are clear contradictions. > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more eolved > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > altogather different. > > regards, > Lalit. > > > , venkatachala pathi <pathiav@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. How > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not know > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling power, > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, and > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in Jainism. > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into being > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of others > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess that > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. No, > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know > many things, yet. > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two or > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, how > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I have > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in any > of these volumes) > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. I > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > running out of my patience. > > > > Regards to all > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Sir, before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and if u cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan Dharma Regards, Tarun , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a fully > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's theories, > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha religion > only, there are clear contradictions. > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more eolved > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > altogather different. > > regards, > Lalit. > > > , venkatachala pathi <pathiav@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. How > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not know > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling power, > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, and > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in Jainism. > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into being > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of others > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess that > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. No, > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know > many things, yet. > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two or > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, how > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I have > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in any > of these volumes) > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. I > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > running out of my patience. > > > > Regards to all > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Dear Friends, This is what I hinted in my last mail. I was afraid that this episode would turn this way. Pl dont create differences between yourself. We are already a divided lot due to our Egos. No more. Bandh mutthi lakh ki Khuli muththi khakh ki. Bhaskar. , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo wrote: > > Dear Sir, > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and if u > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > Dharma > > Regards, > > Tarun > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > fully > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > theories, > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > religion > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > eolved > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > altogather different. > > > > regards, > > Lalit. > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi <pathiav@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. > How > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not > know > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > power, > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, > and > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > Jainism. > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into > being > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > others > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess > that > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. > No, > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know > > many things, yet. > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two > or > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, > how > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I > have > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in > any > > of these volumes) > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. > I > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Namaskaar Sri Pathi Though your post is directed towards Sri Patnaik, it is fraught with errors. I am taking the liberty to reply to you. Please read the replies in blue color I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. How many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not know the end of Lord Krishna. The word Hindus only refer to people living near, on the banks, and on eastern side of river Sindhu. Many are aware that it is a mispronunciation of the word Sindhu. The hindus follows the Vedas and though may not study it directly, their culture, rituals and the things that they do show the same. Hinduism is completely different from all other religions. The major difference is that there is no founder of Hinduism. There wasn't a point in time someone dropped from the sky without being born from a mother, to declare certain dos and don'ts and saying that this is now a new religion. Maybe God was sleeping all this while and suddenly thought I need to send in a Messiah. Hinduism does not have dos and don'ts. It focuses on the Truth only - on Reality. It does not say kill so many people or convert so many people and you'd get Heaven. It simply is a pramana of the Reality. Hinduism is the only way of life which says that any person may pray to the lord in the way he/she may want and it isn't a problem. I have already said aggressive religions are very epitome of " Only this religion should exist " Hinduism isn't decided by majority. It is what it is. It does not need a following to be what it is. Truth is Truth, whether you follow it or you do not. So Hinduism is very different from a churchianism wherein 300 years after the death of a said messiah, the teachings were severely distorted to gain power and spread unverifiable beliefs. Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. You couldn't be more wrong. Religion comes from two words - Re and Ligare. This means to unite back. Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, and rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in Jainism. Sir, you are a person of advanced age and I respect you for the age, but I completely disagree with this. This seems to me very rudimentary explanation. No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into being in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of others believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess that they identified the sanctity of their belief. This shows that a proper study of Religions is needed from your end. Till date only the ignorant of teachings of the Religions say either of these two statements: 1. My Religion should only exist and all others should be exterminated. 2. All Religions are the same and teach the same. This forum is too short to remove such ignorant remarks by way of explanation. But it surely disrespects Hinduism and its depth. It is your responsibility to remove your ignorance and not mine. The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. No, there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. Sir, with due regards, the people in other religions follow the Lord in their own way. Of them I highly respect Sufis, Zen Buddhists, and some others I rather not disclose. I would rather reserve my comments upon some of the majority Religions who have no clue what they are talking about. Believe me, I have had major interactions with Religious heads and luminaries from around the world. Moreover, please remember it is the destructive principles in their religion that I am against, not the people. I think you are suggesting otherwise to Sri Kishore. This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know many things, yet. Very right Sir. Now I implore you to check the religions and see which Religion has this attitude at maximum. They know nothing and yet their blabberings are as if they know everything. What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two or three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, how many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I have a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in any of these volumes) Sir, Sri Ramana Maharishi did not have a single book. Nor did Sri Ramakrishna Paramhamsa. They had the viveka and the bhakti to see the true from the untrue. Maybe time to donate those books and think for yourself or better seek a Guru. I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. I hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the benefits of other Hindus. What Sri Kishore Patnaik has said is a valid point. A person who has no clue about Hinduism should try not to speak about it as if he knows 100% of it. This is what you have been saying too. Why do you say that he is mudslinging? First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am running out of my patience. I can say the same to you, but with due respects. That your statements have not come from undeniable knowledge. Hope you take my words as not an insult upon yourself, cause it is not. When it comes to knowledge, I take blessings from elders but do not let them be away with frivolous arguments such as some of the above. Therefore, if any statement of mine hurts you, please accept my apologies and still bless me. Thanks and Regards Bharat _,_._,___ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 dear Sri Bharat ji, I bless you. Pathi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Dear Mr. Tarun, I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories of soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points are not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - Ananda ! Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great social reformer only. Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion only by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods like Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, never propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who wanted to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime people were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam gachhami " . try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, a religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a political party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on rebirth and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise what takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which were already established by lord krishna. So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus is on their incompletness, inefficiency. Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. regards, Lalit. , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo wrote: > > Dear Sir, > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and if u > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > Dharma > > Regards, > > Tarun > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > fully > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > theories, > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > religion > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > eolved > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > altogather different. > > > > regards, > > Lalit. > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi <pathiav@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. > How > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not > know > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > power, > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, > and > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > Jainism. > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who are > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into > being > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > others > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess > that > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you will > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. > No, > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You being > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not know > > many things, yet. > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read two > or > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, > how > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I > have > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in > any > > of these volumes) > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. > I > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface the > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Dear Mr. Tarun, Pls. read last para of my posting like this - And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on rebirth and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama he will deny the concept of soul, can u tell, otherwise,what takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which were already established by lord krishna. , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories of > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points are > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - Ananda ! > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great > social reformer only. > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion only > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods like > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, never > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who wanted > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime people > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > gachhami " . > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, a > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a political > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on rebirth > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise what > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which were > already established by lord krishna. > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus is > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > regards, > Lalit. > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> wrote: > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and if u > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > > Dharma > > > > Regards, > > > > Tarun > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > > fully > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > theories, > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > religion > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > > eolved > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > altogather different. > > > > > > regards, > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > <pathiav@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. > > How > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not > > know > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > power, > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, > > and > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who > are > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into > > being > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > > others > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess > > that > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you > will > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. > > No, > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > being > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not > know > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read > two > > or > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, > > how > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I > > have > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in > > any > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. > > I > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface > the > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2007 Report Share Posted October 28, 2007 Dear Lalit ji, whatever you have heard or percepted its not abt that. It is ..donot call any dharma or religion as bad. Each community in there control area donot allow other religion to flourish that is example of Badrinath you said and even in India you can see abt the riots which happen on breaking a mosque or temple. My humble request, donot call any religion as bad because someone else would throw stones on our religion too seeing the flaws which are shown to world. if you are talking about Bhagwad Geeta then read it again and follow it. Regards, Tarun , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories of > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points are > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - Ananda ! > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great > social reformer only. > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion only > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods like > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, never > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who wanted > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime people > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > gachhami " . > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, a > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a political > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on rebirth > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise what > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which were > already established by lord krishna. > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus is > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > regards, > Lalit. > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> wrote: > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and if u > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > > Dharma > > > > Regards, > > > > Tarun > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > > fully > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > theories, > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > religion > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > > eolved > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > altogather different. > > > > > > regards, > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > <pathiav@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. > > How > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not > > know > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > power, > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, > > and > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who > are > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into > > being > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > > others > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess > > that > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you > will > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. > > No, > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > being > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not > know > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read > two > > or > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, > > how > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I > > have > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in > > any > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. > > I > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface > the > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2007 Report Share Posted October 28, 2007 Dear Shri Lalitji and Shri Tarunji, While appreciating Your love ,concern and favouritism towards own religion, which qualities every Hindu should have, I request that we do not commit the same mistakes which this fellow Sreenadh has done. All of us know the plus and minus of all the sects, and we need not mouth them out, and cause further trouble or differences between us here. Please refrain from commenting about the miniature branches of Hinduism, otherwise we will move away further from our common cause and remain divided. Shri Tarunji, I request you not to carry the thread about Buddhism further. We have to form a strong force, and United we stand, and Divided we fall.My endeavours towards bringing our Group members closer should not be wasted by petty squabbles or difference of opinions and views. You people are the strength of the Hindu Forces, and talk straightforward, fearlessly which is what a strong group demands. Shri Bharatji also has all these qualities in full,and together we can face the mightiest of storms, but individually we may not be able to. regards, Bhaskar. , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo wrote: > > Dear Lalit ji, > > whatever you have heard or percepted its not abt that. It is ..donot > call any dharma or religion as bad. > > Each community in there control area donot allow other religion to > flourish that is example of Badrinath you said and even in India you > can see abt the riots which happen on breaking a mosque or temple. > > My humble request, donot call any religion as bad because someone > else would throw stones on our religion too seeing the flaws which > are shown to world. > > if you are talking about Bhagwad Geeta then read it again and follow > it. > > Regards, > > Tarun , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read > > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories > of > > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points > are > > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - > Ananda ! > > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great > > social reformer only. > > > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion > only > > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the > > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. > > > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods > like > > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, > never > > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who > wanted > > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime > people > > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > > gachhami " . > > > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, > a > > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a > political > > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha > > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on > rebirth > > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise > what > > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which > were > > already established by lord krishna. > > > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus > is > > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > > > regards, > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and > if u > > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > > > Dharma > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Tarun > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > > > fully > > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > > theories, > > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of > his > > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids > questions > > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his > own > > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > > religion > > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but > like > > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present > their > > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > > > eolved > > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > > altogather different. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > > <pathiav@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different > to > > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals > blindly. > > > How > > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other > religious > > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would > not > > > know > > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > > power, > > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and > worship. > > > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different > cults, > > > and > > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who > > are > > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged > into > > > being > > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find > many > > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > > > others > > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves > profess > > > that > > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you > > will > > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this > world. > > > No, > > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in > other > > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > > being > > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather > together. > > > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not > > know > > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read > > two > > > or > > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu > religion, > > > how > > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( > I > > > have > > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete > in > > > any > > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for > mudslinging. > > > I > > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines > for > > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to > the > > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them > out, > > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface > > the > > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection > around > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2007 Report Share Posted October 28, 2007 Dear tarun Ji, I m saying - " Incompleteness " not the " bad " , these two different words carry two different meanings. So, do u mean, being close to Baudhism, Sriadh should be allowed to speak like this ... regards, Lalit. , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo wrote: > > Dear Lalit ji, > > whatever you have heard or percepted its not abt that. It is ..donot > call any dharma or religion as bad. > > Each community in there control area donot allow other religion to > flourish that is example of Badrinath you said and even in India you > can see abt the riots which happen on breaking a mosque or temple. > > My humble request, donot call any religion as bad because someone > else would throw stones on our religion too seeing the flaws which > are shown to world. > > if you are talking about Bhagwad Geeta then read it again and follow > it. > > Regards, > > Tarun , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read > > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories > of > > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points > are > > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - > Ananda ! > > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great > > social reformer only. > > > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion > only > > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the > > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. > > > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods > like > > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, > never > > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who > wanted > > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime > people > > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > > gachhami " . > > > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, > a > > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a > political > > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha > > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on > rebirth > > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise > what > > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which > were > > already established by lord krishna. > > > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus > is > > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > > > regards, > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and > if u > > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > > > Dharma > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Tarun > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > > > fully > > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > > theories, > > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of > his > > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids > questions > > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his > own > > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > > religion > > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but > like > > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present > their > > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > > > eolved > > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > > altogather different. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > > <pathiav@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different > to > > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals > blindly. > > > How > > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other > religious > > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would > not > > > know > > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > > power, > > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and > worship. > > > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different > cults, > > > and > > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who > > are > > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged > into > > > being > > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find > many > > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > > > others > > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves > profess > > > that > > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you > > will > > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this > world. > > > No, > > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in > other > > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > > being > > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather > together. > > > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not > > know > > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read > > two > > > or > > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu > religion, > > > how > > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( > I > > > have > > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete > in > > > any > > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for > mudslinging. > > > I > > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines > for > > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to > the > > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them > out, > > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface > > the > > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection > around > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 2007 Report Share Posted November 11, 2007 Dear Lalit ji, I just can't imagine why you people go on criticising other religions and religious leaders as if you are fully exalted... all knowing people? A true Buddhist will never condemn another religion or religious leaders. No one is forced to become a Buddhist. No one can become a Buddhist even if he is forced to do so. Just by worshipping Buddha, Dhamma or Sangha one would not become a true Buddhist. The essential thing to become a Buddhist is to understand the Four Noble Truths; 1.sufffering 2.origin or reason of suffering, 3.cessation of suffering 4.the path to cessation of suffering. To understand this one should follow the Noble Eightfold Path. WISDOM 1. Right View 2. Right Intention ETHICAL CONDUCT 3. Right Speech 4. Right Action 5. Right Livelihood MENTAL DEVELOPMENT 6. Right Effort 7. Right Mindfulness 8. Right Concentration Through this one would end suffering and attain 'Nirvana'. It is not an easy task. Other religions have shown the path to final emancipation in their own way. When none of us have attained such status how can we say that this is right and that is wrong? What matters is the way live respecting each other. I think the Golden Rule of Confucius is more important than anything else. " What one does not wish for oneself, one ought not to do to anyone else. " If everyone follows this, the world would be a much better place to live. Let me also remind you that Buddhism is not a religion but a philosophy. Wouldn't it be better for everyone to concentrate on their religious teachings and try to live accordingly rather than wasting time on criticising other teachings? blessings Renu , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories of > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points are > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - Ananda ! > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great > social reformer only. > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion only > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods like > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, never > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who wanted > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime people > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > gachhami " . > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, a > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a political > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on rebirth > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise what > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which were > already established by lord krishna. > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus is > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > regards, > Lalit. > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> wrote: > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and if u > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > > Dharma > > > > Regards, > > > > Tarun > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > > fully > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > theories, > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of his > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids questions > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his own > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > religion > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but like > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present their > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > > eolved > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > altogather different. > > > > > > regards, > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > <pathiav@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different to > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals blindly. > > How > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other religious > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would not > > know > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > power, > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different cults, > > and > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who > are > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged into > > being > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find many > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > > others > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves profess > > that > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you > will > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this world. > > No, > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in other > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > being > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather together. > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not > know > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read > two > > or > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu religion, > > how > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( I > > have > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete in > > any > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for mudslinging. > > I > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines for > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to the > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them out, > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface > the > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2007 Report Share Posted November 13, 2007 Renu, Tell me, were u not there to support idiot srinadh in his cheap act of getting fame by defaming rama ? buddhism is not a fully developed religion it's a truth, aadi shankara has already prooved it in his time. it depends on a person if he wants to know more are tied to his faith only. if u want to learn more, read about aadi shankaracharya. or do some saadhana, that what's a matter of realization is very difficult to understand by arguments. this is all what i can say to you. we may criticize some body but we dont do conspiracy to defame somebody. first see, how honest you are within u. regards, Lalit. , " renunw " <renunw wrote: > > > Dear Lalit ji, > > I just can't imagine why you people go on criticising other > religions and religious leaders as if you are fully exalted... all > knowing people? A true Buddhist will never condemn another religion > or religious leaders. No one is forced to become a Buddhist. No one > can become a Buddhist even if he is forced to do so. Just by > worshipping Buddha, Dhamma or Sangha one would not become a true > Buddhist. The essential thing to become a Buddhist is to understand > the Four Noble Truths; > 1.sufffering > 2.origin or reason of suffering, > 3.cessation of suffering > 4.the path to cessation of suffering. > > To understand this one should follow the Noble Eightfold Path. > WISDOM > 1. Right View > 2. Right Intention > > ETHICAL CONDUCT > 3. Right Speech > 4. Right Action > 5. Right Livelihood > > MENTAL DEVELOPMENT > 6. Right Effort > 7. Right Mindfulness > 8. Right Concentration > > Through this one would end suffering and attain 'Nirvana'. It is not > an easy task. > > Other religions have shown the path to final emancipation in their > own way. When none of us have attained such status how can we say > that this is right and that is wrong? What matters is the way live > respecting each other. I think the Golden Rule of Confucius is more > important than anything else. " What one does not wish for oneself, > one ought not to do to anyone else. " If everyone follows this, the > world would be a much better place to live. > > Let me also remind you that Buddhism is not a religion but a > philosophy. > > Wouldn't it be better for everyone to concentrate on their religious > teachings and try to live accordingly rather than wasting time on > criticising other teachings? > > blessings > > Renu > > > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also read > > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories > of > > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points > are > > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - > Ananda ! > > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a great > > social reformer only. > > > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion > only > > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover the > > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the temple. > > > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods > like > > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, > never > > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who > wanted > > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime > people > > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > > gachhami " . > > > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u think, > a > > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a > political > > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a sangha > > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on > rebirth > > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise > what > > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which > were > > already established by lord krishna. > > > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, focus > is > > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > > > regards, > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and > if u > > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for Sanatan > > > Dharma > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Tarun > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not a > > > fully > > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > > theories, > > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of > his > > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids > questions > > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his > own > > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > > religion > > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but > like > > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present > their > > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much more > > > eolved > > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > > altogather different. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > > <pathiav@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no different > to > > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals > blindly. > > > How > > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other > religious > > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would > not > > > know > > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > > power, > > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and > worship. > > > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different > cults, > > > and > > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, in > > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those who > > are > > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged > into > > > being > > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find > many > > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower of > > > others > > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves > profess > > > that > > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, you > > will > > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this > world. > > > No, > > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in > other > > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > > being > > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather > together. > > > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do not > > know > > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had read > > two > > > or > > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu > religion, > > > how > > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. ( > I > > > have > > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and Vedas, > > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them complete > in > > > any > > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for > mudslinging. > > > I > > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect such > > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide lines > for > > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be to > the > > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them > out, > > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to deface > > the > > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I am > > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection > around > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2007 Report Share Posted November 13, 2007 Renu, If you have really supported the wrong utterances with regards to Lord Ramas birth, then there is no need for you to give pravachans now to anyone. If You felt bad about Buddhism being spoken the way it was, then you should feel like that for every religion . You have written that a true buddhist will never condemn another religion, but Your silence at that time or the support you gave, as per Lalitji, it self shows condemnation towards another religion. I would personally feel hurt if anyone were to talk rubbish about Jesus Christ,Mohhammed, Virgin Mary, Guru nanak, Mahavira Jain and Buddha too, because I love them all, though Rama would remain my Father, all others form part of my family and Pooja room. Unfotunately, I am aware of a few Buddhists in this Group who had remained silent when their voice was needed to be heard., and unnecessary jumping when it comes to themselves. Please remember that You too are a member of the Hindu fold , The Great Banyan tree, and need not feel alienated or seperate. Yet the whole essence in a nutshell, would be to practise, before preach No offence meant, Just a gentlemanly advise. regards, Bhaskar. , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Renu, > > Tell me, were u not there to support idiot srinadh in his cheap act > of getting fame by defaming rama ? > > buddhism is not a fully developed religion it's a truth, aadi > shankara has already prooved it in his time. > > it depends on a person if he wants to know more are tied to his > faith only. if u want to learn more, read about aadi shankaracharya. > > or do some saadhana, that what's a matter of realization is very > difficult to understand by arguments. > > this is all what i can say to you. > > we may criticize some body but we dont do conspiracy to defame > somebody. first see, how honest you are within u. > > regards, > Lalit. > > , " renunw " <renunw@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Lalit ji, > > > > I just can't imagine why you people go on criticising other > > religions and religious leaders as if you are fully exalted... all > > knowing people? A true Buddhist will never condemn another > religion > > or religious leaders. No one is forced to become a Buddhist. No > one > > can become a Buddhist even if he is forced to do so. Just by > > worshipping Buddha, Dhamma or Sangha one would not become a true > > Buddhist. The essential thing to become a Buddhist is to > understand > > the Four Noble Truths; > > 1.sufffering > > 2.origin or reason of suffering, > > 3.cessation of suffering > > 4.the path to cessation of suffering. > > > > To understand this one should follow the Noble Eightfold Path. > > WISDOM > > 1. Right View > > 2. Right Intention > > > > ETHICAL CONDUCT > > 3. Right Speech > > 4. Right Action > > 5. Right Livelihood > > > > MENTAL DEVELOPMENT > > 6. Right Effort > > 7. Right Mindfulness > > 8. Right Concentration > > > > Through this one would end suffering and attain 'Nirvana'. It is > not > > an easy task. > > > > Other religions have shown the path to final emancipation in their > > own way. When none of us have attained such status how can we say > > that this is right and that is wrong? What matters is the way live > > respecting each other. I think the Golden Rule of Confucius is > more > > important than anything else. " What one does not wish for > oneself, > > one ought not to do to anyone else. " If everyone follows this, the > > world would be a much better place to live. > > > > Let me also remind you that Buddhism is not a religion but a > > philosophy. > > > > Wouldn't it be better for everyone to concentrate on their > religious > > teachings and try to live accordingly rather than wasting time on > > criticising other teachings? > > > > blessings > > > > Renu > > > > > > > > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Mr. Tarun, > > > > > > I have read Geeta in my childhood only, I suppose u have also > read > > > that, along with karma theory, lord krishna established theories > > of > > > soul, rebirth, whole astrology is based on these theories. > > > > > > Buddha came after Lord Krishna,still, his ideas on these points > > are > > > not clear, why he avoids queries raised by his own desciple - > > Ananda ! > > > Seem he was not evolved like our other great saints or avataars. > > > > > > he was more like a social reformer, let's accept him like a > great > > > social reformer only. > > > > > > Now, you see further, Shankaracharya eradicted bauddha religion > > only > > > by debating but what bauddha followers did, recently i came from > > > Badrinath, you w'd surprise, Badrinath temple was destroyed by > > > bauddha lamas, It was shankaracharya who mediated to discover > the > > > idol of lord visnu there and managed reconstruction of the > temple. > > > > > > More difference you want to see, look in history, we or our Gods > > like > > > Ram or Krishna never forced any body to convert his religion, > > never > > > propogated our religion, but buddha was the first person who > > wanted > > > to spread his religion, he was the one to see in his lifetime > > people > > > were saying - " Buddham sharanam gachhami .... sangham sharanam > > > gachhami " . > > > > > > try to understand why - " sangham sharanam gachhami .. " do u > think, > > a > > > religion needs an organisation, do u mean a religion is a > > political > > > party ? fanatism was seeded by buddha only by introducing a > sangha > > > otherwise why his followers destryed hindu temples. > > > > > > And let me tell you, Dalai Lama tradition is purely based on > > rebirth > > > and is a soul based system, but if u ask Dalai Lama, otherwise > > what > > > takes birth again and again? It's buddha and dalai lama's > > > ineffeciency that they could not understand basic things which > > were > > > already established by lord krishna. > > > > > > So,where is my focus, focus is not on good and bad religion, > focus > > is > > > on their incompletness, inefficiency. > > > > > > Hope i have clarified myself and these wide open issues. > > > > > > regards, > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Tarun " <tarun.virgo@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Sir, > > > > > > > > before quoting any religion bad, i please you to read all 18 > > > > chapters of Bhagwad Geeta and follow the Karma told in it. and > > if u > > > > cannot follow that karma, u r not eligibile to talk for > Sanatan > > > > Dharma > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Tarun > > > > , " litsol " <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Pati, > > > > > > > > > > Aadi shankaracharya has already established baudhism was not > a > > > > fully > > > > > developed religion, if it was and it had no flaws in it's > > > > theories, > > > > > what he has won in numurous debates with bauddha scholars of > > his > > > > > time. We see, lord buddha is either confused or avoids > > questions > > > > > about life, soul , rebirth whereas dozens of stories of his > > own > > > > > previous birth's are prevalent in Jatak Kathaas in bauddha > > > > religion > > > > > only, there are clear contradictions. > > > > > > > > > > It looks good to read and it's also in favor of hormony but > > like > > > > > science, religions also evolve over the period and present > > their > > > > > theories, definitely, hinduism or sanatan dharam is much > more > > > > eolved > > > > > than any other religions, but how much of it is practised is > > > > > altogather different. > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , venkatachala pathi > > > <pathiav@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. Kishore Patnaik, > > > > > > > > > > > > I beg to differ with your views. Hindus are no > different > > to > > > > > others in other religions, and they follow many rituals > > blindly. > > > > How > > > > > many Hindus are aware of Vedas, Upanishads, and other > > religious > > > > > epics, while they claim they are staunch Hindus? Many would > > not > > > > know > > > > > the end of Lord Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > > > Religion: -means- the belief in a superhuman controlling > > > > power, > > > > > esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and > > worship. > > > > > > > > > > > > Every religion has many superhuman to form different > > cults, > > > > and > > > > > rituals. In Christianity there are many sects. Similarly, > in > > > > Jainism. > > > > > > > > > > > > No religion is less to the other in comparison. Those > who > > > are > > > > > schooled to a custom of faith would claim to be privileged > > into > > > > being > > > > > in that religion. Put a dot on a wall, and claim that it is > > > > > super 'dot' embodiment of Godly powers, then you will find > > many > > > > > worshiping the dot. So Religion, cult, custom, etc. is their > > > > > privilege in which their faith falls upon, either follower > of > > > > others > > > > > believed to have known more on that, or they themselves > > profess > > > > that > > > > > they identified the sanctity of their belief. > > > > > > > > > > > > The more you know about Hinduism in all its manifest, > you > > > will > > > > > claim that religion is superior to all religions in this > > world. > > > > No, > > > > > there could be equally glorious addition in spirituality in > > other > > > > > religions too. Others in other religions are not fools. You > > > being > > > > > follower of another religion may differ, but they gather > > together. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is like that 'I know everything' attitude. I do > not > > > know > > > > > many things, yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am surprised is that when you say some one had > read > > > two > > > > or > > > > > three books and go about with their knowledge in Hindu > > religion, > > > > how > > > > > many books many of us read to comment the salients in this. > ( > > I > > > > have > > > > > a library of 657 Volumes of books on Hindu religion and > Vedas, > > > > > collected over 38 years and I have not gone into them > complete > > in > > > > any > > > > > of these volumes) > > > > > > > > > > > > I do not understand some using this forum for > > mudslinging. > > > > I > > > > > hope they stop this and respect each other. If you opine in > > > > > difference to the contents, the best thing is to neglect > such > > > > > contents. Otherwise bring out more authoritative guide > lines > > for > > > > > emancipating the commentator, and let that contribution be > to > > the > > > > > benefits of other Hindus. > > > > > > > > > > > > First the person presenting his comments must sort them > > out, > > > > > equip with absolute undeniable knowledge and come in to > deface > > > the > > > > > other comment. I am sorry I come with this, as I am sure I > am > > > > > running out of my patience. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards to all > > > > > > > > > > > > Pathi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection > > around > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.