Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 yes, hinduism IS perfectly compatible with all religions and all beliefs that exist or that can possibly exist because hinduism means something different to every indivisual who claims to follow it. Essentially hinduism can be whatever you want it to be! That is why it is a useless and highly ambigious word. To the tamil speaker, Sanathan Dharma trancends all language. It is THE truth. Fortunately we have scripture that guides us to the truth in the form of the vedas and affiliated scriptures (the most famous being the Gita). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Essentially hinduism can be whatever you want it to be! do you think it is a nice thing? You can create or imagine every nonsense and call it hinduism? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 "do you think it is a nice thing? You can create or imagine every nonsense and call it hinduism" I think that is a BAD thing and the cause of much of the confusion amongst Hindus. There are some sects in India with very crude/odd rituals and practices that I'm sure would shock the majority Hindu community, to the extent that some may not wish to associate themselves with that practice and hence prefer to call themselves by their sectarian divisions (e.g Vaishnava) rather than hinduism which would link them with the other sect they so despise. Now the Gita, that's something else, that teaches spirituality and how to apply it to life and is not just like anything...maybe there should be a religion based on just the Gita, but would it be Vaishnavism or Vedanta or both? There are also groups who believe in one or a few scriptures within Hinduism - e.g Arya Samaj believes only in the Vedas, Vedantists believe only in Upanishads, Brahma-sutras and Gita. So some groups only want to be associated with their approach and would distance themselves from others, it's quite natural when you consider how many differences there are amoung the sects (of course there are alot of similarities). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maadhav Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 << hinduism means something different to every indivisual who claims to follow it. Essentially hinduism can be whatever you want it to be! >> gita is THE BOOK OF HINDUISM, PERIOD. have you ever read gita? none of hindu aacharya has said like you said above. apparently you are not a hindu or do not know it enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 I was the one that started this thread and by saying "hinduism means something different to every indivisual who claims to follow it. Essentially hinduism can be whatever you want it to be!", i do mean its a BAD thing. And yes i do study the Gita. Krishna said to abandon all forms of "religion" (including so called hinduism i believe) and to surrender onto him, and that is exactly what should be done by all creeds. I strongly urge you to consider this maadhav! -Amit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 You started this thread to answer the thread re. compatibility with all religions and I tought you meant that it is compatible and that it is a good thing that it is. Indeed, hinduism is a way of life, a philosophy of life, not a religion per se. Hence, it can accomodate all religions. Personally, I would be weary of ANY movement that has strict prescriptions imposed on its followers, be it an "accepted/recognized" religion or a sect (like moon, krishna and so many other dangerous groups luring people and pushing them to total dependence and anhilation). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maadhav Posted March 31, 2004 Report Share Posted March 31, 2004 << Krishna said to abandon all forms of "religion" (including so called hinduism i believe) >> The above is an oxymoron. Gita is the book of sanatana dharma whose new name is hinduism. krishna did not say give up following my word when he said abandon all variety or dharma. additionally when he said sarva dharmaan parityajya then by the word dharma he meant dharma of brahmana, kshatriya, vaishya, and shudra. if a shudra gives up his dharma of serving other three castes and surrenders to krishna, then krishna says - yuddhaaya krita nischaya. so he has to fight adharma. one who surredsers to krishna needs to do what krishna says in gita. else it is not a surrender. get it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Share Posted March 31, 2004 << Krishna said to abandon all forms of "religion" (including so called hinduism i believe) >> The above is an oxymoron. Gita is the book of sanatana dharma whose new name is hinduism. --not exact, what you are calling hinduism was not existing at gita times, gita truths are not accepted or they are not interpreted properly by all hindus.. so hinduism is not sanatana dharma sarva dharmaan parityajya then by the word dharma he meant dharma of brahmana, kshatriya, vaishya, and shudra. --no, you are wrong and giving a concocted political interpretation.. the verse means leave all forms of fanatical religion based or mixed with egoistic advantages and simply surrender to me (krsna), i will protect you destroying the social system is the exact opposite of what gita is saying , Arjuna believed that to surrender to krsna he had to abandon his social status of warrior/politician to be a yogi, but krsna said that one has to remain in his social position and offer his actions and the results to him. Krsna said also that it is much better to do our duty not very well that the other's duty perfectly. So according to our guna and karma we have to remain in our social status and offer our activities to krsna. All gita is meant to make arjuna remain in his own guna and karma and devote to krsna.. if you interprete this verse as a pervertion of social status to became all pseudoksatryas you are going against the main principle of bhagavad gita: "remain at your social place and be my devotee" . one who surredsers to krishna needs to do what krishna says in gita. else it is not a surrender. --that is to remain in the situation who is better fit for us and think of krsna, pray krsna, devote our mind to krsna again you are free to push your idea, but do not use and concoct religion.. this is adharmic, more dangerous than terrorism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Share Posted March 31, 2004 Yes I agree with the last poster. Maadhav, the word "Hindu" was never a word used in the scriptures and so i do not accept it as legitimate. 100 "hindus" will tell you about 100 different religions when you ask them to describe "hinduism". The Gita is the authoritative scripture and this is what I study and follow. And by the way I DID NOT start the original "compatibility" thread, just this thread which is a reply to the original. -Amit 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.