First Experience for Islam

[Guest guest]

any goal should be finite

••spirit is infinite.. if you like finite goals you are a materialist

 

He never said "the right path".

••he said it... "surrender to me.."

 

you asked me to join islam.So were you preaching for islam?

••i am preaching thet you choose to worship god instead of fantasizing about being god

 

who detrmines whats fantasy and whats study?

••you have determined it by saying that you're speaking of something that you don't experience

 

one need not have experience of heart atatcks to suffer a heart attack

••but one needs to suffer an heart attack if he wants to speak what one feels when he's under attack. So if you want to speak about advaita.. first realize it

 

Its enough if the teachers have experience

••who has experience of advaita is disappeared, so he cannot teach.. i have already said to you. Be more attentive

 

im a student and not a teacher.

••you are not a student but simply one who reads some books.. students make experiments, they have experiences, they verify.. they grow gradually. you are not doing anything of it.. only theorizing

 

you speak about vaikunda too.Have you experienced it?

••it is possible to experience vaikunta in the earth because there's no need to lose our individuality.. and for this reason there's also possibility to have a gradual progress. You can't because a true advaitist should not exist in individual form. So everyone is more advanced that you

 

happiness and mercy are not "gunas."They are the natural state of mind

••i agree.. happiness and mercy are natural state, features and qualities of the mind. Nirguna means "nothing". if you introduce some "state", "quality", "definition", "explanation" you are filling this nir-guna with gunas.. so you are transforming it in sa-guna.

So the presence of happiness and mercy negates the nirguna state

 

when somebdoy beats you on your leg youi dont say "he beat my leg".You say "he beat me"

••no.. i say also "he beat my leg.." and when i go to the doctor i say it with precision to be cured in the leg and not in the head that's not injured.. so, again "leg is leg".. and "leg is body".. simultaneously

 

-so why you speak something that you are not?

you spoke about islam.Are you a muslim?

••i am a theist.. one who believe in god and worships god. So, even with their faults, i can understand some of the feelings of another people who worship god. But you are not forced to became a muslim.. i saw that you have a big knowledge of ramayana, so it is enough to give up the idea that you are RAM and convince yourself that you are only a little servant of Sri Ramachandra. In this way everything will go at his place.

 

I will speak and then experience.why not?

••because it is useless and cheating. But the biggest disgrace is for you, even you are irresponsible and you are behaving like in a game.

 

if you call shankara as dwaithi or visistathwaidhi then you are the most comical person in the earth.

••you can make your humour and enjoy it. But you are missing the most important point that you are in big disgrace not accepting the prescription of Sri Shankara Acharya of worshiping Krsna and stopping to be a fool who lives on intellectual arid games.

So accept the instruction, recognize that you have no more logic in defending your position and choose the right mentality and behaviour. Life is very short and yamaraja is ready to punish us if we do not give up maya and we come back to serving the supreme personality of godhead.

Go to see someone dieing and keep your will to make jokes about these subjects if you can

 

how did you know?Did you go beyond bakthi and see for yourself?

••god is endless, and love for him is endless and the love he gives to us is obviously also endless. So how can you find limits and boundaries to cross in bhakti?

 

Nobody can do anything against krishna wills

••of course.. if you praise krsna you will go to him according his will.. if you blasphemy krsna you'll go to hell according to another his will. You have freedom to choose between a place or another.. and the freedom and both places are by Him

 

Thats in bakthi yoga.In jnana yoga he wants m,e...

••in jnana yoga he wants you to acquire knowledge (jnani) about him to develope love for him. That's the real thing, krsna is not contradictory

 

there is nothing except god.Hes neither inside nor outside.Hes everything.

••to say "he's neither..." that means "he's not this and not that.." is in contradiction with "he's everything..". So agreing with you that krsna is everything.. isay also that krsna is inside and outside, creation and supreme lord of creation

 

So now you equate mecca with ayodhya,badrinath,tirupathi etc.Is there any end to your blasphemy to hinduism?Tell me.

••you are again desperately trying to find something to be not completely defeated in the debate. I never said that mecca is better than ayodya.. otherwise i'd have adviced for mecca and not for ayodya, i have no fear. Simply you are already familiar with vedic scriptures.. it is enough if you simply give up your atheistic behaviour against the god's personality and you accept a real path for moksa and not a fantasy that you were not able to defend even for a minute against my logic. So be serious and realistic, it is your life who are you deciding to lose or to make it saint and valuable, not mine's.

 

--you do not have any consciousness and devotion so ask god for them

God will never give me what I dont need to have.

••so develope the need to go back to godhead.. otherwise you'll remain in yamaraja's jurisdiction and you'll again suffer

 

be serious, it is not a joke or a tv debate, you have no need to defend your ego, you are with friends who are suggesting the best to you

[Guest guest]

---you guys have been busting that bubble from adi shankaras time.It doesnt seem to work.

>>> Mayavada has been refuted. Advaita sampradya has no answer to Sata Dusani. Advaita Siddhi couldn't work well against Nyayamrita. Besides upanisads hardly support tenets like two tier brahman, jiva brahman aikya vada, etc.....

 

--He thinks views that are opposite to his are terror and "should be eliminated by all means".

>>> Nope i don't think like that. Ramanujaites and Madhvaites also differ. They don't have absolutely similar views. So if your point means all views opposite to fundamentals of vaishnaivism needs to be eliminated, then that is right. Because only in vaishnavism fundamental tenets of Vedic religion are retained. and not in advaita. You wanna debate this we can go ahead and debate it.

 

--- "Eliminated by all means"--it gets funny here.what are all means?concentration camps for advaithis like jews?making advaitha a thought crime?..what does that mean?

>>> Elimination of a school doesn't means killing people who belong to that school, it just means changing their mindset. If after being refuted they still continue their old ways thats fine, but one must stop propagation of lies so one should not allow their views to circulate freely and corrupt minds of various innocent people by making them think they are brahman covered by ignorance. If you would have cared to read my words properly this wouldn't have disturbed your composure. Elimination here means since mayavada is completely illogical and non scriptural it should be given up. Hence i said elimination of mayavada and not of mayavadis.

 

--- Did krishna ask you guys to remove a contrasting religion by "all means?". Did he say "Kill whomever who worship an alien god?"

>>> Dude relax. Sit back and enjoy a glass of water. You misunderstood me. Between have you ever bothered to look into books like brahma sutra. If you haven't which pretty much seems to be the case then do so at your earliest convinience. In that book Vyasdeva the greatest sage of hinduism and avatar of Narayana has refuted rival/contrasting schools of buddhism, jainism, yoga, pasupati, samkhya, gautama, kanada and caravaka. The point is simple, 1000's of irreconcilable views/ways cannot be means to moksha. Upanisads and brahma sutras allow/specify certain numbers of non contradictory ways called various brahma vidyas as the way to brahman.

 

Few examples:

 

1) Sad Vidya -- Brahman as the ground of all being

Chhandogya Upanishad, VI

 

2) Bhuma Vidya -- Brahman as the Great One

Chhandogya Upanishad, VII

 

3) Antaryaami Vidya -- Brahman as the Inner Controller

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, III.vii

 

4) Akshara Vidya -- Brahman as the Imperishable

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, III.viii.8

 

5) Jyotishaam jyotir Vidya -- Brahman as the Light of Lights

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, IV.iv.16

 

6) Anandamaya Vidya -- Brahman as the Self consisting of Bliss

Taittiriya Upanishad, Anandavalli

 

7) Isavasya Vidya -- Meditation as taught in the Isavasya Upanishad

Isavasya Upanishad

 

and there are many others. These sadhanas have same brahman as their goal. Brahman is meditated upon in different attributes pertaining to its form with love.

 

While sadhans of buddhist and jaina schools etc.... have been refuted in the 2nd adhyaya.

 

Please refer to 3rd adhyaya of brahma sutra also called sadhana adhyaya.

 

In brahma sutra where using logic to interpret Sruti vakyas Vyasdeva himself has defeated various opposition.

 

earlier i told barney -

 

Serach for truth is mutual. One need not bring ego aspect in it. Since i believe in this so this is the only right thing. Be ready for dispassionate analysis of your own belief in a mutual pursuit of truth. We follow same scriptures so what keeps you from quoting scriptures and proving that it supports advaitic concepts/tenets and refute my understanding as erroneous interpretation, or at the best partially correct interpretation. I shall be very happy.

 

In vedantic traditions debate in form of vada without calling for personal character attack is accepted as a genuine and traditional way to debate. However, there is no place for unintelligent, sentimental outbursts without any semblance of philosophical content.

 

Remember empty pots only make noise, and therefore there is no joy in disturbing them however, filled pots don't do that. While disturbing them a person appreciates that they don't make unneccessary noise.

 

So if you want to engage in vada kindly come and join this thread and if you can only rant that oh you think you are the only one correct etc......... then please keep yourself unperturbed by simply keeping yourself away from here.

 

the same hold good for you too.

 

[Guest guest]

>>> Mayavada has been refuted

news to me.

 

---Advaita sampradya has no answer to Sata Dusani

whos that?

 

---So if your point means all views opposite to fundamentals of vaishnaivism needs to be eliminated, then that is right.

you have to defeat 98% of worlds population then.can you do it?

 

---Because only in vaishnavism fundamental tenets of Vedic religion are retained. and not in advaita. You wanna debate this we can go ahead and debate it.

welcome to the debate.

 

-----If after being refuted they still continue their old ways thats fine, but one must stop propagation of lies so one should not allow their views to circulate freely and corrupt minds of various innocent people by making them think they are brahman covered by ignorance. If you would have cared to read my words properly this wouldn't have disturbed your composure. Elimination here means since mayavada is completely illogical and non scriptural it should be given up. Hence i said elimination of mayavada and not of mayavadis.

substantiate this with proof friend.

 

-----Few examples:

 

1) Sad Vidya -- Brahman as the ground of all being

Chhandogya Upanishad, VI

 

2) Bhuma Vidya -- Brahman as the Great One

Chhandogya Upanishad, VII

 

3) Antaryaami Vidya -- Brahman as the Inner Controller

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, III.vii

 

4) Akshara Vidya -- Brahman as the Imperishable

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, III.viii.8

 

5) Jyotishaam jyotir Vidya -- Brahman as the Light of Lights

Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad, IV.iv.16

 

6) Anandamaya Vidya -- Brahman as the Self consisting of Bliss

Taittiriya Upanishad, Anandavalli

 

And the climax of all this is "aham bhrammaswami" meaning "I am bhramman".See where all this leads to?advaitha.

 

---Serach for truth is mutual. One need not bring ego aspect in it. Since i believe in this so this is the only right thing. Be ready for dispassionate analysis of your own belief in a mutual pursuit of truth.

 

I am not here in pursuit of truth.That is a goal which has been ridiculed by vedas and krishna.There is nothing called as truth in the world.We are here to compare our opinions and find out who has the better opinion,thats all.We ncan start our debate on truth itself and then move on to advaitha and dwaidha if you want.Maybe you can start by defining truth.You need not confine yourselves to vedas alone.any book,any dictionary is welcome.start by defining truth.Lets find out if any truth exists in world.

 

A debate is always a rhetoric.It isnt a pursuit of a non existent goal like truth.we advaithis dont believe in truth,since in the illusory world truth is also an illusion.we can start debate on this if you want.

 

---------In vedantic traditions debate in form of vada without calling for personal character attack is accepted as a genuine and traditional way to debate. However, there is no place for unintelligent, sentimental outbursts without any semblance of philosophical content.

 

its nice to hear that you laydown these self regulations to prevent you from losing your temper.Good lets start.But it will be good if we start this in a new thread since all others too can participate in it.

 

I will be out of town from thursday 1 pm chicago time to monday 3 pm.So I will start a new thread on monday and we will start the great debate there.Or you can start a thread and i will join there on monday.Lets see if you bust mayawatha or get busted by it.If I start a thread it will be titled as "truth doesnt exist"-says krishna.Or it will have the word truth in it.

 

so lets again debate on monday.you are welcome to post your replies in this thread till then.In between if i get time i will reply to them but i will start debating from monday onwards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

••spirit is infinite.. if you like finite goals you are a materialist

advaitha is the victory lap of reaching the goal of advaitha moksha thru the racing track of bakthi.

 

He never said "the right path".

••he said it... "surrender to me.."

Did he say "whomever you worship you reach me" or not?Answer that.

 

you asked me to join islam.So were you preaching for islam?

••i am preaching thet you choose to worship god instead of fantasizing about being god

and your definition of god is allah?great.

 

••you have determined it by saying that you're speaking of something that you don't experience

I dont know how many more times i have to explain to you that i can speak of things which i havent experienced but only cannot preach them.speaking and preaching both are different.

 

••who has experience of advaita is disappeared, so he cannot teach.. i have already said to you. Be more attentive

he didnt dispappear anywhere.He is still here only.How he sees the world only differs.

 

••you are not a student but simply one who reads some books.. students make experiments, they have experiences, they verify.. they grow gradually. you are not doing anything of it.. only theorizing

nobody can do an experiment without theorizing.Theoirizing is the first stage to a research.

 

••it is possible to experience vaikunta in the earth because there's no need to lose our individuality.. and for this reason there's also possibility to have a gradual progress. You can't because a true advaitist should not exist in individual form. So everyone is more advanced that you

show where vaikunda is on earth.which place is it?show to me where you experienced vaikunda on earth.

 

••no.. i say also "he beat my leg.." and when i go to the doctor i say it with precision to be cured in the leg and not in the head that's not injured.. so, again "leg is leg".. and "leg is body".. simultaneously

i am yet to hear anyone say "he beat my leg".people usually say "he hit ME on my leg".So what comes first?ME.

 

••i am a theist.. one who believe in god and worships god. So, even with their faults, i can understand some of the feelings of another people who worship god. But you are not forced to became a muslim.. i saw that you have a big knowledge of ramayana, so it is enough to give up the idea that you are RAM and convince yourself that you are only a little servant of Sri Ramachandra. In this way everything will go at his place.

what am i?Am i not a theist?I too am a theist.advaithis udnerstand theism better than dwaidhis.when sri rangam ranganatha idol was hidden by visitathvaidhis in tirupathi in fear of muslim sultan of maduirai in 1365 it was the great advaitha king kumara kambana who came with 20,000 soldiers and amassed a great army and defeated the 400,000 strong madurai sultan army and reinstated ranganatha idol there.

it was the great advaitha saint vidyaranya who established vijayanagar empire to save hinduism from islam.Else whole south india would be muslim by now.so stop talking advaidhis as atheists.we are theists and our god is bhramman who is nothing but this whole universe including us.learn the difference between atheism adn advaitha first.

 

---But you are missing the most important point that you are in big disgrace not accepting the prescription of Sri Shankara Acharya of worshiping Krsna and stopping to be a fool who lives on intellectual arid games.

thanks for admiting me as an intellectual.I dint refuse to worship krishna.I do that daily.I say that once he grants me advaitha moksha i wont worship him.I do it regulary now.

 

••god is endless, and love for him is endless and the love he gives to us is obviously also endless. So how can you find limits and boundaries to cross in bhakti?

 

however good your school is,once you graduate you have to go out.Love on god continues in advaitha by making everything as god.

 

••of course.. if you praise krsna you will go to him according his will.. if you blasphemy krsna you'll go to hell according to another his will. You have freedom to choose between a place or another.. and the freedom and both places are by Him

I dont have free will.whatever I do is determined by krishna.whatever i do is done by him.so how can he punish me for his acts?

 

••in jnana yoga he wants you to acquire knowledge (jnani) about him to develope love for him. That's the real thing, krsna is not contradictory

the jnana he says is about advaitha moksha.Krishna isnt contradicting.you are contradicting.

 

••so develope the need to go back to godhead.. otherwise you'll remain in yamaraja's jurisdiction and you'll again suffer be serious, it is not a joke or a tv debate, you have no need to defend your ego, you are with friends who are suggesting the best to you

 

i develop the need to be god.Yamaraja can never do anything to advaithis since they are immortal(aham bhrammam asmi)I always respect you as friend and I have never taken this debate personally.

 

instead of somebody building me i will create my self by myself.I never allowed even my parents to build my self.Thats my horror,To find that I am only a replica of somebody elses wishes.

 

I will be out of town tomorrow till monday.so i will reply to you a bit late.I will try to access internet on the way and will reply you as far as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitha is the victory lap of reaching the goal of advaitha moksha thru the racing track of bakthi.

--blind faith.. you are not a bhakta nor an advaiti nor a liberated soul so you have no idea. Bhakti is infinite and eternal.. so it is not possible to find his limits

 

Did he say "whomever you worship you reach me" or not?Answer that

--yes.. if you really worship krsna you are right.. if you say that there's something beyond love for krsna you are not worshiping

 

••i am preaching thet you choose to worship god instead of fantasizing about being god

and your definition of god is allah?great.

--allah means "the greatest" and, in sanskrit, "ahladhini shakti" is the internal energy of love who brings devotees to the lord. So you can get benefit from both names.

Be serious, do not try to attempt to save your ego with word jugglery.. what i am saying is very clear and it is said for your benefit

 

speaking and preaching both are different.

--there is no difference. When you speak there's the possibility to be listened and that who listen can change his life according your ideas. You are simply saying like that because you want to cheat me saying that you have the right to speak even if you are not competent. But the matter is not a joke, the spirituality is the more important thing of our life... so the duty is to be competent and if we have solution we have also to give them to others.

So use the term you like more... if you speak, speak of something that you experience... if you preach, preach something that you are experiencing... be serious

 

he didnt dispappear anywhere.He is still here only.How he sees the world only differs

--no.. you have spoken of merge our existence in god's one losing the individuality. So if one's an individual,he's not advaitin

 

nobody can do an experiment without theorizing.Theoirizing is the first stage to a research.

--but if a theory is undemonstrated it has to be refused

 

show where vaikunda is on earth.which place is it?show to me where you experienced vaikunda on earth.

--worship krsna and you will see vaikunta, only krsna can give his darshan to you and he cannot manifest himself personally to you if you keep this blaspheming tendence. Be serious, the faults in your theory are already demonstrated and you have nothing to say to defend it. So it is more important to give up your pride and start to learn seriously the science of god.

 

people usually say "he hit ME on my leg".So what comes first?ME.

--again joking... you want to demonstrate that there's no difference between god and parts with this stupid example of body and parts of the body. It is not sodifficult to understand that depending from circumstances, sometimes it is more useful to speak of the body as a whole (this actress, actor, model, athlete.. has a nice body).. sometimes it is more intelligent to discriminate (mr doctor.. i have some pain in the leg).

So first or second is meaningless... a leg is body, but it is also a different part of the body. You put on pants in the legs and hat in the head, not the opposite and you know exactly wich part of the body is to be used to seat in the bathroom and in wich hole you put food and toothbrush

 

what am i?Am i not a theist?I too am a theist

--no you are an anti theist. Theos mans "god" in greek language.. if you do not recognize the supremacy of the lord and your being a servant eternally.. for you the word "god" has no meaning. So you are not a god worshipper, so you are not a theist but an a-theist... simple

 

I dint refuse to worship krishna.I do that daily.I say that once he grants me advaitha moksha i wont worship him

--so you are not really worshiping but blaspheming.. you are posing of treating him as the supreme, but you internally do not believe like this. I was not speaking of formal worshiping, like pooja and soon... i was speaking of recognizing his supremacy and trying to praise and honour him with the heart

 

however good your school is,once you graduate you have to go out

--this is materialism... a spiritual school never ends because the subject is infinite. Please bring more effective objection, be serious, it is your life

 

I dont have free will

--that's stupid because you are living being active and making decisions. Even now you are speaking with me deciding what to say and how to object. Or.. of you believe that you have no will... stop to talk and leave this forum, a forum is based on people who is free to have opinions and express them. If we were robots what should be the use of speaking each other?

 

the jnana he says is about advaitha moksha

--false.. you are ignorant on basics

 

i develop the need to be god

--what a stupid thing... god is supreme, he is eternally god so he has not to develope the desire to be Him... why you like to appear a madman?

 

I always respect you as friend and I have never taken this debate personally.

--so.. after respecting me.. start to respect your intelligence

 

instead of somebody building me i will create my self by myself

--the result is that maya has created your illusion to be god

 

I will be out of town tomorrow till monday

--it is not a game or a race... the important thing is that you think about what we are saying.

If you give up your fantasy and you start to get real spiritual knowledge you have not to say it to me... if you go on like that, giving answers with the purpose of making poor dialectic tricks without any will to understand your problematic position, i will quit this dialogue very soon

[Guest guest]

First tell me are you male or female ?

 

Second i will wait for you to come back. And before we start debate rules for debate must be mutually decided. Then we can go on from there.

[maadhav]

he will not even assume a vedic username.

like masked terrorists, he comes just as a 'guest'.

 

[Guest guest]

Right Maadhav but you dont necessarily have to be a register

user.Yes that guy was talking .!!!. Islam is a false religion. An American has found out that the Kaabah was a place where vedic rituals were performed before Mohammed took over. There is a reference to King Vikramaditya inside the Kaabah. The Muslims are afraid to acknowledge that!!. There are Navagrahas inside the temple and that is why Muslims

go around the Kaabah.The Kaabah is actually a Shiv Linga and zam zam water signifies the river Ganga!!!!!!!!Arabs were Vedic scholars who benefited greatly under the loving rule of king Vikramaditya

[maadhav]

i know what you are saying:

hinduism is a universal dharm

for all the mankind of all times.

 

the word religion does not mean dharma to the world.

the meaning of the world religion is narrow, and therefore when we say hinduism is a religion, the non-hindu world thinks of hinduism in the narrrow sense they know.

 

i think that there is a good article at

http://www.bharatvani.org

on this subject.

 

every other religious group is saying its religion is the only true religion. so, what we need to say it is:

 

as the history shows we do not see a non hindu religion is true. also we honestly should say that the hindus have malpracticed hinduism for very long, and it needs to stop.

no one shoild define hinduism based on the malpractice of the hindus. true hinduism is in gita. never confuse the world with a variety of our scriptures. just talk of gita only to them. gita is well known as THE BOOK of hinduism.

internally we are free to follow any scripture of our choice, but externaly we should say gita is our book.

and we should know it well too, to be able to argue with them effectively.

[Guest guest]

It is is great to see both you discussing/arguing on the point. I feel the persion who is talking on behalf of Adwaita is DISCUSSING. The person on behalf of Visishtadwita is ARGUING. He keep saying that adwaita is philosphy not yet proved just fantacy. But he didnt give any example how Visistadwaita is proved. Both are theories/philosphies/interpretations. Thats all. Both of you failed to give what exactaly need to do mokhsha either it is advaita moksha or vaikunta moksha. I think that is more important than just discussing on a limited point. I feel and guess at that point both of you may have shared opinion. Leave it whethe we really need to worship or not, the discussion should tell some thing about code of conduct, way of life which we should lead to get these kinds of moksha. I dont think just by worshipping we cant get vaikunta moksha and just not get advaita moksha just by not worshipping. We must do something.

[Guest guest]

i find it ironic that people preach religion with the intention that a person must have faith in god, but then they forget this, and use different doctrinal thoughts to argue how one faith is greater than another faith. ive done it myself and seen how pointless it is. the mistakes made by morons in the past means they were not pure followers. the terrorist muslims of then and now were no closer to real islamic teachings then they are to hindu beliefs. people shouldnt judge based on the actions of idiots. im a hindu, but i respect that a muslim, with all the persecution and hatred they face daily, might be able to pick up his holy book and be able to understand it the way it was intended. hopefully most hindus will help in working towards that ideal, instead of pointing fingers.

[xxvvii]

i know what you are saying:

hinduism is a universal dharm

for all the mankind of all times.

 

the word religion does not mean dharma to the world.

the meaning of the world religion is narrow, and therefore when we say hinduism is a religion, the non-hindu world thinks of hinduism in the narrrow sense they know.

------------

Don't extend the meaning of "hinduism" casually. I'm clearly aware that it's supported & owned by mortals instead of gods at present. I warn you that I still have to regard you as potential rebels. Which one is powerful, vagra or fantastic bubbles? I come here for changing instead of kneeling.

 

every other religious group is saying its religion is the only true religion.

-------------

Revision: Every religious group is saying its religion is the only true religion.

 

as the history shows we do not see a non hindu religion is true. also we honestly should say that the hindus have malpracticed hinduism for very long, and it needs to stop.

no one shoild define hinduism based on the malpractice of the hindus. true hinduism is in gita. never confuse the world with a variety of our scriptures. just talk of gita only to them. gita is well known as THE BOOK of hinduism.

internally we are free to follow any scripture of our choice, but externaly we should say gita is our book.

and we should know it well too, to be able to argue with them effectively

-------------

Our maadhav excludes malpractice from hinduism cleverly. But I don't expect she'll do same thing for other religions.

 

7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

[Guest guest]

Jimbo2342 -

 

{the mistakes made by morons in the past means they were not pure followers. the terrorist muslims of then and now were no closer to real islamic teachings then they are to hindu beliefs.}

 

I think you need a reality check. Are you saying that all the Mughal rulers that persecuted Hindus are not real Muslims? I wonder why Hindus like you always go to the defense of muslims when they would never do the same for you. Are you doing this just to make (fake) friends with them? Do you actually know about Islam and what it really teaches? I'm sure you don't or you don't want to face the truth. The truth is Islam is an agressive religion it always was and always will be. Muslims will always hate Hindus as the koran teaches them that other faiths are false and need to be destroyed, especially those that have teachings dissimmilar to Islam and idol worship.'Slaying the idolators' was not a mistake on their part it was an instruction from God. This agressive nature was always the case from since Mohammed and will never change since it's from the very source.

 

{ im a hindu, but i respect that a muslim, with all the persecution and hatred they face daily}

 

What about the Hindus of Kashmir and Pakistan, I don't see them becoming terrorists or suicide bombers? they suffer persecution and hatred too. By the way alot of the hatred muslims face has been brought uopn by themselves. Alot of them are trouble-makers with other faith-groups.

 

The only thing I agree with you was how Hindus argue over doctrinal schools of thought about which is the greatest. But DEBATE can be productive and should be used to arrive at conclusions. Through debate is the only was religions evolve and will answer questions.

[maadhav]

<< people shouldnt judge based on the actions of idiots. >>

 

i suppose you mean to say "people shouldnt judge a religion based on the actions of idiots who malpractice it."

 

every religion, including hinduism, have people who do not know what their own religion really is, and they malpractice their own religion. so, i have said many times here that hinduism is what is in gita.

 

now, even though the hindus have malprcticed hinduism,

they have not invaded other coutnries, not destroyed any mosque or church, not destroyed any other culture, or never have forcibly converted any.

 

in contrast, islam has invaded india over and over, for centuries, and slaightered hindus, destroyed tempels, raped and looted, and even rule over hindus. if you ask them why they did and sill do it, they will say that it is in koran.

 

so, to us the victims of islam for centuries, islam is what it has done to us. no mulla of the muslim world was able and is able to teach the muslims any better message from koran than what the wahabis and ladin and party are doing.

 

still, are you saying that you have a correct and better peaceful tolerant interpretation of koran to the victims of islam?

 

did you ever try to convince it to ladin and party? if you did, did you succeed? if not, why are you telling it to the victims of islam?

 

why are you preaching the chickens who are being killed by the foxes that the foxes do not know thier religion (and you know it)?

 

if you are a hindu, and can understand what i am saying, you would give up preaching the victims that wahabis are misinterpretating koran. they are not. they are committed to live by koran as it is. we suffered and still are suffering because may of us hindus are not living per gita.

 

in contrast many hindus do not know krishna's message correctly, and are thining that ahimsa is an absolute principle in hinduism. it is not.

 

a muslim has freedom to think and act per koran - convert, even by force or kill (it does not matter if it is illegal in a gov.) but at the same time, we hindus have the freedom to respond with might in such a way that no one will ever dare to practice islam on the vedic land.

 

a posture/proposition like "your religion says to kill or convert me by force and i respect it(!?)," and so you do it. my religion says that i cannot hurt you. so i do not mind getting killed or converted by you" is not hinduism. this is worse than cowardice and total ignorance of dharma.

 

note that we never have problem islam being practiced in the desert of arabia where it grew. our vedic land is not for islam. they on the other hand have serious heartburn when we hindus practice hinduism in our own homeland.

 

still you like islam?

like to be killed or converted by them?

want a some hindu tempes destroyed in india?

 

like to hear the shouts of "allah o kabar?

that is the sound used (and stil use) each time they slaughtered kafirs including us hindus.

 

[Guest guest]

[...now, even though the hindus have malprcticed hinduism,

they have not invaded other coutnries, not destroyed any mosque or church, not destroyed any other culture, or never have forcibly converted any.]

 

No invasions? No destructions? /images/graemlins/shocked.gifCholas and Pandyans invaded Sri Lanka several times. Both Singhalese and Indians confirm that Buddhist temples and cities Anuradhapur, Polonnaruwa were sacked.

 

Apart from Sri lanka, Chola inscription in a South Indian temple Tanjore claims victorious raids on cities on Burmese and north malaysian coast. These inscriptions Chola kings put in their temples must be taken with some caution ofcourse since much is not confirmed or contradicted by other sources. Many medieval kings seem to have had the habit of exeggerating to impress rivals. Nice example of such a inflated claim is a Pandyan temple-inscription that mentions Pandyans full conquest of China in 1254! /images/graemlins/grin.gif( source : Archaeological Dept., Southern Circle, Madras, Annual Report on Epigraphy 1911-12, p. 65; 1916-17, p. 111).

 

Anyway, at least in case of Sri Lanka we see in some cases agression against outside without the need of selfdefence.

 

To return to Islamic agression. India suffered a lot by it. Islam itself can hardly be called a peacefull religion. Its certainly true that Koran has a few verses that preach some tolerance and peace but they are outruled by the verses that can give food for agression and intolerance. Some even call those few peacefull verses the biggest trick in the "game" since by refering to them moslems can claim Islam preaches peace!

 

[subroto]

The main thing is to ask for spiritual liberation no matter which god or demi god you worship. I am not sure, but maybe what krishna meant by abandoning all other vedic practices was that.... don't ask other demi gods for material gifts as they are temporary, demi gods being the givers of material gifts as well ..ask me for spiritual upliftment for that is the ultimate ideal, but if you ask shiva or durga for moksha or spiritual upliftment there is nothing wrong with it. It is what you ask for that is more important than who you ask for it from....maybe thats what krishna was trying to say because in those days a lot of people were praying to demi gods for material gifts.

[Sephiroth]

3)Both have a book as divine.Till death you guys wont leave that book.Muslims have quran and you guys hold on to Geetha.But advaitis will hold vedas and god as irrelevent in the advaita stage.

 

I didn't know there was such idiots as Vaishnavites existed.

 

Bhavagad Gita is for ALL, not for one or two groups to claim to be theirs while condemning others.

 

Those who worship Lord Shiva also can read it, Westerners also can read it, Hell ... even Muslims and Christians also can read. They can follow it if they want, reject it if they don't want it.

 

Accepting Gita don't save you from Rebirth and give Moksha on the spot and rejecting will not change your path to Karma and Rebirth or change of obtaining Moksha.

 

Someone should teach this people the real value of Gita and not as some piece of game piece in "who's right and who's wrong" game.

[maadhav]

we did not invade muslim or xian countries.

 

sri lanka alread was a part of bharat because rama won it and gve it to vibhishan to rule it for him.

 

we never invaded to convert others,

nor invaded to prosletize.

 

nor killed non hindus just because they were non hindus.

 

sure we fought internally a lot.

but now we need to stop it and focus on our real enemies.

 

most of the countries you say we invaded were alread part of the rule of indraprastha of yudhithira 5000 years ago.