Are hindus able to critique semitics without being called communal/ anti-minority ?

[vivekam.vairagyam]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Are hindus able to critique semitic religions without being called communal/ anti-minority ?

how often do secular hindus feel comfortable seen criticizing their semitic counterparts ?

 

[s007bala]

re

Are hindus able to criticise semitic religions without being called communal/ anti-minority ?

how often do secular hindus feel comfortable seen criticising their semitic counterparts ?

vv

sanathana dharma=inclusive of all religions in the world today,is my opinion.

abraham=brahmaa
sara=saraswathi

therefore judaism,christanity,islam all have their root identification with sanathana dharma=hinduism.

to seperate any religion,from sanathana dharma=hinduism,is counterproductive in spiritual quest for truth,imho.

to criticise in a positive manner,to make life a better way,is a fine thing to do.i personally consider abrahamic faith to be my broithers and sisters,despite the fact they do not consider as such.just becoz their books are wriiteen in a manner,that makes their brain go wonky tonky,that does not mean,we shud discard them.heck,i criticise so many of old testament teachings.song of solomon is an entire chapter about sex.

hindus should not only know about their rich religion but should also know,that abrahamic religions borrowed heavily from hindus and incorporated into their holy book.I think my first post in the forum itself was such communion with all religions of this world.

sb

 

[sapr333]

Are hindus able to criticise semitic religions without being called communal/ anti-minority ?

how often do secular hindus feel comfortable seen criticising their semitic counterparts ?

Dear VV,

"Criticize' is different from "Critic'.." Need some corrections in the header message I guess..


Secondly, Semitic religions are not minorities, when compared to Hinduism, on global count..

 

[s007bala]

re

Dear VV,

"Criticize' is different from "Critic'.." Need some corrections in the header message I guess..


Secondly, Semitic religions are not minorities, when compared to Hinduism, on global count..

sapr

i think,vv is writing in context with india only,where the minorities are islam,christians,judaist,sikhs....budhist,jains.....etc vv plz clarify.

sb

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri VV Ji,

In a democracy like India, criticizing anyone on valid grounds is perfectly okay - it is a democracy and has reasonable freedom of speech.

The problem is the so called 'secularists' have co-opted the speech. They have painted our community as communal. But unfortunately they have succeeded because the voices in the support of the Hindu interests have been only saying things that can not really be supported by facts or generally hateful. This is the problem. If we cogently put forth our views that appeal to logic and do not come across as partial, then I do not see how anyone will reject it as 'communal'.

Regards,
KRS

Are hindus able to criticise semitic religions without being called communal/ anti-minority ?

how often do secular hindus feel comfortable seen criticising their semitic counterparts ?

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

sapr-ji , bala-ji ,

i did mean critique ( analyse and comment on shortcomings and the like ) while writing criticise .. thnx for pointing it out and hopefully krs-ji /admn/other moderators can change that in the header ....

krs-ji has opened an interesting road by suggesting that we can improve our presentation to these semitic religions in india ...

for starters , hopefully krs-ji and others can share pointers on how we can present our case better esp with respect to specific disruptive practices involving the media , christianity and islam ..... which means , we need to first identify such specific practices with respect to both these religions and the media and look for solutions in the context of this thread ....

thnk u ji -s ....

 

[s007bala]

re

vv

>>with respect to specific disruptive practices involving the media , christianity and islam ..... which means , we need to first identify such specific practices with respect to both these religions and the media and look for solutions in the context of this thread ....<<

The media in India is tutored by the western media corporations.So,one must know how the conservative groups of namely christians & Islamic organisations argue against such propanganda,in the western world.There must be a confluence of inter-faith & intra-faith communications for this to happen.

Firstly,conversion.Actually a human being is getting converted to from one faith to another.meaning belief in a system of worship,from one god to another.Can we accept that Lord Jesus Christ is the only god of this earth.Does that mean,prior to Lord Jesus Christ,there was no god?It makes no sense,to think like this.Similiarly,Proh.Mohd thru quran has said,only allah is god,and rest of non-believers are kafirs or infidels.Therefore Christian is an infidel.Judaist is an infidel.Hindu is a infidel.Does it make sense?NO.

Becoz ,our sanathana dharma=hinduism,predates any of the existing religion in this world.Rig Vedam teaches us,let all noble thoughts come from all directions.

In order to deter,Christians & Islamic proselytisation in India,the people in majority ie hindus must strive to embrace all people from all walks of life,without any discrimination.Very simply put,think & act for real,Indian=hindu first.From grass root level all people should be included to enjoy life,with comfort and peace,security.

Christians & Islamic ,have materials to barter and trade with India,wherein the population of people is immense.There is no unity amongst hindus.Therefore its easy for Christians & Islamics to proselytise and convert people,with material inducements or thru technology transfers.For a man in wants,how does it matter whether he says hallejuah or allah hu akbar or govinda govinda?

Make India,land of milk & honey,and in abundance.

sb

 

[sapr333]

Dear Sri VV Ji,
The problem is the so called 'secularists' have co-opted the speech. They have painted our community as communal. Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS,

I stronly contest this point, and would request you to share some convincing points.. May be we can browse through the history pages of the last 58 Years of Democracy and Secularism..

I also request a response from V.V.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

in india today , pretty much , a secularist is one who bashes hindus and hinduism .. and a communalist , is almost always a hindu , who tries to stand-up for the sanatana dharma and tries to question or critique things said/done by christians/muslims/their sympathisers ...... rt?

 

[sapr333]

in india today , pretty much , a secularist is one who bashes hindus and hinduism .. and a communalist , is almost always a hindu , who tries to stand-up for the sanatana dharma and tries to question or critique things said/done by christians/muslims/their sympathisers ...... rt?

Dear V.V,
Yes, communism though is all about equality, you have a valid claim on them, cos it rejects GOD.

But Secularism is just a politial ideology of keeping away Religion from politics, not bashing/rejecting any religion. If I could go by your own statement, then there could be 2 possiblities.

Either our Politicians have not understood what secularism is all about (or) the majority doesnt want secularism..Again,majority of our electorate and legislators are hindus.. So from where this confusion is arising?

Thats why I asked in my previous post, some specific examble/instances/circumstances to analyse this confusion. Could you pls make an attempt. Thanks in advance.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

sapr-ji , i was trying to present the current practice with respect to these two terms ....

 

[s007bala]

sapr

i have a confessin to make.Untill L K Advani ji,told us about Babri Masjid and the congress goverment allowed it to be demolished,i did not have the foggiest idea,that it was Lord Rama's birth place temple.In fact the Muslims should have magnanimously asked hindu brothers and sisters to build it,for the wrongs committed by their forefathers in that holy place.Thas the right thing to do.Instead of allowing to snowball into a huge controversy like this.IMHO.

sb

 

[KRS]

Dear sapr333,

I can give you several examples. One recent one:

Mr. Vonod Mehta, Editor/Owner of Outlook, after Sri Sankaracharyals' arrest gave an interview in BBC, slamming again the whole order with mis-information. I was in a small group - we hired a lawyer and threatened BBC with a libel suit. BBC had to withdraw the mischievous interview. I think Mr. Mehta said lies because he did not care about the truth. His God is 'secularism'.

I can go on and on.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS,

I stronly contest this point, and would request you to share some convincing points.. May be we can browse through the history pages of the last 58 Years of Democracy and Secularism..

I also request a response from V.V.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

krs- ji ... i know u dont look for it .. but still , on behalf of everyone here ... thanks for wht u did there reg bbc ....

does it mean that we need a better presentation of our displeasure of the semitic groups' representation of our faith ... for example how shuld we have tackled mf hussain's representation of our deities ....?

 

[anandb]

my 2 cents on this.

I can offer a viewpoint as I live and work in the Gulf for the last 15 years. It is a widely known fact that Semitic religions can hardly tolerate criticism of their dogma though Christianity has improved a lot from their 16th century Inquisition and burning all those who held views against the Church. We Hindus should be proud of the fact that we tolerate criticism of our religion but probably carry it to such an extent that we tolerate it even if it is unjustified. If you compare this attitude with the Muslims in the Gulf (I am not comparing with the Indian Muslim) it is just miles apart. You cannot get away criticizing Islam in the Gulf, the least punishment you will get in Dubai is thrown into jail and probably deported while it could be public flogging and beheading in Saudi. A Gulf muslim is fiercely protective of his religion and cannot tolerate criticism of any kind. One can end getting beaten up trying to criticize their religion. This attitude stems from the government as well which bans all websites/propaganda which are anti-Islam. But thank god Dubai is more liberal than say Saudi, as you can go to a temple and still practice your religions within four walls. I know your question is more in relation to the situation in India but thought to highlight this just to give a perspective about Islam.

I think the sad state of Hinduism in India is all factors and elements seemed to be ganged up against it whether it is the politicians, media or the Hindu people themselves who seemed to be ashamed of the fact that they are Hindu. The truth is there is enough literature available about the violent nature of the semitic religions which is ignored by a majority of its members. But if you try telling a Hindu about caste ism, Sati or child marriage he will hang his head in shame as if our Vedas have authorized these. But try telling a Muslim or a Christian that there are verses in the Quran or Bible preaching violence and the result would be he would flatly deny it or beat you up depending on whether he is a moderate or a fanatic.

 

[sapr333]

>>>The problem is the so called 'secularists' have co-opted the speech. They have painted our community as communal. Regards,>>>>

>>>Ref. Vinod Mehtha..

Dear KRS,

Once again, I just cannot agree to this. Its true, any orthodoxy is viewed as communal with secularistic eyes. This applies to Moslems/Hindus/Christians too.At the moment, the most communal colour is painted on the Moslem community and its the fact. Even catholics in U.S are projected as anti-secularism,because of their conservative and orthodoxy approach.

Regarding Vinod Mehta, Im an avid reader/fan of Vinod Mehtas articles, for long years. ..In my view,he is not that a polarised person..One thing for sure, he is an opportunist, who quickly alligns with the 'Winning side', which he even admitted openly in a TV interview during election results counting time. However, I have read many of his articles , where he equally condemns others also.

But, regarding BBC interview (Maha Periyavals),lets not forget J.J who started it all..then comes all the press and media. There are many a muslim sites/blogs which equally paint Vinod Mehta as anti-muslim..

This is the part and parcel of Editors life, to get blow from all the sides. Im love N.Ram.The first news paper mom has thrusted on my hand was 'The Hindu' and the whole of the press admires him as the best journo. But I have seen many a people calling him as communist and anti-hindu. But for me, I just love him!!

I was quite amazed by your effort and ability, even to chase B.B.C, in true spirits. But equally,without knowing this,you know what many of the forum members tried to portray you as?? Thats the problem when one (be it a press/moderator) wants to take up a 'neutral job'!!

As the saying goes, "Matthalathukku randupakkamum idi'.. ie, 'Drum gets bang on both the sides". Being neutral, is indeed a Thankless job.

PS: I may not be right in opining about that BBC interview, cos I havent seen it, or read any transcripts..

 

[happyhindu]

But try telling a Muslim or a Christian that there are verses in the Quran or Bible preaching violence and the result would be he would flatly deny it or beat you up depending on whether he is a moderate or a fanatic.

While growing up we were a group of very close friends from diff backgrounds. Perhaps because it was that close bond or what i dunno but we'd use the word 'jihadi' very casually with some of our male friends, esp when they tried to act smart with girls...Discussions were very open, there were quite a few of us interested in discussing religion. ofcourse a lot of shayari and passion wud flow somewhere in b/w and all those discussions wud get sidetracked many a time....all said and done, i know of atleast a handful of indian muslims who are at core fanatical about being indian first.

Yes i saw / see in tv and news about how muslims in kashmir support genocide of hindus, abt women who enlist their children as mujahideen and bombers, abt how badly muslims struck in the amarnath temple issue, abt riots, abt how middle-easterners want to see islam "flourish", etc. But then i also remember a hindu girl dumping a muslim boy after 4 years of togetherness to marry a richie rich based in the US, of a muslim girl forced to give up her hindu boyfriend, and of a hindu and a muslim who married after being a couple since high school days...in all those situations religion did figure but each situation was unique to its scenario. Since a long time i was surrounded by friends who i became aware that they were muslims only much-much later.

Sometime i wonder if the people we know personally happen to be different from the people we see on tv. But when it comes to categorizing all people of one religion or all people of one community as the same kind, i wud rather go by the people i know around me, rather than those i see on tv or read abt in papers.

 

[sapr333]

. But if you try telling a Hindu about caste ism, Sati or child marriage he will hang his head in shame as if our Vedas have authorized these. But try telling a Muslim or a Christian that there are verses in the Quran or Bible preaching violence and the result would be he would flatly deny it or beat you up depending on whether he is a moderate or a fanatic.

Dear Anand, fine points taken..They may be having different points to prove their point about violence,which Im not intersted to debate on this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, atleast for 'their' sake, can you whole heartedly deny and pledge that, 'Caste/Discrimination' will no longer exist, anymore. And would be able to openly declare it here.

If so, Im with you.

 

[KRS]

Dear sapr333,

Here you make my point. I did not say that the Hindus were the only ones attacked by so called 'secularists'. Depends on the country where you live some, who I call The 'Institutional Secularists' attack any religion (and vice versa). These 'IS' people do not take a position on an issue based on any merit, their position is that they are against any religion. They consider the people who follow religions really to be illogical, and the religions are the sole cause of all the violence in this world. If not for religions, I can make a case for the humanity to be at the brink of extinction today (not that it is not barely there now).

However, my narrow point of discussion is India and the 'pseudo secularism' practiced here. Many of the same people you admire, sometimes paint Hinduism with much broader brush, without taking in to account the Truth. Sometimes they deliberately do not cover stories, just merely because they are pro Hindu. I can give you examples of this if you want.

Regarding my neutrality as a Moderator - most people know the truth. Just because some partisans say otherwise, it does not matter.

Regards,
KRS

>>>The problem is the so called 'secularists' have co-opted the speech. They have painted our community as communal. Regards,>>>>

>>>Ref. Vinod Mehtha..

Dear KRS,

Once again, I just cannot agree to this. Its true, any orthodoxy is viewed as communal with secularistic eyes. This applies to Moslems/Hindus/Christians too.At the moment, the most communal colour is painted on the Moslem community and its the fact. Even catholics in U.S are projected as anti-secularism,because of their conservative and orthodoxy approach.

Regarding Vinod Mehta, Im an avid reader/fan of Vinod Mehtas articles, for long years. ..In my view,he is not that a polarised person..One thing for sure, he is an opportunist, who quickly alligns with the 'Winning side', which he even admitted openly in a TV interview during election results counting time. However, I have read many of his articles , where he equally condemns others also.

But, regarding BBC interview (Maha Periyavals),lets not forget J.J who started it all..then comes all the press and media. There are many a muslim sites/blogs which equally paint Vinod Mehta as anti-muslim..

This is the part and parcel of Editors life, to get blow from all the sides. Im love N.Ram.The first news paper mom has thrusted on my hand was 'The Hindu' and the whole of the press admires him as the best journo. But I have seen many a people calling him as communist and anti-hindu. But for me, I just love him!!

I was quite amazed by your effort and ability, even to chase B.B.C, in true spirits. But equally,without knowing this,you know what many of the forum members tried to portray you as?? Thats the problem when one (be it a press/moderator) wants to take up a 'neutral job'!!

As the saying goes, "Matthalathukku randupakkamum idi'.. ie, 'Drum gets bang on both the sides". Being neutral, is indeed a Thankless job.

PS: I may not be right in opining about that BBC interview, cos I havent seen it, or read any transcripts..

 

[sapr333]

If not for religions, I can make a case for the humanity to be at the brink of extinction today (not that it is not barely there now).
KRS

Dear KRS, here I concur with you..

Secularism has become a tool for Institutional secularists to attack the religion, esp, the majority religion of the particular arena. And its a global phenomena.. Contrarily, the countries which are theocratic do respect and nourish religions,unfortunately, they have the highest problems of their own in the world, compared to their secular counter parts.

Off late,in this 21st century, many people have started questioning this type of secularism.In my view,secularism& democracy, fits well only for protestants (British),cos it's similar to their church organisational structe & Queen,where even the religious head (Bishop) is elected literally.The whole world copied it last century.But, it utterly failed in Arab nations including the latest pakistan, cos it doesnt fit in to Islamic beliefs.

Unfortunately,no bettter alternate solutions has evolved yet. May be, we need to arrive a middle path.

Thats why I said in one of the earlier post, that 'legislators needs to consult the religious heads before enacting any laws.


>>>If not for religions, I can make a case for the humanity to be at the brink of extinction today (not that it is not barely there now).>>

This is the wonderful point. Many a people quickly make a rejoinder stating,that the worlds most killing are done by religions viz,Inquisition,crusade,Byzantine,witchhunt,burning at stake,buddhist killing etc. But I have read somewhere (I think D.D'souza's book), the author in his debate against aetheists, shares a good amount of statistics to prove that those without God, had made some 300times more killing than those killed in the name of God.

 

[anandb]

Dear Anand, fine points taken..They may be having different points to prove their point about violence,which Im not intersted to debate on this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, atleast for 'their' sake, can you whole heartedly deny and pledge that, 'Caste/Discrimination' will no longer exist, anymore. And would be able to openly declare it here.

If so, Im with you.

The point I am trying to make is there is no denying that the caste system does exist but it is not something which is authorized by the Vedas. The Varnashrama dharma is a class system and not a caste system. Nothing can justify the caste system in India but not many are aware that there are numerous sects and systems in Islam and Christianity. I am just giving below what I read sometime back.

Food for thought *Christianity.* - One Christ, One Bible Religion. You know the Latin Catholic will not enter Syrian Catholic Church. These two will not enter Marathoma Church. These three will not enter Pentecost Church. These four will not enter Salvation Army Church. These five will not enter Seventh Day Adventist Church. These six will not enter Orthodox Church. These seven will not enter Jacobite church. Like this there are *146 castes* in Kerala alone for Christianity, each will never share their churches for fellow Christians..! Wonderful..! One Christ, one Bible, One Jehovah...... What a unity! Now *Islam* - One Allah, One Quran, One Nebi.. Great; unity! Among Muslims, Shia and Sunni kill each other in all the Muslim countries. The religious riot in most Muslim countries is always between these two sects. The Shia will not go to Sunni Mosque. These two will not go to Ahamadiya Mosque. These three will not go to Sufi Mosque. These four will not go to Mujahiddin mosque.

The above does not mean I am supporting the caste system in our country. Unfortunately, it is only the Hindu "castes" which get highlighted in the media. I also wonder why the Hindu dalits once converted as Christians are still called as Dalit Christians. Aren't everyone supposed to be equal in Christianity? Then why these dalit christians cannot enter churches frequented by "upper class" Christians. There is more to all this than which meets the eye.

 

[sapr333]

Dear Anand,

Im not going to prove/disprove your point. But, what exactly are you trying to convey out of that?

Just because someone is bad, let me also be bad?

Just because he is bad, let him not point bad at me...Rather, let both unite to BAD..and brush is all under the carpet?

Is that what you are trying to convey?

 

[anandb]

Dear Saprji,

I don't think anywhere in my message I say that. If that is my point, I should be saying that caste system in Hinduism is ok as other religions have equivalents to it. My point is we Hindus should be aware that there are lot of differences within other religions as well and should not tolerate finger pointing from the secular media or a Christian or Muslim. That does not mean that we should not clean our own house first. What we Hindus should strive for is clear the misconception that castes are something which was authorized by our scriptures when it was not so. I am only saying about someone's moral right to find fault in another system. That is my point. I am not supporting castes.

 

[vivekam.vairagyam]

i was hoping someone wuld share thots on my note about mf hussain's paintings .......

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri VV Ji,

Regarding MF Hussains paintings, I do not think we needed to get all worked up. They are not religious paintings he did - he did certaing themes, expressing himself as an artist. Those paintings should have been judged for his artistry and image representation, rather than as religious paintings of Gods.

This is what happens when we go all hogwire about our religion, without thinking.

Regarding how to counteract the mis information others spread about our religion - they need to be done in a scholorly manner, with papers/articles published in reputable journals/magazines. Not publishing 'facts' in blogs, without proper citations, scrutiny by other peers. Anyone can write anything. But that does not make it true.

The reason many in the history field looked at Sri PN Oak as a 'nut case', because he was making fantastic claims without proof. While they might have been willing to listen to him if he did scholorly work, despite not being a trained historian, he did not do so.

This is why Hindutva related material are viewed as suspect and not scholorly by every one else.

Now I saw one blog about Red Fort by the Physics Professor at the U. of Calcutta, which seems half way scholorly. But then he does not cover the evidence for the opposite side - there is another big Red Fort just outside of Delhi. For his argument to be believed, he needs to publish his claims in reputable History journals - he should have easy entry because of his brilliant academic training.

Regards,
KRS

krs- ji ... i know u dont look for it .. but still , on behalf of everyone here ... thanks for wht u did there reg bbc ....

does it mean that we need a better presentation of our displeasure of the semitic groups' representation of our faith ... for example how shuld we have tackled mf hussain's representation of our deities ....?