• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Does anyone remember the hindu contributions to mathematics and science ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear VV, not just to remember.. Anybody preparing for CAT exam would have meticulously studied vedic maths.. And plenty of books are available in the market also..

Btw,whats the objective of opening this thread?
 
Dear VV, not just to remember.. Anybody preparing for CAT exam would have meticulously studied vedic maths.. And plenty of books are available in the market also..

Btw,whats the objective of opening this thread?


...... the objective of this thread is to inform lame ducks like me of the numerous treasures of our heritage ..... extremely knowledgeable people like u might not find anything new/unknown in this ......
 
Dear V.V,

A small request.. Pls dont add that salutation "Ji' to me. .. It pushes me to 'Cloud No.9"... may be, I dont deserve it..

When we talk about Algebra, the term Algebra itself is Arabic.. You may be not be able to accept that, the 'Double entry accounts' ( I didnt study accountancy even in school though) was an innovation of Arab traders...Hmm!! Later mastered by Indian brahmins during their stint in East India company as clerks..Pursuit of knowledge!! I conclude..

Whats your problem in accepting that? If we were holding all the top knowldge in the past, what stopped us from bagging all the Nobel/Olympic prizes.Pls ponder and do some introspection..


PS: A small tip.. Our ancestors might have invented the whole of science in this world.. But look around the world, and see that if your ideologies could fit in to the 'worldview'..
 
Last edited:
Dear Sapr,

Algebra was not invented by Arabs. I am quoting below in red what I have read and the link where you can find this info as well. Please go through this link titled "India's contribution to the development of modern civilization". It is very exhaustive and the information can make us proud. Now for the quote

The word for mathematics in Arabic is ‘Hindi sat’ meaning the ‘Indian Art’. One of the greatest mathematicians in the Arabic empire was al-Khwarizmi (full name, Abu Jafar Mohammed ibn Musa al-Khwarismi, 780-850) who was summoned to Baghdad in 820 by al-Mamun and appointed the ‘first astronomer’ and later the head of library. He led three scientific missions to India to meet scholars and collect manuscripts. Based on them, he wrote a book ‘Kitab al-jabr wa al-muqabalah’ (Calculation by addition and subtraction, ‘jabr’ here is an Arabi-ised form of Apabhramsha Indian language word ‘jor’ meaning addition, and not the Arabic word meaning ‘difficult’; algebra is a short Latinised form of the word). Later, its Latin translation became a standard textbook of mathematics in European universities. He wrote out the oldest surviving ziz--set of astronomical tables-- surviving from the Indian charts bro ught to Baghdad by Kanaka. This ziz later made the journey to Spanish Cordoba and onwards to the rest of Europe where a Latin translation made in 1126 became one of the most influential works on astronomy in medieval Europe. These are to count just a few of the books al-Khwarismi wrote on mathematics, the Indian art. In 825, al-Khwarizmi wrote on the concept of logarithm (this is a Latinised form of his name itself), zero and positional notation system after learning them from the Indian texts especially Brahmagupta, in his book ‘Algoritmi de numero Indorum’ (this is the title of the Latin translation). This book (in its Arabic form, which unfortunately is not available any more) reached Spain (which was under Arab control at that time) where, in the 990’s, Gerbert of Aurillac taught the Hindu numbers to his students, but it could not be very popular in Europe. In c.1100, an Englishman Robert of Chester visited Spain and translated al-Khwarizmi’s little book into Latin in 1120. This and other translations of al-Khwarizmi, inspired writing of several Latin textbooks on the ‘new arithmetic’ including description of the decimal system and positional notation. Sti ll it took several more centuries before Europeans entirely abandoned Roman numerals despite their clumsiness and inferiority to Hindu numerals (Duncan, The Calendar).

Another standout at Baghdad was al-Battani (c. 850-929), known in Europe as Albategneus who studied Indian astronomy and expounded Indian trigonometric methods to show that the distance from the earth to the sun varies during the year (Ibid.). Half a century later another Iranized Turk (but known as Arab) astronomer, Abu ar-Rayhan Mohammed ibn Ahmed al-Biruni (call him al-Biruni; 973-1048) was born in central Asia. He extensively studied the Arabic translation of the Indian mathematics and astronomy and by the age of thirty, had written at least eight works. Most important of them was one in which he discussed arguments for and against the earth’s rotating on its axis, taking up the debate of Aryabhata versus other Indian astronomers. He went to India with an invading Muslim army of Mehmood Ghaznawi. There he learned Sanskrit and studied every ancient text he could find. He compiled his findings into a book called Kitab-ul-Hind (Kitab fi tahqiq ma li ‘l-Hind). This offers a remarkably candid and critical analysis of Hindu mathematics and siddhantas as well as philosophy and religion


The link is, http://www.hinduwisdom.info/articles_hinduism/133.htm

We did possess all this knowledge before which still shows in the form of the native Indian brain which excels among all adversities. If at all we can be proud of one fact, it is the fact of what Indians have achieved in spite of problems like poverty, corruption, bureaucracy and lack of institutional support. Even Einstein acknowledged that most of the modern inventions would not have been possible if the Indians had not invented the numerals before. A few centuries back, Europe was supposed to have been in the dark ages when there was absolutely no progress in science. If they had in their possession superior scientific knowledge, The Church would not have been anti-science and torturing people holding scientific beliefs. Only in the last 1000 years the scientific progress in India halted and this can attributed wholly to the Islamic rule and the British Empire. But you can see the Bhakti Movement was in full swing in that time. If not for this movement, we would be a Islamic or Christian country by now. I think if you go back on history, it has got answers to a lot of your questions.
 
I see this strange all-permeating idea of taking great pride in some long lost glory by every single section of the indian society, which is all very nice, but period. We'd do better to stop with acknowledging and similing once in a while about it, than live our whole lives in it.

Agreed the muslims ravaged and damaged, many times irrestorably. Agreed christians and colonialists also did the same while causing deep fissions in the indian social fabric. But the past can never be the fault of anybody living in the present. Nobody can "restore" the past in the present. And what does just talking do?

My take is this:

Let us stop chanting about old glory. And do something to make India glorious NOW. Let us, on our own, refuse to give or accept a bribe, to start with. This sounds plain cliched. But i have seen people who have lived by that principle all their life. It certainly is possible. Perhaps they were not very successful, but they are succesful in their own way of life nevertheless.

Let us stop blaming or targetting muslims, christians, colonialists, and anything and everything that can be blamed.

We wud do better to strengthen the indian society from within. A poor man on the streets will beleive anything a missionary will tell him as long as he is poor and illiterate. Can each of us not do that small something to ensure that man on the streets does not always live in poverty. Weeding out this whole idea of bribery, recommendations, commissions, is the first step. Next comes supporting or working out strategies to generate wealth in the smallest ways possible. This ofcourse requires proper guidance from economists and people in related fields.
 
We did possess all this knowledge before which still shows in the form of the native Indian brain which excels among all adversities. If at all we can be proud of one fact, it is the fact of what Indians have achieved in spite of problems like poverty, corruption, bureaucracy and lack of institutional support.

Dear Anand,

I do not think the native indian brain is any different from a native indonesian brain, a native japanese brain, a native scottish brain or any other brain in the whole world.

All descendents of a nobel prize winner do not become nobel prize winners themselves.

IQ has a lot to do with nutrition, environment and various other factors. Not everyone with Apo E develop Alzhemiers. And not all children of genius parents become a genius themselves.

India in the past did not wallow in malnutrition and the kind of stinking poverty we see today. And therefore they cud produce the kind of stuff they produced. Neither did bureaucracy exist. Institutional support seem to have existed as long as the research helped the instituions.

Instead of singling paens of the old world india and its past, let us not forget that the west has produced a lot more inventions in the new world and in this new world, india has still to catch up.
 
Dear Happy Hindu,

I find your logic of connecting two different issues quite strange. Did I say anywhere that taking pride in the past and not solving the ills of present day society are mutually exclusive? I totally agree with your points regarding solving all the problems of present society. I think one definitely needs to know about your past to know the present strengths. The community that you mention of taking pride in old glory is alive only because there is another community which not only refuses to acknowledge that pride but behaves as if that glory never existed and it is all a figment of one's imagination.

I think you are wrongly assuming that people who talk about past glory are not doing anything in the present. I don't think the community you are accusing are blaming the present day muslims or christians for the past atrocities. I don't think even hard core Hindus wants to drive out other communities from India because we very well know India may cease to exist. What present day Hindus need to be aware are the dangers of Christian evangelysing and Islamic Jihad are more pronounced in India than ever and hence we need to be at constant vigil. In the same vein I also denounce Hindu violence as an answer to this. I don't think fortifying one's defenses can be called as religious jingoism.

In this age "talking" does help as it helps create awareness. If not for blogs and online forums, we will simply not know what is happening in the "secular" media. For example, there was this "inter-religious faith" meet called by the cardinals of Vatican and attended among other by SSR and the Kanchi seer and there was this hard hitting speech given by the Kanchi seer followed by a press conference. I am still looking for reports of this meet in the mainstream media but none. Why? If you are interested, please read for yourself in this link. http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=633

I do agree with you about solving the huge problems facing our society and the only way forward is by cooperation between all the communities. BTW, I have friends from other communities with whom I never discuss any of these but I know I am fully prepared with the knowledge of our past if anyone wants to criticize my heritage without proof.

thanks
 
Dear Happy Hindu,

For example, there was this "inter-religious faith" meet called by the cardinals of Vatican and attended among other by SSR and the Kanchi seer and there was this hard hitting speech given by the Kanchi seer followed by a press conference. I am still looking for reports of this meet in the mainstream media but none. Why? If you are interested, please read for yourself in this link. http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=633


Dear Anand, here is the link from the top selling daily press in India ,which narrates well the meeting between Kanchi Acharyal and Cardinal..So pls dont blame the media for all.. If you keep your eyes closed, you may not see the world.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...No-forced-conversions/articleshow/4650456.cms

Compare this info, with that link you shared here, and do some introspection..



Regarding your point about conversion, I take conversion as a personal choice and conviction with God.. No body can interfere in that.. Yes, forced coversion, we all should jointly condemn that, and report such activities to the nearest police station..And thats what Kanchi Seer and Cardinal mutually agreed upon condemning equally the forced conversion and attack on Christians & churches by some goons.

I have shared here an article by JNU Prof Nivedita Menon, published in daily Telegraph.. Check it out let me know which of her points are wrong? Thanks

http://www.countercurrents.org/hr-nivedita070504.htm
 
Last edited:
Dear Anand,

I find your logic of connecting two different issues quite strange. Did I say anywhere that taking pride in the past and not solving the ills of present day society are mutually exclusive? I totally agree with your points regarding solving all the problems of present society. I think one definitely needs to know about your past to know the present strengths.

Unless the past becomes a hurdle in disallowing a peaceful co-existence in the present. Which tends to happen many a time. Esp if politicians decide to make politics out of history like the aryan-dravidian non-existent racial divide. Esp if people themselves, start living in an image of the past, with the idea of bringing back the past to the present. Esp if people, probably for lack of healthy self-esteem, start using past relics to compensate for sense of 'self-esteem' in the present.

The community that you mention of taking pride in old glory is alive only because there is another community which not only refuses to acknowledge that pride but behaves as if that glory never existed and it is all a figment of one's imagination.

I do not understand this. Is there a co-relation?

I think you are wrongly assuming that people who talk about past glory are not doing anything in the present. I don't think the community you are accusing are blaming the present day muslims or christians for the past atrocities. I don't think even hard core Hindus wants to drive out other communities from India because we very well know India may cease to exist. What present day Hindus need to be aware are the dangers of Christian evangelysing and Islamic Jihad are more pronounced in India than ever and hence we need to be at constant vigil. In the same vein I also denounce Hindu violence as an answer to this. I don't think fortifying one's defenses can be called as religious jingoism.

That's what i conveyed as well. About fortifying one's defences. However, i said "indian" instead of "hindu". I have always been much happier as an indian than to be associated with any "religion". I have my faith and do not expect anyone else to follow what i follow. And am not against conversions when done out of faith.

In this age "talking" does help as it helps create awareness. If not for blogs and online forums, we will simply not know what is happening in the "secular" media. For example, there was this "inter-religious faith" meet called by the cardinals of Vatican and attended among other by SSR and the Kanchi seer and there was this hard hitting speech given by the Kanchi seer followed by a press conference. I am still looking for reports of this meet in the mainstream media but none. Why? If you are interested, please read for yourself in this link. http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=633

Am not into looking to be seen as a persecuted person. And i do consider the indian media quite fine.

Lemme also add this: sometimes i think people who fought and died for their faith in the past did not even know what they were fighting for (it was just heroism ?). And thankgod this is the age of communicative freedom.

I read abt this as one the first news items on times of india. Since you ask about mainstream media, am producing some links:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...No-forced-conversions/articleshow/4650456.cms

old news: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...lics-to-hold-dialogue/articleshow/4626312.cms

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_conversion-focus-of-inter-faith-talks_1264434

http://www.daijiworld.com/news/news...d+Conversions,+No+Violence+against+Minorities

http://www.sakaaltimes.com/2009/06/12210651/US-body-should-not-interfere-i.htmlhttp://www.indiancatholic.in/news/s...c-Hindu-summit-condemns-attacks-on-minorities


I do agree with you about solving the huge problems facing our society and the only way forward is by cooperation between all the communities. BTW, I have friends from other communities with whom I never discuss any of these but I know I am fully prepared with the knowledge of our past if anyone wants to criticize my heritage without proof.



thanks
 
Dear Sapr,

I did miss the TOI link. Thx for pointing it out. What I meant was a majority of the mainstream media did not carry it.

About Nivedita’s article, I have a lot of problems. She says genuine religious conversion involves spiritual transformation of the individual based on “knowledge” of the person’s own religion and the one which he converts to. Here the assumption is the Hindu having been born as one has experienced the culture, traditions, pantheon of gods and failed to achieve the spiritual transformation now meets a padri who promises the said transformation if he becomes a Christian. Informed choice, she says.

The question here is who informs him. It is the padri who is as human as any other Hindu. Now who or what gives him that authority to say that my religion has the ability to transform you where Hinduism has failed. By her own accord she talks about “spiritual transformation” and then compares it with examples like companies bidding for rival employees; attempt to convert voters –things more earthly and material. So finally isn’t this just a question of numbers? In the case of companies it is the profit motive and in the case of Islam or Christianity it is the case of numbers. Damn the spiritual transformation. No one is bothered when church attendance is going down in USA and Europe and padris are getting accused for sex scandals. When she talks about “informed choice”, is this kind of information also shared with the potential converts?

She displays her total ignorance of the Hindu culture by making this statement. Are Hindus only worshipping Laxmi for wealth? We worship Ganesha for removing obstacles, Saraswathi for education, Varuna for rain and so on. What is wrong in this? Just because it does not fit into her scheme of religion, do you term it false? And what makes her think that Hinduism is preventing its children from going to school while Christianity offers hope for these kids. Why does Christianity not address the problems of black kids living in ghettos in the US? If she blames Hinduism for kids not going to school then I will blame Christianity for rape, date rape, sodomy, paedophiles, drugs, gun culture, pre-marital sex, marital infidelity, and divorces in the west. To me both these arguments sound stupid.

India is probably the only country where Hinduism still exists as a majority so what is wrong if the Hindus think of protecting the status quo? No one is saying kick out the other communities. If so we would have kicked them out a long time back? No one talks about ethnic Hindu cleansing in Bangladesh or Pakistan but if a Hindu talks about protecting Hinduism in the land of the original Sanatan Dharma we are termed as anti other religions. What hypocrisy? Even Muslims inside and outside the country call this as Hindustan. Hinduism which has never persecuted against any religion and allowed Muslims, Christians, Jews, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs to thrive alongside is now asking questions to protect its identity against proselytising religions interested more in sheer numbers than any kind of spiritual transformation and people like Nivedita is questioning it.

I think Nivedita is not fair in her evaluation but highly biased. Just look at her observations on religions
a. She questions the wisdom of praying Laxmi and praying for success in examinations.
b. She says Hinduism prevented people from going to school while the converted religion offers this opportunity (Where is the proof).
c. She talks about “spiritual transformation” in Christianity and Not in Hinduism (Who decides this, the padri)
d. She asks what if Hindus become a minority in 100 years. (so much for a identity)
e. She talks about the messy humanity in temples (is this a problem of Hinduism? she forgets that if India becomes majority Christian, there will be a messy humanity in churches too).

My final word on this is just this. Other religions very well know that Hinduism is not a proselytising religion because that will go against our law of karma. So it is all very well to say that an individual should have the right to choose his religion when they know that Hindus will not indulge in reverse poaching. I would like to see their reaction once Hindus start preaching and converting other religions.

thanks
 
Dear Happy Hindu,

It is exactly this kind of attitude which caught India napping during the Mughal and British onslaught. Because of my mails, I could be perceived as a hater of other religions which I am not. My whole point is an identity is a must for anyone. When we are born into a good family, we feel proud of it. If we work for a great organisation, we feel proud about it. Similarly religion is a source of great pride to anyone. You are saying you will first call yourself a Indian. I will do the same but does not mean I will forget being a Hindu. It also does not mean that I will insult a Christian or Muslim. I don't think by looking into the past one rakes up everything and tries to act accordingly. I live in a Islamic country for the last 16 years and I absolutely love this place. Given a chance I will settle down in this place because it absolutely allows me to be like a Indian and practice the Hindu culture within my house as long as it does not clash with Islam nor involves saying anything against them. It is because they are fiercely protective about its identity and will not take any insults. I am not even saying this. I am open to criticism of Hinduism and will counter it if I have got the ammo. But one should not be a wolf in sheep's clothing. Read this link for a better idea.

http://mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=11492

thanks
 
1) Stuff i completely agree with:

"I don't understand why religion should occupy a special place from all of the above in a modern democracy. Not that I don't know what the answer will be - religion is a matter of the spirit and not of crass materiality, it should be governed by different standards. In that case, why expect the state to intervene at all in this sacred realm? After all, even from the gods of their ancestors, people expect material benefits.

Hindutva has managed to make an 85 per cent-strong majority community feel insecure about the strength of its durable traditions, unsure of the ability of these traditions to survive. Congratulations. Even a thousand years of "Muslim rule" couldn't achieve this"
.

2) Stuff i somewhat agree with:

"Of course, the real reason behind the Hindu right's obsession with religious conversion has nothing to do with protecting the sanctity of religion. The creation of a birth-based political majority is crucial for the project of Hindutva and for its definition of Indian-ness. If "others" turn into the majority, the easy coinciding of Hindutva and the Nation falls apart. When Ambedkar decided to leave the Hindu fold along with large numbers of Dalits, who felt the most threatened? Not the orthodox Hindus, who thought it was good riddance. It was Savarkar and the modernist Hindutvavadis who reacted most sharply, understanding fully the importance of numbers for a modern politics of Hindutva. Hence their ever-increasing horror stories about galloping Muslim and Christian populations, the most recent example being the Indian Council for Social and Scientific Research-sponsored study on the decline in population of "Indian religionists".

3) Stuff i do not agree with:

"So ignorant Dalits or tribals, who convert to Christianity, Buddhism or Islam in the hope of, and lured by, economic benefits - jobs, schools, health facilities - and social benefits - dignity, self-respect - are instances of fraudulent conversion".

For me:
It is about exploitation. A Christian outfit can provide the same economic benefits without asking the tribal to convert. A humanitarian charity wud do better (since they can teach the man to fish, instead of providing him a few fishes for a few days and then leaving a man to fend for himself by turning him into an MLM business where he becomes an entity that brings in more church attendents). This is where fraud happens.

Some Christian outfits are eager to profess numbers, because more numbers mean receiving more funds (this is another place where fraud happens). To increase numbers, they resort to ugly aggressive means, like vandalism of scriptures of other religions. The bible does contain stuff like incest and things that the missionaries point out in other religions; but turn a blind eye to their own scriptures.

At the same time, there are Christian units managing convents, educational institutions and hospitals that are not involved in forced conversions. A man converts out of his free-will. They are true Christian.

Unfortunately, the hindutva outfits calls for "shuddhi" for non-hindus and propagate the idea of an india only for hindus. This, I most certainly do not accept.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 
Dear Anand,


Dear Happy Hindu,

It is exactly this kind of attitude which caught India napping during the Mughal and British onslaught. Because of my mails, I could be perceived as a hater of other religions which I am not.

Reg the victories of mughals and british, i think it was the attitude of non-cooperation b/w hindus themselves that contributed to certain events, apart from the fact that the white man had technology like guns that indian kingdoms did not have (btw, our defense forces in present day india still tends to be ill-equipped). No i am not seeing you as a hater of any religion. You wish to take pride in your own, which is good for you. Just that am not into any such thing.


My whole point is an identity is a must for anyone. When we are born into a good family, we feel proud of it. If we work for a great organisation, we feel proud about it. Similarly religion is a source of great pride to anyone. You are saying you will first call yourself a Indian. I will do the same but does not mean I will forget being a Hindu. It also does not mean that I will insult a Christian or Muslim. I don't think by looking into the past one rakes up everything and tries to act accordingly.

I have my faults and so do my parents and those around me. Am not looking for perfection. I wud rather accept myself and those around me with their so-called pluses and minuses. I dunno what is there to take pride in. So am not inclined to indulge in such things with my family or the organization i work for. I am just very happy to be to there, and savour it as long as it lasts, knowing fully well that such identitites do not last forever. Neither am i looking to holding on to something to make its existence as a permanent thing. I may look into the past once in a while merely for the sake of fleeting interest.


I live in a Islamic country for the last 16 years and I absolutely love this place. Given a chance I will settle down in this place because it absolutely allows me to be like a Indian and practice the Hindu culture within my house as long as it does not clash with Islam nor involves saying anything against them. It is because they are fiercely protective about its identity and will not take any insults. I am not even saying this. I am open to criticism of Hinduism and will counter it if I have got the ammo. But one should not be a wolf in sheep's clothing. Read this link for a better idea.

http://mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=11492

I wud rather settle in india in an ashram than anywhere else. Am not fiercly protective about anything. Islam is a closed religion. It needs protectionism. Hindusim is an open religion, designed for evolutionary growth.

thanks
 
Dear Happy Hindu,

My whole point is an identity is a must for anyone. When we are born into a good family, we feel proud of it. If we work for a great organisation, we feel proud about it. Similarly religion is a source of great pride to anyone. You are saying you will first call yourself a Indian.

The question is ... Are you going to take pride in being a 'Follower of Hinduism' or wanting for a Hindu identity... Yet another christian may long for his identity, which is definitely wrong in my view, rather, he should take pride in being a true follower of JC's teachings. What do we earn by carrying the identity of Hindu/Moslem/Sikh/Christian, without following the respective teachings?

Secondly, in my view God should be kept and revered above everything on this earth.. Somehow I cannot agree to the adage Matha-Pitha-Guru-Deivam, which keeps God as the last option. Also, I differ HappyHindu here...I wish , God should come first and then the country. I find it right, if someone says, Lord Krishna is my first priority and India is my next....Tomorrow, all borders may fall, Pakistan may merge with India etc etc.. Where as God remains universal for all.
 
Dear Sapr,

Secondly, in my view God should be kept and revered above everything on this earth.. Somehow I cannot agree to the adage Matha-Pitha-Guru-Deivam, which keeps God as the last option.

First, how to prove that "god" exists.
Second, how to conclude that what constitutes "god" to you also means the same to me.
Third, the intended meaning of Matha-Pitha-Guru-Deivam does not mean god is the last option, since a hindu sees god in all and accepts god is all. One of the explanations is that it means, first take care of your mum, dad, teacher and then later pursue god.


Also, I differ HappyHindu here...I wish , God should come first and then the country. I find it right, if someone says, Lord Krishna is my first priority and India is my next....Tomorrow, all borders may fall, Pakistan may merge with India etc etc.. Where as God remains universal for all.

For the concept of "God" to be universal for all, then "all" must accept that "god" means the same things for each of them.

I did not say country comes first or god comes first for me. Neither do i beleive in boundries.
 
My view in blue.

I think God, spirituality and religion is all the more important in Kali Yuga than probably in any other yuga. What we don't need is fighting in the name of religion. The state definitely needs to protect religion when there is a danger of external forces disrupting it. This applies to minority religions as well. So if hard core Hindutva elements are indulging in violence against other religions that needs to be addressed as well.

This again goes to my previous mails about fortifying defenses. Unfortunately the reaction of the Hindu majority (peaceful ones) is perceived to be "insecurity" while what most of the Hindus are indulging in is being better aware and also talk in blogs and forums. The hardcore ones are probably uneducated, illiterate thugs whose passions get whipped up by politicians.

Hindutva has managed to make an 85 per cent-strong majority community feel insecure about the strength of its durable traditions, unsure of the ability of these traditions to survive. Congratulations. Even a thousand years of "Muslim rule" couldn't achieve this"[/I].

Hindus are unfairly being accused that they want a India only for Hindus. I don't anybody in their right frame of mind can even dream about ethnic cleansing of Muslims or Christians. But at the same time if Christianity and Islam are bent on increasing their numbers by conversion then Hindus have the same right of ensuring their numbers don't dwindle by these conversions. Let us remember here that Hindus are not involved in poaching members from other communities. If a person wants to ensure that his house does not get robbed by someone, would you blame the person for that?

2) Stuff i somewhat agree with:

"Of course, the real reason behind the Hindu right's obsession with religious conversion has nothing to do with protecting the sanctity of religion. The creation of a birth-based political majority is crucial for the project of Hindutva and for its definition of Indian-ness. If "others" turn into the majority, the easy coinciding of Hindutva and the Nation falls apart. When Ambedkar decided to leave the Hindu fold along with large numbers of Dalits, who felt the most threatened? Not the orthodox Hindus, who thought it was good riddance. It was Savarkar and the modernist Hindutvavadis who reacted most sharply, understanding fully the importance of numbers for a modern politics of Hindutva. Hence their ever-increasing horror stories about galloping Muslim and Christian populations, the most recent example being the Indian Council for Social and Scientific Research-sponsored study on the decline in population of "Indian religionists".

I really don't know if there is something called a free-will conversion. Even assuming the poor Hindu Dalit got so disgusted with the caste system and became a Christian of his own free will(?) but still continues to be called a Dalit Christian and refused entry into Churches meant for the upper class. When these poorer sections convert it is normally through inducements because they care a hoot about spiritual transformation when they cannot afford one square meal a day. If a upper caste, rich Hindu converts seeking spiritual transformation, I might be able to believe in free-will conversion but even here if "spiritual transformation" is the goal you find more westerners seeking eastern religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism) than the other way around. You also find our Gurus never propagating or saying Hinduism should be your way whether it is Satya Sai Baba, SSR or Mata Amritanandamayi. Our Sankaracharyas' tradition is something unquestionable. You can read (www.kamakoti.org) any number of Christians and Muslims who paid glowing tributes to our Paramacharya. They said they saw Jesus or Allah in him. Such is the power of our Gurus who propagate our religion not by proselytising or converting but by example.

3) Stuff i do not agree with:

"So ignorant Dalits or tribals, who convert to Christianity, Buddhism or Islam in the hope of, and lured by, economic benefits - jobs, schools, health facilities - and social benefits - dignity, self-respect - are instances of fraudulent conversion".

For me:
It is about exploitation. A Christian outfit can provide the same economic benefits without asking the tribal to convert. A humanitarian charity wud do better (since they can teach the man to fish, instead of providing him a few fishes for a few days and then leaving a man to fend for himself by turning him into an MLM business where he becomes an entity that brings in more church attendents). This is where fraud happens.

Some Christian outfits are eager to profess numbers, because more numbers mean receiving more funds (this is another place where fraud happens). To increase numbers, they resort to ugly aggressive means, like vandalism of scriptures of other religions. The bible does contain stuff like incest and things that the missionaries point out in other religions; but turn a blind eye to their own scriptures.

At the same time, there are Christian units managing convents, educational institutions and hospitals that are not involved in forced conversions. A man converts out of his free-will. They are true Christian.

Unfortunately, the hindutva outfits calls for "shuddhi" for non-hindus and propagate the idea of an india only for hindus. This, I most certainly do not accept.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/QUOTE]
 
Please see in blue

I will take pride in both. In my opinion they are not exclusive. What is wrong in having a identity? This forum "Tamil Brahmins" has an identity written all over it. Why should we construe that having a particular identity will lead to a hatred of other identities? If you are born as a human being, can you be without one, whether you like it or not. I see it this way. If one is a "Follower of Hinduism" he should naturally be proud of his Hindu identity as well. But a Hindu who calls himself one but does not follow the tenets of it is not a Hindu in my opinion.

The question is ... Are you going to take pride in being a 'Follower of Hinduism' or wanting for a Hindu identity... Yet another christian may long for his identity, which is definitely wrong in my view, rather, he should take pride in being a true follower of JC's teachings. What do we earn by carrying the identity of Hindu/Moslem/Sikh/Christian, without following the respective teachings?

I too don't agree with you here. I pray a situation does not come for a person to make a choice between god or nation as in our religion everything has its place. And I definitely do not want a chaotic Pakistan with all its Taliban elements to merge with India and create havoc here.

Secondly, in my view God should be kept and revered above everything on this earth.. Somehow I cannot agree to the adage Matha-Pitha-Guru-Deivam, which keeps God as the last option. Also, I differ HappyHindu here...I wish , God should come first and then the country. I find it right, if someone says, Lord Krishna is my first priority and India is my next....Tomorrow, all borders may fall, Pakistan may merge with India etc etc.. Where as God remains universal for all.
 
I think the point I was trying to make was missed altogether. You need to study the history. The Westerners started from a point of advantage. Initially they were the ones who colonized and plundered countries, destroyed native cultures and looted all their treasures. Just look at the state of countries in South America, Africa. North America and Australia was almost entirely cleansed of its aboriginal population while the Caucasians took over. A glorious Vedic culture was put centuries behind by a 1000 years of gross misrule of the Mughals and then the British. Now this misrule is being perpetuated by the present and past governments. In spite of a myriad number of languages, states plus the gross misrule, we as a country has not broken up. I definitely think our past has contributed a lot to it. And gene theory holds up a lot as science is now finding out. And we give more credit to Westerners than what is due. Some of the monstrosities in science like antibiotics, genetically modified foods, food additives, food coloring, processed foods and WMD are western inventions. The are playing havoc with people's health but worse thing is governments are in the payroll of these huge billion dollar companies or just don't care.

But the Westerners are just too damn intelligent. We had forgotten all about yoga and pranayama till it caught like wildfire in the west and they started marketing it back to us in different forms. I had never heard of Ashtanga yoga before till Madonna vouched for it. And now you have power yoga, pilates yoga and so on. When western pharma companies is trying to acquire patents for proprietary ayurvedic herbs, we Indians are impressed. One can go on and on but I don't want to become a bore, if I am not already.

thanks


Dear Anand,

I do not think the native indian brain is any different from a native indonesian brain, a native japanese brain, a native scottish brain or any other brain in the whole world.

All descendents of a nobel prize winner do not become nobel prize winners themselves.

IQ has a lot to do with nutrition, environment and various other factors. Not everyone with Apo E develop Alzhemiers. And not all children of genius parents become a genius themselves.

India in the past did not wallow in malnutrition and the kind of stinking poverty we see today. And therefore they cud produce the kind of stuff they produced. Neither did bureaucracy exist. Institutional support seem to have existed as long as the research helped the instituions.

Instead of singling paens of the old world india and its past, let us not forget that the west has produced a lot more inventions in the new world and in this new world, india has still to catch up.
 
Dear Anand,

My view in blue.

This again goes to my previous mails about fortifying defenses. Unfortunately the reaction of the Hindu majority (peaceful ones) is perceived to be "insecurity" while what most of the Hindus are indulging in is being better aware and also talk in blogs and forums. The hardcore ones are probably uneducated, illiterate thugs whose passions get whipped up by politicians.

It depends on the individual, if he wishes to feel insecure about his faith or not...the illeterate thugs and politicians will make "use" of some other divisive platform, if not religion, anyways...

Hindus are unfairly being accused that they want a India only for Hindus. I don't anybody in their right frame of mind can even dream about ethnic cleansing of Muslims or Christians. But at the same time if Christianity and Islam are bent on increasing their numbers by conversion then Hindus have the same right of ensuring their numbers don't dwindle by these conversions. Let us remember here that Hindus are not involved in poaching members from other communities. If a person wants to ensure that his house does not get robbed by someone, would you blame the person for that?

The hindutva forces do beelive in an india only for hindus. Nope they are not talking abt cleansing the ethnic way, they are talking about cleansing the "shuddhi" way. Numbers mean nothing. We indians have anyways bred like fleas, increasing our quantity rather than quality, since atleast the colonial times. Quantity, without quality, matters only for vote banks, it has nothing to do with spiritualism. People have more freedom of choice now.

Lets put it this way - its the kali yuga where people are meant to live in falsehood, and so on. Its a stage of transformation. Things will possibly go in the direction the way its meant to go. This freedom of individual choice and interference by state / governement are perhaps part of the process of transformation (??).


I really don't know if there is something called a free-will conversion. Even assuming the poor Hindu Dalit got so disgusted with the caste system and became a Christian of his own free will(?) but still continues to be called a Dalit Christian and refused entry into Churches meant for the upper class. When these poorer sections convert it is normally through inducements because they care a hoot about spiritual transformation when they cannot afford one square meal a day. If a upper caste, rich Hindu converts seeking spiritual transformation, I might be able to believe in free-will conversion but even here if "spiritual transformation" is the goal you find more westerners seeking eastern religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism) than the other way around. You also find our Gurus never propagating or saying Hinduism should be your way whether it is Satya Sai Baba, SSR or Mata Amritanandamayi. Our Sankaracharyas' tradition is something unquestionable. You can read (www.kamakoti.org) any number of Christians and Muslims who paid glowing tributes to our Paramacharya. They said they saw Jesus or Allah in him. Such is the power of our Gurus who propagate our religion not by proselytising or converting but by example.

Yes, tehre is something called freewill conversion. Did not vadamas convert to srivaishnavism out of freewill? Were all those who converted rich and not poor?

True, the xtian conversions at the most 'base' levels take place due to money inducements, but what about the 'respect' the new converts claim they get, plus what about the great network the converts also claim that they get - getting money to start off with a small biz does help them break the cycle of poverty. Lets face it - the root cause is poverty. So why not address a man's poverty, instead of blaming him for converting?

I for one, do consider Jayendra Swami a great guru. When he instituted education schemes, he was criticized for not following dharma just because he did things that orthodoxy generally does not do. When he was arrested, tehre were people who said that he deserved it because he did not follow dharma (since he provided education for shudras, etc). On the contrary, the critics forgot the early vedic society had no shudras. It is great to have swamis who move ahead with the times. Another example is Chinna jeeyar swami garu who is simply amazing, so much that i have no words for him. It is so heartening to see swamis like Jayendra swami and Chinna jeeyar swami garu...God bless them...and hope they work in support of one another.
 
Last edited:
Dear Anand,

Some of the monstrosities in science like antibiotics, genetically modified foods, food additives, food coloring, processed foods and WMD are western inventions. The are playing havoc with people's health but worse thing is governments are in the payroll of these huge billion dollar companies or just don't care.

Not sure how one can equate antibiotics with WMD and food coloring. Sir, if not for antibiotics, most of the world's population wud not have survived stuff like plague that used to visit us just sometime back.
 
My views in blue

"The hindutva forces do beelive in an india only for hindus. Nope they are not talking abt cleansing the ethnic way, they are talking about cleansing the "shuddhi" way. Numbers mean nothing. "

I think the Hindutva forces are small in number. Hinduism is a religion of peace and this nature is inborn in a majority of Hindus. If it comes to India finally breaking up on the basis of religion, I don't think any religion will allow that to happen. I am not unduly worried about that. But numbers definitely give strength. As Annie Besant and Aurobindo said, India's strength is its Hindu ethos as it is the only surviving Hindu majority country in the world apart from Nepal.
And Annie Besant specifically said there is no India without Hinduism. And she was a Christian. Of course as you said numbers don't mean anything if people don't follow the tenets of Hinduism. But there is always a community of people who follow the tenets and there is evidence that this community is growing. And ours is the only religion where there is a continuous lineage of gurus and prophets who keep the traditions alive.


Yes, tehre is something called freewill conversion. Did not vadamas convert to srivaishnavism out of freewill? Were all those who converted rich and not poor?

Are you talking about something which happened hundreds of years back with something which happens now? To me converting oneself within the various sects of Hinduism is a bit stupid as Bhagwan Krishna clearly says, "the Supreme is One, but the paths to him are many".

True, the xtian conversions at the most 'base' levels take place due to money inducements, but what about the 'respect' the new converts claim they get, plus what about the great network the converts also claim that they get - getting money to start off with a small biz does help them break the cycle of poverty. Lets face it - the root cause is poverty. So why not address a man's poverty, instead of blaming him for converting?

This is why I have a huge problem with Christian conversions. The fundamental flaw is in the assumption that Hinduism is the reason for keeping people poor. I want to state that people are the reason in keeping people poor. Religion has nothing to do with it. A religion's basic duty is to teach moral principles to the people which is what Hinduism does by talking about Karma (cannot find a more scientific principle than this) and Islam and Christianity does by talking about Judgement Day. The "respect", the "network", "getting money to start a small business" you talk about seems to be in the areas other than spiritual. To me no better than Microsoft trying to wean away an employee of Google by offering better terms. Actually I can accept that as it is happening on purely commercial terms but for a major religion trying to behave like a multinational corporation, well????

I do agree with your views on Sri Jayendrar though I don't know anything about Chinna Jiyar Swami garu. Probably you can enlighten me on him and his activities. I think the greatest strength of Hinduism in KY is the Bhakti Movement which started almost from the first century AD and still continuing with an unbroken tradition of Acharyas and Gurus. I agree with you on what is happening in kali yuga and possibly all pre-ordained. I read that KY is 432,000 years and 5000 years have passed. With the present state of affairs in the world, I shudder to think what can happen in the balance period.

thanks
 
True, the xtian conversions at the most 'base' levels take place due to money inducements, but what about the 'respect' the new converts claim they get, plus what about the great network the converts also claim that they get - getting money to start off with a small biz does help them break the cycle of poverty. Lets face it - the root cause is poverty. So why not address a man's poverty, instead of blaming him for converting?

This is why I have a huge problem with Christian conversions. The fundamental flaw is in the assumption that Hinduism is the reason for keeping people poor.



Dear Anand,
I think you havent really understood conversion mechanism and threw away the usual talks of Money/luring/poor dalit etc etc, keep blaming this way, without understanding that mechanism in depth.. This study is the need of the hour.. First of all, one need to acccept the inablity to propagate the faith... or win over the propagation of other faiths in terms of Spirituality & God concept..I have often heard many of us saying, 'we dont convert/propogate our faith'.. Is that a statement of merit or proves the inablity? Hinduism is the oldest, with grandeur philosophies and has lot of goodness in it..Whats wrong in sharing/teaching the 'Hindu Philosophy' to others.. You say, you found goodness/spirituality/comfort in hinduism, but what stops you from sharing the goodness to others ? Arent you being bit selfish here?

If money can buy souls, it would be the most easiest one. And do you think hindu souls are so cheap? or let me put it in another way.. Do you think the hindu faith,spirituality and hindu foundations are so weak, that it could be bought over by money? I read is somewhere, the the Catholic Church in India's real-estate value in terms of Prime location colleges,Churches and hospitals is second largest in India, only next to Indian Defence establishments which runs to few hundrend Bn$. If money can by souls, they could have sold the lands, and purchased hindu souls..

You know well, South Korea commands a richest economy, and similarly, just last 40Yrs, it has become a Christian majority country. It may contradict your point that, only poor and lowercaste getting converted.. Anyways,no religions talk/promise of making someone rich or promote worldly materialistic things. Yes, being in a Christian society (not refering here follower of Christ) it has really helped people to come up in social life, cos, the missionaries took up the job of 'Educating them and there by liberating people (which hindu society miserably failed to do ), and found Hospitals, in line with the 'Good Samaritan' ideology.. And these really helped people become rich, not that reading Bible /going to church helped them to become rich.

Take for eg, Kannyakumari dt.. Its now 47% Christians, 100% literacy, and every village (be it hindu /muslim/Christian ), you will find a Christian institution.. It all happened in last 100 years. Now, if you go to any IIT/Eng College/Medical college/ you find KK dt boys...And they have infested and occupied most of the TN Govt Jobs...Its a known fact.. Guess why...Is it because of Christianity ( or) because of the empowerment they got by Christian educational system..I would choose the later.. Sad to say, there is one old famous college called 'Hindu College", and admission is only open for Vellalar/Pillai hindus..That college which was once famous, has no takers now.Where as, go to any christian institution out there, you will find diversity in caste/religion. As Shri.Nacchinarkinyan once said, St.Joseph's trichy,was once a Brahmin Bastion. If conversion was the (subtle) intention, they would have admitted only dalits not Brahmins.


So in my view, Money or Subtle offerings cannot buy faith.. There is lot more in to it,which neither the Hindutva nor Swamiji's explored it. They never pondered beyond foreign Money/Dalit Caste.

The jist is... Do good to others.. Help them in need.. Liberate them..respect human dignity.. .Uplift them.. Then, they will curiously ponder, what has prompted/inspired that stranger, to do such a self-less service and try to follow that stranger..Once convinced, he too will get stimulated to reciprocate that help to the society in the name of God. And the chain goes on... One may discount it as MLM, but there should be concrete thing to develop such a strong inspiration... Ponder over it.. Today onwards, try doing this good help to the society. Don't limit that service to relieve your accumulated karmic debts (just as a compensation), even if you have no-bad karma, still do good to others...Soon you would find many a people following you, to find the reason for such a good transformation in you..

Will share some thoughts about it, in my forthcoming post.


PS: I fully agree with your quote on meeting between Kanchi Sankaracharaya acharyal and Vatican Cardinal .. Two good cripy points in the minutes of the meeting... Dont do forced conversion and dont kill non-hindus in the name of religion. Yes, a society should not tolerate these 2 things... I can say, its a historical meeting and Im glad that Vatican has engaged this dialogue with the 'right person' in India, ie, Kanchi Acharyal..
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top