Has Hinduism had the Longest Tradition of Continuous Religion?

contd...#264...

For who Saad Bin Muaz was and further clarifications you`ll really need to read that discussion ...

Yaar abcd .. you have questions but doesn`t look as if you want answers. Anyway, I`ll c/p one extract from Urstruly from that thread ...

The arbitration award given by Saad Bin Muaz was under this clause .. and duly carried out.

Deutronomy Chapter 20

Verses 10-14

10 When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.

11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee.

12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it:

13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:

14
But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

http://www.htmlbible.com/kjv30/B05C020.htm

``6. After the 19th century, when the British had superseded the Mughal rulers and most of their customs, the increasing numbers of educated Hindus, began to be aware that there was little knowledge about their own history, culture and religion. Little was known about any great Hindu king, and many religious scriptures like the Vedas, the Upanishads or even the Bhagavat Gita that were mostly in the secret records of Brahmin pundits were just not known. Only the Ramayana and Mahabharat were widely enacted folktales.``



Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati Swamigal, the 68th Sankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Pitha (period of being Shankaracharya 1907-1994 approx) :

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap3.htm
``The fourteen ``abodes`` of knowledge are: the four vedas; the six Angas or limbs of the Vedas; Mimamsa, Nyaya, the Puranas and Dharmasastra. You must have seen at least references to the Vedas and the six Angas. The Tamil work Tevaram says: ``Vedamodarangamayinanai``. According to this devotional work Isvara is the form of the four Vedas and the six Angas.

The fourteen dharma-pramanas (authorities of dharma) are called ``caturdasa-vidya``. The well-known poetic work `Naisadham` mentions that Nala was conversant with these fourteen branches of learning. The poet (Sriharsa ) plays on the word ``caturdasa``: he says that ``Nala accorded caturdasa to the caturdas-vidya``, meaning he gave the fourteen branches of learning four dasas: reading, understanding what is read, living according to the teachings contained in what is read, and making others also live in accordance with them.

Caturdasatvam Krtavan kutah svayam

Na vedmi vidyasu caturdasasvapi

--Naisadham, 1. 4

All religious knowledge is encompassed by these fourteen branches of learning.

There are yet four more vidyas. If you add to the fourteen already mentioned, you will have eighteen vidyas - astadasa-vidya which are all-inclusive. Of them, the fourteen already mentioned are directly concerned with dharma. The remaining four - Ayurveda, Arthasastra, Dhanurveda and Gandharvaveda - do not directly deal with dharma. They are not dharmasthanas (abodes of dharma) but they qualify to be vidyasthanas(abodes of knowledge). The first fourteen, as already mentioned, are both dharmasthanas and vidyasthanas (abodes of dharma as well as abodes of knowledge).

The dharmasthanas and vidyasthanas are together commonly known as the sastras. The word ``sastra`` means an order or commandment. We speak of a royal ``sasana``, meaning a royal ``edict``. There is a chapter in the Mahabaharaaata in which Bhisma expounds the ordinances of dharma to Yudhisthira and it is called ``Anusasana-parva``. Aiyanar is called ``Sasta`` because he keeps the hosts of Siva under his control (through his orders ). Works on sastras incorporate the ordinances that are calculated to keep us disciplined and ensure that we tread the right path. ``

``The fourteen branches of learning were taught in our country from the remote past until the inception of British rule. Let me tell you something interesting about them. You must have read about the Chinese pilgrim Fahsien and Hsuan Tsang. The former visited India early in the fifth century A. D. and the latter in the seventh century A. D. They have both recorded impressions of their travels here and given particularly glowing accounts of the big universities of Nalanda and Taksasila. We learn about these institutions from archaeological investigations also. They were at the peak of their glory when Buddhism flourished in the country. It is noteworthy that syllabuses of both these universities included the caturdasa-vidya. Ofcourse Buddhist religious texts were also taught, but only after the student had learned the fourteen Hindu sastras. The reason : acquaintance with Vedic learning was a help to any religious community in acquiring knowledge and in character building. The Buddhists thus believed that education to be called education must include a course in the Hindu caturdasa-vidya.

In the South also these sastras we taught at gatikasthanas and other institutions established by the rajas of Tamil Nadu. In the copper-plate inscriptions, dated 868 A. D. , there is a reference to an educational institution at Bahur, between Cuddalore and Pondicerri, where it is stated that the fourteen vidyas were taught. Similarly, there was a school at Ennayiram, between Vizhupuram and Tindivanam, where the ancient sastras were part of the syllabus as evidenced by an inscription of Rajendra Cola (11th century). There are many more similar examples.

Nowadays considerable research is conducted into Tamil history. It has inspired stories and novels. However, nobody seems to have dealt with the information that I have gained from my own historical inquiries -- that the Tamil rulers supported the Vedas and sastras in a big way. There is much talk about the need for impartiality in all matters and about the importance of having a scientific outlook, but we do not see any evidence of it in practice. The Buddhists were opposed to the Vedas, but they believed that an acquaintance with the fourteen Hindu sastras was necessary to nurture the intelligence and shape the moral character of the students learning in their institutions.``

#author

This is an interesting article with some interesting factoids. But I believe it will benefit from providing a citation of your sources rather than making definitive statements of your own.

Your thesis statement is a bit misleading – nobody is making the claim that Hinduism HAS such “longest tradition of continuous religion” – whatever that means. And most religions, as well as cultures and civilizations evolve over time. Those which do not evolve, eventually loose connection to their masses, thus loosing relevancy.

#260 Boomer

Yaar, don`t concede so quickly - mian Trully is just warming up!

And NEVER make promises that are absolutely impossible to keep.

Urstruly:

OK. I concede.
How can one argue with the logic such as yours.
but I promise not to be too drab, dour and dark either..and so should you.

#256 by Urstruly

[The answers on that thread are my answers.]

Then cut and paste the most salient answers. If you can type so many lengthy posts, surely you can cut and paste a couple of paragraphs - no?

#257 by bjkumar

[Dear Ajeya,

The literal interpretation of specific lines in Holy Books is always problematic. People of most faiths are in reality mostly secular in their day-to-day dealings. Most religious rituals and the like are simply matters of habit and family training. Few people have spent the time to pore over every line of their Book – and unless one does so as part of a profession – it is perhaps to be considered a rather peculiar habit.

The bottom line is how people of any faith choose to practice their religion and whether they accord to others the same respect and freedoms that they seek for themselves. That is where the focus of discussion needs to be – not on the literal validity of individual lines in any Book.

Most practitioners of the faith do not attach significance to what is literally said if it fails to make sense. By bringing it up, you end up according undeserved legitimacy to those who do.

Sincerely,
BJK

PS: Darn, I am sounding like Kaal now. Perhaps he is another of my nicks! (That would explain his sweet words in the past.) ]


Dear bjkumar,

There is nothing you say that I disagree with. Faith is the most common commodity in this world, meaning belief that is not borne out of evidence or verifiable facts. And there is nothing wrong with faith - it is a mental crutch people need to survive - unless it is harmful to others. In this respect there is absolutely NO difference between the average Hindu, the average Muslim, the average Christian, or anybody else. This is why in a recent discussion with tahmed, when he finally said that it was his faith that he was following, I told him that just that admission increased my respect for him tremendously.

I only question people who start pontificating about their belief system being the best etc. and insisting that others are wrong. That IS the source of MOST problems around the world.

Otherwise, I don`t give a damn if you believe in Santa Claus, if it makes you happy.

And I have said this many times before.


Ajeya

#253, etc.

Dear Ajeya,

The literal interpretation of specific lines in Holy Books is always problematic. People of most faiths are in reality mostly secular in their day-to-day dealings. Most religious rituals and the like are simply matters of habit and family training. Few people have spent the time to pore over every line of their Book – and unless one does so as part of a profession – it is perhaps to be considered a rather peculiar habit.

The bottom line is how people of any faith choose to practice their religion and whether they accord to others the same respect and freedoms that they seek for themselves. That is where the focus of discussion needs to be – not on the literal validity of individual lines in any Book.

Most practitioners of the faith do not attach significance to what is literally said if it fails to make sense. By bringing it up, you end up according undeserved legitimacy to those who do.

Sincerely,
BJK

PS: Darn, I am sounding like Kaal now. Perhaps he is another of my nicks! (That would explain his sweet words in the past.)

abcd

The answers on that thread are my answers. If you are not interested in getting answers then why bother asking questions?

Echo.

we do not have luxury of Macacaing even for sometime; we are on war footing. We have to set our priorities straight; we have to know the propriety of our actions; and we have to have commitment to ourselves to do the right thing as far as priorities and properieties go.

Look the matter is simple - everything in this world is a test. and we are tested most rigorously when we are most tempted. I have realized the error of my ways of the past and I whole heartedly regret it. I wasted a lifetime away.

#252 by Urstruly

[A very comprehensive discussion on this topic was done on this Chowk thread, where almost all possible aspects of this issue were explored in detail. If you have any question after reading that thread then please let me know:


Islam in Crisis (I)

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00001875&channel=university%20ave&threshold=1&layout=0&order=0&start=0&end=9&page=1#146 ]

I don`t know how many times I have to say this to you - STOP DIRECTING ME TO WEBSITES. TYPE IN YOUR OWN ANSWER. OR AT LEAST CUT AND PASTE THE ANSWERS YOU THINK ARE MOST APPROPRIATE.

Thank you.

#251 by Salim_Chauhan

[But seriously, dude. Shouldn`t you be relying on your own good understanding, fine mind, and sense of objectivity rather than going to the ``Sword of Truth`` website to do your thinking for you? ]

You probably will never understand this, but I do not have a high opinion about the mental abilities of people who read stuff like the Quran and think that it is the best thing to have hit us humans.

Don`t fool yourself. I am not asking you these questions about the suras because I have any doubts about the Quran being the product of a very common mind trying to make up stuff to hoodwink equally illiterate bedouins. It is a very unsophisticated piece of work with wild fantasies and uneducated conjectures about most everything. And the not-so-perfect copy job from the New and Old Testaments (the prevailing religious books of that region at that time) is obvious to any educated mind.

Also, you should also have realized after a few arguments with me that you have to actually PROVE your points with me. No amount of sarcasm or emotional tantrums will prove it for you.

The reason I asked you to show me some Suras that you think are so revolutionary is to make it abundantly obvious to anyone on this forum that there is NOTHING remarkable about the book that apparently came straight from ``God``.



In any case, coming back to the sura in question:

the line

``[112:3] ``Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten.``

seems to mean:

``He Who creates without a partner, and Who was not created``

Tell me whether you agree with this interpretation. If not, please give me your translation.

Thank you.

Re: # 240 Mr abcd

``Show me how the beheading 700 unarmed men and selling their innocent and helpless women and children into slavery is ``right``. ``

A very comprehensive discussion on this topic was done on this Chowk thread, where almost all possible aspects of this issue were explored in detail. If you have any question after reading that thread then please let me know:


Islam in Crisis (I)

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00001875&channel=university%20ave&threshold=1&layout=0&order=0&start=0&end=9&page=1#146

#248 Krishna_abcd {``Could you give me the number of this sura, so that I can understand from other sources what ``neither is He begotten nor does He beget`` signifies. ``}

Krishna - the number is 112:1-4
But seriously, dude. Shouldn`t you be relying on your own good understanding, fine mind, and sense of objectivity rather than going to the ``Sword of Truth`` website to do your thinking for you?

Anyway, here is the text of Sura - 112 Absoluteness (Al-Ikhlaas)

[112:0] In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
1. [112:1] Proclaim, ``He is the One and only GOD.
2. [112:2] ``The Absolute GOD.
3. [112:3] ``Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten.
4. [112:4] ``None equals Him.``

#248 Krishna_abcd {``Could you give me the number of this sura, so that I can understand from other sources what ``neither is He begotten nor does He beget`` signifies. ``}

Krishna - the number is 112:1-4
But seriously, dude. Shouldn`t you be relying on your own good understanding, fine mind, and sense of objectivity rather than going to the ``Sword of Truth`` website to do your thinking for you?

Anyway, here is the text of Sura - 112 Absoluteness (Al-Ikhlaas)

[112:0] In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
1. [112:1] Proclaim, ``He is the One and only GOD.
2. [112:2] ``The Absolute GOD.
3. [112:3] ``Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten.
4. [112:4] ``None equals Him.``