Understanding Sanatana Dharma

I honestly beleive that hindu religion was either created by aliens or by astronauts. I think thousands of years ago either there was an alien landing somewhere in present day karnatka or if it wasn`t an alien it must be an astronaut from our future who got caught in a wormhole and travelled back in time through a time warp and landed in karnatka. With his space suit and breathing tubes and all, the local savages took him for an elephant headed god. His rover must have appeared to them crawling like a mouse. And then one day, in order to communicate with the savages, the astronaut took his helmet off and collapsed due to the strong smell of a toxic agent called heeng in the atmosphere. A fellow older astronaut came and put his helmet back on his head. The oxygen must have revived him and savages thought that the older god had revived his son by replacing his ``head`` and making him elephant god again. And then klingons must have arrived following these astronauts from their intergalactic battles and must have kidnapped astronaut`s wife parvati. The older astronaut shiva must then fired shoulder fired missiles through his bazooka upon klingons which savages referred to as devs, and killed them. Savages then started calling shiva`s weapons as his Asthras.

Many thousand years later when those savages civilized themselves, they were able to decipher the accounts written by their ancestors about their experiences with benevolent alien gods who taught them how to make fire. The modern savages were also able to develop weapons based on the designs described in those vedic accounts. They call their weapons Agni (fire) and Asthra (shiva`s weapons) to honor their gods.

Nazar:

Good to see, some Pakistanis making efforts to learn about eastern philospophies. I would suggest you to pick up any textbook of Asian Philosophies preferably written by academician(s) and published by any of the University presses. Reading Hinduism in some details makes one wonder, what attracted some of these people to Islam. What part of it was most disappointing to them and Islam offered superior interpretation, if political environment and its trappings are to be ignored for discussion purposes only.My own feeling is that open endedness and constant evolving nature of Hinduism thoughts made it open to uninviting, undesired, imposed and parasitic ideas to freely enter into vast and diverse body of liturgy.

Tantra is somewhat the most reccent thoughts within Hinduism, starting with Veda (including commentaries called Upanishads), epic period, Vedanta, temple period and tantric period. Tantra is more like developing short-cuts to achieving dharma goals. Many Hindus dont accept it ebcause it opens to wild experimentation with quick, quicker and quickest means towards goals, such as drugs and enhanced orgasmic techniques.

Bhagti is not necessarily chanting hymns in the presence of a particular diety as a manifestation of ultimate truth. Actually within Bhagti movement, a school of thought believed strongly to avoid any representation of ultimate truth in the form of visible manifestation such as figures. Guru Nanak seemed to be impressed by this school more than any other philosophy and preached ultimate reality to be within each individual instead of outside or in the form of manifestations, thus it needs no outer representation to focus hymns onto. That is the basic philosophy of Sikhism. Although Muslims feel that Sikhism bridged Hinduism with Islam thorugh this path but he was going more to the basics of Hindusim of Atman and Brahman from Upanishads.

Anyway, enjoyed reading it!!!!

Nazar Sahib,

Thanks for an interesting article!! It is heartening to see some Pakistanis taking interest in their pre-Islamic heritage. It is often forgotten that Hinduism actually developed in the area of Pakistan and then spread to the rest of the subcontinent. This means that the ancestors of present day Pakistanis were actually the creators of Hinduism!! It is a strange result of history that most Pakistanis have come to view hinduism as something belonging to India. Maybe the antagonism against India is actually an extension of negating one`s own pre-Islamic heritage as a part of accepting Islam.
Be that as it may, Islam is permanently established in Pakistan for eternity. Now there is no reason to be insecure and harbor ill-will against one`s pre-Islamic past. It is time for ordinary Pakistanis to become neutral towards their past.

Thank you for the research and placing things in such a simple form.

I am sure there will be enough debate.

Just one correction - estimate on number of Hindus in Pakistan varies from 2.5 through 5.0 million, on date, as per Kishinchand Perwani in the latest issue of Outlook. Add to that the large number of converts who still keep some sort of connection to the faith of their fore-fathers, and you make a very good case for the Vedic Republic of Pakistan.

I am sure it can`t do worse. Can you imagine, a secular India surrounded by a Buddhist Sri Lanka, a Hindu Nepal, a Communist Tibet and a Vedic Pakistan?

Nazar,

Thanks for a nice summary on what is Hinduism, especially coimg from a pakistani.

I would not agree on your conclusion about hinduism being neither polytheistic nor monotheistic. Its monotheistic but tolerant of allowing anyone worship reality in any form.

In a way all organized religions originate to assert themselves socially and spiritually distinct from others. Otheriwse who would buy it. Hence their emphasis on their God alone. Political hinduism is trying to shape themselves in the image of other organized religions. Though, i doubt if there`s any scope to it. In a way, Sikhism, due to turbulent relations with others may become an organized religion asserting itself distinct from other sub-continenetal cultural traditions. This would be more in tune with the rise of abrahamic faiths` origin.

More later.

hey bhagwan!
...isn`t anything sacred anymore?a maleecha teaching us about the dharma...ram ram...

Excellent article on Hinduism. Sort of like.... ``In a nutshell``.

I always interpreted Hinduism as a religion that worships nature itself rather than worshipping some abstract imagined entity in abstract imagined worlds. For example, Hindus worship Earth as a ``Bhudevi``. It seems logical to worship something that responsible for giving, sustaining and destroying life itself. Also notice the worship of all kinds of animals in nature.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#1

Now dont tell me you have never heard of Erich Von Daniken!

Nazar sahib, good summary article. I enjoyed it.
I think you missed some other significant countries in your foot note..e.g. Nepal, Mauritius, Fiji etc.

#1 oey Sanatan Dharm did not originate in KarnaTaka....teri KarnaTkiyaN naal kiyoN lagdi ay ainee?

nk:

the nazi symbol is the reverse of swastika...
thanks for a good read.

re:#1 by Urstruly
One reason why i shall keep my interactions limited in chowk. The stink from this guy (and others of his ilk) is unbearable.
Anyway, looks like the guy has had his brains blown out in Guantanama Bay and is now speaking thr` his rear end.
Sridhar

re: this article
An excellent article. I had said in another forum i won`t interact anymore but i think if i see an article that tickles my mind/soul, i will.
Nazar Sahib,
You have said everything that needs to be said about hindusim in nutshell.

I will however differ on the dates that u have quoted. Nobody knows when Vedas were written thought western authors quote dates which sound ridiculous.
You said that Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) suddenly vanished and gave rise to vedic civilization. Does that not sound as odd to u? Some scholars believe that Vedic Civilization was an extention of IVC or the 2 are one and the same, though there is a lot of controversy here.
Vedas predate the time frame of IVC u have given. Veda Vyasa only complied the vedas (that is, he brought the 3 vedas: Rig, Sama, Yajur into one place as they were scattered all across the landmass of India at the time and also successfully argued with other sages of the time to include Atharva veda as the 4th form of Veda). He wrote the vedas into a written form on the scrolls and palm leaves. Prior to that, it was being passed on orally as there were no technology for writing. Veda vyasa is also credited with writing the Mahabharata and the Puranas.

#12 by kaurasach
Mahabharata was compiled by the sage Vyasa in the foothills of himalayas. Legend has it that Ganeshji (the elephant headed God) wrote it to the dictation of Vyasa. When Vyasa requested the deity to write the epic as he dictated, Ganeshji agreed on the condition that it was dictated non-stop. Vyasa`s countercondition was that he would dictate it non-stop as long as Ganeshji understood what he was writing. At places, Vyasa would go on a tangent and dictate deep philosophical thoughts that would make Ganeshji ponder over their meanings, giving the sage enough time to think about the next plot! Thus it went on for a month, non-stop!
Much has been added later to the original text. It was just called Bharata initially and later came to be known as Mahabharata of 100000 verses.
A highly readable version in English was written by Rajaji and is on line:
http://www.hindubooks.org/books_by_rajaji/mahabharata/index.htm

Vedas were no doubt initially complied on the bank of river Indus (modern day Punjab) but various schools of thought came about later all over the landmass called Bharat.
Sridhar

Nazar Khan, it is good to see that you read about dharma.

Btw, there is no ``salvation`` - In Hindu (& Buddhist) thought there is moksha or nirvana
- i.e an end to cycles of birth and death - once knowledge is aquired.
There is a very close relationship between Upanishidic thought and Buddhist thought,
later on the Advaita of Shankara is very close to Buddhist thought. Some of the
Dvaitins refer to Advaitins as Prachanna-Baudha (or closet-Buddhists)

For Sameerjb - Tantra is very closely related to Buddhist thought - especially
Tibetan Buddhism. So it is not as if it is something new. Tantra has existed for
a loooong time.

Nazar, Sameer (and others) ....
One should not use categories of ``religions`` (such as Islam,Judaism, Christianity)
etc for the Dharmic panths (such as vaidika, bouddha,jaina etc)
All these dharmic panths use a common vocabulary related to achieving moksha/nirvana.
But that is not to say they are the same - there are differences.
The Buddha or Shankara would not care if you ``believed`` or not - you would be just
revelling in your ignorance (avidya) and be born & die again and again.

So one has to make an effort to study, then one chooses an appropriate guru and
then one practises dharma - in an effort to get knowledge and freedom from the
cycles of birth and death.

Another important thing is the meaning of the word ``God``. There is no concept
of ``God`` in the dharmic panths that is the semantic equivalent of ``God`` in religions.
While Bhagawan is used as a equivalent of God - it is not so.
Jaina and Buddhist thought do not need any concept of a ``God``....In Hinduism, the
``Brahman`` or Paramatma is used - but that is semantically very different from God.

Anyway, it is good to see Pakistanis learning about something else outside of the ``pure``.

#1 urstruely

heh heh.. you think you are imaginative. you gotta read the hindu puranas (at least some) and the ``imaginative`` stuff that you write will look like PG13 childrens stories. for real ``adult`` material, just read the puranas (or mahabharat for material softer for your sensibilities).

Nazar

The Bhakti movement was I believ an indirect response to fall of major hindu dynasties (e.g. the Yadavs of Deccan) to Turky hordes. Out of this fall, the state sponsorships to brahmanic religion declined. Paradoxically, the spiritual ``needs`` increased with the misery brought by large change of power structures. Loss of state sponsorship weakend the brahmins, and loosened sanskrit based religious interpretation. The increased market demand however got all kinds of ``vernacular`` interpretors going, who mostly based the ``bhakti`` movement on vendantic (upnishad) philosophy (depricating the sanskrit based vedic rituals). So, you see, indians can ``blame`` spiritual revival on medieval invaders.

Note that these invaders were always refered by then locals as ``turki`` or ``habsi`` or ``khan`` etc and not as ``muslim``.

There are many compositions of bhakti tradition folks in whose composition mention of pain due to invadors and criticism of brahminic (vedic) rituals is found. And then these guys even had some kind of a bhakti brotherhood among themselves. There are several mentions of gatherings and we see visits and writings of Namdev from Deccan to Punjab and sikh holy books.

Excelent Article.

I guess you have provided a crash course in Hinduism to not only non-Hindus but for Hindus too. I am not saying this in dis-respect but as a fact. I have few hindu friends and I have spceifically asked all of them that whether thay have read their holy scriptures and the answer is mostly a no. In fact some of my Hindu friends say that they have not even seen a translation of holy Hindu scriptures. One friend jumped in surprise when I showed a copy of Bhavad Geeta english translation from Satyanarayan Prakash. The biggest argumet they present is that it is written in Sanskrit which very few can understand and I have no time to read the translations my self.

Asfand Siddiqui

Interesting article the Hindu jargon is difficult to follow. Hint: use more details in english and do not over siplify key concepts and ideas

To those who criticize Urstruly, I say you do not understand the depth of the man. :)

This is an excellent article... Pakistan has a pre-Islamic heritage that needs to preserved as it is the greater leveller for the Mullah brigade.

Great going Nazar Sahab...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

nazar,

``Political Hinduism is a phenomenon only a few decades old in a history of 4000 years and is confined to only India``

Ahem, and USA/Canada.

---

``A good article. Hinduism is a very scientific religion.``

LOL. It`s lame when anyone makes this claim. I would suggest you use the word `cosmic` or something...I see no science in what was written above.

Rsridhar, Jang …

Ignore the folk-tales of the elephant god and his helmet … we Muslims cannot be outdone due to our own absurdities … this one involving a prophet … who was lifted to the clouds two-thousand years ago … where he continues to reside… licking caviar from the thighs of smooth-skinned maidens …

So, when will this prophet come down to earth? Considering his feast of caviar … probably never … but the ullema speculate that he may descend any day now … how? one may ask … On the shoulders of two angels … on the east side of a minaret … on the dome of a mosque in Damascus … (no $hit)

Once this prophet hits the ground … his deputy … a chap known as the Mahdi … is supposed to magically appear. Together, they will fight a one-eyed monster … called dajjal … whose head will be above clouds … and he will be riding a … get this … a giant, fire-breathing donkey (don’t ask for details … it’s already bad enough …). Once the battle is over … the divine duo will go around killing the Jews … returning the holy land to Palestinians … Kashmir and parts of UP to Pakistan … and the Americas to the red Indians … except that red Indians are now only interested in running state-subsidized casinos in central california ...

The populace of the world will then be asked to choose between accepting Islam … or getting the sword. This will lead Islam to final victory … which will result in Fox and CNN getting shut down, Alan Greenspan being fired, and Britney spears becoming a hijabe woman. Mumbai will be renamed “fatah-e-Islam”, and the unix prompt will be replaced with takbeer. The prophet is expected to get married, have kids, and start itemizing deductions on his 1040 as he finally buys a house in the real-estate bubble market.

Truth cannot be monopolized … and same seems to be the case with sheer stupidity … back to you, Urstruly …

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#6 by Maharana

re: Monotheistic or Polytheistic

Somehow I feel that strong emphasis on monotheism of Hinduism over polytheism is influenced by the 1000 years of imperial and colonial rule, preaching and presenting monotheism as unified, advanced and superior form of ultimate reality almost like unified field theory. This Judeo-Christian-Islamic concept of unified or singular absolute truth is by no mean supeior than polytheistic nature of reality. In fact, this unified simplification was the response of backward tribal cultures living on the fringes of great civilizations to cope with the evolutioin of complex and diverse spiritual thoughts. In history, monotheism of one kind or another predates later polytheism which goes better with the complexity of social evolution in developed civilizations.

Poltheism makes ultimate reality or god easily approachable, brings it down closer to humans and more importantly dilutes it to a level where obeying or pleasing it is no longer the ultimate goal of spirituality. Thus Karma is more important in Hindusim than dharma. It would be akin to asking Abrahamic religions to consider dogma (deen for Muslims) above the belief in one god, and few other things such as prophethood, day of judgment etc. It is not possible for Abrahmic religions because all powerful monotheistic god sits much above and pleasing him by obeying him is the ultimate spiritual act or even purpose of living.

Through polytheism or infintes manifestations of god, pleasing a diety is not the same as pleasing god although in recent times we have witnessed the same fervor for Ram by Hindutva followers. Once approachable easily at human level, god is seen and met in his manifestations by ordinary Hindus every day in life when they touch feets of elders or fold hands in front of guests as welcoming gesture - namaste. That is why in Hindus a highly respected person due to her/ his acts is referred to as `` bhagwan ka roop`` whereas in Muslims, Christians and Jews, the ultimate such honor does not even reach ``prophet ka roop`` level and limits to ``farishta sift`` (angel like).

So the whole debate of monotheistic or polytheistic is a minor thing from Hinduism point of view but Abrahamic religions see it as a major point differentiating them from others. That is why, Karma is more important in Hinduism over fundamental blind faith in few simplified spiritual, metaphysical or supernatural matters. The conceptual thoughts of ultimate reality and god is left to priests to argue among themselves. For Hindus, it is not even half as important to justify their faith as monotheistic or polytheistic as it is for Muslims who could lay waste to polytheists, only if they have the same powers they once had in the region.

This is an admirable attempt to produce a crash course of `hinduism for dummies`, and the `dummies` inlude most of the hindus as well. Most of the hindus wont be able to name the four vedas or to tell the difference between vedas and vedanta. Nor are they required to. Most of them have heard of Ramayana and Mahabharat and the deity they worship which, in case of older panjabi hindus, is as likely to be the granth sahib than ganesh.

Some comments:
``We will skip the debate whether it happened due to the Aryans from the North or whether the Aryans ever existed at all...``
- ...there is no debate about their existence, only whether they are indigenous or came from outside. The Hindu scriptures do refer to aryas, and the word is used to connote a noble person or a gentleman of honour.

- Buddha and Mahavir (Jain) preached at a time when people didn`t call themselves hindus; in fact I don`t think that there was any concept of religion in the sense that it is generally understood in the west. As has been frequently pointed out, there is no equivalent of religion/mazhab in indic languages; dharma merely connoting one`s moral obligations; thus one could have different dharmas of father, children, teacher, student, etc. In India, the term `coalition dharma` also gained currency during the NDA rule.

- I agree with you that the court should have stayed away from defining `hindu faith`. It is perhaps the beauty of the religion that it defies easy definitions.

Keep up the good work!

Nazar,

A good introductory article. However I don`t understand how you got to this Brahmanism. Can you let me know what ur reference is?

- Avkrishna

Interesting...still prefer the Helenic stuff. Or `Thor` comics for that matter...I suggest the author also whip up a write-up on either/both...

Speaking of helenic stuff, one can`t help but notice that although there are similarities (namely the presence of a rich mythology), that Hindiusm`s self-conception seems more similar to less-developed totemestic and shaminestic faiths (aboriginals in North America/Australia) than the Greecko Roman ones...

I wonder if at one point those `faiths` also developed a comprehensive cosmology/philosophy....

Abrahamic religions ( Jewish/Christian/Islam ) :
submit to/please some imagined abstract entity in some imagined abstract alien world.

Eastern religions : Pray to the mother nature. Nature is god.

vertex:
``Speaking of helenic stuff, one can`t help but notice that although there are similarities (namely the presence of a rich mythology), that Hindiusm`s self-conception seems more similar to less-developed totemestic and shaminestic faiths (aboriginals in North America/Australia) than the Greecko Roman ones... ``

...anything is better than what one has rejected!

Avkrishna # 29

Brahmanism (not Brahminism) instead Hinduism was my two pence inclusion. That would have defined the Dharma better - rather than an unrelated word with metaphyisical connotation.

Dullabhatti # 8

I had to cut out few countries with very small Hindu minority to keep article short. Nepal has Hindu majority.

Mog # 2

I had to keep about 2000 words - so all long explanations, frills etc had to be removed.

Satyamvada # 14

After continous cycles of Samsara (reincarnation), when Moksha (liberation) is achieved, eternal goal of happiness is achieved. I used the word Salvation as I felt that it conveyed the same sense as eternal happiness. It was my addition and you noticed it.

Dost-Mitter # 28

I had originally used the secondary title as ``Hinduism for Dummies`` but then I cut it out thinking that it could create some controversy.

A few more points in no specific order.

# God is a forgiving entity. There is not much by way of anger or lack of forgiveness.

# Creativity is encouraged. Even the mythology modernises and evolves with time.

# There is a clear distinction between religion and state. Which is why whenever State tries to impose, it loses out.

# There is no centralisation or father figure. Commercial aspects of religion are often localised.

Yes, many Hindus have no idea of the Vedas or the Upanishads.

At the same time, many Indians have no idea about the spread of Hinduism, in the past, way beyond what is the Indian sub-Continent today.

Urstruly is beginning to sound like Ispahani and vice-versa now, after this article.

Thanks NZ khan for your article.
You have quoted the stanza about different interpretation of truth by Kafir sages.
A parrallel composition is ``As all rains falling on earth finally go to sea ,different way you show gratitude and love expressed goes to same ``god``.( god is not proper world but i do not know better)
Jew, Christian and Islam are monist religion. Our cry is ``there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the last messenger``. I think difference of ethos you have put masterly.
I was fortunate to collect many english hindu religion, literature when was student in our oldest University in Karachi. In 1966 they decided to make way to get read of Hindu things. Being book worm assistant in library told me take all you want as we are throwing it. I was able to pick up many major works along with commentary in English by Mallinath. ( Can any body tell me some thing about Mallinath)

Only you are wrong in technical detail about Swastika. It is not same swastika as kafir hindus. It is my feeling Hitlar picked from Roman traditions . Hindu Kafir Swastika Sign is mirror image of Nazi swastika. The dirction of stands of figure in opposite direction. So jews understand difference and do not take offense of Hindu kafir Swastika.
I wonder on technical basis can hindus be called Kufr? As they have atleast five major holy books. ( But technically they can be called Kufr as old testament common to all three monist religions is not holy book to them). Problems associated with monist religions and creating a special ethos have been studied over atleast 150 years. In karachi in 70s a russian author`s 2 book was available cheaply sold by mir publication by V.Beltov ( Georgy plakhenov), if my memory is write titles were Development of Monist view of history and Anthrapological characters of human history. The book was published after American civil war,. ( Book was authered in 1860s).
I liked great poems of mahabharat and ramayan. I consider Ramayan is moral science and mahabharat is social science.
Best of all i liked the starting of both poems. I have read little poetry and novels but the start of both is great Pathos.
Mahabharat starts with start of war and human weakness of great warrier and and it descends to dialogue of two intelligent people its amazing.
Ramayan starts on very different setting. A sage is meditating and has finished that and thinking of getting up. He sees a hunter with bow about send a arrow to shoot flying bird. He calls on hunter `` Hunter stop it`` the arrow is already released and hits the mail birds fetally and he falls to ground with scream. The female ``kroch`` bird dives screaming to ground and after realiazing what has happened screms with sorrow and rises. This pathos touches Swamy Walmiki`s heart and he starts story of King Rama and story is born. That pathos of life of even idealied King Rama does not end even after all tribulations and loosing of his believed wife as Raj Dharma over rides personal happiness. That pathos is also caught in Uttar Ramcharitra by Bhavbhooti famously.

Inquiry: Recently Mr. Somebody quoted a saying by Rama about this land and mother ( land and mother is more to me than this great land of Shree lanka). It is Quotation from ``raghuvansha`` by Kalidas ?
Thanks again for this short concise article about cultural development od our blood enemies the Hindus of India. As its better to know than you enemy, ignorance is not bliss in coming wars starting with water wars.

I cannot be swayed by religions that originated in Punjab and Arab. Both are psychotic nations.

Wat d’ya say Nikki dude?

Sameerjb -- makes `some` good points.

People seem to think that somehow `Monotheism` is better then `Polytheism` ,
but that is an useless argument. Monotheism and Polytheism are all valid
words only in the context of religions like Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

Among the dharmic panths, words such as Monotheism and Polytheism do not
make any sense. In my previous post, I had pointed out that the concept of
a ``God`` as defined in religion is non-existent in the dharmic panths. So words such
as polytheism and monotheism are meaningless in the context of dharma.

Jang,
In #19 You commented about turkish invasions giving rise to bhakti etc.
All that is communist spin. Sanskrit was the link language for scholars by then.
Scholars all over India used to write the Sanskrit language but in the local script.
There are numerous (in millions) sanskrit palm-leaf manuscripts in local scripts
found all over India. There is now a program to preserve them
( Check out http://www.namami.nic.in/ http://acharya.iitm.ac.in/palm_leaf.html )
In addition, there was already tremendous amount of literature in all languages
of the time. In fact, most of the old literature in other Indian languages is based
on Sanskrit literature itself. Communists try to spin a dreadful period into something
else.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Ahmad Madani

Legend has it that some German soldiers had noticed the Swastika in Finland during WW1. The Swastika, also known as the hakenkreuze, was used by the Freikorps as an emblem. The Freikorps were basically free lance rightwing paramilitary in 1920s Germany constituted of WW1 veterans. Hitler then took the swastika as a symbol from them. The black,red and white color combo was his own creation.

re:#40 by stuka
I think Hitler lifter the symbol from India. He called it swastika but it actually is a crooked cross, different from the Hindu symbol used so commonly in the North (it is not so common in the South).
In the south, a far more common symbol curiously resembles the star of David. It is the symbol of Kartikeya, the son of Shiva, also called Muruga or Kumara in the South. He is worshipped in this form (without a statue) in the temple of Kataragama, Srilanaka.
Sridhar

re: the name of HIndu religion
As Dost mittarji rightly says, there is no equivalent of a religion in Indic civilizations. Religion, as per the western definition, is something with a founder (usually a prophet), a holy book and followers of that prophet and the book. If this definition is followed, we have Islam, Judaism, christianity, Sikhisim, Jainism, Buddhism. But, this definition can`t be applied to hinduism as there is no single founder and no single holy book. So, we have several religions within this broad definition of hinduism. The word ``sanatana dharma`` as used by the author is apt.

re: the date of the Indus Valley Civilization, it is now known by satellite imagery that the bed of saraswati river dried up by ~ 1900 BC. Since Rig Veda (the earliest Veda) has several references to this river, it can be said that this was written at least by 1900 BC, perhaps several centuries earlier. This throws every other dates speculated by the western authors into the dustbin.
Graham Hancock (author of a very readable book ``Underworld: mysterious origin of civilizations) is a marine archeologist with active interest in the archeology of IVC, underwater findings off the coast of Gujarat, among others. This is from this website:

http://www.grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=137702&t=137319
``Evidence from French SPOT satellite and the Indo-French field study have changed this conception of history. By showing that the Saraswati ceased to be a mighty river long before 3,000 BC, they showed that the Rig Vedic civilization must have begun long before the Saraswati became a seasonal trickle sometime long before 3,000 BC. If the Rig Vedic tradition began before 3,500 BC, this would date it earlier the civilizations of Egypt, Harappa, or Mesopotamia.``
It just keeps getting more and more interesting!
Sridhar

re:#26 by sattar2
I just mentioned that tale (of Ganesha) in the passing. As you know, hindus do not take these things seriously. Besides, there is a plethora of Gods with their own stories, all of which enrich that religion but when was the last time u saw 2 hindus fighting over his/her religion? It has somehow concretised into the mind of a hindu that these Gods are mere symbols behind the changeless eternity that other religions call as ``Allah`` or ``Jehova`` or just ``God``.
`` aakashat patitam toyam yatha gachchati saagaram
sarvadeva namaskarah keshavam pratigachati``
(Just like all water falling down from the clouds reach the same source viz the ocean, all the prayers go back to the same source viz one single God).
Sridhar

Although I am told to keep my anus shut, but I cannot help ask this question. I think the origin of Hinduism is based on the concept that the fire must be preserved at all costs. It is the same fire that aliens introduced to the savages thousands of years ago. The savages soon learned that fire actually preserves life like nothing else. It keeps them warm, it keeps them safe from beasts, it provided light to see in the horrific jungle at night, it cooked food and so on and so forth. In earier societies there were some people in the tribe who were designated solely to protect the fire. All they had to do was to sit near the fire and keep throwing dead wood into the fire while rest of the tribe toiled to hunt and gather. Pretty soon these fire preservers realized that they were freeloaders and may lose their jobs anytime when other people will find other ways to make fire, so they started pretending that they did more than preserve fire - they pretended to be thinkers. So in this process of thinking and a strong urge of self-preservation first they started projecting themselves as holymen who were trusted by aliens with fire. These guys thus became the Brahmins or Brahmans. It makes sense since hinduism is not a ``revealed`` religion but a ``concieved`` religion which even its adherents admit. In other words anyone who claims to be a hindu can do his own stuff as long as he is performing certain rituals as prescribed by brahmans, they are good hindus. In other words this religion has no moral values but the diktats that brahman conveys as a sage or sai baba. In Hinduism rituals are constant but values keep on changing thus. In other words, hinduism thus is not a religion but a set of rituals. The rituals define a set of belief which in turn change as the apprehension of reallity changes in the mind of brahman. Thus today what is a poisonous snake may become naag devta tomorrow and vice versa.

This is pretty amazing. The capability of human beings to create their own reality is amazing. But what is reality then? What is out there?

Read Eknath Easwaran, too, though he doesn`t explain it half as gently and easily as NHK.

Urstruly, who would have thought you would be a closet Hindu? OUTing with this article, then. The answer to your question, what`s out there, makes for the foundations for most scriptures anyways. May i suggest a commune with nature, preferably ocean borne, as help?

And never mind the anal references by those who`ve obviously been there, many of us enjoy your wit.

Though I must admit one thing - there has been a (grateful) abscence of the Pakistani shouting brigade on this board. Nor have we heard from the Protectors of Both Faiths either.

Urstruly

You are absolutely correct! Thats why Vedantic philosophy and practices has attracted the attention of many duffers in the west. Duffers such as Thoreau, Emerson, Aldous Huxley, Oppenheimer and too many others to count.

Arent we grateful to have such a genius in our midst? I bow in sheer awe.

Nikki7777 eak baat saaf hae teri behen ko kisi punjabi ne choda hae woh bhi bina paise diye
suchh na

Khamkhwa # 5

(isn`t anything sacred anymore?a maleecha teaching us about the dharma...ram ram...)

Since I knew precious little about the subject, I decided to find more.

I have no problem with the core philosophy of Dharma which pretty much has a touch of universality about it - and could form the basis of any old or new faith.

I am also OK with the complete freedom of choice of rituals - the expression of spirtuality.

The concept of different approaches, lack of a finality and the non-metaphysical concept of Brahman is also appealing.

Nazar

A great article. One small point I`d like to make.

`Ekam sat, viprah bahudha vadanti`

actually means - ``Truth is one: Sages talk of it in many ways``

which is slightly different from ``Sages know it as many``. It basically talks of people having different conceptual frameworks to ``explain`` the Truth (Brahman). I think anyone who could be defined as a ``Sage` should be able to `see` the unity of ``Truth``.

IMHO

Satish

Nazar saab,

How very convenient!! Write a piece after `researching` the material in a free, open-source Encyclopaedia, add the pleasantries, ‘great religion’, ‘amazing concepts’ ET all. And then, back to the old lore. Bemoan the rise of Hindutva - political movement; say forcefully that it has nothing to do with the grand and noble traditions of the `Sanathan Dharma`.

Propagating, preaching and forcefully converting people to political religions like Islam, Christianity and Judaism are fair enough. If the `pagans`, gentiles, polytheists and infidels rise against this, “thou shalt resort to moral preaching” and remind them that their religion teaches them to accept and not reject the arrogance of monotheism as propounded by illiterate ass-riding Arabs and demented Hebrew slaves. Tell them to get back from the roads and practical positions to their lofty moral pedestal, so that they can be converted at ease, like it was done all over the world.

Hindutva supporters can`t forget that the Buddhist civilization of Gandhara has been destroyed, and their inheritors Afghans have become so stupid that they believe Buddha statues were made by Jinns. Destroy Hindutva, and the road to destroying the last bastion of pagan faiths is clear.

Sorry sir,

The real intentions are clear!! And benign Hindu died when that fanatic ‘Alamgir’ destroyed the Shiva temple at Kashi. I read somewhere that he is described as ``tarkashi maa raa khudangi akhareen`` (the last arrow in the quiver of Muslim power in India) by Iqbal, a poet venerated in “the land of the pure”.

Rahulmal # 49

I had said that any faith-based political ideology is eventually disruptive. If ``Hindutva`` is not faith-based, I have no problem with it being a political philosophy.

Though word ``Hindu`` was originally never linked with any faith - and ``Hinduism`` is an artificial term given by the British, - The Supreme Court ruling of 1966 has legally linked it all up.

As Vaajpye said, Indianness is a much better and a safer term to use for nationalism than ``Hindutva`` (meaning Hinduness).

Urstruly#44:
Have you heard of `chiraagh tale andhera!`? When the qur`an tells you to go to the end of the world (china) to gain knowledge, it does not mean that you should ignore the knowledge found in your own house. And as far as I can see, your knowledge of your own house is limited to reading the likes of your ex PM, Ch. Mohammad Ali, whose profound statement about ancient India was that it produced nothing worth mentioning. May I suggest that if you do not have time to read, pay a visit to the museum in Taxila, Lahore or even New York to find out about your real roots - the ones from which you are inseparable no matter how loudly you claim to reject them.

chowk staff:
re #47: I think that this belongs in the ``unplugged``.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Sridhar,

Jainism and Buddhism - do not have founders !

Mahavira in the Jain tradition is the 24th tirthankara , Gautama is only considered
one who became ``Buddha``. There have been and there exists many worlds and
world has been going for a long time, so no-one in any of the Indic traditions claim
to be a ``Founder``.

When one ``founds`` something, that implies a time and space horizon, which would mean
its limitation and non-universality. Also, there is no ``holybook`` for the Buddhists or the
Jains. Certain ignoramuses claim the ``Dhammapada`` as the holy-book of the Buddhist,
similiar claims are made that the Gita is the holy book of Hindus etc. All this is completely
wrong.

There is no one ``holybook`` - but the Dharmic panths have a whole library of books and
in addition, a Guru-shishya parampara for the various schools of thought and a host of
scholars. Over a period of times, new scholarly works are added on.

dost mittar: You are mistaken about unplugged. We actually have some real humor there. And the average IQ level is higher than many single-topic folks on the front page. You should come by unplugged sometime.

re: Sanatana Dharma: a unique way of life?
I won`t call this a religion but a unique way of life.
All monotheistic religions talk about one God. So, where does that God live? Is He in some particular galaxy or constellation? Or is he everywhere?
The moment we say He is in a particular place, we go against the very definition of God: one who is beyond time and space.
Hindus believe He is both immanent and transcendent. He is everywhere: between the atoms and also in the empty space between the galaxies. Hence, Hindus find God in nature, even in animal forms. Tagore said `` when you see beauty, know that it is God``. This is the one surviving major religion that worships God in nature and also God in its female aspect. One may like to ask the christians why their God is always a male. Why is it the Holy father and not the Holy mother?
Sages in India accepted even the tribal religions into their fold and made this into a polytheistic religion in practice but it really is monotheistic in its belief system as everyone knows that there is one Brahman and everything else is a manifestation of that.
IF sages had fought these tribal traditions, they may or may not have prevailed in making this a monotheistic religion. In such a case, there would be one holy book: the vedas, and one God,the Brahman. Such a religion would be very poor indeed! Sages put into practice what they had come to experience by their own austerities: that everything is borne out of God and hence, even the tribal belief system (idol worship, ritualistic practices) has a place.

Today, we find the major monotheistic religions of the world (judaism, Islam, Christianity) fighting each other. Do u find any friction between the eastern mystical religions (Hinduism, zen, buddhism, Taoism)? There is a kind of spiritual freemarket in these belief systems and it is upto an individual to advance spiritually. These are not community religions. Hence, they are in no way competing with each other, the way the 3 major monotheistic religions are.
Sridhar

Ref Urstruly #44

The idea of keeping the fire going occurs in Zorastrianism as well. The Parsis worship fire and the sacred fire in their temples is not allowed to go out.

A highly orthodox Brahmin household -- I don`t believe even a single one exists in today`s India -- would have the sacred fire going at all times. Not a roaring fire but fire tamped down so that the rice husks will be glowing like embers and the fire can be re-started by blowing on it and adding kindling.

At least, the keepers of the fire used their free time productively by making scientific observations. After all, they were among the first people on earth to determine the circumference of the earth and the distance between the earth and the moon; they understood that the Sun was the center of the known planetary system and not Earth; they knew of the existence of at least 7 planets; could predict the seasons and the solar and lunar eclipses; figured out both the lunar and the solar calendar and knew that the year was 365 days long; they knew the major stars and constellations. They wrote epic tales such as the Ramayana and the Mahabharatha, plays such as Mrichakatika and Malavika-Agnimitra. They realized it is better to live and let live rather than kill and held non-violence to be the highest ideal man could aspire to. One of them held his feet firmly planted on earth and wrote the first book on governance and statecraft called ``Arthasastra``.

Now compare that to the worthless wastes of life like Soysauce whose ancestors, while performing the useful occupation of tending cattle, used their considerable spare time not in scientific speculation or writing poetry but engaging in circle jerks.

You would have to admit that the fire-keepers turned out to be more valuable after all.

re: Hindu religion
This site is rich with info:
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduwaymain1.htm
Sridhar

Ref kaurasach #25

[We had a ``Shastri`` teacher who taught Sanskrit. It took him 30 years of learning to attain the status.

One day he substituted our regular teacher and to entertain us, went over the word forming of the language. He wrote several words and then removed a letter or added a letter to change the meanings and their relationships to each other.

It was like scientific discipline. I was impressed and still am vowed by the experience.

Persons who penned these Veds, Shastars, Granths in Sanskrit were amazaing genius.]

Sanskrit grammar is highly ``formal`` in the way mathematicians use the term.

When John Backus of IBM introduced the BNF (Backus Normal Form) notation to describe the algorithmic lanuage Algol, it was suggested that since the BNF definition was very close to the Sanskrit grammar of Panini that BNF should instead be called Backus-Panini Form.

I remember reading a book on Sanskrit grammar written in 1905 by an Englishman who was professor of Sanskrit at Srinagar College. While admitting that Sanskrit grammar is more regular and consistent than the grammar of any other language, he condemned the use of the null (non-existent) term as an artificial device to preserve such regularity. Some 55 years after his book (and 3000 years after Panini), BNF repeatedly uses the null term in the definition of algoritnmic languages for computers.

As to those who created Sanskrit and its grammar, they knew exactly what they were doing.

That is why they named the language ``Sanskrit``, meaning ``refined``. Since no further improvement was possible or needed in the grammar, they also declared it to be the language of the gods!

re:#44 by Urstruly
No sane person would read this guy`s post. He has been told to keep his rear end closed to the outside world but he does not seem to listen. Would i be curious about his views on Hinduism? Heck, no! I think the guy is a hateful moron.
My advice to him: keep your scars on your body (acquired during training with Al-Qaida) well covered. If he is still living in USA, i am told that they are now looking for such scars.
This is from the CBS News:
http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=338546

(CBS News Correspondent Bob Orr reports the Department of Homeland Security has issued an alert that warns customs officers at six of America`s busiest airports to watch for travelers of Pakistani descent who show physical signs of preparing for terror attacks against the U.S.

The bulletin says, ``Officers should look for rope burns, unusual bruises, wounds/scars or other evidence that they engaged in paramilitary training...``)
My advice to Mullah Urstruly:
cover your burn/bruise marks, scars etc. Stop worrying about hinduism. Uncle Sam is watching you. If your rear end continues to stink, it will be another trip to Gunatanama Bay, this time for a much longer time.
Sridhar

Nazar saab,

I recount my experience with a very close friend who is a Muslim. The topic drifted to religion and what it means. He parroted the ``way of life``. God knows this is the vaguest term for describing something with such a profound effect. But, this is in vogue these days, probably because Mr. Gandhi used it first.

Anyway, the discussion continued and we came to political aspects of Islam. And I started asking questions that are too close for comfort. Finally, he gave up and said, ``Islam is not all about piety, there is a political angle to it``.

And Sir,

This is what I`m saying. All these Semitic religions have a political angle to it. Yes, there could be spirituality; people will quote Sufism and what not. But the core of these religions is community building and nurturing a sense of belonging to that community. So, Hinduism of Smritis and all those fancy sounding scriptures can`t ever compete with something like Islam or Christianity. It would require Hindutva or political Hinduism - a set of people who speak on the behalf of Hindus, who dare to say that India is the only country that gives Haj subsidies while taxing Hindus for their pilgrimages. India needs people who dare to stand up against the communists who are hell-bent on dividing the land in `manageable` small portions, who fight at the social, political and religious levels to counter the multi-billion dollar conversion industry, to raise their voice against married Hindu women who have kids being abducted, converted to Islam and married off to goons (heard about Kanchan Mishra).

Islam doesn`t need this; it has in-built political structures. And all those who are opposed to Hindutva are opposed to all the fancy things you researched in your article. Off-course, the subject is broached in a subtle way with pictures of Ansari boy holding his hands begging for his life in Gujarat flashed across the globe.

Use your resources, search the net, read books and let me know if you don`t feel that Hindutva slipping to Moditva is because of obduracy of anti-Hindu forces? As the voices against political Hinduism get shriller, the power of Modi and other hardcore elements will increase. High time , justice is done in India and not appeasement.

i wonder what would be written if one of the indian interactors on chowk wrote an article on islam ..... perhaps gujju bania or nikki or ralph or sadna or nb can write such an article ! hahaha --

Mr Khan, I really am impressed! I`ve known a lot of Muslims who know about Hinduism, but Pakistanis on chowk seem to be completely clueless about it. I don`t care if you just got it from a search engine as has been suggested-the important thing is that you were interested and you learned.
I must be a more knowledgable Hindu than most, though, because there wasn`t anything here I didn`t know! And I never thought I was! The mistake about the swastika`s been pointed out already. I would also like to add that Hinduism has always had some aggressive elements-this is not the invention of the Sangh. Krishna is gentle and romantic and loving, but He goaded Arjuna to fight when it was time to do so. India was ripe for the taking by the 10th or 11th century with infighting, and following that Hinduism had to be `soft` to survive. I do not agree with much of what the RSS says, but they have a valid place in Hindu society, even if that place is only to be ignored. Any way of life or religion must accomodate all personalities. To me, the important thing is that it must not interfere with the rights of other peace-loving people.

Good one Mr. Khan,

Despite the upheavals in its history, there have been many genuine contributions too in South Asia. The foremost is the Hindu philosophy followed by its varied music, dance forms, and of course its cuisine. The nice thing about Hinduism is it allows people to practise atheism and still call themselves Hindus. The mythologies - Ramayana and Mahabharatha, if not for anything else make for good stories. Like someone pointed out earlier, shortcomings in Hindu icons appear in these two at many places. To the uninitiated, this makes their comprehension of the subject all the more complex. Krishna advocating Arjuna to `strike in the back` of Karna while his chariott is sunk in the earth, Bheema killing Duryodhana by hitting on his weakest part -- his thigh, Rama aiming at Vali and striking him with his arrow behind his back

---

all of these can make a Hindu a supporter of the underdogs -- the `villains` in these two mythologies :). In other words, Dharma had to be put on the backburner for the short-term to achieve Dharma in the long-run again, and quickly.


Its true that the lack of a central authority, the lack of rigid tenets in Hinduism, are its unique strengths. It would be nice though, for religion to weigh less in the subcontinent, and worldly matters to gain more space.

Sameer # 23,

Been a long time. Where have you been?

I agree with your observations, and have felt that indians have always been made to feel defensive or inferior about their culture and practices by outsiders. That in my opinion is one of the prime reasons for the rise of hindutva. Most of these hindutvawadis want to shape hinduism like any other abrahamic faith. Shiv sainiks in mumbai try to have mass prayers every wednesday, kind of like sunday prayers and friday prayers by christians and muslims.
Monotheism is the fashion of todays world. All such label creations by abrahamic faiths have the purpose of attracting people to their fold and maintaining a distinct identity. Without this identity, they will gradually merge with other cultures and traditions, something which none of these faiths can digest. 2000 years ago india was a label free place in matters relating to spiritualism. I don`t think anyone in india then defined himself/herself by their personal faiths. This new label of identity was created only by the followers of abraham. Anyone without this label is deliberately separated by the followers in million ways. And I`m sure along with economic and millitary success of the monothesits, this has played a large part in creating this inferiority complex in hindus.
In modern india, part of this hindutva wadi fascism can be explained by our left leaning history books continuing the job of british in telling us that most of everything indian is mythological, inaccurate and shameful as compared to the glorious chapters of judeo-christian facts based faith. Believe it or not, our history books teach us the merits of british colonialism, by way of opening the doors for science and progressive outlook of the chritian west. What some hindutvawadis are trying now is to go to the other extreme in history books without looking at facts. And their are enough disgrutled indians who are realising how they have been robbed of a rightful honored image of themselves in this world by such leftists, only to fall too easily for the hindutva wadis.
Sorry for the digression, but i thought of giving you an indian`s perspective on the actual hinduism vs. hindutva.

Adios

kuarasach

[Scientific approach does not mean science is involved...]

That`s news to me! LOL!

[though their is a lot science in Hinduism. My remark was in general about Hinduism not the article.]

And so too should have been my remark. Appologies for any misunderstanding. Still, what you say is hard to swallow.

[Aritsts, astrologists, social scientists - all use some kind of scientific approach. ]

The word you are looking for is ``methodology``.

[The Hindu religion has calculated approach to different aspects of life. Even sex is researched in famous Kamasutra.]

They have a `caluclated` approach for astrology as well, but there`s no way in hell that should be considered `scientific`.

kuarasach

[Scientific approach does not mean science is involved...]

That`s news to me! LOL!

[though their is a lot science in Hinduism. My remark was in general about Hinduism not the article.]

And so too should have been my remark. Appologies for any misunderstanding. Still, what you say is hard to swallow.

[Aritsts, astrologists, social scientists - all use some kind of scientific approach. ]

The word you are looking for is ``methodology``.

[The Hindu religion has calculated approach to different aspects of life. Even sex is researched in famous Kamasutra.]

They have a `caluclated` approach for astrology as well, but there`s no way in hell that should be considered `scientific`.

omar_r_quraishi

Dear editor, kindly widen your horizons. It will surprise you but I knew very little of what Nazar ji has written in this article. Indian media sources do not have a very high religious content.

Contrast that with your own newspaper. Dawn`s opinion columns drip with praises of Islam almost every other week. You surely do not leave any need for anyone else to write about the religion.

dost,

``...anything is better than what one has rejected! ``

Don`t really think helenic thought was so `rejected` although their pantheon of `gods` may no longer be worshipped, the stories themselves live on and continue to be highly influential, esp in literature.

Quite frankly, Helenic thought is more entertaining and profound (imho)...very deep stuff and not nearly as wishy-washy as that ``sound of one hand clapping``, or endless cycles of this-and-that kind of vague philosophizing (for God`s sake, this has to be the most elaborate and verbose way to say `I really don`t know what the heck is going on!`).

Having said that, the cultural richness of India can`t be beat.

Sorry NHK u suck!

I need not to read ur story or article whatever u may want to call it....the fact remain that suck big time!!!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Maharana #65

This is a very important comment, especially in understanding ``hindutva``.

[quote]
I agree with your observations, and have felt that indians have always been made to feel defensive or inferior about their culture and practices by outsiders.
[end-quote]

I have met Hindus who believe they are monotheists (in the abrahamanic sense), who think that the Bhagavat Gita is a sacred text (NOT! it is maybe a key text but as a hindu I have a right to debate its contents) like the Torah/Koran etc. All of this is confounded by the recent attempts of Shiv Sena/Bajrang Dal to create an islamized/talibanized hindu identity.

The dharma faith traditions or indic traditions have their own vocabulary and concepts. We should not use terms like ``idol worship``, ``monotheism`` or ``polytheism`` when discussing indic traditions. They are meaningless terms in this context, one might as well try to definitively establish the color of water.

Take forms of worship for example: our traditional term is ``sakar`` (with form) or ``nirakar`` (without form). Both are viewed as acceptable WITHOUT ANY PREJUDICE TOWARDS ONE OR THE OTHER. We should never accept derogatory or hateful descriptions like ``idol worship`` anymore than one should describe jews/muslims as ``fanatical monotheists``.

As moderm communication and literacy become more prevalent, I would propose that a system more like the IETF and its standard creation process be used to advance indic traditions. In other words, a modern equivalent of ``samvad`` debate traditions combined with room for different ``sampradaya`` be developed. This is a topic that deserves much more detailed amplification but even a cursory look at:

http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/structure.html

http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/rfc/rfc2026.txt

makes clear the ``one truth but many paths`` flavor of the organization. No wonder so many of the participants somehow turn out to be american buddhists (:-

# 69

I agree with vertex on this one. We shouldn`t throw the word `science` around loosely. That is not to negate very impressive scientific achievements by Indians. Only scientific claims for religions are very hard to swallow and even harder to sustain.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Dost Mitter

I can understand how and why hindus are so insistent on re-writing (as opposed to re-interpretting) history that you had to bring in an irrelevant point into the discussion. But since you brought it up, how about this historically in-accurate and non-sensical comment made by NHK in this article when he says that ``Political Hinduism is a phenomenon only a few decades old in a history of 4000 years and is confined to only India.``

Logically speaking, and this logic is backed up by every similar incident in history in any part of the world and culture, the so called Political Hinduism must start on the date when Mohammad Bin Qasim set foot on the soil of sindh. From 710AD when MBQ arrived in sindh and 1050AD when Ghaznavi carried out his invasion towards East there must be a Hindu political activism. We also see that while Raja JayPal was carrying out his invasions of Afghanistan against Subuktageen (Ghaznavi`s father) and later against Ghaznavi, which is one of the core reasons why Ghaznavi invaded the territories that were later to be called Hindustan by Mughals, Jay pal had friendly relationship with the Muslim rulers of sindh and so did the clergy at Somanath. From that to Pirthvi Raj Chauhan there must be Hindu political activism that must have resulted in resistance. There has to be, when one`s religion, culture, history, places of worship are attacked and destroyed and there must be Hindu nationalism that must emerge in the people. As compared to that take sikhs, for example, who became a major thorn in the sides of Mughals within hundered years of the founding of that religion. My question is, why that so called Hindu nationalism did not emerge in the 900 years of Muslim rule and only emerged in the last few decades (as a matter of fact as british took control of the helm). Even jews, in the face of holocaust were able to establish effective resistance groups throughout Europe against Nazis. Why couldn`t Hindus do the same. So either NHK is lying and incorrect when he says that Hindu nationalism emerged in only last few decades ``This could be termed as yet another fall out of the two-nation theory`` as he puts it or Hindu Nationalism based on resistance to Muslim Occupation was always there. So if it was there, then where was it. And if it wasn`t there then probably Hindus did not feel a need to have a Nationalistic aspiration because their religion, culture, values and history were never threatened by Muslims in the last millenium. My question is why not Hindus felt threatened by the arrival of Muslims and on the other hand they only felt threatened when Muslims started the departure. Why political Hinduism now; why re-writing the history now?

ahmadmadani:
Welcome back. You bring a breath of fresh air to this forum. Interact more often if you can.

``I was fortunate to collect many english hindu religion, literature when was student in our oldest University in Karachi. In 1966 they decided to make way to get read of Hindu things. Being book worm assistant in library told me take all you want as we are throwing it.``

Such hatred! such disrespect for knowledge, if not for their own roots is mind boggling. If this is what the university of a tolerant place like Karachi did, one can only imagine what might have happened at places like Lahore and Peshawar. I knew that the islamisation of Pakistan started much earlier than the much-maligned Zia, but what you say is really astounding. Where did such hatred come from? One could understand if this had happened in 1947, but in 1966? Pakistanis like to quote how muslims preserved the knowledge base of Greeks during the medieval period and neither does the quran teach destruction of knowledge, so what`s the source of this boorish behaviour?

``I wonder on technical basis can hindus be called Kufr?``

I guess that some hindus could be and not the others. Among those who would be in the kufr category, for sure, would be the jains and the buddhists.

``I consider Ramayan is moral science and mahabharat is social science.``
An astute observation!

BTW can you or anyone else tell me the difference between monism and monotheism?

vertex:
I did not mean to downgrade the greek thought. I think that the western renaissance would have come earlier if Christianity had not intervened.


harimau:
``Since no further improvement was possible or needed in the grammar, they also declared it to be the language of the gods!``
...I really am wary of claims of perfection, whether wrt grammar or wrt holy scipture.

Looking at the title, I thought that Nazar has written about his visit to Santa Ana, California with his friend Dharma :-(

Please pass a barf bag.....

Nazar has tried to whitewash the satanic cow/rat/reptile worshipping cult. He glossed over ``Brahmin was made from Brahma`s head, Shudra from Brahma`s feet and Kapoor from Brahma`s arse`` dictum which legalizes aparthied in the society. He overlooked the cult santioned female infanticide, he bypassed all the filth and presents us with this rosy-rosy nicey-nicey picture of the most evil religous cult in mankind`s history.

But hey! there is some attraction in a `create-your-own-deity` or `deity-a-la-carte` belief system. Like the San Franciscan butt-boys are headed towards Hyderabad to worship the latest Madrasi Deity, The Sai Baba`s Linga!

P.S. Vertex, the cult is indeed scientific..... the best Indian brains in medical science are trying to discover the cures hidden in holy cow`s liquid output, and the geniuses at IIT are learing scientific vedic astrology !!

nhk: Just read your article. Very nice overview of hinduism, and ties different aspects together. I see no mention of the caste system, and how it evolved. E.g., I believe it is not mentioned in any of the scriptures, but was a tradition that developed as Aryans sought to establish their superiority over the locals whom they overran.

Ahmed Madani,

You write ``In 1966 they decided to make way to get read of Hindu things..``

This shows that the Pakistani state was implementing its ideology long before Zia.
The apologists on this site like Mantolives, tahmed etc rant at Zia. But you have
now confirmed that Zia was merely one more addition to the process that was
already underway in the ``land of the pure``.

Also, I am impressed that you know about the details of the ``Krauncha`` bird and
how it influenced Valmiki

Knowing about the Kafir is useful too :)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

The purpose of this article is what?

To decry `loss of tolerance` of Hindus, to urge the return of `tolerance` aka unilateral disarmament in dealing with your murderous compatriots? I suggest you forget it. Only very few romantics believe that Pakistan has any workable liberalism left that `tolerant` Indians and Hindus can work with.

Hinduism holds an unimpeachable position as the identifier of enemy to be killed, of idolators and polytheists whose influence is to be shunned or cleansed however ancient its antecedents in your land, of a people whom the father of the nation was determined could be dealt with only with two armies between. Under the pretext of holding the Hindus at bay, Pakistanis have had no compunction about killing thousands of Bengalis, Afghans, Kashmiris who were fellow MUSLIMS. What more is there to know?

It would be more to the purpose if you wrote on the Ahmedi or Jewish faiths instead or on modern salafism. Pakistanis have to actually coexist with those.

Vertex –

I do agree with you on Hellenic history and the way it is reflected upon by the western civilization. The West grew out of it, the East didn’t. Of course, a fan convinced can argue, people who lived 5000 or 3000 years ago knew a lot more than we do today. Unlike the Western, the ancient Eastern images and folklore remain very powerful going into the twentyfirst century. To each his own.

Re this article: perform a “research,” look up an encyclopedia, cut and paste, put something together and call it “an article.” Voila! The exoteric rules!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts