What I wonder is: would the gods really want us to give food to them instead of those that are in more urgent need of it, for appreciation and whatnot, rather than survival?
No wait, forget it, I should know better than to enter these discussions. Sorry.
This.
Plus I believe its the same in all the religions. I know a few hindu people who visits temple everyday just to thank the god for everything they are blessed with but they equally help the poor and hungry people they come across. And thats the point that counts. You can not help everyone in this world and remove poverty and world hunger but you can surely make difference by helping others near you.
So its not wrong to offer God but when you do that by ignoring the sufferings of others near you then its wrong.
What I wonder is: would the gods really want us to give food to them instead of those that are in more urgent need of it, for appreciation and whatnot, rather than survival?
No wait, forget it, I should know better than to enter these discussions. Sorry.
This.
Plus I believe its the same in all the religions. I know a few hindu people who visits temple everyday just to thank the god for everything they are blessed with but they equally help the poor and hungry people they come across. And thats the point that counts. You can not help everyone in this world and remove poverty and world hunger but you can surely make difference by helping others near you.
So its not wrong to offer God but when you do that by ignoring the sufferings of others near you then its wrong.
I don't get exactly what you are implying here. Exactly what do you know about that food you see in front of the Deity? Shouldn't you have shared what happens to it?
That food is distributed among devotes as Prasada after the prayers are over. If you are present there even you will get a share if you want. People who receive it also distribute it to their friends relative and so on. The people is the other picture would also get a share if they happen to be around. People do not eat prasad alone and those kid get a share if they are in the temple. It is believed that sharing it as much as you can is the best thing.
On Festive occasions people organise langar or Sadavart in temples - which means distributing free food or a meal for everyone and anyone, who would bother to join, them according to their personal capacity. Often other people support them by donating in the pool according to their wish.
But of course this information wouldn't suit your purpose I guess?
How come? if you throw a thanks giving/ christmas party or celebrate Id it's not awful but for it's awful for others if they have their own ceremonies?
I think the world will always, no matter what, have those who are unfortunate. It is cruel to say, but it's true.
But yeah that comparison is pretty awful. From what I read about, and from what my uncle personally experienced on his travels....hinduism is very violent, especially against the different factions within the religion
Hinduism is very violent? I'm sorry to say your uncle seems quite bigotted and biased if he made such comments. And yes you offended every Hindu with such an ignorant comment based on very limited information.
that's sad...it's easier for humans to look for comfort in a god than try to help each other and that's just really bad...
Just my opinion don't mean to offend anybody's religion beliefs.
People really need to avoid commenting unless they understand a concept. How do you know people are looking away? Hinduism doesn't tax it's followers with compulsory fixed donations or dogma. One can believe what they want and do what they wish. Even if someone is an atheist no one cares. It has a very rich culture and philosophy about which you probably know next to nothing if anything at all.
Posting two totally unrelated images out of context and asking for vote upon it and others seizing a chance to bash another religion- that's what I call sad.
I don't get exactly what you are implying here. Exactly what do you know about that food you see in front of the Deity? Shouldn't you have shared what happens to it?
That food is distributed among devotes as Prasada after the prayers are over. If you are present there even you will get a share if you want. People who receive it also distribute it to their friends relative and so on. The people is the other picture would also get a share if they happen to be around. People do not eat prasad alone and those kid get a share if they are in the temple. It is believed that sharing it as much as you can is the best thing.
On Festive occasions people organise langar or Sadavart in temples - which means distributing free food or a meal for everyone and anyone, who would bother to join, them according to their personal capacity. Often other people support them by donating in the pool according to their wish.
But of course this information wouldn't suit your purpose I guess?
How come? if you throw a thanks giving/ christmas party or celebrate Id it's not awful but for it's awful for others if they have their own ceremonies?
Hinduism is very violent? I'm sorry to say your uncle seems quite bigotted and biased if he made such comments. And yes you offended every Hindu with such an ignorant comment based on very limited information.
People really need to avoid commenting unless they understand a concept. How do you know people are looking away? Hinduism doesn't tax it's followers with compulsory fixed donations or dogma. One can believe what they want and do what they wish. Even if someone is an atheist no one cares. It has a very rich culture and philosophy about which you probably know next to nothing if anything at all.
Posting two totally unrelated images out of context and asking for vote upon it and others seizing a chance to bash another religion- that's what I call sad.
Lol I'm sorry, but I don't believe you witnessed a riot which lead to many murders by hindu extremists and barely escape with your life in the process.
...so if anyone's being offensive and bigoted, it's you!
the religion itself isn't violent, but some of the people are(not all of course), just like in every religion in the world.....and if you think that's not true, then you're being ignorant.
and for your information, my uncle respects hinduism. He studies it, travels to India to get a better grasp of it's roots and the practices, and then tells me about his experiences.
I don't get exactly what you are implying here. Exactly what do you know about that food you see in front of the Deity? Shouldn't you have shared what happens to it?
That food is distributed among devotes as Prasada after the prayers are over. If you are present there even you will get a share if you want. People who receive it also distribute it to their friends relative and so on. The people is the other picture would also get a share if they happen to be around. People do not eat prasad alone and those kid get a share if they are in the temple. It is believed that sharing it as much as you can is the best thing.
On Festive occasions people organise langar or Sadavart in temples - which means distributing free food or a meal for everyone and anyone, who would bother to join, them according to their personal capacity. Often other people support them by donating in the pool according to their wish.
But of course this information wouldn't suit your purpose I guess?
How come? if you throw a thanks giving/ christmas party or celebrate Id it's not awful but for it's awful for others if they have their own ceremonies?
Hinduism is very violent? I'm sorry to say your uncle seems quite bigotted and biased if he made such comments. And yes you offended every Hindu with such an ignorant comment based on very limited information.
People really need to avoid commenting unless they understand a concept. How do you know people are looking away? Hinduism doesn't tax it's followers with compulsory fixed donations or dogma. One can believe what they want and do what they wish. Even if someone is an atheist no one cares. It has a very rich culture and philosophy about which you probably know next to nothing if anything at all.
Posting two totally unrelated images out of context and asking for vote upon it and others seizing a chance to bash another religion- that's what I call sad.
Posting two totally unrelated images out of context and asking for vote upon it and others seizing a chance to bash another religion- that's what I call sad.
Lol I'm sorry, but I don't believe you witnessed a riot which lead to many murders by hindu extremists and barely escape with your life in the process.
...so if anyone's being offensive and bigoted, it's you!
Witnessed a random riot and decided to make a generalisation and decided an opinion about the whole history and culture which you eagerly posted here. OP didn't even ask opinion about Hinduism in particular but you grabbed the opportunity.
Seeing the population of India, long history (two thousand year of multicultural tradition alone) Hinduism is relatively peaceful. It's not an organised religion like the one most people in the western countries are familiar with.
It is the ignorant comments which generalise random incidence (which you claim to have witnessed by your uncle) that made your comment offensive and bigoted. Your uncle should start reading world history if he gave such an impression. And I mean honest study not a gutter inspection kind of news and history and out of context at that.
the religion itself isn't violent, but some of the people are(not all of course), just like in every religion in the world.....and if you think that's not true, then you're being ignorant.
I don't. Off course there are all kind of people everywhere. That's a pointless argument and if you think I would think that you are the one being ignorant.
and for your information, my uncle respects hinduism. He studies it, travels to India to get a better grasp of it's roots and the practices, and then tells me about his experiences.
I don't know your uncle. But the way your first post was made it contributed little to the actual thread topic TM was referring to and only resonate negativity. If you feel your 'uncle' got unfair criticism in some way sorry about that but you are yourself responsible to bring it upon him when you quoted him that way instead of focussing on the real question.
I don't see you commenting on the actual question raised by the OP- which was probably that people give more importance to religious fanfare rather than real problems worldwide, so yeah my opinion is that you simply let your 'biased slip' show, stands.
Witnessed a random riot and decided to make a generalisation and decided an opinion about the whole history and culture which you eagerly posted here. OP didn't even ask opinion about Hinduism in particular but you grabbed the opportunity.
Seeing the population of India, long history (two thousand year of multicultural tradition alone) Hinduism is relatively peaceful. It's not an organised religion like the one most people in the western countries are familiar with.
It is the ignorant comments which generalise random incidence (which you claim to have witnessed by your uncle) that made your comment offensive and bigoted. Your uncle should start reading world history if he gave such an impression. And I mean honest study not a gutter inspection kind of news and history and out of context at that.
I don't. Off course there are all kind of people everywhere. That's a pointless argument and if you think I would think that you are the one being ignorant.
I don't know your uncle. But the way your first post was made it contributed little to the actual thread topic TM was referring to and only resonate negativity. If you feel your 'uncle' got unfair criticism in some way sorry about that but you are yourself responsible to bring it upon him when you quoted him that way instead of focussing on the real question.
I don't see you commenting on the actual question raised by the OP- which was probably that people give more importance to religious fanfare rather than real problems worldwide, so yeah my opinion is that you simply let your 'biased slip' show, stands.
first of all I never said my uncle was the one that said it was violent, and I said "can" be violent....meaning not always violent, but has the potential to be. I didn't say hinduism is violent as a whole.
Secondly, I saw a pic of hinduism, I assumed the OP was talking about hinduism.
Thirdly, I never generalized.....I said "some" meaning not all and I said the "people" not the religion itself. Every religion has violent followers, even if the religion is peaceful.
I don't think any religion is made for the sole purpose of human-suffering, but the opposite.
....most events in India and in that part of the globe aren't even recorded in comparison to places such as the U.S. and Europe, so you can't just say something doesn't happen because there isn't even enough info on it.
Here is one such article that supports my comment
You must be registered for see links
I don't see how I would be biased if I don't belong to any religion? and I did answer the OP question....I said I think there will always be those who are unfortunate
and then I said hinduism can be pretty violent....because again, there is a pic of a hindu god there. If it was replaced with a christian symbol, I prob would have said the same.
then in my next comment, when the OP says he meant all religion...I replied,
I suppose, although when it boils down to it, you can't really blame anything other than humans
Yes religion is a factor, but when you actually read most of the religions, it actually says to lend a helping hand and try live virtuous lives....it's the people and human nature that twist it into something malicious
no religion is made with the sole intent of human suffering, but the opposite
first of all I never said my uncle was the one that said it was violent, and I said "can" be violent....meaning not always violent, but has the potential to be. I didn't say hinduism is violent as a whole.
Same as above. Read the previous post this issue has been done. And for the rest see the read part below.
Every religion has violent followers, even if the religion is peaceful.
I don't think any religion is made for the sole purpose of human-suffering, but the opposite.
....most events in India and in that part of the globe aren't even recorded in comparison to places such as the U.S. and Europe, so you can't just say something doesn't happen because there isn't even enough info on it.
That's pretty misguided assumption. Indian media isn't the kind to shut up about actions of majority. It's much more free than your Western media and culture on many levels. However it is very protective of minorities and seldom reports incidences where they are involved by name as to void any reaction from general masses.
Also it will do good if you can check who actually owns the major publishing houses and is more active on internet or visual media.
I can post dozen counter articles. I don't because I do not want it to escalate any further. I will just say this much:
Random news and articles which do not even cover the whole issue they are about mean little. Have your media ever reported the terrorism incidents in North Eastern regions of India led by the local churches? Or shows the Church's attempts to conversion based on total lies and misguidance-the way they keep making stories up replacing heroes in local legends and myths with some Christian icons? That usually every conversion means commission to the person who catches a convert and a certain sum of amount to the convert.
And yeah before you too worked up- Hindus in some of those states are almost wiped out. Except some older tribes which practice Animism its mostly Muslims or Christians tribe only now. We don't make it a large issue posting it everywhere to avoid spreading of negative feelings in rest of the country.
Such actions are bound to cause some conflict in the region and mostly such conversions make people in the same families/tribe/clan clash. Unless you can see the things in their whole perspective such arguments are not going to lead anywhere. If Hinduism was that violent Thomas the Apostle wouldn't have been allowed to establishing his churches here.
First Christians in India came here escaping the religious persecution in their own country in early centuries. Just like Parasis( worshippers of Zarathustra in local vocabulary) and Jews. All of them got a place to live with total freedom to practice their personal beliefs without any conditions ( while all three came here running away from each other). Not to forget the Buddhist and even Muslim refugees from Muslim countries. India has been a destination for seeking a peaceful place by a varied range of people from all over the world.
The history of the country proves that the major clashes started only after organised religions started proselytising and seeking converts often through not so nice tactics.
Habit of proselytising religions and their attempts to get wider support by false propaganda and media tactics is often annoying and adds to the negative feelings towards them. And off course not all Christians do that. Many realise what's going on and criticise such people among them. You should try Koenraad Elst and François Gautier, books sometimes to get the meaning.
The majority in India realises what it takes to carry people of so many different beliefs, languages, personal traditions and backgrounds and still keep it together for the most part. And that knowledge of how to handle it comes from traditional Hinduism and it's world view.
See how one things affect another and chain reactions start? Your comment made this thread totally useless for original discussion.
I don't see how I would be biased if I don't belong to any religion? and I did answer the OP question....I said I think there will always be those who are unfortunate
Yes. You did not say some people can be violent- You implied that riot was because of Hinduism itself. You keep repeating it and yet you claim to be unbiased and knowing about the subject you are talking about.
BTW I coloured your statements to highlight the contradiction in your statements- people versus religion and confirms what I understood from your post the first time around. ^^
Here is some food for your thought:
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
because again, there is a pic of a hindu god there. If it was replaced with a christian symbol, I prob would have said the same.
The same? You mean you would have lashed out at Hinduism out of blue still? Anyway lashing at any religion would have been out of context and meaningless. Read the thread topic sincerely next time and think before posting. This section is for serious discussions.
then in my next comment, when the OP says he meant all religion...I replied,
If you think your behaviour was not an ignorant one , even when you didn't even read the OP properly nor paid heed to the exact topic and grabbed at the chance to make a negative comment without proper analysis, suit yourself. I have nothing to say about that. My criteria of knowledgeable post is a bit different. That's all.
Read you own posts. You used your Uncle's name trying to back your comment. I'm not wasting my time repeating anything.
Of course. Reading is over rated and understanding the post is never a priority before posting in threads. Isn't it?
Same as above. Read the previous post this issue has been done.
No argument here.
That's pretty misguided assumption. Indian media isn't the kind to shut up about actions of majority. It's much more free than your Western media. It screams over little incidents. However it is very protective of minorities and seldom reports incidences where they are involved by name as to void any reaction from general masses.
I can post dozen counter articles. Have your media ever reported the terrorism incidents in North Eastern regions of India? Which are often led by the local churches? Or the Church's attempts to conversion based on total lies and misguidance; Or the way they keep making stories up replacing heroes in local legends and myths with some Christian icons? Also usually every conversion means commission to the person who catches a convert and a certain sum of amount to the convert.
Such actions are bound to cause some conflict in the region and mostly such conversions make people in the some families clashes. Unless you can see the things in their whole perspective such arguments are not going to lead anywhere. If Hinduism was that violent Thomas the Apostle wouldn't have been establishing his churches here.
Christianity came here escaping the religious persecution in their own country. Just like Parasis( worshippers of Zarathustra) and later on Jews. All of them got a place to live with total freedom to practice their personal beliefs without any conditions.
Christian's habit of proselytising and attempts to get wider support by false propaganda and media tactics is often annoying and adds to the negative feelings towards them. And off course not all Christians do that. You should try Koenraad Elst and François Gautier, books sometimes to get the meaning.
And yeah before you too worked up- Hindus in some of those states almost wiped out. Except some older tribes which practice Animism its mostly Muslims or Christians tribe only now. The region is on the borders of Myanmar. There were plenty of threads about riots among Muslims and Buddhists in that country. No one posted any sympathy with the Buddhists in India which were targeted by same Muslims in India in the border states where they had to fled from their homes because of mostly illegal immigrants from neighbouring countries.- because we didn't made it an issue.
It simply because the majority in India realises what it takes to carry people of so many different beliefs, languages personal traditions and backgrounds and still keep it together for the most part. And that knowledge of how to handle it comes from traditional Hinduism and it's world view.
See how one things affect another and chain reactions start? Your comment made this thread totally useless for original discussion.
Who said bias means belonging to any religion. Please check the definition of bias in a dictionary.
The same? You mean you would have lashed out at Hinduism out of blue still? Anyway lashing at any religion would have been out of context. Read the thread topic sincerely next time and think before posting. This section is for serious discussions.
Already covered everything. If you think your behaviour was not an ignorant one , even when you didn't even read the OP properly nor paid heed to the exact topic and grabbed at the chance to make a negative comment without proper analysis suit yourself. I have nothing to say about that. My criteria of knowledgeable post is a bit different. That's all.
except the OP edited the original thread, explaining the picture after I posted.
and now you're assuming. Forming counter-articles about hindu's being peaceful doesn't mean they are never violent....now who's being biased?
You're blowing my words out of proportion saying that I flat out "lashed" out on Hinduism, even after I explained to you thoroughly what I meant to say and that I didn't mean to offend because it is in fact true that every religion is violent in some way, but that it's not religion that is at fault, but the people and human nature.
It's funny how people, such as yourself, misinterpret others comments and then hope to justify it with quarreling....sounds a lot like what happens in religion.
and now you instigate further, even after I gave you an apology and explained what I really meant.....it really shows how peaceful you are
Anyways I've come to the conclusion that commenting further is useless since it seems that reason has already failed here.
I apologized already, and that's enough for me to justify myself as the "bigger man" and walk away from this before this argument becomes something we will both regret.
oh and you can't be biased toward a specific religion if you don't belong to one.
Biased: Influence unfairly to invoke favoritism
how was I invoking favoritism? I wasn't, and if you read what I said about how religion isn't to blame, but human nature is....then you would know that.
HUman is not too stupid to determine what they can do or what they cant, thats y human got limit, but nonetheless, if God wanted to control human behaviour and manners and thinking, He wouldnt need to create human, the best form of all His creation. Please could you think before posting something religious, becoz its the truth that YOU need to find out for yourselves, it is within your limit of power to find Him, just use whatever negativity in finding there's no god into ur full efforts finding Him, and i believe u will make it.
Exactly where did I say that? Do not make false statements. Human nature is independent of religious or any other boundaries. All kinds of people are everywhere. People can be violent and dogmatic about any belief religious or not.
You're blowing my words out of proportion saying that I flat out "lashed" out on Hinduism, even after I explained to you thoroughly what I meant to say and that I didn't mean to offend because it is in fact true that every religion is violent in some way, but that it's not religion that is at fault, but the people and human natur
Nope. It got out of proportion because you kept trying to defend your statement and justify it anyway instead of simply accept that your original post was not proper.
Off course there are problems with many issues in Hinduism just like any other culture or belief system. The there are people who may have their brains locked up in a locker, instead of using it.
But your statment was based on lack of proper information and prejudiced which you kept defending.
It's funny how people, such as yourself, misinterpret others comments and then hope to justify it with quarreling....sounds a lot like what happens in religion.
Quarrelling? lol Do not blame your own inability to accept your mistake on any religion in the world. I am merely pointing out flaws in your statement.
and now you instigate further, even after I gave you an apology and explained what I really meant.....it really shows how peaceful you are
Agreed. I accept your apology since the confession and apology sound so sincere. ^^
I apologized already, and that's enough for me to justify myself as the "bigger man" and walk away from this before this argument becomes something we will both regret.
Oh I am sure regret is already there. You see two can do the tango. I might have been politer but then so could have been you. A bigger person is someone who walks away without being pompous about it.
I might have walked out. I would have but I felt it necessary to point out the prejudice in here as it has larger effect in the long run on how people interact with each other. If it was a general topic I wouldn't care. I win some arguments and lose some. If the debater is good on the other side it is fun to debate either way.
oh and you can't be biased toward a specific religion if you don't belong to one.
Biased: Influence unfairly to invoke favoritism
how was I invoking favoritism? I wasn't, and if you read what I said about how religion isn't to blame, but human nature is....then you would know that.
I am closing the thread since there is really nothing to go on. It was not about winning and losing any argument. I merely wanted to point out that you shouldn't make generalised but prejudiced random comments. And when you do it is better to back off gracefully instead of trying to take a last punch till the end.
