PDA

View Full Version : Christian Friend attacks Hindu idea of God!



maruti
08 February 2007, 10:42 AM
Namaskara,

Glad to have found this forum. This is my first post.

I am a Hindu, but I am beginning to have doubts about certain aspects of this religion, especially the ones concerning God. A Christian friend of mine says Hinduism is atheistic, because if everybody is god, there is no god. He also says the concept of illusion, whatever that is, makes Hindus weak and lazy. He gives the instance of Indians being indolent, callous and uncaring.:o He attributes all this to Hinduism.

What are we to do?

Regards,
Maruti

yajvan
08 February 2007, 11:14 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaskara,

Glad to have found this forum. This is my first post.

I am a Hindu, but I am beginning to have doubts ...What are we to do?
Regards,
Maruti

Namaste maruti,
Welcome to HDF. May a I recommend a few ideas? First , not to worry. It will be good to read the many posts on this site. They are rich with ideas, truth, insights, debate, and the like.
Give yourself a few weeks here, then ask this same question later once you had a chance to study.
What others say about Sanatana Dharma is their issue. The world is as you are. If one is wearing red glasses then everything is red, yes? If others find fault with others, they take on the sin of the other individual.

You have no obligation to go and debate/defend Sanatana Dharma. The best defense is to live the values and become an exponent of the Supreme. People measure others by there actions and behaviors - so says Krshna in the Bhagavad Gita Chapt 2 and 3.

So give yourself some to to read these posts... soak in it, ask and ponder the info and add to the forum.

pranams,

Agnideva
08 February 2007, 01:20 PM
Namaste Maruti,

Yajvan has given you some good advice. You need not be concerned about your Christian friend's opinion of Hinduism. Remember, Hinduism is defined by it's followers, the Hindus, not by what others say. Nevertheless, your friend has put some doubts in your mind, so you're here. Hopefully, you will be able to understand Hinduism better and dispel your doubts.


A Christian friend of mine says Hinduism is atheistic, because if everybody is god, there is no god.
Maruti, do you believe there is logic in this statement?


He also says the concept of illusion, whatever that is, makes Hindus weak and lazy. Really? Have you known any Hindus like this, Maruti? I have never known any Hindu anywhere who sits down in a corner and says, the world is an illusion, I am doomed. Neither does Hinduism or any of its philosophies teach that.


He gives the instance of Indians being indolent, callous and uncaring.:o He attributes all this to Hinduism. Do you find this to be true? I find that there are indolent, callous and uncaring people all throughout the world, regardless of religion. I don't think the percentage of people who are like that in Indian Hindu society is any different than anywhere else. Does Hinduism teach us to be indolent, callous and uncaring? Absolutely not, it tells us the exact opposite.

OM Shanti,
A.

saidevo
08 February 2007, 07:42 PM
Namaste Maruti,

Welcome to HDF. For a starter, you might ponder on these points.



A Christian friend of mine says Hinduism is atheistic, because if everybody is god, there is no god.


Sunlight is reflected in every source of polished surface, including the eyes of all living beings. So your Christian friend would say that there is no sun?

The electricity resides in the dual form of electron or energy in everything, from the tiny atom of a stone to the biological cell of life. So your Christian friend would say that there is no electricity?



He also says the concept of illusion, whatever that is, makes Hindus weak and lazy.


Maya is not a concept of illusion, but one of conditional reality. It is easy to realize that the reality and existence of everything in this universe is conditional and time bound. Your Christian friend's present job is also a conditional reality; he might be fired tomorrow! Would this make him weak and lazy and indifferent to his job?

Human life is maya because it is a conditional reality, not illusion. Your friend might die tomorrow, so why toil in life and not just stay lazy and be satisfied with what he has?



He gives the instance of Indians being indolent, callous and uncaring.:o He attributes all this to Hinduism.


Indians are considered as the best in the corporate, intellectual, academic and other areas of life. Bill Gates was asked the question, "If all the Indians in Microsoft, USA, quit their jobs and get back to India, what would you do?" Gates answered, "Simple. I would change the Microsoft headquarters to India."

If an accident happens on the road, a pale westerner would go on his way, unconcerned; whereas an Indian would rush to help out.

A westerner deserts his parents on marriage; he even deserts his wife on flimsy grounds, but that is a different matter. There is no concept of a joint family system or communal living in western countries, unlike in India. Who is more caring? Is not Christianity the reason for such islands of life in the West?

The phrase "Trust me" is often used in conversation in the West. This very phrase speaks volumes of the western attitude and concern.

Indians, whatever their religion, even if they follow the shallow Abrahamic religions, have their timeless culture and tradition running in their blood, which was fostered by Hinduism on the foundation of the Vedas. They would certainly make a positive difference wherever they reside.

saidevo
08 February 2007, 10:05 PM
Namaste MG,



Saidevo, you are being sort of hard on us pale Westerners!:cool1:


I am very sorry if I have offended you as a Westerner in any way. It was not my intention to generalize the criticism. Please read further down.



Why don't we agree that every culture has a wide variety of people and all sorts of personality types-industrious, lazy, caring, uncaring, spiritual, non-spiritual, wounded, non-wounded, committed, non-committed.....


Yes I do agree completely with your statement. People of every culture, including the Indian culture have their positive and negative points. I, for example, who speak all these things, have given raise to the just criticism of being careless about my words. I do have several other shortcomings as a human being. There are several Indians who are lazy, uncaring and unspiritual unlike several Westerners who are active, caring and very spiritual. And the Indian politicians have the distinction of being most corrupt in the world!

Then why did I generaize?



And, so you cannot really say "all Indians" or "all westerners" or "all Hindus" or "all Christians". There are millions of people in every group.


When my Christian friend tells me "Hey you Indians are lazy, uncaring, indolent, callous and weak--all these because of your Hindu religion" I would naturally retaliate in the same tone and say, "What about you Westerners? You are even worse than us, because that is what your religion has made you to be?"

The counter I have suggested to Maruti is in the same friendly and conversational way, for what his friend told him. In a personal conversation it is easy and friendly to generalize without meaning it to its depth. What I have suggested is a way for Maruti to counter his friend. It is not my considered opinion that I would put it in black and white, so please do not mistake me for being flippant in friendly conversation.



And, Maruti, my advice would be to listen to all the posts given and not your friend, who is not giving good counsel to you.


Yes, Maruti, you shoud consider all the posts here, but I don't think your friend is serious about his comments and criticism. He might be under the wrong impression, in which case, it is easy to make him see reason. If he is, on the other hand, serious about his criticism, well the best way is to leave him at that.

And MG, I hope I have made myself clear. Or do you still think that I have somehow managed to wriggle out of the situation?

maruti
10 February 2007, 12:35 AM
Thanks for the welcome, Saidevo. You're right, there's no point in arguing with these people. That said, he did raise some valid points.



Sunlight is reflected in every source of polished surface, including the eyes of all living beings. So your Christian friend would say that there is no sun?


Actually, his point was this: You need a frame of reference and only with respect to it, you say there's a god. That would be missing, if we consider everthing to be god. So in a way, if everything's god, nothing's god.


Maya is not a concept of illusion, but one of conditional reality. It is easy to realize that the reality and existence of everything in this universe is conditional and time bound.I know, but when I told him, he asks pointblank: if maya is accepted as reality, it'll be a contradiction in terms. If not, the question remains.

Znanna
10 February 2007, 06:02 AM
That is a very sad story, about the girl. Large crowds in cities seem to make humans act like animals sometimes.

Regarding your friend, if y'all wish to persist in the tit for tat debate, you might ask him if he thinks Ted Haggard, the former *leader* of tens of thousands Evangelicals is representative of Christians?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard


ZN

saidevo
10 February 2007, 07:44 AM
Namaste Maruti,

Your friend is totally confused between a system and the people who are supposed to follow the system. You cannot find fault with the system for the shortcomings of the people who are supposed to follow them. If we do it, then Science would be the worst culprit, followed by Christianity and Islam. People are the same, whether they are Hindus, Scientists, Christians, Muslims, atheists or others.

The only observation that merits a reply to your friend is this quote of him:



Actually, his point was this: You need a frame of reference and only with respect to it, you say there's a god. That would be missing, if we consider everthing to be god. So in a way, if everything's god, nothing's god.


The frame of reference is the Canvas (as SwamiJ would explain) on which everything takes place. The Canvas is in everything and everything is in the Canvas. They are inseparable. The only difference between them is that the manifestations on the Canvas change with time and space, whereas the Infinite Cavas itself is unchanging and eternal.

By the bye, is your Christian friend an outsider or is he within you?

Ganeshprasad
10 February 2007, 08:51 AM
Pranam Maruti

Remove the veil of hiding behind an imaginary friend only then there can be a meaningful exchange.

Look at the flaw in your argument, large number of highly intelligent Indians in relation to population are insignificant to you, where as one incident, though highly deplorable, you condemn the whole of India.

Coming back to that incident, a thoroughly shameful event, everyone regardless of what religious background they come, should condemn it, there is no place for this anywhere, this is exactly what I meant when I said if we imitate western ways our Dharma is in danger and lets face it, shameless revellers,on a new year's eve ain’t exactly an Indian culture, is it?

Jai Shree Krishna

indianx
10 February 2007, 05:39 PM
Maruti, I think there is no need to discuss the existence of your friend or your intentions.

You have posted questions you feel to be relevant to your understanding of Sanatana Dharma and we, as a community, have done our part in answering them.

Here is my contribution:


A Christian friend of mine says Hinduism is atheistic, because if everybody is god, there is no god.Now, does that sound logical to you?

I will give you an example as to why it is not.

Would you agree that the ideas of sin and sinners are central to Christian theology?

According to your friend's logic, because everybody is a sinner according to Christianity, nobody is a sinner or rather, sin doesn't exist. And if sin or sinners don't exist, there is no need for a Jesus.

Does that make sense to you? If that doesn't seem logical to you, there is no reason for your friend's statement to seem logical.


He also says the concept of illusion, whatever that is, makes Hindus weak and lazy. He gives the instance of Indians being indolent, callous and uncaringNow, my brother, do you live in India? Well, it doesn't matter, but listen to this:

Your friend has characterized, as you say, Indians as being "indolent, callous and uncaring". Do you, as an educated individual, believe that it is possible to label and to generalize the nature of one billion people?

I suppose you have heard about a Hindu named Gandhi. Is there any better epitome of the ability of humans to care?

Your friend also assumes that all Indians are Hindus. In reality, 20% of Indians do not believe in Hinduism.

Now, tell me what makes them "indolent, callous and uncaring"? Is it then Christianity (assuming they are Christians), is it Islam, is it Sikhism, and so on and so forth?

Once again, wouldn't you agree that his argument seems to be fickle?

---

Satay, could you perhaps send me the link our friend, Maruti, posted in a pm.

I would appreciate the opportunity to respond to the accusations in a reasonable manner.

---

Maruti, being probably the only one from your age group in these parts, I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these things with you over IM, if you would like.

maruti
11 February 2007, 12:46 AM
Your friend has characterized, as you say, Indians as being "indolent, callous and uncaring". Do you, as an educated individual, believe that it is possible to label and to generalize the nature of one billion people?


True, but at some point we need to generalize. You don't gulp all the sea water to determine its taste. A sip should suffice. And this also is in line with Vedantic thinking: by knowing a lump of mud, all products made of mud can be known.

saidevo
11 February 2007, 07:26 AM
Namaste maruti.



Sorry, Satay, but I can almost predict my friend's response, or any Christian's response to this. They will argue that all Vaishnava schools believe in the concept of an autocratic Vishnu creating the universe and ruling it. Some schools like Dvaita even believe in eternal hell. Vishsita Advaitins don't visit Shiva temples. So what makes it different from Christianity, they may ask.


1. By doing nothing more than a mailman's job between HDF and your (imaginary) friend, you don't seem to think logically or understand the Hindu concepts and philosophy.

Hindu sects, such as Vaishnava, Dvaita and VA all have a common authority in the Vedas. The difference lies in the layers of meaning derived from the Vedas. The sectorial interpretations are not flawed, but only a way to understand the whole picture. No single sect can understand and interpret God's words in the Vedas in toto. The philosophy of the Hindu sects cannot be equated with the shallow philosophy and concepts of Christianity.

2. What is so big about the Vishsita Advaitins not visiting Shiva temples? As Satay says, there are 2000 Christian denominations; do they visit each other's churches or honour another version of Jesus or his Father? Hindu sects do not have different versions of the Vedas, unlike the Christian denominations that have at least two versions of the Bible--the King James version and the New International Version (source: http://www.chick.com/information/bibleversions/comparison.asp).

3. All Hindu sects agree on karma, rebirth and the cycle of creation and the role of Brahma in each cycle, so it is absurd to say that they speak of eternal hell or eternal heaven, the most foolish concept of Christianity.

When are we going to meet your Christian friend in HDF? Or are we already meeting him through you? If so, why have you, as a Hindu, allowed him to possess your soul?

Agnideva
11 February 2007, 07:32 AM
Namaste Maruti,


True, but at some point we need to generalize. You don't gulp all the sea water to determine its taste. A sip should suffice. And this also is in line with Vedantic thinking: by knowing a lump of mud, all products made of mud can be known.
Yet people are not like seawater or mud. Can you taste all the creatures in the sea by eating a couple of varieties of fish?

A.

indianx
11 February 2007, 08:13 AM
True, but at some point we need to generalize. You don't gulp all the sea water to determine its taste. A sip should suffice. And this also is in line with Vedantic thinking: by knowing a lump of mud, all products made of mud can be known.

What verse from the Hindu scriptures supports this line of thinking, my brother?

I think you have drawn a fallacious conclusion, but I'm always willing to change my opinion - after you show me the verse, of course.

And before I get the response I expect to get, the onus to show the verse (to support your concusion) is on you, not on me, since you posited the argument.

And once again, friend, my offer to discuss these things over IM still stands.

maruti
11 February 2007, 08:28 AM
What verse from the Hindu scriptures supports this line of thinking, my brother?

I think you have drawn a fallacious conclusion, but I'm always willing to change my opinion - after you show me the verse, of course.

And before I get the response I expect to get, the onus to show the verse (to support your concusion) is on you, not on me, since you posited the argument.

It's Chandogya Upanishad, dialogue between Shwetaketu and Uddalaka.

indianx
11 February 2007, 10:56 AM
Thanks for the prompt response, brother.

I believe this is the dialogue you are referring to:


8

‘Man has sixteen phases. Abstain from food for a fortnight if you will, but drink; if you cut off drink, you cut off life.’

Shwetaketu having abstained from food for a fortnight, went to his father and said: ‘What is the lesson today?’

Uddalaka asked him to repeat Rig-Weda, Yajur-Weda, Sama-Weda verses.

Shwetaketu said: ‘I do not remember them.’

Uddalaka said: ‘A coal no bigger than a fire-fly would not make a blaze bigger than itself, so, my son, since only one of your sixteen phases remains, you cannot remember the Wedas. Now go and eat; then you will understand me.’

Shwetaketu having taken food, went to his father again, answered all his questions.

Uddalaka said: ‘My son! A coal no bigger than a firefly if fed with hay makes a blaze bigger than itself.

‘One phase that remained out of sixteen fed with food blazed up, and now you can remember the Wedas.

‘Remember, my son! mind comes from food, life comes from water, speech comes from light.’

Shwetaketu understood what he said; understood what his father said.
9

Aruna’s son, Uddalaka said to Shwetaketu: ‘My son! know the nature of sleep. When a man sleeps, he is united with that Being, that is himself. We think it enough to say that he sleeps, yet he sleeps with himself.

‘A tethered bird, after flying in every direction, settles down on its perch; the mind, after wandering in every direction, settles down on its life; for, my son! mind is tethered to life.

‘Know the nature of hunger and thirst. Man becomes hungry. Water brings his food to his belly. Water brings his food, as cowherd his cow, horseman his horse, general his army. Remember, my son! that body sprouts from food; could it sprout without a root?

‘What is the root of all? What but food?

‘Remember, my son! water is root, food its sprout; light is root, water its sprout; in the same way, that Being is root, light its sprout. All creatures have their root in that Being. He is their rock, their home.

‘Man becomes thirsty. Light brings the water to his gullet, as cowherd his cow, horseman his horse, general his army. Remember, my son! that food sprouts from water; could it sprout without a root?

‘What is the root of all? What but water?

‘Light is root, water its sprout; that Being is root, light its sprout. All creatures have their root in that Being; He is their rock, their home. My son! I have already told you how the three first gods became each of them threefold when in contact with body. When a man is dying, his speech merges into mind, his mind into life, his life into light, his light into the one Being.

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth, He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.

10

‘My son! Bees create honey by gathering the sweet juices from different flowers, and mixing all into a common juice.

‘And there is nothing in honey whereby the juice of a particular flower can be identified, so it is with the various creatures who merge in that Being, in deep sleep or in death.

‘Whatever they may be, tiger, lion, wolf, bear, worm, moth, gnat, mosquito, they become aware of particular life when they are born into it or awake.

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.
11

‘My son! Rivers, flowing east and west, rise from the sea, return to the sea, become the sea itself, forget their identities.

‘These creatures do not know that they have risen from that Being, or returned to that Being.

‘Whatever that may be, tiger, lion, wolf, boar, worm, moth, gnat, mosquito, they become aware of particular life when they are born into it or awake.

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.

12

‘Strike at the bole of a tree, sap oozes but the tree lives; strike at the middle of the tree, sap oozes but the tree lives; strike at the top of the tree, sap oozes but the tree lives. The Self as life, fills the tree; it flourishes in happiness, gathering its food through its roots.

‘If life leaves one branch, that branch withers. If life leaves a second branch, that branch withers. If life leaves a third branch, that branch withers. When life leaves the whole tree, the whole tree withers.

‘Remember, my son! The body bereft of Self dies. Self does not die.

That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.

Uddalaka asked his son to fetch a banyan fruit.

‘Here it is, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘Break it,’ said Uddalaka.

‘I have broken it, Lord!’

‘What do you see there?’

‘Little seeds, Lord!’

‘Break one of them, my son!’

‘It is broken, Lord!’

‘What do you see there?’

‘Nothing, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

Uddalaka said~ ‘My son! This great banyan tree has sprung up from seed so small that you cannot see it. Believe in what I say, my son!

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.
14

‘Put this salt into water, see me tomorrow morning,’ said Uddalaka. Shwetaketu did as he was told.

Uddalaka said: ‘Bring me the salt you put into water last night.’

Shwetaketu looked, but could not find it. The salt had dissolved.

Uddalaka asked his son how the top of the water tasted. Shwetaketu said: ‘It is salt.’

Uddalaka asked how the middle of the water tasted.

Shwetaketu said: ‘It is salt.’

Uddalaka asked how the bottom of the water tasted.

Shwetaketu said: ‘It is salt.’

Uddalaka said: ‘Throw away the water; come to me.’

Shwetaketu did as he was told and said: ‘The salt will always remain in the water.’

Uddalaka said: ‘My son! Though you do not find that Being in the world, He is there.

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. lie is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘1 will explain!’ said Uddalaka.

15

‘My son! If a man were taken out of the province of Gandhara, abandoned in a forest blindfolded, he would turn here and there, he would shout: “~ have been brought here blindfolded and abandoned!”,

‘Thereupon some good man might take off the bandage and say: “Go in that direction; Gandhara is there.” The bandage off, he would, if a sensible man, ask his way from ‘village to village and come at last to Gandhara. In the same way the man initiated by his master, finds his way back into himself. Having remained in his body till all his Karma is spent, he is joined to Himself.

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.
16

‘Relations gather round a sick man and say: “Do you remember me? Do you remember me?” He remembers until his speech has merged in his mind, his mind in his life, his life in his light, his light in the one Being.

‘When his speech is merged in his mind, his mind in his life, his life in his light, his light in that one Being, what can he remember?

‘That Being is the seed; all else but His expression. He is truth. He is Self. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

‘Explain once more, Lord!’ said Shwetaketu.

‘I will explain!’ said Uddalaka.

17

‘My son! They bring a man in handcuffs to the magistrate, charging him with theft. The magistrate orders the hatchet to be heated. If the man has committed the theft and denies it, he is false to himself, and having nothing but that lie to protect him, grasps the hatchet; and is burned.

‘If he has not committed the theft, he is true to himself and, with truth for his protector, grasps the hatchet; and is not burned. He is acquitted.

‘The man that was not burnt, lived in truth. Remember that all visible things live in truth; remember that truth and Self are one. Shwetaketu! You are That.’

Shwetaketu understood what he said, yes, he understood what his father said.I fail to understand how you could draw that conclusion from this dialogue.

Uddalaka is talking about Brahman, that all pervasive force in this universe, not a particular component like mud.


True, but at some point we need to generalize. You don't gulp all the sea water to determine its taste. A sip should suffice. And this also is in line with Vedantic thinking: by knowing a lump of mud, all products made of mud can be known.

And brother Maruti, my point still stands. What makes the 20% of Indians who don't believe in Hinduism "indolent, callous and uncaring"? Following your friend's logic, is it the fault of their religions too?

In the end, I can only hope that you're being honest with yourself. Nothing else matters.

yajvan
11 February 2007, 08:38 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

I am a vaishnava myself but I have no problem going to Shiva temples. In fact, my own ishtadevta is shiva himself.


Namaste satay,
Here is the wisdom of a master ( that you are following):



'He alone is the best devotee who sees his Adored One everywhere. For the devotee of Vishnu the Lord is omnipresent. He should see Lord Vishnu even in the images of Shankar, Devi, Ganesh and Surya etc. Likewise a devotee of Shankar, Devi etc. should visualize his Adored One omnipresent.' Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, Shankarayacharaya of Jyotir Matt