PDA

View Full Version : Hindu Timidness & Dharma



Ganeshprasad
28 May 2007, 03:56 PM
Pranam satay


Do you any of you have any feedback/concerns/issues on my recent posts? I feel very passionate about Hinduism and when I see someone attacking Hinduism, I can't stop myself but attack back. If this behaviour turns you off, let me know and I will stop.

Any suggestions?

I for one have no problem and see no behaviour turn off, not for me at least, that is because, I my self is very passionate about dharma.
Look at the difference here, this is what this noble dharma teaches us, you seek permission on your own forum against I think many times unwarranted attacks or comments.

Hindu dharma by nature is peace loving it does not seek confrontation or conversion.

For far too long we have endured subjugation, therefore we always seek permission even to be nice for I don’t think Vedic teachings can ever allow us to be nasty.

Therefore when I see comments like, say from mg, and I share her anguish and pain at an innocent killing of a child it is natural to long for peace, and yes love is great tool I agree.

But how is this related to this forum or hindu dharma in particular in what way this forum has made her quote


I have been saddened, alarmed and sometimes confused at some of the comments on this board. After reading about the poor child who was stoned in Iraq, I was saddened to come here and read about more venom.

By equating this story of a child with this forum I see this in it self an attack on this forum, this may not be the motive but this is my perception of it.

Since I am still entangled in this material body my actions would be on this level and react with only difference being I take notice of dharma and react accordingly.

To live in the sprit means to be aloof from this material world, nothing would affect such a person just as Krishna says bg 2.11

sri-bhagavan uvaca
asocyan anvasocas tvam
prajna-vadams ca bhasase
gatasun agatasums ca
nanusocanti panditah
The Blessed Lord said: While speaking learned words, you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief. Those who are wise lament neither for the living nor the dead.


Jai Shree Krishna

saidevo
29 May 2007, 10:10 AM
Namaste MG.


The point was that any type of exclusionary, bitterness or militancy is something to be purified. We can cloak it in our own beliefs or desires, but universally it still detracts from the goal.

We can say that anything that does not fit into our box is an attack but then we do not grow and learn.

The point is simple: love. But, people would rather argue and fight.

The ONLY problem for Hindus with Christianity is evangelism. And Hindus know that many Christians are against evangelism, but unfortunately, they don't voice it enough to deter their own authorities, though they know that it is adharma.

Why is this so? I know that as humans beings, most Christians would be capable of altruistic, universal love and wish for peaceful co-existence and meaningful interaction with Hinduism, but I think that such love must be put to action!

I read in some Christian forum that an old Catholic Christian mother firmly believes that no other member of any other sect would go to heaven! I am aghast at such spiritual mindset at an age when even a rustic would have matured better. What would they teach to young Catholic children?

If only the discerning Christians explicitly display their universal love and campaign against the growing adharmic force of Christian evangelism, the world would be a true Vasudeva Kudumbakam (one family of many religions and cultures).

yajvan
29 May 2007, 11:02 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


The ONLY problem for Hindus with Christianity is evangelism.


Namste saidevo,
If I may... I have no problem with evangelism. Now, let me put words in your mouth, you can take them out accordingly.

If you mean evangelism as the 'conversion' process - then that is another matter. To convert one from one's existing beliefs to Christanity or a flavor thereof is not an attactive approach, but that should hold true for a religions, yes?
As they say in the USA, if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.
Even Krsna points this out in the Gita ( Better to live by ones dharma even though exercised imperfectly, then the dharma of another).

If we hold this idea, this evangelism, to be in praise of one's Lord, I see this as upliftment and good for society in general and encourage it.

Yet if one views evangelism=conversion=discomfort to the individual , how can one explain then the Krsna Consciousness (HK's) movement?

For years they have been in every airport in the world until their behaviors had be to religated to the desk/podium and could not co-mingle with passer-bys. Now I found this a curious thing, as I always enjoyed talking with them, yet others obviously did not. Then the HK's chose to wear wigs to blend in, and then converse with passer-bys. This too was soon nabbed after a short period.

If one thinks this was done only by a few HK groups, Swami Prabupada calls out this missionary activity (Chapt 9, Bhagavad Gita, As It Is) as ones duty within the HK approach to life.

So, one approach over anothers... one mission over another.. how does one rationalize this? by intensity?

Hare Krsna Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare.

pranams,

saidevo
29 May 2007, 11:55 AM
Namaste Yajvan.



If you mean evangelism as the 'conversion' process - then that is another matter. To convert one from one's existing beliefs to Christanity or a flavor thereof is not an attactive approach, but that should hold true for a religions, yes?

Yet if one views evangelism=conversion=discomfort to the individual , how can one explain then the Krsna Consciousness (HK's) movement?


I have used the term evangelism as an euphemism for the ugly word proselytism--coversion to Christianity in other words--and not as a term for eulogizing God.

Yes, proselytism should be protested, deterred and ultimately stopped, whether it is done by the HK or the Christian denominations. Movements like the HK are due to the influence of the Christian concepts of One Scripture and One God and sell it as one-garment-that-fits all. In HK, I think they even deny that Krishna was among the dasavatars of Vishnu! Any Hindu with independent inquiry would question such movements for their exclusivity, although he/she may accommodate it as complementary.

There is one difference, though. Swami Prabupada might call it a missionary activity and construe it as a duty of the HK member, but Hindu scriptures (I think including Srimad Bhagavatam and Gita) don't sanction it. It is the opposite case with the Bible and is therefore dangerous to spiritual progress.

satay
29 May 2007, 01:17 PM
namaste MG,
May I ask why you decided to delete your earlier post?

satay
29 May 2007, 01:45 PM
I agree with MG in that yes, the foundation of all ‘religion’ is love. And that yes, we can get boxed into our own interpretations and sects. I also agree with Yajvan’s observation of HKs. But at the same time, I agree with Saidevo and Ganesh too! If I may use Yajvan’s style of writing, ‘How can this be?’

Well, MG what you are advocating here is the true spirit of Sanatana Dharma i.e. the foundation should be Love. Sanatana Dharma has always advocated ‘live and let live’. This is why you see in the puranas that the Lord gives boons to Asuras, humans and Devas equally. There is no discrimination. Yet, humans as well as Asuras are encouraged to get in touch with their devic qualities and rise above by realizing the true SELF where there exists nothing else but Love.

However, I think that you MG are mixing up religion with political matters of India when talking of evangelism. We hindus may tell among ourselves that



I do not think the Bible supports proselyzing. What Jesus actually meant by making disciples and spreading the news, etc. is open to interpretation.


We may even look at Jesus’ actions as you suggested MG, but what are the facts? We may paint all religions and their adherents with the same brush and say things like



In fact, the world wants to tear down young idealists who dream of a world of unity, where people care about their world and all people. The world cannot stand people who come in the name of respect and peace for all~they get assassinated rather quickly.


Again, I encourage you to look at the facts. I encourage you to look at the history of Sanatana Dharma, history of India, history of Judaism and the two offshoots of it as well as the history and behaviour of the adherents of all of these religions. Let the facts speak for themselves instead of us painting every adherent of every religion with the same brush and mud.

We can all cry, shout and scream ‘peace and love’ for our children as this is the foundation of Dharma but does that mean that we have to remain naïve to the events happening around us?

Must we as hindus hide our heads in the sand for eternity? I love pigeons but must we behave as pigeons and close our eyes hoping that the cat in front of us is not a cat at all but is illusion!

Furthermore, why is that if a hindu as much as even has a thought of standing up for Adharma as instructed by the Lord, that he/she gets labeled as an extremists and people start shouting ‘we want peace and hindus won’t let us’. I realize that thousands of years of slavery has made us so timid that Hindus even ask permission on their own land if they want to speak their mind. But my question is, Must we remain slaves to our timid-ness for eternity or do we have any right to stand up for ourselves and our future generation?

Finally yet importantly, do we have a duty to our children or should we offer bharata or what is left of it, our mothers, sisters, brothers as well as children for sacrifice and get ‘idol worshippers’ engraved on our foreheads forever? Perhaps the men of Bharats should go out, shop for some bangles, and live happily ever after, chant peace while our house is getting robbed?

I encourage you to get the facts before painting everyone with the same brush. May I suggest that those Christians who think as you of Jesus and Bible go to their churches and a) teach the other church members the real meaning as you see it b) stop donating money for international missions c) ask the church to stop raping other cultures?

Talk is cheap…what is the price of action?

Comments on HK movement some other day.

Enough for today.

satay
29 May 2007, 02:26 PM
You misunderstand me, Satay. I am saying...yes, direct your issues and concerns with the Christians that do this. Protect the culture. Make laws against this type of visiting of homes, etc. Be proactive and address the issues going on. You can still do this calmly, with kindness. If people chose to disobey the laws, you can penalize them humanely.


namaste,
I agree with this.



I am merely saying let's be cautious of directing hatred or bitterness anywhere, because it starts a cycle. And, also, let's not, especially, direct that anger at a group of people because we may be discriminatory and stop seeing individuals. This is always the danger with anger. That it turns to hatred. And, the seed of hatred turns to prejudice and that leads to discrimination of a broad group.


I agree 100% with this also. But who is advocating hatred and bitterness? Why must we lable ourselves hateful and bitter even at the thought of being dutiful to our dharma?



I deleted my posts because I don't think I belong here. I was not going to post any more. But, then I decided to clarify what I meant, and decided unwisely to attempt to post again.

I regret to read that you feel that you are not welcomed here and that your decision to post again was unwise. I encourage you to continue to post but please gather some facts instead of painting ourselves with the same brush.

I hope that we can continue have a good conversation. I am not hateful and bitter towards. To the contrary, as you know already, my wife is a catholic christian. I am wide open to change of views.


My message to Hindus is a simple one: 'Wake up for the future of our children'. Now let this message be read with whatever mindset the reader has.

Ganeshprasad
29 May 2007, 05:48 PM
My pranams to all



The point was that any type of exclusionary, bitterness or militancy is something to be purified. We can cloak it in our own beliefs or desires, but universally it still detracts from the goal.

We can make all this kind of genralisation statement thats gets us no where. Are hindus exclusionary? Hinduism I know encompasses every thing, it is perhaps the reason it get trampled over and sometimes becomes a laughing stock which comes at a great pain.

Beliefs and desires are varied to say the least, so what universal goals do we have in mind? Bitterness and militancy are product of ignorance, Hinduism has always thought us to rise above them but our love for peace and harmony should never blind us and become cowards. Lord Krishna was very clear on this point to Arjun.

The Supreme Lord said: How has the dejection come to you at this juncture? This is not fit for an Aryan (or the people of noble mind and deeds). It is disgraceful, and it does not lead one to heaven, O Arjuna. (2.02)


Do not become a coward, O Arjuna, because it does not befit you. Shake off this weakness of your heart and get up (for the battle), O Arjuna. (2.03)



We can say that anything that does not fit into our box is an attack but then we do not grow and learn.

I can say the same about any statement or any dogma such as love box.
Fact is we learn from mistakes and history. To grow we have to admit our mistakes and see the truth as it is. Let us see who is willing?
i notice with regrate that you feel you don't belong on this forum, that is sad.if you have conviction in your stand for love you should stay and preach love.



The point is simple: love. But, people would rather argue and fight.

I wish it was that simple. I find this very funny a mere debate or a defence of dharma is unbearable to you and seen as against the definition of love or simply put you can not love my stand and yet you expect us to swallow everything that is wronged against us and love it?

Fact is despite all the wrongs hipped against us we still yearn for peace and love as a result of that both those minority community who committed crimes in ruling us enjoys more rights then the Hindus. This could only happen in India.

Jai Shree Krishna

Ganeshprasad
29 May 2007, 06:32 PM
Pranam Yajvan ji


Hari Om
~~~~~


Namste saidevo,
If I may... I have no problem with evangelism.

If one thinks this was done only by a few HK groups, Swami Prabupada calls out this missionary activity (Chapt 9, Bhagavad Gita, As It Is) as ones duty within the HK approach to life.

So, one approach over anothers... one mission over another.. how does one rationalize this? by intensity?

Hare Krsna Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare.

pranams,

i dont think any one of has any problem eulogizing God as saidevo mentions.And i dont think vedic dharma has any fear of defeat from any quaters not even from cohersion or inducements as it is eternal dharma based on truth. that is the reason it still stands .
satayaMe vijayte.

but our approach to dharma has always been on inquery that is my understanding.

tad viddhi pranipatena
pariprasnena sevaya
upadeksyanti te jnanam
jnaninas tattva-darsinah

Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth. bg4.34

As to missionary work
see what Krishna says

idam te natapaskaya
nabhaktaya kadacana
na casusrusave vacyam
na ca mam yo 'bhyasuyati

This (knowledge) should never be spoken by you to one who is devoid of austerity, who is without devotion, who does not desire to listen, or who speaks ill of Me. (18.67)

Jai Shree Krishna

MysticalGypsi
29 May 2007, 08:21 PM
Right, I should stay and preach love. I know that. Can I hack it? Am I woman enough? I doubt it. I just hate to argue.

I am not attacking you guys. Just trying to point out that it is hard to lump a whole group together. I am totally advocating protecting the Indian culture. When people say, "Indians are like this...." or "Mexicans are like this..." or "Iraqis are like this..." yada yada in a negative connotation, I say the same things I am saying to you. I don't believe we can group hundreds or thousands or millions of people into a group and label them negatively (if we are honest). It is more convenient to do this, less messy for our beliefs. In my opinion, things are more complicated than that. We can say, "This church in my neighborhood did X and I don't like it, it is wrong". But, to say, "Christians are so overbearing". Well, I was a logic minor so....I have trouble with this. Just a pet peeve of mine. You know, One horse is black. Some horses are black. Therefore, all horses are black. Error.

I still do not understand how you get I am attacking India? I tried to make sure that I was against prejudice. I am for sticking up for Indian culture and always have been. Satay asked if his passionate posts were okay and he has asked a couple of times. I gave my opinion. However, maybe I was too judgemental. Maybe I am taking the tone much more vehemently than intended. I had been reading some awful stories of prejudice and injustice and came on the boards to read about the preacher who was attacked. I read about Satay saying Christians are lucky that Hindus do not hand them their heads on a platter. It just was the straw that broke the camels back, so to speak, for that day.

Anyway, I know I am no great person that can face a lot of arguing. It bothers me to argue. So, Ghandi I am not! Carry on! :)

Peace, love, joy, babies!

willie
29 May 2007, 09:50 PM
No use in whinning. This whole conversion thing is going on in the US , all the time. Every year the Jehovas witnesses and the mormans come around looking for new members to sign up. I just listen to them and let the deliver their long winded speeches. It is and exercise in patience nothing more.

People seem to think that religions is some large monolith structure in America. Well it is not. There are varied churches and most keep to themselves and don't have missionary arms in foreign lands. But these organizations are not static and and have changed a lot over the last few year. The southern baptist and been on a conservative bend for about 4 years and they made a lot of the members made. Mainly by saying that wifes should obey their husbands. Well that was sure not the right thing to say as alot of the member churches left to organization. A friend of mine said his church sent a representive to the annual meeting, and the socalled leader got up and gave the women should obey speech. Well you could have heard a pin hit the floor and later this leader was cornered by the representive and some others who wanted to know just what the speech was all about. Well the leader got out the bible and started in . So the representive said: " look guy we are not going back 400 years and you need to take a little trip, and a if I were you I would pack for warm weather". When the represenative got back the church quit the southern baptist and joined another baptist organization.

The southern baptist lost about one third of the member churches so now the leadership is being voted out. In the US the church answers to the people not the other way around.

If the congregation sits on their wallets ,then they don't have to fire a shot or plant and IEDs to take out the leadership.

Hinduism need more of this type of action not less.

satay
30 May 2007, 12:46 AM
Right, I should stay and preach love. I know that. Can I hack it? Am I woman enough? I doubt it. I just hate to argue.


I don't think that we are arguing here. We are just discussing different view points.



I read about Satay saying Christians are lucky that Hindus do not hand them their heads on a platter. It just was the straw that broke the camels back, so to speak, for that day.


Correct, I said that, however, I think that the context of my statement will help here. I made that statement in a reaction to the nonsense the christian preacher said in his article about Hinduism. The statement was a sarcastic remark to the missionaries and an implication that it is easy to shout and scream injustice, call Hinduism demonic only in the land of Hindus. I invite any missionary to try this in a muslim country and see what happens.

No Hindu will ever hand anyone's head on a platter for preaching.

saidevo
30 May 2007, 01:05 AM
Namaste.

The Christian aggression in India in the name of proselytism has long entered into the realms of perversity and hypocrisy, crossing all borders of decency and civilization. Look at some of these facts:

1. Almost the entire population of the tribals in north-east India have been converted to Christianity. The minority Hindus in those areas are not allowed to practice their religion peacefully for the simple reason they refused to be converted. And this is one part of India where the Church resorts to terrorism and employs goons to attack/kill the Hindus in homes and public places.

2. The tribals were easy targets but their conversion did not weaken Hinduism: instead, they attended the Christian masses as well as celebrated their traditional Hindu festivals! So the Church machinery is now targeting other Hindus under various projects.

Project Thessalonica, for example, aims to stop or limit Hindu activity by converting people who form the pillars of Hindu culture, festivals, traditions and activity. Hindu sculptors, mason, craftsmen, temple artists and other religious professionals are lured with better material prospects to abandon their traditional profession. The hideous objective of the missions is that they want to ensure that no new temple construction activity starts.

3. Christianity is preached in the name of moral science in Christian schools and convents. Hindu religious prayers and scriptural teaching have long back been abolished in government schools where the majority of students are Hindus.

4. In these days of Vedic prayers and Deepavali greetings by Christian governments in western countries, the minority Muslims and Christians in India protest singing national songs like Vande Mataram or voicing slogans like 'Jai Hindustan' in the parliament, state assemblies or public functions.

5. Proselytism unashamedly enters into large Hindu gatherings at Kumbha Mela, Tirupati Venkatachalapathy hills and such other occasions. The governments flagrantly use the monetary collections in Hindu temples for the welfare of the miniority communities in the name of funding their educational institutions, hospitals and other service institutions.

6. Major TV channels and other media in India are under the control of Christian groups. Powerful political leaders, specially in the Congress party, have either secretly converted to Christianity under the proxy rule of Sonia Gandhi or have strong Christian affiliations and favouritism. Since the cable TV network is under their control, they don't allow the few Hindu TV channels to be telecast all over the country, whereas they allow the Christian channels like the God channel and even force the other channels to have Christian preaching in addition to their Hindu spiritual programmes.

7. In the name of proselytism, traditional Hindu family network is disrupted. Hindu girls and boys are lured with jobs and money and are encouraged to marry Christians, with specific intentions to split and win over Hindu families.

8. And in the face of such political/economic/societal Christian agression all around, if Hindus seek to voice their opinions and protest, the popular media won't publish them, the politicians and intellectuals would call them extremists, and any sporadic aggression by Hindus against Christian tourists who misuse their tourist visa and resort to proselytism are blown out of proportion in the international media and published as if the Christians are not safe in India.

Today the Hindus in India are slowly awakening. Hindu dharmAcharyas have started to unite themselves and their followers and tackle this great menace to their culture, antiquity and nationalism. The movements are slowly gaining momentum. But the point is, even these actions of protecting their own dharma, culture and nationalism earn them the labels of extremists, fanatics and even terrorists!

Internet is the only channel which is open to discerning Hindus. We need to make best use of our Hindu forums on the Net to educate ourselves, our children and the other less discerning Hindus, and make them aware of the situation.

In this grim situation, my one question to the dissenting Christians here in HDF and elsewhere who have genuine universal love is: what would you people do if placed in a similar situation?

saidevo
30 May 2007, 01:31 AM
Namaste MG.



Right, I should stay and preach love. I know that. Can I hack it? Am I woman enough? I doubt it. I just hate to argue.

Peace, love, joy, babies!

I welcome your decision to belong to HDF and am glad of it. I would request discerning Christian to just bear in mind that love is never complete, altruistic or universal without empathy.

MysticalGypsi
30 May 2007, 07:32 AM
I am not a Christian. ;)

And, yes, I was trying to convey and will try one more time, that I agree with protecting Indian culture. And am in no way supporting people trying to force beliefs on people.

My only comments were directed at avoiding the "slapping back" mentality. Rather, coming at it proactively, calmly and fairly but still firmly as in laws, etc.

I still stand by my argument that lumping together all Christians or becoming aggressive only perpetuates what we have enough of in this world. I am against any religion becoming militant because emotions take over.

I know that about Hindus Satay. I was not sure how to take your comments. I was not sure if you were really advocating for a backlash to take hold or not. Thanks for clarifying.

sm78
30 May 2007, 09:52 AM
Namaste MG,

Glad to see you posting after quite sometime.


...becoming aggressive only perpetuates what we have enough of in this world...

A human being can only try to become free of this world/maya and strive for moksha. How much we may try and wish of making the world better or worse, it is really beyond our capacity. It solely is divine mother's wish and will.

Those are the egotistic human ideologies which are not motivated by Atman, but Ego, that try to make a world better place in some cases (pacifist, democratic) or a worse place for others (war mongers, terrorist). Ironically the result is often the same.

You know what I am sayin...

But human must work as long he lives in this world and let this work be as per dharma and the only rule there is what is mangal, good, auspicious. Protecting the dharma and one's country is the most mangalmay work one can engage his life in. Betterment, worsening rests with God / maya.

Also I can say wrong action which perpetuates injustice (whether pacifist or terrorist) will make the world worse. For law of Karma is the best approximation we have for working of the most mysterious lady of the universe.

MysticalGypsi
30 May 2007, 10:31 AM
We must show compassion to people though. I don't believe that we can just behave how we want because we cannot change the world or bound by karma. I am not saying that you are saying this, but this argument can lead to that kind of "throw up the hands" philosophy. I have seen people turn their lives around, completely change. So, working with karma, human potential is there for people to progress in how they treat others.

I do agree that change on any grand scale is prone to failure. I still believe in the magic of compassion between human beings though.

And, as humans I do think we have a responsibility to avoid hate and treat people with respect. People are capable of this, it just takes more effort. This does not mean we roll over and let people take advantage. We can respect ourselves enough to set boundaries,etc.

Okay, I think I have said MORE than enough. :)

atanu
30 May 2007, 10:36 AM
Well.

To any one of any religion, my Guru used to ask "Have you solved your own problem? Solve your own problems first. The creator of this Universe is capable enough to manage his creation". He also used to ask "Is the problem beyond your consciousness? The enemy resides in your own consciousness".

I understand and follow this teaching but often fail in many situations. But can anyone disagree that a problem exists in the perceiver's consciousness alone. Apart from the perceiver none can verify the existence of a problem. Satay may come back and say "No Atanu, I verify that there is a problem". But I alone perceive Satay verifying.

So, the problems around us and this discussion will lead us to peep into the I, the perceiver.

Om Namaha Shivaya.

PS: MG please make this forum your home. In home, we have lot of disagreements.

My Boss is a bully. He wants everyone and everything to follow his wishes alone. The atmosphere naturally is despicable. One day, it just occurred naturally to me and I blurted out "Sir God has created a variety, he also does not impose uniformity."

He has been nicer since and the ambience has become better.

Om Namah Shivaya

sm78
30 May 2007, 10:40 AM
Namaste MG,

We must treat each other (and plants and animals and mountains and rivers..) with compassion & love which is not stained by ego and bound by expectations...(i think they called it unconditional love or something :) )

It is only a part of the duty to this world, just like protecting the dharma and society you are born in.

Please continue spreading the love, we do need very much

sm78
30 May 2007, 10:44 AM
Well.

To any one of any religion, my Guru used to ask "Have you solved your own problem? Solve your own problems first. The creator of this Universe is capable enough to manage his creation". He also used to ask "Is the problem beyond your consciousness? The enemy resides in your own consciousness".

I understand and follow this teaching but often fail in many situations. But can anyone disagree that a problem exists in the perceiver's consciousness alone. Apart from the perceiver none can verify the existence of a problem. Satay may come back and say "No Atanu, I verify that there is a problem". But I alone perceive Satay verifying.

So, the problems around us and this discussion will lead us to peep into the I, the perceiver.

Om Namaha Shivaya.

PS: MG please make this forum your home. In home, we have lot of disagreements.

My Boss is a bully. He wants everyone and everything to follow his wishes alone. The atmosphere naturally is despicable. One day, it just occurred naturally to me and I blurted out "Sir God has created a variety, he also does not impose uniformity."

He has been nicer since and the ambience has become better.

Om Namah Shivaya

Thanks...a very nice post.

MysticalGypsi
30 May 2007, 10:56 AM
That is a very nice post, Atanu! And, sm also. :)

Okay, I will stay. How can I argue that this whole discussion has taught me so much about myself. I guess I can't take my toys, go home and pout.

So, right now, I am demoted from passionate crusader for love to mopping my kitchen floor. ;) Maybe I will find a bug that I can free outside. :p

atanu
31 May 2007, 12:28 PM
That is a very nice post, Atanu! And, sm also. :)

Okay, I will stay. How can I argue that this whole discussion has taught me so much about myself. I guess I can't take my toys, go home and pout.

So, right now, I am demoted from passionate crusader for love to mopping my kitchen floor. ;) Maybe I will find a bug that I can free outside. :p

Hi Gypsi,

I suppose love cannot be imposed upon and imposed on. It comes on its own. It is the MASTER. For example, I am going through a dry patch as if gods have dumped me. How long will they succeed, since I am love myself?

And right now, reading your post, I feel the sweetness welling up. We will all play with your toys -- what do you say?

Thanks SM and MG for appreciating the earlier post.

Om Namah Shivaya

MysticalGypsi
31 May 2007, 09:57 PM
That is a great idea. And, sounds much more fun than sitting and pouting at home alone. :)

yajvan
01 June 2007, 07:00 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste,
If one looks to the subject matter of this post, at it's core , it is about Timidness and Dharma.
Words are used such as Hindu Dharma by nature is peace loving.
So we have the following assumption:
Timidness + Dharma + Peace loving = peaceful? Perhaps passive too? If this is true, others are not seeing India as a whole though these eye glasses. How so ?

The Economist Group that publishes The Economist newspaper, has compiled a Global Peace Index. India ranks 109th out of 121 possible positions. What does this tell us? First, what does it measure? Peacefulness was based 24 indicators as I understand it.

One interesting one is the ease of access to WOMD or "weapons of minor destruction", guns, and small explosives.
What else was in the mix of indicators? Military expenditure, local corruption, the level of respect for human rights.

Does it have merit? you will have to decide this for yourself. Here are some folks that think this measure may be useful.
A group of supporters that this measure may be vaild:the Dalai Lama, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Former President James Carter, Sir Richard Branson and Harriet Fulbright of the Fulbright Centre, etc.

See what you think :
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/05-30-2007/0004598231&EDATE

What can we draw from this?

atanu
01 June 2007, 10:44 PM
The present strifes in Punjab and Rajasthan show that hatred need not be religion specific. It is based on the ignorance of I-Me-Mine and Us and Them.