Monotheism/Dvaita is of Hinduism, the filth of Abraham is not any of our concern

[Kumar_Das]

Why do I have to deal with the disgusting equation of Abrahamism with Dvaita?

Hinduism is Hinduism. Hindu scriptures are Hindu scriptures. Anyone who accepts the Vedas as revelation is automatically a Hindu.

Even if you are a Hindu who belongs to a single school of thought. Still you are blessed in that your religion holds God in many different forms of Deities. Many different schools of thoughts and has many different scriptures. Different types of scriptures meant for people of different intellects, temperaments and tendencies.

- Vedas [which are divided into Karma Kanda or relation to action and Jnana Kanda or relation to knowledge]
- Puranas
- Itihasas
- Agamas of the different sects
- Sutras of the different philosophies

In terms of understanding the nature of God, we also have various philosophical schools; Advaita, Vishishadvaita, Dvaita, Dvaitadvaita, Paradvaita, Shuddhadvaita to name the prominent ones amongst yet others.

One could be a convinced, commited and staunch follower of anyone yet study the rest. Which is unlike other religions.

This means that when you have a specific belief or stance regarding one aspect of theology and others differ or are in conflict with yours, you can see the difference. Its not just one thing that has been presented and you merely follow out of a lack of choice. Indeed it requires more intellect and greater faith and firm conviction in your idea/understanding of God than for a Jew or Christian or Muslim.(when there are lesser options before you, you have lesser to think about to make decisions to stick with)

People, especially Hindus, need to stop talking about Abrahamism as though it has something to do with Dvaita and equating the two. In any serious Hindu discussion pertaining to Hinduism alone, there is no room for the filth of Abraham.

What on earth...? and why...?

The Monotheistic conception of God belongs to Hinduism. It is our religion that is the religion of the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita and Brahma Sutras!

Not Judaism (Torah/Talmud), Christianity (New Testament) or Islam (Quran and Hadith)

I am NOT proud to be a Hindu as that would be egoistic. The goal of a Hindu is to overcome samsara, that cannot be with pride that entails attachment to worldy living. Rather I am grateful and blessed to be a Hindu as that means I have a chance in following the spirituality that deals with the only thing which puts an end and requires the most valuable/meaningful of things to reach - liberation.

Who are these mlecchas? How come it is as though they have the claim to a Supreme Being? How dare they insult Hindus and Hinduism?!

Indeed it is travesty that Abrahamism has come to have been associated with Monotheism, and Abrahamics can speak of God freely as though they are entitled to do so, worst of all instruct Hindus about it.

The root of this all really are the Semites. Because Abrahamism spread from the Middle East.

Will we see the day when the accursed demon of Abraham finally ceases to ravage?

[Water]

Interesting.

What are your thoughts on Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Vedanta Society in America? In my understanding, they are proponents of understanding the religions you have a distaste for. Could you help me understand how your thoughts relate to them?

[Kumar_Das]

Vedanta Society in America?

What about it?



Could you help me understand how your thoughts relate to them?


I simply don't care.

[Water]

You don't care about Ramakrishna and Vedanta?

The reason I bring it up is because of the parallels presented. Ramakrishna himself spoke to the extent that "all religions are true" - as reflected in Shruti. It is suggested that he practiced Islam and Christianity and sustained samadhi even in these practices.

Vivekananda and the Vedanta societies across America perpetuated those ideas. At many (as I've read) and at least one (as I've seen) Vedanta institution, traditional Hindu concepts are either missing or even banned. For example, all swastika are banned or covered. Siddhartha and Jesus sit in shrines identical to Ganapati. Shiva and Shakti seem to be missing entirely. There are quotes and other material describing Jesus as Bhakti Yoga to Brahman.

From my assumption of what your post was about... it seemed to describe some of the practices related to Vedanta. In no way am I saying that it reflects all of Vedanta! But that is why I asked for your thoughts on the matter.

I personally have the utmost respect for Vedanta, Ramakrishna and Vivekananda. I was curious about the relation of these subjects based on the explanation above to what you were speaking about.

[Adhvagat]

Kumar, your point is valid, even though I'm not a strict Dvaita myself I'd like its visions regarding God to be more proeminent in discussions around here.

I posted this topic http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=7151 on the Advaita section but the intent was also to know more about Dvaita core beliefs.

[anirvan]

Why do I have to deal with the disgusting equation of Abrahamism with Dvaita?
[QUOTE]Who are these mlecchas? How come it is as though they have the claim to a Supreme Being? How dare they insult Hindus and Hinduism?!

Is there anything existent in the universe or out of it which are not part and ansa of God/brahman?

It requires as broad heard as a brahma-vid acharyas heart to see God in all.

This is the teaching of Hinduism which is why its the best Religion. not by any other means.

Harekrishna

[Eastern Mind]

Ramakrishna himself spoke to the extent that "all religions are true" - as reflected in Shruti. It is suggested that he practiced Islam and Christianity and sustained samadhi even in these practices.



Vannakkam Water: I think we have to reflect on the individual's starting point when we hear this about Ramakrishna. When Ramakrishna said this, he was already self-realised from within a Hindu context. That was his starting point.

For Joe Average, the starting point is at a considerably lower point on the mountain.

Aum Namasivaya

[Water]

Vannakkam Water: I think we have to reflect on the individual's starting point when we hear this about Ramakrishna. When Ramakrishna said this, he was already self-realised from within a Hindu context. That was his starting point.

For Joe Average, the starting point is at a considerably lower point on the mountain.

Aum Namasivaya

I completely agree.

Again, the reason for bringing the topic up was in relation to the opening post. It sounded like the author was intending to say that the Abrahamics were bring their religion into Hinduism, while the opposite was also occurring.

[Ramakrishna]

Namaste Water,


Ramakrishna himself spoke to the extent that "all religions are true" - as reflected in Shruti. It is suggested that he practiced Islam and Christianity and sustained samadhi even in these practices.


Hey, I never spoke about that :D

Seriously though, I reiterate what Eastern Mindji said. Sri Ramakrishna had already attained prolonged samadhi many times and was self-realized to a point where he was able to see God in almost anything. I don't think he was "endorsing" Christianity and Islam as much as he was showing how through self-realization, one can see God in everything. It's important to remember how he became self-realized in the first place, and that was through intense practicing of Sanatana Dharma. Not to say that non-Hindus have no chance of attaining self-realization in this lifetime, it could be possible. But Sri Ramakrishna was also known for his criticisms of mainstream Christianity, especially its obsession with sin and hell and all that stuff.

Jai Sri Ram

[Water]

Hmmm...

I can see I haven't quite made my point clear.

I am aware that Ramakrishna wasn't promoting Islam and Christianity. :D

Ramakrishna (not the one posting above me, but y'know... the other guy :)), et al have promoted that Abrahamic Faiths are virtually the same concepts as Hinduism. "All religions are true," etc. Vivekananda even promoted reading the Vedas because "Vedas will make Christians better Christians."

So the question becomes one of paradigm - if all faiths are true, Abrahamic concepts match Hinduism, samadhi can be maintained under any faith, the Vedas apply to all religions.... then shouldn't Abrahamic concepts then virtually mirror Hinduism in a different perspective? As well as the inverse? And how can one be filth while the other is divine (see note below on this)*?

These concepts were suggested by Hindus - not by filthy abrahamics marching against Hinduism.

And that's why I was curious about the authors thoughts on Vedanta, Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, et al.

* The obvious answer to me is the way they are reflected by their followers. Any religion can be twisted to induce and promote unfavorable actions. Some religions (ie: Abrahamics) lend themselves easily to this. Does that discredit the source entirely?

[Ramakrishna]

Namaste Water,


Hmmm...

I can see I haven't quite made my point clear.



No, I understand what you're saying...I think.

It's just that your last post came up while I was typing my reply, so I didn't see your post until after my reply showed up :)

Jai Sri Ram

[Eastern Mind]

Hmmm...

I can see I haven't quite made my point clear.

I am aware that Ramakrishna wasn't promoting Islam and Christianity. :D

Ramakrishna (not the one posting above me, but y'know... the other guy :)), et al have promoted that Abrahamic Faiths are virtually the same concepts as Hinduism. "All religions are true," etc. Vivekananda even promoted reading the Vedas because "Vedas will make Christians better Christians."

So the question becomes one of paradigm - if all faiths are true, Abrahamic concepts match Hinduism, samadhi can be maintained under any faith, the Vedas apply to all religions.... then shouldn't Abrahamic concepts then virtually mirror Hinduism in a different perspective? As well as the inverse? And how can one be filth while the other is divine (see note below on this)*?

These concepts were suggested by Hindus - not by filthy abrahamics marching against Hinduism.

And that's why I was curious about the authors thoughts on Vedanta, Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, et al.

* The obvious answer to me is the way they are reflected by their followers. Any religion can be twisted to induce and promote unfavorable actions. Some religions (ie: Abrahamics) lend themselves easily to this. Does that discredit the source entirely?

Vannakkam Water: This topic has been discussed on HDF at very great length here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4982 and elsewhere. I for one do not wish to have the discussion all over again. There are many swamis who teachings can be considered universalism (or not).

Best wishes in your quest.

Aum Namasivaya

[Water]

Vannakkam Water: This topic has been discussed on HDF at very great length here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4982 and elsewhere.

Oh, I see some of the same concepts present there in much more colorful discussion. I'll go check that out. :)

[Adhvagat]

* The obvious answer to me is the way they are reflected by their followers. Any religion can be twisted to induce and promote unfavorable actions. Some religions (ie: Abrahamics) lend themselves easily to this. Does that discredit the source entirely?

Yes, there's a point in which a school of thought must be discredited because starting from its core followers, it's clearly not spiritual uplifiting.

For example, I can't give credit to islam by the way they treat women and are aggressive towards others based on Qu'ran.

I can't give credity to christianity because of its problems with parampara and heavy adulteration of philosophy/theology for political motives, as it's shown in history.

[wundermonk]

if all faiths are true, Abrahamic concepts match Hinduism, samadhi can be maintained under any faith, the Vedas apply to all religions.... then shouldn't Abrahamic concepts then virtually mirror Hinduism in a different perspective? As well as the inverse? And how can one be filth while the other is divine (see note below on this)*?

To me, any faith that proclaims it alone is in sole possession of all of truth for all of humankind for all times to come is not spiritual. If they divide the world into believers and heathens/infidels based on exclusive belief in "Father, Son and Holy Ghost" or "La Ilaha Il Allah Mohammed Rasool Allah", they have pretty much lost the plot. Islam/Christianity fit this bill. Spirituality, to me, is based on seeing the underlying unity between different entities.


These concepts were suggested by Hindus - not by filthy abrahamics marching against Hinduism.

As mentioned by EM this could be because these Hindus who proclaim this have experienced the unity/Brahman. Hence no thoughts of duality exist. In their minds, they probably see only the "good" of Christianity/Islam without seeing the portion of their scriptures that promise eternal hellfire to non-believers.

Funny how it is always Hindus who proclaim that one can reach God by being a "good" Christian/Muslim. The favour is never returned :( I havent heard a single Muslim Maulana or Christian Pastor proclaim that a Hindu who does not believe in Mohammed/Jesus can reach God.

[Kumar_Das]

I'd like its visions regarding God to be more proeminent in discussions around here.

Okay you are important therefore you "likes" should be met?


I posted this topic http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=7151 on the Advaita section but the intent was also to know more about Dvaita core beliefs.

Okay you just simply copy/pasted the quote from the Dvaita article of wikipedia, what are we supposed to do about that?

[Adhvagat]

I'd like because I'm interested about it and people don't usually expose ideas of Dvaita around, perhaps you, a person that created this thread about Dvaita, could perhaps, hmmm, discuss ideas in that thread (if you got interested).

I'm sorry if I didn't develop my line of thought regarding Dvaita, but I tend to have the decency to not talk too much about something I don't fully understand so I just ask more experienced people about it, so perhaps you, could talk more about it.

The simple copy/paste happens to be the word of the central guru of your sampradaya. I thought this would interest you... I guessed wrong.

And is it really a stretch for you to be a nice person? Did I really bothered you that badly saying I'd like something to happen?
And why not cultivate sattva in speech? I'm not sure this hurtful sarcastic speech is proper of a Vishnu devotee.

[Kumar_Das]

Is there anything existent in the universe or out of it which are not part and ansa of God/brahman?

Namaste anirvan,

You are asking a Dvaitin this question, don't you know what sort of an answer to expect? Not even pious devotees and people who earnestly follow Dharma are considered so.



It requires as broad heard as a brahma-vid acharyas heart to see God in all.


To me there is no "God in all".



This is the teaching of Hinduism which is why its the best Religion. not by any other means.


In the Gita, it is stated that non-dharmic/non-pious people fall lower and lower in the scale of creatures, birth after birth. So the fool and ruffian who mocks and attacks the innocent and pious innocents definitely is commiting grevious sin and as a result becomes even more "inferior" as a punishment.

He gets "removed" away from God and is under the bad books of God.(although they still have a chance if they choose to change)

"sees the God in all" it depends on how you read this.

If you mean very literally as in all = directly and entirely God, that means there are no differences and that you see "God"/the Being Who is God in something other than God.

What I want to know is how is it that you are even "seeing"? What is this "seeing"?

You are proposing two things. "God" and then there is the world which you are aware of through the physical senses.

If you say God is all-inclusive. That is one thing. If you say others include God or are God. Then there is no "God" to speak of. Your idea of "realization" is to "see" everything as God (whatever this means), so why do you have a problem(or somehow are against) with me having a problem with them? :D ;)

You are saying I am non-God about having a problem with them. When I say they are non-God. And you are saying that I am yet to be Godly and when I do that I won't take offense or whatever to them. How come you aren't seeing the God in me?;)

Because you want me to change and be different, it means I am not of the standards of you percieving my Godliness.

There exists a duality IN YOU! For if I were to embrace them and somehow accept them or the least not take offense, it would mean I am "realized"(according to you) but the otherwise instead, the opposite to that, as I am doing now, it is not so.

You are advicing me against having a problem with them. They are the ones who first are problematic. If there is faeces and it smells bad, and I find that foul, I clear the faeces. Likewise there is filth and uncleaness and foulness that is opposed to spirituality too.(I'll get to it below)

1) why don't YOU go tell them AND THEN get back to me
2) why are YOU advicing me only? are you a coward? you will present your holy headedness and intellect to me but not them?

So as I was saying. There is filth/foulness to spirituality. It is called asurya.

Now there is no opposite to God like in Abrahamic religions. God[=Good] and Satan[=Bad]. And God and Satan are enemies. And you choose the team of the other side. And God is the guy who tortures you forever if you don't join his gang.

Asurya are "forces"/"entities" who are diametrically opposed to all things Dharmic and spiritual.

God has no personal interests with asuras.

Jivas are jivas and jivas are of many kinds and they do all sorts of things. But things get ugly, nasty things happen, some try to torture and spoil others and think they can get away with it. They try to hurt others.

There is such a thing as Dharma. And although God is not bound by Dharma, He makes sure that aids those on the side of Dharma, because well, if God were to go other way, just think about it. It's already worse with the asuras around. The bad guys always get the upper hand because they don't play by the book, they cheat and try to escape always. If God took their sides, then you can just imagine how hopeless it would be. Its the worst of things to imagine. God prefers Dharma because He is Just and Kind.

The Puranas are for a reason. Read how Lord Vishnu remains uninvolved only untill the Devas come to plead for help.

God has no personal interest with asuras, but it is significant because it is so from our perspective. Asuras bring stagnation, degeneration and destruction to us. And are a problem to our universal affairs and spirituality. Time and again with the help of God we have to defeat them.

Btw I am not calling Abrahamics as asuras. They are just mlecchas and should not be tolerated and allowed to taint Hinduism.

And to me Hindus somehow putting Dvaita on the same grouping or worse still equating it with Abrahamism, definitely makes it asuric. Because there is an insult that people mean because they say Dvaita is wrong and then treat it with the same contempt as Abrahamism. This is where it becomes like as if Abrahamism is an instrument of removing Dvaita from Hinduism. The true name of Dvaita is Brahma-Vada, and A-Brahamism is a real nuisance.

Just look at it, even if Abrahamics are somehow practicing Dvaita, it is they who have become synonymous with it and are globally representative of it.

[Kumar_Das]

I'd like because I'm interested about it and people don't usually expose ideas of Dvaita around, perhaps you, a person that created this thread about Dvaita, could perhaps, hmmm, discuss ideas in that thread (if you got interested).

I'm sorry if I didn't develop my line of thought regarding Dvaita, but I tend to have the decency to not talk too much about something I don't fully understand so I just ask more experienced people about it, so perhaps you, could talk more about it.

The simple copy/paste happens to be the word of the central guru of your sampradaya. I thought this would interest you... I guessed wrong.

And is it really a stretch for you to be a nice person? Did I really bothered you that badly saying I'd like something to happen?
And why not cultivate sattva in speech? I'm not sure this hurtful sarcastic speech is proper of a Vishnu devotee.

That thread was a thread where HINDUS were discussing brilliantly and beautifully. Speaking about Sanskrit concepts on a highly advanced spiritual level.

Things which are alien to Abrahamic sh*ts.

You just wanted to include yourself in and punctured the exchange that was already going on. And now you are pestering me because you were ignored by everyone there.

Also it would be wise that you stop being responding to me by all means because I have no interest in discussing with you.

And your covert subversion is not going to work on me.

"is it really a stretch for you to be a nice person", "cultivate sattva speech", "hurtful sarcasm" lol please...

I am nice to my co-religionists. I don't have to entertain trolls. And considering you are a non-Hindu you should know when Hindus are arguing about theological/philosophical differences it doesnt mean we are being hateful. I know that for an Abrahamic witnessing such a thing will find it hard to make sense and might even get under your skin, because you maim each other over the slightest of things.

[Kumar_Das]

That thread was a thread where HINDUS were discussing brilliantly and beautifully. Speaking about Sanskrit concepts on a highly advanced spiritual level.

Sorry I confused that link you posted to another thread I read where you had made some posts. But nonetheless you had posted in such a thread.

[Adhvagat]

That thread was a thread where HINDUS were discussing brilliantly and beautifully. Speaking about Sanskrit concepts on a highly advanced spiritual level.

Things which are alien to Abrahamic sh*ts.

You just wanted to include yourself in and punctured the exchange that was already going on. And now you are pestering me because you were ignored by everyone there.

Also it would be wise that you stop being responding to me by all means because I have no interest in discussing with you.

And your covert subversion is not going to work on me.

"is it really a stretch for you to be a nice person", "cultivate sattva speech", "hurtful sarcasm" lol please...

I am nice to my co-religionists. I don't have to entertain trolls. And considering you are a non-Hindu you should know when Hindus are arguing about theological/philosophical differences it doesnt mean we are being hateful. I know that for an Abrahamic witnessing such a thing will find it hard to make sense and might even get under your skin, because you maim each other over the slightest of things.

Hello Kumar Das, I'm sorry if unconsciously I acted selfishly, I'll sure work on improving that.

But I think my words are true. I enjoyed specially your view of the openness in Hinduism:


In terms of understanding the nature of God, we also have various philosophical schools; Advaita, Vishishadvaita, Dvaita, Dvaitadvaita, Paradvaita, Shuddhadvaita to name the prominent ones amongst yet others.

One could be a convinced, commited and staunch follower of anyone yet study the rest. Which is unlike other religions.

So I really remembered that thread and thought it would be nice if you could add thoughts regarding Dvaita in there.

I'm actually truly saddened by your words. I was not born a Hindu, but I had a great sattvic family that allowed me to reach Hinduism. When I was young I took a vow of not lying and I'm managing to keep it thus far. Trolling, being purposely deceitful in communication for ulterior motives, would not fit into this vow.

I'm not an Abrahamist, and I'm also saddened to be put down like this, my interest for the Vedas are genuine, even though you may not consider me a co-religionist, I don't want to have that same atittude towards you. That is all acting on the ahamkhara and is going to dissipate soon. But you're saying I am something which I'm not.

It seems like you're judging me based on broad information that does not reflect my personal experience. Even though my name is italian and Brazil's dominant religion is catholicism, I never stepped foot in a church for religious purposes and was never interested in any of its teachings that never made quite sense to me. My family was already in Kardecism when I was born, a doctrine that deals with reincarnation, karma and the subtle aspect of the world. Since 2003 the whole family is now trailing the path of Hinduism.


Sorry I confused that link you posted to another thread I read where you had made some posts. But nonetheless you had posted in such a thread.

Yes, you must have confused, the thread I linked I only sat back and let the voice of experience talk, only asking some questions to Anirvan, in which he helped me a lot with the answers.

Perhaps you're mentioning the thread where I posted a joke (there was even an emoticon there), because I disagreed with how you were presenting your views.

If that distressed you and offended you, I apologize.

Be well,
Om shanti.