Eastern 'wisdom'

[AtheistNational]

Guru adherents and Krishna pupils collect millions of dollars from naive Westerners. Sixteen-year-old boys, even mentally retarded persons, bring pupils to India for meetings on "meditation". A country where human life is cheaper than the life of a cow and rats are considered "holy" and are kept in rat parks cannot boast of presenting deep thought for human salvation. When Indian religion and philosophy cannot do better than ignore the human misery and desperation of millions of their people, there is no reason to seek depth and understanding in their primitive myths.

The rules of Hinduism show the absurdity of India's backwards superstitions:

"When chewing do not look north or south or into a corner when your father is still alive."

"Do not eat while standing, walking, or lying down."

"When defacating do not look at either sun, moon, fire, water, on a cow or in a Brahman. During daytime, one should turn to the north; during the night, towards the south."

"Do not sleep with your wife on a day of full moon or new moon, and on the 8th or 14th day after these days."

"During intercourse, the man should breathe through the right side of his nose, the woman through the left side."

[premjan]

Which religions present deep thoughts for human progress? The thing about cows may be sensible as I believe the removal of cattle would introduce goats which are harder on the soil and grass cover etc., and cows provide (more) milk etc.

I wonder about the wisdom of a western capitalist system which converts food to fuel while millions of people starve worldwide. Why not pontificate about that as well?

[Will.L]

You will find an abundance of equally absurd rules and regulations in the abrahamic religions. I'm not defending Hinduism or the verses you posted, but it is unfair to focus solely on Hinduism without comparing it to other religions.

You are right though, India has had quite a hard time entering modernity, as have all 19th-20th century colonized nations.

[Trout]

Wow so Hinduism is crap, what a freakin news flash.

I guess this just plays into your "Asia culture are worthless" theme you've got going of late right?

How about attempting to be somewhat even handed at least.

[J.F. Gaul]

AtheistNational,

Methinks you paint with too broad a brush.

[figuer]

A country where human life is cheaper than the life of a cow and rats are considered "holy" and are kept in rat parks cannot boast of presenting deep thought for human salvation. When Indian religion and philosophy cannot do better than ignore the human misery and desperation of millions of their people, there is no reason to seek depth and understanding in their primitive myths.So true...although primitive myths can have their uses in psychology/entertainment.

Pertaining to human salvation there is no match for Western Wisdom: Medicine, technology, democracy, human rights....etc....etc.

[premjan]

This is what Gandhi would describe as a gutter inspector's report.

[figuer]

This is what Gandhi would describe as a gutter inspector's report.As Winston Churchill would probably say; Who bloody cares what that naked fakhir says?

[Autonemesis]

Guru adherents and Krishna pupils collect millions of dollars from naive Westerners.

Genetics at work. If only those naive westerners would evolve some skepticism, the mud people wouldn't be able to to fleece them so easily. Every dollar or euro spent by a white person on Eastern wisdom is a dollar/euro not spent raising a white child. Why interfere with natural selection?

[premjan]

Soon after Winston Churchill was out of office, England was out of India. Churchill was no democrat anyway - he opposed granting freedom or even self-determination to India.
Churchill, who considered himself a true democrat constantly opposed granting freedom to India. In more ways than one, Gandhi was a much greater democrat, especially in believing in self-determination of people and the universal equality of mankind. Churchill was to be irritated further. The following year, Gandhi met face to face with Churchill during the Indian round table conference -- "...I have an alternative that is unpleasant to you" he told Churchill and his clan of imperialists. " India demands complete liberty and freedom...the same liberty that Englishmen enjoy... and I want India to become a partner in the Empire. I want to partner with the English people ... not merely for mutual benefit, but so that the great weight that is crushing the world to atoms may be lifted from its shoulders".http://www.kamat.com/mmgandhi/churchill.htm

[J.F. Gaul]

Pertaining to human salvation there is no match for Western Wisdom: Medicine, technology, democracy, human rights....etc....etc.

Apparently, you are unaware of the destruction "Western wisdom" has wreaked on Eastern countries and the significant contribution of "Eastern wisdom" to Western development.

[figuer]

Apparently, you are unaware of the...significant contribution of "Eastern wisdom" to Western development.Not at all...I am quite aware of India's notable contributions to mathematics and philosophy...but that is ancient history...this thread refers to the contemporary world.

[J.F. Gaul]

Not at all...I am quite aware of India's notable contributions to mathematics and philosophy...but that is ancient history...this thread refers to the contemporary world.

And I suppose by Western wisdom in the contemporary world, you are also referring to Christianity?

[premjan]

Even in the contemporary world, tired, archaic and foolish philosophy is not the only contribution that India makes.

[figuer]

And I suppose by Western wisdom in the contemporary world, you are also referring to Christianity?Your supposition is incorrect...I am reffering to science/technology and humanism.

[figuer]

Even in the contemporary world, tired, archaic and foolish philosophy is not the only contribution that India makes.No one is claiming that India makes no contribution to the contemporary world...but the 'wisdom' that people associate with India and seek there has to do with gurus and nirvanas and chanting and reincarnations.

[J.F. Gaul]

Your supposition is incorrect...I am reffering to science/technology and humanism.

Historically, humanism was an Eastern idea before it was a Western idea.
The rise of Western technology over Eastern technology was due more to political factors than anything else, and the disastrous conditions in places like India is most often linked to Western influences.

[AtheistNational]

The pilgrimage of our youths to India, in quest of spiritual "enlightenment", is a depressing demonstration of the fact that mankind multiplies from the lower regions of genetic ability. The difficulties of modern life with the need for technical understanding and socioeconoic limits for the individual have discouraged the low IQ populace and lead to a total negation of rational solutions in favour of irrational behaviour - and as a consequence, to compounded misery. There is only one hope - that the necessity to learn will dominate finally and that in the process of the formation of superior social groupings such tendencies will be eliminated. But these processes can last much too long in view of our immediate needs to limit human quantity and upgrade human quality.

[J.F. Gaul]

The pilgrimage of our youths to India, in quest of spiritual "enlightenment", is a depressing demonstration of the fact that mankind multiplies from the lower regions of genetic ability. The difficulties of modern life with the need for technical understanding and socioeconoic limits for the individual have discouraged the low IQ populace and lead to a total negation of rational solutions in favour of irrational behaviour - and as a consequence, to compounded misery. There is only one hope - that the necessity to learn will dominate finally and that in the process of the formation of superior social groupings such tendencies will be eliminated. But these processes can last much too long in view of our immediate needs to limit human quantity and upgrade human quality.

As far as population genetics goes, your bit here is a lot of nonsense. The issue much more economic than genetic.

[AtheistNational]

The rise of Western technology over Eastern technology was due more to political factors than anything else,
It was due to differences in average intelligence.

and the disastrous conditions in places like India is most often linked to Western influences.
Nonsense. When the British arrived the Mogul Empire was already in a state of complete collapse. Chaos ensued, similar in many respects to the chaos which followed the downfall of the Roman Empire in Europe. Natives fought each other and fought terribly destructive Afghan adventurers who penetrated far into India from beyond the frontiers. The fittest would survive, and the fittest would be neither natives nor Afghans but one of the European trading companies, which themselves, in mere self-defence, compelled to take a share in the struggle. The British established order and justice and they were welcomed by the natives as liberators.

It is no exaggeration to say that the majority of Indians today owe their very lives to British rule, for it was the law and order, the science and enterprise, introduced by the British, that enabled the Indian peoples to double their population just in the first hundred or so years of British rule. British adminsitration of India was excellent. It was one of the finest achievements of its kind to the credit of any race in any period of history.

[Autonemesis]

The rise of Western technology over Eastern technology was due more to political factors than anything else,
It was due to differences in average intelligence.

If that's so then why does this occur:

Guru adherents and Krishna pupils collect millions of dollars from naive Westerners.

[AtheistNational]

As far as population genetics goes, your bit here is a lot of nonsense. The issue much more economic than genetic.
What issue? No doubt the overfertility of India's underclasses is influenced by economic variables, but cacogenic fertility itself depresses economic development, and so we have a vicious cycle.

[figuer]

Historically, humanism was an Eastern idea before it was a Western idea.
Care to explain the basis for such a wild claim?

[J.F. Gaul]

It was due to differences in average intelligence.

And you base that statement on...?

When the British arrived the Mogul Empire was already in a state of complete collapse. Chaos ensured, similar in many respects to the chaos which followed the downfall of the Roman Empire in Europe. Natives fought each other and fought terribly destructive Afghan adventurers who penetrated far into India from beyond the frontiers. The fittest would survive, and the fittest would be neither natives nor Afghans but one of the European trading companies, which themselves, in mere self-defence, compelled to take a share in the struggle. The British established order and justice in this time of chaos and they were welcomed by the natives as liberators.

The British never completely unified India, and their influence was at first only economic. The British exploited Indian labor and destroyed the economy of India, and maintained it only by the eventual use of military force. British rule would have been impossible without the consent of some major Indian groups with the same economic interests.

It was one of the finest achievements of its kind to the credit of any race in any period of history.

Hardly.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

This is what Gandhi would describe as a gutter inspector's report.

I agree (for Figuer's tranquility, I don't agree because Gandhi said it). One has to ask oneself, am I looking for gems or fæces? I read Gita or Buddha or the Bible in search of their gems, not their blunders.

I already "know" there is no Vishnu. Good. Great. Now I'm over it and can carry on, looking for poetry and philosophy in the voices of yesterday. One day the great religions will be gone, but we will still need a soul to nourish.

[J.F. Gaul]

Care to explain the basis for such a wild claim?

If you are familiar with both Buddhism and Humanism, you shouldn't have much of a problem figuring it out. Here's a hint: (1) Humans are not subject to a god, (2) Human morality based on collective values, (3) belief based on experience, (4) all humans are entitled to the same rights, etc.

[J.F. Gaul]

I already "know" there is no Vishnu. Good. Great. Now I'm over it and can carry on, looking for poetry and philosophy in the voices of yesterday. One day the great religions will be gone, but we will still need a soul to nourish.

Exactly.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Historically, humanism was an Eastern idea before it was a Western idea.
Care to explain the basis for such a wild claim?

When the first rabbi said something like "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Law; the rest is the explanation; go and learn", humanism was born. It is a great accomplishment when a teacher of such a bloody book as the torah is, can say such a sweet thing.

Who was the first humanist? Hard to say. Civilization flourished and with it solidarity, compassion and love. And civilzation flourished in the four corners of the earth, Indus, Egypt, China, Mesopotamia.

[AtheistNational]

Care to explain the basis for such a wild claim?

If you are familiar with both Buddhism and Humanism, you shouldn't have much of a problem figuring it out.
Isocrates in Greece invented humanism.

[figuer]

One day the great religions will be gone, but we will still need a soul to nourish.Since you made a passing reference to me, I must remind you that in post #6, I expressed a similar conception:...although primitive myths can have their uses in psychology/entertainment.

[J.F. Gaul]

Isocrates in Greece invented humanism.

He made significant contributions to humanism in rhetoric, but that's about it.

[figuer]

Contemporary International Humanism is derived from ancient Greek philosophy/culture...not from Buddhism (and the claim that Buddhism and Hinduism influenced Greek thought is a preposterous fantasy).

Evidently we are observing a typical case of Westeners "drowning in the Ganghes"....I prefer to swim in the Atlantic.

[J.F. Gaul]

...although primitive myths can have their uses in psychology/entertainment.

Primitive mythology is more for armchair "philosophers", not psychologists.

[J.F. Gaul]

Contemporary International Humanism is derived from ancient Greek philosophy/culture...

Sure.

not from Buddhism (and the claim that Buddhism and Hinduism influenced Greek thought is a preposterous fantasy).

Early Greek philosophy actually bears many similarities to Eastern thought (e.g. Heraclitus). Whether or not they influenced each other is another question. As far as your thought that "the claim that Buddhism and Hinduism influenced Greek thought is a preposterous fantasy," I hope you will point out where anyone here has actually made that claim. Otherwise you're just having your own preposterous fantasy.

[figuer]

..As far as your thought that "the claim that Buddhism and Hinduism influenced Greek thought is a preposterous fantasy," I hope you will point out where anyone here has actually made that claim.No one has made that claim (in this thread)...yet...that was a preemptive strike....I know this territory.

[figuer]

Primitive mythology is more for armchair "philosophers", not psychologists.Tell that to Jung.

[J.F. Gaul]

Tell that to Jung.

Jung's work was very biased, internally inconsistent, and flat out illogical. Jung's gig was cheap philosophy, not science.

[figuer]

Jung's work was very biased, internally inconsistent, and flat out illogical. Jung's gig was cheap philosophy, not science.So you opine...I disagree.

[J.F. Gaul]

So you opine...I disagree.

Not to deviate from the main topic too far, but surely you must at least concede that Jung's work was culturally biased and far from scientific?

[figuer]

Not to deviate from the main topic too far, but surely you must at least concede that Jung's work was culturally biased and far from scientific?He wasn't perfect...so?

[J.F. Gaul]

He wasn't perfect...so?

I'm just wondering what value you find in his work, other than as something entertaining to talk about. What ideas of his do you find particularly useful?

[figuer]

I'm just wondering what value you find in his work, other than as something entertaining to talk about. What ideas of his do you find particularly useful?I find many of his ideas useful and important, both culturally and scientifically...which ones would be the subject of another thread.

[J.F. Gaul]

To return to the main topic, Western humanism may be derived from the Greeks, but that does not devalue the fact that Eastern philosophy did contain humanistic ideas before Greek philosophy. It is foolish to romanticize Eastern ideas, as many do, but it is equally foolish to unjustifiably devalue Eastern culture.

[adren@line]

Contemporary International Humanism is derived from ancient Greek philosophy/culture...not from Buddhism (and the claim that Buddhism and Hinduism influenced Greek thought is a preposterous fantasy).
.

Not really. There is a solid link at least with Indian atomism influencing Greek atomism.

As far as the rest, "The Shape of Ancient Thought" by Thomas McEvilley is devoted in its entirety to this very subject and establishes clear similarities in ideas and rhetoric. Ashoka sent Buddhist missionary-monks to Greece who set up monasteries in Greece itself. So there is a possible link, and it isnt preposterous at all.

As far as the OP, I cant tell if its flame bait or if the guy is actually being serious. Either way, most of what is in the OP is sensationalized and completely one-sided.

[figuer]

That is not the point. It is evident that 'Westeners' that go to India on spiritual tourism are being a bit silly in believing that they are going to find some sort of superior wisdom. Perhaps there are some meditation traditions etc. that are unique, or evident exotisms like Tantra, and philosophical Buddhism/Hinduism are certainly interesting and not lacking in merit. But the phenomenon has more to do with novelty and sensationalism than with any factual superiority of the East in spiritual matters.

[J.F. Gaul]

That is not the point. It is evident that 'Westeners' that go to India on spiritual tourism are being a bit silly in believing that they are going to find some sort of superior wisdom. Perhaps there are some meditation traditions etc. that are unique, or evident exotisms like Tantra, and philosophical Buddhism/Hinduism are certainly interesting and not lacking in merit. But the phenomenon has more to do with novelty and sensationalism than with any factual superiority of the East in spiritual matters.

This is true, too many Westerners simply get bored with Western philosophy and think that there's something "more true" in Eastern ideas, and in the end, waste their time.

[adren@line]

Well, in my subjective opinion, Christianity (the majority religion in the west) is hardly a religion anymore and is more-so a product, a service, something that is pandered and sold.

Its more of a business than anything else. Its largely empty and shallow, and relies nearly 100% on faith and emotion. Ofcourse, I am generalizing. But as I stated, that is my subjective opinion.

In that regard, Hinduism/Buddhism might offer something different, perhaps better in some regards, worse in others, to people who are tired of the mega-church-fake-spirituality that is so prevalent in the west.

[premjan]

Basically there are two approaches when it comes to something like enlightenment or wisdom, the search for ultimate meaning etc. One is to try to grasp at it. This is a road fraught with difficulties, charlatans etc. The other is to sternly resist the lure of this apple. Indian gurus (e.g. UG Krishnamurti who claimed not to be a guru) themselves have stated that there is nothing to find, stop searching and start living. Others are not so candid and prefer to make two million dollars a year by an easy route of accepting wealthy devotees.

But: this has nothing to do with culture, eastern or western. It is about confidence trickery, ambiguity, futility etc. Indian culture committed itself to searching rather than avoiding. The net result is good, bad and ugly. Don't grasp at Indian culture as the answer. Becoming vegetarian and revering cows and chanting Hare Krishna is not going to get you any wisdom on its own. In fact I think such a search is as likely to disrupt your existence as give you any peace. I would advise trying to find meaning in your own circumstances, using your brain and heart (metaphorically) to find the answers for your existence. Do not become an acolyte as that is the easy way out. Yet those who would be subordinate might become subordinate to one fantasy or one master, if not another. The real trick as UG Krishnamurti has stated (and no doubt western philosophers have stated before and after him) is to stop seeking and find satisfaction in your own condition.

In fact the Gita is also candid about this. Take from Indian philosophy what you will, but use it and do not be used by it.

[Will.L]

Contemporary International Humanism is derived from ancient Greek philosophy/culture...not from Buddhism (and the claim that Buddhism and Hinduism influenced Greek thought is a preposterous fantasy).
.

Not really. There is a solid link at least with Indian atomism influencing Greek atomism.

As far as the rest, "The Shape of Ancient Thought" by Thomas McEvilley is devoted in its entirety to this very subject and establishes clear similarities in ideas and rhetoric. Ashoka sent Buddhist missionary-monks to Greece who set up monasteries in Greece itself. So there is a possible link, and it isnt preposterous at all.

I didn't find anything in McEvilley's book suggesting that there is a "solid link" between Indian atomist schools and those of the Greeks? From what I found, it was the same as everything else he suggested, that it would have been POSSIBLE for diffusion from east to west, but there's far from any hard evidence, and it's perfectly reasonable to assume that there was not a connection...

[adren@line]

McEvilley, surprisingly, doesn't cover atomism much (or at all, if I remember correctly).

[Will.L]

He does cover it, but only enough to mention the existence of certain Indian schools of atomism, especially with regards to the Jains (if my memory serves...)

It's been a while since I've picked that book up though. In fact, I think both you and I read that book at about the same time, probably close to this time last year...

[aupmanyav]

Jains have some sort of atomism, but Vaisesika of Kanada was more so. Nothing like modern atomism. Matter was supposed to be composed of earth, water, fire, and air. The more interesting was their theory of logic. They accepted only two, Pratyaksha (Perception) and Anumana (Inference). Sabda (scriptures) was not taken as proof.

[premjan]

Nothing so great about atomism in that age - just a philosophical speculation that happens to be closer to the truth we hold seen in hindsight.

[zavijava]

Guru adherents and Krishna pupils collect millions of dollars from naive Westerners. Sixteen-year-old boys, even mentally retarded persons, bring pupils to India for meetings on "meditation". A country where human life is cheaper than the life of a cow and rats are considered "holy" and are kept in rat parks cannot boast of presenting deep thought for human salvation. When Indian religion and philosophy cannot do better than ignore the human misery and desperation of millions of their people, there is no reason to seek depth and understanding in their primitive myths.

The rules of Hinduism show the absurdity of India's backwards superstitions:

"When chewing do not look north or south or into a corner when your father is still alive."

"Do not eat while standing, walking, or lying down."

"When defacating do not look at either sun, moon, fire, water, on a cow or in a Brahman. During daytime, one should turn to the north; during the night, towards the south."

"Do not sleep with your wife on a day of full moon or new moon, and on the 8th or 14th day after these days."

"During intercourse, the man should breathe through the right side of his nose, the woman through the left side."


wow, what a horribly offensive and narrow view you have displayed!

[Will.L]

AtheistNational, are you all done with this one? :huh:

[aupmanyav]

.. there is no reason to seek depth and understanding in their primitive myths.Where from did you get all this shit?

I agree, there are con gurus. Sixteen-year olds should be careful, they are not mature enough. Western people are impressed by miracles and magic. Human life is cheap for rougues and criminals everywhere. At least for most people, life, in any form is holy in India. Human salvation is in understanding things, not in faith. India is doing quite well at the moment and is predicted to surpass US economy by 2050. The primitive myths show the right way for life to hindus, we love them. I do not think you have any desire or even the capability to understand hinduism (otherwise you would not have written what you have).

[premjan]

I have no issue if you attack any individual Indians, but attacking the country as a whole is a bit of a red rag.

[Elohim]

AtheistNational,

From a historical perspective, there are both individuals and groups that have broadened the scope of human knowledge in new and dynamic ways in every age. Of course, these various breakthroughs are still confined within the cultural, intellectual, political, religious and social contexts of that particular time, so it should not be surprising to find things that we might find abhorrent by today's standards mixed in with the artistic, intellectual, political, scientific or technological accomplishments of the past.

Even today, many of these archaic views and beliefs still have a hold on certain segments of the population, but that fact alone does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that "in the process of the formation of superior social groupings such tendencies will be eliminated." In fact, there have been many instances of groups that have felt themselves to be superior, and in the formation of such "superior" social groups, new and terrible ideas have emerged that were no better than those they replaced.

While you may disagree, I see human history as a forward progression. As such, I see a lot of reason to not only seek depth and understanding in past accomplishments, but in the views and beliefs of the past as well. Regardless of how we may personally feel about these things, they are a part of our history and we have built our present society on the ruins of those that have come before us. I do not think that we should simply discard the lessons of the past without appreciating them for what they are.

Best wishes,

Jason

[Waning Moon Conrad]

...

[hinduwoman]

Guru adherents and Krishna pupils collect millions of dollars from naive Westerners. Sixteen-year-old boys, even mentally retarded persons, bring pupils to India for meetings on "meditation". A country where human life is cheaper than the life of a cow and rats are considered "holy" and are kept in rat parks cannot boast of presenting deep thought for human salvation. When Indian religion and philosophy cannot do better than ignore the human misery and desperation of millions of their people, there is no reason to seek depth and understanding in their primitive myths.

The rules of Hinduism show the absurdity of India's backwards superstitions:

"

So you have a religion that has superstitions. How novel! :rolleyes:

As for the Westerners it is my opinion that they were brought up as Christians and so are desperate to believe in something, but Christianity is too absurd and Jehovah too blood-thirsty for the modern age. So they gravitate to Hinduism which has far nicer gods and far more sophisticated theologies. :cool:

[Masticator]

Patriotic nonsense. Feel upset about someone cussing your culture so attempt to cuss their culture by assuming they believe in Biblical God.

Actually, the hindu philosophies aren't more sophisticated than anywhere else. I don't know where you get that idea from. I have studied Hindu philosophy and it is all rather tripe.

Now, meditation for relaxation - that is pretty good. Just don't bring up anything remotely metaphysical though.

[premjan]

Not hindu philosophies - hindu theologies. Philosophy is philosophy, wherever it comes from, there are just a few different types. But theologies are manifold. Hindu theology is a lot more complex than the Christian one.

[J.F. Gaul]

I have studied Hindu philosophy and it is all rather tripe.

You studied all of Hindu philosophy?

You studied the various schools of Vedanta, Nyaya, Purva Mimansa, Vaishesika, Yoga, Sankhya, Navya-Nyaya, etc.?

You studied Smriti literature?

The Vedas?

Upanishadic thought?

And it was all "rather tripe"?

[Masticator]

Yes i have studied all those things because they round out into certain philosophies in the end. You can name all kinds of thought models with snaskrit words but in the end they size down to a few models.

Besides, if all those theory models with different names were models you youself know of, then you can ask me about them and see if what i say tallies with your understanding. And if not, you can direct me to said model so that i can find out what it is and report back.

[J.F. Gaul]

Yes i have studied all those things because they round out into certain philosophies in the end.

So basically, you haven't studied them.

You can name all kinds of thought models with snaskrit words but in the end they size down to a few models.

So again, basically, you haven't studied them.

Besides, if all those theory models with different names were models you youself know of, then you can ask me about them and see if what i say tallies with your understanding. And if not, you can direct me to said model so that i can find out what it is and report back.

That would be stupid.

The point I'm trying to make is that you are generalizing to the point of absurdity.

[Will.L]

It is not patriotic nonsense to suggest that hinduism in GENERAL is theologically far more sophisticated than christianity. The reason is simple. Hinduism was never centralized. There was never the need (as there was in christianity through almost ALL of its history) to say "THIS is the right story, if you believe something else, you're wrong. Not only are you wrong, you're going to hell for it!" India, since before Ancient Greece, was a wellspring of metaphysical, philosophical, and scientific speculation. Now, certainly people would think others were wrong, as in the case of internal conflicts within Christianity, but in Hinduism people debated incessantly. They would not go to war or try to wipe out heretics. This kind of diverse environment in which different views are confronted in a dialectic rather than ignored or shunned (sounds like modern universities, dare I say) breeds sophistication, and it is easy to see the byproducts of that still around in Hinduism today. The same cannot be said for abrahamic religions which need things theologically to be black and white.

[Masticator]

Yes i have studied all those things because they round out into certain philosophies in the end.

So basically, you haven't studied them.



So again, basically, you haven't studied them.

Besides, if all those theory models with different names were models you youself know of, then you can ask me about them and see if what i say tallies with your understanding. And if not, you can direct me to said model so that i can find out what it is and report back.

That would be stupid.

The point I'm trying to make is that you are generalizing to the point of absurdity.



So basically you haven't studied them either.

That would be stupid? Huh, that is rich. Ask for information and get a boot in the face. That is why i don't frequent atheist forums. They don't know what manners are.


I agree with the idea that the Hindus mainly used dialogue and peaceful means to come to their conclusions. But that doesn't mean their conclusions are valid. Again, comparing hinduism with the abrahamic faiths is a non-starter for me per what i wrote originally in response to the ignorant tone of the previous poster.

Hindu thought mainly starts with the general and works to the particular. So if you are accusing me of making generalizations and you worship Hindu philosophy you must be praising me.

[adren@line]

How is Hindu philosophy tripe? Id like to hear your argument.

As far as being more sophisticated than the Abrahamic faiths, well it is. The former were invented by barely-literate goat-herders from a primitive and violent society. The latter were developed by various philosophers and ascetics, product of far more advanced civilization than seen in in the Abrahamic-Semitic near-east.

Abrahamic faiths contain little, if no philosophy, thats why the intellectuals of these religions routinely ripped-off the Greeks. Indian religions, on the other hand, do. They have everything from monism to pantheism to atheism to agnosticism to pure logic to atomism. A wide variety, if you will, that stems from pluralistic traditions in India that are in sharp contrast to the iconoclastic and dogmatic nature of the Abrahamics of ancient history.

[premjan]

Hindu philosophy is liberal whereas Abrahamic philosophy is generally conservative. There are exceptions like the Manusmriti which reinforces caste, and left-wing Christianity. But in general.

[Will.L]

Masticator, I'm not sure if your recent post was solely in response to J.F. Gaul, or if it was a general response to some of the things which have been said thus far. If it was the latter, let me defend myself by saying I never argued that Hinduism is valid, simply that it is more sophisticated than any abrahamic religion.

Also, I tried scrolling up to find when you discussed comparisons between abrahamic religion and non-abrahamic religions and did not see anything (maybe I'm blind?). Why would this be a non-starter? What is the problem in comparing/contrasting the two? With Hinduism and Abrahamic religions you have two blocs of the most populous religions in the world. It is perfectly reasonable and worthwhile to look at the differences in my view, as well as to find the common themes within those two blocs which, internally, are quite diverse.

Hindu thought mainly starts with the general and works to the particular. So if you are accusing me of making generalizations and you worship Hindu philosophy you must be praising me. This is far too general to be true ;)

Even if I agreed with your premise that Hinduism "starts" with the general and "works" to the particular, and IF I believed that Hinduism was generally a GOOD thing, it doesn't mean that anytime anyone does anything general it is similarly praiseworthy, which is an implicit assumption in what you wrote here.

[J.F. Gaul]

So basically you haven't studied them either.

Does calling you out on bullshit have such a requirement? If you say that all astrophysics is tripe do I need to have a thorough understanding of astrophysics to inform you of your own delusion?

That would be stupid? Huh, that is rich. Ask for information and get a boot in the face. That is why i don't frequent atheist forums. They don't know what manners are.

You should write a book called How to Perpetually Miss the Point. What was I trying to say?

Hindu thought mainly starts with the general and works to the particular. So if you are accusing me of making generalizations and you worship Hindu philosophy you must be praising me.

I don't worship Hinduism, I simply have no taste for vapid rhetoric that drips with careless ethnocentrism.

[Trout]

It is no exaggeration to say that the majority of Indians today owe their very lives to British rule.

And the Brits owe the good parts of their current cuisine to the Injuns.

Everything ok then?

[premjan]

It is no exaggeration to say that the majority of Indians today owe their very lives to British rule, for it was the law and order, the science and enterprise, introduced by the British, that enabled the Indian peoples to double their population just in the first hundred or so years of British rule. British adminsitration of India was excellent. It was one of the finest achievements of its kind to the credit of any race in any period of history.Slavery was pretty good too. I think the rise in population has mainly to do with innovations in health care that led to lowered mortality.

[hinduwoman]

Patriotic nonsense. Feel upset about someone cussing your culture so attempt to cuss their culture by assuming they believe in Biblical God.

Actually, the hindu philosophies aren't more sophisticated than anywhere else. I don't know where you get that idea from. I have studied Hindu philosophy and it is all rather tripe.

Now, meditation for relaxation - that is pretty good. Just don't bring up anything remotely metaphysical though.

If you had actually bothered to read the op and my post carefully you would see that I do not assume Atheistnational is a disguised Christian. He was wandering about naive westerners who go in search of eastern wisdom, and I pointed out a possible reason why they do so. I also spoke about theology which is far more sophisticated than Christian apologetics, not philosophy.

If that is the level of your reading comprehension I am not surprised you think Hindu philosophy is tripe.
did you actually study anything in the original or whatever was available in WIKI?

[hinduwoman]

It is no exaggeration to say that the majority of Indians today owe their very lives to British rule, for it was the law and order, the science and enterprise, introduced by the British, that enabled the Indian peoples to double their population just in the first hundred or so years of British rule. British adminsitration of India was excellent. It was one of the finest achievements of its kind to the credit of any race in any period of history.Slavery was pretty good too. I think the rise in population has mainly to do with innovations in health care that led to lowered mortality.

It was so excellent that there were famines and constant revolts by the dispossesed even excluding Sepoy mutiny. India actually grew poor even though a class of Indians grew rich.

[whichphilosophy]

AtheistNational,

You say you live in the British Empire. Wot!. It's all gone ole chap. Gin an' Tonic?

[aupmanyav]

Actually, the hindu philosophies aren't more sophisticated than anywhere else. I don't know where you get that idea from. I have studied Hindu philosophy and it is all rather tripe.In addition to meditation, 'Advaita' is very good. It can accommodate the latest in science without batting an eyelid. Even, hindu theology is nice, because it does not compell you to believe in one particular thing. There are hundreds to choose from, whatever suits your inclination. It is very democratic.

[aupmanyav]

Slavery was pretty good too. I think the rise in population has mainly to do with innovations in health care that led to lowered mortality.Premjan, life expectancy has increased all over the world with better health care. It is not that it was always high in Europe. Similarly, we have no data to support that life expectancy in historical times in India was (especially) low. Indians generally followed a clean life-style, worked hard, and had enough food (some say that famines came only with British domination and their disturbing our life style, e.g. indigo plantation instead of rice; and deprivation of livelihood for the millions of weavers by introduction of factory manufactured cloth, e.g., cutting the fingers of the Dhaka weavers who produced the finest muslin. Even during the Bengal famine, it is said that there were enough stocks of rice, only the people did not have money to buy it after having lost their traditional livelihood and paying exhorbitant taxes. The collection of taxes was left to contractors who had to pay a particular sum without any guidelines about how much they should collect from the populace. Most of the rural Bengal lost its land to Zamindars, land owners, who would usurp the land in case of non-payment of the high taxes. The situation improved only after the Crown took over the administration from East-India Company after 1857).

[Lógos Sokratikós]

There are hundreds to choose from, whatever suits your inclination. It is very democratic.

I'd say anarchistic or libertarian. The Roman Catholic Church, in contrast, is democratic. Every papal election is strictly by ballot, and ecumenical councils are decided by vote. And what is voted for becomes compulsory. Of course, in matters of belief, compulsory is deadening, while libertarian is progressive.

[figuer]

The Roman Catholic Church, in contrast, is democratic. Every papal election is strictly by ballot, and ecumenical councils are decided by vote. No, no demo involved...Do not forget that they are guided directly by the Holly Spirit.:D

[hinduwoman]

In addition to meditation, 'Advaita' is very good. It can accommodate the latest in science without batting an eyelid. Even, hindu theology is nice, because it does not compell you to believe in one particular thing. There are hundreds to choose from, whatever suits your inclination. It is very democratic.

Naturally I stand stout in favour of Lokayatas! :devil1:

I am not sure about democratic part. Pluralistic and liberal yes, but people don't actually vote about the content of the belief they choose.

[aupmanyav]

I'd say anarchistic or libertarian.Call it whatever, even 'tantra' (of five makars) and 'aghorapantha' are considered valid experiments in hinduism.

[aupmanyav]

Naturally I stand stout in favour of Lokayatas! :devil1:You are welcome till 'dharma' (social duty and righteous action) is not abandoned. (Devil deflated?) :)

[premjan]

Slavery was pretty good too. I think the rise in population has mainly to do with innovations in health care that led to lowered mortality.

It was so excellent that there were famines and constant revolts by the dispossesed even excluding Sepoy mutiny. India actually grew poor even though a class of Indians grew rich.
Here's a good summation of what the British did to India - though they were good enough to build some railways to make it easier for them to collect taxes.
http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_060206.htm
This systematic drain was nothing short of a loot – albeit carried over 200 years and under the cover of colonial trade. It left the economy in shambles and reduce this great country from one of the powerhouses of the world economy to a laggard which was barely able to sustain itself.
Of course a person of AtheistNational's ilk would be the kind that claims slavery was good for African Americans because at least it brought them to the Americas and gave them a better standard of living than modern Africans. The price though was enormous, 50 million Africans were sold into slavery - probably a large percentage of those died either being marched to the coast, on the ship or due to brutal working conditions. They helped the American settlers to produce more food from the land than the Native Americans - prior to the widespread advent of slaves, the settlers were very much on the losing end of this proposition as not that many of them were experienced farmers anyway. It requires a uniquely colonial mentality to turn every atrocity into a silver lining. I'm not even certain that Mugabe, for all that he has wrecked the productivity of Zimbabwe, is not right when he claims that South Africa for all that its economy has not sunk, is sitting on a time bomb due to the dire poverty of black South Africans. Some Zimbabweans are surely fleeing to South Africa, but is South Africa potentially a demographic powder keg of frustrations waiting to explode?

[figuer]

... South Africa ...is sitting on a time bomb due to the dire poverty of black South Africans.... but is South African potentially a demographic powder keg of frustations waiting to explode?Could be... time will reveal what Fortuna has decreed.

[Azygos]

Guru adherents and Krishna pupils collect millions of dollars from naive Westerners. Sixteen-year-old boys, even mentally retarded persons, bring pupils to India for meetings on "meditation". A country where human life is cheaper than the life of a cow and rats are considered "holy" and are kept in rat parks cannot boast of presenting deep thought for human salvation. When Indian religion and philosophy cannot do better than ignore the human misery and desperation of millions of their people, there is no reason to seek depth and understanding in their primitive myths.

The rules of Hinduism show the absurdity of India's backwards superstitions:

"When chewing do not look north or south or into a corner when your father is still alive."

"Do not eat while standing, walking, or lying down."

"When defacating do not look at either sun, moon, fire, water, on a cow or in a Brahman. During daytime, one should turn to the north; during the night, towards the south."

"Do not sleep with your wife on a day of full moon or new moon, and on the 8th or 14th day after these days."

"During intercourse, the man should breathe through the right side of his nose, the woman through the left side."

You need not follow the rules. They are at most suggestions. If not anything, they teach how to discipline the mind something which the modern western education sorely lacks

[aupmanyav]

Tantra (five Ms) and Aghorapanth followers (for whom eating dead human bodies also is OK, don't we eat dead animal bodies?), the left-handed practices (Vama Marga), gather at Kamakhya temple in Guwahati, Assam for three days. There is no idol in the sanctum sanctorum, only a fissure in the ground from which water trickles out. This represents the vagina of the deity. During these days priests are not allowed to enter the temple. It is supposed to be the menstrual period for the deity when the water turns red because of 'iron oxide/oxidation'. This is the place where the reproductive organs of Sati, daughter of Daksha Prajapati (the first man according to some legends) and the consort of Shiva, fell from her decomposed body after she immolated herself because Shiva was not invited to a great Yagna being conducted by Daksha. Shiva sent his army in anger which destroyed the yagna, beat the Aryan Gods black and blue, Brahma escaping with great difficulty, beheaded Daksha (who was given a ram's head when things cooled down). Then blinded by sorrow, Shiva carried Sati's body on his shoulders all around India till parts fell in 51 various places, including Manikarnika Ghat at Varanasi (where her ear-rings fell). These are known as 'shakti peethas' and venerated by hindus. Sati was reincarnated as Parvati, the daughter of Himalaya, and in due course married Shiva again. (http://www.dailyindia.com/show/252885.php/Ambubasi-Mela-at-Kamakhya-Temple-draws-a-huge-turnout-of-devotees)

Relics of Vaishnav saints of Maharashtra and Karnataka during the the 13th through the 17th centuries, namely, Gnaneshwar, Namdev, Eknath, Tukaram, Purandar Das, Vijay Dās, Gopāl Dās, and Jagannāth Dās, will be taken in a procession from various places to the temple of Vithobha (Krishna) in Pandharpur to pay their annual obesience. About seven hundred thousand peasants (Varkaris) take part in the processions. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandharpur)

[s-o-i-d-p]

The rise of Western technology over Eastern technology was due more to political factors than anything else,
It was due to differences in average intelligence.

and the disastrous conditions in places like India is most often linked to Western influences.
Nonsense. When the British arrived the Mogul Empire was already in a state of complete collapse. Chaos ensued, similar in many respects to the chaos which followed the downfall of the Roman Empire in Europe. Natives fought each other and fought terribly destructive Afghan adventurers who penetrated far into India from beyond the frontiers. The fittest would survive, and the fittest would be neither natives nor Afghans but one of the European trading companies, which themselves, in mere self-defence, compelled to take a share in the struggle. The British established order and justice and they were welcomed by the natives as liberators.

It is no exaggeration to say that the majority of Indians today owe their very lives to British rule, for it was the law and order, the science and enterprise, introduced by the British, that enabled the Indian peoples to double their population just in the first hundred or so years of British rule. British adminsitration of India was excellent. It was one of the finest achievements of its kind to the credit of any race in any period of history.

The Indians don't care. Ask some Indians in the UK what they think of British rule and see for yourself. India might be, in my opinion at least, too fatalistic and debasing a culture but it has better prospects than the UK does.

Most Indians see British rule as a blip in their history. We in the UK should really accept that in the coming century, India would emerge as a more powerful nation-state in the world than us. In decades to come the UK might not even exist - what if the SNP gain more seats in the Scottish Parliament? India was producing science and philosophy long before the British ever did, since it's one of the world's oldest continuous cultures. What were the British doing in the 5th century BCE? Worshipping Baal or living in mud huts?

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

[premjan]

The reshaping of India was no doubt a big achievement for Britain and India was the jewel in the colonial crown, especially after the independence of the United States. It marked the entry of India into the modern age. I think it was a bit of a love-hate relationship. Indians liked all the new institutions, ideas, ways of thinking, and technology brought by Britain as proxy of Europe. They didn't like being made to mostly serve another nation's self-interest though (as the nation in question was geographically separated, this was even more difficult than being ruled by Islamic masters, who at least, under Akbar for instance, became sons of the soil). The local-anarchist culture (more imperialist at the national level historically) took to democracy and wanted it for themselves. I think Indians still have an affinity for things British, like cricket for instance. And the language is pretty much an Indian language at this point, though mostly used by the intelligentsia rather than the unwashed masses.

As for the future, this a time where India is undergoing change more rapidly than some other nations. The winds of history blow in different places at different times, and India and China are among the ones transforming faster in the last few years. Britain is already mature / developed and will see relatively slower change for some time until maybe it chooses to join Europe or some larger Western economic/political grouping. Fatalism in Indian culture is a function of the kinds of socioeconomic forces that have shaped it - agriculture was a given, the monsoons were fickle, the philosopher triumphed over the monarch etc. In a philosophical sense, we were naturalists a long time before the European Renaissance. The fatalism is a function of our naturalism, and will be overcome when our control over nature is adequate to reduce our dependence on, say the monsoons. Of course the other great reason why India was settled and prosperous are its agricultural resources - alluvium from the rivers coursing through tall mountains in the north, and vast lava beds of the Deccan traps in the South. This is the same reason why the Rift valley region in Africa is fertile, and the Siberian traps may be fertile argicultural regions post-global warming.

As for AtheistNational who seems to have hung his hat on the achievements of Whites and Jews, maybe he should expand his ambit to the ancient Aryans who were probably also more or less white Caucasians from Central Asia and make common cause with Hindu nationalists. Instead of restricting his identity boundaries to Europe.

And...a note for people who think colonized countries like India or Palestine should appreciate their colonizers (which in the case of India meant the British took profits from their rule) or ... noncolonizers (whatever the hell it is that Israel does to Palestine - namely take the land but not the people), this is only possible to a point. Appreciating another party depends on being able to identify with them. As long as you are under another person's thumb you aren't going to be able to 100% appreciate a person (consider children and their parents). When there is some separation and equality, then appreciation can grow (often children appreciate their parents more when they are themselves adults of equal standing). Which is all entirely apart from the exploitative part of such colonial relationships.