Morality of Religions- Discussion thread

[HalBass9]

Not exclusive to Islam but this is one that bothers me about most or all monotheistic religions i.e. everything else is secondary...unless you worship the one god of our religion, you're condemned to eternity in hell.

I can't believe people actually like such a god. It's a bit of a cliche but I'd honestly rather just burn in hell for eternity than worship such a guy.

I'd rather just follow a guy who says "I couldn't care less whether you believe in me or not, whether you pray 10 times a day or none, whether you face this side or that. As long as you treat folks well and follow these basic rules of morality <append brief list>, I'll take care you once you die...whatever that means for you. Honestly just forget about me and do your best. If you're an idiot on earth, no threats but you won't get any of the good stuff you want when you're done."

I suppose though prophets and gods can't get followers unless they threaten the hell (pun intended) out of them with fire, torture and all sorts of dire stuff.

Why should it be a concern for anyone who does not adhere to a monotheistic religion?

 

[Stewie]

I suspect you'll regret asking this question. You've stepped on massive landmine there.

Well I wont be any good if I cant defend my faith, can I? You cant be a coward when it comes to such stuff. That is just me. I welcome you to post any questions or concerns. I feel stuff like this ends up turning into a really good opportunity for me to research stuff and strengthen my belief. So in fact, I should be thanking you.

 

[Stewie]

"Indeed, those who disbelieve from the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the Fire of Hell, to stay there forever. They are the worst of ˹all˺ beings".

Surah Al-Bayyinah - 6 - Quran.com

Indeed, those who disbelieve from the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the Fire of Hell, to stay there forever. They are the worst of...

quran.com

Do not marry polytheistic women until they believe; for a believing slave-woman is better than a free polytheist, even though she may look pleasant to you. And do not marry your women to polytheistic men until they believe, for a believing slave-man is better than a free polytheist, even though he may look pleasant to you. They invite ˹you˺ to the Fire while Allah invites ˹you˺ to Paradise and forgiveness by His grace.1 He makes His revelations clear to the people so perhaps they will be mindful.

Surah Al-Baqarah - 221 - Quran.com

Do not marry polytheistic women until they believe; for a believing slave-woman is better than a free polytheist, even though she may look pleasant to...

quran.com

But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them,1 capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Surah At-Tawbah - 4-14 - Quran.com

(4) As for the polytheists who have honoured every term of their treaty with you and have not supported an enemy against you, honour your treaty with ...

quran.com

I think we have already discussed some of it in the past. Polytheism is definitely a no go. So yes Islam is very clear on the subject that polytheists may not find any redemption. I used the word "may", because there are other verses in the Quran which mention that God is the ultimate decision maker and may forgive someone no matter how sinful if they truly repent. So does that mean a polytheist on his deathbed, moments before dying repents, will be forgiven and achieve redemption? I think that point is up for debate and I have heard various scholars come up with different interpretations of it.

Islam is also clear on only marrying women belonging to the people of the book. None of that is new and has been discussed before. As a Muslim, I don't find any of it really distasteful. Most religions have such clauses in their scripture.

Now the last part is clear about waging a righteous war against polytheists who have broken any pacts with the Muslim state. This verse was probably sent after the Qureish of Mecca violated a treaty of peace with Muslims of Medina and were a threat to the existence of Muslims. So this speaks of aggression in manner of self defense. Once again, I don't find anything off putting about it either.

Hope that makes it clear.

 

[Red-Indian]

Why should it be a concern for anyone who does not adhere to a monotheistic religion?

It isn't. Not like it keeps me up an night and it's certainly not like I'm going to suddenly start believing in some god just because he/she/it is more chilled out than the fire and brimstone guys. That "I'd rather just follow" was more for rhetorical effect as you'd guess.

Just mildly annoying. I suppose on the same level that folks who extol Hindutva seem annoy you. Or maybe less. Given your level of vituperation about them.

 

[Stewie]

Not exclusive to Islam but this is one that bothers me about most or all monotheistic religions i.e. everything else is secondary...unless you worship the one god of our religion, you're condemned to eternity in hell.

I can't believe people actually like such a god. It's a bit of a cliche but I'd honestly rather just burn in hell for eternity than worship such a guy.

I'd rather just follow a guy who says "I couldn't care less whether you believe in me or not, whether you pray 10 times a day or none, whether you face this side or that. As long as you treat folks well and follow these basic rules of morality <append brief list>, I'll take care you once you die...whatever that means for you. Honestly just forget about me and do your best. If you're an idiot on earth, no threats but you won't get any of the good stuff you want when you're done."

I suppose though prophets and gods can't get followers unless they threaten the hell (pun intended) out of them with fire, torture and all sorts of dire stuff.

Well, truth be told if you are don't have faith in such a guy then you have nothing to worry about. But if you think there is a higher power like that, then you believe the higher power has a good enough reason to stress the importance of this part, which is stating that other entities you equate with HIM are false and He takes it seriously and considers it a big problem. What good would it do a real creator if he is relaxed on people going willy nilly praying to whoever or whatever they felt like praying to?

I admit this might be a tough concept for Hindus and other polytheists to grasp. But most Abrahamic FAITHS do stress absolute devotion and submission and sound the worst warnings for not adhering to the rules.

 

[HalBass9]

It isn't. Not like it keeps me up an night and it's certainly not like I'm going to suddenly start believing in some god just because he/she/it is more chilled out than the fire and brimstone guys. That "I'd rather just follow" was more for rhetorical effect as you'd guess.

Just mildly annoying. I suppose on the same level that folks who extol Hindutva seem annoy you. Or maybe less. Given your level of vituperation about them.

Once again, I fail to see the correlation between a practicing Muslim adhering to his faith and Hindutva extremists.

Hindus practicing their religion should not be a concern for anyone.

So why do some Indians try so hard to label anyone as an extremist whenever Hindutva bigotry and violence against minorities is called out?

If you don't believe in any of it, there's no reason to be annoyed. After all, everyone derives their sense of morality from different sources.

 

[Stewie]

It isn't. Not like it keeps me up an night and it's certainly not like I'm going to suddenly start believing in some god just because he/she/it is more chilled out than the fire and brimstone guys. That "I'd rather just follow" was more for rhetorical effect as you'd guess.

Just mildly annoying. I suppose on the same level that folks who extol Hindutva seem annoy you. Or maybe less. Given your level of vituperation about them.

I know this response has nothing to do with me but I just wanted to add I have nothing but respect even for devout Hindus who follow their faith. I do not believe they are right but I do respect their devotion and strength in what they believe in.

The Hindustva guys or ideology to me represents a negative aspect of adherents of Hinduism, not Hinduism in itself.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I think we have already discussed some of it in the past. Polytheism is definitely a no go. So yes Islam is very clear on the subject that polytheists may not find any redemption. I used the word "may", because there are other verses in the Quran which mention that God is the ultimate decision maker and may forgive someone no matter how sinful if they truly repent. So does that mean a polytheist on his deathbed, moments before dying repents, will be forgiven and achieve redemption? I think that point is up for debate and I have heard various scholars come up with different interpretations of it.

Islam is also clear on only marrying women belonging to the people of the book. None of that is new and has been discussed before. As a Muslim, I don't find any of it really distasteful. Most religions have such clauses in their scripture.

Now the last part is clear about waging a righteous war against polytheists who have broken any pacts with the Muslim state. This verse was probably sent after the Qureish of Mecca violated a treaty of peace with Muslims of Medina and were a threat to the existence of Muslims. So this speaks of aggression in manner of self defense. Once again, I don't find anything off putting about it either.

Hope that makes it clear.

Are Polytheists, Christians and Jews the worst of the living creatures? You cannot call non-muslims worse than pigs and that too blaring out of loud speakers in a non-Islamic country. Its good that those non-muslims do not understand Arabic. Otherwise, you will see fights and wars everyday.

I know Islam is clear on who a Muslim can marry. Islam commands to convert the other person to Islam as though it is some sort of purification process. Holier than thou attitude.

You break pacts, you unfriend them. Stop relations with them. Not lay hiding and killing the pact breakers. If Pakistan enters a pact with USA and breaks it, will it give the right to Americans to bomb every Pakistani and kill them? Americans can also claim that the pact will put Americans lives in peril. It is up to the discretion of the attacker.

 

[Red-Indian]

Once again, I fail to see the correlation between a practicing Muslim adhering to his faith and Hindutva extremists.

Hindus practicing their religion should not be a concern for anyone.

So why do some Indians try so hard to label anyone as an extremist whenever Hindutva bigotry and violence against minorities is called out?

If you don't believe in any of it, there's no reason to be annoyed. After all, everyone derives their sense of morality from different sources.

Oh don't worry. I get equal opportunity annoyed

I get annoyed at Hindus who claim the epics prove India had flight, plastic surgery and other stuff 2000 years ago
I get annoyed at Jews who claim that the fact that some co-religionists lived in a land a couple of thousand years ago, they have a right to move back there
I get annoyed by those who claim anyone who doesn't follow their religion will go to hell

Doesn't affect my quality of life but it's tough not to be annoyed by silliness.

 

[Justcrazy]

Yes. In being athiest, there is nothing else beyond lack of belief. You lack belief in Krishna, Zeus, Thor, Apollo, Zoraster and thousands of deitys worshipped by mankind in it history. Athiests go one stop further. Thats it.

But since you blamed killing of humans on religions , it is a fact that those who do not have believe in religions and follow this ideology have also killed many people , so your point is negated.

 

[Stewie]

Are Polytheists, Christians and Jews the worst of the living creatures? You cannot call non-muslims worse than pigs and that too blaring out of loud speakers in a non-Islamic country. Its good that those non-muslims do not understand Arabic. Otherwise, you will see fights and wars everyday.

I know Islam is clear on who a Muslim can marry. Islam commands to convert the other person to Islam as though it is some sort of purification process. Holier than thou attitude.

You break pacts, you unfriend them. Stop relations with them. Not lay hiding and killing the pact breakers. If Pakistan enters a pact with USA and breaks it, will it give the right to Americans to bomb every Pakistani and kill them? Americans can also claim that the pact will put Americans lives in peril. It is up to the discretion of the attacker.

I looked at the explanation and basically its saying even people of the book who are "mushrik" - meaning someone who believes someone other than God has equal footing with God as Almighty Creator in the world - are worst of the worst.

And the pact that I was referring to is in regards to war. I believe there was a peace treaty and then some tribes reneged on it and sided with the enemy to raise an army. That is the context of this surah.

 

[Stewie]

So I don't know how authentic this is but I wanted to share it here. I am sure some Hindus will disagree with this stuff.

I don't want to make it look like a *** for tat thing. I was looking into how other religions treat non believers and ran into this. Hinduism it seems to me is not much different. I think pretty much all religions preach they are right and condemns those who don't believe in them.

Is it permissible in Hindu scriptures to kill infidels and kill anti-Vedic atheists?

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They…

sourastra-das.medium.com

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They have no idea how violent Vedas are. Vedas are terror manual which turns humans into savages. Many tribes were destroyed as a result of the violent passages in Vedas. As per Vedas, you must kill a person who rejects Vedas, who hates Vedas and Ishwar, who does not worship, who does not make offerings to ishwar, who insults god (Blasphemy), one who oppresses a Brahmin etc. There are several passages in Vedas which calls for death of disbelievers. I am mostly using Arya Samaji translations of Satya Prakash Saraswati, Satyakam Vidyalankar, Devi Chand, Vaidyanath Shastri, Kshemkarand Das Trivedi, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Shripad Damodar Satvalekar, and orthodox translations of Swami Karpatri and Shri Ram Sharma Acharya (Gayatri Parivar) and I will be using Griffith’s translation as well followed by Hindi translation of Hindu scholars.​

Rig Veda 9.13.9

“May you (O love divine), the beholder of the path of enlightenment, purifying our mind and destroying the infidels who refuse to offer worship, come and stay in the prime position of the eternal sacrifice.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 7.6.3

“May the fire divine chase away those infidels, who do not perform worship and who are uncivil in speech. They are niggards, unbelievers, say no tribute to fire divine and offer no homage. The fire divine turns those godless people far away who institute no sacred ceremonies.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 9.63.5

”Augmenting the strength of resplendent self, urging the waters and rejuvenating all noble acts and destroying the infidels.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Yajur Veda 13.12,

”O king, make progress in thy duty of administration, extend happiness to the virtuous. O terrible chastiser, burn down the irreligious foes. O splendid person, humiliate and consume utterly like dried up stubble, him, who encourages our foe.”

Atharva Veda 12.5.62

Rend, rend to bits, rend through and through, scorch and consume and burn to dust, the one who rejects the Vedas

Atharva Veda 12.2.23

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 10.3.3

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 20.93.1

May our hymns give you great delight. Display your bounty, Thudered. Drive off [kill] the enemies of the Vedas.

Rig Veda 6.72.1

ye killed all darkness and the Gods’ blasphemers.

Srimad Bhagvatam 4.4.17

Sati continued: If one hears an irresponsible person blaspheme the master and controller of religion, one should block his ears and go away if unable to punish him. But if one is able to kill, then one should by force cut out the blasphemer’s tongue and kill the offender, and after that one should give up his own life.

Yaska Acharya also writes about terror,
Nirukta 10.21 …These are hemistichs. Like a spear hurled, it inspires terror (among enemies) or courage (among friends)…

“You can still see that the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies with the ugly appearance of the negroes of today.” Satyarth Prakash, by Dayanand Saraswati, Ch 8, page 266, Tr. Chrinajiva Bhardwaja

Swami Prabhupada writes: “…An atheist is called a demon, and it is a fact that even a person born of good parents can turn into a demon by bad association…” Swami Prabhupada on Srimad Bhagavatam 3.3.6
http://vanisource.org/wiki/SB_3.3.6

 

[Red-Indian]

So I don't know how authentic this is but I wanted to share it here. I am sure some Hindus will disagree with this stuff.

I don't want to make it look like a *** for tat thing. I was looking into how other religions treat non believers and ran into this. Hinduism it seems to me is not much different. I think pretty much all religions preach they are right and condemns those who don't believe in them.

Is it permissible in Hindu scriptures to kill infidels and kill anti-Vedic atheists?

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They…

sourastra-das.medium.com

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They have no idea how violent Vedas are. Vedas are terror manual which turns humans into savages. Many tribes were destroyed as a result of the violent passages in Vedas. As per Vedas, you must kill a person who rejects Vedas, who hates Vedas and Ishwar, who does not worship, who does not make offerings to ishwar, who insults god (Blasphemy), one who oppresses a Brahmin etc. There are several passages in Vedas which calls for death of disbelievers. I am mostly using Arya Samaji translations of Satya Prakash Saraswati, Satyakam Vidyalankar, Devi Chand, Vaidyanath Shastri, Kshemkarand Das Trivedi, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Shripad Damodar Satvalekar, and orthodox translations of Swami Karpatri and Shri Ram Sharma Acharya (Gayatri Parivar) and I will be using Griffith’s translation as well followed by Hindi translation of Hindu scholars.​

Rig Veda 9.13.9

“May you (O love divine), the beholder of the path of enlightenment, purifying our mind and destroying the infidels who refuse to offer worship, come and stay in the prime position of the eternal sacrifice.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 7.6.3

“May the fire divine chase away those infidels, who do not perform worship and who are uncivil in speech. They are niggards, unbelievers, say no tribute to fire divine and offer no homage. The fire divine turns those godless people far away who institute no sacred ceremonies.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 9.63.5

”Augmenting the strength of resplendent self, urging the waters and rejuvenating all noble acts and destroying the infidels.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Yajur Veda 13.12,

”O king, make progress in thy duty of administration, extend happiness to the virtuous. O terrible chastiser, burn down the irreligious foes. O splendid person, humiliate and consume utterly like dried up stubble, him, who encourages our foe.”

Atharva Veda 12.5.62

Rend, rend to bits, rend through and through, scorch and consume and burn to dust, the one who rejects the Vedas

Atharva Veda 12.2.23

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 10.3.3

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 20.93.1

May our hymns give you great delight. Display your bounty, Thudered. Drive off [kill] the enemies of the Vedas.

Rig Veda 6.72.1

ye killed all darkness and the Gods’ blasphemers.

Srimad Bhagvatam 4.4.17

Sati continued: If one hears an irresponsible person blaspheme the master and controller of religion, one should block his ears and go away if unable to punish him. But if one is able to kill, then one should by force cut out the blasphemer’s tongue and kill the offender, and after that one should give up his own life.

Yaska Acharya also writes about terror,
Nirukta 10.21 …These are hemistichs. Like a spear hurled, it inspires terror (among enemies) or courage (among friends)…

“You can still see that the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies with the ugly appearance of the negroes of today.” Satyarth Prakash, by Dayanand Saraswati, Ch 8, page 266, Tr. Chrinajiva Bhardwaja

Swami Prabhupada writes: “…An atheist is called a demon, and it is a fact that even a person born of good parents can turn into a demon by bad association…” Swami Prabhupada on Srimad Bhagavatam 3.3.6
http://vanisource.org/wiki/SB_3.3.6

If the point you're making is that most gods are evil by modern moral standards, I think it's well taken. After all they had to zealously protect their own territory(believers) and not lose strays to other religions. The worst punishments had to be promised.

 

[Stewie]

If the point you're making is that most gods are evil by modern moral standards, I think it's well taken. After all they had to zealously protect their own territory(believers) and not lose strays to other religions. The worst punishments had to be promised.

"Evil by modern standards" You have a way with words, bud.

 

[rpant_gabba]

But since you blamed killing of humans on religions , it is a fact that those who do not have believe in religions and follow this ideology have also killed many people , so your point is negated.

There is no “book” of atheism that commands you murder, enslave others

For the religions there is.

Though that was obvious

 

[rpant_gabba]

So I don't know how authentic this is but I wanted to share it here. I am sure some Hindus will disagree with this stuff.

I don't want to make it look like a *** for tat thing. I was looking into how other religions treat non believers and ran into this. Hinduism it seems to me is not much different. I think pretty much all religions preach they are right and condemns those who don't believe in them.

Is it permissible in Hindu scriptures to kill infidels and kill anti-Vedic atheists?

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They…

sourastra-das.medium.com

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They have no idea how violent Vedas are. Vedas are terror manual which turns humans into savages. Many tribes were destroyed as a result of the violent passages in Vedas. As per Vedas, you must kill a person who rejects Vedas, who hates Vedas and Ishwar, who does not worship, who does not make offerings to ishwar, who insults god (Blasphemy), one who oppresses a Brahmin etc. There are several passages in Vedas which calls for death of disbelievers. I am mostly using Arya Samaji translations of Satya Prakash Saraswati, Satyakam Vidyalankar, Devi Chand, Vaidyanath Shastri, Kshemkarand Das Trivedi, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Shripad Damodar Satvalekar, and orthodox translations of Swami Karpatri and Shri Ram Sharma Acharya (Gayatri Parivar) and I will be using Griffith’s translation as well followed by Hindi translation of Hindu scholars.​

Rig Veda 9.13.9

“May you (O love divine), the beholder of the path of enlightenment, purifying our mind and destroying the infidels who refuse to offer worship, come and stay in the prime position of the eternal sacrifice.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 7.6.3

“May the fire divine chase away those infidels, who do not perform worship and who are uncivil in speech. They are niggards, unbelievers, say no tribute to fire divine and offer no homage. The fire divine turns those godless people far away who institute no sacred ceremonies.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 9.63.5

”Augmenting the strength of resplendent self, urging the waters and rejuvenating all noble acts and destroying the infidels.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Yajur Veda 13.12,

”O king, make progress in thy duty of administration, extend happiness to the virtuous. O terrible chastiser, burn down the irreligious foes. O splendid person, humiliate and consume utterly like dried up stubble, him, who encourages our foe.”

Atharva Veda 12.5.62

Rend, rend to bits, rend through and through, scorch and consume and burn to dust, the one who rejects the Vedas

Atharva Veda 12.2.23

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 10.3.3

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 20.93.1

May our hymns give you great delight. Display your bounty, Thudered. Drive off [kill] the enemies of the Vedas.

Rig Veda 6.72.1

ye killed all darkness and the Gods’ blasphemers.

Srimad Bhagvatam 4.4.17

Sati continued: If one hears an irresponsible person blaspheme the master and controller of religion, one should block his ears and go away if unable to punish him. But if one is able to kill, then one should by force cut out the blasphemer’s tongue and kill the offender, and after that one should give up his own life.

Yaska Acharya also writes about terror,
Nirukta 10.21 …These are hemistichs. Like a spear hurled, it inspires terror (among enemies) or courage (among friends)…

“You can still see that the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies with the ugly appearance of the negroes of today.” Satyarth Prakash, by Dayanand Saraswati, Ch 8, page 266, Tr. Chrinajiva Bhardwaja

Swami Prabhupada writes: “…An atheist is called a demon, and it is a fact that even a person born of good parents can turn into a demon by bad association…” Swami Prabhupada on Srimad Bhagavatam 3.3.6
http://vanisource.org/wiki/SB_3.3.6

Here is the kicker, origins of Rig veda can be traced to modern day uzbekistan

The Age of the Rig Veda

Abstract. The Indo-Iranians came from two areas of Central Asia. The Aryans in India are known from the Rig Veda. This text is the earliest text of the Ind

academic.oup.com

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-full-out-of-india-case-in-short.html

and this population group is still distinct from the rest of the south indian population. Very easily distinguishable physically and easy to target.

 

[Red-Indian]

I know this response has nothing to do with me but I just wanted to add I have nothing but respect even for devout Hindus who follow their faith. I do not believe they are right but I do respect their devotion and strength in what they believe in.

The Hindustva guys or ideology to me represents a negative aspect of adherents of Hinduism, not Hinduism in itself.

"Evil by modern standards" You have a way with words, bud.

Come over to the dark side...we'll win you over yet dude. Your 'nothing but respect' for devout Hindus shows you're a kinder and nicer guy than the Abrahamic god who wants to condemn them to the deepest pits of hell even if they've led nothing but virtuous lives.

That god doesn't deserve a decent guy like you. Our FSM will embrace you fully with his noodly appendages.

 

[IndoorCricket]

So I don't know how authentic this is but I wanted to share it here. I am sure some Hindus will disagree with this stuff.

I don't want to make it look like a *** for tat thing. I was looking into how other religions treat non believers and ran into this. Hinduism it seems to me is not much different. I think pretty much all religions preach they are right and condemns those who don't believe in them.

Is it permissible in Hindu scriptures to kill infidels and kill anti-Vedic atheists?

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They…

sourastra-das.medium.com

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They have no idea how violent Vedas are. Vedas are terror manual which turns humans into savages. Many tribes were destroyed as a result of the violent passages in Vedas. As per Vedas, you must kill a person who rejects Vedas, who hates Vedas and Ishwar, who does not worship, who does not make offerings to ishwar, who insults god (Blasphemy), one who oppresses a Brahmin etc. There are several passages in Vedas which calls for death of disbelievers. I am mostly using Arya Samaji translations of Satya Prakash Saraswati, Satyakam Vidyalankar, Devi Chand, Vaidyanath Shastri, Kshemkarand Das Trivedi, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Shripad Damodar Satvalekar, and orthodox translations of Swami Karpatri and Shri Ram Sharma Acharya (Gayatri Parivar) and I will be using Griffith’s translation as well followed by Hindi translation of Hindu scholars.​

Rig Veda 9.13.9

“May you (O love divine), the beholder of the path of enlightenment, purifying our mind and destroying the infidels who refuse to offer worship, come and stay in the prime position of the eternal sacrifice.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 7.6.3

“May the fire divine chase away those infidels, who do not perform worship and who are uncivil in speech. They are niggards, unbelievers, say no tribute to fire divine and offer no homage. The fire divine turns those godless people far away who institute no sacred ceremonies.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Rig Veda 9.63.5

”Augmenting the strength of resplendent self, urging the waters and rejuvenating all noble acts and destroying the infidels.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Yajur Veda 13.12,

”O king, make progress in thy duty of administration, extend happiness to the virtuous. O terrible chastiser, burn down the irreligious foes. O splendid person, humiliate and consume utterly like dried up stubble, him, who encourages our foe.”

Atharva Veda 12.5.62

Rend, rend to bits, rend through and through, scorch and consume and burn to dust, the one who rejects the Vedas

Atharva Veda 12.2.23

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 10.3.3

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 20.93.1

May our hymns give you great delight. Display your bounty, Thudered. Drive off [kill] the enemies of the Vedas.

Rig Veda 6.72.1

ye killed all darkness and the Gods’ blasphemers.

Srimad Bhagvatam 4.4.17

Sati continued: If one hears an irresponsible person blaspheme the master and controller of religion, one should block his ears and go away if unable to punish him. But if one is able to kill, then one should by force cut out the blasphemer’s tongue and kill the offender, and after that one should give up his own life.

Yaska Acharya also writes about terror,
Nirukta 10.21 …These are hemistichs. Like a spear hurled, it inspires terror (among enemies) or courage (among friends)…

“You can still see that the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies with the ugly appearance of the negroes of today.” Satyarth Prakash, by Dayanand Saraswati, Ch 8, page 266, Tr. Chrinajiva Bhardwaja

Swami Prabhupada writes: “…An atheist is called a demon, and it is a fact that even a person born of good parents can turn into a demon by bad association…” Swami Prabhupada on Srimad Bhagavatam 3.3.6
http://vanisource.org/wiki/SB_3.3.6

Vedas are hyms. These mantras form the core essence of rituals and ceremonies once widely performed throughout ancient India. Usually mantras invoking elements of nature.

These are very much different from God ordained killings. These hyms don't command people to go out and kill infidels.

 

[Stewie]

Vedas are hyms. These mantras form the core essence of rituals and ceremonies once widely performed throughout ancient India. Usually mantras invoking elements of nature.

These are very much different from God ordained killings. These hyms don't command people to go out and kill infidels.

So the ones are shared are made up or not correct?

 

[IndoorCricket]

So the ones are shared are made up or not correct?

You shared some random atheist bheemtard medium type article with no links to any primary source. You tell me.

The is no similar concept of blasphemer in Sanskrit atleast not inline with Abrahamic religions.

Btw Bheemites are against Vedas as Bheemarao Ambedkar was atheist and followed principals of Buddhism and rejected Vedas and Hinduism.


Please present primary sources.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I looked at the explanation and basically its saying even people of the book who are "mushrik" - meaning someone who believes someone other than God has equal footing with God as Almighty Creator in the world - are worst of the worst.

It doesn't make it any better. No one can call others the worst creatures just because they do not follow your faith.

And the pact that I was referring to is in regards to war. I believe there was a peace treaty and then some tribes reneged on it and sided with the enemy to raise an army. That is the context of this surah.

If the treaty is broken even during war, you sever the bilateral relations. Stop all business transactions with them. Not lay in hiding and kill them wherever you find them. That is pretty silly way of dealing with things.

 

[Stewie]

It doesn't make it any better. No one can call others the worst creatures just because they do not follow your faith.

If the treaty is broken even during war, you sever the bilateral relations. Stop all business transactions with them. Not lay in hiding and kill them wherever you find them. That is pretty silly way of dealing with things.

Well we have already agreed it won’t fit well with the so-called “moral standards” of today. People now tend to be very sensitive and we have to be politically correct and sensitive. Obviously the diplomatic and political dynamic of those days are very different from today. In fact I have seen countries today go to war and do far worst if they can get away with it.

At the end of the day, the idea is other faiths and religions do not get it right and we do so come to us. If you think it’s telling us to go kill non believers for nothing, you have it as wrong as dim witted illiterate extremists the world over who wage wars in the name of religion.

 

[Stewie]

You shared some random atheist bheemtard medium type article with no links to any primary source. You tell me.

The is no similar concept of blasphemer in Sanskrit atleast not inline with Abrahamic religions.

Btw Bheemites are against Vedas as Bheemarao Ambedkar was atheist and followed principals of Buddhism and rejected Vedas and Hinduism.


Please present primary sources.

I thought that’s what I did.

And that was my question. Are rig beds and atharva veda false and made up names? Or they are and these verses are not from them?
I am no expert of Hinduism so perhaps you guys can shed more light on them.

Also who are yaska acharya and srimad bhagvatam cited on the link I shared?

Are they made up people or just outlier Hindu theologians or extremists?

 

[Red-Indian]

I thought that’s what I did.

And that was my question. Are rig beds and atharva veda false and made up names? Or they are and these verses are not from them?
I am no expert of Hinduism so perhaps you guys can shed more light on them.

Also who are yaska acharya and srimad bhagvatam cited on the link I shared?

Are they made up people or just outlier Hindu theologians or extremists?

The problem you'll face in Hinduism is that for every holy book you'll find, 90% of the Hindus will say they don't take it seriously. The Vedas in particular are a weird set of collected songs, hymns, ritual procedures that often seem to talk about different gods, contradict each other and occasionally go into philosophical tangents. If you are really interested in discussing what Hinduism at it's essence asks it's followers to accept and believe, your best choice is to quote from the Upanishads.

During my rabid atheist days, I used to love to shock my devout friends with detailed descriptions of the ritual Ashvamedha Yagna as prescribed in the Rigveda and Yajurveda. You may have heard of it as the best way for a king to truly assert his authority and placate the gods. There's lots of weird stuff in there but a particularly juicy piece is the description of how the queen has to simulate intercourse with a dead horse for an entire night. I wonder if Modi can be considered a legitimate leader since he hasn't performed the Yagna and doesn't have a wife to help him out.

 

[Champ_Pal]

So I don't know how authentic this is but I wanted to share it here. I am sure some Hindus will disagree with this stuff.

I don't want to make it look like a *** for tat thing. I was looking into how other religions treat non believers and ran into this. Hinduism it seems to me is not much different. I think pretty much all religions preach they are right and condemns those who don't believe in them.

Is it permissible in Hindu scriptures to kill infidels and kill anti-Vedic atheists?

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They…

sourastra-das.medium.com

Some fanatic Hindus who are unaware of the violent passages in their book often mock other religious texts by misinterpreting them. They have no idea how violent Vedas are. Vedas are terror manual which turns humans into savages. Many tribes were destroyed as a result of the violent passages in Vedas. As per Vedas, you must kill a person who rejects Vedas, who hates Vedas and Ishwar, who does not worship, who does not make offerings to ishwar, who insults god (Blasphemy), one who oppresses a Brahmin etc. There are several passages in Vedas which calls for death of disbelievers. I am mostly using Arya Samaji translations of Satya Prakash Saraswati, Satyakam Vidyalankar, Devi Chand, Vaidyanath Shastri, Kshemkarand Das Trivedi, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Shripad Damodar Satvalekar, and orthodox translations of Swami Karpatri and Shri Ram Sharma Acharya (Gayatri Parivar) and I will be using Griffith’s translation as well followed by Hindi translation of Hindu scholars.​

Rig Veda 9.13.9

“May you (O love divine), the beholder of the path of enlightenment, purifying our mind and destroying the infidels who refuse to offer worship, come and stay in the prime position of the eternal sacrifice.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

O Pavamamas, driving off the godless, looking on the light, Sit in the place of sacrifice.

VedaWeb

vedaweb.uni-koeln.de

The Full Verse is - इन्द्रासोमा महि तद्वां महित्वं युवं महानि प्रथमानि चक्रथुः। युवं सूर्यं विविदथुर्युवं स्व१र्विश्वा तमांस्यहतं निदश्च ॥१॥
The full Translation is - Just as the moon is illuminated after receiving the light from the sun, similarly you too become illuminated souls after receiving knowledge & wisdom from your teachers and preachers. Just as sun removes darkness everyday, similarly you too dispel darkness of ignorance, be happy and continuously destroy the notions of blasphemers and hypocrites

Rig Veda 7.6.3

“May the fire divine chase away those infidels, who do not perform worship and who are uncivil in speech. They are niggards, unbelievers, say no tribute to fire divine and offer no homage. The fire divine turns those godless people far away who institute no sacred ceremonies.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

The foolish, faithless, rudely-speaking niggards, without belief or sacrifice or worship,– Far far sway hath Agni chased those Dasytis, and, in the cast, hath turned the godless westward.

VedaWeb

vedaweb.uni-koeln.de

Rig Veda 9.63.5

”Augmenting the strength of resplendent self, urging the waters and rejuvenating all noble acts and destroying the infidels.” Tr. SatyaPrakash Saraswati

Performing every noble work, active, augmenting Indra's strength, Driving away the godless ones.

VedaWeb

vedaweb.uni-koeln.de

Yajur Veda 13.12,

”O king, make progress in thy duty of administration, extend happiness to the virtuous. O terrible chastiser, burn down the irreligious foes. O splendid person, humiliate and consume utterly like dried up stubble, him, who encourages our foe.”

Atharva Veda 12.5.62

Rend, rend to bits, rend through and through, scorch and consume and burn to dust, the one who rejects the Vedas

Atharva Veda 12.2.23

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 10.3.3

He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice to him be reverence with ten Sakvari-stanzas.

Atharva Veda 20.93.1

May our hymns give you great delight. Display your bounty, Thudered. Drive off [kill] the enemies of the Vedas.

Rig Veda 6.72.1

ye killed all darkness and the Gods’ blasphemers.

GREAT is this might of yours, Indra and Soma: the first high exploits were your own achievements. Ye found the Sun ye found the light of heaven: ye killed all darkness and the Gods' blasphemers.

VedaWeb

vedaweb.uni-koeln.de

Srimad Bhagvatam 4.4.17

Sati continued: If one hears an irresponsible person blaspheme the master and controller of religion, one should block his ears and go away if unable to punish him. But if one is able to kill, then one should by force cut out the blasphemer’s tongue and kill the offender, and after that one should give up his own life.

Yaska Acharya also writes about terror,
Nirukta 10.21 …These are hemistichs. Like a spear hurled, it inspires terror (among enemies) or courage (among friends)…

“You can still see that the description of Raakshasas given therein tallies with the ugly appearance of the negroes of today.” Satyarth Prakash, by Dayanand Saraswati, Ch 8, page 266, Tr. Chrinajiva Bhardwaja

Swami Prabhupada writes: “…An atheist is called a demon, and it is a fact that even a person born of good parents can turn into a demon by bad association…” Swami Prabhupada on Srimad Bhagavatam 3.3.6
http://vanisource.org/wiki/SB_3.3.6

My response in Bold and Red.

No one follows Vedas in Hinduism. No one refers to it to solve the day to day life issues. 99.99% of Hindus never heard Vedas in full. Reading them is impossible.

I was only able to find the Translations with links to Rig Veda. I could not find any online Translation for Yajurveda or Atharva Veda online that I can post the real translation links to.

All of the hymns you posted regarding killing infidels or Blasphemers are not for Humans. They are hymns for the King of Devas - Indra and the Fire God Agni. They were the ones fighting Danavas and Asuras. The verses are praising what Indra(Mythical King of Devas) did to his enemies.

My response is not to defend Vedas or Hinduism. They are not to be followed by humans. They are just praises to what God Indra and his assistants Agni, Vayu, Maruth, Soma etc did during the great fights between Devas and their cousins Asuras.

I consider Vedas to be mumbo jumbo before anyone comments that I am a RSS activist or Modi Bhakt.

PS- The translations you posted are from Neo Buddhists and Ambedkarites. They have an agenda to show that Vedas are no different to Abrahamic Texts.

 

[Champ_Pal]

The problem you'll face in Hinduism is that for every holy book you'll find, 90% of the Hindus will say they don't take it seriously. The Vedas in particular are a weird set of collected songs, hymns, ritual procedures that often seem to talk about different gods, contradict each other and occasionally go into philosophical tangents. If you are really interested in discussing what Hinduism at it's essence asks it's followers to accept and believe, your best choice is to quote from the Upanishads.

During my rabid atheist days, I used to love to shock my devout friends with detailed descriptions of the ritual Ashvamedha Yagna as prescribed in the Rigveda and Yajurveda. You may have heard of it as the best way for a king to truly assert his authority and placate the gods. There's lots of weird stuff in there but a particularly juicy piece is the description of how the queen has to simulate intercourse with a dead horse for an entire night. I wonder if Modi can be considered a legitimate leader since he hasn't performed the Yagna and doesn't have a wife to help him out.

The real Ashvamedha Yagna is graphic. Queens similutaing intercourse with a horse for the victory of her King husband. Then the horse will be sacrificed and the meat is distributed and consumed by all and sundry.

These Yagnas were never performed in Mainland India. There was no evidence for it. Rigveda has its origin in Afghanistan and Central Asia. Horses are not native to Gangetic plain. Same with the plant Soma. The elixir of Soma is made and it is consumed. People used to get high and invoke God Indra to grant them victory in their endeavors. The Indo-Iranian tribes were one group more than 4000 years ago. At some point, the split happened (some 3000 years ago) and wars broke out between Devas and Daityas(Asuras). Both were cousins and fought among themselves and split.

 

[Stewie]

I would like to add about the allegedly “funny” bits of religion while on the subject; there is some stuff that applies to your person and some stuff that addresses the society, state, government, authorities.

We say Islam is a complete legal framework and it is, in that it provides the guidance to you as a person and then the overall society of Muslims. So most of the directives that the non Muslim posters here have expressed concerns about are those that address how a state should act or how a Muslim in the role of a leader (khalifa, pm, president) or a Muslim cabinet should act.

In my personal view it is not telling me as an individual to make unilateral decisions on whether someone needs to be penalized or be punished for whatever actions. Those powers rest with the proper authorities within the legal framework to the best of my knowledge.

So an average “Ahmed” cannot go killing apostates, or others based on his views.

The universal Islamic law that there is no compulsion in faith still applies to an individual Muslim.

Hope that made sense.

 

[Stewie]

The real Ashvamedha Yagna is graphic. Queens similutaing intercourse with a horse for the victory of her King husband. Then the horse will be sacrificed and the meat is distributed and consumed by all and sundry.

These Yagnas were never performed in Mainland India. There was no evidence for it. Rigveda has its origin in Afghanistan and Central Asia. Horses are not native to Gangetic plain. Same with the plant Soma. The elixir of Soma is made and it is consumed. People used to get high and invoke God Indra to grant them victory in their endeavors. The Indo-Iranian tribes were one group more than 4000 years ago. At some point, the split happened (some 3000 years ago) and wars broke out between Devas and Daityas(Asuras). Both were cousins and fought among themselves and split.

How Dothraki of them

 

[Red-Indian]

The real Ashvamedha Yagna is graphic. Queens similutaing intercourse with a horse for the victory of her King husband. Then the horse will be sacrificed and the meat is distributed and consumed by all and sundry.

These Yagnas were never performed in Mainland India. There was no evidence for it. Rigveda has its origin in Afghanistan and Central Asia. Horses are not native to Gangetic plain. Same with the plant Soma. The elixir of Soma is made and it is consumed. People used to get high and invoke God Indra to grant them victory in their endeavors. The Indo-Iranian tribes were one group more than 4000 years ago. At some point, the split happened (some 3000 years ago) and wars broke out between Devas and Daityas(Asuras). Both were cousins and fought among themselves and split.

There's several mentions of kings performing the Ashwamedha Yagna in inscriptions, coins etc. And queens were involved! What's not clear is whether the rituals were performed as or close to the methods prescribed in the Vedas. i.e. whether 609 animals of various descriptions were sacrificed etc. etc.

 

[Champ_Pal]

How Dothraki of them

The Vedic religion was originally very tribal. As the prople started moving to mainland India, they came in contact with Buddhism and Jainism and many other local cults Shaivism and Shaktism. Ideas were borrowed and what we see Hinduism today is a marriage of all of these schools of thought. Vedas got relegated to mere symbolism. Vedic Gods got replaced by local heroes like Rama, Krishna etc. Stories were spun and these local horoes were thought of to be the Avatars of Vedic Gods.

Poor Indra, the main Vedic God who was a hero lost his place to Shiva and Vishnu and made him subservient to them. Indra is often portrayed as a coward and lecherous who runs away to seek refuge with Shiva or Vishnu at the first sign of trouble. Hero became a Zero.

I always believe that the deeper one knows the entire story, the more disbeliever one becomes. I only know a little about these stories. But I know enough to not take any of these things seriously.

 

[Stewie]

The Vedic religion was originally very tribal. As the prople started moving to mainland India, they came in contact with Buddhism and Jainism and many other local cults Shaivism and Shaktism. Ideas were borrowed and what we see Hinduism today is a marriage of all of these schools of thought. Vedas got relegated to mere symbolism. Vedic Gods got replaced by local heroes like Rama, Krishna etc. Stories were spun and these local horoes were thought of to be the Avatars of Vedic Gods.

Poor Indra, the main Vedic God who was a hero lost his place to Shiva and Vishnu and made him subservient to them. Indra is often portrayed as a coward and lecherous who runs away to seek refuge with Shiva or Vishnu at the first sign of trouble. Hero became a Zero.

I always believe that the deeper one knows the entire story, the more disbeliever one becomes. I only know a little about these stories. But I know enough to not take any of these things seriously.

That’s interesting. Some posters will want to make you believe Buddhism and Jainism rose from Hinduism And not the other way around.

Thanks for sharing

 

[Champ_Pal]

That’s interesting. Some posters will want to make you believe Buddhism and Jainism rose from Hinduism And not the other way around.

Thanks for sharing

Buddhism started around 500-600 BC. The same as Jainism. But Jainism claims that Mahavir who is supposed to be the founder of Jain Philosophy is only 24th Thirthankara. There were many before him. So no one knows how old Jainism is. Could potentially be one of the oldest philosophies in the world.

Both Buddhism and Jainism are God Less. Later on Jainism in particular adopted many Hindu Gods. So it is not uncommon to see Jains praying to Hindu Gods and Hindus praying to Mahavir or Buddha. Ideas were definitely borrowed.

Vedic religion in its pure form has nothing to do with Jainism or Buddhism. Sanatana Dharma is the umbrella term for all the schools of thought in India. It now includes Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and most recently Sikhism). Modern Hinduism(5th century) is only slightly older than Islam(7th century).

 

[Stewie]

Buddhism started around 500-600 BC. The same as Jainism. But Jainism claims that Mahavir who is supposed to be the founder of Jain Philosophy is only 24th Thirthankara. There were many before him. So no one knows how old Jainism is. Could potentially be one of the oldest philosophies in the world.

Both Buddhism and Jainism are God Less. Later on Jainism in particular adopted many Hindu Gods. So it is not uncommon to see Jains praying to Hindu Gods and Hindus praying to Mahavir or Buddha. Ideas were definitely borrowed.

Vedic religion in its pure form has nothing to do with Jainism or Buddhism. Sanatana Dharma is the umbrella term for all the schools of thought in India. It now includes Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and most recently Sikhism). Modern Hinduism(5th century) is only slightly older than Islam(7th century).

So the Santana dharma is more of a man made loosely defined term, then. The original or actual philosophies of these faiths may diverge completely or have not much in common. Like you said Buddhism and Jainism are Godless. Hinduism is polytheistic and Sikhism is monotheistic

 

[Red-Indian]

The Vedic religion was originally very tribal. As the prople started moving to mainland India, they came in contact with Buddhism and Jainism and many other local cults Shaivism and Shaktism. Ideas were borrowed and what we see Hinduism today is a marriage of all of these schools of thought. Vedas got relegated to mere symbolism. Vedic Gods got replaced by local heroes like Rama, Krishna etc. Stories were spun and these local horoes were thought of to be the Avatars of Vedic Gods.

Poor Indra, the main Vedic God who was a hero lost his place to Shiva and Vishnu and made him subservient to them. Indra is often portrayed as a coward and lecherous who runs away to seek refuge with Shiva or Vishnu at the first sign of trouble. Hero became a Zero.

I always believe that the deeper one knows the entire story, the more disbeliever one becomes. I only know a little about these stories. But I know enough to not take any of these things seriously.

You have to be careful. You're presenting one of several theories as established fact.

 

[Champ_Pal]

You have to be careful. You're presenting one of several theories as established fact.

I am not a proponent of Aryan invasion theory. There is no evidence of any invasion. There is definitely migration of Indo-Iranian people from central asia. They assimilated with the local culture of Indian subcontinent. We are all product of a mix of everyone's DNA as well as culture and beliefs. There is no pure this or that.

 

[Champ_Pal]

So the Santana dharma is more of a man made loosely defined term, then. The original or actual philosophies of these faiths may diverge completely or have not much in common. Like you said Buddhism and Jainism are Godless. Hinduism is polytheistic and Sikhism is monotheistic

Sanatana Dharma is not a made up term by modern Hindus. It has its origins in Mahabharata epic. It is all about establishing the eternal Dharma or righteousness. It

The idea is to establish righteousness. Whether you follow Hinduism or Vedic Religion or Jainism or Budhism or Sikhism, the idea is to establish Dharma. Sanatana Dharma is as old as Vedic religion as it is also part of Sanatana Dharma. Whether you believe in Gods or idols, whether you do not believe in God(s) or Devatas, it does not matter. THe ultimate aim is to break the circle of Birth and Death. All belief systems or schools of thought that fall under Santana Dharma preach about attaining Moksha or Nirvana. The path one chooses is upon the individual. You choose what suits you.

 

[Stewie]

Sanatana Dharma is not a made up term by modern Hindus. It has its origins in Mahabharata epic. It is all about establishing the eternal Dharma or righteousness. It

The idea is to establish righteousness. Whether you follow Hinduism or Vedic Religion or Jainism or Budhism or Sikhism, the idea is to establish Dharma. Sanatana Dharma is as old as Vedic religion as it is also part of Sanatana Dharma. Whether you believe in Gods or idols, whether you do not believe in God(s) or Devatas, it does not matter. THe ultimate aim is to break the circle of Birth and Death. All belief systems or schools of thought that fall under Santana Dharma preach about attaining Moksha or Nirvana. The path one chooses is upon the individual. You choose what suits you.

So who coined the term? And where does it come from really?

 

[Stewie]

Sanatana Dharma is not a made up term by modern Hindus. It has its origins in Mahabharata epic. It is all about establishing the eternal Dharma or righteousness. It

The idea is to establish righteousness. Whether you follow Hinduism or Vedic Religion or Jainism or Budhism or Sikhism, the idea is to establish Dharma. Sanatana Dharma is as old as Vedic religion as it is also part of Sanatana Dharma. Whether you believe in Gods or idols, whether you do not believe in God(s) or Devatas, it does not matter. THe ultimate aim is to break the circle of Birth and Death. All belief systems or schools of thought that fall under Santana Dharma preach about attaining Moksha or Nirvana. The path one chooses is upon the individual. You choose what suits you.

And also if it is so old, how can it lay claim to Sikhism which really came into existence much much later?

 

[Champ_Pal]

And also if it is so old, how can it lay claim to Sikhism which really came into existence much much later?

Sikhism is Dharmic religion too. Hence it falls under Sanatana Dharma umbrella. Its just the latest entrant.

 

[Champ_Pal]

And also if it is so old, how can it lay claim to Sikhism which really came into existence much much later?

Below is from a quick Google search.

The term Sanatana Dharma is a Sanskrit compound that first appears in the Buddhist Mahavagga, the third part of the Suttanipata.
It also appears in classical Sanskrit literature, such as the Manusmrti (c. 1st–3rd century CE) and the Bhagavata Purana (c. 8th–10th century CE).
The word sanatan has roots in Sanskrit and can be translated to mean "eternal," "ancient," "venerable," or "unshakeable". In popular Hindu beliefs, Sanatana Dharma is a religion that has existed since time immemorial. It can also refer to:
Eternal religions that believe in soul and rebirth
The set of duties and practices incumbent upon all Hindus
That which is integral to something.

 

[Red-Indian]

I see left leaning and right leaning policies as tacks in sailing. Which tack is best depends on where your wind is.

Agreed. I see consistency in politics more as a vice than a virtue. I dislike Modi pretty intensely but voted BJP in the last elections because I dislike the Congress coalition policies more.

I'd probably vote Dem if I could in the States since there's not much difference in the two parties' economic policies and I like the Dem social stuff more.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Agreed. I see consistency in politics more as a vice than a virtue. I dislike Modi pretty intensely but voted BJP in the last elections because I dislike the Congress coalition policies more.

I'd probably vote Dem if I could in the States since there's not much difference in the two parties' economic policies and I like the Dem social stuff more.

I see BJP/Modi as Chemo for the cancer that is current nehru clan/congress

 

[Justcrazy]

There is no “book” of atheism that commands you murder, enslave others

For the religions there is.

Though that was obvious

But there is NO Book of atheism , is there any which we have missed ? So we judge atheists with there actions and religions with scriptures. So , do you agree that atheist mind have had violent history ?

 

[Justcrazy]

Sanatana Dharma is not a made up term by modern Hindus. It has its origins in Mahabharata epic. It is all about establishing the eternal Dharma or righteousness. It

The idea is to establish righteousness. Whether you follow Hinduism or Vedic Religion or Jainism or Budhism or Sikhism, the idea is to establish Dharma. Sanatana Dharma is as old as Vedic religion as it is also part of Sanatana Dharma. Whether you believe in Gods or idols, whether you do not believe in God(s) or Devatas, it does not matter. THe ultimate aim is to break the circle of Birth and Death. All belief systems or schools of thought that fall under Santana Dharma preach about attaining Moksha or Nirvana. The path one chooses is upon the individual. You choose what suits you.

Sanatan Dharam means eternal , so are the vedas also eternal?

 

[rpant_gabba]

But there is NO Book of atheism , is there any which we have missed ? So we judge atheists with there actions and religions with scriptures. So , do you agree that atheist mind have had violent history ?

I have no idea where you are going with this. Is there a point?

Let me try to explain in a different way.

Good (believers and atheists) people do good things

Bad (believers and atheists) people do bad things

Is takes religion to make Good (believers) to bad things.

case in point: One of the posters in this thread: If God came down and commanded me to do something, I would do it ..why .. because he is God lol.

do you get it yet?

 

[BouncerGuy]

Please stay on topic and no personal remarks.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Sanatan Dharam means eternal , so are the vedas also eternal?

Claim is that Vedas are eternal. But we all know they are about 3000 years old with Rigveda being the oldest.

 

[RexRex]

Well I wont be any good if I cant defend my faith, can I? You cant be a coward when it comes to such stuff. That is just me. I welcome you to post any questions or concerns. I feel stuff like this ends up turning into a really good opportunity for me to research stuff and strengthen my belief.

That's a commendable attitude to have

However I'm not sure you have the stomach for it, judging by previous interactions. You get triggered easily if your assertions are challenged. In any case, I did a deep dive into Islam in 2015 with several books and ended up having some reservations, to put it politely. But was about a decade ago; need to brush up again before I can throw you some googlies.

 

[Stewie]

I have no idea where you are going with this. Is there a point?

Let me try to explain in a different way.

Good (believers and atheists) people do good things

Bad (believers and atheists) people do bad things

Is takes religion to make Good (believers) to bad things.

case in point: One of the posters in this thread: If God came down and commanded me to do something, I would do it ..why .. because he is God lol.

do you get it yet?

Do you think if there was a God, He would come down and ask you such a ridiculous thing

 

[Stewie]

That's a commendable attitude to have

However I'm not sure you have the stomach for it, judging by previous interactions. You get triggered easily if your assertions are challenged. In any case, I did a deep dive into Islam in 2015 with several books and ended up having some reservations, to put it politely. But was about a decade ago; need to brush up again before I can throw you some googlies.

That's the thing about online interactions, you cannot judge the tone of the other person. It does get irritating when people are so rigid on their preconcieved notions they forget they are engaging in debates perhaps to understand the other person's view as well as put their view across. I think we are all guilty of it. You cannot claim total immunity from such a human trait.

If you are alluding to my claims that most Hindu posters here come with an agenda, its not entirely untrue. You see a lot of them bringing their anti Pakistan and anti Muslim rhetoric here. The thread on Palestine and the Israeli atrocities is a prime example of it.

 

[Stewie]

That's a commendable attitude to have

However I'm not sure you have the stomach for it, judging by previous interactions. You get triggered easily if your assertions are challenged. In any case, I did a deep dive into Islam in 2015 with several books and ended up having some reservations, to put it politely. But was about a decade ago; need to brush up again before I can throw you some googlies.

.. and you are welcome to come to the table. I look forward to it. As I stated previously, I may not have all the answers but we can both try and make sense of it.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Do you think if there was a God, He would come down and ask you such a ridiculous thing

Hasn't he already. Old Testament. your and @RexRex excuse will be that that it is not divine, human alteration blah blah blah

It is just that. an excuse.

you'll add "from islamic point of view...."

RexRex will add "those are events described in old testament, now we have new covenant"

The translations of Rig veda (you quioted them) which are foundations hinduism, are not pretty either.

 

[Stewie]

Hasn't he already. Old Testament. your and @RexRex excuse will be that that it is not divine, human alteration blah blah blah

It is just that. an excuse.

you'll add "from islamic point of view...."

RexRex will add "those are events described in old testament, now we have new covenant"

The translations of Rig veda (you quioted them) which are foundations hinduism, are not pretty either.

Is it hard to believe for you though? Humanity has been known to perverse and change laws, constitutions, for their own benefit for ages and ages.

Either you use this argument to claim that there is no God, or that such filth can be attributed to men. You cannot claim God is a malicious entity. That is probably the least plausible and likely conclusion, AND THAT IS THE POINT you have been trying to make for some absolutely weird reason. If you want to convince us of atheism, its actually a very very funny and off-putting way of going about it to be honest.

 

[Justcrazy]

Claim is that Vedas are eternal. But we all know they are about 3000 years old with Rigveda being the oldest.

So , sanatan claim is wrong.

 

[Stewie]

So , sanatan claim is wrong.

I am still unclear on that myself. its supposedly an age old religion that started with Buddhism, but somehow modernist Hinduism now identified with it more and it also rejects the ancient texts of vedas by most accounts.

Sounds like a lot of jumping through hoops to me, quite honestly. Or perhaps its difficult for us to understand it because we have had a static scripture since it was put together.

 

[Champ_Pal]

So , sanatan claim is wrong.

Let’s be serious. Modern human is only about 200k years old. Civilization is less than 30k years old. How can any Text claim to be eternal?

Religions can claim anything. The reality says otherwise.

When Hindus say Sanatana Dharma or Eternal Dharma, they mean that nobody knows when and where the worship of Shiva, Shakti have begun. Christianity has it. Islam has it. Sanatana Dharma does not have one. But like everything, they all have a start date. Even the universe has a start date.

 

[IndoorCricket]

So , sanatan claim is wrong.

Written 3000 bc. Sanatan is oral tradition.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Is it hard to believe for you though? Humanity has been known to perverse and change laws, constitutions, for their own benefit for ages and ages.

Either you use this argument to claim that there is no God, or that such filth can be attributed to men. You cannot claim God is a malicious entity.

Yes, I can.

If god is omnipotent, omniscient, merciful blah, blah, he could have created a world where terrible things don't happen and not send 120+ messengers.

If you claim there is only one god, as a muslim, you have acknowledge that Moses was a fraud and that 10 commandments and old testament are man made.

Same goes for Jesus to some extent. of course xtians not being able to separate themselves from Judaism, claim a "new covenant" as an excuse.

Ultmitely, the god of Torah, god of new testament and the one you claim from quran can't possibly be the same entity.

If he/she/it is, it far from omninpotent, omniscient or all merciful at the same time. Mare like a tantrum throwing megalomanic human

That is probably the least plausible and likely conclusion, AND THAT IS THE POINT you have been trying to make for some absolutely weird reason. If you want to convince us of atheism, its actually a very very funny and off-putting way of going about it to be honest.

the only thing I want this proper separation of Church and state. State makes the rules. church complies.

you are welcome to your beliefs.

 

[Suleiman]

It’s really very simple. If I believe in God, and His messengers, starting from Prophet Adam to Prophet Muhammad and all the prophets in between (peace be upon them all), then I simply listen to and obey what God commands.

Couldn’t care less what the creation thinks about what’s moral or not moral. If God has ordained as something as moral, then it’s moral. If he ordains it immoral, then it’s immoral.

A Muslim is one who has submitted to God. So I can only speak as a Muslim, I do not speak for other religions.

What social constructs mankind has created on its own is on them.

But ultimately it all comes down to if you believe in God or not. That’s the real question here, isn’t it?

 

[rpant_gabba]

It’s really very simple. If I believe in God, and His messengers, starting from Prophet Adam to Prophet Muhammad and all the prophets in between (peace be upon them all), then I simply listen to and obey what God commands.

Couldn’t care less what the creation thinks about what’s moral or not moral. If God has ordained as something as moral, then it’s moral. If he ordains it immoral, then it’s immoral.

A Muslim is one who has submitted to God. So I can only speak as a Muslim, I do not speak for other religions.

What social constructs mankind has created on its own is on them.

But ultimately it all comes down to if you believe in God or not. That’s the real question here, isn’t it?

Yeah, no.

If god of judaism, xtianty and islam are the same, . I'll work to put an end to his reign.

 

[Justcrazy]

Written 3000 bc. Sanatan is oral tradition.

Is it preserved in Manuscript ?

 

[Justcrazy]

Let’s be serious. Modern human is only about 200k years old. Civilization is less than 30k years old. How can any Text claim to be eternal?

Religions can claim anything. The reality says otherwise.

When Hindus say Sanatana Dharma or Eternal Dharma, they mean that nobody knows when and where the worship of Shiva, Shakti have begun. Christianity has it. Islam has it. Sanatana Dharma does not have one. But like everything, they all have a start date. Even the universe has a start date.

So as usual Hindu has no answer to any question , it is eternal , but we do not have manuscripts to back that up.

 

[Justcrazy]

I am still unclear on that myself. its supposedly an age old religion that started with Buddhism, but somehow modernist Hinduism now identified with it more and it also rejects the ancient texts of vedas by most accounts.

Sounds like a lot of jumping through hoops to me, quite honestly. Or perhaps its difficult for us to understand it because we have had a static scripture since it was put together.

So when you do not have any scripture with authenticity , how can you have a religion ?

 

[Stewie]

Yes, I can.

If god is omnipotent, omniscient, merciful blah, blah, he could have created a world where terrible things don't happen and not send 120+ messengers.

If you claim there is only one god, as a muslim, you have acknowledge that Moses was a fraud and that 10 commandments and old testament are man made .

Same goes for Jesus to some extent. of course xtians not being able to separate themselves from Judaism, claim a "new covenant" as an excuse.

Ultmitely, the god of Torah, god of new testament and the one you claim from quran can't possibly be the same entity.

If he/she/it is, it far from omninpotent, omniscient or all merciful at the same time. Mare like a tantrum throwing megalomanic human

the only thing I want this proper separation of Church and state. State makes the rules. church complies.

you are welcome to your beliefs.

I acknowledged Moses was a fraud?

You will be hard pressed to find any such post from me.

Rest of your points are the same old rants I have already addressed and don’t feel like repeating.
And I’ll just be me over here keeping myself open to any possibilities but at least at peace no bearded dude in the clouds is going to hit my rear with a lightning bolt.
Cheers!

 

[Justcrazy]

Yes, I can.

If god is omnipotent, omniscient, merciful blah, blah, he could have created a world where terrible things don't happen and not send 120+ messengers.

If you claim there is only one god, as a muslim, you have acknowledge that Moses was a fraud and that 10 commandments and old testament are man made.

Same goes for Jesus to some extent. of course xtians not being able to separate themselves from Judaism, claim a "new covenant" as an excuse.

Ultmitely, the god of Torah, god of new testament and the one you claim from quran can't possibly be the same entity.

If he/she/it is, it far from omninpotent, omniscient or all merciful at the same time. Mare like a tantrum throwing megalomanic human

the only thing I want this proper separation of Church and state. State makes the rules. church complies.

you are welcome to your beliefs.

Did God force the people to have terrible things? Humans have free will to act as they want. A country for example have laws , rules and regulations , now its up to a person to follow or not follow them. If they do not , they will be fined or punished accordingly.

 

[Stewie]

So when you do not have any scripture with authenticity , how can you have a religion ?

According to them
You can! Haha

Or according to Gabba … scripture means evil God because he just wants you to kill and slaughter other humans. YAY, atheists!

 

[rpant_gabba]

Did God force the people to have terrible things? Humans have free will to act as they want. A country for example have laws , rules and regulations , now its up to a person to follow or not follow them. If they do not , they will be fined or punished accordingly.

Sorry bro. It is very difficult find any logic in your posts. Lets move on.

 

[Stewie]

Yes, I can.

If god is omnipotent, omniscient, merciful blah, blah, he could have created a world where terrible things don't happen and not send 120+ messengers.

If you claim there is only one god, as a muslim, you have acknowledge that Moses was a fraud and that 10 commandments and old testament are man made BS.

Same goes for Jesus to some extent. of course xtians not being able to separate themselves from Judaism, claim a "new covenant" as an excuse.

Ultmitely, the god of Torah, god of new testament and the one you claim from quran can't possibly be the same entity.

If he/she/it is, it far from omninpotent, omniscient or all merciful at the same time. Mare like a tantrum throwing megalomanic human

the only thing I want this proper separation of Church and state. State makes the rules. church complies.

you are welcome to your beliefs.

Separation of church and state is a very different topic. You have your evil terminators, aliens and Freddie krugers all mixed up. Maybe go watch ghost busters for a bit so you can actually have a more lighthearted tone like real atheists.

 

[Justcrazy]

Sorry bro. It is very difficult find any logic in your posts. Lets move on.

You said why God did terrible things , where did Quran say to do terrible things ? You are making an allegations here, and when asked about evidence you making excuses.

 

[Justcrazy]

According to them
You can! Haha

Or according to Gabba … scripture means evil God because he just wants you to kill and slaughter other humans. YAY, atheists!

But if we look into past even Atheist ideology has killed huge number of people , that too without any scripture. So I do not understand how they raise this point.

 

[Stewie]

But if we look into past even Atheist ideology has killed huge number of people , that too without any scripture. So I do not understand how they raise this point.

Well let us go with modern atheism who are typically very confident people of science who don’t believe in any god and are actually very laid back and relaxed because they know there is nobody out to judge them or get them.

If you run into a person who believes god is a malevolent entity out to get him, that can’t be an atheist. That’s usually a satanist.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Well let us go with modern atheism who are typically very confident people of science who don’t believe in any god and are actually very laid back and relaxed because they know there is nobody out to judge them or get them.

If you run into a person who believes god is a malevolent entity out to get him, that can’t be an atheist. That’s usually a satanist.

• That's exactly what evangelicals call islam, muslims, hindus etc

• https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah 45:7&version=KJV

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

So Satan would also be a creation of the omnipotent, omniscient, merciful god, according to scripture

 

[Stewie]

• That's exactly what evangelicals call islam, muslims, hindus etc

• https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah 45:7&version=KJV

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

So Satan would also be a creation of the omnipotent, omniscient, merciful god, according to scripture

Satan actually is a creation of God. God created everything. I have to admit you are starting to quickly fail the atheism test in my view. Atheists are supposed to be very well versed in such things so they can prove believers wrong. You seem to have very low knowledge of this kind of stuff.

 

[Champ_Pal]

So as usual Hindu has no answer to any question , it is eternal , but we do not have manuscripts to back that up.

Every religion says it’s eternal or its holy book is eternal with no proof.

 

[sweep_shot]

Satan actually is a creation of God. God created everything. I have to admit you are starting to quickly fail the atheism test in my view. Atheists are supposed to be very well versed in such things so they can prove believers wrong. You seem to have very rudimentary knowledge of this kind of stuff. You sound more like a comic book atheist rather than a proper academic atheist.

To me, most BJP Indians seem either plastic atheists or plastic Hindus. In other words, I find them pretentious.

I think they use atheism/Hinduism as a tool to express their Islamophobia. They are not sincere/clear about what they believe in. That's the vibe I get.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Satan actually is a creation of God. God created everything. I have to admit you are starting to quickly fail the atheism test in my view. Atheists are supposed to be very well versed in such things so they can prove believers wrong. You seem to have very rudimentary knowledge of this kind of stuff. You sound more like a comic book atheist rather than a proper academic atheist.

you are losing the plot chief.

you are stuck not knowing what to say about jews and xtians who mostly they claim they have nothing do with islam.

 

[Stewie]

To me, most BJP Indians seem either plastic atheists or plastic Hindus. In other words, I find them pretentious.

I think they use atheism/Hinduism as a tool to express their Islamophobia. They are not sincere/clear about what they believe in. That's the vibe I get.

Their atheism seems to be borne out of hatred for Abrahamic faiths. I understand the scriptures are not all warm and fuzzy but jeez.. chill out and relax and go easy on portraying us all as satan worshippers.

 

[Justcrazy]

Well let us go with modern atheism who are typically very confident people of science who don’t believe in any god and are actually very laid back and relaxed because they know there is nobody out to judge them or get them.

If you run into a person who believes god is a malevolent entity out to get him, that can’t be an atheist. That’s usually a satanist.

Atheist does not mean that one is scientist , most of this neo atheist have no idea what is science or the methodology or limitations of science.

 

[Justcrazy]

Every religion says it’s eternal or its holy book is eternal with no proof.

Islam does not say Quran is Eternal.

 

[Stewie]

you are losing the plot chief.

you are stuck not knowing what to say about jews and xtians who mostly they claim they have nothing do with islam.

An atheist thinks we are satan worshippers and I am the one losing the plot!

It’s ok. Relax. I’m just joking. We are all good friends here even if I worship a red horned dude with hooved feet and probably have ten atheists locked away in my basement.

The world is not all doom and gloom my friend. There are a lot of positives in this wonderful world and people of religion still get along well with satan worshippers and atheists alike if we can simply put the churlish stuff aside. We are all first and foremost humans.
In the context of this thread.. who cares where you are sourcing your morality from as long as you have it. This thread should really be allowed to die its natural death. So many pages and don’t think any of us learnt much except that vedas might be the devils bible.