L
LDNCatholic
Guest
What do you count as authentic? And why do you assume it is British?
- Status
N
Neil_LA
Guest
An authentic source would be something from the Shastras, and I assume it is British because the British were set on destroying Vedic culture wnen they occupied Bharat for their own selfish ends.
As for example:
F. Wilford
Essay No VIII “On Egypt from the Ancient Books of the Hindus”
“Asiatic Researches” Volume 3 First Printing 1794
" The mythology of the Hindus is often inconsistant and contradictory. Many of them had, perhaps no firmer basis than the heated imagination of deluded fanatics, or hypocrites interested in worship of some particular deity. Should a key to their eighteen Puranas exist, it is more than probable that it would be too intricate or too stiff with the rust of time, for any useful purpose…there is abundant reason to believe that the Hindus have preserved the religious fables of Egypt."
This hardly sounds like un-biased scholarship…
And of course there is Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1st Baron Macaulay’s famous statement from his “Minute on Indian Education”, delivered in 1835.
“It is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population.”
Sounds like an agenda that does not have the best interest of Hinduism at heart.
Another quotation from Macaulay that shows the heart of most English/European/Christian scholars:
"“I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia.”
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
Oh…I was thinking news reports of the events? And Hindu scholars pointing to proof of Human sacrifice. That authentic enough?
N
Neil_LA
Guest
Well…a quote from the Shastras supporting human sacrifice would prove that it is not a deviation.
Or a quote from a religious leader supporting it would prove that it is not a deviation.
I don’t deny that it could exist, but I don’t believe that it is supported by either Guru or Shastra. Guru and Shastra are the authority. Just as in the Catholic Church, Scripture and Magisterium is the authority.
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
It does exist. Heres the examples I found in the last five minutes:
Killing for ‘Mother’ Kali Is a 2000 article which provides the details of a few ritual murders. It also names the tantric sect that carries such murders out. It points out that many temples use six foot flour effigies to simulate the sacrifice nowadays, since human sacrifice now counts as murder in modern India.
This BBC article details a temple in Assam, India, that now uses flour effigies, agreeing with the previous article, after having come under fire from animal rights groups for sacrificing animals.
This article details the rise of sacrifice in modern India, including that of children.
Another BBC article. This time describing the ritual murder of a man by a priest, within a temple, to appease the local goddess.
Anti Slavery Society website indicating trips to India and West Africa investigating human and child sacrifice.
It is interesting they often seem to be linked to Goddesses, Kali, Shakti, and this local goddess.
Also, the practice of Sati continues to this day.
You cannot expect me to believe that this is always free choice. As I say this is not an attack on Hinduism, parts of which I respect, but truth is truth and it is best not to hide it.
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
I don’t “bring up” (generally) ANY points of other religions which I don’t agree with, as I only react to what is presented to me of other religions by those who believe in them. I’m simply not educated enough in other religions to feel it a sensible thing to do to tell you what I believe you believe which is wrong according to what I believe.
So, I get to either wait for others to state what they believe, and then react to that with my response from where it is “possibly correct or entirely incorrect” according to my beliefs. It avoids quite a bit of hallucination on each of our parts when we don’t “imagine” what it is that others believe, and then react to our own hallucinations. Don’tcha think?
I know veritable bupkis (and yes I had to look that word up at dictionary.com) about hinduism, in my opinion, or any religion of “the east”, even after many years of “dabbling” in the subject. I’m simply not interested in deepening my knowledge of them, now, and only in deeping my understanding of my own religion.
BUT, when asked to give an opinion of some “phenomena” of ANY other religion, I’m more than happy to comment on the rightness and wrongness of it as seen from my piece of the river!
But as regards hinudism, it’s a beautifully (and/or tragically) hyper-extended polytheistic monad-tending naturo-personificational paleo-multicultural conglomerate of a religion, as far as I can tell.
How’s THAT for a description!?
<gulp!>
I really don’t know how “firm” you are in your faith (religion) other than by what you tell me, and when I hear things like, “My religion doesn’t claim to have ALL of the truth”, I’m left to ponder why the authoritative representatives of that religion haven’t made that claim after “all this time” (however long that may be) of working on the question.
In fact I think that’s a perfectly honest statement on those “authorities” part! They don’t make the claim because they CAN’T make the claim and they are honest in claiming only what they CAN claim.
We can and do make the claim because we know that we can’t be proved wrong, because the claim has the authority of God Himself behind it, and is quite impervious due to that fact.
That being said, what the Church DOES claim as absolute God-given revealed truth is really only a tiny bit of information, which has been expansively spun-out into masses of “legislation” and pedagogical exposition.
So, what specfically do ya’ wanna jaw about?
N
Neil_LA
Guest
So anyway…as I said…Authorative sources would be Guru and Shashtra, just as for you your authority is Magesterium and Bible.
I don’t believe that this is anything other than anti-Hindu propoganda created by Christians.
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
You assume these people are Christians. One of these sources is an atheist source and the BBC are secular. I’ll keep looking but stop assuming that everything Western is Christian.
Why are we even having these debate as you seem to believe everything that comes out of a Christian’s mouth is a lie?
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
Who is “Guru”? I thought “guru” was a generic term for “teacher”. Is there some “apostolic” (if you’ll excuse the odd translation of the term to this position) authority who speaks for the “original” authority of all knowledge and wisdom?
And the “Shastra” is the written deposit of “the faith”?
N
Neil_LA
Guest
Guru is the authentic head of a particular lineage and Shastra is the written Vedas
N
Neil_LA
Guest
Here’s a responce that I recieved about my inquiry about Mata Kali.
"As a devotee of Maa Kali and a scholar, I would say two things:
Those who are put off by the shocking image of Maa Kali are sensitized to the image of a crucified Jesus, and don’t see that these images are not much different from each other in terms of shocking content."
"As a devotee of Maa Kali and a scholar, I would say two things:
- human sacrifice has never been an official practice in Kali worship, or even common - that is, it’s a rare bastardization of the worship of Maa by individual people who are hungry for power. Most of these stories, however, were false sensationalistic stories spread by the colonizing British. This is similar to the false/sensationalistic rumors written about the British druids by Julius Caesar, etc.
- similarly, other religions have slaughtered (and some could say sacrificed) humans in their thirst for power - Christianity for instance does not have a pretty past, with the Crusades and the Inquisition, not to mention the stories in the Bible wherein God commands the people to kill all the women and children and animals when invading cities. Or today when some random person will say that God/Jesus commanded them to murder people, to go to war, etc.
Those who are put off by the shocking image of Maa Kali are sensitized to the image of a crucified Jesus, and don’t see that these images are not much different from each other in terms of shocking content."
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
- The Druids of Britain DID carry out ritual sacrifice.
- Hinduism is not an organised religion in the normal sense of the word. What is true for this fellow was certainly not true for the murderous priest who slaughtered a man in his temple in Northern India.
- Do you think all Christians are liars as you seem to have indicated? Please answer this, as your answer will lead to whether I continue this discussion or not.
N
Neil_LA
Guest
I do not think that all Christians are liars, but I do think that there is an innate bias against Hinduism in the western media and society and this bias is mainly purputrated by Christians.
I’ve decided that it is a waste of my time and energy to engage in fruitless debate about religion.
I would rather spend my time learning how to be with God than engaging in a discussion that goes absolutely nowhere.
I wish you all good luck and I pray that you attain the Lord of your hearts!
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
Firstly, Is “Maa Kali” the sacrificed or the “person” sacrificed to?
Secondly, people are basically prone to being sinful (aka original sin) but they are also (when naive and “comfortable”) prone to be able to “hear” natural law better, which rather offset each other as motivations for their actions. Once people become “uncomfortable” and/or (but mostly and) “dis-naived”, as it were, they are VERY prone to sin indeed!
Thirdly, these “very prone to sin”-type people will pervert whatever “religion” is their tradition, and bring in some sort of “sacrifice to idols” (sometimes even human sacrifice).
Since I don’t know beans about the particulars of the “eastern” religions, as to their doctrines, I can’t very well speak from anything other than from an “Indiana Jones” informed perspective. I do, at least, always discount Hollywood as any sort of authority vis a vis religion, of course!
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
Kali is the goddess, i believe there is a picture here that Neil has posted in the thread, onyx black skin standing over her defeated foe.
Indiana Jones completely exaggerates human sacrifice in Hinduism, while it existed it was traditionally willing victims, not poor brainwashed people slaughtered by the thousand. Modern human sacrifice in India has been outlawed and the victims of this rare act are not usually willing.
Good luck and God bless Neil I hope this will not be the last we see of you.
Indiana Jones completely exaggerates human sacrifice in Hinduism, while it existed it was traditionally willing victims, not poor brainwashed people slaughtered by the thousand. Modern human sacrifice in India has been outlawed and the victims of this rare act are not usually willing.
Good luck and God bless Neil I hope this will not be the last we see of you.
N
Neil_LA
Guest
Thank you…I’ve very much enjoyed our conversations. I’m sure I’ll be back!
And - - -FYI
Kali is not “standing over her defeated foe.” Actually she is standing over Shiva, who is her consort. Shiva is the Purusha - the Supreme Consciousness of Infinite Goodness and Kali is the Shakti - the Power or Engery of Purusha that is active in the world. The iconography of Kali is showing the balance between the active and passive acspects of God. In this case, however, the passive is shown as male and the active is shown as female. Shakti is the power of God and Shakti is always female. Mother nature dancing on the stage of consciousness.
Kal means time, so Kali is the femimine manifestation of time. All beings are subject to the power of time. Time can be threatening to those attached to their concepts of how things should be, but to those completely surrendered to God, time is the Divine Mother that brings us to eternity.
Kali is shown as black, because she takes away our darkness and takes it upon herself. She is the infinite vastness of space that looks black (or blue) from a distance, but when seen close up is nothing but infinite luminosity.
Kali is decorated with the garland of skulls made from the personifications of her children’s impure thoughts. If you look closely, you’ll see that the severed heads on her garland are actually smiling. This means that Kali takes away our negative and impure thoughts and purifies them into thoughts that serve and are devoted to God.
In one of her four hands, she holds the severed head of the demon “Great Ego.” Great Ego is that sense of “I-ness” that seeks to put oneself on the same level as God and therefore actually cuts us off from God and other beings. Mother Kali relentlessly kills the Great Ego of her childern without mercy. In the killing of the Great Ego, Kali again liberates the ego and brings it in line with Her will and makes it a vehicle for her grace and mercy and helps her children to live in harmony.
In one of her other hands, Kali Maa is holding the great sword (or chopping knife) with which she kills the Great Ego. This is the sword of wisdom which cuts through illusion and distorted thinking. It is the sword of pure intuitive vision which Kali bestows upon her devoted children.
Kali is sticking out her tongue because she has been fighting another great demon who’s name is “Seed of Desire.” Every time the demon Seed of Desire is slashed with the sword of wisdom, each drop of blood from Seed of Desire springs up and takes on the form of another demon Seed of Desire. Each of the infinite numbers of demons Seed of Desire gets slashed with the sword of wisdom and each drop of blood from each demon becomes a new demon. With her tongue, Mother Kali drinks up every drop of blood from every single demon Seed of Desire so that it becomes unable to become another demon. She drinks up all of the Seeds of Desire and therefore calms the minds of her children and again liberates the Seeds of Desire so that again they can be used for Her will.
In her other two hands, Mother Kali frequently is giving the gestures of “Bestowing of Blessing” and “Removal of Fear.”
So as you can see, Kali Maa is NOT a frightful or evil or demonic thing. She is frightful only to those who are opposed to the will of God. To her children, Kali is the most loving and kind mother. She is the Divine Mother who provides all of her Children everything they need and takes away every fear.
Just as one would need to explain the apparently shocking and violent image of a dead man nailed to a cross with blood dripping from open wounds and a lashed and tormented body in Catholic iconography and help those who don’t know what a beautiful and wonderful thing the Crucifix is, so too one needs to understand what the iconography of Kali is saying before one jumps to any conclusions about the violence that one sees there.
Jai Mata Kali! Om Shanti!
May the Divine Mother be victorious and may all of Her children know peace!
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
I’ve always thought that beneath, as it were, the iconography of “the east” (is this “hindu” or what?) there must be some sense which made sense to “good” people, which has been annoyingly dificult to figure out. Good to know that that is the case.
I think I’m of the opinion, OK, I AM of the opinion, that “the east” has been very good at “teasing out” the fine details of God’s “natural law” and “personifying” those details into various “beings”.
The major difficulty that the “west”, or the “western mind”, has with this is our extreme dislike of hyper-complexification of religion, after being exposed to it’s wacky effects during our pre-Abrahamic-contact-times (if you will), and during our Hellenic and Roman times.
After being “told” that God had given a particular people some rather simple actual STATEMENTS from God about “God-stuff”, we were highly inclined to believe them so as to avoid the “headaches” of the “overly complex”, and we were inclined (at least for a while) to hold onto those “simple” beliefs because they actually DID prove to be unassailable as to their truth!
We believe God has personally told us His truth because what He’s told us continually proves itself true, reinforcing our belief in it and Him, and no one has yet been able to “beat” the combination of simplicity and efficacy that Christianity displays.
The highly complex “east” has created a beautiful elaboration of the “natural law”, in my not overly humble opinion, which is rather the “superpower-grade (nearly Area-51 alien) technology” version of the spiritual “distillation” of natural law as capable by human power alone,… but we of “the west” tire of the overly spiritually complex, because we’d rather deal with hyper-complexity in the material realm, and certainly NOT in the spritual realm (not enough “bang for the buck” as it were), and we tend not to fix that which isn’t broken.
I’ll try to answer the rest of your post, which is a WONDERFUL exposition which actually MAKES SENSE (to me anyway), in a way that illuminates the fascinating similarities of the ideas you present with how this particular Catholic sees what you’ve explained.
I’m so impressed with your explanations! They are VERY good material for showing how “the west’s” revealed understandings are “similar” to the deduced understandings of “the east”.
We “westerners” are a simple lot, though Aquinas might beg to differ, and we’ve simply got better things to do with our time than, in our opinion, wildly elaborate spiritual truths, which have already been “spoon fed” to us in their essential simplicity, such as deal with the more physical aspects of our God given dominion.
N
Neil_LA
Guest
Well…I guess I’m still “in” this conversation…I’ve always thought that beneath, as it were, the iconography of “the east” (is this “hindu” or what?) there must be some sense which made sense to “good” people, which has been annoyingly dificult to figure out. Good to know that that is the case.
I think I’m of the opinion, OK, I AM of the opinion, that “the east” has been very good at “teasing out” the fine details of God’s “natural law” and “personifying” those details into various “beings”.
The major difficulty that the “west”, or the “western mind”, has with this is our extreme dislike of hyper-complexification of religion, after being exposed to it’s wacky effects during our pre-Abrahamic-contact-times (if you will), and during our Hellenic and Roman times.
After being “told” that God had given a particular people some rather simple actual STATEMENTS from God about “God-stuff”, we were highly inclined to believe them so as to avoid the “headaches” of the “overly complex”, and we were inclined (at least for a while) to hold onto those “simple” beliefs because they actually DID prove to be unassailable as to their truth!
We believe God has personally told us His truth because what He’s told us continually proves itself true, reinforcing our belief in it and Him, and no one has yet been able to “beat” the combination of simplicity and efficacy that Christianity displays.
The highly complex “east” has created a beautiful elaboration of the “natural law”, in my not overly humble opinion, which is rather the “superpower-grade (nearly Area-51 alien) technology” version of the spiritual “distillation” of natural law as capable by human power alone,… but we of “the west” tire of the overly spiritually complex, because we’d rather deal with hyper-complexity in the material realm, and certainly NOT in the spritual realm (not enough “bang for the buck” as it were), and we tend not to fix that which isn’t broken.
I’ll try to answer the rest of your post, which is a WONDERFUL exposition which actually MAKES SENSE (to me anyway), in a way that illuminates the fascinating similarities of the ideas you present with how this particular Catholic sees what you’ve explained.
I’m so impressed with your explanations! They are VERY good material for showing how “the west’s” revealed understandings are “similar” to the deduced understandings of “the east”.
We “westerners” are a simple lot, though Aquinas might beg to differ, and we’ve simply got better things to do with our time than, in our opinion, wildly elaborate spiritual truths, which have already been “spoon fed” to us in their essential simplicity, such as deal with the more physical aspects of our God given dominion.
My motivation for continuing this discussion is not to show the “superiority” of one tradition over the other, nor to say that one is more appropriate that the other. My only motivation is to try to further mutual understanding.
Thank you for your kind words. Any ability to clearly present these truths to you is solely do to the blessing of the Guru…(both the manifested human Gurus that I have had the blessing to study with, and the Eternal Guru, who is none other than God Himself)
I think you do point out one of the essential differences between the “East” and the “West.”
The east is more concerned with noumenon while the west is concerned with phenomenon.
I hope this is expressive of what I am trying to say. The east is concerned with reality as it is, which is beyond sense-perception, whereas the west is concerned chiefly with things that can only be perceived through the senses.
The east is primarily concerned with a vision of time that encompasses eternity while the west is concerned with a vision of time that can be directly comprehended.
Eternity is infinity vast and is actually beyond comprehension. That is why I believe that the Vedic scriptures are indeed “Divine Revelation.” I believe that the knowledge contained in the “deposit of faith” contained in the Vedic scriptures is too comprehensive to be merely a product of limited human imagination.
I would like to address this issue of “Divine Revelation.” I think this issue is of paramount importance and is especially related to the original topic of this conversation.
I am not contesting that the truth contained in the Judeo-Christian tradition has been revealed by God as you claim. However I am strongly contesting your assumption that the Vedic/Dharmic tradition is something that has been fabricated by human reasoning without any Divine Inspiration.
Your statement
while contained within a complement as to how I am able to present the material, could actually be construed as an insult. (Which I am sure is not your intention
)I shall attempt to show how both the Vedic tradition and the Judeo-Christian tradition are BOTH revealed from God and how saying that they both can be and are revealed by God.
Please forgive me if I over-simplify the scope of the “History of Salvation” as presented in your scriptures. It is not my intention to demean it in any way. And besides, you said that the west likes to keep spiritual things simple. (Although I disagree that this tendency is innate to Christianity in and of itself as the complex liturgical traditions of the Orthodox Churches amply show).
Throughout this talk, I will refer to God primarily in the masculine. This does not mean that I in any way do not believe that God can, should, and does indeed will to be referred to in the feminine. As shown in previous sections of this conversation, I indeed believe that God is Mother as well as Father.
In the stories of the Hebrew patriarchs as recorded in Genesis, they (the patriarchs, i.e Noah, Abraham, Issac , Jacob, etc) actually spoke with God directly as a person. Subsequently, God spoke directly to Moses in the burning bush and also in various other ways as when Moses was given the Law on the mountain and at other times. After Moses, God spoke through the prophets. My understanding is that God spoke to the prophets via dreams and visions. (This is not to discount how the “Presence of God” was made manifest in the Most Holy Place of the tabernacle and the two temples.) Ultimately God revealed Himself to the Hebrews and the (over the course of the history of this particular era) European nations by “descending” to earth in human form in the person of Jesus Christ.
I contend that God indeed “descended” to earth as Jesus Christ and that this is an extraordinarily unique event it the history of this time-frame. I mention “eras” and “time-frames” to highlight the difference between the Vedic world-view and that of the west, as spoken of above. I’ll get back to that point.
However, I must first make mention of my use of the word “descended.” My experience has been (and I believe this point has been made in this conversation as well) that Christian faithful often explain the difference between their faith and the faith of other religions in terms similar to this: “In our faith, God “reveals” himself and “descends” to earth to make knowledge of himself available to mankind. The ultimate revelation of God to his creatures is in the person of Jesus Christ. God made flesh.”
When we look at the vocabulary used in this statement and the vocabulary used when discussing the Vedic tradition, I posit that they are very similar and I believe it lends credence to my assertion that God indeed does manifest, reveal, and incarnate Himself to various people in various ways at various points of history.
The word in Sanskrit (please keep in mind that I am not a Sanskrit scholar, nor can I pretend to be) that is the equivalent to “prophet” in the western (Judeo-Christian) tradition is “rishi.” Not being a Sanskrit scholar, I am unable to break this word down into its root essences, but my understanding of how it is usually translated is “seer.” It is my understanding that the Vedic rishis of hoary antiquity did indeed “see” God and communed with Him directly.
The Sanskrit word “avatar” means “descend” and is the term used for the many times throughout eternity that God has taken human form.
It is my understanding that the Vedas are the oldest extant spiritual records available on earth (although I’m sure that some will contest that). The Vedas themselves proclaim that they are merely a continuation of more ancient revelation. The Vedic conception of time speaks not merely of one creation of the cosmos, but actually records manifold creations and dissolutions over a span of time, that while explained, defies comprehension.
The Judeo-Christian tradition speaks only of one creation and dissolution. These two perspectives of time and God aren’t, I believe mutually contradictory as some would assert. I believe that the scope of Vedic understanding can fully contain within it, the scope of Judeo-Christian understanding. This does not demean or belittle Judeo-Christian understanding.
As you said above, people of the west do not have a need for a complex and detailed understanding of eternity. They are more concerned with the here and now. I propose that God gave what each people needed at each particular epoch.
Over that last couple of thousand years, the west has been ascendant, and the revelation of God though the Judeo-Christian “vocabulary” has been adequate. When one is focused “outwardly, “ one doesn’t need anything more than to be
I guess my point is: If the Judeo-Christian explanation of God and eternity is adequate for you, that is very wonderful. I propose that for many people in today’s day and age it is no longer adequate and God , in His infinite mercy and compassion provides a more detailed revalation that might meet the needs of people to have communion with Him.
R
ralphinal
Guest
Dumb questions:
Why is classical Hinduism opposed to proselyzation? If it is a reveiled religion, why should it fear other faiths teaching their religion? This is also a problem that I have with Islam. Further, if it is a true path, why is there so much resistance historically to those who wish to convert? Also, why is there a caste system that inherently limits your holiness by your position in society?
Why is classical Hinduism opposed to proselyzation? If it is a reveiled religion, why should it fear other faiths teaching their religion? This is also a problem that I have with Islam. Further, if it is a true path, why is there so much resistance historically to those who wish to convert? Also, why is there a caste system that inherently limits your holiness by your position in society?
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
I never said Kali was evil, my Brahmin neighbours have explained her quite well to me, I do find it interesting that ‘‘Kali’’ is also the feminine of ‘‘black/dark skinned person’’ in a number of South Asian languages, I wonder who is named after who.
- Status