Blogger raj said...
Atheist can make fun of any religion/scripture as almost all religions are based on belief that GOD exists.There is no end of logic,as true devotee of GOD Ram can justify all his actions and people like you can do vice-versa. If you do not believe in God , you are not hindu by religion.So you have equal right to comment on other religions by which atleast it will be proved that you are not coward.
Continuation of replies in the previous posts.
*The word religion is an abstract word. It can be defined by different persons in different ways.
*My view of religion is different from the commonly accepted view (probably your view also).
The commonly accepted view revolves around a creator--protector--rewarder--punisher--prayer-listener--almighty, you call it Vishnu, Shiva, Yehova, Allah et al. Gandhiji too accepted this view, when he said "Isvar Allah tere nAm.".
But my view does not provide for a prayer-listener God. In my opinion there is no God in the conventional meaning above. There may be super-human powers. But they cannot listen to prayers. They do not create humans. They cannot reward or punish. Adi Shankara's advaita VEdanta initially spoke about that situation only. It wanted us to realise that this world is ephemeral (transient or temporary or bubble-like). Subsequent Sankaracharyas seem to have made the existence of God from his preachings. They seem to have made some hymns and modified his precepts.
Then, you will ask, what is the purpose of a religion, if there is no God? The purpose can be 'self-realisation' through knowledge or gnAna. What is the awareness? The advaita awareness (which Vivekananda failed to keep up in his 39 years of life) centres around the recognition that the person within us and the person outside is one and the same. I think, Adi Shankara and Tyagaraja, have rightly raised the precept that we should not regard our body as "I or we". The body is also a part of the nature. We are only witnesses to the happenings in this world --sAkshis. A witness does not normally involve himself-herself with what he-she witnesses. I am using the word "normally" because there may be extremely pathetic or pitiable occasions where a witness cannot restrain him-herself. Only participants have feelings. Participation is nothing but attachment.
A self-realised person will have full control on his-her desires, because he knows that the world is unreal and enjoyments are bubbles. Consequently, he makes few demands on the society. This is real sanyAsa (relinquishment). Not the saffron dresses. Not the marks on the foreheads. The marks should be inside the face visible to oneself. Not to the outside world. See the disputes going on in Tirumala Temple about the vadagalai nAmam (U shape), tengalai nAmam (Y shape) and the present nAmam (W shape).
True sanyAsa with gnAnam (relinquishment obtained through awareness) will be in tune with Marxism and Socialism. Marxism and Communism expect people to share their needs and resources with the society. If the society has fewer resources at its disposal owing to excess population (our population 1.2 billion), the citizens' needs will have to be curtailed. If this is done through dictatorship or force, there will be tyranny and despotism. Curtailment should take place voluntarily. Relinquishment through awareness (through Advaita philosophy or not) facilitates this voluntary self-restraint on greed and consumption. Hence, there is a link between the awareness-relinquishment-self-realisation path and the Communism/Marxism.
You will observe that Hinduism is the only religion which explored the relationship between a person within the body and the nature outside the body. Hinduism is the only religion which discussed the ephemerality of the world we see (jagat). The other two imported religions into India center around the preachings of just one person either as prophet or God's son. They do not have deep philosophical bases. They have only one or two books which are interpreted in prayer-halls. The geographical Hinduism in the Indian Sub-Continent is very rich in philosophy with more than a million Sanskrit verses, apart from the literature of millions of pages in Indian languages. Propaganda religions get their propaganda culture from Multi Nationals. What multi-nationals do? They over-praise their own products and call the products of others as barbaric. That is the technique of salesmanship in a market economy.
You might have read my post at my mahabharatayb.blogspot.com blog Click about pork-eating by priests who were guests or in the court of Yudhishthira at the time of inauguration of maya-sabha. Yudhishithira maintained 88,000 priests, giving them 32 women each. Meat of deer and pigs were served to them. As you have desired that I should comment on other religions, I checked on the Google search, what other religions have to say about pork (pig or swine's meat in other words pork/ham/bacon etc.). Here is a link to one of the discussions:
Click to go to : http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread374370/pg15 --Who made eating pork and swine flesh lawful for Christians?, page 15--.
A number of readers commented on this thread. It appears that God gave a dictum to Moses in Old Supplement that pork should not be eaten. Jesus and Paul seem to have given another dictum allowing their followers to consume pork. There was a conflict between what God taught and God's son taught. Some followers held the view that God's dictum should be respected by true Christians. Some held view that God's prohibition was against unclean pork and that clean preparations can be eaten. The arguments between the two sides is very much educative. They are worth reading. I am sad for one reason. Everybody discussed whether pigs or swine were clean or not. No one was bothered about the 'kindness' part to animals. Nobody discussed why only humans need compassion from God and animals do not need compassion from God or God's son or his apostles. Kindness to animals and kindness to fellow-humans are like two eyes or hands which have equal importance. How is it that the God's son could have said 'Love thy neighbor' and 'Eat animals as you like'?
I do not want to comment on the philosophies of other religions, and poke my nose into their affairs. This is because I already have 66 blogs. If I start writing about other religions I shall need 6,600 blogs. My hair has already become grey. I may live another 10 years at the most or die tomorrow itself, by the time you read this blog. I am at present busy doing some useful (in my belief) work for the unity of this country, by writing on music. Pl. see my current blog museyb.blogspot.com. Better, I make the music blog more 'sarvAnga sundaram'.