Topic started by Rohini (@ 61.11.18.38) on Sun May 25 05:51:47 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: I was born as a Hindu, but I will not die as a Hindu

Rahul Sankrutyayan (Born in a Bramhin family,adopted Buddhism): Hinduism is a blame on mankind. This religion should be detroyed from the earth as early as possible to save the mankind.

Why they said this?

Responses:

• From: Om (@ 203.197.20.122) on: Tue May 27 01:40:00 EDT 2003
  
  
  The dalits as significant proportion of the Indian population had been oppressed class for thousands of years due to a hierarchical caste structure in which they have been placed at the lowest level in most unfortunate feature of Indian state. Attempts had been mounted in the past and even at present to eradicate this evil. In caste structure birth determines the caste and that is cited as calling caste system as racism.
  
  It is significant that the world conference against racism held in Durban, south Africa, in August-September 2001 had refused to consider the caste system as a form of racism though many individuals and NGO's had forcefully argued to consider it as such. The campaign by them had even taken the diabolic form of considering some parts of the country as 'Occupied territory'. Birth being considered as basis to determine caste is due to the fact that conversion from one caste to another is not in existence.
  
  The attempt to consider caste discrimination as amounting to racism is a recent development. It had always been held that the Hindu scriptures did not approve of caste differences and therefore it had to be abjured and eradicated. Therefore to consider that the Dalits and upper castes have common ethnicity is only correct and does not need any attempts to "create solidarity". Though a difference in religious faiths exists, the Hindus never considered other religionists of India as ethnically different. They are considered very much Indians. Even those born to aliens such as Persians, Turks, and Moguls etc. in India they are considered Indians only. To give an ethnic color to different religions as against Hindus is a mischievous attempt. It is also not correct to say that none from other religions can convert to Hinduism. There are many instances where members of other religions having converted to Hinduism. The only position is that Hinduism is not proselytizing religion like Christianity or Islam. This is because Hinduism considers itself as Sanatana Dharma or as of universal following which did not need the four-walled compartmentalization of faiths.
  
  As for conversions a simple question is that what was the need for any one to formally embrace another religion? Is it not enough if a person, whatever faith he is born into, believes in the tenants of any other faith, which he considers appealing to his spiritual yearning? There is no antagonism to conversion per se as far as Hindus as concerned. Conversions using unfair means are only opposed. Are the conversions being effected to fulfill aspiration, of questioning and a spiritual search that transcends all barriers and resists all limitations to the human mind?" How come hundreds of illiterate, economically backward people exhibit these yearnings that they assemble and get converted? Are these people urged by individual human creativity and freedom to change their religion? The law itself makes clear distinction between voluntary conversion and those adopting unfair means.
  
  Conversions in this country have been going on for hundreds of years, from the time when Gautama Buddha and Vardhamana Mahavira propounded new religious thoughts and got people to follow them, when St. Thomas set foot on the Indian soil for missionary activities and subsequently when hordes of Muslim invaders entered this country and established their dynasties. Some Islamic institutions had even clamped persecution measures such as special taxes on Hindus in an effort to persuade them to embrace Islam. The fact that majority of Hindu population had remained unconverted to this day despite these efforts would prove that it was not because of VHP or Bajrang Dal or to get rid of oppressive caste system, but because of strong religio-cultural moorings and extra ordinary deep and appealing spiritual process of Hinduism and diverse socio-religious customs and beliefs which the religion permitted to masses across the country.
  
  It is not exactly correct to say that the universalistic view of seeing god as the father/creator of all humans is view of modern societies. Those familiar with Hindu philosophy will have no difficulty in understanding the advaithic postulate of the religion with the concept of individual human soul being considered as a form of universal power (the Brahman) described in brief words as "Aham Brahmasmi" and "Thatwamasi" and the urge of the soul to join the universal power. To understand this greatest principle of practical philosophy one needs greater study of Vedas and scriptures and a deep analysis of their purport. And many westerners and other religionists who had undertaken such an effort had been convinced of the greatness of the religion and even started practicing it.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Om (@ 203.197.20.122) on: Tue May 27 01:41:08 EDT 2003
  
  Its true Buddha criticised Veda but only on the score of animal sacrifice. Jayadeva, the Brahmin author of the Gitagovinda, says that the Buddha criticized only those portions of the Vedas which prescribe animal sacrifice and that he did out of compassion. Ramachandra Kavi-bharati, a Buddhist poet who lived in Sri Lanka in the fourteenth century, echoed the same view and vehemently refuted the allegation of Veda-nindaka on the part of the Buddha.
  
  Even Buddha himself supported panthinsm and talked about worshipping some deities to get certain results. He praised Vedic scholars so he actually praised Vedas alongwith his scholars.
  
  If one embraces Buddhism, he is not cut off from the social structure,the essence remains and strata and life course continues as usual however there are elements of dichotomy. In Hindu way of life the four tier system of social order was out of Guna and Karma and the heriditary trait continues. In Buddhism, the Kshatriyas are very proud of their genealogical lineage as Gautama Buddha was from a family of the Kshatriyas. And you will be surprised to know that both in Sanskrit and Pali literature I have discovered that in the Buddha tradition of reincarnations it is said the in future Buddha would take birth in Kshatriya or Brahmin kula or family and no where else. Thus you see that Sanatan Dharma remains so in the belief system wherever Buddhism went.
  
  
• From: BAB (@ cache-rl04.proxy.aol.com) on: Tue May 27 08:45:55 EDT 2003
  
  When some people are hurt for whatever reason they sometimes say things to hurt others. This is a form of madness.
  
  
• From: Idiappam (@ cache138.156ce.maxonline.com.sg) on: Thu May 29 00:53:32 EDT 2003
  
  In the first place these 'some people' should have been left alone. Provoke a sleeping snake, and it would bite! It is not madness, its nature!
  
  
• From: Om (@ 61.1.178.24) on: Thu May 29 13:40:33 EDT 2003
  
  >> Provoke a sleeping snake, and it would bite! It is not madness, its nature! <<
  
  So kill these people and their reptile attitude before they bite!!
  
  

Want to post a response?