Indian religion i.e. Hindu or Sanatana Dharma?

[hekrishna]

6th Dec 2007 KRSHNADHAM, OTTAWA, CANADA

Hi!

It seems tht Indian Religion is the oldest and the planet earth was ruled by Parikshit Maharaja? Why and how then there are other religions came up? At periods these two religions or faith came up? Why they are stronger than Indian religion?

Thanks if any one can post some replies to our confusion

Thanks

hare krishna mani

[anbu_kathir]

>>>>It seems tht Indian Religion is the oldest and the planet earth was ruled by Parikshit Maharaja?

Coming to your topic name itself first, it says Indian Religion ie ' Hindu or Sanatana Dharma '. I don't think Sanatana Dharma is 'Indian religion' or 'Hinduism'.

The idea of Sanatana Dharma is Indian, maybe you can claim that. But Sanatana Dharma itself is not. How could it ever be Indian, if the very definition of Sanatana Dharma ( Eternal Dharma ) means it is Dharma without beginning or end and is eternal?

Neither is Sanatana Dharma Indian, nor Earthly, nor is it a mere figment of the human imagination. Sanatana Dharma itself transcends all the divisions of the Universe, and it is by definition functioning in such a way to transcend these divisions. It as such requires no 'founder', no 'follower' and no 'leader' either. It is, as such, eternally Present and available to anyone who chooses to follow it.

So Sanatana Dharma is not equivalent to Indian Religion.

So I am guessing what you mean by the Indian Religion is the collection of values/morals/rituals etc which have been practised by a majority of the Indians ( settlers/natives). Now note that all of these have also been changing over the thousands of years from the moment the ideas behind what now is called 'Hinduism' originally started to surface in the human mind/psyche.

And these beginnings albeit important, I think,were humble ones in themselves. The idea of having 'sacred' places/objects/people of worship and reincarnation ( which are perhaps the central ideas of Hinduism ) have been around for a long long time ( since the times of the cave man, atleast) for any one particular religion to claim them for themselves.

Maybe the manner of rituals/values of what is today called 'Hinduism' emerged quite some time back. And maybe they indeed preceded other organised religions. What I fail to see is the point of answering 'How' the religions came up, and 'why' they came up. Here's why I think so.


>>> At periods these two religions or faith came up? Why they are stronger than Indian religion?

Whether we are ready to face the fact or not, many of the organised religions including what is now known as Hinduism ( with its multitudinous branches) , did spread by means of word, or sword. There has been many a time when people have been forced to embrace a particular faith because of the conscious/unconscious greed/lust-for-power of smaller and powerful sections of their own and their ability to manipulate/hypnotise the common folk.

But there also have been instances where people have embraced them for their Love of it. Because the religions definitely inspired them and positively altered their lives. But I think those occasions have been rare, and the people who could exercise such choices were indeed blessed in their own way.

So now, how would you rate the 'strength' of a religion anyway? It is impossible to make such a judgement, for in several cases, the people who had to embrace the religions had no choice in the matter. I hope anyone will realise that just 'counting the heads' of the people who claim to belong to a particular religion is quite irrelevant. So answering that question, in my view, is an impossible task.

To me it is a personal question and a personal answer - Is my way of life ( which is the only religion I can really claim to know, because thats the one I practice, and no other person has the power to change except myself ) keeping me happy? Is my way of life enabling me to live the grandest thoughts I have about myself? Is my way of life showing me the path to Eternal Bliss that is not dependent on anyone/anything but myself?

I believe every person has to put this question to himself/herself. And answer it. Truely, without giving in to any temptations. If the answer is ' Yes' then one ought to live in the way one has been living. Otherwise, change it. For the better, definitely.

Much Love and Light.

[Devar Magan]

anbu_kathir,

u missed "aum tut sut"

[pradheep]

Mani
may be this helps your question

http://veda.sakthifoundation.org/fundamental.htm

[Rohit]

Hi Pradheep
Good to see you back after your long exile. Please keep posting the link.

[pradheep]

Thanks Rohit. Yes I was busy and now I can squeeze some time for here.

[aanaa]

Pradheep
your homepage is very informative
keep do post

[Badri]

There is really no Indian religion. That term is a misnomer. India is a secular country, and as such has no official religion at all.

Technically speaking, this thread has no relevance as the title itself is wrong. Besides, talk of one religion being stronger/older than others is not at all permitted in this Forum. I feel Anbu Kathir has fairly comprehensively covered the actual questions raised by the author and any further discussions on this topic will only violate the norms of this Forum.

I am therefore locking this topic. If anyone has any strong reasons why it should be allowed to continue please send me a PM.