What's new

Do the brits still hate the indian hindus?

Status
Not open for further replies.
When British said hindus they exclusively meant brahmins. But british are no saints either - they deliberately encouraged brahmins in top position because they knew they will help them consolidate.
Rest of hindus like Jats or various vocational castes are just like people anywhere. The brahmin has corrupting influence on them but they still are not that different. Without jats - both hindus and sikhs - north india would have had no food security.
 
Confucianism, Taoism , Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism are pretty close. I would say even Christianity aligns more with these religions than with Judaism and Islam.

Not at all. Confucian world order, Taoism's Ying and Yang, no such concept in Buddhism or Hinduism.
 
Not at all. Confucian world order, Taoism's Ying and Yang, no such concept in Buddhism or Hinduism.

Taoism's Ying-Yang is similar to Hinduism's concept of Ardhanarishvaram which represents the synthesis of masculine and feminine energies of the universe (Purusha and Prakriti)

As I said they are all the same.
 
It is the same wine in different branded bottles. Hardly any difference.

No they are completely different. To begin with "hinduism" is not even a religion but a set of laws which decide who will work waht and how is one punished.
Taoism's Ying-Yang is similar to Hinduism's concept of Ardhanarishvaram which represents the synthesis of masculine and feminine energies of the universe (Purusha and Prakriti)

As I said they are all the same.

"ardhanarishvaram" = some blah blah made up brahmins in 20th centruy.
 
No they are completely different. To begin with "hinduism" is not even a religion but a set of laws which decide who will work waht and how is one punished.

You are right that Hindusim is not an single thought organized religion like Abhrahamic religions.

It is conglomeration set of various religious thoughts that emanated from India like Vaishavism, Shaivism, Tantric, Shaktiism, Buddism, Jainism, Nastikam etc. but you are wrong in saying it being a set of laws to govern people or society.
 
You are right that Hindusim is not an single thought organized religion like Abhrahamic religions.

It is conglomeration set of various religious thoughts that emanated from India like Vaishavism, Shaivism, Tantric, Shaktiism, Buddism, Jainism, Nastikam etc. but you are wrong in saying it being a set of laws to govern people or society.

Well it is bascially anything that the followers want it to be - that cannot be a religion. The only thing that makes it "hinduism" and identified it from others is its caste system and its non-beleif in egalatarian ideologies. And caste system is basically laws not religion.
 
Well it is bascially anything that the followers want it to be - that cannot be a religion. The only thing that makes it "hinduism" and identified it from others is its caste system and its non-beleif in egalatarian ideologies. And caste system is basically laws not religion.

Casteism was codified and promoted by the British to advance their interests as part of their divide and rule policy.
 
Confucianism, Taoism , Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism are pretty close. I would say even Christianity aligns more with these religions
Good for you. You should be ambitious. Now declare them all as 'dharmics' and then appropriate them and their land as Bharatvarshalala. Unity in diversity!
 
Good for you. You should be ambitious. Now declare them all as 'dharmics' and then appropriate them and their land as Bharatvarshalala. Unity in diversity!

I am confident that Indians would not have any issues being absorbed by China from religious/cultural perspective as both gel very well. Any issues will be due to restrictive communistic political ideology which does not gel with open religious/culture/traditions. This is true of Chinese people themselves. Traditional Chinese culture and religion does not gel with the incumbent restrictive communistic political thought.
 
I am confident that Indians would not have any issues being absorbed
I was more thinking along the lines of India absorbing all these 'neo-Dharmics.

incumbent restrictive communistic political thought.
The only restriction they would impose is breaking the shackles imposed by the Brahmins on 70% of Hindus and arresting poverty. Look at the pervasive hunger in India which is listed 101st.

 
When British said hindus they exclusively meant brahmins. But british are no saints either - they deliberately encouraged brahmins in top position because they knew they will help them consolidate.
Rest of hindus like Jats or various vocational castes are just like people anywhere. The brahmin has corrupting influence on them but they still are not that different. Without jats - both hindus and sikhs - north india would have had no food security.

As a Jat, i dont get your point. Brahmin in our villages are totally dependent upon other community to help them out. Some have succeeded in life just like Jats have. Else we have social fabric where everyone is depended uupon each other.
 
I am glad that Churchill criticised my fellow Hindus.

After all a tyrant dictator will criticise and hate (and also fear) those who oppose him bravely.

We fought his type and kicked him out of the country

But yes of course Churchill praised those who kissed his backside. You know who you are. Lol.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom