Indian Denial Accepting Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism as Separate Religions

[Anonymous_CryptoSpy]

for all moronic trollers
Shah Rukh Khan
Salman Khan
Amir Khan

every Indian is a die hard fan of any one of the three khans above each having millions of fan .

BUT WHY?
THEY ARE MUSLIMS!!!
look morons, u are not what religion defines you,but what your behavior defines your self.

PS inter religion marriage occurs in Muslims as well(eg gauri khan is Hindu)

 

[Bang Galore]

They are treated as similar to Hindus under the civil code, nothing outside of that. If India were to have a uniform civil code, does not mean all religions are suddenly one.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It's hardly any surprise , as Hinduism is a mambo jumbo religion.

Its has no structure or clear definition - its plain tribalism, worshipers of Satan, the devil, ghost and spirits, fake gurus/humans (e.g Sai Baba etc) and animals are considered as God and automatically labeled as Hindus.


The above might be true to some extent with Northern India esp Punjab/Sindh - intermarrying/adoption of Sikhis. That isn't the case with in South India. There was no love between the Buddhists/Jains and Hindus esp in the states of Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh !!! Theravada Buddhist were prosecuted by Tamil Hindu kings and they had to flee to Lanka and thus carry with them their anti Hindu sentiments which is reflected in their later day works

Hilarious.

I love these amateur scholars of comparative religion.

Worth the price of admission by themselves. If they didn't exist, we might have had to invent them.

I would rather prefer to live in a hindu majority country where hindus consider all dharmic religions as one and all other religions as one of the paths to god than to live in a muslim country where other religious people are treated as second class citizens and there religion or way of life is called as mumbo jumbo....

Not so.

It's mambo jumbo, not mumbo jumbo.

 

[Nair saab]

SIKHism , BUDDHism , JAINism , HINDUism are all the Part of the Indian Subcontinent ...But non of them are Religion ... Infact they are all a way of leading a righteous life...

Living in Harmony with Nature , Animals and all Human beings... Until the advent of Abrahamic religions which spoiled all these thought's of harmony ... naming each sects as religious...

by the way Khalsa was made to weaponize Hindus against the invading Muslims into India...

OM is found in most eastern scripts ...

 

[manlion]

Obviously, Hindus do not need to measure their religion with the parameters set by childish Abrahmic religions where having a prophet, "book", SOP etc is compulsory. Hinduism is the pursuit of Dharma, the righteous way, and such a paradigm is common for all Eastern sects such as Buddhism, Jainism, Daoism. Buddhism, Jainism certainly come within the fold of Hindu philosophic thought but are considered Nastik as they do not recognize primacy of the Vedas - that however does not make them un-Hindu.

Hinduism too as its share prophets - rishis, "holy books" -sruthi as smrithi and SOP - Agama texts etc but does not qualify Hinduism from not being a hotch potch, mumbo jumbo religion.


The concept of your so called "dharma" / " righteous way" exist in all religions , but its interpretation is subjective. The concept of attaining heaven by fighting a righteous war (jihad) is there in Hinduism (refer Mahabharata)

Even in Hinduism the concept of dharma is not clearly defined, Manu smrithi constitutes the Hindu Dharma-shastras and Manu was racist to the core , who assigned the caste system how righteous was Manu ??

The Hindu philosophy is based upon the vedas and Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism reject the vedas so where is the common paradigm ?

A simplistic concept of heaven and hell exist in all religion and don't make a tall claim that its derived from Hinduism

 

[kingkobra]

Hilarious.

I love these amateur scholars of comparative religion.

Worth the price of admission by themselves. If they didn't exist, we might have had to invent them.



Not so.

It's mambo jumbo, not mumbo jumbo.

Actually it it mambo jambo, is it not?

 

[DarkPrince]

Hilarious.

I love these amateur scholars of comparative religion.

Worth the price of admission by themselves. If they didn't exist, we might have had to invent them.



Not so.

It's mambo jumbo, not mumbo jumbo.

arre dada accept korcho na keno tumi we r da best

 

[asad71]

What a fool!! All the crap that you posted is the same that Mullahs fed to your fore-fathers before partition and that was basically mostly about Muslims and followers of other religions in India. But that all was BS just to get power by the power hungry bunch and the Mullahs to get more attention/recognition. In India, followers of all the religion coexists peacefully with a exception of few who have the legacy of Muslims of Pakistan and BD.

Arey Bhai, agar samajh nahin' a'tee to discuss mat' karo. Bakwas kar'ne mey kya faida?

 

[kingkobra]

Hinduism too as its share prophets - rishis, "holy books" -sruthi as smrithi and SOP - Agama texts etc but does not qualify Hinduism from not being a hotch potch, mumbo jumbo religion.


The concept of your so called "dharma" / " righteous way" exist in all religions , but its interpretation is subjective. The concept of attaining heaven by fighting a righteous war (jihad) is there in Hinduism (refer Mahabharata)

Even in Hinduism the concept of dharma is not clearly defined, Manu smrithi constitutes the Hindu Dharma-shastras and Manu was racist to the core , who assigned the caste system how righteous was Manu ??

The Hindu philosophy is based upon the vedas and Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism reject the vedas so where is the common paradigm ?

A simplistic concept of heaven and hell exist in all religion and don't make a tall claim that its derived from Hinduism

You have absolutely no knowledge of what hinduism is...prepare to get your dose of knowledge...

1.Hinduism was not the dharma of Manu or vedas..Dharma mentioned in vedas is sanatan dharma or vedic sanatan dharma.

2.Hinduism is a umbrella term used for all the different religious practices in India and is coined by muslim invaders and will not be found in any so called hindu scripture..

3.Manu was not racist but his books where highly manipulated by some people and it is quite evident from contrasts seen in manusmriti.

4.Even Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar who burned manusmriti has used some of the quotes from manusmriti to constitute property laws related to hindus.

5.Sikhism does not reject vedas completelty..in guru granth saheb there are many verses in favor of vedas as well as there are verses that state that vedas alone can not give you liberation or moksha(google it, i wont give quotes)

6.Jains claim that vedas were written by their first emperor Bharata...Jains rejected vedas because vedas were misunderstood at their time and used for justifying animal sacrifice when in reality all the vedic sacrifices are supposed to be ahimsak in nature and involve no animal or human sacrifice at all...Many jain tirthankaras are found in vedas( google it, i wont give quotes)

7.I have already told you about buddhism and buddhas views of vedas and vedic scholars very positive..read suttanipata

 

[Kloitra]

Found a good answer:

India’s Constitution does not give a definition of the term Hindu, but it does define to whom the “Hindu Law” applies. It has to do this because the Indian Constitution allows Muslims, Christians and Parsis a separate Personal Law. Personal Law is divided on the basis of religion, and that one of the legal subsystems is called Hindu Law.

 

[asad71]

Jainism and Buddhism reject the vedas which are authoritative in Hinduism. Buddhism is actually a form of atheism,

If hinduism = buddhism = jainism = sikhism then using a similar logic can we say Judaism= Christianity = Islam ??

We Muslims consider the Christians and Jews belonging to Ahl e Qitab, or people of the Book. Their prophets are our prophets too, but Muhammad PBUH is the last and the closest to Allah SWT. Their holy books are our too, but The Holy Qu'oran is the last/ final book of Message. Unfortunately however, unlike our Holy Quoran, the Christians and to some extent, the Jews, have lost their original scriptures owing to personal greed of priests and rulers over millenniums.

 

[Nair saab]

Hinduism too as its share prophets - rishis, "holy books" -sruthi as smrithi and SOP - Agama texts etc but does not qualify Hinduism from not being a hotch potch, mumbo jumbo religion.


The concept of your so called "dharma" / " righteous way" exist in all religions , but its interpretation is subjective. The concept of attaining heaven by fighting a righteous war (jihad) is there in Hinduism (refer Mahabharata)

Even in Hinduism the concept of dharma is not clearly defined, Manu smrithi constitutes the Hindu Dharma-shastras and Manu was racist to the core , who assigned the caste system how righteous was Manu ??

The Hindu philosophy is based upon the vedas and Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism reject the vedas so where is the common paradigm ?

A simplistic concept of heaven and hell exist in all religion and don't make a tall claim that its based on Hindu philosophy

A Hindu can Criticize his Gods and their ways of practice ... and instead take a all together different way... even a Buddhist , SIkhs and Jains can do the same ... without being pe

Can a Muslim do that with his god and their way of Practice without being stoned to Death or head being chopped off...

 

[manlion]

Atheism is one of the accepted philosophies in Hinduism:

Atheism in Hinduism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

thats why I said - Hinduism is a mambo jumbo !!!!! Hindus need to make up their mind whether they are theistic or atheistic !!

 

[Joe Shearer]

They are treated as similar to Hindus under the civil code, nothing outside of that. If India were to have a uniform civil code, does not mean all religions are suddenly one.

A small request?

Could you please take these babes in the wood and walk them through the Brahmo Samaj insistence that they were not Hindus? And then could you explain to the kids the need to legislate a separate marriage procedure for them? And that it was then necessary to explain in this act that it did not apply to the existing marriage acts and procedures: Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains all taken together, as had been the custom under existing 'personal law' prior to the British administration, under the Mughals and under the Sultanate, with one law (five schools of fiqh) for the Muslims, and one for the rest? Finally, could you please explain, gently, about the two main schools of Hindu law, Dayabhaga and Mitakshara, and how it does not apply to the other religious persuasions? (explaining the Hindu Succession Act will probably addle their brains, and lead to a stern admonition from the powers that be, so it is best left aside on our first mission of charity and salvage).

 

[Roybot]

thats why I said - Hinduism is a mambo jumbo !!!!! Hindus need to make up their mind whether they are theistic or atheistic !!

And who are you to dictate them? Thats the beauty of Hinduism, people can interpret it however they want to.