Swami Ramdev attacked in Southall Gurudwara
On Monday 22nd August, while visiting Havelock Gurudwara in Southall, a group of Sikh men allegedly surrounded Swami Ramdev and hurled abuse at him. Two of them also tried to assault him, but were stopped by Swami Ramdev’s bodyguards and others present at the Gurudwara, and swiftly evicted from the premises.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:57 am
In the Sikh ardas (prayer) where does the concept of ek aum kar comes from?
Were not Guru Nanak parents Hindu?
In the Sikh ardas (arti) why is the name of Bhagauti mentioned before that even of Guru Nanak?
September 25th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
This is really disgusting. He has nothing to do with the government, even members of UPA govt. had trouble with him.
If someone donot like the teaching then do not practice it. To assault him is really shamefull.
September 25th, 2006 at 3:16 pm
Jainism/Buddhism and Sikhism - described as Indic religions are the Offshoots of Hinduism. While jainism and Buddhism are ‘ascetic’ - meaning the Religious Paths having ‘renunciation’ or ‘minimization’ of the material posessions as their main tenet.
As in contrast as it were - Sikhism is a religious Path with a crusader or a ‘religious warrior’ Sprit and Action as its chosen mode.
Sikhism came into being in Punjab State of India - at the traumatic jucture of a combined threat to the Indian Native Population - the Hindus - by the decadent Moghul Rule which had joined hands with the emerging aggressive British East India Company’s Soldiers. It is at this time again that the neighbouring Bengal State of Easten India also witnessed a quasi-religious uprising - ‘A Revolt by the Hindu Saints’ against the alien powers.
If we look at the Hindu religious-Theology and historiography we find that the two principal Hindu deities - Lord Rama and Lord Krishna have both waged wars against the injustice and assault of the innocent.
So then Sikhism in reality is an offshoot of Hinduism with a premium placed on Martiality - which was an absolute need to save the Land and its religion from ignomy and obliteration.
Vedapushpa
Bangalore - India
September 25th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
The vacume which ascetic and renounciatic teaching of Hindusim created resulting hords of invasions to India and no spirit to fight back inspired some brave and dedicated Guru es to form an army of fighters–who vowed to protect their country,And that is sikhsim.They are like our hands which protect the whole body and without which the body is helpless.
we revere them we love them and we cannot do without them.
we always want them with us .
September 25th, 2006 at 4:05 pm
Anyone who will read the Gurugrantha sahib in sober mind will not argue against the thesis that the Sikh and Santan Dharma are just different fingers of one’s hand or different branches of the same tree. The same is true with Budddhism, Jainism, etc. For that matter, all the revealed religions have some commonality that are already there in the Vedic texts.
September 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
We came across from Swami Dayananda Saraswatiji in your Aug issue a statement ” Every one is a Hindu until he says that he is not ” That every one includes a Christian, Muslim, atheist, agnostic…
So what is the problem? If one wish to think that Sikkism is part of Hinduism let him and if one wish to think that it is not…it is not. The reality is not going to change by either section…or both may be right.
The point is one of GROWING TO MATURITY…
and why maturity?
Because only maturity can bring happiness
and why happiness?
because that is the very nature of our life…that is the purpose of life…to live happily.
The real Hindu has no problems with any religion- even if their idea differs from the Hindu way of thinking. The problem comes only when other religion go for violence to get an entry to heaven. As long as there is no violence, as long as there are no terms like ” BLASPHEMY” every one is a Hindu. That is why Hinduism will never die.
Hinduism respects all DIVERSITY. When it consider THERE IS ONLY GOD, how else will it react.
People react because of IGNORANCE…only way to fight it out is to spread KNOWLEDGE.
Let us do our bit
September 25th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
AUM
Namaste Friends. I am indeed shocked to learn of an attempted assault on respected Swami Ramdev Ji. The Swami is doing a yeoman’s service to mankind by teaching Pranayam and Yogasan to one and all. There is no discrimination on grounds of race or religion or sex. Anyone who sees a hidden agenda in the Swami’s noble mission is just myopic and mad.
Let us ignore the madding men and women and proceed further on the path of progress.
CHARAIVETI CHARAIVETI, that is move on and on says the Vedic Thought of our Tishis.
Regards,
Chitranjan Sawant
September 25th, 2006 at 8:10 pm
Guru Nanak ji’e parents were Hindus , He was an offshoot of his parents. Therefore Sikhism is an offshoot of Hinduism. He loved his parents. He did not hate them for being Hindus.He loved his roots. His teachings are followed by many Hindus, What he has taught is universal truth.
Panjabi comes from Sanskrit.
Swami Ramdev ji follows the teachings of all the Gurus.
I do not see why anyone would want to stop anybody from following the teachings of the Gurus.
It is impossible to understand why any one following the
teachings of Guru Nanakji could do this.They should look at their roots and their history going back thousands of years.
The roots of sikhism are in Hinduism going back thousands of years.
kamlesh UK
September 25th, 2006 at 9:11 pm
Let the Sikhs decide what they are, no reason for Hindus to get so worked up when Sikhs say they are not Hindus, they have been saying that since a 100 years or so, someone said that Sikhs are our protectors and that we can’t do without them, the person needs some basic history lessons since he doesn’t seem to know that we were there before Sikhs came along and that the Marathas were the one’s who liberated most of India from Mughal India and broke the back of the Mughal empire.
September 26th, 2006 at 12:40 am
What happened in Southall was not good . These few young kids do not represent the huge masses of good people who love and care about Ramdev ji and his methods of teaching Pranayam and Yoga. This single person has, in a short period of time, done which scores of people in their life times cannot achieve. May he live long and continue his noble service to the mankind….
The Sikhs came into being, I understand, because of the need of the time then. The cruelty of the muslim rulers to the Hindus had gone beyond imagination. To protect Hinduism and the country from the cruel grips of the mogul kings, the eldest son from each Hindu family would join the army of the Guru and call himself a sikh. To identify and to distinguise from the others the five ‘K’s were adopted.
They were warriors in the true sense- tall strong and courqageous.
They, under the guidance of the ten Gurus saved the rest of Bhartat becoming muslim. All the Hindus throughout the world are and will always be indebt to these heroes….
The concept of Sikhs not being a part of Hindus slowly infilterated by the instigation of British rulers. They wanted to alienate them from the main Hindu majority. This is now again strongly done by Congress ruling government……It all adds upto DIVIDE AND RULE…….
In the passage of time, some will forget their true roots… we have to remind them again…
Pravin M Pankhania
September 26th, 2006 at 9:00 am
These young men ,by doing what they did, raised Swami Ramdev’s profile even more. Out of every bad comes good. The young men are ignorant about the true meaning of religion.What they did was against the principle of any religion. Sikhism does not promote violence towards anybody ,including animals. As for Hinduism it is a way of life through principles of love, right conduct ,non violence ,truth, peace, AND these are universal.
If they are questioned about the principles of the religion they are trying to ‘protect’ they will be ignorant ,so they need to first go back and learn the principles .They will themselves see that if they followed the Dharma properly, Dharma can protect itself, it does not require such actions.
September 26th, 2006 at 4:05 pm
Enough has happened , these sikhs should be taught a lesson . Us Hindus are the original warrior race and these people are just off shoots .
Jai Bharat Maa
September 26th, 2006 at 5:17 pm
No wonder…. people behave like this…
how much hindus hear, the sacrifise of sikhs for them…
and how much sikhs knows, that sikhs are considered as army of hinduism…
the problem lies in our own structure… where we don’t want to condemn Islam….. the same things are also seen in Sati system … where people condemn the act of sati, and place whole blame on hindus. but the same poeple forget to blame unhuman act of mughals… which has forced those womens to make sucide 700 yrs back, which was starting of sati tradition in india.
September 28th, 2006 at 12:42 am
What those thoughtless kids did to Swamiji is terrible and they should be punished. Swamiji is well-loved because he is a selfless and pure person. Those boys were taking their own ignorant anger out on him because they don’t have the sense to realise that he is not the cause of their problems. Someone should educate them.
I believe that Sikhs are our brothers and we should retain close links with them. At the same time, I will not call them a branch of Hinduism because one of the main tenets of Sikhism is that they reject the Vedas. Any religious system that rejects the Vedas cannot be called a part of Sanatan Dharma.
September 29th, 2006 at 7:51 am
AUM
TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE NEITHER GURU NANAK NOR OTHERS CREATED A SEPERATE IDENTITY.
WHEN THE TWO SONS OF GURU GOVIND SINGH WERE FORCED TO CONVERT AND ON THEIR REFUSAL THEY WERE BURRIED IN A WALL THAT
GURU GOVIND SINGH GAVE THE 5-K PRINCIPLE AND CREATED A SEPERATE IDENTITY SO AS TO BE RECOGNISED EASILY.
October 1st, 2006 at 9:51 am
I am shocked and ashamed of the so-called deciples of our Guru Nanak Dev, who pride themselves creating and promoting anti-Hinduism.
These people ought to be reminded:
Firstly, that our all ten gurus came from Hindu khatri families, starting with Bedi, Trehain, Bhalla and the remaining were Sodhis;
Secondly, the name of our renowned shrine is Shri Hari-mandir, populary known as the Golden Temple;
Thirdly, the sacred book, the Guru Granth Sahib is full of Hindu teachings in simple langauges which is greatly appreciated by not only the people of Punjab but also, in India and worldwide.
Fourthly, the aim of the Sikhs ( shishy-meaning followers) was to protect their fellow Hindu brothers and sisters against the Muslims attrocites. This could be substantiated by highlihted the voulntary offering or contributions of the Hindu sons to Gurus (becoming Sikhs) as per tradtion and practice, thus creating a sect to promote Hindu universal values.
Lastly, let me reiterate a well known couplet; who says that Hindus and Sikhs are not separate; but they are the left and the right eyes of Hinduism. Every Hindu is a Sikh and every Sikh is a Hindu.
Vande Matarm
Leave a Reply
Name Sumraj
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
——————————————————————————–
October 1st, 2006 at 12:11 pm
Thanks a lot Sumrajji,
I am not a Sikh, but consider myself very fortunate to have been able to go to Amritsar and the Golden temple. I could hear the Bhajans and the atmosphere was so great… The people who fight are really ignorant ones, who neither know Hinduism nor what Guru Nanakji said.
Many enjoy DIVIDING THE EVERYTHING AROUND….
THEY are the ones who do not know the BEAUTY OF DIVERSITY.
DIVERSITY IS REALLY BEAUTIFUL. If we look around , in VYVAHARIKA (transactional) life we see only DIVERSITY. the food that we eat, the people we meet, the flowers we see…why even our own parts of the body ..virtually their is no two things exactly similar. When the CREATION- the intelligently put together- is such that there is DIVERSITY, why CANNOT WE LEARN TO ENJOY IT by agreeing to disagree if we cannot agree -
This life is really a beautiful present - and HINDUISM believes that one gets it in human form so that one can further the study and understanding and practice of SANATANA DHARMA and KNOWLEDGE OF BRHAMAN so that one day one gets the opportunity to know that ‘ TAT TVAM ASI ‘ .
October 1st, 2006 at 3:27 pm
Wow, some people here really need to get a reality check. Oh and not only this, but many here need to stop having and promoting such an inferiority complex.
Sikhs “saved Hindus”?…Sikhs “protect Hindus”…yes indeed, Sikhs have been a brave people and faught courageously, but in glorifying their deeds, lets not forget our own heroes who defied great odds on numerous occasions for millenia THROUGHOUT India (not just the Punjab). We had Rajputs, Marathas, Gurkhas, Kshatriya, thousands of Kingdoms and armies who repelled and stemmed the attacks by numerous invaders. Do people out there realise just how many martial arts India has? A benign people just wouldnt create so many martial arts.
Sikhism is only 500 years old and the establishment of the Khalsa (the warrior saints) is only 300 years old. To suggest that Sikhs saved Hinduism is a GROSS misrepresentation. The back of the Mughal empire was broken by the HINDU Marathas and the Rajputs bore the brunt of numerous incursions and aggression by the Muslims. Lets not forget that Alexander the so called great was also (according to many historians) BEATEN by a Hindu warrior King (Pururva) though im sure most western accounts will depict Alexander as the victor. Dig a little deeper though and you will see that historical accounts on his exploits are anything but black and white and categorical.
So Hindus, I yrge you to LEARN about our history and learn and realise that we have and continue to battle against adharmic forces. Sometimes with intellect - at other times with might. Credit where credit is due…Sikhs faught well in Punjab against Muslims. But did they SAVE Hinduism? Nope. Did they always fight WITH Hindus..nope (a few times, Sikhs faught AGAINST Hindus. A good example would be the wars of Independance when the Sikhs ramained loyal to the BRITISH and also the campaigns against Hindu hill rajas). And to suggest that a few thousand Sikhs saved Millions of Hindus is not only STATISTICALLY preposterous but it is also LOGISTICALLY ridiculous. So are we to believe that Sikhs “saved” the Hindus THOUSANDS of miles away from Punjab? Bharat is a BIG place if you didnt realise.
We Hindus will always suffer becuase we dont take the time and effort to learn about our history.Our past. Our deeds…our OWN deeds..of which there are many. We never needed protection and to this day we still dont need protection because we have faught against the odds too many times to need to rely on others. If the Sikhs deny their ancestoral parentage, then so be it. I urge every Hindu whos cares, to learn about our History and I am sure upon doing so, each and every one will have pride automatically instilled in them. Its hard NOT to be proud when one learns about our Hindu ancestor endevours.
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:27 am
Proud Hinduji,
KIndly understand that History is only a perception of a small knowing limited capable human being. We were taught the story of the four of five blind men to to think, understand, discriminate etc. That is possible only if one develops a mind which is not biased, conditioned, open to hear, listen, think, etc.
So, what ever we read, we need to read, but need not accept fully. what we do, what we act, what we plan to perform should be based on the Sanatana Dharma. That is Hinduism.
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:45 am
Dear pairamblr,
Why wasn’t your preaching aimed at others who’ve previously expressed their historical opinions on this thread? From what I have seen, people who think they are spiritual often have the worst historical understanding of Hindu history.
Proud Hindu’s opinion is clearly based on at least some research, unlike the folk stories that a lot of other people here hae been regurgitating.
Jai Shri Rama
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:15 am
Dear Raju,
folk stories are stories..but research data particularly on history is most unscientific since it is purely interpretation based on ones conditioned mind. Kindly understand that there is no problem absolutely with what ever one wish to believe, that includes- u me and every one around. But in the process of believing something negative, if u hurt some one you can not remove that by saying sorry. But if you bear some ones hurt, when things become clear, you will then be happy and the one you would have hurt otherwise will feel hurt and he will say sorry to you.
Divids , war, fight etc have never won anything except may be for a short duration.
Also before commenting on ” Hindu ” history, if ever you try that, you do not know what is in store for you. Since Hinduism is so widely DIVERSE…
People who wish to criticise Hinduism talk about 4 cast divisions and subcasts. Can any one authoritatively say how many casts and how many subcasts are there? The small knowing one generalise…with his limited knowledge..people belonging to same cast or same subcast has different traditions as you travel some 50 or 100 km in same state. One need to really go into the details if one has interest to know this…But then either one will get mad and leave the study or will become wiser with the DIVERSITY of HINDUISM and then appreciate it.
If you try to study the Indian History, if you have interest, you can get more than 10 different versions …Depending on which Govt ruled the state, Depending on who was the chied of Education Dept earlier days, and NCERT etc now…every one rewrite the HISTORY. If mr Raju has a friend in JNU, then they can form a group and take any part of history and rewrite it. These are facts few knows as many would prefer to leave it to politicians since we are not going to get ANY BENEFIT from this history.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:41 am
“Sikhism is a religious Path with a crusader or a ‘religious warrior’ Sprit and Action as its chosen mode”
“To protect Hinduism and the country from the cruel grips of the mogul kings…theywere warriors in the true sense- tall strong and courqageous.”
“They are like our hands which protect the whole body and without which the body is helpless.”
What kind of self-depreciating pansy @r$e inferiority complex do you morons suffer from. Read on this excerpt from Koenraad Elst for your own sake.
“In the Guru lineage, we don’t see much physical fighting for Hinduism. Guru Nanak was a poet and a genuine saint, but not a warrior. His successors were poets, not all of them saintly, and made a living with regular occupations such as horse-trading. Guru Arjun’s martyrdom was not due to any anti-Muslim rebellion but to the suspicion by Moghul Emperor Jahangir that he had supported a failed rebellion by Jahangir’s son Khusrau, i.e. a Muslim palace revolution aimed at continuing the Moghul Empire but with someone else sitting on the throne. Arjun refused to pay the fine which Jahangir imposed on him, not as an act of defiance against Moghul sovereignty but because he denied the charges (which amounted to pleading his loyalty to Jahangir); it was then that Jahangir ordered a tougher punishment. At any rate, Arjun was never accused of raising the sword against Jahangir, merely of giving temporary shelter to Khusrau.
Tegh Bahadur’s martyrdom in 1675 was of course in the service of Hinduism, in that it was an act of opposing Aurangzeb’s policy of forcible conversion. An arrest warrant against him had been issued on non-religious and nonpolitical charges, and he was found out after having gone into hiding; Aurangzeb gave him a chance to escape his punishment by converting to Islam. Being a devout Muslim, Aurangzeb calculated that the conversion of this Hindu sect leader would encourage his followers to convert along with him. The Guru was tortured and beheaded when he refused the offer to accept Islam, and one of his companions was sawed in two for having said that Islam should be destroyed.
At any rate, he stood firm as a Hindu, telling Aurangzeb that he loved his Hindu Dharma and that Hindu Dharma would never die,-a statement conveniently overlooked in most neo-Sikh accounts. He was not a Sikh defending Hinduism, but a Hindu of the Nanakpanth defending his own Hindu religion. However, even Tegh Bahadur never was a warrior against the Moghul empire; indeed, the birth of his son Govind in the eastern city of Patna was a souvenir of his own enlistment in the party of a Moghul general on a military expedition to Assam.
Tegh Bahadur’s son and successor, Govind Singh, only fought the Moghul army when he was forced to, and it was hardly to protect Hinduism. His men had been plundering the domains of the semi-independent Hindu Rajas in the hills of northeastern Panjab, who had given him asylum after his father’s execution.52 Pro-Govind accounts in the Hindutva camp equate Govind’s plundering with the Chauth tax which Shivaji imposed to finance his fight against the Moghuls; they allege that the Rajas were selfishly attached to their wealth while Govind was risking his life for the Hindu cause. The Rajas, after failed attempts to restore law and order, appealed to their Moghul suzerain for help, or at least to the nearest Moghul governor. So, a confrontation ensued, not because Govind Singh had defied the mighty Moghul Empire, but because the Moghul Empire discharged its feudal duties toward its vassals, i.c. to punish what to them was an ungrateful guest turned robber.
Govind was defeated and his two eldest sons killed in battle; many Sikhs left him in anger at his foolhardy tactics. During Govind Singh’s flight, a Brahmin family concealed Govind’s two remaining sons (Hindus protecting Sikhs, not the other way around), but they were found out and the boys were killed.
The death of Govind’s sons provides yet another demythologizing insight about Govind Singh through its obvious connection with his abolition of the Guru lineage. A believer may, of course, assume that it was because of some divine instruction that Govind replaced the living Guru lineage with the Granth, a mere book (a replacement of the Hindu institution of gurudom with the Book-centred model of Islam). However, a more down-to-earth hypothesis which takes care of all the facts is that after the death of all his sons, Govind Singh simply could not conceive of the Guru lineage as not continuing within his own family.
After his defeat and escape (made possible by the self-sacrifice of a disciple who impersonated the Guru), Govind Singh in his turn became a loyal subject of the Moghul Empire. He felt he had been treated unfairly by the local governor, Wazir Khan, so he did what aggrieved vassals do: he wrote a letter of complaint to his suzerain, not through the hierarchical channels but straight to the Padeshah. In spite of its title and its sometimes defiant wording, this “victory letter” (Zafar Nâma) to Aurangzeb is fundamentally submissive. Among other things, Govind assures Aurangzeb that he is just as much an idol-breaker as the Padeshah himself: “I am the destroyer of turbulent hillmen, since they are idolators and I am the breaker of idols.” Aurangzeb was sufficiently pleased with the correspondence (possibly several letters) he received from the Guru, for he ordered Wazir Khan not to trouble Govind any longer.
After Aurangzeb’s death in 1707, Govind tried to curry favour with the heir-apparent and effective successor, Bahadur Shah, and supported him militarily in the war of succession: his fight was for one of the Moghul factions and against the rival Moghul faction, not for Hinduism and against the Moghul Empire as such. In fact, one of the battles he fought on Bahadur Shah’s side was against rebellious Rajputs. As a reward for his services, the new Padeshah gave Govind a fief in Nanded on the Godavari river in the south, far from his natural constituency in Panjab. To acquaint himself with his new property, he followed Bahadur Shah on an expedition to the south (leaving his wives in Delhi under Moghul protection), but there he himself was stabbed by two Pathan assassins (possibly sent by Wazir Khan, who feared Govind Singh’s influence on Bahadur Shah) in 1708. His death had nothing to do with any fight against the Moghuls or for Hinduism.
So far, it is hard to see where the Sikhs have acted as the sword-arm of Hinduism against Islam. If secularism means staying on reasonable terms with both Hindus and Muslims, we could concede that the Gurus generally did steer a “secular” course. Not that this is shameful: in the circumstances, taking on the Moghul Empire would have been suicidal.
In his last months, Govind Singh had become friends with the Hindu renunciate Banda Bairagi. This Banda went to Panjab and rallied the Sikhs around himself. At long last, it was he as a non-Sikh who took the initiative to wage an all-out offensive against the Moghul Empire. It was a long-drawn-out and no-holds-barred confrontation which ended in general defeat and the execution of Banda and his lieutenants (1716). Once more, the Sikhs became vassals of the Moghuls for several decades until the -Marathas broke the back of the Moghul empire in the mid-18th century. Only then, in the wake of the Maratha expansion, did the Sikhs score some lasting victories against Moghul and Pathan power. They established an empire of sorts including most of the North-West, but as we know its greatest monarch Ranjit Singh was a conscious and committed Hindu by any definition.
Sikh history has its moments of heroism, but not particularly more than that of the Marathas or Rajputs.”
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:26 pm
“These are facts few knows as many would prefer to leave it to politicians since we are not going to get ANY BENEFIT from this history.”
No wonder then that young Hindus think Hindus are loser types because with attitudes like these we need no enemies.
October 2nd, 2006 at 4:16 pm
Harishji,
Unless one has an open mind, education is not possible. Education means listening, reading, understanding, assimilating the knowledge. Then you have a choice to accept it or reject it. But assuming things and accepting or rejecting is not education….and that is one big problem for we small knowing, limited capable human beings have…
We know so many things that is taking place around us, but we are helpless. But just because we are helpless, we do not close our eyes , we keep our eyes open, understand, talk, discuss with others ..
This is exactly I meant by my statement ” these are facts few knows as many would prefer to leave it to the politicians…” today, politicians in India can decide anything …they are the law makers and they are the biggest law breakers…and are protected by - they say - by constitution.
So what use bothering about that? It is better we discuss such things in this type of forum and let people know so that when it becomes necessary the little better known can take up the matter …no one knows still the result.
Now, Hinduism will never die, simply because, the basis of HINDUISM is not belief…BUT KNOWLEDGE. But the journey to that KNOWLEDGE is a bit long and one need to have the initiative. And to prepare one towards that journey, like one goes from standard 1 to 12 to graduation to PG to research etc…our Hinduism is also introduced to ordinary people with stories, puranas etc…and slowly it moves towards VEDANTA.
Many are not aware that educated people from Japan, Brazil, and many other western countries spend months together and some times a few years in places like HRISHIKESH and Himalayas learning even SANSKRIT and then they have taken up on themselves teaching of these to their people who are interested in these. These I say because I have been seeing so many .
Now, the objective of our discussions on Hinduism is mainly to understand ourselves and not to advice others since it is GROWTH OF THE SELF TO MATURITY that is expected of when one has the knowledge. And when one is mature, does he face any problems?
For a student of Vedanta, steven covey’s book 7 habits of most effective people is almost like an abridged translation of what has been talked and discussed in VEDANTA….But again this needs ability to relate and differentiate. This one gets when one has an open mind…not a conditioned mind.
One with an open mind has no complexes, since that mind is willing to listen to anything.
sorry that i write a bit too too much..But i enjoy these discussions and hope others too enjoy even if they do not agree with me. atleast i am learning somethings from these discussions.
October 2nd, 2006 at 4:37 pm
To pairamblr,
Comments like yours do nothing but further alienate Hindus from their History. One reason why Sikhs and Muslims are such a proud people is because they are actively ENCOURAGED to learn about their past and in doing so they learn about their great deeds (OK, perhaps I cant count Islam here) Hindus on the other hand are berrated if they try to learn about their religion, their past. Is a Hindu who shows pride and defiance necessarily a fundamentalist? Is a Hindu who stand up for their religion, who protects their fellow Hindus from physical and verbal abuse a militant? And if this is so…then whats the shame in that? By adopting a passive nature and by taking the moral highground EACH AND EVERY TIME, all we do is communicate that we are inept and cowardly. If I was a non Hindu and I wanted to slander a religion…no doubt in my mind I would slander Hindus. Why? Because I know that I would recieve one or two letters in the post by Hindus saying they find it unfortunate that I wrote such things, but then I would also know that I would get a MILLION letters by HINDUS saying that I am free to write what I want about Hindus and that Hindus are tolerant. If we keep this attitude up, we can say Bye to Hinduism pretty quickly. I dont advocate that we become some intolerant religion like Islam, but please, we need to stop having this “Hindus are tolerant and so we cannot must not say anything or do anything in protest to attcks on our religion” mentality. To link back to the actual article, so many people who have posted comments have shown such submissive, weak and inferior attitide. Have some pride. The very Sikhs that so many Hindus claim that “saved us” and “protect us” and “we cant do without” would be the FIRST to laugh at such comments…all you are doing is showing that we are cowards and NEED protecting. Does Hinduism need baby sitters? Have we in our thousands of years in existence needed looking after? NO WAY. Noone respects a community that doesnt respect itself. So LEARN about the TRUE history of Hindus. Koenrad writes good articles as does Fracois Gautier.
Lets garner some much needed SELF RESPECT.
Why is that Hindus are always expected to show tolerance? Tolerance to a certain degree is good…but to the point where we get slaughtered and vilified by all? Even the most meek animals will retaliate when they feel in danger or feel the need to protect their own kind.
October 2nd, 2006 at 4:54 pm
pairamblr,
I appreciate that you enjoy discussing things about Hinduism. BUT your posts are very difficult to interpret…is there any way you can summarise them perhaps. i dont mean this in any derogetory way and hope you dont take offense.
Yes, Hinduism IS aspiritual journey and as a Hindu I appreciate the compex nature of Sanatan Dharma (in comparison to the abrahmic faiths). However, what we must realise is that the world is now connected in each and everyday. Hindus number a BILLION yet our influence is TINY. In most of the countries that we reside (eg, UK, USA) we are affluent, educated and fully integrate into society. Yet still we are mute. Sure, Hinduism is not about dogmas and fundamental interpretations or rulings, but in this global era, just like Hinduism has done so for the many millenia it has been in existence, it must ebb and flow and adapt. In this day and age, Hindus need to be knowledgable and strong.
October 3rd, 2006 at 1:56 am
Proud Hinduji,
1.Because I am trying to be Hindu by learning, by getting KNOWLEDGABLE, there is no question of some one hurting me mentally- simply because - if the other person has the inclination to listen, then i can discuss. If not, then i leave him to his belief. I like to be a student of Hinduism.
2. Kindly also understand that there are too too many misunderstandings in us- what is called IGNORANCE. Hinduism is in reality not a spiritual journey, but LIVING A LIFE HAPPILY. As one learns to become a Hindu, one will see that what ever he learns he can apply in day to day life - even when he is to do something against DHARMA, then he knows that he is doing it for certain reason, but out of his own choice and he will accept the result what ever it is . Just imagine, if one is prepared to accept a result, then where is stress etc? Now depending on level of ones education one can accept it as PRASADA from the ALMIGHTY, or the LAW OF KARMA in action.
3. Thank God today the world is connected better, and that really help HINDUISM a lot more, since more and more people could communicate and LEARN , they can hear other learned ‘ what was my misunderstanding, how do improve my understanding etc. This change is taking place since about last 10 years. The number of youngesters who are associated with LEARNING OF HINDUISM are now in millions. They study, they spend their time on SEVA besides their day to day work. These youngesters for sure will transfer their knowledge - though limited- but based on DHARMA to more new ones
4. Hinduism is not asking any one to convert. Hinduism is not against SCIENCE. Hinduism is always OPEN to listen to anything and discuss. This is real FREEDOM-
FREEDOM FROM IGNORANCE.
Interestingly, the west and Japan, because of the improvement in communication, has now come across the BEAUTY OF HINDISM and that is why more and more are learning, understanding HINDUISM.
5. HINDUISM says PRAYER IN ANY FORM IS VERY GOOD. be it Islamic, Christian , Buddhist or any other.
6. Hindus are mute because, MOST OF US HAVE NO REPLIES TO QUESTIONS OTHERS ASK US
a) when others tell us we are IDOL worshippers
b)we are cast based
c) how can any one worship an animal? etc..
If we know the reply, would not we reply in a nice way? logically we can make them silent…silent meaning they will be forced to think on what we have replied. that will work in their mind…may be subconsciously.
7. You have stated about being affluent…yes..
any one in poverty is interested in coming out of the poverty. For him Hinduism and anyother philosophy is same. That is why conversion has been rampant in rural areas..where the poor were induced by material help. Hinduism cannot fight this with more material offering. The only way Hinduism can resist conversion is by helping people to get education so that that will help them to earn their living and also education helps open the mind - to ask more questions- and HINDUISM IS NEVER AFRAID OF ANY QUESTIONS. If I do not have an answer for a question of yours that does not mean HINDU PHILOSOPHY has no answer…it only show my limited knowledge and sure there are many many more people who are highly learned and so i can also try and find out the answer from them.
That is SATSANG.
YOUR LAST LINE OF POSTING…” IN THIS DAY AND AGE HINDUS NEED TO BE KNOWLEDGABLE AND STRONG” is without doubt very right. permit me to add that KNOWLEDGE IS THE STRENGth.
I believe web is doing a wonderful job in this direction. Hindu voice, ADVAITINS yahoo groups, so many blogs, ..INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IS HELPING HINDUISM TO THE FRONT DOOR OF TODAYS YOUNGESTERS MIND.
October 3rd, 2006 at 10:14 am
Proud Hindu has some very efficient points on this debate. Hindu’s have lost their focus on religion specially the younger generation- you stop a young muslim and asking him to give you references from the Quaran then he’d do it. I am not sure whther our generation can even say what our holy scriptures are.
I personally feel we should not be making any divisons within Hinduism and sikhism as there is enough divide in the world today and christianity and islam are just waiting to explout this.
Why is it that they are so keen on converting hindu and sikh girls into islam? Dr. Farukh has written in his message to young islamics going to uni that hindu and sikh girls are the easiest to convert as they have not a ounce of clue about their religions and they can be spurned simply by taking them out and complimenting them- so where did this come from?
It is all because our younger generation have not been taught the values an traditions of our culture.
October 3rd, 2006 at 10:18 am
Sikhism is Hinduism. All sikhs were Hindus not long ago. For them to not think this just shows how much they know about their religion. Muslims as well were once Hindus yet no days none of them want to think of their past. Sikhs force themselves to be different visually as well as vocally to try and be as different from Hindus as possible yet their roots are 100% Hindu. They build temple or gudwaras as they call it to create a symbolic difference in religion but at the heart of it their gurus were not born Sikhs but were Hindus practicing a different way of religion and were merely teachers hence the name Guru. Over many decades it has turned from a teaching to a religion. I also was not amazed to see that it was some 20 yr old kids as most of them are hot headed kids who really do not know much.
October 3rd, 2006 at 11:32 am
Very nice Sunnyji,
May be the younger generation should ask the elders about this ? But do you think many would venture into this? That is why we need to have SATSANGs where people meet and listen, discuss, think etc which help us in our life.
We need to focus on ourselves - not on others- as what others do and dont do should not be the deciding factor for our growth.
we need to know Sanatana Dharma, Vedanta etc.. atleast we need to make a beginning towards learning that…
take the initiative and write on these columns what is your experience…
difficulties etc,…you will be surprised by the support that you get and help that pour in.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:44 pm
can some one please explain me. is this true that the granth saheb recites the name of rama in every verse, which means nearly 2500 times??
October 6th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
very well said rudra. hats off to you sir!!
October 7th, 2006 at 3:33 pm
I read that every eldest son of Panjabi families joined the Sikhs for protection of Hindu Dharma. And marriage with Hindu women was common.
Every Sikh is a brother to Hindus, he may not want to accept it.
“Sumiran karle mere mana, teri beeti umar HARI( ie: Narayan) naam bina”
-Guru Nanakji
October 7th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
Rudra
Vaah bhai! Hit the nail on the head there!!
October 13th, 2006 at 11:08 am
Only after reading the messages posted here i learnt that Swami Ramdevji was attacked while in Britain. I watch Swamiji on television daily & he never mentioned this incident, probably because in India a majority of Sikhs dont differentiate themselves with Hindus and they live together in harmony, not to forget that Swamiji could have maligned the Sikh Community. Swamji was invited by the British Sikh community to visit the Gurudwara. Swamiji once said about his critics that they oppose him due to their lack of knowledge.
October 14th, 2006 at 7:46 pm
Sikhism is a branch of Hinduism. That is why the Abhangas (philosophical / Spiritual poems) of Hindu Sant Naamadev ( from Maharashtra) could find place in Guru GranthSaahib. There are more temples of Sant Naamadev in North than in Maharashtra. I being Hindu never thought Sikhs being different from Hindus. Actually, they are protectors of Hinduism. Had they supported Maraathaas in the fight against Islamic aggression (by Moghals) and British, then we would not have Pakistan and BanglaDesh.
Who was Banda Bairaagi ? Who was Guru TegBahaadur ? Why they got killed and not accepted Islam till their last ? Forgotten, O misguied Sikhs (who have such seperatist mentality ) ?
November 27th, 2006 at 2:30 pm
sikhs are not hindus. guru nanak dev ji was equally critical of hindus and muslims. guru nanak dev ji outwardly and correctly rejected any hindu rituals since birth as he rightly seen them as pointless. Guru arjan dev ji says in the guru granth sahib ji that we are neither hindus nor muslims. The guru granth sahib ji also says gusain, allah and khuda…. does that mean that we are muslims?… even muslims claim guru nanak dev ji was a muslim which is why he went to mecca. out gurus gave us a seperate identity. first with gurmukhi and lastly with amrit.
Because Guru Nanak Dev Ji was so great every1 wanst claim him as therz… Hindus… Muslims etc. It is written in the janamsakhi of Guru Nanak Dev Ji that He Himself outwardly spoke that he is neither Hindu Nor Muslim. Now that is the truth, that is how Guru Ji addressed himself. So u can all say Guru Nanak Dev Ji was hindu untill your blue in the face, but that wont change the Janamsakhi of Guru Nanak Dev Ji.
In addition to this, the RSS have NO PLACE in sikh places of worship. We find it very offensive if something is given greater attention then the present Guru, Guru Granth Sahib Jee. Its discusting that on that day, Guru Granth Sahib Jee was ignored and the Sikh sadhsangat were not allowed to pay their respects to Guru Granth Sahib Ji. They were literally pushed aside, some even pushed out the Gurdwara. That swami guy should do his preaching somewhere else other then a Gurdwara. Gurdwara is for Gurbani, nothing more nothing less.
VAHEGURUJIKAKHALSAVAHEGURUJIKIFATEH
November 27th, 2006 at 3:43 pm
Who was Banda Bairaagi ?
Banda Singh Bahadur
Who was Guru TegBahaadur ?
9th Guru. Gave his head for freedom of religion.
Why they got killed and not accepted Islam till their last ?
Didn’t agree to convert to islam
Forgotten, O misguied Sikhs (who have such seperatist mentality ) ?
no..
“At any rate, he stood firm as a Hindu, telling Aurangzeb that he loved his Hindu Dharma and that Hindu Dharma would never die,-a statement conveniently overlooked in most neo-Sikh accounts.”
Any accounts of this made?? Or just something else made up.
And please Rudra, I am looking forward to the proof and historical evidence you have about your spiced up story you beautifully wrote about “Govind Singh”.
Thanks
November 27th, 2006 at 6:57 pm
Sikhs, Moslems, Christians, etc are An-Aryans. Or Adharmic. The only True Aryans are those of the Aryawarth Faith. Us The Hindus. We do not need others!
Veda Shakti
November 28th, 2006 at 12:09 am
Sikhism is NOT a part of Hinduism…
Thoughts such as the ones put forward in this thread are the reason why so many Sikhs are furious with the RSS…
How ignorant are some of you people who claim to have done “research”…
“Banda Bairaagi” was Banda Singh Bahudur…he had full Sikhi saroop
(unlike the crap the RSS would have you believe)…And then you waonder why we get angry…If wanting to protect our history is EXTREMISM…then yes, every Sikh is an extremist…
Guru Nanak Dev Ji rejected many common Hindu practices such as the wearing of “janjoo”…Guru Teg Bahadur Ji gave his head to protect the Kashmiri Brahmins…but that wasn’t because Sikhism was created “to protect Hinduism”…Sikhism is opposed to oppresion anywhere…
My Brothers and Sisters…we are not against Hindiusm, Islam and any religion…every human bein is God’s creation…but the pollution and alteration of our history by organisations such as the RSS WILL NOT be tolerated…
And Sikhism is not a part of Hinduism…
November 28th, 2006 at 2:08 am
deeno sharma, you say “we hindus dont need others”.
so explain why your hindu pandits begged our 9th Guru to save your faith?
November 28th, 2006 at 4:38 am
Well said jsc…
but the RSS would have you believe that when Guru Teg Bahadur Ji’s head was severed from his body, the janjoo he was wearing remained attached around his neck…
What a joke…
And then some people have the nerve to wonder why we get upset…
November 28th, 2006 at 5:34 am
’so explain why your hindu pandits begged our 9th Guru to save your faith’
No one begged anyone because this a later on myth.Soon you’ll be saying that Sikhs saved Hindus which is itself even a bigger myth.How can a few thousand people save a massive population over a maasive geographical land mass would be the question that anyone with common sense would ask.Read the following :
Tegh Bahadur’s martyrdom is usually interpreted as an act of self-sacrifice for the sake of the Kashmiri Pandits threatened with forced conversion. As such, it is a classic Hindutva proof of the Hinduness of Sikhism, though it is also a classic neo-Sikh proof of the “secularism” of Sikhism (“showing concern even for people of a different religion, viz. Hinduism”).31 However, this whole debate may well rest upon a simple misunderstanding.
In most indo-Aryan languages, the oft-used honorific mode of the singular is expressed by the same pronoun as the plural (e.g. Hindi unkâ, “his” or “their”, as opposed to the non-honorific singular uskâ), and vice-versa; by contrast, the singular form only indicates a singular subject. The phrase commonly translated as “the Lord preserved their tilak and sacred thread” (tilak-janjû râkhâ Prabh tâ-kâ), referring to unnamed outsiders assumed to be the Kashmiri Pandits, literally means that He “preserved b is tilak and sacred thread”, meaning Tegh Bahadur’s; it is already unusual poetic liberty to render “their tilak and sacred thread” this way, and even if that were intended, there is still no mention of the Kashmiri Pandits in the story.32 This is confirmed by one of the following lines in Govind’s poem about his father’s martyrdom: “He suffered martyrdom for the sake of his faith.”33 in any case, the story of forced massed conversions in Kashmir by the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb is not supported by the detailed record of his reign by Muslim chronicles who narrate many accounts of his biogorty.
http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/wiah/ch8.htm
November 28th, 2006 at 5:51 am
“Guru arjan dev ji says in the guru granth sahib ji that we are neither hindus nor muslims.”
Well did he then say that we’re Sikhs instead ? He wouldn’t would he because just like the thousand of Hindu gurus who also say there’s no such thing as Hindu or Muslim or now Sikh or whatever is because in reality the Atman doesn’t have any label .It was philosophical statement and not a political one.
”
Because Guru Nanak Dev Ji was so great every1 wanst claim him as therz… Hindus… Muslims etc. It is written in the janamsakhi of Guru Nanak Dev Ji that He Himself outwardly spoke that he is neither Hindu Nor Muslim.”
Not really.India has has in the past and will in the future will produce great gurus so dont get egoistic over nothing because an ego itself is a great obstacle to reason and spiritual progression.
“In addition to this, the RSS have NO PLACE in sikh places of worship”
Whats the RSS got to with it ? Are you being totally illogical?.Even though they wear funny khaki shorts but You should be thanking them for saving all those Sikhs during the Anti Sikhs riots by the Congress party in 84 .Anyway Many Sikhs themselves do yoga do so whats wrong with that ?So its only natural that Swami Ramdev was invited to Gurudwara. Or do you lot have a inferiorty complex with anything connected with Hinduism ? ? You might as well stop speaking Punjabi because thats a Hindu language.You want a seperate religion then go ahead and create one which is original because we Hindus dont have no problem with that but dont make it on lies and hatred about Hindus.So far your khalistanism is only neo- nazi fascism and nothing else and is being exposed and that’s the the real reason most true Sikhs wont buy it.
November 29th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Hindus who class Sikhs or try to class Sikhs as any shred of Hinduism are a bunch of losers and wasters. Sikhs are An-Aryan. Me I am glad that they are a separate entity. I would be happier if they would live in Europe and stay here, it’s a nice place.
India is Marching proudly shaking off its imperialist past and taking its rightful place in the league of Productive GDP nations. It does so even with Sikh & Moslem 5th columnists and terrorists gnawing at its passion for life. Look at the nations that traitored their past.
Egypt (now Moslem), but earning its greatest revenues from its past Animist & Nature religion.
Syria (now Moslem), yet its highest accolade was during the life of the Sham. When Varun ruled its culture.
Babylon (now Moslem), yet its highest achievements was during the Pre-Moslem period
Persia, (now Moslem), yet its highest achievements were during its Zoroastrian period
Etc.
It is clear. Never traitor your heritage. It is your mother. Those who do leave us with very little faith in their word.
The Hindus (The Aryawarth) have always been Hindus. Can any Sikh say so? It doesn’t matter. You are not us and we should be happy about this ( I am). Because now we know who we can rely on.
JSC – All the Sikhs fall back on is some ancient and clouded issue supposedly bout us needing Sikh defence.
FYI – Before you guys showed up
1) India was the most envied economic force in the world, built by Hindus
2) When the all of Asia Minor could not have defeated Alexander The Great – We Hindus Did – NO SIKHS!
3) We had created the greatest literature, Maths, astronomy, theology etc
4) We had given Common Faith to all of Asia (Bhuddism) without the Abhramic bloodshed of the Jews, Christians & Moslems
5) Vijaynagar (The Southern Indians) – No Sikh Needed. We kicked the crap out of the Sultans
6) Etc
7) OK 1 more I love this one. India’s highest military accolade PARAM VIR CHAKRA won first by who (now you guys were around). Well it was a Bhramin who took Chatri Code (I love this) Major Som Nath Sharma, (heck that dude could be my cousin)
Etc etc.
Bottom Line we were doing fine without you guys. We are doing fine even with you and others (Moslems, Christians, Freakin Commies etc) harassing us. India – Global Pride of the Hindus!
I am sorry that this is so long but India is a Big Country! ATB
PS Why don’t you guys get your own theory bout death. Re-Incarnation is Uniquely Hindu. You guys (Sikhs) should choose heaven as home after death. Or be original!
Scuse me whilst I have a nice Ham N Mustard Sandwich and a beer to Vijaynagar.
November 30th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Any one who whishes to come into my home and demand a share of it will never gain my respect. And I will fight to the death to stop them from taking an inch.
Seek’s, Moslems, Christians etc. have a right to co-exist in India, along side Hindus but they most certainly do not have a right to claim any of it to be theirs. India has given enough to other cultures already, only for them to turn and ask for more.
They are all ungreatful and deserve nothing other than left overs one would feed to a pet.
I have no problem with Seeks, but I do have a problem with them or any other culture who ask’s or fights or kills, for more than recognition.
Deeno is quite corect in “Never traitor your heritage” as this in affirmed in the Bhagavat Gita, C 1, V44.
December 4th, 2006 at 7:51 am
British young Sikhs are different from the British older Sikhs and the Sikhs in India.
British young Sikhs, like many of the Ugandan or Kenyan Gujarati Hindus, think, that they are British and they want to cut themselves off from their
roots.
They are the people who are fanatic Khalistani, because they suffer from a complex, similar to that of PakistaniBangladeshiand Buddhists in Sri Lanka, that without India they do not have much history. India means Hinduism. That is the reason they want to attack Hinduism and Hindus to prove their seperate identity.
However, Older Sikhs in Britain and Sikhs in India have a different perspective and knowledge. They do not suffer from any complex, so they have no hesitation to accept the common heritage of India, which is Hinduism. That is the reason they, older Sikhs in Britain, invited Yogi Ramdev to Gurudwaras in Britain.
Yogi Ramdev is a very brave man, he said recently that we should not forget the contributions of the revolutionaries, many of them were Sikhs, in the freedom movement of India.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:08 am
DB you must agree that they are still An-Aryan. They are not us.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:41 pm
Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhisim are different religions, although these are derived from Hinduism.
December 4th, 2006 at 2:01 pm
So in the words of the RV they must all be An-Aryan. The only true Aryans are the upholders of this faith of The Aryawarth. Please confirm that others outside this faith are An-Aryans.
December 5th, 2006 at 2:29 am
Deenoji,
Since you are so much of an Aryan, would you kindly explain a little in detail what and who is ‘ARYAN’ and what and who is ” AN ARYAN” .
I am asking this only to understand your posting better.
thanks
December 5th, 2006 at 7:19 am
What is the meaning of un-Aryan?
Gautam Buddha’s book was AryaPath. Thus, who follows Buddha are Aryans???
Definitely Russians are Aryan, as an Aryan city at least 4000 years old is now discovered near Ural mountain.
If we say everyone who speaks Indo-European languages are Aryan, then everyone from Ireland to Hokkaido Island of Japan ( the original people of Japan were Indo-European speakers who still live in Hokkaido Island) are all Aryan.
If we say that those who accept the Vedas are Aryan, that may leave out the Hindutva crowd of Savarkar as well ( According to the website SavarkaryaHindutva.com Vedas have no authority over the Hindus either).
If the Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists do not accept Vedas, they are not Hindus, but even Afghans and Iranians , although they are Muslims, claim that they are Aryans.
December 5th, 2006 at 8:32 am
In Rig Veda, it is written, “Brahman of glory is he to whom both the Aryans and the Dasas belong” (Book VIII, Ch 8, verse 9).
Thus, there is no restriction for the non-Aryans to be Hindus.
December 5th, 2006 at 10:26 am
In the Strict Vedic sense ONLY those who uphold the faith of the Aryawarth are Aryans!
Others who do not hold true to Lord Aryaman (RV) are An-Aryan.
These are Christians, Sikhs, Moslems etc.
Uphold the faith and you are Aryan. To take other nations eg from Japan to Russia as Aryans is to corrupt this Great Faith. Aryan / Aryawarth ia a Sanskrit word it means “The Noble Ones”, We are that. The Hindus are the last remnants of this glorious past. We should not include others for they do not uphold the faith!
It is Adharmic to include Khazaks, Pakistanis, Afgans, Russains, Latins etc as Aryans. I would knidly ask that we stop abusing ourselves by leaning to other nations.
Stand Proud Aryawarths you need no others!
Veda Shakti!
December 5th, 2006 at 1:53 pm
Deenoji and Deepakji,
Now do we need to understand that
a. people who subscribe only to RVEDA are Aryans …noble ones. people who talk of other 3 vedas are AN ARYANS ??
b. does it mean that even all born Hindus are not Aryans?
c. Do you also subscribe to the theory put forward by DMK, DK and all Dravidian political parties of India that ARYANS INVADED AND DROVE THE DRAVIDIANS who are the real Indians away ?
d. may be you have some historical proof that you have read ?
e. and what is Soma that is more important than so many other aspects of Hinduism???
thanks for a lot more info.
December 5th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
Pairamblr.
A) I never said only those of the RV persuasion are Aryans. I said those who uphold the faith of the Aryawarth. Vedic by root, this includes all the Vedas and Veda derived literature eg. Upnishads, MB. The Aryawarth must however, practice the Vedas first before all other literature.
Again. An-Aryans are those who do not uphold the faith. The Europeans, Moslems, Sikhs etc.
B) Soma is not greater than x etc this is not a game of which is greater. The importance is that it is essential to the faith and it is lost. It was essential along with Great Agni. If 10% (one entire book Bk 9 of the RV) was missing from your faith wouldn’t you be alarmed. “so many other aspects” of this Great Faith are exaclty that ’so many other’ they hold very little command within the Vedas. If we are to call ourselves Aryawarth we must first practice the Vedas.
Veda Shakti
Pls
December 5th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
Deenoji,
nice and quick reply.
Now would you be able to let us know what is practice of Veda?
there is no comment about the point ‘c’ and ‘d’.
and when you write about the practice of Veda from where it is to begin?
expalin in detail.
thanks and namaskaram
December 5th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
live and let llive. . . . carry on debating if sikhs arwe hindus , but the fact is we ent. insted u cud be praying to god
December 5th, 2006 at 4:41 pm
C) I think to focus on who drove the Dravids away etc is a Euro-Centric red herring to keep us “Natives” busy whilst our country is raped. The focus is not who drove the Dravids etc but that the only upholders of the Aryawarth are ones who uphold our Dharma. All of Hindu persuasion must say
Veda Shakti - We are Aryawarth! END
D) linked above.
Your Question. Practice of the Vedas. For this you will need
The Seven Elements of the Faith of the Aryawarth
This is being delivered to the Moderators (they may be inclined to publish it. If they feel Deenos’ work is not dominating this web LOL). I assume that they are already concerned that I seem weigh in at every opportunity.
To help your question, in some small way. How to Practice the Vedas. Well you have actually started. Your quest for knowledge and enlightenment. That you have made intelligent commentaries and refrained from profanity and name calling is “Practice of the Vedas”. That you use your energies for the betterment of your faith is to help the world. Remember we (The Aryawarth) do not advocate repression, conversion or slaughter of other An-Aryan nations. We are here to educate and offer answers to worldy questions. etc etc.
Practice of the Vedas. Make it daily in any small way. eg. your closing Namaskaram - What does it mean? How does is sound? Feel the Aryawarth. Say
Veda Shakti
It sounds like your core is Vedic. It is vibrant, sharp, precise, ancient.
It means as you know - “Power of the Vedas” There you have practiced the Vedic way in another subtle but strong way!
There is more. But I may get banned for taking up all this space.
Veda Shakti!
December 6th, 2006 at 4:19 am
Pairambir:
DMK got their idea from the British, who wanted to seperate South Indian from the North Indian by creating the theory of Aryan invasion.
There are many important discoveries took place in Russia recently about the 4000 years old very advanced Aryan civilization near Ural mountain. According to the Russian archeologists Aryans came from the east of Iran, via Turkey, Armenia and Georgia to Russia. They never went down to the south from Russia to India.
The Aryan Invasion Theory is historically false as there is no evidence of any such invasion.
If you just look at anyone from Andra Pradesh/Karnata/TamilNadu unles he will start speaking, you may think he is from Bengal or Gujarat or Bihar.
Deeno Sharma: Are the Asuras Aryans? Asuras can be Assyrian from Iraq. One Assyrian king of Babylon has the name Asura Bani Pal, sounds very Indian.
December 6th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Deeenoji and Deepakji,
most likely this post will not appear as the moderators have told me that i should write small and give only the website ref so that any one who is inerested can read it at that site.
I do not know if the moderators are aware that there are sites which cannot be accessed unless one is a member of that group. - well that is my understanding and if wrong stands to be corrected. so I felt that i should post this following msg which - i hope will provoke some thinking process.
subrahmanian_v wrote:
— In advaitin@yahoogroups.com, Shyam wrote:
> ________
> “he Brahmin has to wake up at four in the morning and bathe in
cold water, rain or shine, warm or cold. Then, without a break, he
has to perform one rite after another: sandhyavandana, Brahmayajna,
aupasana, puja, vaisvadeva and one of the 21 sacrifices. If you sit
before sacrificial fire for four days you will realise how difficult
it is with all the heat and smoke. How many are the vows and the
fasts the Brahmin has to keep and how many are the ritual baths….
>
> …. Other castes do not have to go through such hardships. A
Brahmin cannot eat “cold rice”in the morning like a peasant - he has
no “right” to it. The dharmasastras are not created for his
convenience or benefit, nor to ensure that he has a comfortable
life. He would not have otherwise imposed on himself the performance
of so many rites and a life of such rigorous discipline. When he has
his daytime meal it will be 1 or 2. (On the day of a sraddha it will
be three or four). This is the time the peasant will have his rest
after his meal under a tree out in the field where he works. And the
Brahmin’s meal, mind you, is as simple as the peasant’s. There is no
difference between the humble dwelling of the peasant and that of
the Brahmin. Both alike wear cotton. The peasant may save money for
the future but not the Brahmin. He has no right either to borrow
money or to live in style. …
ShrIgurubhyo namaH
Namaste,
There is this following verse that is quoted by Sri Chandrashekhara
Bharati Swamiji in His commentary to the Vivekachudamani, verse
2 ‘jantUnAm narajanma durlabham…’:
brAhmaNasya tu deho’yam na upabhogaaya kalpate
iha kleshAya mahate pretya ananta sukhAya cha
This is a verse from the Vasishtha smriti (yoga vAsishtha ?)
This means: This body of a braahmana is not for merry making and
enjoyment. Then what for is it meant? It is meant for severe
austerities here so as to experience limitless bliss after death.
The Swamiji writes: From this it is known that by the
dharmAnushthAna, the performance of dharma through the observance of
the scripturally prescribed duties and refraining from the
scripturally prohibited acts, it is possible for a brahmana to get
Brahman-knowledge in a single lifetime itself.
There is a story about Chanakya. He was a minister. Once, he was
entrusted with the work of distributing rugs to the needy during a
cold season that was severe. A certain robber, knowing that Chankya
was the minister entrusted with relief materials, broke open into
the house of this Brahmana minister on a night. What he saw there
astonished the burglar. While the pile of rugs was neatly stacked
in a corner of that extremely simple house, Chanakya was fast asleep
on the floor with no rug to cover himself. The roof of that tiled
house was sagging with the weight of darbha and samit bundles meant
for sacrificial rites. In great appreciation of this minister who
had the power but not the tendency for enjoyment, the robber left
the place, a changed man.
It is reported elsewhere that Chanakya had a reason for the austere
life that he led. He had the viveka, the discriminative insight,
that all position and power is ephemeral and could cease at any
moment. In such an eventuality, he was ever prepared to relocate
himself by leaving all that came with the position that he occupied,
in just a moment’s notice. It was with this viveka that he did not
give himself to not just the luxury but even the minimum comforts
that he could have easily had for himself. What great lessons does
this episode give us in the path to spirituality !!
Best regards,
subbu
Om Tat Sat
——-namaskaram
December 6th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Folks the foregoing studiously laid out by Pairamblr is the exact reason why we need to return ONLY to the RV understand it. Then access other books.
None of the foregoing is covered by our central book.
ATB
December 9th, 2006 at 11:10 am
Can you imagine having kids and providing for them, only to have them discard and not make use of materials provided for them, not beacuse some else is gaining the benefit of them - With all due respect I don’t buy into these folk stories of self-sacrifice - They do nothing to help our faith be more pragmatic and to thrive.
December 11th, 2006 at 11:47 am
sharmakji,
I am a student of VDEANTA, but i do not have the knowledge of SANSKRIT, but understand it reasonably well, thanks to the regional languages of India which have almost 40 to 70%words from Sanskrit.
As a part of our training, I would like not to assume something when i do not understand and then I have to request to explain so that what is told and what is understood is reasonably nearly same.
If you can kindly explain what actually you meant by ” i dont buy into these folk stories of self sacrifice …” etc.
Kindly understand that i am requesting this so that i can understand what u have in mind clearer and look at my understanding - compare it and correct my understanding if that needs modification.
thanks and namaskaram
December 11th, 2006 at 12:49 pm
Kesh Well done. You have chosen to stand. SharmaK you write like a Bhramin. Please make it easier for the public.
A) Could the ‘Genuine Hindus’ (erroneous reference ), we are Aryawarth. However, could they kindly comment on the following (prev posted)
Note Hindu Calender
Feb - Shivaratri
Mar - Ram Nawmi
Apr - Hanuman Jayanti
Sep - Krsn Janamashtmi
Nov - Ganesh Chaturi
END
Does it concern anyone that no Vedic Gods - The ones who brought us this faith is honored?.
Also. Is there anyone out there who is of the opinion that The RV does not contain all that we need?
Pairamblr - thanks for your quest. Self Sacrifice is very much a Catholic issue. Pls check with RV you will find an Acquistorial faith. Not one of self sacrifice. PS I hope you enjoy the mental puzzle listed above. Pls offer comment, any is better than none. Perhaps together we can distil the truth.
Veda Shakti
December 11th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
I think Vedic devas ( not Gods) are honoured in a different way.
There is the Mitra puja until 16th december( date of the upwartd journey of sun from the tropic of cancer) every year
Agni is worshiped in all occasions
In marriages Brahma ( as Prajapati) is worshipped.
But others devas/devis are not worshipped, for some unknown reason.
Is it because Purans are more popular than the Vedas today?
December 11th, 2006 at 3:18 pm
Well done DB -
A) The First man to recognize Mitra Janyanti - Christmas
B) Yes deviated from Vedas to Puranic
your reading is very well accomplished DB. I am send my Mitra Jayanti to the moderators
You must see the tragedy of this deviation?
December 11th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
namaskaram
In the process of understanding the word ” self sacrifice” has to be studied.
Is it sacrifice by the self?
well, in transactional life, superficially one can say that one is sacrificing. But dive a little deeper. Is there such a thing called self sacrifice?
If one looks at it from another angle, then one can see that in “real” terms any action performed by “self” is to satisfy the “self”. So it is the happiness that “self” gets by performing the action that tempts “self” to take the action. Performing of action being the result of application of ones FREE WILL.
In another angle one can say - in crude terms - it is the selfishness of getting happiness that one gets in to this mode of “sacrifice”. { that is why we are never supposed to say that we are sacrificing something}
I know for sure there is hardly any vote will i get if my this view is put to vote..but logically can this be contradicted??
;-))
namaskaram
+++++++++++
December 11th, 2006 at 5:10 pm
Pairamblr - Your issue with self sacrifice. First question
Do you hold the opinion that all that the RV does not hold all that we need?
ATB
December 14th, 2006 at 6:53 am
Is there any theory of reincarnation/ Theory of Karma in the Rig Veda?
December 14th, 2006 at 7:01 am
Taking back the debate to Yogi Ramdev:
Yogi Ramdev made some brave statements about the role of the revolutionaries in the India’s freedom movement. As a result The Congresswalas in India started agitating against Yogi Ramdev.
Yogi Ramdev’s courageous statement that we must not forget the role of the revolutionaries in the freedom movement of India has called for a reexamination of the role of Mahatma Gandhi and his Satyagraha.
According to the British Prime Minister Clement Attlee, during whose regime India became free, it was the INA( Indian National Army) and the RIN ( Royal Indian Navy) Mutiny of February 18–23 1946 that made the British realise that their time was up in India.
An extract from a letter written by P.V. Chuckraborty, former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, on March 30 1976, reads thus:
“When I was acting as Governor of West Bengal in 1956, Lord Clement Attlee, who as the British Prime Minister in post war years was responsible for India’s freedom, visited India and stayed in Raj Bhavan Calcutta for two days. I put it straight to him like this: ‘The Quit India Movement of Gandhi practically died out long before 1947 and there was nothing in the Indian situation at that time which made it necessary for the British to leave India in a hurry. Why then did they do so?’
In reply Attlee cited several reasons, the most important of which were the INA activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, which weakened the very foundation of the British Empire in India, and the RIN Mutiny which made the British realise that the Indian armed forces could no longer be trusted to prop up the British.
When asked about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by Mahatma Gandhi’s 1942 movement, Attlee’s lips widened in smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, ‘Minimal’.”
(in
Anuj Dhar’s website: www.hindustantime.com/news/specials/Netaji/; Dhanjaya Bhat, The Tribune, February 12, 2006;
Majumdar, R. C., Jibanera Smritideepe, Calcutta, General Printers and Publishers, 1978, pp. 229-230;
R.Borra, ‘Subhas Chandra Bose, The Indian National Army, and The War of India’s Liberation’, The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1982 (Vol. 3, No. 4), pages 407-439; http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v03/v03p407_Borra.html)
December 12th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
RSS AND TAMIL TIGERS BEEN SPONSERING EACHOTHER FROM TIME NOT ONLY IN UK BUT ALSO IN AMERICA AND CANADA. RSS IS LOADED WITH MONEY. TAMIL TIGERS IN UK HAVE ALSO STATED THAT THEY HAVE BEEN TRAINING WITH RSS AND THAT BJP LEADERS FROM TAMIL NADU HAVE ALSO BEEN SENDING MONEY.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
can some body tell me the definatioin of hindusim when it started,the date ,the prophet name.first search for all these,then call sikhs a part of hindusim.