Global Religious landscape- Pew Forum

[timetravel]

Approx 460 million muslims and 1 billion hindus in ancient india as a total, Pakistan + India + Bangladesh.

We did a great job.

Yes I agree the Muslims invaders did a great Job in being successful in converting large parts of Hindustan into Muslim fold... Hinduism has lost a great deal by loosing Pakistan and Bangladesh.. they were also Hindus.!!

But still they could not remove the Indian Culture from complete subcontinent .... India is still there and following ancient Indian civilisation.... 1 Billion and 15% is a huge number

 

[Azazel]

.The point is that Dravidian nationalists are adamant that the Vedic culture was imposed by force. Indeed, this forms a cornerstone of their nationalism.

No such incident of imposition of Vedic culture is documented in history.Their nationalism is based on linguistic purism.They try to justify it using old Aryan Invasion theory although it has never proven to be true.The truth is Vedic culture through centuries of cultural exchanges of North and Southern India.Th whole process might have started thousands of years before Birth of Christ.In fact, South largely contributed to Indias Vedic culture.

How many gods are there? 0, 1, many, infinite?

You know, ancient India was instrumental in establishing zero as a valid number

What does this mean.Denial of God!!.Is this such a difficult fact understand.

Any Hindu who does not accept belief systems other than his own. Do you seriously deny that such Hindus exist?

I don't deny existence of such Hindus.

And there are those extremists who claim that anyone who worships a tree deity or such is not a Hindu. Again, you can claim that no such extremists exist. Fine!

Such practices can be justified by Pantheistic aspect of Hinduism.I don't think any body can say they are not Hindus.

There's not really much non-religious cultural transfer northwards in terms of language or other aspects, is there? Sure, there were religious contributions from southern scholars, but these happened long after the initial southward conquest.

Just because Luther was a German doesn't change the fact that Christianity was an imposition onto Germanic tribes initially.

This depends on what you mean by culture.Religion itself is a part of culture.If you look at closely at things like Dance and Music(Especially classical ones),you will find they all have a common origin.Painting another example,almost all ancient paintings in India came from South. Raja Ravi Varma is one the greatest painter in Indian history is from South.If you study about Indian art you will find a different picture.You have certain preconceived and prejudiced notions on India

Give me one historical account of a southern conquest from a Northern King(Not the Muslim ones).Their is no such thing,At least not in the recorded history.

 

[abhishekgoel80]

Two questions to all the person in this thread
1) Do they think culture to be changing or static?
2) Do they believe the stories told to them by their respective religions?

 

[Vinod2070]

Yes I agree the Muslims invaders did a great Job in being successful in converting large parts of Hindustan into Muslim fold... Hinduism has lost a great deal by loosing Pakistan and Bangladesh.. they were also Hindus.!!

But still they could not remove the Indian Culture from complete subcontinent .... India is still there and following ancient Indian civilisation.... 1 Billion and 15% is a huge number

For us, that loss should be considered as a write off.

As they say in finance, no point throwing good money after bad.

The Dharmic civilization has a great future ahead. We have nothing to do with Islam now.

 

[timetravel]

India is 85% Dharmic today. Compare that to all countries to our West. Not a trace of their culture and civilization remains.

Just the dreary sameness!

And you were done a great job on. At least the vast majority of you.

yes you are right.. many of them were forced to convert under pressure and by use of force.. but today after many generations those people don't remember the forced conversions of their lineage..

so it is as much a loss for them as for the indigenous ancient Indian civilization

 

[Azazel]

you are wrong.
it will be like this - Caliphate-> monarchy -> Anarchy -> Divided Muslims -> So many muslim deaths -> Many Arabs will die -> Allah will inspire a man to take the leadership of muslims overnight, and all muslims knew about him, they will obey him as Imam Mehdi -> Return of Caliphate -> numerous battle in KSA, Syria region -> Return of Jesus pbuh -> Battle in Israel -> peaceful muslim world -> Every pious muslim will die -> Doomsday

we are passing this era as stated in the hadith -

“The People will soon summon one another to attack you as people when eating invite others to share their food.” Someone asked, “Will that be because of our small numbers at that time?” He replied, “No, you will be numerous at that time: but you will be froth and scum like that carried down by a torrent (of water), and Allah will take the fear of you from the breasts (hearts) of your enemy and cast al- wahn into your hearts.” Someone asked, “O Messenger of Allah, what is al-wahn?” He replied, “Love of the world and dislike of death.” [An authentic hadith recorded by Abu Dawud and Ahmad]

Another one of the Dooms Day prediction.

 

[Vinod2070]

No such incident of imposition of Vedic culture is documented in history.Their nationalism is based on linguistic purism.They try to justify it using old Aryan Invasion theory although it has never proven to be true.The truth is Vedic culture through centuries of cultural exchanges of North and Southern India.Th whole process might have started thousands of years before Birth of Christ.In fact, South largely contributed to Indias Vedic culture.

This whole Dravidian-Aryan "conflict" is just two centuries old.

And guess who started the whole thing!

What a surprise that some non Indians should be latching on to this ridiculous concept that has almost no currency in India itself.

 

[timetravel]

For us, that loss should be considered as a write off.

As they say in finance, no point throwing good money after bad.

The Dharmic civilization has a great future ahead. We have nothing to do with Islam now.

yes right.. that loss is now a write off for India..India is doing a great deal of good progress and the Indian civilization is progressing.

I hope that the great Indian civilization prospers even more into the future

 

[Azazel]

This whole Dravidian-Aryan "conflict" is just two centuries old.

And guess who started the whole thing!

What a surprise that some non Indians should be latching on to this ridiculous concept that has almost no currency in India itself.

It was completely invented by foreigners.And it is nothing but a myth.Their may have migrations(which has evidence based on DNA study) but no evidence of any invasions what so ever.

 

[Vinod2070]

It was completely invented by foreigners.And it is nothing but a myth.Their may have migrations(which has evidence based on DNA study) but no evidence of any invasions what so ever.

Not only there was no invasion, there was no discord and no imposition.

In fact, the South has preserved the Dharmic traditions best as it was less plundered by the uncivilized barbaric nomads than the North.

 

[Bang Galore]

I would disagree with you - where is the separation of state and religion? why allow different civil laws for different religions ? The Indian constitution is nothing but an adoption of Government of India Act 1935 but whose basis is the Simon Commission report of 1928. Nehru report was prepared by Motilal for the same reason the Simon Commission report was prepared and which was much more secular in nature - single law for Indians and representation for muslims according to their percentage in various provinces to safeguard their interests. But Nehru ditched his father's vision and went in for his rival's vision.

I don't disagree with you on the different civil laws, in fact I could not agree more. It(Uniform civil code) remains a directive principle in the constitution but at the time of drafting it, it was felt that the Muslims were unsure of their position in India post partition & that this might further make them feel victimised. Bad, bad move in my opinion but that was the reason. Today, it has become shameless pandering for votes & there is no nobility of thought as was then. Mistakes were made, they were humans after all, don't however judge those great men by today's standards for politicians.

 

[Sashan]

I don't disagree with you on the different civil laws, in fact I could not agree more. It(Uniform civil code) remains a directive principle in the constitution but at the time of drafting it, it was felt that the Muslims were unsure of their position in India post partition & that this might further make them feel victimised. Bad, bad move in my opinion but that was the reason. Today, it has become shameless pandering for votes & there is no nobility of thought as was then. Mistakes were made, they were humans after all, don't however judge those great men by today's standards for politicians.

Mate - I respect all the great men(except Nehru and Gandhi) as they were idealists to the core - even I respect Jinnah for being a straight shooter - But my dislike for Gandhi and Nehru is for the following reasons. Gandhi for having introduced the religious politics in India - the reason why he supported Khilafat movement(the same reason why I respect Jinnah for his position on the Khilafat movement) - Nehru for not introducing the uniform civil code(in fact he was the assistant to his father when his father prepared those principles outlined in the Nehru report) and for not modernizing the muslim personal law when the Hindu civil law was modified and other reasons(like Kashmir issue screwup etc)

But I would not agree on causing insecurity for muslims - It is not our fault that the muslims voted in majority giving credibility to the Muslim League which stood on the plank of the partition in the 1945/1946 central and provincial elections. They made their choice that is partition. Once the partition happened, there are only two options - declare India as Hindu country or declare proper secular country. My position is considering there were other religions, it should have been second. But neither happened and the reason was Nehru.

 

[Bang Galore]

Mate - I respect all the great men(except Nehru and Gandhi) as they were idealists to the core - even I respect Jinnah for being a straight shooter - But my dislike for Gandhi and Nehru is for the following reasons. Gandhi for having introduced the religious politics in India - the reason why he supported Khilafat movement(the same reason why I respect Jinnah for his position on the Khilafat movement) - Nehru for not introducing the uniform civil code(in fact he was the assistant to his father when his father prepared those principles outlined in the Nehru report) and for not modernizing the muslim personal law when the Hindu civil law was modified and other reasons(like Kashmir issue screwup etc)

But I would not agree on causing insecurity for muslims - It is not our fault that the muslims voted in majority giving credibility to the Muslim League which stood on the plank of the partition in the 1945/1946 central and provincial elections. They made their choice that is partition. Once the partition happened, there are only two options - declare India as Hindu country or declare proper secular country. My position is considering there were other religions, it should have been second. But neither happened and the reason was Nehru.

Gandhi's greatness more than makes up for his flaws. Khilafat movement was unnecessary but Gandhi saw it as a means to an end....wrongly.

Nehru wasn't responsible solely for those charges. Of all Indian politicians, Nehru was the most democratic minded. This was not his decision alone, you can argue that he should have out his foot down & done it differently but your charge does not stick.

The rest of your post is, unfortunately where we must agree to disagree. All Indian citizens were equal in the eyes of the Constitution creators but your attitude of "my way or the highway" may not always have worked. Granted that Nehru should have made those changes in the laws since he was the only one with the stature to carry it off but we know better with hindsight what a blunder that was. It might not have appeared to be as big a problem then, they would have assumed that by now, we would have moved on to a Uniform code just like they thought about the longevity of reservation.

 

[Sashan]

Gandhi's greatness more than makes up for his flaws. Khilafat movement was unnecessary but Gandhi saw it as a means to an end....wrongly.

Nehru wasn't responsible solely for those charges. Of all Indian politicians, Nehru was the most democratic minded. This was not his decision alone, you can argue that he should have out his foot down & done it differently but your charge does not stick.

The rest of your post is, unfortunately where we must agree to disagree. All Indian citizens were equal in the eyes of the Constitution creators but your attitude of "my way or the highway" may not always have worked. Granted that Nehru should have made those changes in the laws since he was the only one with the stature to carry it off but we know better with hindsight what a blunder that was. It might not have appeared to be as big a problem then, they would have assumed that by now, we would have moved on to a Uniform code just like they thought about the longevity of reservation.

For the first highlighted, my reasoning is that it set an example for the following generations of politicians which has become to bane of the Indian politics today.(I mean communal politics).

And I agree to the second highlighted for the rest of the post especially when Nehru was the most influential person at that time but that is what separates great men like Ataturk and Nehru.

 

[Armstrong]

Dissecting the statement and explaining it will take a lot of time. I have my own definition for all of this. May be people will find it weird but it works for me. Its the values that are passed on to me from the people around me. Many are good, some are bad.

All these abstract things which you ask will itself find a meaning once you act with clear, focus mind with basic goals in mind. It works for me, may not for others.

Tuuu nahin samjhaaa !

Chall chooor...whose the lady in the avatar ?