Whatever

[Nilgiri]

@MilSpec @Nilgiri stop tagging me

Roger! Over and out!

 

[M. Sarmad]

The truth is, pakistan is not ready to have some islamic laws. Like the blasphemy law, we havent reached that stage of enlightenment yet. Islamic laws arent ment to be abused, and people are doing it. In my opinion that's worse then someone making fun of the religion. We should have those kind of laws when we actully become muslims. It's a shame people like us call our selves muslims, we are worse then the enemies of Islam. I make dua after every prayer that "ya Allah, put every Pakistani and muslim on sirat e mustaqeem" It hurts me to see muslims misusing islam for their own benefits.

I oppose Pakistan's blasphemy laws which stipulate a mandatory death penalty for all blasphemers regardless of their religion (or without taking into consideration the intent or circumstances) not because they are Islamic ........ But because they are unIslamic, and are in contradiction with clear Quranic injunctions. We, however, can agree to disagree on that

 

[Nilgiri]

I wish you could live in Bangladesh from 2001 to 2006 ; specially 2005/06 , and here some of our pakistani fellas also! Otherwise it is impossible to explain that the video link you posted , Bangladesh was much worse than that time.
And besides , I am afraid that I am unable to explain that condition with my basic level of English skill , because it will take page after page ( it can cross hundreds of pages if someone need to explain the real messy condition ) if I want to explain those days as a common man of Bangladesh who do not believe in intellectual method . Intellectual method is telling half truth and half lie . So mate maybe it's wise for me not to mess in such situation since I am unable to explain with correct expression because of my poor English language skill So I did not comment on that video .

I just think BD deserves lot better than BAL or BNP....these two should not be the choices and playing their games with each other to get sympathy from the people they abuse again and again in the end.

So responsibility lies on BD people to create something better in the end....rather than say it was better/worse from one of these parties...and that keeping one as lesser evil etc for stability sake is long term acceptable. I mean @Mage and others already saying if SHW is gone, thats it for BAL, they will be chased out of the country and fully purged. Like I don't think that will happen so quickly at all (and the time spent in that delaying will cost a whole lot...almost civil war like probably)....but can you imagine how bad this is for country of 170+ million people to even be building up such now?

This is why I don't think people should be making "for the greater good" argument to allow political party cheat to stay in power (or just establish itself as the only power to begin with)....because if people need to learn things hard way but have their voices heard at least in process....so be it! You need to give people that choice...if you always staple it and glue it forever so they can't do that....you only make it worse down the road....and even much more blood and tears will be spilled then (or in many ways worse... a slow decline like china into this moral laziness). It is catch 22 situation unfortunately...I say BD its not too late, not even close...but something has to give soon (say in the next decade).

@bluesky @Skies

Okay one more question then @Nilgiri , can you give me some basic idea about hinduism outside Bengal region ? Bengali Hindus are mostly belong to shakta branch . And some are Gaudiya vaishnava who believe that Sri Krishna is the supreme being .
So what about others ? I mean vaishnava , shaiviya , specially smartha and others ? I would really like to know , but do not find authentic article on it .
I mean which branch is more mainstream and nearer to vedas ?

The main orthodox branches that you mention are all equally close to Vedas. Vedas by itself (like a pitamah) defines the orthodox schools, they may debate with each other about this subject (who is closer)....but they are all its children.

Mostly throughout India (pragmatically) you will find vaishnavism is the largest branch in practice in mainstream fashion (given avatar hero stories/legends being very emotionally connecting with laypeople, they are very easily accessibly stories esp with the nature of invasions/conflicts in the area...whereas saivite really needs strong sanctified cultural hearth to exist in comparison). Of course a lot of saivism is inserted there as well (Esp ganesha worship, who is probably the most worshipped deity by far in India).

But I would say TN in south and Himalayas (given mountain mythology) in North are the two main exceptions regarding the Hindus there preferring Saivite doctrines/flavours of worship etc (both were able to maintain cultural hearth environment)...it plays a huge role in our underlying culture (TN most notably with the veneration of Murugan who is Shiva's son aka Skanda/kartikkeya in north and probably subsumed an earlier Tamil deity...one can say Murugan IS the one Tamil god)....but Vaishnavism coexists there too to high degree. In TN for example there are both nayanar (saivite) saints and Alvar (vaishnavite) saints...both are highly venerated by both sides.

It just depends how you in the end choose to see the nature of supreme being....as he is beyond you in the end (in fact there is a higher state of being known as the "Brahman" that is the ultimate eternal reality that the Vedas/Upanishads are ultimately about, past the different big or small names/deities/concepts etc).

The fundamental philosophical question is dualist/monoist (dvaita/advaita) inside Hinduism w.r.t this Brahman....are human souls different to it in some way or are they simply themselves part of it? Duality tends to be accepted by mostly Vaishnavite schools because it allows a clearer defined hierarchy (with their supreme lord above and seperate to anything down here etc)....whereas I would say most schools of thought in general follow Advaita. Again everything is equally close to the sruti Vedas...we all accept it is just our interpretations (hence why we debate).

 

[Nilgiri]

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/hindu-indians-marry-their-siblings.595399/page-2#post-11079734

@PakSword Manu story is equivalent of Adam and Eve. The issue here lies with if you go with notion there was original man and woman inserted onto Earth etc..what does the next 2 generations look like?

It does not mean anything to human society "downstream" as to the norms they develop when obv many more people are around and effects of deteoriation from the early perfect society (by close marriage) is quite apparent to them. Close kinship marriage in Hinduism is forbidden....much earlier in previous yugas itself...and we are in the last kali-yug right now. Some instances of cousin marriage are there, but thats about it.

@padamchen

BTW doc, how closely are parsis allowed to marry given small community?

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

I oppose Pakistan's blasphemy laws which stipulate a mandatory death penalty for all blasphemers regardless of their religion (or without taking into consideration the intent or circumstances) not because they are Islamic ........ But because they are unIslamic, and are in contradiction with clear Quranic injunctions. We, however, can agree to disagree on that

I wouldnt know because I am ignorant regarding the certain requirements but if I'm serious, it felt weird to me from the start. The death sentence anyways, it shouldve be an education or community service/fine sentence.

 

[Nilgiri]

I wouldnt know because cause I am ignorant regarding the certain requirements but if I'm serious, it felt weird to me from the start. The death sentence anyways, it shouldve be an education or community service/fine sentence.

To me if you give a very clearly unfair punishment to a crime (say death)....it just adds some credence to that crime in the first place (like you are covering up some complex/fear of yours).

Lot of people simply don't get that to begin with.

If the Koran truly stands on its own ( a divine source of knowledge), it does not need your mortally flawed "protection"....not like this anyhow (compulsion and capital punishment). To indulge in the latter...means you have some flaw in accepting the former deep down.

@M. Sarmad @Atlas

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

To me if you give a very clearly unfair punishment to a crime (say death)....it just adds some credence to that crime in the first place (like you are covering up some complex/fear of yours).

Lot of people simply don't get that to begin with.

If the Koran truly stands on its own ( a divine source of knowledge), it does not need your mortally flawed "protection"....not like this anyhow (compulsion and capital punishment). To indulge in the latter...means you have some flaw in accepting the former deep down.

@M. Sarmad @Atlas

Indeed, unfortunately islam along with all major religions have been politicized, and used to do the dirty work of a few people. They use Islam to do heinous things that would never be encouraged or enforced by it. Its actually very sad

 

[VikingRaider]

To me if you give a very clearly unfair punishment to a crime (say death)....it just adds some credence to that crime in the first place (like you are covering up some complex/fear of yours).

Lot of people simply don't get that to begin with.

If the Koran truly stands on its own ( a divine source of knowledge), it does not need your mortally flawed "protection"....not like this anyhow (compulsion and capital punishment). To indulge in the latter...means you have some flaw in accepting the former deep down.

@M. Sarmad @Atlas

Actually giving death penalty for blasphemy is not Islamic, it came from some fabricated hadith, and also it makes no sense . There are other ways to counter it if it cross it's limit . Personally I am against any type of strong punishment for blasphemy until it will be the cause of anarchy in society . And in order to avoid anarchy , surely we will confront blasphemy , but giving death penalty is our of question . I only suggest death penalty for cold blooded murderers or serial killers.

 

[padamchen]

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/hindu-indians-marry-their-siblings.595399/page-2#post-11079734

@PakSword Manu story is equivalent of Adam and Eve. The issue here lies with if you go with notion there was original man and woman inserted onto Earth etc..what does the next 2 generations look like?

It does not mean anything to human society "downstream" as to the norms they develop when obv many more people are around and effects of deteoriation from the early perfect society (by close marriage) is quite apparent to them. Close kinship marriage in Hinduism is forbidden....much earlier in previous yugas itself...and we are in the last kali-yug right now. Some instances of cousin marriage are there, but thats about it.

@padamchen

BTW doc, how closely are parsis allowed to marry given small community?

First cousins.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Nilgiri]

First cousins.

Cheers, Doc

Fair enough dude...in the US plenty of states still allow it btw.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

Of course socially its somewhat frowned upon...but I find it kind of ridiculous that certain pots (who are now springing up with all kind of genetic and health defects in 3rd party "vetted/credible" areas like the UK thanks to extensive cousin marrying) are calling kettles black...for the feelz.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Bhalo bolesen.

Amar Babar Pawan Das er gaan Bhalo lage. Amaro lage.

Yes they are both bovine meats, so similar but different too. Here in North America, there is Bison meat as well which is different but similar too.

In India, buffalo meat (called carabeef outside) is just called as beef. Cattle beef is very rare....even among muslims and christians (to live in better coexistence with Hindus....same reason Hindus + christians dont really go for pork so openly etc).

As for what Hindus consider, it depends on the Hindu. Hinduism is collection of many religions and philosophies (given Hinduism is really geographic based larger culture to begin with)...some are more mainstream, some less so....but there is no "council of nicaea" etc that delineated/canonized all this formally into a dogma.

I am born Hindu and I eat beef.

The main orthodox branches that you mention are all equally close to Vedas. Vedas by itself (like a pitamah) defines the orthodox schools, they may debate with each other about this subject (who is closer)....but they are all its children.

Mostly throughout India (pragmatically) you will find vaishnavism is the largest branch in practice in mainstream fashion (given avatar hero stories/legends being very emotionally connecting with laypeople, they are very easily accessibly stories esp with the nature of invasions/conflicts in the area...whereas saivite really needs strong sanctified cultural hearth to exist in comparison). Of course a lot of saivism is inserted there as well (Esp ganesha worship, who is probably the most worshipped deity by far in India).

But I would say TN in south and Himalayas (given mountain mythology) in North are the two main exceptions regarding the Hindus there preferring Saivite doctrines/flavours of worship etc (both were able to maintain cultural hearth environment)...it plays a huge role in our underlying culture (TN most notably with the veneration of Murugan who is Shiva's son aka Skanda/kartikkeya in north and probably subsumed an earlier Tamil deity...one can say Murugan IS the one Tamil god)....but Vaishnavism coexists there too to high degree. In TN for example there are both nayanar (saivite) saints and Alvar (vaishnavite) saints...both are highly venerated by both sides.

It just depends how you in the end choose to see the nature of supreme being....as he is beyond you in the end (in fact there is a higher state of being known as the "Brahman" that is the ultimate eternal reality that the Vedas/Upanishads are ultimately about, past the different big or small names/deities/concepts etc).

The fundamental philosophical question is dualist/monoist (dvaita/advaita) inside Hinduism w.r.t this Brahman....are human souls different to it in some way or are they simply themselves part of it? Duality tends to be accepted by mostly Vaishnavite schools because it allows a clearer defined hierarchy (with their supreme lord above and seperate to anything down here etc)....whereas I would say most schools of thought in general follow Advaita. Again everything is equally close to the sruti Vedas...we all accept it is just our interpretations (hence why we debate).

Will get back on this post.

SO you think calling someone a tomato farmer is fun?

You are one of the best; tough, but fair.

So it was really a surprise to see you handing out a negative rating for calling someone a 'tomato farmer'. It isn't a compliment, but it isn't much of an insult either; rather watery, in fact. It doesn't deserve attention; one of Nilgiri's weakest posts.

 

[RealNapster]

Khan sb har kisi ke lye itna easy ni hota na

That i agree. But afterall, this is a bloddy online forum where everyone is faceless and no matter who says what at the end , nothing matters. Cyber bullying do exist as well as trolling, but we are not kids to be afraid from them. I am more OK with the person who disagree my opinion than the one who share my thought. As that way i end the debate by “live with it”. Very easy

 

[Nilgiri]

It doesn't deserve attention; one of Nilgiri's weakest posts.

I suppose you have not really chatted all that much with Bharwana....sigh....most ppl that havent dont "get it"...

 

[padamchen]

Fair enough dude...in the US plenty of states still allow it btw.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

Of course socially its somewhat frowned upon...but I find it kind of ridiculous that certain pots (who are now springing up with all kind of genetic and health defects in 3rd party "vetted/credible" areas like the UK thanks to extensive cousin marrying) are calling kettles black...for the feelz.

Most of UK and European monarchy for hundreds of years are all.interrelated and progeny of cousin unions.

WWI was fought between first or second cousins as I recall.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes they are both bovine meats, so similar but different too. Here in North America, there is Bison meat as well which is different but similar too.

In India, buffalo meat (called carabeef outside) is just called as beef. Cattle beef is very rare....even among muslims and christians (to live in better coexistence with Hindus....same reason Hindus + christians dont really go for pork so openly etc).

As for what Hindus consider, it depends on the Hindu. Hinduism is collection of many religions and philosophies (given Hinduism is really geographic based larger culture to begin with)...some are more mainstream, some less so....but there is no "council of nicaea" etc that delineated/canonized all this formally into a dogma.

I'd rather that people thought of 'Indic' religions and of 'Indic' theologies separately. Look at it this way:

1. Three distinct religions, united by their derivation from references in the Vedas, that don't belong to any one of them but to all three; these three, worship of Vishnu, worship of Siva and worship of Shakti, HAVE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT methodologies for achieving salvation. That is a strong argument for considering them distinct religions.
2. These three, Vaishnavism, Saivism and Shakti-worship, are within what is known as Hinduism, but there is also the other three, Buddhism, Jainism and, in parts, Sikhism.
3. Within these three, there are different ways of speculating about the nature of divinity: Advaita (monism), Visishtadvaita and Dvaita; these are particularly strong in the south, although they have huge influence all over India. If you want, the nature of these speculations can be elaborated separately, not here, not now.

YES!! There is google w o r l d defense forum if you couldn't find it tell me i will find a way to link you to it.

YOU are a ****-***-*******.
Where's your Wehrmacht series?