ఈ సనాతన ధర్మం ఏంటి?

[galiraju]

Just now, Spartan said:

 

Varna System was defined in Manusmruti ---  Not Sanatana Dharma.

Sanatana Dharma said you need to be clean to maintain healthy life. Not segregate people who clean your filth..

both are two different things.

But most people argue that Sanatana Dharma includes Manusmriti too. Although Sanatana Dharma does not preach untouchability or oppression, a simple document that may or may not have been followed eons ago opens the doors to criticism by other organizations that tend to prey on uneducated people. So, Hinduism lo boochini chupinchali anate Manusmiriti chupistaru. 

[Ara_Tenkai]

Also Hindu is not even a word!! Sanskrit lo word Sindhu undi and greeks and persians vallaki taggattu Indu and Hindu ga marcharu!! Hindu , India and  Hinduism!! Google it brah…

[galiraju]

1 minute ago, Ara_Tenkai said:

Also Hindu is not even a word!! Sanskrit lo word Sindhu undi and greeks and persians vallaki taggattu Indu and Hindu ga marcharu!! Hindu , India and  Hinduism!! Google it brah…

This! Indeed, the concept of India and Hinduism is inseparable.

[JackSeal]

17 minutes ago, galiraju said:

I think it is a way to distinguish Hinduism from other organized religions. Since Hinduism has no single head, organization, or book. So by calling it Dharma and thus trying to prevent fitting it into the Western template of "religion." 

As swami vivekananda said modern day hinduism is based on vedas and not based on ancient dharmas.

[JackSeal]

13 minutes ago, Spartan said:

 

Manusmriti lo mention chesaru ani undi kaani....Manusmriti did not define the Sanatana Dharma...

Sanatana dharma doesnt prevent you from eating any animal... thats way of life to survive. dantlo astonishing em ledu.

 

 

Evadki kavalsinattu vadu anvainchukoni dhanni sanatana dharma antunnaru epudu. ---  idi correct.
    Hindus say they follow Sanatana Dharma.. Critics say.. Sanatana Dharma is Hinduism..

 

Today, Sanatana Dharma is associated only with Hinduism. In current-day usage, the term sanatana dharma is diminished and used to emphasize a "traditional” or sanatani ("eternalist") outlook in contrast to the socio-political Hinduism embraced by movements such as the Arya Samaj. In sharp contrast to the efforts by Lahore Sanatana Dharma Sabha to preserve the Hindu tradition against the onslaught of reform, now it is being stressed that Sanatana Dharma cannot be rigid, it has to be inclusive without excluding the best and totality of knowledge to guide the karmic process, especially as Sanatana has no beginning and no end.

 

సనాతన ధర్మం అంటూ ఒకటి ఉంటే , దానికి ప్రామాణికం అయిన గ్రంధాలు ఎంటి?  When I asked this question you referenced manusmriti.

[JackSeal]

16 minutes ago, galiraju said:

As far as I know, India is one of the largest exporters of beef. Also, desivali cows are only not touchable for consumption anukunta. But masses ni control cheyatam kastam

When manusmriti was written or even during vivekananda time I belive its all desivali cows. So beef eating was not wrong then why it is wrong now ?

[galiraju]

3 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

As swami vivekananda said modern day hinduism is based on vedas and not based on ancient dharmas.

Another problem the other religions have with Hinduism is doesn't shy away from discussion and inquiry. I heard that Vedas contains elements that encourage inquiry and discussion. 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Spartan said:

 

Varna System was defined in Manusmruti ---  Not Sanatana Dharma.

Sanatana Dharma said you need to be clean to maintain healthy life. Not segregate people who clean your filth..

both are two different things.

Those who criticize  whatever is said in Hindu scriptures centuries ago should realize that it is completely stupid to view scriptures by today's standards or society. Until recently in the US, there was segregation based on skin color. They had different water fountains, different schools, sun-down clause, burnin down Black churches, burning down black wall street and many more instances of cruelty just because of a difference in skin color. 

Needless to say how cruel the slavery in the US was & all these things happened from roughly 1700s to 1966. 

Compare these attrocities to whatever objectionable content(by today's standards) mentioned in Hindu scriptures which were written in 1 or 2 AD. 

Then we have the British Empire & countless genocides & attrocities. Worst of all, Islamic invasion in India. 

Even now, Hindu scriptures stand out in the most humane form possible when compared with Abrahamic religions. 

Above all, for Hinduism to even reform, the country came back to the Hindus as recently as 1947. So Hindus lost India for more than 1000 years & lost all its wealth. (Although the Indian Emperors, Kings & Queens never probably ruled India in its unified form as it is today except for few exceptions like Ashoka for example, a supposedly peace-ful Buddhist who committed countless attrocties which are well-documented)

 

[galiraju]

During that period, I had no firsthand knowledge. Instead, I learned from listening to my elders and their discussions, which led me to believe that cows were consumed after their natural death. It's important to note that cows were not intentionally slaughtered for consumption. Additionally, from a scientific perspective, historical evidence suggests that horses were consumed during the Indus Valley Civilization, as I came across in an article published approximately 5-10 years ago.

[JackSeal]

6 minutes ago, rushmore said:

Those who criticize  whatever is said in Hindu scriptures centuries ago should realize that it is completely stupid to view scriptures by today's standards or society. Until recently in the US, there was segregation based on skin color. They had different water fountains, different schools, sun-down clause, burnin down Black churches, burning down black wall street and many more instances of cruelty just because of a difference in skin color. 

Needless to say how cruel the slavery in the US was & all these things happened from roughly 1700s to 1966. 

Compare these attrocities to whatever objectionable content(by today's standards) mentioned in Hindu scriptures which were written in 1 or 2 AD. 

Then we have the British Empire & countless genocides & attrocities. Worst of all, Islamic invasion in India. 

Even now, Hindu scriptures stand out in the most humane form possible when compared with Abrahamic religions. 

Above all, for Hinduism to even reform, the country came back to the Hindus as recently as 1947. So Hindus lost India for more than 1000 years & lost all its wealth. (Although the Indian Emperors, Kings & Queens never probably ruled India in its unified form as it is today except for few exceptions like Ashoka for example, a supposedly peace-ful Buddhist who committed countless attrocties which are well-documented)

 

You are comparing atrocities with other religion individuals with vedas.

There are countless atrocities by hindus on buddhists, thats how buddhism completely wiped out from India.

Show any hindu temple as old as ajanta ellora or amaravathi ?

[Spartan]

12 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

సనాతన ధర్మం అంటూ ఒకటి ఉంటే , దానికి ప్రామాణికం అయిన గ్రంధాలు ఎంటి?  When I asked this question you referenced manusmriti.

@JackSeal   it was mentioned in Manusmruti and Bhagadgita ani cheppina..

ave Sanatana Dharma ani kaadu.

[galiraju]

2 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

You are comparing atrocities with other religion individuals with vedas.

There are countless atrocities by hindus on buddhists, thats how buddhism completely wiped out from India.

Show any hindu temple as old as ajanta ellora or amaravathi ?

Mundheswari Devi Temple 3 BC does that work?

[Spartan]

 

7 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

You are comparing atrocities with other religion individuals with vedas.

There are countless atrocities by hindus on buddhists, thats how buddhism completely wiped out from India.

Show any hindu temple as old as ajanta ellora or amaravathi ?

Yoganarasimha temple in Nagamangala Taluk, Karnataka, the idol has been worshipped for more than 2500 years, there is a 3000 years old tree fossil inside the temple premises.

[Allasaani_Peddana]

1 hour ago, JackSeal said:

గత కొన్నేళ్లనుంచి ఈ మధ్యకాలంలోనే హిందూమతానికి పర్యాయపదంగా ఈ సనాతన పదం వాడుతున్నారు.

Definitely not a society of flat earthers  and not a monolithic institution.  Have the courage to teach evolutionary theory and heliocentric model without having to worry about neighborhood priest inciting violence.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

You are comparing atrocities with other religion individuals with vedas.

There are countless atrocities by hindus on buddhists, thats how buddhism completely wiped out from India.

Show any hindu temple as old as ajanta ellora or amaravathi ?

Buddhism, which originated in India, gradually dwindled and was replaced by approximately the 12th century.

According to Lars Fogelin, this was "not a singular event, with a singular cause; it was a centuries-long process."

The decline of Buddhism in the Indian subcontinent coincides with the spread of Islam in that part of the world, especially due to the Islamic invasions that occurred in the late 12th century. Another factor was invasions of north India by various groups such as Indo-Iranian Huns, Hephthalite Huns, Alchon Huns, Turco-Mongols, Arabs, and Persians, and subsequent Islamic destruction of Buddhist temples, shrines, and institutions, such as the Taxila and Nalanda universities, and religious persecutions perpetrated by Muslim invaders. Religious competition with other Indic religions and later Islam were also important factors. The Persecution by Alchon Huns in 5th century and subsequent destruction of Buddhist centres caused the decline of Buddhism in the northwestern regions of the Indian subcontinent. A similar process occurred in northeast, where Islamization of Bengal and demolitions of Nalanda, Vikramasila and Odantapuri by Muhammad bin Bakhtiyar Khalji, a general of the Delhi Sultanate are thought to have severely weakened the practice of Buddhism in East India where it previously received strong patronage under the Pala Empire.

From 986 CE, the Turks started raiding northwest India from Afghanistan, plundering western India early in the eleventh century. Forced conversions to Islam were made, and Buddhist images smashed, due to the Islamic dislike of idolatry. Indeed in India, the Islamic term for an 'idol' became 'budd'.

The Buddhist university of Nalanda was mistaken for a fort because of the walled campus. The Buddhist monks who had been slaughtered were mistaken for Brahmins according to Minhaj-i-Siraj.
(Congress dogs often claim Islamic reign in India was peaceful)

The walled town, the Odantapuri monastery, was also conquered by his forces. Sumpa basing his account on that of Śākyaśrībhadra who was at Magadha in 1200, states that the Buddhist university complexes of Odantapuri and Vikramshila were also destroyed and the monks massacred. Forces attacked the north-western regions of the Indian subcontinent many times. Many places were destroyed and renamed. For example, Odantapuri's monasteries were destroyed in 1197 by Muhammad bin Bakhtiyar Khilji and the town was renamed. Likewise, Vikramashila was destroyed by the forces of Muhammad bin Bakhtiyar Khilji around 1200.[86] Many Buddhist monks fled to Nepal, Tibet, and South India to avoid the consequences of war.Tibetan pilgrim Chöjepal (1179–1264), who arrived in India in 1234, had to flee advancing troops multiple times, as they were sacking Buddhist sites.

The north-west parts of the Indian subcontinent fell to Islamic control, and the consequent take over of land holdings of Buddhist monasteries removed one source of necessary support for the Buddhists, while the economic upheaval and new taxes on laity sapped the laity support of Buddhist monks.[71] Not all monasteries were destroyed by the invasions (Somapuri, Lalitagiri, Udayagiri), but since these large Buddhist monastic complexes had become dependent on the patronage of local authorities, when this patronage dissipated, they were abandoned by the sangha.

In the north-western parts of medieval India, the Himalayan regions, as well as regions bordering central Asia, Buddhism once facilitated trade relations, states Lars Fogelin. With the Islamic invasion and expansion, and central Asians adopting Islam, the trade route-derived financial support sources and the economic foundations of Buddhist monasteries declined, on which the survival and growth of Buddhism was based. The arrival of Islam removed the royal patronage to the monastic tradition of Buddhism, and the replacement of Buddhists in long-distance trade by the eroded the related sources of patronage.

Decline under Islamic rule

Ruins of Vikramashila, it was one of the most important centers of learning, during the Pala Empire, established by Emperor Dharmapala. Atiśa, the renowned pandita, is sometimes listed as a notable abbot.[92]

After the conquest, Buddhism largely disappeared from most of India, surviving in the Himalayan regions and south India.[5][24][93] Abul Fazl stated that there was scarcely any trace of Buddhists left. When he visited Kashmir in 1597, he met with a few old men professing Buddhism, however, he "saw none among the learned".

According to Randall Collins, Buddhism was already declining in India by the 12th century, but with the pillage by invaders it nearly became extinct in India in the 1200s.[93] In the 13th century, states Craig Lockard, Buddhist monks in India escaped to Tibet to escape Islamic persecution;[95] while the monks in western India, states Peter Harvey, escaped persecution by moving to south Indian Hindu kingdoms that were able to resist the power.

Brief accounts and the one eye-witness account of Dharmasmavim in wake of the conquest during the 1230s talk about abandoned viharas being used as camps by the Turukshahs. Later historical traditions such as Taranatha's are mixed with legendary materials and summarised as "the Turukshah conquered the whole of Magadha and destroyed many monasteries and did much damage at Nalanda, such that many monks fled abroad" thereby bringing about a demise of Buddhism with their destruction of the Viharas.

While the sacked the Buddhists viharas, the temples and stupas with little material value survived. After the collapse of monastic Buddhism, Buddhist sites were abandoned or reoccupied by other religious orders. In the absence of viharas and libraries, scholastic Buddhism and its practitioners migrated to the Himalayas, China and Southeast Asia. The devastation of agriculture also meant that many laypersons were unable to support Buddhist monks, who were easily identifiable and also vulnerable. As the Sangha died out in numerous areas, it lacked the ability to revive itself without more monks to perform ordinations. Peter Harvey concludes:

Between the alien, with their doctrinal justification of "holy war" to spread the faith, and Hindus, closely identified with Indian culture and with a more entrenched social dimension, the Buddhists were squeezed out of existence. Lay Buddhists were left with a folk form of Buddhism, and gradually merged into Hinduism, or converted to Islam. Buddhism, therefore, died out in all but the fringes of its homeland, though it had long since spread beyond it.

Fogelin also notes that some elements of the Buddhist sangha moved to the Himalayas, China, and Southeast Asia, or they may have reverted to secular life or become wandering ascetics. In this environment, without monasteries and scholastic centers of their own, Buddhist ascetics and laypersons were eventually absorbed into the religious life of medieval India.