“Spontanious Ahimsa”

September 27, 2016

Hi friend!

But the word “Ahimsa” as is used like a term does not exist in Veda. Does it? Please
Regards

Like

Vedas are not eternal. Are they?

September 5, 2016

I had a discussion on my favorite discussion forum  <http://www.religiousforums.com/forums/religious-debates.15/&gt; , in the thread <Vedic Period, Pre-Vedic Period and Post-Vedic Period>.

Aug 26, 2016#53

shivsomashekhar said: 

Unlike the Quran, the Veda is accepted as eternal, without a beginning. So, the questions of language, location, time and authorship become irrelevant.

Paarsurrey wrote:

Does Veda claim it? Please quote from Veda/Yajurveda
Regards

Aug 26, 2016#55

shivsomashekhar said: 

The Veda does not have a start date to it – nor an end date. Hence, it is eternal.
You will have to read up on Indian epistemology and the concept of apaurusheyatva (unauthoredness) to understand the concept. Without this, you are just wasting your time on this topic.

Paarsurrey wrote:

Sorry, the claim and reason must be from the Veda itself, if it is a living Scripture, else it is already dead as happened to the Sanskrit language in which it is supposed to be originally. Please quote from the Veda/Yajurveda.

Regards

Aug 26, 2016#57

shivsomashekhar said: 

Nope. You do not understand how it works. You have to move past your simple world to understand epistemology and unauthoredness. Without doing that, you are trying to view Hinduism through your semitic lens and are just wasting your time.

Paarsurrey wrote:

I am told that Hinduism is not a religion, it is a conglomerate of many religions. My interest is in Veda/Yajurveda, not in Hinduism religions which are not even mentioned in Veda/Yajurveda. Does Veda/Yajurveda mention Hinduism? Please quote from Veda/Yajurveda if it mentions Hinduism. Kindly
Regards

Aug 27, 2016#59

shivsomashekhar said: 

The Veda does not have a start date to it – nor an end date. Hence, it is eternal.You will have to read up on Indian epistemology and the concept of apaurusheyatva (unauthoredness) to understand the concept. Without this, you are just wasting your time on this topic.

paarsurrey said:

In that sense every inanimate thing has no start date or an end date inscribed/engraved on it. So what is the peculiarity of Veda, then? Please
Anybody, please
Regards

Aug 27, 2016#60

shivsomashekhar said: 

The Veda does not have a start date to it – nor an end date. Hence, it is eternal.

You will have to read up on Indian epistemology and the concept of apaurusheyatva (unauthoredness) to understand the concept. Without this, you are just wasting your time on this topic.

paarsurrey said:

One may like to read post#56 in another thread but very much related to this one. Please do read it as it proves that Veda/Yajurveda was never eternal. Right? Please
Regards

Aug 27, 2016#56

Aupmanyav said: 

This hymn is a combined effort of poets who belong to one genealogical line, the Vasishthas (except for the last two). Upamanyu’s father’s name is also included in the list (Vyaghrapada). Mrilika, from the same family, seems to have been a woman poet. But which verse was added by whom is not mentioned in the list. It is possible that the verses were written over a long period of time (even centuries) and not at the same time. There is no way of knowing what is not mentioned.

“Maitravaruni Vasishtha, Indrapramati Vasishtha, Vrishanag Vasishtha, Manyu Vasishtha, Upamanyu Vasishtha, Vyaghrapada Vasishtha, Sakti Vasishtha, Karnasruta Vasishtha, Mrilika Vasishtha, Shukra Vasishtha along with Parashara Shakta and Kutsa Angirasa.”

paarsurrey said:

So, you mean that Veda/Yajurveda is not at all “eternal” as is claimed here (in this forum but in another thread) , its contents have been continuously been added/increased, period after periods and now nobody knows exactly who wrote which verse, that speaks of its volume been increased from one Volume to several over time. Right? Please
Regards

Aug 27, 2016#59

Aupmanyav said: 

I suppose by this time you know that Hindus may have different views about things. As I have said in the last post that I do not believe that Vedas are ‘Word of God’ and there have been additions, and there are hymns which have been lost during the thousands of years. But then, I am a rare bird, an athiest. My views do not represent the whole of Hinduism. Most Hindus do accept Vedas as eternal and unchangeable, even through the periodic destruction and regeneration of the universe. No change whatsoever, no abrogations in like Quran, no change of God’s mind. Not that at one time, he wanted people to face Jerusalem during Salah and later directed people to face Mecca.

paarsurrey said:

Never-mind about Hinduism, they have grown only in the Post-Vedic period, no Hinduism existed in the Vedic-Period. Right,everybody!? Please
Regards

Aug 27, 2016#60

atanu said: 

Quran, which speaks of Allah, was revealed and written around 600Ce. Therefore, Allah, is not eternal. Yes. Thanks. Okay?

Veda, the Word (shabda -Om) is aupaurusheya (not of human origin). It pervades the three periods of time and is situated transcendentally as the very Brahman. It is revealed to sages, who too arepresentas our mind-senses.

paarsurrey said:

Vedas were never eternal which is evidenced from the additions and subtractions that have taken place in them and also from the portions that have lost. There was no promise from Brahman for their being secured and protected. Please read post#58above that will benefit one.
Further, the very first, HYMN 1:

2 Worthy is Agni to be praised by living as by ancient seers.
He shall bring hitherward the Gods.
http://www.sanskritweb.net/rigveda/griffith.pdf
There were seers in the Pre-Vedic period who had died and never compiled any Vedas for their progeny. The living ones all related to the Vedic-Period.
Veda/Rigveda/Yajurveda were never eternal. Right? Please
Was Agni ,mentioned above, a god of the Atheism people ? Please

Regard

Aug 28, 2016#63

Aupmanyav said:

You have been discussing Hinduism all along and now you say ‘never mind Hinduism’!Vedas are but a part of Hinduism.What otherwise have you been discussing? Post-Vedic means when the Vedas were canonized, after which no change has taken place. All changes, if any, happened in the Vedic period. Hinduism existed in India even before the time when Aryans came in. It is like the sea existed before the river water drained into it.

paarsurrey said:

One is simply wrong, Hinduism never existed in the Vedic-Period:

Hinduism (n.)
blanket term for “polytheism of India,” 1786, fromHindu+-ism.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Hinduism

It is strictly speaking not even a name of any specific religion, just a blanket term, that is why even some Atheism people use it as a cover. Veda does not support Atheism or any of the people who take cover under this blanket. Please
Regards

paarsurrey said:

One is simply wrong, Hinduism never existed in the Vedic-Period:

Hinduism (n.)

blanket term for “polytheism of India,” 1786, fromHindu+-ism.http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Hinduism

It is strictly speaking not even a name of any specific religion, just a blanket term, that is why even some Atheism people use it as a cover. Veda does not support Atheism or any of the people who take cover under this blanket. Please

Regards

paarsurrey said:

Anybody who lived in the basin of the river Sindh was described as such, it does not describe any religion but people of whatever religion living in the region would be described as such. The same is about India, it is from the river Indus another description of Sindh:

Athi S Sundar, Greek/Sanskrit Etymology,with reference to Tamil is my area of special interest.

Stephen Knapp says ” We must remember that the term “hindu” is not even Sanskrit. Numerous scholars say it is not found in any of the Vedic literature. So how can such a name truly represent the Vedic path or culture? And without the Vedic literature, there is no basis for “Hinduism.”

Most scholars feel that the name “Hindu” was developed by outsiders, invaders who could not pronounce the name of the Sindhu River properly. According to Sir Monier Williams, the Sanskrit lexicographer, you cannot find an indigenous root for the words Hindu or India…..

Another view of the source of the name Hindu is based on a derogatory meaning. It is said that, “Moreover, it is correct that this name [Hindu] has been given to the original Aryan race of the region by Muslim invaders to humiliate them. In Persian, says our author, the word means slave, …. ”

About The Name “Hindu”

The real root of the word is from the Tamil word ‘Sindhu'(சிந்து ) which means ‘sea,river,water,sindhu river,sindhu country,triplet verse ……’சிந்து Tamil Agaraathi, tamil-english dictionary, english words, tamil words

So since Tamil was the language of ancient India and spoken in Indus delta,the people of the area were called ‘Sindhus’ which turned to ‘Hindus’ to Persians and Indus> India to thePage on westerners.itmay be noted that the word ‘Hindu’ is not attested even once in any Vedas or other scriptures .So it is not a religious term but a geographical term only.https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-etymology-of-the-word-Hindu

Regards

Aug 28, 2016#67

Aupmanyav said:

Well, whatever you choose to call it, it still existed in India before the coming of Aryans. Religious views have existed in all societies since the time of Neanderthals. .. Invaders or traders. We used to trade with Gulf, Iran and through the Silk Route with China and countries in West. This was known as “Uttarapath” (Northern Highway) in Hindu Scriptures. As for invaders, you need to remember that the Maurya empire extended to nearly whole of Afghanistan, Kabul had Hindu kings till 1,000 AD, and the Sikh ruler Ranjit Singh marched into Kabul in 1838. So, boundaries change with time in history, nothing new in this.

paarsurrey said:

Please confine to Veda/Yajurveda from Veda.

Nothing in your post has any references from the Veda/Yajurveda. Right? Please

Regards

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

paarsurrey says:One may join the discussion in the religious forum or in this thread, the topic is still open and may be discussed to find the Truth that is everybody right to find.

Thanks and regards

Vedas are not eternal: A detailed Analysis

August 26, 2016

TruthaboutHinduism

Written by Ibn Muhammad

Majority of  the Hindu and Non Hindu scholars of Vedas accept Vedas to be of a finite date. Only a minority of Hindus especially the Arya Samajis claim that the Vedas are eternal and beginningless. This they try to explain only by mere conjecture and some philosophical gymnastics. As far as the tangible evidence is concerned, there is no reason to believe in this myth of Vedas being eternal. We will  analyse this topic  from many angles and thus build a coherent view that Vedas are of a finite date. When the finite age of the Vedas is established, it will bring to rest many false theories and questions that are built on this supposition that Vedas are eternal.


View original post 2,299 more words

Are humans born with a default atheistic position?

April 12, 2016
Post#466

Wonderful!
Thanks and regards

Post #467
Post #468
viole said:
You, ArtieE and Ouroboros like this.
ReligiousForums.com
Thread: “Humans are born as atheists”
Post: #468

The mute scientific method!

April 6, 2016
Post #175

paarsurrey

I never said that religion is in subordination to science. I always say that religion and science are in different domains, they don’t necessarily contradict one another. Science deals the material and physical domains, religion deals in moral and spiritual domains.
The science deals the temporary, religion deals the lasting truth.
Science deals the relative, religion deals the absolute truth.
Science did not create any word or any iota/atom in the universe, it only borrowed words and symbols or integers without which it would have been mute and have been incapacitated to do anything.
Right?
Regards

ReligiousForums.com

Thread: “Was Muhammad The Greatest Moral Example?”

Post:  #175

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-muhammad-the-greatest-moral-example.185227/page-9#post-4702742

Name Peter and its reality

April 6, 2016
Post#424

Neither Jesus gave him the name Peter nor Simon himself changed it:
“Jesus gave Saint Peter (whose given name was Simon) the name Kephas or Cephas meaning “stone” inAramaic.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_(given_name)
It is a usual trick of Christianity, names are never translated from the original language.
One may like to see the following cassette from YouTube :
Muhammed in the bible – Ahmed Deedat 2 of 11

Please set the timer @8:24 for the name “Peter” and its reality.
Regards

ReligiousForums.com

Thread:”Ask a Catholic”

Post:#424

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/ask-a-catholic.185372/page-22#post-4701960

Was Islam spread by the sword?

April 5, 2016
Post#3374
  1. A country could go to war for many political and other reasons, not necessarily for conversion to one’s religion.
  2. People don’t change their religion to the religion of the invaders, it is an altogether different phenomenon not linked with the battles or wars.
  3. Alexander conquered a large part of Asia, nobody changed their religion because of it.
  4. When I quote from Wikipedia, I don’t change anything written there even if it is against my religion because I could argue against those things reasonably as I am doing now.
  5. If people of Cyprus could convert to Islam peacefully now as I have given examples when there is no war going on there for conversion to Islam, that amply proves that it had happened at that time in the past also peacefully.
  6. The invaders didn’t remain there all the time since invasion. If people of Cyprus converted to Islam under sword, they could have reverted to their previous faith anytime later when there was no sword on their head.

What kept them steadfast on Islam? It is the truth of Islam/Quran/Muhammad that bound them and glued them to this faith. Right?
Regards

ReligiousForums.com

Thread: “Was Islam spread by the sword?”

Post:#3374

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-islam-spread-by-the-sword.163547/page-169#post-4701242

Paul faked/forged/copied the idea of dying on the Cross and the resurrection to invent a god for “Christianity

March 30, 2016
Post #31
paarsurrey

Paarsurrey wrote:

So Paul faked/forged/copied the idea of dying on the Cross and the resurrection to invent a god for “Christianity”:

This religion* , cloaked in mystery and secrecy, has captivated the imaginations of scholars for generations. Many facts discovered sheds vital light on the cultural dynamics that led to the rise of Christianity. The National Geographic Society’s book “Great Religions of the World,” page 309 writes; “By Jesus’ time, East and West had mingled here for three centuries. Down columns of boulevards walked Roman soldiersloyal to the Persian god Mithras.” Mithras was a Persian deity. He was also the most widely venerated god in the Roman Empire at the time of Jesus. The Catholic Encyclopedia as well as the early Church Fathers found this religion of Mithras very disturbing, as there are so many similarities between the two religions, as follows:
1) Hundreds of years before Jesus, according to the Mithraic religion, three Wise Men of Persia came to visit the baby savior-god Mithra, bring him gifts of gold, myrrh and frankincense.
2) Mithra was born on December 25 as told in the “Great Religions of the World”, page 330; “…it was the winter solstice celebrated by ancients as the birthday of Mithraism’s sun god”.
3) According to Mithraism, before Mithra died on a cross, he celebrated a “Last Supper with his twelve disciples, who represented the twelve signs of the zodiac.
4) After the death of Mithra, his body was laid to rest in a rock tomb.
5) Mithra had a celibate priesthood.
6) Mithra ascended into heaven during the spring (Passover) equinox (the time when the sun crosses the equator making night and day of equal length).

http://noahide-ancient-path.co.uk/i…iours/mithras/2013/07/mithras-christianity-2/
*Paul’s invented “Christianity”.

Regards

ReligiousForums.com

Thread: “Empty Tomb / Empty Coffin”.

Post: #31

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/empty-tomb-empty-coffin.185566/page-2#post-4693185

God took the responsibility of securing the text of Quran, verbal as well as in writing form and also its meaning

March 29, 2016
Post #244

With the advent of Muhammad, humanity took a turn and a new era ushered in, G-d took the responsibility of guarding the text of Word of His Revelation and it meaning, so those whose conscience is lacking something, they could benefit from it in all times. This is a peculiarity of Islam/Quran/Muhammad not found in other religions, their scriptures and their founders.

Regards
#223

ReligiousForums.com

Thread: “Did you read Quran neutrally?”

Post:  #244

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/did-you-read-quran-neutrally.89002/page-13#post-4692083

Did Moses Really Write the Torah?

March 22, 2016
Post #64

Torah was mostly a verbal transmission and later, rather very late that it was known to be a book:

Did Moses Really Write the Torah?

“It was only once Judea fell under Greek culture that a book market began to develop and the author began to be of importance. The first Hebrew book to state clearly who its author was is the Wisdom of Sirach, written in the beginning of the second century BCE by a Jewish scribe named Ben Sira, well after the Greek conquest.
Thus an identity for the writer of the Pentateuch became sought. But how did the misunderstanding that it was Moses arose? That brings us to the second change – a semantic one.”
read more: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/.premium-1.657492

A book, therefore, has not necessarily to be bound in covers (of leather etc). Is it?

Regards

ReligiousForums.com

Thread: “How does (did) one know who has (had) authored a book?”

Post #64

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/how-does-did-one-know-who-has-had-authored-a-book.185390/page-4#post-4683039