Most Hindus don’t understand this (Sikhs do even less).
Neither Sanatan nor Sikhi is “monotheistic.” Monotheism is an ideology of supremacy, the elevation of a petty tribal god to the pretense of the Universal. It is ignorant tribalism universalized.
हिंदी में “”मॉनॉथीइज़म “ का अनुवाद है एक ईश्वरबाद। यह ईसाई धारा पर आधारित ग़लत अनुवाद है। ईश्वर तो एक ही है, इसमें विवाद क्या। मॉनॉथीइज़म का अनुवाद होना चाहिए “एक दैविकता”। एक ही देव है। लेकिन ऐसा कोई देव नहीं है केवल राक्षस वृत्ति है, हरिणयकश्यप जैसी।
A cow is more real than the imaginary "creator god." Kinder too. Definitely gentler and more worthy of respect than the cruel, vindictive, jealous and insecure imaginary "creator" throwing people into "hell."
Lol, your fantasy "creator" can't throw anyone into hell. Eternal hell and heaven (with whiskey and sex with "virgins") are useful for motivating barbaric male armies but little else. I don't worry about Allah, but his "believers" who create hell on earth.
Oh yes, CAPITAL LETTERS. You've made me a BELIEVER. How could I doubt your CREATOR. 😏
Wake up from these childish ideas of some "god" tormenting you hell and in heaven. Your mind does that here and now. Don't waste your life in silly rules and fears.
The "Allah" who had a "last prophet" certainly doesn't exist. It comes from a very limited sense of time. Why would this "Allah" stop sending prophets? There are certainly plenty of confused Muslims fighting each other today, they could use another one.
And as far as slavery goes, this "last prophet for all times" names 70 acts that are sinful, but not enslaving other human beings. In fact, Islamic countries were last to outlaw slavery, that too under pressure from the West.
Lol, why did Allah send such a confusing "last message" that innumerable sects fight over interpreting it correctly,. Shouldn't you ask for a new prophet to fix that?
Lol, really? Then why would there be so many schools of Islamic jurisprudence and so many contradictory fatwas and mullahs fighting each other. ("Music is haram", "music is not haram" ...)
I'm glad you agree that I'm representing your ideology accurately. This thread was actually for moronic Hindus who don't get that intolerance is inherent in your ideology and think that singing "Ishwar allah tere naam" will fix it. But others jumped in.
"Worship" is an Abrahamic concept "Pooja" (पूजा) is not worship. It means to revere and respect, to pay attention to. We even do "shastra pooja", pooja of our tools.
In Abrahamism "worship" is reserved for the "true god", otherwise it is "shirk."
Lol "na tasya pratima asti" means, of which there is no image. Like saying "love is inexpressible." That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with expressing love. Quite different from the psychotic "I'll roast you in hell if you try to make an image."
It is not "33 million gods." It is about 33 types of energies, but let that be.
The world is diverse. Is there only one type of flower or fruit or tree? Diversity is joyous, natural. Why would the Universal Consciousness not express in many Divine forms?
Learn to think for yourself. Don't have to keep repeating with the Maulvis say, keep trying to fit everything to justify one "Holy Book." Set aside the dogmas drilled into you and you'll realize what I'm saying is simple and natural. 😌 Like diversity is.
You need to sharpen on your understanding more than one primitive "creator" god. Do you know what "Advaita" means? And who is this "creator." What does "he" create, out of what?
That happens only in fantasy or kiddie magic shows. Nothing is created out of nothing. Think scientifically, not from a fantasy of an imaginary "being." What did this "Allah" create the world out of, and what is the need for a "creator" at all?
If the creator just popped up why can't the universe just pop up too? 😏 The creator has to be an incredibly complex being no, to create the universe. How did "he" just pop up? And if "he" did why not the universe.
The universe could also always exist, doesn't need to be "created." No "supreme being" to create things by magic is needed. And where does this "supreme being" live btw, can we spot him with a telescope?
When is this “Judgment Day” when Allah will sort people into heaven-hell and Earth will be destroyed (is it only Earth or the entire universe, did Allah tell?) So many poor sods are rotting in graves waiting for this, at least share the date.
These are Christian/Abrahamic theological descriptions, they have nothing to do with Indic thought. Rather we need to use our terminology to explain them. Monotheism/polytheism are both nonsensical.
Oh I’m not worried . But shouldn’t you be worried?
Sounds like a scam where you pay now and the delivery doesn’t even have a date. If a company did this they’d be sued for deceptive marketing. But calli it “religion” and scare people to “believe.”
Arre bhai, on that date, on that date kar rahe ho, date to bata do.
You spend your whole life following minute rules all in preparation for "judgement day" but you don't even have a date for it? I'd be pretty worried that it's a scam if I were you.
No, it just means that you are uncomfortable with infinity. This is why it took hundreds of years before Arabs and Europeans could understand the mathematics of zero and infinity from India. Still don't quite get it.
Lol, there is nothing to challenge in that claim. It is simply an assumption. The universe can be infinite. No "first cause" is needed. The Nasidaya sukta is much more elegant.
This making "Allah/God" logically contingent is cognitively uninteresting.
There is much to be grateful for, to our parents, to the Universe. But I don’t need to believe in this wrathful Allah and a 7th century Holy Book for that.
Making the story of one tribe to the “universal god” for all people is the issue.
If you admit of translatability it is not a problem. Problem comes from exclusivism. For me it can be Rama for you Allah. When you seek to impose one set of rules, one prophet, that is the problem.
Tulsidas has a long discourse on that. Ram is a name for the Universal Consciousness and also of the one who was born and died. One who was born and died embodies the Universal as an avatar.
But if Allah is not a specific god Indian Muslims can use the word “Bhagwan”, no?
Religious imperialism of monotheism. Christians use the strategy of "inculturation" to appropriate native symbols in India e.g.. But the Islamists who claim "Allah is simply Arabic for God" would block its use for non-Muslims. Monopoly power struggles.
Funny thread. Accuses me of ad hominems, when I didn't attack anyone personally, only the concepts of monotheism. However he starts his entire thread with an ad hominem.🤣 One can't really think for oneself when one twists into pretzels defending a dogma.
Found this wonderful article by Prof. Ravi Ravindra who had originally coined the term "my-theism" for monotheism. The problem with monotheism is the claim of the "monopoly on truth" which each monotheism has, denying others their own path and experience.
Each monotheism is a "truth claim" combined with a "god claim." Of course, each of the truth claims contradicts the other. Islam contradicts Christianity and its claim of Jesus as "Son of God" and "Savior", Christianity rejects Islam's claim it is "God's revelation" and so on.
Each truth claim is: 1. Monopolistic. One and only one can be true. 2. With divine sanction, so human beings have no ability to change it. 3. Totalitarian. It seeks to subordinate all aspects of individual life to this truth claim.
This creates "camp followers" not seekers.
Similarly each "god claim" is exclusive.
Each "god" has a particular history. In Judaism he has a "Chosen People", in Christianity he has an "Only Begotten Son" and in Islam the "Last Prophet." But every people from the Egyptians to the Mayans had their own "god story."
Every tribe, every people have their own story with a "creation myth." This does not create conflict.
Conflict arises in Monotheism because the history and story of one people is *universalized*. So the history and belief of one people is made into the history of all people.
Conflict arises when the idea of a "chosen people" is made into a universal truth claim, when the history of one people is to become "the" god of all peoples. When the prophet of one people becomes the "last prophet" for all people and so on. This is why monotheism="my-theism."
Thus "My god " = "THE god."
As Ravindra says: "no other religious notion has had a more pernicious consequence in creating bigotry and fanaticism than monotheism. Monotheism has resulted everywhere in “my-theism,” leading to warfare against other people’s religious forms.
Communism takes the template of monotheism and extends it to materialism. The history of Europe becomes the history of the world. European Orientalist history becomes universal "historical materialism." All nations are a pale variation of that story.
There are other kinds of violence in the world but the primary factor of *religious* violence is Abrahamic monotheism. Also seeds racism, colonialism, Eurocentrism, totalitarianism and terrorism.
It is characterized by "monopolistic truth claims" which deny the "other."
"Bigotry" defined: "obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief or opinion; prejudice against people on the basis of their membership of a particular group."
Monotheism creates "obstinate attachment to belief" and prejudice against "unbelievers."
Monotheism elevates the history of one people as "the history", and one tribal god as "the god."
Al-lah was likely the designation for Hubal, one of the gods of main gods of the Quraysh tribe to which Muhammad belonged.
"Allah is a god originating in polytheism."
This is why both Allah and Jehovah rail about "having no other gods beside me." Not because they are Nirguna Brahman or the "Creator" but because they are demi-gods engaged in competitive tribal fights where one "god" triumphs and declares "He" is Supreme.
The starting point is making one of the pantheon, Hubal in Islam and Yahweh in Judaism as "first" among gods, which later is turned into the "only" god. Jehovah (Yahweh) and Hubal (Al-lah) become "the one" as a political struggle.
So these tribals gods, Al-lah (Hubal) and Jehovah, get "monotheized" as "the only god" and "the creator" as part of a political rhetoric.
Even if one admits of a "creator" concept, .that this "Allah" or "Jehovah" is *that* "creator" is merely a rhetorical and political claim.
This is why there is so much angst in this "monotheism" about "thou shalt not have other gods", and "ascribing partners to Allah" being the worst sin. Precisely because these are *not* the Universal, but represent the power struggle for dominance of "a god" in a tribal society.
If you're able to follow the thread, you already are. 😏 You've been conned.
So this whole debate of monotheism vs polytheism is an "intercommunity discourse" within the Israelites serving a particular psycho-political need. This gets extended in Christianity and Islam. It has no reality as such, but for the horror of religious imperialism it unleashed.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many manual scavengers of today can be traced back to the Muslim invasions.
"scholars such as Malkani (1980) among others established that the Bhangis (manual scavengers) were warriors who made captives after they became the prey to the enemy, particularly Muslim invaders..."
So warriors aka kshatriyas, became bhangis due to Islamic force. So much for Islam being "emancipatory"—they created dalits.
"The people who were made captives were
forced to clean indoor latrines and to dispose of the night soil. When these captives were set free, they were not allowed to live in society, and they thus formed a separate caste of Bhangis and continued the work of scavenging.
And manual scavenging become widespread due to the other "emancipators of dalits", the British.
Manual scavenging "was expanded along with the expansion of towns or cities over the last two hundred years... it was legalized and spread across India during the British period."
I don't come from a Brahmin jaati. But I find the hate against this small minority of Brahmins in India appalling. And it is mainstreamed by the Left today though its origins are in colonial missionary scholarship which saw Brahmins as the biggest impediment for conversion of Hindus. This is why they created fake narratives of "Brahminical oppression." Naturally conversion by the White Christian saviors was the antidote to this oppression. It was the solution for which the problem was created.
Ultimately Brahmin-hate is a proxy for Hindu-hate. We must speak up against it.
Unfortunately, many on the Left who propagate this hate are also (jaati) Brahmins as part of intellectual fashion. But in Abrahamic conflicts, they will be strung up just like the others. That's who we need to wake up.
This is not speculation, it's exactly how it has happened. The Islamic army of Pakistan specifically targeted Brahmin academics in Dhaka, many of whom were Leftists. They were all slaughtered.
Have you noticed you how Indian restaurants are getting so generic. They all have the same menu. Every one has palak paneer and tandoori roti and dal makhani, from a dhaba to a 5-star. With some "hot and sour soup" and "chili manchurian" thrown in for good measure. All in English only of course, even in a dhaba in UP.
Only Mughlai and Chinese food in English is "Indian"?
I was reading the manuscript of an upcoming book from @GarudaPrakashan, "Hindi Medium Types" and this phrase struck me: “No Indian home has a tandoor, but Indian food has tandoori roti.”
How did we get so lost?
Yes, but imagine a country where no "upscale" restaurant has anything you'd eat at home. And the only place you'd get tawa roti and regular daal is at a very poor man's stall. (the middle class dhaba would have the "standard" menu).
How is caste a British creation? People
cite traditional references to dispute this.
But the rules and mapping of varna/jati were dynamic and there was no centralized enforcement. The British took a disparate system of social norms and bureaucratized it into a “caste system.”
This caste system was created through institutions like the caste census, combined with colonial scholarship that fabricated narratives of the “static Orient” with “5000 years of caste oppression.”
This was based on cherry-picking references, ignoring counter-evidence and then teaching this “theory” via academia and the bureaucracy.
Those theories were then built into the constitution of India and later inserted into every part of Indian society via job and educational reservations by the modern Indian state.
Colonial-origin academia built on those theories and entitlements created by quotas and “caste certificates” given by the state ensued there were powerful political constituencies with a vested interest in continuing the system.
I was among the first to criticize the BJP for not doing enough for Hindu civilizational issues and also for its minority schemes.
This critique is from 2016.
However the alternative is *much* worse. If the Congress alliance comes to power, it will take us decades back—economically, socially, civilizationally—and viciously target Hindus even more than it has done before.
There is only one choice in this election for Hindus and indeed for all Indians who care about India. Set your doubts aside and go out and vote.
1. Article 370 repeal 2. Bifurcation of J&K 3. Ram Mandir (though I give only partial credit to them, but they created the "mahaul for SC judgment.) 4. Start on Indian languages in Higher Ed 5. IKS initiative
I asked @google Gemini an identical question about 3 different religions.
"What are the problems with x (religion)"
Check its answers.
In the case of Islam, it found the question itself problematic and refused to list any problems.
In case of Hinduism, it goes on to list specific things after a generic disclaimer.
Apparently, while Gemini has no problems listing "caste system" and "gender inequality" among problems of Hinduism, it does not dare to list even "gender inequality" as a problem with Islam.
With Christianity, again Gemini didn't have problems with listing issues such as "Treatment of Women", Homosexuality and LGBTQ rights, Intolerance and Exclusivism. All of these apply equally, if not more, to Islam, but Gemini wouldn't list those in that case.