CuAnnan
And I am... not redefining hinduism. I'm not even defining Hinduism.
See the difference?
In case you don't, I don't need to be Indian or Hindi to say "I'm not sure it's appropriate for a bunch of white guys to redefine Hinduism like that".
Because - you know what? I'm going to just skip to where I address this and respond to your response there.
CuAnnan
Xiam
Because it's ******** rude? I mean, damn.
But not when you guys do it?
Seriously?
My religious beliefs not only allow for it. In specific instances (arguably, at a stretch, including this one) my religious beliefs
require it.
So it's only rude when it doesn't offend
your sensibilities. When it does, then ******** that rule and display the behaviour that is otherwise unacceptable, except when you guys do it when it's fine.
It's always rude, dude. I call myself out on that s**t all the time. Though probably not in text...
CuAnnan
Xiam
You say "rape and pillage" like they're actually causing harm to others by researching other cultures to enrich their lives, which as you say, are perhaps unfulfilling.
By misrepresenting cultures they don't belong to?
Do I
really need to demonstrate how the word Karma has been completely misappropriated to the point that it now means "Cosmic justice system"?
Doesn't to me. And I'm not even Hindu.
CuAnnan
Xiam
Because it's not
exactly what the other cultures believe?
Actually, judging from content, it's not
remotely what the other cultures believe.
Which content?
CuAnnan
Xiam
Or perhaps you think it's just because they're white? Well who the ******** are
you to say what a person should or should not believe?
No, I know a couple of white Hindi (of different sects) personally. Admittedly, I don't know any white Hindi of that hard-core reclamist sect that's becoming popular.
It's because they're not learning what Hinduism is. They're reinterpreting the texts that hinduism came from and calling what they create whole-cloth Hinduism. Sure, you can learn a lot about a religion by reading about it and reading its texts. With the exception of Christianity, I don't know a single religion that claims that reading the texts are enough for membership.
And what exactly makes you think these particular individuals are doing that?
CuAnnan
The difference is, I don't maintain that respect is presupposed.
At least they're trying though, eh?
Oh, I don't suppose we encountered it then. Okay, I have to bring back up this one thing - maybe I mentioned it in another thread, I don't recall - what about how many cultures have already adopted other belief systems and applied them to their own cultural beliefs? Again I'll bring it back to Buddhism and Christianity, which have vastly different flavors depending on where in the world you find them. You mentioned that Christianity simply requires to read the book. But in general, Buddhism pares it down to the basics - the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path... I think the Three Jewels, right?
So I mean... maybe I'm completely wrong, but I at least see a precedent here for how things
can travel and pass along through cultures, with the core tenets surviving while the particular flavors of the religions can change. To bring it around to food, it's like the Japanese making ice cream flavors of green tea, rice, sesame, squid ink, etc. to appeal to Japanese tastes, but nevertheless it's still, at its core, ice cream.
And people could say, "That's gross, that's not what ice cream is! Ice cream is vanilla, or chocolate, or strawberry, or rocky road!" And I could respond, "Well that's bullshit, ice cream only has a cream flavor, let them eat what they want."
So here you are, complaining that these people are enjoying green tea ice cream, and... what, telling them to throw it away? Get some ********' cookies and cream because that's what you think is the "proper" kind of ice cream?
Come the ******** on, man.
EricKrasnyy
To get more back on track and to ignore him, this is a thread for all people who practice Hinduism. If he refuses to acknowledge ideas outside of his own schema, then there is no use talking to him or even about him.
Oh goddammit, did you block him for having an opposing viewpoint? That's just as bad as what he was doing. And I was having a discussion!
Pagan Jesus
However, what you're doing is reinforcing his opinion that you're just a bunch of outsiders saying "Oh, that's shiny, I'll have that".
Which is enough to make anyone's blood boil.
Sure he's being a bit aggressive about it. But he's being
transparently aggressive.
You're being passive aggressive. I mean the whole "blocking him so he can't take part in the conversation because he doesn't agree with you" thing.
Seriously. Dammit, what am I supposed to do with my replies now?