Atheism is something unique.

[Eran of Arcadia]

I don't need to defend the honor of my religion to keep it.

I also don't need to investigate the truth claims of all faiths in order not to accept them. I don't explicitly reject most religions, I essentially take an agnostic approach.

 

[aneeshm]

See, by saying that Hinduism isn't a religion, you are defining "religion" more or less in Abrahamic terms.

That is correct. And I'm doing that for a reason. It's because the word has certain connotations which are applicable only to the Abrahamnic traditions. To call other traditions religions is to make a travesty of the truth, and to use language to obfuscate instead of elucidate.

The word "religion" can mean a lot of things, and as such Hinduism is best described as a religion more than atheism is.

No, it isn't.

Please, try to understand. Try to do a sincere study, just once, of the nature of our tradition. If you still retain this impression after that, fine. You'll at least have tried.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

That is correct. And I'm doing that for a reason. It's because the word has certain connotations which are applicable only to the Abrahamnic traditions. To call other traditions religions is to make a travesty of the truth, and to use language to obfuscate instead of elucidate.

But language is meaningless if everyone uses their own definition. Religion is and always has been far more than just the form it takes in the Abrahamic faiths.

Please, try to understand. Try to do a sincere study, just once, of the nature of our tradition. If you still retain this impression after that, fine. You'll at least have tried.

How deep need it be? I studied Hinduism in a theology class; that is more, I am willing to bet, than you know of my faith.

 

[Truronian]

I'll ignore your last post, you're obviously easily amused.

Tell me that next time, when I try to contribute to a debate without knowing anything about the traditions in question.

Read the thread title, where does it say 'Hinduism'?

I used the word 'religions' in quotes for a reason.

A religion is a set of beliefs and practices generally held by a human community, involving adherence to codified beliefs and rituals and study of ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.

Describes Hinduism pretty well... (I do know a bit more about it than I've been letting on, thank compulsory RE for that).

 

[aneeshm]

I don't need to defend the honor of my religion to keep it.

Then good for you. I'll try to explain what I mean.

If Moses did not actually part the Red Sea, if it turns out that the Jews never congregated at Mount Sinai and that the Ten Commandments were made up by Moses, if it turns out that Christ never actually performed any miracles and wasn't crucified, or if it turns out that Mohammed did something - anything - wrong, or made a mistake in the Quran, it's a big "GAME OVER" for the respective religions. The entire basis goes away. They break down.

This is not the case with the Hindu traditions. Even if it turns out that the Puranic accounts are complete fabrications, if it turns out that the epics consist almost entirely of embellishments, even if it turns out that Krishna or Rama didn't actually ever exist, the tradition will remain almost completely unaffected.

This is because it is philosophy which is the basis of the tradition, not faith or history. Philosophy is self-sufficient, not needing any external validation, and open to experience. If a better, more coherent, and more powerful and constructive philosophy comes along, the new takes over the old, and the tradition changes accordingly.

I also don't need to investigate the truth claims of all faiths in order not to accept them. I don't explicitly reject most religions, I essentially take an agnostic approach.

Again, you do the only sensible thing, given the circumstances.

 

[Swedishguy]

And I who made this thread to make people contemplate upon the fact that Atheism can't be changed and religions can. Oh well.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

If . . . it's a big "GAME OVER" for the respective religions. The entire basis goes away. They break down.

This is not the case with the Hindu traditions.

Just because Abrahamic religions make specific historical claims, and Hinduism doesn't, doesn't mean Hinduism isn't a religion. If reincarnation isn't real, that puts a big crimp in Hinduism; just because there is no single codified set of beliefs deosn't mean there isn't faith involved.

 

[aneeshm]

But language is meaningless if everyone uses their own definition. Religion is and always has been far more than just the form it takes in the Abrahamic faiths.

What if there exists no one word to describe what I'm wanting to say?

How deep need it be? I studied Hinduism in a theology class; that is more, I am willing to bet, than you know of my faith.

Which theology class was this?

As for that claim about what I know of your religion - quite true. That is why I keep my mouth clamped shut regarding it.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Well, Hinduism is, like I said, obviously different from the Abrahamic religions; but that doesn't mean it isn't a religion. (It is, to be sure, more than that, but it is also that. The same can be said of others.) The word "religion" describes perfectly well the parts we are discussing here.

And you have made some claims about my religion, as in your post just above the last one.

 

[aneeshm]

Describes Hinduism pretty well... (I do know a bit more about it than I've been letting on, thank compulsory RE for that).

Not quite.

There IS NO ONE SET OF BELIEFS OR PRACTICES OR RITUALS! Why don't you get that?

What have your RE classes taught you? I'm curious to see how Hindu traditions are presented in a non-Indic context.

Within the Indic tradition itself, there have been atheists, and every seeker starts out usually as an agnostic (again the right word is mumukshuk), and goes where experience leads them.




Atheism is damn well not unique in any sense of the term. There have been Indic atheists and sceptics since before the BC years, all within the "Hindu" framework. This is a childish claim, that of the OP.

 

[aneeshm]

And you have made some claims about my religion, as in your post just above the last one.

It's not me who made these claims, it's your traditions which make them, and bases itself on them.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

There IS NO ONE SET OF BELIEFS OR PRACTICES OR RITUALS! Why don't you get that?

The same is true of Abrahamic religions - even within Islam.

I'm curious to see how Hindu traditions are presented in a non-Indic context.

I'm curious how Abrahamic traditions are presented in an Indic context . . .

Within the Indic tradition itself, there have been atheists, and every seeker starts out usually as an agnostic (again the right word is mumukshuk), and goes where experience leads them.

In theory, but you can't tell me that cultural inertia doesn't exist within Hinduism.

Atheism is damn well not unique in any sense of the term. There have been Indic atheists and sceptics since before the BC years, all within the "Hindu" framework.

Well, just because there are Hindu atheists doesn't mean that atheism is not unique compared to theism.

 

[RubricousMidget]

Atheism is damn well not unique in any sense of the term. There have been Indic atheists and sceptics since before the BC years, all within the "Hindu" framework. This is a childish claim, that of the OP.

An Indian atheist is still an atheist.

There IS NO ONE SET OF BELIEFS OR PRACTICES OR RITUALS! Why don't you get that?

Ehm... By that definition, Christianity isn't a religion either, because there are different beliefs, practices and rituals from denomination to denomination and, even, Christian to Christian.
But, if that point was to be conceded, it would merely turn Hinduism from a religion to a group of religions.

Btw., my religion classes also taught me about Hinduism, so don't go making high claims of ignorance, lest I ask you what the three basic scriptures of Norse mythology are.

 

[Truronian]

There IS NO ONE SET OF BELIEFS OR PRACTICES OR RITUALS! Why don't you get that?

So...?

What have your RE classes taught you? I'm curious to see how Hindu traditions are presented in a non-Indic context.

Some of the basic principals (Brahman has many forms...) and a few of the tales (The Ramayana). Bear in mind this was five or six years ago, aimed at 13-14 year olds.

 

[Shaihulud]

Judging from how the op puts it, atheism is not unique. Most religion denies the validity of other opposing religion, the belief that every religion exist in a vacumn is inaccurate, they just do not actively refute other religion like atheism.

Btw the world is rational and ordered or we would not have science.

 

[Che Guava]

Then good for you. I'll try to explain what I mean.

If Moses did not actually part the Red Sea, if it turns out that the Jews never congregated at Mount Sinai and that the Ten Commandments were made up by Moses, if it turns out that Christ never actually performed any miracles and wasn't crucified, or if it turns out that Mohammed did something - anything - wrong, or made a mistake in the Quran, it's a big "GAME OVER" for the respective religions. The entire basis goes away. They break down.

With all due respect, I think that you underestimate christianity and the diversity of beleifs within it.

While you are certainly correct that there are many christians (or any followers of an abrahamic faith) that do take a more literal approach to scripture (and indeed there does seem to be a trend towards it), it is no so mich of a 'historical faith' as some would have you beleive. The essence of christian morality, faith and ideals are exemplified through stories in scripture, but there are many within the faithful that don't really care if moses parted the red sea or not: the basis of faith is not contingient on historical fact, it is based on what those stories represent and tell us about ourselves.

Within christianity today I beleive that there is something of a split now between those that take scripture as absolute truth, and those that take a more 'philosophical view' (for lack of a better term). The fissure is especially aparent in large denominations, like anglicism, that straddle many cultures. As someone who has moved from within the christian community to a more agnostic view, I think that christianity is starting to come to a compromise between its literal and philosophical rammifications.

As an older faith, I think that hinduism has made more progress in that manner, but I worry that there is a potential to 'backslide' a bit, especially when i hear about the rise of hindu fundementalist groups in india. I would love to hear your thoughts on that aspect of hinduism, and whether you think there are those out there today high-jacking your faith in the name of 'literalism' over 'philosophicalism'.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Or else it seems ordered, since we humans look for patterns in everything -- we even look for Elvis on Mars.

 

[RubricousMidget]

Or else it seems ordered, since we humans look for patterns in everything -- we even look for Elvis on Mars.

Blasphemy!


Everybody knows he went to Alpha Centauri.

 

[Shaihulud]

If we can percieve order on some scale that is good enough to say that the Universe is ordered. Human drive to find order is what makes us great.

 

[Tboy]

I'm atheist, yet I still appreciate the variety of religions with all their good and bad points, and good and bad results. It's foolish to lump all religions with one lable, and call them all the same.