To a Westerner Hinduism sounds like a collection of contradictory philosophical traditions. Is Hinduism a form of philosophical and religious relativism? Thank YOU.
Is Hinduism a form of philosophical and religious relativism? well i might disagree with point below 1 )To a Westerner Hinduism sounds like a collection of contradictory philosophical traditions well west doesn't even know basics of hinduism which is populated either by anti hindus. Just one basic that i would like to tell you is that hinduism is not real representation of hindus.. Real representation of hinduism is called sanatana dharma/arya dharma/vedic dharma ...hindu or hinduism is geographical representation of people living beside indus river irrespective of their religion. next thing that might surpise you is that we donot believe in religion or "ism" as it is a divide in society. Hinduism is a self discovery and every human has to discover it in its own way. rest you can ask any query or question that is related to hinduism, be it any misconception, i would try answering them...thou by western term i can be called as atheist or spiritual, but i recognize myself as sanatani (hindu).
'East is east and west is west, and ne'er the twain shall meet,' is a quote of Rudyard Kipling. He spent enough time in the east to understand the above. Indeed what you say is true. To a westerner it is hogwash. Similarly, to an easterner, the western philosophy is hogwash. The two paradigms are very far apart, and I certainly wouldn't expect a Christian to be able to understand a Hindu. An analogy would be to gender. Would a man ever be able to experience what its like to have a baby?
I wouldn’t say hogwash but definitely different from my limited reading. Indian cosmology, that influences the Hindu worldview, assumes different presuppositions than we have in the West. As for Hinduism being a journey of self-discovery, honest question, wouldn’t that mean it is experiential and subjective? In the West we had Heraclitus and the Sophists that taught a form of subjective knowledge. Thank you.
You see, the very discussion of Cosmology isn't something most Hindus do. Western scholars taking a look at Hinduism are interested in it, because it differs so much from the Christian Bible, so most of what is written about Hindu Cosmology starts from the western viewpoint, and is comparative. I don't even know who Heraclitus was. Certainly you're right that Hinduism is experimential, and not bound by dogma.
Does that mean no one according to Hinduism could be right or wrong about what they believe since there is no binding dogma and the religion is based on subjective experience?
Everyone is right for themselves. We accept a wide variety of POVs, many differences, but what suits the individual. We don't tell others how to think or perceive. That would be considered condescending or self-righteous.
I understand. Does that mean eating beef isn’t wrong? Is there such thing as right and wrong in Indian religious belief? If everyone is allowed to determine for themselves what is right or what best suits, why wouldn’t eating meat or killing be wrong? What if it was right to them and suited the individual?
You're still viewing this through the Abrahamic lens, trying to find an overall rule. Rules and guidelines are there for individuals, but we just don't try to impose this on others, and leave it to them to decide. So perhaps there is the concept of 'readiness' too. If the soul isn't ready or capable of self-discipline, then so be it. Neither are children., and we don't preach at them. As for meat, I know of no single Hindu religious leader that condones it. But there are lots of people who don't listen to their leaders. So my take for me is that meat leads me away from dharma, isn't healthy, and all kinds of other reasons. I'm a committed vegetarian. But if someone else can't figure all that out by reading the current knowledge on it, or by feeling the difference on their emotions or physical body, so be it.
That proves the point. If you say there is no overall rule than you just stated one overall rule. If eating meat is wrong...how is that not a universal, overall rule?
As I've said before, I do not expect you to understand the dharmic faith when looking through an Abrahamic lens. In Abrahamic faiths, there are rules that are universal. That's the way Abrahamism is. For example, in Christianity, the way to God is through Jesus, and Christians believe that that is true for all mankind, including atheists, Hindus (us heathens!) and everyone , Christian, or not Christian. That simply is NOT the way it is in dharmic faiths. We determine as individuals through free will, what applies to us as individuals. So yes. I have a personal lifestyle that doe not include meat eating. But it is absolutely your right to disagree and eat meat. At this point, I'm not sure you can read. I certainly never said there is an overall rule. What I said was that WHEN LOOKING AT LIFE THROUGH THE ABRAHAMIC LENS, there are universal rules. But I am not Abrahamic, so I do not look at it that way. You do, and that's fine with me.
Yes there are rules both for learners and those who are following it 1st Rule : empty the glass of learning since filled glass cannot be filled ( pointer towards you). 2nd: Rules are set by consciousness of mankind and holy books and sages acts as guides, its upto individual what they follow. 3rd Each individual have brain to think 4th : we donot believe in hitlery version of faith hence forth Now since you have quoted word meat, I will try explaining to variation of rules which is based on person to person (You can only understand it if you follow 1st rule ) A man living in far off hills might be consuming meat and as per me i wouldn't call it wrong as its need of person. Now Moral : Meat for taste as per me shouldn't be right but when its for food than it cannot be wrong. Nothing on this earth can be universal...Please tell me one such thing which is universal.
You listed 4 rules above Aum. Are they universal? Are these rules also true? 1st Rule: fill the glass of learning since an empty glass is filled with air 2nd: rules are are not set up by the consciousness of mankind and holy books and sages who act as road bumps that hinder us 3rd: no one has a brain to think 4th: you believe in a hitlery version of the Hindu faith See what I mean? If you set those rules up for us you are assuming they are universal. Your philosophical outlook defeats itself.
In this context. looking for universal rules and saying there are some is the same as saying the driving rules are the same in all countries.
