I completely agree with the religion bill.

Buddhists and Hindus and Jains are all part of a single greater religion. The only people who are still b!tching are Ambedkerites and the sort.

The christians aren't being characterising as one super group in the same bill. Jains != buddhist

Christians would go along with Jews and Muslims under the Abrahamic religions umbrella.

I completely agree with the religion bill.

Buddhists and Hindus and Jains are all part of a single greater religion. The only people who are still b!tching are Ambedkerites and the sort.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/060921/211/67tc6.html

http://in.news.yahoo.com/060921/211/67tc9.html
Thank you Hindu nationalists

What's the point in lumping Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism together? What is the Gujarati government trying to achieve by doing that?

The dude VIDEO clip sound like Abu in Simpson

To be blunt. That is fu-king retarded. Hinduism is a different religion from Buddhism and Jainism, its not just the Jains are just as angry.

You must know nothing about Buddhism or Jainism

Hinduism is an umbrella term that holds numerous dharmic paths underneath it. There is absolutely no reason why Buddhism and Jainism (two more dharmic paths) should be kept seperate, Its like declaring Arya Samaj or Vaishnavism to be individual religions.
Try to keep personal attacks out of your posts when debating.

Hinduism has caste
Buddhism and Jainism detest the caste
Buddhism and Jainism are ignostic (not a typo)
Hinduism is henotheistic/monotheistic/polytheistic

The term Hindu was invented long after the terms Buddhist and Jain

Buddhists do not believe in a soul. All Hindus do.
Buddhists and Jains believe in an infinitely old universe. All Hindus believe in a universe that was created or a universe that had a beginning

Buddhism and Jainism may be 'Dharmic paths' but they are very different from Hinduism

Actually, only Ambedkarite (and other lower caste groups) Buddhists have that whole rejection of caste bit.

Also, caste is a social institution, not a religious one. Buddhists and Jains are all bound by caste as long as they are part of society.

Diety worship varies from Buddhist group to Buddhist group. Tibetan, Bhutanese and Nepalese Buddhists all worship at the same locations as Hindus and often worship the same dieties or natural features (such as Mt. Kailash and Lake Mansovar in Tibet).

Same with the concept of the soul. There are plenty of Buddhists (especially in the near and far east) who believe in the concept of atama as well as its relation to human life. Likewise there are Hindu groups who don't believe in the soul and do not consider it a part of human life.

Buddhism and Jainism are both Dharmic paths every bit as similar as those found within the various gorups that make up modern Hinduism.

If there is no soul, what is it that is reborn, one might ask. Well, there is nothing to be re-born. When life ceases the Kammic energy re-materializes itself in another form. As Bhikkhu Silacara says: "Unseen it passes whithersoever the conditions appropriate to its visible manifestation are present. Here showing itself as a tiny gnat or worm, there making its presence known in the dazzling magnificence of a Deva or an Archangel's existence. When one mode of its manifestation ceases it merely passes on, and where suitable circumstances offer, reveals itself afresh in another name or form."

It follows that there cannot be a soul, but only the sequence of one moment giving rise to the next, constituting appearances with characteristic possibilities (human, for example, as oppose to animal, through the skandhas, aggregations). The no-soul doctrine is referred to as anatman. It follows equally as well that there can be no eternal God, independent of the cosmos, who creates it. There are many gods in Buddhism, which is, especially at the popular level, an extremely theistic religion. But God, or gods, is part of the process, having the characteristic appearance, as opposed to that appearance of animal or human.

The three marks of existence are crucial to the Buddhist understanding of ourselves and the world around us. The first of these 'marks' or 'characteristics' is anicca or impermanence. The second of these is dukkha or suffering, which is also the first noble truth and the third is anatta or not-self. To see the world in its true nature is to see these three characteristics inherent within all things - that the world is a place of suffering and dissatisfaction: that nothing stands still and that, however hard you look, you will never find a permanent essence, self or soul in anything!

Differences

1. Hinduism is not founded by any particular prophet. Buddhism was founded by the Buddha.



2. Hinduism believes in the efficacy and supremacy of the Vedas. The Buddhist do no believe in the Vedas.



3. Buddhism does not believe in the existence of souls as well in the first cause, whom we generally call God. Hinduism believe in the existence of Atman , that is the individual soul and Brahman, the Supreme Creator.



4. Hinduism accepts the Buddha as an incarnation of Mahavishnu, one of the gods of Hindu trinity. The Buddhist do not accept this.



5. The original Buddhism as taught by the Buddha is known as Theravada Buddhism or Hinayana Buddhism. Followers of this do not worship images of the Buddha nor believe in the Bodhisattvas. The Mahayana sect considers the Buddha as the Supreme Soul or the Highest Being, akin to the Brahman of Hinduism and worship him in the form of images and icons.



6. The Buddhists consider the world to be full of sorrow and regard ending the sorrow as the chief aim of human life. The Hindus consider that there are four chief aims (arthas) in life which every being should pursue. They are dharma (religious duty), artha (wealth or material possessions), kama (desires and passions) and moksha (salvation.)



7. Hindus also believe in the four ashramas or stages in life. This is not followed in Buddhism. People can join the Order any time depending upon their spiritual preparedness.



8. Buddhists organize themselves into Order (Sangha) and the monks live in groups. Hinduism is basically a religion of the individual.



9. Buddhism believes in the concept of Bodhisattvas. Hinduism does not believe in it.

The Buddha, himself born into the warrior caste, was a severe critic of the caste system. He ridiculed the priests claims to be superior, he criticised the theological basis of the system and he welcomed into the Sangha people of all castes, including outcasts. His most famous saying on the subject is : " Birth does not make one a priest or an outcaste. Behaviour makes one either a priest or an outcaste". Even during the time when Buddhism was decaying in India and Tantrayana had adopted many aspects of Hinduism, it continued to welcome all castes and some of the greatest Tantric adepts were low castes or outcastes.

um....WTF? There is no tide of chesus, lol Missionaries aren't converting that many poor and starving, even when dangling food in front of there face. India doesn't need anti conversion law. Nor does it need to absord buddhist, jains into it's religion. The only thing that needs to happen is a formal ban on missionaries. stop funding them, stop supporting them. And stop letting Americans send them to our country as "humanitarian aid"!

that will never happen. this whole uper caste lower cast BS could go away easier, if India just straight out banned the fu-king caste system. which i'm in favor of. the thing is people who are anti-hindu want the caste system to exist, becausr it's the only thing that keeps Hindus devided. If u think xianity/islam is ;so great because it has no caste, u're wrong. xianity, is divided by sect, and so is islam. the catholics thing there better than baptist, evangelicals thing they're better than everyone. In Iraq u have shiites killing sunni and vice versa. And Hindus have caste, caste in it's present state is useless and should be gotten rid of. The varna system is the original caste system, and had important religious meaning, bit know caste really has no religious meaning and it should be gotten rif of completely. But selling out and trading in 8,000 yrs. of culture, religion history isn't the answer. Nor is it somethin that could happen. Hinduism is an evolving religion, it can change and adapt to any surrounding. There are many reform Hindu sects that are caste less, like Gaudiyas(my religion).

i don't care, but Hindus, who make up the majority of India should be the ones helping lower caste. Everyone in India is poor, low and high caste. We don't need missionaries to help anyone, Hindus (low and high caste) can. You seen to root for xianity a hell of a lot for a hinu(if u r).If u hate Hinduism, so much, Buddhism is 1000x more peaceful, not to mention it has it's roots in India. Importing xian fanatics into India, is going to help anyone. there are hindu missions that help the poor. what's wrong w/ them. why have foreign missionaries, come in the first place. to come and undermine the culture and religion of a society. u can believe what u want and value, u're xian missionaries all u want. but it doesn't change the fact that they r no good for india and should leave.

have u ever thought why xian missionaries aren't in countries in South America or the Philippines/East Timor helping all the poor peolple there? Why come to Indian and non-xian countries. Those countries have already been bribed into xianity, so there work is done. after they convert the poor and dying they're never heard from again, why is that? I'm sure you're smart enough to figure it out.
there are Hindu charities who, help low caste, they do a fine job of it!

http://www.ffl.org/
http://www.bapscare.org/

i'm done. no Hindu is going to say he'd wish the whole of india is converted. i'd say that's someone who doesn't value there tradition much. secular Hindus nowadays seen to be on par w/ xian missionaries. as a secular Hindu, instead of rooting for xianity, why aren't you starting your own charity? Honestly you'd be more useful as a Xian than a Hindu. If secularism is basically a means to call yourself one religion and promote another, then it's useless to India. If India needs humanitarian aid, then it should import secular aid. Would you really be in Pakistan chat or Saudi Arabia chat trying to convince them to let missionaries to come to there country and convert people. More importantly would they listen, why expect Hindus to accept that? Would you tell xians to do the same? There missions shouldn't be supported by the state either, xians don't support Hindu/Muslim/ Jewish missions in there country. Why do Hindus have to be so generous?

anyways why as a Hindu root for them to be Jesus freaks, as if there are no xian fanatics/militants. Why not promote buddhism which is more peaceful than xianity, and would turn them into fanatics/freaks of any kind?

cool, i'm sick of arguing. but i'd like to know why your brand of secularism is used to promote minority religions, instead of no religion at all. Actual secularism iis kinda the opposite. I never said you're anti Indian, i said you sounded anti-Indian. Just like you said Iranians are better than Pakistanis in your PM! If you think society shouldn't be led by spirituality, than why not be a atheist. i'm done!

Jesus this is like dumb and dumber. I don't the like Christians efforts mass convert a lot of low income people, but BJP (RSS) can't keep bullying people either. They need start a grassroots revival in at local temples and support more of the Hindu reform movement if they want to protect Hinduism in India.