A religion originated in India

>a religion originated in India
>with an Indian as the main figure in it
>mostly spread among the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and other gooks, while not popular in India at all

How?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=7_8cyeL0GeY
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtavakra
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_Tandava_Stotram
youtube.com/watch?v=Ku3lADtR22Y
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatendu_Harishchandra
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unakoti
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I think becuase indian have already their religion (Hinduism)

It's like Christianity to Europe

>while not popular in India at all
Literally everything he said is written in Bhagvad Gita and the four Vedas.
He just compiled everything with non-violence in it and made a new religion,

In what ritual the hindu smoke Ganja (Marijuana)?

>Maha Shiv Ratri
The Great Night of Shiva

In shiva ratri[The day when lord shiva was born]

herro mountain chink

But this is accepted by the indian and nepalese's law in the normal days?

Hell dhoti

lol Ganja is banned in India , idk about Nepal .
The police can't stop us , if they do , riots will break out.

No only in that day and only in certain places such as Pashupati temple

mein dhoti nahi pehenta, momo.

it's a slang term used by us for indians

yeah , I went to Pashupati Temple . Really liked the sign which says "Non-Hindus aren't allowed here"

Hinduism is superior to Gautama's nihilistic, and defeatist doctrine.
t. hinduboo

R A R E

Only in sign they wouldn't even care if you go full on wearing black veil there.It just there for being there

>In the four vedas
wrong - buddha explictly rejects a lot of the higher notions in the upanishads of things (if we take these to be the philsophical side of the vedas) like brahman and atma and all this sort of stuff.

buddha also rejected the yagna culture of the 4 vedas
>in the gita
semi right.

the gita was probably written after him though, and vaishnavas and shaivites like adi shankar just adopted alot of his teachings about stuff like non-materialism and temporarality of life whilst rejecting the anti-god stuff.

he's not popular in india because buddhism is a layer over folk religion. in china its a layer over chinese folk religion, in india it was a layer over pajeet folk religion aka folk hinduism.

so most laypeople had the exact same religion/beliefs when buddhism was popular and when it became less popular - except for monks/brahmins. In India hindu philosophers won the debate with buddhists and jains so hindus won more political patronage. Hindus also just adopted a lot of buddhism and even revere buddha in their own system (mahayana and vajrayana buddhism also adopted a lot of hindu shit - hence why in nepal the lines between buddhism and hinduism are particularly blurry). Longer-extant buddhist areas got more Islamified than hindu ones (sindh, bengal, north-western punjab).

They are not rare here.

I'm the only one posting here in int so he*

>"Non-Hindus aren't allowed here"
Fucking hate that shit.
Just show your goddamn temples to the world. Show your architectural accomplishments and maybe you'll get someone interested in the faith itself as well.

>'ll get someone interested in the faith itself as well.

non-pajeets technically can't become hindus according to many scriptures. though many hindu groups ignore that

You're definetely not the only posting here, i see your flag quite a lot.

Buddhaism predates Hinduism

>the gita was probably written after him though
Wrong , Wrong and Wrong.
Gita was written in Dwapar Yuga nad Buddha was born in Kalyuga .

>Hindus also just adopted a lot of buddhism
Now you are making shit up . The Rig Veda was there before Buddha.
Here is a video about Ashtavakra . A man who was cripple but has immense knowledge about Life and Prapancha . He was mentioned in Ramayan and Mahabharat.
youtube.com/watch?v=7_8cyeL0GeY
Here is something about him : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtavakra

Like i said slav it just there for being there.We dont restrict anyone who enters there.We dont care if you're white or black or any other religion entering the temple.Just dont enter temple with your shoes.Wearing shoes or sandals inside temple is a big no no

false.
buddhism is from 500bc.
hinduism in its earliest forms is from 2000~bc

the earliest forms of hinduism are still extant in modern hinduism.

Indian and Nepalese ITT, do you speak any Sanskrit?

I'm only one.You can easily notice me desu

Nah , wrong .
Bhuddha was born in Kalyuga and Hinduism is there since Satyuga.

Don't worry thats only in Pashupati Nath Mandir.

Ancient Vedic religion isn't Hinduism.

True
>Religion originated in jewland
>with a jew as the main figure
>mostly spread in Europe while not popular among jews

Actually, most of the Buddhist and Jain philosophy comes from Samkhya, which itself is kind of ancestral to most of the old Indo-Aryan philosophy.

I remember Shiv Tandava Stotra , because my mum made me learn it.
it was written by a demon(Ravana) to please Lord Shiva , and Lord Shiva was super pleased at him.

No but it is written in same script

Nope, you are thinking about the vedic religion. The loose term "hinduism" generally refers to the Puranic doctrine which started to form some time in the last few centuries BCE.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_Tandava_Stotram
See the tab named "Ravana"
youtube.com/watch?v=Ku3lADtR22Y

This.

not sure whom should i ask this but
are jaunpuris niggers among niggers?
gypsies come from the obviously nordic aryan state of india so im curious if theyre as chimpish back home
theyre dalits if it matters btw

>Gita was written in Dwapar Yuga nad Buddha was born in Kalyuga .
yeah dumbo i'm not talking about muh mythical ages where the mahabharat took place 100 thousand years ago, but according to actual historical dates. the gita was probably written somewhere between 500bc-200bc.

>making shit up
No I'm not. Hinduism has been constantly evolving.
Rig Vedic hinduism with endless yajnas to indra and rudra is quite very different to modern advaita vedantism - the latter has received several doses of new ideas into it fro mthinkers along the line.

many of these thinkers were adopting ideas or making arguments against ideas. including the ideas of the jains and buddhists. Ashtavakra prboably was a contemporary of buddha if not someone who came along later.

if ashtavakra did actually exist, and was not just an author's creation, then he may have very well been trying to counter buddhist ideas by following a similar line of argument but ending up at brahman-atma instead of anatman nirvana.

hindu myths are not actually history, pajeet. they're myths, they are representative of things that may have happened in some way, but do you think that krishna's speech on kurukshetra was really his speech being seen and read by sanjay (which then was written down by vyas)? or someone was composing a story, and someone thought of a good philosophical argument - attributes it to God and also tackles buddhist ideas indirectly through it. - the latter is more likely.

Is your native language a descendant of Sanskrit?

So pajeet do you know when kali yuga ends?Do they describe the end of it anywhere?

Yes

Because it's centered around monasteries while Hinduism is ingrained into the very culture. Islamic conquers destroyed the monasteries, wiping out the former, but nothing short of complete genocide can remove the latter.

The Gita came after Siddhartha.

Because offshoot.....stupid Sergey.

Hindus still use the vedic scriptures and still follow rituals from them. there are brahmins who still go mostly by the vedas.

the vedas also come with 100s of commentaries and derivative texts which means just going by the 4 vedas is not strict. also the later vedas like the atharvaved are more similar, whereas the earlier ones like the rig and the sama are more distant.

Samkhya definitely inspired them, but i think buddha's innovations and to a different extent mahaviras were taken into hinduism.

for example some hindus went from animal sacrfiicers to strict vegetarians who are pacifcist, it is likely that some attempt to emulate or rival arguments put for by mahavira could have played a role in this.

Our native language didn't exist before 200 years . en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatendu_Harishchandra , this man took 5-6 languages which was spoken in North India and mixed them together . The script is Sanskrit btw (Devnagri)

Only some of them do so. And overall, the Puranic doctrines have far overshadowed pre Puranic and vedic doctrines (including some slightly non-Vedic doctrines such as Samkhya and Mimamsa).

Are chutiya hai kya ye.
ye padh

yeah i'd say the puranic literature is much more relevant to the average 'du. but i wouldn't say that its a different religion as such. its just a more fluid religion.

haha

pajeet.
hinduism is older through the vedas.
but most of hinduism is newer through the purans, mahabharata etc.

>animal sacrfiicers to strict vegetarians
I am a pure vegetarian and I was a part of goat sacrifice in Kolkata . No one eats them.

Buddhism also was deprived of state sponsorships just before the islamic invasions, and was dying as a sect, which it recieved during Ashoka's rein, and no more missionaries were travelling east and south. Although buddhist ideas were already ingrained in the main/popular belief. Chinese scholars who came here mostly argued with gurus in favor of buddhism. Also buddism was not very popular ever in rajputana, as they classed themselves as warriors.

Pussy pajeet.

many vaishnavas wouldn't ever get involved in animal sacrifice lad.

this

but I was involved , the scene was horrifying but I felt contenment after the ritual was over.

The vedic religion certainly has much less in common with the puranic religion when compared to the similarities among the abrahamic religions. If the abrahamic religions are considered to be separate due to the number and magnitude of their differences, then there is no reason to push vedic and puranic religion in one composite religion.

>the Gita has existed as long as Hinduism has

Except no. The Gita was written, or at least at some point adapted, to tackle Buddhism theologically.

Not going to eat meat lad , I am a Brahmin.

Pajeets of Sup Forums.

Is Hampi and Jaipur worth visiting? They're archaeologically fascinating and I heard good things but I'm worried it'll be too dirty.

That's kind of like saying that pre-Buddhism Japan was Shinto.

Hinduism is an evolution of Vedicism, but not the same thing, just like how Vedicism was an evolution of the PIE religion, that branched off into many other faiths.

What is stopping you?

What is that language? Hindi?

gonna go to narak for that my man.

ahimsa paramo dharma.
>compared to abrahamic religions/vedicism is different
hinduism compares differently though.

a pacificst strict-veggie singing and dancing bald vaishnava with a choltli is almost certainly belonging to a different religion a kali maa human sacrificing thuggee - sure. but they will call themselves as belonging to the same religion despite believing opposite things.

to say that everything from vaishnavism to weird tantric shaktism to folk animist hinduism - are still the same religion - but for some reason the common thing like they like to point to (the vedas) is a different religion strikes me as a bit strange.

either there is no hinduism but just a nebulous blob full of different religions or there is one religion in many forms.

You going to just visit a place because it shows dicks and tits?
Visit this instead . en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unakoti

Also, to add, there was no concept of 'hindu' in those times. Buddha was considered one of the gurus, and his teachings were subject to criticism and debate, like any other teacher before him. Buddhism got popular because it was sponsored by Ashoka, which was a pretty big thing as he controlled most of India at that time, and could afford to send missionaries in every corner of the world.

I would say that the term Hinduism should not be used as a religion, but as a category, like "Abrahamism". There are many complex ideas too different to be a part of the same doctrine or religion. But they can certainly be grouped as a related clusters of religions/doctrines and philosophies.

>either there is no hinduism but just a nebulous blob full of different religions or there is one religion in many forms.

I gravitate towards that idea ɖeʂu

yes.

Yes I am going to narak , but not for being involved that ritual. There was a reason for me being involved , I can't tell you sadly.

Jaipur is great. Its full of forts and stories.

Nothing.

...

lol u srs m8? The Vedas are the oldest religious text by a mile. They make your Torah look like modern space magic.

>there is one religion in many forms.
I second this.

This.
Even in buddhist sri lanka they still revere murugan and vishnu. In thailand brahmin rituals are still undertaken by brahmins and the royals seem to be more involved in hindu stuff.

That's fine by me - though its difficult to then speak about hinduism as something separate from sikhism, jainism and buddhism because they all will fall under the broad hindu umbrella unless you go by 'whether they classify themselves as hindus' (though hare krishnas won't be included as hindus either then). but then it doesn't make sense to say hinduism is newer than buddhism. even pretty modern ideas like modern day vaishnavism probably route back to older forms of worship for vishnu or the myth of krishna that probably predate buddha.

It would be like saying early christians before the trinity idea, cannot also be called christians as most christians today believe in the trinity.

hat behen ke lode , mein nahi khaunga meat , chahe tu jitna mujhe force karle.

Then good for you pajeet i just hope you won't turn to vegan meme

'hat behen ke lode' Seriously though what the fuck does this even mean?

>Vedas
>Texts

I am not a vegan , I am a vegetarian .
Sister's Dick

No you retard. I'm obviously going for the city. The tits is just a plus.

Where specifically? How clean is it? Is it dangerous?

>Sister's Dick
WTF??

At this point the term ''Hinduism'' is more nationalistic than religious.

Only in india

CURRIED

>It would be like saying early christians before the trinity idea, cannot also be called christians as most christians today believe in the trinity.
what the fuck

Everywhere. Its not very clean but cleaner than Delhi I think.
But the outskirts are full of slums.

in very very old times the Vedas were transmitted from one man to another with mouth .Then after some time when Brahmins began to forget them (because they were turning into beta faggots), they were written down for the sake of Hinduism.

Isn't that apply to your country too?

>No you retard. I'm obviously going for the city
Don't bring your girlfriend there , and be safe.

i mean hindus who are hindus at least nominally accept the authority of the vedas call it 'the eternal faith' not hinduism.

the problem with accepting the authorities of the vedas even nominally is that some hindus don't even nominally accept the vedas but will still be call themselves hindus of some proportion - and nominally sikhism, jainism and buddhism have things which could be interpreted as at least a partial-acceptance of them (though most wouldn't agree with that)
council of nicea and all that

Is the term even used outside of India?

chut ke pani

indonesia, nepal. (in countries where the people calling themselves hindu don't feel sort of indian)

you think that the christians prior to the nicaea did not believe in the trinity?

I dont know india is very right leaning country there's that

There are hindus in Indonesia?

probably.