3 ms·

Hinduism most certainly does not believe in a common set of rights for everyone. Each person is assigned a clear position in the social hierarchy based on the c

Hinduism most certainly does not believe in a common set of rights for everyone. Each person is assigned a clear position in the social hierarchy based on the caste of the parents and then the person is obligated to carry out the "dharma" as per that caste - anything outside of that is considered "adharmic" or wrong.

minimal1 5y ago
In contrast, Christians believe in being born again, and the capability of anyone becoming children of God. That God wants that for us, and that there is no favoritism of where you were born, status or race etc, Hes loves everyone. That actual seems more important and deeper then what the article is talking about, but it would certainly seem an outgrowth to it. I do not know what Judaism exactly thinks on it, although the concept of God is our father couldn't have been alien - Jesus sermon on the mount was to a Jewish audience. But being born again seems unique to Christianity, a new nature. I suspect that much Judaism - I know at least there is different sects, probably has a tendency to fall into legalism or following the law properly, as Christians one can to. If you reject being born again and a new nature and changed person, going to following the law more perfectly would be what someone might turn to.
truth_ 5y ago
But Buddhism does recognize human rights. I was just reading some days ago how Buddhist emperor Ashoka the Great abolished discriminating policy of a Brahmin never being punished to death irrespective of the nature and severity of the crime while it was allowed for other castes. Buddhism is one of the rare religion that does not recognize divine rights of kings. In Buddhist mythology a king is like everyone else who merely gets 1/6th of the harvest and maintains peace and protects from external threats. He is jist another man. Christinaity and Islam, on the other hand, do vastly believe in divine rights of kings. The aspect of Hinduism that you mention was actually practiced, but the inner core of Philosophy tells the division among men emanate from their quality and practice. Birth does not matter. But, in mythology, when a low caste man named Shambuka tried to study the Vedas, the Ramayana epic king and Vishnu incarnation Rama murders him.
- minimal1 5y ago
  Most of the Reformation was about not believing in the divine rights of kings, and the entire concept (not rightly understood here, but not going into it) was not universal anyway. In example, angle saxon kings (where english, "anglo-is" comes from, were elected.
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  Isn’t this because killing Brahmin (even in death penalty) is for Hindus mortal sin?
  - truth_ 5y ago
    When rules are made by the Brahmins, what do you expect?

minimal1 5y ago

In contrast, Christians believe in being born again, and the capability of anyone becoming children of God. That God wants that for us, and that there is no favoritism of where you were born, status or race etc, Hes loves everyone. That actual seems more important and deeper then what the article is talking about, but it would certainly seem an outgrowth to it. I do not know what Judaism exactly thinks on it, although the concept of God is our father couldn't have been alien - Jesus sermon on the mount was to a Jewish audience. But being born again seems unique to Christianity, a new nature. I suspect that much Judaism - I know at least there is different sects, probably has a tendency to fall into legalism or following the law properly, as Christians one can to. If you reject being born again and a new nature and changed person, going to following the law more perfectly would be what someone might turn to.

truth_ 5y ago

But Buddhism does recognize human rights. I was just reading some days ago how Buddhist emperor Ashoka the Great abolished discriminating policy of a Brahmin never being punished to death irrespective of the nature and severity of the crime while it was allowed for other castes. Buddhism is one of the rare religion that does not recognize divine rights of kings. In Buddhist mythology a king is like everyone else who merely gets 1/6th of the harvest and maintains peace and protects from external threats. He is jist another man. Christinaity and Islam, on the other hand, do vastly believe in divine rights of kings. The aspect of Hinduism that you mention was actually practiced, but the inner core of Philosophy tells the division among men emanate from their quality and practice. Birth does not matter. But, in mythology, when a low caste man named Shambuka tried to study the Vedas, the Ramayana epic king and Vishnu incarnation Rama murders him.

minimal1 5y ago
Most of the Reformation was about not believing in the divine rights of kings, and the entire concept (not rightly understood here, but not going into it) was not universal anyway. In example, angle saxon kings (where english, "anglo-is" comes from, were elected.
selimthegrim 5y ago
Isn’t this because killing Brahmin (even in death penalty) is for Hindus mortal sin?
- truth_ 5y ago
  When rules are made by the Brahmins, what do you expect?