And all she got was a bun.

Posted on by

Wow, more weird India news! Yay!.jpg

Allow me to preempt someone from asking why I chose to write this story. No, really, let’s get it out of the way, this nimisham:

• Did this really have to be blogged?

• Slow news day?

• Aren’t X,Y and Q more important?

• And furthermore, doesn’t your lack of blogging X,Y and Q indicate that you are a heartless bitch who doesn’t care about Pakistan/the Nuke Deal/the environment/immigration??

Yes,

maybe,

perhaps and

refer to my finger, for that last one. It’s an extra-challenging week at work, so I can’t write anything dazzling, not that the performances which I usually phone in are sublime. I don’t have much time, but when something’s on my mind, it’s easier (read: cathartic) to type, so a “Musings” post it shall be.

Unless you were the last person to be found during hide and seek yesterday, you have heard the cringe-inducing-on-so-many-levels news about an Indian man “marrying” a dog (thanks, Aggiebabe). It is somewhat like the whole “Aish weds trees…twice”-fiasco…except in TMBWITW’s case, she was doing it to compensate for her apparently unfortunate nakshatram and not because she had killed two trees.

An Indian man has “married” a female dog, hoping the move will help atone for stoning two other dogs to death.
P Selvakumar, 33, said he had been cursed since the killings, suffering paralysis and a loss of hearing.
The wedding took place at a Hindu temple in Tamil Nadu state. The “bride” wore an orange sari with a flower garland and was fed a bun to celebrate.
Superstitious people in rural India sometimes organise weddings to animals in the hope of warding off curses.[BBC]

Buried among the hundreds of jokes which punsters are giddily guffawing over (enjoy your free pass to bitch about how the bride is a bitch…but more on that later) is to me the most appalling aspect of this story; this man killed two innocent, defenseless creatures.

I didn’t know how he killed them until I settled in to my seat on the subway this morning and found out that he had stoned them. That detail bothered me so much, because my imagination doesn’t need any assistance in recreating actual events. Have you ever seen an animal cowering in front of a human? Yelping and whimpering out of fear and pain? It’s heartbreaking, but that’s what this so-called man saw, as he brutally stoned two dogs. I remember the way our late German Shepherds looked terrified and anxious, when they were merely being scolded…and that was after they had committed capital offenses, like uprooting our only curry leaf plant.These dogs must have been perplexed as to why they were being hunted down by this sadist. The whole crime makes that red, squishy thing in the middle of my chest ache a little bit. Achtung, it’s lame that I have to assert this, but I’m not some granola-lite, bleeding heart Aggie who puts the welfare of puppies over people—no, I’m someone who, like most of you, is well aware of the connection between perpetrating violence against animals and committing it on humans.

Many studies in psychology, sociology, and criminology during the last 25 years have demonstrated that violent offenders frequently have childhood and adolescent histories of serious and repeated animal cruelty. The FBI has recognized the connection since the 1970s, when its analysis of the lives of serial killers suggested that most had killed or tortured animals as children. Other research has shown consistent patterns of animal cruelty among perpetrators of more common forms of violence, including child abuse, spouse abuse, and elder abuse. In fact, the American Psychiatric Association considers animal cruelty one of the diagnostic criteria of conduct disorder. [woof]

Dogs and cats are simple, available targets, and practice makes perfect, if the definition of perfection involves torture and murder. What else has this person done? And to whom? And I recognize that I was born here, in the first world, that I am privileged because of that and thus view this news story through my very American eyes, but at least I’m aware of this heinous flaw o’ mine. At least I am ashamed that I have this privilege to be bothered by what some consider a triviality.

But he killed two dogs. That’s all my mind returns, when I pause between Outlook storms. Maybe I should add the Humane Society to my slowly-expanding list of Causes on Facebook, since I’m obsessed with this. And dogs in general (and this cat, but she’s the exception which proves the rule).

Back to our story- after slaying two canines, the groom lost his hearing and according to most stories I’ve read, became paralyzed. Obviously this is divine retribution for being such a flaming merde-bag, oui? Oui. How could one fix this? But of course! Have him marry a dog! Easy atonement, even as such atoning is gleefully retold the world over, ensuring that some desi kid at a less progressive, less diverse school– like the ones I went to– will be having a GREAT recess and lunch period.

Crowds cheered the newly-weds at the end of the ceremony in Sivaganga district, about 50km (30 miles) east of the city of Madurai.
The “bride”, who is called Selvi, was led to the temple in Manamudurai wearing a sari before vows were exchanged in a traditional Hindu ceremony.
A relative of the groom who attended the wedding said he hoped Mr Selvakumar would now be cured.
“Fifteen years back Selvakumar was physically fit. But, once he attacked a pair of dogs and thereafter Kumar could not move his limbs freely,” the relative, Ramu, told the BBC.
“He tried every cure for his ailment but could not be rid of his disability.
“On the advice of an astrologer and others, he decided to marry a bitch to get cured. Then we arranged Selvakumar’s marriage with a bitch.” [BBC]

Who is going to look after that bitch and protect her from abuse–no, I don’t want to get in the possibilities– or is the prevailing assumption that he’s learned his lesson and now will behave? Speaking of “bitch”, that is the final snag on my mental stockings—the B word. Is “bitch” commonly-used in India? Does it have the same connotations? Yes, it’s an even more trivial triviality, atop that other triviality, i.e. my soft shpot for dogs.

This entire story leaves me feeling weird and I don’t feel like I have the “privilege” to explore one of the other aspects of it, which is bothering me- religion. I don’t know enough about Hinduism and though I eat like one, I’m certainly not Hindu. What does this story tell the world (or us, or martians, or…) about religion and what we are willing to tolerate within it?

Then again, maybe there’s some weird Christian tradition that makes even less sense to some girl in Madurai*, I don’t know. Maybe she’s not even thinking of such things. Maybe she’s already rolled her eyes, written this off as mega-superstitiousness which has nothing to do with her or the life she leads, and moved on. I wish I could shake this or make sense of the maelstrom this story evoked within, as easily.

*the closest city to where this happened, I think.

410 thoughts on “And all she got was a bun.”

  1. Once one of the mutineers has resorted to the Spoorlam handle (and it is clearly a shared handle among them, much like SM Intern) it’s clear that the dialogue has ceased. Though the very fact that such an entity exists on this site is a pretty clear indication of its leanings….

    …but I am off, since I’m sure you are all eager to label me as an RSS sympathizer etc. (which I am not). You win, ANNA, Hindus are funny and there is nothing wrong with making fun of us. Thank God India is secular, if we’re lucky in 100 years the only Hindus left will be of the enlightened western Pardesi Gori variety.

  2. Though I will leave with a question/thought:

    Why is that western scholars, academics and intellectuals are consistently drawn to Eastern (Buddhist, Hindu) philosophy, while (Hindu) Indians are seemingly doing the opposite, decrying their centuries of tradition in favor of a more “modern” western sensability? Something I noticed while at college, never understood it at all.

    In case you are wondering, I follow the Upanishads and Vedanta, and therefore do not follow any of the regressive traditions some of you have pointed out. The same is true for my entire family and community, to the point where we don’t even have a caste anymore. And yet I am always meeting Christian Indians (mostly Syrian Christians) who are eager to inform me of their caste, or even require that a potential spouse be of the same caste, despite their conversion. Hypocrisy, anyone?

  3. Geez lay of the Anna bashing. I agree that she has gone over the top before, and I’ve been critical of her, but I don’t understand how you people are getting anything offensive out of THIS one. Anyways, I’ll give credit where credit is due. Thanks for the interesting post.

  4. You misread:

    I believe all that matters is written word and doctrine when it comes to categorizing the religion, as it greatly effects actions in present day.

    Look at it this way, If the recipe for lemon pie calls for lemons and sugar and baking powder, but I use lime, salt and vinegar , but then claim it to be lemon pie. I’d look very foolish, wouldn’t I? Because the recipe (scripture) for lemon pie calls for certain ingredients.

    Now, I’m not saying Christians must be intolerant to retain their Christianity… what i am saying is A christian can be tolerant and still identify himself as a Christian, but cannot claim that the religion preached him tolerance. That’s something he had done on their own accord.

    I don’t see what you expect to achieve by getting a Christian or a Muslim to say that his/her faith is intolerant and hateful, except for some minute victory of the ego that does no one any good.

    Then likewise you should equally lambast the efforts of Christians or Muslims (and their respective leaders – ie the Pope) to say Hindus are ‘idol-worshippers’ that practice a heathen religion and are going to hell for not following the true prophet.

    Anyway, the discussion only came about earlier because someone erroneously stated “Christianity preaches tolerance”

  6. I think it is better for the commenters to not indulge in personal attacks on the bloggers. For all we know they could just interchange handles and post stories just for fun or to check the reaction of the commenters.

  7. Then likewise you should equally lambast the efforts of Christians or Muslims (and their respective leaders – ie the Pope) to say Hindus are ‘idol-worshippers’ that practice a heathen religion and are going to hell for not following the true prophet.

    I may not ‘lambast,’ but I do call people on such idiocy.

    I think your insistence that religious texts define (or categorize, whatever you want to call it) a religion is very short-sighted. How do you explain Hindu violence toward Muslims then? You’re ignoring social, historical, and political contexts, which are important in shaping a religion and how it interprets its texts. But ultimately what defines a religion is its followers. I urge you to ponder how your actions and your words are defining Hinduism.

  8. indian-american… what kind of question is this?

    just curious. ive always found the language describing peoples identity in the US as borderline incoherant. a lot of it is just wrong. my question has nothing to do with you really. if you want ot talk about it, shoot me an e-mail.

  9. How do you explain Hindu violence toward Muslims then?

    I’m in agreement whole-heartedly with the “all religions have bad people” shtick. Maybe it’s just the logician in me, that says, the religion is what texts define it, people can misinterpret and justify and stretch and do all kinds of bad sh*t because of it, but that shouldn’t taint the religion.

    Wasn’t you in fact you said:

    I judge people by their actions, not whatever faith they proclaim to be of

    yet now you are using the actions of people to judge the religion.

  10. I’m perplexed as to you (and people like you) are more incensed by a Christian peacefully trying to convert you

    Not to get dragged in this debate at all.

    But a major correction. Conversion = peaceful. Where did you get that idea? Let us look @ the history of last 400 years.

    Absolutely not. Some examples:

    a) Entire South American conquest, colonization, and conversion. For cliff notes like quick education, watch Jeremy Irons, Robert De Niro’s Mission. There is a huge body of serious historical literature on civilizing, colonization, and proselytism in South American conquest.

    b) Same in Africa, and in India, Goa. Read Church’s role, Aparthied and Institutionalized Religion, Afrikaners, and South Africa.

    c) Let me end this conversation with a great saying by Jumo Kenyatta, Father of Kenya, and hero of their freedom struggle, and great statesman of Africa.

    It goes like something this:

    “When the missionaries came to Africa we had land; they had the Bible. They asked us to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them they had our land; we had the Bible“

    PS: This is my last comment on this thread.

  11. Once one of the mutineers has resorted to the Spoorlam handle (and it is clearly a shared handle among them, much like SM Intern) it’s clear that the dialogue has ceased. Though the very fact that such an entity exists on this site is a pretty clear indication of its leanings…. …but I am off, since I’m sure you are all eager to label me as an RSS sympathizer etc. (which I am not). You win, ANNA, Hindus are funny and there is nothing wrong with making fun of us. Thank God India is secular, if we’re lucky in 100 years the only Hindus left will be of the enlightened western Pardesi Gori variety.

    Dude, calm down. I agree that Indian secularism is broken and somewhat hostile to Hindus…the question is do we fix secularism or toss the baby out with the bath water ? The free inquiry that typified the most vibrant periods of Indic religions and philosophies would be squelched by the VHP whose leadership suffers from petrification of the mind.

  12. Wasn’t you in fact you said: I judge people by their actions, not whatever faith they proclaim to be of yet now you are using the actions of people to judge the religion.

    No, I brought up the point of Hindu violence against Muslims not to judge all Hindus as the same (& why would I do that??), but to contest your argument that the texts are what define a religion, where there is no basis for ‘intolerance’ in Hindu texts but Hindus sure are exhibiting the same behavior as followers of the ‘intolerant’ religions.

    Maybe it’s just the logician in me,

    Come now. You’re not really a logician, are you?

  13. But a major correction. Conversion = peaceful. Where did you get that idea? Let us look @ the history of last 400 years.

    I was referring to the examples of Christians in the U.S. that HMF brought up. Door-to-door Jehovah’s Witnesses, loud people going off on the subway, etc. They’re annoying but I certainly don’t feel my life to be threatened by them.

  14. where there is no basis for ‘intolerance’ in Hindu texts but Hindus sure are exhibiting the same behavior as followers of the ‘intolerant’ religions.

    Well, you’d have to ask the groups that actually commit the violence for their reasons, but from what I understand, it has nothing to do with asserting Hinduism’s ‘superiority’ over Islam, rather (in their eyes anyway) it has to do with defense of political borders of what they see as ‘Hindu’ land. Is there an incident in history where Hindus have ventured overseas in conquest, in the name of “The Gita”?

    I’m not justifying the violence, just saying it’s not coming from any kind of “intolerance” in the same way the Christians and Muslims have explicitly stated. So I wouldn’t say the behavior is the ‘same’.

  15. I don’t see what you expect to achieve by getting a Christian or a Muslim to say that his/her faith is intolerant and hateful, except for some minute victory of the ego that does no one any good.

    Hah! I guess you missed the “objectivist” religious fundamentalists and their free offerings of “Atlas Shrugged,” otherwise you wouldn’t say ‘ego does no one good.’ 😉 🙂

  16. You win, ANNA, Hindus are funny and there is nothing wrong with making fun of us. Thank God India is secular, if we’re lucky in 100 years the only Hindus left will be of the enlightened western Pardesi Gori variety.

    100 years? The genocide is happening now! On blogs! Amongst the genocidal Leftist cabal! We have about ten months left MAXIMUM! I even heard that Pankaj Mishra has a new book coming out soon! We’re f**ked!

    Oh no, I just heard from a spy, the saffron plot to disconnect the SepiaMutiny servers has failed, they’re going to carry on posting rapes of us, we probably only have about 100 days left! Before we’re exterminated!

    Quickly!

    We have to save Hinduism!

    Before it’s too late!

    Death to Syrian-Christian double-agents working for Leftist cabal-ISI nexus!

    Hail Mogambo!

  17. But ultimately what defines a religion is its followers. I urge you to ponder how your actions and your words are defining Hinduism.

    But nala, the “followers” are not a homogeneous bunch. Using that, all Americans are guilty because of Bush’s stupidity – whether they voted for him or not, whether they protested the war or not.

  18. Hah! I guess you missed the “objectivist” religious fundamentalists and their free offerings of “Atlas Shrugged,” otherwise you wouldn’t say ‘ego does no one good.’ 😉 🙂

    an objectivist would rather sell you a copy..

  19. Hillside, if you like every blogger except anna, why make it a point to comment on her posts, unless you secretly enjoy drama? Also, from your frothing at the keyboard, it sounds like what really cheeses you is the fact that a “sophomoric”, inferior writer has visibility. What’s worse, she’s not just a bad writer, she’s one of those evil CHRISTIANS!

    Also, that “you win Anna”, which came after she disengaged from the conversation reminds me of when someone gets fired and they scream, “I quit!”, to reclaim control.

  20. I’m not justifying the violence, just saying it’s not coming from any kind of “intolerance” in the same way the Christians and Muslims have explicitly stated. So I wouldn’t say the behavior is the ‘same’.

    See, I think that it only matters to a limited extent what justification people use for their crimes. A dead person is a dead person. But if you can identify the social/political/historical/economic roots for why that justification is being used by its followers and resolve those, that’s a much better path than lambasting the ‘intolerant’ religions.

    Hah! I guess you missed the “objectivist” religious fundamentalists and their free offerings of “Atlas Shrugged,” otherwise you wouldn’t say ‘ego does no one good.’ 😉 🙂

    It’s funny you bring this up, because though I find Ayn Rand’s philosophy morally empty, her concept of objective reality seems similar in some ways to moksha.

  21. But ultimately what defines a religion is its followers. I urge you to ponder how your actions and your words are defining Hinduism. But nala, the “followers” are not a homogeneous bunch. Using that, all Americans are guilty because of Bush’s stupidity – whether they voted for him or not, whether they protested the war or not.

    This is why I don’t say ‘this religion is good’ (no matter how much I would like to believe it) in addition to not saying ‘this religion is bad.’ I would hate for people to judge me based on George Bush.

  22. but then again, I am also a published writer, and the site I work for gets many times the traffic of SM, though the topics I cover are admittedly much more mundane/not as interesting from our (brown) point of view.

    LOL. yes, they’re so mundane there’s nothing for you to do at work.

  23. It’s funny you bring this up, because though I find Ayn Rand’s philosophy morally empty, her concept of objective reality seems similar in some ways to moksha.

    I wouldn’t really know as I haven’t read much of her original writings. I simply judge Ayn Rand by the statements of her rabid followers and the fact that they distribute free books to students in school. 😉

  24. I wouldn’t really know as I haven’t read much of her original writings. I simply judge Ayn Rand by the statements of her rabid followers and the fact that they distribute free books to students in school. 😉

    Really? That’s frightening. There’s also an essay contest for high school students by the Ayn Rand Foundation, where students are asked to write about the greatness of objectivism and Ayn Rand. Even more frightening. (ok, I’m just bitter ‘cos my essay didn’t make the cut.)

  25. But if you can identify the social/political/historical/economic roots for why that justification is being used by its followers and resolve those, that’s a much better path than lambasting the ‘intolerant’ religions.

    Well, no one is lambasting the intolerant religion as a whole, like I said, I’ve known many kind christians. Only saying that it does indeed preach intolerance.

    And again with your either/or… it’s good to identify social/political all that good stuff as well, stating a religion for what it is doesn’t preclude one from investigating other reasons/factors for behavior attributed to a segment of a religious group

  26. Well, no one is lambasting the intolerant religion as a whole, like I said, I’ve known many kind christians. Only saying that it does indeed preach intolerance. And again with your either/or… it’s good to identify social/political all that good stuff as well, stating a religion for what it is doesn’t preclude one from investigating other reasons/factors for behavior attributed to a segment of a religious group

    ok. Now tell me, are you really a logician?

  28. Nala, I don’t get what joke you’re going for. What I mean is, I tend to see things for what they are.

  29. Nala, I don’t get what joke you’re going for. What I mean is, I tend to see things for what they are.

    I’m teasing. I can’t help it, I think your ‘I keep it real’ philosophy is cute.

  30. Umm. Thanks, I guess. However, by your definition, wouldn’t it be nice if more cute people existed in this world?

    Of course, there are times when this could happen.

  32. Cute, bringing up a nonexistent entry on urbandictionary. Does this mean you also see what isn’t there? But I don’t want to derail this thread any longer since I didn’t get to respond to your comments in the other thread, so you can e-mail me if you want.

  33. Look at it this way, If the recipe for lemon pie calls for lemons and sugar and baking powder, but I use lime, salt and vinegar , but then claim it to be lemon pie. I’d look very foolish, wouldn’t I? Because the recipe (scripture) for lemon pie calls for certain ingredients.

    You might look foolish. Or if most people make lemon pie with lime, salt and vinegar, that becomes the de facto recipe for lemon pie. Even in your comment 295, you made two statements, which contradict one another:

    I believe all that matters is written word and doctrine when it comes to categorizing the religion, as it greatly effects actions in present day. … maybe that doesn’t matter, for a zealot will stretch anything to mean anything

    And I am sorry for not being your performing monkey and linking to youtube.

    So Rahul, what’s your answer? Is it that all religion is stupid, that Hinduism is specifically worse, or that you just make snarky comments but can’t offer any better alternatives.

    I do think that, on balance, religion causes more problems than it solves primarily because it creates this false group identification, by which, all people of a particular religion are assumed to be the same. So, if person 1 of religion X in one area does something bad to person 2 of religion Y, it is used to justify anger and retribution against an unrelated person of religion X by an unrelated person of religion Y. But that’s not the issue here.

    I am not interested in getting into a religion-off here, but I bring up the points about Hinduism only in response to comments that are saying that Hinduism is better. I respond to Christian and Muslim apologists when they rant on this site too.

  34. Nala- Seeing how you’re 18 and in school I will assume you don’t have a full time job. Almost anyone who does can confirm that if you are in front of a computer with internet access all day, you will waste a great deal of time surfing on sites like this. It is inevitable.

    LOL. I have a part-time job, and I am adept at multi-tasking.

  35. nor would I want to open myself up to the kind of anti-hindu attacks that I see on this site consistently

    They pull our ass cheeks apart and rape us on this website daily! And we have only 6 weeks left before we are genocided!

    Death to Dirty Dogs!

    Hail Mogambo!

  36. You might look foolish. Or if most people make lemon pie with lime, salt and vinegar, that becomes the de facto recipe for lemon pie.

    But how likely is that to happen, if a group of people are always there to remind the “recipe changers” the true recipe, (especially when the recipe is indisputable) Look at post-9/11, when people committed acts of violence in the name of Islam, everyone else rushed to say it wasn’t the true “recipe”

    maybe that doesn’t matter, for a zealot will stretch anything to mean anything

    I’m agreeing here with Nala’s “a dead person is a dead person is a dead person” from a practical sense, but still asserting that it’s useful to see things for what they truly are.

    And I am sorry for not being your performing monkey and linking to youtube.

    You’ve been doing so well thus far, why quit now ?

  37. But how likely is that to happen, if a group of people are always there to remind the “recipe changers” the true recipe, (especially when the recipe is indisputable) Look at post-9/11, when people committed acts of violence in the name of Islam, everyone else rushed to say it wasn’t the true “recipe”

    I didn’t realize that scriptures were indisputable. Really puts the entire religious scholarship industry out of business, doesn’t it? Heck, we can’t even agree on what a constitution written 230 years ago with a pretty detailed historical record means.

    I don’t know what your point about 9/11 is supposed to mean, that the originalist Koran interpretation exhorts the flying of planes into skyscrapers, or that it doesn’t?

    You’ve been doing so well thus far, why quit now ?

    I only link to youtube to impress women and make other men jealous.

    … But that’s not the issue here.

    Just wanted to correct/amplify this statement in my previous comment. My basic point is that people are inherently similar in their instincts to protect the ways of their life they care about, and to the extent religions are different currently, it is because of different evolutionary parameters (look at the Hindu response to competing religions both in the past and present). So, to say, that average Christians are better or worse than average Hindus, or vice versa, purely based on the religion they adhere to, seems pretty far-fetched to me. But, maybe I am just a left leaning cultural relativist.

  38. I didn’t realize that scriptures were indisputable.

    the points I raised about Christianity’s intolerance are certainly hard to dispute, as they are very specific. The response was “That’s the old testament, it doesn’t count”

    point about 9/11 is supposed to mean,

    The point is, the scripture (while open to interpretation in some instances) always holds weight and stands as a legitamite (in the Abrahamic cases, the only) source of what the religion is, irrespective of what some people do.

    I only link to youtube to impress women and make other men jealous.

    Really, no wonder people have missed you, the site has been undergoing maintenance.

  40. HMF, on the one hand you say all that matters is text and doctrines, but on the other hand you express total ignorance of enormous swaths of the hindu canon and identify as a hindu. guess you don’t believe in practicing what you preach?

  41. 276 · JGandhi said:

    However hardly any attention is paid to the millions of Hindus ethnically cleansed from pakistand and Bangladesh over the last 60 years or the organized and deliberate attempty to destroy what remains of Hinduism in malaysia and Indonesia. Also no posts on the Hindus that keep getting blown up by bombs which adds up to thousands of Hindu casualties every year – like 2 or 3 9/11s happen to Hindus in India every year, its just spread out voer time and place.

    I’m going to have to agree with “brown” @ 280 and quote Gandhi and say “Be the change you want to see.” You don’t like what they’re posting? Start your own blog. What are you doing here, anyway?

    Hillside @ 290–does your religion teach you to be needlessly mean? Bravo, ol’ chum! You’re what I call Klassy with a CAPITAL “k.”

  42. the points I raised about Christianity’s intolerance are certainly hard to dispute, as they are very specific. The response was “That’s the old testament, it doesn’t count”

    There is also scripture saying the opposite. How do you reconcile that with being a true believer in the doctrine that the entire body of scripture for a religion is,completely self-consistent. and stands independent of human interpretation and practice?

  43. I’m going to hell for sitting here at work laughing my brown ass off at the way this thread has progressed.

  44. Re: Hinduism vs Christianity thing. If you are looking at pure religious dogma, both have intolerances built into them. Different kind of intolerances, but intolerances nevertheless. Christianity doesn’t tolerate other gods. You have to believe in the Christian God and believe in Jesus as your savior to be able to get to heaven. There is intolerance for different kinds of spirituality built into it. Hinduism doesn’t tolerate different ideologies. You be a good son, then a good husband, then a good father, otherwise you pay for it. There is intolerance for individualism built into it. (Although, to be fair, in practice, adherents of both religions are doing well in shedding their intolerances. Still, we are talking by-the-book-Christianity vs by-the-book-Hinduism). I don’t know if one is “better” than the other.

  45. HMF @ 295 said:

    those who proselytize and have a difficult time justifying those beliefs if they are Hindu

    Hindus don’t need to proselytize because they just co-opt and appropriate other faiths. 1, 2, 3.

  47. 298 · HMF said:

    I identify as Hindu, I’ve not read the manusmrti once.

    310 · HMF said:

    the religion is what texts define it

    Carry on…

  48. HMF, on the one hand you say all that matters is text and doctrines, but on the other hand you express total ignorance of enormous swaths of the hindu canon and identify as a hindu. guess you don’t believe in practicing what you preach?

    No, because Hinduism, as many have stated is not really a “religion” in the sense that Christianity, Islam, etc.. are. The religion itself allows for a little “breathing room” as it were, as no one document is the defining, Secondly, The manu smriti is not an “enormous swath” rather its a grain of sand compared to the vedas, upanishads, the gita, bramhasutras, puranas, aranyakas, etc…

    Also, when I say all that matters is text and doctrines, I’m talking about in terms of defining what “the religion is”, see my analogy re: lemon pie recipe. A lemon pie is what the lemon pie recipe prescribes.

    There is also scripture saying the opposite.

    I wouldn’t say those quoted scriptures are “opposite.” to the Deutoronomy and Mathew text (in particular proselytization)

  49. Carry on…

    I sure will. you should work for the FoxNews/Manju Quoting department, you’d fit right in,

    I also said,

    295 ” I’d say what most Hindu’s consider as their “teachings” is an amalgum of the Upanishads & the Bhagavad Gita (and in some cases, the Bramha sutras – these three make up what’s called “Prasthana Thraya””

  50. Having been away from this thread for a while, it took me some time to figure out how the topic had changed from animal welfare and punsterosity to comparative religion. Accordingly, I conducted an experiment with a real live dog. Here are the results.

    Pingpong: Doggy, doggy, do you think Hinduism is the best? Dog: [silent]

    P: Oh? What about Christianity? D: [silent]

    P: [goes on to name 20 other religions including those found only in science fiction universes] D: [still silent]

    P: How about some food then? [holds up a bowl of dog food]. Dog: Wow!

    [tumultous applause]

    [Dog graciously follows his “Wow!” with a bow]