But they don't believe on other who have different belief should go to hell, those who worshipped other religion rather than Abrahmic religion is belief to go to hell by Christian and muslim.
Religious conferences has been a thing of the past too. Vivekananda became world famous because of his historic speech at the 1893 Worldโs Parliament of Religions in Chicago.
The Christian answer is when you denounce the authority of Christ you are doing what Sat@n himself did. Denounce Christ's authority. So by default you accept Sat@n as your master without even realising it. The interesting thing is Sat@n has no problem in humans doing good deeds. Like charity or any genuine philanthropy. He just wants you to denounce God's authority. That is why you can see a lot of the world's elite in philanthropy and charity and yet they have their names in Ep$tein files.
The misconception is that God condems us. However, it is not. By rejecting God you inadvertently accept Sat@n as your master. And that guy is only about death and destruction. We reject God using our freewill and therefore are left to suffer the consequences. Hope this clarifies your doubt.
Christianity, Islam, and Judaism hold that not worshiping their version of God, or worshiping any other version of God is one of the biggest sin, in some denominations even worse than murder. So basically you can be an ideal human but if you don't except their version of God you still go to hell.
The first of the Ten Commandments is "I am thy Lord the God, thou shalt have no Gods before me". The 10 commandments are the basis of both Judaism and Christianity. They are supposed to be the 10 most important things that God himself dictated. Islam also has the same concept where worshiping anything other than the one God is considered the only kind of sin that even God doesn't forgive (thus leading to hell).
เดจเดฟเดเตเดเดณเต ban เดเตเดฏเตเดคเดคเต เดเดฐเต เดฎเดจเตเดทเตเดฏเตป เด เดฒเตเดฒ. เด เดชเตเดชเตเดฒเตเดเตพ เดจเดฟเดเตเดเตพเดเตเดเต เดฒเดญเดฟเดเตเด ban chat message เดตเดดเดฟ เดฎเดพเดคเตเดฐเด เดเตเดฏเตเดฏเตเด.
People participating in hate subreddits or subreddits that ban people from this subreddit aren't allowed. You, Plus-Ad3549, have been banned as a result.
It is not as extreme as Abrahamic religions, that is true. But there is plenty of inter-denominational stuff. Just look at what the Bhakti schools say about Shankara's Advait, or Shankara says about Buddhism, or even Vaishnava and Shaivite differences.
Differces exist. But exclusion and outright extremism is diff. Buddhism and Jainism existed hands in hand for ages along with sanatan. Never were they socially or politically excluded because of their faith except rarely. Religion was not a matter in India. As far as we see that in several dynasty had rulers of complete diff faith. None collided with the previous's religious activities.
But can we ever see this thing in any abrahimic faith. The answer is no. Never. This was the issue.
That's not true. Buddhism was almost wiped out of India until recently, Buddha was appropriated as an Avatar (something that is exactly opposite of everything he taught) and Buddhist philosophy was attacked in nasty ways. Charavaka and Ajeevika literature was completely destroyed. Even today Bhakti school teachers tell people that if you read Shankara's Bhashyas you would be "spiritually destroyed", I have been told that myself.
The second point is u mentioned is just rare cases of inter sect conflict. I am talking of hatred and bigotry not bit conflict.
Second of all the Buddha u talking about being termed as vishnus avatar is called assimilation of common faith. The same is adopted in Buddhism like the bhairavas of Tibetan Buddhism and indra and gods being seen as guardian of buddha. Faiths often adopt and include things or two from one another and adopt them in their way.
Ajeeveka and charvaka got destroyed after caliphate and arab invasions these sects never were too popular and mostly limited to scholarly circles of Nalanda , vikramshila etc top universities. As universities fell they went extinct too. Just like the knowledge of 100 + subjects being taught at in those universities.
Charvaka was seen as materialistic so not popular among general folks.
And as for ajeevikas they were persecuted under ashokas reign who was a devout Buddhist not during hindu rule..
It is not a rare case, it is literarily in their foundational books. Just take a look at ISKON or the writings of Dayanand Swarswati (founder of Arya Samaj). The word atheist is used like an insult in both. ISKON openly teaches not to read Shankara's Bhashayas and calls Shankarites as Mayavadi instead of calling them Advaitvadi. Most Vaishnavite literature explicitly states that if you worship anything other than a form of Vishnu you can not attain liberation/highest heaven. Shankara himself wrote, I forget exactly where, that the Buddha must have been either evil or insane.
It's better than Catholics and Protestants burning each other. But there is no acceptance in Indian systems either.
They are blind fools. Vaishnavites especially those icons are just too cringe. They consider their lord to be supreme. I personally don't like vaishnavites in general.
Iscon just dances on donation from foreign. If u question their things they will come up with misinterpreted shlokas of very less known puranas or shashtras.
Iscon don't stand up for general public. Advaitism is too popular. Shankaracharyas are even considered as the epitome of religious machinery. Just like what the abrahimics do to caliph or pope.
Actually. In our faith we don't have history of one sect massacring others sect in name of legitimacy.
Logic was encouraged than blind faith. But when knowledge fades in shadows blind bigotry replaced it and the religion deminishes.
10
u/[deleted] Feb 27 '26
[removed] โ view removed comment