Temples should allow non-Hindus, agree?

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

441597

Suspended

Posted: 15 years ago

#71

Originally posted by: souro

Can't say about other Hindu temples but yes Jagannath temple in Puri does have this rule. People of other religions are not allowed there. Though am not surprised at all, with the kind of hostility famous temples had to face throughout those Islamic invasions it's only natural. Infact, when Buddhism came to power even they ransacked many temples (which is why I don't get it when people claim that only buddhists are the only one who have never been the aggressor).

^^ but still then, does the Medieval expierience make it justifiable for any House of Worship in the 21st century, to have such narrow disciplines?

Quote

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 15 years ago

#72

Originally posted by: souro
Infact, when Buddhism came to power even they ransacked many temples (which is why I don't get it when people claim that only buddhists are the only one who have never been the aggressor).

This is new information for me. Do you have any links or references for further reading on this matter? I'd love to read more into it.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 15 years ago

#73

A temple maybe a private institution owned by a trust or organization. But it serves a public interest. The temple offers public services like worship, rituals, spiritual discourses, religious meetings etc. A private institute has rights to have their own rules. However, in democracy these rules stop at racism and discrimination.

For example fancy restaurants can be black tie only, malls can prohibit people for no shoes and no shirts. This is because these are universal laws anyone can follow irrespective of race etc. However, no private restaurant or mall can say no blacks, Asians, Indians, Jews etc.

Similarly I think temples can have fair universal rules. No footwear allowed etc. They can have requests like modest clothing, no meat eaters and other regulations requested that people can universally follow. However, when they say no foreigners, no outsiders that is discrimination.

It is not just temples, many religious institutions have this practice. While there may have been reason in the past, the practice is archaic and old and must be discouraged. It is about time even religious institutions were held accountable for equality and fairness - each and everyone of them.

Quote

casper

@Roadrunnerz

Voyager

Posted: 15 years ago

#74

The trouble that we had on the Ramjanma bhoomi thread for calling a temple a structure !!! Here RTH goes again - calling it pvt institute !

I see no fireworks yet 😉 Members must have matured since my last visit here 😆

Quote

sudesh kumar

@qwertyesque

Rocker

Posted: 15 years ago

#75

Originally posted by: souro

Can't say about other Hindu temples but yes Jagannath temple in Puri does have this rule. People of other religions are not allowed there. Though am not surprised at all, with the kind of hostility famous temples had to face throughout those Islamic invasions it's only natural. Infact, when Buddhism came to power even they ransacked many temples (which is why I don't get it when people claim that only buddhists are the only one who have never been the aggressor).

temples policies may not be representative of the religion as whole.. Islam for which for eg.. will have consistent rules.. puri.. cant make its rules....and that thing about buddhism is a real news... but its not to be forgotten that buddha was born hindu and belonged to india at that time.. and the people who follow him or adopted buddhism dont have an rules to follow.. now half the dalits in india are buddhists... and they go on vandalizing under that religion it will distort the tenets of budhhism.. if chinese adopted buddhism.. they have been aggressors irrespective.. so .. budhha's hindu origins.. make itmore non-violent kind of religion...

Quote

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 15 years ago

#76

Originally posted by: crazy_sunny
The trouble that we had on the Ramjanma bhoomi thread for calling a temple a structure !!! Here RTH goes again - calling it pvt institute !
I see no fireworks yet 😉 Members must have matured since my last visit here 😆

I was unaware that structure and private institution were blasphemy. 😕

SVCG must have hit everyone with the thesaurus.

Quote

sudesh kumar

@qwertyesque

Rocker

Posted: 15 years ago

#77

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I was unaware that structure and private institution were blasphemy. 😕

SVCG must have hit everyone with the thesaurus.

its almost like calling your dad "dude:"..😆.. not illegal but maybe not done... some reverence is expected...

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 15 years ago

#78

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

This is new information for me. Do you have any links or references for further reading on this matter? I'd love to read more into it.

I don't really have any proofs for this. Two names of important temples that I can mention are Angkor Wat and Badrinath. However, quite a large number of people at that time became Buddhists, maybe they altered the temple to suit their new need. So, 'ransack' was the wrong word to use I guess, as I don't know whether they used force to arm-twist the remaining Hindus to give up or not. Maybe they just got rid of the deities which they no longer believed in and altered some of the carvings to make them those of Buddha.

Btw, since you were talking about temples being private institutes used by the public. I was thinking then what about schools? If authorities of school A doesn't allow students of school B to enter school A (especially during school hours), will we say that the authorities are wrong in doing that?

Quote

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 15 years ago

#79

Originally posted by: souro

I don't really have any proofs for this. Two names of important temples that I can mention are Angkor Wat and Badrinath. However, quite a large number of people at that time became Buddhists, maybe they altered the temple to suit their new need. So, 'ransack' was the wrong word to use I guess, as I don't know whether they used force to arm-twist the remaining Hindus to give up or not. Maybe they just got rid of the deities which they no longer believed in and altered some of the carvings to make them those of Buddha.

Btw, since you were talking about temples being private institutes used by the public. I was thinking then what about schools? If authorities of school A doesn't allow students of school B to enter school A (especially during school hours), will we say that the authorities are wrong in doing that?

I'd say more research would have to be done to determine what happened with Angkor Wat and Badrinath. But if you find more info please do share.

Schools public or private have to have nondiscriminatory admission procedures. Students are tied to their school after a fair admission process. They still can enter other school premises for sports, competitions, social events etc. During school hours is a different issue because they should be studying and one can disrupt the other.

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 15 years ago

#80

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I'd say more research would have to be done to determine what happened with Angkor Wat and Badrinath. But if you find more info please do share.

Schools public or private have to have nondiscriminatory admission procedures. Students are tied to their school after a fair admission process. They still can enter other school premises for sports, competitions, social events etc. During school hours is a different issue because they should be studying and one can disrupt the other.

If we say that we won't allow others (say blacks or whites or people from so and so nations) to accept Hinduism, then that would be discrimination. But if we take Hinduism as the institute with the various temples acting as the school buildings and Hindus as the students, then I don't see any discrimination as a temple remains closed for all during the sleeping time and rest of the time it is working hours.