Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on hindus in india
Hinduism in indian culture
Hinduism in indian culture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on hindus in india
This essay will be about the beliefs and teachings of Swami Vivekananda a famous religious leader from India who had substantial influence on the revival of Hinduism in the 19th century and nationalism felt by Indians in regards to the British rule.
Vivekananda thought that the human mind was restless, hyperactive and constantly curious. He likened it to a monkey in that it was in our mind’s nature to be incessantly active and unfocused so he stressed on concentration, that if our minds’ were more focused they would be much more powerful. This leads on to his reasons for god existing. The human mind is always restless claiming that it needs proof and evidence for something to be true. But you do not need a torch to see the sun, to show you that it really is there, it is self-effulgent, it is the truth and it shows itself on its own it needs nothing else. The truth is staring us in the face. If truth needs evidence what will evidence that evidence and so forth. In accordance to natural theology it is evident that there must have been something or someone who created this complex world and rather than having to find evidence for everything and then trying to find evidence for that we should stop scampering, wind down and focus. That the truth is there but invisible to the monkey like mind. The truth is that there is a god and we should not be constantly be trying to find ways around the truth to satisfy yourself. This idea is linked towards the design argument with both using the fact that there must be some intelligent creator, however this views it in a different way with rather than the universe explaining the existence of a god, God is self- explanatory, it is just looking at the fact that there is a god and his presence is fe...
... middle of paper ...
...hink the same as them. Religions preach love, love of god and love of others, the fanatics are people who do not understand the love that is spoken of and think that their love of god is shown by destroying opposition. These people are not devotees of a religion and are not close to god at all, they are furthering themselves away from god. The love of god that is taught is a love of everyone, a love that pervades religion and one that results in acceptance of others. Fanatics do not belong to any religion, they are on their own.
These are the beliefs and teachings of Swami Vivekananda and his perception of the world, the universe and God. The foundations of his belief are based on the soul, karma and faith. These beliefs can be found at the roots of every religion and are extremely important when valuing the arguments for the nature of god.
The controversial topic involving the existence of God has been the pinnacle of endless discourse surrounding the concept of religion in the field of philosophy. However, two arguments proclaim themselves to be the “better” way of justifying the existence of God: The Cosmological Argument and the Mystical Argument. While both arguments attempt to enforce strict modus operandi of solidified reasoning, neither prove to be a better way of explaining the existence of God. The downfall of both these arguments rests on commitment of fallacies and lack of sufficient evidence, as a result sabotaging their validity in the field of philosophy and faith.
Not only did the inequality and separation of the Indian society frustrate the citizens of India, but the imperialism Britain had upon them as well. In the early 20th century, Indian nationalists wanted to take a stand against the British rule and make India independent. The British created unfair laws that created a nationalist movement in India to regain their freedom. He believed that there should not be a Caste System because of one’s birth.
However, there is no researchers or method to either prove or disprove the existence of “God”. Descartes argues that the mind and soul cannot be measure in science; the mindless mechanistic “coincidences” is the direct results of God’s work. To conclude, the argument is all about faith and beliefs. There is no doubt that science contradicts religion, even some greatest scientists of the world have declared that there is some invisible power that we cannot explain through science. Yet, I believe that we should consider evidence that we have in order to examine the reality and “truth”. Our experiences of everyday life, the time that passed, the behaviors that we observe, were far more convincing than something that bases on a vague
forgiven, so there is no need to ‘force’ yourself to believe. This argument is far from proving the existence of God, it argues more for. the purpose of believing in him rather than whether he actually exists. The.. In conclusion, all the arguments bar one that have been covered have. been strongly criticised, questioning their validity.
In Descartes’ second meditation, he offers up an argument for Defective Nature Doubt that brings forth the idea that we can’t be certain of anything we perceive being actual and real (153). Descartes thinks that there is a possibility that we are constantly being deceived due to the fact that we don’t know, with perfect certainty, know where our ideas originate from (154). He tries to describe a method in order to dispel this Defective Nature Doubt by giving an argument for the existence of God. I think that the argument he gives for the existence of God is valid, yet I find it to be unsound due to the fact that a few of his premises are can easily be debated. In order to express this opinion, I will first provide explanations of the premises and conclusions of the argument, and then I will critique the premises that I find to be inadequate in order to support my opinion that Descartes’ argument is valid but unsound.
In this universe everything has a cause of its existence, so this universe might have a cause, but no is sure who created, so we as humans think that God created this universe, but unless if you’re an atheist who doesn’t believe in God. The reason time exist because of this universe, which mean that time has a cause and time didn’t exist before if the universe wasn’t existed. At the end of the day, as opposed to surmise that God exists, we may think there is only an interminable relapse of causes. Something has dependably existed. God's presence isn't coherently demonstrated, yet it is likely, given the premises. Considered without anyone else, the claim God exists is exceptionally implausible, says Swinburne. However, in light of the cosmological contention, it turns out to be more plausible, on the grounds that God's presence is the best clarification for why the universe exists. God is the real reason why orders and purpose of things that we find on this universe, according to design, viz. We can include the contention from religious experience and a contention from supernatural occurrences. Each work a similar way, “The presence of God is the best clarification for these wonders”. When we set up every one of these contentions together, he asserts, it turns out to be more likely that God exists than that God doesn't. the premises are conceivable, and the inductions are natural. So, in spite of the fact that it isn't an explanatory
The statement "everyone is a Hindu" is an extremely broad one that is open to much interpretation. This owes partly to the fact that Hinduism itself is a broad and vast religion with many ways of following. In this paper I seek to explain that the statement "everyone is a Hindu" is a worthy one because Hindus have a sense of interconnectedness in all organisms and life on earth, and that the ultimate goal of a person is to join the rest of the universe in "moksha." Additionally, the attribute of the Hinduism that lends well to the statement is that Hinduism is a very hospitable religion that not only requires no specific adherence or conversion, it stresses the understanding of other religions as well.
Mahatma Gandhi and Thomas Aquinas were two of the most influential philosophers of their respective times. Aquinas’s theological ideas on politics, ethics, and natural law have influenced have been a great influence western civilization and he is also held in high regard within the Catholic faith tradition, being honored as a saint. Gandhi was an influential leader in the movement for India’s freedom from British rule. He preached a philosophy of nonviolent civil disobedience and is held as the inspiration for civil rights leaders and non-violent activists around the world. Both philosophers sought to instruct others on how to live a virtuous life and help contribute towards the common good of all people. However, Aquinas and Gandhi hold different views on how their shared goal is to be met. When comparing the two philosophies, one finds that Thomas Aquinas’s philosophy of natural law is superior to Gandhi’s philosophy of Satyagraha since it allows individuals and countries a way to justifiably defend themselves against those who wish to do them harm.
...e of an "architect" of the world (similar to what we might call mother nature), not a supreme creator. The leap from using this the empirical proof of an "architect" to a "creator" is done entirely through speculative reason, and can not be looked upon as being proof that there is a God.
This is an essay about Mahatma Gandhi and his beliefs about the world, and his belief compared to what I believe and think about the world and how it works. I will be covering the points of non-violence, gods and higher power beliefs and the true behavior of people and what Gandhi and I believe about these points. Also the Hindu beliefs of Satya, Ahimsa, and Brahmacharya.
A disruption of values arises as a powerful factor in the creation of Gandhi’s theory pertaining to spiritual sickness and the gener...
Eliot, Sir Charles. HINDUISM AND BUDDHISM. 1921. Vol. 1. London: ROUTLEDGE & KEGAN PAUL LTD, 1954. 3 vols. wisdom library. Web. 9 Dec. 2013. .
Dr. William Lane Craig supports the idea of existence of God. He gives six major arguments, in order to defend his position. The first argument is quite fare, Craig says that God is the best reason of existence of everything. He gives the idea, that the debates between all the people, cannot reach the compromise, because the best explanation of the reasons of existence of everything is God, and nothing can be explained without taking Him into consideration. The second argument of Craig is from a cosmological point of view: he says that the existence of the universe is the best proof of the existence of God. Because, the process of the creation of the universe is so ideally harmonious, that it seems impossible to appear accidentally. The third argument is about the fine tuning of the universe. The universe is designed in such a way that people always have aim of life, and the life of people and the nature are interconnected. The fourth argument of Dr. Craig is about the morality: God is the best explanation of the existence of the morality and moral values in people’s lives. The...
Kumar, Ravindra. Mahatma Gandhi at the Close of Twentieth Century. New Delhi: Anmol Publications, 2004. Print.
There is a distinct difference between popular Indian nationalism, that is the nation believing in a state independent of Britain, and Indian nationalist movements, for example the Muslim League or the Hindu revivalist movement. These movements fought for independence but were far more religiously orientated and were fighting in their own interests. Although Indian nationalism initially found expression in the Mutiny of 1857, its deve...