Most political are ignorant to the religion that they are following especially BJP's but not religious leaders or i doubt that

Ideology is worse than religion. It killed and oppressed more than religion ever did.

Uhh... Level of logic doesn't equate to atheist Many people are aTHeIsT because there's no image of GOd So It doesn't makes any sense

@@mr.gamerkabir8142 Bro thinks he said something

@@pranavyedlapalli2127 every darshan of hinduism is debated for hundred of years From Buddha philosophy to Advaita vedanta to charvaka Every philosophy was logically formed and logically dissected with critical thinking and not fuelled by faith

to tu khol na podcast /live streaming channel, gyan chod rha hai

@@the3mevrick sorry for hurting your sentiments.

@@openatheism "sorry for hurting your sentiments." ================================= I wonder what in your comment got 'th3mevrick's' goat! 😂😂

@@ex.hindu.now.atheist it's useless to argue with such people. Thanks mate.

@@openatheism "it's useless to argue with such people. Thanks mate." ======================== You are welcome. :-)

It is not a debate 😂

@@ashakiran268 I know. But the way they were putting points and discussing the topics, I liked it. I couldn't find any other word for it😅

Just no He makes false claims and fails to understand hinduism through Neo buddhists ambedkarites Also the fact He claimed that ramanujacharya created dvaita vedanta and not vishishtadvaita So He will collab with that MF?

​@@mr.gamerkabir8142Cry out loud gunzo😂😂☕

@@mr.gamerkabir8142 🤣 wo MF hai ye aapko kaise pata 🤣 shayad M aapki hogi. Dusri baat ki jab tujhe nahi pata to mat bol, LINDUISM totally fake religion hai aur Buddhism open mind + reality base way of living hai ( i am not a Buddhist, and never will ) duniya ke saare dharam apni apni gali ke 🐕 hai 🤣 JABKI Rationalist kahin se bhi ho, wo ek hote hai ( kuch exceptions har jagah hote hai ) to tu apni MAYYIYA tere parampita Brahma se bacha pehle 🤣

@@manojoy6913 Adhikarana summary: Refutation of the Bauddha Idealists Brahma-Sutra 2.2.28: Sanskrit text and English translation. नाभावः, उपलब्धेः ॥ २८ ॥ nābhāvaḥ, upalabdheḥ || 28 || na-not; abhāvaḥ-non-existence; upalabdheḥ-on account of their being experienced. 28. Non-existence (of things external) is not (true), on account of their being experienced. From this Sutra begins the refutation of the Idealists among the Bauddhas, according to whom only ideas exist and nothing else. According to them the external world is nonexistent. Does it mean that the objective world is absolutely non-existent like the horns of a hare, or does it mean that it is unreal even as the world seen in a dream is unreal. The Sutra refutes the former view. In that case we could not have experienced it. The external world is an object of experience through the senses, and cannot therefore be altogether non-existent like the horns of a hare. The Buddhist may say that he does not affirm that he is conscious of no object, but only that what is seen in his consciousness alone shines as something external. But then the very nature of consciousness itself proves the existence of external things different from consciousness, for men are conscious of things or objects of perception, and nobody is conscious of his perception merely. The very fact that the Bauddhas say that the internal cognition appears ‘as something external’ shows that the external world is real. If it were not real, the comparison ‘like something external’ would be meaningless. No one says that Devadatta is like the son of a barren woman. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.29: Sanskrit text and English translation. वैधर्म्याच्च न स्वप्नादिवत् ॥ २९ ॥ vaidharmyācca na svapnādivat || 29 || vaidharmyāt-Owing to the difference of nature; ca-and; na-is not; svapnādivat-like dreams etc. 29. And owing to the difference of nature (in consciousness between the waking and the dream state, the experience of the waking state) is not like dreams etc. This Sutra refutes the alternative view given in the previous Sutra. The Bauddhas may say that perception of the external world is to be considered similar to dreams and the like. In a dream there are no external objcts; yet the ideas appear in a twofold form as subject and object. The appearance of an external world is similarly independent of any objective reality. This Sutra refutes that view. There is a difference between the dream state and the waking state. What is seen in a dream is contradicted by waking experience, it is unreal. The dream state is a kind of memory, but the waking state is a real perception; so it cannot be rejected as untrue. Moreover, what is the proof of the existence of consciousness except experience? If that is so, why should not an object which is experienced be taken also as existing ? It may be said that even the Vedantins acknowledge the unreality of the external world, since it is contradicted by the knowledge of Brahman, and that this view is based on the Srutis. But if the Bauddhas accept the authority of the Vedas, then they would be included within the Vedantic school and no longer remain outside it, but as a matter of fact they do not accept the Vedas. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.30: Sanskrit text and English translation. न भावः, उनुपलब्धेः ॥ ३० ॥ na bhāvaḥ, anupalabdheḥ || 30 || na-Is not; bhāvaḥ-existence; anupalabdheḥ-because (external things) are not experienced. 30. The existence (of Samskaras) is not (possible according to the Bauddhas), because (external things) are not experienced. The Bauddhas say that though external things do not exist, yet the actual variety of notions like pot, cloth, etc. can be accounted for by the preceding Samskaras or mental impressions left by previous experience, even as the impressions of the waking state give rise to the variety of experience in the dream state. This view is not tenable, says the Sutra, for mental impressions are impossible without the perception of external objects, and this the Bauddhas deny. The assumption of a beginningless series of mental impressions as cause rnd effect would only lead to a regressus in infinitum and not solve the difficulty. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.31: Sanskrit text and English translation. क्षणिकत्वाच्च ॥ ३१ ॥ Kṣaṇikatvācca || 31 || Kṣaṇikatvāt-On account of the momentariness; ca-and. 31. And on account of the momentariness (of the ego-consciousness it cannot be the abode of the Samskaras). The mental impressions must have an abode. Without that they cannot exist. But the doctrine of momentariness denies permanency to everything. Even the Alayavijnana or ego-consciousness, is momentary and cannot be that abode. Unless there is a permanent principle connecting the past, present, and future, there cannot be remembrance or recognition of an experience originating at a particular time and place. If the Alayavijnana is said to be something permanent, then that would go counter to the doctrine of momentariness. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.32: Sanskrit text and English translation. सर्वथानुपपत्तेश्च ॥ ३२ ॥ sarvathānupapatteśca || 32 || sarvathā-In every way; nupapatteḥ-being illogical; ca-and. 32. And (as the Bauddha system is) illogical in every way (it cannot be accepted). This Sutra can also be interpreted as refuting the Nihilists: The translation would then be : And (as Nihilism) is illogical etc. Nihilism of the Bauddhas goes counter to everything. It goes against the Sruti, the Smriti, perception, inference, and every other means of right knowledge and so has to be entirely disregarded by those who are mindful of their welfare. Refutatation of the main philosophy of Buddha by JAGADGURU ADI SHANKARACHARYA

@@manojoy6913 aage Dvaita vedanta created by RAMANUJA? iska jawab nahi hai? Kyu? Buddhism rational aur open minded? Ashoka ne kitne massacre karvaye the Buddhism ke naam par? Yaad hai? Pata hai Buddhism mein bhi heaven and hell ka concept hai? Maine na apke aur na aapke kisi bhi parivar ke baare mein bola magar tabh bhi apni aukat dikha di

Rationalism is never an artifact. May be u r pre existing biases makes you think so. What ever we say you find it antagonistic to you 😂😂😂. Simple question we are giving RS 100 as revenue to center and get only ₹ 27 back the rest ₹ 73 is split among north of India would you be willing to do the same ?? Inspite of this you say we are antagonistic i.e pre-existing bias against us south of india

​@@avinashm2255Okay, try remembering that we are living in a concept called as country, now. People of North are very hardworking and honest at their work, it's just that their politicians are not so very good in terms of governance.

@@amangupta-rz7hn tell that to @ubermensch1979 who started that and blamed us for being antagonistic to North. Don't lecture us about the concept of Country first you learn to respect and be accomodative to others. Only you are in a eco chamber believing that only North Indian caste Hindus are total representatives of india. I agree people are good every where and governance is not good but that's not relevant to this conversation

True. Look at religion as a tool and don't take details very seriously. Use your brain + be religious. Hindu religion especially is motivating you to asks questions. It reflects in different vedas. Such as asthavakra gita, and bhagwad gita too. The most important question - who are you?, whoever attempts to answer that and have a discussion in my eyes is the best religion. Just take the positive things and don't take what doesn't sit with you. Hindu religion is very tolerant, no hard lines in terms of how to be a hindu. Don't listen to anyone who claims they are the ideal hindu. The most ideal hindu will not boast, and will appreciate questioning on the core.

@@sarthakd1840 thanks brother you are right.

@@sarthakd1840 I have seen Mahabharata Gita on KZfaq it teaches nice things . Ramayana teaches never to be proud of ourselves like ravan etc. So we should take what sits with us from hindu religion not everything that people say which also includes pseudoscience etc.

@Himanshu "As a montheist Hindu, I don't [...] from his guest." =========================================== What is a 'MONTHEIST'? Do you mean 'monOtheist' ?

@@ex.hindu.now.atheist I have edited now.

@@Himanshu-vz5xe there's nothing monotheism in hinduism By monotheism Which philosophy do you follow? Bhagavd gita 9.3-4 is beyond any type of theism

@@mr.gamerkabir8142 I follow the six schools of Hindu philosophy, particularly I am fond of Nyaya philosophy. How do verses 9.3 and 9.4 prove your point? I don't see that. What does "beyond theism" mean anyway? "There is nothing monotheism in Hinduism" Maybe I should have used just theism instead of "monotheism", but what I wanted to say is I believe God has one form, i.e, I don't subscribe to the notion of mainstream Hinduism where God is depicted in many human forms.

@@Himanshu-vz5xe bhagavd gita 9.3 means Everything pervades INSIDE ME That refers to pantheistic and panentheistic(universe inside god) Nonetheless Beyond theism is referring to Advaita which is not pantheistic(most probably) or panentheistic (quite accurate)not polytheistic monotheistic I hope this helps

Nastik and atheist are two different things..😂 ok if it's different thing then am i allowed to shout rama was a wife beater in ram mandir!

@@prithwipatil5813 try it

@@Vededits6542 😜i know the consequences "Thai teeli laam" army gonna eat me.. so stop your bullsh!t.. do u know who else are cool with thier children being atheist Christians, Jews, many African regions, Norse, zoroastrianism almost every religion except Islam so stop acting like your religion is "special"

@@Vededits6542 mob lynching ho jyga bhakts are illiterate too and hindu books are pure religious ...vedas says to punish the nasik

Not possible. Even if you're free of all desires, you're not free from the desire to be free of all desires. 😅😂

mirchi lagi kya..? it's always good to be on learning path rather than falling for some mumbo-jumbo..

@@AP-eb8hd Mereko kyon mirchi lagegi ? Wikipedia professor ko jo upload karna hai wo kare mari balaa se.

I belong to Northern India, the social environment has been polluted and people have been polarized based on religion in the past decade. Instead of becoming more receptive to others, people are being brainwashed to judge others in the name of their religion and religious identity. Even I see my friends and colleagues have been easily taken for a ride by hardliners. It's all very depressing where our generation and new one is heading. People need to keep their religion and regulations their identity to themselves at the same time be ok with others beliefs.

Then simply drop the bhakti (devotional) path, try other onces if you find them intresting which doesn't require a literal faith in an anthropological godly being with a will to par take in human affair. Like Gyana (knowledge oriented) or karma (action oriented) path where the notion of non dualist immanent substrate of God is emphasized rather than the all loving deity aspect. Essentially core understanding of God in Hinduism is atheistic so it really doesn't matter which path you take when at the end it demands you to renounce the notion of personal god (except if you are part or Madhavacharya or Isckon cult). + idk how you find him that narcissistic when even surrendering water to him once a day will suffice the devotional commitment he excepts his followers to have.

Once you realize all this god stuff is what humans created out of free time, you'll pretty much get the answers..

@@adi-qx8ls "Then simply drop the bhakti (devotional) [...] commitment he excepts his followers to have." ====================== Why should I surrender ANY THING to ANY ('concept' of) god-even if it is the word-play, word-salad, 'non-dualist' (concept of) god advocated by Advaita (which is what you seem to be peddling)? There is NO VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE that I owe ANY THING to ANY god; heck, *there is NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that ANY god exists, in the first place!*

@@AP-eb8hd "Once you realize all this god stuff [...] you'll pretty much get the answers.." ======================= Yes, I agree with you. There is no credible evidence that any of the god-stuff is and/or has been created by any entity other than human beings (presumably to control other human beings). The only logical, rational answer is: 'stop basing your decisions and the choices that you make on the UNPROVEN CLAIMS that (ANY) god exists. At the very least, stop making laws, rules, and regulations based on religion-based, god-based beliefs.'

It does

You don't need to offer anything to "atheist gurus/gods".. see it saves your time and money😜

@@gukananand6647 🤣😂 naaa!!!! It ONLY replaces one set of activities with another set of activities which can even be injurious to your body and soul

@@KasimAnafo-re7wu what set of activities

@@prithwipatil5813 🤣😂☝️naaaa!!!! It only replaces one set of activities with another set of activities which can be injurious to your body and soul , u only thinking about the good side , but u must know every system has positive and negative sides , the other stuffs attached to atheism way of life will definitely come up and EAT your time and money

Just two people having a rational conversation with logical arguments, that's all I could see. When you have a 1hr 28min conversation you won't agree with everything that other individuals say! So your point is very subjective rather than objective!

I can sense your inability to digest views u don’t believe in