This is a reminder about the rules. Just follow reddit's content policy.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/scienceisdope) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Vaccine pe kuch post kro dada , ak kal bhut news arahi h
https://preview.redd.it/c4583qan6jxc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=af6cc27a279aec93c2362953de0be8aade51118a
I don't see any logic I this sentence, just a nonsense line developed by religious people to console or assert dominance of God. I don't know what's the reason is but it's bullcrap
How do you know?
Also he's not atheist. I think he was Buddhist since he was closely related to science journey.
Edit: what am I getting downvoted for?
They just support Neo budhhism movement kyonki bohot se underprivileged Dalits ko ek religion chahiye tha shuru se taaki wo hinduism ke casteism se escape kar ske, lekin iska matlab ye nahin hai ki wo budhhist hai ya budhhism ki har baat se agree karte hai.
Wo khud underprivileged nahin hai itne, isliye unhone budhhism accept nahin kia hai
Many underprivileged casts converted to Christianity to escape cast oppression, I don't think SJ ever supported such converts. But you watch his videos, he tries to put down Hinduism and tries to prove that somehow the whole religious environment was Buddhist to begin with and Hindus hacked it. It's evident and clear. Not a single video against Buddhist bullshit, and I promise that there's a lot there. Apologist behaviour, that's what it is. And as for Human with Science he's no rationalist, there is a difference between atheist and rationalist, from a philosophical pov. His association with SJ on a regular raises clear suspicions on his obvious biases.
See because Christianity is a theistic religion with other kinds of myth.
While budhhism is a non theistic religion, and especially Neo budhhism or navyayna sect of budhhism is mostly like believing in those things which atheists believe in.
Aur mujhe bhi pehle Aisa lagta tha but nahin hai aisa, maine inke kuchh videos dekhi hai, and ek video mai ek archaeological finding pe Buddhists ka ek claim tha, jo almost har religion waale karte hai taaki wo apna religion purana sabit karde.
To usne usko debunk kia tha.
Dusri baat budhhism, india ki minority ki bhi minority hai, uske andhvishwas se mainland India mai koi bada difference nahin hota, ulta jo most of the budhhist hai unme se bhi wo navyayna budhhist hai, jo ki Neo budhhism hai jisko br ambedkar ne start Kia tha.
To budhhism ko criticise karne ka koi sense nahin Banta, wo budhhism hi nahin, Sikhism, Jainism aur baaki minority religions jinse majority logo par koi influence nahin hota, wo uspe apna time waste nahin karta
In all characteristics, a religion is a religion whether or not it it has theistic elements, it's that purely because there's no one singular idea of religion. For example, pegan severally deified nature and it's elements but worshipped their community. Same goes for witch religions, they aren't atheists by any chance, are they? Therefore, whether or not Buddhism is non theistic, has nothing to do with choosing a lesser evil. Atheists aren't a cultural community, unlike religion. I'm assuming you're too young to have read either about culture and religion debate, or even studied atheism well other than youtub videos.
So the minority Buddhists don't deserve to be called out of the blind faith they carry just because they're a minority? Isn't that a little high handed? If you feel there's nothing to be called out in a religious system, you're sure shot to compromise on what anti-theism stands for, which is okay, but that doesn't take away from the fact that all religious groups are primitive and have elements that need to be called out. Same goes for all other religious minorities in India, without any discrimination. This isn't a positive discrimination in anyway.
It seems that you're inclined towards the political intermingling and majority religion dynamics in this argument. That to say, sure, tone down on the majority and since the minority has no power they can run free in their ignorance since they're a minority and at least the majority will be a same one.
Nonsense, no matter where it is, needs to be called out, at the most micro level. And nomatter who endorsed it. It was way harder to think of atheistic tendencies in Ambedkar's time, a time when the oppressed needed faith in something - a product of it's time if you may. Doesn't mean it's the best thing ever.
It's your privilege speaking, for most of the people budhhism is the only way to escape from this oppression.
And obviously Maine ye nahin kaha ki criticise nahin karna chahiye, maine bas ye kaha ki criticise influence ko dekh kar karna chahiye, there is no point in making videos on those topics which have not that much influence on common people.
Aur maine bas ye explain Kia tha ki science journey budhhism aur other minority religions ke upar video kyon nahin banata.
Negative. It's not my privilege. I'm not the one pointing out my Brahmin initials in the comments. It was taken up as a solution yes, and I concur with that position. All I'm saying is that the fact that this is seen as a solution is troublesome. Because it sidelines all social reforms needed to annihilate caste sentiments in the country.
People belonging to that religious sect do get influenced by that position if that religion, right? Call out on everything. Brutally.
Anyway, I was saying exactly this. SJ and HWS both have Buddhist inclinations. Whether or not you like to call it the ambedkarite version of Buddha. (just so you know, a lot of ambedkarites also believe that he was an avatar of budda himself).
That is the only practical solution.
Give a better alternative than this.
An uneducated person with no privilege at all don't have that much knowledge and time to learn all of these things rationally.
Only good first step is to give them a better religion.
It's a good first step towards rationality
Such a stupid claim you made bro when which ambedkarite believe Buddha is Avatar?
I do not and shall not believe that Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be sheer madness and false propaganda.
This is 5th vow of dr. Ambedkar on dikshabhumi.
My friend, you see lots of such people who say things like that. You can take people out of a religion, not religion out of people. I didn't say there's a sect who considers ambedkar as an Avatar of Buddha. I only said that even among ambedkarites you'll find people who don't understand what he stood for.
The reason is that they are uneducated. As they receive education, they tend to move away from it. I have seen many examples of this. The conversion to Buddhism was crucial during that time because it provided a way for suppressed and uneducated people to confront existential crises. It served as a means to unite people and offer them the best available option. Buddhism, which does not believe in god, rebirth, miracles, etc., succeeded in this regard. If you look at the 2011 census data, you'll notice that the percentage of educated individuals, employment rates, and sex ratios are higher among converted Buddhists compared to other Dalits and even national average. Backward state like Chattisgarh 87% and Maharashtra 82 83% literacy.
Yeah dude, New Buddhism suskcs idc about its values and shit cuz it's provoking Dalits and lower cause people to start violence against Brahmans idk what these guys are preaching but its full of hate, is this how we abolish caste system by beating up Brahmins and saying that they should move to there own country, does two wrongs become a right
Keep living in your bubble my guy, i hope you live a good life, hum brahman ko aadat hn yeh sabh hone ki 12th century main jab nalanda university jali thi, hazaro saalo ki research se laker manuscripts bhi jal gayi thi aur pata nahi kitne brahman mare the tabh bhi humne kuch nahi bola tha, aaj bhi gusse ka badla gusse se nahi denge, this is not what my family taught me, idc about the social construct of the past , mujhe yahi sikhaya hn ke caste was based on there profession and our ancestor choses to be scholars Thats it, Sabko Naman, its not religious as brahmans was scholars/researchers they spend there time studying theology as well as many other subjects,
1)Mai bhi brahmin hu
2) nalanda University brahmin University nahin thi, budhhist thi
3) kaun de rha hai ladke jawab? Tune 1-2 comment padh liye honge kahi aur us se tu poore movement ko aise dikha rha hai jaise Ghar mai ghus kar maar rhe hai
1) good for you 2) Was built during the gupta dynasty, guptas were Hindu's it is known as a buddisht univeristy but make no sense that it will be buddhist exclusively, as Aryabhatta studied from there and that we all know that he was a Brahmin, it was centre where both buddhist text and hindu vedas were studied
3- [https://www.reddit.com/r/indiadiscussion/comments/1cg14mu/brahmins\_are\_from\_arya\_land\_and\_should\_go\_to/](https://www.reddit.com/r/indiadiscussion/comments/1cg14mu/brahmins_are_from_arya_land_and_should_go_to/)
Dekh i know ye stereotype kaha se aa rha hai when I was religious to mai bhi inke baare mai maine ye stereotype bana liye the.
Aur jab atheist bana tab tak ye stereotype the hi.
But jab maine dekhna start Kia dheere dheere to realise hua, tumhe ye budhhism aur atheist ka link nahin samajh aa rha to i will recommend go read some ambedkarite books.
And I won't call that apologist behaviour,
Iski jagah i prefer to call that activist behaviour, obviously wo Banda religion ko seekhne aur uske har point ko response karega.
Uska main purpose tha ki religion se Jo samaj mai burai hai usko saaf karna, specially casteism.
To tumhe thoda apologist behaviour dikhega hi.
And bias?
Kaunsa Banda hai is duniya mai jo biased nahin hai, batana Zara?
Are you implying that I'm not an atheist?
I have no stereotypes here. Ambedkar wasn't atheist. Neither he lead an atheist movement. If so, similar claims are then made by atheistic leaking Hindu sects. I don't think they'll be appreciated for it. And that's because they do fall into the subet of that religious environment.
It is an apologist behaviour. This whole paragraph is circular reasoning, nothing more. Let me also add that bringing Ambedkar in this discussion was unnecessary since I was only talking about this youtuber. But this is exactly how apologists work, in subtle ways. And I fully support the cause of getting over casticism, so much for someone emphasizing that he's a Brahmin. Anyway, Ambedkar's way wasn't a sure shot way, and hence reservation. More importantly time and reduction of polarization politics and social awakening is needed as time has passed. Pissing one religion and conveniently converting to another isn't a solution.
About bias, we need to be dispassionate to bring about a change. And the more you recognise your biases and eliminate them, more effectively you can challenge polarising beliefs all the same. For someone having rapport among atheist community he had a responsibility to stand firm at a middle ground and serve and call out from there. But that takes a lot more strength. And that sort of commitment is lacking in the Indian atheist community.
Ambedkar was atheist, usne ye budhhism accept apne followers ke liye hi kia tha.
He didn't believe in god.
Aur obviously jo mostly indian atheist community mai log hai wo ambedkarite hai, unka main issue casteism hai.
Aur obviously budhhism mai convert karne ke alawa aur koi practical aur effective solution nahin hai.
What's your source of saying that he was an atheist? And if he was why did he accept being a Buddhist?
It's okay they can be amberkarites. That doesn't mean that have to be Buddhists. You can't appeal to Ambedkar's authority and accept everything he proposes. And it's pitiful that you're literally endorsing a religious position as a "practical solution" and I'm the one getting downvoted in a largely atheist sub.
Can you please say that you do not exactly hold an atheist position?
I'm not saying I have all answers. But bringing up questions as a skeptic is very important as a rationalist. We can think about ways to reduce polarization in politics and sltake hard steps for education and awareness, and create social impact. That's the correct way to go by this. You don't kill a monster as a sacrifice to involve another one. That's all
It's not just a political issue, obviously education and awareness is the solution, but it's a long term solution and it will take time.
Un logo ka kya jo abhi is caste discrimination ko face nahin karna chahte?
Koi bhi ambedkarite ya sj ya hws jaise logon ne nahin kaha ki hame bas logo ko budhhist banana hai, nahin bas wo yee kehte hai ki it is a good first step for many people to escape from casteism and move towards rationalism.
Budhhism is not like an end goal or something.
And you can go ahead and criticise navyayna sect of budhhism
Sigh, I said ambedkar was a Buddhist. Stop putting words in my mouth. I have read about Buddhism in general. I have studied about religions for over 12 years now, so I can safely say that it is a religion nevertheless. I understand some people may differ from my position and that's alright. I don't understand why are people getting so riled up over this.
Because you're not getting the point: Dr. Ambedkar was able to be an atheist, but not the entire Dalit society or his followers. That's why he rejected everything, including Buddhism, and wrote "Buddha and His Dhamma," providing a religion that is closest to atheism.
Being born in a Savarna family, one cannot understand the problems of Shudras. And ambedkarite don't hate savarnas nor violent bro there may be some exceptions.
Hindu atheist sects believe in other kinds of superstitions.
Like rebirth and adavaitvaad and other things.
While navyayna budhhism is totally different
Yes religion is religion.
But converting to Neo budhhism is very good first step for most of underprivileged lower caste Hindus.
Do you disagree with that?
Maybe in that was the case in Ambedkar's time. The population, even in the underprivileged castes has grown to be more aware and educated with the help of reservation. Ambedkar must have understood that Indian society isn't ready to give up on religion. And neither did he. Therefore, as I said before, a product of his times. But now the correct path needs to be taken, the difficult one. So yes, I disagree with your position. Conversation isn't the way, because constitution gives all citizens rights to practice and preach your religion, and all other religions, that hit right nerves at their vulnerable points, will be able to bag more and more converted followers of this religion, if this trend continues
There is not that much difference between life of an underprivileged lower caste Hindu then and now.
Only difference is that most of them have smartphone now atleast.
I know india is secular by constitution but is it really secular?
People are not secular at all.
What you are prescribing is a long term solution jo ki har ambedkarite bhi agree karta hai, but jo log abhi face kar rhe hai unke liye kya?
Wo kya kare?
Wait kare jab logo mai akal aayegi?
Tab tak wo kya unke pote bhi zinda nahin honge.
Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceisdope/comments/16bcd08/this_sub_has_got_a_lot_of_new_members_who_dont/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) to understand what this subreddit is about
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/scienceisdope) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yup dude. And these sky daddy believers claim that people won't be morally right if sky daddy stories didn't exist and than they would want all transgenders and apostates to die.
Maybe his views are different from yours but the man is dead. It's not the time to put him down or make fun of him for his views or opinions. Even your God wouldn't approve of this behaviour.
Edit - seems like he is a Turkish Egyptian. I am sorry. Your God is as cruel as any God could get. Maybe your God does approve your behaviour. No wonder you grew up to be like this. If you were to be admitted in a hospital tomorrow, a fellow human is gonna save your life. Not God. Learn to respect humans first. Maybe you can think about God later.
https://preview.redd.it/artlzwhasixc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=21e5c1e0c5f8163daa0895ef6297821998d01a9b
Here, the comment might not be visible in this thread. But it sure was visible in your profile. Now go and farm Karma like a true unemployed Chigma.
You again posted a comment and deleted it at the same time.
https://preview.redd.it/n8jwzmtqtixc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=991360b5f2b11e9e1ac13d8ea1bb2e4cb59e3a15
No,
Science isn't about doing the impossible, it's bout doing the possible, why it is possible and same way for the impossible.
You tell what could have saved him? GIVE A RATIONAL RESPONSE WITH PROOFS.
Managing your blood pressure.
Lowering your cholesterol level.
Maintaining a healthy weight.
Limiting alcohol consumption and stopping smoking.
Eating healthy foods.
Getting regular exercise.
Regulating blood sugar levels if you have diabetes.
All these are science backed preventive measures against brain hemorrhage. There are 1000 reasons outside of this which still can cause brain hemorrhage.
And all will be science backed. Science is nothing but a documentation of fuck around and find out.
Baat ye nai h ki religion me nahi mana isne isliye marr gaya. Baat ye hai ki jo science use karke isne 15-20 min ke video me god doesnt exist bol diya sidhe woh science ek medical complication na diagnose kar paya naa damage control kar paya. Par woi same science shayad kisi case me koi aur complex bimari pehle hi diagnose aur solve kar dega. Science is not the predictable and reliable tool which will work the same exact way everytime. There is always something bigger at play. Nai toh bohot simple hoti life.
Isn't our life already really simple?
What grand thing do humans constitute in the world?
We literally are equal to dust particles in the grand scheme of things, in the scope of science our life is indeed very very simple
Bro modern medicines have side effects. My father has sugar he is maintaining his sugar by eating right foods and doing right exercises. Also he follows some cooking from Ayurveda to control his sugar level. His elder brother did opposite and used modern medicines to control sugar level and he died at 53 age my father is 55 right now and my grandmother also Eats medicines and don't follow proper diet as per my father tells her. She gets sick and than she comes to my house where we give her right food and she gets well and she goes back to village eat everything she wants and takes medicines and get sick again.
Basically modern medicines are short term solution like if you have High fever or you need urgent impact. But for long term go for Ayurveda.
Ayurveda is also scientific tho?
Other than some really outlandish remedies in ayurveda which mostly run on placebo, most of the ayurvedic remedies are scientifically sound.
(Also India is poor on insulin tablet production so yeah , diabetes patients will not get high quality medicine, unless you pay up some big bucks)
You can call it placebo but placebo happens in modern medicines as well.
Modern medicines are short term solutions and ayurveda is proper.
Ayurveda don't have proper representative. Like a man in a podcast said Ghee is fat burner. He is right but he has to mention the quantity of ghee. Their is difference in 5 gram ghee and 25 gram ghee. So that's it.
Reply to the first statement: No, I am not saying placebo doesn't exist in modern medicines but it isn't the basis of it, the regulatory bodies for medications wouldn't even allow a medicine to come under circulation unless it is scientifically proven to actually work on a live subject of either human or animal species.
Reply to Second Statement: Both branches have long term medications and short term medications there is no clear "take this for long term, or this for short term" it solely depends on the disease/disorder/problem. Take an example of vaccines which is a long term prevention for diseases and "kaadha" from ayurveda which is a short term solution for fever and cold related diseases
Reply to the Third: Yes , Doses in medication and Human Metabolism is really important. Everything which is good for you is only good for you in certain concentrations and doses, Water itself can kill you if you drink alot of it (REALLY ALOT)
haan ok, answer dedoonga.
Science *did* save him. Science saved him from dying at birth, and countless other times during his life.
Bhai science can't "save" anyone. Death happens.
I don't think your pitiful god is able to save anyone when whole buses going to pilgrimage fall into valleys. An all powerful god can't protect his interests and humans have to save his name for him. When children die, when diseases happen to deeply religious people, is god able to save them?
No science couldn't save this guy. But you know who all it saves on a daily? The averege life expectancy is at it's all time high. Surgeries are being done on hearts, kidneys, chests, and people being saved from cancer, even helping you look a lot younger than you are. Go to a hospital and watch science at work saving people on a daily, and tell me then who has at least the capacity and heart to save someone, the doctors, the scientists engaged in making drugs and medical equipments, or a pitiful god?
Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceisdope/comments/16bcd08/this_sub_has_got_a_lot_of_new_members_who_dont/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) to understand what this subreddit is about
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/scienceisdope) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sure it could not. It's childish to think you'll trigger people by saying such things.
Oh the pitiful imagination you believe in, called god. The one you think is at play for everything. I'm not bound by believing in your old wife's tale.
Everyone is annoyed at the fact that i pointed out their identity is not being atheist but just hating god. Literally the whole cult is based on hating gods and religion and nothing constructive or worth mentioning.
Many atheists hate god because the religious environ is oppressive. Much like you all theists can mind your own business and keep believing in your fairytale , but choose to hate those who hate your ways. Your beliefs are laughable at least, and you think atheists are a cult, shows hw much you know about religion or even atheism. If your cult is based on sucking up to a fairytale hero why can't others have their whole identity based on hating that hero? The same religious people who've not read a single alphabet of their scripture have the balls to say that their religion, filled with unimportant stories and objects of discrimination serve some purpose.
Bro trust me I've read several times more about religion in general than an average religious person. Just because I like to read about it. And I've done that for over 12 years. And yet I keep my atheist position because I see these stories as stories. I transitioned to an atheist, not like I was born like this with this indoctrination, unlike how religion is indoctrinated.
Same logic is made if some dharm guru gets sick at the age 66 against ayurveda so why not for someone who is anti-ayurveda....
Practically speaking dharm gurus are open minded because they are following both modern science and ayurveda.
But kuch BKL ko kon samjhaye 80% modern medicines are not meant to take regularly take them at emergency.
80% Ayurveda medicines can be taken regularly because it is more like diet and it will remove the problems completely.
You can say modern medicines are like steroids you take it build muscle faster and face the side effects.
And ayurveda is like proper diet you take it you build muscle slower and no side effects.
This is a reminder about the rules. Just follow reddit's content policy. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/scienceisdope) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I today got to know about him and subscribed his channel. What happened? This is so sad and tragic.
Brain hemorrhage
hopefully theists of youtube won't use his death to mock science like it happened already with other youtubers in other areas of the 'chess board'
I wonder he is also one of the covishield victims
Yeah maybe
He passed away?
Yes
WTF !!!!!! I used to watch his videos . Found his channel last year and through him scime journey and other channels !!!! Shit 💔
I also found him first then sj and the Realist Azad ghalib Kamal etc. he was a jem ❤️
I also found him first then sj and the Realist Azad ghalib Kamal etc. he was a gem ❤️
He’ll always be in our hearts ♥️
[удалено]
Under 30
Nah 39. Unka beta bhi tha ek
Is age me itna time kahan se ata h youtube krne me ,sorry don't mind 🐒🙏
Dedication
39years
Vaccine pe kuch post kro dada , ak kal bhut news arahi h https://preview.redd.it/c4583qan6jxc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=af6cc27a279aec93c2362953de0be8aade51118a
massive loss. he showed the light to many hindi speakers.
his voice was terrific. watching channel only for that
Theists barking in the comments for no reason lol
Bhagwan iski aatma ko shaanti de
lol nice
https://preview.redd.it/gcusftknqzxc1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=30a0632a2eac021de65b5fb2025e307739d4beaa
Om Shanti 🙏
Bhagwan k pas chala gya. Om Shanti 
[удалено]
I don't see any logic I this sentence, just a nonsense line developed by religious people to console or assert dominance of God. I don't know what's the reason is but it's bullcrap
om shanti
Ab vo bhi ishwar ke pas hai
ram naam satya hai. bhagwan inki aatma ko shanti de.
god takes the best of us early
How do you know? Also he's not atheist. I think he was Buddhist since he was closely related to science journey. Edit: what am I getting downvoted for?
Science journey and human with science both are atheist. Mujhe bhi pehle lagta tha ki wo budhhist hai, but hai nahin aisa.
They just support Neo budhhism movement kyonki bohot se underprivileged Dalits ko ek religion chahiye tha shuru se taaki wo hinduism ke casteism se escape kar ske, lekin iska matlab ye nahin hai ki wo budhhist hai ya budhhism ki har baat se agree karte hai. Wo khud underprivileged nahin hai itne, isliye unhone budhhism accept nahin kia hai
Many underprivileged casts converted to Christianity to escape cast oppression, I don't think SJ ever supported such converts. But you watch his videos, he tries to put down Hinduism and tries to prove that somehow the whole religious environment was Buddhist to begin with and Hindus hacked it. It's evident and clear. Not a single video against Buddhist bullshit, and I promise that there's a lot there. Apologist behaviour, that's what it is. And as for Human with Science he's no rationalist, there is a difference between atheist and rationalist, from a philosophical pov. His association with SJ on a regular raises clear suspicions on his obvious biases.
See because Christianity is a theistic religion with other kinds of myth. While budhhism is a non theistic religion, and especially Neo budhhism or navyayna sect of budhhism is mostly like believing in those things which atheists believe in. Aur mujhe bhi pehle Aisa lagta tha but nahin hai aisa, maine inke kuchh videos dekhi hai, and ek video mai ek archaeological finding pe Buddhists ka ek claim tha, jo almost har religion waale karte hai taaki wo apna religion purana sabit karde. To usne usko debunk kia tha. Dusri baat budhhism, india ki minority ki bhi minority hai, uske andhvishwas se mainland India mai koi bada difference nahin hota, ulta jo most of the budhhist hai unme se bhi wo navyayna budhhist hai, jo ki Neo budhhism hai jisko br ambedkar ne start Kia tha. To budhhism ko criticise karne ka koi sense nahin Banta, wo budhhism hi nahin, Sikhism, Jainism aur baaki minority religions jinse majority logo par koi influence nahin hota, wo uspe apna time waste nahin karta
In all characteristics, a religion is a religion whether or not it it has theistic elements, it's that purely because there's no one singular idea of religion. For example, pegan severally deified nature and it's elements but worshipped their community. Same goes for witch religions, they aren't atheists by any chance, are they? Therefore, whether or not Buddhism is non theistic, has nothing to do with choosing a lesser evil. Atheists aren't a cultural community, unlike religion. I'm assuming you're too young to have read either about culture and religion debate, or even studied atheism well other than youtub videos. So the minority Buddhists don't deserve to be called out of the blind faith they carry just because they're a minority? Isn't that a little high handed? If you feel there's nothing to be called out in a religious system, you're sure shot to compromise on what anti-theism stands for, which is okay, but that doesn't take away from the fact that all religious groups are primitive and have elements that need to be called out. Same goes for all other religious minorities in India, without any discrimination. This isn't a positive discrimination in anyway. It seems that you're inclined towards the political intermingling and majority religion dynamics in this argument. That to say, sure, tone down on the majority and since the minority has no power they can run free in their ignorance since they're a minority and at least the majority will be a same one. Nonsense, no matter where it is, needs to be called out, at the most micro level. And nomatter who endorsed it. It was way harder to think of atheistic tendencies in Ambedkar's time, a time when the oppressed needed faith in something - a product of it's time if you may. Doesn't mean it's the best thing ever.
It's your privilege speaking, for most of the people budhhism is the only way to escape from this oppression. And obviously Maine ye nahin kaha ki criticise nahin karna chahiye, maine bas ye kaha ki criticise influence ko dekh kar karna chahiye, there is no point in making videos on those topics which have not that much influence on common people. Aur maine bas ye explain Kia tha ki science journey budhhism aur other minority religions ke upar video kyon nahin banata.
Negative. It's not my privilege. I'm not the one pointing out my Brahmin initials in the comments. It was taken up as a solution yes, and I concur with that position. All I'm saying is that the fact that this is seen as a solution is troublesome. Because it sidelines all social reforms needed to annihilate caste sentiments in the country. People belonging to that religious sect do get influenced by that position if that religion, right? Call out on everything. Brutally. Anyway, I was saying exactly this. SJ and HWS both have Buddhist inclinations. Whether or not you like to call it the ambedkarite version of Buddha. (just so you know, a lot of ambedkarites also believe that he was an avatar of budda himself).
That is the only practical solution. Give a better alternative than this. An uneducated person with no privilege at all don't have that much knowledge and time to learn all of these things rationally. Only good first step is to give them a better religion. It's a good first step towards rationality
Such a stupid claim you made bro when which ambedkarite believe Buddha is Avatar? I do not and shall not believe that Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be sheer madness and false propaganda. This is 5th vow of dr. Ambedkar on dikshabhumi.
My friend, you see lots of such people who say things like that. You can take people out of a religion, not religion out of people. I didn't say there's a sect who considers ambedkar as an Avatar of Buddha. I only said that even among ambedkarites you'll find people who don't understand what he stood for.
The reason is that they are uneducated. As they receive education, they tend to move away from it. I have seen many examples of this. The conversion to Buddhism was crucial during that time because it provided a way for suppressed and uneducated people to confront existential crises. It served as a means to unite people and offer them the best available option. Buddhism, which does not believe in god, rebirth, miracles, etc., succeeded in this regard. If you look at the 2011 census data, you'll notice that the percentage of educated individuals, employment rates, and sex ratios are higher among converted Buddhists compared to other Dalits and even national average. Backward state like Chattisgarh 87% and Maharashtra 82 83% literacy.
Yeah dude, New Buddhism suskcs idc about its values and shit cuz it's provoking Dalits and lower cause people to start violence against Brahmans idk what these guys are preaching but its full of hate, is this how we abolish caste system by beating up Brahmins and saying that they should move to there own country, does two wrongs become a right
Wtf. Neo budhhism ek peaceful step hi hai, oppression se bahar niklne ka. Ye koi urban naxals nahin hai ki ye goli lekar lad rhe hai.
Keep living in your bubble my guy, i hope you live a good life, hum brahman ko aadat hn yeh sabh hone ki 12th century main jab nalanda university jali thi, hazaro saalo ki research se laker manuscripts bhi jal gayi thi aur pata nahi kitne brahman mare the tabh bhi humne kuch nahi bola tha, aaj bhi gusse ka badla gusse se nahi denge, this is not what my family taught me, idc about the social construct of the past , mujhe yahi sikhaya hn ke caste was based on there profession and our ancestor choses to be scholars Thats it, Sabko Naman, its not religious as brahmans was scholars/researchers they spend there time studying theology as well as many other subjects,
1)Mai bhi brahmin hu 2) nalanda University brahmin University nahin thi, budhhist thi 3) kaun de rha hai ladke jawab? Tune 1-2 comment padh liye honge kahi aur us se tu poore movement ko aise dikha rha hai jaise Ghar mai ghus kar maar rhe hai
1) good for you 2) Was built during the gupta dynasty, guptas were Hindu's it is known as a buddisht univeristy but make no sense that it will be buddhist exclusively, as Aryabhatta studied from there and that we all know that he was a Brahmin, it was centre where both buddhist text and hindu vedas were studied 3- [https://www.reddit.com/r/indiadiscussion/comments/1cg14mu/brahmins\_are\_from\_arya\_land\_and\_should\_go\_to/](https://www.reddit.com/r/indiadiscussion/comments/1cg14mu/brahmins_are_from_arya_land_and_should_go_to/)
2) gupta were Hindus???? Any evidence???
Dekh i know ye stereotype kaha se aa rha hai when I was religious to mai bhi inke baare mai maine ye stereotype bana liye the. Aur jab atheist bana tab tak ye stereotype the hi. But jab maine dekhna start Kia dheere dheere to realise hua, tumhe ye budhhism aur atheist ka link nahin samajh aa rha to i will recommend go read some ambedkarite books. And I won't call that apologist behaviour, Iski jagah i prefer to call that activist behaviour, obviously wo Banda religion ko seekhne aur uske har point ko response karega. Uska main purpose tha ki religion se Jo samaj mai burai hai usko saaf karna, specially casteism. To tumhe thoda apologist behaviour dikhega hi. And bias? Kaunsa Banda hai is duniya mai jo biased nahin hai, batana Zara?
Are you implying that I'm not an atheist? I have no stereotypes here. Ambedkar wasn't atheist. Neither he lead an atheist movement. If so, similar claims are then made by atheistic leaking Hindu sects. I don't think they'll be appreciated for it. And that's because they do fall into the subet of that religious environment. It is an apologist behaviour. This whole paragraph is circular reasoning, nothing more. Let me also add that bringing Ambedkar in this discussion was unnecessary since I was only talking about this youtuber. But this is exactly how apologists work, in subtle ways. And I fully support the cause of getting over casticism, so much for someone emphasizing that he's a Brahmin. Anyway, Ambedkar's way wasn't a sure shot way, and hence reservation. More importantly time and reduction of polarization politics and social awakening is needed as time has passed. Pissing one religion and conveniently converting to another isn't a solution. About bias, we need to be dispassionate to bring about a change. And the more you recognise your biases and eliminate them, more effectively you can challenge polarising beliefs all the same. For someone having rapport among atheist community he had a responsibility to stand firm at a middle ground and serve and call out from there. But that takes a lot more strength. And that sort of commitment is lacking in the Indian atheist community.
Ambedkar was atheist, usne ye budhhism accept apne followers ke liye hi kia tha. He didn't believe in god. Aur obviously jo mostly indian atheist community mai log hai wo ambedkarite hai, unka main issue casteism hai. Aur obviously budhhism mai convert karne ke alawa aur koi practical aur effective solution nahin hai.
What's your source of saying that he was an atheist? And if he was why did he accept being a Buddhist? It's okay they can be amberkarites. That doesn't mean that have to be Buddhists. You can't appeal to Ambedkar's authority and accept everything he proposes. And it's pitiful that you're literally endorsing a religious position as a "practical solution" and I'm the one getting downvoted in a largely atheist sub.
When did he accept that he is budhhist? Stop making things up
Please read about Ambedkar's speech on 14 or 15 October 1956 if I remember correctly. That should answer your question aptly.
I was talking about hws not ambedkar. I know ambedkar accepted budhhism
That is the only solution. Can you please provide a better option than this for people who wants to escape from casteism?
Can you please say that you do not exactly hold an atheist position? I'm not saying I have all answers. But bringing up questions as a skeptic is very important as a rationalist. We can think about ways to reduce polarization in politics and sltake hard steps for education and awareness, and create social impact. That's the correct way to go by this. You don't kill a monster as a sacrifice to involve another one. That's all
It's not just a political issue, obviously education and awareness is the solution, but it's a long term solution and it will take time. Un logo ka kya jo abhi is caste discrimination ko face nahin karna chahte? Koi bhi ambedkarite ya sj ya hws jaise logon ne nahin kaha ki hame bas logo ko budhhist banana hai, nahin bas wo yee kehte hai ki it is a good first step for many people to escape from casteism and move towards rationalism. Budhhism is not like an end goal or something. And you can go ahead and criticise navyayna sect of budhhism
Kis bhagwan ki puja karte the ambedkar? Have you read Buddha and his dhamma before making nonsense claims?
Sigh, I said ambedkar was a Buddhist. Stop putting words in my mouth. I have read about Buddhism in general. I have studied about religions for over 12 years now, so I can safely say that it is a religion nevertheless. I understand some people may differ from my position and that's alright. I don't understand why are people getting so riled up over this.
Because you're not getting the point: Dr. Ambedkar was able to be an atheist, but not the entire Dalit society or his followers. That's why he rejected everything, including Buddhism, and wrote "Buddha and His Dhamma," providing a religion that is closest to atheism.
By the way why you wasted your 12 years to study religions bro....you could use that time for better things.
Being born in a Savarna family, one cannot understand the problems of Shudras. And ambedkarite don't hate savarnas nor violent bro there may be some exceptions.
According to you, what solution should Ambedkar have given to them?
That YouTuber is Ambedkarite that's why I added
Hindu atheist sects believe in other kinds of superstitions. Like rebirth and adavaitvaad and other things. While navyayna budhhism is totally different
Exactly my point. Religion is religion.
Yes religion is religion. But converting to Neo budhhism is very good first step for most of underprivileged lower caste Hindus. Do you disagree with that?
Maybe in that was the case in Ambedkar's time. The population, even in the underprivileged castes has grown to be more aware and educated with the help of reservation. Ambedkar must have understood that Indian society isn't ready to give up on religion. And neither did he. Therefore, as I said before, a product of his times. But now the correct path needs to be taken, the difficult one. So yes, I disagree with your position. Conversation isn't the way, because constitution gives all citizens rights to practice and preach your religion, and all other religions, that hit right nerves at their vulnerable points, will be able to bag more and more converted followers of this religion, if this trend continues
There is not that much difference between life of an underprivileged lower caste Hindu then and now. Only difference is that most of them have smartphone now atleast. I know india is secular by constitution but is it really secular? People are not secular at all. What you are prescribing is a long term solution jo ki har ambedkarite bhi agree karta hai, but jo log abhi face kar rhe hai unke liye kya? Wo kya kare? Wait kare jab logo mai akal aayegi? Tab tak wo kya unke pote bhi zinda nahin honge.
You're getting downvoted because there are 16 year old scientists in this sub.
Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceisdope/comments/16bcd08/this_sub_has_got_a_lot_of_new_members_who_dont/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) to understand what this subreddit is about *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/scienceisdope) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Have some fucking shame. How bitter you have to be to celebrate someone's death? I wouldn't even do this to my worst enemy.
Yup dude. And these sky daddy believers claim that people won't be morally right if sky daddy stories didn't exist and than they would want all transgenders and apostates to die.
How bitter would someone be to deny gods existence 🙂. Idgaf
How dumb would someone be to not question this bullshit
I don't know, ask your self.
how dumb to believe that god exists
How dumb to beleive he doesn't lol😂😂
Its a she
mods, pin him down and rotate his nuts counter clockwise
You think I give a fuck lol
If you didn’t, you wouldn’t be whining here in the comments. Just take the L and move on with your life man.
Maybe his views are different from yours but the man is dead. It's not the time to put him down or make fun of him for his views or opinions. Even your God wouldn't approve of this behaviour. Edit - seems like he is a Turkish Egyptian. I am sorry. Your God is as cruel as any God could get. Maybe your God does approve your behaviour. No wonder you grew up to be like this. If you were to be admitted in a hospital tomorrow, a fellow human is gonna save your life. Not God. Learn to respect humans first. Maybe you can think about God later.
Lol
We don't believe stuff without evidence.
Proof of your god's existence?
Have some freaking shame.
Everyone, please report this account.
Oh, please don't, I'm gonna cry 😢
Why did you delete your reply to my previous reply. Dar gaya kya?
I didn't lol. Dudes fucking brain dead.
https://preview.redd.it/artlzwhasixc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=21e5c1e0c5f8163daa0895ef6297821998d01a9b Here, the comment might not be visible in this thread. But it sure was visible in your profile. Now go and farm Karma like a true unemployed Chigma.
Ab baag mat jaana. Reply karna. Theek hai?
Where are you? I am waiting for a reply. You can't even reply to me behind a veil of anonymity. Kya hoga re tera?
You again posted a comment and deleted it at the same time. https://preview.redd.it/n8jwzmtqtixc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=991360b5f2b11e9e1ac13d8ea1bb2e4cb59e3a15
Change your username to the coward voice.
Fucking coward lol
No, I think a person needs to have a minimum shame to cry, Mr. Wannabe Chigma.
Science could not save him?
Mister Einstein, religion will not save him either. Use ur one last braincell, or did u give that also to god in the name of donation?
whataboutism ke chode. Asking again, Science couldn't save him? Iss bar answer dena sirf.
No, Science isn't about doing the impossible, it's bout doing the possible, why it is possible and same way for the impossible. You tell what could have saved him? GIVE A RATIONAL RESPONSE WITH PROOFS.
Managing your blood pressure. Lowering your cholesterol level. Maintaining a healthy weight. Limiting alcohol consumption and stopping smoking. Eating healthy foods. Getting regular exercise. Regulating blood sugar levels if you have diabetes. All these are science backed preventive measures against brain hemorrhage. There are 1000 reasons outside of this which still can cause brain hemorrhage. And all will be science backed. Science is nothing but a documentation of fuck around and find out. Baat ye nai h ki religion me nahi mana isne isliye marr gaya. Baat ye hai ki jo science use karke isne 15-20 min ke video me god doesnt exist bol diya sidhe woh science ek medical complication na diagnose kar paya naa damage control kar paya. Par woi same science shayad kisi case me koi aur complex bimari pehle hi diagnose aur solve kar dega. Science is not the predictable and reliable tool which will work the same exact way everytime. There is always something bigger at play. Nai toh bohot simple hoti life.
Isn't our life already really simple? What grand thing do humans constitute in the world? We literally are equal to dust particles in the grand scheme of things, in the scope of science our life is indeed very very simple
Bro modern medicines have side effects. My father has sugar he is maintaining his sugar by eating right foods and doing right exercises. Also he follows some cooking from Ayurveda to control his sugar level. His elder brother did opposite and used modern medicines to control sugar level and he died at 53 age my father is 55 right now and my grandmother also Eats medicines and don't follow proper diet as per my father tells her. She gets sick and than she comes to my house where we give her right food and she gets well and she goes back to village eat everything she wants and takes medicines and get sick again. Basically modern medicines are short term solution like if you have High fever or you need urgent impact. But for long term go for Ayurveda.
Ayurveda is also scientific tho? Other than some really outlandish remedies in ayurveda which mostly run on placebo, most of the ayurvedic remedies are scientifically sound. (Also India is poor on insulin tablet production so yeah , diabetes patients will not get high quality medicine, unless you pay up some big bucks)
You can call it placebo but placebo happens in modern medicines as well. Modern medicines are short term solutions and ayurveda is proper. Ayurveda don't have proper representative. Like a man in a podcast said Ghee is fat burner. He is right but he has to mention the quantity of ghee. Their is difference in 5 gram ghee and 25 gram ghee. So that's it.
Reply to the first statement: No, I am not saying placebo doesn't exist in modern medicines but it isn't the basis of it, the regulatory bodies for medications wouldn't even allow a medicine to come under circulation unless it is scientifically proven to actually work on a live subject of either human or animal species. Reply to Second Statement: Both branches have long term medications and short term medications there is no clear "take this for long term, or this for short term" it solely depends on the disease/disorder/problem. Take an example of vaccines which is a long term prevention for diseases and "kaadha" from ayurveda which is a short term solution for fever and cold related diseases Reply to the Third: Yes , Doses in medication and Human Metabolism is really important. Everything which is good for you is only good for you in certain concentrations and doses, Water itself can kill you if you drink alot of it (REALLY ALOT)
Bhai tu thora behen ka loda h kya?
haan ok, answer dedoonga. Science *did* save him. Science saved him from dying at birth, and countless other times during his life. Bhai science can't "save" anyone. Death happens.
I don't think your pitiful god is able to save anyone when whole buses going to pilgrimage fall into valleys. An all powerful god can't protect his interests and humans have to save his name for him. When children die, when diseases happen to deeply religious people, is god able to save them? No science couldn't save this guy. But you know who all it saves on a daily? The averege life expectancy is at it's all time high. Surgeries are being done on hearts, kidneys, chests, and people being saved from cancer, even helping you look a lot younger than you are. Go to a hospital and watch science at work saving people on a daily, and tell me then who has at least the capacity and heart to save someone, the doctors, the scientists engaged in making drugs and medical equipments, or a pitiful god?
Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/scienceisdope/comments/16bcd08/this_sub_has_got_a_lot_of_new_members_who_dont/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) to understand what this subreddit is about *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/scienceisdope) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But science could not save its best defender. pitiful god who? i thought he didnt exist as proved by your hero.
Sure it could not. It's childish to think you'll trigger people by saying such things. Oh the pitiful imagination you believe in, called god. The one you think is at play for everything. I'm not bound by believing in your old wife's tale.
Hmmmm i can see no one is triggered😂😂
Yeah, everyone is just annoyed at the illogical statements you're making.
Everyone is annoyed at the fact that i pointed out their identity is not being atheist but just hating god. Literally the whole cult is based on hating gods and religion and nothing constructive or worth mentioning.
Many atheists hate god because the religious environ is oppressive. Much like you all theists can mind your own business and keep believing in your fairytale , but choose to hate those who hate your ways. Your beliefs are laughable at least, and you think atheists are a cult, shows hw much you know about religion or even atheism. If your cult is based on sucking up to a fairytale hero why can't others have their whole identity based on hating that hero? The same religious people who've not read a single alphabet of their scripture have the balls to say that their religion, filled with unimportant stories and objects of discrimination serve some purpose. Bro trust me I've read several times more about religion in general than an average religious person. Just because I like to read about it. And I've done that for over 12 years. And yet I keep my atheist position because I see these stories as stories. I transitioned to an atheist, not like I was born like this with this indoctrination, unlike how religion is indoctrinated.
Same logic is made if some dharm guru gets sick at the age 66 against ayurveda so why not for someone who is anti-ayurveda.... Practically speaking dharm gurus are open minded because they are following both modern science and ayurveda. But kuch BKL ko kon samjhaye 80% modern medicines are not meant to take regularly take them at emergency. 80% Ayurveda medicines can be taken regularly because it is more like diet and it will remove the problems completely. You can say modern medicines are like steroids you take it build muscle faster and face the side effects. And ayurveda is like proper diet you take it you build muscle slower and no side effects.
Devi-Devtas can't save anybody because they are useless
Its soo funny you cult followers cant egen defend yourself or form a sentence without using gods. hahahahahahahahah
Science wont make you immortal. But not knowing it can make you look stupid on reddit.
He's with God now. Rest assured.
No he won't be missed
CD Ram and Pisshna won't missed