And why is that these great emperors were forgotten?

You claim that “the gods of the old religions weren’t “destroyed””

This can be proven wrong easily on two accounts:

1) Incorporating a god as a mortal in your newly adopted mythology is the same as destroying that god. That god’s status is now demoted from divine being to just some hero. This is destruction in of itself.

2) Nobody seriously worships Thor, Odin, Zeus, Jupiter, Isis, Anbubis, Hubal, Baal etc. These gods were completely destroyed by Christianity and Islam. You are trying to make the case otherwise but there is no real proof and I just don’t see it.

__________________

If you say tha Hindu are idol worshipers since they have religious iconography, then by extension that would equally apply to Christians.

If you ask anyone, on any continent today which living religion today they associate with idol worship, they will not hesitate to name Hinduism. It’s extremely apparent.

I just don’t understand why Hindus don’t actually own this, rather trying to prove that Hindu religion does not have explicit idol worship.

____________________

there are massive differences between Islam and Christianity.

Yes there are. But we aren’t talking about the differences in the two religion’s theology, free will, after life concepts.

We are talking about their relationship with paganism, polytheism and idol worship.

In that sense, these two religions are extremely similar, infact the Christians have been much more hardcore than Muslims in advocating against pagan belief.

And let’s not pretend to downplay monoetheism as a tenet of Christianity. It is the most central tenet. They invented the contradictory concept of Trinity to reconcile their creed with the monotheistic requirment. The Jews don’t buy it and the Muslims are skeptical but still accept them as a monotheistic religion due to some early Christian sects rejecting Trinity.

______________________

You are trying to list down Hinduism as an organized religion. It’s just not an organized religion man, it doesn’t even have a name of its own.

You can be a Hindu if you are born to a Hindu caste, even if you explicitly reject “Karma, Rebirth, Self, Brahman,”. Look at how Indian law defines who a Hindu is.
This should just tell you that this is not an organized religion like Islam or Christianity, but more like an ethnic religion which is no different than other pagan religions of Europe and Near East.

In any case let’s agree to disagree

Well, there is a different connotation behind “Idol worship” in the socio-political context of India that doesn’t exist in non-Indian countries. Historically, the term “Idol worship” has been used to disenfranchise Hindu populations and even destroy religious structures, whose impact is felt to this very day. Also, the term is very general, and you have not fully clarified what you mean by Idol worship; is it the use of religious iconography, or would it be people believing the idols are divine in and of themselves? 

A comprehensive example from the Indian side would be the Hindu Vaishnava, stating that they find non-vegetarian food disgusting and find the choice made by non-vegetarian individuals morally wrong. On the surface, it is fundamentally an opinion that can be held by a person irrespective of others’ opinions. However, vegetarianism has been historically used in a manner that disenfranchised people of lower caste groups, more heterodox sectarian views, and members of other religions. This context transforms a mere opinion into a subtextual support of conservative political practices that often persecute other groups, even if you don’t support such a position. There is also the issue that these statements exsist in a grey area between free speech and a dog whistle for prejudice.

I don’t mean to be insulting, but I don’t think you understand any of these religions here. Firstly, most religions that have existed historically have used a large amount of religious iconography and symbols for the longest time. Islam (and Judaism; I’m not fully sure) has a weird relationship with iconoclasm that is an anomaly rather than the norm. If you say tha Hindu are idol worshipers since they have religious iconography, then by extension that would equally apply to Christians. Secondly, Christians in Europe quite frankly did not like anyone of any religion, even other Christians. Most Christian monarchs did things like expelling jews or, you know, the Reconquista that killed and expelled non-Christians (including muslims), or the religious wars between protestants and catholics. Also, the Roman Empire persecuted anyone who didn’t follow their religion before they became Christians and persecuted non-Christians after becoming Christians; I doubt it was Christianity, rather it was the fact that Romans were assholes like that. 

Additionally, the gods of the old religions weren’t “destroyed” (whatever that means); they were reintegrated into the new theological system. Many Norse and Celtic gods were made into human heroes who were carried in the culture. A similar thing happened in India, where the Yaksha and Naga cults were submerged in the newly emerging Hindu complex. Also, Hindu and Muslim rulers in India have literally destroyed each other’s religious complexes in addition to providing patronage to different religious groups. This seems to be more of a cultural difference between Europe and India rather than a religious one. 

As for the rest of your argument, there are massive differences between Islam and Christianity. As a person who was raised in a very conservative Christian family, I can say without the shadow of a doubt that there are massive theological rifts between the two religions, especially in relation to free will, sin, original sin, the Son of god, hell/heaven, the holy trinity, etc. Monotheism is a part of Christianity, but it doesn’t take any more precedence than the other concepts. I mean, most American Christians, for example, don’t exactly like Muslims any more than they like Hindus, so there is a clear difference. Furthermore, many of the people who become irreligious in the West end up going down two paths: hardcore atheism that rejects religion as a whole or new age spiritualism that invovles that mix of Christian and non-Christian elements like tarot readings, astrology, crystals, belief in rebirth, meditation, and some even engage in Secular Buddhism. Also, I am pretty sure both of these groups are just as likely as their religious counterpart to oppose other organized religions like Islam. Organized religion is just not well-liked in the West; I doubt they care about it being pagan. The export of feminism and other things is due to power structures that have less to do with religion and more to do with historical patterns of colonisation. 

Lastly, most followers of other Dharmic religions like Buddhism and Jainism, in my experience, seem to understand Hinduism quite well, actually. Christians, Jews, and Muslims specifically seem to have a harder time since they don’t have the same theological basis, so most end up working with social stereotypes about Hinduism (but also Buddhism, Jainism, and other religions). The reverse cultural stereotypes also exist. In the end, most of these are stereotypes that reflect people’s lack of education on different subject matter. I read a lot of history and philosophy, which, from my perspective, presents a very consistent view of both Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain religions. Furthermore, within Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Islam, Christianity, alongside more out there Hindu groups (like the heterodox Kaula sect, for example) are seen as heretical since it fails to meet their religious regulations. Condemnation aganist others religions has existed in Hindu works as well, so they have clear theological positions, and there are more core beliefs like Karma, Rebirth, Self, Brahman, etc. that they are unwilling to change. They have a lot of sectarian divisions, but that’s very common in India, where every religion has deep-seated sectarianism. 

Grave worship and saint worship actually straddles the line pretty closely bewteen monotheism and polytheism. The argument given is that the saints are simply intercessionary due to their esteemed status in the eyes of God, and that appealing to them to intercede on behalf of themselves in front of God is acceptable. However the big difference is the theology behind it, even those venerating the saints know they are powerless and will not be able to do much.

This concept usually always straddled between monotheism and polytheism since the peasants often ascribed supernatural powers to the saints themselves independent of God.

The first time I travelled through rural Sindh, I realized that many people, often the non-literate sections of society, were Muslims in name but practised polytheism. It was different than Hindu polytheism but they most certainly ascribed independent supernatural powers to the saints which is clearly prohibited even in the sects of Islam that allow saint veneration. The only thing was that since they did not make their intentions clear, their actions could not be judged as polytheism openly.

We both know that Hindus do not actually believe that they are praying to one all powerful diety when they pray to Ganesh for luck or Kali for revenge. This is the difference.

—

I don’t think Hinduism is one religion, but Hindus definitely think so.

But think of it like this:

Muslims & Christians are very big on proselytizing, when some one accepts Islam members of the community would literally throw a celebration. And yet we have literal sects like Ahmadiyya who are considered outside the folds of Islam, even when they identify as Muslim, have 99% of similar beliefs to orthodox Islam and just differ on one core tenet. Things are very similar in Christianity.

Now consider the contrast with Hindus, who claim other religions as part of Hinduism (Buddhism/Sikhism) whereby those religions explicitly state they are not Hindu and want nothing to do with Hinduism.

This is the dichotomy, while Islam proselytizes yet still excludes heresy, Hinduism claims different beliefs and religions and tries to do the same with Islam and would have even succeeded if Islam in India did not hold firm in its tenet.

This is why Hinduism is not *a* religion, because it simply accepts everything. It’s an oxymoron to think that completely different core belief systems are part of the same religion.

At best, it’s an ethnic identifier, and it’s literally in its name: Hinduism (Hindu being historically a geographical term) and the name Hinduism popularized by the British.

Hindus today may want to unify under a common banner, but let’s not pretend this was always the case historically.

The gatekeepers generally tend to be the vocal minority – yet another instance of the ‘tyranny of the intolerant minority’.

Ashok wasnt forgotten in particular.
Indian memory had also forgotten Samudragupta – arguably the greatest conquerer from India.
Compared to Samudragupta – Ashok finds a passing reference in Puranas.

India had forgotten a lot of its ancient historic kings.
Even Kautilya’s arthashashtra was forgotten.

“….the restrictive policies discouraged unnecessary slaughter of animals, advised people to avoid despicable and useless beliefs and practices, and emphasized restraint in glorifying one’s own faith.”

2500 years later, unfortunately, top two religions are those that proselytize vigorously at the cost of social harmony. Such wise words, imagine how progressive and thoughtful that society must have been.

Why was Asoka samrat almost forgotten? Was it just the social disintegration because of instability or was it deliberate ? We remember and recollect Mahabharatha and Ramayana like they happened a few hundred years ago.

Why?

You have no right to tell other people how to feel. My feelings are not in your control.

Idol worship disgusts me. It disgusts all believing Muslims.

The point is that this doesn’t need to matter to you.

I don’t care if you call me “Hinduphobic”. You can do it every day for all I care. You’ve made many comments on here demonstrating that you are an anti-Muslim bigot. So we’re in the same boat.

**Whatever the finer points of Hindu philosophy, Muslims see idols being worshiped. We find that viscerally offensive.**

**Of course, Hindus are entitled to do whatever they want. But you can’t pretend not to understand why Muslims are disgusted by idol worship.**

Sorry, this is full blown Hinduphobic.