Have you ever observed this advisory notice, on the TOP right side, when you enter into main site?
Like any library, Hinduism Stack Exchange shares great
information, but does not offer personalized advice, and does not
take the place of seeking such advice from any Acharya, Pundit,
astrologer, Guru or other trustworthy Counselor.
This particular word Library, is a myth/mirage, as far as this site is concerned. This particular notice, often misleads many a novice member into thinking that the site is really offers great information.
As I stated above, it is a MYTH/MIRAGE.
What will a library offer?
It will offer access to all types of ideas on different subjects from various authors, without demeaning any idea.
For example take the subject Ramayana:
There are many books on this single subject. The Library will contain the original version of Valmiki Ramayana, Tulasidas Ramayana, Jain Ramayana, etc.
It can also contain books authored in an eccentric way by people like Devadut Patnaik or by Western writers or people under the influence of Marxism.
Whether the opinions expressed by different authors have basis in scriptures? I don't think so.
So members have wide choice of selecting books of their choice, reading and forming opinions.
Here, in this site, the majority of the members belong to one particular sect or believe in a limited literature from Hinduism as authentic. :-).
Naturally, they will not allow ideas of other sects/way of thinking to flourish here. Be it a question posted in Main site or here in this Meta site, they will see that it has been discouraged by downvoting or closed.
I am giving reference my own Meta post - Why don't we start a sect-wise SEs in Hinduism?, which was downvoted by 12 members.
Why should a Meta post be downvoted? Is not a Meta post for discussion purpose?
Remember Moderators are dormant here.
I am giving reference to my answer for this question Do Vedas mention that Vedas ALONE are to be followed and Itihasa/Purana should be discarded?, which received 5 downvotes.
If the post, be it a question or an answer, is promoting violence or instigating other sects or projecting obscene or vulgar ideas, etc, then it can be removed altogether.
However, when the moderators are claiming that this site will act as a Library for Hinduism, that idea should have been materialised in real sense.
That is not happening here. That is why neither this site is able to attract new members with varied ideas or nor is it retaining earlier members.
This site is shrinking.
2 members accused me of the following, in the comments section:
I would like to answer point-wise.
- I don't have any obsession with the sect. I stated in my answer as follows:
.. the majority of the members belong to one particular sect or
believe in a limited literature from Hinduism as authentic. :-).
Naturally, they will not allow ideas of other sects/way of thinking to
I had sufficient grounds for stating so. In fact, the rules framed by members, who were in the initial stages or a little later, have obsession with the literature pertaining to particular sect. This is my experience in this site in 2015 and from May 2019 onwards.
These members will see that answers/questions that go against their valued literature will either be removed/deleted or downvoted.
My question Was Vishnu Sahasranama, not a part of Anusasana Parva of Mahabharata, but a later day addition? was closed on flimsy grounds by a group of members, just because it is questioning their literature.
Another question of mine Why Gautama, the Buddha said about 3 Vedas only? marking it as a duplicate, though I had stated that my question is different, again because it is questioning their literature.
This question Is Gautama Buddha an avatar of Lord Vishnu? still allowed to remain, though it pertains to Buddhism, because it is favourable to the particular sect.
My answer under this question was downvoted, though proper references were provided, just because it is speaking against the beliefs of a particular sect.
my answer under my own meta question, will throw light on some other aspects also.
So it is the obsession of members pertaining to one sect, causing irreparable damage to this site.
Basically, the core area of Sanatana Dharma aka Hinduism is Spirituality but not ritual practices, as commonly misunderstood by many in this site.
Rig Veda encourages probing deep into one's own self, which is the prerequisite for Spirituality.
it is necessary to impose certain restrictions with respect to ritualistic questions so as to make many answers authentic.
Spirituality is an ABSTRACT thing.
Can we give references to LOVE, HATRED, HAPPINESS, etc, which emotions and ABSTRACT? We can only experience them.
It is too childish to expect answers to questions on Spirituality to be backed with reference. And, closing questions with respect to Spirituality, on the pretext of opinion based, is much more childish.
Many of the members in this site refer to Bhagavad Gita.
What does BG 4.34 say?
तद्विद्धि प्रणिपातेन परिप्रश्नेन सेवया।
उपदेक्ष्यन्ति ते ज्ञानं ज्ञानिनस्तत्त्वदर्शिनः।।4.34।।
This you should learn [from those, endowed with knowledge], by
prostration, by iniry and by service [all offered to them]; those who
are endowed with knowledge and are capable of showing the truth will
give you the truth nearby;
Why should a Realised soul like Sri Krishna say परिप्रश्नेन instead of प्रश्नेन? Why should Sri Krishna use the word the Wise, indicating many wise people?
A sage explained once that परिप्रश्नेन indicates not mere questioning for the sake of questioning, but questioning with an intention of clearing doubts and getting wisdom.
He used the word the wise, to indicate that wisdom can be obtained from many people and including inanimate things, as was mentioned in Avadhutopaakhyanam of Bhagavatam.
So SPIRITUALITY does not always offer references from scriptures. Wisdom that emanate from deep pondering cannot be substantiated with scriptural references.
I repeat, expecting answers on SPIRITUALITY to be always backed with scriptural references, is mere childishness.
And, closing questions on SPIRITUALITY, on the pretext of opinion based, is much more childishness.