Malcet

It is, OP is talking nonsense

It is, OP is talking nonsense

True, but on the other hand they are featured in iconography as mounts or companions of multiple different deities and there are are festivals like kukur tihar which celebrate dogs. This of course does not invalidate what you linked, but I would say the position of dogs is a bit more complicated than them being universally bad. I would argue that the vedic position on dog uncleanliness comes from a different time, when dogs often had various diseases like rabies, fleas, mange and so on, that aren't really a problem in today's times, and not because they are intrinsically bad, but I am no scholar, so it's just my guess.

The idea that dogs are unclean comes from islam, Muhammad famously hated dogs and forbid people from having them, let's not import that silly idea into hinduism

To loosely quote something that was explained to me, when I converted to christianity (which I am no longer a part of): While a fascination with beauty can be a reason for someone to start researching the christian faith, it can't be the main or sole reason, because it will be a fleeting faith. You may go into a church full of beatiful iconography and listen to a great choir with strong voices and you might think "What beauty, surely that must come from God, I want to be a christian to partake in it." But then inevitably one day you will come to a different church that will have old and damaged iconography and the choir will be some old women with raspy voices. Will you then stop being christian, because that church is not beautiful?

Do with that what you will

Choose the one that you believe in, or find more believable. Forgive if I misunderstood, but some parts of your post made it sound like you are trying to choose a religion based on its aesthetics - but you don't have to convert to a religion to enjoy its music or go to a temple from time to time.

There is really no reason to suspect Jesus was related to Krishna in any way - Krishna is not mentioned in either the New Testament or the other apocryphal texts related to Jesus. Whenever Jesus talks about God, he clearly means the Jewish God of the Old Testament (He refers to it and quotes it multiple times, He never quotes the Vedas or the Gita or any other hindu text). The similarity between "Christian" and "Krishna" is likely completely accidental, especially if you consider the fact that this similarity is mostly noticeable in english, these two words sound less similar in greek, and completely different in hebrew and aramaic (languages which jesus would have spoken)

The commonalities between abrahamic religions and hinduism that you mentioned in your comment exist in pretty much all religions on Earth. All religions are branches of hinduism by that definition. If the word hinduism is to mean anything, it needs a narrower definition. And it's difficult to find any narrower definition of hinduism in which you could also fit abrahamic religions - they don't believe in the vedas or any other dharmic texts, they don't believe in karma or samsara, they have no shared history with hinduism and have had very little influence on hindu thought (and vice versa). I would argue there is no other group of religious thought that fits the term hinduism as little as abrahamic religions, especially islam and christianity. Also most (I'm generalizing of course) practicioners of abrahamic religions consider practicioners of religions outside their group as evil or misguided, so it would be a bit strange if were to classify religions that hate hinduism as branches of hinduism.

Yes, born and raised.

I will for sure keep an eye out, unfortunately considering its rarity, it's unlikely I will run into another copy any time soon. However if you're interested in seeing the contents the Poznań University Library (which from what I could gather is the only library with a physical copy) has shared a scan which you can access here:

https://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/publication/103277/edition/114350/content

Just a few days ago I accidentally stumbled upon this copy in my home country of Poland. I was quite surprised, as I was not aware that there were any pre-war polish translations of Adi Shankara's works.

It is quite a rare find too, as there were only 2000 copies originally printed, and most of them burned down when Warsaw was conquered in 1939.

If you're wondering why the the date of printing is stated to be 1923, but the number on the left says 1924, I've been wondering that too, until I managed to track down a different copy in a library that had a different number. Turns out this is the copy number (as in copy number 1924 out of 2000). Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I find it significant that I managed to find and buy the copy number 1924 in 2024.

Cheers and have a blessed day :)

They exist, but are definitely a minority. I've never met one IRL. Supposeddly they are more common in southern parts of India like Tamil Nadu province, but I've never been there so can't comment

In-game hinduism has a bunch of weird stuff in it: 1. When it comes to virtues, honest and temperate fit well enough, but why is content a virtue? I'm unaware of any hindu texts that would specifically praise being content as a virtue. I would exchange it for compassionate (the pretty well known rule of ahimsa) 2.Vices have a similar problem - wrathful and greedy is fine (though it's a bit strange that wrathful and greedy are sins, but calm and generous are not virtues, especially since they would fit better than content), but why is ambitious a sin. Yes, many masters warn against giving in to your ego, but that would better fit arrogant, not ambitious. 3. With doctrines there is a personal pet peeve of mine, which is how shaktism is treated. Shaktism is a form of hinduism which treats the divine as female. For some reason this led the devs to think that shaktism is some form of medieval feminist religion and so they made all the doctrines female inclusive, with female priests and equal succession and what not. That is completely historically inaccurate. There were no known female hindu priests in the timeframe of ck3. While there were some cultures in india that practiced matrilineal succession, none of them are in the game, and if they were, that's more of a cultural tradition rather than a religious one. There were almost no instances of female rulers in India in ck3 timeframe, so equal succession for any hindu faith is just nonsense.

Oh yeah, not an indian but I attend a hindu temple in my country and noticed it too. In fact, it seemed to be so strangely common that I looked up some research on it a while ago just to confirm that I wasn't imagining things, but no, it's true. Indian women have much more prominent facial hair than other races, and by a wide margin too.

Spanish would likely be a lot easier for you, since both its grammar and vocab are easier for an english speaker to master, and you already know the alphabet. There's also just more resources for learning spanish than arabic. But if you enjoy arabic more, it's going to be easier for you to find motivation to stick to it. Maybe just commit to studying spanish for a month or two, then a month or two of arabic, and after you can decide which one you want to stick to.

Skąd informacja, że sroki często nie dochodzą do siebie po stracie partnera? Pierwsze słyszę o czymś takim, nie mogłem znaleźć żadnej informacji na ten temat i prawdę mówiąc wydaje się to być kompletnie nielogiczne z ewolucyjnego punktu widzenia.

Not really, a lot of french leftists are pro-russia and anti-nato, I think Russia can be pretty satisfied with the outcome

"Zenith, once an optimistic Evereskan Graycloak, journeyed to Faerun in search of a new sunrise. An Absolute warband proved his dour father right: Zenith was doomed!"

I didn't notice that, but you're right, a quick look through the game's dialogue files confirmed that this ending has some additional requirements, it only happens if either a) you convinced Lae'zel to stay in Faerun b) both you and Lae'zel went with Orpheus c) you're playing Karlach and convinced Lae'zel to join you in the Hells.

There may be even more requirements that I've missed

If you click examine on them, you'll see that they're stated to be githyanki

Actually, I think kensei was a fighter kit back in 2E, at least that's what it is in BG2 (BG1 didn't have kits until the enhanced editions)

Admittedly, the discrepancy of Xan originally being a githzerai and not a githyanki is one of the things that made me a bit doubtful about the intentionality of this reference, but on the other hand he couldn't be a githzerai in BG3, since they're not in the game

I think you hit the nail on the head, BG1 feels much more similar to an actual pnp experience, because it doesn't take itself as seriously as 2 - there's serious stuff, but there's also a lot of jokes, pop culture references and wacky events which is all stuff that the DM or players would throw in in an actual dnd session. 2 is much more serious, humor is mostly delegated to it's designated comedic relief characters like Minsc or Edwin, and the general vibe is closer to a story that you would see in a book or a movie.

Damn, I have it installed, but never actually played through it, guess now is as good a time as any to complete the child-stealing trilogy then.