Are you Hindu

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Just a small observation. The web site quoted above talks about Sanatan Dharm and not Sanatana Dharma. The Hindi wallahs have twisted all Sanskrit names like making Rama into Ram and Sanatana Dharma to Sanatan Dharm.

This site show the money power of the Sanatana Dhrama propounders. They have the money power and spend millions in propagating their ideas. The Swamiji who is the force behind this and hundreds of other similar sites. He owns the biggest Hindu temple in the world in Austin, Texas.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

By the way please avoid posting links to sites which do not accept Siva as a God and carries on a slander campaign against Adi Sankaracharya. Those who believe in only one supreme God.

I do not think we should be posting links to Propaganda sites.

Please note that in spite of all the verbiage on the site, nowhere is there a mention about the name Sanatana Dharma being mentioned in the Vedas or any of the scriptures.

I can point our to howlers in the site like <<Max Müller (who was a highly paid employee of East India Company)>> and also rejoinders. But that is not the purpose of my posts.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

 

[renuka]

Just a small observation. The web site quoted above talks about Sanatan Dharm and not Sanatana Dharma. The Hindi wallahs have twisted all Sanskrit names like making Rama into Ram and Sanatana Dharma to Sanatan Dharm.

This site show the money power of the Sanatana Dhrama propounders. They have the money power and spend millions in propagating their ideas. The Swamiji who is the force behind this and hundreds of other similar sites. He owns the biggest Hindu temple in the world in Austin, Texas.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

By the way please avoid posting links to sites which do not accept Siva as a God and carries on a slander campaign against Adi Sankaracharya. Those who believe in only one supreme God.

I do not think we should be posting links to Propaganda sites.

Please note that in spite of all the verbiage on the site, nowhere is there a mention about the name Sanatana Dharma being mentioned in the Vedas or any of the scriptures.

I can point our to howlers in the site like <<Max Müller (who was a highly paid employee of East India Company)>> and also rejoinders. But that is not the purpose of my posts.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

Dear Sir,

That way we can hold any one in India guilty for distorting Sanskrit words.
For example in Tamil..Shiva has become Sivan,Rama is Raman,Om Namah Shivaya is pronounced as Om Namah Chivaya and in Kannada Lakshmi is also called Lakumi at times.

Bengalis turned every V into B and even A becomes O.. for example Vishwa becomes Bishwa and Vijay becomes Bijoy.

So what to do??? Darling Yeh Hai India!!!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

But all of us including the Bengalis do not insist that it is Sanskrit. We know the difference. The Hindiwallahs are not even aware of the difference.

 

[informed]

The name Hindu Kush has been given long before even Islam was born. It was the boundary of the Hindu area of influence before both Islam and Christianity was born.

Pliny mentions about Aseni and Asoi clans (Sakas) south of the Hindu Kush in his book about the tribes of India.

Any reference for this? I mean book name or URL or something?

Since Pliny lived around third century A.D, it is worthwhile to do a research whether he mentioned the name Hindu Kush. The problem is that there has not been enough research done on this.

Does it mean you don't know and its just your assumption or hear say? I am surprise how you then confidently say that that Hindu Kush was named before Islam was born, it does not make sense. Also, if Hindu term itself was given after Persian invasion, you yourself mentioned this, then how can Hindu Kush get its name before Islam was born?

When I was talking about Hindu Kush mountains being the border I was talking about the Sakas, Kushans, Mouryas and others. That was the time of the Gandhara kingdom.
For me the history of Hinduism started 3500 years back and not with the advent of Islam. Both Sakhas and Kushans invaded India. so did the Greeks. Again the Huns invaded India and committed countless atrocities. Please read Raja Tharangini.

All these are irrelevant. Hindu Kush means 'massacre of hindus', I had pasted the reference clearly pointing to various other references and refuting Nigel Allen. You now proposed that some other person called Pliny though you are not sure if he did refer to Hindu Kush in his writings. With due respect, I would hope since you have no better evidance, you would now assume that Kush meant masscre and not mountains which would be Koi.
Regards

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Please let us understand that the renaming of Hinduism to Sanatana Dharma is big business. Billions of dollars business. It is also part of a marketing strategy.

Now let us see why some Hindus were unhappy with the name Hinduism and why they wanted it to be changed.

Two major groups were involved.

1. The English educated intelligentia. This group did not approve of two aspects of Hinduism.

a. The caste system or Varnashrama Dharma.

b. The religious practices of the Tantriks and castes other than Brahmins. Animal sacrifices, drinking of liquor and worship of female and Village deities. What we call as Folk Hinduism which does not depend on Vedas or any scriptures.

2. The Orthodoxy. I am using this term in the absence of any other suitable term. Surprisingly this group shared the same concerns as the first one.

a. Varnashrama Dharma. According to this group Varnashrama Dharma is Hinduism.

b. This group also intensely disliked the religious practices of the Tantriks and castes other than Brahmins. Animal sacrifices, drinking of liquor and worship of female and Village deities.

In this dislike of Folk Hinduism both the groups were united.

Group 1:

This group was appalled by the prevalence of the caste system. Some (very few) of thes people took up social restructuring to remove the caste system. But it was done rarely and not effectively. This group are/were not social reformers.

Group 2:

This group was against abolition of sati, widow remarriage, the shrada act which abolished child marriages and giving property rights to women. They were appalled at making knowledge of the scriptures available to one and all irrespective of caste. This is knowledge which they had zealously guarded for thousands of years. Knowlege which gave them power.

Both these groups are extremely poweful. They have money. Tonnes of it. They also have political power.

The new name movement got an impetus from the renaming of the Islam religion. It was called as Mohammedism, Mohammedanism etc. The term Islam was used by the followers who objected to the name Mohammedanism.

In my next post we will see how these groups went about renaming and modifying Hinduism to suit their objectives. In fact they went about rewriting Hinduism. You may call it sanitizing hinduism.

I am writing all this because In India the people who practice Folk Hinduism are in a overwhelming majority. The above groups have tried to keep Folk Hinduism outside the Hinduism fold. This has weakened Hinduism and enabled other religions to convert Hindus.

 

[zebra16]

Now about the name Sanathana Dharma.

According to Wikipedia it is the name by which the Hindus call their religion. This is how it is projected now. Of course we have a number of books/articles on that.

But the question is How far is it true? It is not true.

Sanathana Dharma is a term which was unknown before 1960. Swami Vivakananda, Sri Ramakrishna or Ramana Maharishi did not talk about Sanathana Dharma. Ask your grand father whether he is familiar with the name. Again just walk onto to the street and ask an ordinary Hindu to what religion he belongs to. Hardly any one will say Sanathana Dharma.

The questions which arise are:

1. What was the necessity of a new name? Why?

2. How did we get the name?

3. Reasons why it has not been accepted by all Hindus.

I had sought the assistance of sanskrit group to find out the earliest usage of "Sanathana Dharma" in scriptures/literature etc. and append herebelow the extract of reply furnished by a research scholar, which is self explicit

QUOTE:

All references of सनातन derived from the अव्यय - सना meaning ancient:

[not assigned]
Garbhopaniṣat1/559
Parāśaradharmasaṃhitā1/214
Garuḍapurāṇa4/75641
Nāradasmṛti1/13274


Epic
Mahābhārata 202/7512260
Manusmṛti 12/375420
Rāmāyaṇa 23/2607910
Viṣṇusmṛti1/19182


Classical
Bhāgavatapurāṇa 6/42634
Kūrmapurāṇa78/817540
Liṅgapurāṇa28/1273840
Matsyapurāṇa18/1224120
Pañcārthabhāṣya4/21641
Suśrutasaṃhitā2/146319


Medieval
Ānandakanda1/84015
Kālikāpurāṇa2/4091
Mātṛkābhedatantra2/7839
Parāśarasmṛtiṭīkā1/7556
Rasārṇava1/32027
Rasendracintāmaṇi1/13320
Skandapurāṇa1/16366
Spandakārikānirṇaya1/10186
Tantrasāra1/14221


Late
Gokarṇapurāṇasāraḥ1/14643
Haṭhayogapradīpikā1/5649
Sātvatatantra4/10107
Skandapurāṇa (2)25/113973


Rāmāyaṇa

• Rām, Bā, 24, 16.1
  rājyabhāraniyuktānām eṣa dharmaḥ sanātanaḥ /

The Mahabharata in Sanskrit: Book 12: Chapter 128
परस्पराभिसंरक्षा राज्ञा राष्ट्रेण चापदि
नित्यम एवेह कर्तव्या एष धर्मः सनातनः ॥31||


BhāgavPur, 3, 16, 18.1
tvattaḥ sanātano dharmo rakṣyate tanubhis tava /


In all the above references, as Mm. suggested it is used as qualifying a duty since time long. I have produced this only for the earliest reference to the usage of the word सनातन in respect of धर्म and nothing more than that it serves. In the statistical references, it qualifies many things brahma, shakti, etc. And सनातन is one of the four sons of ब्रह्मा, the creator born at the beginning of the creation according to पुराण-s.

UNQUOTE

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Thank you, Zebra16. Excellent.

Dharma is eternal. But the question is whether the term has been used to denote a religion or a set of rules practiced by a group of people.

In my view it does not.

 

[zebra16]

Thank you, Zebra16. Excellent.

Dharma is eternal. But the question is whether the term has been used to denote a religion or a set of rules practiced by a group of people.

In my view it does not.

There are two stages of its use, I am told, to denote religion like thing, or a set of rules practiced by a group of people:

1. usage by Sri Swami Vivekananda
2. usage by Sri Veer Savarkar

but I am yet to get any evidence, so far. So this is just my opinion at present

 

[prasad1]

Nacchi,
I like your avatar very much, I used to have Durga face mask like that, with puja approaching it makes me nostalgic.

When I posted the original message, I was not proposing a name change of the religion. First of all my personal religion is a derivation of this so called "Hindu" religion. I follow some of the principles of Hindu Religion, but to me our religion is like a super market. We choose what we want, and leave the rest. Even Agnostics can claim to be a Hindu. Whole humanity, or even entire living world can claim to be Hindu. So how do you convert out/ or convert to Hinduism. Philosophically why do I need to convert. People convert for socio-economic reason. In the west sometimes even before marriage they decide as to which religion they are going to raise their children in.
I have no money riding on the outcome of the name for the religion. My posting was mainly to inquire as to how other Hindus (mainly NRI) express their religion to people who are not Indians.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Prasad,

The reason why I chose to post on that was that attempts have been made and have succeeded in projecting an image of Hinduism abroad which is not true. They have succeeded in taking Tantra, Folk Hinduism and many other aspects out of their own version of Hinduism.

Just to quote an example, is it not strange that when in India the vast majority of the Hindus eat non-vegetarian food, we are trying to make out that Vegetarianism is a prime requisite for a Hindu? We swear by the Vedas, but deny that that the Vedic rituals included Animal Sacrifices.

You are right. Hinduism is like a Mall. But attempts are being made to turn it into a Monotheistic religion and an intolerant religion.

I will talk about this later.

My post is aimed at NRIs who should be aware of such attempts.

 

[informed]

Prasad,

The reason why I chose to post on that was that attempts have been made and have succeeded in projecting an image of Hinduism abroad which is not true. They have succeeded in taking Tantra, Folk Hinduism and many other aspects out of their own version of Hinduism.

Just to quote an example, is it not strange that when in India the vast majority of the Hindus eat non-vegetarian food, we are trying to make out that Vegetarianism is a prime requisite for a Hindu? We swear by the Vedas, but deny that that the Vedic rituals included Animal Sacrifices.

You are right. Hinduism is like a Mall. But attempts are being made to turn it into a Monotheistic religion and an intolerant religion.

I will talk about this later.

My post is aimed at NRIs who should be aware of such attempts.

I think you are picking an imaginary group and making too generic statements to counter those imaginary groups. Your examples are also not clear. If majority of hindus are vegetarians, that doesn't also mean non-vegsm is a prerequisite. I don't know whom you are trying to target, which group said vegsm is a prerequisite being hindu? I don't understand what you are trying to say by your animal sacrifice example, who succeeded in saying that they never happened?
And you say big attempts made to turn it into monotheistic, i'm surprised, what is your philosophy, did you not understand that the monotheism they refer to is not same as other monothestic religions? they refer to panantheism actually. And I've no idea who said hinduism is intolerant as you accused. To be honest, I've never seen any reference from you so far in this thread, your personal opinions won't help, it will be just another propaganda. You seem to using too many superlatives like 'big attempts', 'billion dollar busiess'(I wonder what billion dollar in a name), 'tonnes of money' etc etc, all too subjective and as propagandic as anyone else.

 

[prasad1]

Prasad,

The reason why I chose to post on that was that attempts have been made and have succeeded in projecting an image of Hinduism abroad which is not true. They have succeeded in taking Tantra, Folk Hinduism and many other aspects out of their own version of Hinduism.

Just to quote an example, is it not strange that when in India the vast majority of the Hindus eat non-vegetarian food, we are trying to make out that Vegetarianism is a prime requisite for a Hindu? We swear by the Vedas, but deny that that the Vedic rituals included Animal Sacrifices.

You are right. Hinduism is like a Mall. But attempts are being made to turn it into a Monotheistic religion and an intolerant religion.

I will talk about this later.

My post is aimed at NRIs who should be aware of such attempts.

You are contradicting others constant posters here who claim that even Tam Brahmins have become non-vegetarians. There is a misconception about hindu's in countries outside India. They have met mostly Vegetarian Hindus, and also Know that cow is sacred to Hindus. Some of the so called swamis who have established their ashrams, and derive their following, have strict code of vegetarianism. Those are private groups and can preach what they want.

Can you blame the Non-Indians, if they form an opinion of most Hindus, on the basis of few they meet? There is no motive in that.
If you are pointing to ISKON:
They might be an embarrassment to section of Indian.

Please consider that they are very well organised, and have a lot of following. My hats off to them. They are promoting their brand of Hinduism.

 

[sangom]

Shri informed, Shri Prasad1,

My own impression, based on feedback given to me by my sons (one in US and two in UK) has been that it becomes unavoidable to accept NV or NV contaminated food if one has to live in foreign countries and get along with the local populations there. I am told that if one has to stay overnight at the workplace because of any exigency, the only vegetarian item will be coffee at the workplace which also may not be there once the evening supply is exhausted. One of my sons occupies a fairly senior position (Executive Director) in a MNC and when I asked him if he cannot have some vegetarian food ordered, he smiled and said that the MNCs never foresaw strict vegetarian Tabras working there, nor are they so very keen to promote our tabra preferences; in short, "if you can't take what you get, please go" is the loud message, he said.

My sons also tell me that there are many tabras who have adjusted to the foreign food style completely, but once they land back in India they will like to put on a hypocritical image of their own. The only person to tell us the truth was an old lady whose six sons have become US citizens long back,, when she said that irrespective of with which son they stay, she cooks our tabra veg food for the two of them because the children and more especially, the grandchildren just cannot live on the strict vegetarian norms followed by us.

I have visited US once and my son told me that even in that ubiquitous 'subway' chain, one has to know which is veg and which is not.

 

[kunjuppu]

sangom,

re your post # 38

My wife and I eat out regularly.

Yesterday, for example, we went to an Italian restaurant: we had a variety of choices of vegetarian food, and just not an odd item or two. Below I give you the url of the menu, and while one may suspect the rennet in the cheese, the food, otherwise is fresh and tasty.

I think in the usa, it has become the norm, to label the food, as vegetarian or vegan if applicable. I have seen the same in England.

The current trend, even in my office, is to go out of the way to accommodate minority preferences. Recently we had a pizza lunch in my department (48 people). Me and another white lady wanted veggie pizza, one other white lady wanted vegan pizza (no cheese), and the rest opted for non veg.

At the end of the session, we had one 11 slices of vegan pizza, 9 slices of veggie pizza left, which nobody wanted. Ofcourse there were some leftovers of non veg pizza too, but no way in proportion to the amount ordered and the number of people who ate it.

Personally, I have found the west increasingly vegetarian friendly past 20 years or so.

Tutto Pronto - Fine Food To Go

 

[sangom]

sangom,

re your post # 38

My wife and I eat out regularly.

Yesterday, for example, we went to an Italian restaurant: we had a variety of choices of vegetarian food, and just not an odd item or two. Below I give you the url of the menu, and while one may suspect the rennet in the cheese, the food, otherwise is fresh and tasty.

I think in the usa, it has become the norm, to label the food, as vegetarian or vegan if applicable. I have seen the same in England.

The current trend, even in my office, is to go out of the way to accommodate minority preferences. Recently we had a pizza lunch in my department (48 people). Me and another white lady wanted veggie pizza, one other white lady wanted vegan pizza (no cheese), and the rest opted for non veg.

At the end of the session, we had one 11 slices of vegan pizza, 9 slices of veggie pizza left, which nobody wanted. Ofcourse there were some leftovers of non veg pizza too, but no way in proportion to the amount ordered and the number of people who ate it.

Personally, I have found the west increasingly vegetarian friendly past 20 years or so.

Tutto Pronto - Fine Food To Go

Kunjuppu,

I think the ordered pizza lunch is very different from what one may be able to get late at night in the office, unless the office has a 24 hours' canteen. I understand that most employers started skimping on such peripheral benefits like coffee, canteen etc., during the bad days two or three years before and have not yet reinstated these. May be yours is a very different set-up and may be Canada is different but what I said related to US (Atlanta) and London. I have no reason to believe that the feedback given to me was not factual.

 

[kunjuppu]

i beg your pardon sangom, i was not questioning the factuality of your post. ofcourse your sons have told you the truth.

i am only giving you what my experience is. i am only a lowly 'doer' of stuff. the rules for senior managements are quite different i understand. they may have to conform more to their peers than lowly folks, who can assert themselves, to reinforce the concept of egalitarianism, and the big bosses usually go along with it. politically right thing to do.

a close relative works for goldman sachs in nyc. according to him if he stays past 6pm, there is a website which lists the various restaurants and their take out delivery menu. budget $30, enough for a sumptuous feast.

i think, it depends on the company and their culture. the options re living veggie are available, cheap and healthy. today's west is indeed, i never tire of repeating, a paradise for vegetarians and vegans.

 

[sarang]

Simple. If one wants to be a vegetarian, he can remain so. I have lived in england for 10 years, visited japan, US and most of the countries in europe, many a time for periods lasting from a week to three months. I never faced any difficulty in getting simple vegetarian food both in the factory canteens or in the executive lunch rooms. In fact, in some factories, one can opt for a full vegetarian menu of 4 or 5 dishes. At least one factory in germany had a vegetarian day - all items in the factory canteen were vegetarian.

The first question people ask is - is it against your religion? When explained that it is more to do with family traditions and is by choice, vegetarianism is accepted without any reservation. In fact, some religious christian executives even say prayers before starting the meal. All accepted without raising an eyebrow.

At least among my relatives, when their children and grandchildren visit india, they eat our standard vegetarian diet only; they neither demand nor are given nonvegetarian food, irrespective of what they eat in the foreign land.

 

[prasad1]

Simple. If one wants to be a vegetarian, he can remain so. I have lived in england for 10 years, visited japan, US and most of the countries in europe, many a time for periods lasting from a week to three months. I never faced any difficulty in getting simple vegetarian food both in the factory canteens or in the executive lunch rooms. In fact, in some factories, one can opt for a full vegetarian menu of 4 or 5 dishes. At least one factory in germany had a vegetarian day - all items in the factory canteen were vegetarian.

The first question people ask is - is it against your religion? When explained that it is more to do with family traditions and is by choice, vegetarianism is accepted without any reservation. In fact, some religious christian executives even say prayers before starting the meal. All accepted without raising an eyebrow.

At least among my relatives, when their children and grandchildren visit india, they eat our standard vegetarian diet only; they neither demand nor are given nonvegetarian food, irrespective of what they eat in the foreign land.

I love this observation, I fully endorse it.

 

[prasad1]

Life is a compromise. You leave your house (sometimes even in the house) your food is contaminated. India used to import lard to mix with Vanaspati Gee. Even today the so called vegetarian food is a compromise.

Why are we Vegetarian? It is for our satisfaction, and the sake of society. I suppose one can make religious argument from either side of vegetarianism. Are we absolutely sure that we have not harmed some other life today? I doubt that.
One need not wear vegetarianism as a badge to show off, do it for your satisfaction. If one is left in an underground cave for more than 40 days without food and water, and there is only a dead body!!!!! how will that person react, I prey that I am not in that situation.
Coming back to your post when there is a will there is a way. A friend was on business trip to Korea, and survived on rice, yogurt, and pickle. Some of the people act certain way because of pressures, but want to experiment with different lifestyle. They find excuses to tell others.

You can find same excuses for alcohol consumption, and others stay Teetotaler.
I wish people were "Honest", but then again sometimes you do not want to hurt others, so an "innocent" lie is acceptable.

 

[zebra16]

Thank you, Zebra16. Excellent.

Dharma is eternal. But the question is whether the term has been used to denote a religion or a set of rules practiced by a group of people.

In my view it does not.

Thanks to the scholars on another group, which I had already mentioned, I append extract of reply received, relevant to our question:

QUOTE:


A colleague of mine sent me a message on this topic. I will copy and paste here only the relevant parts. But the gist of it is that, without doubt, the term 'sanatana dharma' was in use long before the comparitively recent incarnations of Swami Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo, and/or Annie Besant.

Take a look:

... if you're not already aware of this mode of searching, you might also find it interesting to see what happens when you do a Google Book Search, Advanced option, with dates specified as 1899 or earlier:

The Indian year book - Google Books

Another reference from 1876 mentions the 'Sanatana Dharma Rakshini Sabha, a highly orthodox Calcutta 'Society for the preservation of [Hindu] religion.'"

The Brahmo year-book for ...: brief ... - Sophia Dobson Collet - Google Books

And there is an 1878 reference from a Baptist magazine which states:

"...a few years ago, an association was established to support the tottering fortunes of Hinduism, called the Sanatana Dharma Rakshini Sabha, or Society for the Preservation of the Eternal Religion..."

Thus the contemporary usage may have emerged in part in the context of polemics. Interesting, because of recent work I've been doing, I happen to know that the same is true of Western phrases, such as the very word "religion" itself (see Platvoet, J. (1999). Contexts, concepts & contests: Towards a pragmatics of defining 'religion'. In J. Platvoet, & A. L. Molendijk (Eds.), The pragmatics of defining religion: Contexts, concepts, and contests (pp. 463-516), Leiden; Boston: Brill.)


UNQUOTE

Thus, it appears the word "Santhana Dharma" has been use since at least the begining of the 19th century, used to express the idea of religion practiced by a group of people.

 

[sangom]

... if you're not already aware of this mode of searching, you might also find it interesting to see what happens when you do a Google Book Search, Advanced option, with dates specified as 1899 or earlier:

The Indian year book - Google Books

Another reference from 1876 mentions the 'Sanatana Dharma Rakshini Sabha, a highly orthodox Calcutta 'Society for the preservation of [Hindu] religion.'"

The Brahmo year-book for ...: brief ... - Sophia Dobson Collet - Google Books

And there is an 1878 reference from a Baptist magazine which states:

"...a few years ago, an association was established to support the tottering fortunes of Hinduism, called the Sanatana Dharma Rakshini Sabha, or Society for the Preservation of the Eternal Religion..."

Thus the contemporary usage may have emerged in part in the context of polemics. Interesting, because of recent work I've been doing, I happen to know that the same is true of Western phrases, such as the very word "religion" itself (see Platvoet, J. (1999). Contexts, concepts & contests: Towards a pragmatics of defining 'religion'. In J. Platvoet, & A. L. Molendijk (Eds.), The pragmatics of defining religion: Contexts, concepts, and contests (pp. 463-516), Leiden; Boston: Brill.)


UNQUOTE

Thus, it appears the word "Santhana Dharma" has been use since at least the begining of the 19th century, used to express the idea of religion practiced by a group of people.

Shri Zebra,

The earliest reference you could find is 1876, so how can we say that the word has been use since at least the begining of the 19th century, used to express the idea of religion practiced by a group of people? May be we can say "from the second half of the 19th. century, i.e., it is current now for 260 years.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Thank you, Zebra. Excellent material. It reminds of the days way back when we used search engines which were written for a specific purpose. I was using two of them which were actually scripts written by some of the members of our organization. Of course being India google does not allow me to download these books. I will ask someone in U.S to download and send me the books.

The time line fits my reasoning. The movement for renaming Hinduism to make it more acceptable started in Bengal with Brahmo Samaj. Sanatana Dharma Rakshini Sabha could have been a reaction to Brahmo Samaj. Or was it one of the earlier names for what became Brahmo samaj? I wonder. The Brahmos called their religion Adhi Dharma.

Dayanand Saraswathi was another spirtual stelvart who was not happy with Hinduism either in name or practices. He founded Arya Samaj.

Later came the the influence of U.S. Paramahamsa Yogananda propagated Yoga in the U.S. Though Yoga is part and parcel of Hinduism, the practice differs from general Hinduism. Kriya Yoga. Paramahamsa yognanda was followed by many Gurus teaching different Yoga techniques in the U.S.

Then Mahrishi Mahesh yogi came on the scene with Transcendental Meditation. The Guru Dev for all T.M initiates is Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math from 1941 to 1953.

But neither Yoga nor Meditation was sold to the devotees as part of Hinduism. The Transcendental Meditation group in fact denied any linkage. The Yoga groups also took the cue.

Recently I was reading about how Hindus were trying to get back Yoga in the U.S. I remember arguing about it on the net in 2001. But I could make any headway because most of the other participants were disciples of Yoga gurus. Yoga was a separate religion with Hindu origins. That was the best bargain I could get.

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi wanted the Vedic religion to be named Vedism. There are still some sites about that.

Hinduism was not acceptable but Yoga and Meditation were acceptable. This is what I called marketing strategy.

So Yoga became a separate religion. At this point of time some of Ramana Maharishi's followers wanted a separate Advaita Vedanta religion. This caught on in U.K. There are many web sites about this religion which is not part of Hinduism.

I respect all the gurus who went to U.S. They did fantastic service to Hinduism and India by making its ideas and practices known. They also were following the basic dictum of Hinduism. The Guru can teach only the method by which he has attained salvation. He has adhikara only for that.

But to reply to Prasad's question about why I am agitated about these developments. The vast majority of the Hindus stay in India. They practice Hinduism in the ways that they have done for centuries. By taking some of the aspects of Hinduism out of it and by presenting an image of Hinduism which is not in consonance with Indian Hinduism, Hinduism in India is weakened.

I will present the development of the name Sanatana Dharma in my next post.

 

[prasad1]

But to reply to Prasad's question about why I am agitated about these developments. The vast majority of the Hindus stay in India. They practice Hinduism in the ways that they have done for centuries. By taking some of the aspects of Hinduism out of it and by presenting an image of Hinduism which is not in consonance with Indian Hinduism, Hinduism in India is weakened.

I will present the development of the name Sanatana Dharma in my next post.

Great post.
We do stand poles apart. I am nostalgic of the Hinduism, as I know and look in from far. You are looking at Hinduism from within India.

In this day and age of Information, views expressed are available worldwide. People reading it do not know the location, or the audience it was meant for. So if we keep beating ourselves, we only give others that much more material to beat some of us.

I feel on the defensive when I have to explain some mysterious hindu practice my non Indian friends found. May be I feel that I have to be an ambassador for anything Indian. There has been so much negatives about India in foreign press in the past, that we used to search for some positive comments. It is getting better, and here we are giving more ammunition to fire at us.

 

[Nara]

...I feel on the defensive when I have to explain some mysterious hindu practice my non Indian friends found. May be I feel that I have to be an ambassador for anything Indian. .

prasad1, this is not your cross to bear. I won't expect my Christian friend to defend Christianity, neither can anyone expect a Muslim friend to defend everything that gets done in the name of Islam. A few days ago the state of Georgia executed a man whose guilt was clouded by substantial doubt, and I won't defend that action just because I am an American.

All organized religions come with loads of dirt and the so called Hinduism has more than its fair share. It is not wise to just sweep it under the rug. Face it and and if you must, explain the historical context and what some progressives are doing about it. You need to be thankful for the views some of us express here so you can be more prepared to do this explaining like an ambassador of anything Indian, if you so choose.

Cheers!

 

[nachi naga]

sindu to indu to hindu.more becoz hindi was the language so hindu stuck from north west to north east.its interesting as to how lord shiva and goddess parvathi got embeded in psyche of sangam tamizhans though!