Stealing Ideas without giving credit - New Age movement

[sankar100]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

The new age movement seems to have taken all or most of their 'philosophy' and 'ideas' from hinduism.

There is nothing wrong with that in and of itself.

However, don't you think it is wrong that none of them give any credit to hinduism?

Even people like deepak chopra seems to be taken all his stuff from here.

This is a billion dollar plus industry right now. The creators of the ideas and the initial teachers who taught it to a lot of students selflesslely without getting anything in return are not even mentioned.

Westerns take all of the good stuff from hinduism and repackage it and sell it as their own ideas without giving any credit but take the bad stuff and portray it as the only things that hinduism has.

Do you think this is fair? What can be done about it?

 

[sangom]

Shri Sankar100,

You are partly correct, imo. The New Age Movement has borrowed some of the key Oriental concepts regarding self, rebirth, karma, heaven & hell, superman, astral, and so on and so forth. But these notions are prevalent in one ore more of the oriental religions and the question as to which of these has the patent right, is not going to be a simple one to solve, I feel. For example, the hinduism (if it may be called that) depicted in the rigveda did not talk at all about rebirth or hell; there was only a pitruloka in which the more meritorious were given a high status and they mingled with the devas.

Hinduism, as is known today, does believe strongly in karma-triggered rebirth, heaven and hells and so on. Is it possible to prove that these notions originated first in some hindu brain/mind only and nowhere else, and that at the relevant point of time no other religion believed in such or similar ideas? So, it appears to me as though, at least as far as religious growth is concerned, people of this world have been indulging in exchange of ideas without acknowledging the source or patent, from time immemmorial. If we want to reverse this trend, it should be possible to have international patent for religious, and philosophical ideas.

I do not consider that "The creators of the ideas and the initial teachers who taught it to a lot of students selflesslely without getting anything in return are not even mentioned." If you have the ancient sages who functioned as gurus or teachers also, in your mind, there was a very well-established practice of "guru-dakshina" and ekalavya being forced to sacrifice his thumb for his mistake of mentally revering Drona as his "maanaseeka guru" told in the Mahabharata should be taken, imo, as depicting the state of affairs then widely prevalent.

The neo-age 'gurus', swamis and babas, godmen & godwomen, of course go to the west and start preaching about hinduism and all that (including all the 'ideas' which you refer to) because they get a very luxurious life abroad from the vast funds collected from/donated by (?) the gullible public there. Hence these modern 'teachers' of all these great ideas to the western minds are, in fact, parasites scrounging for a better life and the west compensates all of these, including some who later turn out to be rank criminals, adequately or even more than adequately.

I therefore feel that it is better for us to shed, once and for all, this "trumpeting" of old glory and ask ourselves, "what new ideas has India produced in the last one thousand years, and how can we sell those brilliant ideas for the highest bidder?"

 

[kunjuppu]

sankar,

you need to be more specific.

the new age folks, while they absorb what you think as the best of hinduism, are they bad mouthing it for all the shortcomings?

or is it other folks? if so, what are the bad stuff they are mocking? is there some truth in it?

re new age, what type of acknowledgment you expect.

in fact we get acknowledgement in indirect ways. the old ussr banned yoga because it was supposed to be against communist principles.

many islamic countries have banned yoga sensing it to be unislamic.

on the other hand, there was a movement a while ago in the usa, which wanted to patent a type of yoga. also patent basmati rice.

the world, i think is funny when it starts slicing and dicing ideas. but the vast majority of folks dont care. those who do yoga or new age
know that they owe an acknowledgement to india. others dont know and dont care.

so, unless you give us some specifics, i do not understand your queries. or your fears.

thank you.

ps. talking of stealers, of late, the biggest stealers of knowledge and technology, have been china and india, in that order. if you
want to know more about it, just google, 'violation of copyright' and see what comes up maybe we should hear complaints from
the west too?

 

[Iyyarooraan]

Morally we have not subscribed to the idea that knowledge is one's exclusive property. I remember in the olden days the cheap reprint of Chase's, Gardner's, etc. were freely available here in original and translated languages. We do not steal only foreign's, but local films and songs.

 

[happyhindu]

For example, the hinduism (if it may be called that) depicted in the rigveda did not talk at all about rebirth or hell; there was only a pitruloka in which the more meritorious were given a high status and they mingled with the devas.

Hinduism, as is known today, does believe strongly in karma-triggered rebirth, heaven and hells and so on. Is it possible to prove that these notions originated first in some hindu brain/mind only and nowhere else, and that at the relevant point of time no other religion believed in such or similar ideas? So, it appears to me as though, at least as far as religious growth is concerned, people of this world have been indulging in exchange of ideas without acknowledging the source or patent, from time immemmorial.

Am told the whole idea of karma and re-birth comes from buddhism and is linked to the theory of causation, and some such philosophical concepts in buddhism. The ideas of karma and re-birth did not exist in any of the vedic texts (samhitas, brahmanas). Am told we see these concepts mentioned for the first time in upanishads and puranas both of which are either post-buddhism compositions or coincide with the Buddhist period. Am yet to ascertain how far this claim is true.

Am also told brahmins started becoming vegetarians around this time (puranic) period due to the influence of buddhist concept of karma and rebirth. It seems "enterprising people" borrowed the concepts of karma and rebirth from buddhism and positioned themselves as those who inherited good purva janma karma to be brahmins. Again, am yet to ascertain these claims, however when it comes to copying ideas, maybe we need to have a good look at our own religion first.

I suppose we feel the pressure today because there are religions more enterprising than us. They copy our concepts and add them to their religions - christianity being the prime mover in such copying games.

 

[sangom]

Am told the whole idea of karma and re-birth comes from buddhism and is linked to the theory of causation, and some such philosophical concepts in buddhism. The ideas of karma and re-birth did not exist in any of the vedic texts (samhitas, brahmanas). Am told we see these concepts mentioned for the first time in upanishads and puranas both of which are either post-buddhism compositions or coincide with the Buddhist period. Am yet to ascertain how far this claim is true.

Am also told brahmins started becoming vegetarians around this time (puranic) period due to the influence of buddhist concept of karma and rebirth. It seems "enterprising people" borrowed the concepts of karma and rebirth from buddhism and positioned themselves as those who inherited good purva janma karma to be brahmins. Again, am yet to ascertain these claims, however when it comes to copying ideas, maybe we need to have a good look at our own religion first.

I suppose we feel the pressure today because there are religions more enterprising than us. They copy our concepts and add them to their religions - christianity being the prime mover in such copying games.

Smt. HH,

The concept of karma and then the idea of a birth to experience the fruits of the left over (remaining) karmas, might have come to thinking minds in those days when philosophical enquiry was at a high pitch in India and both Buddhism and mainstream poorvameemamsakas both might have been influenced by such ideas; anyway the Buddhist view of Karma is different from the hindu one and so, I cannot surely say that hinduism borrowed the buddhist ideas.

There is more probability for the brahmins having been forced to turn to strict vegetarianism due to the popularity of Jainism which had very strict vegetarian tenets. The vaisyas increasingly favoured the heretical Buddhism and Jainism, and pumped a lot of money (resources) in spreading their new found religion. The brahmins who were the sole custodians of hinduism found their resource base dwindling and possibly this would have made them copy as many items as possible from the two heresies; of these Jainism had a lot of common ground with hinduism because both had a large load of mythology, puranas and possibly irrational belief systems whereas Buddhism did not venture that much into unknown and unknowable things, at least during Buddha's times.

The problem with hinduism today is that it is a stagnant pool of water, but the pool-keepers won't allow any purification and at the same time they feel mighty glad to stir the pool and exclaim "see how ancient this water is; it was once pure water and so it must be potable even now".

 

[kunjuppu]

Morally we have not subscribed to the idea that knowledge is one's exclusive property. I remember in the olden days the cheap reprint of Chase's, Gardner's, etc. were freely available here in original and translated languages. We do not steal only foreign's, but local films and songs.

iyya,

good one this arguement.

we have in toronto, all tamil movies, good cd quality, for 1 canadian dolla, within a few days after release. also hindi movies with subtitles. all for one dolla.

the truth is, legal copies are only 3 dolla, but the 1 dolla sells, 3 dolla does not sell.

i guess we subscribe to that philosophy - nobody can put money value on knowledge.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Am told the whole idea of karma and re-birth comes from buddhism and is linked to the theory of causation, and some such philosophical concepts in buddhism. The ideas of karma and re-birth did not exist in any of the vedic texts (samhitas, brahmanas). Am told we see these concepts mentioned for the first time in upanishads and puranas both of which are either post-buddhism compositions or coincide with the Buddhist period. Am yet to ascertain how far this claim is true.

Whether the atheistic/ agnostic religions such as buddhism and jainism propounded karma/ rebirth theory or merely copied them from hinduism (or brahminism for some) is not known with certainty. But there are evidences in tamil scriptures of such agnostic religions that these concepts were used to ratify caste system.

As an example, Seevaka Chintamani, a jain text, says:

வில்லின் மாக் கொன்று வெள் நிணத் தடி விளிம்பு அடுத்த
பல்லினார்களும் படுகடல் பரதவர் முதலா
எல்லை நீங்கிய இழி தொழில் இழி குலம் ஒருவி
நல்ல தொல் குலம் பெறுதலும் நரபதி அரிதே

இதன் பொருள்: வில்லாலே விலங்குகளைக் கொன்று வெண்மையான நிணமும் ஊனும் ஓரத்திற் பற்றித் தின்கின்ற பற்களையுடையவர்களும் மீன்படு கடலின் ஓரத்தில் வாழும் பரதவரும் முதலாக அளவு கடந்த இழிதொழிலைப் புரிபவர் இழிகுலத்தினின்று தப்பி உயர்ந்த பழங்குடியிற் பிறத்தலும் அரியது.

In another verse it says:

ஊனொடு தேனும் கள்ளும் உண்டு உயிர் கொன்ற பாவத்து
ஈனராய் பிறந்தது இங்ஙன் இனி இவை ஒழிமின் என்ன..

ஊனையும் தேனையும் கள்ளையும் உண்டு உயிரையும் கொன்ற தீவினையால் இவ்விடத்திலே இழிந்த வேடராய்ப் பிறக்க நேர்ந்தது என்பது இதன் பொருள்.

On the other hand, theistic religions wrote in support of "lower" castes.

For example, Appar wrote:

சங்கநிதி பதுமநிதி இரண்டுந் தந்து
தரணியோடு வானாளத் தருவரேனும்
மங்குவார் அவர் செல்வம் மதிப்போம் அல்லோம்
மாதேவர்க்கு ஏகாந்தர் அல்லராகில்
அங்கமெலாம் குறைந்தழுகு தொழுநோயராய்
ஆவுரித்துத் தின்றுழலும் புலையரேனும்
கங்கைவார் சடைக்கரந்தார்க்கு அன்பராகில்
அவர் கண்டீர் நாம் வணங்கும் கடவுளாரே!

Nammaazvaar's paasuram says:

குலந்தாங்கு சாதிகள் நாலிலும் கீழ்இழிந்து, எத்தனை
நலந்தான் இலாதசண் டாளசண் டாளர்கள் ஆகிலும்,
வலந்தாங்கு சக்கரத் தண்ணல் மணிவண்ணற்கு ஆள்
என்று உள் கலந்தார், அடியார் தம் அடியார் எம் அடிகேளா

Here you can see that it is the atheists who were fatalistic!

One can see that the agnostics/ atheists were not holy cows. They were not holy cows then! They are not holy cows now!

There are people here who write how great the agnostic buddhist and jain religions are in the sense that they are anti-brahminical. The truth is they were anti-brahmin, but not anti-caste! Of course, such truths are lost on those, who use these terms "brahminism" and "casteism" interchangeably with vested interests. This post is not for them!

 

[Nara]

I don't hold a brief for any religion, buddisim or jainism. If they did write in support of casteism, I condemn that with equal vigor as I condemn Brahminism.

Brahminism being the source of casteism is undeniable, but the evidence provided for the claim Jains treated some castes as lowly is simply not true. The verses cited only speak of குலம், which is not necessarily ஜாதி. The dictionary meaning of குலம் includes caste, family, clan, tribe, etc. So, one cannot simply assert the word குலம் in சீவக சிந்தாமணி is undeniably ஜாதி only.

Unless there is additional textual evidence to show that குலம் was meant as ஜாதி, like for example குலம் தாங்கு சாதி by நம்மாழ்வார், the terms இழிகுலம் and உயர்குலம் simply means lowly family/clan or exalted family/clan. Further, a Jain for whom non-violence is supreme talking of hunter being lowly is unsurprising, but nothing to do with ஜாதி.

BTW, to be sure my position is not misunderstood, I reject even this notion that actions in one birth will result in a future birth in a lowly or highly family or clan, expressed in Seevaka Chintamani. All I am saying is strictly about what is meant by kulam in the cited verses, it is not ஜாதி as in the caste system advocated by Brahminism.

.....அங்கமெலாம் குறைந்தழுகு தொழுநோயராய்
ஆவுரித்துத் தின்றுழலும் புலையரேனும்
கங்கைவார் சடைக்கரந்தார்க்கு அன்பராகில்
அவர் கண்டீர் நாம் வணங்கும் கடவுளாரே!


.....
வலந்தாங்கு சக்கரத் தண்ணல் மணிவண்ணற்கு ஆள்
என்று உள் கலந்தார், அடியார் தம் அடியார் எம் அடிகேளா

Those who quote such verses must also answer why these ideas have been roundly rejected by the theists in practice. Given they have rejected them in practice, they can't claim credit for the ideas expressed. I would like to know how many தொழு நோய் புலையர் are treated as கடவுள் by the Shaivas because they were கங்கைவார் சடைக்கரந்தார்க்கு அன்பர். It is utter hypocrisy to assert there has never been one single புலையர், even without தொழு நோய், who was a true enough அன்பர் of கங்கைவார் சடைக்கரந்தார் to be let into Brahminical matams, let alone treated as கடவுள்.

Similarly, how many of these சாதிகள் நாலிலும் கீழ் இழிந்த சண்டாள அடியார்கள் have been permitted to even enter a SV Matam, let alone be treated as அவர் தம் அடியார் தம் அடியார் எம் அடிகள். Not a single one in the last 1000 years.

Put these ideas into practice and then claim credit for these words. Rejecting them in practice, but taking credit for the words is rank hypocrisy.

Cheers!

 

[கால பைரவன்]

The thrust of my post is being given a miss! My post was a response to the canards being spread here on how atheism espouses compassion and that theistic vedic brahminism is the only religion to uphold caste system. But the truth is that the caste system was a product of the then society that existed (நில பிரபுத்துவ சமுதாயம்). The religions did not create them. They can at best be accused of endorsing the system. In addition, the agnostic and atheistic religions were not different from theistic religions in providing such endorsement. While the bakthi movement tried to use people's proclivity to believe in the existence of a supreme being to counter the caste system, it did not succeed. Because religion did not create caste system, it could not succeed in eradicating it.

The wishy-washy defense of caste vs clan was also expected given the fact that the texts quoted belong to agnostic religions! The groups mentioned - the எயினர் and பரதவர் are still listed as caste groups. Whether the degradation of these caste groups stemmed from the principle of non-violence is irrelevant! The fact is agnostics and atheists provided intellectual support to such degradation! Just like how the agnostics and atheists of this forum provide intellectual support in spreading hatred directed against brahmins!

 

[Nara]

The thrust of my post is being given a miss!

The thrust of my post was to show you were misinterpreting old Tamil poetry to suit your thesis. Make whatever argument you want, but do it without citing invalid evidence.

 

[happyhindu]

The thrust of my post is being given a miss! My post was a response to the canards being spread here on how atheism espouses compassion and that theistic vedic brahminism is the only religion to uphold caste system. But the truth is that the caste system was a product of the then society that existed (நில பிரபுத்துவ சமுதாயம்). The religions did not create them. They can at best be accused of endorsing the system.

KB, i have already mentioned how the caste system is different from the varna system in the Aarakshan thread.

Till date there are tribes who follow a clan system. The clan system is NOT a caste system. If you want i can send you material over emails. Or you could wait for a few months when i complete writing on various tribes, clans, their customs, occupations, etc. After i finish writing, i hope to put the content on this very website.

Within one clan, members can take to different occupations. They are not forced into occupations or slavery. Material on clan kinship, and ties among various clans, is available on google books also, if you are interested.

Occupations were graded as hierarchial castes in the Varna system. This is the root cause of caste discrimination. Varna system belongs to the Smartha religion.

I would say Varna system was created by the Smartha religion, a religion which selectively borrowed from selective texts like jaimini's purvamimansa, to create an exclusive club of brahmins and brahmakshatras.

Varna system was alien to the Clan system. Incoming rulers brought the ideas of organising society as 4-class system, although initially it was not the varna system. So far, as my search goes, the Pallavas were the first rulers to organize the tamil society into a 4-class system.

AFAIK, the influence of the Kshatraps only existed until the stretches of Godavari, until the time the Pallavas made inroads into the Tamil country. So i would say the tamilians owe the 'caste-system' (of casteism / discrimination) to the Pallavas infact.

I have been watching on Sun TV about 7am arivu. People spill out of theatres and even shout slogans. But i have no idea how ALL tamilians can claim kinship association with the Pallavas.

In addition, the agnostic and atheistic religions were not different from theistic religions in providing such endorsement. While the bakthi movement tried to use people's proclivity to believe in the existence of a supreme being to counter the caste system, it did not succeed. Because religion did not create caste system, it could not succeed in eradicating it.

The wishy-washy defense of caste vs clan was also expected given the fact that the texts quoted belong to agnostic religions! The groups mentioned - the எயினர் and பரதவர் are still listed as caste groups. Whether the degradation of these caste groups stemmed from the principle of non-violence is irrelevant! The fact is agnostics and atheists provided intellectual support to such degradation! Just like how the agnostics and atheists of this forum provide intellectual support in spreading hatred directed against brahmins!

KB, if you speak of inter-clan differences then am with you; since various clans fought against one another. IMO clan wars (of one clan fighting against another clan) gave rise to the concept of kula deivams. Then again, the Caste System is different from the Clan System. Nearly ALL jain thirthankaras are from the Ikshvaku clan. Poets singing about the greatness of certain clans is no suprise.

Also, violence in clan wars, one group enslaving the other, creation of the hierarchial caste system, and varna system -- was the outcome of wars which everyone fought. So i wud say brahmins alone cannot be blamed. It was just the way social ideas and norms were at that time.

But i must say i am saddened, and tend to have some grouse about some certain brahmins of the colonial period who were floating on cloud nine (in their own world of supreme greatness) and wished to see people divided into varna system (and that too just 2 classes of brahmins and shudras). These were people who helped create an india where things run on caste-system in a 'democracy'. But when things got upturned on them (with reservations and misuse of the same caste-system by politicians), some brahmins cry hoarse about so-called meritocracy.

 

[prasad1]

In this world there are various divisions, some are based on geography (like Punjabi, Gujarati, Sindhi, etc). Some are based on Economy (like upper, middle, lower, or powerty etc). Then there are religion based (like Sikhs, Muslim. Hindu elc). Then there are division based on sex (like male, female, etc). Similarly there are groups based on achievements.

Some of the distinctions are based on birth alone and by law that discrimination is banned by law, and is abhorrent to majority in PUBLIC places. What you practice in your private home or your private club is up to you.

A total class less society is an Utopian dream. It will not be attained in our life time anywhere on earth, and it is not the fault of Brahmins as you will be advised in this site. It is not to say that we all should not strive towards that goal, and please tell that to 99% of the Americans who have been protesting this ineqality.