PDA

View Full Version : A year dedicated to Hinduism



heartfully
04 December 2009, 01:11 PM
On December 14, I may dedicate myself to a year as a Hindu. Though I know this religion is probably the one that is best for me, its hard letting go of my old religion for many reasons (but I have to face it is making the Divine feel farther away versus closer). I have chosen December 14 because it is a day that is spiritually very significant for me.

I would like to mark it with some sort of ceremony and some rituals. I am thinking of taking a "spiritual" Hindu name to help me deepen my relationship with Hinduism on a variety of levels. Has anyone else taken a name when they converted?

I am looking for guidance, ideas and recommendations from among the members of this forum. What are some of the best ways for a beginner to begin living sanatana dharma as a way of life, etc..

Also, anything you can help me with in terms of daily rituals and objects I might want to purchase, I would appreciate that also. I believe I have read enough on Hinduism to get a basic understand of beliefs, but I am strugglilng to find information on daily rituals. Also are there any good social communities online? I do not have a temple nearby so the internet will be my main source of interacting with others who are practicing Hinduism.

Namaste! And Peace!
Heartfull

Eastern Mind
04 December 2009, 03:57 PM
Vannakkam: So you can become a Hindu for a year? I didn't realise that was possible.

Perhaps you mean dedicating one year odf study to Hinduism. For that I would recommend one of Subramuniyaswami's s books in his trilogy which each have 365 daily lessons.

Where are you again in US? Maybe there is a temple closer than you think.

Aum Namasivaya

ScottMalaysia
04 December 2009, 07:03 PM
Also, anything you can help me with in terms of daily rituals and objects I might want to purchase, I would appreciate that also. I believe I have read enough on Hinduism to get a basic understand of beliefs, but I am strugglilng to find information on daily rituals.

Yes, this is a problem. There are many books on what Hindus believe, but there are very few detailing the practice of the religion in a clear, concise, step-by-step manner. This is possibly because the religious practices are passed on from father to son and mother to daughter. Hindus learn them from their parents and in turn pass them on to their own children.

However, this is a problem not only for converts, but for those Hindus born into secular or nonreligious families. As I explained in another thread, I'd like to write a book giving detailed step-by-step instructions on Hindu practice - how to set up a home altar, how to offer puja, how to celebrate each festival, how to celebrate the samskaras etc.

For instructions on Ganesha puja, see the following link:
http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/lg/lg_ch-12.html

My wife's grandfather is a religious Saivite, and the puja he does is like this.

He starts by offering incense and a camphor lamp to the pictures of his departed relatives set on a table on the right-hand side of the prayer room. He then takes the equipment over to the altar, and offers incense, an oil lamp and a camphor lamp to the pictures on the altar (including Sathya Sai Baba) and the picture of Saraswati off to the side of the altar. On Fridays, he breaks a coconut as well and rings the bell when offering the items.

However, he has some weapons on the left-hand side of the prayer room whose functions I don't understand. That's why I'd like to write a book explaining all these things.

sanjaya
04 December 2009, 09:14 PM
However, this is a problem not only for converts, but for those Hindus born into secular or nonreligious families.

Or for those of us who were born in religious families but didn't pay attention. As I said in the other thread, I would very much appreciate if the directives for preparing and performing a puja were recorded in some easily accessible book. Currently I don't feel confident that I could properly perform a puja without significant assistance from someone who knows better than me.

Regarding Heartfully's original post, may I ask why you're departing from your previous religion to practice Hinduism? Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that you want to learn more about the Hindu religion. But converting from one religion to another usually requires departing from well-established family traditions, and in general it's not something I would recommend. I certainly think you're doing the right thing by taking a year to explore Hinduism before making any permanent decisions (at least that's what I hope you're doing, since Eastern Mind correctly stated that it doesn't make sense to "be" a Hindu for a year). But as Sri Krishna says, salvation is found not in religious practice, but in surrendering oneself fully to God. Just something to think about.

heartfully
05 December 2009, 02:12 PM
Vannakkam: So you can become a Hindu for a year? I didn't realise that was possible.

Perhaps you mean dedicating one year odf study to Hinduism. For that I would recommend one of Subramuniyaswami's s books in his trilogy which each have 365 daily lessons.

Where are you again in US? Maybe there is a temple closer than you think.

Aum Namasivaya

lol, :) . i understand how confusing and odd this must sound. its better for me to say "practice" it for a year. i would like to commit myself to exploring it for a year and finding out if i am right to leave the religion i am practicing now. i love parts of my current religion, but i also feel "oppressed" by it and unable to be the real me. my current religion is very conservative and hindus seem to be so much more tolerant, creative, concerned more with the inner than the outer ways of practicing a religion.

i have been confused about what to do with all this. and i think i have to either devote myself to one or the other...not always dipping over from one side to the other. if i didn't feel the need to remain cryptic about my current situation, it would make more sense.

i will look up that book right now. thanks for recommending it.

namaste!
heartfully

heartfully
05 December 2009, 02:17 PM
Vannakkam: So you can become a Hindu for a year? I didn't realise that was possible.

Perhaps you mean dedicating one year odf study to Hinduism. For that I would recommend one of Subramuniyaswami's s books in his trilogy which each have 365 daily lessons.

Where are you again in US? Maybe there is a temple closer than you think.

Aum Namasivaya

Namaste! I did a search at Amazon and I'm not sure which of his books you are referring to. Could you let me know?

I actually have Dancing With Siva. I purchased recently. Is that one a good book to use to learn from?

Peace,
Heartfully

heartfully
05 December 2009, 02:19 PM
Yes, this is a problem. There are many books on what Hindus believe, but there are very few detailing the practice of the religion in a clear, concise, step-by-step manner. This is possibly because the religious practices are passed on from father to son and mother to daughter. Hindus learn them from their parents and in turn pass them on to their own children.

However, this is a problem not only for converts, but for those Hindus born into secular or nonreligious families. As I explained in another thread, I'd like to write a book giving detailed step-by-step instructions on Hindu practice - how to set up a home altar, how to offer puja, how to celebrate each festival, how to celebrate the samskaras etc.

For instructions on Ganesha puja, see the following link:
http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/lg/lg_ch-12.html

My wife's grandfather is a religious Saivite, and the puja he does is like this.

He starts by offering incense and a camphor lamp to the pictures of his departed relatives set on a table on the right-hand side of the prayer room. He then takes the equipment over to the altar, and offers incense, an oil lamp and a camphor lamp to the pictures on the altar (including Sathya Sai Baba) and the picture of Saraswati off to the side of the altar. On Fridays, he breaks a coconut as well and rings the bell when offering the items.

However, he has some weapons on the left-hand side of the prayer room whose functions I don't understand. That's why I'd like to write a book explaining all these things.

namaste! i do think your book would be greatly appreciated by many.

peace,
heartfully

heartfully
05 December 2009, 02:24 PM
Or for those of us who were born in religious families but didn't pay attention. As I said in the other thread, I would very much appreciate if the directives for preparing and performing a puja were recorded in some easily accessible book. Currently I don't feel confident that I could properly perform a puja without significant assistance from someone who knows better than me.

Regarding Heartfully's original post, may I ask why you're departing from your previous religion to practice Hinduism? Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that you want to learn more about the Hindu religion. But converting from one religion to another usually requires departing from well-established family traditions, and in general it's not something I would recommend. I certainly think you're doing the right thing by taking a year to explore Hinduism before making any permanent decisions (at least that's what I hope you're doing, since Eastern Mind correctly stated that it doesn't make sense to "be" a Hindu for a year). But as Sri Krishna says, salvation is found not in religious practice, but in surrendering oneself fully to God. Just something to think about.

namaste! actually, no one in my family (near or distant) practice the religion i practice. it was my choice. it has been a good choice, in some ways, because it forced me to explore what i need from a religion. but it is hard to be myself in the religion i practice now. i'm still confused in some ways, but i am wondering if that is more of a guilt trip i am laying on myself about considering converting. does that make sense?

today i feel unsure about whether to go through with this or not. it is as if the Divine keeps pulling me back to my current religion which feels like such an awful fit. maybe there is a place for me somewhere and i just don't know it yet?

i know its confusing. i'm not comfortable sharing more in a public forum.

peace,
heartfully

sanjaya
05 December 2009, 02:26 PM
lol, :) . i understand how confusing and odd this must sound. its better for me to say "practice" it for a year. i would like to commit myself to exploring it for a year and finding out if i am right to leave the religion i am practicing now. i love parts of my current religion, but i also feel "oppressed" by it and unable to be the real me. my current religion is very conservative and hindus seem to be so much more tolerant, creative, concerned more with the inner than the outer ways of practicing a religion.

May I ask what you mean by "conservative?" It's true that Hinduism doesn't require you to vote for a particular political party, support specific cultural issues, or actively convert others, nor do we believe that anyone is going to hell for practicing the wrong religion. However, Hinduism isn't without its own moral code, most of which is similar to what you'll find in any other religion. I know of people who've started exploring Hinduism with a false belief that it's some sort of a hippie religion (for lack of a better term) only to find out that we have a strict sense of right behavior too. In many ways, India is one of the most conservative countries in the world, as evidenced by the fact that everyone freaks out and threatens criminal charges when two people kiss in public. Yes, some of this is influenced by the British Victorian era. But a lot of it is also because Hinduism teaches us self-discipline.

I don't mean to suggest that you're looking for a religion that tolerates some sort of immorality, and I'm certainly not trying to dissuade you from looking into our faith. I just want to caution you that like most religions, Hinduism requires its adherants to develop certain personal disciplines. Since I recently began practicing more seriously, I've found that it's not as easy as I thought it would be.

heartfully
05 December 2009, 02:26 PM
PS- I wonder if I am too old to begin practicing a new religion. will i spend more time learning than worshiping? that's my concern.

peace,
heartfully

yajvan
05 December 2009, 02:53 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté heartfully,


PS- I wonder if I am too old to begin practicing a new religion. will i spend more time learning than worshiping? that's my concern.

They ( worship and learning) are brother and sister...they compliment each other.
Worship brings devotion and purification; learning does the same.

It is said, na hi jñānena sadṛṣaṁ pavitram i.e. certainly ~indeed (hi) there is nothing (na) so purifying (pavitram) or suitable (sadṛṣaṁ) then knowledge (jñānena) - Bhāgavad gītā , chapter 4, 38th śloka

praṇām

Harjas Kaur
05 December 2009, 02:56 PM
Your atma doesn't have any age. If you don't believe in your birth religion and don't feel comfortable to practice it, by all means, you're free. I think the point people have been making is that there is no missionary belief in Sanatana Dharma and hence no reason for you to feel a need to convert. You can find God in your own religion and should feel no pressure.

There are many sects and philosophies and you should feel free to simply explore them all and just believe what you believe in and practice what makes you feel comfortable and happy. Then as you get more into it, and it's become a part of you, you can look at something more formal. But really, unless your getting married to a Hindu, or taking some kind of vows I don't think anyone will really care one way or the other.

I'm still a big advocate of the Guru-chela system. If you want to belong to something meaningful, try to find a Guru. Then there is no doubt what you should be practicing. Usually a Guru won't require conversions either. You will belong to the Guru and not really to a formal "religion." I guess it depends also on whatever sect you feel a part of. Anyone who "believes" in Hindu religion is far more interesting to talk to regardless of their birth religion then someone born Hindu who prefers to watch football game and knows nothing about Hinduism. Just find a sangat of like-minded people and be yourself.

heartfully
05 December 2009, 03:12 PM
May I ask what you mean by "conservative?" It's true that Hinduism doesn't require you to vote for a particular political party, support specific cultural issues, or actively convert others, nor do we believe that anyone is going to hell for practicing the wrong religion. However, Hinduism isn't without its own moral code, most of which is similar to what you'll find in any other religion. I know of people who've started exploring Hinduism with a false belief that it's some sort of a hippie religion (for lack of a better term) only to find out that we have a strict sense of right behavior too. In many ways, India is one of the most conservative countries in the world, as evidenced by the fact that everyone freaks out and threatens criminal charges when two people kiss in public. Yes, some of this is influenced by the British Victorian era. But a lot of it is also because Hinduism teaches us self-discipline.

I don't mean to suggest that you're looking for a religion that tolerates some sort of immorality, and I'm certainly not trying to dissuade you from looking into our faith. I just want to caution you that like most religions, Hinduism requires its adherants to develop certain personal disciplines. Since I recently began practicing more seriously, I've found that it's not as easy as I thought it would be.


good points are made here. i do not see sanatana dharma as a "hippie" religion. i identify with many of the values of Hinduism. the concept of ahimsa is one i have practiced for years. there is a great respect for life. what i understand of puja, it is so gentle and reverent. karma holds us accountable just like "sin" in the Abrahamic traditions. The way it is inclusive rather than insisting one set of beliefs is the "only right way". That inclusiveness is everywhere...even the reverence for nature and the environment are included in it.

what other values would you include? these are the ones i know of so far.

peace,
heartfull

heartfully
05 December 2009, 03:20 PM
Your atma doesn't have any age. If you don't believe in your birth religion and don't feel comfortable to practice it, by all means, you're free. I think the point people have been making is that there is no missionary belief in Sanatana Dharma and hence no reason for you to feel a need to convert. You can find God in your own religion and should feel no pressure.

There are many sects and philosophies and you should feel free to simply explore them all and just believe what you believe in and practice what makes you feel comfortable and happy. Then as you get more into it, and it's become a part of you, you can look at something more formal. But really, unless your getting married to a Hindu, or taking some kind of vows I don't think anyone will really care one way or the other.

I'm still a big advocate of the Guru-chela system. If you want to belong to something meaningful, try to find a Guru. Then there is no doubt what you should be practicing. Usually a Guru won't require conversions either. You will belong to the Guru and not really to a formal "religion." I guess it depends also on whatever sect you feel a part of. Anyone who "believes" in Hindu religion is far more interesting to talk to regardless of their birth religion then someone born Hindu who prefers to watch football game and knows nothing about Hinduism. Just find a sangat of like-minded people and be yourself.

Namaste.

How do people find gurus?

The other religion I practice would never accept someone practicing Hinduism though it has been done among the mystics and I consider myself more in that group than the traditional ways the religion is practiced. So it feels like I need to decide. The views of my current religion are very different than what I have learned about Hinduism.

If anyone wants to send me a private message, I could be more specific. :(

peace,
heartfull

TatTvamAsi
05 December 2009, 04:56 PM
Word of advice: DON'T.

Hinduism is not a fad nor is it a new "style" to be tried out by every Tom, Dick, and Harry. That is why we believe in no conversion. When your soul ("you") are ready, perhaps several hundred (thousands?) lifetimes later, you will be born into a Hindu family.

It is a great insult to Hinduism to treat it the way you are. Same problem with Yoga in the west; to many, it's a fad.

Remember, we are all better off with our own kind; even in religion. Please stick to your own religion and when you have NATURALLY outgrown it, you will be born into Hinduism.

Namaskar.


On December 14, I may dedicate myself to a year as a Hindu. Though I know this religion is probably the one that is best for me, its hard letting go of my old religion for many reasons (but I have to face it is making the Divine feel farther away versus closer). I have chosen December 14 because it is a day that is spiritually very significant for me.

I would like to mark it with some sort of ceremony and some rituals. I am thinking of taking a "spiritual" Hindu name to help me deepen my relationship with Hinduism on a variety of levels. Has anyone else taken a name when they converted?

I am looking for guidance, ideas and recommendations from among the members of this forum. What are some of the best ways for a beginner to begin living sanatana dharma as a way of life, etc..

Also, anything you can help me with in terms of daily rituals and objects I might want to purchase, I would appreciate that also. I believe I have read enough on Hinduism to get a basic understand of beliefs, but I am strugglilng to find information on daily rituals. Also are there any good social communities online? I do not have a temple nearby so the internet will be my main source of interacting with others who are practicing Hinduism.

Namaste! And Peace!
Heartfull

heartfully
05 December 2009, 05:44 PM
Word of advice: DON'T.

Hinduism is not a fad nor is it a new "style" to be tried out by every Tom, Dick, and Harry. That is why we believe in no conversion. When your soul ("you") are ready, perhaps several hundred (thousands?) lifetimes later, you will be born into a Hindu family.

It is a great insult to Hinduism to treat it the way you are. Same problem with Yoga in the west; to many, it's a fad.

Remember, we are all better off with our own kind; even in religion. Please stick to your own religion and when you have NATURALLY outgrown it, you will be born into Hinduism.

Namaskar.

Namaste,

1) I mean no disrespect toward Hinduism or other Hindus. What makes you think I'm treating it as a fad? It is exactly the opposite. You do not know my whole story.

2) If Hinduism accepts no converts, how come so many people convert to it? I would like to know more about your opinion on this. I assume you were born into a Hindu family then. Knowing "Hindu" originally refers to a people not a religion. Is that how you view it?

3) When you say, I will naturally "outgrow" it, do you mean the religion I am practicing now is somehow inferior? "Outgrow" seems to say that where I am at now is not as advanced as where I'll be when I practice Hinduism. That to me feels like the whole caste idea.

I'm very curious to learn more about why you responded to me the way you have.

Peace,
Heartfull

Eastern Mind
05 December 2009, 05:44 PM
Namaste! I did a search at Amazon and I'm not sure which of his books you are referring to. Could you let me know?

I actually have Dancing With Siva. I purchased recently. Is that one a good book to use to learn from?

Peace,
Heartfully

I think they all comprise 365 lessons now, but I'm not sure. There are several editions and revisions. Perhaps you have an older edition. I just purchased the newer edition of 'Living with Siva' myself. Certainly it is set up that way, so I have a year of work/reflection ... again. But I can't make judgment on 'good book' or not as I am extremely biased, and this would be going against the rulers of the forum. You would have to read it yourself for awhile and then decide.

Aum Namasivaya

sanjaya
06 December 2009, 12:17 PM
good points are made here. i do not see sanatana dharma as a "hippie" religion. i identify with many of the values of Hinduism. the concept of ahimsa is one i have practiced for years. there is a great respect for life. what i understand of puja, it is so gentle and reverent. karma holds us accountable just like "sin" in the Abrahamic traditions. The way it is inclusive rather than insisting one set of beliefs is the "only right way". That inclusiveness is everywhere...even the reverence for nature and the environment are included in it.

I think I understand why you're interested in studying Hinduism, and I think you are here for all the right reasons. I too appreciate Hinduism's stance that even "false" religions will not lead to divine condemnation. This belief, I think, leads to hatred of people who practice other religions, and Hinduism certainly teaches against such behavior. I wish you well on your journey, and I believe that this is a good forum to learn from many knowledgable posters (which is why I'm here).


what other values would you include? these are the ones i know of so far.

Well in addition to the usual things found in most religions (sexual morality, ethical treatment of others, etc.), I think Hinduism places a strong value on respecting one's parents and surrendering to God, and in that order. Unlike other faiths which teach that "God comes first," Hinduism seems to carry an underlying philosophy that we are serving God by first serving our family and community. As you mentioned, respect for all life is important in Hinduism as well. This is why we are against cruelty to animals, and why we respect people of other religions, even though we might not believe in those religions. Of course there are many other values that Hinduism teaches, and no one person has the time to enumerate them all. But these are the basic virtues that I've learned from my own limited study.

Harjas Kaur
07 December 2009, 04:21 AM
I do not believe that the eternal truth is related to the physical body, linguistic or nationality or race of a person. The eternal truth relates directly to a person's atma. It cannot be said Hinduism is for born Hindus only because that would be to give ownership to eternal truth. Can the truth be owned by one group and exclude any other? Can anyone put the God in his hip pocket?

At the same time there is nothing about race or nationality or birthright which gives anyone the proper respect for religion to claim that any other has rude intentions. Religion is simply not limited in those ways. No one with human brain can understand the totality of TRUTH in such a way as to be showing maximum respect and reverence. But if we prevent and discourage people from learning those things which have the power to alleviate their suffering condition and change themselves and OUR world for the better, then we become agents of Adharma.

In truth, no one needs to formally convert to enjoy the wealth and beauty of Snatan Dharm. But if someone wants to become educated and make a formal conversion I don't see what is wrong with that either. On another thread someone asked about Stephen Knapp. And the conclusion of the thread was maybe not agreeing with his points but that he was a formidable opponent to Muslim and Christian missionaries and anti-Hindu agendas.

I don't believe Stephen Knapp is a "born-Hindu." Yet, he is a friend of Dharma if he has obtained the knowledge to defend Dharma against onslaught of abuse and discrediting by missionary groups. What does anyone gain to discourage greater understanding and friendship with people all over the world?

In reality, there are many political problems, many misunderstandings of every kind. Yet, truth is it's own defense. Let those so inclined drink deeply of all they can. For one thing, you do not know the nationality of all your births. You do not have a clue the reincarnation history of someone drawn to Hindu religion. That person may be your very own brother from the past born in another country precisely to promote tolerance and understanding of Hindu's in a world which is filled with so much misinformation, animosity and demonizing of the same.

To heartfully, you don't have to convert, and probably it should be discouraged as basically meaningless. You can practice and learn as much Hindu religion as you want exactly as you are. But if it's something you want or feel the need to do, then do it. Your eternal soul has no color and no creed and already belongs to the eternal truth.

devotee
07 December 2009, 04:56 AM
Namaste HF,


On December 14, I may dedicate myself to a year as a Hindu.

I am sorry, but it ( dedicating one year as Hindu) does make me laugh & that is why, perhaps, TTA suggested you to "Don't". However, if you feel to do it, please go ahead. There are many
Hindus here on this forum who are not born-Hindus who can guide you.


I would like to mark it with some sort of ceremony and some rituals. I am thinking of taking a "spiritual" Hindu name to help me deepen my relationship with Hinduism on a variety of levels. Has anyone else taken a name when they converted?

If you want to do it only for a year, then I don't know why this all is necessary at all, if not just for a fad. You have just to start a Hindu way of life to become a Hindu. There is no organisation dictating you to formally convert to Hinduism. However, if you are keen to convert, you may contact the Aarya-Samaaj people in your area.


I am looking for guidance, ideas and recommendations from among the members of this forum. What are some of the best ways for a beginner to begin living sanatana dharma as a way of life, etc..

My advice is that you start reading some good scriptures to start with & make yourself aware of the core philosophy of Hinduism. Bhagwad Gita is an excellent scripture which will give you a very good understanding of what is there in Hinduism. You may also start worshipping Lord Krishna/ Lord Shiva/ Mother Goddess Durgaa etc. having their pictures/images in your shrine at home. You may start celebrating some festivals, e.g. Holi, Dussehra, Deepawali with Hindus in your area. You may start visiting temples which are nearby. Make friends with some of Hindus living nearby & learn about their customs, their faith, value system etc.


Also, anything you can help me with in terms of daily rituals and objects I might want to purchase, I would appreciate that also. I believe I have read enough on Hinduism to get a basic understand of beliefs, but I am strugglilng to find information on daily rituals. Also are there any good social communities online? I do not have a temple nearby so the internet will be my main source of interacting with others who are practicing Hinduism.


In Hinduism, there is no set formula to follow. You can decide your own daily ritual. However, most of the religious Hindus start their day taking name of God, taking bath & worshipping God in their shrine before taking any food. This ritual may be for one minute of just lighting one incense stick & saying a few mantras/bhqajans to even quite an elaborate ritual lasting for an hour or more. This is again repeated in the evening. In some Hindu families, the whole family gathers for Sandhya (the ritual in the evening) saying bhajans & doing Aarati in front of the deities. Regarding Bhajans/Mantras too, it all depends upon you. There are books available for performing elaborate pooja to various deities but normally it is used by the priests for formal worshipping & not for everyday routine worship. So, you needn't buy those books. You may also memorise some mantras & bhajans to start with ... that would be easier & less time consuming.

In case of any specific difficulty, please raise your doubts on this forum. We have many experts here who can give you good advice.

OM

heartfully
08 December 2009, 02:28 PM
Namaste!

I appreciate all the comments and criticisms. Being at a point of spiritual "crisis", if that can actually be, I actually came to see my ideas about "converting" are more about officially leaving my current religion than embracing a new one. The religion I am practicing now is very conservative and rigid (I like Hinduism does not force people to be/think/believe a certain way).

My current religion has turned into a prison. I feel unable to be myself. I am looking for the key out of the prison. For now, the only way for me to officially break away is to latch onto another religion. Hinduism promotes the same things I value. My current religion rejects most of what I value.

What do I value? Non-violence/ahimsa, vegetarianism to avoid animal suffering, freedom of religion, all religions that lead the Divine are valid, mysticism, the Feminine Divine, the Hindu scriptures, chanting...just to name a few.

I am sorry I offended or turned people off with how I am planning to break away from a religion that is making it harder instead of easier to feel close to the Divine. It feels the only way I can do it, is to commit myself to a exploring a new path intensely. Perhaps that is just to numb the grief. In fact, that is certainly why I'm making these plans.

Do I mourn my old religion? Or does mourning it mean I wasn't meant to leave it?

heartfully
08 December 2009, 02:47 PM
I'm trying to do the mulitiple quotes, but can't figure out how to do it. ended up deleting the whole message. sorry for any confusion.

heartfully
08 December 2009, 04:20 PM
namaste,

hi. i'm sorry, i can't figure out how to put the quotes in parts so i can reply beneath what someone says. i'll try to find the appropriate forum to ask how to do that.

hugs

Harjas Kaur
08 December 2009, 07:10 PM
Before I leave this forum I did want to address Heartfully's sincere questions, as I feel that anyone in a crisis should receive support and encouragement.

Being at a point of spiritual "crisis", if that can actually be, I actually came to see my ideas about "converting" are more about officially leaving my current religion than embracing a new one.You have your answer in these words. You don't HAVE to DO anything to be accepted. If you are a friend to Hindus and a kind person, YOU WILL BE ACCEPTED AS YOU ARE. You don't have to formally convert. Conversion makes Hindu's uncomfortable since it has such a negative connotation and Hindu religion is very tolerant.

I don't even feel you need to formally "leave" your current religion. If you stopped believing in it and have no faith in it, then it's no longer a "guide" for you. Don't worry about it. Just embrace those things you DO believe in and hold them close to your heart like a cherished reality.


My current religion has turned into a prison. I feel unable to be myself. I am looking for the key out of the prison. For now, the only way for me to officially break away is to latch onto another religion. Hinduism promotes the same things I value. My current religion rejects most of what I value.You don't have to officially do anyone. You just need to give yourself time and freedom to come to a degree of healing and peace. If Hindu religion promotes things you value, then by all means study all you can, go to satsangs, make friends with people. Visit temples of different sects. You may find a home of like-minded individuals. And if you do not, that's okay too. Hinduism never required you to convert or change yourself in any way. You can only gain by being a friend of Hindu's. At worst you will learn some wise and beautiful things by studying the scriptures.

The prison is in the mind, it's in the perception. You may have past life traumas over this issue that has become like a Klesha. This life is your opportunity to free yourself from the prison of having to be something, and having the freedom to just be yourself and believe whatever you believe without force or compunction. You won't find any freedom in putting yourself in another kind of cage which is "different."

What do I value? Non-violence/ahimsa, vegetarianism to avoid animal suffering, freedom of religion, all religions that lead the Divine are valid, mysticism, the Feminine Divine, the Hindu scriptures, chanting...just to name a few.Those are marvelous, wise, wonderful and beautiful things to value.

I am sorry I offended or turned people off with how I am planning to break away from a religion that is making it harder instead of easier to feel close to the Divine. It feels the only way I can do it, is to commit myself to a exploring a new path intensely. Perhaps that is just to numb the grief. In fact, that is certainly why I'm making these plans.Realize that you're going to always offend somebody. This is sansaara, a world of suffering realities and miscommunication. It doesn't matter because you were not born in this world to please those people or make them happy. Just have a thick skin and keep going in the direction that brings you peace. There are many views. It is my view that Hinduism is rejecting of nobody and only fights in it's own self-defense without oppressing anyone. You would be welcome to become a Hindu formally by many groups. But the truth is, you don't HAVE to. And right now I don't think you should because that would be, at this time, another obligation, another cage.

It's better if you just stay what you are. For example I am a Sikh. I stayed a Sikh. But I embraced the larger Hindu Dharm and I accept the Sruti of the Vedas as preeminent truth and everything thereafter as having to conform to those fundamental truths. Because I accepted diksha with a Hindu Guru I don't feel like I bow down to primacy of Sikh Guru Sahibaan, but to the Divine Jyot which resides in every Satguru. Because I have a Hindu Guru I feel no need to formally convert to Hinduism or adopt Hindu practices. I simply perform the sadhana practices given me by the Guru. I have Hindu satsang bhais and bhens who perform pujas and I attend. I have no problem with performance of Hindu religion and enjoy participating in sincerity. But I am myself without any formality. And I think I get a better acceptance this way then if I converted to become a formal Hindu. I consider myself a Hindu as far as having relationship to Hindustan and also to overall body of revealed truth which is Sanatana Dharma, that is my religion. That is what I believe in.

So just believe in what you believe. No one in their right mind will turn away a friend. There are lots of people not born Hindus who have become wonderful advocates of Sanatana Dharma. Far better to have friends then enemies. Why encourage someone to stay in a hostile religion which is enemy of Dharma? That's self-destructive. You can belong to the Divine Truth without any formality. In fact, you already do in your core and deepest reality. See, Sanatana Dharma isn't just a formal religion, it's the TRUTH. Just give yourself time to move away from rigidities and into a peaceful self-acceptance. You will heal. But right now I think you would be vulnerable to another version of rigidity. That's why it's better to just explore on your own without wearing a hat, so to speak. Don't join anything. Just enjoy everything. Later, when you feel there is a good fit, just stay there and keep enjoying. A formality is really meaningless. You already belong to the God. You can't formally dedicate a year, you have no guarantee of tomorrow. How can you promise what you have no certainly to deliver? But with the Divine you already have eternity. Dedicate your eternity to dancing with the Divine Beloved and you can't go wrong.

ScottMalaysia
09 December 2009, 11:11 AM
2) If Hinduism accepts no converts, how come so many people convert to it? I would like to know more about your opinion on this. I assume you were born into a Hindu family then. Knowing "Hindu" originally refers to a people not a religion. Is that how you view it?

Some Hindus mistakenly believe that one must be born a Hindu and that conversion to Hinduism is not possible. This view is not scriptural and has no backing to support it. There are no strict guidelines as to what makes a person a Hindu in the first place, so no-one can say that you can't convert to it. For more information read Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami's book How to Become a Hindu, which is available online here. (http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/hbh/)

Heartfully, from what you say about your current religion, I'm guessing you're either a Christian or a Muslim. It doesn't matter if you call yourself "Christian" or "Muslim" or "Hindu" as long as you serve God and worship Him. These are only outward labels. If you're a Christian and you convert to Hinduism, the essence of what you're doing (serving God) has not changed, just the outward rituals and beliefs. It's like this: Say you take the bus to work every day. But then you find out that the train goes there faster, so you decide to take the train. The essence of what you are doing (going to work) has not changed.

So give Hinduism a go. Read the Bhagavad-Gita. If you're interested in Saivite Hinduism (the sect of Hinduism that says that Lord Shiva is the Supreme), then you can read a lot of online books about Saivism here (http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/). If I were you, I'd start with Dancing with Siva (found at the above link). It serves as an introduction to Hinduism. After that there are two more books, Living with Siva and Merging with Siva. I think that these are the books that Eastern Mind was referring to.

sanjaya
09 December 2009, 12:59 PM
Heartfully, from what you say about your current religion, I'm guessing you're either a Christian or a Muslim. It doesn't matter if you call yourself "Christian" or "Muslim" or "Hindu" as long as you serve God and worship Him. These are only outward labels. If you're a Christian and you convert to Hinduism, the essence of what you're doing (serving God) has not changed, just the outward rituals and beliefs. It's like this: Say you take the bus to work every day. But then you find out that the train goes there faster, so you decide to take the train. The essence of what you are doing (going to work) has not changed.

Yes, this is quite right. Religious distinctions are just labels, and no one has God in their pocket. If someone really wants to convert to Hinduism, of course I would welcome them. But Christians and Muslims who serve God properly are no different than Hindus. I'm reminded once again by the example of Shirdi Sai Baba. Though he was an avatar of God and taught people the stories of the Hindu Scriptures, I don't know that he ever even called himself a "Hindu." He dressed like a Muslim, lived in a mosque, and called God Fakir (Allah). Both Hindus and Muslims used to come to Shirdi just to visit him, and he did many recorded miracles. The point here is that God is not a Hindu or a Muslim or anything else. He is the immutable Absolute Reality, and to fit him into silly religious distinctions makes no sense.

But as I said Heartfully, if you really want to "convert" to Hinduism, I think that most Hindus would happily accept you.

Ganeshprasad
09 December 2009, 03:08 PM
Pranam Bahen ji Pranam Heartfully


Before I leave this forum I did want to address Heartfully's sincere questions, as I feel that anyone in a crisis should receive support and encouragement.
You have your answer in these words. You don't HAVE to DO anything to be accepted. If you are a friend to Hindus and a kind person, YOU WILL BE ACCEPTED AS YOU ARE. You don't have to formally convert. Conversion makes Hindu's uncomfortable since it has such a negative connotation and Hindu religion is very tolerant.

.

Some very nice advice you have got here by many, i have nothing to add accept follow Dharma, truthfulness, ahimsa, purity and austerity these are the main pillars of Hindu Dharma for these, no one has to convert to any thing.

on a separate note, bahen ji, i for one would be sad to see you go, for what ever reason why? i think you should stay, if you have conviction in your belief.

Jai Shree Krishna

heartfully
09 December 2009, 05:09 PM
thank you, harjas kaur. why are you leaving the forum, harjas? :( please don't go. your wisdom is such an asset to seekers like myself. it means a lot you cared enough to write all the things you did. it has been a very special day today. and you helped it to be one. its good to see a sikh who grows by following the path of the heart.

thank you also, scottmalaysia. your kindness blessed me with insights. i have a lot to think about while considering all the responses i received. the link you shared rocks. i have dancing with siva. just started contemplating sloka 3.

sanjaya, the reason hinduism is such an eternal religion is the freedom ppl have to drink from its wisdom in whatever way aids them on their journey. not many religions are like that. i used to think baha'is embraced all truths but learned that in theory only is that how bahai's are. in reality, if their messenger didn't say it, they don't consider it a source of truth. sad but true. even in unitarian universalism there are certain ways that are honored by UUs more than others. to have a religion that says just find your own Truth and make it your journey...that is a blessing i wish i had early in life. sanatana dharma remains a journey of the heart and soul, unconcerned with dressing the body with rigid adhesion to the outer.

ganeshprasad, thanks for your advice. it has taken me a long time to realize that religion isn't the important thing; the soul's relationship with the Divine is. i feel i have learned more on this forum in a week than i have in a year sometimes. that is special. and i also hope harjaskaur won't leave. :(

sm78
10 December 2009, 12:21 AM
Or for those of us who were born in religious families but didn't pay attention. As I said in the other thread, I would very much appreciate if the directives for preparing and performing a puja were recorded in some easily accessible book. Currently I don't feel confident that I could properly perform a puja without significant assistance from someone who knows better than me.

Desire to do puja is a great blessing. However you first need to understand what orientation you have, what *sect* (not in the narrow sense, but in the sense of upasana marga) you feel you belong to. This requires study of hindu philosophical thoughts and sat-sanga. I personally believe in the current age, self study is much better than wasting time and money listining to dubious teachers.

Once you know what upasana marga you should follow, it is then time to dig into the paddhatis and subsiquently to the sva-shastras. True value of puja can flow when one understands the science behind them which in turn depends on the understanding of the perticular school/marga. So following a valid marga and associated shastra is must for serious puja. In all this Guru comes into the picture, but once someone is convinced of the efficacy of the path (eg shakta or shaiva or vaishnava or even a more personal hybrid), the availibility or unavailibility of a physical guru should not stop his/her progress. A real diksha into the path can occur only when the sishya is prepared (just like we need to prepare to pass exams), which comes from real practice of the methods. (At least this is my belief, some traditionalists believe that practice can start only after diksha - this is causing great pain to many faithfuls causing them to seek dubious guru's and keeping real practice at bay).

In the meantime, if you want to follow a simple puja ritual to a diety or dieties, one may simple offer the 5 substances and do some chanting and japa after that. Even going by obscurantic smartic beliefs which tries to prohibit spiritual practices beyond their previledged classes, there are many mantras which can be chanted by anyone including the maha mantras (om namah shivaya, om namo narayanaya etc.)

Japa, chanting and simple ritual of showing incense, lamp etc (before japa and chanting) is what I can suggest to a new practioner along with self-study (and reflection of what has been studied) which is the most important component.

sm78
10 December 2009, 12:40 AM
Please stick to your own religion and when you have NATURALLY outgrown it, you will be born into Hinduism.

Namaskar.

ya ya, all the solutions and relief to the pains and problems of this life is stored in the next life and life hereafter.

sanjaya
10 December 2009, 01:59 AM
Desire to do puja is a great blessing. However you first need to understand what orientation you have, what *sect* (not in the narrow sense, but in the sense of upasana marga) you feel you belong to. This requires study of hindu philosophical thoughts and sat-sanga. I personally believe in the current age, self study is much better than wasting time and money listining to dubious teachers.

Once you know what upasana marga you should follow, it is then time to dig into the paddhatis and subsiquently to the sva-shastras. True value of puja can flow when one understands the science behind them which in turn depends on the understanding of the perticular school/marga. So following a valid marga and associated shastra is must for serious puja. In all this Guru comes into the picture, but once someone is convinced of the efficacy of the path (eg shakta or shaiva or vaishnava or even a more personal hybrid), the availibility or unavailibility of a physical guru should not stop his/her progress. A real diksha into the path can occur only when the sishya is prepared (just like we need to prepare to pass exams), which comes from real practice of the methods. (At least this is my belief, some traditionalists believe that practice can start only after diksha - this is causing great pain to many faithfuls causing them to seek dubious guru's and keeping real practice at bay).

In the meantime, if you want to follow a simple puja ritual to a diety or dieties, one may simple offer the 5 substances and do some chanting and japa after that. Even going by obscurantic smartic beliefs which tries to prohibit spiritual practices beyond their previledged classes, there are many mantras which can be chanted by anyone including the maha mantras (om namah shivaya, om namo narayanaya etc.)

Japa, chanting and simple ritual of showing incense, lamp etc (before japa and chanting) is what I can suggest to a new practioner along with self-study (and reflection of what has been studied) which is the most important component.

Thank you for your suggestions. I will consider everything you've said seriously.

TatTvamAsi
11 December 2009, 01:16 PM
Namaste Heartfully,

I shall answer your questions one by one.


Namaste,
1) I mean no disrespect toward Hinduism or other Hindus. What makes you think I'm treating it as a fad? It is exactly the opposite. You do not know my whole story.

1.) The fact that you are "trying out" Hinduism for "a year" is most definitely treating it as a fad.

Once one realizes the principles of Hinduism as corresponding with the nature of reality, there is nothing to be 'tried out'. It is as axiomatic as the sunrise and sunset of a daily routine. This may not be apparent at this time to you. However, it is for Hindus (born Hindus).


2) If Hinduism accepts no converts, how come so many people convert to it? I would like to know more about your opinion on this. I assume you were born into a Hindu family then. Knowing "Hindu" originally refers to a people not a religion. Is that how you view it?

2.) In Hinduism, there is NO conversion. In modern times, there have been some organizations that accept conversions to Hinduism for non-Hindus but this is more of a socio-political scheme than a philosophical or religious one. In actuality however, one is either born a Hindu or not. I view Hindus as people who are born into the philosophical system we call Sanatana Dharma. Therefore, to me, a Hindu is an Indian who is part of the age old traditions and philosophical systems of the land (Bharat). This is because we can all trace our ancestry to one of the Sapta Rishis (7 sages). Non-Hindus (avarna) have been expunged from the philosophical system due to their karmic cycle and for certain reasons. Remember, you, and most non-Hindus, view life as a 'one-time' thing whereas we Hindus look at it in terms of several lifetimes. The progression of the soul is not immediate; it takes time; several lifetimes in fact.

There are many so-called "Hindus" who eschew this fact but they are simply mistaken because Adi Sankara himself reiterated in his magnum opus: VivEkachUdAmanI that one should be blessed to be born as a human, and even more as a man, and ultimately as a Brahmin male. To you and other non-Hindus, this could be anathema but for us Hindus it is fact!

Unlike the desert cults, you cannot cherry-pick whatever you like and discard things that don't fit with your (limited) understanding.


3) When you say, I will naturally "outgrow" it, do you mean the religion I am practicing now is somehow inferior? "Outgrow" seems to say that where I am at now is not as advanced as where I'll be when I practice Hinduism. That to me feels like the whole caste idea.

3.) Perhaps I have to be the bearer of bad news to you, but all religions (philosophical sytems) are NOT equal. Anyone who says otherwise is an absolute idiot. The question isn't which philosophical system is best, but which philosophical system is BEST for YOU (in this lifetime)! That is why we Hindus don't impose our philosophy on others because it is akin to insisting to a child in grade school that Quantum Mechanics is the best branch of science and learning biology is an absolute waste of time. We have to leave it to the child's understanding as to what is best for him. When he GROWS out of that, he will decide which system fits him the best based on his understanding. This is what we call "PROGRESS". This is perhaps the hardest thing for any non-Hindu or non-Indian to understand. To simply put it, don't think in terms of absolutes.

And furthermore, caste is not an "idea". This is again why I think you should not even come within a 1000 feet of Hindus. It is in nature and Hinduism has described the origin and function as well as the purpose. Again, if you didn't know, non-Hindus are untouchables. When you eventually are born a Hindu, you will work your way up to become a Brahmin and then eventually become enlightened. The difference is, we Hindus don't deny the fact that even untouchables will become enlightened. However, that does not mean in any way everyone is "equal" (spritually speaking).

You do believe in evolution right? There is evolution of the soul (jIvA not Atma) as well and it is an integral part of Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism).

Perhaps Buddhism may be more fitting for people like you.


I'm very curious to learn more about why you responded to me the way you have.

4.) I have responded this way because I am a staunch Hindu who doesn't cherry pick from the philosophy. There are too many shameless Hindus who would sell their souls for kissing the feet of a foreigner. I am not one of those!

SATYAMEVA JAYATE!

JAI HIND!

Namaskar.

masterbbb
15 December 2009, 03:51 PM
Namaste Heartfully,

I shall answer your questions one by one.



1.) The fact that you are "trying out" Hinduism for "a year" is most definitely treating it as a fad.

Once one realizes the principles of Hinduism as corresponding with the nature of reality, there is nothing to be 'tried out'. It is as axiomatic as the sunrise and sunset of a daily routine. This may not be apparent at this time to you. However, it is for Hindus (born Hindus).



2.) In Hinduism, there is NO conversion. In modern times, there have been some organizations that accept conversions to Hinduism for non-Hindus but this is more of a socio-political scheme than a philosophical or religious one. In actuality however, one is either born a Hindu or not. I view Hindus as people who are born into the philosophical system we call Sanatana Dharma. Therefore, to me, a Hindu is an Indian who is part of the age old traditions and philosophical systems of the land (Bharat). This is because we can all trace our ancestry to one of the Sapta Rishis (7 sages). Non-Hindus (avarna) have been expunged from the philosophical system due to their karmic cycle and for certain reasons. Remember, you, and most non-Hindus, view life as a 'one-time' thing whereas we Hindus look at it in terms of several lifetimes. The progression of the soul is not immediate; it takes time; several lifetimes in fact.

There are many so-called "Hindus" who eschew this fact but they are simply mistaken because Adi Sankara himself reiterated in his magnum opus: VivEkachUdAmanI that one should be blessed to be born as a human, and even more as a man, and ultimately as a Brahmin male. To you and other non-Hindus, this could be anathema but for us Hindus it is fact!

Unlike the desert cults, you cannot cherry-pick whatever you like and discard things that don't fit with your (limited) understanding.



3.) Perhaps I have to be the bearer of bad news to you, but all religions (philosophical sytems) are NOT equal. Anyone who says otherwise is an absolute idiot. The question isn't which philosophical system is best, but which philosophical system is BEST for YOU (in this lifetime)! That is why we Hindus don't impose our philosophy on others because it is akin to insisting to a child in grade school that Quantum Mechanics is the best branch of science and learning biology is an absolute waste of time. We have to leave it to the child's understanding as to what is best for him. When he GROWS out of that, he will decide which system fits him the best based on his understanding. This is what we call "PROGRESS". This is perhaps the hardest thing for any non-Hindu or non-Indian to understand. To simply put it, don't think in terms of absolutes.

And furthermore, caste is not an "idea". This is again why I think you should not even come within a 1000 feet of Hindus. It is in nature and Hinduism has described the origin and function as well as the purpose. Again, if you didn't know, non-Hindus are untouchables. When you eventually are born a Hindu, you will work your way up to become a Brahmin and then eventually become enlightened. The difference is, we Hindus don't deny the fact that even untouchables will become enlightened. However, that does not mean in any way everyone is "equal" (spritually speaking).

You do believe in evolution right? There is evolution of the soul (jIvA not Atma) as well and it is an integral part of Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism).

Perhaps Buddhism may be more fitting for people like you.



4.) I have responded this way because I am a staunch Hindu who doesn't cherry pick from the philosophy. There are too many shameless Hindus who would sell their souls for kissing the feet of a foreigner. I am not one of those!

SATYAMEVA JAYATE!

JAI HIND!

Namaskar.

i feel i must respond to some of your statements

1, that not all religions are equal. you are somewhat correct but not in the way you described it. only in ones mind does one religion go above all others. all religions teach similar things and the progress on top of the former. all religions are valid and do lead to a afterlife ( heaven, reincarnation, abha kingdom. whatever you want to name the afterlife) as long as someone is good on this earth will lead them to that afterlife. all religions are valid in their own sense and hinduism does not trump any other religions, nor does any religion trump hinduism (though some may think)

2, please refer me to where i can find the caste system in the hindu scriptures. if i am not correct the gods of hinduism did not create the caste system. it is something that has been incorprated into hinduism. remember that krishna taught peace and non-violence. then why would there be a caste system that does in some cases promote hatred.

to the thread starter: good for you! i would say become hindu, but practice it for a year and see where it goes. i am not practicing hinduism, but from someone who has changed religions in their lifetime. treat your religion as just that, your religion. it does not define you. if you do believe in some of the practices, don't abondon them. because the ones you believe is part of who you are. don't change who you are for a religion.

yajvan
15 December 2009, 06:45 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté masterbbb.

Welcome to HDF , and thank you for your post. I think you will get mulitple responses from your posting.

For me, (and perhaps others), I have no interest in an after-life that is considered heaven, or 'individual- centered' existence. Sanātana dharma (some call Hinduism) has a different view on this matter. This can be reivewed ( this notion) in the kathā upaniṣad ( some write kathopaniṣad) and several other insightful upaniṣad-s. I will be happy to answer your questions on this matter at a later date if you chose.

I also am of the firm belief you may need to define 'good', as you mention in your paragraph below:


all religions are valid and do lead to a afterlife ( heaven, reincarnation, abha kingdom. whatever you want to name the afterlife) as long as someone is good on this earth will lead them to that afterlife

IMHO 'good' is a function of culture, time, place and event. 'Good' is therefore relative to a condition of time, place and cause. Yet I wish not to address this for now , others may wish to.

If I may, let me address one part of your post:

2, please refer me to where i can find the caste system in the hindu scriptures. if i am not correct the gods of hinduism did not create the caste system. it is something that has been incorporated into hinduism. remember that krishna taught peace and non-violence. then why would there be a caste system that does in some cases promote hatred. I see why you may say this. But that said, let me offer the same reference you offer, Kṛṣṇa ( some prefer Kṛṣṇ).

He tells us in the Bhāgavad gītā¹ that at the core of the 4 fold order or division of society that He created (cātur-varṇyaṁ) is based upon the 3 guṇa-s. That varṇa¹ is the following: brahmaṇa-s, kṣatriya-s, vaiśya-s, and śudra-s.
Yet you have to ask if there are 3 guṇa-s how do you get 4 varṇa? It is based on the 3 guṇa-s primary and secondary combinations. We needn't go to the tertiary or 3rd level because if the 1st and 2nd levels are not possible, the 3 level will not matter.

1. Sattva as primary and rajas as secondary
2. Sattva as primary and tamas as secondary

3. Rajas as primary and sattva as secondary
4. Rajas as primary and tamas as secondary

5. Tamas as primary and sattva as secondary
6. Tamas as primary and rajas as secondary

Note that the 2nd and 5th combinations are not possible due to the drastic contrast of sattva and tamas. This leaves us with 4 possible varṇa that align this way:

brahmaṇa-s : Sattva as primary and rajas as secondary
kṣatriya-s : Rajas as primary and sattva as secondary
vaiśya-s : Rajas as primary and tamas as secondary
śudra-s : Tamas as primary and rajas as secondary I will assume you can read about the the 4 fold order or division of society i.e. brahmaṇa-s, kṣatriya-s, vaiśya-s, and śudra-s and what they do, their roles in society and the like.

This subject has been talked about here on HDF in detail. If this is of great interest, search on 'caste' and you will find substantial content. You will see the divisions have much to do with ability (says the upaniṣad-s) and growth, behavior vs. one's birth-form.

We welcome your questions, comments and insights.

praṇām

words and references

Bhāgavad gītā - 4 fold order - Chapt 4, 13th śloka
varṇa वर्ण - color or variation of color; color then considers species , kind, sort, character, nature, quality, property, class, kula, tribe, order or, caste

masterbbb
15 December 2009, 09:27 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté masterbbb.

Welcome to HDF , and thank you for your post. I think you will get mulitple responses from your posting.

For me, (and perhaps others), I have no interest in an after-life that is considered heaven, or 'individual- centered' existence. Sanātana dharma (some call Hinduism) has a different view on this matter. This can be reivewed ( this notion) in the kathā upaniṣad ( some write kathopaniṣad) and several other insightful upaniṣad-s. I will be happy to answer your questions on this matter at a later date if you chose.

I also am of the firm belief you may need to define 'good', as you mention in your paragraph below:

IMHO 'good' is a function of culture, time, place and event. 'Good' is therefore relative to a condition of time, place and cause. Yet I wish not to address this for now , others may wish to.

If I may, let me address one part of your post:
I see why you may say this. But that said, let me offer the same reference you offer, Kṛṣṇa ( some prefer Kṛṣṇ).

He tells us in the Bhāgavad gītā¹ that at the core of the 4 fold order or division of society that He created (cātur-varṇyaṁ) is based upon the 3 guṇa-s. That varṇa¹ is the following: brahmaṇa-s, kṣatriya-s, vaiśya-s, and śudra-s.
Yet you have to ask if there are 3 guṇa-s how do you get 4 varṇa? It is based on the 3 guṇa-s primary and secondary combinations. We needn't go to the tertiary or 3rd level because if the 1st and 2nd levels are not possible, the 3 level will not matter.

1. Sattva as primary and rajas as secondary
2. Sattva as primary and tamas as secondary

3. Rajas as primary and sattva as secondary
4. Rajas as primary and tamas as secondary

5. Tamas as primary and sattva as secondary
6. Tamas as primary and rajas as secondary

Note that the 2nd and 5th combinations are not possible due to the drastic contrast of sattva and tamas. This leaves us with 4 possible varṇa that align this way:

brahmaṇa-s : Sattva as primary and rajas as secondary
kṣatriya-s : Rajas as primary and sattva as secondary
vaiśya-s : Rajas as primary and tamas as secondary
śudra-s : Tamas as primary and rajas as secondary I will assume you can read about the the 4 fold order or division of society i.e. brahmaṇa-s, kṣatriya-s, vaiśya-s, and śudra-s and what they do, their roles in society and the like.

This subject has been talked about here on HDF in detail. If this is of great interest, search on 'caste' and you will find substantial content. You will see the divisions have much to do with ability (says the upaniṣad-s) and growth, behavior vs. one's birth-form.

We welcome your questions, comments and insights.

praṇām

words and references

Bhāgavad gītā - 4 fold order - Chapt 4, 13th śloka
varṇa वर्ण - color or variation of color; color then considers species , kind, sort, character, nature, quality, property, class, kula, tribe, order or, caste


ok, i am not sure i totally understood what you explained. but form my perspective you stated that it is a spiritual thing. but from my (limited) understanding. and from a historical prospective.

the origins of the caste systam come from the high preists of the aryan people, and if i am not correct the preists wrote the vedas as to the origin of the caste system orignated in the rig veda ( rig veda 10.90 11.12)

from a historical viewpoint. one is born into a caste, and cannot change caste's. only through reincarnation can one progress through caste's. and cannot marry other caste's

nothing is spiritual in the modern caste system. the people born into lower caste's are considered poor people. and are mostly servents for the high class people.

from a spiritual prospective, yes there is levels. but that should not be reflected in society

but i feel that every person can progress through those levels in their own lifetime. and that one does not have to be a certain caste to be enlightened

Eastern Mind
15 December 2009, 09:38 PM
the origins of the caste systam come from the high preists of the aryan people, and if i am not correct the preists wrote the vedas as to the origin of the caste system orignated in the rig veda ( rig veda 10.90 11.12)



Namaste: Just where have you been getting info. Aryan invasion theory and influence of Aryans has gone, proven wrong many times now. Please don't listen to the western slanted British bias versions of caste.

Aum Namasivaya

masterbbb
15 December 2009, 09:44 PM
i have been getting my information from a few different book. this one i recieved the information from is a book on hinduism that is used as a provinical standred book that teachers use to teach students in the ontario, canada

and i also wanted to add that how can one person tell if one is a brahmin or a untouchable. only through material wealth can one tell. so i feel that may just be a little bias. as then one spiritual progress is determined by wealth.

devotee
15 December 2009, 09:48 PM
You are learning wrong things from a wrong source !

OM

masterbbb
15 December 2009, 10:23 PM
You are learning wrong things from a wrong source !

OM


here is the sample pages that are found online of the ontario secordary school aproved world religions course

http://www.buyteachercreated.com/estore/files/samples/TCR_estore/BTC/0624s.pdf

the books is called World Religions,

though i cannot gaurantee the accuracy of the text, but it is where my knowledge of the caste system origin

sanjaya
16 December 2009, 02:10 AM
and i also wanted to add that how can one person tell if one is a brahmin or a untouchable. only through material wealth can one tell. so i feel that may just be a little bias. as then one spiritual progress is determined by wealth.

Not necessarily. For example, I and my family are Brahmins. We're financially stable, but by no means wealthy, and my parents live in a fairly average home. Granted, this is America, and even poorer Americans are rich compared to the rest of the world. But even back in India my family was never particularly high on the financial scale. Usually people determine one's caste by one's family name, i.e. their lineage.

However, if I'm reading you right, then I think I agree with your underlying point. Caste is really an artificial distinction. How silly it would be to determine spiritual progress by wealth. If anything the wealthy ae at a spiritual disadvantage, because they have far more worldly attachments. Family lineage is an even more arbitrary distinction. Though the Scriptures make mention of caste, or varna, I don't believe they talk about caste being based on birth. I can accept the idea of some professions being more noble than others, but not the idea that God favors certain people by virtue of their birth. The caste system in its modern form has only been detrimental to all Hindus, and I believe it should be discarded. To believe oneself to be superior because of his birth is pure arrogance, and only leads to godlessness. Sri Krishna said that salvation is found by abandoning all forms of religion and surrendering to him. This is something that can be done by people of any caste.

TatTvamAsi
16 December 2009, 02:39 AM
i feel i must respond to some of your statements

1, that not all religions are equal. you are somewhat correct but not in the way you described it. only in ones mind does one religion go above all others. all religions teach similar things and the progress on top of the former. all religions are valid and do lead to a afterlife ( heaven, reincarnation, abha kingdom. whatever you want to name the afterlife) as long as someone is good on this earth will lead them to that afterlife. all religions are valid in their own sense and hinduism does not trump any other religions, nor does any religion trump hinduism (though some may think)

"good" did you say?

And exactly by who's standard are we measuring "good"?

you see, as stated in my previous response, non-Indians and especially non-Hindus will never understand non-absolutes!! you cannot even grasp the notion that perhaps, just perhaps that everything is NOT defined by opposites! This is what is called 'conditioning'. good v bad, good v evil, black v white, and so on... these are ALL subjective at some level and therefore are founded on UNtruth. That which is inseparable AND non-different is what is real! At least, in Hinduism.

Ultimately, if one system of philosophy describes the nature of reality and another merely is stuck discussing the messenger (jesus, muhammad, buddha, etc.), the former is indeed "superior" in the real sense; as one is TRUTH (Hinduism) and others are UNtruths (all other systems of philosophy).

Just because there may be hints of the nature of reality as described in Hinduism in other religions do not make them equal by any means whatsoever.



2, please refer me to where i can find the caste system in the hindu scriptures. if i am not correct the gods of hinduism did not create the caste system. it is something that has been incorprated into hinduism. remember that krishna taught peace and non-violence. then why would there be a caste system that does in some cases promote hatred.



In Hinduism, the CREATION & the CREATOR (GOD) are NOT SEPARATE (non-different)!

ScottMalaysia
16 December 2009, 04:45 AM
2.) In Hinduism, there is NO conversion. In modern times, there have been some organizations that accept conversions to Hinduism for non-Hindus but this is more of a socio-political scheme than a philosophical or religious one. In actuality however, one is either born a Hindu or not. I view Hindus as people who are born into the philosophical system we call Sanatana Dharma. Therefore, to me, a Hindu is an Indian who is part of the age old traditions and philosophical systems of the land (Bharat).I am very offended by this post. I am a convert to Hinduism and telling me to practice my "birth religion" is not possible, since I was not raised in any religion.

Please show me sastric proof that people cannot convert to Hinduism. You won't find any since the word "Hinduism" is not in the sastras. There is no clear definition of what makes a person a Hindu, so therefore, you cannot say that a person who identifies as a Hindu and believes in Hinduism is not Hindu.

In 1966, the Supreme Court of India laid down the following guidelines for declaring someone a Hindu.

1. Acceptance of the Vedas with reverence as the highest authority in religious and philosophic matters and acceptance with reverence of Vedas by Hindu thinkers and philosophers as the sole foundation of Hindu philosophy.
2. Spirit of tolerance and willingness to understand and appreciate the opponent's point of view based on the realization that truth is many sided.
3. Acceptance of great world rhythm by all six systems of Hindu philosophy: vast periods of creation, maintenance and dissolution follow each other in endless succession;
4. Acceptance by all systems of Hindu philosophy of the belief in rebirth and pre-existence.
5. Recognition of the fact that the means or ways to salvation are many.
6. Realization of the truth that numbers of Gods to be worshiped may be large, yet there being Hindus who do not believe in the worshiping of idols.
7. Unlike other religions, or religious creeds, Hindu religion's not being tied down to any definite set of philosophic concepts, as such.

Nothing in there about being born a Hindu, is there? So if you think that you are right and the Supreme Court of India is wrong, then you need to provide some pretty explicit sastric proof.


And furthermore, caste is not an "idea". This is again why I think you should not even come within a 1000 feet of Hindus. It is in nature and Hinduism has described the origin and function as well as the purpose. Again, if you didn't know, non-Hindus are untouchables. When you eventually are born a Hindu, you will work your way up to become a Brahmin and then eventually become enlightened. The difference is, we Hindus don't deny the fact that even untouchables will become enlightened. However, that does not mean in any way everyone is "equal" (spritually speaking).

The word 'caste' is derived from the Portuguese 'casta'. The Sanskrit word is varna, meaning 'colour' (the Malay word for 'colour' is warna as it is Sanskrit derived). It referred to the colour of the temperament of one's mind. Your varna is determined by the kind of work you do, not by your birth. There is nothing in the sastras that says that varna is determined by birth. This is like saying to a surgeon's son "Your father's a surgeon so you are too. Please come and operate on this man". In ancient times, sons usually followed their father's profession, but that doesn't mean that if your father is a brahmana, then you are a brahmana too.

In the Mahabharata (Vana Parva Section 311 (http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_03311.php)), all of the Pandava brothers fall dead except Yudhisthira as they refused to answer the questions posed by a Yaksha before drinking from a mystical pool. The Yaksha (who is actually Yama, the Lord of Death and Yudhisthira's father in disguise) demands that Yudhisthira answer the same questions, and he agrees. One of them is as follows.

'By what, O king, birth, behaviour, study, or learning doth a person become a Brahmana? Tell us with certitude!'

Yudhishthira then answers:
'Listen, O Yaksha! It is neither birth, nor study, nor learning, that is the cause of Brahmanahood, without doubt, it is behaviour that constitutes it. One's behaviour should always be well-guarded, especially by a Brahmana. He who maintaineth his conduct unimpaired, is never impaired himself. Professors and pupils, in fact, all who study the scriptures, if addicted to wicked habits, are to be regarded as illiterate wretches. He only is learned who performeth his religious duties. He even that hath studied the four Vedas is to be regarded as a wicked wretch scarcely distinguishable from a Sudra (if his conduct be not correct). He only who performeth the Agnihotra and hath his senses under control, is called a Brahmana!'

Yudhisthira explicitly refutes the idea that being born into a Brahmana family makes you a Brahmana.

devotee
16 December 2009, 05:44 AM
Namaste ScottMalaysia, Heartfully and all who are not born Hindus,

I would like to tell you something :

a) My dear friends, why do you need someone to endorse what you should do & what you should not ? There is no Church & no Mullah to dictate terms to Hindus or to people who have come to Hindu fold. There is no scriptures that says that conversion is not allowed in Hinduism. Aarya Samaaj which helps in conversion to Hinduism can be considered authority in the Vedas & certainly those people won't violate the Vedas !

b) If you want to be Hindu & you have adopted the Hindu way of life, you are already a Hindu. If you want to convert formally, it is ok & if you don't want then also it is ok.

c) As far as caste of those coming from outside is concerned, there is no need for you to identify yourself with any caste unless you want to marry in an orthodox Hindu family. There are many inter-caste marriages within Hindus & they still remain Hindus. The population of people leading Hindu way of life, though those are no born-Hindus, runs in hundreds of thousand, thanks to many Hindu Teachers in the West. So, there should be no worry that you are unique in doing this.

d) There is another term Varna. So, you belong to the Varna depending upon your nature and gunas as Lord Krishna has said in the Bhaagwad Gita.

The freedom of faith is your birth right. Don't ask anyone else to endorse it. It is already yours. Why ask someone's permission to do what is your fundamental right ?

Does it make the matter clear ?

OM

masterbbb
16 December 2009, 06:18 AM
Not necessarily. For example, I and my family are Brahmins. We're financially stable, but by no means wealthy, and my parents live in a fairly average home. Granted, this is America, and even poorer Americans are rich compared to the rest of the world. But even back in India my family was never particularly high on the financial scale. Usually people determine one's caste by one's family name, i.e. their lineage.

However, if I'm reading you right, then I think I agree with your underlying point. Caste is really an artificial distinction. How silly it would be to determine spiritual progress by wealth. If anything the wealthy ae at a spiritual disadvantage, because they have far more worldly attachments. Family lineage is an even more arbitrary distinction. Though the Scriptures make mention of caste, or varna, I don't believe they talk about caste being based on birth. I can accept the idea of some professions being more noble than others, but not the idea that God favors certain people by virtue of their birth. The caste system in its modern form has only been detrimental to all Hindus, and I believe it should be discarded. To believe oneself to be superior because of his birth is pure arrogance, and only leads to godlessness. Sri Krishna said that salvation is found by abandoning all forms of religion and surrendering to him. This is something that can be done by people of any caste.

auctally, you said it better than i could have. we cannot not dertirmine ones spiritual progress through ones family.



and my definition of good in that context = doing things for the betterment of all people

and i have read much about hinduism, but my knowledge of the caste system is from a purely historical viewpoint. and that knowledge is limited. so i am sorry if i have offended you. but that is just my opinion on the caste.


and also i am personally offended at your comments regarding jesus and mahummad. i truely revere both of them. and so i will leave the other faiths at that, as we clearly have different view and both strong opinions on it.

heartfully
16 December 2009, 08:09 AM
TatTvamAsi (and all who are debating with him). I never meant to start a war of words. I refuse to get into it with you, Tat. My reactions to you are my responsibility.

I will say that I am going to request moderators review and remove this thread because I don't ever want to be part of a thread that calls Muslims and Jews by names that are so hateful.

As for the rest of us on this thread, why don't we accept this is Tat's beliefs and leave him be. We don't need to be a part of his energy unless we choose to.

Some of you, I will pm so that if the thread is removed before you read this reply, you will understand the reason.

Be the Love,
Heart=full of Love

Eastern Mind
16 December 2009, 08:30 AM
the notion that perhaps, just perhaps that everything is NOT defined by opposites! This is what is called 'conditioning'. good v bad, good v evil, black v white, and so on... these are ALL subjective at some level and therefore are founded on UNtruth. That which is inseparable AND non-different is what is real! At least, in Hinduism.


In Hinduism, the CREATION & the CREATOR (GOD) are NOT SEPARATE (non-different)!

Namaste TTA:

Excellent points. I especially enjoy the rant on the black/white stuff. Early Christian programming in one's life goes a long way. The good guy or bad guy mentality is permeating media, literature. One definition of literature even explores this conflict thing. The classic "man vs man, man vs self, man vs nature themes. We are absolutely bombarded by this duality opposite thinking. Of course, here you are the villain now. The world just needs a villain.http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I enjoy my role as an untouchable. Its a karmic consequence from some past actions, and offers me the opportunity to be humble, or not. This sense of all souls being born equal with equal opportunity is a load of hogwash as well. (More American propaganda to give the lower classes some hope, I suppose.) All one needs to do is teach for a very short while in front of 26 students, and mark a piece of their writing ... probably only 24 pieces as 2 will have 'left mine at home' , and anyone with two eyes half blind can see we're not all given the same opportunity.

Aum Namasivaya

Ganeshprasad
16 December 2009, 09:54 AM
Pranam all

i thought i join the fray or may be not.
all i want to say or rather what Lord Krishna says and i quote



The Self is present equally in all beings. There is no one hateful or dear to Me. But, those who worship Me with devotion, they are with Me and I am also with them.(9.29)


Even if the most sinful person resolves to worship Me with single-minded loving devotion, such a person must be regarded as a saint because of making the right resolution. (9.30)


Such a person soon becomes righteous and attains everlasting peace. Be aware, O Arjuna, that My devotee never perish. (9.31)

my personal feelings are that if anyone follows the four pillars of Dharma is a Hindu, what needs is there to convert. one may take on different Sanskars and even a Guru Diksa if the Guru is willing.

on other hand,
Varna system is complex and i would not like to go there.
i would be more in tune with TTA on this one.

Jai Shree Krishna

isavasya
16 December 2009, 11:03 AM
Namaste Heartfully,

2.) In Hinduism, there is NO conversion. In modern times, there have been some organizations that accept conversions to Hinduism for non-Hindus but this is more of a socio-political scheme than a philosophical or religious one. In actuality however, one is either born a Hindu or not.



Namaste tattwamasi,

You are 100% wrong and unfortunately thoughts like yours have led to decline of sanatan dharm as much as any other exogenous factors.

First if in ancient times, there was no conversion, then India would have been a buddhist or jain country, or at least not majority hindu, because at one stage they were equally dominant religion.As a matter of fact in ancient times, religion was a matter of debate* more than just accepting because of being born in a family or by force. And yes, usually the loser of the debate got converted to the religion of the winner. Gurus, acharyas, monks themselves converted to those who beat them in debates, and then followers of those guru followed them. Thats how shankara converted millions of buddhists, jains,mimsaka or even carakvas. Even mimsAka like mandana mishra converted to be a advaitin under name of Suresvaracharya.

And it was not just shankara, even before him , Kashmiri shaivites defeated many buddhists and converted millions to shaivism. Similarly tamil Kings sent many voyages to indonesia, malaysia and yes even combodia,loas etc was a Hindu nation once.




These are ALL subjective at some level and therefore are founded on UNtruth. That which is inseparable AND non-different is what is real! At least, in Hinduism.In Hinduism, the CREATION & the CREATOR (GOD) are NOT SEPARATE (non-different)!

Alas there are millions in India who are strict monotheists, and don't believe that created and creator are equal.So Vaishnavs like madhvas,vishistadvaitins,gaudiyas or shaivas like siddhas, or followers of bhagwan basavanna (lingayats) will be first to refute you,so are they not hindu ? Why are you making hinduism another 1 path teaching religion.


The veda teaches,

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam - Let us make this world a noble place to live in.

That is spread the vedic thought and make everyone noble (Aryan)



And for the nth time, non-Hindus, yes YOU, are (an) untouchable(s)!

Oh is it ? Which dharmic shastra told that ? fake smritis of medieval age ? Let me tell you, some smriti texts of medieval age also tell , when a person leaves Indian soil, he automatically becomes mellecha (worst than untouchable) !! I hope you disagree with it!! or else you are yourself an untouchable now. and this was a very strong belief at one time, even for advaitins.

sanjaya
16 December 2009, 11:53 AM
and i have read much about hinduism, but my knowledge of the caste system is from a purely historical viewpoint. and that knowledge is limited. so i am sorry if i have offended you. but that is just my opinion on the caste.

Not at all! There's a lot of misinformation going around about the varna system as well as the modern caste system. Part of the problem is that there are so many differing views in Hinduism.



and also i am personally offended at your comments regarding jesus and mahummad. i truely revere both of them. and so i will leave the other faiths at that, as we clearly have different view and both strong opinions on it.

I'm assuming this was directed at TatTvamAsi. I certainly share your reverence for Jesus. Many of his teachings are similar to Hinduism. Mohammad...not so much. But since he is regarded by millions as the prophet of Islam, I still believe it's important to show him the proper respect. It would be rather arrogant of Hindus to expect others to respect our religion, and then not show that same respect to faiths that we don't believe in. The fact that India is home to many religions is a testament to the tolerance of Hinduism. This is a strength and not a weakness.

Likely I'll get called a closet Christian for saying the above, or my status as a Hindu will otherwise be challenged. This is all somewhat similar to the people who accuse educated African Americans of not being truly black. At some point we need to step back and recognize the absurdity here. My God, are we going to start conducting witchhunts? Why bother to have Portuguese conquerers bring an Inquisition when we are experts at the art? Let's all beware of fundamentalism. It ruined Christianity within the first couple hundred years of the religion's birth, and we are not immune either.


TatTvamAsi (and all who are debating with him). I never meant to start a war of words. I refuse to get into it with you, Tat. My reactions to you are my responsibility.

I will say that I am going to request moderators review and remove this thread because I don't ever want to be part of a thread that calls Muslims and Jews by names that are so hateful.

Sorry to hear that Heartfully. Anyway, good luck with your exploration of Hinduism.

heartfully
16 December 2009, 01:31 PM
Peace Sanjaya,

I was wondering if you would tell more about how you think the teachings of Jesus, peace be upon him, are similar to the teachings of Hinduism (and I agree with you on this) & how you view Muhammad's, peace be upon him, teachings as not similar to Hinduism's teachings (somethiing I also would have agreed with until I started studying hadith more and giving more time to contemplation.

As a Sufi, I tend to resonate more with Hinduism than conservative Islam. Yet it is also as a Sufi that I am learning to see Muhammad's message as universal and similar to the core teachings of most religions.

I would like to hear more about your opinions on this.

Love to u,
heartfully



Not at all! There's a lot of misinformation going around about the varna system as well as the modern caste system. Part of the problem is that there are so many differing views in Hinduism.




I'm assuming this was directed at TatTvamAsi. I certainly share your reverence for Jesus. Many of his teachings are similar to Hinduism. Mohammad...not so much. But since he is regarded by millions as the prophet of Islam, I still believe it's important to show him the proper respect. It would be rather arrogant of Hindus to expect others to respect our religion, and then not show that same respect to faiths that we don't believe in. The fact that India is home to many religions is a testament to the tolerance of Hinduism. This is a strength and not a weakness.

Likely I'll get called a closet Christian for saying the above, or my status as a Hindu will otherwise be challenged. This is all somewhat similar to the people who accuse educated African Americans of not being truly black. At some point we need to step back and recognize the absurdity here. My God, are we going to start conducting witchhunts? Why bother to have Portuguese conquerers bring an Inquisition when we are experts at the art? Let's all beware of fundamentalism. It ruined Christianity within the first couple hundred years of the religion's birth, and we are not immune either.



Sorry to hear that Heartfully. Anyway, good luck with your exploration of Hinduism.

yajvan
16 December 2009, 01:32 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté masterbbb.


Welcome to HDF .

I guess you can see , there are many opinions, POV's, and passions regarding this matter.

What you have asked is a substantial amount that can be answered in an orderly fashion. Yet the amount of information needed, and to be continued on this string would be like trying to boil the ocean.

If you care to take some of your questions, one or two at most at a time, and start a new string, I think we will be happy to address them ( I will be happy to , at the least) in a orderly and calm way.

If you are open to this, and wish to compare-and-contrast your knowledge with the knowledge and information of this HDF forum, it may be a suitable learning experience.

You mention the 10th mandala of the ṛg ved (some like to write rig veda) and what was written. It would be prudent for you to consider and review a key principle of sanātana dharma's scriptures¹, that of śruti and/or smṛti.

Śruti is what is heared, directly cognized. The veda-s are considered śruti and considered the Divine Word, revelation of the Infinite revealed to the ṛṣi¹ or one in possession of ṛta (truth) consciousness.

And what of that which is remembered ( memory ) ? It is smṛti i.e. recollection. What śāstra-s are considered smṛti? The vedāṅga-s ( limbs of the ved), dharma-śāstra-s ( law books), the pūraṇa-s , the ithihāsa-s.

I mention this because the 10th mandala is 'composed' by ṛṣi-s. They are not the 'original' authors, but only transcribe what they cognized ( see ) - that is, truth within their own being/consciousness.
If you falter here with this one notion, then understanding sanātana dharma's scriptures will be a meager attempt at understanding the foundation of this 'Hinduism'.

I mentioned the Bhāgavad gītā¹ that at the core of the 4 fold order or division of society (cātur-varṇyaṁ) because you asked, 'show me the scriptures' that mention this caste system. Another is a 'law book' that calls out varṇa ( group, cast, class, gathering) and specific codes of ethics/rules. This is Manusmṛti (or Manusmriti) , also a work of dharma-śāstra ( scripture of laws, guiding behaviors, etc)

I hope to see some of your posts and questions we can take in an orderly fashion.

praṇām

words

ṛṣi's - are satyavachāh (one who speaks truth). According to tradition, other sages might falter, but a riṣi was believed to speak truth only, because s/he existed in the Higher World (the unified field of consciousness) according to the Sanskrit 'riṣi'. Ṛṣis are also called kavi
This sanātana dharma is considered ārṣa jñāna or the knowledge/wisom (jñāna) of the ṛṣi-s ;
ārṣa आर्ष means relating or belonging to or derived from ṛṣi-s ; the ṛṣi-s are the seers, the ones that cognize & sees Truth and relates it to us, the family of man

sanjaya
16 December 2009, 02:13 PM
Peace Sanjaya,

I was wondering if you would tell more about how you think the teachings of Jesus, peace be upon him, are similar to the teachings of Hinduism (and I agree with you on this) & how you view Muhammad's, peace be upon him, teachings as not similar to Hinduism's teachings (somethiing I also would have agreed with until I started studying hadith more and giving more time to contemplation.

Hi Heartfully. From my reading of the Bible, I've found Jesus' teachings in the Sermon on the Mount to be particularly similar to Hinduism because he stresses trust in God, and a general non-violence. He also told the Pharisees that observance of rituals wasn't a substitute for true worship of God, which is done in spirit and truth.

This isn't to say that all of Jesus' teachings agree with Hinduism. For example, elsewhere in the Gospel he says that he came to divide families. And there is the command to perform missionary activity. But perhaps these teachings were given in a cultural context, and have been misunderstood by us.

As far as Mohammad's teachings go, I can't identify very well with his establishment of a governing body in Medina, or Islam's apparent commands for holy war. Again though, maybe these teachings have been somehow misunderstood. God knows he wouldn't be the first religious figure to be misquoted.


As a Sufi, I tend to resonate more with Hinduism than conservative Islam. Yet it is also as a Sufi that I am learning to see Muhammad's message as universal and similar to the core teachings of most religions.

Good for you. If you can find truth in Mohammad's message as a Sufi, then there's no need at all to convert. But as I said before, if you ultimately choose to do so, we'd be happy to have you.

masterbbb
16 December 2009, 04:30 PM
Not at all! There's a lot of misinformation going around about the varna system as well as the modern caste system. Part of the problem is that there are so many differing views in Hinduism.




I'm assuming this was directed at TatTvamAsi. I certainly share your reverence for Jesus. Many of his teachings are similar to Hinduism. Mohammad...not so much. But since he is regarded by millions as the prophet of Islam, I still believe it's important to show him the proper respect. It would be rather arrogant of Hindus to expect others to respect our religion, and then not show that same respect to faiths that we don't believe in. The fact that India is home to many religions is a testament to the tolerance of Hinduism. This is a strength and not a weakness.

Likely I'll get called a closet Christian for saying the above, or my status as a Hindu will otherwise be challenged. This is all somewhat similar to the people who accuse educated African Americans of not being truly black. At some point we need to step back and recognize the absurdity here. My God, are we going to start conducting witchhunts? Why bother to have Portuguese conquerers bring an Inquisition when we are experts at the art? Let's all beware of fundamentalism. It ruined Christianity within the first couple hundred years of the religion's birth, and we are not immune either.



Sorry to hear that Heartfully. Anyway, good luck with your exploration of Hinduism.

thank you for you comments, and auctally those comments you quoted and thse below were for tat, sorry for lack of @

TatTvamAsi
17 December 2009, 02:22 AM
Namaste,


I am very offended by this post. I am a convert to Hinduism and telling me to practice my "birth religion" is not possible, since I was not raised in any religion.

If you were not affiliated with any religion, it doesn't really mean much to "convert" to Hinduism. As stated before, CONVERSION in Hinduism is non-existant.


Please show me sastric proof that people cannot convert to Hinduism. You won't find any since the word "Hinduism" is not in the sastras. There is no clear definition of what makes a person a Hindu, so therefore, you cannot say that a person who identifies as a Hindu and believes in Hinduism is not Hindu.

Shastric proof did you say?

Although there may not be an exact injunction in the Vedas against "conversion" or for conversion, the topic is never referred to in the Vedas altogether. Why? In the days of yore, before Kali Yuga, there existed ONLY Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism). It didn't matter which darshana one belonged to or was affiliated to because all of them fell under the umbrella of "Hinduism". With the degradation of religion, there arose "different" religions and systems of philosophy such as Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam etc. Therefore, any talk of conversion is only pertinent in these times. Hence, when Hinduism was the ONLY philosophy in the world, either one was withIN the system or withOUT (AVARNA). Likewise, nowadays, if one is NOT a Hindu by birth (lineage), then one is also an AVARNA (OUTCASTE).

No definition as to what makes one a Hindu? Do you see why you still are not Hindu and never will be considered one (by orthodox Hindus)? The Vedas have described the nature of reality by the Rishis of India and they describe clearly what a PERSON (in other words, a HINDU) should do, his purpose on this planet, and the general goals of "life". When one is not of Hindu lineage, one can never be considered Hindu regardless of how many customs one adopts (tilak, dhoti, singing bhajans, and eating idli dosa).

If you respect the Shastras, then you will understand that BIRTH is determined by previous lives' vAsanAs (latent tendencies), Karma (action), and Guna (character); the permutation of the 3 gunas determine WHERE, WHEN, and to WHOM one is born. Everybody conveniently forgets this FACT.


In 1966, the Supreme Court of India laid down the following guidelines for declaring someone a Hindu.

1. Acceptance of the Vedas with reverence as the highest authority in religious and philosophic matters and acceptance with reverence of Vedas by Hindu thinkers and philosophers as the sole foundation of Hindu philosophy.
2. Spirit of tolerance and willingness to understand and appreciate the opponent's point of view based on the realization that truth is many sided.
3. Acceptance of great world rhythm by all six systems of Hindu philosophy: vast periods of creation, maintenance and dissolution follow each other in endless succession;
4. Acceptance by all systems of Hindu philosophy of the belief in rebirth and pre-existence.
5. Recognition of the fact that the means or ways to salvation are many.
6. Realization of the truth that numbers of Gods to be worshiped may be large, yet there being Hindus who do not believe in the worshiping of idols.
7. Unlike other religions, or religious creeds, Hindu religion's not being tied down to any definite set of philosophic concepts, as such.

Nothing in there about being born a Hindu, is there? So if you think that you are right and the Supreme Court of India is wrong, then you need to provide some pretty explicit sastric proof.

The Supreme Court of India also recognizes the country as a "socialist secular democratic republic...". So their definitions of what is Hindu and who is a Hindu is NOT based on the Shastras.

And think for a moment whether a GOVERNMENT of a country will actually dictate the religious injunctions to its people! India is not a theocratic state. People should realize for themselves (a self-transformation if you will) the importance of the Shastras and live by them. Thankfully, this is the case in most of India but unfortunately the admixture of castes, as warned by Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, is rampant in the metropolitan areas; hence the degradation of relgion in general. Education is sorely-lacking for these people.


The word 'caste' is derived from the Portuguese 'casta'. The Sanskrit word is varna, meaning 'colour' (the Malay word for 'colour' is warna as it is Sanskrit derived). It referred to the colour of the temperament of one's mind. Your varna is determined by the kind of work you do, not by your birth. There is nothing in the sastras that says that varna is determined by birth. This is like saying to a surgeon's son "Your father's a surgeon so you are too. Please come and operate on this man". In ancient times, sons usually followed their father's profession, but that doesn't mean that if your father is a brahmana, then you are a brahmana too.

Birth is not the ONLY factor, but it is an IMPORTANT FACTOR in one's varna. Jati is the appropriate word for occupation moving from one generation to the next.


In the Mahabharata (Vana Parva Section 311 (http://www.mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_03311.php)), all of the Pandava brothers fall dead except Yudhisthira as they refused to answer the questions posed by a Yaksha before drinking from a mystical pool. The Yaksha (who is actually Yama, the Lord of Death and Yudhisthira's father in disguise) demands that Yudhisthira answer the same questions, and he agrees. One of them is as follows.

'By what, O king, birth, behaviour, study, or learning doth a person become a Brahmana? Tell us with certitude!'

Yudhishthira then answers:
'Listen, O Yaksha! It is neither birth, nor study, nor learning, that is the cause of Brahmanahood, without doubt, it is behaviour that constitutes it. One's behaviour should always be well-guarded, especially by a Brahmana. He who maintaineth his conduct unimpaired, is never impaired himself. Professors and pupils, in fact, all who study the scriptures, if addicted to wicked habits, are to be regarded as illiterate wretches. He only is learned who performeth his religious duties. He even that hath studied the four Vedas is to be regarded as a wicked wretch scarcely distinguishable from a Sudra (if his conduct be not correct). He only who performeth the Agnihotra and hath his senses under control, is called a Brahmana!'

Yudhisthira explicitly refutes the idea that being born into a Brahmana family makes you a Brahmana.

To add to your statement above, there are hardly ANY real Brahmins in Kali Yuga left! However, that does NOT, I repeat, does NOT make everyone else equal or mean an equitable distribution of predispositions towards spirituality/religion! Remeber, VARNA is determined by presiding GUNA (of the combo of the 3) and most "Brahmins" by birth are SATTVIC in nature (character/action).

Last but not least, one can NEVER be a real Hindu and denounce Varnashrama Dharma (caste "system")! It is the BACKBONE of Sanatana Dharma. Casteism on the other hand is dangerous and I denounce that. There is a limit however.

Namaskar.

TatTvamAsi
17 December 2009, 02:29 AM
your definition of good may not fit everyone's defintion of it and it is highly arrogant of you to think otherwise.

also, read about Hinduism written by whom?

auctally, you said it better than i could have. we cannot not dertirmine ones spiritual progress through ones family.



and my definition of good in that context = doing things for the betterment of all people

and i have read much about hinduism, but my knowledge of the caste system is from a purely historical viewpoint. and that knowledge is limited. so i am sorry if i have offended you. but that is just my opinion on the caste.


and also i am personally offended at your comments regarding jesus and mahummad. i truely revere both of them. and so i will leave the other faiths at that, as we clearly have different view and both strong opinions on it.

TatTvamAsi
17 December 2009, 02:47 AM
Namaste isavasya,

I appreciate your candor in your response but I must refute some (erroneous) statements you have made.

In "ancient" times, there was only ONE RELIGION: HINDUISM. Therefore, there was no conversion IN or OUT of it. When the degradation of religion occurred and other religions/philosophies came about, people were naturally born into those and some converted INTO Hinduism and some OUT OF Hinduism. However, as stated earlier, this was for a SOCIO-POLITICAL reason than a philosophical reason. If India was to be overrun by Buddhism because of a philosophical difference, well, it would have happened. It didn't because Buddhism, its principles, are NON-DIFFERENT to Hinduism and its rituals/practice was different for a different time and people (far east).

The pUrvaPaksha you talk about was indeed very true; however this existed for thousands of years AMONGST HINDUS THEMSELVES. These Hindus from different darshanas debated with each other. There was no socio-political scheme in this whereas when the 'religions' themselves differed, it became a necessity to "convert" Buddhists/Jains in order to keep a critical mass of followers of Hinduism.

And remember, mImamsA is simply another darshana and even buddhism is another (nastika) darshana of Hinduism. So where was the "conversion"? Especially in the modern sense this is not the case.

Regarding Southeast Asian countries becoming Hindu, yes, that is true. However, again, this is a result of the conquest of those regions; a socio-political reason; NOT a philosophical one.


Namaste tattwamasi,

You are 100% wrong and unfortunately thoughts like yours have led to decline of sanatan dharm as much as any other exogenous factors.

First if in ancient times, there was no conversion, then India would have been a buddhist or jain country, or at least not majority hindu, because at one stage they were equally dominant religion.As a matter of fact in ancient times, religion was a matter of debate* more than just accepting because of being born in a family or by force. And yes, usually the loser of the debate got converted to the religion of the winner. Gurus, acharyas, monks themselves converted to those who beat them in debates, and then followers of those guru followed them. Thats how shankara converted millions of buddhists, jains,mimsaka or even carakvas. Even mimsAka like mandana mishra converted to be a advaitin under name of Suresvaracharya.

And it was not just shankara, even before him , Kashmiri shaivites defeated many buddhists and converted millions to shaivism. Similarly tamil Kings sent many voyages to indonesia, malaysia and yes even combodia,loas etc was a Hindu nation once.




Alas there are millions in India who are strict monotheists, and don't believe that created and creator are equal.So Vaishnavs like madhvas,vishistadvaitins,gaudiyas or shaivas like siddhas, or followers of bhagwan basavanna
(lingayats) will be first to refute you,so are they not hindu ? Why are you making hinduism another 1 path teaching religion.

I merely stated what Advaita Vedanta teaches; as I am an Advaitin. If there are others that don't subscribe to it, then by all means that is okay. We are talking about CONVERSION in Hinduism here.

One cannot become Hindu without burning the karma of their vAsanAs. In due time, they will be born Hindus. Remember, being Hindu is more than just chanting shlokas, singing bhajans, watching Ram-lIlas, and celebrating "diwali". Lineage is of UTMOST importance. If you don't believe this; I'm sorry to say, you are NO Hindu.



The veda teaches,

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam - Let us make this world a noble place to live in.

That is spread the vedic thought and make everyone noble (Aryan)

And I completely agree!

This is going to be tough with 2 billion christians, 1.5 billion muslims, and 1.5 billion communists. :D



Oh is it ? Which dharmic shastra told that ? fake smritis of medieval age ? Let me tell you, some smriti texts of medieval age also tell , when a person leaves Indian soil, he automatically becomes mellecha (worst than untouchable) !! I hope you disagree with it!! or else you are yourself an untouchable now. and this was a very strong belief at one time, even for advaitins.

My statements are not based on medieval smritis or ramblings by some baba. I don't claim to be an expert on the Vedas however from the little reading I have done, I know for a FACT that Varnashrama Dharma is FUNDAMENTAL to HINDUISM and therefore to nature!

If you feel people who have left India are mlecchas, then that's your prerogative. I am not perturbed by it at all. At the end of the day, what does each one of us have to do to bring about the equilibrium in the mind?

I suggest we focus on that and leave everything else to Iswara.

Namaskar.

TatTvamAsi
17 December 2009, 02:50 AM
Namaste Devotee,

The statement (I emboldened) you have made is great!

The OP asked a question about "trying out" Hinduism for a year and I made my opinion clear. It seems like this is another one of those 30 vs 1 against Varnashrama Dharma. :rolleyes:

I know you are secular, but it would be highly disingenuous to discredit Varnashrama Dharma.

So if you can show these people as Yajvan has already done that VD is integral to SD, then case is closed.

Namaskar.


Namaste ScottMalaysia, Heartfully and all who are not born Hindus,

I would like to tell you something :

a) My dear friends, why do you need someone to endorse what you should do & what you should not ? There is no Church & no Mullah to dictate terms to Hindus or to people who have come to Hindu fold. There is no scriptures that says that conversion is not allowed in Hinduism. Aarya Samaaj which helps in conversion to Hinduism can be considered authority in the Vedas & certainly those people won't violate the Vedas !

b) If you want to be Hindu & you have adopted the Hindu way of life, you are already a Hindu. If you want to convert formally, it is ok & if you don't want then also it is ok.

c) As far as caste of those coming from outside is concerned, there is no need for you to identify yourself with any caste unless you want to marry in an orthodox Hindu family. There are many inter-caste marriages within Hindus & they still remain Hindus. The population of people leading Hindu way of life, though those are no born-Hindus, runs in hundreds of thousand, thanks to many Hindu Teachers in the West. So, there should be no worry that you are unique in doing this.

d) There is another term Varna. So, you belong to the Varna depending upon your nature and gunas as Lord Krishna has said in the Bhaagwad Gita.

The freedom of faith is your birth right. Don't ask anyone else to endorse it. It is already yours. Why ask someone's permission to do what is your fundamental right ?

Does it make the matter clear ?

OM

devotee
17 December 2009, 03:52 AM
Namaste TTA,

I was trying hard to stop myself from posting anything in this thread as I fully knew that it would lead to confrontation. However, it is difficult to control one's nature ... the effect of my varna !

I don't deny Varnaashram (it applies to all human beings & not just to Hindus). How can it be denied when it has been decided by Lord Himself ? However, I see Varna separate from caste. Caste or birth in a Kula is based on one's past karma as says Lord Krishna in Gita. However, the Varna is decided by his Guna & Karma which is not only his past Karma/Guna but takes into account of his Guna & Karma in this life too. Varnas are only 4 where there are many castes. My understanding based on Bhagwad Gita and Vajrashoochika Upanishad is clear & I have no doubts on that whatsoever.

Moreover, my dear TTA, I can't see anyone as lower than or inferior to me ... who is lower to whom when same Supreme Lord (as PrajnaGhana) resides equally in all hearts .... when Jiva is actually Shiva ? He is in everyone ... if I hate anyone or see anyone lower than me, is it not a crime against Lord Himself ? I don't say that I have fully achieved what I am saying but that is what I keep on trying.


OM

sanjaya
17 December 2009, 04:03 AM
TatTvamAsi, I'm not as knowledgable in the Scriptures as you appear to be, but I do have some issues reconciling your statements with logic. Perhaps you can help to clarify the following points. I hope you won't take my comments as soliciting hostile debate; I honestly want to understand your position better.


If you were not affiliated with any religion, it doesn't really mean much to "convert" to Hinduism. As stated before, CONVERSION in Hinduism is non-existant.

Why is it meaningless for an irreligious person to convert to Hinduism? Conversion is usually defined as changing one's religious belief and practices. In this case, Scott has moved from non-belief and absence of practice to Hinduism. The change is just as substantial as it would be for someone to convert from any theistic religion. Do you disagree?


Shastric proof did you say?

Although there may not be an exact injunction in the Vedas against "conversion" or for conversion, the topic is never referred to in the Vedas altogether. Why? In the days of yore, before Kali Yuga, there existed ONLY Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism). It didn't matter which darshana one belonged to or was affiliated to because all of them fell under the umbrella of "Hinduism". With the degradation of religion, there arose "different" religions and systems of philosophy such as Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam etc. Therefore, any talk of conversion is only pertinent in these times.

This part I understand. You are effectively pointing out that the Scriptures don't address the issue of conversion, because such a topic wouldn't make sense to people in times before Kali Yuga. I'm not sure about your statement that Sanatana Dharma was the only religion that existed before Kali Yuga. If I'm not mistaken, Kali Yuga begins with the death of Sri Krishna, which people date to around 5,000 BC. Modern archaeology tells us that other cultures and religions existed before this period in history. We have found images of non-Vedic gods. So I'm not sure about your statement that Hinduism is the only religion that existed before Kali Yuga. I think this is worthy of further discussion, but let us leave this issue for the moment, and stipulate to your proposition that the Scriptures could not possibly address the issue of conversion.


Hence, when Hinduism was the ONLY philosophy in the world, either one was withIN the system or withOUT (AVARNA). Likewise, nowadays, if one is NOT a Hindu by birth (lineage), then one is also an AVARNA (OUTCASTE).

The first sentence here makes sense, but isn't it a leap of logic to say that one's status as a Hindu is determined by lineage? Everything I've read in the Scriptures seems to suggest that it's determined by one's actions, e.g. the Pandavas and Kauravas. Yes, one could argue (based partly on Krishna's statement that he endlessly casts evil souls into the wombs of asuras) that one's godliness is in some sense divinely predestined. Indeed, other Hindu saints have also said that we are incapable of even thinking about God unless he grants us that capability. But again, I don't see how you're making the connection to birth. Perhaps you could elaborate on this.

On a random sidenote, though I am a born Brahmin Hindu, I feel that I've learned more from Western Hindus (whom you call "untouchables") than I have in all my years as a Hindu. They seem more dedicated to their faith than those of us who were born Hindus. In fact I consider them to be more Hindu than I am, and I hope to someday have their level of devotion. To say that one's Hinduness is defined by birth therefore betrays my personal experiences. That's why I'm having trouble understanding your position.


No definition as to what makes one a Hindu? Do you see why you still are not Hindu and never will be considered one (by orthodox Hindus)?

But why is the opinion of orthodox Hindus important? I thought God's opinion was what mattered. Do these so-called orthodox Hindus claim ownership of God? Furthermore, I'm not sure how we define an "orthodox" Hindu. Are we talking about people who surrender wholly to God? If so, then I would hope that everyone on this forum strives to be an orthodox Hindu. I'm left wondering why you are assuming that certain people have an inherent right to dictate who is and isn't a Hindu. Again, perhaps you could elaborate here.


The Vedas have described the nature of reality by the Rishis of India and they describe clearly what a PERSON (in other words, a HINDU) should do, his purpose on this planet, and the general goals of "life". When one is not of Hindu lineage, one can never be considered Hindu regardless of how many customs one adopts (tilak, dhoti, singing bhajans, and eating idli dosa).

I have two comments here.

1.) On what basis can we assume that the Vedas are addressed specifically to Hindus? By your own admission, at the time the Vedas were given to the Rishis there was no distinction of religion; there were only religious and irreligious people. As such, it seems like a leap of logic to make religious people correspond with born Hindus and that irreligious people correspond with born non-Hindus.

2.) Your statement about how no non-Indian can be considered a Hindu implicitly assumes that there is some governing authority besides God who can determine who is and isn't a Hindu. What is that authority?


If you respect the Shastras, then you will understand that BIRTH is determined by previous lives' vAsanAs (latent tendencies), Karma (action), and Guna (character); the permutation of the 3 gunas determine WHERE, WHEN, and to WHOM one is born. Everybody conveniently forgets this FACT.

But this could just as easily taken to mean that one's karma from previous lives will determine whether that person has God on his mind or not. As such, a Westerner who comes to the Hindu religion might have done so because of previously accumulated merit, while a born Hindu who becomes an atheist and walks away from God also does so because of his previously accumulated karma. This, I believe, is taught in the Gita, is it not? Again, most of what you're saying is true, but I have trouble understanding how you come to the conclusion that lineage has anything to do with one's religiosity.


Thanks for the late-breaking news! :rolleyes:

You have understood ZILCH about caste. Birth is not the ONLY factor, but it is an IMPORTANT FACTOR in one's varna. Jati is the appropriate word for occupation moving from one generation to the next.

Again, I can see how it is an important factor to the extent that the children of religious parents will tend to be religious. But how does lineage specifically become so important?




Last but not least, one can NEVER be a real Hindu and denounce Varnashrama Dharma (caste "system")! It is the BACKBONE of Sanatana Dharma. Casteism on the other hand is dangerous and I denounce that. There is a limit however.

I was under the impression that God is the backbone of all Dharma. Without him it wouldn't even occur to us to do righteous deeds. When compared to God himself, the caste system seems like a tangential issue at best.

Also, I'm confused about how one could place such a great importance on lineage in determining Hinduness, and then stating that failure to believe in some doctrine will cause one to cease being a "real Hindu." What makes a person a Hindu? Is it lineage, as you stated in most of your post? Or is it belief in certain doctrines, as you've stated in the above quote? Christians tie belief in doctrine to one's standing before God, but I thought that we Hindus have evolved past that point.

satay
17 December 2009, 10:18 AM
Admin Note

My apologies for being away from HDF for a couple of days. I am closing this thread for now.

Thank you to all of you who sent me notes regading this thread.

Thread is under review and posts will be edited/removed according to the rules of HDF.

Thanks

Update: Dec 18th, 2009

I have opened the thread. Please keep it on topic. Ensure that you are following the forum rules. Please report all posts that are against the forum rules.

Thank you and enjoy the discussion!