The 'H' word.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: I don't get it. What's wrong with the term 'Hindu'? I read stuff that sounds quite Hindu, or at least leaning towards Hinduism, but I see no mention of the term itself. What exactly are people afraid of?

Stuff like this:

I practice yoga, but its definitely not Hindu.
I follow Sanatana Dharma, not Hinduism.
I believe in karma, but it's not a Hindu concept.

I was browsing through a certain 'yoga' organisation's site, and I never saw the word ... not even once.

Is Hindu a curse word or something? Any insights, anyone?

Aum Namasivaya

[realdemigod]

Namaste EM,
There is nothing to be afraid of. It's just to derail new people from learning these ancient practices are from Hinduism and to devalue Hinduism so that articles are suited for westerns. I have come across many articles similar to the ones you read. This goes back to the influence of few supposed cults claim to be god's religions.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam rdg: Oh, I am not afraid of anything, but it seems some other souls are. :) Of what I don't know. Maybe they think Hindu is synonymous with 'evil' or some other thing. Personally, I love the term, even though I know it's not historically accurate.

I would be hesitant, and doubtful about reading about 'Hinduism' if the said organization can't even call themselves Hindu. Seems like going to a baseball game in New york with a Yankee fan who won't admit he's a Yankee fan, or that he claims we're actually watching cricket.

Aum Namasivaya

[surrenderindailylife]

Namaste EM

I had read some years back that immediately after WWII, Japanese firms were very reluctant to use tag 'Made in Japan' on their products. The reason was quite simple to grasp - Japan in WWII was a loser and consumers didnt want to buy from a loser! It took several years for the Japanese firms to be recognized for their quality focus, a new identity so to say... Only after that, 'Made in Japan' made its way back.

Hindu religion is usually associated with India. My guess is when India as a nation grows to play a more leading role on world stage, Hindu religion would grow in stature as well. Rest all things (as mentioned by you) would fall in place.

Om Namah Shivay

[Jainarayan]

I also think Hinduism is associated with India and Indian ethnicity only. Not in any wrong or bad way, but in a way of "I'm not Indian, so I really don't have anything to do with Hinduism". Someone, knowing I'm Hindu asked me how you'd say [I forgot what it was] in Hindu. :doh: I said there is no such language, and if you mean Sanskrit, I wouldn't even attempt it. It's a matter of education.

[realdemigod]

Namaste EM,
I'm reiterating nobody is afraid of Hinduism. West wants to devalue Hinduism so that the future generations would accept things like yoga is sophisticated aerobics developed by ingenious people from the west, we have advanced sciences, our psychologists and theologians have concluded the comic law of karma and nobody can claim the roots. Future generations will accept them as the concepts of the west like Pythagora's theorem. West still thinks we are big brothers we get to rule the world at the expense of the east and they are still uncivilised barbarians. Adding to all these BBC and other channels fudge the history of not only the east but also the Bosnian war to suit their supremacy in their documentaries.

[Sahasranama]

Vannakkam: I don't get it. What's wrong with the term 'Hindu'? I read stuff that sounds quite Hindu, or at least leaning towards Hinduism, but I see no mention of the term itself. What exactly are people afraid of?

Stuff like this:

I practice yoga, but its definitely not Hindu.
I follow Sanatana Dharma, not Hinduism.
I believe in karma, but it's not a Hindu concept.

I was browsing through a certain 'yoga' organisation's site, and I never saw the word ... not even once.

Is Hindu a curse word or something? Any insights, anyone?

Aum NamasivayaThere are multiple factors that cause people to avoid the word Hindu. Sometimes it is done by Indians who want to look sophisticated and say things like "I am not a Hindu, I am a follower of Sanatana Dharma." This is a completely meaningless utterance, because Hindu and Sanatana Dharma have become synonyms and are used interchangeably. They come with arguments that the word Hindu is of relative recent origin, but what they don't realise is that the word Sanatana Dharma in the context it is used nowadays is of even more recent origin. The word Hindu was already used by the ancient Persians to describe the location eastward of the sindhu river, later it started to denote the religion of the people in India. For some Indians its a matter of pride, they don't want to use a foreign word to describe their religion. Some see it as a British construct projected on the religions of India, but they don't know that the word Hindu was there before the British already and is even mentioned in some shastras.

The last argument is also used by the Universalists, but for other reasons altogether. They do not want to use the word Hindu, because for them it signifies a geographic location and they don't want to confine Hinduism to certain place on the planet, sometimes because they still have strong attachments to their birth religion. They are in a phase where they are unhappy with their birth religion, but still use it as a filter to look at Hinduism. These people see Hinduism as an "open source software" that they can use to update their old religion. They still have a place in their heart for Jesus Christ, light candles in front of their altar to commune with god and read from the Bible or if they are muslim, they still pray to Allah five times a day. Hindus have to be very careful for these type of people. They will act friendly as long they are absorbing from Hinduism to fill that empty hole that their birth religion has created. But as soon as they have had enough, they will become the most vicious missionaries of (upgraded) monotheism 2.0 and start condemning idol worship, animal and nature veneration and devotion towards multiple deities. Just like Rahu was able to obtain amrita from Mohini, these asuras will absorb Hindu knowledge only to become bigger demons. Hindus should be very careful not to spill any amrita in their hands.

हीनं च दूष्यत्येव हिन्दुरित्युच्यते प्रिये
(Meru Tantra)

Hindu is one who discards the mean and the ignoble.

ओंकारमूलमन्त्राढ्य पुनर्जन्मदृढाशयः।
गोभक्तो भारतगुरुर्हिन्दुहिंसनदूषकः॥
(Madhava Digvijaya)

One who meditates on Omkar as the primeal sound, believes in karma & reincarnation, has reverence for the cow, who is devoted to Bharat, and abhors evil, is deserving of being called Hindu.

हिंसया दूयते यश्च सदाचरणतत्पर।
वेदगोप्रतिमासेवी स हिन्दुमुखशब्दभाक्॥
(vriddha smriti)

One who abhors the mean and the ignoble, and is of noblebearing,
who reveres the Veda, the cow, and the idol, is a Hindu.

हिमालयं समारभ्य यावदिन्दु सरोवरम्।
तं देवनिर्मितं देशं हिन्दुस्थानं प्रचक्षते॥
(brihaspati aagama)

Starting from Himalaya upto Indu waters is this God created country Hindustan

(Translations are by Dr. Murlidhar H. Pahoja)

[wundermonk]

I practice yoga, but its definitely not Hindu.

Yoga is as much Dharmic as red is a colour. Yoga is the practical aspect of Samkhya. Samkhya is non-theistic Vedanta. Vedanta accepts the ontology of Samkhya. So, all are Dharmic in essence. Anyone who denies Yoga is Hinduism is probably reacting to the cognitive dissonance in his mind - "how could these Indians, of all people, have come up with something as stupendous as Yoga and all these other philosophies. I was thinking my religion (Islam/Christianity) is the best in the world thanks to it being drummed into my head since birth...but lo and behold, my religion cannot hold a candle light in front of Hinduism....So, Yoga is definitely not Hindu."


I follow Sanatana Dharma, not Hinduism.

No big deal - just a nomenclatural issue.


I believe in karma, but it's not a Hindu concept.

Karma was accepted by all Dharmic faiths in some form or the other - be it Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism or Buddhism.


I was browsing through a certain 'yoga' organisation's site, and I never saw the word ... not even once.

This could be because the organization is trying to sell it to non-Indians. When their clientele predominantly consists of Xians/Mohammedans whose Gods are jealous and fire-spewing, it is best to lie about Yoga. Capitalism.

As others have pointed out, it could also be because India is currently poor. As India gains economic ascendancy, credit will be given where it is due. I think it is human nature to want to be associated with a winning side. Thus far, even though Hinduism beats all other religions hands down, India as a country has managed to screw things up. People are as of yet unwilling to disassociate Hinduism and India.

[realdemigod]

Namaste EM,
Just to give you an example, I'm reading a book (Sexual Secrets - The Alchemy of Ecstasy) where the author talks about dream yoga and here is one line taken directly.

These practices are simple, direct, and especially suited to the highly developed intellectual capacities of the Western mind.

I know I'm stereotyping but thing like these clearly show that the west isn't grateful of the things the east taught to the world and unrightly claim many as theirs.

[Mana]

Namaste EM,

I am sad to say that I have heard it said, by a very kind and well practised yoga teacher, "the Hindu religious fanatics are just as bad as in any other religion, some are worse". She did not want to associate with fundamentalism. To her "Hindu" meant an association with fundamentalism.

This is not my view but it does reply to your question.

Maybe she is not understanding of the Warrior class?

I am intrigued to learn of the evolutionary flow of Durga, Bindu, Hindu, Bindi and Hindi ...

praNAma

mana

[MahaHrada]

Vannakkam: I don't get it. What's wrong with the term 'Hindu'? I read stuff that sounds quite Hindu, or at least leaning towards Hinduism, but I see no mention of the term itself. What exactly are people afraid of?

Stuff like this:

I practice yoga, but its definitely not Hindu.
I follow Sanatana Dharma, not Hinduism.
I believe in karma, but it's not a Hindu concept.

I was browsing through a certain 'yoga' organisation's site, and I never saw the word ... not even once.

Is Hindu a curse word or something? Any insights, anyone?



People are very different, while you think it is wrong to deny a hindu identity when one is practising yoga, i think it is disturbing how many people think that an interest or practice of indian traditions can somehow convert them into Hindus. Then after reading some neo Hindu books , they come to preach to their fellow "Hindus" about "true" Hinduism and the divine christ conciousness. In Hdf we have lots of self declared hindus and the threads contain more information about the bible and JC than about anything else, in recent threads. Do we really need more of this?

Hinduism has no concept of conversion or proselytizing, and orthodox Hindus even criticise re-conversion of former Hindus not to speak of foreigners. So when Hinduism itself is not welcoming conversions, why should these, mostly western based Yoga or neo advaita and neo tantra websites and others similar people self declare themselves as a part of Hinduism?

I think there would be a lot of justified protests from more orthodox Hindus if suddenly all kind of new age cults, sex massage tantrics, neo pagans and other western gurus declare themselves to be part of Hinduism.

[wundermonk]

People are very different, while you think it is wrong to deny a hindu identity when one is practising yoga, i think it is disturbing how many people think that an interest or practice of indian traditions can somhow convert them into Hindus.

I dont think the thread is about "conversion into Hinduism". It is about calling out those who say Yoga/Karma are NOT grounded in Hinduism.


Hinduism has no concept of conversion or proselytizing, and orthodox Hindus even criticise re-conversion of former Hindus not to speak of foreigners. So when Hinduism itself is not welcoming conversions, why should these, mostly western based Yoga or neo advaita and neo tantra websites self and others declare themselves as a part of Hinduism?

Here (http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/4401654) is an article that talks of large scale reconversion of Muslims back to Hinduism. There are many Shuddhi programs that were/are organized by Arya Samaj. A google search of "reconversion to Hinduism" gave me the following (https://www.google.co.in/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=reconversion+to+Hinduism&oq=reconversion+to+Hinduism&aq=f&aqi=g3g-v1&aql=&gs_nf=1&gs_l=hp.3..0l3j0i15.929.3596.0.3856.24.15.0.5.5.2.465.3576.2-6j3j2.13.0.Ly-tzLivPPE&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=ba6c205675f97627) results. Not very scientific but shows that reconversion efforts ARE on. So, we need more evidence before we conclude something sweeping such as "Hinduism itself is not welcoming conversions".

Also, who are the "orthodox" Hindus who oppose reconversion?

[MahaHrada]

I dont think the thread is about "conversion into Hinduism". It is about calling out those who say Yoga/Karma are NOT grounded in Hinduism.



Here (http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/4401654) is an article that talks of large scale reconversion of Muslims back to Hinduism. There are many Shuddhi programs that were/are organized by Arya Samaj. A google search of "reconversion to Hinduism" gave me the following (https://www.google.co.in/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=reconversion+to+Hinduism&oq=reconversion+to+Hinduism&aq=f&aqi=g3g-v1&aql=&gs_nf=1&gs_l=hp.3..0l3j0i15.929.3596.0.3856.24.15.0.5.5.2.465.3576.2-6j3j2.13.0.Ly-tzLivPPE&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=ba6c205675f97627) results. Not very scientific but shows that reconversion efforts ARE on. So, we need more evidence before we conclude something sweeping such as "Hinduism itself is not welcoming conversions".

Also, who are the "orthodox" Hindus who oppose reconversion?

Read the first post it is about websites, mostly western, avoiding the term Hinduism. I say this is the correct attitude, they should by all means avoid calling themselves Hindus out of respect. Not all smartas agree that these shuddhis are advisable.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: Thanks everyone, for your insights. And I'm also sorry for rehashing a same old topic. It was only because I read something yesterday that got me thinking about it --- again. :rolleyes:

Aum Namasivaya

[Amala]

Namaste,

Apparently, when the Persians heard the people living in the Indus Valley refer to 'sindhu' it was mispronounced, 'hindu' and came to be the label for those living there by all outsiders. Sindhu translates as river or ocean. So it is historically just a simple geographical indicator with nothing to do with how they lived or what they believed in.

The following is what I found on the topic in "Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300," by Romila Thapar.

p. xxix

Close identities between religious sects and castes are frequent in Indian religion and the multiplicity of reasonably independent sects has led some scholars to speak of the Hindu religions (in the plural). The term 'Hindu' to describe a religious identity came into currency as late as the second millenium AD. Prior to that, sectarian identities were more frequently referred to, since the over-arching term Dharma included not only sacred duties but also a range of social obligations.

p. 275

To use the general term Hinduism at this stage [c. 200 BC - AD 300] is historically something of an anachronism. The term 'Hindu' was not in use in the early first millennium AD, and those who were supporters of what today we call 'Hindu' sects used their sectarian labels to identify their religion. Therefore, they identified themselves by the broader labels of Vaishnava and Shaiva or, within these, by the narrower labels of Bhagavatas, Pashupatas and so on. The consciousness of a religious identity was that of the sect and not of an all-inclusive religion incorporating every sect. This makes a significant difference to understanding the nature of what today is called Hinduism.

The wider application of the term 'Hindu' originated with the Arabs after the eighth century AD, when it referred to all those who lived beyond the Indus.

p. 438

What we define as the Hindu community in religious terms actually consisted of a range of groups with clear internal identities as sects - such as Vaishnava, Shaiva, Shakta or, more closely, Bhagavata, Pahupata, Kapalika and so on.. The Buddhists and the Jainas were distinct even if some beliefs and practices overlapped.

******
As for people getting upset over terminology, it's best not to get wrapped up in it. Of course, we should be respectful of general preferences, but we can't account for everyone's likes and dislikes so if we're gentle and humble I think most will see that our intent is honourable. But there's always the reactionary ones - and they have their right to live in the world of drama. We can choose not to.

My teacher doesn't like the word Hindu either, but he slips into using it anyway too. Categories are convenient.... that's why we have dictionaries... but they often fall far short of their target. :-)

[wundermonk]

Read the first post it is about websites, mostly western, avoiding the term Hinduism. I say this is the correct attitude, they should by all means avoid calling themselves Hindus out of respect.

Again, labels dont matter. When someone claims Yoga is NOT Hinduism or that Karma has no basis in Hinduism, they are wrong whether they practise Yoga or not or whether they choose to label themselves Buddhist or Christian, etc.


Not all smartas agree that these shuddhis are advisable.

Would you happen to know why they believe so?

[Eastern Mind]

I say this is the correct attitude, they should by all means avoid calling themselves Hindus out of respect.

Vannakkam MH: Good point. If they're not Hindu, then they shouldn't call themselves such. It would only confuse the seeker.

Aum Namasivaya

[MahaHrada]

Again, labels dont matter. When someone claims Yoga is NOT Hinduism or that Karma has no basis in Hinduism, they are wrong whether they practise Yoga or not or whether they choose to label themselves Buddhist or Christian, etc.

I have never heard that anybody denied in any website that there are Hindus practising Yoga or beliving in Karma, but Buddhist Jains and Taoists, also belive in Karma and practise Yoga. There is stronger priority on karma in buddhism than in Hinduism and todays global concept of karma is closer to buddhist ideas than to pre buddhist indian traditions.


Would you happen to know why they believe so?

There are many problems, like where should these reconverts worships?I think it was in Bihar where they had to build so called svastika temples especially for reconverts since people objected to worship together with them in the local temples. Then what ashrama, jati and gotra do they have? Tribals and muslims as well as westerners most often lack these distinctions. Many ceremonies and customs require this knowledge. Then there were no ceremonies in the smritis for reconversion, they had to be newly invented, so there are a lot of points of dispute about reconversion. So the shuddhis are considered a necessary evil, as long as christian and muslim conversions occur, people must be able to reconvert but that does not mean that conversion is a part of Hinduism per se.

[wundermonk]

There are many problems, like where should these reconverts worships?I think it was in Bihar where they had to build so called svastika temples especially for reconverts since people objected to worship together with them in the local temples.

Well, the "originals" are just wrong here if they opposed common platform of worship. In any case, in any temples I have been to, there is no one who seems to be looking at me to size me up whether I am an "original" or a recent convert. The problem you cite will go away due to anonymity.


Then what ashrama, jati and gotra do they have? Tribals and muslims as well as westerners most often lack these distinctions. Many ceremonies and customs require this knowledge. Then there were no ceremonies in the smritis for reconversion, they had to be newly invented, so there are a lot of points of dispute about reconversion.

Ceremonies and customs change with times. Previously knowledge about Hindu darshanas were obtained in a Gurukula. Nowadays with information so freely available with internet and so on, any Muslim/Xian can walk into a bookstore and purchase a copy of the Bhagavad Gita if she so desires. Too bad if the "orthodox" Hindus dont like it. They are just wrong.

Hinduism cannot be held hostage to such beliefs.

[MahaHrada]

Well, the "originals" are just wrong here if they opposed common platform of worship. In any case, in any temples I have been to, there is no one who seems to be looking at me to size me up whether I am an "original" or a recent convert. The problem you cite will go away due to anonymity.

Ceremonies and customs change with times. Previously knowledge about Hindu darshanas were obtained in a Gurukula. Nowadays with information so freely available with internet and so on, any Muslim/Xian can walk into a bookstore and purchase a copy of the Bhagavad Gita if she so desires. Too bad if the "orthodox" Hindus dont like it. They are just wrong.

Hinduism cannot be held hostage to such beliefs.

I am not saying that this is right or wrong, who am i to judge? I am just stating the facts. Every creep with a tantra massage parlour can call himself a hindu, there is no copyright on this word, so who cares.
I just meant to say that not everyone interested in indian traditions who is avoiding to call himself a hindu does this necessarily out of disrespect. Also it is not necessarily positive for Hinduism if everyone who has read one book about "Krishna Conciousness" converts to hinduism, comes to hdf and preaches the coming of the avatar Jesus Christ to his fellow Hindoos.

[Jainarayan]

Namaste.

Consider also all the words that have come into the English language via India; words that people do not associate with India, though not necessarily having to do with Hinduism. The point is that India has given the world many things, the origins of which are forgotten or simply unknown. This is not always a matter of an effront to India and Hinduism. Many people are making it so and looking for monsters under every bed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Sanskrit_origin (http://[URL) List of English words of Sanskrit origin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Hindi_or_Urdu_origin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Hindi_or_Urdu_origin List)List of English words of Hindi or Urdu origin.

[Jainarayan]

Namaste.


Namaste,

Apparently, when the Persians heard the people living in the Indus Valley refer to 'sindhu' it was mispronounced, 'hindu' and came to be the label for those living there by all outsiders.

It's not a mispronunciation in Old Persian. It's part of a regular sound shift in Indoiranian languages, of which Old Persian and Vedic Sanskrit are members. S=H from Sanskrit to Old Persian. Sindhu=Hindu, sapta=hapta, saptasindhu (seven rivers)=haptahindu, asura=ahura (with a coincidental reversal of meaning), Saraswati (river)=Hairovati, dasa=dahae (though cognate, the meanings and usages changed completely). Someone with whom I had this conversation tried to be funny and ask why Persia(n) is not Perhia(n). Well, that's because "Persia(n)" is a Greek work, not an Old Persian word. ;)

[Aum namah Śivāya]

नमस्ते,

I more or less grew up in the new age movement, so I've seen this all throughout my life. People in the new age movement many times consider a particular "organized" religion to b beneath them—too restrictive. They will freely take from various traditions, usually Hindu, maybe native American, Buddhist, Taoist, even Christian, and combine these into a conglomeration of their own beliefs, sometimes adding some or removing some.

In the west, where truth is considered relative and personal, it is tempting to follow such a path where you decide what is true for you, and drop the labels of religion. I was like this not that long ago, until I realize that deciding my own truth wasn't actually doing any good for me. It is because of the new age movement that ideas like yoga, karma, reincarnation, etc, are stripped of their religious context and label and popularized within the west.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. It was because of these ideas that I knew what Hindus believed, and subsequently led me to Hinduism itself. It also dilutes the Christian culture, so that it's not unheard of to have a Catholic who practices yoga, believes in karma and so forth, though the Catholic Church decries and denounces these beliefs and practices as "evil." Still, if it were kept strictly within the Hindu context, they would not be quite so accessible to westerners and there would be a strict divide. So no, not necessarily a bad thing that this happens.

Of course, I follow Yogānanda, who was largely responsible for bringing Hinduism to the west, an often drew parallels between the Bible and Hindu scriptures. I think this is beneficial.

ॐ नमः शिवाय

[charitra]

the thread is mainly about 'who owns yoga', 'yoga wars', and 'reclaiming yoga' etc. Please google those words and gain insights into the debate that has been ongoing last couple of years here in America. Dont discuss conversion on this thread, if you can help it. Namaste.:rolleyes:


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/opinion/l04yoga.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/opinion/l04yoga.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/who-owns-yoga/2012/01/11/gIQAOZZ9rP_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/who-owns-yoga/2012/01/11/gIQAOZZ9rP_story.html)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/who-owns-yoga_b_790078.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/who-owns-yoga_b_790078.html)
http://yogauonline.com/yogatherapy/news/who-owns-yoga/422121610-who-owns-yoga-yoga-spirit-contributor-loren-fishman-md (http://yogauonline.com/yogatherapy/news/who-owns-yoga/422121610-who-owns-yoga-yoga-spirit-contributor-loren-fishman-md)
http://www.spiritualityhealth.com/blog/sh-editors/who-owns-yoga (http://www.spiritualityhealth.com/blog/sh-editors/who-owns-yoga)

[Sahasranama]

the thread is mainly about 'who owns yoga', 'yoga wars', and 'reclaiming yoga' etc. Please google those words and gain insights into the debate that has been ongoing last couple of years here in America. Dont discuss conversion on this thread, if you can help it. Namaste.:rolleyes:



This topic about yoga has been discussed to death already. Another discussion has started here about why people who take bits and pieces from Hinduism, but still worship that zombie on a stick or align their chakras with their partner's emotions, shouldn't be calling themselves Hindus in the first place, out of respect and not to dilute the Hindu tradition. That is a valid answer to question in the opening post.

[Adhvagat]

There are lots of reasons.

Firstly because "Hindu" doesn't sound so cool and marketable.

[wundermonk]

There are lots of reasons.

Firstly because "Hindu" doesn't sound so cool and marketable.

Possibly.

Yet another reason is that Hinduism is pretty daunting for a newcomer. A Hindu herself will have to spend a lifetime understanding Hinduism.

In any case, that is one of the beauties of Hinduism, at least for me personally. :)

[realdemigod]

There are lots of reasons.

Firstly because "Hindu" doesn't sound so cool and marketable.


Pietro, you made me laugh..and christ sells like hot cakes round the world..lol

[wundermonk]

Pietro, you made me laugh..and christ sells like hot cakes round the world..lol

No...I think Allah/Mohammed is more marketable. After all, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world as our Muslim friends would like to remind us. :)

[realdemigod]

I guess and we are just old school :)

[TatTvamAsi]

The word "Hindu" or "Hinduism" is associated with the negative aspects of Indian society. Due to missionary propaganda, vilification of Hinduism from all corners (including "secular" Hindus themselves), and outright denigration through shoddy 'scholarship' has created a very negative picture of Hinduism and subsequently India.

That is why there is an enormous effort to de-link Yoga, meditation, and even Hindu symbols from Hinduism, for Hinduism is about bride-burning, ill treating women, "lower" caste people, and cows. Oh, I forgot curry as well. :rolleyes:

For anyone who is curious about India and/or Hinduism, always point to the quote by Mark Twain on India after he visited there in 1896 (3 years after Swami Vivekananda gave his speech in the Parliament of Religions in Chicago):


India is, the cradle of the human race, the birthplace of human speech, the mother of history, the grandmother of legend, and the great grand mother of tradition. our most valuable and most instructive materials in the history of man are treasured up in India only.

This trend of "hiding" Hinduism has been going on for decades and has surfaced only recently due to the debate in the west on Yoga. To anyone who even thinks of questioning the bond between Yoga and Hinduism, it would behoove them to read the 2nd sUtrA of Patanjali's Yoga sUtrA:


Yogas cittah vritti nirOdhahThe cessation of the movement of the mind (ie thoughts) is when Yoga is achieved! Given the fact that Yoga is an astika darSanA of Hinduism, it is rank intellectual dishonesty to say it is somehow "different" from it.

To those who claim to be Hindu, be proud of it and show it publicly. Don't feel ashamed to be part of the greatest philosophical tradition manifested on this planet.