What is Neo Hinduism?

[Twilightdance]

Ok, makes sense now.

[ShivaFan]

Namaste All.

I refuse to adopt or be belittled into accepting a label which probably has origins from those who not Hindus or probably are British in origination. I will no more accept being labled a Neo-Hindu than being labled an Idol Worshipper.

Some believe that only worshipping their Hindu Saint or Divine is allowed and to worship anyother Hindu Divine or Guru or Saint is Idol Worship.

I will never expect those who do not worship Shiva or Saiva Divinity to take a label "Idol Worship Hindu" nor "Neo Hindu". Neo Hindu is not in my sacred texts, nor do those who are my teachers use any such term.

I am not a foreigner to Hinduism nor are those who teach me. I don't care if Neo Hindu is a term in Wikipedia. It is a great resource but does not define me.

In regards to Indian Nationalist movements, I support the VHP. I do not think Neo Hindu is a straight-jack VHP members call themselves. You never know, there could be one, if you want to be called Neo Hindu I do not tell any Hindu what Sampradaya teachings they must follow or what they want to call themself. However, I do not accept such a foreign term to be tattooed onto me, never.

Om Namah Sivaya

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam:

My father had a saying ... "You can call me anything you want, just don't call me Late for breakfast."

In other words, practical things like eating are important.
I've been accused of being neo-Hindu by some.
I've been accused of being too traditional, too dogmatic, by others.
Some people say I'm a white Hindu, so I'm not a real Hindu.
Others called me anti-Christian.
Still others said I was anti-Smarta and knew nothing.
Others criticized my Guru.

In my teaching days some parents came in and yelled at me for being too strict.
The next set of parents insisted I wasn't strict enough.

My family worried I was going to die from the vegetarian diet.
Some old aunts worried I was going to hell.

And so it goes.

Will this stop me from worshipping beloved Siva? No.
Will this stop me from doing daily sadhana? No.
Will this stop my hatha yoga practice? No.
Will this stop my self-reflection? No.
Will this stop me reading people, or reading scripture? No.
Will this stop me from smiling? No.

"In one ear and out the other," is great wisdom.

Aum Namasivaya

[Jeffery D. Long]

Vannakkam:

My father had a saying ... "You can call me anything you want, just don't call me Late for breakfast."

In other words, practical things like eating are important.
I've been accused of being neo-Hindu by some.
I've been accused of being too traditional, too dogmatic, by others.
Some people say I'm a white Hindu, so I'm not a real Hindu.
Others called me anti-Christian.
Still others said I was anti-Smarta and knew nothing.
Others criticized my Guru.

In my teaching days some parents came in and yelled at me for being too strict.
The next set of parents insisted I wasn't strict enough.

My family worried I was going to die from the vegetarian diet.
Some old aunts worried I was going to hell.

And so it goes.

Will this stop me from worshipping beloved Siva? No.
Will this stop me from doing daily sadhana? No.
Will this stop my hatha yoga practice? No.
Will this stop my self-reflection? No.
Will this stop me reading people, or reading scripture? No.
Will this stop me from smiling? No.

"In one ear and out the other," is great wisdom.

Aum Namasivaya

Thank you, Eastern Mind, for this wise and lovely posting, to which I am sure many of us can relate.

[wundermonk]

As an aside, there is much contradictory material in the smRiti, no doubt some being interpolated much later than the date of their compilation, and no one here has claimed that traditional Hindus follow every regulation in every smRiti.

Were you not the one who sometime ago held some other poster's feet to the fire when he chose to dispute the relevance/authenticity of Manu smriti? Now that the shoe is on the other foot...

What leads you to believe Manu smriti verse forbidding Brahmins from crossing oceans to be of doubtful purport?

Are you a "Brahmin"?

Did you cross the ocean going against Manusmriti? If you did, explain to me how you are not "Neo"?

How can "Brahmin" priests become priests of temples outside of India if Manu smriti is "traditional" without these "Brahmin" priests becoming "Neo"?

[philosoraptor]

Beliefs have evolved constantly and neo-Hindu (as can be seen in the wikipedia pages) is specifically applied to changes that came about to cater to a Western mindset.

I think that's about the most accurate characterization one can make about the term Neo-Hinduism.

[philosoraptor]

I refuse to adopt or be belittled into accepting a label which probably has origins from those who not Hindus or probably are British in origination. I will no more accept being labled a Neo-Hindu than being labled an Idol Worshipper.

Swami Vivekananda and Ramananda Roy were the first to inaugurate the term, as they spoke of bringing forth a "new Hinduism" in their correspondence. And Swami Vivekananda does indeed say that Hindus are "Idol worshippers."

[Jeffery D. Long]

Swami Vivekananda does indeed say that Hindus are "Idol worshippers."

Though murti puja is a regular feature of the ritual life of the Ramakrishna Order and its lay devotees, both in India and abroad, and was practiced by Swami Vivekananda himself. As mentioned previously, random (i.e. decontextualized) Swami Vivekananda quotes can be as misleading as random scriptural quotes.

[philosoraptor]

Were you not the one who sometime ago held some other poster's feet to the fire when he chose to dispute the relevance/authenticity of Manu smriti?

Manu smriti is relevant and authentic, as evidenced by the fact that it is quoted or alluded to in the Ramayana of Valmiki, the Vishnu Purana, and the Bhagavata Purana. This is not the same thing as saying that everything we have in today's editions of Manu is the same as what was spoken by Manu in the original edition.

Similarly, we all say that the Puranas are fifth Veda, based on evidence in shruti. But being that they have not been so carefully preserved, we don't accept everything in the Puranas that we have today as true.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot...

Not really. I've always verbalized my doubts about the authenticity of some parts of Manu, even as I've pointed out that the scriptures acknowledge the existence of an authentic Manu-samhita.

What leads you to believe Manu smriti verse forbidding Brahmins from crossing oceans to be of doubtful purport?

Several reasons:

1) The fact that traditional scholars have been crossing the ocean for the last several decades to give discourses in the West. Not that this proves the verse is interpolated; i suppose it could also be that those scholars are just violating shAstra in spite of their erudition and other conservative views.
2) The fact that "crossing the ocean" does not, itself, seem to have any specific spiritual significance, unless the issue is one of prohibiting people to visit mleccha/non-Vedic civilizations for fear that they will take up the bad habits of those people. However, this lead to...
3) The fact that the purANic conception of the world was one in which Vedic civilization was spread everywhere, which begs the question of why specific areas of the world would be prohibited in a scripture that was of that period. There are references to sages visiting higher (and sometimes lower) worlds, for example, yet parts of Earth are completely forbidden?
4) The fact that the smRiti acknowledges the visiting of far-flung corners of the globe by great twice-born persons. For example, King Vishvaamitra was said to have travelled the entire world before visiting the sage Vasishtha in his hermitage (this is in Ramayana) and King Parikshit was said to have done the same (as per the Bhagavata). Hanumaan crossed the ocean to visit Lanka, which at that time was well known to be a civilization of meat-eaters, cannibals, and drunks (again, as per Ramayana). In none of these situations do we see any expression of doubt that travelling to distant parts might be forbidden because of a stricture in Manu. This is in contrast to, say, the duties of a wife to a husband in which Manu is quoted or alluded to in the Ramayana in order to arrive at a conclusion about what is to be done. So, again, why would it be wrong now and not back then?

Note that it's a doubt, not a definitive pronouncement, but I think a carefully considered one. I have similar doubts about the authenticity of other pronouncements of Manu which also seem to contradict other scriptures.

Did you cross the ocean going against Manusmriti?

No

If you did, explain to me how you are not "Neo"?

How can "Brahmin" priests become priests of temples outside of India if Manu smriti is "traditional" without these "Brahmin" priests becoming "Neo"?

The same reason you can still be a traditional Hindu even if you do not accept the authority of each and every statement in the mahAbhArata and the purANa-s, as is the case with all traditional vedAnta schools.

[philosoraptor]

Though murti puja is a regular feature of the ritual life of the Ramakrishna Order and its lay devotees, both in India and abroad, and was practiced by Swami Vivekananda himself. As mentioned previously, random (i.e. decontextualized) Swami Vivekananda quotes can be as misleading as random scriptural quotes.

That's fine, I was merely pointing out to Shivafan that the term "idol worshipper" was not exclusively used by foreigners. Vivekananda did use the phrase, did engage in it, and did rationalize it (albeit very poorly IMHO). I of course, have explained my objections to the term "idol" for specific reasons. I would say we are "God-worshipers" who worship Him in the form of a murthy whose design is specified according to shAstric injunction. That doesn't mean it will be any more palatable to Christian and Muslim missionaries, but I do think we should still aim for better precision in language.