Temples

[Liang Ch'an]

What is Hinduism says the following about temples:
"The Hindu temple and stone images in it work as a channel for the Diety, for the Gods, who hover over the stone image and, in their subtle etheric forms, change people's lives through changing the nerve currents with them through their darshana. People come to a sanctified temple and go away, and in that process they are slowly changed from the inside out. They have changed because tier very life force has changed, their mind has been changed and their emotions have undergone a subtle transformation."

While the book does say later on that Hinduism is dependent on any of three foundations of temple, philosophy, and guru and just one is enough to embody the religion. However, it seems the temple contains a special experience that is fundamentaly central to understanding Hinduism. As a Zen practitioner, I focus and value direct experience over ideas/beliefs/authority. We say that the teachings are like a finger pointing at the moon, where the moon is the truth, not the finger. So in order to understand Hinduism, I suppose I really need to visit a temple. What do you guys think? Is there a good directory of temples in the USA I could visit?

Thanks, -Liang

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam Liang: There are around 800 temples in North America, by some estimates, so you should have no problem finding one or two. The google map 'search nearby' catches most of them. Either that or just selecting a city and searching it with +Hindu temples. I agree with the editors of 'What is Hinduism?" Westerners who arrive at our door from a scripture based paradigm often have difficulty transferring to a new paradigm where scripture isn't quite so important. Best wishes in getting to a temple. For seekers, it often 'cuts to the chase' so to speak. If you don't (or do) feel comfortable in the presence of Hindu Gods, it should be a hint about your path.

Aum Namasivaya

[Liang Ch'an]

Thanks Eastern Mind. I am taking some time off work in two weeks that would be perfect for a day trip to one. I think I'll call ahead though.

I definitely understand what you mean by paradigms and I run into that frequently as a "Buddhist." My practice is almost exclusively meditation and scripture study with a heavy bias towards monasticism. So when I met an ethnic lay Buddhist we actually have very little in common. Their experience is often culturally and ritual based. So I don't bring it up anymore when I see shrines at Chinese restaurants, haha.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: Where are you, if you don't mind saying? Maybe someone on HDF can recommend one. I'd gladly host you if you're anywhere near Edmonton, Canada.

Aum Namasivaya

[Liang Ch'an]

I live in Lynchburg, Virginia. I am thinking about visiting this place, about 1 hour away.
http://www.roanoketemple.org/home.html

The what is Hinduism book is amazing, can't put it down. A lot of things make more sense now. I am very interested in Siva and related practices. Most temples (nowadays) have places for all the major Gods, correct?

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: Temples actually vary a lot. I'm really generalizing but the are are two basic styles, South Indian, and North Indian. Both types often have several or most deities, but there are also sectarian ones like ISKCON (Vaishnavite) or the Murugan (Saivite) temple near DC. In the North style, the murthies are usually white marble, whereas in the south they're black granite. North is somewhat more congregational, and South is somewhat more individual in worship. If you can, over time, I'd definitely recommend going to more than one. I really like going to temples and have been to nearly 50 in North America alone. (Not the one you linked to)

Glad to hear your comments about 'What is Hinduism?' The editors are Saivites, but the book is for all of Hinduism, as is Hinduism Today the magazine. So if you want to explore Siva worship more, that's a resource too.

Aum Namasivaya

[Believer]

Namaste,

I echo EM's thoughts on visiting as many temples as physically possible to experience the diversity and to figure out which deities are right for you by getting a feel with being in their presence in various temples. You might also look at the following link for random thoughts on some aspects of Applied Hinduism,

http://www.angelfire.com/ca/Hinduism/

Pranam.

[markandeya 108 dasa]

Namaste Liang,

However, it seems the temple contains a special experience that is fundamentaly central to understanding Hinduism. As a Zen practitioner, I focus and value direct experience over ideas/beliefs/authority. We say that the teachings are like a finger pointing at the moon, where the moon is the truth, not the finger.

The moon would be the Deity and the finger would be Mind which includes our sensory experience, like as Bruce Lee says dont look at the finger or you will miss all the heavenly glory, so we have to see the Deity ultimately with no Mind. Mind as usually defined in Hinduism or Vedanta would be the construct of Buddhi~ Discernment, Manas~ thought patterns, Ahamakara~ Ego or sense of I as a separate entity, and Chitta~ Memory or storehouse. Those are the basic descriptions of the 4 attributes which make up Mind.

People see the Deities and Forms of Hinduism differently according to the tradition or school they follow, or based on personal realizations, so there will always be varying accounts of what Deities are about and all the forms that we see in the various traditions and practices. There is a deep under current unity that is revealed in more mature stages but the variations of practice and form are very diverse. Not all Hindu's will even use Deities for the cultivation of realization, Samadhi and Dharshan~ direct vision.

I find it quite interesting when Buddhist takes interest in Hinduism, I know some of what Cha'an is , and if I repeat something that you already know please forgive me, I will just try to fit something in context to help you manage to see parts of Hinduism as non different from the Zen experience. As you may know the word Cha'an comes from the Pali Jhana and Sanskrit Dhyana, meaning meditation, but not the type of meditation where it is practice but rather experience, a mental absorption, a spiritual form of concentration, or in the most simplest description an experience. Maybe I am interested to see how you understand Hinduism from your Zen perspective, myself I think its easily converged.

I am not sure how much you looked into the History of Chinese Buddhism and how most of the teachings came from Nalanda, which was very strong in Tantra and Divine visualizations of Divinities, the Vajra School of Buddhism has this and also Chinese Buddhism has mystic Tantric schools too, so its not foreign in anyway.

There is a lot of depth within Hinduism and the Culture of India and Deities have almost the main central role, mostly they are seen non different from Absolute.

If Zen is anything, (the state of Zen I mean) its to see things in wonder, without interpretation, seeing that which is there without our views and Mind getting involved. Tradition is good, it protects and maintains religion in a society, Tradition is never separate from the meditation side of Hinduism, there is however something deeper than tradition or hidden in tradition, and as a mediator and being more of renounced mind that needs to be taken into account or you may miss what they actually are and represent to get the experience "Dharshan" that the book you are reading suggests is there in the temple.

[Liang Ch'an]

Markandeya,

Thank for that response and yes you do a good job at getting at heart of ch'an/zen. Like Hinduism, Buddhism has may schools and within each school each teacher has their own emphasis. Add onto that cultural influences of the particular country.


For me, zen is method of direct (no mind) inquiry/experience and meditation is central to this. I love that ch'an just means meditation. My master frequently said there are no "Buddhists" and not to identify with labels or belief systems. So I try to encounter Hinduism and look forward a temple visit in that spirit. I am devoted to truth as I directly experience it. I cannot allow previous prejudices or expectations color my experience. I have trouble describing even the process of "direct experience" and even more describing the Reality beyond description I encounter through my meditative practice. Buddhism is a just a worn path taken by others before me to such a place and as you said tradition maintains and protects, not just the society, but the individual seeker as well. I suspect there are those within Hinduism, perhaps some of the non-dualists, that have a very similar approach.


Yes, there are many other crossovers as well. Tantra is Hindu in origin and is a key part of Tibetian Buddhism in particular. I've never really understood or practiced tantra (except for metta meditation which is a Tibetan practice). Though I deeply respect it. Yoga in the same way is starting to crossover into Buddhism as well and is being used by more practitioners as modern example of how traditions exchanged practices.


But why study Hinduism as a Buddhist? Recently my teacher/master passed away unexpectedly. He was part of a ch'an lineage which is a dying school of Buddhism. In ch'an there are only a few active temples thanks to the Chinese government and the innovations of newer forms of Zen (from Korea and Japan) or Pure Land that are more popular. So my teacher had few other students at the time. I feel that is important to me honor his legacy and lineage and continue them in my own practice. Though I feel very ill equipped to do so. I've studied some of the Pali cannon, some mahyana texts and as well as zen and pure land stuff. But I wanted to start at the beginning and progress my study from there. I keep finding a lot of references to Hindu concepts and practices in the Pali (early Buddhist) writings.


But what I've found already in just reading a few chapters on Hinduism is that it has been extremely helpful in providing new perspectives or at the very least a good contrast to Buddhist teachings. Several things now make more sense in the right context. But I've also found an appreciation for the "mysticism" in Hinduism. It's frankly beautiful. Obviously I have just started in my study, but I regret not searching here earlier. I think that's because Hinduism has not been accurately portrayed to me in the past. In typical western depositions such as in public school or in a quick encyclopedia search it is comes off as very polytheistic and primitive. As a philosophy student in college, the focus was on extreme rituals or outlandish portions of texts with sweeping generalizations. (My religion 101 and eastern philosophy classes are painful to recollect as a practitioner of eastern religion!!) Even Buddhists tend to portray Hinduism as an obsolete system of aesthetics and ritualists. So it's not at all what I thought it was.

[Believer]

Namaste,

Even Buddhists tend to portray Hinduism as an obsolete system of aesthetics and ritualists.

In order to prove the validity of Buddhism, Buddhists have to define Hinduism as an obsolete system that they have moved away from. Both Buddhism and Sikhism were started by men who were born in Hindu families and were raised as Hindus. But, in today's climate, for these religions to survive, their followers have to cultivate a strong identity separate from the mother religion. It is unfortunate, but spiritual progress comes second to labeling. The brand has to be protected at all costs. It is almost like being afraid of losing royalties if the brand dissolves into something else. The high priests of the daughter religions would lose their following, their livelihood and their power if they acquiesced that their spiritual/moral code is pretty much the same as the Hindu code. There are lot of self-serving undercurrents dragging Hinduism down.

Pranam.