Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Evolution of the term Hindu

  1. #1
    Join Date
    November 2008
    Location
    mumbai
    Posts
    56
    Rep Power
    0

    Evolution of the term Hindu

    Hi

    Its commonly thought that 'hindu' is the one who believes in Vedas, even though
    the legal definition of the term 'hindu' in India is different. Initially, a hindu
    was the one who lived in east of sindhu river. So what were the reasons for the
    evolution of the term 'hindu' as the one who believes in Vedas only. Was there
    a subconscious reason for giving Veda central place, to be acceptable to the
    christians, muslims so that hindus can argue they are also 'people of the book' ?

    Just curious...... I have also come across some literature by RSS saying the term hindu is found in sanskrit literature. Is it a credible ? Or was it due to
    Persian influence ?

    thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,670
    Rep Power
    1652

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu#Etymology

    "Hindu" is the Persian word for "Sindhu". There was a regular sound shift between what became Persian and Sanskrit when Proto-Indo-Aryan split into its daughter languages. Sanskrit /s/ became Persian /h/. Much like the sound shift in Greek and Latin from /h/ to /s/. Greek hypo-, hyper-, hex-, hept- --> Latin sub-, supe-r, sex-, sept-.

    I apologize if I didn't fully answer your question, as I cannot speak on the Vedas. I think the first few lines of the article will explain better.
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  3. #3
    Join Date
    August 2006
    Age
    67
    Posts
    3,162
    Rep Power
    1905

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    namaste.

    It's explained in this post:
    The name Hindu for the people and the country--not a Hindu name?
    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...25&postcount=1
    रत्नाकरधौतपदां हिमालयकिरीटिनीम् ।
    ब्रह्मराजर्षिररत्नाढ्यां वन्दे भारतमातरम् ॥

    To her whose feet are washed by the ocean, who wears the Himalayas as her crown, and is adorned with the gems of rishis and kings, to Mother India, do I bow down in respect.

    --viShNu purANam

  4. Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    It is about Adharmik or anti-Hindu writers who says that Hindu is a corrupt word of Sindhu by the Islamic world.

    Let say muhammad made Ihlam and his followers were Muhalman, but the H was transformed to S
    [CENTER][B][FONT=Arial Black][SIZE=7][COLOR=Yellow] ॐ[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/B]
    [/CENTER]

  5. #5
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,670
    Rep Power
    1652

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    Quote Originally Posted by PARAM View Post
    It is about Adharmik or anti-Hindu writers who says that Hindu is a corrupt word of Sindhu by the Islamic world.
    Namaste PARAM.

    I'm sorry, but the foregoing is not true. See my post about the Persian/Sanskrit sound changes. Moreover, Arabic is in no way related to Persian or Sanskrit. Arabic is a Semitic language of the Afroasiatic family. So there is no connection in Arabic to the Persian/Sanskrit sound change. Arabic, after spreading throughout southwest Asia including Persia, now Iran, adopted the Persian word, becoming al-Hind.

    The Persian/Sanskrit sound change pre-dates Islam by at least 1500 years. Classical Sanskrit and Old Persian diverged from Proto-Indo-Iranian around 500 BC. Classical Arabic did not develop until about 200 BC; modern Arabic about 400 AD, Islam arose in the 600s AD. So the Islamic world could not have corrupted something that already existed.
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  6. #6
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,670
    Rep Power
    1652

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    Quote Originally Posted by saidevo View Post
    namaste.

    It's explained in this post:
    The name Hindu for the people and the country--not a Hindu name?
    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...25&postcount=1
    Actually there is proof, scroll down to the bottom for the S/H sound change:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-I..._sound_changes

    Proto-Indo-Iranian Old Iranian Sanskrit
    *s>ss ~ h
    *septm̥ "seven"saptá "seven"hapta "seven"
    1. ^ "Indo-Iranian Languages." Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Ed. J.P. Mallory and D.Q. Adams. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1997. pp. 305.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-In...vilization_era

    Pre-Islamic Persia and Vedic civilization era
    The languages of the northern, western, central, and eastern regions of India belonging to the Indo-Aryan family have originated from the same source as the Iranian languages, namely the Indo-Iranian language family, that itself is a member of the Satem group of Indo-European languages. The Indo-Iranians were a semi-nomadic people originating from the Central Asian steppes, via the Oxus river valley, at c. 2000 BCE.[7]
    Vedic Indian people referred to themselves as Aryas. The word Arya in classical Sanskrit means "noble".[8] Ancient central and northern India was also referred to as Aryavarta, meaning "abode of the Arya". Iranian peoples, such as Darius in his Behistun inscription, referred to themselves as Aryans as well (Ariya), from which the word "Iran" originates (such as Avestan airyanam vaejo meaning "expanse of the Aryans").
    Vedic civilization began in India around 1500 BCE, with the Rigveda being the oldest of the Vedas. The Rigveda was composed in Vedic Sanskrit, which is very similar to Avestan, the ancient language of the Iranian Zoroastrian sacred text Avesta. According to the Vendidad (ch.1), the Ariya lived in sixteen countries, one of them being Hapta Hindu, which is the Avestan form of the Sanskrit Sapta Sindhu (Rigveda), meaning "seven rivers" and referring to the northwestern region of the Indian subcontinent. Ancient Vedic religion and Zoroastrianism also have much else in common.
    The Vedas and the Avesta include the performance of sacrifice (Sanskrit yajna or Avestan yasna) and the importance of priests. Many myths that appear in the Yasht part of the Avesta have their roots in ancient Indo-Iranian culture.[6]

    I'm not trying to argue, but simply point out that cultural and political bias often overrides linguistics and archaeology. There's a saying that "a language has a navy, a dialect doesn't".
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  7. #7
    Join Date
    September 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,191
    Rep Power
    5024

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    I'm not trying to argue, but simply point out that cultural and political bias often overrides linguistics and archaeology.
    Vannakkam: And herein lies the problem with world history. The Abrahamics simply cannot handle that the origin of mankind may have been somewhere else besides around Jerusalem. So they start with this basic assumption that holds no bearing whatsoever, and everything follows from there. Being a stuck in-intellectual-debate group of souls, they feed on it, and are the sources of most so called 'history'.

    The Indus Valley is one of the oldest to date. As archeology continues, older tools and other advanced civilisations may well be discovered, and the debates will ego ethnocentric debates will continue.

    Personally, I've dropped it into File 13 in my mind, and only occasionally retrieve little bits of it, like now. The fact of the matter is that most of us here are known to ourselves and to others as Hindus.

    If I had to call out the owner of every 'restaurant' every time I walked into it for stealing the word from French, I would be considered mighty petty indeed.

    Over time, the name may change again. Besides Absolute Reality, that is the only constant: Change. God is beyond names.

    Aum Namasivaya

  8. #8
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,670
    Rep Power
    1652

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    Quote Originally Posted by Eastern Mind View Post
    Vannakkam: And herein lies the problem with world history. The Abrahamics simply cannot handle that the origin of mankind may have been somewhere else besides around Jerusalem.
    You know they say history is written by the victors.

    One of the things that dismayed me about being a "Christian" is the egocentrism. I use quotes because many of them are anything but. As Mahatma Gandhi pointed out "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians".

    I don't like the idea of the evangelization and forced conversions and massacres of indigenous peoples, and the notion that I'm going to go to Hell because I made God angry with me. I don't mean to turn this into a "Throw 'em to the lions!" (I did once say "so many Christians and so few lions"... it was not well-received).

    I have posited on a religion and politics forum (there's a recipe for disaster) that the Abrahamic beliefs are a continuation, if not a plagiarism, of earlier Mesopotamian beliefs. I've argued similarities between the teachings of Jesus, Sri Krishna and Buddha. To no avail.

    The Indus Valley is one of the oldest to date. ...

    The fact of the matter is that most of us here are known to ourselves and to others as Hindus. ...

    Over time, the name may change again. Besides Absolute Reality, that is the only constant: Change. God is beyond names.

    Aum Namasivaya
    And those are all truths! I think I was always Hindu; I have always felt I'm somehow connected to India. I'm fascinated by the IVC. I was fascinated by it the first time I saw a reference to Mohenjo Daro in a magazine decades ago. I would love to go back in time to see it. And I want to know what language they spoke!
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  9. #9
    Join Date
    September 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,191
    Rep Power
    5024

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    I have posited on a religion and politics forum (there's a recipe for disaster) that the Abrahamic beliefs are a continuation, if not a plagiarism, of earlier Mesopotamian beliefs. I've argued similarities between the teachings of Jesus, Sri Krishna and Buddha. To no avail.
    Vannakkam: That comparison is to no avail to me either. I don't believe Christ existed. (I was raised agnostic leaning to Atheism) Pretty hard to for me compare to something I don't believe existed. Kind of like comparing India to the Klingon Empire.

    Why bother to make comparisons when everything you would ever need at all is found within SD?

    For many Hindus, Christ and the religion by that name are totally irrelevant, other than when they have forced interaction with us.

    Aum Namasivaya

  10. #10
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,670
    Rep Power
    1652

    Re: Evolution of the term Hindu

    When I say "I've argued similarities between the teachings of Jesus, Sri Krishna and Buddha" what I mean is that what Christians think is original, is not. It was Christians I argued the point with. They don't realize that what they believe all comes from SD, which is far older by several milennia than Christianity.

    I have long thought that what's attributed to Jesus and what became Christianity came from SD writings and philosophy. I don't know if Jesus existed or not, but there's a lot that sounds like Sri Krishna's words. Especially considering that the Bhagavad Gita pre-dates the gospels by at least a couple of centuries. So Sanatana Dharma is what the name says, eternal truth, whether people realize it or not. I've thought this for a long time.

    I can respect others' beliefs, I wish they'd respect and give credit to mine (or at least try to understand it).
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 44
    Last Post: 06 April 2014, 07:07 AM
  2. khalsa rejects
    By GURSIKH in forum Sikhism
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 26 March 2012, 03:28 PM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 18 March 2012, 10:38 PM
  4. Was TAJ MAHAL a temple called TEJO MAHALAYA?
    By brahman in forum Hot Topics
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 26 March 2011, 10:32 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •