Understanding Sanatana Dharma

Nazar

A great article. One small point I`d like to make.

`Ekam sat, viprah bahudha vadanti`

actually means - ``Truth is one: Sages talk of it in many ways``

which is slightly different from ``Sages know it as many``. It basically talks of people having different conceptual frameworks to ``explain`` the Truth (Brahman). I think anyone who could be defined as a ``Sage` should be able to `see` the unity of ``Truth``.

IMHO

Satish

Nazar saab,

How very convenient!! Write a piece after `researching` the material in a free, open-source Encyclopaedia, add the pleasantries, ‘great religion’, ‘amazing concepts’ ET all. And then, back to the old lore. Bemoan the rise of Hindutva - political movement; say forcefully that it has nothing to do with the grand and noble traditions of the `Sanathan Dharma`.

Propagating, preaching and forcefully converting people to political religions like Islam, Christianity and Judaism are fair enough. If the `pagans`, gentiles, polytheists and infidels rise against this, “thou shalt resort to moral preaching” and remind them that their religion teaches them to accept and not reject the arrogance of monotheism as propounded by illiterate ass-riding Arabs and demented Hebrew slaves. Tell them to get back from the roads and practical positions to their lofty moral pedestal, so that they can be converted at ease, like it was done all over the world.

Hindutva supporters can`t forget that the Buddhist civilization of Gandhara has been destroyed, and their inheritors Afghans have become so stupid that they believe Buddha statues were made by Jinns. Destroy Hindutva, and the road to destroying the last bastion of pagan faiths is clear.

Sorry sir,

The real intentions are clear!! And benign Hindu died when that fanatic ‘Alamgir’ destroyed the Shiva temple at Kashi. I read somewhere that he is described as ``tarkashi maa raa khudangi akhareen`` (the last arrow in the quiver of Muslim power in India) by Iqbal, a poet venerated in “the land of the pure”.

Rahulmal # 49

I had said that any faith-based political ideology is eventually disruptive. If ``Hindutva`` is not faith-based, I have no problem with it being a political philosophy.

Though word ``Hindu`` was originally never linked with any faith - and ``Hinduism`` is an artificial term given by the British, - The Supreme Court ruling of 1966 has legally linked it all up.

As Vaajpye said, Indianness is a much better and a safer term to use for nationalism than ``Hindutva`` (meaning Hinduness).

Urstruly#44:
Have you heard of `chiraagh tale andhera!`? When the qur`an tells you to go to the end of the world (china) to gain knowledge, it does not mean that you should ignore the knowledge found in your own house. And as far as I can see, your knowledge of your own house is limited to reading the likes of your ex PM, Ch. Mohammad Ali, whose profound statement about ancient India was that it produced nothing worth mentioning. May I suggest that if you do not have time to read, pay a visit to the museum in Taxila, Lahore or even New York to find out about your real roots - the ones from which you are inseparable no matter how loudly you claim to reject them.

chowk staff:
re #47: I think that this belongs in the ``unplugged``.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Sridhar,

Jainism and Buddhism - do not have founders !

Mahavira in the Jain tradition is the 24th tirthankara , Gautama is only considered
one who became ``Buddha``. There have been and there exists many worlds and
world has been going for a long time, so no-one in any of the Indic traditions claim
to be a ``Founder``.

When one ``founds`` something, that implies a time and space horizon, which would mean
its limitation and non-universality. Also, there is no ``holybook`` for the Buddhists or the
Jains. Certain ignoramuses claim the ``Dhammapada`` as the holy-book of the Buddhist,
similiar claims are made that the Gita is the holy book of Hindus etc. All this is completely
wrong.

There is no one ``holybook`` - but the Dharmic panths have a whole library of books and
in addition, a Guru-shishya parampara for the various schools of thought and a host of
scholars. Over a period of times, new scholarly works are added on.

dost mittar: You are mistaken about unplugged. We actually have some real humor there. And the average IQ level is higher than many single-topic folks on the front page. You should come by unplugged sometime.

re: Sanatana Dharma: a unique way of life?
I won`t call this a religion but a unique way of life.
All monotheistic religions talk about one God. So, where does that God live? Is He in some particular galaxy or constellation? Or is he everywhere?
The moment we say He is in a particular place, we go against the very definition of God: one who is beyond time and space.
Hindus believe He is both immanent and transcendent. He is everywhere: between the atoms and also in the empty space between the galaxies. Hence, Hindus find God in nature, even in animal forms. Tagore said `` when you see beauty, know that it is God``. This is the one surviving major religion that worships God in nature and also God in its female aspect. One may like to ask the christians why their God is always a male. Why is it the Holy father and not the Holy mother?
Sages in India accepted even the tribal religions into their fold and made this into a polytheistic religion in practice but it really is monotheistic in its belief system as everyone knows that there is one Brahman and everything else is a manifestation of that.
IF sages had fought these tribal traditions, they may or may not have prevailed in making this a monotheistic religion. In such a case, there would be one holy book: the vedas, and one God,the Brahman. Such a religion would be very poor indeed! Sages put into practice what they had come to experience by their own austerities: that everything is borne out of God and hence, even the tribal belief system (idol worship, ritualistic practices) has a place.

Today, we find the major monotheistic religions of the world (judaism, Islam, Christianity) fighting each other. Do u find any friction between the eastern mystical religions (Hinduism, zen, buddhism, Taoism)? There is a kind of spiritual freemarket in these belief systems and it is upto an individual to advance spiritually. These are not community religions. Hence, they are in no way competing with each other, the way the 3 major monotheistic religions are.
Sridhar

Ref Urstruly #44

The idea of keeping the fire going occurs in Zorastrianism as well. The Parsis worship fire and the sacred fire in their temples is not allowed to go out.

A highly orthodox Brahmin household -- I don`t believe even a single one exists in today`s India -- would have the sacred fire going at all times. Not a roaring fire but fire tamped down so that the rice husks will be glowing like embers and the fire can be re-started by blowing on it and adding kindling.

At least, the keepers of the fire used their free time productively by making scientific observations. After all, they were among the first people on earth to determine the circumference of the earth and the distance between the earth and the moon; they understood that the Sun was the center of the known planetary system and not Earth; they knew of the existence of at least 7 planets; could predict the seasons and the solar and lunar eclipses; figured out both the lunar and the solar calendar and knew that the year was 365 days long; they knew the major stars and constellations. They wrote epic tales such as the Ramayana and the Mahabharatha, plays such as Mrichakatika and Malavika-Agnimitra. They realized it is better to live and let live rather than kill and held non-violence to be the highest ideal man could aspire to. One of them held his feet firmly planted on earth and wrote the first book on governance and statecraft called ``Arthasastra``.

Now compare that to the worthless wastes of life like Soysauce whose ancestors, while performing the useful occupation of tending cattle, used their considerable spare time not in scientific speculation or writing poetry but engaging in circle jerks.

You would have to admit that the fire-keepers turned out to be more valuable after all.

re: Hindu religion
This site is rich with info:
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduwaymain1.htm
Sridhar

Ref kaurasach #25

[We had a ``Shastri`` teacher who taught Sanskrit. It took him 30 years of learning to attain the status.

One day he substituted our regular teacher and to entertain us, went over the word forming of the language. He wrote several words and then removed a letter or added a letter to change the meanings and their relationships to each other.

It was like scientific discipline. I was impressed and still am vowed by the experience.

Persons who penned these Veds, Shastars, Granths in Sanskrit were amazaing genius.]

Sanskrit grammar is highly ``formal`` in the way mathematicians use the term.

When John Backus of IBM introduced the BNF (Backus Normal Form) notation to describe the algorithmic lanuage Algol, it was suggested that since the BNF definition was very close to the Sanskrit grammar of Panini that BNF should instead be called Backus-Panini Form.

I remember reading a book on Sanskrit grammar written in 1905 by an Englishman who was professor of Sanskrit at Srinagar College. While admitting that Sanskrit grammar is more regular and consistent than the grammar of any other language, he condemned the use of the null (non-existent) term as an artificial device to preserve such regularity. Some 55 years after his book (and 3000 years after Panini), BNF repeatedly uses the null term in the definition of algoritnmic languages for computers.

As to those who created Sanskrit and its grammar, they knew exactly what they were doing.

That is why they named the language ``Sanskrit``, meaning ``refined``. Since no further improvement was possible or needed in the grammar, they also declared it to be the language of the gods!

re:#44 by Urstruly
No sane person would read this guy`s post. He has been told to keep his rear end closed to the outside world but he does not seem to listen. Would i be curious about his views on Hinduism? Heck, no! I think the guy is a hateful moron.
My advice to him: keep your scars on your body (acquired during training with Al-Qaida) well covered. If he is still living in USA, i am told that they are now looking for such scars.
This is from the CBS News:
http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=338546

(CBS News Correspondent Bob Orr reports the Department of Homeland Security has issued an alert that warns customs officers at six of America`s busiest airports to watch for travelers of Pakistani descent who show physical signs of preparing for terror attacks against the U.S.

The bulletin says, ``Officers should look for rope burns, unusual bruises, wounds/scars or other evidence that they engaged in paramilitary training...``)
My advice to Mullah Urstruly:
cover your burn/bruise marks, scars etc. Stop worrying about hinduism. Uncle Sam is watching you. If your rear end continues to stink, it will be another trip to Gunatanama Bay, this time for a much longer time.
Sridhar

Nazar saab,

I recount my experience with a very close friend who is a Muslim. The topic drifted to religion and what it means. He parroted the ``way of life``. God knows this is the vaguest term for describing something with such a profound effect. But, this is in vogue these days, probably because Mr. Gandhi used it first.

Anyway, the discussion continued and we came to political aspects of Islam. And I started asking questions that are too close for comfort. Finally, he gave up and said, ``Islam is not all about piety, there is a political angle to it``.

And Sir,

This is what I`m saying. All these Semitic religions have a political angle to it. Yes, there could be spirituality; people will quote Sufism and what not. But the core of these religions is community building and nurturing a sense of belonging to that community. So, Hinduism of Smritis and all those fancy sounding scriptures can`t ever compete with something like Islam or Christianity. It would require Hindutva or political Hinduism - a set of people who speak on the behalf of Hindus, who dare to say that India is the only country that gives Haj subsidies while taxing Hindus for their pilgrimages. India needs people who dare to stand up against the communists who are hell-bent on dividing the land in `manageable` small portions, who fight at the social, political and religious levels to counter the multi-billion dollar conversion industry, to raise their voice against married Hindu women who have kids being abducted, converted to Islam and married off to goons (heard about Kanchan Mishra).

Islam doesn`t need this; it has in-built political structures. And all those who are opposed to Hindutva are opposed to all the fancy things you researched in your article. Off-course, the subject is broached in a subtle way with pictures of Ansari boy holding his hands begging for his life in Gujarat flashed across the globe.

Use your resources, search the net, read books and let me know if you don`t feel that Hindutva slipping to Moditva is because of obduracy of anti-Hindu forces? As the voices against political Hinduism get shriller, the power of Modi and other hardcore elements will increase. High time , justice is done in India and not appeasement.

i wonder what would be written if one of the indian interactors on chowk wrote an article on islam ..... perhaps gujju bania or nikki or ralph or sadna or nb can write such an article ! hahaha --

Mr Khan, I really am impressed! I`ve known a lot of Muslims who know about Hinduism, but Pakistanis on chowk seem to be completely clueless about it. I don`t care if you just got it from a search engine as has been suggested-the important thing is that you were interested and you learned.
I must be a more knowledgable Hindu than most, though, because there wasn`t anything here I didn`t know! And I never thought I was! The mistake about the swastika`s been pointed out already. I would also like to add that Hinduism has always had some aggressive elements-this is not the invention of the Sangh. Krishna is gentle and romantic and loving, but He goaded Arjuna to fight when it was time to do so. India was ripe for the taking by the 10th or 11th century with infighting, and following that Hinduism had to be `soft` to survive. I do not agree with much of what the RSS says, but they have a valid place in Hindu society, even if that place is only to be ignored. Any way of life or religion must accomodate all personalities. To me, the important thing is that it must not interfere with the rights of other peace-loving people.

Good one Mr. Khan,

Despite the upheavals in its history, there have been many genuine contributions too in South Asia. The foremost is the Hindu philosophy followed by its varied music, dance forms, and of course its cuisine. The nice thing about Hinduism is it allows people to practise atheism and still call themselves Hindus. The mythologies - Ramayana and Mahabharatha, if not for anything else make for good stories. Like someone pointed out earlier, shortcomings in Hindu icons appear in these two at many places. To the uninitiated, this makes their comprehension of the subject all the more complex. Krishna advocating Arjuna to `strike in the back` of Karna while his chariott is sunk in the earth, Bheema killing Duryodhana by hitting on his weakest part -- his thigh, Rama aiming at Vali and striking him with his arrow behind his back

---

all of these can make a Hindu a supporter of the underdogs -- the `villains` in these two mythologies :). In other words, Dharma had to be put on the backburner for the short-term to achieve Dharma in the long-run again, and quickly.


Its true that the lack of a central authority, the lack of rigid tenets in Hinduism, are its unique strengths. It would be nice though, for religion to weigh less in the subcontinent, and worldly matters to gain more space.