Understanding Sanatana Dharma

#1 urstruely

heh heh.. you think you are imaginative. you gotta read the hindu puranas (at least some) and the ``imaginative`` stuff that you write will look like PG13 childrens stories. for real ``adult`` material, just read the puranas (or mahabharat for material softer for your sensibilities).

Nazar

The Bhakti movement was I believ an indirect response to fall of major hindu dynasties (e.g. the Yadavs of Deccan) to Turky hordes. Out of this fall, the state sponsorships to brahmanic religion declined. Paradoxically, the spiritual ``needs`` increased with the misery brought by large change of power structures. Loss of state sponsorship weakend the brahmins, and loosened sanskrit based religious interpretation. The increased market demand however got all kinds of ``vernacular`` interpretors going, who mostly based the ``bhakti`` movement on vendantic (upnishad) philosophy (depricating the sanskrit based vedic rituals). So, you see, indians can ``blame`` spiritual revival on medieval invaders.

Note that these invaders were always refered by then locals as ``turki`` or ``habsi`` or ``khan`` etc and not as ``muslim``.

There are many compositions of bhakti tradition folks in whose composition mention of pain due to invadors and criticism of brahminic (vedic) rituals is found. And then these guys even had some kind of a bhakti brotherhood among themselves. There are several mentions of gatherings and we see visits and writings of Namdev from Deccan to Punjab and sikh holy books.

Excelent Article.

I guess you have provided a crash course in Hinduism to not only non-Hindus but for Hindus too. I am not saying this in dis-respect but as a fact. I have few hindu friends and I have spceifically asked all of them that whether thay have read their holy scriptures and the answer is mostly a no. In fact some of my Hindu friends say that they have not even seen a translation of holy Hindu scriptures. One friend jumped in surprise when I showed a copy of Bhavad Geeta english translation from Satyanarayan Prakash. The biggest argumet they present is that it is written in Sanskrit which very few can understand and I have no time to read the translations my self.

Asfand Siddiqui

Interesting article the Hindu jargon is difficult to follow. Hint: use more details in english and do not over siplify key concepts and ideas

To those who criticize Urstruly, I say you do not understand the depth of the man. :)

This is an excellent article... Pakistan has a pre-Islamic heritage that needs to preserved as it is the greater leveller for the Mullah brigade.

Great going Nazar Sahab...

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

nazar,

``Political Hinduism is a phenomenon only a few decades old in a history of 4000 years and is confined to only India``

Ahem, and USA/Canada.

---

``A good article. Hinduism is a very scientific religion.``

LOL. It`s lame when anyone makes this claim. I would suggest you use the word `cosmic` or something...I see no science in what was written above.

Rsridhar, Jang …

Ignore the folk-tales of the elephant god and his helmet … we Muslims cannot be outdone due to our own absurdities … this one involving a prophet … who was lifted to the clouds two-thousand years ago … where he continues to reside… licking caviar from the thighs of smooth-skinned maidens …

So, when will this prophet come down to earth? Considering his feast of caviar … probably never … but the ullema speculate that he may descend any day now … how? one may ask … On the shoulders of two angels … on the east side of a minaret … on the dome of a mosque in Damascus … (no $hit)

Once this prophet hits the ground … his deputy … a chap known as the Mahdi … is supposed to magically appear. Together, they will fight a one-eyed monster … called dajjal … whose head will be above clouds … and he will be riding a … get this … a giant, fire-breathing donkey (don’t ask for details … it’s already bad enough …). Once the battle is over … the divine duo will go around killing the Jews … returning the holy land to Palestinians … Kashmir and parts of UP to Pakistan … and the Americas to the red Indians … except that red Indians are now only interested in running state-subsidized casinos in central california ...

The populace of the world will then be asked to choose between accepting Islam … or getting the sword. This will lead Islam to final victory … which will result in Fox and CNN getting shut down, Alan Greenspan being fired, and Britney spears becoming a hijabe woman. Mumbai will be renamed “fatah-e-Islam”, and the unix prompt will be replaced with takbeer. The prophet is expected to get married, have kids, and start itemizing deductions on his 1040 as he finally buys a house in the real-estate bubble market.

Truth cannot be monopolized … and same seems to be the case with sheer stupidity … back to you, Urstruly …

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

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

#6 by Maharana

re: Monotheistic or Polytheistic

Somehow I feel that strong emphasis on monotheism of Hinduism over polytheism is influenced by the 1000 years of imperial and colonial rule, preaching and presenting monotheism as unified, advanced and superior form of ultimate reality almost like unified field theory. This Judeo-Christian-Islamic concept of unified or singular absolute truth is by no mean supeior than polytheistic nature of reality. In fact, this unified simplification was the response of backward tribal cultures living on the fringes of great civilizations to cope with the evolutioin of complex and diverse spiritual thoughts. In history, monotheism of one kind or another predates later polytheism which goes better with the complexity of social evolution in developed civilizations.

Poltheism makes ultimate reality or god easily approachable, brings it down closer to humans and more importantly dilutes it to a level where obeying or pleasing it is no longer the ultimate goal of spirituality. Thus Karma is more important in Hindusim than dharma. It would be akin to asking Abrahamic religions to consider dogma (deen for Muslims) above the belief in one god, and few other things such as prophethood, day of judgment etc. It is not possible for Abrahmic religions because all powerful monotheistic god sits much above and pleasing him by obeying him is the ultimate spiritual act or even purpose of living.

Through polytheism or infintes manifestations of god, pleasing a diety is not the same as pleasing god although in recent times we have witnessed the same fervor for Ram by Hindutva followers. Once approachable easily at human level, god is seen and met in his manifestations by ordinary Hindus every day in life when they touch feets of elders or fold hands in front of guests as welcoming gesture - namaste. That is why in Hindus a highly respected person due to her/ his acts is referred to as `` bhagwan ka roop`` whereas in Muslims, Christians and Jews, the ultimate such honor does not even reach ``prophet ka roop`` level and limits to ``farishta sift`` (angel like).

So the whole debate of monotheistic or polytheistic is a minor thing from Hinduism point of view but Abrahamic religions see it as a major point differentiating them from others. That is why, Karma is more important in Hinduism over fundamental blind faith in few simplified spiritual, metaphysical or supernatural matters. The conceptual thoughts of ultimate reality and god is left to priests to argue among themselves. For Hindus, it is not even half as important to justify their faith as monotheistic or polytheistic as it is for Muslims who could lay waste to polytheists, only if they have the same powers they once had in the region.

This is an admirable attempt to produce a crash course of `hinduism for dummies`, and the `dummies` inlude most of the hindus as well. Most of the hindus wont be able to name the four vedas or to tell the difference between vedas and vedanta. Nor are they required to. Most of them have heard of Ramayana and Mahabharat and the deity they worship which, in case of older panjabi hindus, is as likely to be the granth sahib than ganesh.

Some comments:
``We will skip the debate whether it happened due to the Aryans from the North or whether the Aryans ever existed at all...``
- ...there is no debate about their existence, only whether they are indigenous or came from outside. The Hindu scriptures do refer to aryas, and the word is used to connote a noble person or a gentleman of honour.

- Buddha and Mahavir (Jain) preached at a time when people didn`t call themselves hindus; in fact I don`t think that there was any concept of religion in the sense that it is generally understood in the west. As has been frequently pointed out, there is no equivalent of religion/mazhab in indic languages; dharma merely connoting one`s moral obligations; thus one could have different dharmas of father, children, teacher, student, etc. In India, the term `coalition dharma` also gained currency during the NDA rule.

- I agree with you that the court should have stayed away from defining `hindu faith`. It is perhaps the beauty of the religion that it defies easy definitions.

Keep up the good work!

Nazar,

A good introductory article. However I don`t understand how you got to this Brahmanism. Can you let me know what ur reference is?

- Avkrishna

Interesting...still prefer the Helenic stuff. Or `Thor` comics for that matter...I suggest the author also whip up a write-up on either/both...

Speaking of helenic stuff, one can`t help but notice that although there are similarities (namely the presence of a rich mythology), that Hindiusm`s self-conception seems more similar to less-developed totemestic and shaminestic faiths (aboriginals in North America/Australia) than the Greecko Roman ones...

I wonder if at one point those `faiths` also developed a comprehensive cosmology/philosophy....

Abrahamic religions ( Jewish/Christian/Islam ) :
submit to/please some imagined abstract entity in some imagined abstract alien world.

Eastern religions : Pray to the mother nature. Nature is god.

vertex:
``Speaking of helenic stuff, one can`t help but notice that although there are similarities (namely the presence of a rich mythology), that Hindiusm`s self-conception seems more similar to less-developed totemestic and shaminestic faiths (aboriginals in North America/Australia) than the Greecko Roman ones... ``

...anything is better than what one has rejected!