A few questions

[illykitty]

Can someone be a Hindu without a temple to go to? Also, is a guru someone you talk to face to face or can they be an example you look up to (like if you took Ghandi as your example)? What if there is no one like a guru where you live?

I'm still not sure on my religion, but Hinduism is one I consider to be very alike to my beliefs and thoughts. Problem is, there's nothing around me, only place I know of is Hare Krishna and I'm not even sure if that's open (not to mention some people don't consider them Hindus).

There's also the issue of having social phobia. Most people are already nervous about such things, well I'd probably go into many panic attacks before stepping in a temple...

I'd love to know your honest opinions and advice! Thank you! :bow:

 

[Maya3]

Absolutely on both accounts. At least in the beginning, if you get really deep into a meditation practice you might need someone to talk to about it and might want to find a guru or a teacher that can help you.

But when it comes to temple visits, a lot of Hindus don´t attend temple that much. It is very common to have your own altar at home and pray and meditate there. If you choose too. The altar really is not necessary but it provides a sense of a sacred space.

Good luck and welcome to the Hindu DIR.

Maya

 

[Gaura Priya]

Can someone be a Hindu without a temple to go to? Also, is a guru someone you talk to face to face or can they be an example you look up to (like if you took Ghandi as your example)? What if there is no one like a guru where you live?

I'm still not sure on my religion, but Hinduism is one I consider to be very alike to my beliefs and thoughts. Problem is, there's nothing around me, only place I know of is Hare Krishna and I'm not even sure if that's open (not to mention some people don't consider them Hindus).

There's also the issue of having social phobia. Most people are already nervous about such things, well I'd probably go into many panic attacks before stepping in a temple...

I'd love to know your honest opinions and advice! Thank you! :bow:

Yes, you can be a Hindu without any temple. However, if you're learning about Hinduism, it truly helps to have gone to a temple at least once to familiarise yourself with the rituals, such as aarti, puja, darshan, etc.

Gurus are helpful. One can be a shiksha guru (a teaching guru) with any guru's philosophy that is considerably significant in your life, which you can associate through his (or her) personage, through their books, and pictures. A diksha guru (initiating guru) is needed if you want to further your spiritual life and become strict in the principles. Most people don't do diksha (initiation), but it certainly helps for people who want to dedicate their entire lives to ascetic Hindu principles.

Sometimes you may disagree on the philosophy. Hare Krishnas (Gaudiya Vaishnavism) are Vaishnava Hindus, and sometimes can be fundamentalist, depending on who you talk to. Some devotees will say, "We are not Hindu; we are Vaishnavas" and others will say, "Yes, it is a form of Hinduism." I suggest to go check out their temple at least one Sunday though, even if you disagree with the philosophy. I myself practice the same denomination (Vaishnavas) as Hare Krishnas.

Good luck, and if you get panic attacks or anxiety problems, just take it one step at a time! Having a home altar for worship and meditation with your favourite Deities, and books can be simply good enough.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Can someone be a Hindu without a temple to go to?

Yes. I suspect many of us rarely go to temples. In some traditions, the temples are mapped to the "internal [subtle] body cosmology" with a corresponding "inner pilgrimage" with prominent temples and power-places seen as consisting of the various parts of the [ultimately partless] self.

Also, is a guru someone you talk to face to face or can they be an example you look up to (like if you took Ghandi as your example)?

Strictly speaking, the guru is one whose wealth is the ability to rid us of what does not exist [as defined by Dnyaneshwar, best I've found so far.] "Gu" and "ru" refer to darkness and light, ignorance and illumination; the guru's role is to function as the purest voice of the self in the external world, and bring about realization of the self without separate inner or outer, united in the guru's consciousness which is conveyed directly.

So, to bring this back to your question directly, most "gurus" who talk face to face are not true gurus per se; the greatest guru in the world could be a mute, and the most eloquent spiritual spokesman the most wretched guru. The words are dross, the direct transmission of energy (shaktipat) is what matters.

Hence, the guru is fundamentally within; external gurus arouse the internal energy of enlightenment. This is why - to address the second question - Ekalavya was able to gain absolute mastery of archery by constructing an idol of Dronacharya (who had refused to train him) and treating it as if it were a real guru, Drona himself, receiving the martial transmissions from it. So real was this for Ekalavya, that when Drona discovered this he demanded that Ekalavya cut off a thumb as the due payment for instructions which he received.

What if there is no one like a guru where you live?

Find the right historical or mythological figure and place your guru-adoration with them as with Ekalavya, understanding them to be manifestations of the internal adi-guru.

 

[Andal]

As everyone else has said yes . You don't have to attend temple. In fact I hardly ever go. With that said temple can be a wonderful opportunity to connect with other Hindus. Properly maintained temples also have energy associated with it that are healing. Plus it is nice to have darshan with God.

You. can go to the ISKCON temple without being a member. I'm just a regular hindu and my temple is ISKCON mainly because it's the only one.

You don't need a formal guru either although in the future you may want one.

The most common practice is to have a home altar where you can pray and meditate. This also brings blessings and good energy into the home.

Since you mentioned anxiety you may want to look into EFT.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Sumit]

Can someone be a Hindu without a temple to go to?

I never go to temple even temple is close to my house.

Also, is a guru someone you talk to face to face or can they be an example you look up to (like if you took Ghandhi as your example)? What if there is no one like a guru where you live?

Guru is one that gives you knowledge and shows you a path. Just find the experts of that particular field which you like or want to learn and they are your Guru.

I'm still not sure on my religion, but Hinduism is one I consider to be very alike to my beliefs and thoughts.

We all have common dharma or Religion, It never changes. Differences arise because we are brought up in different societies.

Problem is, there's nothing around me, only place I know of is Hare Krishna and I'm not even sure if that's open

Temples are open for all. However you can perform prayer at home by meditating, chanting mantras or performing small yajnas.

 

[Vinayaka]

For people who get a lot out of temples, its really good to live near one. I'm one of those, but as others have said, its not necessary.

The true Guru-sishya relationaship is personal, yes. The Guru should know you personally, as each soul has personal qualities, and karmas, and its very much an individual matter. But that's later in the whole process. But loosely speaking, any teacher could be called a guru as well.

But since it is a two way relationship, it is an error to say '________ is my guru, when you've never met. Guru has to accept you as a sishya.

 

[Valjean]

You're thinking of Hinduism as you would an Abrahamic religion, Illykitty. It's not about rules and commandments.
You're free to make it up as you go along.

 

[Madhuri]

Problem is, there's nothing around me, only place I know of is Hare Krishna and I'm not even sure if that's open (not to mention some people don't consider them Hindus).

I think everyone has answered well so I will focus on this part above.

The Hare Krishnas do not represent the majority of Hindu beliefs or culture, however they are a Hindu religion by just about any definition of the term. Maybe they are to Hinduism what Mormonism is to Christianity.

I think that if it is the only temple around, it can still be helpful or a good experience whether or not you believe in their exact dogma. You may as well go and see for yourself if you like it or not. You can certainly learn about Vaishnava and Puranic ideas through the Hare Krishnas.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Just want to note that many vaishnavas, even gaudiya vaishnavas, would not consider ISKCON/"hare krishnas" truly representative of their tradition

 

[Madhuri]

Just want to note that many vaishnavas, even gaudiya vaishnavas, would not consider ISKCON/"hare krishnas" truly representative of their tradition

Why not?
They are a branch of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. I've been part of more than one Gaudiya group, ISKCON being the one I was born into, and the main difference I perceived was regarding which guru was worshipped. It was a political and juvenile difference. Everything else was pretty much the same.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Why not?
They are a branch of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. I've been part of more than one Gaudiya group, ISKCON being the one I was born into, and the main difference I perceived was regarding which guru was worshipped. It was a political and juvenile difference. Everything else was pretty much the same.

All I can say is that my experience growing up in a gaudiya vaishnava household was /very/ different from my encounters with ISKCON, and that what I can tell of Prabhupada's life and teachings seem to me a tremendous departure from the lineage.

I can't read ISCKON literature without my insides tensing up in visceral distaste for the attitudes I feel behind the text; whereas 'gaudiya' texts are more nectarine to me as advertised.

I'm speaking from personal perspective only, but other vaishnavas I've talked with have commented similarly on ISKCON's counterfeit status.

I suppose I see ISKCON more as 'scientology,' a racket only incidentally of gaudiya persuasion.

 

[Madhuri]

All I can say is that my experience growing up in a gaudiya vaishnava household was /very/ different from my encounters with ISKCON, and that what I can tell of Prabhupada's life and teachings seem to me a tremendous departure from the lineage.

That's very interesting to me. I've had experience with ISKCON, the Gaudiya Math and followers of Govinda Maharaj. They were all very similar but I think Prabhupada was part of the Gaudiya Math originally or they were somehow closely associated.

Which other Gaudiya Vaishnava sects do you know about? I'd like to do a search about them.

I can't read ISCKON literature without my insides tensing up in visceral distaste for the attitudes I feel behind the text;

I get that feeling too now when reading from Prabhupada. I love his Krishna books but his general doctrine reminds me of born again Christianity. I find him contradictory to the mood of Sri Caitanya.

 

[Yogi1054]

The idea of a 'Guru' is quite hard to get your head around - many people in the west quite like the idea of someone telling them what to think and how to behave - very much like a Priest or Rabbi or Mullah would do. Soemtimes a guru is important to have - I follow a more Tantric path and my teacher plays an important role - in the Bhakti traditions (or some of them) the teacher can take on a very important on role as a guide. Sometimes I think the guru can abuse the role with the student - human nature can fail somtimes in the guru teacher bond - that is why I can understand when people say the Guru is within

 

[Jainarayan]

I haven't been to temple since mid-September, before my shoulder surgery. Honestly I don't see myself attending any time soon. I simply don't derive the spiritual energy from it as I did in the beginning. Maybe the honeymoon is over, but I don't think that's it. I don't think that attending public worship is for everyone. As I've said several times before, I derive more spiritual energy from my own shrine, and the deities' pictures I have all over the house.

Also, fwiw, I consider two people on this site to be the closest I am getting to a guru. For me it's a matter of physically locating one, which is why I haven't yet. But the direction I've gotten from these two persons have drawn out and instigated many thoughts and much soul-searching, I believe, for my betterment and learning. Sometimes it's confusing and may even hurt a bit, but that's part of learning.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Just want to note that many vaishnavas, even gaudiya vaishnavas, would not consider ISKCON/"hare krishnas" truly representative of their tradition

Religion is always changing. Alot of non-ISKCON Gaudiya Vaishnavas are not accepted by other Vaishnavas because of the avatarahood Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Many Vaishnavas do not accept Swaminarayanis as Vaishnavas because of Swaminarayan. Pushtimargis won't even eat prasadam from non-Pushtimargi temples, even if they are Vaishnava.

Have you read anything of Srila Sridhar Maharaj (Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math), Tripurari Swami (Sri Chaitanya Sanga), or Narayan Maharaj (Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti)? After Srila Prabhupada, many Westerners are familiar or have grown up with the teachings of these gurus, and all of these gurus are Gaudiya Vaishnavas, each having their own mathas. All of these gurus trace their lineage through to Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur.

I do not agree with the institution of ISKCON, even though I consider myself a Gaudiya Vaishnava. However, to call it a 'racket' is a little much, I think.

 

[StarryNightshade]

As someone who very recently has decided to seriously consider Hinduism his spiritual home, I would like to chime in.

Like with other religions, I would assume that most practioners don't go to temple that often. In fact, the one I go to serves about 400 people, but throughout the week perhaps only 150 will attend; with Monday Shiva pujas being the most attended. While there are rituals, temples and other organized aspects to Hinduism, I find it to be a more personal, less centralized faith than others. In fact, I've have only regularly been to Friday meditation and a few small pujas throughout the week; including a couple of Shiva pujas and one Krishna. And, honestly, aside from a few special services (like the large monthly Sunday puja and a once a month Ganesh puja), I don't see myself going to many other services. According to the man who conducts the mediation, that's perfectly fine. So yes, you can be a Hindu without regularly going to a temple, but I would check out the one near you just to experience it and get a feel of what it is like.

As for gurus, I don't have one and don't think I ever will. I consider myself Smarta/non-sectarian and don't feel the need for a centralized authority in my faith. I certainly admire many gurus, but I don't have one personally. And I think that's perfectally fine.

 

[Ashoka]

Namaskar,

No, you don't have to go to a temple to be Hindu. There are none near me either, and yet I manage.

Pranams :namaste

 

[Vinayaka]

The idea of a 'Guru' is quite hard to get your head around - many people in the west quite like the idea of someone telling them what to think and how to behave - very much like a Priest or Rabbi or Mullah would do. Soemtimes a guru is important to have - I follow a more Tantric path and my teacher plays an important role - in the Bhakti traditions (or some of them) the teacher can take on a very important on role as a guide. Sometimes I think the guru can abuse the role with the student - human nature can fail somtimes in the guru teacher bond - that is why I can understand when people say the Guru is within

I know this is an old post, but I'm responding anyway. I think westerners coming to Hinduism often carry with them the 'Messiah Complex'. They are looking for a Messiah who will 'take care of them' rather than a teacher who can teach them how to fend for themselves. So in essence, they're looking for a Christ replacement. Unfortunately, some 'Gurus' go right along with this concept, and even devalre it that way about themselves. "I'm here. I'm here" like Foghorn Leghorn. This is essentially getting you nowhere as it takes the responsibility off the individual. Same thing is sometimes extended to God. "I'm in Krishna's hands now." or some other similar idea. Whereas karma dictates you are responsible for your own actions.

 

[Kalidas]

Moral of the story is no you dot have to go but some may wan to. I have a temple near by (25 miles) but I have no car but want to go o meet people. So I may go next month on the bus. I have found (I think) that hindusim is about finding god within not without.