The Label "Hindu"

[SalixIncendium]

I do not choose to call myself an Advaita Vedantist because I have never studied the Vedas...

It is my understanding that Sri Ramakrishna didn't read them either.

 

[Shantanu]

I decided to try it on a few days ago when I felt comfortable based on my inquiries here that Hindus native to the culture wouldn't take exception to my identifying as such.

Over time, the more and researched and meditated on my discoveries and experiences, the more I realized that my worldview aligns almost perfectly with Hinduism, and after discovering the philosophy, specifically Advaita Vedanta. Even years ago, when I walked a neo-Pagan path and participated in another religious forum, there were those Hindus and Theosophists who would tell me that my views were more in line with Hinduism than neo-Paganism. I identified by path as "Nondualism" here on the forum for quite some time, but that's more a philosophy than a religion, and my OCD tendencies were bothered by the 'Religion: Nondualism' label in my profile. "Advaitist Hindu" is, in my opinion, an accurate term to describe my worldview given my understandings and realizations based on my experiences, and might facilitate understanding of my spiritual views by others.

Of course as a Hindu we love you for accepting an aspect of Hinduism for the more you study Hindus the more you will see the great strengths of Hinduism and its philosophies suited to different experiences of humans. God is so kind.

 

[Shantanu]

It is my understanding that Sri Ramakrishna didn't read them either.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I decided to try it on a few days ago when I felt comfortable based on my inquiries here that Hindus native to the culture wouldn't take exception to my identifying as such.

Welcome brother, from another advaitist. Although we may differ on finer points. After all, advaita is not a monolith. There is no reason or right for any Hindu to take exception to your taking up this label. And you don't do it frivolously. Welcome.

It is my understanding that Sri Ramakrishna didn't read them either.

You see, Salix, one can arrive at understanding, realization, enlightenment, bodhi, jnana, in three ways. IMHO, Sankara through Jnana, Ramakishna through Bhakti and Gandhi through Karma. Many roads to the goal, depends on one's inclination/aptitude.

Yes, I do not find the mention of Sri Ramakrishna having studied Sanskrit for any period of time.

 

[Vinayaka]

Welcome brother, from another advaitist. Although we may differ on finer points. After all, advaita is not a monolith. There is no reason or right for any Hindu to take exception to your taking up this label. And you don't do it frivolously. Welcome.You see, Salix, one can arrive at understanding, realization, enlightenment, bodhi, jnana, in three ways. IMHO, Sankara through Jnana, Ramakishna through Bhakti and Gandhi through Karma. Many roads to the goal, depends on one's inclination/aptitude..

Just to clarify for Salix ... separating these 'paths' into categories is the Vedanta method, first outlined clearly by Vivekenanda. In Siddhanta paths, these ideas of service, bhakti, and jnana are all integrated. The jnani is also a bhaktar, never outgrowing the temple, the bhaktar has touches of jnana, and they all do seva, or service. So the so called 'different paths' are all integrated into the path of Siddhanta. We also view jnana as something totally different than the Vedantins do.

But yes, welcome home.

 

[SalixIncendium]

But yes, welcome home.

I was torn whether to mark your post informative or friendly, as it was both, but since I went with informative since I did learn something, for the friendly part, I'll reply to this part with a thank you.

 

[Shantanu]

Just to clarify for Salix ... separating these 'paths' into categories is the Vedanta method, first outlined clearly by Vivekenanda. In Siddhanta paths, these ideas of service, bhakti, and jnana are all integrated. The jnani is also a bhaktar, never outgrowing the temple, the bhaktar has touches of jnana, and they all do seva, or service. So the so called 'different paths' are all integrated into the path of Siddhanta. We also view jnana as something totally different than the Vedantins do.

But yes, welcome home.

I have never heard of the Siddhanta path, all I know is the satya-advaita path, that is the seeking out of truth through truth accommodation, which means that jnana comes foremost, and this is accompanied by bhakta and karma, but not seva. The only seva I have engaged in is the seva to my ownself as swadharma. And this continues even now in the religion of Existentialism.

 

[Vinayaka]

I have never heard of the Siddhanta path, all I know is the satya-advaita path, that is the seeking out of truth through truth accommodation, which means that jnana comes foremost, and this is accompanied by bhakta and karma, but not seva. The only seva I have engaged in is the seva to my ownself as swadharma. And this continues even now in the religion of Existentialism.

Siddhanta means 'path', so in Siddhanta, the focus is on how to get to jnana, rather than on jnana itself. 'Jnana' here means knowledge obtained directly from within, via meditation, and has nothing to do with books. So siddhanta describes a process. My version, Saiva Siddhanta means the path of Saivism.

 

[Shantanu]

Siddhanta means 'path', so in Siddhanta, the focus is on how to get to jnana, rather than on jnana itself. 'Jnana' here means knowledge obtained directly from within, via meditation, and has nothing to do with books. So siddhanta describes a process. My version, Saiva Siddhanta means the path of Saivism.

I see, my Siddhanta is therefore the Siddhanta of Existentialism.

 

[SomeRandom]

Of course, you are well within your rights to have no labels so that no one can pin you down.

No one can pin me down. Rebel till the end
I can’t help but wonder, all this talk of labels and who fits what exactly, can this be seen as a part of the ego? Another attachment that pulls us down?
Yes labels are helpful, of course. But if one is so worried about being X, is this not an aspect of the ego?

 

[Vinayaka]

No one can pin me down. Rebel till the end
I can’t help but wonder, all this talk of labels and who fits what exactly, can this be seen as a part of the ego? Another attachment that pulls us down?
Yes labels are helpful, of course. But if one is so worried about being X, is this not an aspect of the ego?

There is also an insecurity or embarrassment factor. I know several Hindus, even Gurus and swamis who now abhor the term Hindu, because it doesn't go well with the western paying customers. Years of anti-Hindu programming by western belief systems has had a negative effect. It's sad. It's like when you ask a person his occupation, and he lowers his eyes, and head to say, "I'm a garbage man." There is no confidence, which is far different than pride.

 

[SomeRandom]

There is also an insecurity or embarrassment factor. I know several Hindus, even Gurus and swamis who now abhor the term Hindu, because it doesn't go well with the western paying customers. Years of anti-Hindu programming by western belief systems has had a negative effect. It's sad. It's like when you ask a person his occupation, and he lowers his eyes, and head to say, "I'm a garbage man." There is no confidence, which is far different than pride.

Hmm perhaps there is less religious zeal where I live, I’ve never really encountered anyone who are ashamed of the label “Hindu.” Or Sai Baba person or Hare Krishna or what have you. Though perhaps being Australian we are all too drunk to notice.

 

[Vinayaka]

Hmm perhaps there is less religious zeal where I live, I’ve never really encountered anyone who are ashamed of the label “Hindu.” Or Sai Baba person or Hare Krishna or what have you. Though perhaps being Australian we are all too drunk to notice.

ISKCON temples are usually called Vedic temples, and they make sure to say they're not Hindu. Sai Baba groups are universalist, and claim to be of all religions simultaneously. So too with ISHA. It's all good, just an observation, and I find it kind of funny actually. But I personally have no problem calling myself Hindu.

 

[SomeRandom]

ISKCON temples are usually called Vedic temples, and they make sure to say they're not Hindu. Sai Baba groups are universalist, and claim to be of all religions simultaneously. So too with ISHA. It's all good, just an observation, and I find it kind of funny actually. But I personally have no problem calling myself Hindu.

Isn’t the word Hindu a romanisation anyway?

 

[Vinayaka]

Isn’t the word Hindu a romanisation anyway?

I don't know. That is the most common theory, but there are several theories. History of a word doesn't matter to me. Today the fact it Sanatana Dharma is known world wide as Hinduism, so it has it's uses.

 

[Kapalika]

Not really, but I kind of dislike the term for other reasons... it refers to something so broad yet people tend to think of it as one religion when it really isn't. I am very often surprised by how many people have never heard of Shiva. Often when asked my religion I say Shaivite, and when asked what that is I say we worship Shiva... half the time people say they don't know what that is or anything about it. It's really surprising how many didn't pay attention in school or even have a passing awareness of religions outside of Abrahamic ones.

So I end up using Hindu to give them a ballpark as people just get confused... but I prefer not to.

 

[SalixIncendium]

It's really surprising how many didn't pay attention in school or even have a passing awareness of religions outside of Abrahamic ones.

I don't think it's that surprising. Religions, let alone deities of those religions, were not taught in my school (unless I wasn't paying attention), and most Americans aren't exposed to much religion outside Abrahamic faiths, specifically Christianity in one form or another.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Isn’t the word Hindu a romanisation anyway?

It is Zoroastrianization. We first hear of 'Hindu' in the first Fargard of Vendidad.

19, (72, 73): — “I, Ahura Mazda, created as the fifteenth best country, Hapta Hendu (from the eastern to the western Hendu). In opposition, Angra Mainyu created untimely evils, and pernicious heat [or fever].”

 

[SomeRandom]

It is a Zoroastrianization. We first hear of 'Hindu' in the first Fargard of Vendidad.

19, (72, 73): — “I, Ahura Mazda, created as the fifteenth best country, Hapta Hendu (from the eastern to the western Hendu). In opposition, Angra Mainyu created untimely evils, and pernicious heat [or fever].”

Interesting.

 

[Shantanu]

No one can pin me down. Rebel till the end
I can’t help but wonder, all this talk of labels and who fits what exactly, can this be seen as a part of the ego? Another attachment that pulls us down?
Yes labels are helpful, of course. But if one is so worried about being X, is this not an aspect of the ego?

Of course: what is wrong with ego?