Hinduphobia:
In any case the preponderance of evidence provided in this thread more very much sealed the deal that Yoga is Hinduism. The evidence provided has been historical, archeological, textual and logical. The opposite position, which should not be a position at all, has been found completely lacking in evidence and more a result of ignorance of what Hinduism is.
As proven in a recent post Hinduism was a Yogic religion during Vedic times and is still a Yogic religion today in modern times. Therefore it is the religion of Yoga. If you practice Yoga you are indeed practicing a Hindu practice. Now how you reconcile that with your own religion is something you are going to have to deal with yourself.
Just a remark on historical revision. It has to be understood that Indian history has to be revised in wake of the archeaological evidence that has been piling up for decades now which simply does not support the history that the British scholars wrote for India. Moreover, obvious colonial bias, racism and politics has been found in those British scholars.
Archeaological evidence shows that Indian history is 10,000 years old. The oldest sites that been found have been found submerged under water and they are dated around 9000BCE. The second oldest have been in the Megarh period which is 7000BCE. The first evidence of urban civilisation has been found in 3000BCE. It is clear that this civilisation is Vedic because it has Vedic features(swastikas, fire-altars for Vedic rituals, Vedic metrics, Vedic geography and rivers) and is consistent with Vedic description. The textual evidence inside the Vedas mention observations of star configurations which take it back to 7000BCE. In addition to India’s own historical records mention geneologies of kings going back to 7000BCE. These are also recorded by Greek historians.
But the history as recorded in Western text books have not revised the old scholarship which started Indian civilisation in 1500BCE(this date itself was later discredited by the scholar who proposed it, saying he was just guessing and Indian history could be as old 15,000 years) So the entire ancient history of India has been fit in between 1500BCE and 5AD(Vedic period, post-Vedic period, Maurayan period and Gupta period) ridiculously condensed to fit the Western bias. So that is 10,000 years of history which has been fitted into 2000 years purely based on racist scholarship.
But as I said the archeaological evidence does not support it. It supports what the Indian historical and Greek historical records of their long geneologies of kings. It goes back 10,000 years. Therefore Indian history needs to be revised in Western textbooks. They are giving wrong dates(out by thousands of years) for all important periods in Indian history.
If Hinduism and Yoga are one & the same, how could this happen?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/nyregion/28yoga.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp
[QUOTE=Indra Deva;45629]If Hinduism and Yoga are one & the same, how could this happen?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/nyregion/28yoga.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp[/QUOTE]
How could what happen? A debate? 
An article on how Indian history has been falsified by colonial scholars: http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2009/01/de-falsify-indian-history-dr.html
It appears the falsification was done by dating the great Maurayan empire to 300BCE, when in actual fact it was 1534BCE. This was done by misidentifying Chandragupta Mauraya(the emperor the the Maurayan empire) with Chandragupt Gupta(the emperor of the Gupta empire) As a result all important Sanskrit scholars like Panini, Patanjali, Kapila et al have to be moved back to around 2000BCE. Now this would make sense because the Bhakti tradition flourished under the Gupta empire who built many temples and we find Bhakti begins roughly during Gupta’s reign.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;45635]An article on how Indian history has been falsified by colonial scholars: http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2009/01/de-falsify-indian-history-dr.html
It appears the falsification was done by dating the great Maurayan empire to 300BCE, when in actual fact it was 1534BCE. This was done by misidentifying Chandragupta Mauraya(the emperor the the Maurayan empire) with Chandragupt Gupta(the emperor of the Gupta empire) As a result all important Sanskrit scholars like Panini, Patanjali, Kapila et al have to be moved back to around 2000BCE. Now this would make sense because the Bhakti tradition flourished under the Gupta empire who built many temples and we find Bhakti begins roughly during Gupta’s reign.[/QUOTE]
Chandragupta Mauraya was 300BCE
Chandra Gupta was after 300CE
what do these have to do with 1534BCE??? You seem a little confused on your scholarship (if not your religious belief & feeble attempts at revisionist history).
S. Radhakrishnan dates both Patanjali and the Yoga Sutra to 2nd century BCE. & Panini wasn’t any further back than 7th century BCE.
I think we should take his word for it over your desire to push what people consider “Hinduism” (the religion, not the civilization) back into pre-history.
Patanjali has only codified Yoga practices into the Sutra. Yoga practices have existed as far back as 3000 BCE.
There are also various dates attributed to Patanajali which vary from 400 BCE to 200 AD.
Take your pick.
[QUOTE=Indra Deva;45637]Chandragupta Mauraya was 300BCE
Chandra Gupta was after 300CE
S. Radhakrishnan dates both Patanjali and the Yoga Sutra to 2nd century BCE. & Panini wasn’t any further back than 7th century BCE.
I think we should take his word for it over your desire to push what people consider “Hinduism” (the religion, not the civilization) back into pre-history.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Indra Deva;45637]Chandragupta Mauraya was 300BCE
Chandra Gupta was after 300CE
what do these have to do with 1534BCE??? You seem a little confused on your scholarship (if not your religious belief & feeble attempts at revisionist history).
S. Radhakrishnan dates both Patanjali and the Yoga Sutra to 2nd century BCE. & Panini wasn’t any further back than 7th century BCE.
I think we should take his word for it over your desire to push what people consider “Hinduism” (the religion, not the civilization) back into pre-history.[/QUOTE]
I know what Western history says. I dispute it, because it based on racist scholarship and false sheet anchors.
Read the article. It gives compelling evidence that Chandragupta Gupta was the the one that Megesthenes reported, who was the contemporary of Alexandra the great and not Chandragupta Mauraya. There are no records in the Mauraya period of Alexandras so-called invasion.
[QUOTE=Indra Deva;45629]If Hinduism and Yoga are one & the same, how could this happen?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/nyregion/28yoga.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp[/QUOTE]
IT happens when prejudiced people like you want to degrade “Hinduism” and disassociate Yoga from “Hinduism” to make it look even more inferior than you fools have made it out to be.
I once again suggest you stop practicing Yoga, a product of our religion and culture, if you hate India and Hinduism so much. Mlecchas are not worthy of learning these things.
[QUOTE=Nietzsche;45645]IT happens when prejudiced people like you want to degrade “Hinduism” and disassociate Yoga from “Hinduism” to make it look even more inferior than you fools have made it out to be.
I once again suggest you stop practicing Yoga, a product of our religion and culture, if you hate India and Hinduism so much. Mlecchas are not worthy of learning these things.[/QUOTE]
I just love how anyone who doesn’t agree with your world view is an “anti-Hindu fool”… :rolleyes:
Why are you here again? To discuss the great science of Yoga, or to proselytize for your Hindu religion?
If either of these ‘gentleman’ had any real insight this thread would not exist.
[QUOTE=Indra Deva;45654]I just love how anyone who doesn’t agree with your world view is an “anti-Hindu fool”… :rolleyes:
Why are you here again? To discuss the great science of Yoga, or to proselytize for your Hindu religion?[/QUOTE]
Actually, when one disagrees with my views AND goes around posting links to anti-Hindu sites and derogatory articles on Hinduism/subscribes to bizarre theories on how Yoga somehow predated Hinduism (have you talked to an unbiased historian about this yet? I am waiting to hear stories of how you get spit at)/how “Hinduism” was invented when invaders came and gave a foreign word to the religion/practices of Indians (even though they obviously had their own name for it), I call them racist/anti-Hindu/etc. These are the very same arguments missionaries and other anti-Hindus use to ridicule our culture/religion and convert us.
Why are you here? To defame Hinduism, to spread anti-Hindu propaganda, to spread lies about it and its sub teachings, to disassociate Yoga from its Hindu roots to appease your Christian/Western ego, and what not? Why did you put your name as “Indra Deva” when you love posting links to anti-Hindu sites and articles?
Find me the exact posts in which I have attempted to convert people to Hinduism. The most I have done was denounce Christianity and Islam (and many of its practitioners) and the false/biased views of Westerners like you who attempt to disgrace our culture and practices by spreading lies and propaganda.
If the Vedas, the Upanishads and the science of Yoga are the foundational central pillars of the religion of Hinduism, then necessarily the Religion must come after the spiritual principles it is based upon. If you can’t grasp the basic causality at work, then you have more problems than we thought.
(& any historian that doesn’t agree with your world view is going to be “biased” or “wrong” or “anti-Hindu”, aren’t they?) :rolleyes:
& as for you critiquing my forum handle, while yours is Nietzsche & you fervidly debate for Hinduism while whining about “truth”… that’s a laugh.
Why are you here? To defame Hinduism, to spread anti-Hindu propaganda, to spread lies about it and its sub teachings, to disassociate Yoga from its Hindu roots to appease your Christian/Western ego, and what not? Why did you put your name as “Indra Deva” when you love posting links to anti-Hindu sites and articles?
If you can’t take my word for it that I don’t “hate Hinduism”, then that’s your problem. What I AM for, however, & I freely admit this, is critical thought with respect to ANY religious belief system. If you take this as “hate” or “anti-” then that’s your issue, not mine.
Find me the exact posts in which I have attempted to convert people to Hinduism. The most I have done was denounce Christianity and Islam (and many of its practitioners) and the false/biased views of Westerners like you who attempt to disgrace our culture and practices by spreading lies and propaganda.
So… when you & your buddies spread lies, propaganda, and attempt to disgrace the two other major global religions that compete with Hinduism, while pushing revisionist history and vehement defense of Hinduism… what do you think this is? When people think they need religion, and the only religion they can find with any public credibility is yours, and you’ve actively participated in the defaming of all these other religions, leaving only your own standing…
If the Vedas, the Upanishads and the science of Yoga are the foundational central pillars of the religion of Hinduism, then necessarily the Religion must come after the spiritual principles it is based upon. If you can’t grasp the basic causality at work, then you have more problems than we thought.
This does not make sense. There was a religion in Vedic times as well, and you can consult historians and you will be told the same. This religion was a religion started by the Risis of the Vedas, where Risis convened together and discussed the Veda and compiled it. They attended big rituals known as yagyas(fire sacrifices) over which they would chant the mantras of the Vedas. They had gurukuls(schools) where Brahmanas would be trained in order to learn the Vedas and the sacred art of chanting them as well as the rituals(as expounded in the Brahmanas) and the esoteric aspect of them(jnana khananda) were expounded by gurus to their students in the form of Upanishads(literal meaning: sitting near the feet of the guru)
In this time there were no temples with idols etc. The predominant religious practices were yagya(fire sacrifice) and tapas(Vedic yoga) Society at this time was rather agrian(archeaological evidence suggests this was in the neolithic age around 7000BCE, coinciding with the Megarh period of India)
It was around this time Lord Rama is said to be lived and the Ramayana took place(The Ramayana is recorded in Indian, Sri Lankan, Indonasian, Cambodian, Thai, Phillipines history)
The vast pantheon of Hindu gods were already in the Vedas at the time described as powers in nature. Vishnu, Rudra/Shiva, Brahma, Durga, Kali, Lakshmi were all included.
What you can’t seem to get your head around is this original Vedic religion evolved over time to include many other aspects. In Post-Vedic times in the urban period(archealogicial evidence suggests this was in the mature Indus valley phase around 3000-2000BCE) New developments were made to the Vedic religion. The Vedas were compiled and written down, edited by Ved Vyasa, who is called as such because he is famous for editing them and the puranas(Mahabharata, Ramayana) It was during this period the Hindu philosophie arose of Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya and Lokatya and the various janapradas(republics) Also, Lord Krishna lived during this time and was widely recognised to be an avatar of Vishnu, and a cult of worship of Lord Krishna started to form after he passed away(similar to Jesus cults)
In the Bhakti period several cults had started to form various Hindu gods and sacred personalites - Vaishnavaism arose(similar to Christianity) and then arose rival sects in South India in the Tamil language of Sivaism and Shaktism(Tantra) with their own revealed scripture of Agamas. Naturally, any sect would like to build their own temples to their object of worship and compile books detailing their life, miracles and glories - and that is exactly what happened. Temples sprang up in their thousands all over India(sponsored by powerful kings who had converted to the sects) Like sects of Christianity, they all traced their religion back to the original religion and borrowed all their core doctrines and philosophies from it. In essence they were the Vedic religion + new rituals, temples and scriptures.
The first reformist movements to return back purely to the Vedic religion was Smartism founded by Adisankaracharya which is based on Vedanta and his particular brand of it Advaita. However, he did not reject Bhakti, but merely put Bhakti into context. He himself was a Shiva Bhakta, but was not an idolator like his peers at the time. His primary aim was to bringing the back the spotlight on the Vedas. He started off a new sect of his own, and his followers glorified him. Adisankara made a massive influence in shaping Hinduism in his time all over India and everybody started to accept Advaita Vedanta.
However, the massive popularity of Advaita Vedanta started to challenge the Bhakti cults, who could not reconcile their practices with the impersonalism of Advaita. So new movemements arose a few centuries later that tried to reconcile Vedanta with Bhakti, the first of these was Vishveshadavia(qualified non dualism) founded by Ramunjacharya where the soul was distinct, but also one with god. He was a Vaishnava, and worshipped Vishnu and also formulated a concept of heaven called Vaikunta where one could be one with the personal form of god Vishnu if one won his grace. Then a few centuries later arose the first proper dualist school of Vedanta started by Madhvacharya, which might as well be Christianity. Madhavacharya declared the soul was completely different from god and god was almighty and powerful and soul was a mere servant. The soul must win his grace to enter Vaikunta where the soul can worship god for eternity, and if the soul incurs his wrath it maybe eternally damned.
Fortunately, unlike Christianity which became a dualist tradition, dvaitism did not reach popularity in Hinduism and most sects remain Advaitists or Visheshadvatists. There are some Dvaitist sects such as Gaudiya vaishnavism.
In modern times neo-sects of Hinduism arose: Ramakrishna movement, Arya Samaj movement, Kriya Yoga movement, Aurobindo movement, Hare Krishna movement, Ramanana Maharishi movement, Sivananda movement and have given rise to the vast diversity of Yoga movements we see today.
Modern Hinduism is a vast matrix made out the following:
The original Vedic religion + Vedic philosophy + Vaishnavism + Sivaism and Shaktism + Smartism + Advaita Vedanta, Visheshadvaita Vedanta and Dvaita Vedanta + Neo-Hinduism.
Modern Hindus can choose to be a part of all of these at once, or just some of these. There are some Hindus who insist purely on the original Vedic religion, such as myself(but I include Vedic philosophy) There are some Hindus who insist purely on Bhakti, and practice all Bhakti sects(I know of many Hindus who worship Vishnu, Shiva and Divine mother) and some only only practice one sect. Some Hindus who insist on only pure Advaita and some who practice only neo-Hinduism.
It’s all Hinduism. This religion is so dynamic and diverse you can choose whichever aspect of it you want to emphasise. I have chosen to only emphasise the original Vedic religion. One thing is for certain though: Yoga is common to everysingle sect. There is not a single aspect which does not practice some of Yoga and does not expound Yoga philosophy.
Vaishnavism’s main scriptures are all Yogic texts: Gita and Yogavasistha
Sivaism and Shaktism’s scriptures are all Yogic texts: Agamas, Shiva Samhita, Hatha Yoga Pradipaka
The ultimate Yogic text is the Vedas themselves which enjoin you to reconnect to Brahman and become self-realised. The most scientific articulation of this science was given by Patanjali.
What you need to do is come out of this narrowminded and chauvanistic mindset that only one part of Hinduism is Hinduism, and the rest is not Hinduism. This is offensive to the religion of Hinduism, the history of India and Hindus. Hinduism is a dynamic religion which has a history of 10,000 years. The word “Hinduism” refers to this vast tradition which flowered in India. All of it is Hinduism.
As long as you continue to offend us you will incur our wrath 
Let me give my thoughts. There is only ONE basic tenet in Hinduism. And that is that all of us are Paramatman. It is only that due to our identification with the body, we are unable to see it. Break the identification and you realise you are Paramatman.
Yada Naham Tada Moksho,
Yada Aham, Bandhanam Tada.
That being so- all scriptures, Patanjali etc etc are subsidiary - these are only tools. Let us not confuse the road with the destination.
[QUOTE=Indra Deva;45663][B]If the Vedas, the Upanishads and the science of Yoga are the foundational central pillars of the religion of Hinduism, then necessarily the Religion must come after the spiritual principles it is based upon.[/B] If you can’t grasp the basic causality at work, then you have more problems than we thought.
(& any historian that doesn’t agree with your world view is going to be “biased” or “wrong” or “anti-Hindu”, aren’t they?) :rolleyes:
& as for you critiquing my forum handle, while yours is Nietzsche & you fervidly debate for Hinduism while whining about “truth”… that’s a laugh.
If you can’t take my word for it that I don’t “hate Hinduism”, then that’s your problem. What I AM for, however, & I freely admit this, is critical thought with respect to ANY religious belief system. If you take this as “hate” or “anti-” then that’s your issue, not mine.
So… when you & your buddies spread lies, propaganda, and attempt to disgrace the two other major global religions that compete with Hinduism, while pushing revisionist history and vehement defense of Hinduism… what do you think this is? When people think they need religion, and the only religion they can find with any public credibility is yours, and you’ve actively participated in the defaming of all these other religions, leaving only your own standing…[/QUOTE]
:lol: You know nothing of the history of Hinduism (or of most religions for that matter, if you are really serious about your train of logic. I could say the Q’uran and the Hadith are the foundations of Islam and that Islam arose from it, when clearly the reverse is the case). Surya Deva has already taken care of this argument so there is no need to me to rectify your views further.
You call posting links to anti-Hindu sites and articles “critical thought with respect to ANY religious belief system”? It is one thing if you respect Hinduism and other religions for what they are and criticize the negative aspects of them (which some religions have to greater extremes than others) like the caste system in the case of Hinduism (that would be something which I wouldn’t mind debating about). It is another when you start posting anti-Hindu propaganda and cite those as faults within Hinduism.
“…Compete with Hinduism” ? For what, converts? Have you been reading Surya Deva’s and my posts blindly? Converting is the domain of those Abrahamic religions. All we want to do is point out the evils of [I]those [/I] two religions and the negative way they have and are effecting India/Hinduism and the world (which is why we believe they are inferior to Hinduism). This is where Surya Deva and I diverge. I have already mentioned that I have no problems with any other religions of the world; with the exception of Christianity and Islam, I believe any other belief system is as valid a path as any other.
“Revisionist history?” You must be one of those people who still believe in the fairy of the Aryan Invasion Theory.
German dad: Let me tell you a story my son.
German son: Oh oh! Ok daddy!
German dad: There was once this group of nomadic warriors called the Aryans. They descended from the Caucasus. Then they went on to conquer the land of India.
German son: Oooohhhh!
German dad: Yes, and with them, they brought their religion and arts of civilization.
German son: Aaaaahhh!
German dad: The best part is, it all supposedly occurred at a date that is perfectly in line with Biblical history, even though the whole theory is based on a mistranslated verses, scant archeological evidence, and Christian/European supremacist views!
German son: Tell me more! Tell me more!
German dad: Thats it son. But the moral of the story is, the civilized people of white ancestry civilized the dark skinned Indian natives. Whites have always civilized the rest of the non-white world and will continue to do so.
German son: Thanks for the story dad!
German dad: Good night.
“What do [I] think it is?” A never ending battle against ignorance regarding Hinduism, Christian/Western bias against Hinduism, propaganda against Hinduism, and so forth. I wouldn’t have to vehemently defend Hinduism if people like you didn’t keep posting propaganda and keep spreading deceptively innocuous lies on the origins of Hinduism/Yoga.
Find me one post where I have defamed “all these other religions.” The only two religions I have denounced are Christianity and Islam. I have even mentioned that I have great respect for all other religions of the world.
Actually, if people needed religion, I would recommend whatever suits their pre-existing notions the best. For example, I would not normally recommend Hinduism to a Chinese “looking for religion.” I would recommend Taoism/Buddhism.
[QUOTE=reaswaran;45697]Let me give my thoughts. There is only ONE basic tenet in Hinduism. And that is that all of us are Paramatman. It is only that due to our identification with the body, we are unable to see it. Break the identification and you realise you are Paramatman.
Yada Naham Tada Moksho,
Yada Aham, Bandhanam Tada.
That being so- all scriptures, Patanjali etc etc are subsidiary - these are only tools. Let us not confuse the road with the destination.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Finally someone with more sense…
[QUOTE=Nietzsche;45704]…Find me one post where I have defamed “all these other religions.” The only two religions I have denounced are Christianity and Islam. I have even mentioned that I have great respect for all other religions of the world…[/QUOTE]
If you’re going to deliberately misquote me, we’re done.
Have fun with your racist isolationist agenda. :rolleyes:
(of course, Eastern Philosophy is all over the west, there’s no taking it back, & railing against it is pretty pathetic and pointless, but you keep going, okay?)