oooow childish?..really??.
[QUOTE=Terence;54663]Indus seals depict human sacrifice. Rajendralal Mitra argued that human sacrifice in India had Vedic origins. ‘Sati,’ where a widow must throw herself in fire or be scorned, continued up to fairly recent times. Sati is an example of human sacrifice and a lack of awareness to the principles of ahisma, which occurs or continues to occur after the compilation of the main Yogic texts. As I said, the history of evolution is not a black and white subject.
Taking the human sacrifice subject aside, modern day Hinduism has clearly changed and evolved since ancient times. One of the main reasons for this has been the works of the Yogi sages. Yoga in turn is part of and is rooted in the ancient science Vedic Dharma.
I would agree that Patanjali and Swatmarama didn’t necessarily come up with something new, however their works systematized and compiled the practice so well that they can be considered revolutionary.
Taking into account that ‘Hindu’ is an adapted term for Vedic Dharma, to say that ‘Hinduism predates Yoga’ or ‘Yoga predates Hinduism’ are both childlike assumptions.[/QUOTE]
I am afraid I do not agree with you. Sanatana Dharma by definiton precluded any taking of life.(except in the line of one’s dharma). For if you are the Paramatman and Paramatman prevades all, then who kills who ?
Perhaps you are not aware that Sati had nothing to do with Dharma. It evolved as a response to save Rajput women from Muslim invader’s hands. I am not disputing the rights or wrongs of it, but to those practicing it , the fate of falling into the hands of the Muslim invaders was apparently a fate worse than death. So please do not confuse Sati as being part of Sanatana Dharma.
I do not understand this debate actually. Yoga evolved as a part of Sanatana Dharma. Why is it so difficult to concede that ?
Whether it can be beneficially practiced without the theoritical framework of Dharma is another question altogether. I hold the view that it is best practiced within the framework of Sanatana Dharma (Yoga for me is the eightfold path-not just asan-pranayam). But there are others who may hold differring views…to which they are entitled and I have no quarrel with them over their beliefs.
[QUOTE=Terence;54656]History and the evolution of culture can’t be put into black and white.
The earliest record of Hatha Yoga gos back to the Indus Valley civilization. Obviously, it was based upon and came after the Vedic Dharma that existed before this time.
Are modern day Hindus practicing Vedic Dharma of the early bronze age? Human sacrifice has long been discontinued so obviously not.
Modern day Hinduism/Vedic Dharma owes its origins to the Vedic Dharma that preceded it, of which Yoga is an intregal part. The Vedic Dharma of the early Indus Valley was a more rajasic, less refined version which has greatly changed in subsequent millenia.
Obviously, Yoga is a part of Vedic science and by the time of Patanjali(arguably the greatest refinement of yoga) came after the commencement of Vedic Dharma. Obviously, modern day Hinduism has greatly changed since 2000BC, and owes its refinement more to the Vedic Yogi sages than the meat eating Vedic priests who would slash a mans throat to appease the gods.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. Guess who the seals depict DOING the Hatha Yoga? Indian gods, or what look like them at least.
Wrong. Human sacrifice was never practiced in the Vedic religion, silly ignorant Britisher.
Wrong. Learn your Indian history mleccha.
Once again, human sacrifice was never practiced in the Vedic times. Animal, yes, human, no.
I find it amusing that you are itching to defame Indian culture and history by accusing our ancestors of human sacrifice, when your ancestors were nothing more than cannibals in the Stonehenge days.
[QUOTE=Terence;54663]Indus seals depict human sacrifice. Rajendralal Mitra argued that human sacrifice in India had Vedic origins. ‘Sati,’ where a widow must throw herself in fire or be scorned, continued up to fairly recent times. Sati is an example of human sacrifice and a lack of awareness to the principles of ahisma, which occurs or continues to occur after the compilation of the main Yogic texts. As I said, the history of evolution is not a black and white subject.
Taking the human sacrifice subject aside, modern day Hinduism has clearly changed and evolved since ancient times. One of the main reasons for this has been the works of the Yogi sages. Yoga in turn is part of and is rooted in the ancient science Vedic Dharma.
I would agree that Patanjali and Swatmarama didn’t necessarily come up with something new, however their works systematized and compiled the practice so well that they can be considered revolutionary.
Taking into account that ‘Hindu’ is an adapted term for Vedic Dharma, to say that ‘Hinduism predates Yoga’ or ‘Yoga predates Hinduism’ are both childlike assumptions.[/QUOTE]
No. Sati had its origins with the invasion of the Muslims. My ancestors were the Rajputs and their wives considered it an honor to be burned at the pyre than be taken as a sex-slave by a MusLim. Sati continued with the invasion of India by your uncivilized barbarian ancestors who caused such economic and societal degradation that the inhabitants ever despaired of having a good future. This is evident in the fact that the places in which Sati was most prevalent were the places which suffered the greatest economic failures, such as in Bengal.
No. Present day Hinduism has its origins in the Upanishadic periods of “Hinduism” history, a period which predates Yoga by several centuries. Learn your Indian history.
Sanatana Dharma predates Yoga.
[QUOTE=Terence;54656]History and the evolution of culture can’t be put into black and white.
The earliest record of Hatha Yoga gos back to the Indus Valley civilization. Obviously, it was based upon and came after the Vedic Dharma that existed before this time.
Are modern day Hindus practicing Vedic Dharma of the early bronze age? Human sacrifice has long been discontinued so obviously not.
Modern day Hinduism/Vedic Dharma owes its origins to the Vedic Dharma that preceded it, of which Yoga is an intregal part. The Vedic Dharma of the early Indus Valley was a more rajasic, less refined version which has greatly changed in subsequent millenia.
[/quote]
To claim tht the “indus valley civilization” predates vedic dhrma is a result of falsehoods propagated by the european imperialists in the 19th century. That which is called the ivc should rightly be called the sarasvati-sindhu civilization, and is nothing but early vedic civilization. The aryan invasion/migration theory are simply falsehoods perpetrated by vested imperialist interests. Nowhere in the traditional records are there any references to such invasions or migrations.
[QUOTE=reaswaran;54670]I am afraid I do not agree with you. Sanatana Dharma by definiton precluded any taking of life.(except in the line of one’s dharma). For if you are the Paramatman and Paramatman prevades all, then who kills who ?
Perhaps you are not aware that Sati had nothing to do with Dharma. It evolved as a response to save Rajput women from Muslim invader’s hands. I am not disputing the rights or wrongs of it, but to those practicing it , the fate of falling into the hands of the Muslim invaders was apparently a fate worse than death. So please do not confuse Sati as being part of Sanatana Dharma.
I do not understand this debate actually. Yoga evolved as a part of Sanatana Dharma. Why is it so difficult to concede that ?
Whether it can be beneficially practiced without the theoritical framework of Dharma is another question altogether. I hold the view that it is best practiced within the framework of Sanatana Dharma (Yoga for me is the eightfold path-not just asan-pranayam). But there are others who may hold differring views…to which they are entitled and I have no quarrel with them over their beliefs.[/QUOTE]
It is alright. Terence has shown himself/herself to be another Brit itching to defame Indian civilization and culture through his/her ignorance.
It can’t be more obvious that he/she is racist towards Indians.
[QUOTE=reaswaran;54670]
QUOTE Perhaps you are not aware that Sati had nothing to do with Dharma. It evolved as a response to save Rajput women from Muslim invader’s hands. I am not disputing the rights or wrongs of it, but to those practicing it , the fate of falling into the hands of the Muslim invaders was apparently a fate worse than death. So please do not confuse Sati as being part of Sanatana Dharma. QUOTE
Sati, the burning of Indian women once their husbands were dead, was observed by a Greek historian in 316BC, before the Muslim invasions. It wasn’t fully stopped until Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, way after the Muslim invasions and after Indian independence.
I definitely don’t confuse the burning of women as part of Yoga and Sanatana Dharma, we can agree on that one.
QUOTE I do not understand this debate actually. Yoga evolved as a part of Sanatana Dharma. Why is it so difficult to concede that ? QUOTE
Please read my previous post. Respectfully, I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing. I feel the subject too big and complex to be summed up in a sentence, or by a few words.
[QUOTE=Dwai;54680]To claim tht the “indus valley civilization” predates vedic dhrma is a result of falsehoods propagated by the european imperialists in the 19th century. That which is called the ivc should rightly be called the sarasvati-sindhu civilization, and is nothing but early vedic civilization. The aryan invasion/migration theory are simply falsehoods perpetrated by vested imperialist interests. Nowhere in the traditional records are there any references to such invasions or migrations.[/QUOTE]
Namaste Dwai,
Yes, I have to agree with you. It isn’t surprising that Terrence is subscribing to such lies, considering the fact that his/her ancestors were the ones who propagated them in the first place. It is saddening that he/she has inherited the white man’s racism and bigotry against Indians and their religion…
[QUOTE=Terence;54683][QUOTE=reaswaran;54670]
QUOTE Perhaps you are not aware that Sati had nothing to do with Dharma. It evolved as a response to save Rajput women from Muslim invader’s hands. I am not disputing the rights or wrongs of it, but to those practicing it , the fate of falling into the hands of the Muslim invaders was apparently a fate worse than death. So please do not confuse Sati as being part of Sanatana Dharma. QUOTE
Sati, the burning of Indian women once their husbands were dead, was observed by a Greek historian in 316BC, before the Muslim invasions. It wasn’t fully stopped until Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, way after the Muslim invasions and after Indian independence.
I definitely don’t confuse the burning of women as part of Yoga and Sanatana Dharma, we can agree on that one.
QUOTE I do not understand this debate actually. Yoga evolved as a part of Sanatana Dharma. Why is it so difficult to concede that ? QUOTE
Please read my previous post. Respectfully, I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing. I feel the subject too big and complex to be summed up in a sentence, or by a few words.[/QUOTE]
I am aware of those Greek records. What you still fail to understand, ignorant silly goose, is that Sati was an isolated incident, highly dependent on the city, village, or kingdom in question.
Sati was not an officially sanctioned practice of Sanatana Dharma and never has been.
You are very ignorant of Indian history. Drop your British history textbooks and learn not trust everything white men asserted was history.
[QUOTE=Dwai;54680]To claim tht the “indus valley civilization” predates vedic dhrma is a result of falsehoods propagated by the european imperialists in the 19th century. That which is called the ivc should rightly be called the sarasvati-sindhu civilization, and is nothing but early vedic civilization. The aryan invasion/migration theory are simply falsehoods perpetrated by vested imperialist interests. Nowhere in the traditional records are there any references to such invasions or migrations.[/QUOTE]
Vedic Dharma in whatever form existed in the Indus Valley. This is backed up by evidence, for example the famous depiction of a Hatha Yogi in seated meditation pose. Haven’t really read any historical accounts of India by 19th century Europeans, and I wouldn’t bother. David Frawley suggests that the Aryan invasion never actually happened, his book on the subject is very interesting.
[QUOTE=Terence;54687]Vedic Dharma in whatever form existed in the Indus Valley. This is backed up by evidence, for example the famous depiction of a Hatha Yogi in seated meditation pose. Haven’t really read any historical accounts of India by 19th century Europeans, and I wouldn’t bother. David Frawley suggests that the Aryan invasion never actually happened, his book on the subject is very interesting.[/QUOTE]
Interesting that you should take one tidbit of non-Eurocentric Indian history and discard the rest in favor of lies such as human-sacrifice with respect to ancient Hindus.
You lie. Eurocentric Indian history pervades throughout Western media and academia. You have been privy to it without your knowledge.
Nietzsche, I’m afraid you continue to be on my ignore list. No doubt mouthing away about how everything in your life is the white mans fault.
I’m of Indian origin myself, and don’t have that problem.
Good luck son.
[QUOTE=Terence;54696]Nietzsche, I’m afraid you continue to be on my ignore list. No doubt mouthing away about how everything in your life is the white mans fault.
I’m of Indian origin myself, and don’t have that problem.
Good luck son.[/QUOTE]
That post proved you are performing beautifully in ignoring me.
Actually, everything wrong with Hinduism and India today IS the fault of the white man.
You are of Indian origin. Yipee. So far, you have proved that you are white-washed to the extent where you SHARE their biases and bigotry.
It may be the white man’s fault that India became the way it is, but the reason it STILL remains so is due to Indians like you.
[QUOTE=Terence;54687]Vedic Dharma in whatever form existed in the Indus Valley. This is backed up by evidence, for example the famous depiction of a Hatha Yogi in seated meditation pose. Haven’t really read any historical accounts of India by 19th century Europeans, and I wouldn’t bother. David Frawley suggests that the Aryan invasion never actually happened, his book on the subject is very interesting.[/QUOTE]
Depending on where you learnt your indian history, you could have and more than likely did learn a eurocentric rendition of events, chronology, etc. David frawley is one of the few western scholars of indology that i rwespect so i would suggest you more of his works like sages and kings etc to get a more traditional view of indian history. If you would like learn about the systematic decontruction of the native narrative of indian history and culture, read “the heathen in his blindness” by prof sn balagangadhara of ghent university.
http://rajivmalhotra.sulekha.com/blog/post/2002/09/risa-lila-1-wendy-s-child-syndrome.htm
Also read rajiv malhotra’s (he is the founder of the infinity foundation) theses on western academia and its apathy towards indic systems And history.
Terence is another white-washed Indian, who uncritically accepts British propoganda. It is pretty obvious that the British cannot be trusted to give a fair and accurate history of a people they have subjugated, whom they treat like dogs and call heathens. It would be like trusting Nazi history written on the Jews. Yet, these highly dense white washed Indians, quote from British propoganda like its the absolute truth on India.
The earliest record of Hatha Yoga gos back to the Indus Valley civilization. Obviously, it was based upon and came after the Vedic Dharma that existed before this time.
Ummm, no. Hatha Yoga is a relatively modern development, which began in the later medival ages and was preserved by the Natha tradition. The Hatha Yoga Pradipika was composed in the late medival ages. It is during this period that the chakra system arose and Kundalini. The IVC seal shows an asana, not Hatha Yoga.
Are modern day Hindus practicing Vedic Dharma of the early bronze age? Human sacrifice has long been discontinued so obviously not.
What nonsense are you spouting. There were no human sacrifices in Vedic dharma. Human sacrifices were highly isolated incidents that were commited by black tantriks in the medival times. There is an account of how Sankarcharya was attacked by one of these black tantriks, who told him to follow him and be his sacrifical offering. Sankarcharya agreed, followed him and on the way a tiger mauled to death the black tantik. This was by far not a common problem, but a rare crime in Hindu society.
Indus seals depict human sacrifice. Rajendralal Mitra argued that human sacrifice in India had Vedic origins. ‘Sati,’ where a widow must throw herself in fire or be scorned, continued up to fairly recent times. Sati is an example of human sacrifice and a lack of awareness to the principles of ahisma, which occurs or continues to occur after the compilation of the main Yogic texts. As I said, the history of evolution is not a black and white subject.
As everybody has already told you sati was not a common practice in Hindu society at all. It became a major problem during Muslim rule, where Hindu women would immolate themselves because they did not want to be captured by Muslims and taken as a sex slave. In the Quran, explicit instruction is given to take women prisoner and have sex with them.
You are citing a single Greek records to tell us about the history of India? The Greeks were liars and were highly unreliable. They claimed all sorts of fictional stuff about India, like the Indians had flying shield aircraft that darted at their armies. They claimed there was a race of giants in India, they claimed that India had animals which did not exist. They lied about Alexandra the great’s defeat of India. Western historians themselves question whether Megasthenes who composed the Indica, the first Greek traveller in India, even went to India. The Greeks were so ignorant about India they claimed Indians descended from the Egyptians.
Now if you look at your own records you will see a completely different picture. The Arthshastra which sets out Hindu law, allows women to remarry. It gives them right to divorce and inheritance and alimony. There is nothing about sati in this text. Hindu women were highly respected. They had a lot of freedom, could freely roam about in society, attend feasts, participate in temple worship and compose scriptures. They could also become gurus.
I find it highly hypocritical that you just condemned Karen in the Hindu persecution thread for making what you thought was an anti-semetic comment and called for her immediate ban. And here you have made one anti-Hindu comment after the other.
I really think Terence is highly dense. It has already been explained to him by severalmembers that the word Hinduism is another synonym for Vedic dharma/sanatana dharma. The reason we use this term is because the entire world knows us by this term.
The notion of human sacrifice was advanced by British colonial scholars by literally translating the word purushamedha as sacrifice of man. They claimed that the savage Vedic risis occasionally would sacrice a human. They even claimed the famous purusha suktam in the Rig Veda which describes how the cosmic spirit sacrifices itself in order to create the universe, to be a literal account of a sacrifice of a human.
The words purushamedha, gomedha, ashwamedha were all translated respectively as human sacrifice, cow sacrifice, horse sacrifice. But those idiot Westerners did not realise that the Vedic texts also talk about pitrimedha - sacrifice of the ancestors? How the hell can you sacrifice the ancestors who are dead? What these words really meant was sacrifice FOR man; sacrifice for cows; sacrifice for horses. The Vedic risis did not sacrifice animals or humans. The Western translators perverse translations of the Vedic texts forced these meanings into the Vedic texts.
Swami Dayananda Saraswati and Sri Aurbindo proved that the Vedas were deeply symbolic and had a deep meaning. Purushamedha is service to humanity. The Vedas are full of verses enjoining people to render service onto humanity. Gomedha is the sacrifice for knowledge. Go both meant cow and light. The famous Vedic story of the cows being trapped in the caves, is a symbolic way of saying releasing trapped knowledge. Ashwamedha is the sacrifice for the motherland. The Shatapata Brahmana confirms that ashwamedha is looking after the country and sacrificing for the country by administering its affairs. This is why the ashwamedha sacrifice was done by royalty.
The Vedas texts very clearly say to protect animals, to love one another, to treat the world as a global famly, to speak sweetly and softly to one another. In the Gita, the Vedic sacrifice is told as fullfilling our debts: ours debts to our parents, our debts to nature; our debts to humanity and our debt to the ancestors.
Yoga is part of Hinduism , it is a spiritual practice BUT it need not be either, it depends on the emphasis you place on it or your particular school or branch.
You can practice purely physical exercises just like Callenetics, Pilates, etc with NO spiritual or metaphysical aspects or teachings. Many people do Yoga in that manner, and could not care less about the spiritual aspects. Just as many prac tice Tai Chi but have zero interest in usingf it for self defence or learning fighting applications or the spiritual & mental aspects , they just want exercise.
I’m not fully Indian ‘Surya Deva’, but I will say that moaners like you give the Indian community a bad name.
My Indian ancestors were slaves. But you know what? The people who did that to them are dead, long dead. And the racial hatred they had is dead with them. But not for you, it lives on in you like a cancer, and you’ll probably pass it on to the next generation. That makes you a carrier of the illness that’s destroying the planet. I actually hope you get over this.
You obviously have a distaste for England. SO DON’T LIVE IN ENGLAND. You are a spoiled hypocrite. You don’t like the ‘west?’ Then why are you living in the UK? Go to India, find a group of sad cases like yourself and spend the rest of your life moaning about how the west messed you up, go spout crap about evil white women in short skirts.
Take your defeatist, hypocritical attitude, your racism, your sexism and remove yourself from the UK, which you obviously hate.
Your on my ignore list, and I couldn’t give a damn what you say in this life or the next. But it will probably be along the lines of, ‘woe is me, how I suffer, its all somebody elses fault.’
Apologies for the outburst David, this is the last time I write on the religion part of this forum. Or anything that is entitled ‘religion’ for that matter.
[QUOTE=Terence;54723]I’m not fully Indian ‘Surya Deva’, but I will say that moaners like you give the Indian community a bad name.
My Indian ancestors were slaves. But you know what? The people who did that to them are dead, long dead. And the racial hatred they had is dead with them. But not for you, it lives on in you like a cancer, and you’ll probably pass it on to the next generation. That makes you a carrier of the illness that’s destroying the planet. I actually hope you get over this. [/quote]
So you think the annual rememberance of the holocausts and the slavery of the blacks, the musuems dedicated to it, the tons of literature and multimedia available on it is a waste of time?
History is remembered so that it is not repeated. Constructing an accurate history for any civilisation is very important, because it tells us where they came from, it tells us about their ethos and philosopy, their contributions to the world, social evils and how civilisations collapse.
You obviously have a distaste for England. SO DON’T LIVE IN ENGLAND.
Being a part of England means I cannot criticise England? What logic is this. There are plenty of English born cultural critics of England, who have condemned Western culture, condemned colonialism. So you are saying because they were living in the West, they were not allowed to do that?
You are a spoiled hypocrite. You don’t like the ‘west?’ Then why are you living in the UK?
No, actually the only person who seems spoiled and a hypocrite is you. Spoiled because you are obviously insecure about defending your absurd statements about sati and allowing the members on this forum to educate you and keep on trying to bring David into this, and a hypocrite because you immediately called for the banning of Kareng when you thought she made an anti-semetic comment, but in this thread you have made loads of anti-Hindu comments. Shall we call for your immediate ban?
Go to India, find a group of sad cases like yourself and spend the rest of your life moaning about how the west messed you up, go spout crap about evil white women in short skirts.
You don’t get it because you’re a very ignorant and pigheaded person. We are not moaning about what the British did to us. We are trying to spread awarenesss and discussing how to take constructive action to undo the damage the British did
- By first restoring India’s accurate history from 8000BCE to present
- By reversing the poisoning of Indian culture and religion by the British which lead to India becoming a desperately poor nation and the to undo the hundreds of misconceptions British propoganda spread about Hinduism, in order to lift 800 million people out of poverty and make them self-sufficient and to restore faith in their heritage.
- By changing how India and Hinduism is portrayed in the world and getting the world to acknowledge its contributions and history.
Take your defeatist, hypocritical attitude, your racism, your sexism and remove yourself from the UK, which you obviously hate.
Take your big mouth and buzz off. Somebody accused me of being racist, sexist recently, and took their words back after I told them how strongly I am against racism and sexism. I have a racist friend who hates Muslims, and behaves very badly around Muslims. Now, despite the Muslims cruelty and tyranny against my people, I do not generalize it to Muslims I meet in everyday life. I had Muslim friends in college and have Muslims friends currently as well. I was really appaled by my friends attitude against Muslims, and severely reprimanded him.
I don’t know with what shame you can accuse me of being sexist. I recently revealed how uncomfortable I became with the objectification of women by my buddies and their lewd sexual gestures and in general how British men treated women. I have told my friends, “You should not objectify them, they are a soul just like and I am” I stressed how important it is to respect a woman, because as soon as a woman starts getting disrespected, society decays. Now the heck is that a sexist attitude? There are very few men in the UK who think like me.
On the other hand, in your infinite ignorance, you are telling me if a woman wants to objectify herself by wearing clothes that show her assets that she is sexually liberated. The anecdote I told about my 40 year old friend who got a random call of man to pay her a sexual favour you call sexual liberation - but which is actually free prostitution. He treated her like a call girl. And you think this is ok? It turns out it is you who have no respect for women.
Your on my ignore list, and I couldn’t give a damn what you say in this life or the next. But it will probably be along the lines of, ‘woe is me, how I suffer, its all somebody elses fault.’
You are basically putting everyone on your ignore list whose views you cannot tolerate. Because I like I said your insecure. You are afraid of having your arguments refuted or new understanding taking place. So you open your mouth and spout stuff, and then run away like a coward. Anyway I have clearly refuted your insenstivie and outrageous comment that Hindu’s practiced human and animal sacrifice with clear information. I have also corrected your wrong understanding that Hatha Yoga goes back to the Indus valley. My knowledge on Hinduism and Indian history far exceeds yours.
I don’t care if you can’t see my reply or not, because others will see it, and many will see sense in what I am saying.