Is Yoga Hinduism?

Spirituality Religion
#1061

So you think the annual rememberance of the holocausts

A simple but fatal point against your entire position has just occured to me. You condemned Kareng as anti-semetic and called her her immediate ban. You told us Hindus to stop moaning about the British. Therefore you should maintain the same about Jews to be consistent: Stop moaning about the Nazis. I assure you if you said this in your workplace and there were Jews there, you would be sacked from your job and have a permenant blight on your record. Indirectly, it is you who have just made an anti-semetic comment.

However, I know the truth, and that is you are a blatant hypocrite. You recognise anti-semiticism, but not anti-Hinduism. Despite both being the most persecuted people in history.

#1062

Terence…It’s very easy to jump to conclusions about someone on account of what they have written. You have to get used to the persons style of writing and their intention and get a feel for what they are really about.

SD is very knowledgeable regarding Indian history. He has a gift in that area. I don’t feel a humiliation by saying this. Yes he can appear arrogant at times and anti west and be downright irritating …but I have seen more about him and know he can be trusted, at the end of the day…by that I mean he is a decent guy. Sorry, but I think you are being too sensitive in your response to challenging text.

#1063

[QUOTE=MindNinja;54710]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.[/QUOTE]

Wow. Thank you for making perfect, logical sense once again.

This is precisely what SD and I have been arguing for 36 pages, with the exception that if one seeks to practice it liberally, one should still respect the religion/culture it came from, rather than defaming it and spreading lies about it.

#1064

[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.

You obviously have a distaste for England. SO DON’T LIVE IN ENGLAND. You are a spoiled hypocrite. You don’t like the ‘west?’ T[B]hen 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.[/B]
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]

No, it is misinformed part-Indians like you that give Indians as a whole, a bad name.

So you are saying fighting against misinformation and ignorance regarding Indian history and Hinduism is bad? What is wrong with you!?

Evil white women in skirts? What the f***? You are such a damn racist. If you don’t like Indians, India, or Hinduism, WHY ARE YOU PRACTICING YOGA? Why are you practicing something thats a product of the efforts of supposedly sexist Indian/Hindu men?

In the end, it is you that is the hypocrite and the bigot. Practicing OUR traditions and THEN spewing crap such as “Hindus practiced human sacrifice,” “Yoga predated Hinduism,” and so forth. Practicing Yoga and then BLAMING INDIA for its faults, when it was the British who turned it into the nation it became. BLAMING US when WE are trying to ameliorate the damage the British did.

FYI, I indeed dislike the West/Westerners because of the IDEALS they embody; economic/political/religious/racial world dominance. That does not mean I hate THE RACE, but rather the IDEALS that MAKE THE RACE the WAY IT IS.

And you, Terrence, (or should I say people like you) are the very reason I dislike the West.

#1065

This forum/site has more rules and restrictions than any other forum I have every encountered. This is ironic because my practice of yoga has led me to believe in fluidity, openess and expansion. Oh well. . .Take care.

#1066

[QUOTE=marperl;54941]This forum/site has more rules and restrictions than any other forum I have every encountered. This is ironic because my practice of yoga has led me to believe in fluidity, openess and expansion. Oh well. . .Take care.[/QUOTE]

This site actually has less restrictions than most other forums.

What indicated otherwise?

#1067

Human Values: The Common Ground Of All Religions
4:04 AM
I see a crisis facing the world today. It is fundamentally one of identification. People identify themselves with limited characteristics such as gender, race, religion and nationality, forgetting their basic identity as part of the universal spirit. These limited identifications lead to conflict on a personal level and globally.
Every individual is much more than the sum of these limited identifications. The highest identification we can make is that we are part of Divinity, and only secondly are we human beings and members of the human family. In divine creation, the whole of the human race is united.
Along with the proper identification of our true nature, we need to return to the values that are the essence of all major traditions. Religion has three aspects: values, rituals and symbols. The moral and spiritual values are common to all traditions, and the symbols and practices–those rituals and customs that form a way of life within a religion–are what distinguish one tradition from another and give each their charm. The symbols and practices are like a banana skin, and the spiritual values–the quest for truth and awareness of our divinity–are the banana. However, people in every tradition have thrown away the banana and are holding on to the skin!
This distinction between value and ritual and symbol was made in ancient times. The Sanskrit term smriti refers to those practices that are appropriate to time and place, those things that are time-bound. Shruti refers to those values that are timeless.
In the right order of things, what is time-bound is secondary to what is timeless, or eternal. However, in all the traditions, we find the order inverted. People tend to honor what is time-bound (the symbols and practices–those things which give them an individual identity) more than the values, which are timeless. Then fanaticism flourishes and the differences have to be defended. We can see this today in the wars taking place around the world in the name of religion. If we could focus on the values, the larger truth that the symbol represents, then most of the conflict in the world would be resolved.
Symbols vary between religions because they relate to the relative factors of location, environment and time. The crescent moon and star on the flag of Islam was chosen by people living in a desert region, where evening is a pleasant relief from the scorching heat of the day. The sun was chosen as a religious symbol in Japan and in Tibet where it gives welcome warmth and a feeling of eleva*tion. Symbols are relative, but they are intended to lead us to something beyond the symbol, to the essence of religion. We need to reach for the deeper values and not be distracted by the apparent differences.
Practices are also time-bound, dictating how you should dress, what name you are to take, what you can eat, how many wives you may have, how a person should be punished if they make some mistake. In all traditions you find practices like these that were necessary at the time they were instituted, but they may no longer serve a good purpose today. In the Koran , it is prescribed that if someone steals, their hand must be cut off. At one time a Christian who wanted to be religious had to take a vow of poverty. Jains were not allowed to touch money (this dilemma was solved by having someone accompany them to carry their money for them). Jews could do no work on the Sabbath. Those who follow this rule today cannot turn on a light switch.
Human values are social and ethical norms common to all cultures and societies as well as religions. They represent a melding of social progress, justice and spiritual growth.
The timeless values are:

  • a deep caring for all life

  • a responsible attitude toward the planet

  • nonviolence

  • compassion and love

  • friendliness and compassion

  • generosity and sharing

  • integrity, honesty and sincerity

  • moderation in one’s activity

  • service

  • commitment and responsibility

  • peace, contentment, enthusiasm
    Much of the misery that has come into the world in the name of religion can be avoided by reintroducing these shared values. And it is not necessary to use guilt and fear to promote these values. You will find in the history of all the religious systems in the world that guilt and fear were used to control people, but such discipline is not needed today. At this time we need only to cultivate love and understanding.

  • Art of Living Foundation

#1068

I am new to this thread so sorry if I am bringing up old stuff. Firstly Yoga is unequivocally Hindu. NO problem. However, the underlying problem seems to have been ignored. If Yoga is Hindu, does this mean that it cannot ALSO be Buddhist, or Jain, or even fitness and exercise? - maybe Iyengar or Bikram? The pluralistic Hindu traditions seem to want to inform us that we can devote our lives to Krishna or Ganesha, and still be Hindu. So the words we need to use are not EITHER/OR but ALSO/AND. Hinduism is so plural that Buddha is often seen as a Hindu Avatar. We are dealing with very complex sets of things and by claiming Hindu EXCLUSIVITY with yoga is actually denying both Hinduism and yoga. Also, with a risk of oversimplification, the fact that yoga is Hindu is NOTIONAL - in the same way that “Cricket is British” is notional. I am not sure that English cricketers would suggest that their Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani colleagues are not playing “real” cricket - would they?

#1069

[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;55538]I am new to this thread so sorry if I am bringing up old stuff. Firstly Yoga is unequivocally Hindu. NO problem. However, the underlying problem seems to have been ignored. If Yoga is Hindu, does this mean that it cannot ALSO be Buddhist, or Jain, or even fitness and exercise? - maybe Iyengar or Bikram? The pluralistic Hindu traditions seem to want to inform us that we can devote our lives to Krishna or Ganesha, and still be Hindu. So the words we need to use are not EITHER/OR but ALSO/AND. Hinduism is so plural that Buddha is often seen as a Hindu Avatar. We are dealing with very complex sets of things and by claiming Hindu EXCLUSIVITY with yoga is actually denying both Hinduism and yoga. Also, with a risk of oversimplification, the fact that yoga is Hindu is NOTIONAL - in the same way that “Cricket is British” is notional. I am not sure that English cricketers would suggest that their Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani colleagues are not playing “real” cricket - would they?[/QUOTE]

All SD and I were saying was that Yoga came after “Hinduism.” This is a historical fact.

#1070

No, my point is not that Yoga came after Hinduism. Yoga is Hinduism and arose simultaneously with Hinduism. The earliest Yoga is found in the Vedas.

#1071

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55594]No, my point is not that Yoga came after Hinduism. Yoga is Hinduism and arose simultaneously with Hinduism. The earliest Yoga is found in the Vedas.[/QUOTE]

Ah, thanks for the correction.

I was referring to the organized system of Yoga anyway, as found in the Yoga Sutras.

If you are speaking of Yoga in general, then us, they arose simultaneously.

#1072

No, my point is not that Yoga came after Hinduism. Yoga is Hinduism and arose simultaneously with Hinduism. The earliest Yoga is found in the Vedas.

I think here you stop short of claiming that the two words mean EXACTLY the same thing by using the word “simultaneously”.

So, you tacitly admit that yoga and Hinduism are not exactly the same thing - which seems a reasonable statement.

Rather, I think you mean they arose “at the same time” and you could be right.

But that point of chonological seriation is actually an academic one, and something that might be either supported or brought into question by a historian, either european or asian - when it comes to discovering and presenting historical evidence nationality and religious beliefs are not as relevant as they are when it comes to interpreting that findings - or making an informed opinion - and opinion is what we make of something.

The problem we have when we talk about yoga is usually one of definition.

Eg. Contrary evidence to Hindu claims rely on artifacts that simply show people sitting cross-legged - this to me is not a very good way of proving that yoga was being practiced at a particular place or a particular time.

But similarly, simply because the first WRITTEN evidence we have of yoga is the vedas neither convinces me that yoga absolutely began at that time either.

We might speculate that some form of yogic tradtion was being practiced thousands of years before by illiterate, nomadic tribes for example, but they neither called it yoga nor had the skills to record what it was they were doing.

This is speculative on my part I know, but after all consider this: “absence of evidence” is not the same as “evidence of absence”.

What I mean is that we have to look at what the evidence we have might actually mean, and how significant it is.

Hinduism seems to be “the best bet” when it comes to looking at the origins of yoga - but it wasn’t so long ago that everyone thought the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth.

Again, I am not sure that because two things may have occured at about the same time that this means that they ARE, in fact - EXACTLY the same THING.

There were also times in its history when yoga was seen as something outside Hinduism as its practitioners were outcasts and it was socially unacceptable.

Hinduism itself has managed to capture many different beliefs and practices, yoga being one of many.

Hinduism encompasses a much broader and larger corpus of texts than yoga, and so we might think of yoga as a subset of Hinduism, much like “lotus” is a subset of “plants”.

This might explain how yoga can, and has been lifted from its Hindu foundation and found root in Tibet, China, Europe and America wheras Hinduism has tended to develop differently.

#1073

I think here you stop short of claiming that the two words mean EXACTLY the same thing by using the word “simultaneously”.

Nope, not really. We are using these words Yoga and Hinduism as separate words out of convention. They are both the same thing, and the intelligent amongst us know this.

But similarly, simply because the first WRITTEN evidence we have of yoga is the vedas neither convinces me that yoga absolutely began at that time either.

We might speculate that some form of yogic tradtion was being practiced thousands of years before by illiterate, nomadic tribes for example, but they neither called it yoga nor had the skills to record what it was they were doing.

This is speculative on my part I know, but after all consider this: “absence of evidence” is not the same as “evidence of absence”.

We can speculate that the spaceship was used by an illiterate nomadic tribe thousands of years before. After all the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence :wink:

Stop wasting my time with this useless speculation. The evidence shows that Yoga was a practice discovered by the Vedic people. The end. Deal with it.

#1074

We are using these words Yoga and Hinduism as separate words out of convention. They are both the same thing, and the intelligent amongst us know this.

OK, I understand from this that you are asserting that although the words ARE (obviously) separate they denote an equivalence and may be used interchangeably - one other example of the way language can be used like this might be “lamp” and “lightbulb”.

I have no problem with this, although I am sure you will agree that when you say, “They are both the same thing” you mean the same “SET of things” represented by use of either word - as you will know that both words represent many ideologies, sects, traditions, philosophies and methodologies.

As entities, Hinduism does share this similarity with yoga in that each represents very complex sets of things, rather than a single, discrete practice or belief.

All there is left to argue, if we feel so disposed is what belongs in each set, and this is something I have no time for, and I am guessing from your response - neither do you.

I am also of the opinion that speculation is not something that we should engage in for its own sake, but neither should we turn a blind eye as to the level of certainty we may have in discussing the subject, and I would argue that when we are dealing with ancient history, reasonable speculation (or perhaps “inference” is a better word) is almost as useful as interpreting the evidence, or a lack of it.

I have no personal issues whatsoever with the origins of yoga, as much of it is academic and might not always be especially meaningful unless one is also committed to it - and I thank you for introducing some heat into what can be very cold subject matter.

I am currently working on a number of campaigns to try and get Hinduism better represented at national level within the yoga community within the UK, and to some extent America and Europe and would welcome any help that you might be able to offer in this regard.

As much of this work is of a political nature I cannot discuss it in public form but would be happy to discuss further through other channels if anyone is interested.

#1075

The words “Hinduism” and “Yoga” indeed refer to a complex tradition. But this tradition is not complex if you are culturally and historically aware. Something does not begin as complex, but becomes complex over time. Originally, around 7000BCE Hinduism was not complex. It was known as Vedic times and the Vedic people worshipped expressions of the ONE Brahman they called devas by performing fire sacrifices and inner sacrifices using practices of Yoga. This consisted of moral acts, breathing, physical austerity and meditation. So it is right to say Yoga is Hinduism. As it refers to both the philosophy and practice of the Vedic people.

Then after Vedic times we have classical times. In the Hindu calender this begins in 3000BCE with the beginning of Kaliyuga. It is shortly afterwards that we see the the rise of the sects of Hinduism: Vaishnavism, Shivaism, Shaktism and finally Smartism. Before, the Vedic people worshipped natural powers. Now Hindus shift to worshipping deity, but their practice of worship is still Yoga and their philosophy is still Yoga.

Every Hindu scripture teaches Yoga philosophy and practice:

The Vedas
The Upanishads
The Gita
The Yoga Vasista
The Tantras

This is why Yoga and Hinduism are interchangable terms for the same Vedic religion.

#1076

[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;55971]I think here you stop short of claiming that the two words mean EXACTLY the same thing by using the word “simultaneously”.

So, you tacitly admit that yoga and Hinduism are not exactly the same thing - which seems a reasonable statement.

Rather, I think you mean they arose “at the same time” and you could be right.

But that point of chonological seriation is actually an academic one, and something that might be either supported or brought into question by a historian, either european or asian - when it comes to discovering and presenting historical evidence nationality and religious beliefs are not as relevant as they are when it comes to interpreting that findings - or making an informed opinion - and opinion is what we make of something.

The problem we have when we talk about yoga is usually one of definition.

Eg. Contrary evidence to Hindu claims rely on artifacts that simply show people sitting cross-legged - this to me is not a very good way of proving that yoga was being practiced at a particular place or a particular time.

But similarly, simply because the first WRITTEN evidence we have of yoga is the vedas neither convinces me that yoga absolutely began at that time either.

[B]We might speculate that some form of yogic tradtion was being practiced thousands of years before by illiterate, nomadic tribes for example, but they neither called it yoga nor had the skills to record what it was they were doing.[/B]

This is speculative on my part I know, but after all consider this: “absence of evidence” is not the same as “evidence of absence”.

What I mean is that we have to look at what the evidence we have might actually mean, and how significant it is.

Hinduism seems to be “the best bet” when it comes to looking at the origins of yoga - but it wasn’t so long ago that everyone thought the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth.

Again, I am not sure that because two things may have occured at about the same time that this means that they ARE, in fact - EXACTLY the same THING.

[B]There were also times in its history when yoga was seen as something outside Hinduism as its practitioners were outcasts and it was socially unacceptable.[/B]

Hinduism itself has managed to capture many different beliefs and practices, yoga being one of many.

Hinduism encompasses a much broader and larger corpus of texts than yoga, and so we might think of yoga as a subset of Hinduism, much like “lotus” is a subset of “plants”.

This might explain how yoga can, and has been lifted from its Hindu foundation and found root in Tibet, China, Europe and America wheras Hinduism has tended to develop differently.[/QUOTE]

The only parts I disagreed with are the bolded parts.

First of all, all hunter-gatherer and nomadic peoples practiced forms of shamanism and nature worship. It is illogical, in light of all archeological evidence there is, to think that Yoga, even in its “primitive” form, could have existed long ago.

I have never heard of such a time period in which Yoga was suppressed. Yoga was just another philosophical sect of Hinduism. Whether any persecution of Yoga practitioners occurred or not is not a religious problem, insofar as Hinduism is concerned, but rather a problem highly dependent on the particular village, town, guild, or kingdom in question. You must remember that Hinduism is also a culture that many different groups in what we now call “India” practiced differently.

#1077

[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56111]OK, I understand from this that you are asserting that although the words ARE (obviously) separate they denote an equivalence and may be used interchangeably - one other example of the way language can be used like this might be “lamp” and “lightbulb”.

I have no problem with this, although I am sure you will agree that when you say, “They are both the same thing” you mean the same “SET of things” represented by use of either word - as you will know that both words represent many ideologies, sects, traditions, philosophies and methodologies.

As entities, Hinduism does share this similarity with yoga in that each represents very complex sets of things, rather than a single, discrete practice or belief.

All there is left to argue, if we feel so disposed is what belongs in each set, and this is something I have no time for, and I am guessing from your response - neither do you.

I am also of the opinion that speculation is not something that we should engage in for its own sake, but neither should we turn a blind eye as to the level of certainty we may have in discussing the subject, and I would argue that when we are dealing with ancient history, reasonable speculation (or perhaps “inference” is a better word) is almost as useful as interpreting the evidence, or a lack of it.

I have no personal issues whatsoever with the origins of yoga, as much of it is academic and might not always be especially meaningful unless one is also committed to it - and I thank you for introducing some heat into what can be very cold subject matter.

I am currently working on a number of campaigns to try and get Hinduism better represented at national level within the yoga community within the UK, and to some extent America and Europe and would welcome any help that you might be able to offer in this regard.

As much of this work is of a political nature I cannot discuss it in public form but would be happy to discuss further through other channels if anyone is interested.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you.

I wish you the best of luck in your combat against misconceptions and misinformation regarding Hinduism.

Hinduism is perhaps the most misunderstood and most hated religion in the world. It gladdens me to see someone fighting against this oppression.

#1078

The words “Hinduism” and “Yoga” indeed refer to a complex tradition.

So, we agree on that point.

But this tradition is not complex if you are culturally and historically aware.

I disagree, the complexity of something is not dependent on our awareness - unless you are thinking about oversimplification. To deliberately want to simply something despite its complexities is a teaching method and something serious practitioners are very wary of.

Something does not begin as complex, but becomes complex over time.

Yes, that is my assertion, that both words have undergone a semantic shift to such an extent that they encompass ideologies and methodologies that may not have been envisioned by the earliest traditions. Similarly we might look at the word “computer”, at one time was a simplt mechanical counting device but is now the word is used to describe an electronic, digital processor.

Originally, around 7000BCE Hinduism was not complex.

Well, we can only speculate - and in any case [B]it would not have been called Hinduism[/B], this is a [I]“eurocised”[/I] word that has been used to label as many Indic traditions as the orientalists have dared to commentate about

Yoga and Hinduism are interchangable terms for the same Vedic religion.

Yes, I have no problem with that, but we must notice how this is [B]notional[/B] and not an absolute truth.

That statement depends on being able to define what we mean by each word, and we have agreed that they represent [B]sets[/B] - and if we were to draw a Venn diagram they you may well want them to overlap completely, but (depending how we define each one) the way they overlap may differ depending on what we want to put in each set.

If we take a meditation object that brings us into a moderate level of mental absorbtion.

If we were to use Krishna as that object of love and devotion and I not sure why we would want to create any distinction between yoga and Hinduism.

If we were to change that object to say, Buddha, then you might also be able to hold onto both sets, if we concede that Buddhism is not a separate religion, but a hindu heterodoxy

But when it comes to using a candle flame, or the sound of a gong then we might struggle to attribute our yoga to any religion.

As I say, I have no problem with any of this and am not in opposition to your views, I am merely stating that your view is one of a mutiplicity of views - and you are quite within your rights to call all those views Hinduism too if you wish, but there does come a point when the words Hinduism and yoga as we use them today become less effective as a means of expression, and this is where we can become needlessly frustrated and angry.

#1079

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;56165]I agree with you.

I wish you the best of luck in your combat against misconceptions and misinformation regarding Hinduism.

Hinduism is perhaps the most misunderstood and most hated religion in the world. It gladdens me to see someone fighting against this oppression.[/QUOTE]

There is no way that Hinduism is the most hated religion in the world Nietzche…never in my life have I heard anyone slate this about the Hindu religion or the Hindus…if this is your experience, where have you experienced it?

If it was as you say, by now, I would have detected that…

I would say the the average person in Britain has no idea of the practices of Hinduism, so yes, better education about Hinduism, is needed.

I think Hinduism is left out of peoples minds here because they have a peaceful profile…they don’t draw attention to themselves or have had attention drawn to them

Muslims in Britain, here and there have had a harder time due to the London bombings and 9/11 etc…I am sure there are many who think Hindus are Muslims…yes, in Britain this happens…the Sikh Turban always helped people separate and identify them as Sikh…it gets harder when to the untrained eye, the visual differences between Hindu and Muslim is unclear.

#1080

all hunter-gatherer and nomadic peoples practiced forms of shamanism and nature worship. It is illogical, in light of all archeological evidence there is, to think that Yoga, even in its “primitive” form, could have existed long ago.

Again, you could be right - I do not want to engage in speculation for its own sake but this is the same attitude that I have in remaining unconvinced by the method of attributing the origins of yoga to the word appearing in a book, since most traditions were oral, they were passed on from Guru to student, from father to son etc. and it perhaps says more about our reliance on literature than it does about the origins of yoga.

I obviously want to attribute yoga to vedanta, but I am also aware that subsequent archeological evidence may well cast doubt on that, which I am also fine about, in the sense that it does not really matter that much - the point is rather academic.

I have never heard of such a time period in which Yoga was suppressed.

I have come across many references to yogis being feared and dangerous outcasts - living on the margins of their society. This would indicate a little socio-religious tension between the prevailing Hindu orthodoxy and yogis.