@Dwai Please note that both SD and I have agreed that Hinduism is a eurocentric concept.
SD then goes on to eqaute a eurocentric notion witha sanskrit word, “yoga” and argue their equivalence. I would just leave that nonsense there but he then goes on to complain that eurocentrics have spoiled his own (adopted) eurocentrism - CAN YOU NOT SEE THE ABSURDITY OF HIS POSITION?
@Nietzsche I love your arts - but not your smarts - don’t give up on the pretty pictures - you have found your true calling
[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56632]You are taking everyone around in a circle again:-
WHAT DO YOU WANT HINDUISM TO REPRESENT?
WHAT DO YOU WANT YOGA TO REPRESENT?
You can’t just say they are the same thing withour analysing them.
ONCE AGAIN - I REPEAT HINDUISM is an ENGLISH word - so you have to tie down that notion - yoga is also a difficult one to pin down (see above).
YOUR claim that YOGA IS HINDUISM is very unstable.
From your responses, you are ACTUALLY saying that YOGA CAN BE NOTHING ELSE BUT HINDUISM which implies that if it is not Hinduism it is not yoga?
So - as I have said before - you can say “yoga is Hinduism” - and I agree - but see my previous response as you are oversimplifying the issue in order to promote the interests of Indian Nationalism - you are appealing to Indians to rise up against Europeans on the basis that they diid not do a good enough job at translating a text that even Sanskrit scholars still argue about !
Lame[/QUOTE]
Calm down. Take a deep breath. Stop typing in caps and making yourself look like a raging imbecile.
So what if its an English/Arabic/Persian word? Bollywood is an English word. Who cares? People label things all the time, and sometimes the name sticks.
No, it is not unstable. Your claims which are based on racist interpretations of our history are the most unstable here.
What you are saying is that “Allah” didn’t exist since the Arabic word for it didn’t exist until after Prophet Mohammed. This is a retarded argument since Allah is simply what the Arabs called their concept of the Divine.
Hey guess what? “God” didn’t exist until the English language popped up! You are a moron if you don’t realize the stupidity of your argument.
This has nothing to do with Indian nationalism. I see that Yoga has failed to have any appreciable effect on opening your mind and soul. This is about the Truth.
You are precisely the reason why most Indians feel only us Indians should be allowed to represent our history. You have no idea how much damage these so-called “mistranslations” have done to Indian society. Every time we try to educate you racists, you just say “oh, its not a big deal.”
With respect, the better representation of India is a cultural, religious, and racial matter. You are not helping the issue. Please quit your activities and let people who know what they are doing (Indians/Hindus/historians) solve this problem. With your kind of attitude, you might as well be a Christian missionary who is constantly seeking to convert the “heathens.”
P.S: The AIT is well-known in the historical community to be a very flawed historical interpretation of Indian history. In fact, I asked all my history teachers in my high school on what they thought of the AIT. [B]All of them [/B] acknowledged its falsity and told me that it pains them to have to teach it to their students.
[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56703]@Dwai - you are now at notch 2 - keep going like this and you could be my Guru sooner than you would like ;-)) - or maybe I will be yours ? In any case We appear to be shooting from the same place sir.
My yoga is authentic - and it appears from your initial responses that yours might be too.
I am wary of making any statments as to my exact attainments as this is counter productive in public forum.
My sources are authentic and there is as much baggage for Hindus as there are Christians, Americans, Rapists, Theives and Tibetans.
Please do not make the mistake of assuming I am like your western students.
In return I will not make the mistake of thinking that you are of the same simple mindset as SD and his cronies.[/QUOTE]
Your sources are the real baggage here. You are very deluded. I pity you.
You are like ignorant Western students who think that the “Hinduism” they see depicted in the media is actual “Hinduism”.
SD, Dwai, and I are all right. You are wrong. Why? Because you think you are Yogi/Hindu/historian/philosopher when you are not.
@Nietzsche please read my previous post on provisional naming - it is tradtional Indian logic which I rather hoped you would swallow - but maybe you are not as Indian as you would like which is why you become irrational and emotionally inflamed by my simple questions to SD’s claim that Yoga is Hinduism - you are behaving like a european - take a tip from Dwai as to how to conduct yourself in philosophical debate and stop being so european.
[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56707]@Dwai Please note that both SD and I have agreed that Hinduism is a eurocentric concept.
SD then goes on to eqaute a eurocentric notion witha sanskrit word, “yoga” and argue their equivalence. I would just leave that nonsense there but he then goes on to complain that eurocentrics have spoiled his own (adopted) eurocentrism - CAN YOU NOT SEE THE ABSURDITY OF HIS POSITION?[/QUOTE]
You are a fool. Debating someone with your paucity of intellect is highly degrading to me.
I will repeat this for the hundredth time; Hinduism is indeed a English/Arabic/Persian word for “what the Indians did.” However, “Sanatana Dharma” and “Hinduism” are used interchangeably since they both refer to the same thing, just like “Bollywood” and “Indian film industry” are both used are synonyms.
You are very insular. Yoga (or should I say, “diluted Western yoga”?) has failed to open your mind. This is why I maintain that Yoga will never have any effect on Westerners so long as they cling to their supremacist, racist, and cultural biases.
[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56711]@Nietzsche please read my previous post on provisional naming - it is tradtional Indian logic which I rather hoped you would swallow - but maybe you are not as Indian as you would like which is why you become irrational and emotionally inflamed by my simple questions to SD’s claim that Yoga is Hinduism - you are behaving like a european - take a tip from Dwai as to how to conduct yourself in philosophical debate and stop being so european.[/QUOTE]
Yogi Mat, please calm yourself. There is absolutely no need to start resorting to racism.
You really need to stop misrepresenting people’s posts. You have become highly irrational and deluded because you cannot accept we are telling the Truth.
A true Hindu/Indian/Dharmi does not shirk from the Truth. You are not a Hindu/Dharmi/Indian.
I wish you the best of luck. You are traversing down the wrong road, the road to ignorance and destruction. I cannot set you on the right path for you refuse to open your eyes.
Namaste.
“Sanatana Dharma” and “Hinduism” are used interchangeably
Well great - so we can FINALLY say that yoga is Sanatana Dharma since the claim is that Hinduism and yoga can also be used interchangably (see previous responses).
Sanatana Dharma is timeless - it has no beginning and no end - wheras both you and SD want your Hinduism (and your yoga) to start - what 10,000 years ago or something?
(Not that it matters as it is purely academic).
How many other things can you say are alike which are also different?
If something is timeless and absolute (beyond conception) and something else is chronologically seriated, relative and conceptualised how can we claim they are exactly the same thing?
This is not something I expect you to fully comprehend going by your failure to understand traditional Indian logic elsewhere but pleased do try again.
I haven’t quite given up on you yet.
Let me make it really simple for you - I have a picture in my mind of a clear blue sky (Sanatana Dharma) and I suggest that this mind-image is always available to me, and has always been available to all my forebears since we humans first began roaming the earth - it is a generic image with no identifiable characteristics - it has no name - only the colour blue and a sense of clarity.
I do not need to teach my children about what this clear blue sky look like - they look up and they see it.
However, if I have a photograph of a cloud formation from a day in May 10 years ago in Kerala (Hinduism/ Buddhism/Sikhism/Jainism/Indology/Atheism/Christiamnity…) I must preserve this picture and not let it get spoilt if I want to convey that information to people.
Now, you are saying that the photograph I have is representative of all the clear blue skies that there ever were anywhere in the world.
Wheras I am refuting that claim and saying that the photograph I have is only a snapshot of what a clear blue sky looks like - at a particular time and in a particular place.
Now, what do you have to say about this idea? AND PLEASE no more about racist europeans making the sky look red or poor Indians having to read English translations of what a blue sky looks like.
Just stick to the problem of provisional naming and you will see why SD’s claim is TRUE - but with conditions.
If SD does not accept the conditions for his claim then I am afraid the claim is not valid.
If he is prepared to accept some limitations to his claim than we can all move on.
[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56718]@Nietzsche
Well great - so we can FINALLY say that yoga is Sanatana Dharma since the claim is that Hinduism and yoga can also be used interchangably (see previous responses).
Sanatana Dharma is timeless - it has no beginning and no end - wheras both you and SD want your Hinduism (and your yoga) to start - what 10,000 years ago or something?
(Not that it matters as it is purely academic).
How many other things can you say are alike which are also different?
If something is timeless and absolute (beyond conception) and something else is chronologically seriated, relative and conceptualised how can we claim they are exactly the same thing?
This is not something I expect you to fully comprehend going by your failure to understand traditional Indian logic elsewhere but pleased do try again.
I haven’t quite given up on you yet.[/QUOTE]
Your mental incapacity is beginning to make itself apparent. You are deluded and lost. As a true Hindu, unlike you, whose intellect far surpasses yours, I wish to help you come out of the diabolical white man’s life you lead.
I have never said Sanatana Dharma is timeless or asserted that it is 10000 years old. In fact, I have not mentioned any dates with respect to “Hinduism’s” origins because I understand that its a controversial field. Please do your best to stick to the truth. I know that such a thing can be hard for someone who was raised in a bestial and degraded culture.
Your argument is, therefore, baseless. It is clear that I am infinitely superior in matters of logic, philosophy, semantics, etc.
[QUOTE=Yogi Mat;56719]Let me make it really simple for you - I have a picture in my mind of a clear blue sky (Sanatana Dharma) and I suggest that this mind-image is always available to me, and has always been available to all my forebears since we humans first began roaming the earth - it is a generic image with no identifiable characteristics - it has no name - only the colour blue and a sense of clarity.
I do not need to teach my children about what this clear blue sky look like - they look up and they see it.
However, if I have a photograph of a cloud formation from a day in May 10 years ago in Kerala (Hinduism/ Buddhism/Sikhism/Jainism/Indology/Atheism/Christiamnity…) I must preserve this picture and not let it get spoilt if I want to convey that information to people.
Now, you are saying that the photograph I have is representative of all the clear blue skies that there ever were anywhere in the world.
Wheras I am refuting that claim and saying that the photograph I have is only a snapshot of what a clear blue sky looks like - at a particular time and in a particular place.
Now, what do you have to say about this idea? AND PLEASE no more about racist europeans making the sky look red or poor Indians having to read English translations of what a blue sky looks like.
Just stick to the problem of provisional naming and you will see why SD’s claim is TRUE - but with conditions.
If SD does not accept the conditions for his claim then I am afraid the claim is not valid.
If he is prepared to accept some limitations to his claim than we can all move on.[/QUOTE]
Let me make something childishly clear.
Your deluded mind is now starting to project ideas on what [B]you think[/B] I have said this entire time. A product of growing up in an inferior culture no doubt.
I have never opined anything regarding a sect of Hinduism representing all of Hinduism. What I was trying to drill into your Indian-logic-deprived mind was that just because the label for something appeared long after the thing being labeled, that does not mean the thing being appeared at the same time as the label.
Allow me to make an analogy:
You walk into a store and see jars with a generic “Peanut Butter” label.
You walk into the same store the next day and now see jars labeled “Jiffy” in place of the previous ones.
This does not mean peanut butter was invented at the same time as the label “Jiffy.”
Your logic has been discredited and your argument proven to be, once again, baseless.
Yes, racist Europeans are responsible for the degradation and misrepresentation of Indian culture and religion, India, and Indians. You, poor lost soul, are a racist European. It was people like you who destroyed the very fabric of Sanatana Dharma.
Do not claim to be an Indian or a Hindu when you know not of our history, religion, and philosophy. Do not fight for us when you cannot even fight for yourself.
Do not practice false Yoga. I urge you to quit, discover yourself, and come to terms with your bigotry, racism, and ignorance.
Namaste.
Namaste,
Yogimat is a very interesting person. Until now, all opponents towards our position Yoga is Hinduism or Yoga and Hinduism are inseparable or integral, have made their case clear. It is another thing of course that their case has been found lacking and we have countered it with hard empirical and textual evidence.
Yogimat is the only “opponent” that has not made a clear case. I still have no clear idea of what his position in this debate is - it is the most confused presentation of somebodies position I have seen in a long time and a very confusing use of language. One time he says Yoga is a philosophy and a religion and another time he says he absolutely agrees Yoga is Hinduism. It appears all of his posts to both myself, Neitzsche and Dwai are just insults and patronizations. I also note how he keeps comparing his knowledge to our knowledge and calling his knowledge superior and underminine ours, for example he claimed I got all my knowledge from Wikipedia and one book by a swami, he said to Dwai, “No, you’re one notch up” though it has become apparent he has no knowledge in this area and he himself has said he does not like facts. This bespeaks insecurity. Dwai has made a good point, that Western converts to Hinduism or Yoga, suddenly start to think they know Yoga, Hinduism and have equivalent knowledge to somebody who is immersed in the tradition.
I don’t mind insults, as I got use to them on this forum from people like Indradeva etc. But when you are not making a solid point and your post is nothing but insults, then that is a clear sign of idiocy. I am sorry to say then Yogmat sounds like an utter idiot, an even bigger idiot than Indradeva. And yet this one claims to be a supporter and campainger of Hinduism. Ironic
I want to help Yogimat and I have tried to help him earlier by identifying what his position in this debate is. It appears Yogimat does not care about history at all, so he is not making a FOR or AGAINST case against the Indian chornology or the Western chronology. Although a lot of his posts, such as the link to the scholar at Punjab university saying Hinduism is a product of Buddhism assumes a Western chronology and nor has he taken AIT seriously and how much it has damaged and distorted the history of Hinduism and both Yoga, and despite the fact he has been told of how racist Indologists were and they indeed expressed their intention to destroy Vedic civilisation, he still seems sympathetic to them. I can surmise from this if not a complete acceptance of the Western chronology, an inclination towards it.
It is difficult to talk about history with somebody who categorically says he does not care for facts. After all, if you are talking about something that happend when you were not born, you clearly are going to have to rely on facts. This guy says he does not care for facts. Which kind of makes him look like an unscientific idiot who rejects the entire discipline of history. (But I bet you he’s cocksure on Western history and its dates like the batting of Hastings happening in 1066)
The argument he does appear to be making over and over again, despite the fact that it has already been refuted, is the very old argument we have heard from other historically ignorant people: "Hinduism was invented by the British because they invented the term"
Apparently, this argument is saying that something only comes into existence when you invent a term for it 
I do seriously think anybody who takes this argument seriously is mentally retarded.
I have already explained in the past on several occasions the reason the British classified Hinduism as a religion(as they did in classifying every other religion) was because the Indian traditions qualified as a religion based on the qualities a religion has: a belief in god/s and supernatural, worship practices and rituals, purification or salvation doctrine, a collection of tenets. Imagine, the if you were a British man arriving into India, and seeing Indian people worshipping an idol in a temple - are you not going to think this is a religion?
Of course you are. Because it is.
The British initially got confused because it looked like India had various religions: There were some Indians who worshipped Vishnu, some who worshipped Shiva, some who worshipped the Divine mother, and some who worshipped a number of gods - each had a vast tradition of its own, its own unique scriptures, mythology, philosophy and practices. But when they studied it deeper, they realised each of their traditions went back to a common older tradition: the Vedas. They realised that the gods Vishnu, Shiva, Divine mother are first described in the Vedas. They also realised that every tradition considered the Vedas as their master scripture. So it was clear now that all these traditions were part of the same tradition that went back to the Vedic tradition.
When they analysed the beliefs and practices of each sect of the Vedic tradition they discovered common doctrines and practices. They were 1) Atman and Brahman, they all believed that a deep spiritual reality existed within them that they must realise 2) Karma, dharma, samsara: They believed all of reality was governed by laws, there was an absolute law of cause and effect, and the world was place of suffering where we incarnate over and over again until we attain moksha/liberation 3) Samkhya: They all believed reality was multi-level or planes and time was cyclic, consisting of yugas and shared the same itihas(histor) and 4) They all had a collection of practices called Yoga which consisted of moral practices, postures, ascetic exercises, breath control, contemplation, meditation, ritual, idol worship.
It thus became very apparent to the British that this was ONE religion. And it had many sects which they identified as Vaishvaism, Shivaism, Shaktism and Smartism. No different to how Christianity has catholism, protestanism, mormonism, unitarianism, or Buddhism has Theravada Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism, Zen Buddhism and many sub-sects. They called this religion Hinduism, after the name of the people of India who they called “Hindoos” because that is what the Mughals called them.
Simply put, Hinduism refers to the Vedic tradition of the Indian people. It is distinct from Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism because they reject the Vedic tradition and insist on their own tradition. Although they have evolved out of Hinduism, they have asserted their independence from the tradition.
The Vedic tradition had their own terminology to refer to themselves. They called themselves Vedic dharma or the Astika tradition of India. The Astika tradition being the orthodox religious tradition which accepted the Vedas.
I cannot explain it any better than this. If you still don’t get it, you have to be mentally retarded. There is no other explanation for you not getting this.
The second point I want to explain is my position that Yoga IS Hinduism which I have not budged on ever since I declared it on this forum. Other people who share my position take a softer position saying Yoga is an integral part of Hinduism.
The reason for why I take the position Yoga is Hinduism is because both Yoga philosophy and practice is what Hindu religious scriptures teach. It is not just a part of the teachings, but a core teaching that pervades all of our religion and it is because we accept these teachings that we are Hindu. I believe in the ultimate self and ultimate reality, the law of karma and the goal of life to become liberated from rebirth, I believe reality is a spectrum of planes and I believe practicing Yoga will lead to upgrading my consciousness and finally liberation. Anybody should be all to identify me as a Hindu from what I have told.
All of core tenets of Hinduism which I identified in the earlier post: Atman and Brahman, Karma and Samsara, Samkhya and of course Yoga practices are encapsulated by the word Yoga alone.
Atman and Brahman: The very definition of Yoga is union/connection; the connection of lower self to higher self; of mind-body and spirit; of masculine with feminine; of the solar and lunar channels; of lower reality with higher reality; of man with god. They all mean the same thing. It about restoring the mind-body system to its original and essential state.
Karma and samsara: The very reason that Yoga works is because there is a law of cause and effect which governs everything, including the mind. The Upanishads say that prana and chitta respond to one another i.e., cause and effect. The reason there is suffering explains Samkhya darshana is because we are falsely misidentified or entangled with material reality, and we must reverse this identication or disentangle ourselves to reveal our essential nature as pure consciousness. Yoga darshana describes this same thing as modifications of consciousness, and only when we still the modifications, do we restore the original state as pure consciousness. Therefore the very reason anybody will do Yoga is because they identify their suffering, and Yoga scientifically can treat your suffering.
Samkhya: In Yoga it is accepted there exists several kinds of body. The physical body, the quantum body, the mental body, the intellectual body and causal body. In fact none of the Yoga techniques would work without reference to the the quantum body(prana body, energy body is technically wrong) because all the asanas are designed to remove blockages in the quantum body to get prana flowing again, activate chakras and awaken kundalini. Pranayama is based on stilling the activity of thoughts in the mental body. Dharana and dhyana is based on stilling the awareness in the intellectual body. Samyama is based on the causal body. These 5 bodies are first described in the Upanishads.
Yoga practices: This is a no brainer. Yoga practices presuppose all the former tenets. These practices are taught by all Hindu gurus and described in all Hindu scriptures. It is our means to liberate ourselves.
In conclusion it should be now apparent why Yoga is Hinduism. Not only is Yoga what Hindu gurus and scriptures teach, but Yoga itself presupposes every Hindu tenet that if you accept you will be clearly identified as Hindu. Simply put then Hinduims is the Yoga religion. Yoga is just a politically correct synonym for Hinduism. Anybody who is praciticing Yoga in its full form are indirectly subscribing to our religion. Those who accept Yoga philosophy are directly subscribing to our religion. Finally, those who only practice physical Yoga are partially subscribing to our religion.
To complete this triology of posts. Some people on this forum don’t call my posts posts, but propoganda But these are the same people who claim dancing is banned in India 
I will now explain why it is absolutely imperative to recognise that Yoga is Hinduism. Hinduism being the Yoga religion abounds in Yoga literature. There is not just the Yoga Sutras, there is the Bhagvad Gita, the Upanishads, the Samkhya karika and sutras, Yoga Vasistha, Shiva Samhita and of course the Vedas. This will give the yogi a comprehensive and detailed knowledge of Yoga its origins, history, philosophy, science and purpose. All Yogis need to read Hindu scriptures and understand Hinduism to get a full appreciation of Yoga. This is why Patanjali recommends the study of scripture.
Also, there are many great Yogic systems that one should also learn about and practice: Ayurveda(medicine) Jyotisha(astrology) Vaastu(engineering and architecture) Natya(music and drama) and Niti(politics and economics). These are all founded by enlightened yogis. These enlightened yogis also found the finest philosophical systems in the world: Nyaya(logic and epistemology) Vaiseshika(natural philosophy/physics) Mimassa(linguistics) Samkhya and Vedanta(metaphysics) Not to mention the most advanced language in the world, which gives you access to reading the Vedas.
In order to be a complete yogi one needs to be fully immersed in Hindism. Otherwise you will have massive gaps in your knowledge.
Location: Somewhere, and yet Nowhere
At least we agree on something !
Also, your inflammatory tone has been duly noted.
Do stop behaving like a european
[NOTE TO SELF: ADD Nietzsche to IGNORE LIST]
Bye bye
Thanks for your information dump on Hinduism SD, which was not asked for.
You fail to understand basic Indian logic, which is that the premise “YOGA IS HINDUISM” fails for TWO reasons.
For example - you want Hinduism to be vedic - but you say Buddhism is NOT vedic and yet it is also Hindu !!
So, you fail to see the incoherence in your statement and you need to soften your position to state that Hinduism and yoga are perhaps COTERMINOUS.
So, my compalint in that making the statment “YOGA IS HINDUISM” tyour assertion clearly fails for two obvious reasons.
By the way - in case you are tempted to backslide into Nietzsche racist jibes about me being anti-Hindu - I can also safely say (as I have said MANY MANY MANY times before) yoga is ALSO Hindu.
You are obviously inexpereienced in philosophical debate and I hoep you have learned something from making an assertion, providing evidence and then dealing with complaints and rebuttles.
I bear you no ill will sir and thank you foi the time you have taken.
Sorry it didn’t work out for you
If there is nothing else you wish to discuss with me then I willl add you to my ignore list in due course.
Thanks again.
You seem to behave like this thread revolves around you. That you have to ask for somebody to give you an argument or information, that somehow we are here to help you. The reality is in this 1000+ thread you just suddenly appeared, liberally thrown about insults and you’ve still not made a point
I have in the last three posts explained what Hinduism is, why Yoga is Hinduism and why it is essential any aspirant of yoga immerses themselves in Hinduism.
Now if you want to continue this discussion, then respond to the arguments I have given. Preferably, respectfully. If you continue to make posts which are full of insults, but no points, you will be branded as a retard.
- Hinduism is an English word that is a notional concept for an ideology and methodology which you have not been able to define in 40 pages without contradicting yourself
For example - you want Hinduism to be vedic - but you say Buddhism is NOT vedic and yet it is also Hindu !!
I said in that post that if you still don’t understand that Hinduism is just a term to describe the religion that was being practiced in India that goes back to Vedas, the only explanation is that you are mentally retarded.
I never said Buddhism is Hindu. It is clear to anybody who is not mentally retarded that Buddhism is not Hinduism. That is why Buddhism is considered a separate religion. In Hinduism we use the term “Nastika”
- Yoga is a Sanskrit word that appears in vedic scripture and has many different meanings. For example in yoga can mean in Sanskrit “the act of yoking or attaching”,
“a yoke or team”, “sum”, “expedient”, “means”, “supernatural means”, “magic”, “trick” and many other things, including “application of mind” and “concentration”. In modern
Indian languages the word has an equally wide range of meaning. In Bengali, for instance, yoga (pronounced jogo), can signify “union”, “mixing”, “blending”, “relation”, “contact”,
“expedient”, “medium”, “vehicle”, “auspicious time”, “remedy”, “food”, “addition”, and “the plus sign”.
We all know the Sanskrit word Yoga comes form the root yuj which means connection or union. You will see this definition cited everywhere on the net, in Yoga studios and by Yoga scholars.
Unlike you, I am going to stick to facts on what words mean. I am honestly suspecting you have problems with language. All the posts by myself, Neitzsche and Dwai are in English. You are English, you should be able to understand the points we are making in simple English.
So, my compalint in that making the statment “YOGA IS HINDUISM” tyour assertion clearly fails for two obvious reasons.
You have made nothing obvious other than the fact that words can have so many meanings. Yes, tell me something I don’t know. But we know what the word Yoga means and it is the most universally cited definition.
You are obviously inexpereienced in philosophical debate and I hoep you have learned something from making an assertion, providing evidence and then dealing with complaints and rebuttles.
I have a first class degree in philosophy, with a dissertation in Yoga, Samkhya and science with distinction. In addition to that I have been reading on Hinduism for 10 years and have read approx 100 scholarly books on Hinduism. I have also been a practicing Hindu for 10 years. I have also given talks on Hinduism at the Theosophical society England, attended by 40-50 people.
What are your credentials?
If there is nothing else you wish to discuss with me then I willl add you to my ignore list in due course.
Thanks again.
It will not make no difference to me whether you place me on an ignore list or not. I don’t know who you are. You have still not made any concrete points in this thread. And on top of that you sound mentally retarded and struggle with language. You will not be missed
Sorry, I quite simply do not believe that you have a degree in philosophy as your debating technique and arguments and so simplistic that they are at about the same level as English Secondary (Ordinary) level.
So, I wonder if you could provide evidence of this (I know you like empirical facts).
I will not repeat again the problems your claim that “Yoga IS Hinduism” has.
AGAIN - we have another contradiction - you say “I never said Buddhism was Hindu” but then you say it is “Nastika” which mean “Hindu heterodoxy”.
HO HUM - you are a very challenging opponent SD - but not in the way you think.
I am used to talking with Professors of philosophy and I have to say your arguments are at the same level as a child.
I am only not ignoring you yet because I feel sorry for you.
You continue to argue with yourself.
You really do have my sympathy - I can no longer be angry with you because you obviously struggle with basic logic - just like my six year old daughter - and I love her too.
God Bless SD - Satyagraha!!
Yogimat,
It is fairly obvious you are going to insult in every post now. I am simply going to accept this because it seems obvious you have this defect in your mind. I mean, seriously, your every other word in your posts are insults. And yet you call yourself a yogi
Anyway you did not answer my question, what are your credentials?