Reply to Yoga is Hindu. Period.

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Yoga is Hindu. Period."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][/quote]
There is so much wrong about your post. [/quote]

OP here. There's nothing wrong with his/her post, but a great deal of assumptions in yours. I swore to myself that I would drop the subject and conserve my energy and stay out of the thread earlier, but it appears that I just can't. So. Here goes!

[quote]
And I never said I can't "stomach" Hinduism.  I don't think anyone on this thread has said that.  You seem to have a lot of misplaced anger.[/quote]

The PP's "misplaced anger", and mine, is because you have repeatedly tried to fit dharmic religion into the paradigm of Abrahamic religion, on the assumption that a religion can only be a cohesive religion if it follows a progression model similar to Abrahamic religion. This same flawed reasoning, FYI, is why so many Westerners try to insist that Buddhism is atheist - it's because they can't accept a theistic model that doesn't believe in a single creator deity and does not advocate worship.

Similarly, you are unwilling to grasp a single, theistic religious complex which is unified despite not having one single origin, one single text, one single prophet. The unity is manifested in different ways, which the other PP explained and which I'm preeeetty sure I already wasted some breath explaining earlier.

[quote]
And for what it's worth, Gandhi studied Christianity pretty seriously.  He was genuinely interested in other faiths and still committed to Hinduism.  The interesting thing is that he was murdered by a Hindu nationalist.  Extremism in any religious tradition is, IMHO, a bad thing.[/quote]

Oh Lord.

1) Extremism is not what is going on here. Religious appropriation is what is going on here. Violation of boundaries is what is going on here. A lot of cultural privilege is what is going on here. I've said repeatedly that I've studied and admired other religious traditions such as the Jewish Kabbalah, which you conveniently ignored, though I said it like...3/4 times. If anyone is "genuinely interested in other faiths and still committed to Hinduism", it's me.

It's a bit of a straw man argument when a religious group that is being marginalized in its own tradition speaks up, and you equate that to Hindu nationalism. Just wow.

[quote]
I also didn't say that "Hinduism is not Hinduism."  I said that Hinduism has drawn from and has been influenced by other traditions.  Different sects of Hindus place different emphasis on different texts and different practices/deities.[/quote]

And yet even in the Vedic age, you didn't see Vaishnavas warring with Shaivas, or Shaktas murdering Sauras. Because Vishnu was never seen out of harmony with Shiva, and Devi was never seen as opposed to Surya, and every different sect and different text within the Hindu religious complex came out of the Vedas and adhered in one way or another to the overarching concept of a Divine Source emanating in different forms...and it is this, most of all, that differentiates different Hindu sects from Jain theology and Buddhist theology, and what unifies those Hindu sects.

[quote] And I said that it is mostly used as an umbrella term.  I also believe the term itself originated from outsiders and then stuck. [/quote]

Yes, both of these sentences are correct. I've also said both of these things myself. I've also said that these statements do not contradict the idea that Hinduism is a religion.

[quote]
You sound a bit unhinged and angry.  And I'm not sure exactly why. [/quote]

I can tell you why. Because you demonstrated an incomplete understanding of Hinduism, tried to define dharmic religions based on an Abrahamic model (and thus revealed your own unconscious biases as to what constitutes "religion"), defended religious appropriation, and accuse people trying to stop the appropriation of "extremism."

[quote]
No one is "stealing" Hinduism from you.   To imply that Hinduism exists in a vacuum is absurd.[/quote]

Nobody implied that any religion exists in a vacuum. However, on a practical, physical level (as opposed to a transpersonal, transcendent level), yes it is entirely possible for Hindu practices to be appropriated and for that to have social and cultural repercussions for the marginalized religious group.

Yoga appropriation may be more benign than swastika appropriation, but that doesn't mean the insensitivity doesn't exist. There have been a lot of "benign" appropriations throughout history. Like the PP said, everyone can enjoy yoga, but to disassociate it from Hinduism...that is the problem.

[quote]
No, Hinduism is not a missionary religion.  There is no mandate to convert people.  But there is also no organized body that serves as the final authority on what is or is not Hinduism.Rather, there are different schools, different temples, et cetera.  You act as if all Hindus are unified in their concept of what Hinduism means.  And I have heard Hindus -- yes, Hindus, and not, as you claim, people who don't care -- debate these issues.[/quote]

Once again....you're judging Hinduism's validity as a religion based on your experiences of Abrahamic religions. Hindus don't need to be incapable of internal debate in order to be considered Hindus, FYI. In that case we could start rounding up all the Christian denominations and tell them they aren't Christian.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics