Labels Without Differences [was christian yoga]

[Guest guest]

*** Yoga does already exist divorced from Hinduism since appx. 2500

years. you just didn´t notice. Since appx 500 years before Christ,

Buddhism was founded. ***

 

If I my interject, this too is all a matter of labels; a distinction

without a difference. The following excerpt from Narendra Nath

Bhattacharyya's 1974 essay on the development of modern Hinduism,

entitled "The Formative Period, c. 600 BC- AD 300," sets out the

fact that these "-ism" labels have been mainly applied by outsiders

-- scholars, historians, ethnographers, etc. Below I've excerpted

just a few key paragraphs from NNB's lengthy analysis to support my

assertion. Arguments, examples and specific details may be found in

abundance by referring to the original:

 

**********

 

"The popular view that Buddhism or Jainism -- as well as the later

monotheistic creeds such as Vaisnavism, Saivism and others -- were

in constant conflict with the adherents of the 'orthodox Brahmanical

religion' (itself a misnomer) is fallacious. There was no such

Brahmanical religion in Indian history, though there is no dearth of

Brahmanical influence on most religious systems [that arose in

India], including Buddhism and Jainism. In fact, the renowned

Buddhist and Jain teachers and theoreticians were mostly Brahamnas

and they [influenced] these systems' orientation through the process

of Sanskritization. [...]

 

"The Buddha and Lord Mahavira did not found any new religion. They

set forth a way of life based on ethical principles. Although their

teachings later assumed a religious character, their original

purpose was different. [...] Though they had some functional

differences with the Vedic systems and their sectarian offshoots --

which subsequently came to be known as Hinduism -- from the

viewpoint of religio-philosophical terms and concepts, the basic

similarity underying all these systems cannot be overlooked or

ignored.

 

"[...] Hitherto in the studies on Indian religion the so-called

differences between various systems has been overemphasized by most

scholars, and their basic unity ignored.

 

"It is wrongly said that Buddhism and Jainism are anti-Vedic

systems. The evidence of the Buddhist and Jain texts suggests that

both the Buddha and Lord Mahavira did not consider Sruti or the

Vedas as the only source of valid knowledge. [but] the Buddha did

not reject the Vedic gods. Surprisingly enough, all the Rgvedic

nature-gods have a place of honor in Buddhism. Even the legends

pertaining to them occur in Buddhist mythology. Just as in the later

Samhitas and Brahmanas the Rgvedic gods were subordinated to the

ritualistic principle called yajna and in the Upanisads to the

idealistic principle called Brahman, so also in the Buddhist texts

the Rgvedic gods were subordinated to the Buddha. [...]

 

"So the post-Vedic [period's] thought-ferment -- whether of the so-

called non-Brahmanical heterodoxy, or of the so-called Brahmanical

orthodoxy -- yielded the same or similar ethical principles of

universal application that formed the substrata of the functional

aspects of all the subsequent sects and cults [within Hinduism,

Buddhism, Jainism, and others]."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

------------------------ Sponsor --------------------~-->

Protect your PC from spy ware with award winning anti spy technology. It's free.

http://us.click./97bhrC/LGxNAA/yQLSAA/XUWolB/TM

--~->

 

 

<*>

/

 

<*>

 

<*> Your