Labels Without Differences [was christian yoga]

[Guest guest]

, "Devi Bhakta"

<devi_bhakta wrote:

>

> *** 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]."

>

 

Dear Devi Bhakta,

Similarly to our dear Kochu i do not like the label "Hinduism" at all

and only use it very reluctantly since it is an expression invented

by western Scholars and does not do justice to the great diversity

of religious expressions existing on indian soil.

I do not object to the statement that one cannot or should not

divorce Yoga from the Indic Religions and pay respect to its indic

origin.

But if the word Hinduism comes into play one must define Hinduism as

something different from the other Indic Religions or Asian Religions

otherwise the word does not make any sense at all.

 

I do consider it unjust to the Buddhists, Sikhs, Sufis and Jains to

deny them the right to define themselves as they like.

Some fervent universalist Hindus like to stick a Hindu Label on

everything, even modern inventions, declaring hinduism as supreme

and at the same time denying this right to others. i am opposed to

this attitude.

 

During my life I have not only studied the scriptures but also

received direct instructions from teachers of 3 of these 4

Traditions. I am writings this on their behalf, each of them deserves

to be respected as part of a distinct tradition as is their expressed

wish.

 

The author you cite is assuming that his interpretation is more valid

than those of the majority of other indological scholars and more

valid than the teachings and opinions that are preserved by the Gurus

of the concernend traditions (Jain and Bauddha) he refers too.

 

Contrary to the author i do not base my opinion merely on unproven

assumptions that are contrary to well established facts, but since I

had the honour to study Buddhism with Gurus of several buddhist

Traditions for quite some time i can ashure you that Buddhism is

considered by them as more than a "Label without a difference" but as

a teaching distinct from Hinduism.

 

To become a buddhist since the time of Buddha you have to undergo a

ceremony of conversion with consists of a set of vows, that differed

you either become a monastic or a lay follower of Buddha. You are

either a buddhist or a non-budhhist depending on wheter you take

refuge in the Buddha Dharma and Sangha or worldly gods.

 

The only buddhists that consider themselves non-distinct from Hindus

are found in the community of tantric vajracharyas of the Newar

community of Nepal, mainly followers of the esoteric Cakrasamvara

Tantra, and some Vajracharyas of Bungamati who worship

Matsyendranath as an emanation of the Adi Buddha and Adi Nath Shiva.

 

While the author based his opinions on a scholarly analysis of the

different writings, I base my opinion on a both a scholarly study of

the relevant texts plus the oral commentary of eminent teachers plus

the practical application of several buddhist sadhanasa and retreats

under the guidance of buddhist teachers.

 

If there are any, or how important the practical or the doctrinal

differences are can be discussed by me only AFTER one has paid due

respect to the opinion of these revered Gurus and their teachings,

which includes their wish to be considered as independent from

Hinduism.

 

Mahahradantha (Tenzin Sangpo)