Am I a Hindu ? . Who is a Hindu ? .

[Guest guest]

Dear Hindu Brothers and Sisters ,

Swamy Vivekananda has defined Hindu as a Person who lives according to the Vedas . The Hindus strictly follow certain traditional ethics in their lives . To them, "Bharat" is the " Land – Incarnation " of Mother Goddess Durga . They eulogize beloved Mother- Land by chanting "Bharat Mata Ki Jai " !!! ( Victory to Mother Bharat) .

Those born in non-Hindu religions in or outside Bharat but are following the Vedas are also Hindus .

There are different Spiritual Paths in Hinduism . A Hindu has the freedom to select the Path according to his/her taste .There are both Vegetarian and Non-Vegetarian Gods and Goddesses to choose from .

Hindus believe in "Karma"and reincarnation . A Person takes birth in this life according to his "Karma" in previous birth . Hindu tries to improve own "Karma" by purifying Self . Vedic practices such as Deity worship and `Nama-Sankeertan' are to purify the Self. There is a deep meaning behind each Vedic austery which were mercifully provided to Hinduism by Divine ancient Rishis . One's character depends a lot on the food he eats . This is why Beef is forbidden to the Hindus .

Only a highly skilled Hindu can grasp the Vedas . Bhagavad Gita contains the essence of the Vedas . A God believing Hindu can easily understand Gita and apply it in his own life. On the contrary , a God-hater can never gain anything from the Gita . For example , Jawaharlal Nehru who was born as Kashimiri Brahmin . . Sometimes He used to read Gita casually for a change , but he had no faith in Lord Krishna , the creator of Gita . Nehru always rubbished Hinduism and did everything possible to destroy it . Thus he violated the sacred injunctions of Bhagavad Gita. He ate meat, drank liquor, indulged in sinful sex with others wives and forgot own "Raja-dharma" . He betrayed his unfortunate countrymen ( who chose this Evil man and adored him) . Nehru was forced to see his country being defeated by China . And finally he died of the shameful "Syphilis's" !!!

Similarly there are other "Self-styled" Hindu - Leaders like L.K.Advani and Sushama Swaraj who project themselves as the only saviours of Hinduism . But in their personal lives they don't follow Lord Krishna's Gita-advice . Such Leaders always try to create communal conflicts for their personal gains . They are also evil personalities . It is no surprise that L.K.Advani seeks regular guidance from the Mumbai Bishop . Bhagavad Gita is not for "Pseudo-Hindus" like him .

Hinduism is based on the Vedas which is eternal Truth . There is no scope for opportunism in Hinduism . You either follow Lord Krishna or the Asuras . No question of political manipulations here .

Bhagavad Gita holds the key to Hinduism . It contains vital information to succeed in this life and to attain the eternal abode upon death .

If someone tries to educate other Hindus on Bhagavad Gita , it is a great contribution to Hinduism .

Hare Krishna,

Narayanadas

------------------------------Dr S Sharma <dr_ssharma wrote :

Who is a Hindu?

The definition of a Hindu is so simple , precise and most satisfying as described in this Sanskrit verse :

AASINDHU SINDHU PARYANTA, YASHYA BHARAT BHOOMIKA; PITRIBHU PUNYA BHOOSCHAIVA, SA VAI HINDU RITI SMRITAH. ------------D. V. Savarkar.

There is a land between river Sindhu and an ocean [Hindmahasagar/Indian ocean ] called Bharat and those who consider this land as their father land [ land of their ancestors] and /or holy place [ land of pilgrimage /Punya bhoomi] are all Hindus .Veer Savarkar defined the word Hindu while in Kalpani - Andaman Nicobar jail in 1905.

This is the definition we must know and adopt and teach every Hindu and be proud and have no dilemma about yourself as a Hindu .

SAY WITH PRIDE THAT I AM A HINDU.------Swami Vivekanand. DR.S.SHARMA

----------------.

Am I a Hindu?

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist & file_name=mitra%2Fmitra279%2Etxt & writer=mitra

A London datelined report last week said that a school run by a Hindu religious foundation had laid the criteria to qualify as a "practising Hindu". Only those who fulfilled these would be considered for 30 generous scholarships offered by the Avanti Krishna School in Harrow on London's outskirts .

Apparently, under British Government rules, educational institutions run by religious foundations can receive official funding only if they prove that special benefits are extended to members of the community they purportedly cater to . That requires such institutions to classify the defining characteristics of the religious group concerned . This poses no problem for "people of the Book" -- Christians, Muslims, Jews and most major religions . But, in order to qualify for Government assistance Hindu institutions, too, had to define "Hindu".

The neo-Hindu foundation, apparently linked to the Krishna Consciousness movement, faced a dilemma . There is, after all, no authoritative definition of what makes a person a Hindu . For more that 5,000 years that Hinduism has flourished in the geographical confines of the Indian subcontinent, nobody has attempted this mind-boggling task . However, in their eagerness to attract funding, the school authorities hurriedly put down a definition conforming, predictably, to their own beliefs and practices .

According to the conditions laid down, to be a "practising Hindu" a person had to : (a) Offer prayers daily at a temple or in the home; (b) Participate in temple activities/rituals at least once a week ; © Perform voluntary services in a temple at least once a week ; (d) Follow the tenets of Hindu scriptures, particularly the Bhagvad-Gita in everyday life ; and (e) Abstain from consumption of meat, alcohol and tobacco as a matter of principle . As the report unraveled , I shuddered. By this definition, I do not qualify to be a Hindu at all . In fact, I don't fulfil a single criterion . While I do occasionally offer prayers at home, I do not visit temples regularly. Of course, I have gone to Tirupati, Varanasi, Kalighat and some other Hindu shrines, but except on Saraswati Puja (Vasant Panchami) . I do not usually pay obeisance at temples unless I get an urge. On occasions such as launching a new project or entering a new home, I do organise a puja and devoutly offer prayers while, conversely, avoiding starting anything new on inauspicious periods such as pitrapaksh. Diwali is observed at home and office every year, but that is about all by way of participation in rituals. I have read and tried to comprehend the Bhagvad-Gita and some Upanishads, but have never consciously thought of following the tenets of the Gita in everyday life, whatever that means. And as for abstinence from meat, alcohol and smoking, I am "guilty" on all three counts. So am I a Hindu? But then, I have always prided myself for being a Hindu, though I am probably more of a "political Hindu" than a religious one. Till the Harrow school chose to define Hinduism in a narrow, sectarian way I never thought it necessary to conform to a rigid set of doctrines to belong to my own faith. Perhaps, it is not the fault of the foundation. Seeking Government funding is a legitimate pursuit of any social or educational institution. Here the Central Government subsidises Haj pilgrimage while some State Governments, almost in retaliation, nowadays offer financial packages to pilgrims undertaking the arduous trek to Kailash-Mansarovar. Land is given at subsidised rates to charitable institutions, most of which are run by religious bodies. So, the Avanti Krishna School at Harrow cannot be faulted for seeking official funds. The problem lies with British rules and procedures, which are based on the underlying assumption that religious identities are codified in accordance to scriptures. This is axiomatic for Judeo-Christian (or Abrahamic) faiths, which originated in the same geographical area and share cultural and theological commonalities. Incidentally, most Indic religions too are clearly demarcated. There is no difficulty about defining a Jain, Buddhist or Sikh (although there are some breakaway sects there too), even if these religions share an entire body of philosophy with Hinduism. But try defining a "practicing" Hindu and you open a Pandora's box. At the risk of sounding like woolly-headed liberals, a tribe I intellectually despise, I have always believed that liberalism is my religion's greatest strength. Consider the sheer diversity of beliefs and practices that are accommodated happily within its ample bosom. The Kashmiri Pandit is an avid meat/ fish eater and yet this community is regarded as one of the purest Brahmin sub-groups. The daughter of one of Karnataka's leading Christian political families told me that they were once high caste Brahmins ostracised for consuming fish and, in protest, converted to Christianity. Even now, arranged marriage in that family happens only among fellow Brahmin-Christians! The mahant of the Gorakh Nath Math in Gorakhpur is necessarily a Rajput, not qualified to priesthood under the chaturvarna classification. My own upper caste (Kayasth) claims were rubbished by a priest in Haridwar. He informed me that pandas there clubbed all castes from Bengal, Orissa and Assam together, because we consume fish and meat. Yet these States boast Kalighat, Jagannath Puri and Kamakhya, three of Hinduism's holiest shrines. In Delhi's Bhairon Mandir (opposite Pragati Maidan), the standard offering is a bottle of rum, whisky or more frequently country hooch. After a few drops are poured on the lingam, the bottle is returned to the devotee as prasad! Examples of this bewildering diversity can be multiplied ad infinitum. The time, in fact, is for greater liberalism rather than constriction. I was distressed when some Balinese Hindus were recently denied entry to the Jagannath temple in Puri because they didn't "look like Hindus". Having visited Bali, 97 per cent of whose population is Hindu, thanks to the 6th Century mission of Swami Markandeya, it was shockingly insensitive of the Puri priests to do this. They obviously do not know that on Mauni Amavasya, the busy N'gurah Rai Airport at Denpasar shuts down because the island observes maun or silence. A Thai princess was recently turfed out of the same temple because she declared herself Buddhist. Incidentally, King Bhumibol of Thailand sports the title Rama IX and engaged the scholarly PV Narasimha Rao in a three-hour discussion on Hindu philosophy and scripture during the late Prime Minister's Bangkok visit some years ago. Hinduism survives and thrives because it is a way of life, not a codified text. We are different from others because anybody who considers himself or herself a Hindu is a Hindu; nobody has the right to decide who is a Hindu and who isn't. So, regardless of the firman of the ayatollahs of Harrow I remain a proud Hindu.

"A warrior relaxes and abandons himself; he fears nothing. Only then will the powers that guide human destiny open the road for a warrior and aid him. Only then…."