Hindu Narrative

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-sengotuvel+Apr 26 2007, 10:39 PM-->QUOTE(sengotuvel @ Apr 26 2007, 10:39 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->There is absolutely no need for this abject self flagellation.[right][snapback]67887[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Wow there, little critter. No need to jump to imaginings of self-flagellation.
It is a <i>fact</i> that the knoweldgeable Hindu people of the older generation of my acquaintance (and by symmetry I include many others) know more of Hinduism and lived it, than the modern types who feel their opinions on the same are as equally grounded.


Before moving on, just for clarification: I only posted #68 and #70 in this thread in reply to a statement of yours, for no other reason.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why don't you make an attempt to say why you think you are not up to your grandparents' standard?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Sometime earlier I already stated I was not going to be adding my 'Hindu narrative' and why.
Besides, this is a thread that is called "Hindu Narrative by Sengotuvel" who also wrote that "the ultimate Hindu, who's realised the absolute, can only be an atheist". For myself, I'd therefore feel as comfortable sharing with them personal experiences about Hindu villagers, friends and family, as I would with entrusting these to random people or missionaries or whatnots. Don't get all offended again, this is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Raju+Apr 27 2007, 08:36 AM-->QUOTE(Raju @ Apr 27 2007, 08:36 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-sengotuvel+Apr 27 2007, 07:53 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sengotuvel @ Apr 27 2007, 07:53 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I have already posted a passage where the author says how Smartha Brahmins and Iyengars are shunned by this group of Madhwa Brahmins as impure.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I can't find this, where was it ?

and shiv how do the Madhwa Brahmins view the Kerala Nambudiris ?
[right][snapback]67923[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Check post no 48.

Raju - remember the word parochial with a capital "P". There is no way this small group would even have come across Namboodiris, leave alone thought about them.

All this is really ironic because this very group had migrated South from Maharashtra and had the patronage of kings in an earlier era, and members of these and other groups had the patronage of the Maharaja of Mysore in a later era.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Apr 27 2007, 08:44 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Apr 27 2007, 08:44 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sometime earlier I already stated I was not going to be adding my 'Hindu narrative' and why.
Besides, this is a thread that is called "Hindu Narrative by Sengotuvel" who also wrote that "the ultimate Hindu, who's realised the absolute, can only be an atheist". For myself, I'd therefore feel as comfortable sharing with them personal experiences about Hindu villagers, friends and family, as I would with entrusting these to random people or missionaries or whatnots. Don't get all offended again, this is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.
[right][snapback]67925[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I am never one to feel shy of saying why I disagree as I am sure you would have figured out.

But unless you share your narrative the narrative does not come out. I see that you insist on listing reasons why you DO NOT want to post your narrative. No need to rationalize and give excuses. If you don't want to post your narrative, feel free to stay off from posting it. No need to make a post and say "I am not going to post my narrative because of this huge chip on my shoulder created by the "little critter" Sengotuvel and that upsets me" I am not trying to upset you deliberately - and I am requesting you politely to keep off my toes.

You are welcome to disagre - but do not expect me to put up with your self admitted impoliteness
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> But I do tend to be rude. Just ignore it. I'll try 'n learn politeness soon, I'll have some time.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I have already posted a passage where the author says how Smartha Brahmins and Iyengars are shunned by this group of Madhwa Brahmins as impure.

This was the attitude of one sect of Brahmins towards another, but it is a reflection of how India, full of Hindus, had divided itself up into little pockets of jealousies and discrimination. This attitude is fading now but has not disappeared. It is exactly this parochial (<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nonsense! This is the attitude of people whose traditions are divergent and diverse, of communities that take their traditions, rituals and practices seriously. I don't know much about these specific communities, but we used to have this in AP as well. Again, this is mostly because of divergent traditions. The fact that people no longer fight about them is usually because of two reasons:
1. Most people today (Brahmins included) are not aware of the traditions of their sect.
2. Most people today (Brahmins especially) don't take their religious traditions seriously.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But fortunately things are changing in India. One nephew of mine is marrying a Kashmiri Pandit in a couple of months. Another marries a Punjabi girl from Jammu next week. I quote these only as family examples - but there are many such unions caused by a refreshing breakdown of barriers that Hindus had. Drop the barriers first don't keep on posting objections and conditions to ask everyone to prove that he is not Christian/Muslim/psec/marxist/atheist etc first. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not to belittle all your nephews, sengotuvel, <b>[EDITED]</b>. And as I pointed out before, they don't particularly care for the tradtions of the Madhwas, or of anyone else's for that matter.

[Guest]

I have heard of Namboodiris also viewing Smarthas and Iyengars exactly as sengotuvel mentioned.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->but they are most likely not marrying them because they are Hindus, they are marrying them because they want to continue having sex with them. And as I pointed out before, they don't particularly care for the tradtions of the Madhwas, or of anyone else's for that matter.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

that is the perspective of a layman or a voyeur. It is a deeper need to relate to a soul that usually culminates in a love marriage. That need might turn into sexuality later on but that is immaterial.

To say that someone else has married due to a need for sex is akin to viewing them as carrying lower moral standards than the observer.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But unless you share your narrative the narrative does not come out.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->My narrative - and those of others I've worked with (illustrated for a children's book on Greek Gods, and in late primary to high school worked on a graphic novel about Thor for the school magazine) - are definitely coming out or will be coming out some day. But in the manner of <i>my</i> choosing. Not in this thread, to be compiled and presented by someone who I don't feel is representative of me. You have to admit that that's my choice, even if you choose to consider it as an 'excuse'.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->do not expect me to put up with your self admitted impoliteness<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Though you can view the rest of my post #81 as you wish, you can't possibly have been offended by my use of 'little critter'. Watched any old cowboy movie lately? "Little critter" is how the cowboy referred to his horse. (I suppose you could have wrongly inferred that I was referring to you as my sidekick and so got offended for that reason <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> , but that wasn't the case when you see its usage in context.) Locals where I live regularly tell their friends "let's mozie on over there, little critter". Of course one can use 'little critter' for other purposes too. Like I did with my "wow there, little critter" where it has the same effect as if I had written "hold your horsies", both meaning: don't jump to conclusions.
You're too sensitive, save taking offense for when I am being offensive.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->but they are most likely not marrying them because they are Hindus, they are marrying them because they want to continue having sex with them.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That was a cheap shot even by your standards my friend and also a direct personal attack on another forum member.

3 assumptions in your statement: when you use the word 'continue' in your post you are assuming they are already having sex so would continue having sex after marriage. May I suggest you do not measure everyone by your standards i.e. simply because you did or are doing something doesn't mean everyone else is also doing or would exactly the same thing (a person having jaundice sees everyone with yellow eyes). No.2 Are you suggesting that you view marriage purely from the point of just having sex & nothing else? I thought marriage also meant amongst other things, mutual respect, caring & love for each other etc. And from what I know marriage also in Hindu tradition means coming together of two families i.e. boys and the girls family. Ok, even going for a minute by your convoluted logic, i.e. if according to you a person just marries for sex, why can't he have sex with someone from his own community? So most of us do not see marriage as simply a means to have sex as you do. And do I take it this is the typical reflection of the views of a person who claims to be a 'pure' Hindu about Hinduism?

Majority of members here on this forum I am sure would agree with me when I say that inter-caste marriages is a good sign as it indicates majority of Hindus have started seeing themselves first and foremost as Hindus and do not see themselves still as a member of so and so caste or belonging to this or that region of India.

Now instead of just being a arm chair critic how about contributing something positive on this thread for a change by letting us know what does 'Hindu narrative' mean to you? Sometime back I think you declared everything is available on the net these days so how about sharing all your knowledge about Hinduism with other forum members by looking it up on the net & posting it here?

Either you are attacking the posts of other members or now & then like a Mullah (who cries 'Islam khatray main hain') raising the similar cry about Hinduism & imploring the admins. to lock the thread. If I didn't know you better, I would have thought you are a non-Hindu pretending to be a Hindu trying your best to get this thread locked so the Hindu narrative does not come out at all.

Attacking posts of just one particular member now and again is a sign of insecurity and it gives an impression to others that you feel so much threatened by a particular member on this forum & his posts that you just target & are being critical about his views just for the sake of being critical…. No.2 there is a saying in the army ‘don’t create problems, give solutions’. So how about making some positive contributions to this thread for a change?

[Guest]

Vishwas - I don't believe that you actually have a clue about India other than what you can garner from your visits and news media. The only sad thing about that is that your views about helping Hinduism (if any) won't count because you are so out of touch. Your fervor sounds useful but your gyan is weak.

Husky has made a passing reference to "villagers" in one post in a sentence whose meaning is not very clear to me - I took the meaning to be "his experience with villagers".

Now that again is a sure-fire sign of a person who is out of touch with things within India. Nothing wrong with being out of touch except that opinions won't count for much if they are unreal. The "Mozie" and "lil critter" stuff confirms that. We are referring to Indians in Hindoostan, not Injuns and we don't get cowboy movies in Inja no more.

The "Indian villager" who gives people a warm fuzzy and bring recollections of old Hindi movies is dwindling to become almost a myth. 40% of India is now urban and most villagers have family in cities. There is a huge population shift and a shift in economics and attitudes to a lot of things. Assumptions that people make - including Vishwas' statements that appear naive and uninformed to me may look good - but I repeat that unless you can get a grip on which way Hindus are moving we may leave huge gaps open for evangelists to work on. You have to know where Hindus' strengths and weaknesses lie. Evanjihadis have a better social netwok and more sociologists working right here in India.

Laughably uninformed statements about who is thinking or feeling what make entertaining reading, but are no substitute for actual polls or social information.

I don't believe that we can seriously even scratch the surface of the issue without recording a tiny sample like about 25,000 narratives (for starters). It is important to just record the narrative. What a person thinks about the narrative is secondary at this stage. if Vishwa sees sex, it only means that his mind works that way and his narrative recognises sex as the motivation in inter-state/caste marriages in India. (or at least in Sengotuvel's family)

Interestingly - let me put this down in a public forum, since I have a penchant for hollering "satyameva jayate". My grandmother and her sisters used to feel that all anglo-Indian women in India were loose women. To them, any childbirth involving a Brit and an Indian meant that sex was more important than faith or other loyalty. Vishwa feels exactly the same about Hindus who marry outside their immediate community.

What that says about him is moot. He has given a narrative about himself without realising it.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->you can't possibly have been offended by my use of 'little critter'. Watched any old cowboy movie lately? "Little critter" is how the cowboy referred to his horse.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Husky, I am glad you get so inspired by cowboy movies that you incorporate the lingo of these movies in your daily vocabulary. Even I used to see Hollywood cowboy movies years back when I was still in school but saw these movies purely for ‘Time Pass’ (TP), nothing more, nothing less and was rarely inspired by them….

Most of these movies justified white men’s massacre of local Red Indian tribes & in fact glorified such killings making such killings in these cowboy movies sound/appear as perfectly normal…The underlying message these movies tried to portray was horrible….but anyway, that is another story all together best kept for some other day & for another thread….

Coming back to your last post, I don't now remember the use of 'little critter' in these cowboy movies but I remember some phrases from these cowboy movies like 'a boy desperately trying to fit in the ranks of grown up men’ (by making controversial statements to draw attention, and referring to other forum members by their post numbers e.g. 'hey you post no.71' instead of politely calling or referring to them by their userids). <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

I had enrolled into an intro to film studies class (yeah, one of those 'optional compulsories', it looked like less homework and I'm all for that). We had to watch some cowboy movies for it. Not the best hours I ever spent, certainly. But what can ya do?

'Little critter' is used a lot where I live, and <i>never</i> in a low mean-spirited way.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I am glad you get so inspired by cowboy movies that you incorporate the lingo of these movies in your daily vocabulary<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->No need to attribute statements to me that I never made. Who said I was "inspired by the cowboy movies" to use 'little critter'? I referred to those films by way of explaining the origin of the term and its use in today's generation (where I live, leastways).

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Most of these movies justified white men’s massacre of local Red Indian tribes & in fact glorified such killings making such killings in these cowboy movies sound/appear as perfectly normal…The underlying message these movies tried to portray was horrible….<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yes, I do know, having watched a few myself.
Of course they could never get a real native N American to play the role of the 'evil Injun', so European-American men (with blue eyes too! - where's them brown contacts when you need 'em, eh?) put some red paint on their skin to add insult to injury and then imitated the stereotype Americans had created about the native N Americans.


On the more pleasant topic of native Americans in a <i>positive</i> western setting, in Europe, whenever people play cowboys and Indians, everyone wants to play the native N Americans and only the losers get stuck with the cowboys. The cowboys are known as murderers and so the 'Indians' always get to win.

Germans have long been enamoured of native N Americans, as they had several old tv series of Germans playing heroic native Americans harassed by European settlers who they fought valiantly against and still tried to make truces with. (TV series complete with German women also dressed up as native American women who play the heroines.) The makeup was far more subtle and the series were highly respectful even if possibly romanticised (why not?).
Some very fond memories of my childhood watching those kids series <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Of course none of it compares to the pleasure when seeing real native American actors in movies.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->'hey you post no.71' instead of politely calling or referring to them by their userids<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Never said such a thing as "hey you post number".
I do regulary do "Post x:". Not going to change, I'm afraid.

<b>Added:</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Husky has made a passing reference to "villagers" in one post in a sentence whose meaning is not very clear to me - I took the meaning to be "his experience with villagers".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->My whole paternal side is from a village. They were what I referred to as (half of my) family. The non-family members of the same village are those whom I referred to as villagers.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Now that again is a sure-fire sign of a person who is out of touch with things within India. Nothing wrong with being out of touch except that opinions won't count for much if they are unreal.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The "Indian villager" who gives people a warm fuzzy and bring recollections of old Hindi movies<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I don't know about Hindi movies. I do know about a few villages in my father's state.... So easy on there.

[Guest]

sectorial analysis will lead to inter-sect issues and complexities including personal bias and depicting it on to the religion. i am a brahmin, i hate mr. x of y religion. hence i hate y religion is the larger mentallity of normal daily-wagers and street talks of hinduism.

hindu ways of living is only getting perfected with collection technique from various sects.. and in the process, if the issues are taken out of proportion to highlight only the issues and not come to a collective narration, then we fail on the objectives.

hating other sects/caste/religion/sub religious categories is human thing. its a social problem, and nothing it adds to hindu narration. i guess, we are losing the point that the narration criteria must highlight were it blends, what is that makes that sect merge into, or give into the whole~. lets forget about the greats like biggie acharyas and other religious leaders from the point of narration discussion, since what they say and do is pure gandhistic, in the sense, its damn difficult to implement for the mass, other than the creators of such theories and practices.

here is a narration, my mom who lived most of her times with my IAF dad, all over India, and many a times in God's own country land kerala. Though kerala and TN are divided and sub-divided as they themselves being possessed about this evolving nature of sub-dividing and differentiating ( i think there should be some differentiation formulae already out there in some form of sancrit text), she would always narrate the positives.. about how each of these sects in kerala respect one another., inspite of deep differences.

in times of crisis, religion and sects don't play.. its human sense at the end that survives. hence lets jolt that sense with some extra power and share in all those positives into the narration.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Majority of members here on this forum I am sure would agree with me when I say that inter-caste marriages is a good sign as it indicates majority of Hindus have started seeing themselves first and foremost as Hindus and do not see themselves still as a member of so and so caste or belonging to this or that region of India.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, lot of plus. Different gene pool is always good.
In my family we had marriages out of caste, state, country and religion. Every marriage brought good and bad experience. Marriage between Hindus whether it was out of caste or State worked very well. Even north and south India did well. Marriage between xitian and Hindu turned out to be bad because both were strong towards own faith. They are still married but girl/wife doesn’t mix with Hindu Husband side of family. Out of country marriage ends up with tragedy. Among Hindus, in-laws stress was there but both families brought their own traditions and rituals, which itself became new tradition and healthy one.

I think till marriage day or before marriage caste may be a smaller issue but after marriage that evaporates and traditions and rituals take over. Both sides tries to be better than other in following RIGHT way of tradition and rituals.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-saik+Apr 27 2007, 09:27 PM-->QUOTE(saik @ Apr 27 2007, 09:27 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->sectorial analysis will lead to inter-sect issues and complexities including personal bias and depicting it on to the religion. i am a brahmin, i hate mr. x of y religion. hence i hate y religion is the larger mentallity of normal daily-wagers and street talks of hinduism.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Saik - an analysis and faithful record of the "sectorial analysis" that has already happened in many millennia of Hindu history is essential, because "sectarian differences" is precisely what is used by Islamists and Evangelists to divide and rule Hindu society.

The more we avoid these questions, the more the "dark, undocumented areas" of Hindu society we are leaving for someone else to pick up and write a false narrative that then becomes the "Hindu story" that we have to swallow and accept. Caste, sati, "idol worship" etc are all catchwords and catch phrases that have been created by people outside Hindu society picking up isolated facts that they thought they noticed and then highlighting them as "This is what Hinduism is all about". The Hindu narrative that you find today has been written by all sorts of people, and they have chosen to highlight the negative more than the positive, and they have even converted positives into negatives.

This ridiculous situation needs to be turned upside down. In my view that can only come from telling the Hindu story (narrative) unabridged and truthfully. Hinduism has given Indians the strength to survive onslaughts from militarily powerful people with narrow bigoted beliefs who have used death as a tool to spread love and peace. But there have been weakness that have allowed Hindus to be pushed aside, killed, persecuted and otherwise "modulated", and we cannot begin to comprehend those weaknesses unless we document the entire Hindu narrative and then look at it objectively with a view to seeing what it was that made a society of people who were minding their own business so vulnerable to onslaught. It is also equally valid to try and analyse what strengths made Hinduism survive when so many civilizations were wiped out by love and peace. A complete and honest documentation is only the beginning.

[Guest]

Please permit my thoughts to wander - you are welcome to disagree or point out inconsistencies - I am merely using this post as a "pensieve".

Imagine a world in which your identity or your character is not defined by any particular god. Imagine a world in which there are civilized humans, living their lives, but do not have god as a reason to fight among themselves, or declare one human inferior to another by virtue of his following, or not following the dictates of some silly conjured up "God". Gods are allowed to exist, but they are allies and friends whom you can speak to, but not dictatorial ogres ready to punish, and they don't want absolute power. (They *are* power personified and don't need humans (yahoomans?) to keep boosting their egos)

3000+ years ago, your ancestors, who lived in the land now called India did not call themselves "Hindu". They were just people following a particular (and to a large extent advanced) code of life that gave meaning to existence, life, death, joy and sorrow.

If you can imagine such a society, then you can get a picture of Hindu society before the Gods of peace and love came into being.

When people from outside India saw these people - they went back to their lands and called them some name and that name has now come down to us as "Hindu". I believe that the description Hindu refers to people I have described in paragraphs two and three above.

Yesterday I had an eerie exposure to this when I "interviewed" a few people. With this "narrative" business playing in my mind, I decided to ask a few people what they meant when they said they were Hindus. I deliberately decided not to ask people who were obviously highly educated but spoke to people who have probably not gone beyond school (or less). I spoke to a parking lot attendant, a couple of ward boys a driver and a couple of others.

I first asked them if they were "Hindus". When they answered "yes" I asked them "What do you mean when you say that you are a Hindu?". Most were stumped, and I had to explain the question and asked "You say you are a Hindu. So what is it that Hindus do to call themselves Hindu?"

The descriptions were similar. They basically described themselves and their lives as in "We're just people". Only one person (out of the seven I polled) spontaneously added that "Hindus tend to worship Krishna, Shiva, Ganesh". But he also characterized Hindus as farmers who tended the soil.

None of them spontaneously came up with "We are not Muslim or Christian"

I then had to do further probing.

I asked each one "OK - so this is a Hindu. Are there any people who are not Hindus?"

This then brought the response that there are also people called Muslims and Christians. I then asked them "So what do these people do?". Again, most people were stumped initially, but some prodding and leading questions got the reply that they have their gods to whom they pray.

I then asked them if there was anything wrong if those non-Hindus prayed to their gods. Every single person I polled said "No, nothing wrong". "They have their beliefs" was the consensus.

I then asked them to say what they would think if the non Hindu told them not to worship the gods that Hindus worship. With the question worded in this manner they said it was wrong. But I can see that these people are so innocent, accepting, uneducated and not well off, and it would be easy for me, as an educated and "respected" person to rhetorically convince them that their beliefs were wrong.

These people are the prototype Hindus who were untouched by jealous gods of love and peace. They have never been asked to consider or think the egregious "you farted" thought process that "My god is bigger than yours" - a thought process that was introduced by love god and peace god. When faced with the thought they say what comes naturally, but I believe these are innocents - just like Hindus originally were and can be hoodwinked under the correct circumstances.

[Guest]

Could someone please send me a couple each of car stickers that say:

"I'm pagan and I'm proud of it"

and

"The world is too big for one god"

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This then brought the response that there are also people called Muslims and Christians. I then asked them "So what do these people do?". Again, most people were stumped initially, but some prodding and leading questions got the reply that they have their gods to whom they pray.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

sengotuvel, also ask what happens if hindus keep photos of Christ, sufi saints etc along with other deities. Do they still remain hindus ?

And what happens if muslims/christians observe hindu festivals and believe in hindu Gods as well. Do they still remain muslims/christians ? Answers should be interesting.

[Guest]

I am cross posting this from another thread because it forms part of the overall story of a historic Hindu narrative

http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index....topic=1853
<!--QuoteBegin-k.ram+Apr 20 2007, 07:48 AM-->QUOTE(k.ram @ Apr 20 2007, 07:48 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->From Ian Hancock's book
<b>How Indian are Romanies?</b>


“Oh Indra, determine who are Aryan and who are Dasa, and separate them!”


While a nine centuries’ removal from India has diluted the Indian biological connection to the extent that for some Romani groups it may hardly be representative today, Sareen (1976:42) concluded that overall, we still remain closer, genetically, to Asians than to the Europeans around us; European genetic material, for some groups at least, is still located at the shallow end of the gene pool:

The European Gypsies, who migrated from Northern India about 800-1,000 years ago, have been well studied serologically, mostly by ABO, MNS and Rh systems. The results indicate that their blood groups agree well with the warrior classes of northern India . . . and differ significantly from those of the local European population . . . the individuality of the blood its other serum protein factors, such as haptoglobins, transferins, the group-specific component (Gc) and the Gm system. Hp1 gene has been known to be the least common in Asia, with a gene-frequency of only 0.2 to 0.3; it could thus help in studies on Roma. Haptoglobin groups have been studied in Swedish Gypsies in comparison with those in Swedes and North Indians, and these also point to their North Indian origin.


Siváková (1983:98), another geneticist who has compared Indian, Romani and European serological material, found the same results:


As can be seen, the lowest genetic distance value was found between the recent Indian population and the Slovak Gypsies. In other words, these two populations are in the closest relationship, suggesting a relatively low degree of genetic assimilation of Gypsies with their surrounding populations.

Mastana & Papiha (1992:50) have demonstrated that this is more evident in eastern European Romani populations than among those in western Europe, where the incidence of mixing with non-Romanies has been higher:


The evidence of the present study favours that Gypsy populations of eastern Europe still have greater genetic affinity with Indian nomadic groups and the genetic differentiation may primarily be due to isolation, high rate of migration of subgroups towards Europe and genetic drift, whilst the Western Gypsies are more homogeneous to their local population which might have resulted from a high degree of genetic admixture.


Nevertheless, culture, language and identity are not inherited genetically but socially, and apart from the genetic and linguistic evidence, a core of direct, unbroken transmission from India in these other areas may also be readily identified. While there are many Romani customs and beliefs for which no origin has been determined (such as symbolically cutting the invisible lupunza or fetters which tie an infant’s feet together to allow it to learn to walk, with the words por, por, por "feather, feather, feather"), parallels in India may yet be found as research continues.

Some would seem to be incontrovertibly Indian, however. These are found among Romanies throughout the world in all areas of the culture; some groups in Hungary, Slovakia and Transylvania maintain the Indian bhairava musical scale, for example, as well as a type of mouth music known in India as bol and called bega in Romani (and szaj bögö in Hungarian), which consists of nonsense syllables imitating the rhythm of the tabla drum. The tribunal where internal disputes are settled, called the kris(i) in Romani, while a Greek word, is identifiable with the Indian panchayat or nasab, and has the same form and function, or even likelier with the earlier administrative and judicial Rajput body of men called the panchak la, from which the panchayat developed. The pilivani wrestling matches with oiled bodies, called pehlivan in India and Iran, and the stick dancing (called rovljako khelipe or botolo in Romani) are both still found amongst Romanies in Hungary; snake-charming (called farmeko sapano) is a profession among Romanies in Serbia; the burning of one’s possessions after death (called phabaripen) and even, among some populations at least into the twentieth century, the ritual suicide of the widow, which has striking parallels with s ti in India. Marriages (biava) which are arranged by the couple’s families (the betrothals are called thomnimata), and which take place between children, and which involve dowry (darro), are Romani as well as Indian. Fonseca (1996:110-11) has commented upon the Romani habit found in India of “shaking the head from side to side to signify ‘yes’”.

Hübschmannová (1972) provides valuable insights into the parallels between traditional Indian social structure and the divisions within Rromanipen. She has also found (1978:277-8) what she believes to be retentions of Indian personal names among Romanies in the Czech Republic. Some of these, which existed among the adivasi subcaste are Bado, Duzhda, Gadjor, Goral, Kandji, Karela, Mizhikar and Mirga, and are all found in Europe today. Rishi (1976) lists several more that he has also recognised.

Some Romani groups in Europe today appear to maintain elements of Shaktism or goddess-worship; the Rajputs worshipped the warrior-goddess Parvati, another name for the female deity Sati-Sara, who is Saint Sarah, the Romani Goddess of Fate. That she forms part of the yearly pilgrimage to La Camargue at Stes. Maries de la Mer in the south of France is of particular significance; here she is carried into the sea just as she is carried into the waters of the Ganges each December in India. Both Sati-Sara and St Sarah wear a crown, both are also called Kali, and both have shining faces painted black. Sati-Sara is a consort of the god Shiva, and is known by many other names, Bhadrakali, Uma , Durga and Syama among them. Various Romani populations in Europe and America also maintain nacijange semnura or group symbols, such as the sun (representing the Serbian Romanies) and the moon (representing the Lovara), which may be found drawn or carved onto the stago or ‘standard’ at a wedding, and on the semno or rupuni rovli (‘silver baton’), i.e. the clan leader’s staff, and which are appealed to at the consecration of the mulengi sinija or ‘table of the dead’ at a Vlax Romani pomana (plural pomeni) or wake. Here, the invocation is “Khama, Chona thaj Devla, ašun man!” which means “Sun, Moon and God, hear me”. The significance is in the fact that the Sun and the Moon were the two symbols worn emblematically on the armour and tunics of the Rajput warriors to identify them in battle from all others.

Elements of an Indian legacy have been preserved in Romani riddles. Reference to the Vedic god of the wind and the air, Vayu (also called Marut), is retained in a number of these: Kana hulavel peske bal o Vajo, legenisavol e char (“When Vayu combs his hair, the grass sways”), Amaro Vajo hurjal tela savorrenge podji, aj konik našti t’astarel les (“Our Vayu flies under everyone’s petticoats, and no one can catch him”), O pharo vurdon e Vajosko tsirdajlo ekhe šele grastendar kaj phurden ande’l rrutunja (“Vayu’s heavy waggon is pulled by a hundred horses blowing through their nostrils”)­the answer to each is e balval “the wind”. In Indian theology the task of Vayu’s son M ruti (also called Hanuman) is to tear open the clouds and let the rain fall, and in Romani the expression marutisjol o Del means “the sky [lit. “God”] is growing overcast”. The reference to a hundred horses may also be of Vedic origin; there are several references in the scriptures to the a vamedha yajña or “horse sacrifice”, whereby in ancient India the king would release one hundred horses to roam freely through his kingdom. Stopping them or blocking their path was forbidden.

The female spirits or fates, called the vursitorja, hover in its presence three days after a child is born to determine its destiny and to influence the choice of name the parents will decide upon. They may be compared with the Indian m trk or “little mother” spirits who also possess a baby’s destiny at the time of its birth. The red thread (the loli dori) tied around a newborn’s ankle or wrist and worn for two or three years afterwards to guard against the jakhalo or ‘evil eye’ reflects the protective properties of that colour, which is also worn or painted on the body in India.

Shiva’s trident, called trishula in Sanskrit, changed its role from Hindu symbol to Christian symbol and has become the Romani word for “cross” (trušul). This probably happened when the migration first reached Armenia; in the Lomavren language terusul means both “church” and “priest”, another indication that the ancestors of the Rom and the Lom may still have been together at that time. Similarly, rašaj “(Christian) holy man” represents a shift of meaning from Sanskrit rseya “of a (Hindu) holy man”. The Romani word for “Easter”, Patradji, as well as the word kirvo “godfather” are almost certainly from Armenian, as is the word xanamik, “co-parent-in-law”, further indication that it was in Armenian-speaking lands that our ancestors first encountered Christianity. Although Hinduism as a cohesive faith has not survived, our people today practicing a great number of religions adopted because of a historical need to survive, nevertheless many Hindu-based beliefs continue to be maintained in day-to-day cultural behaviour. These similarities have been discussed in a number of works by Indian authors, among them Rishi, Joshi, Bhattacharya, Lal, Shashi and Singhal, and these can be usefully read for more parallels between Romani and Indian societies.

‘Religion’ is usually thought of in terms of a physical place of worship, a set of written scriptures and a clergy, and for that reason it has been repeatedly stated that we have no religion of our own since we have none of these. One story maintains that we did have a church once long ago, but it was made of cheese and we got hungry and ate it. A truer definition of religion is that it is the belief in a higher spiritual power, and the maintenance of a daily way of life dedicated to serving and pleasing that power. From this perspective, not only do we have a religion, but living it is so much a part of our lives that we don’t even think of it as such; it isn’t only saved for the weekends. We believe in one god, o Devel or o Del, and the devil, o Beng, and we believe that there is a constant struggle between them for dominance over our lives. To live properly is to abide by a set of behaviours collectively called Rromanipen or Rromanija, and this entails maintaining spiritual balance. This Ayurvedic concept, called karma in India (and in Romani kintala, or in some dialects kintari or kintujmos) is fundamental to the Romani worldview. This dualistic perspective groups the universe into pairs, God and the Devil, Romanies and non-Romanies, adults and children, clean and polluted­even the stages of life are two in number: adulthood (and able to produce children) and, taken together, childhood and old age (when one is not able to produce children).

Time spent in the non-Romani world (the jado) drains spiritual energy or dji. Sampson (1926:257) gives the various meanings of this word as “[s]eat of the emotions, heart, soul; temper, disposition, mood; courage, spirit”, comparing it to Sanskrit jiva, Hindi ji, “life, soul, spirit, mind” and Armenian (h)ogi, “soul”. One’s spiritual batteries can only be recharged by spending time in an all-Romani environment­in the normal course of events, in family homes. It is in the area of spiritual and physical wellbeing (baxt) that the Indian origin of our Romani people is most clearly seen.

In the preparation of food, and in one’s personal hygiene and deportment, it is absolutely essential that a separation between the two conditions of ‘pure’ and ‘polluted’ be maintained. A pure state is achieved by maintaining the spiritual balance in one’s life and avoiding shame (ladjav or ladj); that is, being declared unclean or, in extreme cases, being shunned by the community. Avoiding shame involves, among other things, demonstrating patjiv or ‘respect’ to the elders. Maintaining balance or harmony pleases the spirits of the ancestors (the mulé), and they are there to guard one and help one to do it, but if they are displeased, they will mete out punishment, or a ‘warning signal’ (prikaza), by way of retribution. Depending upon the nature of the transgression, this may be mild, e.g. stubbing one’s toe, or so severe as to involve sickness and even death. The consequences of prikaza underlie the universal Romani belief that nothing is an accident­that nothing happens simply by chance.

The penalty for extreme pollution is being banished, or made an outcast, and an out-caste, from the community, for which different Romani words are durjardo, gonime or strazhime. ‘Banishment’ is variously durjaripe, gonimos or strazha, which may or may not imply a state of pollution, being imposed also for other reasons, e.g. disregard for territorial claims. Being in a state of pollution is being magerdo, marime, pokhelime or makherdo (literally ‘smeared’, i.e. with menstrual blood). These words can be contrasted with melalo which also means ‘dirty’, but only from physical dirt. Daravipe (‘fearfulness’, from dar ‘fear’) is a particular charge of marital infidelity that, if proven, also demands a penalty, perhaps even the disfigurement of the offending party.

Prikaza brings bad luck (bibaxt) and illness (nasvalipe), and it can be attracted even by socializing with people who are not vuzhe (< vuzho ‘clean’). Non-Romani people are not seen as vu e, which is why Romanies avoid contact which is too intimate. But this is not an inherited condition of non-Romanies, it is because these cultural practices are not maintained. A non-Romani woman who marries into a Romani family is expected to adopt them, and in doing so becomes in that context vuzhi. Without a doubt, it is particularly the factor of ritual cleanliness and ritual defilement that has helped maintain Romani separateness­and as a result Romani identity­for so long.


********************************************************************
<i>
[p.70>] There is in the brâhmanas a constant association of the notions of noose (pâza) and drúh. Vedic man prayed to be delivered from Varuna's noose, or from "wrongness" and the noose, or from the noose of wrongness. Cf. "With the words 'I have been delivered from Varuna's noose' he is delivered from the Varuna-noose", " 'With the words 'May I be delivered from wrongness, from Varuna's noose, he delivers him from wrongness, from the Varuna-noose", "That snare of wrongness of thine, O king Varuna, that, consisting of the metre Gâyatrî, has entered the earth and has the brahman for its support, that of thine I hereby avert, by sacrifice, svâhâ to it!" The phrase "snares of wrongness" occurs once in the Rigveda: "The furious man, O Maruts, who is fain to kill us, even when we do not expect it' O Vasus' may he put on himself the snares of wrongness". cf. also in the Atharvaveda: "Thus I deliver thee from the afterbirth, Nirrti, the curse that come from thy kin, from wrongness, from Varuna's noose" and "the fetters of wrongness that does not release." [<p.70] [p.71>] Varuna's krûra ['cruel' - SV] character is most clearly shown by the fact that he is identical with Death. The Gopatha Brahmana even uses the term Varuna Mrtyu. In the funeral hymns of the Rigveda it is said that the deceased will see king Varuna and Yama in the next world and in one of the Vasistha hymns, which testify to a close intimacy with Varuna, the poet prays the gods that he may not have to go into the "clay house". In spite of Geldner's different interpretation these words probably refer to the grave. [note #256>] Geldner Kommentar, p.115: "die irdene Gruft für die Gebeine, das Beinhaus"; Übersetzung: "die Urne, in der die Gebeine beigesetzt wurden." [<#256]  [<p.71]

F.B.J. Kuiper, I.11 "Varuna as a Demoniacal Figure and as the God of Death" (pp.67-74), Varuna and Vidûshaka (North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1979)</i>
[right][snapback]67482[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Does anyone recall why Lord Shiva has a snake wrapped around his neck, or why his face is blue?

Why does Shiva have a crescent moon depicted over his head?

Why does he have a fountain of water flowing out of the top of his head?

Does anyone recall how Ganesha came into being?

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-sengotuvel+Apr 29 2007, 12:59 PM-->QUOTE(sengotuvel @ Apr 29 2007, 12:59 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Does anyone recall why Lord Shiva has a snake wrapped around his neck, or why his face is blue?

Why does Shiva have a crescent moon depicted over his head?

Why does he have a fountain of water flowing out of the top of his head?

Does anyone recall how Ganesha came into being?
[right][snapback]68019[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Found 2 sources though not sure about their reliability.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva
& http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesha

http://www.crystalinks.com/ganesh.html

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Found 2 sources though not sure about their reliability.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We need a Hindu narrative not from other who still refers Western Narrative.