Christian Subversion And Missionary Activities - 6

[Husky]

a) People did this to themselves (it's what happens when attempting to peddle the non-shareable. Hindu religion is only to be practised and passed down, not peddled to others who have nothing to do with it).



newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/aseem_shukla/2010/04/nearly_twenty_million_people_in.html

The true purpose of yoga, as espoused by Patanjali, is to transcend all distinctions, including those between individuals, which would seem to include especially religious distinctions (i.e. this one is better than that one).

[color="#800080"](Isn't it cute that the christoterrorist would claim to know what Adishesha "actually" meant (the usual claim)? Meanwhile, Adishesha - itself a Divine Nagapambu - worships his Hindu Gods.)[/color]



That the author fails to recognize this suggests rather strongly that he is not worthy of claiming the 'theft of yoga', for the simple reason that he has not yet understood, let alone 'realized', the true meaning of 'yoga'.



Yoga is NOT about Hinduism - it's much bigger - once realized, everything is transcended, including one's religious attachments.



To honor Hindusim for the significance of it's historical contribution (to yoga) is proper.



[color="#0000FF"]To claim that yoga without Hinduism is somehow wrong (as in 'theft') is the worse sort of religious condescension, and more importantly, to do so defies the fundamental teachings of yoga itself![/color]



One does NOT need Hinduism to realize the highest teachings of yoga. Indeed, [color="#0000FF"]one must drop religio[/color]us trappings to do so.



[color="#FF0000"]namaste,[/color]

clay

[color="#800080"](And of course there would be a christoterrorist attempt to steal the Namaste too.)[/color]



Posted by: cfmsp | April 20, 2010 11:01 PM

Report Offensive Comment

Even more openly christoterrorist comments at the link.



Like I said: the west doesn't know anything about Yoga. It obviously doesn't work for them. (Since if it had worked for them they could never declare in such impossible ignorance that Yoga is not Hindu - the Hindu Gods intrinsically belong to Hindu religion.)



Anyway *that* is what one gets when one tries to peddle 'Hinduism' (Lite onlee of course) in the west. No doubt one will hear more Hindus of the era declare how much of a 'hindu success' it is that something called "Yoga" is being practised "all over the west".







b ) From the same link. Both the following excerpts are taken from the main article by Dr. Aseem Shukla, of the “Take Yoga Back Movement", a "urologist and a second-generation Indian-American":

“When our kids go to school and say they are Hindu, nobody says, ‘Oh, yeah, Hindus gave the world yoga.’ They say, ‘What caste are you?’ Or ‘Do you pray to a monkey god?’ Because that’s all Americans know about Hinduism.”

Why is yoga severed in America’s collective consciousness from Hinduism? Yoga, meditation, ayurvedic natural healing, self-realization–they are today’s syntax for New Age, Eastern, mystical, even Buddhist, but nary an appreciation of their Hindu origins. It is not surprising, then, that Hindu schoolchildren complain that Hinduism is conflated only with caste, cows, exoticism and polytheism–the salutary contributions and philosophical underpinnings lost and ignored.

Before moving on:

1. declaring that "Hindus gave the world 'yoga'" is *not* how you take Yoga back. One demonstrates ownership by publicly correcting the entirely false perception - propagated by various Indian cultists peddling something dubbed 'yoga' in the west - that what has been peddled there was never Yoga to begin with. Because it really isn't.

The west (factually) doesn't have it. So they can't speak of any Yoga - not knowing of it.

Simple.

2. Note: Ayurveda and Hindu Yoga are Hindu. Not Buddhist. Just like Tai Chi and acupuncture - etc etc - remain Taoist, *not* Buddhist (nor any generic Chinese nationality/ethnicity/whatever either).



Onto what's wrong with the above 2 quoteblocks:

There was NO reason for Aseem Shukla to list the christo-question on Hanuman with the one on caste - which implies both are equally offensive/matters of insinuated shame to a Hindu - nor to mention "polytheism" (and cows) alongside caste etc. And no reason to contrast either with (an invented) hinduism: a 'pure' spiritual .... "philosophy" as some today would have it, devoid of the Gods except as decoration.



- Forgotten is that the Gods through their rushis (being the knowers of the Gods) gave Yoga to the Hindus. (Numerous Hindu texts to give as an example. Including Agamic ones like Tirumantiram by Tirumoolar, etc, etc.) And oh yeah, no one gave the right to 'Hindus' to "give" Yoga to the world. Like all Hindu things it is non-shareable and doesn't concern others.



- After crediting *themselves* with Yoga instead (with the line "Hindus gave the world Yoga"), they then feel offended to stick by the very Gods (who are also the very centre for the Hindu Teachers devotedly attached to the same) who gave Hindus all the good things of the Hindu religion.

I.e. on one hand they want to be known to the world for the "positive" of "Hindus gave the world Yoga", while they easily, unthinkingly contrast this against "Do you pray to a monkey god" <- At the very least a source of discomfort to even the adults, as they choose to list it alongside the offensive "what caste are you?" Same with the similar listing of the Gods (under "polytheism") and Cows together with "exoticism and caste".



I refer only to the following extract in McCabe's statement, used as secondary support for a statement I wish to make thereafter:

http://infomotions.com/etexts/gutenberg/...soev10.htm

The Story of Evolution / McCabe, Joseph, 1867-1955

[...]

to recognise culture, like the early Chinese, as a gift of the gods.

I.e. Joseph McCabe admits that the early Chinese - he is speaking of the Taoists, i.e. the traditional Chinese - recognised that (their) culture was a gift of their Gods. (Even if he doesn't accept that their perception could be true - since he is unreligious/knows no Gods - he acknowledges that they held this view. Certainly, the traditional Chinese attribute a lot/all to their Gods=their religion. And they can demonstrate it.)



And it holds true not just for the early Chinese religionists, but to this day. They're heathens.

The traditional Taoists from the past until today, as well as the GrecoRoman Hellenes of the past (and from what I can tell also those today) and the Hindus of the past and the elderly Hindoos remaining - being *actual* heathens - still (vocally) recognise their Gods as the origin of all their religio-culture ("civilisation"): from arts and artistic inspiration - the very motivation and source for it (e.g. Kalidasa again) - to skills to sciences, including of course the great sciences of their Gods. Hindu Yoga is a science of the Hindu Gods. And despite modern Indian presumptions, Hindus' Yoga derives from their Gods and intimately concerns the Hindu Gods. It is one of the means that traditional Hindoos practice to reach their Gods, once they get - what's a good word - deekSham in it.



To rephrase Shukla's question (the one that mentioned "polytheism"):

Why is yoga and all of Hindu religion severed in modern Hindus' collective consciousness from the Hindu Gods? Yoga, meditation, ayurvedic natural healing, self-realization (kalaripayatt, literary works by Hindus*, etc.)–they are today’s syntax for New Age "hinduism lite", but nary an understanding and recognition of their origins in the Hindu Gods, due to a loss of proper perception and appreciation of the Hindu Gods who are central to it.

*E.g. Kaalidaasa is usually described as merely "the greatest Sanskrit poet" - even by Indians, presumably because they think he's another claim for some generic "Indianness". But he is Hindu. That is his identity: he doesn't have to say the word "Hindu" (the modern identifier merely describes the state of who/what he is and is superfluous), as his state of being a Hindu is more than explicit in how he refers with love to his Hindu Gods, seeing in them his All - which is exactly what they are.





For all those Hindus whose ancestors worshipped Hanuman and who still follow their heathen religion (as opposed to being de-heathenised into conceiving of their ancestors' religion as alien), the answer to "Do you pray to a monkey god?" can be anything as simple as:

Yes *of course* I do. He is a Monkey, he is certainly a God, he is most definitely real, and he is the confluence of all that is most good and great, and is one well-known for being seated/standing in Yoga meditating on my other Gods Shri Ramachandra and his Wife Sita=my Mother Shree Devi. So it is but natural that I worship him. This Divine Monkey was correctly recognised as one of their own dear Gods by the great Hindus of the past and by the remaining traditional Hindus of the present - of whom I am (because I choose to be, and in gratitude) a natural product - and whose expert first-hand knowledge on these important matters I *know* to value greatly.

(That is the heathen answer.)



^ But, obviously, that can only be the answer if one *does* worship Hanuman the Kapi, who is a great God indeed.



(And to christist interrogators, one can add:

"Whereas of course I don't worship any invisible, non-existent - and therefore specifically non-imageable - mono-gawd. <- Now *that* would clearly be ridiculous, as any sane person will have to agree.")