A useful example - in blue below - of the kind of stupidity that the "anything and everything Indic is Hindu" promoters invited.
opindia.com/2014/12/calling-pk-anti-hindu-is-stupid-hindus-dont-need-to-turn-so-touchy/
By none other than the editor of opindia: he thinks 1. pk is not anti-Hindu and that 2. Hindu orgs should not have gone protesting the movie.
While I think (2) is a waste of time (time much better spent preventing christoislamic bans on movies that expose christoislamania), it does not negate the fact that pk is an anti-Hindu movie, if indeed it featured a man dressed up as Shiva and moving a vehicle with a muslimah in it.
No heathen population would make such a scene about heathen Gods (e.g. the Taoists are incredibly respectful of the HindOO Gods, one could mistake them for HindOOs). Non-motivated/non-ideological persons - e.g. plain vanilla western atheists, i.e. non-militant kind - wouldn't care to make anything about heathen Gods. Only missionary ideologies and subverted would pen such a scene into a film, and it most certainly is for subversive purposes and as an attempt at indirect iconoclasm. And only de-heathenised would be so incapable of recognising the subversion or the intent.
It's true fake "swamis" or "babas" or whatever they're called are part of the christian conversion programme - see also opindia.com/2014/12/dear-hindus-outraging-at-pk-look-what-babas-are-doing-they-are-converting-hindus-to-christians/ (important read). And I think the age has arrived where Hindus need to seriously distance themselves from exalting human persons - certainly avoid elevating them to the primary object of their devotion and loyalty - and ought to return their loyalties and piety to where it belongs: the Hindoo Gods alone. The Hindoo Gods should be the first and foremost objects of adoration and loyalty, and 2nd priority should be all the Hindoo heathens loyal to the Gods. Avoid subversionists of any stripe. Certainly shouldn't elevate them to authorities or teachers.
But the actual example I wanted to draw particular attention to is the following. It's of yet another unheathen anti-heathen who has been allowed to encroach on the Hindu label/"I'm a Hindu too":
opindia.com/2014/12/calling-pk-anti-hindu-is-stupid-hindus-dont-need-to-turn-so-touchy/
Typical. BadVaction is not just an unheathen, but a classic case of anti-heathen.
Note how he implies that others calling themselves Hindus - the primary group that label belongs to, i.e. Hindoos/heathens ("polytheistic idolators") are singled out, as only they can truly be offended by PK's attack on their Gods - are to be lumped with 'mullahs and evangelists' for seeing through PK's psyops and objecting to it.
But what can one expect of unheathens reconstructing the charvaka movement? After all, PK pales in comparison to the virulent anti-Hindoo dawaganda the original charvakans (sp?) used to peddle about. They're famously anti-heathen (they'd have attacked Taoists and Hellenes too, if they had the chance). More in common with christoislamania - besides being a missionary ideology - than ever with any heathenism, including that of India: Hindoos' heathenism.
So of course "BadVacation" is not offended by PK and only offended at Hindoos - totally unrelated to unheathens and anti-heathens as they are - taking offense at PK's cinematic iconoclasm. The unheathen BadVaction pretends his convenient "equanimity" and non-recognition of PK's provocation is the "True Hindu" response to PK's christoislamic denigration of heathen Gods.
I.e. it's not enough for unheathens to have encroached on the Hindu label, now they pretend they're the exemplaries.
When christoislam comes for BadVacation - as it will one day - Hindoos should return the favour and lecture him and all of its uninvited kind that they have no right to protest in any way either: "don't go all taliban by defending yourself against violence of any sort, it's embarrassing". Then Hindoos should proceed to do absolutely NOTHING to save these people (they're not Hindoos' problem, right? That's the beauty of apathy: it works both ways and is perfectly justified. Besides, Hindoos lose nothing by christoislam cannibalising that other anti-heathen missionary ideology. I don't get paid to care.)
Charvaka is in some respects quite like an Indic Ayn Randianism. In any case, NOT to be compared to plain vanilla western atheism, which is individual not ideological (and before people want to paint western atheists as uniformly or even predominantly hedonist: many western atheist individuals in my ken actually seem closer to an Epicurean frugal type of atheism, than anything like Charvakan or Ayn Randist, while not being remotely communist either. I don't know any hedonistic western atheist personally, only articles written by obviously trivial journalists and even they are becoming the minority. Oh, and western atheists don't want/aren't waiting about for new-agey Indian cults or any religion: they're happy being sensible and free from convoluted notions about the afterlife. Indics should leave western atheists and ex-christians alone, stop selling 'religion' at them).
"Hindu" and "Hinduism" in the western sphere has, fortunately, not referred to anything BUT India's heathens, i.e. the Hindoos. The west may have tossed a thousand insults against Hindoos and their heathenism, but "Hindooism", "Hinduism", "Hindoeisme" etc* has consistently referred to the religion centred on the Hindoo Gods alone. *That* is what's in print. They may well deny its existence as a religion or as a collective hereafter, but I still possess encyclopaedias where the print still affirms clearly what "Hindooism/Hindoeisme" and "Hindoo/Hindu" has meant all this while in western languages: the polytheistic idolatry born from the Vedas alone (and listed in contrast to every other Indic religion).
Nothing else. No one else is recognised in all that old western print under the label 'Hindu'. (Has served its purpose for posterity.) Everything else is owing to Hindu nationalism's rewriting of the usage of western terminology in the context of a western language.
Unheathens are not going to try their usual parasitic inculturation trick - a la christianism - and try to encroach on exclusively Hindoo=Gods-centred religious practices like Bharatanatyam and Carnatic music under the ruse of a "shared" "Hindu" label, right? Usually poaching on Hindoo "civilisation" (i.e. Hindoo achievements and religio-culture, heathen-dom) - plus the chance of enlarging the pool of fish to choose mates from - is all that unheathens seek when they eye using the "Hindu" label. They must be reminded that they have no right to either, regardless of whather they encroach on the term 'Hindu'. Charvakan reconstructionists are free to marry fellow unheathens (though many other "Hindu" and Indic unheathens dislike Charvakans even more and WILL not intermarry with them). Many communists used to refer to themselves as Charvakans or at least plug for it. Some may still do.
* Hmmm, the word Hinduism could turn out useful after all. It cannot refer to unheathens, as it specifically refers to a religion of polytheistic idolatry. I was wrong to have let the word go. It shows its usefulness after all when the medium is some western lingo. A word with some shadow of the intended meaning may be better than none... None of the Hindoo words for Hindoo heathenism like Sanatana Dharma or Vaidika Dharma etc is in English print to connect what was written about a collective to the collective that still exists, after all.
Anyway, hope Hindu nationalists/'Hindutva' peddlers won't pretend that Badvacation/Charvaka reconstructionism are Hindoos' "friends" and christoislamics are the "enemy". All anti-heathenisms terrorise heathens. Like all those 'Hindus' said about the Hindu label - that there is no such thing as a 'Hindu' unless Buddhists, Jains etc are all *equally* related - then there certainly is no such thing as 'we' either.
a. There's the Hindoos and their larger family: their relatives, the heathens from across the globe (and throughout history) [e.g. there are traditional Taoists and even Shintos who identify with Hindoos first. There are even Native Americans writing on the internet who identify their religion and views with their fellow Hindoo heathens, from among everything in the world they could have chosen from]. These are Hindoos' direct and only kin.
b. Then there's plain vanilla atheists in the west - who are neutral (as in: they don't care about heathens one way or another, leaving alone those who leave them alone).
c. And there's anti-heathens, like subversionists* and the replacement/missionary ideologies.
*Including the very kind that denied Hindoos' existence by denying them a label, and instead forced Hindoos to share a label with all and sundry from all 3 groups.
opindia.com/2014/12/calling-pk-anti-hindu-is-stupid-hindus-dont-need-to-turn-so-touchy/
By none other than the editor of opindia: he thinks 1. pk is not anti-Hindu and that 2. Hindu orgs should not have gone protesting the movie.
While I think (2) is a waste of time (time much better spent preventing christoislamic bans on movies that expose christoislamania), it does not negate the fact that pk is an anti-Hindu movie, if indeed it featured a man dressed up as Shiva and moving a vehicle with a muslimah in it.
No heathen population would make such a scene about heathen Gods (e.g. the Taoists are incredibly respectful of the HindOO Gods, one could mistake them for HindOOs). Non-motivated/non-ideological persons - e.g. plain vanilla western atheists, i.e. non-militant kind - wouldn't care to make anything about heathen Gods. Only missionary ideologies and subverted would pen such a scene into a film, and it most certainly is for subversive purposes and as an attempt at indirect iconoclasm. And only de-heathenised would be so incapable of recognising the subversion or the intent.
It's true fake "swamis" or "babas" or whatever they're called are part of the christian conversion programme - see also opindia.com/2014/12/dear-hindus-outraging-at-pk-look-what-babas-are-doing-they-are-converting-hindus-to-christians/ (important read). And I think the age has arrived where Hindus need to seriously distance themselves from exalting human persons - certainly avoid elevating them to the primary object of their devotion and loyalty - and ought to return their loyalties and piety to where it belongs: the Hindoo Gods alone. The Hindoo Gods should be the first and foremost objects of adoration and loyalty, and 2nd priority should be all the Hindoo heathens loyal to the Gods. Avoid subversionists of any stripe. Certainly shouldn't elevate them to authorities or teachers.
But the actual example I wanted to draw particular attention to is the following. It's of yet another unheathen anti-heathen who has been allowed to encroach on the Hindu label/"I'm a Hindu too":
opindia.com/2014/12/calling-pk-anti-hindu-is-stupid-hindus-dont-need-to-turn-so-touchy/
Quote:
BadVacation 4 months ago
Good article. I am a nastika/charvaka Hindu. Proudly Hindu, secular and agnostic. I hope there are more people like you who stops us from looking like the crazy Mullah's or Evangelists.
Typical. BadVaction is not just an unheathen, but a classic case of anti-heathen.
Note how he implies that others calling themselves Hindus - the primary group that label belongs to, i.e. Hindoos/heathens ("polytheistic idolators") are singled out, as only they can truly be offended by PK's attack on their Gods - are to be lumped with 'mullahs and evangelists' for seeing through PK's psyops and objecting to it.
But what can one expect of unheathens reconstructing the charvaka movement? After all, PK pales in comparison to the virulent anti-Hindoo dawaganda the original charvakans (sp?) used to peddle about. They're famously anti-heathen (they'd have attacked Taoists and Hellenes too, if they had the chance). More in common with christoislamania - besides being a missionary ideology - than ever with any heathenism, including that of India: Hindoos' heathenism.
So of course "BadVacation" is not offended by PK and only offended at Hindoos - totally unrelated to unheathens and anti-heathens as they are - taking offense at PK's cinematic iconoclasm. The unheathen BadVaction pretends his convenient "equanimity" and non-recognition of PK's provocation is the "True Hindu" response to PK's christoislamic denigration of heathen Gods.
I.e. it's not enough for unheathens to have encroached on the Hindu label, now they pretend they're the exemplaries.
When christoislam comes for BadVacation - as it will one day - Hindoos should return the favour and lecture him and all of its uninvited kind that they have no right to protest in any way either: "don't go all taliban by defending yourself against violence of any sort, it's embarrassing". Then Hindoos should proceed to do absolutely NOTHING to save these people (they're not Hindoos' problem, right? That's the beauty of apathy: it works both ways and is perfectly justified. Besides, Hindoos lose nothing by christoislam cannibalising that other anti-heathen missionary ideology. I don't get paid to care.)
Charvaka is in some respects quite like an Indic Ayn Randianism. In any case, NOT to be compared to plain vanilla western atheism, which is individual not ideological (and before people want to paint western atheists as uniformly or even predominantly hedonist: many western atheist individuals in my ken actually seem closer to an Epicurean frugal type of atheism, than anything like Charvakan or Ayn Randist, while not being remotely communist either. I don't know any hedonistic western atheist personally, only articles written by obviously trivial journalists and even they are becoming the minority. Oh, and western atheists don't want/aren't waiting about for new-agey Indian cults or any religion: they're happy being sensible and free from convoluted notions about the afterlife. Indics should leave western atheists and ex-christians alone, stop selling 'religion' at them).
"Hindu" and "Hinduism" in the western sphere has, fortunately, not referred to anything BUT India's heathens, i.e. the Hindoos. The west may have tossed a thousand insults against Hindoos and their heathenism, but "Hindooism", "Hinduism", "Hindoeisme" etc* has consistently referred to the religion centred on the Hindoo Gods alone. *That* is what's in print. They may well deny its existence as a religion or as a collective hereafter, but I still possess encyclopaedias where the print still affirms clearly what "Hindooism/Hindoeisme" and "Hindoo/Hindu" has meant all this while in western languages: the polytheistic idolatry born from the Vedas alone (and listed in contrast to every other Indic religion).
Nothing else. No one else is recognised in all that old western print under the label 'Hindu'. (Has served its purpose for posterity.) Everything else is owing to Hindu nationalism's rewriting of the usage of western terminology in the context of a western language.
Unheathens are not going to try their usual parasitic inculturation trick - a la christianism - and try to encroach on exclusively Hindoo=Gods-centred religious practices like Bharatanatyam and Carnatic music under the ruse of a "shared" "Hindu" label, right? Usually poaching on Hindoo "civilisation" (i.e. Hindoo achievements and religio-culture, heathen-dom) - plus the chance of enlarging the pool of fish to choose mates from - is all that unheathens seek when they eye using the "Hindu" label. They must be reminded that they have no right to either, regardless of whather they encroach on the term 'Hindu'. Charvakan reconstructionists are free to marry fellow unheathens (though many other "Hindu" and Indic unheathens dislike Charvakans even more and WILL not intermarry with them). Many communists used to refer to themselves as Charvakans or at least plug for it. Some may still do.
* Hmmm, the word Hinduism could turn out useful after all. It cannot refer to unheathens, as it specifically refers to a religion of polytheistic idolatry. I was wrong to have let the word go. It shows its usefulness after all when the medium is some western lingo. A word with some shadow of the intended meaning may be better than none... None of the Hindoo words for Hindoo heathenism like Sanatana Dharma or Vaidika Dharma etc is in English print to connect what was written about a collective to the collective that still exists, after all.
Anyway, hope Hindu nationalists/'Hindutva' peddlers won't pretend that Badvacation/Charvaka reconstructionism are Hindoos' "friends" and christoislamics are the "enemy". All anti-heathenisms terrorise heathens. Like all those 'Hindus' said about the Hindu label - that there is no such thing as a 'Hindu' unless Buddhists, Jains etc are all *equally* related - then there certainly is no such thing as 'we' either.
a. There's the Hindoos and their larger family: their relatives, the heathens from across the globe (and throughout history) [e.g. there are traditional Taoists and even Shintos who identify with Hindoos first. There are even Native Americans writing on the internet who identify their religion and views with their fellow Hindoo heathens, from among everything in the world they could have chosen from]. These are Hindoos' direct and only kin.
b. Then there's plain vanilla atheists in the west - who are neutral (as in: they don't care about heathens one way or another, leaving alone those who leave them alone).
c. And there's anti-heathens, like subversionists* and the replacement/missionary ideologies.
*Including the very kind that denied Hindoos' existence by denying them a label, and instead forced Hindoos to share a label with all and sundry from all 3 groups.