This post is about the inculturating late Jain clone version of the Da Only (=Vedic) Gayatri Mantram and the Buddhist replacement for the Gayatri Mantram
Loosely continued from post 185 of the Sanatana Dharma thread, but this post belongs here.
Meanwhile that other Nastika, Sandhya Jain, whom I last saw screeching at Swami Swaroopanand for his views which were the same as that of the Dharma Sansad (and hence she screeched at them too, logically speaking, as the "crime" was the same),
that same Sandhya Jain has now come out with a totally different article (vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=3585), where she - in the course of reviewing Juluri - indirectly encroaches on the Vedam and Gayatri mantram as if these suddenly have equally to do with -or in fact, anything to do with- her Jainism. And in the article she also pretends that the Ishwara of the Vedam can in any way be equated with the 1st teerthankara/thhe "Adi" "Bhagavaan" of Jainism, by using new agey mystifying language (sort of what christian interfaith dialogue also uses to equate the Hindoos' Gods/Ishwara with the biblical gawd).
Really don't know how S Jain has the nerve to continue her Nastika/Jainist encroachment on the Vedic religio/religio-civilisation, after her attack on legitimate Hindoos upholding Vaidika tradition with legitimate views, and after she blackened their characters to an ignorant Hindu audience.
And good grief, the Gayatri mantram too.
She has right only to the very late and regionally restricted Jain clone (Bad Copy) of the Gayatri mantram: the Jain so-called "Gayatri mantram" of some southern Jains, which is essentially a combination of
- the wholesale copy of the Vedic Gayatri mantram (into which nastikas don't have deeksham, so why were they stealing again?) AND
- with the addition of a single line conveniently declaring the mantram's now speaking about their backprojected and invented 1st teerthankara instead.
Or maybe Sandhya Jain thinks her Jain Bad Copy - which was invented for inculturation purposes - is the same as the Vedic version of the same, which is Da True=Only version of it, and hence she thinks there's only one.
* Note also how in this way Jainism allowed southern ex-brahmana converts to Jainism to continue reciting the Gayatri Mantram by re-interpreting (twisting) it as something to do with jeebus I mean the 1st teerthankara/Jainism instead. By blatantly stealing elements from Vedic religion and then mangling/reinterpreting these as Jainism (or Buddhism) is how the Nastika religions even survived to today.
Among the many thefts and manglings that Jainism and Buddhism committed against Vedic religion for inculturation ends, Jainism cloned and mangled the Gayatri mantram for inculturation purposes alone too, just like christianism has similarly started inculturating on the Gayatri Mantram now in the very same way and is selling it as being suddenly all about jeebus/christianism.
Can note how both christianism and Jainism have followed the same inculturating process.
Here, a Jain page on the Jain inculturation on/Jain Bad Copy of the Gayatri Mantram:
jainsamaj.org/rpg_site/literature2.php?id=1145&cat=42
Buddhism does not have the Gaayatri mantram (and still sounds fortunately resistive, no doubt afraid of a Vedic infiltration of their 'pristine' Buddhism). Though sudden new-age converts to Buddhism have shown an eager interest in dabbling in the Gayatri mantram under the mistaken notion that it would magically belong to Buddhism too (lots of western sudden converts to Buddhism use Buddhism as a means to dabble in Vedic mantras and Gods and then Bauddhify these; they're horrible new-ageists and subversionists). E.g.:
- zenforuminternational.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7353
- dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5631
(where the same question as in the first link is asked again - note the eagerness in the Gayatri - but is fortunately shot down.)
From that last link:
Response there:
However, Buddhism apparently invented its "sharaNam gachChAmi" triple liner (seen peddled by Rajeev Srinivasan and other Bauddhified Hindus/Hindu nationalists on the web) specifically as a replacement for the Gayatri. As seen argued at the next link by a Buddhist
hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?4002-Buddhist-Gayatri!
At the above link, can also see that zealous Indic convert to Buddhism try to first sneakily peddle Buddhism and then - upon failure to convince/convert - overtly/angrily peddle the same among Hindus using out-and-out Replacement Theology tactics: referring to Buddhist so-called "Dharma Shastras" as The "Dharma Shastras" (i.e. as if Da Dharma Shastras of Vaidika Dharma is interchangeable with the Buddhist "Dharma Shastras"), and then insisting that the oh-so-obvious replacement of Hindoo heathenism done in these late Buddhist works means that Buddhism has superceded the Vedam in authority [="the New Vedam/the current form of Vedic Dharma"] and that the "Dharma Shastras" (the Buddhist replacements, of course) say that Buddha has superseded the Hindoo Gods as the go-to in Kaliyuga. *Exactly like how christianism has repeatedly tried to pass off the babble as the "5th Vedam" that supercedes the Vedam, and jeebus as the God who supercedes the Hindoo Gods.
Can see how Buddhism is *still* attempting to missionise among Hindoos, by invading Hindoo sites (as christians do) to peddle the babble I mean Buddhisms.
It's not just christianism. All these missionary religions are the same: aiming for replacement, by means of inculturation and encroachment and developing replacement theology and missionising.
Sandhya Jain has no right to pretend Jainism has any claims on the Vedas/Vedic Gods/Vedic religio (and civilisation). I see that she knows well enough to list Buddhism separately. She badmouthed a legitimate and well-meaning Shankaracharya (who was moreover correct) and tried to brainwash her Hindu readers with this too. Even otherwise, enough with nAstikas encroaching on Vedic=Hindoo heathenism, all in order to equate their replacement dharma shaastras and mantras and backprojected replacment adi bhagavaans/buddhas with that of the Vedic religion. There is no such equation. It is just replacement. She had earlier peddled the Jain late rewrite of Vedic King Bharata as being a "Jain" (c.f. the Jain late rewrites of Rama & co as Jains) and that Hindoos' Shiva-Maheshwara is the Jain Rishabha. Even if Sandhya's merely ignorant that there's No Equality between any of these things (Vedic Bharata/Rama and late Jain rewrites, Vedic Gayatri/Shiva and late Jain inculturation on these) her efforts should still be rebuffed to prevent subversion of Hindoo heathenism into Jainism. Enough Hindus of the internet generation have been Bauddhised and Jainised already by the Jain/Buddhist spins/inculturations on Hindoo heathenism.
While S Jain comes across as very positive in her article, Hindus allowing nastikas to piggyback on Vedic religion (Sanatana Dharma) is not a good idea and only allows nastikas to create a position of 'equal authority' among Hindus, which they invariably end up using to subvert or even generate rebellion against genuine tradition and authorities in Hindoo heathenism/Vedic religion. (Rather like what Elst does.)
Even Sandhya - next to her subverting aspects of Vedic religio-history to her Hindu audience using the Jain inculturations on these - stoked up suspicion among her Hindu readers against Swami Swaroopananda. And he and the loyal Naga Sadhus have been suffering (e.g. threats of lawsuits) from just this sort of unthinking positioning by modern Hindus easily misled by nastikas who are ignorant on Vedic religion.
Besides, no one needs fair-weather friends. In the end, nastikas keep turning into a stone around Hindus' neck: Hindus keep wanting to carry them along in some umbrella "Hindu" term and a significant and visible/influential number of them is only interested in dissing Hindus/Vedic religion and/or subverting/Jainising/Bauddhifying the latter (even if only subconsciously).
Hindus have never gained anything by letting others piggyback on Vedic religion=Hindoo heathenism (if other Indics want to have a share in the cake, they are always free to revert properly, i.e. without bringing in any of their nastika stuff). It always ends up being parasitism - besides infiltration of (subtle to gross) subversionism - and an excuse to let others have the cake and eat it too, which is how Hindoo religion lost any laity (and parts of SE Asia) to the nouveau Indic religions in the first place.
This post was about the inculturationist late Jain clone version of the Da Only (=Vedic) Gayatri Mantram and the Buddhist replacement for the Gayatri Mantram
Loosely continued from post 185 of the Sanatana Dharma thread, but this post belongs here.
Meanwhile that other Nastika, Sandhya Jain, whom I last saw screeching at Swami Swaroopanand for his views which were the same as that of the Dharma Sansad (and hence she screeched at them too, logically speaking, as the "crime" was the same),
that same Sandhya Jain has now come out with a totally different article (vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=3585), where she - in the course of reviewing Juluri - indirectly encroaches on the Vedam and Gayatri mantram as if these suddenly have equally to do with -or in fact, anything to do with- her Jainism. And in the article she also pretends that the Ishwara of the Vedam can in any way be equated with the 1st teerthankara/thhe "Adi" "Bhagavaan" of Jainism, by using new agey mystifying language (sort of what christian interfaith dialogue also uses to equate the Hindoos' Gods/Ishwara with the biblical gawd).
Really don't know how S Jain has the nerve to continue her Nastika/Jainist encroachment on the Vedic religio/religio-civilisation, after her attack on legitimate Hindoos upholding Vaidika tradition with legitimate views, and after she blackened their characters to an ignorant Hindu audience.
And good grief, the Gayatri mantram too.
She has right only to the very late and regionally restricted Jain clone (Bad Copy) of the Gayatri mantram: the Jain so-called "Gayatri mantram" of some southern Jains, which is essentially a combination of
- the wholesale copy of the Vedic Gayatri mantram (into which nastikas don't have deeksham, so why were they stealing again?) AND
- with the addition of a single line conveniently declaring the mantram's now speaking about their backprojected and invented 1st teerthankara instead.
Or maybe Sandhya Jain thinks her Jain Bad Copy - which was invented for inculturation purposes - is the same as the Vedic version of the same, which is Da True=Only version of it, and hence she thinks there's only one.
* Note also how in this way Jainism allowed southern ex-brahmana converts to Jainism to continue reciting the Gayatri Mantram by re-interpreting (twisting) it as something to do with jeebus I mean the 1st teerthankara/Jainism instead. By blatantly stealing elements from Vedic religion and then mangling/reinterpreting these as Jainism (or Buddhism) is how the Nastika religions even survived to today.
Among the many thefts and manglings that Jainism and Buddhism committed against Vedic religion for inculturation ends, Jainism cloned and mangled the Gayatri mantram for inculturation purposes alone too, just like christianism has similarly started inculturating on the Gayatri Mantram now in the very same way and is selling it as being suddenly all about jeebus/christianism.
Can note how both christianism and Jainism have followed the same inculturating process.
Here, a Jain page on the Jain inculturation on/Jain Bad Copy of the Gayatri Mantram:
jainsamaj.org/rpg_site/literature2.php?id=1145&cat=42
Buddhism does not have the Gaayatri mantram (and still sounds fortunately resistive, no doubt afraid of a Vedic infiltration of their 'pristine' Buddhism). Though sudden new-age converts to Buddhism have shown an eager interest in dabbling in the Gayatri mantram under the mistaken notion that it would magically belong to Buddhism too (lots of western sudden converts to Buddhism use Buddhism as a means to dabble in Vedic mantras and Gods and then Bauddhify these; they're horrible new-ageists and subversionists). E.g.:
- zenforuminternational.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7353
- dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5631
(where the same question as in the first link is asked again - note the eagerness in the Gayatri - but is fortunately shot down.)
From that last link:
Quote:Hey Guys, and Gals, I'm interested in the Gayatri Mantra. I know it's a Vedic Mantra, but apparently it has some foothold in Buddhism as well. I have defitnely heard recordings of Tibetan Monks chanting it, but other than that I don't know much.
Thanks in advance.
Response there:
Quote:Some western converts to Buddhism (new-ageists) can be disgusting in their illegal encroachment on Hindoo heathenism. They're unable (unwilling) to follow their chosen religion of Buddhism properly.Quote:I have defitnely heard recordings of Tibetan Monks chanting it, but other than that I don't know much.
Nope, you have not. The Gayatri does not exist as a tradition in Buddhism of any kind. There may however be some Western Tibetan Buddhists that are fond of chanting it (I know one too).
However, Buddhism apparently invented its "sharaNam gachChAmi" triple liner (seen peddled by Rajeev Srinivasan and other Bauddhified Hindus/Hindu nationalists on the web) specifically as a replacement for the Gayatri. As seen argued at the next link by a Buddhist
hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?4002-Buddhist-Gayatri!
At the above link, can also see that zealous Indic convert to Buddhism try to first sneakily peddle Buddhism and then - upon failure to convince/convert - overtly/angrily peddle the same among Hindus using out-and-out Replacement Theology tactics: referring to Buddhist so-called "Dharma Shastras" as The "Dharma Shastras" (i.e. as if Da Dharma Shastras of Vaidika Dharma is interchangeable with the Buddhist "Dharma Shastras"), and then insisting that the oh-so-obvious replacement of Hindoo heathenism done in these late Buddhist works means that Buddhism has superceded the Vedam in authority [="the New Vedam/the current form of Vedic Dharma"] and that the "Dharma Shastras" (the Buddhist replacements, of course) say that Buddha has superseded the Hindoo Gods as the go-to in Kaliyuga. *Exactly like how christianism has repeatedly tried to pass off the babble as the "5th Vedam" that supercedes the Vedam, and jeebus as the God who supercedes the Hindoo Gods.
Can see how Buddhism is *still* attempting to missionise among Hindoos, by invading Hindoo sites (as christians do) to peddle the babble I mean Buddhisms.
It's not just christianism. All these missionary religions are the same: aiming for replacement, by means of inculturation and encroachment and developing replacement theology and missionising.
Sandhya Jain has no right to pretend Jainism has any claims on the Vedas/Vedic Gods/Vedic religio (and civilisation). I see that she knows well enough to list Buddhism separately. She badmouthed a legitimate and well-meaning Shankaracharya (who was moreover correct) and tried to brainwash her Hindu readers with this too. Even otherwise, enough with nAstikas encroaching on Vedic=Hindoo heathenism, all in order to equate their replacement dharma shaastras and mantras and backprojected replacment adi bhagavaans/buddhas with that of the Vedic religion. There is no such equation. It is just replacement. She had earlier peddled the Jain late rewrite of Vedic King Bharata as being a "Jain" (c.f. the Jain late rewrites of Rama & co as Jains) and that Hindoos' Shiva-Maheshwara is the Jain Rishabha. Even if Sandhya's merely ignorant that there's No Equality between any of these things (Vedic Bharata/Rama and late Jain rewrites, Vedic Gayatri/Shiva and late Jain inculturation on these) her efforts should still be rebuffed to prevent subversion of Hindoo heathenism into Jainism. Enough Hindus of the internet generation have been Bauddhised and Jainised already by the Jain/Buddhist spins/inculturations on Hindoo heathenism.
While S Jain comes across as very positive in her article, Hindus allowing nastikas to piggyback on Vedic religion (Sanatana Dharma) is not a good idea and only allows nastikas to create a position of 'equal authority' among Hindus, which they invariably end up using to subvert or even generate rebellion against genuine tradition and authorities in Hindoo heathenism/Vedic religion. (Rather like what Elst does.)
Even Sandhya - next to her subverting aspects of Vedic religio-history to her Hindu audience using the Jain inculturations on these - stoked up suspicion among her Hindu readers against Swami Swaroopananda. And he and the loyal Naga Sadhus have been suffering (e.g. threats of lawsuits) from just this sort of unthinking positioning by modern Hindus easily misled by nastikas who are ignorant on Vedic religion.
Besides, no one needs fair-weather friends. In the end, nastikas keep turning into a stone around Hindus' neck: Hindus keep wanting to carry them along in some umbrella "Hindu" term and a significant and visible/influential number of them is only interested in dissing Hindus/Vedic religion and/or subverting/Jainising/Bauddhifying the latter (even if only subconsciously).
Hindus have never gained anything by letting others piggyback on Vedic religion=Hindoo heathenism (if other Indics want to have a share in the cake, they are always free to revert properly, i.e. without bringing in any of their nastika stuff). It always ends up being parasitism - besides infiltration of (subtle to gross) subversionism - and an excuse to let others have the cake and eat it too, which is how Hindoo religion lost any laity (and parts of SE Asia) to the nouveau Indic religions in the first place.
This post was about the inculturationist late Jain clone version of the Da Only (=Vedic) Gayatri Mantram and the Buddhist replacement for the Gayatri Mantram