• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sanatana Dharma - Aka Hinduism (3rd Bin)
(Moved from the christianism=terrorism thread)

Post 2/3

That link is too entertaining. Must archive its contents.


Quote:Introduction to the Baha'i Faith for the Followers of Krishna

The 'Song of God' or Bhagavad-Gita was first given to Arjuna around 1246 B.C. by Krishna. It is considered the 'gospels' of Hinduism. The essence of the teachings of Krishna is this: that we should detach from materialism in order to evolve spiritually. In the Baha'i Faith, we have a similar teaching that we should detach from all save God.

The full teaching to the Indian people are called the Vedas. They constitute six times the bulk of the Bible and recount similar stories and figures; such as the coming of Adam, the flood of Noah, and the missions of Shem and Abraham.

(Amazing how Bahai have become the experts on the Vedas. The proof that they have no idea what they're spewing is in how they have imagined Adam, Noah and Shem/Abraham into the Vedam - and convenient ignorance about how deluge stories are present in most ancient heathen religions, which is where they were copied into the missionary religions.

Bahai is right up there with how oryanists like to read themselves - Europeans "Oryans" - into the Vedas.)

For example, one of the oldest figures in the Vedas was Manu. He was the "progeniter of humanity." His followers were known as the Manus. "According to the Vedas, the Manus represent the earliest Divine Lawgivers, who established sacrificial acts and religious ceremonies." (Encyclopedia of Eastern Philosophy and Religions, pg. 220) An enlightening parallel when compared with the book of Genesis which recounts Adam as the first divine lawgiver. It was Adam who taught his descendants their rituals of sacrifice. This is but one of the numerous parallels that occur throughout the texts of all the world's religions.

(Huh. Not sure what the World's Stupidest Invented (AKA Missionary) Religion is any more. Each one is more delusional than the one before. It's like they're competing for "the most mentally-regressing" prize. This one is pure drivel.)

There is a relationship between the Vedas to the Holy Bible. In part, this is due to the lineage of Krishna and the Indian people which can be traced back to Adam. Krishna is a descendent of Adam (Manu) through Abraham's third wife Keturah. Moses and the Israelites share a lineage tracing back to Adam through Abraham's first wife Sarah. More importantly, the religions of the Hindus and of the Jews and Christians all originate from the same, Omniscient Creator of the universe. All dissimilarities are due to the tamperings of the clergy classes.

(Since the Vedas have zip-all in common with the Abrahamic religions, the entire Vedam must therefore be dubbed one big dissimilarity. So Bahai should explain the *entire* vedam away as "the tampering of clergy classes", and leave the Vedas and Hindus out of their insane and late mythmaking.)

The Hindu texts speak of teachers or prophets that are sent from Brahma (the One True Invisible God). They call them Avatars which means, "an incarnation of divine consciousness on Earth." These teachers have this title because they recieve the "Logos" which is "thought of God." Baha'is refer to these great Avatars as "Manifestations" because they manifest the attributes of God to mankind. They come progressively and teach humanity spiritual truths and reveal laws for an ever advancing civilization. The Vedas speak of 10 Avatars that are to come in this cycle of humanity known as the Adamic cycle which was started with the coming of Adam 6000 years ago.

(Avataras are not "prophets", which is a feature of ME and W-Asian religion. Avataras are full manifestations of the Hindu - note not Bahai or any other - Gods.

And of course, other self-delusional Bahai lies in the above para need correction too, like: 1. the Hindu God Brahma is not invisible nor the sole Hindu God: he is for example part of a trinity of male Gods and is further married to female Goddesses. That's as per *Hindu* texts, hence totally contrary to Bahai make-believe about what said Hindu texts have to say. 2. Plus the Vedas don't speak of 10 avataras, but other Hindu texts do speak of the 10 avataras. 3. And they're not of any random invisible=invented monogawd's avataras either: the Hindu texts - i.e. the only legitimate texts to speak of 10 avataras or of any avataras for that matter - speak of the particular Hindu God *Vishnu's* 10 avataras.)

These Avatars, chronologically, were Adam, Moses, Krishna, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, the Bab and Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah was the 9th Avatar (aka - the "reincarnation of Krishna). Baha'u'llah revealed the "New" Song of God for this day. His is the message desperately needed for a demoralized society. The 10th Avatar is called Kalki Avatar; he appears at the end of this cycle or age (now) with his sword drawn for the final destruction of the wicked. What you will find here is Proof that Baha'u'llah truly is the one sent from Brahma. His proof is given from The Holy Bible because we live in a predominately Christian society. If you would like to read the proof for the Kalki Avatar, please download Over the Wall from our homepage.

(All missionary religions that poach on one of the Dashaavataram, always poach on Kalki to close as the 10th. This is because Hindus' religion made the 10 famous and always held up Kalki as a future avataaram, which was well-known. Can see several Buddhisms use Hindus' Kalki in a manner similar to the Bahai, while declaring it all a Buddhism and peddling it about as Buddhism.

Plus need to negate further deranged Bahai lying: 1. The 10 avataras as per Hindu texts - which are again the only texts that can legitimately speak of avataras at all, all else are late and bad copies=invented religion - are nothing to do with Zoroastrianism let alone anything Abrahamic. 2. Again: Hindu texts/religion had never heard of anything Abrahamic. 3. The 10 avataras of Vishnu are - as anyone except adherents of invented=fake=lying religions would know: The Fish Matsya, the Tortoise Koorma, the Boar Varaha, the Man-Lion Narasimha, Vamana, Parashurama, Rama, Balarama, Krishna, Kalki. This is the predominant southern Hindu tradition, including of Shri Vaishnavas and Madhvas, Shankara Mathas and southern Shaivas incl. Shaktas. The northern Hindu tradition puts Balarama with Krishna - or makes Krishna a special case - and introduces Buddha between Krishna and Kalki. So either way, most of the invented Bahai list of alleged 10 avataras is just Bahai lying/drivel. 4. Also, the Hindu texts don't only speak of Vishnu's 10 avataras, but of his 24 avataras too - none of which includes anything from alien and late/invented religions eiter, but only includes further Indian-onlee avataras. In other words: Bahai can only make converts among idiots.)
(Comments in purple expanded to be more complete.)

And today's Moronism prize goes to... Bahai. Wow are they embarrassing themselves. If any proof was needed that some religions are entirely made up, then the above link provides a good short example.

These people are almost as debile as the kind of temporary alien converts to Hindu religion who go about terrorising Hindus with "you are monotheists, monotheists".

But next time islamaniacs terrorise the Bahai some more, remind me not to care. (They're obviously *dangerously* delusional themselves: they are a danger to heathenisms.) What with their pretences at "knowing" Krishna better than Hindus (and I'm not even talking about the moronic oryanist example linked in the previous post) and their pretending to know him at all and for their utter delusional dawaganda on Hindu scriptures, Hindu Gods, Avataras and other Hindu terminology and Bahai's audacity to tie all this to totally-unrelated Abrahamistic stuffs. Needless to say, they haven't seen a single one of the characters they commandeered as prophets for their religion, let alone having seen the Hindu Gods or the Buddha. It's bad enough to invent a lame religion - and Bahai is pure, unadulterated, mind-numbing invention, no different from christoislam etc - but to then poach on other people's Gods to peddle your own and to give your invention a longer pedigree should be denounced as an act of anti-heathenism and universally outed as a falsehood.

Baha'i and Manichaeanism etc brings me to a related subject.

Some time back, the Rajeev2004 blog hosted some article whose writers were peddling that Yezidis' religion - which is an "Adamic" religion too (Yezidis claim descent from Adam), and which is often classed as an old Abrahamic one, along with other old and less familiar ME Abrahamic religions like that of the Mandaeans and Samaritans -

Again: the writers were peddling that Yezidis' religion was a "Dharmic" religion and that the primary angel of the Yezidis was moreover an "avataaram" identical to Shiva and Murugan etc. The article at the Rajeev2004 blog further invoked the "Supreme Brahman" and associated this with Adam and Eve and Abrahamic religion and all, just like the Bahai above. (And somewhat like Manichaeanism, which was combining Abrahamic religion and Iranian, Zoroastrian, Buddhist and Hindu religions. And which also rewrote the meaning of avataaram.)

Yezidism is a monotheism and it took a lot of influences from Mithraism and Zoroastrianism (many older ME religions were heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism and Mithraism). It is very likely that Yezidism is about as old as late Mithraism in Rome, or as old as Manichaeanism which is about as old as christianism, since there were lots of religions like Manichaeanism and Yezidism springing up around that time. Back then, features of old Iranian and Babylonian religion were still around and influenced people in nearby regions. Just because a religion X has elements of old Iranian religion does NOT mean that it is coeval with the origins of that old Iranian religion. Just like Manichaeanism is not coeval with older Iranian religions that it poached from.

Historically, Hindu religion was very familiar to people west of the Indian subcontinent too, a path followed by Buddhism later on. And some memory of both and of their popular features lingered for long after. Which is why Yezidism - which has been influenced over time by religions older and younger than itself - has imbibed these notions. Like Manichaeanism - and the very recent Bahai - Yezidism (now) seems to also like to claim Hindu Gods along with Abrahamic entities as "avataaras" [in the re-defined ME sense] of its own mono-deity, within its (very closely related to Abrahamic) cosmology. Doesn't make Yezidism Dharmic, just as it doesn't make Manichaeanism or Bahai etc Dharmic.

Here. Tracked down the link:


Quote:Monday, August 11, 2014

Fwd: Are Iraq's Vanishing Pagan Yezidis the Hindus' Last Dharmic Cousins in the Middle-East ?

Particularly relevant is the image of a pamphlet/article there, where Hindu stuff is claimed at random for Yezidism and gets forcibly merged with Adam and Eve* and with the late invention of the ME monogawd. Not a decade back, Yezidis were still audibly insisting that they were a Zoroastrian religion, with Zoroastrians heavily denying any relation. Now it seems Yezidis want to be a Dharmic religion. (Tomorrow they may claim relations with Taoism?)

* Some say Adam and Eve has Iranian origins too. Nevertheless, late Iranian religious motif innovations/inventions are still not Hindu.

It's one thing for some religion X to start involving our Gods and religion, it's another for Hindus to fall for their claims and imagine it a long-lost "sister" religion. Yezidism is no more related than Manichaeanism. The links they all make are - like hyperlinks - all *one* way.

Also, Hindu religion is not *their* religion. These are not *their* Gods. They don't know what they're talking about.

If the Bahai (=Abrahamists) are not to be confounded with/conflated as "Dharmic" by Hindus, then may apply the same sense to Yezidis: they are more closely related by far to Zoroastrianism (not to mention Abrahamism). And not even Zoroastrianism can be called a Dharmic religion: Zoroastrianism was itself a missionary religion that *replaced* ancient Iranian religion, which latter admittedly was related to Hindus' religion.

Another thing that seems to blinker (willingly) gullible Hindus is the type of photo also seen at the rajeev link of Yezidis apparently gathered around a painting of a Hindu woman in a saree holding a Deepam/Vilakku with a Mayoora at the top. Yezidis might choose to mistake anyone having a peacock lamp as having something to do with their religion or as being adherents thereof. But there's several issues here:

1. Hindus can show their working of how our deepas including those with mayoora imagery was derived. Shilpis - at least in the south - always learn to create not just moorties of the Gods but also deepams (as these are also our Gods) and this is a *long* tradition in India. Its ancientry and independent (original) derivation among Hindus is easily demonstrated. See also point 3.

[I'd like to see people producing evidence of *ancient* usage of peacock lamps among Yezidis' - older than 2000 years, since we knew even Manichaeanism of 2nd century CE was using some of the Hindu stuffs that were already doing the rounds in W Asia and beyond at least some 2000 years BP. And especially want evidence of peacock lamps being Yezidis' own derivation and not borrowed - considering so many aspects of their religion are owing to borrowing from other religions. If they want to claim it is derived from Hindus, they then need to admit that the source it was derived from used it for Hindu purposes and cosmological views, which had nothing to do with Yezidi beliefs. And which moreover didn't know of Yezidi beliefs: the old Hindu scriptures don't know of Yezidi religion or other Abrahamic religions.]

2. Mayoora aren't the only common motif seen on Hindoos' deepam. There is of course also the typically ornately-rendered Hamsa used on deepas (and IIRC sometimes also Yazhis). In any case, hamsas are just as common as mayoora in deepam. Compare with how certain animals are common on top of the bell that Hindus ring during deepaaraadhanam: e.g. Nandi is often on top of the bell.

3. The blue (deep, royal blue) peacock is exclusively native to the Indian subcontinent. (The similar-looking but beautifully aquamarine - dubbed "green" - peacock is native to some Himalayan nations and SE Asia.*) The blue peacock being native to India, it is natural for it to appear in Hindu religion since ancient times. However, everyone else - everywhere else - *must* have been introduced to the peacock at some point in known history, and if they claim that the peacock motif in their religion goes back to some ur-period, they are backprojecting.

The blue peacock's range is actually confined largely to the bounds of *modern* India and of SL, and is absent from most of Pakistan let alone Afghanistan or Iran, forget Kurdistan. Always did wonder how they found their way into Hellenismos/GrecoRoman religion: blue peacocks, and especially their tail feathers, have since ancient times been closely been associated with Goddess Hera. (It's one of many exclusively-Indian elements that I noticed had somehow appeared in western religions long ago. Something Hindus should have investigated. In contrast I have not yet discovered anything demonstrably exclusively European found in Hindu religion. Obviously not counting oryans claiming that the ancient Vedic heritage of Hindoos was "white"/European and arguing that such a backprojected claim is magically "proof".)

[* I see that according to wackypedia, there's apparently a 3rd and final type of the peacock family: a variant in the Congo, but it doesn't have the long distinguishing tail that we associate with a peacock and looks a bit like a Turkey and like a different type of bird altogether. While wacky further mentions the Indian (blue) peacock's occurrence in Hellenismos, it typically attributes this - as it does all other Indian arrivals in Greece - as something that must have happened after Alexander. There is however a link there to a book - by an Indian, of course - which claims the blue=Indian peacock may been introduced to Greece some centuries before. I doubt western people will publicly take notice of such a book, as it will raise all sorts of other questions the west doesn't like to ponder: a lot of their edifice is built on their needing to assume that Alexander was the first contact between India and Greece. Ooh wackypedia even has a bit on peacock usage - as food and medicine against poison - among Vikings. It is a Hindu view - from experience of peacocks - that peacocks have an anti-poison function, since peacocks eat some snakes. The Vikings would likely have been introduced to both the peacock as well as the notion of it being a deterrent against poision from the same (intermediary) source. Anyway, the peacock's presence in other old religions is one of several things whose direction of travel is definitely known and undeniable. Whereas the longtailed peacock's presence in Indian and Himalayan/SE Asian religion is naturally indigenously-derived.]

Anyway, Yezidis can argue that the above 3 points are owing to Hindu influences that they had brought with them from their origins in India, since the article posted at Rajeev2004 has some Yezidis asserting Indian origins. But if Yezidis' ancestors *did* have a history in India, it was very clearly *before* the invention of Yezidi religion: ancient India had no knowledge of Yezidi religion, Yezidi religion obviously postdates post-Vedic Iranian religions and movements (since Yezidi religion has no features of original Iranian religion, only inheriting stuff that existed from the time of Zoroastrianism and Mithraism and the general breakup/obscuring of old Iranian religion), plus Yezidis must have come by their Yezidi religion *after* leaving India and probably after settling in the ME. All this only applies if they still want to claim that their people originated in India. Because India - and Hindu/Vedic religion especially - knows nothing about Adam and abrahamisms. So Yezidis should halt attempts at forcibly merging their religion onto Hindus' religion. These attempts can't be that old either. Because, less than a decade back (when I first looked up info on them), Yezidis still insisted uni-directionally that their religion was a Zoroastrianism. And Zoroastrianism was never Indian but Iranian: it was born in NW Afghanistan or Iran (NW Afghanistan was, at least at that time, Persian territory / Iranian-inhabited).

Further, Zoroastrians denied any original association between Zoroastrianism and Yezidism, so why should today's new-agey Hindus (desperate?) seek to imagine an even more tenuous (or rather untenable) connection between Hindus' religion and Yezidism, merely because a western convert to Hinduism and some Yezidis want to promote such a connection? (In fact, many a site on Yezidism online which claim elements in common with Hindu religion, further claim that theirs is the original and originating world religion, that it and its God is at the root of all others such as Judaism/christianism/islam - i.e. the abrahamisms - and Hindu religion, etc, etc. Then again, even islam claims to be not only The One True religion but also The Sole Original religion, contrary to all evidence.) Any Hindus eager to entertain notions of an association with Yezidism should then have the honesty to equally claim that Bahai and Manichaeanism are ancient "Dharmic" religions and related to Hindu religion too, even though Bahai is closer to islam and Manichaeanism is closer to Zoroastrianism and even though both the Iranian religions of Bahai and Manicheaeanism are known historic inventions.

That Kurdish is classed an Indo-Iranian language is not the question (Kurdish is IIRC Iranian?). Whether the speakers merely adopted the language or not is not certain - at least, that was a point of discussion by Persian Zoroastrians - but, either way, the religion [Yezidism] is NOT related to Hindus' religion. And they may prove from genetics that they are "more" related to Hindus than -say- (non-Russo) Armenians, if they really want to insist on it.

None of this is to say that Hindus should not support the Yezidis - monetarily or at the very least morally - in the horrors they face under their current predicament vis-a-vis islamania, since Yezidism is not a missionary religion (unlike Bahai) and so poses no threat to heathens in that sense. However, even when sympathising, people may use some sense to draw the line. Hindus don't even conflate Zoroastrianism with our religion, why conflate a religion that is partially a spin-off from Zoroastrianism (plus Zoroastrianism is itself a prophetic, monotheistic and once-missionary tradition) and which was moreover significantly influenced by Abrahamic religions? Hindus should for Yezidis' *own* sake defend the latter's right to exist as a non-belligerent people and to be left in peace.

How to put it... By all means support Yezidis, but not because Hindus think they can squeeze Yezidis to fit into the same... 'box' as Hindus. And Yezidis need not imagine that the only way they will win Hindus' sympathy is by appealing to 'connections' between the two religions. (Actually, that is offputting.) Hindus need no convincing to muster at least moral support for non-threatening populations.

Lots of religions historical and modern make ridiculous claims on Hindu religion (while not even being heathenisms). Modern "Hindus" seem intent in falling for the claims of each and subvert their own religion thereby by peddling partial info. (For instance, the article re-posted at Rajeev2004 didn't even seem aware that Yezidism is no more uniquely "Dharmic" - in whatever respect it supposedly is "Dharmic" - than Bahai, say, or that other example: Manichaeanism.) Consider how much ur-Shramanism has seeped into modern Hindus' psyche to the extent that a great many of them have revealed subscribing to one or other ur-Shramanist make-beliefs concerning Indian and especially Hindu history.

The other weird behaviour is that when modern Hindus take a moment from looking ever westward for approval and turn to notice what's to the east of us, they always tend to assume everything further east "must be" derived from Indic religions, even though religions like Taoism can show indigenous derivation of key aspects of their religion such as martial arts or medicine or other religious practices and views - which are often the very aspects encroached upon by others for Buddhism (or PIE/Oryanism) - no less than Hindu religion can show native derivation of Hindu stuffs.

In highlighting modern Hindus' tendency to not take the religions further east seriously despite these being ancient and original/native heathenisms, I'm not hereby claiming Hindus and their religion are ..."genetically" related to Taoism etc. And one can't technically foist the term Dharmic on Taoists and Shintos (especially not in any set where the non-Hindu Dharmic religions of Buddhism/Jainism/Sikhism are a part), but insofar as Hindoos' religion is the subcontinent's native ancestral heathenism and Taoism, Shinto, Hellenismos etc are the native ancestral heathenisms (a.o.t. locally derived spin-offs and missionary religions) of their various parts of the world - in *that* sense perhaps one is allowed to refer to all these as the Sanatana Dharmas of their respective ethnic populations/regions.
The only new post in the series of spam. Featuring an article that already existed in 2003 (and maybe before).

Post 3/3

On the following statement from the above post:

Quote:Further, Zoroastrians denied any original association between Zoroastrianism and Yezidism

Here, an article by Parsis:



by Noshir H. Dadrawala

Fellow Mazdayasni Zarathushtris,

The Gatha-alone cult in the West, in one of it's worst excesses, has thrown open the doors of our sacred religion to any Tom, Dick and Harry that wants to waltz in, on the payment of a "tax-deductible donation". We now have moneyed non-Zoroastrians, such as Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Jews going to the Gatha-alone cult to "try out" what passes for the ancient religion of Zarathushtra, before "moving on" to other New Age religions in the West.

"Try before you buy" seems to be the catch-all Western phrase at work here, but the Westerners dont seem to understand that such material attitudes cannot be applied to spirituality and the sacred religions of the East. Religions cannot be "tried out" then "discarded" as if they were ice cream cones - take the example of a lady we all know, who was born in a different religion, then "became" a Christian, and now her Muslim mentor wants to make her a "born-again Zoroastrian", and takes her to the "come one, come all" fire prayer halls in the West. This is the Gatha-alone cult in action, and TO US STAUNCH ZARATHUSHTRIS WHO BELIEVE THAT RELIGION IS SOMETHING SERIOUS AND NOT TO BE "CHANGED" EVER IN OUR LIVES, ALL THIS SEEMS VERY SICK.

(I agree with their criticism. But to be pedantic: the "Hindus" these Parsis speak of above are obviously new-age Hindus. New age 'Hindus' like to dabble almost as bad as aliens, and worse still: they invite alien dabbling and "conversion" into Hindus' ethnic religion.

Would apologise to Parsis for the new age "Hindus" terrorising their religion, except Hindoos are already terrorised by the same new ageists who keep inviting alien terrorists to parasite on Hindoos' ancestral heathenism, thereby making Hindoos' and Hindu religion equally victims of the same menace that the above Parsis mentioned.

Some of these new age "Hindus" further try to invite alien terrorists to dabble in Taoism. :Grrr: No I'm not kidding. Of course, if it were up to me, no one would hear from such "Hindus" ever again...)

We must remember that this Gatha-alone cult is peopled mainly by ex-Muslims and other non-Zoroastrians, who of course fail to understand the pride and faith we born Zoroastrians feel in our religion, and the abhorrence we feel for the unhappy practise of conversion, which several Parsi scholar-dasturjis have confirmed was NEVER practised by our great and proud ancestors.

The fact is : today, the outsiders are selling our religion in exchange for cold CASH. This crass commercialization of our religion in North America is disgusting and needs to be opposed, our religion is NOT something that can be bought if one has enough money. Our Mazdayasni Zarathushtri Religion is our sacred BIRTHRIGHT and we will not see it CHEAPENED and SOLD in this manner.

Here is an article from the famous Parsi writer Noshir Dadrawala on the "Yezidis" of Kurdistan, these people have been proclaimed by the Gatha-alone cult to be "hidden Zoroastrians". Noshir examines this assumption, studies the beliefs of the Yezidis including their incredible reverance of Satan, and shows us once and for all HOW THE GATHA-ALONE CULT IN NORTH AMERICA IS MISLEADING THE ZOROASTRIAN COMMUNITY, AND MISLEADING THE WHOLE WORLD when it speaks and commits untruths in the name of our great religion.

Kudos to Noshir Dadrawala, and to scholars like Dr. Pallan Ichaporia in the West, who have frequently exposed the wrong teachings and actions of the ex-Muslim Gatha-alone Cult in the West.

A Note of warning: This article describes the religious ideas of the Yezidis, these ideas are non-Zoroastrian, and are only described here to show that their religion is not Zoroastrian.

<The main article then starts. See at link.

Interesting is that Yezidism is pointed out by Encyclopaedia Britannica as also having incorporated influences from Manichaeanism. Which could explain some of the "Hindu" imports into Yezidism.>


Note that the Internet Archive crawled the above page for the first time in 24 Oct 2003. I.e. the article is *at least* as old as that:

Instead of reading the recent stream of new-agey articles about Yezidism (the kind that got passed around by angelsk-speaking Hindus and alien converts and is all over the internet now), here are some sources that at least sound more reliable or sensible.


Quote:Christine Allison (is the) Ibrahim Ahmed Professor of Kurdish Studies at University of Exeter


1. cais-soas.com/CAIS/Religions/iranian/yazidis.htm

YAZIDISIM: A Heterodox Kurdish Religion


Note that CAIS merely hosts her article. About CAIS:


Quote:CAIS was established in 1998 by Shapour Suren-Pahlav and Oric Basirov (Department of Art and Archaeology), under the name of "Ancient Iranian Civilisation at the School of Oriental and African Studies" (AIC at SOAS) and later changed to "The Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies" (CAIS at SOAS) of the University of London, to act as a forum for the exchange of information about the art, archaeology, culture and civilisation of Iranian peoples. CAIS no longer has any affiliation with SOAS.

2. theconversation.com/explainer-who-are-the-yazidis-30280

9 August 2014, 12.38am AEST

Explainer: who are the Yazidis?

Christine Allison

Good to read in entirety at link. But contains the important paragraph highlighted in blue below:


Like all religions, Yazidism can’t be explained in a sentence, but it has two key characteristics that can help us understand it. Firstly, there is a belief that divine beings (the “Seven Angels”) can reincarnate themselves in human form, most recently in the ancestors of their leading religious clans.

These people are called by the Arabic word “khas”. Saints and prophets from other religions – among them Jesus from the Christian faith and, Hasan al-Basri, the companion of Mohammed – have been claimed as “khas”. And since God is a remote figure, it is the chief of the Holy Beings, the Peacock Angel, who rules the world.


Seventy-two persecutions

Yazidism, as we know it today, began in the 12th century, when the Muslim sheikh ‘Adi bin Musafir settled in the Kurdich hills north of Mosul, where he was acclaimed as a “khas by locals who followed an older religion from Iran, the origins of which are still debated.

Which explains some more of the syncretism.

3. The above linked the ref to Muslim "Sheikh Adi bin Musafir" to:


Quote:Thursday, 17 March 2011

"Yazidism/Yezidism", origin of the Yezidis

Yazidism is also known as Sharfadin

(from Sharaf ad-Din ibn al-Hasan, sixth leader of the Adawiyya Sufi order).

The first leader, Sheikh Adi Ibn Musafir Al-Hakkari was born in the 1070’s.

He grew up in the village of Bait Far in the Bekka valley.

It is likely he was ethnically an Arab, but that is only going from the fact that he and his family had Islamic Arab names.

As a young man he went to study in Baghdad and later Mosul.

He became a Sufi and moved to the Sinjara mountains for spiritual contemplation and the creation of his Sufi order, called the Adawiyya.

He died here in 1162. His tomb, Lalesh, is now the center of Yazadi worship.

There were seven leaders of this Sufi order.

From the 1070’s – 1220’s the Middle East came under the rule of the Seljuk Turks.

Though ostensibly Sunni Muslims, they actually had a heterodox idea of Islam.

In the art of that era can be seen Buddhist mandalas, dragons, peacocks and lions. Even the sun had a place in the art of that time. The father of Alp Arslan, the first Seljuk Sultan, was Jewish by religion, his name was Mikhael. They had originally lived in the Khazar Khanate. Even in the Seljuk army there must have been many Nestorian Christian Turks from the Ferghana region.

Seeing the people and history behind the establishment of the Adawiyya order helps to understand why it was so heterodox, how it could have come to exist and why the descendants of this order, the Yazadi, have this heterodox religion today.

Sheik Adi claimed descent from the Ummayad Caliph Marwan (623-85 AD).

The order had the calamity, as the world did, to suffer from Mongol attacks.

[... timeline of Mongol attacks]

Even after the loss of their spiritual leader it seems the Adawiyya followers remained in the Sinjara region. They were a heterogeneous society, already comprising of Islamic Arab influences, Kurdish influences and as we will read further on, Aramaic Christian influences…

There are five castes in their society; Pir (clergy), Sheikh, Kawal, Murabi, and Murid (layity).

The “Mir” (Emirs) is the secular leader of the Yazadis, he claims descent from the Ummayad Caliphs. The “Sheik” is the religious leader.

Also there are three classes of within the Pir: Kochaks, Fakirs, and Farashes.

None of them are permitted to intermarry.

Marriage to outsiders has been shown to be punishable by death.

Although we assume the caste system is something from India, it was also strictly followed in pre-Islamic Iran.

(Uh *Yeah*. And also, didn't an old Zoroastrian website already admit that? Though the pre-Zoroastrian case may have looked more like the Indian varna setup than even the Zoroastrian one.)

All Yazadi are given spiritual guidance by the Sheikh and Pir families. More esoterically they are also given a “brother” or a “sister of the after-world”.

This is similar to Manichean ideology. Mani's teachings are revealed to him through his spiritual companion and celestial twin (his syzygos).

Yazidis, like the Buddhists and Druze, believe in reincarnation.

(1. And like the Manichaeans.

2. So Druze adopted it too, hmmm? IIRC Druze are a type of muslim - spin-off of Shia, was it? - considered heretical by other muslims.)

The name Yazadi is said to derive from the Ummayad Caliph Yazid.

They say that a “Sultan Ezdi” preceded the Caliph, who was a reincarnation of “Ezki”.

The only historical person who bore a name such as “Ezdi” before the era of the Caliphs was the Persian Shah, Yazdigerd III. He was the last Zoroastrian king of Persia.

Also the year Yazdigerd was crowned, 632 AD, marks the base year of the modern Zoroastrian calendar.

(I only knew of "Yazdgerd" : a place in Iran and thought it might be related to Yezidis.)

Yazdi meant Godly in middle Persian.

Even today the Parsees of India, who are Zoroastrian by religion, call themselves “Yazdi”.

Yazadis, like Zoroastrians are both forbidden from desecrating fire even to speak rudely in front of it. Extinguishing fire by water is not allowed in any circumstance as this destroys two elements, water and fire, at the same time.

Sun worship is ancient, even in Iraq where the center of Yazidism is located.

The ancient temple of Hatra, south-east from Mosul, was dedicated to Shamash god of the Sun.

They main Yazadi tribe in north Iraq is called “Dasani”. There was once a Christian diocese called Dasaniyat in that area.

It is supposed that this name is a legacy of the Nestorian Christians who joined the Adawiyya Sufi order, either escaping persecution from the Sunni Muslims or joining by free choice.

The Bishop of Arbel (Erbil) lamented the loss of his flock to Sheik Adi:


In the Sinjara region many Yazadi villages still have Syraic Christian names.

Baptism and the Eucharist, both Christian practices, are part of the Yazadi religion.

Being baptized with water, when children, the priest holding their head.

Children can also be circumcised, though it is not mandatory.

Also in the Sinjara area, when a Yazadi man and woman marry, they will go to a Nestorian Christian church and partake in the Eucharist, drinking from the cup of wine which they call “Isa” (Jesus).

A newly married Bride is expected to visit all temples and churches on her way to the Grooms home, but not a mosque.

The Yazadi also share similar beliefs as the pre-Islamic Arabs had, such as the reverence of stones, wells, springs and trees.

These are also Mithraic beliefs.

Sacred trees have ribbons of cloth tied to their branches in offer of prayer.

It was believed if someone untied these, the person would be cursed.

Also the site of Lalesh seems to be based on Mecca.

(The “Haj” to the Kabba was already a part the tradition of Mecca before Islam.)

At Lalesh there is a spring called “Zamzam” and the pilgrims must walk up the nearby mountain as part of theis Haj, just as in Mecca pilgrims must walk up mount Arafat.

The Yazadi have five daily prayers; dawn, sunrise, noon, afternoon and sunset. Yet most pray only at sunrise and sunset.

There was an Armenian sect in the time of the first crusade, 1099 AD, called the “Arevordik”.

They worshipped the Sun.

Just as the number 5 is special to them, so is the number seven. There are seven Angels (Izrafael, Jibrael, Michael, Nordael, Dardael, Shamnael, and Azazael), in the Sinjara area there are seven temples with eternal flames. Above the tomb of Sheikh Adi at Lalesh is engraved a seven branced candelabra. The number seven was revered by the Sabeans who are mentioned in the Koran as “people of the book”.

The first Wednesday of April marks their new year. Of note is the custom of painting eggs.

There is also the great seven day festival (23 September-1 October) for Sheik Adi called “Cejna Cemaya” or Feast of the Assembly, in which the seven Angels are believed to visit Lalesh. A bull is also sacrificed, which seems to hark back to Mithra/Mir, the pagan Iranian god of the Sun. The festival of Mithras was celebrated on September 21 in pre-Islamic Iran.

(Lots of Mithraism and Iranian religion is also in christianism. Christianism is a syncretic spin-off of Judaism.)


Still a little more at link. Worth reading in full.

Explains why so many Yezidis (and Kurds in general) look ME/Arabian.

Explains the Peacock.

Explains the re-incarnation. Also seen in other ME/late Iranian religions.

Explains Zoroastrian and other features.

Explains the Abrahamic portions of their religion.

And explains a lot more.

But poor people.

They do have one advantage over Hindus at present though: Hindus are regularly being genocided by muslims all over India now not just in TSP and BD (with Hindoo women and kids additionally being kidnapped and raped and sold into rape-slavery into islam) and Hindus are being genocided by christians in India's NE too. But none of that comes into the international news AT ALL.

Furthermore, whenever Hindus are mentioned in any context now, aliens - christos and islamics primarily, but other kinds too - quickly declare that "Hindu men rape their women" [and hence that they would "deserve" to get extincted, if the news of the genocide of Hindus was brought to light].

But aliens' apathy and hostility is par for the course. So much so that plain neutrality from them sometimes seems like sympathy.


(Angelsk-speaking) Hindus have been busy collecting money for the Yezidis, to help restore their families and prevent their women from being sold into islamic sexual slavery. All good and well.

But I note that the same Hindus haven't even been collecting money to save their women from being sold into islamic sexual slavery - happening every moment of every day now - nor to retrieve and rehabilitate these. Or that bothered about an ever-increasing number of Hindu social workers and Hindu leaders being butchered left and right.

Worrying. That angelsk-speaking Hindus (well, those on the internet) are ready to save the world. But not their own.

Is this - what some Hindu women in India are going through - that much better than what the Yezidis are going through in Iraqi Kurdistan area?


Quote:A young Hindu woman, a teacher in a Madrasa in Meerut, U.P was abducted, gangraped and forcibly converted to Islam, forcibly had her Fallopian tubes removed - forcibly sterilized by the Indian Taliban - she can never be a mother.

She states that there are over 40 young Hindu women held captive and being subjected to all kinds of bestiality in that Madrasa - possibly being held for trafficking as sexual slaves to Arab countries or sold off to brothels run by Jihadis around the country.

http :// m.rediff.com/news/report/tension-grips-meerut-after-woman-gang-raped-forced-to-convert/20140804.htm

Watch the victim narrate her story

https :// m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=J8A259ia9ow
1. Vanavasis (i.e. Hindoos) stuck at JNU tell the very christian leftist terrorists (it's christian, see link in point 2) and their islamaniac yes-men to go hang themselves:



Me too: of the Hindoo tribe/collective (and a fellow ur-native of the Hindoo subcontinent), loyal worshipper of Durga Amman, and of all the Gods inhabiting my ancestral home.

2. indiafacts.co.in/fact-sheet-jnu-mahishasura-day-controversy/

Fact Sheet on the JNU Mahishasura Day Controversy

The very christian left conspired to tell Hindus that Mahishasura "must have been" a dravoodian victim of the oryans they invented.

Tragically, only the debile christians and their equally-moronic islamic brethren believed it.

But it's more proof that christians support the jihad because jihadis scratch their back in return, as seen above.

The 2nd item also reminded me directly of posts 146, 147 and 149 (the rest of this post will not make sense without reading those):

* the christo and left (christo-left) inverted re-write of history/backprojection of dravoodianism with Mahishasura now projected as a "dravoodian" victim of some alleged oryan invaders who then allegedly imposed the Vedic religion on the backprojected dravoodians - when the real history is that the Vedic religion is the native religion of India and dravoodianism is a recently invented ideology that has only been able to gain an earlier ancestry by means of backprojection -

* is VERY much like: Rajeev Srinivasan swearing his oath of love and fealty to the backprojection of Buddhism onto Trivikrama/Vamana vs Mahabali account, where Mahabali is now the one being cheered in place of the hero Trivikrama, and Mahabali and his people are suddenly even projected as an allegory for how the religion of the "poor" Buddhists (elsewhere Jains) replaced by "upanishadic Hindus" as per Rajiv. Or Witan's version where the Trivikrama account was allegedly "actually" all about how Mahabali and people were to have been the native "dravoodians" who were oppressed and their religion/identity supplanted by invading oryans (euphemised as/unnamed but implied to be north Indians).

Now, WHERE is the difference between

- the JNU christoterrorists' inverted version with Mahishasura as (allegory for) backprojected dravoodian victimhood from "oryan" Vedic religion, with Durga as the chief villain; when ORIGINALY and historically and truly (and in Hindoo homes to this day), Navaratri/Durga Pooja is all about Durga as the heroine defeating the Mahishasura (who is as much a part of Vedic cosmology as Durga, and has nothing to do with dravoodianism which is a post/colonial construct)


- Rajeev's inverted version with Mahabali as allegory for backprojected Buddhist victimhood from Upanishadic Hindus (i.e. Vedic religion), with Trivikrama eclipsed by Rajeev's declaration that Onam is "actually" about Mahabali. When ORIGINALLY and historically and truly (and in Hindoo temples to this day), Onam was all about Vishnu as Trivikrama, with the EQUALLY-Vedic (and pre-Buddhist, not to mention unBuddhist) Mahabali only as a more minor character


- Witan's inverted version with Mahabali as (allegory for) backprojected dravoodian victimhood from Vedic religion, with Trivikrama eclipsed by Witan's insistence that Onam is "actually" residual "dravoodian" memory about defeat of dravoodianism/the "south" by the "north", and is hence allegedly about Mahabali as a centre of dravoodian resistance. When ORIGINALLY and historically and truly (and in Hindoo temples to this day), Onam celebrates a native Vedic Hindoo event known to all corners of ethnic Hindoo-dom: it's all about Vishnu as Trivikrama, with the EQUALLY-Vedic Mahabali only as a more minor character (plus dravoodianism - the concept - is unheard of to both Mahabali and Trivikrama. And Mahabali - the Vedic ritualist - would have been the first to crush all the suddenly-invented dravoodianists, for the anti-Vedic vermin* that they are. *Oryanists too, of course).

Shudder. :Unforgivable:

^ So where's the difference? ^

Nowhere. There is NO difference. They're all the same.

JNU christoterrorism = Rajeev's parroting of Buddhism = Witan's parroting of dravoodianism. In fact, the latter were not just parroting, they were peddling, same as JNU's christoterrorism.

The only difference lies in the Hindu audience's treatment of the left-hand side: they object to the lies of the christo-communists of JNU, but they keep quiet (or acquiesce or even applaud) to the lies propagated (though not invented) by Rajiv and Witan.

In other words: it proves as usual that today's Hindus care only about who says something, not about what is said. All the whining of "hurt Hindu sentiments" are play-acting reserved for the Hindu-baiters. Who cares about hurt sentiments. People should care about the truth and legitimate tradition vs speculation/fiction/lies.

Now, since Hindus won't even correct the "Hindu" nationalists peddling falsehoods in their midsts (dravoodianisms and late Buddhist dawaganda), is there any point in objecting to/correcting lies by more obvious Hindu-baiters? <= That's a rhetorical question. The answer is of course that 1. there is no point (in doing things in the wrong order: sane persons would be exposing the errors by people closer to home first, i.e. correcting those claiming to be Hindus); and 2. it is hypocritical to only expose and remonstrate against the blatant lies/moronisms peddled by the anti-Hindus.

[Disclaimer: Of course I have no intention of correcting anyone. I'm just judging people - being a very judgmental person. More specifically, it's because I have a theory about humanity. And every year I have lived, has only confirmed it to be a working theory: that people should naturally do the right thing, with no prompting, with no correcting. That those that are Right, would be Right innately, from the ground up. That, left to themselves, people will reveal what they are made of. And that it is exactly situations where subversionist ideas present themselves, that will naturally reveal people's true tendencies/characters: How they deal with subversionist ideas - whether they fall for it, whether they object, by what arguments they object, etc. Because most everyone falls for one thing or another. So I want to know at which point any given individual keels over. And I want to know which ones won't fall over - which ones won't fit the pattern - and that's the hardest of all to discover. Because there are so many subversions out there and any given person could manage to avoid most, but fall into just one of them. So one wants all the subversions out there thrown at people, just to see how many and which of the modern Hindu population is actually heathen=insubvertible, and which ones are actually subvertible=dangerous=gangrene when it comes down to it. The numbers will indicate the certainty of Hindu-dom's decline/eclipse. The inverse is not necessarily true: if the numbers are optimistic, it still does not guarantee victory against the anti-heathenisms, but is still a decent indicator of strength of resistance, and definitely of immunity to subversions.

Therefore, no external influences allowed, no preventative or corrective measures [to curtail vocalists and other modern Hindus from revealing their mental propensities], in order to be able to identify those that are innately perfect (insubvertible, heathen), and those that aren't, and are hence flawed, diseased, to be avoided.]

So glad that the Vanavasi Hindoos at JNU stuck to their Amman. Loyalty [to heathenism, to the Gods] is a great and precious heathen thing, after all. It is a primary force in preventing de-heathenisation and subversion. And insubvertibility is a heathen's only asset and it is innate (to heathens). Surprising how many Hindu "nationalists" and other vocalists don't really possess loyalty - when push comes to shove - despite braying loudly.

And the news was:

1. indiafacts.co.in/tribals-worship-goddess-durga/


2. indiafacts.co.in/fact-sheet-jnu-mahishasura-day-controversy/

Fact Sheet on the JNU Mahishasura Day Controversy

Compare the article in 2 with the latter half of post 146 (along with the context of posts 147 and 149).
The indiafacts links in the previous post are important, this post is just comments.

Forgot. Two comments on this next paragraph from


Fact Sheet on the JNU Mahishasura Day Controversy

Quote:In response, an individual call to protest was given by Arnab Chakravarty, a research scholar in SIS, under the banner of “United Hindus” on 13 October. This protest saw a 400-strong crowd. It saw the participation of students from all castes and regions be it Northeast, South India, North, East or West India. A large number of Left supporters especially girls joined it. The Left parties began to realize that by targeting Durga they had scored a self-goal. After all, the worship of Goddess is among the most ancient and sacred traditions of India. And even according to Aryan-Dravidian construct, worship of Shiva and Shakti is considered to be the indigenous tradition having its roots in tribal shamanic traditions.

1. Worship of Shiva and Shakti is rooted in the Vedas. Any other claims require *proof*. The first evidence of mention of Shiva is in the Vedas - including the first occurrence of his common mantram (YV) - and in the same anuvaaka is also mention of Shiva united with Amman (IIRC as Soma - i.e. his name as meaning "with Uma"). From the Vedam too, one of the "oldest" upanishads as per indologicals and certainly a *ritualistic* upanishad, is the reference to Shiva as "Uma-pati ... Ambika-pati" - i.e. the husband of Uma (also meaning brahmavidya), the husband of Ambika (Ambika being the Mother Goddess of the Hindus; and Shiva being her husband, i.e. the Divine Father of Hindus).

- In this context: the "...puruSha(M?)-krishna-pingalam" (or something) line when referring to Shiva at the end of the same mantropasanam is also IIRC viewed/explained as a reference to Ardhanaarishwara. (It is also at times translated as referring to Mohini+Shiva and Shankara-Narayana.)

- The first references to not just Sankhyam but *cosmological* Sankhya is from the Vedas. And cosmological Sankhya is BTW unique to the pre-classical=theistic Sankhya, and specifically does not exist in classical Sankhya (which therefore loses its origins/proof of derivation). The first references to Shakti and her relation to Shiva are from the Vedas.

The *Vedam* (and the practical tradition of Agamic/temple worship - but then the Vedas themselves are called Agama as well as Nigama, and hence are the same/same body/variants of the same) is the first source of the cosmological knowledge of Shiva-Shakti and where worship of the Hindu cosmological view of the Hindu Divine Parents comes from.

That is not to say that Shiva-Shakti - or any other of the Hindu/Vedic pantheon - belongs "more" to Hindus who have been ejected by aliens and unHindus as oryan invaders, than to Hindus who have been dubbed (by aliens and unHindus) as "aboriginal" or "dravoodian". The Hindu=Vedic Gods are native to the Hindu countryside, and native to the ethnic population. In specific, Hindu religion (aka Vedic religion, Sanatana Dharma etc) IS the native ancestral heathenism of the subcontinent.

Anyway, the specific point is, Shiva and Shakti are AS MUCH Gods of the Vedam as say Indran or VaruNa or Vishnu. Cannot eject one as alien and not the other. That is, there is NO UNIVERSE in which one is a product of "oryan invasion" and the other is "oppressed native dravoodian". The Hindu pantheon is one body and is native or alien together. Even Ayyappa is a Vedic God.

The fact that Hindu Gods are seen in villages and the remotest parts and communities of the Hindoo homeland is because a. the Hindu=Vedic Gods ARE native to the Hindoo homeland, since it is their original and natural habitat in this world and b. the Hindoo Gods are ATTACHED to the ethnic Hindoo natives, who are their people, and therefore manifest among them variously and repeatedly (both in natural swayambhu forms and local avataaras), as much as they manifest in manifestations known to all ethnic Hindus (pan-Hindu).

Anyone who wishes to claim that Shiva and Shakti worship have any other origin - outside of or predating the Vedic tradition - needs to show pre-Vedic textual proof of their claims. (Not backprojected ur-Shramanisms/Jainisms/Buddhisms/dravoodianisms/christianisms etc. They will be dismissed in toto.) Like the Americans say, Put up or shut up.

2. More urgent: What in the world is the word "shamanic" doing in a reference to India? Outside of some northeast Indian communities - specifically the heathen Nagas, who do have Shamanistic traditions, as seen in ep 5 of the Animal Planet documentary "Wildest India" - how in the world can there be any Shamanism in India?

Shamanism is a *very specific* religious term. And "Shaman" too, is a *very specific* religious term. It is particularly a religious term associated with the ancient (and still extant) form of ancestrally closely-interrelated religions of *E Asian* and related peoples. I.e. the populations that the west dubs the "mongoloid race" or as having been related to them (like the Fins). Shamanism is the religious form of ethnic Koreans, Mongolians/Turkic tribes, Tibetans, and Siberians, Finno-Ugric people are included here; some also say Shamanism is the ancient form of the religion of the Japanese and Chinese. (While Shamanism is definitely the religious form of some Chinese minority populations, scholars refer to the ancient 'beginnings' of mainstream Chinese=Taoist religion as a variant of Shamanism too.)

Shamanism is not - and cannot be - the ancient form of the religion of Indian people (even of those suddenly uniquely dubbed as aboriginals) since they're not ethnically E Asian or related. Well, Indians can start to claim it, but then don't whine if China takes you at your word and tries to claim all of India and ejects all Indians: when Indians are by and large not an E Asian population, if you start to claim the ancient ethnic Indian religion originated as a Shamanism, then you're essentially saying all non-E-Asian Indians are alien invaders. So more fool you if China holds you to it.

Unless dravoodians want to claim they were all originally E Asian looking, no one is going to believe dravoodians are natives if Shamanism is elected the original native form of religion in India.

Note: It's been some decades since even the Native Americans - who qua phenotype at least are more closely affiliated with Finno-Ugric/Siberian/Kamchatka (sp?) and other circumpolar populations and the main "E Asian" (and many SE Asian) populations -

again: It's been some decades since even the Native Americans have rejected the term Shamanism for their own religions, despite the details of their religions being more similar to Shamanism than to say Hindu religion. But they do not want their religions to be declared as being derived from E Asian religion, and thereafter to be declared as being derived populations. Plus they find their religions sufficiently different to not see these as being actual Shamanisms beyond initial outward appearances.

Then how can Hindus claim any non-E-Asian Indian populations would have been Shamanist in India's past? How? Unless the claim is that all of India was inhabited by populations genetically related to the E-Asians... Shaman is a very specific term, like brahmana. (And in similar fashion, the Shamanist laity is not called a "shaman".) You don't randomly go tell Africans or Native Americans who gather ritualistically around fires that they are "brahmins" do you, or that their religions are "brahminical/Vedic"? Same thing. Religions are related to ethnicity. Indians outside of the regions bordering E Asia and SE Asia (such as the Himalayan regions and SE Asian islands) - which are naturally spill-over areas/meeting places of Indian and other Asian populations - are not greatly genetically-affiliated with E Asians. (I'm not saying there's no relationship, since Tamil Brahmanas - at least - have some very E-Asian phenotypes among them - specifically Japanese and Chinese looking ancient strains, though these are specifically not C-Asian/Turkic/Mongolian-phenotypes; but this is a very tiny percentage. Alternatively, it could just be due to the native Indian gene pool's great genetic and phenotypical variety.)

Therefore for Indians to claim Shamanism while not being ethnically E/SE Asian is an impossibility.* Alternatively, if you're going to claim Shamanism, claim your genetic origins are E-Asian/Mongolian.

Almost as impossible as Egyptian or GrecoRoman religions being dubbed Shamanisms: all animistic (hence all heathen) religions are to some degree similar to the officially-designated Shamanisms to some extent, but religions that are actually derived from ancestral forms of real Shamanism and whose adherents are consequently ethnically related to some degree are factually dubbed "Shamanism".

In a way, it's sort of like how the word "Dharmic" can't be applied to African or Native American or E Asian or European religions: only religions that have the word Dharma in them [for which they need to be rooted in the Indic subcontinent/Indian ethnicity] are called "Dharmic". No matter how similar African, European, Native American, or other Asian relgions may be to Hindu religion, they aren't technically "Dharmic" (even though they might be termed 'Dharmic' in the more meaningful sense).

Pre-emptive prediction (bad joke, but you never know):

Next, the evil ur-Shramanism peddlers may try to encroach on Shamanism, using their talent for pathetic excuses: "because" ShramaNa has "so many letters in common" with Shaman - though when spelled in Roman characters. (Never mind that Shaman is all of just 2 syllables, so what a "great" miracle...) Sadly, despite the words not actually being related, it is further to be noted that 1. ShramaNa is a Vedic Sanskrit term, which itself is in direct conflict with the fundamental claims of ur-Shramanism and which also shows that the Prakritic forms of the word are necessarily derived; and 2. Shamanism is at the other end of the spectrum from Shramanism: Hindu religion is far more closely related to Shamanism, than Buddhisms or Jainisms are related to Shamanism (corrected typo). [May explain why Buddhism desperately extincted Bonpos/Shamans in Tibet and Mongolia and tried to kill and replace Bon/Mongolian Shamanism there.]

That is to say: Hindus' religion is sooner to be designated a Shamanism, than Buddhism/Jainism (or the ur-Shramanism fiction) is.

The links in the previous post are important, this post is just comments.
Haha, found some documented indirect support for this statement in the above, not that proof was needed (it is a commonly held view among at least some Hindoos):

[quote name='Husky' date='29 October 2014 - 03:36 PM' timestamp='1414576738' post='117422']

- In this context: the "...puruSha(M?)-krishna-pingalam" (or something) line when referring to Shiva at the end of the same mantropasanam is also IIRC viewed/explained as a reference to Ardhanaarishwara. (It is also at times translated as referring to Mohini+Shiva and Shankara-Narayana.)


Compare with:


Quote:The address नीललोहित can be interpreted in two ways- black in neck and red in rest of the body, or, Ardhanariswara with Devi’s part in black and Easwara’s part in red.
The same is said about the line I had mentioned.

And look at this from the Silappadikaaram:

1. From p.113 of S. Krishnamoorthy's translation of "Silappadikaram" visible at Googlebooks:

Quote:Madurapati, the guardian-deity of Madurai, has matted hair and a crescent moon resting in it, she has black-lily-like collyrium-painted eyes and a radiant face; her molar teeth stick out of her coral-like, red lips; her pearly teeth are bright like moonlight; the left side of her body is dark-blue, while the right is golden yellow; her left hand bears a golden lotus while the right wields a lustrous lovely axe; her right leg sports the warrior's ankle-ring while the left wears the peerless jingling anklet.1

Being the protector of the line of the Pandian, the lord of the cool Korkai and Kanyakumari ports, the ruler of Podiyil hills, whose northern boundary is the golden Himalayas, she appeared[...]

That a couple of Amman's beautiful white teeth stick out cutely - as also described above in Madurapati - is often seen in many village Shakti Kovils to Amman all over TN and Kerala too. The Ammans housed there are *exactly* the above description.

Can further see how the above descriptions of Ardhanaree(shwara) Uma-Shiva - who is the local manifestation Madurapati, deity of Madurai - matches exactly what is in Hindus' Vedam including Upanishads, and Puranas (including stotras) and imagery.

Parashu in one hand and padmam in the other, exactly like in Arhdanaaree images, even the male and female anklets match.

=> "she has black-lily-like collyrium-painted eyes and a radiant face"

That's a reference to Prakriti (there's 3 colours to Amman's eyes: black, red and white), exactly as in Hindoo shaastras. But then Hindoos' Gods are veda-svaroopam.

Look how the body of Madurapati - the Ardhanaaree(shwara) - is clearly described above as nIla on the vaamabhagam and golden yellow on the right. Shiva in the Yajurveda's Rudram is repeatedly described as the colours of the sun (aruNa) and indeed as the sun. This expressly includes the colours golden-yellow to reddish/brown.

[And so another name of Shiva is vilohita (very red/deep-red), because his body is deep-red.*]

Proof. See relevant portion of MW dictionary entry:

Quote:1 aruNa mf(%{A4} [RV. v , 63 , 6 , &c.] or %{I4} [RV. x , 61 , 4 , & , (nom. pl. %{aruNa4yas}) 95 , 6]) n. ( %{R} Un2.) , reddish-brown , tawny , red , ruddy (the colour of the morning opposed to the darkness of night) RV. &c. ; [...] m. red colour BhP. ; the dawn (personified as the charioteer of the sun) Mn. x , 33 , &c. ; the sun S3a1k. ;

[... lots of other meanings and personal names]

N. of a river MBh. iii , 7022 and ix , 2429 seq. , (%{I4s}) f. red cow (in the Vedic myths) RV. and SV. ; the dawn RV. ; (%{a4m}) n. red colour RV. x , 168 , 1 , gold AV. xiii , 4 , 51 ; a ruby BhP.

* Shiva's son Murugan looks a younger version of him and is Red just like him. Murugan's red colour is indicated in one of his ancient names in Tamil.

Note that Shiva himself also comes in nIla colour, sphaTika (crystal) or transparent colour, and shweta colour, besides golden and red. Panchamukha Shiva have these colours. Ashtabhairavas are also supposed to cover these colours.

2. The following are excerpts from some of the shlokas in a stotram to Durga sung by the Hindoo huntsmen in Silappadikaaram, whose kuladevam she was (as she remains for many Hindoos in the south).

The shlokas are taken from the visible pages 72 and 74 of S. Krishnamoorthy's translation of "Silappadikaram" at Googlebooks.

I've inserted all the stuff in [square brackets].

Note how knowledgeable the Tamil Hindoo huntsmen are about the Vedam, by knowing their Amman so well:

Quote:7. "You stand on the black head of the wild buffalo [=mahishasura; Vishnu-Durga moortis in TN show her standing on it], clothing yourself in elephant-hide and tiger-skin; [=exact description of Shiva's garments from dhyanam to Yajur Veda's Rudram and from Puranas. Amman dwells in half of Shiva's body, plus also dresses like she's the female version of him;]; worshipped by the celestials and beyond the reach of even the scriptures, [=being DurgA, hard to reach, repeated in may stotras that by bhakti she will be reached], you stand steady as the sprout of supreme wisdom! [= direct reference to upaniShads. DurgA IS umA who IS brahmavidya.]

8. "Wielding a sword in your hand, which wears bangles carved with lines, you killed the mighty buffalo and bestrode the stag with black, coiled horns. [=one of her vaahanas, also in old TN Hindu imagery] You are the effulgent light, ensconced in the lotus-hearts of Vishnu, Shiva and Brahma and scattering rays of light far and wide! [=repeating Pauranic texts and stotras. Plus the explicit reference to trimoorti makes Amman=parabrahman. And devaatmashakti from Vedam.]

9. "Holding the conch and the discuss in your lotus-hands, [=Vishnu-Durga, Vishnu-Maya from Puranas; ancient imagery of whom is present all over Hindu TN] you straddle the ferocious lion-like bull with blood-shot eyes. ["Lion-like bull": maybe like how Amman is ardhanaaree, her vaahanam is half-and-half with that of her husband too here? In images of Ardhanaarishwara this is shown as a simham or puli/vyaaghra on Amman's side and the vrishabham on Shiva's side.]

Assuming female form and adored 1w* [OCR error; "by"/"of"?] the scriptures, [=Vedas=Hindoo scriptures onlee; famous epithet of all Ammans], you occupy the occupy the left-half of the forehead-eyed Lord who bears the Ganga on his matted hair! [<- Repeats Vedas/upanishads. Amman is in vaamabhaagam of Shivan, this is IIRC said in the Rudrahridayopanishad. Mohini Amman is also said to be in Vaamabhagam of Shiva, and Vishnu in trimoorti forms of Shiva is said to be on the vaamabhagam and Brahma on the other side. Both Vishnu and Shiva's Shakti are nIlam in colour. Also, Mohini is on the vaamabhaagam of Shiva because both Mohini and DurgA are actually the same: Vishnu's Shakti=Vishnu's Prakriti=Vishnu- Maya/Mohini=Vishnu-DurgA=DurgA. These are all direct references to upanishads and puranas. Also SL IIRC says that Vishnu's form as Mohini was able to win Shiva only because it looked exactly like Lalitha, because Lalitha had granted this as a boon to Vishnu (since Ayyappa needed to be born to save the Hindoo cosmos). And also, Shaastaa/Dharmashaastaa is said to be Lalitaa's son. That's because he is Mohini's son. Because Mohini=Vishnu-Durga=Durga.]

19. "Please accept this blood mixed with flesh offered to you to the sound of the drum, the tabor and the horn by the huntsmen--who resemble the tiger which attacks at midnight--in fulfilment of the vow they had made touching the feet of yours, the virgin goddess!

[Durga is Kanyakumari. The Kanyakumari manifestation is eternally engaged but not yet married, since she needed to destroy an asura as a Kanya. In Tiruvilaiyadil or some other ancient Hindu tradition - which was filmed long ago - the Gods and Rishis finally reunite Kanyakumari and Shiva in the beyond and they are married.

Also, Adi Shankara in his Shivananda Lahari plays on the double-meaning of "Durga" in a verse, and the second (and romantic) meaning speaks of the divine romantic union of Uma-Shiva. I.e. that she is also not a virgin. I'd parrot it, but I have a tendency to spoil anything that is either funny or romantic in my re-telling.

Also the above and previous verse shows that Hindoos offering non-vegetarian foods to certain Gods is acceptable and traditional. That said I'm still a vegetarian and would only ever offer vegetarian fare.]

20. "O Sankara's spouse! One who pervades the skies! The blue-hued one! The Goddess who wears the red-eyed serpent and the crescent on her matted tresses! Please enjoy this offering of food by the huntsmen [...]

21. "Despite having consumed nectar, the celestials cannot escape death; but you remain immortal even after consuming poison1** that none else can imbibe. Please accept this offering made by the merciless huntsmen [...]

22. "You crawled through the pair of arjuna trees and felled them; you kicked to pieces the revolving wheel sent by your deceitful uncle Kamsa. Please accept this offering from the huntsmen [...]

** The halaahalam: note that any Amman is always automatically credited with the accomplishments of her husband or (in the case of Durga) even of her brother too.

When all looked upon the terrible kaalakooTam as it would poison all life in the world, Shiva, caring not for himself, selflessly swallowed the kaalakooTam. Everyone was relieved upon seeing him take the matter into his own hands, only his wife (Amman) was concerned for his welfare - he, who was in turn concerned only for the welfare of the world - and so Amman stepped up too, and lifted her hand to clasp her husband's neck, to stall the viSha from flowing further down, due to her natural fear (as his caring wife) that it might injure him, even though it couldn't really. But because she did so, the viSha didn't go past his throat, which made him therefore NeelakaNTha.

However, because Amman is Shiva's wife and further dwells in half of his body, she is described as the one who swallowed it.

The SL and/or LS also refers to the fact that Uma-Shiva alone are the witness of the end of universe, being immortal and the only ones to also exist beyond this. This is not actually to be taken to deny the immortality of the other Hindoo Gods or that they are not also its parents. The reference here, as in Silappadikaaram, is to the identification of Uma-Shiva as that Ishwara/Parabrahman/Paramapurusha/etc - whose own power is the Devaatmashakti from whom the All evolves - and who remains as eternal witness, despite the world of manifestation returning back into Prakriti's balanced state and everything folding back.

Anyway all this merely proves that the Hindoo huntsmen of Tamil/Kerala regions in ancient times were far more Vedic than I could ever be. But then, they were HindOOs.

The huntsmen in the Silappadikaaram were offering their Amman MahishAsura-mardinI

1. food (="feeding the Gods"=homam), and

2. rendering stotras in praise of her and singing to her (=riks and saamam).

Moreover, the stotras in praise of her are identical in meaning and essence to what the Hindoo shaastras say, starting from the Vedam. This is seen in Hindoo local-language folksongs throughout India, including the remotest parts. The knowledge the Hindoos have of their Gods is from ancient interaction - i.e. derived first-hand, from the direct vision of the Gods themselves - that is why having the vision of the Gods is knowing the vedam (since the Hindoo Gods=the vedam) from which derive accurate renderings of the Gods' likenesses in Hindoos' stotras.

[TN has lots of kovils to Maariamman. Maari, a name of Durga, looks just as described in Silappadikaaram above - her hair looks like that of Bhairava (on fire) and/or she holds his Ayudhas - plus her name Maari is already there in Devi Mahatmyam and in Hindoo Sahasranamas (Durga and Lakshmi Sahasranamas).

Corrected: Devi Mahatmyam, not atharvasheerSham]

Anyway, so what is all this (at indiafacts, see previous post) about Shiva-Shakti being indigenous but not the Vedas, and that the two could ever be separate? Shiva-Shakti is Vedic religion - and inseparable from it - and Vedic religion IS the ancestral, indigenous religion of the subcontinent; hence the ancient ancestral religion of remote Hindoo communities from all over Bharatam, such as also the huntsmen of ancient Hindoo Tamil Nadu. Like Yudhisthira said in the MBh (paraphrasing): the Vedam is seen in all the Hindoos.
Directly related to posts 151 - 157 (158) on the previous page.


Quote:"Sai Baba Took the Name of 'Allah'. He Said no to Ganga Snaan" By Prabhu Chawla

Published: 07th July 2014 07:27 PM

Last Updated: 07th July 2014 07:27 PM

Swami Shree Swaroopanand Saraswati talks to the New Indian Express Editorial Director Prabhu Chawla on his objections to the worship of Sai Baba, the Ram Temple, the scrapping of Article 370, and the promises made by PM Narendra Modi on Sachchi Baat on News X.

PC: Why did you raise the question on the worship of Sai Baba?

SS: We have been raising the issue for long. But the media wasn’t giving it attention. This time they have given it attention. We really have been saying this (for long).

PC: When did you last raise the issue?

SS: We had raised it during my visit to Mumbai.

PC: Did you say that people should stop worshipping Sai Baba?

SS: We believe in what AdiShankaracharyahad said – he had said that Shiva, Shakti, Vishnu, Ganesh, and Surya should be worshipped in the temples. They all are one in Brahma Roop.

PC: What about the 24 avatars?

SS: There are 24 avatars of Vishnu. For Shatki there are 10 MahaVidya and NauDurgas. The same way there are many avatars of Ganesh and Shiv.

PC: There are 33 crore deities in the Sanatan Dharma. Aren’t people free to worship the deity they want to?

SS: There are yantra,mantra and the method of worship related to the deities. The reward or fruit of Karma comes from the Lord. Sri Krishna has said in the Geeta that “I am the one who gives the worshippers of other Gods the fruit of their worship and devotion.”

PC: But you raised the question….

SS: Krishna in BhagvatGeeta says, “I am the ‘Avinashi’. Main sab praniyonkaishwarhun.Tab bhi main apniSachchinandRachnaprakritikabinatyagkiye hue apniyogmaya se avatarletahun.”

PC: Were Ram and Krishna not born? Is being born of Ram from Kaushalya mere imagination?

SS: It’s written in the Ramayana, ‘BhayPrakatKripala, DeenDayala…”Tulsidasji says in Ramayana, “Ram prakat hue, he wasn’t born out of Kaushalya.” Coming to Krishna, he was the Lord.He took an avatar out of his own wish.

PC: Has your raising the issue on Sai Baba’s worship divided the Hindus?

SS: We are not dividing the Hindus. People of the Hindu society who consider themselves part of the SanatanDharm were drifting. They were worshipping a man who was, by birth and deeds, a Muslim.

PC: Where is it written?

SS: It is written in their granths (holy books). I can show it to you.

PC: Is it written in the granthsthat he was born in a Muslim family?

SS: Yes. His devotees say it in his aarati.

PC:His devotees worship him. He never asked anyone to worship him. People considerShankaracharya God. You never asked people to address you as God.

SS:I would never ask devotees to establish my statue at a temple. Why are people doing what he hasn’t asked them to? A Sikh man told me yesterday, that Guru Nanak has saidthat he serves the Lord and that, he is here to see the world,people who address him as the “Lord” will be consigned to hell. There is a difference between God and Guru. A Guru is the one who guides us towards the devotion to the Lord,the one who makes us relate with the Lord. He is not the guru if he starts addressing himself as the “Lord”. In the SanatanDharm, we believe that the Saints and the Mahatamasshow us the path towards the Lord, and they direct us towards the worship of Lord. People are worshipping a person who never took the name of anyone but “Allah”, the one who said no to Ganga Snaan. People have made a God out him.

PC: You accepted Gautam Buddha as Lord.

SS: No. They don’t consider themselves part of the Sanatan Dharma.

PC: What about the Jains?

SS: Jains have 24 Teerthankars. They can’t consider Sai Baba the 25Teerthankar.

PC: Sikhs worship their Gurus.

SS: Yes. They do. We have no issues with that. I am referring to people of my religion. In our religion,
it is said that you would be accepted by the Lord whom you remember in your last moments. Hence, be devoted to Krishna, to Ram.

(Swami Swaroopanand clearly distinguishes between the other Indic religions and Hindus' religion aka the Sanatana Dharma. Actually, there's a lot more that can be inferred about his views from the above statements as well.

Interviewer: "You accepted Gautam Buddha as Lord." Swami: "No." Classic.)

PC: You have issues with the size of Sai Baba’s statue as well.

SS: We are being duped. Sri Krishna showed Arjun his viraatroop. They are showing Sai Baba’s viraatroop and not Sri Krishna’s.

PC: Do you want to say that there should be no other idol in a Sai Baba temple?

SS: There is no need for it.

PC: But there are temples dedicated to certain deities where the idols of other deities are much smaller in size.

SS: It doesn’t matter in that case. We are talking about the statues and idols of a person claiming to be God. He is showing our deities smaller in size. He shows Lord Ganeshaseated in his feet.

PC: But does he show Lord Ram in his feet?

SS: Such images are objectionable.

PC: Do you feel that the worship of Sai Baba should stop?

SS: Yes.
The people from Puri and the society are supporting us.

PC: Will you convince the people of the Sanatan Dharma on this issue?

SS: Yes. I am doing that.

PC: Has the Ram Temple issue taken a back seat?

SS: The issue and path of Ram Temple will be pursued once the building of new Sai Baba temples is stopped.

PC: But you played a role in the laying of the Ram Mandirfoundation.Buta Singh was present. The matter became controversial later. The building of the Temple hasn’t begun.

SS: The matter was in the High Court. We disputed on the subject for 45 days in the court. Our advocate proved it that Mughal emperor Babar never came to the land, thatit has been Ram Janmabhumi since the beginning.

PC: Your critics say that you reflect the views of the Congress.

SS:You are calling me a Congressman. I will answer this. When TR Balu was in the Congress, former PM Manmohan Singh had said that Ram Setu is a symbol of the victory over the Aryas. We objected to it. The matter reached the court. We said that the Setu shouldn’t be broken. The central government gave the affidavit that there is no historical evidence to establish the fact that the Setu was built by Ram.

PC: They made changes to it.

SS:That was because I objected to it. Had I been a Congressman, I wouldn’t object to it.

PC: You criticisedUma Bhartiji. You said that she is a Sai Baba devotee.

SS: She said that it’s a personal matter. It was said that there is devotion towards the parents. How can we stop that? We had said that we can’t let it be established as the parental faith and devotion of the other people. They are establishing those statues instead of the deities’ in the temples. We said that there are people who haven’t gone to worship Sai Baba. Why does one need Sai Baba if the Ganga, their Krishna, Ram and deities accept them? We don’t need them. They need us.

PC: What about the Sai Baba of Puttaparthi?

SS: The guru of Uma Bharti, he gave me a telephone call. He said that he agrees with me completely. Her guru agrees with me.

PC: Has he supported your views on Sai Baba or your views on Uma Bharti?

SS:He has supported my views on Sai Baba.

PC: Will everyone protest on this issue?

SS: Yes. The core issue is that if we are occupied with the devotion towards Sai Baba and his temples, how will people have the devotion for the Ram Temple?

PC: What is your agenda?

SS: Our agenda is to increase and strengthen people’s faith and devotion in the deities of the (Sanatan Dharma).
People who are talking about Sai Babaare actually not devoted to him. They are occupied with their ambitions.

PC: Is it a conspiracy against the Hindu religion?

SS: Yes.

PC: You also made statements on the impact ofWesternisation on our society.

SS: Our sisters and mothers are being ill-treated. They are being raped despite the tough laws. Alcoholism and drugs are the core issues. The youth is falling into the trap of alcoholism and drugs. They are not in their senses. They don’t realise what they are doing. In Kottayam in Kerala, a man allegedly assaulted his mother in the state of intoxication. People should get alcohol and drug rehabilitation. The supply of drugs from abroad should stop. The sale of alcohol should stop.Drugs are being sold outside schools. That should stop. In China, there was a movement against drugs. The dictatorialcommunist rule in China stopped the use of drugs. There should a movement against drugs and alcoholism in India. China curbed the use of drugs. China encouraged the long hours of hard work among people. People in our country don’t want to work hard. The country will develop only through hard work and by stopping the use of drugs and alcohol.

PC: Did the Hindus of the country consolidate their vote for Modi?

SS: We had said before the polls that we want a “Majboot” (strong) and not “Majboor” (weak) government. We have got a strong government.

PC: Will he fulfil all the promises made?

SS: He must.

PC: What do you think?

SS: It’s a test. If he scraps Article 370, if herenews the free flow of a clean Ganga, if he builds the Ram Temple, people will appreciate him.

PC: Until when will you wait?

SS: We will see. I will open my mouth when I need to. But let me tell you, I am not a Modi critic.

PC: What are your expectations from Modi?

SS: People have trusted him.

PC: Should he make a Hindu Rashtra?

SS: I am not talking about that. He must fulfil his promises. Article 370 should be scrapped. The Kahmiris will benefit from it. They will be accepted in India. Otherwise, they will be limited to …

PC: But the RSS talks about making a Hindu Rashtra. Do you agree with them?

SS: We want a Ram Rajya. We don’t want HinduRashtra. We are people of principles.

PC: Thanks for coming to our studio.

SS: Thanks.

In the above, the Swami

- doesn't seem to be against Modi at all (contrary to insinuations), but was being cautiously optimistic that Modi will do right regarding Hindu concerns and national concerns

- doesn't seem to conspire against other Hindu Gods in favour of Rama and Krishna exclusively, and besides repeating Adi Shankara with "Shiva, Shakti, Vishnu, Ganesh, and Surya", he also mentions Ganga:

"Why does one need Sai Baba if the Ganga, their Krishna, Ram and deities accept them?"

(BTW, there is a Gangaashtakam ascribed to Shankara BP.)

So again: what's the great 'evil' conspiracy that the Swami was supposedly plotting against other Hindu Gods - as alleged by Sandhya Jain and her thoughtless, brainless Hindu parrots?

Sandhya Jain can get away with badmouthing a Hindoo acharya of an established lineage who is innocent of the insinuations made against him. There are no repercussions to her falsely accusing him, casting aspersions about him and brainwashing others on the matter. Because she's a Jain. There's no remote expectation that she has to have at least some allegiance to him - to give him the benefit of doubt - and that she ought to first try to find if there's anything that will exhonerate him from suspicion.

But her Hindu parrots and sycophants in the matter can't get out of the hole they climbed in, despite the crimes on the surface being the same as that of Jain. Because they claim to be Hindus. There's a price to pay for treachery. And the wonderful thing is that I don't even need to go around collecting it. Because moronism brings its own rewards, in time. And it is not merely to live with the knowledge that they were utterly, totally, hideously wrong about something rather important. But to live with the knowledge that there are far heavier consequences to their thoughtless idiocy. And that they *will* feel it in themselves. (People didn't think they'd get away unaffected by badmouthing random innocent individuals, let alone merely those Hindoos trying to protect dharma from subversionist pollution, let alone acharyas working for Hindoos benefit?)

The real moral of all major classes of treachery against heathenism is: think before you take a public position against your ancestral heathen tradition and before taunting other Hindus who stick to tradition or trying to brainwash other Hindus against tradition, because there is NO way back after taking the anti-traditional position if you find you were wrong "after all". (And it's very easy to turn out to be wrong after all. Since, at a minimum, tradition has time on its side: time enough to have been challenged before. In other cases, tradition further has "It Works" on its side: i.e. proven by generations over time. I speak of tradition in heathenisms, not in missionary religions.)

I personally think the No Backpeddling rule should be enforced socially too. I mean, why should the Hindoo community at large have to continue to stand for dangerous nonsense from backstabbers/subvertibles? Also, instant ostracisation from ancestral heathenism - "you're now free to join any other religion, all except remaining in Hindoo-dom, but remember: No Parasiting on *anything* Hindoo hereafter" - will also serve as a warning to other "Hindus" to not advocate anti-traditional positions so easily/so fast/so brainlessly, but to deeply think through what they're doing and to make the choice to proceed very consciously, so as to be ready to live with the consequences of being jettisoned out of heathenism if they turn out to be wrong.

The reason for so much subversionist, de-heathenising, even anti-Hindu lies being readily peddled by "Hindus" (and all over the internet) is because they think there are no consequences to their damnable hobby of lying and speculating and insinuating against Hindu religion on a whim. That is, they think 'No Harm Done' to their own interests if they find they were mistaken. And so they are ready to peddle dangerous subversions with no second thought given to the matter, as they do not worry about the consequences, not being able to imagine any adverse fallouts for themselves. But people are motivated by self-interest. So were Hindoos as a whole to make it known that backpeddling will not be tolerated and error will result in being banned from Hindoo-dom, then I can guarantee that the number of "Hindus" peddling subversionist anti-Hindu nonsense will drop drastically. Certainly, the number that will assert with assumed know-it-all-ness will plummet. And when they cease to assert with that pathetic aura of authority donned only by the dangerous, they will admit to Mere Speculation. And when they admit to speculation, their opinions will be recognised by the public as Mere Speculation and hence not taken seriously.

So every time some "Hindu" claims something subversionist against heathen tradition, Hindoos would do well to make them aware that they've entered into a serious matter (though whether Hindoos choose to warn them or not, the consequences still hold): "Remember this moment. You make that choice/push that statement, you make it for all time. No backpeddling if you ever find you're wrong and have falsely influenced/subverted others: which means you agree to then bow out gracefully from Hindoo heathenism, never to dabble in it again. So. Knowing this, you're now free to re-iterate the claim. Let's hear it again then." Just a gentle reminder that there are repercussions to consider and to therefore not embark lightly onto subversions.

1. On these statements from the above:

Quote:SS: There are 24 avatars of Vishnu. For Shatki there are 10 MahaVidya and NauDurgas. The same way there are many avatars of Ganesh and Shiv.

Shiva's manifestations are not strictly "avataaras". Well, Tamil Shaiva Hindoos seem to argue that Shiva has no avataras in that sense. (Or maybe it depends on the meaning of the word? Still, Dasha mahavidyas, saptamatrukas, navadurgas, Shodashi nityas, ashtabhairavas, ekadasha Rudras etc etc all seem more like the Set of 4 Vishnu forms, rather than like the sequence of avataaras of Vishnu. But Ayyappa for example is an avataaram of Dharmashaastaa in the same sense as Vishnu's avataaras.) Whatever the word, Shiva doesn't usually tend to first appear in baby form, grow up and then do whatever was the plan 'all along'/the purpose for coming when the time is ripe. Instead, Shiva just... appears. Actually, quite like a Deus-ex-machina. (What an appropriate term.) So more like the Narachimmam avataaram of Vishnu that way. Shiva's manifestations tend to be called "Shiva moorties" in TN, as far as I'm aware. E.g. the cuddly Kaarunya Moorti of Shiva: he came in the form of a Varaaham in response to a bunch of hungry wild baby piglets in a forest, who were desperately calling out to their missing mother. She could not hear them anymore IIRC, whereas he did, of course, and so he instantly came in her stead and looked after them as their parent. But then, he is the Divine Father of all ethnic Hindoos after all. And just as when a hungry baby Tirugnyaanasambandhar had called out "Amma Appa" and was answered by his Divine Amma-Appa and was fed by one, the piglets similarly called out - in their own style of 'speech' - to their parent, and were thus similarly instantly answered by the over-arching Parent.

But goes to show that not all the manifestations of the Hindoo Gods occur among humans: a great many happen among Hindoo animals, not all of which appearances are noticed by Hindoo humans, or else not made widely famous among them. But the human Hindoos did notice this particular case. Consequently, this form of Shiva is worshipped among Hindoo humans too now. There is a famous vigraham of the Kaarunya Moorti (Shiva as a varaaham) carrying the numerous piglets on both sides in a very famous Kovil.

2. The interviewer asked:

Quote:PC: There are 33 crore deities in the Sanatan Dharma. Aren’t people free to worship the deity they want to?

How is this even an argument? The set of 33 koti Vedic Gods do NOT include christoislamic entities, let alone christoislamic humans. It doesn't even include beings of other Indic cosmologies, like the multiple Buddhas that Buddhism invented later and which only exist in Buddhist cosmology, etc. In fact, contrary to how my brain may at times choose to operate, the set of 33 koti Hindoo Gods is not likely to include the pantheons of other heathen cosmologies like the 8 million Shinto Kami, the huge number of Taoist Shen, the n thousand Korean Shin, the Olympic Gods, the Aesir and Vanir etc etc. And yet those are all *real* Gods.

So why on earth would some islamic human be in the set of 33 crore Hindoo Gods?

People are free to worship whatever, but worshipping something christoislamic can't be called Hindu religion nor even heathenism.

And the news was:


Quote:"Sai Baba Took the Name of 'Allah'. He Said no to Ganga Snaan" By Prabhu Chawla

Published: 07th July 2014 07:27 PM

Swami Shree Swaroopanand Saraswati talks to the New Indian Express Editorial Director Prabhu Chawla on his objections to the worship of Sai Baba, the Ram Temple, the scrapping of Article 370, and the promises made by PM Narendra Modi on Sachchi Baat on News X.

The contents of this old article show that Swami Swaroopananda was unfairly (malevolently?) maligned by people pretending to have Hindu interests at heart (and certainly by people who think they know better than him), and which shows that his position on Shirdi Sai Baba is not novel, not anti-Hindu, but in keeping with Hindu tradition. And his views on Rama and Krishna is not to the exclusion of other Hindu Gods. Also, he does not seem to have an issue with Modi. Rather, he seemed interested - in a positive sense - about whether Modi will bring necessary changes.

Quote:A Hindu Nationalist Perspective

Saturday, December 27, 2014

Quick notes: Evangelical startups, Super-intellect...

•Mohandas Pai on hyper-growth evangelism: "I have noticed over 30% of taxi drivers have converted over the last 5 years. Some 9-12% of undivided AP has been converted".

(They do all this silently, unlike the VHP folks who make loud noises after converting 20 people.)

While the christian advance in AP (and TN) is a horror - and I can see the escalation in christoterrorists with every visit to my home - the final line is what I want to comment on. Inferno-turned-'pagan' said: "They [christomaniacs] do all this silently, unlike the VHP folks who make loud noises after converting 20 people."

Wow, Inferno is an abominal ingrate. And conveniently ignorant besides.

1. Hindoos - such as RSS/VHP - have been very silently reverting many to Hindoo religion. And not just a mere 20 or 200, though the numbers certainly add up. And not just recently.

I accidentally found out from reading an old online exchange between an islamic taunting a Hindu that 'Hindus keep converting to islamania while no muslim converts to Hinduism, therefore islamania is Troo' and the Hindoo responding with links to how just one branch of the RSS/VHP and in 2011 alone had reverted 200,000 Indians from christoislamania. (Am deliberately withholding the supporting link. People can pretend I made it up. I didn't. But the links mention the names of key Hindoos. And I prefer my Hindoos to be living and safe.) It was not at all bragging.

Never mind Inferno. I for one am grateful to the RSS/VHP for helping Indians to revert to Hindoo religion. I hope the reverts may be grateful for what the RSS/VHP has done for them: they have sacrificed their free time - that others spend blogging inanities - to set alienated Indians on the path of reunion with their ancestral Gods. I can't imagine a greater accomplishment. Emperor Julian would have been proud to call such people his own.

2. And the TOI link that as per HK broke the news of the recent reconversion that has been turned into a controversy by christoislamania mentioned that IIRC in the last 10 years, the particular Hindus involved had reverted some 1 or 2 lakhs as well. I'm not sure there's any overlap with the reverts made by the earlier mentioned Hindoos.

Like I said, 10 people here and 100 people there add up. While 200,000 over 10 years is not much, it's better than internet bloggers who drool over alien converts and peddle about the mangled alien "vedic chanting" (and it IS mangled - and bad in more ways than one). New ageism is one of the killers of heathenism, BTW.

Occasionally, Indian news publishes incidents of reversions, though many happen silently.

So the publicity given to the recent incident and particularly the uproar generated is for ulterior purposes, I'm certain. Perhaps to ban reversions to Hindu religion, because it is alarming the christoislamaniacs.

Whatever Hindoos do, they must NOT agree to banning "conversions" except conversions to christoislam. That is, all reversions to Hindoo religion must be allowed. Though conversions to christoislamania (and communism) should ideally be banned.

If all conversion was banned, then India will eventually be de-heathenised by the demographic jihad/crusade of the christians and islamics and then they'll start forcibly converting people again like in India's convert-or-kill-ed christoconverted NE.

Besides, even if there are laws against conversion, christoislamics will merely continue their attempts to convert Hindus more silently - and the christomedia will ensure this is silent and so too the cryptochristos in law enforcement and govt - but they will never cease (nor reduce) their conversion attempts.

3. Hindus have been on reversion sprees since at least IIRC the late 19th century.

- E.g. I have a journal article saved somewhere where European christomorons (missionaries) were IIRC screeching at how "fundamentalist" Hindoos had been going on reversion drives in IIRC Kerala in the 19th century, and they were whining how "fundamentalist" of the Hindoos this behaviour was. I.e. the same sort of whining going on now, though now the evil Indian [crypto] christoislamaniac class is whining about the same.

- And in 1928, an American newspaper (NYTimes, IIRC) published a piece on how a Shankaracharya in some distant part of India was presiding over a mass reversion. The AmeriKKKan paper surprisingly did not whine, despite mentioning an American girl's conversion too (going native was a feature during the colonial era; always invited reprisals, yet Hindus under the influence of the colonial era allowed it perhaps because a foreigner converting encouraged natives to revert). But no doubt the AmriKKKan paper's coverage was meant to send out the alarm nevertheless: to warn US/Euro missionaries to take action to prevent the Hindoos from further reverting their hard-gained sheepies.

May as well link to this at least. Since the Hindoo activists involved have probably passed on and hence are safe from christoislamic terrorism:


Quote:1928:8,000 Convert to Hinduism : IN OUR PAGES:100, 75 AND 50 YEARS AGO

Published: March 28, 2003



LONDON: More than 8,000 Christians and Moslems have been gathered into the Hindu fold within the past week following the conversion of the former Miss Nancy Ann Miller, according to dispatches from Bombay. The largest number of conversions was made in the Portuguese quarter where 4,000 embraced Hinduism, while in Khandesh an initiation of 700 fishermen took place under the auspices of the Shankarachaya who converted the American girl. A number of new Hindu missions are being organized.
Probably a northern Shankaracharya. Shankaracharyas in the south still tend not to encourage or accept foreign 'converts' or recognise them as Hindus, though they will give audiences to sincere western people and answer their questions.

Will try to eventually locate the PDF of the other re-conversion drive, the one from the late 19th century or whenever it was.

But wonder how many Indians the oh-so-superior Inferno-turned-'pagan' reconverted. And every time I ever read him, he merely advertised for English school kids in some british prep school (Santa something or other catholic) chanting-shanting Vedic mantras. BTW, part of the current British political-level scheming to convert India via their "caste and poverty" debate is entirely because the British aristocracy have always been bothered by any English people "going native". The christo-reprisals against native Americans for numerous Brits (and other Europeans) deciding to convert to native American religio-tradition - through no instigation of the native Americans - were of the form of an increased christoEuropean desire/urgency to genocide the native Americans.

Likewise, unwanted and uninvited (and illegal) alien dabbling in Hindoo religion *really* disturbs the Brits and the US and many European/Russian people including at high-levels. They view this as bad as miscegenation was viewed not long ago. Christo-society always wanted Hindoo religion extincted, but they want it more badly now. And they know that if only they could stop Hindoo religion in India, they could prevent the various Hinduism-Lite movements and cults and independent dabbling hobbies seen proliferating among western people including in the west.

So, by all means, people like "Pagan" should keep promoting alien anti-Hindu terrorism=alien attempts to dabble in the vedam and the rest of Hindoo religion. Their interest in alien converts and their encouragement of alien dabbling is adding fuel to the fires being lit under Hindus by the christowest.

Also, it's a crime against the Gods of European heathenisms to further alienate Europeans from their ancestral Gods/heathenisms by sidetracking them into Hindoo religion next. Their ancestral religion is not Hindoo religion. Any heathen - i.e. what's called a pagan - would be encouraging sincerely heathenism-inclined Europeans to return to their own ancestral religions. Though any western person threatening to dabble in Hindoo religion (or Taoism etc) can't be sincere/a heathen by definition. All sincerely heathen-inclined are in their own ancestral religions/pursuing their own ancestral Gods. So all the western people that dabble in Hindu religion - which is a temporary hobby, sometimes abruptly ended by the death of the dabbler - are specifically non-heathens and not really serious or sincere. (Which also explains why many western "converts" often move from terrorising Hindu religion to terrorising Taoism next.)
1. swarajyamag.com/culture/caste-is-hardly-an-impediment-for-homecoming-hindus/

Very good article by someone writing under the handle Jataayu* on how Hindoo society

a. has been facilitating reconversions since the early islamaniac invasions and

b. has generated Hindoo manuals on how to do the purification properly (outlining the necessary rituals) since about that early time.

* NOOOoooooo, *I've* always eyed the username Jataayu. Fine, very well, the person's picture looks cuddly so I will let it pass, just this once. (Where are his Hindoo markings though, what's a Hindoo without markings?) But am reserving Jaambavaan - all spellings. "I called it first." In fact, I call all animal names AND good-rAkShasa/hero names from our texts - most especially Hanumaan/Anjaneya (all names) and Ghatotkacha (all spellings). Phew. Calling things is more powerful than the law.

Just kidding. Except about the Jaambavaan, Hanuman and Ghatotkacha bit.

2. What's wrong with this:


Quote:The idol is that which is at the center of your mind’s attention. The most powerful idols are not physical. The concepts the mind clings to are the most powerful idols. Think you are “secular”, “atheistic”? For you money may be most important, that is what you obsess over. You can make an image of Kubera, the god of wealth, and worship it, it is the same thing. Kubera is already in your mind and he is the object of your worship. Or it may be sex instead. Then you worship Kama deva, the god of sensory pleasure. It is just a way to name it.

Then, by logical extension of what the writer - one Sankrant Sanu - has written here, all those who worship death are worshipping Yama Dharmaraja (like in the islamaniac accusation against Modi) and all those who worship Shiva are worshipping "destruction" etc.

[The answer is No on all counts, by the way.]

And just for the record: the traditional Vaidika Hindoos doing homas to Kamadeva* or to Kubera (but Sankrant left out the more obvious Lakshmi, perhaps because he knew that his logic didn't hold) are not worshipping money or sex/sensory pleasure. *Nor are those who worship Amman as carrying the panchabaana.

Just like the Hellenes who adored the God Eros (Cupid) and hence worshipped his sacred images with rites were not "therefore" worshipping sex either. [But I doubt people understand this statement either. The time has come when even allusions to Greek religion will fail on the diseased Indian wannabe-Hindu brains.]

And also: it's not seculars/atheists who worship Kubera and Kamadeva, only HindOOs do.

I know it's hard/impossible for modern "Hindus" to understand the above. Hence no explanation provided. Just a simple denial of their pretence - seen in their inane statements - that they "get" it or that their opinions are in any way representative of Hindoo religion/heathenism. No more than the many Donigers' are.

Of course, Sankrant Sanu's article has been the recipient of a lot of applause from similarly new-agey Indian "Hindus" in the comments section. Not one objection. Typical.

Don't know if Sanu (and applauding fans) was ever on BR, but certainly fits with the class of unheathen de-heathenised wannabe-heathen entities dubbed "BR types".

Q: Why do supposedly "Hindu" readers accept lectures on HindOO religion from de-heathenised entities? Is it because they are subvertible OR already subverted? (One of the two. No other answers even possible, obviously.)

And another Q: will these people be using the "Hindu" label - and their pseudo-Hinduism - to try to mate with (marry) actual Hindoos? <= And that's another important reason why gangrene must be identified and avoided like the plague by Hindoo society. I mean, let's be honest, would any conscious Hindu let their son/daughter/nephew/niece/grandchild marry anything that had unheathen, de-heathenised, anti-heathen notions like this? It would be the same as marrying them off to entities who, in *similar* vein, declare that "Krishna is a womanizer" etc (as Elstian "Hindus" do, even by way of "Qui tacet consentire videtur").

There is just one rule - implicitly adhered to by all heathens: that those who don't know the Gods would Shut Up on the subject else parrot Tradition on it. That is, if they *are* heathen. In contrast, only de-heathenised would presume to lecture* on what they don't (and never will) know, and who will invariably subvert others to their own nonsense. Such gangrene.

* Pre-emptively: facts are NOT a "matter of opinion" and hence "open to debate". Facts are either so or not so. So de-heathenised entities can't disguise and excuse their ignorant lectures on the Gods as being their "opinions" and invoke "the right to express their opinion" because such an argument is irrelevant.

The purpose of this post was -

A good article on how Hindoos have reconverted Indians since the islamic invasions - with purification rites specifically for this:

The main (first) link in the previous post is important.

This post just continues on the whinge binge.

This next is sort of related to point #2 of the above post. It's the other half of the story: whereas that was about the ignorance (and the subversion) of de-heathenised "Hindu" vocalists as regards how heathens view their heathenism/Gods (a), this next example is about how de-heathenised "Hindu" vocalists have a very christian view of the fictional christian jeebus-gawd entity (b]. Correlation? Not necessarily, I suppose. Because even when the de-heathenised finally rid themselves of (b], they never overcome the problem (a). Put alternatively: (a) is a constant among the de-heathenised wannabe-"Hindus" among vocalists. That is, whether they 'get' christianism as well as a christian does, they universally suck at heathenism, notably their own.


Article Title: PK is slow poison

Author: IndiaFacts Staff

Description: A telling article on PK.

The situation is similar with the global Christian ummah. They have waged wars on humanity for nearly 2000 years despite their Messiah, a messenger of pure love, giving up his life on a cross even while forgiving the perpetrators of this heinous crime.
Would ya look at that? Hook. Line. And sinker.

Meanwhile if you ask such "Hindu" vocalists for a para summarising the Hindoo view of Kamadeva, you get "just another name for sensory pleasure". And if you ask them for the Hindoo view of "Kubera", you get "just another name for money". Ask the Elst-fandom about Krishna etc and you get - never mind.

But ask them about their view (not christians' view but their view) of jeebus and you get the christian view - the sort of junk reproduced in the quoteblock here. = christoconditioned view

Or, ~post-2010, some BR types might have (finally) latched on to how JesusNeverExisted.com. = post-christian christoconditioned view

But, of course, either way, their answers on Kamadeva, Kubera (Krishna etc) will still remain anything but heathen, anything but Hindoo. Aliens.

Well, one day the peddlers of "temple culture" (having suddenly discovered temples) might have come so far as to make themselves sound heathen - regurgitating arguments of actual heathens - but they'll never be heathen. (The distinction is all that matters.) Still aliens.

The irony is, the whole "Kamadeva/Kubera are just idols for worshipping sensory pleasures and moolah" spin that vocalist Sankrant Sanu provided (ref point 2 in the prev post) is something any western atheist could have stated* about these Gods in Hindu religion. But it's specifically not anything a heathen would expect from someone with presumably direct Hindu ancestry. (:Eek: But it does go to show how quick alienation can strike at a heathen society and wither it away. So that it still claims to be heathen, but isn't and never shall be again. And by the way, this - the changeover from heathen Hindoo views to Sankrant Sanu type views on heathenism - has happened in India within just 1 or 2 generations. Consider the west has had between 1.5 millennia to 1 millennia of pure christo-conditioning. =Something for future India to look forward to. Confusedcore: ConfusedarcasmSmile

* Actually, to be fair to western non-religious friends and acquaintances, they have slightly less alien views on what Hindoo/heathen Gods mean to Hindoos, and what heathen are actually doing when they worship "idols", and what the idols of each God "actually" mean to the heathens. And it bears mentioning that heathens did not teach them that answer: western atheists worked out that bare minimum for themselves. [Yet "Hindu" vocalists of Hindu parentage couldn't.]

Surely it says something when western atheists have a somewhat more accurate notion about heathen Hindoos and their heathenism than modern angelsk-speaking Indian wannabe-"Hindu" nationalist vocalists. Of course, western atheists still have no actual understanding either of heathen views and heathenism and heathens, but they're not meant to be Hindoos or other heathen, so it's only natural. However, there's *nothing* natural about the de-Hinduised state of the alienated vocalists allegedly batting for Hindus' religion and penning article after article.

All of which sort of illustrates the ultimate problem facing Hindoos in India: even were christoislamicommunism to be suddenly whisked away from existence (oh, that it would), de-heathenisation is guaranteed, so that Indians (NRIs included) will turn into a nation of aliens. Probably 3rd world 3rd rate at being alien too. :chuckle:

Just mentally extrapolate from the Sanu-s, Amish Tripatis, Rajarants, Elstians, etc - the whole range of subversions - into one generation from now, then two generations from now, then a century, and another etc. And shudder. Because anyone can see that it's only going to get worse, since the transformation is without exception unidirectional: from heathen antecedents to de-heathenisation to total alien status. Obviously no way back.)

Ah gangrene in Hindoo society. Should have amputated it. Or at least gagged it.

The main (first) link in the previous post is important.

This post is just more complaining.
This post is mostly complaints. All that's relevant are the links and the stuff in quoteblocks, and possibly any emphasised text.

Somethings I had observed before and during holidays.

1. swarajyamag.com/culture/interview-vamsee-juluri/

This article was recommended at the R2004 blog as a vision for the future of Hindu religion.

Uh, all it contained was flowery words. Oh and a blatant plagiarism of the Japanese views on evolution - also once mentioned at the Rajeev2004 blog - as being more harmonious and cooperative than purely cut-throat competitive as projected in western storytelling/dramatisation on evolution (though the R2004 blog wrongly attributed the JP view to the Buddhism of the Japanese, instead of their Shintoism. But it is specifically a Shinto view). Saw Elst (positively) describe this feature in one of his articles as a novelty.


Quote:On the other hand, Juluri explores new trails of anti-Western criticism, and these are rather sensible Thus, he finds that the Western mind easily projects violent scenarios and explanations on natural processes, e.g. in evolution theory. But Hindu experience is that life is only to a very limited extent a struggle, and mostly a matter of cooperation and harmony.

Apparently Elst doesn't know this is a longstanding JP view on evolution either (and JP criticism of western narrative presentations on evolution), that Juluri was not original, that it is not exclusive to Hindu religion and that in Shinto the harmonious interactions between species and cooperative progressions on the path of life (and hence evolution) are often better described/documented including in famous oral traditions than in Hindu religion.

But it's worrying that the article came recommended as a sign of optimism. It was to advertise for a work called "re-arming HInduism" or the like. Except the interview read like yet another modern person writing about heathenism and grasping for heathenism, rather than when you read works by traditionalist heathens who demonstrate expertise in sharing their knowledge and insights about heathenism.

But I guess for modern wannabe-heathens - Hindu nationalists - who are likewise grasping for what is increasingly apparent is their lost once-heathen identity (they want to be heathens, but they're not), these sorts of articles and books are an inspiration, whereas they will feel quite out of place reading actually heathen works by traditionalists. This reasoning would explain the phenomenon of an increasing number of Indian wannabe-heathen nationalists (posing as heathens) reading books and articles on Hindu religion by aliens and recommending these to Indian Hindu audiences of like bent.

It's a worrying trend. More disturbing/disappointing is how it all reveals the extent to which the English-speaking nationalist masses have been de-heathenised. No wonder that modern nationalism has been utterly impotent in being remotely restorative for Hindudom and is disinterested in doing so besides: it is championed by people who aren't actually heathens, though they use the word Hindu to identify themselves (which has come to mean anything and everybody).

Karyakarta once argued - not long ago - that the Sri Rama temple at Ayodhya should be rebuilt for symbolic value. <- That is all that is left of English-speaking nationalists on fire for "Hindutva" which is the de-heathenised remnant of the ancestral religion. Itself a shadow or symbolic placeholder for Hindu religion.

Then again, the progression has been Hindoo heathenism transmuted into Hindu Nationalism transmuted into "Hindu" nationalism/Hindutva (lowercase n) which last isn't even heathen but merely retains the trappings of a heathen nomenclature.

That is, nationalism/Hindutva is a replacement religion, for the Hindu Nationalism (capital N) equated with the Sanatana Dharma by Aurobindo, which itself had slightly lost its heathen focus compared to the sort of uncompromising Hindoo-ness that fired the likes of Shivaji.

It is an inevitability. If you look closely, except for maybe a couple of internet "Hindu" nationalist vocalists in every 500, the rest are actually not heathens.

So yes, trite articles (about what promises to be an equally trite book*) such as on "Rearming Hinduism" are considered some milestone achievement by generations of lost nationalists who playact heathenism, who claim heathenism, but aren't really heathens.

Such articles are just for English-speaking wannabes. Actual heathens of Hindoo origins would be reading *heathen* works. There are so many in local languages. But even the contents are utterly unknown to the vociferous internet activists, the English-speaking generation.

After skimming through Vamsee Juluri's article which said nothing true that was original (or even his own voice)*, nothing actually inspiring, nor were the soundbytes from his lauded book anywhere as novel or as magnificent as the interviewer praised them as (to be honest, I cringed at what passes for good phrasing). I was more moved by statements of Emperor Julian in translation - but his forceful unapologetic heathenism is undeniable, energetic, inspiring. It becomes imprinted.

* Another thing I noticed was Vamsee's use of affection. I have NEVER encountered an English-speaking modern Hindu - like Vamsee or the countless nationalists commenting passionately on the web - use the word "affection" for what the Hindoo feels for its Hindu Gods. NEVER.

Of course, It is an utterly accurate word for what *heathens* feel for their Gods, and it is certainly the word that the translation of Julian showed him using for his Gods (whence I stole it from for Hindoos and Taoists). But it sounded a false note in Vamsee's adoption. Like he thought it a pretty word to add to the rest of his flowery writing. In any case, it is clearly not the same meaning in which Julian used it (and felt it) nor in the sense I have used it for heathens.

But the most galling part of all in Vamsee's interview is the one that shows him to be a new-agey entity and not a heathen at all. (Compare with Julian as an exemplar.) The part where Vamsee Juluri denounces actual heathens fighting for their own survival as heathens=the survival of heathendom, while promoting his purely-theoretical, modern - I will dub it "anglicised" (I could just call it new agey) - take on Hinduism.

I was so glad to see someone else ticked off by the same usual snubbing - carried out by all the elitist new-agey "Hindus" and nationalists - of the Hindoos who are facing the brunt of the christoislamic assault:

Quote:Jishnu • 9 days ago

When Vamsee is happy talking of "what is said about Hinduism" and not "what is being done to Hindu society" he better limits his talk to it instead of pronouncing judgments about things he does not know. To call one self moderate one needs an extreme, so "Hindutva" becomes that extreme. Vamsee probably does not know the difference between writing articles and defending his people when their lives are endangered, as it happened for centuries in this land and is continuing to happen in Bengal, Kerala, Kashmir. If he thinks defense on ground is extreme, he is no different from the left-lib anti-Hindu folk he claims are denigrating Hinduism.

(Emperor Julian was a great defender of his heathens. Not just of his heathendom: he would not let heathens defending Hellenismos from christomania be thrown under the bus, but bore it foremost in his mind to protect them, because they demonstrated in action their love for what he loved as well as they did: the Great Gods of Hellenismos=Hellenismos. But then, Julian was a true heathen. Not a poseur nor de-heathenised, unlike so many "Hindu" "thinkers"/"nationalist" vocalists.)





Share ›


Jitu Jishnu • 9 days ago

I feel he just comes across as confused. I know that feeling... When you know injustice is being meted out to your kin, you feel you should speak out, but don't want to come across as extreme. That's a fear many moderates face. But what was striking was, he was all over the place. From Sai baba to Doniger, from academics to rituals. Yet, besides his views on Sai Baba, he said nothing concrete. He didn't take a stand on any issue. Just rambled on from here to there. The questions asked seemed more well framed than his answers did imo.

(Second that. And the only useful and clear things Vamsee Juluri said had already been stated by a great many everyday Hindus. Plus the JP take on evolution was not an original description by Juluri, and not unique to Hindu religion.)

He came across as a an ultracrepidarian. Well, to be fair, I often come across as one too. But I'm not writing a book. He did. I wonder now how the book is.





Share ›


Jishnu Jitu • 9 days ago

But thats the beauty of left-lib intellectual rowdyism. If you take any stand on anything you are a hardliner, fundamentalist. If you do not, you are harmless for them regardless of what views you hold. Many play into it without even seeing that they are.





Share ›


Arohtak Jishnu • 9 days ago

Pure supremacist Rowdyism. I agree. Well said.





Share ›


Jitu Jishnu • 9 days ago

:-) Agree!




Share ›

India's wannabe heathens need to acquire better taste than promoting wishy-washy stuff like Vamsee Juluri's interview (and his book promises to be equally foggy and pointless for actual heathens). And as for their recommending it as promoting an optimistic view for Hindu-dom's future - which led me to read the interview at swarajyamag.com/culture/interview-vamsee-juluri/ - I came away far more pessimistic than before: if this is what passes for an inspiring voice for heathenism, then it is more than clear that the actual last English-language voices championing Hindu heathenism died with Swarup and Goel (and even they were skirting the boundaries in not having addressed the Hindoos and warning these off from the English-speaking Gangrene/subverted, but addressed the lost cause of the latter instead. And moreover, they left nothing but the twin subversionists Rajarant and Elst as their self-proclaimed alleged 'successors').

Ignoring the fraudulent successors however, I could forgive Goel and Swarup for not sounding heathen enough since their targets were not heathens. They sounded as secular as they needed to attempt to win over the minds of the English-speaking alienated. They massively failed, and modern generations of nationalists inspired by their writings are more de-heathenised than in their era. They picked the wrong target audience.

Current nationalist vocalists pick the right target audience (aiming to reach actual Hindus) but read the wrong lesson: subverting them with nonsense and new-ageism that gets passed off as "Hindu religion".

Anyway, if Juluri is the best that 21st century Hindus writing in English can produce and is considered a success by English-speaking Hindus, I think it's honestly time to write Hindu-dom's epitaph. Can stop pretending anything of heathenism is left in such people. All they can muster is excuses. Like - sadly - Karyakarta's reason for why Ayodhya's Sri Rama temple must be rebuilt.

What a colossal failure modern Hindus have wrought. Themselves the foremost failure.

2. On the same topic (while I'm complaining anyway), at this next page, there is one "Daibon Ten" [Indian with JP Buddhist title?] commenting everywhere, on fire to keep christoislamania at bay and to expose it.

But he also writes this, rendering his efforts/countless posts ultimately pointless if what he wanted to defend was native religions:


Quote:daibon Ten shf • a month ago

Gandhi is real. JEsus is fiction.. a Mythology not unlike Mohammad and Gabriel or even Rama.


Note how only modern "Hindus" - including those of Hindutva/nationalists on fire for nationalism - cave. Never christoislamics.

Also, no ancient Hindoo would have ever caved in such a manner.

Modern Hindus get subverted so easily. And they never even recognise that they did. Yet they still keep terms like "Hindu" for themselves and insist on being recognised as such.

Which is why the word Hindoo has been coined for the heathens: for the unsubvertibles. To distinguish them from the likes of the above. Who also uttered this inanity amidst his "defence" against christoislam, rendered useless to him since he's already been sucessfully de-heathenised (which is all that christianism wanted). You know it's a victory for christianism when christianism gets should-be heathens to repudiate their heathen Gods.

And this next - total alienation from proper heathen perception, replaced by novel, modern, utterly nonsensical views - is a victory for christianism too:

Quote:daibon Ten Aravind Ganesh V • a month ago

This whole anti Gay thing is an Abrhamic religious thing. Hindus and Hinduism really has no issues with gays... There are transsexual and Bisexual Gods and iconography in Hinduism which was why it was denigrated by evangelicals as an evil religion.

Only the first part is true: Hindus may or may not have no issues with homosexuality (depends on the individual). In India, they usually they have no opinion either way, since it does not directly impact their lives. Some NRI Hindus tend to be more pro-active and vote for equal rights for people of other sexual orientation. (But as far as I am aware, Hindu religion does not seem to speak of homosexuality at all.)

But the final statement - "there are transsexual and Bisexual Gods and iconography in Hinduism" (by which I suspect daibon is referring to Harihara and Ardhanareeshwara again) - is more of the recently-invented nonsense that only the ignorant de-heathenised "Hindus" and of course alien dabbling "converts" conclude.

Alien dabblers can be ignored: they're not Hindus, their total ignorance is par for the course. In the case of Indians of supposed Hindu ancestry, the nonsensical conclusion is serious: it shows an utter ignorance of Hindu religion, an utter lack of heathen/proper understanding/perception and reveals daibon Ten to be de-heathenised and alienated.

Only aliens draw these conclusionns. And Daibon Ten is clearly an alien. Any ethnic ancestry is irrelevant to alien status. There are many aliens of Hindu ancestry in modern India, after all. Alien is merely an unheathen. In this case, a post-Hindu like Daibon Ten, who goes through the motions of defending against christoislam, even after he has himself lost what it is he is defending.

Perchance Daibon Ten is but an ethnically-Indian Buddhist and not a Hindu. (For his own sake, here's hoping it's true.) Though unlikely, it could explain his position on Rama and his complete ignorance on the other Hindu Gods he alluded to.
This post is just another long complaint.

The spam is continued from the heathenism/Natural Religions thread.

First, reprising final paras for context -

Quote:I have caught whimpers of complaint from internet "Hindu" activists rejecting late christo-conditioned Europe's presumption in claiming Greek philosophy stripped of its Gods by its illegally attempting to divorce the two: christoconditioned Euros were trying to separate Philosophy from the Heathenism of the GrecoRomans, since - again - the latter could not be digested by the unheathen mind that dared to covet the former. (Later on, christianism would try to ingest Philosophy as a christianism.) There are many christoconditioned in the west now who praise Philosophy as their great ancestral tradition, even as they, often in the same breath, dismiss or even deride the very Olympic Gods who brought forth this divine wisdom - which is of Them, and inextricably linked to Them - into (Hellenistic) mankind's ken.

Yet not a murmur from any Hindus when the Hindoo Gods are treated like nothings while the teachings passed on by Rishis - intimately associated with the Gods - are coveted and are delinked from the Gods and the religion pertaining to them.

I never learnt from christoconditioned western books that "Plato was a worshipper of the images of the Gods" (which books instead preferred to pretend he was a 'secular' Greek philosopher). To learn that detail, I had to hear it from Emperor Julian, whose recorded statement first revealed this little - yet non-trivial - fact about Plato to my limited knowledge. I see the same happening increasingly with Hindoos' ancestral heathenism.

Everyday I come across some "I'm a Hindu" atheist/agnostic entity who is happy to claim as his inheritance everything heathen in Hindus' religion - except the very thing that makes it a heathenism: the Gods. And they go about some self-rationalised means to stake their claims. (It is not only unheathen alien dabblers that are attempting to divorce the heathenism from Hindoos' heathenism.)

After Shivaratri, came across a link to an article by IIRC atheist Atanu Dey. He was full of pride/full of himself upon finding a Nataraja had been planted (a gift from Indics) at a key physics site in Europe. Atanu Dey lectured all-knowingly - his instruction came from Sagan - about the cosmological significance of Shiva and his Tandavam. Also like a typical unheathen*, Dey declared his displeasure in the fact that Nataraja statues were 'sadly' delegated to gracing only Hindu dance centres and the like, when the suddenly-expert Dey finds that Nataraja statues have better places (like European physics institutes) to be posted mutely at. Also, Dey expressed gratitude to the intelligence or was it intellect or intuition of his 'ancestors' for intuiting physics cosmology (and presumably for embedding it in allegories concerning Shiva).

<- Not a single commenter to that article noticed the myriad problems in Dey.

First of all, Sagan learnt of the Hindoo cosmology of Shiva from traditional *heathen* accounts, but Sagan shaved off the heathenism and reduced Shiva, his Tandavam and Hindoo cosmology to an *allegory* of physics cosmology. But Sagan can't be expected to do more (and he did well to get as far as he did): Sagan's an atheist with 0 ethnic Hindu background, and this is as far as Hindoo cosmology will compute or reveal itself to him. Dey is another story:

Despite having some (presumably ethnic Hindu or at least Indic) ancestry, Dey - who is clearly not familiar with (not interested in) the traditional Hindoo cosmological view, getting his knowledge exclusively from the much reduced (and de-heathenised) spin by atheist Sagan - concludes that Sagan's interpretation of Shiva (Tandavam and cosmology) is Da interpretation. I.e. that it is all merely allegory for the atheist universe rather than a literal truth. I.e. what Dey did is to interpret the heathen=theistic cosmology of the Hindoos into the atheist cosmology revealed by pure science, turning Shiva into a notional construct that Indian "Hindutva" atheists can delusionally imagine they have an equal claim to. No and Never.

(And stating matter-of-factly, to record for posterity some authentic Hindoo-dom 'Hindoo narrative' to counter the growing wave of atheist encroachment on Hindoo heathenism which is rewriting heathenism into an allegory to make it compatible with atheism:

Shiva's Tandavams - and the laasya of his wife - is *literally* true. He literally does dance, often with his wife, and takes great pleasure in it. This is not evidence, and no more than mere confirmation for Hindoos who already know: Even yet-living bhaktas - at least one - have been granted darshanam of the dance duet, and learnt profound insights by witnessing it, just as Panini and Patanjali were to have had. The particular tandavam that dissolves the universe is a much more cosmic level one and - mayhap - has another form. But make no mistake: there is no allegory to either Shiva or his tandavam (or his wife). <- No apologies for the lack of proofs provided for this statement. But these sorts of matters touch on the very reason why Hindoos and Taoists are not atheists, and why the matter of the Gods bears bringing up repeatedly: they're at the centre/core of heathenisms for a reason.)

Presumably the atheist Dey thinks that a Nataraja statue belongs at alien scientific centres to serve as a reminder of the re-imagined great, rationalist 'Hindutva' conception of the universe in 'elegant' allegory. Dey thinks Nataraja has been "confined"/"limited" to Hindoo dance centres owing to ignorance among actual Hindoos of the great 'actual' significance of Nataraja that he [Dey] imagines he's realized (from internalising Sagan's interpretation: no originality on Dey's part, and certainly no familiarity with the actual Hindoo tradition concerning Shiva/Hindu cosmology). This neglect of Shiva et al's greater 'meaning' - statues of him are relegated to dance centres - Dey laments as a regression of Hindus in their 'proper' understanding, which only Dey has (courtesy of Sagan).

What a joke. Shiva is Sabhaapati. He (embodied in his images) must be housed only where there are bhaktas who acknowledge him as the centre of the universe. This is *exactly* why he is given a pride of place in Hindoo traditional dance centres: he presides over the dance hall. They dance for him, and by his leave, he is the prime audience. And he is the promulgator of the dance they do in his honour and as his worship, in his imitation, and as union (yoga=bharatanatyam) with him.

His images Do Not Belong in centres of aliens and atheists who think Nataraja a quaint statue that is symbolic of physics cosmology from an 'enlightened' ancient Indian perspective.

His images may well be housed in Hindoo centres of physics, where he -and other Hindoo Gods- are given pride of place as the core of all learning, all sciences, by the Hindoos researching there. <- That would be acceptable, as long as he is offered worship and not forgotten, like some toy or piece of art or furniture.

Dey has no right to speak on Shiva or the Tandavam or Hindoo cosmology - unless he repeats the Hindoo heathen POV alone - even less right to interpret it or pretend to know the "true" meaning/implication and the "true" use(s) for the Nataraja statue. He need not waste time in thinking about or looking at Nataraja/Shiva either. Like I stated earlier: if you don't view your Gods (and their images) aright, you are a Failure as a heathen='idolator'. Dey is not a heathen and, like all aliens, he is Not welcome to view the Hindoo Gods, since all he can do - and no more was to be expected from the like, I realise - is to subvert heathenism in order to turn it into an atheism so that it may compute to thim (be forcibly made compatible with him) and so that he may pretend he has any claim to it. He lost all any claims to heathenism when he found himself an atheist. This is no loss: atheism is not remotely invalid. Truth is (truth) as far as may be ascertained by an individual. BUT atheists may not encroach on any part of heathenism. There are no two ways about that statement. If one is an atheist - whether of older Indic or modern "international" flavour does not matter - stick to what is yours alone. No coveting any part that belongs to heathenism. It no longer concerns one.

Dey even betrays undeserved pride at the fact that international scientists allowed the Nataraja statue on their western premises, assuming that they thereby acknowledge the 'greatness' of ancient Indian insights - and thanks 'his' ancestors for their wondrous insights. But they ceased to be his ancestors when he ceased to be heathen. This is as true of Taoist as of Hindu heathenism. They're merely random genetic predecessors, as related to him as more ancient monkey forbears. Heathen ancestors no more identify with atheist progeny - however fervently espousing "Hindutva", that great replacement of Hindoo heathendom with airy nothings - than they would identify with christoislamic progeny, both being dead ends to their lines, from their perspective. (Aside: Hindoo heathens can still commune with pitrus. "Hoe zit dat nou, en met Sankhya?") Christians likewise can't claim the accomplishments of ancient Hindoos in their family tree. And - just as Indic atheists are forbidden from twisting Hindoo heathen=theistic cosmology into an atheism to suit their own atheist outlook, neither can christians twist the Hindoo accomplishments of Hindoos in their dwindled pedigree into achievements of, for or about christianism. Again: anyone who is not of the ancestral tradition and its views has no more claims on it, and lost the right to speak on it as any authority (let alone to interpret it).

Another example of ongoing de-heathenisation of heathenism by removing the Gods:

Just yesterday I happened upon a twitter comment, possibly a few days old, by the SandeepWeb person, while looking up a Baloch gentleman who sounded like he was inclined towards heathenism. Anyway, the Sandeepweb person (he of "discovering temple culture" fame/infamy) said something along the lines of how "we" are defined or guided by "our dharma, our temples, our Rishis". <- He actually said even the word temples, but without a mention of the Gods. A more than obvious omission. But that word and what it entails really sticks in de-heathenised throats' doesn't it? What temples is he talking about, Buddhist and Jain ones? And if so, does he plan on lumping them with Hindu temples under an umbrella "temple culture religion"? Confusedneers: The only people allowed in Hindoo temples are those who have come to adore the Gods residing therein (and as per traditional perception alone). Not those who can't compute the Hindoo Gods anymore, nor other aliens.

A couple of years back, some commenter on fire for nationalism at HK similarly new-ageistically [so I made that word up too] declared that "temples were centres of power" and therefore good places for levitation I mean meditation. He kept repeating that "temples" were "centres of power", and was earlier seen arguing against the christoislamic destruction of "Hindu culture" and "civilisation" and lamenting the loss of these in Hindus. When confronted about why he left out the mention of the Gods when speaking of temples, and why he preferred to new-agily fasten on to the "centres of power" as his reason for their (temples') being and for visiting them, he merely gushed more of the exact same new-ageism - "centres of power" - but with greater irritation. In other words: the Gods didn't compute to him, yet he wanted to stake ("retain") a claim on the Hindu temples he too had forfeited.

The point is, the same obvious unheathenness is evident in a statement that is of the form "[Hindus are guided by] our dharma, our temples and our Rishis". Once more: the omission is telling. The Gods are *not* implied, not in a sentence of that structure. It is deliberate neglect.

How anyone can formulate such a statement is beyond me. There is no heathenism without the Gods. Temples of heathens have no purpose without the Gods, who are at their centre. The Rishis and the Hindoo temples and Da (only=Vaidika) Dharma are inseparable from the Hindoo Gods, and mentioning the latter is to mention all the former, but vice-versa doesn't hold: the Gods become conspicuous by absence, and the silence is that of the apologetics of one to whom the Gods do not compute and are not even an afterthought.

SandeepWeb's sudden interest in temples - "temple kultur", which he presented like some religion in itself - reminds me of another Hindu entity commenting on twitter, who looked at pictures of southern Hindoo temple carvings and after admiring these, displayed some brazen ignorance in asking what certain creatures (yazhis) were. Ugh, temple "culture" 101. Guess SandeepWeb didn't "explain" it for latecomers to "Hindu reconstructionism". The non-response from the "temple culture" person posting the pictures of the southern Hindoo temples he was invading to tourist about/admire was even more telling. I'm sure if someone told them what Yazhis were, they'd next post pictures of yazhis and start writing captions explaining - in typical connaisseur fashion - what yazhis are, as part of their sudden "I'm into temple culture now" hobby. Ugh.

But the above does provide a nice test for HindOOs when screening potential brides and grooms for one's family members: ask them what 'temples' are and where they stand on the Hindoo Gods/what or who they think the Hindoo Gods are, or if they're to be interpreted as some symbolic notion.

And when they blabber their new-age nonsense (like of the Achintyachintaka kind*), people can quickly and politely end the interview.

The word Hindu does not mean what Hindoos used to think it meant. It means nothing and less than nothing now. Therefore Hindoos need not ask for its avowal.

* Yet another internet vocalist. IIRC it was he whose articles declared a novel 'Hindu' orthodoxy where Hindoo Gods were to be psychic notions cooked up by Hindu human brains, as metaphysical means to metaphysical ends.

This post consists of complaints and nothing more. Pure spam.
On a repeated phrase in this article:


Wish Rajeev wouldn't have christened Hindus' religion as a "feminine religion".

- The established replacement theologies, notably the christoclass mindviruses, are patriarchal certainly.

- But only new-ageisms (neo-paganisms and wicca) are feminine religions. And that reactive positioning is also unnatural and because of christo-conditioning.

Neither is a heathen mentality.

Both are frauds perpetrated against heathenisms, as a replacement. Wicca/neo-pagans regularly rewrite history into how women were the originators of ancient "neopaganisms" (oxymoron) and that women essentially invented sex (really? I thought evolution did that?) To some extent this was even noticeable in the Clan of the Cave Bear or similar books IIRC. It is a regular new ageist conceit to pretend that women used to preside over sex, that women used to be in charge of religion originally but that jealous/misogynistic men had masterminded a coup against the benevolent female rule and usurped women's predominant position in religion and written them out of history books ("it is a male conspiracy against the ownership/authorship of religion by women"), that women used to be in charge in the world at large at some peaceful enlightened point in time, that had women ("still") ruled, there would ("still") be world peace, an end to world hunger etc.**

Never mind that Santa Helena was a woman - the conversion of Rome was as much her .... accomplishment as that of her useful idiot son. Never mind that women effected the Bauddhisation of Tibet too, which similarly destroyed the native heathenism of that nation.

Never mind that converted women were often the right hand of various missionary ideologies, and were thus at the forefront of causing bloodbaths and persecution. Both Constantine and his mummy dearest may take a bow for what they did to the heathen Roman empire and GrecoRoman heathenism. There is nothing to choose between the genders. People of either gender can be horrid. Just as both genders can give rise to what is admirable. I have met wo/men of both types. But it is the peculiarly blind and the ungrateful that would not recognise the greatness of good men (like Shivaji or Julian, say) or who would ignore the sacrifices of countless Hindoo males who died fighting off christoislamoronisms to protect their heathen community and its progeny. But Indian fembots are such ingrates: they imagine they're a universe all by themselves. They *like* to see enemies everywhere. And like ingrates do, they forget the selfless sacrifices made by the opposite gender which enabled their own miserable existence.

To speak ill of "males" generally - as fembots of both genders do today - is to badmouth all the good males who ever were. *Never* do it. You might as well spit at all those who died specifically so you might be, and might be free. But one never sees heathens badmouth either sex. They may dislike individuals, but only ignorants ever hold the genders of unlikeable individuals accountable.

[** In fact, this feminist new-agey re-writing of the past/this backprojection of modern wishy-washy feminist fantasies onto the past even has traces in some biologists who interpret animal societies through the same lens: IIRC New Scientist had an article comparing how Bonobos being matriarchal were more peaceful and less competitive than our closer cousins the Chimps who are patriarchal and "therefore" meany to each other. IIRC NS went so far as to imply that most of our issues with implementing that ever-elusive 'world peace' could have been resolved had we but descended from more Bonobo-like primates rather than from Chimpanzee-like primates. By that logic then, what about bunnies where the females wield significant power but institute their own pecking order against other females and use males to do their dirty work for them to maintain this order and keep in check the females who are in disfavour? People need not delude themselves.

** INSERT: It is in this context of rewriting actual history with a new-agey slant to feminise it, that the neo-pagans - like typical aliens - have hijacked the Goddesses of various ethnic heathenisms, divorcing these from their pantheons and from the Gods their husbands, in order to invent the fake "Goddess Religion" neo-paganisms, using Other People's Goddesses/other people's living heathenisms. But, as seen in Hindoo religion at least: the Hindoo Goddesses love their husbands and cherish being married to their husbands most of all, and vice-versa. They do not recognise the alien dabbling neopagans (or other alien dabblers) who terrorise them. No more need even be said on this.]

In contrast to the patriarchy of the missionary religions and the femininity (I prefer to think of it as effeminacy) of the equally-fraudulent recently-invented new-agey cults that love to rewrite history (neo-paganisms), none of the heathenisms are masculine or feminine. They are in perfect gender balance. That is why in Hindu religion practically all the Gods - and divine animals like Diggajas - have their female counterparts, and form families. The same is true in Taoism, where the universe is created by a harmonious union of the feminine and masculine components (the Divine Parents of Taoism) and most Gods are married and seen as Divine Parents. Even single, ascetic Taoist Rishis respect the married state of the Divine Parents and hence also respect this general tendency in humanity. In Hindu and Taoist religions, the Supreme Ultimate (as the Taoists call the similar phenomenon in their own religion) exhibits both male and female "parts"/aspects, which together create and bring forth the All.

Ysee.gr also doesn't fall for the feminist new-ageist trap. Their learned explicators express with typical heathen gender-impartiality that the pantheon of their religion is beautifully represented by a numerically-significant 12 principle Deities, 6 of each gender. Heathen religions are in perfect balance. They generally avoided disdaining male or female, nor gave it undue importance which result in genderisms. (The same can't be said for missionary religions, alien or Indic.) Heathenisms respect and cherish families, as well as familial love including the romantic kind* (usually dismissed by missionary religions that exhalted ascetism [and a celibate one at that] at the expense of life, and wrongly made ascetism the one ideal for all). Heathenisms don't overweight sexual relations (like new ageisms do), nor do they deny it a part in a heathen life lived in sanctity. Heathenisms see in the regular life of man and other animal/plant/creature the existence of a divine path, and a means to attain to the Gods from everyday life. The Gods are great promoters of marriage and family, having these things themselves and making themselves into the primary examples of these matters for heathens.

The Taoists have at least 2 Gods presiding over romance and who are recalled on the Chinese Love Day: an old-looking male God who is the divine matchmaker and matches couples in harmonious manner ("matches made in Taoist Heaven") and a young female Goddess, whose romantic life was sprinkled with some difficulty but was overcome and she became a Divine protectress of romantic couples and of young Taoist men and women looking for romance and marriage.

* Both cases also seen in an invocatory verse of Kalidasa itself: where Shiva is a householder - happily married with family - despite being the greatest of ascetics and despite being chosen by mortal ascetics as their ideal God. Not even those Hindoos with severe ascetic (including celibate) tendencies repudiated romance and marriage for all (or even the majority) or denied the fact that the Gods are married (which they are, though the married state of the Gods simultaneously - but not exclusively - has another meaning as well).

It is un-Hindu to refer to Hindu religion - or any heathenism - as a feminine religion when it is neither feminine nor masculine. The Gods are no less represented in heathen males than the Goddesses are in heathen females. While the Devi is said to be seen in all that is feminine, it is implicitly true that the Gods are equally present in all that is admirably male. (In Taoism, both aspects of the Tao - the Divine Parents - are to be represented in a harmonious balance in the ethnic Taoist cultivator, be this male or female. Actually, the Divine Parents are to be found residing in all Hindoos too, which is why Hindoos don't have a gender hang-up either.)

And that is why heathenism is so fundamentally beyond the reach and conception of the missionary aberrations or the equally-false and christoconditioned recent new-agey inventions (neo-paganisms are a by-product of post-christian christoconditioning): the last two kinds can only swing from one gender bias to another. Never finding any balance. Forever un-egalitarian.

Heathenisms are not obsessed with gender and hence are beyond considerations of trying to be egalitarian: they simply are, without having to "try" to be. Trying is a by-product of a guilty conscience. That is not to say that heathenisms don't have a notion of specialisation, which they do for optimisation, efficiency, but there is no gender bias and it is not restrictive. There are no punitive prescriptions against a gender either. Heathenisms produce ethnic adherents that seek to mirror the harmonious companionship and family life that mirrors the harmony of the Divine Parents/the Tao. In fact, the Vedas - which belong to the Hindoos alone - may be among the most egalitarian heathen literature/oral tradition in that it IIRC declared that the best friend of man, his only friend even and his constant companion (the only one who would guaranteeably be at his side throughout life), was his wife, the DharmapatnI. It goes without saying that a best friend relationship is a two-way relationship: and that, therefore, the Vedas - by simple implication - also tell us that the woman's best friend is her husband. The Vedas affirm a truth overlooked by many modern morons, who like to imagine dichotomies where there are none: that not only do [the heathen, unsubverted] men like women, but [the heathen, unsubverted] women like men.* -> They both get along. This is the natural state. The heathen state.

* Actually, this is true in a larger context too, i.e. not always/necessarily in any romantic or otherwise possessive sense, but rather: contentment about their mutual presence on the planet. Quite like the way heathens are simply happy about the presence of animals on the planet; that all our fellow creatures exist "out there", and that one may be glad of the sight of them and their well-being.

The modern west is trying to rediscover this notion of friendship between husband and wife - even though until recently you could still hear the observation in the west that "between men and women, no friendship can exist (only romantic equations)", as if there existed some mutual exclusivity between friendship and romance. Though some in the west today mouth the notion that "man's best friend is his wife" too, it has not yet become natural to them (christoconditioning is hard to throw off), the way it has been among old Hindoos, who find a very deep friendship and a unique comraderie with their spouse. And it is a very long-lasting romance that heathens experience. Well into old age, Hindoo men have spoken fondly yet wistfully of their departed wife as being the dearest one in their lives and as the person whom they miss most of all. These private relationships of heathen couples is so respectable and admirable, in fact, that I have never even dared to ridicule it (not counting good-natured jesting).

Of course, heathenism recognises that the romantic husband-wife kind is not the only relationship in the world. Mankind's friendships are all 'romances' in a way (as all relationships take a short or long time to form, comparable to the "falling in love" stage): good friends, dear animal friends, affection between family members - to abiding friendship between women or between men and the unbreakable comraderie of 'brothers-in-arms' of whatever gender - all of these are deep and profound too, and can be lasting. The heathen's pantheon of Gods already mirrors all these relationships, and values them all highly. Children, parents, brothers, sisters, in-laws, uncles and aunts, ancestors, animal friends in the family (or human friends in animal families), all is accounted for: the Gods of heathen pantheons are all related. Heathenisms are wholesome in every sense. (Heathenism additionally affirms one other great bi-directional relationship, a very profound kinship in heathenism: that between the heathen and its Gods/Divine Parents.)

To reduce HindOOs' heathenism to a 'feminine religion' - whatever that means - is to not only view Hindoo religion in a very novel manner, as a laughable new-ageism (a neo-paganism), but it wrongs all that is admirable about male qualities (even as it sidelines the great male Gods of Hindoo-dom; and to slight the male Gods is to make enemies of their wives, same as vice-versa) and further gives undue weighting to gender considerations, which is the first step of un-egalitarian thinking. And didn't everyone threaten that they were egalitarian? <snip>

Heathens form an inseparable collective - male and female, old and young, human and other animal, even animate and 'inanimate' (which last is perhaps most obvious in Shinto). They see themselves as part of the natural world/cosmos, not as apart from it, alienated from the rest. The latter, mutually-alienated perceptions are novel, unnatural and are (by-)products of the christo-class meme.

Hindoos *like* men and women. They will boo and hiss at nasty individuals even as they cheer and praise those whom they like. This disinterest in scrutinizing others' gender is also the reasoning behind why heathens like to identify themselves - or derive inspiration from - heathens of either gender, and never even think to choose only exemplaries of their own sex (only aliens would act so).

Quote: Ram was imam; Ayodhya our place of pilgrimage, claim Muslim women in Modi’s constituency

News18 | Mon Mar 30, 2015 | 09:36 IST

Varanasi Uttar Pradesh

Claiming that Lord Ram was their imam and Ayodhya was their place of pilgrimage, several Muslim women in Varanasi congregated to offer prayers to to his idol on Saturday, the occasion of Ramnavmi.

"Ayodhya hai hamari jiyaratgah ka naam, rahte hain jahan Imam-e-Hind Shri Ram (Ayodhya is the name of our pilgrimage, where our Imam Shri Ram lives)," they recited while praising Lord Ram during Ramnavmi celebrations.

The women, associated with the Vishal Bharat Sansthan (VBS), have been celebrating Ramnavmi for years to give a strong message of communal harmony.

According to a report in Times of India, taking the 'thaal' of aarti, these women sang in praise of Lord Ram at Varunanagaram Colony, Hukulganj. They also wrote 'Ram naam' in Urdu on pieces of paper and deposited in 'Rurdu Ram Naam Bank'.

Nazneen Ansari, who has scripted 'Shri Ram Aarti' and 'Shri Ram Prarthana', said: "Lord Ram is the ancestor of all of us. Everyone should take part in his aarti, breaking the barriers of caste, creed and faith."

Being a Muslim, Nazneen has no hesitation singing in praise of Hindu deity and she believes that the name of Rama is enough to end all adversities. "That's why a bank of 'Ram naam' in Urdu has also been created by these women at the VBS. Anyone can deposit Ram naam scripted paper in this bank," VBS founder Rajiv Srivastava said.

"Ram humare purvaj hain aur duniya ke liye adarsh hain. Humein is baat ka fakhr hai ki hum Ram ki santan hain. Ram nam hi nafrat mita sakta hai (Ram is our ancestor and ideal for the world. We are proud of it. It is the only name which can eliminate hatred)," said Nazneen, who has also translated Hanuman Chalisa into Urdu.

She is working on the translation of Ramcharitmanas after scripting 'Durga Chalisa' in Urdu.

(Rama, Hanumaan, Durga. Offering prayers to Rama idol. Demanding Ayodhya Sri Rama temple be reconstructed. Polytheistic idolator. Welcome home heathen and dear sister.)

Nazneen also presented a 'Ram-naami dupatta' to former central information commissioner O P Kejriwal, who was present on the occasion. Other members like Najma Parveen, Mohammed Azharuddin, Razia Begum, Shams-un-Nisa, Hajra Begum and Bilqis Begum also took part in Ramnavmi celebrations.

(VHP/RSS should just invite these people to return home completely. They're not muslim in any sense anymore. Their mentality is that of "polytheistic idolators". Can't be more heathen in one's thinking than that.)

They believe that the message from Kashi will be instrumental in bringing peace and communal harmony in other parts of the country and advocate for construction of Ram Mandir at Ayodhya. Nazneen and her fellow members had also sent a petition to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, urging construction of Ram Mandir at Ayodhya.

They believe that Ayodhya belongs to Lord Ram and if Muslims want respect from Hindus, they should come forward to build the temple at his birthplace.

^Ex-muslims^ - to call them what they are, rather than what they think they are - more loyal to the traditional heathen POV of Sri Rama than "Hindu" vocalists. More insistent on having the Sri Rama temple at Ayodhya rebuilt than "Hindu" nationalist leader Modi, who only cares about toilets and (now also) issuing easter celebration messages apparently.

Maybe someone should tell these poor ex-muslim "muslim" women that it's too late. Too late to come home. The rest have burnt the house down already. "Hindu" nationalists are already on record insisting that Rama is a myth, that a temple at Ayodhya is merely symbolic (typical 'Hindu' nationalism: wants to waste people's time to build things that are no more than symbols), NS Rajarant wants temple worship brought to an end altogether, Elst & co have their own insistences. Etc etc. <- And all these regard themselves as (the true) "Hindus", and many of them have set themselves up as expert "Hindus" besides to lecture others, despite being unheathens of the 1st order.

So Nazreen and her kind - and all heathen ex-muslim and ex-christian ethnic Indians who feel an attachment to the Gods - are better off not wasting their time returning home, though I say so myself. There is no home to return to. There is only de-heathenisation, subversion, "I'm an atheist/agnostic Hindu" type excuses, etc, all of which have replaced Hindoo heathenism and nothing will ever undo that. (And eventually there will be only ISIS/caliphate in India, but that's further into the future than even christianism.)

But what "islam" is this that Nazreen et al are part of? The one that worships the idol of Shri Rama and sings hymns to him and wants the Ayodhya temple rebuilt to Rama not as some symbol of the unheathen replacement theology "Hindutva" but for living their heathenism. Perhaps any remaining Hindoos should convert into this heathen pseudo-"islam" that adores Sri Rama and Hanumaan and Durga etc, rather than Hindoos remaining stuck getting forcibly lumped with unheathens under the "Hindutva" and reinvented "Hindu" label. Let's be honest, Hindoos have nothing in common with the latter: Hindoos have more in common with pseudo-"muslims" like Nazreen than with most Hindu vocalists seen on the internet. (As seen in how Hindoos would be more ready to intermarry with people of Nazreen's mentality than that of the de-heathenised "Hindus", except the latter use the "I'm a Hindu too" label in order to deceive Hindoo families and marry into them = love jihad.)

Nazreen and co. should build a new home for India's heathens, and may find Hindoos choose to move in with her. (Just drop the "imam" bit.)
Post 1/4

1. Pasting link here to refer to the comments by one 'Raj Singh' at


Also the comments by VeVePe

(Am not pointing out the article itself, which I don't care for. Nor do I particularly think that Malhotra is the turn-to for a full or even authentic criticism.)

[And oh the disclaimer: Don't agree with absolutely everything Raj Singh said. But am referring to his comments for the points he made that are important. Fortunately there's not enough reason yet to warrant spamming in length about why the referral to his comments at the link is qualified.]
Post 2/4

2. indiafacts.co.in/are-indian-tribals-hindus-part-6/

Quote:In itself, Hinduism contains the seeds of every kind of philosophy, and is comfortable with all streams of thought, and not necessarily to do with the worship of “Gods”. In Hinduism, we find all kinds of atheistic and materialistic philosophies, the most well known being the Lokayata philosophy of Charvaka, who believed that there is only one life, that there is no such thing as an afterlife, or heaven or hell, or rebirth, and that our only purpose in life should be to maximize our pleasures and minimize our pains.

The very basic texts of Hinduism contain the seeds and roots of agnostic philosophies, from the Rigvedic Nasadiya Sukta (X.129. 6-7, which says: “Who verily knows and who can here declare it, whence it was born and whence comes this creation? The Gods are later than this world’s production. Who knows then whence it first came into being? He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it? He whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not.”) to the Upanishadic speculations which reject everything, after deep discussion, with the phrase “neti, neti”: “not this, not this”, i.e., “no, this is still not the ultimate truth”. And then of course, there is every kind of deistic, henotheistic, pantheistic, polytheistic, and every other kind of -theistic philosophy, including even (but not exclusively) monotheistic philosophy (minus the hatred of “other” false religions and false Gods, and the concepts of permanent Heaven for believers and Hell for non-believers, characteristic of Abrahamic monotheism).

So now the novel argument is that the Vedas is the propounder of agnosticism. And of course it requires a novel interpretation of the translated verses from the Vedam to come to that conclusion, but whatever it takes, right? That is NOT what the verses are saying.

Even from a basic tack then. Anyone at all - moi, for instance - with only the slightest (barely passing) familiarity with the sorts of questions Vaidika Hindoos had/contended with could easily come to more valid conclusions that are far more consistent with the statements. => "Is the Ishwara of the Vedas the material cause as well as the efficient cause or only the latter?" - a question Vaidika POVs seemed to have kept themselves busy with - is a far better fit, surely, especially as the first quotation takes the Ishwara (the "He, first origin of this creation") as a given (a fundamental assumption), as is obvious from the phrasing of the questions. The question being, did Ishwara bring the stuff making up the cosmos (incl time and space) into being too, and if so or even otherwise, how did it come to be?

By the way, the typically Vaidika question of whether Ishwara is the material as well as efficient cause or only the latter, not only presupposes the Ishwara (well obviously) but is one of the underpinning differences between some otherwise highly-similar Vaidika Hindoo POVs. The matter concerns the specific nature of the (materia and other stuffs of the) cosmos and Ishwara's specific relation to it. (E.g. Nyaya and Pashupatas IIRC had Ishwara as the efficient cause alone. I now looked it up and can't make out if Vaisheshika has Ishwara aka Maheshwara as the material cause as well, but it seems like it.)

It's getting Beyond Annoying to see Indic atheists/agnostics encroaching on Hindoo heathenism, i.e. theism.

I understand that Hindoo heathenism=theism doesn't compute to de-heathenised who still feel they want to be a part of it and who moreover insist they are a part of it and must be a part of it.

Apparently it is not enough to lump Lokayata and Buddhism and Sikhism and Jainism etc as Hinduisms. Now the Vedas has to be rewritten to suddenly propound an "agnostic" POV.

I take it back: Indian atheists/agnostics are far more annoying than the militant (evangelically atheist) kind of western atheists (who are non-dabbling of course). At least the latter don't feel self-entitled to turn heathenism into "actually" an atheism/agnosticism.

CORRECTED above: inserted the crucial word of "militant=evangelical" western atheists, to distinguish them from plain vanilla western atheists/agnostics who don't want to convert the world to their POV, but who would like to be left alone in turn [not unlike heathens who are similarly non-missionary], and who are no threat to heathens/heathenism. But even missionary atheists - like Dawkins' evangelical activities for atheism - are not so offensive in their atheism (separate from Dawkins' extra-curricular interference in India) in that at least they don't dabble in heathenism or otherwise try to subvert heathenism into "actually" being an atheism.


Also, Jabali - sp? - of Ramayanam was not an atheist, contrary to internet "Hindus" of the non-theist variety suddenly trying to promote their equal right to Vaidika religio-history that way.

Jabali admits to no more than deliberately espousing un-Vaidika views in order to sway Rama by any means to IIRC stop continuing the exile so Rama would break his word to his father (and king) Dasharatha and return to Ayodhya instead. But in many -possibly all- heathen religions, giving one's word is not only binding on the giver but is an act that invokes the Gods as witness, and breaking one's word is thus considered the same as uttering untruth. (E.g. "I promise to do X" but if I don't do X thereafter, then that makes my promise into a lie.) And truth - as Rama says - is the Ishwara himself [i.e. Ishwara of the Vedam=Hindoo heathenism alone, there is no other Ishwara].

After Rama denies Jabali's arguments - I think Rama essentially declared these subversive - Jabali says he merely espoused them as any means to the end of getting Rama to return, not that these were his own views.


  • valmikiramayan.net/utf8/ayodhya/sarga108/ayodhya_108_frame.htm, where Jabali tries unVaidika arguments out on Rama as a last-ditch effort, after Bharata's arguments failed to get Rama to forsake his word in favour of returning home to rule as king;

  • valmikiramayan.net/utf8/ayodhya/sarga109/ayodhya_109_frame.htm, where Rama becomes seriously displeased with Jabali's attempts and essentially says 'never try to get at me that way' and denounces Jabali for his arguments;

  • still at valmikiramayan.net/utf8/ayodhya/sarga109/ayodhya_109_frame.htm, you can at the end see Jabali admit that these were not really his own arguments, that they were merely employed opportunistically for the sake of expediency/for the exigency of getting Rama to return by whatever means or arguments would work. The brahmana Jabali is an adviser/royal minister type person and ministers when desperate for a greater good could apparently try to argue anything to get the job done - going by what Jabali attempted. (But surprised he didn't just try to kidnap Rama. About as much chance of that succeeding...)


As for Talageri's reference to "neti neti", it can be easily argued that it admits to no more than negating definitions=limitations for what describes/defines Parabrahman. The same negation is specifically employed for the Tao, for example, since it is particularly indefinable (both for reasons to do with the nature of the unmanifest Tao, and because the Tao is ultimately all that is/everything reduces to the Tao ultimately). That is, the Tao is the conceived, the conceivable, and that which is beyond conception 'the inconceivable' (though not inconceivable to the Tao, of course). Can also compare with the Platonist definition of the Eka of Platonist view of Hellenismos, which in my understanding seems related 'similarly' to the many - or similar enough for Taoists and Hindoos to begin to understand Platonist reasoning.

Anyway, was it not the Agni or Vayu Purana, Correction: it was the Garuda Purana -and almost the same shlokam also in Srimad Bhagavatam- that said that atheists will hijack dharma and play at being its authorities? Well, if aliens like Elst are allowed to do it, I don't see why more sympathetic persons like Talageri aren't allowed. Then again, whoever does it, won't make it correct.

Of course there will be applause for Talageri's statements, replacing critical thinking and even the most basic logical reasoning on whether what Talageri claimed about the Vedam supposing or implying agnosticism actually necessarily matches with the translated statements of the Vedam he quoted.

I have Nothing against atheism. I even come up with arguments specifically for [western] atheist friends to employ to defend themselves against missionary terrorists. But. There can be no confusing nor conflating heathenism with atheism. This is not a line drawn by me. Nor by masses of heathen Hindoos, Taoists and Hellenes (ancient ones but also more recent ones like emperor Julian). It is a very real line. And it may not be blurred. Heathenism - e.g. the Vedam, the Tao, Philosophy, etc etc, and all that has come of these things - belongs to heathens and not to unheathens. That's all there is to it. Non-heathens need to accept that and stick to what is theirs. Not covet what is not theirs. You either are a heathen or not. If you're not, heathenism does not belong to you and may not be contorted to plead that it advocates your unheathenism. Else, it is equally right for christians to contort heathenism to plead that it advocates christianism. SAME difference, same attempt at subversion, same outcome: de-heathenising heathenism (to hijack it for replacement ideologies or personal views).

Oh, and BTW, heathenism is NOT monopolytheistic (mono, poly, heno etc), contrary to Talageri's descriptions of Hinduism. ISKCONism is monotheistic (though it starts off as a henotheism), but then, it is actually a replacement theology.

People need to know the meaning of christo-accusations/the labels that christianism uses to box heathens into so it can better subsume their heathenism as a christianism.

Polytheism in the heathen Greek sense is not wholly objectionable but not wholly a true/accurate description of Hindu and Taoist religions. For better explications of how views of Eka and Naika go hand-in-hand in Hindoos' heathenism, can see Taoism or to some extent Hellenismos (had long ago posted an extract discussing the Eka-Naika in Hellenismos in the Contra Buddhism thread). <- Professional heathens say it so much better than I ever could anyway.
Post 3/4

3. indiafacts.co.in/are-indian-tribals-hindus-part-6/

contains another statement that caught my eye:

Quote:The result is that today the most popular Hindu deities in every single part of India are originally tribal Gods: whether Ayyappa of Kerala, Murugan of Tamilnadu

:GRRRRRRR: x infinity.

But one must be reasonable.

Talageri is not from the south clearly. Because only that could explain his terrible error.

Ayyappa is at least as much a core God to Tamil Hindoos as to Kerala Hindoos.

Repeat: He is a very prominent God in all regions that historically were associated with Tamizh regions.* Long ago, the Tamil regions included a greater area than it does now. I don't mean this as some chauvinistic threat to other southern Hindoos, but it is a fact that there are parts of Kerala that were historically associated with Tamil Hindoo kingdoms and considered culturally identical with the Tamil Hindoo regions in TN.

(*This is why DMK pretends Ayyappa is a "Tamil" God - in DMK parlance Tamil magically means "Dravidian", don't ask. But Ayyappa is a Vedic God, as all the experts who know him will testify. Specifically not a pro-Buddhist God, by the way, contrary to self-delusions by the Bauddhified. For that matter, Murugan is a God beloved to all heathen Hindoos - or ought to be. Of course, Ayyappa and Murugan are extremely fond - understatement - of Tamizh Hindoos, and Hindoos in the south more generally, because said Hindoos remain devoted to them and know the ritual practices associated with them.)

As for Ayyappa or Murugan being "tribal" Gods ... they're as much "tribal" Gods as Indran and Rudra or any God of the Vedam. Then again, all the Vedic Gods - despite being Gods of the universe - are tribal Gods of the Hindoo tribe onlee. I.e. they're pan-Hindoo Gods. Ayyappa's manifestion is localised but he is nevertheless pan-Hindoo. (Dharmashaastaa repeatedly manifested in the southern region, in Pandya country, because the Hindoos are since ancient times very attached to him there. Like a famous stotra to Ayyappa said: the local Hindoos' deep bhakti to him is what makes him repeatedly manifest among them, to grant them their hearts' desire of his company among them even in life.) The Vaidika rituals like homas for Shaastaa are no less involved than those for other Vedic Gods known throughout Bharatam. Hindoos dress in black to worship Ayyappa. This is why TN Veda brahmanas who are ancestrally associated with Shaastaa (Ayyappa) dress in black-coloured [patta or pseudo-silk] veshtis and perform the homas and pooja rituals to Shaastaa and sing the Saamaveda to him, which he factually delights in. But every ritual practise that every 'lay' Ayyappa bhakta performs is extremely Vedic: it is based on the same Hindoo cosmological reasoning/origins as the ritual practices for Murugan and Shiva. **

As I had said long ago, Ayyappa is not at all exclusive to Kerala: he is ancient in TN too and is embodied in many Hindoo temples there, all over. But there aren't just countless ancient Hindoo kovils housing DharmaShaastaa and family in TN including in villages, and once-Hindoo Tamil places in SL. I didn't want to mention this next on a non-Tamil Hindoo site, since the Bauddhified "Hindu nationalist" types that tried to kidnap the Ayyappa manifest at Shabarimalai for Buddhism may one day try to hijack the other major Ayyappa Hindoo temples for Buddhism too, if ever they learn about it (since such Bauddhified don't seem to know about these temples yet). But there is a specific set of 6 main Dharmashaasta Hindoo sites/Kovils, where each is associated with one of the 6 chakras of Kundalini pertaining to Shaastaa's body [Sahasrara has a special prominence], a la the 6 prominent Kovils of Murugan (the Aaru-Padai-Veedu) which are likewise associated with the Kundalini chakras related to Murugan's body (c.f. Shiva's subset of 6 temples that specifically pertain to Kundalini Yoga in TN, and Amman's ~52 specific temples associated with all the parts of her body). Where was I? Oh yeah, the 6 Kundalini-related Kovils/sites of Dharmashaastaa that Hindoo Ayyappa pilgrims visit, one of which is of course Shabarimalai, but the other related temples and one site are also very important to Ayyappa Bhaktas. And IIRC at least one of those is in Tamil Nadu proper, many are in modern Kerala. All six tend to be traversed in specific order by Hindoo pilgrims. Just as there are entire Tamizh language texts on how Murugan and Valli Amman are to be worshipped through Kundalini Yoga, similarly, there are similar Kundalini Yoga-related ritual practices for how to worship Ayyappa and his Wives.

The Hindoo Pandya dynasty, which was since ancient times devoted to Dharmashaastaa and other Hindoo Gods and into which dynasty Dharmashaastaa graciously took birth as a chieftain to please and protect the bhaktas, is found in what is modern Kerala and modern TN. Ayyappa - like all heathen Gods when they make regional appearances - exercises a ... hmmm, a gravity field of attraction on the Hindoo heathens. These heathens, starting from those nearest by, "fall into" Ayyappa thereupon. (The heathen Gods are factually irresistible.) This is why neighbouring states have devout Ayyappa bhaktas, and the attachment keeps spreading further still.

** Tamil Hindoos in Indonesia also still do Ayyappa homas along with the other Gods. Worship of Murugan and Ayyappa is prominent wherever Tamil Hindoos are. Historically too, back when Tamil Hindoo kingdoms were spread all over SE Asia. I've located a modern example:


Quote:Jakarta : Nov 20th Ayyappan annual pooja celebrated by Jakarta Friends group in Indonesia. Ayyappan Pooja has been conducted for three days 14th Nov 2010, 16th Nov 2010 and 17th Nov 2010. 14th nov 2010 it started with Ganapath Homam followed by mrityunjaya homam and abishagam and alangaram to Sri Ganapathy, Siva and Sri Ayyappan. 16th Nov 2010 started with Vilaku Pooja based on Lalitha sahasranamam and Devi Bhagavadam parayanam. 17th started with Sastha Homam, followed by maha abishagam to Ayyappan , 18 step pooja and bajans. The event was fully filled with Bakthi and entire city and hearts of the Indians were filled with divine bakthi.
Typical Hindoo heathenism. Even if one consigns it to "merely" being Tamil Hindoo heathenism (though it is actually all-southern Hindoo heathenism, and - once upon a time at least - it was all-pan-Hindoo heathenism actually), it is still Not to be confused with the modern "Hindu means anything and anyone" routine.

And found proof too for the other claim I made (the following uses Tamil phonetics for Kundalini chakras, but any Hindoo can work out what the Skt equivalents are):


Quote:Vishvam in Sanskrit means World-Universe. It has six parts beginning from the sitting part of the human body to head at the top. So some parts of the world – in this context India, are attributed to these six parts viz. Mooladhara, Swathishtana, Manipooraga, Anagadha, Vishuddhi, Aagna, Sahasrara or Bhrammarandra. Every human body too has this aspect and those enlightened in the philosophy undertake some necessary spiritual exercises to take the power (Kundalini) to the head from the sitting part. Great and holy places and shrines represent these Chakras. This is an elaborate philosoly which only great scholars can handle and explain.

For Lord Aiyappa Mooladhara are His legs, Swathishtana the waist, Manipooraga the belly, Anagatham the private part, Vishuddhi the mind, Aagna the back neck and Brahmmarandra the head. For Shiva Kshetras, Mooladhara is Tiruvarur, Swathishtana is Tiruvanaikaval, Manipooraga is Tiruvannamalai, Anagatham is Chidambaram, Vishuddhi is Kalahasthi. Aagna is Varanasi-Kasi and Brahmmarandram is Kailash.

(^Hmmm, that list has a large overlap with Tamizh Hindoos' panchabhoota kshetras of Shiva temples...)

Similarly, for Lord Aiyappa, Mooladhara is the Sori Muthian temple in Papanasam, Swathishtana is Achankoil, Manipooragam is Ariyangavu, Anagatha is Kulathupuzha, Vishuddi is Pandalam, Aagna is Sabarimala and the Brahmmarandra (Sahasrara as per the page) is Kanthamalai**. The first temple for Aiyappan is the Sorimuthian temple in Papanasam according to this theory.

(** Ayyappa's Kanthamalai - at the sahasrara - is a physical sacred site that is a gateway to the Beyond: apparently there's no physical temple there, though the site is part of the worship to Ayyappa. The others listed are physical Hindoo temples to the Vedic God Ayyappa/Dharmashaastaa. Sorimuthian at least is in Tamilnadu, most or all of the others are in modern Kerala as far as I can work out, but in places which were once considered part of a larger culturally-Tamil region, which is why these sites are not just part of Kerala Hindoos' Ayyappa yatras but remain part of Tamil Hindoos' Ayyappa yatras too.)

Dharma Sastha graces here in the name of Sorimuthu Aiyanar. This was alo in the midst of dark jungles in the Pothigai hills housing wild animals. River Tambiraparani flows close by. On the Aadi new moon day in July-August, huge number of devotes gather here to perform Tarpan to their ancestors and worship Lord Aiyappa for relief from sins.

Eventually the bauddhifiers may try to encroach on these other temples too. Lokesh Chandra might manufacture lots more drivel to Bauddhify these other Hindoo=Vedic Ayyappa sacred places, and then his idiot parrots will parrot it about. Sadly for them, the 6 sites, the rituals and the views associated with them are part of Hindoo=Vedic cosmology onlee, specifically not Buddhist/Jain/Lokayata/christian whatever. "Sorry".

And repeat: there's nothing remotely Buddhist about Ayyappa - nor does he like Buddhism :understatement: or anything Pashanda - as anyone familiar with his names would know. (Hint, hint) Only new-ageists could re-write Ayyappa as magically having Buddhist origins or even as being "equally Buddhist". <- The way christians are attempting too at this moment. (And christians have an equal right to succeed, surely? Since claims on Ayyappa made for Buddhism are no less true/are as false as those made on him for christianism.)
Post 4/4

4. About something else I noticed in


Talageri repeats the christo-western de-heathenisation routine - other modern Hindus have sadly done so too, having been exposed to the same western "scholarship" on the subject and having imbibed it, as can happen to those with no first-person knowledge of/interacton with the Gods - by declaring local Hindoo manifestations of pan-Hindoo Vedic Gods to be merely a later superimposition of Vedic identities onto local Indians' "tribal" Gods. Utterly false. The Olympic Gods like Zeus and Athena etc who were manifest at sites in various cities and villages inside and even outside Greece are not suddenly local GrecoRoman/Mediterranean "tribal" Gods who merely had Zeus and Athena superimposed, they were from origin always Zeus and Athena and Apollo etc, and the locals knew that. (Not to be confused with later conflation of certain Celtic Gods with Olympic Gods by late Romans, which was a heathen tendency to try to identify one's own Gods in the actually-distinct Gods of others.)

The same is true about regional manifestations of pan-Taoist Gods in China and Taiwan. In every village and city, many prominent Taoist Gods would manifest and Taoist temples would be built at those sacred sites. These local manifestations had both the God's pan-Taoist name and the local manifestation's particular name, same as with Greek and Hindu Gods. But then, only heathens would know this.** That many local Tamil Hindoo village Gods and Goddesses are the same pan-Hindoo Vedic Gods is long known to Tamil Hindoo villagers. Even to this day, the Gods manifest in person regularly among their bhaktas, as part of their leela, as part of their living example embodying the ideals of the Hindoo Dharma, and no less to delight their Hindoo bhaktas.


** Repeat: In all such heathenisms, there are of course region-specific Gods too, like river, tree, grove, mountain or village-specific Hindoo Gods too etc. These are distinct Gods, and are thus not conflated by the heathens with those Gods known to manifest throughout the heathen nation. There are locally-manifesting pan-Hindoo Gods like Ayyappa, widely-manifesting pan-Hindoo Gods like the well-known ones, and locally-manifest local Hindoo Gods - still of Hindoo cosmology onlee - like many water or tree Gods or those who are chieftain of/preside over a specific region etc, or inhabit a specific region like Kannagi who is a Goddess known to Malayali and Tamil Hindoos and other parts of southern India.

One sees all these categories of Gods - pan-ranging/pan-manifesting, regionally-manifesting but still cosmic, or location-specific and locally known - in Shinto, Taoism and Hellenismos too. And these are all still regarded as single religions with pantheons that include all 3 categories of Gods.]

It's sad actually. Was happily following Talageri's series of articles on why Vanavasis are hyper-Hindoos (A: because the Vedic Gods ARE their ancestral Gods.)

I misconstrued his arguing from the western perspective of separate definitions - about "tribals" and "their religion" - as merely Talageri's clever way of proving, even from said western perspective, that the Vanavasi Hindoos were Vaidika Hindoos (heathens) as much as all other Hindoos. (From the Hindoo POV - including the Vanavasi Hindoo POV - the question does not even arise, as they've long known the Vedic Gods in person, as these manifest all over the sacred homeland/ancient regions of the Hindoo species, since all Hindoos are of them. The way the Taoist Gods are known the length and breadth of the regions historically inhabited by Chinese people.)

But turns out that that was not Talageri's intent or method after all. In this final article the realisation's set in that he actually views the matter from the outside.

The irony is that what is recorded in the Silappadikaaram about the Tamil Hindoo hunter community and its Vedic worship of their very Vedic Goddess (Durga), is actually true about the worship of Durga by Vanavasi Hindoos all over Bharatam: it is the same Durga of the Vedam, bearing all the marks seen in the Vedanta and indicating Hindoo cosmology onlee.

Pity that, at the end of the day, every modern Hindu nationalist writer - no matter how well-meaning - sells off the Hindoos and Hindoo heathenism. And it is always people who have never seen the Gods - that much is very clear - who do it. The others would know not to.

(And the number which advocate that Charvakans/Lokayata is "also Hindu, also Hinduism" - who are way too eager to keep bringing up that extinct anti-heathen movement, which only reconstructionists and de-heathenised refer to - seems to be indicative of modern tendencies, the direction of where all this is heading and the interests of the writers themselves.)

The future for heathenism - what some call "paganism" aka "polytheistic idolatry" - in India and hence among NRIs whose recent homeland is India looks very bleak. And not because of christianism or islam. But because of de-heathenisation.

I don't see heathenism in India surviving for anywhere near as long as the more optimistic have estimated. Wonder when "intellectuals" will turn to this urgent topic. Though I rather suspect they will never even notice it, the problem having already overtaken their own minds.

Southern Hindoos - being hyperheathens still - may do okay for a little while longer (remain heathens for longer/not de-heathenise immediately or as swiftly). But they are likely to eventually get dragged down into the muck by fellow Indians from the rest of the country, who like to speak on southern Hindoos' heathenism too and redefine it for them, the way Talageri has done ("Ayyappa is a 'tribal' god of Kerala" etc), as only Indians who don't know what they're talking about would do. (I mean, what would Talageri know about Ayyappa or even Murugan, who at least was historically known in other parts of India too.)

Older Tamil Hindoo settlements outside India (in Singapore etc) and their spiritual kindred in SE Asia will survive for longer still possibly (SE Asia by and large practices Hindoo heathenism introduced by Tamil Hindoos; actually the same is true of the Hindoo heathenism seen all the way to China along the same southern path). Ironically, there was a time - perhaps longer ago than I imagined so far - when other parts of India were as heathen as Tamil Hindoos are yet. The rate of de-heathenisation - and the inability for heathenism to compute to modern Indians - as seen in other parts of India is breathtakingly fast. I occasionally still come across instances of heathen Hindoos in more northern parts of India - Hindoos bearing Hindoo markings posing with a Hanuman moorti who's been garlanded and bathed in manjal by them. Perhaps they are Vanavasis - who are loyal to their Gods=heathenism for longer - and not urban people. Whereas in TN, even relatively large proportions of urban people are still extremely heathen.

All the "Hindu" intellectualism seen on the internet tends to be of the de-heathenised and de-heathenising Malhotra, Elst, Talageri etc etc kind, who produce de-heathenised "apologetics" which is no benefit to Hindoos and only repeatedly discounts and subverts living heathenism. The only heathen voices I find - you know, the polytheistic idolatrous kind with hyper-heathen POVs - tend to be exclusively from the southern parts of India, or otherwise Vanavasis like the ones who recently stuck up for their Durga Amman over the christo controversy created about Mahishasura Mardini at some christoislamicommunist university.

Of course, TN and the other southern states also produce English-speaking de-heathenised "intellectuals" flooding the internet and defining Hindoos' heathenism away into a new-ageism, or a conglomeration with unheathens or an atheism. But when I think of it, I haven't seen other parts of India producing visible heathens anymore who are active in English on the internet. Scratch the surface and they all turn out to be non-heathen, new-ageist, or of the Karyakarta kind (the best of the lot, btw) who argued that a Rama temple at Ayodhya was necessary for its symbolic value. [Say what you will, that last ain't heathen reasoning. Though it may be what passes for "Hindu nationalism" today.]

I'm not sure I ever read even one heathen from more northern parts vocalising -in English- on the internet. Sita Ram Goel - despite his reference to Krishna and Durga as his ishtadevams (but at least they were still Gods to him, not historical humans or otherwise deified etc) - doesn't count. He is of a generation from quite long ago, and he was an exception even then, which merely underlines the rule. Plus neither he nor Swarup ever wrote much/enough about a specific heathenism or Hindoo heathenism particularly - maybe because of their choice of target audience being English-speaking or otherwise 'progressive' types whom Goel and Swarup wanted to de-programme. The two usually merely wrote what happened to Hindus (and consequently Hinduism) under christoislam, communism and secularism.

If heathenism has stopped producing vocalists in other parts of India, that would explain A Lot. But it would also mean it was time for Hindoo heathens to tell Talageri etc to Shut Up about Ayyappa and the Hindoo heathenism of people in parts of India that the likes of him don't know. After all, in dismissing Vaidika Gods worshipped by Vanavasis as being "not originally Vedic", Talageri is no more favourable to Vanavasis' traditional views on Durga etc than aliens have been. Talageri etc are not representing such Hindoos; his descriptions/mere speculations about TN and Kerala certainly don't represent the local views of Ayyappa and Murugan. [Murugan is considered by Tamil Hindoos from the remotest TN village to be the same Kumara of Kalidasa, whereas people like Talageri tend to dismiss Murugan as being a local "tribal" Tamil God who merely had Kartikeya superimposed on him.*** Uh, remote Tamil Hindoo villagers still *see* Murugan, right? He still teaches them about himself and who he is (Hindoo=Vedic cosmology onlee), because he is deeply attached to Tamil Hindoos because they are deeply attached to him. There's a reason why Tamil Hindoo villagers know full well that Murugan is the same as the Vedic God called Kartikeya/Kumara - the very names seen in Tamizh language folk songs - and why such Tamil Hindoo villagers consider themselves Hindoos=of the Vedic religion and not of any suddenly-invented, backprojected "dravidian" (or Buddhist etc) religion. Parallel arguments for Ayyappa.] Again, while Talageri etc will never know this, he and like-minded only have the Right To Shut Up about it. Other Indians need to stop talking about things they don't know and too far removed from their ken/ability to compute. And in that vein: stop selling the history of TN/Kerala - and all of southern India in general - to Buddhism and Jainism. I mean, even today, the northern parts of India - well, the vocalists certainly - are more Bauddhified (even swearing by the invented multiple Buddhas etc) than the southern states.


*** Talageri and the like seem to imagine that southern regions where Murugan=Subrahmanya is so conspicuously prominent must for this reason be unique/a special case (hence Talageri and the like 'tribalising' a pan-Hindoo God). Except that it is not the south that has changed, but rather that it has remained constant: Murugan worship has remained alive and fully so in southern parts, noticeably in Tamil regions (and ancient Tamil Hindoo literature already knows that Murugan is Kartikeya, so there is no question of who Murugan is: he IS the Vedic God Kumara). It is the more *northern* parts of India that have ceased to maintain their once equally-intimate familiarity with Murugan=Guha. Talageri wouldn't be drawing his conclusions about how 'Murugan must be a Tamil "tribal" God' if Kartikeya worship had remained constant in northern regions of Bharatam too instead of dwindling there due to whatever reasons.
More spam.

This post actually follows - for no clear reason - from post 89 of the 'Evil' Hindu practices thread.


Quote:This 60 second breathing exercise could help you sleep and reduce anxiety

Focusing on your breath can also distract you from stressful thoughts

Sophie McIntyre

Saturday 02 May 2015

Tense at work or struggling to drift off at night? Then maybe Dr Weil’s 4-7-8 breathing technique could help.

Harvard trained Dr Andrew Weil advocates practising the ‘relaxing breath’ twice a day in order to reduce tension or help you sleep.

(He's already named the practise, as if he invented it.)

The technique is a ‘natural tranquiliser for the nervous system’; it mimics aspects of yoga and meditation and helps the body unwind.

(Note use of the milder word "mimic" in place of theft.)

According to Dr Weil's YouTube channel: 'The 4-7-8 Breathing Exercise is utterly simple, takes almost no time, requires no equipment and can be done anywhere.'

Sitting up with your back straight, Dr Weil suggests you do the following twice a day, for six to eight weeks until you have mastered the technique.

1) Exhale completely through your mouth, making a whoosh sound.

2) Close your mouth and inhale quietly through your nose to a mental count of four.

3) Hold your breath for a count of seven.

4) Exhale completely through your mouth, making a whoosh sound to a count of eight.

5) This is one breath. Now inhale again and repeat the cycle three more times for a total of four breaths.

'Note that you always inhale quietly through your nose and exhale audibly through your mouth. The tip of your tongue stays in position the whole time,' Weil stresses.

Read more: The millions of dust mites and germs living in your bed linen could make you seriously ill, according to experts

'Exhalation takes twice as long as inhalation. The absolute time you spend on each phase is not important; the ratio of 4:7:8 is important,' he continues.

The most important part of the process is holding your breath for eight seconds.

Keeping the breath in allows oxygen to fill your lungs and then circulate effectively around the body.

This extra oxygen can have a relaxing effect.

Focusing on your breath can also distract you from stressful thoughts and allow you to calmly focus.

There are similarities to the practices of mindfulness and yoga which both use breathing techniques to focus the mind.

("Practices of mindfulness" is the relabelled rebranded phrase for Hindoos' dhyana yoga aka meditation.

Notice how the christowest is careful to speak of mere "similarities" instead of outright plagiarism. That's what they do in early stages, since the theft from yoga is too obvious. Tomorrow they will no longer mention yoga - same as how they've stopped introducing pilates as a yoga spin/rip-off and how they've stopped acknowledging Hindoo meditation techniques and speak of "practices of mindfulness" as if it were some knowledge universally known to mankind let alone the christowest or independently derived by the modern west.)

Dr Weil is an author as well as a trained physician and lives in Tucson, Arizona.

  • Long ago, somewhere on IF, I linked to a German indology site acquiring IIRC Ayurveda and other Hindoo manuals (on chemistry and classifying materials etc, and general Hindoo religious texts) and using the acquisition for data mining these texts for various herbs and what Ayurveda prescribed them as remedies for/what their properties were. Even as the international christomedia - not just the local one - is harnessed to malign Ramdev, Ayurveda and Hindoo heathenism, the west steals the same. It's what the christowest always does. Hindoos need to be aware that the more the west screech at anything Hindoo or heathen, and tries to discourage it in India/among Hindoos, the more you can be sure that the west covets it for itself. With the death of heathenism in the west - murdered by what remains in the modern west (which is christianism and christo-conditioned post-christianism) - the west is now only a thief and murderer. [Western heathens are still too few in numbers to change this.]

  • In a somewhat more recent year, linked to how a Harvard engine was the back-end of the manual digitisation work (by Hindoo women in India) of Yoga and tantra manuals still in India and which had thus far not yet fallen into the christoconditioned west's possession.

The above is an example of the sorts of theft the west uses it for.

Other example cases are documented in passing in the comments of one "Raj Singh" at


Here's a relevant comment by that person (showing how many others than Malhotra have noticed this problem which itself goes back for quite some time - everyone should have noticed it by now):

Quote: Raj Singh • 3 days ago

I just wanted to offer a defence of Malhotra against some of the criticisms below that he is an activist and that he has unfairly targeted a well-wishing and reputable Hindu scholar like Prof Rambachan, what somebody earlier described as "friendly fire"

I don't know Rambachan personally and hence I have nothing personal against him. To me it does not appear that Malhotra also has a personal objection against Rambachan, his objection is against the activity that Rambachan is involved in, whether intentionally or non-intentionally, he is acting as an instrument in eroding the cultural distinctiveness of India. The more fierce articulation of this, he is acting like a Western sepoy in this war of civilizations.

To many the whole notion that there is some war going on between Western civilization and Indian civilization is ridiculous. What kind of war is this where there is no invasions, no bullets fired, no economic sanctions. In fact we find the opposite conception in the popular psyche, India and West are natural allies, friends, civilizational siblings. The West is putting a lot of direct investment in India's economy and fueling industry and creating jobs for Indians. How the heck then is this a war, surely this is some nationalist hyperparanoia?

The war is a cultural war. It has been going on since the establishment of the East India company. Slowly, but surely India's distinct culture has been eroded by eroding what makes India's culture distinct(See Malhotra's Being Different) by reinterpreting it, repackaging it and rebranding it as something Western.

There are three distinct areas I can identify in which India's cultural knowledge systems have been reinterpreted, repackaged and rebranded

1. Yoga

2. Ayurveda

3. Advaita

1. Yoga has been reinterpreted and repackaged as exercise. In the popular psyche it is no longer a psycho-spiritual discipline to still the mind and unlock our dormant potentials and transform our consciousness, but it seen as an exercise industry. Yoga has become synonymous with stretching, Yoga mats, weight loss. In fact so pervasive is this connotation, that we distinguish Yoga from meditation, as if they are two different things. In the Western popular psyche meditation is associated with Buddhism.

In Western science it has been rebranded in Modern Psychology. It is not known to most people who have not studied the history of Psychology, that most psychotherapy is directed derived from Yoga and Buddhism.

2. Ayurveda has been reinterpreted and repacked as organic food and cosmetics, sustainable living.

In Western science it has been rebranded in Allopathic medicine as Nanomedicine(rasashastra) reconstructive surgery(shalya tantra) body types(dosas) and clinical trials(dravyaguna vigyan)

3. Advaita has been interpreted and repackaged as religous scholaticism, no different in character to Christian scholasticism or Islamic scholasticism.

In Western science it has been rebranded as interpretations of quantum mechanics. Holographic interpretation, observer-collapse-measurement interpretation, thermodynamic interpretation, quantum field interpretation. Again this reveleation is sure to shock, but again those who know the history of quantum physics will know that all the pioneers of quantun physics were deeply involved in the study of Advaita and used Advaita concepts to explain quantum physics. Schrodinger's wave mechanics is attested by his biographer to be a direct result of his reading of Advaita:

The unity and continuity of Vedanta are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics. In 1925, the world view of physics was a model of a great machine composed of separable interacting material particles. During the next few years, Schrodinger and Heisenberg and their followers created a universe based on super imposed inseparable waves of probability amplitudes. This new view would be entirely consistent with the Vedantic concept of All in One.

Walter J. Moore in Schrödinger: Life and Thought (1989) ISBN 0521437679

It is obvious that Schrödinger changed his mind about a wave aspect to electrons between 1923 and 1926. There is some controversy about how Schrödinger actually arrived at Wave Mechanics, but in the Fall of 1925, presumably as he was building his theory, he wrote an essay, Seek for the Road, which may provide some clues. (Reference: My View of the World, (Cambridge, 1964).

You may recall the Schrödinger's Cat paradox, which was first published in its "scientific form" in 1935 in Zeitschrift der Physick. However in his 1925 essay he recounts an ancient Sankhya Hindu paradox that, jazzed up with some technology, became the cat paradox. In that original form the paradox was cast in the form of two people, one looking at a garden, the other in a dark room. The modern equivalent would be one person looking in the box to see if the cat is alive or dead, while a second person waits out in the hall. As we discussed, in this modern form the state "collapses" for the first person while it does not collapse for the second person.

In 1925 Schrõdinger resolved that paradox the way the Vedantists did: he asserted that all consciousness is one. As he wrote:

"But it is quite easy to express the solution in words, thus: the plurality [of viewpoints] that we perceive is only "an appearance; it is not real. Vedantic philosophy, in which this is a fundamental dogma, has sought to clarify it by a number of analogies, one of the most attractive being the many-faceted crystal which, while showing hundreds of little pictures of what is in reality a single existent object, does not really multiply the object."

The plurality that we perceive is only an appearance; it is not real. Vedantic philosophy... has sought to clarify it by a number of analogies, one of the most attractive being the many-faceted crystal which, while showing hundreds of little pictures of what is in reality a single existent object, does not really multiply that object...

"The Mystic Vision" as translated in Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World's Great Physicists (1984) edited by Ken Wilber

In itself, the insight is not new. The earliest records, to my knowledge, date back some 2500 years or more... the recognition ATMAN = BRAHMAN (the personal self equals the omnipresent, all-comprehending eternal self) was in Indian thought considered, far from being blasphemous, to represent the quintessence of deepest insight into the happenings of the world. The striving of all the scholars of Vedanta was after having learnt to pronounce with their lips, really assimilate in their minds this grandest of all thoughts.

David Bohm: Holographic interpretation:

Deep down the consciousness of mankind is one. This is a virtual certainty because even in the vacuum matter is one; and if we don't see this, it's because we are blinding ourselves to it.

Statement of 1986, as quoted in Towards a Theory of Transpersonal Decision-Making in Human-Systems (2007) by Joseph Riggio, p. 66

Consciousness is much more of the implicate order than is matter . . . Yet at a deeper level [matter and consciousness] are actually inseparable and interwoven , just as in the computer game the player and the screen are united by participation.

Statement of 1987, as quoted in Towards a Theory of Transpersonal Decision-Making in Human-Systems (2007) by Joseph Riggio, p. 66

There are several dozen other pioneers of quantum physics who freely drew from Advaita.

It is interesting to note that while in the popular Western culture Yoga is an exercise program; Ayurveda organic food and cosmetics, and Advaita religious scholasticism, in the Western scientific world Yoga is treated as Psychology, Ayurveda as Medicine and Advaita as Physics, and theories from them are taken and rebranded as Western scientific concepts and techniques e.g. Yoga techniques like Yoga Nidra is rebranded "progressive relaxation" Yogic mind-control techniques of pratipaksha bhavana is rebranded as "Cognitive Behavioural therapy" Buddhist four noble truths is rebranded as "Existentialist therapy" Prakriti/Maya/Akasha is rebranded "quantum field"

When we hear this our first reaction is to dismiss them because of the popular connotations we have associated with Yoga, Ayurveda and Advaita, it simply sounds absurd that Advaita could be compared to quantum physics or Yoga to Psychology or Ayurveda to Allopathy. On the other hand, when the Indic derived concept is rebranded as Western science then suddenly it becomes acceptable, credible and reputable e.g. Maya sounds like mysticism or religion, but when it becomes the "quantum" it becomes physics. People who would otherwise stay away from Yoga seeing it as some mystical and Eastern woo, would happily undergo CBT, psychodynamic, humanistic and mindfulness therapy.

Now ask yourself if you take absolutely everything from India, reinterpret it and repackage it and rebrand it as Western, then what distinctiveness is left of Indian culture? This is what Malhotra refers to as "cultural genocide" I hope you can see there is merit in his so-called activism. He is empirically documenting what many of us Indians already known and feel. "The West stole all our knowledge and then used it to further their science"

This is a kind of civilizational war, that many of us don't actually know is happening. So Malhotra should be commended for being one of the very few Hindu scholars in the world to actually fight back using the critical analysis techniques of Western academia itself. I hope he exposes them some more.

Well, it's been readily apparent for quite some time to even the most dense :cough: that from every small to every big thing, the west steals. Then it covers the tracks of its theft. Often it is not the admiring copycats in science - who admire and find 'inspiration' for "their" ideas in Hindoo (or Taoist) heathenism - that cover their own tracks of plagiarism (non-independent thought). It is later scientists who hide the fact that a lot is stolen from heathenism. And part of it is convenient amnesia.

The modern west (unalterably christoconditioned) could never have advanced - to be where it is today - without parasiting illegally on the discoveries of the GrecoRomans first and now on Hindoos. And next on the Chinese Taoists - though the west has for decades already begun poaching on and rebranding Taoism's QiGong/TaiChi and its views of the human (and cosmic) system, Taoist medicine including acupuncture and its Chinese view of the body system, and Taoist "diets" related to Qi too (dubbed alchemy until the west relabels it and brands it a science).

May as well archive some of the relevant comments on the topic of theft.

Quote:Raj Singh [replies to] VeVePe • 3 days ago

For sure it is a deviation from our Dharmic tradition.

If you read my latest post I show that in fact the true import of our Dharmic systems is being understood and applied in Western science, but when Dharmic systems are juxtaposed into Western science, they are rebranded and the Dharmic connections erased. It is like committing plagiarism, when one plagiarises they rebrand somebody else's ideas as their own and then erase the connections to the original source.

The West extracts all the essence or juice from the Dharmic systems to use for its own purposes, and then leaves the carcass behind for the Indians e.g. They derive all the psychological science from Yoga to develop new therapies, and then leave behind exercise for the Indians. In the same way they derive from Advaita theoretical physics, and leave behind for the Indians scholasticism.

Malhotra discusses this as a part of the steps in the process in his U-turn theory. The first step is some Westerner will go to India and learn one of India's traditional knowledge systems. The second step is they will bring it back to the West and then rebrand it, remove the links to the original source, and may even go further and denigrate the original source as primitive, to make it look like the West merely took basic ideas or inspirations and turned them into something advanced and scientific.

But at the same time you cannot blame the Western scientists for taking traditional Indian systems of knowledge and creating new technologies and new fields of science out of them, because we need them to progress. The tragedy in this affair is, it should be Modern Indians who should be doing this and not the West.

Sadly, as I said earlier Indians think of their Yoga as exercise and not Psychology; their Ayurveda as nothing more than herbal complimentary medicine and not as a fully fledged scientific medical system on par with Allopathy and their Advaita as scholasticism and not as theoretical physics.

There is another area I have not mentioned; Indians think of their Sanskrit language as a religious Aryan supremacist language, while the West see it as Natural language programming for AI systems.

(Actually, not quite. Few Indians see it as the former. But some Indians see it as the latter too, not just the west and the west is later in the game than Hindoos have been. But a certain segment of the west most definitely sees Skt as the pinnacle of *their* development in linguistic communication. And humans are defined - distinguished - by language, w.r.t. other species are they not? And with this claim on Skt by the west, they are essentially declaring they are the pinnacle of humanity for having come up with the language they covet the most and which they pompously feel must be theirs and "therefore" is theirs.

In any case, neither of Raj Singh's descriptions is how traditional Hindoos view Skt, although such features as the fact that it is a highly inflected language - conveying meaning with less chance of ambiguity - make it certainly more appropriate for scientific uses and rationalising thought than English, something for which Skt is naturally appreciated by its natural=native speakers. To the native traditional heathens, it is not just a living language, it is the language that allows them to think and reach the sorts of conclusions - besides attaining to the sorts of accomplishments - as their heathen ancestors. And it is very much the language of Hindoos' heathen religious terminology - samadhi etc are a Hindoo experience and concept and only the Hindoos' speech have words for it. No different from how Taoist concepts have no equivalent in tongues foreign to them. Taoists even borrow the word Mantra from Hindoos because English has no equivalent by far. Which, btw, is more proof that Taoists consider Hindoo heathenism closer to their religion than most other stuff out there.)

It is almost as if Indians are being fooled by the West into thinking the gems they have are worthless. It is like fooling somebody into giving away their gold by convincing them it is worthless.





Share ›



VeVePe Raj Singh • 2 days ago

>>"It is almost as if Indians are being fooled by the West into thinking the gems they have are worthless. It is like fooling somebody into giving away their gold by convincing them it is worthless."

(Methinks everyone has said that at least once by now - practically the same words too, IIRC - after having noticed the problem. We're all just repeating each others' experiences.)

Very nice, I think there is a Panchatantra fable that illustrates this point :-)

But I take offence at the implication that Hindoos (or Taoists) do not see the parallels to "western discoveries" or the developments in physics say. I'm sure a *lot* of people have been adding 2 and 2 together since childhood. To be honest, both Taoist and Hindoo cosmologies are better and especially completer fits of the universe than physics, but I won't press the point.

There is an innate ability to understand the universe in Hindoos and to recognise the cosmic significance of our heathen texts (well, they hardly conceal it in analogy, do they: they state most of it literally, much of it unverifiable - ever - by science).

On another matter, something I didn't want to get into, but sooner or later it will spill out anyway. Raj Singh places too much emphasis on science and a scientific approach to the whole of heathenism. The simple example being his implying that Skt's greater purpose would be as an ideal "natural language programming for AI systems". More complicated examples are in how he thinks that the greatest uses - the fullest use - of yoga is psychology, that the fullest use of advaitam is for quantum physics, etc.

The irony is that even with the most sophisticated equipment, science has worked out less about the universe than Hindoos' heathenism (and that of Taoists - the Taoists go into great detail about the universe, none of which I plan to reproduce/C&P to prove my point about their model of the universe being surprisingly accurate too). The means which the Hindoos used and even the ends were much greater than psychology and a mere scientific classification and understanding of the universe or of our brains or even the crude understandings of consciousness that we can perhaps replicate in AI to create artificial forms that can (sometime in the future) think in complex manner like our less artificial selves.

How to say it, the means and the ends of heathen practices ARE more than science. Heathen practices reveal realities that science cannot approach, although said practices also reveal the reality that science is able to reveal.

Yoga is more than the science of psychology. What can be and is meant to accomplished by yoga is much more also.

Let's say this next is but a suspicion, but Samadhi is not a state that once "we figure it out" we can replicate at will under select conditions, such as by making the inner environment of a subject (say via hormonal levels and neuro pathways) identical to one who is actually in samadhi. I think there will always be a difference.

I think Raj Singh places too much emphasis on the scientific uses of heathen ritual practices and derides the fact that they factually have larger uses. And the same: heathen cosmology has factually revealed far more than science can reveal. It has gone to a point beyond which science simply cannot tell us what's there. And I'm not just talking about the moments before the universe's birth (which are at best denied), or the origins of, development of and final evolutes of consciousness - about some of which, theories are emerging in physics (again, by plagiarising on Hindoo and even Tao heathenisms).

And even the west (not talking about new-agey dabblers or reconstructionists), like the digitisation program eagerly backed by a harvard engine, admits that Hindu yoga and tantra manuals are more than for scientific uses of creating altered states and heightened awareness and other scientific ends. They are encroaching on Hindoo (and other heathens') stuffs from more than a mere scientific POV and for more than scientific purposes. That is a part of the theft that Hindoos also need to realise. A part of Hindoos' wealth that they also take from us for themselves, while deriding it in Hindoos' possession.

I think to reduce heathen practices and their ends to mere science and scientific ends is to limit them severely, including the original intention behind much of them. The purposes of Ayurveda admittedly is generally more hmmm 'practical' or this-world or this reality or whatever (although it was also for better stamina for Vedic rituals, and Ayurveda is an upaveda of the Rig though other Indic religions started treating it as "secular"). But the objectives of Yoga and Advaitam - and Vedanta in general - is much more than explicating this universe or even the containing multiverse. I think some Indians are so technically minded that they have a one-track mind. I wonder why they are Not like the ancestors they claim to admire and emulate (the Vedic rishis).**

Sure much of Hindoo stuffs are rigorously systematised and documented, there has been a very scientific approach to all this, surely (usually by the very heathen experts prone to the much-derided "rituals"). But the practices themselves achieve more than that and are meant for more too. There are Hindoos who factually walk on water (a side-effect) and I'm not talking about someone on TV, but obviously about someone in my ken. I don't think that a scientific technique to achieve the same result would be the same thing as what the Hindoos have been doing and which manifested such a side-effect, nor ever lead to what the Hindoos have been attempting to achieve or have achieved (the ends).***

And much of the early Hindoo realisations were ... let's call it 'intuited' - there was no other way to discover most of the things they perceived, and still isn't and it's unlikely that science is tomorrow going to start advancing by the same means of perception. Science is defined by observation and empirical evidence, testable and repeatable by all, not by - I really need a better word - intuition, whatever the word to describe much of the Vedic Rishis' grasp on realities, their means for scientists (for science as it is defined and shall be for a long time) still verges on 'magic'. Hindoo heathenism (and Taoist heathenism) = Science + More.* I don't know a word for that "More", but whatever it is is Not science. And standing on one's head won't make it so. Which is why I wished Hindoos would resist every time someone declares they're going to scientifically analyse Vedic rituals etc, in that the results won't be descriptive of all the parts of it. I think a certain type of people's pedantry with science has eclipsed that More. People for whom the more heathen parts don't compute unless understood within a framework they undderstand, even though the framework is limiting of the view it gives and hence limiting of their understanding.

* Specifically, that Hindoos (and Taoists') heathenism = more than science and more than can be approached by science (scientific means).

** The technically - or as they like to consider themselves, scientifically - minded persons championing that heathenism should be dissected into a science dismiss experts in ritual practices as not fully knowing what they're doing/what they're achieving, all because of an (assumed) lack of knowledge on the part of the heathen experts. But it is not the heathen experts who are unaware of the full extent of what they are doing. They know what they're doing, what it means, how to do it, and why they do it, why it must be so.

*** There are Hindoos who can perceive things accurately from a distance of space and/or time. (There are Taoists also who can do all kinds of such things.) And weirder stuff. Some Hindoos and Taoists are *born* with such skills. I think one can fairly guarantee that there is nothing actually scientific about these people's abilities.

There are a lot of things that simply work in heathenism and no amount of strapping expert practitioners to monitoring equipment is going to reveal any more than their bodily (including brainwavey) conditions (and how it's no hoax). But it's still not the sum total of what they undergo. And I think there's a very real danger to lose sight of the much larger/greater totality by reducing it all to fit into science. Since, like I said, heathenism is more than science [what can be explicated by science, both now and -as I still suspect- any time in the future], although science is a natural part of it. I hate wishy-washy nonsense and am sorry to say that I can't sound sensible here and have therefore reduced my argument (non-argument) to handwaving - since I have no evidence to submit (which is not the same as not having evidence, of course) - but I feel it important to say something in defence of that part of heathenism that can (I'm borderline certain) never be explained/revealed by science.

Anyway, people can only go by what they know and experience first-hand, or what makes sense to them and in as far as it makes sense to them. More than that never computes. And in this age where science is - understandably - dominant, there's the need for many that everything must be seen and understood only through the lens of science and not with the fuller original perception employed by the Taoist sages I mean Vedic Rishis and living expert heathens/oddities.

But as a final ... disclaimer almost: whenever I have said "heathenism works", I never meant all what I was alluding to in the sense that this was a scientific process to be emulated by scientific means, by the way.


There are comments at the swarajyamag link pleading that Buddhism etc must not be regarded as distinct from Hindoo heathenism, because of 'similarities' such as yoga (and later tantra) also being used in Buddhism (and Jainism). But the fact remains that these are originally Hindoo heathen ritual practices (and Buddhism even stole some Taoist ones) and that, although Buddhists admitted using these Hindoo practices in the same means, they insist that the ends achieved by them through these means - and not just the ends aimed for by them - are different. [The end of Advaita is only an 'intermediary stage' and 'the Buddhist goal is the true final one', etc.] Again, utterly incompatible cosmologies. And it is Not because there aren't sufficient experts of Hindoo, Jain and Buddhist practices to come to the realisation that they've all reached the same ends, the very experts insist the ends reached are not the same. (And though lay people will perceive the differences as subtle, the experts in question insist these are not subtle but huge differences.)

Oh and Advaita let alone the rest of heathenism is NOT similar let alone very similar to Buddhism.

At least the comments by Raj Singh underline that Adi Shankara did Not invent Advaita (Advaita like the other two well-known views on the Vedanta - go back to the Vedanta/Vedam.)

One other theft that appears to not be mentioned in the above comments by one Raj Singh (and may perhaps not be mentioned by Malhotra either) is the origins of remote viewing. The Russians IIRC started this and they still credited the origins of their rudimentary knowledge to the Hindoos. The Americans competed with the Russians and obtained what the little they know from the Russians, and by this time there is no credit to the Hindoos. The Americans also have (or had) a very low level but otherwise inconstant and inconsistent success rate, as per books on the subject.
This post is in consequence to having pasted a link - and having referred to comments there - in the previous post.

Found a comment by someone in defence of Hindoo/Vaidika rituals. Although it was not written in reply to Raj Singh, some of whose comments were referenced in the previous post which were on another article at swarajyamag (swarajyamag.com/culture/untangling-the-false-knots-in-rajiv-malhotras-indras-net/), still seems applicable: IMO, a comment that defends Vaidika rituals (as proper ends in themselves) is very necessary, to offset Raj Singh's off-hand dismissal of ritualism (which Raj Singh opinion btw doesn't reflect any traditional Hindoo view I'm personally familiar with). Especially necessary since pasting from Raj Singh may have come across as an endorsement, when I usually don't agree more than partially at best (but who does):


Quote:Jishnu 5 months ago

The real problem about perception of ritual is not just that people think of it as superstition or "preliminary" but that ritual is not associated with the main mukti mArga, namely karma yoga. Path of ritual, performance of karma is karma yoga. That such a fundamental association is not made is a problem in both teaching and learning. The overemphasis on "experiential" nature of sAdhana at the expense of meticulousness, has brought down the overall standard of practice and learning.

But x3, wasn't Karma yoga already specifically declared to include rituals for attaining the highest end? E.g. in the Bhagavad Geeta, the Karma Yoga chapter (3.1-3.27) already answers Arjuna's question that Bhagavaan Krishna reveal to him what the greatest good is for him (for Arjuna, but also all Hindoos). And besides explaining that Arjuna has his duty to discharge, as discharging one's own dharma is the highest perfection for each individual, Vaidika rituals as interaction with the Hindoo Gods are specifically also mentioned as the "param shreyaH" greatest good (BG 3.11, but all of 3.9-3.16. Also 3.20 shows an example of the attainment of perfection through performing just "karmaNA eva", which may be in Janaka Raja's general living of Vaidika Dharma, but a Hindoo Raja also performs yagnyas, so). [And this looks like it's the chapter that also covers the true meaning of renunciation as being renunciation not of karman itself but of the phalam. Though this is more for Sannyasis and other such evolved non-lay Hindoos, since the aim is to acquire good phalam for Hindoo society - to do good for Hindoo society - while repaying the Gods for the bounties they bestow on the Hindoos.]

The original default meaning of karma was vaidika karma as well as action in accord with one's dharma as prescribed by Vedas, as far as I could follow. Or rather, acts in accordance with these constitute karma yoga. (Buddhism and Jainism rewrote the meaning of karma. And today it further means anything.)

Even in Shankara BP's Advaitam - meant for sannyasis onlee - where karma is not the end in itself, vedic rituals are nevertheless more than merely "preliminary", and are at least prerequisites without which the gnyaana kaandam is totally off-limits (beyond understanding of the aspiring sannyasi anyway). I think BG 3.17-3.18 is more a descriptive for the aims of the sannyasi, although even the established acharyas at Shankara Mathas still perform daily poojas both in private, as part of their ritual practices, as well as performing poojas in the public so the public may partake of it. (Not inconsistent with BG 3.19-3.21, 3.25, IMO. 3.22-3.24 is about why Bhagavaan forever chooses to set the example, which makes 3.21 also highly applicable to Bhagavaan).

For most brahmanas - i.e. those that don't turn into sannyasins - my distinct impression (not from interrogation but from observation and occasionally catching some things stated to us) was that a life of vaidika rituals together with gnyaana kaandam [which also has ritual parts anyway] are thought of as achieving moksha.

And here's a ritualistic old Hindoo swami from AP, who quotes Adi Shankara on how the Vishnu Sahasranamam like the Rudram from the YV confers moksham on the Hindoo. The point being that - as per tradition, at least - the Adi Shankara clearly thinks the declaration made about the Rudram (=Vedic ritual) achieving moksha* for the Hindoo is self-evident and beyond question, and Adi Shankara then proceeds to declare the same is the case with Vishnu Sahasranamam:

[* Because 'immortality' ref below implies no more death. Which implies no more samsaara. Which implies mukti.]

Quote:"Etaani ha vaa amritasya naamadheyaani, etair-havaa amrito bhavati" "These are the names of the immortal Almighty [=Ishwara, i.e. Rudra]. By chanting and listening to these names, man** achieves immortality" the Veda has proclaimed while describing about the chapter "Rudraadhyaaya". "The same can be said about Vishnu Sahasranaama" - Sri Shankaracharya has stated.

** And other kinds. E.g. a famous sarpam in TN caught on camera doing bilva pooja on a temple's Shiva Lingam, and which animal obviously recited the Sri Rudram inwardly as dhyana yoga.]

The point of pasting the above is that even actual extant advaita tradition - as seen in the quoted Swami who invokes Adi Shankara - insists Vaidika rituals and pooja confers immortality. [Not to mention that apparently the Veda itself has said so about the ritualistic reciting of the names of the Supreme Ultimate of the Hindoos, i.e. Rudra=Ishwara=also Sarva Devas (see Ashwattha or RHU). And since the Rudram is yajur vedam what's more - being the most 'ritual' oriented Vedam - can there be anything more ritualistic? Then surely the other Vedas also must qualify? Especially since IIRC the Saamam has its own variant of the Rudram too. Whatever, the Hindoos consider the Vedam a most primary authority. Invoking argument from authority here is not a fallacy, since the point is that it is the Vedam that implicates itself I mean testifies for itself of its karma being karma yoga.]

Plus in Hindoos' tantram, at least certain tantra texts -the ones I've heard of/can think of- proclaim of themselves that [with the right perception by the Hindoo bhaktas] they are karma yoga too in their practise with bhakti to the Gods of the text: conferring mukti as well as bhukti*. (Which is exactly the sort of description that is also applicable to the Vedam. But then, Hindoos' ritual practices and Vedam/Vedic rituals is one and the same - belong to the same set - and Hindoos' tantra texts affirm so).

The purpose of this post was actually not to spam all the above comments, but to paste this in response to some of one Raj Singh's statements at an article mentioned in the previous post:


Quote:Jishnu 5 months ago

The real problem about perception of ritual is not just that people think of it as superstition or "preliminary" but that ritual is not associated with the main mukti mArga, namely karma yoga. Path of ritual, performance of karma is karma yoga. That such a fundamental association is not made is a problem in both teaching and learning. The overemphasis on "experiential" nature of sAdhana at the expense of meticulousness, has brought down the overall standard of practice and learning.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)