• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Inculturation: the OTHER christian conversion tactic
More evidence of christianism's intent to subsume Samskritam even while getting this banned among Hindus.


Quote:Those unconvinced about credentials of desert god are singing about the glory of Amrithdhara,

10/05/2015 12:34:22 GSK Menon

I was watching Surya TV Malayalam channel, when I saw a shocking title of a Christian Fellowship Centre program, which was titled "Amrithdhara" !

Do these people have any belief in Amrithdhara ? What is Amrithdhara ?, Amrith is the nectar that emerged as a result of the churning of the Milky Ocean referred to in Hindu Scriptures. "Dhara" is the anointment from head to toe of Hindu deities in temples by different substances. Therefore "Amrithdhara" has nothing to do with foreign faiths and beliefs.
Yet, the converts are forced to subscribe to doctrines, beliefs, customs and rituals which are anathema to the desert religion. Read the foreign scripture, it starts with a stern warning by different desert tribal gods who admonish that they should not be worshiped in the Heathen/Pagan mannert . Yet, here we find evangelists forcing converts to use Hindu lamps, Dhwajastambham (which represents the Spine of the deity inside the sanctum sanctorum. These desert religions claim that they do not believe in idol worship, I want to know which desert god's spine is now protruding in front of churches ? ).

Post 1/2

Oh NO. He did it again. Brutus.

(via the blogentry by 'Pagan' at rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2015/06/quick-notes-bio-fuels-angkor-copy.html)


Quote:Rajiv Malhotra @RajivMessage

Yoga = Hindu refers to supplier, not user. Anyone can use. Some ideologies have contradictory ideologies: they must not distort yoga to fit

9:41 AM - 6 Jun 2015

179 179 Retweets

And 82 sycophants I mean favourites, 179 retweets.

Now replace Yoga (and what Rajiv said earlier about Bharatanatyam) with the Vedam.

So, now read this - as it is a legitimate and representative transpose and extension to what Rajiv Malhotra is saying:

Quote:VEDA = Hindu refers to supplier, not user. Anyone can use. Some ideologies have contradictory ideologies: they must not distort yoga to fit

Wait, deja-vu. Yes. I'm repeating myself.

And also:

[quote name='Husky' date='02 October 2011 - 06:31 PM' timestamp='1317559991' post='113123']

I'm afraid what the English-language vocalists/representatives for the Hindu side will have to say when the Vedam one day comes up as "disputed territory".

Will the argument go the same way as Yoga and Bharatanatyam? Recapping Hindu vocalists' arguments on appropriation of:

1. Yoga: "Just acknowledge it is Hindu, and all are allowed to dabble"

2. Bharatanatyam: "Inculturation not allowed. But all - including even christoislamaniacs - are welcome to dabble."

If the inculturating, appropriating and dabbling kind assume that the same logic therefore applies to the Vedam, one can hardly blame them for their conclusion, considering all the encouragement they've been getting so far on all other matters Hindu.

I certainly think the same logic does apply, but that 1 and 2 are entirely wrong. I.e. 1 and 2 should be "(Yoga/Bharatanatyam/...) has nothing to do with aliens and other non-Hindus." So that the same applies to the Vedam. In fact, that should form the universal response to all attempts to encroach on any part of Hindu religion.


(Point 2 above is what Malhotra is arguing for Yoga now.)

Yoga is NOT merely Hindu by 'supplier'.

I submit that it is exclusively for Hindu use too, i.e. for those ethnics of traditional perception.

Not for dabblers, not for aliens.

It is totally rooted in Hindoo cosmology (not counting re-interpretations/re-locations into other ideologies, which christianism is also doing). How can it concern anyone else if their cosmological perception is not the same?

Soon Rajiv Malhotra will declare that "OM = Hindu refers to supplier not user. Anyone can use."

Well, Buddhists/Jains/et al have inculturated on and re-interpreted OM into their use, so why should not christoislamics do the same, right?

After all, OM is identical to Brahman (the Paramaatman, the Sarvaatman) in Hindoo cosmology in which OM is rooted.

Buddhism denies Atman and denies Brahman by definition (although some later forms of Buddhism also inculturated on the word Brahman and re-interpreted it into Buddhism). How can OM have any meaning - but a novel one - in Buddhism? That is, Buddhism "distorted OM and at times even Brahman to fit", to use Malhotra's phrasing.

So then don't argue when christianism does the same.

Either be consistent or accept that the floodgates are open. And now *anyone* can come in.

Sure, Buddhism and Jainism had adapted sankhya views since early on and hence took to yoga too (since B&J were replacement theology spin-offs from Vedanta/Upanishads i.e. Vedic religion). But Buddhism and Jainism also negated a lot of the original context and views (Hindoo cosmology) and retrofitted their own views onto the remainder.

So what if christoislam were to next remove even more of the original Hindoo=Vedic cosmology from yoga - more than Buddhism/Jainism have done - (e.g. remove all of sankhyan views) and declare that therefore yoga is a practice of christian communion now?

So what if christoislam declares that OM now magically refers to jeebusjehovallah, since Sikhs have already declared that 'their' Ek O~Nkaar magically refers to their invisible mono-deity now whom they are most emphatic is not anything Vedic=Hindoo.

What or who's to stop christianism from doing this? Modern Hindus? Who can't even keep their argument straight let alone sane?

But the facts remain, that

- OM, Sankhya-Yoga[-Vedanta] is exclusively Vaidika (Astika) in origin and cosmology, and others in India merely refitted it for their purposes. (Not Charvakans admittedly, since they were dead set against Sankhya and all otherwordliness.)

- Yoga well predates classical=atheist Sankhya, Jainism and Buddhism. That's not even a question:

- Yoga is inseparably associated with pre-classical=Vedic=theist Sankhya onlee, which combine is further intimately (inseparably) associated with Vedaanta (Upanishadic perspectives), all being definitively Vedic. And no matter how much other Indic religions inculturate on and re-interpret OM to mean something for their religion, it isn't ever going mean anything but what it means in the Vedam: the Parabrahman, of Hindoo cosmology alone, not open to re-interpretation.

Yoga is of Vedic religion, and many Upanishads are on this very subject (note that several of these are *known* - even by indological schemes of chronology - to be very old compared to even the MBh incl Gita, both of which predate not just Buddhism and Jainism but classical sA~Nkhyam and Patanjali's yogasutras).

Pre-classical=Vedic=theistic Sankhya IS older than the later classical=atheist Sankhya. (Explicated at length by Hindoo scholars. A.o.t. new-agey "atheist/agnostic Hindus" vocalising on the internet, or indologists/alien dabblers.)

Classical=atheistic Sankhya is known to be derived from pre-classical=Vedic=theistic Sankhya by very obviously lopping off Vedic=Hindoo cosmology (which is theistic): Classical Sankhya has no cosmological views since it thought them irrelevant to its narrower focus of pre-existing sankhyam.

And Buddhisms and Jainisms retrofitted their eventually concocted cosmologies (i.e. backwards in time) onto pre-existing sAMkhyan views.

Again -

It is too late in the day for Hindoos, it is very nearly night, but the statement should have been and will ever be:

Yoga like the Veda and all Vedamantras starting from praNava - and all Vedic forms of mantras (and the word 'mantra' itself)- is of and for HindOOs onlee [and all origins of Tantra too, also regardless of inculturations by spin-off religions]; only for Hindoos to practice and only with traditional Hindoo views (not new-age or otherwise subverted views). Everything else being inculturation.

Same for Bharatanatyam and Carnatic, etc etc.

Post 2/2

What everyone else is doing is inculturation and re-interpretation ("re-locating" Hindoo practices into the missionary replacement theologies. Re-location is the word used by S Korean christian hysterians to justify De Nobili's inculturation agenda).

If Buddhism and Jainism used yoga (and a modified version of sankhyan views, to make it suited to their intents) starting some 2500 years ago, after removing the rest of Hindoo cosmology from it, and this became legitimate in time rather than the subversionism it is from the original=Vaidika=Hindoo POV,

then if christianism removes all of Hindoo cosmology from yoga and markets 'yesu namaskaram' in place of suryanamaskaram and declares jeebus as yogacharya in christian yoga centres (both of which they have already done), then 2500 years from now, christianism too will be a valid sampradaya by "virtue" of the mere age of 'yoga' in christianism by that time. No?

If people are going to say No to inculturation, then can't be hypocritical about it.

We've only ever lost people to the inculturating missionary replacement theologies.

+ Koenraad Elst got away with declaring that Hindoos=heathens "polytheistic idolators" (i.e. theists) hijacked Patanjali's 'essentially atheist' yoga sutras.

+ IIRC it was in the same article that Koenraad Elst had averred that Hindoos had similarly essentially hijacked classical Sankhyam which was atheist too (Elst made some statement about Hindoos="pagans" having eclipsed the atheistic schools of thought or something). What an utter inversion.

+ Elst further pretended that kaivalya in Patanjali's YS made it closer to the atheistic spin on kaivalya seen in Jainism, despite the Vedic concept of kaivalya existing in the heathen context in several older, core upanishads [whose ancientry - especially vis-a-vis later Indic movements-turned-spinoff-religions - is not in question by anyone but ur-Shramanists and ideologically-motivated or ignorant indologists].

+ Feeling encouraged by Elst's successful (well, to his adulating audience) divorce of Sankhya-Yoga from Hindoo heathenism, Buddhism peddlers (inculturationists) at Elst's article had the audacity to comment that Patanjali's YS was closer to Buddhism than to 'theism and Vedanta' (IIRC the Buddhism peddlers actually made a distinction between the two. Since when were Vedantins - including very much advaitins - *anything* but theists. Of course, am not counting today's "atheist/agnostic" new ageists poaching on Advaita, who spout nonsense and pretend they're advaitins. They're a class apart.)

And even ignoring Patanjali and his YS, it still remains a fact that sankhya-yoga (inseparable from 'vedanta') is Vedic onlee in origin in very cosmology, and thus that all else that appeared and diverged from this thereafter is again: merely inculturation + re-interpretation by missionary=replacement religions that turned up later.

Yet the lies listed above will grow, have been growing, nurtured by aliens and various Indics ("Hindus" inclusive). And the Hindus vocalising frequently on the internet - but who remain silent in crucial matters such as the problems enumerated above - allowed such lies to spread and take root and grow. It will therefore not be an unforeseen harvest at all, except perhaps to those who do not wish to extrapolate to inevitable conclusions. People should have nipped this nonsense in the bud.

Instead, Hindoo heathenism is mired in new agey subversionists who like to peddle that all "Dharmics" should magically be allowed an equal claim to yoga, sankhya, tantra and OM (all of which are intimately connected parts of Vedic religion originally and still), even after these spin-off Dharmics have shown ur-Shramanistic or seccessionist tendencies. Rather, "the one universal Dharma" peddlers will lecture to Hindoos that these may not dare say that all such matters as OM, sankhya + yoga + vedanta + tantra are rooted in Hindoo cosmology onlee (and are of course of Vedic religion onlee; not merely in origin, but at the very least so). Yet they will implement no such censorship against other Indic religionists making claims of originality on any/most of these for their own religions instead: when encroaching Buddhists and Jains make claims to originality and uniqueness (via overt or subtle ur-Shramanism), and when western dabblers and new-agey Indian "atheist Hindus" (who aren't even following their direct ancestors' tradition, but want to do some "Hinduism" of their own accord and stripped of all things that won't compute to them now, though even then they presume the right to lecture traditionalists on Sanatana Dharma=Vedic religion onlee) encroach on Hindoos' natural right to their own heathen stuffs, by declaring these matters are 'equally' a lot of other people's, and moreover belong less to Hindoos than to the late re-interpretationists (as Elst's article and Bauddha comments there had done). <= All these others get away with robbing Hindoos. To enrich and aggrandise themselves. Which is missionising.

Therefore: why may christoislamaniacs not do the same replacement? "One man may steal a horse, the other may not even look over the hedge." Hmmm?

If OM can be re-interpreted by Buddhism to have something to do with its Buddhist un-Atma views, and if OM can be re-interpreted by Sikhism to refer to their invisible mono-deity who is specifically no longer anything Hindu (though it was before, and hence the use of the O~Nkaara in Sikhism now refers to an entity recently invented), etc, then why may christoislamism not declare OM refers to jeebusjehovallah next? And the same argument for all other encroachment too.

If some or any matters can be divorced from the very Hindoo cosmology they are rooted in, to thus be poached on by others for their purposes, why object to only one group that does so? That is,

+ Is it only the degree of divergence from the original tradition that provokes resistance about christianism? But then, between Atma and anAtta is a chasm that is already *quite* wide even by intra-Indic standards. (Not counting new-ageists that pretend it's all same-same or that the differences are inconsequential). And Buddhists are on record saying that all of Hindu heathenism "even advaita" is closer to christianism than Buddhism. (Buddhism also says the same of Taoism, btw. When really, all inculturating missionary replacement ideologies surely have more in common with each other; while heathenisms like Hindoo and Taoist and Hellenistic and Shinto religions - all of which have "polytheistic idolatry" and "monism" - certainly are more similar to each other than they are to other Indic traditions let alone the christoclass virus.)

+ Or is it only the 'ancientry' of the later...Shramanist re-interpretations of Upanishadic knowledge by Buddhism/Jainism that raises these last two religions to co-originators & to having an equal right of claim as Vedic religion has to itself (despite the later religions moreover trying to replace Vedic religion)? But if ancientry is the deciding factor, then, like I said, given enough time of inculturating on yoga, christianism should also merit the same right by automation, on expiration of the same time frame. Some 2500 years should do the trick.

+ Or (also weak): is it only the nativeness to the soil - of Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism - that gives them equal right to make equal claims to Vedic stuffs that pre-date all of them? But at least vocalists of two of these - being Jainism and Buddhism - now claim that Vedic religion is not native to India. (Part of the ur-Shramanism nonsense theory.) Aside: But regardless of whether Vedic religion is native or not, Vedic religion is the *sole* origin of sankhya-yoga-vedanta. And everyone else merely inculturated and re-interpreted aka poached, the latter being the apt word when they dare pretend it was Vedic religion that was unoriginal/plagiarist and moreover alien and oppressive, even as nouveau religions then try to pass themselves off as the originators and native to India and 'oppressed' and plagiarised, not to mention pretending to be far more ancient than they actually are. <- All for missionising purposes: same reasons why christianism attempts the same.

+ Is it that all promoters of the notion that "Yoga [and therefore Sankhya] belongs *equally* to all Dharmics (Hindoos may not dare to interject that it is Vedic in origin, even when Elst and Buddhists are allowed to sell this off as belonging more to other Indics and even to alien dabblers than to Hindoos)" <- is it that such "Hindus" as would argue so, believe in ur-Shramanism: that Buddhism, Jainism magically go back to at least as long as Vedic religion (via a hypothesised ur-Shramanism inserted backwards in time, along with backprojected multiple Buddhas and Teerthankaras), and that yoga was - from its very origins no less - magically "common to all these" since "the beginning" or at least "since the IVC"?

[INSERTED: An equidistant common source for yoga implies that Yoga was a separate/distinct thing or even movement, and that all extant Indic religions using yoga therefore merely borrowed or inherited from this common source. BTW, the Ur-Shramanism 'theory' falsehood, merely posits that that common source WAS ur-Shramanism (but that Vedic religion unnaturally adopted the features of yoga). The actual evidence on the other hand shows that Vedic religion originated sAMkhya-yoga: sAMkhya is from Hindoo cosmology, and yoga is the practice intimately associated with the implications of its views. As already argued in the Natural Religions thread, Hindoos' ancient Vedic religion is the *only* religion that can show its working on the derivation of both the views and the invariably associated practices. Buddhism and Jainism in contrast were magically born with bits and pieces of samkhya and yoga that they chose to adopt and adjust (re-interpret) to their views, like they did with so much else from Vedic religion. So the frequent nationalist pretence that yoga is equally common - let alone in its origins - to all "Dharmic religions" is a self-delusion. Then welcome christianism when it too poaches tomorrow.]

So which of these reasons is it? And who thinks any of them is valid? And furthermore, who thinks any of these reasons/subterfuges cannot be used by christianism next, to similarly inveigle its "equal right to claim" (and eventually even claim to originate, as an intrinsic christianism) yoga etc?

Inculturation was not invented by christianism/the christoclass virus.

It is an oft-seen feature in missionary religions, including the other Indic/Dharmic religions.

The self-immunisation programme must be greater. Greater than what 'Hindus' are willing to do now. They'll never wear it.

Rajiv Malhotra writes tomes to no purpose, it seems: He has repeated his earlier-seen deadly utterance on Bharatanatyam regarding yoga too now (and on the Vedam tomorrow). The same arguments against why that was dangerously self-destructive (turning the masses into lemmings after him?) applies now.

And the news was:

Malhotra's done it again. Nice backstab.


Quote:Rajiv Malhotra @RajivMessage

Yoga = Hindu refers to supplier, not user. Anyone can use. Some ideologies have contradictory ideologies: they must not distort yoga to fit

9:41 AM - 6 Jun 2015

179 179 Retweets

And 82 sycophants I mean favourites, 179 retweets.

Response as before, here.


[quote name='Husky' date='02 October 2011 - 06:31 PM' timestamp='1317559991' post='113123']

I'm afraid what the English-language vocalists/representatives for the Hindu side will have to say when the Vedam one day comes up as "disputed territory".

Will the argument go the same way as Yoga and Bharatanatyam? Recapping Hindu vocalists' arguments on appropriation of:

1. Yoga: "Just acknowledge it is Hindu, and all are allowed to dabble"

2. Bharatanatyam: "Inculturation not allowed. But all - including even christoislamaniacs - are welcome to dabble."

If the inculturating, appropriating and dabbling kind assume that the same logic therefore applies to the Vedam, one can hardly blame them for their conclusion, considering all the encouragement they've been getting so far on all other matters Hindu.

I certainly think the same logic does apply, but that 1 and 2 are entirely wrong. I.e. 1 and 2 should be "(Yoga/Bharatanatyam/...) has nothing to do with aliens and other non-Hindus." So that the same applies to the Vedam. In fact, that should form the universal response to all attempts to encroach on any part of Hindu religion.


(Point 2 above is what Malhotra is arguing for Yoga now.)

The tendency of "Hindus"* to universalise Hindoo heathenism is going to destroy Hindoos and turn heathenism into a travesty. And that includes their reluctance to say that Hindoo stuffs is not only of/by Hindoo heathenism but for (ethnic) HindOOs. All else being poaching and/or subversion, as explained by the L/N/Dakota Declaration of War on all encroachment on their sacred religion.

* On fire for nationalism, new-ageists, "I'm an intellectual/scholar, watch me sink my own ship" types.

"Thanks a lot Malhotra. Again."

ADDED: Connected to 198 and subsequent of the Sanatana Dharma thread.
More spam.

Related to posts 196 and 197 from the SD thread / follows on from them in a way.


Uh, what's "international" about yoga?

What, no "international raindancing day" to imitate=dabble in the rain dancing practices of Africans, NA native Americans and IIRC heathen (=Taoist) Chinese kings?

I mean, if yoga is 'international', then so should native American rain-dancing be, surely? But the native Americans sensibly disagree. Modern Hindus are the insensible ones.

Typical article though. Wants to have the cake and eat it too.

Hindus want to both universalise all things Hindoo (=ethnic Hindu) and will object when this invariably gets out of hand.

Don't know what people were thinking was going to happen.

What has happened - of everyone=all the subversionists trying to turn yoga into a universalism, and then often into christianism or islamania too, having removed Hindoo heathenism out of it by the universalisation process - is exactly the only thing that could have come of all this. And anyone with half a brain could have foreseen that. But modern Hindus don't *want* to see it: because they are still bent on peddling & universalising Hindoo heathenism, i.e. turning it into a new age travesty. Which is why their argument is still that "anyone may dabble, just acknowledge it is 'Hindu'".

Then such people deserve everything that they're getting. Love their heartburn about aliens not acknowledging them. :Mwahahahahaha:

If Hindus feel they've "lost" yoga now (or that they will in the future) it is entirely their Own Fault. No one else is to blame.

Can see this in the BJP "Hindu nationalist" govt's determination to de-heathenise yoga and sell it to India's christoislamaniacs too.

Apparently islamics object only to the Hindoo mantras in Surya Namaskaram. If I was a muslim or christian I'd make damn sure I go nowhere near any part of it, the entire thing is intimately connected to Soorya Bhagavaan onlee (who most certainly is NOT the jeebusjehovallah), and has all kinds of side effects when you do it wrong (including with wrong views as to what or who is its ends), such as skipping mantras or pretending the ritual practice has to do with jeebusjehovallah instead (like the christian clone of Surya namaskaaram into 'yesu namaskaram' tries to project this as).

Yoga is not for dabblers and can have very unpleasant and non-transparent side-effects, as the west is but slowly discovering. (I could have told them that. But is anyone else sniggering that many western dabblers are increasingly crashing and burning, and horribly? Just deserts.)

The solution is simple, but will never be implemented by today's Hindus - not until it's too late (as with everything that modern Hindus do: too late in realising any sense at all, since they never think before they act):

- acknowledge and declare openly, repeatedly, consistently and in unison that Hindoo religion is an ethnic religion and tell all alien dabblers (including "converts") to turn on their heels and do whatever else: anything but any part of Hindoo heathenism.

The west has no - and never shall have - deekSham into anything Hindoo. Again: this is an ethnic religion. As are all things that belong to it. The west is only good at one thing: kicking away its own ancestral heathenism and dabbling fruitlessly in others'. (E.g. Arthur Avalon. ConfusedniggersSmile

- state the truth publicly: that there is NO yoga and no initiation into anything actually Hindoo in the west. All that they ever got is Hinduism Lite, including the Vedicist dabblers and the pretenders to Shaiva/Shakta initiation. And they're all demonstrably deluded in their conclusions.

The fact that the west does not have actual yoga or tantra is essentially admitted by the Harvard-backed digitisation programme of heretofore inaccessible (to the west) tantra and yoga manuals in India. That programme openly admitted that the west has never had access to actual yoga/tantra - i.e. that the west has only learned new-ageism - and it expressed the hope they could now learn actual yoga/tantra by spying yet more on ancient Indian written materials on the subject. Nice self-delusion.

The west is good at imitation. At "reading" Skt and pretending it understands what's written. And that's as far as they will get here too. Because learning Skt does not at all mean that you can become an expert in heathen practices (e.g. see so many Indians - like Suhas Mahesh or whoever writing at swarajyamag - translating away at Skt shlokas from sacred stotras and drawing novel conclusions because his perception is alien. And the west is even more alien, even when more willing to be new-agey/neo-pagan.)

- Most importantly/obviously, and this too is a fact, should state that without Hindoo cosmological views, it's not yoga. And so others are merely plagiarising the outward forms, like all inculturationists do.

In short, Hindoos should in unison issue the L/D/Nakot Declaration of War.

And like these native Americans, need to tell all other "Hindus" that Hindoo heathenism is NOT "shareable"=universal. This will never go down well, of course, since the primary advocates for turning Hindoo heathenism into a new-ageism (that it's "a universal spirituality") are modern "Hindus". They're gangrene. They'll never learn that what they're doing is directly killing Hindoo heathenism. That they number very much among its murderers.

As already mentioned often enough, the west already stole from yoga to create "exercises": that's what pilates is. The 'creator' of pilates is admitted to have taken from yoga and secularised it into an exercise. So there is no reason for the west to market the mere exercise it does under the "yoga" label, since what they're doing is just more pilates albeit more blatantly a copy of the outward form of yoga.

The exercises the west does and calls yoga is NOT yoga.

The west already dabbles in yoga as if it were part of some new age buffet. Even backsliding christos are in on this - and I agree with the Vatican and fundy christians that there is a fundamental disconnect/mutual exclusivity between yoga and christianism.

So the western/Middle-Eastern/Paki marketing of "yoga" as some neutral spiritual something - so neutral now that it can be magically re-attached to christianism or islam - is just a new-ageism. Not yoga.

The dabbling demon west - fond of "converting" into this and that eastern religion, or mixing and matching bits of this and that - and christoislamic inculturationism on "yoga" will gain nothing from their imitations and dabbling.

Of course it's all still plagiarism of aspects of genuine yoga, but fruitless.

That such plagiarism has come to pass at all is still the fault of "Hinduism Lite" peddlers. This is a modern problem, since only modern "Hindus" invented the problems of "anybody can convert" and "let's universalise Hinduism". It started with NRIs trying to exert their self-confidence (or rather, wanting their egos stroked). Then don't whine when choking on these mistakes.

When Hindoos' ancestors came up with their "the whole world is one family" phrase, they Never had christoislamania in mind. They didn't know about this, it was beyond their ken. When ancient Hindoos thought of teaching yoga to worthy people, they never had the west in mind: which has genocided everybody else thanks to its christianism (and by far most of the modern west has been *bred* by christianism, while most all the heathens were genocided long ago. What remains is almost entirely a genetic product of christianism's artifical selection process. This becomes more evident when Hindoos meet heathens of unbroken lineage from Asian nations.)

So stop trying to "redeem" the west. It can't be done via Hindoos' heathenism. It can only be done by the west's own ancestral religion. And the fact that so many in the west - most noticeably those dabbling in yoga or other aspects of Hindoo or Taoist or Shinto heathenisms (or indeed "converting" to any of these) - are not pursuing a sincere and proper return to their ancestral religions but are dabbling in Others' stuffs to any degree is a Huge Indication that they're still possessed by christianism, and have not yet been released to their own Gods.

All the more obvious in christoislamics dabbling in Hindoo stuffs.

The obstructions to yoga that Pata~njali lists will ever plague the dabbling demons (as it so obviously already does). Because they're dabbling. And because that's all they can ever do. It is clearly futile for them: like a human leaping repeatedly off a cliff and pretending that "this time I will finally fly". Never going to happen.

For the Pakis or Indic muslims wanting to do yoga: revert to Hindoo heathenism already. There is No Other Way to get anything out of it.

For aliens: now would be a good time to revert to your own ancestral heathenism. And anyone who still doesn't, owns to being a dabbling hypocrite/new-ageist.


Yoga is now "international"?

More proof for: "Only death cures stupidity."
Post 1/2

1. swarajyamag.com/politics/yoga-soulfully-hindu-is-the-bjp-sorry-about-it/

by one Abhiram Ghadyalpatil

who writes:

Quote:Shripad Naik, a minister in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s cabinet, has unwittingly delivered the worst possible advertising message for Yoga. Mr. Naik, in an apologetic bid to accommodate Muslim ‘concerns’ about Yoga, suggested they could take Allah’s name if they thought chanting the shlokas was un-Islamic.


Then why complain about "yesu namaskaaram" and "christian yoga" and jeebus as "yogacharya"?

Well, at least they're starting to be consistent now: allowing any and all to inculturate equally now. Not just Indic missionary religions any more. Good.

Quote:To be fair to him, Mr Naik’s is not the only note of apology. There are ministers in the Modi government and BJP spokespersons who have frequently sounded sorry about things they ought to have been proud of. No one, not even those with a stated sympathy for the Hindu way of life, expects Modi and his ministers to be the messengers of Hinduism on a daily basis. But Hinduism and the Hindu political thought cannot afford bad ambassadors and wrong messaging either. It’s time the ‘sorry-for-being Hindu’ apologists, who may well be genuine well-wishers, stopped batting for Hinduism on the back foot. They need to own their agenda and feel proud of their exceptional heritage.

They won't. They're dhimmis. Fair-weather friends.

Quote:Yoga, and so many other things fundamentally stemming from the Hindu thought, does not have to be sold cheap.

So at what price must yoguh be prostituted so that the price be not regarded as "cheap"? Still prostitution, mind.

Quote:The infinite faculties of mind and body that Yoga offers to anyone who is willing to practice it need not be tempered or customised to target a particularly sulking audience.

That is not the purpose of yoga.

But let me guess, these new-ageists will tomorrow start peddling the Gayatri Mantram to "everyone" as the next 'gift to the world' too? Oh wait. They'd already started that nonsense too. Never mind little things like mantra deeksham.

Quote:Yoga is essentially Hindu and one of Hindu civilisation’s greatest gifts to the world. Why be sorry about it?

NO. The question - again - is: how/why is it a "gift" to the world? It is NOT.

And this is why the upaniShads were not meant for all and sundry. 'Cause inclined to new-ageism will readily 1. peddle this to subvert heathens and 2. peddle it to unworthies/aliens/christoislamics, and thus universalise what is NOT universal and NOT for everyone.

Neo-vedanta is to blame for the universalism: it started peddling the private pursuits of Sannyasis (who are by definition not aiming to be part of life/this world for much longer) as being the svadharma to be pursued by all ethnic Hindus.* Those who fell for it then became subverted and started peddling it to aliens.

* The individual dharma-s of the majority of HindOOs is reflected throughout the MBh and Ramayanam (and Pauranic material) which illustrate every ethnic Hindoo heathen's svadharma and are life-affirming and lead to bhukti and mukti for society at large.

The propagation of the itihaasas to ethnic Hindoo society has been replaced by the subversive peddling of neo-vedanta. From this

process, which has subverted the ethnic Hindus into new-ageists, has come the next level of subversion: peddling of Upanishads including yoga and even other aspects of Hindoo heathenism to aliens.

The BhagavadGita is an upaniShad that is directly useful to all Hindoos, because it validates ALL Hindoos in their own heathen lives, whatever this be. It affirms - such as by means of Arjuna - that karma yoga and bhakti yoga ARE yoga, and thus that we -us non-Sannyasins- don't need to abandon (indeed mustn't) what comes more natural to us and is suited to us, and mustn't abandon our natural attachment to our Gods (and thus our rites), in favour of pursuing full-time dhyAnayoga/contemplating the ahambrahmasmi etc as if we were all sannyasins. Most Hindoos were never Sannyasins, which pursuit was always that of a minority. Until the original pseudo-Vedantists appeared:

It was the Shramanists that originally wanted to peddle some 'sannyasin' state - their spin on this, at any rate - universally, on all laity, and would impose Bhavabhaya or rather Bhava odium on all and make all the native society nihilistic and stuck permanently contemplating other-worldliness. Hindoo society has paid greatly for that mistake of the subversions (conversions). Now neo-vedanta is pursuing the same nonsense that is destructing Hindoos' heathenism and Hindoo society and converting them from Hindoos into new-ageists.

That leads back to this again:

Quote:Yoga is essentially Hindu and one of Hindu civilisation’s greatest gifts to the world. Why be sorry about it?

How does reduced yoga belong to the more secularised-sounding 'Hindu civilisation' when it belongs specifically to Hindoo heathenism originally=authentically=exclusively (there can be no re-interpretations, like there can be none on OM).

Again, how did it become a "gift" to the world? And why would the world have use for any "yoga" that is NOT first stripped of Hindoo heathenism?

- Much of the world will not accept the Hindoo cosmological views that are INSEPARABLE from yoga, i.e. the old sAMkhya (seshvara sAMkhya, but any sAmkhya would be deemed offensive), as this goes not only against christoislam but against plain vanilla atheism too. It goes against all the west and the world at large.

- And if the author of the swarajyamag article is willing to peddle a yoga stripped of sAMkhyan views, which willingness on his part is *implicit* in his averring that yoga was meant as a "gift to the world", then why object to other Hindoo aspects being stripped from yoga too? Like OM. Like re-interpreting Ishvara to mean an atheism (as Elst and parrots did), etc.

- And again: why is it 'Hindu civilisation' and not Hindoo heathenism? 'Hindu civilisation' is a softer - more secularised - plank to start universalising Hindoo heathenism from.

I suspect every angelsk-speaking modern Indian 'Hindu' is a universalist, i.e. willing peddler of 'Hinduism Lite' to the west. They only differ by degree. And so the author of the swarajyamag article finds Naik's extreme universalism - in the form of total capitulation to islam by offering islamics to islamise yoga - offensive, but settles for a less drastic kind.

The answer is very simple: christoislamics should not do yoga. It is HindOO onlee. They cannot re-interpret Hindoo practices to refer to jeebusjehovallah or to make appeals to jeebushjehovallah, as it is about the Hindoo Gods onlee (doesn't stop christos and even some islamics from trying, but it is pointless, though many muslims are still not quite as idiotic as the desperately opportunistic christians in willingly subverting their own religion with paganism. But christianism is another success story of inculturation: it's still around isn't it?)

All re-interpretations of OM - to magically refer to jeebusjehovallah or the new invisible monodeity of Sikhism (which has since been declared to be specifically distinct from any Hindoo Gods) or which in time was given Buddhist and Jainist re-interpreted meanings - are simply that: re-interpretations.

There was a Buddhist/Buddhism peddler commenting at Elst's article on the Yogasutras, the one where Elst had defined Yogasutras as being 'actually more atheist than anything Hindoo heathen', so Elst could feel he had more right to dabble in this too (like he started to invoke Vedic Rishis since). Anyway, the Buddhism peddler had recommended some alien author's spin on the Yogasutras, as this work had "rescued Patanjali's Yogasutras from the Vedantic and theistic misinterpretations and acknowledged the heavy Buddhist influence." (For their exact phrasing, see bottom of this post.)

Indic universalists ("Hindus"/nationalists) of course would never dare respond. They're sticklers for this.

But then: Yoga needs to be rescued from the re-interpretations of EVERY inculturationist, including the Indic kinds. Note how they're all missionaries of missionary ideologies and want to claim yoga for themselves. When its origins and complete process of 'development' are in the Vedic religion onlee, in Veda texts onlee. Making everyone else a late plagiarist and - furthermore - a liar in pretending they have greater claims. They now deserve to be denied any. Though Hindus won't do that: won't return what Buddhists and Jains have been doing. (Though, at least, one can't say it would be either untrue or undeserved if Hindoos did it.)

Quote:In the early 1980s when the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) was spearheading a movement to reclaim the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, it had coined a slogan to provide the emotional quotient. ‘Garv se kaho hum Hindu hain’ (say with pride that we are Hindu) was the leitmotif that covered the Sangh Parivar’s larger ideological, cultural, and political agenda. The Ram Mandir in Ayodhya was one of the symbols of this Hindu renaissance that aimed at rekindling the Hindu pride. The slogan obviously angered the practitioners of the Indian variant of secularism. There was some discomfort on the non-secular side also. The discomfort had valid reasons.

The statement emphasised in bold is the author's - Abhiram Ghadyalpatil's - own interpretation.

But depending on how many vocalist "Hindu nationalist" treat the sacred site at Ayodhya and the necessity for the restoration of a temple to Hindoos' Sri Rama there as mere symbolism to prop up "Hindu pride" - is rather indicative of why there is still no Rama Mandiram at the site.

People first need to be deserving of it. And the undeserving gangrene is drowning (out) all those who are deserving.
Post 2/2

This is a more subtle case. But it must be said.


Quote:Let me make one thing very very clear. I am a practicing Catholic Christian. My voice is not against Christianity or Catholic religion.

They also gave us herd mentality and we need to break from that … which is not against the spirit of Jesus but in tune with what He taught.

Another problem is my emphasis on our own spiritual traditions which are far older… like the mother goddess worship which is very much in our blood.

I am today the voice of my people as the guardian of the coast of Mother India … as the owners and creators of this age old civilization… from Ramayana to Mahabharatha to every Purana my people have a role in it, they are not an imported people. They have their roots in this culture and in this spiritual tradition. The fact that I am a Catholic cannot deny this heritage of our people. I hence speak their voice.. the voice of our ancestors speaks through me.

Joe D'Cruz is welcome home Any Time of his choosing. But it must be wholly. With no vestige of anything else.

But until then he may make no claims.

He cannot AND remain a catholic/any type of christoislamic AND claim any part of Ramayanam/Mahabharatam/Puranas.

These itihaasas and puruNas speak of his Hindoo ancestors. Not of any christians who have replaced their lineages.

That is, these Hindoo texts mentioning the Tamizh fishing communities are not speaking of converts to Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Christianism, Islam, atheism, scientology, raelianism. They speak of those who were and remain ethnic Hindoos alone. Both: ethnic Hindu AND HindOO.

It is NOT a heritage of others. It is a living tradition and will ever remain exclusively the heritage of ethnic Hindoos alone. Conversion to other religions is NOT a free ticket to still make claim to Hindoo history with.

And when the last Hindoo among this fisherman community is dead - or the heathenism of the last Hindu fisherman has been murdered and converted to christianism/islam/atheism/whatever else - that is when the references in the Hindoo puranas and itihaasas to these fishermen ceases to speak of a living community but speaks of an extinct one: of HindOOs who existed once, but have now been replaced by replacement theologies.

Any dilution of the kind D'Cruz does - he claims he is a practising catholic, even while trying to claim Hindoo heathenism as his "heritage", based on the obviously dying vestiges/embers in his community of worshipping some unnamed "Mother Goddess" (this isn't a neopaganism, name her, she is named in the Vedam and subsequent scriptures of the Vedic tradition onlee)

Again: Any dilution of the kind D'Cruz does is an injustice to (and ultimately contributes to the destruction of) Hindoo heathenism and Hindoos - all those who have remained loyal and are not half-hearted, not trying to straddle the world of the genocidal and false christianism (christianism being an Evil Lie, as Julian said) and heathenism.

Any dilution further turns Hindoo heathenism into a travesty. Into a pick and choose religion. A buffet. Like alien neo-pagans have been doing.

Joe D'Cruz should come home when he's ready. He can take his time, but he may NOT claim any Hindoo heathenism - anything from the Vedam/Upanishads to itihasas and puranas and tantras and agamas - as the heritage of his christianised community or ANY christians or islamics or Bauddhified or Jainised etc in India or beyond. All of these converts to replacement theologies have run off with Hindoos and Hindoo heathenism, and have only used the inculturated "inherited" parts of the latter to make more converts from the former.

Can see Buddhists and Jains today pretend they have equal claims to Ramayana "traditions" etc and use this illegal self-enrichment to simultaneously missionise on more Hindoos.

Hindoo heathenism and all that comprises it are not a culture to be inherited, to have a pretend life in those in whom heathenism is dead or dying.

It belongs in the living heathens thereof and dies with them.

D'Cruz is free to return. Or free to stay where he is. And that is all the choice open to him. And if he chooses to return - instead of trying to straddle both heathenism and christianism, pretending the two can even be reconciled (what, like a Jewish concentration camp victim and the nazi gestapo who sent his people to the gas chambers?) - if D'Cruz ever chooses to return properly and fully, then all of Hindoo heathenism will be open to him. And the MBh and Ramayanam etc would be speaking of him, as a conscious Hindoo still of that tradition alone and unsubverted and insubvertible.

Not until then. Never until then.

Everywhere including Greece and Rome you can see catholics pretending they are the "native" "inheritors" of the ancient GrecoRoman Hellenistic "civilisation". Having genocided it. Genocide wasn't enough for christoislam: it has to pretend it has "inherited" it all. Merely by pointing to genetics, i.e. ethnicity.


But I'm sure no Hindu commenting will say that to D'Cruz and would in fact object to any other Hindus saying so. I admit D'Cruz is far from being an unsympathetic character, and that I am actually very much inclined towards liking him. But even so, and regardless, my religio and my heathens must be safeguarded from any gangrene and are the first and only priority. So before he can make claims upon any of this - or before Hindus being allowed to acknowledge his claims - he must be free of any gangrene and not bring it with him to poison heathenism with, as he would be doing by remaining a catholic while claiming Hindoo heathenism as some merely 'ethnic' heritage - No Ramayanam, MBh are not "all Indian" "heritage". They are Religio onlee.

If D'Cruz truly cared - and if he truly regrets his people's conversion, as many did for a long time after their initial conversion - he'd stay away until he was ready to take the full plunge into Hindoo heathenism. =What any unselfish person would do. What anyone who claimed to respect any of it would do.

Most important is for "Hindu nationalists" to not get carried away by emotions and let people like D'Cruz (and less sincere people will try to sneak in by the same door*) remain both a christian/anything unHindoo AND make claims on heathenism. *Because that's what Hinduwisdom.info's host once did to an Indonesian ex-Hindu convert to christianism who asked whether they can still claim Hindu history/achievements via "cultural" Hinduism. To which the Hinduwisdom.info host unthinkingly agreed.

Any "Hindu"/nationaist who agrees has essentially signed Hindoo heathenism's death warrant: because what is stopping every missionary religion from hereafter pillaging from Hindu heathenism as its "equal heritage" while still converting people out into their replacement theologies? Nothing is stopping them. Though that is exactly the position modern Hindus have against Buddhism etc constantly claiming Hindoo stuffs and still poaching from our people (and elsewhere still genociding them/their heathenism and that of others).

Aside: Meanwhile, "Gopi Thomas" - frequently seen commenting at swarajyamag - is a subtle subversionist. Whether she (?) is well-meaning or not is not even an important question. But odd how she is allowed to lecture Hindoos on their heathenism and gets applauded even. I recall something she said against Bhishma that found takers. Typical. Hindus will allow anyone to subvert them. Even christians who are still christian. Gopi Thomas is still a christian by the way*, so why is she allowed - by other Hindus to make claims on Hindoo heathenism as if any part or degree of it were her inheritance? Why do others allow her opinions - obviously informed by the presence of lingering christianism - to dictate the character of Bhishma. Some hours ago Gopi Thomas referred to Yoga as being recognised as an "Indian origin contribution". "All-Indian?" What, equally (or to any degree) hers?

Coming from Hindus that statement would be more short-sighted universalising of Hindoo stuffs. But coming from still-christians like Thomas, that statement is invariably to be taken as the first step of inculturation: declaring something is all-Indian before declaring it is equally christian then originally/actually christian.

If she were actually interested in "Indian traditions" why doesn't she revert? Exactly why does she spend so much time on Hindu nationalist sites (even as 'her cardinal is [still] Cleemens', see below).

And why does she declare opinions on Hindoo matters with "authority"? How can even a recent revert - let alone someone who is still christian and not reverted nor has chosen to be - be an authority at all? Even recent reverts have only the right to learn from Hindoo experts, not to arrogate authority to themselves and interpret for themselves and lecture with their speculations.

And until people revert, they are not to be trusted, and Hindu nationalist readers should stop elevating these people to more than they are: christians who are not hostile. Any more, and Hindoos and their heathenism will only get burned. Wouldn't be the first time.

And why do Hindu nationalists expect such people to revert? Why do they never push for it? But clearly Gopi doesn't want to, else she would have. She can speak of Indian nationalism if she wants to be a nationalist while being christian (if her church and cardinal and religion allow her). She has no right to speak of Hindoo heathenism or dabble in reading its stuffs part-time while still being a christian. Christians pretending to be sympathetic need to stop turning Hindoo heathenism into a travesty and stop making a joke out of their own religion too, which does not approve of heathenisms and their misplaced sympathy and clearly they're acting independent of it (then why still pretend, like it's some neopaganism worshipping jeebus and reading Hellenistic philosophy). Can't have the cake and eat it to.

Quote:gopi thomas • 4 hours ago

Yoga is immensely popular throughout the world; recogmized as an Indian origin contribution by all over.

* Found it:


Quote: gopi thomas • 3 months ago

The English media jumps at the first instance and takes the position giving a headline completely distorting the incident. For example, the recent Haryana 'church demolition'... A Hanuman bust near the cross may not be welcome to many; however, it hardly qualifies as demolition. There are too many examples..

One would think there is an ISIS type attack on Yazdis happening here!

There are many NGOs whose survival depends on fund collection from abroad by magnifying these. May be they are pumping money into newspapers/editors. I cannot see any other reason for distorting and undue coverage - of course the Modi hate is there ... How did the chaiwallah come to power after 'we put up a major obstacle"..

I was a lil disturbed by Sri Rubio's article.. may be he is becoming senile. Age catches up.

I was more than troubled by my Cardinal - Cleemes - statement about cow protection /women protection/ nun protection. I believe t ddnt come from him; he was forced to make that statement.
Not inculturation by christianism.

Outright theft by the west, here the cosmetics industry. But not sure of the thread in which this should be archived.

Quote:JagoBharatVasiyo > gopi thomas • 20 hours ago

Aveda is one such company started by an American by stealing Ayurvedic knowledge and plants from India and starting a cosmetics company and then sold to I believe L'oreal for billions. This is just one such example. There are lots more like this. And what we got in return, absolutely nothing.

How the illegitimate is legitimised by merely exchanging hands. Rather like the theft and smuggling of Hindoo vigrahas into western museums, where they pass from "private collections" purchased from smugglers (or stolen first-hand) to museums and it magically becomes legal.

Surprised Hindus still haven't gone to war over these things.

In contrast, AmeriKKKa would have nuked nations or otherwise genocided people over the same.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)