Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Labels and Practice

  1. #1

    Labels and Practice

    Namaste

    There are a couple of things that I have been struggling about concerning the path of Sanatana Dharma and they are the usage of labels and the practices that a person does.

    I've read a few webpages and then threads on this message board about who is a Hindu (or adherent of SD). Here are some of the answers to this question that I've come across:
    • One who reverently accepts the Vedas
    • One who accepts even a few chapters of a text (Purana, Upanishad, etc)
    • One who was born into a Hindu family
    • One whose origin is on the other side of the Indus
    • One who is in contact with a Guru
    My question is this: who/what is the correct authority on who is a Hindu?

    I must let it be known that I am not interested in calling myself a Hindu because consciously I think (linguistically) that a Hindu is someone whose origin is on the other side of the Indus from the Persians' point of view. What I should be interested in is actually: can I say that I follow Sanatana Dharma? Labels, to someone who believes that God is not the sole property of any one religion or people, are not important. Using words that describe what I am/do and believe in, is perhaps a better thing to do. For example, I am a Reflective Mystic (deeply thinking of God to eventually attain union) and believer in Monistic Idealism (that consciousness is the ground of all existence). The only sacred texts that I find valuable are those which are found in Sanatana Dharma because they resonate with my practice/belief and are like a wonderful warm cup of chai. The problem is when I may have to reveal on a form or document what exactly my "religion" is or if someone came and asked me what my "religion" is. It would be easier to say that I follow Sanatana Dharma or Hinduism than to say "well, I am a Reflective Mystic, believer in Monistic Idealism, and reader of Hindu texts" because the latter would require more explanation. So what must be known is this: what makes one a follower of Sanatana Dharma and who is the right authority with this answer?

    The other thing that I want to talk about is the actual practice for someone in my situation; believer, new, and without Guru.

    From what I read as a reply to my very first post on this wonderful message board is that I should pray and meditate as much as possible.

    In this year I have been learning about different faces of God in SD and I have attempted to see which ones resonate with myself. Ganapati does but Lord Rama resonates much better with me, so far. The arguments amongst some Hindus over which deity is the Supreme or worthy of worship is, from my point of view and belief, rather juvenile. It will always be to me that Ganapati, Shiva, Devi, Vishnu, et cetera and all of their forms are Brahman and Paramatma; nothing is superior to anything else because there is no difference in the first place. It's like how I believe that the Bhagavad-Gita is not limited to any denomination and that any deity and prince could had spoken to each other. The only thing that concerns me is why is it that certain faces of God appeal to one person rather than other faces of God.

    My posting about what faces of God resonate best with myself has to do with the practices of prayer and meditation. Whenever I meditate it is either by one of these methods: (a) mentally repeating the sacred syllable Aum in alignment with the breath or (b) mentally or silently repeating Sri Ram as a mantra. Whenever I am awake I remember the name Sri Ram and other things about Lord Rama as much as possible.

    There are people who see no harm in someone like myself meditating on Aum and then there are those who believe that I must not do this practice. As for the use of Sri Ram as a mantra, I cannot see why anyone (if anyone is at all) opposed to it. I've read that any mantra has no value to the user whatsoever if they did not receive it from a Guru. Ever since I started using Sri Ram a few weeks ago it has not ceased to quickly develop love in my heart, make me feel ecstatic because of that sweet and wonderful presence of God, and have more of a spiritual attitude in daily life. Even the syllable Aum has small likeable effects and there was a time where I experienced Aum as a very vast and tranquil consciousness that is actually not verbal or having to do with language in the first place. My experiences are telling me that it must not be necessary to be initiated by a Guru to do the practice of meditating on Aum or the Bhakti-Smarana. If it is wrong of me to do any of these without permission of a Guru, then please show me scriptures that say so. If it turns out that I must cease these practices at once, then please show me how I should meditate according to scripture (Bhagavad-Gita, Puranas, Upanishads, etc) to where I will not be in the wrong.

    My main reason on why it is certainly fine for anyone to meditate on Aum (Pranava Yoga) is that the sacred syllable itself is the very Paramatma that resides in this body which is the temple of God and the breath makes its sound according to Upanishad(s). Why need permission to meet that when it must then be your birthright?
    Last edited by rmystic; 17 July 2008 at 12:31 AM. Reason: Added more to the second to last sentence at the bottom.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    369

    Re: Labels and Practice

    Quote Originally Posted by rmystic View Post
    Namaste
    There are a couple of things that I have been struggling about concerning the path of Sanatana Dharma and they are the usage of labels and the practices that a person does.

    I've read a few webpages and then threads on this message board about who is a Hindu (or adherent of SD). Here are some of the answers to this question that I've come across:
    • One who reverently accepts the Vedas
    • One who accepts even a few chapters of a text (Purana, Upanishad, etc)
    • One who was born into a Hindu family
    • One whose origin is on the other side of the Indus
    • One who is in contact with a Guru
    My question is this: who/what is the correct authority on who is a Hindu?
    Namaste mystic,

    I see that your questions are unanswered for sometime and thus though I am not the correct person to answer such questions, I venture to add a few points. More appropriate answers should be forthcoming.

    By definition, a Hindu is an individual who accepts the religious guidance of the Vedic scriptures. This is the constant guide. Other definitions are more or less political or less accurate.


    What I should be interested in is actually: can I say that I follow Sanatana Dharma?
    You certainly can. You can visit a local temple of your area, if available, and seek guidance from the priest. It is always better to be guided.


    There are people who see no harm in someone like myself meditating on Aum and then there are those who believe that I must not do this practice. As for the use of Sri Ram as a mantra, I cannot see why anyone (if anyone is at all) opposed to it. I've read that any mantra has no value to the user whatsoever if they did not receive it from a Guru.
    One must not discuss or divulge one's mantra indiscriminately. There are complicated reasons for this. While it is certainly true that a mantra is almost useless without a diksha from a Guru, yet you are free to totally surrender at the feet of God and then it is His responsibilty. Also there are vedic mantras like Gayatri, Mrityuonjaya, and few others that by their very vibrations are said to induce changes and lead one to the correct path. I think that loving acceptance of a vedic mahamantra is submission at the feet of Lord.

    My main reason on why it is certainly fine for anyone to meditate on Aum (Pranava Yoga) is that the sacred syllable itself is the very Paramatma that resides in this body which is the temple of God and the breath makes its sound according to Upanishad(s). Why need permission to meet that when it must then be your birthright?
    IMO, It is a question of authority. An order passed by a clerk and by the CEO will have different weightage; a clerk's dictum no one will follow. We at our present level cannot even imagine the difference between the minds of a sage and a common man. A sage has the power to quieten most turbulent of minds. That power a common man certainly lacks. So, accepting superiority and bowing down to Guru is a strict requirement. But yet again, you can surrender without any question at the feet of Rama. Then you must unquestioningly accept what God gives.

    Om
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •