Re: Hindu: According To Me
namaste eriko.
Originally Posted by
eriko
A Hindu is the one who realizes that It is the greatest receptor (conscious being) in the universe, treats the Law Of Karma as the driving force behind all universal occuring and constantly works towards moksha in all Its births.
Hindus are always concerned about the quality and not the quanity, so people who are born as Hindus, but remain as Hindus but don't realize this cannot be considered as Hindus.
I can have umpteen definitions about who is a Hindu and who is not, feel elated about their supposed spirituality, brevity and objectivity, and then go gaga about them pronouncing 'Hey, this one is a Hindu, this one is not by this definition', but all my attempts would be pathetic, unless even my personal-and-to-me-only definitions
• acknowledge the authority of the Vedas
• recognize and revere the ancient land and culture that gave me the true knowledge and the means to attain it.
As Yajvan has pointed out subtly and Snip more openly, I need to acknowledge and revere the origin, which is always materialistic in manifest creation, because it is akin to the reverence I show towards my mother.
The defintion you have given, although intended to focus on the spiritual aspect rather than the dharmic rituals and practices that are worldy, suffers from deficiencies that include:
• First of all, how do I know about the 'It'? By hearsay? From the textbooks? From the Internet? Or from my own Self-Realization? Even for my own Self-Realization, I need to know about 'It' first, so how do I know it?
The answer to all these questions, is the Vedas. Only the Vedas have taught me that I am not what I am or what I seem to be, and that I am the divine Tat. Just as a Christian or Muslim or a person of any other religion cannot talk about his religion without remembering its 'Bible' and its 'Prophet', as a Hindu, I cannot talk about my religion in any other sense except as the Vedic religion.
• The knowledge of the Vedas was 'heard', and 'seen' and then disseminated to us by the great Rishis who are the forefathers of all Hindus. I cannot talk about the laws of motion or force of gravity in science without remembering the name of Newton; about the Bible without remembering the names of the Apostles; of the Quran, ignoring the name of Mohammad. But then I talk about my own Vedas day in and day out until the side edges of my mouth are sour or my typewriting fingers develop cramps and yet do not know the name of a single Rishi who gave me the knowledge! This is a strength--not a weakness--of a Hindu because a Hindu only needs to remember, not the names of the Rishis but the fact that the Vedas were given to mankind by the Rishis.
• It is alright to say that I am a Hindu although I am not born in India, but who am I to say that a Hindu born in India and in Hinduism is not a Hindu because he/she has not realized It or have such and such other qualifications?
Where is Hinduism and the concept of Hindus without the ancient India, her citicizens and her global culture--the Sanatana Dharma that she gave the world and proved its efficacy by her citizens remaining as living examples of the Dharma for centuries--if not thousands--of years until the apple cart was upset by the Islamic and European invasions?
Thus, any definition and conviction about Hinduism and Hindus, even a personal one, that ignores the source and seeks to be exclusive rather than inclusive, can only help to fan our ego rather than advance us towards Self-Realization.
रत्नाकरधौतपदां हिमालयकिरीटिनीम् ।
ब्रह्मराजर्षिररत्नाढ्यां वन्दे भारतमातरम् ॥
To her whose feet are washed by the ocean, who wears the Himalayas as her crown, and is adorned with the gems of rishis and kings, to Mother India, do I bow down in respect.
--viShNu purANam
Bookmarks