“Thus I have explained to you the most confidential of all knowledge. Deliberate on this fully, and then do what you wish to do.” (Lord Krishna, Bhagavad­-gita, 18.63)

Download this episode (right click and save)

इति ते ज्ञानम् आख्यातं
गुह्याद् गुह्यतरं मया
विमृश्यैतद् अशेषेण
यथेच्छसि तथा कुरु

iti te jñānam ākhyātaṁ
guhyād guhyataraṁ mayā
vimṛśyaitad aśeṣeṇa
yathecchasi tathā kuru

In this hypothetical situation, I am approached by someone and asked to describe the particular faith to which I belong. If there would be a local church to have affiliation, a book to swear an oath on, or a box to check on an official government form, which one would it be?

From knowing me, the person asking the question assumes that the answer would be “Hindu” to the religion followed. In a nice way, I take slight objection, as I am not entirely comfortable with that designation. I know that it is the word most commonly associated with a certain way of life, applying to a specific geographic region, but just because others go along with something does not make it valid or rooted in truth.

1. It is a term created by outsiders

“The ‘Hindu’ term is from outsiders. You will not find it in any of our sacred texts. We maintain access to the original scripts of these texts. Though it may be difficult, people can still read the original texts. We have translations, for sure, as is necessary with the passage of time, but the so-called ‘change disease’, as described by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, is a little more difficult to stick on the Sanskrit culture.

“Other people saw this particular culture and didn’t know what to make of it. They came up with this idea of ‘Hinduism,’ based on a juxtaposition to a specific river or valley. It is fine if that is how others want to identify the culture, but understand that it is a deep, significant, and rich culture, with many subtleties and nuances. The name applying to that culture should not be based on geography.”

2. The term has no real meaning

“The ‘Hindu’ term has no real meaning. As a simple example, consider that both my neighbor and I belong to this particular religion. Others will say that I am a Hindu and that my neighbor is also a Hindu. The problem is that I have a certain way of going about life. I follow a specific conclusion about the nature of the world and its origin. I adjust my diet accordingly. I celebrate certain holidays throughout the year.

“My neighbor, who is also Hindu under this designation, has an entirely different conclusion about the meaning of life. They celebrate different holidays. They eat different kinds of food. The two of us barely share anything similar in the way we go about life. To say that we are both Hindu, in this context, is to give up in trying to understand. It is taking shelter of a term that has no actual meaning.”

3. There are too many misconceptions

“The ‘Hindu’ term also carries many misconceptions. We are accused of having the degraded caste system. While the system has its many obvious flaws today, the original version is scientific in nature. It is nothing more than a proper division of labor applying to society at large.

चातुर्-वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टं
गुण-कर्म-विभागशः
तस्य कर्तारम् अपि मां
विद्ध्य् अकर्तारम् अव्ययम्

cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ
guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ
tasya kartāram api māṁ
viddhy akartāram avyayam

“According to the three modes of material nature and the work ascribed to them, the four divisions of human society were created by Me. And, although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the non-doer, being unchangeable.” (Lord Krishna, Bhagavad-gita, 4.13)

“On the local baseball team, for instance, one person throws the ball. Another person catches, and another person protects a particular base. The players have different qualities. The catcher is not well suited to playing the outfield, in running down fly balls. The outfielder likely cannot withstand remaining in a seated, crouched position for upwards of nine innings. The different players are equally members of the team, though they take on different roles. It is similar with the origin of the caste system, which is varnashrama-dharma in the proper understanding.

“People say that Hindus worship cows. Actually, in a mood of reverence we show respect to a lot of people. It begins with the parents. We offer the same to our teachers. The spiritual guide and the parents can both be identified as guru. We respect the cow in the same manner, as she is an innocent mother who produces an abundance of milk at the mere sight of her children. To kill her simply to satisfy taste desires is akin to killing one’s own mother for the same purpose.”

“There are seven kinds of mothers according to Vedic injunction: the real mother, the wife of a teacher or spiritual master, the wife of a king, the wife of a brahmana, the cow, the nurse, and the mother earth. Because Putana came to take Krishna on her lap and offer her breast’s milk to be sucked by Him, she was accepted by Krishna as one of His mothers.” (Krishna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vol 1, Ch 6)

4. There is no dogmatic insistence

“When you inquire as to which faith I connect with, you are implying that what I follow bears any resemblance to other traditions popular in the world or local to the area. The big difference is that there is no dogmatic insistence. If you apply the ‘Hindu’ term, then you sort of get away with lumping us in with others.

“We take issue with that association because the culture is scientific in nature. We do not need to scare anyone into following. There is no reason to threaten precisely because we consider birth to be a horrible event. Birth is one of four miseries to experience in this existence. From birth you get old age, disease, and death. How can we frighten others about a bleak future in the afterlife when we already have in our destiny the horror of forced separation from all of our attachments? What can be worse than this?

“Rather, the culture appeals to the understanding and rational thinking in the human species. We should hear. We should show respect. We should offer some service to the ones teaching us. After the interaction is complete, we should deliberate fully. We should be convinced on our own of the validity to the presentation. We should not follow blindly, out of fear, or simply to get along with the rest of the crowd.”

5. The culture is scientific in nature

“We do not like the ‘Hindu’ term because it relegates the culture to some kind of mass allegiance that lacks intelligence. The proper term is ‘sanatana-dharma.’ Dharma can refer to righteousness, honor, duty, or religion, as the rest of the world understands it. But dharma is actually the essential characteristic of something, and when applying to the individual, it refers to their tendency to serve.

“Real religion is one. It is known as sanatana-dharma because this essential characteristic applies to all periods of time. Dharma is not created. It never goes away. To say that we belong to a specific faith is akin to saying scientists subscribe to the faith in the law of gravity. That would not make sense. The law of gravity applies whether someone believes in it or not.

“In the same way, the scientific nature to the material energy, time, the individual, the consequences to action, and the Supreme Being overseeing everything applies whether one is familiar with the principles or not. These five topics [prakriti, kāla, jiva, karma, and ishvara] are covered nicely in Bhagavad-gita, which is a sacred text appealing to the entire human population, irrespective of the box they check on a government form.”

In Closing:

To which do I belong?
A tradition timeless and strong.

One that is scientifically based,
Never by time erased.

One by the intellect to approach,
Not by force to encroach.

Or others to frighten and scare,
Dharma for the sober and aware.

Categories: the five

Tags: bhagavad-gita, dailyprompt, hindu, hinduism, poem, poems, poetry