incorperating Yamas and Niyamas into our Sadhana , can we realy call our selves Hindu if we dont ?

[shivsomashekhar]

the question is can we realy call ourselves Hindu if we dont at least try to follow them ?

Yes. There is not a *single* rule that the Hindu needs to follow to be a Hindu. The only criteria for being Hindu is

Be born into a Hindu family (and not convert over to Islam, etc.)
Or be born into a different religion, but adopt the Hindu label.

There is nothing else to be done. For those, who are unclear of what Hindu entails, here is a quick write-up -
https://shivsomashekhar.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/hinduism-or-sanatana-dharma/

 

[Chakra]

Many Buddhists are atheist, and yet observe rituals.

Same for many Mimamsakaras, although they also include polytheists.

I think at that point, the question is not "atheist or theist", but rather "spiritualist/mystic or materialist".

 

[Kirran]

I think at that point, the question is not "atheist or theist", but rather "spiritualist/mystic or materialist".

That seems fair. Perhaps even 'materialist or non-materialist' - idealist takes seem to me to merge into takes in which the ultimate truth is neither ideal nor material. Materialists are more discrete.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The constitution of India provides a much broader definition. Anyone who claims to be a Jain, Buddhist, Sikh or Hindu, is a Hindu.

That is not true, Shiva. The Constitution clearly accepts them as separate religions, only applies the same civil laws to them since they have one culture. This also has changed in recent times. Sikhs have their own rules and others also are eligible to ask for their own rules. Constitution is not averse to that.

I think at that point, the question is not "atheist or theist", but rather "spiritualist/mystic or materialist".

No question can be asked of a Hindu other than whether he is one or not. Atheist or theist, spiritual/mystic or materialist, all can be Hindus.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Kiran ji

Many Buddhists are atheist, and yet observe rituals.

this sadly is a missunderstanding , the majority of non theistic Buddhists are simply non theistic , ...no need to be Atheistic this is a rather western concept , ...

this whole new take on Buddhism comes from Global secularisation , ...this secularisation affects not just Buddhism but Hinduism and other faiths , ....

if you look closely at Buddhist practice (Sadhana) it follows the same practices as contained in the Eight limbs of yoga the only differences are those that you also as an Advaitin have chosen to make , ....marked in Red , ....the only difference is that the Buddhist regards the attainment of Buddhi to be the supreme state , ....Many Buddhists on the other hand regard Buddha to be not only Divine but also eternal , .....and posessing the same qualities of omnicience omnipotence and omnipresence that a Hindu might equate witth the Supreme whether that be Ishvara or Brahman , ...

the eight limbs of yoga , .....

1. Yama ; ......... Universal Morality
2. Niyama ; ...... Personal Observances
3. Asanas ; ...... Body Postures
4. Pranayama ; . Control of Prana through Breathing
   
5. Pratyahara ; . Control of the senses
6. Dharana ; .... Concentration and cultivating inner perceptual awareness
7. Dhyana ; ...... Devotion, Meditative absorbtion in the Divine
8. Samadhi ; .... Union with the Divine

you have linturpreted the Eight limbs with marginal differences , ...as being Yamas and Niyamas folowed by , ...


Asana - physical posture
Pranayama - breath control
Pratyahara - withdrawal of senses from objects
Dharana - one-pointedness of mind
Dhyana - flowing meditation
Samadhi - union, a state deep within meditation where there is no longer any subject-object division.

Personaly I dont think it matters to the extent that it is worth arguing about as when one attains Buddhi Moksha or Samadhi , ...all which we are incapable of comprehending will be understood , known and experienced , ....
so for any one to addopt a stance of Anti anything it seems to me some what presumptious or vainglorious ? it is like saying I allready know !!! ...?

 

[ratikala]

Not necessarily anybody. The ritual can be useful for the practitioner. Or they may not believe in God, but believe that ancestors, teachers etc can hear them.

I wouldn't say they are necessarily confused, no. Just different to theistic takes.

for their ancestors , or teachers to hear them , .....they must have become Buddhas , ...or Ghosts , ...or at least reside in heavenly realms ...

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Shantanu ji

Who would atheist Buddhists perform their rituals as an offer to? - or what purpose do the rituals serve? Is this not an indication of their confusion over the supernatural?

I assume that those thinking themselves to be atheist Buddhists dont understand the Rituals they are performing , ...many rituals are much the same as Hindu rituals that are performed as a way of seeking blessings , ....Personaly I fail to see how an atheist can seek blessings ???....blessings from What ? ...

 

[Kirran]

namaskaram Kiran ji



this sadly is a missunderstanding , the majority of non theistic Buddhists are simply non theistic , ...no need to be Atheistic this is a rather western concept , ...

this whole new take on Buddhism comes from Global secularisation , ...this secularisation affects not just Buddhism but Hinduism and other faiths , ....

if you look closely at Buddhist practice (Sadhana) it follows the same practices as contained in the Eight limbs of yoga the only differences are those that you also as an Advaitin have chosen to make , ....marked in Red , ....the only difference is that the Buddhist regards the attainment of Buddhi to be the supreme state , ....Many Buddhists on the other hand regard Buddha to be not only Divine but also eternal , .....and posessing the same qualities of omnicience omnipotence and omnipresence that a Hindu might equate witth the Supreme whether that be Ishvara or Brahman , ...

the eight limbs of yoga , .....

1. Yama ; ......... Universal Morality
2. Niyama ; ...... Personal Observances
3. Asanas ; ...... Body Postures
4. Pranayama ; . Control of Prana through Breathing
   
5. Pratyahara ; . Control of the senses
6. Dharana ; .... Concentration and cultivating inner perceptual awareness
7. Dhyana ; ...... Devotion, Meditative absorbtion in the Divine
8. Samadhi ; .... Union with the Divine

you have linturpreted the Eight limbs with marginal differences , ...as being Yamas and Niyamas folowed by , ...


Asana - physical posture
Pranayama - breath control
Pratyahara - withdrawal of senses from objects
Dharana - one-pointedness of mind
Dhyana - flowing meditation
Samadhi - union, a state deep within meditation where there is no longer any subject-object division.

Personaly I dont think it matters to the extent that it is worth arguing about as when one attains Buddhi Moksha or Samadhi , ...all which we are incapable of comprehending will be understood , known and experienced , ....
so for any one to addopt a stance of Anti anything it seems to me some what presumptious or vainglorious ? it is like saying I allready know !!! ...?

I didn't mean atheist as in anti-theist! Just that they don't rely on a personal God. I believe Buddha said, regarding the origins of the world and whether there was a God in the sense of a personal Creator; "We can't know for sure. Don't bother with that, and get on with attaining enlightenment."

So it's an agnostic atheism, I suppose.

Atheism is simply the lack of belief in God, not a certainty of there being no God.

Sorry for confusion, ratiben. Pranams.

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Ji

I didn't mean atheist as in anti-theist! Just that they don't rely on a personal God. I believe Buddha said, regarding the origins of the world and whether there was a God in the sense of a personal Creator; "We can't know for sure. Don't bother with that, and get on with attaining enlightenment."

So it's an agnostic atheism, I suppose.

Atheism is simply the lack of belief in God, not a certainty of there being no God.

Sorry for confusion, ratiben. Pranams.

Pranams most humbly accepted and returned , ....

this is the sad problem of Discussing in English , ...we use the word God so it has Christian Theistic overtones , ..so here we have Hindus and Buddhists identifying as Atheist , ...Anti Theist , ...Secular , ....all these are dangerous , ...

Here the discussion is Yamas and Niyamas which even if the Ishvara Consciousness is taken out , Yoga is still a method of linking the mind to a higher level of understanding , a desire to trancend the Bodily and tempoary realm Trancending secular concerns , ....Ok whilst we are here be behave in accordance with a morality which is benificial to all with whom we temporarily share this position , ...but both Yoga and Buddhism aim to trancent this and to realise that , .....

 

[Kirran]

Pranams most humbly accepted and returned , ....

this is the sad problem of Discussing in English , ...we use the word God so it has Christian Theistic overtones , ..so here we have Hindus and Buddhists identifying as Atheist , ...Anti Theist , ...Secular , ....all these are dangerous , ...

Here the discussion is Yamas and Niyamas which even if the Ishvara Consciousness is taken out , Yoga is still a method of linking the mind to a higher level of understanding , a desire to trancend the Bodily and tempoary realm Trancending secular concerns , ....Ok whilst we are here be behave in accordance with a morality which is benificial to all with whom we temporarily share this position , ...but both Yoga and Buddhism aim to trancent this and to realise that , .....

Very much agreed. As well as Yoga in the sense of Patanjali's Yoga, I would say we can include the four yogas here too. So including bhakti!

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Shivsomashekhar Ji

Yes. There is not a *single* rule that the Hindu needs to follow to be a Hindu. The only criteria for being Hindu is

Yamas and Niyamas are not Rules , .......

you will kindly note I used the correct terms , ....

Yamas being restraints , ...and Niyamas being observances , ....

Be born into a Hindu family (and not convert over to Islam, etc.)
Or be born into a different religion, but adopt the Hindu label.

so it is a label ??? .................not a Noble tradition???

There is nothing else to be done. For those, who are unclear of what Hindu entails, here is a quick write-up -
https://shivsomashekhar.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/hinduism-or-sanatana-dharma/

You are quoting your own Blog , ....??? ....prehaps we need a higher authority than your own opinion , ...???

We have discussed this previously , .....Sanatana Dharma Due to its eternal nature needs no title , ...the title is for sake of clarity only , ....

 

[Kirran]

To be honest, I'd say Hindu is the label used to describe a family of traditions, rather than being the name of one single tradition. Sanatana Dharma, as you use it ratikala, of course extends beyond Hinduism to universal values.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Namaskaram Shivsomashekhar Ji

Yamas and Niyamas are not Rules , .......

you will kindly note I used the correct terms , ....

But they are rules. Niyama translates to rule/limitation/convention/restriction/law. How are you translating it?

so it is a label ??? .................not a Noble tradition???

How can Hinduism - an umbrella term, formed to contain widely diverse, pre-existing beliefs - be a a single, unified tradition? We are all sentimental about it and while, that is all good, it does not mean that we can start making up rules (yamas and niyamas) for all of Hinduism. Besides, the bulk of those rules can easily be applied to other religions as well.

You are quoting your own Blog , ....??? ....prehaps we need a higher authority than your own opinion , ...???

I did not claim that to be a quote of authority. I posted the link instead of typing out all that text again. There are several people who are ignorant of the labels Hindu and SD, their history and their significance and so I have it written down to avoid repetition.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Niyama normally translates to "rules" (so shivji is right) but that is a common mistranslated (the correct sanskrit word for rules is vidhi). Niyama and yama used in the context of Yoga, have very specific meanings (they are part of a process as Ratikala ji stated.).

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Atheism is simply the lack of belief in God, not a certainty of there being no God.

That is confusing. They sound the same to me.

If you are seeing the two as different and labeling the first type as atheist, what is your label for the second type?

And how do you translate the sanskrit word nastika?

 

[Kirran]

That is confusing. They sound the same to me.

If you are seeing the two as different and labeling the first type as atheist, what is your label for the second type?

And how do you translate the sanskrit word nastika?

So it's like 'Is there somebody in the next room?' 'I don't know' vs. 'No, it's empty.'

I'd say they're both atheists. But the latter is a strong atheist, or a gnostic atheist.

Ouch. Variously Historically, this was applied to a certain set of philosophical traditions within the Vedic complex of North India, which did not follow the Vedas as the astika schools did but were nevertheless in a set of traditions in which the Vedas were so prominent that they were defined by their non-acceptance of them. Buddhism, Jainism, Charvakism and Ajivikism.

So one could just expand that to all non-Veda-accepting or -centred philosophies.

It's also used a lot for 'atheist', although it isn't quite speaking of those who reject a personal Ishwara but much more broadly speaking of those who reject 'a Seer' of some kind. Whether it is actually accurately applied, I don't know.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

So it's like 'Is there somebody in the next room?' 'I don't know' vs. 'No, it's empty.'

AFAIK, the common labels for these categories are agnost (I do not know) and atheist (No).

So one could just expand that to all non-Veda-accepting or -centred philosophies.

According to Panini, nastika is a non-believer. The subject of non-belief can vary. In the religious context, it has been used for non-belief in an after world, non-belief in the veda and non-belief in Ishwara and so on. I would say atheist comes pretty close to the term - more than any other word.

Atheist too, means disbelief in a subject of religious nature. So, it means different things to different people. A devout Christian may view all non-Christians as atheists, a Muslim may view all non-Muslims as atheists and so on. Aup considers belief in Brahman as atheism.

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Nitai Dasa ji

Niyama normally translates to "rules" (so shivji is right) but that is a common mistranslated (the correct sanskrit word for rules is vidhi). Niyama and yama used in the context of Yoga, have very specific meanings (they are part of a process as Ratikala ji stated.).

Thank you Prabhu ji , ...

all be it for me to speak on sanskrit , ..but I feel that Context in which it is spoken is very important , ...as I said ''restraints'' , ...meaning that it is a voluentary imposition one places willigly upon one self out of a sence of duty , ....

यम yama m. self-control forbearance
यम yama m. any rule or observance
यम yama m. any great moral rule or duty
यम yama m. restraint
यम yama m. bridle


and of course yes there are rules in the sence of 'Law' , ..as there are Laws of Nature , Law of Causation and Laws of Karma , ....

therefore in the Case of Niyamas it is a matter of observing such laws , ...as to break them goes aginst the Laws of Nature , against the Laws of Dharma , ....

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Shivsomashekhar ji

But they are rules. Niyama translates to rule/limitation/convention/restriction/law. How are you translating it?

Rule as in Law , ....but we must understand if we come at it from this perspective it is a code of conduct observed as to dissregard it brings chaos upon society , upon mankind , and upon life in its entirity , ..to respect it is to bring Harmony into our own lives and the lives of others , .....

How can Hinduism - an umbrella term, formed to contain widely diverse, pre-existing beliefs - be a a single, unified tradition? We are all sentimental about it and while, that is all good, it does not mean that we can start making up rules (yamas and niyamas) for all of Hinduism. Besides, the bulk of those rules can easily be applied to other religions as well.

I am not in the least sentimental about the term Hindu'ism , ....Yamas and Niyamas are for humans as oposed to animals , ....Animals eat , sleep , mate and deffend , ....to be higer than animals we act in accordance with certain Laws , recognising such laws as the Law of Nature the Law of causation , the Law of Dharma is what differentiates a human being from an animal , ....

prehaps also the reason that the same laws are recognised by many religions is that these religions are religions of mankind we are all human we may all equaly dissern the need to act acording to some moral or ethical code , ...

And how do you translate the sanskrit word nastika?

Astika , ......Having faith .......Nastika Not having faith , .....which is nearer to agnostic rather than atheistic , .... not having faith may not be the same as not beleiving , ....

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Sayak ji

Japa and Huta seem non-essential. A person devoted to sadhana of self-less action or knowledge/truth do not necessarily need to do Isvarapujana. In general they may be virtues that can be aspired for and perfected, but are certainly not a criteria for being a Hindu or being excluded from Hinduism.

there is no obligation to practice all symultaniously , one of course may practice one which may in time lead on to andn understanding of another , ....

I was not nececarily thinking of exclusion , ...but more of each person taking time to reveiw the qualities associated with Hindu Dharma , ...

I am unsure if the primary meaning of Brahmacharya is the attitude of studentship that secondarily involves restraint of Kama that disrupts the mind that can absorb understanding and gain wisdom from a teacher, or the primary meaning is restraint of sense pleasures. I think its the former.

it is generaly considered in one sence to be a stage of life where by one restrains oneself from all forms of indulgences particularly those that gratify the sences as these distract the mind from learning , however even as one progresses into maried life one may practice Brahmacharya by restraining the sences and by preserving the sanctity of maraige , ...one may also observe the practice of celebacy within mariage , regarding sex life as merly for procreation, ...otherwise it can become a distraction , ..in the context of the Yamas the primary meaning is that of dedicating ones time and energy to higher things than pleasuring the sences , ...so it may be practiced at all stages of life , ........basicaly it is reminding us to maintain a healthy ballance and focus , ...