Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
I am interested in Vedanta, but was wondering if they call themselves as followers of Vedanta or Hinduism? Is there a regular place of worship or just on certain days? Any specific ways to worship? I'm a newbie...
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It's all definitions. What's your definition of Religion, Hindu, Vedanta, etc.? You don't want to get the group here started believe me.I am interested in Vedanta, but was wondering if they call themselves as followers of Vedanta or Hinduism?
No and No.Is there a regular place of worship or just on certain days?
NoAny specific ways to worship? I'm a newbie...
We here were known as Hindus since before the time of Zoroaster (Zarathroshta - people living around the River 'Sindhu' or east of it. Central Asians and Persians could not pronounce 's' and made in to an 'h', therefore 'Hendu'; of the land of seven rivers 'Sapta-Sindhu' or 'Hapta-Hendu', that is modern Pakhtoonkhwa (Gandhara), Indian and Pakistani Punjab, and the Indian state of Haryana where River Saraswati flowed at one time (Aryavarta). It has since dried up). Of course, we were always as colorful as a stained-glass window.Now of course, we are much more unified and go by the umbrella term "Hinduism".
If we go back a couple of centuries, there was no such thing as Hinduism. All the sects that we now call part of Hinduism were their own separate religions and traditions. So Vedanta, Samkhya, Nyaya, Mimamsa, Shaivism etc were all separate traditions and were loyal only to theirs. Even Vedantic traditions like Advaita and VA considered themselves independent. Now of course, we are much more unified and go by the umbrella term "Hinduism". So I'd call myself a Vedantin and a Hindu.
Oh, I figured it was probably the oldest religion, so it was considered Hinduism. Interesting.
We here were known as Hindus since before the time of Zoroaster (Zarathroshta - people living around the River 'Sindhu' or east of it. Central Asians and Persians could not pronounce 's' and made in to an 'h', therefore 'Hendu'; of the land of seven rivers 'Sapta-Sindhu' or 'Hapta-Hendu',
I am interested in Vedanta, but was wondering if they call themselves as followers of Vedanta or Hinduism? Is there a regular place of worship or just on certain days? Any specific ways to worship? I'm a newbie...
The purpose of Dharma is Vedanta. So yes, Vedanta is real Dharma.
Followers of Vedanta or followers of Hinduism, the same thing with different names. There are other names as well like Arya-Dharma, Sanatana Dharma, Shrauta dharma, Smarta Dharma. In Hinduism sects, words Sanatana & Vedic are more common.
What I have said is not different that the word Hindu has long been in use. However the statement "Veda Vyas was an elder contemporary of Shri Krishna (3100 B.C.)." (from your link) needs historical evidence. That should not stop us from believing in it.''Antiquity and origin of Hindu word" http://www.b-i-f.com/hindu.pdf
Not all Hindus are vedantins, not all vedantins are hindus; though the latter often endorse the hindu way of life and the former respect (mostly) the vedantins. There are hindus who denounce vedanta. There are also vedantins who disagree with several, often modern, hindu practices. For instance, all vedantins accept vedas as ultimate authority on truth, whereas such acceptance is not mandatory on most others who consider themselves hindus. Even within vedantins you have śrautas - those conforming to practices from various veda śākhās (~tradition/school) and smārtas - those emphasizing conformance with smṛties like various purāṇas as well as those who adopt a few practices from the former and a few from the latter. Though historically, modern hinduism grew out of vedantic traditions. Afaik, Śri Śaṅkara/Śri Rāmānuja/Śri Madhva have not made any claims of being hindus but have considered themselves vedantins. Perhaps even Bauddha philosophy was once considered not as a separate religion. Most vedantins still don't, it is as much a darśana as say, Nyāya.I am interested in Vedanta, but was wondering if they call themselves as followers of Vedanta or Hinduism?
In both, the emphasis is on daily practices as opposed to say, a Sunday mass, though specific days have specific significance. For e.g., Thursday for Guru. Moreover, everyday has a special significance based on the various combinations of rising constellation, lunar day, etc..Is there a regular place of worship or just on certain days?
From 'all ways lead to the Ultimate (universalism)' to the 'exclusive path approach' there exist various philosophies. Modern, mainstream hinduism is quite close to universalism, though the common ground for each philosophy within hinduism and vedanta is small. The vedanta schools do not support universalism, yet there are many institutions that do cater to broader groups, at times watering down core philosophies. Even the idea of dharma and karma vary significantly between each school of thought often leading to contradicting standpoints.Any specific ways to worship?
Your post is excellent as always but I differ from the above. Is it regrettable that people following various streams in Hinduism tick Hinduism as their religion; and if the government forms mentioned the sects, then they would have liked to tick those and not declare themselves Hindus? Perhaps it is the view of a very small minority with exaggerated self-importance. I would strongly be against it, it is weakening of Hinduism, a secession. I am sorry that you think this way.For lack of better option, in the Govt forms, most of us would tick the box adjacent to Hindu. But from the perspective of practice, the term Hindu is only of geo-socio-cultural significance and is not used in any of the daily practices. So if you are searching for pivot to say this is it, you'll only find someone disagreeing the moment you arrive at a semblance of such a thing.
Is it regrettable that people following various streams in Hinduism tick Hinduism as their religion; and if the government forms mentioned the sects, then they would have liked to tick those and not declare themselves Hindus?
Perhaps it is the view of a very small minority with exaggerated self-importance. I would strongly be against it, it is weakening of Hinduism, a secession. I am sorry that you think this way.
I'm sure you know that the term 'hindu' itself had no religious connotation, perhaps until the Brits employed it to refer to various philosophies.
नारायणायेतिसमर्पयामि ।
I am not aware of any Government of India allocation for various Hindu sects.For instance, say if there was survey to identify naiyāyikas, there could've been budgetary allocation specifically to that group which has to otherwise compete with more popular schools.
As Shivasomashekhar says you would have to move the date of the word Hindu used to indicate a religion back by a few Centuries. The Muslims were here in Seventh Century. I do not know what Kushanas and Huns termed our religion as (though I do not know of any word other than Hindu which could have been used. I am sure they did not know of the words 'Sanatan' or 'Vedic').The transition of the term Hindu from one of geographic to one of religion, happened when invading Muslim conquerors made India their home (~10th Century CE). The term Hindu came to mean non-Muslim, primarily for administrative purposes. Until then, its meaning was strictly geographical (with no religious connotation), used in Western Asia and Europe to mean a person who lived East of the Sindhu river.I'm sure you know that the term 'hindu' itself had no religious connotation, perhaps until the Brits employed it to refer to various philosophies.
Your view implicitly disagrees with some characteristics identified / endorsed by the Supreme Court of India as 'basic concepts':
"Thereafter, the basic concepts of Hindu religion, are stated thus:And, further in the same ruling:
(35). ...The first amongst these basic concepts is the acceptance of the Veda as the highest authority in religious and philosophic matters. This concept necessary implies that all the system claim to have drawn their principles from a common reservoir of thought enshrined in the Veda. ..."
"Features of Hindu religion recognized by this Court in Shastri Yaganapurushdasji (supra) as coming within its broad sweep are these:
(i) Acceptance of the Vedas with reverence as the highest authority in religious and philosophic matters and acceptance with reverence of Vedas by Hindu thinkers and philosophers as the sole foundation of Hindu philosophy."