Hinduism

[john]

With all the talk of Bhakti on the forum, maybe we could have some discussion on Hinduism and how it fits with the various branches of the BK world. For example which religious scriptures and sects are most in line with:-[

list]BKs
PBKs
Vishnu Party
Any other party[/list]
Is the knowledge coming through from the various chariots/leaders biased/influenced towards their past and present Bhakti sanskars.

[arjun]

For example which religious scriptures and sects are most in line with: BKs, PBKs

Bhagwad Gita, Ramayana, Mahabharata, Bhaagwat (stories of Krishna's childhood & youth)

Is the knowledge coming through from the various chariots/leaders biased/influenced towards their past and present Bhakti sanskars.

Brahma Baba was the devotee of Krishna (which he is going to become in the first birth of Golden Age). I am not sure, but I suppose Baba Virendra Dev Dixit was the devotee of Ram (as he is going to get revealed as the Confluence-Aged Ram) and Shivshankar.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

[alladin]

Interesting proposal, John! Always enriching, to find the roots!

[john]

VCD NO.216, AUDIO CASSETTE NO.697, DATED 21.04.05, AT SHRIKALAHASTI

So in the beginning of the Yagya, that Yagyapita (Father of the Yagya), through whom the foundation of knowledge was laid in the intellect-like womb of Brahma departed because he did not get the complete dose of knowledge. After that soul departed, all those who were his followers, who are called Shaiv community – the ones, who emerge from Shiv – departed. And who remained? Vishnu remained and those who belonged to the Vaishnav community, who had come after experiencing divine visions at that time, remained. Brahma remained and Brahma Samajis remained. Three communities have been very important in India. Shaiv community that emerged from Shiv. Vaishnav community that emerged from Vishnu. And Brahma Samajis who emerged from Brahma. So, Vaishnav community remained, Brahma Samajis remained and this satsang (spiritual gathering) continued with them.

From a newly posted Murli Clarification is some kind of explanation of the different communities/sects within the Yagya.

[fluffy bunny]

Interesting post, John. Poetic.

Just as an aside, I find it interesting to note that Brahma is worshipped quite widely throughout South East Asia (Thailand, Malaysiam, Bali etc), perhaps moreso than he is in India. How would that be accounted for? Hinduism is, of course, not limited to India. In Bhakti also, Shiavite are much less than Vaishnavites.

This is why I would love to have more documentary evidence of the Golden Circle and the original Om Mandli members which I think we might find through their relatives etc.

[arjun]

In Bhakti also, Shiavite are much less than Vaishnavites.

I would like to differ here. Vaishnavites are much less than Shaivites in any part of India.
Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

[alladin]

Sorry if I dare posting just a personal feeling; this stuff, especially what John quoted, somehow makes me dizzy. Intriguing but alarming :roll:. Could that be the reason why the idea of "finishing Bhakti and its endless stories" and making everything simple appealed to me?

[john]

Could that be the reason why the idea of "finishing Bhakti + its endless stories" and making everything simple appealed to me?

Yes, I agree. BKSWU made it all so simple, neat and complete package. Yet, what of it can we now believe?

[bansy]

which religious scriptures and sects are most in line with; BKs, PBKs, Vishnu Party, Any other party

John,

Regarding your study into Hindusim, I tried with a few reference books. One that pops in mind is a Penguin publisher book, A Handbook of Living Religions. However, the chapter on Hindusim was so complex that it basically has no start or no end. There are a few more texts, but got more and more confused trying to link to BKisms. Arjunbhai has answered on scriptures in line with PBKs. With the VPs, I understand it is to do with the Vedas and Upanishads.

Is the knowledge coming through from the various chariots/leaders biased/influenced towards their past and present Bhakti sanskars.

In line with the above, I think so. They cannot speak of the stories and characters without having some history of them within themselves.

Regardless of background, how many folks felt that when they started their BK foundation course it was or had some linkage to Hinduism? Or did it just feel like "New Age Yoga". Then at what point in your BK life did it begin to feel like Hinduism?

[fluffy bunny]

Regardless of background, how many folks felt that when they started their BK foundation course it was or had some linkage to Hinduism? Or did it just feel like "New Age Yoga". Then at what point in your BK life did it begin to feel like Hinduism?

Good question for a poll bansy!

I would like to differ here. Vaishnavites are much less than Shaivites in any part of India.

I will stand corrected then. I could not find any figures but it does vary North to South and in the Deccan leans heavily towards Vaishnava. In the West, we definitely learn towards Krishna and Advaitists. Shiva, Durga etc are a rarity.

Is that Shiva or Shankar? I am still wondering what proportion of them are Shankaracharya followers (according to Basic Knowledge).

[alladin]

How is the BKWSO doing in states like Kerala, famous for being Catholic, Communist stronghold and with high literacy %?

[arjun]

will stand corrected then. I could not find any figures but it does vary North to South and in the Deccan leans heavily towards Vaishnava. In the West, we definitely learn towards Krishna and Advaitists. Shiva, Durga etc are a rarity.

Actually speaking most Hindus worship Vishnu, Shiva (including the incarnations of Vishnu) and other female deities. But when we speak of Vaishnavites (worshippers of Vishnu), it mostly refers to those Brahmins who strictly worship Vishnu or his incarnations, do not worship or visit the temples of Shiv (Shankar) and follow the strict rules related to worship, living & food habits, cleanliness, etc. But there may be groups among the Kshatriyas (warrior class) and Vaishyas (business class) who may be worshipping only Vishnu, but that may be rare.

Similarly, when we speak of Shaivites (worshippers of Shiv-Shankar) there are two categories. One is those Brahmins who worship only Shiv-Shankar and neither worship Vishnu nor visit Vishnu temples. The second is those from other three castes (Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras) who worship Shiv-Shankar.

But I have also seen many Brahmins who worship Shiva as well as Vishnu.

There is a third group which gives greatest importance to the worship of Shakti (consort of Shiva, and her various forms). They are called Shaakt. There are exclusive groups among Brahmins who worship only Shakti.

On the whole it could be said that Vaishnavites are lesser in number than the Shaivites. Shiva is worshipped by all classes of Hindus (including the majority of lower caste Hindus) while Vishnu is worshipped mostly by Upper Class Hindus (mostly the Vaishnavite Brahmins).

But in today's modern society, the barriers of castes and sub-castes are breaking at a fast pace. In earlier days, Vaishnavites Brahmins did not used to marry their children into Shaivite families and vice-versa. But now, even being a Brahmin or a vegetarian is considered OK for marriages among Brahmins and Vaishyas. Inter caste and inter religion marriages are on the rise in big cities, while the villages still follow the age-old rules of marrying within castes/sub-castes/religions.

Since I have not been into Bhakti much (as I became a BK at 6), it would be nice if a Hindu member could correct me if any of my above statements are wrong.

Is that Shiva or Shankar? I am still wondering what proportion of them are Shankaracharya followers (according to Basic Knowledge).

Most Shaivites follow the Shankaracharyas. Similarly, Vaishnavites have their own set of Gurus (descendants/disciples of Madhvacharya, Ramanujacharya, etc.)

[fluffy bunny]

Most Shaivites follow the Shankaracharyas. Similarly, Vaishnavites have their own set of Gurus (descendants/disciples of Madhvacharya, Ramanujacharya, etc.)

Do you think that there was ever a time where there was a difference between those "Hindus" that followed Shiva and "new" souls that followed Shankar (as known to the BKWSU) and the Shankaracharyas according to the Gyani concept?

[arjun]

Do you think that there was ever a time where there was a difference between those "Hindus" that followed Shiva and "new" souls that followed Shankar (as known to the BKWSU) and the Shankaracharyas according to the Gyani concept?

The school of Shankaracharyas began in India only in the second half of the first millenium (AD). But Shiva's Bhakti existed much earlier than that. And as far as I know worship of Shiva as a lingam as well as Shankar has been prevalent since the beginning of the Indian civilization.

Even as per BK theory, the worship of Shiv-Shankar began with the commencement of the Copper Age, i.e. around 2500 years ago. But Shankaracharya came at the beginning of the Iron Age.

Unlike the name suggests, Shankaracharyas are not just the worshippers of Shankar/Shiv, but they also worship other deities. But the focus is on Shiv-Shankar. In fact, Shankaracharya was responsible for the revival of Hinduism during his period.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun

[arjun]

Om Shanti.

Yesterday's Times of India newspaper (and perhaps all the Indian newspapers) carried a news report on the Indian Government's stand on the issue of Ram Setu, with the Government filing an affidavit in the Supreme Court of India stating that "Valmiki Ramayana and Ramcharitmanas admittedly form an important part of ancient Indian literature, but these cannot be said to be historical records to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters and occurences of events depicted therein". Thus they have put a question mark on the existence of Ram as a historical character and therefore infuriated most Hindus and the political parties that support Hindutwa.

According to the above newspaper "The Sethusamudram project is meant to dredge and 83-km-long canal linking Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar and reduce shipping distance. Environmentalists contend it would destroy marine biodiversity and increase the risk of natural disasters. Some organisations claim the project would wipe out Adam's bridge or Ram Setu, which finds mention in the Ramayana."

Ram Setu is believed to have been built by Lord Ram to get his army across to Lanka to rescue Sita from Ravana's captivity.

Yesterday my colleagues were discussing this topic in the office. One of them said that more than a religious issue, it is a scientific issue because the region where the Adam's bridge or Ram Setu is located has one of the richest deposits of Thorium a nuclear fuel. By destroying the natural Adam's bridge, these deposits may be permanently lost. Some developed nations may have a vested interest in the early completion of the project. Moreover it may also serve the economic purposes of many Western nations whose ships have to sail around Sri Lanka to reach to the other side of the Adam's bridge at present. Further, it is also pointed out in the news reports that Adam's Bridge which is a natural structure between India and Sri Lanka helps in preventing Tsunami like destruction.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun