There’s a popular translation by Krishna Dharma.
The one I’ve read, and liked, is by C. Rajagopalachari
** What’s the general view on the spread of Hindu symbols and figures? Gwen Stefani gave up the bindi a few years back, but I still see shops selling finger puppets of Siva, Kali, G’nesha, and Garuda as well as Krisna lunchboxes. Apu still has his little shrine to G’nesha on the counter.**
I feel about the commercial things the same way as Christians probably feel about ruby & diamond studded Jesuses - tacky, tacky. I have NO PROBLEM with white people adopting bindis without knowing the meaning, what’s the big deal. And I find Apu very funny. YMMV.
How are other religions/philosophies viewed?
Hinduism is nominally very accepting of other religions. All paths are a path to salvation. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to work this way IRL, particularly when it comes to Muslims.
Can you recommend a translation of the Mahabharata? I’m looking for something that doesn’t censor or change things, but hasn’t been rendered into dry and boring english.
Try this link from hawkeyejo:
Mahabharat
But I haven’t readit myself, yet (at least this version.) When I go home I’ll try to hunt down the version I have read, and post it.
About how many flavors, sects, or what ever the correct term is are there?
How high can you count? Every household, almost, worships differently. When you get married chances are high your in-laws will worship a different god and in a different way than your parents did.
This is the one I read, and liked too. I couldn’t remember his name.
You asked if Atman is Brahman. They are not held as identical. Pretty simple, no?
I’ve read Ramachandran’s book on Phantom Limbs. He proposes some trick experiments on self-demarcation and also discusses the concept further. I clearly thought he was referring to self as sense of (bodily) ownership, even though he doesn’t seem to explicity recognize or acknowledge the other (baser) self.
Not an expert ( to say the least ) and that was at one time my understanding as well. But I keep running across references like these:
http://www.countercurrents.org/comm-puniyani150803.htm
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2001/09/16/stories/13160467.htm
- Tamerlane
Tamerlane from your first link
I’m very surprised by this. I thought one of the strengths of henotheistic or polytheistic religions was the ability to just add new aspects or gods to the pantheon/ (aspecteon?). OTTOMH, Hanuman, Quan Yin, and Hotei were all Daoist gods. Then, Buddhism made Quan Yin a boddisvata, Hotei either a boddisvata or a Buddhist teacher, and changed Hanuman from a wild and crazy guy into a meek disciple of the Budha. Why destroy the tree instead of altering and absorbing Gautma?
Which reminds me, how did Hanuman come to be an aspect of the Godhead?
Re Castes
How can you tell who’s who? Presumably Brahmins and (The warrior/noble caste I can’t remember the name of. Udishtira was in it) have little reason to dress as a lower caste (Unless they lose at dice and need to lay low of course). But, what prevents somebody from putting on a different caste mark and the clothes of a different caste? Come to think of it, how many of the Hindus living in India wear caste marks and dress according to caste?
What (if anything) does this mean to you “Acintya bheda abheda Tattva” (Please correct my Sanskrit if wrong).
This thread may finally give the answer to the riddle of this brass doodad. It’s a vessel of some kind.The base is circle 4.5’ wide. It bears the words “Sana Brna India”.From the base, the walls rise straight for 2.5 inches. There is an inscription. I’ve looked around the web and haven’t found a matching alphabet. Above the inscription, the walls curve in sharply, rise 2.5 inches and flare outward (something like the shape of a pushpin or the cooling towers of a nuclear plant). Rising up and out for another inch and a half, is another inscription. If the description doesn’t help, I could resort to ASCII or try and borrow a digital camera.
What is this thing? Flower vase? A vessel for offering milk to the godhead? A cremation urn? A chamberpot?
India is one of the biggest exporters of beef, mainly to Malyasia and Phillipines. This is carabeef (buffalo meat). There is a ban on exporting cow beef. It still happens illegally of course, but the slaughter of cows is carried out mainly for the leather that can be sold in Europe and the Middle East. All but 2 states in India ban cow slaughter.
18% of India’s population is non-Hindu and comprise the largest beef-eating contingent. Other than that the untouchables and lower castes also eat beef. It shouldn’t be surprising, now that I think about it, that Hindus in Kerala eat beef. It has a large Christian and Muslim population and many Hindu sects may have co-opted their eating habits.
I have travelled well over India and eaten in many hostels myself, but have not met a religious Hindu who eats beef. In fact, I haven’t encountered any place that is not predominantly in a Muslim area or owned by a Muslim or Christian person that serves beef. I’m pretty sure that there must be such places, but they are pretty uncommon.
Any Hindus that eat beef are either not religious (like me), or more worried about putting food on the table than about what the priest in the temple feels about dietary restrictions.
With 820 million Hindus in India and Brahmins comprising only 10-15% of the population (estimates, because the census does not recognise caste), I don’t doubt beef eating is more widespread than I had thought…just not enough to be obviously noticeable.
That’s Dvaitic (Dualism) philosophy. In Advaita (non-dualism), the goal is to realize that the difference between Atman and Brahman is an illusion and that they are the same. I might be nit-picking but there is a difference.
I wouldn’t be surprised if many among the poorest poor ate beef because cows are readily available. I also wouldn’t be surprised if beef was exported in large quantities. In fact, I have heard that (even stray) dog meat is sometimes mixed with chicken to lower the cost of food to the poor :eek:
Starvation trumps all beliefs. But, the bottom line is beef-eating is expressly verboten in Hindu society.
For someone who knows nothing whatsoever about Hindu, could you jump back a step and give me some of the basics?
- Who are G’nesh, Kali, Garuda and the rest of that crowd? Were they ever supposed to have been real people who lived at some point? Are they still alive on a higher plane of existence?
- Who’s this Krishna guy?
I know that the answers to this can be extremely long and in depth, but I’d prefer some sort of pocket definition that I can get an overview with as a jumping off point. Something along the lines of “Christ was this philosopher who had a bunch of followers in Jerusalem. The Romans had him executed, but he reportedly came back to life again. Neat trick, that.” Is there a Hindu equivalent?
On the subject of the beef thing - are non-beef eating Hindus disgusted by those of us who do eat beef? Have I inadvertantly offended my Hindi friends when I go to lunch with them an order a burger?
Thanks much for starting this interesting thread.
G’nesh is the elephant-headed god of wisdom. He lost his head when mom (IIRC Shakti) went to take a bath and told him to let no one disturb her. Dad, (Shiva IIRC) came home and wanted to see his wife. G’nesh would not break his promise of service and refused to let dad in. Shiva got angry and decapitated him. Shakti was upset by this. So, Shiva resurrected G’nesh using the head of an elephant. G’nesh is often depicted riding a rat, symbolizing his power to overcome all obstacles (Just as rats can dig under, climb over, or chew through any obstacle). All prayers begin with a prayer to G’nesh to assure that the prayers find their way.
Kali is the angry, extremely dangerous side of women. She’s depicted with fangs, four arms, and either black or bright red skin. Remember Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom? The Thugees were inaccurate and sensationalized. But, there were real Thugees and they really did strangle victims as part of their worship. (The following is almost certainly a flawed version of the tale)- Long ago, there was a demon. Kali slew it. But, from each drop of its blood sprang a new demon. She killed them too. From each drop of their blood sprang new demons. This went on for a while and Kali began to tire. She paused to wipe the sweat from her brow. From two drops of sweat, she made two men. She tore a strip from her dress and made a rumal (weighted strangling cloth). She told the men to kill the demons. When they had killed them all. Kali plucked out one of her teeth and made it into a pickaxe. She gave that to the other man. Then, she told them that they alone would be her children and have her favor. The Thugees never strangled women or members of certain castes.
Garuda is the king of all birds. I think Indra sometimes rides him into battle, but I could be misremembering.
IIRC Krishna was one of the incarnations of Vishnu. Vishnu’s first incarnation was a giant fish. The Vedas had been lost under the sea and he became a fish to get them. Vishnu has also incarnated as cute boy with flute, and once as a man with the head of a lion. In that form he killed a king and wore his entrails as a necklace. Krishna was present on earth during the events of the Mahabharata, a great war between the forces of (I’m not entirely sure. good and evil. duty and not doing your duty. worldly attachment and seeing beyond material illusions). Two groups of royal cousins fight. The good guys win but only through lying, trickery and such. This marked the end of the age when good was pure. At one point, Krishna says to Arjuna (general of the good guys and world’s greatest archer) ‘I have many followers, thousands of them. If I ask them to, they will fight for you. I give you a choice. You may have all my armies, or you may have me.’ Arjuna picks Krishna. When the armies line up for the last battle, Arjuna (good guy, world’s greatest archer) looks at the enemy and sees family, friends and mentors (these people must fight for the bad guys even if they don’t want to. It’s their duty). Instead of sounding a horn and starting the battle, Arjuna is overcome with compassion. He sits down and doesn’t know what to do. Krishna councels him. Their conversation is The Bhagavad Gita, which contains all kinds of important teachings.
A very back to basics question: Is there a difference between Brahman and brahman?
And on a side note, it’s nice that all the protagonists I was hoping to see present in this thread are here.
Are you asking about Brahman and brahmin? A brahmin is one sect (read “caste”) within Hindu society whereas Brahman is the Universe. Now, if you are asking about Brahma and Brahman, Brahma is one of the many gods in the pantheon (the trinity, to be exact). There was someone on the dope who confused Brahma and Brahman and wifully refused to accept his error… but that’s another story 
No. I am confused by the Wiki quote below and seek clarification on the point.
Why are Brahman and brahman identified as two separate states of consciousness?
I’m confused, I thought he just created it.
IIRC Brahma creates the universe. Vishnu preserves the universe. Eventually, Shiva destroys the universe. Brahma then starts a new one.
Aanamika, it seems as if you have a very practical view of Hinduism. I find that admirable and good.
What exactly is your personal understanding of the bindi and its personal significance to you? Also, what is your understanding and beliefs in the more mystical parts of Hinduism. i.e.- Yoga, Chakras, Ayurvedic, etc.
What little I know about Brahman and Brahma suggests that Brahman is the everything. It is the Universe, it is consciousness, it is all that lies beyond the veil of maya. It includes our phenomenal and philosophical worlds and goes beyond that.
Brahma is the Creator, yes. But he is a sort of manifestation of Brahman. The nuts and bolts man, as it were.
Or that’s what my grandmother used to tell me anyway.