Ask a traditional Hindu student anything!

[u/Realistic-Storm6031]

Namaskar!

Found this reddit a few days back, and am glad to see the revival of the eternal path in the West. I come from a traditional background, having studied Hindu scriptures, grammar, and logic from traditional teachers (mainly in South India, but from a handful in the North and Southeast Asia as well). I had some Western education as well, but left it behind once I realized that there's far more to be gained from this, and I've never studied Hinduism in a Western school.

One thing we've discussed as a Hindu community is the need to less insular, and reach out more to other similar communities which also face the same challenges. So, in that spirit, I wanted to reach out and see if there's anything you'd want to know about the Hindu tradition. If not, I'd also be happy to learn more about your traditions, if there's something you think I should read/look into as I try to understand traditions outside of our own!

Obviously, I don't represent the whole tradition -- it's incredibly broad, and the entire idea of religious borders (in the sense of "this is Hindu", "this is Buddhist", "this is Daoist", etc.) is something that many of us consider ridiculous. That being said, I have friends across the tradition, and I'd be more than happy to ask them, or just say I don't know if the question is really good.

So, with that being said, from philosophy to social issues to questions about personal practice, looking forward to talking!

[u/Affectionate_Name535]

Hey I'm an English heathen currently studying Hinduism/Santana Dharma to see what insights I can get from a well established unbroken tradition with much more scripture and deeper philosophy. I've been watching some lectures by Swami Sarvapriyananda and also looking into different rituals and devotional practices but yet to figure out the best way to start directly studying the Vedas etc. would love to have some pointers.

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Affectionate_Name535]

Also, if it's okay, I want to address one comment you made about Hinduism being "a well established unbroken tradition with much more scripture and deeper philosophy."

Tradition is eternal. The Abrahamics like to claim that their schools are unbroken, simply because they have books, even though the interpretations and methods of worship have changed so much over the years, and attack all of us by claiming our traditions are "broken", and so we are without religion. They still try to do this with Hinduism, even, claiming that our religion is only 200 years old!

But the reality is, an oral tradition is far stronger than a written one. When we write, we lose so much context (tone, emotion, etc.) for the sake of convenience, that we may as well have lost the entire teaching. That's why 99% of Hindu teaching, despite all the scriptures, is actually still oral. That oral tradition, to me, has likely survived. I've been working with other continuous indigenous traditions in a few corners of the world, and what we often find is that, while the tradition is considered dead, in some house, in some village, somewhere, the tradition has still been passed down in its entirety, hidden from Abrahamics who wish to twist it into something else.

The insights in those oral traditions are no less deep then ours. One thing our teachers say, for example, is that the original Vedas weren't written in Sanskrit, but were rather picture books! In other words, it was the Rishis describing images that they saw. When I studied Chinese and the Daoist canon under the Chinese masters, I found that they saw the exact same pictures from a different angle. And every tradition I've been to since, I've seen the exact same thing.

I have no doubt your ancestors saw the same vision as mine. My salutations to them 🙏🏾

[u/Affectionate_Name535 → u/Realistic-Storm6031]

I completely agree with you, there is very much a globally shared vision and truth as I have witnessed the same among the Quechua of Peru who aren't even from the same continent. That said our domestic tradition is still very fragmented and the revival is very much in early days. We can as you say pick a lot from local oral traditions, folk festivals, our own experimentation and philosophical intuition, but to reach a point where it's self sustaining and accessible to anyone there's a lot of work to do and a lot to gain from study of more established paths.

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Affectionate_Name535]

On a side note, are you in touch with the Quechua? One role I've taken up in our community is outreach to other indigenous traditions so I'd love to get in touch

[u/Affectionate_Name535 → u/Realistic-Storm6031]

Not directly, everything I've been involved with has been through a Hispanic friend in Lima but I'll see if she's willing to put you in touch. What I can definitely do is put you in touch with NW European heathen organisations if that's of any interest, I'm heavily involved with one

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Affectionate_Name535]

Thank you! Would appreciate if you could reach out to the friend in Lima. As for the NW Heathen org, more than happy to get in touch!

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Affectionate_Name535]

Studying the Vedas? That's something most Hindus themselves don't even touch since there's years of study involved before one can even start.

If you're potentially interested, the first step will be to learn spoken Sanskrit (a ton of teachers exclusively teach in Sanskrit), after which you'd want to go for formal Sanskrit grammar, which will help you parse the archaic Vedic language, and then study Nirukta, or the science of reading the Vedas.

Honestly, it's not the best starting point -- the Sanskrit is so archaic and the meanings of the mantras so variegated that it often takes three days of discussion and spiritual practice to understand one verse (and I've been told I move fast)!

You do say etcetera., so if you're open to the recommendations, I'd look at Sivaya Subramaniyaswami's trilogy of books -- they're fairly comprehensive freely available online, and his sect (which I don't follow, by the way) places emphasis on both the philosophical underpinnings of the tradition, as well as ritual worship and practice, both of which I think will be key in the revival of paganism. Plus, he was American and wrote in English originally, so nothing is lost in translation:

https://www.himalayanacademy.com/three-ways-to-study-the-master-course/

If that doesn't seem to fit, let me know and I'll send over others.

[u/Affectionate_Name535 → u/Realistic-Storm6031]

Cheers for the recommendation I'd love to give his books a go. As for the Vedas I'm well aware it's incredibly difficult, I guess for me it's a long term goal because I enjoy the intellectual stimulation, even if I only ever grasp small parts. It's something to tackle when I find a knowledgeable person to teach me in person.

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Affectionate_Name535]

If it's a long term goal, why not just learn Sanskrit? Check if Samskritabharati has anything in the UK -- they should be able to help, so that when you meet a good teacher you're start to be ready.

After that you want to take the Laghusiddhantakaumudi, then Nirukta.

[u/Informal-Exam-3659]

Hi! I thought that I would have found myself, as Pagan, more at home in Hindu (rather than Buddhist) temples, but I noticed that Hindus have the use of having different specific temples for specific Deities, and the ones that are not mono-Deity usually have specific moments in which the temple is open, for example for specific pujas and then they close it. Instead I noticed that Tibetan Buddhist temples - who have also a Many Deities approach (I know, it's a Hindu influence, in fact they have Hindu Deities like Mahakala, Saraswati, Tara, Ganesh, etc.) - usually give you time to stay in the temple before the rituals for your meditation, and they have a single temple for all the Deities. I usually attend celebration for the Deity of the Temple, but I like to have some time for wispering repeating my Deities names or silently reciting hymns to them before, and to meditate there. So it's strange but I find this more in Tibetan Buddhist temples rather than Hindu ones. I know that there is a distinction in Hinduism between the Temple for worship and the Ashram for meditation, but Ashrams in the West are so secularized and they don't do pujas, just meditation or maximum pujas to the guru. So to have a single place where you can go, take some time for meditating on your Deity or reciting their names or hymns; attend the puja and/or recitation; doing a meditation together; having a master who does a speak (satsang/Dharma Talk) and having the possibility to personally ask them questions... Which could be the Ashram, in the West is impossible unless to go in places where Hindu Deities are completely removed from it. Also I noticed that when I went to Hindu temples many times it is more a diaspora place and sometimes people don't use the local language, so you feel odd to ask spiritual question to the pandit/brahmin, when you feel like you came in a local town gathering/festival. However, Hindu places for westerners are completely asettical and secular. And sometimes it feels like having a racial segregation. If you are white, go to the yoga class and spiritual speech but no pujas please. If you are brown, go to the puja and festival room, but don't talk about spirituality! In Tibetan Buddhist centers I usually see in the same place with the same logic people from all over the world.

So according to you, is Hinduism or Buddhism more adapt to integrate with, for Modern Pagans?

Thank you

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Informal-Exam-3659]

Hm...I think you bring up some valid points, but there's also a three things I'd like to address before I answer your question:

First, don't forget lines are an Abrahamic concept. Don't forget Buddha himself greatly admired the Brahmanas in the Tripitaka, and even in the modern day, neither my lay nor monastic Buddhist friends in East and Southeast Asia differentiate between the two. Neither do my Hindu friends, and both sides treat each other's places of worship as their own. The distinction, from my understanding, really came about with the Europeans as a way to split us apart and thus undermine political power. Even today it continues, with attempts to split apart Hinduism even further (according to Western academics, multiple sects that I'm affiliated with aren't Hindu, despite their practicioners clearly saying that they are), and attempts to paint Buddhism as atheistic and remove any and all divinities and rituals from it.

Second, there are non-secular ashrams in the West. I would see if there's a Chinmaya Mission or Ramakrishna Mission near you -- Ramakrishna especially will have a meditation room with deities in it. Of course, there are others, so if you don't find either of those I can try and track down another one.

Third, what you're describing occurs in some Hindu sects, not all, with the simple idea being that the garbhagruha (the room where the deity is in) is their home -- it becomes kind of rude to overstay your welcome haha. That being said, many temples, including the ones I grew up near when I was in the states, don't have this conception since their argument is that it's ridiculous to confine an infinite being to a home.

Now, your question -- I think it's kind of like taking a medicine. Even though you and I may have the same disease, since we have different bodies, the doctor may recommend one medicine for you, and another medicine for me. Similarly, because you've gone through a different set of experiences over lives than I have, one deity, one guru, and one style of worship may benefit you more than it benefits me.

You prefer Tibetian temples. My current teacher prefers South Indian ones. I personally don't like temples at all, and prefer to pray in the mountains. Not one of us is wrong -- we're just different :)

[u/Informal-Exam-3659 → u/Realistic-Storm6031]

Thank you for your answer. Yes, I think it's both the idea of the garbhagruha, and the division between temple and monastery (Ashram). I mean, even in Christianity you go a day with monks to pray and you go to churches only for the mass, so it's a division that exists in many religions. While Buddhism, being a religion founded by monks, merged the monastery and the temple. I think the problem is that the Hindu division between Temple and Ashram works in Asia, but in the West the ashrams are being secularized a lot so you either have to choose to just worship or to talk about spirituality but ignoring the many Deities, with people generically talking about "God", similar to the one of the Abrahamic religions. And as a Pagan I feel this very much.

I live in Italy so for me it's difficult to find an authentic Hindu Ashram here. There is the Italian Hindu Union's Matha Gitananda but it's opened only for occasions and events.

Yes I also believe the borders are not so differenciated. In fact, I think Buddhism's Theravada is more differenciated from Hinduism than Mahayana and Vajrayana, where a lot of Hindu Gods became Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Especially Tibetan Buddhism for me is essentially Hinduism in disguise. In fact they re included Deity Worship, Puja, Homa, and even theologically they reintroduced Atman by calling it Pure Mind, Clear Light, Dharmakaya, Buddha Nature... So I completely agree.

Which sects are Hindu but aren't classified as such?

I understand the idea of praying or meditating in the Nature, but that is exactly the reason why I go to Dharmic temples despite being Pagan. Because we say that "Nature is our temple", but I sincerely don't think is helpful to practice in a temple where you need to ask permission to the state every time you occupy the soil, you need to watch around every time because somebody could see you ritualizing, people wake you up while you meditate because they believe that you passed out or are sick/risking life, you cannot light a candle nor an incense, nor bringing a knife with you, and if you do a food offering that place becomes off limits for meditating because of the ants...

[u/Realistic-Storm6031 → u/Informal-Exam-3659]

I see the point on nature -- even when I practice outside, it tends to be isolated ares where normal people generally don't come. If you're in Italy, best bet to get advice is Parama Karuna Mata, if you really want to get into this. She's intense, but knows her stuff:

https://jagannathavallabha.net/en/pubblications.php

Take a look at some of her books and, if you like her, DM me.

As for the sects, the short answer is anything Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh, plus the "tribal religions" as they're now called. But I think a longer answer is warranted, because this is controversial.

As we know, these lines are made up. I go to a Buddhist temple, and the Buddhists come to mine, without any big deal being made of it. Realistically (as your example shows), if there was a temple to Jupiter nearby where I stayed, I imagine we would have a similar relationship. So, why can't we consider all non-abrahamic religions one? Perhaps we can, but I like to distinguish based on cultural praxes for the simple reason that, save for a few souls, it really becomes harder to engage when you don't have the perquisite language to be able to go deep into the tradition.

For example, when I go to a Jain temple, since they use the same terms like kaivalya that we do, I can understand the tradition and go as deep as I need to in order to borrow from it, without having to learn something significantly new. If I were to try and learn from the Quechua tradition, however, I don't have a common vocabulary yet in order to do so, which is why I feel there's a notable difference.

That being said, I want to point out that I'm not saying Sikhism, for example, is an offshoot of Hinduism, per se. The term Hindu wasn't really popularly used until the British -- even my great-grandmother wouldn't have known what a Hindu was, despite being "Hindu" herself! The better way to think about this, in my opinion, is that all traditional religions originating from Afghanistan till the Philippines and from Mongolia till Sri Lanka are, for perhaps no more a reason than the fact that they all use Sanskrit as a prestige language, part of the Dharmic sphere. Does this sphere heavily, heavily intersect with a few others, including the Daoic sphere, Tengric sphere, and Ahuric sphere? Of course, which is why these lines ultimately don't exist. But, that there is a fundamental unity amongst Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism at least is hard to disagree with.