"Hinduism was one of the world's most easy-going faith traditions, famed for it's non-persecutory history."

I can assure you, it is NOT.

It is neither easy-going, nor non-persecutory. In fact it is the very opposite.

Thread.

Modern Hinduism is a British colonial concept, created in concert with Brahmins, who are at the "apex" of the caste system. The word "Hindoo" in fact, is of Persian origin, meaning a person who lives in the Indus valley.
Colonialists who attempted to study Indian religion in the 18th century (NOT, at the time, Hinduism) were baffled by it. Strata of people living distinctly (the caste system) with overlapping gods didn't fit into their Judeo-Christian understanding of religion.
Which has an ecclesiastical authority, a holy book etc., which Indian religions lacked. In studying "The Hindoo", colonialists prioritized textual sources of knowledge, which is where Brahmins, the priestly caste with a monopoly over education/text come in.
Brahminism was a distinct "religion" (although i don't really want to use the term in this way) that was frankly terrorized of other castes. In fact, the very basis of Brahminism is oppression. Brahmins had scholars who recorded *Brahminical* canon textually.
When the British looked to them for text material, what was "Brahminism" became "Hinduism" writ large. Brahmins were only too gleeful, and why wouldn't they be, placed as they were at the apex of this new religion.
So that's about "Hinduism". This idea of it being easy-going and non-persecutory has its origin in Romantic Orientalism: a strand of European philosophers who fetishized and exoticized everything about the "mystical magical East"
In this construction the West is culturally vapid, self-interested, the East its mirror image: culturally superior, altruistic, benevolent. Better than the West in oh so many ways. Karma? What a (misinterpreted) concept!
Anwyay, this narrative of Indian superiority was catnip to the Indian intelligentsia: a new class of Indians, educated in the Western tradition, who could never really get over the blow of being colonized.
It was balm to them. They could blame British guns, they could lament their own slow technological development -- these were the only reasons that we, culturally and morally and spiritually superior folk, could actually be colonized.
Romantic Orientalism - balm though it may have been - is still really damaging because the very reasons that Indian subcontinental people were fetishized were also reasons for their oppression. Spiritual and savage are two sides of the same coin.
In the late 1800s, Swami Vivekanand - who took this romantic orientalist conceptualization of "Hinduism" pretty seriously - went to the World Parliament of Religions (uninvited). It was there that "Hinduism" first gained international acceptance as a "religion"
And the romantic notions of Hindusim that Frum articulates thus become crystallized.
In sum then, "Hinduism" is a modern construct, with a modern history. Because of the caste system it has always been deeply oppressive and terribly violent. In fact non-Brahmins have long-converted to other religions like Islam and Buddhism to escape Brahminical tyranny.
It's time we set the record straight about Hinduism. In the West today, Indian-inspired culture like yoga contribute heavily to the whitewashing of its real history and the atrocities that have been perpetrated in its name, that continue to be perpetrated in its name.
🚨STOP FETISHIZING HINDUISM🚨

More from Religion

#BookExcerpts #Venkateshwara #Balaji

I will write a 3 part thread series with some interesting points from this book.

Part-1 : History of Tirumala & Venkateshwara Swamy
Part-2: Rituals & Prasada Procedure
Part-3: Historical records

Part-1 thread below

1/


Venkatachala Hill

Maha Vishnu wished for the mountain Krida / Krida Parvatham / Kridhachalam from Vaikunta to be brought to the earth for his avataram.

This was brought to earth by Garuda and Ananta & placed it on banks of river Swarna Mukhi

2/


This is where current Tirumala temple is located. The fact that this was transported from Vaikunta is apparently a scientifically proven fact.

The scientific dating of the sedimentary rocks have confirmed the date to be around 120 million years ago..

3/

This timeline coincides with Swayambhu Manu manvanthara of the Sweta Varaha Kalpa which is the time when Swamy descended on earth in the form of Venkateshwara Swamy.

From a survey of flora and fauna, they have found rare species of plants & animals like golden gecko..

4/

that are exclusive to this hill range only and not found anywhere else in the world.

Tirumala hills are a range of 7 hills
1. Seshachala
2. Vedachala
3. Garudachala
4. Anjanachala
5. Vrishabhachala
6. Narayanachala
7. Venkatachala --> Where temple is present

5/
@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Hindu nationalism should not have a negative connotation. It’s not exclusivist because Hinduism isn’t a religion - rather, it’s a way of life, and the term “Hindu” refer broadly to the people around and east of the Sindhu. This transcends the modern construct of religions.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew For “Hindus” - a broad-brush stroke for a people whose culture is underpinned by a knowledge system that provides logical structure for adopters of a plethora of philosophies, “Hindu nationalism” by definition, is inclusive and pluralistic. It gives space to everyone.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew If Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Purva-Mimamsa, Buddhist and Jain philosophies are studied in comparison with Abrahamic faiths, India’s unique Carl Popper Paradox comes to light. The imposition of a western matrix of secularism on a pluralistic culture has done much harm.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Because the traditions are rooted in universalist philosophies, India gladly hosts followers of non-proselytizing faiths. Supremacist theocratic ideologies find little resonance with the people of the land. To understand “Hindu nationalism,” one has to study Indic philosophy.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Equally, it is important to view history objectively, know the excesses of supremacist invaders/colonizers, and importantly, understand the asymmetries created by the “secular” state which structurally disadvantage the vastly heterogeneous so-called “Hindu” majority.
#Ramayana #LecturesOnTheRamayana

In the past, we had a glimpse of Lakshmana's devotion towards Sri Rama, his brother and father figure.

However, it is interesting to note his unique relationship with Sita, especially as seen by from her perspective.

Thread below

1/

We all know about the Golden Deer / Maricha incident and the way Sita influences Lakshmana to go in search of his brother.

Personally, I am unable to get 2 strong emotional points in one thread and hence, I will skip this incident for today.

2/

In Sundara Kanda, when Hanuman meets Sita, she says the following

सिंहस्कन्धो महाबाहुर्मनस्वी प्रियदर्शिनः।
पितृवद्वर्तते रामे मातृवन्मां समाचरन्।।

Lakshmana, who has lionshoulders and strong arms, who is handsome, who takes Rama as his father & treats me as his own mother

3/

ह्रियमाणां तदा वीरो न तु मां वेद लक्ष्मणः।
वृद्धोपसेवी लक्ष्मीवान् शक्तो न बहुभाषिता।।

Heroic Lakshmana, did not know while I was borne away. He is prosperous, foremost in serving elders. He is energetic and reserved in his speech like my father-in-law ..

4/

He is a prince dear (to his brother).

These are from Sarga-38, shlokas 60 and 61.

There are 3 distinct points which I want to draw the attention of the reader to.

1. She also compares Lakshmana to Dasaratha much like how Rama did when he constructed the hut in panchavati

5/

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x