Usually, the term used is:
- adherents Veda
- Acarya
- Sanatana Dharma
- Some even say ISKCON
Here is the writing of Stephen Knapp, a former American Christians who have embraced the Vedic religion is much broader horizons than our pure-born Hindu.
ABOUT THE NAME "HINDU"
By Stephen Knapp
I feel the need to clarify the use of the word "Hindu" and "Hinduism". In fact it is true "Hinduism" is based on Vedic knowledge, which is related to our spiritual identity. Many org accept it means the same as Sanatana-dharma, which is actually a more accurate term for the Sanskrit Vedic path. The identity beyond any temporary name as Christian, Islamic, Buddhist, or even Hindu.
However, God never describe himself as belonging to the category, saying that he was only the Christian God, the Muslim God, or God Hindu. Therefore some great spiritual teachers from India have moved away from identifying themselves as Hindus only. Vedic path is eternal, and therefore beyond all the temporary designation.
So I mentioned the name "Hindu" temporary appointment?
We must remember that the term "Hindu" was not even a Sanskrit term. Many experts say that it is not found in any of the Vedic Literature.
So how can a name like that represent roads or Vedic tradition?
And without the Vedic literature, there is no basis for "Hinduism."
Many experts feel that the name "Hindu" has be developed other hand, the invaders could not mention the name of the Sindhu River properly. According to Sir Monier Williams, Sanskrit lexicographer, you can not find a root native to the words Hindu or Indian. Not even the words are found in every Buddhist texts or Jain, or one of the 23 official languages of India.
Some sources report that Alexander the Great who first changed the name into Indu Sindhu river, removing the letter "S", in order to facilitate the pronunciation for the Greeks. This is later known as the Indus. This is when Alexander invaded India around 325 BCE. Strength Macedoniannya thereafter called the land east of the Indus as India, a name that is used primarily during the British regime. Prior to this, the Vedic name for the area is Bharath Varsha, where many people still prefer to call it by that name.
Then, when the Muslim invaders arrived from places like Afghanistan and Persia, they call the river Sindhu as Hindus River. After that, the name "Hindu" is used to describe the inhabitants of the land tract in northwest provinces of India where located Sindhu river, and the area itself is called "Hindustan." Because the Sanskrit sound of "S" turns into "H" in Persian, Muslims call "Sindhu" as "Hindu," although at the time the people of the area do not use the name "Hindu" itself. This word is used by foreign Muslims to identify the people and religion in which these people live in that area. After that, even the Indians in accordance with the standards as set by those in power and the use of the names of Hindu and Hindustan. Instead, the word has no meaning except the meaning people give him or now used beyond usability.
A view of the name "Hindu" indicate confusion natural to understand the true essence of Indian spiritual path. As written by RN Suryanarayan in his Universal Religion (p.1-2, published in Mysore in 1952), "The political situation in our country since centuries ago, say 20-25 centuries, has made it very difficult to understand the nature this nation and religion.
Western scholars, and historians, too, have failed to trace the real name of this Land of Brahman, vast continent such as the state, and therefore, they have satisfied themselves by calling it with a term that means 'Hindu'. This word, which is a foreign innovation, not made of the use by us and Acharya Sanskrit writers were respected in their works. Political power seems to be responsible for continually emphasizing the use of the word Hindu. The word Hindu is found, of course, in Persian literature. Hindu-e-Falak means 'darkness of the sky' and 'Saturn'. In the Arabic language Hind not Hindu means nation. It is embarrassing and ridiculous've read so far in history that a Hindu name given by the Persians to the people of our country when they landed in the holy land of Sindhu. "
Locations in which the word "Hindu" what happened to some people felt the first time in the Avesta of Iran in the description of the Indian state and its people. As Zorastrime state religion, the word seems to take a derogatory meaning. And of course, as to which Islam spread in India, the word "Hindu" and "Hindustan" become less and less respected in the arena and even hated Persians, and more prominently in Persian and Arabic literature after the 11th century.
Another view of the source of Hindu name based on derogatory meanings.
It is said that, "In addition, it is true that this name [Hindu] has been given to the original Aryan race to humiliate their Muslim invaders. In the Persian language, our author says, the word means slave, and according to Islam, everyone who does not embrace Islam is referred to as slaves. "(Shri Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati Aur Unka Kaam, edited by Lala Lajpat Rai, published in Lahore, 1898 in Introduction).
Furthermore, a Persian dictionary titled Lughet-e-Kishwari, published in Lucknow in 1964, gives the meaning of the word Hindu as "duty [thief], dakoo [robber], raahzan [waylayer], and Ghulam [slaves]." In another dictionary, Urdu-Feroze-ul-Laghat (Part One, p 615) the Persian meaning of the word Hindu was further described as Barda (obedient servant), it FAAM (black color) and kaalaa (black). So all of this is insulting phrase to translate Persian term Hindu as a label on the people of India.
So, in essence, is just a continuation of the term Hindu Muslim who became popular only in the last 1300 years. In this way, we can understand that this is not a valid Sanskrit term, also has nothing to do with the Vedic culture or Vedic spiritual path. No religion ever called "Hinduism" to the people of India in general gives value to the name, as given by those who dominated over them, and accept its use. Furthermore, the term has been used to convey the degrading connotations.
So, whether it is not surprising that some organizations Vedic acharya India and do not care to use the term?
The real confusion starts when the name "Hindu" is used to indicate the religion of India. The words "Hindu" and "Hinduism" is often used by English with a focus on the effects of differences between the Muslims and the religion of the people who became known as the "Hindu". This is done with the intention of creating friction rather successful among the Indian community. This is in accordance with the policies of the British upper division and rules to make it easier for those who continue to rule over the country.
However, we should mention that other people are trying to justify the word "Hindu" now is the idea of the sage terdalu, several thousand years ago, also called central India Hindustan, and the people who live there are Hindu. The following Sloka, said of the Vishnu Purana, Padma Purana and Samhita Bruhaspati, given as evidence, but I am still waiting to learn the exact location where we can find this paragraph:
Several other references are used, although the exact location is I believe, include:
Himalayam Samaarafya Yaavat Hindu Sarovaram
Tham Devanirmmitham desham Hindustanam Prachakshathe
Himalyam Muthal Indian maha samudhram vareyulla
devanirmmithamaya deshaththe Hindustanam Ennu parayunnu
This again shows that the region between the Himalayas and the Indian Ocean is called Hindustan. Thus, the conclusion from this is that all Indians are Hindus irrespective of caste and religion. Of course, not everyone will agree with it.
Other people say that in the Rig Veda, Bharata is referred to as the state "Sapta Sindhu", ie the state seven major rivers. It is, of course, be accepted. However, precisely chapters and books that can be derived from this sloka needs to be clarified. However, some people say that the word "Sindhu" refers to the river and the sea, and not just to a certain river called "Sindhu".
Furthermore, it is said that in Vedic Sanskrit, according to ancient dictionary, "sa" is pronounced as "ha". So "Sapta Sindhu" is pronounced as "Hapta Hindu". So, this is how the word "Hindu" is deemed to have come into being. It is also said that the ancient Persians referred to Bharat as "Hapta Hind", as recorded in their ancient classic "Bem Riyadh". So, this is another reason why some experts began to believe that the word "Hindu" was originated in Persia.
Another theory is that the name "Hindu" does not even come from the name of Sindhu.
Mr A. Krishna Kumar from Hyderabad, India explained. "This [Sindhu / Hindu] This view can not be maintained because of India at that time was amazing highest ranked in the world in terms of civilization and wealth would not be without a name. They are not the unknown aborigines waiting to be discovered, identified and baptized by foreigners. "He cites an argument of the book Self-Government in India by NB Pavgee, which was published in 1912 The author tells the old Swami and Sanskrit scholar Mangal Nathji, who found the ancient Purana known as Brihannaradi Sham village, Hoshiarpur, Punjab. It contains this sloka:
himalayam samarabhya yavat bindusarovaram
hindusthanamiti qyatam hi antaraksharayogatah
Again the exact location of the sloka lost in the Puranas, but Kumar translates it as: "the State which lies between the Himalayas and Bindu Sarovara (Cape Comorin sea) is known as Hindusthan by combination of the first letter 'hi' of 'Himalaya'dan compound last letter 'ndu'dari word' Bindu '. "
It is, of course, is considered to have given birth name "Hindu", indicating indigenous origin. Conclusion that the people who live in this area is thus known as the "Hindu".
So once again, by any means these theories can present their information, and any way you look at it, the name "Hindu" started just as the body and the designation of the area. The name "Hindu" refers to a location and people, and originally had nothing to do with philosophy, religion or culture of the people, which must be changed from one thing to another. It is like saying that all the people of India is India. Of course, that is acceptable as a name that refers to a location, but what about their religion, faith and philosophy? It is known by many names in accordance with the views and beliefs. So, they do not all Hindus, because a lot of people who do not follow the Vedic system already objected to calling themselves by that name.
So "Hindu" is not the most appropriate name of a spiritual path, but the Sanskrit term Sanatana-dharma is much more accurate. Ancient Indian culture and history is the beginning of their Vedic culture or Vedic Dharma. So it is more appropriate to use a name that is based on the culture of those who followed him, not only the address of the location name of a nation.
It seems that only the kings of Vijayanagara empire Veda in 1352 was the word "Hindu" is used with pride by buccal who describes himself as "Hinduraya suratrana". While major Sanskrit texts, and even rituals that have been performed in the temples of thousands of years ago, using the word "Bharata" in reference to the current area of india. Therefore, traditionally and technically more accurate to refer to the Indian soil as "Bharata" or "Bharat varsha".
Unfortunately, the word "Hindu" has gradually been adopted by almost everyone, even the people of India, and is now applied in a very general way, so much so, in fact, that now "Hindu" is often used to describe anything from activities even religious or nationalistic Indian social activities. Some of the so-called "Hindu" events that are not supported in the Vedic literature, and, therefore, should be considered non-Vedic.
Thus, not just anyone can call themselves a "Hindu" and is still regarded as a follower of the Vedic path. Can also relax any activity can be called as part of the Hindu and think long considered part of the true Vedic culture.
Therefore, the Vedic spiritual path is more appropriately called Sanatana-dharma, meaning the eternal occupation of the soul which does not change in relation to the Supreme Being. Just as the dharma of sugar is to be sweet, it does not change. And if it is not sweet, it was not sugar. Or dharma of fire is to provide warmth and light. If you do not like it, then it is not fire. In the same way, there are certain dharma or nature of the soul, which Sanatana or eternal. That has not changed. So there is a state of dharma and the dharma. Following the principles of Sanatana-dharma can bring us to a state of pure reclaim forgotten our spiritual identity and relationship with God.
It is the purpose of Vedic knowledge and self-realization system. Thus, knowledge of all the Vedas and the Vedic literature, such as the message of Krsna in the Bhagavad-gita, and the teachings of the Upanishads and the Puranas, is not limited to "Hindu" are limited to certain areas on the planet or birth family. Such knowledge is actually meant for the entire world. As every person is a spiritual being and have the same spiritual essence as described in accordance with the principles of Sanatana-dharma, then everyone should be given the right and privilege to understand this knowledge. It can not be held for the exclusive province of a group or population.
Sanatana-dharma is also fully developed spiritual philosophy fills any cracks can be left by the philosophical teachings of other religions are less developed. Direct knowledge of the soul is a "universal spiritual truths" that can be applied by everyone, in every part of the world, at any time in history, and in every religion. It is eternal. Therefore, as an eternal spiritual truth, it transcends all time and worldly designations. Knowledge of the soul is the essence of Vedic wisdom and more than what the meaning of the name "Hindu", especially after understanding where that name came from.
Even if the time comes in the time of Kali-Yuga bad after many thousands of years when Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and even (as we call it now) might disappear from the face of the earth, there will still be the teachings of the Vedas which remains as a spiritual and universal truth, even if the truth may be forgotten and must be re-established again in this world by Lord Krsna Himself. I doubt then that he would use the name "Hindu." He must have said what he said when he menyabdakan BG last time.
So, although I do not feel that "Hinduism" is an appropriate term to represent the Vedic Aryan culture or spiritual path, I also use the word from time to time for the same meaning because it has become part of everyone's vocabulary. If it does not, because I follow the path of Vedic Sanatana-dharma, I call myself Sanatana-dharmist. Which reduces the need to use the label "Hindu" and also helps focus attention on the universal nature of the Vedic path. Therefore, I propose that all people who consider themselves as Hindus began to use the term Sanatana-dharmist, which not only refers to the correct Sanskrit terminology, but also more accurately describe the true character and spiritual intent of the Vedas. Other people have also used the term Sanatanis or even Dharmists, both closer to the true meaning of the Vedic culture.
However, for political purposes, and the law may be convenient to continue to use the Hindu name for a while. Until the term Sanatana-dharma or Vedic Dharma is becoming more recognized by international law and society in general, "Hindu" can remain behind the terms used to march the Vedic culture. But in the long run, it is the name that will change in the sense of different views because of the lack of real linguistic basis. Just based on the values people place in it, the meaning and purpose will vary from person to person, culture to culture, and of course from generation to generation. We can see how this happened with the English in India. So, there will be a preservation problem with the name and why some people and groups will not want to accept it.
However, with the continual and increasing use of the term Sanatana-dharma or the Vedic dharma, at least by people who are more aware of the definitive basic Sanskrit these terms, they will gain recognition as a more appropriate term. It just takes time to make the proper adjustments.
It is a way to help heal misinterpretations or misunderstandings that may derive from the use of the name "Hindu," and also an end to the reasons why some groups who do not care to identify themselves under that name. After all, most of the Vedic groups, regardless of their orientation and special way that they follow, must be united behind the term Veda Dharma.
APPENDIX: Srila Prabhupada, founder of the International Society of Krishna Consciousness, has said different things at different times or for different people regarding the use of the name "Hindu". Many times members of ISKCON seems to think that the name Hindu should be avoided at all costs. And on numerous occasions Srila Prabhupada ISKCON said members should not Hindu.
However, he explained briefly to Janmanjaya and Taradevi in a letter from Los Angeles on July 9, 1970 that there is a relationship between Hinduism and Krishna Consciousness: "Regarding your question: Hindu means Indian culture.
India happens to be located on the other side of the Indus River in Pakistan are now spelled Indus-called Sindhu in Sanskrit. Where "Sindhu" is misspelled by Europeans as "Indus", and from the Indus word 'Indian' came. Similarly Arabs usually say sindhus as Hindu. It is [thus] spoken as Hindu Hindu. This is not a Sanskrit word is not found in the Vedic literature.
But the Indian or Hindu culture is the Vedic and start with Chess and Chess Varna Ashrama. So this four varna and ashrama meant for the human race truly civilized. Therefore, the conclusion is true when the civilized man in the true sense of the term he followed the system of varna and ashrama and then he can be called 'Hinduism'. Krishna consciousness movement we teach the four varnas and four ashrama, so of course has had a relationship with a Hindu. So Hinduism can be understood from the point of view of culture, not a religious viewpoint. Culture is never religion. Religion is faith, and culture is the advancement of education or knowledge. "
He further pointed out in a letter from Los Angeles, July 16, 1970, in which he answered questions for a Nevatiaji: "9. Americans are very smart and boys and girls so that they understand quality principles as the original and thus they receive it. They understand that the Krsna Consciousness movement is not Indian or Hindu, but a cultural movement for the entire human society although of course because that comes from India is [the] Indian and Hindu touch. "
In this way, Srila Prabhupada distinguishes Krishna Consciousness as a to-universality, cultural and spiritual movement that can stand alone, apart from certain religious and cultural differences. However, he still tells how there are certainly people of India and Hindus have a relationship with what is presented in the movement. And this does not have to and should not be completely ignored or avoided. We can certainly work together for the preservation and promotion of Vedic culture without difficulty with people who might prefer to call themselves Hindu, knowing our relationship with the Vedic tradition.
Sources vedasastra.wordpress. com / about-name-hindu
posted back in http://cakepane.blogspot.com
