[Sxscdergh]

Now about the name Sanathana Dharma.

According to Wikipedia it is the name by which the Hindus call their religion. This is how it is projected now. Of course we have a number of books/articles on that.

But the question is How far is it true? It is not true.

Sanathana Dharma is a term which was unknown before 1960. Swami Vivakananda, Sri Ramakrishna or Ramana Maharishi did not talk about Sanathana Dharma. Ask your grand father whether he is familiar with the name. Again just walk onto to the street and ask an ordinary Hindu to what religion he belongs to. Hardly any one will say Sanathana Dharma.

The questions which arise are:

1. What was the necessity of a new name? Why?

2. How did we get the name?

3. Reasons why it has not been accepted by all Hindus.

[Innockcroff]

hindu as a word did not exist 1400 years back.of course its not possible to ask personally anyone,but historical books,icons,tablets,plates indicate such a truth.fact is only god exists as the foundation of existance.gods manifestation is now considered as god itself.a part of god is implied as god itself.its convenient to call as hindus because,the communication in real time in real world is possible.if we keep drilling down,then as a smartha.further the gothram.the rishis.one finds our heritage in a nutshell.one feels smug and secure finally.sanathana=eternal ; dharma= ones righteous living principle.the word or sentence coinage maybe of a newer mode,but its concept is beginingless or timeless imho.

[caseferter]

I had posted earlier that the name Hinduism for the religion did not exist till may be about 500 to 600 years back.

Hinduism like most religions did not have a name. If Sanathana dharma was the name by which the Hindus themselves called it, there would have been no problem. But they did not.

When the English landed in India they had to coin a word for the religion of the Hindus. Since the religion was propunded by Brahmins they initially called it Brahminism. Not Brahmanism but Brahminism that is the religion of the Brahmins. Later when their knowledge of the people of India widened, they found that there were differences in the practice of religion by the people who were not Brahmins. There were objections from the Hindus to the name Brahminism. You will find that interested people who want to carry on an anti-Hindu campaign still use it.

The term Hinduism was coined to include the religious practices of all the castes and creeds.

Religious historians traced the evolution of the religion and divided it into three/four phases. The Vedic religion, the Epic/Puranika/Smartha religion and then Hindusim which encompassed all these and much more. The Epic/Puranika/Smarta religion was the one they called Brahminism and not the Vedic religion. It is because the people of India had given up the Vedic religion long back. The revival of the Vaidic way of life by the Smarthas did not bring back the Vedic religion.

The term Brahminism was objected to as being very narrow and full of contradictions. The term was given up later. Of course it was revived by Indian historians for preaching anti-Brahminism later.

Now till aroung 1950 or 1960 ( I am not sure of the date) the term Sanathana Dharma was never used. Swami Vivekananda did not use it. Pandit Madanmohan Malaviya the founder of Banares Hindu university and other Hindu scholars like Tilak and pundits never used the term. Swami Dayananda Saraswathi who founded Arya Samaj to revive the Vedic religion also did not use it.

The term Sanathana Dharma was first used in copper plate of the middle ages which was excavated after independence. The copper plate defined Sanathana Dharma as the combination of Shruti and Smiriti. I did have the exact sanskrit verse. But I am not able to trace it.

As I write this I am referring to the book "A religious history of ancient India' by R.P. Goyal. This was a prescribed text book in many universities long back. This book is a compilation of information from various sources with a lot of reference citations in every page. This is one book which deals extensively on the Smarta religion, which many of the later historians have ignored. The book was published in 1986. The index does not even have an entry called Sanathana Dharma.

[bashansasasasa]

I had posted earlier that the name Hinduism for the religion did not exist till may be about 500 to 600 years back.

Hinduism like most religions did not have a name. If Sanathana dharma was the name by which the Hindus themselves called it, there would have been no problem. But they did not.

Good info. Hinduism is a popular name known even in far away lands. So, keeping that way would be helpful. Hindus in Africa (who settled there longtime) may not follow as per our strutis or smrits, but still carry on their pride or memory of culture. So, I would say, be that way.

Except those who go through pAtashalAs, follow the vedic way of living who can be called real vaidikAs, all of us are hindus at various levels. But, being in India, in close proximity of rich temples and vedic spiritualists, bhAgavathAs, scholars and philosophers, with well-written books, we should strive to make a humble, sincere attempt in pursuing/practising such wisdom.

[thierabess]

Hinduism-Bhartiya-Sanatan Dharm?


The terms Sanatan Dharm and Bhartiya are used throughout this site. They are original names that refer to the same eternal knowledge that the modern world calls Hinduism.Sanatan Dharm

The eternal (sanatan) universal religion. It contains the knowledge for the spiritual well-being of all the souls. It provides the guidelines for all kinds of people of the world, which, if followed, leads them towards God realization. It is the universal religion of the Upnishads, Gita and the Bhagwatam which Bharatvarsh has introduced for the whole world.Bhartiya

According to the scriptural description of the brahmand (the planetary or solar system and the celestial worlds) the entire earth planet is called Bharatvarsh, but particularly the area of the continent that lies south of the Himalayas is called Bharatvarsh. It is also called Aryavart. The inhabitants of Aryavart are called the Aryans as referred to in the Rigved. Thus, the words Bhartiya or Aryans were both used for the inhabitants of Bharatvarsh or Aryavart, however, the words Bhartiya and Bharatvarsh were more popular.Hinduism & India

Persians used to call ‘Hindu’ for the Sindhu river, which was a localized version of the word Sindhu. When Muslims invaded Bharatvarsh from the west (which was the land of the Sindhu river) they started calling the inhabitants of Bharatvarsh ‘the Hindus.’ Accordingly, the country of the Hindus was called Hindustan by them which means the place (sthan)of the Hindus (Hindu). For speaking convenience the colloquial form of the word ‘sthan’ became ‘stan’ and in this way the word Hindustan (Hindu + stan) came into being. The Greeks used to call ‘Indu’ for ‘Hindu,’ because there is no letter ‘h’ in the Greek alphabet. When English people came, for their convenience, they altered the names of quite a few places and also some of the rivers. They called ‘Indus’ for the Sindhu river and, accordingly, ‘India’ for Hindustan or Bharatvarsh. Thus, the words India and Hindu became popular, and the religion and culture of Hindus began to be called the Hinduism.Hindu philosophy, religion and history are all intertwined. The Sages and the acharyaswho produced the scriptures (which form the body of Sanatan Dharm) are the prominent personalities of Bhartiya history. Thus, the main part of our history is the history of the Divine personalities; and our religion is the universal religion of devotion to God.

I personally do not have a problem with the name Hinduism.
We change our name to make it easy for others to pronounce it, similarly I can go with a religion that others are happy with.
Hinduism-Bhartiya-Sanatan Dharm?

[RagonaCon]

Just a small observation. The web site quoted above talks about Sanatan Dharm and not Sanatana Dharma. The Hindi wallahs have twisted all Sanskrit names like making Rama into Ram and Sanatana Dharma to Sanatan Dharm.

This site show the money power of the Sanatana Dhrama propounders. They have the money power and spend millions in propagating their ideas. The Swamiji who is the force behind this and hundreds of other similar sites. He owns the biggest Hindu temple in the world in Austin, Texas.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

By the way please avoid posting links to sites which do not accept Siva as a God and carries on a slander campaign against Adi Sankaracharya. Those who believe in only one supreme God.

I do not think we should be posting links to Propaganda sites.

Please note that in spite of all the verbiage on the site, nowhere is there a mention about the name Sanatana Dharma being mentioned in the Vedas or any of the scriptures.

I can point our to howlers in the site like and also rejoinders. But that is not the purpose of my posts.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

[ariniaxia]

Just a small observation. The web site quoted above talks about Sanatan Dharm and not Sanatana Dharma. The Hindi wallahs have twisted all Sanskrit names like making Rama into Ram and Sanatana Dharma to Sanatan Dharm.

This site show the money power of the Sanatana Dhrama propounders. They have the money power and spend millions in propagating their ideas. The Swamiji who is the force behind this and hundreds of other similar sites. He owns the biggest Hindu temple in the world in Austin, Texas.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

By the way please avoid posting links to sites which do not accept Siva as a God and carries on a slander campaign against Adi Sankaracharya. Those who believe in only one supreme God.

I do not think we should be posting links to Propaganda sites.

Please note that in spite of all the verbiage on the site, nowhere is there a mention about the name Sanatana Dharma being mentioned in the Vedas or any of the scriptures.

I can point our to howlers in the site like and also rejoinders. But that is not the purpose of my posts.

There are millions of dollars at stake here. I can not compete against this money power.

Dear Sir,

That way we can hold any one in India guilty for distorting Sanskrit words.
For example in Tamil..Shiva has become Sivan,Rama is Raman,Om Namah Shivaya is pronounced as Om Namah Chivaya and in Kannada Lakshmi is also called Lakumi at times.

Bengalis turned every V into B and even A becomes O.. for example Vishwa becomes Bishwa and Vijay becomes Bijoy.

So what to do??? Darling Yeh Hai India!!!

[DoctorAlexandro]

But all of us including the Bengalis do not insist that it is Sanskrit. We know the difference. The Hindiwallahs are not even aware of the difference.

[Terinalo]

The name Hindu Kush has been given long before even Islam was born. It was the boundary of the Hindu area of influence before both Islam and Christianity was born.

Pliny mentions about Aseni and Asoi clans (Sakas) south of the Hindu Kush in his book about the tribes of India.

Any reference for this? I mean book name or URL or something?

Since Pliny lived around third century A.D, it is worthwhile to do a research whether he mentioned the name Hindu Kush. The problem is that there has not been enough research done on this.

Does it mean you don't know and its just your assumption or hear say? I am surprise how you then confidently say that that Hindu Kush was named before Islam was born, it does not make sense. Also, if Hindu term itself was given after Persian invasion, you yourself mentioned this, then how can Hindu Kush get its name before Islam was born?

When I was talking about Hindu Kush mountains being the border I was talking about the Sakas, Kushans, Mouryas and others. That was the time of the Gandhara kingdom.
For me the history of Hinduism started 3500 years back and not with the advent of Islam. Both Sakhas and Kushans invaded India. so did the Greeks. Again the Huns invaded India and committed countless atrocities. Please read Raja Tharangini.

All these are irrelevant. Hindu Kush means 'massacre of hindus', I had pasted the reference clearly pointing to various other references and refuting Nigel Allen. You now proposed that some other person called Pliny though you are not sure if he did refer to Hindu Kush in his writings. With due respect, I would hope since you have no better evidance, you would now assume that Kush meant masscre and not mountains which would be Koi.
Regards

[Sheelldaw]

Please let us understand that the renaming of Hinduism to Sanatana Dharma is big business. Billions of dollars business. It is also part of a marketing strategy.

Now let us see why some Hindus were unhappy with the name Hinduism and why they wanted it to be changed.

Two major groups were involved.

1. The English educated intelligentia. This group did not approve of two aspects of Hinduism.

a. The caste system or Varnashrama Dharma.

b. The religious practices of the Tantriks and castes other than Brahmins. Animal sacrifices, drinking of liquor and worship of female and Village deities. What we call as Folk Hinduism which does not depend on Vedas or any scriptures.

2. The Orthodoxy. I am using this term in the absence of any other suitable term. Surprisingly this group shared the same concerns as the first one.

a. Varnashrama Dharma. According to this group Varnashrama Dharma is Hinduism.

b. This group also intensely disliked the religious practices of the Tantriks and castes other than Brahmins. Animal sacrifices, drinking of liquor and worship of female and Village deities.

In this dislike of Folk Hinduism both the groups were united.

Group 1:

This group was appalled by the prevalence of the caste system. Some (very few) of thes people took up social restructuring to remove the caste system. But it was done rarely and not effectively. This group are/were not social reformers.

Group 2:

This group was against abolition of sati, widow remarriage, the shrada act which abolished child marriages and giving property rights to women. They were appalled at making knowledge of the scriptures available to one and all irrespective of caste. This is knowledge which they had zealously guarded for thousands of years. Knowlege which gave them power.

Both these groups are extremely poweful. They have money. Tonnes of it. They also have political power.

The new name movement got an impetus from the renaming of the Islam religion. It was called as Mohammedism, Mohammedanism etc. The term Islam was used by the followers who objected to the name Mohammedanism.

In my next post we will see how these groups went about renaming and modifying Hinduism to suit their objectives. In fact they went about rewriting Hinduism. You may call it sanitizing hinduism.

I am writing all this because In India the people who practice Folk Hinduism are in a overwhelming majority. The above groups have tried to keep Folk Hinduism outside the Hinduism fold. This has weakened Hinduism and enabled other religions to convert Hindus.

[illilmicy]

Now about the name Sanathana Dharma.

According to Wikipedia it is the name by which the Hindus call their religion. This is how it is projected now. Of course we have a number of books/articles on that.

But the question is How far is it true? It is not true.

Sanathana Dharma is a term which was unknown before 1960. Swami Vivakananda, Sri Ramakrishna or Ramana Maharishi did not talk about Sanathana Dharma. Ask your grand father whether he is familiar with the name. Again just walk onto to the street and ask an ordinary Hindu to what religion he belongs to. Hardly any one will say Sanathana Dharma.

The questions which arise are:

1. What was the necessity of a new name? Why?

2. How did we get the name?

3. Reasons why it has not been accepted by all Hindus.

I had sought the assistance of sanskrit group to find out the earliest usage of "Sanathana Dharma" in scriptures/literature etc. and append herebelow the extract of reply furnished by a research scholar, which is self explicit

QUOTE:

All references of सनातन derived from the अव्यय - सना meaning ancient:

[not assigned]
Garbhopaniṣat1/559
Parāśaradharmasaṃhitā1/214
Garuḍapurāṇa4/75641
Nāradasmṛti1/13274


Epic
Mahābhārata 202/7512260
Manusmṛti 12/375420
Rāmāyaṇa 23/2607910
Viṣṇusmṛti1/19182


Classical
Bhāgavatapurāṇa 6/42634
Kūrmapurāṇa78/817540
Liṅgapurāṇa28/1273840
Matsyapurāṇa18/1224120
Pañcārthabhāṣya4/21641
Suśrutasaṃhitā2/146319


Medieval
Ānandakanda1/84015
Kālikāpurāṇa2/4091
Mātṛkābhedatantra2/7839
Parāśarasmṛtiṭīkā1/7556
Rasārṇava1/32027
Rasendracintāmaṇi1/13320
Skandapurāṇa1/16366
Spandakārikānirṇaya1/10186
Tantrasāra1/14221


Late
Gokarṇapurāṇasāraḥ1/14643
Haṭhayogapradīpikā1/5649
Sātvatatantra4/10107
Skandapurāṇa (2)25/113973


Rāmāyaṇa

• Rām, Bā, 24, 16.1
  rājyabhāraniyuktānām eṣa dharmaḥ sanātanaḥ /

The Mahabharata in Sanskrit: Book 12: Chapter 128
परस्पराभिसंरक्षा राज्ञा राष्ट्रेण चापदि
नित्यम एवेह कर्तव्या एष धर्मः सनातनः ॥31||


BhāgavPur, 3, 16, 18.1
tvattaḥ sanātano dharmo rakṣyate tanubhis tava /


In all the above references, as Mm. suggested it is used as qualifying a duty since time long. I have produced this only for the earliest reference to the usage of the word सनातन in respect of धर्म and nothing more than that it serves. In the statistical references, it qualifies many things brahma, shakti, etc. And सनातन is one of the four sons of ब्रह्मा, the creator born at the beginning of the creation according to पुराण-s.

UNQUOTE

[Hpdovoxm]

Thank you, Zebra16. Excellent.

Dharma is eternal. But the question is whether the term has been used to denote a religion or a set of rules practiced by a group of people.

In my view it does not.

[LoisCampon]

Thank you, Zebra16. Excellent.

Dharma is eternal. But the question is whether the term has been used to denote a religion or a set of rules practiced by a group of people.

In my view it does not.

There are two stages of its use, I am told, to denote religion like thing, or a set of rules practiced by a group of people:

1. usage by Sri Swami Vivekananda
2. usage by Sri Veer Savarkar

but I am yet to get any evidence, so far. So this is just my opinion at present

[BegeMoT]

Nacchi,
I like your avatar very much, I used to have Durga face mask like that, with puja approaching it makes me nostalgic.

When I posted the original message, I was not proposing a name change of the religion. First of all my personal religion is a derivation of this so called "Hindu" religion. I follow some of the principles of Hindu Religion, but to me our religion is like a super market. We choose what we want, and leave the rest. Even Agnostics can claim to be a Hindu. Whole humanity, or even entire living world can claim to be Hindu. So how do you convert out/ or convert to Hinduism. Philosophically why do I need to convert. People convert for socio-economic reason. In the west sometimes even before marriage they decide as to which religion they are going to raise their children in.
I have no money riding on the outcome of the name for the religion. My posting was mainly to inquire as to how other Hindus (mainly NRI) express their religion to people who are not Indians.

[soajerwaradaY]

Prasad,

The reason why I chose to post on that was that attempts have been made and have succeeded in projecting an image of Hinduism abroad which is not true. They have succeeded in taking Tantra, Folk Hinduism and many other aspects out of their own version of Hinduism.

Just to quote an example, is it not strange that when in India the vast majority of the Hindus eat non-vegetarian food, we are trying to make out that Vegetarianism is a prime requisite for a Hindu? We swear by the Vedas, but deny that that the Vedic rituals included Animal Sacrifices.

You are right. Hinduism is like a Mall. But attempts are being made to turn it into a Monotheistic religion and an intolerant religion.

I will talk about this later.

My post is aimed at NRIs who should be aware of such attempts.

[InvertPrete]

Prasad,

The reason why I chose to post on that was that attempts have been made and have succeeded in projecting an image of Hinduism abroad which is not true. They have succeeded in taking Tantra, Folk Hinduism and many other aspects out of their own version of Hinduism.

Just to quote an example, is it not strange that when in India the vast majority of the Hindus eat non-vegetarian food, we are trying to make out that Vegetarianism is a prime requisite for a Hindu? We swear by the Vedas, but deny that that the Vedic rituals included Animal Sacrifices.

You are right. Hinduism is like a Mall. But attempts are being made to turn it into a Monotheistic religion and an intolerant religion.

I will talk about this later.

My post is aimed at NRIs who should be aware of such attempts.

I think you are picking an imaginary group and making too generic statements to counter those imaginary groups. Your examples are also not clear. If majority of hindus are vegetarians, that doesn't also mean non-vegsm is a prerequisite. I don't know whom you are trying to target, which group said vegsm is a prerequisite being hindu? I don't understand what you are trying to say by your animal sacrifice example, who succeeded in saying that they never happened?
And you say big attempts made to turn it into monotheistic, i'm surprised, what is your philosophy, did you not understand that the monotheism they refer to is not same as other monothestic religions? they refer to panantheism actually. And I've no idea who said hinduism is intolerant as you accused. To be honest, I've never seen any reference from you so far in this thread, your personal opinions won't help, it will be just another propaganda. You seem to using too many superlatives like 'big attempts', 'billion dollar busiess'(I wonder what billion dollar in a name), 'tonnes of money' etc etc, all too subjective and as propagandic as anyone else.

[infarrelisam]

Prasad,

The reason why I chose to post on that was that attempts have been made and have succeeded in projecting an image of Hinduism abroad which is not true. They have succeeded in taking Tantra, Folk Hinduism and many other aspects out of their own version of Hinduism.

Just to quote an example, is it not strange that when in India the vast majority of the Hindus eat non-vegetarian food, we are trying to make out that Vegetarianism is a prime requisite for a Hindu? We swear by the Vedas, but deny that that the Vedic rituals included Animal Sacrifices.

You are right. Hinduism is like a Mall. But attempts are being made to turn it into a Monotheistic religion and an intolerant religion.

I will talk about this later.

My post is aimed at NRIs who should be aware of such attempts.

You are contradicting others constant posters here who claim that even Tam Brahmins have become non-vegetarians. There is a misconception about hindu's in countries outside India. They have met mostly Vegetarian Hindus, and also Know that cow is sacred to Hindus. Some of the so called swamis who have established their ashrams, and derive their following, have strict code of vegetarianism. Those are private groups and can preach what they want.

Can you blame the Non-Indians, if they form an opinion of most Hindus, on the basis of few they meet? There is no motive in that.
If you are pointing to ISKON:
They might be an embarrassment to section of Indian.

Please consider that they are very well organised, and have a lot of following. My hats off to them. They are promoting their brand of Hinduism.

[Qeiafib]

Shri informed, Shri Prasad1,

My own impression, based on feedback given to me by my sons (one in US and two in UK) has been that it becomes unavoidable to accept NV or NV contaminated food if one has to live in foreign countries and get along with the local populations there. I am told that if one has to stay overnight at the workplace because of any exigency, the only vegetarian item will be coffee at the workplace which also may not be there once the evening supply is exhausted. One of my sons occupies a fairly senior position (Executive Director) in a MNC and when I asked him if he cannot have some vegetarian food ordered, he smiled and said that the MNCs never foresaw strict vegetarian Tabras working there, nor are they so very keen to promote our tabra preferences; in short, "if you can't take what you get, please go" is the loud message, he said.

My sons also tell me that there are many tabras who have adjusted to the foreign food style completely, but once they land back in India they will like to put on a hypocritical image of their own. The only person to tell us the truth was an old lady whose six sons have become US citizens long back,, when she said that irrespective of with which son they stay, she cooks our tabra veg food for the two of them because the children and more especially, the grandchildren just cannot live on the strict vegetarian norms followed by us.

I have visited US once and my son told me that even in that ubiquitous 'subway' chain, one has to know which is veg and which is not.

[virtuah]

sangom,

re your post # 38

My wife and I eat out regularly.

Yesterday, for example, we went to an Italian restaurant: we had a variety of choices of vegetarian food, and just not an odd item or two. Below I give you the url of the menu, and while one may suspect the rennet in the cheese, the food, otherwise is fresh and tasty.

I think in the usa, it has become the norm, to label the food, as vegetarian or vegan if applicable. I have seen the same in England.

The current trend, even in my office, is to go out of the way to accommodate minority preferences. Recently we had a pizza lunch in my department (48 people). Me and another white lady wanted veggie pizza, one other white lady wanted vegan pizza (no cheese), and the rest opted for non veg.

At the end of the session, we had one 11 slices of vegan pizza, 9 slices of veggie pizza left, which nobody wanted. Ofcourse there were some leftovers of non veg pizza too, but no way in proportion to the amount ordered and the number of people who ate it.

Personally, I have found the west increasingly vegetarian friendly past 20 years or so.

Tutto Pronto - Fine Food To Go

[soonahonsefalh]

sangom,

re your post # 38

My wife and I eat out regularly.

Yesterday, for example, we went to an Italian restaurant: we had a variety of choices of vegetarian food, and just not an odd item or two. Below I give you the url of the menu, and while one may suspect the rennet in the cheese, the food, otherwise is fresh and tasty.

I think in the usa, it has become the norm, to label the food, as vegetarian or vegan if applicable. I have seen the same in England.

The current trend, even in my office, is to go out of the way to accommodate minority preferences. Recently we had a pizza lunch in my department (48 people). Me and another white lady wanted veggie pizza, one other white lady wanted vegan pizza (no cheese), and the rest opted for non veg.

At the end of the session, we had one 11 slices of vegan pizza, 9 slices of veggie pizza left, which nobody wanted. Ofcourse there were some leftovers of non veg pizza too, but no way in proportion to the amount ordered and the number of people who ate it.

Personally, I have found the west increasingly vegetarian friendly past 20 years or so.

Tutto Pronto - Fine Food To Go

Kunjuppu,

I think the ordered pizza lunch is very different from what one may be able to get late at night in the office, unless the office has a 24 hours' canteen. I understand that most employers started skimping on such peripheral benefits like coffee, canteen etc., during the bad days two or three years before and have not yet reinstated these. May be yours is a very different set-up and may be Canada is different but what I said related to US (Atlanta) and London. I have no reason to believe that the feedback given to me was not factual.