I haven't heard these terms much in America, but it is the way that Indians refer to being vegetarian or not vegetarian. I thought I'd talk a bit about the history of vegetarianism in India and Hinduism today.
Personally I been feeling very drawn to being Veg, my body seems to want it. For the last week or so I have stopped eating meat except for fish. For the time being I am still eating fish and animal products like eggs and milk. So I can't really call myself Veg yet, but I'm closer anyway.
According to Wikipedia, India is 31% vegetarian (this being something called lacto-vegetarian, which includes eating diary products except for eggs). Another 9% eat eggs. That number seemed low to me. I was surprised. Although Wikipedia seems to say that only 4% of Americans identify as vegetarian, so that puts the number in perspective. Then again, the article says some estimates put the number of Indian vegetarians at 20-42%. I wonder if the variation has to do with the definitions being used for vegetarian. In America, I know, there is a lot of variety of which things can be eaten.
I think in America we are often less cautious about animal products that wander into unexpected places. Gelatin in a variety of foods, chicken broth used for vegetable soups, or MacDonald's fries that have been fried in animal lard. It depends on the individual how strict she is going to be. According to the article, Indians are much, much more cautious about what is in food and packages of food and medicine are marked according to whether they have any animal product in them.
Two main reasons given for vegetarianism in India are 1) Ahimsa and 2) the belief that what we eat effects our personalities, minds, souls ("You are what you eat").
Ahimsa is a Sanskirt word meaning non-violence. It is listed by Krishna as one of the qualities of a great man. I've heard several people say that ahmisa is much more stressed in Buddhism than in Hinduism, but Hinduism has started to be affected by it through Buddhism. A history of ahimsa can be found here.
The wikipedia article on vegetarianism in India says: "Also, Hindus believe that one's personality is affected by the kind of food one consumes and eating flesh is considered bad for once's spiritual/mental well-being. It takes many more vegetables or plants to produce an equal amount of meat [10] many more lives are destroyed and more suffering is caused when meat is used as food [11]."
The analysis of the statistics say that the percentages of vegetarianism are much higher for Jains and Brahmans (55%).
Jainism is an off-shoot of Hinduism. Sometimes it is considered a separate religion and sometimes it is considered a branch. The standards of ahimsa are extremely strict. Ideally only fruits and vegetables that have naturally fallen to the ground can be eaten so as not to harm the plants by pulling things off.
Some commenters have mentioned before that different degrees of Veg or non-Veg are expected for different castes. This seems to relate to the idea that what we eat is related to who we are and what we do.
Hinduism is a religion that is beautifully grounded in consequences. A good reason for Veg diet and ahimsa is the law of karma (law of action). It is better for our sanskara to limit the amount of killing or suffering we are causing.
Also, getting a bit off topic, the belief in reincarnation makes the consequences of everything more important. The long-term sustainability of a meat-less diet and the help to the environment is really important because Hindus cannot just shrug and figure that the long-term consequences won't effect them. Because we live over and over again, the damages that happen to the environment now are things we will have to deal with ourselves when we are reborn, not just something our children or grandchildren will have to deal with.
Now, in Vedic times animal sacrifices were part of the larger worships. The way that animals were killed is called jhaṭkā . The article doesn't say, but presumably this is a method of killing an animal which is more humane. One of the concerns with eating meat is that the fear that the animal felt in its last moments of life would be transferred into those who ate it. Meat that is sometimes eaten is often lamb meat. Never beef for any Hindus, as far as I know.
I'm sure that you've heard that the cow is sacred. Well, all animals and all people and all everything is sacred! The cow is special because the cow is so generous and provides us with the gift of milk, ghee, cheese, yoghurt, etc.
The transition from the culture of animal sacrifices to valuing ahimsa seems to give support to the idea that Hinduism was influenced by its off-shoot, Buddhism. Now, none of these articles has said what is common for those of the Kshatriya(warrior) caste to eat and I would suspect they were the ones doing most of the animal sacrifices in ancient times. And certainly there is plenty of hunting going on by this caste in the great epics.
Some Vaishnavas (one of the major branches of Hinduism) also stay away from garlic, onions, and other overly-stimulating foods. Someone mentioned here earlier that ISKON avoids those things and they are a Vaishnava organization. This has to do with the guna of food. I'll have to do a post on the gunas soon!
So, there is my overview of Veg and non-Veg. Please, feel free to comment and correct or clarify what I have found.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
In the Future and in my Imagination
Inspired by going to see SM and having such a grand time, I wish it were more possible for us all to meet up!
Perhaps some day I can take a trip to England and visit you, Tandava.
I would so love to sit down and chat with CS and Art.
I think Basu would be so bright and friendly face to face.
Mouse would be awesome to go shopping with!
Sita, and Dhurga, and Kat and so many others who have commented here.
I can imagine us all together having amazing discussions and enjoying a dinner together.
Ah, the Internet can be such a beautiful thing. I am so glad to have virtually met you all!
I am coming near to having 100 posts already. I never knew I had that much to say. I know I will continue to be inspired as I push boundaries in my life. I think there will be some very interesting posts in the future about marriage and children and I'm sure there will be posts inspired by my class on Civil Rights and Liberties this summer!
I'm thinking also that I will post the first few pages of the novel that I talked about a while back. I'm a very slow writer so it will be ages before the book is finished, but I would like to share the little bit that I have.
Perhaps some day I can take a trip to England and visit you, Tandava.
I would so love to sit down and chat with CS and Art.
I think Basu would be so bright and friendly face to face.
Mouse would be awesome to go shopping with!
Sita, and Dhurga, and Kat and so many others who have commented here.
I can imagine us all together having amazing discussions and enjoying a dinner together.
Ah, the Internet can be such a beautiful thing. I am so glad to have virtually met you all!
I am coming near to having 100 posts already. I never knew I had that much to say. I know I will continue to be inspired as I push boundaries in my life. I think there will be some very interesting posts in the future about marriage and children and I'm sure there will be posts inspired by my class on Civil Rights and Liberties this summer!
I'm thinking also that I will post the first few pages of the novel that I talked about a while back. I'm a very slow writer so it will be ages before the book is finished, but I would like to share the little bit that I have.
Native-American or Indian?
This weekend the boyfriend and I had dinner with commenter SM and her family. We had a wonderful time. She mentioned that she might want to start a blog and I hope that she does. If you do, SM, come and share the link with us!
Also, another of our commenters has just started a blog. Art is writing about creating a Hindu American Identity: http://bamboothoughtlemons.blogspot.com/
I know a lot of people seem to be interested in forming a new identity as non-Indian Hindus. I am cautious because it is hard for me to separate out what is the religion and what is the culture and what will you lose when you let go of some of the things. But there should be a way to separate them. I was not satisfied with how it was done by the community I grew up in, but that does not mean that it's not possible.
As I was reading up on this other Churchill fellow from the last post, it brought to mind an issue that came up for me in college. I haven't faced it that much since only because I am not involved in Native American things. Although when I tell someone that I'm involved in Indian things, sometimes they think I mean turquoise jewelry and totem poles and someone once told me that she had heard that the swastika was actually an ancient symbol of Native-Americans. Sigh. No, it's an ancient symbol of India.
In America there are many different terms for different ethnic groups. In our society we put a premium on what has been labeled "Political Correctness." This means being polite when referring to ethnicities or cultures (or sexualities, religions, abilities/disabilities) different from our own. Some people say it goes too far, as many of us are very afraid to accidently offend someone by calling him the wrong thing. The "correct" term for a group can go in and out of fashion. I recently saw a debate on a message board between saying "black" people or "African-American" people. I think most people default to African-American these days. The possible trouble with that is that it qualifies someone's "Americanness" and makes it sound like they are less American than I am because no one ever calls me Irish-American.
But that example is not the point. The point is that there is a huge amount of confusion with the word "Indian."
When I was a kid I was taught that the people native to America, the ones Columbus mistakenly thought must be Indians because he thought when he got to America that he had reached India, were properly called Native-Americans. That was the PC term then.
In college I had a professor who was involved in these things and he told us that now the people preferred to be called "Indian." They were "taking back" the term. We read a wonderful book called The Lone Rancher and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven, about Native-Americans living on reservations. You can see, I stubbornly continue to say "Native-American."
I asked this professor, what then would we call actual Indians? People in India? He said "East Indians." I thought that was ridiculous. I'm sorry to Native-Americans, but you can't have the term. It's been taken. The people from India or who live in India get to call themselves Indian before you do.
Not that the word "India" is native at all, but it's been around for a lot longer than America has been.
Native words for India include Bharat and Hindustan. I welcome commenters in India to add to that list.
But still, to me the word "Indian" is always going to refer to people in India and the Native-Americans are going to have to find another term if they don't like that one.
Also, another of our commenters has just started a blog. Art is writing about creating a Hindu American Identity: http://bamboothoughtlemons.blogspot.com/
I know a lot of people seem to be interested in forming a new identity as non-Indian Hindus. I am cautious because it is hard for me to separate out what is the religion and what is the culture and what will you lose when you let go of some of the things. But there should be a way to separate them. I was not satisfied with how it was done by the community I grew up in, but that does not mean that it's not possible.
As I was reading up on this other Churchill fellow from the last post, it brought to mind an issue that came up for me in college. I haven't faced it that much since only because I am not involved in Native American things. Although when I tell someone that I'm involved in Indian things, sometimes they think I mean turquoise jewelry and totem poles and someone once told me that she had heard that the swastika was actually an ancient symbol of Native-Americans. Sigh. No, it's an ancient symbol of India.
In America there are many different terms for different ethnic groups. In our society we put a premium on what has been labeled "Political Correctness." This means being polite when referring to ethnicities or cultures (or sexualities, religions, abilities/disabilities) different from our own. Some people say it goes too far, as many of us are very afraid to accidently offend someone by calling him the wrong thing. The "correct" term for a group can go in and out of fashion. I recently saw a debate on a message board between saying "black" people or "African-American" people. I think most people default to African-American these days. The possible trouble with that is that it qualifies someone's "Americanness" and makes it sound like they are less American than I am because no one ever calls me Irish-American.
But that example is not the point. The point is that there is a huge amount of confusion with the word "Indian."
When I was a kid I was taught that the people native to America, the ones Columbus mistakenly thought must be Indians because he thought when he got to America that he had reached India, were properly called Native-Americans. That was the PC term then.
In college I had a professor who was involved in these things and he told us that now the people preferred to be called "Indian." They were "taking back" the term. We read a wonderful book called The Lone Rancher and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven, about Native-Americans living on reservations. You can see, I stubbornly continue to say "Native-American."
I asked this professor, what then would we call actual Indians? People in India? He said "East Indians." I thought that was ridiculous. I'm sorry to Native-Americans, but you can't have the term. It's been taken. The people from India or who live in India get to call themselves Indian before you do.
Not that the word "India" is native at all, but it's been around for a lot longer than America has been.
Native words for India include Bharat and Hindustan. I welcome commenters in India to add to that list.
But still, to me the word "Indian" is always going to refer to people in India and the Native-Americans are going to have to find another term if they don't like that one.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Other White Americans Looking for Culture
I happened to stumble upon some blogs about other ways in which people of European ancestry find culture in their lives. I know we have a few Pagan readers here and I think this is the same or similar. It seems that some people are going back to Nordic traditions of their ancestors as well. This suggests to me that my sense of lack of culture is a common problem here in America.
One person put it really interestingly:
""I know the feeling of having been exiled from your ancestors’ traditions. I know what it feels like to see other cultures reveling in traditions, and medicines, and lifestyles passed down to them for thousands of years, while I am given only Advil with which to soothe my pains."
The post is about how sometimes people trying to reclaim their European heritage fall into problems with racism (wanting to have White pride, since Black pride is okay).
It seems that a lot of people feel very connected to their own family and ancestry. I don't really feel that. I don't have a sense of my lineage reaching back through time in one particular family. Believing in reincarnation, this body is little indication of what other lives I've had and those lives are equally valid as this one. It's not like a previous life is less real because it is over. I may have been Indian in my last life. I may have been something else.
With that in mind it is also hard for me to understand how people get held accountable for the actions of their race in the past. It seems like such a strange idea to me because I didn't personally do any of those things that white people did to subjugate other races. But is that just a "white" way to think?
The same person above quotes Churchill [Edited to correct: not The Churchill, apparently, just A Churchill] as saying: “[People who appropriate the affects [sic] of other spiritual cultures] are attempting to avoid responsibility, to sidestep the heritage they’re a part of. Rather than rectify it, putting it right, putting it back in balance, they want to step out of it and appropriate something else from somebody else so they can pretend to be other than who and what they are.” (From what I read of the link Tandava shared, this Churchill guy is out of his mind. With alleged claims of a little bit of Native American blood, he criticizes all other white people for being imperialists and apparently published an essay basically saying that victims of 9/11 had it coming).
I don't understand this perspective at all. For wrongs of the past, I think we should all be working to rectify those. I think we should do our best to avoid those wrongs in the present. It seems to me that the responsibility belongs to everyone, not just those whose ancestors two hundred years ago did something wrong.
So here we are, back at the subject of cultural appropriation. I went looking for a definition and I was pleased with what I found. A detailed article on Pagans using Hindu deities gave this definition:
" Cultural appropriation happens when someone from one culture borrows symbols, rituals, and practices from another culture without fully understanding the context, meaning, and complexity of those things, and then passes them off as one’s own, or uses their own interpretations and then passes them off as 'authentic.' "
By this definition, one would need to be using items from another culture without understanding their full meaning and claiming one's own interpretation as more valid. I don't believe that I am doing either of these things. I come to Hindu practices with much respect. I have a great deal of study, knowledge, and practical experience participating in Hindu ritual. I value my own understanding of my worship, but I'm always open to deepening that understanding with the many, many people who know more than I.
This person goes on to say, "I’ve seen plenty of neo-Pagans doing a great job at respectfully approaching Hindu deities and incorporating Hindu worship into their own with some amount of care and respect. At the same time, I’ve also seen a few neo-Pagans worship Hindu deities with some bravado, and have seen and heard about some rituals that are at best ignorant and at worst blatantly disrespectful of Hindu traditions and culture."
Another blog post defining cultural appropriation says this: "Cultural Appropriation: The unhealthy aspect of multiculti, where a more powerful culture raids a less powerful neighboring culture ... and appropriates aspects of that culture without proper acknowledgment of the 'home culture' or understanding the cultural context from which these aspects spring. Examples: yoga, Buddhism, hip hop and ebonics-derived slang, graffiti art, etc."
Pretty similar, the key idea being that the source of the cultural tradition is not acknowledged and the understanding is incomplete.
The first article is more positive in tone than the second, but both give me the impression that there are ways to do what we do well and there are ways to do it badly and we need to be aware of that. It doesn't mean that neo-Pagans can't worship Hindu deities or that non-Indians can't worship Hindu deities, it just means that we have to do it with care and respect.
The same blog above has more to say on this subject and also references someone else's thoughts as well:
And We Shall March
A post referencing the above post and adding some things
One person put it really interestingly:
""I know the feeling of having been exiled from your ancestors’ traditions. I know what it feels like to see other cultures reveling in traditions, and medicines, and lifestyles passed down to them for thousands of years, while I am given only Advil with which to soothe my pains."
The post is about how sometimes people trying to reclaim their European heritage fall into problems with racism (wanting to have White pride, since Black pride is okay).
It seems that a lot of people feel very connected to their own family and ancestry. I don't really feel that. I don't have a sense of my lineage reaching back through time in one particular family. Believing in reincarnation, this body is little indication of what other lives I've had and those lives are equally valid as this one. It's not like a previous life is less real because it is over. I may have been Indian in my last life. I may have been something else.
With that in mind it is also hard for me to understand how people get held accountable for the actions of their race in the past. It seems like such a strange idea to me because I didn't personally do any of those things that white people did to subjugate other races. But is that just a "white" way to think?
The same person above quotes Churchill [Edited to correct: not The Churchill, apparently, just A Churchill] as saying: “[People who appropriate the affects [sic] of other spiritual cultures] are attempting to avoid responsibility, to sidestep the heritage they’re a part of. Rather than rectify it, putting it right, putting it back in balance, they want to step out of it and appropriate something else from somebody else so they can pretend to be other than who and what they are.” (From what I read of the link Tandava shared, this Churchill guy is out of his mind. With alleged claims of a little bit of Native American blood, he criticizes all other white people for being imperialists and apparently published an essay basically saying that victims of 9/11 had it coming).
I don't understand this perspective at all. For wrongs of the past, I think we should all be working to rectify those. I think we should do our best to avoid those wrongs in the present. It seems to me that the responsibility belongs to everyone, not just those whose ancestors two hundred years ago did something wrong.
So here we are, back at the subject of cultural appropriation. I went looking for a definition and I was pleased with what I found. A detailed article on Pagans using Hindu deities gave this definition:
" Cultural appropriation happens when someone from one culture borrows symbols, rituals, and practices from another culture without fully understanding the context, meaning, and complexity of those things, and then passes them off as one’s own, or uses their own interpretations and then passes them off as 'authentic.' "
By this definition, one would need to be using items from another culture without understanding their full meaning and claiming one's own interpretation as more valid. I don't believe that I am doing either of these things. I come to Hindu practices with much respect. I have a great deal of study, knowledge, and practical experience participating in Hindu ritual. I value my own understanding of my worship, but I'm always open to deepening that understanding with the many, many people who know more than I.
This person goes on to say, "I’ve seen plenty of neo-Pagans doing a great job at respectfully approaching Hindu deities and incorporating Hindu worship into their own with some amount of care and respect. At the same time, I’ve also seen a few neo-Pagans worship Hindu deities with some bravado, and have seen and heard about some rituals that are at best ignorant and at worst blatantly disrespectful of Hindu traditions and culture."
Another blog post defining cultural appropriation says this: "Cultural Appropriation: The unhealthy aspect of multiculti, where a more powerful culture raids a less powerful neighboring culture ... and appropriates aspects of that culture without proper acknowledgment of the 'home culture' or understanding the cultural context from which these aspects spring. Examples: yoga, Buddhism, hip hop and ebonics-derived slang, graffiti art, etc."
Pretty similar, the key idea being that the source of the cultural tradition is not acknowledged and the understanding is incomplete.
The first article is more positive in tone than the second, but both give me the impression that there are ways to do what we do well and there are ways to do it badly and we need to be aware of that. It doesn't mean that neo-Pagans can't worship Hindu deities or that non-Indians can't worship Hindu deities, it just means that we have to do it with care and respect.
The same blog above has more to say on this subject and also references someone else's thoughts as well:
And We Shall March
A post referencing the above post and adding some things
Thursday, June 24, 2010
A new book to read
Someone on Ravelry just mentioned this book that I had never heard of.
It's called How to Be a Perfect Stranger and it is a guide book to most of the religious services one might encounter in the U.S.
Absolutely brilliant idea for this very diverse country. It looks like they cover a lot and answer questions about how to dress, how services work, how to address the clergy, etc.
I ordered it from Amazon, and I look forward to seeing what it has to say about Hinduism.
It's called How to Be a Perfect Stranger and it is a guide book to most of the religious services one might encounter in the U.S.
Absolutely brilliant idea for this very diverse country. It looks like they cover a lot and answer questions about how to dress, how services work, how to address the clergy, etc.
I ordered it from Amazon, and I look forward to seeing what it has to say about Hinduism.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
I'm sorry, Christians
Okay, I know that of late I've been letting my animosity toward Christianity show. I have a lot of anger about it and I am working to let go of that, but it's tough.
I used to have a lot more patience, but over the years I got closer and closer to the end of the proverbial rope so that now, everything sends me over the edge! I have no opportunity to grow this patience back because Christianity is rammed down my throat every day.
It's not just evangelicals. Of every 50 people you meet in America, probably 49 of them will be wearing a cross. Something like 30 of them will have a Bible quote at their desk at work. Christianity is everywhere you look here. It's in my face all day, every day. T-shirts, bumper stickers, tattoos, jewelry. Bibles in hotel rooms, prayers at events where they should not be legally doing them at all, etc. Bad enough that one can't walk ten feet in America without hitting a church. And I get told I'm just being sensitive and a spoil sport. If my religion were forced on them as much as theirs is on me, they would be saying something very different.
All I ask of Christianity is that it leave me in peace. That's it.
I can't even get away from it in my own home. I get email forwards with Bible verses or talk about angels, I see Bible quotes on Facebook, there are ten television stations dedicated to sermons, and advertisements for Wow Worship music on mainstream channels.
And then there are the people knocking on my door wanting to talk about Jesus Christ, who has been DEAD for more than two thousand years, people. (And before anyone says anything about resurrection, don't forget who you're talking to. I don't believe death exists for anyone. "He who thinks he can kill, he who thinks he can be killed; both are mistaken." Gita).
One of the reasons I make myself very visible as a Hindu is because I am forced to see Christians' religion. If they're going to put their religion in my face, I'm going to put mine in theirs. And I'll tell you, I was very glad I was wearing a bindi when we went to a friend's house to play games and a new person there was wearing a "Jesus Saves" shirt. I can play that game too.
You know what else gets on my nerves? The expression "You only live once." I don't know how it is in other parts of the world, but this expression is everywhere in America. It is usually used to justify stupid behavior. The thing that gets to me is that this phrase is thrown around like it's absolute truth that everyone acknowledges and believes. Well, I don't. I don't think we live once at all.
As the article yesterday said, the ethos of Christianity is all around us in America. People have a baseline assumption that everyone around them is Christian, shown when someone complains in a room full of people about having to have a holiday party at school instead of a Christmas party as though everyone around is going to agree with them (shut up and stop whining is what I want to tell them. Not having a Christmas party is not equivalent to being persecuted. Talk to the people who were burned alive for being Christian).
The idea of a National day of prayer is ridiculous. Leaving aside that it favors religion over non-religion and I completely respect my boyfriend's right to not believe in any God or higher power, Christians in favor of it like to say that it is "non-denominational," so it's okay.
It's non-denominational Christian. Don't kid yourself. I don't know of any other religion that prays the way Christians do. If you want to pray one day of the year, go ahead. If you want to pray every day of the year, go ahead. Do it in your home. Do it in private, like the Bible says to!
I once told a Christian about how Hinduism has a trinity and the similarities between Jesus and Krishna. Know what he said? That Hinduism had TAKEN it from Christianity. Sorry, dude, Hinduism had those ideas way before Christianity ever existed.
I know that this apology is not one at all, it's just a rant.
It really is a shame because I do know some great people who are Christians. They have loved and respected me enough not to try to convert me and I appreciate that. I have at least a couple of friends who have been very much helped by becoming Christian. That's great for them. I'm sorry that I don't have more patience. I know there are people out there praying for me to get some!
In the mean time, I am going to try to keep the anger out of my posts. I really do want to focus on Hinduism and what it means to be a Hindu in America and to be a non-Indian Hindu. I don't care about Christianity's issues or how they see the world. I've heard it all before. This blog is not for Christianity. In fact, it should be a place where I can get away from it. So, from here on out, no more jabs at Christianity. If I should worry about offending anyone, it is my Christian friends.
I used to have a lot more patience, but over the years I got closer and closer to the end of the proverbial rope so that now, everything sends me over the edge! I have no opportunity to grow this patience back because Christianity is rammed down my throat every day.
It's not just evangelicals. Of every 50 people you meet in America, probably 49 of them will be wearing a cross. Something like 30 of them will have a Bible quote at their desk at work. Christianity is everywhere you look here. It's in my face all day, every day. T-shirts, bumper stickers, tattoos, jewelry. Bibles in hotel rooms, prayers at events where they should not be legally doing them at all, etc. Bad enough that one can't walk ten feet in America without hitting a church. And I get told I'm just being sensitive and a spoil sport. If my religion were forced on them as much as theirs is on me, they would be saying something very different.
All I ask of Christianity is that it leave me in peace. That's it.
I can't even get away from it in my own home. I get email forwards with Bible verses or talk about angels, I see Bible quotes on Facebook, there are ten television stations dedicated to sermons, and advertisements for Wow Worship music on mainstream channels.
And then there are the people knocking on my door wanting to talk about Jesus Christ, who has been DEAD for more than two thousand years, people. (And before anyone says anything about resurrection, don't forget who you're talking to. I don't believe death exists for anyone. "He who thinks he can kill, he who thinks he can be killed; both are mistaken." Gita).
One of the reasons I make myself very visible as a Hindu is because I am forced to see Christians' religion. If they're going to put their religion in my face, I'm going to put mine in theirs. And I'll tell you, I was very glad I was wearing a bindi when we went to a friend's house to play games and a new person there was wearing a "Jesus Saves" shirt. I can play that game too.
You know what else gets on my nerves? The expression "You only live once." I don't know how it is in other parts of the world, but this expression is everywhere in America. It is usually used to justify stupid behavior. The thing that gets to me is that this phrase is thrown around like it's absolute truth that everyone acknowledges and believes. Well, I don't. I don't think we live once at all.
As the article yesterday said, the ethos of Christianity is all around us in America. People have a baseline assumption that everyone around them is Christian, shown when someone complains in a room full of people about having to have a holiday party at school instead of a Christmas party as though everyone around is going to agree with them (shut up and stop whining is what I want to tell them. Not having a Christmas party is not equivalent to being persecuted. Talk to the people who were burned alive for being Christian).
The idea of a National day of prayer is ridiculous. Leaving aside that it favors religion over non-religion and I completely respect my boyfriend's right to not believe in any God or higher power, Christians in favor of it like to say that it is "non-denominational," so it's okay.
It's non-denominational Christian. Don't kid yourself. I don't know of any other religion that prays the way Christians do. If you want to pray one day of the year, go ahead. If you want to pray every day of the year, go ahead. Do it in your home. Do it in private, like the Bible says to!
I once told a Christian about how Hinduism has a trinity and the similarities between Jesus and Krishna. Know what he said? That Hinduism had TAKEN it from Christianity. Sorry, dude, Hinduism had those ideas way before Christianity ever existed.
I know that this apology is not one at all, it's just a rant.
It really is a shame because I do know some great people who are Christians. They have loved and respected me enough not to try to convert me and I appreciate that. I have at least a couple of friends who have been very much helped by becoming Christian. That's great for them. I'm sorry that I don't have more patience. I know there are people out there praying for me to get some!
In the mean time, I am going to try to keep the anger out of my posts. I really do want to focus on Hinduism and what it means to be a Hindu in America and to be a non-Indian Hindu. I don't care about Christianity's issues or how they see the world. I've heard it all before. This blog is not for Christianity. In fact, it should be a place where I can get away from it. So, from here on out, no more jabs at Christianity. If I should worry about offending anyone, it is my Christian friends.
A Hindu-American Identity
There's not too much new in my world to talk about. I continue to go to work, school, dance class and try to keep up with all my hobbies.
I'm taking a new class on Civil Right and Civil Liberties and it should be very interesting and give me some things to talk about once we get into Freedom of Religion issues! That stuff is near and dear to my heart. The thing I love most about America is that the government and religion are separate. Being allowed to practice my religion in the way that I see fit is my most precious freedom.
Since I don't have too much to say, I thought I would send you around to some other places for some interesting reading.
This article, The Hyphenated Hindus, was published in 2006, but it is really interesting and well done, and definitely still applicable. It is about creating the Hindu identity in America. I got it from Hindu Mommy's blog, but I don't know if it was originally published elsewhere.
Ms. Bannerjee writes "There is a subtle but powerful Christian ethos that pervades America, and to this day, it draws rather than alienates me." For me, it is alienating. It didn't used to be, but as I said in the comments recently, I have run completely out of patience with Christianity.
And she speaks to how children learn Hinduism in school: "In school, when there was a conscious effort of being multicultural, we spent perhaps fifteen or twenty minutes discussing world religions, wherein Hinduism was quickly depicted as a religion of hundreds of gods, many of whom had animal features, as an ancient faith ridden with social ills like caste and sati." Notice that it is fifteen to twenty minutes for all the world religions together, not for each one! That's how it was in my school too. One paragraph in the textbook on Hinduism, one on Buddhism, one on Zen, and that's it.
And speaking of the image of Hinduism:
Creation of a Hindu identity in America, the real crux of the article:
(Emphasis added)
The atmosphere around us affects our religious practices:
Thanks so much to Ms. Bannerjee for expressing these ideas so well.
Someone on Ravelry also posted an article about a Black Jewish community that explores issues of ethnicity and religion and conversion.
I've discovered some more interesting posts on other people's blogs about the issues we look at here, so I'll be gathering those to share with you soon.
I'm taking a new class on Civil Right and Civil Liberties and it should be very interesting and give me some things to talk about once we get into Freedom of Religion issues! That stuff is near and dear to my heart. The thing I love most about America is that the government and religion are separate. Being allowed to practice my religion in the way that I see fit is my most precious freedom.
Since I don't have too much to say, I thought I would send you around to some other places for some interesting reading.
This article, The Hyphenated Hindus, was published in 2006, but it is really interesting and well done, and definitely still applicable. It is about creating the Hindu identity in America. I got it from Hindu Mommy's blog, but I don't know if it was originally published elsewhere.
Ms. Bannerjee writes "There is a subtle but powerful Christian ethos that pervades America, and to this day, it draws rather than alienates me." For me, it is alienating. It didn't used to be, but as I said in the comments recently, I have run completely out of patience with Christianity.
And she speaks to how children learn Hinduism in school: "In school, when there was a conscious effort of being multicultural, we spent perhaps fifteen or twenty minutes discussing world religions, wherein Hinduism was quickly depicted as a religion of hundreds of gods, many of whom had animal features, as an ancient faith ridden with social ills like caste and sati." Notice that it is fifteen to twenty minutes for all the world religions together, not for each one! That's how it was in my school too. One paragraph in the textbook on Hinduism, one on Buddhism, one on Zen, and that's it.
And speaking of the image of Hinduism:
"Though I saw myself as a Hindu, for a long time, I did not call myself one. Frankly, it just didn’t sound good. Being Christian conjured connotations of compassion and charity. Being Muslim meant in my mind being of strong faith, the fastest growing faith, a religion that though one of the world’s youngest, had in its history been one of power, empire, and global dominance. Being Buddhist evoked images of meditation and the esoteric realms of philosophy and enlightenment. But being Hindu – being Hindu suggested idolatry, a chaotic collection of myths; it stood for caste and sati, for the subordination of Sita and all the women who followed her, for Brahmanic oppression and backwardness. These were not trivial concerns. Public perceptions, grossly generalized or misconstrued though they may be, matter...
Moreover, I did not want to call myself Hindu because there were no others around me proclaiming themselves as Hindu either. There were no chaplains representing the Hindu faith in the universities I attended. Though there were student associations for most other religions, hardly any existed for Hindus. When I tried to start one up, I faced suspicion that it was a façade for Sangh politics. There has been an emphasized divorce between religion and cultural identity when it comes to South Asian student groups. This is acceptable when people of other faiths have Muslim or Christian student associations to nurture their religious needs, but Hindus often have no such outlets."
Creation of a Hindu identity in America, the real crux of the article:
"Not only is there a paucity of classes dealing with Hinduism at the college level, but the attitudes of South Asian professors are sometimes problematic. It seems that a number of these professors are so embedded in Indian or South Asian politics that they do not distinguish, as they should, between the pursuit of a Hindu identity in India and the creation of one in America...As the generations pass, the links with India will prove more and more tenuous, while the links with Hinduism will hopefully remain as strong if not stronger. Furthermore, there are many Hindus of non-Indian descent who also seek a Hindu community to which they can belong, in which they have a voice...These are some of the frustrations that I and others like me have faced and continue to face as Hindus in America. The Hindu-American community needs to take responsibility for the fate of our religion in our country. It is only through our efforts that the opportunities and resources can be provided for interested individuals to engage with Hinduism in its spiritual, philosophical, intellectual, and cultural dimensions. The first step in paving this path, I believe, is the conscious formation of a Hindu-American community and identity."
(Emphasis added)
The atmosphere around us affects our religious practices:
"One of the difficulties of engaging with Hinduism in America is that we live in a predominantly non-Hindu setting. It is easier to practice Hinduism in India, where the culture and the religion have become so intertwined, where Dussehra merits a holiday, where interpretations of the epics have been shown on wildly popular TV serials, where grandparents share the stories of the Puranas with children, where the resources for learning about the religion are more readily available than they are here. There is a subtle yet powerful Hindu ethos in India that is absent in America. Immersion in the ethos of Hinduism, of course, does not a Hindu make, but it does facilitate engagement with the religious aspects of the tradition if one so chooses...The result is that very few Hindus in America think of themselves as being Hindu. One may very well ask, so what? Why does this matter? Why is it something we should, as a community, expend energy and resources in trying to change?(Emphasis added)
Some fear that adopting a Hindu-American identity would threaten an Indian-American identity or a South-Asian-American one. That fear reflects a misunderstanding of the interplay between identities. Identities do not have to compete with each other. Wouldn’t it actually be better to separate being Indian from being Hindu rather than conflating the two as some try to do? Cannot an Indian-American Muslim have two identities, one as an Indian-American and one as a Muslim-American? Indeed, I know of many Indian-American Muslims who are equally active in South Asian groups as they are in Muslim organizations. One identity does not have to supercede or substitute for another."
Thanks so much to Ms. Bannerjee for expressing these ideas so well.
Someone on Ravelry also posted an article about a Black Jewish community that explores issues of ethnicity and religion and conversion.
I've discovered some more interesting posts on other people's blogs about the issues we look at here, so I'll be gathering those to share with you soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)