This is an article from Hinduism Today–15 years old–that discusses both the view that yoga cannot be separated from its “hindu-ness” and that whenever people begin spiritual practices of Hindu origin, most eventually dive in deeper to the roots of those practices to discover and appreciate Hinduism. Note the contrary view quoted in this article by Swami Premananda. I find the analogy helpful in furthering my thinking on the topic, although limited of course, as all analogies are.
Some questions I have for you readers (please share your insights!):
- How does this relate to other foundational religions that birthed new sects, and even religions, from its adherents? Are there any parallels you see in “practices” of the spiritual life such as in yoga?
- When can a ritual or practice become severed–if it can– from its original context? (notice the comment by the author of Hindus that don’t identify themselves as Hindus even though they walk, talk and practice like Hindus)
- What about the concepts of adaption, modification, evolution in relation to religion in general?
- What practices have you adapted from other denominations, religions or anywhere else to fit into your faith?
June 1994
Editorial
Yoga-Sweet Fruit From Dharma’s Tree
By the Editor
Mommy. Anjali says yoga is inextricably rooted in Hindu cosmology. Is she right?
As the articles for this issue gathered from the far corners of the earth, delivered digitally to our Macintosh network in the Pacific Ocean, we noticed they contained more yoga than usual. There was our color poster, exploring the teachings of Yogaswami, Sri Lanka’s sage. There was the unexpected and unsorrowful (we can say this, for death is, to the Hindu, an exalted state of oneness, liberation and light) stories of the two great souls mentioned by our publisher above. This provoked our pondering about yoga’s relationship to religion. What’s intriguing about this subject, from an editor’s view, is that it has steadfast and eloquent adherents on each side. We expect lots of mail, and welcome it.
Many these days who are drawn to yoga are repelled by religion, and it’s not difficult to understand why. Their religious leaders have run amuck, awash in sexual scandals, financial improprieties and terroristic plots. As if that weren’t enough, religious institutions have turned into entrepreneurial endeavors, political movements and personality cults. No wonder soulful people seek other paths. And what path is more profound, more unworldly, more intimate in its communion with the Divine than yoga?
As the stature of institutionalized faith dwindles, yoga is increasingly depicted as unrelated to Hinduism, separate from religion altogether. If religion is discussed at all in yoga classes or ashrams, it is in hushed tones, couched in spiritual Esperanto-an artificial, universalistic, cautiously nonsectarian language. In these contexts yoga is propounded as the “essence of all religions.” All else that is commonly revered as religion is viewed as unnecessary accretions, something like the barnacles on the hull of a ship which impede its progress. From this perspective, yoga is the only necessary vessel for traversing the sea of births and deaths. The rest is superstition, dogma, mindless ritual and theological mumbo-jumbo. The sooner these are outgrown and eliminated, the better.
Now, don’t get us wrong. We love yoga, practice yoga, teach yoga. It is the swiftest path to Truth, the great sadhana which brings the soul to knowledge of its true Self. Yoga is the highest Hindu ideal and teaching, the sweetest fruit on dharma’s life-giving tree. And that’s just the point-yoga is Hindu (as well as Jain, Sikh and Buddhist). That the two are considered by some as separate would have seemed strange to the great yogis of yore-to Patanjali, Vallabhacharya, Mahavira, Tirumular, Sankara and ten million others. They practiced yoga in the context of their Hinduness.
Without yoga, Hinduism is not deep. Without Hinduism, yoga is not whole, in fact, would not exist. Yoga cannot be severed from the body of Hinduism. It is like body and soul, fruit and seed, ghee and milk. No one will doubt that ghee is richer and more precious than ordinary milk, but we should not therefore diminish the value of milk and conclude that we should sell the family cow.
Hindus ourselves are responsible, for we are teaching the world that yoga has nothing to do with Hinduism. “Practice yoga,” it is said, “and you will be a better Christian, a better Jew, a better Muslim, a better human being.” So people practice yoga with sincerity and seriousness and are drawn deeper and deeper into its wonderful mysteries, into the teachings of karma, dharma, reincarnation, God-Realization and moksha, teachings which are antithetical to Christian-Judiac beliefs and scriptures. Perhaps these yogis become more illumined persons, but to say they are becoming better Christians is to misconstrue and mislead. Ask any Christian minister. Ask the Pope, who in 1989 admonished all Catholics not to practice meditation, zazen or yoga. The Pope knew these practices had become popular among his flock and that they would not make for better Catholics. He knew, and boldly stated, that such methods are antithetical to the Holy Church.
Catholics, to their credit, value both religion and yoga. We can’t say the same of all Hindus. We’re the first to deny our Hinduness, as if such a denial of our roots were more apotheosis than apology. Yoga is dharma’s fulfillment, not its transcendence. Ponder this. If you met a man from an Indian preceptorial lineage born to Hindu parents, who bore a Hindu name, dressed in the robes of an Indian monk, taught of karma, dhyana, yoga and moksha, quoted from the Vedas, Upanishads or the Gita, would you not think this man to be a Hindu? It seems a logical conclusion. Yet so many such men and women demure and call themselves something else, anything else.
This is not everyone’s opinion, to be sure. Many will argue, as Swami Premananda, founder of the American Yoga Conservatory in New Jersey, vehemently did in a letter to the editors in 1985. Finding such perceptions “divisive and sectarian,” he offered another perspective: “Your view that yoga is Hindu and only Hindu is viewed by this self as unfortunate indeed. No one would ever dispute the fact that yoga evolved from Hindu roots. However, that Union which is represented by the word yoga is not and cannot be held limited by parochial definitions. An apple is produced by the tree, and gives life to the person who eats it. The tree cannot be food for man, but it can produce food for the man. The apple’s destiny and the tree’s are distinct and separate. The apple can be transported around the world, and it will be food for whoever eats it. Yoga, like the apple, is a completely detached product which evolved from Hinduism and which has the ability to nourish any and all who partake of it. Yoga bridges all separations.”
It seems to us that, indeed, yoga can and does nourish all those who ardently pursue it to its depths. But just as the Swami’s apple tree produces, let’s say, Macintoshes, the Hindu tree produces yogas. Swami implies that Macintoshes, once plucked from the tree and taken from the orchard, are somehow no longer apples (as yoga is, to him, no longer Hindu). This world is blessed with diverse species of philosophical trees, each unique, each nourishing. Shall we object to this multiplicity? Shall we try to eliminate differences and pretend there is actually only one “fruitness”? Shall we dismiss as useless category-making the subtle savor of mango, pear, fig and litchee? Certainly not! Let’s enjoy what all paths have to offer mankind in his search for Truth.
Serious yoga sadhana leads one along a Hindu path to a Hindu goal-oneness with Satchidananda and realization of the timeless, formless, spaceless Absolute Reality, variously called Brahman, Parasivam, Self, Truth or God. Those who practice it should know this. TM provides a useful example. The most ardent of those who took refuge in TM, practicing daily sadhanas, went deeper and deeper. Not content with the sanitized, pre-shrunk, one-size-fits-all approach, they explored further, sought out more knowledge about Hinduism and discovered the many rich fulfillments in yoga’s source.
It may not be apparent in Swami Premananda’s depiction, but apples don’t last forever. If they are to feed the world, someone needs to plant more apple trees. If yoga is to nourish the spiritual hunger of future generations, someone must propagate Hindu dharma. We would urge all who teach yoga to do so.
*************
There is a vital image in Christianity about Jesus being the vine and his followers being the branches that are grafted onto the vine. It is inherent in being a follower of Christ to graft many different elements as we connect ourselves, with our cultures and diverse lives, to the vine of Christ. Of course, we are called to be conformed to Jesus’ image and put on the mind of Christ as God transforms us. This is a whole other long topic, but just meditate on the idea of grafting and how or what that entails…
June 26, 2008 at 4:02 am
Personally, as a self-ascribed American Yogi, and sharing little in the kinds of religious or spiritual perspectives of many practitioners of yoga believe in, I see yoga not as CREATED by Hindus. I see yoga as a natural, inborn human process, a way of being, of observing, of seeing, a way of relating to each and all things including ourselves, that was naturally built into us by Nature and Nature’s God. But it was more or less dormant for most human beings for most of human history and prehistory. (Although I am sure it leaked out here and there without most people noticing.)
Regardless, the capacity of mind-body union, yoking or yoganess was always there, waiting for someone to discover it. Yes, it was, most likely, DISCOVERED in the East, very possibly by a Hindu. But Hindus did not CREATE yoga. They just got lucky because they were, probably, the first to invest the time and energy to explore areas of being human that others had not … yet. Hindus might have figured out what no one else had ever figured out before. But the first person* to discover the unconscious mind had no rights to defining it for anyone else, except for his/her copyrights to their writings about it. It’s just there, regardless of who figured it out.
(*Usually thought in the West to be Freud, but the Aramaic-speaking discoverers of naphsha [see below] already had it figured out long before Freud did.)
So too, Hindus might have discovered this inherent process or capacity, what they called yoga, of being a fully actualized human being (even though not usually explored by most people.) But once discovered and revealed to humanity, Hindus have NO claim to tell other people what yoga IS or IS NOT for anyone, except those who ask them. Hindus have every right to tell anyone and everyone who wants to know what yoga means and is TO THE HINDU (as long as you can get all the Hindus to agree on what that definition is). But they have no standing to tell other people what yoga is or is not for anyone else.
And if you go to the classical Sanskrit dictionaries, the word yoga has MANY definitions that have nothing at all to do with anything remotely religious, spiritual or mystical. To say that yoga IS (fill in the blank), is not being honest nor fully truthful. … However, to say what Hindu-based, Patanjali-style Yoga IS to certain people, can be very truthful and accurate. But the word yoga by itself must be qualified by the user to the satisfaction of all involved in that particular conversation, without assumptions.
Hindu yogis should not pretend that they can claim and define the word *yoga* by itself. Doing so does psychological and emotional violence — anti-ahimsa — to anyone who strongly believes differently. The Hindu, or whoever, needs to allow for other manifestations of what yoga means, even if they have to shut up for a while and learn from others, even if the others are not so enlightened. Even if the other person’s personal definition is repugnant.
Sorry Gang, the age of unquestioned authority is OVER.
Except in very casual conversation, people should not be using the word yoga by itself, even by so-called Hindu authorities, because it leads to confusion, disagreement and conflict (very anti-yoga). This is an example of words that (unless you are speaking or writing to a group that already fully agrees with your interpretation) for general use needs qualifiers. The word yoga, used by its self, is too basic, generic and general to pin it down to just one definition, and in the end, destroys the humanness of the essence and benefits of physical/mental/relational yoga as it is thought of by people like me.
Even if the qualifier is: My approach to yoga is …, that at least personalizes it, and does not necessarily impose upon or invalidate the point-of-view of the listener.
As to the Pope banning mind/body yogic practices, whoever is Pope right now would do well to read the small book titled Enlightenment which explores the deeper meanings, from the Dead Sea Scrolls, of certain words from the New Testament, and the very important word NAPHSHA.
Long story short: Naphsha refers to a pre-conscious, meditative state that links the un-, sub- and conscious minds, and does so under a body of moral law (in the case of naphsha, the Ten Commandments and the several hundred sub-statutes of the first five books of the Old Testament). Jesus (or someone at the time) taught and often referred to this phenomena repeatedly in the New Testament, but you have to read the Aramaic translations to see it. Unfortunately, the concept of Naphsha has been translated nearly out of existence, to the point very few know its meaning, at all. I was very lucky to stumble across the book. But from an early age I knew some concept like Naphsha HAD to be in the Bible, IF the Bible was a truly holy book. (To the degree I accept the concept of holiness, which isn’t much.) And oh yes, the concept of Naphsha IS on Google!
So here’s to the Stopping of Doing Violence (the practicing of Ahimsa) to other human beings by NOT being too emotionally attached to particular usage of certain words.
Thanks for Reading,
David Scott Lynn
June 27, 2008 at 6:23 am
David,
Thanks for writing! I am so thrilled that you took the time to provide such a thoughtful response the provides me with further learning and expansion of perspective. I greatly appreciate you sharing your insights on this topic with me, as well as, pointing out further areas of study.
I’ll have to look further into the concept of Naphsha that you mention. I know that the majority of the New Testament was written in Koinonia Greek and some Aramaic. This direction will be helpful to my studies.
What you say about qualifying the word Yoga is extemely helpful in clarifying categories. Also, I appreciate your words on origins and owning of ideas.
It gets me excited to keep going when I read such a response as yours.
Thanks again!
October 27, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Yoga IS a Hindu practice. I think Mr. Lynn and a lot of Christians/Westerners have difficulty grasping this because they’re confused about what a “Hindu” is. It’s just an umbrella term created by foreigners to label a lifestyle/culture of people. Hinduism is not a “religion” in the Abrahamic sense. We’re not required to pray or believe in God like Christians do. We believe that people take different paths to reach their destination and thus we have different faiths; Christianity is yours. Why do you think Hindus don’t go out converting people and there are Hindus who read the Bible? We’re free to believe what we want. So technically you guys are “Hindu” too. =)
November 13, 2008 at 6:17 am
Why was my comment deleted?
November 19, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Ayan,
Thanks for your perspective. BTW, your comment wasn’t deleted, I just was off the computer for a while–taking a media break. Someone else commented on the some non-Hindu type origins of yoga on another page…I’m looking into it.
The Hare Krishnas are hindu, no?
Actually, Christians are not “required” to do anything (if people say they are that is just “religion” and man-made rules). Whatever we do is because we believe in a loving personal god–thus we pray, worship, honor, etc. When you accept this as reality then you want to follow in loving God and others…
I’m learning more about all this and thank you for your comment!
January 25, 2009 at 1:20 pm
My mistake!
I’ve read that on another blog. The person said that making the assumption that “Hinduism” was created at a certain date with set concepts when it’s just an umbrella word created by Westerners to encompass all the native beliefs and practices in India.
I’m not familiar with Hare Krishnas or their beliefs, but since “Hinduism” doesn’t require you to believe anything specific so I don’t see why they wouldn’t.
I guess “required” isn’t the right word, but christians have set beliefs, but we don’t.
March 2, 2009 at 7:24 am
All of real Yoga is Hinduism, this is fact. What we have today is a complete distortion of this fact. The (H)indus created the language of Sanskrit and the Sanskrit/Hindu word “Yoga.” Above every other Sanskrit/Hindu word, Yoga descibes both the goal and the way to the goal. For Hindus, the goal is “to yoke Atmana and Brahmana.” The way to the goal (for Hindus) is Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, Raja Yoga (which includes Hatha Yoga) and Jnana Yoga.
These truths about real Yoga/Hinduism are a far cry from the spurious Yoga exercise business and/or vague “spirituality.”
Swami Param
Dharma Yoga Ashram (Classical Yoga Hindu Academy)
March 12, 2009 at 11:05 am
Ayan,
Thanks for you perspective and clarifying
You are correct in that there are some basic beliefs in what is called “orthodox” Christianity. There are so many branches and views that differ, but the basic, basic issue relates to the fact that Jesus existed in history, is the son of God/God, died on the cross for our sins and resurrected from the dead, and salvation is a free gift we accept to be in restored relationship with our holy, perfect, loving God. The rest is gravy:-)
March 12, 2009 at 11:12 am
Swami Param,
I see that there is a debate regarding “true” yoga v. whatever else is out there. So, is this a fundamental(ist) issue? What do (serious? orthodox?) Hindus think about calling the “unreal” yoga?
I’m wondering if since all the “other” stuff we call yoga isn’t “true” yoga in your view, it then is void of whatever spiritual power would be associated with “true” yoga?
I understand that asanas are only a small part of the whole yogic path. Does performing asanas have special “powers” or anything from Hindu perspective if not viewed as Hindu?
Appreciate your insight,
HY