Tag Archives: Hindu Thought

BBC Documentary-The Story of the Swastika

At last, the BBC has produced an excellent video explaining how Hitler hijacked the swastika–a symbol of auspiciousness used by ancient cultures worldwide and held sacred by Hindus–and distorted its meaning so that the Western world now regards it with fear and loathing, as a symbol of hatred and genocide. Footage of Nazi Germany is contrasted with the swastika’s uses and significance in Hindu culture and religious observances.

Although the narrator doubts we can ever effect a complete recovery (even saying that Hitler “changed the perception of the swastika in the West forever”), the video ends on a very positive note, hypothesizing the day when each child’s early exposure to the swastika will be in terms of its traditional, benevolent uses and meanings–and the later knowledge of Hitler’s misuse of it will be met with the same sense of sock, horror and outrage that Hindus themselves feel. “And if we can get to that point, then Hitler will have finally been defeated.

Info received by Hindu Association USA. LONDON, ENGLAND, May 13, 2014 (BBC):

A Book Review of Indra’s Net by Rajiv Malhotra

THE INTELLECTUAL PUGILIST

 ( Indra’s Net by Rajiv Malhotra, Harper Collins Publishers India, 2014)

By Khandavalli Satya Deva Prasad

Indra's Net

The title of this book is a metaphor for the profound cosmology and outlook that permeates Hinduism. Indra’s Net symbolizes the universe as a web of connections and inter-dependencies among all its members, wherein every member is both a manifestation of the whole and inseparable from the whole. In these pages I seek to revive it as the foundation for Vedic cosmology and show how it went on to become the central principle of Buddhism, and from there spread into mainstream western discourse several disciplines.

The metaphor of Indra’s Net originates from the Atharva Veda, which likens the world to a net woven by the great deity Shakra or Indra. The net is said to be infinite, and to spread in all directions with no beginning or end. At each node of the net is a jewel, so arranged that every jewel reflects all the other jewels. No jewel exists by itself independently of the rest. Everything is related to everything else; nothing is isolated. The mantra is brihaddhi jaalam brihatah shakrasya vaajinivatah(8.8.6), Ayam loko jaalamaaseet shakrasya mahato mahan (8.8.8). The fundamental idea of unity-in-diversity underpins all dharmic traditions….

Now excerpts from the preface of the book:

Each of my books tries to provoke a new kind of conversation, the goal of which is to confront some specific prejudice against Indian civilization. Established biases covering a wide range of issues need to be exposed, especially when they are unsubstantiated. The objective of every book of mine is to pick a particular dominant narrative which is sustained by a nexus of scholars specializing in that theme, and then target it to effectively subvert it. If my counter-discourse can become established in the minds of a sufficient number of serious thinkers, thenit will assume a life of its own and its effects will continue to snowball without my direct involvement. This is the end result I seek. To be effective, a book must resist straying from its strategic priorities and must avoid arguing too broadly.

For example, I developed the strategy, overall thesis, and much of the content of Invading the Sacred so as to take aim at the Freudian psychoanalytical critique of Hindism. This hegemonic discourse was being propagated by powerful nexus in the heart of the Western academia, and had spread as a fad among Indian intellectuals. Invading the Sacred gave birth to, and incubated, a solid opposition which cannot be ignored today.

My subsequent book, Breaking India, focused on demonstrating how external forces are trying to destabilize India by deliberately undermining its civilization. Such efforts are targeted at confusing and ultimately aborting any collective positive identity based on Indian civilization. The book exposed the foreign interests and their Indian sepoys who see Hinduism as a random juxtaposition of incoherent and fragmented traditions. Many watchdog movements have sprung into action because of that book. It has triggered a domino effect with other researchers now exposing more instances of the same syndrome.

My most recent book, Being Different, presents a coherent and original view of dharma as a family of traditions that challenges the West’s claim of universalism. Because Western universalism is unfortunately being used as the template for mapping and defining all cultures, it is important to become conscious of its distorted interpretations of Indian traditions. Being Different is prompting many Indians to question various simplistic views concerning their traditions, including some that are commonly espoused by their own gurus and political leaders. It is a handbook for serious intellectuals on how to ‘take back’ Hinduism by understanding it on its own terms.

The present book exposes the influential narrative that Hinduism was fabricated during British rule and became a dangerous new religion. The central thesis which I seek to topple asserts that Swamy Vivekananda plagiarized Western secular and christian ideas and then recast them in Sanskrit terminology to claim Indian origins for them. Besides critiquing this nexus and defending Vivekananda’s vision, this book also presents my own vision for the future of Hinduism and its place in the world.

Hence the book has two purposes: to defend the unity of Hinduism as we practice it today, and to offer my own ideas about how to advance Vivekananda’s revolution to the next stage.

This volume introduces some new vocabulary and ideas such as ‘open architecture’ and ‘toolbox’, which are critical to my insights on Hinduism. While openness has always been characteristic of Hindus, too much of a good thing can be dangerous. I argue that this very quality of openness has made Hinduism susceptible to becoming ‘digested.’ ‘Digestion’, a concept introduced in my earlier books, is further elaborated in these pages.

In the conclusion, I stick my neck out and introduce a set of defensive strategies for safeguarding against digestion. I call these stragies the ‘poison pill’ and the ‘porcupine defence’. I hope this provocative proposition will trigger debate and controversy.

Some of the new vocabulary that was introduced in Being Different such as ‘history centricsm’, ‘integral unity’ and ‘embodied knowing’ will be further sharpened in these pages. I will also ascribe new meanings to the old Sanskrit terms astika and nastika, and utilize them differently than in the tradition.

Clearly, I wish to influence mainstream Hindus who are often seriously misinformed about their own traditions.

My hope is to spur the genesis of what I call a ‘home team’ of intellectual leaders who would research, reposition and articulate Hinduism in a responsible way on important issues today.

I have made some compromises for practical reasons. For instance, I use the term ‘philosophy’ to refer not only to western philosophy but also, to Indian thought, even though the latter would more accurately be called darshana.

The difference between philosophy and darshana is significant. Philosophy is entirely disembodied and is an intellectual tool driven by the ego. Darshana includes philosophy but goes much further because it also includes embodied experience. Traditionally, Indian thoughthas been characterized by the interplay of intellectual analysis and sadhana, with no barriers between the two. Hindu practices cultivate certain states of mind as preparation for receiving advanced knowledge. In other words, darshana includes anubhava (embodied experience) in addition to the study of texts and reasoning. The ordinary mind is an instrument of knowing , and its enhancement through meditation and other sadhana is seen as essential to achieving levels of knowledge higher than reasoning alone can provide. Western philosophy emphasizes reason to the exclusion of anubhava and thus consists essentially of the disembodied analysis of ‘mental objects’. Such a philosophy can never cross the boundary of dualism.

The very existence of smritis- texts that are written and rewritten to fit the context of each specific period and place- indicates that our tradition has never been frozen in time. It has evolved in stip with the needs and challenges of each era.

Hinduism cannot be pigeon-holed into tradition, modern and post-modern straitjackets in the way the west sees itself, because Hinduism has always been all three of these simultaneously and without contradiction.

The book focuses on toppling a specific, well-entrenched line of discourse that tries to isolate tradition in order to create conflicts and contradictions. My challenge is to help general readers undergo some serious mental shifts.

Following are my comments:

Like the seminal concept of Indra’s Net, most fundamental concepts that are ruling the intellectual space in the modern days are from Vedic (Hindu) India. For instance the very idea of interconnectedness and complementary reflected in the Indra’s Net fascinated the western scientists and contributed in no small measure to the foundation ideas of quantum physics. Scientists like Ervin Schroedinger openly acknowledged their debt to Vedantic ideas in understanding and clarifying quantum concepts. Going further back, it is a well known fact in History of Hindu Science that the Zero symbol, concept of infinity, the number system, the decimal place value system, are the exclusive discoveries of Hindus. This fact is recorded by such historians of mathematics as G.B. Halstead. The medical science, astronomy, the cosmology of Hindus travelled to Arabia and Moorish-Spain in a big way beginning with 8th century. From there these Hindu sciences reached Europe from Spanish moors and also directly from Persia. Buddhism has Hindu knowledge system for its base and served as the export variety of Hinduism (vide S.Radhakrishnan). It is perhaps the first missionary religion in the world and carried Hindu Ayurveda, and Sanskrit lore to distant lands. The sramanas (thera-putras) served the medical and educational needs of the people of foreign lands and gained converts to Buddhism. These conversions were voluntary and never resulted in the disruption of those foreign cultures and societies as is the case with christian and muslim conversions in India at present. The medical services of thera-putras were so popular that the very name for the science and art of medical treatment came to be called therapeutics. It is an undeniable fact that Buddhism adopted its pantheon, and tantric lore from its mother Hinduism, however vehemently may some alienated neo-Buddhists deny the fact. Thus Hindu knowledge first went to Buddhism, then spread to distant lands, though some direct passage also occurred. One point to remember here is that the western mind with its excessively materialistic tendencies and lack of experiential culture, is forever at sea to grasp the Hindu knowledge in the original. So it needed some half-wayhouse. Buddhism and Islam served as the conduits. One who investigates the global circulation of ideas, and the history of ideas will see the truth in this statement.

Rajiv Malhotra attempted in this book not only to turn the tables on the west’s subversion attempts, but also to reestablish the centrality of Hindu knowledge system. His book is important in more than one way to the Hindus in general and to the alienated Hindus in particular who have lost all respect and confidence in their own dharmic religion and culture.

 

 

RSS Speaks on Propaganda of Hindu Terrorism

There is a vicious propaganda by some sections of the politicians and media to promote a brand called “Hindu Terror / Saffron terror” on the lines of “Islamic terror”. Using terror as a tool, they are attacking the organisations like RSS. They want to ensure that Sangh that does not spread its wings. However, the Hindu society sees through their evil designs and shall defeat all their efforts.

The RSS believes in a positive approach and its work has resonated in the hearts of the common people.

RSS General Secretary ( Sarkaryawah ), Sri Bhayyaji Joshi speaks on this subject of Hindu terrorism – Video length 5 mins

True Concept of Dharma

  • M.G.Vaidya

M.G.VaidyaIt may sound ironical, but it is my observation that many who know English find it difficult to understand the true meaning of “Dharma”. The reason is, the English knowing public, is accustomed to equate “Dharma” with religion. A common man who does not know English is under no such obsession. He knows the meaning of “dharmashala”. It is not a religious school. He understands the meaning of “Dharmarth Hospital” .No religion is treated in such hospital. He comprehends the meaning of “Dharma Kanta “. It is not a balance that weighs different religions. He knows “Raj-dharma” which is not a religion of a king apart from the religion of his subjects. He understands that the “Putradharma” is not the religion of the son, as distinct from that of his parents. .

Go To the Roots

The above examples are sufficient to establish that “dharma” and “religion” cannot be equated. The natural question is. what is “Dharma”? To comprehend the full connotation of the concept of “Dharma”, we must go to its root. We should follow the adage that when you are in difficulty you should go to the fundamentals. The word “Dharma” is derived from the Sanskrit root “dhri” which means to hold together, to bind, to sustain. What does “dharma” hold together? It holds together the whole universe. Therefore our Shastras say that “dharanat dharma ityahuh” (it is called “dharma” because it holds together or sustains).

Now let us see what this universe consist of. There are four broad entities or existences. The one is the individual, the other is the society in which the individual exists and lives; the third is the whole of the non-human world, both animate and inanimate and the fourth is the soul or the spirit. Each of these is a part, nay constituent, of the higher entity, and each of higher entities pervades the lower, the smaller entity. An individual is a part of the society, at the same time, the society pervades the individual. The human society is part of the nature and the nature pervades both the individual and the human society. All the three, viz the individual, the society and the nature are parts of the soul and at the same time are pervaded by it. This relation is expressed by our Shastras as “Yat pinde tad brahmande”. These four existences are termed as Vyashti, Samashti, Srishti and Parameshti. And Dharma is a string that binds or holds together and sustains all these four entities. It is a bridge that joins these four. When you build a house for your own use, it is no “dharma”, but when you build a house for others to live in, a “dharma shala” comes up.

When you make arrangements for your own health, it is no “dharma” but when you arrange for the health of others, then a “dharmarth” hospital is created. This “dharma takes the form of one’s duty as in “Rajdharma” or “Putradharma” but at the same time it gives the guarantee for the rights of the subjects and the parents respectively. Prajadharma connotes the duties of the subjects, but at the same time, guarantees the rights of the king. Thus “Dharma” is a mutual moral arrangement. “Dharma” is always in relation to something. It is a relative concept. It exists and sustains in relation to something. When it becomes the absolute concept, it gets the name of “Moksha.

How to bind an individual with society? It can be done through coercion also. But it is beyond the domain of “Dharma”; it may fall within the sphere of the State. Dharma enjoins voluntary relationship. This relationship is created by a sense of mutual respect. It is priceless, voluntary and ennobling. “Dharmashala” joins an individual with the society without coercion or compulsion. It denotes an individual’s concern and respect for the good of the society. In this way an individual serves the society and the society in turn raises the moral stature of the individual. The human society is required to show the same respect for the Nature (Srishti) of which it is a part. The Hindu Thought has raised this sense of respect to the highest pitch by calling it “Mother” (Matri) .The nature is not a lifeless, emotionless outsider. It is a living and as respectable and loving as a mother. Therefore the nature is Srishtimata. The earth is Bhoomata, the river is “lokamata”, the Cow is “Gomata”, the river Ganga is “Gangamata”, even the Tulsiplant is “Tulsimaiyya”. It is the prerogative of the human mind only, to think about such sacred relationship. There are many reptiles that eat their own offspring’s. There are many animals that are ignorant of the relation of the mother and child. Cows do have some sort of affection for their calves. But a calf when it grows into a bull, loses all intimations of mother or sister. It is the characteristic of the human mind alone that transforms even an inanimate thing into a vibrant living intimacy. Then the earth is not merely a conglomeration of sand and stones, but it becomes motherland, “matrbhumi , it becomes mother earth. Vishnupatnee and the seer says, “Vishnupatni namas tubhyam padasparsham kshamaswa me” (Oh, consort of Vishnu, I bow to thee. Please excuse me for treading on you). Because we have such an intimate Dharmic view towards the Nature, we never thought of exploitation of Nature. Our Hindu Thought never regarded that the man is the only centre of the universe and that the whole of the universe is for his enjoyment. Our attitude has been explained by the Bhagawad Geeta “ ‘Devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah Parasparam bhavayantah shreyah paramavapsyatha (Ch 111, 11) (By this, foster ye the gods and let the gods foster you. Thus fostering each other you shall attain to the supreme good. ) This is the reason why there were no environmental problems in this land.

The Hindu thought, believes in the existence of the soul also. It is the primordial living principle. This principle as embodied in a human frame is the same that pervades the whole universe. The Shastras say, “Tat twam asi” (Thou art that). So aham ” (1 am that). In short, there is this intrinsic, intimate relationship. An individual is intimately connected with all the other three, viz society, nature and soul. His relationship with the soul or the spirit is the domain of religion. His relationship with all the three is the domain of Dharma. Therefore Dharma is a much, more broad a term than religion; and because it connects all these four with reverence and harmony, Dharma is called the ‘principle of universal harmony’.

By accepting this principle we do not become oblivious of the differences and the diversities in the universe. They are naturally there. But it is the Dharma that makes us conscious of inherent unity in the midst of diversity. Man has certain economic tendencies (Artha) .He has the sexual urges (Kama) .But these tendencies and urges, though natural, have to run within the limits of the Dharma. Just as a water of the river, when it flows within the limits of its banks is useful and benevolent, but when it transgresses these limits, as in the time of flood, it becomes destructive, so also the economic and the sexual urges of man have to run within the banks of the Dharma. Then alone they are benevolent; but once they transgress these limits, they lead to exploitation and permissiveness and become an ultimate curse to the very human existence.

Even the State should confirm to the Dharma principle. The Hindu Thought says that it should be “dharmarajya”. Dharmarajya is not a theocratic state. Hindus never envisaged a theocratic state. No Shankaracharya was allowed to become a king; and no king could become a “Shankaracharya”. It is elsewhere that we find an emperor of a country become a “Khalifa”; it is elsewhere that we find a Pope, a religious head meddling with the affairs of the state. To the Hindus, the state has always been secular, because it deals with the affairs of this world. The state is and has to be this worldly. The other worldly activities are outside the sphere of the state. It is religion’s domain. But the state must be attuned to the Dharma. Our Dharma is both this worldly and other worldly. Dharma is defined as “Yato abhyudaya nisshreyasa siddhih sa dharmah” .It means dharma is that which brings about this worldly prosperity as well as the final emancipation. All Hindu books on Dharmashastra deal with both these aspects of human life. More than half of the Manusmriti deals with secular topics, and yet it is called “manava dharma shastra” .The state will naturally have its primary law i.e., constitution. It all will have its physical laws that govern the activities of its people. But above all such laws, there is the Dharma. All laws, primary or secondary have to conform to the Dharma. Dharma is the ultimate reference point. The law of the Dharma is a moral law. All other laws must be in conformity with this ultimate moral law. Hence in a state of Hindu conception, the sovereignty rests, not with the “Parliament, nor with the people nor with the king. It rests with Dharma. Dharma alone is sovereign, and all others have to be attuned to it.

Dharma is the substratum of all of our social, economic and political institutions. Marriage is not a contract for the satisfaction of our carnal desires. It is a dharma, it is a “Sanskar, it is a duty and an obligation. Therefore there is a stress on preserving and sustaining a marriage. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan has rightly said, “that marriage is successful which transforms a chance mate into a life companion” .Therefore divorce is considered a weakness, a defeat. Our economic activities must be guided by Dharma. Only then there will be no exploitation. There is no conflict between the interests of an individual and society or between two classes of society. Therefore, Hindu Thought does not subscribe to class struggle. The worker and the employer must cooperate. That is the order of Dharma. To do good to others is Dharma. To cause pain to other is adharma.

In this broad sense, Hindu is a Dharma. The term “Hindu” has been acquired through History. Its qualitative epithet is “Sanatan” i.e. eternal. It was valid in the past, it is valid today and it will be valid in the future. That is the meaning of “Sanatana” .Just as there is an eternal aspect of Dharma, there is a practical and changing aspect also. It may change according to times. We wear some clothes in summer. They are changed in winter. This change is inevitable and we must accept it. To stick to the same methapher, we can say that wearing clothes is a Sanatana dharma. The quality and nature of clothes is Yugadharma i.e. dharma of the times. There is also an “apaddharma” i.e. dharma in exceptional circumstances. There is a pertinent story in the Upanishadas. Once there was a famine. People began to migrate from their place of residence. A Brahmin living in that village was also affected by famine, therefore he left his village and went to another village in search of food. But he was disappointed. While going out of that village, he saw an elephant guard, sitting under a tree, an elephant by his side, eating something from a cup of leaves. He was eating mustard seeds. The Brahmin asked him to give a few seeds. The elephant guard said, “Oh Brahmin, how can I give it to you. The seeds have been contaminated by my mouth” .The Brahmin said, “Whatever it is, I need them.” The elephant guard gave to the Brahmin the remnants of the mustard seeds. He had some water in an earthen jar. The guard put the jar to his mouth and drank it, after leaving a portion of it in the jar. When the Brahmin finished his eating, he requested the Brahmin to take the water in the jar. The Brahmin refused it, by saying that I don’t drink water contaminated by your mouth. The guard said, “Oh Brahmin, you could eat mustard seeds contaminated by my mouth, why are you refusing the water?” The Brahmin replied, “Had I not eaten the mustard seeds, I would have died of hunger. Now I have got some strength, I will go and find out water from a nearby stream.” Eating contaminated grain is an exception, an “apad dharma”. It cannot be a rule.

In short, Dharma is a principle of universal harmony. It creates harmony where there is natural dissension. The power of the State is effective only when it has the support of the Dharma. And in return, the Dharma gets its sustenance from the power of the state. As in the case of State, so in all spheres of human activity. Dharma is the cause of mutual benefits. We observe Dharma and thus Dharma is protected by us and in return Dharma protects us. Therefore, it is said that “Dharmo Rakshati Rakshitah.”

Sri M.G.Vaidya A prolific writer, an author of several books, Shree M. G. Vaidya was a former national executive member of RSS. He is a former editor of ‘Tarun Bharat’ Nagpur

Yoga Asanas and Hinduism

Yoga Asanas and Hinduism
– Shankara Bharadwaj Khandavalli

There is lot of discussion these days about the Hindu origins of yoga-asanas or the postures, how many of them are really Hindu and how many are “imported” from the west.

The Politics

Prima facie, this is just a continuing exercise – anything Hindu would first be attributed to some western source and then its roots would be traced to ancient texts and practices. And that has to be certified by some westerner for Indians to believe the Indian orgin. The list is just too long, but we look at two examples – the Pythagorean Theorem finds a much earlier mention in Baudhayana’s Sulba Sutra (Seiden berg’s Mathematics in Ancient India). Similarly Panini is to be rightly credited for the first usage and conception of Backus-Naur form (The Panini-Backus Form in Syntax of Formal Languages by Subhash Kak and TRN Rao).

So it is only fair that one would be skeptical about the motivation behind the questions on yoga-asanas. And the reasons are many –

1.Yoga is a Hindu system and asana is not isolated but an integral part of yoga. And the way it is taught in the east and west too, is not as isolated postures although skin-deep researchers seek to isolate them.

2.Yoga is of late famous and plagiarism is at its best – there are slogans like “Christian Yoga”, and there are attempts to detach yoga from Hinduism so that one may not credit Hinduism for its important contributions.

3.People are looking at Hindu practices and asking Hindus to prove that they are Hindu, without establishing any prior non-Hindu presence of those practices. This is the same arrogance we see in most of the recent time debates.

4.Most of those who raise these questions have average or below agerage knowledge of the practical and experiential side of Hindu traditions.

5.The critics have ignored the bulk of yoga, mudras, the philosophy, the associated subjects and have selectively talked of asana-s, which makes one suspect their motives.

There are questions about the antitquity of yoga postures and their origin. While it is obvious that things evolve over time, and that people cannot talk of yoga itself not being Hindu, the west-lovers and Hindu-haters have picked up a selective question – of the asanas alone, which “cannot be found in ancient texts”. The texts on Hatha Yoga are surveyed for instance, but as is known to any practitioner Hatha Yoga involves rigorous physical *discipline* in its six-limbed yoga but not rigorous physical flexibility training or health training. Soon after dealing with initial physical postures the hatha yoga moves inwards, deals with mudras and bandhas – whose knowledge and practice is not easy without the basic knowledge of asanas. And in turn, the bandhas etc have their own purpose in kumbhaka etc that are needed in the subsequent limbs of yoga. So there is no point in looking for a repertorie of yoga-asanas in hatha yoga texts.

The next thing to be kept in mind is that knowledge in Hindu traditions has always been taught and learned within the fold of guru-sishya parampara-s or the teacher-disciple lineages. While there are many texts published these days, bulk of practical knowledge still remains within these – because the knowledge is not deductive but experiential. So the same question about asana-s would be applicable to mudras too – there are several known and practiced by Hindus, hundreds of them, and how many could really be traced into texts in print? Even the celebrated Yoga Sastra of Patanjali deals exhaustively with the yogic worldview, its philosophy, its approach and methodology and not with specific techniques.

But the real question for a Hindu, and a grnuine one, would be why at all does one need to establish these? It was Krishnamacary who taught, it was Matsyendra who taught, and there is no known legacy of asana-s or mudra-s in the west proven by anyone who is doing this questioning, which could be (again just a speculation even if it were there) the source of the asana-s in yoga.

Living Traditions

Moving from the politics of the topic to the topic itself, the most important thing to understand is that Hindu traditions are living and experiential, and that information would be found in the practicing oral traditions. To survey libraries harldy helps one arrive at truth.

Then we should understand how inseparable asana is from the rest of yoga. Yama-niyama are prerequisites of asana, and asana is not just a physical posture – it is a combination of breath control, a physical posture, holding the mind in a particular place in the body, display of certain mudra-s, control of specific muscles and nerves and so on.

More importantly, asana-mudra-bandha are not part of “just some yoga school”, but forms an important part of several traditions – the most celebrated natya sastra or the traditional dance. The dance section in Vishnu Dharmottara Purana devotes a complete chapter (23) to asana. Besides, the importance of mudra-s and assisting necessity of asana-s in dance can never be exaggerated, and every traditional Hindu school of dance stands proof – if only the arm chair critics are ready to take the pain of surverying those. These traditions have centuries of legacy, and cannot be wished away by them.

Similarly all the traditional martial art schools involve asana-training.

Each school uses the asana-s that suit its approach and purpose. While hatha yoga involves more rigorous physical discipline, raja yoga emphasizes asana-s much less. But in all these traditions the asana-s are prescribed depending on the practitioner’s needs and are kept within the tradition.

Keeping aside the yogic part, asana-s for health as they are seen in the most terrestrial sense, are also not new to Hindus. Surya Namaskara-s, the well known Sun-salutations have centuries of legacy. While the mantra-s are found in many places including Aruna Ketuka(the first prapathaka of Taittireeya Aranyaka), the Surya namaskara-s, along with the compilation of mantras, asana-s, their sequencing, and the whole procedure as is known today, are arranged by the great Baudhayana, who is among the most well known seers for arranging several such prayoga-s or applications. He is the author of a set of Kalpa Sutras, a limb of the Veda. They contain Sulba sutras (geometry of altars), Srauta Sutras (this is the primary text for ritual procedures), Grihya and Dharma sutras. Besides, there are several ritual procedures he created, including the celebrated Mahanyasa and graha worship.

And the Surya namaskara-s of Baudhayana prayoga krama enjoyed an uninterrupted legacy, till date. While these are known in oral tradition, old manuscripts are also available. While the antiquity of Surya namaskara-s is indisuptable, Samartha Ramadasa (Sivaji’s Guru) is also known to have practiced those, which rule out the possibility of their import in the past two centuries.

Saura or the worship of Surya/the Sun God was one of the six major religions in India, but is now not visible more than as a small aspect of Vaishnava and as the celebrated Gayatri. Surya is worshiped as the giver of health, the father of the doctor-god twins Asvins, the sustainer of life.

Besides, most of the martial art traditions and traditional physical practice traditions are extinct – thanks to thousand years of invasions.

The other source of asana-s is the prescription of Ayurveda, as is known, prescribed and practiced traditionally. The inseparable knowledge of postures and physiology can hardly be questioned. Besides, the very approach of Ayurveda is to discipline man to heal with secondary emphasis on treating him with external medication.

Conclusion

So the critics actually have lot of homework to do, to survey –

(a) the various yoga traditions

(b) the martial art traditions

(c) the dance traditions

(d) the upasana traditions

(e) the ayurveda traditions

at the least, before throwing the ball into the court of Hindus and asking them to prove.