In defense of Hinduism, everyone beyond India’s borders should understand the very term “Hinduism” is an exonym, a name given by outsiders to describe the religious tradition of the subcontinent.

 

I, being a linguist, necessarily begin my defense of Hinduism in a deconstruction of the term.  The term Hindu finds its origins in the Sanskrit word for river, “sindhu”. Historians acknowledge the etymological root of the term but have never corrected the misperception.

 

The Sanskrit word “sindhu” was generically applied to a single river, and it became known as the Indus.  Sindhu, Indus, Hindus and, finally, India.  You get it.  During the Moghul period was India named by outsiders.  From that earlier age European perceptions are all derived.  

 

I am convinced the Indus River will have an older, more authentic name, for who, anywhere, would simply name a major river “the river”?   No other river of the subcontinent is generically named, so the Indus must have an aboriginal identity which has yet to be acknowledged.  The prime candidate for the aboriginal name for the Indus River is the Saraswati, a river which features prominently in Hindu mythology, cosmogony and folklore, but was thought of as a fable until recently.

 

Recently, an ancient river has been discovered by environmental archeologists.  In truth, it was discovered by satellites using ground penetrating radar, but that still qualifies as environmental archeology.  This ancient river has been identified as the Saraswati because of its obvious correlation and corroboration to folk lore, mythology and theology.

 

Full stop.

 

Before continuing, I insist that accredited academia evaluate what has just occurred.  Twenty first century technology just authenticated the folk traditions of this region as being, not just based on fact, but accurate to within kilometers.

 

My only objection to identifying this ancient river as the Saraswati is that it was not extended to the Indus as a whole.  Only an extinct tributary of the Indus River has been ascribed the name Saraswati, but since there is no mention of the Indus River at all in ancient tracts of lore, it stands to reason that, originally, the Saraswati included the Indus in its entirety.

 

If anyone in my audience believes I am wasting time on an unnecessary tangent, then you are sadly mistaken.  The point I am making is that the Realm of Bharat (the real name of India) has been entombed in ignorance for centuries.  Across the centuries, outsiders took little if any interest in the true history of the region and merely slapped the term “river” on everything in sight.

 

India, as a noun, is derived from Indus.

 

Granted, the Indus River forms a cognitive barrier in the minds of everyone west of Bharat for the same reasons the Himalaya Mountains form a cognitive barrier in the minds of everyone north of Bharat.

 

The result, from both directions, has been to pour the diverse regions and cultures of Bharat into a monolithic mold.  If it were not for the fact that Buddhism originated in Bharat, there would certainly be as much religious ignorance to the north and east of Bharat as there is to the west of Bharat.

 

What then do the faithful of Bharat call their own religion?

 

Regrettably, many have succumbed to the exonym and identify as “Hindus”.  Say it enough and it sticks.  But, in Sanskrit scriptures, the religion is called Sanatana Dharma, a term which translates directly in English to “Eternal Divine Order”.

 

I like that.  I am going with that.  For what believer anywhere, in any age, could argue against devoting oneself to the “Eternal Divine Order”?

 

The obvious objection of everyone west of Bharat will be that the aboriginal term “Sanatana” strays misleadingly close to the word Satan, a proximity which will prime western children toward ill-advised humor.  But it is what it is and westerners are obligated to cope with reality.  Westerners are obligated to teach their children to refrain from insults.

 

Regrettably, everyone west of the Indus River took one look at the people and culture of the subcontinent and dismissed them all as “noble savages”, a primitive people who still worshipped idols.

 

I pray I am wrong about the state of western perceptions today, for modern communications have made the few decent documentaries on Bharat accessible for all.  Just don’t search for them under the name Bharat. One will still have to search for content using the name “India”.

 

I believe I made my point.  The remainder of my argument will be made by the Iconographic Record, which reveals the precise boundaries and origins of Bharat, the authenticity of Her Devi and, of course, the relevance of Her scriptures to all of Mankind.

 

I could, and probably should, and I still may, devote the remainder of my life in a comprehensive defense of the religion of Sanatana Dharma, but a summary defense requires brevity which will only insult the oldest, contiguous religious tradition in existence. 

 

Allow me to offer a Caveat Pro Eo, for iconologists of the future are certain to determine the morphological order of precedence in the Iconographic Record, and that will reveal where faith first manifest itself in the written record.  I predict Mankind’s “Spiritual Eden” will be Australia, but time will tell.

 

Returning our attention to Bharat, Her religious traditions are already acknowledged to encompass too many schools of theology to be accommodated under the term “Hinduism”, but nearly all of the subcontinents acknowledged “religions” are derived from the Vedas and Puranas, the canonical texts of Bharat.  Everyone from the ascetics to the Janas, from the Sikhs to the Shaivas, including all Buddhists, find their theological roots in the Sanskrit cannon of antiquity.

 

Are we not, then, just talking about denominations of Sanatana Dharma when we talk about all of these religions?

 

I believe we are but my opinion on such distinctions is moot.  What matters is the opinion of believers in Bharat.  In the context of my discovery, answering that question will be the challenge of our generation.

 

My discovery will inaugurate an age of rediscovery in Bharat as much as it will inaugurate an age of discovery everywhere else in the world.  But because the religious traditions of Bharat rest on such ancient foundations, and their adherents number in the tens of millions, it is imperative that all believers in the region begin their journey of rediscovery secure in the knowledge their gurus did not lie.

 

I cannot explain it, but believers the world over, no matter what denomination we belong to, feel compelled to conclude that our tradition and our texts have got it right.  That is only natural, for what rational man would subscribe to a tradition they thought was wrong?

 

The failure comes not in subscribing to the authenticity of one’s religious tradition, but that assumption, while accurate, deceives us all.  That assumption appears to render all other religious traditions wrong.

 

The Eternal Truth is a gem with a multitude of facets.  In one light the gem shines brilliantly from one angle, and in another light, it shrines brilliantly from another angle.  The faithful of Mankind are, in every sense, the proverbial blind men describing an elephant with only their sense of touch.

 

Which brings us to Ganesha.

 

In November of 2024 I will be revealing Ganesha to my subscribers and allowing the faithful of Bharat to educate me on the theology.  Today, as I write this, my understanding is that Ganesha is the Deva of Bharat’s beginnings, and the Iconography I have deciphered confirms that as fact. 

 

Ganesha, the elephant headed Deva of Sanatana Dharma, was depicted as a man with an elephant’s head for the same reason that Horus, the Hawk-headed  “god” of ancient Egypt was also depicted as a man with a hawk’s head.

 

On Christmas Day of 2023 I will be revealing the precise reason.

 

Here and now I can only say that, just as iconographers in Egypt depicted Horus as a human with a hawk’s head, iconographers in Bharat depicted Ganesha as a human with an elephant’s head.  And for the same reasons.  Christians, Jews and Muslims will all want to pay close attention, for we are, as a family, sinning against Hindus when we accuse them of “idolatry”.

 

You see, Hindus did not retire “graven images” in the Abramic Age.  In fact, Hindus did not retire “graven images” at all.  But Hindus are not ‘worshipping idols”.  Hindus are just employing an information technology that the rest of the world forgot.

 

I pray the Rabbis, Priests and Imams of the world are paying close attention as my discovery goes live, for what is the greater sin, reading from a sacred text printed in an old font, or condemning believers who do?

 

I will not climb into the Seat of Judgement reserved to the Lord Almighty, but I am inclined to conclude reading from a sacred text printed in an old font is no sin at all.

 

Judaism, Christianity and Islam all maintain belief in the prophets, saints and angels.  Are not the Hindu entitled to revere theirs?  More correctly, are not the Hindu obligated to revere theirs?

 

Mind you, I write my defense of Hinduism on the approach to Christmas 2023 when I will be revealing the Madre De Occidente’s secret, so I cannot divulge more than I must, but the timing is perfect to warn my Jewish, Christian and Muslim brothers and sisters away from an obvious sin.

 

Does not the Arabian cannon all agree believers will receive a “glorified body” when reunited with God in Paradise?

 

Indeed, we all acknowledge that to be the case. 

 

Why then would God not grant Ganesha an elephant’s head, if only to redeem His Children in Bharat of a baseless accusation?

 

On Christmas Day of 2023, my warning will become perfectly clear.  Although iconographers do not depict Ganesha with an elephant’s head because he actually had an elephants head, no Jew, Christian or Muslim living to read these words can deny God Almighty has the power to re-render Ganesha precisely as depicted by believers.

 

Accuse the Hindu faithful of “idol worship” at your souls’ peril. 

 

In Judaic, Christian and Islamic theology, there is only one “unforgivable sin”, to deny the Spirit of God.  If the Hindu faithful are called by the Spirit of God to worship in the manner that they do, and to the Devas relevant to their family, libeling the sincerity of their prayer brinks dangerously on denying the Spirit of God.

 

Does it not?  I am convinced it does.

 

In defense of Hinduism, we all have more to learn from Sanatana Dharma before we can form an opinion, much less raise an objection.

 

Namaste,

 

An Unknown Soldier