Purge and blacklist the tag Neo-vedanta

Question

Many questions were posted in Meta, regarding purging of Mythology tag. One Moderator explained here the efforts that are being made to purge this Mythology tag.

Good.

The tag neo-vedanta was created by some members, targeting a group of members and to demean the ideas of particular category of members, especially advaitins.

So far 18 questions were posted under this neo-vedanta tag.

---

Some of the members already made comments under some questions, expressing their disagreement in using this tag and subject content in the question concerned.

1. Do the official Shankaracharya Peethams recognize the validity of Neo-Vedanta?

Again and again and again. Same question different clothing...'Neo-Vedanta' is a term given my Western scholars as a way to denigrate ALL Hindus...There are no sects or philosophies that identify themselves as Neo-Vedantists.... – Swami Vishwananda Jan 21 '19 at 14:14

2. Does Neo-Vedanta reject Dharma Shastras? If so, why?

Again, there are no sects or groups that identify themselves as 'neo-Vedantins'. This term was invented by Western Christian orientalists to denigrate the Hindu religion. – Swami Vishwananda Jan 16 '19 at 12:08

This is not the site to denigrate particular sect or group of people. – Pandya♦ Jan 16 '19 at 12:19

Term "Neo-Vedanta" is not recognized by Hindus. Western Orientalists coined that word to denigrate Hinduism. Better if you avoid using that. Be respectful to all sects. – The Destroyer♦ Jan 16 '19 at 13:21

3. Is Neo-Vedanta a modern modification of Hinduism?

Neo-Vedanta is just a term coined by someone and nothing else and not followed by anyone so the question of modification does not arise. – Pinakin Dec 9 '18 at 4:41

@ChinmaySarupria What would you call those set of beliefs then? – Ikshvaku Dec 9 '18 at 15:01

Which set of beliefs? There is no one in Hinduism who tried to westernize or modernize traditional Hinduism. – Pinakin Dec 9 '18 at 15:26

@ChinmaySarupria Vivekananda tried to do it. He himself admitted that many ancient Hindu rituals, like animal sacrifice, are barbaric. – Ikshvaku Dec 9 '18 at 15:39

Yes, animal sacrifice are barbaric because people didn't knew how to do it. Swami Vivekananda's guru Sri Ramakrishna also mentioned that only certain sacrifices done with proper procedure are good as they are beneficial for that particular animal. People with half knowledge were slaughtering animals so God incarnated in the form of Buddha and stopped the barbarism to a large extent. – Pinakin Dec 9 '18 at 16:22

@ChinmaySarupria Ok, then if that's the justification he used, then that's correct. – Ikshvaku Dec 9 '18 at 16:23

There's no thing called Neo Vedanta and it is just a word coined by westerners. All your questions assume there's a sect called neo Vedanta. – The Destroyer♦ Dec 10 '18 at 6:32

What @ChinmaySarupria said it correct. There are rules laid out in Sastras how to do certain Sacrifices. If Swami Vivekananda said something about them, then it must be there in some Sastras and It could not be just to entertain western principles. – The Destroyer♦ Dec 10 '18 at 6:46

---

Majority of the questions with this tag were floated by a single member Ikshvaku

Please purge this tag, which is one of the reasons for unwarranted debates in this site

Answer 1

Your current question is "What are the Mods doing to delete the specified tag?" OR "What steps are being taken currently to purge the specified tag?".

Now, this is not the same as proposing "Purge the specified tag".

The answer to your current question is " No actions being taken as there has been no proposal of purging the tag yet".

If you are proposing to delete the tag, then you have to modify your question accordingly.

You should also give reasons due to which the tag must be purged.

And, then it's upto us (i.e. the community of users) to decide what to do with the proposal.

People who agree with the proposal will vote up and people who disagree will vote down

In that manner a consensus will be built, based on which, the decision of whether the tag should be deleted or not will be taken.

UPDATE:

When I posted this answer, it was perfectly valid and answering the question. But after that the question was edited, as suggested in my answer, and it made my answer irrelevant. Now, I am not sure, whether there is rule which forces me to update my answer in such a case, but since one Mod has requested me to do so, I am updating my answer making it relevant with the current version of the question.

I agree with your proposal. Because:

1. the term is not accepted by traditional Hindus, all Hindus. As pointed out in the quoted comments, no Hindu sects identify themselves as neo-vedantists. There is no Guru Paramapara for this sect and there is no traditional teachings related to the sect. Such a sect itself is thus non existent.

2. The term itself also is apparently created by someone who is not even a Hindu.

3. If you notice, although the term uses Vedanta (one of the six Darshanas) in it, the target sect (or followers) is only some modern day followers of Advaita. Now, Dvatins and Vishistadvaitins also proclaim to be followers of Vedanta but the tag is primarily used on the site only to target some followers of the sect Advaita. So, changing the tag name to neo-advaita is the ideal thing to do and then see how people respond to it's use.

My conclusion is it is a redundant tag and we can perfectly live without it.

Answer 2

Well, though the tag neo-vedanta was created while posting questions denigrating the beliefs of certain personalities associated with Vedanta of modern period, that tag may be useful for questions like What are the principal differences on siddhanta basics, and details, between tradional vedantists and neo-vedantists?.

I remember that this term is also used by Swami Dayananda Saraswati (founder of Arya Samaj) in his popular work Satyarth Prakash. Quoting from English Translation of Satyarth Prakash:

Beliefs of the Neo-Vedantists.

The beliefs of the Neo-Vedantists are discussed below in the form of questions and answers:

By the way, the use of tag should be restricted to the questions dealing with philosophy explicitly belonging to it and should not be used just with every questions of modern interpretation of Vedanta school.

So, I think we don't need to purge the tag, we may just need to keep the usage restriction in mind.

---

Thanks for your clarification. So I will await for a few days, and start implementing my own agenda, as a group of members implenting theirs own. @sv. - srimannarayana k v

This site should not be used for taking revenge or implementing personal agendas. I suggest to avoid such practice.

Answer 3

I have used the tag/term myself on Who coined the term "neo-vedanta?" and not in the way you describe in your post ("demean...particular category of members, especially advaitins"), so, I don't support purging of this tag.

Besides, even if you delete the tag, users can still use 'Neo-Vedanta' in posts and comments, because, merely using the word doesn't break the CoC - it's the intent that matters. If someone uses the term and then follows it up with needless criticism of a sect because of the sect's liberal interpretation of scripture, then you can flag the post or comment as 'rude or abusive'.

Also, a quick survey of Prabuddha Bharata ('Awakened India'), the monthly journal of the Ramakrishna Order started by Swami Vivekananda, shows that it places no restriction on its contributors w.r.t the term's usage. E.g., in the January 2010 edition, different authors writing on the topic, 'Perspectives on Vedanta', have used 'Neo-Vedanta' (and 'Neo-Hinduism') in different ways. Some like Swami Atmapriyananda and Javier Ruiz Calderón have actually adopted and used it in a positive sense. So, I see no reason why this site should restrict users from using the term as a tag or in posts and comments.

Neo-Vedanta and the New World Order (Swami Atmapriyananda)

Three Principles of Neo-Vedanta

One of the latest acharyas to have interpreted and infused new life into Vedanta texts was Swami Vivekananda—who was naught but 'his Master's voice'. His interpretation of Vedanta is in effect a rejuvenation of the ancient texts, and is often called the 'Neo-Vedanta of Ramakrishna-Vivekananda'. We need to examine this phrase to find out what, if anything, is new in this 'Neo-Vedanta'. In order to do this, we need to ask: What exactly did Swami Vivekananda teach? He himself said: 'I have a message, and I will give it after my own fashion.' What was the message he gave?

Swami Vivekananda's message of Vedanta is based on the following foundational principles:

1. divinity of the human being;
2. unity of all existence, solidarity of the universe; and as a corollary to these
3. the essential spirituality of life.

...

What Is New in Neo-Vedanta?

Although the term 'neo-Vedanta' has gained currency, there are not scholars wanting who question the use of the prefix 'neo-' before Vedanta. Their point of view is that 'neo-' smacks of a departure from the Vedanta tradition per se, a tradition handed down over the millennia via an army of illumined acharyas. They argue that it is perhaps better to say that Sri Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda reinterpreted, rejuvenated, and revitalized the eternal message of Vedanta, making it a living force in the modern world. The adoption of the prefix 'neo-' is perhaps misleading, for it would mean that Ramakrishna-Vivekananda added something new to the eternal Vedanta. The question now is: Is it true that they did? And if so, can this claim be justified?

...

---

Advaita Vedanta and Philosophy of Religion (Javier Ruiz Calderón)

From this critical religiosity, there is not only one true religion, but many true religious traditions in the pragmatic sense that they can lead humans to holiness. For each one, her or his own tradition and the symbols it includes are the best; but one must not think dogmatically that what is best for me is best for everyone. In fact, we should not only tolerate other traditions but we should be open to learning from them.

In this respect, Hinduism has been a pioneering tradition. Sri Ramakrishna experienced in himself that the different ideas of the Divine are different names for the same experience and that all spiritual paths lead to the same goal. And Swami Vivekananda proclaimed this message to the world, boldly stating in the 1893 World's Parliament of Religions held at Chicago that all religions are true. I believe that this humanistic and universalist neo-Hinduism or neo-Vedanta has become, despite the opposition of the more conservative, orthodox, and dogmatic sections of Hinduism, the most pluralistic, dialogic, and open religious tradition, and fortunately this attitude is also gradually entering into other religions.

---

Advaita Vedanta: Its Vision and Possibilities (Swami Satyamayananda)

The religion of Vedanta in all its philosophical phases, called Hinduism, has moulded every aspect of Indian life—its spirituality, ethos, language, culture, and so on. Vedanta is not a closed philosophical system, and so great sages and saints come, verify, and push Vedanta to newer grounds. The fundamentals are sacrosanct but its approaches and applications are reinterpreted accordingly to new circumstances and expansion of secular or relative knowledge. The latest to do that is Swamiji. He saw Advaita Vedanta as a panacea for all individual and social problems and preached it as such. There is a tendency in some scholars to call it neo-Vedanta but it is not really so. Swamiji made Vedanta practical.

---

Swami Vivekananda on Advaita Vedanta (Jeffery D Long)

'Neo-Vedanta'?

Over the course of the last few decades, academic scholarship on Advaita Vedanta has had a tendency to affirm a sharp distinction between 'classical Advaita', essentially the Advaita taught by Acharya Shankara, and 'neo-Advaita' or 'neo-Vedanta', which is either traced to Swamiji or to the reformers of the Brahmo Samaj who influenced him in his early years. Often, this divide and the prefix 'neo' in front of 'Advaita' or 'Vedanta' is taken to imply some inauthenticity, as if the Vedanta of the modern period is not the 'real' Vedanta. The assumption is that the only 'real' Advaita Vedanta is that of Acharya Shankara.

...

The term 'neo-Vedanta' was coined by a Roman Catholic Indologist named Paul Hacker (1913–79). Hacker, as James Madaio states, 'influentially argued that Neo-Vedanta was a nationalistic movement dependent on the "assimilation" of Western ideals. The category "Neo-Vedanta", in that way, entered mainstream academic discourse as a pejorative term—indiscriminately used in reference to a number of different Hindu thinkers who held variant theological views—and connoting a sense of inauthenticity because "continuity with the past has been broken".'

Hacker's dichotomy between 'neo' and 'authentic' Vedanta depends on viewing Acharya Shankara's expression of Advaita Vedanta as definitive of authentic Vedanta, thus rendering all other thinkers' expressions of this philosophy inauthentic. If a scholar were to make an analogous move with regard to Hacker's own Roman Catholic tradition, it would render all Roman Catholic thought since Thomas Aquinas 'neoCatholicism.' Catholic thinkers of the modern period, like Hans Urs von Balthasar and Karl Rahner, not to mention Paul Hacker himself, would thereby become 'neo-Catholic'.