Likewise, Indu (Soma-juice or nectar) used to be offered to God as libation in Vedic yajnas (worships), and consumed afterwards by people (Hindu) for health, life, prosperity and progeny. Hindu means as someone propitiated by Indu (the Vedic libation). Note, H -- in Hindu, and pronounced as in hut -- implies auspiciousness or delight.

Religion belonging to Hindu is called Hindu Dharma.

In response to the misconception that the word Hindu originated as some foreigners stepped into India, note that no one from outside could have come to India and started calling the locals Hindu suddenly if such a word (in Sanskrit -- not those foreigners' language) had not already existed there. 'Hindu' also is not related to 'Sindhu' -- a word with similar ending and meaning ocean or river, especially in the west of India.

The words Sindhu (ocean or river) and Hindu (expiated by Indu) are linguistically and phonetically different, and Hindu is not derived from Sindhu. Note that Vedic Sanskrit did use the letters (sounds) 's' and 'dh' and therefore would not replace them with 'h' and 'd', respectively, transforming Sindhu into Hindu. In addition, the ancient Greeks reaching India (circa Alexander the great) could have easily pronounced Sindhu without changing it to Hindu by dropping S in favor of H since they were used to pronounce Sigma (an alphabet in Greek, their mother-toungue) which is syllabically somewhat similar to Sindhu. Furthermore, Muslims entering India for the first time and speaking Arabic or Persian -- languages having alphabets Sad and Sin etc. for 's' sounds -- would not have to substitute H for S in Sindhu (and thus make it Hindu) to pronounce or use it in their own languages. The word Hindu -- not specific to any particular region or area -- was already in use when these foreigners arrived in India, and they did not invent it from Sindhu accidentally or due to necessity.

Women's Issues:
It seems from the above that the ancient society was quite considerate and respectful to those (both men and women) engaged in various vocations, and people were free to make choices or changes in their careers or skills if the opportunity existed. Vedic prayers also indicate that the women had considerable say in selecting their marriage partners, and were espoused to live in monogamous relationships while enjoying same rights as their husbands. Furthermore, in the Vedas there is little evidence of child marriages, dowry system and the practice of suttee or sati (self-immolation of a woman upon her husband's death). Similarly, there is no indication of any stigma relating to widowhood or the remarriage of a widow. Note also that the well-educated, scholarly and charismatic women of yore, who also participated in many philosophical debates with men, included Gargi (the daughter of Vachaknu - from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad) and Vidyottama (wife of the famed poet and writer, Kaalidasa, who started his life as a humble and menial worker in the woods). It is clear that the women or the lowly and humble in the society were neither ignored nor abandoned.

Listed below are a few examples of multi-vocational families and people changing their occupations and life styles.

(a) As indicated in the above, from the Rigveda, the mother of a bard (probably of the scriptures) was working in corn-grinding (an activity usually for a Shudra).

(b) Majority of the Rishis (sages) were both Brahmin and Kshatriya so as to manage their Aashramas (hermitages) effectively.

(c) In the Chandogya Upanishad, Satyakama (the illegitimate, varnasankra, son of a Shudra woman who did not even remember who her son's father was) went on to be accepted and educated for Brahmin work (the Gita: Ch. 18 - verse 42). This shows that the people (including the Shudra and of unknown lineage) had the choice of pursuing any occupation (even that of a Brahmin).

(d) Valmiki (given to chanda - meaning impetuosity - in his early days) started life as a robber. But later in life, after performing penance, he studied to become a Brahmin. He went on to become a great Rishi (sage) and wrote the Ramayana in Sanskrit. Thus, going from being a chandaal (meaning - cruel and brutal person) to a great human being not only demonstrates his personal endeavor, but also that the society was quite accepting of such a process and its outcome. In general, as indicated here and in the Vedic passages, the concept of untouchability (with respect to the Shudra or any one else as a dalit / untouchable) did not exist. Any shunning or condemnation of a person was due mainly to his / her engaging in an activity not useful or acceptable to the society. Above all, it is also clear that any type of socially stigmatic situation could be easily improved through penance and by changing one's behaviour. Incidentally, this type of humane rehabilitation of criminals and sinners is a sign of civilized people long ago; and this humane practice exists even today in various countries claiming to be modern and civilized.

(e) In one of the stories from the Ramayana, Rishi Viswamitra is said to have conducted Yajna (worship) at which the officiating priest was a once Kshatriya and the Yajamaan (worshipper) a Chandaal.

(f) In the Mahabharata, Satyavati (a Shudra-girl whose father was a fisherman), when presented with a marriage proposal from king Shantanu, married him only after he accepted her pre-nuptial agreement. Her own children, in stead of another older heir to the throne, went on to inherit the Kshatriya kingdom as was demanded in the pre-nuptial agreement. This indicates that the intercaste marriages and exchanges were quite prevalent; and that the women and Shudras could make free choices even when there was royalty involved.

(g) Matrimonial and Vocational Choices:
The evolution of society and customs was mainly due to the individual and collective needs and choices (as indicated also in some of the above Vedic quotes on marriage, vocational activities etc.). In addition, the role and influence of various espoused or suggested proclamations such as involving the varnashrama dharma (casteo-monastic orders) etc. - based on non-scriptural (non-Vedic) writings (such as Manusmriti etc. accredited to Manu et al.) - on the development and progress of society at large (across-the-board) was rather insignificant.

The ancient society (generally modest and homogeneous economically) did not restrict the cross-caste matrimonial and occupational choices. In spite of the socially liberal conditions, though, the change in vocation did not always lead to significant economic gains. In addition, some vocations (e.g., Vaishya and Shudra) were inherently conducive for their young to quickly and easily engage in the family business / profession and settle down (socially and economically) early in life. Consequently, the children from these families found the other vocations (such as the Brahmins and, to some extent, the Kshatriya) to be less rewarding and not worth the preparatory effort, which included living and training (and paying the teacher through labor) for decades in hermitages in harsh and forest-like conditions where the knowledge exchange between the guru and the pupils was usually in the oral tradition since the written manuscripts (on papyrus etc.) were scarce. On the other hand, the children from the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas families were predisposed (through the natural and continuous exposure to the family business) and were readily inducted by their parents into their traditional professions. Over time, this type of selecting the professions inadvertently gave rise to the tradition of vocation based families all around even though the society had not sought such an outcome. Note that the society in this respect remained flexible and allowed people (including the Shudra, who also engaged in menial and ignoble pursuits) the freedom of choice in their undertakings (e.g., Satyakama in the above).

In a similar and related context, it was deemed vocationally advantageous and convenient for a couple to marry if they both had the same background, because they would then be able to get involved in their family occupation quickly and easily without facing any uncertainty or requiring any additional apprenticeship. Moreover, the bride or the groom in this type of wedding arrangement would be less likely to encounter any unexpected, unfamiliar, inhospitable and unwanted post-marital social situations. Note also that, in addition to the weddings involving same type of families, the marriages among people from vastly different backgrounds also frequently took place (as in the case of Satyavati and Shantanu) and the society posed no restrictions.

Thus it was basically an arbitrary social custom which arose over time as a matter of convenience whereby the people stuck to their family professions and also married within same type of families (vocations). Note, the lack of relevant information available in print etc. probably also led to the guru-pupil based disciplic tradition for knowledge/spirituality which would otherwise be not as crucial. In any case, people (of any caste) desiring to not follow these customs or to break away from them simply should go on their own - without any fear of repercussions from the state, society or religion - to learn and pursue new vocations; and in the process they would also be able to find compatible and willing marriage partners for themselves within the society at large. Moreover (as regards to the Gita: Ch. 5 - V. 18, Ch. 6 - V. 9, Ch. 9 - V. 32), the priests and temples that serve (cater to) and admit all (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra including the disadvantaged or Dalit) should be accorded the greatest respect and support.

Illustration of the rise of Subcastes within Castes:
As humans continued to create and adopt new occupations, move to new places and territories, or encounter unfamiliar surroundings and situations, the four primary vocations (castes: Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra) developed or transformed into several secondary subcastes characterized by peoples' tasks etc. For example, vocationally speaking, if a person - while trying to become a Brahmin - learnt two Vedas, he would be called a Dwivedi, whereas the learner of three Vedas would be known as a Trivedi. It shows that titles (or subcastes) as Dwivedi and Trivedi basically correspond to certain specific Brahminic pursuits.

Similarly, a Vaishya engaged in forming objects from loha (iron) would be called the Lohar, whereas, the maker of articles from sona (gold) would be called the Sonar. Moreover, if a Sonar's son pursued his father's occupation (business) and was followed by his son, and so on, it would give rise to a subcaste (lineage) called Sonars within the Vaishya caste. Note that such preference or tradition for family business would occur for several reasons. First, the parents generally found it easy and safe to guide their young towards a familiar and time assured vocation. Second, the familiarity with parents' job made it easy for children to learn and practice that occupation. Third, it might probably help in attaining the familial stability and lead to an easy transfer of accumulated knowledge and expertise between generations.

The influence of migration on subcastes can be similarly explored. Consider the following example. At some point in history, a certain inhabited area was to be inundated under a new dam and the people had to move and live elsewhere. As they settled in a new area, the locals there would address them as the Damiya (meaning - from the dam). Some of the newcomers might even prefer this new title to that they had before moving to the new place. Moreover, when, for example, a newcomer (migrant or Shudra) started working as Mistree (mason), he would be called a Damiya-Mistree (a Vaishya - usually a person in non-priestly or non-administrative occupation). Similarly, if the person worked as a priest, he would be known as the Damiya-Brahmin. This indicates that the title 'Damiya' had suddenly acquired the status as a subcaste. More importantly, note that two principal castes (Brahmin and Vaishya) had gained subcastes with the same name (Damiya) with reference to totally different tasks (as priests and masons).

The above examples illustrate the manner in which the subcastes are created and the way they relate to the principal castes. Note also that, depending on the circumstances, the newly created subcastes may either co-exist with the original subcastes, or replace some or all of the latter. This surely can lead to drastic fluctuations in their numbers. As this process of creating and retaining of subcastes occurs time and again over vast places and cultures, their numbers remain uncertain and alter frequently making it difficult to keep track of them. Nonetheless, the subcastes are functional in character and subject to easy transformations.

(h) Vedic/Hindu Tenets:
The ancients were in favour of progressive ideas (e.g., about the environment, philosophy / religion and life style) and appear to have conducted their affairs reasonably and democratically. They either shunned or actively opposed the stagnant, blind and baseless practices (rituals) and the intolerant / autocratic persons and beliefs (faiths). The rituals for invocations of the physical, imagery (tales / myths) and the mundane were deemed less rewarding than the meditation of the spiritual, the source (truth / logic) and the divine; (meditation is explained in Ch. 6 of the Gita). Note that the reality expressed in terms of various physical (artistic) forms or through poetry can have different interpretations. For example, in some of the ancient texts, a viman may just be a cart or chariot and not necessarily an airplane or sky-craft.

While considering chatur as four (and bhuj meaning arm, and mukh meaning face or mouth), chatur-bhuj and chatur-mukh are shown as four-armed and four-faced idols. In stead, consider for example, chatur as the skilled one: chatur-bhuj and chatur-mukh will then represent, anthropomorphically (like a human with a face and two arms), a god (deva : friendly and blissful, superior being) who is skilled-armed (or ambidextrous: probably in all the occupations) and skilled-orator (i.e., a fine instructor). Thus, chatur-bhuj and chatur-mukh are, respectively, symbols of the omnipotence and the omniscience of One God, or reflect His excellence in enterprise (as Vishnu) and instruction (as Brahma). God is One: Braham or BRAHMAN (not the Brahmin caste). When He (as Atman) enters the body (or as spirit unites with nature), life begins, and He is called Brahma. As long as He stays in the body, the life continues, and He is seen as preserving it and is called Vishnu. Once He leaves the body, life ends (or body expires); and His departure is seen as if He has worked as Rudra in bringing an end to life. But, throughout, He remains One: Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra are only His aspects of creation, preservation and termination.
Thus, in regard to man-made symbols for displaying various Divine attributes for the purposes of worship and meditation etc., there should be some correspondence between the attribute and the symbol. For example, if omnipotent God is to be represented 'as meaning Vishnu' in human form, it is sufficient and logical to interpret chatur (in chatur-bhuj) as skilled (even as ambidextrous) in all the tasks. Similarly, if omniscient God is to be represented 'as meaning Brahma' in human form, it is sufficient and logical to interpret chatur (in chatur-mukh) as skilled in oratory and knowledge. Thus, there is no need to interpret chatur as four in chatur-bhuj or chatur-mukh; and hence it is unnecessary to assume or create various four-headed and four-armed religious symbols for representing God anthropomorphically. Incidentally, note also in Ch. 11 of the Gita, Arjun - after having realized vision of the Omnipresent encompassing all Creation - wishes (verse 46) to see the lord (mentor) in chatur-bhuj form (holding scepter and circle), which seems to refer only to latter's dexterity. And Arjun's wish is soon fulfilled (Ch. 11 - V. 50) as he is able to see Krishan as a regular (normal looking) person, and there is no suggestion anywhere that the former had an encounter with anyone bearing four arms.

Metaphorically speaking, Shiv-Linga (or Shiv-Lingam) refers only to Shiva - the remover of destruction, i.e., same as the preserver (Vishnu or God), and it necessarily is not a certain special symbol (e.g., shown often in pollex or index form); because in Linga (or Lingam), the word Li (which in second or Object case singular form becomes Lim or Lin with nasal sound ending) means loss or destruction, and ga (or gam) implies removing or going away. Thus, Shiv-Linga (or Shiv-Lingam) symbolizes God's power (attribute) to extricate from destruction or loss.
Note also that the symbol (such as, the pollex, ling or phallus looking), portrayed in various religious rituals (Hindu and elsewhere), has probably the origins in the ancient fire (Agni) sacrifice or worship to God. It appears to be a solid image of jwala (flame) from a yajna (sacrificial fire) and was perhaps introduced long ago as a duplicate for the sacrificial fire. Because creating and lighting of a yajna used to be a very difficult and time-consuming process (as indicated in some of the Vedic hymns also), this image made the worship possible anywhere anytime (i.e., by using it in place of live fire and pouring oblations upon it). Note that the smearing of the solid symbol with ash also points to a close association with fire worship. Similarly, when this fire (Agni) solid (symbol) is placed under a pitcher from which the libation slowly and continuously flows over it, it appears to give the impression of an unending and uninterrupted active worship even during the absence of worshippers. There, the solid symbol represents the live fire in a yajna and the pitcher (with dripping libation) symbolizes the worshipper pouring oblations into the fire. In addition, it is worth noting that some of the practices in present-day worships appear to relate closely to the original fire sacrifice: the lighting of lamps or candles represents the actual or original fire (flame), and the burning of incense recreates the aroma that would be given off by the oblations (soma etc.) into the live fire.
In this regard, the symbols dedicated to Agni (or Shiv, God) should also correspond to logic and not just to myth or fiction. The identification of Agni symbol (i.e., jwala, or Agni-ling: ling meaning symbol) as a phallus is perhaps due to the confusion that their shapes are similar. Note that the early humans were praying and worshipping for everything. They also prayed to God for children (heroes, sons). In this regard, religiously and psychologically, the Agni symbol 'looking like phallus' became the favorite idol. Unfortunately, over time, people forgot about its association with Agni, and identified it only in terms of biology and procreation. (Note: Since Shiva refers also to the auspicious flame or Agni-jwala, Agni-ling or a similar looking object probably was referred to as Shiv-ling.)

Note, Agni is a manifestation of BRAHMAN or Iswara. Agni in the male aspect is Shiva, and as female is Shakti. The Agni-jwala (flame) is called Shiva. The common symbols (e.g., long or stubby ling or symbol) for Shiva and Shakti are just solid images of Agni (Yajna fire). Incidentally, Shiva and Shakti always appear together -- perhaps due to their common association with Agni. Moreover, Agni is also probably the biggest destroyer. Thus the connection between Agni and Shiva as the destroyers can be seen. On the other hand, Shankra is the greatest among Rudras; and Rudras are destroyers. Thus Shiva (through a connection with Agni as the greatest destroyer) probably, in His destructive aspect at least, is also identified with Shankra (the greatest Rudra destroyer). Note, Agni probably also is the origin of a number of other dark colored gods (idols), where their color corresponds to dark (black) colored ash (associated with fire or yajna).

In references to Hanumat or Hanuman, the name appears simply to imply a strong-jawed (or a very strong) person and not necessarily a monkey or monkey-chief. Similarly, Ganesha or Ganapati may simply mean Lord (Isha, Pati) of the people (Gana) and not just an elephant-headed figure (ganika meaning a female elephant).

Thus, it seems that there is a tendency to express and endorse a certain specific divine trait as a whole (entire) phenomenon through recognizable art (shapes and forms) and stories (fictional accounts) to make it more appealing and understandable to the masses. Unfortunately, if such a message is not communicated properly or is lost over time, it will mislead and confuse people and may even wrongly imply that there is more than one real source of divinity. Note, as indicated also in Rigveda (Book 1: Hymn 164 # 46) and the Gita (Ch. 13: Verse 16), the Source basically is, locally and universally, the same and complete in essence and attributes.

Similarly, in the Rigveda, the division of Purusha (Being or Spirit) is indicated to have taken place at the beginning; the implication of which really is the transcendence of the (chaotic) old into the (stable) new in terms of evolution of the society. There, the emergence of Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra from the body of Purusha symbolically corresponds, respectively, to their occupations giving the society its voice (arising as if from Purusha's mouth), order (as if through Purusha's arms), form (as if on Purusha's thighs), and change or migration (as if via Purusha's feet).

Furthermore, in the three original (basic to Hinduism) Vedas (Rig, Yajur and Sam) referred to above, little mention or support is shown for astrology; and sorcery, witchcraft, magic and worthless worships are condemned (RV: Book 7, Hymn 104.20, 23-25; Book 10, Hymn 37.4). Similarly (RV: Book 7, Hymn 104.5,7, 13-16), civic or religious (for god or faith) deception (corruption, cheating and wickedness) and exploitation (including coercion, bondage, aggression and plundering) are forbidden and not to be tolerated. Note, the Gita (Ch. 16) reiterates these precepts; and (Ch. 3 - V. 26) favors advancing of religion/spirituality peacefully and by example.

(i) Salvation, Karma, Reincarnation and Metamorphosis:
It was realized long ago that, irrespective of one's background, attaining the immortality or overcoming the death (or the fear of it) is in understanding oneself (individual life or being) - the union between soul (spirit - real, sat or eternal) and body (matter - unreal, asat or transient) - as part of the Supreme (stated also in Ch. 2, 6, 7 & 9 of the Bhagvad Gita). Symbolically, therefore (as stated in Ch. 8 of the Gita), following the path (or going in the time) of clarity (as in the light of day or the sun) about the self is liberating (Ch. 6); whereas, following the path (or going in the time) of confusion (as in the darkness of night or the moon) about the self brings nothing but fear (morbidity). It is worth noting (the Gita: Ch. 6 - verse 45) that, whatever a person's social status or civic duty, the spiritual gains derived from all efforts for achieving the union of one with the One are imminent and cumulative.

In this context, the Karmic principle (i.e., a good or bad action leads to a good or bad outcome) is assumed to influence the course of events taking place during this life and, supposedly, afterwards. Accordingly, each experience or action by a person affects him in body* and soul in the next situation or future. Each experience itself is a life/Janma : its beginning and end symbolically being birth and death. Moreover, according to the Karmic principle, even when the body dies, the soul continues to live and may feel the residual effect of the preceding existence. The reincarnation therefore symbolically represents the extension of this principle during the hereafter. It is, in other words, a new opportunity or promise to accrue spiritual gains on the basis of actions during previous life. Note also that reincarnation merely presents to a person a new possibility (opportunity) arising out of countless influences, and, depending upon the new surroundings (people, environment etc.) and the future actions by the individual himself, it may or may not fully materialize (the Gita: Ch. 18 - verse 14). For example, as indicated above, even though Satyakama started as a Shudra (in a non-Brahmin vocation), he went on, through his own initiative and effort and with the help of his guru, to acquire new skills to become a Brahmin (the profession of choice for him). Thus, reincarnation - being associated with the soul - appears to be unimportant with regards to the worldly pursuits such as involving vocations (castes) etc. Similarly, salvation (Moksha) - which also relates to the soul - is achievable by all (irrespective of their background), and can be easily attained by uniting (elevating) one's soul with God by practicing good deeds and penance etc. The Gita, to this end, states (in Ch. 2) - in response to a query in Ch. 1 (verse 42) regarding the rituals to ancestors - that God's grace and the good deeds by a person during his own lifetime are important to seek salvation.

The supposed metamorphoses of God as Ram and Krishan etc., heroes of the early civilizations (in epics Ramayana and Mahabharata etc.), should be taken in spiritual/moralistic/philosophical context. The reverence (mainly ritualistic or for a reward) to them - dedicated according to their physical eminence and existence, and based primarily on the stories which appear to be skewed over time into myths/tales (Pauranic etc.) - thus needs to reduce. Note that God alone is deemed worthy of all worships (the Gita: Ch. 9 - V. 24, Chs. 10 & 4) since all the eminence and creation -- including even all the gods and goddesses associated with various places, times or events -- are ultimately due to Him. Incidentally, when Krishan speaks in the Gita, he is not only speaking as a friend (well-wisher) and charioteer (worker and assistant) of Arjuna, but he is also advising Arjuna in the capacity of a guru. Above all, in essence, Krishan also is both BRAHMAN (Iswara) and Atman in the Gita.

Note also in this regard that the notion of a personal God sometimes results in a very informal devotee�deity relationship. The devotee often uses various preferred salutations, representations and rituals (worships and offerings) to express his unique love and reverence towards the 'kind and caring' deity. But, when many people engaging in this manner - in their own special ways of worships ,etc., are viewed collectively, their society is seen to be overly ritualistic and following many gods, even though, in reality the ultimate object of reverence remains One. (Note, the Gita: Ch. 9-V. 26).