Can the Yogic experience be replicated using psychedelics?

Commentators debate this interesting question. The answer is a 'no' from every commentator, but each offers slightly different reasons. What do you think?
 
November 2013
Spiritual experience due to psychedelics
Vijaya comments:
"there was a discussion in this forum (why mantra cannot be performed by a machine) regarding the attempt to replace living pandits with devices like Ipod to chant sanskrit mantras. Similarly, isn't there a possibility to reduce the spiritual experience gained through meditation/Yoga to the experience due to psychedelics and eventually replace meditation/sadhana with psychedelics?
Sam Harris in his Huffpost blog seem to equate the experience due to the ingestion of psychedelics like LSD and spiritual experience gained through meditation, although he is cautious about the former.

(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/drugs-and-the-meaning-of-_b_891014.html)
"...it cannot be denied that psychedelics are a uniquely potent means of altering consciousness. If a person learns to meditate, pray, chant, do yoga, etc., there is no guarantee that anything will happen. Depending on his aptitude, interest, etc., boredom could be the only reward for his efforts. If, however, a person ingests 100 micrograms of LSD, what will happen next will depend on a variety of factors, but there is absolutely no question that something will happen. And boredom is simply not in the cards. ...It is, however, a difference that brings with it certain liabilities."
This approach presupposes the material nature of our consciousness as opposed to the dharmic position of many layers of reality. Also, it separates the metaphysics of objective outer cosmos and the subjective inner consciousness, which is antithetical to integral unity."

Maria responds:
"Very interesting post, specially your conclusion. Many of these western scientifics, whose scientific knowledge I don´t doubt, but have a very limited vision influenced by subtle abrahamic ideas like only one life. Their potential as researchers is very much limited, provided that they cannot help but associating mind to the brain, and the end of everything with the death. If they could go further, see the implications into the world of samskaras and vasanas brought from life to life, how would they explain it? There would be a revolution in their own minds. Like they cannot afford going further, they end up relating every spiritual experience as provided by the brain. As a material effect of a material cause, that´s all. Instead of seeing that the brain could be a material tool in the hands of an spiritual consciousness. I think that is why many western scientific become atheists..."

Prasad responds to the previous two posts:
"... the dharmic position of many layers of reality is nothing more than another "unfalsifiable presupposition" from a scientific point of view. I am not aware of any evidence through neuroscience which requires any neuroscientist to consider a Dharmic view of many layers of reality as a scientific theory or position. Thus, there is no reason also for scientists to presuppose anything of the sort of a divide between what is the cosmos and what is inner consciousness. The duality between mind and body(brain) is not a chief concern for neuroscience as far as I know, since there is no scientific evidence as such for any mind separate from a body.

...Guys like Sam Harris have spent a llllong time trying to study Dharmic positions like those in Buddhism and also Advaita Vedanta. It is not their influence by subtle abrahamic ideas that they stick they to their claims. Please try to understand the methodology of science before commenting on scientists and their "biased" worldviews. Science does not proceed by handwaving or by unfalsifiable theories. It proceeds by rigorous evidence. So in order for a neuroscientist to seriously consider the dualistic claim (i.e. there is a body separate from a mind), an experiment has to be first described which can show whether the claim is true or not. In other words, see what Harris says - 

..

- So I would opine that the scientific community (which now includes almost all of humanity) would not be doing science by assuming a duality between a body and mind and then working from such an assumption to discover truths about the mind.

Now let me come to how a response can still be made in the lines of Rajivji's ideas of "being different".

First of all, it is simply a narrow view to treat mind-altering drugs and meditation (which I will now call dhyAnA, identifying it as a step in Patanjali's ashtAnga yoga scheme) on the same lines, i.e., as a means to effect changes in the mental states (I am purposefully not calling these "states of consciousness" because of my Advaitic leaning that the mind is different from the Atman, which is the Original Consciousness). Sam Harris' claim is that both can effect changes in the mental states. According to my understanding, in Yoga/VedAntA and other indian darshaNAs, the purpose of dhyAnA is not just about altering your mind-states during the time of meditation. Instead, the main purpose of dhyAna is to effect the triumph of one's will over the constantly drifting/changing mind...

In the same way, a yogi who practises dhyAna according to the Indian traditional darshana's need not have all the kinds of experiences or mental states that Harris is talking about. However, over time, he/she will gain the strength of mental will to concentrate on any particular object. This one-pointedness of mind which one gains is called "chitta-ekAgrata" in some traditions. The supporting factors to doing proper dhyAna and achieving its intended results include living a life of ethical and moral values and having devotional mindset (roughly, yamA and niyamA - the first two steps of ashtAnga yogA), sitting for dhyAna in correct physical posture (Asana - 3rd stage), prANAyamA (the 4th stage, learning to breathe properly prior to dhyAnA), restricting one's diet to saatvic food and restricting one's mental diet to saatvic imagery/sounds/ etc (pratyAhArA). Only after all these stages can dhyAnA be done properly and will bear the appropriate fruit. This is what the Indian Yogic traditions say, as far as I know. This is why the so-called meditation does NOT work for everyone and anyone. It is like taking a medicine without observing the appropriate dietary restrictions for it to work, and then claiming that the medicine doesn't work!..."

 

Vijaya responds:

"...My point is that science has a reductive approach to consciousness as BD explains (Page 104),

"...the Western scientific tradition has been reductionist rather than integral. Reductionism attempts to explain wholes in terms of their parts. This works, to a large extent, in ways that are practical, and hence modern science has made major contribtions to our lives using this principle.

The unity assumed in most of the dharmic traditions is a unity of consciousness. Western scientists and philosophers often ask how consciousness can arise from the chemistry of the brain. In the Indian tradition, we find the reverse problem. Absolute consciousness is understood to be the source of everything. The challenge is to understand the ordinary world of multiplicity."
Even your definition of dhyana "to effect the triumph of one's will over the constantly drifting/changing mind",  is also another mental state with a different/dynamic biochemical composition, according to neuroscience. So why to do all the tough sadhanas? We can put our efforts in producing drugs that will give an 'enlightened state' and distribute them to all?
This is not philosophically possible from the viewpoint of vedanta. The 'turiya' state which is the self and the pure consciousness is not a state of mind but is the whole essence of other three states, waking (jågrat), dream (svapna) and deep sleep (susupti). So the self transcends the other three states. The knowledge of neuroscience(and even the world) which is in realm of the waking state is limited and it cant find ways to reach a state that transcends it.

Another important point neuroscientists like Sam Harris make is that such altered mental states of mind do not represents reality by any means. This is in line with the basic axiom of science, the objective existence of the universe.
A Sadhaka in dharma religions does not need to start with such an axiom. That's why realised sages from Ashtavakra to Ramana maharishi describe enlightenment with analogy of 'waking up from the dream'. So a sage indeed perceives a different reality. That's why I mentioned different layers of reality.
Finally, there is more to dharma than the reductionist scientific methods. Dharma traditions take a nuanced approach to one of the pramana (epistemic tool), Sabda, the verbal testimony. The words of a realised Yogi which becomes smriti, is accepted and followed if it agrees with Sruti. This is why we have guru sishya traditions which help seekers in their spiritual quest. "  

 

This discussion is not over. If you have addition insights on this topic to share, please join the discussion group and contribute.

 

 

 

The Sita Syndrome

This is a discussion on the erroneous interpretation of Sri Ram as a woman-absuser. This post provides samples of the type of shoddy, misrepresentative, and superficial work of Hinduism and its epics that is being done in US academia.

October 2013
Anshu starts the discussion by sharing an article: "The Sita Syndrome"
Archana Bhatt (2013). The Sita syndrome (pdf link): Examining the communicative aspects of domestic violence from a South Asian perspective...

I wanted to write a letter to the editor or a journal article explaining that this phenomenon is prevalent worldwide, regardless of race or religion. I can do a literature review for Gender Based Violence, but need some help to justify Shri. Ram's actions..."

Rajiv shares a Huffington Post link: "The following is a typical superficial article by a Hindu in interfaith:

A prominent Hindu rep supported this "Sita sings the blues" when I first got to know her in the 1990s, taking a western feminist stand. Then we had some arguments. I think she later regretted encouraging this interpretation but by then it had taken root and gone mainstream. Today this interpretation of Ram = woman abuser is very standard in academic and other intellectual circles."


Anshu shares a couple of links and comments:
" UChicago link 1, link 2.

Not only that, GOI also "gifted" $1.5 million to burn. But, when it comes to fund "real" scholars or research, they never have enough money.

What to say about Ministary of Culture, Hinduism is not even in their ("secular") mission statement..."


This discussion is continued in another thread. This is largely about whether the Uttara Kanda of Ramayana was or was not a part of the original, Valmiki's Ramayana.


Param adds:
" Uttara Kanda is certainly not a part of Valmiki's epic; for instance it distorts the characters of Rama, Lakshmana and Sita; the Shambuka story is also fake.
...  Also, what some critics call Sita's "agni-pareeksha" is really Sita's Agni-pravesha".  Rama NEVER suspected Sita's chastity, and Sita knew it..."

Krishnamurthy responds
"while Shambhuka episode is a patent interpolation, being not in consonance with the Valmikian philosophy, Uttarakanda cannot be severed from Ramayana, since the biography of any character should stretch from the entrance of that character to his exit; as otherwise it will be incomplete. Further, it is wrong to say that the said kanda is in derogation of the Characters of Rama, Sita and Lakshmana; though there are good many misinterpretations by the Commentators; which lead the lay readers astray.."
 [more discussion truncated, read the original thread in the forum for complete details]





 

RMF Summary: Week of March 11 - 17, 2013

March 12
worship of Jesus child
Maria posts: .... Freising near Munich: Seelenkind (Soul child). When a new nun went to the monastery, she brought a Jesus child (doll) with her who was looked after by her during her whole life in her room with fancy dresses, toys, even changing napkins and fondling it. They discovered several Jesus children which used to belong to nuns from our convent school. We never knew about it.



March 12

My new blog on Tibet Uprising Day: China delayed it by 4 days after Rajiv shares his new blog on HuffPost:  Please post comments THERE AND NOT HERE. You can post a link here to your comment... .....BTW: My Wharton blog first went into 48 special editorial review, and I had to escalate the matter to higher ups, complaining that HuffPost should live up to its public image of intellectual freedom. Once I did that it went thru fast. On the Tibet blog, it took 4 emails to various levels of management, and well over 4 days... March 13 Kant's rigid and abstract categorial imperative versus Indian contex Subra shares a link: .... Rajiv ji tweeted yesterday:  The post uses ideas from BD to study how Kant's 'categorical imperative' rigidity is less useful in practical conflict resolution (e.g. in modern decision-support systems) compared to the contextual ethics developed in Dharmic thought systems, and is illustrated using Asimov's sci-fi robotic laws. March 14 US Catholic Church a $170 billion business Srinath shares: Hindus too have been watching the choice of a new Pope, perhaps with a faint anticipation of a more "liberal" Pope and a softening of the views of the Church... it's sheer folly to think that a business that spends $170 billion annually in the US alone will change its tactics or philosophy any time soon. March 15 Re: Manipal's Mohandas Pai wakes up to India's shabby treatment, say Ganesh shares:....visit to IISc, Bengaluru for the launch of Sri Rajiv Malhotra's book Being Different. His speech in IISc, clearly showed his understanding of the western universalism and how many of the Indian academicians, with their left leanings, were influencing top US universities in a manner that can only be called retarding progress. Hoping to hear more such top notch names of Indian industry come out in open and voice their support for the right cause, without fear of media and the ruling party. Renu adds: "....Let us resolve to not just be the World Guru but also a strong power that will stand for no nonsense and small acts of silly disrespect from the West or the East any more. That is our YUGA DHARMA now."   March 16 Shri Rajiv Malhotra's Talk at New Delhi on 23 March Jalan invites: ... 7th Chamanlalji Memorial Lecture which Shri Rajiv Malhotra will be delivering. Details as below:     Event:                     7th Chamanlalji Memorial Lecture     Main Speaker :     Shri Rajiv Malhotra     Chief Guest :          Dr.Subramanian Swamy     Time:                       Saturday March 23, 4.00 pm     Venue:                    Constitution Club, New Delhi   March 16 Shiva-worship-not-a-religious-act-income-tax-tribunal-says Kiran shares a link. Arun shares an alternative link: ....The Economic Times has it much better.   In brief, the IT department had gone after an institution claiming it was a religious, not a charitable institution; and the IT Tribunal said, no, it was a charitable institution... Venkat comments: "....Expense on worship of Hindu Gods & Temple maintenance cannot be regarded to be for religious purpose The core issue the definition of Hinduism and giving importance and preference to the western term "religion" The answer will be a vigorous propagation of indigenous Hindu friendly terms while showing why foreign descriptions are not suitable for our society. . Rajiv adds: "A major problem has been caused in India by the legal use of the term "religion" in giving special tax treatment and other concessions. The above article is the latest of a series of rulings that some aspect of Hinduism is not entitled to religious treatment. So to get equal rights in our own country, we must prove we are a "religion" as per Abrahamic criteria, because that's the definition enshrined in our laws. I wish someone would litigate in the Supreme Court that the legal provisions made for "religions" should equally apply to dharmas as well. Otherwise we are at a disadvantage when we show our distinctiveness, and to claim parity we must get ourselves digested into "religion". What a joke! What a circus full of clowns!!"  [We have noted Rajiv ji's comments on the sad state of affairs  in the wikipedia page. This website now has a collection link to Rajiv Malhotra's works. Click Rajiv ji's picture on the right to access]. March 17 My Wikipedia entry is obsolete, misleading Rajiv comments: ... In [the] .... Wiki post (on differences between dharma and religion) also, he has "digested" my works into a sundry of misc articles by several persons. There is virtually nothing I wrote and certainly not a deep appreciation of the differences between dharma/religion as expounded in BD [this directly relates to the book BD. We hope to collect this discussions and summarize in a separate post] March 17 Special issue on Being Different in the International Journal of Hindu Studies Several critical reviews were written. Here is Rajivji's rebuttal to those reviews. ... [depending on the trajectory of the discussions in this thread, we may cover this in depth later.] March 17 ISKCON: Push Marketing? Sunday March 10, 2013, Hindu Temple of Atlanta had special Mahasivaratri puja & events. The premises has separate temples for Shiva & Vishnu (Balaji). I was...

RMF Summary: Week of March 5 - 11, 2013

March 7
Jesus Yoga - the website
Ravi shares a link.

March 7
My new blog - THE HIJACKING OF WHARTON
I just tweeted this new blog. (Given the controversial nature of my blog, it took them 2 days to finally accept it completely unchanged.) ..

Karthik comments:
"... In a Daily Pennsylvanian report, Toorjo Ghose, one of the U Penn humanities sepoys who led the campaign to disinvite Modi, has sought to justify his position as not being contrary to free expression:

"Ghose said he did not believe it was a free speech issue because Modi had been invited as an honored, plenary speaker and this position was tantamount to the conference endorsing his development ideas.We are under no obligation as an institution to endorse his brand of politics and that's exactly what we would have done had the invitation gone through, Ghose said."

In fact, Ghose is lying, and U Penn had every obligation to let the Wharton students' invitation stand. By inviting Modi to speak at their conference, the student organizers of the Wharton India Economic Forum had expressed their intention to do exactly this: facilitate a distinguished guest who represents certain ideas of development and a certain brand of politics. The WIEF conference is organized by students of the Wharton School, and should they choose to endorse certain ideas of development by association with the guests they invite, it is entirely within their rights of open expression, guaranteed by the University of Pennsylvania itself, to do so.

See the Provosts' Guidelines for Open Expression, as listed on the U Penn website:

Of particular relevance here is:

"D. In case of conflict between the principles of the Guidelines on Open Expression and other University policies, the principles of the Guidelines shall take precedence."

...

The rank hypocrisy of Ghose, who himself availed of constitutional free speech guarantees by participating in the Occupy Philadelphia movement, stands vivdly illuminated. Apparently, open expression is fine as long as it happens to serve his own political proclivities.  Political positions in opposition to his own are to be silenced by any means necessary; blackmail, activism and thought policing are perfectly acceptable when it comes to obviating the WIEF student organizers' right to open expression. "

Rajiv's response: "This is why I am glad to see that Kartik and many others have posted their comments on Huffpost. This is how ideas spread, not through private whispering. Thanks to Kartik and others..."

Karthik further adds:

"It's an astonishing volte-face. The shrill Sepoys who relentlessly castigate Modi on allegations of human rights abuse, invariably respond with deafening silence to the Pakistani genocide in Bangladesh. In fact, some of them actually transform into David Duke-calibre Holocaust Deniers on that subject. One particularly nasty specimen is Sarmila Bose, who has crafted an entire "scholarly" career out of systematically minimizing the scale of Pakistan's atrocities. In a curious inversion of the usual Sepoy propensity to cite overblown atrocity-lit, Bose has actually deflated the well documented figures of three million murders and ten million displaced by the Pakistani army, to arrive at merely "thousands" of victims. 

... In Bose's case, the Hidden White Hand accidentally showed itself by clicking "Reply All" on a certain e-mail chain. The encouraging words of the Woodrow Wilson Institute's William B Milam, urging Bose to simply ignore those who questioned her credibility, were inadvertently sent to everyone who had been included on that chain... including her questioners! ..... 

Here is an article by Naheem Mohaiemen, a Bangladesh history scholar, which lays out a devastating critique of Bose's thesis. The debate continues, with Bose's response answered by a crippling rejoinder from Mohaiemen:

Hope the above references are useful."

March 9

An encounter with Jehovah's Witnesses
I just wanted to post a note about about my recent encounter with Jehovah's Witnesses. It was Saturday and while I had better things to do I started on fixing ...
...They started on the idea of "being saved". I asked, "saved from what"?
"Oh, don't you know, we are all born sinners", said the JW. I then asked why I was a sinner and the reply was exactly along the lines Rajiv Ji talks about - Adam/Eve and Original Sin, Virgin Birth blah blah blah. And therefore, he concluded that we must accept Jesus as our savior. I
gave him a small talk about my birth being divine and God being within myself and the notion of God realization etc. Then I asked him if he (the JW) would pay for my sin. He said No, but that Jesus would. I pointed out the fact that either he unwilling to do what JC would do and
therefore somewhat hypocritical, or expected another person to pay for his faults including any sin he commits. A blank stare ensued and by now they were a tad uncomfortable. Seeing his weakness I had to nuke now, so
I asked rather innocently "Does Jesus believe in the Original Sin"? He frantically searched his copy of the Bible and merely muttered, Umm, Jesus believed in the Old Testament ... and so must be... Was time for them to leave. [But I myself do not know if JC himself
believed in the original sin]...."

March 9
Universities in US & China are getting lessons on human values from
Universities in US & China are getting lessons on human values from the great epic - Ramayana ...

AHMEDABAD: Students at universities in China are getting lessons on human values from the great Hindu epic - Ramayana.

Wise sayings from Valmiki's text are being adapted by the universities teaching Hindi in China and are being made relevant to the current world situations. At least six leading universities in China including the prestigious Peking University, the Beijing Foreign Studies University as well as colleges in different parts of China are teaching Hindi, which has become a popular foreign language in China.

"We are taught verses from Ramayana as part of literature classes at the university," said Eric Huidram, a student-turned Chinese translator and interpreter from Manipur.

Several universities in the US have included reading the Ramayana as part of comparative humanities and literature sessions on Asia.

It was through the efforts of Chinese indologist Ji Xianlin that many Chinese learnt the language of Sanskrit and the epic Ramayana. Ji, who founded the Department of Eastern Languages at Peking University, translated Ramayana from the original Sanskrit to Chinese in poetry form. Ji's translated work of Ramayana and Mahabharata will be displayed at the culture park being planned at Kailash Mansarovar by India China Economic and Cultural Council (ICEC)..."



[Sandeep's 'Rediscovery of India' is among the very best, if not the best blog whose content if filled with original Indian thought]
March 9
Fwd: [TheBecoming] Fwd: How Wharton Scored a Huge Self-Goal by dis-i
JP shares: How Wharton Scored a Huge Self-Goal March 5, 2013 By  Sandeep Balakrishna

[We will create a separate webpage for the collection of Rajiv's links below and display it on the right of the blog]
March 11
My Wikipedia entry is obsolete, misleading

".... fix the Wikipedia entry on me.

• It gives too much importance to wendy doniger as though i have nothing useful or original of my own to say, and i am some sort of heckler bothering her.
• even in the context of doniger it does not lead the reader to my extensive articles at Sulekha (at least half a dozen large ones) on the whole freudian psychoanalysis issue.
• there is no mention of BI or BD- each even deserves its own page. There is abundant material available on these books at their respective web sites, and other places like the hitchhiker's guide.
• no mention of my YouTubes
• No mention of my writings on Huffington Post, FirstPost, Niti Central, Patheos, Beliefnet and lots of other places.

With all due respects may I point out that our folks often tend to suffer from:

• Paralysis by analysis: this means going on and on with planning, analyzing some very large scale project that becomes too unwieldy to ever happen, rather than DOING something manageable quickly which can be extended later.....

....specific examples of changes to my Wiki entry that I feel would be fair. Here are some that come shouting out:

• Most references given are NOT my work but the works of opponents being promoted, or completely irrelevant items. So delete references to Kurien, Campbell, Prothero, Wilberg, Hinnells, Block. Frankly I had no idea of such things until I saw Wiki. What a bunch of rubbish to define me in those terms.
• The Youtube seems to have been just added. But the direct Youtube site gives scattered and unorganized videos, often part 1 and part 2 of same item show up unrelated. Better is to have "Videos - Being Different" and "Videos - Breaking India"
• Beliefnet, Firstpost, Sulekha home pages for me should get added.
• http://beingdifferentbook.com/blogs/ also has many of my blogs
• http://beingdifferentbook.com/articles/ contains some excellent works by third parties on my ideas
• http://beingdifferentbook.com/downloads/ has several pdfs that give useful summaries, such as the first one in 8 pages
• http://beingdifferentbook.com/faqs/ has useful FAQs
• The hot link to my book Breaking India should be given: http://www.breakingindia.com/
• http://invadingthesacred.com/ is the link to a site on Invading the Sacred maintained by Ravi and friend
• Why only one sulekha article listed with hot link? There are a few dozen that should be individually listed. See them at:
• Speakingtree - http://www.speakingtree.in/rajivmalhotra/profile
• Each individual item in Sulekha one has to click and see if its my blog and if so, add it. (The have revised their presentation so many times and messed up so bad that I stopped writing there. But old writings are precious and must get salvaged.) Go to the list of many, many pages at: http://rivr.sulekha.com/rajiv-malhotra_225884
• Rediff has a home page with old articles I did many of which say things that were ahead of their time: http://www.rediff.com/news/malhotra.htm
• A precious old debate I had online with Vijay Prashad, head sepoy of FOIL. See home page: http://www.outlookindia.com/taghome3.aspx?tag=102635
• More debate: http://creative.sulekha.com/follow-up-on-manusmriti-to-my-article-in-outlook-india_135208_blog
• UChicago magazine (home of Doniger and Nussbaum) does a balanced interview with me: http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0412/features/index.shtml
• Even the links to Infinity Foundation's projects go to the wrong places. For instance, a project at Columbia has a link to Columbia's general home page which has nothing to do with us. it should go to the specific page at Infinityfoundation.com dealing with that project - see:
• http://www.infinityfoundation.com/col.htm
• http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/i_pr/i_pr_columbia_frameset.htm
• The Mandala site stopped being updated but was the single most popular source of research works on these subjects for a decade. it deserves a listing: http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/indic_mandala_frameset.htm
• The Global Renaissance Conference was the first large scale conf of 4 days done by us. The papers are available online and (still) in the process of being edited by volunteers for publication. The entire conference site is at: http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/s_pr/s_pr_GRC_frameset.htm
• Our HIST project (History of Indian Science and technology) has produced 8 pioneering volumes and is the ONLY such project on India. Has continued for 12 years. Why no mention of it. Pls include: http://www.indianscience.org/index.html

RMF Summary: Week of April 9 - 15, 2012

April 9

Should we offer 'mutual respect' to a 'bad' ideology Analogy: Suppose we offer a million dollars to some bad person, on the condition that he must kill himself. A naive criticism would be that we are giving money to a bad person. But a proper understanding would be different: In order to claim the money, he has to first kill himself, and then the dead person is simply unable to make any claim. So its a good offer to make. Similarly, the mutual caveat in 'mutual respect' must be understood properly. If accepted by the other side, it forces the demise of the exclusivity clause of that ideology - because the exclusivity clause compels them to regard all others as false religions and not worthy of respect. There is a domino effect if they accept the offer - without exclusivity the entire logic falls apart. So we are not 'giving away' respect to someone who does not deserve it. We are forcing their demise if they accept it, and we are forcing them to admit their arrogance if they cannot accept it. For many years, I have been asked in numerous talks: Why would you respect bin laden, hitler, etc? My answer in talks and writings has been consistent: Because such a person cannot respect others, he will not get our respect; the respect being offered demands reciprocity. It is not unconditional respect. The word 'mutual' is not extraneous; it makes all the difference. It was Swami Dayananda Saraswati's stoke of genius to offer Cardinal Ratzinger (the present Pope Benedictine) 'mutual respect' instead of 'tolerance' in the UN Millennium Summit of 2000. BD's chapter 1 explains what happened as a result. It gave swamiji the moral high ground and put the Vatican in a corner. It exposed their hypocrisy.... My reason for this post is that despite many attempts to explain this point as a strategic ploy, I sometimes get 'critiques' sent to me by those who just dont get it..... Anil responds: "Actually I used to think about Mutual Respect as Rajiv ji puts it but found it does not work in reality - the [evangelist] missionary respects the other pluralistic view but he expects respect for his view to convert that view in the same mutual understanding - so he says he respects the Hindu universality and its need not to convert anyone but please respect mine to convert you. This is Mutual Respect." Rajiv comments on the under-preparedness of the average debating Hindu and the tendency to underestimate the opponent's skill level: Mutual respect has to be explained deeper than mere talk. Such an evangelist posture is disrespect camouflaged as respect, just to fool Hindus who are unable to debate. I love taking on such persons in debate. Hindu leaders who cant do this run away, which has not helped, as it shows fear to the youth. Once you open the debate on mutual respect, be prepared to take it all the way into history centrism and its nasty implications. Be prepared to take that further into synthetic unity and the history of the West in that way of seeing things, and so forth. In other words, dont start a debate you have not had enough experience engaging in at many levels; otherwise you will deplete your arguments quickly and then make a fool of yourself. 99% of the Hindus involved in public representation are unschooled and inadequately read in the subject. They want quick visibility but are unqualified.  Pradip shares an experience in the U.S: "... we rented a church auditorium for celebration.The next week many church members came to know that we had moorties of our deities during the celebration there, were totally displeased, and decided not to rent the lace to us again.Thus unhappy, the church had a long talk over it with our organizer... [she was] saying to them that all gods are equal, so she couldn't comprehend the  unhappiness of the church members.The church leader told her if she believed all gods are same, then, she should convert to christianity and join his church.She was flummoxed. ... Rajiv comment: "If all gods are same, then you must convert to christianity": This is simply an illogical conclusion. Never fear such fools - just call out their foolishness. btw: I dont agree that all deities are the same - they refer to distinct intelligences that comprise the Supreme Being. Sort of like departments of a complex entity, though this analogy is reductionist. Each does give access to the entirety, so they are not isolated, separated; but they are distinct accesses points. The notion of ishta-devata is wonderful, giving you "equal value" with "distinct access"." Sreekumar adds: ""Ekam sat vipra bahudavadanti". Different people approach or access the absolute (Ekam, not one but absolute), differently. As you wrote, there are different access points. Rajiv comment: There are different access points but not all of them lead to the same place. Contrary to the popular saying, not all rivers lead to the ocean: some rivers end up in the Dead Sea. But I can still respect the other person (who is heading towards the dead sea) despite knowing that his ideology is misleading him - as long as it is his private life only, and does not effect me." anon asks: "I often wonder how debate might be useful when engaging with individuals who are clearly deficient in rationality? In this particular case it seems like a classic case of as rajiv pointed out -- "foolishness" plain and simple. Would a meaningful dialog be possible in such a case? It would be more beneficial for communities to rally, raise funds and build establishments of reasonable sizes (proportional to size of funds raised)?...." Rajiv comment: These are not mutually exclusive activities. Both are needed because the pursuit of one does not exempt you from addressing the other. ... given our dharma's sociopolitical condition today .... we cannot run away from all other people. We cannot refuse to work with others in our professions and isolate our kids from others' influence (unless you want to join the Amish community). So the issue of how to engage others in mainstream forums (schools, universities, media talk shows, public policy forums, etc.) does not go away. .....Bottom line: The above is an emotional, not rational approach, hence not practical. It WILL get you a big applause at the next gathering of Hindu activists."  Sameer asks: "Consider an ideology which you regard as wrong and misguided, but which does "respect" your own ideology. Can you "respect" that other ideology? If you freely express your belief that they are wrong, would you still be respecting them? Rajiv comment: This is a great question: Can I have mutual respect for someone who I know to be wrong? Is the other person's 'knowledge of truth' a necessary condition for him to be respected? First of all, our ancestors practiced purva paksha even with opponents who they knew to be wrong. If they had refused to engage in respectful debate with those they considered ideologically flawed, there would not have been any debates at all. They would have been of the same caliber as the tribal warriors of the Middle East desert. Respectful debate does not mean I must agree with you. I can argue against you, and yet we can respect each other for having different worldviews. Respecting the other does NOT mean I accept his faith for myself. I practice my faith without imposing upon him and he must practice his faith while respecting me. Secondly, lets separate PRIVATE belief in ideology from PUBLIC conduct. Whatever private ideology you subscribe to, I can still respect you and your right to hold that ideology. It is your own private life ... Reciprocity means that you do not attempt to interfere with my private ideology, hence you cannot try to convert me. My attack is on those with exclusivity claims. I cannot be guilty of having my own ideological exclusivity claims which all others must accept in order to deserve my respect."  Koti comments: "Good analogy. Pope can not respect Hinduism and remain a Pope. That is blasphemy. Swami Dayananda can respect Christianity and can still not violate Hinduism. Pope can only respect Swami as individual and with hope that he will embrace (not just respect) Christianity and reject Hinduism."  April 9 Exclusivism eloquently demonstrated in 5 minutes Surya posts: Exclusivism eloquently demonstrated in 5 minutes. David Platt on Universalism, Rob Bell, Love Wins, Heaven and Hell  (youtube video) April 10  Re: in India Greek philosophers Surya responds to an earlier post from last week:... Maria Wirth wrote: " ... interview with the Woodstock School Principal Dr. Long about education in the Pioneer. He talks about the philosophical... Thanks for bringing up this important issue to the forum.  I will proceed with one very reasonable assumption that Long is a Christian. I will start with a discussion of the method argumentation required here. Recently, when I went to buy a car, the eager dealer walked me through the aisles to show his large inventory.  He paused for a moment next to two cars and asked, "Which do you want to buy?  The red car? Or the blue car?" As a smart buyer, I may say neither and dodge being forced into buying one of those two cars. As a smarter buyer, I would say that this is not an EITHER-OR situation.  A car is a bundle of features.  I do not have to pick between two bundles posed to me.  If I am smart, I can put together the right bundle that suits me. Someone asked me recently whether I am a Conservative or a Liberal.   I explained that this is a poorly posed choice.  What if I am a financial conservative but a social liberal?  Why do you  have to bundle everything conservative into one artificial bundle and everything liberal into another artificial bundle and then force the issue on me as an "either or" situation? Understanding this argument is very important if we have to stop artificially bundled concepts being imported into India under the guise of religion and bring along culturally subversive behaviors and attitudes into the country that way.  Suddenly, these culturally subversive ideas are legitimized by bundling. To strike down all philosophical thought of Indian origin blindly and trying to supplant it with Western philosophical thought just because it came artificially bundled with Christianity is anti -cultural, and anti-national behavior.  The above argument offered by a Christian teacher in India,  quoted above, is exactly that: anti-cultural and anti-national.  You are forcing Indians to denounce Indians ideas or things and replace them with Western ideas or things just because they come bundled with Christianity. Following Christianity in India does not have to mean that you jettison everything Indian and replace it with what comes bundled with Christianity imported from West.  If it meant that, then Christianity is anti-cultural and anti-national. Now, the alert BD reader quickly raises an objection that this argument will lead to encouraging inculturation.  Indeed.  We need to consider both arguments together. The well-laid argument then is a two-sided coin.  Essence of this coin is "DO NOT make artificial or synthetic bundles". Artificial bundling is disingenuous.  It can slip into culturally subversive attitudes and behaviors.  Artificial bundling is synthetic unity. ....In a recent article on this forum, Ram wrote that Christianity should be stripped down to its own contributions.  He is right on.   He is saying NO to synthetic bundles. " April 10 A stellar example of Western Universalism Dear all, I've been familiar with the writings of Lawrence Auster (a Conservative traditionalist Catholic) for quite some time. He is an extremely erudite and... April 10 NY Times - Digesting Yoga into Islam   Nikudi posts: Here is an article from today's NY Times about Yoga and Islam. Yoga's Hindu roots are being clearly stripped out in order to make it "acceptable" to Muslims. The Imam who advocates such approach clearly says that if the Sanskrit benedictions are left out, Yoga can be more appealing to Muslims...." Bhattacharya posts: "Aside from its content, the tone of the article is notable for promoting digestion. Read this passage, invoking an undefined 'American conception' of yoga: "For many immersed in a culture where vinyasa yoga is more readily associated with a New York Sports Club than a Hindu temple, the origin matters little. And for some of the devout living here, the American conception has overridden the beliefs with which they were raised." .... reminded me of an older NYTimes article, in which Yoga digestion was discussed in a similar, matter-of-fact manner, almost a 'how-to guide' for Yoga digestion. I reproduce the earlier article below. It's rife with disturbing examples of Yoga digestion, but pay special attention to the writer's tone. And look for the section describing how Shal-OM replaces Om, very similar to the line I quoted from the more recent piece. Oddly, it seems NYTimes likes to print this type of article every few months or so: ....  " TO 'om' or not to 'om': For those who teach yoga in schools, that is a question that arises with regularity.The little syllable, often intoned by yoga students at the beginning and end of class, signifies different things to different people. But with its spiritual connotations, it is a potential tripwire for school administrators and parents, along with 'namaste' and other Sanskrit words, chanting and hands in the prayer position...."  Ravi: Of the many comments this article has (111 & counting), one stood out for me as a classic example of Western/abrahaimc Universalist exclusivist attitude: "...As an observant Jew I am not comfortable performing sun salutations or invoking the names of Hindu deities any more than I would kneel in a church. But take out the references to hinduism & I can participate. Religion isn't a buffet table for people to sample. For many people of faith seemingly innocuous practices from other cultures do conflict with their beliefs. I applaud the yoga instructors in this article for finding ways to accommodate their students. " So it appears that Religion" is'nt a buffet table, meaning Abrahamic ones, but "cultures" are, so that the item called "yoga" can be evaluated by itself, & reshaped willy nilly.... Renu: The problem is that majority of us Hindus were brought up with the idea of sharing knowledge freely as that keeps it going and getting better. It is in recent years of Patent and copyright laws, that are causing a lot of distress; these ignorant persons are super hungry to own and make money; want to own even trees, plants and things given by Bhagavaan. So there has to be a way to stop thru an international law any such digestion. ....what we need is a mass movement towards an understanding among majority of people that they need to take their lives in their own hands not leave to Churches who go around converting and Jihaading in the name of god/allah or what ever. Pradip: The comment section following the article has several interesting comments. one that I liked is: "yoga, when practised regularly, will eventually make you revolt against monotheist intolerance, and thus endanger your religion. buyers beware." Poonam: Personally, after supporting that yoga is for everyone & not just Hindus, & that it has nothing to do with Hinduism, I have, as I grew older, & more knowledgable & wiser, have come to understand that Yoga IS A FORM OF HINDU WORSHIP. It is the process of preparing the body, the consciousness & the Atma of a Hindu to move on to the path of Nirvan/Moksh/or returning to Parabrahm. How can anyone do the yoga without the Sanskrit chants? each chant of the Yog is designed to generate the vibes & sounds that The chanting of the word jesus or mohammad or yaweh or allah does not produce the same effect. The chants practiced in Yoga are different from those that are used in the pooja pranali & practice. The vibrations & the effects of the different sounds is a "scientifically measurable" entity. The moden day scientists are committing piracy by not testing it & then cutting it off from the roots. Rajiv comment: Please read in BD my critique of Baba Ramdev for his stand that Aum can be replaced by Allah, Amen, etc. BD has a lot on the non-translatability of mantras as vibrations, each with a distinct effect beyond its mental/conceptual meaning. Virender: Instead of complaining that others are taking over YOGA, How many of us have taken concrete steps to claim that YOGA is Hindu spiritual and physical practice ? How many of us educated our Kids, friends or made public efforts to let world know YOGA is ours. It remind me of my mother who used to say it's the weak who complain not the strong ones. Let's be "Khstryias" and start campaigns worldwide [ Does't matter how small or where] to educate the world of Hindu assets including Yoga. Otherwise lets thanks west/Muslim for making Yoga popular on world platform. Krishna: Asanas can be considered as exercises. yoga can be taken as breathing exercise. As long as  physically,emotionally and mentally if yoga helps one irrespective of religion can freely practice it. When Muslims have so much of resistance to use Sanskrit words,I don't know how so many Hindus and particularly Bollywood people use the word Inshallah so frequently. Is it for fashion or they mean God or Bhagwan in general or do they actually mean Allah. bluecupid shares: Originally from Mumbai, this Muslim-Canadian yoga teacher writes her perspective on Yoga, Islam and identity; April 11 Digestion of Vedic mantras Gross misappropriation and digestion of vedic mantras http://www.churchofindia.org/maniiyer.htm... April 11 The Intolerance of Tolerance Surya posts: In his article on Huffington post titled "Tolerance Isn't Good Enough: The Need for Mutual Respect In Interfaith Relations", Rajivji wrote: Begin Quote: ..... In BD, Rajivji explains how the notion of tolerance is not free of intolerance and why it should  pave way for mutual respect.   There are others who say the same thing with the opposite intent.  There are cases where some come out and admit that they cannot even stand tolerance.  Their intolerance is so steeped that they find tolerance itself intolerable.   See the video below: (would like to see good responses to this video) The intolerance of Tolerance, Don Carson April 12 The desi criteria for success: Knighthood for Dr. Sudhir Parikh Arjunshakti responds: "...These indians still live in the british raj even if they are getting knighted in some cheap beach in malta" Rajiv comment: I know other Indians in New Jersey who are bloating over being "knighted by Malta" or some other Church subsidiary with a dark history. The new "knights" now are a bunch of brown dunces who want to buy (with newly made money) a seat at the white man's table. Its that simple, an inferiority complex. The Indian media, pop culture and elite circles in the metros are glamorizing this. Thats the trend." Surya: The West has for long mastered the value of soft power. The East has for long fallen for it. The use of gun salute to indicate relative power and respect during the colonial rule in India is a well known tactic. Rulers competed with each by offering favors and ceding powers to get more guns to salute them.  Difference anxiety from below (explained in BD, pages 25-36) is formalized and entrenched in the society with this tactic; all rulers tacitly conceded that the 101 gun salute to the British Emperor makes the Emperor far superior to them since they were entitled to the 21 or fewer gun salute. Knighthood conferred is similar. Similarity is that the one conferring the "status" is offering a valueless trinket or token in return for taking something valuable at the expense of the one conferred with the "status"..." Karthik adds: "The thing to recognize is that Western soft power is completely dependent on the global acceptance of Western universalism as a foundation. This is why Rajiv (and the rest of us) will face massive opposition in our task of challenging Western universalism: the effect is to knock over the pedestal and undermine the entire edifice of Western soft power. This represents a much deeper threat to Western hegemony, at all levels, than simply opposing missionary activity etc...." April 13 UTurn prevention: Is there a Hindu equivalent of baptism? Saxena asks:  Just finished watching the Pondy event vids. It would be interesting to find out from the German U-turner (and others) what their course of action would have been if the Aurobindo Ashram (and other dharmic traditional schools) required their equivalent of baptism in order to allow her to participate in their social life the way the church does..... Rajiv comment: The strategy in BD is to use difference to create the desired effect. Example: Negate things like Nicene Creed without which they cannot be Christian - the German lady confirms when I ask her whether she believes in Nicene Creed. Using difference, undermine that which allows the DNA of the predator to function. For yoga based organizations like Sri Aurobindo, this means explaining that history centrism is a grand nama-rupa which blocks progress in yoga. So Nicene Creed as nama-rupa runs counter to the teachings of Sri A. This would achieve your goal to renounce "everything that goes contrary". Use chapter 2 to show that history centrism runs counter to Sri A's Integral Yoga. Then show that Nicene Creed is the worst kind of history centrism. This forces the choice between mutually contradictory ideological positions. Gurus must learn this when teaching westerners.   April 14 Virginia Tech & Oikos University Massacres: Difference Anxiety the Root Cause? Subra shares a blog post: "An examination of the April 2007 Virginia Tech massacre and the April 2012 Oikos university shootings shows disturbing commonalities that suggest a probable root cause of 'Difference Anxiety' ... ... Chapter 1: "Difference: Anxiety or Mutual Respect" that among other things, notes that rather than ignoring or trying to erase differences, they must be recognized and respected. The above two examples indicate that failing to respect differences can result in DA that may not be effectively manageable via prescription medication or "just praying", and can in the worst case, lead to violent problems in the society."   April 14 Western digestion of ideas and philosophy. Chocka asks: Is this one form of 'digestion'?   Rajiv comment: I would say so. He translates and maps many nontranslatables into common words in english. This means we no longer need to refer to Brahma, Vishnu, Maya, etc as these are replaced by simple ideas in popular culture. This type of writing and speaking is fashionable now and the trend is getting worse. If you critique this, they will come back with arguments like: truth is one; ultimate reality is one; etc. This is false logic I have critiqued many times - I call it Moron Smriti. It is an App that has been downloaded to nearly all Indians.

RMF Summary: Week of February 15 - 21, 2013

February 16
Sunday 11am on MSNBC television panel
I will be on the Melissa Harris Show at 11 am (Eastern Standard Time) on MSBNC. The themes are: American minorities, the context in Black History month....

February 18 (continuing discussion from previous week)

Re: Are all religions really the same according to Vedas?
Raghu responds to Surya (pls see last week's post):

I like your response. However, I think we also have to look at minds that are conditioned by the teaching and the social constructs that the teaching implies.

A Hindu mind seems to have two characteristics that are important in this context. One the ability to accept different ways, and the other to act from a sense of generosity. These are civilization-ally more advanced than mono cultures of thought and hierarchical political control. Over the years, it has turned into a passivity. This passivity was leveraged to great advantage by Gandhiji, but it has also led to a glorification of non violence. The non violence of Gandhiji was very powerful, it s not afraid of confrontation or of being violated.

When such a mind confronts the aggressive and predatory mind, it fails to value itself. Rajivji's analysis of difference anxiety is spot on. In my behavioural work self-hate of being Indian reveals itself often..."

Thatte responds:
".......why the tendency of  all religions are same  seems  to  pervade amongst a number of people - Hindus and non-Hindus..

In my analytical model for a religion, (and by the way, this is applicable to all religions) the outer layer is comprised of rites, rituals, festivals and practices. ...The next layer is comprised of values. Values dictate how one lives in a society. Since most  religions claim to promote harmony in the society  the values tend to be very similar.

For example, the key values of Hinduism are:

1.      Truth                           (Satyam)

2.      Purity                           (Satva Shuddhi)

3.      Self- Control                (Brahmacharya)

4.      Non-Violence              (Ahimsa)

5.      Charity                         (Danam)

6.      Forgiveness                 (Kshama)

7.      Detachment                (Vairagya)

Different religions may emphasize certain values more than others.  But, by and large these values are professed by all religions. This is where most people stop and take a position that all religions are  same...."

 
Surya responds:
"The tiger and deer metaphor comes to mind. It is the nature of tiger to be predatory. Deer is better off understanding this and behaving accordingly..."

February 18
Excellent critique of Romila Thapar
Venkat posts: ...Wagish Shukla ... details how Romila Thapar relies on translations of Sanskrit texts and distorts the meanings to suit her line of thinking.

February 19
Evangelical Christian group helps sue California school over yoga
Ravi shares a link: 
http://www.guardian

.co.uk/world/2013/jan/10/christian-parents-sue-california-school-yoga...

Karthik responds:
"A highly relevant passage from the article:

Ann Gleig, the editor of Religious Studies Review and assistant professor of religious studies at the University of Central Florida, said in an email that two groups have continually asserted that yoga is inherently religious evangelical Christians, and some Hindus who want to preserve the practice's religious influences.

"So both of these groups, which have very different agendas, ironically support each other in an historically flawed construction of yoga as an essential unchanging religious practice that is the 'property' of Hinduism," Gleig said.

{It is Gleig's analysis that is flawed by essentialization. She considers the Christian category of "religion" to be equivalent to, and interchangeable with, Hindu traditional utilization of  yoga as a "religious" practice. In Hindu spiritual traditions, yoga is one of many techniques by which the truth of man's ultimate unity with the Supreme can be verified, empirically, at a personal level. Christian religion does not allow for man to unite with the Supreme, and only permits communion with the Supreme through specific intermediaries and institutions. Hence, any technique which may verify an idea inherently blasphemous within Christianity (direct personal experience of unity between man and the Supreme) does, in fact, stand in direct opposition to Christianity. Yoga may not be anybody's "property" but it can never, ever be practiced by religious Christians without blaspheming the very foundations of their religion, i.e. the Nicene Creed.

Gleig's canard that a religious practice must be "unchanging" in order to remain the "property" of a particular religion, is another example of her flawed understanding. Hinduism is not history-centric, as Abrahamic religions are. The wealth of our knowledge system isn't static, it's always evolving; but for all that, it remains our own, and the credit isn't up for grabs.}

Andrea Jain, assistant professor of religious studies at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis said that the forms of yoga commonly practiced in the US are the result of the mix of colonial India and euro-American physical culture.

"In fact, postural yoga has been shown to be a successor of fitness methods that were already common in parts of Europe and the United States before postural yoga was introduced," Jain said. "So we could think of postural yoga as a 20th century product, the aims of which include all sorts of modern conceptions of physical fitness, stress reduction, beauty and well-being, these things were not present in pre-colonial traditions of yoga at all."

{According to this Andrea Jain, "conceptions" of physical fitness, stress reduction, beauty and well-being were completely absent from pre-colonial India, and hence could not have played any role in inspiring people to practice yoga in pre-colonial Hinduism. Instead, because these "aims" existed only among people of colonial India, Europe and the United States... ITSELF a dubious and highly problematic claim... then any technique applied to fulfill such "aims", no matter what its origins, belongs only to those who experience it in pursuit of those "aims", and not to those who originated it.

....

These postural forms of yoga include Ashtanga yoga, which was introduced in the early 20th century.

"Unless we want to argue that contemporary American culture and its valorization of physical fitness, beauty and health, modern conceptions of those things are religious values, then we really can't identify yoga as religious," Jain said. "We certainly can't identify it as essentially Hindu."

{Andrea Jain casually transfers attributes from the subject of her argument (Americans steeped in a culture that valorizes fitness, etc.) to the object of her argument (Yoga itself). Is it her faint hope that no one will notice this rather sloppy and intellectually dishonest sleight-of-hand? 

If I use a fountain pen, not to write but to stab people to death... is it now no longer a writing instrument? Is Louis Waterman (the inventor) now a weapon-maker? Or is Louis Waterman to be deprived of all credit for inventing the fountain pen at all?...

As a child in India I would watch Mickey Mouse cartoons, and "identify" with the character Mickey Mouse in terms of other, pre-existing "mouse" representations in my own culture... such as the more familiar Mouse from the Panchatantra fable, who freed the pigeons from the hunter's net out of cleverness, loyalty and compassion. ... Does this mean that Mickey Mouse is no longer quintessentially American but Indian? Does MY experience (as the "subject" experiencing Mickey Mouse) count for more in defining what Mickey Mouse is, than Mickey's (the "object"s) intrinsic origins? }

 

Manas posts:

"Ann Gleig, one of the academics quoted in that piece is associated with a group called, "Modern Yoga Research" which includes Mark Singleton, one of the primary exponents of the not-Hindu-but-is-Euro-American-Christian "postural"-yoga thesis. Singleton's name has previously come up in this forum. Singleton is also associated with a notorious Hardvard academic's sidekick and this "modern yoga research" group has been endorsed by this sidekick in the e-list he runs. In a recent AAR conference, Singleton presented a paper titled, "Christian Influences in the Development of Modern Yoga". A search in this forum archives will provide more information on these dangerous nexuses and their agendas."

Rajiv comment: I agree fully. I wish more persons were informed as the person who posted this. We have too much uninformed opinion and forwarding the same stuff to look important - that is counter productive.

I have known of Singleton's work for many years which only recently started becoming public this way. Too many Hindus continue to support such works. The co-editor of his forthcoming book infiltrated Vivekanandra Kendra's yoga camp, took lots of notes and recordings which her web site proudly says will be used to expose yoga gurus. The very same folks who find my works "too controversial" to promote and claim they dont have funds to support it either, line up in awe when they welcome such visitors and scholars. The decadence within Hindu leadership is amazing. These are termites who have caused the decay. Because I point this out openly in order to warn others from joining such bandwagons, I am branded.

 

Koenraad Elst responds to Karthik:

Recap for comment 1: "....So both of these groups, which have very different agendas, ironically support each other in an historically flawed construction of yoga as an essential unchanging religious practice that is the 'property' of Hinduism," Gleig said.

  ... In Hindu spiritual traditions, yoga is one of many techniques by which the truth of man's ultimate unity with the Supreme can be verified, empirically, at a personal level."

Patanjala Yoga Sutra, known till Shankara as a branch of Sankhya or simply as Patanjala Darshana, defines yoga in an atheistic way. "Yoga is the stopping of the motions of the mind" is a purely technical definition. The next verse, "Then the seer rests in himself", defines the goal of yoga as "isolation" (kaivalya), i.e. of consciousness (purusha) from its objects (sensory perceptions, desires, memories, intellection, all belonging to the less or more rarefied reaches of nature/prakrti). In both phrases, there is no God in the picture, He has nothing at all to do with the goal of yoga.

Patanjali makes a practical concession to the believers among his readers by saying that "devotion to God" is one of the preparatory stages of yoga. He defines God/Ishvara exactly like radically atheist Jains define their liberated
souls, namely as a desireless purusha; so it remains highly uncertain that "God" as currently understood is meant. At any rate, he refuses to make this special purusha somehow the goal of his yoga. Yoga does not revolve around an external being called God, but is purely a matter of relating to yourself, viz. totally sinking into yourself and forgetting about the world and the "tentacles" of consciousness into it.

When modern Hindus speak about yoga (and they speak about it a lot but practise it very little), they have a distorted view of it, inflected by what has been
the dominant stream in Hinduism for centuries, viz. theistic bhakti (devotion). "Unity with God", whatever that may mean, is a concept from bhakti/sufism and also adopted by some writers on Christian mysticism. But it is completely absent in historical yoga as defined by Patanjali.

Yoga is very much part of Hindu civilization, but is not the property of contemporary God-centered Hindus.

I am currently finishing a booklet for the greater public on the external enemies of Hinduism. It will make me very popular among Hindus. But next, I want to write a similar booklet about the internal enemies of Hinduism, or is other words: what is wrong with the Hindus... it will certainly make me many enemies among Hindus. They don't like a Westerner criticizing them, though I have most of it from Hindus themselves. At any rate, if Hindus don't make a systematic diagnosis of the problem, someone else has to do it. And the current (sentimenal and confused) Hindu bhakti notion of "God" is certainly a big part of the problem.

Recap for comment 2: " ... Andrea Jain, assistant professor of religious studies at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis said that the forms of yoga
commonly practiced in the US are the result of the mix of colonial India and euro-American physical culture.:
> "In fact, postural yoga has been shown to be a successor of fitness methods that were already common in parts of Europe and the United States before postural yoga was introduced," Jain said. "So we could think of > postural yoga as a 20th century product, the aims of which include all sorts of modern conceptions of physical fitness, stress reduction, beauty and well-being, these things were not present in pre-colonial traditions of yoga at all."

This supposed expert Andrea Jain is simply parrotting a very recent theory. She is plainly wrong, for yoga in the sense of meditation is very ancient, and was given a synthesis (of pre-existing views) by Patanjali. As for postural yoga, it dates back at least to the Nath yogis, who started in maybe 1100 AD, before Muslim rule in the Ganga plain, when the British were nowhere in the picture and America as a state didn't even exist yet.

Unlike Patanjala Yoga (meditation) the more recent postural Hatha Yoga is indeed directed to relaxation and fitness. Hatha Yoga classics promise you a lustrous body and concomitant success with the opposite sex -- not quite the goal of Patanjala Yoga, but very much the goal of Madonna and millions of other American yoga practitioners. But whatever may be the worth of that, Indians invented it themselves, long before British conceptions of fitness could (marginally) influence it."

tvikhanas also catches the falsehood on postural Yoga:
" This lie is now popping up in many places. Looks like this is the currently favored strategy to break up Asanas from the larger Hatha Yoga (and that in turn from Hinduism).

The overall story goes like this: Hatha Yoga Pradipa (HYP) is the founding text of Hatha Yoga and is 500 yrs old. HYP mentions only a dozen or so seated poses.
The rest and more advanced poses are recent invention. In fact, they were invented in 20th century under the influence of militarism & British physical culture. The pioneer of this was Krishnamacharya, the guru of BKS Iyengar, Pattabhi Jois and others. .... Ergo case established and we can reclaim what is really ours after putting it through due scientific process to clear it of all undesirable
cultural/religious/superstitious baggage.

We are going to hear a lot more about "Modern Yoga", "Postural Yoga". The story is of course garbage and it has any number of holes:

1.HYP is dated to 500 yrs based the usual fraudulent methods.

2. Sri Krishnamacharya himself credited a Yogi living in Himalayas for teaching him Yoga. (Incidentally, one of the sons of Sri Krishnamacharya, Desikachar seems to crave western approval & money. He and his son keep dishing out whatever nonsense western "yogis" want, like Yoga is not religious etc)

3. HYP itself acknowledges there more poses than the dozen or so it describes in detail. This is in line with Indian tradition where only the important points are given and rest left to the living tradition or pupil's effort. Quite
different from western patent driven approach where the goal is claim as much for oneself as possible.

4. Within Hatha Yoga asanas themselves are quite preparatory. The real deal is pranayama, bandhas etc. So it is stupid to expect HYP to devote all the space to a minor aspect.

5. Vedantins condemned the focus on body that Hatha Yogis fall into. Traditional sannyasins in orthodox mathas practice hatha yoga.

6. Ayurveda uses asanas in treatment for various disorders. Traditional dance poses are closely linked to some asanas.

So on and on.

This story seems have started with Mark Singleton's book Yoga Body. Singleton seems to be church funded. He is very well published in all the right places Oxford University Press etc (which probably are held directly or indirectly by the church as well). He teaches at St. John's College at New Mexico, a Christian institution. Take a look at his website (http://modernyogaresearch.org/people/dr-mark-singleton/), it's a real master piece of deception. A casual observer will think he is very sympathetic to
Yoga/India and not understand why we should be critical of his work..."   

Ram notes:
"....We won't accomplish much by circular debates within
this forum. We may educate (and frustrate) ourselves in the process and provide necessary ears and eyes for Rajivji, but members should be encouraged to individually bring open pressure on systemic forces bent on expropriating,
abusing, denigrating, or marginalizing the wisdom and achievements of India.

Since joining this forum and reading Rajivji's book "Being Different", I am encouraged to be more assertive in speaking up and defending what's mine!..." 

Srinath asks:
"What should Andrea Jain have said? A lot of Indians might offer up similar analyses in the hopes of diffusing criticism that Yoga is religious, which could serve to turn-off American Christians. Indians are usually very eager to enhance Western acceptance of India and Indian philosophies as we have been looked down upon by the West for so long, and perhaps water-down concepts to make them more acceptable..." 


February 19
Digesting the gurus
Rajiv posts: The ... Huffpost blog criticizes westerners who look for "eastern gurus". This type of rethinking is quite a phenomenon for a few decades now. They turn away from the source and replacing it with westerners as the new source. Note how the two authors are now the
gurus, with their own marketing programs. Note that all their spiritual leaders" are these uturned people - see list at the bottom of the blog where they are selling them. All this is justified using a quote from Ramana Maharshi. If the purpose is to be one's own guru, why are Ed and Deb selling their own products? It is just one kind of guru replacing another. Yet out folks go ga-ga when they see such people showing their "sympathy" for Hindu dharma. There is one thread someone on how exciting it is to see some harvard people studying kumbh mela. ...Amazing inferiority complex. Yet they love to organize events with fancy themes like "decolonizing Hindu Studies". Nothing really changes after participating in 20 years of hundreds of such events - because its fake and meant to impress.The tiger says that he loves the deer. The stupid deer takes it as a great compliment."

February 20 Dharmic perspective on Artificial consciousness Amol posts: What is the Dharmic perspective on 'whether machines can develop consciousness'. Have our philosophies answered these questions ? I am curious to know. Miguel Nicolelis is a leading neuroscientist working on brain machine interfaces and he says that "human consciousness (and if you believe in it, the soul) simply can't be replicated in silicon. That's because its most important features are the result of unpredictable, non-linear interactions amongst billions of cells..." February 20 My recent event at Princeton University This past Monday, I had a different kind of academic event for my book, "Being Different". This was a big success. Two Hindu student leaders, ... along with the dean of religious life, .... organized something with a different format than usual. .... it was not open to the general public ...One woman minister from the Presbyterian Church generated an interesting discussion with me. She appreciated many things but disagreed with my depiction of Christianity concerning its fear of "chaos" and obsession with "order". She cited some good counter examples. I responded by citing that Aristotle's Law of the Excluded Middle had become deeply embedded into Christianity ever since Augustine started what we know as "Christian theology". This law extols normative thinking and cannot deal with ambiguity, flux, uncertainty, etc. She agreed with the facts, but felt that this Greco-Roman takeover was not the "real Christianity". Then I mentioned my next point that western corporate institutions (the Roman Church being the first multinational) were mechanisms of power/control  and expansionism, and these were built on normative rules, policies, governance, etc. The whole notion of normative "commandments" from God and absolute "laws" imposed on peoples was the product of history centrism. This is very different than decentralized embodied knowing approaches in dharma, which the Christians persecuted in their own mystics. I did not expect her to get convinced, but I must say she was quite open and we had a healthy exchange. The purpose of such exchanges (as all debates) is to benefit and educate the audience who are watching. Hindu students need more events where their stance is resilient to being toppled easily. Too often we have leaders who either capitulate easily by hitting the "sameness" button in panic (once they feel cornered), or the opposite extreme when they resort to anger or chauvinistic proclamations. I don't think either extreme works. We need calm, informed positions that can be backed up with evidence. For young minds today the extreme/unintellectual approaches are a good way to turn off people. We need serious responses that make sense. This capability comes from long-term research and debating experience, something too many of our folks want to bypass by taking shortcuts... .....some years back one top caliber MA graduate of the same seminary worked for me as a research intern on a full-time basis. This man was simply brilliant, and also open minded. ....He helped my work a great deal, especially in anticipating and responding to issues raised by Christians. Because we had frequent brainstorm sessions to churn on serious Hindu/Christian differences, he also started to rethink what he had been taught in the seminary. By the end of his year long internship with me, he told me that he had changed his career plans. He would no longer pursue the career of a church minister or theologian. .....After hearing this, she said that she might also be heading in the same direction herself, as my previous intern. So I will be evaluating her as a candidate to help my work. ... I want the other party to be candid and able to argue against my positions, because that churning is precisely what strengthens my final work. Whether the other party changes or not is unimportant to me. If they can help improve my work, that's what I appreciate. February 20 Coexistence with India - A Dawn Blog Gopal shares: Part 1:  Coexistence with India-1 Part 2:  Coexistence with the world Part 3:  Coexistence with India-2 February 21 The history of India is a history of colonialism: The Telegraph Appearing today in the UK, The Telegraph .... another one of those periodic articles designed to subtly reinforce colonial history and shape the opinions of the upcoming generation. I posted the comment below, as a first line of defense and to promote Rajiv's work. "oh dear, yet another of these articles which tries to build on a fabricated idea of Indian history in a sweeping way. I wonder how qualified the author of this article really is.  Some brief thoughts: 1) The Aryan Invasion Theory has been discredited - it has no basis!  Importantly this was an imported idea, this supposed invasion finds no mention within classical Indian history or within its own texts, it was used primarily to justify British plunder and rule. The Sanskrit term "Arya" denotes a human characteristic: noble, righteous etc....The term was later hijacked by European Indologists ... read Rajiv Malhotra " Breaking India, Western Interventions in Dalit and Dravidian Faultlines" or Rajiv Malhotra "Being Different". Here is someone who is an intellectual, historian and has knowledge of Sanskrit. If Charles Allen considers himself a serious scholar/researcher then I look forward to reading what he has to say in response to whats put forward in these two books, particularly the first one, which trash much of what he has said above. Indian history, as its studied now, begins with conquests, first the Moghuls and then the Europeans. This has given rise to a sorry generation of Indians, who have only been familiar with a history of conquest. This then gives space for such misleading article titles, such as the one Charles has used. Just consider ancient Indian contributions to the world (there are too many to mention) the concept of Zero, the 1-10 number system (referred to as Arabic, but in fact having an Indian origin, the Arabs being the middle men in the transition of knowledge from East to West) Language, the antiquity and unparalleled sophistication of Sanskrit (Panini), Medicine (Ayurveda), Integrated Spiritual/Mind/Body Sciences (Yoga). Indian academia has even till now struggled to throw of the Macualite shackles. ....glossing over history or worse still, fabricating it, just will not do! What Indians suffered here was akin to a holocaust in its magnitude of impact upon millions of people, except over a much longer period of time. Empire was all about Money, Control and Power hiding behind a veil of a "a necessary civilizing mission that the white man had to burden. "