This is the latest in our series of blogs dealing with the problem of digestion of Hinduism, which is quite different from both inclusivism and conversion to Abrahamic faiths. For example, in Kerala, the digestion of many aspects of Hinduism in general, and the festival of Onam, in particular have been covered in the last few days. This post is part of the discussion on Phil Goldberg's 'American Veda' has been shown to be an example of this problem. You can find Part-1 of the current discussion here. However, many Hindus live in denial for a variety of reasons. You can find the first set of posts in 2012 on Goldberg's American Veda: Analysis-2 that summarizes the first set of feedback on AV is here, and Analysis-1, is the very first summary, where AV was introduced to the forum, and shows Goldberg's attempted defence of his work.
There are several other dicussions of 'digestion' in the forum that can be accessed by clicking the keyword. Another external blog that was among the very first to comment on AV is the 'Digesting Veda blog'.
For those who want to get the full details on digestion of Hinduism, the links (total of 9 posts) provided above can be traversed in the following order:
1. Familiarize yourself with digestion activities in Kerala
2. Understand how digestion differs from both inclusivism and conversion
3. American Veda: start with the DigestingVeda blog
4. Then read Analysis-1 and Analysis-2
5. Read Part-1 and Part-2 of the current discussion on how American Veda is being supported by Hindu intellectuals (this one and the previous one)
6. Examine other discussions of digestion in the forum.
7. Don't stop there! Blog, discuss and educate others about this serious problem.
In Part-2 of our current discussion below, we examine the foreword and contents of Phil Goldberg's book 'American Veda' shared in this blog, and then see how Hindu intellectuals respond to it.
Inside the 'American Veda' - celebration of uturners
Subra shares: "...
Just the first 25 pages. We can see the shoddy scholarship, the Sanskrit
mistranslations being used to set the stage for digestion, the
reductionism, and the justification for digestion. Once this is done,
the remaining chapters celebrates one u-turner after another..."
Rajiv responds:
"Thanks for a good analysis. People who are in doubt should read the analysis:
It
is sad how many so-called supporters of our cause failed to understand
digestion at work, and went around proudly promoting the author. One
such man called me... to say: "What if we get him to state he is against the Aryan theory and against missionaries"?
I told this man he does not understand digestion. It is not about being
against missionaries, being against Aryan theory, and so forth.
If
a thief is taking your assets and digesting them by characterizing them
as belonging to others, does it help you because he praises your home,
expresses anger at some of your opponents, etc and other unrelated
things.
THE DIGESTER LOVES WHAT HE IS DIGESTING OTHERWISE HE WONT DIGEST IT. Why am I unable to get this across???
These
people among us are so STUPID and ignorant of our own history where we
have seen so many westerners support us, praise us, etc precisely to
dupe such IDIOTS. By now we ought to have no more fools but sadly we do.
I
am confident I can get a statement from Witzel opposing missionaries.
In fact he told me as such in person many years ago. But is that the
issue???
Can Hinduism be rescued by a bandwagon of fools, who are
easily swayed, lazy to read and understand issues, and in awe of
someone supporting them with glamor.
I hope people who have promoted his works will now do penance by promoting the link above with greater enthusiasm."
Aditya has a useful suggestion:
"... Does anyone want in this group want to write an "alternative" review for
AV on Amazon with a mention of "Being Different" as a book to read?
... for someone who has [read the book], this would be
one small step in the right direction."
css shares feedback from another person who disagreed that 'American Veda is digestion'. Please read the details in the forum. We only provide a gist of the arguments here:
1. He acknowledges the impact of Indian spirituality on America
2. He is not working on behalf of missionaries
3. He is not a practitioner in the Ken Wilber mould
4. Sloppy scholarship does not prove digestion
Rajiv comment: The above looks at DIRECT digestion only. Does not
understand the subtlety and multi layered processes at work. This
simplistic view is quiet common and hence I know my work is cut out for
me.
PhilG valorizes digesters - he himself does not have to be one. Every
digester has a coterie of cheerleaders supporting him, building is brand
value, legitimizing him. These cheerleaders might not be smart enough
to do the heavy thinking like a digester. They are his support team.
PhilG is such a cheerleader. Wilber and Keating are examples of top tier
digesters that PhilG celebrates. Good analogies are:
- most sepoys merely suck up to another thinker and hence build brand
credibility for a major thinker and are not capable of doing this
thinking themselves.
- People in Indian media are supporting X but not doing the nasty things
personally that X does. Yet we oppose such media persons. They are part
of the entourage of X that makes X important.
The problem .... is that he has not read Keating or Wilber,
for example...What he sees is PhilG praising these folks in ways that
seem reasonable. This is why incomplete knowledge is dangerous... I have separate
volumes in the pipeline on each of these men, along with many others.
The history of PhilG work with me... (Read the original and complete information in the forum).
...
5) When the book came out I was shocked. He took all my info on the uturners and made them look like heroes.
This inverts my thesis. He celebrates the process that I consider a
problem...
6) ...PG's book has a couple of pages on me. I am
depicted as someone who complains about uturns. He is dismissive of my
complaint. He includes me to be able to say "I have already factored
what Malhotra has to say". This is a tactic to dispose of a serious
issue without properly dealing with it.
....point on PG criticizing missionaries is simply
irrelevant. It further shows shallowness of understanding this theater.
...Witzel also opposes proselytizers, and so do most
western scholars we fight - Doniger, et al. By the standards of
sophisticated western scholars, proselytizing is crude, old fashion,
meant for extreme right wing christianity. These folks are liberal left
wing and hence anti-proselytizing.
....As I said
before: People who digest from the liberal left wing side are not
proselytizers or in support of them. For instance, Wilber is too
sophisticated to operate at the evangelism level. Nor are any of the
neuro-scientists and cognitive scientists appropriating Hindu and
Buddhist ideas and practices. ... understand
the complexity of liberal/leftist ideas of dharma and not try to collapse
all western approaches as proselytizing. (For one thing Jews are not
christians or proselytizers and yet many of them are digesters!)
It is sad that while I must invest years of rigor to get one book at a
time out, there are "supporters" who cant wait. .... On limited knowledge they align
themselves with the very same digesters I spend all my time
investigating."
Showing posts with label Phil Goldberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phil Goldberg. Show all posts
Why are Hindus Celebrating the Digestion of Hinduism? - Part 1
This post was triggered by promotion material for a Phil Goldberg talk that was found on twitter.
Phil Goldberg promotion in India
subra shared a link.
"...flyer promoted on twitter by a RSS representative
..promotes Mr. Goldberg's 'American Veda', which has been clearly exposed as an attempt to digest Hinduism in this very forum, and \summarized here in two parts: 1, and 2.
Rajiv comment: The sad fact is that most Hindu leaders continue to see digestion as something good happening to Hinduism. This is the next frontier of encounter we must have. It wont be easy as the "good cops" have done a great job winning over large numbers of confused Hindu leaders - political, spiritual, community, etc. I am glad yo brought this up. I am only one voice and others are needed to teach about digestion.
RS adds:
This discussion continues into Part-2.
Phil Goldberg promotion in India
subra shared a link.
"...flyer promoted on twitter by a RSS representative
..promotes Mr. Goldberg's 'American Veda', which has been clearly exposed as an attempt to digest Hinduism in this very forum, and \summarized here in two parts: 1, and 2.
Rajiv comment: The sad fact is that most Hindu leaders continue to see digestion as something good happening to Hinduism. This is the next frontier of encounter we must have. It wont be easy as the "good cops" have done a great job winning over large numbers of confused Hindu leaders - political, spiritual, community, etc. I am glad yo brought this up. I am only one voice and others are needed to teach about digestion.
Arora disagrees:
"Phil Goldberg is working in a really positive way and does not at all
come across as alarming to an american or western audience. Also, he
does not use words like "digestion", as his concern is simply to say
what's true without delving into the more controversial areas.
Rajiv comment: Above post does not understand meaning of digestion at all.
(1) Obviously a digestor speaks positively - did you not watch the thread on jesus digestion of dance, yoga, Zee TV video etc? All very positive views on dharma. Did you ever read on good cops?
(2) one not have to use the word "digestion: to be a digestor, any more than a crook does not have to say "crook" to be one.
What ignorance our folks have??? And these are supposed to be shining the light on others. "
Rajiv comment: Above post does not understand meaning of digestion at all.
(1) Obviously a digestor speaks positively - did you not watch the thread on jesus digestion of dance, yoga, Zee TV video etc? All very positive views on dharma. Did you ever read on good cops?
(2) one not have to use the word "digestion: to be a digestor, any more than a crook does not have to say "crook" to be one.
What ignorance our folks have??? And these are supposed to be shining the light on others. "
Maria adds:
"...Rajivji
himself had explained in the beingdifferent forum..:
"WHERE do I stand and gaze at them? How am I different? This is how I got started, and then begins the quest to understand one's difference in a way that is not causing anxiety.
Once difference is clearly anchored (with mutual respect), then the resistance becomes a possibility."
Therefore the NEED of having an indian/hindu or dharmic identity to use as our framework, or even shield for the kurushetra. The lack of this identity is what, IMHO is favoring the different digestión processes. All of us need to ask these questions to ourselves, and get answers that will conform that identity, which has to be strong, firm and self-secure. We have to know who we are and what is our role in this world as hindus/dharmics. "
"WHERE do I stand and gaze at them? How am I different? This is how I got started, and then begins the quest to understand one's difference in a way that is not causing anxiety.
Once difference is clearly anchored (with mutual respect), then the resistance becomes a possibility."
Therefore the NEED of having an indian/hindu or dharmic identity to use as our framework, or even shield for the kurushetra. The lack of this identity is what, IMHO is favoring the different digestión processes. All of us need to ask these questions to ourselves, and get answers that will conform that identity, which has to be strong, firm and self-secure. We have to know who we are and what is our role in this world as hindus/dharmics. "
Rajiv responds:
"An immensely big paradigm is shift required for digestion to be seen as
something harmful.
This is why most of our well meaning leaders have difficulty
understanding what digestion means and why its a problem.
Only a fraction of the members here understand it deeply, as it obvious
from many posts we find. You can imagine how uninformed most other
persons are.
A big issue is that Hindu leaders imagine they are well informed because
they hang around other "like minded people" and they reinforce each
other into a sense of false reassurance. Actually, these are "like
minded ignorant folks". Very few of them read enough. Most knowledge is
hearsay, old pravachans re-re-re-repeated in every event they go to. The
chelas are blind followers and afraid to point out when the emperor has
no clothes on.
This situation is also why the leaders dont think they need to actually
read what I write, because they are programmed to think that they have
learned everything worthwhile knowing. They assume some thesis I must be
writing about which is not at all my message in a given book. Also,
those who read one thing I wrote a long time ago assume that everything
I ever write must be a mere restatement of that. As if I am one-track in
my knowledge and interests just as they are.
I never came across a larger number of such ill-informed leaders on the
subject matter that they are leading in. So the task ahead is immense.
But rather than blaming them, its more productive to see them as simply
ignorant.
Notice how many awards, recognitions, grants are being given to scholars
whose work has not been adequately studied by the groups giving these
awards. They base their evaluation on personality and superficial things
like: he talks well and positively about us, does not show any
negativity, means well,better than many others, etc. Leaders are
supposed to be extremely well informed and at a much higher standard.
Sadly, not only the leaders, even their "experts" who brief them are
lazy and un-read...
something harmful.
This is why most of our well meaning leaders have difficulty
understanding what digestion means and why its a problem.
Only a fraction of the members here understand it deeply, as it obvious
from many posts we find. You can imagine how uninformed most other
persons are.
A big issue is that Hindu leaders imagine they are well informed because
they hang around other "like minded people" and they reinforce each
other into a sense of false reassurance. Actually, these are "like
minded ignorant folks". Very few of them read enough. Most knowledge is
hearsay, old pravachans re-re-re-repeated in every event they go to. The
chelas are blind followers and afraid to point out when the emperor has
no clothes on.
This situation is also why the leaders dont think they need to actually
read what I write, because they are programmed to think that they have
learned everything worthwhile knowing. They assume some thesis I must be
writing about which is not at all my message in a given book. Also,
those who read one thing I wrote a long time ago assume that everything
I ever write must be a mere restatement of that. As if I am one-track in
my knowledge and interests just as they are.
I never came across a larger number of such ill-informed leaders on the
subject matter that they are leading in. So the task ahead is immense.
But rather than blaming them, its more productive to see them as simply
ignorant.
Notice how many awards, recognitions, grants are being given to scholars
whose work has not been adequately studied by the groups giving these
awards. They base their evaluation on personality and superficial things
like: he talks well and positively about us, does not show any
negativity, means well,better than many others, etc. Leaders are
supposed to be extremely well informed and at a much higher standard.
Sadly, not only the leaders, even their "experts" who brief them are
lazy and un-read...
... They BETTER take the time and
get educated thoroughly. This includes anyone who makes decisions on who
and what to support with funds, patronage, etc. Most persons supporting
such lecture tours and scholars by digesters have NOT read enough about
the nature of the digestion problem. Contrast this with seminaries
where a minimum Masters Degree is given to any leader employed by a
Christian group. In other words, we the civilization of learning have
forgotten leadership training - not about slogans and parroting the
netas to get ahead."
RS adds:
"The inability of The RSS intelligentsia towards any kind of
intellectually rigorous and sophisticated reasoning in countering and
responding to leftist-missionary-Marxist propaganda has been nicely
unravelled and exposed in [Koenraad Elst's] book "Decolonising The Hindu Mind".
[picture link is Amazon.com]
I believe multiple
copies of BD/Vibhinnata need to be distributed to every RSS shakha along
the length and breadth of this country so the next generation of RSS
leadership acquires the conviction of RM's position, arguments and
stance on these matters."
Aditya adds:
"... an extremely important point that all Hindus should be aware of.
Digesters are not going to admit to digesting, not going to admit to
appropriating another culture, not going to admit to do anything "bad."
To them, there simply isn't a problem. In fact, digesters actually think
that not "digesting" (they won't use this term obviously) is a bad
thing since they believe they are promoting various principles found in
Hinduism.
If Hindus also do not think there is a problem, they are implicitly aiding the digesters.
This attitude of not thinking there is a problem must stop. The sooner, the better. Hindus need to stop allowing themselves be duped by all the "nice" and "polite" forms this digestion takes form and to recognize it for what it is.
Once Hindus start acknowledging the problem, then this itself is a lot of progress (though not enough). The next logical step is then to begin counter-efforts against the digestion and the digesters."
If Hindus also do not think there is a problem, they are implicitly aiding the digesters.
This attitude of not thinking there is a problem must stop. The sooner, the better. Hindus need to stop allowing themselves be duped by all the "nice" and "polite" forms this digestion takes form and to recognize it for what it is.
Once Hindus start acknowledging the problem, then this itself is a lot of progress (though not enough). The next logical step is then to begin counter-efforts against the digestion and the digesters."
[at this point, there are some comments from folks still utterly clueless about digestion. We'll leave those out since I'm blowing a couple of valves myself reading that]
Rajiv Malhotra who discovered and coined the word 'digestion' has the final word in this post.
"...My sense is that Indians are addicted to a dependency to "feel good"
about themselves in order to counteract some deep complex/self doubt.
Hence there is refusal to acknowledge a problem, because that disrupts
the "feel good" zone - almost like some intoxicant.
Such people not only fail to engage in constructive problem solving, they also are vulnerable to being easily manipulated by someone who knows how to push their "feel good" buttons. This is why a crowd throngs to hear a white scholar who will tell them great things about themselves. There is some sort of psychological condition here."
Such people not only fail to engage in constructive problem solving, they also are vulnerable to being easily manipulated by someone who knows how to push their "feel good" buttons. This is why a crowd throngs to hear a white scholar who will tell them great things about themselves. There is some sort of psychological condition here."
This discussion continues into Part-2.
What are the differences between Digestion and Conversion?
This is another very important post in the series on 'digestion. Here we examine the difference between the differences between digesting Hinduism versus converting Hindus to some Abrahamic religion.
November 2013
None in US will support Missionaries' conversions in India
Raghav started this thread by sharing a link and commenting:
The following was posted on an another e-group (Hindu Civilization). The good cop's assurance is what I see here. Mr. Goldberg might have overlooked Rajiv Ji's 'Breaking India'
Rajiv comment: The digester will repackage it (i.e. digest) into whatever western framework he subscribes to. This means there are as many varieties of digestion as there are varieties of predators..Specifically, the following is a partial list of western digesters:
1) Christians who will turn it into a part of christianity.
2) Hard material scientists turn it into secular science.
3) Post-modernists will show that it is generic and same in every culture.
4) Indians into Dalitstan/Dravidstan will show that whatever is good about it belonged to pre-Aryan people who are now the dalits/dravidians. Whatever is wrong with it was a contamination by later aryans turned into brahmins.
5) Islamic scholars will show it was always part of islam.
I am aghast at the trivial/superficial capacity of our so-called thought leaders. They have still not understood the following:
- the difference between hinduism haters and hinduism digesters (and some who combine both).
- the difference between several kinds of digesters, as illustrated above.
- the public postures of good cop and bad cop, which can hide the private agendas of hater or digester. I got calls and private emails from Hindus claiming victory that a digester touring India was speaking against missionaries, hence he is good for us!!!
November 2013
None in US will support Missionaries' conversions in India
Raghav started this thread by sharing a link and commenting:
The following was posted on an another e-group (Hindu Civilization). The good cop's assurance is what I see here. Mr. Goldberg might have overlooked Rajiv Ji's 'Breaking India'
'None in US will support Missionaries' conversion activities in India', says Philip Goldberg, author of American Veda
Rajiv comment: Jews are active digesters though they dont convert. Most Christian digesters are liberal, left wingers who hate missionaries. They reject Christianity and the digestion is into WESTERN SECULARISM/SCIENCE. Will I see the day when our folks do not think of every problematic person as christian missionary? On the one hand our folks are seriously troubled by the LEFT and yet they confuse them all as missionaries. If YOU read BI (forget whether Goldberg read it; did YOU read it?) you ought to notice the clear emphasis that leftwing and rightwing threats are DIFFERENT. If so, why is it a big deal for a leftwing to certify that he hates missionaries???
...All that someone has to do to get certified by morons is to decry missionaries.
To make it simple again: If you want to eat and digest food you do not reject it, do you? You LOVE it. Thats digestor mindset = love for Hinduism as food to be digested.
On the contrary, if you are a missionary you propagate REJECTING it. Can you please see these are OPPOSITES and yet each is harming us?
Another attempt: Missionary teaches repulsion for it. Digestor teaches love for it as food. The Christian Yoga promoters LOVE yoga, not hate it."
Rajiv comment: Jews are active digesters though they dont convert. Most Christian digesters are liberal, left wingers who hate missionaries. They reject Christianity and the digestion is into WESTERN SECULARISM/SCIENCE. Will I see the day when our folks do not think of every problematic person as christian missionary? On the one hand our folks are seriously troubled by the LEFT and yet they confuse them all as missionaries. If YOU read BI (forget whether Goldberg read it; did YOU read it?) you ought to notice the clear emphasis that leftwing and rightwing threats are DIFFERENT. If so, why is it a big deal for a leftwing to certify that he hates missionaries???
...All that someone has to do to get certified by morons is to decry missionaries.
To make it simple again: If you want to eat and digest food you do not reject it, do you? You LOVE it. Thats digestor mindset = love for Hinduism as food to be digested.
On the contrary, if you are a missionary you propagate REJECTING it. Can you please see these are OPPOSITES and yet each is harming us?
Another attempt: Missionary teaches repulsion for it. Digestor teaches love for it as food. The Christian Yoga promoters LOVE yoga, not hate it."
Neeraj asks:
"... when the digester is assimilating [Yoga],
he is branding it as Christian Yoga and not something neutral like
holistic yoga or secular yoga. If the digester is leftist, then his/her
hatred for christianity would push him to do so. Wouldn't it?
Rajiv comment: The digester will repackage it (i.e. digest) into whatever western framework he subscribes to. This means there are as many varieties of digestion as there are varieties of predators..Specifically, the following is a partial list of western digesters:
1) Christians who will turn it into a part of christianity.
2) Hard material scientists turn it into secular science.
3) Post-modernists will show that it is generic and same in every culture.
4) Indians into Dalitstan/Dravidstan will show that whatever is good about it belonged to pre-Aryan people who are now the dalits/dravidians. Whatever is wrong with it was a contamination by later aryans turned into brahmins.
5) Islamic scholars will show it was always part of islam.
I am aghast at the trivial/superficial capacity of our so-called thought leaders. They have still not understood the following:
- the difference between hinduism haters and hinduism digesters (and some who combine both).
- the difference between several kinds of digesters, as illustrated above.
- the public postures of good cop and bad cop, which can hide the private agendas of hater or digester. I got calls and private emails from Hindus claiming victory that a digester touring India was speaking against missionaries, hence he is good for us!!!
What a bunch of murukha (idiots).
"
Harish summarizes: "...digestion means "loving" and conversion means
"rejecting". I really appreciate Rajiv ji's clarity of thought."
Rajiv comment: "Digesting is deadly love. I love you in such a way that you turn into my property and lose your self existence. When I see a delicious dish I appreciate it and praise it. A stupid deer would go around saying "he loves me and invited me to his dinner table". What makes digestion far more dangerous is that it occurs over a long time. The digestion tract takes time to suck out the nutrients and expel what's waste. So fools being digested go around dancing with glee that the predator is being so nice to them."
Rajiv comment: "Digesting is deadly love. I love you in such a way that you turn into my property and lose your self existence. When I see a delicious dish I appreciate it and praise it. A stupid deer would go around saying "he loves me and invited me to his dinner table". What makes digestion far more dangerous is that it occurs over a long time. The digestion tract takes time to suck out the nutrients and expel what's waste. So fools being digested go around dancing with glee that the predator is being so nice to them."
Srinath makes an interesting observation:
"Aren't
both digestion and conversion observed in varying degrees across the WU
power spectrum... Missionaries reject, convert, and subjugate for the
most part but also engage in stealth digestion. Examples from pagan
Europe abound. The Scientists on the other hand while being "uber"
predators - also negate other sources of intelligence, suppress
independence with groupism, etc. For sure digestion is the killer app
because it can be resorted to with subterfuge when heavy handedness
isn't yielding the highest return. I see this mix of digest/convert
between let's say, Akbar and Aurangzeb. Neither of them were 100% in
one area but even within their lifetimes the pendulum swung slightly
this way or that depending on the political landscape."
Rajiv comment: "Yes. This is how I have explained these. Its about time our members got beyond the basics and started going further. We cannot afford to come back to ground zero every few weeks and repeat the same basics."
Rajiv comment: "Yes. This is how I have explained these. Its about time our members got beyond the basics and started going further. We cannot afford to come back to ground zero every few weeks and repeat the same basics."
American Veda: A Digestion of Hinduism - Part 2
This post covers Part-2 of the discussions on Phil Goldberg's 'American Veda.' Part-1 introduced his book, noted his initial defense of his book, his writings in various magazines and his video presentations to uncover the digestion of Hinduism into Western Universalism.
The discussions here started in September 2012 and progressed through December 2012. Phil uses some fancy footwork as he attempts a self-justification of "why his book does not include the word Hindu". The followup discussion totally exposes Phil's attempted appropriation of Hinduism as well as his weak attempts to cover up.
Original Christianity Original Yoga
Recently, I chanced upon and corresponded with this organization based in New Mexico (US) called "Original Christianity Original Yoga" (OCOY; website:.
In this post Surya noted:
"...digest Dharma. When they discuss essential cosmology, Dharmic ideas are digested and mapped onto Biblical traditions. No mention of Dharmic sources. In the end, this tells you why the Bible is retained. In the end, Ishannism is no different than Phil Goldberg. They differ in their means. They are different variations of Good-cop. No matter what flattering things they say about Dharma, in the end they are victimizing Dharma and protecting Christianity. The unstated goal is to stop tendencies of thinking Christians from crossing over to Dharma by offering a version of Christianity that comes in several shades and closeness to Dharma. At a more sinister level, it lowers the barriers and allows flow from Dharma to Jesus"
Science and Sanskrit tradition: A Western scholar'
A Westerner who is studying Sanskrit in India has sent me a paper that challenges the way Indians want to integrate modern science and Sanskrit. After a few...
The westerner here cites Golberg's work American Veda as one of his references.
Why the book American Veda is not called American Hinduism
Venkat posted:
"Phil Goldberg is the author of the recently published American Veda. He explains why the word Hindu is not there. Book reviews can be read
from this link: http://americanveda.com/
Below Sri Ashok Chowgule writes about his thoughts on the title of book and the next paragraph is Phil's explanation. Both conversations are extracted from the Abhinavagupta group (you have to be a member to access the messages). The topic is Debate on "White Hindu Converts"
Phil Goldberg's response:
Let me expand on your explanation about why my book was not called "American Hinduism" or "Hinduism in America" or a similar title. It's actually a bit more complicated than what I might have indicated earlier.
It was mainly to avoid confusing the reading public about the book's contents.
In the minds of Americans, the words Hinduism and Hindu are religious terms. Hinduism is the name of one of the five world's religions they've at least heard about, Hindu is the name of people who practice Hinduism, or are born into a family from that tradition. So, it was felt that people would think "Hinduism in America" was about the Indian diaspora, because they associate "Hindu" with "Indian." Also, the impact of Sanatana Dharma on America - which is the real subject of the book - has been secular as well as religious. It's impacted psychology, science, medicine, etc., and we felt
that point might get lost if we used a term people think of as religious in the title.
Plus, as you know, it has mainly been Vedanta philosophy and the methodologies of Yoga that were adopted in the West, not the normative Hinduism of India. Temple Hinduism is a relatively new phenomenon in the US, and its influence on the culture as a whole is in its early stages. We felt that having Hinduism in the title would narrow the scope of the book in people's minds, and they would think it's only about pujas, bhajans, and holiday celebrations.
Finally, as I say in the book's Introduction, "the most influential gurus and Yoga masters who came to the West made a big point of saying they were not preaching Hinduism. They were Hindus themselves, of course, but they asserted that all could utilize their teachings without deserting their own religions. Indeed, the ideas and practices they proffered did not have to be viewed religiously at all.." I remember thinking, Swami Vivekananda did not start the Hinduism Society, he started the Vedanta Society; Paramahansa Yogananda did not write Autobiography of a Hindu, and he called his organization the Self-Realization Fellowship, not the Hinduism Fellowship; and Maharish Mahesh Yogi did not call his TM practice Hindu Meditation.
In other
words, we felt we were being faithful to the decisions made by
the great teachers who brought the Vedic gifts to the US.
I hope that further clarifies the choice of titles. These decisions about language are very delicate, and I understand perfectly that many Hindus would prefer that we made a different decision. As I said in the book, I hope that the historic misconceptions are overcome soon so "future books
will use the term Hinduism freely, without fear of misleading the public."
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain this.
Phil"
Surya responds:
"Reminds me of something that friends from Bangalore told me happened in 1980s. A vendor close to their college was selling chapati and sabji for Rs. 2 each. Demand was lukewarm. The smart vendor recognized that students dressed, spoke, and craved for things with a Western motif. Vendor came out with a new product
called Frankie and priced it Rs. 15 each. Frankie was an instant success. Turns out Frankie was the same chapati rolled with sabji with a toothpick holding the roll together..."
Rajiv Malhotra responds:
"...Read carefully the points I listed in my prior post on this thread. I did not say the goat remains a goat but gets a new name given by the tiger. The goat does not remain a goat. Instead we have a pile of tiger shit and a stronger tiger. The goat is not there.
Before I select any instance of digestion as worthy, one of my criteria is to see if the entity got changed in some significant way that makes a difference. When western buddhists remove reincarnation to secularize it, its not the same thing with new ownership. When mantra is removed and replaced by some other word its a different vibration. When kerala ayurveda massage removes the requirement to chant mantra, its a change/distortion of the product.
... Many of our Hindu groups took up my complaint which I spoke about since the 1990s about yoga's appropriation; but they made making loud noises only that the origin was not being acknowledged. But none of these seem to have understood what difference that makes to the new variety of yoga being perpetrated. This is a dumb down version of the problem. They sound like whining kids in need of a pacifier. Give them a lollypop and pat on the back and they will stop crying.
I am glad that the maharishi people have understood what has changed due to Herb Benson's appropriation of TM. They will support my work on that specific matter, and have offered to get some researchers involved. Lets see where that goes; but at least I did not get a trivialized appreciation or some sort of patronizing sympathy. I feel they really get it.
Frankly, I would rather have a school named Oakridge that teaches authentic dharma, than a school named something like
maha-sanskriti-vishva-kendra that teaches a diluted version."
Sanjay posts:
"One of the books that Rajiv references in "Being Different" provides another illustration of the insidious manner in which minds get colonized: Jonathan Kirsch in "God against the Gods" relates how Jews began aping the Greeks after the conquests of Alexander.This is the passage (p 76):
Alexander brought Hellenism to the land of the Jews when he replaced the defeated Persian emperor as its overlord. Much to the horror of the Jewish rigorists, the Chosen People promptly showed themselves to be no less vulnerable to the charms and attractions of Hellenism than they had been to the "abominations" of their pagan seducers in distant biblical antiquity. By the second century B.C.E., the city of Jerusalem boasted its own gymnasium, where Jews studied the Greek language and practiced the athletic skills that were put on display in Olympic-style games. Not only did they insist on competing in the nude, aping the traditions of ancient Greece, but some of them resorted to a primitive form of plastic surgery to conceal the fact that they were circumcised-an act that was regarded by the rigorists as the ultimate betrayal of the God of Israel.
We cannot know how Judaism would have fared if the Jews of antiquity had been free to choose between their own traditions of monotheism and the attractions of Hellenism.Then, as now, the lure of assimilation was so powerful that no amount of scolding or sermonizing was effective in preventing defections from the oldest and strictest traditions of Judaism..."
tvikhanas notes:
"That's a funny argument Goldberg gives. When Yogananda identified himself as a Yogi he would done it as a further specialized identity on top of Hindu identity, not in exclusion of it. When Swami Vivekananda talked of Vedanta he
was using it as further qualification of the Hinduism he brought to America, not something different from it.
It is strange to turn this around, give it as an excuse to not use the word "Hindu". It's like we are comfortable with "quantum mechanics", "optics" etc but not with the term "Physics"."
Pratap adds:
"Like Abraham Maslow's "Hierarchy of needs" is welcome but not "panca kosa" theory."
Surya comments:
"Goldberg ... is one of those good cops who praises Hinduism but sees Hinduism as a deli from which you can pick and choose what you want.
tvikhanas notes:
The discussions here started in September 2012 and progressed through December 2012. Phil uses some fancy footwork as he attempts a self-justification of "why his book does not include the word Hindu". The followup discussion totally exposes Phil's attempted appropriation of Hinduism as well as his weak attempts to cover up.
Original Christianity Original Yoga
Recently, I chanced upon and corresponded with this organization based in New Mexico (US) called "Original Christianity Original Yoga" (OCOY; website:.
In this post Surya noted:
"...digest Dharma. When they discuss essential cosmology, Dharmic ideas are digested and mapped onto Biblical traditions. No mention of Dharmic sources. In the end, this tells you why the Bible is retained. In the end, Ishannism is no different than Phil Goldberg. They differ in their means. They are different variations of Good-cop. No matter what flattering things they say about Dharma, in the end they are victimizing Dharma and protecting Christianity. The unstated goal is to stop tendencies of thinking Christians from crossing over to Dharma by offering a version of Christianity that comes in several shades and closeness to Dharma. At a more sinister level, it lowers the barriers and allows flow from Dharma to Jesus"
Science and Sanskrit tradition: A Western scholar'
A Westerner who is studying Sanskrit in India has sent me a paper that challenges the way Indians want to integrate modern science and Sanskrit. After a few...
The westerner here cites Golberg's work American Veda as one of his references.
Why the book American Veda is not called American Hinduism
Venkat posted:
"Phil Goldberg is the author of the recently published American Veda. He explains why the word Hindu is not there. Book reviews can be read
from this link: http://americanveda.com/
Below Sri Ashok Chowgule writes about his thoughts on the title of book and the next paragraph is Phil's explanation. Both conversations are extracted from the Abhinavagupta group (you have to be a member to access the messages). The topic is Debate on "White Hindu Converts"
Ashok Chowgule:
"one of the source of my contention that more and more Americans (Hindus and non-Hindus, academics and outside) are openly expressing their appreciation, empathy, etc., about Hinduism is his book "The American Veda". I had mentioned to him, when I read the book, that I was disappointed that the word Hindu was not seen on the cover page. If I recollect correctly, he said to me that his publisher said that the
word at that place may turn away people from the book!
(At the same time, a book which came after "The American Veda", namely Wendy Doniger's book "The Hindu: An Alternative History", a book which does not look at Hinduism with empathy, has the word Hindu on the cover page. Perhaps the publisher felt that more people will read it
for exactly that reason!)
"one of the source of my contention that more and more Americans (Hindus and non-Hindus, academics and outside) are openly expressing their appreciation, empathy, etc., about Hinduism is his book "The American Veda". I had mentioned to him, when I read the book, that I was disappointed that the word Hindu was not seen on the cover page. If I recollect correctly, he said to me that his publisher said that the
word at that place may turn away people from the book!
(At the same time, a book which came after "The American Veda", namely Wendy Doniger's book "The Hindu: An Alternative History", a book which does not look at Hinduism with empathy, has the word Hindu on the cover page. Perhaps the publisher felt that more people will read it
for exactly that reason!)
I would like to bring to the notice a book by Thomas Wendell titled "Hinduism Invades America". It was published by The Beacon Press Inc, New York, in 1930, and reprinted by Kessinger Publishing in 2010. The title say 'Hinduism' and not 'Hindus'. And this is significant. The book talks about the many Hindu gurus, other than Swami Vivekanand, who had come to America to teach (to the people, not in universities) Hinduism. The period in which these gurus taught in America is interesting, since it was a period when generally Hinduism was projected in poor light, culminating in the work of Katherine Mayo's "Mother India". Also, due to colonisation, India was a poor country, etc. (Incidentally, the word Hinduism did not appear to distract the people from buying the book at the time!)
Phil Goldberg's response:
Let me expand on your explanation about why my book was not called "American Hinduism" or "Hinduism in America" or a similar title. It's actually a bit more complicated than what I might have indicated earlier.
It was mainly to avoid confusing the reading public about the book's contents.
In the minds of Americans, the words Hinduism and Hindu are religious terms. Hinduism is the name of one of the five world's religions they've at least heard about, Hindu is the name of people who practice Hinduism, or are born into a family from that tradition. So, it was felt that people would think "Hinduism in America" was about the Indian diaspora, because they associate "Hindu" with "Indian." Also, the impact of Sanatana Dharma on America - which is the real subject of the book - has been secular as well as religious. It's impacted psychology, science, medicine, etc., and we felt
that point might get lost if we used a term people think of as religious in the title.
Plus, as you know, it has mainly been Vedanta philosophy and the methodologies of Yoga that were adopted in the West, not the normative Hinduism of India. Temple Hinduism is a relatively new phenomenon in the US, and its influence on the culture as a whole is in its early stages. We felt that having Hinduism in the title would narrow the scope of the book in people's minds, and they would think it's only about pujas, bhajans, and holiday celebrations.
Finally, as I say in the book's Introduction, "the most influential gurus and Yoga masters who came to the West made a big point of saying they were not preaching Hinduism. They were Hindus themselves, of course, but they asserted that all could utilize their teachings without deserting their own religions. Indeed, the ideas and practices they proffered did not have to be viewed religiously at all.." I remember thinking, Swami Vivekananda did not start the Hinduism Society, he started the Vedanta Society; Paramahansa Yogananda did not write Autobiography of a Hindu, and he called his organization the Self-Realization Fellowship, not the Hinduism Fellowship; and Maharish Mahesh Yogi did not call his TM practice Hindu Meditation.
I hope that further clarifies the choice of titles. These decisions about language are very delicate, and I understand perfectly that many Hindus would prefer that we made a different decision. As I said in the book, I hope that the historic misconceptions are overcome soon so "future books
will use the term Hinduism freely, without fear of misleading the public."
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain this.
Phil"
Surya responds:
"Reminds me of something that friends from Bangalore told me happened in 1980s. A vendor close to their college was selling chapati and sabji for Rs. 2 each. Demand was lukewarm. The smart vendor recognized that students dressed, spoke, and craved for things with a Western motif. Vendor came out with a new product
called Frankie and priced it Rs. 15 each. Frankie was an instant success. Turns out Frankie was the same chapati rolled with sabji with a toothpick holding the roll together..."
Rajiv Malhotra responds:
"...Read carefully the points I listed in my prior post on this thread. I did not say the goat remains a goat but gets a new name given by the tiger. The goat does not remain a goat. Instead we have a pile of tiger shit and a stronger tiger. The goat is not there.
Before I select any instance of digestion as worthy, one of my criteria is to see if the entity got changed in some significant way that makes a difference. When western buddhists remove reincarnation to secularize it, its not the same thing with new ownership. When mantra is removed and replaced by some other word its a different vibration. When kerala ayurveda massage removes the requirement to chant mantra, its a change/distortion of the product.
... Many of our Hindu groups took up my complaint which I spoke about since the 1990s about yoga's appropriation; but they made making loud noises only that the origin was not being acknowledged. But none of these seem to have understood what difference that makes to the new variety of yoga being perpetrated. This is a dumb down version of the problem. They sound like whining kids in need of a pacifier. Give them a lollypop and pat on the back and they will stop crying.
I am glad that the maharishi people have understood what has changed due to Herb Benson's appropriation of TM. They will support my work on that specific matter, and have offered to get some researchers involved. Lets see where that goes; but at least I did not get a trivialized appreciation or some sort of patronizing sympathy. I feel they really get it.
Frankly, I would rather have a school named Oakridge that teaches authentic dharma, than a school named something like
maha-sanskriti-vishva-kendra that teaches a diluted version."
Sanjay posts:
"One of the books that Rajiv references in "Being Different" provides another illustration of the insidious manner in which minds get colonized: Jonathan Kirsch in "God against the Gods" relates how Jews began aping the Greeks after the conquests of Alexander.This is the passage (p 76):
Alexander brought Hellenism to the land of the Jews when he replaced the defeated Persian emperor as its overlord. Much to the horror of the Jewish rigorists, the Chosen People promptly showed themselves to be no less vulnerable to the charms and attractions of Hellenism than they had been to the "abominations" of their pagan seducers in distant biblical antiquity. By the second century B.C.E., the city of Jerusalem boasted its own gymnasium, where Jews studied the Greek language and practiced the athletic skills that were put on display in Olympic-style games. Not only did they insist on competing in the nude, aping the traditions of ancient Greece, but some of them resorted to a primitive form of plastic surgery to conceal the fact that they were circumcised-an act that was regarded by the rigorists as the ultimate betrayal of the God of Israel.
We cannot know how Judaism would have fared if the Jews of antiquity had been free to choose between their own traditions of monotheism and the attractions of Hellenism.Then, as now, the lure of assimilation was so powerful that no amount of scolding or sermonizing was effective in preventing defections from the oldest and strictest traditions of Judaism..."
tvikhanas notes:
"That's a funny argument Goldberg gives. When Yogananda identified himself as a Yogi he would done it as a further specialized identity on top of Hindu identity, not in exclusion of it. When Swami Vivekananda talked of Vedanta he
was using it as further qualification of the Hinduism he brought to America, not something different from it.
It is strange to turn this around, give it as an excuse to not use the word "Hindu". It's like we are comfortable with "quantum mechanics", "optics" etc but not with the term "Physics"."
Pratap adds:
"Like Abraham Maslow's "Hierarchy of needs" is welcome but not "panca kosa" theory."
Surya comments:
"Goldberg ... is one of those good cops who praises Hinduism but sees Hinduism as a deli from which you can pick and choose what you want.
In
his blogs on Huffington Post, Goldberg clearly mentioned that Vedas and
Yoga help Jews and Christians develop their spirituality and then go
back to their religious fold. He says Hindus accept all religions and
do not mind others choosing what they like in Hindu thought. THAT is
the main reason for focusing on secularized Veda. Not because Hinduism
does not sell..."
tvikhanas notes:
"You are touching on an important point when you mention Goldberg's HuffPost essays. One can find many westerners today setting themselves up as "authentic" representatives of Hinduism and undermining Hindus whether intentionally or
unintentionally. Goldberg seems to be one such character.
It is one thing for non-Hindus to adopt Hinduism but it is entirely different to set themselves up as insiders, or leaders or representatives. We can see this happening big time to "Buddhism". May be it requires a different thread to discuss how to deal with this.
What's happening to Buddhism and Yoga actually serve as powerful reminders why we must resist various Dharmic schools being severed from the larger Hindu religion. It becomes very easy for non-Hindus to set themselves up as representatives of these severed schools and then to steer
them in self serving directions. What's happening to Buddhism & Yoga in America is quite instructive. Most of the
visible Buddhists on various websites are westerners and they claim to be authentic representatives (until 10-20 yrs later they do a u-turn back to catholicism/judaism). If we point out the nonsense they are spouting, they claim their view is the authentic/original/scientific/rational version and that our
views are colored by Hindu superstition/chauvinism/nationalism!.."
unintentionally. Goldberg seems to be one such character.
It is one thing for non-Hindus to adopt Hinduism but it is entirely different to set themselves up as insiders, or leaders or representatives. We can see this happening big time to "Buddhism". May be it requires a different thread to discuss how to deal with this.
What's happening to Buddhism and Yoga actually serve as powerful reminders why we must resist various Dharmic schools being severed from the larger Hindu religion. It becomes very easy for non-Hindus to set themselves up as representatives of these severed schools and then to steer
them in self serving directions. What's happening to Buddhism & Yoga in America is quite instructive. Most of the
visible Buddhists on various websites are westerners and they claim to be authentic representatives (until 10-20 yrs later they do a u-turn back to catholicism/judaism). If we point out the nonsense they are spouting, they claim their view is the authentic/original/scientific/rational version and that our
views are colored by Hindu superstition/chauvinism/nationalism!.."
He further notes:
"There are many characters in the west calling themselves as "Vaishnavas", "Advaitins", "Tantrikas" or "Yogis". This serves two purposes:
1. It lets them avoid facing the unpleasant truth that they are voluntarily adopting what they themselves for the last ~300 yrs condemned as superstition and other worldly nonsense. 2. More importantly, they can spout nonsense and not be challenged by Hindus in general. They can always claim that's what their tradition teaches and there will naturally be far fewer from that particular tradition to challenge those claims
For instance, a lot of garbage is written by ISKCON [Western] dudes on HuffPost, and they claim to be authentic representatives of Gaudiya Vedanta. There are very few people from that particular tradition to respond and even if there are a few they will probably prefer to keep quite.
The point is these sub-categories are specialized identities within the larger Hindu framework, not something independent of it. The relationship between these
schools is very nuanced and some one who has lived in the west will have not have appropriate experience/analogies to understand them. They will only make nonsense of it (like Buddhism being a revolt against Hinduism just as
Protestantism was against catholicism).
It is farcical for westerners to claim to have become vaishnavas or yogis or what ever after a few years of practice. At the very least they have to unlearn some of the fundamental thoughts that their culture has given them, like eternal damnation..."
1. It lets them avoid facing the unpleasant truth that they are voluntarily adopting what they themselves for the last ~300 yrs condemned as superstition and other worldly nonsense. 2. More importantly, they can spout nonsense and not be challenged by Hindus in general. They can always claim that's what their tradition teaches and there will naturally be far fewer from that particular tradition to challenge those claims
For instance, a lot of garbage is written by ISKCON [Western] dudes on HuffPost, and they claim to be authentic representatives of Gaudiya Vedanta. There are very few people from that particular tradition to respond and even if there are a few they will probably prefer to keep quite.
The point is these sub-categories are specialized identities within the larger Hindu framework, not something independent of it. The relationship between these
schools is very nuanced and some one who has lived in the west will have not have appropriate experience/analogies to understand them. They will only make nonsense of it (like Buddhism being a revolt against Hinduism just as
Protestantism was against catholicism).
It is farcical for westerners to claim to have become vaishnavas or yogis or what ever after a few years of practice. At the very least they have to unlearn some of the fundamental thoughts that their culture has given them, like eternal damnation..."
American Veda: A Digestion of Hinduism - Part 1
Prologue:
This is the first of two parts of a detailed summary that tracks the discussion on Phil Goldberg's American Veda (AV) in the forum. On the surface, this appears to be a very positive book about Hinduism that will have a positive impact in the long run. Besides, the author himself appears to be an amiable person (he's on twitter too). What does a deeper analysis of Phil's writings reveal? The first round of discussions was initiated in December 2011 that resulted in an email debate between Phil and Rajiv. A few more threads around this topic were posted in February and June of 2012. The most recent discussions occurred in September and December 2012, and will be summarized in a sequel to this post. A big thanks to contributor Surya for the Purva Paksha done in this post!
There are three sections to part-1.
The first section introduces Phil's book. RMF gets to know of Phil's book.
Section-2 gets inside the book and some of Phil's articles in Huffington Post and his Youtube videos. Evidence of digestion, deliberate erasing of original Hindu sources are sighted.
Section-3 (Digestion) gives you a blow-by-blow textbook example of digestion, where the conversation starts with the greatness of Hinduism and how the world can learn from it .... and ends with a stiletto that says you don't really have to be a Hindu, no way to convert, have your Ash Wednesday, and you can just utilize Yoga and Hinduism like a "plug in" or a "add-on" to your existing religion (Abrahamic).
My response to a Christian wanting to DIGEST Hinduism into Christian The person writing the post below is threatened by my positions on difference between Hinduism and Christianity. He espouses how Hinduism can be digested into...
In a followup response, Rajiv Malhotra had this to say in reference a quote from a Newsweek article posted by Surya:
"... We are all Hindus now - Lisa Miller, Newsweek, August 14, 2009,
..Quote 2
The Rig Veda, the most ancient Hindu scripture, says this: "Truth is One, but the sages speak of it by many names." A Hindu believes there are many paths to God. Jesus is one way, the Qur'an is another, yoga practice is a third. None is better than any other; all are equal."
Rajiv's response:
" The mindset in the above quotes, from Lisa Miller to Stephen Prothero, and on to Phil Goldberg's "American Veda" - all represent the digestion of dharma. Prothero above even says that Hinduism is nothing more than a collection of parts you can pick and choose from. he does not understand the
notion of integral unity I explain in chapter 3 of BD. That is what we need to understand to prevent this digestion by breaking into parts and cherry picking. "
In a subsequent followup, Rajiv noted:
"...Self-Realization Fellowship, Lisa Miller's article "We are all Hindus", Phil Goldberg's recent book called "American Veda" and many other similar works that our gurus parrot - these are accepting the Judeo-Christian premises into which Hindu deities and stories get mapped WITH APPARENT RESPECT...."
Someone forwarded Rajiv's comments to Phil, leading to an interesting email exchange and discussion that is captured in this thread. We carry excerpts here:
Phil Goldberg's exchange with me
Phil (to Rajiv): You are right that I rejoice in the impact the dharma has had on me and America as a whole. You are not right in implying that I don't care if the original sources are not recognized. I stated several times in American Veda that it is important to acknowledge the sources and maintain their purity. ... In the last chapter, for instance, I write:
Rajiv to Phil: Hi Phil, I would be delighted to discuss with you online or live, with mutual respect. I regard you as a good writer and mean nothing personal when I feel a certain way of your thesis. If you recall, i spent considerable time with you in person in delhi in 2005 going through my UTurn Theory. At that time you said you were thinking of writing a book on the history of yoga in america. I pointed out to you that the real story is how its Indian roots got forgotten. You were intrigued. I also mentioned that the story does not end with yoga as commonly understood but goes into neuroscience, cognitive science, transcendentalism, etc. You were at my talks when i described all this in great detail using powerpoints. Later after a few months you wrote to me that you had extensively revised the book and it was going to take longer. When it finally came out, I did see a whiff here and there on the uturn theory, but my concern has been that it truncated it and glossed over the real issues with appropriation - the digestion into western universalism. ... This is what BEING DIFFERENT discusses, i.e. the irreducibility of core differences that force a choice. These choices are the boundary where the western ego recoils and wants to return home and reclaim western identity. The commonly celebrated "joy of being digested" as in the references to Lisa Miller or your writings are the result of not understanding the full dimension of digestion. None of this means that your work is intentionally "dangerous" - but its incompleteness in appreciating the process at work causes people to celebrate the digestion as a sort of merger of equals which it is not. The tiger digesting the deer remains the tiger, in fact stronger, but the deer turns into a pile of shit. This has happened to many civilizations that were also similarly "assimilated" into Christianity and the west - but they now live in museums... If you want to discuss this, I would be delighted. Lets approach it with open minds.
Venkat comments:
"... A very good observation by Rajiv in his response to Goldberg. Historically, Christianity has usurped traditions that belonged to other religions and cultures, by a process George.T aptly calls Christian scavenging. Ironically, many traditions such as yoga (and its intrinsic aspect of meditation) are incompatible with Christianity. Recent researches in neuroscience make it clear that if one were to be faithful to Christianity, a contemplation on the Christian god results in rumination, which activates the limbic system and the amygdala, producing an undesirable fight-or-flight response, unlike Hindu meditation, which activates the anterior cingulate and causes bliss...."
Rajiv's response:
"I started this work in the mid 1990s as a theoretical physicist pursuing Indian philosophy. The center of my interest was consciousness studies. I invested heavily on inquiring why the appropriations from dharma into what became "western" theories in the mid 1990s was not see as an issue. Nobody cared, least of all the highly ignorant Hindu leaders patrolling with pomp all over the place.
So the first set of grants given by my foundation were specifically to get trained Indian philosophers into this area. After a few million dollars and several dozen events and sponsored scholars, we did achieve in making a few obscure Indian scholars very prominent.
But Templeton Foundation stepped in and appropriated nearly every one of them. This is a major story I want to write one day. The data is well organized but I have been too busy elsewhere...."
bluecupid commented:
"I like Phil's approach. The Dharmic traditions of the East are being accepted and mainstreamed into the West bit by bit and its creating an open-minded, inclusive atmosphere which benefits Indian Hindus, if only Indian Hindus would take advantage of that."
Rajiv response:
"The above view is precisely the one held by "liberal, secular,
progressive" westerners who (contrary to what liberalism ought to mean) cannot shed their fixation about western identity....
... Note her separation and dissection of dharma away from the cultural soil of the source. This is precisely what the west did to separate Buddhism from India and from Hinduism - all in the name of "cleaning" it of its cultural inferiority. ... now this digestion is rather open.
I predict that Hindu dharma is following suit fast - and bluecupid is an example of this mindset. Digestion is being called "mainstreaming". The old soil from which it emerged is to be rejected in favor of the new soil thats clean (and white).
This discussion is good education for those Indians and other Hindus sitting in silos imagining that the only danger is Christianity. I find folks of this kind at places like Esalen - a white bastion as its founder also once said - and their racism is indeed very deep but subtle."
Rajiv Malhotra is another followup brilliantly sums up the necessity for Purva Paksha:
"Reversing the gaze is a necessary but not sufficient condition to resist.
Until you do this, you will continue to live unconsciously in the colonized paradigms that have been downloaded over centuries. The mere act of gazing at the "other" turns the colonial framework into "other", creating space between
subject and object to examine the other unemotionally.
This separation then generates the need to understand the "self" that is doing the gazing. WHERE do I stand and gaze at them? How am I different? This is how I got started, and then begins the quest to understand one's difference in a way
that is not causing anxiety.
Once difference is clearly anchored (with mutual respect), then the resistance becomes a possibility.
Gandhi established his difference and used that as his ground for resistance - his use of purva paksha, difference and refusal to get digested are explained in the book as examples."
Wadhwa responds:
"Mr.Phil Goldberg's attempt to write American Veda and using this as a title for his book amounts to intellectual subversion and moral turpitude behind the mask of literature. Vedas are basically repositories of knowledge with a scientific basis standing for dignity and sublimity of human life and its perfection. They are the first and foremost books of the world literature and the foundation of Hindu religion since they form the root of most of Hindu scriptures. Apparently, using the title 'American Veda' by Phil is nothing short of a disinformation campaign to mislead people and a subtle attempt to digest real Vedism..."
Shaas responds:
"... "American Veda" - the title is sloppy, lacking humility and respect. But in the same manner, Veda is not Indian. As you stated, Veda stand for "dignity and sublimity of HUMAN LIFE and its perfection". Therefore they are as American as Indian and as Brasilian. Veda is the basis, the blueprint of life and the
Universe. They contain universal truths, universal laws."
Rajiv's response:
"yes, title is a non issue. I am in private discussion with Phil
and we both hope to have a video taped conversation between us to bring both sides openly and amicably. Meanwhile, as a courtesy to him as he is not present here (though we invited him to join), I am closing this thread."
Readers can find more details in a few posts from the blog "DigestingVeda": "Phil Goldberg's exchange with Rajiv Malhotra".
A second thread that deals with Goldberg's work is:
American Digestion
This thread was initiated by Surya, and Rajiv provides a preface:
"..Besides the issues raised by Surya below regarding Goldberg's book, I have expressed my displeasure to Goldberg. He interviewed me in depth in India and USA for material to write his book and received numerous leads from
me. I was speaking at a Delhi conference on my UTurn Theory and there he was in the front row with his recorder. So many of the ideas and examples I gave then found there way in his book - including the one about Mary baker Eddy mentioned below - with only a marginal acknowledgment.
So here is another kind of digestion also going on here: Western authors who learn from Indian "native informants" (myself in this case) then go on to write in their own names what ought to be credited to the "native informants". I will
address this issue in my uturn writings... In Jim Burklo's critique of BD (to be published in a week) he relies upon
Goldberg as his authority to claim that Hinduism is a bogus category invented by Indians under colonial influence! Talk about one westerner quoting another, who in turn merely cited yet another - in a circular chain of quotes - to then
establish what becomes known as "fact", and this shows up in Wiki, media, textbooks, museum interpretations..."
Surya posted:
"The Background
---------------
Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910), founder of the Christian Science Movement, published "Science and Health With a Key to the Scriptures" in 1875. She was greatly influenced by writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry D. Thoreau who
made their Dharmic knowledge influence widely felt through books, magazines and newspaper articles. We find in as late as the 33rd edition of her book, excerpts from Sir Edwin Arnold's translation of Bhagavad Gita.
... Philip Goldberg, in one of the presentations of his book "American Veda", makes a reference to it and admits that these references were dropped in later versions. He just smiles uncomfortably as he says this and nothing more.
.... in future versions of Mary Baker Eddy's book, ideas were implicitly presented as Christian Science. No more references to Bhagavad Gita.
This is what Rajiv Malhotra calls digestion - as in, you digest the content and wipe out the identity of the source. Goldberg implicitly acknowledges in the presentation with his uncomfortable smile that digestion has happened.
Do not expect sympathy or remorse from Goldberg - he goes far enough to call Emerson the American Shakaracharya, kind of implying the split from Dharmic roots began with Emerson.
I applaud Goldberg for pointing out the Dharmic origins in his presentations. His comments on Dharmic systems are very respectful and complementary of their richness. Unfortunately, he does not make any direct references to Christian intentions of digesting Dharmic knowledge systems...
Let us take a look at his article in Huffington Post titled "Colbert: Try Hinduism for Lent".
In that article, Goldberg writes:
"(a) While researching my book, American Veda, I interviewed dozens of Christians and Jews -- among them ministers and rabbis -- who returned to their ancestral faith after a lengthy period of alienation or indifference, because the teachings that were birthed in India gave them a new perspective on what it
means to be spiritual.
(b) You don't even have to call yourself a Hindu for that matter. I know it seems weird, but the tradition is so adaptable and welcoming that tens of millions of Americans orient their spiritual lives around meditation, yoga and other practices from India but don't think of themselves as Hindus"
I rest my case"
Arjun adds:
"I dont think Rajiv's critique of the Western paradigm is anti westerner or anti white because most of his work is criticizing Indians much more.People like myself can appreciate his work because we have the advantage of seeing both worldviews much more clearly then most because we are brought up in both.So he's right on the points he's making because who wants to see Yoga stripped away from its roots where instead of a whole lifestyle based on Dharma becomes an accessory to a western lifestyle to later end up like a Tamagotchi doing the Asanas for you when you touch the buttons when you're out shopping at your local
shopping mall.."
Surya has a followup to his initial post:
"Philip Goldberg is an ordained interfaith minister. He had openly stated that he is not a Christian...
Goldberg is definitely sympathetic (if not more) to Christianity. ... If he really did not believe in Christianity, he should not try so hard to prop-up what he does not believe in. Why not just encourage people to follow the secular spiritual practices that he so wholeheartedly preaches and ask them to shun what he himself does not believe in? After all, he is so quick and frequent to suggest that these secular spiritual practices do not need religious beliefs.
... Every chance he gets, he is happy to write about taking spiritual aspects from Dharmic systems while suggesting that the Hindu religious beliefs can be dropped. He is also quick to disqualify Hinduism as a hodge-podge of regional sects that was congealed into an incoherent mass by the constructive power of the British Raj. But in the same breath, he is very happy to suggest layering these isolated spiritual practices with Abrahamic religions which he claims he does not believe in...
...It is cleaner for interfaith ministers to prop-up the edifice of Abrahamic religions by extracting aspects of Dharmic systems, call them secular, and add them to Abrahamic religions. Would undermine the faith if a self-proclaimed Christian preacher or religious scholar were to do this. There is the added benefit I suppose; Calling yourself interfaith and Universal lends you credibility that you need when you are busily searching for things to extract out of Dharmic systems. But actions and words cannot hide biases and true intentions.
Systematic theology is always on the prowl for uplifting secular add-ons for updating theology to fit the thinking of the times. Dharmic spiritual practices are fast penetrating American lives. .... Since Christian core scriptures are incompatible with other religions, stripping out Dharmic religious aspects is essential to ensure scriptural integrity before absorbing secular aspects of Dharmic systems. ... if you can undermine and dismember the connections to the scripturally-incompatible Dharmic religious aspects before digesting the compatible spiritual aspects. Who better to deliver this than one who appears to love Dharmic spiritual practices but has nothing to do with Christianity?"
Here is the post from Digesting Veda blog on section-2
2. Post 2: "Goldberg's Interfaith "Digestion" plan exposed!"
Section 3 (June 2012) Digestion
This thread was motivated by a review of "Being Different".
Response to a BD review and Evolution of God
Veena posted:
"I came across a video on Youtube by Philip Goldberg who is the author of the book American Veda. This is a 46 minute lecture enlightening a group of Americans on the extent of influence of ancient Indian thought within modern American society. While I have not read his book, his effort appears
complementary to the efforts of Being Different."
Rajiv comment:
" Message 2255 and the thread that follows from there was a
discussion specific to how Goldberg's work is a uturn/digestion. I recommend you go through that. Superficial impressions can be misleading."
Renu asks a very interesting question:
"I heard Mr. Goldberg's talk at the U of M in Ann Arbor. My feeling was some what similar to Veena ji's. Later I read the discussions -- one question that presents itself is; so what will make us feel better? Should we let them (white Christian, Muslim and others to be like us or not)? How is Hindu Dharma to spread?
Rajiv's response:
" Same dilemma exists for every instance of digestion. Each digestion also has the effect of spreading oneself. The deer gets 'spread' widely once it gets digested into the tiger - as part of the tiger's DNA running around, as the tiger's shit being spread, as part of the powerful tiger's presence in the jungle. The price is the loss of one's separate self existence. Through the East India Company's digestion of India's wealth, one could celebrate that Indian wealth has 'spread' widely - the crown jewels in the London Tower are mainly digested Indian jewels, for instance. So lets celebrate this, ok?
Whats a better way to spread without losing one's SEPARATE SELF-EXISTENCE? I am afraid I have explained this time and time again in writing and talks, so I wont be able to do it again at this now..."
Surya follows up in a separate thread using the good cop / bad cop analogy that was also mentioned in section 2 [sorry, i edited it out, but you can read it in the original thread]
Digestion - The Good Cop Style Let us recall the good cop/bad cop roles. (This was explained by Rajiv in Invading the Sacred, pages 253-261, and since then in numerous writings and talks.) They are two sides of the same digestion coin.
Bad cops are bad mouthing Dharmic traditions and calling for conversions. They are easy to spot. They are the tigers wanting to digest the deer. Deer has no confusion - Deer sees the tiger as is and is fully ware of what the tigers want to do. Tiger has never any confusion and makes no efforts to be subtle.
Good cops are respectful and full of praises. They are not easy to spot. They are sophisticated tigers in sheep's clothing. Deer often confuse the disguised tiger to be a real sheep. Deer needs to be sophisticated and not fall for the external appearance. ...
Let us take a look at one of Phil Goldberg's blogs and analyze carefully.
Phil Goldberg writes: "one of the unique merits of the Indian spiritual heritage that colonial powers labeled Hinduism is that it's so multifaceted it makes Christianity, Judaism and Islam seem uniform by comparison. You know all those deities -- the gods and goddesses that cause outsiders to think Hinduism is polytheistic? To Hindus, they're just different forms of the one ultimate reality called Brahman. Same with avatars like Krishna and Rama."
Comment: What a nice guy! Such a friend of Hinduism. He truly understands us.
Phil Goldberg adds: "So there's plenty of room for Jesus. Most Hindus are happy to include him -- along with Buddha -- in the pantheon of incarnations, saints, gurus and holy ones they regard as worthy of reverence. In fact, if you visit any number of organizations created by Indian teachers in America, such as Swami Vivekananda's Vedanta Society or Paramahansa Yogananda's Self-Realization Fellowship, you will see portraits of Jesus in places of honor. And in some of those institutions, Christians who want to be initiated with a sacred mantra are invited to choose one associated with Jesus -- or with Mary, if they're inclined toward the Divine Feminine. It's part of a concept known as ishta devata, or cherished deity.
Comment: Phil is calling for reverse digestion!! He is suggesting that Jesus should be assimilated as an Avatar. Let us invite him to our temples for flattering talks to boost our egos and send some money his way to say thank you for being a friend.
Phil Goldberg adds: "For thousands of years, India has understood that the divine can be imagined and experienced in all kinds of ways, as in the oft-quoted verse from the Rig Veda, Ekam sat vipraha bahudha vadanti -- typically translated as, "Truth is one, the wise call it by many names." Hence, individuals are free to use their preferred form in their spiritual practices. "
Comment: Hmmm ... why is Phil suddenly bringing this up? I have seen this verse quoted by tigers to tenderize Deer before digestion. This should raise a red flag because it is being wrongly interpreted to soften and disarm Hindus. The verse is saying that truth can be seen and presented in more than one way. A convenient, but wrong, interpretation that is often invoked for this verse is that all religions offer the same truth...
Wait a minute. Is that why he suggested that there is plenty of room for Jesus? I see now that he is not suggesting assimilation of Jesus as an Avatar. Instead, is he suggesting that Hindus should find it acceptable to use Dharmic practices with Christianity?!
Phil Goldberg adds: "While researching my book, American Veda, I interviewed dozens of Christians and Jews -- among them ministers and rabbis -- who returned to their ancestral faith after a lengthy period of alienation or indifference, because the teachings that were birthed in India gave them a new perspective on what it means to be spiritual. And you don't have to wear a dhoti, put a mark on your forehead (you've already done that for Ash Wednesday anyway) or declare your allegiance to anything. There is no Hindu equivalent of what we call conversion."
Comment: OK. Not exactly cheering for Hinduism. But he wants Christians and Jews to experience spiritual practices of Hinduism and return to their respective faiths. Still no blatant digestion but getting suspicious. Some of us happy-go-lucky Hindus are happy as long as they openly acknowledge that they are digesting Dharma (rather than be angry with the thief, they are happy as long as the thief acknowledges that he stole from their specific house.)
Phil Goldberg adds: "You don't even have to call yourself a Hindu for that matter. I know it seems weird, but the tradition is so adaptable and welcoming that tens of millions of Americans orient their spiritual lives around meditation, yoga and other practices from India but don't think of themselves as Hindus."
Comment: Hello! Unadulterated, blatant, quintessential digestion!! This is typical of good-cop U-turners as described by Rajiv Malhotra.
Source
The U-turner who wants to internally harmonize what he has brought back from Dharma must digest what he likes of Dharma into his biblical DNA. This goes through various stages of removing aspects of Dharma (such as karma-reincarnation) that are incompatible with biblical DNA. Some prior Western U-turner might have already gone through this sifting process, eliminating the incompatible. Many of the popular U-turners have gained their popularity because they have created digested versions (they were involved in digestion and/or compiled what others already digested) for consumption by the mass market."
Bhattacharya responds:
"I'd suggest that as soon as Phil says "so there is plenty of room for Jesus", warning flags should go up.
At this point, we may think to ourselves: hmmmmm...plenty of room for Jesus who? Jesus Christ? But exclusivist history-centric Christian truth claims are at odds with Dharmic embodied knowing and integral unity. I bet this Phil fellow is
using a 'good cop' routine on me, any second now he'll try to digest Dharma, and remap it into synthetic Christian 'sameness'/Western Universalism."
Rajiv Malhotra presents necessary conditions for how non-Hindus, (Christians, for example), can respectfully embrace Hinduism
1) Start with mutual respect as a necessary condition that we demand.
2) "Mutual" does not mean unconditional; it has to be reciprocated from the other side. This is why Ravana, Bin Laden, Hitler type of persons do NOT deserve our respect, i.e. because they simply cannot respect others who are different.
3) History-centrism must be EXPLICITLY REJECTED by the other side, because HC results in mandatory exclusivity claims, and hence CANNOT respect others.
4) Accepting Jesus without the prerequisite of removing HC is like adopting a snake without first removing its poison. I am always inviting my Christian friends to adopt dharma and see Jesus as Ishta-devata, BUT always explaining that the concept of ishta-devata requires removing HC. No ishta-devata can be exclusive or HC as that would distort the principle of ishta-devata..."
Sameer comments:
"There is a growing section of the population in the west that calls itself Christian, wants to follow Jesus, but does not accept the history-centric exclusivity claims. It is this section that can be compatible with Dharma and I think Dharmic people ought to make them feel welcome."
Rajiv's comment:
"Not so fast. This is the group represented by Gregg in my Patheos debate. Pls read that and all the comments following his post. This mindset is also represented by Mark Tully - pls go through that video.
The point is that most of the time the non-history-centrism is a posture to help digest dharma, but upon closer inquiry there remains in the background the notion of the historical Jesus as necessary. I request that you kindly do some reading beyond the "sameness Christianity" - thats the next bridge for you to cross."
Chandramouli adds:
"... Mark Tully, suave, cultivated, genteel, rational, reasonable, global - and focussed - reveals a mindset that underpins what Rajiv has pointed out even while Tully Sahib projects a cultured universalism.
Listen, for example, to his "Life in a Seminary" .."
Raghu adds some interesting comments:
"According to Carl Jung, there are three deficiencies in the Christian Myth. These are:
firstly, the space given to women. In Catholicism there is space for a virgin pure woman.
Secondly, the space given to matter is only as a dead entity. It is also seen as the devils play ground.
Third, the space given to the other. The other is evil.
Sameer has some questions on Surya's deconstruction of Phil's article:
1. Let's be fair. Phil is saying that Jesus is compatible with Dharma but he is not saying that all religions offer the same truth.
[Moderator notes that a history-centric Jesus is simply incompatible with Hinduism and Dharmic faiths, as explained by Rajiv earlier]
This [the final part where Phil simply mouse-cliks & deletes Hinduism] I agree is objectionable. If they adopt Indic practices, they should respectfully acknowledge the source."
Surya has a brilliant followup that hits the nail on the head:
"Please ask them the following questions:
(1) Do they believe that Jesus is the Son of God? [Rajiv's comment: I would add 'literal' son, otherwise they play games with what 'son' means.]
(2) Do they believe that Jesus died to redeem us of sin?
(3) That humans can have salvation only through Jesus?
If they say NO to all three questions, we can agree that history-centric exclusivity has been dropped.
If the answer is YES to all [any] three of those questions, they have much bigger problems than worrying about compatibility with Dharma.
For example:
(1) What did Jesus achieve? Did he die in vain? How does he compare with Gandhi in achieving freedom for his people?
(2) What are the moral implications of Jesus forgiving sins of other people?
Is it morally right for Jesus to forgive someone who harmed me without me forgiving that someone first?
What are the implications of a human Jesus taking away personal responsibility by taking their sin away?
(3) What does Christianity offer that Dharmic traditions do not already offer?
...
Ergo, Christianity needs history-centrism, and hence the importance of Nicene creed to Christianity. There is no escaping.
Christianity is a very resilient religion. It has faced much opposition in its history and Nicene creed is a very well thought out expedient for its stability and survival.
Thus, if a liberal Christian says that they reject history-centrism, either they do not know the implications of what they are saying or they are lying with the intent of digesting Dharma.
This leads us to the consideration that Rajivji mentioned in his response: "The point is that most of the time the non-history-centrism is a posture to help digest dharma, but upon closer inquiry there remains in the background the notion of the historical Jesus as necessary."
Rajiv's comment:
This is exactly the sharpness of purva paksha and response that our tradition calls for. We must learn to push deeper and not settle for easy answers.
Sameer proceeds to do a Purva Paksha of the SRF (spiritual research foundation) that does not raise any red flags at a first glance. Rajiv's response:
"...Swami Kriyananda is simultaneously speaking great things about Hinduism and also Christianity WITHOUT THE CAVEAT OF REMOVING HISTORY CENTRISM ..
...Recently a western documentary maker was
scheduled to interview me for a film on spirituality. He wants to show the sameness of all paths, but after reading BD he got uncomfortable. So at the last minute he got what he wanted in an interview with a well known RKM swami in the Boston area and another with a well known "sameness" Vedanta scholar in Rochester. Both of them were glad to oblige, and not provoke with a stand that forces people out of their comfort zone. So he called me to say that he already
has the statement from Hindu experts that suffice. I face this all the time ...
... I refer you to www.HinduGoodNews.com to understand the difference between Hindu and Christians good news about dealing with the human condition....
...I am disappointed but not surprised that such a large number of well meaning persons dont seem to understand some rudimentary logic: The universality of physics does NOT mean that ALL TRUTH CLAIMS are valid. I think people dont get the idea that truth claim is different than truth. Every physics-claim by every scientist does not turn out to be true; each claim undergoes validation as per the scientific method. Just making a claim by itself does not establish its validity. We have free speech which includes the right to make claims that could be false. Physicists make all sorts of hypotheses and every hypothesis is not necessarily true. You should refer to Christian doctrine as a hypothesis, no more and no less. You must go through my detailed responses in another thread recently that: All claims of dharma are not dharmic; otherwise the ideologies or Ravana, Bib Laden, Hitler, and every random person would be dharmic. Dharma would turn into moral relativism with no standards or criteria to determine it."
Jalan has another analysis of SRF and Paramahamsa Yogananda's writings on Christ. For brevity, we leave it out, but its worth reading in the original thread.
Surya responds to one of Sameer's earlier comments on universalism of science:
"> Sameer: Dharma is a universal science - it cannot belong to any nation any more than Physics can. The original teachings of Jesus are nothing but Dharma.
Underlying principle you are using is: Universal science does not belong to any one nation. It does not follow that people can take laws of Physics and add subjective variations and send back into the world of science.... It suffices to say that modifying or adding physics knowledge is a tightly controlled and managed process and not a free for all. Should not the same be true for Dharma? "
Rajeev has the last word in this long post. For brevity, only the highlighted ones are included:
".....I do not deny that: Jesus' statement could be reinterpreted using entirely new categories and meanings to make them close to dharma. (So no use telling me how this or that swami reinterpreted. As per #1 above, we know that is a simple thing to do. What I question is the legitimacy of such reinterpretations. These new categories and meanings contradict the basic premises of Bible and Christianity, so such reinterpretations are lifting Jesus out of the context of that tradition....
.... Can you get Christians to install Krishna, Shiva, Durga, Kali, Ganesh, Hanuman into their church on the basis of sameness of divinity? Please watch my Tully debate in which I ask him to do this when he claims "we are same" and notice how he recoils at my bold suggestion."
Epilogue:
At this point, it's clear that the evidence is quite damaging in that the approach chosen by the author (Phil Goldberg), what ever may be his intent, is in fact an example of digestion of Hinduism, where he is cherry-picking Hindu concepts (ripping them from Hindu context) and doing a plug-and-play into Western Universalism, essentially deeming Hinduism to be irrelevant to Westerners today. Yet, it seems there is some more to said about this encounter. Don't miss part-2.
This is the first of two parts of a detailed summary that tracks the discussion on Phil Goldberg's American Veda (AV) in the forum. On the surface, this appears to be a very positive book about Hinduism that will have a positive impact in the long run. Besides, the author himself appears to be an amiable person (he's on twitter too). What does a deeper analysis of Phil's writings reveal? The first round of discussions was initiated in December 2011 that resulted in an email debate between Phil and Rajiv. A few more threads around this topic were posted in February and June of 2012. The most recent discussions occurred in September and December 2012, and will be summarized in a sequel to this post. A big thanks to contributor Surya for the Purva Paksha done in this post!
There are three sections to part-1.
The first section introduces Phil's book. RMF gets to know of Phil's book.
Section-2 gets inside the book and some of Phil's articles in Huffington Post and his Youtube videos. Evidence of digestion, deliberate erasing of original Hindu sources are sighted.
Section-3 (Digestion) gives you a blow-by-blow textbook example of digestion, where the conversation starts with the greatness of Hinduism and how the world can learn from it .... and ends with a stiletto that says you don't really have to be a Hindu, no way to convert, have your Ash Wednesday, and you can just utilize Yoga and Hinduism like a "plug in" or a "add-on" to your existing religion (Abrahamic).
Section 1 (December 2011) Initial Exchange
The discussion of AV was motivated by the discussion in the following thread:My response to a Christian wanting to DIGEST Hinduism into Christian The person writing the post below is threatened by my positions on difference between Hinduism and Christianity. He espouses how Hinduism can be digested into...
In a followup response, Rajiv Malhotra had this to say in reference a quote from a Newsweek article posted by Surya:
"... We are all Hindus now - Lisa Miller, Newsweek, August 14, 2009,
..Quote 2
The Rig Veda, the most ancient Hindu scripture, says this: "Truth is One, but the sages speak of it by many names." A Hindu believes there are many paths to God. Jesus is one way, the Qur'an is another, yoga practice is a third. None is better than any other; all are equal."
Rajiv's response:
" The mindset in the above quotes, from Lisa Miller to Stephen Prothero, and on to Phil Goldberg's "American Veda" - all represent the digestion of dharma. Prothero above even says that Hinduism is nothing more than a collection of parts you can pick and choose from. he does not understand the
notion of integral unity I explain in chapter 3 of BD. That is what we need to understand to prevent this digestion by breaking into parts and cherry picking. "
In a subsequent followup, Rajiv noted:
"...Self-Realization Fellowship, Lisa Miller's article "We are all Hindus", Phil Goldberg's recent book called "American Veda" and many other similar works that our gurus parrot - these are accepting the Judeo-Christian premises into which Hindu deities and stories get mapped WITH APPARENT RESPECT...."
Someone forwarded Rajiv's comments to Phil, leading to an interesting email exchange and discussion that is captured in this thread. We carry excerpts here:
Phil Goldberg's exchange with me
Phil (to Rajiv): You are right that I rejoice in the impact the dharma has had on me and America as a whole. You are not right in implying that I don't care if the original sources are not recognized. I stated several times in American Veda that it is important to acknowledge the sources and maintain their purity. ... In the last chapter, for instance, I write:
...Even more important,
respecting the source can help prevent something vital from getting lost
in translation. . . . while adaptation is inevitable and desirable,
one hopes the process will be carried out with care. If we do
not treat authentic Vedic teachings with respect, we will deprive the
future of their true value. The task—a delicate and sacred one—is to
carefully shape the ancient ideas to fit modern society without
distorting them or diminishing their value.
I hope that clarifies my position. I'm not sure what you mean when you say: So many Indians and Hindus support this book (and others like it) and are surprised when I tell them how dangerous this is. Do you think there is something dangerous about my book? If so, I'm at a loss to understand what you could possibly mean. Rajiv to Phil: Hi Phil, I would be delighted to discuss with you online or live, with mutual respect. I regard you as a good writer and mean nothing personal when I feel a certain way of your thesis. If you recall, i spent considerable time with you in person in delhi in 2005 going through my UTurn Theory. At that time you said you were thinking of writing a book on the history of yoga in america. I pointed out to you that the real story is how its Indian roots got forgotten. You were intrigued. I also mentioned that the story does not end with yoga as commonly understood but goes into neuroscience, cognitive science, transcendentalism, etc. You were at my talks when i described all this in great detail using powerpoints. Later after a few months you wrote to me that you had extensively revised the book and it was going to take longer. When it finally came out, I did see a whiff here and there on the uturn theory, but my concern has been that it truncated it and glossed over the real issues with appropriation - the digestion into western universalism. ... This is what BEING DIFFERENT discusses, i.e. the irreducibility of core differences that force a choice. These choices are the boundary where the western ego recoils and wants to return home and reclaim western identity. The commonly celebrated "joy of being digested" as in the references to Lisa Miller or your writings are the result of not understanding the full dimension of digestion. None of this means that your work is intentionally "dangerous" - but its incompleteness in appreciating the process at work causes people to celebrate the digestion as a sort of merger of equals which it is not. The tiger digesting the deer remains the tiger, in fact stronger, but the deer turns into a pile of shit. This has happened to many civilizations that were also similarly "assimilated" into Christianity and the west - but they now live in museums... If you want to discuss this, I would be delighted. Lets approach it with open minds.
Venkat comments:
"... A very good observation by Rajiv in his response to Goldberg. Historically, Christianity has usurped traditions that belonged to other religions and cultures, by a process George.T aptly calls Christian scavenging. Ironically, many traditions such as yoga (and its intrinsic aspect of meditation) are incompatible with Christianity. Recent researches in neuroscience make it clear that if one were to be faithful to Christianity, a contemplation on the Christian god results in rumination, which activates the limbic system and the amygdala, producing an undesirable fight-or-flight response, unlike Hindu meditation, which activates the anterior cingulate and causes bliss...."
Rajiv's response:
"I started this work in the mid 1990s as a theoretical physicist pursuing Indian philosophy. The center of my interest was consciousness studies. I invested heavily on inquiring why the appropriations from dharma into what became "western" theories in the mid 1990s was not see as an issue. Nobody cared, least of all the highly ignorant Hindu leaders patrolling with pomp all over the place.
So the first set of grants given by my foundation were specifically to get trained Indian philosophers into this area. After a few million dollars and several dozen events and sponsored scholars, we did achieve in making a few obscure Indian scholars very prominent.
But Templeton Foundation stepped in and appropriated nearly every one of them. This is a major story I want to write one day. The data is well organized but I have been too busy elsewhere...."
bluecupid commented:
"I like Phil's approach. The Dharmic traditions of the East are being accepted and mainstreamed into the West bit by bit and its creating an open-minded, inclusive atmosphere which benefits Indian Hindus, if only Indian Hindus would take advantage of that."
Rajiv response:
"The above view is precisely the one held by "liberal, secular,
progressive" westerners who (contrary to what liberalism ought to mean) cannot shed their fixation about western identity....
... Note her separation and dissection of dharma away from the cultural soil of the source. This is precisely what the west did to separate Buddhism from India and from Hinduism - all in the name of "cleaning" it of its cultural inferiority. ... now this digestion is rather open.
I predict that Hindu dharma is following suit fast - and bluecupid is an example of this mindset. Digestion is being called "mainstreaming". The old soil from which it emerged is to be rejected in favor of the new soil thats clean (and white).
This discussion is good education for those Indians and other Hindus sitting in silos imagining that the only danger is Christianity. I find folks of this kind at places like Esalen - a white bastion as its founder also once said - and their racism is indeed very deep but subtle."
Rajiv Malhotra is another followup brilliantly sums up the necessity for Purva Paksha:
"Reversing the gaze is a necessary but not sufficient condition to resist.
Until you do this, you will continue to live unconsciously in the colonized paradigms that have been downloaded over centuries. The mere act of gazing at the "other" turns the colonial framework into "other", creating space between
subject and object to examine the other unemotionally.
This separation then generates the need to understand the "self" that is doing the gazing. WHERE do I stand and gaze at them? How am I different? This is how I got started, and then begins the quest to understand one's difference in a way
that is not causing anxiety.
Once difference is clearly anchored (with mutual respect), then the resistance becomes a possibility.
Gandhi established his difference and used that as his ground for resistance - his use of purva paksha, difference and refusal to get digested are explained in the book as examples."
Wadhwa responds:
"Mr.Phil Goldberg's attempt to write American Veda and using this as a title for his book amounts to intellectual subversion and moral turpitude behind the mask of literature. Vedas are basically repositories of knowledge with a scientific basis standing for dignity and sublimity of human life and its perfection. They are the first and foremost books of the world literature and the foundation of Hindu religion since they form the root of most of Hindu scriptures. Apparently, using the title 'American Veda' by Phil is nothing short of a disinformation campaign to mislead people and a subtle attempt to digest real Vedism..."
Shaas responds:
"... "American Veda" - the title is sloppy, lacking humility and respect. But in the same manner, Veda is not Indian. As you stated, Veda stand for "dignity and sublimity of HUMAN LIFE and its perfection". Therefore they are as American as Indian and as Brasilian. Veda is the basis, the blueprint of life and the
Universe. They contain universal truths, universal laws."
Rajiv's response:
"yes, title is a non issue. I am in private discussion with Phil
and we both hope to have a video taped conversation between us to bring both sides openly and amicably. Meanwhile, as a courtesy to him as he is not present here (though we invited him to join), I am closing this thread."
Readers can find more details in a few posts from the blog "DigestingVeda": "Phil Goldberg's exchange with Rajiv Malhotra".
Section 2 (February 2012) Red Flag
A second thread that deals with Goldberg's work is:
American Digestion
This thread was initiated by Surya, and Rajiv provides a preface:
"..Besides the issues raised by Surya below regarding Goldberg's book, I have expressed my displeasure to Goldberg. He interviewed me in depth in India and USA for material to write his book and received numerous leads from
me. I was speaking at a Delhi conference on my UTurn Theory and there he was in the front row with his recorder. So many of the ideas and examples I gave then found there way in his book - including the one about Mary baker Eddy mentioned below - with only a marginal acknowledgment.
So here is another kind of digestion also going on here: Western authors who learn from Indian "native informants" (myself in this case) then go on to write in their own names what ought to be credited to the "native informants". I will
address this issue in my uturn writings... In Jim Burklo's critique of BD (to be published in a week) he relies upon
Goldberg as his authority to claim that Hinduism is a bogus category invented by Indians under colonial influence! Talk about one westerner quoting another, who in turn merely cited yet another - in a circular chain of quotes - to then
establish what becomes known as "fact", and this shows up in Wiki, media, textbooks, museum interpretations..."
Surya posted:
"The Background
---------------
Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910), founder of the Christian Science Movement, published "Science and Health With a Key to the Scriptures" in 1875. She was greatly influenced by writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry D. Thoreau who
made their Dharmic knowledge influence widely felt through books, magazines and newspaper articles. We find in as late as the 33rd edition of her book, excerpts from Sir Edwin Arnold's translation of Bhagavad Gita.
... Philip Goldberg, in one of the presentations of his book "American Veda", makes a reference to it and admits that these references were dropped in later versions. He just smiles uncomfortably as he says this and nothing more.
.... in future versions of Mary Baker Eddy's book, ideas were implicitly presented as Christian Science. No more references to Bhagavad Gita.
This is what Rajiv Malhotra calls digestion - as in, you digest the content and wipe out the identity of the source. Goldberg implicitly acknowledges in the presentation with his uncomfortable smile that digestion has happened.
Do not expect sympathy or remorse from Goldberg - he goes far enough to call Emerson the American Shakaracharya, kind of implying the split from Dharmic roots began with Emerson.
I applaud Goldberg for pointing out the Dharmic origins in his presentations. His comments on Dharmic systems are very respectful and complementary of their richness. Unfortunately, he does not make any direct references to Christian intentions of digesting Dharmic knowledge systems...
Let us take a look at his article in Huffington Post titled "Colbert: Try Hinduism for Lent".
In that article, Goldberg writes:
"(a) While researching my book, American Veda, I interviewed dozens of Christians and Jews -- among them ministers and rabbis -- who returned to their ancestral faith after a lengthy period of alienation or indifference, because the teachings that were birthed in India gave them a new perspective on what it
means to be spiritual.
(b) You don't even have to call yourself a Hindu for that matter. I know it seems weird, but the tradition is so adaptable and welcoming that tens of millions of Americans orient their spiritual lives around meditation, yoga and other practices from India but don't think of themselves as Hindus"
I rest my case"
Arjun adds:
"I dont think Rajiv's critique of the Western paradigm is anti westerner or anti white because most of his work is criticizing Indians much more.People like myself can appreciate his work because we have the advantage of seeing both worldviews much more clearly then most because we are brought up in both.So he's right on the points he's making because who wants to see Yoga stripped away from its roots where instead of a whole lifestyle based on Dharma becomes an accessory to a western lifestyle to later end up like a Tamagotchi doing the Asanas for you when you touch the buttons when you're out shopping at your local
shopping mall.."
Surya has a followup to his initial post:
"Philip Goldberg is an ordained interfaith minister. He had openly stated that he is not a Christian...
Goldberg is definitely sympathetic (if not more) to Christianity. ... If he really did not believe in Christianity, he should not try so hard to prop-up what he does not believe in. Why not just encourage people to follow the secular spiritual practices that he so wholeheartedly preaches and ask them to shun what he himself does not believe in? After all, he is so quick and frequent to suggest that these secular spiritual practices do not need religious beliefs.
... Every chance he gets, he is happy to write about taking spiritual aspects from Dharmic systems while suggesting that the Hindu religious beliefs can be dropped. He is also quick to disqualify Hinduism as a hodge-podge of regional sects that was congealed into an incoherent mass by the constructive power of the British Raj. But in the same breath, he is very happy to suggest layering these isolated spiritual practices with Abrahamic religions which he claims he does not believe in...
...It is cleaner for interfaith ministers to prop-up the edifice of Abrahamic religions by extracting aspects of Dharmic systems, call them secular, and add them to Abrahamic religions. Would undermine the faith if a self-proclaimed Christian preacher or religious scholar were to do this. There is the added benefit I suppose; Calling yourself interfaith and Universal lends you credibility that you need when you are busily searching for things to extract out of Dharmic systems. But actions and words cannot hide biases and true intentions.
Systematic theology is always on the prowl for uplifting secular add-ons for updating theology to fit the thinking of the times. Dharmic spiritual practices are fast penetrating American lives. .... Since Christian core scriptures are incompatible with other religions, stripping out Dharmic religious aspects is essential to ensure scriptural integrity before absorbing secular aspects of Dharmic systems. ... if you can undermine and dismember the connections to the scripturally-incompatible Dharmic religious aspects before digesting the compatible spiritual aspects. Who better to deliver this than one who appears to love Dharmic spiritual practices but has nothing to do with Christianity?"
Here is the post from Digesting Veda blog on section-2
2. Post 2: "Goldberg's Interfaith "Digestion" plan exposed!"
Section 3 (June 2012) Digestion
This thread was motivated by a review of "Being Different".Response to a BD review and Evolution of God
Veena posted:
"I came across a video on Youtube by Philip Goldberg who is the author of the book American Veda. This is a 46 minute lecture enlightening a group of Americans on the extent of influence of ancient Indian thought within modern American society. While I have not read his book, his effort appears
complementary to the efforts of Being Different."
Rajiv comment:
" Message 2255 and the thread that follows from there was a
discussion specific to how Goldberg's work is a uturn/digestion. I recommend you go through that. Superficial impressions can be misleading."
Renu asks a very interesting question:
"I heard Mr. Goldberg's talk at the U of M in Ann Arbor. My feeling was some what similar to Veena ji's. Later I read the discussions -- one question that presents itself is; so what will make us feel better? Should we let them (white Christian, Muslim and others to be like us or not)? How is Hindu Dharma to spread?
Rajiv's response:
" Same dilemma exists for every instance of digestion. Each digestion also has the effect of spreading oneself. The deer gets 'spread' widely once it gets digested into the tiger - as part of the tiger's DNA running around, as the tiger's shit being spread, as part of the powerful tiger's presence in the jungle. The price is the loss of one's separate self existence. Through the East India Company's digestion of India's wealth, one could celebrate that Indian wealth has 'spread' widely - the crown jewels in the London Tower are mainly digested Indian jewels, for instance. So lets celebrate this, ok?
Whats a better way to spread without losing one's SEPARATE SELF-EXISTENCE? I am afraid I have explained this time and time again in writing and talks, so I wont be able to do it again at this now..."
Surya follows up in a separate thread using the good cop / bad cop analogy that was also mentioned in section 2 [sorry, i edited it out, but you can read it in the original thread]
Digestion - The Good Cop Style Let us recall the good cop/bad cop roles. (This was explained by Rajiv in Invading the Sacred, pages 253-261, and since then in numerous writings and talks.) They are two sides of the same digestion coin.
Bad cops are bad mouthing Dharmic traditions and calling for conversions. They are easy to spot. They are the tigers wanting to digest the deer. Deer has no confusion - Deer sees the tiger as is and is fully ware of what the tigers want to do. Tiger has never any confusion and makes no efforts to be subtle.
Good cops are respectful and full of praises. They are not easy to spot. They are sophisticated tigers in sheep's clothing. Deer often confuse the disguised tiger to be a real sheep. Deer needs to be sophisticated and not fall for the external appearance. ...
Let us take a look at one of Phil Goldberg's blogs and analyze carefully.
Phil Goldberg writes: "one of the unique merits of the Indian spiritual heritage that colonial powers labeled Hinduism is that it's so multifaceted it makes Christianity, Judaism and Islam seem uniform by comparison. You know all those deities -- the gods and goddesses that cause outsiders to think Hinduism is polytheistic? To Hindus, they're just different forms of the one ultimate reality called Brahman. Same with avatars like Krishna and Rama."
Comment: What a nice guy! Such a friend of Hinduism. He truly understands us.
Phil Goldberg adds: "So there's plenty of room for Jesus. Most Hindus are happy to include him -- along with Buddha -- in the pantheon of incarnations, saints, gurus and holy ones they regard as worthy of reverence. In fact, if you visit any number of organizations created by Indian teachers in America, such as Swami Vivekananda's Vedanta Society or Paramahansa Yogananda's Self-Realization Fellowship, you will see portraits of Jesus in places of honor. And in some of those institutions, Christians who want to be initiated with a sacred mantra are invited to choose one associated with Jesus -- or with Mary, if they're inclined toward the Divine Feminine. It's part of a concept known as ishta devata, or cherished deity.
Comment: Phil is calling for reverse digestion!! He is suggesting that Jesus should be assimilated as an Avatar. Let us invite him to our temples for flattering talks to boost our egos and send some money his way to say thank you for being a friend.
Phil Goldberg adds: "For thousands of years, India has understood that the divine can be imagined and experienced in all kinds of ways, as in the oft-quoted verse from the Rig Veda, Ekam sat vipraha bahudha vadanti -- typically translated as, "Truth is one, the wise call it by many names." Hence, individuals are free to use their preferred form in their spiritual practices. "
Comment: Hmmm ... why is Phil suddenly bringing this up? I have seen this verse quoted by tigers to tenderize Deer before digestion. This should raise a red flag because it is being wrongly interpreted to soften and disarm Hindus. The verse is saying that truth can be seen and presented in more than one way. A convenient, but wrong, interpretation that is often invoked for this verse is that all religions offer the same truth...
Wait a minute. Is that why he suggested that there is plenty of room for Jesus? I see now that he is not suggesting assimilation of Jesus as an Avatar. Instead, is he suggesting that Hindus should find it acceptable to use Dharmic practices with Christianity?!
Phil Goldberg adds: "While researching my book, American Veda, I interviewed dozens of Christians and Jews -- among them ministers and rabbis -- who returned to their ancestral faith after a lengthy period of alienation or indifference, because the teachings that were birthed in India gave them a new perspective on what it means to be spiritual. And you don't have to wear a dhoti, put a mark on your forehead (you've already done that for Ash Wednesday anyway) or declare your allegiance to anything. There is no Hindu equivalent of what we call conversion."
Comment: OK. Not exactly cheering for Hinduism. But he wants Christians and Jews to experience spiritual practices of Hinduism and return to their respective faiths. Still no blatant digestion but getting suspicious. Some of us happy-go-lucky Hindus are happy as long as they openly acknowledge that they are digesting Dharma (rather than be angry with the thief, they are happy as long as the thief acknowledges that he stole from their specific house.)
Phil Goldberg adds: "You don't even have to call yourself a Hindu for that matter. I know it seems weird, but the tradition is so adaptable and welcoming that tens of millions of Americans orient their spiritual lives around meditation, yoga and other practices from India but don't think of themselves as Hindus."
Comment: Hello! Unadulterated, blatant, quintessential digestion!! This is typical of good-cop U-turners as described by Rajiv Malhotra.
Source
The U-turner who wants to internally harmonize what he has brought back from Dharma must digest what he likes of Dharma into his biblical DNA. This goes through various stages of removing aspects of Dharma (such as karma-reincarnation) that are incompatible with biblical DNA. Some prior Western U-turner might have already gone through this sifting process, eliminating the incompatible. Many of the popular U-turners have gained their popularity because they have created digested versions (they were involved in digestion and/or compiled what others already digested) for consumption by the mass market."
Bhattacharya responds:
"I'd suggest that as soon as Phil says "so there is plenty of room for Jesus", warning flags should go up.
At this point, we may think to ourselves: hmmmmm...plenty of room for Jesus who? Jesus Christ? But exclusivist history-centric Christian truth claims are at odds with Dharmic embodied knowing and integral unity. I bet this Phil fellow is
using a 'good cop' routine on me, any second now he'll try to digest Dharma, and remap it into synthetic Christian 'sameness'/Western Universalism."
Rajiv Malhotra presents necessary conditions for how non-Hindus, (Christians, for example), can respectfully embrace Hinduism
1) Start with mutual respect as a necessary condition that we demand.
2) "Mutual" does not mean unconditional; it has to be reciprocated from the other side. This is why Ravana, Bin Laden, Hitler type of persons do NOT deserve our respect, i.e. because they simply cannot respect others who are different.
3) History-centrism must be EXPLICITLY REJECTED by the other side, because HC results in mandatory exclusivity claims, and hence CANNOT respect others.
4) Accepting Jesus without the prerequisite of removing HC is like adopting a snake without first removing its poison. I am always inviting my Christian friends to adopt dharma and see Jesus as Ishta-devata, BUT always explaining that the concept of ishta-devata requires removing HC. No ishta-devata can be exclusive or HC as that would distort the principle of ishta-devata..."
Sameer comments:
"There is a growing section of the population in the west that calls itself Christian, wants to follow Jesus, but does not accept the history-centric exclusivity claims. It is this section that can be compatible with Dharma and I think Dharmic people ought to make them feel welcome."
Rajiv's comment:
"Not so fast. This is the group represented by Gregg in my Patheos debate. Pls read that and all the comments following his post. This mindset is also represented by Mark Tully - pls go through that video.
The point is that most of the time the non-history-centrism is a posture to help digest dharma, but upon closer inquiry there remains in the background the notion of the historical Jesus as necessary. I request that you kindly do some reading beyond the "sameness Christianity" - thats the next bridge for you to cross."
Chandramouli adds:
"... Mark Tully, suave, cultivated, genteel, rational, reasonable, global - and focussed - reveals a mindset that underpins what Rajiv has pointed out even while Tully Sahib projects a cultured universalism.
Listen, for example, to his "Life in a Seminary" .."
Raghu adds some interesting comments:
"According to Carl Jung, there are three deficiencies in the Christian Myth. These are:
firstly, the space given to women. In Catholicism there is space for a virgin pure woman.
Secondly, the space given to matter is only as a dead entity. It is also seen as the devils play ground.
Third, the space given to the other. The other is evil.
The
dharmic myths have a balance between the masculine and feminine. Every
human quality has a god, and every god has a consort. Matter is divine,
and man is one part of the infinite evolution and manifestation of
matter. Matter is Prakruthi and a primal godhead. There is no 'other' to
be fragmented, dumped with ones shadow, therefore hated. The other is
to be embraced and is part of oneself. This was explicitly stated by the
Buddha as he achieved Nirvaana.
The Dharmic
ways are therefore psychologically holistic, sociologically inclusive
and politically democratic, ecologically oriented and spiritually
grounded. That's why they are the hope for mankind. Wars will end and
the earth will be treated with love only when the myths based on the
fragmentation between the victim, the oppressor and the savior retreat
and give space to the myths of deep inner work and meditation. The
fragmented myths are not only the stuff of the Abhrahamic books but also
of every Hollywood film and TV serial. They are the subtext of every
advertising commercial. "
1. Let's be fair. Phil is saying that Jesus is compatible with Dharma but he is not saying that all religions offer the same truth.
[Moderator notes that a history-centric Jesus is simply incompatible with Hinduism and Dharmic faiths, as explained by Rajiv earlier]
This [the final part where Phil simply mouse-cliks & deletes Hinduism] I agree is objectionable. If they adopt Indic practices, they should respectfully acknowledge the source."
Surya has a brilliant followup that hits the nail on the head:
"Please ask them the following questions:
(1) Do they believe that Jesus is the Son of God? [Rajiv's comment: I would add 'literal' son, otherwise they play games with what 'son' means.]
(2) Do they believe that Jesus died to redeem us of sin?
(3) That humans can have salvation only through Jesus?
If they say NO to all three questions, we can agree that history-centric exclusivity has been dropped.
If the answer is YES to all [any] three of those questions, they have much bigger problems than worrying about compatibility with Dharma.
For example:
(1) What did Jesus achieve? Did he die in vain? How does he compare with Gandhi in achieving freedom for his people?
(2) What are the moral implications of Jesus forgiving sins of other people?
Is it morally right for Jesus to forgive someone who harmed me without me forgiving that someone first?
What are the implications of a human Jesus taking away personal responsibility by taking their sin away?
(3) What does Christianity offer that Dharmic traditions do not already offer?
...
Ergo, Christianity needs history-centrism, and hence the importance of Nicene creed to Christianity. There is no escaping.
Christianity is a very resilient religion. It has faced much opposition in its history and Nicene creed is a very well thought out expedient for its stability and survival.
Thus, if a liberal Christian says that they reject history-centrism, either they do not know the implications of what they are saying or they are lying with the intent of digesting Dharma.
This leads us to the consideration that Rajivji mentioned in his response: "The point is that most of the time the non-history-centrism is a posture to help digest dharma, but upon closer inquiry there remains in the background the notion of the historical Jesus as necessary."
Rajiv's comment:
This is exactly the sharpness of purva paksha and response that our tradition calls for. We must learn to push deeper and not settle for easy answers.
Sameer proceeds to do a Purva Paksha of the SRF (spiritual research foundation) that does not raise any red flags at a first glance. Rajiv's response:
"...Swami Kriyananda is simultaneously speaking great things about Hinduism and also Christianity WITHOUT THE CAVEAT OF REMOVING HISTORY CENTRISM ..
...Recently a western documentary maker was
scheduled to interview me for a film on spirituality. He wants to show the sameness of all paths, but after reading BD he got uncomfortable. So at the last minute he got what he wanted in an interview with a well known RKM swami in the Boston area and another with a well known "sameness" Vedanta scholar in Rochester. Both of them were glad to oblige, and not provoke with a stand that forces people out of their comfort zone. So he called me to say that he already
has the statement from Hindu experts that suffice. I face this all the time ...
... I refer you to www.HinduGoodNews.com to understand the difference between Hindu and Christians good news about dealing with the human condition....
...I am disappointed but not surprised that such a large number of well meaning persons dont seem to understand some rudimentary logic: The universality of physics does NOT mean that ALL TRUTH CLAIMS are valid. I think people dont get the idea that truth claim is different than truth. Every physics-claim by every scientist does not turn out to be true; each claim undergoes validation as per the scientific method. Just making a claim by itself does not establish its validity. We have free speech which includes the right to make claims that could be false. Physicists make all sorts of hypotheses and every hypothesis is not necessarily true. You should refer to Christian doctrine as a hypothesis, no more and no less. You must go through my detailed responses in another thread recently that: All claims of dharma are not dharmic; otherwise the ideologies or Ravana, Bib Laden, Hitler, and every random person would be dharmic. Dharma would turn into moral relativism with no standards or criteria to determine it."
Jalan has another analysis of SRF and Paramahamsa Yogananda's writings on Christ. For brevity, we leave it out, but its worth reading in the original thread.
Surya responds to one of Sameer's earlier comments on universalism of science:
"> Sameer: Dharma is a universal science - it cannot belong to any nation any more than Physics can. The original teachings of Jesus are nothing but Dharma.
Underlying principle you are using is: Universal science does not belong to any one nation. It does not follow that people can take laws of Physics and add subjective variations and send back into the world of science.... It suffices to say that modifying or adding physics knowledge is a tightly controlled and managed process and not a free for all. Should not the same be true for Dharma? "
Rajeev has the last word in this long post. For brevity, only the highlighted ones are included:
".....I do not deny that: Jesus' statement could be reinterpreted using entirely new categories and meanings to make them close to dharma. (So no use telling me how this or that swami reinterpreted. As per #1 above, we know that is a simple thing to do. What I question is the legitimacy of such reinterpretations. These new categories and meanings contradict the basic premises of Bible and Christianity, so such reinterpretations are lifting Jesus out of the context of that tradition....
.... Can you get Christians to install Krishna, Shiva, Durga, Kali, Ganesh, Hanuman into their church on the basis of sameness of divinity? Please watch my Tully debate in which I ask him to do this when he claims "we are same" and notice how he recoils at my bold suggestion."
Epilogue:
At this point, it's clear that the evidence is quite damaging in that the approach chosen by the author (Phil Goldberg), what ever may be his intent, is in fact an example of digestion of Hinduism, where he is cherry-picking Hindu concepts (ripping them from Hindu context) and doing a plug-and-play into Western Universalism, essentially deeming Hinduism to be irrelevant to Westerners today. Yet, it seems there is some more to said about this encounter. Don't miss part-2.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)