The difference between two kinds of differences: Digestible and Non-digestible

Two kinds of differences: Digestible and Non-digestible

I want to respond to a common confusion about the kind of difference we need to assert in order to protect ourselves. A difference that the other religion can adopt is not sustainable and can easily become a part of the other faith as well.

For example: Removing shoes to enter a temple, wearing tilak, eating with one’s hands without silverware, eating on a banana leaf, wearing saffron clothes, giving prasad, etc. – each of these has become common practice in Christian churches in south India. None of these differences causes any violation in the core tenets of Christianity. They see these practices as mere “culture” that can be accepted by them without any problem.

The church developed the doctrine and practice called “inculturation” precisely to encourage its followers to adopt local cultures, symbols, even festivals, etc. in order to “localize Christianity”.

This is no different than MacDonald’s adopting Paneer Burger for menus in India and Chow Mein for China. It is a very common globalization strategy to adapt products for local markets. The church gave this the name “inculturation” and experimented it for generations in Africa, Latin America before introducing systematically in India. Each adapted product is market tested, feedback given from field operations to headquarters, policies updated, new versions developed, etc. This process is ongoing very studiously.

This is why Western Indologists like to separate religion and culture, so they can reject the former and digest the latter.

What are the Hindu dharma items that the Christian host cannot digest because these items would violate core Christian tenets? These are the kinds of things explained in Being Different. If such a tenet were absorbed by the Christian side, they would need to distort it in order to make it fit their framework and assumptions. Here the Hindu side must forcefully resist letting such distortions take place – for which we need well-informed and assertive Hindus.

What would happen if Christians were to ingest such non-digestible items in their authentic form (i.e. without being able to distort them)? The result would be what I have called the poison pills.

Below is a post I received that I now want to respond to. I have removed references to a specific guru because that leads to personal fights for/against, which is silly, because what we want to do is to discuss the principles and learn.

The discussion thread was about examples of digestion; a guru’s position on yoga came up in this context. A follower of his defended him by writing the following:

‘As a counter example, I can say I first learnt one of the main essences of "Being Different" from XYZ's talks, long before Rajiv's book "Being Different" was published. Like for example his talk on uniqueness of Hindu Temples, as he says here "Nowhere else in the world, such wisdom exists", or his talk on how Indian Temples are totally different from places of worship of other religions like Churches or Mosques.’

Note that he is unconscious of the distinction between digestible and non-digestible differences. Merely praising Hinduism is useless if the issue is to explain what/why certain differences are non-negotiable for us and at the same unacceptable to the other side. The question is not how Hindu temples are superior/unique. But in what ways do they have features that are impossible for Christians to adopt and adapt? Clearly the person who wrote the above is not focusing on this, and it remains unclear whether his guru is sufficiently focusing on teaching non-digestible differences. Difference can be at many levels.

What I am requiring is impossible to do without reversing the gaze and first studying the other religion. How can you be sure that Hindu item X is non-digestible into a certain religion, and that it will act as a poison pill, if you have only a superficial idea of that religion?

This is the crux of the matter. Teachers who are mixed up about the other religion, perhaps partly because they want to be politically correct with them, simply lack the depth of knowledge about the other religion to be able to formulate Hindu dharma in non-digestible terms. They can go on praising Hinduism, but that does not address the issue of digestion.

Sufism: The latest fashion statement among Hindus

This introductory post on 'Sufi' brings to your attention how Hindus are constantly found wanting in assessing the dangers that will eventually confront them if they are not vigilant to the modes and forms of digestion prevalent around them today. Sufism is one such attractive and subtle mode of inculturation and digestion that has enticed a large number of Hindus particularly among the elites (read 'secular') in India and the diaspora in the West.

While this post focuses primarily on a current thread in the forum, we also provide links to other threads where the subject has surfaced before and highlight some of Rajiv Malhotra's comments. Interested readers can navigate to the discussions to gain a more in-depth understanding of the what is going on. First to the particulars of this thread:

As we have just celebrated Ganesh chaturthi, Rajiv Malhotra wrote in to say:

Last evening there was a high class event in my neighborhood thrown by a wealth Hindu family. It featured sufi quwalli singers.

I have been down with flu for 3 days so I could not have gone in any cse. But it was called a great success by many. Strange way to celebrate Ganesh Chaturthi!

Clearly, the digestion into Islam/Sufism/Urdu is a serious issue deserving discussion. This is the high fashion among north Indian Hindus.

Ashok replied:

A couple of months ago I sat through a very Hindu wedding reception with similar 'Alla-hoo, Alla - hoo' and 'Khwaja mere Khwaja' being sung and danced to with great enthusiasm by the troupe. 

I lightheartedly objected amongst those at my table and although they too felt a bit uneasy when I mentioned it, the general feeling was 'what a good singer - he reached the finals in the Britain Has Got Talent TV show, you know'. 

It would have been very rude of me to mention it to the host (who obviously paid for this) but I would not be surprised if he was ambushed into this and was feeling sorry for not having vetted the songs in advance. 

I am mentioning this here, so none of us make a similar mistake. 

To the above, Rajiv responded by saying that he was in disagreement about the fact that those Hindus who are actually sponsoring such sufi programs at their celebratory gatherings might be naive or careless about checking facts. Rajiv was of the opinion that such Hindus genuinely loved the music and that they were willing to pay for this. He added:

I am told yesterday's event [the one near his place for Ganesh Chaturthi] was paid by every attendee. 90% were Hindus, the same ones who go for pujas to the temples. 10% were Pakistani Muslims, delighted to see this easy entry.

The sales pitch yesterday was that sufism unites all religions. God is one. So whats the problem singing to God this way? There was a nice intro explained to sufism, which the Hindus lapped up. Nobody disagreed at all. It was a huge success. Many more Hindus now want to host a similar event in their homes.

Rajiv also provided a link which profiles the group that had performed at the puja.

Ananth then wrote in referring from a paper titled "The Mughals, the Sufi Shaikhs and the Formation of the Akbari Dispensation" by Muzaffar Alam. He said:

Muzaffar Alam (Ref 1, p171--172) says that Baqi-Billah, a Naqshbandi Sufi, opposed the importance of music, considered mysticism of secondary importance, and emphasized the dividing line between a believer and an infidel.  When Baqi-Billah fell ill, his mother recommended a Hindu doctor.  Because Baqi-Billah emphasized obedience to parents, he obeyed his mother, but when the Hindu doctor examined him, Baqi-Billah refused to make eye contact with the doctor.

What this shows is that among Sufis, there was disagreement about how much tolerance Muslims had to show to Hindus.  It is true that some Sufis did consider other religions on par with Islam (Ref 1, p 162).  Those Sufis would satisfy Rajiv's criterion of mutual respect (Being Different).  But many Sufis were not interested in the principle of mutual respect. 

The practice of left-leaning secularists is to gloss over this fact.  Left-leaning secularists only speak of the those Sufis who actually showed mutual respect.  But how important were they to practicing Muslims?

Sant wrote in to give a perspective on the lead singer of the group that was asked to perform at the puja near Rajiv's place. He said:

The lead vocalist is Sonny K Mehta has been the President of Hindu Students Association.

Years ago, I together with a number of Hindu elders in Washington DC area had collected funds to promote their activities. Sometime later to my surprise turned to this form of entertainment.

The original Hindu Students organization at the university campuses in the US were getting discredited.

Rajiv responded that it was interesting to see how change happened in individuals within as short a time span as 3 years (the article linked above in Sant's post is dated in 2011); the fact that it seemed that less and less of the people considered leaders and role models by the Hindu diaspora were real "Hindus"; that a Hindu student leader in the USA had turned into a sufi singer.

Other forum members responded on this thread. Champak wrote in to say how sufi music had become a regular fixture at the Ganga Mahotsav held at Varanasi every year. Saptaswara talked of how there was a a qawwali performace at Chinmaya Mission temple in Boston. Prayas wrote in to say that while Hindus agonized about sufi music becoming so popular, it was also important that Hindus questioned themselves on why they stopped popularizing and patronizing Hindustani and Carnatic classical music among their kids. Rohit spoke about the recent trend of dharmic festivals being corrupted these days with the introduction of extremely frivolous forms of entertainment. In response, Rajiv expanded on the topic thus:

1) How far back the digestion occurred is irrelevant: Our calendar got replaced by western calendar long back. But the effect of this change is v. important to understand. One day people will say we are English speakers for generations, so why bother discussing it? Maybe in 20 years most Indians will practice Christian Yoga and scholars trying to uncover the dogestion will be told this is an old thing so leave it alone. Point: Though sufism might be old in India, that does not make any difference on what we must think of it.

Analogy: Smoking tobacco became popularized in India by the Mughal court long ago. That should not prevent us from fighting against it.

2) Understand the philosophical dimension first: I have explained in Youtubes and/or blogs how advaita vedanta and sufism differ in serious ways. Similarity, eys. But apple is similar to orange does not make them interchangeable or the same. Similarity means certain overlap exists between x and y. Thats true of any to objects. Even shit and prasad share the fact that both are made of the same electrons, protons, neutrons; hence one could say they are the same because they are made of identical ingredients. Difference is what makes an entity what it is. At the human level of consciousness where dharma is enacted, how we relate to something is as per whats distinct about it. Otherwise there would be no difference between dharma and adharma, between tamas and sattva, between right and wrong. Once you appreciate whats different about sufism then you can converse intelligently, beyond superficialities.

3) Understand the political past of sufism in India: Sufis were the Good Cops sent to soften the target, and then the Bad Cops (tough, radical Muslims) could then defeat the compromised Hindus. Please try to understand this history.

4) Pop culture can be understood only after 2 3: All digestion facilitators are nice guys, goody-goody, we are same, global brotherhood, no boundaries, etc.Tell them to practice this in the other side. Why dont the Sufi festival people in Delhi hold it in Jama Masjid? In Mecca? After all, this would present the world a great face for Islam. The Nawab running the Delhi Sufi fest was shocked at my question in a delhi elite farmhouse gathering of Hindu morons - all in awe of his aristocracy. Most Hindus present sided with him that we need not go into it, just sit back and enjoy. But I persisted. Finally, he told me that the "authorities at major mosques will not allow music, sufi or not". So this should be one's opportunity to open the door to further inquiry. 

5) Read Muslims scholars on the differences between Sufism and mainstream Islam: You must realize Sufism is outside the fortress, meant to appease and tempt non Muslims in the door. Its a strategic deployment, just like inculturation by the church in the third world to make the natives happy, and remove barriers to conversion.

Shalini added to the discussion by providing some links on sufism. Some of the links are provided below.

The Wiki entry on sufism states:

Muslims and mainstream scholars of Islam define Sufism as simply the name for the inner or esoteric dimension of Islam^[2] which is supported and complemented by outward or exoteric practices of Islam, such as Islamic law.^[15] In this view, "it is absolutely necessary to be a Muslim" to be a true Sufi, because Sufism's "methods are inoperative without" Muslim "affiliation".^[16] In contrast, author Idries Shah states Sufi philosophy is universal in nature, its roots predating the rise of Islam and Christianity.^[17] Some schools of Sufism in Western countries allow non-Muslims to receive "instructions on following the Sufi path".^[18] Some Muslim opponents of Sufism also consider it outside the sphere of Islam.^[2][19]...

Its also states:

The rise of Islamic civilization coincides strongly with the spread of Sufi philosophy in Islam. The spread of Sufism has been considered a definitive factor in the spread of Islam, and in the creation of integrally Islamic cultures, especially in Africa^[52] and Asia. 

Here is a google books link which in fact shows that sufism in medieval times, was a way for forcible conversion particularly in Bengal. Interestingly, the book is a critique of Islam by M.A Khan, a person who left Islam for reasons mentioned here.

In an earlier thread relating to this topic, the context for Rajiv's response above was provided by Vijendran who noted:

The irony is that the US/European universities like Harvard are introducing Bhagawad Gita as a part of the standard texts for their MBA programs, while the Indian IIMs are stuck with the western ideals! ..

This comment from Rajiv underlines how mentally colonized Hindus believe sufi is "cool".

Rajiv responded thus:

 Indian universities are also teaching BG in IIMs. ...The problem is different. 

Indians are borrowing spirituality from the west which the west appropriated has from India - this is called stage 5 of Uturn, the Pizza effect. Hence, [Howard Gardner?] teaches multiple intelligences at Tata, Infosys and other corporate houses even though we have more profound versions of it in dharma; Andrew Cohen and Eckhart Tolle type of frauds impress Indians because they see it as "Made in USA" spirituality. Many secular folks I know in Delhi who are outright embarrassed by things Hindu, flock to such events because its cool. In the same way, its cool to get "sufi" teachings even though the same or deeper versions are found in Hinduism.

To follow this entire thread go here on this blog.

On another thread, Rajiv touched upon the use of sufism as a tool for digestion. The context was provided by a conversation between Jeffrey and Maria, on the point of how Hindus are different and how one needs to take firm positions.

Rajiv response was to point out that those who didn't take clear positions and preferred to sit on the fence advocating sameness of religions, were generally stage 2 u-turners. He reiterated that this phase was dangerous because the mirage of sameness led to a false "feel good" factor among Hindus who believed they were legitimized by a westerner. He also gave the example of Unitarians who tried hard to make "whitened Bengalis" (or sameness experts) of Ram Mohan Roy and other Bengali bhadralok with the result that they are an extremely marginalized (<1%) group among the US Christian population. He uses this example to drive home the point that most other Christian denominations reject "sameness". Rajiv also uses the fashion for sufism (a digestion tool) among Hindus today, pointing out that only a very small portion of mosques allow sufi music and dance. He stresses that the core of Islam has no place for sufism.

To follow the entire thread, join the discussion. Here is the link to that particular discussion on yahoo groups. Here is the summary of that thread on this blog.

RMF Summary: Week of March 23 - 29, 2013

March 24 (continuing discussion)
Pope Francis calls for "respect" for all religions
Is it the first time that a pope said something like this? If true Rajivji's stand on mutual respect is accepted:Pope Francis calls for 'respect...

Tariyal comments: "... pope will never give equal respect to the Dharmic people. This is because of the fundamental dogma of Christianity that man is a born sinner and he or she can only be saved through Jesus Christ. Also the old testament forbids worshipping of false gods. To give equal respect to us will mean they would not be Christians any more. So an avowed Christian respecting our Dharmic traditions is an oxymoron. Cannot happen. Can only happen if the person will give up the core dogma, which means he or she is not a Christian anymore."

Alex responds: "Reg. [] Tariyal's following comments, I would like to, as a Christian respectfully offer the following comments:

"A true Christian especially a pope will never give equal respect to the Dharmic people."

While I do not know whether the new Pope is hypocritical or not when he spoke about respecting all faiths, but I do know that Dr. Tariyal is factually
incorrect when he says that a "true Christian will never give equal respect to the Dharmic people".

There are hundreds of millions of "true" Christians all over the world, who do take seriously the admonitions of Jesus of Nazareth to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" & "love thy neighbor as thyself". They are all required to give equal respect to followers of all faiths, Dharmic religions included.

.... Jesus was preaching to the Jews in the role of a Rabbi who was trying to reform the Jewish religion. He did not "establish" Christianity. His followers established that faith which got interpreted in many different ways and
generated many sects of Christianity, just as it happened in all religions including Sanatana Dharma.

.... Those statements of Dr. Tariyal, I submit are based on his own interpretation of Christianity. And, it is very unfortunate that Dr.Tariyal has been too quick to
generalize without perhaps having interacted with true followers of the tenets of Jesus who value more than anything, first, the golden rule of do unto others
as you would have them do unto you and second,to love thy neighbor as thyself.

Such Christians are in the millions and so are many millions in the Dharmic faiths who do not hold []Tariyal's views nor are they as vehement as he is in
asserting as to who is a Christian and who is not.

Belief in God is a deeply personal matter and respecting one's neighbor requires the humility not to be judgmental in proclaiming who is a true follower of one religion or another. That is best left to the believer and his or her
conscience.

Not withstanding Dr.Tariyal's assertion, I as a follower of the tenets of Jesus of Nazareth, do respect and love people of all faiths and I also respect and love those who profess no faith in God. ..."

Rajiv comment: ... So how do I recommend reconciling these views?

Though Tariyal ji means well, I find that most Hindus lack adequate understanding of Christianity, and hence they conflate too many things into simplistic categories. To be able to discuss with credibility in well-informed
forums, Hindus must learn the important differences among each of the following aspects of Christianity:

1) Jesus' own utterances.
2) Bible as a collection of utterances by many voices of which Jesus is just one. (This means Bible cannot be seen as shruti, but evaluated as smriti - like a purana perhaps.) Pls note that there are many persons who reject Bible as
literal word while worshiping Jesus.
3) Theologies formulated by numerous persons since Jesus onwards.
4) Belief systems of the Catholic Church.
5) Belief systems of the Eastern Orthodox Church. (Alex belongs here.)
6) Belief systems of the mainline Protestant Churches.
7) Belief systems of the non-mainline Protestants - pentacostals, mormons, etc.
8) Philosophies of numerous Christian rebels today, who in turn are also having many diverse views amongst themselves...

It is better to articulate an issue, and invite the other party to respond with a stand. Let each Christian thus be able to decide for himself where he stands.

In this spirit. I request Alex to inform us of his stand (which may have nothing to do with some institutional "Christianity" per se) on the Nicene Creed as it
relates to Hindu tenets. Specifically:
- does he accept it literally or metaphorically?
- what is the status of Hindu avataras, deities such as Shiva, Devi, etc?
- how does he see principles like karma-reincarnation?
- what is his position on conversions being done in India?"

Maria adds:
"Alex is right that there are millions of ‘respectful’ Christians who love Jesus and would never convert anyone. However, that is not the point.  Christianity and Islam (and each sect of them) claim that they are the only true faith. They indoctrinate their flock. Before each mentioning of “Catholic Church” in Germany, there was the prefix “alleinseligmachende”, which means “which can alone give salvation”. .....Most Christians at least in Europe, would not condone conversion; in fact, many do not even believe that conversion is still happening today.

The point is that the different Churches are on a conversion spree in India and probably in many other places, too. So if the Pope wants to give respect, he cannot possibly condone trying by hook and crook (that’s what happens) to convert Hindus. He would have to make an announcement to this effect if he was sincere..."



Alex responds to Rajiv:
"...my article on Proselytization in India which was subsequently published in Sulekha. Its link is provided below. .... recommend that they read the last page where I have sought the inclusion of a prohibition against Proselytization in the UN's Declaration of Human Rights. The link below will answer the last item on your list, viz., my position on religious conversions in India.

... Reg. Nicene Creed, though my Church believes in the Nicene Creed (431 CE) I do not! The Church has every right to ex-communicate me if it chooses to do so for
that... But, there are far too many like me who do not subscribe to everything that the Church demands. I also do not believe as many others also do not, that the Bible is inerrant. Thank God, the Eastern Orthodox Churches do not believe in the infallibility of their Patriarchs! For me, the Jefferson's Bible is quite sufficient for my understanding of the teachings of Jesus.

Reg. Hindu avatars, deities, Shiva, Devi etc…the way I understand avatars is that they are different manifestations of the transcendent God...

For me, Shiva is the Supreme God of Shaivites, also called Mahadeva. Devi (if you mean Shiva's consort Parvati) is the Supreme manifestation of Shakti which
showers unconditional love on all her children. Interestingly, in the Eastern Orthodox Christianity, the Holy Spirit is called Shekinah (feminine) as is the case in Judaism. Shekinah is also endowed with the power of showering unconditional love on all of `creation".

Reg. Karma, I do not see any contradiction between that concept in Sanatana Dharma and orthodox Christianity. For e.g., In Galatians (6:7) it is stated that "For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap". I also believe that one does not have to wait for the next birth to reap the outcomes of one's action.

Reg. Reincarnation, there is some evidence in the Bible, that the Jews also believed in reincarnation. For e.g. In Matthew 11:14, Jesus speculated that John the Baptist could be Elijah, the Old Testament prophet reincarnated! In John 9:2, some disciples of Jesus brought a blind man to be healed by Jesus and asked Jesus, "whose sin is this, this man's or his parent's?" I tend to believe in both more than I reject them outright. But, in my Eastern Orthodox Church, both Karma and Reincarnation are not accepted.

..While all religions preach that in one form or another, it is unfortunate that both the golden rule of treating others as you would like to be treated and being a true and loving neighbor are both breached more often than they are followed. ... I am an American of Christian faith and
a Hindu by culture. That self-identification is my privilege and not of the Church or any one else for that matter."

Rajiv comment: I am glad Alex accepted the invite to respond to questions. This egroup should be a forum for respectful discussions even when we disagree. Let
us maintain that tone and continue the thread. "

Maria asks Alex:

"... intrigued why you still identify as a Christian, even though you (like me) fall clearly into the ‘heretics’ category and if we had lived a few centuries earlier, our lives would have been in danger. I may oversimplify again (my forte, Rajivji), but in my view whatever is good and helpful in Christianity is there already since long in Hindu Dharma (and there is even much much more that is helpful) and what is bad and divisive in Christianity, both of us have rejected. But since there is no pick and choose option in Christianity, both of us are basically not Christians anymore.

... could you imagine considering yourself a Hindu by culture who has Jesus as his Ishta devata? Keeping all songs, prayers, rituals, but considering him as one among many different ‘ways’ that can lead to the truth? ...."

Alex answers:

".....there is no religion that has all its followers adhering to everything that religions demand or their "dogmas" dictate. Sanatana Dharma is no exception to this.

All faiths, including Christianity and its different denominations have their own "dogmas". ... rational human beings think for themselves as to what is sensible and what is not for them to maintain their relationship with their understanding of "God".

In fact, I know that even among Christians (as in other faiths) there are agnostics who still go to their places of worship for social reasons or as an "insurance" against their "wrong bets"! ...

Do all Sanatana Dharmis, be they Shaivites, Vaishnavites, Lingayats, or whatever, do they follow all of their respective "creedal" requirements? No, they do not. If one were to apply your logic, they should not consider themselves Sanatana Dharmis. (I make a distinction between Hinduism which is a culture of the Indian subcontinent and Sanatana Dharma which is the religion of the large majority of the people of the Indian subcontinent.)

I would also venture to say that the large majority of most of the World's Religions do not follow everything that their respective religions proclaim as their "dogmas". As to your assertion, that there is no "pick and choose" option in Christianity, I submit that you are in error, that is if you have observed the behavior of "practicing Christians". For example, this is the season of Lent. Do you really believe that all "practicing" Christians observe fasting and or avoid eating meat, fish etc?

Finally, why I remain a Christian you ask... I find that the more I read Advaita Vedanta, the more congruence I find between the seminal sayings of Jesus and what I find in Vedanta. I see my religious identity and other identities as "my" labels and I see no reason to change any of them: I am an Indian by birth, American by naturalization, Christian by faith and Hindu by culture. ... I am not ashamed of any of my identities, nor will I ever consider courteous for anyone else to define the "purity" of my faith or challenge the legitimacy of any of my identities since I have earned them all by legitimate and rational means. ..." 

tvikhanas asks Alex:

" 1. You admit that Bible is fallible but at the same time you feel compelled to see traces of karma and reincarnation in Bible (a position contradicting the
official position). Why do you feel the need to find these ideas in Bible?

2. You say you are culturally a Hindu. What does it translate to in practice? How do we prevent main stream predatory churches from using that as a shield for
inculturation?

3. Is it even possible to separate Hindu thought into "cultural" and "religious" buckets? These concepts like "secularism" evolved in an different milleu and cannot be applied so easily to India. As an organically evolving entity, every aspect of Indic "culture" is tied to "religion"; there is no clean demarcation.
Thus, the reason for putting bindi/tilak is not merely cultural or fashion.

4. Through the examples of narrow minded Hindus you claim that even the so called followers of Dharma are not really following it and that one can follow Dharma even though one doesn't belong to the traditional schools. This I think every true follower of Dharma will grant: there are no clubs to belong to be "dharmic". But the reverse is not true. If you belong to some clubs you will be
prevented from following (or at least it will be very hard) Dharma. ...Does that bother you?

5. As you pointed out there are narrow minded individuals among Hindus as well and as you say that's human nature. The question is are these lower impulses
empowered by the religion. In case of Hinduism there is no sanction for them. There is no main stream text or acharya that sanctions narrow minded sectarianism and vast majority freely visit all temples. The same is not true
for Christianity and Islam which explicitly exploit the lowest fears & drives in their quest for domination. And the fruits of these religions can be seen in their core followers. " 

Surya responds to Alex:

"...You most certainly do not have to justify your faith to anyone. You do not have to justify or feel compelled to explain and defend your faith in Jesus as your savior. It is entirely your choice and you choice will be respected on this board because you have respected the freedom and
choice of those who follow Dharma traditions. That is the only way for mutual respect.

You see the sad predicament though. When you take proselytization and digestion out, there is no need to fight, be on the offensive. Restraint in your comments as you fend off attacks shows that.

Dharma traditions face the same. Unfortunately, the digesting or proselytizing religions (or sects) do not relent. They see the failure of the other side to respond as an opportunity to go for a kill. To be clear, digestion also exists in the secular variant of Western Universalism which is focused on hegemony and civilizational intolerance. Proselytization and digestion are offensive,
intolerant, and disrespectful.

.....Unfortunately, many Christians of Indian descent are becoming increasingly this way too. Hopefully, forum members read your comments and see you in a different light." 

Rajiv responds:

"I agree with Surya below that we should close this thread and it has served a good purpose. My own conclusions are:
- Alex is not required to defend all Christians or the Church, when he has already written extensively against proselytizing. When a man distances himself from some institution, its silly asking him to defend that institution or blame him for the conduct of other members.
- Given the above, he is only explaining his own PERSONAL faith, and the rest is rendered irrelevant.
- We need to encourage more Christians to be like him, i.e. challenge from within that system of belief.
- Asking him to become like us means having one less Christian ally and just one more Hindu.
- Having said all this, I want to now clarify: Alex's "sameness" is from Christianity leading towards Hinduism. I WOULD NOT ENCOURAGE THE REVERSE DIRECTION, I.E. WHERE HINDUS ADVOCATE SAMENESS TOWARDS CHRISTIANITY. Yes, this is a double standard but I am prepared to defend it. While Christians are well
grounded in identity based on history-centrism, most Hindus are confused/morons. Therefore, advocating sameness is ill-advised now. Playing the game of diplomacy towards other faiths requires expertise that is well over the heads of most Hindus, incl most Hindu leaders. So its best avoided until we first achieve a
much higher standard of identity formation. That is the goal for BD to initiate." 

Arun comments:

"In the spirit of Being Different, we would recognize and appreciate the many strains of Christianity, and know that some of them do live with mutual respect with us; and some of them don't. (This is a matter of lived experience, and not a matter that can be decided by theory.)

Further, we do not grant the followers of the intolerant varieties of Christianity the power to decide "who is a true Christian"? They can make their judgment, we are not obliged to accept it.

Incidentally, we make the same mistake with Islam - we implicitly or explicitly agree with the fundamentalists that they own the definition of "who is a true Muslim? " .." 

Anantha asks:

"I've heard a lot of people say "I'm culturally Hindu but Christian by religion". However, it strikes me as extremely telling that I have never heard anyone say "I'm culturally Christian but Hindu by religion". ... is it indeed possible to be "Christian by culture and Hindu by religion"? If yes, then what does living such a life entail?" 

Surya responds to Anantha's question:

"Rajivji's concepts of integral and synthetic unity explain your questions.

For Dharma traditions culture is not separate from their traditions.  Much has been written on this forum on how music, dance, and other art forms are integral to Dharma traditions. Thus, one cannot separate "religion" from "culture" with Dharma traditions.  A Hindu is confused to hear such statements because, even unknowingly, such integral unity is deep rooted.   

Ravi Zachariah, a Christian apologist, said that when other religions were absorbed into Christianity only their culture was retained in Christianity.  He uses this to explain to new converts to drop their "religion" but keep the culture if they want.  Rajivji calls this synthetic unity which could be for any number of reasons including opportunistic maneuvering.  In India, this is going on in the name of inculturation.

Rajivji explains that inculturation of integral aspects of Dharma is really digestion.  Digestion has happened before.  Pagan religions disappeared but the "Christmas tree" has been digested and still survives.

Rajivji has explained as "Himsa" when something integral such as Bharatanatyam is being separated out and treated as secular art form.  A Hindu is flabbergasted to see Jesus mudras in Bharatanatyam not because Christianity will gain social acceptance but because what is integral to Dharma has  been split asunder."

 

Venkat notes:

"This seems to a case of moderate peaceful Christians vs fundamentalist conversion prone Christians, in this case also good cop vs bad cop.

In India at least, we seldom hear the voices of such moderate peaceful Christians talking against conversions, let alone against the fundamentalists and the harm they are doing to society..."

 

Rajiv comment: Agreed.

So can we encourage some good cops to break ranks and publicly turn hostile against the proselytizing bad cops? I have seen Alex do just that since the past 2 decades.

This INTERNAL dissent from within Christianity is helpful to us, and we must encourage this. We are not strong enough in the kurukshetra by ourselves to fight the might of well-entrenched powerful nexuses, and we do need allies. "

 

Wadhwa asks:

".... I would also like to know  stand of Mr.Alex on the following point: 

 

"Shall mere faith in Christ lead to canceling  or negating  ones sins or bad karmas"? 

 

Here I would like to add that in a 3 day debate between Swami Dayanand Saraswati and  Dr.T.J. Scott(a Christian missionary), in August 1879, at Barilly one of the subjects discussed was: 'Can sins be pardoned through Grace or repentence?'  The stand of Swamji was that mere faith in Christ cannot help any one in undoing the effect of ones sins or bad karmas. He said that inevitably, every one gets punishment or reward as per each  deed or karma."

 

Alex responds:

"As to your question reg. "mere faith in Christ alone lead to canceling one's sins/karma etc".

My answer is NO. And, I believe that I can find you support in the New Testament (see: James 2:20., "O vain man, faith without works is dead".) But, please read
the verses above to get the context of my assertion.

I will hasten to add that there are passages elsewhere in the Bible where faith alone will suffice!

In the scriptures of all the world's major faiths, one can find contradictions in texts and the beliefs of its followers. Sanatana Dharma is no exception to this.

May I ask you two questions to highlight this point: 1)why do millions of followers of Sanatana Dharma dip in the Ganges River during Kumbh Mela and believe that by doing so their sins will be forgiven and at least some of their bad karma can be wiped out?

2) Why does the most pluralistic of all faiths that I know and admire greatly (Sanatana Dharma)have sects like Lingayats who shun Krishna/Vishnu and Ayyangars
who shun the worship of Shiva? In my neighborhood, I was glad to see the construction of a Shiva-Vishnu temple, but soon after its construction,the south
Indians Shaivites split off and constructed a Murugan Temple (brother of Ganesh) within the stone throw of the Shiva-Vishnu temple!

All faiths have human failings being superimposed on their respective belief systems. Therefore, in my humble opinion, it is counter-productive to throw stones at the belief systems of others. Worse still is the penchant of some to judge others as to who is a true Christian, true Muslim or true follower of Sanatana Dharma. A fully evolved follower of any faith will know that it is the
height of ignorance to judge another person's purity of faith.

Unlike others who are ridden with "avidya" I would dare not brand or call them as being not "true followers" of Sanatana Dharma because my common code of ethics (not just my faith) has taught me not to judge another's faith or lack of it. If you have the time, please answer my question. Thanks." 

Tariyal responds:

"I agree with the comments of Alex. However, he is defining Christians in his own convenient way. As a follower of teaching of Christ he is correct that millions of people may follow what he follows as a person, and he has elected to call himself a Christian. However, the meaning of Christian as defined by the current Churches, be it Catholic or the various Protestant ones requires that the person believe in the central dogma of Christianity....

.. In summary I do not disagree with the basic sense of Comments by Alex, but I define a true Christian as a follower of the accepted Christian Dogma. And with that Caveat I stand by my comments."

 

Alex responds:

".... The Baptists, Mormons, Pentecostals, Jehovah's witnesses, Church of Christ, & Seventh Day Adventists do not accept the Nicene Creed. A few of these sects do not believe in the Trinity as well. They also call themselves Christians.

Majority of Eastern Orthodox scholars accept inclusivism. While holding the view to the centrality of Christ for themselves,they acknowledge that salvation
can be found outside of Christianity. And, I must add that they do not proselytize.

Contrary to your assertion, there is no accepted dogma to subscribe to for anyone to call himself/herself as a true Christian. It is between the follower of that faith and his conscience to determine as to whether he or she is being
true to his/her ishta Devata.

I would never ever dare to judge you or assert that you are not behaving as a true follower of Sanatana Dharma because of your expressed eagerness to judge
others like me, since that can be construed as due to avidya, a common failing of the human condition brought about by one's inability to subordinate one's ego.

..... By the way, if you would google the World Council of Churches (WCC), and query "salvification outside the church" you will be surprised to find that there are many other Christian sects (besides mine) which concede that there are indeed other faith systems by which a human being can find salvation. Unfortunately, the Roman Catholic Church is not yet a full member of the WCC. Hope Pope Francis will join that organization which also has come out against proselytization, but not to the extent that I would like WCC to do...." 

March 25
Saket asks: In Hindu traditions the practice is to cremate the body after death. However I have observed that when a human is less than one year old that is navjat , in Hindu traditions he is buried.  Can someone highlight why this minor exception is made in case of navjat?  

Devendra responds:

"Hindu traditions do have reasons behind their rituals. Death ceremony is also considered an important ritual. One reason behind burial of a child,as opposed to cremation,upon his death is that he has not yet developed attachment to his body,so there is no need to destroy it by cremation..."

Vishwa adds:

"Do note that the pre-Vedic Indus Valley civilization had many burial grounds. Burial was quite a common practice in that civilization." 

KK comments:

"For infants and Sanyasis and Saints, there is no unfulfilled/pending Karma that might attract the 'Jeeva' to hover around the dead body, hence no harm in burying. In the case of Sant-Mahaatmaas, even their 'dead' body helps the followers by inspiring duty/devotion.

For all others, merging with Pancha Bhootas/the last Yaaga is one thing as also the possibility that if they are unable to let go of their Naama-Roopa even after physical death burning on a pyre might ensure an easier onward journey.....nothing to 'go back to'
Pregnant women are also not cremated,... " 

Ashok adds: "......perhaps we ought to look at ourselves a bit to see why is it that Hindus convert. Could it be that we do treat some if our own less favourably and they do not feel supported?

As Rajiv ji has earlier pointed out, there are two levels of religion. One consists of those like me who just practice it (and are the vast majority, the followers) and those that deal with it at a higher level and are in a position to discuss issues with their counterparts in other religions. These would be our Akhara leaders, our saints, our Shankaracharyas and our intellectuals like Rajiv ji. As a 'follower' I would only interact with 'followers' of other religions. Anyway, coming back to the point, today I feel betrayed by those in power in my own religion. And I am neither the oppressed nor financially challenged. 

Perhaps we need to look at ourselves and discuss ways of supporting our oppressed brethren in addition to of course supporting our intellectuals with our voice thoughts,minds and pockets. "

[there are some personal and poignant discussions here that are left out].

 

 

March 27

Interesting paper questioning Western Universalism in Psychology
Alakshendra shares: I just came across this interesting paper which states that broad claims about human psychology and behaviour based on narrow samples from Western societies are regularly published and questions the practise. It makes a very interesting read. Specially the term WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic) used for the folks of the west ...

Below is a part of the paper which you might like:
************************************
Research in moral psychology also indicates that non-Western adults and Western religious conservatives rely on a wider range of moral principles than amorality of justice ..... In sum,the high,secular Western populations that have been the primary target of study thus far appear unusual in a global context, based on their peculiar reliance on a single foundation for moral reasoning (based on justice and individual rights).
************************************

The paper also describes the commonalities and the nuances of American from the rest of the west"

Rajiv adds: "A great bit of research that illustrates how Western Universalism (in this case in the field of psychology and ethics) has been wrongfully imposed upon other cultures. It is amazing how many "eminent" Indian psychologists have adopted such WU ideas."

 

March 27

video of padre casper raj who is seen in every riot out of TN.
Chandra shares: video of padre casper raj who is seen in every riot out of TN. Embroiled in 2G scam too. Should Lankan players be made hostage to politics? ... 

 

RMF Summary: Week of February 3 - 9, 2013

The forum turned two! Congratulations to all participants and thanks to Rajiv ji
 
February 4 (continuing discussion from February 3)
''We need to study western ‘White’ culture on our own terms'

Dear Rajiv-ji, This refers to your recent blog post titled *'**' We need to study western ‘White’ culture on our own terms' ... Manish responds to a previous comment: "... Hindus, IMHO, have only two options at the current juncture in our history --- congregate or perish ! Stark, simple. It is only at these congregations that we shall be able to assert our collective identity with full confidence. ....If it means changing our millenia old habit of non-congregation, then we must change that habit. It has been done --- by the Arya Samajis, for instance. It won't be easy, for sure, but giving up is not an option. Btw, you have highlighted a very interesting difference b/w the Hindu communities of Canada and US..." Rajiv comment: "But this also requires competent, selfless leadership. Otherwise the "congregation", is misled as we often find today. The leadership job description demands solid knowledge of the global discourse kurukshetra, which I must say very, very few leaders have. They are too busy inside the organization playing personal politics to impress and climb up. Most individuals I know lack the ability to do concentrated intellectual work over a long term to produce breakthrough results. .... they are tamasic-rajasic combo. Just look at some recent fund raising campaigns going on - sucking in millions of dollars of the community with hype and promises, but these leaders have zero experience to actually do anything like this. They wasted their lives in useless pursuits and back slapping each other with mutual congratulations. Now in their late years they are desperate to show some result. So its easy for them to appropriate some slogans, one liners, slick Powerpoints. But that is hollow. In other words, our community lacks a solid leadership training institution. I mean at the level of IIMs where they could learn the skills to be on the world stage representing dharma."  Anila shares an Indo-Canadian perspective: ".... I must indicate that while America does operate more like a melting pot and Canada is more like a "mosaic" there is still no comparison to the level of self-confidence and strength of identity seen in other immigrant cultures, especially amongst us second generation youngsters born here in North America. Growing up in Canada, in spite of the occasional cultural shows, festivals and get-togethers with fellow Indian families that I attended, there was a sense of isolation from the friends I had in school and the manner in which they lived their lives. In my younger years, I often found myself (and many youth) feeling that the expectations of Indian standards of culture, tradition and morality were being imposed upon us and alienating us from the remaining youngsters. It took me some years of growth to finally learn what it was that my parents were trying to teach me, and the realization came most powerfully when I finally engaged with peers who were proud of their culture (select students from India or students who were brought up here but were lucky enough to have been taught from a young age about the details of culture history). ....it is also important to create spaces for youth to learn about their past, learn about their religious background and also be given the freedom to debate issues with one another. ...This freedom to question, to understand all aspects of life on this planet by seeking truth, is the very essence of Hindu philosophy (and I will go so far as to indicate that it is not as powerfully prescribed in other cultures or religions). ....Simply being in a community with families whose parents were from the same motherland is not enough to inspire pride and true understanding of culture. It is important that youngsters learn the basics of Hindu philosophy, and learn their history, so that they can teach the next generations of our diaspora and be proud of who they are in spite of the fact they are not like the others they interact with daily. And from what I am seeing more and more, the need for this kind of education lies not only here, but also in India....."  February 3 Prashanth: "Hi Was wondering if the group has come across this piece of news about our national security advisor's assertion in Munich. I am just wondering if Rajivji's influence is hitting South Block already Rajiv comment: He was at the closed door meeting at Indian International Center where they discussed "Breaking India", chaired by former Foreign Secretary, Kanwal Sibal. BTW, the new jacket of BI has the endorsement by Kanwal Sibal which is a very important statement. See: http://www.breakingindia.com/new-book-cover/"  Srinath says: "... Abrahamic religions eliminate competition from native (non history centric) spiritualities by digesting them as well - when genocide is either impractical or the value added by digesting the prey is higher than its total elimination.  Even their violent methods are a brute form of digestion .... Digestion infuses new life and ideas into a parasitic host which is non self-sustaining and over time would have collapsed under its own weight of dogma - existence of other creative civilizations allow the conflict to be externalized, offering outlets for frustrations and channelizing rebellious tendencies towards conquest (death in battle etc. incentivized by core requirements of host survival/expansion). "  [egroup commentators react to Rajiv's MSNBC discussion] February 4 Recording of my MSNBC television interview Vish: While all around congratulations are in order, I look forward to the day when I can watch RM make it into a Dinesh D'Souza or a Bill Moyer panel on National TV. ... I don't know this for a fact, but I wonder if Moyer would ever constitute a panel that might share something like"Now, lets ask what our Hindus or Buddhists or Sikh friends might have to say about this?" Girish: Great ! You cleared mentioned the reason why Bobby converted..... Gopal: ....fantastic to see you putting forward the perspective so lucidly. That is the need today.A Hindu voice on mainstream media. A voice that is clear, that is balanced, that holds itself on firm ground and is not lost in the confusion of the society. The choice of words are profound and deep, for example, "Every thing about Jindal is white except the color of his skin"  You stood as one amongst equals on national TV. ...  On your next trip to Toronto we should get you onto "The agenda" by Steve Paikin. That is one the intellectually strong programme's on Canadian networks. Kushal: ...a great sense of pride for me to see you there. you made some vital points. February 4 Germany scholar is in Chennai for doing interviews on BI I received the following email. Those in Chennai might want to follow up with the individual directly and then let us know what happens. Note his dravidian interests. Only some competent persons should do this. As preparation, study his research goals, who else he is meeting, his professor's past publications, etc. My name is Bjorn [] and I am a research assistant and PhD student [] at the Institute [] in Germany. In order to collect data for a research project on ‘westernization’ as one aspect of globalization I am going to interview representatives of political, especially dravidian, parties in Chennai. I am interested in Tamil Nadu's party’s and party member’s personal opinions about all kinds of influences western countries have on India in general and Tamil Nadu in particular. Because your book Breaking India is currently a very inspiring source for my view on the Dravidian movement .."  February 5 subra shares: "Kareem Abdul Jabbar, NBA legend and African American, reverses the gaze, analyzes western monoculture, and encounters air-resistance..." February 6 Prashanth posts: God Loves Uganda" is a film that was part of the official selection of the prestigious sundance film festival. "God Loves Uganda explores the role of the American evangelical movement in Uganda, where American missionaries have been credited with both creating schools and hospitals and promoting dangerous religious bigotry. ...attempt the radical task of eliminating "sexual sin" and converting Ugandans to fundamentalist Christianity." February 7 One of the UTurn patterns: An example Rajiv Malhotra posts: "One of several patterns of Uturns is when the scholar takes Hindu contributions to the West, and reclassifies them as "Asian" or something broader, in order to dilute the Hindu origins. Example: In the mid 1990s, Infinity Foundation gave a grant to a Western scholar of Hinduism who specializes in music. His proposal was to travel to European museums and see if the oldest musical instruments in Europe were of Indian origin or had been influenced from India. He was to use this physical evidence combined with text based evidence that early European music was influenced by the raga, and Indian instruments influenced European ones. We gave this grant with great enthusiasm. But then nothing came out of it since almost 2 decades. Recently I got the following disappointing status: "After submitting the project several times for publication, it has been rejected by many good publishers on various grounds. I always try to get it into a "university press" if possible. I have since reworked the concept into a broader spectrum of "Indo-Iranian Contributions or Influences on the West" which has now some prospective takers.  The new framework takes us back to Zoroastrianism's influence on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as well as the very pronounced musical influences (and chant) upon all three, etc. ...." Most of our "dharma" activists dishing out grants would be awestruck to hear him play sitar, impressed that he gives lectures on Indian music at prestigious places. It depends upon how high you raise the standard. I find this shift from Indian to Indo-Iranian unacceptable. In other words, raga gets classified somehow as Zoroastrian and hence its spread to the West is easier to sell to publishers. I have written by disappointment quite candidly." Gene posts: "You could change the world if you were to present the Hindu Concept of Kundalini to America in strictly scientific terms.  One strong supporter ... Dr. Karan Singh, M.P. He would be 100% behind you in this cause." Rajiv comment: No. Its already been highly digested precisely because of these so-called "scientific" terms. The tendency has been to use the pretext of science to de-contextualize the categories, and thus prepare them to get re-contextualized (i.e. digested). That's what I am exposing in my work on digestion. Regarding Dr. Karan Singh: I have known him personally and admire many qualities in him. But political ambitions turns into political correctness and this can compromise a person's ability to take a strong stand for dharma. To be specific: Disappointed at the way under his watch Auroville has been turned over to leaders who are rapidly facilitating it to get digested into the belly of Ken Wilber via various suction mechanisms at work there." tvikhanas responds:  "I have noticed this pattern several times too, from mathematics to yoga. If West wants to deny precise credit, all it has to do is claim in a very reasonable and enlightened manner that cultures x, y, z apart from India too had these ideas in one form or the other. The implication would be there is nothing special in India's discovery and West can rightly claim it is "humanity's" discovery. We see this happening big time when it is claimed that native Americans had "spirituality", Africans had "spirituality", Chinese Taoists had "spirituality" etc. It goes without saying that the superior whites also had "spirituality" and Indian "spirituality" is up for grabs without due acknowledgement. The same is happening when Yogis are lumped with shamans/medicine men, "higher consciousness" is bandied about as if it is an obvious thing that every one, including the West, knew about. Huxley's Perennial Philosophy is the classic example of this strategy to appropriate Indic thought/techniques. But when it comes to West's discoveries the standards for drawing comparisons suddenly become very stringent. This "everyone in every age had it" has the effect of taking Indians away from their authentic tradition to a low grade mishmash created by third rate academic charlatans. Ground fact is that there is simply no comparison between Indic traditions and any other culture. The "spirituality" label, while convenient in certain contexts, can hardly do justice to the reality." Rajiv comment: Well said. February 7 infinitestars shares: .....Good talk by Mr Jay Lakhani but he also seem to be having the same problem like many hindus have ie everything is the same. Please watch this video esp between 34:40----37:25 February 8 Is there a secular ayurveda: Cultural Issues in Bringing Ayurveda to Venkat shares: A highly relevant article as the author discusses the perils of secular ayurveda... The author concludes that "Sanskritization and Inculturation must go hand in hand, as we read both the text of the Ayurvedic classics, our only source of authority and authenticity, and the text of the current life situation." Introduction Transplanting Ayurveda to the West raises a number of significant cutural issues. An ancient, indigenous indian art, Ayurveda has evolved within a specific cultural and religious milieu. The cultural context of a country such as the USA is in many ways the polar opposite of this milieu. How can we transplant Ayurveda to this culture without doing violence either to the integrity of the teachings or to the cultural bias of our students and patients? In this paper, rather than attempting to provide answers, we will highlight some of the issues as well as suggesting a conceptual frame within which to understand the ways in which we may choose to make this adaptation. What Happens When Cultures Meet? Jesuit missionaries, engaged for the last four hundred years in bringing Catholicism to different lands, have described two different dynamics at play in the meeting of cultures.The first is Inculturation...."