RMF Summary: Week of April 2 - 8, 2012 - Part 1

April 2

On CNN: How Abrahamic religions justified slavery ... How religion has been used to promote slavery ... Interview with Rajiv Malhotra on where his work fits into Hindu Traditions Karthik shares: New interview with Rajiv Malhotra on where his work fits into Hindu Tradition. ...  April 2 Rajiv responds: This is one of my best interviews, as it clarifies many issues raised since the book came out. I urge you to read it and post your own comments on that blog please. April 3 Harmeet Singh's review Has anyone read the review by Harmeet Singh, now posted on Amazon page for the book? I wonder if anyone could comment on the Brhadarankyaka Upanishad line he... April 4 Kannada scholars digested and forgotten Venkat shares: Senior Litterateur and scholar Prof T V Venkatachala Shastry said that the contribution of the Western scholars (missionaries) in popularising Kannada was invaluable but unfortunately, what is disheartening is the fact that the local scholars who had helped the foreign scholars have been forgotten to the extent that there are no documentations on these scholars at all.... Ravi adds: "....KATHRI ( an interesting acronym in itself), the  Karnataka Theological Research Institute, in association with Central Institute of Indian Languages (CIIL) - presumably a Govt undertaking with it's own bureaucratic-political trajectory. So in essence the KATHRI is carrying forward the colonial / missionary torch aided & abetted by Indian govt policies...... As Rajiv has said before, once a culture feels proud of "outsourcing" it's knowledge production to wonderful foreigners & theologians, it can merely watch from sidelines as control of categories is wrested away from it...." Priyadarshi comments: "...1. This is not the case with Kannada alone but with many other Indian languages. Naturally, the Western scholars/translators received aid and input from local experts of any language. In erstwhile Fort William College of Calcutta, where several modern Indian languages were developed, there were Pundits and Asst Pundits to help the British scholars. History records some names like Mrityunjaya Tarkalankar and Jagganath Tarkalankar. 2. However, modern nationalists loathe to admit that there all modern Indian languages are directly or indirectly indebted to English. There was hardly any prose literature in any Indian language prior to the advent of English... 3. True fruition of modern literature in Kannada happened in 1920s, much after the rise of modern literature in other Indian languages. This is perhaps because today's Karnataka was administratively fragmented into various parts. ... Fortunately, it was an English education officer who found out that the language of this part was actually Kannada not Marathi. 4. R.S. Mugali in his book History of Kannada Language (Sahitya Academy, 1976) gives credit to Christian missionaries like Kerry, Maccerrel, Rieve, Kittel, Rice and Caldwell for developing modern Kannada language although their main objective might have been to spread Christianity. It is but natural they could not work without local support.  5. Let us not blame the West alone. There may be any number of Indian academics who had benefited from local experts and then summarily dumped them without sharing the limelight..." Rajiv responds: "I am copying my AAR Conference paper presented at the panel discussed in message 2497. You will see the Kannada scholars becoming digested in a new light of a wider syndrome: Panch (Five) Asymmetries in the Dialog of Civilizations: A Hindu View... To have a genuine dialog of civilizations, the 'other' side (in this case the Hindus) must be present as themselves and not via proxy, must be able to use their own framework to represent themselves, and must be free to anthropologize and criticize the west without fear of undue censorship or academic reprisal. However, five asymmetries resulting from the present imbalance of power often obstruct this dialog today. Before describing these asymmetries, I wish to clarify that I represent neither pole of what has become a bipolar fight for the representation of Indian culture: I am not representing the Hindutva view, which should not be conflated with Hinduism, because: (i) Hindutva is a political mobilization, (ii) it is a recent 20th century construct in response to contemporary situations, and (iii) it assumes a specific (reductionist) package of stances, whereas most Hindus pick and choose positions from an a la carte menu of choices..... The five asymmetries, of which the first three concern academic translationsof Indic culture, are:.... I. Anthropologist Versus Native Informant: While unintentional in some cases, scholars often seem to operate on the notion that distance (intellectual, cultural, geographic) produces objectivity.But distance has been the antithesis of dialog, and reciprocity is the key to dialog.[2]Western anthropologists use native informants, who are typically poor and lesseducated villagers paid to produce the data, and who typically place thescholar on a pedestal because of their own limited material resources and theglorification of India's xenophile elite... II. Western Scholar of Texts Versus Pandit: The use of pandits is another method by which the west re-maps Indianculture. Many pandits are simple and straightforward, not aggressive comparedto many western scholars, not into power games or concern for royalty orintellectual property rights, and are trusting of western intentions. Themis-appropriation of basmati rice and other intellectual property may be usedas an analog to appreciate that the Indian ethos does not emphasize personalownership of know how (including spiritual knowledge), and that some of whatthe west does is unethical and exploitative as per the pandits' own system ofprofessional ethics.... III. Cognitive Scientist Versus Yogi/Meditator: The laboratory measurement of higher states of consciousness achieved by advanced yogis and meditators is at the cutting edge of transpersonal and humanistic psychology, mental health, neuroscience, and phenomenology. And some Indic theoretical models are at the center of the philosophy of quantum physics based emerging worldviews. But many ancient Hindu-Buddhist inner science discoveries are being mis-appropriated and/or plagiarized: 'Lucid Dreaming' is the western name for Indo-Tibetan nidra yoga, and Stanford's Stephen LaBerge is nowadays the acknowledged discoverer. 'Mindfulness Meditation' is Jon-Kabat Zinn's trademarked repackaging of vipassna. Herb Benson repackaged TM into his 'Relaxation Response' and now runs a multimillion dollar business based at Harvard, claiming these as his discoveries. Numerous spin-offs in mainstream stress management and management consulting theories came from this source. Rupert Sheldrake recently 'came out' in an interview acknowledging that his famous theory known as 'Morphogenic Resonance' was developed while researching in India's ashrams. Ken Wilbur started out very explicitly as an interpreter of Sri Aurobindo's philosophy for the benefit of psychologists, but now places himself as the discoverer on a higher pedestal. Esalen Institute appropriated J. Krishnamurti and numerous other Indic thinkers into what its contemporary followers regard as it own 'New Worldview'. Thomas Berry, Brother Keating (successor to Bede Griffiths), and others have constructed the New Liberal Christianity, using Indic appropriations. Jewish scholars have likewise constructed the 'non-dualistic Kabala' based on Vedanta. This is only part of a long list: the core of the emerging 'western'worldview and cosmology involving physics, cognitive science, and biology isbeing rapidly built upon repackaged Indic knowledge,..... IV. RISA Versus HinduDiaspora: The Hindu Diaspora, which includes non-Indian Hindus in yoga-meditation centers, is usually kept out of the RISA fortress. Huston Smith, in the Spring2001 Harvard Divinity Bulletin, describes certain western scholars' attitude towards Hinduism as "colonialism updated". When compared to science,technology, business, and other professions where Indians now routinely achieve the highest positions, Indology remains perhaps the last holdout of colonialism. Indians with self-esteem and experience in dealing with westerners are seldom included as dialog representatives in a joint enterprise to study the tradition. Meanwhile, Indian Marxists and Macaulayites—born again as 'progressives' after the Cold War—dominate India's academe, and often power broker and become strategic allies with western academicians as experts on India.But there are many contradictions in these intellectual sepoys: (i) While many are Subalternists, India's masses, classics and culture are often alien to them, and they disrespect and caricaturize Hinduism in a reductionist Eurocentric way. (ii) Instead, they know mainly western thought and hermeneutics. (iii) Yet, their careers are based on being proxies for the very tradition that they regard as a scourge.[5] The phenomenon of South Asianizing, which has emerged from this confluence of excessive ethnography and Indian Macaulayism, has subverted Hinduism's universal truth claims..... V. Asymmetric Hermeneutical Power: There is asymmetry in the license to criticize: RISA and its scholars control the vyakhya (i.e. hermeneutics, right to criticize, what is deemed important and interesting, etc.) , manage the adhikara (i.e.appoint those in charge of gate-keeping the academic channels), and sometimes even field the persons who represent the Hindus. Any in-bred, pedigree-based, closed system is likely to slip into stagnation. When opposed by truly independent outsiders (i.e. those who do not seek visas, PhDs, jobs, tenure, etc.), some RISA members have resorted to intimidating name-calling to affect censorship.Sometimes, this attack on the messenger deflects from the message. The trial of Sri Ramakrishna in absentia, with no defense side allowed, is an example of what happens under such asymmetries of power. But Hindus have a long standing tradition of making fun of their gods,since they do not fear blasphemy. Hindus can summon a god, argue and make fun of him, even scold him with impunity—in a process called 'nindastuti'....  ....6. As one example only, those adopting a literalist interpretation of Indian texts are often deemed as fanatics, nationalists,and fundamentalists. But in Bible Studies, literalist interpretations are a well-respected hermeneutical approach. George Gallup's book of surveys of Americans' religious beliefs says that over 50% of all Americans believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible. Yet, we don't denounce the majority of Americans as fundamentalist-fanatics. In the case of Islam, the Koran is viewed as the literal history and not metaphorically by the mainstream.Personally, I prefer the metaphorical interpretation of all religious texts,but feel that literalist interpretations are a person's right without facing abuses...." [there is a lot of material in this post below that provides us a glimpse of the kind of debate that was ongoing in the 1990s. I'm heavily excerpting. Be sure to read the content in its entirety from the egroup link below].  April 4  One of my interventions with AAR more than a decade ago - a bit of history [Preface by Rajiv: In the 1990s, I was having numerous debates and arguments with the US academy over their Hinduphobia. At that time hardly anyone else in the diaspora supported me and most of the "leaders" felt things were going just great. "Look at how many temples we have built" I was told. "I go to campuses and nobody bothers me for practicing my faith", said many. I went to as many academic events as I could to debate them, and found myself all alone. The focus of "activists" was 100% India based - Ayodhya fund-raising, impressing visiting politicians from India, etc. I got tired of making attempts to gather support on US based issues. Indians were drunk in their new wealth and material success in the US. Nobody wanted to hear any bad news or rock the boat. Swami Tyagananda had refused to go public with his criticism of Kripal's new book (that won him AAR awards and a Harvard post-doc to launch his career!) which was attacking Sri Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda's integrity. He said "I am a monk and we dont fight". I worked with him privately and got the first copy of his critique posted online at my own site. Once the precedence was set, he also posted it at other places himself and went public with his critique. My articles starting with Risa Lila on Sulekha started a huge storm that blew up in the faces of the academics; and all these "Hindu activists" were still sleeping, holding "like-minded people's" meetings to discuss petty issues and egos. No sign of strategic thinking at all. Disconnected from the ground reality. Thats when I decided to take the war into the academy by using the internet, until such time as the academics could no longer ignore me. This worked. Jack Hawley started a "research" project called "Hinduism Here" which was projected as a way to study American-based Hinduism. Its real intention was to dig up dirt on various Hindu groups and send this material to US authorities for investigation. His spies were caught in Arsha Vidya Gurukulam and it sparked a debate within that organization on what posture ought to be taken towards such intrusions. At one AAR conference, Harvard's top scholar on Hinduism said that the FBI ought to be doing surveillance on Hindu groups just as it does on Islamic ones! The material below is from one of the AAR panels that I was invited to more than a decade ago. It was meant to serve as a sort of "in house hearing" of my gripes. I was sandwiched between speakers faithful to the academy at both ends, some making nuanced and oblique hints of criticism, but muted and within the boundaries of permitted criticism. I used to run one of the largest egroups in those days, called "IndicTraditions" where many of you got to know me first. ..... Infinity Foundation supported dozens of scholars to shift the discourse. We learned a lot on how the machinery works versus what it appears to be from the outside. Gradually things have changed quiet a lot. Hinduphobia is less blatant but its still there. Today there is a new breed of leaders who dont know any of this history or background. The sangh has tried to reinvent itself and even co-opt many of these new groups that started independently. Many scholars and organizations we backed had sold out along the way - an old story of how the west has perfected this art of co-opting Indians very diplomatically. Many of the old guard of activist leaders (who had blocked my initiatives in the 1990s) as well as scholars I had funded and who later sold out, have now come together to launch "pioneering" initiatives to bring a new kind of presence of dharma in the academy. I wish them well. Many are well meaning and should succeed. Others are self-serving - the same old minds repackaged with new vocabulary that they have picked up from all this new discourse. ... Defamation/Anti-Defamation –Hindus in Dialogue with the Western Academy A panel discussion held at the annualmeeting of the American Academy of Religion in Denver on November 17, 2001. http://www.barnard.edu/religion/defamation/hawley.htm A Word ofWelcome Introduction     John StrattonHawley     BarnardCollege, Columbia University Overviews     SwamiTyagananda     The Vedanta Society, Boston     V. V. Raman     RochesterInstitute of Technology Engagements     Edwin Bryant     RutgersUniversity     Vasudha Narayanan     University of Florida Defamations     Rajiv Malhotra     The Infinity Foundation     Ann Grodzins Gold     Syracuse University Futures     LauriePatton     Emory University     KalaAcharya     K. J. Somaiya Bharatiya     Sanskriti Peetham Introduction John Stratton Hawley Barnard College, Columbia University In the course of the last five years, the form, content, history, andauthority of Western academic scholarship about Hinduism have been vigorouslyquestioned by practicing Hindus. Major landmarks along the way have been theinternational conference on "Revisiting Indus Saraswati Age and AncientIndia" (Atlanta, 1996), the AAR panel on "Who Speaks for Hinduism?"(Orlando, 1998), and the renewed controversy about Jeffrey Kripal's Kali's Child in the light of Swami Tyagananda's rejoinder Kali's Child Revisited, or, Didn't Anyone Check the Documentation? (distributed at the AAR, 2000). Recently the institutional reality of the AAR itself has become a target of criticism. This panel is an attempt to gather various strands of that debate, includingthe voices of some of the major participants to date. Inevitably, we findourselves re-engaging controversies that are already familiar to many readers,but our principal hope is to step aside from the particulars of these debates and try to understand better the dynamics that underlie them. As our title suggests, we feature a sense of defamation, experienced in very different ways by different members of the panel. In addition to providing perspectives on this history of tension, hurt, and attack, several of our panelists draw attention to moments of concord and cooperation. The text that follows is a written representation of what our panelists saidin Denver. Inmost cases, it is the text from which panelists they actually read. Rajiv Malhotra's contribution is the exception to this rule, in that he spoke from notes; those notes form the basis for the text he presents here. There was also lively discussion. Alas, we cannot reproduce that discussion here, but we hop that by publishing the remarks on which it was based, we will allow it to continue. In the course of the year 2001, several statements circulated in anticipation of our panel at the AAR. I would like to quote from three of these as a way of marking the terrain on which our discussion takes place. They provide us with three signposts—three points of orientation to keep in mind as wade into the conversation that follows. The first characterizes that conversation as a game. The second sees it as a sort of cold war. The third suggests what it might mean if it were to be seen from the perspective of a court of law. Signpost 1: The Game The first of these signposts was erected by one of our panelists, RajivMalhotra, on February 15, 2001, as a message to hcs-l@...: "It's basically a game, in which one side controls the rules, appointsthe referees, and even fields most of the players on behalf of the other side!It started with 18th and 19th century Indology, now re-labeled as Orientalism and found to be heavily catering to missionary, colonialist, and racist agendas. The tradition was established that Western scholars study 'primitive'cultures through informants, and there was no pretence of symmetry or honest conversation as peers. At that time, the political power asymmetry required that this had to be so. "But the methodology remains largely unchanged today. Notice how 'Hindu reactions' must be represented by scholars who 'gather data' on the informants 'reactions and not by bringing in Hindus to speak for themselves. The three examples of proposed panels I mention above [including the panel we reproduce here - ed.] suffer from this asymmetry." Signpost 2: The Cold War The second signpost was staked down by Dr. S. Kalyanaraman, a member of the listserv Indictraditions. Anticipating the AAR's annual meeting in November, and with it the convening of a panel just such asours, he wrote as follows to Indictraditions@yahoogroups.com on April 1, 2001: ..... Reflections on Hindu Studiesvis-á-vis Hindu Practice Swami Tyagananda  The Vedanta Society, BostonTwo years ago, after I was invited to join the United Ministry at Harvard asthe Hindu chaplain, I was curious to know how the chaplains working on thecampus were connected with Harvard's Divinity School. When I asked aminister about it, she shrugged her shoulders and said, "We don't have toomuch connection with them really. They study religion whereas we are practitioners."This answer surprised me. I had naively assumed that since both the chaplains and the Divinity School were involved with religion, they would naturally share common interests and goals. Later when I got to know more people on the campus—at Harvard as well as inother colleges in and around Boston—Igot a clearer picture. I saw that there was indeed a wall separating religious studies from religious practice, but it was not uncrossable. Some scholars are practitioners and some practitioners are scholars. While there is often a tension between what ministers think and what ordinary practitioners believe—and this tension complicates the picture—we still must acknowledge thatthe scholar/practitioner divide is real and it merits discussion. Although much of what I say will probably be applicable to religious studyand practice in general, I shall use examples from Hinduism studies in the Westand from the life of practicing Hindus, since that is the context of thisdialogue. Many factors are responsible for the split between the academy and thepracticing community. One factor is the focus of the two groups. Those whostudy Hinduism in an academic setting want to know about Hinduism, andnot all scholars want that knowledge to influence the direction of their lives.This is not to deny that many of those who do study Hinduism do so forreligious reasons. On the other hand, practicing Hindus study their traditiontoo, but they do so with the clear intent of transforming their lives. Thisdifference in focus leads to differing approaches to Hindu philosophy andreligious personalities. ....  On the Gore and Glory of Western Indology V. V. Raman  Rochester Institute of Technology The field of inquiry and commentary which has come to be known as Indologyhad its origins, like Sinology, Egyptology, and other such disciplines, in theexploratory, intrusive, and scholarly interests of European colonialism,missionary zeal, and Enlightenment. Many centuries earlier, Islamicexpansionism had shown a similar enthusiasm for understanding, interpreting,translating, and critiquing the literature, philosophy, and traditions of otherpeoples. Aside from genuine intellectual curiosity, there were at least two othermotivations for the Western pursuit of Indology. One was the need to have aclear understanding of the history and culture of the people the colonialistswanted to (had to) govern. The otherwas to use that knowledge to persuade Hindus that theirs was a religion which,with all its inner light, needed to be replaced by a better religion, namely,Christianity. This is why not only independent scholars, but alsogovernment-affiliated thinkers and missionaries took interest in Indology. For almost two centuries, as a result of the efforts of Western scholars,with ever increasing collaboration with Hindu academics and religious thinkers,Indology has been flourishing and evolving. Thanks to the untiring dedicationof such people, much of ancient Hindu history has been reconstructed. Thanks toa number of Western archaeologists the even more ancient Indic civilizationswere unearthed. The rich treasures of Sanskrit as well as Tamil and othervernacular literatures have been translated, commented upon, and propagated tothe world by the exertions of Western scholars and linguists. Herein lies theglory of Western Indological scholarship. However, the colonizing and Christianizing motivations of early Indologistsare, in retrospect, offensive to Neo-Hindus today. More regrettably, in theview of some, many Indian minds have been transformed to the Western mode ofthinking and analyzing historical and spiritual matters. This is drasticallydifferent from traditional modes. As a result, a deep chasm has arisen not onlybetween English-educated Indian scholars who think like their Westerncolleagues and their non-English speaking compatriots whose approach toreligion and tradition are untouched by modern ways, but also between anawakened body of modern Indians who have recognized the self-serving Euro-centricinterpretations, unintentional mis-portrayals, and intentional distortions ofIndia's rich culture, ancient traditions, and complex religions. All this isthe gore of Western Indological scholarship. The happy collaboration between Western and Indian scholars has thus beensubject to some serious assaults. A number of post-modern Hindu thinkers havebeen seeing in much of Indology, past and present, many culture-insensitive andracially motivated factors with more hidden agenda than had been surmised thusfar. A new movement has already taken its initial steps whose goal is toexpose, condemn, and keep away what is considered to be cold-bloodedscholarship with a hidden-agenda with little reverence or sensitivity for theliving religion that is Hinduism. In this new vision, which incidentally, has anumber of Western scholars among its protagonists, a great many supposedlysympathetic Indologists are, in fact, wolves in sheep's skin. ... When Scholarship Matters:The Indo-Aryan Origins Debate Edwin Bryant Rutgers University Everyone in the field of South Asian studies by now knows about, and islikely exasperated by, the debate over the origins of the Vedic-speakingIndo-Aryans. We have all, I think, heard something of the voices that haveemerged, primarily from Indian archaeologists and historians, as well as fromthe Hindu diaspora, challenging the idea of an external origin for thislanguage and cultural group, and claiming an Indigenous origin for the Vedicculture (a view I have termed the 'Indigenist' position). Fueled by suspicionof the racist and elitist biases of colonial Indology, and, according to itsdetractors, by the imperatives of Hindu nationalism, this view provokes endlessdiscussions, as anyone with the patience to follow the Indo-Aryan migrationdebates on the Indology nets and other conferences in the West can attest. Thesedebates all-too-often degenerate into emotional name-calling, as accusations of'neo-colonial chauvinism' from one side, and assertions of 'Hindu nationalisticdogma' from the other, inevitably start to be bandied about, while thescholarly value of the discussions rapidly evaporates. Most western Indologists, on the whole, have remained unconvinced by thelimited exposure they have had with the all-too-often selective quality of theIndigenist arguments they encounter, which they view as indicative of anationalism that seeks authenticity in unscholarly interpretations of historyand pre-history, and some scholars are becoming exasperated by the polemicalrehashing of the racist genesis of western Indology. While the debate is viewedby most western Indologists as, at best, peripheral to serious scholarship and,at worst, as an annoying—and, in the present-day Indian context, politicallydangerous—disturbance, it is ferociously contested in India, where it issituated in much more of a mainstream academic context. The Indigenist stress on the continuity of Indian history, and the genericuse of the term 'Vedic culture', with its ahistorical and monolithic overtonesand troublesome implications for minority cultures, is the feature of the'Indigenist' position, that is most troubling to opponents of this view. Theconcerns of those who fear the ideological corollaries underpinning suchinterpretations are by now well-known: if the Vedic Indo-Aryans are interpretedas being indigenous to India, then the 'Vedic Civilization' and all thatdeveloped from it can be construed as 'truly Indian' and all subsequentcultural groups known to have immigrated into India can be depicted as'Others'. Indigenism, consequently, is generically stereotyped as a discoursepromoting communal tension. ... Defamation and Diaspora Hindus: Notes on Internet Discussions VasudhaNarayanan University of Florida Should there be a lakshman rekha, a line self-imposed or otherwise, thatscholars should not cross? If so, who should draw the line and who should moveit? My task today is to talk about "defamation" on the internet. Thereis some ambiguity attached to the term in the context of today's discussion: wedeal with the alleged defamation of Hinduism on the one hand, and defamation ofscholars on list serves and web pages on the other. I will spend most of mytime today outlining a list of issues that concern some Hindus about listserves where most of the discussants are non-Hindu. I will focus primarily onRISA-L and, to a lesser extent, on Indology. In this enterprise, I would liketo acknowledge the help of a former Indian/Hindu student from the University of Florida who took some advanced levelreading courses on Vedanta, specifically the Sri Vaishnava tradition, with me.He would like to be identified as "a recent resident in the US, anengineer by profession but very much interested in scholarly Hindustudies." He sent me a long document with specific problematic issues inRISA-L, and it seemed to reaffirm the tenor of many internet discussionscriticizing western scholarship. However, he does say that this critical reportdoes not mean that he holds the "RISA scholars in contempt per se;"and says that this is only an anthology on what he considers to be the"bad aspects." Many moons ago, when western scholars studied and wrote about Hinduism,Hindus had little control over what was said and how information wasinterpreted and disseminated. The audience for the articles and books was alsoEuro-American scholars. Obviously that has changed now—we all know that thereare Indo-American, Hindu scholars in the academy, and second generation Hindusin our classrooms. More important to our discussion today, there are manyHindus who are reading and listening in on academic discussions. While in thepast, there had been groups of Hindus rather bemused and occasionally evenflattered at the attention that American or European scholars seemed to lavishon their texts and rituals, now there are some in the United States who arewary and angered at the way in which they perceive Hinduism is being portrayedin classrooms and more particularly at the AAR. It is, of course, hard to getnumbers in this quest and I certainly do not want to generalize about how"Hindus" feel about so called "western" scholarship. Justspeaking from my anecdotal experience, most Hindus are not aware of a greatdeal of "western" scholarship and have not made an attempt to knowmore about it. Panch (Five) Asymmetries in theDialog of Civilizations: A Hindu View Rajiv Malhotra The Infinity Foundation (excerpted earlier in this post) Toward Context Sensitivity Ann Grodzins Gold Syracuse University I accepted Jack's invitation to join this session with an emotion I can onlydescribe as dread. Prior to his email, I had firmly decided not to go to Denver, and indeed hadalready become involved in organizing a session for AAA (it makes for a killerNovember to do both I can tell you). A couple of weeks ago, when I thought Ihad better organize my thoughts, I looked for the AAR file on my computer anddiscovered I had named the folder, last spring, "Denver01misery". Ihave to say that—in the wake of September 11 and its aftermath of ongoingviolence—last spring's dread and misery have seemed to me nothing if not petty,and even unworthy of further consideration. However, Laurie's email, with thebold dictionary definitions of "defamation," somewhat re-kindled bothemotions. I do not wish to squander my remaining nine-and-a-half minutes rehearsingthe sorrows of last winter, but it isn't possible to ignore them completelybecause that is why we are here. Luckily, I had been reading Saurabh Dube'sstill unpublished book manuscript Stitches on Time. Saurabh was aparticipant in the "Who Speaks for Hinduism?" session a few yearsback—a session to which today's might seem a kind of less mellow, or moremelancholy, sequel. For some editorial reason I don't understand, hiscontribution was not included in the JAAR volume that emerged from thatsession, but will be part of his new book which he has given me permission tocite. Dube argues that at the heart of the "Who speaks" forum was theanxiety of Western scholars, "under threat from vociferous critiques of apostcolonial provenance" and thus fearing that they would be denied theright to speak. He writes quite evocatively, even poetically, of"anxieties and aggressions produced within everyday encounters andquotidian confrontations in academic arenas . . . "—experiences many of usshare, whatever our religious or ethnic identities. Dube does find somepotential value in dealing with all of this, a challenge to think through"the ambiguities and ambivalences, contradictions and challenges, and predicamentsand possibilities at the heart of the current cultural politics of identitiesand the contemporary political cultures of scholarship." But he also questions the terms in which the challenge wasformulated. Reasonably enough, he observes, "Many speak about Hinduism.Some speak around Hinduism. For a few it is perhaps possible to speak fromwithin Hinduism(s). But speaking for Hinduism? . . . . " Theimplication is; how can that be? So, the primary lesson I take from Dube is the foolishness of imagining orreifying a singular entity over which any of us should indulge in tug-of-war. Iknow this has been said before, more than once, but it seems to get just asregularly forgotten. Dube is not at all sanguine about the prospects of finding what he calls a"talking cure" to these problems. Yet, if the ready alternative tothe talking cure in today's mental health world is a pill, we in academia havenot yet synthesized a quick chemistry of equilibrium. Thus we find ourselveshere, trying once again for a talking cure, in a case that could seem stillmore hopeless. Rather than embracing hopelessness, I will suggest that if there is a cureit lies in two related practices: 1) sharing or diffusing any and all claims toauthority among all concerned; and 2) remaining sensitive to contexts—bothpoints to which I shall return. But first I do need to explain a little aboutmy own close encounter with Rajiv Malhotra and the Infinity Foundation, whichwas one major impetus for Jack's organizing this session. I don't want to speak in terms of defamation but of pain. Both parties tothis encounter were wounded, I believe, in their deepest sense of self. Both,moreover, felt self-righteous to the bone. In terms of understanding whatactually took place at last year's AAR, bothparties' memories could not be more totally at odds. Were we in the same roomat the same time? Interestingly enough, my paper—the one Rajiv found objectionable—was aboutthe workings of memory. And our divergent interpretations of the memory panelgo to support this paper's major point. Its opening sentences were these: Various readings have characterized memory, from one perspective or another,as a "brightly lit theater of the world"; a "mirror of the darkabyss of the mind" (both cited in Hutton 1993); the breaking waves of theocean (Halbwachs 1992); lava that "melts away the earth" from thedead and makes them live again (old Jewish lady cited in Myerhof 1992);"not only a spring, flowing from the well of the past, but also a tomb,whose contents climb like withered ivy to the mind" (Langer 1991: 69);"a roadway full of potholes, badly in need of repair, worked on day andnight by revisionist crews" (Kirmayer 1996). I think as we look at the disparate interpretations from Rajiv and from me asto what took place in my paper and the session, we can see just such processes:the revisionist crews are hard at work, the waves of the ocean are shaping theshore. To speak from my viewpoint then, briefly: In my paper about memory I tookexamples from an oral history project I've been working on, collaborativelywith an Indian co-author, since 1993. These examples were of memories gatheredin interviews with women and men from a leatherworking community, a few of whomrecollected abuse by some members of the Kshatriya community, about fifty yearsback, although often in veiled terms. The word Hinduism appeared exactly once in the paper, in the phrase:"devotional expressions within Hinduism" from the bottom of theritual hierarchy—with a reference to well-known poets such as Raidas andChokhamela. I argued that, as these poet-saints had done before them,disempowered persons in the twentieth century might find in Hinduism's mythicand devotional expressions sources of and mediums for strength and resistance. To Rajiv, just by mentioning disempowered persons residing in India, I wasdefaming Hinduism. He had come to the AAR tolearn the ways that American academics dealt with what he prized and held mostdear. What he saw and heard in my talk, which used slides, was not what Ithought I was showing: old women, looking back from a happier time in thenineteen-nineties to recollect some of the sufferings of their youths, underthe rule of kings and colonizers. Rather, he saw defamation at work, and theexperience upset him so much he left the session before it was over. For Rajiv,images of leather workers, and their critiques of the behaviors of a fewabusive land owners in a small kingdom sixty years ago, were assaults on hisexistence as a Hindu in America. He subsequently published an account of his anger on his web site and in anewsletter, referring to my paper as an example of "typical Hindubashing." Now, I felt assaulted. To me, the words "Hindu-bashing" burn sobadly I can neither write nor speak them without a shudder in my gut. I felt asif my twenty years of appreciation for and participation in Indian culture, andmy whole self, professional and human, had been assaulted (of course this isthe crux of Euro-American postcolonial anxiety to which Dube points; this isnot hitting close to home, this is home). In his published account, Rajiv wrote about the AARmeetings in general: What would shock most Hindus attending this [AAR]for the first time would be the nature of portrayal of Hinduism in Americaneducation. It is nothing like what you would find at a temple, ashram or Hindugathering. Rather, it is mainly an arms-length 'objective' view typicallydominated by graphic details of the social ills of Hindu society—caste, women'sabuse, poverty, pollution, superstitions, animal worship, animal sacrifice andthe like. This material permeates college teaching about Hinduism and India in a bigway, and in many instances also secondary schools. Notice two things in Rajiv's published report that are crucial to mymessage. One is the statement that goings-on at the AARare "nothing like what you would find at a temple, ashram or Hindugathering." The other is the immediate leap from AARto college teaching. The issue of context is very important in both thesestatements. Is this an impasse beyond healing? Frankly, I felt initially that it was—myimpulse was to withdraw. "Why should I deal with this? I'll go to theanthropology meetings." However, nothing is ever that easy. For one thing, I have always been myselfdeeply concerned with false impressions of Hinduism prevalent in the US; as Iteach it at the introductory level almost every year, I have to counteractthese perspectives in my courses. So I find myself in considerable sympathywith my so-called "defamer" (who responded with prompt and kindconsideration to my impassioned protest, immediately removing my name from hispublications and assuring me that it was nothing personal, and I had simplybeen in the wrong place at the wrong time). Once again, context is all. A.K. Ramanujan, as everyone here of my generation probably knows, wrote awonderful essay, published in 1990 but widely circulated and cited muchearlier, titled "Is there an Indian way of thinking?" I wish I couldread you the whole thing! For the question is phrased in multiple fashions withmultiple answers and subtle nuances that simply refuse summarizing. In it Ramansuggests that if there is any characteristic pattern of Indian thought, it is"context-sensitivity." He finds commonalities of context-sensitivityin his father who was both a mathematician and an astrologer, in Sanskritgrammar, in Tamil aesthetic theory, and in the Laws of Manu—which prescribe(this just happens to be the example Ramanujan selected) a smaller fine for aKshatriya who defames a Brahmin than for a merchant (hmmm). As the Infinity Foundation seeks to showcase the many contributions of Indiccivilization to the world, I would hope that this subtle one ofcontext-sensitivity might be included not only as subject but as practice. (Inmany ways it seems to me to anticipate recent important philosophical argumentssuch as Donna Haraway's about "situated knowledge.") The AAR is, I believe, a context, anacademic forum, where we should be able to present our current research—theoreticallyframed—to a limited audience of scholars. If, when presenting work here, wemake no claims to be speaking "for Hinduism" we should be taken atour word. There are many other contexts in which we behave differently. Forexample, I teach almost every year, Religion 285, a basic introduction toHinduism. In that class I am acutely sensitive to my position as aEuro-American outsider, in front of an audience that always includes Hindus aswell as Christians, Jews, and occasional Muslims and Buddhists. I am acutely and perpetually alert to the possibilities for mis-representation, to the concerns of insiders, and to the prejudices of outsiders. I do not talk ofuntouchable women in that introductory course. I teach the Upanishads,Valmiki's Ramayana, the Gita, Kabir and the Virashaivite poets in Ramanujan'sbeautiful translations. This teaching has been a learning experience for me since I first steppedinto the classroom—fall 1985, Cornell, as a new visiting assistant professor ina class called "Perspectives on South Asian Culture." I planned touse a lot of films, and the first one I showed I had thought quite exemplary inits clear illustration of ritual action: "Hindu Sacraments ofChildhood." This film features South Indian Brahmins in the city of Madras, urban elites, performing elaboraterituals for infants and children that are right out of fourth centuryGriyasutra texts. In my class, a young Punjabi, non Brahmin, raised his hand the minute thefilm was over, and declared in no uncertain terms, "nobody in India doesrituals like this any more . . . " As a novice teacher, I couldn't help but be deflated; my authority had beenchallenged, and by an insider! I tried to explain that such rituals mightindeed be rarely performed, or not at all where he was from, but that someBrahmins in South India were evidently still doing them; or at least they were,when the film was made . . .. I expect I sounded rattled and defensive and abit lame. One problem of course is with the false claims of the title "HinduSacraments of Childhood." This has to be contextualized as South IndianBrahmins, who care about ritual, in the nineteen sixties, demonstrating theirvalued cultural performances for an American Sanskritist and his film crew. Ilearned later from Dan Smith, the film maker, that the whole thing was staged,as no polluting, barbaric foreigner would have been allowed to be present atthe real rituals . . .. This does not mean that with appropriate contextualization we could notstill gather some knowledge of life cycle rituals from these documentaries(though now dated in style as well as content). The larger lesson I have carried through another fifteen years of teachingis always to talk about multiplicity, and context; and always to offer to shareauthority with students, especially Indian students, in a fashion they cantrust. Luckily Indiagave us the fable of the blind man and the elephant, and I bring this up in myfirst class. I tell the students of South Asian descent that rural Rajasthan ismy piece of the elephant, while theirs may be urban Bombay,or New Jersey(and I must credit and thank Joyce Flueckiger for helping me arrive at my ownstrategies by telling me hers). Over the years, I have significantly altered my syllabus content as a directresponse to objections and suggestions from Hindu students; I no longer showvideos with animal sacrifice; I no longer try to deal with Ayodhya in atwo-week unit at the end—not on the grounds that such conflicts should behidden, but that two weeks are not enough in an introductory course to produceanything but confusion—which was clear enough to me from the Euro-Americanresponse papers. I don't feel as if I am succumbing to censorship in thesenegotiations, but rather sharing authority and being sensitive not only tostudent identity issues, but to the context of an introductory course; acontext that I would insist is quite different from that of the AAR—which isindeed neither a "temple, ashram or Hindu gathering," nor a collegeclassroom.... Toward a Gandhian Pragmatics of Scholarly Collaboration Laurie Patton Emory University Kala Acharya K. J. Somaiya Bharatiya Sanskriti Peetham Laurie Patton: This paper comes as a joint, practical effort of two scholars ofHinduism—one Hindu and Indian and the other non-Hindu and white. We have"represented" each other in our written work and in our lecturesabout "the other." It is, in part, a narrative of the corrections,fumblings, and exhilarations between Hindu and non-Hindu scholarly endeavors.It is also a set of narratives which are informed by certain Gandhianprinciples, and premised on a model of mutual need, mutual correction, andloyal oppositions. The Hindu and the non-Hindu need each other's scholarshipbecause they most profitably are engaged in a process of mutual correction andcompanionship. We begin by simply drawing your attention to the principles laid down byGandhi in his civil disobedience campaign. In your handout we have translatedthis into a scholarly version which you see underneath the original principles.We view these not as anything we practice successfully—not by any stretch ofthe imagination! Rather we view them as our own impossible ideals. Nor do we even necessarily view them as Gandhi did, a set of principles bywhich to live unwaveringly. Rather, we take the view that Johannes Fabian doesin his recent article, "Remembering the Other: Knowledge and Recognitionin the Exploration of Central Africa" (Critical Inquiry 26: 1999).In this work he scrutinizes the moments of meeting between two cultures inethnographic narratives: moments where the power balance is momentarilyrighted—between field assistant and anthropologist, between explorer andexplored, colonizer and colonized. These are moments of recognition of need, orof mutual survival. We assume that, contrary to the scathing critiques which corrode ourrelationships in the past years, these moments of recognition between Hindu andnon-Hindu occur every day; these moments are part of each of our scholarlyrepertoires, and that these moments, not the acrimony, are the basic facts ofevery day scholarly life. These are moments of freedom, in which a"Hindu" scholar can momentarily agree with a so-called"Western" point of view, and a "Western" scholar canmomentarily agree with a so-called "Hindu" point of view, withoutfear of being attacked and branded forever. We argue that these moment shouldbe foregrounded as much as, if not more than, the critique which pitchesnon-Hindu against Hindu, Indian against white, in an increasingly vituperativeand unproductive battle in which neither side is weighed evenly. We are on verymuch the same side here. We all want more Hindus to be involved in the study ofHinduism. We all want our Hindu students to be brave enough to choose SouthAsian studies and not medical school as the path of least resistance. We assume that these moments of recognition are also results ofconflict—inevitable and intense, between Hindu and non-Hindu scholars. They aremomentary conflicts because the larger project of lokasamgraha, the comingtogether of the world, is for most of us far more important than any givendisagreement. Moreover, the mutual correction that both sides submit to, doesnot assume that either side is always more powerful. Rather, the power balanceis constantly shifting; hence the need for constant mutual correction within alifelong companionship. There will be the power of the one who can afford tovisit a country vs the one who cannot afford the plane ticket; there will bethe power of the funder vs. the relatively controlled position of the funded;the power of the one who has better library resources vs. the one who cannotgather the basic texts necessary for research. At one time, the anthropologistwill be at a loss, unable to decode the ritual without the help of a teacher;at another, the foundation money will be able to dictate the terms of theintellectual project. At another, the moment will come when a pandit will saythat the Western edition of a text is good for his work; and a scholar mightsay that the brilliance of Hinduism that she fell in love with is vibrant andrecognizable in many forms, including those forms she had previously beensuspicious of. These are all moments when power must be recognized andrealigned, just as in Fabian locates these tiny encounters as moments ofcultural change. Both Hindu and non-Hindu are all momentary satyagrahis in thestruggle for a truthful and flexible relationship between the Hindu traditionand its scholars.... (Message over 64k, truncated.) Apr Here is part-2 of the summary for this week.

RMF Summary: Week of March 26 - April 1, 2012

March 26

Sanskrit - U-Turn ... Shantanuji had published an excerpt from Dr. Prodosh Aich's interview, which had this bit about Sanskrit at Stage 5 of U-Turn, which is sadly true. I am just curious to know if Dr. Aich is familiar with Rajivji's U-Turn theory. This sounds like he probably does: [European "translators", Max Mueller and others] have transported a type of Sanskrit to Europe where I have doubts that it is Sanskrit at all. But the tragic part is that this Sanskrit has been imported  back to India. This is what we learn in India with the help of the Sanskrit dictionaries. Has anyone in the group read Dr. Aich's book Lies with Long Legs? Rajiv comment: Yes I have that book and read it. He limits his critique to largely colonial era people. I think today's re-colonizers are more dangerous - see my Uberoi Foundation talk:   March 26 An Indo-centric response to Euro-centric suggestions... Raj posts: As a National Geographic Book Panel member, I vote on their suggestions for books, and also provide suggestions. While their reach is admittedlyfocused to the... March 26 AAR's role in yoga digestion and the straw-man of Hindutva Manas shares: "The American Academy of Religion's last annual meeting had a panel on "Yoga and Christianity". I would like to bring to the attention of list member papers presented by two academics who participated in that panel. Andrea R. Jain, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis Yogaphobia and Yoga Ownership: The Shared Fundamentalism of Christian and Hindu Criticisms of the Global Popularization of Yoga Mark Singleton, St. John's College Christian Influences in the Development of Modern Yoga I have read some ofAndrea R's essays and there is a decided move to demonize and declare as extremist/fundamentalist any Hindu attempt to speak out against digestion of yoga into Christianity. As we have seen multiple times in this list, most recently being the case of the German U-turner, this is sought to be justified under the cloak of "universal good", etc. Singleton however presents a less insidious facet. If anyone his read his last book there is a very clear attempt to trace the roots of yogAsana into Christianity via European Gymnastics, YMCA, etc. He also very cleverly repackages yogAsana as what he calls "modern (postural) yoga". ....  It might be pertinent to mention here that Mihir Sharma, an Indian journalist at one point called BI as Hindutva...." subra asks: "..author is cited as Ms Alison Hinks. would a person with knowledge in this area validate the general accuracy of this depiction.... (source link: https://alisonhinksyoga.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/yogaflowchart.jpg?w=640&h=640) Rajiv comment: I have seen this diagram before. It is incomplete, i.e. it leaves major gaps in influence. The gaps seem to indicate that various modern gurus who are well known in the west started magically out of thin air. But when I personally interviewed BKS Iyengar and Yogi Amrit Desai (among the modern gurus), they emphasized that they belonged to a lineage going back to traditional yoga. The gap in such diagrams is partly out of ignorance and partly in serves a strategic purpose not to go back all the way. Such gaps then serve as "opportunity" for Singleton type scholarship to try and claim that the gaps should be connected to western sources. Thats the "aha" moment when digestion gets completed - a Western history is found and then it gets propagated fiercely. Note how aggressive the Wilber movement has become in just the past 5-10 years in such digestion. Mallika posts: "Mark Singletons scholarship is anthropological and extremely selective of the sources he chooses. He summarily dismisses claims of Indian Yoga Gurus that they are part and parcel of great Yoga asana traditions of India. However he generously quotes racist Indologists, including Katherine Mayo's Mother India (Gutter inspector report, in Gandhiji's words). His book 'Yoga Body' has a few pictures of Bukhs exercises, 1925, his gymnasium in the same year. It also has pictures of one Adonia Wallace doing some exercises, it is captioned "Best figure in the British Isles" (July, 1935) ". A cursory look at these pictures shows clear similarities between asanas and these 'gymnastic' stretching and exercises. But, using these similarities to make a correlation between these 'exercises' and T.Krishnamacharys asnas needs a huge leap of faith....  Ramesh adds: "Shiva Samhita is a wonderful work explaining Yoga and Asanas which I think is older than the Bukhs exercises. Chapter 3, verse 84 of shiva samhita says: " There are 84 asana postures of various modes. Out of them, four ought to be adopted, when I mention below: - 1) Siddhasana 2)Padmasana 3)Ugrasana 4)Svastikasana....." Raghu posts: "......Shri Krishnamacharya learnt his yoga Aasana practice with Shri Ram Mohana Brahmachari in Manasorovar. The Krishnamacharya Yoga Mandiram has published a few of the drawings that were given to Shri Krishnamacharya by his Guru that are the basis of his work. (The Yoga of a Yogi- ISBN 81-87847-24-7). These are part of the tradition followed by his teacher. These drawings are copies of older documents in the Gurus's possession. There are drawings with the use of ropes and staff as props in the practice of aasana. Shri Krishnamacharya in the course of his teaching would talk to us about his failures and successes and his understanding of how modern life is weakening the body. The teaching of aasana and praaanayaama by Iyengar, Pattabhi Joyce and Desikachar have developed on the basis of what they learnt from Shri Krishnamacharya...." Hemachandra comments: "Gheranda samhita 2.1 talks about 84 lakh asanas! (as related by Shiva) of which 84 asanas are said to be the best. Of these 84, 32 are said to be useful to mankind (Gheranda samhita 2.2). Of the 32, many of them (Gheranda samhita 2.3-6) are some of the popular ones today .."  Srinath posts: "I had a unique opportunity to meet the nonagenarian BKS Iyengar in person at his Bangalore residence some years back. It was an unforgettable experience in many ways -- BKS was addressing an informal gathering of his family members.... ......He was particularly interested in knowing how Iyengar yoga was being represented in the retail sphere i.e. Yoga studios and Gyms in USA, and commented that over 1/2 of all Western yoga schools derive from Iyengar yoga itself. There was feedback from the group about how yoga poses are being "digested" (although they didn't use the exact same expression) by the West and re-packaged as hybrid forms. BKS said he would like to patent or trademark many of these as a safeguard against future intrusions, but not sure about the best approach -- because he wanted them all to be traced back to their origins i.e. Patanjali. Incidentally BKS has consecrated the only known temple in honor of rishi Patanjali, at his home town in Bellur in 2005. Rajiv comment: I had a personal meeting with BKS Iyengar on his 89th birthday and the person with me made a video of it. I am trying to get a copy of that video. I told him about the uturns and it bothered him quite a lot. He went on the record saying that most westerners have not gone into the spiritual dimension of his teaching which he felt is inseparable from yoga, how they take that portion out and adopt only a subset. My sense is that after he is gone the digestion will accelerate full steam as even many of the loyal followers will vie with each other to claim to be the latest guru." March 26 Uberoi Foundation Lecture: Decolonizing India Studies Bluecupid asks: I watched the video and appreciated many of the points made. However how do you resolve the dichotomy of on the one hand objecting to Indonesian Muslims returning from Mecca completely Arabicized in name, culture, clothing and identity, and yet on the other hand faulting Western practicioners of Dharmic traditions for retaining their Western identity along with their practice? Rajiv comment: I have no problem with westerners remaining western in identity as pure culture - name, dress, etc. (The Muslims returning from Mecca are asked to change those...) My problem in the uturn is with westerners re-mapping dharma on to Jesus Christ, Greek Goddesses, Plato, modern "western" neuroscience, etc. It is a total hijacking of the history of ideas, in a way that distorts when dharma is forced to fit into the western paradigm. March 26 Using Western Devotees/Scholars to Mitigate Effect of Digestion Mr. Malhotra, What is your experience with interacting with various western devotees and scholars of Dharma (and Indian history perhaps) vis-a-vis the problems... March 26 kirtan digestion Maria posts: Recently a foreign 'spiritual travel' group came to Haridwar. Two of its members (first time in India) had learnt kirtan in the US from an American. The tour guide organised a kirtan session in an Indian family with the two Americans leading the kirtan. At the end, they expressed surprise that the Indians knew the tunes and words of the kirtan. They thought it was an American thing. March 29 no U turn, just exasperation Maria shares a western perspective: "..... I talked to an American friend of 30 years, who had lived in an ashram in India in his 20s, still comes every year and has gone deep into Hinduism, both by sadhana and study. 'I have decided not to bother anymore what happens here', he told me this time. 'If Hindus can't unite and put a strategy in place to stop conversion. I guess, they deserve what they get.' He sounded frustrated, but clearly still feels for India. As for me, too, it is often exasperating to be immediately challenged by certain acquaintances with Hindu names, when I say something positive about Hinduism, like: What do you say about the way Ram has killed Vali? Have you read Manu? Then you would not be in favour of Hinduism anymore. Just see, how Hindus treat cows. They claim she is their mother. You read the wrong books. Hindus were and are very violent. It was them who estroyed Buddhism. Did you read about that incident where a girl was not allowed to ride a cycle to school, because she is Dalit? .... Many westerners in India are likely to meet people who seem to hate Hinduism and even quote the Bible to show how educated they are. They are still under the spell of their forefathers having been brainwashed ..... Rajiv comment: These examples of "exasperation" are among the causes (or at least excuses) cited for making uturns."  March 30 Rajiv's Toronto visit - Media release March 21, 2012 issue: Headline News Dr Rajiv Malhotra tells audience at the Toronto launch of his book, "Being Different"Replace 'tolerate' with 'mutual respect'... (source: http://www.indocaribbeanworld.com/archives/2012/march_21_2012/images/1_rajiv-malhotra.jpg) pic: Trinidad & Tobago Consul General Dr Vidhya Gyan Tota-Maharaj having her copy of Being Different signed by its author.  (source: http://www.indocaribbeanworld.com/archives/2012/march_21_2012/images/12_book-signing.jpg)

RMF Summary: Week of February 9 - 15, 2013

February 9
Deepak Chopra gives another glaring example of his being in the Stag
Jalan posts: 
In a recent article on Linked-in (http://goo.gl/uqK2N) Deepak Chopra talks of consciousness/awareness as a principal part of leadership - clearly, the spiritual/psychological ideas have been picked up from Hinduism but he has been successful at completely de-contextualising them. (I even feel he is force-fitting the spiritual ideas into the sphere of business management, as is fashionable nowadays.) 

What is particularly remarkable is that he writes "The most ancient wisdom traditions say, Know that one thing by which all else is known." Ah he is shy to say "The Upanishads say..." since this great human inquiry comes from the Chhandogya Upanishad ("What is that by knowing which all else is known?") What "traditionS" is he talking of? It is singularly to be found in Hinduism. DC either suffers from deep inferiority complex and/or he is simply trying to be more acceptable to the western audiences who are his target market... "

Shiva responds:
"If these are his views, he has his ideas wrong.

Consciousness is not a tool to be used for leadership. if you are chasing consciousness to be a better leader, its the wrong idea. You will end up getting bliss trips, and not concentrate on Karma yoga.
...Management professionals end up using yoga, [spirituality] as some escape from pressures of worklife, its no different than a healthier version of cigarettes. One has to integrate work and life as single stream, where the work itself becomes joy.
One of my professors in indias top institutions, is a brahmakumari follower. He is always in a meditative state of bliss consciousness, but is more like drugged rather than aware. He is one of the worst professors around...

Rajiv comment: There are multiple points above, each requiring its own response. For instance,

1) raising consciousness can be useful to become a better manager or for that matter improve oneself in daily life in general. Yoga is not only for escape to moksha from the real world.

2) The point about brahmakumari escapism as some kind of intoxicant is valid, and this applies to a large number of modern Hindu movements in vogue. "

Saket adds:
"My Vedanta guru explains leadership in this way- there is leader, there is group to be led, leadership is how the leader relates to the group being led. One may easily find the principle of one brahman and its multiple manifestation but analogy is not complete. To understand the multiple manifestation maya one must understand the brahman. Hence I concur with Rajiv Ji's observation no. 1. 

... even Arjuna has a session of Jnana yoga before he pursued the path of karma yoga. Hence they exist in combination. One can not impose strict categories like heaven or hell.
On third point about  Management professionals end up using yoga, spirituality as some escape from pressures of work life and a prof in a meditative state of bliss consciousness; there is a precise injunction in
Isavasyo Upanishad mantra 9 on this state of mind. This is what the master says:
Those who worship avidya ignorance enter into blinding darkness; but those who revel in vidya knowledge
enter as it were into greater darkness than that..." 

Poonam adds:
"I know hoe deepak chopra packages the Hindu Vedic Knowledge wisdom in a western context totally refuses to mention its Hindu origins. But he does not forget to patent copyright his books, so that he can het the financial benefit from them. But he has a partner /or friend, Wayne Dyer. The Dyer Chopra families, it appears, are very close, frequently vacation together all over the world in India. I remember watching Wayne Dyer often on PBS during their fund raising marathons, where he would the patrons were given for te highest contribution level, a set of books, workbooks, DVDs, CDs. conduct seminars specially for PBS. what he called "the whole enchilada). I listened to a lot of his seminars, he often referred to his experiences during the time he spent with Neem Karoli Baba in India, often mantioned him as his Guru..."

February 11
"The Permanence Of Ideas
Ganesh posts: Came across this article in today's ...Times of India. A fair enough take on Sanathana Dharma with Maha Kumbh as the backdrop. Evidence of chapter titled "order and chaos" from Sri Rajiv Malhotra's Being Different clearly visible."
   
Rahul comments on the false equivalence of Brahma and Abraham in the above post:
"p251 of BD has a section about Sanskrit non-translatable's that explains Brahman as the all-expansive ultimate reality which creates all and lives
in all and transcends all. The J-C God is the creator of the universe and *distinct* and separate from it. Whereas Brahman is immanent, not merely the creator but IS that world. Brahman and its manifestation are inseparable."   

February 12 (continuing from last week)
One of the UTurn patterns: An example
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...  

Raj comments:
"This is truly very disappointing & unfortunate. Based on the description, I guess this is referring to []Beck? I knew he had received funding, so when I came across his books on Amazon I assumed they were outcomes of research funded by Infinity Foundation. The local American Kirtan groups who know about his research will be utterly shocked to learn this ....  If after almost his entire career of research, deep cultural & personal involvement with Indian classical music & artists, he can so easily abdicate his responsibility towards truth, fairness & integrity, it is a complete betrayal of trust..."

February 13 
Are all religions really the same according to Vedas?
Rohit asks : "ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadanti" is often quoted to mean that Hindus accept all religions as different ways to the same truth. Phil Goldberg [see American Veda posts in this blog archive to learn more about PG] has quoted this expression to suggest that Hindus subscribe to sameness and hence do not object to treating Hinduism as a deli by other religions.Following is the verse in Rig Veda where this quote comes from.  There is no way such a meaning can be ascribed to it....Rigveda 1.164.46...

Manas responds:
"...The savant Sita Ram Goel has addressed this matter as well. Quoted below from his book, Defense of Hindu Society:
**************************** The one Vedic verse which modern Hindus quote most frequently is the third quarter (caraNa) of Rigveda 1.164.46..."

Surya also provides some excellent feedback:
"Proposition: All religions are equal - This formulation is understood to mean equal in some particular sense and not in the sense that all religions are identical.

Response: Since it is self-evident that any two religions have some noticeable differences, "equal" cannot mean identical.  It can mean equal in some particular sense.  All religions are equal as religious entities in the same sense as all individuals are equal as legal entities.  ...Rather, what is meant is that no individual is entitled to a privileged position.  Nor does it mean that one person cannot be picked in preference over another based on differences.  Thus, what Hinduism is saying is that all religions are equal in the sense that they all make truth-claims and none of the can claim its truth-claims to be true and there proceed to null-doze all others to be false.  

"All religions are equal" acquires the same revolutionary force which the cry "All me are created equal" had on the lips of those who stormed the Bastille.

Proposition: All religions are One - If ultimately everything is Brahman, and all there is Brahman, then any differences between religions is superficial and perceived as real because of ignorance.  Therefore, all religions are one when one looks beyond their superficial differences.

Response:  The idea of oneness in "All religions are one" has been made one with the idea of oneness of Brahman.  The two have been collapsed into one claiming that the collapse is justified by non-duality ideas of Advaita.  Advaita does not say that manifestation of the Universe and differentiation of things manifest are homogeneous in ultimate reality.  The key element to remember when talking about ultimate reality is not the "oneness" but the "indescribability", not its unity but ineffability.  

If the ideas of oneness are not the same, then what do Hindus mean by oneness in saying "All religions are One"?  Hindu idea of oneness for religions is an idea of tolerance.  Hindu idea of tolerance is as much connected to Hindu theism as with Hindu non-duality.  

Proposition: All religions are the same - This formulation is understood to mean that all religions are means to the same end, furnishing men with different but partial insights into nature of reality of equal value.

Response: This position holds that all religions are merely paths and do not have any truth associated with their particulars.  Thus, differences in particulars of the religions is irrelevant to the ultimate truth.  They merely are different paths to the same goal or destination and hence ultimately false.

This is at best an extreme position even for Advaita which asserts the dependent reality of Saguna Brahman and the Universe which are not false but relative truths.   Besides, Hindus who are non-Advaitins certainly do not accept that their path is false.

Proposition: All religions are essentially the same - This formulation suggests that, upon careful enquiry, one finds that the essence of all religions is the same.  Their differences are only superficial.  

Response: A generality of all religions has been postulated called the essence with all religions as particulars of this general essence.  Problem with this is that an essence is posited but we are not told what the essence really consists of.  At a minimum, there needs to be an argument cannot but be based on a common, general essence.  This has not been done either.

Proposition: All religions have an abiding sense of the Universal - ..there is an abiding sense of the Universal, then this Universal has to exist independent of the religions it abides in.  Why?  Many religions have a known beginning and some have disappeared.  Therefore, what is abiding is not the particulars of religions but the Universal essence that is contained in all of them.

Response: This argument suffers from not establishing that there needs to be a common abiding sense of the Universal.  It also fails to offer any indication of what this shared sense of Universal is.

Question: Can the Hindu position be "All religions are true?".  If so, what is its intended meaning?

Response: Yes, it is the Hindu position.  It is best understood as the diametric opposite of "My religion alone is true and all else are false."  The intended meaning is "Each of the religions may be true or false.  When Hindus use words like same or valid or equal or equally true or One, they are not suggesting Homogeneity.  Because of the metaphysical nature of essential claims of a religion, there is no way of ascertaining its truth or falsity.  Thus, one cannot be designated as truth and the rest designated as false."

Reference: All Religions Are: Equal? One? True? Same?: A Critical Examination of Some Formulations of the Neo-Hindu Position

Arvind Sharma

Philosophy East and West
Vol. 29, No. 1 (Jan., 1979), pp. 59-72
Published by: University of Hawai'i Press .."

Wadhwa adds:
"....

Commenting on western scholars' Vedic interpretation and particularly of 'ekam sad' (RV 1-164-46), Sri Aurobindo (in a chapter on Dayananda  and the Veda) writes:

 

"An interpretation of  Veda must stand or fall by its central conception of the Vedic religion and the amount of support given to it by the intrinsic evidence of the Veda itself.  Here Dayananda's view is quite clear, its foundation inexpugnable.   The Vedic hymns are chanted to the one Deity under many names which are used and even designed to express his qualities and powers. The Vedic rishis ought surely to have known something about their own religion, more,  let us hope than Roth or Max Muller and this is what they knew."

 

Sri Aurobindo further states "We are aware how modern scholars twist away from the evidence.  This hymn they say was a late production, this loftier idea which it expresses with so clear a force rose up somehow in the later Aryan mind or was borrowed by those ignorant fire-worshippers, sun-worshippers, sky-worshippers from their cultured and philosophic Dravidian enemies.  But throughout the Veda we have confirmatory hymns and expressions: Agni or Indra or another is expressly hymned as one with all the other gods.  Agni contains all other divine powers within himself, the Maruts are described as all the gods, one deity is addressed by the names of others as well as his own, or most commonly, he is given as Lord and King of the universe, attributes only appropriate to the Supreme Deity......"
 
February 15
NRI Experiences -- The way Hindus deal with Death
Venkat shares:
".... At Jeevodaya we assist terminally ill cancer patients die with dignity making their last days on earth as pleasant and pain free as possible

Hindus generally have a pretty awful way to farewell the dear departed following age old traditions that need a big over haul:

Yesterday 28th March 2008, I had to attend the Funeral of a good friend of mine.

Anthony[]..., was a maths teacher at a Girls
High School, was a great Rugby player when young and coached my sons Rugby team.

When I fell ill in the year ..., Tony stepped in unasked as Anand¹s God Father, took him under his wings and steered him through his ... Exams....

Soon after Tony was diagnosed with Kidney Cancer and ... the Cancer had spread to his brain and was terminal. Tony passed away on Easter Friday....
.....Over all the mourners gave a fitting farewell to a nice man. The Club members gave a guard of honour and sang in chorus
Considering I have lived in Sydney since ...., I have spent half my life in Australia and the first half in India, something was bugging me. Why can we Hindus not treat dead people with more love and respect ?
Driving back home my thought went fleeting back to the funeral I had to attend in February this year while I was in Madras. He was a relative of mine, ... and had had a grand life and died in his sleep.
Family members were told that the cremation would be in the morning. ....the body was moved outside the house and placed on the ground on the drive way. We all stood around while the professional cremator ( what ever you call him ) blew the Chonk and the Bugle ( for want of a
better word). He did this several times sending shivers down our spines.
I looked up at the sky and the apartments around the house. One by one curtains were drawn and windows closed shut to cut out the scary noise as well as keep the bad luck out of their houses.
The entire process was appalling, with the corpse being de robed and bathed and clad in a white cloth in the drive way. A make shift cloth curtain was used and ladies were asked to look the other way. His jewelry were removed
unceremoniously. Garlands were placed on the body and close relatives walked around the body thrice and before we even realised the body was carried away by pall bearers to the cemetery for cremation.
I am sitting here comparing the two funerals and keep wondering why in the name of religion we treat our dead in such an appalling manner. No one said a kind word about the man and there were no prayers offered by family and friends.
This is a non Brahmin funeral I am talking about and the Brahmin funerals are worse. The minute a man or a woman dies, the body is placed outside the house and within a matter of minutes the corpse is wrapped in a cloth and
placed on a bamboo frame and marched off.
If this bit is bad you must think of the appalling conditions at the cemetery or the new Indian crematoriums. Abandoned buildings in ruins that are filthy, operated by scavengers who ask for mourners for money for every
thing. On one occasion we had to wait there with the body for a few hours as there was some mix up and one of the furnaces malfunctioned.
NRIs I should say have made funerals respectable....I prefer the Christian way of farewelling dead people and am glad Hindu NRIs have adopted a similar style...."

Moderator's question:
"Below reference from Venkat is an interesting example of
ignorant Indian's using a really broad brush to paint Indic Antyeshti (funeral) traditions as 'bad'. Whether genuine or just a conversion ploy, it will rattle those Hindus who are unaware of the profoundly organic/existential & well
thought Samskaaras inherent in all Indic traditions, which have inspired almost all Asian civilizations to incorporate these frameworks into their practices.
I wonder what would members' response be to this Australian deracinated Hindu who prefers the Christian ways of bereavement practises." 

 

[Also refer to prior RMF threads on Vegetarianism here].
February 13
Vegetarianism is India's curse, it must be ditched
Srinath initiates the debate: 
This was first suggested by someone in the sixties, but the green revolution made such discussions moot. Hunger in India is more due to poverty or problems with food distribution than the non-availability of food, and so such "solutions" are unnecessary. Besides, no sensible person worth their salt would make such a statement today, with a much better understanding of the environmental effects of animal husbandry, the amount of grain that is currently diverted to cows for beef production in the West (especially the US), and the fact that world population could top 15 billion by the middle of the century or at least by the end of it. Most nutritional guidelines are advocating lowering the consumption of red meat rather than increasing, and so this article again misses the mark. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but it's probably worth investigating the UK Independent newspaper's motivations....."

Rajiv comment: Farm land is more efficiently utilized to feed vegetarians than non-vegetarians. This is well established. From a given amount of acreage one can feed 3 to 5 times as many vegetarians as non-vegetarians. There are also studies on how non-vegetarianism costs environmental problems. If the argument raised by the opponent is based on economics and social well being, then we must respond in kind and not cite a moral response only. 

Deen says:

"1. Grass/leaves eating animals have long intestine and carnivorous animals have short intestine. Human beings have long intestine.
2. Grass/leaves eating animals drink water by sucking and carnivorous animals use their tongue for taking water in. Human beings drink by sucking/swallowing..."

Arihant says:

" In my honest opinion, Hindus are mostly cowards and vegetarian weaklings as well as spiritually corrupt by not following their Aryan Vedic forefathers or Aryaputras like Shri Ram, Maharaj Kaushik turned Brahmarishi Vishwamitra, King Shibi, Maharishi Agastya and so on. All of these great personalities used to hunt and eat animal flesh and were manly Seers and/or King-Warriors who
would strike into the hearts of their enemies. Greatest Vedic sacrifice Ashwamedha Yajna or Horse sacrifice for expansion of empires and political power demands sacrifice of the ceremonial horse or Ashwa into 36 pieces...."

Wadhwa provides Vedic and other Hindu text references to rebut prior posts:

"....Vedas and Vegetarian diet:

Atharva Veda says:

1. Breehimattam yavamattamatho maashamatho tilam

Esha vamm bhaago nihito ratnadheyaaya dantau maa hinsishtam pitaram maataram cha (Atharva Veda 6.140.2)

Abstract meaning: O Teeth! You eat rice, barley, gram and sesame.  These cereals are specifically meant for you.  DO NOT KILL THOSE WHO ARE CAPABLE OF BEING FATHERS AND MOTHERS.

2.  Anago hatya vai bheema kritye.  Maa no gaamashvam purusham vadheeh.(Atharva Veda 10.1.29)

Abstract meaning: It is definitely a great sin to kill innocents.  Do not kill our cows, horses and people....

....The Vedas do not at all sanction animal sacrifices.  The synonym for the Yajna in the Vedic lexicon called Nighantu is Adhvara.  The Word has been explained by Yaskacharya, an ancient vedic etymologist, as:

Adhvara eti yajyanam dhvarati hinsa karma tatpratished Nirukta 1.7 

Adhvara means where there is no violence of any kind (or the act which is perfectly non-violent).  This word(Adhvara) has been used in all the four Vedas hundreds of times clearly proving that the Vedas do not sanction animal sacrifices.  

In the Sam Veda-176,  too it is clearly stated - We  act according to the injunctions contained in the vedic hymns.  We never kill animals.

Meat-eating is not sanctioned by the Vedas.  On the other hand it is strongly condemned and prohibited.  Rig Veda 10.87.16  says....
 

Who then started such obnoxious practice of animal sacrifice?  Bhismacharya replies to Yudhishtra in Mahabharata (Shanti Parva - 261.9) "Dhortey pravriti  yajney naitadveydeshu vidyatey" i.e., Taking Wine, fish and flesh of animals, intoxicating drinks of various kinds, etc. is not sanctioned by the Vedas at all.  It is the wicked people that have introduced such ignoble practices. ....

In the Vedas the cows are called Aghanya i..e, which are never to be killed.  Ashvamedha means the proper administration of the State to promote or consolidate power of the State as is evident from Shatpatha Brahmana. 

Source:  "Teachings of the Vedas": An introduction by Pt.Dharma Dev Vidya Martand, pub.by Shree Ghudmal Prahaladkumar Arya Dharmarth Nyas, Hindaun City, Raj.

Swami Vidyanand Saraswati, (formerly Principal and Fellow Punjab University) writes while quoting Atharva Veda 1.16.4 "Capital punishment has been ordered for one who kills or tortures our cows or men, deserves to be shot dead, because such a person is a murderer(viraha).  How can we then conceive the killing of animals in any yajna which has been termed as the noblest act or 'shreshthatam karma' .  It has been generally held by western scholars and their zealous followers here, that horse were sacrificed as the Ashvamedha.  But the word Ashvamedha, during the Vedic period, was used in the sense of administration or welfare of the state(Rashtram va Ashvamedha -  Shatpatha 13-1-6).  ...

To support his argument in favour of  non-vegetarian diet Mr.Arihant in his mail has quoted Swami Vivekanand while conveniently ignoring the views of Maharishi Dayanand (1824-1883) who started a signature campaign against cow slaughter and sent a memorandum to Queen Victoria.  Maharishi Dayanand writes in his book Satyarth Prakash  "Neither we should kill, nor allow others to kill animals like cow, who in one generation does good to four lakhs seventy five thousand and six hundred people....

I can only say that anyone who looks at our vast ancient literature with an illogical, subjective and selective approach without taking into consideration its dominating spirit as well as the interpolated part shall neither be able to explode the myths nor find the gems of deeper Vedic truths..."

Viswa comments:

"....While I do not consider vegetarianism is a curse - rather it is a boon for a sustainable and an eco-friendly civilization (as we all know from recent years as to how much corn and soybean is being consumed in China to feed the pigs that are meant for human consumption - http://pigpenning.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/report-feeding-chinas-pigs/ ) -
my own time spent amongst the Ho-tribes in Chhotanagpur exposed me to a very astonishing and wonderful discovery.
Generally, the tribes do not eat beef or pork or even meat in general because of poverty. T heir poverty does not allow them to consume anything more than a chapatti or soaked rice... However, during times of celebrations / festivities - almost all of these festivities related to either agriculture or hunting - an entire tribe will consume a pig or cow or goat..." 

 

Thatte asks:
".... would like someone in this group shed some light on this issue of the Rishis and ancient Hindus eating meat, especially beef.Please note the verse 6.4.18 of  Brihadaranyaka  Upanisad.   Ramakrishna Math (Chennai) English translation of this shloka says,

" He who wishes, May a son be born to me, who will be a reputed scholar, attend assemblies, speak words that one likes to hear, be versed in all the Vedas and attain full longevity", should have rice cooked with meat .."

Chittaranjan responds to prior comment:
"...The translation of that Brihadaranyaka Upanishad mantra mentioned by you (6.4.18) is correct. But please note that this mantra relates to a ritual, i.e., the ritual of getting a son with certain characteristics, and is not to be
understood as a general prescription for people to follow in their day-to-day lives. In rituals, as in medicine, consuming meat that is prohibited otherwise may sometimes be allowed..." 

Sanjay responds to Arihant:
"...Arihant: Two greatest exponents of Yoga in 19th century universally recognized, first Swami Vevekanand and  secondly Evolutionary Yogi Sri Aurobindo both used to eat red- meat(goat meat or mutton), egg, chicken and fish. That did not stop  them from transcending all Gunas(modes of material nature) and  attain highest enlightenment in the history of evolution.

Not entirely true.  There was a time before his Self-realization when Sri Aurobindo gave up meat. He said : "With the vegetarian diet I was feeling light and pure. It is only a belief that one can't do without meat; it is a question of habit" (Evening Talks, vol 3, p 88)


Alberruni  the 11th century visitor to India offers a possible reason for why cow-eating was forbidden in ancient India.  This is the passage from the book

Alberuni: Some Hindus say that in the time before Bharata (i.e.Mahabharata war) it was allowed to eat the meat of cows, and that there then existed sacrifices part of which was the killing of cows. After that time, however, it had been forbidden on account of ...
.....As for the economical reason, we must keep in mind that the cow is the animal which serves man in travelling by carrying his loads, in agriculture in the works of ploughing and sowing, in the household by the milk and the product made thereof. Further, man makes use of its dung, and in winter-time even of its breath. Therefore it was forbidden to eat cow's meat; as also Alhajjaj forbade it, when people complained to him that Babylonia became more and more desert.
The text can be read online
(Edward Sachau. Alberuni's India. ....."

Vikram comments:
"...Tapan... maybe on to something although slightly reversed. It maybe that in places with plenty, people include it and in those places where its scarce, they turn vegetarian...
This would suggest ecological economics plays a very important part in the Hindu's Diet and therefore more sustainable than any other diet (even purely vegetarian ones). Its goes back to the point that the Hindu strives to reduce himsa and does not differentiate between plant/animals..."

Varun shares some useful links and statistics:
"....

Some good articles in favor of vegetarianism.

Meat Production Wastes Natural Resources - 

Meat-eaters soak up the world's water - 

Vegetarian Diet May be Necessary to Prevent Global Water and Food Shortage - 

13 Breathtaking Effects of Cutting Back on Meat - 

Estimation of the water requirement for beef production in the United States -

Some imp one-liners from these articles:

1. On average, it takes 1,790 litres of water to grow 1kg of wheat compared with 9,680 litres of water for 1kg of beef.

2. It takes more than 11 times as much fossil fuel to make one calorie from animal protein as it does to make one calorie from plant protein.

3. Excrement produced by chickens, pigs, and other farm animals: 16.6 billion tons per year -- more than a million pounds per second (that's 60 times as much as is produced by the world's human population -- farmed animals produce more waste in one day than the U.S. human population produces in 3 years). This excrement is a major cause of air and water pollution..."

Srinath comments:

"....Many Hindus are vegetarians today. Period! Whatever be the reason for that, vegetarianism is a noble practice and it is supported by well documented evidence of the inherent cruelty of animal husbandry, and the sheer inefficiency and environmental costs of using grain to feed animals that feed us. Just check out PETA's site if you don't believe me - now, if the fact that Westerners are advocating vegetarianism will not convince you, I don't know what will.

Thirdly, both Upanishadic truths and modern genetics tells us that we are all pretty much the same. Vegetarianism is fundamentally a recognition of this fact. We should be proud that Hindus came to this conclusion before the advance of genetics and PETA.

In summary, it is extremely unfortunate that Hindus cannot be proud of their vegetarian beliefs in spite of overwhelming evidence that their beliefs are supported by advances in science. How can then we accuse Westerners of not respecting us and our philosophy?..." 

Closing statements:
 
Rohit shares info on a vegetarian diet works for body builders

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/no-meat-muscle-4-rules-for-building-mass-on-vegetarian-diet.html

Read about Sitko, a vegan body builder ...

Menon (quoting from another egroup)

On Vegetarianism - Part-1 By Swami Sivananda

...
Sage Uddalaka instructs his son Svetaketu: "Food when consumed, becomes
threefold. The gross particles become the excrement, the middling ones flesh,
and the fine ones the mind. My child, when curd is churned, its fine particles
which rise upwards form butter. Thus, my child, when food is consumed, the fine
particles which rise upwards form the mind. Hence, verily, the mind is food".

Three Kinds of Diet

Diet is of three kinds, viz., Sattvic diet, Rajasic diet, and Tamasic diet. In
the Bhagavad-Gita, Lord Krishna says to Arjuna: "The food which is dear to each
is threefold. The food which increases vitality, energy, vigour, health, and joy
and which are delicious, bland, substantial, and agreeable are dear to the pure.
The passionate persons desire foods that are bitter, sour, saline, excessively
hot, pungent, dry, and burning, and which produce pain, grief, and disease. The
food which is stale, tasteless, putrid, rotten, and impure, is dear to the
Tamasic".

.... Fish, eggs, meat, salt, chillies, and asafoetida are Rajasic
food-stuffs; they excite passion and make the mind restless, unsteady, and
uncontrollable. Beef, wine, garlic, onions, and tobacco are Tamasic food-stuffs.
They exercise a very unwholesome influence on the human mind and fill it with
emotions of anger, darkness, and inertia.

Srinath:

....at least 4000 years of adherence to Sanatana Dharma have resulted in a significant proportion of Hindus who are vegetarian, and that today, this behavior is being accepted as healthier, nobler, and perhaps even necessary for mankind. To those who say that eating meat is their prerogative, I would simply say that many Hindus eat meat, and so this is not about converting those who will eat from doing so. We must all weigh the existing evidence and the call of our conscience.

....However, it is not only a moral issue, since it could develop into a serious resource/environmental issue. This could be especially troublesome in India where environmental laws are weak and enforcement is lax. ...However, these arguments are useful for the purposes of rebutting Western claptrap that animals are a protein resource that is being overlooked.

Lastly, I would like to suggest that in a culture in which vegetarianism is important, the importance of cows makes sense, since milk is an essential and necessary component of a Hindu vegetarian diet, and certain nutrients like vitamin B12 are not available in any significant amount in plants (besides the fact that milk is an important source of calcium, protein, and many other nutrients). But then why venerate cows and ban their slaughter? I would suggest that this is to ensure their humane treatment, since they are animals that are necessary for our food source and must be reared and tended. Seen in this light, cows are indeed Go-Maata as they provide needed and necessary nourishment, and if their veneration ensures their humane treatment, this is a good thing. To me at least, 4000 years of Hindu wisdom makes perfect sense and may even be finally getting acceptance today."

Krishnamurthy:          

I must also add that the word 'Ashwamedha' is wrognly interpreted as 'Horse Sacrifice'. The connotation of the word 'ashwa' is 'ashnute vyaapnoteeti ashwah'. [One who expands; or one who radiates]. The word 'medhaa ' is NOT sacrifice. The connotation is 'maatrashaH edhati anayaa iti medhaa" - [That by which one can determine exactly is Medhaa]. The famous 'Ashwamedhaa sukta' (Rik. 1-164), which is widely misinterpreted as 'Horse Sacrifice' neither mentions a horse nor describes a sacrifice. It is a sukta, wherein Dheerghatamaa Maharshi explains the science of Cosmos. Unfortunately most of the Commentators are not exposed to Science; and hence go astray. All these I have elaborated in my book 'The Science of Hinduism', pending publication.


5.  Shambhu  responds to Thattey's question

I have doubts on these translations.

BrihadaaraNyaka 6-4 deals with garbhaadaana and naamakaraNa.

Its five mantras 14-18 should be understood together - here RiSi Yaajnavalkya narrates the kinds of food to be taken by a couple desiring a son (mantras 14-16 and 18) or daughter (mantra 17) of Vedic learning.

In the context of the preceding four mantras, mantra 18's three words (maamsa, ukSaNa, and RSabha) can be connected to meat eating only with great fantasy. Moreover, the words ukSaNa and RSabha are in triteeyaa vibhakti (i.e., with/by ukSaNa, with/by RSabha). Lastly, the Rigvedic word for bull is ukSANa and not ukSaNa.

Therefore: maamsa here is the fleshy part or pulp of fruit. ukSaNa is sprinkling (of water), and RSabha is aumkaara. The word pra+ukSaNa (prokSaNa) is in use in many Indic languages even today, and its ritual usage is widespread in any purification ceremony (udakashaanti, puNyaaham, maarjana during the daily sandhyaavandanaa, etc.)...."