About Hinduism

[Guest guest]

 

 

Wed, 8 Sep 2004 03:02:01 -0700 (PDT)

Parama Karuna xparamakaruna

About Hinduism

VFA-members

Cc: vrnparker

Dear Vrin, Hari Om!

I appreciated your postings, and I agree with your point that we need some legal

definition on which to stand to defend dharma -- a common standpoint.

Unfortunately the names of "Sanatana dharma" or "Vedic dharma" have not been

recognized yet by International law (although I strongly think they should, and

by initiative of the Hindu authorities and leaders themselves, considering the

inauspicious origin and meaning of the word so nicely illustrated by Sri

Nandanandana) so for the time being "Hinduism" is a term behind which we can

and should all rally, by giving up all sectarian considerations. Devotees of

Krishna, devotees of Vishnu, devotees of Shiva, devotees of Shakti, devotees of

Ganesh etc as well as advaitin philosophers, they should all be considered

Hindus and treated as such, provided they do not offend other forms of God (who

has unlimited names and forms) and their genuine worshipers, out of a misguided

idea of "superiority" or "exclusive devotion" that is

actually just ignorant fanaticism.

In fact the most outstanding characteristic of Hinduism is the readiness to

respect and accept all the genuine and compatible religious and spiritual paths

within its fold: sarva dharma samabhava. As I had mentioned some time ago, the

problem is rather to ascertain if a particular religious path is genuine or

not, if it can be called "dharma" or not. Dharma must absolutely be

characterized by: 1. truthfulness, 2. compassion, 3. cleanliness, 4. austerity.

Otherwise it cannot be defined as dharma. Those groups who are led by, and

pledge allegiance to leaders and traditions that do not follow or value the

four universal principles of religion listed above, cannot be considered

genuine religions, even in their ranks there can be sincere people who

individually follow the true principles of religion out of common sense and

decency.

Regarding the genuine Vaishnava affiliation of Christians and Muslims, I just

want to say that they may be accepted as Vaishnavas only if they actually

follow the Vaishnava conclusions and practices, and especially if they don't

destroy or desacrate temples and deities of Vishnu Himself or His dear servants

and associates (like Shiva, Hanuman etc), offend them by calling them "false

gods", "devils" or "pagan idols", and hate, blaspheme and persecute their

worshipers.Unfortunately, Christians and Muslims in India have regularly been

behaving in ways that are completely opposite to the genuine Vaishnava ideals.

And not in India alone, to my knowledge. Persecution and vilification of "other

faiths" and even of sects of their same Abrahamic faith i.e. Jews, Muslims (and

within the Muslims various sects, Shiaites, Sunnites etc), Christian

protestants, orthodox, catholic and "heretics", have always been the rule, and

still is, as we can see from the news. Recently in Italy a

Catholic magazine published an article "re-evaluating" the good old Inquisition

(officially stopped in Europe only by Napoleon Bonaparte when he defeated the

Pope) and vilifying its victims, especially the most articulate and self

realized philosophers and spiritualists like Giordano Bruno. The separatist

militant terrorism in Tripura is also very explicit in its "Christian"

ideology: God has assigned the "promised land" of north east India to

Christians and like in the Bible's stories, everyone else living there should

be eliminated by all means. In Muslim countries it is a crime to speak of

Vishnu or to worship Him: it is considered "proselytizing against Islam" and

"blasphemy" (and so is speaking of any other religion that is not considered

Islam). Religious books other than Koran are severely banned.Vaishnavas who

present themselves as Christians or Muslims, or Christians or Muslims who

present themselves as Vaishnavas, without specifying their actual beliefs and

practices, are actually increasing the confusion and aggravating the problem.

Friedrich von Schlegel, German philosopher and poet, wrote:"When one considers

the sublime disposition underlying the truly universal education (of Vedic

India) ... then what is or has been called religion in Europe seems to us to be

scarcely deserving of that name. And one feels compelled to advise those who

wish to witness religion to travel to India for that purpose..."

However, I am convinced that the subject is more complex than what it seems, and

we should not be too simplistic. There are pressing problems that we need to

solve. Let us therefore remain on the legal platform.Legally speaking, who is

actually considered a Hindu? In some places like England and the United States

and even in Russia as you properly mentioned, people who were not born in India

and even not of Indian descent have come to be legally considered Hindus and as

such they cooperate together and often greatly contribute to the upholding of

Vedic dharma.This is certainly to the credit of intelligent and sensible Hindus

(of original Hindu descent) living in those countries, who understand the

dangers of the pressure of adharma and are therefore ready to cooperate with

all good and sincere people, opening their fold to qualified people and

strengthening their ranks instead of weakening them, thus abandoning racist

considerations. Probably it is because outside India

the Hindu leaders themselves and the great majority of their supporters have not

been born in India, and are of "mixed" families (many Indian immigrants married

local women), so their idea of Hindu has become somewhat "wider". Probably

because they may have been object of vilification and persecution as

minorities: sometimes one has to experience wrongs and injustice personally

before he properly understands what is wrong and unjust. The historical pattern

in Kali yuga is to vociferously ask for freedom of religion, justice or

tolerance only when one is on the bad end of the wrong deal.

In most areas of India this open minded cooperation is not happening yet,

although this is where it is most urgent and needed. For Indian laws, only

those who were born in a relatively small number of families belonging to some

specific castes can be considered Hindus, although there is a much greater

number of people who worship God according to the Vedic conclusions. Public

temples, that are supposed to be the authority in establishing who is Hindu and

who is not, are giving a very clear message every day, and I am sorry to say

that it is not the right message.Such negative message is generally coming from

most high caste and caste-conscious Hindus, and reinforcing wrong opinions in

the common people, in government officers and in the media. Even people born in

India in families of tribal descent, or in the "untouchable" castes such as

Dahlits are not considered "Hindus", what to speak of foreigners.At the same

time, since being "Hindu" is considered a

question of birth and not of qualification (i.e. guna and karma), it is commonly

understood that people born in Hindu families do not need to qualify themselves

by studying or practicing Vedic knowledge, a serious blind spot that makes them

more vulnerable and impotent when it is the time to defend dharma against

attacks.We should remember that (alas) almost all public Hindu temples in India

are controlled by the Indian Government, which, being carefully and rigidly

"secular", considers the question of Hinduism from the atheistic and

materialistic point of view: as an ethnic and social issue. This spells the

rules on who is allowed to enter the temples, and who is not.

It is true that a lot of good work has been done, and is still being done by

RSS, who is "converting" tribals or "re-converting" Christians to Hinduism. One

of the things I like most of RSS is their open mindedness, intelligence and

common sense demonstrated by these activities.Hinduism cannot grow or even be

maintained by simply pushing high caste Indians to beget more children, by not

recognizing those who have already and genuinely embraced the Hindu faith and

practices, and by ousting good (but needy) Hindus who have been somehow forced

by circumstances to associate with or be blackmailed by other groups, like

Muslims and especially Christians (schooling, hospital assistance, etc).

Another problem that I see is the great amount of misinformation and ignorance

about Hinduism, often among those who profess themselves as Hindus, and of

course among followers of Sanatana dharma.In fact the influence of

Semitic/Abrahamic culture and mentality has been pounding on India

for centuries (at least from 700 CE) and on Europe (and peoples of European

descent who now live around the world, including Americans etc) at least from

3000 BCE. We cannot underestimate it.In my personal experience, the only way to

solve the impasse is to propagate Vedic knowledge, information about historical

facts and encourage an open debate on philosophy, by keeping an open mind.

Today I read on the Times of India about the results of a census released on

Monday by census commissioner of India, J.K. Banthia. The figures are amazing:

Percentage on total population:Hindus 80.5%Muslims 13.4%Christians 2.33%Sikhs

1.84%Buddhists 0.76%Jains 0.40%

Growth rates (from the years 1981-91 to the years 1991-2001):Hindus from 25.1%

to 20.3%Muslims from 34.5% to 36%Jains from 4.6% to 26%Sikhs from 24.3% to

18.2%Christians from 21.5% to 22.6%

Literacy rates:Jains 94.1%Christians 80.3%Buddhists 72.7%Sikhs 69.4%Hindus 65.1%Muslims 59.1%

Female literacy rates:Jains 90.6%Christians 76.2%Sikhs 63.1%Buddhists 61.7%Hindus 53.2%Muslims 50.1%

Since these figures have been calculated up to 2001, we must either think that

in these last 3 years of BJP government the number of Christian conversions has

gone up considerably, or that the number of people who have reportedly been

"converted" to Christianity has been inflated by propaganda, or that such

conversions are so artificial that the "converted" people actually declare to

be Hindus when interviewed by census officers.I tend to agree with your

opinion, expressed some time back in the VFA Forum, that the so-called majority

of Christians in the north-eastern states of India is just propaganda, but I

also tend to think that the actual growth in conversions to Christianity must

be addressed in a sensible manner by studying its root problems.

PKD

 

 

Read only the mail you want - Mail SpamGuard.