Only Shakti is entrenched in Bible (Comforter), Koran (Ruh), Vedas, Granth Sahib

[Guest guest]

shriadishakti , " jagbir singh "

<adishakti_org> wrote:

>

> O Ek suki yaha lakoh mein.

> O Only one in a hundred thousand is in bliss.

>

> Ansoo hai croroh ankhoh mein.

> There are tears in millions and millions of eyes.

>

> Hum neh gin gin har takdir dekhi.

> I have counted and seen every fate for years,

>

> Ek hasta hai dush rote hai

> Only one soul laughs while ten are in tears.

>

> Kuch bhol Prabhu yeh kya Maya

> O! Speak Almighty GOD what is this Illusion,

>

> Tera khel samaj meh nah aya

> Your Divine Play is all confusion and delusion.

>

>

> For weeks the Divine was asked, amid a profusion of tears, to

> reveal the Truth. Repeatedly He was implored to answer the meaning

> of life, creation, and this useless, empty human existence. Above

> all, He was begged for the Truth that would destroy the falsehood

> that the religious regimes had deluded him and the rest of

> humanity. What was desired was the Absolute Truth of the All

> Mighty Creator, not the conflicting gods of various organized

> religions. Any god that could not explain and account for the

> other Messengers was not God. Any yahweh that only cared for his

> kind was not Yahweh. Any allah that had only one messenger was not

> Allah. Any prabhu that was found only in a single scripture was

> not Prabhu. Any buddha that had no Knowledge of His kingdom was

> not Buddha.

>

> The Supreme Creator had to be the Lord of all Messengers that came

> on Earth. His Truth had to be found in all Scriptures that humans

> possessed. His Reality had to be Absolute, Irrefutable, and All

> Compassing. Then, and only then, will He be acknowledged as God

> the Almighty.

>

> On the night of September 28, 1993, i was sitting all alone,

> completely drunk, and somehow listening to the relaxing music of

> Kitaro. My children were fast asleep and wife still at work.

> Nothing stirred. i was peace with myself and Earth.

>

> Suddenly, out of nowhere, a thunderous voice bellowed, " JOIN SHRI

> MATAJI. "

>

> Now after a decade of joining Shri Mataji i know for sure why i am

> on Earth! And i have also found that Brahman is the Lord of all

> Messengers that came on Earth. His Truth is found in all

> Scriptures that humans possess. His Reality is Absolute,

> Irrefutable and All Compassing. The most important and priceless

> of all knowledge, in my opinion, is the Shakti's removal of Maya

> to reveal that Brahman is within myself. She has taught me this

> Highest Tuth that has set me free from decades of delusion and

> ignorance.

>

>

 

Before reading the article, " Proselytization In India: An Indian

Christian's Perspective " , i just want to remind all of what Jesus

declared as he was teaching the multitudes in the temple in

Jerusalem. " You will know the truth, and the truth will set you

free. " (John 8:32)

 

After reading the article it will be obvious that few, if any, of

the religious masses are free to embrace the faithful of other

traditions. Except for the tolerant Hindus, nothing has collectively

enlightened them over the millennia that the Divine is One. Religion

continues to divide humanity and bring death and destruction.

 

Only the Shakti can reveal the truth that will set Hindus (Sanaatana

Dharma), Jews (Messiah), Christians (Comforter), Muslims (Ruh),

Buddhists (Maa Treya), and Sikhs (Aykaa Mayee) free. Only those who

seek Her are set free from all that plagues the religious masses.

That is why She had to incarnate on Earth in the form of Shri Mataji

Nirmala Devi. Yes, you will know the truth, and the truth will set

you free to UNCONDITIONALLY embrace all His prophets, scriptures and

their message.

 

Jai Shri Mataji,

 

jagbir

 

 

Proselytization In India: An Indian Christian's Perspective by C.

Alex Alexander

 

Since colonial times to the present, the impetus for Christian

proselytizing work in India has largely emanated from Western

Christian Church groups and missions. The latter's continuing

obsession for promoting religious conversions under the aegis of

India's Constitutional guarantee of religious freedom has triggered

a raging debate among religious and political leaders of that

country. Many Hindus of the Indian Diaspora have also been drawn

into it.

 

Over seventy years ago, Mahatma Gandhi stated that:

" proselytizing under the cloak of humanitarian work is unhealthy,

to say the least. It is most resented by people here " [1]. The

resentment that Gandhi alluded to has increased in India over the

years, mostly due to the persistence of religious conversions

engineered by Christian evangelists who derive their financial

support from foreign sources. Fundamentalist Muslims too have

entered the fray in recent years with substantive financial

contributions from Muslim countries interested in furthering the

spread of Islam in India. Some Hindu groups have resorted to reverse

conversions. All these trends are destructive to India's time-tested

culture of religious tolerance.

 

The muteness of liberal Indian Christians, both in India and

overseas, is indeed surprising. The aim of this essay is to rectify

that omission at least in part. I hope that liberal Indians of all

faiths will debate this issue with their fundamentalist counterparts

in a similar vein to prevent the spread of inter-religious conflicts

in that subcontinent. At the end of this essay, I shall present for

your consideration a plan for pre-empting the religious militancy

embedded in the fundamentalist varieties of both Christianity and

Islam.

 

Though I have been living in the United States (US) for over forty

years, I have maintained my moorings in the Indian culture through

periodic visits to that country and close interactions with my

Indian friends here regardless of their religious affiliations. The

gift that I cherish most from my Indian origin and parental

influence is one of unbridled religious tolerance. That Indic

tradition of allowing people of diverse faiths to seek their own

spiritual centering is now under attack in India at the hands of

fundamentalists of all religions.

 

The divisive and supercilious natures of their arguments have given

me the impetus to write this article. I am not a religious scholar.

But, I do value and cherish the teachings of Jesus as conveyed to me

through my early religious influences in my childhood. Therefore, I

am able to empathize with the angst of an adherent of any religion

when he or she is confronted by the caricature of one's personal

faith as portrayed by a fundamentalist of another religion. Like all

my non-Christian friends, I too am annoyed when a well-meaning

Christian fundamentalist knocks on my door and asks me whether I

am " born-again " and whether I would like to be saved! I can

internalize the frustration of a non-Christian subjected to such an

intrusive interrogation.

 

I am well aware that fundamentalist Christians may condemn my views

expressed in this article. If they do, I am certain that I will be

able to weather their damnation because of my roots in an ancient

Christian tradition whose commitment to the tenets of Jesus is no

less than theirs. My faith will allow me to forgive their

condemnation. I hope that their beliefs will likewise permit them to

forgive my interpretations of Jesus' teachings if they find them to

be at variance with theirs.

 

My religious tradition has always placed more emphasis on the

spiritual dimension of Jesus' teachings than in the establishment of

Bible's historicity. My reading of the history of early Christianity

leads me to believe that the Western churches' obsession for

converting others to Christianity is based more on their historical

tradition of using proselytization as an instrument of statecraft

for the extension of their political and mercantile influences, than

in furthering the spiritual welfare of their flocks.

 

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

 

The ancient traditions of Christian churches evolved from their

native eastern Semitic belief systems. But, most of the currently

existing dogmas of Christianity as advanced by the western churches

were molded by the impact of Greco-Roman traditions. To this day,

the ancient (often referred to as oriental orthodox) churches of

Syria, India (in Kerala), Ethiopia, Egypt, and Armenia have

successfully shielded themselves from the dogmas of western

churches. But, that was not easy in India after the arrival of the

European colonizers there.

 

In 1498 CE, the Portuguese tried and failed in a hostile takeover of

the ancient Indian Orthodox Church through intimidation[2]. Again,

starting from 1836 CE, the Indian Orthodox Church was subjected to

the machinations of the Church Missionary Society (CMS) of the

United Kingdom with the connivance of the British Residents who were

assigned to the Kingdom of Travencore to serve as Agents of the

British Crown[2a]. Such meddling in the internal affairs of the

ancient church resulted in the formation of a proselytizing group

called the CMS; which is now part of the Church of South India

(CSI). Subsequently in 1889 CE; another split in the original Indian

Orthodox Church occurred to create a " reformed " group, with

an explicit recognition that evangelism is essential for the growth

of Christianity. That reformed orthodox group is known as the Mar

Thoma Church. Interestingly, that Church's conversion activities

have remained modest and are mostly undertaken outside of Kerala.

 

The original Indian Orthodox Church too has been buffeted over the

centuries by internal feuds. But, they have all been unrelated to

theological issues. In 1912 CE, this ancient and original orthodox

church splintered to form two separate churches, one known as the

Malankara Indian Orthodox Church totally autocephalous with its own

spiritual head in Kottayam, Kerala and another called the Malankara

Syrian Orthodox Church subject to Patriarchal oversight from the

Syrian Orthodox Patriarch in Damascus, Syria[2c]. That division

appears to have been based more on issues of autonomy and

nationalism than on canonical differences. The Indian Supreme Court

was recently drawn into yet another court fight between these two

groups to settle issues concerning property rights of their

respective churches. The theological beliefs of the original Indian

orthodox churches along with their Egyptian, Armenian, Syrian and

Ethiopian counterparts as well as the Greek and Russian orthodox

churches (known as the Eastern Orthodox) seem to have survived in

tact over a span of over 1600 years. They did not develop the same

degree of fixation about proselytization as their Western

counterparts did.

 

Unlike the western churches, the oriental orthodox churches did not

raise armies or promote crusades as the Bishop of Rome (Pope's title

in early Christianity) did in order to spread Christianity. The

oriental orthodox churches seek God realization through the mental

disciplines of contemplation and prayer in lieu of dependence on

Christian eschatology. From the earliest of times, they exercised

moderation in the practice of Jesus' commandment to spread the

" good news or evangelion " . They fulfill their obligation to

" propagate " their faiths through natural processes such as

births, marriages and the inclusion of those who seek conversion

brought about by real changes in their religious convictions. That

has remained so for nearly two millennia.

 

Even in today's post-Communist Russia with its newly established

religious freedom, the Russian Orthodox Church does not look upon

kindly at proselytization undertaken by any religious sect. In

Greece, its Constitution also prohibits proselytization. Whenever it

is flouted by a religious sect, the Greek Orthodox Church seeks

governmental intervention to suppress it[3]. I am not holding up

either Greece or Russia as a model of democracy. Greece is a

theocratic state since Greek Orthodox Christianity is its state

religion. It restricts the office of its Presidency to citizens of

that faith. But, I am merely citing Greece and Russia as examples of

two western nations that do not tolerate proselytization even when

they are undertaken by Christian denominations.

 

The fundamentalist Christians both in India and abroad have been too

quick to condemn as draconian the recent anti-conversion

legislations enacted by a few Indian states. Proselytization was not

a distinctive hallmark of Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches of

early Christianity. Jesus himself appears to have condemned

proselytization when he said, " woe unto you scribes and Pharisees,

hypocrites for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and

when he is made, ye make him twofold more than the child of hell

than yourselves " [4].

 

I often think of those verses whenever I hear of mass conversions of

Dalits and tribals in India. They often seem to become outcasts

twice! It is unfortunate that caste prejudice still persists not

only among many Hindus but also among many Christians and Muslims as

well. Frequently, it comes out of the closet when matrimonial

alliances are considered, even when the two families involved in

such discussions are of the same faith. Conversion to Christianity

does not seem to eradicate caste prejudice in India any more than it

eliminates racial discrimination in the US. Despite Jesus' call for

brotherly love, isn't Sunday the most segregated day in America? If

not, how does one explain the need for English-speaking African-

Americans and Hispanics of Christian faith to maintain separate

places of worship? Many fundamentalist Christian groups in the US

still maintain racial separation and frown upon inter-racial dating.

 

WESTERN CHRISTIANITY

 

Christian fundamentalists believe that the prophecies in the Book of

Revelation (New Testament) were revealed by the resurrected Jesus to

his disciple John when the latter was on the island of Patmos in the

Aegean Sea. The religious broadcast media in the United States is a

good source for seeing and hearing the vehemence with which the

Christian fundamentalists assert that every word in the Bible is

true and infallible. A contemporary example of such misguided

beliefs is discernible in their views about the military conflicts

in Iraq and Palestine. They claim that the establishment of Israel

and the war in Iraq are both vindications of the prophecies in the

Book of Revelation. During recent months, five verses from that book

are frequently cited by biblical literalists as examples of the

Bible's infallibility. Those verses predict the second coming of

Jesus after " the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great

river of Euphrates and the water thereof dried up (so) that the way

of the kings of the east might be prepared " [4a] .

 

The fact that the verses refer to the " kings of the east "

crossing the Euphrates is explained away by fundamentalists as mere

allegorical reference to Bush, Blair and Aznar. A few of their troop

formations did in fact cross the river from the east! Some even

point to the uncanny accuracy of the reference to " kings "

because of the behavior of Bush, Blair and Aznar. The latter three

leaders of democracies did disregard the wishes of their

" subjects " when they decided to wage war! So far, so good!

But, how does one interpret without concern a subsequent prophecy in

the same book which predicts one thousand years of world misery

after the way for the kings are prepared and the river gets dried up?

[5] The biblical literalists have an answer for that too. It is just

another allegorical measurement of God's time. It may mean a

thousand hours, days, weeks or months!

 

Bumiller, reporting on President Bush's stance on Iraq stated that

he " sees the world as a biblical struggle of good versus evil " [6].

The fundamentalists of all religions seem to believe in the

infallibility of their prophets and strive for a historic

fulfillment of their prophecies regardless of whether they inflict

untold miseries on themselves or their unwitting neighbors. The late

Robert K. Merton, one of America's foremost sociologists eloquently

stated that: " a self-fulfilling prophecy is, in the beginning, a

false definition of the situation evoking a new behavior which makes

the original false conception come true. The specious validity of

the self-fulfilling prophecy perpetuates a reign of error, for the

prophet will cite the actual course of events as evidence that he

was right from the very beginning " [7].

 

Christian fundamentalists holding on to their blind beliefs in the

infallibility of every word in the Bible are not affected by facts

such as: (i)there are many versions of the Bible, (ii)Jesus spoke

Aramaic and not Latin, Greek or English in which most western Bibles

are written, (iii)many oriental orthodox denominations have their

own Bibles which are derived from the ancient Aramaic or Syriac

translations of the Greek texts, (iv)the Book of Revelation was

absent from many early Greek texts of the New Testament, (v)

St.Paul's writings on Christianity are not universally accepted by

all Christians, (vi)the Gospels were selectively gathered, (vii)many

early versions of the new and old testaments were hand copied with

likely human errors of both omissions and commissions, (viii)many

original works of Jesus' associates (Thomas in particular) were

discarded by some Christian sects during the first five or six

centuries following the death of Jesus, (xi)many such discarded

books are still used by other Christian sects, and (x)the first King

James version of the English Bible was printed only in 1611 and has

been revised seven times so far[8].

 

Christianity, as practiced by the West, has become insensitive to

the emotional violence inflicted on the poorest of the poor when

inducements such as free food, medical care, money, and employment

are used as baits to engineer religious conversions. It is even

worse when intimidations are used to facilitate conversions, as some

Islamic nations do. While Christianity and Islam, as practiced by a

large majority of their followers, do to peace, tolerance

and non-violence, the daily occurrence of death and destruction

based on religious differences in our present-day world highlight

the distortions that are perpetrated by militant adherents of these

religions. In Saudi Arabia, non-Islamic visitors and guest workers

cannot even bring their books of worship or congregate in public

places to conduct community worship services. Like their Christian

counterparts, Islamic fundamentalists also want to actualize the

prophecies in the Koran. Such obsessions to make religious texts

serve as passports to heaven are mercifully absent in the non-

Abrahamic faiths.

 

MY CHRISTIAN FAITH

 

Being a liberal Christian and raised in a non-fundamentalist

tradition, I am able to perceive little or no contradiction between

the tenets of Jesus and many of the seminal concepts of Hinduism and

Buddhism. The priceless affirmation in the Hindu scripture which

says " eko sat vipra bahudi vedanti " (one truth, but discerned

differently by the wise) is somewhat similar to one of Jesus'

sayings, " in my Father's house, there are many mansions, if it

were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare one for

you " [4b]. Another of Jesus' sayings which affirms that: " I and my

Father are one " [4c] is similar to the Hindu Mahavakya, " Aham

Brahmasmi " (I am Brahman). The " born again " attribute

necessary for a Christian's salvation as required by Jesus is no

different from the concept of " dwija " or twice-born in

Brahman (often misconstrued as Brahmin)[4d].

 

There are also several references in the New Testament indicating

that Jesus and his disciples believed in both karma and reincarnation

[4e]. It appears that the belief in reincarnation has persisted over

the years, as evidenced by the continuing belief of Christian

fundamentalists in the second coming of Jesus. The Acts of Thomas

which were excluded from the New Testament, contain concepts

prevalent in the advaita of Hinduism[9]. Even the sacrificial nature

of Jesus' assumption of the sins of his followers through his own

crucifixion and death is similar to the willingness of adept Hindu

Gurus to assume the karmic baggage of their followers. I also find

that many of the parables Jesus used in his teachings are strikingly

similar to Buddha's teachings imparted 500 years before Jesus was

born[10].

 

Like the majority of human beings, I too inherited my religion

through the faith of my parents. Their Christian roots in India's

Kerala State are very ancient. My family lived very amicably with

other religious minorities in a predominantly Hindu environment. I

cannot recall even a single instance where I or any of my non-Hindu

friends were subjected to any kind of religious discrimination. The

Christian faith that I acquired through my parents has been so

liberating that I have had no problem in accepting the plurality of

worship pursued by others. I was brought up to believe that the

practice of one's faith should be a personal affair and of no

concern to others. Jesus himself prescribed it thus: " when you

pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who

is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will

reward you " [4f].

 

One of the early explanations regarding the Holy Trinity (Father,

Son and the Holy Spirit) that I heard was in the form of

characterizing the Father as the eternal truth, the son as an

expression of that truth in human form, and the Holy Spirit as the

transformation of the latter as agape or unconditional love.

Therefore, I have no difficulty in equating the state of bliss

posited in Sat-Chit-Ananda with the transcendent bliss invoked

through the Holy Spirit. In my mind they are conceptually well

correlated: sat is the eternal truth, chit is the consciousness of

that truth, and ananda is the bliss experienced through unattached

love.

 

A CALL TO INDIAN CHRISTIANS

 

In my opinion, most Christians born and raised in India's diverse

milieu are innately liberal and pluralistic in their outlook.

Therefore, they should now raise their voices against the divisive

activities of the evangelical Christians, especially those that are

bankrolled by the Western churches. Failure to do so is likely to do

harm both to the religious freedom of India's minorities and the

territorial integrity of that nation. The peripatetic foreign

missionaries certainly have no stake in preserving the territorial

integrity of India. But, Indians of all religions do. Besides,

separatist movements in Northeast India have been suspected of

deriving support from foreign missionary groups. Given the sordid

history of Western Christianity, eternal vigilance is indeed

prudent.

 

A page from the recent history of East Timor may be appropriate for

Indians to review in order to understand the negative potential of

offshore proselytization! The indigenous tribes in that island were

first converted to Christianity by Dutch and Portuguese

missionaries. Then they were helped by the western nations to secede

from Indonesia. India may run similar risks if it continues to allow

foreign missionaries to have unfettered access to its tribal

populations.

 

If India is to maintain its hard-won nationhood and regain its past

level of religious tolerance, all Indians of goodwill must do

everything possible now to stifle the voices of religious

fundamentalists. Muslim and Christian clerics must learn to tone

down their assertions of monotheistic superiority as well as refrain

from denigrating religions which do not to their views of

salvation. They must come to terms with the fact that the Hindu

perception of God in myriad forms is just as sacred and inviolate to

them as the monotheistic concept is to the followers of Judaism,

Christianity and Islam.

 

The Christian evangelists and the literal Islamists must also

realize that they cannot continue to maintain their exclusive

monopolies for marketing the road maps to heaven. Likewise, Hindu

organizations should not allow their legitimate concerns about

insensitive and duplicitous missionary groups to degenerate into

generalized bashing of minorities through acts such as indulging in

mass distribution of tridents or creating a climate of suspicion

against all minorities. Pluralistic Indians of all religious faiths

have an urgent need now to close their ranks and drown out the

rhetoric of religious fanatics if they truly want to allow India to

emerge as an economic and political power. Otherwise, India will

remain a weak and soft State much to the glee of the Western

nations.

 

LIBERAL CHRISTIANS

 

Liberal theologians of Christianity seem to have no difficulty in

conceding that the ultimate truth can be sought through other

equally valid religious traditions. If Christianity is to flourish

and thrive anywhere in the new Millennium, it needs to heed the

calls of its liberal leaders and theologians like Thomas Jefferson,

John B. Cobb Jr., James Luther Adams, Paul Tillich, John Shelby

Spong et al. If it merely wants to use the faith as a wedge to

divide and enslave people as in the past, then it should continue to

march to the drumbeats of Christian fundamentalists like Pat

Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Oral Roberts and Billy Graham.

 

In 1984, the then Episcopal Bishop of Newark (NJ), John Shelby Spong

visited India and wrote the following: " what I learned about

Hinduism enhanced my appreciation for this ancient religious

tradition. I saw a beauty in it that was enviable, and I found many

points where Christians and Hindus are seeking to deal with the same

human needs in remarkably similar ways " . He admired the absence

of the " spirit of missionary imperialism " in Hinduism and

questioned whether or not the " Christian claims to possess

infallibility or ultimate truth are not signs of a brittle pettiness

that cannot endure " . His writings credited such insights to the

dialogue he had with three Hindu scholars at a very old Christian

seminary in Kottayam, in India's Kerala State[11].

 

While Christian fundamentalists take great pride in establishing the

historicity of the Bible, they condemn all scholarly attempts of

liberal Christians to study Jesus as a historical figure. They

consider all such inquiries to be part of the " devil's "

preoccupation to either misquote or deny Jesus' teachings. The

fundamentalists of Christianity lack the insight to accept the

limitations of the human mind to comprehend God. They are quick to

condemn all plural definitions of God and ascribe such differences

to the ignorance of the " heathens " .

 

Without any hesitation Christian fundamentalists will concede that

Jesus advocated forgiveness of one's enemies and commanded that an

offender be forgiven not " seven times but seventy times

seven " [4g]. But, that will not deter them from claiming that their

wars are always just because they wage them only to destroy the

wicked and the evil! And, God will always call upon them to decide

who is evil and who is wicked! The notion that wars are inconsistent

to the beliefs inherent in both the Old Testament's call for the

beating of swords into plowshares[4h] and Jesus' own admonition to

his followers not to resist evil has never been of concern to

Christian rulers[4i].

 

Liberal Christians do recognize that during the last 1500 years, the

European nations have indeed hijacked and corrupted an eastern

mystic's (Jesus) efforts to replace the then-prevailing Judaic

concept of a vengeful God with one of compassion and infinite love.

From the early European crusades to the Holocaust, Hiroshima,

Nagasaki, Vietnam, Bosnia, Kosovo, and now Iraq, the Judeo-Christian

western nations have not shied away from using violence to resolve

political and ethnic conflicts despite Jesus' commandments to abjure

violence and promote peace. The victorious nations always justify

death and destructions as unavoidable " collaterals " which are

inseparable from their Christian obligation to fight evil, promote

freedom, or preserve human dignity! The last Millennium's history is

replete with such callous and cynical behavior of Western nations.

 

From the middle of the mid 10th Century, the western nations seem to

have expended great efforts in converting Jesus, a Semite into an

Anglo-Saxon. They just could not tolerate letting him remain an Afro-

Asiatic, which he was. Astute visitors to any large museum that

houses a collection of medieval icons and church paintings can

easily discern for themselves the slow conversion of the images of

Jesus, Joseph and Mary from their original Afro-Asiatic appearances

to those of Europeans. The Western nations not only expropriated the

Middle Eastern persona of Jesus and his tenets to fit their Western

traditions but they also confiscated the intellectual properties of

ancient cultures without giving the latter any credit for their

accomplishments.

 

Such expropriations of intellectual property from traditional

cultures continue to occur even today. It is ironic that the Western

nations who now demand universal adherence to the sanctity of

patents and copyrights are the very ones who committed such plunders

in the past. It is no secret that all colonial powers used

Christianity as a useful weapon in their arsenal to expand their

imperial domains. As Bishop Desmond Tutu often says, " When the

missionaries came, they had the Bible and we had the land. They

said, 'let us pray'. We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had

the Bible and they had the land " [12].

 

INDEPENDENT INDIA AND CHRISTIANITY

 

Since India's independence, Hindu nationalists have been complaining

about the ulterior motives of many foreign missionaries working in

India. In recent years, particularly since the late 1980s, such

complaints have become more vigorous, mostly as a result of the

brazen calls of many western evangelists and the Pope to

Christianize Asia. While visiting India in 1999, the Pope openly

proclaimed his wish to " witness a great harvest of faith " there

through the Christianization of the whole country. It is well

outlined in the Pope's promulgation, " Ecclesia in Asia " which

was released during his visit.

 

Predictably, a group of Hindu religious leaders were outraged. Not

only did they ask the Pope to retract his proclamation; but also

sought an apology from him for the notorious Goan Inquisition of

1560 CE which was carried out under the dictates of one of his

predecessors. While the Pope had no hesitation at publicly praying

at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem or apologizing for the past

persecution of Jews, he was not willing to throw any such sop to the

Hindu religious leaders.

 

Only recently I became aware of the fact that since 1974, the

International Congress on World Evangelization (ICWE) has been

quietly developing a grand design to evangelize the rest of the non-

Christian world which is known among Christian fundamentalist

circles as the " 10/40 window " or the Joshua Project. It

targets for conversion all those living in countries within the 10th

and 40th parallels, truncated longitudinally in the west by the

western borders of Africa and in the east along the eastern fringes

of Japan. I would like to urge interested readers of this article to

visit that organization's website to fully comprehend the potential

impact of such a worldwide conversion campaign[13].

 

The ICWE is supported by the powerful churches of the west. They

have enrolled native agents from all countries within the " 10/40

window " to implement the Joshua Project. For India, the ICWE has

developed a plan which targets for conversion, 150 communities of

Hindu, Muslim and Parsee faiths. The Kashmir region is part of that

project. On the same website, there is also a revisionist narrative

of the history of Indian Christianity authored by Rev. Richard

Howell. It is a classic example of the distortions that take place

when vested interests reconstruct historical events. For example,

though Rev. Howell concedes that Christianity in India is ancient

and " two millennia old " , he is silent on the historically

verifiable presence of the ancient Indian Orthodox Church as well as

the tolerance shown by the then Hindu rulers (Cheraman Perumals) on

the southwest coast of India to a new faith in their midst. He fails

to grasp that religious peace prevailed there only because of the

non-proselytizing nature of the early followers of Christianity.[13]

 

When conversions to Christianity took place in pre-colonial India,

they occurred more as a result of a true change in religious

convictions than through an exchange of material benefits. There is

also no mention in Rev. Howell's writings about the intimidation

used by Portuguese rulers in the late 16th Century against the

oriental orthodox churches in Kerala to make them submit to the

Pope's authority. Through the use of the Portuguese armada in the

Arabian Sea, their padres frequently harassed many orthodox priests

traveling in dhows to and from Syria and Persia to India's

southwestern ports at Cochin and Cranganore. There is a well-

documented report of the kidnapping of an Orthodox Bishop by the

Portuguese while the former was headed to India in an Arab dhow[2b].

The Bishop was never seen again! In 1930 CE, the Pope succeeded in

enticing several Indian Orthodox Christian priests to switch sides

through an offer of immediate elevation to the status of Bishops in

the Roman Catholic order.

 

The British Residents in India's former princely states as well as

the Provincial Governors of British India actively assisted

Christian missionaries from UK and other western nations to continue

with their quest to Christianize India. They did that without coming

into conflict with their Roman Catholic counterparts who had been on

that path since the early sixteenth century. Thus, for nearly four

hundred years, the entire Indian subcontinent became available to

Western nations for Christianization. Even after India's

Independence, the presence and influence of foreign missionaries in

India have remained significant, mostly because of the tolerance of

the large majority of Hindus who believe in pluralism. In contrast,

the activities of all Christian missionaries in Pakistan and

Bangladesh have been vastly curtailed due to the intolerance of

Islam to the spread of other faiths.

 

PROSELYTIZING CHRISTIANS

 

I am not at all surprised at the emerging rise of Hindu nationalism

in India, given the historical experience of the Hindus whose faith

had been assaulted first by Muslim invaders and subsequently by

European colonizers. Since the citizens of India can now think for

themselves, they can demand that they be shielded from intrusive

evangelical activities through the use of democratic means.

 

The Indian electorate has become sophisticated enough to distinguish

between acts of selfless service and questionable acts of charity

concocted by Christian missionaries involved in conversion

activities. Such deceptive behaviors would have been an anathema to

Jesus himself because we know that he insisted on not letting even

one's left hand know what the right hand does as charity[4j]. I am

also quite perplexed at the silence of liberal Indian Christians

when they are confronted by the strident rhetoric of Indian

evangelicals like Mr. John Dayal and Archbishop Alan de Lastic of

New Delhi. So far, the latter seem to revel more in sowing seeds of

discord between Christians and Hindus than in promoting religious

amity between Hindus and other religious minorities.

 

In my opinion, Mr. Dayal showed poor judgment when he appeared

before the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF)

in Washington DC in September 2000 when the Prime Minister of India

(Mr. Vajpayee) was here on an official visit. Mr. Dayal should have

thought of the possibility that the timing of that invitation

extended to him by USCIRF was not an accident. It is quite likely

that it was part of the US State Department's plan to place the

visiting Prime Minister on his defensive and thereby weaken India's

efforts to convey to the American public the destructive

consequences of cross-border terrorism aided and abetted by

Pakistan.

 

Parenthetically, I would like to express my dismay here at the

absence of representation for Hindus on USCIRF. After all,

Christian, Jewish, Bahai and Muslim faiths are represented by

Americans on the Commission. But nearly a billion Hindus and another

billion Buddhists on this planet have no representation on the

Commission despite its claim of being a watchdog for

" international religious freedom " . Therefore, I believe that

fairness demands that both Hindu and Buddhist Americans get

representation on the Commission. The term of most of the

Commissioners now on the USCIRF is due to expire in May 2003.

 

While testifying before the USCIRF, Mr. Dayal vigorously argued

against according recognition to Vishwa Hindu Parishad as an

accredited UN-Non Governmental Organization (NGO)[14]. His objection

remained unaffected despite the fact that many religious

organizations representing Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths are

currently accredited to the UN as NGOs. Mr. Dayal demanded that the

Indian Constitution continue to honor its commitment to citizens to

freely " profess, practice and propagate " their faiths. But,

he fails to comprehend the distinction between freedom to propagate

a religion and the right to coercively convert people to another

faith.

 

It has become clear to me that religious conversions using material

enticements are coercive and therefore ought to be forbidden by law.

For years, I used to think that the complaints of many Hindus about

the use of economic inducements as a means of conversion to

Christianity may be exaggerations until I personally came across

incidents such as a Catholic school's offer to defray the marriage

expenses of Hindu girls if they agree to wed Christian boys. Anti-

conversion laws may be the only civil means available for Indian

states to deter such nefarious conversion activities.

 

Mr. Dayal's website also contains articles alleging insensitivity

on the part of some Hindu nationalists who " mock and blaspheme

virgin birth, resurrection etc.[14] " If it is found to be true,

it should be condemned just as vehemently as one should in the case

of similar allegations made by Hindu organizations against Christian

missionaries who ridicule Hindu beliefs.

 

Mr. Dayal also complains about blanket discrimination by Hindus

against all minorities. He implies that discrimination and religious

intolerance are the contributing factors to the reduction of the

Christian population of India from 2.9% in 1947 to 2.3% in recent

years[14]. But, he neglects to consider the probable impact of

family planning measures used by the non-Catholic Christians as a

more likely contributor for the small decline in population growth.

He is silent on the dramatic declines of Hindus both in Pakistan

(25% in 1947 to current 1%) and in Bangladesh (35% in 1971 to

current 7%) as well as the rise in India's Muslim population from 8%

in 1947 to its present level of 13%[15] [16]. In view of such

demographic changes in that subcontinent, Mr. Dayal's claim of

discrimination of religious minorities in India is not credible. It

is disappointing that Mr. Dayal's website does not contain even a

single word of Christian concern for the plight of nearly 300,000

Kashmiri Hindus who were displaced from their homes to the refugee

camps of New Delhi[14].

 

Mr. Dayal equates the Hindutva concept of " one nation, one

people, one culture " with the " Nazi-fascism of Europe " .

Is not India's entire people one nation, one people and one culture?

Isn't culture a derivative of multiple factors such as language,

climate, diet, habits, music, literature, arts and other traditions

with religions playing minor roles at best? No religion by itself

can imprint a specific culture on an individual. The western

Christian culture is quite different from the culture of the Coptic

Christians of Egypt, just as it is with the Indian Orthodox

Christian communities of Kerala. The culture of Muslims in Bosnia is

not identical to the Muslims of India, Bangladesh or Pakistan. For

an Indian of any religion to be offended by anyone's claim that

India is one nation, one people and one culture is baffling to me.

Precisely because India is one nation and one people, I hope that

India's present government will finally muster the requisite

political courage to enact a single civil code for all Indian

nationals as well as develop a uniform system for the management of

all its religious places of worship and religious schools.

 

Having read most of Mr. Dayal's polemical views and his explanations

for the worsening of relations between Christians and Hindus in

India, I believe that the 25 million Indian Christians who believe

in India's pluralistic tradition would be better off by not allowing

Mr. John Dayal to remain as their sole spokesman. Failure to do so

will only result in more acrimony and strife among Hindus and

Christians.

 

Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism originated as offshoots of Hinduism.

Their founders were neither crucified nor exiled. The ancient

history of India attests to the symbiotic existence of multiple

religions in that subcontinent. Religious tolerance has been the

norm in India for thousands of years. Therefore, the emergence of

religious intolerance there needs to be studied seriously in the

context of foreign funding of all religious activities in India.

Foreign sources of funding derived by all religious and charitable

organizations in India deserve close monitoring by its government

just as the US has begun to do with regard to similar organizations

registered here.

 

TOWARDS GLOBAL RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE

 

Regardless of their religious affiliations, all religious leaders of

goodwill can find myriads of theological convergences if they are

open to sincere and deep inter-faith explorations. While it is less

threatening for the practitioners of non-Abrahamic faiths to

undertake such faith-based voyages of discovery, the religious

fundamentalists of the monotheistic faiths shun all such excursions.

 

India and China have a combined population of more than two billions

who do not to Abrahamic faiths. Besides, China is becoming

increasingly concerned at the inroads religions are making in that

country. Therefore, it may be timely for the two nations to jointly

seek an amendment to the UN Declaration of Human rights which will

explicitly forbid religious conversions attempted through physical

coercion or material inducement[17]. Western democracies which

advocate a strict separation of church and state should be

challenged to lend their support for such a measure, more so because

of the emerging menace of Al Queda and its philosophical stance

steeped in Koranic literalism which argues for the world-wide

establishment of 'sharia', the law of Islam[18].

 

Therefore, I would like to propose further that secularists of all

religions everywhere mount a vigorous campaign to limit full

membership status and voting rights in the United Nations (UN) to

countries that are truly secular. Theocratic nations should be

encouraged to amend their Constitutions to reflect their secular

status if they aspire to become full members of the UN. The US and

many other western nations should also find such a proposition to be

in tune with Jesus' advocacy to " give unto God what is God's and

to Cesar what is Cesar's " [4k].

 

The US is particularly well poised to take the lead in such a move

since the first amendment to the US Constitution explicitly erected

a wall of separation between the church and the state. Thomas

Jefferson, a liberal Christian President of the US, recognized very

early the deleterious impact of religion on a pluralistic America

which was then getting established. Writing about religion, he said

that its negative potential " has been severely felt by mankind,

and has filled the history of ten or twelve centuries with too many

atrocities not to merit a proscription from meddling with

government " [19]. He also objected to religious conversions rather

strongly when he said that: " were the Pope, or his allies, to

send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us

to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a

national aggression on our peace and faith " [20].

 

India and many other nations are facing similar challenges today

from both fundamentalist Christians and militant Islamists. If

liberal Indians of all religions do not speak up and challenge their

fundamentalist counterparts, India's precious tradition of religious

tolerance will become a mere footnote to its ancient history.

Likewise, if there is no worldwide effort to contain theocracies and

ostracize the militants of all religions, the new millennium may

indeed witness many clashes of civilizations.

 

The UN may in fact be the last best hope for mankind to usher in a

peaceful world devoid of religious upheavals. The liberal adherents

of all religions are now at the crossroads of a crucial choice. They

can either remain silent and permit their fundamentalist minorities

to fan the flames of religious conflicts, or speak out against them

and insist on religious tolerance as the only legitimate road to a

peaceful world. As a Christian nurtured by the pluralistic tradition

of India, my choice continues to be the latter.

 

http://www.sulekha.com/expressions/column.asp?cid=305819

 

(Acknowledgment: The comments and suggestions of Rajiv Malhotra,

Sankrant Sanu, Gopala Rao and Vinu Joyappa were very helpful to me

in writing this article. I wish to recognize their valuable

assistance.)

 

REFERENCES

 

[1]Gandhi, Mohandas K: In Young India, April 23, 1931

 

[2]David, Daniel: The Orthodox Church of India, Printaid, New

Delhi., 1986, pp.97-100

 

[2a]Ibid. p. 153

 

[2b] Ibid. pp. 110-111

 

[2c] Ibid. pp. 383-428

 

[3]Brown, Harold J: Religious liberty: Greeks face prosleytization

court test., Christianity Today, Vol.41, No, 11, 1997, p.89.

 

[4] The Holy Bible: King James Version, Collins, NY, 1952. St.

Matthew, 23:15

 

[4a] Ibid. The Revelation, 16:12-16

 

[4b] Ibid. St. John, 14:2

 

[4c] Ibid. St. John, 10:30

 

[4d] Ibid. St. John, 3:3-7

 

[4e] Ibid. St. John, 9:1-3, St. Mark, 6:14-16., 8:27-29., 9:11-13.,

St. Matthew., 11:13-15., 17:10-13

 

[4f] Ibid. St. Matthew, 6:5-7

 

[4g] Ibid. St. Matthew, 18:21-23

 

[4h] Ibid. Isaiah, 2:3-5

 

[4i] Ibid. St. Matthew, 5:39-40

 

[4j] Ibid. St. Matthew, 6:2-4

 

[4k] Ibid. St. Luke, 20:25

 

[5]Broadway, Bill: Dire predictions for war in Iraq, The Washington

Post, March 8, 2003, p. B 9.

 

[6] Bumiller, Elizabeth: Aides say Bush girds for war in solitude,

but not in doubt, The New York Times, March 9, 2003, p.1

 

[7] Merton, Robert K: Social theory and social structure, Glencoe,

IL, Free Press, 1957

 

[8] Davidson John: The Gospel of Jesus, Element, Rockport, MA, 1995,

pp. 47-77

 

[9] Pagels, Elaine: The Gnostic Gospels, Vintage Books, NY, 1989

 

[10] Borg Marcus: Jesus and Buddha, Ulysses Press, Berkeley, CA.

1997

 

[11]Spong, John S: The Bishop's voice, Crossroads Publishing

Company, NY. 1999, pp.143-146

 

[12] Tutu, Desmond. www.brainyquotes.com

 

[13] Website, www.Ad2000.org

 

[14] Dayal, John: website, www.Dalitstan.org/christian/dayal

 

[15] Gupta, Arun K: Data on Hindu, Muslim Populations of Indian

Subcontinent, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh. (Go to

http://www.indianetwork.org/res/relig2.html)

 

[16] Patel, Bipin: www.indiacause.com/OL_091302.htm

 

[17] Alexander, C.Alex: Gujarat & Hindu nationalism: a rejoinder to

Dr. Lancy Lobo, OYSTER, Vol 5, No.3, Feb 2003, pp.5-8., (PO Box

42163, Washington, DC., 20015)

 

[18] Berman, Paul: The philosopher of Islamic Terror, The New York

Times Magazine, March 23, 2003, pp.24-67

 

[19] Cohen, Adam: What Jefferson would think of Ms. Myles addiction

program, The New York Times, Week in Review, Section 4, March 0,

2003, p.23

 

[20] Jefferson, Thomas: To Michael Megear (1823.ME.15:434),

electronic text. Go to (http//etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/ot2www-

jeffquot)

 

 

** The author is a naturalized US citizen and a physician executive

who recently retired after 35 years of combined service to both the

US Department of Veterans Affairs as Chief of Staff, Hospital and Regional Chief Medical Officer and the US Army Medical

Corps (Colonel).

[Guest guest]

shriadishakti , " jagbir singh "

<adishakti_org> wrote:

>

> Before reading the article, " Proselytization In India: An Indian

> Christian's Perspective " , i just want to remind all of what Jesus

> declared as he was teaching the multitudes in the temple in

> Jerusalem. " You will know the truth, and the truth will set you

> free. " (John 8:32)

>

> After reading the article it will be obvious that few, if any, of

> the religious masses are free to embrace the faithful of other

> traditions. Except for the tolerant Hindus, nothing has

> collectively enlightened them over the millennia that the Divine

> is One. Religion continues to divide humanity and bring death and

> destruction.

>

> Only the Shakti can reveal the truth that will set Hindus

> (Sanaatana Dharma), Jews (Messiah), Christians (Comforter),

> Muslims (Ruh), Buddhists (Maa Treya), and Sikhs (Aykaa Mayee)

> free. Only those who seek Her are set free from all that plagues

> the religious masses. That is why She had to incarnate on Earth in

> the form of Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi. Yes, you will know the

> truth, and the truth will set you free to UNCONDITIONALLY embrace

> all His prophets, scriptures and their message.

>

> Jai Shri Mataji,

>

> jagbir

>

 

India Ascendant by Romesh Diwan

 

According to B. G. Tilak, a Hindu is defined by the " acceptance

of the Vedas with reverence; recognition of the fact that the means

or ways to salvation are diverse, and the realization of the truth

that the numbers of the gods to be worshiped is large, that indeed

is the distinguishing feature of the Hindu religion. "

 

Since the RNI are anti-Hindu, their members have gone to the Supreme

Court, thrice, to get Hindutva banned. It is educative to learn how

the Supreme Court defined it. In fact, the Supreme Court has defined

Hindutava in three separate judgments: 1966, 1977 and.1995.[xxx] In

all these cases, it accepted Tilak's definition.

 

The first judgment of the Supreme Court in 1966: [xxxi] It says,

" Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not

claim any one prophet; it does not worship any one god; it does not

to any one dogma, it does not believe in one philosophical

concept, it does not satisfy the narrow traditional features of any

religion. " It maintained that constitution makers were fully

conscious of the broad and comprehensive character of the Hindu

religion, which included Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists within the

term " Hinduism . " It quoted the opinions of (i) S.

Radhakrishnan that Hindu implies residence in a well-defined

geographical area, that is India; (ii) Monier Williams that Hindu

religion is based on the idea of universal receptivity; and (iii)

Arnold Toynbee that Hinduism takes for granted that there is more

than one approach to truth.

 

The second judgment was delivered in 1977 by five judges including

Justices M. H. Beg and R. S. Sarkaria -- both non-Hindus . It

describes Hindutava as follows: " In principle, Hinduism

incorporates all forms of belief and worship without necessitating

the selection or elimination of any. " " The Hindu is inclined

to revere the divine in every manifestation and is doctrinally

tolerant, leaving others, both Hindus and non Hindus -- whatever

creed and worship practices suits them the most. " " A Hindu

may embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu. "

" Hinduism is then both a civilization and conglomerate of

religions with neither a beginning, a founder, nor a central

authority hierarchy or organization. " This judgment also quoted

Encyclopedia Britannica.[xxxii]

 

The third judgment by the Supreme Court was delivered in 1995 and is

recorded in 1996.[xxxiii] It was given in a case under the election

law asking the court to disqualify use of Hindutva for elections

because asking votes in the name of Hindutva was religious appeal.

It describes Hindutva as follows. " Hindutva is indicative more of

the way of life of the Indian people. " " It is not Hindu

fundamentalism; " " nor is it to be confined only to the strict

Hindu religious practices; " " [nor is it] unrelated to the

culture and ethos of the people of India, depicting the way of life

of the Indian people. " Considering Hindutva as hostile, inimical,

or intolerant of other faiths, or as communal " proceeds from an

improper appreciation of its true meaning. " It quotes Maulana

Wahiuddin Khan [xxxiv]who considers Hindutva synonymous with Indian;

to the Maulana, Indian and Hindu are one and the same. Recently,

even Vasant Sathe, a Congressman and an RNI, has supported Vir

Savarkar's formulation of Hindutva.[xxxv]

 

 

India Ascendant by Romesh Diwan

http://www.sulekha.com/expressions/column.asp?cid=298065

 

 

[xxx] Gurumurthy. 2002a.

[xxxi] All India Reporter [AIR]1977 SC p.1119

[xxxii] AIR 1977 SC p.1119

[xxxiii] AIR 1996 SC p. 1113.

[xxxiv]Indian-Muslims: the need for a positive outlook "

[xxxv]Admiring Savarkar's succinct and scientific exposition of

Hindutva, Mr Vasant Sathe veteran Congressman asserted that adopting

it is the key to resolution of communal strife in India. Savarkar

had described Hindu tva as " Spread between river Indus to the Ocean

is this land of India; whosoever deems it as fatherland and holy

land is a Hindu . " Punj 2002 c

[Guest guest]

shriadishakti , " jagbir singh "

<adishakti_org> wrote:

>

> Before reading the article, " Proselytization In India: An Indian

> Christian's Perspective " , i just want to remind all of what Jesus

> declared as he was teaching the multitudes in the temple in

> Jerusalem. " You will know the truth, and the truth will set you

> free. " (John 8:32)

>

> After reading the article it will be obvious that few, if any, of

> the religious masses are free to embrace the faithful of other

> traditions. Except for the tolerant Hindus, nothing has

> collectively enlightened them over the millennia that the Divine

> is One. Religion continues to divide humanity and bring death and

> destruction.

>

> Only the Shakti can reveal the truth that will set Hindus

> (Sanaatana Dharma), Jews (Messiah), Christians (Comforter),

> Muslims (Ruh), Buddhists (Maa Treya), and Sikhs (Aykaa Mayee)

> free. Only those who seek Her are set free from all that plagues

> the religious masses. That is why She had to incarnate on Earth in

> the form of Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi. Yes, you will know the

> truth, and the truth will set you free to UNCONDITIONALLY embrace

> all His prophets, scriptures and their message.

>

> Jai Shri Mataji,

>

> jagbir

>

 

 

 

" HINDUISM

 

The gospels are silent about the life of Jesus between his boyhood

visit to the Jerusalem Temple with his parents, and the beginning of

his public ministry at the age of 30. But in India there is a strong

tradition that the teenage Jesus slipped away from his parents,

journeyed across Southeast Asia learning yogic meditation and

returned home to become a guru to the Jews. This legend reveals just

how easily Hinduism absorbs any figure whom others worship as

divine. To Hindus, India is the Holy Land, its sacred mountains and

rivers enlivened by more than 300,000 local deities. It is only

natural, then, that Jesus would come to India to learn the secrets

of unlocking his own inherent divinity.

 

As Gandhi was, many Hindus are drawn to the figure of Jesus by his

compassion and nonviolence--virtues taught in their own sacred

Scriptures. But also like Gandhi, Hindus find the notion of a single

god unnecessarily restrictive. In their perspective, all human beings

are sons of God with the innate ability to become divine themselves.

Those Hindus who read the Gospels are drawn to the passage in John in

which Jesus proclaims that " the Father and I are one. " This confirms

the basic Hindu belief that everyone is capable through rigorous

spiritual practice of realizing his or her own universal " god-

consciousness. " The great modern Hindu saint Ramakrishna recorded

that he meditated on a picture of the Madonna with child and was

transported into a state of samadhi, a consciousness in which the

divine is all that really exists. For that kind of spiritual

experience, appeal to any god will do. " Christ-consciousness,

God-consciousness, Krishna-consciousness, Buddha-consciousness--it's

all the same thing, " says Deepak Chopra, an Indian popularizer of

Hindu philosophy for New Age Westerners. " Rather than " love thy

neighbor,' this consciousness says, 'You and I are the same

beings. " "        

                                                    

The Other Jesus, Newsweek, March 27, 2000