Jagat

<a href=http://www.jesuschristsuperstore.net/index.html>Jesus Christ Superstore</a> <a href=http://www.jesuschristsuperstore.net/lfigurespages/lfkrishna.html>Cosmic warrior and lover of many women!</a>

There is no such thing as a philosopher without a differing opinion. tarko'pratiSThaH zrutayo vibbhinnA nAsau munir yasya mataM na bhinnam dharmasya tattvaM nihitaM guhAyAM mahAjano yena gataH sa panthA Debate leads nowhere. The scriptures are all different. There is no such thing as a philosopher without a differing opinion. The truth of religious duty is buried away deep in a cave somewhere. The route to follow is the one that previous great souls have taken. There is the story of a fool who took "mahAjana" in the sense of "travelling merchant" and ended up following a caravan.

Shiva, your presentation is flawed. Liberation theology "Marxism with the orders as dictators" is really propaganda. Liberation theology is about the hypocrisy of Christianity that exploits the poorest in society. Marx was often criticized for taking Christian social idealism without Christ. The Liberation Theologians say that true Christians will not tolerate social injustice and that fighting against such injustice is the highest service to Jesus. The idea of social justice has always been stronger in the Abrahamic religions than in Hinduism, but all human beings crave it, except those who profit from their own social advantages. Nevertheless, the bourgeois are often the ones who lead social movements, because they are driven by an intellectual imperative to strive for justice. This is why, though most Marxists in India come from the lower classes, the leaders are mostly from the bourgeoisie, just like the Christians. Not so strange, really.

I recall reading a bio of de Nobili many years ago, in which it was stated that he adopted almost all Hindu customs, (sannyas) dress, etc., in order to preach Christianity, but was then later blasted by the Holy See for "going native."

I believe that the section on the BVP in my article is not found on that link. I'll have to get back to editing the material I have. Basically, the BVP is almost certainly a late Bengali Purana written AFTER the Chaitanya movement, but not by someone directly involved with it. It contains various lilas and siddhantas that are not found anywhere else. Some things, like the name of Radha's husband, are found there. The tradition that Radha is older than Krishna is found only in Bengal. It has its roots in the first verse of Gita Govinda. The same thing is found in Garga Samhita, which seems to have been written on the inspiration of the BVP. I suggest R. C. Hazra's "Studies in the Upapuranas" for a good discussion of BVP. His dates are always way too early, but otherwise you get a good idea of content and other source materials. -------- As far as the original question is concerned, you may read my article summarizing <a href=http://www.granthamandira.org/~jagat/articles/showarticle.php?id=72> the Gopala Champu's last section</a>, where the marriage of Krishna and the gopis is described very elaborately.

I got a riotous laugh out of a Canadian/Indian film "Masala" that came out a few years ago. The granny (Zohra Segal) does puja to the television and Krishna (Saeed Jaffrey) appears on it and talks to her. She asks him to intercede in their life, so he does. He appears in one scene wearing the entire Toronto Maple Leaf hockey gear and takes a slapshot at a Mail Truck, causing it to crash, with the result that a rare stamp falls into the hands of the granny's son. There are many other amusing scenes with Krishna, especially at the beginning, where Krishna is scene directly intervening in the crash of an airplane (the famous Air India crash had taken place not long before the film was made). I forget the name of the actor who played Krishna, but he is a well known Indian actor. The granny, too. "There are countless anecdotes about Bombay films and songs that have become a cultural reference and therefore a means of social interaction for Indians of the diaspora. A very good example of the importance of films for this diaspora can be seen in the Canadian film Masala by Srinivas Krishna. This film focuses on an Indian community in Toronto, where we witness an excellent parody of the popular film phenomenon through an old Indian mausi (maternal aunt in Hindi) who converses with the god Krishna (avatara of Vishnu) who inhabits her television. For the diaspora these illusory films represent a form of Indian reality. Krishna is enclosed in the TV set (he has managed to exit the audio-visual cassette which "contained" him, where he was acting in a mythological film adaptation of Vyasa's Hindu epic, The Mahabharata) and appears at opportune moments to voice his vichar (words of wisdom) in order to advise the mausi who has prayed for him to show up." The film is not a great film overall, but it has a number of high points, especially, I would imagine, for children of the Indian diaspora, like Srinivas Krishnan himself.

I would also like some other references to "three Gods." I would imagine that in a subcontinent where the Muslim presence is very strong, awareness of the contentiousness of this "polytheism" would be high.

So there is an indigenous "hybrid" Christianity, like the Brazilian or Haitian versions? I'd like some documentation. It sounds like a fascinating area for anthropological research. Jagat

The point was "Trinity of Gods" is incorrect Christian theology. Two wrongs don't make a right, Karthikji.

Dear friends, Just a reminder of two *pre*-meetings organized under the auspices of the Society for Hindu-Christian Studies and open to all! (1) Additional Meeting #33 The first -- a trip to the Toronto ISKCON temple for dinner and a panel -- is on Friday night, November 22, from 6-10 pm. PLEASE NOTE EARLIER STARTING TIME THAN IS LISTED IN THE AAR PROGRAM BOOKLET! The schedule is as follows: 6 pm: meet at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre entrance and travel together via public transportation to the ISKCON temple 6:45-7:15: brief memorial service, led by the ISKCON temple, for Tamal Krishna Goswami, an AAR member and Society member, who passed away last year. 7:15-8: dinner (donation would be gratefully received) at the ISKCON temple dining room 8-9:30: panel discussion, at the temple, on the theme of "Negotiating Multiple Identities in ISKCON." Panelists include Anuttama dasa, Michael Gressett, and Bhakti Cohen, as well as one or two members from the Toronto temple 9:30-10: return via public transportation to the conference hotels All are welcome! (2) Additional Meeting #79 The second session is Saturday morning, 11/23, 9-11 am, in the Weston Harbor Castle Hotel, Regatta Room Theme: Hindu and Christian Worship: Parallels, Differences, Appropriations Joseph Prabhu, Presiding Panelists: Pravrajika Saradeshaprana, Joseph Prabhu, Graham Schweig (Garuda Das), and Tinu Ruparell Discussant: Pratap Kumar Again, all are welcome! Thanks, and hoping to see you there, Rachel Macdermott _____________

Jan - I would like to have the source of this piece. - Catholics Consider Including Sanskrit in Prayers <blockquote>PATNA, INDIA, October 21, 2002: Leaders of the Roman Catholic Church said Monday they were considering adding a Sanskrit word to liturgical prayers to make Christianity more acceptable to Hindi speakers. A synod of archbishops and bishops from India and Philippines, which began Sunday in Patina, was studying a proposal to include the word "Sachidanand" in liturgical prayers. B.J. Osta, the archbishop of Patna, stated "The word 'Sachidanand,' meaning the Trinity of Gods [sic???], also conforms to the Christian precept of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit." [Etc.] </blockquote> This is not at all new, you know. Early in the wake of Vatican II a largely Sanskrit mass was developed and is still in use in some specially permitted places, using whole slokas, not just a single word such as saccitananda, in the liturgy. The initiative to use Sanskrit in the liturgy was soundly rejected by most lay Catholics, especially Dalits, for the simple reason that it called to mind the suffering they have endured under Brahmanical oppression for generations. Why, they asked, should a message of liberation be delivered in the oppressor's tongue, rather than in their own? The quotation from Fr. Osta seems incorrect, but that, of course, is nothing new when non-Christian newspeople in India quote Christian sources. Sat-Cit-Ananda has not one single authoritative definition - Saiva or otherwise - and it has been used extensively in the Indian Christian theological tradition for exactly the purpose contemplated here - as one expression of the mystery of the Trinity. Saccidananda is, from the Advaita perspective, of the highest possible order of objectification of the unobjectifiable Brahman within the temporal framework in which words can be useful - aiming to express the unreachable - exactly as the doctrine of the Trinity aims to represent in words what cannot be uttered with accuracy and in the fullest truth. "Father" is primordial existence, from which all comes; "Son"/Logos is the principle of intelligibility, informing phenomena; "Holy Spirit" is the principle for the engagement of human beings in the beatific vision and active existence; so saccidananda seems quite apt as a Trinitarian expression. If the meaning of words were not being continually contested...??? Please send the citation - and preferably URL - for this article. Thanks. - Richard MacPhail

How does what one wears have anything to do with whether one is speaking the truth? Charan Das Babaji was, I can assure you, widely recognized as a great Vaishnava in the Gaudiya community. He was also recognized as such by the King of Puri and many others as well. He had many significant disciples like Ramdas who were widely recognized as advanced Vaishnavas. Even those who did not agree with their opposition to chanting the Maha Mantra in kirtan without counting still honored them. Even Bhaktivinoda Thakur had cordial relationships with Charan Das, whom he met in Puri in 1901, even though he disagreed with him. The biographies of Charan Das and Ramdas describe meetings with both Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Siddhanta Saraaswati from their point of view. There is also a full defense of sakhi bhekhi in those books. Is the version you are reading complete, Madhava? The Bengali edition is six volumes of about 300 pages each.

How does what one wears have anything to do with whether one is speaking the truth? Charan Das Babaji was, I can assure you, widely recognized as a great Vaishnava in the Gaudiya community. He was also recognized as such by the King of Puri and many others as well. He had many significant disciples like Ramdas who were widely recognized as advanced Vaishnavas. Even those who did not agree with their opposition to chanting the Maha Mantra in kirtan without counting still honored them. Even Bhaktivinoda Thakur had cordial relationships with Charan Das, whom he met in Puri in 1901, even though he disagreed with him. The biographies of Charan Das and Ramdas describe meetings with both Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Siddhanta Saraaswati from their point of view. There is also a full defense of sakhi bhekhi in those books. Is the version you are reading complete, Madhava? The Bengali edition is six volumes of about 300 pages each.

Chaitanya Charitamrita Chaitanya Bhagavata Bhaktivinoda's works (Harinamacintamani, Bhajanarahasya, songs) Prema Vivarta

Dr. Elst is not known for such. On the contrary, though he is much loved by Indian historical revisionists, Dr. Elst has a rather dubious reputation as a scholar among Western academics, who feel that his assessment of data is clearly biased. If there is a conflict, the blame must rest entirely on the Christians, who have for centuries abused Hinduism and continue to do so. Whenever I see "entirely" I get suspicious. Christianity has certainly put Hinduism on the defensive, and Western culture, now in its American form, continues to put increasing pressure on the Indian way. Nietzche said, what does not kill us makes us stronger. The pressures of Islam resulted in certain notable changes in Hinduism, primarily the bhakti movement. The influence of modernization and Christianity as well as the continued pressure of militant Islam in neighboring countries are in the process of producing transformations in Hinduism, some more positive than others. These other religions have kept up a sustained criticism of Hinduism to which Hinduism is obliged to respond. The monotheisms have not allowed Hinduism its usual relativistic copout (any more than Vaishnavas have condoned pantheistic relativism -- joto mot toto poth). In certain respects, Hindus are absolutely right in their relativism (!), in others, it is a real copout. In some respects, Hinduism take a stand on where it stands has been the primary effect of this external aggression. But as Hindu takes form as a definable entity, it must insist on its fundamental tolerance and pluralism. Hinduism has proved resilient in the past. I have confidence that it will continue to be so in the future, but I suspect that it may still have to go through some changes. I am not particularly enamored of Bal Thackeray's approach. It is to the credit of the Hindus that they don't critically analyse Christian theology and expose it for what it is worth, which is nothing, though I see no reason why not. In fact, I am drafting a thorough text on the myth of Jesus and how what is known as Christianity is indeed a masala mix from myriad sources, often tribalistic in nature. Hindus should cease to be on the defensive and instead give a taste of their own medicine to the Christians. You are perfectly welcome to do this kind of work, though I hope you will not simply be repeating the research of hundreds of Westerners, Christian and agnostic alike. You may like to start with "The Golden Bough" by James Frazier, which though somewhat outdated is a prodigious work of scholarship and one of the most influential monographs in the early study of comparitive religion. But this would only be a beginning. Christ lived 30 years. Christians have been around for 2000. You might want to look at Jaroslav Pelikan's "Jesus Through the Centuries." Things don't always stay the same. Is the Krishna of Chaitanya the Krishna of Bankim and Aurobindo? But to say "it is to the credit" that Hindus don't analyze Christian theology, which is "worth nothing," does betray a dogmatic attitude that you pretend not to possess. We feel that Christians have failed to understand "us", but how well do we understand them. We base our criticisms of them on the most ignorant faction, just as they tend to criticize the worst features of Hinduism. Then, in the purest straw man argument, we contrast our high ideals with their failings. In the above citations of criticisms of Ratzinger, I found many good things, but I liked the Belgian theologians comment that the Christian ideal lies in front of them, not in the Church as it exists. This is something that Hindus should also remember. Criticism comes easily, living up to our ideals is harder. We should concentrate on the latter and worry a little less about the former. We can all learn from the idealism of other religions and at the same time we should not avoid self-scrutiny. Read Gregory Baum's comments above and see what a high level of understanding his criticisms of Ratzinger are based on. Jai Radhe!

Not much to say except that they are two different words. They are Indo-European and so have cognates in many European languages, as well as Persian and other family members. nava = novus = new navan = novem = nine

Karthik, reading your comments above shows that you believe what you want to believe. I don't deny that some Harijans/Dalits may find their calling in Hinduism. Why not? It is possible. But the general rule is that revolutions are rarely made by the most downtrodden. You have found exceptions. Ever heard the expression "The exception makes the rule." Revolutions come when people have a little education, a little wealth, a little insight into how they have been deprived of their fundamental rights, and when they see the possibilities that equal treatment would afford them. When they see some hope, in other words. Perhaps the situation was better in Tamil Nadu than elsewhere in India, but I would hesitate to extrapolate from TN to the rest of the country.

"If Christianity has to be reformed and made into a rational religion, one has to transform it so much until what emerges ceases to resemble Christianity any further. - Dr. Koenraad Elst" Pompous claptrap. The same thing can be said for Hinduism and any other religion. This is the kind of unhelpful comment that results in uselessly exacerbating conflict. <hr> I did a little looking around, actually trying to find the French theologian Jacques Dubois, who taught in Delhi and is one of the liberal Catholics that incited Ratzinger to write his declaration "Dominum Iesum," which was a giant step backward for ecumenism and rather set the stage for the ugly visit of the Pope to India that Karthik mentions. The links that I had previously found to Fr. Dubois' articles seem to be down. Here is what I did find, though, which may remind us all that there is a strong liberal element in the Catholic Church that has not yet given up its voice: Here is an article by <a href=http://www.culture-et-foi.com/dossiers/dominus_jesus/gregory_baum.htm>Gregory Baum</a>, a liberal Christian theologian who was one of my professors at McGill. This is a comment on Dominus Iesus, the declaration made by Ratzinger in 2000, the most influential cardinal after the Pope. Excerpt: <blockquote>"The Declaration has other defects. One of them is the idea that dialogue with the world religions is compatible with the intention of making converts. Dialogue is a conversation based on trust and mutual acceptance, in which the partners feel free to reveal their own problems and unresolved questions. Dialogue is an unguarded conversation. Dialogue is an exchange that transforms both partners, leading them to a better self-understanding, revealing to them the prejudice mediated by their own tradition, and making them aspire to a more authentic and enlarged possession of their own religion. It would be utterly deceitful to lure a partner into dialogue, attempt to create a community of trust in which the partner is willing to expose the weakness of his own tradition, and then abuse this confidence in an effort to persuade the partner to change his or her religion. It may happen, of course, that in such a trusting dialogue a partner decides to move to another religious tradition. But interreligious dialogue would be a form of manipulation if its aim were to make Christians of the participants. The proposal that dialogue and convert-making can go together is unethical. This seems to me such a basic moral conviction that if a person does not sense it – like Cardinal Ratzinger – one cannot explain it to him. "The Declaration does not deal at all with the pastoral problems of the present. I wish to mention two of them. First, there is the awareness among today’s Christians that the missionary movement – the European invasion of the other continents from the end of the fifteenth century on and the subsequent creation of the Catholic and Protestant colonial empires – was for the most part associated with a political and cultural project. We should not be surprised, therefore, if in many parts of the world people continue to look upon Christianity as a foreign religion introduced under the protection of the conqueror. The unwillingness to honour the religions of the colonized people has been denounced as a sin in Pope John Paul II’s liturgy of repentance on March 12, 2000. The Canadian church leaders, including the Catholic bishops, have repeatedly made apologies to the Native peoples regretting that the Church’s missionary activity did not respect their religious traditions and, even though sustained by faith and love, the mission understood itself as part of a European civilizing endeavour. Many Catholic bishops in Asia have raised the question whether respect for the Asian religions and their contemporary vitality does not demand a rethinking of the Church's mission and an end to the efforts to make converts. Yet when John Paul II went to India, he announced an alternative policy, namely an intensification of the Church’s effort to convert Hindus to Christianity. Hindu nationalists who feel that their religio-cultural identity is threatened by powerful westernizing forces, including the Christian church, have used the Pope’s message to justify their hostility to Christians in India. Will Cardinal Ratzinger’s Declaration intensify opposition to Christians in some parts of Asia?"</blockquote>This article <a href=http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Igpress/2000-11/analysis.html>Echoes in Asia</A> lays open both Karthik and my positions:<blockquote>When Dominus Iesus first appeared, most Vatican-watchers agreed that the statement was intended primarily for an Asian audience. On that continent, where Christians are a small minority, some theologians have advanced the notion that in order to avoid conflicts with the dominant popular culture, missionaries should introduce the Gospel as only one among many possible paths toward salvation. This theological approach holds particular strength in India, where Hindu nationalists have accused Christian missionaries of subverting the nation’s culture. It was no coincidence that on September 20—two weeks after the publication of Dominus Iesus—Cardinal Jozef Tomko was in Bangalore to speak at the opening meeting of the Indian bishops’ conference, and to underline the message of the new document. The best contribution that Catholics can make to India’s culture, he said, is to profess their faith in Jesus as savior of the world and to bear witness to the message of the Gospel. Three weeks later, at a conference in Rome on the duties of diocesan bishops, an Indian prelate acknowledged that Dominus Iesus highlights “a challenge to which the Indian bishops must respond.” Archbishop Ivan Dias of Bombay pointed out that, for him and for his brother bishops on the subcontinent, the issues addressed in the Vatican document are anything but academic. “I speak as an Indian,” he said, “living in a country were we confront these problems every day.” Archbishop Dias disclosed that Catholic theologians who reject the basic message of Dominus Iesus and promote a relativistic approach to religious beliefs have gained extraordinary influence in India. They have gained teaching posts in some seminaries, he said, and they are particularly active in inter-faith dialogue, where they give their Hindu counterparts an inaccurate notion of Catholic Church teaching. Dominus Iesus was welcomed by Indian hierarchy, Archbishop Dias reported, because this theological dissidence is a source of constant consternation, “for the bishops of India, not just the ones in Rome.” </blockquote>The following is an article by the Jesuit student of Vaishnavism, often published in JVS, <a href=http://www.americapress.org/articles/clooney-di.htm>Francis X. Clooney</a>, commenting on the same Ratzinger declaration. He concludes:<blockquote>I close with a personal admission that may explain my ambivalence in the preceding paragraphs. I grew up a fairly traditional Catholic, and so I am today. Much in the declaration makes immediate sense to me; its intense focus on Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of God and Savior seems very important, very beautiful, very true. But I have also been visiting India and studying the Hindu religious traditions for over 25 years; it is my form of obedience to Christ, one might say. I know for myself that Pope John Paul II was correct in saying, in India in 1986, “When we learn from other traditions we let God be present in our midst; when we open ourselves to one another, we open ourselves to God.” I know it is an error to dismiss other people’s beliefs without studying them deeply first. We must see other people’s beliefs and practices only in the light of Christ, but we must also see Christ newly radiant in the light of those other traditions. Learning from other religions does not change the timeless truths of our faith, but it certainly does enrich and deepen our way of following Jesus, driving out not only relativism and indifferentism, but also arrogance and ignorance. Dominus Iesus is in important respects an admirable achievement, but the congregation appears oddly inarticulate when we wonder how specifically to confess the Lord Jesus—boldly, but with open eyes and ears too—in this new millennium. </blockquote> From elsewhere: "Dissident Swiss theologian Hans Kung, who has been disciplined by the Vatican in the past, said the document was reactionary. "It's a mixture of medieval backwardness and Vatican megalomania," he was quoted as saying by an Italian news agency. Kung, who had his license to teach in a Catholic University withdrawn by the Vatican cardinal who wrote Tuesday's document, said it was hypocritical to "continually talk about dialogue while not talking about this colossal pretence of absolutism." Walking a theological tightrope, the document said the "Church of Christ" was present in other Christian Churches." http://www.confronti.net/english/archives/nov00_03.htm The fact that on October 3rd the Pope himself intervened to defend DI ("approved by me in special form") has not prevented the protests. Seventy-three Spanish theologians (both men and women), but also German (Hans Kung), American (Rosemary Redford Ruether), Brazilian (Leonardo Boff and T. Motta da Silva), Salvadorans (Jon Sobrino), and then Mexicans, Colombians, Argentines, Panamanians, Cubans and Peruvians, have undersigned a text recalling that Vatican II in the Lumen Gentium does not state "the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church," but instead "the Church of Christ subsists in - subsistit in - the (Roman) Catholic Church." It is pointed out "With the new formulation the Council wanted to avoid the exclusive and excludable identification of 'the Church of Christ' with the 'Catholic Church'. The fact that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church does not exclude that it subsists also in other Christian communities. For this reason it seems to us that this reductionism on the part of the DI is worrying." For fifty-three Belgian theologians (both men and women), DI is pervaded by an intolerable "attitude of superiority" and has an "authoritative tone." Furthermore the text "seems to us far removed from the actual daily life of many Catholics and theologians engaged in a work of inquiry with non-Catholics, whether they are believers or not." The question of truth which is discussed in the document is "fundamental" but, the Belgians note, this can only be resolved "with a participation on a basis of equality in which each one proposes its own path but without absolutism with respect to others. We believe that Christ is 'the way, the truth and the life,' but we believe also that the fullness of the truth is before us and no one can pretend to possess it."

As usual, Karthik, you are very knowledgeable in your reply. Of course, I do agree with you. The current pope is known for his conservative and rather backward views. I know and admire a more liberal Christianity, and I mentioned certain names. I could mention more. Admittedly, these are in the minority even within the Christian world, as liberals tend to abandon ship--just as they unfortunately do in Islam or Hinduism. Under John Paul II, the more liberal currents of Indian theology were suppressed, as were liberal theologian like Hans Kung in Europe, as well as leading Liberation Theologians in South America. It is to be hoped that when this fellow dies, something better will come along. But despite your obvious study of the issues, when it comes to caste, I don't know which Hindu apologist you have been reading. Why not read a little Vivekananda and find out where he got some of his ideas from? Was he not an ardent admirer of Europe? Are you going to tell me that the Brahmo Samaj and the other reform movements of the 19th century were not a conscious reaction to the embarrassment that learned babus like Ram Mohun Roy felt when confronted with traditions like Suttee, caste exclusion, kulin brahmin marriage, etc. "Animism" is indeed a name, like so many others. It does, however, which has come to mean a kind of unsophisticated polytheism/pantheism. Hinduism is in many ways a sophisticated version of the same, so it is easy for the tribals to assimilate by the Sanskritization process through identification of their gods with the Hindu pantheon. But in general, the tribals feel little or no sense of adherence to the greater Hindu tradition. The Veda means nothing to them, nor should it, as the Brahmans have always excluded them from it. Dalits and other low-caste Hindus are also feeling increasingly marginalized, and with political empowerment, their need to identify as Hindus is weakening. Hinduism is a little more than camphor and ghee lamps. Those you can just as easily offer to a statue of Christ or the Buddha. The challenges that face Hinduism are great. The resources that it has are also great, so there is no reason to think that it should not be able to meet these challenges. Just one more thing, Gandhi was a great man who did indeed think "outside the box." He admired many things about Christianity and saw how many Christian concepts were true to the heart of Hinduism as well. He thus became influential, not only in India, but in the West as well, on Christianity itself. In view of this, John Paul's comment may not have been so much an insult, but an appreciation of Gandhi, who may well have said the same thing himself. Too much of what passes for Hinduism is blind nationalism based on superficial understanding of history. Jagat

I may ask what the heck you know about Catholic theology? Christianity has been around for 2000 years. The theological literature it has produced dwarfs that of India by probably several hundred to one. Have you read St. Thomas d'Aquino, Anselm, Peter Abelard, Thomas à Kempis, John of the Cross, Tillich, Barth, Otto, Hans Kung, Bornhoeffer, etc., etc. just to name a few off the top of my head. Christianity has been engaged with modernity since Hume, Hinduism has barely entered into the modern age, yet. Iskcon devotees are still trying to prove that the Bhagavatam is the last word in cosmology. The Christians dealt with these questions since the time of Galileo and Copernicus. Of course they are trying to convert. They think that they have something better. They are convinced they are acting for the general good. That is their right. As someone has already said, if you want to prevent them from doing so, there are surely ways. No one changes religion unless they feel obliged to do so, unless their own religion does not provide them with meaning. If Hinduism fails to provide meaning to its excluded, then that is its failure, not a Christian conspiracy.

Your response shows that you did not understand my post very well. My point was that "sat-chit-ananda" represents a discourse about the absolute that is 3000 years old. Christians use of the term enters into that discourse. The article is obviously superficial in its treatment of the issue, and we should not take the quote as fully representative of Indian Christian debate about the use of Sanskrit terminology. As you say, Gaudiya Vaishnavas interpret the term in a way that is not universal in Hinduism, but it is nevertheless true to the original meaning. There is no reason to think that Christian speculations will not have a legitimate connection to the term. When we translate terms into English, do we not make use of words that have time-honored traditions of usage in Christianity. For instance "God." Are we not interpreting the word according to our biases? Does our use of the term not mean that we are participating in the eternal debate about what or who God is? When we use the term "God", does that mean we have to necessarily accept the Christian concept of God? If preaching in a Muslim country, would we say "Krishna is Allah"? Would this be a meaningless statement? Obviously, if they are using the word "just because it is used by Hindu swamijis", they will be shooting themselves in the foot. If they want to convert, they will now have to show, to the Hindu conversant with his own culture, how their use of "sac-cid-ananda" is superior to the swamiji's. This is, in effect, entering the discourse.

Thought this might be of interest: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:49:53 +0200 ngordon@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Neve Gordon <ngordon@bgumail.bgu.ac.il> Tel-Aviv University Sanskrit Scholar Yigal Bronner, Imprisoned!!!!!!! Dear friends, I have been jailed by the Israeli Army for refusing to take part in the occupation of Palestine. I have been sentenced for 28 days in military prison. The reasons which led me to say no to the humiliation, dispossession and starvation of an entire people are perhaps obvious to some of you. Nonetheless, I have explained my motivations in the form of a letter to my military superiors, and this statement is at the bottom of the letter and can also be found at http://www.yesh-gvul.org/yigal-english.html or at http://www.yesh-gvul.org/yigal.html or at http://www.seruv.org.il/signers/24_1_Heb.htm (Hebrew-version). Please do not hesitate to send my statement to your friends as well. This message is sent to you by my friend Neve Gordon, who has taken it upon himself to keep you informed about my news. Please do not flood Neve with messages. He will update you every once in a while, whenever there will be something to report. You can write me while I am in jail, Neve will let you know my address as soon as he gets it. Those of you who know Galila should feel free to call and support her. She, after all, clearly has the harder assignment. While I'll be vacationing in jail, she'll be alone with both Amos and Naomi. You may also help by protesting my imprisonment. At the bottom of this message are fax numbers and addresses of several senior Israeli officials. Please circulate all this information as widely as possible. I want you to know that I am strong, and that I thank you for all your support. Shalom, Yigal <hr> <center><h3>A Letter of Response to the General By Yigal Bronner</h3></center><blockquote>”GENERAL, YOUR TANK IS A POWERFUL VEHICLE It smashes down forests and crushes a hundred men. But it has one defect: It needs a driver.” (Bertolt Brecht)</blockquote>Dear General, In your letter to me, you wrote that "given the ongoing war in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, and in view of the military needs," I am called upon to "participate in army operations" in the West Bank. I am writing to tell you that I do not intend to heed your call. During the 1980s, Ariel Sharon erected dozens of settler colonies in the heart of the occupied territories, a strategy whose ultimate goal was the subjugation of the Palestinian people and the expropriation of their land. Today, these colonies control nearly half of the occupied territories and are strangling Palestinian cities and villages as well as obstructing -- if not altogether prohibiting -- the movement of their residents. Sharon is now prime minister, and in the past year he has been advancing towards the definitive stage of the initiative he began twenty years ago. Indeed, Sharon gave his order to his lackey, the Defense Minister, and from there it trickled down the chain of command. The Chief of Staff has announced that the Palestinians constitute a cancerous threat and has commanded that chemotherapy be applied against them. The brigadier has imposed curfews without time limits, and the colonel has ordered the destruction of Palestinian fields. The division commander has placed tanks on the hills between their houses, and has not allowed ambulances to evacuate their wounded. The lieutenant colonel announced that the open-fire regulations have been amended to an indiscriminate order "fire!" The tank commander, in turn, spotted a number of people and ordered his artilleryman to launch a missile. I am that artilleryman. I am the small screw in the perfect war machine. I am the last and smallest link in the chain of command. I am supposed to simply follow orders -- to reduce my existence down to stimulus and reaction, to hear the sound of "fire" and pull the trigger, to bring the overall plan to completion. And I am supposed to do all this with the simplicity and naturalness of a robot, who -- at most -- feels the shaking tremor of the tank as the missile is launched towards the target. But as Bertolt Brecht wrote: “General, man is very useful. He can fly and he can kill. But he has one defect: He can think.” And indeed, general, whoever you may be-- colonel, brigadier, chief of staff, defense minister, prime minister, or all of the above-- I can think. Perhaps I am not capable of much more than that. I confess that I am not an especially gifted or courageous soldier; I am not the best shot, and my technical skills are minimal. I am not even very athletic, and my uniform does not sit comfortably on my body. But I am capable of thinking. I can see where you are leading me. I understand that we will kill, destroy, get hurt and die, and that there is no end in sight. I know that the "ongoing war" of which you speak, will go on and on. I can see that if the "military needs" lead us to lay siege to, hunt down, and starve a whole people, then something about these "needs" is terribly wrong. I am therefore forced to disobey your call. I will not pull the trigger. I do not delude myself, of course. You will shoo me away. You will find another artilleryman -- one who is more obedient and talented than I. There is no dearth of such soldiers. Your tank will continue to roll; a gadfly like me cannot stop a rolling tank, surely not a column of tanks, and definitely not the entire march of folly. But a gadfly can buzz, annoy, nudge, and at times even bite. Eventually other artillerymen, drivers, and commanders, who will observe the senseless killings and endless cycle of violence will also begin to think and buzz. We are already hundreds strong. And at the end of the day, our buzzing will turn into a deafening roar, a roar that will echo in your ears and in those of your children. Our protest will be recorded in the history books, for all generations to see. So general, before you shoo me away, perhaps you too should begin to think. Sincerely, Yigal Bronner Please send letters of protest on behalf of the objectors to: Mr. Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, Minister of Defence, Ministry of Defence, 37 Kaplan St., Tel-Aviv 61909, Israel. E-mail: sar@mod.gov.il or pniot@mod.gov.il Fax: ++972-3-696-27-57 / ++972-3-691-69-40 / ++972-3-691-79-15 Another useful address for sending copies would be the Military Attorney General: Brig. Gen. Menachem Finklestein Chief Military Attorney Military postal code 9605 IDF Israel Fax: ++972-3-569-43-70

Sorry for the confusion. My apologies to JN.

This verse is so familiar, I am rather surprised I cannot find a source. Does anybody know where it comes from? <center>ata eva mAyA-moha chARi buddhimAn nitya-tattva kRSNa-bhakti karena sandhAna</center> <blockquote>Therefore an intelligent person gives up his enchantment with this illusory material world and searches out the eternal truth of devotion to Krishna.</blockquote>

Just like Vaishnavas are trying to convert Christians, Muslims and Jews everywhere they go. If there is no market, there are no sales. Christians and Muslims promote their evangelical activities where they is a vacuum, dialogue where there is conflict. If Hindus deal with them as partners in the war against irreligion or atheism, rather than competitors, then there is a possibility of dialogue. I may remind you that Prabhupada, when he first came to America, once suggested a common theistic front of this sort. Hindus think that they have some kind of monopoly on religion in India. However, there have always been animist tribals and outcastes whose religious needs were marginalized or ignored by the Hindu elites. Occasionally bhakti movements made some concessions to these people, but in general Hindus were indifferent to them except for concerns about the danger they presented to their own ritual purity. Hinduism's great weakness lies in caste discrimination. Due to pressure from Christianity, it has been forced to make reforms in this area, just as it was in the cases of Suttee, widow remarriage, etc. Vivekananda was influenced by Christian missionary activity to promote welfare work and social uplift as a valid religious function of the sannyasi. This subsequently led to many other socially-oriented Hindu organizations. Surely these are positive results derived from Christian influence. The VHP has made strides towards liberalizing Hindu caste attitudes, but generally, Hindus have difficulty in convincing lower castes of their bona fides in this matter. In fact, their motivation is rarely genuine concern with the spiritual welfare of the lower castes, but more with the nationalistic concerns of the dominant caste Hindus, who are afraid of the deterioration of their culture and the undermining of the nation itself, such as the threat of revolt caused by the massive Christianization of the northeast. The true Hindu values are tolerance and inclusiveness. This is reflected in the fathers of Independence's choice of a secular state. The RSS's jackboot tactics only bring disrepute to the culture they propose to defend.