In defence of Lord Krishna

[Guest guest]

In defence of Lord Krishna

HindustanTimes.com

New Delhi, December 8, 2005

A section of our surfers will agree, Hindus have traditionally been

seen as 'passive'. Not any more. Hindus, learning from people of

other religious sects, are quick to react every time a defamatory

statement or picture appears.

 

The comment of Archbishop Nikon of Ufa and Sterlitamak from the

Russian Orthodox Church statements against Lord Krishna has evoked

sharp and informed reaction from one of our surfers.

 

It certainly merits attention.

 

In recent times, there have been a good number of cases when Hindu

gods and goddesses have been misused. Take the British postage

department's mistake in November this year. The stamp allegedly

featured two Hindus with 'tilak' marks worshipping the infant Jesus

Christ. The Hindu Forum of Britain immediately raised a furore

demanding its withdrawal from circulation.

 

There has been any number of cases of fashion fraternity misusing

Hindu icons and symbols as context for lingerie display.

 

It is in this context that the article and its response gain

importance.

 

Let's first discuss the article appearing in HindustanTimes.com/UK

Edition.

 

It said that the Archbishop sent a letter to the Mayor of Moscow,

proposing against the building of a Hindu temple in the city. He

called Lord Krishna "an evil demon, the personified power of hell

opposing God", and "a livid lascivious youth".

 

It is amazing how a prominent member of such an important sect can

have such intolerant and ignorant notions of another.

 

In a fitting reply, the article quotes Sanjay Jha, President of the

Association of Indians in Russia as saying that besides displaying

stunning ignorance of the world's oldest religion, it is also

evident from the statement that the Russian Orthodox Church is still

embedded in the dark ages of religious exclusivity, which has no

place in today's increasingly pluralistic society.

 

Our surfer Mr William Glick from Gainesville, US wrote to put up an

informed counter-argument.

 

He says, "The Archbishop Nikon of Ufa and Sterlitamak from the

Russian Orthodox Church has shown that he has no understanding of

Hinduism."

 

Glick contends Hinduism is far more assimilative as against the

intolerance of the Archbishop.

 

Glick says that the Bhagwat Gita believes that through the chequered

history of mankind, "God or His representatives come to reclaim

conditioned souls".

 

There may be differences due to differences in culture, climate and

people, but the basic principle remains the same, he says.

 

Hinduism, therefore, agrees with the Biblical claim that Christ was

the son of God and had come from the kingdom of God to reclaim

conditioned souls, just as Lord Krishna.

 

This is in sharp contrast to the intolerant creed of the Archbishop.

 

The article on HindustanTimes.com also counters the

Bishop's 'satanic' claims when it says, "To call Lord

Krishna 'satanic' is not only sacrilegious in the eyes of Hindus, it

is also patently ridiculous as any student of Hinduism knows, for

Krishna is famous as the slayer of demons, Bhagavad-Gita (4.7-8)".

 

Glick further shows the similarity between Hinduism and Judaism. He

says, "In fact, the Jewish and Hindu (Vedic) religions are saying

the same thing and using almost the same language root. Their

calendars are only about 300 years apart (after 5000 years). The

most important name of God for every Jewish person is the name El

KNA, who every Hindu knows as Kana, another name of Krishna."

 

A far cry from the exclusivity of Russian Archbishop's notions of

his religion!

 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1567434,0093.htm