Posted on 07/28/2009 7:37:17 PM PDT by Willie Green
Festivities in a new temple dedicated to the Indian monkey god Hanuman in Frisco, Texas, earlier this month remind us that a minority of religions exists within the shores of the United States that is relatively silent. The faith that is the subject here, of course, is Hinduism, which in that North Texas town, at least, is enjoying an "expanding population," according to the Dallas Morning News. Despite the fact that Indians have been quietly enriching the American melting pot for decades to centuries, few non-Indians know much about the colorful religion of Hinduism.
In actuality, the term "Hinduism" represents not a monolithic faith but a conglomeration of more or less varied religions, sects and cults largely originating on the Indian subcontinent and often incorporating beliefs, doctrines and traditions dating back several thousand years. What we perceive of as "Hinduism," then, encompasses and embraces a wide variety of beliefs, to the extent that even recent icons such as Elvis Presley, Princess Diana and Mother Teresa have reputedly made it into the extensive Hindu pantheon of a traditional "333 million" deities, demigods and saints, etc.
According to his hairdresser-cum-spiritual advisor Larry Geller, the "King of Rock and Roll" Presley, who was raised a Christian, was fond of reading books about Eastern spiritual traditions. The affection for Indian philosophy by members of the music group the Beatles is legendary, especially in the case of George Harrison. Many Indian gurus and yogis have found welcome on this side of the Atlantic and Pacific, and the ancient physical and spiritual exercise of yoga in a myriad of forms is practiced by up to 20 million Americans.
Yet, Hinduism remains a mystery to most Americans, both at times intriguing and bizarre with its sundry gods and goddesses. Part of the reason for this oversight is because Hinduism in its fullness seems so alien to cultures largely dominated by either the Abrahamic faiths with their aloof monotheistic God or the "New Atheism," which has a tendency to ridicule and dismiss such lively piety.
Hinduism plays nice in the U.S.
Another reason Americans as whole are largely oblivious to Hinduism is because its practitioners in general do not rabblerouse, set up terrorist camps, call for the destruction of the U.S. Constitution, bilk the American public for millions, establish bogus "charities," engage in unethical and seedy "televangelism," lobby Congress for special favors and consideration, challenge constantly the principle of separation of church and state, abuse the First Amendment and all of the fun stuff (sarcasm) we are used to seeing from fervent religionists in our country and elsewhere.
This lack of aggression by Hindus in America does not reflect that they do not take their faith very seriously, as they certainly do. Like Christians who proclaim that Jesus Christ is real because they have had visions of him, devout Hindus often feel as if their deities have made their very real presence known, as in the case of Cheeni Rao, author of In Hanuman's Hands, who while going down the destructive path of drug abuse was "saved" by the monkey-headed god. Rao's experience was every bit as life changing as that of Christians in a similar position—and this instance illustrates that the form of a profound spiritual presence purportedly experienced is largely if not entirely dependent upon one's cultural conditioning, not upon any "ultimate reality" or "absolute truth."
"Hinduism" as a monolith has its flaws—and non-Hindus both religious and secular will no doubt point them out—including taking itself too seriously to the point where, in its native land, a certain amount of strife and atrocity can be traced to Indian beliefs, such as the rare but ongoing practice of widow-burning or sati in various districts, as well as other sexism, prejudices—such as the caste system—and violence committed by its fanatical minority. Yet, while some "enlightened gurus" have been opportunists preying on a gullible American public with enticing stories of metaphysical and supernatural wonders, so far traditional Hinduism's practitioners generally have not brought unsavory and violent "traditions" along with them to their new homelands and demanded they be allowed to break the law of the land in practicing them, unlike members of other faiths.
We can only hope that other religionists in the United States and elsewhere will follow suit and behave in a similar, more spiritually mature manner as the American Hindu population, rather than bullying and elbowing their way in, exploiting the system and creating enmity. Rarely if ever do we hear complaints or derogatory news items about Hindus in America, while members of other groups such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam often make it into the news for unethical and illegal behavior. Does this frequent broadcasting of these three faiths result because they are under a bigger microscope, or could there be a problem with the Abrahamic monotheism itself, whereby it insists on its own way, to compel and force itself upon people against their will, with dire threats of eternal punishment for rejecting it?
Concerning the fanatical monotheism depicted in the Old Testament, from which the Abrahamic faiths arose, in Pagan Christs (17-18) John M. Robertson remarked:
Monotheism of this type is in any case morally lower than polytheism since those who held it lacked sympathy for their neighbors. Most of the Jewish kings were polytheists. What I am concerned to challenge is the assumption—due to the influence of Christianity—that Jewish monotheism is essentially higher than polytheism, and constitutes a great advance in religion.... If the mere affirmation of a Supreme Creator God is taken to be a mark of superiority, certain primitive tribes who hold this doctrine and yet practice human sacrifice must be considered to have a 'higher' religion than the late Greeks and Romans."Monotheism in America will simply need to become accustomed to the fact that this country is inhabited by polytheists such as the Hindus as well as atheists, humanists and secularists, and to stop being so aggressive and insistent upon its own way. That's America under the U.S. Constitution, a fact that freedom lovers everywhere will appreciate.
Many peoples and traditions of the world consider proselytizing to be essentially non-peaceful. Hindus do not proselytize, and simply want to abide in their own villages without their children or their faith subject to proselytization. And though it is against Hinduism, some Hindus feel so threatened by Catholic proselytizing that they feel their violence is a response to what they perceive as a relentless and generationally unending Catholic violence towards their minds, faith and culture. In short, they just want to be left alone to practice their own religion, in their own villages, in their own country.
As far as this desire to simply be left alone somehow violating Catholic core beliefs, and amounting to a violation of "comity," an unfair "exploitation" of "western democracy" and an imitation of Muslim religion-sanctioned murder, such contentions are utterly bigoted in favor of a Catholic-centric application of definitions and rule of law for the entire planet, as well as a slander against Hinduism specifically, and thus are dismissable on their face. And as you are well aware, they also absolutely do not represent the official positions of the Catholic Church towards Hindus, Hinduism, or India.
A belief system that accepts Christ as the incarnation of God and then allows for gods incarnated as monkeys and baboons makes a mockery of Catholicism and its central tenets. ...We do not believe the simplistic notion that “there are many paths to Heaven” because this would make the birth, death, and resurrection of the Christ meaningless. Why add one more path?
Your simplistic interpretation makes a mockery of Hinduism and it's central tenets. As well, Hindu beliefs existed thousands of years before the coming of Jesus Christ, and therefore hardly represent any reaction whatever towards Christianity. However, for a Hindu, once Jesus came He was hardly meaningless, but seen as a genuine incarnation of God who was and is utterly crucial to the saving of the human race, and deserving of the highest and most solemn veneration and worship. What other religion on the planet so absolutely accepts the stature of Jesus Christ as God, besides Christianity? You know not of what you speak.
This is just rank slander. Icons and images stand for spiritual principles - and as a Catholic, you are majorly throwing stones from a glass house. You want to talk about taking icon worship at face value in a sanitarium? How about worshipping a bloody, tortured, murdered guy up on a cross, and then partaking in the ritualistic eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood? How does that sound, taken at face value, without any spiritual interpretations or teachings to explain it's deeper meanings? You are way, way out of line, and you're not doing Catholicism any good with your ignorant rantings about a religion of which you are utterly ignorant and against which you are clearly biased and abjectly unfair, insulting and misleading.
There are many resources available to explore these religions and their intersections, and they have always interested me.
No: Catholicism has been under the microscope for over 2000 years by scholars, theologians, historians, jurists, and philosophers of every stripe and the Man on the Cross resurrected himself according to eyewitness accounts. Go read the historical accounts. This is not some false myth, legend or pagan offering..
My comment was in response to strong Catholic reaction to the Da Vinci Code in the context of Hinduism. That the long history in India of bloody reactions to alleged Hindu desecration is evidence enough that they should in this context understand what is a relatively mild and democratic response to those who produced this movie. Apparently you failed to grasp this context.
idolatry is considering that God inhabits a statue. Catholicism doesn’t believe that. Neither, for that matter, does ARya Samaj.
americans are doers. hinduism is navel-gazing. Americans might be attracted to islam cause it gives them something to do, even if it is blowing up buildings. old hindus are scary looking. they all have really worn out faces and wicked dark circles under their eyes. No American wants to look like that. Finally, while I know hindus can get agitated and violent, they generally are associated with ghandi and pacifism and nonviolence. Again, that’s just not the American DNA.
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
As in?
"I have traveled to India and even lived for extended periods there. I wouldn't trust Indian Christians. Most of their stories are fabricated in order to get our money. I used to support our church's activities, but after traveling to India, I realized that Indian churches come up with stories of persecution and feed them to us in order to rip us off of our money. There is an entire industry there which claims that so many churches were burnt down this year. If you ask them to show you the remnants of the church, they will claim that these were really small wooden shacks which were 10 ft by 10 ft in size and they were completely burnt down. I have faced so much fraud from Indian Christians that I have lost all sympathy for them. India is a country where buildings are made with brick and mortar and this story about wooden churches of a very small size when asked for evidence doesn't wash."
Spreading the message of Jesus is one thing, but the exaggerations and claims of churches being burnt are wholly another. Put yourself in my shoes. I give money and travel to India and find out that I've been taken for a ride and that I am not alone in this. There is an industry out there that generates tales of persecution and martyrdom in order to strike a chord with us and it is extremely difficult to describe the rage I felt when I realized that the people feeding me stories were evasive about their claims."
get a grip.
Can’t quarrel with that analysis!
My ex-GF was adamant that ALL true Indians were Hindu by "worldview", but that other faiths introduced "foreign elements" over the years that were incompatible with this worldview. Of course, I did get her to acknowledge that Hinduism itself had adapted outside traditions over the centuries (as is the case with any religion that has "survived").
Now if you want to call names we can either end this discussion or be prepared to face a rhetorical fussilade. Of course burning theaters and arson is not a democratic response. So why don’t you provide actual proof of such occurences or simply shut up! At least I has the courtesy of presenting you proof of several thousands of Sikhs massacred at the Golden Shrine over something as flimsy as the claimed birthplace of one of the lengendary gods. With each post you continue to show your shallowness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.