<
p>
 |
|
ISKCON devotees in Allahabad |
It is these I.D.-creationists who are leading the current barrage of anti-evolution lawsuits… They have found enthusiastic allies among the Hare Krishnas… who have been actively propagating their theory of “Vedic creationism”, “Krishna creationism”, or “Hindu creationism”, as it is sometimes called…
Earlier this year, the Hare Krishnas filed an amicus curiae brief supporting I.D.-creationists… Hare Krishnas appealed to the court to keep the anti-Darwinian warning stickers. As the stickers only attack Darwin without endorsing a specifically Christian God, Hare Krishnas see them as an opportunity to introduce Vedic creationism into American schools. They know that once one religion gets its foot inside the door, all others will automatically get equal time to bring in their own creation stories and cosmologies into science classrooms in America. [Link]
The ID’ers don’t mind since it gives them multi-culti camouflage:
`I.D.’ is often accused of being a scientific-sounding cover for Christian creationism. The ID-ers conveniently use the support of Hare Krishnas to paint themselves in multicultural colours. Prominent I.D. theorists (Philip Johnson, Michael Behe) and some Catholic creationists have endorsed Vedic creationism. Any enemy of Charles Darwin is their friend… [Link]
ISKCON creationism sounds just as nutty as the ID’ers:
The intellectual force driving Vedic creationism is a pair of American Hindus, Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson, both resident “scientists” of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, the research wing of ISKCON. Cremo recently published a huge book, Human Devolution: A Vedic Alternative to Darwin’s Theory… While Cremo insists he is offering a “scientific” alternative to Darwin, almost all of his evidence comes from paranormal phenomena, including studies of extra-sensory perception, faith-healing, reincarnation and past-birth memories, UFOs (unidentified flying objects) and alien abductions…
But here’s the kicker: instead of believing in the fundamentalist Christian idea of a 6,000-year-young earth, the Hare Krishnas believe in yugas, and that humans have been around for two billion years. So the political allies start with a fundamental contradiction from day one.
… Cremo and Thompson accept the notion of the “day of Brahma” lasting some 4.32 billion years as literally true. They also accept as fact the idea that the “current day of Brahma” began two billion… years ago. A literal reading of the Ramayana convinces them that humans and monkey-like hominoid creatures coexisted… they come up with the fantastic notion that the ancestors of modern human beings have existed for two billion years. They want us to believe that human beings walked the earth at a time when fossil records show that only bacteria existed on the earth. [Link]
<
p>I love the mind-expanding Vedic concept of time. In a dialogue with most religions, it sounds like it was written by Topper:
Argh! Honestly, even if you are super religious you can reconcile hinduism with evolution. Vishnu came to earth and each time he moved up the evolutionary chain. Granted, humans exist in each of these stories. But I still think there are some amazing similarities.
from balagokulam
Natural historians don’t believe that humans are the “zenith” of the evolutionary chain. Far from it – humans haven’t lived through much. You have to look to sharks, cockroaches, and ferns as examples of real branches that have actually lasted and withstood calamity. Humans just bring it.
Who designed the designer?
I was going to say the very same thing SG.
Anyway, religious people rejecting science and supporting ID – no surprises there. ISKCON being a bit weird – no surprises there. I enjoy ancient Hindu philosophy and how prophetic some of it was, it’s much easier to reconcile with subsequent scientific fact. This is, therefore, a bit irritating.
Yep, the Hare Krishnas can make anything sound ridiculous. They make the best puri-aloo though.
one of stupidest things I heard along the lines was from Deepak Chopra where he said something to the effect – “look at the beauty of this world, the mountains, the birds, oceans, all that beauty can’t be evolved though some randomness or natural selection – there should be an intelligent design behind it”.
I think, the way I see this is that the relgious types never accepted evolution, now they have come half way into saying there was some evolution involved in getting where we are today. It wouldn’t be too long before they accept evolution as Darwin envisioned it – it is just a matter of time.
Manish
The Hare Krishna’s had no right to appropriate the term “Vedic” to describe their sectarian view of the creation of the world. Meera Nanda’s critique is therefore misplaced in that it assumes that all Hindu intellectuals share the Hare Krishna perspective. This said, Meera Nanda is highly ideological, self-opinionated and vitriolic in her position as well. One can describe her as a self-hating Hindu. Hence her selective critiques to date.
Psst….I have this new cult here called DDiAism — it is like Dadaism, but only a little vaguer. Recruits have to believe that the world was created in one day by me. Bhajans/Choirs etc have been replaced by 80s disco music and we are wearing vertical stripes for religious ceremonies — since vertical stripes are so slimming. Naturally, there will be no ritual fasting — merely ritual binging on roshogollas.
Now bow before me.
I think the embracing of every bit of legend towards proving their case is the fundamental weakness of the ID assumption. It is like a patchwork quilt and IDers keep making assumptions each time they have to explain something new. That is not to take away from Hindu creationism, or any other form of creationism as an allegory of the real thing. So SG and Bong might be onto something there.
But. it. is. still. not. a. scientific. theory. Its a wild hunch. NOT a theory. (courtesy Abhi)
Christian idea of a 6,000-year-young earth
one point: only one faction of protestantism is wedded to a literal inerrant interpretation of the bible. there is a fundamental pecularity that conservative protestants in the united states can set the terms of the debate and imply that young each creationism is a necessary inference from christianity when mainline protestants, catholics and the orthodox reject their scriptural interpretation.
Amusing to see even NASA administrators supporting ID.
Pluto mission lifts off after days of delay
I’ve always had a dislike for the Hare Krishnas. Especially since they always seemed hell bent on waking me up in college by chanting and singing at 6am near the train station.
Probably, that’s the oldest theory by the wisest men of the primitive societies. That’s how, even now, an Indian tribe called Koya starts its version of origin of life. Hinduism just incorporated one of those primitive knowledge.
Civilization developed on the banks of water bodies. So no big surprizes there. Perhaps, Koya tribal religion and not Hinduism should get even higher recognition if anybody wants to get amazed by it.
the plot thickens…
i dont get ISKCON… i remember being little and being excited when i would see a hare krishna on the street. then my mom would shush me and hurry me along. i still don’t get it. are they really that bad? anyone care to elaborate? i mean they’re a bit nutty…but…i dunno i dont get it.
Allmixedup,
No, the ISKCON crowd are just a Hindu sect who focus on Krishna and his philosophies. They’re not some kind of weird cult, despite the Western media image (and their admittedly unorthodox ideas about evolution and the age of the human race). They do seem to have attracted a lot of non-Indian converts, but they have a huge number of Indian followers too. There’s a temple here in the UK (north London) which they run — the building was donated by ex-Beatle George Harrison, who was also an admirer of the sect, I believe — and it’s usually full of mainly Gujarati families, especially during major Hindu festivals.
AllMixedUp writes: ISKCON… are they really that bad?
They’re mostly Westerners who are disillusion with Christianity and come to Hinduism to “find” true religion. Unfortunately, they carry the baggage of intolerance from their prior lives, and hence turn their version of Hinduism into exactly the same thing they fled from. Their motto is: Krishna is the One and True way. All others (Ganesha, Durga worshippers) will never get Mokhsha/Nirvana. On occassion one can find HareKrishnas in Hindu temples in North America castigating the devotees for worshipping other Devatas. Most Hindus find it amusing, especially since it’s coming from whites clad in saffron.
Their cooking though, as Divya said, it just mouth watering.
M. Nam
I grew up in ISKCON so I have a little knowledge…
As for All Mixed Up’s question, ISKCON is a branch of the Gaudiya Vaisnava movement of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. (Don’t have time to link all these, but Google will help you). Basically they are devotees of Krishna, worshipping Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the bhakti-yoga tradition as taught by Caitanya Mahaprabhu and his followers about 500 years ago. A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami (honorific title of Prabhupada) brought these teachings to America and ultimately world-wide world beginning in New York in 1965. If you visit Vrindavana (U.P.) or West Bengal or Orissa (especially Puri) you will find many others non-ISKCON with the same basic beliefs and practices. In other words, it’s not a totally made-up thing but an established tradition later transferred to the West and the world.
There is a certain fundamentalism to their beliefs as they accept the Bhagavad-gita, the Bhagavat Purana, the Caitanya Caritamrita, the Upanishads and other Puranas as literal truth (with some interpretation in the Gaudiya tradition required). They are personalists (God is ultimately a person and Brahman and avatar manifestation comes from that, not the other way around), believe in the tenets of the Gita such as the soul, karma, and reincarnation, and the basic practices of bhakti-yoga in their tradition are acceptance of a guru, daily japa meditation of the Hare Krishna mantra, Deity worship, bhajan and kirtana, and missionary activities (as ordered by Mahaprabhu). They eat no meat, fish or eggs (thus the delicious prasada), practice celibacy (sex only for procreation even in marriage), take no intoxicants (including caffeine), and don’t gamble (and other time-wasting frivolous pursuits). The basic idea is to become a saintly person so fully in love with Krishna such that at the time of death one goes to Goloka Vrindavana, the eternal abode of Krishna, never to return to this material world (as Krishna promises in the Bhagavad-gita).
As an organization, ISKCON has had many failings including major abuses of authority and a fairly steady problem of living up to the high standards. However, I still believe that most are sincere and some are truly saintly. There are a number of internal debates and dissensions as well on various theological issues, with a fair bit represented on various internet sites. The organization is fairly de-centralized, with ultimate management resting in a Governing Body Commission rather than any one acharya.
As for the whole ID thing: SOME Krishna devotees have signed on to the campaign, while others are sceptical seeing it as a program of the Christian right which ultimately wants a Christian theocracy and is no friend of heretic pagans like the devotees. However, subscribing as they do the creation story and ontology of the Bhagavat Purana and the ultimate principle of creation by a Supreme Being, not by chance interaction of chemicals, they have an extensive critique of evolutionary theory (for what it’s worth).
Gaura bhakta vrinda ki jai ho!
Meera Nanda’s casual use of the terms “Darwinism” (not a scientific theory) and “Darwin’s Theory” (a very imprecise term for the scientific study of evolutionary biology) indicate that her essay has been cobbled together in haste. Reading through one can see why. Her target seems to lie elsewhere, in the recent excitement over Amartya Sen’s “The Argumentative Indian”. Sen’s book has helped a few Indians and people of Indian origin around the world take feel good about their past without becoming stuck in it. But being a collection of essays written with little history in them the book has found critics among liberals, classicists and conservatives in India and abroad. Meera Nanda not being a scholar in the Indian classical traditions would naturally find Sen’s book irksome from the modern point of view. For those who wonder why this is such a big thing it would help to look at education in India which unlike in the West is all but absent. For various reasons studies in the Indian languages especially Sanskrit are superficial excepting for those who have chosen to study it in depth at the graduate level. India’s ‘intellectuals’ are as a rule are comfortable in English only. Meera Nanda has little use for any approaches to the study of Indian classical traditions excepting for the point of view of modernity.
Creation is not a significant event in Hindu mythology. Neither the Ramayana nor the Mahabharata have anything to do with the act of Creation. A few of the Puranas do contain narratives of creation but these are peripheral to the larger narrative. Vedic Creation is an inappropriate term as the Rig Veda brings up the question of who created the universe or when it happened and leaves it unanswered. The ISKCON has unfortunately come in favor of ID. There was a time when ISKCON distanced itself from mainstream Hindu communities many of whom would find its earlier ideas on other Hindu tradtions (the other four broad ones – Shaiva, Smartha, Vaishnava and Sakta) offensive. In recent years the ISKCON has begun to embrace other Hindu groups (especially over the last 10 years) as its fortunes have declined and the number of newly arrived Hindus from India has surged. ISKCON itself is in the process of returning to the ‘big tent’ of Hinduism and would do well not to blow its chances.
A popular understanding of evolution sits comfortably with Hindu mythology. An extremely old cosmos (Hindu cosmology puts a cycle of creation and destruction at over a trillion years), the lack of a sharp distinction between humans and animals, monism (everything is one) and a diffuse and non-corporeal absolute entity are some of the ideas that make it easier for many Hindus to accept evolution, even if these ideas have not been derived scientifically.
This rings true. There are innumerable creation myths in the vedas, upanishads and puranas – each one different from the other. This goes to show creation wasn’t that significant a matter for the vedic indians who were otherwise so concerned with precision. It’s like the sages gave this matter some thought, drew some broad conclusions (cyclic time, infinity etc.) but then just moved on to things that really mattered. The creation thing is best summed up in the Nasadiya Sukta which concludes: who really knows how the world was created? Maybe God does, but then maybe even he doesn’t.
The last few lines of the creation hymn in the Rig Veda.
“Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being?
Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.”
In another thread when there was a discussion about atheism being emerged in christian context, I was thinking exactly about the above lines from Rig Veda. This seems to be the oldest known script where they have challeged the power and existence of god.
I didnt know this. Wow!!!
I’d like to, again, make it clear that Meera Nanda’s notion that “the Hare Krishna’s” support I.D. — with the impression that they support the christian version — is an over-generalization. The Hare Krishna’s are very fractioned. Many have left ISKCON to start factions or sub-sects, and even within ISKCON there are a lot of differences of opinion.
Many Hare Krishna’s do NOT support I.D., and certainly not the christian version. It just happens too often that the so-called ISKCON leadership makes decisions, like filing this brief, without the consent of the movement at large or even informing them, because they are mostly out of touch with the rank-and-file members.
Likewise, the notion that all Hare Krishna’s do not believe that the US put men on the Moon is wrong. There are plenty of Hare Krishna’s who happily accept this fact.
ISKCON in Russia has more serious things to worry about . And here is what is happening about it.
Left out the first link. Sorry for the double post.
M.Nam you wrote:
“They’re mostly Westerners who are disillusion with Christianity and come to Hinduism to “find” true religion. Unfortunately, they carry the baggage of intolerance from their prior lives, and hence turn their version of Hinduism into exactly the same thing they fled from. Their motto is: Krishna is the One and True way. All others (Ganesha, Durga worshippers) will never get Mokhsha/Nirvana. On occassion one can find HareKrishnas in Hindu temples in North America castigating the devotees for worshipping other Devatas. Most Hindus find it amusing, especially since it’s coming from whites clad in saffron.”
Actually most Hare Krishna’s today are not westerners. For the first 20 years of ISKCON (acronym for the international society for krishna consciousness-the hare krishnas) they were mostly westerners, but most were not coming from Christianity. A large portion were from the hippie new age subculture, a large portion were jewish left wing types, and a large portion were involved in some other form of Yoga. Very few were Christian.
Today the vast majority of practicing Hare Krishna’s (not necessarily living in their yoga ashramas i.e the congregation) are Indians. They have millions of Indian congregational members and only maybe 100,000 non Indian congregational members. Their temples in India (mumbai, new delhi (built by the hinduja family) bangalore etc) are amongst the most popular temples in India. As far as working in their ashramas in India the majority are Indians, in North America a large percentage are Indians, in South East Asia and Africa the majority are Indians, and in Europe the majority are westerners. Their temples outside of India are often the main religious gathering place for the Indian diaspora, especially at the tmeple George Harrison donated outside of London called Bhaktivedanta Manor which is the main meeting place for Hindus and Hindu groups in England. see http://news.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=224645&cat=World http://www.hinduforum.org/
As far as intelligent design here are some links (which I support)
http://www.arn.org http://www.designinference.com http://www.idintheuk.blogspot.com http://www.idthefuture.com http://www.iscid.org http://telicthoughts.com http://darwinismrefuted.com
For Michael Cremo
Reviews of his infamous book ‘Forbidden Archeology’ http://www.mcremo.com/reviews.html
And here is the website for that book http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/
GTF:
You quoted this bit from the Rg Veda:
“Who knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being?”
As for that quote from the Rg Veda; it’s not about the creation of the world, it was about the origin of God. Here is the whole section which you took a bit from the end:
“At first was neither Being nor Nonbeing. There was not air nor yet sky beyond. What was wrapping? Where? In whose protection? Was Water there, unfathomable deep? There was no death then, nor yet deathlessness; of night or day there was not any sign. The One breathed without breath by its own impulse. Other than that was nothing at all.
Darkness was there, all wrapped around by darkness, and all was Water indiscriminate, Then that which was hidden by Void, that One, emerging, stirring, through power of Ardor, came to be.
In the beginning Love arose, which was primal germ cell of mind. The Seers, searching in their hearts with wisdom, discovered the connection of Being in Nonbeing.
A crosswise line cut Being from Nonbeing. What was described above it, what below? Bearers of seed there were and mighty forces, thrust from below and forward move above.
Who really knows? Who can presume to tell it? Whence was it born? Whence issued this creation? Even the Gods came after its emergence. Then who can tell from whence it came to be?
That out of which creation has arisen, whether it held it firm or it did not, He who surveys it is in the highest heaven.”
Another part of the Rg Veda talks about the creation of this world and all being. That is the Purusha Shukta, believed to be the oldest part of original Vedas.
You can read it here:
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/purusha_sukta.htm
Shiva Dasa,
The websites/weblogs you refer contain nothing of any scientific value whatsoever. The ID movement (or mentality as Dawkins calls it) is simply warmed over Creationism, Neo Creationaism or Creationism in a cheap tuxedo. Its “arguments” and methods are the same as its earlier versions but its objectives are harder to discern. As for how to interpret the Rg Veda you know that Hindus have debated the subject for millennia. But unless you are willing to twist the text out of shape it is impossible to establish that those few verses are about primal creation. They are not.
It is good to see that ISKCON is attracting Hindus from all traditions and not only those of Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition. ISKCON is doing a lot to revive the academic study of Hindu tradition and philosophy. The Oxford Center for Hindu Studies is a fine example of what ISKCON can do if its approach is progressive and inclusive. ID/Neo-Creo doesn’t fit with this. You would be surprised to know how many Vaishnava and Gaudiya Vaishnava adherents reject ID Creationism.
Colombo Tamil Lawyer said:
Great. Way to take YET another page from the Zionist playbook. Self-hating Hindu. I’ve been wondering when this term would take off, and honestly I’m surprised that it’s taken this long (I guess pseudo-secular has served well enough that self-hating Hindu wasn’t necessary). Google only turns up three pages, but I suppose that number will go up soon enough.
The use of the term self-hating Hindu (just like self-hating Jew) is a convenient way to try and silence an opinion without engaging with it. Labeling Meera Nanda a “self-hating Hindu” aligns you with hardline ideologues of Hindu nationalism who would use the same rhetoric to refer to those of us who opposed the destruction of the Babri Masjid in 1992 and the Gujarat riots in 2002. Whether or not this was in fact your intention, I don’t know.
What I find doubly disturbing, on the face of it, without knowing anything about you beyond your screen name, and assuming that your screen name tells us something about yourself, is the fact that you’d use that epithet, given the fact that your screen name is “Colombo Tamil Lawyer.” What would your response be if a Sinhala Buddhist who opposed the Sri Lankan state’s policies toward Tamils was dubbed a “self-hating Buddhist?”
Or for that matter, would it be appropriate for a Tamil who opposes LTTE violence to be branded a “self-hating Tamil?”
shiva you wrote:
“The websites/weblogs you refer contain nothing of any scientific value whatsoever. The ID movement (or mentality as Dawkins calls it) is simply warmed over Creationism, Neo Creationaism or Creationism in a cheap tuxedo. Its “arguments” and methods are the same as its earlier versions but its objectives are harder to discern.”
That’s a very pretentious and glib argument. Obviously you haven’t read those sites nor much on the topic. http://www.lewrockwell.com/murphy/murphy102.html
“As for how to interpret the Rg Veda you know that Hindus have debated the subject for millennia. But unless you are willing to twist the text out of shape it is impossible to establish that those few verses are about primal creation. They are not.”
It is very specific about how God came to exist through stages. First God was an unconscious being, the primeval substance of the cosmos, then consciousness emerged in that being through “ardor”, then mind. The Purusha Shukta and numerous other vedic texts go into the details of creation by God.
“ID/Neo-Creo doesn’t fit with this. You would be surprised to know how many Vaishnava and Gaudiya Vaishnava adherents reject ID Creationism.”
Well I’ll make sure they get your memo doc, although I don’t know of a single actual Hare Krishna who believes in evolution. I know some ex-Hare Krishna’s who do. And I know many many gaudiya vaisnavas. Anyone who is without bias and who TAKES THE TIME TO DO THE RESEARCH of ID will conclude like hundreds of scientists have already concluded i.e that evolution is a total fraud and that the design inference is easily proven. But obviously a person like you is not interested in study. Your smug put down of those sites tells me that you are another person who knows little to nothing about a topic but who has a big opinion due to a big ego.
Om twat sat baby!
Shiva Dasa,
For all your description of ISKON and hare-krishnas, I have this to say as a ‘regular’, ‘ordinary’, ‘common’ hindu : Its true that they have the most visible Hindu organization in the West, and also that their temples are major Hindu congregation centers. What is also true is that a lot of Indian Hindus go there for lack of other equally organized and supported Hindu temples in the city. I personally have gone to the ISKON temple in Phoenix AZ quite many times. The only thing familiar and comforting there was the beautiful marble statues of the deities. Most daily religious practices seemed unfamiliar to me. I went there even on Janmashtmi, but the whole thing that day was unlike I’ve seen in temples in India. No recognizeable bhajans, no familiar ceremonies including those that happen in the Dwarkadheesh temple. Just back to back singing/chanting, a number of non-ethnic Hindus jumping up and down while ALL the desi hindus looked on in consernation upon entering before settling down to offer their personal prayers and getting the heck out of there ASAP!
All in all, not what I’ve ever associated with Hinduism back home. Also, the ISKON support of ID lays bare their inherent worldviews that carries over from western, judeo-christian traditions. I agree completely with Moor Nam #16. Krishna has the same place in ISKON as Jesus in Christianity. In Hinduism that would just be an over-zealous sect, not practice of Hinduism itself. I’d be amazed if you can show me the Hindu masses in India pushing for ID in place of theory of evolution. Most laugh out loud when one mentions the ID efforts in USA and say people in USA have too much time and money on their hands. The right practice of Hinduism causes no conflict between spiritual belief in divinity and a rational explanation of creation.
Shiva Dasa
This link is worse than even the ones you posted earlier. Pseudoscience is too mild a term for the content found there. Evolutionary biology is science my friend. If the debate were to be conducted wrt incantations, imagination, conjuring etc., your sources of information may prove useful. In the field of science your sources are useless. ID is such unadulterated claptrap that there is nothing to study in it. It is fascinating to study the history of ID for its record of deceit, conceit, ignorance and stupidity. The 100s of scientists who question evolution or support ID will make no impact on science unless they take the trouble to work in the field and produce something original (that they have no interest in doing).
Shiva Das, You are ignorance personified. Please stop leaving any more such comments or I will be forced to ban you simply in order to prevent you from spreading more ignorance to unsuspecting readers. Our website supports free speech but not idiot speech. Thank you.
Sometimes, we all need a bit of Bill Hicks…
“A war is when TWO armies are fighting…People said ‘uh-uh Bill, Iraq had the fourth largest army in the world.Â’ Yeah maybe, but you know what? After the first three largest armies, thereÂ’s a real big fuckinÂ’ drop off, all right? The Hare Krishnas are the fifth biggest army in the world…and theyÂ’ve already got our airports.”
Abhi, it’s nice to see that id is allowed to be called cretinism but not allowed to be defended on your site. Thanks but no thanks, I don’t hang with fascists.
I don’t believe that there is a defense.
Madura Vivekan,
Meera Nanda is not a classicist. And yet she attempts to write on something she knows very little about. Shiva’s comments above are relevant here. Hers is an exclusive condemnation of the Hindu inheritance without placing commensurate emphasis on the religious belligerence of other traditions. This is one sided, counter productive and will back fire.
She is entitled to attack the hardline right wing. But to dismiss an entire religious tradition is unacceptable. She is free to condemn obscurantism. But to focus on Hinduism alone reveals her pathological hatred of that tradition.
Hence her recent focus on the Hare Krishnas – who are no threat to the liberal agenda. Her partisan agenda is self-defeating because people begin to doubt her and more importantly the cause she purports to represent i.e. reason and tolerance. I suggest that you read Susantha Goonatilake’s excellent critique of her last month.
And I hope that you are not anti-semitic given your dismissive remarks on Zionism. That’s counter productive too.
Colombo Tamil Lawyer: superbly put and I agree wholeheartedly. Here’s another link that critiques Meera Nanda. It’s time to deconstruct her self-righteous pretentions.
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.org/articles/politics/bogey.html
I have been to few ISKCON temples. They accept and follow vedic scriptures. You need to scratch the surface and maybe get a few of the books published by them as they are the largest publishers of vedic literature world wide in a lot of languages. I think ISKCON had done an exemplery job in the spread of sanatam dharma and vedic culture world wide. A large number of people have benefitted and made their lives blissful and the world a better place. Try the sites Krishna.com and Iskcon.com for more information.
Colombo Tamil Lawyer,
First, opposition to Zionism and antisemitism are not the same thing.
Second, I don’t think Meera Nanda has anything to do with my comment, or that my comment has anything to do with Meera Nanda. I was challenging your authority (or anyone else’s), to call anyone a self-hating anything.
I have been silent b/c I am very busy and also somewhat ill, and also because this discussion pains me. I feel a duty to say something to the uninformed.
Iskcon is a direct descendant of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. In fact, at its best, it is Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Isckon itself is extremely multifaceted, fractured, and complex, however, so there is a big expressed range from worst to best. It is really no longer just one institution. While it is true that many Iskcon devotees–in fact almost all Iskcon devotees–are proponents of their own form of ID, it is not true that most of them are involved in this particular effort. The various branches and factions of Iskcon–various centers, various countries, various programs (the Book Trust, the Food for Life Program, The Bhaktivedanta Institute, the farming communities, the Festival of India) have all grown into their own entities in some sense. So I wouldn’t take the behaviors and intellectual processes of these few guys and their quest for ID and make big extrapolations about the intellectual and psychological processes of all Iskcon devotees.
Most non Iskcon Gaudiya Vaishnavs I know don’t particularly care about evolution. If you asked them what they thought, they’d probably choose ID, but if you argued with them, they usually shrug and essentially go, “whatever. who cares?” if you really argue with them–as I do when I feel it’s important to–then you can sometimes even convince them of the massiveness of the evidence behind evolution, and its lack of incompatibility with the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition that they do care about. I don’t really have the energy to get the evolution aspect of this discussion beyond that.
But I do have to comment on some of the other things being said.
The Hare Krishna’s had no right to appropriate the term “Vedic” to describe their sectarian view of the creation of the world.
Their view is based on an interpretation of scriptures rooted in the Vedas, so it is one Vedic view. Despite the fact that I disagree with this view, I am rather offended at the use of the word appropriation. There is no appropriation going on here.
I’ve always had a dislike for the Hare Krishnas. Especially since they always seemed hell bent on waking me up in college by chanting and singing at 6am near the train station.
Don’t go to India the, or any part of the Islamic or Buddhist world for that matter.
i dont get ISKCON… i remember being little and being excited when i would see a hare krishna on the street. then my mom would shush me and hurry me along. i still don’t get it. are they really that bad? anyone care to elaborate? i mean they’re a bit nutty…but…i dunno i dont get it.
That’s a question for your Mom. That’s a question that I often burned to ask other people’s Mom’s, but was too polite to do. Still am.
“that bad”? there are aspects and members of Iskcon who have done terrible things–much as the Catholic Church has. (Actually, if I had to guess, I’d guess that Iskcon has done better about making amends than the Catholic Church has.) But if someone tugged their child to hurry along every time they saw someone with a crucifix on their neck walking by, well, I’d think that person was building up some powerful prejudice. What the hell does a “bit nutty” even mean?
They’re mostly Westerners who are disillusion with Christianity and come to Hinduism to “find” true religion. Unfortunately, they carry the baggage of intolerance from their prior lives, and hence turn their version of Hinduism into exactly the same thing they fled from. Their motto is: Krishna is the One and True way. All others (Ganesha, Durga worshippers) will never get Mokhsha/Nirvana. On occassion one can find HareKrishnas in Hindu temples in North America castigating the devotees for worshipping other Devatas. Most Hindus find it amusing, especially since it’s coming from whites clad in saffron.
This is an unfortunate amplification of an accurate interpretation of the Gita. It is the Gaudiya Vaishnav view that purely worshipping the Devas will neither earn you Moksha nor perfect satisfaction. Yet with all of that said there is nothign wrong with worshipping the Devas. It’s just not the tops from the Vaishnav point of view. The tops is worshipping Vishnu/Krishna/Ram.(That’s why it’s called Vaishnavism.) Now this is subtly but very importantly different from the Christian concept of decrying not worshipping Jesus. A) There is no eternal hell. B) There is eternal time. C) many lifetimes –> many more chances to try the tops. D)there are plenty of ways and modes in which Deva-worship is perfectly compatible with Krishna-bhakti.
In many Gaudiya Vaishnav temples there will be a shrine for Lord Shiva–He is the Greatest Vaishnav, and therefore most worshippable. There may be a shrine for Mother Durga–She is Vaishnavi, and therefore most worshippable. There may be a shrine for Siddi-Datta-Ganesh–a Vaishnav does not pray to Ganesh to remove material obstacles (no car puja, say)or for self desire, but does pray to remove obstacles in the path of devotion. Etc. Etc. Everyone of one of these Worshippable Entities (who span the range from elevated jiva souls to greater beings) is most respectable, most worshippable, and most dear to Krishna, and therefore most deserving of respect and honor and affection from a Vaishnav. The main principle of Gaudiya Vaishnavism is that one serves the Lord by serving those whom He loves, prioritizing by those who love Him, and those who serve those who love Him–and since He loves everyone, and everyone eventually nurtures Their love of Him, in the limit—to borrow a term from calculus—everyone takes care of and loves everyone else, all anchored around the Lord. So if I was at the “Hindu” temple when a “White guy in Saffron” came by and started spouting this, I would argue with him on his own terms (which happen to also be rather close to my terms), rather than despising him simply because of his race and my psychoanalysis of what I’ve guessed to be his childhood history.
Hmm, I have just noticed ABC’s comment. I guess I could have saved myself some time by basically endorsing it in its spirit, which would add whatever small value some of you may or may not attribute to my credibility. That may be necessary given further comments like this:
The only thing familiar and comforting there was the beautiful marble statues of the deities. Most daily religious practices seemed unfamiliar to me. I went there even on Janmashtmi, but the whole thing that day was unlike I’ve seen in temples in India. No recognizeable bhajans, no familiar ceremonies including those that happen in the Dwarkadheesh temple. Just back to back singing/chanting, a number of non-ethnic Hindus jumping up and down while ALL the desi hindus looked on in consernation upon entering before settling down to offer their personal prayers and getting the heck out of there ASAP!
Yeah, and when I went to Bangalore and saw some Ayyappa devotees it was COMPLETELY different than anything I or my (native) parents had ever seen before either. So . . .wow, South Asia and Hinduism are diverse, and you might run into something unrecognizable. Welcome to the Mutiny.
Sorry if I’m a little sarcastic, but I often feel like many desi kids and desi Americans revile Iskcon out of a sense of superiority. And an over-confidence in the extent to which they know what the real Hinduism is. This desi snobbery reminds me of the contempt of the Portugese for the Syriac churches—just b/c they hadn’t heard of Thomas the Apostle’s church in India did that mean his was not Christianity? Just b/c you ain’t familiar with my ancestral tradition, don’t freakin’ knock it. And how does a Greek regard a Greek-Orthodox Indian? Frankly, I also feel there’s an aspect of racism here. I’m sorry, but I can’t help but smell the acrid tinge of racism in the contempt and mockery and snark that is frequently heaped on any non-Brown person with an interest in originally-Brown religion. I think it’s racist to say that someone can’t convert to Hinduism and embrace it just b/c they’re white. (And another thing about the racism—THEY AREN’T ALWAYS WHITE. G-d-damn it pisses me off when people say this.) We Gaudiya Vaishnavs adore Mahaprabhu b/c of His great generosity. “Here,” He says, “here is this beeautiful gem. Take it, anyone, everyone!” That generousity is termed in terms of qualification of character and soul, not race—and to consider terming it in terms of race (or caste! or religion of birth!) is perturbing. I have seen many amazing things in my life, but perhaps most amazing is the shrugging, easy acceptance with which backwoods village Bengalis who have never left Bengal will accept that Iranians, Russians, South Africans, Afro-Brazilians, Japanese, Serbians, Mexicans, Bolivians, Venezuelans, Italians, Brits and White and Black and Chicano and Asian and Native Americans are now one of them. I didn’t pull those nationalities out of a hat, I or my immediate family has seen or talked to every single one of them, and draw some of my dearest and oldest friends from their ranks. It’s not because of the desi diaspora that I have friends and a place to crash in every corner of the world–it’s because of the Gaudiya Vaishnav diaspora. And that Gaudiya Vaishnav diaspora–for all it’s multifaceted existence now—was created by Iskcon. It would be ungrateful of me not to point out its authenticity, sincerity, and deep connectivity to tradition, both historical and living.
So yeah, there may not be very many of us Gaudiya Vaishnavs, but we ain’t any more nutty than all the other aunties–and I’m proud of the fact that we’re from all over the world.
Madurai Vivekan
Glad to know that Meera Nanda is no longer the issue here. You had initially defended her. I called her “self-hating” because of her persistent anti-Hindu attitude and I have the right to my opinion. And you do to yours.
Second, there is often a close relationship between anti-semitism and anti-zionism. The two are not identical but are frequently inter-linked. A majority of Jews in the world support the Zionist movement. This does not necessarily mean that they back the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. But it does imply support for Israel’s “right to exist”. Now that is Zionism pure and simple.One can not attack one nationalism (in this instance Zionism) while condoning all others. It was you who first referred to Zionism – not me.
Saheli – I agree with most of what you have written. However, I do think it is possible for a “religion” to be hijacked or even defined by a handful of people, irrespective of whether the vast majority of its followers hold the same beliefs or attitudes. This has happened repeatedly throughout history and continues to the present day. Iskcon stands on a solid foundation – the Vaishnava tradition – and therefore will always be meaningful. But it is also true that they have a vast bureaucracy which happens to be the public voice and public face of Iskcon. Their belief in ID thus becomes the official position of Iskcon irrespective of whether the vast majority of its adherents even care about this subject. This is not something one can completely ignore, specially since an “official” version of the truth is something that is otherwise lacking in the vedic traditions.
I wasn’t defending Iskcon’s defense of ID, nor saying that most Iskcon devotees don’t believe in ID. I’m quite sure they do, and in fact more stringently than most Gaudiya Vaishnavs. There are a lot of ways in which a few people can negatively take over an organization or family of organizations like Iskcon, and in many ways this has happened, but none of the relevant ones have to do with ID. Let’s put it this way—-this ID thing is a very small part of what Iskcon does and is not really functionally connected to a whole lot else Iskcon does. So while it might be an accurate representation of its members views, it’s not really representative of their wider schtick—not nearly on the same scale that similar vehement is of the church members who fund and defend ID.
What bothered me in this comment thread (not the post, really), is Abhi that seemed to look like this, (I exxagerate and condense for effect):
Post: Iskcon defends ID.
commenterA: That’s b/c Iskcon is nuts in all respects!
commenterB: Yeah, they’re not even Hindus.
commenterC: I always thought they were kinda freaky.
commenterD:I don’t recognize their rituals, which I am now going to talk about in a way that makes them sound strange and freaky, so therefore they must be inauthentic and use as bad evidence for overgeneralizations and bad analyses of a complex and well-developped theology that I obviously don’t understand at all. Nevermind that they are almost all exact replicas of centuries-old Gaudiya Vaishnav techniques–and there just happen not to be that many Gaudiya Vaishnavs in the diaspora, so I wouldn’t necessarily know that–I’m just going to assume they’re crazy hippies and anyone who jumps up and down during an arati singing is nuts.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
It is this–not the ID stuff, but this reflexive and easy ability to bash Iskcon for its very existence (rather than for some of it’s actual functional problems, which, honestly, very few people here could really even understand properly, judging from the level of commentary the subject routinely gets) that I find distastefully bordering the edge of racism, and this easy assumption that the unfamiliar aspects of Iskcon are inauthentic to be somewhat arroagant, and the therefore easy mockery to be somewhat personally offensive. I think we are one of the most mellow and harmonious sects around–if over-zealous means enthusiams, then yes, but that’s not what it usually means. Evolution aside (and my point is that it’s not actually that big a deal to most people or even to the organization, and should not be used as ammunition in analysis of unrelated aspects), it’s true that there is a lot of Judeo-Christian influence in Iskcon now, much of which may be problematic, but none of you have actually brought up the true symptom of that—my guess is that no regular Mutineers even know what it is or understand it. Instead almost everything you’ve brought up is a symptom of the fact that Iskcon is rooted in my old, ancestral Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition, and so the mockery of Iskcon as it’s being practiced amounts to a mocker of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, one which I think is rather unwarranted and baseless.
Look, I happen to know that there aren’t a whole lot of people in the diaspora who can trace their ancestral roots in Gaudiya Vaishnavism back as well as I can. In Vaishnavism this matters not at all—I feel bizarre and icky even bringing it up—but among diaspora narcissicists it seems to be one of the only ways one can have the authority to say–hey, this is really desi, this isn’t something the hippies made up, my great grandfather did these things before anyone even thought of coming to America. It’s a demographic accident of fate that a relatively small group sent forth an even smaller set of non-celibate representatives into the new world. Given the ease with which Mutineers like to snark up things, I would be terribly remiss not to speak up and represent, so to speak. I don’t actually like talking about this stuff online very much at all, but this is getting a little ridiculous.
Sorry, I have a sinus infection and am extremely woozy right now, so that was probably slightly incoherent, but I had to try.
Saheli, I think you may be reading too much into my comments. My issue is not with the Hare Krishna religion (which I have experienced in a positive way that I won’t be discussing here) but with one specific commenter that made a comment that I know to be an entrirely non-sensical, and a purposely false comment. If you are asking why I didn’t step in to chastize the statements of others, it is simply because I didn’t have the time to do so. I study the evoloution of life on Earth though, so there was no way I was going to let such nonsense slide on my blog. This issue always hits a nerve with me.
Abhi, that was a typo—I had very little problem with anything you said at all. There was a supposed to be a “Abhi posted this and then there was a discussion” in there.
Sigh. Sorry. I should not comment until the sudafed has kicked in.
Ok, no problem 🙂
Saheli,
Thanks for sharing your experiences. Looks like some of our comments have touched a raw nerve with a Bhaktin.
The crux of some of our comments is:
Does HK/ISKON’s support of ID in a large part come from the fact that a large number of its leaders are Christian converts who carry religious baggage over into their newly embraced faith? I think, yes.
Isn’t it true that most Hindus who are also ardent practising Vaishnavas (Gaudiya or not) do not care much about ID and are comfortable with Evolution and other scientific concepts? Yes, again.
Isn’t it true that most Hindus who adopt the ways of ISCON/HK generally tend to be more literal in their interpretation of scriptures and hence tend to support ID? I thought yes, but after reading your comments I am willing to concede that it may not be as widespread.
It’s a flame bait, and I’ll take it!
It’s got nothing to do with race. There are many White Hindus who visit temples, and most of them behave “normally”, ie, they come, they sing bhajans, prostrate before moorthis, take prasad, and leave. It’s only the white ISKON types who tend to pontificate to others, a truly Christian missionary quality. Hence, the derision is well-deserved. (Most Indian/Hindu ISKON types do not pontificate.)
M. Nam
I have no raw nerves left, I am too hopped up on codeine. Mmmm, codeine cough syrup and antibiotics, food of the gods!
Race came from this:
Most Hindus find it amusing, especially since it’s coming from whites clad in saffron.
If you agree that it has nothing to do with race, then fine. I accept it. But you did indeed bring it up. I mean, what does that especially mean anyway?
You also seem to be assuming that any White (I prefer the designator non-South Asian ) Hindu that does not prosletyze about the Devas at a “normal” Hindu temple must not be an Iskcon devotee. Do you interrogate them all to check? B/c I know many who would not so prosletyze who were, at some point, Iskcon devotees, and certainly can trace the cause of their becoming Hindus to Iskcon. (Like I said, it’s a multifaceted, fractured set of organizations now.)
The fact is, Iskcon has been immensely successful at creating permanent, deep converts with a very thorough interest in theology and scripture, and given the current composition of American society, there’s going to be a high cross section between theologically minded people and people with a strong Judeo-Christian background. So yes, Iskcon devotees have very strong Judeo-Christian backgrounds which can in turn influence their take on Gaudiya Vaishnavism.
But that’s a function of being in the west and successfully attracting converts, not a function of the all the non-racial things that make Iskcon seem so strange and unfamiliar to most of the people here. If transcendental meditation or OSHO or what have you were remotely comparable in their deep conversion rate, I think you’d see elements of Judeo-Christianity popping up in those organizations as well. (Particularly since all the Aunties scurried off with their offspring, well, yeah, Iskcon is going to be more non brown than brown, with the attendant influences.) In fact, I’m told you do anyway. The missionary quality has two parts to it. One part involves these elements–a rigorous interpretation of scripture, a desire to inspire the unengaged to engage in devotions to the Lord, an acceptance of participants regardless of race, an urgent desire to share motivated out of a sense of compassion, and a linking of that compassion to a conviction that suffering is caused by disengagement. Another part involves activiely seeking out individual subjects of attention, a desire to inspire the engaged (i.e. already religious) in particular devotions to the Lord, and a sense of urgency that does not seem informed a belief in infinite second chances.
Iskcon devotees may very well exhibit both aspects of the missionary quality. What I am saying is that the first aspect is not Occi-Anglo-Judeo-Christian. You may or may not like it, but it’s an authentic desi (Gaudiya) tradition. The second part is Occi-Anglo-Judeo-Christian. You may or may not like it, but it’s not as authentic a Gaudiya tradition.
And I still don’t see quite how the derision is so well deserved. In fact, I normally don’t see how derision is well-deserved. Derision implies a harsher degree of laughter, so completely lacking in any desire to actually get to know, understand, and be friends. Why deride anyone who’s being sincere and not unkind? Why are we always, always, always so bent on mockinng people, snarking them out, making fun of them, psychoanalyzing them, etc? It’s certainly nice to feel clever, but the use of the word derision strikes me as a warning sign that the addiction to cleverness is getting too powerful.
If, like me you made it to the bottom of this blog waiting for a conclusion, then think again…. lol
Here’s a quote from the founder of the Hare Krishna movement:
“So one has to come to the religious principle on the spiritual platform. That is real dharma. Sa vai pumsam paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhoksaje [SB 1.2.6]. It doesn’t matter what religious system you are following. Because actually religion means to abide by the orders of God. That is religion. Simply definition of religion. Just like good citizen means who abides by the state laws. He does not break the state laws. Similarly, any person, it doesn’t matter whether he is Hindu, Muslim, Christian or this or that. It doesn’t matter. If he is a devotee of the Supreme Lord, then his religion system is first class.
Generally, we have love for these material things. First of all myself, centered round my personal body, then extended in the family, then extended in the society, then extended in the community or nation. In this way we are extending. But these are all bodily concept of life. When we actually develop our love for God, that is real religion… That is first-class religion. Sa vai pumsam paro dharmah. It doesn’t matter. The result… Phalena pariciyate. Just like a businessman. It doesn’t matter what business he is doing. If he has got some money, then we say he is successful businessman. It doesn’t matter whether he is this business or that business. Similarly, it doesn’t matter what kind of religion you are following. If you love for God has enhanced, if you understand what is God, if you understand what is your relationship with God, and if you understand what is the end of life, what is the end of or the object of human life, then your life, is successful”
Hyderabad, April 18, 1974
REPLAY,AND AN email address we can submit this offer. THANK YOU: Riccardo.HOUSE FOR SELL IN RADHA KUNDA ( MATHURA )U.P. BELONG TO A FRIEND OF MINE. LOCATED IN RADHA NAGAR COLONY,(NEW RAISING BENGALI COLONY) LAND 1000 Sq. feet, HOUSE: 900 Sq Feet.BELONG TO A BENGALI NOW RESIDENT IN CALCUTTA.VERY REASONABLE PRICE. THE OVNER IS LIVING IN CALCUTTA: MOBILE num. 09836009530. IF THIS IS NOT THE CORRECT PLACE TO MAKE SUCH AN ADVERTAISMENT KINDLY GUIDE US (GIVING ANOTHER Email address belonging to ISCKON) HOW WE CAN PROMOTE THIS SELLING OF THE HOUSE IN VRAJA. ANOTHER AVAILABLE FOR RENT FULL TIME (YEARLY) IN THE SAME COLONY, LAND 5400sq. feet, house 1260+ ground flor + 600 Sq feet second floor. KINDLY HELP GIVING US A