My Letter to the Editor of Hinduism Today

[BryonMorrigan]

I received the new issue of Hinduism Today this morning and saw this in the letters to the editor:


Are Paths Many?

I've read the statement "Truth is One, Paths are Many" several times in your magazine, but I wonder if Hindus really truly believe this without any additional qualifiers. I am not a Hindu, but a Christian, and have been reading your magazine to learn more about Hinduism. Your magazine is very informative, and the best religious magazine I have read. I support your purpose of informing and inspiring Hindus worldwide and people interested in Hinduism, and in protecting and preserving your religion. By all means, be proud of your religion, educate others about it and raise up your children in your faith.
However, as a person from outside the Hindu worldview, some things that I have read in your magazine are puzzling. A writer of a letter in your April/May/June 2010 issue titled "Stop Conversion" wrote, "...Intermarriage should only be accepted if the Christian boy or girl agrees to embrace Hinduism." If Hindus truly believe "Truth is One, paths are many," without any additional qualifiers, then it really shouldn't matter what path one chooses to embrace. Why demand a conversion to Hinduism?
As I understand it, Hindus believe all scriptures are part of the One truth but belong to different yet valid paths. Do Hindus believe the Bible is wrong, in error or being misinterpreted when it says to preach the gospel to all nations?
I was appalled to read about the lawsuit by the Hindu American Foundation against the Ten Commandments display in Austin. It was heartening, however, to see that the article actually pointed out several significant and problematic differences between Christianity and Hinduism. When Christians bring up such differences they are usually labeled intolerant. However, you can only be tolerant of something you have a difference of opinion with. We can agree to disagree and don't have to resort to legal action which seems to me intolerant. If I were living in India and a similar situation existed, I would never consider bringing legal action to change a monument related to the established religious/political system.
The essence of the wording captured on the monument is taken from the Bible that Christian's believe is the holy and inspired Word of God. The article stated that this wording "directly conflicts" with and "cannot be squared" with Hindu theology.
Truth by its very nature is exclusive--exclusive of error. Do Hindus believe the Christian Bible is wrong--in error--in the way it states the Ten Commandments? I believe they do, based upon the comments from the article in your magazine. You may say that religions can contradict each other without being a problem, or they are only able to describe a part of the elephant so to speak, but this is your viewpoint that's not accepted by many in other religious faiths.
"Truth is One, paths are many." I personally don't believe this, but it doesn't mean I'm intolerant. I have friends of various religious beliefs from countries around the world, and am tolerant of what they believe. Tolerance doesn't mean agreement. If Hindus truly believe "Truth is One, paths are many" without any additional qualifiers, then it really shouldn't matter what path one chooses to follow. This would apply to their children and family as well. However, the article titled "Raising Children as Good Hindus," in your May/June/July 2005 issue, said, "The correct teaching is that Hindus believe that all religions worship the same truth, the same Supreme Being. However, this does not mean that all religions are identical and that it doesn't matter which religion you follow".
Based on this statement, it does seem to matter which religion you follow. From an outsider looking in based on reading your magazine it sounds more like, "Truth is One, paths are many, and Hinduism is definitely the best path to be followed." As a Christian I would disagree with a statement such as that, and so would many other religious faiths.
I did not write this to be argumentative, but to express the beliefs and opinions of one who shares a different worldview. I thank you again for an excellent and informative magazine that I look forward to reading more issues of in the future.
Gerald Readore
Houston, Texas

greadore _@_ airmail.net

I was so livid in reading this garbage that I just wrote a letter in response. Hopefully, it will get printed, but in case it doesn't, I'm printing it here:


I read with revulsion the letter to the editor "Are Paths Many?" where a Christian attempted to berate Hindus and Hinduism Today magazine for daring to be both Pluralist and proud of being Hindu.

At one point, he stated that he doesn't believe that "Truth is One, paths are many," and said that this does not make him intolerant. Actually, it does indeed. The concept of religious Exclusivism, the idea that one religion is correct, while all others are "false," is indeed the central point from which all religious intolerance emanates. Noted Egyptologist Jan Assmann has discussed this significantly in his scholarly works on what he terms the "Mosaic Distinction."

Belief in the validity of other religions as spiritual pathways does not mean that they are "identical," as he put it. A phrase that I have come to use as a personal motto is "The only false religions are those that believe in the existence of false religions." While not all Christians believe that their religion is the only "true" religion and all others are "false," I cannot respect that kind of intolerance any more than I can respect racism.

The writer's attempt to cleverly disguise his intolerance should not be overlooked or tolerated. He can claim he respects Hinduism and this magazine all he wants, but it is apparent that such is not the case.

And finally, in regards to his objection to the Hindu American Foundation's lawsuit in opposition to a Ten Commandments display in Texas, he states that he would never consider doing the same in India in regards to, "the established religious/political system." Obviously, the writer is under the delusion that the United States is a "Christian Nation" and that we have an "established religion," when clearly enough in our Bill of Rights is states that our government cannot make any law "respecting an establishment of religion." We are a secular country founded upon the Enlightenment ideals of Pluralism, Egalitarianism, and Tolerance...not the Theocracy that he so obviously desires.

I would hope that no one was fooled by such nonsense.

[BryonMorrigan]

I don't know why this board has a tendency to repeat sections of posts, but since I couldn't get it to format correctly, I colored all of MY statements in BLUE, so that they wouldn't get confused by those of the intolerant Christian.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakam Bryon: I'm guessing yours will not be the only letter they get. Now I'm wondering how many people on here subscribe to Hinduism Today. (I do as well.) Maybe we can discuss various articles. The newest edition is also online. I just prefer the print version.

Aum Namasivaya

[sanjaya]

Interesting. I too noticed the author's tacit assumption that the United States is a Christian nation. While I agree that this person is highly intolerant, he does have a point. This "all religions are equally valid" business is ultimately a pleasant contradiction. Fact and fiction cannot be simultaneously true. In general it may not be our place to judge others' spiritual beliefs, but we certainly can judge the results of those beliefs. On that basis, I believe that Hindus can take offense to violent religions such as Christianity, and can protest a Ten Commandments monument without being intolerant.

Again, I don't agree with the bulk of what this guy is saying. But perhaps our understanding of religious tolerance and/or pluralism is worth reexamining.

[satay]

namaste,


Now I'm wondering how many people on here subscribe to Hinduism Today. (I do as well.) Maybe we can discuss various articles. The newest edition is also online. I just prefer the print version.

Aum Namasivaya

I subscribe to HT.

[Sahasranama]

I don't agree with most of the argument in the original letter. Paths are many doesn't mean "Christianity" is a valid path too. There may be a 1000 routes to Rome, but there will be a much larger number of routes that do not lead to Rome. Christianity is one of those paths that doesn't lead anywhere.

But I do believe he has a right not to believe that paths are many. Personally, I do not see Christianity, based on the bible and the church, as a valid spiritual path. Paths are many doesn't not mean that all paths are valid. I have no problem if Christians belief that Hinduism is not a true path. Respecting another faith is something else than believing it's a true path to salvation or enlightment.

I respect Christians and Muslims who are peaceful and who do not have a desire to convert people. At the same time I do not believe that their believe in the Church, Bible, Jesus, Koran or Allah will save them from temporary damnation. Only Hindu Gods can clear the sins of the past and bestow their grace upon their devotees. Christians and Muslims cannot clear their karma going to church or mosks. Hindus can do so just by chanting the authentic names of Hindu Gods like Rama, Durga, Hanuman, Krishna, Ganesha. The worship of gods not mentioned in our Sanatana Dharma is false, but it can bestow minor results, because of the ideas of honest devotion and worship can develop in a certain person outside of Hinduism. If they get lucky, make advancements in their sadhana and do not insult the saintly people who are devoted to the Gods of Sanatana Dharma, they will be born as Hindus.

Everyone has the right to believe that their religion is the right one, even to believe that others are false. I also believe Hinduism is the right path and that Christianity is false. Completely opposite to the populistic opinion of Mahatma Gandhi or Swami Vivekananda I would say, I strongly believe that Islam, Judaism, Budhism, Jainism and Taoism, Paganism, Satanism and what not are all false religions, even though they may benefit the person following the religion in some way spiritiually or psychologically. Some I respect more than others, but that does not mean that I believe that they "also" speak of the same truth as in the many paths within Hinduism.

Hindus are cutting themselves in their feet, extenting the logic of "ekam sat, vipra bahudha vadanti" outside of Sanatana Dharma, the mantra specifically speaks of vedic gods.

[Ramakrishna]

Hindus are cutting themselves in their feet, extenting the logic of "ekam sat, vipra bahudha vadanti" outside of Sanatana Dharma, the mantra specifically speaks of vedic gods.

Namaste Sahasranama,

Does "Ekam sat, vipra bahudha vadanti" really apply only the Vedic gods? That thought had actually crossed my mind before, but from what I have seen and read in various places, I was always led to believe that it applies to other religions.

Hare Krishna

[saidevo]

namaste everyone.

I think the issue about 'one Truth many paths' is not a question of one path being right and all others false, or many paths actually leading to the same Truth.

It is a question of hierarchy about the many paths, which means that only one path leads to the Ultimate Truth in its Absolute Nature, and that all the others only lead to Related Truths, as secondary/temporary destinations. This also means that all the paths are necessary and valid in their own domains to reach the secondary destinations en route the final.

Hierarchy is perhaps the most distinctive concept in Creation. It exists in the human and divine worlds of all religions. The concept of Trinity is accepted by many religions. In Hinduism, the Trinity itself is a manifestation of the Absolute Truth and expands to a comprehensive setup of divinity from Eternity to Here. In the same way, a setup of spiritual hierarchy does exist in all the religions in the form of pontiff, clergy and laity.

If there is a hierarchy, it could only mean that there is only one thing at the top and that all other things under it are its delegates. To reach the thing at the top, the delegates must necessarily be passed through, although one may be happy with a delegate and stay there as his/her final destination.

So far as Hinduism is concerned,

• the most common path is the dharma-bhakti mArga--path of dharma and devotion, that leads a jIva--individual soul, to the svarga--heavens, but continues the cycle of reincarnation and karma.

• at the next higher level is the path of pravRtti--path of return, comprising karma and bhakti yoga, which takes a jIva to the divine worlds of its iShTa devata--preferred God-form, and frees it from the cycle of reincarnation, until the divine world itself is dissolved in mahA-pralaya.

• at the highest level is the path of nivRtti--path of no return, accomplished by jnAna yoga under the grace of God, wherein a jIva becomes a jIvan-mukta--liberated while living, and after the physical body is dropped, becomes a videha-mukta--permanently merged with Brahman, never to return through the cycle of reincarnation, whatever the time level of the cycle.

Under this ultimate setup, it is clear that the Abrhamic religions with its concept and practice of exclusivity, falls short of even the path of dharma. This is not to say that a sincere and devoted follower who believes in peaceful co-existence and follows the dharma of life cannot attain liberation. Only that such a follower attains it not because of, but in spite of the main teaching of his/her religion. And again, the liberation attained may not be the ultimate liberation.

All paths might lead to the same summit on the mountain in the physical world. But in the spiritual world, the summit is reflected in the lower rungs of the mountain, which most travellers take to be the final destination and stop there.

*****

[Alise]

Namaste (:

I don't subscribe Hinduism Today, but I read it online. And when I saw that letter I thought, why would christian read HINDUISM today and think that saying that in intermarriage children should be HINDUS is intolerant or not as torelant as says 'paths are many. Truth is one.'. After all title of magazine says everything. This magazine is about Hinduism, not just religion. These who follow Sanathana Dharma should be encourage to have Hindu family living in Western society. I think it's really hard to have your own beliefs if almost everyone else has different faith.
If this magazine would be Christian one & Christianity would be tolerant (like that would ever happen), I wouldn't think Christianity would be intolerant, if it encourages it's followers to raise children in Christianity even they would believe the same 'Paths are many, truth is one.'

Of course of all religions I can't stand christianity, I even think that evangelical christians take away american rights of free religion (as I don't live in USA). I still remember one girl saying that 'doing [insert sins according to commandments] doesn't make you worse christian than other christians. 'Cause you still believe'you are sinner, believe in Jesus as savior etc.'

Have a nice day,
~Alice

[sambya]

in respect to the original letter in HT i would like to add just one personal veiwpoint in addition to what has already been said .

saying that in order to marry a hindu , the other person must convert to hinduism too is so islamic . i have never heard this logic being applied anywhere within hinduism before and always thought that it epitomises the typical islamic intolerance !!

[sambya]

I don't agree with most of the argument in the original letter. Paths are many doesn't mean "Christianity" is a valid path too. There may be a 1000 routes to Rome, but there will be a much larger number of routes that do not lead to Rome. Christianity is one of those paths that doesn't lead anywhere.

hi sahasranama . i just want to understand your perspective a little better . exactly what ways are there to determine which paths lead to rome and which not ? someone must have walked along all of the paths before proclaiming this ? so , who is that man ?



Respecting another faith is something else than believing it's a true path to salvation or enlightment.i was thinking whether respect can really come when you are convinced that a path is wrong . what would rather come is a feeling of diplomacy -- you know its wrong and yet keep shut to be diplomatically correct and safe . that is just another version of hypocrisy !!



Only Hindu Gods can clear the sins of the past and bestow their grace upon their devotees. Christians and Muslims cannot clear their karma going to church or mosks. Hindus can do so just by chanting the authentic names of Hindu Gods like Rama, Durga, Hanuman, Krishna, Ganesha.oh ! that's new to me !!


The worship of gods not mentioned in our Sanatana Dharma is false, but it can bestow minor results, because of the ideas of honest devotion and worship can develop in a certain person outside of Hinduism.isnt this creating a paradox ? i worship and believe in a false god and yet get bestowed with minor results . and to top it all devotion can develope too ! devotion for whom ? the false god ? how does belief in false god generate devotion -- in hindu sense of the word ?





Hindus are cutting themselves in their feet, extenting the logic of "ekam sat, vipra bahudha vadanti" outside of Sanatana Dharma, the mantra specifically speaks of vedic gods.
thats also something new to me . i have never heard of this one . where is it specifically written that the sloka is to interpreted only in context of indian gods ?

[sambya]

namaste everyone.

It is a question of hierarchy about the many paths, which means that only one path leads to the Ultimate Truth in its Absolute Nature, and that all the others only lead to Related Truths, as secondary/temporary destinations. This also means that all the paths are necessary and valid in their own domains to reach the secondary destinations en route the final.

namaste saidevo . theory of many paths does mean a heirarchy and relative truth . but i would differ with you saying that a certain path leads to truth in its absolute nature .

the question is , can truth be known in its absolute nature with my physical and psychological imperfections ? shastras opine that even the gratest of nitya-mukta sages like narada coudlnt know him completely . he is infinite . its is not possible to comprehend his true nature fully due to imperfections of body .

i would quote a story from sri ramakrishna's sayings . im sorry if im qouting him a bit too often in my posts . i find his parables simple and illustrative and am also a follower of his bhavas . cant help it . hehe :)
here it goes---

" who can know god completely ? he is like a mountain of sugar crystals . we are like ants . an ant came in took a crystal back to his den and came back for another one to eat . and as he was going away he chukled to himself thinking that he would come back next time and take home the entire mountain ! only a tiny crystal of him satisfies our hunger "

i think it is a question of relativism . discovering one aspect of god . some relegions discover a little more than others , but never in its totallity .

[Sahasranama]

......

[Sahasranama]

hi sahasranama . i just want to understand your perspective a little better . exactly what ways are there to determine which paths lead to rome and which not ? someone must have walked along all of the paths before proclaiming this ? so , who is that man ?

It's a matter of accepting the vedas(āstika) or rejecting the vedas(nāstika) to know which paths are true.

i was thinking whether respect can really come when you are convinced that a path is wrong . what would rather come is a feeling of diplomacy -- you know its wrong and yet keep shut to be diplomatically correct and safe . that is just another version of hypocrisy !!

There may not be anything wrong with someone's path as long as they are peace loving and not out for conversions and sacred wars. But that doesn't mean that their faith has become the truth. Personally, I reject Christianity as a true path.

oh ! that's new to me !!

Good think I told you then. :p

The names of the Hindu gods are sacred in Hinduism. The names of Jesus and Allah are not. As an hindu you would be insulting your own gods to equate the names of Jesus or Allah with those of Durga, Krishna, Ganesha, Shiva etc.

isnt this creating a paradox ? i worship and believe in a false god and yet get bestowed with minor results . and to top it all devotion can develope too ! devotion for whom ? the false god ? how does belief in false god generate devotion -- in hindu sense of the word ?

If the devotion is solely towards the fake gods like Jesus Christ or Maria then it's worthless in the Hindu perspective. But in a rare case, if the devotion extends towards the nirguna brahman or vishva rupa, even in minor ways, like in new agy type of beliefs, that can develop into Hinduism in the next life.

thats also something new to me . i have never heard of this one . where is it specifically written that the sloka is to interpreted only in context of indian gods

People quote that mantra out of context. The mantra mentions gods like Indra, Varuna. It also mentions the word vipra which can only be given to our rishis and not to prophets of the mleccha dharmas.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam:

One way to look at various paths is to study the body language and words of the leaders. (and the adherents, but we don't get to know so easily)

In Hinduism we see happy smiling swamis and gurus and sadhus that seem to glow with some sort of inner contentment, coupled with a sense of humour. Mostly. Not always. Maybe photographers only push the button when a smile is there.

In Islam it seems we see yelling angry old men. Maybe somewhere yet in minority sects a few people look content.

In Christianity, we have a very sad looking man in the pope, crippled by his own church's controversy, and the evangelical preachers who yell fire and brimstone at you. Maybe some Franciscan monks hiding somewhere are content. I don't know, never saw one. Some more liberal pastors look happy enough, but usually they're not hell bent on conversion and exclusivism.

The Dalai Lama seems a happy man despite the politics.

These are just my mundane random observations.

Aum Namasivaya

[sambya]

hi sahasranama . i just want to understand your perspective a little better . exactly what ways are there to determine which paths lead to rome and which not ? someone must have walked along all of the paths before proclaiming this ? so , who is that man ?

It's a matter of accepting the vedas(āstika) or rejecting the vedas(nāstika) to know which paths are true.

that not the answer to my question . i accept the vedas in my own way . i wanted to know what is your method of 'acceptance' . kindly read the orignal question once more ..... im speaking of simple logic . :)


i was thinking whether respect can really come when you are convinced that a path is wrong . what would rather come is a feeling of diplomacy -- you know its wrong and yet keep shut to be diplomatically correct and safe . that is just another version of hypocrisy !!

There may not be anything wrong with someone's path as long as they are peace loving and not out for conversions and sacred wars. But that doesn't mean that their faith has become the truth. Personally, I reject Christianity as a true path.

good . now that you have used the word "personally" i guess it eliminates all confusion . you are surely entitled to think your way .

by the way , the opposite of truth is always wrong (false to be precise) .


another question . do you believe that other(since your ishta is probably krishna, judging by your posts) gods of hinduism are on the level as krishna ?

[Sahasranama]

I accept the paths within Hinduism as valid spiritual paths without judging who is right on a philosophical level. The paths outside Hinduism are nāstika by definition, because they reject the vedas. Some can still be helpful on a psychological level, but they are devoid of any religious merit.



by the way , the opposite of truth is always wrong (false to be precise) .Morally there might be nothing wrong with praying to Jesus and going to church, as long as they are not preaching about forceful conversions etc, so there's no reason to object to their faith even if I believe it's a false religion. Christianity remains a nāstika pantha.



another question . do you believe that other(since your ishta is probably krishna, judging by your posts) gods of hinduism are on the level as krishna ?
Yes, they are all one. But on an emotional level your ishta deva can stand out.

Let me ask you a few questions too. Do you believe Ma Kali is a real godess or do you believe that Jesus Christ was the only son of God born from a virgin mother and do you believe in the biblical God in heaven?

[saidevo]

namaste Sambya.

Perhaps if I change a word in my statement you have quoted, my meaning would be clearer:

This is my original statement:

It is a question of hierarchy about the many paths, which means that only one path leads to the Ultimate Truth in its Absolute Nature, and that all the others only lead to Related Truths, as secondary/temporary destinations. This also means that all the paths are necessary and valid in their own domains to reach the secondary destinations en route the final.

Let me change
"only one path leads to the Ultimate Truth in its Absolute Nature"
to
"only one path extends to the Ultimate Truth in its Absolute Nature".

I agree with you that the UT in its AN is unknowable even by the devaRishi NArada or by his father BrahmA. Even our MahAViShNu and MahAdeva are constantly in dhyAna--meditation, investigating the UT further and deeper.

• The most significant aspect of SanAtana Dharma vis-a-vis other religions (East or West) is that only this religion has given a comprehensive, logical and impersonal postulation about the UT.

• At the same time, SD has also said that the Absolute Nature of that UT is beyond the faculties of Atma-buddhi-manas-brain. I think what this means is that a jIvan-mukta who has realized his Self and thereby tasted the AN of the UT can only experience it more and more, not express it in any way.

• An ordinary sAdhaka--seeker, can adore the Gods and understand what he/she can by reading, of the lofty truths of our scriptures, but would certainly need a human guide to take as a spiritual role model. This is where the guru comes in, who could validate a sAdhaka's approach to the UT and ensure that the seeker groomed by dharma and is capable of realizing it in svAnubhava--personal experience.

• Just as we need to pass the living room and threshold of our home and then go through our street to reach the main road, the paths of jnAna is overlaid on the paths of karma and bhakti, although it extends beyond them.

‣ In the modern scenario a sAdhaka lives in, some people limit their sAdhana only within the confines of their home by niyama-anuShTAna--rigours, of dharma and bhakti.

‣ Some people are inclined to peep in at the temple in the street corner or in another road.

‣ And the are some, albeit very few, who take to the jnAna yoga of meditation on the Self, sitting at their homes. Even these people must first need to obtain chitta-shuddha--purity of mind, by following the paths of dharma and bhakti.

Yes, as sage RAmakRShNa said, who can know God completely? But then we as Hindus know that God is such an unknowable entity, and not a super human personality. This is where Hinduism raises above the other religions and gives as choices of paths groomed by dharma and paved with bhakti.

*****

[sambya]

The paths outside Hinduism are nāstika by definition, because they reject the vedas.

not all paths outside hinduism rejected the vedas . after the invasion of india by alexander in 327 B.C. he left behind many greek generals and army men to rule over the conquered territories . you would be surprised to known that most of them accepted vedic authority and some even erected garuda stambhas in their own name . now we all know that back in 327 b.c. no ritual could have been possible in india without brahmins . and errecting a garuda stambha in someones name implies that there was puja and sankalpa done by brahmins in their name . that also implies that the brahmins back then didnt object to it !

and all this from what you call pagan believers more than 2000 years back !!



Let me ask you a few questions too. Do you believe Ma Kali is a real godess or do you believe that Jesus Christ was the only son of God born from a virgin mother and do you believe in the biblical God in heaven?

haha . my maa kali is a royal lady who doesnt come out in front of outsiders . outsiders have to see her through a muslin(an expensive cloth) curtain while she sits on her throne the other side . these outsiders mistook her for a bearded jew and an ageing ruler of heavens , getting to see her partially .

so i hug them an say . "atleast you have managed to see her outline . someday you too shall come over to the other side of the curtain and sit on her lap , like i do !! :)

its just that i dont say " my mother has her doors closed for all you guys and others not born in india or of indian lineage !! "

simple , isnt it ?

[sambya]

thanks saidevo for explaining . that was all i wanted to know . god bless :)

[rcscwc]

That xian gentleman anyway attests: Truth is One [Jesus] and path is ONE. That too a narrow one. A few points and replies.

Stop conversions. Of course Hindus call for it. But a xian has hardly a complaint here. After all, they too object when a xian converts to some other faith. Come on, pope called protestants in S. America as "rapacious wolves" poaching on catholics.

Intermarriage. None of the xian church recognises a marriage as valid unless it is solemnised by xian rites. They accept inter-marriage only if the non xian partner agrees that the children are brought up as XIANS only. Why such a demand?

If Bible is wrong: He wonders if Hindus believe that bible is wrong. I think first he should clarify if he himself thinks that Gita is wrong, and then expect a reciprocal treatment. why should the xians demand a right to preach without giving this right to non xians? Any morality?

I agree with him on "it does seem to matter which religion you follow".