Being Different

[dwai]

Well as I have said I am ignorant of India and Indian history. It does not surprise me that an academic Groupthink has ruled anthropology, culture studies or whatever else in the U.S.

 

My interest in history lay elsewhere so that's what I studied. I do think the U.S. is on it's way down in the world. In fact...very deeply down while many other countries are on the way up - China in particular but other countries as well.

 

In truth I welcome America losing its pre-eminence in the world as I have long been quite weary of American Nationalism (I'm sorry but that's exactly what American "Patriotism" is in actual practice and I could tell from Dwai's posts to me that's the category he thinks I am "subconsciously" in and I feel threatened by being 'gazed back at' ) and how it drives U.S. foreign policy, trade policy and military policy. Taobums should be glad the U.S. is not up to my sole vote on directing its future for if it was I'd shutter every single military base not in one of the 50 States, cut military contracts by 2/3rds and devote the savings to paying down the national debt and bring all troops home completely. The vacuum left by such an about-face around the world would be most interesting to see.

 

 

 

 

Anyway...it's a good book. But so far I've seen the author's arguments from other sources albeit from sources Malhotra is completely unaware of. He relies way too much on woefully uninformed Catholic and Protestant Intellectuals who have never actually practiced the Christian inner science techniques passed down within Christian monasteries and convents.

 

One of the very few current moderate religious intellectuals who DOES have intimate familiarity with the long tradition of Christian inner yogic techniques is author Karen Armstrong. She used to be a Catholic nun and in an interview admitted the reason she finally left the convent was that she was unable to achieve any success with the Catholic meditation techniques the other Nuns at the convent had. So it's clear that in the few Catholic convents that still exist in the world these inner Christian yogic techniques do survive. But the modern academic environment doesn't promote people based on practices like that. It gives tenure and recognition based on publishing research and so that's what Catholic and Protestant Intellectuals focus on (duh). That's been in place since the turn of the 20th century (and I think in the 19th century as well).

 

christian inner practices cannot be considered mainstream especially in a historical analysis of it because these have always been in the fringes and the author does reference these.

 

p.s. Who in the world gave Malhotra this idea?

 

India often strikes the Westerner as dysfunctional, defying all rational expectations and surviving only by good fortune.

 

 

 

I have never had that idea of India. My impression was always one of a country where industriousness and intellectual achievement was revered by all its inhabitants. Why else would Indians strive so hard to study the sciences (something I wish more Americans were inclined to do). India gave the world the utterly freaking brilliant mathematician Ramanujan - who re-derived over 100 years of high level mathematics in total isolation all by himself as a 12 year old boy! Some of Ramanujan's equations are so advanced they have still not been solved!

 

Surely my impression of India and Indians is not that off-the-mark from other Americans.

 

 

well you unfortunately are not representative of the general state of knowledge about india...and preconceptions and judgements are abound

Trust me, its there...and more so than not. Odds are it will change soon, with india "graduating" to first-world country status in the next 15-20 years...

[Aaron]

Yet comparatively is it not astonishing how few the practitioners of judaism are compared to those of its children - christianity and islam?

 

Why is that, or more importantly, why exactly do you think this is?

 

My point is that terming something mainstream isn't necessarily the truth and that perhaps, the author had preconceptions about Western civilization that colored his view on the actuality of it.

 

And of course that one should at least have a general knowledge of what they're criticizing, rather than one based on sound bites and a one hour lecture.

 

In that sense, I could very well defend Christianity and Islam, at least the generalities that have been pushed forth here, but I don't think that's necessary.

 

There were some great insights made in this thread, but I think the general anti-west sentiment diminishes them.

 

Aaron

[dwai]

Why is that, or more importantly, why exactly do you think this is?

 

My point is that terming something mainstream isn't necessarily the truth and that perhaps, the author had preconceptions about Western civilization that colored his view on the actuality of it.

 

And of course that one should at least have a general knowledge of what they're criticizing, rather than one based on sound bites and a one hour lecture.

 

In that sense, I could very well defend Christianity and Islam, at least the generalities that have been pushed forth here, but I don't think that's necessary.

 

There were some great insights made in this thread, but I think the general anti-west sentiment diminishes them.

 

Aaron

 

The entire book is about using a different worldview to look at the West. Since westerners live in the West, they have no choice but to use a Western worldview to self-interpret/represent...thus the need to reverse the gaze.

 

Okay, I bet you a 1000 dollars that this author knows far more about all these abrahamic traditions than you or anyone else on this forum does. You know why? Because I know the guy...I know what he knows...I know how many years of research went into this book.

You just don't like what he has to say (and that too without ever reading the book)

 

I had warned that this book would affect many western readers...I hadn't expected it to affect non-readers too...

 

The reason is that the purpose of the book is to show that there is a different perspective than the western one and when one looks at the west through that lens, it doesn't look as glamorous or glorious as is the West's self-image.

[Creation]

christian inner practices cannot be considered mainstream especially in a historical analysis of it because these have always been in the fringes and the author does reference these.

dwai,

 

Christian inner practices were not mainstream among the common people, but they were well known and practiced among the monks.

 

Was it not the same in India? What proportion of all Hindus that have ever lived actually took to the practice of yoga?

[Jetsun]

I actually think it is a book more for those in the East, for the most part the West is pretty self critical already, in my country probably too much so. Sure it is sometimes easier and useful for an outsider to see blind spots but it is more Easterners which glorify the culture than anyone else which need to reappreciate their own. In Korea for example American culture was fully embraced but in the process they lost much of their Buddhist culture which needs to be relearned as they find they still aren't happy despite material wealth. But essentially it comes down to power, people adopt whatever is most powerful, so as Eastern countries rise again they will start to assert themselves in all areas.

[3bob]

Now compare Joscelyn Godwin's talk on esoteric forms of knowledge in the West of ancient mythic high cultures with another man I greatly admire:

 

Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath on Manu (the mythic progenitor of the Human Race)

 

 

 

 

Both are focusing on forms of knowledge that are considered "unacceptable" and "unscientific" by current day Intellectuals (I'm sure Michael Shermer must be having a heart attack somewhere at Dr. Godwin giving accredited university classes on Atlantis ) But such forms of knowledge would be more acceptable in India than in the U.S. or Britain.

 

SereneBlue, I like the "Manu" video by Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath. Note: and just in case - one should not feel inferior to all the realms, time periods and great Beings that he mentions except for giving them their due respect as a "big Daddy"... for the secret in the heart of Manu is the same secret in the heart of every Being and there is no Lord over that Lord, and no Being great or small that can keep that Truth from knowing its Truth.

 

Om

Edited March 27, 2012 by 3bob

[dwai]

dwai,

 

Christian inner practices were not mainstream among the common people, but they were well known and practiced among the monks.

 

Was it not the same in India? What proportion of all Hindus that have ever lived actually took to the practice of yoga?

Almost all the dwijas over time have had yoga in some form.

The path to becoming dwija is initiation into yoga (pranayam, gayatri mantra ad associated rituals of sandhya vandanam)...

[Creation]

Almost all the dwijas over time have had yoga in some form.

The path to becoming dwija is initiation into yoga (pranayam, gayatri mantra ad associated rituals of sandhya vandanam)...

If I understand what you are saying, phrased differently it could be said that there is a strong continuity between the inner science of attaining moksha and the rites and rituals of Hinduism for the "common person".

 

Correct?

 

Whereas in Christianity, there were those pursuing spiritual perfection through various esoteric practices, but it was in some sense incidental or tangential to exoteric Christianity, and indeed was all but eliminated in the Protestant tradition.

[Birch]

SereneBlue, I like the "Manu" video by Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath. Note: and just in case - one should not feel inferior to all the realms, time periods and great Beings that he mentions except for giving them their due respect as a "big Daddy"... for the secret in the heart of Manu is the same secret in the heart of every Being and there is no Lord over that Lord, and no Being great or small that can keep that Truth from knowing its Truth.

 

Om

Reminded me of the Taoist rulers of periods and ages in Flying Star Feng Shui.

[dwai]

If I understand what you are saying, phrased differently it could be said that there is a strong continuity between the inner science of attaining moksha and the rites and rituals of Hinduism for the "common person".

 

Correct?

 

Whereas in Christianity, there were those pursuing spiritual perfection through various esoteric practices, but it was in some sense incidental or tangential to exoteric Christianity, and indeed was all but eliminated in the Protestant tradition.

Not only that, but also the "mystics" in the western context were ostracized and/or exterminated. Those in the indian context have always been revered. Since there was no theological dogma or religious central body (aka church) that had a vested interest in preventing the esoteric knowledge from becoming public...there were open initiations and freedom to spread the knowledge very organically...

[JustARandomPanda]

I know I'm resurrecting an old thread but thought about it again tonight due to a thread on a philosophy forum I'm a member of.

 

 

 

1. I do recommend the book. It's really good reading and I do like the idea of mutual respect as opposed to tolerance of other religions. I do question his exclusive focus on Christians. I suspect most Atheists (especially those who venerate Hitchens, Dennett, et.al.) would only 'tolerate' Hinduism the way they currently 'tolerate' Christianity (they sure as hell don't respect it). Any religion/spiritual tradition to the 'new Atheists' is ridiculous and scientifically unverifiable - including Hinduism. If it's unverifiable and unfalsifiable they retain the right to tolerate but not respect said religion or spiritual tradition. Aproximately 22% of Americans claim no specific religious tradition at all and a subset of that go as far as to say they are outright atheist. The next largest sect in America is Catholic (20%).

 

2. There was no discussion on 'Confucianism or Taoism gazing' (or any other ism for that matter). It is strictly and only from the point of view of India's cultural and spiritual tradition. I suppose that makes sense. No one tries to claim Confucianism is a dharmic tradition. Also, anyone expecting any 'dharma gazing' at anything other than U.S. moderate-Christians will be disappointed.

 

3. There was a moderate amount of 'gazing' at certain Enlightenment philosophers, Hegel and other Western philosophers but not as much as I would've liked to see. The dharma-gazing at those philosophers was the extent of the author's critiques of Europe. Also I believe his painting of Plato and the Greeks "know thyself" as dry intellectualism is misguided and just shows he got the bulk of his research info from the same type of philosophy profs and authors I had in University. That is - people who don't practice qigong or meditate daily and so have zero attainments in those areas and don't recognize Plato's discussion of Forms is from a man who had direct Samadhi attainment. He also believes that the vast majority of meditation practices around the world owe all their practices to Hinduism. India is The Root Source of all meditations (except on continents separated by vast oceans). He did not provide evidence for this which I would've preferred whether in the text itself or at least in copious research notes. But if anyone states other cultures also have meditation practices his reply (as in the text) that I've always seen him give is that they obviously got them from India.

 

I suppose such sparse attention given to anything other than the U.S. is because Christianity for all intents and purposes in Europe is dead. Only 5% of Western Europe considers itself actively Christian. Western Europe is profoundly secular materialist.

 

Also, it sounds like he's part of the Indian Diaspora in America. I gather he doesn't live in Europe so his critiques are focused on American Christian moderates. BTW - he never discusses American Christian Fundamentalists/Pentacostal/Evangelicals - but maybe it's cause those people don't waste their time on Interfaith dialogues nor give a rat's *ss whether any other religion's practitioners feel disrespected at being 'tolerated'. I got the persistent impression from the book he has more respect for the hardline Christian Fundies than for the Moderates.

 

4. I have been looking around the web to examine the various reactions and it does seem that Malhotra is also subject to being 'gazed back at' by his own fellow Hindus, not all of whom agree with his book (plus accusing him of sloppy research, factual errors and logical fallacies).

 

One that I appreciated is by Dr. Seshachalam Dutta. I appreciate the critiques because I simply do not know enough about Hinduism or India to be able to evaluate Malhotra's Being Different arguments. It takes an "Insider" to know another "Insider". [warning: The following blog is from a Hardline Hindu from what I can tell.]

 

SERIOUS CRITIQUE OF RAJIV MALHOTRA'S "BEING DIFFERENT" EXPOSES FLUFF, FLAWS AND FALLACIES BEWARE READERS AND ADULATORS

 

 

"Rajiv Malhotra’s argument that Hinduism is Dharma and not a religion is untenable. Hinduism is a religion with its own epistemology, soteriology, and philosophy. Dharma is the code of life as elaborated by scriptures. (dharati lokaaniti dharmah.) Also "Dhiyateevaajanyriti dharmah. Dharmo dharayati prajaah." In the context of religious life of Hindus, it refers to code of life in accordance with the scriptures, but not independent of religion. The term Hindu religion was always used by many Hindu leaders from Tilak and Aurobindo to Radhakrishnan and Gandhi."

 

 

Dr. Seshachalam also examines Malhotra's "intemperate defense" of his book (ie. he can dish it out but can't take it)

 

Intemperate Defense of “Being Different” by the Author Malhotra - Critical Analysis

 

Excerpt: "It is Malhotra who called his critiques "half baked intellectuals," "new entrants into field", called them "sour grapes" and described some as "jealous" (of his achievement presumably), although he has not published a best seller yet nor achieved the recognition of Deepak Chopra at least! He called Hindu Gurus and Acharyas "incompetent" to conduct what he mistakenly calls "purva paksha" with adversaries. At the same time he carries his own baggage that runs afoul. He is the man who defended the charlatan Nityananda, in allegations of sex scandals, describing him as a great spiritual leader and concocted the story that the latter was defamed by some Christian conspiracy. Then he called Vijaya Rajiva, his former collaborator in activism as a ‘hero’."

 

 

Here's another by

 

G.P. Srinivasan

 

Being Different with many U-turns of the author - A critique of the book

 

He dumps all the three quarrelling Abrahamic religions into one Middle Eastern basket is a naive way of dealing with them. It is like the ostrich burying its neck in the desert sand, during a sand storm hoping the storm will go away.

O. “There is problem of plenty in Indic religions”; the author dumps all Indic religions into one dharma basket again a way of dealing with them not bothering to differentiate between Vedic-theism, Vedic-atheism versus Non-Vedic Middle east religions [though considered but theistic] from Vedic point of view they are viewed as Atheistic as they do not think Vedas as their authority.

 

 

Also...I began to wonder about Malhotra himself. It seems many Hindus formerly knew him as a longtime prominent Hindu Nationalist but now see him as a turncoat against the very Hindu culture he claims he is promoting respect for.

 

Similarly, many people are now openly questioning author and writer Rajiv Malhtora for what can be perceived as his version of the u turn from exponent of the dangers that India faces, to someone who has made common cause with the self same 'enemies', with his agenda of interfaith dialogue. Some have even gone as far as to ask that he do a prayaschitta. It is time that the Hindu Samaj seriously raised the question of whether a second front is being opened up against Dharma, wittingly or unwittingly. The present writer has written articles on this u turn.

 

 

Having said (and linked to) all the above I do actually like the book and encourage others to read it. I don't think Malhotra understands Western philosophy (or rather ancient Greek philosophy) as well as he thinks but I don't really fault him for that. I'm of the firm belief the majority of University Profs and authors don't really get what Plato was about either. They see it as a philosophy and so dubbed it Platonism but I suspect for Plato it was simply a spiritual search for truth to be lived and then transmitted to students for them to replicate. He certainly had direct experience into the form realm - something only somebody with Samadhi attainments can have. I've never heard of a "muggle" (aka the average Joe Beer-Six-Pack) directly experiencing such without also consistently practicing meditation daily or some kind of meditation + qigong.

 

 

Finally...It may seem I'm being quite critical of the book but then I doubt anyone would be interested in reading a one-liner by me saying, "Hey this book is really good and worth reading". Besides...I'm a sucker for critiques of my own society/culture - especially if they hold the promise of actually using a new or little-known framework unfamiliar in the west. That's why I was kinda hoping he'd done some research on Taoism and Confucianism and included those gazes in the book but alas there was zero discussion on that front. No biggie. Probably unreasonable to expect an Indian who is not a Taoist or Confucian himself to include those 'gaze-frames'. He's Hindu although he never states in the book exactly which Hindu spiritual lineage he's of nor whom his Guru is.

 

 

Anyway...it's a good read and I definitely encourage others to check it out.

[GrandmasterP]

http://www.amazon.com/Being-Different-Rajiv-Malhotra/dp/9350291908

 

In the past few years I've been a participant (and prior to that an observer) on TTB, I've noticed a marked lack of awareness of the internal conditioning that many (well-meaning and some not so well-meaning) members have developed (as a process of being part of a socio-cultural group(s)). That by itself is not a problem, but the problem arises when these people try and employ their native "lenses" to study something that doesn't fit into that framework. Eg, Westerns studying Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism. This results in a few things:

 

a) the student learns quickly enough to let go of his/her native tendencies (intellectual, cognitive etc) and re-learns the process in the "language" of that which he/she is studying.

the student learns a particular tradition and is deeply conflicted in being able to successfully reconcile that with his/her native perspective.

c) the student learns a particular tradition (or more) and can disengage the part of their intellectual process to be able to understand the tradition but as soon as they revert back to their native system they feel conflicted and end up appropriating those portions of the "other" that they have learnt (the parts that are in coherence with their native system) while rejecting those parts that are in conflict (often at the risk of trying to eliminate the very traditions they have studied and creating/rebranding the parts of the system they think are applicable in their native culture).

 

This book is probably the best book in the past 100 years, that has clearly exposed this paradox in terms of Indian (Indic) and Western modes of thought. I would strongly recommend reading the book. While many portions of it might seem outrageous to some of you, I suspect that the process of reading and understanding what's in the book will help each and every one of you a better Daoist, a better Buddhist, a better Vedantin/Hindu (fill in the blanks as you need).

 

I hope you find it as enlightening and refreshingly honest as I did.

 

Best,

 

Dwai

...............

Not Malhotra please. He was done to death on Dharma Wheel.

Total subaltern studies clap trap from cover to cover.

Slightly racist too from a European point of view but I guess that's tit for tat.

[JustARandomPanda]

...............

Not Malhotra please. He was done to death on Dharma Wheel.

Total subaltern studies clap trap from cover to cover.

Slightly racist too from a European point of view but I guess that's tit for tat.

 

Can someone please explain what "subaltern studies" is?

 

GrandmasterP...Dwai is a Hindu too, hence his interest in spreading the book's ideas.

 

**************

 

 

Edit: Nevermind...found it on Wikipedia.

Edited October 24, 2012 by SereneBlue