5th February, 2010. http://vigilonline.com/
Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha heading the way of Gandhi’s INC
Siddhis like milestones must fall by the wayside
After his trouncing defeat on the battle-field by Sage Vasistha in a war in which Viswamitra lost his 100 sons, a vastly chastened Viswamitra was forced to acknowledge that his kshatriyatej was no match for Vasistha’s brahmatej. Overawed by the powers unleashed upon him by Sage Vasistha’s brahmadand and no longer content with being a rishi or even a rajarishi, Viswamitra with the fire of anger and vengeance burning in his heart and mind, resolved to become a brahmarishi like Vasistha so that he too could possess the matchless brahmadand.
Viswamitra, it was clear, had a long, long way to go before he could get his hands on brahmadand. Rajiv Malhotra should read the Srimadvalmikiya Ramayan to know that brahmadand, the physical siddhi could be wielded only by a brahmarishi, a person with brahmatej. The status of brahmarishi was not about siddhis or mind over body but dharma over mind and body, gyan and vigyan. So much for moral-neutral science or siddhi!
Every Hindu thoughtlessly propagating Rajiv Malhotra’s defence of Nityananda must read Sarga 22, 27 and 55-65 from the Balakandam of Srimadvalmikiya Ramayan (Gita press, Gorakhpur edition) to understand why Malhotra’s treatise on how the world should view Nityanada’s sex videos, is both immoral and subversive.
Sarga 22 describes how brahmarishi Viswamitra initiated Srirama and Lakshmana into the bala and atibala mantras; Sarga 27 describes brahmarishi Viswamitra transferring all weapons of war under his control and in a dormant state within his mind from then on to reside in Srirama’s mind under his control. While Sarga22 says Lakshmana too was initiated into the bala–atibala mantras, Sarga 27 makes no mention of Lakshmana in the ritual where Viswamitra transfers all weapons to Srirama. The omission is significant and more on this in just a while.
Rajiv Malhotra’s amazing defence of Nityananda’s conduct would merit no attention from this writer except for the fact that Malhotra makes reference to HDAS in this defence document with a casualness which deserves scrutiny. As pointed out in the earlier column on the same issue, the writer had observed that Nityananda’s peccadilloes are of little interest to the writer and merited attention only because of his relationship to GFCH and because of GFCH’s undesirable link to HDAS via Pujya Swami Dayananda Saraswati who is a part of both.
At the heart of the matter is the undeniable truth that Nityananda had sex with a lady who he himself accepted, was living in the ashram to ‘serve’ him. Gandhi too referred to the women in his ashram with whom he conducted the completely un-Hindu experiments in brahmacharya as women who ‘served’ him.
Important men and women in the INC and Gandhi’s close associates and colleagues outside the INC knew of his terrible experiments using women in his ashram and yet chose not to dislodge him as the unchallenged and unquestioned leader of the INC for fear of weakening the INC vis a vis the ascendant Jinnah and Muslim League. The Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha has the dharmic responsibility to Hindu bhaktas across sampradayas to make Nityananda accountable for his actions without fear of destabilizing or weakening Hindu society in these extremely trying times.
The vulnerability of exposure is minimal compared to the destruction which will be caused by complicit or craven silence.
Rajiv Malhotra has tried to build an edifice of bogus scholarship in Nityananda’s defence which, given Malhotra’s mutually profitable association of long years with the man, seems more like an effort to minimise Nityananda’s guilt for fear of having the scandal affect his growing influence in certain circles inside India besides affecting his pretensions to be an ‘independent researcher’ with the self-arrogated authority to comment on and influence Hindu issues on Hindu bhumi.
Despite Viswamitra’s grueling and extraordinary tapasya through intense yoga and dhyana for a thousand years after his defeat at the hands of Sage Vasistha, Bhagawan Brahma refused to accept that Viswamitra was a brahmarishi and told Viswamitra that while he was a great rajarishi, he was still not worthy enough to be bestowed with the mahaprasada of being acknowledged as brahmarishi.
For good effect, and as a demonstration of the exemplary laws of karma, Bhagawan Brahma told Viswamitra that only Sage Vasistha, the object of Viswamitra’s uncontrolled greed, anger, vengeance and ambition, could bestow this grace upon him.
Rajiv Malhotra’s exercise to mitigate the effects of Nityananda’s sex scandal goes far beyond the crux of the matter and audaciously metamorphoses into a commentary on Hindu traditions. The writer is not a scholar in any sense of the term in any discipline but has enough sense to know that Malhotra’s arguments are wholly flawed and are also immoral because of the deliberate intent to dismiss the general understanding of dharma, particularly sanyasa dharma, held by ordinary Hindus of this bhumi.
Malhotra makes the following audacious arguments with supreme sangfroid which presumes these arguments and the chosen idiom cannot be challenged or faulted. He says, and the words and phrases highlighted in the excerpts from the document indicate the flawed idiom –
Gandhi used his Hind Swaraj, written in 1909, as launching pad for his political career in India. Hind Swarajwas Gandhi’s political ideology in black and white where Gandhi equated satya with ahimsa and both with love which he also called soul-force. The craven INC and brainless Hindus then and now have allowed the flawed and totally un-Hindu equations to remain.
It was this killer brew called Gandhian Satyagraha which led the Hindu nation towards vivisection in 1947. Politically-savvy Hindus cannot allow any distortion of idiom or imposition of alien paradigms in public discourse on aspects of Hindu dharma which impact upon politics of religion. This zero tolerance will include not only Malhotra-type exercises but also the Chennai/Malhotra-clique inspired HDAS resolutions.
Malhotra, like Gandhi is guilty of crafting flawed equations and flawed arguments for vested interests. He has reduced tantra to sex, dharma to narrow morality, sadhana to techniques and equated siddhis to science besides declaring that science is moral-neutral and therefore siddhis are moral-neutral too.
That science is moral-neutral is a Christian assumption where narrow morality prevails in the absence of the pervasive sense of sanctity which permeates every aspect of a Hindu’s life. In Christian theology, only the Christian god is sacred. Even his creation (including human beings), is only secular and bereft of sanctity.
If science, according to Malhotra, is only knowledge of the rules of nature or creation which is not sacred, then knowledge of science, which is the fruit of the human brain, too is bereft of all sanctity. It is therefore natural that the character of western-Christian Bacon’s science and the knowledge and use of scientific principles are both moral-neutral at best and immoral at the worst.
For Hindus, all Creation, all knowledge, both para and apara, are sacred because it is only this sense of sanctity which ensures that all knowledge is used for the greater good. A guru (he who ends darkness) therefore not only practiced dharma but also had to know dharma so that all knowledge in action, including action of the mind, was purposefully used for lokahita or the greater good. In Hindu tradition, knowledge and practice of dharma is held to be way above any narrow Christian sense of morality.
Malhotra’s flawed equations and even more flawed arguments will not only lead Hindus not rooted to traditional sampradayas and mathams astray by such motivated modern interpretations of our dharmic traditions but also seriously threaten the sanctity of the HDAS.
A chagrined Viswamitra was forced to acknowledge that evolving from rajarishi to brahmarishi did not mean performing more siddhis or more spectacular sidhdis than before as testimony of improved dexterity in use of ‘scientific principles’; the status of brahmarishi could be attained only when the bestower of the recognition was convinced about the end-use of these capabilities. What separated the brahmarishi from the rajarishi was his unflinching commitment to dharma when he used his brahmatej or brahmadand and his absolute and infallible control over mind and body.
When Bhagawan Brahma told Viswamitra that he still had a long way to go before he could become abrahmarishi, let us remember that Viswamitra, with all the yogic powers or siddhis at his command, had created another world, suspended between the earth and the heavens, for Trishanku.
The story of Trishanku is too well known to warrant repetition but it bears mention that Trishanku’s desire to ascend to pitruloka without shedding his mortal body, was adharmic; and when Viswamitra agreed to fulfill Trishanku’s desire after Vasistha and Vasistha’s sons had refused to do so, he was using the cumulative powers of yoga harnessed over thousands of years of tapasya, only to fulfill Trishanku’s adharmic wish and only as an egoistic demonstration of his hard-earned siddhis. Needless to say, Viswamitra’s adharmic conduct destroyed his siddhis and he had to start all over again.
Viswamitra’s life should set to naught Malhotra’s bizarre declaration that Hindu siddhis are moral-neutral. They can be moral-neutral or adharmic (as the writer prefers to call it) only at the risk of wantonly dissipating all yogic powers that were harnessed as a result of the dharmic anusashana and deva/guru-anugraha which went into acquiring them. When siddhis are misused or abused they also run the attendant risk of endangering the life and well-being of not only the siddha but everything that he touches.
More than anything else, misuse of siddhis or any knowledge acquired from a Guru is guru-droha and that is why Malhotra’s aphorism that siddhis are moral-neutral is in itself immoral at the very least and downright adharmic. A Guru is a wholistic entity and cannot be fragmented into parts – his knowledge, his siddhis, his character, his conduct and so on as being stand-alone features de-linked from each other. A Guru is all this together. The writer therefore charges Malhotra’s arguments as being subversive of our guru-sishya parampara.
De-linking the practice of yoga and meditation or dhyana from their ultimate goal has led us to a point where these instruments or sadhana for yogic siddhi have been made ends in themselves. Yoga anddhyana if pursued, not with the limited objective of toning the mind and body (which is a modern fad and even a necessity) but with singularity of purpose, can unleash tremendous powers of the mind and body in a yogi.
In Hindu tradition, yoga and dhyana have been and continue to be pursued only as one of several means leading to self-knowledge or spiritual fulfillment. There are several ways towards self-realization; the path of yoga is only one among them. Yoga entails dhyana, chanting and pranayama.
If teachers of yoga are sanyasis it is unimaginable that their own learning or their teaching can be indifferent to its end-use by their students. And that is why brahmarishi Viswamitra had to undertake moretapasya to become worthy of Vasistha’s recognition and also why he transferred the weapons of war that he controlled by his siddhi only to Srirama who was, in Viswamitra’s judgment purushottama or best among humans.
Viswamitra knew Lakshmana to be only a part of the whole. Ravana, Bhasmaasura and Hiranyakashipu instead of using their siddhi as a milestone on their spiritual journey, stopped their journey upon attainment of certain siddhis and made the attainment an end in itself.
It is not without reason that our rishis considered siddhis to be ‘dosha bij’, or imperfect seeds which are created as a result of yogic powers. This implies that the siddhis or the ‘dosha bij’ which come along the way must be tossed aside before they sprout and take root. Siddhis are like milestones which fall by the wayside when the seeker does not stop his journey to nurture them or worse, enjoy their powers.
There was nothing in the labyrinthine defence document to indicate that Malhotra believed the sex videos to have been manipulated or morphed. Rather, Malhotra seems to accept that it was indeed Nityananda caught in the act with a lady actor; only he is making a case for all of us to place the sex act in the context of a tantric exercise or experiment.
In March 1906 Gandhi announced his decision to observe absolute continence for life. Nityananda, at the time he is alleged to have had sexual relationship with a woman in his ashram, had already donned saffron robes indicating that he had entered sanyasashrama. When Gandhi announced that he had decided to abstain from sex, it was assumed that Gandhi had overcome his desire for sex or that such was his resolve that like Bhishmapitamaha he would remain unswerving in his resolve.
Similarly, when Nityananda had already donned the saffron and had manufactured a reputation for mastery over siddhis, it was expected that he would not be swayed by the five senses ruling his body, from the path of sanyasadharma
Gandhi, till his sudden death in January 1948, was still sleeping without clothes with women in his ashram in the pretext of conducting experiments with brahmacharya. Not that alone, he called his act a yagna. Gandhi refused to stop his experiments with brahmacharya even after being exhorted to do so by Amritlal V Thakkar (Bapa) with the clever argument that, if he gave up even one of the five principles by which he lived, it would be akin to giving up on all of them!
Malhotra, like Gandhi is offering seemingly unassailable arguments in defence of the content of the Nityananda video. Arguments proffered by both Gandhi and Malhotra deserve to be decimated with precision by political Hindus because, as this writer intends to delineate in the second part of this essay, these arguments, if not challenged and neutralised effectively and at once, will impact the way our worst enemies, Islam and the Church will henceforth deal with Hindu dharma and its custodians.
Chapter 2 of Patanjali’s Yogasutra, sutra 30 mentions the five qualities – ahimsa, satya, asteya,brahmacharya and aparigraha mandated in every teacher and seeker of yoga. Patanjali did not foresee yoga, dhyana or chanting being transformed by new-age discount sanyasis into vastly profitable, money-spinning commercial enterprises. brahmacharya was mandatory for brahmacharis or students residing in the ashram of their Guru. The Guru of course was a sanyasi and would have given up all desires related to matter.
There are four categories of sanyasis; of these the highest, vivideesha sanyasis and vidwat sanyasis alone can claim to be paramahamsa. Nityananda claimed he was a paramahamsa sanyasi. For Malhotra to even attempt to explain away a paramahamsa sanyasis’s experiments in sex with his body, is in the writer’s judgment, the most audacious act of subversion.
Gandhi’s argument that he could not give up his experiments in brahmacharya because this would be as good as giving up on the other four principles too, does not hold water. If Gandhi had to conduct these terrible experiments with women because he was not sure he had perfected his brahmacharya, the logical conclusion from Gandhi’s argument would be that his satya, ahimsa, asteya and aparigraha were imperfect too. Gandhi betrayed the trust of the nation because his mahatmahood rested on his public announcement in 1906 of continence for life. When women entered his ashram to ‘serve’ him, their families would have sent them to serve Gandhi the mahatma.
A sanyasi who lives in the ashram with his students or other sanyasis, is a vidwat or a vividisha sanyasi; he is expected to have perfected his control over mind and body because of the tremendous influence he wields over the student’s mind and thought. If the sanyasi has not attained perfect control even after claims to being paramahamsa, then the Guru who gave such an unworthy student deeksha into sanyasa is as imperfect as his sishya has proved himself to be. And that is why lineage in both Gurus and sishyas continues to remain an important index to judge worthiness.
Hindu society has the right to know Nityananda’s lineage; it is just as important for us to know who accorded him the title of paramahamsa and at what age in his life and within how many years of entering sanyasashrama? Hindu society is not obliged to accept Malhotra’s explanation that Nityananda was conducting experiments in tantra. Even if that were true, then sanyasa dharma mandated that Nityananda should have moved out of society to live in some inaccessible region with only co-seekers for company.
Gandhi’s perverse experiments with women till his death and Nitayananda’s sex videos have no dharmic explanation. People like Gandhi and Nityananda who have violated the norms prescribed by Maharishi Patanjali for seekers of brahmagyana through yoga should not aspire for leadership status in Hindu society. Hindus failed in their responsibility to hold Gandhi accountable for perverting exalted Hindu principles. We cannot fail again this time with Nityananda. We have the right to expect nothing but the best from our leaders. (To be concluded)
Mirrored at: http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1148
Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha heading the way of Gandhi’s INC – 2
Mirrored at http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1165
The Abrahamic War Doctrine
Whereas in Hindu tradition wars were fought for dharma and by dharma, wars, for the adherents of the Abrahamic religions is about annihilating or reducing to slavery the non-Christian and non-Muslim peoples and nations. Because conquest of territories and subjugation of the world is the ultimate objective of these political, One Book-war-documents masquerading as religions, the nature, purpose and methods of war are inbuilt into their One Book.
The mandate for war is inherent in these two religions of Love and Peace whose ‘only one god’, Jehovah-Yahweh or Allah is described even by his people as a jealous, angry god intolerant of competition. The Islamic war doctrine has remained unchanged since the times Prophet Mohammed began to do his own thing. Jihad was and jihad continues to be the only doctrine that Muslims use to convert the world into one geographic, borderless caliphate or Dar-ul-Islam.
Jihad, the convoluted, twisted metaphysical arguments to the contrary, is a violent, bloody and ruthless weapon of war; it is impervious to the consequences of its violence, and all destruction on the path to becoming Dar-ul-Islam is just so much justified creative destruction. Killing and being killed for Islam and in the name of Islam is the stuff jihad and Islamic martyrs or jihadis are made of. So, jihad as war doctrine is simple and straightforward.
The Christian war doctrine on the other hand is a masterpiece in camouflage; but it is only camouflage – the predator pretending to be something else to deceive the prey until the prey lets its guard down. The church, from the times Jesus decided to do his own thing, has demonstrated its ability to adapt its war strategy and weapons of war to suit the context.
The white church and Islam both believe that the last war will be fought between them; and in preparation for that final confrontation, both religions since their birth as heretic, breakaway faiths from Judaism, are racing towards strengthening their respective camps for the final showdown. Asia poses the biggest challenge to both Islam and the white church and India and China pose the biggest challenge in Asia to the two Abrahamic predators’ expansionist intent.
The core of the Christian war doctrine like the Islamic war doctrine – to annihilate every other God, religion and peoples of other faiths – remains unchanged; only the Christian war strategy is revised. The white church did not feel the need to revise its war strategy until the turn of the twentieth century. The two world wars exposed (as unintended consequence) the sheer bestiality of the white race’s war doctrine and methods of war with regard to slavery in the US, colonialism around the world and Nazism in Germany; an urgent revision of war strategy was called for.
The timing of the Second Vatican (War) Council must be seen against the backdrop of the ending of Nazism, colonialism and state-endorsed racism linked to slavery in the US. The white church and white state could no longer use slavery, inquisition, colonialism and Nazism as weapons to de-populate non-Christians. Promoting alcohol, cigarettes, compulsive meat-eating, drugs, insurgency and abnormal sex would become the new organized and high-funding de-populating non-conventional weapons of war (also called eugenics) of the white race; besides conventional warfare which would remain the method-of-last-resort.
The Church had to invent new weapons to suit the new war strategy to fight the smaller battles before the last war. Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Redemptoris Missio: On the permanent validity of the church’s missionary mandate which he issued in December 1990 is the most explicit, well-crafted, audacious and nakedly aggressive war document in contemporary times.
Pope John Paul II thumbed his nose at every post World War II political ideology governing the former colonial countries and declared that he intended to bring the world under the Vatican heel. The most powerful Protestant nation, the US did not even squeak a protest and as we shall see, placed all instruments of the state, by and by, at the service of Redemptoris Missio. This was no new alliance considering that it was this partnership between the US and the Vatican which broke up the Soviet Union and broke up Indonesia to create the Christian state of East Timor.
What Asians never realized and what Hindus never realized was that Asia was the exclusive and single-point focus of the Second Vatican War Council (1962-’65) and later of Redemptoris Missio; specifically, the Hindus of India and the Chinese Confucian civilization were the intended targets of the US and the Vatican.
Redemptoris Missio was issued in 1990 by Pope John Paul II to commemorate twenty-five years of the first war doctrine of the twentieth century – Ad Gentes which was proclaimed at the Second Vatican (War) Council. The conciliar document Ad Gentes reaffirmed to the chastened post-colonial, post-slavery, post-Nazi Christian world that the white church was not deterred by the setback to its expansionist goal and would continue to be missionary by nature with redoubled vigour.
“Missions” is the term usually given to those particular undertakings by which the heralds of the Gospel, sent out by the Church and going forth into the whole world, carry out the task of preaching the Gospel and planting the Church among peoples or groups who do not yet believe in Christ. These undertakings are brought to completion by missionary activity and are mostly exercised in certain territories recognized by the Holy See. The proper purpose of this missionary activity is evangelization, and the planting of the Church among those peoples and groups where it has not yet taken root. http://www.vatican.va
Through Ad Gentes the Vatican proclaimed that the depredations and pervasive destruction wreaked by slavery, colonialism and Nazism notwithstanding, the white church would continue to expand across the globe. In short, the Good Shepherd was reassuring his flock that the war doctrine remained intact; only the strategy would be re-worked.
The white church pushed overt war to the background and adopted covert war to capture the prey. The conciliar document Lumen Gentium made the in-your-face assertion that it was the Vatican’s mission to herd all the sheep from all nations into the sheep pen called Kingdom of God in Heaven.
It follows that though there are many nations there is but one people of God, which takes its citizens from every race, making them citizens of a kingdom which is of a heavenly rather than of an earthly nature. All the faithful, scattered though they be throughout the world, are in communion with each other in the Holy Spirit, and so, he who dwells in Rome knows that the people of India are his members“.
Since the kingdom of Christ is not of this world the Church or people of God in establishing that kingdom takes nothing away from the temporal welfare of any people. On the contrary it fosters and takes to itself, insofar as they are good, the ability, riches and customs in which the genius of each people expresses itself. Taking them to itself it purifies, strengthens, elevates and ennobles them.
This characteristic of universality which adorns the people of God is a gift from the Lord Himself. By reason of it, the Catholic Church strives constantly and with due effect to bring all humanity and all its possessions back to its source In Christ, with Him as its head and united in His Spirit. (Lumen Gentium: Dogmatic Constitution on the Church http://www.vatican.va/archive)
The Church, sent by Christ to reveal and to communicate the love of God to all men and nations, is aware that there still remains a gigantic missionary task for her to accomplish. For the Gospel message has not yet, or hardly yet, been heard by two million human beings (and their number is increasing daily), who are formed into large and distinct groups by permanent cultural ties, by ancient religious traditions, and by firm bonds of social necessity. (Read Hinduism and caste)
The Church, in order to be able to offer all of them the mystery of salvation and the life brought by God, must implant herself into these groups for the same motive which led Christ to bind Himself, in virtue of His Incarnation, to certain social and cultural conditions of those human beings among whom He dwelt.
In order that they may be able to bear more fruitful witness to Christ, let them be joined to those men by esteem and love; let them acknowledge themselves to be members of the group of men among whom they live; let them share in cultural and social life by the various undertakings and enterprises of human living; let them be familiar with their national and religious traditions; let them gladly and reverently lay bare the seeds of the Word which lie hidden among their fellows.
Even as Christ Himself searched the hearts of men, and led them to divine light, so also His disciples, profoundly penetrated by the Spirit of Christ, should show the people among whom they live, and should converse with them, that they themselves may learn by sincere and patient dialogue what treasures a generous God has distributed among the nations of the earth. But at the same time, let them try to furbish these treasures, set them free, and bring them under the dominion of God their Savior.
Let Christians labor and collaborate with others in rightly regulating the affairs of social and economic life. With special care, let them devote themselves to the education of children and young people by means of different kinds of schools, which should be considered not only as the most excellent means of forming anddeveloping Christian youth, but also as a valuable public service, especially in the developing nations, working toward the uplifting of human dignity, and toward better living conditions. Furthermore, let them take part in the strivings of those peoples who, waging war on famine, ignorance, and disease, are struggling to better their way of life and to secure peace in the world. In this activity, the faithful should be eager to offer prudent aid to projects sponsored by public and private organizations, by governments, by various Christian communities, and even by non – Christian religions. (Decree Ad Gentes: On the Mission Activity of the Church)
Every insidious evangelical cancerous cell which will be planted into the body of Hindu society has been indicated in these two documents which encapsulate the white church’s war doctrine –
White church and white trade have always walked hand in hand and the writer sees definite connection between the US/west-enforced trend towards globalization of the world economy, trade and commerce in the early years of the 1990 decade and Redemptoris Missio. The white Christian nations and the Vatican had begun a new era of partnership; the protestant churches of Europe and the rabid new-age church denominations in America would also join the fray.
The first explosive consequence of globalization was the vastly sophisticated and technologically brilliant advances in communication. Satellite channels provided the white church access into every house in every town, city and metropolis in Asia. Globalization of the economy also caused a new and intense migration of peoples of Asia to white Christian countries in numbers never before experienced in world history; foreign investment and the growing presence of foreign manufacturing industries in Asia brought more and more white Christians into these countries.
The white church saw great potential for expansion in this two-way migration of populations and fine-tuned its war doctrine and strategy to facilitate its expansionist goal. Tamil Nadu, the writers’ native state has invited all major South Korean, American and even European automobile giants for setting up production and manufacturing units for automobile and auto-ancillary parts.
Tamil Nadu is besieged by Americans, South Koreans and Germans and their presence in the guise of globalised economy, has allowed them to invite more and more of their friends, relatives and countrymen into the country on tourist visas. This Dravidian state, anti-Hindu in intent and action has never monitored the actions of this vast populace to see what they and their ‘tourist’ clan do on this soil. But the white church saw great potential in this two-way migration of peoples –
In the world of today, characterized by rapid communications, mobility of peoples, and interdependence, there is a new awareness of the fact of religious plurality. (Pontifical Council for Inter-religious dialogue, Dialogue and Proclamation, Rome 19, May 1991 http://www.vatican.va)
Not only theological changes, but changes in the world in which mission is conducted has an effect upon how we think of future challenges to the mission ad gentes. There are two such changes in the world that I would like to underscore here. The first is the advent of globalization. Although it bears a number of similarities to the imperial expansion of Europe between the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries, the globalization which arose in the final decade of the twentieth century is distinctive in the extent of its reach, the intensity of the interconnectedness it has created, the velocity with which information and capital are moved, and the impact it is having. One thing that globalization is changing (we will return to others in the final part of this presentation) is the meaning of territory and the nation-state. Because the information and capital flow made possible by communications technology, boundaries of the nation-state, which have been a staple of political economy since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, have ever decreased significance. With the flow and migration of peoples, as well as the incursion of global cultural forces on local communities, “culture” as territory has ever decreasing significance. While neither nation-state nor cultural territory will completely disappear (as was the fear in earlier stages of discussion of globalization), its significance is greatly diminished. What does this mean for a mission that defines itself as ad gentes, if the world is no longer so neatly divided into cultural and ethnic groups? Missionary institutes ad gentes have tried to redefine ad gentes as ad extra (that is, simply going out from where one is), or more recently, as ad altera (that is, to those who are made “other”). The shifting of boundaries which define “the nations” or “the other” raises questions about the conduct of mission as well as its rationale.
One must look also to the changes in the agents of mission themselves. I am referring here especially to the missionary institutes, although for a full picture, one should take into account lay missionaries, and volunteers who commit themselves to mission for shorter, specific periods of time. The mission institutes which were established in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as national mission-sending societies have experienced a decline in membership. The mean age is much higher, and new members are very few. What will that mean for their longer-term work? For those who now receive members from areas where they first went to do mission work, most of the newer members come from these one-time “mission areas” while the financial resources to support the mission ad gentes come from the original sending countries. Two other changes confront missionary institutes ad gentes in the future. In some areas where they first went to evangelize, they now find themselves part and parcel of the local Church, and as such are not really part of first evangelization any longer. For a variety of reasons, they cannot extricate themselves from these situations. A second factor is the emergence of new missionary institutes ad gentes, in countries which were until recently themselves objects of mission. What attitudes and ideas shape these missionaries as they go out from countries of Africa or from South Korea?
The Vatican admits that the presence of foreign missionaries in Asian countries as has decreased alarmingly but globalization and its add-on ‘religious pluralism’ can facilitate pushing in missionaries camouflaged as foreign investment or tourism.
Already the missionary journeys of the Apostle Paul as recounted in the Acts of the Apostles followed the trade routes and highways of the Roman Empire. It should not be surprising, then, that the upsurge of missionary activity which began with the European voyages beyond Europe in the late fifteenth century was intimately connected with the expansionist designs of Spain and Portugal, and later France, the Netherlands, and Great Britain.
The gentes to which mission is directed will be not shaped so much by territory as by how identities are being shaped and constructed in globalization. Those identities will be much more fluid. (Challenges today to Mission Ad Gentes, Robert Schreiter, C.PP.S, Catholic Theological Union, Chicago, EE.UU, 1 May, 2000
The countries and nations of Asia were asked not only to throw open their borders for white Christian market forces, they were also asked to keep the doors open for a new wave of invading Christian missions; only this time the invasion came camouflaged as contemporary international paradigm in politics and governance, wearing the fig-leaf of democracy, human rights and freedom of religion.
Sowing the seed for the bizarre notion of ‘fluid identities’ which actually means we will all be consigned into the Christian melting-pot where national identities are dismissed unless these are Christian nations united under one Christian God, Pope John Paul II made an in-your-face statement in the United Nations, where he rejected the idea of nationalism and propagated instead the vacuous and anemic ‘patriotism’.
And here we can see how important it is to safeguard the fundamental right to freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, as the cornerstones of the structure of human rights and the foundation of every truly free society. No one is permitted to suppress those rights by using coercive power to impose an answer to the mystery of man.
We need to clarify the essential difference between an unhealthy form of nationalism, which teaches contempt for other nations or cultures, and patriotism, which is a proper love of one’s country. True patriotism never seeks to advance the well-being of one’s own nation at the expense of others. For in the end, this would harm one’s own nation as well: doing wrong damages both aggressor and victim. Nationalism, in its most radical forms, is thus the antithesis of true patriotism, and today we must ensure that extreme nationalism does not continue to give rise to new forms of the aberrations of totalitarianism. (Pope John Paul II, UNGA, 5 October, 1995)
If Hindus have any sense, they must see these menacing war doctrines emanating from every important Christian capital in the world for what they are – a blueprint for Christianizing Hindu India. Realizing that migration of peoples across continents and religious frontiers gave the church the best opportunity yet for harvesting non-Christian souls it detailed the process of dialogue and proclamation.
No matter what the war strategy, this is how the white church and white nations have dealt with the target population –
This includes either rejecting Hindu nationalism and economic nationalism (swadeshi) totally or quietly backing off from previously held public positions. The favored ones in fact must facilitate the invasion and occupation of the nation by foreign nationals or their stooges, alien ideologies, religions, and political doctrines and also facilitate their prolonged stay and continuance.
There are two ways of concluding a fact – from a set of well-defined theoretical principles to detect application in real life; or to formulate theoretical principles from observation and analysis of empirical data. That the HDAS is proceeding along the path of Gandhi’s INC is a conclusion based on empirical data of how the British dealt with us between 1893 and 1947.
Madanlal Dhingra, Bhagat Singh, the Chapekar brothers and thousands of nameless Hindu nationalist kshatriyas were summarily hanged to death. The British did not have to kill all armed ksahtriyas; they only had to pick the bravest, the brightest and the most inspirational and make an example of them for those wishing to travel the same road.
Tilak and Savarkar were deported to alien lands; many thousands were jailed for years and decades without hope of release, Aurobindo, VU Chidambaram Pillai, Subramania Bharati, the Bengal Revolutionaries and other Hindu nationalist intellectuals were broken physically and mentally, reduced to abject penury and cast by the wayside. The Hindu nationalist thinker and doer were both made exemplary targets of the British government.
The church and its state power have not given up bestiality as a menacing weapon – Indonesia and Iraq have been victims of this war doctrine while Suharto, Indira Gandhi, Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic and the still spirited Radovan Karadzic and Narendra Modi attest to their methods of dealing with stubborn resisters – kill them, or remove them from political space, or persecute them relentlessly to weaken them in body and mind before the final kill.
(To be concluded)
More posts by this author:
Please follow and like us:
Co Authors :
%d bloggers like this: