Recently, a podcast show was aired where the leader of a Hindu association in UK was in a discussion/debate with a Christian apologist who was claiming the superiority of Christianity and Jesus over other world religions and religious figures (here Krishna specifically). The discussion was a civil one, but I do not think that Dipen did a good job in articulating the ideas driving Hinduism that makes it distinctive. Watch the episode here:-
Unbelievable? Krishna, Christ and Hinduism debate – Ken Samples and Dipen Rajyaguru : Saturday 04 March 2017 2:30:00 pm - Premier Christian Radio
My own preliminary views on the matter that I posted in the comments might be useful to kickstart a discussion here. So here they are:-
I am a practicing Hindu. I personally found the above discussing a bit scattered in terms of content. After carefully looking at Christianity over a course of 6-7 years (I went to Bible study circle out of interest with a group of my Christian friends), I would have to say that Christianity does not stand up well against either Hinduism or Buddhism. I would mention certain basic points:-
1) No eternal Hell:-Firstly Hinduism does not believe in the concept of eternal Hell. While the concept of the ultimate state of existence, moksha, differs a bit between the schools, most agree that all beings attain it over the course of their (multiple) lifetimes.
2) No place for original sin:- Hinduism does not believe that there has been any alienation between the world and its material condition and God (Brahman). The world is not not fallen, and humans are not alienated from God. This world of shape and form retain its original nature as the aesthetic expression of creativity of Brahman (lila) and will never lose it.
3) Origin of Suffering:- Some beings, over the course of their many lifetimes, temporarily becomes too enamored with the moment-by-moment unfolding of this world and forget that they are more than changeable, mortal selves that is their outer form. This forgetting causes them to assess their condition differently than they would have if they remembered their correct nature( as part of Brahman connected to the world of shape and form as locii of creative action). Actions and decisions they then make out of this ignorance create conditions that put them out of sync with their own true selves and this disjoint is perceived as suffering.
4) Diversity of practice:- Since the problem is forgetfulness of the self and its true relationship with both the world and the transcendental reality, the solution is practices that help one remember them. There are many modes of doing this, and one can latch on to any or multiple combinations.
a)The theistic strands do this by love and worship of God or Gods (Bhakti-Yoga) who are personal manifestations of Brahman who, knowing their own correct nature, seek to aid more forgetful beings in their own path to realization. That is the nature of Gita, where Krishna instructs Arjuna in this vein. Forms of Mahayana and Pure Land Buddhism are also of this nature.
b) Meditative strands where, instead of building a loving relationship with a God, one looks within oneself through meditation and self reflection (yoga) to uncover one's true nature as Atman who is non-different from Brahman. The Upanisads encapsulate this insight while the Yoga texts describe the disciplines by which one achieves this. It is to be noted that Buddhist meditation practices are essentially of this vein though there are differences between Hindu-s and Buddhist on what is the nature of the thing that is uncovered by this. Most renouncers (sannyasins) fall in this category.
c) Analytical methods whereby one uncovers the true nature of the world and the self through rational inquiry and philosophical and scientific investigation (Anviksiki). A very very important strand of classical and medieval Hinduism, these include the logical and epistemic investigation of realist and rationalist Nyaya school, the ontology and metaphysical investigation of atomistic Vaisesika school and the investigation of language and meaning by Mimansa school. An Indian Hindu will be practicing Anviksiki if he is in an academic discipline and his/her toil and effort in uncovering philosophical, mathematical, linguistic or mathematical knowledge would ideally be part of his yoga within Hinduism.
d) Uncovering oneself through acting in the world (Karma-Yoga). Emphasized in the Gita, this method of how to act in the world so that it produces fruits of enlightenment is the subject matter of dharma and constitute the largest fraction of Hindu texts. They span principles of ethical action(the epic literature, the Dharmashastras), principles of politics and wealth acquisition (Arthshastra, Shantiparva in Mahabharata etc.) principles of cultural refinement, art and aesthetic (Natyashastra) and principles of lovemaking, family duties and filial relationships (Grihya-sutras, Kama-sutra etc.) While the principles are fixed, their application in the world changes as conditions of the world change. Hence texts in this subcategory continues to written in every age by the masters. Thus, the writings of Gandhi form as much a part of Dharmashastra texts as more ancient writings.
While individuals and schools focus on different aspects of the four categories of enlightenment activities discussed above. However, a dharmic society as a whole is expected to pay equal emphasis in all four, and it is believed that all beings participate in all of the above through their multiple lifetimes.
That's an incomplete gist. The corpus of texts and associated disciplines is so vast that no Hindu is expected to know or master all. So no Hindu can present a complete picture and one needs to talk to many to get a sense of the ecosystem of the Hindu worldview.
Comments? Impressions?
Unbelievable? Krishna, Christ and Hinduism debate – Ken Samples and Dipen Rajyaguru : Saturday 04 March 2017 2:30:00 pm - Premier Christian Radio
My own preliminary views on the matter that I posted in the comments might be useful to kickstart a discussion here. So here they are:-
I am a practicing Hindu. I personally found the above discussing a bit scattered in terms of content. After carefully looking at Christianity over a course of 6-7 years (I went to Bible study circle out of interest with a group of my Christian friends), I would have to say that Christianity does not stand up well against either Hinduism or Buddhism. I would mention certain basic points:-
1) No eternal Hell:-Firstly Hinduism does not believe in the concept of eternal Hell. While the concept of the ultimate state of existence, moksha, differs a bit between the schools, most agree that all beings attain it over the course of their (multiple) lifetimes.
2) No place for original sin:- Hinduism does not believe that there has been any alienation between the world and its material condition and God (Brahman). The world is not not fallen, and humans are not alienated from God. This world of shape and form retain its original nature as the aesthetic expression of creativity of Brahman (lila) and will never lose it.
3) Origin of Suffering:- Some beings, over the course of their many lifetimes, temporarily becomes too enamored with the moment-by-moment unfolding of this world and forget that they are more than changeable, mortal selves that is their outer form. This forgetting causes them to assess their condition differently than they would have if they remembered their correct nature( as part of Brahman connected to the world of shape and form as locii of creative action). Actions and decisions they then make out of this ignorance create conditions that put them out of sync with their own true selves and this disjoint is perceived as suffering.
4) Diversity of practice:- Since the problem is forgetfulness of the self and its true relationship with both the world and the transcendental reality, the solution is practices that help one remember them. There are many modes of doing this, and one can latch on to any or multiple combinations.
a)The theistic strands do this by love and worship of God or Gods (Bhakti-Yoga) who are personal manifestations of Brahman who, knowing their own correct nature, seek to aid more forgetful beings in their own path to realization. That is the nature of Gita, where Krishna instructs Arjuna in this vein. Forms of Mahayana and Pure Land Buddhism are also of this nature.
b) Meditative strands where, instead of building a loving relationship with a God, one looks within oneself through meditation and self reflection (yoga) to uncover one's true nature as Atman who is non-different from Brahman. The Upanisads encapsulate this insight while the Yoga texts describe the disciplines by which one achieves this. It is to be noted that Buddhist meditation practices are essentially of this vein though there are differences between Hindu-s and Buddhist on what is the nature of the thing that is uncovered by this. Most renouncers (sannyasins) fall in this category.
c) Analytical methods whereby one uncovers the true nature of the world and the self through rational inquiry and philosophical and scientific investigation (Anviksiki). A very very important strand of classical and medieval Hinduism, these include the logical and epistemic investigation of realist and rationalist Nyaya school, the ontology and metaphysical investigation of atomistic Vaisesika school and the investigation of language and meaning by Mimansa school. An Indian Hindu will be practicing Anviksiki if he is in an academic discipline and his/her toil and effort in uncovering philosophical, mathematical, linguistic or mathematical knowledge would ideally be part of his yoga within Hinduism.
d) Uncovering oneself through acting in the world (Karma-Yoga). Emphasized in the Gita, this method of how to act in the world so that it produces fruits of enlightenment is the subject matter of dharma and constitute the largest fraction of Hindu texts. They span principles of ethical action(the epic literature, the Dharmashastras), principles of politics and wealth acquisition (Arthshastra, Shantiparva in Mahabharata etc.) principles of cultural refinement, art and aesthetic (Natyashastra) and principles of lovemaking, family duties and filial relationships (Grihya-sutras, Kama-sutra etc.) While the principles are fixed, their application in the world changes as conditions of the world change. Hence texts in this subcategory continues to written in every age by the masters. Thus, the writings of Gandhi form as much a part of Dharmashastra texts as more ancient writings.
While individuals and schools focus on different aspects of the four categories of enlightenment activities discussed above. However, a dharmic society as a whole is expected to pay equal emphasis in all four, and it is believed that all beings participate in all of the above through their multiple lifetimes.
That's an incomplete gist. The corpus of texts and associated disciplines is so vast that no Hindu is expected to know or master all. So no Hindu can present a complete picture and one needs to talk to many to get a sense of the ecosystem of the Hindu worldview.
Comments? Impressions?
