Two approaches towards reforming Islam: the Bahai Faith and Ahmadiyya Islam.

[Vinayaka]

There is no denying that many christians and muslims have a sectarian narrow-minded outlook because their way of thinking is not tantric or mystic enough.
However, there are also many so-called hindu or buddhist type of religious folk whose outlook is just as narrow-minded and focussed more on asking for personal boons rather than on growing spiritually.

I agree, but in both cases they are small minorities. I've only met a couple of narrow-minded Hindus, and have never met a mystic orientated Christian. There are exceptions, in all cases. The early swamis who came west felt they had to adapt the teachings somewhat, else they would have no audience at all, and I think that's where most of this comes from. Swamis who stay in village India remain staunchly Hindu, for the most part. Yogananda really comes to mind. Many westerners who encounter our traditions simply cannot drop Christ, of all versions. The subconscious mind is a powerful force.

 

[paarsurrey]

Good. But what do you think of atheists, since you did suggest you think the biggest spiritual divide is atheism with theism.

Paar, another reason I don't see it this way is that I generally feel far closer in mind to atheists, than I do to Abrahamic theists, even though I'm a dharmic theist. The concept of God is so different in the two, that the dharmic faiths have room for atheism.

There is no division intended to create hatred, it is for understanding the reality and to reach it.
It is OK for me if one feels closer to the Atheism people.
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

There is no division intended to create hatred, it is for understanding the reality and to reach it.
It is OK for me if one feels closer to the Atheism people.
Regards

Atheism isn't a type of people, it's a belief. Yes. divisions aren't intended to create hatred. That might be a possible consequence from exclusivist, "I'm better than you' types of faiths, but I don't think that is the original intention. Most divisions are just a way to categrise people, much like country boundaries, race, gender, and all that. It's just a recognition that we're all very different in so many ways.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes. I think there is some long held resentment to wards both the British, and to the Indian government at the time, about false promises when they were taken away as indentured labour.

IMHO, the resentment may be because of the difficulties they faced when their rights were taken away. We did not help them. Actually, we were not in any position to help them. It was/is a dectatorship.

"Fiji is one of the rare countries in the world that officially imposes disabilities on a group that constitutes a large part of the population on the pretended basis of race. It has caused an exodus of the Indians, who until recently formed a slight majority in Fiji.

Many Indo-Fijians argue that these terms do not provide them with adequate security and have pressed for renewable 30‑year leases, while many ethnic Fijians fear that an Indo-Fijian government would erode their control over the land. The Indo-Fijian parties' major voting bloc is made up of sugarcane farmers. The farmers' main tool of influence has been their ability to galvanise widespread boycotts of the sugar industry, thereby crippling the economy."
Politics of Fiji - Wikipedia

 

[Marcion]

I agree, but in both cases they are small minorities. I've only met a couple of narrow-minded Hindus, and have never met a mystic orientated Christian. There are exceptions, in all cases. The early swamis who came west felt they had to adapt the teachings somewhat, else they would have no audience at all, and I think that's where most of this comes from. Swamis who stay in village India remain staunchly Hindu, for the most part. Yogananda really comes to mind. Many westerners who encounter our traditions simply cannot drop Christ, of all versions. The subconscious mind is a powerful force.

I have met many narrow-minded hindus, admittedly from not such a big sample of meetings. And even within my own tradition some less educated people born in India seem to be anti-christian and anti-muslim probably influenced by public opinion and the press. If my teacher/preceptor had had this same mentality, I would never have followed him. But it seems such xenophobic religious sentiments run high in present-day India like they do in the United States and the Middle East.

I don't know enough about the swami's who went to the West. What I have read I liked (of Yogananda and Aurobindo), but it did not seem very useful or profound philosophically. My own teacher is very universal in his teachings (not particularly hindu) but on the other hand there is no superficial mixing going on and he hardly ever mentions any western mystic stuff, just the odd mentioning of something from the gospel of John and something of St. Paul. The rest seems mostly connected to Indian spiritiual philosophy including Buddhist teachings.

I can imagine that it is easier for a Westerner to start performing a highly modernised type of tantric-yogic practice than it is to join an old style more culturally hindu type of movement, although I hesitate to use the term 'hindu' at all because it is unclear what is meant by that. I could e.g never have joined ISKCON or the Satya Sai Baba movement or the Catholic Church because of the type of rituals and ideas that feel irrational or "religious" to me.

Old and traditional does not mean that it is better or somehow undiluted or more genuine or indeed more spiritually effective.
It was nothing remotely christian that attracted me to my tantra-yoga path, I was raised in an anti-christian family and I have always been suspicious of religions that seem at odds with rationality and science.

 

[Vinayaka]

IMHO, the resentment may be because of the difficulties they faced when their rights were taken away. We did not help them. Actually, we were not in any position to help them. It was/is a dectatorship.

"Fiji is one of the rare countries in the world that officially imposes disabilities on a group that constitutes a large part of the population on the pretended basis of race. It has caused an exodus of the Indians, who until recently formed a slight majority in Fiji.

Many Indo-Fijians argue that these terms do not provide them with adequate security and have pressed for renewable 30‑year leases, while many ethnic Fijians fear that an Indo-Fijian government would erode their control over the land. The Indo-Fijian parties' major voting bloc is made up of sugarcane farmers. The farmers' main tool of influence has been their ability to galvanise widespread boycotts of the sugar industry, thereby crippling the economy."
Politics of Fiji - Wikipedia

Fiji politics are complicated, to say the least. In my opinion, they make for a needed relief in the general immigration of Indian origin people here in Canada. There is something lovingly simplistic about their blue collar character here, as compared to mostly professionals from India. Little wonder the two groups often don't see eye to eye that much. It's class consciousness.