On 2008-05-07, Romanise <jo****dm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 7, ?:?? am, ravimpillay <ravimpil...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> > All kinds of Sanyasis, Sadhus, of India have significant numbers of
>> > perverts among them. They do ***ually exploit vulnerable Indian young
>> > and old women.
>>
>> all kinds of christian priests and fathers also have ***ual perverts
>> among them
Given a large population - all Christians, all Hindus, you'll find good
eggs and bad eggs. As far as I understand the sanyasis are individuals,
so there's a chance you'll get bad ones. You can also get bad priests
in any religion.
The news channels here tend to paint Hinduism in a bad light at times
which may not help. I'm not sure how much I have the true picture of how
the religion works in practice in India. I only really have the local
people and how it works for them, and the relatively little knowledge
I have of the scriptures.
Maybe we can ask whether Brahmacharia, which as far as Swami Sichanada
seems to say in his writings goes as far as seeing natural body processes
as disease, is a problem. Many religions have celibate clergy. Some
may be able to do it, maybe for some it's a strain. Of course if we
start challenging that then we start asking questions like "why have
monks anyway?" which has quite complex answers.
With a church or a temple you have the hope that the clergy or pundit
is sup****ted and effectively vetted by their community, by a larger
community perhaps. The priest at my local temple has been very good,
and one thing I do like is that there is actually no pressure for me to
convert to Hinduism. My local church is evangelical, quite different in
its beliefs. It believes in the need to "Go out and win souls". To be
fair they don't try to force it on you but they really wish to convince
you.
As for this church in India making itself look like a temple. I think
it depends on how they do it and why, most im****tantly why. The Why will
shape what it does in its community. One thing I so strongly believe is
that helping others with intent only to convert them is wrong. If they are
genuinely crossing the boundary and accepting the good bits that Hinduism
has then great. If they are doing it because to them the only thing that
matters is "winning souls" no matter how then that is not great.
Then again it would be isolated. It would presumably serve those that
accept it well. As long as it doesn't cause difficulty. Is Hindu wor****p
of Christ much different to Hindu wor****p of, say, Swami Narayan? As
long as you keep some basic understandings including that other people
have other ways which are also valid for them?
I wish people would realise that in the end the actual teachings of
the major religions are so similar. I've been given a booklet by my
local church, "Newness of Life" by John Eddison, with its readings and
teachings and in the readings I can see so much of what I've learned from
Hinduism and Buddhism. I can almost draw parallels with other scripture -
maybe better if I knew all the other scripture better. I can certainly
_easily_ relate the readings so far to Hindu or Buddhist concepts.
The only thing that gets me is this insistence on the idea that you
_have_ to be Christian to be "saved". The commentary in the book also
uses this interpretation. It seems that Christianity can work well.
The teachings are there, but there's this additional stuff. Generalise
it a bit and you get something quite nice.
- Richard
--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard dot Corfield at gmail dot com
_/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/ _/ _/ Time is a one way street,
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ except in the Twilight Zone
|
