Thoughts of Some Famous People on Hindu Literature and Culture

Swadeshi Nepal

 Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) American Philosopher, Unitarian, social critic, transcendentalist and writer: "In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seems puny."

"What extracts from the Vedas I have read fall on me like the light of a higher and purer luminary, which describes a loftier course through purer stratum. It rises on me like the full moon after the stars have come out, wading through some far stratum in the sky."

"In the great teaching of the Vedas, there is no touch of sectarianism. It is of all ages, climes and nationalities and is the royal road for the attainment of the Great Knowledge."

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) German writer and certainly one of the greatest philosophers of the 19th century. "From every sentence (of the Upanishads) deep, original and sublime thoughts arise, and the whole is pervaded by a high and holy and earnest spirit.... "In the whole world there is no study so beneficial and so elevating as that of the Upanishads. It has been the solace of my life -- it will be the solace of my death.

Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Physicist. In 1905 he published his theory of Relativity. Einstein said: "When I read the Bhagavad-Gita and reflect about how God created this universe everything else seems so superfluous." "We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made."

Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882) Author, essayist, lecturer, philosopher, Unitarian minister said this about the Gita: " I owed a magnificent day to the Bhagavad-Gita. It was as if an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence which in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the same questions which exercise us."

Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767- 1835) Prussian minister of education, a brilliant linguist and the founder of the science of general linguistics. He said this about Gita: "The most beautiful, perhaps the only true philosophical song existing in any known tongue ....perhaps the deepest and loftiest thing the world has to show."

Annie Wood Besant (1847-1933) George Bernand Shaw regarded her the greatest woman public speaker of her time. She said this on Hinduism : "After a study of some forty years and more of the great religions of the world, I find none so perfect, none so scientific, none so philosophical and none so spiritual than the great religion known by the name of Hinduism. "

Rudyard Kipling,(1865-1936) British writer, a Nobel Laureate in Literature, said this to Fundamental Christian Missionaries : "Now it is not good for the Christian's health to hustle the Hindu brown for the Christian riles and the Hindu smiles and weareth the Christian down ; and the end of the fight is a tombstone while with the name of the late deceased and the epitaph drear , " A fool lies here who tried to hustle the east".

Aldous Huxley (1894-1963) the English novelist and essayist, born into a family that included some of the most distinguished members of the English ruling class. "The Bhagavad-Gita is the most systematic statement of spiritual evolution of endowing value to mankind. The Gita is one of the clearest and most comprehensive summaries of the spiritual thoughts ever to have been made."

Sir Monier-Williams (1860-1888) Indologist and head of the Oxford's Boden Chair said: "The strength of Hinduism lies in its infinite adaptability to the infinite diversity of human character and human tendencies. It has its highly spiritual and abstract side suited to the philosopher, its practical to the man of the world, its aesthetic and ceremonial side attuned to the man of the poetic feeling and imagination; and its quiescent contemplative aspect that has its appeal for the man of peace and the lover of seclusion." "The Hindus were Spinozists more than 2,000 years before the advent of Spinoza, and Darwinians many centuries before Darwin and Evolutionists many centuries before the doctrine of Evolution was accepted by scientists of the present age.

J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904-1967) Scientist, a theoretical physicist and the Supervising Scientist Manhattan Project, the developer of the atomic bomb said: "Access to the Vedas is the greatest privilege this century may claim over all previous centuries." Oppenheimer described the thoughts that passed through his mind when he witnessed the first atomic test explosion. "Of a thousand suns in the sky if suddenly should burst forth the light, it would be like unto the light of that Exalted One. (Bhagvad Gita XI,12)

Dr. Carl Sagan (1934-1996) Astro-physicist, in his book "Cosmos", he says: "The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang. And there are much longer time scales still."

Paul Deussen (1845-1919) scholar of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, has observed: "Whatever may be the discoveries of the scientific mind, none can dispute the eternal truths propounded by the Upanishads. Though they may appear as riddles, the key to solving them lies in our heart and if one were to approach them with an open mind one could secure the treasure as did the Rishis of ancient times"

Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire (1694-1774) France's greatest writers and philosophers, said : " I am convinced that everything has come down to us from the banks of the Ganges, - astronomy, astrology, metempsychosis, etc." " It is very important to note that some 2,500 years ago at the least Pythagoras went from Samos to the Ganges to learn geometry...But he would certainly not have undertaken such a strange journey had the reputation of the Brahmins' science not been long established in Europe...

Are Religion Studies Prejudiced? A Look at Microsoft Encarta

Sankrant Sanu

Introduction

In this article we discuss the differences, in both approach and result, of Encarta's articles on Hinduism in comparison with the articles on some of the other major world religions in Encarta. Encarta Encyclopedia is published by Microsoft Corporation, which claims that it is the Best-selling encyclopedia brand. Encarta is widely used as a reference source in American schools. In particular, because of its widespread use amongst children, we would expect Encarta's coverage of religions to be even-handed, sensitive and unprejudiced. In a world of religious conflict, it becomes particularly important that children are given balanced viewpoints of mainstream beliefs and practices of all religions.

Unless otherwise noted, all references below are to the main content article on each of the religions in Encarta. We have used Encarta Encyclopedia 2002 (US edition) for our reference, though a casual look at Encarta 2003 suggests that the articles on the major religions have remained the same as Encarta 2002. All actual quotes are in quotation marks preceded by the name of the article in Encarta.

The Contents Page

Our study begins with the main contents page for each of the religions. In some cases, the contents page contains, in quotes, a single highlighted statement about the religion. In the 2002 version of Encarta, these quotes are present for Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism, and not for Christianity and Islam.

Judaism: The God of creation entered into a special relationship with the Jewish people at Sinai.

Buddhism: Karma consists of a person's acts and their ethical consequence.

Hinduism: Rama and Krishna are said to be avatars of Vishnu though they were originally human heroes.

Note, that the one statement that was chosen about Hinduism is that which repudiates Hindu belief, while the statements for the other two religions reflect a balanced positive or neutral stance. Notice also the use of said to be in Hinduism while the statement on Judaism is presented in the editorial voice as a presentation of fact. To understand this representation, let us draw up a hypothetical quote on Christianity to parallel the quote on Hinduism. Christianity*: Jesus Christ is said to be the Son of God though he was just a human. Irrespective of belief in the truth or falsity of this statement, or the parallel one in the case of Hinduism, when such a statement is the highlight of the commentary on a religion, it reflects a certain attitude about how the subject is approached. Let us see if this attitude continues to persist in the article on Hinduism in comparison to other religions.

Fundamental principles

In the article on Hinduism, we find the Fundamental Principles divided into four sections -- Texts, Philosophy, Gods and Worship and Ritual. We find the sequencing of ideas within this section fairly haphazard -- generally moving to specifics without laying out the general -- giving the impression of a somewhat incoherent system.

Hinduism: The canon of Hinduism is basically defined by what people do rather than what they think. Consequently, far more uniformity of behavior than of belief is found among Hindus, although very few practices or beliefs are shared by all. A few usages are observed by almost all Hindus: reverence for Brahmans and cows; abstention from meat (especially beef); and marriage within the caste (jati), in the hope of producing male heirs.

In doing so, the author takes the richness and diversity of Hindu thought and tries to approach it from the point of view of an orthodox church defining a single canon. Failing to find the canon or articulate the underlying worldview of a system that allows many paths to flourish within it, the author gives up to quickly start listing mainly social practices. Let us see how the same issue is treated in Christianity.

Christianity: Any phenomenon as complex and as vital as Christianity is easier to describe historically than to define logically, but such a description does yield some insights into its continuing elements and essential characteristics. In the description of Christianity, Encarta approaches it from a point of view of humility -- the problem being of the expository limitations of the author. No such humility is visible in the description of Hinduism, where the author quickly reduces any notion of complexity to an anthropological viewpoint. Further on, we explore various examples of how the anthropological viewpoint dominates the article on Hinduism.

Dealing with contradiction

Let us see how the articles deal with supposed contradictions.

Hinduism: Although Hindus believe and do many apparently contradictory things -- contradictory not merely from one Hindu to the next, but also within the daily religious life of a single Hindu -- each individual perceives an orderly pattern that gives form and meaning to his or her own life. The article on Hinduism is very clear that there are contradictions, and highlights this aspect. The articles on Christianity and Islam are either unable to find any contradictions, or don't find them the most significant aspect of the religion to cover. In the few instances when they do, they use substantially different language to talk about these.

In Christianity, any contradictions of behavior are attributed to the limitations of individuals rather than limitations of the faith or of Christians as a generalized entity. Christianity: To a degree that those on the inside often fail to recognize, however, such a system of beliefs and values can also be described in a way that makes sense as well to an interested observer who does not, or even cannot, share their outlook.

The article on Islam does not mention any contradiction at all, but a continued refinement. Islam: Recurring debates among Islamic scholars over the nature of God have continued to refine the Islamic concepts of God's otherness and Islamic monotheism. Even when the article on Islam admits differences in contemporary practice, it puts the difficulty of these on the analytical or expository abilities of the author (difficult to identify), rather than the religion. Islam: Yet the radically different political, economic, and cultural conditions under which contemporary Muslims live make it difficult to identify what constitutes standard Islamic practice in the modern world.

The key to understanding both the diversity as well as the unity of Hinduism is neither in the search for a canon (a strongly Christian worldview), nor in the anthropology of particular practices. It is in recognizing that the philosophical foundations of Hinduism have celebrated diversity of path and individuality (which itself is a distinctive feature), while at the same time encouraging theological debates to further understanding. In the articles on Christianity and Islam the problem, if any, is usually depicted as that of the author's inability to describe rather than any contradictions. The author of Hinduism, apparently, faces very little difficulty -- she carries on with an anthropological description of practices from above -- sure that any contradiction that is found is surely in the religion itself, and not in any lack of understanding or expository ability.

Peaceful Jihad and violent Ahimsa

A further study about the difference in approach and attitude in the articles on religion can be found in the description of subtle concepts. We take two -- jihad and ahimsa, in particular, both of which may be somewhat familiar to the lay reader.

Islam: Many polemical descriptions of Islam have focused critically on the Islamic concept of jihad. Jihad, considered the sixth pillar of Islam by some Muslims, has been understood to mean holy war in these descriptions. However, the word in Arabic means "to struggle" or "to exhaust one's effort," in order to please God. Within the faith of Islam, this effort can be individual or collective, and it can apply to leading a virtuous life; helping other Muslims through charity, education, or other means; preaching Islam; and fighting to defend Muslims. Western media of the 20th century continue to focus on the militant interpretations of the concept of jihad, whereas most Muslims do not.

Hinduism: The most important tenet of Sanatana Dharma for all Hindus is ahimsa, the absence of a desire to injure, which is used to justify vegetarianism (although it does not preclude physical violence toward animals or humans, or blood sacrifices in temples). In both cases, the authors treat subtle subjects in the respective religions. In the article on Islam, the author presents a sympathetic view of Jihad, and attempts to favorably influence Western perceptions. In the article on Hinduism the author adds decidedly unfavorable editorial asides seeking to correct possibly favorable perceptions by introducing contradictions. The tone of the article again is of a higher entity looking down on lowly customs and illogical native interpretations as in (ahimsais used to justify). This is an illustration of the very different viewpoint (dare we say agenda) from which the article on Hinduism is written. While the articles on Islam and Christianity attempt to uplift the reader to a refined understanding of those religions, the article on Hinduism attempts to denigrate instead.

To understand what we mean by this let us see how Encarta would present Christianity and Islam, if it were to use the same logic and attitude as used in the article on Hinduism. Christianity*: The most important tenet of Christianity is love (although it does not preclude burning heretics and witches at the stake, the Crusades, Christian colonization and the Jewish Holocaust). Islam*: Muslims claim that Islam is a religion of peace (although it does not preclude suicide bombing or other terrorist acts).

To be really clear, we are not suggesting that such descriptions of Christianity or Islam should have been in Encarta -- they would be decidedly negative portrayals. Unfortunately, this tone of portrayal prevails in the article on Hinduism. This is, surprisingly, not the only example of the technique of negative editorial aside in the article on Hinduism. We see also:

Hinduism: Svadharma comprises the beliefs that each person is born to perform a specific job, marry a specific person, eat certain food, and beget children to do likewise and that it is better to fulfill one's own dharma than that of anyone else (even if one's own is low or reprehensible, such as that of the Harijan caste, the Untouchables, whose mere presence was once considered polluting to other castes).

A positive portrayal of Svadharma (literally Self-Dharma) would introduce it as a high statement to an individual to discover and understand their purpose and calling in the cosmos and actualize it, rather than letting it be defined by some other, like an orthodox religious hierarchy. Yet in the hands of the Encarta author it becomes an excuse for an aside on the historical practice of untouchability that is derided in contemporary mainstream Hinduism. In neither of the other two articles of the major religions, Christianity or Islam, do we find the use of the technique of the denigrating editorial aside. Indeed, the purpose of the other two articles appears to be to elevate rather than to denigrate -- and quite rightly so for a mainstream source dealing with religion.

Philosophy or Anthropology?

The article on Hinduism appears quite disjointed in its understanding of Philosophy, Anthropology, Cosmology and Mythology. Fundamental Principles leads with Anthropology. As we see below, the section on Philosophy is mostly Mythology depicting Cosmology -- the very limited coverage of the well-developed schools of Hindu philosophy is relegated to a list in the section Rise of Devotional Movements, in the topic on History. Without setting out the philosophical principles underlying beliefs and practices in Hinduism, the coverage of Gods and Rituals appears particularly bizarre. Let us see how the section on Philosophy starts.

Hinduism: Incorporated in this rich literature is a complex cosmology. Hindus believe that the universe is a great, enclosed sphere, a cosmic egg, within which are numerous concentric heavens, hells, oceans, and continents, with India at the center. They believe that time is both degenerative -- going from the golden age, or Krita Yuga, through two intermediate periods of decreasing goodness, to the present age, or Kali Yuga -- and cyclic: At the end of each Kali Yuga, the universe is destroyed by fire and flood, and a new golden age begins.

Firstly, this is not philosophy, but as the author points out, cosmology. Secondly, as a description of Hindu cosmology, it is fairly inadequate and reductive. It fails to point that there are multiple creation myths in Hindu texts. Also, as far as Hindu cosmology goes, people like notable astronomer and author, Prof. Carl Sagan, have pointed that the calculations of the age of the universe based on this cosmology works out to be fairly close to our current scientific estimates -- and (Hinduism) is the only ancient religious tradition on the Earth which talks about the right time-scale.[i] Mentioning any of this, would, of course be quite contrary to the tone of the article. Rather than presenting the creation myth as a story and presenting the hidden elements of scientific truth, the article gives a reductive description, preceded by the phrase Hindus believe.

To understand this better, let us compare it with the article in Encarta about the Biblical creation myth.

Adam and Eve: Adam and Eve, in the Bible, the first man and woman, progenitors of the human race. The biblical account of the creation of human beings occurs twice: in Genesis 1:26-27 and in Genesis 2:18-24. Marked differences in vocabulary, thought, and style between these accounts have led to the scholarly consensus that these creation stories reflect two distinct sources (see Bible: The Development of the Old Testament). In the first account, the Hebrew common noun Adam is used as a generic term for all human beings, regardless of gender; Eve is not mentioned at all. In the second account, Adam is created from the dust of the earth, whereas Eve is created from Adam's rib and given to him by God to be his wife.

The first notable difference is that of the expository technique. The latter article presents different creation accounts in the reading of Biblical texts. Note how this shifts subtly if it were preceded by Christians believe . That there are differences in the two stories in the same book could then be extrapolated, as is done in the article on Hinduism to state, Christians believe many contradictory things. Instead the article about Adam and Eve treats it as a scholarly study of text (where different accounts are found), rather than conclusive statements about Christian belief. Let us see how one would present a section on Christian Philosophy with the same approach as in the case of Hinduism.

Christianity*: Christians believe that all humans descend from one man and woman, called Adam and Eve and calculated the age of the world to be about 10,000 years. They believe also that the female Eve was created from male Adam's rib by God to be his wife (which is used to justify Christian attitudes towards women such as a historical denial of voting rights). Christians believe many contradictory things -- for example, that an all-loving, forgiving God puts human beings in everlasting Hell, if they sin without repenting in this life.

This would be a similarly reductive account presenting Christians as irrational, and failing to grasp the multiple levels of subtleties involved in understanding a religion. As we see in the description of Hinduism, this is precisely the approach of the Encarta article.

An account similar to the one in Encarta of Adam and Eve would be a neutral objective treatment of similar material in Hindu mythology, rather than a treatment that boxes-in the rich and diverse Hindu cosmology into Hindu belief. Adding the relationships to modern scientific understanding would make it a sympathetic treatment for current audiences. Instead, the Encarta article on Hinduism consistently chooses a subtle (and sometimes, not so subtle) negative portrayal.

Despite a very rich philosophical tradition, the anthropological view dominates the article on Hinduism. Both the articles on Christianity and Islam, lead instead with the philosophical ideas. Apparently the broadness of Hindu philosophical ideas Vasudeva Kutumbha (the world is a family), and the ideas of religious pluralism (many paths lead to God) that continue to guide most Hindus, find no place in the Encarta article.

Gods

Nowhere is the anthropological view more apparent than in the treatment of gods. Firstly, an inadequate attempt is made to put the idea of gods (not Gods) in proper perspective for a Western reader. The word deva in Sanskrit, is less akin to the God of Christianity, but more so to angel (a power higher than man but lesser than God). Secondly, the concepts that God is unknowable and that different deities are thus representations of different aspects (roop) of God, is glossed over. The Encarta article also completely misses the concept of the Hindu trinity -- that any Hindu child could recite -- a key idea in the presentation of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva as creator, preserver and destroyer, and their female counterparts as three aspects of the One God. That the male and the female energies co-exist in Hindu thought and the idea of God as both male and female (at the same time being beyond gender) is also missed. Having skipped all the structure, the topic of Gods is presented as a confusing curio-shop of unrelated deities and sects, complete with sensational descriptions of blood and gore.

Hinduism: Shiva embodies the apparently contradictory aspects of a god of ascetics and a god of the phallus. He is the deity of renouncers, particularly of the many Shaiva sects that imitate him: Kapalikas, who carry skulls to reenact the myth in which Shiva beheaded his father, the incestuous Brahma, and was condemned to carry the skull until he found release in Benares; Pashupatas, worshipers of Shiva Pashupati, Lord of Beasts; and Aghoris, to whom nothing is horrible, yogis who eat ordure or flesh in order to demonstrate their complete indifference to pleasure or pain. Shiva is also the deity whose phallus (linga) is the central shrine of all Shaiva temples and the personal shrine of all Shaiva householders; his priapism is said to have resulted in his castration and the subsequent worship of his severed member.

While phallus is one interpretation of linga there are others as well. Apparently the author, whose interests appear to have a limited focus, continues to find contradictions from that single point of view -- missing both other common interpretations as well as the underlying symbolisms. A disproportionate interest in the dimension of esoteric sects, phallus, skulls, flesh and ordure dominates the article and we find that practices and aspects far more prevalent and relevant to contemporary times -- like Yoga or Chakras, meditation or mantras, breath and Pranayama that are practically absent in the article.

The article continues with these descriptions, clearly showing the author's interest in particular ways of looking at Hinduism.

Hinduism: As Durga, the Unapproachable, she kills the buffalo demon Mahisha in a great battle; as Kali, the Black, she dances in a mad frenzy on the corpses of those she has slain and eaten, adorned with the still-dripping skulls and severed hands of her victims. The Goddess is also worshiped by the Shaktas, devotees of Shakti, the female power. This sect arose in the medieval period along with the Tantrists, whose esoteric ceremonies involved a black mass in which such forbidden substances as meat, fish, and wine were eaten and forbidden sexual acts were performed ritually.

In the well-embellished description of Kali, the intensity of the language speaks for itself of the Encarta's author interest in this particular area. Clearly blood and gore, erotica and exotica are of much greater interest to this particular writer than Hindu philosophy, or any of the symbolism of these ancient descriptions. Again, the article shows more interest in the portrayal of esoteric sects and ceremonies than exploring mainstream and commonplace Hindu rituals -- like saying namaste, the sacred syllable Om, lighting diyas or wearing bindis (the dot on the forehead) -- practices that are vastly more familiar to a Westerner and a Hindu child alike, none of which find a place in the Encarta article.

The article instead describes various Gods and Goddesses, particularly emphasizing the sensational, as we saw in the description of Kali above, without presenting these within the unifying coherent theme that most Hindus view these manifestations -- of different forms of One Supreme Reality, which cannot be boxed into a single set of attributes or descriptions.

As the section on Indian Philosophy on Encarta states: Most of the poems of the Veda are religious and tend to be about the activities of various gods. Yet some Vedic hymns and poems address philosophic themes such as the henotheism that is key to much Hindu theology. Henotheism is the idea that one God takes many different forms, and that although individuals may worship several different gods and goddesses, they really revere but one Supreme Being.

Has the Encarta article on Hinduism lost all keys? While there is a passing mention of this concept in the Encarta, it is, characteristically, watered down from the clearer statement above.

Hinduism: In this way Hindus have been able to reconcile their Vedantic monism (see Vedanta) with their Vedic polytheism: All the individual Hindu gods (who are said to be saguna, with attributes) are subsumed under the godhead (nirguna,without attributes), from which they all emanate.

A common Hindu saying is: As you are, so God's image appears to you -- since God is beyond images or attributes, we superimpose our own. Does Encarta's choice of subjects and descriptions in the article -- scatological and incoherent, reflect the author's own state?

Finally, let us see how the article describes Rama and Krishna, considered as incarnations of God (as Vishnu).

Hinduism:  Krishna (hero of the Mahabharata and the Bhagavata-Purana), both of whom are said to be avatars of Vishnu, although they were originally human heroes.

The article appears to speak with the certainty of divine knowledge! Let us see how a similar issue, the divinity of Jesus is treated in the article on Christianity; Christianity: The ultimate mystery of the universe, called by many different names in various religions, was called Father in the sayings of Jesus, and Christians therefore call Jesus himself Son of God. At the very least, there was in his language and life an intimacy with God and an immediacy of access to God, as well as the promise that, through all that Christ was and did, his followers might share in the life of the Father in heaven and might themselves become children of God.

We note both the subtlety of thought and the sensitivity of expression in description, versus the heavy-handed certainty by which the article on Hinduism speaks, of happenings and events further back in time than the historical Jesus. Is this certainty born out of knowledge of fact, or simply a disregard for the corresponding religious sentiment?

More blood and animal sacrifice

The presentation of Gods is not the only place in the article that Encarta is interested in gory descriptions -- of blood, skulls, ordure and the like. Starting from the concept of ahimsa (which refers to blood sacrifices) to the celebration of the Hindu festival of Holi, this point of view permeates the article. In fact, the Encarta article on Hinduism has more references to blood and animal sacrifices than it does to Yoga. Yoga, arguably the most popular contribution of Hinduism to the West is mentioned in two places -- both insignificant, as we see later on. Other than the quote above, let us see where else Encarta mentions themes related to blood or animal sacrifice in the article on Hinduism.

Hinduism: Holi, the spring carnival, when members of all castes mingle and let down their hair, sprinkling one another with cascades of red powder and liquid, symbolic of the blood that was probably used in past centuries.

Let us start with factual accuracies -- Holi, as any Hindu knows, is celebrated with all the colors of spring -- green, yellow, red, pink, not just red as the article states. It celebrates the coming of spring with a riot of color. Factual details aside, for Encarta the suggestion of cascades of red powder and liquid works well to further the theme of blood and gore prevalent in the article. This goes on in the description of Worship and Rituals. Hinduism: In many temples, particularly those sacred to goddesses (such as the Kalighat temple to Kali, in Kolkata), goats are sacrificed on special occasions. The sacrifice is often carried out by a special low-caste priest outside the bounds of the temple itself.

Similarly, the vast majority of Hindus living today have probably never seen an animal sacrifice in their life -- and many temples is certainly a gross inaccuracy. Why is this rare practice chosen when we don't find mention of commonplace practices like satsang (literally, company of truth, or good), meetings where people congregate to communally chant or read from scripture, that are orders of magnitude more prevalent? The comment on low-caste that rounds out the quote above is obligatory to keep the otherness of Hinduism on centre stage -- a technique we find employed elsewhere in the article.

It is also very worthwhile to compare this overall approach to highlighting blood and gore with the treatment of animal sacrifice in the Encarta article on Islam, a religion on which such sacrifices are obligatory that every Muslim is required to perform on Hajj (rather than a rare occurrence).

Islam: The final ritual is the slaughter of an animal (sheep, goat, cow, or camel). This is a symbolic reenactment of God's command to Ibrahim to sacrifice his son Ismail, which Ibrahim and Ismail duly accepted and were about to execute when God allowed Ibrahim to slaughter a ram in place of his son. (In the Hebrew and Christian Bibles, Abraham is called to sacrifice his son Isaac rather than Ishmael.) Most of the meat of the slaughtered animals is to be distributed to poor Muslims.

Notice how the stress is on symbolism and how the last line is used to soften the theme. We shall spare the reader a rewrite of the Islamic depiction with details of the animal's severed head and pouring blood and omitting any hint of symbolism. Would an anthropologist probing the Bible many millennia from now condemn Christians as cannibals when reading of Christ's disciples being asked to partake of Christ's blood and flesh? If approached from the point of view of the Encarta article on Hinduism, devoid of either sensitivity or an understanding of symbolism, this would probably be the case. Surprisingly, the author chooses this approach to Hinduism, which is a living contemporary tradition rather than simply an anthropological study of relics and past rituals.

These are choices in both omission and commission that are worth noting. While including exotic details and ritual the author continually misses large and commonplace topics -- like the forms of Hindu dance and music as a component of the religion, the celebration of Ram Lila -- public enactments of Ram's life common throughout the north, and major Hindu celebrations like Janamashtami (Krishna's birth), Raksha Bandhan or Onam.

Where is the real Philosophy and Yoga?

Now that we have read the description in Encarta of Aghoris, to whom nothing is horrible, yogis who eat ordure or flesh in order to demonstrate their complete indifference to pleasure or pain, we look around for the yogis we have seen or known. Unfortunately, with the concern of the Encarta article on Hinduism in looking for scatology, it completely misses the highly refined theology and practices like Raja Yoga or Hatha Yoga or Patanjali or yogic meditation. In fact, the word Yoga has exactly two occurrences in the article (other than the one description of Aghoris as yogis above):

Hinduism: Many elements of Hinduism that were not present in Vedic civilization (such as worship of the phallus and of goddesses, bathing in temple tanks, and the postures of yoga) may have been derived from the Indus civilization, however. See Indus Valley Civilization.The philosophies of Shankara and Ramanuja were developed in the context of the six great classical philosophies (darshanas) of India: the Karma Mimamsa (action investigation); the Vedanta (end of the Vedas), in which tradition the work of Shankara and Ramanuja should be placed; the Sankhya system, which describes the opposition between an inert male spiritual principle (purusha) and an active female principle of matter or nature (prakriti), subdivided into the three qualities (gunas) of goodness (sattva), passion (rajas), and darkness (tamas); the Yoga system; and the highly metaphysical systems of Vaisheshika (a kind of atomic realism) and Nyaya (logic, but of an extremely theistic nature).

The first reference serves to separate Yoga from Hinduism. In the second reference, it is buried in a list of themes, each of which is probably more significant to describe than long-winded descriptions of Kali. Note that this section which lists classical philosophies is the only significant description of these philosophies in the entire article on Hinduism -- that too not in the explicit section for Philosophy, but embedded in the Rise of Devotional Movements section of History

To be fair to Encarta, there does exist a separate article on Yoga that the article on Hinduism does not directly reference. That article states:

Yoga: As a system of practice, Yoga has from the beginning been one of the most influential features of Hinduism.

Surely, as one of the most influential features of Hinduism, Yoga merits more than a single word (with no link or reference) mention in the article on Hinduism.

In the obsession with external aspects of myth and ritual, blood and gore, the article gives very little space to either the highly developed systems of Hindu theology and philosophy or its most commonplace practices in comparison to the other articles on religion, neither does it link directly to a separate article on Hindu philosophy. In the next section we will see a surprising example of what it does choose to include as a link.

Contemporary growth of the religion

There are other differences in detail that consistently add an unsympathetic flavor to the reading on Hinduism. We will end with some examples relating to the contemporary spread of these religions.

Islam: The Muslim community comprises about 1 billion followers on all five continents, and Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the world. Today about 1 billion Muslims are spread over 40 predominantly Muslim countries and 5 continents, and their numbers are growing at a rate unmatched by that of any other religion in the world.

Both in the introduction and conclusion, the article on Islam repeats positively how Islam is growing, almost from the point of view of an evangelist.

Let use see how Encarta covers the spread of Hinduism.

Hinduism: In more recent times, numerous self-proclaimed Indian religious teachers have migrated to Europe and the United States, where they have inspired large followings. Some, such as the Hare Krishna sect founded by Bhaktivedanta, claim to base themselves on classical Hindu practices.

As is consistent with the tone of the article, notice the deprecating use of self-proclaimed and claim to, words rarely used in similar ways in the other articles. The author also fails to mention the fast growing Yoga movement (which Time magazine reported as having over 15 million practitioners in the US) and the large influence of Hindu thought on the New Age movement. The article completely misses movements like Transcendental Meditation of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and the Self-realization fellowship of Parmahansa Yogananda, or the influence on Americans of the beat generation or the 60's culture (Swami Satchitananda was called the Woodstock guru) -- people like George Harrison, Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, Mia Farrow, Madonna. To do that would bring Hinduism in, leave it less other. But, unfortunately, the quote above follows the general theme of the article -- to obscure or denigrate anything positive, and find and highlight that, which is likely to be misunderstood, failing to provide it in the proper context.

Endnote

The article on Hinduism ends with a bang -- something that can aptly demonstrate the deep-seated prejudice and even, perhaps, a political agenda. After failing to have links for yoga or Hindu philosophy in the Encarta article, at the very end Encarta discovers the power of links. Hinduism: For information on religious violence in India, See India. This is the appropriate ending for the article on Hinduism? We first surmised that this might be due to some current events (even then it would not be an appropriate ending for an academic article on Hinduism, other than motivated by considerable prejudice). But we find the same ending, for the same article, as far back as Encarta 1999! As a crosscheck, let us look at the other articles on religion. Christianity: For additional information, see articles on individual Christian denominations and biographies of those persons whose names are not followed by dates. Islam: [No link suggested at the end]

Given the thread of negativity that permeates the Encarta article on Hinduism, it comes as no surprise when, in the end, it suggests the topic of religious violence as additional reading. If the articles of Christianity and Islam were written with the same intent, this is what the last links could look like. Christianity*: For additional information about burning witches at the stake, see Witch Hunt. Islam*: For terrorist violence, see International Terrorism. Again, we do not suggest these endings be used, nor does Encarta do so. They are provided for the purpose of illustrating the underlying attitude in choosing such endings -- an attitude that pervades the article on Hinduism.

Deliberate prejudice or error?

While there is some evidence of prejudice on the part of Encarta's author on Hinduism, it is not clear whether prejudice also exists in Encarta as well. Certainly, as the ultimate editorial authority, Encarta cannot evade responsibility for the situation, at the very least in the selection of authors and editorial oversight over prejudiced treatment in a sensitive topic like religion. However, Encarta may well have, knowingly or unknowingly participated in an environment of bias. A western graduate student of Hinduism in a US university, suggests a broader prejudice: in American academia it is politically incorrect to treat Hinduism in a positive light and it is taboo to deal negatively with Islam.[iii] Certainly, the comparison of the articles on Encarta would validate this thesis. However, more study of this topic is clearly required.

Effects

We have not studied the effects of such negative portrayal of Hinduism on Hindu children growing up in America. We can speculate that derogatory mainstream portrayals of Hinduism, quite different from what they have seen or experienced first hand, would at the very least be confusing, and ultimately damaging to the self-esteem of such children. In the author's personal experience, many Hindus are reluctant to identify themselves as such publicly, even when they are practicing Hindus -- we conjecture that this may result from unconsciously accepting the negative portrayals of their religion. We find that this subject has not been studied much -- however, the one study[iv] that we found supports this possibility. There are also accounts that scholars studying Hinduism that also come out to be practicing that faith face allegations of bias apparently this is not seen to be the case when Christians or Muslims study their own faiths in the academic community (which is the general rule). Such articles in Encarta also get used by various religious fundamentalists and hate groups to label Hinduism a cult -- the Encarta article serves as a good objective reference to make their point. The interested reader can do a web search on Hinduism cult Encarta to find examples. Inaccurate, negative mainstream portrayals of a religion can ultimately only prove harmful to the community. Clearly much more work is needed to study the exact effects and consequences of such portrayals.

In this article, we compare the treatment of different religions in Encarta. We find that there are significant differences in the treatment of Hinduism vs. the treatment of Islam or Christianity in both the selection of content and the attitude displayed in the writing -- resulting in a distinctly negative portrayal of Hinduism vs. the other religions. We conjecture that the reason for this difference is related largely to the difference choices in the selection of authors -- whether they are emic or etic and their area of interest or specialization in the religion they study. We also find that Prof. Doniger, the author of the Encarta article on Hinduism is controversial within the Hindu community.

The authors of the article on Islam and Christianity have a mature and balanced viewpoint and they represent their religions in a way that the vast majority of adherents will find appropriate and positive. We commend Encarta for their choice of authors in portraying these religions in a sympathetic way. Unfortunately, the same balance and sympathy is not visible in the article on Hinduism. While Prof. Doniger is certainly free to pursue her specific areas of interest and scholarship in Hinduism, we do not believe that her article represents the mainstream of Hindu thought in both the selection of content and its interpretation, which would be appropriate for a widely read source such as Encarta.

Given that Prof. Doniger's specific interests and attitudes strongly influence the article, it would be insufficient to simply remove a few of the most glaring examples of negativism, while leaving the rest of the article unchanged. We recommend instead that an article written by someone emic to the community, who can represent Hinduism in a positive, mainstream viewpoint, promptly replace the article on Hinduism in Encarta.

We also recommend that further research be done to study the instances, causes, effects and resolutions for the prejudice in the study of Hinduism in America.

Microsoft® and Encarta® are registered trademarks of Microsoft® Corporation. Note: Unless otherwise stated, all quotes are from Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2002. © 1993-2001 Microsoft Corporation.

* These are hypothetical quotations for the purpose of illustration, not actual quotations from Encarta. These quotations are also not the views of the author who neither supports these quotations nor suggests that they be used to depict that religion in question.

[i] Prof. Carl Sagan, distinguished Cornell University astronomer, covered this in the television series Cosmos dealing with Astronomy and Scientific exploration. http://www.rediff.com/news/jan/29sagan.htm presents an interview from which this quote is taken. [ii] See, for instance, Rajiv Malhotra's, RISA Lila - 1: Wendy's Child Syndrome and associated comments. [iii] Yvette Claire Rosser, Puzzling Dimensions and Theoretical Knots in my Graduate School Research. [iv] Yvette Claire Rosser, Stereotypes in Schooling: Negative Pressures in the American Educational System.