Upon reading Sat Maharaj's article headed "Prophetic faiths vs Hinduism" (December 24), I shook my head sadly at the shallow analysis and blatant falsehoods regarding Christianity. What he fails to realise is that Judeo-Christian perspective is derived principally from two factors:
�2 That man is inherently limited in his ability to appreciate God. n That to properly appreciate an objective aspect of the Supreme Being, God must reveal Himself to man. Underlying the distinction between Christianity and Vedism (allow me to call Hinduism by its proper name) is the concept of the nature of reality.
This interpretation of reality is centred around whether an objective reality exists that can be appreciated by the human senses and mind, or if everything is illusion (which is termed "maya" in the Vedic tradition). Atheists face the same problem along the lines of whether moral absolutes exist. Both proponents of Vedism and atheists eventually retreat to subjectivity to protect their positions when the existence of an objective reality cannot be denied...the fact that people can communicate means that there is something with inherent meaning in itself that they can refer to and understand. This is basic epistemology.
Accordingly the Bible records a history of experiences wherein a being with supernatural power intervened in the affairs of humanity, a being that revealed itself to individuals and groups and that first identified itself to a nation that was enslaved in the name-symbol of YHWH–the "I AM" which means "the One that always was, always is, and always will be." And this being did not talk to a few men, but to a whole population of about two million people. The method by which this being delivered that nation from slavery left no doubt that it was not a series of coincidental natural disasters by which the Egyptian empire was forced to let the Israelites go.
Intervention by this being continued through the course of history and the revelation of the nature of this being continues to this day through the gospel. God has no doubt revealed himself to all nations at some stage of their history: we see in Genesis 14:18 that a priest of "God Most High" existed in Salem and was not part of Abraham's lineage. Similarly, Job is considered Abraham's contemporary and lived in a different country. The scripture states in Romans 1:18-21 that God's eternal nature and character has been revealed to all men through the wonder of creation, but men have chosen to corrupt their understanding of God.
If one digs deep enough into Vedism one finds at the beginning the idea of "Brahman." The problem is that those granted this awareness were not able to perpetuate this understanding... somewhere along the line it became diluted with other notions which detract from it. The purpose of Abraham's covenant was that the original concept of the absolute being would be preserved to this day and that humanity can have the opportunity to be exposed and to partake in it. Unfortunately, there are those who have used the name of God as an excuse to perpetuate their own agenda throughout history–this is not exclusive to "prophetic" faiths but has been the bane of all religions.
In conclusion, contrary to Maharaj's claims, in many ways Vedism is more exclusive than Christianity in that it requires the disciplines of yoga and detachment to attain "enlightenment" and "release," both of which (according to the precept of "maya") are subjective and not objective experiences anyway. Consider well that feelings may either reflect reality or delusion, or a mix of both. Oneness with God is not reserved for an elitist group of ascetics–it is accessible and attainable by all through simple worship and acceptance of Jesus whose name means "God is our salvation." God is not distant, He's just waiting for us to open our hearts to Him. The question is: when the knowledge of Jesus is presented before you, what will you choose to do with it?
Dirk Bosland
San Juan