Regarding my intent in post 225. Probably I should have clarified it there to avoid confusion. My intent was limited to submitting that, the early Hindu/Vedantic missions in the west (the one I had mentioned, was established in 1930s), with object of popularizing Vedant/Yog philosophy to the westerns, had adopted the similar technique, as we notice in the strategy of the Christian missions in India. That is: avoid cultural conflicts, instead, utilize the prevalent symbols, language, social outlook, even appearances.
I wish to also clarify that the center I had mentioned is run not by the Indians/NRIs, nor meant particularly for the Indians, though it claims to have the lineage linked back to Adi Sankar. The center, as I noticed, is actually managed and run mostly by the westerners and is more popular amongst westerners. The priests, volunteers, as well as attendees were mostly white and some black people, with some Indians here and there. Also, it has no links to Ramakrishna Mission, though might be inspired by it.
To help the thread back to the topic, below from the link given by Acharya in other thread:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Christian Europe as it was taking shape first grew in opposition to and later in forgetfulness of Greek culture. <b>Christian Europe in its early period used Greek language and Greek philosophy to establish itself; then it attacked ferociously Greek culture;</b> it destroyed Greek literature, its schools and libraries. The work of destruction was so complete that even the memory of Plato and Socrates was obliterated and for a thousand years Christian Europe grew in complete ignorance of what it calls its classical antiquity.
When Greek learning revived again, it was too late for it to exert a living influence on anyone. It had died as a living tradition and it was now a thing belonging to museums and libraries and was a topic only for learned dissertations. But even in this form, it began to invite fierce opposition. The Reformation was a revolt against the classical Renaissance, a "reaction of backward minds", or a "protest of antiquated spirits", as Nietzsche saw it. The call to go back to the Bible and to Jehovah was in a very deep sense a repudiation of the Greek tradition, whether spiritual or intellectual. Today what Europe calls the Greek learning is not the learning as it was seen by the Greeks, but as it is understood by the Europeans through their own categories of thought. To the Greeks, Homer and its Gods were great realities, part and parcel of their lives; to Europeans of the Renaissance period, they were legends and interesting tales.
Even earlier, during the first centuries of Christianity, <b>it was clear that the Greek and Christian approaches to the life of the spirit were incompatible and Christianity waged a relentless war against the Greco-Roman approach</b>; and when the Greek learning revived again, the old incompatibility was still there undiminished. But if the Greek learning still found a certain receptivity the reason was that by this time, it was totally misunderstood and misconceived. <b>For any truly classical revival, Christian soil was very inhospitable indeed.</b>
http://www.voi.org/books/ohrr/ch04.htm
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wish to also clarify that the center I had mentioned is run not by the Indians/NRIs, nor meant particularly for the Indians, though it claims to have the lineage linked back to Adi Sankar. The center, as I noticed, is actually managed and run mostly by the westerners and is more popular amongst westerners. The priests, volunteers, as well as attendees were mostly white and some black people, with some Indians here and there. Also, it has no links to Ramakrishna Mission, though might be inspired by it.
To help the thread back to the topic, below from the link given by Acharya in other thread:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Christian Europe as it was taking shape first grew in opposition to and later in forgetfulness of Greek culture. <b>Christian Europe in its early period used Greek language and Greek philosophy to establish itself; then it attacked ferociously Greek culture;</b> it destroyed Greek literature, its schools and libraries. The work of destruction was so complete that even the memory of Plato and Socrates was obliterated and for a thousand years Christian Europe grew in complete ignorance of what it calls its classical antiquity.
When Greek learning revived again, it was too late for it to exert a living influence on anyone. It had died as a living tradition and it was now a thing belonging to museums and libraries and was a topic only for learned dissertations. But even in this form, it began to invite fierce opposition. The Reformation was a revolt against the classical Renaissance, a "reaction of backward minds", or a "protest of antiquated spirits", as Nietzsche saw it. The call to go back to the Bible and to Jehovah was in a very deep sense a repudiation of the Greek tradition, whether spiritual or intellectual. Today what Europe calls the Greek learning is not the learning as it was seen by the Greeks, but as it is understood by the Europeans through their own categories of thought. To the Greeks, Homer and its Gods were great realities, part and parcel of their lives; to Europeans of the Renaissance period, they were legends and interesting tales.
Even earlier, during the first centuries of Christianity, <b>it was clear that the Greek and Christian approaches to the life of the spirit were incompatible and Christianity waged a relentless war against the Greco-Roman approach</b>; and when the Greek learning revived again, the old incompatibility was still there undiminished. But if the Greek learning still found a certain receptivity the reason was that by this time, it was totally misunderstood and misconceived. <b>For any truly classical revival, Christian soil was very inhospitable indeed.</b>
http://www.voi.org/books/ohrr/ch04.htm
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->