"Love Guru" Ridicules Hindu Concepts

Religions, just all other things in this world, should be discussed, analyzed and even laughed at, without censorship. Don't be so touchy.

Mr. Rajan Zed,
Thank you for all of the publicity you've given to Mike Myers' new comedy.
How much Mike Myers Paid You?

Main Problem with our NRI Hindus are They are Loyal than Kings.
Due to the influence of Christian and Muslim cultures, they started behaving like Minority community behaving in India.
They forgot that Hinduism is a way of life rather than a Religion, Here each and every body have his own belief and God to worship, and nobody is worried of survival of GOD/Religion, like religion which depends on a single personality.
One thing Mr. Rajan Zed to under stand is One of our God figure use to Steal, still he remain Great, He in several occasion lied, Use to go after eves, and so on...
Mr. Rajan zed please do your work, Hinduism doesn’t need your promotion or help to sustain.
Your Activities are Tarnishing Hindu community all over the world.

Main Problem with our NRI Hindus are They are Loyal than Kings.
Due to the influence of Christian and Muslim cultures, they started behaving like Minority community behaving in India.
They forgot that Hinduism is a way of life rather than a Religion, Here each and every body have his own belief and God to worship, and nobody is worried of survival of GOD/Religion, like religion which depends on a single personality.
One thing Mr. Rajan Zed to under stand is One of our God figure use to Steal, still he remain Great, He in several occasion lied, Use to go after eves, and so on...
Mr. Rajan zed please do your work, Hinduism doesn’t need your promotion or help to sustain.
Your Activities are Tarnishing Hindu community all over the world.

Considering that colonization is past, Hindus can choose to talk their language. The modern systems allows the terrorists to explain themselves.

I appreciate mr Zed for caring to clarify the concept of karma, to distinguish it from colonial as well as racist interpretations, caricatures as well.

Many hindus are trained in colonial systems, some hindus work as maoists and kill tens of thousands of their own for revolution...I am sure they would have problems with this post.

I wouldn't be offended, for 150 years India has been described by west and elites from Harbards in terms of races, poverty and weirdness. This was bit offensive until it dawned that offense doesn't matter.

During this time, british had Indian agents who managed for the white british men to spread the british colony. These people ensured to drill down the idea that the Indian way is uncivillized and aryan dravidian racial analysis is scintific and secular. They hated Indians, Indian don't wear their traditional dresses because of shame.In India, no traditional institution has school systems or political parties, unless they have been endorsed by west, or they learned to speak english.

Some of these former colonial slaves have posted in this forum, who have identified themselves as raised in India......These are faruds, trained to look english and feel snow from their birth.

About the karma they have theories on action in universities , ...just that these plag wouldn't have to acknowledge Indian unless they are lampooning it.

I don't get offended ...and all of you modern people who follow the tradition of colonizing India through slander and misrepresentation please don't preach me.

i just read your blog in the washington post and, as you now know, the film ""bombed" in the theatre!.

Bollywood, India directors and script writers interested in Scientology are invited to read two discussions on this forum in response to two essays posted by Claire Hoffman, in UNDER GOD blog May 08.

Just found this

Dr Deepak Chopra in his own words about the movie:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/film/deepak-chopra-says-the-jokes-on-him/2008/06/03/1212258816753.html

From the main page :

VICTORIA :

how folks can continue to have mindless knee jerk reactions and opinions on a film they have not actually seen is a total mystery to me-

June 22, 2008 10:33 AM

---------------------------------

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia:

Victoria

You are absolutely right! I should never have written a comment without actually seeing the film. But as you can see it is all a bit too late now and it is not possible for me to delete my posts.

I was merely concerned about the premature overreaction of some Hindus as highlighted with Mr Zed's response. I contributed my own share of ignorance with a premature reaction.

Thanks for highlighting a very important point: never jump into conclusions without sufficient information.

June 23, 2008 12:19 AM

Bollywood, India directors and script writers could gather their information about Scientology from Germany, since the Germans have done a thorough scientific study of the religion.

Hinduism could express its spiritual genius in assessing religions.

If Bollywood, India decides on returning the favor, then before it finalizes its script for a film lampooning Scientology they are urgently advised to consult an army of the best Indian lawyers and at least a couple specialized in international law.

Bollywood, India could return the favor by making a block buster on Scientology, a religion made in the US of A, since it is a religion quite popular with a handful of Hollywood stars. Hinduism is the oldest religion of India and Scientology is the youngest at least in the US of A.

I know Mr. Zed...it is amazing how Hindus don't have a problem with someone like Deepak Chopra, who frankly makes a great spiritual religion into commercial nonsense through his books and "Oprah" shows, and then take aim at something that is just a bad movie. When Hindus allow someone like Mr. Chopra to spread Hinduism in a palatable western style way, you have to take the good with the bad. What Mr. Zed fails to see is this movie lampoons the commercial aspects that Hinduism and Eastern religions have sadly allowed themselves to fall into...that faith does not lend itself to slogans and mantras but to seeking out enlightenment from within.

Victoria writes:

but i cannot think of any movie that actually mocks judaism

That is only because you cannot think as you consistently demonstrate.

Laughter unfortunately has to stop on occasion so that we can evaluate certain dangers in the world. One of the great dangers today is Islam as pointed out succinctly in that famous quote,

"Until the koran is deflawed, all mosques "febrezed" and all Shiites and Sunnis pacified, no one is safe!!!! "

o btw soja- yes, the christians were calling for blood with the last temptation of christ-
at least here in america-
the sad thing is- kazantzakis really is a very spiritual writer- nobody reads books anymore-
as far as books go- one of the funniest laugh out loud satires on evangelicals is don imus' "god's other son"

it is really hysterical

i can undersand soja imagining that iskcon is some benign example of the best of hinduism- because she doesnt live in america (embezzlement, child abuse both sexual and physical,murder,and a faux caste system complete with slave labor)

but to say that there are no satires on christianity is just uninformed-

have you never seen the simpsons? how about south park? any monty python (every sperm is sacred anyone?) george carlin-
or movies-
1)saved-
2)dogma is a non stop satire on the more ridiculous coda of catholicism,
3)life of brian of course,
4)praise the lord and pass the ammo

the lets not forget the last temptation of christ- while not a satire it certainly had chrisitans ready to lynch the producers-

for gruesomeness theres always 'the village' or sheer 'blasphemy' the da vinci code-
but dont just take MY word for it-

heres a list of 1,200 reviews and analysis of movies that christians find directly offensive-

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/index.htm

it seems the only groups that are safe from real mockery is judaism and buddhism-
certainly there are comedies, but i cannot think of any movie that actually mocks judaism or buddhism-

maybe you can come up with some!

that's the thing about comedy- it is irreverent-

Jed writes:

If you are living in the U.S., a multicultural society, you need to grow up and accept the fact that you are surrounded by people who don't give a damn about your religion, your culture or your sensitivities. That's the price you pay for freedom. If we were only "free" to say nice things about one another that would be tyranny. Freedom of speech only matters, and only needs to be protected, when your speech upsets someone else who thinks he has a right to tell you "what is not meant to be mocked."
--------------
Extremely erudite. However, since this is "a multicultural socienty," why, then, have there been almost no filmic satires of WASPS and White Catholics?! They are indeed the most multitudinous in multicultural US.

How about some parodies of the mass? Come on. Inside a church, with swinging censors, men dressed up in gowns, etc.

And how about some WASP satires? JUst reach down into the mayonnaise jar and pull up a joke or two.
Hymns to mayonnaise?

I'm no humorist, but do live in this multicultural society. Perhaps if the White Protestants and the White Catholics got on board, filmic satire of different cultural groups could do some good. That would begin with the White Catholics and the White Protestants recognizing that they are simply cultural groups, two among others.

Protestant, Catholci satires, anyone?

The author wrote:

"But faith is something sacred and attempts at belittling it hurt the devotees."

Awwwww . . . Poor babies. Are your itty-bitty fewwings hurt?

"But there are certain convictions in every tradition, which are venerable and not meant to be mocked."

You mean, they are not meant to be mocked by members of the congregation. The rest of us can mock them all we like. It is none of your business what we mock, and we don't care how much it bothers you.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that anyone who complains about his hurt feelings and who thinks he can tell me what is "not meant to be mocked" deserves to be mocked!

If you are living in the U.S., a multicultural society, you need to grow up and accept the fact that you are surrounded by people who don't give a damn about your religion, your culture or your sensitivities. That's the price you pay for freedom. If we were only "free" to say nice things about one another that would be tyranny. Freedom of speech only matters, and only needs to be protected, when your speech upsets someone else who thinks he has a right to tell you "what is not meant to be mocked."

- Jed

Christine:

Unfortunately, it is the religions themselves that lack humor. Certainly, some of them.

HOw about ‘He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned'. [Mark 16:16].

BELIEVE or DIE forever is foundational to Christianity.

If we could be freed from Believe or die, we'd be a lot better off.

I'd really like to see some Catholic, Protestant, spoofs dealing with the religions. I'd like to see them on TV.

June 19, 2008 9:46 PM

--------------------------

Christine

If my memory serves me right, there are plenty of books and some movies where some Catholic clergy has been portrayed as villains. I can't recall that Catholics took to the streets and demanded books or movies portraying Catholic priests in a bad light be banned or authors and movie producers be killed.

There there all the time Cristine but they usually don't last long you can't make any money when you eliminate right off the bat 80% of potential viewers.

Besides which if you watch some of the stuff on the religious channel you'll see that the real problem is that it is darned hard to parody something that is already a parody.

Since all religion is a human construct, why should it be considered immune and sacrosanct from satire and lampooning? Humans at their most pious and sanctimonious are also at their most ridiculous - true seekers know well that the real Dharma is beyond religion....religion is generally more of an impediment than not.

The Buddha said 'I truly gained nothing from complete and unexcelled Enlightenment'. What does that mean?

Neither movies nor humor are the issue, are they?

As a Hindu and from a family of conservative Brahmins, born, raised, educated in India and unlike Rajad Zed, who while living in a "Free Speech State" is actually wasting his time. Do you really think that anyone gives a damn about a movie that lampoons Hinduism. Hinduism has been here to stay for thousands of years and no movie can take that away. Am I offended? Well, after all my name is Guru. My parents and grandparents gave it to me. There are worse things in life than having a Mike Myers movie to be upset about. How about poverty? How about all the conflict? How about giving a sock in the face of Right Wing hindu's who have nothing better to do but cause trouble. Perhaps Sri Zed could server us Hindu's better by focusing on more important aspects of life than a silly movie. It is people like him which make me scream out aloud. If you dont like the movie, dont watch it! And really, based on the reviews the movie tanks big time. So what's the point in protesting regarding a non-event! Waste of time, energy which could have been focused on more serious and important crisis that we face today.

As noted below, History and Rational thinking reduces religions to include Hinduism to the laughable relics that they are. I believe Mike Myers has sequels in the works lampooning Christianity and then Islam in these future movies. Let the laughing begin!!!

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia:

Re Movie Love Guru on further exploration of the movie website:

I get the impression that the movie is not about a Hindu guru or Hinduism at all, but indirectly about Dr Deepak Chopra and his wisdom being portrayed as fictional comedy! TM is introduced in the movie guru's teachings at a subliminal level. Dr Deepak Chopra seems to have lent his voice to Guru Pikta!

For more visit

http://www.thegurupitka.com/

Unfortunately, it is the religions themselves that lack humor. Certainly, some of them.

HOw about ‘He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned'. [Mark 16:16].

BELIEVE or DIE forever is foundational to Christianity.

If we could be freed from Believe or die, we'd be a lot better off.

I'd really like to see some Catholic, Protestant, spoofs dealing with the religions. I'd like to see them on TV.

Let me try this one more time. Whatever your religion is you have no right and in fact should not expect those who do not follow your religion to take it as seriously as you do.

If your God is so tiny and small and ineffectual that he needs you to threaten others to get people to take him seriously he is no God worth your time or mine.

This is not to say that you can't attempt to inform the uninformed only that you can't tie them down while you do it.

Garak I'd like to know where you found this Christian Doctor given that for the last hundred + most of the Physicians in Sub Saharan Africa practicing modern medicine have Been Christians from America or the US.

Dear All,

In a civilized society we can enjoy freedom of expression but it should be exercised with sense of responsibility. I agree with Pedro Padilha that “You don't need to use a religion to be funny... You have a lot of topics to make a good joke.. why explore something so delicate?”

Defamation of any religion (in any form) on this earth is wrong and we all should strongly appose it because faith is something sacred and attempts at belittling it hurt the devotees.

Great work Mr. Rajan Zed and keep fighting. Just ignore criticism, because all who are criticizing doesn’t seem to be from civilized society and hence they don’t know what they are doing.

I will try to share this message to my near and dear and urge them to boycott all the movies from Paramount Pictures.

Gratitude,
Redkar

I think all of you have misdirected your anger regarding this movie...As a Canadian I am deeply offended by my fellow Canadian's blasphemy toward our national religion...Hockey...and its perrenially downtrodden prophets...The Toronto Maple Leafs.

For decades I have peacefully put up with the jokes...well peaceful I can be no longer...I am personally challenging Mr. Myers...lace em up and drop the gloves buddy...you need to be reminded that you used to be Canadian too.

Consider this my Hockey Fatwa Mr. Myers...maybe you should go back to Scotland where they still think you're funny.

finally- mr zed- if you haven't even seen the movie yet- how can you have an opinion that is anything other than misinformed?

i cannot even find ONE represntation of muslims that is positive ANYWHERE- they're ALL bad-

PC gone overboard-

see it- THEN critique it!

Really? Huh... No one seems too concerned when Christianity is lampooned. I think it is deplorable to mock anyone's faith, buy why the double standard?

Mr. Zed or whatever you are:
As person who was born of Hindu parents, this is no big deal. You theists if you cannot take a little bit of ridicule from others then stop talking about your stupid, childish beliefs. What is it Krishna had 16,008 wives. Bahama sits in a Lotus flower that protrudes out of Vishnu's navel (with out clarifying if it is a innie or an outie). Asking the newly weds to witness the Arundhati star at mid-noon. You stop believing in these cock-a-mamie stories people will stop ridculing. The same goes for Jews, Christians, Muslims, Budhists and all your ilk.

i have to say mr zed cannot be much of a student of human nature-

what is the old hollywood adage? "i don't care what you write about me, just spell my name right?"

and
"there is no such thing as bad publicity!"

this formerly disinterested, ambivalent consumer intends to plonk down my 8 bucks to see this film now-

(the website is pretty funny- i linked it on the main page)
mariska hargitay (my husband just loves her)

Why is religion always supposed to get a free pass when it comes to criticism in any form, from humor to philisophical? Why are we always supposed to bow to others' religious beliefs no matter how irrational we consider them to be? Reincarnation? Ridiculous! Bread and wine into body & blood? Ridiculous! Rapture? Ridiculous! If we really get serious about what we believe and why we believe it, it's all pretty funny. But since all most do is blindly believe without any real thought, it's just sad.

Yo, Rajan Zed, please take your intolerance elsewhere.

Funny thing about humor. It isn't funny if there isn't someone hurt. The root of all humor is the existance of a hurtful condition that people are laughing about to ease the pain, or laughing at because they have avoided it themselves. People can laugh at themselves, and not take offense. People can laugh at others, and not take offense. But when others laugh at people, they get totally bent out of shape.

In the land of equal opportunity, it just happens to be the turn of the hindu's. Speaking of equal opportunity, try listening to George Carlin sometime, everybody is fodder for him.

Garak, as long as you don't belong to a new brand of anti-theists who'd like to abolish all religions altogether, that is just fine.

Trying to impose anti-theism is even worse than trying to impose a religion. Both are wrong.

How interesting that the Post today also carries a story about "Christian" physicians who refuse to treat people their religion considers inferior.

Religion is your problem, not mine. If you can't handle free speech, leave.

This country has far too many religious fanatics and extremists--Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, whatever. These fanatics actually believe freedom of religion means they get to shove their religion up everyone else's posterior.

DEAD WRONG!

Freedom of religion means I don't have to accept anyone's religious bigotries. I don't have to accept my life being affected in any way whatsoever by someone else's religion.

Freedom of religion means freedom from religion.

Dear Mr Zed

As a Christian who grew up in India, I cannot say for certain how my Hindu friends would react to this movie. My hope however is that they will not take offense and exhibit the generosity and tolerance that Hinduism at its best is known for.

I doubt too if great Hindus like Mahatma Gandhi and Vivekananda would have taken offense at a movie that portrays *false gurus* in a funny light. They, as Hindus themselves, did not withhold criticism about aspects of Hinduism they did not approve of.

The movie "Love Guru," from what I understand, is about a *false Hindu guru.* It is the equivalent of making a movie about a bad Catholic priest. As you are well aware, "Bhagavan" Rajneesh later known as Osho, was one such false Hindu guru. In India even Hindus referred to him as a "sex-guru" and had great fun laughing at Westerners who treated him like god and about how they gave up all their money to worship him in his Ashram. The opinion of the ordinary Hindu in India at the height of his fame was that Westerners were spiritually open but not discerning at all when dealing with gurus from India.

Hinduism is five thousand years old. It is a con-federation of religions. It has no proselytizing element. It is hardly likely that Hindus would abandon their faith because of a movie about a false Hindu guru. Every real Hindu knows that there are false gurus because real guru have warned them. So I do hope you would not feel overly concerned about the impact of a movie on a religion such as Hinduism. Those who are genuinely interested in Hindu philosophy would seek it in great spiritual works like the Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita etc.

No, Brahman the Absolute, is not going to be harmed by this movie or any movie, not what I understand of Brahman and Hinduism anyway.

Here a few words of wisdom from Guru "Pikta" (the guru in the movie in question).

My only concern about the words of wisdom is that guru Pikta has plagiarised them.

1. Into me I see

2. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind (well known saying of Mahatma Gandhi)

3. When love goes wrong nothing goes right

4. First reduce the greed, then reduce the need

5. There is no failure only early attempts at success

6. Go from nowhere to Now here

The Guru Pikta

"Faith is not sacred by itself. Belief without evidence cannot be sacred. The Truth is sacred."

Well, ain't that just the picture of another darn fight brewing.

'I can roll over your holy place or disinform the uninformed for a laugh cause I got the 'Truth.'

Yeah, that's real productive.

Frankly, I'm all for free speech, but Hindu people complaining about negative portrayals is different from Fundies trying to squelch anything that *doesn't* elevate their faith above all others, because Hindu people *ain't* trying to make the world Hindu, and therefore *don't* have a massive advertising machine saying differently in the West, where people are *astoundingly* ignorant about the *reality*... As below.

I like to think comedy's pretty sacred, too. As in so many things, there's a duty there, 'To comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.'

Once that gets backwards, it's not funny. It's something else.

And if you can't tell the difference between trying to suppress all voices but your own and saying, 'Ow, that was insulting, hurtful, and defamatory,' you're the last person I think ought to be capitalizing 'The Truth.' Where were you raised, a capital T factory? Why not make it The TruTh? Or was that supposed to refer to some concept of your own superiority you might have been entertaining?

cyrano: "Nonsense, Faith is not sacred by itself. Belief without evidence cannot be sacred. The Truth is sacred. Your "faith" may be sacred to you, but it is not so for others. Talk about the freedom of speech getting curbed. You can't start with a false assumption like "Faith is sacred" and then try to whine about being hurt. Religion and it's practices like any other UNreasonable group activity is open to ridicule by rational folks."

Truth is scared to you??? I will laugh myself all the way back to bed. Too bad my hony went home or he would be laughing back to bed with me.

"But faith is something sacred and attempts at belittling it hurt the devotees. Filmmakers should be more sensitive while handling faith related subjects, as cinema is a very powerful medium."

Nonsense, Faith is not sacred by itself. Belief without evidence cannot be sacred. The Truth is sacred. Your "faith" may be sacred to you, but it is not so for others. Talk about the freedom of speech getting curbed. You can't start with a false assumption like "Faith is sacred" and then try to whine about being hurt. Religion and it's practices like any other UNreasonable group activity is open to ridicule by rational folks.

To me "Comedy is sacred". Self proclaimed [sic]"Holie men" should be more sensitive while handling laughter related subjects, as comedy is a very powerful medium.

Let laughter prevail

Peace

See, here's a good example:

" datdamwuf:

"But the underlying whine is the same, don't you dare make fun of a religion."

Who says that movie is actually making fun of the real religion? You made that assumption already. You presume what you see in that movie actually *is* Hinduism. Whatever it says.

" If your faith is so weak that a movie making fun of it undermines it in some way then you have a problem."

Actually, Hinduism does not consider *advertising* a particular command of their own faith. This doesn't mean that defamation doesn't affect real people in real ways in real life, particularly when they aren't among those who know better.

"Of course, that is the bottom line problem of all faiths, isn't it?"

Depends what your faith considers a 'bottom line,' actually. Not all actually care that much what you think of them, till it gets to feeling lied about.

Frankly, you probably got your idea that that's 'All Religion,' cause *certain* ones figure you can 'win souls' or some other perk by gaining converts. Believe it or not, not everyone even *thinks* that way.

Gods know you'd not have heard so much about modern Pagans if we weren't having to counter some pretty aggressive and dangerous disinformation campaigns the past decade or two. Kind of an interesting phenomenon, call it Threefold Return, compounded annually, if PR is all you can see.

Don't ask me, really. When I found there were others still called by the Old Gods, I was like, 'Here's a nice quiet little religion to keep my contentious nature out of trouble a while.' Heh.

But, no, not everyone's out looking for converts or has 'weak faith' if they don't cram their doctrines down your throat... But... In a world where people make a lot of political and economic hay calling you Godless idolaters, and that has real repercussions in your life, some jokes just ain't so funny.

I mean, I'd call myself Willowheart Moonflower if it'd make you smile, but you wouldn't get the joke even if you knew me. :)

Ian Corrigan:

"I'd advise Muslims, Christians, hindus, etc, to just smile a take it when people make fun of their religions - only the insecure can't take it."

There's a difference, Ian, and others, between having a laugh about the reality of something, even a religion, and when lampooning relies on ignorance and false stereotypes.

Now, I've just seen a few advertisements for the film, and actually it didn't occur to me there'd be anything about real Hinduism about it, my presumption was Mike Myers was trying to have a laugh about Western new Agers or some such, and I thought a lot was in poor taste, like the old 'beat on the midget' schticks.

But the fact is, most Americans can't tell the *difference* in the first place. Gods know a lot of people like to have 'fun jokes' about Pagan religions that act like they're satirizing something real, but are actually just saying, 'Look at these people, we're satirizing them over foibles, and no one knows those aren't the real foibles: they're the things they're defamed or misunderstood about."

Pagans, for instance, get our own laughs out of stuff like the now-old Dragnet movie, where Pagans were presented as 'People Against Goodness And Normalcy,' worshipping devils and sacrificing virgins, and all that... It's funny to us cause it's so untrue, and the main character's obviously a prig, but.. a lot of people actually didn't know any better, especially back then, when your local tree-huggers weren't exactly household words.

Even stuff that we get accused of having something to do with, like 'Charmed,' which, though it appropriated a lot of Wiccan terms for flash and dash and a *sense* of reality, was actually just appropriating some terms, removing all the actual spirituality, and grafting it into the same old Faustian worldview with angels and devils and stuff... A lot of it *sounds* very Wiccan, particularly to outsiders, but there's little to do with it, apart from us being basically regular people and generally of good will.

Didn't stop ignorant people from going, 'Aha, so *that's* what you think you are.' They were mostly upset that it portrayed Wiccans as *good guys,* even if in the context of some 'War in Heaven' and notion of conjuring powers that actually has nothing to do with us.

It's very much the same about Hinduism... People in America really understand *so* little about it, that they might not get the difference between actual Hindu religion, and Mike Myers' (presumably) lampooning charlatans who'd go over to India, appropriate some Hindu stuff, then come to America as 'Gurus' to aggrandize themselves and make some money.

The popular satirical show South Park sometimes crosses that line, too, ...if you're queer-community literate, you might laugh about Mr. Garrison's sex change, going, 'Ah, he's so closeted about being a gay man he thinks he's a transsexual,' but the 'witty satire' about that really denigrated everyone involved, cause the satire was *based* in the presumptions that gay people really want to be the opposite sex, or that transsexuals are just gay people who can't admit it, cause for some reason they think it'd be easier to be a tranny than a closeted gay. I've known several transsexuals, and let me tell you, despite prejudices to that effect even in the gay community, they aren't thinking like that.

A lot of people, I presume, would see that and figure it's a witty satire on the reality of gay and trans people.

Just like, *because* we're *astoundingly* ignorant in general, in the West, about Hindu belief and tradition and spirituality, people just don't know the *difference* between laughing about a fake who's apparently a real jerk, and the actual people the character's kind of exploiting.

That's not a matter of 'Hindu people can't take a joke,' it's a matter of 'Most the audience couldn't even *get* the joke, they're gonna see that and have the wrong idea about real people.'

Know what I'm saying?

Then don't go to the movie. Explain the reality of Hinduism when it comes up and don't worry about the movie at the worst it will give you an opportunity to enlighten others.

The average American doesn't know the Difference between Kharma and Dharma and has never heard the word maya though the concept itself is found in one form or another in most world religions.

There's just no such thing as a right to be free from mockery. Free speech is a much higher value to society than reverence for tradition, whether one's own or someone else's. Every human tradition (and all religions are human traditions) is worthy of mockery - even nature itself is silly.
I'd advise Muslims, Christians, hindus, etc, to just smile a take it when people make fun of their religions - only the insecure can't take it.

Having just migrated from India, I am grateful for the secularism in this country and the ability to take on criticism or even mockery in good faith.

I had witnessed rise of Hindu fundatmentalism- but seriously much of that is due to rise of Islamic, Sikh and even some Christian funamentalism.

Sikhs have blown up movie halls killing innocent people, just because they felt the movie insulted their religion.

I do hope and pray that Hindus never ever get to Muslim/ Sikh level of intolerance.

I have no problem with a movie poking fun at false Gurus. There are false Gurus everywhere and America has a fair share of them.

The joke's not only on false Gurus but also on the countless Westerners who get taken for a ride. That's the way I see it. This is an excellent opportunity for all of us (Westerners included) to laugh at ourselves. I hope Hollywood does not miss this opportunity. What is it that makes Westerners so insecure as to be latching on to any idiot calling himself a Guru?

If, on the other hand, the movie simply offends for the sake of offending (I doubt that), it is not a good movie to begin with and it would be a big flop.

Thank God, at least there will be no fatwas from Benaras!

Western media never covers india in the news. Loook like nothing bad happens in inida, as media cover the bad items. Pakistan is coverd everyday as is heaven for terrorist. Now Love Guru is nothing but bad side of Hinduisum. We hindus need to protest as we have no country to defend us. Muslim have 57 countries and billions dollers float all aroud to create terror if any one talks about them. Its time Hindus need a country and Voice and money to defend its roots.

Good to see that Hinduism has started adjusting its tolerance levels according to the changing needs of this modern world. Hindu tolerance has become cowrdness in last few centuries. With rising India, Hinduism is also rising and its affect in India and outside will multiply in many years.

Peaceful protests like these may not stop this film but will work to counter misunderstanding that this film will spread against Hindus and Hinduism. People who will watch this film will be forced to think twice when they will read than millions are protecting against what they just watched.

Hmmm, time for that famous synopsis of the flaws and errors of contemporary religions. Said synopsis reduces these religions to include Hinduism to the laughable relics that they are. I believe Mike Myers has sequels in the works lampooning Christianity and then Islam in these future movies.

The Said Flaws and Errors:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists, amazon.com) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider". (See Professor JD Crossan's book Who is Jesus)

3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions). (wikipedia.com, and graduate theology studies at many large Catholic universities)

4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers. (Karen Armstrong's books, Ms. Armstrong is an On Faith Panelist, the Encyclopedia Britannica and wikipedia.com)

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/ mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”. (cnn.com)

And who funds this terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia. (cnn.com)

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism." (Encyclopedia Britainnica)

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):" (wsu.edu/~dee/BUDDHISM/SIDD.HTM)

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

Well at least the Hindus don't threaten to kill the movie makers, much better than if they spoofed on Islam.

But the underlying whine is the same, don't you dare make fun of a religion. If your faith is so weak that a movie making fun of it undermines it in some way then you have a problem. Of course, that is the bottom line problem of all faiths, isn't it?

The author says: "Comedy should make everybody smile and should not come at the expense of ridiculing others’ faith and spreading misinformation. Hinduism is the oldest and third largest religion of the world with about one billion followers and a rich philosophical thought and it should not be taken lightly. No faith, larger or smaller, should be ridiculed."

How can I take that seriously? Does this author also object to Sacha Baron Cohen and his Borat movie? Or to a the many movies spoofing black families, jews or italians? Maybe he stood up and complained when the movie the Godfather painted all Italians as mobsters? This whole argument is pathetic. Humans are human, we like comedy and it's always at someone's expense.

To me the author's most chilling statement is: "No faith, larger or smaller, should be ridiculed." Because his religious brothers in Islam take that to an unheard of degree. If you ridicule Islam, especially their prophet, they will kill you or burn your house. We all have the right to free speech in all mediums and we also have the right not to look at a movie or listen to a radio show or read a news article if it offends us.

I also notice he doesn't include atheists in his statement, as in "nor those with no faith". But then no one really makes fun of us...

There are a lot of "should" statements in this article, none of which do more than express the author's preference.

You don't want people to make fun of your faith? Noted. Some take that kind of preference seriously, and they'll avoid the film. Others don't see a problem, and they'll either see it or not based on their own preferences. Should they do otherwise?

"Should" is debatable at the best of times.

Religion is ripe for ridicule everywhere. I am not so sure about individual faith, but what the heck. I can take it, I hope you can too.
The stupidity, avarice and outright evil of organized religion has been evident since the invention of the printing press, if not long before. (it has also done some amazingly good things, btw)
Many (not Mr. Myers) use humor to make an otherwise unbearable situation more palatable, and I can't for the life of me think of one reason to scold them about it.
and don't get me started on politics...

I just realized why Zed is so upset about this movie. Zed's criticisms are weak and diffuse. His real problem: the main character in the movie is a parody of Rajan Zed himself, and probably more likeable, funny, and true to Hindu values than Zed ever could be. Thus, the brillant depiction of Mike Meyers' Love Guru exposes Zed for what he is, a religious sham, and he just cannot stand that.

Krishnan:

I am quite certain that those who ingest animals' testicles do so for purely epicurean or culinary reasons, not because they ascribe to them some supernatural power or ability. The very idea that a creature that can be killed, by either natural or other causes, has within it a holy elixir borne entirely as a result of a renal physiological process does require something beyond the rational.

Keep trying; there might be a good argument out there somewhere. May the Force be with you.

Krishnan:

I am fairly certain that ingest animal testicles do not do so as a sacramental exercise; it is for culinary or epicurean purposes only. It is not a question of making jokes of a person's caloric intake, only the person's attempt to ascribe to it some supernatural power.

Keep trying; I'm sure you can come up with a more rational argument in time. May the Force be with you.

The biggest indian sport is to mock and make fun of everything that is not Indian, we just don't understand when they suddenly change english to "turkey" language, so please save yourself for this outcry, this is America where you are free to call your president stupid, if not go live with Chavez and Castro and try to do that.

God Bless America!!!!!

I love mike myers and would love to watch this movie.

But AJ makes a great point --

>Answering stoopid questions from stupid people is a lot of work, IMHO....

I know how you feel brother !

Orpheus:
Stupidity can manifest in several different ways. One way is to make fun of someone else's religious belief. If you can eat the testicles of dead animals, why not drink live cow's urine?

I have not seen this movie, "The Love Guru," but I have seen Mike Myers's movies in the past. One thing I can say about Mike Myers is that he is a completely harmless person, who would not even hurt a fly.

His movies are not even satires, but more like light-hearted fluff. He reminds me, more than anything, of Jerry Lewis, in his movies of the mid and late 60's. (Perhaps the French will give him a medal). His comedy derives mainly from character idiosyncrasies, and also a little from exagerated movie cliches. And that is all.

To me, the name of the movie seems perhaps more related to the English-adopted word, guru, meaning the eccentric leader of a cultish fad, or of a faddish cult, than it does to any true reference to real Hinduism.

(But of course, as I said, I have not seen the movie, so I could not say for sure).

Krishnan:

Metaphysical belief, for those who can't handle rational thought, is one thing; faith in the sacrality of an animal's waste products is quite another.

Happy drinking!!!

Orpheus:
If you believe virgin birth and reincarnation of Christ, why not statues drinking milk? If you can believe in one invisible god, why not a hundred? And in a world where loads of people go about eating animal offal, why not taste cow's urine?

If you mock any one for their religious beliefs you are mocking your own. Of course, if you dont have any religious beliefs, making fun of religious people is a sensible thing to do.

Did you say, "...using Hindu terms frivolously.”??

Hindus have "terms"? Isn't there something inherently humorous in that alone? Hindus have some kind of patent on "terms"?

The evangelical patent application on God has been rejected. Not to worry any for the evangelical patent on Devil has been approved with, "keep Him. We don't need Him." If you're applying for a patent on "terms" don't be surprised at your application being rejected just like theirs. Do you have a fall back possibility like them and their Devil Lucifer? Time to put it to work.

Religion withers in the face of cross examination. It's hard to ask the hard questions that aren't inherently loaded with humor when Spike and Muggsy take the stand.

SK writes:

Hey SK,

Obviously, you know nothing about the panchyagavyam and the accompanying mantras to be cited. It involves cow's urine- aka gau mutrawhich-, dung, milk, yogurt and clarified butter. it is considered medicinal in ayurveda treatments.

Try reading the Rig Vedas before exposing your ignorance. If you can't get the information to learn about your own religion, at least you have other lifetimes to get it right.

Rajan,
If you think you can reclaim the sanctity of the words "karma" and "guru" at this late date, you are delusional, or shall we say, caught in your own maya.
Mistaking the outer shell of spirituality--words and behavior--for the real experience, is the very reason orthodox religion has become weak, ineffectual and insecure.
My guess as to why the studio didn't bother with a prescreening for you was that they found out this was just a personal publicity stunt for you, and that all the other religious experts were just local clergy friends of yours living in the sticks of Northern Nevada. Small wonder that it didn't impress the movie executives.
You say you can take a joke. We'll see, as it becomes more and more apparent that you are the one that is acting foolish.
You never addressed the criticism about why you are qualified to speak for all Hindus. You're not a Shankaracharya, you're not a Guru, a Swami or a Pundit. You are a sad, insecure Hindu starved for attention. It's time for you to discover your true Self, Atman, instead of glorifying your ego.
Namo Narayana

my $.02

There is always a thin line between offensive and funny that is drawn on subjectivity. Some Hindu's may find it offensive, while some may not. Its a free world, so all I can say to those who find it offensive is shove it. No one cares.

However, I am an Indian and was raised a Hindu (Currently agnostic, thank you for asking). My only problem with this movie is that I will probably have to spend some (ok quite a lot) of time trying to correct the misconceptions this movie will raise in the mind of an average non-hindu. I could have definitely done w/o that.

I guess I am thankful that Mike Myers doesnt attract a following like the Indiana Jones movie. I believe the temple of doom was released when I was 2 yrs old and I am seriously contemplating getting a message t-shirt that says we love monkey-brain. I am gonna pray to Ganesha and Buddha and Allah and Moses and Baby Jesus that the 'Love Guru' goes the way of 'The Guru'- into the dumpster. Answering stoopid questions from stupid people is a lot of work, IMHO....

Thank you, come again....:)

I am not a Hindu, but I am deeply offended by this movie as should anyone else who respects religious tolerance. I'd love to see what people's reactions would be if someone made a wide-release movie like this about evangelicals, Catholic priests, or rabbis.

Go see Get Smart!!!

Namaste to all.

Americans have been exposed to images of Hinduism for two centuries. Myers draws on the post-1960s exposure, which was touched off by the experiments of the Beatles, as you may recall.

Soon we had the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and baby Guru Maraj Ji and other Hindus touring the states. commercializing Hinduism for their own greater good, wrapping it in a veneer of veneration. For a while the Maharishi was gathering the pseudo-scientific square root of 1% of the world population at the Maharishi International University in Fairfield Iowa where they would lower the crime rate in Buenos Aires (but perhaps not nearby Chicago) for 24 hours through meditation and practice levitation by thumping their knees on the floor.

These are the images - commercialized and distorted Hinduism - that Myers draws on.

Now the movie audience knows that Myers is not a reality-based film maker, and they know that the history of self-agrandizing "gurus". To ridicule those whose acts ridicule Hinduism - is this a bad thing? Where was Rajan Zed when these holy men themselves were presenting false images of his faith?

Might this movie release actually represent and opportunity for American Hindus, a teachable moment in which the public is interested in discussions of the faith and its practice?

Drop your crusade against Myers and Paramont, Mr Zed. Turn your energy to positive ends. Don't let your chakras get all knit up in knots.

Americans have been exposed to images of Hinduism for two centuries. Myers draws on the post-1960s exposure, which was touched off by the experiments of the Beatles, as you may recall.

Soon we had the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and baby Guru Maraj Ji and other Hindus touring the states. commercializing Hinduism for their own greater good, wrapping it in a veneer of veneration. For a while the Maharishi was gathering the pseudo-scientific square root of 1% of the world population at the Maharishi International University in Fairfield Iowa where they would lower the crime rate in Buenos Aires (but perhaps not nearby Chicago) for 24 hours through meditation and practice levitation by thumping their knees on the floor.

These are the images - commercialized and distorted Hinduism - that Myers draws on.

Now the movie audience knows that Myers is not a reality-based film maker, and they know that the history of self-agrandizing "gurus". To ridicule those whose acts ridicule Hinduism - is this a bad thing? Where was Rajan Zed when these holy men themselves were presenting false images of his faith?

Might this movie release actually represent and opportunity for American Hindus, a teachable moment in which the public is interested in discussions of the faith and its practice?

Drop your crusade against Myers and Paramont, Mr Zed. Turn your energy to positive ends. Don't let your chakras get all knit up in knots.

Who laughs at religious practices? Everyone who is in a different religion.

Christians and Jews are told that there is one God and "Thou shalt have no other gods." It's rule number one, followed immediately by a ban against idolatry. Hinduism is a multi-theistic belief system with idol-worshipping going on all over the place.

To hold one of these belief sets as sacred seems to require a diminished regard for the other, which invites lampooning and mockery. Kind of like politics.

Cinema rarely creates stereotypes. It prefers to reflect the ones we already know. The Hari Krishna guys were in the airports before we started making fun of them, not for their faith, but for being annoying.

Mike Myers did not create the guru stereotype or the commercialization of it. International spies did not protest "Austin Powers." Musicians did not protest the "Spinal Tap" parody. Redneck NASCAR fans (or drivers) didn't protest to stop "Talladegha Nights." Black people didn't rise up in anger when their religious idiosyncracies were exaggerated for comic effect in the "Blues Brothers."

Mike Myers is a comedian. We do not take him seriously. We will not go to his movie in search of spiritual enlightenment.

Lighten up.

Judeo-christian tradition has been the subject of many a cinematic farce. The creators of South Park practically got their start poking fun at Mormonism. Lampooning Scientology is an internet-video genre. What you should remember is that in the modern USA, being mocked is part of being accepted. A movie like this is a triumph of Hindu integration into US culture. What this movie really says is, "Hinduism is a part of us," because we laugh hardest at ourselves.

If you don't believe me, look at Islam. Very few dare lampoon Islam, and it is the religion least integrated and most distrusted in the US. It is hard to say where the cause and effect are, but the relationship is not coincidental.

You can boycott and get angry and all that, it's your right as a resident of this nation. But you should consider instead reading between the lines for the real message, "Welcome, Hinduism, to this crazy quilt we call a US culture."

Mr. Zed,

Yoga, Guru, karma are now universal terms. Hindus should be proud of that. Of course, you do have your right to peaceful protests and boycotts but please do not engage in any violence like Muslims.

And please if you want to do something good for Hinduism (my religion), please do something to stop (or at least speak out against) dowry system, caste system, superstition/astrology, female child abortions etc. Thank you.

I did it on purpose, Jack (short for Jack***). You know, compare and contrast? But thank you for proving my point, that your skin is entirely too thin.

Orpheus writes

"You would spare yourself a lot of grief and ridicule if you stopped worshipping cows and phallic symbols of Shiva, sprinkling cow urine on your food and convincing yourself that statues drink milk"

You idiot, No one sprinkles cow urine on the food.
Also, how is it different from you worshipping a dead arab on a stick.

Everybody is just so damn sensitive about their irrational superstitious beliefs. Your religions - all of them - we know to be a "crock" and perfectly suitable for mockery and ridicule. Whether it's Muslims going berserk over cartoons in Danish newspapers, or Christians upset with the Beatles for being more popular than Jesus, or Hindus objecting to a motion picture comedy, it's all the same BS. What you say? You demand respect? For what? For promulgating ignorance and superstition? The more mockery and ridicule the better. Maybe it will wake some people up and nudge them out of the morass of their mysticism, superstition and self-deception.

Many posters on this thread seem to think the movie is about ridiculing the religious beliefs of others, and they're okay with that. I'm not. Ridicule and hate speech are one anothers' ugly cousins, like sexual harrassment and sexual assault. Or teasing and punching, or bullying and lynching. Tolerating the former enables the latter, and both are meant to intimidate and dominate. Of course we need watchdogs against that sort of ugliness, or our culture will degenerate into brutal chaos.

Has there been any indication in the pre-release publicity that this movie comes from a dark and vicious place in the screenwriter's soul? That it's meant as an expression of hostility toward Indian people and the Hindu religion? Everything I've seen about it hints the opposite, and the only informed opinions will come after viewing the movie itself, or at the very least reading in-depth reviews once it's released.

DON'T TAKE YOUR FAITH SO SERIOUSLY! If your faith cannot stand up to some good-natured joking in a comedy movie, then you probably don't deserve to be heard.

If Christianity, Islam or Hindu, Dao/Tao/Buddhism, or Atheism can't stand upto a joke, then they have no business being a faith. You don't think your gods can't appreciate a joke? Get over yourselves.

This kind of de-basing of any other religion would have triggered either fatwas or angry words from the Vatican but Hollywood gets away by ridiculing the most peaceful religion in the world i.e Hinduism.

I dare say Mike Myers could not make a movie lampooning Jews, Christians or Muslims. That says it all.

Thank you Mr. Zed for taking up this cause. I am with you.

Oh lighten up already. The rest of us shouldn't enjoy the movie because you and some rabbi didn't like it?

Mr. Zed and others mentioned in his article make an assumption that the majority of moviegoers are uneducated, and therefore are unable to separate fact from fiction. Also, movies (as opposed to documentaries) are not designed to educate.

Furthermore, the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution generally limits free speech to obscenities and threats. Mocking or making fun of religion does not fall into either category. If that were the case, then no one would be permitted to criticize someone's religious views or practices. Being open-minded sometimes requires tolerance which in turn promotes discussion instead of violence.

Welcome to the Club ! Islam which is such a huge religion, but like all other religions does have issues in the world of today , so dude's let not get very sensitive about Hunduism which is practised by some of the greatest minds in the World yet these people believe in some weird symbols from "P" to carrots and Cows
As a muslim I have learn't to take the punchs, so why not hunduism., by the way I do like some of the concepts of Hunduism.

You need to grow up dude. I guess people like you who dont have any work, make mockery of movies a business.

I am totally in the tank for this Rajan Zed dude, 'cause his name is totally awesome! ("Deepak?" "Chopra?" Sorry, sounds like some veggie I didn't like as a kid.

Anyways, I mostly wanted to say, hey! what about the little people? Did you get a load of that "Lollipop Guild" comment in the trailer?! That was WICKED disrespectful!

Myers, I just gotta say, on behalf of all Hindi little dudes*: yer on thin ice, and baby the temperature is risin'. (Rock-on, Rajan!)

* OK, full disclosure, I am not actually, a Hindi little dude myself, but, hey, the Lorax spoke the trees didn't he? nuf said.

This wouldn't be such a huge deal if there weren't so many misconceptions about Hinduism (no doubt, perpetuated by you, Rajan). The only time prominent Hindus come to the fore is when there is percieved insensitivity. Why not organize and campaign to educate people what Hinduism really is about? Then there would be no need to mindlessly boycott a harmless, third-rate comedy.

I doubt the billion adherents of the faith have a strong grasp of what Hinduism really is besides not eating beef.

Rajan, Your recent actions confirm in my mind that you are perhaps the worst possible public representative of Hinduism imaginable. It is not because you are a bad person or have bad intentions, but because you are insecure in your beliefs and your intellect, perhaps your own personal emotional development, is closed and lacks the desire for genuine introspection.

I cannot imagine a more counterproductive and hypocritical campaign than to lampoon against a comedy movie. Not only are you insuring that this movie will be a much greater success (kudos Mike Meyers, who is laughing even harder now), but you are loudly publicizing yourself and your flavor of Hinduism in the worst possible light, as humorless and overly dogmatic. Thus you have managed to accomplish exactly the opposite of what you wanted.

It would be a great strength of Hinduism to be able to laugh at itself, and also be flattered if there were aspects of the culture/faith that were depicted in Western media, even if they were incorrect. You have not shown this strength, but only weakness. Your smug, ignorant tone is a poor representation of Indians in the West. You should get some psychological and communcation counseling, because it appears you have not learned anything about public discourse. In particular, you could learn volumes from Deepak Chopra, but it appears that you are too incurious for that.

"But there are certain convictions in every tradition, which are venerable and not meant to be mocked."

I need this to be explained to me. Is there punishment for "mocking?" Are both insider and outsider "mockers" punished. What is at risk if the mocking is allowed? What is accomplished if it is prohibited?

Mr. Zed, thank you for all of the free publicity you've given to Mike Myers' new comedy.

It's amusing to me to see that Hindus can come across in just the same pompous and sanctimonious manner and Catholics and Evangelicals. On the way to spiritual 'enlightenment', it would seem, one needs to leave a sense of humor at the door.

Personally I think you're missing the point. For dozens of years Westerners have been throwing time and money at self-declared 'gurus' from Asia who are quick to seperate these fools from their money. Starting with the Beatles, we've been introduced to all manner of frauds and hucksters keen on taking advantage of the Western urge to explore their spirituality in different ways.

Where has the outrage of Hindus been in these cases?

Being a Hindu, I think it is pretty embarrassing when my fellow Hindus over-react when some people in the West make fun of Indian culture or religions. I think a bit of humor is fine as long as you don't cross the limit. The film 'Love Guru' hasn't even released yet and all this blah blah about it is definitely pre-mature.

I lived in India for years, and I have to say that the most over-used and oft abused phrase in the Sub-continent has to do with "hurting religious sentiments."

People shove every little thing under that heading, and it's seriously ridiculous.

Hinduism has stood for how long? How many thousand years? And you're worried about a Mike Myers movie?

Come on now. Chin up, laugh it off, or ignore it. Its nothing but a movie.

Did Hinduism finally destroy the cultural evil that is the caste system?

Movies aren't supposed to be politically correct. Movies, like all other art, are best when provocative. For example, the Last Temptation of Christ was exponentially more contraversial than The Love Guru appears to be. To some people, art is religion. To request that someone change their art because it offends your sensibilities is unreasonable and insulting. You wouldn't want an artist asking you to modify your religious ceremony or celebration, would you?

I'm a proud Hindu as you can get. I believe such hyper sensitivity to such slights as love guru and other symbols of Hindus are sign of weak character and to be honest inferiority complex, where you have to go on offense to defend slightest of provocation. We had many Indian movies which has done much more that what love guru can even come close. I actually consider these movies as sign of we have arrived. Rather than being offended I’m flattered. This is a movie not a documentary if you don’t like it make better one with your own interpretation.

I’m sick of these leaders of Hindus who pretend to defend us. No one is making them watch it so if they don’t like do watch. God save us from them and if they don’t stop speaking for us, I’m ready convert to Judaism where I will make Love Rabbi movie.

"...and asking 'who laughs at religious practices'."

Who laughs at religious practices? Anyone who thinks about them critically, for a few nanoseconds. So who laughs at them? Not enough people, clearly. Not nearly enough people.

Thing about "Life of Brian" and "da Vinci Code" is they came from within the Christian culture, not from outside it. Kevin Smith can get away with some jaw-droppingly jabs and observations on Catholicism, like in "Dogma," because he came up Catholic. If the same stuff came from Islamic, Jewish, Baptist, or Hindu screenwriters, it would be considered hate speech. Hate speech never goes down easier with the explanation that people should lighten up or grow thicker skin.

So the question is whether this Love Guru movie rises to the level of hate speech. Myers of course comes from outside the tradition he is lampooning, which puts him on thin ice that way. I would have to see the movie first, but seeing the "Iconoclasts" episode predisposes me give him the benefit of the doubt. There is more to the movie than one would gather from the surface treatment of trailers and posters. He says that when he has something serious to say, he wants it to go down like Flintstone Vitamins, where you're too busy laughing to notice that you're taking in something of substance. From the trailers it's impossible to say what that "something" might be, but I'm inclined to look for it.

Mr. Zed,

I agree with some others who have posted. I think that there are many opportunities for various religions to be offended if one looks around. (The Da Vinci Code, Big Love, Dharma & Greg, House - and almost every TV serial... and every movie that uses the name of God in vain...)

After living and working in India for over 3 years, I came away with more confusion about Hinduism than understanding of the same. If you want people to understand Hinduism and not be confused by silly movies, then work at forming some sort of BASIS for that understanding. (Hinduism for Dummies?) It may be the religion of over a billion people - but it has over a billion interpretations of what it means to be a Hindu. We won't even go into the earthly, human rights issues of assuming that people who are downtrodden and poor are SUPPOSED TO be there and should be there throughout their earthly lives...

And really - using the words guru, karma and yoga is an affront to Hinduism? I grew up here in the United States hearing and using those words without any reference to Hinduism. (The Beatles: Instant Karma). However, as a Christian, I am offended by the use of the term BCE in your article. It was BC - BEFORE CHRIST - until someone decided that this was not fair to non-Christians and changed it to BEFORE COMMON ERA. Well, it is still the same time frame... We counted time from the birth of Jesus Christ. Changing the NAME of that time frame only leaves Jesus Christ out of the picture - which I find offensive.

life is funny. but if you want to make a placard and draw attention to yourself, i'll pass you the markers and posterboard.

Three words: Life of Brian.

That should be enough defense on its own, but sadly, those Christians who flew off the handle at that film serve only to buttress Rajan's "point."

Religion is fun. Christians: how many of us have heard the "water into wine" story from the gospel of john? were you aware that the jars jesus used for this miracle were ceremonial/religious jars, and what he did amounted to using a communion chalice as a snazzy "pimp cup?" Jesus was all about removing artificial barriers person-to-person and person-to-god. Humor, satire, irony, these were his tools of the trade.

Hinduism is likely no different. I imagine all the greatest hindu thinkers/gurus injected a healthy dose of humor into their thought.

Additionally, citing mis-used words from hinduism? give it up. you can't corner the market on words. i do partner yoga with my fiancee every wednesday. and other than the fact that it is fun, does it really amount to anything religious? no. it's a word. once you say it, it's no longer yours, it's everyone's. in the same sense, christians can't call a moratorium on the use of the word "gospel." jewish people can't claim "mashiach (aka messiah)" as their own. that's not how it works.

I just saw this on the front page of the Post (look for the "misuse" of the term "guru")

A last-minute request poured in: Could Chef on Call spend an afternoon with author, TV personality and guru of the grill Steven Raichlen? (Photo: Michael Temchine/For The Washington Post)

Many of these Hindu words that have entered our common culture.The word "guru" has been used to describe anyone who has acheived a very high mastery in a particular subject. "Yoga" is considered to be a form of physical conditioning that is no more religious than Pilates or spinning.

If comedians can't use these concepts, then we might as well take away the lampooning or depiction of concepts like "sin", "prayer", "heaven", or "hell". If we can't have a "Love Guru", then maybe we can't have Dante's "Inferno", "Damn Yankees", or "The Devil and Daniel Webster".

Mr. Rajan Zed would benefit from acquiring a cultural attribute some of us in America are usually born with: a thicker skin.

I am offended at least as easily as the next person. However, I take comfort in an astronomical document called an ephemeris.

Whenever I am offended by someone's remark or reference or joke, I look up the next day's sunrise and sunset times in my ephemeris. I find that, no matter how terribly offended I am, the sun seems to rise and set at the predicted time.

It appears, then, that the rest of the universe considers my individual sensitivities to be personal matters and of no great import in the greater scheme of things.

This works so well for me that I have tried to share it with my Baptist friends, my Jehovah's Witness friends - even my Catholic friends. They evidently have their own special documents because they don't seem interested in my ephemeris. Maybe because they already have their own special document. Maybe because they don't want a reference that can actually be checked and verified without using circular reasoning. Maybe they are just dumb-asses.

In any case, I shall press onward, protected by my thick skin and comforted by my ephemeris.

Lighten up, Rajan. Hanging out with Indians and seeing those ridiculous Bollywood movies and the way Hinduism is portrayed, realizes that Hollywood didn't start the mockery bandwagon. For anyone who has ever had to endure the nauseatingly long and boring Mahabharata can attest to the silliness of Hinduism as depicted by Hindus.

The only thing more ridiculous than the feigned sanctimony and outrage of Rajan is the convenient omission of the intolerance and mocking of other religions practiced by so many Hindus. The harassment and killing of Christians in India by Hindu extremists (read: pious Hindus) is a crime that does not get nearly the coverage it should.

You would spare yourself a lot of grief and ridicule if you stopped worshipping cows and phallic symbols of Shiva, sprinkling cow urine on your food and convincing yourself that statues drink milk.

Why people can not criticise or ridicule about religions that should be rediculed. When you speak publicly about anything, you must be prepared to hear criticisms also. Comment is commonly mistaken for criticism. All these religious speakers are reverends and holy men. A moment's thought will make them know that they speak about things they least know about. Everything in religion is conjecture and is open to correction.
Regards to Mr. Rajan Zed.

This is ripe stuff.

Say the line, "Hinduism is not to be taken frivolously in double-meaning taglines" in the voice of Apu from The Simpsons and see if that doesn't bring a smile to your face.

Thanks for the chuckle, Rajan.

Holy cow! Get a new life!

No, I don't think "Faith is sacred...". Or should be. No, that would be bad. Faith is personal, certainly, and I respect my friends' faiths as long as they remain within the confines of their own sensibilities without interfering with mine own. But sacred? Nooooo. If everything is sacred, which it is, then nothing is sacred, which it also is. Faith is no thing, how can it be anything?

Janet: you have "liberal guilt" written all over your post. Lighten up -- it's just a movie -- I'm a Hindu and would hardly be offended by an inane parody that's probably not even worth its salt.

Let me ask you: were you offended by the Da Vinci code? If not, you are a hypocrite. If yes, then I will sigh and resign from this discussion on the *need to protect religions from the savagery of creativity*

Lighten up, guru ji, will you? It's a movie - you are supposed to enjoy it. Stop taking yourself and your goddamn religion so seriously. And stop forcing people to think and speak like you.

I agree with only one point, i.e. 'movies are effective in creating sterotypes'. The rest of the article sounds like a copy-right voilation on some Hindu words (like Karma, Yoga etc), i.e. no one can use these words in any context other than specified by 'Hindu Guru's'...I think we need more 'open-sourced' religious terms. What do you think?

Mike D, you sound like a real fun guy. Lighten up. Laugh at yourself once in a while. We are all ridiculous. It's people like you who take life and themselves too seriously that make life for the rest of us difficult. That's all that the guys you mentioned are trying to do, make life a little less serious and stressful for the rest of us.

Thank you for this post. When I first saw the previews for this movie I was shocked and felt both deeply offended on behalf of my Hindu friends and embarrassed that producers in my country consider this acceptable comedy. I think when you're making a comedy about religious subjects, you need to strike a careful balance between caricature and respect. This is particularly true when most of the intended audience has no basic understanding of the precepts behind the faith. This is by and large a Christian nation, so comedies featuring Christian subject matter already have context and some measure of respect in the mind of their viewers.

You're making a mountain out of a molehill. People make fun of stuff because it's funny. This movie sure doesn't look like intelligent satire, and I suggest you not take it as such. It's crass humor, and really just harmless.

As long as people don't "learn" Hinduism from movies, I think it's all good. We have way too many bigger problems than to worry about a silly comedy. But strictly speaking, why shouldn't people make fun of religion? We make fun of people who believe in fairies and unicorns, so what wrong with making fun of religion. It's really not that different.

And for the record, I think the irony of the entire situation is that Deepak Chopra is supporting a movie that makes fun of fake gurus. Which, just to clarify, Deepak Chopra himself is :)

Din't we go through this 25 yrs ago with 'The Life of Brian'........

I dont know if this movie mocks Hinduism but there should be more movies mocking all religions. Here are grown men playing with invisible friends and when there are called into question they always point to their rule book. Then they go on about their feelings and sentiments. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend.

Griff - you're an idiot. Hindu's don't issue fatwas - and we certainly didn't issue one against Salman Rushdie. He actually spends much of his time in India so he can avoid getting killed. You're referring to an Islamic edict "fatwa". You should get your facts straight before posting anything on a public forum.

Sir,

I was born a Hindu and I respect your opinion here. I appreciate your observation that hinduism encourages public debates and appreciates humor.

But, the points you raise here are barely a defense in your defense of venerable Hindu culture:
- You oppose the lampooning of "guru". But, it is no comedy that there are so many varieties of *fake* gurus in India today (as I'm sure you are aware), who have done more damage to the word "guru" than this harmless film can ever make.

- You oppose the trivializing of yoga. I myself am a Yoga practitioner and I greatly appreciate what it has done to me and my life. However, any yoga practitioner is strong enough to *know* what yoga is and what it can do for you - such comedy will come as (really) a comic relief.

- You oppose the trivializing of "karma". When it comes sexuality, Hinduism is abundant with many ambiguous spiritually sexual innuendos. For example, the shiva linga and then there is kamasutra and so many other mythological stories which makes Hinduism all the more interesting and un-didactic. So many movies and TV shows (incl Sex and the City) have already borrowed the use of "karma", that their trivialization here seems hardly relevant.

As you have pointed out, this is but a silly comedy (which seems so silly that I would not want to watch it) that will lose its attention in a few months. Why do you want to give it any more attention than it deserves? Let it go.

I am sure that the movie's terrible attempt at comedy (blatantly obvious from just the few clips shown in the trailer) will be much more offensive to any audience than its sad misrepresentation of Hindu beliefs.

Give it up Meyers, Sandler, Stiller, Ferrel... Your movies are awful. Stop making these insipid movies for 13 year old boys and appearing in public as if the rest of the adult world cares what you're doing.

When I saw the trailers I wondered what kind of movie this was, and whether Hindus would be offended. Or if I'd be offended myself if I were Hindu. It might have been a good thing for Rajan Zed to hold off on commenting until he'd actually seen the film.

It might also have been good for Deepok Chopra in his own commentary to have disclosed his personal friendship with Mike Meyers, who is interested in and respectful of Hindu practices in his daily life. I saw these guys paired in an "Iconoclasts" episode, which put me in a very different frame of mind about this movie. I haven't seen it yet, but it seems from what I've read to be an earnest attempt to explore psychological and spiritual themes using humor. And there's no such thing as reverent humor.

This "issue" would be worth the space if any thinking individual were going to see this film, let alone take away any pointers on how to relate to a/your religion.

They won't; it's not.

Hey Raj, lighten up. There's a fine line between splitting hairs and issuing a fatwa against Salman Rushdie. Methinks you doth protest too much, dude.

As a Buddhist practitioner in the West, I have come to expect a general misunderstanding of Buddhist precepts from the general public. I don't get upset at strange misconceptions but do not appreciate ridicule. However, I don't expect the public to become educated overnight and find comedic treatments fairly harmless.

If I was a Hindu, I would be more concerned about serious depictions of the religious and social practices such as those shown in the film, "Water".

I think that there is a word that changes the human's acts and thoughts: RESPECT

Using this simple word before writing something, doing a movie or starting a conversation you will be able to be, at least, more polite.

You don't need to use a religion to be funny... You have a lot of topics to make a good joke.. why explore something so delicate?

A big hug from Rio de Janeiro.