She told me that most of her college mates, who had been to English medium schools, had become atheists. Yet she loves her Hindu faith and we had a good conversation about the depth of her tradition.

When I was studying at Hamburg University in the 1970s, atheism was fashionable, too. Peer pressure also did its part. None of my friends went to church on Sundays, including me.

Google explains the driving factors for atheism in this way:
“Studies suggest that higher levels of education, increased access to scientific information and secular philosophies via the internet, and a generational shift away from organized religion are the primary drivers of this growth.”

This sounds, as if atheism is more rational than belief in a God. Isn’t it?

The prominent Israeli historian, Yuval Noah Harari, who was hosted and praised also on an Indian TV channel, and is a regular speaker at the WEF, also said, “It’s ridiculous to believe in a God and a soul.”
He is a heavy-weight. His books sell in tens of millions. So, he should be right, isn’t it?

Let’s try to find out:

Harari didn’t explain what he means by God and soul. And the definition is of course crucial. Most people may say,” Isn’t it clear? God is the English word for the Creator of the universe, for the Highest Truth.”

Few will doubt, except some atheists, that this universe, and we included, has to come from somewhere and ‘God’ is given as the answer. He is seen as the ultimate power, from which all else emanates.
Now how to describe this great power? Here lies probably the reason why atheists don’t believe in God:

Somehow, the Abrahamic view of God has taken predominance, maybe, because the majority of humans are Christians or Muslims:

God is seen as a male, all-knowing, all-powerful superhuman entity in heaven. He has allegedly conveyed to a few special persons what he wants from us humans. He is also compassionate and loving. But he loves only those who believe in him and who follow the instructions sent down through those special envoys. Those who don’t follow his instructions will be sent to eternal hellfire.

This view is reinforced and fear of eternal hell is instilled in children, generation after generation. Even in most adults, this belief has become part of their mental make-up.

However, though Christianity, Islam and Judaism go all back to Abraham and have similar views regarding the creator, each one claims that its own God alone is the true one and needs to be worshipped.
Except for Judaism, which does not want converts due to its belief that Jews are chosen by God to rule the world, the two other Abrahamic religions see it as their duty to make the whole world believe in their particular God. That means, Christianity claims all must become Christians, and Islam claims all must become Muslims to gain entry into heaven. And they can be (and have been) ruthless in pursuing their goal.

This notion of God needs urgent scrutiny – not only by outsiders, but also by insiders in those Abrahamic faiths.

Is it possible that the Supreme is a sort of superhuman entity and heavily biased towards his followers and unforgiving towards ‘others’? It’s difficult to believe that this kind of God is the highest truth.

So, does it mean that Yuval Noah Harari and atheists are right?

Let’s look at a different view about God before deciding on this important issue.
Here, ancient India comes in:

In ancient times, long before Judaism, Christianity or Islam appeared, Vedic Dharma (today called Hinduism) had a very mature understanding of the Highest Truth which is called Brahman in the Vedas (there are other names, like Paramatman, Tat..).
Brahman is not personal, not a superhuman entity, not male or female, but the most subtle, invisible, conscious, one basis of all. The Rishis declared, “Brahman is not what the eyes can see, but That whereby the eyes can see. Brahman is not what the mind can think but That whereby the mind can think” (Kena Upanishad).

They realised that this varied universe is a mistaken perception of the one Brahman due to its innate creative Shakti or Maya. Maya makes this manifold world appear as a Lila (play) on the one Brahman. It can be compared with a movie that plays temporarily on the one screen (Brahman) or like a dream of Brahman.

The Rishis give another example how it is possible to miss the truth though it is right in front of our eyes: we go to a potter’s shop. We see all types of cups and jugs, but we miss to see the mud from which they are made. The mud is the essence of the temporary form of a cup. It remains after the cup is broken.

Similarly, Brahman, best described as pure consciousness, is the essence of our person and remains when our person has ceased to exist.

Yet do the Rishis have any evidence for their view?

Yes, they have. The Rishis vigorously and intelligently enquired into the truth which is reflected in the ancient texts, especially the Upanishads. For example, they give criteria for the absolute truth:
One: it must be at all times – past, present and future,
Two: it must not need anything else to shine or in other words, it has to be self- evident.

Those two criteria dismiss the whole universe as not absolutely true. Apart from the fact that it is not always, it also needs something to ‘shine’ – it needs consciousness.

So, what is left?

The Rishis came to the conclusion that the subtle, conscious basis of everything is left – Sat-Chit-Ananda. It is here right now as pure, thought-free awareness. It is not some separate thing at some different place, like in heaven. It is our very Being and therefore there is a chance to ‘real-ise’ (know it as real) by turning inwards to what is unchanging and true in us and develop devotion for it.

But why should we do this? Why should we try to still the mental chatter at least sometimes for a little while? Is there any benefit? Yes, there is an immense benefit:

The Rishis claim that our essence is not only the source of valuable inspiration, but is also most blissful – far more blissful than what any worldly enjoyment can give. And the Rishis spoke from experience.

This Indian knowledge is very valuable and needs to spread. And even atheists may come to the conclusion that the Indian Rishis have a point.
Yet instead, Western media and even academia often demean the Hindu tradition as primitive and even demonic. Why? Do they not want humans to know that ‘God’ is within them??
By Maria Wirth

if you like my writing, consider getting my books
“Why Hindu Dharma is under attack…” both in English and Hindi
“Thank you India” in English,
also in Kindle and abroad available.
Link: https://www.amazon.in/s?k=maria+wirth

The post Are Atheists right? Or did they get the meaning of “God” wrong? first appeared on Maria Wirth.

India and silence seem to be opposites, much like noise and silence.

On the other hand, India is called the spiritual teacher of the world, and no other country has yet challenged this title. There is a special atmosphere in the country that many visitors sense. It seems as if one becomes quieter inside, despite the unfamiliar noise. As if one automatically adopts a certain distance from what is happening to oneself – for example, when, travelling in an auto rikshaw in the chaotic yet swiftly flowing traffic, one is close to a collision at any moment, yet experiences the whole thing as impersonally as if one were casually watching a fast-paced computer game. Could it be that true silence can be found even in noise, and is not the opposite of noise? That it might even be more easily discovered amidst unbearable noise than when everything is outwardly quiet?

Anandamayi Ma, a saintly woman from Bengal (1896 – 1982), advised Melita Maschmann, a German journalist who lived with her for many years, to sit directly under the large bell in the temple every morning and evening during Arti and meditate amidst the cacophony of conch shells, bells, rattles, drums, and loud chanting. Melita told me that at first, she felt some resistance, but after a while it no longer bothered her, and she actually became still inside. Her resistance vanished. Anandamayi Ma was her guru, and it was a matter of course for her to follow her advice and accept the situation.

In all likelihood, accepting a challenging situation is the key to stillness—to a comforting stillness within one’s own mind, independent of external circumstances. And I feel that the special atmosphere in India is connected to the fact that thoughts are generally quieter in the minds of Indians than in the minds of Westerners, even though external circumstances in India are often more challenging. Indians resist relatively little, are rarely indignant, and are quick to accept difficult situations and difficult people.

Their philosophy is live and let live. They believe that everything is exactly as it has to be because a compassionate Ishwara is behind the drama in our lives and in the world. This belief lifts a burden from their shoulders and removes the reason to worry too much. It also helps to be a witness and maintain a certain distance from the drama and their own role in it, and not to be helplessly swept away by it. “What is, is” (Jo ho, so ho) I often heard Anandamayi Ma say when I frequently visited her at the beginning of my stay in India. It made perfect sense to me.

But this acceptance of a situation is by no means a given, even when one knows that, essentially, one has no other choice but to accept a situation, precisely because it is already a fact that one is confronted with. The inner resistance and the screaming against it seem to be innate in human beings. And it is even considered by some to be the only sensible course of action.

I recall an episode from quite early in my stay in India which made me reflect:
It was in the tourist bungalow in Haridwar. Several foreigners were staying there, all on a spiritual quest and with Anandamayi Ma as their guru. In the morning, the hotel boy came to clean the floor. When he was finished in my room, he knocked on the next door. A Westerner was meditating there at that time, and every morning there was the same pandemonium. The tall, strong Westerner angrily opened the door and shouted at the skinny boy, who looked about 14.
“Damn it! How dare you disturb me during meditation! I want peace and quiet at this hour, and I’ve told you countless times not to knock…” At first, I felt sorry for the boy, but as time went on, I got the impression that the shouting didn’t affect him much. He probably didn’t understand how a knock on the door could upset an adult man so much. Perhaps he was even secretly looking forward to the spectacle, since he was only doing his duty. And, of course, he calmly let the storm pass without defending himself and moved on to the next door.

I noticed at the time that the foreigner’s peace was indeed severely disturbed, not because of the knocking, but because of his own reaction. Perhaps he didn’t realize that his thoughts were making far more noise than the boy, and that a shrug and acceptance of the situation (because the boy apparently couldn’t be taught not to knock) and a shout out: “no cleaning today” would have given him the peace he craved.

It’s always easier to spot foolish behavior in others, but once you’ve internally shouted at a hopeless situation often enough, you learn to see it in yourself, too. It was a slow learning process for me. Perhaps it was easier for me to go through this process in India, precisely because the irritations are often considerable. On the other hand, I’m certain that everyone is provided with the optimal environment in which they can access their quiet, subtle essence, if they so choose.

Even the frequent power outages in the 1990s helped me gradually bring my inner stillness to the surface. At that time, I wrote my articles on a word-processor, which required me to save my writing to a floppy disk. When I was fully focused on writing, despite my best intentions, I invariably forgot to save. And then the power would suddenly go, and everything I had so diligently written was gone. Simply gone. “No!!! This can’t be true!” was my (understandable?) reaction, accompanied by helpless anger. It happened often, but over time my reaction weakened until only a neutral “Everything’s gone again” flashed through my mind. I took a deep breath and started over.

It’s not worth getting upset about something that has already happened. Indians seem to understand this better. Many Westerners, on the other hand, even consider it abnormal not to be indignant and regard equanimity under all circumstances (the ideal of a yogi) as boring.
The reason is probably that we are primarily focused outwards. We always want something to be happening. We want action to take place, and we don’t feel anything within ourselves, because we never really look attentively inside. And we still don’t realize that lasting happiness can’t be found that way. It lies hidden within ourselves. The boundless, invisible, blissful “inner Self” is the more important dimension in life.
By Maria Wirth

the above article (translated) is part of a chapter which i wrote for the German anthology “Wege der Stille”.

if you like my writing, consider getting my books
Title: “Why Hindu Dharma is under attack by Muslims, Christians and the Left” 2025, Rs 311
link: https://www.amazon.in/dp/8119670655 or

Why Hindu Dharma is Under Attack by Muslims, Christians and the Left: A Collection of Essays

Title: “Thank you India,a German woman’s journey to the wisdom of yoga” 2018, Rs 349
link https://garudalife.in/thank-you-india-by-maria-wirth
they are also available as Kindle

The post Inner stillness in outer noise first appeared on Maria Wirth.

It was a spontaneous exchange. I didn’t reflect much on my replies. Unfortunately, he was stuck in his ‘law of non-contradiction’ and couldn’t grasp that name and form are temporary, and the essence is eternal simultaneously.

My original post:

Why this opposition and even hatred for Hinduism? The reason may be that India’s wisdom endangers Christianity, Islam and Judaism, because it is empowering the individual and makes sense.
Three important factors are in favour of Hindu Dharma:
1. If people of other religions come to know about the Hindu concept of One Consciousness as the essence of all, they might realize that the concept of a separate and vengeful God in the monotheistic religions is a distortion and cannot be true.
2. If they hear of karma and rebirth, it probably would make more sense to them, than the claim that we all have only one life, which decides if we go to heaven or hell.
3. If they hear that the one consciousness permeates also animals and nature, they might stop this massive daily bloodbath of slaughtering our younger brothers and sisters, the animals, and respect nature.

Comment by @OsamaKhalid
The idea of multiple gods can never make sense to sane minds. There is but One Almighty Who reigns. The concept of equally powerful gods is nonsense
2. Karma is the one of the most diabolical concepts one could endorse. What you confused with vengeance is justice.

My reply:
You are right. the Source of everything must be one. the Vedas were the first to postulate the one source (Brahman, pure consciousness). Like all other forms and names, devas (and asuras) are within Maya, only longer lived and more powerful but not eternal.
Names and forms are like the temporary waves on the eternal ocean (Brahman). It means the Divine is within us. This knowledge lifts Hindu Dharma above the ‘monotheistic’ religions.
imo, the idea of a vengeful, separate God as being the one source behind this universe can never make sense to sane a mind, isn’t it? Check out my new book “Why Hindu Dharma is under attack by Muslims, Christians and the Left…”

Osama Khalid’s reply
Basically, for the 1st comment, you have fallen prey to the law of non-contradiction which the monotheistic religion doesn’t suffer from.
Again, what you confuse with vengeance is justice. A result for one’s efforts makes sense to sane minds.

My reply:
I don’t get what you mean in your first para – eternal oneness versus temporary plurality is no contradiction. Compare the one movie screen with the plurality of changing pictures on it.
And yes, result for efforts makes sense but, eternal hell for being born in the “wrong” family?? Does this make sense?

His reply:
Exactly, the example of law of non-contradiction, the changing pictures represent the mortal despite being the part of immortal i.e. the eternal. Its illogical either the picture is fully mortal or immortal. Who doesn’t know the reward is also eternal?

My reply:
It’s not illogical. The screen is ever the same, the pictures are ever changing. Yet when you touch any “thing” in the movie, you touch only the screen. The screen is the essence of all, similarly, Brahman is the essence in this Lila or Maya.
Try to understand, not just try to refute. Imo, Vedic wisdom is top. Your ancestors discovered it.

His reply:
It’s illogical since the picture/essence can either be immortal or mortal, can’t be both simultaneously. It’s like saying one likes hot-cold ice-cream. I am simply answering to your responses. &, btw, it’s was your original post which tried to refute monotheism.

My reply:
Can’t you see that the pictures are not the same (‘eternal’ doesn’t apply here as no analogy is fully apt for the truth) and the screen is the same simultaneously? Btw this ‘screen – movie analogy’ was given by Ramana Maharshi.
Monotheism postulates a separate, Creator-God somewhere in heaven. Monism or panentheism (Indian view, but why should we speak Greek?) is closer to truth. Truth does not fit into logic. but it also does not contradict it.
To defend logically the position that there is a separate God without addressing the question where it came from and with what he made the universe, is difficult.
The Rishis claim: something (not a thing of course) eternally is/exists (consciousness and it can be felt in yourself) and out of that the universe ‘appears’.

I really wish, Muslims would understand that their disdain for Hinduism is unjustified. Meditation is helpful to understand.
The division between Hindus and Muslims fits so well into the agenda of the deep state to divide societies everywhere.
Why should we do its bidding?

So far I haven’t heard back to my last comment.
By Maria Wirth

if you like my writing, consider getting my books
Title: “Why Hindu Dharma is under attack by Muslims, Christians and the Left” 2025, Rs 311
link: https://www.amazon.in/dp/8119670655 or

Why Hindu Dharma is Under Attack by Muslims, Christians and the Left: A Collection of Essays

The post An exchange with a Muslim on X (Twitter) first appeared on Maria Wirth.

A German friend sent me a YouTube video about an Indian, Santosh Acharjee, who had a near death experience. He is telling his experience to a Christian interviewer, Randy Kay.  It was posted 2 months ago and had already over 2,8 lakhs views.

I guessed he would advise everyone to “accept Jesus”, because it is one of the propaganda methods of the Church. There are several videos like that. They try to make people believe that the “loving God” whom people encountered during their time out of the body, is Jesus Christ. It’s a powerful tool for them. They tell those whom they target for conversion, “Look, he was at the gate of heaven and has seen Lord Jesus. Therefore, you better also accept Jesus as your saviour, so that you won’t end up in hell.”

I started listening to what Santosh Acharjee had to say. It sounded genuine. Yet in the end, he gave exactly the advice which I had expected. I cringed when the interviewer hinted that Santosh was lucky (as a Hindu) that the Lord ‘saved’ him. And he speculates why this happened: The Lord knew that this Hindu man will genuinely search for the truth and will share it – meaning he will come to Christianity, the true religion, and bring by his testimony others to the true faith…

My feeling was that Santosh got trapped by those ‘kind’ (with a motive) Christians. He accepted their ‘help’ in interpreting his experience and actually betrayed what transpired in the conversation between the Almighty, as he had called that giant compassionate figure, and himself.

Let me tell in brief his story:

His father was a respected Sanskrit scholar. Yet he “took a different route” and went into engineering. He had a responsible job, earned well, travelled all over, lived in Germany, Canada, Brazil, and mainly USA.

In October 2006, he fell very sick and was in the ICU. His family was around him when he collapsed. He couldn’t see anything, but still could hear. His family was sent out, doctors hectically took over and the last he heard was “we just lost him”. He came back to consciousness after 3 days. Later he came to know that they had induced an artificial coma, when they ‘lost him’.

His experience after the doctors “lost him”

He says, once out of the body, all was dark. He couldn’t see anything, but suddenly realized that his “physical death did not finish” him. He was still alive. He could still think. Then a bright light came near him. He knew this light had ‘superior authority’. He could see now his body on the hospital bed. The light engulfed him and he knew it was there to protect him. He actually fell in love with this divine light. Together they “travelled for quite some time”, and once in a while they “went through some dark tunnels”. At the end, the light stopped over a beautiful compound with beautiful mansions. He realised it was the kingdom of heaven and wanted to go inside, but the gates were closed. He was standing on the left side of a huge high platform. Looking down, he saw a burning lake of fire. He was afraid to fall down.

In the centre of the huge platform there were 3 steps and on the last step a throne. A giant figure sat there and he knew it was the Almighty, the Lord of all.

He felt shame and guilt, because he had committed so many sins who were flashed before his eyes. “Lord, pleased forgive me”, he kept pleading. He was afraid to fall into the lake of fire, as “this would be the end of me”.

Then the Lord spoke to him, with so much love, tenderness, and mercy and he “could understand him through all the languages he knew”.

He said “What are you doing here. I will send you back to the earth.”

Santosh saw a narrow gate near the feet of the Almighty and wanted to go through it, but knew that he needed his permission.

Since the Almighty was so loving, he asked him, “Lord, please tell me, when I am back, which church, temple or mosque I should join?”

The Almighty did not respond. He kept pleading. “Please tell me otherwise I commit the same sins over and over. Next time I want to go through this narrow gate.”

After much pleading, the Almighty told him: “Those things are not important.”

Santosh was shocked because he “thought that one needs to be a religious person to enter the kingdom of heaven”. Instead, the Almighty said, “I want to see an honest relationship. I want to see how sincere, how honest you are with me. Not just once a week, every day.”  Santosh didn’t understand what he meant.

“Lord I am simple human being, please tell me what I need to do”, he pleaded again.

One directive and five instructions

Then the Almighty gave “one directive and five instructions”.

The directive was: you must love your family and children when you are back.

The five instructions were:

1. always tell the truth. Don’t lie and search for the truth.

2. the wages of sin are death. Commit no more sins.

3. surrender yourself completely unto me in your daily life. Let me be the driver in your life.

4. walk with me.

5. always be kind and generous to the poor.

He asked him also to write two books.

The Interviewer intercepted and asked him, how Jesus revealed himself to him, since he grew up as a Hindu and had not connection with Christianity.

He replied that he didn’t know at that time that this was Jesus. But he knew it was the Almighty, the Lord of all.

After he was back, he kept wondering for long what he had seen during his near-death experience. He wondered, why he had not encountered Hindu gods and goddesses. Yet he was not religious earlier. He thought that with the death of the body, everything is finished.

Then, 4 or 5 years later, he happened to attend an Easter mass though he was not a Christian. The priest spoke in his sermon of “the narrow gate into heaven” and it struck him that that’s what he had seen. He started reading the Bible and attended mass weekly. He went more and more into the Bible and became convinced that it was none other than Jesus whom he met. The priest probably did his bit to help him come to this conclusion.

Santosh fulfilled the instruction and had written 2 books. As he didn’t know how to write, he felt as if it was dictated to him. Later, he said, with the help of his Christian friends, the two books were put together into one book with the title, “My encounter with Jesus at heaven’s gate”.

It would be interesting to know if these two earlier manuscripts were different and if they had mentioned Jesus.

Self-righteousness and hypocrisy of the Interviewer

The interviewer asked him for a message. Santosh said that ‘we need to love. God is love and he loves all of us, never mind from which culture or which religion we come. He wants ALL to come to him. He is waiting for us. Just ask him to forgive you. Everyone who asks will get his mercy.’

The interviewer didn’t seem too pleased and became more explicit.

He tells him that the God he saw was not like those “Hindu gods with four arms and strange faces” and asks him, “Why do you think God saved you?”

Santosh replied that “Love is the name of God. Love God with all your strength. This is our purpose. When we love, we cannot sin.” And adds, “I am not here to change others. I change myself.”

Again, the interviewer did not seem satisfied and proposed now an explanation why God saved him, ‘God knows all things. He knew that you sought after the truth and you found the Bible. The truth set you free, when you became a believer in Jesus.’

Then he asked regarding his family. “Do they know Jesus as their saviour or do they still live as Hindus?”

“All my family are Hindu”, Santosh replied. “They don’t know the Lord. Some of my family don’t want to hear what I say. I leave it all to my Lord.”

Now the interviewer becomes again annoying. He says, Jesus said, “No one comes to the Father except through me”. You cannot bring impurity into heaven (did he mean Hindus?). But in your case, I can see why he returned you. You have a message. Pick and choose. He wanted to save you from the fire. He gave you a second chance.”

He asks Santosh to lead in prayer.

Santosh starts, ‘regardless which religion you have, if you even commit one sin, you have to dive into fire. Please don’t do this. You don’t have to be a religious person. God made it so simple for us. Love is only through the Lord Jesus.  Nobody else can save us. Only by surrendering to Jesus, you will come to him. Repent for your sin…’

Now the interviewer seemed satisfied and I felt annoyed.

Did Santosh Acharjee not go against what the Almighty told him? “Your relationship with me needs to be honest. Church, temple mosque are NOT important. Follow the directive to love and follow the five instructions.”

How do Christians, and now also Santosh, dare to limit the Almighty as the property of Christianity? How does he dare to tell someone, who loves Krishna or Shiva or Devi, that he will be saved only through Jesus?

The Almighty told him to surrender to Him, to walk with Him, to be honest in his relationship with Him. If someone genuinely loves the Almighty through Jesus, he will reach there in the same way, as someone who loves the Almighty through Krishna or Devi. But to declare that Jesus alone can save, is self-righteous, hypocritical and preposterous.

I hope Santosh Acharjee realizes this and with him, other Hindus who fell for the Christian propaganda.

By Maria Wirth

The post Dishonest Christian Propaganda first appeared on Maria Wirth.