1. Who is the author?

Khushwant is a lawyer, writer, diplomat, journalist. He is a great writer.

I appreciated his work, contribution on his own history — the Sikhs.

In his work of Sikhs, he goes in depth about Sikh history, religious history, socio-economic history.

My memory of reading Khushwant was during my time in Chennai, India.

I used to live close to Muthiah Chettiar Boys School, Chennai, India.

2. What is his work about?

His work is a criticism of Religion.

His work is a gentle attempt at Comparative Religion.

3. What was my favorite part from his work?

Kushant has read widely, and contributed to his community’s history — Sikh History.

He quotes Samuel Johnson, famous writer, author of English Dictionary.

My favorite part of this book was Chapter Four.

In Chapter Four, he writes about, Anti-Muslim Prejudices.

Khushwant writes common myths, beliefs of Muslims.

He writes appropriate responses to myths, prejudices.

Everyone needs to be aware of the myths, literate about religious traditions.

Other parts of his work are trivial - Why?

Most of his arguments or objections are part of discourse among detractors. Detractors from, theistic beliefs from any religious tradition.

To which, there are reasonable responses from major religious traditions. I’d say, reasonable responses, to make it rational or tenable.

I like some of Khushwant’s Good Objections:

1) God is not for sale

2) In India, astrology has religious sanction. It must therefore be exorcised from the Indian religion of the future. That it is totally unscientific is beyond dispute. Astronomy is a science; astrology is not.

4. What are his major criticisms?

1. If God is the cause and the world the effect, who created God in the first place?
It is the primary cause, the causa causans, about which we know nothing.

a. The author makes a Philosophy 101 objection.

Within any religious tradition, this objection wouldn’t hold true. Most theists from major religious tradition would say, they don’t believe in a created God. In their definition, he would be a necessary being.

2. Instead of entering into a pointless debate on whether or not God exists, it is more important to bear in mind that belief in the existence of God has little bearing on making a person a good or a bad citizen.

a. This is a serious flawed understanding.

b. No Major Religious tradition claims, one can't live a moral life without it.

c. Most Religious tradition offer to practice faith, and build up virtues for human flourishing.

d. Many Religious Traditions, have produced virtuous people through their practices.

A simple example from any of the religious tradition: A Question on Forgiveness — how can someone forgive if they themselves have not felt forgiven?

3. In the Chapter of Founders of Religions, Khushwant goes into, how it all came into being, any religious tradition.

a. To show something is not true, due to origins -- He commits the classic, Genetic fallacy.

4. The ultimate purpose of religion should be to abstain from causing hurt to all living things – human beings, flaura and fauna – as far as possible.

a. A cursory reading would seem that this is true.

b. Unfortunately, no human being has lived without hurting another.

c. Most importantly, Kushant seems to have made basic foundational mistake.

d. In Easter Europe about few decades ago, during Communist times.

People wanted a utopian government; Where factory managers are assumed to be benevolent, care for their own workers. And in the end, all are equal, happy.

Did that happen? Contrary to their assumption, managers were corrupt, prideful, vengeful, hoarded wealth, treated workers with contempt.

Why?

Let's see response from history, on why?

e. Famous English Physician and Philosopher, John Locke’s response would be -- human nature has a predilection to do evil.

Locke would say, manifestation of predilection to do evil from human heart comes out in ways like jealousy, envy, contempt, greed et al. Therefore, Kushawant, the author gets, human nature wrong.

When the author builds other beliefs, with this wrong assumption, it is bound to fail everything else.

5. What is my own summary of him?

When doing a work of criticism, it is highly important to represent your opponent accurately.


“
The Judaic group maintains that God created the world, sent out Adam and Eve to propagate the human race and created all other forms of life. According to it, one day, all life on earth will end and there will be a Day of Judgement when people will rise from their graves to be judged for the good or evil they did in life and accordingly be sent to heaven or hell. The Judeo-Christian-Muslim view of life is linear: it has a beginning, a middle and an end.
“

Unfortunately, this is not the exact belief or representation. Therefore, his understanding is woefully wrong.

Former Anglican Bishop, N.T Wright would say, "Criticisms are good, yet why bother on someone, when he can't represent accurately?"

He has borrowed content from his other work on Sikh History, which is not surprising.

I'd only recommend Chapter Four - Why? Because, it extinguishes common myths against prejudices and bias. This would take less than 20 minutes. Other parts are not true, not represented accurately.

Deus, Vult
Gottfried ( )