Howard J. Resnick (Hridayananda das Goswami)
& Shabby Scholarship

BY: RADHA DAMODAR DAS

Apr 18, 2018 — GERMANY Originally published in the Sampradaya Sun-

Howard J. Resnick, Ph.D. (http://www.howardjresnick.com) has received his Ph.D in Sanskrit and Indian Studies from Harvard University. As a visiting scholar at UCLA, Dr. Resnick has taught the history, philosophies and religions of India at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley and at the University of Florida in Gainesville. Dr. Resnick, according to his own website, is a world-renowned teacher of both Sanskrit and Indian Studies. Dr. Resnick has translated numerous Sanskrit texts and has written many commentaries, essays and articles. Dr. Resnick is also known as Hridayananda das Goswami or Acharyadeva, and he is one of the prominent leaders of ISKCON (International Society of Krishna Consciousness) and Krishna West.

Known among his disciples and friends for his erudite scholarship, Dr. Resnick recently published an article, "Historical records and Vedas". In this article or rather published question/answer: where original question is if ancient King Parikshit was world emperor with Hastinapur being his capital, are there historical records for that?

Dr. Resnick. who is teaching history, philosophies and religions of India, while answering the question proclaims that there are absolutely no historical records that ancient Indians or Vedic people had travelled across the sea, implying that Indians had no maritime abilities although they were having trade with Romans and Persia -- it was rather Romans or Persians who were sailing to India than Indians sailing out -- so he implies if there was no maritime travel abilities among ancient Indians, there is no way an ancient Indian King like Parikshit would have been world emperor.

In his own words:

Reading such bold statements from a world renowned erudite scholar, I tried to find empirical evidence from ancient maritime history of the world, which is readily available through simple Google search or Wikipedia search. I found according to the Wikipedia article on Ancient maritime history of the world:

1) It is believed that navigation as a science originated on the Indus river some 5000 years ago according to maritime prehistory.


2) The world's first tidal dock & port was built in phase II of Lothal, Gujarat, India


3) The earliest known reference to an organization devoted to ships in the world is in ancient India, the Mauryan Empire from the 4th century BC


4) Emperor Chandragupta, Maurya's Prime Minister -- Kautilya's Arthashastra devotes a full chapter on the state department of waterways under navadhyaksha (Sanskrit for 'superintendent of ships').

So, I tried to bring these empirical evidences to Dr. Resnick's attention by replying to his Facebook post featuring the above mentioned article. Within a minute, my reply to his posting was labeled as SPAM and blocked from the view of other viewers. This event compelled me to expose this shabby work of scholarship on the Internet by writing this article.

Now, as I am also academically qualified with a Doctorate from Heidelberg University, I challenge Dr. Resnick to defend his statements by answering my following questions:

1) If there is no historic record of any Indian crossing ocean or great sea in ancient India, then why first time in the world navigation as a science was originated on the Indus River some 5000 years ago according to maritime prehistory?


2) Why did ancient Indians make the world's first tidal dock port on the western coast of India so that sailors from Rome and Persia can land on Indian soil, as Indians themselves were not able to have maritime travel? If so, why there is no port or docks in Roman Empire or Persia predating to the one which is in India?


3) Why did ancient Indians make the world's first tidal dock port on the western coast of India to trade, when they were only trading with Burma, Myanmar andThailand, all of which lie in the east? Why not on the eastern coast of India and why west coast?


4) Why, 400 years before Christ, is the only Kingdom in the world to have a Waterways department headed by navadhyaksha (Sanskrit for 'superintendent of ships') documented by Kautilya Chanakya? Dr. Resnick must prove with empirical evidence that this waterways department and naval superintendent was used only for travel within the subcontinent and not for maritime travel to the western hemisphere.


The very word 'navigation' is derived from the Sanskrit word NAV Gatih. The word navy is also derived from the Sanskrit 'Nou'. In Rigveda 1.25.7; 7.88.3 and other instances, samudra(ocean/sea) is mentioned together with ships. In RV 7.89.4 the rishi Vasishta is thirsting in the midst of water. Other verses mention oceanic waves (RV 4.58.1,11; 7.88.3). Some words that are used for ships are nau, peru, dhi and druma. A ship with a hundred oars is mentioned in RV 1.116. There were also ships with three masts or with ten oars. RV 9.33.6 says: 'From every side, O Soma, for our profit, pour thou forth four seas filled with a thousand-fold riches.'

I do not want to believe that Harvard University training did not teach Dr. Resnick to study the empirical evidence from History before making such statements on ancient history. I do not want to believe that as a teacher of Indian history, religion and philosophy, Dr. Resnick does not know what empirical evidence in history is, and I also do not want to believe that he is not teaching about the importance of empirical evidence to his students.

Now, I assume his academic teaching of "history, philosophies and religions of India" at UCLA and University of Florida Gainesville would have been also littered with many such non evidence based statements and this is my genuine academic concern for the students of these universities.

I am pained at the pathetic exhibition of poor scholarship from a well-trained scholar. There should be scholastic ethics and humility, that if you do not know something be candid and tell the questioner that you will come back after studying. Putting the wrong historic evidences to the question just because it suits your narrative is ridiculous for a person who describes himself as a world renowned scholar/teacher. To block someone who brings forth counter-arguments is certainly not academic intellectualism nor does it fit scholarly integrity, and it can be easily put in to the category of argumentum ad hominem.

In 2013, Dr. Howard J. Resnick (Hridayananda Goswami) conceived and established Krishna West, which aims to make bhakti-yoga easy, relevant and enjoyable for Western people. I genuinely admire his intentions to bring western people to the devotion of Krishna in their familiar atmosphere, but I also have genuine doubt that his predominant preaching methodology of constant ill speaking of Indian culture, food and dresses is of any interest to the newcomer westerners. This constant denigrating of Indian dresses, food, languages and culture is more oriented towards re-converting those westerners, who had already to some degree or other embraced Vedic philosophy with its ancient but still alive vibrant culture, food and dresses. A little course correction in his preaching methodology will do wonders and set things right.