In my contribution I trace the transformations of the descent into the underworld from ancient Assyria via Greece and Rome to the world of Christian Late Antiquity. My aim is to analyse the evolution of a pagan and Jewish hellscape into a Christian one. First, I will briefly discuss the earliest known literary descent, that by Enkidu, which almost certainly influenced the poet of the Odyssey (§ 1), who, in turn, paved the way for the famous descent of Orpheus (§ 2). Subsequently, we will return to Assyria, and from there move to Israel and Rome during the early Imperial period (§ 3), before concluding with Christian Late Antiquity (§ 4). In my argument I will concentrate on the interplay of pagan and Christian traditions, as well as to the nature of the sinners in the various hellscapes.

The aim of this research is to clarify the view of classical Sāṁkhya on the relationship between the Vedas and its own teaching. Sāṁkhya is regarded by the Hindu tradition as a school of philosophy which recognizes the authority of the Vedas (āstika), but what is the real Sāṁkhya attitude towards the Vedas? My study is based on all the extant texts of classical Sāṁkhya. The textual analysis allowed me to distinguish four different tendencies (lines of thought) that constitute the classical Sāṁkhya view on the status of the Vedic revelation (śruti) in relation to its own doctrine: 1) the Vedas are an authoritative source of knowledge, but they do not play an important role in the grounding of the Sāṁkhya doctrine; 2) Sāṁkhya is authoritative because it is based on śruti; 3) Sāṁkhya is śruti, that is, it is identical to the quintessence (i.e., the highest teaching) of the Vedas set forth in the Upaniṣads; 4) Sāṁkhya is higher than the Vedas. Taking into account the results of my analysis, it is possible to say that the Sāṁkhya view on the status of the Vedas is no less ambiguous than the general Hindu attitude to them.

The influences of the phenomena of religious consciousness on the thinking and philosophy of Modern India are described in the article, based on the Bengal Renaissance works of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, especially those of the inaugurator Rammohun Roy. He created the basic foundations of Neo-Vedanta philosophy predominantly owing to the special phenomena of religious consciousness. The basic phenomena are primordial religious experience and the experience of contemplation and understanding of an Other religion (Islam and Christianity). Derivative phenomena are “monotheistic revolution” (term by G. Pomerants) and dialogue of religions in personal consciousness. Opening the resemblance of Vedanta and other religious traditions’ meanings to dialogue helped to achieve a new interpretation of the darśana. The novelty of Neo-Vedantism lies in the appearance of mighty ethical and social vectors of thinking. The combination of the aforesaid phenomena created the method of philosophising – free dialogue between one’s own tradition and another in order to enrich indigenous thought.

The distinction between religion and spirituality can be observed in the travel and tourism industry. The term “religion” is associated with institution, uniformity, and group. Spirituality, on the contrary, is individual, subjective, and experience-based. This opposition overlaps with the disparity between travelling and tourism. The content analysis was inspired by an article by Siv Ellen Kraft. My aim was to verify her statement in the contexts of Lonely Planet’s guidebooks to Indonesia and Thailand, Eastern countries popular among foreigners charmed by their religious and spiritual otherness. I examined the images of religions delivered by Lonely Planet and studied the context and the frequency of application of the following terms: “religion,” “spirituality,” “belief.”

Review: Maciej Potz, Teokracje amerykańskie. Źródła i mechanizmy władzy usankcjonowanej religijnie (“American Theocracies. Sources and Mechanisms of Religiously Sanctioned Power”), Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 2016, 395 pp.