>The question for Hindus is, do we have to
become
>"non-believers" for our religion to conform to modern
>times? Shouldn't it be easier for us to change our
>interpretations (or reject them entirely) because we
>are not followers of THE book?
>"non-believers" for our religion to conform to modern
>times? Shouldn't it be easier for us to change our
>interpretations (or reject them entirely) because we
>are not followers of THE book?
My two cents of above:
In fact that is what is being done
in Hinduism in every age. Hinduism is one religion which had been
interpreted and reinterpreted any which way you like so to say That
is what the reformers did during the middle ages in India.
Shankarchaya came and interpreted the Gita, the Vedanta Brahma Slwko
and the Vedas in such way that Hinduism became strict monism almost
like Buddhism and there was not room left for a personal God for Bhaktivad
So Ramanujam and others had to reinterpret later and prove Shankarachaya wrong
and create new rooms for Bhaktivad. In modern days, Ram Mohan Roy,
Vivekananda, Gandhi, Tegore, Radhakrishnan and others have been redefining
Hinduism their way. Hinduism has one advantage for re-interpretation
because there are so many different scriptures and so very little were
actually written in the original texts and in such symbolic language. If
one does like one scripture, one can always pull things from other
scriptures. If one does like the Vedas, one can cite one of the
Upanishads. In other religions, there are not much scope for fresh
interpretations, because they have THE BOOKS, and one cannot do much
reinterpretation of the same BOOK. In Hinduism, today one may say, 'We don't
believe the Manusmriti' and I think no damage would be done. Does one have to
believe the Vedas to remain a Hindu? What about the Gita? What about
'reincurnation' or the theory of 'karma'? If one does not believe in any
of these, is the guy still a Hindu? The Xongkor Xongho do not believe the
Vedas. In fact Vivekananda had a hard time trying to come with a proper
definition of a Hindu as to what minimum things he would have to believe
and still claim that he was a Hindu. The greatest re interpretation of the
Gita was by Gandhi, because fracnkly speaking he could not reconcile the fact
that Lord Krishna was actually advising Arjun to fight and kill his own
relatives in the Kurukshetra war. Ultimately he came up with the vision that
Krishna was actually telling not of the real war but a war in the minds against
evil. So in Hinduism, first set your belief system as to what you
like, and then find the specific scriptures which will support your view, and
ignore the rest. You will remain a good Hindu without any conflict. That
is why I say, more than any other religion, Hinduism is more a 'political
religion' . You are a Hindu because your father was a Hindu.
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rajib Das" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Roy, Santanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chan Mahanta"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "xourov
pathok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <assam@assamnet.org>
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] caste
system
>
> Thanks as always for very considered responses. Yes, I
> admit I couldn't escape putting in rhetoric there in
> those list of questions.
>
> Let me put in further questions to your responses. I
> will still await responses to my questions from the
> rest of the group here.
>
> Further questions:
>
> 1. Are the 4 castes really, inextricably linked to the
>
> cycle of karma and rebirth? What I mean is - does it
> find specific reference in the Rig Veda? Does it
> specifically say that you have to "abide by the
> bondage" of your caste to escape the karmic cycle?
>
> Or does it state that you escape the karmic cycle when
> you follow "Dharma" and Dharma is not necessarily
> defined by varna.
>
> 2. As per the original scriptures, is there a
> gradation of incentive systems or really the incentive
> system has just one incentive - moksha? Or escape from
> the karmic cycle of births and rebirths. Meaning - it
> really does not matter you are born into a particular
> Varna - what matters is that you are born at all.
>
> 3. We know Islam (and Islamic society) is finding
> itself difficult to reshape itself to modern times.
> Christians in Europe are doing it by, in essence,
> becoming non-believers.
>
> The question for Hindus is, do we have to become
> "non-believers" for our religion to conform to modern
> times? Shouldn't it be easier for us to change our
> interpretations (or reject them entirely) because we
> are not followers of THE book?
>
> 4. When I argue for certain tenets - such as the
> hereditary nature of the Varna system (or the Varna
> system itself) - does it really mean I am arguing for
> a new religion? I would like not to think so.
>
>
>
>
> --- "Roy, Santanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Dear Rajib:
> > I cannot answer all of your questions. I can see
> > that some of them are
> > rhetorical. There are others I really don't know the
> > answers to.But I
> > can try to put some kind of response for a few.
> >
> > 2. Does Varnashrama Dharma refer specifically to and
> > only to the 4 castes and the 4 ashramas - or does it
> > posit on a bigger spiritual and philosophical
> > canvas?
> >
> > SR: As I understand it, the 4 castes are
> > inextricably tied to the reward
> > and punishment structure posited by karma and
> > rebirth. If you do very
> > well, you will be reborn as a higher caste. If you
> > do very badly, you
> > may become a shudra or even worse, born as an
> > animal. In each life, you
> > pay or reap the rewards for your earlier lives.
> > Therefore, you should
> > accept your current station in life as a temporary
> > state and abide by
> > the bondages dutifully so that you can rise up in
> > later lives. And if
> > you do this very very well, you may even escape the
> > cycle of birth and
> > death some day.
> >
> > 2. Varna finds its mention in the Rig Veda all
> > right.
> > But do the Vedas themselves specify that the Varnas
> > are defined by birth? Or did it come much later with
> > the likes of Manu? And if the Varna system were not
> > to
> > be defined by birth but by someone's desire, will
> > and
> > action, would it change anything in the way we
> > percieve things about Hinduism?
> >
> > SR: Answer to last question: it would. It would
> > screw up the incentive
> > system tied to cycles of life and death as posited
> > in the early
> > scriptures.
> >
> >
> > 6. Since Islam has always had a bloody history right
> > from the time of when the transition of leadership
> > was
> > to happen from the prophet to his disciples and
> > since
> > it has enough mention in the Koran of killing of
> > kufrs, should it be called "Unsalaam" or something
> > and
> > should Muslims reject Islam in its entirety?
> >
> > SR: Islam is very much face to face with the
> > contradictions between some
> > of its core narrative and the values of modern
> > society. This is the
> > basic clash of civilizations we are supposed to be
> > in the midst of.
> >
> > 7. Should Christianity with its reference to
> > slavery,
> > keep continuing to celebrate slavery - after all it
> > was ONE of the tenets expounded in the Bible and
> > therefore you cannot ignore it and ipso facto, a
> > Christian must reject the Bible in its entirety?
> >
> > SR: I don't know much about this. The New Testament
> > in effect does
> > reject some of the tenets of the old testament. I am
> > not aware of
> > slavery being a central tenet of Christian faith at
> > any point of time. I
> > thought Christians themselves were enslaved and fed
> > to lions in the
> > first few centuries after Christ. As a
> > philosophical, the Christian
> > doctrine does not - as far as I am aware - propose
> > slavery as a crucial
> > element in the chain of earth and heaven. I'd like
> > to hear more about
> > this. However, there are other aspects of core
> > Christian tenets that may
> > be in contradiction to modern life. Homosexuality,
> > premarital sex,
> > divorce and so on.
> >
> > 9. Why is the option of plainly denying the
> > existence
> > of "all these aspects" the only other way? Did any
> > one
> > of us really grow up with our parents teaching us
> > the
> > gunas of the Varnashrama system? Or did we really
> > look
> > forward to the excitement of Durga Puja and other
> > religious/social events? Has anyone denied my right
> > to
> > a Hindu religion when I married a Brahmin woman?
> >
> > SR: The question you ask is whether you are still a
> > Hindu (or why not)
> > even though you may have violated or not believed in
> > all this stuff.
> > Nobody told you that you are not. I think this is
> > not sufficient.
> >
> > More so, why would not a re-interpretation of the
> > meaning of Varna (I assume no one has problems with
> > Ashrama) be in the order of things? Or even the
> > rejection of it?
> >
> > After all there were enough reformers within the
> > Hindu
> > fold (and even Buddha wasn't exactly outside the
> > Hindu
> > fold in his life, was he?) who had enough following
> > through the times to change things.
> >
> > SR: You are probably arguing in effect for a new
> > philosophical system
> > that is more in accordance with your view of life.
> > That is a new
> > religion. You may not call it so.
> >
> >
> > 10. And why should we forget what our forefathers
> > did
> > to our religion? Why should our kids not learn that
> > there was for the longest time in history (and still
> > is) such gross injustice within our religious and
> > social order that things needed to change? And why
> > would they not accept it as a part of the bad they
> > inherit in as much as all the good they could?
> >
> >
> >
> > If such were the logic then the Christians and
> > Muslims
> > would have an even tougher time defending their
> > religions to their children, wouldn't they?
> >
> > SR: They do. It will become harder over time. We too
> > should have a hard
> > time. My point is that some people are in denial.
> > They don't want to
> > have a hard time. I am glad you are not in that set.
> >
> >
> > Take care-
> >
> > Santanu-da.
> >
> >
> > --- Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > >The other option is to gloss over and plainly
> > deny
> > > the existence of
> > > >all these >aspects (as many on this net do) and
> > > then to march
> > > >forward with a very >selective view of Hinduism
> > > that is in
> > > >consonance with modern society and >liberal
> > values.
> > > The trouble with
> > > >this approach is that in all honesty, you >cannot
> > > be very sure of
> > > >what it is you are clutching on to & therefore,
> > in
> > > the >long run,
> > > >are bound to run into certain contradictions -
> > > perhaps as
> > > >your >children question you....
> > >
> > >
> > > *** Well said Santanu. But I am not sure the
> > > inquisitive children are
> > > enough of a deterrence to that attempt at living
> > in
> > > a make-believe
> > > world. I have seen 'children' of those who would
> > > choose to live in a
> > > delusion, raised, indoctrinated and molded in the
> > > image of their
> > > parents :-), who grow up perfectly willing to
> > > perpetuate the myths
> > > and the delusions.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam@assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
_______________________________________________ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
