Indian values and culture are subjected to ill treatment in the Academic circles of America in the field of Indic...
Indian values and culture are subjected to ill treatment in the Academic circles of America in the field of Indic studies /South Asian studies /Indology and Hinduism studies. Read the views expressed by the foremost Western Vedaacharya Sri. Vamadeva Shastri (Dr. David Frawley) in this piece.
http://vedanet.com/2014/08/26/anti-hindu-attitudes-in-american-academia-need-to-be-questioned/
http://vedanet.com/2014/08/26/anti-hindu-attitudes-in-american-academia-need-to-be-questioned/
Very correct, this is not meant for those Americans to whom Indians don't exist. Hence they need not worry. This is meant for Indians to know their own Culture, Religion, Ethos, Values, etc. and have clarity about 'who they are' at least with respect to their day to day worldly affairs and belief systems. If you forget your father's name you could be considered a "basta*d"
ReplyDeleteYes, it is another Hindu's duty to remind one not to forget his/her father's name. If one is not happy with me doing such a job, I can't help. If one feels, it is insufficient then that one is free to add, if there are mistakes one is always welcome to correct - and that's why we have such forums.
ReplyDeleteIt is important to note that any rebuttal or corrections have to be backed with proper references of Shastra with original Sanskrit /Tamil /Pali /Prakrit source. Any Neo /loose stuff will be thoroughly rejected.
I don't consider myself having the necessary 'qualifications' to 'teach' 'Hinduism'. I also don't accept the claims of anyone's authority to do so (academic or non academic). The right person for one to refer - which is applicable in today's context is Sri. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Bhagavan Sri. Ramana Maharishi, Swami Vivekananda, Sri. Aurobindo and few others - even all these Gurus have mostly guided people of the 'Adhyaatma' aspect. Hinduism is too vast and too deep to study academically. Shastra says that even one single shastra can't be mastered in a lifetime. So what about Hinduism with its Vedas, 100s of shastras, Itihaasa, Purana, etc.
ReplyDeleteAll I can do is to write about a few topics here and there and bring in certain new perspectives. Also I am not bringing here the vast ocean of Bhakti aspect of Hinduism in this forum - which by itself is huge and also highly subjective.
For that matter in Hinduism nothing can be separated or compartmentalized without the subjective aspect - including Yoga or even Ayurveda or even shastras which are considered to be purely objective such as Vaastu (Architecture & Construction).
So what is this subjective aspect - the experiential dimension that gets included as part and parcel of the shastra and can only be considered as a whole one single unit.
In addition there is a great deal of overlap across shstras - Tantrayukti in Ayurveda is very similar to Nyaya yuktis. The manasshastram in Ayurveda and the 33+8+8 Bhaava in Naatyashastram are very similar. Most of the Mathematicians of medieval times in India were Linguists.
Can anyone differentiate or explain the difference between one sweetness and another. Such as that of Mango and Banana. One can only experience. All one can say is that Mango's sweetness is different from that of Banana, or else one Banana's sweetness to another variety's. We have 20 different varieties of Banana and 100s of varieties of Mango - we want to preserve all - as it is. Thus we won't allow molding all others with that of the popular one. We are not making Robots here. Even in Yoga - there are many different methods - we want to preserve all. To my knowledge there 6 different versions of Surya namaskara itself. All these have to be preserved, not in some libraries or archives ( and calling that as 'Pagan' or so) or Indological study groups - but in practice. Christian evangelists are trying to target the minority groups and covert them (mold them) to some form of Christianity. As a result we have lost the majority of the different sects of Hinduism which were practiced in North-East India for centuries.
What the western style Indological studies are trying to do is, to mold and compartmentalize Hinduism into some buckets like Vedic /Classic and some "isms" - this is not only futile - but would result in half-baked foolish stuff. But this is done to mold Hindus into one bucket and create targeted advertisements and messages.
In shastra parlance this is explained as the "paanakarasanyaya". This means from where the "paanakam" (a sweetened water) gets its taste - from the Sharkara or Amla or Ela, etc. - the answer is no not from one thing. It is from the combination of all in certain proportions. So our Dharma is to protect Hinduisms all different aspects and that dharma is Hinduism.
Sitting in some ivory tower - one can never understand the subtle -subjective nuances of Hinduism - Hinduism is in how we get out of bed, how we greet each other, how we approach our studies, what importance we give to our parent's words, how we look at another life-form, how we see a tree, how we find it difficult to hurt other, how we think, how we speak, how we understand and comprehend, etc. When we look - what we see. the "drk" drishya viveka" - this is too deep.
Some are thinking that just by learning some Texts or by studying for few years - they know about Hinduism - such thinking is the height of foolishness. In my personal experience the more I study, my conclusion that "I know less and less" gets firmer and firmer. i decided to study, till I conclude that "I know nothing" (untill the point where the subject, verb, and object - all slowly disappearing and becoming one)
ReplyDeleteHere what I object to is that, with just such a compartmentalized bits and pieces education - people are jumping into conclusions and calling themselves as Indologist etc. and not allowing different opinions to emerge. Rajiv Malhotra is attempting to give a different opinion from that of the Western opinion (originated from Max Muller) on Hinduism - thus he is getting all brickbats. This itself is against the core principles of Hinduism.
I am of the opinion that I don't need any westerner to either abuse or praise Hinduism, that too with an ulterior motive of controlling - this despite whether Hindus are minority or majority in US or elsewhere.
This kind of lethargic attitude is what is rejected by Swami Vivekananda. So the question doesn't arise whether it is True religion or not and also the question doesn't arise whether one is merely removing the ignorance or "protecting". Most misunderstand people who are trying to remove ignorance as the ones who are defending or protecting, because they get threatened when it gets refined time to time - starting from Sri. Siddhartha Gautama to Nagarjuna to Bhartrhari to Kumarila Bhatta to Adi Shankara to Abhinavagupta to Swami Vivekananda. From where one gets the idea is that a reformer is acting with "fear".
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome to express your opinion
ReplyDelete