Friday, September 14, 2007

Hinduism welcomes Blasphemy

In my article, ‘Why do we criticize our nations?’, I said:

Most overzealous people in an obsessive effort to combat their enemy become just like their enemy, but on the other side of the coin.

Hinduism has now upgraded itself to include blasphemy. The BJP, which appoints itself as the official spokesman for all Hindus, has accused UPA government of ‘blasphemy’ for ‘telling the Supreme Court that there was no historical evidence to establish the existence of Lord Rama or the other characters in Ramayana.’

Now, can someone list all the things that are blasphemous in Hinduism? Can I ridicule LK Advani? Is it blasphemy? Can I dismiss existence of Narasimha avatar where a man takes the form of a Lion? Can I dismiss construction of a bridge by monkeys? Or is it a blasphemy too?

What about the incident where Devas (gods) and Asuras (demons) churned the sea using a mountain and a snake on the back of a giant turtle (or is it tortoise)? Is it blasphemy if I consider that incident to be mythology? May be we should NOT venture into Bay of Bengal if some idiot says that sea is the purported sacred place where this churning took place.

Blasphemy, we welcome you! Our national IQ average is falling rapidly, are we are becoming complete idiots, please embrace us!

5 comments:

  1. The first such blasphemy was committed in hinduism by a person no less than Jaimini. In mimamsa-sutras Jaimini takes great pains to elaborate why personalities mentioned in veda-s CANNOT be taken as actual beings. This was considered scandalous by other theist schools of the time. However, later mimamsaka-s, bhatta-s and prabhakar-s apparently made some concessions to theists in their interpretations.

    A similar blasphemy was committed by doyen of Indian philosophy -shankara himself. In his theory of jurisdiction of pramana-s, shankara has concluded that scriptures cannot be taken as authoritative in matters of knowledge gained through sense perception since such matters do not fall into legitimate jurisdiction of shruti. In his commentarry on Gita, he mentions that even a hundred shruti declaring fire as cold cannot make it cold. As per shankara, in the jurisdiction of sense perception, only legitimate pramana-s are perception and inference. This stand is refuted by dvaitins even today.

    Apparently, shankara would also be in the list of "blasphemers" in rejecting Valmiki Ramayana as a pramana on this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You said : Can I dismiss existence of Narasimha avatar where a man takes the form of a Lion? Can I dismiss construction of a bridge by monkeys? Or is it a blasphemy too?

    I say: Divine Incarnation Lord Narasimha is not a man taking form of Lion for your information. When you do not know the complete information do not give false opinions. Faith is not based on Logic and Half Doctor kills the patient. Every action is bound to have reaction. What you give to others comes back to you in a surprising ways and sometimes with amplification.

    There are so many idiotic things in other religions which you may have not have same feelings as you have with Sanatana Dharma with things like how can God tell a man of 80 years in dreams to marry a girl of 8 who happens to be kid of his friend playing with dolls. This can be interpreted like God acting like a dating agency on steriods for dying man or worse a pimp. But you do not wish to implement your reasoning in such idiotic and psychotic things in other religions then why do you pick one religion and try to rape it to the point where your mind gets same satisfaction as raping prostitutes of all brothels in this world.

    Even atheists are respected in our religion whereas atheists get crane hanging treatments for just being atheists. Respect what others believe on and you get the same respect back.

    ReplyDelete
  3. OK, Narasimha avatar is half-man and half-lion. Does it change anything? :)

    Even atheists are respected in our religion whereas atheists get crane hanging treatments for just being atheists. Respect what others believe on and you get the same respect back.

    Oooh! Is that a new threat now? Do you guys want to start Insurrection in India now?

    ReplyDelete
  4. A Scholarly note. when you talk about monkeys building bridges, you are misinterpreting the word Vanara to be monkey. It actually means forest dweller(ask any local sanskrit scholar in a proper university) and their description in the mahabharata and ramayana is the first(and earliest) description of ape-like humanoids in any form of literature in the world. It is perfectly feasible for ape-like humanoids to demonstrate the sentinence shown in the bharata.

    It is not far fetched(although still unproven) to hypothesize that parts of the mahabharata were based on real-life events involving humans and homnids working together.

    Whats also to be noted is that the Mahabharata and Ramayana are basically literary works (Technically epic sanskrit poetry)
    which like all poems tend to hyperbole and romanticize the heroes and it might be true that Ram or Krishna might just be great human kings whose actions were romanticized in these poems.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It’s true that superstition & blind belief in religion will result in low IQ, as is the case in crores of people in India.

    As for the case of BJP accusing UPA government of ‘blasphemy’, it’s nothing but realpoliticking.

    Politician use emotive issues to garner votes or to have a go at the opposition. But do they really believe in everything they utter in public? NOT ALWAYS! They say one thing for mass consumption – but another in their drawing rooms. This is an open secret!

    ReplyDelete

Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.