Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
Quite correct. In fact, a Neo-Hindu would be more likely to denounce these as quaint mythology intended for spiritually undeveloped minds, just as Swami Vivekananda did for icon worship.
Remember, the Neo-Hindu is very anxious to make sure that his version of "Hinduism" is well-respected in Western, rationalist circles. Thus, the Neo will argue that Hindu creation stories are compatible with macroevolutionary theory, that dashavataras represent evolution of man from animals, that Hinduism upholds the "Big Bang Theory," and so on. Often, these are people are are familiar neither with the scriptures nor with the scientific theories with which they are alleging compatibility.
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
We actually find both arguments misused by neos, for instance Manus Smriti was dug up and promoted and propagated and pushed by the british and their vedantic sepoys and instituted as a law book with relevance for all India during their rule, because they did not want to cope with the variety of different laws, rules, sects and diverse regulations in all the different regions, but wanted one law and one religion to simplify their rule. To establish one law for all and one holy book for all all over India was a western colonial power game, that was the reason for sponsoring and promoting vedanta above other traditions it was the most convinient way to mould hinduism in the likeness of abrahamic traditions, and a sanitized version of vedanta was sponsored to do just that, establishing vedas and Upanishads as a holy book just like the Bible, should help replace the 'barbaric' practices of other sects, and using the literate and anglophil, and in their viewpoint the more civilized brahmin community for these purposes, was an ideal choice.
That may be true regarding the British, but the discussion here is about Neo-Hinduism versus traditional Hinduism. Traditional Hindus did have different dharma-shAstras, but they had the same Veda. Neo-Hindus are more likely to downplay the authority of dharma-shAstras while only giving lip-service to the authority of the Veda, as they tend to claim that "Hindus have no rules or regulations" or that Hindus can decide for themselves what they want to follow. Both viewpoints are easily discernable as false with even a casual study of the canonical Hindu literature.
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
I do not care for your point score. You failed to understand the import of my post. It does not matter.
What delightful company that must be - a bunch of "real" Hindus/practitioners united in their hatred for the "acharyas". Where do you guys meet?I am far too controlled on the "acharyas" in this forum, in other places where members are insiders and practionersnif either family or real traditions of mantravada, they get treated much less kindly. You need to understand hinduism doesnt start and end with them and constant blown out of proportion importance they receive here seems like infraction on hinduism discussion to me.
BTW...do you consider yourself Hindu? Are you a traditional one or a neo one? If neither, why do you post on HDF?
Yes i agree with you, as i do with most of what you write, just there is always a tiny but..... because.... people like Ramakrishna and Vivekananda and others like the founder of Brahmo samaj, Ram Mohan Roy, are Neo hindus that were sponsored and promoted also by huge grants of money from the west, just to civilize and sanitize Hinduism with their compromised version of vedanta and tantra. Tantra i mention here because apparently Ram Mohan Roy was behind the propagation of the forged Maha Nirvana Tantra which is injected with lots of elements of hidden british agenda, so it is very relevant that the british raj and their vedantic friends, gave rise to a variety of Neo Hinduism many Hindus on this forum embrace.
Last edited by MahaHrada; 07 March 2013 at 12:50 PM.
I agree that these people do not hold traditional Hindu views, the reason I mentioned them is that the indological bureaucrats did not allow for them to hold pro Hindu political views and maintain their academic jobs or association in indology circles which goes to show how censored western indology is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks