Thursday , December 29, 2011 at 15 : 17
Bhagwad Gita and some thoughts===============================================
"I owed a magnificent day to the Bhagavad Gita. It was the first of books; it was as if an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence which in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the same questions which exercise us." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
A Siberian court yesterday threw out a petition that sought to ban a translation of the Bhagavad Gita as "extremist" literature. Judge Galina Butenko of the Leninsky District Court in Tomsk ruled on Wednesday that there were no grounds for recognising 'Bhagavad Gita As It Is' as extremist because the book was "one of the interpretations of the sacred Hindu scripture."
Not just Hinduism, of which the Bhagawad Gita is a holy book, no religion instructs intolerance or violence against worshippers of 'false gods'.
Monotheistic religious founders Jesus Christ and Mohammed never conceptualised any new religion in their time. They all sought reformation within their own religious practices and it was their followers who turned their teachings into religions. The zealousness of the followers made them to pursue their beliefs with severity which led to religious divisions.
Even in the ancient Indian religions, a divide broke out such as - Shwethambar-Digambar among the Jains, Mahayana-Hinayana among the Buddhists. As for the Western ones, Roman Catholic-Protestant among the Christians, Sunni-Shia among the Muslims. The Shaivaite-Vaishnavite divide too was evident till a few centuries ago.
Hinduism preaches universal brotherhood, Mahavira abstinence, Buddha peace, Jesus love and Mohammed oneness. Jainism and Buddhism have never seen the ugly face of intolerance. Among the two other monotheistic religions, 'Jihad' as associated with mystics, rejects the legal definition of jihad as armed conflict and teaches Muslims to withdraw from the worldly concerns to achieve spiritual depth.
The 'Crusades' being conceived of by Jesus, one who was readily crucified, too are unimaginable. It is thus a matter of simple conjecture that each religious founder's preaching was diametrically opposed to that of his followers.
The founder's physical image itself gradually saw a sea change, the Buddha took the likeness of his worshipper, whether in India or in southeast Asia, Mahavira's appearance was different in the North from the South of India. Jesus Christ, though Palestinian by birth, took on a Caucasian appearance with fair complexion and pink lips. In Hinduism too, the gods are invariably breathtakingly beautiful and serene. It may be fair to say that gods generally were representative of serenity and beauty.
No religious symbol can be representative of hatred or intolerance and if any religion were to preach it, it would never enjoy mass appeal. Each religion had to have a central theme that united humanity to succeed. If it did not, its existence would be short lived.
Most religions therefore held out a hope for the shunned, depraved or the pathetic. The cruelest of men - 'Angulimala', who killed men and wore their fingers as trophies, was drawn by the Buddha, so much so that he decided to become a monk - he was eventually lynched by a mob of people who thought that it was a ploy to kill them all.
Similarly, Jesus brought under his ambit depressed persons from varied cross-sections, and Mohammed the prophet exemplified compassion, particularly to orphans.
Chimpanzees are notoriously quarrelsome and would feud at the slightest opportunity, but not so their counter parts, the Capuchins or even the Bonobos. The Bonobos live in groups of about 100 and share a bond of cooperation and tolerance. The Bonobos have sex as a strong means of conflict resolution.
The Bonobos and Common Chimpanzees are our closest living relatives, sharing approximately 95 per cent of their DNA with us. Yet, the temperamental difference between these cousins is phenomenal.
This comparison is apt between certain Asian nations as compared to a country like Norway. For the fourth year in a row, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) has ranked Norway as having the highest standard of living in the world.
Researchers for the UNDP also weighed countries' degrees of cultural freedom in their analysis. They called cultural freedom a "basic human right," and awarded high scores in this year's UN Human Development Report to countries that accept immigrant cultures in addition to their own.
Norway's cultural diversity has blossomed in recent years, and public policies are aimed at integrating various ethnic groups and promoting tolerance. Norway is one of 19 countries in the world with no measurable rates of illiteracy.
Pakistan, on the other hand, is a nation born on the basis of religion and faces serious allegations of being a major exporter of terror. Secularism is practiced in fits and bursts, mostly because Turkey inspires a part of the ruling militia in Pakistan.
In Pakistan, by 1992, the population over 25 had a mean of only 1.9 years of schooling, and yet the Pakistan Government claims 54 per cent literacy. This fact explains the minimal criteria for being considered literate, which is, having the ability to both read and write (with understanding) a short, simple statement on everyday life. Education is the key to resolution of conflict and thereby ensuring secularism, nations must take their own initiatives to infuse a secular outlook.
Our societies are today splintered on the basis of communities; members of certain religions prefer to stay in each other's company. Religious leaders lack universal appeal and worse, they lack appeal within their own religions.
Ritualism holds the key to most religions and the subject of reformation is taboo. Religious leaders are engrossed in proving their sway over their people and rehashing cliches. Each religious leader wants to outdo the other, within their communities and outside.
Religion is now playing a major role in terrorism and fanaticism. The scourge of terror racks several major nations of the world. In retribution, the powerful nations are trampling on imaginary enemies, which provides spurt to the forces of terror.
Moderate voices have fallen silent as frenzied non-seculars rule. Intermixing, joint celebration of inter-religious festivals, concern for degradation of symbols and icons, leaders of men addressing issues of multi-religious nature, leaders of religious groups expressing genuine concern for issues facing other religious groups are the hallmarks of a civilised society. It is a foregone conclusion that our sons and their progeny will view us as citizens of a barbaric world.
Religion is undoubtedly the "opium of the masses". So long as it enjoys acceptability, it will be impossible to proscribe religion to achieve Plato's republic where 'Philosopher Guardians' will rule unencumbered by marriage. We are indeed far away from that world where children who belong to the state are brought up with the best interests of the Republic.
Today's children have no exposure to the other side; they would therefore grow up with their parents' worldview which is pretty much bigoted. No State, however sensitive it is to minorities, opens its doors to them, nor does it aspire to enter their's.
No State has conceptualised an inter-religious youth exchange programme. An average American, for example, has no empathetic idea as to the lifestyle of his Muslim neighbour, no idea of their God, no idea of their livelihood and their concerns. His view of them is shaded by hazy impressions gained on his own and by those carried by his friends, neither is right.
Yet he is convinced that he has done his best to foment conditions for multi-culturalism and remains shocked that the Muslims he has been particularly kind to have been ungrateful.
The Muslim, on the other hand, is bristling with dissatisfaction over perceived improprieties and seeks positive amends to right agonising wrongs.
If cultures do not meet and religions do not see eye to eye, the human race is likely to meet the fate of the dinosaur.
Pursuing gigantic humanitarian causes, which have the capability of capturing the imagination of people at large, is perhaps one way of keeping fundamentalism at bay. The most cussed are the most deprived or who suffer a perception of deprivation, the cure for which is to work for the emancipation of the wretched. The numbers of abandoned persons, including geriatrics, children, wives and handicapped persons in the world number several hundred million. Their welfare is a project that would deeply concern each nation and each religion individually.
The problem of abandoned persons is only one among serious problems that confront the world, as we know it. The Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potentials, a publication that began in 1972, has listed about 12,000 such world problems clustered into 320 overlapping hierarchies and running into 1200 pages. Our generation would fail future generations if we do not endeavour to solve even some of these problems, for reason that we do not see eye to eye.
Intermixing of communities can be conducive only so long as each religious group plays a fair game, and each nation follows the rule of law in letter and spirit. Playing the game by the rules has its inherent strengths.
Jesus Christ, a humble man, preached love and compassion -and in his lifetime had but a few hundred followers. Yet, when he was accused of making a false claim to being the King of the Jews and faced the prospect of crucifixion, he allowed the Roman Empire to play the game by its distorted rules.
The Roman Empire crumbled at this insistence on fair play; today Christianity has the largest number of followers in the world. History would have undoubtedly taken a different course if the Romans did not exercise their matchless strength so arbitrarily.
It is widely perceived that George Bush, a devout Christian, on the other hand, denied Saddam Hussein a fair chance. It is no wonder that each terrorist attack taunts the western world about its poor record on Iraq.
The Dalai Lama, who has been exiled and is in India since 1959 is an exceptional follower of the rule of law. The Chinese Government took over Tibet turning a Nelson's eye to voices of strong disapproval. Providing asylum to the fleeing leader indeed proved detrimental to India when it faced the Chinese aggression of 1962. Dalai Lama is the Tibetan leader in exile and has not spoken a word of ill-will against the Chinese, such is his moral strength that he counsels young Tibetans not to bear hatred against the Chinese. The Dalai was the recipient of the Nobel Prize on 10 December 1989, he has legions of followers and is probably the best known Buddhist leader next to Prince Siddhartha himself. If not for the arbitrary action of the Chinese Government, the Dalai Lama may well have remained a little known spiritual-temporal head of Tibet.
The Bhagavad Gita is both a treatise on war, as it is on peace. How it is propagated depends on the person spreading the message. If he has extremism in his heart, it is easy to infuse it into his lesson, thereby rendering the text extremist.
Similarly, the Koran preaches the Lord's word to take humanity from darkness to light and yet, a perverted 'Jihad' is proffered by the unworthy to be one of its offerings.
The Bible preaches love and compassion and yet its followers perform scores of unworthy and uncompassionate acts.
The most peace-loving people are the Parsis, but yet their's was one of the most martial races that walked the face of this earth during the time of Cyrus the great (580-529 BC).
This is to say that no religion has an inherent temperament; no religion is peace loving or war-mongering. Religions are a mixed bag and its followers choose a cap that best fits them. A secular outlook inculcated during the formative years and nurtured with good thoughts, good deeds and good words are indeed the key to fruitful existence. For those, who refuse to heed words of wisdom, there is no hope, for the struggle will kill the aggressors and the meek shall inherit the earth.
A rather dispassionate view of religion will somewhat help. In ancient Egypt, Rome or Greece, countless millions worshipped gods who do not today exist, with the greatest faith. Did they worship false gods? Let us imagine a Roman, who lived at around 150 BC, who was a fervent believer of say Zeus. He lived and died in the strident belief that Zeus brought him happiness and also sorrow, prosperity or penury.
Yet today, his god does not exist- not only did the Roman die, but his deity did too. The point is this - we will all eventually die and in this endless continuum of life, our gods will die too. New gods will emerge, new religions will spring to life and so will new believers. Yet the godly qualities of humanitarian concern, virtue, kindness, selflessness and importantly, tolerance, will endure.
Bhagwad Gita and some thoughts===============================================
"I owed a magnificent day to the Bhagavad Gita. It was the first of books; it was as if an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence which in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the same questions which exercise us." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
A Siberian court yesterday threw out a petition that sought to ban a translation of the Bhagavad Gita as "extremist" literature. Judge Galina Butenko of the Leninsky District Court in Tomsk ruled on Wednesday that there were no grounds for recognising 'Bhagavad Gita As It Is' as extremist because the book was "one of the interpretations of the sacred Hindu scripture."
Not just Hinduism, of which the Bhagawad Gita is a holy book, no religion instructs intolerance or violence against worshippers of 'false gods'.
Monotheistic religious founders Jesus Christ and Mohammed never conceptualised any new religion in their time. They all sought reformation within their own religious practices and it was their followers who turned their teachings into religions. The zealousness of the followers made them to pursue their beliefs with severity which led to religious divisions.
Even in the ancient Indian religions, a divide broke out such as - Shwethambar-Digambar among the Jains, Mahayana-Hinayana among the Buddhists. As for the Western ones, Roman Catholic-Protestant among the Christians, Sunni-Shia among the Muslims. The Shaivaite-Vaishnavite divide too was evident till a few centuries ago.
Hinduism preaches universal brotherhood, Mahavira abstinence, Buddha peace, Jesus love and Mohammed oneness. Jainism and Buddhism have never seen the ugly face of intolerance. Among the two other monotheistic religions, 'Jihad' as associated with mystics, rejects the legal definition of jihad as armed conflict and teaches Muslims to withdraw from the worldly concerns to achieve spiritual depth.
The 'Crusades' being conceived of by Jesus, one who was readily crucified, too are unimaginable. It is thus a matter of simple conjecture that each religious founder's preaching was diametrically opposed to that of his followers.
The founder's physical image itself gradually saw a sea change, the Buddha took the likeness of his worshipper, whether in India or in southeast Asia, Mahavira's appearance was different in the North from the South of India. Jesus Christ, though Palestinian by birth, took on a Caucasian appearance with fair complexion and pink lips. In Hinduism too, the gods are invariably breathtakingly beautiful and serene. It may be fair to say that gods generally were representative of serenity and beauty.
No religious symbol can be representative of hatred or intolerance and if any religion were to preach it, it would never enjoy mass appeal. Each religion had to have a central theme that united humanity to succeed. If it did not, its existence would be short lived.
Most religions therefore held out a hope for the shunned, depraved or the pathetic. The cruelest of men - 'Angulimala', who killed men and wore their fingers as trophies, was drawn by the Buddha, so much so that he decided to become a monk - he was eventually lynched by a mob of people who thought that it was a ploy to kill them all.
Similarly, Jesus brought under his ambit depressed persons from varied cross-sections, and Mohammed the prophet exemplified compassion, particularly to orphans.
Chimpanzees are notoriously quarrelsome and would feud at the slightest opportunity, but not so their counter parts, the Capuchins or even the Bonobos. The Bonobos live in groups of about 100 and share a bond of cooperation and tolerance. The Bonobos have sex as a strong means of conflict resolution.
The Bonobos and Common Chimpanzees are our closest living relatives, sharing approximately 95 per cent of their DNA with us. Yet, the temperamental difference between these cousins is phenomenal.
This comparison is apt between certain Asian nations as compared to a country like Norway. For the fourth year in a row, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) has ranked Norway as having the highest standard of living in the world.
Researchers for the UNDP also weighed countries' degrees of cultural freedom in their analysis. They called cultural freedom a "basic human right," and awarded high scores in this year's UN Human Development Report to countries that accept immigrant cultures in addition to their own.
Norway's cultural diversity has blossomed in recent years, and public policies are aimed at integrating various ethnic groups and promoting tolerance. Norway is one of 19 countries in the world with no measurable rates of illiteracy.
Pakistan, on the other hand, is a nation born on the basis of religion and faces serious allegations of being a major exporter of terror. Secularism is practiced in fits and bursts, mostly because Turkey inspires a part of the ruling militia in Pakistan.
In Pakistan, by 1992, the population over 25 had a mean of only 1.9 years of schooling, and yet the Pakistan Government claims 54 per cent literacy. This fact explains the minimal criteria for being considered literate, which is, having the ability to both read and write (with understanding) a short, simple statement on everyday life. Education is the key to resolution of conflict and thereby ensuring secularism, nations must take their own initiatives to infuse a secular outlook.
Our societies are today splintered on the basis of communities; members of certain religions prefer to stay in each other's company. Religious leaders lack universal appeal and worse, they lack appeal within their own religions.
Ritualism holds the key to most religions and the subject of reformation is taboo. Religious leaders are engrossed in proving their sway over their people and rehashing cliches. Each religious leader wants to outdo the other, within their communities and outside.
Religion is now playing a major role in terrorism and fanaticism. The scourge of terror racks several major nations of the world. In retribution, the powerful nations are trampling on imaginary enemies, which provides spurt to the forces of terror.
Moderate voices have fallen silent as frenzied non-seculars rule. Intermixing, joint celebration of inter-religious festivals, concern for degradation of symbols and icons, leaders of men addressing issues of multi-religious nature, leaders of religious groups expressing genuine concern for issues facing other religious groups are the hallmarks of a civilised society. It is a foregone conclusion that our sons and their progeny will view us as citizens of a barbaric world.
Religion is undoubtedly the "opium of the masses". So long as it enjoys acceptability, it will be impossible to proscribe religion to achieve Plato's republic where 'Philosopher Guardians' will rule unencumbered by marriage. We are indeed far away from that world where children who belong to the state are brought up with the best interests of the Republic.
Today's children have no exposure to the other side; they would therefore grow up with their parents' worldview which is pretty much bigoted. No State, however sensitive it is to minorities, opens its doors to them, nor does it aspire to enter their's.
No State has conceptualised an inter-religious youth exchange programme. An average American, for example, has no empathetic idea as to the lifestyle of his Muslim neighbour, no idea of their God, no idea of their livelihood and their concerns. His view of them is shaded by hazy impressions gained on his own and by those carried by his friends, neither is right.
Yet he is convinced that he has done his best to foment conditions for multi-culturalism and remains shocked that the Muslims he has been particularly kind to have been ungrateful.
The Muslim, on the other hand, is bristling with dissatisfaction over perceived improprieties and seeks positive amends to right agonising wrongs.
If cultures do not meet and religions do not see eye to eye, the human race is likely to meet the fate of the dinosaur.
Pursuing gigantic humanitarian causes, which have the capability of capturing the imagination of people at large, is perhaps one way of keeping fundamentalism at bay. The most cussed are the most deprived or who suffer a perception of deprivation, the cure for which is to work for the emancipation of the wretched. The numbers of abandoned persons, including geriatrics, children, wives and handicapped persons in the world number several hundred million. Their welfare is a project that would deeply concern each nation and each religion individually.
The problem of abandoned persons is only one among serious problems that confront the world, as we know it. The Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potentials, a publication that began in 1972, has listed about 12,000 such world problems clustered into 320 overlapping hierarchies and running into 1200 pages. Our generation would fail future generations if we do not endeavour to solve even some of these problems, for reason that we do not see eye to eye.
Intermixing of communities can be conducive only so long as each religious group plays a fair game, and each nation follows the rule of law in letter and spirit. Playing the game by the rules has its inherent strengths.
Jesus Christ, a humble man, preached love and compassion -and in his lifetime had but a few hundred followers. Yet, when he was accused of making a false claim to being the King of the Jews and faced the prospect of crucifixion, he allowed the Roman Empire to play the game by its distorted rules.
The Roman Empire crumbled at this insistence on fair play; today Christianity has the largest number of followers in the world. History would have undoubtedly taken a different course if the Romans did not exercise their matchless strength so arbitrarily.
It is widely perceived that George Bush, a devout Christian, on the other hand, denied Saddam Hussein a fair chance. It is no wonder that each terrorist attack taunts the western world about its poor record on Iraq.
The Dalai Lama, who has been exiled and is in India since 1959 is an exceptional follower of the rule of law. The Chinese Government took over Tibet turning a Nelson's eye to voices of strong disapproval. Providing asylum to the fleeing leader indeed proved detrimental to India when it faced the Chinese aggression of 1962. Dalai Lama is the Tibetan leader in exile and has not spoken a word of ill-will against the Chinese, such is his moral strength that he counsels young Tibetans not to bear hatred against the Chinese. The Dalai was the recipient of the Nobel Prize on 10 December 1989, he has legions of followers and is probably the best known Buddhist leader next to Prince Siddhartha himself. If not for the arbitrary action of the Chinese Government, the Dalai Lama may well have remained a little known spiritual-temporal head of Tibet.
The Bhagavad Gita is both a treatise on war, as it is on peace. How it is propagated depends on the person spreading the message. If he has extremism in his heart, it is easy to infuse it into his lesson, thereby rendering the text extremist.
Similarly, the Koran preaches the Lord's word to take humanity from darkness to light and yet, a perverted 'Jihad' is proffered by the unworthy to be one of its offerings.
The Bible preaches love and compassion and yet its followers perform scores of unworthy and uncompassionate acts.
The most peace-loving people are the Parsis, but yet their's was one of the most martial races that walked the face of this earth during the time of Cyrus the great (580-529 BC).
This is to say that no religion has an inherent temperament; no religion is peace loving or war-mongering. Religions are a mixed bag and its followers choose a cap that best fits them. A secular outlook inculcated during the formative years and nurtured with good thoughts, good deeds and good words are indeed the key to fruitful existence. For those, who refuse to heed words of wisdom, there is no hope, for the struggle will kill the aggressors and the meek shall inherit the earth.
A rather dispassionate view of religion will somewhat help. In ancient Egypt, Rome or Greece, countless millions worshipped gods who do not today exist, with the greatest faith. Did they worship false gods? Let us imagine a Roman, who lived at around 150 BC, who was a fervent believer of say Zeus. He lived and died in the strident belief that Zeus brought him happiness and also sorrow, prosperity or penury.
Yet today, his god does not exist- not only did the Roman die, but his deity did too. The point is this - we will all eventually die and in this endless continuum of life, our gods will die too. New gods will emerge, new religions will spring to life and so will new believers. Yet the godly qualities of humanitarian concern, virtue, kindness, selflessness and importantly, tolerance, will endure.
================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment