Tuesday, March 13, 2018

Koenraad Elst on "The Founder of My Religion"

While remaining within the "Hinduism is some type of religion" idea, Koenraad Elst describes the nature of religious authority in Hinduism, in this transcript of a talk that he gave in 2009, on the theme "The Founder of My Religion".

In Hinduism, authority rests with a vast array of scriptures: the Veda-s and the Bhagavad-Gita most famously, but also in the Agama-s or doctrinal scriptures of all the various sects, such as the Nanak Panth (= Sikhism)'s Guru Granth. But more importantly, it rests with every enlightened master, everyone who visibly embodies the sacred. It rests with your parents and personal teachers, and ultimately also with yourself. Your own common sense and intuition are the most important guide in your life's choices, informed by the plethora of Hindu sources of light, and not excluding even the non-Hindu sources. Living Hinduism is an application to the religious sphere of "the wisdom of crowds", the principle the combined insights of many provide a more accurate guide than the insights of an individual, be he prophet or messiah. I note with satisfaction that the Ahmadiya movement has incorporated a bit of this Hindu attitude by acknowledging Krishna and the Buddha as legitimate religious teachers.

May all beings in the Universe be happy.

A book on my reading list: The Impossibility of Religious Freedom

As a reminder to self:
Winnifred Fallers Sullivan (2007), The Impossibility of Religious Freedom
Introduction (PDF file)
Blurb (emphasis added):

The Constitution may guarantee it. But religious freedom in America is, in fact, impossible. So argues this timely and iconoclastic work by law and religion scholar Winnifred Sullivan. Sullivan uses as the backdrop for the book the trial of Warner vs. Boca Raton, a recent case concerning the laws that protect the free exercise of religion in America. The trial, for which the author served as an expert witness, concerned regulations banning certain memorials from a multiconfessional nondenominational cemetery in Boca Raton, Florida. The book portrays the unsuccessful struggle of Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish families in Boca Raton to preserve the practice of placing such religious artifacts as crosses and stars of David on the graves of the city-owned burial ground.

Sullivan demonstrates how, during the course of the proceeding, citizens from all walks of life and religious backgrounds were harassed to define just what their religion is. She argues that their plight points up a shocking truth: religion cannot be coherently defined for the purposes of American law, because everyone has different definitions of what religion is. Indeed, while religious freedom as a political idea was arguably once a force for tolerance, it has now become a force for intolerance, she maintains.

A clear-eyed look at the laws created to protect religious freedom, this vigorously argued book offers a new take on a right deemed by many to be necessary for a free democratic society. It will have broad appeal not only for religion scholars, but also for anyone interested in law and the Constitution.

Winnifred Fallers Sullivan is associate professor of law and director of the Law and Religion Program at the University at Buffalo Law School. She is also the author of Paying the Words Extra: Religious Discourse in the Supreme Court of the United States

Monday, March 12, 2018

What is इतिहास?

Itihaasa (इतिहास) is commonly translated as "history".

Here is a competing meaning, and seems to be more in tune with the actual exemplars of Itihaasa that we have (e.g., the Mahabharata).

इतिवृत्त (Itivritta) is the word that means chronicle, annals, record of historical events; and in dramaturgy, it means the plot of a play.

PS: footnote 20 on this page on the Natya Shastra has this:

Kauṭilya in his definition of itihāsa enumerates purāṇa and itivṛtta as belonging to its contents. An itivṛtta, according to Winternitz, can only mean an “historical event” and purāṇa probably means “mythological and legendary lore.” Vol. I. p. 518. Pargiter has, however, extracted solid historical facts from some of the extant Purāṇas (See his Ancient Indian Historical Traditions, London, 1922). According to the Indian tradition itihāsa is said to be an account of events that occured in the past, carrying in it instructions about duty, wealth, enjoyment of pleasure, and salvation. The same tradition assigns the position of itihāsa to the Mahābhārata the great Indian epic. It is possibly this itihāsa that has been connected with the Nāṭyaveda by the author of the śāstra. Hence it appears that Oldenberg’s theory about the original connexion between epic and dramatic poetry, is worthy of serious consideration. Nāṭyākhyaṃ pañcamaṃ vedaṃ setihāsaṃ karomy aham (15) seems to be very significant. Ag. (I. p. 13) explains setihāsam as itihāsopadeśakarūpaṃ saprabbedam. See Winternitz, Vol. I. pp. 100 ff, 312 n,

On the Right to Bear Arms: George Mason

This webpage, of Dr Walter Williams of the faculty of George Mason University has a whole bunch of quotes of US of A founding fathers, supporting a particular interpretation of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
If you look up the source, (yes, it is the 1836 edition not the 1788 edition) you will see that it should read:
"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except for a few public officers."
That "now" is significant, and is not some random addition by some editor, as can be seen by the full text below.  I wonder how many other distortions have been introduced by our worthy gun lobby.

Saturday, March 10, 2018

Divya Jhingran on Shashi Tharoor's "Why I am a Hindu"

Shashi Tharoor published a book recently, "Why I am a Hindu". (As of this blog post, I haven't read it.)

Divya Jhingran, co-author with Balangangadhara of Do All Roads Lead to Jerusalem?: The Making of Indian Religions, has some reflections on Shashi Tharoor's book.  She argues that "a more apt title for Tharoor’s book would have been “Why I am a Protestant”.

As S.N. Balagangadhara notes, if you take away the Bible and you take away Jesus, there will be nothing left that would be recognizable as a religion called Christianity. Similarly, if you take away the Quran and take away Mohammad, there will be nothing left that would be recognizable as a religion called Islam. Religions stand or fall based upon these two factors. If these two factors are necessary components of religion, it obviously means that the Indian traditions are phenomena of a different kind. You cannot use different standards of determination in judging this matter. Even Buddhism does not need a Buddha, nor does Jainism need a Mahavira. The Indian traditions will still exist, each as a distinct entity and each distinguishable from the other without any such props. They are human discoveries that can be communicated in any number of ways, not a belief system handed down from God.

Friday, March 09, 2018

Jakob de Roover: "Europe, India, and the Limits of Secularism"

In this hour-long talk, Professor Jakob de Roover, a PhD student of Balagangadhara, gently explains why ideas that work in Europe don't work in India.  IMO, it is well worth the time spent.

Thursday, March 08, 2018

Synopsis of The Heathen in His Blindness

Kausik Gangopadhyay has a synopsis of Balagangadhara's "The Heathen..." in Pragyata.

Monday, March 05, 2018

Rakhigarhi gossip

Per someone on the intertubes, he was told by Dr. Kumaraswamy Thangaraj that the Rakhigarhi aDNA publication would take several months.  So it isn't coming out anytime soon.

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Gandhi on the authority of the shastras

 From the digital version of the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi:


When I was in Kashi, three questions were sent to me on behalf of the Kashi Pundit Sabha. I considered it my duty to answer these questions, but I did not then have time to do so. Later the questions lay in my file. I could not attend to them during my tour either. Now I am cleaning up my file. The questions are:
1. How can a sanatani Hindu who is well versed in the doctrines of sanatana dharma and accepts the Vedas and the smritis based on them as an infallible authority, contend that there is no untouchability in Hinduism or lend his support to freely mixing with untouchables, excepting on the occasions enumerated in the well-known verse: “In religious processions, marriages, emergencies, rebellions and in all festivals, contact with untouchables does not polllute”? 

2. Your work is among the people of India who are predominantly sanatana dharmis and who implicitly believe in the Gita dictum: “Let the Shastras, therefore, be they authority in deciding what is to be done and what is to be shunned.” How can you then effectively carry on the work of eradicating untouchability till you have proved that this work is in conformity with the Shastras? 

3. The Muslim Ulemas are firmly convinced that there is merit in killing all those who follow any religion other than Islam for they are Kaffirs, and that Muslims can mingle with them only when they accept Islam. So long as all Muslims are under the influence of these Ulemas, how can Hindus make friends with Muslims while protecting the Hindu dharma?