12-09-2006, 06:43 PM
Can you all go thru my posts # 95 and # 132. Have tried to make sense of this debate from two entirely different points of view our Indian philosophy and materialistic view point.
The discussion with Digvijay was useful to the extent that his question of why India remained Hindu during the medieval period was interesting one brought some new ideas. I have made some points of why Zoroastrianism succumbed while comparing with the situation in India and the strength and conviction of us in our religious beliefs.
Why India remained Hindu throughout the ancient and medeival ages down till now or in other words how the Vedic philosophy was able to assimilate all philosophies and ethnic strands into itself is a very interesting question. It is important issue bcos it has influenced the way we have embraced change in the past 200 years. How exactly it has influenced we have to discover and discuss but it has brought another dimension to change than just the colonial agency. Britishers were just a change agent, but how we changed depended on what we were. So it has important bearing to "India becoming modern" question and even in current times. I read the Balagangadhara article. Ramana or was it kram, thanks for it. It was very interesting. Its slightly long but its worth going through it. On a broader level it makes us understand, that we all view the same facts and interpret history through our cultural spectacles, which colors what we see.
http://s-n-balagangadhara.sulekha.com/blog...renaissance.htm
My original idea behind delving into this "India becoming modern" question was to understand how we have shaped, become different in the immediate past century or two of our history, for this will give us pointers to where we as a culture and nation are headed in the future. But lets for now not jump into the future. Lets fully understand the past first. This "India remaining Hindu" perspective has given food for thought and I have one or two (maybe controversial) ideas that I wish to share. But more of that later.
The discussion with Digvijay was useful to the extent that his question of why India remained Hindu during the medieval period was interesting one brought some new ideas. I have made some points of why Zoroastrianism succumbed while comparing with the situation in India and the strength and conviction of us in our religious beliefs.
Why India remained Hindu throughout the ancient and medeival ages down till now or in other words how the Vedic philosophy was able to assimilate all philosophies and ethnic strands into itself is a very interesting question. It is important issue bcos it has influenced the way we have embraced change in the past 200 years. How exactly it has influenced we have to discover and discuss but it has brought another dimension to change than just the colonial agency. Britishers were just a change agent, but how we changed depended on what we were. So it has important bearing to "India becoming modern" question and even in current times. I read the Balagangadhara article. Ramana or was it kram, thanks for it. It was very interesting. Its slightly long but its worth going through it. On a broader level it makes us understand, that we all view the same facts and interpret history through our cultural spectacles, which colors what we see.
http://s-n-balagangadhara.sulekha.com/blog...renaissance.htm
My original idea behind delving into this "India becoming modern" question was to understand how we have shaped, become different in the immediate past century or two of our history, for this will give us pointers to where we as a culture and nation are headed in the future. But lets for now not jump into the future. Lets fully understand the past first. This "India remaining Hindu" perspective has given food for thought and I have one or two (maybe controversial) ideas that I wish to share. But more of that later.