<!--QuoteBegin-brahma+Jul 9 2008, 01:21 AM-->QUOTE(brahma @ Jul 9 2008, 01:21 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->--<b>It is doubtful</b> whether a "<b>h</b>indu" identity can ever be defined. <b>As far as one can see</b>, the situation is somewhat like this :a cultural "iron grid" is provided by the brahmanas, who absorbed local deities in addition to their vedic practices. It is <b>highly likely that</b> locally, the masses worship only their deities, while giving a short shift to the <b>myths</b> linking their <b>gods</b> to brahminical hinduism. The brahmanas also absorbed the regional shamanic practices and <b>probably</b> systematized them into the tantras, also refining and adding to it.[right][snapback]83951[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Cute bedtime scare-story. Though Hindus are familiar with it, having heard it often (never from Hindus, of course). It's but an abridged version of the christohistory that the faithful colonial brits wrote for us.
Nice insert of the always-necessary 'myths' and lowercase 'gods', by the way. And I just <i>love</i> the reference to 'shamanic practises' amongst Indians (in spite of us being non-Finno-Ugric - but then why should facts like this be a domper when they didn't influence the rest of that quoted para). Some minor disappointment about the ommission of the word 'animists', but am still deeply impressed - at the perfect parroting.
None of the older gen in my family had even heard of the concept "brahminical Hinduism" (perhaps they were too busy with their 'shamanic practises'?), but what could they know when the above post has explained Hindus/Hinduism so thoroughly and with so much supporting proof... or rather, with so much allusion to evidence through obviously <i>incontestable</i> use of such elements as "it is doubtful", "highly likely", "probably, "as far as one can see" and my all-time-absolute-favourite: the absence of such terms altogether (which apparently makes the containing statements even more completely irrefutable, assuming anyone dared to be in doubt). Now, <i>that's</i> the way to present indubitable arguments.
And encased in such forceful writing as that of the post above, everyone's given the very democratic 'option' of merely nodding one's head and agreeing that the christobrits' pseudohistory was right: that there is no Hinduism and never was one either. And then the minor marxist corollary - being an essential part thereof - must be accepted as automatic truth as well: "India is no more than a geographic expression" and its christo equivalent that 'there was no India until the christobrits invented it'.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To develop a "hindu" identity,<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->OOooh, oooh, oooh, I know this logic! Brings to mind Nehru and his book The Discovery of India. Because, you know, if he hadn't discovered it, it wouldn't exist. (<- It follows when one uses the OTHER math to work it out.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To develop a "hindu" identity, <b>if it exists</b> will require vast amounts of data, and the ability to abstract some guiding principle from even divergent opinions. This task need not be completed in our lifetimes.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Hinduism is just <i>so</i> greatly honoured and advantaged to have working for its benefit someone who doesn't even know that since ancient times there was such a thing as Hinduism or that a Hindu identity exists just as it had existed for all that time.
An interesting thing readers auto-infer from the above quoteblock: it doesn't claim to be written by a Hindu. (Most obviously, since Hindus don't think they're mythical or doubt their own existence/identity. Use Normal math/logic for this.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But the survival of the traditions and practices must be ensured.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And... the consistency is gone. Shame, the internal logic (what little there was) had been rattling along so well.
What 'survival'? When the para doubted it existed in the first place? Beats me how anyone could argue that something's 'survival must be ensured' after going on about why its having existed at all was dubious. Oh wait, it requires Other Math again. (Drat that I was never good at complicated Other Math.)
Modernist Indians are ever so entertaining. (My mind's catching the pertinent refrain of that aptly-titled song 'Easy'.) It's like hearing the memorable christocolonial brits speak all over again. :enchanting
Modern puppets have memorised the old tale so well and, more importantly (amusingly), they completely believe it. They have my wholehearted support/condolences. Go Joe!
Nice insert of the always-necessary 'myths' and lowercase 'gods', by the way. And I just <i>love</i> the reference to 'shamanic practises' amongst Indians (in spite of us being non-Finno-Ugric - but then why should facts like this be a domper when they didn't influence the rest of that quoted para). Some minor disappointment about the ommission of the word 'animists', but am still deeply impressed - at the perfect parroting.
None of the older gen in my family had even heard of the concept "brahminical Hinduism" (perhaps they were too busy with their 'shamanic practises'?), but what could they know when the above post has explained Hindus/Hinduism so thoroughly and with so much supporting proof... or rather, with so much allusion to evidence through obviously <i>incontestable</i> use of such elements as "it is doubtful", "highly likely", "probably, "as far as one can see" and my all-time-absolute-favourite: the absence of such terms altogether (which apparently makes the containing statements even more completely irrefutable, assuming anyone dared to be in doubt). Now, <i>that's</i> the way to present indubitable arguments.
And encased in such forceful writing as that of the post above, everyone's given the very democratic 'option' of merely nodding one's head and agreeing that the christobrits' pseudohistory was right: that there is no Hinduism and never was one either. And then the minor marxist corollary - being an essential part thereof - must be accepted as automatic truth as well: "India is no more than a geographic expression" and its christo equivalent that 'there was no India until the christobrits invented it'.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To develop a "hindu" identity,<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->OOooh, oooh, oooh, I know this logic! Brings to mind Nehru and his book The Discovery of India. Because, you know, if he hadn't discovered it, it wouldn't exist. (<- It follows when one uses the OTHER math to work it out.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To develop a "hindu" identity, <b>if it exists</b> will require vast amounts of data, and the ability to abstract some guiding principle from even divergent opinions. This task need not be completed in our lifetimes.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Hinduism is just <i>so</i> greatly honoured and advantaged to have working for its benefit someone who doesn't even know that since ancient times there was such a thing as Hinduism or that a Hindu identity exists just as it had existed for all that time.
An interesting thing readers auto-infer from the above quoteblock: it doesn't claim to be written by a Hindu. (Most obviously, since Hindus don't think they're mythical or doubt their own existence/identity. Use Normal math/logic for this.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But the survival of the traditions and practices must be ensured.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And... the consistency is gone. Shame, the internal logic (what little there was) had been rattling along so well.
What 'survival'? When the para doubted it existed in the first place? Beats me how anyone could argue that something's 'survival must be ensured' after going on about why its having existed at all was dubious. Oh wait, it requires Other Math again. (Drat that I was never good at complicated Other Math.)
Modernist Indians are ever so entertaining. (My mind's catching the pertinent refrain of that aptly-titled song 'Easy'.) It's like hearing the memorable christocolonial brits speak all over again. :enchanting
Modern puppets have memorised the old tale so well and, more importantly (amusingly), they completely believe it. They have my wholehearted support/condolences. Go Joe!