07-10-2008, 02:50 PM
My previous post looks communistic, but the intent is not. The apparent insults which you point out are no insults at all. My opinions are just opinions and as a follower of my forefathers, I would like to ensure the continuance of the traditions of Bharata.
1) In my view, "Hinduism" definitely has distinct streams. The techniques and the object of worship vary widely between jatis and regions. The same jatis in different regions have different beliefs and practices.The important unifying factor of Bharat is the presence of Brahmanas, who were able to reconcile the legends/traditions of various regions (Tantric) with their Vedic pracitces, which connected them to Brahmanas elsewhere. In addition, the constant migrations of Brahmanas cross disseminated ideas almost all over India, which form the basis of the cultural unity of India. Sabarimala, Kamakhya temples are examples of this absorption.There are tribes which are at various stages of being influenced by the dvija philosophies.
2) How are you sure that there was a Hindu identity all over India since very ancient times. And what was the basis of their identity? Was it the vedic-darshana system of the dvijas or the local practices, which were different? The tantric and some yogic systems detail processes for specific results as compared to the search for truth/ultimate reality and understanding that is embodied in the darshanas.
The histories of Bengal, Assam record the arrival of various beliefs, their kingly patrons etc. Even though the southern regions have had Brahmanas for aeons, they do have temples where the system of worship is not agamic and have non brahmin priests.
In the case of your elders, they may have simply followed the traditions of their forefathers, not caring or being ambivalent about the other jatis.That is not the case with the current generation. We are in a crisis of survival and we need to correctly identify the threats and neutralize them. An accurate understanding of our society and its history is essential to plan the defence,even if the truth is not in accordance with our pre conceived notions.
And it is not necessary that all westerners had an agenda to demean the Bharata-vasis. Many of them were sincere scholars, and in the 1700's and
1800's, were the better minds of their countries, though that may not be the case nowadays.
3) The term shaman is not derogatory as you take it to be. I used it in the sense of the wise man who everyone holds in regard for his knowledge/power/wisdom.
The question of a Hindu identity still remains. In India, the primary identity of a person is his jati, no matter what other allegiances he may profess. A bharata vasi primarily exists as a vehicle to transport his traditions in time, and improve upon them according to his ability and adapt to changing circumstances as required. Those who fail to do so are separated from their jati, though it happens more subtly nowadays, over two or three generations and not in a sudden and public manner as before.Unlike in other countries,where identity is equivalent to belief and ethnicity, the jati is a social construct. Till some time back, it decided what you did, your peers,
and in general provided a roadmap for your life. Even today most Indians retain caste indicators in their names.
We can impose a common Hindu identity only with great difficulty simply because not only are the traditions differentiated by jatis but also by region. Some common themes like dharma, athithi satkar, ahimsa do appear in most traditions but these pertain to actions and it cannot be held that they form the identity of a jati in totality.
Just by collating the common practices and knowledge of modern day Indians,
who have already lost much of their heritage one cant claim to have a "Hindu"
identity.
1) In my view, "Hinduism" definitely has distinct streams. The techniques and the object of worship vary widely between jatis and regions. The same jatis in different regions have different beliefs and practices.The important unifying factor of Bharat is the presence of Brahmanas, who were able to reconcile the legends/traditions of various regions (Tantric) with their Vedic pracitces, which connected them to Brahmanas elsewhere. In addition, the constant migrations of Brahmanas cross disseminated ideas almost all over India, which form the basis of the cultural unity of India. Sabarimala, Kamakhya temples are examples of this absorption.There are tribes which are at various stages of being influenced by the dvija philosophies.
2) How are you sure that there was a Hindu identity all over India since very ancient times. And what was the basis of their identity? Was it the vedic-darshana system of the dvijas or the local practices, which were different? The tantric and some yogic systems detail processes for specific results as compared to the search for truth/ultimate reality and understanding that is embodied in the darshanas.
The histories of Bengal, Assam record the arrival of various beliefs, their kingly patrons etc. Even though the southern regions have had Brahmanas for aeons, they do have temples where the system of worship is not agamic and have non brahmin priests.
In the case of your elders, they may have simply followed the traditions of their forefathers, not caring or being ambivalent about the other jatis.That is not the case with the current generation. We are in a crisis of survival and we need to correctly identify the threats and neutralize them. An accurate understanding of our society and its history is essential to plan the defence,even if the truth is not in accordance with our pre conceived notions.
And it is not necessary that all westerners had an agenda to demean the Bharata-vasis. Many of them were sincere scholars, and in the 1700's and
1800's, were the better minds of their countries, though that may not be the case nowadays.
3) The term shaman is not derogatory as you take it to be. I used it in the sense of the wise man who everyone holds in regard for his knowledge/power/wisdom.
The question of a Hindu identity still remains. In India, the primary identity of a person is his jati, no matter what other allegiances he may profess. A bharata vasi primarily exists as a vehicle to transport his traditions in time, and improve upon them according to his ability and adapt to changing circumstances as required. Those who fail to do so are separated from their jati, though it happens more subtly nowadays, over two or three generations and not in a sudden and public manner as before.Unlike in other countries,where identity is equivalent to belief and ethnicity, the jati is a social construct. Till some time back, it decided what you did, your peers,
and in general provided a roadmap for your life. Even today most Indians retain caste indicators in their names.
We can impose a common Hindu identity only with great difficulty simply because not only are the traditions differentiated by jatis but also by region. Some common themes like dharma, athithi satkar, ahimsa do appear in most traditions but these pertain to actions and it cannot be held that they form the identity of a jati in totality.
Just by collating the common practices and knowledge of modern day Indians,
who have already lost much of their heritage one cant claim to have a "Hindu"
identity.