<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+May 22 2009, 06:32 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ May 22 2009, 06:32 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
<b>
I get the picture that INC is the new Romans for India without the overt evangelization.</b>
INC controls the education and the media. This is the true control over the soceity which allows them to win and be the ruling party.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I want to add something more.
Adoption and defending AIT is part of the same imperialism.
AIT is the bedrock of the Indian project and they will do anything to preserve this.
<!--QuoteBegin-HareKrishna+May 22 2009, 10:00 PM-->QUOTE(HareKrishna @ May 22 2009, 10:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-dhu+May 22 2009, 11:28 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dhu @ May 22 2009, 11:28 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->eisance to the Lord God of Daniel. the authors simply went back into history, chose a few prominent figures, and made a revisionist Monotheist timelime (thousand year civil war between a line a monotheist prophets and their erring polytheist cousins)
Interpretative history as opposed to king lists is the greek innovation. Add in a colonial setting and the output is monotheism.
This has nothing to do with desert heat, harems, tribal war, arab blood lust, semitic absolutism, cousin marriage, and other such ad hocs.
[right][snapback]97635[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>your completely wrong about this;anyway not going to argue on this subject.</b>
The jew-hellenist-roman writers who write the bible have a social backround which influenced their writing.
[right][snapback]97648[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bringing out the truth can hardly be described as being argumentative. So if you know more please elaborate or else delete your statement. I had requested you to collaborate with dhu, instead you want him to pull the cart and flog it here and there. Very nice.
I have added a few more elements to the site. Although it is not a unified presentation, it still manages to get the basic ideas across. The only new thing for most here would be a table of parallels from CM.
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+May 24 2009, 06:28 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ May 24 2009, 06:28 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I have added a few more elements to the site. Although it is not a unified presentation, it still manages to get the basic ideas across. The only new thing for most here would be a table of parallels from CM.
[right][snapback]97709[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please connect AIT in the modern era to your blog content
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+May 22 2009, 05:49 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ May 22 2009, 05:49 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
There was a balagangadhara audio file which Acharya posted in the Sociology thread (intraforum link). If anyone has this, can they upload to rapidshare or esnips. I no longer have this. This is a full hour talk by Balagangadhara and gives needed perspective about difference between Religions and Traditions. Otherwise, people tend to apply equal equal. Especially believers and seculars.Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have the entire audio and more.
I will upload it.
I think the above post is off topic for this thread and doesnt belong here. Thanks for the detailed reply though.
ramana
Viren, can you do the honors?
I know to several Christians the historicity of Jesus is very important. But it is not several others. I do not know the numbers that would fit into each bucket.
What kind of impact will the Western Civilization have if the historicity can be proved wrong?
It's the theology in Christianity which is crucial. If the theology originated in "problematic" circumstances as imperial war propaganda, then there is no way out for Christianity. And the fact that the entire western intellectual edifice is a secularization of christian theology.. free will, liberty.. means that this entire edifice will also collapse.
05-27-2009, 04:39 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-27-2009, 07:08 AM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+May 26 2009, 08:37 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ May 26 2009, 08:37 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Please connect AIT in the modern era to your blog content
[right][snapback]97748[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is clear that the Judaic Monotheist prophet timeline is revisionist history and that AIT is the same for India.
AIT is a natural consequence of a religious culture coming into contact with a heathen culture and needing to mold an understanding of that heathen culture as a degraded and degenerated form of religion (ie caste system is an ad hoc theological "system" needed to explain the tyranny of the priests and so on).
Judaism is an initial transformation, the birthing moment of monotheism itself. Going by parallel, the thousand year timeline of monotheist prophets fighting their errant polytheist cousins is a revisionist effort necessitated by the colonial need to problematize the native canaan culture as immoral (war propaganda). This entire revisionist history originated out of the imperative to theologize or normatize in a colonial setting.
05-27-2009, 07:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-27-2009, 07:26 AM by dhu.)
There were innumerable invasions back and forth between Egypt and Canaan. Why should one of these become particularly associated with the Monotheist Deity?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Caste System and Aryan Invasion Theory
Marianne Keppens
Abstract
The controversy about the Aryan Invasion Theory has occupied scholars from several domains over the last few decades. The advocates of this theory claim that a Sanskrit-speaking Aryan people invaded or entered India around 1500 BC and brought along a language, religion and social structure, which they imposed on the indigenous population. The opponents claim that the Aryan people, their language and religion have always been present in India and hence that an invasion could never have happened. When we analyze the arguments from both sides, these sustain only one general conclusion: India has a long history of co-existence and cross-fertilization of different groups of people, cultural traditions, languages, etc. Given the <b>trivial nature of this conclusion, </b>the question becomes: why have so many scholars debated the Aryan Invasion Theory with such passion? To answer this question, my paper looks at how the Aryan Invasion Theory was developed in the nineteenth century. I argue that the theory itself did not emerge from empirical evidence or scientific theorizing about the Indian languages, archaeology or history.<b> Instead this theory developed as an explanation of two entities central to the European experience of India: the caste system and Hinduism as a degeneration of Vedic religion. </b>The Aryan Invasion Theory not only explained how the caste system came into being, it also accounted for the degeneration of the religion of the Vedas and allowed for the classification of its evolution into three main phases: Vedism, Brahmanism and Hinduism. The contemporary debate shows that it remains impossible to defend the occurrence of an Aryan invasion on the basis of the available linguistic, archaeological and other evidence. However, the significance of the Aryan invasion controversy becomes intelligible when one realizes that this theory did not emerge as a description of real historical events.<b> Rather, it is a theory that explained entities which exist only in the European experience of India. As such, if we desire to understand how the âAryan invasion' as well as the âcaste system', âBrahmanism' and other related concepts came into being, we need to study the development of Western culture.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+May 26 2009, 06:05 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ May 26 2009, 06:05 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->It's the theology in Christianity which is crucial. If the theology originated in "problematic" circumstances as imperial war propaganda, then there is no way out for Christianity. And the fact that the entire western intellectual edifice is a secularization of christian theology.. free will, liberty.. means that this entire edifice will also collapse.
[right][snapback]97776[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Islam had similar cicumstances our war and problems in the middle-east, so why would Christians feel bad for the "problematic" origins? Sorry for doing a equal-equal, my family's kula-daivam is Murugan, and to me (and us) it does not really matter about the different stories of his origin. There are theories about Kartikeya from the North and Murukku a warrior god from the south being two entities who finally merged and became one - son of Shiva. Point is, all these fascinate me but it is not going to really diminish my faith on Hinduism - culturally or religion wise.
So why are the Christians having so much kujli?
<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+May 24 2009, 09:16 PM-->QUOTE(ramana @ May 24 2009, 09:16 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Bringing out the truth can hardly be described as being argumentative. So if you know more please elaborate or else delete your statement.
[right][snapback]97690[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
deleted already.
Ramana, any further thoughts since last??
05-27-2009, 10:06 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-28-2009, 08:44 PM by dhu.)
There were innumerable invasions back and forth between Egypt and Canaan. Why should one of these become particularly associated with the Monotheist Deity?
---------------
The answer is that it is an ad hoc (historical) explanation necessitated by a particular type of colonial, problematizing, and propagandistic (ie normatizing) endeavor. Israelites are the normed Canaanites......
05-27-2009, 11:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-27-2009, 11:54 PM by ramana.)
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+May 27 2009, 04:32 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ May 27 2009, 04:32 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ramana, any further thoughts since last??
[right][snapback]97789[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK, How to explain Paul/Saul and the spread of the Jesus movement among non Jews?
Paul had the ephiphany to evangelize the non-Jews and make the message more universal among other Romans. Then how to explain the Roman brutalization of the followers - throwing them to circus animals, torture etc.
Maybe the Romans brutalized them in order to diminish the spread?
Somehow this brutalization reinforced the message and spread the faith so much so that Constantine was forced to make it a state religion.
Was it a power struggle between two Roman factions?
What does Atwill or others say?
05-28-2009, 08:44 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-28-2009, 09:10 AM by dhu.)
Atwill states that Paul/Saul is the Emperor Domitian, the younger brother of Emperor Titus. The relevant essay was available on the previous CM site. Just as Domitian was never Deified, Paul also was never able to escape the shadow of Jesus. This class of authors states that Christianity was the personal cult of the Flavians and was promoted as such.
----------------
Casta "system" is the alterego and projection of the British Empire in the Subcontinent. AIT is the false history necessitated by this artificial normatizing projection. Martial caste/criminal caste are the forward mechanisms of expansion. When the baton is passed to the Successor Empire, the old agent (Aryan) of the false history is demonized, and a new martial caste (DFN) is installed in its stead.
Israelites are the old martial caste. Canaanites the old criminal caste. Judaism is the false history necessitated to explain the creation of the sepoy Israelite class. With Roman succession, the old martial Israelite caste was demonized and the new Christian Martial caste was installed.
05-28-2009, 09:30 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-28-2009, 09:49 AM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-Swamy G+May 27 2009, 07:29 AM-->QUOTE(Swamy G @ May 27 2009, 07:29 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->So why are the Christians having so much kujli?
[right][snapback]97781[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Go to minute 4:00 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSfNyGSiRck
Christianity would be falsified just by discovering peoples "without religions". The entire project of projecting an Abrhamic framework upon the diverse traditions of India is an attempt to forestall just such a realization.
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+May 27 2009, 04:00 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ May 27 2009, 04:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Christianity would be falsified just by discovering peoples "without religions". The entire project of projecting an Abrhamic framework upon the diverse traditions of India is an attempt to forestall just such a realization.
[right][snapback]97829[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
With existence of Paganism it would make the religion as a falsified movement.
By bringing western concept for Indian traditions they give credibility to the religion called 'Christianity'
dhu: Thanks the parts around 5:30 were really illuminating. It gives me a little more clarity. But what Balu talks about will it impact the Christian intellectuals or normal Christians? What will prevent Christians to morph into Hindus - state where most of us don't bother about the historicity of our gods and goddesses?
|
