<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Mar 12 2008, 10:23 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Mar 12 2008, 10:23 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Unlike the earlier generations of Asian intelligentsia, we are not confronted by what they had to cope with viz., a dynamic western society. We know only too well today, what choices they had and what they made of them yesterday: either they retreated into obscurantist revivalism touting the indigenous culture as the only or the best form of life[right][snapback]79564[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This bleak view may be warranted in some cases but not in all. I remember one time seeing a pandit accosted about the 'meaning' of some or other practice (though not from a secularist or religious stance) and he gave a stern reply that meaning should not always be sought. Vivekananda's dharma was simply to take these rascals by the scruff and give a good beating and also make sure that enough connections survived for future generations to pick up the pieces. Rajiv Malhotra gave the example of "Kurma Niti" being explicitly expounded in a Kumbha Mela as a response to Islamic depradations. The same pandit once advised to make Ghuri your role model for trying again and again in the face of failure- of course it does not mean he was advocating Islam (which he clarified when someone asked). In the recent Delhi conference, a Sikh scholar gave the example of differentiations between 'Dheen' and 'Dharma' present in SGGS. Nationalists have always insisted on a qualitative difference between the colonialist intrigues and our traditions - even if it only came down to saying that -they practice a religion while we live a 'way of life'-; this was transformed into the "pagan" versus "abrahamic" distinctions explicated/adopted by many Nationalists (incl Talageri). Buddha gave the example of remaining silent in certain circumstances (though these were certainly qualitatively different that the colonialist impositions).
Due credit should be given to those who have survived the colonizing experiences even if their responses were not perfect. Their responses were at least coherent enough to ensure that their descendents were aware of a problem. Even from the standpoint of a strategy of confidence buliding, it would be worth the while to chronicle our varied past responses.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This bleak view may be warranted in some cases but not in all. I remember one time seeing a pandit accosted about the 'meaning' of some or other practice (though not from a secularist or religious stance) and he gave a stern reply that meaning should not always be sought. Vivekananda's dharma was simply to take these rascals by the scruff and give a good beating and also make sure that enough connections survived for future generations to pick up the pieces. Rajiv Malhotra gave the example of "Kurma Niti" being explicitly expounded in a Kumbha Mela as a response to Islamic depradations. The same pandit once advised to make Ghuri your role model for trying again and again in the face of failure- of course it does not mean he was advocating Islam (which he clarified when someone asked). In the recent Delhi conference, a Sikh scholar gave the example of differentiations between 'Dheen' and 'Dharma' present in SGGS. Nationalists have always insisted on a qualitative difference between the colonialist intrigues and our traditions - even if it only came down to saying that -they practice a religion while we live a 'way of life'-; this was transformed into the "pagan" versus "abrahamic" distinctions explicated/adopted by many Nationalists (incl Talageri). Buddha gave the example of remaining silent in certain circumstances (though these were certainly qualitatively different that the colonialist impositions).
Due credit should be given to those who have survived the colonizing experiences even if their responses were not perfect. Their responses were at least coherent enough to ensure that their descendents were aware of a problem. Even from the standpoint of a strategy of confidence buliding, it would be worth the while to chronicle our varied past responses.