<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Sep 17 2008, 03:54 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Sep 17 2008, 03:54 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So no, reincarnation was not part of Sanâtana ("eternal") Dharma, it was an innovation. (Or as a believer might put it, a "discovery": first the notion wasn't there, then some yogi saw the "truth" of reincarnation, then the idea spread, while more and more practitioners learnt the technique to "verify" the "fact" of reincarnation.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]88122[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The point of that example was whether or not veda-s attest to the concept of avatAra (and punarjanma, karma etc). Not sure what in that argument caused you to react in this way. Concept of avatAra can stand on its own in sanAtana-dharma, in its own right, even without veda supporting it, as far as veda does not contradict it.
The point K. Elst was making was the tendency of many modern Hindu-s to add 'vedic' to every new knowledge created even in the last few centuries, or decades. (more examples: "Vedic astrology", "Vedic Mathematics", "Vedic Vastu"...), obviousely all being hoax. The tendency of getting everything pushed into the name of vedic should be at least recognized. Only shows even the educated modern Hindus to believe in such hoaxes and secondarily lack of historic sense.
Second tendency is to claim that everything that we understand today as sanAtana dharma existed since day-1. Why? Why can dharma not evolve just like other bodies of knowledge and experience? Why can religion/spirituality not be just like another science that evolves, learns new notions and rejects old notions, just as it gains new experiences?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Umm, well, that's not it. The Vedas are neither the origin nor the sum of all that is Sanatana Dharma.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
what is then the place of veda-s in sanAtana-dharma, meaning by this term the Astika-matas of hindus? Certainly, going by the internal and external evidence in the texts, veda-s are the paramount and supreme authority even if neither the beginning nor the sum total. Anything contradicting shruti is unauthentic -- that has been the mantra of sanAtana dharma. (and a chief source of contention with nAstikamata-s)
[right][snapback]88122[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The point of that example was whether or not veda-s attest to the concept of avatAra (and punarjanma, karma etc). Not sure what in that argument caused you to react in this way. Concept of avatAra can stand on its own in sanAtana-dharma, in its own right, even without veda supporting it, as far as veda does not contradict it.
The point K. Elst was making was the tendency of many modern Hindu-s to add 'vedic' to every new knowledge created even in the last few centuries, or decades. (more examples: "Vedic astrology", "Vedic Mathematics", "Vedic Vastu"...), obviousely all being hoax. The tendency of getting everything pushed into the name of vedic should be at least recognized. Only shows even the educated modern Hindus to believe in such hoaxes and secondarily lack of historic sense.
Second tendency is to claim that everything that we understand today as sanAtana dharma existed since day-1. Why? Why can dharma not evolve just like other bodies of knowledge and experience? Why can religion/spirituality not be just like another science that evolves, learns new notions and rejects old notions, just as it gains new experiences?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Umm, well, that's not it. The Vedas are neither the origin nor the sum of all that is Sanatana Dharma.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
what is then the place of veda-s in sanAtana-dharma, meaning by this term the Astika-matas of hindus? Certainly, going by the internal and external evidence in the texts, veda-s are the paramount and supreme authority even if neither the beginning nor the sum total. Anything contradicting shruti is unauthentic -- that has been the mantra of sanAtana dharma. (and a chief source of contention with nAstikamata-s)