2 comments found at swarajyamag:
1. swarajyamag.com/culture/art-exploits-hindu-onus-of-tolerance/
2. realitycheck.wordpress.com/2015/01/14/je-suis-tiruchengode-or-perumal-murugan/
Finally, someone who complains about that junk. Though my objection is to the whole premise and the methodology, the overall class of the problem: modern un-traditional Hindus (not heathens, i.e. no traditional heathen perspective) - angelsk-enabled of course - writing a neo-mythos and/or de-deifying our Gods is an act of not just subversion but de-heathenisation. And every fool who read it and appreciated it and recommended it just bought into that subversion, though I suppose they were prone to it (i.e. they were subvertible). There have been many such. E.g. IIRC one of the persons who commented at a blog of the very pro-heathenism Senthil was - although a loud vocalist on something or other about Hinduism - a big fan of the trilogy and admirer of its author as batting for Hindu religion with his works. :Grief:
It is a sign of "modern attitudes" (= euphemism for ignorance and lack of traditional perception of heathenism, i.e. de-heathenisation) where modern Hindus feel such works are meaningful in *any* sense.
Not read the trilogy, but had read the brief summary of subject matter at flipkart, which sufficed for forming an opinion on it, as it diverged sufficiently from anything that could be deemed heathen (and no, new-ageism is not heathen). It was the roaring favourite at flipkart and featured on the front page: the reviews were at that point exclusively by the christians infesting India, and they were all unanimous about how such tripe should really replace the traditional views of Hindoos (which they deemed nonsense), so that Hindus can come at last to see their puranas etc as pointless mythos that can further be replaced by other mythos (hence underlining their pointlessness), rather than have any divine perception about what our Vedic, Pauranic, etc accounts are really about. The whole thing about heathenism, after all (and the christian reviewers had noticed it, but troubling that wannabe-heathen modern "Hindus" have not), is NOT to transplant the divine actors from their natural stage - the traditional accounts of their exploits, rendered authentically - into novel, pseudo-settings, but to recognise that the divine actors (the Gods and heroes) are inseparable from their backgrounds/narratives. The narratives themselves MATTER, as much as the Gods themselves. The Gods de-deified and transplanted into neo-mythos (i.e. modern invention) is meaningless and is actually specifically anti-heathen. If a christian or alien had written that trilogy, some Hindu nationalist vocalist may have recognised it for the subversion it was. The real problem is not who is doing it - or even why, in this case - but that *what* is being done is an act of de-heathenising sacred narratives that need to be transmitted intact/with the traditional narrative intact.
Even had a similar issue long ago with I think it was called Krishnaavataaram published by IIRC Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, which tried to explain away all that is "fantastic" about the MBh setting and replace it with backprojected reasonings to "rationalise" everything to the non-computing (non-heathen) mind. The modified yarn was no doubt appreciated by that latter class, but it is not heathen and neither are they, and those two facts are never going to change.
Modern Hindus won' t understand the point being made. So as always let's use a different example of other heathens: There is no meaning to modern stories which feature alleged Olympic Gods in fake contexts. Or turn them into human characters. Or both. Only non-heathens, non-Hellenes would make up such fictions. The real narratives of the Greek Gods are paramount in importance to the Hellenes as the narratives - and the Gods within them - impart great knowledge of heathenism. Had already argued this indirectly (no point arguing it directly to a modern Hindu audience) in post 108 of the Natural Traditions/Heathen Religions thread.
What the trilogy crap did is to subvert both the Gods (and that they are Gods) as well as their divine narratives, which are both fundamental to the narratives, and therefore to Hindoo heathenism. (This is often what Jainism and Buddhism tried to do to Hindoo narratives, when they weren't trying to hijack the same to propagate their own missionary ideologies.) And only morons - without apologies - among modern "Hindus" appreciated it. They're in like-minded company: as the others who expressed great appreciation for the trilogy, all while deriding the Hindoo Gods and Hindooism in the very same book reviews that lauded the books themselves, were christians (as seen at flipkart for example). <- It's never a good sign when christians agree with you on rewrites to heathenism.
Anyway, there was never any point in complaining about the trilogy, as there's subversions much closer to home. The layers of subversion that Indians of once-Hindoo origin are faced with are so many and so dense, that you'll be left complaining till the cows come mooing home. Consider the example covered in detail in the Buddhism or Sanatana Dharma thread: Rajeev Srinivasan and Witan - "Hindu" nationalist vocalists - are so severely subverted, that the former peddles backprojected Buddhist spins on the Trivrikama account while the latter peddles backprojected dravoodianist spins on the same. <- Both the views peddled are also to be filed under neo-mythos/replacement mythos. Rajeev further declared - like only a Bauddhified/non-heathen would - that Sabarimalai and Ayyappa "must have" had a Buddhist history, all because of unscholar (cryptoBuddhist) Lokesh Chandra's sudden, badly researched and patent drivel on the subject (a matter already discussed in excessive length in the Buddhism thread). It takes nothing but very recent and preposterous speculation to Bauddhify or otherwise subvert some alleged "Hindus". Then there are of course the slightly more subtle de-heathenised subversionists, such as of the Elst-fandom variety. Yet they will be offended if they were not recognised as Hindus, hence the phrase HindOOs (i.e. Hindu heathens/traditionalists) was coined to distinguish between actual heathens and the subverted [and subvertible].
Subverted would-have-been heathens are a dime a dozen in modern India and follow noticeable patterns ("classes" of de-heathenised). But it is evenfall for Hindus anyway. Even if christoislamania disappeared within 2 decades, those 2 decades are sufficient to have bred so many more masses of angelsk-enabled subversive wannabe-Hindus that India is guaranteed never to return to heathenism. (India is a lost cause for heathenism. Only subverted new-ageism seems to take root in current angelsk-speaking generations, and English language - the vehicle used for miseducation - is an unavoidable feature of the near future, and all future generations thereafter will be tainted by the effects of subversion thereafter.)
Anyway, the angelsk-enabled "Hindu nationalist" vocalist brigade is filled with such people as above, and such people alone. [None of whom, BTW, are even related to anyone who has seen the Hindu Gods
hock: - as one could tell by their hopeless and hollow arguments allegedly in "favour" of Hindoo religion as well as by their invariable subversions on Hindoo religion.]
So why complain about the subversiveness of the class of replacement mythos and de-deifying literature produced by deheathenised, who still go through the motions of being Hindu (in their view) and the pretence of being heathen - apparently Amish Tri... tripod sees himself as a Hindu, though he's neopagan *at best* - when even people less far-gone/less subverted have been eroding their own and others' traditional views (being subverted subversionists).
They ought to have defended the traditional=heathen POV as authority. But that's the one thing they can't do: only heathens can do that, because to recognise the heathen POV need to *be* a heathen. Instead, they set up their inexpert selves, inexpert others and their own ignorant speculative opinions ("opinionations") as authoritative, moreso where these departed from tradition=heathenism. And the more they differed from tradition, the pushier they were about it (and actually threaten traditionalists concerning it), in order to force the matter.
Like Indian governance under BJP is "Hindu nationalist" but not Hindoo - i.e. *not heathen* - governance, similarly Hindu nationalist vocalists write a lot and are very activist - to no real purpose and no usefulness to heathenism ultimately - but are not actually heathen, if anyone were honest. I've read more actually *Hindoo* arguments defending Hindoo religion from subversion from traditional Taoists. But then, they are actually heathens, so they naturally sound more Hindoo then non-heathens who call themselves Hindu but are de-heathenised and subverted.
Soma Vishal is wasting his breath. There is no point arguing or trying to convince modern "Hindus". Use them - their arguments, their writings - to defend your religion where necessary (i.e. if they ever say anything useful or sensible), but don't ever rely on them and never trust them/take them at face value. Subvertibles=gangrene are very dangerous to heathens, because on the surface one is led to the assumption that they are Hindu - because they claim to be, etc - by which they can get under Hindoo society's skin, but any intimacy with them (by which I mean association or attempt at friendship/trust, obviously) will only blow up in heathens' faces and will dent heathenism. Would dearly have said avoid like the plague and close rank (certainly what I'd do), but beggars can't be choosers I suppose. Just be aware of what they are and never lose sight of what they are, and Hindoos should be fine with the enforced but limited interaction.
Save trust for fellow heathens like Taoists (and HindOOs of course).
The only relevant parts of this post are the blockquotes.
1. swarajyamag.com/culture/art-exploits-hindu-onus-of-tolerance/
Quote: Neeraj
It is not about freedom of expression or secularism. It is not about innocent civilians getting killed, or armed soldiers getting killed. We Hindus (civilian or armed) are all the same for them.
This is about a war that has been launched on Hindus by an evil axis of Indian Christians and Muslims. It is about the Hindu respect and goodwill for others not being reciprocated. It is about the certainty of genocide/ethnic cleansing/exile of naive Hindus, once Christians and Muslims reach critical proportions of India's population. We, my dear Hindus, have been at war. Even Godhra train burning was an act of war. Terrorism word is an invention of twentieth century. Terrorism is nothing but war. When we are cowardly, and don't want to go on war; we say this is terrorism. But, this is unadulterated war.
2. realitycheck.wordpress.com/2015/01/14/je-suis-tiruchengode-or-perumal-murugan/
Quote:Soma Visal said, on January 14, 2015 at 12:09 pm
Even one Amish, in his Book on Trilogy of Shiva, has said Lord Shiva married Sati who is a widow who gave birth to Lord Ganesha. And finally Sati died in a cruel way (war). Where are the so called Hindu saviours? No knowledge about this three parts book?!
Reply
Finally, someone who complains about that junk. Though my objection is to the whole premise and the methodology, the overall class of the problem: modern un-traditional Hindus (not heathens, i.e. no traditional heathen perspective) - angelsk-enabled of course - writing a neo-mythos and/or de-deifying our Gods is an act of not just subversion but de-heathenisation. And every fool who read it and appreciated it and recommended it just bought into that subversion, though I suppose they were prone to it (i.e. they were subvertible). There have been many such. E.g. IIRC one of the persons who commented at a blog of the very pro-heathenism Senthil was - although a loud vocalist on something or other about Hinduism - a big fan of the trilogy and admirer of its author as batting for Hindu religion with his works. :Grief:
It is a sign of "modern attitudes" (= euphemism for ignorance and lack of traditional perception of heathenism, i.e. de-heathenisation) where modern Hindus feel such works are meaningful in *any* sense.
Not read the trilogy, but had read the brief summary of subject matter at flipkart, which sufficed for forming an opinion on it, as it diverged sufficiently from anything that could be deemed heathen (and no, new-ageism is not heathen). It was the roaring favourite at flipkart and featured on the front page: the reviews were at that point exclusively by the christians infesting India, and they were all unanimous about how such tripe should really replace the traditional views of Hindoos (which they deemed nonsense), so that Hindus can come at last to see their puranas etc as pointless mythos that can further be replaced by other mythos (hence underlining their pointlessness), rather than have any divine perception about what our Vedic, Pauranic, etc accounts are really about. The whole thing about heathenism, after all (and the christian reviewers had noticed it, but troubling that wannabe-heathen modern "Hindus" have not), is NOT to transplant the divine actors from their natural stage - the traditional accounts of their exploits, rendered authentically - into novel, pseudo-settings, but to recognise that the divine actors (the Gods and heroes) are inseparable from their backgrounds/narratives. The narratives themselves MATTER, as much as the Gods themselves. The Gods de-deified and transplanted into neo-mythos (i.e. modern invention) is meaningless and is actually specifically anti-heathen. If a christian or alien had written that trilogy, some Hindu nationalist vocalist may have recognised it for the subversion it was. The real problem is not who is doing it - or even why, in this case - but that *what* is being done is an act of de-heathenising sacred narratives that need to be transmitted intact/with the traditional narrative intact.
Even had a similar issue long ago with I think it was called Krishnaavataaram published by IIRC Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, which tried to explain away all that is "fantastic" about the MBh setting and replace it with backprojected reasonings to "rationalise" everything to the non-computing (non-heathen) mind. The modified yarn was no doubt appreciated by that latter class, but it is not heathen and neither are they, and those two facts are never going to change.
Modern Hindus won' t understand the point being made. So as always let's use a different example of other heathens: There is no meaning to modern stories which feature alleged Olympic Gods in fake contexts. Or turn them into human characters. Or both. Only non-heathens, non-Hellenes would make up such fictions. The real narratives of the Greek Gods are paramount in importance to the Hellenes as the narratives - and the Gods within them - impart great knowledge of heathenism. Had already argued this indirectly (no point arguing it directly to a modern Hindu audience) in post 108 of the Natural Traditions/Heathen Religions thread.
What the trilogy crap did is to subvert both the Gods (and that they are Gods) as well as their divine narratives, which are both fundamental to the narratives, and therefore to Hindoo heathenism. (This is often what Jainism and Buddhism tried to do to Hindoo narratives, when they weren't trying to hijack the same to propagate their own missionary ideologies.) And only morons - without apologies - among modern "Hindus" appreciated it. They're in like-minded company: as the others who expressed great appreciation for the trilogy, all while deriding the Hindoo Gods and Hindooism in the very same book reviews that lauded the books themselves, were christians (as seen at flipkart for example). <- It's never a good sign when christians agree with you on rewrites to heathenism.
Anyway, there was never any point in complaining about the trilogy, as there's subversions much closer to home. The layers of subversion that Indians of once-Hindoo origin are faced with are so many and so dense, that you'll be left complaining till the cows come mooing home. Consider the example covered in detail in the Buddhism or Sanatana Dharma thread: Rajeev Srinivasan and Witan - "Hindu" nationalist vocalists - are so severely subverted, that the former peddles backprojected Buddhist spins on the Trivrikama account while the latter peddles backprojected dravoodianist spins on the same. <- Both the views peddled are also to be filed under neo-mythos/replacement mythos. Rajeev further declared - like only a Bauddhified/non-heathen would - that Sabarimalai and Ayyappa "must have" had a Buddhist history, all because of unscholar (cryptoBuddhist) Lokesh Chandra's sudden, badly researched and patent drivel on the subject (a matter already discussed in excessive length in the Buddhism thread). It takes nothing but very recent and preposterous speculation to Bauddhify or otherwise subvert some alleged "Hindus". Then there are of course the slightly more subtle de-heathenised subversionists, such as of the Elst-fandom variety. Yet they will be offended if they were not recognised as Hindus, hence the phrase HindOOs (i.e. Hindu heathens/traditionalists) was coined to distinguish between actual heathens and the subverted [and subvertible].
Subverted would-have-been heathens are a dime a dozen in modern India and follow noticeable patterns ("classes" of de-heathenised). But it is evenfall for Hindus anyway. Even if christoislamania disappeared within 2 decades, those 2 decades are sufficient to have bred so many more masses of angelsk-enabled subversive wannabe-Hindus that India is guaranteed never to return to heathenism. (India is a lost cause for heathenism. Only subverted new-ageism seems to take root in current angelsk-speaking generations, and English language - the vehicle used for miseducation - is an unavoidable feature of the near future, and all future generations thereafter will be tainted by the effects of subversion thereafter.)
Anyway, the angelsk-enabled "Hindu nationalist" vocalist brigade is filled with such people as above, and such people alone. [None of whom, BTW, are even related to anyone who has seen the Hindu Gods
hock: - as one could tell by their hopeless and hollow arguments allegedly in "favour" of Hindoo religion as well as by their invariable subversions on Hindoo religion.] So why complain about the subversiveness of the class of replacement mythos and de-deifying literature produced by deheathenised, who still go through the motions of being Hindu (in their view) and the pretence of being heathen - apparently Amish Tri... tripod sees himself as a Hindu, though he's neopagan *at best* - when even people less far-gone/less subverted have been eroding their own and others' traditional views (being subverted subversionists).
They ought to have defended the traditional=heathen POV as authority. But that's the one thing they can't do: only heathens can do that, because to recognise the heathen POV need to *be* a heathen. Instead, they set up their inexpert selves, inexpert others and their own ignorant speculative opinions ("opinionations") as authoritative, moreso where these departed from tradition=heathenism. And the more they differed from tradition, the pushier they were about it (and actually threaten traditionalists concerning it), in order to force the matter.
Like Indian governance under BJP is "Hindu nationalist" but not Hindoo - i.e. *not heathen* - governance, similarly Hindu nationalist vocalists write a lot and are very activist - to no real purpose and no usefulness to heathenism ultimately - but are not actually heathen, if anyone were honest. I've read more actually *Hindoo* arguments defending Hindoo religion from subversion from traditional Taoists. But then, they are actually heathens, so they naturally sound more Hindoo then non-heathens who call themselves Hindu but are de-heathenised and subverted.
Soma Vishal is wasting his breath. There is no point arguing or trying to convince modern "Hindus". Use them - their arguments, their writings - to defend your religion where necessary (i.e. if they ever say anything useful or sensible), but don't ever rely on them and never trust them/take them at face value. Subvertibles=gangrene are very dangerous to heathens, because on the surface one is led to the assumption that they are Hindu - because they claim to be, etc - by which they can get under Hindoo society's skin, but any intimacy with them (by which I mean association or attempt at friendship/trust, obviously) will only blow up in heathens' faces and will dent heathenism. Would dearly have said avoid like the plague and close rank (certainly what I'd do), but beggars can't be choosers I suppose. Just be aware of what they are and never lose sight of what they are, and Hindoos should be fine with the enforced but limited interaction.
Save trust for fellow heathens like Taoists (and HindOOs of course).
The only relevant parts of this post are the blockquotes.