"But when the outsider wonders how a people, bound hand and foot, as we reckon, to an unprofitable polytheism, can be so attractive in their daily lives, governed by principles of action which never seemed to influence their gods, he will find the explanation in the fact that the Hindu has lived a double life. When he returns to his home from the temple of Krishna, the god who played tricks ..............., the Hindu has no intention in most cases at least of following the example of gods who, with the exception of Rama, are possessed of lower moral qualities than his own. In fact, some of his holy books have already warned him of the danger of doing so............. He may not have risen to the conception of a God who is both righteous and pure. ............ But God fulfills himself in many ways, and India has heard God speaking to her soul, with the result that there has been expressed for her in living parable and legend that wonderful variety of moral teaching which has helped to make her people what they are."
This passage is from the preface of the book mentioned in the title. It struck me that this in a sense reflects an attribute of a motif in Hindu scriptures. All the parables and moral lessons are presented in such an exaggerated form that the follower has to understand the essence of the teachings before applying it. Whether it is about a demon who got too proud for his own good or a god who committed a terrible crime, he need only imbibe the moral maxims in them. By sometimes forcing this of the believer (at least some of them), I feel it gives them some leeway to be spiritually at peace. Even people who cannot agree to the basic tenets of the religion (like me) should be able to appreciate this fact about it. None of it seems to have been meant to be followed to the word and this is what contributes to the harmonious environment of the region. But as always there are the bad apples who take it upon themselves to be enforcers of their own (or their leader's) interpretations. We can always claim that as being characteristic of Kali Yuga, that is a very handy escape route.
Another excerpt that interested me, "The Indian, even the well- educated Indian, is only too often ignorant of his own treasures. They lie hidden in a mass of puerile and sometimes repulsive rubbish, while the practice of treating everything as equally inspired leads him, as it has led people of other countries, to reckon the jewel and the paste, the false and the true, as of equal worth." Very true. But only a non-believing scholar would make the above mentioned distinction. I mean, which believer is going to judge his faith?
This passage is from the preface of the book mentioned in the title. It struck me that this in a sense reflects an attribute of a motif in Hindu scriptures. All the parables and moral lessons are presented in such an exaggerated form that the follower has to understand the essence of the teachings before applying it. Whether it is about a demon who got too proud for his own good or a god who committed a terrible crime, he need only imbibe the moral maxims in them. By sometimes forcing this of the believer (at least some of them), I feel it gives them some leeway to be spiritually at peace. Even people who cannot agree to the basic tenets of the religion (like me) should be able to appreciate this fact about it. None of it seems to have been meant to be followed to the word and this is what contributes to the harmonious environment of the region. But as always there are the bad apples who take it upon themselves to be enforcers of their own (or their leader's) interpretations. We can always claim that as being characteristic of Kali Yuga, that is a very handy escape route.
Another excerpt that interested me, "The Indian, even the well- educated Indian, is only too often ignorant of his own treasures. They lie hidden in a mass of puerile and sometimes repulsive rubbish, while the practice of treating everything as equally inspired leads him, as it has led people of other countries, to reckon the jewel and the paste, the false and the true, as of equal worth." Very true. But only a non-believing scholar would make the above mentioned distinction. I mean, which believer is going to judge his faith?
0 comments:
Post a Comment