Rethinking Religion in India: In search of new idioms

[Guest guest]

Rethinking Religion in India: In search of new idioms

The Hindu

Dec. 9, 2007

by Sudha Anantharaman

 

" We need to develop indigenous frameworks to study the

various religions of India, " says Prof. S.N. Balagangadhara,

who will be heading the first international conference on the

religions of India in January 2008. There is a long-standing

complaint that the academic study of religion and culture

has never really taken off in India. Rather than lamenting

this, he would like to change this state of affairs.

 

---------------

 

Professor S.N. Balagangadhara was a student of National

College in Bangalore and came to Belgium in 1977 to study

philosophy at Ghent University, where he obtained his

doctorate. Presently, he is professor at Gent University and

heads the research centre Vergelijkende Cutuurwetenschap

(Comparative Science of Culture). He has been researching

the nature of religion and his central area of enquiry has

been the study of Western culture against the background of

Indian culture. He will head the first of the five-year

international conference clusters " Rethinking Religion in

India " which will be held in New Delhi between January 21

and 24, 2008. Excerpts from an interview...

 

Q: Why this conference on Rethinking Religion in India?

 

There is a long-standing complaint that the academic study

of religion and culture has never really taken off in India.

Rather than lamenting this, we would like to change this

state of affairs.

 

The current theoretical framework is firmly embedded

within Western cultural history and proves inadequate when

it comes to studying non-Western traditions. The framework

therefore needs rethinking.

 

Q: When you talk about " rethinking " religion in India, will

the emphasis be on Hinduism?

 

No, there will be an emphasis on what the term " religion "

actually means, as there is no satisfactory understanding of

the concept, as well as an examination of the nature of

Indian traditions and not just Hindu traditions.

 

We will also look into the nature of the caste system

because it has always been associated with Hinduism and

then question the premise of whether Hinduism, Buddhism

and Jainism are religions at all.

 

Q: What is the framework you would use to define

Hinduism in this conference?

 

The definition will only come later. We would first need

some kind of description. We will look at traditions first. Is

it possible to demarcate traditions? Can we, for example,

say that Buddhist traditions are completely different from

Advaitin traditions? Do they overlap? Where do you draw

the line? Should you draw the line? Why draw the line?

These are the kinds of questions that will be asked.

 

The plurality of Indian traditions has led to them being

described as " deficient " religions. An attempt of this

conference is to start developing new ways of thinking

about these traditions, finding out what their strengths are

and how it might be possible for us to recover their essence

and explain them in 21st century language. It makes no

sense to speak of chittasuddhi, manasuddhi, atman, etc.

because many of us don't even know to what these terms

refer. We would have to explain the concepts in a simple

language - English in this case, because it is the language

of the present time.

 

Q: Do you think part of the problem in understanding Hindu

concepts like atman is that we don't speak Sanskrit any

more? And most of our philosophical texts are in Sanskrit.

 

No, because Sanskrit, in the first place, was never a spoken

language. It was a language of the literati who wrote the

texts. It is not simply the absence of Sanskrit that creates a

problem. The problem lies in transmitting words, but not

their underlying meanings and theories. One could, of

course, read up Patanjali's Yogasutra, but it is very difficult

to agree with his theories of the gross body, the subtle body

etc. These kinds of explanations are both inadequate and

unscientific.

 

Q: But is there no understanding beyond scientific

understanding?

 

No, but what I'm going to say is something more

interesting. Indian insights in themselves are scientific in

nature. What we need to do is understand and develop these

extraordinary insights into the nature and structure of human

psychology that no sociology, psychology or political

science has ever come even remotely close to doing. And

we have to re-formulate in 21st century language what was

formulated 3,000 years ago in languages and idioms of that

time.

 

Q: Understanding Indian philosophical concepts is not easy.

Do you believe there was a simplification of these concepts

to make them appeal to the average person?

 

I don't think there was any simplification at all. A

multiplicity of ways and means for people to be happy, and

by this I mean not just sukha and dukha but ananda, was

developed. We need now to understand what its structure

was, and focus on developing it.

 

So far Indian philosophers like Dr. S. Radhakrishnan have

only been reproducing what Western philosophers have

been saying about us.

 

Q: Would you equate philosophy with religion?

 

First of all, we have no religion in India and even

philosophy, as the West knows it, is absent. But what we

have is something different. We have experience. We have

reflection on experience. We ask a different set of questions

to what the Western philosopher asks.

 

Experience, in occidental philosophy, is confused with

sensations, or emotions, or feelings, or thoughts. But

experience is actually all of this. It is not identical to any of

these. It is what we call anubhava, which roughly translates

as " having an appropriate way of being in the world " . This

knowledge that Indians have developed over the last 3,000

years belongs to all human kind and it is this knowledge that

we seek to share in this conference.

 

Q: Going back to your earlier comment on whether

Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism can be regarded as

religions at all. Why this comment?

 

The religions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam share a set

of characteristics that are absent in the Indian traditions: the

belief in one god, a system of beliefs, holy scriptures taken

to be the word of god, and so on. Since these characteristics

are essential for these religions to be recognisable as

religions at all, the absence of these characteristics in the

Indian traditions constitutes a serious problem with religious

studies in India. The very nature of Hinduism, Buddhism

and Jainism is extremely complex and diversified. They

have so many doctrines and nobody knows them all; there

are hundreds of contradictory stories behind the beliefs,

rituals and practices. It is therefore impossible to find a

common core of doctrines that is believed in by all

adherents of the religion. Scholars speak instead about the

" evolution from Vedism to Brahmanism to Hinduism " .

What was earlier characterised as a " false " religion with its

proliferation of gods and rituals, practices and doctrines, is

now explained as a mixture of influences from both

indigenous people and Aryan migrants. [....]

 

Q: Is having this conference now, at this point in time, of

any particular significance?

 

It is significant because in contrast to the last 500 years,

India is now an economic power with a new confidence.

" How does the West or the rest of the world appear to us

Indians? " is a question that will grip an entire class of

intellectuals.

 

" What is it that makes us Indian? " is another question that

needs answering. We've always accepted what the West has

said about us, but is it true? Do we live the way books say

we do? What about our own experiences? We have to ask

ourselves all these questions. And along the way if we find

injustices or prejudices we have to endeavour to change

them.

 

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2007/12/09/stories/2007120950090400.htm

 

Additional information on the conference:

http://www.cultuurwetenschap.be

[Guest guest]

, " jagbir

singh " <adishakti_org wrote:

 

Dear All,

 

It will be of benefit for 'East-West' cultural understanding, that there's going

to be international conference clusters on five separate yearly occasions, on

the topic of: " Rethinking Religion in India " . It will be especially beneficial,

since it's going to be done with the use of research study of Western culture,

against the background of Indian culture, and new idioms made, to help cross the

cultural barriers. We really do need this

 

This brings to mind what Shri Mataji told us, about India as a country rising

again to prominence - not only culturally but economically. Surely there can be

no greater 'prominence' than having other countries beginning to understand your

ancient spiritual knowledge! Relatively recently, Nicole posted material that

reveals the spiritual influence that India had on China, Korea and Japan!:

 

/message/8773?var=1 & l=1

 

From what i have read and learned through my research into religions, if you

trace their " source " into antiquity, it invariably seems to come from India, the

Land of Sahasrara! Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi taught that the branches (religions)

of the one Tree of Life, had decided to go their own way, that is, " split off "

from that main Tree of Life. She said that the religions as they are today, will

not be able to sustain themselves, because a 'branch' cannot survive, if it

breaks off from the 'tree'. According to Her, Sahaja Yoga is the " connecting

line " that will again re-unite all the branches to the tree. The religions can

either be re-invigorated, or they will die.

 

As regards the 'branches' (religions) that have broken off from the Tree of

Life, they must have been connected in the first place, at some common origin or

source, someplace, somewhere. I dare say that that " source " must have been from

India, where a majority of the saints and incarnations have also been born! At

least, all the reading and research i have done, seems to point to that. However

unfortunately, because the different 'branches' have broken from the 'original

tree', there is a great gap in the cultural understanding between Eastern and

Western ways of 'thinking' and 'being'.

 

One of the ways that the 'East' and 'West' think differently is that the

Westerners tend to feel guilty about most everything and anything, because they

have been taught by the religion, that they are " born in sin " and that they are

" therefore guilty " . Indians, however almost never feel guilty, since they have

been taught that they have been born " free of sin " to start a new incarnation!

According to Shri Mataji, they don't even really know what the word " sin " really

means!:

 

" I am sure Sahaja Yogis will understand the importance of the Agnya Chakra. In

the East, no problem, because to them He is only Ganesha. Ganesha is a child,

and they know for definite, that childhood has no contamination, no problems,

nothing. So they are still children as far as sin is concerned. There is a

story. One pastor went to a village and gave a big lecture to them, and the

villagers had to thank [him]. So he [the villager] got up and said: " Thank you

very much for telling us all about it. We did not know what was 'sin' and thank

God you have told us that there is sin! " So this awareness [of sin] is not in

their heads. They do not understand [that]. You will be surprised, you cannot

ask Indians. They won't understand what it means, you know! They may say 'Mr.

Freud, this, that'; but they do not understand [that] it is anti-God. Actually,

I did not know till the other day, when Rustom told me with great hesitation,

what it 'really' means. So that is what it is, and we have to understand this. "

(Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi – Christmas Puja, `Christmas Eve Talk' – Pune, India -

24 December, 1982)

 

With such divergence in 'worldview', there is bound to be some cultural angst,

even with the people who really want to get along well together. Sahaja Yogis

had to be strong people, as Shri Mataji cleverly used the 'melting pot' of

Sahaja Yoga, to try and rebalance through us, these 'opposite cultural

outlooks'. She helped with self-realisation, to balance things out, and with Her

teachings, about where we had 'all gone wrong' regardless of the culture we came

from. So Sahaja Yoga did not just become 'Union with the Divine' - it also

became a 'melting pot' for people from divergent cultural outlooks.

 

Looking back, i would say that Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi achieved a lot more,

than is at first apparent. i have heard that there have been some 'casualties'

along the way, but i don't think that Shri Mataji had any control over these,

really, since we are all such individual creatures. She said, that we each had

to " work things out " - be our own Master, Teacher, or Guru. It did require a lot

of spiritual work!

 

Yes, i believe that 'developing an idiomatic understanding between East and

West', will help in the intercultural understanding. Idioms, to my

understanding, are 'agreed upon meanings' to words that are foreign (in this

case) to the Western mindset. i realise that there is this gap in the

'understanding', which is why, when quoting Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi, i will

also write 'in the English way', but with the meaning of what Shri Mataji gave,

being retained. i realise very much the need for the Western mindset to more

easily understand the Eastern way of 'thinking' and 'being', which was

previously foreign to them. Having myself been brought up in the Western

mindset, i see these as 'hurdles' to be overcome. i know that for the Western

mindset to understand the Eastern way of 'thinking' and 'being', it really has

to be explained in the 'meaning base' of the Western mindset, so that the

average person can understand it too. All this will help to open up Shri

Mataji's teachings, to the Western understanding. Shri Mataji has done a lot of

work on this, but One person, can do only so much, even if they are the Divine

Mother!

 

Practically speaking, we might be talking about the English language, being

greatly expanded by an 'influx' of Indian words and concepts. This has to be a

good thing, that will unite the cultures of 'East' and 'West', and in the

process, bridging that cultural gap. It can't but help to also bridge the

spiritual gap!

 

I am pleased that Jagbir brought this article to our attention. i wonder what

interesting idioms will eventuate from the cluster conferences.

 

regards to all,

 

violet

 

 

> Rethinking Religion in India: In search of new idioms

> The Hindu

> Dec. 9, 2007

> by Sudha Anantharaman

>

> " We need to develop indigenous frameworks to study the

> various religions of India, " says Prof. S.N. Balagangadhara,

> who will be heading the first international conference on the

> religions of India in January 2008. There is a long-standing

> complaint that the academic study of religion and culture

> has never really taken off in India. Rather than lamenting

> this, he would like to change this state of affairs.

>

> ---------------

>

> Professor S.N. Balagangadhara was a student of National

> College in Bangalore and came to Belgium in 1977 to study

> philosophy at Ghent University, where he obtained his

> doctorate. Presently, he is professor at Gent University and

> heads the research centre Vergelijkende Cutuurwetenschap

> (Comparative Science of Culture). He has been researching

> the nature of religion and his central area of enquiry has

> been the study of Western culture against the background of

> Indian culture. He will head the first of the five-year

> international conference clusters " Rethinking Religion in

> India " which will be held in New Delhi between January 21

> and 24, 2008. Excerpts from an interview...

>

> Q: Why this conference on Rethinking Religion in India?

>

> There is a long-standing complaint that the academic study

> of religion and culture has never really taken off in India.

> Rather than lamenting this, we would like to change this

> state of affairs.

>

> The current theoretical framework is firmly embedded

> within Western cultural history and proves inadequate when

> it comes to studying non-Western traditions. The framework

> therefore needs rethinking.

>

> Q: When you talk about " rethinking " religion in India, will

> the emphasis be on Hinduism?

>

> No, there will be an emphasis on what the term " religion "

> actually means, as there is no satisfactory understanding of

> the concept, as well as an examination of the nature of

> Indian traditions and not just Hindu traditions.

>

> We will also look into the nature of the caste system

> because it has always been associated with Hinduism and

> then question the premise of whether Hinduism, Buddhism

> and Jainism are religions at all.

>

> Q: What is the framework you would use to define

> Hinduism in this conference?

>

> The definition will only come later. We would first need

> some kind of description. We will look at traditions first. Is

> it possible to demarcate traditions? Can we, for example,

> say that Buddhist traditions are completely different from

> Advaitin traditions? Do they overlap? Where do you draw

> the line? Should you draw the line? Why draw the line?

> These are the kinds of questions that will be asked.

>

> The plurality of Indian traditions has led to them being

> described as " deficient " religions. An attempt of this

> conference is to start developing new ways of thinking

> about these traditions, finding out what their strengths are

> and how it might be possible for us to recover their essence

> and explain them in 21st century language. It makes no

> sense to speak of chittasuddhi, manasuddhi, atman, etc.

> because many of us don't even know to what these terms

> refer. We would have to explain the concepts in a simple

> language - English in this case, because it is the language

> of the present time.

>

> Q: Do you think part of the problem in understanding Hindu

> concepts like atman is that we don't speak Sanskrit any

> more? And most of our philosophical texts are in Sanskrit.

>

> No, because Sanskrit, in the first place, was never a spoken

> language. It was a language of the literati who wrote the

> texts. It is not simply the absence of Sanskrit that creates a

> problem. The problem lies in transmitting words, but not

> their underlying meanings and theories. One could, of

> course, read up Patanjali's Yogasutra, but it is very difficult

> to agree with his theories of the gross body, the subtle body

> etc. These kinds of explanations are both inadequate and

> unscientific.

>

> Q: But is there no understanding beyond scientific

> understanding?

>

> No, but what I'm going to say is something more

> interesting. Indian insights in themselves are scientific in

> nature. What we need to do is understand and develop these

> extraordinary insights into the nature and structure of human

> psychology that no sociology, psychology or political

> science has ever come even remotely close to doing. And

> we have to re-formulate in 21st century language what was

> formulated 3,000 years ago in languages and idioms of that

> time.

>

> Q: Understanding Indian philosophical concepts is not easy.

> Do you believe there was a simplification of these concepts

> to make them appeal to the average person?

>

> I don't think there was any simplification at all. A

> multiplicity of ways and means for people to be happy, and

> by this I mean not just sukha and dukha but ananda, was

> developed. We need now to understand what its structure

> was, and focus on developing it.

>

> So far Indian philosophers like Dr. S. Radhakrishnan have

> only been reproducing what Western philosophers have

> been saying about us.

>

> Q: Would you equate philosophy with religion?

>

> First of all, we have no religion in India and even

> philosophy, as the West knows it, is absent. But what we

> have is something different. We have experience. We have

> reflection on experience. We ask a different set of questions

> to what the Western philosopher asks.

>

> Experience, in occidental philosophy, is confused with

> sensations, or emotions, or feelings, or thoughts. But

> experience is actually all of this. It is not identical to any of

> these. It is what we call anubhava, which roughly translates

> as " having an appropriate way of being in the world " . This

> knowledge that Indians have developed over the last 3,000

> years belongs to all human kind and it is this knowledge that

> we seek to share in this conference.

>

> Q: Going back to your earlier comment on whether

> Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism can be regarded as

> religions at all. Why this comment?

>

> The religions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam share a set

> of characteristics that are absent in the Indian traditions: the

> belief in one god, a system of beliefs, holy scriptures taken

> to be the word of god, and so on. Since these characteristics

> are essential for these religions to be recognisable as

> religions at all, the absence of these characteristics in the

> Indian traditions constitutes a serious problem with religious

> studies in India. The very nature of Hinduism, Buddhism

> and Jainism is extremely complex and diversified. They

> have so many doctrines and nobody knows them all; there

> are hundreds of contradictory stories behind the beliefs,

> rituals and practices. It is therefore impossible to find a

> common core of doctrines that is believed in by all

> adherents of the religion. Scholars speak instead about the

> " evolution from Vedism to Brahmanism to Hinduism " .

> What was earlier characterised as a " false " religion with its

> proliferation of gods and rituals, practices and doctrines, is

> now explained as a mixture of influences from both

> indigenous people and Aryan migrants. [....]

>

> Q: Is having this conference now, at this point in time, of

> any particular significance?

>

> It is significant because in contrast to the last 500 years,

> India is now an economic power with a new confidence.

> " How does the West or the rest of the world appear to us

> Indians? " is a question that will grip an entire class of

> intellectuals.

>

> " What is it that makes us Indian? " is another question that

> needs answering. We've always accepted what the West has

> said about us, but is it true? Do we live the way books say

> we do? What about our own experiences? We have to ask

> ourselves all these questions. And along the way if we find

> injustices or prejudices we have to endeavour to change

> them.

>

> http://www.hindu.com/mag/2007/12/09/stories/2007120950090400.htm

>

> Additional information on the conference:

> http://www.cultuurwetenschap.be

>