Rajendra Senchurey’s article “Satanic verses” (Sept 2) is a barefaced attempt to justify religious conversion by lambasting Hinduism, but one that is far removed from the ground realities of present times.
I, an educated Hindu Brahmin, am open to conversion to Christianity or Buddhism, but if I did convert, it would not be because of a maliciously written religious propaganda, but because of the love Christ professes through his actions and compassion that the Buddha expounds in his teachings.
Hinduism thrived on assimilation of evolving ideas, not on orthodox beliefs. It is this assimilative and open nature of Hinduism that gives Senchurey the opportunity to pick verses from myriad texts to justify his plainly biased and extremely anti-Hindu, half-baked notions to give shape to his incoherent and highly selective interpretation of realities.
First, his attempt to constrain Hinduism to some scriptures, “holy theology” (does that mean anything at all?), Vedas, puranas and Manusmriti so that he can set a boundary on what Hinduism stands for for the convenience of his criticism is truly pathetic. And it is not just even me saying it.WordWeb, an online dictionary developed by the Princeton University, describes Hinduism as: “a body of religious and philosophical beliefs and cultural practices originating in South Asia; it is characterized by a belief in reincarnation, by a belief in a supreme being of many forms and natures, by the view that opposing theories are aspects of one eternal truth, and by a desire for liberation from earthly evils.”
So, Senchurey be better aware of “earthly evils”, for they can cloud his understanding and distort his perception of realities.
Senchurey berates Hindus and Hinduism for denigrating low-caste people as Shudras or untouchables without properly explaining the contexts in which the term was introduced or interpreted in authoritative Hindu scriptures. This one verse mentioned in our shaastras explains how caste-division is to be seen.
Janmanaa jaayate shoodrah samskaaraat dwija uchyate
vedapathnaad bhaved viprah brahma jaanaati braahmanah
The verse means that everybody is a Shudra by birth. Only after acquiring proper culture does one ascend to a higher birth. After studying the Vedas, one becomes truly worthy of respect as then one would have attained wisdom. Lastly, one can claim to be a Brahman only after knowing the Brahma, or the creating force of Brahmanda, the universe.
With regard to scriptures Senchury seems to have set out on a task he is not up to. But he also seems not have his ear to the ground as his claims and predictions are miles away from the truths of our time.
Flying in the face of his claim that “educated new generation will find no reason for adhering to discriminatory Hinduism” are hundreds of thousands of youths lining up outside the temples in Kathmandu for their turn to pay their obeisance to Hindu deities on auspicious days. And he has chosen to overlook broad changes taking place in the country that he explains so well in his article.
Senchurey talks about the entry of Dalits to Pashupatinath Temple in 1954 (I am truly amazed that it happened 60 years ago, before he and I were born), and then he goes on to cite other examples of the temple entrance. But they are pretty insignificant when he has already been welcomed inside the temple of the Supreme Lord, whom all Hindus regard as their ultimate deity.
I went to a school that was open to all and where I shared benches, lunches, and books with students—my friends—who came from all sorts of castes and communities. And that was two decades ago.
And here Senchurey is stoking cinders that have stopped even giving up smoke, let alone sparks, and picking up battle that has already been settled, through constitutional provisions, laws and civil movements.
This scribe cannot be blind to the historical injustices committed to the members of lower-caste. But it is clear from Senchurey’s article that he has deliberately chosen to see the glass half empty, giving less credit to the positive changes taking place in the country than they warrant and putting more weight behind isolated, on-off cases they actually don’t deserve.
Senchurey happens to be a Fredskorpset Fellow. If the article was an attempt to burnish his credentials as a scholar, here’s my observation. His article is full of vague and confusing logic, misrepresentation and unabashed selective interpretation of truths, overgeneralization and, at a more personal level, misdirection of frustration.
The author is a copy editor at Republica
amendrapokharel@gmail.com
source:- myrepublica.com
No comments:
Post a Comment