Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: INDIAN CULTURE - subservient?
From: J.Ainikkal@massey.ac.nz (J. Ainikkal)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 23:25:13 GMT
Organization: Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Keywords: Indian Culture - Subservient
Summary: Indian Culture - Subservient
X-Reader: NETNEWS/PC Version 2c

 
ja == J. Ainikkal (J.Ainikkal@massey.ac.nz) wrote: 
 
sri ==  udumudi@vanilla (u v babu srinivas)  writes: 
 
 
ja> Besides religion should be personal (as Selvakumar puts it). 
ja> do not deny the fact that religion can bring more happiness. 
ja> religious person often does not think - and there is a lot
ja> truth in the statement 'Ignorance is Bliss'.  
 
sri>you are associating with word 'religious person' with someone
sri>who follows his/her 'sacred texts' blindly, someone who
sri>doesn't think, someone who does all kinds of rituals without
sri>even trying to understand the real symbolic meaning. and may
sri>be, a fanatic. 

I would say, and with some confidence, that the majority (if not
all) of Indians follow religion without questioning it. 70% of
Indians live in rural areas where they, without questioning,
perform meaningless rituals (Not to say that the Urban population
is very different). These are also the people who can be swayed
into hating and mistreating or in turn allow others to mistreat
them due to these beliefs. They accept many evils due to their
beliefs.
 
sri>I am not. I am talking about someone who knows the true sense
sri>of religion, as I have made it clear in the previous article.
sri>I meant to say that a person with a spiritual side would 
sri>definitely be more happy than a material person. and any one 
sri>can have this spiritual orientation, a truth seeking
sri>scientist to a politician. it might be more prominent in
sri>some.

Here again we are talking about the concept of happiness. While
U seem to believe that TRUE happiness can be achieved only
spiritually - I beg to differ. To me true happiness makes more
sense using Maslow's hierarchy. Happiness is achieved by meeting
ones needs. Ones needs do not have to be spiritual. 
 

sri>yes we need reform. but, that's a totally different matter.
sri>reform doesn't mean that we have to reject all what's there.
sri>and religion is the last we should throw away. I think, in
sri>its reformed form, religion and the spiritual view it gives
sri>to life, is what we have  and others lack, which is our
sri>strong point. 

Positive and successful reform comes through a concentrated
effort to throw out useless dogma. Religion has been amoung the
leading contributors that lead to the decline of our
civilization. We can still turn things around - If not for us -
at least for our grand children. Or we can still 'divide' using
religion and cotinue to live in the cesspool we created.

We need to fight the greatest crime in our country - poverty. And
one of the leading contributors of this crime has been religion.

Maybe someone historian could shed some light as to why there was
fragmentation since Harsha Vardhan.

 
sri>I can't think of a truth seeking, truly religious person who 
sri>wouldn't recognize individual rights. having individual
sri>rights and having wealth are two different things. one might
sri>be related  to other in some sense, but the former doesn't
sri>follow automatically from the latter is what I want to say. 
 
sri>take arab countries for example. this is what you said about
sri>them: 

some stuff on problems with arab countries deleted.

sri>so what did wealth do to them? did everything else follow
sri>automatically? isn't that a good example proving what you
sri>have said wrong? 

No - definitely not. It is religion that has kept them
'primitive' (sorry to use such terms - but using my prejudices -
IMO, their laws and culture is primitive). They are wealthy not
because of their attitudes, or culture - but because they got
lucky. And unfortunately they have not used their wealth to get
rid of evils within their society. 

And why have they been so unsuccessful in reducing evils - Due
to their religious beliefs.
 
 
sri>no he wouldn't. religion has always been used by people for 
                                 ^^^^^^
sri>their quest of power and for commercial ends. they are not
sri>truly spiritual people. their primary goals in life are
sri>material. that's what makes them behave the way they do. and
sri>this leads to all kinds of problems we see in today's world.
sri>you should see that it's the MATERIAL edge in him that is the
sri>prime cause for all the evil, and not his spiritual side. you
sri>would be making a mistake if you reject the true principles
sri>some person USES them for wrong [material] purposes.  
 

And it will ALWAYS be the same. There is no reason to believe
that it will change.
 
sri>I have no problems with giving them wealth. but I have a
sri>problem with asking them to shed their spiritual side. I
sri>wouldn't give  them religion as it is followed now either. 

I would'nt give them religion. While it might help a few - It
will supress the masses. It will lead to ignorance and
persecution. the history of the world is all one needs to look
at to believe the above. 

sri>show me one person whose life is merely controlled by
sri>material luxuries he strives to gain, and is happy. 
 
I could ask the same question (1 person who is happy) of all
those who do not get 2 meals a day - which (poverty) I believe
is a direct result of the use/misuse of religion.

sri>if I understand you properly, you have assigned blame to the
sri>spiritual side of our culture which religion gives [not
sri>necessarily only  religion] for all the problems we have
sri>today, and you are saying that we need to get rid of any form
sri>of religion. and you say that one should be totally material
sri>and gain as much wealth as possible in order to be happy. 

I can not help but smile:) U make me sound very primitive. But
I would rather be a wealthy 'primitive' person with my rights and
a mind that is not stifled in its diversity of thought - than a
religious person who in his/her ignorance is being supressed.

sri> 
sri>not just talking at personal level, but the society as a
sri>whole should have that outlook, you say. is that right? 
 
sri>then, no... material societies can never achieve happiness. 
 
sri> because a tool is used in the wrong way, you don't throw it
sri>away. you tell them how to use it in the right way. what you
sri>are asking for is the very wrong which made the tool look bad
sri>--materialism. 

When truly spiritual leaders try to rectify the use of a tool -
and fail for 1000's of years - the chances are that there is a
serious defect with the tool.

sri>I think a common [superior] culture would arise, and shared
sri>by all the citizens of the country.  
 
I hope so too. Something that get rid of all dogmas that lead to
evils in society.

sri>imagine  how the world would be if we undid all the ugly
sri>[purely] material  sides the cultures have developed.  

We would be living in furs, 
and hunting with spears:)
 
John Ainikkal 
I think - Therefore I am.
'Aotearoa' - Land of the long white cloud