Thursday, February 5, 2009

lost january

heya readers.......ur favourite writer is back। i couldnt write for a whole month not that i had anything else important to do. like my good friend puts it, "it's all a Deja-Vu", repeating daily the same thing all over again and again but rather i had nothing to write about. Though that is not the case now, i hav plenty to write and tell you what being me means.

This post of mine is for all the God fearing people out there, not fnatic ones but people like me। People who dont go around plundering other Gods niether those who start preaching ever rahul, sameer and karan (indianized version of ' tom, dick & harry')। it is for those who need god in their everday life, who talk to Him and wait for a reply, who sometime wonder wether he is listening yet believe he is watching over always ready to hold u when u slip, ready guide you when you are lost. It is for people like me.

well coming to the point, i have been studing a course about different religons and their psychologies. Not that i am a expert as yet but i have come across some interesting theories that i wish to share. one of friend wrote a blog post about evolution of God from a supreme being feared and loved by all to a weapon used by some people to exploit others. well that might be true but where did it all started. Sigmund Freud concieved that man found a father in God. he said that man's parental issues got projected in God and as he wished for a compasionate and merciful father he created a father like God and named Him. later the acts of patricide was replaced by religious sacrifices. he even goes on to say that these illusional idea of religion was only an act of ignorance. but then what about the pagan religions, the non prophetic religons, where there is no father figure, what about hinduism where there is a god for every 3-4 hindu. well here comes another philosopher, Carl Gustav Jung. He remarked that we as humans follow religon b'coz we cannot help it, that it is are unconcious that makes us believe in a supreme being and we are victims of it.

now all these might be true and not that i'm challenging any of these great thinkers, but i just dont feel that these definations go for any of the indian religons( by indians i mean the ones originated from india) especially hinduism. If you study hindu scriptures as an outsider and not hav any preconcieved notions you will either see a great work of fiction with great characters or you shall find a rule book or a guideline for man to live in a civilised world. we know that civilisation started from india and that hinduism is the oldest living religion. When it all started, i believe what man needed was to undestand his world and to know how to live in it. The meaning of being a Human, a son, a husband and a brother. the vedas taugth him about the nature, the world. the itihaas ( sanskrit for it-so-happened) which include the epics of Ramayana and Mahabharta taugth us the meaing of living in a society when there was chaos and when people were still savages in other parts of the world we were learning to live in harmony. These epics were writen by valmiki and krishna dwaipanya vyasa( veda vyasa) and both of them while writting these books claimed that everything required for living are in these books and there is nothing else important. this was the reason that our religion still survives even though our conterparts in egypt and greece and rome failed. it is because we learnt to be humans at a very early age and still live. Not only that in one of the hindu scriptures called 'brahma sutra' there is chapter dedicated to understanding to live in harmony with other concepts of living or self knowing and to come up with a universal doctrine which can accepted by all. then why today some people we go about sacriliging other's concept of living. some outfits claiming to be workers of God use means that they justify to be Godly and correct. Quoting geeta they claim to perform for the God himself but nowhere geeta says that someonewho does not believe its teachins is a adharmi, no where it says that other dharms are adharms. so using a knowledge like this to do somethimg totally opposite is surely an act of adharm and if there is a supreme being watching this then i am sure he is not liking it.

3 comments:

Bandan said...

orAs I always believe in , a religion is known by its followers .Prophets were always good people but followers carry the symbol , the faith forward. The concept of religion doesn't exist in nature , not for the birds and animals or the mountains, it exists amongst the mankind for ubiquitous common good , which has been stressed upon from time to time by the good prophets.
Because the animals/plants/mountains never needed this common good , they never felt the need , we do , because we as humans , are very pathetic at carrying our lives forward without external help. We need someone who is always there , someone immortal.
So whatever you have stated , is actually very true , and the whole concept of religion boils down to its followers.

Just wonder if Hinduism was introduced to a foreigner through the Rama Sena!?!? :)

Kaaran Dhar said...

first of all thank u for comments.

well, what i wanted to convey was the idea of religion (rather hinduism) according to me.

the idea if ramasena teching hinduism to outsider gives me goosebumps. [:P]

diwu said...

hey i didnt knew that you scribble ....
For the first time today i saw your blog.
Well i got much of the text you have written here.and we have also discussed about it in detail. But knowing the source of religion and its evolution is quite interesting in the context of sigmund frued's writing.