It has been really a fascinating experience for me to hear you guys share your thoughts and discuss so vividly on topics which are of great importance. Let me now share a bit of history of the country from where I belong.
As you all must be aware, Hinduism has been the most dominant religion in India for many centuries now, although the term "Hindu" came much later. It originated from the word "Indus", a very famous river which flows from Tibet, through North India, and finally to Pakistan. So the people residing south of Indus river were called the "Hindus". The ancient religion in India was called "Sanatana Dharma", or the "eternal way". It is believed that sages and monks in the very early days had gone to a recluse in the forests, and meditated to realise the "truth", which were put in the form of writing in the religious scriptures such as Vedas, Upanishads, etc. around the period 1000-1500 B.C. But through time, the original philosophical ideas were replaced by rituals and sacrifices which became of utmost importance. The upper caste of "Brahmins", or priests, started exploiting the society to a great extent. The knowledge of the Vedas and Upanishads were only restricted to the Brahmins, and the common people had only access to the interpretations made by the upper caste. As expected, they used it for their own benefits. The lower caste ("Shudras") and the untouchables faced the tyranny of both the Brahmins and the rulers and warriors (Kshatriyas).
At this important junction, Lord Buddha came into the picture. He was born in a royal family, in "Kapilavastu" in present-day Nepal. At the age of 29, he experienced for the first time the harsh realities of the society, and so left home to lead an ascetic life. After intense meditation, he attained "enlightenment", and henceforth was called "Buddha" or the "awakened one". He began travelling and teaching a diverse range of people, from nobles to outcast street sweepers. From the very beginning, Buddhism was equally open to all races and classes, and had no caste system, which was one of the main causes of its expansion in the society, at the cost of Hinduism. Buddhism spread rapidly all the way to Greece, South-East Asia, China and Japan.
But surprisingly, after a few centuries, Buddhism started to decline. As a matter of fact, it almost got eradicated from India, the very place of its birth. There are various reasons for the decline of Buddhism, including external invasions which India had to face. But predominantly, historians consider the decline of Buddhism due to the emergence of three important leaders, Adi Shankara, along with Madhvacharya and Ramanuja, who helped in reviving Hindu philosophy in India. These leaders borrowed a lot of ideas which was formulated by the Buddhist philosophers and thus incorporated a lot of changes in Hinduism.
We thus see a "cyclic" nature of "revolution" which was discussed in the earlier classes. A religion, which came into being as a revolution to the existing order, faded away in the course of time. Ironically Hindus still regard Lord Buddha, the revolutionary, as one of the incarnations of their God "Vishnu"!
As you all must be aware, Hinduism has been the most dominant religion in India for many centuries now, although the term "Hindu" came much later. It originated from the word "Indus", a very famous river which flows from Tibet, through North India, and finally to Pakistan. So the people residing south of Indus river were called the "Hindus". The ancient religion in India was called "Sanatana Dharma", or the "eternal way". It is believed that sages and monks in the very early days had gone to a recluse in the forests, and meditated to realise the "truth", which were put in the form of writing in the religious scriptures such as Vedas, Upanishads, etc. around the period 1000-1500 B.C. But through time, the original philosophical ideas were replaced by rituals and sacrifices which became of utmost importance. The upper caste of "Brahmins", or priests, started exploiting the society to a great extent. The knowledge of the Vedas and Upanishads were only restricted to the Brahmins, and the common people had only access to the interpretations made by the upper caste. As expected, they used it for their own benefits. The lower caste ("Shudras") and the untouchables faced the tyranny of both the Brahmins and the rulers and warriors (Kshatriyas).
At this important junction, Lord Buddha came into the picture. He was born in a royal family, in "Kapilavastu" in present-day Nepal. At the age of 29, he experienced for the first time the harsh realities of the society, and so left home to lead an ascetic life. After intense meditation, he attained "enlightenment", and henceforth was called "Buddha" or the "awakened one". He began travelling and teaching a diverse range of people, from nobles to outcast street sweepers. From the very beginning, Buddhism was equally open to all races and classes, and had no caste system, which was one of the main causes of its expansion in the society, at the cost of Hinduism. Buddhism spread rapidly all the way to Greece, South-East Asia, China and Japan.
But surprisingly, after a few centuries, Buddhism started to decline. As a matter of fact, it almost got eradicated from India, the very place of its birth. There are various reasons for the decline of Buddhism, including external invasions which India had to face. But predominantly, historians consider the decline of Buddhism due to the emergence of three important leaders, Adi Shankara, along with Madhvacharya and Ramanuja, who helped in reviving Hindu philosophy in India. These leaders borrowed a lot of ideas which was formulated by the Buddhist philosophers and thus incorporated a lot of changes in Hinduism.
We thus see a "cyclic" nature of "revolution" which was discussed in the earlier classes. A religion, which came into being as a revolution to the existing order, faded away in the course of time. Ironically Hindus still regard Lord Buddha, the revolutionary, as one of the incarnations of their God "Vishnu"!
That is fascinating, thank you Arya! It is typical of a conquering religion to assimilate the conquered gods as their own lesser gods. The importance of the Virgin Mary in Mediterranean cultures has been suggested to be due to the previous strength of goddess worshipping cultures in that area. Christianity has certainly assimilated the earlier pagan solstice holidays with Christmas, Easter, and the like.
ReplyDeleteAssimilation is a pretty big threat to revolution; assimilation into the enormous bureaucracy is how the Chinese withstood countless invasions. And isn't that what OWS finally succumbed to? Yes the movement was too open-source and therefore couldn't agree upon a concrete, achievable agenda that resulted in legalized changes. But where has all that energy gone now, when they should be learning from that and re-mobilizing? No, that wave of momentum has passed, even though the political situation has gotten much worse. Where has that energy gone? Has been sucked back into the need to pay student loans, and the pressures of every day life? Drained by the practical need to assimilate back into your culture?
Maija, the Occupy Wall Street is an interesting case study in revolution. Rather than assimilation causing the movement to fizzle out, however, I would argue that the lack of marginalized peoples was the cause. While the protesters spanned a breadth of backgrounds, quite a large percentage were middle to upper class, employed, white males. Perhaps if the individuals involved in OWS had been more greatly marginalized, we would have seen more impact from the movement. If they had had nothing to lose, wouldn't they have been more dedicated and desperate for change?
ReplyDeleteI would argue that OWS had problems due to lack of a clear political agenda and lack of alliances within established micropowers. The tea party has a similarly disproportionate representation of white males (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement#Membership_and_demographics). Yet they have been very effective. The OWS also involved homeless people at first, who are dispossessed people in our society lacking adequate health care, shelter, security, and sometimes food. OWS was also persecuted by the state and city governments, showing that they did not form the right bridges with authority; in contrast, the tea party has found such bridges in certain circles. The federal government keeps tabs on OWS according to Wikileaks. So generally OWS has not been successful at a governmental level.
ReplyDelete