Comments on: Are Unitarians “vague Hindus?”

By: kim

kim — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:06:03 +0000

As I see it, Hinduism says there are different ways to be religious/spiritual depending on what speaks to you and your personality. Different “gods” if you want to say it that way.
Then other religions come along that insist their particular way of doing it is THE ONLY way, and they insist only one of the possibilities works, when really it’s that only one works for them. So the only new thing in each new religion is how it’s pruned down to one part of what Hinduism suggested, its limitations and intolerance. And the individual expressions of that, the wall paper and window dressing. The problem is that so many people only see the wall paper and window dressing; they think that’s what religion is.
In Small Gods, Terry Pratchett writes about religions getting so encrusted with this stuff that the god in the middle suffocates and dies. I think that’s pretty accurate — the surface stuff gets so thick that you lose the spirit. Then power get substituted for spirit, and power games for spiritual feeling. It almost makes me want to say that all religions die with their founders. Only the wall paper remains.
UUism is trying to avoid this trap by having as little wall paper and window dressing as we can humanly get away with. It’s no wonder so many look at UUism and see nothing — the window is invisible to them without the dressings. Some of us still see the light….

By: trouble

trouble — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:02:11 +0000

imagine a hindu devotee who has only seen her/his chosen image of god. this person passes down generation after generation a reverence for this one “god.” as a christian, my culture was dictated to me by my family and society. i heard about other “gods”, but those were not the gods of my tradition.

i think that we are all (every religious/spiritual person)are all part of the same vague religion. look at how much is shared. in the essentials, very little isn’t.

By: kim

kim — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 03:38:31 +0000

An interesting thought, that we might be vague Hindus….
I know Hinduism essentially throught Huston Smith’s writing, so it’s the idealized version rather than the practical. It does seem to me that Hinduism encompassed it all and there was really no need for any others….

By: Vinayak

Vinayak — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:50:11 +0000

One man’s belief is another man’s black magic !!

I generally refrain from writing on religion. One, there is generally NO end to religious debate. Two, on an impersonal medium like the net, religious discussion, raises all sorts of passions and leads to fights and is counter productive. Last but not the least, I believe that men, especially Indian men have to concentrate on lot of other issues and so religious debate has no place here. At least here.

However I am concerned at the insensitive legislative process in India.

So as an exception, I am bringing up one discussion on insensitive legislation – which is bound to affect upon MOST RELIGIONS in India today. It affects the Babas as much as it affects the kisthis and it affects Buddhists as much as it affect Jains.

Looks like our law makers are trying to legislate every piece and parcel of our daily lives.
– Marriage which was a smaskra, a sacred religious duty has been legislated. The moment you marry, you fall within the ambit of the Hindu Marriage Act or the Sharia or the Parsi Marriage act …. one of the many marriage laws in this secular land !
– Vidhya – education, was (a) legislated and now (b) commercialised as well…
– The Hindu Religious and endowment Act has helped Govt. nationalise a lot of temples !!
– The Christians had to fight for making divorce simpler …
The list of legislations that affect or personal freedom goes on and on …

Also, law makers in India seem to be borrowing more and more from the west, where religion and state have an un canny agreement. In the west there is a state religion and most things within the religion are defined. It started from the times of Henry the VIII.

India has had a long and chequered history of religious plurality. Three of four major religions were born here. There is NO state religion, and even with the majority Hindu religion, NOT much is uniform, for practices vary state to state.

Look at Hindu’s core practices and you will see all sorts of variations.

– Brahmins traditionally do NOT eat fish .. well.. eh… unless you are a Bengali Brahmin, and then Fish is auspicious.

– Sapthapathi is an essential part of Hindu marriage ..eh… EXCEPT in Tamil Nadu and Kerala ?

– Women are allowed inside temples ?? really … NO, NOT IN sabarimala !!

and so on ….

Now, the Maharashtra govt. is trying to pass a Maharashtra Eradication of Black Magic & Evil & Aghori Practices Act (Anti-Superstition Act)!! and is planning to give GREAT powers to OFFICERS who have a great discretion and decide what is Black Magic !!!

To begin with, the language of this ACT is said to be vague & imprecise. What is suppersition ? What is BLACKmagic and what is logic ? Could black magic and superstition include all that is NOT scientifically proven ? What about the karam kAnda of the Vedas ?, what about Chandamama and the children stories ? and what about Muhharram ? …. other religious practices ?

Worse, the bill also empowers the vigilance officer to enter & search any premise, where, he thinks, black magic has occurred.

This is where I see further in sensitivity.

This is just like the ANTI DOWRY legislation (sec 498A of IPC) empowering the police to arrest without trial, empowering arrest of HUSBANDS and their RELATIVES, including AGED PARENTS !!

So, is this bill a terrible mistake that needs to be stopped before it is enacted ??

more below

Discussion on the Maharashtra Eradication of Black Magic & Evil & Aghori Practices Act (Anti-Superstition Act)
or at : http://tinyurl.com/qofr7

AT THIS PAGE PLEASE SCROLL DOWN BELOW TO SEE THE DISCUSSIONS

By: PeaceBang

PeaceBang — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 03:53:43 +0000

Interesting thoughts, Chutney, cool.
According to the Commission on Appraisal’s fairly recent report on our theological diversity, 370 of our congregations report that they hear almost no Hindu or Muslim readings in worship services. Part of what I was wondering is how many Buddhist readings and Buddhist-themed sermons we’re getting in our services.

By: Clyde Grubbs

Clyde Grubbs — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:32:12 +0000

It is no secret that Emerson was a student of Hinduism, at least he read about it and was influenced by it. But what he did was adopt the inspiration of the Atman is Brahmin to Soul is Oversoul, and maintain a Yankee cultural form.

I would note that we have diversity but not Hindu diversity. The major form of Hindusim the way to God by devotion (bhakti yoga?) is not developed among us, and while we have devotees of the way to God by knowledge, the way to God by body harmony, the way to God by self less action etc. as you have mentioned they are manifested in a way that no Hindu would recognize.

I suspect Hinduism is a culturally specific religion, and has not yet been abstracted and repackaged for the West (yes Vendata yoga is one effort and Hatha yoga is popular for those who want to stretch and be spiritual at the same time.)

I would argue that Unitarian Universalism is a culturally specific religion with its own traditions as well, we aren’t about to go wade in the Mississippi. If some Unitarian Universalists find us vague, they need to ask is it the message or is it my perception of the message. I would argue we do have a central message, but most of us are on message.

We may have variety in delivery and voice, but we have a message. For those who wonder what it is I suggest reading Rebecca Parker, Bill Shultz, Sharon Park, and Paul Rasor in a row and then randomly selected 50 UU preachers and listening to what they are saying.

Less ambitous, read the World and the UU blogs and discriminate the personal from the corporate.