Nothing on earth can be the same.
Unfortunately, or in reality, most religions are institutionalised social
engineering tools or constructs and hence institutional dispensation unlike Sanathan
Dharma which is not merely a way of life for the name sake but actually,
practices a way of life ( meaning various and different ways life) it
accommodates, assimilates and acknowledges many ways, any way and every way of
life.
It is too broad to be confined to the term religion as
understood by the West ( nothing wrong , every region, culture, society,
civilization, social system is entitled to their own definitions,
understanding, ethnocentric pride etc).
But the problem is our forefathers unintentionally allowed
or did not mind Sanathan Dharma to be classified as religion as per the
Western label of religion because they may have ignorantly or innocently or
naïvely felt let others understand through their known labels or frames of
references.
Having said all these, all religions have many common
aspects, certain unique practices and also various traditions, beliefs, rules,
social mores and morals.
But often, being social constructs, they are too
strict with certain observances ( strict here is a euphemism for narrow and
forced observances).
Sanathan Dharma is an exception to this, because it is
too liberal in nurturing natural variety or variations or differences without
violently punishing and hence, in many ways disorganised as well.
It does not enforce anything based on any single institution
or scripture. It is in that sense too disorganised as well because 'the
way of life of every individual' preferably cannot and must not be
externally organised.
Core of religion varies from religion to religion, to a
hardcore Jain even many Hindu practices are harmful.
But when it comes to beliefs and rituals in every
social , individual or institutional construct there will be certain things
logical and some illogical.
As for rituals of any religion, unless one knows as
practitioners, their intrinsic meaning or centuries of observed justifications
or traditions, merely as outsiders no religious person can or is entitled to
mock at or to criticise another
religion.
But the civilisational culture, intrinsic humane values,
methods of nonviolent non harmful ways of life that enables social cohabitation
as a species must be prioritised rather than creating animosities in the name
of religion.
Afterall, all or every life is mortal, there are too
many aspects to this life, some of them are more important contextually to live
in the present times with Cosmopolitan sophisticated civilised rational living
which ensures peace (more precisely nimadhi- inner peace),
certain amount of conscious heartfelt happiness ( not to be
confused with momentary pleasures, tough to clearly distinguish generically),
then certain comforts and affordable enjoyments and of course ,
most vitally ensure basic needs as much as possible to as many as
possible in whatever way we can to the unfortunate individuals of our
species.
For our body to ensure certain level of good
health . For livelihood certain amount of
wealth. For social cohabitation observing certain basic
reciprocal or mutually beneficial rules.
Besides, these, there are many add-ons or additional
dimensions and supplementary dynamics.
However, being one aspect of the many aspects of life,
excessive obsession of any belief will or may unnecessarily create unwanted
uneasiness.
While everyone is entitled to their own philosophical
perspectives, their own cherished beliefs and concepts, everyone must remember
that life is too vast to be confined to any particular/specific ideology,
specific practices, beliefs, particular system of life as per any
specific preaching or sermonising.
The following works through enough light like A. Ramamurthy’s
Indian philosophy of religion, Dr. S. Radhakrishnan’s philosophy of religion,
Sri Aurobindu’s Synthesis of Yoga, Swami Vivekananda’s raja
yoga, Neale Donald Walsch’s Conversations with God, J.K’s
philosophical questions, Osho’s vast explanations, Chinmayananda’s Logic of
Spirituality and ultimately, most simple but also most difficult to
practice Bhagwan Ramamaharishi’s prompts to proper self-realisation are
a few that come to my mind. Besides, I had a wonderful book titled ‘Philosophy
of religion’ it was a research work by a lady , I have forgotten the
name, in google some other names are indicated , let me rework on my memory and
try to get back.
The problem is religions expect a particular collective
realization but realization can be only individual, discipline, following
adjusting, tolerance etc can be promoted as collective
responsibility.
Above is response to the following:-
No comments:
Post a Comment