cowardice and religiocity

[peaccenicked]

This essay tries to refute the connection but I remain perturbed. Humanism at its highest form is Marxism perhaps foremost because it emboldens the working class to end all injustice in the fight for universal human freedom.

penny for your thoughts.
http://www.humanistsofutah.org/1998/evans4.html

[Pete]

A few points.

Many people have already redefined religion, at the scholarly level atleast, the thing is that the "West" is trapped in the belief that Christianity = religion. This stems back to the days when their where four religions in the world: Religion (christianity), Judaism, Islam, and Paganism. Everything that was not the first three got lumped in the last catergory. That was slowly redefined, but the effects are still here.


I agree that Humanism is deeply connected to Marxism. I see marxism as being a product of humanism and romanticism in a way, but also a product of the critical human mind, which one can see as being humanism at its finest. With this said, that is one reason why I don't fully agree with humanism. I believe that any anthropocentric view point is damanging in the logn run, and leads to mass exploitation and the destruction of the world we live on and must rely on to surivive.

-Pete



What comes below is a mistake in reading, but I wrote it so damn it I am going to let itbe read!

Being moderately educated in Hinduism I have come to a similar conclusion as you, and at the same time the complete opposite. The wonderful nature of hinduism allows both to be true at the same time with out contradiction.

Upanisadic Hinduism (this is more the modern version, but as it has to be said that Hinduism rarely abandons anything, and is shoudl becalled the hindu religions because of its diversity) in many cases suppirts this. The atman (self) is brahman (everything) and one must seek out and understand the connection to the atman to reach the brahman. The upanisads repeat this again and again (it is not the only concept in there, but the one I think you are referring to). This is the way of knowledge, the jnana yoga. It was meant for, scholars believe, Brahmins, and that is where the contradiction lies. Sure the wise man sees the holy man, the dog, the outcaste sacavanger, and the elephant as being one and the same, but the wise man is more often than not a highcaste Brahmin who can afford to mediate all the time.

Another form of 'upanisadic hinduism' is based around pure and honest devotion. A good example of this is the Bhagavad-Gita. Anyone can participate in this this marga (it is know as the path of devotion, or bhakti yoga... marga is means 'way' or 'path'), Krishna getst his across clearly in the Bhagavad Gita. The problem here is that it invloves complete devotion to a supreme diety, although in whatever means you choose as long as it is sincere, although brahman is one but the wise call it by many names, meaning that each person can have their own ishtadevita (own god).

The thrid marga is the karma yoga (way of action) which is the most classest of the three. Basically it says to 'do your svadharma' or 'do your own duty.' Any action that falls into ones svadharma, which is decided based on age, sex, and caste, helps one move out of samsara. This is good, but obviously if a Brahmin priest wants to be a Ksatryia warrior he is breaking his svadharma and thus will not acheive moksha.

Vedic rituals (where I believe the western use of the term 'karma' comes from) is about worldly goods, but the caste system is deeply entrenched here. The story of the Pursasukta (Rg Veda 10:90) explains how the world is created and how each part of Pursasukta (the primeval man) becomes a different caste. Also, one sacrafices ect for worldly benifits. Basically you do good actions, you get good rewards. That is the major criticism in the Upanisads of the Vedas, taht it is based upon one life, and disregards samsara.

Samsara is a whole nother problem. The cycle of death, birth, and redeath that is never ending allows one to accept servitude in one life, knowing that if the4y are the best damned shit scooper (if that is there dharma) in this life they may be reborn as a Brahmin priest, and if they are the best damned Brahmin preiest they may be born as an Indra, but of course the Puranas tell us that Indras all become ants, the lowest of the low.

Basically, the feeling that hinduism brings across, of everyone being essentailly equal within at the atman, which is truly the universal brahman, is noble and seems close to marxism, one can also see that the deeply entrenched caste system (which is illegal, but still lingers in India), the fact that is presupposes a sacred reality, and shit I just realized all this typing that I just did is irrelevant, but I will leave it here in italics to show that university students cannot read as well as they think.

[peaccenicked]

Pete, thankyou for your reply.
"The wonderful nature of hinduism allows both to be true at the same time with out contradiction"
Hmmm. Interesting thought. Truth without contradiction. It seems idealistic as a goal but then again it maybe something a classless society can come to terms with. It may also depend on what types of truth perhaps not scientific nor poetic truths but plain political and simple spiritual truth. It all seems beyond the limits of my vision.
The question of anthrocentrism is more in the domain of politics. My personal hope is that humanity becomes aware of how it interrelates with nature and that harmony rather than disharmony is pursued. It should make sense to everyone that if we poison the planet, we poison ourselves.The red banner must be changed to show some greenery.