Ramayana and Mahabharatha and Puranas were derived from Vedas or at least were never in conflict with Vedic ideas..
And the description of the story line as well as the spiritual details in various itihasas, puranas and upapuranas followed identical story-lines faithfully, and the descriptions did not have major variations..
And these have evolved over a few millenniums and all institutions of Hindus, and rituals followed over centuries have evolved from those texts..
You can note that there were many literary creations like Raghuvamsam, Shakunthalam, Kirataarjuneeyam, Naishadham, Shishupalavadham and so on which also relied on puranic and Itihasic themes.. and, but for some poetic liberties of minor nature, they did not deviate much from the scriptures.. Still the works of Kalidasa, Bharavi, Magha and Sreeharsha are never accepted as authoritative texts of Hinduism/
Whether the scriptures Vedas and puranas were true or false can be a matter of conjecture.. Then Hinduism can be also called a big farce..
But those texts and tenets contained therein were followed by us and our forefathers for centuries..
How can the brainchild of some fiction writer of today be ever compared to that?
Many books analyzing various characters in our lore have been written by many Indians and foreigners.. Are they accepted as final words in Hinduism.?. Tagore wrote about Urmila, for example. that is considere as his view alone..
Hinduism has its basic texts..For some it may be Vedas and Puranas and for some it may be the local lore developed over centuries.. But to call Shiva Trilogy which challenges almost all precedents as seen from the hoary traditions, is called as a standard text of reference for Hinduism , I cannot help calling it ridiculous..
Who will accept a new Bible or a new Koran at deviation from the originals..?
I just repeat, the catholicity and flexibility of Hinduism, and lack of reverence to a great extent on the part of followers gives rise to such queries and ideas..
And every religion is based on Faith evolved over years,, and the standard texts followed as authentic are sacrosanct..
Religion need not be always rational..
In fact every religion has evolved from situations where the rational approach did not really work and man felt helpless.
If anyone wants, he can establish Shaivism on the basis of the trilogy..
Who can oppose it.?.
It is a free country..
And the description of the story line as well as the spiritual details in various itihasas, puranas and upapuranas followed identical story-lines faithfully, and the descriptions did not have major variations..
And these have evolved over a few millenniums and all institutions of Hindus, and rituals followed over centuries have evolved from those texts..
You can note that there were many literary creations like Raghuvamsam, Shakunthalam, Kirataarjuneeyam, Naishadham, Shishupalavadham and so on which also relied on puranic and Itihasic themes.. and, but for some poetic liberties of minor nature, they did not deviate much from the scriptures.. Still the works of Kalidasa, Bharavi, Magha and Sreeharsha are never accepted as authoritative texts of Hinduism/
Whether the scriptures Vedas and puranas were true or false can be a matter of conjecture.. Then Hinduism can be also called a big farce..
But those texts and tenets contained therein were followed by us and our forefathers for centuries..
How can the brainchild of some fiction writer of today be ever compared to that?
Many books analyzing various characters in our lore have been written by many Indians and foreigners.. Are they accepted as final words in Hinduism.?. Tagore wrote about Urmila, for example. that is considere as his view alone..
Hinduism has its basic texts..For some it may be Vedas and Puranas and for some it may be the local lore developed over centuries.. But to call Shiva Trilogy which challenges almost all precedents as seen from the hoary traditions, is called as a standard text of reference for Hinduism , I cannot help calling it ridiculous..
Who will accept a new Bible or a new Koran at deviation from the originals..?
I just repeat, the catholicity and flexibility of Hinduism, and lack of reverence to a great extent on the part of followers gives rise to such queries and ideas..
And every religion is based on Faith evolved over years,, and the standard texts followed as authentic are sacrosanct..
Religion need not be always rational..
In fact every religion has evolved from situations where the rational approach did not really work and man felt helpless.
If anyone wants, he can establish Shaivism on the basis of the trilogy..
Who can oppose it.?.
It is a free country..
No comments:
Post a Comment