Monday, April 18, 2016

'Hinduism' the 'religion' does not exist. 'Religion' is an abusive concept.

In the following article headlined 'Why The Terminological Terrorism Of ‘Left Liberals’ Needs To Be Debunked,' R. Jagannathan talks of 'Hinduism' and describes it as a 'religion'.

"All religions have their priests and ideologues; in Hinduism it was Brahmins," he writes.
Having described 'Hinduism' as a 'religion', Jagannathan then places, by analogy, this so called 'Hinduism' in the same category as Christianity and Islam.
He writes: "Didn’t Christianity and Islam not have their priests and ulema, their own rabid guardians of the faith...?"

The article was published on 14 April 2016 on Swarajya magazine website. It can be read on the following link.

I think, Jagannathan is on the wrong track. I posted the following comment in response to what I believe are the wrong assumptions and analogies in his article.

Dear Jagannathan, you are fighting a losing battle. You lost it even before you started it by accepting all the fraudulent concepts of the West.

You accept, for instance, that there is a thing called Hinduism, the 'religion', just like Christianity and Islam. So you assume that the so called Hinduism is equivalent to Christianity and Islam. And then you go on to argue, quite slavishly like a Westerner, more instances of phony equivalence between Hinduism on the one hand and Christianity/Islam on the other.

The fraudsters of the 'Abrahamic' faiths would be sniggering at your disastrously self-defeating reasoning.

The fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as Hinduism the religion.

'Religion' is an utterly abusive, colonial and imperial concept that applies only and only to Judeo-christianity and Islam, i.e. the Abrahamic system.

'Religion' can -- and should -- never be applied to any human culture across the world (Indic or non-Indic) through history.

India, through history, has always had 'cultures' - which are open systems, unlike 'religion' which is a closed system.

In fact, all human cultures -- not just in India but across the world -- are open systems.

No human culture can ever exist in a healthful manner and evolve without openness. This openness does not need defining.

However, just to show an important distinction we are discussing here, let me say that this openness can be denoted by the term 'syncretism'.

'Syncretism' is the DNA - the meme - of every human culture across the world and through history.

But 'syncretism' is execrated and anathematized by 'religion', i.e. by Judeo-christianity and Islam.

Just check the Vatican website and search for the word 'syncretism' to understand how Christianity rejects 'syncretism'.

Islam uses the Arabic word 'shirk' for 'syncretism' and anathematizes it.

So the concept of 'syncretism' explains the key difference between 'culture' on the one hand and 'religion' on the other.

Culture is open source.

Religion is closed source.

By anathematizing 'syncretism', 'religion' -- i.e. Judeo-christianity and Islam -- acts as an ethnocidal force in the world.

And 'religion' mislabels and mischaracterizes human cultures across the world as one of its own category --- such as "Hinduism", "Buddhism", "Shamanism", etc.

A commentator called PV contradicted me by posting the following.

"Dear Kapil...When the legions of Islamo and Jesu come trumpeting with their organized "religion" force, there are audience who remain on the side, like you, lecturing and advocating pompous phrases like "...there is no such thing as Hinduism, the religion".

Somehow, the opposite side, does not understand anything other than the word "religion". So, they have to be dealt in the same way. Meanwhile, please do not be friendly to those gangs. 

Coining the word "religion" in the context of Hinduism does not rob 0.00000001% of the "cultural" side of it. And, when you say every culture has been open, I sense that your mental state is nor right. Do not lecture openness to Hindus."  

The following is my rejoinder to PV.

Nothing that you write in your affectedly brash tone is going to make "Hinduism" even 0.00000001% more "organized" or "religion".

And allowing the Abrahamic education and propaganda system - which creates the mass confusion between open 'culture' and closed 'religion' - to continue will continue to undermine what we already have, let alone help us gain anything.

The so called "Hindus" are already "converted" -- wiped out -- if they consider themselves followers of some "religion". Missionaries don't have to lift a finger.

I suspect a fast growing majority of people across the world -- including those who get called "Hindu" or pagan/heathen -- are already "converted".

This idea of yours that the so called Hindus can resist the legions of Islam and Christianity by adopting their fraudulent concepts is so obviously stupid and self defeating that I wonder if you can really think for yourself.

The whole "battle" is about resisting the acceptance of certain fraudulent concepts and resisting viewing oneself through the prism of those concepts.

The physical battle only flows from the larger conceptual and perceptual battle.

The whole world is actually by its very nature Hindu or pagan. That's the truth. The Abrahamic system has been trying madly to make it behave in certain fundamental ways like it can never behave.

And therefore the so called "Hindus" need to lead a worldwide movement of showing the falsity and imperialism of the Abrahamic system and the 'syncretism' of human cultures.

I don't like buzz words, but one can call it 're-paganization' of the world (even though I believe the world has always been pagan despite the mislabelling and mischaracterization practised by the Abrahamic system.)

Yes, every human culture has 'sycretism' as its meme. 

In fact, Christian and Muslim societies can also not run without accepting syncretism, even though they profess complete rejection of syncretism in order to justify their own existence.

You need to spend your time reflecting and understanding some basic concepts.

Without some elementary wisdom, we are all dead and buried.

No comments:

Al Ma'arri, an Arab 'Brahmin' of the 10th century, describing the terror of early conversions to Islam

Muslims of his time called Arab philosopher Al Ma'arri (973-1057) a Brahmin for he was a strict vegetarian and denounced the barbarous ...