07.30.07
ID, theism, and Buddhism
James comments on “ID gang worried about Buddhism”.
Buddhism is unique in the degree to which it has maintained a consistent tradition, but those days may be passing. With Hinduism, the history of the influence of theism on its doctrines is a somber one. Perhaps that influence is only on the surface, or in the minds of non-Indian intellectuals (if you can worship Shiva in a multitude of Hindu temples it hardly seems to run very deep), but it is there, and quite insidious. For example, the Yoga Sutras in one version came out under the title How To Know God, but as one Indian scholar points out (See the material on The Quest For The Historical Gita at history-and-evolution.com) the god reference in the sutras is a later interpolation!
I don’t speak here either as a theist, atheist, or agnostic. I try to stay ‘fluid’ beyond these categories, which devolves to a kind of ‘de facto’ atheism, i.e. the term ‘god’ has been hijacked by multiple religious bandits and is effectively unusable, leaving one simply struck dumb.
I don’t wish to devalue Chopra but it seems that the blend of theism and Indian religion produces a kind of inscrutable pantheistic ‘feeling god’ mixed with tidbits of yogic lore and spaced out quantum mechanics.
The instincts of the Darwinists are in a way understandable given this set of historical facts (which never makes it into the history books) because it shows how the steady pressure of obsessive theists (over not just decades, but centuries) can slowly but surely erode traditions by creating false hybrids.
James said,
July 30, 2007 at 8:29 pm
“With Hinduism, the history of the influence of theism on its doctrines is a somber one. Perhaps that influence is only on the surface, or in the minds of non-Indian intellectuals (if you can worship Shiva in a multitude of Hindu temples it hardly seems to run very deep), but it is there, and quite insidious.”
True. The Bhakti movement completely destroyed the Indian tradition. The Indian tradition had moved beyond theism only to be sucked back into the abyss by the Brahmin propangandists. Dawkins, for all his faults, is probably correct in asserting that the “God” concept is dangerous.
James said,
August 4, 2007 at 8:32 pm
“I don’t wish to devalue Chopra but it seems that the blend of theism and Indian religion produces a kind of inscrutable pantheistic ‘feeling god’ mixed with tidbits of yogic lore and spaced out quantum mechanics.”
Why not? His shtick is tiresome and pernicious. The nonsense he spews should’ve died out in the ’70s.