No, Mr. QR, I will not go that far. Spielberg has not made the movie with a view to distorting Hinduism. Scary looking goddess Kali was not invented by him. There was a time when humans used to be sacrificed, although very rarely, to please this goddess. The story is interesting and worth making a film.
The problem is the lack of knowledge on the part of the viewers. The trouble with this kind of viewers is that they tend to generalize. So they may ask you funny questions. One of my wife's colleagues asked her how many cows her father gave to me during her wedding. The other day one of my colleagues asked me how we can still drive in cities where cows are grazing at large. She has an impression that cows being holy are given full freedom. The people I just mentioned are educated people.
There are also people who possess deep knowledge about India and they have regard for her cultures and civilizations. Campbell is one of them. One of my white American colleagues gave me as a gift one book by Campbell. He has high regard for Buddhism and mythology. It is from him that I got an interpretation of Natarajan and his dance. I am sure Spielberg's knowledge about India is profound enough not to ridicule it.
Sent from my iPhone
Joseph Campbell was different. His groundbreaking work the power of myth will open many eyes. It is not biased towards any religion but goes over most prominent cultures of the world and speaks about them in an unique way. If you do not have time to read, you can watch the PBS production with Bill Moyer, which had interview with Joseph Campbell.
Joseph Campbell & Power of Myth With Bill Moyers (25th Anniversary Edition) (1987)
The name itself suggests that, he did not endorse any religion but I think most of you will enjoy watching it.
After talking with some Americans I have discovered that Spielberg's Indiana Jones has left negative impression about Hinduism in the western mind.
>>>>>>> Distortion of Islam continues in media, publication and movies.
Source: http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/islamophobia-has-become-a-full-fledged-industry/
Shalom!
-----Original Message-----
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Mar 3, 2014 6:14 pm
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understand life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
I have studied a little bit of Campbell. I will not be surprised if he also indulged in orientalism. After talking with some Americans I have discovered that Spielberg's Indiana Jones has left negative impression about Hinduism in the western mind.
On Sunday, March 2, 2014 6:47 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
Niskondho was an Arabian invention. The desert traders of the silk rout invented it to ward off others and retain their monopoly in silk and spice trades. Campbell could do better to point out that every religion is tribal. Christianity, for example, is Mithraism in a Roman package. Santa Claus is a reincarnated Wodin. Michael is Mithra, Gabriel is Geb+ Ra+El and so on.Kali is no different from Anat of Mesopotamia, and Anat is Anahita of Avestan religion. Anahita is none other than mother Mary!In South India, the ritual against drought is to invert a cut green coconut (symbol of womb)on Shivalingam in reverse coitus pose. If one avoids everything with sexual overtone, he/she has to throw the pen away as it or the pencil is derived from penis.
Sent from my iPadSunil obviously was not an idiot. He was a well read man. No doubt he was well versed in Hindu mythologies and Hindu religion. He could rise above all prejudices and blind beliefs. That's why he converted to atheism. But he showed audacity by writing some thing that hurt the religious feelings of the God fearing West Bengal Hindus. That was not proper. Probably he was honest. Probably he was showing off. Who knows!Joseph Campbell, a renowned mythologist and an expert in oriental religions and comparative religion, has said that Hinduism is a tribal religion. Hindus worship different forms and exotic figures like "niskondho" ( a huge non-human being without skondho or neck). This justifies the observation of Campbell. Shivalingam and goddess Manasa are two more examples. If one tours whole India, he will see many more such examples.The believers worship different figures purely from religious point of view: glorify the god or goddess and pray for health, wealth, and happiness. Kissing the Shivalinga or Yoni or whatever is not meant for sexual pleasure. Our modern mind will not understand it. Even being a tribal form of worship, goddess Kali, for example, is worshipped with highest devotion in big cities even by great scholars. Huge literature and various art forms including music and dance have developed around all these so called tribal worship.If such religious activities are not harming people or are not being used as tools for exploitation or discrimination, I will have respect for their religious feelings. That's how I live happily among the believers.Sent from my iPhoneI am unclear as to whom Dr. Das has agreed with. But, I did not call Sunil Ganguli an idiot for not having significant knowledge on scripture; I called him an idiot for crudely provoking a lot of believers for no good reason.As for kissing some idols/stones of certain shapes, I would not spend much time criticizing it as long as it is just silly and stupid with no hatred against any kind of people. Just compare this innocent but ridiculous practice with the message of "punish/kill the infidels/apostates"! The latter kind of message is what the civilized world must stop with all its intellect/power.SuBain=======================================From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 1, 2014 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understand life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
I would agree that Sunil Ganguly did not have significant knowledge on scripture either. But "tene chok Mara" is not much of a religious offense compared to kissing the Shivalingam or the Yoni at Kamakhya and Hajre - Aswad.
Sent from my iPadI disagree with Dr. Kamal Das. I think Sunil Ganguli was an idiot when he made the comment.What is the difference between putting the knowledge of Hindu religious scripture in context and putting the knowledge of Islamic scripture in context? Are we supposed to go by the scriptures, or by our common sense of decency, justice and civility? Sunil Ganguli's comment on Saraswati served no good purpose; it just worthlessly angered a lot of people who worshipped Saraswati with absolutely no hatred/injustice/incivility against any kind of people in the world.SuBain
=========================================From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 1, 2014 1:53 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
There is nothing wrong in winking at Saraswati. She is the Goddess of learning, love and war. Her equivalent in Avesta is Anahita, a stark naked Goddess riding a lion. Those critics of Sunil Ganguly had no knowledge of religious scripture.
Sent from my iPadI mean he was born of a Hindu family. Probably he became an atheist at an old age. In the weddings of his son and daughter he followed the Hindu rituals.Remember Sunil Ganguly created controversy by saying that on his young life the goddess Saraswati used to provoke sex in him? He was sued by a retired Hindu police officer. He was criticized heavily by many atheists, liberals, and believers.
Sent from my iPhoneWhen one stresses upon the need to understand the context, he forgets that it imposes the limits of non-universality upon the person being discussed curtailing the limit of his prophethood. With such followers, who needs non-believers?
