Introduction and Episode Overview - The discussion begins with the hosts welcoming each other and reflecting on the time elapsed since the last episode, indicating a gap of almost two and a half months. - The hosts express gratitude for the opportunity to engage in this project, emphasizing the importance of the conversation at hand. - This episode marks the third installment of the series, titled Dharma 101, which builds upon previous discussions about the nature of tradition and the eternal aspects of Vedic tradition. - The focus of this episode is on narratives within tradition, particularly how these narratives differ from the empirical historicism prevalent in modern times. - The hosts aim to clarify why traditional narratives cannot be neatly categorized within the framework of modern empirical history. Challenges of Understanding Tradition - The hosts acknowledge the complexity of the ideas discussed in the series, noting that these concepts require significant intellectual effort and extensive reading to grasp fully. - They emphasize that understanding Hindu tradition and Dharma is not akin to consuming pop-science material, which often oversimplifies complex subjects. - It is highlighted that readers must delve into original scriptures and traditional commentaries to appreciate the depth of these narratives. - The conversation transitions into a critique of modern interpretations of tradition, particularly those that fail to acknowledge the nuanced and layered nature of historical narratives. Hindu Historical Documentation - The hosts address the common critique that Hindus have not adequately recorded their history, questioning whether this is due to a general aversion to empirical recording. - They argue that this lack of documentation was a deliberate choice made by ancestors, who prioritized the individual's welfare over rigid historical accounts. - The conversation suggests that the traditional approach to history emphasizes assimilation of the past for present benefit rather than striving for an objective recounting of events. - The sages of the tradition recognized that objectifying the past could lead to conflict and strife, thus opting for a narrative approach that intertwines objective truths with metaphysical elements. The Role of Narratives in Tradition - The hosts discuss the importance of narratives as a cohesive force within social groups, helping individuals maintain loyalty to foundational messages. - They explain that narratives serve to reduce feelings of alienation that can arise in larger, more complex social structures. - In the context of Hinduism, narratives are essential for preserving the pursuit of Moksha among a vast population, offering a means for individuals to connect with the tradition. - The conversation emphasizes that narratives are not merely historical accounts but are imbued with higher truths that guide individuals in their spiritual and worldly pursuits. Comparative Analysis of Time Concepts - The discussion shifts to the contrasting notions of time in Hinduism and Western traditions, with Hinduism viewing time as cyclical and Western traditions often perceiving it as linear. - The cyclical nature of time in Hindu thought reflects the interconnectedness of life, nature, and spiritual practice, emphasizing the eternal recurrence of events. - The hosts argue that this cyclical view allows for a more nuanced understanding of divinity and the continuous presence of gods in human affairs. - They assert that the narratives of Hindu epics, such as the Ramayana and Mahabharata, transcend historical events, embodying eternal truths that remain relevant across time. The Nature of Myth and Interpolation - The hosts delve into the concept of mythology, arguing that it should not be dismissed as mere fiction but rather appreciated for its deeper symbolic meanings and truths. - They critique the tendency among some scholars to interpret Hindu myths as literal historical events, asserting that such interpretations fail to capture the essence of these narratives. - The conversation addresses the issue of interpolation in texts, emphasizing that variations and adaptations are part of a living tradition rather than signs of corruption. - The hosts highlight the need for a respectful approach to understanding these texts, acknowledging the traditional methods that have historically governed interpretations and adaptations. Conclusion and Future Discussions - As the episode concludes, the hosts reflect on the importance of narratives in preserving tradition and fostering connection among individuals within the Hindu community. - They propose that the next episode will explore the topic of dharmic atheism and its implications for understanding tradition. - The conversation emphasizes the need for ongoing dialogue about the relevance of narratives in contemporary society and the challenges posed by modern interpretations of tradition. - The hosts express gratitude to the audience for their engagement and encourage further exploration of the themes discussed in the episode.
The fact that our historical worldview is DELIBERATELY not purely objective is visible also in the very definition of Itihaasa. 'That which happened in the past, but with historical embellishments'
Few doubts, As per ashishs views. If ramayan shouldnt be considered historically valid. Then doesnt that make the strive for reclaiming ram janam bhoomi and ayodhya temple unnecessary and unimportant?!. Also if rishis made narratives with the well being of the people as the goal instead of actual history. Then what is preventing us from creating a narrative with the goal of uniting us with the people from the relgion of peace. By forgeting the atrocities that have happened in the past . So that there can be peace and well being now.?
I did not say that Ramayana is not historically valid. I just said that it has elements of history intertwined with philosophy, ethics, mythology etc and it is impossible to separate one from the other. At any rate, the reclamation of Ram Temple has nothing to do with all that and is contingent on the existence of a temple at what was considered a disputed site. What prevents us from achieving peace with the religion of peace is the religion of peace itself. I thought that was obvious.
@@infinitchy ashish I understand that it is not possible to make peace with religion of peace . My question is that. If any narrative that is made with the intention of human well being is acceptable. Then why cant hindus just dispose their religion and accept Islam? . We say that abhramism adharmic when we see it through the lens of our religion. But isnt Abhramic reglions also narrative created for the cohesion and well being among its people? So why is that narrative not acceptable? In short, why should a hindu remain as hindu and follow Hindu tradition?
@@infinitchy @infinitchy ashish I understand that it is not possible to make peace with religion of peace . My question is that. If any narrative that is made with the intention of human well being is acceptable. Then why cant hindus just dispose their religion and accept Islam? . We say that abhramism adharmic when we see it through the lens of our religion. But isnt Abhramic reglions also narrative created for the cohesion and well being among its people? So why is that narrative not acceptable? In short, why should a hindu remain as hindu and follow Hindu tradition?
@@infinitchy ashish I understand that it is not possible to make peace with religion of peace . My question is that. If any narrative that is made with the intention of human well being is acceptable. Then why cant hindus just dispose their religion and accept Islam? . We say that @bhramism adharmic when we see it through the lens of our religion. But isnt @bhramic reglions also narrative created for the cohesion and well being among its people? So why is that narrative not acceptable? In short, why should a -indu remain as -indu and follow -indu tradition?
@@infinitchy My comment is getting deleted. I understand that we can't make peace with the religion of peace. If narrative indented for human well being is human well being is acceptable . Then why not accept any of such narratives. In short, why remain #indu and follow #indu traditions, why not accept the narrative of @bhr@ism if all well being is the top priority ?
If Dharma doesn't have a "foundation" , according to Mr Ashish Dhar, then on what basis are we supposed to understand it? How're we supposed to grasp it then?
pls be more articulate. the conversation opens with calling narratives as tangible features. lighting diya or agarbati can be tangible. words like meta-physical and such comments make you sound like post-modern. the americans still celebrate thanksgiving with mashed potatoes and eggnog and call it tradition but indians think making moon-daal on birthday or aalo gravy during shraad is result of poverty past and they eat cakes and pizza.
All Hindus who want to know the difference between history and Itihaas/ইতিহাস/इतिहास should listen to this insightful conversation.
Gentlemen, you've really outdone yourselves in this episode.
Dharmic atheism and other fairytales 😂 eagerly awaiting! Thank you so much, Ashish ji and Aditya ji 🙏🏻
Dharmo rakshati rakshitah 🙏🏻
Great narratives, dwell on age of Sanatan Dharma wrt others proving it's oldest...
full on Trad Shiromani 🔥🔥love it
Love this talk ❤
Introduction and Episode Overview
- The discussion begins with the hosts welcoming each other and reflecting on the time elapsed since the last episode, indicating a gap of almost two and a half months.
- The hosts express gratitude for the opportunity to engage in this project, emphasizing the importance of the conversation at hand.
- This episode marks the third installment of the series, titled Dharma 101, which builds upon previous discussions about the nature of tradition and the eternal aspects of Vedic tradition.
- The focus of this episode is on narratives within tradition, particularly how these narratives differ from the empirical historicism prevalent in modern times.
- The hosts aim to clarify why traditional narratives cannot be neatly categorized within the framework of modern empirical history.
Challenges of Understanding Tradition
- The hosts acknowledge the complexity of the ideas discussed in the series, noting that these concepts require significant intellectual effort and extensive reading to grasp fully.
- They emphasize that understanding Hindu tradition and Dharma is not akin to consuming pop-science material, which often oversimplifies complex subjects.
- It is highlighted that readers must delve into original scriptures and traditional commentaries to appreciate the depth of these narratives.
- The conversation transitions into a critique of modern interpretations of tradition, particularly those that fail to acknowledge the nuanced and layered nature of historical narratives.
Hindu Historical Documentation
- The hosts address the common critique that Hindus have not adequately recorded their history, questioning whether this is due to a general aversion to empirical recording.
- They argue that this lack of documentation was a deliberate choice made by ancestors, who prioritized the individual's welfare over rigid historical accounts.
- The conversation suggests that the traditional approach to history emphasizes assimilation of the past for present benefit rather than striving for an objective recounting of events.
- The sages of the tradition recognized that objectifying the past could lead to conflict and strife, thus opting for a narrative approach that intertwines objective truths with metaphysical elements.
The Role of Narratives in Tradition
- The hosts discuss the importance of narratives as a cohesive force within social groups, helping individuals maintain loyalty to foundational messages.
- They explain that narratives serve to reduce feelings of alienation that can arise in larger, more complex social structures.
- In the context of Hinduism, narratives are essential for preserving the pursuit of Moksha among a vast population, offering a means for individuals to connect with the tradition.
- The conversation emphasizes that narratives are not merely historical accounts but are imbued with higher truths that guide individuals in their spiritual and worldly pursuits.
Comparative Analysis of Time Concepts
- The discussion shifts to the contrasting notions of time in Hinduism and Western traditions, with Hinduism viewing time as cyclical and Western traditions often perceiving it as linear.
- The cyclical nature of time in Hindu thought reflects the interconnectedness of life, nature, and spiritual practice, emphasizing the eternal recurrence of events.
- The hosts argue that this cyclical view allows for a more nuanced understanding of divinity and the continuous presence of gods in human affairs.
- They assert that the narratives of Hindu epics, such as the Ramayana and Mahabharata, transcend historical events, embodying eternal truths that remain relevant across time.
The Nature of Myth and Interpolation
- The hosts delve into the concept of mythology, arguing that it should not be dismissed as mere fiction but rather appreciated for its deeper symbolic meanings and truths.
- They critique the tendency among some scholars to interpret Hindu myths as literal historical events, asserting that such interpretations fail to capture the essence of these narratives.
- The conversation addresses the issue of interpolation in texts, emphasizing that variations and adaptations are part of a living tradition rather than signs of corruption.
- The hosts highlight the need for a respectful approach to understanding these texts, acknowledging the traditional methods that have historically governed interpretations and adaptations.
Conclusion and Future Discussions
- As the episode concludes, the hosts reflect on the importance of narratives in preserving tradition and fostering connection among individuals within the Hindu community.
- They propose that the next episode will explore the topic of dharmic atheism and its implications for understanding tradition.
- The conversation emphasizes the need for ongoing dialogue about the relevance of narratives in contemporary society and the challenges posed by modern interpretations of tradition.
- The hosts express gratitude to the audience for their engagement and encourage further exploration of the themes discussed in the episode.
The fact that our historical worldview is DELIBERATELY not purely objective is visible also in the very definition of Itihaasa. 'That which happened in the past, but with historical embellishments'
great work guru jii , sadho sadho
ENTROPY is "linear", Ashish ji!
Ram Ram guru ji , angreji itni complex ho gayi kuch bato thodi upar se nikal gayi , par jo samaj aaya accha laga
राम राम हिमांशू जी
❤❤❤
book recommendation: jesus from outer space by richard carrier
What is it about?
We need fund's.. free temples
Few doubts,
As per ashishs views.
If ramayan shouldnt be considered historically valid. Then doesnt that make the strive for reclaiming ram janam bhoomi and ayodhya temple unnecessary and unimportant?!.
Also if rishis made narratives with the well being of the people as the goal instead of actual history.
Then what is preventing us from creating a narrative with the goal of uniting us with the people from the relgion of peace. By forgeting the atrocities that have happened in the past . So that there can be peace and well being now.?
I did not say that Ramayana is not historically valid. I just said that it has elements of history intertwined with philosophy, ethics, mythology etc and it is impossible to separate one from the other. At any rate, the reclamation of Ram Temple has nothing to do with all that and is contingent on the existence of a temple at what was considered a disputed site. What prevents us from achieving peace with the religion of peace is the religion of peace itself. I thought that was obvious.
@@infinitchy ashish
I understand that it is not possible to make peace with religion of peace .
My question is that.
If any narrative that is made with the intention of human well being is acceptable. Then why cant hindus just dispose their religion and accept Islam? .
We say that abhramism adharmic when we see it through the lens of our religion. But isnt Abhramic reglions also narrative created for the cohesion and well being among its people? So why is that narrative not acceptable?
In short, why should a hindu remain as hindu and follow Hindu tradition?
@@infinitchy @infinitchy ashish
I understand that it is not possible to make peace with religion of peace .
My question is that.
If any narrative that is made with the intention of human well being is acceptable. Then why cant hindus just dispose their religion and accept Islam? .
We say that abhramism adharmic when we see it through the lens of our religion. But isnt Abhramic reglions also narrative created for the cohesion and well being among its people? So why is that narrative not acceptable?
In short, why should a hindu remain as hindu and follow Hindu tradition?
@@infinitchy ashish
I understand that it is not possible to make peace with religion of peace .
My question is that.
If any narrative that is made with the intention of human well being is acceptable. Then why cant hindus just dispose their religion and accept Islam? .
We say that @bhramism adharmic when we see it through the lens of our religion. But isnt @bhramic reglions also narrative created for the cohesion and well being among its people? So why is that narrative not acceptable?
In short, why should a -indu remain as -indu and follow -indu tradition?
@@infinitchy
My comment is getting deleted.
I understand that we can't make peace with the religion of peace.
If narrative indented for human well being is human well being is acceptable . Then why not accept any of such narratives.
In short, why remain #indu and follow #indu traditions, why not accept the narrative of @bhr@ism if all well being is the top priority ?
🐮🐮🐮🐮🐮
Massive Chit fund scheme😂
If Dharma doesn't have a "foundation" , according to Mr Ashish Dhar, then on what basis are we supposed to understand it? How're we supposed to grasp it then?
Dharma IS the foundation. My objection was to a historical foundation.
At 38:20 Ashishji mentioned nirgun niraakaar for Abrahamics…. Actually, they have Sagun, niraakaar ‘God’…😮
@@devyanipb Yes, thanks for correcting me. It was an oversight.
🙏🏽
pls be more articulate. the conversation opens with calling narratives as tangible features. lighting diya or agarbati can be tangible. words like meta-physical and such comments make you sound like post-modern. the americans still celebrate thanksgiving with mashed potatoes and eggnog and call it tradition but indians think making moon-daal on birthday or aalo gravy during shraad is result of poverty past and they eat cakes and pizza.
We cannot be as articulate as you. Please start your own podcast.
Moronic comment
Jai Sanaatan
Jaldi daala kro do mahine ke baad maaye