tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post346125508744157699..comments2023-08-27T12:35:12.308+02:00Comments on sanscrite cogitare, sanscrite loqui: Difficult Apologetics: How to justify evil prescriptions in the Sacred Textselisa freschihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17068583874519657894noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post-36546586257386617412013-08-05T13:55:09.893+02:002013-08-05T13:55:09.893+02:00@Marco: you are absolutely right, Mīmāṃsakas (and ...@Marco: you are absolutely right, Mīmāṃsakas (and other Indian authors, as far as I know) do not take into account the historical dimension and rather neglect the notion of "progress": the world will, for them, always be like it is now.<br /><br />@Sudipta, thanks for your comment. I enjoyed your point re. the Veda as kalpataru, a very appropriate point re. the Śyena sacrifice. I am not sure I understand what you mean with your third point, though. Could you elaborate more?elisa freschihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17068583874519657894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post-51426373085062909352013-07-30T17:37:38.117+02:002013-07-30T17:37:38.117+02:00Comparable with this is the following well-known v...Comparable with this is the following well-known verse (5/56) from the Manusmṛti –<br /><br />न मांसभक्षणे दोषो न मद्ये न च मैथुने।<br />प्रवृत्तिरेषा भूतानां निवृत्तिस्तु महाफला॥<br /><br />On this Sarvajñanārāyaṇa, one of the commentators makes an interesting observation –<br /><br />“एतादृशमेवैतत् यत्सामान्यतो निषिद्धत्वेऽपि ततो निवृत्तिर्महाफलेति । एतच्च वेदैकसमधिगम्यत्वान्न विपरीतदृष्टान्तमात्रेणान्यथा संभावयितुं शक्यमिति तात्पर्यम् ।”<br /><br />Thus, by mentioning the prohibited things, the negativity of such prohibited things are better reinforced – a technique of underlining its character of being a parisaṅkhyā vidhi. Another notable remark is ‘vedaikasamadhigamyatva’ – if this is read with a word used in one of the opening verses of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, ‘nigamakalpataru’, three important features emerge –<br /><br />i. The all-pervasive character of the authority of the Vedas – both in case of dharma and adharma;<br /><br />ii. A ‘kalpataru’ or wish-fulfilling tree is said to give whatever is asked for from it by any seeker, irrespective of the merit of the gifts thus accorded. The merit or demerit of the fruit accorded does not at all pertain to the giver (i.e. the Vedas), but the receiver. By this a sort of ‘religious buffet’ is offered, as it were;<br /><br />iii. A psyco-ethico-linguistic approach to dharma and adharma is here adopted.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07695587062582618769noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post-69215353148171089032013-07-30T17:05:33.823+02:002013-07-30T17:05:33.823+02:00Discussions about polygamy and slavery (both expli...Discussions about polygamy and slavery (both explicitly accepted by the Quran; the first still accepted by many Muslims, although rarely with enthusiasm, the second generally considered abhorrent to most) in modern Islam often follow a similar pattern, with the addition of a bit of "progressive" vision (slavery was permitted at the time but with the aim to alleviate it in order to phase it out, etc.) that is also very common in the Christian analysis of the Christ/Moses dialectic. In Christianity, this is already apparent in St. Paul, and I believe it emerged within Islam pretty early as well. <br />This historical awareness seems to be lacking in the Indian exemple you offer here. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11879077062187701054noreply@blogger.com