Re: [RajivMalhotraDiscussion] Request for serious papers on modern times and Vedic living/Sanatana Dharma-- good idea

[Navaratna Rajaram]

 

    I have already written an article that uses the Vedantic perspective as an alternative to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations thesis. It will be appearing in FOLKS in a few days.

 

    I will bring it everyone's attention as soon as it appears.

 

    It is an excellent idea to encourage and solicit such thinking. It is also part of my program that I have called VEDANTA AND THE 21ST CENTURY.

 

N.S. Rajaram

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Rajiv Malhotra <RajivMal...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

I am closing the thread on Vedic lifestyle's viability today. Thanks for many good ideas and inputs that are useful for more serious work.

But we cannot go on indefinitely quibbling on tidbits and not addressing the big picture questions: In what ways are the classical era's teachings applicable and practical today? In what ways do they have to be modified? In what ways do they have to be rejected?

In other words, imagine you are delivering a paper at a serious conference with scholars from many civilizations, and the theme is how to use classical thought and practices for humanity's benefit today. What would you say about the dharmic/Vedic civilization's applicability? This entails more than a factoid here and there. More than pedantic stuff or quibbles some minute point.

One of the Apps I am working on is to use BD to open doors in circles where they have previously been closed to dharma. I am referring to social sciences/humanities in India. I have had 2 doors open:

1. One is ISEC in Bangalore, where I delivered the keynote at their second workshop on how to re-imagine society using "traditional knowledge systems". (Note: TKS is acceptable in secular circles as a sort of undefined "tradition's" knowledge, whereas there is allergic reaction to Hindu, Vedic, dharma, etc. because these are tainted as suspicious, politically motivated and socially abusive.) The video of my talk and the Q&A will get uploaded soon. The door has been opened by their director to collaborate on joint conferences, workshops, books, etc. This is significant since ISEC is a government funded organization and is now opening up in this regard.
2. A group of top social sciences scholars in Delhi gathered for a one-day event under the joint banner of Infinity Foundation and their own group. The purpose was to explore if we can use "traditional knowledge" (provided it is free from "modern politics") to re-think and propose a fresh approach to the social sciences. I have the raw footage of the entire event, but the recording quality is poor, so lets see how much can be salvaged. Here also, there emerged a concrete action plan to meet again in 6 months, and to shoot for a first volume of papers within a year.

To make serious headway beyond the chai shop (or barber shop) gossip club of idle people, we need serious scholars who can commit and produce publishable works that are well thought through. This takes serious rigor, dedicated time and energy. I want only papers written at a high standard of scholarship. Those interested to participate as contributors (we are not allowing "watchers" at this stage in order to keep the focus on productivity of research and publishing) should write to me privately with a concrete proposal - abstract, partial bibliography and commitment of delivery of draft by June, 2012.

Meanwhile, lets return to BD. We have not discussed past chapter 3 yet.

Regards,

rajiv

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 61

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

[Ganesh R]

Dear Sir,

I just went through the said article. But your understanding of Sri. Mmadhvaachaarya questioning the Mahaabhaarta needs some clarification for  his ground of questioning it is entirely based on a different perspective and it is essentially theistic in nature while your stand, as I infer, is in the rationalistic plane. This  very much so even in his understanding of apurushsEyatva of the Vedas and this is the general stand of all theistic systems of Indian philosophy. This, in essence is no way different form the stand of the so called people of the book! Can you pl through light on this aspect?

regards

ganesh

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com

[Navaratna Rajaram]

Namaste:

 

    I agree with you. The article was written for a young skeptical audience that has been brainwahsed into believing that Vedanta is superstitious belief.

 

    People of the Book ask you to accept their belief as dictated by the 'prophet' or son of god. The late Ram Swarup called them God-substitutes. Any book can only be a human creation and cannot be apaurusheya.

 

Best,

N.S. Rajaram

[Aditya B.S.A]

नमो नमः

< Any book can only be a human creation and cannot be apaurusheya.> 

वेदापौरुषेयत्वबोधकं वाक्यं प्रमाणम् अपूर्वार्थबोधकत्वे सति इतरप्रमाणाविरुद्धार्थकत्वात्। 

रामानुजदासः, 

आदित्यः 

अभिनिवेशवशीकृतचेतसां बहुविदामपि सम्भवति भ्रमः।
तदिह भागवतं गतमत्सरा मतमिदं विमृशन्तु विपश्चितः॥