OUR Vedas:- A site of possession and identity
I was in conversation with my relative. She was telling me about stories in Ramayana and principles in the Vedas and how they all have "scientific significance ". I was reminded of what we studied in class in relation to Gnyan Prabodhini and other institutions and how it is an endeavour to make scientific something that is getting frowned on for being too narrow and religious in today's day.
This is similar to what efforts the HSS (Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh) takes in the USA, to redefine Hinduism in one's favour and for one's own redemption. It is an effort to rewrite the narrative and appropriate it through a new lexicon of science as it also makes it even more impossible to question something that is "scientifically sound". The claim is that these ancient texts mention the technology that was not known to be available at the time. Hence they are made out to be "advanced and beyond their time". However, we know that it is a common occurrence for mythologies to have aspirational technology within. The collective psyche is known to extend beyond its reach on many occasions. To put it simply, it is very possible that these were simply desires of the story makers and not the real, material objects. (Pushpak-viman)
My feminist training taught me to contextualize and complicate this conversation.
I responded by saying that fields like science are masculinized and come within the threshold of the neo-liberal world. If we feel the need to embrace these fields and their contributions instead of worshipping them, we also need to realize that they are:-
1) Not God
2) Do not know all the answers
3) Constantly to be questioned
The response I heard to this was that there are some "facts" that cannot be changed regardless of what one does. In the end, facts are facts. I said how we used to believe that the earth was flat and that this was a fact. These facts have shifted. How this "fact-obsessed" humanity took part in injecting hundreds of people with a single syringe to treat AIDS. The reason is simple. They did not know better. This is entirely okay. However, the tendency that we have is to hold anything on a pedestal that gives us answers to the questions that come all the time. There was an endeavour to re-ignite the Hindu religion through all these "scientific" re-appropriations.
This narrative of facts being ubiquitous stretches out to the perception of mythology as factual history. There is a tendency to misunderstand mythology as a singular and accurate account of "what happened". These are not then taken as mythic traditions from which hints of the past can be derived but rather, the past itself.
Rather than discounting these reports of Hanuman sightings as the work of fools, we should examine the circumstances in which they were made. They appear in the context of an external religion/authority posing a danger to religion by threatening to render the "facts" held by it obsolete. In this situation, it is critical to restore religion's identity and credibility by providing "real-life" evidence. Making a mythic story into history is thus a defensive project.
These figures then become alive in various other ways. They become a grounding & comfort mechanism to soothe the injuries that Hindus feel when their sentiments are "attacked". They also become the affect-inducer for a particular group that time and again seeks validation within them. They become a way of organizing as well as otherizing and demonizing. The belief is then, that "Our Gods are real and living and all other religions are attacking this "fact".
Thus, we need to be hyper-conscious of when we are singularizing a particular narrative because a lot goes on behind the curtains to make any more narrative of mythology into "legitimate history". Ram is simply an incantation of the collective consciousness, so is Vibhishan and so is Sita. They can have alternative stories and through that multiplicity is how they should be studied.
Comments
Post a Comment