Friday, May 18, 2018
Does my Interpretation of Mahabharata and Ramayana Offend Hindoos?
Perhaps it should - unless it shakes them up to check out how it fits the facts.
My interpretation of these epics is no more a Hindoo one, than the Hindoo interpretation of the Gospels (Hindoos often have one, especially in the West) is a Christian one.
Any religion claiming to be the true one, and the one which is so, must be one of the ones claiming it, must have at least in principle a fairly complete answer to the other religions, the false ones.
If Hinduism claims to be true, it needs, especially in the West, an interpretation of the Gospels, and how we Christians "misunderstood" Our Lord Jesus Christ.
If Christianity claims to be true, it needs, since at least 16th Century Portuguese contacts, or even earlier, the Thomas Christians, some kind of attitude about the story of Ramayana and Mahabharata.
Mine is, the early predecessors of Hindooism after the Flood clang to the memory of Rama (in Douay-Reims called Regma), turned young Nimrod (his brother, who started out as a good and protective brother, before he went bad) into Hanuman (he had perhaps a close relation with monkeys - some explain his "beginning to be a giant" with inoculation with monkey genes, but that could be after his protection of Rama, or the most catastrophic results, at Babel / Göbekli Tepe could have come after that), and put the memory of a pre-Flood set of heros, among which another Cush than the one so called in the Bible, I presume Jubal, the flute player, into the Mahabharata and Puranas. And counted years (of what is now known as "kali yuga") from his death, before the Flood. THEN pushing back the tale of Rama to well before him, so India could seem a continuity from Rama's post-Flood settlement "into" what was actually a memory of Nod, East of Eden.
If this offends a Hindoo, let him consider, I am not pretending to be a Mahabharata or Ramayana or Puranas scholar, I am simply giving a Christian view on why Hindoos believe what they traditionally believe. Obviously, this involves Hinduism being wrong, just as my interpretation of Mohammed involves Islam being wrong, or of Joseph Smith Mormonism being wrong. A religion is an exclusive thing, if one is right, the others are wrong. Since I am a Catholic, I believe other interpretations of Christianity, and non-Christian religions, are wrong. If that offends all Hindoos in the world, I will still not change it.
I said sth about fitting the facts. Mahabharata seems to involve trace memories - not a full accurate, but partial accurate descriptions - of nuclear warfare. Put this in archaeological contexts like the timespan of carbon dating I consider post-Flood, it won't fit very well. Put it pre-Flood, and the worst scenes could have been covered by mud in the Flood, which afterwards became the Himalayas. God's Taj Mahal over so many men suffering so much evil, so much heroism leading to so little good.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Second Friday of
St Venantius, Martyr