PDA

View Full Version : China and India - and an essay by Amartya Sen


lucia
May 17th, 2010, 11:53 AM
I didn't really know where to post this............

Over in Exploring Divination Hilary’s blog on Nearing, Seeing pressed a few memory buttons that reminded me of a couple of things in India.

Lin: Nearing reminded me of the Sanskritic idea of Darsan which is about more than just being a devotee in the presence of a deity and looking; and is actually about an exchange that takes place between the eyes. As I said in my post, the deity gives darsan and the devotee receives it. I observed that this is often represented in Street Art as dotted lines between the eyes of the two. In my mind there is a relation of “overseeing” by the deity. Hilary pointed out that Lise says something similar about the eyes in ancient Chinese inscriptions of Lin: “Another old form of Lin shows connecting lines between the eye and the objects (a).”

The India button had been duly pressed and for Kuan I remembered the pillars of Asoka.

The pillars of Asoka are scattered around India, are/were around 50 feet high and along with various bits of Buddhist symbolism bear the edicts of Asoka in the popular (as opposed to “elite”) language of the day. They suggest ideas such as the mutual existence and understanding of religions. Some articles about the pillars don’t get past Asoka’s Buddhism and thus see them as religious but there is much more to them than that.

Ven S Dhammika:
“Scholars have suggested that because the edicts say nothing about the philosophical aspects of Buddhism, Asoka had a simplistic and naive understanding of the Dhamma. This view does not take into account the fact that the purpose of the edicts was not to expound the truths of Buddhism, but to inform the people of Asoka's reforms and to encourage them to be more generous, kind and moral. This being the case, there was no reason for Asoka to discuss Buddhist philosophy. Asoka emerges from his edicts as an able administrator, an intelligent human being and as a devoted Buddhist, and we could expect him to take as keen an interest in Buddhist philosophy as he did in Buddhist practice.”

These pillars were constructed along borders, trade routes, densely populated areas, pilgrimage centres and Buddhist sites. In other words wherever they would get the maximum audience or readership. They were made of a sandstone that was so highly polished they shone as if made of metal. In other words there was no way you could miss them. To see and be seen……. Kuan?

Ven S Dhammika:
“The contents of Asoka's edicts make it clear that all the legends about his wise and humane rule are more than justified and qualify him to be ranked as one of the greatest rulers. In his edicts, he spoke of what might be called state morality, and private or individual morality. The first was what he based his administration upon and what he hoped would lead to a more just, more spiritually inclined society, while the second was what he recommended and encouraged individuals to practice. Both these types of morality were imbued with the Buddhist values of compassion, moderation, tolerance and respect for all life.”

Anyway, here is the link to Dhamikka’s article which goes into good detail as to what was written on the pillars for those who are interested:

http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~malaiya/ashoka.html

I am not, by the way, trying to assert that these two things are “the same” as Lin and Kuan – just a remarkable connection in quite ancient thinking. Meanwhile, in the same Exploring Divination thread, there was a gentle debate about “culture” and the movement of people’s in ancient times was raised.

So, all this is a long winded way to introduce an interesting and readable essay by the multi-talented Indian economist Amartya Sen in which he talks about some of the exchanges between India and China. Here is a tiny excerpt:

Amartya Sen:
“Certainly religion has been a major source of contact between China and India, and Buddhism was central to the movement of people and ideas between the two countries. But the wider influence of Buddhism was not confined to religion. Its secular impact stretched into science, mathematics, literature, linguistics, architecture, medicine, and music. We know from the elaborate accounts left by a number of Chinese visitors to India, such as Faxian in the fifth century and Xuanzang and Yi Jing in the seventh,[1] that their interest was by no means restricted to religious theory and practices.”

Sen goes back in time to the start of Buddhism but there is no doubt that these exchanges were taking place well before then. Anyone who has been to what now constitutes the borders of India, Pakistan and China and Tibet will have a feel for what I mean. Here is a link to the essay and I hope you enjoy………………………..

http://www.cul-studies.com/english/chinastudies/200412/351.html

Lucia

pocossin
May 18th, 2010, 12:43 PM
The author of the article wishes to discount the role of religion in history and is, I think, mistaken. One needs only to look at the cathedrals of Europe.

Buddhism came to China also by sea: "In 412, the Chinese Buddhist monk Faxian landed at Laoshan, on the southern edge of the Shandong peninsula, and proceeded to Qingzhou to edit and translate the scriptures he had brought back from India."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shandong

And China seems to have been as connected by sea as by the Silk Road.

http://islamicceramics.ashmolean.org/Abbasid/trade.htm
sea trade from the Persian gulf

http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/197504/the.china.trade.htm
the Arab-China trade

Papermaking was not voluntarily transmitted to India:

http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/t_es/t_es_tiwar_paper_frameset.htm
History of Paper Technology in India

lucia
May 18th, 2010, 08:50 PM
The author of the article wishes to discount the role of religion in history and is, I think, mistaken. One needs only to look at the cathedrals of Europe.

Are we reading the same article? Or is it me :D He doesn't discount it he just observes that a narrow view of religion isn't the only thing. He also says that by limiting a view of history to "Hindu" "Muslim" you miss things........... But far from denying their role he thinks they are vital... he's a wise scholar and has written about Buddhism with admiration elsewhere....

But religion is only one part of the much bigger story of Sino-Indian connections during the first millennium

We do the same in another eurocentric view of history with a tendency to talk about the ancient, medieval and modern times and then superimpose them onto other cultures.

This is a guy who writes about Buddhism as well as being an economist.... He also talks about the "secular" impact of Buddhism by which he means things like science, etc., He's not dismissing religion - far from it - he is saying you can't just limit it to "religious texts" and "religious Ideology"

For instance.............

Many are now predisposed to see the history of Muslims as quintessentially Islamic history, ignoring the flowering of science, mathematics, and literature that was made possible by Muslim intellectuals, particularly between the eighth and the thirteenth centuries. One result of such a narrow emphasis on religion is that a disaffected Arab activist today is encouraged to take pride only in the purity of Islam, rather than in the diversity and richness of Arab history. In India too, there are frequent attempts to portray the broad civilization of India as "Hindu civilization"—to use the phrase favored both by theorists like Samuel Huntington and by Hindu political activists.

He is also not writing for academics but for a "public audience" and he is saying that there is more to "religion" and religious history.........

Years ago I looked at the Bhagavadgita - an amazing text that is, these days presented as "central" to Hinduism. That's actually nonesense. Yes it is the most incredible piece of thinking but hardly anyone in India knew of its existence until two things happened. The British Governor William Hastings had it translated into English in an attempt to win a fight in the British parliament between the Orientalists and the Utilitarians who had two conflicting views of how to run the British Empire; and the reformist movement developed in "Hinduism" (Vivekananda for instance) in an attempt to "Christianise" it and make it acceptable in the West. The Bhagavadgita which was by then known in the West became "the bible"...

It was a long time after before it became known in India and then it eventually went on to become a "Nationalist" "Hindu fundamentalist" text that is used to justify the massacre of thousands of Muslims and Christians - ie it's poltical.. If you remove the context of the text it is way off. For me that doesn't detract from the beauty of the Bhagavadgita. The thing is until the Brits came along there was no such thing as "Hinduism". I mean no unified centralised "religion". And many of the Sanskrit "texts" (actually many were oral) were translated by some Germans, for instance to justify ideas of the Aryan super race... It is much more complex than is often presented and for me that's even more interesting.

For me doesn't detract from the power and awesomness of many of them...

I am not sure what you are saying here really... we know much of how Buddhism was spread he's saying the same and some.

My point in posting the article was because of the remarkable similarity in thinking in the darsan idea and the Asokan pillars and Nearing and Seeing.....

Not sure if we are talking at cross purposes or what, or am I misunderstanding your point? My point is that Buddhism, which sprung from Hinduism was probably not the first link between so-called India and so-called China and the cross-fertilisation of ideas..... but one of many links.

I love this stuff....

Lucia

pocossin
May 19th, 2010, 02:49 AM
Are we reading the same article?

Yes, we are reading the same article, but not with the same Nearing and Seeing. I do not share Amartya Sen's values, which perhaps you do, so we'll have to differ. I question this:

Years ago I looked at the Bhagavadgita - an amazing text that is, these days presented as "central" to Hinduism. That's actually nonesense.

There have been numerous commentaries on the Gita since Shankara's (788-820 A. D.), and it is one of the three foundational texts of the Vedantic schools. Looks central enough to me.

lucia
May 19th, 2010, 02:41 PM
I wouldn’t presume to know what are Amartya Sen’s values (although I know he champion's the poor) and perhaps you shouldn’t presume mine either…

The Bhagvadgita is actually part of the Mahabharata which was oral and not written. All of these are quite amazing but they were until relatively recently unknown except by a very tiny Brahmanic elite. A very tiny minority could understand Sanskrit – not even “all” Brahmins. Outside of that the Gita was unknown. It is only in the last 250 – 300 years that they were expanded beyond that as “outsiders” took an interest. The Gita was unknown by the vast majority of the population. It only became central to Hindu believers after the refomist movements such as the Arya Samaj of the late 19th early 20th century and Vivekananda’s visit to Chicago in 1893.

There was no “Hinduism” – no centralised unified religion. Even now it is highly contested all over India. And as I said, some (not all…) of it’s proponents are what are regularly referred to in India as “Hindu extremists”. Organisations such as the Rastriya Swayam Savek or RSS were modelled on Mussolini’s Blackshirts and it’s founder Hedgewar was an open admirer of Hitler. It was a member of the RSS that killed Gandhi. They were also behind the murder of 2,000 muslims in Ahmedabad, Gujarat in 2002, the destruction of the Babri Masjid in Ayodia ten years earlier and many other things. But it was not my intention to get into this but be careful of using things like Wikipeadia as sources as you will see there is a massive fight over exactly this because the RSS keep editing the page.

Interestingly, what became more solidified as “Hindu” and “Muslim” in India also only became that way after they became census categories during the British Empire. There is loads of evidence that for many people saints were shared along with festivals and so on. That is true even now in parts of India. Which is why fighting in the name of religion is so dreadful.

None of this should detract from either Hindu scriptures or beliefs or Vedic philosophy just as what is written in Sen’s article doesn’t detract from Buddhism or religion – quite the opposite. Why is it “wrong” to write about astronomy or medicine? Some of the early Vedic Sanskrit works talk about flying machines!! And he writes about Buddhism having an important influence on ideas of democracy:

Sen:
As a religion, Buddhism began with at least two specific characteristics that were quite unusual, its agnosticism and its commitment to broad discussion of public issues. Some of the earliest open public meetings on record, aimed specifically at settling disputes over religious beliefs as well as other matters, took place in India in elaborately organized Buddhist "councils," in which adherents of different points of view argued their differences. The first of these large councils was held in Rajagriha shortly after Gautama Buddha's death 2,500 years ago. The largest of the councils, the third, was held in the capital city of Patna, under the patronage of Emperor Ashoka in the third century BCE.

I am not sure why you mentioned paper because Sen doesn’t and neither did I. He talks about PRINTING (put it in caps 'cos my bold doesn't work..) and credits Buddhism for it:

Sen:
IIt is also significant that nearly every attempt at early printing in China, Korea, and Japan was undertaken by Buddhists.[11] The first printed book in the world (or rather, the first printed book that is actually dated) was the Chinese translation of an Indian Sanskrit treatise, the so-called Diamond Sutra, which was printed in China in 868 AD. While the Diamond Sutra is almost entirely a religious document, the boldly inscribed dedication of this ninth-century book, "for universal free distribution," announces a commitment to public education.

My interest in this is the Nearing and Seeing of Hex 19 and 20 and for me it was a delight to discover the similarities between Ching ideas and the Hindu concept of Darsan and the Buddhist Indian Asokan pillars. The Ching is actually older than Buddhism but it is logical to assume there was movement between the two places well before by whatever mode of transport…

I am not sure why you write what you write which is why I am concerned I might be missing something. I wrote it for the reader’s pleasure nothing else and to chat about the two-way traffic of ideas between these two places.

Lucia

pocossin
May 20th, 2010, 01:16 AM
There was no “Hinduism” – no centralised unified religion. Even now it is highly contested all over India. And as I said, some (not all…) of it’s proponents are what are regularly referred to in India as “Hindu extremists”. Organisations such as the Rastriya Swayam Savek or RSS were modelled on Mussolini’s Blackshirts and it’s founder Hedgewar was an open admirer of Hitler. It was a member of the RSS that killed Gandhi.

That's one view. Here's another:

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) (Hindi: राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ, English: National Volunteers Organization), also known as the Sangh, is a Hindu volunteer organization in India. It was founded in 1925 by Dr. K. B. Hedgewar, a doctor from Nagpur, as a social and cultural organisation in British India.

The volunteers of the RSS participated in various political and social movements including the freedom movement. The RSS volunteers are also known for their role in the relief and rehabilitation work during natural calamities and for running more than 100,000 service programs in education, health care, rural development, tribal emancipation, village self-sufficiency, and the rehabilitation of lepers and special needs children etc.

Some critics have referred to the RSS as a Hindu nationalist organization. Many have also accused it of supporting militancy, which the RSS has vehemently denied and protested, often going to the extent of suing the accusers in court. Accusations have led to the RSS being banned thrice by the Government of India, prominently in 1948 when it was accused of being involved in the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. But it has been acquitted of all charges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sangh


Sen: It is also significant that nearly every attempt at early printing in China, Korea, and Japan was undertaken by Buddhists. The first printed book in the world (or rather, the first printed book that is actually dated) was the Chinese translation of an Indian Sanskrit treatise, the so-called Diamond Sutra, which was printed in China in 868 AD.

Kaiyuan Za Bao, or Kaiyuan Chao Pao, Bulletin of the Court, was an official publication which first appeared in the 8th century, during the Kaiyuan era. Its main subscribers were imperial officials. Every day the political news and domestic news were collected by the editors, and the writers transcribed it to send to the provinces. It was hand printed on silk, and appeared between 713 and 734.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiyuan_Za_Bao

Both of the above quote refer to block printing.

. . . be careful of using things like Wikipedia as sources . . .

I have consulted Wikipedia many thousands of times. I use it daily, and have yet to be mislead. In this brief discussion I looked up Amartya Sen , his welfare economics, Asoka, printing, movable type, paper, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Kaiyuan Za Bao, Emperor Xuanzong of Tang, Warren Hastings, Gita, Journey to the West, Communist Party of India (Marxist), and others. We definitely read different things.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/world/asia/23iht-letter.1.17189658.html
Want to be heard in India? You'd better form a militia

pocossin
May 20th, 2010, 01:25 PM
More positive, I hope, would you expand further on darshan? Isn't it similar to numen? Or the effect of recognizing an omen as an omen? So we might speak of the darshan of any symbol.


▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄▄


Tell the Truth but tell it slant -
Success in Circuit lies
Too Bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise.
As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind,
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind -
-- Emily Dicksinson