“Borrow but curse” dynamic in schisms

The below is drawn from a dialogue between two friends about what we can learn from the failing of the followers of the AgingCamel.
Borrowings from Hindu traditions
Zoroastrianism with their angry schism from Vedic civilization, and their disingenuous “borrow but curse” relationship with Brahminism – something Islam later did to Zoroastrianism (and Buddhism and Hinduism). There is no doubt that the Hindus were in no mood to help the Saracens, especially since they had extended their empire into the Punjab.

During Buddhist times, a lot of positive cross-pollination happened between Buddhist Indics and Buddhist and Zoroastrian Iranics. But perhaps that did not do much to humour Hindu Indians. Some speculate that one reason the Iranics had an affinity for Buddhism was probably because Gautama Siddhartha himself was from the Shakya clan that supposedly had Iranic roots – and had Iranic traditions that ran counter to Vedic strictures, including sibling marriage.

ZarathruShTran iconoclasm and its consequences
So far as Alexander’s invasion goes, we don’t have any direct sources from the Hindu side on their thought process but we can speculate a bit. Greeks despite being more distant cousins of Hindus than Iranians seem to have diverged less from Hindus in some key ways in their praxis. The development of Zoroastrianism involved to some extent what Assmann calls as “counter religion”, the counter part here involving the deva-s and their worshipers. Perhaps the Hindus still retained this antagonism from the old days. It was 150 years before Alexander that Xerxes boasted of wiping out the last of the deva worshipers in Iran. May be the Hindus still remembered this?

We know that the post Zoroastrian Persians had a streak of iconoclasm if the Greek claims of their temple destruction during their invasion of Greece are to be believed. The Greek view is that their own sacrilege in Persia under Alexander was a payback. Much later Cicero also provides a religious motive for the Persian actions in Greece.

Considering all this the Hindus may not have been too eager to help the Iranians once they threw out the Greeks & unified themselves under the Mauryas.

“The Persians, on the other hand, regard all these forms of idolatry as impious, and it is affirmed that the sole motive of Xerxes for commanding the conflagration of the Athenian temples, was the belief that it was a superstitious sacrilege to keep confined within narrow walls the gods, whose proper home was the entire universe. Afterwards Philip, in his hostile projects against the Persians, and Alexander, in his expedition, alleged this plea for war, that it was necessary to avenge the temples of Greece. And the Greeks thought proper never to rebuild these fanes, that this monument of the impiety of the Persians might always remain before the eyes of their posterity.”

– Above is from Cicero

Advertisements

एक उत्तर दें

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / बदले )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / बदले )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / बदले )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / बदले )

Connecting to %s