Here's another detailed critique of this 'documentary'.
http://indiafacts.org/reza-aslans-believer-exhibit-unconcealed-hinduphobia/
http://indiafacts.org/reza-aslans-believer-exhibit-unconcealed-hinduphobia/
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
CNN documentary
- Thread starter Vinayaka
- Start date
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I have been searching for information on Aghora. Aghora comes in two forms. One is left-handed and the other is right-handed. The right-handed Aghoris are known as Shivanetras (Wikipedia) who follow 'sattvika' way.
Aghora is removal of eight great bondages, ashta-maha-pashas. They are Ghrina (Hate), Lajjaa (Shame), Bhaya (Fear), Shankaa (Doubt), Jugupsaa (Censure/Reproach), Kula (Family), Jaati (Caste) and Sheela (Modesty). (India Divine)
Aghora creed: Shiva is perfect (having omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence) and that Shiva is responsible for everything that occurs – all conditions, causes and effects. Consequently, everything that exists must be perfect and to deny the perfection of anything would be to deny the sacredness of all life in its full manifestation, as well as to deny the Supreme Being. (Wikipedia)
ps - Aghora is more than just eating flesh of the dead and drinking urine.
Aghora is removal of eight great bondages, ashta-maha-pashas. They are Ghrina (Hate), Lajjaa (Shame), Bhaya (Fear), Shankaa (Doubt), Jugupsaa (Censure/Reproach), Kula (Family), Jaati (Caste) and Sheela (Modesty). (India Divine)
Aghora creed: Shiva is perfect (having omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence) and that Shiva is responsible for everything that occurs – all conditions, causes and effects. Consequently, everything that exists must be perfect and to deny the perfection of anything would be to deny the sacredness of all life in its full manifestation, as well as to deny the Supreme Being. (Wikipedia)
ps - Aghora is more than just eating flesh of the dead and drinking urine.
Last edited:
Fireside_Hindu
Jai Lakshmi Maa
So I finally had a chance to watch the episode so I wanted to write down my thoughts while they were fresh.
1.) My initial assumption seems to have been correct - that what Reza Aslan was trying to achieve was a "You think Hinduism is this, but it's this" format for the documentary.
However...
2.) The positive message he was trying to explore and get across could have been achieved without the "Aghori Theatrics" he idiotically tried to participate in. The first half of the documentary was for sensationalism only and only served to make Reza (and the audience) uncomfortable. For a religious scholar, he seemed profoundly unprepared to deal with the people and rituals he was encountering and he approached them like a child. Whether he truly is that poor a scholar or he was playing up ignorance for show, I can't say.
3.) The episode launches directly into Casteism and a VERY oversimplified view of Karma and then harps on it for the rest of the episode. I believe Casteism should be addressed, but it's impossible to do that in 40 minutes, so he ends up speaking out about it without context the entire time.
4.) The episode leads the viewer to believe that the idea of oneness within Hinduism is a new idea and that only Aghori believe in it, when in fact it is a central tenant of almost all Hindu practice. I couldn't stop wondering why Reza didn't explore Bhakti, or any of the scripture or enumerable other groups within Hindu society that are working to break down the caste system.
5.) While I appreciate him ending on a positive note, I think it was overshadowed by the first half's problematic treatment of Hinduism as a whole. As the show draws to a close and Reza is seen making all kinds of offerings at temples and bowing in shrines, I was almost insulted and at the very least annoyed. You just spent 40 minutes acting like an *** and talking about Hindus like we're freaks and now you want to pay your respects? I don't buy it and I would prefer he didn't bother.
6.) Reza tries to tie several social and environmental issues together in too short a time and therefore does justice to none of them. The issue of the pollution in the Ganga as it relates to Hinduism could be an entire 2-3 hour documentary on its own. The only reason to bring it up at all in this context is to prepare the audience to watch him cringe his way through a dunk in the water and ultimately it sends the message that "Hindus are dirty". People are dirty. Don't make this about religion.
In short, I think the exploration of Aghori and Hinduism was lazy and patronizing and as a result it only serves to fan the fire of ignorance and fear. Reza may have had good intentions, but he doesn't seem to have put any real work into making sure he did his job as a scholar and CNN certainly failed hard on the journalism. I can understand why people were upset. The most upsetting thing for me was his apparent lack of preparation and his forced respect.
1.) My initial assumption seems to have been correct - that what Reza Aslan was trying to achieve was a "You think Hinduism is this, but it's this" format for the documentary.
However...
2.) The positive message he was trying to explore and get across could have been achieved without the "Aghori Theatrics" he idiotically tried to participate in. The first half of the documentary was for sensationalism only and only served to make Reza (and the audience) uncomfortable. For a religious scholar, he seemed profoundly unprepared to deal with the people and rituals he was encountering and he approached them like a child. Whether he truly is that poor a scholar or he was playing up ignorance for show, I can't say.
3.) The episode launches directly into Casteism and a VERY oversimplified view of Karma and then harps on it for the rest of the episode. I believe Casteism should be addressed, but it's impossible to do that in 40 minutes, so he ends up speaking out about it without context the entire time.
4.) The episode leads the viewer to believe that the idea of oneness within Hinduism is a new idea and that only Aghori believe in it, when in fact it is a central tenant of almost all Hindu practice. I couldn't stop wondering why Reza didn't explore Bhakti, or any of the scripture or enumerable other groups within Hindu society that are working to break down the caste system.
5.) While I appreciate him ending on a positive note, I think it was overshadowed by the first half's problematic treatment of Hinduism as a whole. As the show draws to a close and Reza is seen making all kinds of offerings at temples and bowing in shrines, I was almost insulted and at the very least annoyed. You just spent 40 minutes acting like an *** and talking about Hindus like we're freaks and now you want to pay your respects? I don't buy it and I would prefer he didn't bother.
6.) Reza tries to tie several social and environmental issues together in too short a time and therefore does justice to none of them. The issue of the pollution in the Ganga as it relates to Hinduism could be an entire 2-3 hour documentary on its own. The only reason to bring it up at all in this context is to prepare the audience to watch him cringe his way through a dunk in the water and ultimately it sends the message that "Hindus are dirty". People are dirty. Don't make this about religion.
In short, I think the exploration of Aghori and Hinduism was lazy and patronizing and as a result it only serves to fan the fire of ignorance and fear. Reza may have had good intentions, but he doesn't seem to have put any real work into making sure he did his job as a scholar and CNN certainly failed hard on the journalism. I can understand why people were upset. The most upsetting thing for me was his apparent lack of preparation and his forced respect.
Last edited:
National Geographic Channel (I don't get it, unfortunately) is doing a special on Tirupati airing March 27.
I hope somebody here gets a chance to watch it.
It would be interesting to know whether the documentaries portraying Hinduism are generally negative, or some sources are at least neutral. I just finished watching the end of a BBC Globetrekker on trains and other stuff in Northern India. I've always quite enjoyed the Globetrekker series as they tend to explore cultures in a very enthusiastic non-judgemental way.
I hope somebody here gets a chance to watch it.
It would be interesting to know whether the documentaries portraying Hinduism are generally negative, or some sources are at least neutral. I just finished watching the end of a BBC Globetrekker on trains and other stuff in Northern India. I've always quite enjoyed the Globetrekker series as they tend to explore cultures in a very enthusiastic non-judgemental way.
There are many good documentaries. Here is a recent one on Kumbh Mela that does focus on the faith of the pilgrims.
One more. Older and better. Here the narrator, first goes to Varanasi and Kumbh Mela...but then also showcases the no-frills village Hinduism by staying for several months in a small village in Bihar.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I will inform the members if it is beamed live.
I feel ashamed. What kind of Hindu am I? No puja, no meditation, no kumbha!
Last edited:
I will inform the members if it is beamed live.
I feel ashamed. What kind of Hindu am I? No puja, no meditation, no kumbha!
You're so cute, Aupji... Wipe that grin off your face, you shameless Son of my Beloved Prankster!
What kind of Hindu am I? No puja, no meditation, no kumbha!
Maybe next lifetime.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I won't come back. I pervade the whole universe.
अहं निर्विकल्पो निराकार रूपो, विभुत्वाच सर्वत्र सर्वेन्द्रियाणाम् ।
न चासङत नैव मुक्तिर्न मेयः, चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहम् शिवोऽहम् ll
ahaṃ nirvikalpo nirākāra rūpo, vibhutvā ca sarvatra sarvendriyāṇaṃ l
na cāsangata naiva muktir na meyaḥ, cidānandarūpaḥ śivo'ham śivo'ham ll
I am all pervasive. I am without any attributes, and without any form. I have neither attachment to the world, nor to liberatio. I have no wishes for anything because I am everything, everywhere, every time, always in equilibrium. I am indeed, That eternal eternal form of bliss, the auspicious (Śiva).
अहं निर्विकल्पो निराकार रूपो, विभुत्वाच सर्वत्र सर्वेन्द्रियाणाम् ।
न चासङत नैव मुक्तिर्न मेयः, चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहम् शिवोऽहम् ll
ahaṃ nirvikalpo nirākāra rūpo, vibhutvā ca sarvatra sarvendriyāṇaṃ l
na cāsangata naiva muktir na meyaḥ, cidānandarūpaḥ śivo'ham śivo'ham ll
I am all pervasive. I am without any attributes, and without any form. I have neither attachment to the world, nor to liberatio. I have no wishes for anything because I am everything, everywhere, every time, always in equilibrium. I am indeed, That eternal eternal form of bliss, the auspicious (Śiva).
Last edited:
I won't come back. I pervade the whole universe.
अहं निर्विकल्पो निराकार रूपो, विभुत्वाच सर्वत्र सर्वेन्द्रियाणाम् ।
न चासङत नैव मुक्तिर्न मेयः, चिदानन्दरूपः शिवोऽहम् शिवोऽहम् ll
ahaṃ nirvikalpo nirākāra rūpo, vibhutvā ca sarvatra sarvendriyāṇaṃ l
na cāsangata naiva muktir na meyaḥ, cidānandarūpaḥ śivo'ham śivo'ham ll
I am all pervasive. I am without any attributes, and without any form. I have neither attachment to the world, nor to liberatio. I have no wishes for anything because I am everything, everywhere, every time, always in equilibrium. I am indeed, That eternal eternal form of bliss, the auspicious (Śiva).
Maybe next lifetime you'll actually believe that too, from realisation. lol
Don't you mean he already believes that but maybe this or a next time he'll realize it? (Can't find a way to draw a line through your 'lol,' dang it!)
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Another translation:
6.1: I am Without any Variation, and Without any Form,
6.2: I am Present Everywhere as the underlying Substratum of everything, and behind all Sense Organs,
6.3: Neither do I get Attached to anything, nor get Freed from anything,
6.4: I am the Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness; I am Shiva, I am Shiva.
Nirvana Shatakam - in sanskrit with meaning - Mano Buddhi Ahamkara
My problem is with the 'consciousness' part. Chid (ever) Ananda (bliss) Rupah (A form of). So, no consciousness - That eternal eternal form of bliss.
6.1: I am Without any Variation, and Without any Form,
6.2: I am Present Everywhere as the underlying Substratum of everything, and behind all Sense Organs,
6.3: Neither do I get Attached to anything, nor get Freed from anything,
6.4: I am the Ever Pure Blissful Consciousness; I am Shiva, I am Shiva.
Nirvana Shatakam - in sanskrit with meaning - Mano Buddhi Ahamkara
My problem is with the 'consciousness' part. Chid (ever) Ananda (bliss) Rupah (A form of). So, no consciousness - That eternal eternal form of bliss.
Are you sure "chid" means 'ever'? Never heard that definition. This has always been my understanding, i.e., cit or chit or chid in this context means 'consciousness.'
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Satchitananda (IAST: Satcitānanda) or Sacchidānanda representing "existence, consciousness, and bliss"[1][2] or "truth, consciousness, bliss",[3] is an epithet and description for the subjective experience of the ultimate, unchanging reality in Hinduism called Brahman.
Satchitananda (IAST: Satcitānanda) or Sacchidānanda representing "existence, consciousness, and bliss"[1][2] or "truth, consciousness, bliss",[3] is an epithet and description for the subjective experience of the ultimate, unchanging reality in Hinduism called Brahman.
If I was going to have a problem, it might be with the rupah'. Form?? Hmmm, Lord Shiva, wachoo mean by that?
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: Search Results
1 cid 1 in comp. for %{cit}.
2 cid 2 ind. even , indeed , also (often merely laying stress on a preceding word ; requiring a preceding simple verb to be accentuated [Pa1n2. 8-1 , 57] as well as a verb following , if %{cid} is preceded by an interrogative pron. [48] ; in Class. only used after interrogative pronouns and adverbs to render them indefinite , and after %{jAtu} q.v.) RV. VS. AV. ; like (added to the stem of a subst. e.g. %{agni-} , %{rAja-}) Nir. i , 4 Pa1n2. 8-2 , 101 ; %{cid-cid} or %{cid-ca} or %{cid-u} , as well as , both , and RV.
Cid ananda = what type of ananda? = the eternal ananda. For example cidvilas: eternal repose.
Of course, another interpretation will be cit ananda if it starts with sat.
1 cid 1 in comp. for %{cit}.
2 cid 2 ind. even , indeed , also (often merely laying stress on a preceding word ; requiring a preceding simple verb to be accentuated [Pa1n2. 8-1 , 57] as well as a verb following , if %{cid} is preceded by an interrogative pron. [48] ; in Class. only used after interrogative pronouns and adverbs to render them indefinite , and after %{jAtu} q.v.) RV. VS. AV. ; like (added to the stem of a subst. e.g. %{agni-} , %{rAja-}) Nir. i , 4 Pa1n2. 8-2 , 101 ; %{cid-cid} or %{cid-ca} or %{cid-u} , as well as , both , and RV.
Cid ananda = what type of ananda? = the eternal ananda. For example cidvilas: eternal repose.
Of course, another interpretation will be cit ananda if it starts with sat.
I beg your pardon? That gibberish didn't say one thing about 'eternal.' Did it paste incorrectly??
Long standing inside joke, Swamini. Nothing more, nothing less.
OH! Many sorries to both of you!! Just wait 'til us dasis get together and get our little secret inside joke club going!
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Sassymaa, I need to do some reseach on it.