(November 16, 2013 at 6:53 am)arvind13 Wrote: Sure, people give all kinds of reasons as to why they do this or that puja. All of them are accepted. Or you have the option of giving no reason at all. This is itself evidence for the fact that beliefs are irrelevant to performing a ritual in Indian and Chinese cultures.
By the same metric, a Christian may give traditional reasons for going to Church on a Sunday or celebrating Easter - or he may give no reason at all. That would mean belief is irrelevant to their religion as well. Which makes Hinduism as much a religion as Christianity.
(November 16, 2013 at 6:53 am)arvind13 Wrote: Because if these practices are predicated on beliefs, then there would have been huge theological tracts written about what to believe, what not to believe, truth claims. We do not have such doctrines. The Vedas and Bhagavad Gita are not doctrines. The vedas contain ritual chants and instructions on how to reflect on our experience. The bhagavad Gita is just a poem instructing the reader on appropriate action depending on the context.
Except - that's what doctrines do. Which is precisely why Bhagvad Gita and the Vedas are doctrines. They are the huge theological tracts upon which Hindu beliefs are predicated.
(November 16, 2013 at 6:53 am)arvind13 Wrote: There are no doctrines or 'belief system' behind puja or going to temples. There are plenty of books on how to perform a puja, but that is a different matter.
So, let's get this straight - for Hindu tradition to be regarded as part of a religious belief system, there would need to be huge theological tracts informing that belief system and the consequent practice. As it happens, there are huge theological tracts that tell you all about those ritual, but "that' a different matter"? Are you high?
(November 16, 2013 at 6:53 am)arvind13 Wrote: And yes, the fact that it is a tradition is given as its own justification in many instances. I have personally seen it many times, especially among the older generation.
Except, tradition is not given as "its own justification" - belief is. Especially among the older generation.
(November 16, 2013 at 6:53 am)arvind13 Wrote: when it comes to the semitic religions, you're right, without doctrinal justification (based on beliefs) none of their practices make sense. Why is this the case? What is it about the structure of the semitic religions that makes belief central? Why can't one be a Christian and not believe in the bible? What gives doctrines their authority?
The assumption that those doctrines came from a divine source - that's what makes them central to their particular belief system and that's what gives them the authority. And guess what - its the same with Hinduism - gods are credited with the authorship of central doctrines - such as the Vedas - and that's what makes them central and authoritative to Hinduism.
(November 16, 2013 at 6:53 am)arvind13 Wrote: One needs to do research and build and develop a theory of religion in order to answer such questions. Definitions can't help us in the matter, because anyone can make up any definition. There are no empirical consequences or constraints.
So without a theory, any answer you provide to such questions will be ad hoc and unscientific.
Been there, done that. There is a pretty comprehensive theory on what a religion is, its definition, its characteristics and so on. The only one "making up" definitions here is you.
