Re: Hinduism rant.
Many of the world's great spiritual teachers used parables and fictional stories to express spiritual truths.
Think of Jesus - I mean no one actually believes that there actually was a real Prodigal Son, Good Samaritan, Dishonest Manager, Good Shepherd, Unforgiving Servant, Unjust Judge, Friend at Night, Rich Fool etc. ? One could also consider the very colourful parable of the Rich man and Lazarus where Jesus actually gives his fictional character of the poor man a name - Lazarus. This is practically Jesus' telling a very short story with a fictional protagonist and antagonist. Kamala used the example of the Twilight character Bella - well, Jesus actually creatured fictional characters in his stories and told them to common people during his wandering teaching miniostry around Galilee and Judea. In the Old Testament there are many fictional stories. The Book of Judith is actually said to be the first historical novel! It is completely fictional, as is the story of Susanna which is the first detective story and can be found in the Bible! Other examples are the Book of Job and the Book of Tobit both of which are clearly fiction. Judith, Tobit, Tobias, Susanna, Job and a few more biblical heroes and heroines never existed.
And Jesus invented all of the people in his Gospel Parables from his own mind. That doesn't mean because they are fictional that these stories are not
true in the moral sense however just as we cannot take Jesus' stories literally I think it would be a misreading of the text of the Holy Granth too suggest that in using characters and stories famaliar to Indians so as to help raise their spiritual awareness that the Gurus were thereby expressing belief in Hindu gods and mythological figures.
In the Gospel of Luke, the parable of the Good Samaritan - for example - is introduced by a question, known as the
Great Commandment:
Behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"
He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read it?"
He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind and your neighbour as yourself."
He said to him, "You have answered correctly. Do this, and you will live."
But he, desiring to justify himself, asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbour?"
— Luke 10:25–29, World English Bible
Jesus replies with a story:
Jesus answered, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan while travelling came near him; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, having poured oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii,gave them to the innkeeper, and said, “Take care of him; and when I come back, I will repay you whatever more you spend.” Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?"
He said, "The one who showed him mercy."
Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise."
— Luke 10:30–37 (NRSV)
Now this is clearly fictional. If we were being really literalist then we could take Jesus words at face value: "
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho..." as fact, Jesus was aware of a certain man who travelled from Jerusalem to Jericho. However this beginning is clearly a story-intriduction not unlike, "
Once upon a time"....Jesus is asked a question and thinks up a little moral tale that will be entertaining and hold his audience's attention yet teach them a spiritual truth by using ideas famaliar to his listeners - the conflict, during his time, between the Jews and Samaritans who had different religions and were of different races and hated each other. The Samaritans had devils according to the Jews of tis time. But this Samaritan was the only person who helped this dying Jew, and even paid for a few nights at the Inn. Think Sunni and Shia, Protestant and Catholic...This is what Jesus was trying to heal in the Parable of the Samaritan, as well as racial/ethnic fighting. Jesus risked a lot in telling this Parable. In taking the side of the "Good Samaritan" over his fellow Jews, Jesus would have been viewed by many as a traitor to his people. The Judaeo-Samaritan conflict was a very real and terrible ethno-religious dispute similar to the modern Israel-Palestine conflict. The striking features of Jesus' parables is that they twist the hearer's expectations, contain an element of surprise and are generally very shocking in their context. Jesus' parables are the equivalent of modern-day films with a huge PLOT TWIST. The Baddie turns out to be a Goodie afterall. Jesus was a master at this. You can almost imagine his original listeners hearing of the Priest and the Levite and thinking - yes, these are pious Jews those are the good guys! And then - SHOCK HORRROR - its a Samaritan, one of those so-called "filthy", allegedly "demon possessed" half-breeds who is the true neighbour and friend of humanity! This is fictional story-telling not that far removed from modern novels. You can easily discern plot, characterisation etc. in Jesus' parables.
Now why can the Gurus not have done the same with Hindu mythology familiar to their listeners? No one has ever taken Jesus' parables as factual narratives, so I fail to see why one need view the Gurus use of mythological tales and heroes of India in a factual light.
It is an unecessary extrapolation to think that because a spiritual teacher mentions characters and tales that he believes or intended them to be taken as historical fact.
