Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of Periodical (2820) (remove)
Language
- English (2820) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2820)
Keywords
- taxonomy (312)
- new species (255)
- Odonata (73)
- morphology (73)
- Financial Institutions (45)
- distribution (38)
- systematics (37)
- Taxonomy (36)
- Capital Markets Union (32)
- new records (32)
Institute
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (282)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (276)
- E-Finance Lab e.V. (69)
- Extern (69)
- Institut für Wissenschaftliche Irenik (61)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (58)
- Evangelische Theologie (55)
- House of Finance (HoF) (54)
- Präsidium (38)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (29)
The historian has to safeguard the strangeness of the past. Therefore, religio-historical research has to scrutinise the reconstruction of the real history of religions by religious ideologies of the present. Very often religious ideologies fall back to the past in order to get an alleged legitimacy for their actual am-bitions; however, for that purpose they have to model or falsify the past according to their present ideo-logical needs. One of the outstanding examples of such an ideologisation of history of religion is the modern view of Buddhism. Developed by the Western colonialist Indology this ideology portrayed and still is portray-ing Buddhism as an rationalist-atheistic, anti-brahmanical, anti-caste and egalitarian religion - in con-trast to Hinduism which is caricatured as idolatrous, casteistic and brahmanised. The aim of such an ideological interpretation is to demonstrate the alleged Western modernity of Buddhism and the alleged obscurantism of Hinduism. The target of that ideological aggression was the Hinduism. In order to exploit the wealth of India the Western colonialists needed the weakening of the Hindu self-consciousness; therefore they favoured an Indology which produced an not existing Indian Buddhism as an alleged modern alternative to the alleged primitive religion of the 'Hindoos'. Playing the Buddhism against the 'Hindoos' the colonialist attempt to defame the vast majority of the Indian people was very successful. Even Indian religious intellectuals and leaders (i.e. the secularists or the Neo-Buddhists1) are sharing and supporting that colonialist view still today. We want to dispute these asserted positions by empirico-historical reasons. First we will discuss the early Buddhism, than Ashoka's reform program of the dharma and at last the historio-graphical dilemmata of scholars sharing the colonialist ideology of Buddhism. ....
First, why I have avoided to use in this paper the expression ‘the Composite Culture’, which even is used in our Constitution of India to describe unified one culture of our country.1 It is because such a demand is not only against one of the basic realities of our Indian way of life, it also goes against the divine will, which was and is behind this created world with different shades and colours. In this regard the following observation made by Dr. Ram Singh is also noteworthy: It is debatable issue whether there is a separate entity called “composite culture” of India, or it is merely the interaction of various cultures which, instead of resulting into an integrated culture, are still in a position to maintain their separate identities. Beside what Dr. Ram Singh says, the reality is that multi or pluralism is part of our Indian or even Asian way of life. It is quite a different thing, if some of us are not willing to accept this truth. But it is still there, in the form of multi-cultures, multi-languages, multireligions and multiethnicities. Therefore the question of ‘composite culture’ is not only debatable, but also a doubtful principle, unless we are willing to take it as an eschatology reality. I do not intend to deal with this point in detail here, because of the time factor. But we may be able to come back to this question of ‘composite culture, in our discussion if you will wish to do so. ...
I would like to begin my presentation with the quotation of the first sentence of Shafii’s Trea-tise er-Risala, the first work which has been reached us until now, concerning foundation of Islamic jurisprudence. “Praise be to God gratitude for one of His favors can only be paid through another favor of him. And this favor generates favor to be bestowed, wherefore, one should feel obliged continuously to pay gratitude to God for each favor.” It is possible to conceive that Mercy (al-Rahma), the common expression of all favors granted by the Almighty Creature of human beings, has two salient characteristics: one is vertical that is with regard to the Creator and creatures, and the other is horizontal that is concerning hu-man relations among themselves as well as with other creatures. When the concept of Mercy is evaluated in perspective of God-human being relations in the existing world, it indicates that God’s favors, without discrimination, are granted to all human beings. ...
As for the relation between Islam and pluralism, it seems a little bit complicated. There are some verses in The Koran for pluralism and at the same time we have some verses against. Among the sayings of Prophet Muhammad like the some Koranic verses, we came across with something good and bad for non-Muslims in special contexts. By another saying, we find both positive and negative statements for Jews and Christians in different circumstances. Muslim scholars the complexity still exists. We find both positive and negative stances. So it is difficult to see a standard or official view on this issue. However, we should point out that Islam recognizes all the sacred (Semitic) books and their messages. It accepts all prophets of that traditions. It defines itself as the last and perfect religion of Semitic tradition and states that no other religion will be accepted from anybody else other then itself. It criticizes both the Jews and Christians especially about their failure to uphold the Oneness of God, tawhid, and to preserve the authenticity of their scripture from interventions. This exclusivist aspect of Islam as many conservative scholars formed with putting together some evidences from the Koran is generally accepted by Muslims.
Religious Anthropology studies the origins, evolution and functions of religions. The discipline researching religious beliefs and rituals comparatively with cross-cultural perspectives tries to enlighten the belief world of the mankind. Religion, as a term, can be defined as "believing as well as worshipping to the supernatural powers and/or beings by the individual who are emotionally or consciously devoted to them" (Örnek 1988: 127). There have been a number of theories so far which try to bring an explanation to the origins and the evolution of religion. In these theories, Fetishism, cults of nature, animism, Totemism, dynamism, Manism, magic, polytheism, monotheism as well as certain physiological phenomena have been particularized as evolutionary stages and forms of belief (Evans-Pritchard 1998: 124). All of these theories have the perspective of so called "progressive" and / or "unilinear" that maintain a religion which has reached ongoing stages and that communities which have developed from primitiveness to civilization. They argue that there has only been one single line of progress, and all of the communities are bound to go through the same evolutionary stages.
Untouchability and inter-caste relations in rural India : the case of southern Tamil villages
(2004)
Justice and equality are the two subjects often talked about by most of the nationalists and leaders of various political and ideological streams across the world including India. India was at the fore-front in condemning racial discrimination particularly apartheid and also the influence of super powers) on the internal affairs of independent nations. Her commitment to secure its citizens' freedom, justice, equality and fraternity is reflected in the very preamble of the Indian Constitution. Towards achieving these challenging goals, special provisions have also been made in the Constitution to protect and promote the interests of the most oppressed section of Indian society - traditionally known as Untouchables and Constitutionally as the Scheduled Castes. These provisions are expected to alter the given unjust distribution of power (political and economic) and status (social) among different sections of people and thereby transform India into an egalitarian society. Given India's unequivocal commitment to secure its citizens these noble ideals - particularly the most exploited and pilloried section of India -, we shall attempt here to understand Indian villages, which host over 80 per cent of the Indian population, from the point of view of whether or not these villages patronise the institution of caste which is in contravention of these ideals or whether there are these little republics ideal for realising the said goals and thus to be preserved as they are as claimed by many social reformers including Mahatma Gandhi. In the process, we shall also address the question of how caste has remained unchanged, how it controls social interaction between higher and lower caste groups and accordingly perpetuates unequal control over power and status. And most importantly we shall also understand whether all the Scheduled Castes (lower castes) treat their members as equals or there is hierarchy, discrimination and practice of untouchability even among them.
Dialogue has become a fashionable word in the theological circles for quite some time now. However, there is a need to review what has been achieved so far. If it is significant, we should then review how much religious tension has been reduced so far. If it is not much, why has there been no progress. In this note I will deal with the issues relating to Hindu-Christian dialogue. I am using Christianity only as a reference point, and the issues raised do have a wider context as well. As far as Hindu-Christian dialogue is concerned, I am of the opinion that there has been hardly any progress all these years. Many academics and theologians have been involved in the exercise so far. The whole literature, over a long period of time, seems to follow a familiar pattern – a discussion on the theory of the dialogue, what should be included in a dialogue, who should and should not be involved in a dialogue, and ends with a lament that there is so very little progress. The problem, according to me, is that the dialogue does not even consider a need to discuss what is the basic difference between Hinduism and Christianity, and an inquiry into whether these come in the way of communal harmony. A dialogue is really not necessary if we are to discuss only what is similar between the two systems. ...
The Dalai Lama, in exile since 1959 in Hindu majority India, has continuously been taking a firm stand on giving importance to an inter-religious dialogue and interaction. He has made it absolutely clear that Buddhism represents just one of the many religious ways open for mankind. Nonetheless, he has always referred to the bond shared between Buddhism and Hinduism as a very special one and has experienced it as a religious tie. Both these religious streams belong to what is known as Bharatiya or Indo-genous Dharma. The Dalai Lama does not restrict his care for nurturing this common bond to a mere academic talk. In fact he has been taking active part in promoting this kind of inter-religious dialogue and has been showing a fiery political commitment as well. He thus took active part in the second World Hindu Congress organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad held in Prayag-Allahabad in the year 1979. According to official reports, the organizers in their welcome speech for the Dalai Lama were frank enough to admit that 2500 years ago, the Kashi Pandits (Kashi also known as Varanasi) had stopped Siddharta Gautama Buddha from entering the Vishwanath temple. It was also mentioned that for all these years, there has never been any letup in the conflict between Sanatani Hindus and Bauddhas, despite the fact that later on Shakya Muni was rewarded the status of avatara by Hindus. The fact that these very Kashi Pandits had invite one of the highest religious authorities of Buddhism - the Dalai Lama- to this congress should be seen as "a positive step towards reconciliation." The Dalai Lama was thus pleasantly surprised to see that the highest rung of the religious body of Hindus publicly acknowledged the divine status of Siddharta Gautama Buddha and recognized the presence of the Dalai Lama as a valuable contribution towards the reconciliation between the two religious streams. ...
A fresh look at the understanding of charity : with special reference to the present Indian practice
(2005)
The discussion of this paper is divided in two parts: Present understanding of Charity and a fresh look at the understanding of Charity particularly with a reference to the present Indian practice. As the major religious and theological perspectives specially from the Christian and the Islamic point of views are being dealt by other presentations in this seminar, therefore, the discussion here is limited only first, to the dictionary based linguistic meaning of Charity as understood in three main English speaking contexts and then (second), the Charity as practised in the Indian context. The new and revised deluxe edition of the Webster’s Encyclopaedic Unbridged Dictionary of the English Language has given the following meanings of Charity: 1)charitable actions, as almsgiving or performing other benevolent actions of any sort for the needy with no expectation of material reward: to devote ones life to charity, 2)something given to a person or persons in need; aims: she asked for work not charity, 3) a charitable act or work 4) a charitable fund, foundation, or institution: He left his estate to one of his charities, 5) benevolent feeling, esp. towards those in need or in disfavour: she looked so poor that we fed her out of charity, and 6) Christian love; agape 1 Cor. 13. The Chamber English Dictionary, the meanings of Charity gives as: universal love (N.T.): the disposition to think favourably of others, and do them good almsgiving: a usu. non profit-making foundation, institution, or cause, devoted to caring for those in need of help etc. According to Concise Oxford Dictionary Charity means: an organisation set up to provide help and raise money for those in need, the voluntary giving of money those in need, tolerance in judging others and love of humankind, typically in Christian context. These three set of meanings of Charity, represent the three English regions or contexts: American (Webster), Scottish (Chamber) and English (Oxford). The common important element in all for these three is, the Christian understanding of Charity, because all the three directly have referred to the Biblical usages of Charity in some forms. Here for the discussion of this paper, one can also add that even these usages are limited to the contextual understanding of the English world. Because language is also considered as an vehicle of a culture. But it is true that even the English speaking persons from the non-English world particularly of the Southern countries, (where English rulers have ruled in the past), understand the meaning of Charity more or less in the above sense only. ...
Islam, the Muslim traditions and the ulama in Central Asian societies are becoming increasingly important for assessing the situation in and around the region. To understand of the post Soviet Muslim republics it is nec-essary to know the Islamic heritage of the Soviet Union, i.e. the Islamic understanding and interpretation of Soviet official ulama which still influence the mind of the people and the contemporary Central Asian ulama. The official ulama were endeavouring to reconcile Islam with science and progress and to guarantee its survival in a modern environment, they served by an extremely energetic effort to preserve Islam at least in purity and integrity as religion and national sentiment and to prevent it from relapsing into deprivation and ignorance. The most important official Muslim religious figure, the Mufti of Tashkent Z. Babakhan interpreted Islam as a bulwark of progress, disseminator of knowledge, the religion of peace and friendship; portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a “democrat, reformer and revolutionary, even a socialist”; reconciliation with socialism and communism.