My argument with @SanjeevSanskrit shows me very clearly that literalism, lack of knowledge of the texts and rejection of everything not in line with organisational goals haunts Hindus today. Dramas and books written 1000 years ago cannot and will not conform to today's standards.
@SanjeevSanskrit Rejecting every text that contains some material incompatible with today's egalitarian world will end up throwing out the whole of Indian religious scripture (every single text has problematic bits, and it cannot be otherwise - the world and its morals have changed).
@SanjeevSanskrit The point is not to reject the past - it is to pick the useful bits from there, and build on them. Every single one of our philosophies have built on the past religious literature, rejected bits that were incompatible with changed times, and built up newer material from there.
@SanjeevSanskrit Even refutation of philosophies does not render the older ones `irreligious' or `dooshit' (to use @SanjeevSanskrit's expression). It builds on the past. Throwing out everything not compatible with today's standards in search of an ideal past will result in cultural discontinuity.
@SanjeevSanskrit The past was not ideal. There was no `perfect golden era' (no Krita Yuga) - every era has had a lot of problems, many injustices to many groups. Searching for an ideal such will only result in agony, a pathetic discarding of our own history, and culture, and will result in ruin.
@SanjeevSanskrit One builds on the right of the past, and corrects the wrongs in our own way. This is the only way to ensure our civilisational continuity. Both throwing out the past, and sticking unquestioningly to it will result in civilisational ruin. And neither has been our way.
@SanjeevSanskrit If one reads the history of our philosophical movements, there are two constants a) searching for answers to problems b) building on the useful bits of the past, and changing what needs to be changed. This is the path to civilisational survival.
