What does Swadharma need in order to grow?
My bias, heavy and entrenched, narrowed my answer to this question — honest, humble intellectual discourse on excerpts of Hindu scripture.
But that is clearly not enough. People might say “it is nice that you are putting time into Swadharma,” or “I am glad that you are doing this” — thank you if you have! But they only say it out of kindness. The true test of Swadharma’s success is when there is self-evident value in its content. I can sit here and write a lot of crap (if I am, send me an email), but if I don’t say a sentence worth hearing, then I am not doing my duty. I do not want Swadharma to become a site where scriptural samurai have swordfights all day. I also do not want Swadharma to become completely independent of any tradition.
But how can we reconcile scripture with fresh thought? As our current co-president Rohan Prasad (‘10) pointed out — the citation of scripture is “intellectually intimidating,” but some deference to scripture is necessary in order to preserve Hindu identity. But why bother preserving Hindu identity at all? What is the point of retaining tradition?
The point is — to avoid the mistakes our ancestors made, which they have documented for our benefit. (If you want to debate this point, then comment.)
I want to make this clear — scriptural knowledge is useful, but what is equally useful is the act of behaving virtuously in life. If we can find what our ancestors were getting at without the use of scripture, that is great! If scripture allows us to attain a virtuous life, that also is great! These are valid paths to the same goal of being satisfied with life.
I want Swadharma to be a dance, where some of us are the choreographers, and others of us are the dancers. The two are, of course, not mutually independent — one can choreograph and dance equally well. The main point is that both are equally important to the dance — the choreographers, with their knowledge of the theory and the scriptures, and the dancers, for their willingness to act and do things. Perhaps scriptural citation is intellectually intimidating, and the mere existence of choreography frightens the dancers away. But without dancers, what are you choreographers to do? And you dancers — perhaps you want to dance to the beat of your own drum. But without the music of history to guide your actions, how can you evade the mistakes of the past?
Several days ago, I was talking to Vijay Yanamadala (‘07), a former Dharma co-president and one of the original founders of Swadharma, over dinner in Eliot House. He made an important point –
Dharma is only half about organizing pujas and doing discussions. Dharma is one-hundred percent about building community.
Choreography is only half the story — if you are a dancer, stand up. If your preference is to improve your life by action, know that you are equally important to the great dance we are designing here. If you are a choreographer, deflate your importance a bit — without the dancers’ practicality, you are nothing. Each requires the other in order to succeed — and that is why we are a community. These types of discussions devolve into choreographer worship — that is why I ask you dancers to be confident in what you think. Your own thought has no less legitimacy than scripture. Do not feel guilty — you have prolific scriptures within you in the originality of your thought and the freshness of your movement.
I consider myself a choreographer, because I like going to the primary source texts and pondering the details. But if you are a dancer, and have never touched a word of scriptural texts, you are equally important to this dance. So close your eyes and ask yourself whether you are a choreographer or a dancer — or both. What we need now is for you — if you haven’t asked yourself already, do it now — to realize which parts you play in this dance, so that you can improve your life as effectively as possible, with the help of the dancers and the choreographers alike, so that Swadharma can become the cosmic dance of theory and practice that it is destined to become.
Related posts:
One Comment
Great post Saketh. You’ve raised some good questions, and provided some good answers.
I’m still trying to balance these two statements:
“But without the music of history to guide your actions, how can you evade the mistakes of the past?”
“Your own thought has no less legitimacy than scripture”
Are the “intellectually intimidating” scriptures relegated to the choreographers? Is it the responsibility of choreographers to make them more approachable for dancers?
Post a Comment