Over the past few weeks, I’ve been learning about Christian faith and history between my Roman history class and the general Easter season, and there are many worthy ideas in the general practice of the Christian faith that are worth considering and discussing. One of these ideas was the practice of giving up something one likes during Lent; it could be chocolate, Facebook, texting, or any other facet of life which we enjoy, at times possibly too much.
When I suggested this to a friend, he mentioned that as a Hindu he already gives up meat, so why the need to give up anything more? The answer is that as admirable (I think) as it is to give up meat, it is not something which, at this point of our lives, we struggle with daily. Challenging ourselves to give up something that has been an integral but not necessarily beneficial part of our lives in the present time can create discipline, and show us new opportunities and avenues to pursue in life. You might never know how much you like apples until you gave up chocolate, or how much you liked reading the New York Times until you gave up Facebook. The origins of Lent include the following, according to Wikipedia:
“Jesus retreated into the desert, where he fasted for forty days, and was tempted by the devil (Matthew 4:1-2, Mark 1:12-13, Luke 4:1-2). Jesus overcame all three of Satan’s temptations by citing scripture to the devil, at which point the devil left him, angels ministered to Jesus, and he began his ministry. Jesus further said that his disciples should fast “when the bridegroom shall be taken from them” (Matthew 9:15), a reference to his Passion. Since, presumably, the Apostles fasted as they mourned the death of Jesus, Christians have traditionally fasted during the annual commemoration of his burial.”
Stories of early Lent are also worth reading:
“Fasting during Lent was more severe in ancient times than today. Socrates Scholasticus reports that in some places, all animal products were strictly forbidden, while others will permit fish, others permit fish and fowl, others prohibit fruit and eggs, and still others eat only bread. In some places, believers abstained from food for an entire day; others took only one meal each day, while others abstained from all food until 3 o’clock. In most places, however, the practice was to abstain from eating until the evening, when a small meal without meat or alcohol was eaten.”
The idea of fasting is not uncommon in Hinduism — for example, my mom fasts approximately every 2 weeks (by the Indian calendar) for Ekadeshi/Agyaras, as well as on various special holidays throughout the year. Taking on this ritual of personal sacrifice every year could make us stronger individuals and learn more about ourselves. The Question of the Week: Do you think a practice such as Lent could be personally and spiritually beneficial in a developmental sense? Would it be fine for Hindus to practice something similar if they felt it was a good idea?
Related posts:
3 Comments
To answer your first question, yes giving up something for a few days or a few weeks of the year can prove immensely rewarding. It can teach us things about ourselves that we didn’t know before, it can help us recognize and develop our inner strength and will power. It can help us lead disciplined lives.
As for your second question about whether it is okay for Hindus to undertake such practices, I’d say that it is most definitely okay. Fasting is an established practice in Hinduism; my mother fasts every thursday, and I have fasted at some point myself. From what my parents and teachers have taught me, everything written in the scriptures about good Hindu practices originally had to do with science. In ancient times, learned men used religion and scriptures to instill scientific practices in people’s lives. Fasting, too was introduced as a Hindu practice so that the weekly day of the fast would be the day of detoxifying your body and resting your digestive system.
Undertaking personal sacrifice can also be looked at as a way of detaching oneself from all worldly things, and taking one more step towards Hinduism’s goal of being one with the Universe.
Being the said “friend” from the original poster’s reply, I feel compelled to offer my opinion (as usual). The point you bring up is actually a very valid point and I agree completely—that vegetarianism does not test the same level of discipline that Lent does. It is not a fair comparison since we don’t feel the same level of “suffering” or temptation from meat as you would when you give something up you are used to—like smoking, drinking, Facebook, desserts.
It almost belittles Jesus’ sacrifice to say that because Jesus fasted and gave up his life at the end of the month to rid the world of sin, you are giving up “chocolate” for the month of Lent. These theological discussions are more pertinent to evaluating Lent within the context of Catholic doctrine—but are also important to discuss in its appropriation to Hinduism. What value does the Hindu Lent serve if it is not to be taken seriously?
If Lent is to be a month long, it serves close to no value in my opinion. So you can give up soda for a month, but at the end of the month you return to drinking it. Ideally you should give up something that has an adverse effect on your life—smoking, drinking, cursing are all perhaps great examples of “meaningful” sacrifices. Soda, desserts, and other unhealthy foods CAN be interpreted as having a negative impact on your diet and health. They can be justified as viable sacrifices. But the sacrifice should extend for more than just a month. Lent seemingly provides an extrinsic motivation for giving something up, when in fact, the motivation should be intrinsic. By this way, you are likely to give it up for good—not just a month. I know you argue that Lent can be the start of giving something up, but if your attitude toward Lent is “20 more days until I can eat ice cream again,” you are contradicting its intent. Granted, many Hindus give up meat at birth—never actually eating it, so you say it doesn’t have the same effect. However, we still live in a society that tempts us with meat and we have to prove our commitment on a daily basis when we try to find food that accommodates our diet, when America may not necessarily do so. For us, it is very different than growing up vegetarian in old India where every meal is home-cooked and there is no question of meat. We have to scavenge the dining halls for vegetarian options, making do as part of our commitment as Hindus/vegetarians. It would make life a lot easier to eat meat, particularly away at college—but our commitment to vegetarianism is a testament to our diligence and self-restraint (as is the intent of Lent). A note should be made, however, that I do not necessarily see vegetarianism as essential to Hinduism (see my other posts on Swadharma).
Continuing—as you mention, Hinduism does have some level of sacrifice already built-in. Besides fasts, Jains observe a time called Paryushan every year—an eight day period meant to allow for reflection and a test of self-discipline. Many Jains take on stricter diets for this period, giving up onions, carrots, potatoes, and garlic (root vegetables). Others demonstrate their piety through elaborate fasts. My cousin in India fasted for eight straight days, drinking only boiled water with no food at all. At the end, there was the possibility she needed to be hospitalized, having lost five or six pounds in a week. The question this begs is whether organized religion should even call for such demonstrations of piety? Is it necessary to prove your religious commitment on an annual basis in such a fashion? Would it not be more beneficial to prove commitment through daily measures like prayer? Or rather, perhaps there is no NEED to prove your religious commitment to anyone. In a day of increasingly individualized and personalized religions, the need to declare one’s spiritual piety may have outlived its times—particularly in such manners as Lent.
It is important to understand that Sanatan Dharma or “Hinduism” is not a “way of life”.It is a plural body of knowledge and active praxis and inquiry into the nature of the divine.The implications of this are important to note.Nothing in intrinsic to this, in so far as ,they dont relate to this inquiry.Meat-eating for example- the early inquirers were meat eating ( beef, goat, etc) but they were inquireres none the less.Certain practices ( vegetarianism) may help some down a path – but are by themselves neither necessary nor sufficient as hallmarks of Hindu faith.Indeed, a majority of Hindus are non-vegetarians.
( http://www.blonnet.com/2006/10/18/stories/2006101800510900.htm ). Coming to appropriating a concept like lent – clearly, the idea of giving up something has been present in human kind for thousands of years, so it is not apprpriation from Christianity – but does that help one is spiritual pursuit, if yes, one just has to respond to already present inclinations.If they have been made into rituals/formalisms elsewhere, it really does not matter.We just need to say that it is a spiritual engagement and not a “way of life” engagement- for then tokenisms replace engagements.
Post a Comment