注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

N·格里高利·曼昆的博客

恒甫学社的学术性分支博客

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我
曼昆  

曼昆

网易考拉推荐

森《真实的印度》(2):印度不是灵性国度  

2009-05-04 20:42:45|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

二、印度不是灵性国度

Pranab Bardhan (PB): Your book, The ArgumentativeIndian, challenges the rather naive interpretation of Indianculture in the West - that analytical reasoning is quintessentially Western,and that Indian culture is primarily concerned with spirituality and uncriticalreligious faith.

PB: 你的大作《争议印度人》,对西方人对印度文化的幼稚解释,是一个挑战。他们的那种分析推理,本质上都是西方的;他们还认为,印度文化,主要讨论的是灵性,是盲目的宗教信仰。

Amartya Sen (AS):That interpretation of Indian culture and civilization has been dominant in theWest's relation with India.When the British were first establishing themselves in the 18th century, peoplelike William Jones and others were quite interested in Indian mathematics andastronomy, and science generally. But by the time the empire settled down,James Mill - who was very proud of the fact that he wrote his history of Indiawithout going to India at all, and who also didn't speak any Indian language -argued that if there was anything to Indian culture, it's just kind ofspiritual, religious stuff. Whereas Jones had discussed important astronomersand mathematicians in ancient India,like Aryabhata, who rejected the prevailing view of the sun going around theearth.

AS: 对印度文化和印度文明的解释,在西方与印度的关系中,占据支配地位。18世纪时,英国人第一次进入这个领域。像William Jones以及其他人,对印度的数学、天文学和一般的科学,都有很浓厚的偿趣。但是,到了这个事业安定下来之后,那个不通印度语、也从未到过印度的、写了一本印度史并以此为荣的James Mill,却说:如果印度文化里有什么,那就只是灵性和宗教。然而,Jones早已讨论过古印度重要的天文学家和数学家了,像Aryabhata,他就抛弃了“地心说”的主流看法。

PB: Thisis in the sixth century?

PB:这是公元6世纪的事?

AS: He was very late fifth century - his major book was completed in ad499. He also discussed diurnal motion of the earth and why is it that objectsdon't get thrown out into space.

AS: 他是公元5世纪晚期的事。他的主要著作,完成于公元499年。他还讨论过地球的白昼运动,讨论过为什么人们不会被抛到太空里去这样的问题。

His students and followers,like Varahamihira and Brahmagupta, argued that every object attracted everyother - early speculations on gravity. Making India the domain of religion playeda part in the undermining of Indian culture. To some extent, India fell intothe trap. Rather than contesting that there was quite a strong tradition ofscience, and also one of atheism and materialism (the earliest atheistic versesyou see in the RigVeda itself, which is around 1500 bc), they said, "Okay, theWest is terrific in science, but we are very good in spirituality." It'ssomething quite important to resist.

他的学生和他的追随者们,像VarahamihiraBrahmagupta,指出:物体之间相互吸引——这是关于重力的最早猜测。说印度是宗教国家,这是推翻印度文化的一个推手。从某种意义上说,印度就是陷入了这个圈套之中。印度人,并没有反驳,没有说在印度存在很强的科学传统,没有说它有着无神论和唯物主义的传统(你可以在Rig Veda里,看到最早的无神论的诗句,那大约是公元前1500年),相反,他们却说:“好吧,西方的科学是很好,但是,我们在灵性上也很好。”这种东西,是我们最要反击的地方。

PB: But the really more dangerousoversimplification about Indian culture and history today is the creation ofthe Hindu chauvinists in India.

PB:但是,今天,对印度文化和印度历史,有一种更加危险的过度简化,那就是印度的印度教沙文主义的产生。

AS: I agree it's dangerous, and a distortion. It's not entirelyunrelated to the colonial history. In some ways people had got used to the ideathat Indiawas spiritual and religion-oriented. That gave a leg up to the religiousinterpretation of India,despite the fact that Sanskrit had a larger atheistic literature than exists inany other classical language. Even within the Hindu tradition, there are manypeople who were atheist. Madhava Acharya, the remarkable 14th centuryphilosopher, wrote this rather great book called Sarvadarshansamgraha, which discussedall the religious schools of thought within the Hindu structure. The firstchapter is "Atheism" - a very strong presentation of the argument infavor of atheism and materialism. The second chapter is on Buddhism, which istreated as an offshoot of Hinduism. And then it goes through the other schoolsof Hinduism.

AS:我同意,它是危险的,它是扭曲的。而这一点,并不是完全与殖民历史有关。在某些方面,人们都习惯了一种看法,那就是:印度是灵性主使的、是宗教导向的。这就导致了对印度的宗教解释,尽管事实是:Sanskrit所写的无神论文字,要超过所有其他的经典的语言。就算是印度教传统之中,也有许多人是无神论的,像Madhava Acharya,这位14世纪的杰出的哲学家,就写过一本极其伟大的作品,叫Sarvadarshansamgraha,这本书里讨论了印度教结构中的所有宗教派别。第一章就叫“无神论”,这是极有利于无神论和唯物主义的展示。第二章讨论的是佛教,他认为是印度教的基础。然后,他全面讨论了其他的印度教派别。

One of the things I tried toargue in TheArgumentative Indian is that there's a long tradition ofphilosophical argument. People ask, "Which really reflects Indian culture?Is it this or is it that?" What reflects Indian culture most are thearguments themselves, rather than any resolution in one direction or the other.The Hindu sectarian view of Indian nationalism is based on a historicalmisinterpretation, and then they distort history by rewriting textbooks. Thereligious rhetoric is exaggerated to suggest that the dominant religion is allthere is in terms of the Indian cultural history. That point of view is verylimited, very misleading, and indeed, wrong. Then if you add to it thenastiness of sectarian politics whereby regarding other communities to beeither inferior or nasty or having treated Hindus badly in the past, likeMuslim conquerors are supposed to have, then you generate needless anger andhostility. Sometimes they try to be quite nasty to other communities, andsometimes pretty violent. Some killings have occurred, especially in Gujarat in2002 and in Bombayabout a decade earlier.

我在《争议印度人》中,试图说明的一件事,就是:在印度,存在一个悠久的哲学争论。人们问:“什么才真正反映了印度文化?是这个,还是那个?”这种问法,最能说明印度文化本身就是争论的,而不是某个方面上的定论。印度派对印度国家主义的看法,是对历史的误解,因而,他们在重写教科书时,扭曲了历史。宗教的说法,被他们夸大,被他们解释为:主要的宗教,就是印度文化历史的全部内容。这种观点,真是太褊狭了,根本就是错误。因此,如果你再看到派别政治的丑恶,并由此认识到,其他社会或者低级、或者丑恶、或者看到过去的时间里印度教徒被虐待(就像穆斯林征服者所做的那样),你就会产生无用的愤怒和敌对。有时,他们试图丑化其他社会,有时是很激烈的冲突。一些杀戮就此发生了,尤其是2002年的古吉拉邦州和10年前的孟买。

 

 

  评论这张
 
阅读(124)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017