You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Mar 2001

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00024 Mar 2001

 
Mar 2001 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


--- Anand K Karalapakkam <kgk@xxxx> wrote:
> Still there are section of people for whom Idol is not
> derogatory in sense. Hence, while there can be a better
> usage, it can't be an improper usage alltogether.
> 
> This is my last note on this issue.
> 
> aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,
> anantapadmanAbhan.


Dear friends,

The dust settles and finally there is light!

Reading all the interesting mails of all the learned members on this
subject all these weeks has indeed been fine education for me
personally. I had never realized that the word "idol" in the
religious lexicon was in fact one of those obnoxious "4-letter words"
everyone loves to hate. 

I offer just a few personal thoughts to all learned members:

(2) I think it's 'idolatry' that one really hates not "idols". There
is nothing wrong or unsavoury with the word "idol" per se, except
that "idolatry" makes it so, isn't it? Tomorrow if "iconoclasm" were
to become a virulent religion amongst people then the word "icon" too
would fall from grace, right? ("Love" is not a bad word, but "making
love", in a context of carnality, does give off a rather malodorous
connotation, doesn't it?)

(2) If people were ready to kill one another for the sake of an
'idol' it would be "idolatry". What does it matter then what we call
it... "idol", "icon", "image", Deity, whatever?

(3) If an "idol" inspires or promotes love, humanism, pacifism and
brotherhood amongst people then would it be wrong to be intensely
"idolatrous" (or fanatical) about it? Conversely, if one is fanatical
about "non-idolatry" and would go to any extent... even large-scale
violence... for the sake of it, then what might be said of those
"idols"? The Buddha preached universal "ahimsa" and non-violence of
all forms. His famous "idols" in Afghanistan made out of natural rock
formations several centuries ago got demolished in minutes last week
on the purely religious conviction that "idols" are taboo. So which
side is wrong here? The "idol" or the "anti-idolatry"? 

(4) Saint Thyagaraja of TiruvaiyAru had a personal idol of Sri.Rama
which he worshipped intensely, spoke to it, fed it lovingly, put it
to bed, sang immortal songs for it... The idol was not sanctified by
any "Agama"... But what does it matter to us if the idol of
TiruvaiyAru is called "idol", "icon" or "image" or "archA"...
Rama-bhaktA-s and Tyagabrahmam's bhaktA-s know in their hearts what
it truly was to the saint then and what it means today to them...

Regards,
dAsan,
Sudarshan 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list