Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Cretinist · 09-24-2003, 05:11 PM

I'm sure some of you have read the stuff at Secular Islam regarding research into the origins of the Koran. To quote a quote from the article:

Quote:

I have often encountered individuals who come to the study of Islam with a background in the historical study of the Hebrew Bible or early Christianity, and who express surprise at the lack of critical thought that appears in introductory textbooks on Islam. The notion that "Islam was born in the clear light of history" still seems to be assumed by a great many writers of such texts. While the need to reconcile varying historical traditions is generally recognized, usually this seems to pose no greater problem to the authors than having to determine "what makes sense" in a given situation. To students acquainted with approaches such as source criticism, oral formulaic compositions, literary analysis and structuralism, all quite commonly employed in the study of Judaism and Christianity, such naive historical study seems to suggest that Islam is being approached with less than academic candor.

What I want to know is if this is the case regarding research of other religions like Buddhism and Hinduism?

Also, what would be the Hindu equivalent to, say, Raymond Brown's Introduction to the New Testament? For that matter, what would be the Hindu equivalent to Earl Doherty's The Jesus Puzzle?

I'm sure a lot of you know, based on either reading Doherty or some of Vorkosigan's posts, about the scholar Charlotte Allen who doubts the existence of a historical Confucius, claiming that Confucius is largely a 16th century invention due to Confucian contact with Jesuit priests. While I would like to know about stuff like that, I'm also looking for more conservative stuff.

CX · 09-25-2003, 01:54 PM

Let's trot over to GRD and see what they say...

Toto · 09-25-2003, 02:01 PM

AFAIK, Buddhism and Hinduism are not based on the literal truth of ancient tales. If the Buddha were simply a legend, it would have no effect on Buddhist practice or beliefs. Christianity and fundamentalist versions of Islam and Judaism are the only places were historical debunking would make any difference to religious practice.

Islam is in the unfortunate situation now where fundamentalists are so influential that intelligent doctrinal discussion is squelched by fears of a fatwa or a charge of blasphemy.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-25-2003, 01:54 PM	#2
CX Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Portlandish Posts: 2,829	Let's trot over to GRD and see what they say...

09-25-2003, 02:01 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	AFAIK, Buddhism and Hinduism are not based on the literal truth of ancient tales. If the Buddha were simply a legend, it would have no effect on Buddhist practice or beliefs. Christianity and fundamentalist versions of Islam and Judaism are the only places were historical debunking would make any difference to religious practice. Islam is in the unfortunate situation now where fundamentalists are so influential that intelligent doctrinal discussion is squelched by fears of a fatwa or a charge of blasphemy.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.