Looked up some sites: interesting. http://www.shastras.org/Shastras-Balinese-01.htm http://www.indiatravelite.com/Indonesia/baliintroduction.htm
There are different possibilities I can think of.
1. The culture that started off 1000 years ago through import of Indian Hinduism remains largely unmodified in Bali. And hence, we can deduce that there was no untouchability in Hinduism in India 1000 years ago.
2. A few people left India for Bali; perhaps from Cuttack, which celebrates BaliYatra each year. The people who moved may have had slightly variant ideals (e.g. immigrants to US vs. those who stayed back in Ireland?). Perhaps, more adventurous, more liberal ideals. Also, with fewer people in an immigrant group, it might have been difficult to have tough untouchability rules. Hence, we have a more liberal version of Hinduism in this immigrant version.
3. The few people who left India mingled with the locals, 'Bali Aga', and in the mingling, both cultures were influenced. Now the 'Bali Aga' culture represents a unique combination of their animistic origins and Balinese Hinduism. Perhaps, the same is true of the Hinduism. Hence, we have a more liberal version of Hinduism in this blended version.
4. The people who left for Bali were of one caste. So untouchability didn't exist.
5. People who left the shores were outcast anyway. I know of people in the family who went to England in 1900s and their communities treated them as outcaste.
2 comments:
Good question.
Looked up some sites: interesting.
http://www.shastras.org/Shastras-Balinese-01.htm
http://www.indiatravelite.com/Indonesia/baliintroduction.htm
There are different possibilities I can think of.
1. The culture that started off 1000 years ago through import of Indian Hinduism remains largely unmodified in Bali. And hence, we can deduce that there was no untouchability in Hinduism in India 1000 years ago.
2. A few people left India for Bali; perhaps from Cuttack, which celebrates BaliYatra each year. The people who moved may have had slightly variant ideals (e.g. immigrants to US vs. those who stayed back in Ireland?). Perhaps, more adventurous, more liberal ideals. Also, with fewer people in an immigrant group, it might have been difficult to have tough untouchability rules. Hence, we have a more liberal version of Hinduism in this immigrant version.
3. The few people who left India mingled with the locals, 'Bali Aga', and in the mingling, both cultures were influenced. Now the 'Bali Aga' culture represents a unique combination of their animistic origins and Balinese Hinduism. Perhaps, the same is true of the Hinduism. Hence, we have a more liberal version of Hinduism in this blended version.
How do we analyse the possibilities?
4. The people who left for Bali were of one caste. So untouchability didn't exist.
5. People who left the shores were outcast anyway. I know of people in the family who went to England in 1900s and their communities treated them as outcaste.
Post a Comment