There is a lot of fascination in the Hindu Right with the idea of an Indic Renaissance but what I always find coupled with this idea, like a parasite, is the ideal of equality.
But what has Equality got to do with Renaissance?!
But to the Europeans, the Renaissance was very different from the Reformation, not only in its period, but also in its character.
Here Nietzsche is praising the Renaissance while simultaneously criticising his fellow German, Martin Luther, the father of Protestantism.
The spirit of Renaissance itself runs counter to that of Reformation, in that, the Renaissance came into being through contact with classical (pagan) knowledge, whereas, the reformation came out as a puritanical Christian reaction against the Renaissance.
The Renaissance wasn't progressive in any sense, in fact it incorporated Roman ideas such as Paterfamilias, which implied that the father was the ruler of the family.
You might remember it from my thread on Cincinnatus. https://twitter.com/kryocken/status/1171754861743890433?s=09
Out of Luther's many problems with the Church, one was that only the Catholic Preists were allowed to read and interpret the Bible, everyone else learnt its teaching through the Preists. A practice quite similar to ours.
So Luther opened up the gates for everyone to interpret the Bible themselves. He himself interpreted it to mean that he, despite being a monk, could get married.
How convenient!
Such democratization of religious authority came with a price.
Over time, many idiotic interpretations lead to religious wars all over Europe.
Afterall, the purpose of adhering to a religious book over millennia, is to stay faithful to its ancient values, isn't it?
Then what is the point of bringing about an interpretation of the written word divorced from the existing millennia old tradition?
As such anyone can interpret almost anything from the contents of the Vedas & Puranas by comparing himself with the Gods themselves, not to forget the modern women comparing themselves with Goddess Shakti.
Or maybe that's exactly what they want, to have a convenient religion, they just want to use the Gods to claim an authority higher than that of the Preist.
The Christians actually even granted themselves temporal promises like 'Last Judgement', which are clearly much more convenient than any answer a mere Theologian or Philosopher could possibly give.
To Nietzsche, destruction of noble values is an inbuilt feature of Christianity, it destroyed the Romans, when Roman values reasserted themselves in Renaissance, Christianity took form of Protestantism and later turned into enlightenment ideals.
Nietzsche later in the same book contrasts the Bible with the Manusmrti. He starts with the concept of a "Holy lie" which he holds common to both Christianity & Hinduism but considers the intention behind the Holy lie of Manusmrti to be for achieving a Noble goal.
Earlier, I mocked the Shaktitvavadis, but do they still need to falsely consider themselves embodiments of Shakti, when the following is already the traditional view of our religion?
To Nietzsche, the caste system is the most natural thing and to follow Manu means, "To be ambitious of the highest art of living"
Nietzsche knew that living by Noble values is not easy and so he wanted the ones who "play with vices which overwhelm others (as) a recreation" to "keep the mob under control".
Lastly, Nietzsche doesn't hate the artisan class, he simply believes their purpose is to pursue specialization in their jobs.
And that they should not be instigated against the ruling class because "Injustice never lies in unequal rights, it lies in the claim to equal rights".
So, in short, the Indic Renaissance isn't going to come from idiotic reinterpretations of the scriptures and donating free Janeus to 🅱️alits, it's going to come with the reassertion of traditional Hindu values.
You can follow @kryocken.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: