Reading and Study Questions for Session 2

Reading and Discussion Questions for Week Two

Huston Smith: The World’s Religions, “Hinduism”

Huston Smith points to two tortured issues about Hinduism, which he talks about but does not attempt to resolve. The first is whether Hinduism ought to be thought of as Polytheistic or Monotheistic. The other is the extent to which personal identity is preserved through the cycle of rebirths – especially at its conclusion. What is it that gives rise to each of these issues? Why does it matter which way each turns out, if it does?

The mainstream Western religions certainly have nothing even remotely resembling the Hindu notion of long cycles of births, lives, deaths, and rebirths. Why is that, do you think? What is the function of that idea of Samsara in Hinduism? Do the Western Religions, with which you are familiar, have another way to satisfy this function?

Huston Smith stresses that the various yogas address different types of persons, depending on their various aptitudes. Nevertheless, all have as their first step the living of a moral life? Why is that?

Huston Smith is at some pains to caution against interpreting Hinduism’s embrace of the “Path of Renunciation” as “life-denying”. Why might it be interpreted like that? How does Smith defend it from that charge? And, finally, why is he so anxious to defend it from that charge?

In discussing Hinduism, Huston Smith explicitly floats an account of the origin of religion, and its function in human life. Does that account strike you as the sort of thing that insiders (i.e. members of various faith communities) would accept or reject? Why or why not?

Karen Armstrong: A Short History of Myth, “What is a Myth?”

According to Armstrong: what is the source of the familiar modern disdain for myth?

The so-called ‘perennial philosophy’ is mentioned again and again throughout the book. What does that idea come to?

Of course an introductory chapter has to be somewhat sketchy. Still, how does Armstrong explain the origin of myth? And what is a myth supposed to be, exactly? It’s not supposed to be contrasted with “the false” – that’s a modern misstep, according to Armstrong. What then is myth supposed to be contrasted with? (i.e. ask yourself: when would you say “it’s not an x; it’s a myth.” Or: “It’s not just an X; it’s a myth.”)

Apparently, “myths” are not supposed to be true in any ordinary sense; but they are supposed to be ‘true’ in some extraordinary sense? True?

ANSWER QUESTION BELOW:

THE TRUTH OF MYTH

Apparently, for Karen Armstrong, myths are not supposed to be true in any ordinary sense, but they are supposed to be true in some extraordinary sense. True?

Huston Smith on the Origin of Religion

In discussing Hinduism, Huston Smith explicitly floats an account of the origin of religion, and its function in human life. Does that account strike you as the sort of thing that insiders (i.e. members of various faith communities) would accept or reject? Why or why not?

LIFE-DENYING?

Huston Smith is at some pains to caution against interpreting Hinduism’s embrace of the “Path of Renunciation” as “life-denying”. Why might it be interpreted like that? How does Smith defend it from that charge? And, finally, why is he so anxious to defend it from that charge?

THE FUNCTION OF SAMSARA

The mainstream Western religions certainly have nothing even remotely resembling the Hindu notion of long cycles of births, lives, deaths, and rebirths? What is the function of that idea of Samsara in Hinduism? Do the Western Religions, with which you are familiar, have another way to satisfy this function?