(Fwd.) Max Mueller (Part 2 of 2)

[thompson at jlc.net]

In response to Howard Resnick's remarks:

>        As scholars, we should first admit that there is no feature or
>aspect of an
>academic education that qualifies one, as a scholar, to say that there is, or
>that there is not, a god of fire. This is a religious issue, and only a
>hopeless logical positivist would argue that we must reject a god of fire on
>"scientific" grounds. To affirm or deny a particular proposition places one
>in the identical realm of discourse. An algebra teacher that marks a
>student's answer right or wrong requires the same knowledge. To affirm that
>Agni is the god of fire is no more a religious utterance than to deny that he
>is and thus proceed to a discussion of how and why a community "created" this
>notion.
>Howard Resnick
>Adjunt Professor
>Graduate Theological Union,
>Berkeley, California

It seems to me that if a Vedic poet, say DIrghatamas, is capable of
doubting the existence of Agni, among a number of other gods, then we
should be able to be a little tolerant of Greg Downey's apparent doubts,
especially since he hedges them with a parenthesis: "(for the sake of the
argument)."

Also, if I recall, it is very Vedic to be polite to guests.

Sincerely,

George Thompson