ovde - vera znanje mir

Poseta dr. Helmuta Klara hramu (1944)
Na svom putu za Beč, nemački oficir dr. Hemut Klar, je prošao i kroz Beograd, kojom prilikom je
posetio hram Kalmika. Bilo je to u februaru 1944. godine. Tada je nastala i ova serija fotografija
hrama kao i njegovog starešine bakše Sanđi Umaljdinova. Izvesno je da su to poslednji sačuvani
snimci sveštenika i budističkog hrama u Beogradu. Bakša Umaljdinov (1882 - 1946) je bio
starešina hrama od 1928. godine kada je na toj funkciji zamenio počivšeg bakšu Mančuda
Borinova (1872 - 1928). Nekoliko godina kasnije, dr. Klar je objavio kraću reportažu o toj svojoj
poseti.
izvor:
http://www.members.tripod.com/budisti/
p.s.
eto kako je ova skolica super stvar - do danasnjeg chat-a sam o pagodi u BG- u znala samo da je
postojala, i imala sam sliku koju mi je neko poslao mail-om…a onda kada sam krenula da okacim
sliku na blog, javila mi se logicna potreba da pronadjem i prigodan tekst - i evo na sta sam naletela
- na mnogo bolje fotke i na veoma zanimljiv prikaz “nasih” nekadasnjih budista, koji su za mene
bili potpuna nepoznanica…
nadam se da ce vam biti zanimljivo!
Pozz
An Exploration of Boundaries that Define Locations of Religious
Identity
Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008
Eileen BARKER
Given the theme of the ISSR Conference for which I was invited to prepare the paper, ‘‘Religion
and Society: Challenging Boundaries’’, I found myself asking what kind of boundaries are likely
to be associated with different kinds of locations of religious identity, one, but only one, of which
would be based on the nation. This involved: (1) contrasting the sociological relativism espoused
by Mary Douglas with the Platonic essentialism associated with many believers;(2) considering
the variety to be found between different types of boundaries;(3) constructing an ideal typology of
some possible locations of religious identity and (4) hypothesizing about variations in the types of
boundaries that each of the types of locations might exhibit.
Boundaries as Both Necessary and Arbitrary
At a conference of the International Society for the Sociology of Religion it could be taken almost
as a truism that conceptual boundaries are socially constructed. Most contemporary
anthropologists, sociologists and historians recognize the wide variety of ways in which different
societies, and subgroups within and across societies, have perceived the world and categorized its
different components; empirical diversity clearly indicates that while what is actually ‘‘out there’’
might suggest how we perceive reality, it does not actually dictate what we see.At the same time,
it may also be a truism that the majority of people throughout time and space have considered
many, if not all, categories to be God-given or ‘‘natural’’ symbols. It has been, and
overwhelmingly still is, the case that millions consider that God or nature determined the natural,
ideal family, the ideal man and the ideal woman, and a universally right (natural) way of doing the
right (natural) thing. It is assumed there is a Platonic or neo-Platonic world in which ideal forms
comprise the one true, eternal, unchanging, absolute essence of things. This is a world in which
boundaries are drawn correctly; where it is known what religion really is;where Good and Bad are
clearly delineated; where Truth and Falsity are unambiguously distinguishable. For the religiously
committed, the world is divided by numerous God-given differences—God created, for example,
Male and Female; and He created the 12 tribes of Israel. These differences may, moreover, be
hierarchically evaluated. God, many believe, made women inferior to men; God made the black