The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Secularism is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution……and it was Justice Ahmadi who said the following while justifying the 42nd amendment - “The term 'Secular' has advisedly not been defined presumably because it is a very elastic term not capable of a precise definition and perhaps best left undefined”. [Note how he is comfortable contextualizing the concept.
So basically he does not define it. Not defining then according to you is 'comfortably contextualizing' the concept, Secularism in this case. So whats your problem if i didn't give any definitions of those values.

Others:

From what i gather you consider values are in context and thus no universality to them. That is Moral Relativism. Your Truth is different from the Truth of others. The concept of such moral relativism translates to all other Truths are = to your Truth. By indulging in moral relativism you have implicity recognized other Truths as having the same validity as your truth.
Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others. It has often been associated with other claims about morality: notably, the thesis that different cultures often exhibit radically different moral values; the denial that there are universal moral values shared by every human society
In short and in one shot, you have narrowed Dharma and all the values espoused by Lord Krishna and many others to narrow self imposed constraints.
If you have to set it up as Constitution vs. Hindutva fight, then at the very least you have to come prepared on Constitution
The fight is not Hindutva vs constitution. The question is what kind of constitution do the Hndutvaadi's want? It's for them to define. This thread title and purpose is after all establishing such a state, right? From my side i have defined XYZ ideology whatever you want to pursue must reflect ABC values.

So if you set up some Hindutva state that is despotic, uncompassionate, untruthful, biased to it's citizens, seeking it's destruction is nothing wrong. That is the real Dharm Yudh. Ravana as i mentioned before was according to most here a HIndu, intelligent, learned in the Vedas. shastras etc etc. So why was he destoyed? Well i have been giving you the answer all along..

Ultimately cry, whine, yell, scream, froth as much. Whatever concept you come out with, it will have to be certified and tested with respect to values one expects the State to reflect.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Again Lord Krishna in BG:
Know that the wisdom which perceives in all nature one single principle, indivisible and incorruptible, not separate in the separate objects seen, is of the sattva quality. The knowledge which perceives different and manifold principles as present in the world of created beings pertains to rajas, the quality of passion. But that knowledge, wholly without value, which is mean, attached to one object alone as if it were the whole, which does not see the true cause of existence, is of the nature of tamas, indifferent and dark.
That Rajas quality of perceiving different and manifold principles is what you are aggressively and loudly propagating here.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Hindu & Bharatiya

Unlike the Abrahamic faiths, which are based on single cult figures, few historical events, concise theology, conceptual simplicity, strict adherence to commandments and laws, and most importantly on an expansionary missionary agenda all that what enhances anchorage of the identity in temporal constructs, the Hindu Continuum (Dharmic traditions) are not bound by such and thus free but also they is lack of temporal anchorage to better define and demarcate the identity.

The Hindu Continuum of Dharmic traditions is really based on the organic evolution and fusion of philosophies, mythologies and samskaras (rituals). The Hindu Continuum of Dharmic traditions is based on geographic and temporal continuity.

That is also the reason why
  • Islamic Genocide of Brahmins,
  • Destruction of Libraries,
  • Sufi-Infiltration,
  • Islamic Rule,
  • Macaulayism,
  • Partition of Bharatvarsha,
  • Nehruvian-Secularism,
  • Aggressive Evanjihadism Proselytism,
  • Rapid Demographic Expansion of Abrahamic faiths,
  • Jaati-Compartmentalism and lastly
  • Yuppyism
have been such a disaster for Hindu-ism.

All have caused breaks in the civilizational continuity of the Hindu Continuum, as well as asphyxiation of the civilizational tree.

That is also the reason why instead of relying on our civilizational continuity we have had to take recourse to organizing ourselves differently, to defining ourselves differently rather than in the most natural way as the theo-philosophical expression of Bharatiya Sabhyata.

It is also the reason why we are so emphatic about defining 'Hindu' through our faith and tradition. It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to but it is the next best thing in order not to lose our anchorage completely due the ravaging processes mentioned earlier.

Atri garu says
Atri wrote:It is time we become sanatan dharmiks by practice. To begin with, we should start performing our kulacharas and kuladevta and ishtadevata upasana and please our ancestors.
Rudradev ji says
The only primary identity I have is Hindu; even my being a Bharatiya is pre-contingent on my being a Hindu first; and my allegiance to the modern Republic of India comes a long, long way after that. I categorically reject any efforts to construct some fabricated Bharatiya identity that conceals and apologizes for its roots, which arise only and exclusively from Hindu civilization.
First and foremost priority was to preserve the Hindu identity from the ravagers and as a Hindutva rose as an ideological platform in India.

However the health of Hindu identity as a whole community's identity is not just dependent on an individual Hindu's practice of kulacharas, even though they play an important role. It is dependent on reinvigorating the whole gamut of aspects of Bharatiya Sabhyata, in order to restore the Continuity, and thus the essence of the Hindu way.

There are things that can in course of time and much effort be repaired, but loss of knowledge embodied in the books of the libraries burnt or manuscripts lost due to criminal neglect is part of the Continuum lost for ever, and the holes can never be plugged again.

In order to regain our confidence, composure and strength, we will again have to nurture the tree of Bharatiya Sabhyata.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

BG messages context wrt MB:
SANJAYA:

Thus have I been an ear-witness of the miraculous astonishing dialogue, never heard before, between Vasudeva and the magnanimous son of Pritha. By the favor of Vydsa I heard this supreme mystery of Yoga -- devotion -- even as revealed from the mouth of Krishna himself who is the supreme Master
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:From what i gather you consider values are in context and thus no universality to them. That is Moral Relativism. Your Truth is different from the Truth of others. The concept of such moral relativism translates to all other Truths are = to your Truth. By indulging in moral relativism you have implicity recognized other Truths as having the same validity as your truth.
Rudradev ji spoke of Moral Positivism and not really Moral Relativism.

Anyway I think your difficulty is that you cannot differentiate between the two:
  1. Claim of Universal Applicability of something
  2. Definition of Semantics
"value labels", i.e. words do not have much use only as labels as their meaning is defined by their past (historical) use or through various thesis where the concepts revolving around those words are spoken of in detail.

So when I asked you to give context, I am asking you to define the semantics. You however always want to take the discussion towards "universal applicability", e.g. of Truth. It is okay to claim the universal applicability of some concept. I do not have a problem with that, but all that can really start only after one has defined the semantics.

In case of "value labels", you will have to make a reference towards the philosophical system and historical context which specify the semantics of the "value label"!
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

So when I asked you to give context, I am asking you to define the semantics. You however always want to take the discussion towards "universal applicability", e.g. of Truth. It is okay to claim the universal applicability of some concept. I do not have a problem with that, but all that can really start only after one has defined the semantics.
But but then Ravi G says it's ok not to define it to give context. Everyone of you then asking me context has a different definition of what context means.

PS: Quite a comedown now when you say it is OK to claim universal applicability of some concept. You and the Hindutvaadi's are claiming only and specifically Hindu applicability. :D

Come on don;t shy away from saying you were not propagating Moral Relativism..be truthful. :)
member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_23686 »

harbans ji,

kindly respond to this post so that i can learn some more values

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 3#p1408193
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:
So when I asked you to give context, I am asking you to define the semantics. You however always want to take the discussion towards "universal applicability", e.g. of Truth. It is okay to claim the universal applicability of some concept. I do not have a problem with that, but all that can really start only after one has defined the semantics.
But but then Ravi G says it's ok not to define it to give context. Everyone of you then asking me context has a different definition of what context means.

PS: Quite a comedown now when you say it is OK to claim universal applicability of some concept. You and the Hindutvaadi's are claiming only and specifically Hindu applicability. :D

Come on don;t shy away from saying you were not propagating Moral Relativism..be truthful. :)
harbans ji,

If you can point to a single post where I have said what you claim, I'll give you the credit for being right. The problem has always been your chronic inability to grasp simple concepts for you simply skirt and ignore what others write addressed to you.

Otherwise continue trolling!
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

5. the hijacking of our memes is what outrages me. you get the memes right and system will fall in place. when system will resonate with our memes, it will naturally radiate policies that uphold the moral values, but getting morals right without correcting the system and ownership of our memes will end up with us dead and our women becoming commodities. one should not forget what time has taught us. durga did not anshan-ed while fighting with mahishasura.... prithviraj let ghazni get away... both things had different effects, one prevented girls from getting raped, other gave you khaps.

the memes here is bhartiya identity onlee...
Dharamraj Ji, my apologies. I did actually respond in a few posts regards this, but i will try and explain.

Firstly the Hijacking is made possible by folks amongst us who reject first and think later. For example, by loudly demanding context protagonists of Hindutva have rejected their claims to universality of many memes that originate in India. So if XYZ organizations in the West or anywhere now start claiming codes with universaility, our Hindutva protagonists will seethe. But they won't have any depth to claim it as their own as they have explicitly already rejected that meme from the HIndutva that they are strongly propagating.

By this very approach of rejection and not assimilation, they have made a case themselves for others to claim it. For example, if the Universal Declaration of Rights now is being touted by Hindutvaadi's as having it's meme as Xtian, whereas many of the values are already in our core literatures, we have given them on a platter a higher moral ground. Then why the outrage if that happens?
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

If you can point to a single post where I have said what you claim, I'll give you the credit for being right.


Rajesh ji, if you deny that you wanted values to be Hindu values and nothing else, must say it's you who has been doing the trolling.
If these values are presented without context, these can be applied to other non-Dharmic traditions as well:
1) Truth - lā ʾilāha ʾillā l-Lāh, Muḥammadun rasūlu l-Lāh

2) Patience - Thousand-Year Jihad, War with Thousand Cuts, ...

3) Forgiveness - If you convert, we will spare you!

4) Self-Control - Bide time till one has Demographic Majority (Moderate Islam)

5) Shaoca - Wudu and Ghusl

6) Benevolent Intellect - Allah o Akbar

7) Knowledge - Iman and Aqīdah

8 ) Compassion - Dhimmi paying Jizya

9) Equality - All (male) Muslims are "equal" in front of Allah
You have been repeatedly harping on the Hindu and Bharatiya concept to Values as opposed to any sort of universality. So stop denying that now. It's all over 7 pages of this thread for you to retract like this.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to
Dharamraj Ji, this is another post that Rajesh ji posted right above emphatically. In one shot he says the hindutva state does not ascribe to the Moksha seeking tradition. So the tens of millions of Indics that do believe in Moksha Shastras like the BG, or evolving themselves to such find no basis in Hindutva that is being propagated here. Then if anyone else claims that, why should the Hindutvaadi's be outraged? Those Dharmic strands thus that believe in Moksha as the ultimate whether practiced through Bhakti, Gyana whatever will try and classify themselves as non-Hindutva in the first place. Many have started to even classifying themselves as not Hindu.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:
If you can point to a single post where I have said what you claim, I'll give you the credit for being right.


Rajesh ji, if you deny that you wanted values to be Hindu values and nothing else, must say it's you who has been doing the trolling.
If these values are presented without context, these can be applied to other non-Dharmic traditions as well:
1) Truth - lā ʾilāha ʾillā l-Lāh, Muḥammadun rasūlu l-Lāh

2) Patience - Thousand-Year Jihad, War with Thousand Cuts, ...

3) Forgiveness - If you convert, we will spare you!

4) Self-Control - Bide time till one has Demographic Majority (Moderate Islam)

5) Shaoca - Wudu and Ghusl

6) Benevolent Intellect - Allah o Akbar

7) Knowledge - Iman and Aqīdah

8 ) Compassion - Dhimmi paying Jizya

9) Equality - All (male) Muslims are "equal" in front of Allah
You have been repeatedly harping on the Hindu and Bharatiya concept to Values as opposed to any sort of universality. So stop denying that now. It's all over 7 pages of this thread for you to retract like this.

harbans ji,

as I said, you have a chronic inability to grasp simple concepts.
  1. Value Labels can be used by different people, religions in their own way!
  2. Value Labels whose semantic has been defined and thus fixed, cannot be used by others as they please. For the "Value Labels" you provided above, you did not define the semantics, which I constantly urged you to do.
  3. If those semantics had been provided, say from various Dharmic traditions of the Hindu Continuum, those "value labels" would have become "values" and it would have been acceptable to say they have universal applicability, e.g. say as a moral compass.
  4. Then it would have been acceptable to adjudge whether the Islamics adhere to that moral compass or not.
  5. By showing the ability to assign variable semantics to "value labels", I wanted to show you that you need to fix the semantics, if you do not wish these "value labels" to be used arbitrarily.
Anyway, I do not really have the hope that you will understand this if you have not understood in all the 7 pages before.
Last edited by RajeshA on 10 Feb 2013 18:41, edited 1 time in total.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:
It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to
Dharamraj Ji, this is another post that Rajesh ji posted right above emphatically. In one shot he says the hindutva state does not ascribe to the Moksha seeking tradition. So the tens of millions of Indics that do believe in Moksha Shastras like the BG, or evolving themselves to such find no basis in Hindutva that is being propagated here. Then if anyone else claims that, why should the Hindutvaadi's be outraged? Those Dharmic strands thus that believe in Moksha as the ultimate whether practiced through Bhakti, Gyana whatever will try and classify themselves as non-Hindutva in the first place. Many have started to even classifying themselves as not Hindu.
As has been amply shown that you cannot understand what I write (7 pages of evidence), why do you try to translate what I write for others?
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Pranav »

RajeshA wrote: So in order to give an anchor to the Hindu Continuum, I proposed

"traditions which originate in Bharatiya Civilization or are based on other traditions which have their origin in Bharatiya Civilization" belong to Hinduism.
By that definition Buddhism "belongs to" Hinduism.

One is free to have any definition for any label, but I prefer the older term "Dharma" for reasons outlined earlier.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

3) If those semantics had been provided, say from various Dharmic traditions of the Hindu Continuum, those "value labels" would have become "values" and it would have been acceptable to say they have universal applicability, e.g. say as a moral compass.
I have all along said each value i posted was taken from Dharmic tradition. But it is you and other Hindutvaadi's that insist in saying these are or must be defined as Hindu values as opposed to Islamic or Xtian values. The moment you say that you have acknowledge Hindu Values, Islamic Values, Xtian Values as different. Aka Moral relativism. Now ofcourse the Hindu, Xtian, Islamic will say his version is correct. What is important that by insisting on the Hindu context you have taken the plank of claiming universality from any of these values. No you were unable to grasp this for the last 14 days, i doubt you will now. You do understand you have painted yourself in a corner and are unable to extricate yourself.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

By that definition Buddhism "belongs to" Hinduism.
And by simultaneously posting that the Moksha tradition is not Hindu tradition in a single tactically brilliant stroke he has removed multitudes of people away from Hindu/ HIndutva/ Bharatiya. And we are getting outraged at other people hijacking our meme's.. :D
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

Pranav wrote:
RajeshA wrote: So in order to give an anchor to the Hindu Continuum, I proposed

"traditions which originate in Bharatiya Civilization or are based on other traditions which have their origin in Bharatiya Civilization" belong to Hinduism.
By that definition Buddhism "belongs to" Hinduism.

One is free to have any definition for any label, but I prefer the older term "Dharma" for reasons outlined earlier.
Well when Buddhism formed a separate identity, there was probably no overarching Hindu-ism identity which included the various streams which we call today by Hinduism, however since Hinduism crystallized as an identity separate from the intruding Abrahamic faiths, Hinduism was not in the business of pushing out others from the tent.

It was usually Westerners who formally for official purposes and their scholarly works defined Hinduism haphazardly and narrowly and determined that due to Buddhism's spread across Asia, it was separate from Hinduism, a narrative which some Buddhists accepted later on.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:
By that definition Buddhism "belongs to" Hinduism.
And by simultaneously posting that the Moksha tradition is not Hindu tradition in a single tactically brilliant stroke he has removed multitudes of people away from Hindu/ HIndutva/ Bharatiya. And we are getting outraged at other people hijacking our meme's.. :D
Now you are really trolling!
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:
3) If those semantics had been provided, say from various Dharmic traditions of the Hindu Continuum, those "value labels" would have become "values" and it would have been acceptable to say they have universal applicability, e.g. say as a moral compass.
I have all along said each value i posted was taken from Dharmic tradition. But it is you and other Hindutvaadi's that insist in saying these are or must be defined as Hindu values as opposed to Islamic or Xtian values. The moment you say that you have acknowledge Hindu Values, Islamic Values, Xtian Values as different. Aka Moral relativism. Now ofcourse the Hindu, Xtian, Islamic will say his version is correct. What is important that by insisting on the Hindu context you have taken the plank of claiming universality from any of these values. No you were unable to grasp this for the last 14 days, i doubt you will now. You do understand you have painted yourself in a corner and are unable to extricate yourself.
Do you know North Korea calls itself Democratic People's Republic of Korea. If one took their meaning of "Democracy" and say that of "Switzerland" and then said we are trying to form a common value of "democracy", and then say "democracy" is universalist value, would it stick? :roll:
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to
That Rajesh ji, is what you wrote not me. Right above a few posts up. The moment you say that you have acknowledged that Hindutva is a non moksha tradition. So basically most Dharmic strands are excluded. So is the BG or Upanishads sages. YOu cannot spin that away now, unless you troll. So stop accusing me of trolling and rethink what you have been saying all this while.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Do you know North Korea calls itself Democratic People's Republic of Korea. If one took their meaning of "Democracy" and say that of "Switzerland" and then said we are trying to form a common value of "democracy", and then say "democracy" is universalist value, would it stick?
Of course i know. And the thought struck me days ago much earlier. Yet US, West had equality etc in their constitutions much before they gave rights to women, blacks and so on. Also the Democratic in DPK has as much strength in their constitution as the Slogan Satyameva Jayate in ours. But i realize the problem is not that. When i said i took all those values from Dharmic tradition, that context should have sufficed. But your aim as i asked was not a State that reflected Dharmic values but something else. That is why i asked you to define your vision. All you come up with basically is wish lists. Again i asked you to reflect if a State with your wish lists if it does not reflect on these values..is that fine. No introspection. When i mention BG lists of many values spoken in a conversation "never heard before" as to what context is there for those values, no answers. When i gave you a basic definition of Truth, it does not suffice.
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_20317 »

harbans wrote:So basically he (insert : Justice Ahmedi) does not define it. Not defining then according to you is 'comfortably contextualizing' the concept, Secularism in this case. So whats your problem if i didn't give any definitions of those values.
Harbans ji, do you realize definitions go against the very idea of contexts which way you cannot really ask for definitions from Hindutva vaadis. Also you are rightly being asked for the definitions since you believe definitions are sacrosanct. Context is what you have a problem with so you cannot rely on it. You cannot escape the implications of what you want continued. You like the learned judge cannot be expected to define for many varied reasons. But primarily because it allows you to do a Dharmakehetra==Holy land, which for reasons understandable the two of you have decided you need.
harbans wrote:From what i gather you consider values are in context and thus no universality to them. That is Moral Relativism. Your Truth is different from the Truth of others. The concept of such moral relativism translates to all other Truths are = to your Truth. By indulging in moral relativism you have implicity recognized other Truths as having the same validity as your truth.
Bhai ji another thing that Hindutva vaadis have been saying while you were not paying attention is that:
1) That the equation is not ‘My Truth = Your truth’. That is the advert only.
2) The equation is ‘My Truth = ? = Your truth’. This being reality is not moral relativism or WT_ it is accused to be.

And duh where have you been bhai ji. The absence of context is what everybody was highlighting when they were opposing US interventionism and Modernity and Constitutional activisim by people inimical to Hindu interests.
harbans wrote:The fight is not Hindutva vs constitution. The question is what kind of constitution do the Hndutvaadi's want? It's for them to define.
Abhi jaldi kaisi bhai. Thodi mirch, thoda noon, thoda sonth, thoda tel. :) I suspect you would be a good sparing partner. And you really need to let go of this State business. Right now people are talking about the Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition. Lets concentrate on that.
harbans wrote:So if you set up some Hindutva state that is despotic, uncompassionate, untruthful, biased to it's citizens, seeking it's destruction is nothing wrong. That is the real Dharm Yudh. Ravana as i mentioned before was according to most here a HIndu, intelligent, learned in the Vedas. shastras etc etc. So why was he destoyed? Well i have been giving you the answer all along..
You are sounding more and more like a Hindutva vaadi. I guess now you would be amenable to pulling down whatever it is that caused all this that you accuse Hindutva off. Remember Hindutva vaadis have had only 5 years in power and they did a good job by most accounts.

Anyways the last few years the Hindutva vaadis have been mocking the veterans of the old order for what these vets claimed the law was and which they went on to equivocate on when the occasion arose to implement it.
harbans wrote:Ultimately cry, whine, yell, scream, froth as much. Whatever concept you come out with, it will have to be certified and tested with respect to values one expects the State to reflect.
Usual stuff. I guess you are hurt at some level, I think I will tolerate you. :rotfl:
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

Irrespective Ravi ji, whether i provided or didn't provide a context/ definition. If you do feel the State or whatever your Bharatiya/ HIndutvaa version must reflect certain values, why don't you put up the values and associated contexts? If you feel they are not important why ask me to do so? By asking me then, are you ready to agree that whatever the kind of State we/ you put up, it's Institutions have to reflect certain values or not? Do you then further agree that if the said State does not reflect these stated values, then it has failed? If you do, then indeed it is proved that the Value systems must be made nodal for the Governing elite as template. The contexts and definitions are subsets of the above.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RamaY »

harbans wrote:Again Lord Krishna in BG:
Know that the wisdom which perceives in all nature one single principle, indivisible and incorruptible, not separate in the separate objects seen, is of the sattva quality. The knowledge which perceives different and manifold principles as present in the world of created beings pertains to rajas, the quality of passion. But that knowledge, wholly without value, which is mean, attached to one object alone as if it were the whole, which does not see the true cause of existence, is of the nature of tamas, indifferent and dark.
That Rajas quality of perceiving different and manifold principles is what you are aggressively and loudly propagating here.
Again mis-understanding and mis-interpretation.

Satva/Rajas/Tamas are not qualities/characteristic of action itself. They are the characteristic of karana/intention behind them.

That is how Dharmavyadha's actions remained Satva where as Arjuna's Kshama became Tamasic.
member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_23686 »

harbans wrote:
5. the hijacking of our memes is what outrages me. you get the memes right and system will fall in place. when system will resonate with our memes, it will naturally radiate policies that uphold the moral values, but getting morals right without correcting the system and ownership of our memes will end up with us dead and our women becoming commodities. one should not forget what time has taught us. durga did not anshan-ed while fighting with mahishasura.... prithviraj let ghazni get away... both things had different effects, one prevented girls from getting raped, other gave you khaps.

the memes here is bhartiya identity onlee...
Dharamraj Ji, my apologies. I did actually respond in a few posts regards this, but i will try and explain.

Firstly the Hijacking is made possible by folks amongst us who reject first and think later. For example, by loudly demanding context protagonists of Hindutva have rejected their claims to universality of many memes that originate in India. So if XYZ organizations in the West or anywhere now start claiming codes with universaility, our Hindutva protagonists will seethe. But they won't have any depth to claim it as their own as they have explicitly already rejected that meme from the HIndutva that they are strongly propagating.

By this very approach of rejection and not assimilation, they have made a case themselves for others to claim it. For example, if the Universal Declaration of Rights now is being touted by Hindutvaadi's as having it's meme as Xtian, whereas many of the values are already in our core literatures, we have given them on a platter a higher moral ground. Then why the outrage if that happens?
the bolded part is where i agree with you, however, this is nobody's fault. every political institution says that they will support "equality", "truth" etc (they may or may not mean it). how these values are enforced is why "context" is important.
member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_23686 »

harbans wrote:
It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to
Dharamraj Ji, this is another post that Rajesh ji posted right above emphatically. In one shot he says the hindutva state does not ascribe to the Moksha seeking tradition. So the tens of millions of Indics that do believe in Moksha Shastras like the BG, or evolving themselves to such find no basis in Hindutva that is being propagated here. Then if anyone else claims that, why should the Hindutvaadi's be outraged? Those Dharmic strands thus that believe in Moksha as the ultimate whether practiced through Bhakti, Gyana whatever will try and classify themselves as non-Hindutva in the first place. Many have started to even classifying themselves as not Hindu.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

gotcha :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

wait for my reply
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by devesh »

harbans wrote:
That Rajas quality of perceiving different and manifold principles is what you are aggressively and loudly propagating here.

serious question to admins:

is it possible that the user account has been hacked?
I would not rule it out.
the shocking slide in the past few days is incredible. I'm having trouble believing this is the same person with whom I found myself agreeing on many occasions in the past.

can the IP address of posting computer be checked by the admins?
Last edited by devesh on 10 Feb 2013 20:54, edited 1 time in total.
member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_23686 »

harbans wrote:
It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to
Dharamraj Ji, this is another post that Rajesh ji posted right above emphatically. In one shot he says the hindutva state does not ascribe to the Moksha seeking tradition. So the tens of millions of Indics that do believe in Moksha Shastras like the BG, or evolving themselves to such find no basis in Hindutva that is being propagated here. Then if anyone else claims that, why should the Hindutvaadi's be outraged? Those Dharmic strands thus that believe in Moksha as the ultimate whether practiced through Bhakti, Gyana whatever will try and classify themselves as non-Hindutva in the first place. Many have started to even classifying themselves as not Hindu.
:rotfl:

this is why context is important...

let's see what rajesh ji said
RajeshA wrote:Hindu & Bharatiya
It is also the reason why we are so emphatic about defining 'Hindu' through our faith and tradition. It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to but it is the next best thing in order not to lose our anchorage completely due the ravaging processes mentioned earlier.
you see, he was writing a long post under the heading "Hindu & Bharatiya" which you can read above. also you only quoted "half statement" (like media)

now see the context...

rajesh ji was following the line of thought started by atri ji
Atri wrote:
you have to acknowledge that four purushaarthas are segregated and are parallel. Out of four, only Moksha is personal (and hence not dependent on context as much as other three).

The theory of Purushaarthas is a Dhaarmik (I sense your aversion towards the word Hindu) exposition to categorize human interactions. Purushaarthas are designed keeping in mind how human interactions form the center-stage of the whole experience of "being human".

Please understand that dharma-artha-kaama (Purushaartha trayi - triad of purushaarthas) are based on interpersonal relationships. And it is a very dynamic field. Contexts change every instant, hence the values OR thoughts which guide the human interactions change as well. Else, they break down.

Yes, some gestures and urges are universal to human species (Urges of hunger, sleep, fear and libido - Aahaar, nidraa, Bhaya, Maithuna).. Almost all human interactions categorized in three Purushaarthas are workable set of solutions which society arrived upon to address these four urges of a person (primarily). When these are quenched, Dharmik man turns to Moksha related pursuits which may OR may not have human interactions. That is out of our scope.

Set of solutions (call it nash equilibrium, if you may) which takes care of these four urges of all (rather as many possible) components of ecosystem is Dharma. The solutions are dependent on space and time. What is universally constant is that "Unless amicable solution is implemented, society breaks down". What solution should be and how should the solution be implemented, depends upon space and time. Geography and Time are too diverse to allow a universal constant. I did not even bother to add to it, the vagaries of human nature, the system becomes too complex to model.

Hence context is important. By not acknowledging the importance of context in dharma-artha-kaama related human interactions, you are following the track of PBUH (sorry to say).
this comment sit right above the first post belonging to "Hindu & Bharatiya" by rajesh ji on previous page.

now atri ji clearly explained "why" moksha is not being counted in "this particular" instance. rajesh ji took discussion from here and landed where you can take half of his statement out of context and say-- oh look people, this rajesh just said that moksha is not part of hindu.

great :rotfl:
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7127
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by JE Menon »

Pranav

>>One should not try to put Dharma into a box.

Agreed 100% ... And there is a very high risk that that is exactly what will happen, if we view ourselves or try to fit ourselves within a framework set by faiths such as Islam and Christianity. That will be a problem, at least for a while. There is a strong streak of dogmatism behind the drive to define. Hopefully we will avoid it.
harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by harbans »

the shocking slide in the past few days is incredible. I'm having trouble believing this is the same person with whom I found myself agreeing on many occasions in the past.
Devesh ji, stop being dramatic.

Dharmaraj ji, i answered you in good faith. Your response is mostly ROFLs. I don't still see what your point is. You mentioned being outraged at Indic meme's being hijacked. How does it help by saying even in part that
It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to but
It is obvious to anyone unbiased that then Dharmic groups that consider seeking Moksha as the ideal will wean away from Hindutva. It does not matter who said what. Other Dharmic groups will focus more claim to Moksha because Hindutva groups have already disclaimed it.
member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_23686 »

harbans wrote:
Dharmaraj ji, i answered you in good faith. Your response is mostly ROFLs. I don't still see what your point is. You mentioned being outraged at Indic meme's being hijacked. How does it help by saying even in part that
It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to but
It is obvious to anyone unbiased that then Dharmic groups that consider seeking Moksha as the ideal will wean away from Hindutva. It does not matter who said what. Other Dharmic groups will focus more claim to Moksha because Hindutva groups have already disclaimed it.
harbans ji, my response is actually below rofls and above JE Menon ji comment. link-

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1408348

i'm sorry if rofls offended you, could not help it.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by devesh »

harbans ji,

I'm not being "dramatic". I'm having serious doubts right now. it's as if you've magically transformed into something different almost overnight. this is a little disturbing. if it was a "mask" you were wearing, why decide to slip it off now? and so suddenly? whatever. I'll give that line a rest, though I have my reservations.

to others with a problem with "Hindu":
Pranav wrote:
One is free to have any definition for any label, but I prefer the older term "Dharma" for reasons outlined earlier.
the "older" term for our system was not really "Dharma". it was "Vaidika Dharma".

so for people who have a problem with "Hindu", the only valid option is "Vaidika Dharma", not simply "Dharma".

"Dharma" is a 1000 things for 1000 different contexts. you cannot call our civilization "Dharma". you have to qualify it and ground it in a set of philosophical and theoretical explorations and investigations. otherwise, it will be set adrift in a vast ocean of "dharmas" with no individuality for itself.

so "Dharma" needs a qualifier. our forefathers long ago described our civilization as the one following "Vaidika Dharma", not simply any kind of "Dharma".
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_20317 »

It is also the reason why we are so emphatic about defining 'Hindu' through our faith and tradition. It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to but it is the next best thing in order not to lose our anchorage completely due the ravaging processes mentioned earlier.

Harbans ji, the quote is perfectly ok from all traditions.

Constitution - provides that the Moksha marg is a personal business and it is the other legal and social interaction that it seeks to control. [New comers pls ref my post on pg 6]

Hindu traditions - Also provide for a choice in terms of Moksha Marg. That is why most Hindus accepted the current Constitution because it did not interfere in the choice of Puja paddati and Moksha marg. Some restriction were deemed necessary due to changed circumstances, which were placed and accepted.


..........................

Hindutva vaadi proposal (I am one man so I speak for myself only. Other hindutva vaadis may have other ideas to be resolved in the spirit of Sarva Dharm Sambhav :)) :

My proposal inter alia, too wants to restrict the Constitution to Artha, Kaam, Dharm. Nothing to do with choice of Moksha marg.

Harbans ji would you as a representative of a non-Hindutva vaadi school take that up or reject it.

Way forward needs your response.
member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by member_23686 »

harbans ji,

i didn't asked you "how" memes got hijacked. it was a statement that i made before pointing towards a possible solution to recover both memes and value system---
you get the memes right and system will fall in place. when system will resonate with our memes, it will naturally radiate policies that uphold the moral values, but getting morals right without correcting the system and ownership of our memes will end up with us dead and our women becoming commodities
here is how i tried to put this abstract thought in a timeline---
i'm putting my vision in a timeline. gurujans can add.

1. namo happen- economic reform- remove propaganda from education- take steps towards creating a system that rewards hardwork- proper law enforcement (5years)

2. start a movement for ownership of all symbols and memes that have been misappropriated by west- start capturing humanities section in all indian unis- positive representation of our memes in bolly/tolly/holly/whatever wood (next 5years)

3. bring necessary changes/constitutional amendments to move towards a system based on our memes- use economic strength to remove anti-bhartiya propaganda from western unis- become global center for scientific research (next 5years)

4. birth of a new generation that is rooted in our memes and have no doubts about their bhartiya identity and understand that beacon of values only shine in strong hands
i just needed to know whether this timeline satisfies every point you are trying to make or did i miss something? please note that i placed economic, social, and educational transformation before any generation even decide to form policies on the values as quoted by you.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4226
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by Rudradev »

harbans wrote:
For example, by loudly demanding context protagonists of Hindutva have rejected their claims to universality of many memes that originate in India.
Classic instance of Harbans ji's logic on display here.

According to him, establishing a Hindu context for something means giving up the universal applicability of that thing.

Very simple example to show how flawed this logic is.

Consider the term
"20 + 20 = 40".
Is this universally applicable? Yes, in most countries of the world where a decimal number system is used for arithmetic.

So what is its context? Where did the decimal number system evolve? Where did the symbols representing modern numerals come from?

Their origins are, beyond any doubt whatsoever, Hindu.

So here are two possible approaches to this.

Someone like Rajiv Malhotra dedicates his entire life to accumulating evidence that the zero, the decimal number system etc. are of Indian origin. This in no way affects the "applicability" of such systems. But it establishes, for all the world and all generations to come, that the context of their origin is Hindu. Not Western, not Arabic, not Chinese. Hindu.

Someone like Harbans-ji thinks that if we publicly establish the Hindu context for the decimal numerical system... we will automatically be giving up claims to its universal applicability :rotfl:

The Macaulayite colonization of Harbans-ji's mind is apparently limitless.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RamaY »

Ravi_G garu,

1. I am the one who called the constitution of India as "Ambeskar Smriti". It explains two things (1) Sri Ambedkar is a new age Hindu Risi and (2) The constitution of India is the modern smriti = dharma sastra, that is written, accepted and practiced by all Indians. Ambedkar is a true Hindu Risi because
- He (and other constitutional Risis) correctly defined Hinduism as anything other than Abrahamic faiths
- He limited the reservation system to facilitate all hindus to achieve rashtra power, leaving underlying cultural and social structure intact
- He, along with his followers moved from one Hindu faith to another Hindu faith (constitutional definition) thus facilitating a lateral movement within Hindu religious structure.

2. It is called constipation, only when answering the prophetic posters who either (A) claimed it to be the next bible/Quran - like Theo ji who said they would not allow the constitution to be changed and blood will be spilled kind Or (B) who made it to be a "secular" (Christianity without church or soft-Christian) instrument that is pushed down Hindu throats.

3. What Harbans is trying to do using his dharmic/code of ethics is nothing but creating another constitution because he has no interest in touching upon the religious sensitivities of the individual/society. I can give him some benefit of doubt because at the most he will come up with a constitution that will replace the secular socialist with dharmic. Beyond that his proposal has no value addition.

4. My question to him is would such change achieve any tangible value? I think his project will fail miserably as there is no way he can ensure the implementation of his ethical code as he doesn't care about the context. His constitution will define dharma to be the 10.2 as Rudradevji pointed out and every citizen can interpret it the way s/he wants based on their religious context. But Harbans and even ShauryaT thinks it will not happen and somehow people will automatically become dharmic because the constitution said so albeit any implementation mechanism that comes with rashtra coercion.

5. Let us assume Harbans and ShauryaT want to add the state coercion power behind the Dharmic constitution. Then all power to them. After they complete that exercise, i am 100% sure, the end product will be exactly same as how Bharat was before the Islamic and christian invasions.

The biggest opponents of such a constitution would be the soft/hard secularists, followers of Abrahamic faiths. There is no Christian or Muslim (Indian or otherwise) can follow such a dharmic code without compromising on their religious beliefs.

If the Muslims and Christians can achieve such adherence to the concept of nationality, then we wouldn't be seeing the opposition that we see today to sing Vandemataram.

What Harbans and ShauryaT doesn't accept is whether they like it or not, their project will be seen as Hinduisation of Bharat by Christians And muslims of India and will be resisted thus.

What harm they are doing in the process is to rob the identity of Hindus. Hindus are already weakened by the distorted history and secular education. We don't need another layer of wool on their eyes.

This is exactly Sri Rajiv Malhotra's are fighting for. We do not want Hindu ideas stolen by pseudo intellectuals and then sold to same Hindus after branding them as non-Hindu concepts.

Uttishta Bharata!
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by ShauryaT »

RamaY wrote: If the Muslims and Christians can achieve such adherence to the concept of nationality, then we wouldn't be seeing the opposition that we see today to sing Vandemataram.

What Harbans and ShauryaT doesn't accept is whether they like it or not, their project will be seen as Hinduisation of Bharat by Christians And muslims of India and will be resisted thus.

What harm they are doing in the process is to rob the identity of Hindus. Hindus are already weakened by the distorted history and secular education. We don't need another layer of wool on their eyes.

This is exactly Sri Rajiv Malhotra's are fighting for. We do not want Hindu ideas stolen by pseudo intellectuals and then sold to same Hindus after branding them as non-Hindu concepts.

Uttishta Bharata!
All I have seen so far is Harbans proposing that the term Hindu is not as unifying and has gained sectarian constructs - even within the various Aastika and Nastika folds. There is no way out but to fight and eliminate adharmic ideologies from our land. It is our solemn duty. Hindu or Dharmic will not change that equation. I prefer the words Dharmic and not Hindu simply because the word Hindu has been given to me by others while derivatives of the word dharma are my very own. The word Hindu does not mean anything to me, the word Dharma does. Dharmic does. SD does. Arya Dharma does. I have my dharma shastras as my anchors. I have the teachings of 1000's of gurus and dozens of works to guide me and provide principles, objectives, values of Dharma. I reject this foreign word Hindu and choose to use terms that my own lands have produced to make me understand who we are and what we stand for and refuse to be defined by others!
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by devesh »

OK, so let's call ourselves "Hindu" or "Vaidik Dharma" or "Arya Dharma".

simply "dharma" is not good enough. and that's not how our forefathers identified themselves.

"Arya" and "Vaidik" are unique identifiers. and "Hindu" is fine too. Sindhu/Hindu is not essentially a "denigrating" term. it is simply a description of "east of Indus" by the Persians and the people to the west of Persia. I don't have a problem with the "Hindu" term.

so now, can we move past the terminology and to the next step?

let's consider Arya/Vaidik/Hindu/Hindava Dharma as "acceptable".

is that good enough?
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RajeshA »

harbans wrote:
It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to
Dharamraj Ji, this is another post that Rajesh ji posted right above emphatically. In one shot he says the hindutva state does not ascribe to the Moksha seeking tradition. So the tens of millions of Indics that do believe in Moksha Shastras like the BG, or evolving themselves to such find no basis in Hindutva that is being propagated here. Then if anyone else claims that, why should the Hindutvaadi's be outraged? Those Dharmic strands thus that believe in Moksha as the ultimate whether practiced through Bhakti, Gyana whatever will try and classify themselves as non-Hindutva in the first place. Many have started to even classifying themselves as not Hindu.
For other readers,

harbans ji is into distorting others views, either deliberately or because of his new but chronic failure to grasp simple concepts, much to my regret.

So I am adding an explanation to my above quote.
RajeshA wrote:It is also the reason why we are so emphatic about defining 'Hindu' through our faith and tradition. It is not really the idealized spirit of inquiry and seeking of one's own unique Moksha path that our tradition ascribes to but it is the next best thing in order not to lose our anchorage completely due the ravaging processes mentioned earlier.
Explanation: Within Hinduism, as it should be, the Moksha Margs can be endless and it is for each individual to search for his own Moksha Marg or through his own experimentation based on previous Dharmic works to develop new Moksha Margs. This freedom is intrinsic to Hinduism.

However if under pressure from Abrahamic faiths one is forced to give a Content Definition of Hinduism and thus specify a some predefined Moksha Margs, then it may not be in the spirit of individual search, but still this strategy is completely understandable due to the pressure. That does not in any way impinge on the legitimacy of preexisting Moksha Margs, those Moksha Margs listed in the Content Definition of Hinduism.

In Hinduism, seekers have developed Moksha Margs and avataars have themselves given guidance. These have continuously evolved and will continue to be evolved, but all this evolution has been based on previous research and Dharmic works of gurus and rishis.

Continuity and Evolution underline both the anchorage and the dynamism of Hinduism.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Post by RamaY »

ShauryaT wrote:All I have seen so far is Harbans proposing that the term Hindu is not as unifying and has gained sectarian constructs - even within the various Aastika and Nastika folds. There is no way out but to fight and eliminate adharmic ideologies from our land. It is our solemn duty. Hindu or Dharmic will not change that equation. I prefer the words Dharmic and not Hindu simply because the word Hindu has been given to me by others while derivatives of the word dharma are my very own. The word Hindu does not mean anything to me, the word Dharma does. Dharmic does. SD does. Arya Dharma does. I have my dharma shastras as my anchors. I have the teachings of 1000's of gurus and dozens of works to guide me and provide principles, objectives, values of Dharma. I reject this foreign word Hindu and choose to use terms that my own lands have produced to make me understand who we are and what we stand for and refuse to be defined by others!
ShauryaT garu,

Did you get a chance to pose this question to the likes of RM? What was his answer? I am curious.
Post Reply