Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 21:25

My Observation has been that increasingly there are fundamental issues of identity, vision, agenda being discussed about our own selves in various threads, and this perspective is being used to look at our interests with various countries in the neighborhood.

We are questioning ever more what really are our interests as an old civilization and culture. We are asking ourselves ever more what does India stand for.

Our outward attitude has been formed by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru - The Non-Aligned Movement, Panchasheel Doctrine, Non-Interference, Indo-Soviet Friendship Treaty, Gujral Doctrine, Sanctions Breakout, De-Hyphenation with Pakistan, Indo-US entente, Aman ki Asha, etc.

Most of these ideas have been either reactive, defensive, junior partnerships, appeasing, etc. Just as Communism-Marxism, Western Universalism, Islamism, Sinic Hegemony, have been doctrines through which Soviet Union, USA & Europe, Ummah and China have tried to put the stamp of their cultural, economic, and military domination over others, we Indians really have shown utmost hesitation to offer others our vision for the world. Non-interference is a very weak substitute for the aggressive marketing and imposition that others have been doing.

While many threads are there in this Strategic Forum looking at our reaction towards other nations and regions in the world, there are few threads really looking introspection as to how we should be looking at the other nations and regions, depending on who we are. There are some threads which deal with similar issues:

a) Indian Interests
b) Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent - II
c) New ideas on Post western World and India
d) Evolution of Indian Strategic Thought-1

these threads have a very different focus. Often in these threads, there is an assumption, a justified assumption, that the Indian nation has been already been defined and so have our interests been identified. That is a legitimate perspective, in fact, it is the default perspective. However in that perspective many ideas are also ingrained like secularism, socialism, Nehruvianism, Indian state as heir to British India, shrunk borders of traditional Bharat, etc.

This thread is basically to discuss fundamental aspects of what should be our vision, our agenda for the us and for the world.

In practical terms, this thread is also to take over the political-philosophical discussions, which often come up in other threads, thus harming the focus of other threads.

Furthermore I think this thread should be in the Strategic Forum, because after all how we present ourselves to the world, based on fundamental memes of our civilizational history, is also of prime importance to the rest of the world and would surely, if not in the next decade, in the decades after that influence our policies towards other countries as well.

I hope many BRFites would contribute to the thread.

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23686 » 03 Feb 2013 21:31

okay x posting a few things

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23686 » 03 Feb 2013 21:32

dharmaraj wrote:in case harbans ji miss my response, here is the most important one-

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...

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23686 » 03 Feb 2013 21:34

harbans wrote:
Bharatiya Identity and all that it entails - including cultural intelligence on how to apply and uphold values!


Say you have within your 'Bharatiya' identity a particular cultural trait that say demeans women. What would you prefer to defend and fight for. That particular 'Bharatiya' trait or the women folk that are victim of that trait.

This is a single choice simple question. What would you fight to death to defend. Values or Culture?


harbans ji, 'Bharatiya' identity already defines position of women (yatra nari pujyate, tatra devta ramante). all the demeaning traits can be removed by-

1. providing proper ways to make a living to youths
2. creating a system that rewards hardwork
3. proper law enforcement

'Bharatiya' do not stop their daughters and wives from getting jobs and living freely if they know that they won't be gangraped by juveniles. 'Bharatiya' men also respect women when they are getting what they deserve from their hardwork.

we do know of certain identities which did not allowed women participation in workforce and even discouraged us while civilizing us.

harbans wrote:No there is nothing wrong with the question. However even a more starker example:

Case 1:
Say you are in medieval India. A powerful neighborhood mlecha cheftain says : "i want 3 pretty young women from your villages each year. Else i will ransack and smash the millenia old XYZ temple and it's sacred idol just across'. What are you going to do? The choice is a fight where you have sort of a chance but not much. You can save the villages and the sacred temple though by compromise.

Answer Choices:

(A) Give 3 girls and keep intact the local temple and idol.
(B) Fight even though it might mean destruction of the temple and idol.



Case 2: You get irrevocable proof that oh man..the AIT is true. That Veda's came from central siberia. Snskrit too came from elsewhere and not Bharat. But with that finding you also have a choice. Bury it and no one will know the Truth. What will you prefer to do..bury the Truth or put the Truth forward as it is..that Sanskrit and the Veda's came from elsewhere..

Answer Choices:

(A) Bury the Truth, no one will know.
(B) Expose the Truth about Veda's and Sanskrit, even though it implies the basics of our culture lie outside India.

Case 1 and Case 2..what are your answers going to be?


case1: b
send away women and kids to comeback and re-establish the idol

case2:
ait is false... period. there have been so much discussion, just don't start it again.
even if vedas were given to homo penguines in antarctica, it doesn't change anything. we are the ones who stick to it. if alexander's ancestors created it then his kids should have protected them instead for asking for love and peace. if our kids leave vedas then they don't deserve it, let andromedans claim it.
harbans wrote:
perhaps one should take this discussion to the "Indic Cultural Renewal" Thread or some other thread in GDF.


Rajesh Ji, this thread is about India's interests. My contention has been that India must identify values it truly wants to believe in. The core institutional decision making ability must emanate from these values. I am not exploring a link between these values and Indian cultural renewal.

Food, Sangeet, Natya, ritual, clothing, worship all aspects of cultural revival can be enhanced has nothing to do with my contention here. So if in a part of Bharat a group says it has been our culture for millenia to say sacrifice a young boy every year to some goddess, the State should have no hesitation in curbing the practice for example.

Case 2 for example, i would go for the option of let the Truth come out. Even if it hurts. I think many who are invested in only cultural renewal as their agenda will not want that to happen. So if you want cultural renewal please do so on that thread. I am about India's Interests. You say that it lies in India's cultural renewal. That is why i gave 2 cases. What choices would one make. Case 2 threatens to wipe out for example, that Sanskrit is Indic to Sanskrit has been given by blue eyed blonde people from the steppes. The very core on which our culture stands..does one stand for the truth or bury it deep and keep up with the facade that the culture is ours. Somewhere we have to differentiate and make a stand.The definitions of India's core interests will fall there. Rest is all maya.

i do not know of any case where this is recommended in bharat but i am willing to be proven wrong. i know of cultures where this is recommended.
even if some particular village/tribe/clan lose their mind and start following it, it is the responsibility of king/system to ensure that they end such a system. many examples and stories of great kings exist who took their place in folklore by removing maneating tribes... go figure.

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23686 » 03 Feb 2013 21:34

harbans wrote:Dharamraj ji, all that is idealistically Bharatiya may be fine and dandy. But if you have decided Bharatiya implies equality to women, why not just put that as a cornerstone policy. Meanwhile we have in the past, present all sorts of inequities and injustices to women. Look at some of the Bharatiya type leaders statements on the gangrape. Look at our Khaps. Check figures for female infanticide and more. So being Bharatiya may or may not have the required effect to instill a basic value system, that women will be treated equally under our laws.

It is easy within the Bharatiya Sanskriti also to point out inequities against women. Ask any woman who ventures out in India if she's been groped and humiliated anytime. All these people who do such are products of Bharatiya culture only. Now if you dangle a chimera that lets first be Bharatiya in our Constitution fully. We need not have value systems at all. Well Assrams will make policy for you and me. And we will not be ever sure if it works for women.

In the recent past a boy was killed every day at a Kali temple in Bengal. Do we have to go back to that Sanskriti first? Or do we decide this is wrong and we don't do that again.

even if some particular village/tribe/clan lose their mind and start following it, it is the responsibility of king/system to ensure that they end such a system.


NO why do you consider killing boys losing their mind? It's a part of culture in that place. Why should the King object? The rule book says maintaining Sanskriti comes first. What is a boy's life. Sacrifice to Kali is supreme. This kind of thing is not usually stopped by the Sanskriti maintenance crowd. When such acts happen, recourse should not be to preservation of Sanskriti first.

With Islamics also, most cannot fathom such acts are done by muslims. There is disbelief. Islam means peace. We all have idealistic grandeurs of culture. Muhammed was the most peace loving man you can imagine etc. Didn't you know that Islam gave equal rights to women? Irrespective of the report of Barbarian dad what he did to his 3 year old daughter in the Islamism thread..and worse still: The Islamic Cultural beacon state of Saudi Barbaria's reaction to the rape and murder.

So the first step to identifying India's core interests must lie in identifying what abhors/ outrages you. What do you want to stand up for? These i can identify through values i would like to stand by. The GoI and it's institutions must comply and evolve to stand by them. That is the primary compilation we have to make here. Today the lack of backbone is exemplified even as a SC Judge (Lodha?) tells the Army Chief to blow with the wind..whatever that means, it surely implies a lack of a backbone. So when Islamic armies move to delhi Lodha's will become Mohammed Lodhi's..right? What is this compromise culture, that judges want to negotiate ban on perfectly legitimate scenes some film maker has, just because it has AQ terrorists reciting HK while beheading. No Truth is subservient here to Sanskriti. Truth is subservient to hurt sentiment. Truth is subservient to every idiot group that feels hurt by this and that.

That women should dress modestly looks fine and dandy. Many North Indian states with Islamic influence did exactly that. They found nothing wrong. But was there? There must have been rapes and when people revolted or were outraged, involved groups blamed the victim. So then a rootless society decided, that is a good point. Why not make make stronger purdah system, restrict freedoms of women etc..no harm done. No the harm was done. The choice should never have been based on 'blaiming the victim' for the crime. That is exactly even what one see's after the gangrape incident. Hindu and Muslim flag bearers reacting surprisingly similarly. This equal has not been done by me, but by the flag bearers of Sanskriti. The Assrams and Bhagwats.

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23686 » 03 Feb 2013 21:35

harbans wrote:Dharamraj ji, all that is idealistically Bharatiya may be fine and dandy. 1.But if you have decided Bharatiya implies equality to women, why not just put that as a cornerstone policy. Meanwhile we have in the past, present all sorts of inequities and injustices to women. 2.Look at some of the Bharatiya type leaders statements on the gangrape. Look at our Khaps. Check figures for female infanticide and more. So being Bharatiya may or may not have the required effect to instill a basic value system, that women will be treated equally under our laws.

It is easy within the Bharatiya Sanskriti also to point out inequities against women. 2.Ask any woman who ventures out in India if she's been groped and humiliated anytime. All these people who do such are products of Bharatiya culture only. Now if you dangle a chimera that lets first be Bharatiya in our Constitution fully. We need not have value systems at all. 2.Well Assrams will make policy for you and me. And we will not be ever sure if it works for women.

3.In the recent past a boy was killed every day at a Kali temple in Bengal. Do we have to go back to that Sanskriti first? Or do we decide this is wrong and we don't do that again.

even if some particular village/tribe/clan lose their mind and start following it, it is the responsibility of king/system to ensure that they end such a system.


NO why do you consider killing boys losing their mind? It's a part of culture in that place. Why should the King object? The rule book says maintaining Sanskriti comes first. What is a boy's life. Sacrifice to Kali is supreme. 4.This kind of thing is not usually stopped by the Sanskriti maintenance crowd. When such acts happen, recourse should not be to preservation of Sanskriti first.

With Islamics also, most cannot fathom such acts are done by muslims. There is disbelief. Islam means peace. We all have idealistic grandeurs of culture. Muhammed was the most peace loving man you can imagine etc. Didn't you know that Islam gave equal rights to women? Irrespective of the report of Barbarian dad what he did to his 3 year old daughter in the Islamism thread..and worse still: The Islamic Cultural beacon state of Saudi Barbaria's reaction to the rape and murder.

5.So the first step to identifying India's core interests must lie in identifying what abhors/ outrages you. What do you want to stand up for? These i can identify through values i would like to stand by. The GoI and it's institutions must comply and evolve to stand by them. That is the primary compilation we have to make here. Today the lack of backbone is exemplified even as a SC Judge (Lodha?) tells the Army Chief to blow with the wind..whatever that means, it surely implies a lack of a backbone. So when Islamic armies move to delhi Lodha's will become Mohammed Lodhi's..right? What is this compromise culture, that judges want to negotiate ban on perfectly legitimate scenes some film maker has, just because it has AQ terrorists reciting HK while beheading. No Truth is subservient here to Sanskriti. Truth is subservient to hurt sentiment. Truth is subservient to every idiot group that feels hurt by this and that.

1.That women should dress modestly looks fine and dandy. Many North Indian states with Islamic influence did exactly that. They found nothing wrong. But was there? There must have been rapes and when people revolted or were outraged, involved groups blamed the victim. So then a rootless society decided, that is a good point. 1.Why not make make stronger purdah system, restrict freedoms of women etc..no harm done. No the harm was done. The choice should never have been based on 'blaiming the victim' for the crime. That is exactly even what one see's after the gangrape incident. 2.Hindu and Muslim flag bearers reacting surprisingly similarly. This equal has not been done by me, but by the flag bearers of Sanskriti. The Assrams and Bhagwats.


i'm numbering the bolded parts-

1. women empowerment is already a cornerstone policy for Bharatiya. here is what i said earlier

"'Bharatiya' do not stop their daughters and wives from getting jobs and living freely if they know that they won't be gangraped by juveniles. 'Bharatiya' men also respect women when they are getting what they deserve from their hardwork."

2. even asuras were able to get boons from devatas and then used those boons for spreading asurism. such "leaders" won't be able to get elected/capture power when-

"1. providing proper ways to make a living to youths
2. creating a system that rewards hardwork
3. proper law enforcement"

3. okay

"i do not know of any case where this is recommended in bharat but i am willing to be proven wrong."

4. which is why i asked for king/system to take responsiblity-

"it is the responsibility of king/system to ensure that they end such a system. many examples and stories of great kings exist who took their place in folklore by removing maneating tribes... go figure"

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.

ps- daer supreme court saar, i don't subscribe to harbans ji views on a shri judge ji....and this is not facebook so i did not liked it even.....

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 177
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23686 » 03 Feb 2013 21:36

i shall now pass the baton to RajeshA ji

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 21:52

Continuing from "Indian Interests" Thread

Case 2: You get irrevocable proof that oh man..the AIT is true. That Veda's came from central siberia. Snskrit too came from elsewhere and not Bharat. But with that finding you also have a choice. Bury it and no one will know the Truth. What will you prefer to do..bury the Truth or put the Truth forward as it is..that Sanskrit and the Veda's came from elsewhere..

Answer Choices:

(A) Bury the Truth, no one will know.
(B) Expose the Truth about Veda's and Sanskrit, even though it implies the basics of our culture lie outside India.


harbans wrote:Case 2 for example, i would go for the option of let the Truth come out. Even if it hurts. I think many who are invested in only cultural renewal as their agenda will not want that to happen. So if you want cultural renewal please do so on that thread. I am about India's Interests. You say that it lies in India's cultural renewal. That is why i gave 2 cases. What choices would one make. Case 2 threatens to wipe out for example, that Sanskrit is Indic to Sanskrit has been given by blue eyed blonde people from the steppes. The very core on which our culture stands..does one stand for the truth or bury it deep and keep up with the facade that the culture is ours. Somewhere we have to differentiate and make a stand.The definitions of India's core interests will fall there. Rest is all maya.


harbans ji,

1) Even according to AIT, nobody claims that Sanskrit is not of Indian Subcontinental origins. The claim is only that the language from which Sanskrit developed has an origin from outside the Indian Subcontinent.

2) Even according to AIT, nobody claims that the Vedas, and our other scriptures are not of Indian origin. AIT claims that only the Rigvedic deities may have become part of the lore outside India. Indian mythology is however very vast and not just restricted to Rigvedic deities.

3) Europeans have been able to create a cultural and historical edifice on scanty evidence and they have adorned all of it with a whole lot of exaggerations, emphasis, fiction and publicity. We on the other hand, even with the AIT lies, have much to base our Bharatiya identity on.

4) You also seem to mix up evidence with truth. If some evidence comes out, it stands always in a hall full of many different types of evidences. There is no such thing as the "Truth comes out". Together based on all the evidence one arrives at a theory, and even then it remains the most plausible theory. It is seldom one starts calling it out as the Truth.

5) You may have missed much of the "Out of India - From Theory to Truth" Yagya, so it has perhaps escaped you how hollow AIT really is, otherwise the hypothetical that you pose is somewhat "naive". Even in the name of the thread, I have emphasized the "Truth" aspect.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 03 Feb 2013 22:17

Rajeshji don't make assumptions. I was questioning AIT in the 80's. So i am not new to this debate.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 03 Feb 2013 22:20

So how do you reconcile Ramay ji's Bharatiya vision of giving away 3 girls from the Bharatiya/ Hindu clan and keeping the Mlecha cheftain happy for case 1.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

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

Postby RamaY » 03 Feb 2013 22:22

Don't try to be a smart a$$. I didn't give an answer. I just said that it is a stupid question and the answer depends on many variables.

Stop behaving like a JNUwallah by putting your words and logic in others posts.

I can write what I think. You don't need to interpret them in your dhimmi logic.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:25

harbans ji,

the assumption was based on your case "study". Also your hypothetical that "irrevocable proof" comes out goes against all past experience, for usually any "irrevocable proof" would have to dismantle all previous evidence that speaks in favor of Vedic Indigenism, and it is seldom the case that one gets such a strike using Bowling terminology.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 03 Feb 2013 22:28

In the first case your choice depends upon the girl population in the group, the probability of winning/losing the war, the birth rates, the time required for you to make the probability of winning the war near 100% and so on...

The logical fallacy of Harban's question is on one hand he wants to give the girls equal rights but he is ok with 1000s of men dying for 3 girls.


So explain what that means wrt Case 1. What is my spin. These are your words.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:36

harbans ji,

regarding your Case 1, you are of course aware that for the honor of Sita and in a way for the honor of Draupadi, two Dharma Yudhs have been waged in Bharatiya Itihaas.

But even though the honor of two women energized and catalyzed the forces of Dharma in Bharat to take up arms, the main aim has always been to crush Asuric forces and to consolidate power of Bharat under a Dharmic leadership.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 03 Feb 2013 22:40

Rajesh ji why are you posting that to me? Seems the forum self proclaimed Hindutva sepoy Ramay Ji is unaware of that. Direct that post to him. Not me.I will fight for the woman even a single. Even if i have to ally with monkeys like Rama did. Problem is how many allies within the Hindutva fold itself will you get for such a venture? Ramay and his types look pretty much out on this.
Last edited by harbans on 03 Feb 2013 22:43, edited 1 time in total.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:41

X-Posting from "Indian Interests" Thread

harbans ji,

a) I know you don't have anything against Hindu-ism.

b) I also know that you mean it well when you speak of having a Dharmic code as a guiding principle for India.

c) I also know that you speak of a Dharmic code and not a Hindu code because you wish to include as many communities into the consensus as possible, communities that do not call themselves Hindus, and that is your primary driver.

d) I also know that you think that by calling for and advocating a Hindu code you would end up alienating many communities, who would not jump into the wagon.

Having said that I think your way of going about it is not productive. The Dharmic code needs to be instilled at the level of society and the Government should encourage its inculcation, through education, through media, through building of icons, through example, etc.

Only an enlightened society would send the right people to represent them.

However I see the problem as something else, and that is deracination.

  1. Deracination takes away the feeling of belonging.
  2. Lack of Belonging takes away the sense of responsibility.
  3. Lack of Responsibility leads to what we see today.
  4. Lack of Belonging also takes away the need to follow any Group Code of Conduct.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

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

Postby RamaY » 03 Feb 2013 22:41

harbans wrote:
Please do not fall into the nonsensical trap-questions.

In the first case your choice depends upon the girl population in the group, the probability of winning/losing the war, the birth rates, the time required for you to make the probability of winning the war near 100% and so on...

The logical fallacy of Harban's question is on one hand he wants to give the girls equal rights but he is ok with 1000s of men dying for 3 girls.


So the Bharatiya Sanskriti that you envisage is give 3 young girls to the mlecha's. Nice compromise. I wonder what Rama would think of your statement above. After all 1000's did die for Sita.

If the responses from the Bharatiya's can differ so much seen through the Bharatiya prism, it would be impossible as most would squabble. Ramay through his Bharatiya/ HIndutva prism does not mind giving the mlecha cheftain 3 young girls from the fold to preserve his temple, idol etc. Small price really 3 girls for him. Dharamraj Ji, D Roy and Ravi G would fight for the girls through their own Dharmic/ Bharatiya prisms. And i agree with them not even from any Bharatiya prism..
His interest is to weaken Hindus but not strengthen them.


You have some gall to say that after what you posted Ramay Ji.

Dhramraj ji, i did read your responses.


Rama, not RamaY, wanted to find his wife Sita and get her back. How did he go about it?

1. He went out searching for her following one clue after another (Jatayu, Sugriva and his ministers, Vanaras, and so on).

2. Once he got confirmation that Ravana did it, he wanted to go fight with him to get her.

3. He waited till the rainy season was over.

4. He took the help friends, who came to help him on their own. It is a different matter what motivated them to help him (gratitude, dharma, reverence and so on)

5. He made plans and executed them patiently until he has highly success rate (Building setu)

Would Rama go to war with Ravana even without all these? Of course yes. Could he go to war within one day? Of course not, because it takes whatever time he takes for him to reach Lanka. Would he fight Ravana alone even if no one comes to his help? Of course, because that was his dharma and valor.

Was Rama sure of his victory even if he were to fight entire Ravana's MIC on his own? Yes. But still he took whatever time it took to achieve his goal. Can we blame Rama for letting Sita wait, suffer Ravana's coercion for nearly 1 year? Who are we to judge? Sita didn't. She didn't even want to come with Hanuma even when she had a chance.

A curve ball question here. Why should Rama go get Sita? Does it mean he thought Sita as an object and that too one he owns or his own? How is Rama has a higher responsibility of Sita's well being, safety and independence than Sita herself?; especially when Rama and Sita are equal and have same rights and so on? Would we expect Sita to do the same if it were Rama who got kidnapped? Does it mean, deep down we all see women as objects to own and to be protected all the time?

OK Rama won the war, killed Ravana and freed Sita. Does it make Sita his war prize? Is Sita Rama's property for ever just because he married her 20 years ago? How come the marriage, a ritual that lasts hardly few hours, puts the wife/husband in certain roles/responsibilities for year's to come? What if Sita chose to stay with Vibheeshana/Lakshmana/anyoneelse, do we all accept it as a dharmic deed? Would such an outcome make Rama's duty to go to war with Ravana's entire MiC any less/more dharmic?

This is what happens when we become self-declared prophets :mrgreen:

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:47

harbans wrote:Rajesh ji why are you posting that to me? Seems the forum self proclaimed Hindutva sepoy Ramay Ji is unaware of that. Direct that post to him. Not me.


Because when responding to your hypothetical the issue is not simply to protect 3 girls. It is of course a major imperative, but Indian tradition has used such a case not simply as an incentive to show "values" but also as a catalyst to finish off the Mleccha.

So the Bharatiya thinking goes beyond your "values" vs. "no values" dichotomy. I had assumed it would be clear why the post was addressed to you.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:49

Cross-posting post from Atri from "Indian Interests" Thread

Dharma is inherently secular (if you pardon me), because artha and moksha are segregated. When discussing about dharma and artha, it is folly to quote moksha-shastras. It would be wise to quote various arthashastras and danda-shastras (our modern constitution is incumbent danda-shaastra). For example, it would be great if there could be a quote from Apastambha, shanti-parva, manu smriti, naarada-sanhita, IPC and other codes from our incumbent constitution and thoughts of our strategists, social, military and political leaders and visionaries. For example, thoughts of Deen Dayal Upadhyay are worth studying here.

dharma is eternal and natural for every entity in this entire existence. since we are talking about artha, talking about anything beyond Sanskriti (civilization) is outside the scope of inquiry. Similarly, Talking of any shaastra which deals family issues and then inwards (individual-mind-intellect-ego etc) also fall outside the scope.

artha deals only with community-jaati-samaaja-raajya-raashtra-sanskriti.. there are many egos beyond these on both ends. Dharma segregates them. hence it is inherently secular (separation of religion and state - the crude simplification by westerners).

harbans wrote:1. Satyam (Truth)
2. Dhrti (patience)
3. Ks’ama (forgiveness)
4. Dhama (self-control)
5. Shaoca (cleanliness)
6. Dhii (benevolent intellect)
7. Vidya (knowledge)
8. Karuna (Compassion).
9. Samatha (Equality)


The ten characteristics of a Dharmik are as follows and in this order..

१. धृति - DhRti - Patience
२. क्षमा - Kshamaa - Forgiveness
३. दम - Dama - Self control (i.e. control over mind, intellect and ego - Mana-buddhi-ahamkaara (मन/बुद्धी/अहंकार)
४. अस्तेय - Astéya - Non-stealing - no corruption
५. शौच - Shaucha - Cleanliness (of actions by all egos) - This is what Gandhiji called Saadhana Shuchita (साधन शुचिता) - Cleanlines of means
६. इन्द्रियनिग्रह - Control over 5 organs and desires they are associated with (Shabda-Sparsha-Roopa-Rasa-Gandha शब्द/स्पर्श/रूप/रस/गंध)
७. धी - Dhee - A good memory and reservoir of information
८. विद्या - Vidya - Knowledge to use the above mentioned vast reservoir of memories and information timely and appropriately
९. सत्य - Truth
१०. अक्रोध - Non-involvement/Staying emotionally neutral towards and unaffected by the decisions being taken. To use modern lingo - being professional.

These are ten Lakshanas of Dharma. There is no place for Karunaa (करुणा) and Samaanata (समानता) in this. Dharma and adharma cannot be equal. devas and asuras cannot be equal. It is adharmik to show karuna towards asura and asuratva, however meek he/it may be. There is no place for emotions like Karunaa in affairs of Artha.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:53

Cross-posting a post from johneeG from "Indian Interests" Thread

harbans wrote:
All the Vedic/Hindu social rules are to encourage and facilitate individuals to reach that upanishad levels of consciousness. But until they reach that levels, the interactions are judged based on varna-Asrama dharma rules.


So since your HIndu/ HIndutva is stuck at Varna, Ashrama levels and not at God Realization, then why blame Buddhists, Jains or who so ever if they practice penance and meditation and come to whatever realization? They are certainly then way above you both in Dharmic sense and God realization. Since you're stuck at the bottom of the heap how can you even comment on them?


The difference between Hinduism and other creeds('dharmic' or otherwise) is that they have a single 'solution' that they try to foist upon all of humanity. All the non-creeds come up with a one size fits all philosophy. A single book, a single prophet(or saviour or guru or avatar) will guide all of the humanity.

In Hinduism, on the other hand, there is something called: adhikara(competence/qualification). Based on the seeker's(saadhaka's) adhikara(competence/qualification), there are different solutions. One size does not fit all.

Most people are in basic level only. For such people, the path of karma has been prescribed. Karma means rituals, rites, duties as prescribed in shastras(vedas and associated scriptures).

There is also another path of bhakti(devotion). Those who cannot perform karma for some reason can take up bhakti marga. Even those who perform karma can use bhakti to make their karma more impactful.

Finally, there is a gyana marga. This marga is called Raja Marga. It is a straight-forward to realization. Realization of self/Atma == realization of God/Goddess/Universal/Brahman. But, it is the most difficult of methods. It is reserved for only the most advanced saadhakas(seekers).

In the following post, I try to explain why gyana marga is not suitable to all saadhakas.

johneeG wrote:
Oh, I left out a juicy bit. My brother's question - "if this 'Brahman' is so important to Hinduism, how come there are no temples for this 'Brahman,' even after so many thousand years? See how stupid Hindus are?" What would your answer be to my brother, Murugan? Do you think your view of SD could convince him any better than I could?



I don't know whether the answer would convince him but regardless:

Aham brahmasmi ----------------- I am Brahman.
Tat tvam asi --------------------- It(Brahman) is you.
Ayam atma brahma --------------- This self is Brahman i.e. self(Atma) and Brahman are same.
Prajnanam brahman -------------- Brahman is supreme Consciousness-Knowledge.
Ekam evadvitiyam brahma --------- Brahman is one, without a second
Sarvam khalvidam brahma --------- All of this is brahman
Brahma satyam jagan mithya ------- Brahman is eternal(real); the world is temporary(illusory)
satyam jnanam anantam brahma ---- Brahman is eternal(true), knowledge(consciousness) and infinite.

Brahman is Sat(Ever existent), Chit(Consciousness) and Ananda(Bliss).

Brahman is formless and qualityless.

yato vAcho nivartante aprApya manasA saha
Neither words nor mind can reach it i.e. Brahman is beyond description and imagination.

Such a Brahman cannot be loved or hated, praised or condemned, worshiped or disregarded. It is beyond all of this. Yet, all exists because of it. Just as without Sunlight one cannot see anything. But Sun is unaffected by everything.

As you can see, no one is capable of worshipping such a Brahman(in temple or outside). The only way is to realise Brahman as self(Atma).

There is method for this realisation: Since Brahman cannot be directly described, or imagined. A negative method is employed in analysis. It involves, a careful analysis while disqualifying(rejecting) everything which is not Brahman. This is the famous 'Neti Neti' approach. Neti means not this. Here, everything that is not Brahman is rejected. Brahman cannot be seen, touched, tasted, heard, or smelled. So, everything that can be seen, touched, tasted, heard or smelled is rejected(Neti). So on the analysis continues until everything that is not Brahman is rejected. So, what is left unrejected must be Brahman.
Eg: If you boil the salt-water, all the water will evaporate and you will be left with salt.


As you can see, this is a very difficult approach. This approach is called Jnana Marga(Path of Knowledge). It is unfeasible for ordinary folk. And spirituality would become a domain of few select elites.

So, to facilitate everyone, Brahman(the formless, infinite, eternal being) acquired forms, performed some Leelas, exhibited qualities. Essentially, Brahman which is unaccessible to people has now become accessible. The people can meditate on these beautiful divine forms, imagine these leelas, understand these qualities. People can worship these forms and chant the names. It is these various forms that have temples.

There are various such forms: Sri Rama, Sri Krishna, Shiva, Vishnu, Parvati, Lalitha, Surya, Ganapati, Subrahmanya...etc. All of these forms are Brahman.
Several ponds and rivers may exist. But all of them are water.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa gave an example(I don't know if I remember correctly):
Water does not have a shape. Similarly, Brahman is formless. But to aid the people, Brahman obtained forms. Just as water condenses into an ice crystal(which has a form). This is Karuna(Compassion) of the God(s).

The people can worship these forms and be benefited. This is Bhakti(Devotion).

Then, once devotee has acquired enough maturity, he realises that the forms, he worshiped are nothing but Brahman. This is similar to ice melting to liquid and then to steam. This is Jnana(Realisation-Knowledge).

----
The forms acquired by Brahman are not similar to our forms. Brahman has acquired forms by the power of Maya which is in its control. While Jeevas(Ordinary mortals) are in the grip of Maya, Brahman controls Maya.

The Leelas are not similar to our actions. Our actions are Karmas, while actions of God/Goddess are Leelas because they are not bound by their actions unlike us.

In short, God(s)/Goddess(es) are absolutely independent and free. Unlike us. By worshiping their forms, chanting their names, meditating on them, we can benefit.

At somepoint, we will acquire to the maturity to implement the 'Neti, Neti' method to reject everything but Brahman. Then, we will 'know' Brahman. Such a person is called 'Brahmavit'.

Brahmavit Brahma eva bhavati.
One who knows Brahman becomes Brahman.
(Corollary: Only Brahman can know Brahman)


Link

But, there is no Moksha(liberation from cycle of birth and death) without Gyana.

What is the impediment in acquiring the Gyana?
One's vasanas(impressions).

A karma(action) has two reactions:
a) a result of the action
b) a mental impression on the doer of the action.

If a karma(action) is repeatedly performed, than the doer of that karma(action) becomes habituated to the karma(action). Roughly, this mental habit/obsession is called vasana. Strictly speaking, vasana is a mental impression in the doer of any passive or active karma(action).

These mental impressions(vasanas) propel people to act in a certain manner. They manifest as desire, anger, ...etc. Mental impressions(vasanas) can be both 'good' and 'bad', just like habits can be 'good' and 'bad'.

The ultimate step is to remove all vasanas(mental impressions), so that the mind is free from all bondage of past actions(and associated mental impressions).

How to stop vasanas(mental impressions)?
All mental impressions(vasanas) manifest as karma(actions). If you are habituated to smoking, then that habit will force you to smoke. How to stop it? By not indulging in smoking anymore. Similarly, to stop mental impressions, one will have to stop indulging in the associated karmas(actions).

But, all vasanas(mental impressions) cannot be stopped in one go. Attempting such a thing can be counter-productive, generally. A heavy chain-smoker cannot quit smoking suddenly.

What to do then?
To quit smoking in a phased manner. Slowly, in a calibrated manner, cut down on the number of smokes. Similarly, slowly and in a calibrated manner, one will have to reduce the vasanas(mental impressions) by control of sensory organs(Indriya nigraha).

For this purpose, Ashramas have been designated. Brahmacharya(bachelorhood), Grihastha(marriage), vanaprastha(retirement), sanyasa(renounciation) are the four ashrama(stages) which gradually 'de-addict' a person from his vasanas(mental impressions).

Once the person is free of mental impressions(vasanas), and has cultivated vairagya(detachment for the pleasures of life and after-life), then the person is ready for gyana marga(path of knowledge).

This is the structure of Hinduism. The essential goal is to take everyone to Moksha(liberation). But the method is not always same because different people have different needs, desires and temperaments.

Hinduism is comprehensive set that contains all the valid methods. All the other 'religions' in the world have directly/indirectly taken one or some of these Hindu methods and created a new creed.

johneeG wrote:
VikramS wrote:If you have not understood why, you have made much use of your time on BR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_a ... ifferences Do you believe Khushwant Singh or Mcleod? KS is almost 100 years old and has been alive for almost a one third of the existence of the Khalsa 1699.

Sikhism is the latest refinement of Dharma. In most progressive systems, newer iterations tend to be a more appropriate and relevant version than the old. This cycle will hopefully continue.


I don't subscribe to the simplistic view that the latest is the best version. There are several factors that can give rise to the newer versions and make them popular. Just because a newer version has come into existence, does not mean it is better than the previous version. If a system has already attained the maximum peak, then the newer iteration can only be inferior. As far as I am concerned, Hinduism(along with the Vedantic part) is the zenith of philosophy, spirituality, Dharma and religion. All other versions(dharmic or otherwise) are inferior to Hinduism.

Anyway, even the claim that Sikhism is the latest 'refinement' of Dharma is debatable. There are several more 'Gurus' who keep manifesting with their messages and 'refinements'. The latest 'Guru', that I can think of, is Satya Sai Baba. Maybe there is a more newer 'refinement' than him. So, according to your theory, Satya Sai's version must be superior to all the previous iterations.

I think this whole business of the latest is best is silly. A better method is to investigate the pro and cons of each ideology/philosophy regardless of their antiquity.

The wiki link that you provided enumerates the differences between Sikhism and Hinduism. I could not see how sikhism was any better than Hinduism from that link. That link also has some mis-info.

For example:
the link claims that "Sikhs do not believe that going on pilgrimages or bathing at holy rivers will give you mukti (salvation) but only meditation on the naam (name) of Waheguru will." It needs to be clearly mentioned that going to pilgrimages or bathing at holy rivers is not the only way to Mukti/Moksha(Liberation) according to Hinduism. Chanting the names of Gods/Goddesses, worshipping them, doing good karma like Dana(charity), Tapa(Austerity), Yoga, ...etc also lead to eventual liberation. As Bhagavad Gita clearly explains, there are 3 ways:
a) Karma Marga: Ritualistic Approach,
b) Bhakti Marga: Devotional Approach,
c) Gyana Marga: Philosophical Approach.

And then, there is Yoga which enables one to increase the physical and mental abilities which will enable a seeker to better practice one of the above 3 methods.

Anyway, the Advaita Vedanta firmly proclaims that Moksha can be attained only through Gyana.

Similarly, each of the points mentioned can be countered.

------

If one accepts that that Sikhism has its roots in Hinduism, then Sikhism just happens to be one more. It is neither the first, nor is it likely to be the last. Many branches have sprung forth from Hinduism. These branches have emphasized a certain aspect and have rejected some other concepts. For example, Arya Samaj.

Each such branch believes that they have 'refined' Hinduism. But it is simple their mistake. They have taken the concepts that are agreeable to them and rejected the others. Just because the other concepts did not find favour with them, does not mean that they are inferior or irrelevant. Hinduism contains all the various concepts that all the multitude of humanity need. As there are diverse human beings with diverse needs, Hinduism contains all the diverse concepts to help them. Each person or group is free to pick the concept that they think suits them. But it does not mean that other concepts are discarded. The whole is better than the parts. The branches will wither away, if they are not connected to the tree.



---
Harbans,
it seems clear to me that you have a problem with Hinduism, and not just the term 'Hinduism'. The whole debate on the origin of the term 'Hinduism' was merely a strawman. You real intention is to deny the very existence of Hinduism(or Santana Dharma). You are saying that there are only various schools/communities/castes/philosophies, but no Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma. You do not even acknowledge that these schools/communities/castes/philosophies themselves proclaim that they are part of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma.

When it was pointed out to you that Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma was a clear definition, you retorted that this definition will not be acceptable to other 'Dharmic strands'. I replied that whether it is acceptable to others('dharmic' or otherwise) is of no concern. I also said that all indic religions can work with each other to defend themselves from the onslaught of non-indic religions because of the common interests.

You ignored all that and continue to question the existence of 'Hinduism' using all sorts of disingenuous logic. At the same time you are propping up 'Dharma'. I have repeatedly asked you which 'Dharma' you are referring to. You did not give a straight-forward answer.

So, instead of this cloak and dagger stuff, why not cut to the chase?! I think that when you talk of 'Dharma', you refer to Sikhism. Am I right?

You are essentially saying that there is no Hinduism, only 'dharmic strands' and they must reject the label of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma and form a new union under the label of 'Dharma'. Of course, the existence of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma is a hindrance to this new project, so Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma would have to be denied/taken out, right?!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:56

Cross-posting a post from Arjun from "Indian Interests" Thread

johneeG wrote:Harbans,
it seems clear to me that you have a problem with Hinduism, and not just the term 'Hinduism'. The whole debate on the origin of the term 'Hinduism' was merely a strawman. You real intention is to deny the very existence of Hinduism(or Santana Dharma). You are saying that there are only various schools/communities/castes/philosophies, but no Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma. You do not even acknowledge that these schools/communities/castes/philosophies themselves proclaim that they are part of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma.

When it was pointed out to you that Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma was a clear definition, you retorted that this definition will not be acceptable to other 'Dharmic strands'. I replied that whether it is acceptable to others('dharmic' or otherwise) is of no concern. I also said that all indic religions can work with each other to defend themselves from the onslaught of non-indic religions because of the common interests.

You ignored all that and continue to question the existence of 'Hinduism' using all sorts of disingenuous logic. At the same time you are propping up 'Dharma'. I have repeatedly asked you which 'Dharma' you are referring to. You did not give a straight-forward answer.

So, instead of this cloak and dagger stuff, why not cut to the chase?! I think that when you talk of 'Dharma', you refer to Sikhism. Am I right?

You are essentially saying that there is no Hinduism, only 'dharmic strands' and they must reject the label of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma and form a new union under the label of 'Dharma'. Of course, the existence of Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma is a hindrance to this new project, so Hinduism/Sanatana Dharma would have to be denied/taken out, right?!

JohneeG, I am sure Harbans will be replying to you - but I think you are very far from the mark in your analysis of Harbans ji's agenda and reference to Sikhism etc.

My sense is that he is focused on defining the difference between Dharmics and Abrahamics in terms of fundamental values that are important to either side. And that, he believes, is a good way of clearly enunciating how the 'other' is different and completely unlike Dharmics in basic values. Once you define the difference in terms of values rather than rituals or customs - the ability to convey the difference to others and propagate your point of view is considerably enhanced. That is his basic objective.

In this, I am in 100% agreement with Harbans. I agree with the entire thought process of the above paragraph. What India needs is to define something which is the equivalent of 'American values'. These values would be defined in completely a-religious terms, ie they would not refer to any religion at all (just like American values don't directly reference Christian values). However, the values should be such that they are clearly derivable from liberal Hindu / Dharmic values - exactly the same as secularism as a value is derived from a Christian context and history and is clearly redundant when applied to non-dogmatic religions such as Hinduism.

Only through such an exercise can any civilization have hope of spreading and propagating core values across the globe.

However, I think the final values that he comes up with (Truth, Equality and Compassion) don't quite achieve what seems to be the intended aim. The values need to be far more explicit in their 'othering'. Sapeksha Dharma, ie respect or tolerance offered to another Panth only when they make it mutual, OR Respect for Indigenous Culture (which is another value which can be Universal) I think are much better choices...Harbans ji's thought process is exactly what is required today and his bringing the topic of core values up is highly admirable - but the final selection of values need more consideration.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 03 Feb 2013 22:58

Cross-posting a post from RajeshA from "Indian Interests" Thread

Arjun wrote:The values need to be far more explicit in their 'othering'. Sapeksha Dharma, ie respect or tolerance offered to another Panth only when they make it mutual, OR Respect for Indigenous Culture (which is another value which can be Universal) I think are much better choices

Respect for Native Culture is the "value" we are looking for.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_20317 » 04 Feb 2013 00:38

harbans wrote:So how do you reconcile Ramay ji's Bharatiya vision of giving away 3 girls from the Bharatiya/ Hindu clan and keeping the Mlecha cheftain happy for case 1.


harbans ji in a thread driven towards the future discussing something that will bring out the history may be germane. Even if related only to a rhetorical fishing expedition like you are on. Also my promise to not interfere with your debate on this issue cannot realistically be upheld now. The context changed. So here I am. I am merely being faithful to my own framework.

So here goes.

As I see it you want ‘definitions’ so you can put up a ‘governing structure’ to be understood/used in the ‘common parlance’, such that nobody can use lacunae eg. citing a ‘context’ to get away from the ‘Law’. Since such a thing is in understood as a Constitution. And I will treat you as a constitutionalist. Since citing of context is basically Dharm. I will treat the other position, my own, as Dharm.

See a bigger and bitter version of what you are now fishing for has already happened in the Indian subcontinent. We do not call it Hindu holocaust :) .

Now let me just take you through the full 360 degrees of this rhetoric.

If I am half the Dharmic that the contitutionalist will allow me to be, under his constitution, I will be forced to sue everybody who is a Muslim/Christian, considering Crime has not been subjected to the law of limitations and an abatement to crime or hiding of evidence is just as much a crime. Oh wait! this should be done by the constitution because prosecution in a criminal case is a state vs. criminal case. Let us go forth and multiply this with what the Constitutionalist can normally be expected to come up with. Ah! the constitution was not there so nothing can be done now for a historical wrong.

Fine! Well not quite.

This is also happening even now. What do you think happened in Assam recently. Would you like to quote the numbers for Love Jihad being committed in Kerala as quoted by a minister on the floor of their assembly. What do you think is happening to these girls. And what do you think would be happening to the children of these women.

OK constitution also has to take care of Public policy and world peace. hein ji. Is that so?

Fine if that is the case while dealing with one set of people, surely the constitution will not feel otherwise, if a certain other set of people decide to present it with exactly the same set of 'dilemma'.

Going further still I will have to go and seek a restraint order against all the Muslims/Christians alongwith their consitutionalist friends simply because the same constitution tells me to stand up for things like fraternity. The bunch which allowed this to happen and were a direct beneficiaries of this system can hardly be expected to mend ways and I have got to fight for my fraternity, hein ji. Would you like to define/redefine Fraternity in a way that I can avoid having to do that.

Well what has the constitution done for the people suffering under the constitutionally guaranteed terrorism under the guise of public policy. How can such a constitution expect a healthy man like myself to rely on 'The Word'.

Harbans ji, look deeper. It is the constitution with its contextless ethics, that has to come up to the standards of Dharm. Life was moving even without this constitution. It had its ups and it had its downs but the people despite all, hung on to Dharm while constitution is being run hollow by its own internal contradictions.

Now lets just explore what will happen if I am half the Dharmic that a constitutionalist will accuse a Dharmic of. Well that is simple, I will have to kill everybody around me. And that is why Dharm cannot be left to the hands of constitution walas.

Dharm is a proposition/purushaarth not a guarantee. Dharm never carried any legitimate or illegitimate Danda behind it. The danda itself was a political executory part. Whenver the Danda part was carried out faithfully the results have been there. Whenever the danda part was subverted by political considerations the people suffered without even realizing what hit them. Quite unlike the constitution you are trying to push which fails regardless. The executory part is Karm which is distinct from Dharm. This being a position unlike that of the constitution which claims to be swayambhu. You have been mentioning Ram Singh as Hindu, well you are quite nearby in terms of your hindu-hood. That did not stop you from burying one case that did come up to shake the nation's conscience in a cess pit of legalese and social engineering. Dharm was the same for both of you. Karm put up the reality for all to see.

Now you tell me what would happen in your little pink ring of roses if we load your grand enquiry with one more input. What if there is no evidence of what you apprehend, even when we know it did happen. What would the constitution/values say in such a case? Do we just fill up our pocket full with phoses and go to sleep under the assurance of a swayambhu constitution?


To repeat letting the 3 girls go is one of the Dharmic ways of handling the situation among many others most of which are not even there in your grand enquiry. I wonder if that was so, on purpose! Nicely put up 'experiment' to the 'subjects'.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 01:04

Frankly Ravi g..couldn't make out what you are trying to say.

AFAIK, i am not on a fishing expedition. My statement is clear. That ultimately India must define itself based on value prepositions. The best way of doing that IMO is making them cornerstones of Constitutional polity. To guide, reinforce and further and evolve on those values.

If your or anyone's Dharma, Hindutva, Bharatiya, XYZ pan involves giving 3 women to a cheftain in a compromise exchange to preserve a temple/ idol/ Bharatiyapan...then a big finger up that school of thought is not too hard to say. Spin it anyway. But that is my take. Maybe the value systems of those that propose such don't mind giving their own sisters and daughters. But i don't think any right thinking man of any disposition should have trouble answering that question.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 01:53

Just to recap for the benefit of the readers, the contention (by harbans ji) is that we should embed a Dharmic code, a value system within the Indian Constitution which should guide the nation, especially the political leadership.

The corollary is that these "values" can be sourced from Dharmic traditions but then need to be expressed without any further context, for these values have to be considered as having a unique universally self-evident semantic, and they need not be qualified with any further cultural context, so as to retain their claim on universality.

The contention is that by associating the Constitution with any particular civilizational history and culture, it would restrict the acceptability of the Constitution only to the community whose civilizational history and culture is referenced as context for the values, whereas all other communities would reject the dominion of the Constitution.

There are several weaknesses is such a proposition and these are being addressed.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 02:04

harbans wrote:If your or anyone's Dharma, Hindutva, Bharatiya, XYZ pan involves giving 3 women to a cheftain in a compromise exchange to preserve a temple/ idol/ Bharatiyapan...then a big finger up that school of thought is not too hard to say. Spin it anyway. But that is my take. Maybe the value systems of those that propose such don't mind giving their own sisters and daughters. But i don't think any right thinking man of any disposition should have trouble answering that question.


harbans ji,

I think it does not do you any credit to misrepresent the position and opinion of others. One does not really win arguments like that.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20410
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 04 Feb 2013 02:10

harbans wrote:
In the first case your choice depends upon the girl population in the group, the probability of winning/losing the war, the birth rates, the time required for you to make the probability of winning the war near 100% and so on...The logical fallacy of Harban's question is on one hand he wants to give the girls equal rights but he is ok with 1000s of men dying for 3 girls.

So explain what that means wrt Case 1. What is my spin. These are your words.


First , if the Mleccas have made such demand then it is the fault of Dhamric that it have lost its Kshatriya element the extent that Mleeccas are daring to do so. The answer is to accumulate Strength in all the aspects of life that it will be the Dharmics making demand and rules of engagement. Battle is already lost in question asked by Harbans Ji.
Dharmic code evolves with time , it cant be made static by fixing it to certain instructions.
Last edited by Prem on 04 Feb 2013 02:13, edited 1 time in total.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 02:12

Just to recap for the benefit of the readers, the contention (by harbans ji) is that we should embed a Dharmic code, a value system within the Indian Constitution which should guide the nation, especially the political leadership.

The corollary is that these "values" can be sourced from Dharmic traditions but then need to be expressed without any further context, for these values have to be considered as having a unique universally self-evident semantic, and they need not be qualified with any further cultural context


Thanks for putting that Rajesh ji. However personally i am not too rigid on the context front, hesitant yes, to start with that because of agenda groups pushing in their contexts and creating confusion. The contentions are not mine. Yet they are:

1. We don't need values. They come automatically by making India a Hindu country.
2. India's interest is Hindu. Nothing else needed.

From the arguments, many long winded i gathered anything goes. You can spin anything and everything. It is also OK to give away your women, if it means saving a temple and idol in it. It is idiotic and Murakhpan to lose a 1000 men to defend ones women. I also notice anything ancient written in Sanskrit becomes authoritative material and is brandished by the self proclaimed Hindutvadi's..one way or the other.

The opposition to the code is coming from the Hindutva folk. That just want a ritualistically Hindu state. IF that is the case, then they need to define themselves. Not me for them.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 02:17

I think it does not do you any credit to misrepresent the position and opinion of others.


What is wrong with the representation? I am not in argument. If someone wants to quote Bharatiya Sanskar/ culture/ Hindutva and all that and talks about giving women to appease the mlecha..i or any sane person cannot have a healthy respect for Hindutva or Bharatiya pan for that matter.

In the first case your choice depends upon the girl population in the group, the probability of winning/losing the war, the birth rates,


IF that is what you are defending..i stand by. No arguments needed at all. :D 8)

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14220
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby svinayak » 04 Feb 2013 02:22

Are we supposed to discuss Indian value based on western bsed values.
Do the west really have value system. Do the west have morality

Western system does not ave any relavance to India and Indian society at all.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 02:27

The answer is to accumulate Strength in all the aspects of life that it will be the Dharmics making demand and rules of engagement. Battle is already lost in question asked by Harbans Ji.


The battle Prem ji was lost because we did not take a stand earlier. The stands taken were similar to what Ramay gives again in this scenario. Calculate number of women, oh we have 100 of them..we supply 3 no problem. Everyone happy. We have our temple too. Idol intact. The battle would have never come to this if we had flung ourselves with strength when our first value systems were violated. But we never stood by value systems. We stood by compromise. OK you follow your thing, i do mine. We did that with Islam. We did that with the approaching mlecha. Only when they were too powerful and dominating we realized we have to slip back. We have lost half the country. 50 pc of the population is Islamic if one includes Pak and BD in the subcontinent. Good armies don't mind 10 soldier dying to retrieve 1 body from the enemy. Here we have guardians of Hindutva calling me names for fighting for 3 women being demanded..BS!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 02:32

harbans ji,

it is in fact pathetic that you put some in my opinion very naive hypotheticals of black and white, setting up "values vs Hindu" contention and then you use the irritation of others to claim that you are right, that you are the one sitting on the high moral horse and all others who have expressed their irritation, perhaps less than elegantly, are marked by you as raving Hindus who have no sense of values.

I had hoped the dialogue about this could rise above these childish rants and self-claims of "oh I won an argument"! You had a wonderful opportunity here to put forth logical arguments, and you blow the opportunity to do a lousy victory-round. Furthermore instead of dealing with the reservations and counter-arguments of others, you simply ignore them.

I don't know what you are taking with you, whether it is some self-congratulations, but I would say it is more like a wasted opportunity. Sorry!

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 02:44

Rajesh Ji this exercise is pointless. If one is agenda driven, everything is through the prism of that agenda. I did not name call. You want to drive a Bharatiya agenda do so. If you cannot decide on values, i cannot for you. Values like Truth are indeed universal whether they are applied to science, self or governance issues or as templates. There is no Hindu truth or Western truth. Truth is there are many westerners more truthful than lying cheating indics. Truth is not some Indic preserve. Big deal.

Just to recap for the benefit of the readers, the contention (by harbans ji) is that we should embed a Dharmic code, a value system within the Indian Constitution which should guide the nation, especially the political leadership.

The corollary is that these "values" can be sourced from Dharmic traditions but then need to be expressed without any further context, for these values have to be considered as having a unique universally self-evident semantic, and they need not be qualified with any further cultural context


You wrote the above. Tell me why that should enrage Hindutvadi's to name calling and insinuation. What do you want more from me to explain regarding the above without clarifying from others what their problem is to value systems being a nodal guide. How can truth be considered regional when it is universal. Most have no clue what they mean by Bharatiya or HIndutva by that matter beyond the GoI indulging in some ritual and acting like the big HIndutva dada to other minorities. Tell me what your vision is. I told you mine. Ask the HIndutva vision. Don;t give me rubbish that Truth is regional in context. Rubbish and no one really is going to buy that nonsense ever.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 02:55

harbans wrote:Don;t give me rubbish that Truth is regional in context. Rubbish and no one really is going to buy that nonsense ever.


I had written

RajeshA wrote:The discussion is whether your list of "value labels" are immune to misinterpretation and misrepresentation depending on the cultural background of the reader.


You never responded to that, beside many other counter-arguments you chose to ignore.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 03:06

The discussion is whether your list of "value labels" are immune to misinterpretation and misrepresentation depending on the cultural background of the reader.


Right, The agenda driven already gave there answer. Value systems cannot be nodal. They must be through the prism of the agenda. This the Ism becomes dominant over the Value.

Hence the Case 1 hypothetical question was put up. And you say i have not answered that? Obviously value systems are prone to be misused/ not used if one puts an Ism before them.

In that context i mentioned Secularism and Socialism. The GoI is being completely faithful to these. No context to what Socialism and Secularism means has been given in the constitution too. And these 2 are right at the preamble. What you are witnessing in India is not rape of the Constitution of India but it's end product. NREGA and doles and votebank politics emerge right from the preamble nodes. Do you remember that from just a day or two ago?

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5111
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

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

Postby devesh » 04 Feb 2013 03:28

regarding Harbans ji's Case 1:

Shivaji faced a similar situation.

the Mughals went around smashing temples with the hope that Shivaji would come out and face them at their place of choosing.

it didn't happen. Shivaji understood the tactic, let the temples be broken down, and waited till he could set the field on his own terms.

trading women/girls for "worship rights" at a temple is not an optimal strategy.

that very choice should show us that the Mlecchas are to be militarily decimated.

sacrificing a few temples is worth it, if it means that the "honor" and more importantly "Psychological purity" is kept intact. when you start giving away women/girls, you put a price on rape, and basically say that as long as this "payment" is given to us, we will trade with anything. once that mentality sets in, things get worse. everything becomes a trading commodity.

If I was a "Hindu Chieftain", my priority would be to maintain the "psychological resistance" at all costs.

physical symbols can be rebuilt. but psychological defeat/subservience is hard, if not impossible, to overcome.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 03:46

harbans wrote:
RajeshA wrote:The discussion is whether your list of "value labels" are immune to misinterpretation and misrepresentation depending on the cultural background of the reader.


Right, The agenda driven already gave there answer. Value systems cannot be nodal. They must be through the prism of the agenda. This the Ism becomes dominant over the Value.

Hence the Case 1 hypothetical question was put up. And you say i have not answered that? Obviously value systems are prone to be misused/ not used if one puts an Ism before them.


I had written

RajeshA wrote:I know you don't like "-Isms", but "-Ism" means basically a belief in a way to organize state/society/group according to some principles. It is the content of "-Isms" which make them desirable or not.


You are putting up a straw-man villain - the "-Ism". One could say that you believe in "Value-Nodism", or "Valueism". All the "-Ism" really refers to is a belief in superiority of certain principles. There is nothing wrong with using "-Ism". Once there is a belief in the superiority of certain principles, whatever they may be, of course there would be an "Agenda". You are again setting up "Agenda" as a villain, whereas all it is a drive to implement one's "-Ism".

So you are introducing two villains, "-Ism" and "Agenda", both straw-men, and you are making the claim that because of these two every "value" becomes rotten and abused/misused/unused.

It is like saying the damn cockroaches caused the financial crash of 2008.

harbans wrote:In that context i mentioned Secularism and Socialism. The GoI is being completely faithful to these. No context to what Socialism and Secularism means has been given in the constitution too. And these 2 are right at the preamble. What you are witnessing in India is not rape of the Constitution of India but it's end product. NREGA and doles and votebank politics emerge right from the preamble nodes. Do you remember that from just a day or two ago?


The fact that lack of context may be at fault does not occur to you. If one only has undefined terminology and grafted "values" from alien contexts, then don't you think that it would cause abuse?

How can you say, that the Constitution is not being abused, when the right use has not been defined precisely and thus one doesn't have any reference framework against which we could measure the adherence to the provisions like Socialism and Secularism?

Even if "Socialism" and "Secularism" were properly defined, one would have noted that these concepts emerged in the West and they were grafted onto India without properly considering whether they would have a relevance to India or not? Indians just think that "Socialism" means "looking after the poor" and "Secularism" means "all religions are to be equally respected". But were these concepts really used in this way?

Isn't the example you offered a good example in favor of giving a precise definition of anything that goes into the Constitution along with the historical-cultural context in which those principles were developed?

You just argued against your own context-free "value labels".

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 04 Feb 2013 03:46

that very choice should show us that the Mlecchas are to be militarily decimated.

sacrificing a few temples is worth it, if it means that the "honor" and more importantly "Psychological purity" is kept intact. when you start giving away women/girls, you put a price on rape, and basically say that as long as this "payment" is given to us, we will trade with anything. once that mentality sets in, things get worse. everything becomes a trading commodity.


Absolutely! Not that these are easy choices to make in reality. There will be a lot of lobbying the local ruler to compromise. Whereas the choice should be no compromise on giving women away. We have had this culture of compromising values for some time now for some temporal gain. The effects are in banning KHs film, the Rushdie affair, the Taslima affair..we just give in. And it is considered Chanakyan in some quarters. Shivaji is admired much like Sikh guru's because they did not give in. Ram fought and many 1000' sacrificed for the honor of a single woman.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 03:50

harbans wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Just to recap for the benefit of the readers, the contention (by harbans ji) is that we should embed a Dharmic code, a value system within the Indian Constitution which should guide the nation, especially the political leadership.

The corollary is that these "values" can be sourced from Dharmic traditions but then need to be expressed without any further context, for these values have to be considered as having a unique universally self-evident semantic, and they need not be qualified with any further cultural context


You wrote the above. Tell me why that should enrage Hindutvadi's to name calling and insinuation. What do you want more from me to explain regarding the above without clarifying from others what their problem is to value systems being a nodal guide.

"Enrage" is a strong word.

1) I would presume the irritation of others, is because they consider your agenda not to be too dissimilar to that of "tiger" as how Rajiv Malhotra uses the term in his "tiger and deer" analogy.

Rajiv Malhotra has often spoken of how the West has over the years been taking knowledge systems out of Dharmic traditions and relabeling them first as self-evident and universalist and not particularly associated with the Dharmic Traditions (2nd stage of digestion), and then they integrate those knowledge systems into their own Western Universalism, trying to sever any links to their origin in Dharmic traditions through suppression of origin (3rd stage of digestion).

First for this reason, the context of any "values" is important, where those values have originated from. One needs to give due recognition to the traditions where those "values" have emerged from.

Your insistence that they are universal would make people think you are doing 2nd stage digestion.

2) Also you wish to use context-free "value labels" without expressing the historical semantic evolution of those terms through the associated civilizational context and tradition.

This means those "value labels" are prone to misunderstanding and misrepresentation.

3) Others have become irritated because your own rhetoric is quite anti-Hindu, where you degrade them as people not concerned with values, but just interested in some idol and temple. The whole demeanor of your posts has been heavily pseudo-secular, and as such it is hard for any of them to believe that you have their interests at heart.

4) You have to go through various loops in order to make your case. That your suggestions are conceptually sound. That your suggestions would find any takers, i.e. you know how to sell them. That your suggestions have a political-philosophical imperative. That you could suggest a way, how these could be politically implemented. At the moment hardly anybody is convinced that these are conceptually sound, let alone the rest.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Feb 2013 03:58

harbans wrote:
devesh wrote:that very choice should show us that the Mlecchas are to be militarily decimated.

sacrificing a few temples is worth it, if it means that the "honor" and more importantly "Psychological purity" is kept intact. when you start giving away women/girls, you put a price on rape, and basically say that as long as this "payment" is given to us, we will trade with anything. once that mentality sets in, things get worse. everything becomes a trading commodity.


Absolutely! Not that these are easy choices to make in reality. There will be a lot of lobbying the local ruler to compromise. Whereas the choice should be no compromise on giving women away. We have had this culture of compromising values for some time now for some temporal gain. The effects are in banning KHs film, the Rushdie affair, the Taslima affair..we just give in. And it is considered Chanakyan in some quarters. Shivaji is admired much like Sikh guru's because they did not give in. Ram fought and many 1000' sacrificed for the honor of a single woman.


Here again I believe you misunderstand. devesh ji's position, as far as I have understood it, is that one doesn't give in to Mlecchas demands or their blackmails, because it destroys a very important commodity of a community - psychological purity and honor. One could call it moral integrity. It has a very perceptible effect on the community as it becomes prone to further blackmail and the community's members lose their trust in their leadership and in themselves.

So what we are talking about here is the health of a community.

His stance differs from yours, as I see it, that he is advocating making a stand not for the sake of some universalist values but for the health of the community, which differs from your stand.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anoop.G and 29 guests