Rudradev wrote:What economic-military and demographic weight did the early Christians have against the Roman Empire? Yet, by this one expedient of targeting influential people and seizing authority over prevailing self-narrative, they conquered the Roman Empire during the reign of one monarch, Constantine. Then they consolidated their grasp by recasting the entire way in which the Roman Empire saw itself, the world, its past history, and by projection its future destiny. JohneeG ji has written of the disastrous results for all of Europe in his new thread.
Again, wrong way of reading history.
Xtians were highly persecuted by the Roman empire. After many centuries, it was made a partner along with two other religions - European Sun worship and Persian religion of Mithraism.
Much later, due to Constantine getting a sun stroke, seeing a cross in his delirium, and then winning the next battle - he became convinced of the power of the 'cross'.
Then Xtian religion was made official religion of Roman empire, and then using it as pretext - Rome attacked everything not Xtian. This is how Xtian religion became the sole religion of Europe - when a military power decided to use Xtian religion for political purposes.
Otherwise the CHurch fathers' were nothing more than Sunday lunch for lions at the circus.
Only after this was the Church able to indulge in inquisitions, witch hunts, and other such happy activities.
Remember even in this sequence, it was the Roman military power that subsumed Xtian Church to its own purpose, and not the other way round.
The stories of X-ists persecution before 325 seem to be myths created much later. Infact, it seems that the first organized persecution of X-ists was arranged by none other than Constantine himself. It was constantine who systematically persecuted the Arrians(a X-ist sect which was popular among the Germanic tribes and Africa). Infact, it seems that the Arrian sect had much more followers than the Nicean creed at 325 CE. So, Arrians were seen as a threat to the dominance of Nicean creed by Constantine.
abhischekcc wrote:A_Gupta ji,
The British won in India because of genocide - something that we were not prepared for either mentally or morally. The socially manipulative policies (Macaulayism, racism, creation of INC, etc) was done AFTER the military victory in 1857-58.
Check the sequence of events. Yes there is a feedback loop involved in all cases.
But when you check the relationship between hard power and soft power - it is easy conclude that hard power is the active partner - hard power shapes soft power - the reverse is almost never true.
Regarding the idea that India/China will never attain the living standards of the west - that remains to be seen. If our military power is allowed to grow to defend our legitimate interests in India and abroad - there is no reason why we cannot do it.
Of course, the financial crisis in the west is not fully resolved.
Though experiment :
1. Which is the largest pool of energy in the world - ME
2. Which is the largest military power closest to ME - India
Think about it - over a period of 30-40 years.
a) Having a largest pool of energy is not enough, it must be cheap and affordable.
b) So, the question is what is the most cheapest and largest source of energy?
Sun, Air, Water, ...etc. If and when these alternate sources of energy are viable, most of the world can live quite comfortable life(I would say better than the life of present bhestern society).
What is the present bhestern society's standard of living:
a) One starts working from a very young age(about 22-24) till atleast the age of 54.
b) Both genders work.
c) Marriages break and children live with only one of the parents.
e) Many people are under debts and are working incessantly to clear those debts.
f) old people can't depend on their children to take care of them, so they have to arrange for the life after retirement.
I think its possible for most of the world to live in a much better society where all these above problems are considerably reduced by people.
Bhest seems better because there is massive poverty in rest of the world. The massive poverty in rest of the world is actually helping the bhest stay marginally richer. Its a circle.
The only thing which the bhest had going for them was: employment. Of course, they also have good propaganda tools: media and movies.
In one of the texts of Santhana Dharma, they say that the true Lakshmi is not currency but sun, air, water, ...etc, people, ...etc. When I first heard that I thought it was just some morality lesson. But, the more I think of it, it seems that this is the real truth. The true wealth is not currency. Truly wealth is natural resources(including human resource). If a person does not have water to drink, its completely useless for him even if he has all the currency in the world under his control.
Middle-east is a desert. It needs extensive amounts of hardwork to sustain a settled living in a desert. To sustain such a living, massive amounts of money has to be poured. Its an unsustainable system. The only proper mode of living for them is nomadic. Nomadic lifestyle is possible for two types of people: traders or pirates.
Therefore we always will be on the losing side. On the other hand, Adi Sankara won - in shaping India for centuries to come - without any substantial financial backing or armies behind him.
It seems that according to the biography of Adhi Shankara, even He needed the support of the King Sudhanwan to suppress a sect of violent Paashupathas.
The Acharya continued his travels winning in argument over various scholars including Jains, Madhyamikas, Lingayats and followers of Bhatta Bhaskara. Some of them took to violent physical means, to put down which King Sudhanva with his army fought them.
Even Kumarilla Bhatta had engaged in a debate(and later miracle contest) to prove the superiority of Santhana Dharma to a King so as to get the support of the King. Soft Power cannot be sustained without Hard Power. However, even Hard Power cannot be sustained without Soft Power.
A_Gupta wrote:On the other hand, Adi Sankara won - in shaping India for centuries to come - without any substantial financial backing or armies behind him.
Bad example. Adi Shankara's formidable efforts to propound a version of Brahma gyan, which may have borne fruit in the spiritual domain, did squat to stem the onslaught of the Islamic armies or the ability to unify the disparate monarchies under a common umbrella or to meet the intellectual and organization rigor required to acquire Arthic power that would have been able to defeat the onslaught of the British.
The question is not if intellectual knowledge is an essential component to acquire Artha - it clearly is and attested so, within our teachings Vidya underpins Viveka. Artha Mulam Dharmyam, says Kautilya, i.e.: the root of Dharma is Artha. Adi Shakara was not able to establish Dharma (in the temporal domain) for his teachings had largely nothing to do with Artha, kama or Dharma in the land mass he propagated his teachings in. Dayananda Sarasvati of the Arya Samaj has diagnosed it right. There is an over emphasis of Moksha and Brahma gyan amongst our Acharya and Sants and this has come at the expense of the other three purusharthas.
There are many examples of the central/west asian region to act as major power bases for many centuries and the Ottoman and Persian empires come to mind. How will this current lack of geopolitical power in the region, pan out in the future is anyone's guess. If you ask me, the lack of a "core" state in the region is the reason for the mess they are in and the key lesson for us to keep them that way.
Link to post
Why should Sri Sankara oppose Udayanacarya when he himself argues for the existence of Ishvara? I can understand his "punga" with Mimamsakas like Kumarila Bhatta, but with Udayanacarya? why?
Think of it as a philosophical and theological restoration after the Buddhist hiatus(which introduced various corruptions). This is a slow process with various stages. At each stage, some aspects of previous stage are also taken down. For example, when you build a house, you set up many supporting structures. Once you build the house, you take out all these supporting structures.
Another example, when you perform a surgery to cure a problem, you also take care that the surgery itself does not lead to infection. For this purpose, some medications are given to cure the effects of surgery.
The same thing happened to restore Hindhuism philosophically and theologically. Shri Shankara was the final stage of this restoration. He took care to rectify all the previous stages of the restoration along with the original malaise.
But, what is noteworthy is that this kind of restoration did not take place with respect to other aspects of society. For example, social structure(including caste), war-sciences(which includes physics, bio and chem along with Maths)...etc.
And before that restoration could take place, jihadi invasion started. So, till now, there has not been a social restoration of India to pre-Buddhist stage. So, essentially, Indian is socially organized according to Buddhist times. Then, the jihadis added their own twist. This was not taken out either after the jihadis lost power. On the top of this, EJs and colonialists added their own layer. This was not corrected after independence. After independence, commies and 'secularists' added another layer of social narrative.
That explains why there is so much confusion and contrast in desh. Because social engineering of previous regimes/ideologies was never corrected from the time of Buddhists and continue to co-exist creating disharmony.
what is wrong if a view is based on 'one holy book' or 'prophet' or 'guru'?
the story of Bruhaspathi and Thara seems to be some kind of an astronomical allegory. It seems that one point of time in human history, the marriages were open(i.e. men and women could still have sexual relations with others even after marriage), but this method seems to be a divergent one that was followed at one point in time. This practice was later abandoned and people returned to the original practice of staying away from extra-marital affairs.
At another point in time, large number of males were killed off in a war(Parashu-Raama) episode and women had fertilization from the left over men.
Yes, its clearly spelled out that the child belongs to the person who marries the mother of the child. However, when such things should be understood in larger context. It is the entire system. The child belongs to the mother for first 16 years. (One can see this in Bheeshma's case where his mother took away along with her).
Generally, for most of the human history(including Hindhuism) the women did not even venture out of their homes leave alone having affairs. Atleast from the time of Shri Raama, women having any affair with another man are shunned. Swayambhuva Manu also says the same thing. So, somewhere in between Manu's time and Raama's time, this divergent practice was followed for sometime. But, it soon given up. So, the idea that people should not have extra-marital affairs is common. For a brief period, this rule was over-turned for some reason. But, soon people returned to the proper mode. There is nothing biblical or victorian about such ideas.
The basis of Bhestern Universalism is the idea of linear progression of human beings.
why we try to fit Puranic stories in linear time framework?. Aren't Puranic characters eternal and "Annadi", existing in human psyche (Chitta)?.
+1, Sushupti ji.
I think frequently people mix the western linear time concept and Indian circular time concept. And create new interpretations. The best thing is to keep the 2 things separate.
We shouldn't try to fit Vedas and Puranas into the linear time frame(or linear human development) model of West. It just doesn't fit. The same applies vice versa also.
The modern science(influenced by christian west) has a model. According to it, the human civilization started as barbaric(nude, living under the trees and hand to mouth). Then, from there, it slowly developed into a civilization. The epitome of this civilization is represented by the western countries. The human civilization will continue to develop in this manner, led by the west, until by some incident the human civilization becomes extinct. This is a linear time frame model and linear development model.
The ancient India had a diametrically opposite model. According to it, the first human beings were exceptionally civilized and perfect. As the time passed, the civilization eroded due to the spiritual degradation. This degradation will continue until it reaches a low point, when the whole system will be reset. It is a cyclical model. According this model, ancient India represents the epitome of the civilization.
As we can see, both the models just do not agree with each other. So, there is no point in trying to fit the narrative of one model into another. Because it gives rise to weird interpretations.
The choice is simply to accept the model or reject it.
The idea is that the human beings started out from a primitive origin and are getting better and better. So, by this idea, the people of today are better than the people of yesterday. The kingdoms and empires of today are better than the kingdoms and empires of yesterday.
There is an interesting evolution to this idea. It seems that this idea is actually based on Malsi.
Mo claimed that he is better than all the previous prophets. He is a more advanced version and that his views become superior to the views and rules of all the previous prophets. Malsi claimed superiority on this basis.
X-ists were told that they were inferior because their prophet or godson had come too early. Mo was superior to their prophet and godson because Mo was more latest. So, the idea that the latest is best was first created by the Malsi.
This idea seems to be copied by the Bhest when it was grappling Malsi. Many Malsic ideas seem to have been copied and incorporated by the Bhest during this time.
These ideas were used by a section of society to counter the power of the church which had become too powerful. During crusades, it seems that some sections had become rich and powerful due to loot. This loot was used to finance(loans) the royalty to prop them up against the church. Renaissance may also have been funded by this group. Many ideas gained from Malsi were used during renaissance. Nudity was used in Renaissance. Malsi itself had learnt many of its ideas from Cheen, Bhaarath and Greece.
The science in bhest was developed when it spread from Malsi. Malsi learnt its science from Cheen, Bhaarath and Greece. So, Bhestern science adopted the ideas from Malsi into itself. This force was against X-ism. So, Bhestern science adopted the idea that the 'latest is best'.
In 1800s, it seems there was a curious phenomenon. The church was defeated. So, X-ism was co-opted into this system. Now, the X-ism and science would act as two opposing forces, but their elite supporters are same.
It was and is accepted that the human beings are the best. So, it was postulated that human beings are better because they are latest(in evolution). This is simply a corollary of the idea that 'latest is best'. If latest is best, then the best must be latest. Since, human beings are better than other animals, they must be the latest in evolution.
Another twist was that the Oirope managed to create a colonial model by inspiration from jihadhi model. Once, they managed to set up their own empires, they had more interest in claiming that their empires were better than the previous empires. Infact, they claimed that since they are the latest, this represents the heights of human existence. They claimed that they achieved something that no one has ever achieved.
Then, this same narrative is continued by Amirkhan and commies. Both claim that they are the best because they are the latest. Since, the latest is greatest, they are the best and greatest. All this is based on Malsi's ideas that the latest is best.
The idea of Santhana Dharma is that the oldest is best. Till Malsi, everyone believed that oldest is best. Everyone was claiming themselves to be the oldest. When you couldn't claim oldest, then you had to find some other way of establishing your credentials.
Now, generally one believes that arts, science and religion develops without caring for politics. But this seems to be a completely baseless idea. Infact, it seems that politics is at the very heart of the development of science, arts and religion. Politics selectively supports or suppresses the ideas and narratives based on whether it is convenient to them or inconvenient to them.
The the science that developed during colonial times was convenient to the powers of colonial times. It incorporated and supported the narratives that the colonials wanted to push.
Similarly, today's science incorporates and supports the narratives that the powerful of today's world want to push. The funding for research, popularizing a research, rewards and awards, ...etc are all controlled by the rich and powerful. The scientists are dependent on them for all these facilities. Basically, science is not rational or independent entity with its own mind. Science like religion or arts is controlled by the rich and powerful directly or indirectly.
Bhestern Universalim uses the science as its corner stone to push for its pet agendas.
X-ism and Malsi are presented as other competing ideologies. However, these two seem to be part of the same set-up.
Questioning the Bhestern science of today can be as jolting to most people as question X-ism would have been during the times of renaissance for the people of Oirope.