Tackling Islamic Extremism in India - 4

[shiv]

This forum runs, and has been run in a particular way and it has had its greatest support from non-trolling committed users.

Unfortunately, Rahul Mehta who definitely has a message to give everyone is unable to pass his message without appearing like a troll and disrupting. Shri. Mehta must learn to pass his message on his own steam, or he must learn to cooperate and flow with the stream and he will be given a voice. But he is a man in a hurry and wants to be heard over anyone else.

This has been pointed out to him many times. He has misused the privilege he gets for posting on here as a lever to disrupt once too often. This thread has been the limit and I have finally acceded to a request he made long ago that he should be banned. He has been banned.

[ShauryaT]

I seriously believe Sanku and you are arguing in parallel and challenging the "reinvention" of Dharma, but you do not offer any alternate definition of Islamic Extremism that I can understand, other than each sub-group of Hindu's perhaps have a different perception of what Islamic Extremism means to them.

Is there not just one simple definition of Islamic extremism? Islamic fundamentals, when put to practice, lead to Islamic extremism.

Or another way to look at it is, there is no such thing as Islamic extremism, for all the alleged extremists are doing is practicing Islamic fundamentals.

So, the extremist label is something that is used only by a person, not knowledgable about Islamic fundamentals.

[shiv]

I seriously believe Sanku and you are arguing in parallel and challenging the "reinvention" of Dharma, but you do not offer any alternate definition of Islamic Extremism that I can understand, other than each sub-group of Hindu's perhaps have a different perception of what Islamic Extremism means to them.

Is there not just one simple definition of Islamic extremism? Islamic fundamentals, when put to practice, lead to Islamic extremism.

Or another way to look at it is, there is no such thing as Islamic extremism, for all the alleged extremists are doing is practicing Islamic fundamentals.

So, the extremist label is something that is used only by a person, not knowledgable about Islamic fundamentals.

How about this one. Islam itself is extremism, looked at from the viewpoint of Dharma. A lot of what it calls for is far from what is dharma, although there may be some dharmic aspects.

We have dissected Islamism. Can one dissect individual islamic dictates and demands from a dharmic viewpoint?

[Rye]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

[ShauryaT]

How about this one. Islam itself is extremism, looked at from the viewpoint of Dharma. A lot of what it calls for is far from what is dharma, although there may be some dharmic aspects.

We have dissected Islamism. Can one dissect individual islamic dictates and demands from a dharmic viewpoint?

Let the dissection of the world, from a Dharmic view point begin.

[Pulikeshi]

Hinduism

Indian historian Irfan Habib makes this point when he quotes an early Persian source that Hindus are those who have been debating with each other within a common framework for centuries. If they recognize another as somebody whom they can either support or oppose intelligibly, then both are Hindus. Despite the fact that Jains reject many Hindu beliefs, Jains and Hindus can still debate and thus Jains are Hindus. But such discourse does not take place between Hindus and Muslims because they do not share any basic terms.

The question is why not?

The time has come for the scope of the debate to be expanded - Hindus ought to take the Dharmic debate to the book religions.

Such as debate would demand we expand and define a new framework acceptable for discourse.
The Zoroastrian, Manichean, Mitraism, Greek and Roman thought and traditions (long since dead in Europe) could find a common framework with Christianity.
Why cannot living Dharma find a common framework with Islam?

[svinayak]

Hinduism

Indian historian Irfan Habib makes this point when he quotes an early Persian source that Hindus are those who have been debating with each other within a common framework for centuries. If they recognize another as somebody whom they can either support or oppose intelligibly, then both are Hindus. Despite the fact that Jains reject many Hindu beliefs, Jains and Hindus can still debate and thus Jains are Hindus. But such discourse does not take place between Hindus and Muslims because they do not share any basic terms.

The question is why not?

The time has come for the scope of the debate to be expanded - Hindus ought to take the Dharmic debate to the book religions.

Such as debate would demand we expand and define a new framework acceptable for discourse.
The Zoroastrian, Manichean, Mitraism, Greek and Roman thought and traditions (long since dead in Europe) could find a common framework with Christianity.
Why cannot living Dharma find a common framework with Islam?

Irfan is talking about historical times.
Modern globalized world is a different world with common points of debate

[Rye]

From the discussion, it appears that Hindus themselves are not very sure of how to precisely define a "dharma framework"...the knowledge is all there, but needs to get out of people's heads into writing. Obviously it is not a simple matter such as "the five pillars of Islam" (or it would have been spelt out on this thread by now), and are more likely to be in the form of meta-rules (rules on making rules) than a specific set of rules.

[ShauryaT]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

Before we look at individual “actionsâ€

[Pulikeshi]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

Its a great question!
If a rule were given, then it won't be Dharma anymore. Our dhimmi mind still craves the security of "given" rules.
For example you could say to me it is Dharmic to pray only once a day facing east and I write so in a book to codify it.
But it would not have anything to do with Dharma per se!

Dharma - is what is agreed by the collective as commonly accepted and more importantly acceptable practice to stabilize society
We need to arrive at this point by debate not by decree.

All that said - my humble definition of Adharma:
Any collective that prevents the freedom to pursue (gnana) knowledge, artha (wealth), kama (desires) or moksha (salvation) by an individual.

Notice that by this very debate we change our society and the definition of Dharma itself - this is why Dharma is dynamic.

[ShauryaT]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

Its a great question!
If a rule were given, then it won't be Dharma anymore. Our dhimmi mind still craves the security of "given" rules.
For example you could say to me it is Dharmic to pray only once a day facing east and I write so in a book to codify it.
But it would not have anything to do with Dharma per se!

Dharma - is what is agreed by the collective as commonly accepted and more importantly acceptable practice.
We need to arrive at this point by debate not by decree.

All that said - my humble definition:
Anything that prevents the freedom to pursue (gnana) knowledge, artha (wealth), kama (desires) or moksha (salvation) by an individual would be adharmic as it would destabilize society.

Pullikeshi: Why does that preclude from the design of rules or laws. Laws can change if Dharma changes....the application of law can be contextual. The determination of appropriateness can be decided by a judge or jury.

It is one thing to say, Dharma cannot be codified forever, but codified for situations, in light of history, theology and practice, it can be.

I think you said it earlier that Dharma does exist in different planes apart from individual. Family, community, National and Universal.

[Rye]

ShauryaT wrote:

Why does that preclude from the design of rules or laws. Laws can change if Dharma changes....the application of law can be contextual. The determination of appropriateness can be decided by a judge or jury.

I think we already have something known as the constitution that is supposed to allow Indians to do exactly that.

If changes to the constitution were done to further cause of society, then that seems to be equivalent to practising good dharma.

Don't tell me that the answer to all of these threads is "go out and vote".

[ShauryaT]

ShauryaT wrote:

Why does that preclude from the design of rules or laws. Laws can change if Dharma changes....the application of law can be contextual. The determination of appropriateness can be decided by a judge or jury.

I think we already have something known as the constitution that is supposed to allow Indians to do exactly that.

If changes to the constitution were done to further cause of society, then that seems to be equivalent to practising good dharma.

Don't tell me that the answer to all of these threads is "go out and vote".

Constitution and laws are simply tools and structures better suited to the modern world. The idea is to make these tools Dharmic, for it is no longer the Panchayat or the regional feudal boss or the monarch, wielding power. The structure has changed and hece new tools are needed.

I wish, I had some super radical idea to change the dynamics but it is really as simple as that. Go and vote - for the leader(s), who understand Dharmic principles and has the guts to do something about them - at a very minimum.

[ShauryaT]

All that said - my humble definition of Adharma:
Any collective that prevents the freedom to pursue (gnana) knowledge, artha (wealth), kama (desires) or moksha (salvation) by an individual.

Does it not require a further categorization into Satvic, Rajasvic and Tamasvic to determine, if these actions in pursuit of the above goals are Dharmic or not?

[Pulikeshi]

All that said - my humble definition of Adharma:
Any collective that prevents the freedom to pursue (gnana) knowledge, artha (wealth), kama (desires) or moksha (salvation) by an individual.

Does it not require a further categorization into Satvic, Rajasvic and Tamasvic to determine, if these actions in pursuit of the above goals are Dharmic or not?

Those are gunas - and they may confuse the issue here. If you think it helps we can try that..
Let us try to keep the terminology minimal if possible.

How about this one. Islam itself is extremism, looked at from the viewpoint of Dharma. A lot of what it calls for is far from what is dharma, although there may be some dharmic aspects.

Shiv has suggested an extreme view, perhaps to start the debate, that Islam itself is extermism from a Dharmic viewpoint.
The other extreme viewpoint would be that Islam is harmonious and allows the freedom to pursue Gnana, Artha, Kama and Moksha.

In order to call ourselves Dharmic, we have to allow in our society the freedom for Muslims to choose their path to Moksha. (Do we?)
However, we must also point out to them that their book tell us that we are sub-human unbelievers and thus are condemned to hell in the afterlife at best, and right now at worst.

The suggestion I have here is we have spent enough time understanding Islam, several of us are very familiar with Dharma and Hinduism as well.

What if anything is the common points we can agree upon?
If we can say - here are the tenets of Islam, can we then say of these we can see tenets 2, 5 and 6 enable Dharma?
Or can we reach no such agreement?

[ShauryaT]

What if anything is the common points we can agree upon? If we can say - here are the tenets of Islam, can we then say of these we can see tenets 2, 5 and 6 enable Dharma?
Or can we reach no such agreement?

I fear no such agreement. EVERYTHING in Islam is subject to the frameworks setup in Islam, which claims totality. Meaning, you cannot take out verse x, y and z and say, here it is, where it claims brotherhood of man or no force in religion, etc.

If someone can show that you can separate the Quran into parts and choose to ignore other parts, then this whole debate of Islamism would be moot.

Even if you can, there are central tenets in every system, which cannot be ignored. There is a reason why, Christians have been able to do such a thing - with some limitations. This was their way to separate parts of their lives from their religion and called it secularism.

[shiv]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

and

From the discussion, it appears that Hindus themselves are not very sure of how to precisely define a "dharma framework"...the knowledge is all there, but needs to get out of people's heads into writing. Obviously it is not a simple matter such as "the five pillars of Islam" (or it would have been spelt out on this thread by now), and are more likely to be in the form of meta-rules (rules on making rules) than a specific set of rules.

Rye a valid question and a perceptive comment. I think you have hit the precise spot that indicates why there is widespread discomfort and angst but nobody is able to come up with any good definition of Islamic extremism For the same reason I suspect that a thread on "Evanjihadism" will call attention to all the takleef that is being caused without being able to pinpoint why Hindu takleef occurs.

Unfortunately the following seems to have occurred. Because nobody is able to bark off in point form the reasons why Hindus feel alienated, the conclusion is that they have no case.

There is a medical analogy. A patient comes with a pain somewhere - say a pain in the butt. The doctor does an examination and a battery of tests and the results are all normal. The doc then tells the patient "You are normal". The patient then asks "Then why do I have this pain in the butt?"

The truth is that the patient is not "normal". The patient has a pain in the butt, but the doctor's examination and tests have not managed to pinpoint the cause of the pain. That does not make the patient normal. Inability to detect the truth does not indicate absence of the truth.

In fact the Hindu case against or the angst against Islam or conversions seems to be related to the fact that they are seen as killers of family and killers of society. I think Pulikeshi made the "preservation of society" link earlier

The Hindu concept of Dharma runs at a very deep level and it is quite clear. But it needs to be set forth in clear terms that Hindus will relate to instantly. The reason why nobody (on here) is able to set it in clear terms is because most of this awareness of Dharma is inculcated when Hindus are very small children even before they are able to reason why a particular view is Dharmic. But the reasoning for all that does exist at a very high level in Hindu literature which nobody needs to have access to in order to have a basic sense of what corresponds to one's Dharma and what does not. (More on that below)

We may need to start looking at a basic worldview that Hindus share - a comfortable, informed and enlightened worldview that is raped by crude intruding religions with zero insight into the universe and life.

Hindu dharma includes at the outset, a fundamental grounding in basic precepts about the sanctity of the earth and all nature and the basic acceptance that all life and man (also a life-form) are one with that nature. Wanton destruction of that framework is like ripping the clothes of a teenager and raping her - for that is the sort of insult Hindus feel on being asked to accept crass and superficial ideologies that give a sheen to complete ignorance and total darkness about what existence is all about. Hindu dharma includes a comfortable grip on what existence and reality is that makes anything less than that look like a silly fairy tale to be heard and discarded. Technically the Dharma that this "Hindu" awareness relates to can exist among Indian Christians and Muslims as well.

In many ways Hindu Dharma may not be unique. It arises from concepts of oneness with nature and great explanations of existence itself have been arrived at by many civilizations. But most have been destroyed by the crass superficial ignorance of the One God Coercive Religions (OGCR)

Hinduism is unique in two ways - but the two reasons may be interconnected.

1) Hinduism codified all that understanding of the nature of existence and the world into (a) rational explanations (Vedic literature) and (b) stories and folklore. This twin approach allowed both hifalutin scholars as well as aam-junta to relate to and understand the view of life and existence

2) Hinduism has survived - unlike all the little tribal religions and animist faiths of the world who may have reached an understanding of nature and existence just like Hindus did, but were killed by the OGCR.

[Murugan]

The Hindu concept of Dharma runs at a very deep level and it is quite clear. But it needs to be set forth in clear terms that Hindus will relate to instantly. The reason why nobody (on here) is able to set it in clear terms is because most of this awareness of Dharma is inculcated when Hindus are very small children even before they are able to reason why a particular view is Dharmic. But the reasoning for all that does exist at a very high level in Hindu literature which nobody needs to have access to in order to have a basic sense of what corresponds to one's Dharma and what does not.

it is suggested that bhagvad gita and commentary on it by some informed one will dispel the darkness.

it starts like this:

dharma kshetre kuru kshetre samaveta ...

and ends with

... dhruva nitir matir mama||

mama dharma = my religion

and everyone knows that Bhagvad gita is in form of FAQ

Arjun'd doubts
Sri Krishna's replies

dhritrashtra's fear
and sanjay's vision

this will give ample idea of hindu dharma or bharat dharma or whatever

[Murugan]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

sir, this is eveybody's question and that was the question of arjun too.

i recommend gita and commentary on it : books or discourses. this will greatly help in defining dharma and adharma.

[shiv]

Sorry for the basic/rudimentary question, but can any of the gurus explain in simple terms: What are the fundamental rules for evaluating whether an action is dharmic or not? Should this be defined in terms of some set of litmus tests for an action that puts it in the "dharmic" or "adharmic" category?

sir, this is eveybody's question and that was the question of arjun too.

i recommend gita and commentary on it : books or discourses. this will greatly help in defining dharma and adharma.

Sorry. This isn't good and this is the failing of Hindus who are themselves unable to say what's good in the Gita.

Man goes to doctor and say "Doc - I have this terrible pain and high fever"

Doc says "Look at the bookshelf behind me. It has all my textbooks. I recommend that you study them for the answer"

Knowing that there is an answer, and knowing that there is a source for the answer but not being able to give the answer is what is leading to the takleef, and eventual demise of Hindus. There is a disconnect between mind and source.

This, in fact is the idiotization of the "educated" Hindu mind. But I do know that a lot of people on the ground are clearly able to rationalize and explain the Gita in terms that a questioner can relate to rather than asking a questioner to go and study the book.

"Its all in the Quran" "Read the Quran"

What's the difference?

[Prem]

One major Hindu takleef is the wanton destruction of HINDUSTHAN , its population, cviliztional ethos, social structure by ISLAM. Tne cruelty heaped on us in the name of Islam has left deep scar . The paradox of watching the same doctrinal and physical forces demanding different previlages within India while keeping affinity with its civilizational tormentors has left Dharmic people bewildered about the 1000 years of mortal sacrifices . Unfortunately Dharmic folks are in fix becuase Dharam dont allow them to differentiate in the name of God with explicit declartion like "not one of us or dont belong here " The issue is of wish and reality, desire and dispair. No doubt it has cause great confusion in average person . There is urgent need to see through the mess and set desired goals for Dharmic forces and leadership if any . The awareness about urgency has just started and will take natural course to gather momentum for coming to set goals and certain conclusions to strengthen civilizational soul of India .

[shiv]

One major Hindu takleef is the wanton destruction of HINDUSTHAN , its population, cviliztional ethos, social structure by ISLAM. Tne cruelty heaped on us in the name of Islam has left deep scar . The paradox of watching the same doctrinal and physical forces demanding different previlages within India while keeping affinity with its civilizational tormentors has left Dharmic people bewildered about the 1000 years of mortal sacrifices . Unfortunately Dharmic folks are in fix becuase Dharam dont allow them to differentiate in the name of God with explicit declartion like "not one of us or dont belong here " The issue is of wish and reality, desire and dispair. No doubt it has cause great confusion in average person . There is urgent need to see through the mess and set desired goals for Dharmic forces and leadership if any . The awareness about urgency has just started and will take natural course to gather momentum for comeing to set goals and certain conclusions to strengthen civilizational soul of India .

Prem that is an excellent post that summarizes the angst that adds to communal friction in India.

It is not merely a sense of what was destroyed or lost, but the sensation of an ongoing tendency to persist with absence of Dharmic principles.

In fact that brings me to the other point when one speaks of dharma Also important is the discomfort caused by lack of dharma. Reversion to dharma requires removal of adharma,

In real terms adharma that is currently causing communal friction includes (among other factors):

1) Persistent use of denial and lies in speaking of Hindu history in order to soothe political sensitivities, This is an extremely painful fountain of adharma.

2) The presentation of the dogma of Islam as though that is somehow equal to the active debate that represents Hindu culture. Ishwar Allah tere naam.

3) The overuse of adharmic principles like greed, lies and expediency in the political arena to protect what is already seen as adharmic.

4) Apology and reticence in stating the obvious - i.e that the existing and well known dharmic principles of coexistence, of give and take and of respect for the other's viewpont are being trashed and trampled upon in the name of political correctness.

I will expand on real life examples of this in due course.

[Pulikeshi]

Shiv,

I suggest a subtle change in your point one: “Hinduism codified all that understanding….â€

[shiv]

*) Requiring history to be presented in an adharmic way – therefore real facts are denied to future generations to learn from the success as well as mistakes made in the past.

*) Requiring special personal laws that are adharmic – there ought to be only one law that governs all people.

*) Prevention of healthy discourse. Disallowing ideas to enter the market and raising the issue of takleef at the drop of a hat, in a free society, that is based on dharmic principles.
Asking that books, movies, media, etc. ban or censor ideas that may challenge Islamic dogma.

*) Prevention of liberal education and access to health care for Muslims. In either fear or ignorance, there seems to be a reluctance to adopt science, technology and liberal education across the board for Muslims – girls & boys. Preventing universal health programs such as vaccination for polio, etc. due to fear and suspision.

*) Allegiance to a supra-national Islamic Ummah prior to allegiance to the nation-state. This is a grave sin in many a Hindu’s mind. It is adharmic to even consider any other allegiance before the one the citizen has with the state.

These are some I can rattle off the top of my head. More on this later…

Great points Pulikeshi.

So it does see that it is possible to list out the problems more clearly in terms of dharma and adharma! That deserves a Talisker celebration.

Not sure I fully understand 3 & 4 yet,

3) The overuse of adharmic principles like greed, lies and expediency in the political arena to protect what is already seen as adharmic.

Vote bank politics


4) Apology and reticence in stating the obvious - i.e that the existing and well known dharmic principles of coexistence, of give and take and of respect for the other's viewpont are being trashed and trampled upon in the name of political correctness.

Needless censure or censorship so as to not cause takleef to "our brothers". The behavior of the "Dhimmi Liberal" or "HISI"

[shiv]

*) Allegiance to a supra-national Islamic Ummah prior to allegiance to the nation-state. This is a grave sin in many a Hindu’s mind. It is adharmic to even consider any other allegiance before the one the citizen has with the state.

The land that you live on, and the land that you live off is sacred. As are the trees, plants and animals that inhabit that land. Anything less than this is unacceptable.

Of course dharma allows the other person to have his view, but dharma certainly does not stop anyone from saying that the attitude is wrong. Not saying so openly is adharmic even in the name of misplaced secularism.

[ShauryaT]

Sorry. This isn't good and this is the failing of Hindus who are themselves unable to say what's good in the Gita.

How do you expect the idiot Hindus to learn, when a dhimmified and macuaylized mind is propogating "secular" education, instead of Hindu education in the sacred land of the Hindus?

Hence, the battle to change the nature of the tools that govern us. Our constitution - article 30.

PS: The personal handicap, I feel in not being able to read or write sanskrit and not know many things on the theory and practices of Hinduism is painful as I learn more and more, in my private studies at a much older age. That is no replacement for wide education of Hindu subjects, culture, theory and practices at a much younger age as part of a regular curriculum.

[Prem]

*) Allegiance to a supra-national Islamic Ummah prior to allegiance to the nation-state. This is a grave sin in many a Hindu’s mind. It is adharmic to even consider any other allegiance before the one the citizen has with the state.

The land that you live on, and the land that you live off is sacred. As are the trees, plants and animals that inhabit that land. Anything less than this is unacceptable.

Of course dharma allows the other person to have his view, but dharma certainly does not stop anyone from saying that the attitude is wrong. Not saying so openly is adharmic even in the name of misplaced secularism.

One can have allgiance to civilizational values over Nation State as long as these are not in conflict with each other . The Ummah has the bloody history regarding Indics , having loyalty to this entity equals to having death wish for majority of Indian people. Not confronting this is Adharma becuase we will leave/postpone this mortal threat to our future generations. Who in the right mind will leave his grand children at the mercy of jihadi Sword ? In Ramayna , Lord Ram has declared that removing this kind of threat to family, kith and kins is Dharma as
Bali was killed for the exact same reason.

[JwalaMukhi]

3) The overuse of adharmic principles like greed, lies and expediency in the political arena to protect what is already seen as adharmic.

Vote bank politics

4) Apology and reticence in stating the obvious - i.e that the existing and well known dharmic principles of coexistence, of give and take and of respect for the other's viewpont are being trashed and trampled upon in the name of political correctness.

Needless censure or censorship so as to not cause takleef to "our brothers". The behavior of the "Dhimmi Liberal" or "HISI"

Good posts everybody and nice discussion. The act of controlling the uncontrollable nature by crude means is a major takleef for dharmic types. Instead of finding a harmonious way to negotiate with nature, wilful wanton destruction of things that were unpalatable to islamic sensitivites, were conducted in the hope of controlling/restricting the natural flow. This is compulsive obsession, to force anything that one can lay hands or eyes on to mould them according to islamic paradigm, failing of which destroying them so they cease to exist. The path of dur-marga has been used over and over again. This leads to all sorts of anacharas and durachars.

Other takleef for dharmic types, will be plain loss of people and continuing destruction of young minds to become close minded with a know-all knowledge capsule in the form of 'Kitabh' . This is serious abuse on the impressionable minds, to cultivate restriction on thought process, where freedom is denied. Subjecting population to bankrupt ideologies, to produce paranoid individuals who consistenly are on war path with their ambience, should not be acceptable even in a democratic setup, let alone in dharmic setup. While right of individuals to be foolish should be upheld, but when the foolishness spills onto the society with grave ramifications, then such rights needs to re-examined carefully.

[shiv]

Sorry. This isn't good and this is the failing of Hindus who are themselves unable to say what's good in the Gita.

How do you expect the idiot Hindus to learn, when a dhimmified and macuaylized mind is propogating "secular" education, instead of Hindu education in the sacred land of the Hindus?

Hence, the battle to change the nature of the tools that govern us. Our constitution - article 30.

PS: The personal handicap, I feel in not being able to read or write sanskrit and not know many things on the theory and practices of Hinduism is painful as I learn more and more, in my private studies at a much older age. That is no replacement for wide education of Hindu subjects, culture, theory and practices at a much younger age as part of a regular curriculum.

With respect Shaurya your post is indicative of the rigidity and blindness that education in India and pressure from other civilizations has brought about in Hindu thought.

I am referring to the manner in which books are invoked as repositories of truth, forgetting that the truth exits outside of the books too and the books are only examples of and descriptors of the truth.

Sorry about that complex sentence. I will describe what I mean in simpler terms.

Dharma is not some complex mumbo jumbo that we need to read about in our Holy Gita-Bible or Gita-Quran in unreadable Arabskrit.

For most part (but by no means completely), dharma is simple rules of living that you are taught from day 1 as a child

1) Do not tell lies
2) Do not be cruel
3) Do not take life needlessly
4) Respect your parents, teachers and elders
5) Do you duty to your family and society
6) Show respect for other's feelings and sensitivities
7) Do not do anything in excess
8) Do not gamble
9) Do not be greedy
10) Do not cheat
11) Do not insult
12) Do not expect or demand things that are not yours or due to you. That which is due to you is all that you will get. What you get is what is due to you.
13) Understand that the universe exists within you and you are part of the universe.
14) The universe, along with the earth and every part of it, living and non living is sacred
15) Protect dharma - which is all of the above and more.

The "protect dharma" part is important because it allows you to judge whether dharma is being eroded or broken by someone else. If it is you must set it right.

(Note: Arjuna's confusion in the Gita is just one subset of this. He does not want to kill his brothers. But a dharmic decision has to be made in which it becomes alright to kill his brothers in order to protect dharma. Of course Hindu thought does not rule out your being punished in some way for even being right in protecting Dharma. That in fact is indicated in the Yudisthira's "white lie" agreeing that Ashwatthama is dead, when in fact only an elephant by that name has been killed. His chariot which floats above ground on account of his impeccable protection of dharma then touches the ground)

For largest part dharma is completely consistent with what is commonly seen as morality and good behavior. it is also consistent with a national constitution. If one really needs and explanation of why India always appeared to take the high moral ground (a fact that we have cursed and cursed and cursed as stupidity as opposed to other countries) it is because Indians operate by a simple dharmic mindset.

[Prem]

The current clash / problem of Adharma with Dharma has no parallel in Indian history, myths or legends. Dharma provides enough flexibility to find solution per circumstances , from Sat Yug to Treta to Dwapar and Kalyug.The current Dharmic forces has to find , set new paradigm , new way to define reighteous conduct suitable for this Yuga which might or might not be compatiable with past standards. The threat now consist not onlee to way of life but to physical existence of indics also. Enough of what "they" did,do or will do. We cant change them.
What is required is fundamental changes in us to meet the challenge, discarding reactionary tamas and taking rajasvic initiative to identify and control the internal institutions with the ability to bring upon the change.

[Murugan]

sir, this is eveybody's question and that was the question of arjun too.

i recommend gita and commentary on it : books or discourses. this will greatly help in defining dharma and adharma.

Sorry. This isn't good and this is the failing of Hindus who are themselves unable to say what's good in the Gita.

Man goes to doctor and say "Doc - I have this terrible pain and high fever"

Doc says "Look at the bookshelf behind me. It has all my textbooks. I recommend that you study them for the answer"

Knowing that there is an answer, and knowing that there is a source for the answer but not being able to give the answer is what is leading to the takleef, and eventual demise of Hindus. There is a disconnect between mind and source.

This, in fact is the idiotization of the "educated" Hindu mind. But I do know that a lot of people on the ground are clearly able to rationalize and explain the Gita in terms that a questioner can relate to rather than asking a questioner to go and study the book.

"Its all in the Quran" "Read the Quran"

What's the difference?

very big difference.
my reply was just: a recommendation and i said it will greatly help. it was not for lot of people. too much for idiotization of "educated" hindu mind. the needle is pointing somewhere else.

lot of people needs bread, roti, kapda, makan and a nano - this is the first dharma : bhukhe bhajan na hoi!! - this is my version of hindu dharma - it will at least curb conversion, i trust.

***

these 15 points version of dharma is really very nice!
this "Do Not Do " version of dharma speaks much.

My ancestor's version of dharma is very positive:

1) Satyam Vadah : Speak the Trutch (not that "Do Not version)
2) Dharmam Charah : Obey/follow/according to the dharma
3) Matru Devo Bhavah, Pitru Devo Bhavah : Parents are (Equal to) Deities
4) Acharya Devo Bhavah : Teacher is (Equal to) a Deity
5) Aithi Devlo Bhavah : A Guest -do -
6) Swadhyayanma Pramadah : Do Not be lazy in introspection/study

Thank You!

[Murugan]

Sorry. This isn't good and this is the failing of Hindus who are themselves unable to say what's good in the Gita

Karmanyev Adhikaraste ...
Thy business is with the action only...

Not with piskology!

lost Kailash
lost Man-sarovar
lost Kashmir
and Aksai Chin
lost confidence
lost face
lost the sense of dharma - the dharma of karma

Hari Om!

[Sanku]

I seriously believe Sanku and you are arguing in parallel and challenging the "reinvention" of Dharma, but you do not offer any alternate definition of Islamic Extremism that I can understand, other than each sub-group of Hindu's perhaps have a different perception of what Islamic Extremism means to them.

Pulikeshi; speaking for myself; as I mentioned before I am not challenging the "reinvention" of Dharma; I believe I said it explicitly before. I am however challenging some assertions and steps in the reinvention of Dharma. I would be most distressed if we in our attempts at reinvention (which is necessary) created a Adharmic system at the end.

Secondly I have not offered a definition of Islamic extremism recently; however I did offer one in couched terms very early on which was perhaps seen a by the few folks interested in my post. IMVHO my view will be too extreme for consumption if said in as many words. So like Shiv said in many contexts so far -- first fix the Hindu problem the rest will get auto fixed -- thus recently I have limited my posts to the line of thought mentioned by Shiv.

[Murugan]

1) Do not tell lies
2) Do not be cruel
3) Do not take life needlessly
4) Respect your parents, teachers and elders
6) Show respect for other's feelings and sensitivities
7) Do not do anything in excess
Do not gamble
9) Do not be greedy
10) Do not cheat
11) Do not insult

Many times You have TO DO all of above to :

15) Protect dharma - which is all of the above and more.

there are many examples, Ramayana and Mahabharata are the best examples

even Maryada Purushottam Shri Ram cheated Bali! Purchased vibhishan's loyalty! And Ram-doot Hanuman-ji ne to unnecessarily Lanka jala di thi! Hanuman-ji did not show respect for other's feelings and sensitivities. very cruel!

Lord & Purna Purushottam Krishna Did many of Do Not List Above to Protect Dharma, to show respect for other's feelings and sensitivities


***

15 points dharma version requires lots of Swadhyaya - introspection - does not stand well, imvho. coz, that way our dharmic icons like rama and krishna and hanumanji look Adharmic

[prashanth]

Correct.

Its the Anglo-Saxons who have unleashed or unchained the Islamic dragon on the Europeans and the world. So the historic ghost of 'Eastern' conquest of Europe is coming back to haunt them. But the AsS dont acknowledge their culpability.

Post WWII the Europeans had given the Anglo Saxons the sword to become the arbiters of Western destiny. Unfortunately it has become a repeat of the Panchatantra story of Monkey with the sword.

You have hit the nail Ramana sir. Good observation.

The US, which suffered relatively minimum damage when compared to other allies during WW2, was given a responsibility to bring peace in the west. On the contrary, due to their capitalistic and neo colonial interests, they chose to encourage islamic extremism, in the cover of 'plausible denialability'.(The so called multicultural UK also has some role in this). Now that an islamic bomb exists,thanks to american help, Europe and India have to suffer .

[Murugan]

15 points dharma version requires lots of Swadhyaya - introspection - does not stand well, imvho. coz, that way our dharmic icons like rama and krishna and hanumanji look Adharmic

Karmanyeva adhikaraste ma phaleshu kadachana
Ma karmaphalahetur bhurma te sangostvakarmani.

"Thy business is with the action only, never with its fruits; so let not the fruits of action be thy motive, nor be thou to inaction attached."

Gita: Chapter II-47.


This is Dharma IMVVHO

(inaction is adharma!)

Amarnath is waiting...

[vsudhir]

The current clash / problem of Adharma with Dharma has no parallel in Indian history, myths or legends. Dharma provides enough flexibility to find solution per circumstances , from Sat Yug to Treta to Dwapar and Kalyug.

Prem bhai, by definition, in Kalyug that flexibility is lost because the balance/harmony breaks down. That is why it is 'kalyug' after all.

The current Dharmic forces has to find , set new paradigm , new way to define reighteous conduct suitable for this Yuga which might or might not be compatiable with past standards. The threat now consist not onlee to way of life but to physical existence of indics also. Enough of what "they" did,do or will do. We cant change them.

Thanks for stating this eloquently. My saying this in my words makes me look like some rabid monster, most likely.

Though, allah kasam, I would surely prefer peaceful alternatives to the coming great war, there are no peaceful alternatives I can see (unless we dharmics decide to roll over and die. Perhaps, not even then).

What is required is fundamental changes in us to meet the challenge, discarding reactionary tamas and taking rajasvic initiative to identify and control the internal institutions with the ability to bring upon the change.

What if the fundamental change requires bloodletting? Dhimma represents tamsic inactivity and cowardice in the present Indian milieu, IMHO. Before the great war between dharma and adharma, we must first fight the little war between dharma and dhimma. Recall that nice diagram that shiv made about 2 paths around a tree on the road... and only one of the 2 paths is unblocked....

How better than to end with some peacenik verses of loving kindness from the Gita....

....Paritranaaya saadhunaam, vinaashaaya chatiskrita
dharma sansthaapa naarthaaya, sambhavaani yuge yuge....

[asprinzl]

Is cricket related to MacCaulism?
Avram

[Prasenjit Medhi]

Cricket certainly has a lot to do with race. The racism is still in place, to an extent. But money talks.

[ShauryaT]

With respect Shaurya your post is indicative of the rigidity and blindness that education in India and pressure from other civilizations has brought about in Hindu thought.

I am referring to the manner in which books are invoked as repositories of truth, forgetting that the truth exits outside of the books too and the books are only examples of and descriptors of the truth.

Sorry about that complex sentence. I will describe what I mean in simpler terms.

Dharma is not some complex mumbo jumbo that we need to read about in our Holy Gita-Bible or Gita-Quran in unreadable Arabskrit.

For most part (but by no means completely), dharma is simple rules of living that you are taught from day 1 as a child[/b]

Shiv, The debate is not about, if these universal dharmic values will be lost, if we do not make use of our civilizational literature. They will not be but does that mean you throw out this literature (just like the Britsh did) because it is mumbo-jumbo to your ears?

If you are doing that, you will make the same mistake our founding fathers did, i.e: throw away all our civilizational literature in one sweep.

I accept, this literature has to evolve to fit modern times (something that Sri Aurobindo tried and succeeded with his concept of the integral Yoga system).

I will give you some more examples. I have purchased copies of the Rig for over a decade now, in a desperate search to understand its meanings and translations. Being handicapped in Sanskrit, I was at the mercy of the world view of the author. Until, the right author did not come along, the Rig was largely Mumbo-Jumbo, Rituals and some gems of wisdom, in that order. Now, with some translations in hand, the order is completley reversed.

Please do not make the mistake of throwing out this rich literature. It is not mumbo-jumbo and is not like saying go and read the Quran. For, this literature is never used as a source of authority, like the Quran but only as a source of spiritual knowledge.

I will again refer back to the terminology debate. You tried to express some dharmic values in terms of morality and terms, which do not fully encompass dharma. The words you chose to express them, were clearly from an alien framework. Namely the 10 commandments (consciously or unconsiously)

There is a choice here. We can continue to try to express ourselves on these alien frameworks and fall short continuously or learn our own framework, evolve it further for modern life, and then contrast and compare with these other frameworks. To me, there is no excuse not to learn your own literature.

It is when we do not know, this literature first, that it sounds mumbo-jumbo, complex, etc. Can these truths be found outside of this literature, most cetainly, but why give away 1000's of years of investment in these tools and reinvent the wheel.

There is another aspect to all this. It is to do with faith, identity and a sense of pride in our systems. A sense that we do have a rich civilizational understanding of Dharma and the Indic people are well aware of their literature and not idiots running around claiming the Rig veda is a bunch of mumbo-jumbo rituals only.