Indian Interests

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 01 Jun 2012 20:27

Speaking of spelling bees...

An Indian/Indian origin speller has once again won the National Spelling Bee. 5th year in a row an ethnic Indian has won it! Congrats!

usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_.../11996585-snigdha-nandipa... - United States

Let's anticipate some of the negative remarks, even by Indians themselves:

What's so great about a spelling bee?
We have spell checks now
There is no creativity involved in a spelling bee
Foreigners are taking over American preserves
Indians should focus on other things
Those kids must go through hell with parental pressure and studying
It makes people look nerdy and geeky
Spelling Bees are so woosy, try winning an NFL Superbowl

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 02 Jun 2012 00:25

Chittagong Trailer

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jun 2012 07:47

The other day I was listening to a speech on Upanishads. Of all the places this Swamiji spoke about the issue with all the liberal talk we see threadbare - IS WAR THE ONLY OPTION TO SOLVE AN ISSUE? The answer is no, if you can bring them into Dharmic path some other way. But when there is no option but WAR to get people into Dharmic path, then that is more preferable than peace as bhagavan Sri Krishna told us in Bhagavadgita.

***

The speech was on Mundakopanishad. As the foreword he was explaining how the materialistic world view will not create the right foundation for the individual or for the society.

Then he gave the example of Samrat Ashoka.

Ashoka had an issue with Kalinga kingdom. He thought war is the best option. He went to the Kalinga battle and destroyed the entire army machinery of Kalinga kingdom. Standing amidst the piles of dead bodies, he pondered.

Then he realized that war need not be the option to change a society. But didn't know what is the best option. He sought guidance from his sources. Unfortunately he found a wrong teacher and opted Buddhism.

The result of that strategic misstep defeated Indian interests for nearly 2000 years.

***

That brings us to the post I made in distorted history thread... I am reporting it here (ipadme doesn't allow me to copy the link

)

The King and population has to be co-religionists (or co-dharmists) to enable a stable kingdom/rashtra. This is the cardinal rule. The dharmic approach was for the King to enforce the Dharma (ensuring Varna-Ashrama Dharma is the primary duty of the king in SD). This is the best and natural option. The second option is for the king to adopt the dharma of the population (this is filled with traps because the people do not care for long-term interests of the state/civilization). The third option is for the king to enforce his Dharma (or Adharma) on his population. When an Adharmic king enforces his adharma it becomes Asuric. Various puranic asuras and modern Abrahamic rules are of this category.

SD always took the first option. The role of king was to ensure proper enforcement of varna-ashrama dharma a.k.a rule of law. The law was defined by the intellectual section of the society suitable to that time. Many Smritis are born that way. Our current smriti is B.R Ambedkar Smriti. Unfortunately the latest smriti is not Vedic-compliant and instead belongs to Charvaka (aVedik) philosophy.

In all recorded hindu puranic history the victor of the battle/war would establish the descendant of the deceased king to be the successor of the occupied kingdom and him acting as Saamanta (vassal) to the victor. We can see this in case of Jarasamdha and many other scenarios in MB. Interestingly almost all of these people stood by Pandavas in MB war. That was achieved when Dharma was paramount.

The second trend is what we saw with Genghis Khan’s son converting to Islam to rule Islamic majority kingdom. This is what we are seeing in current political landscape in India with YSJ etc.,

Islamic invaders followed third option. They converted entire populations by force to ensure that their rule is secure.

When SKD conquered BeDanda fort, he released MohammedSha from the prison and made him the king, and got the name “Yavana Sthapanaacharya”. I do not know if this is the same MohemmedSha who took a owe to kill 100,000 hindus and did that and who declared it is customary Jihad to kill a number of Hindus every year. It is not easy to understand how a person whose proclaimed life goal is to establish a Hindu Bharat and kick out Islam from entire Bharata Varsha can do this. In fact these very Islamic satraps of Vijayanagara Empire lead to its destruction in 1565.

My understanding of this action is - By the time SKD won these southern sultanates the majority population was forcibly converted to Islam. That doesn’t mean SKD could not revert them back to Hinduism. After all the founders of Vijayangara Empire, Harihara and Bukkarayas were reverts themselves. Then why didn’t SKD do that? My guess is that he and VE were not yet strong enough to do that. They were still fighting other Hindu kingdoms who didn’t want to join SKD in his pursuit of establishing an united Bharatiya Hindu Rajya. Secondly all these southern sultanates were supported by other Islamic kingdoms in northern-india and SKD was not ready to face the combined might of Islamic north.

What this means in current political environment?

Bharatiya political history cannot be separated from Bharatiya Dharmic history (Hence Puranas and not historical texts). Bharatiya society’s Dharmic progress is reflected in its political scenario (Hence Dasavataras etc.,). The culture grew strong. The society weakened as soon as its Dharmic roots are weakened. That lead to weakening of the nation.

Contemporary India is being ruled under a Charvaka based Ambedkar Smriti. Charvaka is considered a non-Vedic philosophy because it goes against the Vedic standard (Advaita bhava thru self-realization = by knowing one’s true self, one will realize the unity of self and God consciousness).

As long as the Bharaitya population remains overwhelmed by the philosophies that put humanism (humans > other nature), materialism and ahamkaara (Atheism) before sarvadharma samabhava (all beings are equal), interdependency and Aatma-tatva (which is same as God consciousness), Bharat will remain in Kali yuga.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jun 2012 08:14

A few remarks on above post. When using abbreviations its excellence to first spell it out and then use the abbreviations.

I wouldn't term this Ambedkar smriti. Its the INC distortion under MMS. PVNR liberalized but he didn't have a mercantile/Charavaka mind set.

Ambedkar was a real mahapurush. Lets not blame current problems on his work.

IMHO onlee.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jun 2012 08:40

^ sorry Rji

I copied only a portion of the full post in distorted history thread. SKD = Sri Krishna Devaraya.

On BR Ambedkar, I would like to keep my view point if that is not against forum etiquette.

Not that I have any less respect for him, but I think certain choices by people in power/influence can have huge impact on a nation, which is the key point in my post.

BR Ambdekar has his world view built upon his life experiences and i empathise with him. It is ironic that he married a Brahmin woman In 1948, when he was writing the constitution of India 1947-1949, and yet change her name. Then he writes in 1948

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/prit ... 1940s.html

==1948== He published *"The Untouchables: a Thesis on the Origin of Untouchability"*(New Delhi: Amrit Book Company), as a sequel to his book on the Shudras. As always on this subject, he wrote with passion. In the Preface he said, "The Hindu Civilisation.... is a diabolical contrivance to suppress and enslave humanity. Its proper name would be infamy. What else can be said of a civilisation which has produced a mass of people... who are treated as an entity beyond human intercourse and whose mere touch is enough to cause pollution?"

Should I respect him for what he wrote above?

The above statement shows he neither knew anything about Sanatana Dharma nor about the impact of Islam and Christian colonialism on Bharatiya society. He happened to study in Columbia and got proper positional advantage to write the constitution of independent India.

In 1935, Ambedkar was appointed principal of the Government Law College, Mumbai, a position he held for two years. Settling in Mumbai, Ambedkar oversaw the construction of a house, and stocked his personal library with more than 50,000 books.[23] His wife Ramabai died after a long illness in the same year. It had been her long-standing wish to go on a pilgrimage to Pandharpur, but Ambedkar had refused to let her go, telling her that he would create a new Pandharpur for her instead of Hinduism's Pandharpur which treated them as untouchables. Speaking at the Yeola Conversion Conference on 13 October in Nasik, Ambedkar announced his intention to convert to a different religion and exhorted his followers to leave Hinduism.[23] He would repeat his message at numerous public meetings across India.

This is the man who wanted equal rights to all indians and freedom of religion including propagation of that faith

In 1936, Ambedkar founded the Independent Labour Party, which won 15 seats in the 1937 elections to the Central Legislative Assembly. He published his book The Annihilation of Caste in the same year, based on the thesis he had written in New York. Attaining immense popular success, Ambedkar's work strongly criticized Hindu orthodox religious leaders and the caste system in general. Ambedkar served on the Defence Advisory Committee and the Viceroy's Executive Council as minister for labour.
In his work Who Were the Shudras?, Ambedkar attempted to explain the formation of Untouchables. He saw the Shudras, who form the lowest caste in the ritual hierarchy of the Hindu caste system, as being separate from Untouchables. Ambedkar oversaw the transformation of his political party into the Scheduled Castes Federation, although it performed poorly in the elections held in 1946 for the Constituent Assembly of India. In his 1948 sequel to Who Were the Shudras?, which he titled The Untouchables: A Thesis on the Origins of Untouchability, Ambedkar said that:

Here B R Ambedkar did two things. First he separated Shudras (his strata) from untouchables and started a political party to represent/cater only his strata.

Check his positions before independence.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 Jun 2012 20:49

Babasaheb had one fault as an intellectual - that he allowed his early personal experience to colour his analysis, whereas a real seeker detaches himself from his emotions when exploring as-yet-unnown truths/facts.

Also people look at different stages of Babasaheb's intellectual development and outpourings selectively. There are phases that can be used by INC, and there are phases that can be used against INC.

He made his personal grievance a public issue. A really evolved leader makes public issues personal over and above the personal issues.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jun 2012 21:40

^ thanks Bji for making my point clear.

This attribution of personal prejudices on SD scripts is another phenomenon we are yet to deconstruct -For example the secular/Abrahamic interpretation of Purusha Sukta.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Jun 2012 22:52

RamaY wrote:
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/prit ... 1940s.html

==1948== He published *"The Untouchables: a Thesis on the Origin of Untouchability"*(New Delhi: Amrit Book Company), as a sequel to his book on the Shudras. As always on this subject, he wrote with passion. In the Preface he said, "The Hindu Civilisation.... is a diabolical contrivance to suppress and enslave humanity. Its proper name would be infamy. What else can be said of a civilisation which has produced a mass of people... who are treated as an entity beyond human intercourse and whose mere touch is enough to cause pollution?"

Amazing that he was writing this in a country which had slaves before and did not give universal sufferage as promised.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Jun 2012 22:54

RamaY wrote: we are yet to deconstruct -For example the secular/Abrahamic interpretation of Purusha Sukta.

Where is this interpretations.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 03 Jun 2012 00:28

^ I was talking about the sekkular interpretations of people coming from head, feet etc., that too from a purusha (man) as if they came literally from feet- that too a mans feet and so on... And there are interpretations of PS from EJ perspective.

What people do not understand is that a intentional mis-interpretation of PS lead to current social engineering on caste system, reservations and so on...

***

Kancha Iliah is talking about post-Hindu India. The secularists try to portray the entire Indian history, including islamic rule and christian english rule under Hindu-India carpet.

A few years ago the revolutionary thinker Professor Kancha Ilaiah proposed that we are going to be in a post-Hindu India from 2010. Dalits including ourselves had gotten into a celebratory mode on Prof Kancha’s forecast. We have been waiting for this post-Hindu world since hundreds of years. We are waiting for our chains to be broken and the ugly caste system dismantled.

No connect the dots between various events happening since 2010....

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 03 Jun 2012 00:54

RamaY wrote:
***

Kancha Iliah is talking about post-Hindu India. The secularists try to portray the entire Indian history, including islamic rule and christian english rule under Hindu-India carpet.

A few years ago the revolutionary thinker Professor Kancha Ilaiah proposed that we are going to be in a post-Hindu India from 2010. Dalits including ourselves had gotten into a celebratory mode on Prof Kancha’s forecast. We have been waiting for this post-Hindu world since hundreds of years. We are waiting for our chains to be broken and the ugly caste system dismantled.
No connect the dots between various events happening since 2010....

OK I got it. The secular interpretation has been taken up by EJ and now they identify with foriegn power.
Their cover is blown and foriegn power sponsered anti India movement has come inside India.

------
Kancha is trying to replicate the western EJ plan for the entire world and it is very interesting and imaginative.
In India they have a grand plan based on the EJ narrative.
This is part of the large global social change which the bankers and geo political are planning to change societies.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 03 Jun 2012 04:02

Acharya wrote: Kancha is trying to replicate the western EJ plan for the entire world and it is very interesting and imaginative.
In India they have a grand plan based on the EJ narrative.
This is part of the large global social change which the bankers and geo political are planning to change societies.

Touche'

Dalits support FDI in retail

Divya Trivedi - The original inhabitants of the land, Scheduled Castes, erstwhile untouchables or Dalits feel that foreign investment in the retail sector has tremendous socially liberating potential.

The political leader of the Dalits Mayawati, Chief Minister of the largest state of north India Uttar Pradesh, has opposed the approval of Foreign Direct Investment in retail, as mooted by the UPA Government at the Centre. {bye bye Maya - 2012 elections}

Constituted by more than a fifth of India’s population, the Dalits have, for centuries, been relegated to jobs considered ‘impure’ by upper castes and hence systematically kept outside the fabric of economic prosperity that a section of the population enjoys. {What happened to Sudra community that has all the engineering fields under them? That is a separate Social Engineering project with another 30% of the population.}

By establishing a purely economic relationship in business and delinking it from political powers and other forms of domination, FDI will be a boon to the socially and economically backward communities, says Dalit Marxist Mr Chittibabu Padavala.{Padavala surname in telugu means boats - most probably indicating a boat-building/running family. Can it be called "systematically keeping outside social/economic fabric?"}

Public intellectual Mr Chandrabhan Prasad welcomes the mall culture and asserts that unless culture breaks, caste cannot break. “Caste stands on the twin pillars of blood purity and occupation purity. FDI in retail is an arrest warrant for Manu as it turns him on his head,” he says.{Poor Manu. He couldn't imagine FDI in retail sector and put enough prayaschitta for such abhorring acts }

Political thinker Professor Kancha Ilaiah, points out that if a Dalit sets up a shop in a village, nobody will buy from him but if he is a manager in a mall, then nobody will bother him. Walmart’s practices, when compared to those of small shopkeepers’ come off as less dangerous. Small time shopkeepers are the fountains of corruption; they do not give receipts and often save on taxes. Walmart may underpay its employees but in contrast Baniyas employ under aged children, provide zero job security, no fixed hours, and pay less than minimum wages, says Mr Prasad. {There you go! It is OK to be slaves to Walmart, it is OK for Christianity to have slavery, persecution and genocide written all over its religious body politics, it is acceptable.}

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 03 Jun 2012 04:07

@RamaYji, is the above piece some serious article or a sattire on how the media would play out and connect Dalits<--->FDI Retail?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 03 Jun 2012 04:37

^ Prahaarji.

Check the link provided and go check other posts... you will see who, how, what...

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 03 Jun 2012 05:25

Archaeological Excavations in Bihar

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jun 2012 05:32

Bji, There is now a new historical movement in UK that the Brits did the wrong thing by selling Cashmere to Maharaja Gulab Singh. Its a reconstruction of a new thinking. It ignores the fact that EIC was commercial company that had to raise money for all its adventures. Maharaja Gulab Singh at that time was one of the richest men in the Empire with an annual income more than the richest people in England. Further the England was worried that Tsarist Russia would mistake the annexation of Kashmir a buffer state as an imperial move. So selling of Cashmere was a good move to pay for the Punjab war and allay Russia's suspicion. Remember it was 10 years before the Crimean war!

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 03 Jun 2012 09:57

In one of his essays, Rahul Sankrityayan writes about this scholar.

From here.

Panditraj Jagannath was a great Sanskrit scholar and critic. He was born in South India in a Tailang Brahmin family. After the completion of his studies he came to Delhi to get some stipend and went to the court of the then Mughal Emperor Shahjahan (r. 1628-1658) but failed to draw his attention. While going back rejected, he composed a verse: "Either the Lord of Delhi (i.e. Shahjahan) or God can alone fulfill the needs of a human being. The help extended by any other king will get exhausted in buying victuals." When the courtiers drew the emperor's attention to this verse he was very pleased. He not only rewarded the poet, but also adorned him with the honorific title of 'Panditraj' ('King of pandits') and requested him to teach Sanskrit to his son Darashikoh. The entire span of Panditraj's youth was thus spent in the company of the emperor, as he himself acknowledged in his verses. He was one of the very close associates of Shahjahan and used to play chess with him.

It is said, once when the emperor was playing chess with Panditraj Jagannath and was about to win the game, he challenged Panditji to defeat him. He promised to grant the poet whatever he desired if he would win the game. As luck would have it, the very moment a ravishing Muslim princess named Lavangi entered the room. Jagannath, enthralled by her charm, asked from the emperor for her as reward. He won the game. The emperor fulfilled his promise and got Panditraj Jagannath and Lavangi married. Later, after finishing his duties he went to Kashi (Varanasi), but the pandits of this sacred city expelled him from his caste. He wrote Manoramakucamardana and Citramimamsakandana to counter the Praudha Manorama Tika and Citramimamsa written respectively by the then celebrated scholars of Kashi, Bhattoji Dikshit and Appaya Dikshit who had taken a leading role in ostracizing him. Besides these he composed books like Ganga Lahari, Amrta Lahari, Sudha Lahari, Laksmi Lahari, Karuna Lahari, Asaphavilasa, Pranabharana, Jagadabharana, Yamunavarnana, Rasagangadhara, Bhaminivilasah, etc.
The book Ganga Lahari by him was to be his last book, written in penance to cleanse him of the act of marrying a yavani (foreigner). It is said that, tormented by ostracism and a sense of guilt, Panditraj along with his wife came to the Panchaganga Ghat of Kashi to bathe in the river Ganga. But Ganga also seemed to boycott him, as she started receding step by step when he descended to reach her. Seeing this, he felt immensely dejected and, sitting right there on the steps of the ghat, started praying to goddess Ganga by chanting the slokas from Ganga Lahari. It is said that Ganga would ascend one step with the chanting of each sloka, and on the completion of the 53 slokas she finally embraced Panditraj and his beloved into her bosom.

Indica Books has published (2007) an illustrated version of Ganga Lahiri, with the Sanskrit original plus an English and a Hindi translation.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jun 2012 10:04

In the same spirit, am x-posting your post in GDF:

abhishek_sharma wrote:From the book 'Hindi Upanyaas ka Itihaas' (History of Hindi Novels) written by Gopal Rai

Some notes from first two chapters:

-- 1st written novel in Hindi- Devrani jethani ki Kahani' in 1870.
-- Stories were verbally transmitted for hundreds of years.
-- Publication of books depends on literacy and availability of printing material. These conditions were not available before 18th century in the Hindi-speaking region.
-- Before the British rule the language of instruction was Farsi. Devanagari was used for religious purposes.

-- Stories like baital pachisi, sinhasan batisi and sabras were written before 17th century. However, common people had no access to them. They used to hear them when someone read it to them.

--Written material limited to zamindars, nawabs---listeners changed into reader in 19th century

1667 -- first book on China published in Devanagari
1745-58 -- translation of Bible available in Hindi
1800 -- Priest William Carey started a press in Shrirampur and started printing Bible in Hindi and other Indian languages

1802 -- Baital Pachisi printed
1803 --- Premsagar (incomplete) printed
1805 -- Sinhasan Batisi printed
1809---Rajniti printed

1810 -- Sanskrit press in Calcutta started --- printed books by Tulsi Das

1818 --- Shrirampur's missionaries started Baptist Mission press in Calcutta and published many books in Hindi

1832---Ramcharit Manas published in Kanpur/Banaras
1834---scores of press started
1846---'Rani Ketki' published from Calcutta

--books published before 1850 were mainly printed by missionaries to spread their religion. Most presses were started by them.

--Fort Williams started teaching Hindustani to the British. They encouraged Hindi printing press. Hindustani was preferred over Hindi. The books were printed in Devanagari.

--after 1850---Reacting to books published by missionaries, Hindus started publishing their books. Nawal Kishore Press in Lucknow started printing in Hindi/Urdu. At this time Hindu middle class used to read Hindi/Farsi.

--East India company did not show any interest in education until 1823.

--From 1823-33 --- some emphasis on education for filling company’s requirement---no care for primary education---illietracy continued to increase---Christian groups worked in the poorest regions.

--1833—charter act – English used for government work

--1835—Macaulay’s suggestions accepted

--Before 1836—Farsi was used for company’s work

1837---Urdu got preeminence in courts---Muslim leaders tried to ensure that Hindi was sidelined in school syllabus

1850---number of people who studied Hindi was negligible

1869—ratio of Urdu: Hindi students in middle school = 4:1

1854—Wood’s dispatch changed the condition of education by encouraging women’s education. In 1871 there were 1760 primary and 134 middle schools for girls in the whole country. This led to new types of books which called for improving the condition of women in the society.

After 1837—Hindustani contained more words from Arabic/Persian---Govt tried to curb it---They were ignored.

Before 1837---- Hindustani was written in Devanagari script.
After 1837 -- Hindustani was written in Persian.

Readership depends on economic prosperity. British policies led to 10 great famines in 70 years (1800-1869). Lakhs of people died.

1807—In Patna and surrounding regions, one sweet maker’s (halwai) annual income was Rs 16/year. One sewing machine operated by 3 people led to savings of Rs 108/year. One laborer got 2 annas/day in 1840 (even this work was not guaranteed). Given these conditions not many people were expected to read/write literature.

First newspaper in Hindi ‘uddant martand’ stopped publication after 1.5 years. Bang-doot (1829) ended publication after 11-12 editions.

No hindi newspapers were printed from 1829 to 1845.
A few newspapers were started in 1845 but they did not last for a long time. However, Urdu newspapers were doing well.

After 1850, the condition of Hindi magazines improved. Bhartendu Harischandra’s effort is considered important in this regard.

Books like baital pachisi , sinhasan batisi, prem sagar and rajniti were printed for British officers. Their price was in the range of Rs 13-16. (Not many people could buy these books at these prices.) Govt used to buy these books and distributed them among British officers. This practice continued until 1850.

A new edition of these books was published in 1839 for common people. Rani Ketki ki kahani (1803) written by Syed Insha Allah khan was quite popular. This is not considered a novel because it is not a realistic portrayal of the society. It is a sufi love story.

Prem sagar was printed for common people in 1869.
1860—'Robinson Crusoe' was first translated novel in Hindi from Bengali
1867 – The Pilgrim’s Progress was translated by Christians
1868--- Urdu Gul-Bakawli translated
1870---Devrani Jethani ki khani, vama shikshak and bhagyawati printed for women’s welfare.

Bhartendu Harischandra was working on developing/encouraging khar boli. Writers of his age wrote books in the service of the country. Some of them were not published. Very few people cared for books which were published. Therefore, the rise of Hindi novels is related to virtual absence of middle class in the Hindi speaking region.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 03 Jun 2012 23:37

From PsyOps-Media Watch thread...

gakakkad wrote:
In Gokuldham society of the popular comedy serial “Tarak Mehta Ka Ulta Chashma”, there are Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, but not a single Muslim family (except a token Muslim small store owner). Perhaps that reflects the reality of many other building complexes in Mumbai. No Muslims Please!
I 400% agree... each and every TV serial should have a Moslem/sc/st character...if they are depicted as store owners , than there sickoolar credential of the prodoocer saab are at stake...this taarak mehta is fascist onlee..wait a minute ,did you say Mehta ? he is a gujju right ? same place where hitler modi is the CM... We must complain to minorities commission about this attrocity..how can a moslem receive a minor role as a store owner ..

we must do CBI enquiry ...and nia must probe potential sangh terror links of taarak mehta...

This is careful projection of grievances. It is not just enough to have a Moslem/Christian/SC/ST etc., character in your serial. Their roles too matter. They have to be in leading roles. Even then, you cannot have a Moslem/Christian female lead and Hindu male lead. It has to be the other way.

That is reflected in the society. A Moslem/Christian/SC/ST MP/Minister is not good enough. They have to President, PM, SC Chief Justice, Election Commissioner etc. A Hindu CBI officer investigating a minority minister or MP/MLA is not acceptable.

When people proclaim that this is secularism and rule of law, that indicates the intellectual bankruptcy of the nation.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 04 Jun 2012 00:26

RamaY wrote:

When people proclaim that this is secularism and rule of law, that indicates the intellectual bankruptcy of the nation.

This is psy ops and actual social engineering of the political landscape. This is what leftist are using to slowly change the political selection and image building of Indian society for Indians itself in their own country.

This is of the most sophesticated games being played inside India.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 04 Jun 2012 08:05

Rahul Sankrityayan on Ambedkar:

Dr. Anbedkar knew that a new analysis of Hindu religion and texts cannot give us a new path. Unless we get rid of these rituals and religious texts completely, we cannot see the path to our future. After all, due to them a huge group did not get the rights of human beings. But Dr. Ambedkar did not want to throw the baby with the bathwater. We should not throw away our Indian culture. We should be proud of its literature, arts and other achievements. All sections of the society have contributed to it. He saw that just ??* a religion is not sufficient. One should offer a better alternative. He quickly realized that Buddhism was that alternative. A person born in Hindu-traditions cannot leave the idea of god and soul. A person who understands this can avoid the maze of Hinduism and understand Buddhism.

* प्रत्याख्यान

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 04 Jun 2012 08:58

Continuing ...

How did our country develop friendly relations with China soon after independence? Buddha's messengers should get the credit. They were not afraid of the waves of the oceans or the peaks of the Himalayas. Our govt spends 1.5 crores on our embassy in England. Its role is to promote friendly relations between the two countries. By maintaining good relations between India and China, Buddha has done what can't be done by spending crores every year on embassies. A PM other than Nehru couldn't have shown this foresight. Nehru was attracted towards Buddhist philosophy.

--

He then goes on to suggest that Buddhists should get reservation.

Between May 1956- May 1957 (25th centenary of Buddha's niravana) 0.5 crore people converted to Buddhism.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jun 2012 09:27

A look at the past in Madras:

http://www.thehindu.com/life-and-style/ ... 483436.ece

A record of Dewanship

When Saraswathi Dole identified E. Vinayaka Row (Miscellany, May 21s) as her father and a Tamil Nadu Maharashtrian, little did I think it would lead me to another Tamil Nadu Maharashtrian family of eminence. Sir T. Madhava Rao I had heard of as one of India's most eminent statesmen in the latter half of the 19th Century. But of his equally eminent family I had not heard till Dole sent me her two compilations on Eminent Maharashtrians of South India.

A Maharashtrian of Kumbakonam, Goudopunt, I learnt, was the father of Venkat Rao and Ranga Rao, both of whom became Dewans of Travancore. Venkat Rao, Dewan Peishkar of Travancore became Dewan in 1822 and remained in that position till 1832 when he was transferred to Mysore as Native Assistant to the (British) Commissioner and was recognised as “the first native revenue servant in this part of India.” He was bestowed the title Rai Raya Rai by the Government of India in 1838. That year, he returned to Travancore as its Dewan, succeeding his brother Ranga Rao to the post. Ranga Rao had held the post only for a short time and Venkat Rao held it for just two more years during his second tenure before resigning. Venkat Rao's lasting achievement was the construction of the canals that linked Trivandrum and Cochin.

The third Dewan of Travancore from this family was T. Madhava Rao, to be knighted in 1866 and receive the title of Raja in 1877 when Queen Victoria assumed the title Empress of India. Madhava Rao was the youngest of Ranga Rao's sons and was, in 1846, one of the first Proficients of the High School of Madras that became Presidency College. This star pupil of Eyre Burton Powell, who headed the School and then the College, joined the Accountant General's Office and moved from there to become the Dewan of Travancore, a post he held till he relinquished office in 1872. But he was not to lead a quiet life in Madras. He was appointed Dewan of Indore in 1873 and, then, in 1875 requested to step into the mess that Baroda was and sort it out as Dewan Regent; Mulhari Rao, the Gaekwad of Baroda, had been deposed and Madhava Rao was appointed to guide the minor who had been made Gaekwad. After straightening out the princely state, Madhava Rao retired in 1882 and spent his retirement studying Marathi literature, composing Marathi poems and making his voice heard among the Congress moderates. He left both Travancore and Baroda with the reputation that he had made them ‘modern States'. In the former, he had courted unpopularity with fiscal reforms and working out a compromise on the ‘upper cloth' issue. He had also gone up against the Madras Government when he insisted that a European could be tried in a court in a princely State. This kind of even-handedness as well as his contributions to education, healthcare and the Travancore High Court, however, also made him respected by all.

A fourth Dewan in the family was R. Raghunatha Rao, the son of Venkat Rao. He succeeded Sir T. Madhava Rao as Dewan of Indore, after having built up a high reputation in government service in the southern districts of the Madras Presidency. His stint in Indore was, however, short, finding himself caught between the differing views of the Maharajah and the Government of India. In time, he became one of the founders of the Indian National Congress and also served as a member of the Madras Legislative Council.

Trivandrum-born T. Rama Rao, a cousin of Sir T. Madhava Rao, after long years in Travancore Government service, was made Dewan of the State in 1886 and was in office till 1892. Revenue Survey and agricultural reforms were his signal contributions to the State. Rama Rao's daughter married T. Ananda Rao, Rajah Sir T. Madhava Rao's eldest son. And Ananda Rao became Dewan of Travancore after serving in the Mysore Government service. In both he had a splendid record.

Another Kumbakonam Madhava Rao, V.P. his initials, was another Principal Porter-influenced success story from Kumbakonam Government College. As the first Indian Inspector-General of Police of Mysore State, he set up a Police Training School to which the Police Training School in Vellore owed much. In 1902 he was appointed Dewan of Travancore and then went back to Mysore as its Dewan in 1906. After he retired in 1909 he was requested in 1914 to become the Dewan of Baroda. There he served till 1918. By 1919 he was an ardent member of the Indian National Congress.

Other Maharashtrian Raos who were Dewans were Reddy Rao (Travancore, 1817-21 and 1843-45), ‘English' Subba Rao (Travancore, 1830-37 and 1839-42), and K. Krishnaswamy Rao (Travancore, 1897-1903, after having been for 13 years Chief Justice of the Travancore High Court).

I wonder whether there is any other community or extended family in South India that could boast of so many ‘Prime Ministerships'. It's quite a record the Maharashtrians of Tanjore — and the graduates of the Kumbakonam Government College — can boast of.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Jun 2012 09:34

ramana ji,
those b****** historians should first ask themselves whether it is a typically British national character to sell something that does not belong to them. As we know how Queen Victoria apparently took over [or her household on behalf of her] additional items sent for inspection and valuation over and above the primary object for sale - out of a loot by a British army officer after their genocidal spree during 1857 - and without payement as expected for those additional items. Most of the items looted by the inherently looter British psyche after the random killings and massacres - found their way into her majesty's home island on the antiques and exotics market and was turned into cash.

Perhaps the British or their bootlicker historian segment do not find it unnatural to sell other's possessions, but others should point it out to them that not everyone in humanity is British.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Jun 2012 09:41

In the 57-58 phase Rahul Sankrityayna had already had his tussle with the communist party, begun to doubt Stalin, been virtually expelled and was seeking the majjhim ground between his returning spirituality and his communist past. [Disillusionment with Stalinist russia was perhaps accelerated by his enforced separation from his Russian born linguist wife when she was not allowed to accompany him back to India]. Eulogizing Buddhism was a good compromise. Further 56-58 was the period when JLN was in full form in his Hindi-chini bhai bhai propaganda. CPI was going through its internal intensifying split along China-Moscow axis [Ranadive faction renegading from uprising line vs Telengana insurrectionists] and the "intellect" section of the CPI and JLN were both seeking each other out.

What RS says has to be analyzed in the background of the politics of the time.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 04 Jun 2012 09:54

By the way, Panditraj Jagannath himself does not write or we do not have surviving writings from him personally detailing his version of what supposedly happened in his romantic life. I am surprised that the same criticisms applied to narrative claims like this by Thaparites are not applied to the Pandiraj claims. If we apply the Thaparite criteria to similar narratives on Mahmud and the supposed priest of Somnath and the devadasi, or the Jaina claims of idols being restored from Muslims, that these reflect an obvious wishful thinking and an auto-desensitization from trauma/loss of confidence/sense of emasculation of a culture/faith - we should arrive at the conclusion that the story of his last moments in the Ganga could very well have been unrelated to any aspect of his marital/romantic life.

Stories emerging from the UP about Mughals being oh-so-secular should be taken with a pinch of salt - as has been noted with the false plants of stories about a Hindu princess and the vishwanath destruction by Alamgir.

Especially with ShahJehan, the story seems really out of character - as we have specific evidence of firmans from both him and his dad, thundering against "giving Muslim women" to "Hindu men", but all for taking "Hindu women".

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 04 Jun 2012 20:32

abhishek_sharma wrote:Rahul Sankrityayan on Ambedkar:

Dr. Anbedkar knew that a new analysis of Hindu religion and texts cannot give us a new path. Unless we get rid of these rituals and religious texts completely, we cannot see the path to our future. After all, due to them a huge group did not get the rights of human beings. But Dr. Ambedkar did not want to throw the baby with the bathwater. We should not throw away our Indian culture. We should be proud of its literature, arts and other achievements. All sections of the society have contributed to it. He saw that just ??* a religion is not sufficient. One should offer a better alternative. He quickly realized that Buddhism was that alternative. A person born in Hindu-traditions cannot leave the idea of god and soul. A person who understands this can avoid the maze of Hinduism and understand Buddhism.

* प्रत्याख्यान

Abhishekji,

It is nothing but coincidence that I was listening to this story and was about to write here, and you bring that topic..

On one day a group of young men went to watch a social-activism movie, 1st show in the night. The movie ended at around 9PM and they came out of the theater with excitement and inspiration from the "social responsibility" message of that movie.

As they walked down the street, they came across this very old woman who was searching for something under the street light. They stopped, still excited with the movie they just watched, and decided to help the old woman and started searching under the street light along with the woman.

After searching for few minutes, one of them asked the old woman, "grandma, what are we looking for?". The old woman replied dear grandson - I lost a needle.

The friends realized it will be waste of their time finding a needle in the middle of the road and thought that it would be better use of everyone's time if they give some money to the old woman so she can get a new needle.

But one of them, who thought he was socially conscious, didn't agree to it. He said "why should it matter if it is a needle or a diamond. We must not resort to easier ways and economic optimizations on the matters of principle" and insisted that they would search and find the needle, after all they are 5 of them.

Another hour passed without any luck.

Then one of the friends, who by now is completely tired of this fruitless search, approached the old woman and asked "Grandma, where did you lose the needle?".

The old woman answered "my dear grandson, I was stitching my cloths in my hut and the lamp was put off by the wind. That is when I lost the needle. Since I don't have any lamp in the hut, I am searching for the needle here because there is a much brighter street lamp here".

Replace the old woman with B.R Ambedkar and the other intellectuals like RS with the group of friends and you will get the message.

Why do we need to RS's or anyone else's certificates when we have access to the original ideas, words and deeds of Ambedkar? Is Ambedkar so helpless that he need RS's certificate for us to be sympathetic to him?

RS's analysis of BR itself if wrong, while BR himself was ignorant about Hindu philosophy and how/why a society behaves the way it behaves when it is influenced by ideologies like Buddhism, Jainism and Charvaka followed by Islam and Christianity. That is a very looong time for any society - ~600BC to 1947AD = 2500 years for our BR Ambedkar to figure out what he did.

I will write a more detailed response in my blog in a couple of days and post a link here. Writing it here may be OT here.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 04 Jun 2012 20:45

How did our country develop friendly relations with China soon after independence? Buddha's messengers should get the credit. They were not afraid of the waves of the oceans or the peaks of the Himalayas. Our govt spends 1.5 crores on our embassy in England. Its role is to promote friendly relations between the two countries. By maintaining good relations between India and China, Buddha has done what can't be done by spending crores every year on embassies. A PM other than Nehru couldn't have shown this foresight. Nehru was attracted towards Buddhist philosophy.

Utter craappp! When did we develop friendly relations? China invaded Tibet and murdered Buddhists without ado. Then within a decade more it invaded India. Nehru had no love for Buddhists. He completely abandoned Tibet to PRC and the Han imperialist.

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 04 Jun 2012 23:47

Now, RSS mouthpiece cautions 'intolerant' Narendra Modi

I'm waiting for the day when a non-bjp, non-congress(both are nothing but high caste partys) leader takes over the command of india. Modi(a fruit seller caste) starting to take over BJP is unbelievable. He might actually be THE man who could wrestle power away from the elite. Even the much celebrated ambedkar couldn't do it. Ambedkar might have been a hindu hater but he was also a true patriot of india. Anyone who fights for the betterment of our countrymen is a true hero for me. It is another matter that he viewed hinduism as a synonym to the high caste. But what really matters is that he was the first guy to challenge elite india. If you're looking at him as a hindu hater then you are purportedly under-estimating the hold of the elite over india.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 05 Jun 2012 01:42

I'm waiting for the day when a non-bjp, non-congress(both are nothing but high caste partys) leader takes over the command of india. Modi(a fruit seller caste) starting to take over BJP is unbelievable. He might actually be THE man who could wrestle power away from the elite. Even the much celebrated ambedkar couldn't do it. Ambedkar might have been a hindu hater but he was also a true patriot of india. Anyone who fights for the betterment of our countrymen is a true hero for me. It is another matter that he viewed hinduism as a synonym to the high caste. But what really matters is that he was the first guy to challenge elite india. If you're looking at him as a hindu hater then you are purportedly under-estimating the hold of the elite over india.

oh! so now, to add to the fascist, racist, "upper"-caste, casteist, Hindu terrorist, there is there is another new category: "Underestimating the hold of elite over India".

i won't even go into the arrogance of that statement. but first, please define one term for me: Elite?
who are these elite? are they uniformly spread out across the country? across the country, do they come from a single "caste" background? who paved the way for these "elites" to becomes elites in the first place? what historical progression made sure that these "elites" come to power?

these are only a few questions, and I haven't even scratched the surface. I want to know who these mythical "elites" are. by purposefully portraying Ambedkar's Hindu baiting against these "elites", you are implying that the "elites" all have a "commitment" to placing "Hinduism first". by juxtaposing the specific trait of Hindu-hatred of Ambedkar against these "elites", you are painting the picture of these "elites" as "bulwark" of Hindus. this is a very stunning generalization and I request that you back it up with evidence. statements like those are not made without proof.

but forget all that. just define these "elites" first. then we'll talk about the rest of your flawed thesis.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 05 Jun 2012 01:51

nvishal wrote: I'm waiting for the day when a non-bjp, non-congress(both are nothing but high caste partys) leader takes over the command of india. Modi(a fruit seller caste) starting to take over BJP is unbelievable. He might actually be THE man who could wrestle power away from the elite. Even the much celebrated ambedkar couldn't do it. Ambedkar might have been a hindu hater but he was also a true patriot of india. Anyone who fights for the betterment of our countrymen is a true hero for me. It is another matter that he viewed hinduism as a synonym to the high caste. But what really matters is that he was the first guy to challenge elite india. If you're looking at him as a hindu hater then you are purportedly under-estimating the hold of the elite over india.

nvishal garu, please think...

Can you please show me an Islamic, Christian, Buddhist, Communist, Secular, Dhimmist, Slave and you name it society that didn't have
- Intellectual elite or priest community
- Ruling dynasties (in one form or other)
- Business/Trade families/corporations
- Worker class

Forget about India. Please show me a kingdom/civilization/society that didn't have these stratas, ever in the history of humanity, even when the so-called God-men were ruling.

Why don't we see affirmative action in other societies such as West/USA where slavery was legal until 1800s yet they sponsor the numerous NGOs that create havoc in India?

Since independence in 1947 we are following a secular, socialist constitution with caste-based reservations to so-called Hindu lower castes. 60 years means 3 generations. Do you think after another 100 generations the society will respect their Hindu ancestry and ethos that respected, allowed and facilitated affirmative action?

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 05 Jun 2012 02:30

to add to the above list,

let us also think about the relations between the various strata of society in the pre-Islamic era, including attitudes towards women. South India is a very good case study on this. there are extensive records of the labor relations of various jatis from the South from the 17th century onwards. you see that under the Vijayanagara realm, a very sophisticated method of union bargaining and trading was established, which was very profitable for the labor classes. this entire infrastructure was overturned when the British took over. I had read a book about this, with extensive data from primary sources to back up the claims. I will go back and post it in a short time.

the historians call the Vijayanagara era "pre-modern", but in reality, the post-Vijayanagara was a regression into pre-modernity while the VN itself was modern. the Europeans labeled Indian history based on their own history. for them it might be true, but for us, or at least the South, the post VN was a phase of regression, not one of progression.

this is the tragedy of the Dravidians. we went from being the sole remaining independent realm within India, capable of fending off the Islamics and not bowing before them, to becoming enslaved under British Order, and finally to emerge from the British phase with a decimated psyche believing in the grotesque victimization that is the hallmark of the Christian induced Dravidian inferiority complex.

IMHO, this is one of the greatest delusions imposed on Bharatiyas: the inferiority and victim complex imposed on Dravidians, when in fact the Dravida base was the only "base" which was insulated from Islamic colonization, and which retained the classical "Hindu" culture.

the British did a good job of erasing that memory with the forced poverty of the labor and agricultural classes, and systematic segregation of the intellectual elite in the name of "education".

small regions within the vast India can be incubating places for resurgence. and Dravida cultural and political independence from Delhi Islamic rule could have been one of those incubators, if not for the decimation under Brits.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Jun 2012 05:04

Bollywood 'insult' song angers Hindu activists
http://news.yahoo.com/bollywood-insult- ... 26397.html

A Hindu nationalist group filed a court case on Monday seeking to ban the release of Bollywood film "Shanghai" over satirical lyrics that describe India as a land of diseases and cow dung.Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena (BSKS), a conservative Hindu group based in New Delhi, said it had applied for the court order on the basis that the song was "anti-national" and a "clear insult" to the country.The movie, a political thriller scheduled for release on June 8, tackles the thorny issue of the poor being thrown off their land for urban development and compares modernisation in India with China.The song, called "Say victory to Bharat Mata (Mother India)", includes the words "India is land of dengue, malaria... and cow dung"."We want the court to impose a blanket ban on the song. How can we allow anyone to ridicule our own country like this?" said Tajinder Singh Bagga, the president of BSKS.The Delhi high court admitted the petition and will conduct a hearing on June 6.The film's director Dibakar Banerjee, who has a reputation for controversial films, was not immediately available for comment

Adrija · Post by **Adrija** » 05 Jun 2012 09:42

deveshji wrote

"this is the tragedy of the Dravidians. we went from being the sole remaining independent realm within India, capable of fending off the Islamics and not bowing before them, to becoming enslaved under British Order, and finally to emerge from the British phase with a decimated psyche believing in the grotesque victimization that is the hallmark of the Christian induced Dravidian inferiority complex.

IMHO, this is one of the greatest delusions imposed on Bharatiyas: the inferiority and victim complex imposed on Dravidians, when in fact the Dravida base was the only "base" which was insulated from Islamic colonization, and which retained the classical "Hindu" culture."

What complete bullshit.........amazing that this has been allowed to go unchallenged on BRF

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Jun 2012 09:45

I think it was a sarcastic post

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 05 Jun 2012 09:49

I think,deveshji means the geographical appellation-south indians(by dravidians).No need to get worked up.

believing in the grotesque victimization that is the hallmark of the Christian induced ....

I think you have missed this.

Adrija · Post by **Adrija** » 05 Jun 2012 10:07

I think,deveshji means the geographical appellation-south indians(by dravidians).No need to get worked up.

Why even use the Dravidian/ Aryan appellation and potentially play into the hands of those promoting the "north vs south" divide? These things sound innocuous to begin with...

Just to be very clear, I support the term "dravida movement" as that is what they themselves choose to call themselves, but not sure of the implications of extending it indiscriminately to an entire region/ culture

Anyways, not getting worked up, and apologies to deveshji if he has taken offense........

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 05 Jun 2012 12:35

@devesh
If you read my comment again you'll see that I made references to indic religions but it had nothing to do with indic religions.

There is no point defining an elite. The elite I talk about have no inclinations towards indic religions whatsoever. Instead, they work to occupy places of influence even if they have to convert. Take a look at the parishes in mumbai. Or the christians of goa and konkan area. The syrians(both hindu and christian) in kerala. The muslim communities all across north and south india.

I can't say that I'm writing a theory because a side of my family are samvedi christians and I've "seen" this sh!t myself. If you think these elites(hindu, muslim or christians) have any love for indias religious, cultural and ethnic diversity then I'd say you've not seen all your beloved indians up close and personal.

@RamaY
You're talking the monarchy system(council, knights and commoners). Monarchy is dead and this high born low born narrative should have died along with it like it has died in post monarch europe. Instead, a select few communities in india have occupied influential positions and kept this stratification alive. Believe it or not, reservations enforce stratification. The congress inherited the divide and rule policy from the british and they have continued this tradition till today and it will continue in the future unless.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 05 Jun 2012 12:52

@NVishal, just as a point to note (without having to digress from your intent), post monarch europe still has official Royalty and royal bloodlines which enjoy much more benefits than any of the 562 princely states enjoyed in post independence India.

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 05 Jun 2012 13:06

Post-monarchy india too allowed royal families to keep their personal wealth, fortunes and even titles(maharajas, nawabs, sultans etc) minus political influence.