Future Strategic Scenario for the Indian Subcontinent -II

[kmkraoind]

Brihaspati garu, I am going to use that beautiful explanation in Disqus forums (mainly in Firstpost) with my own name.

-Mallikarjuna

[Atri]

great post, devaguru.. pranaam...

[Klaus]

brihaspati Sir ji
I think our Poojya PM Sahibs in his PM years took the cue from the diary of Babuta when he declared the first right of Muslims over Indian resources. I have this suspicion that he knew exactly what he was saying and pandering to this psychology of Ropexcretiousness.

Good find sir.

Brihaspati ji, wonderful post for all time.

[Agnimitra]

B ji, what is the link to your blog? TIA.

[johneeG]

Bji,
It seems to me that your view on Indian epics is a 'vakra bhashya'. It is nobody's case that Hinduism is liberal towards women. Hinduism is certainly not egalitarianism nor does it accept equality of sexes. The only 'dharma' that has been prescribed for women, in general, is 'Pativrata-ness'.

Ahalya was not accepted back just like that. She had to endure a prolonged penance is complete isolation that was redeemed by no less than the God Himself. Of course, one can raise doubts on 'penance' part, but then one can raise doubts on the whole story itself and dismiss it as imaginary. Either the story can be accepted as containing truth or not. One can't pick and choose. Moreover, the same Ramayana's central heroine Sita is never truly accepted back by the people and hence, given up by Her husband who loves Her! That makes it amply clear that society was not liberal. It is malicious speculation to say that Tara was conniving to assassinate her husband. It is a denigration of not only Tara, but also Sugriva(and thereby his friend and ally, Sri Rama). Such speculation is not supported by the Valmiki Ramayana. Moreover, Tara is one of the 'Panchakanyas' who are praised for their chastity and virtue.

Ahalya, Draupadi, Seetha, Thara, Mandodari thada,
Panchakanya smarn nithyam maha pathaka nasanam

Daily remembering the five maidens great,
Ahalya, Draupadhi, Seetha,
Thara and Mandodhari
Will destroy the greatest sins

http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Pancha_Kanya_Stuti

There are other examples in Puranas that clearly show that extra-marital affairs were the biggest blot which could be cleared by death/re-birth(or its equivalent). Ahalya was 're-born' after a prolonged penance and audience of Lord Sri Rama. Similarly, Sita was re-born in Agni-Pariksha. Yet, She was not accepted back by the general society. There are other cases like Renuka(mother of Parasurama) who had to undergo death/re-birth merely for 'mental thoughts'.

Ramayana also portrays a free society and liberal women. But, this society happens to be Lanka. In Lanka, women roam freely. It is also mentioned that there are Rakshasas in Lanka who eve-tease them. One can clearly see that the modern society reflects the society of Lanka under Ravana, from Valmiki's portrayal.

Draupadi's polyandry is debated and established as an exception in Mahabharata itself. There are similar examples cited like polyandry practiced by Prachetas(if I remember correctly). Even then, Draupadi had to endure humiliations on this aspect.

All Hindu epics portray polygamy as norm. Sri Rama's 'eka-patni-vrata' is an exception and therefore is considered a great commitment(especially, when He was estranged from His beloved wife).

I am not well-versed with Uddalaka's or Brihaspathi's case, so I can't argue there.

You may be correct about the social situation of the buddhist period, but was it supported by Hinduism?

I am not saying that other religions were not 'misogynist'. To me, all those religions(including Buddhism) have been and continue to be 'misogynist'. I agree with you that the best example for this attitude is Buddha's reluctance is accepting women into his monk-fold. Infact, he is supposed to have said that by accepting women, the overall lifetime of the creed established by him would come down by half. Also, he accepted the women, not on merit, but on the emotional pleas of his cousin. That, in itself, demonstrates the attitude. The later attitudes are expansion on this.

But, Hinduism was no different from this in any which way. Infact, it seems to me that Buddha was displaying a classical Hindu attitude when he declined from accepting women into 'sanyasa'. Remember, Hinduism does not allow sanyasa to women. Some exceptions always exist. But the rule should not be confused with exception. Women like 'Gargi Vachaknavi' and other such figures in Puranas(and Itihaasas) are an exception and not rule. Even during Buddha's time, women like Amrapali existed. But, again, they were not mainstream norm, but rather exceptions.

The 'secular' game is to shift all blame on Hinduism while ignoring everything else. Islam's views on women are well-known. And X-ism treatment of women in history is also well-known. Hunting any moderately intelligent woman, in the name of witches, seems like a favourite pass-time of church. The modern day liberal egalitarian views are still not accepted by the Islam or X-ism. Or by any other religion, for that matter. Then, why single out Hinduism?

I agree that comparatively speaking, Hinduism is definitely more liberal towards women than the Islam and X-ism. The most important thing is that Hinduism allows exceptions like 'Gargi Vachaknavi' to exist. Infact, there are even recent examples like Akka Mahadevi and Tarigonda Vengamamba.

As for Sati, it seems to me that it was always optional. The rajastani 'jauhar' became more compulsory due to the prevailing circumstances. The rajput women seemed to have preferred death to being captured by the Islamic raiders. But, Sati is not supposed to enforced. It seems to me that when it is enforced, it cannot be called 'Sati' anymore. The original term, it seems to me, comes from the act of self-immolation of Sati(daughter of Daksha) which later resulted in beheading of Daksha by Veerabhadra. Sati immolated Herself. It was a suicide. Therefore, any 'Sati' is supposed to be suicide. If it is enforced, it is no more suicide, it becomes a murder. So, there is no such thing as enforced 'Sati'.

In Ramayana, Kaushalya, Sumitra and Kaikeyi do not commit Sati. You mentioned Tara as an accomplice to her husband's death. That is not true. But, if you are looking for a similar character, then Kaikeyi may fit your needs. Kaikeyi was an indirect accomplice to her husband's death. She is not even repentant about the death and indeed is happy that her son(Bharatha) can now be crowned. This comes out when she talks to Bharata when he returns from his uncle's home after the death of Dasharatha. But, in Ramayana, this is not celebrated. It is said that Kaikeyi is too head-strong and Dasharatha should be stricter with her. Anyway, eventually, Kaikeyi also repents are actions.

Tara, on the other hand, actively discourages Vali from falling into the trap. Vali ignores her advice and dies. After Vali's death, Tara wants to be killed by Rama, so that she can accompany her husband. Sri Rama assuages her and consoles her.

All instances of Sati in Hindu epics seem to be voluntary. And they are highly esteemed because of the sacrifice(possibly the greatest sacrifice a person can make: one's own life). If person willingly dies for a cause, then can anyone not praise them for this sacrifice? And if that cause is marital love(and not some malicious one like: jihad), then it is no surprise that it evokes respect.

Actually, if it was a norm, it would not have evoked much respect or admiration. If everyone brushes their teeth, there won't be any applause if I also brush my teeth. Similarly, if everyone committed 'Sati', then it would have been a norm(and nothing special). The fact that it was considered special and admirable, is proof that it was rare and exceptional.

It seems to me that this anti-rape protests started off as liberals vs seculars. When the heat on seculars was getting a bit too much, then seculars started activating their moles in liberal camp. And these people started shifting the blame from governance, laws and policing to culture, Hindutva and Hinduism. Media, as is usual, is a willing accomplice in shifting the goal posts.

So, any real or imaginary tidbit that can be distorted to make the 'Hindus' look bad is being giving lot of airtime. The slogans are being made about Hindus worshipping Goddesses. It seems, in nutty world of secularism, worshipping Goddesses leads to rapes?! Imagine that for logic?!

One should actually argue that Hindus respect women more than other religions because of presence of Goddesses instead of a single male jealous god, no? Hindus respect women because they are seen as 'saha-dharma-charini' instead of sexual pleasure, no? All kinds of bollywood seculars(mascarading as liberals) are indulging in pervert logic to portray Hinduism as the villain. As if Hinduism is asking its adherents to rape women?! Even when the two main epics(Ramayana and Mahabharata) are based on how mistreating women(Sita and Draupadi) leads to ruin(Ravana and Duryodhana)...

So, the thing that is happening is that the religion that is most pro-women is being shown as anti-women, while covering up the deeds and attitudes of all other ideologies and ideologues(including the likes of Mao). How come not a single muslim or X-ian voice that is anti-women is being aired? Does that mean that no muslim leader or X-ian leader is not voicing anti-women views? Does that mean they have suddenly become liberal? No, it simply means that the media is playing its favourite game of ignoring the misdeeds of its friends, while being busy in indulging in the exaggeration of any real or perceived gaffe of its enemies.

Having said that there is no need to jump to the other extreme and argue that Hinduism == liberalism or to claim that Hinduism is absolutely liberal before the advent of other creeds. Hinduism is only comparatively liberal. Because, just as Hinduism speaks about the need for respecting women, it also speaks of women being respectable. Of course, the later part is strictly unacceptable to liberals. The 'uncovered meat' is not just an islamic view, but also supported by Hinduism(if not directly, then indirectly). Infact, it is also supported by X-ism. So, targeting only one religion, when everyone shares the same view is dishonest.

Sometime back, RamaY saar had posted how he clinched an argument by showing Islam's 'anti-woman' stand. I though most of ideas of Islam are also shared by Hinduism. Here's a link to my post: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 6#p1375346

It is for this reason that I do not indulge in bashing Islam on women's issue. Because, there is no point in singling out Islam when all other ideologies and ideologues share a similar view. There are reports of treatment of women cadre among naxals. Most of the times rape and sexual harassment is part of induction(of adolscent and young girls) and sexual harassment continues after that. Yes, Islam may be most obnoxious in this regard, but still no moral highground can be claimed. I am not justifying Islam's views, but I don't see how other ideologies can claim higher moral ground. They can only claim relatively better treatment and attitude towards women. Hinduism is definitely the most relaxed religion. But even then, from a liberal perspective, it is still a 'repressive' religion.

I think Islam's greatest success has been its ability to preserve its family structure. It is the secret to Islam's survival. X-ism is failing in west because its family structure has unraveled. Hinduism seems to be heading the same path. Hinduism has been able to survive due to its strong family model and social model. Some individuals are bound to experience inconvenience, but it has helped the system itself to survive in harsh climate. It is good that some of the balance between society and individuals is being restored, because individual convenience seems to have taken a complete backseat in the last 1000 years. But, one needs to be very careful... if only individual convenience is given importance over and above the system, then the system will collapse. Hinduism and Hindus need to be aware of this...

All kinds of ideologies, in India, cooperate with each other on all kinds of issues to dismantle Hinduism. So, conveniently, it is only Hinduism they find fault with, while ignoring the vile misdeeds of others.

[RamaY]

JohneeG garu,

We shall take this discussion in epics thread. I have a wonderful rendering of Ahalya story that came in some Telugu news paper. If you can read Telugu, pls email me.

The definition of Kanya in Vedic sense is slightly different from the modern perspective of virginity. A good Telugu book on this is "Sausilya Draupadi" by Sri Kasturi Murali Krishna. This is available at kinige.com.

[abhishek_sharma]

>> Draupadi's polyandry is debated and established as an exception in Mahabharata itself.

I don't think so. As far as I know, there were regional differences. For example, polyandry was practised in Panchal but not in Hastinapur.

[abhishek_sharma]

>> It is nobody's case that Hinduism is liberal towards women. Hinduism is certainly not egalitarianism nor does it accept equality of sexes. The only 'dharma' that has been prescribed for women, in general, is 'Pativrata-ness'.

How was a person like Satyvati ruling her kingdom with an iron hand after the death of Shantanu? Why didn't men (like Bheesma) argue that women are not capable of governing?

Satyavati's role in Mahabharata certainly goes beyond the boundaries of pativrata-ness.

Even before her marriage, Satyavati forced Shantanu to accept her demands. It appears that she had more than enough powers in her relationship with her husband.

[Manish_Sharma]

Issue 2:
The major difficulty in India's security and down the line even impacting its economic growth, are India's serious territorial holes. The territorial weaknesses, breaches allow Indian neighbours to extract political, economic, and social taxes at India's cost.

Hoping that external powers will help India to neutralize threats, is handing over too much power to other entities, who may or may not always be thinking of India's interests. In fact they are more likely to perpetuate threats becaus by that they can create dependence in India on these externals.

Please watch the video from 5:57 onwards



Isn't this happening to Bharatvarsh slowly slowly? First Ahaganasthan, then porkland and bangladesh, Joshua Project's 'Breaking India' map & Nagas demanding separate nation?

[devesh]

per latest news, seems like there is a surge in mosque building activities in Hyderabad. a friend recently visited, and as per her, the entire stretch from Mehdipatnam to the Airport, the as yet relatively sparsely populated Shamshabad and neighboring areas, have become swarmed with mosques and buildings which show a uniquely Arab architecture. she says they are being built right on the main route from the City proper to the Airport in Shamshabad. her observation is that the buildings are also subtly more dominating than the mosques which used to be built until a decade ago. the minarets are a bit taller, and the width of the compounds showcasing Arabic script is greater, than the older mosques.

[Abhi_G]

Some form of countdown seems to have begun or at least the news has come out in the open. This may imply some form of sign to the people of India.

Pioneer has reported today of a funds freeze for the "cold start" doctrine which means neutering the capability building of IA. The mountain divisions for a two front war have been put in deep freeze. If this is not a sign of retreat then what is?

[RamaY]

>> Draupadi's polyandry is debated and established as an exception in Mahabharata itself.

I don't think so. As far as I know, there were regional differences. For example, polyandry was practised in Panchal but not in Hastinapur.

the answer to Draupadi's polyandry is in virata parva.

When D goes to virata desa ( current Rajasthan?) she tells everyone that
1. She has 5 husbands (Gandhavas)
2. She worked for Draupadi
3. She lived in Indraprastha (Hastina is just 50miles awAy)

If draupadi's polyandry is so rare, anyone can identify her, espeicIally given her beauty and grace. But she was accepted very casually by everyone in Virata.

[johneeG]

>> Draupadi's polyandry is debated and established as an exception in Mahabharata itself.

I don't think so. As far as I know, there were regional differences. For example, polyandry was practised in Panchal but not in Hastinapur.

I will quote an old post of mine:

^ if we understand the difference between Varna and Caste and use the appropriate term then things get cleared.

The essential point is that there was, at that time, no difference between Varna and Caste. To be sure, what is caste and what is varna?

What many people followed in these circumstances were their varna dharma. I will give couple of examples using current secular modern democratic system.

1. Imagine I am 40yrs old and mastered all aspects of civic administration and got Ph.Ds from the worlds top institutuions. Imagine I am a senior professor in Admin Staff college of india training hundreds of IAS officers. Suddenly one day I wanted to become IAS officer but I did not pass that one exam when I was before 30 yrs. Can I demand the megistraterialmpowers that come with IAS position?

2. Imagine, our nation is pulled into war by Pakis. I am a patriotic Indian with a gun license. Can I jump into the war and fight on Indian army's side without their invitation and approval?

All that is fine. The bone of contention is 'birth based' criteria instead of 'merit-based' criteria. Let me also give example using current secular modern democratic system

1. Imagine I am 20yrs old and want to acquire a Ph.D from an institution. I go there and apply for it. But, my application is rejected on the basis of my 'birth'. Eg: Ekalavya.

2. Imagine I want to be an IAS officer and am pursuing it. But, I am punished for pursuing it because of my 'birth'. Eg: Shambuka.

Note carefully that birth was an over-riding factor the above two cases(Ekalavya and Shambuka).

P.S: read Rama's words during Agni Pareeksha episode. He says the sick eye doesn't see he fire for what it is. So it relies on an Agni Pariksha for the Fire.

I know. More importantly, Agni Pareeksha was not ordered by Sri Rama. Sri Rama simply declared that Sita was free to do as She wishes(in short, Sri Rama abandoned the Mother Sita). It was Sita Amma who decided to prove Her character through Agni Pareeksha. The Gods gave verbal testimony to Sri Rama vouching for the unblemished conduct of Sita during the time She spent in Lanka. It is, then, that Sri Rama accepts Her.

Moral of the story: Only a chaste, pious, devoted and unmolested woman was acceptable as wife. If the woman is molested then she becomes tainted. In that case, the husband can abandon her(in fact, husband must abandon her to protect his own reputation).

We need to get away from the TV and movie depictions by secularists, manuvafis etc and read the books and make right understanding.

Indeed. And one should also accept it in its totality instead of picking only those parts that are convenient and weaving a new narrative. Also, one should desist from making one's own interpretations to make it fit into one's philosophy. In short, one should accept it as it is rather than try to create(or interpret) it into newer forms to suit one's own ideas.

Since you mention Manu, I had a point to make:
Manu is an important figure in Hinduism. He was the first law-maker. Manu-smriti has quite an importance in Hinduism. If something has been mentioned in Manu-smriti, then it cannot be brushed aside.

Modern Hindus' ignorance of Manu is not surprising. Because modern Hindus are ignorant of much of Hinduism. But, this ignorance does not in least indicate that Manu is not important. Of course, whether Manu-smriti was implemented or not is debatable. But, Manu's and his smriti's importance in Hinduism cannot be ignored. If Manu made unsavory remarks on any subject, then thats the way it is. It seems to me that some people want to disown Manu just because he has become a controversial figure.

I feel(though I don't know) that if one examines the various smritis, one would find most smritis in agreement with Manu on most aspects.

Of course, one way to disown only the controversial parts of Manu Smriti is to claim that those parts are later interpolations. But, how can one determine which are interpolations and which are not?

Anyway, interpolations or not, if the Smriti is accepted by the Orthodox school, then it is what Hinduism is. No point in denying it.

Draupadi told everyone in Virata's kingdom that she had 5 husbands (Gandharvas or whatever) and she worked for Draupadi. If she were the only person with 5 husbands in that time, then is the entire virata kingdom full of idiots not to make the connection? Everyone took it so cooly when a woman walks into streets telling she had 5 husbands, what does it mean?

Well, the simple point is that she claimed her husbands were Gandharvas. In Gandharvas, many strange and innovative customs may be followed. Gandharvas seem to be happy go lucky types who are fun oriented.

Anyway, many many people must be working under Draupadi because she was THE Empress. If some of them have special backgrounds, it is hardly surprising.

About polyandry:

"Vaisampayana said, 'Then all the Pandavas and the illustrious king of the Panchalas and all others there present stood up and saluted with reverence the illustrious Rishi Krishna (Dwaipayana). The high-souled Rishi, saluting them in return and enquiring after their welfare, sat down on a carpet of gold. And commanded by Krishna (Dwaipayana) of immeasurable energy, those foremost of men all sat down on costly seats. A little after, O monarch, the son of Prishata in sweet accents asked the illustrious Rishi about the wedding of his daughter. And he said, 'How, O illustrious one, can one woman become the wife of many men without being defiled by sin? O, tell me truly all about this.' Hearing these words Vyasa replied, 'This practice, O king, being opposed to usage and the Vedas, hath become obsolete. I desire, however, to hear what the opinion of each of you is upon this matter.'

"Hearing these words of the Rishi, Drupada spoke first, saying, 'The practice is sinful in my opinion, being opposed to both usage and the Vedas. O best of Brahmanas, nowhere have I seen many men having one wife. The illustrious ones also of former ages never had such a usage amongst them. The wise should never commit a sin. I, therefore, can never make up mind to act in this way. This practice always appeareth to me to be of doubtful morality.

"After Drupada had ceased, Dhrishtadyumna spoke, saying 'O bull amongst Brahmanas, O thou of ascetic wealth, how can, O Brahmana, the elder brother, if he is of a good disposition, approach the wife of his younger brother? The ways of morality are ever subtle, and, therefore, we know them not. We cannot, therefore, say what is conformable to morality and what not. We cannot do such a deed, therefore, with a safe conscience. Indeed, O Brahmana, I cannot say, 'Let Draupadi become the common wife of five brothers.'

"Yudhishthira then spoke, saying, 'My tongue never uttereth an untruth and my heart never inclineth to what is sinful. When my heart approveth of it, it can never be sinful. I have heard in the Purana that a lady of name Jatila, the foremost of all virtuous women belonging to the race of Gotama had married seven Rishis. So also an ascetic's daughter, born of a tree, had in former times united herself in marriage with ten brothers all bearing the same name of Prachetas and who were all of souls exalted by asceticism. O foremost of all that are acquainted with the rules of morality, it is said that obedience to superior is ever meritorious. Amongst all superiors, it is well-known that the mother is the foremost.

Even she hath commanded us to enjoy Draupadi as we do anything obtained as alms. It is for this, O best of Brahmanas, that I regard the (proposed) act as virtuous.'

"Kunti then said, 'The act is even so as the virtuous Yudhishthira hath said. I greatly fear, O Brahmana, lest my speech should become untrue. How shall I be saved from untruth?'

"When they had all finished speaking, Vyasa said, 'O amiable one, how shall thou be saved from the consequence of untruth? Even this is eternal virtue! I will not, O king of the Panchalas, discourse on this before you all. But thou alone shalt listen to me when I disclose how this practice hath been established and why it is to be regarded as old and eternal. There is no doubt that what Yudhishthira hath said is quite conformable to virtue.'

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Then the illustrious Vyasa--the master Dwaipayana--rose, and taking hold of Drupada's hand led him to a private apartment. The Pandavas and Kunti and Dhrishtadyumna of Prishata's race sat there, waiting for the return of Vyasa and Drupada. Meanwhile, Dwaipayana began his discourse with illustrious monarch for explaining how the practice of polyandry could not be regarded as sinful.'"


"Vaisampayana said, 'Vyasa continued, 'In days of yore, the celestials had once commenced a grand sacrifice in the forest of Naimisha. At that sacrifice, O king, Yama, the son of Vivaswat, became the slayer of the devoted animals. Yama, thus employed in that sacrifice, did not (during that period), O king, kill a single human being. Death being suspended in the world, the number of human beings increased very greatly. Then Soma and Sakra and Varuna and Kuvera, the Sadhyas, the Rudras, the Vasus, the twin Aswins,--these and other celestials went unto Prajapati, the Creator of the universe. Struck with fear for the increase of
the human population of the world they addressed the Master of creation and said, 'Alarmed, O lord, at the increase of human beings on earth, we come to thee for relief. Indeed, we crave thy protection.'

Hearing those words the Grandsire said, 'Ye have little cause to be frightened at this increase of human beings. Ye all are immortal. It behoveth you not to take fright at human beings.' The celestials replied, 'The mortals have all become immortal. There is no distinction now between us and them. Vexed at the disappearance of all distinction, we have come to thee in order that thou mayest distinguish us from them.' The Creator then said, 'The son of Vivaswat is even now engaged in the grand sacrifice. It is for this that men are not dying. But when Yama's work in connection with the sacrifice terminates, men will again begin to die as before. Strengthened by your respective energies, Yama will, when that time comes, sweep away by thousands the inhabitants on earth who will scarcely have then any energy left in them.'

"Vyasa continued, 'Hearing these words of the first-born deity, the celestials returned to the spot where the grand sacrifice was being performed. And the mighty one sitting by the side of the Bhagirathi saw a (golden) lotus being carried along by the current. And beholding that (golden) lotus, they wondered much. And amongst them, that foremost of celestials, viz., Indra, desirous of ascertaining whence it came, proceeded up along the course of the Bhagirathi. And reaching that spot whence the goddess Ganga issues perennially, Indra beheld a woman possessing the splendour of fire. The woman who had come there to take water was washing herself in the stream, weeping all the while. The tear-drops she shed, falling on the stream, were being transformed into golden lotuses. The wielder of the thunderbolt, beholding that wonderful sight, approached the woman and asked her, 'Who art thou, amiable lady?
Why dost thou weep? I desire to know the truth. O, tell me everything.'

"Vyasa continued, 'The woman thereupon answered, 'O Sakra, thou mayest know who I am and why, unfortunate that I am, I weep, if only, O chief of the celestials, thou comest with me as I lead the way. Thou shall then see what it is I weep for." Hearing these words of the lady, Indra followed her as she led the way. And soon he saw, not far off from where he was, a handsome youth with a young lady seated on a throne placed on one of the peaks of Himavat and playing at dice. Beholding that youth, the thief of the celestials said, 'Know, intelligent youth, that this universe is under my sway.' Seeing, however, that the person addressed was so engrossed in dice that he took no notice of what he said, Indra was
possessed by anger and repeated, 'I am the lord of the universe. The youth who was none else than the god Mahadeva (the god of the gods), seeing Indra filled with wrath, only smiled, having cast a glance at him. At that glance, however, the chief of the celestials was at once paralysed and stood there like a stake. When the game at dice was over, Isana addressing the weeping woman said, 'Bring Sakra hither, for I shall soon so deal with him that pride may not again enter his heart.' As soon as Sakra was touched by that woman, the chief of the celestials with limbs paralysed by that touch, fell down on the earth. The illustrious Isana
of fierce energy then said unto him, 'Act not, O Sakra, ever again in this way. Remove this huge stone, for thy strength and energy are immeasurable, and enter the hole (it will disclose) where await some others possessing the splendour of the sun and who are all like unto thee.' Indra, then, on removing that stone, beheld a cave in the breast of that king of mountains, within which were four others resembling himself. Beholding their plight, Sakra became seized with grief and exclaimed, 'Shall I be even like these?' Then the god Girisha, looking full at Indra with expanded eyes, said in anger, 'O thou of a hundred sacrifices, enter this cave without loss of time, for thou hast from folly insulted me.' Thus addressed by the lord Isana, the chief of the celestials, in consequence of that terrible imprecation, was deeply pained, and with limbs weakened by fear trembled like the wind-shaken leaf of a Himalayan fig.

And cursed unexpectedly by the god owning a bull for his vehicle, Indra, with joined hands and shaking from head to foot, addressed that fierce god of multi-form manifestations, saving, 'Thou art, O Bhava, the over-looker of the infinite Universe!' Hearing these words the god of fiery energy smiled and said, 'Those that are of disposition like thine never obtain my grace. These others (within the cave) had at one time been like thee. Enter thou this cave, therefore, and lie there for some time. The fate of you all shall certainly be the same. All of you shall have to take your birth in the world of men, where, having achieved many difficult feats and slaying a large number of men, ye shall again by the merits of your respective deeds, regain the valued region of Indra. Ye shall accomplish all I have said and much more
besides, of other kinds of work.' Then those Indras, of their shorn glory said, 'We shall go from our celestial regions even unto the region of men where salvation is ordained to be difficult of acquisition.

But let the gods Dharma, Vayu, Maghavat, and the twin Aswins beget us upon our would-be mother. Fighting with men by means of both celestial and human weapons, we shall again come back into the region of Indra.'

"Vyasa continued, 'Hearing these words of the former Indras, the wielder of the thunderbolt once more addressed that foremost of gods, saying, 'Instead of going myself, I shall, with a portion of my energy, create from myself a person for the accomplishment of the task (thou assignest) to form the fifth among these!' Vishwabhuk, Bhutadhaman, Sivi of great energy, Santi the fourth, and Tejaswin, these it is said were the five Indras of old.

And the illustrious god of the formidable bow, from his kindness, granted unto the five
Indras the desire they cherished. And he also appointed that woman of extraordinary beauty, who was none else than celestial Sri (goddess of grace) herself, to be their common wife in the world of men.

Accompanied by all those Indras, the god Isana then went unto Narayana of immeasurable energy, the Infinite, the Immaterial, the Uncreate, the Old, the Eternal, and the Spirit of these universes without limits. Narayana approved of everything. Those Indras then were born in the world of men. And Hari (Narayana) took up two hairs from his body, one of which hairs was black and the other white. And those two hairs entered the wombs of two of the Yadu race, by name Devaki and Rohini. And one of these hairs viz., that which was white, became Valadeva. And the hair that was black was born as Kesava's self, Krishna. And those Indras of old who had been confined in the cave on the Himavat are none else than the sons of Pandu, endued with great energy. And Arjuna amongst the Pandavas, called also Savyasachin (using both hands with equal dexterity) is a portion of Sakra.'

"Vyasa continued, 'Thus, O king, they who have been born as the Pandavas are none else than those Indras of old. And the celestial Sri herself who had been appointed as their wife is this Draupadi of extraordinary beauty. How could she whose effulgence is like that of the sun or the moon, whose fragrance spreads for two miles around, take her birth in any other than an extraordinary way, viz., from within the earth, by virtue of the sacrificial rites? Unto thee, O king, I cheerfully grant this other boon in the form of spiritual sight. Behold now the sons of Kunti endued with their sacred and celestial bodies of old!'

"Vaisampayana continued, 'Saying this, that sacred Brahmana Vyasa of generous deeds, by means of his ascetic power, granted celestial sight unto the king. Thereupon the king beheld all the Pandavas endued with their former bodies. And the king saw them possessed of celestial bodies, with golden crowns and celestial garlands, and each resembling Indra himself, with complexions radiant as fire or the sun, and decked with every ornament, and handsome, and youthful, with broad chests and statures measuring about five cubits. Endued with every accomplishment, and decked with celestial robes of great beauty and fragrant garlands of excellent making the king beheld them as so many three-eyed gods (Mahadeva), or Vasus, or Rudras, or Adityas themselves. And observing the Pandavas in the forms of those Indras of
old, and Arjuna also in the form of Indra sprung from Sakra himself, king Drupada was highly pleased.

And the monarch wondered much on beholding that manifestation of celestial power under deep disguise. The king looking at his daughter, that foremost of women endued with great beauty, like unto a celestial damsel and possessed of the splendour of fire or the moon, regarded her as the worthy wife of those celestial beings, for her beauty, splendour and fame. And beholding that wonderful sight, the monarch touched the feet of Satyavati's son, exclaiming, 'O great Rishi, nothing is miraculous in thee!' The Rishi then cheerfully continued, 'In a certain hermitage there was an illustrious Rishi's daughter, who, though handsome and chaste, obtained not a husband. The maiden gratified, by severe ascetic penances, the god Sankara (Mahadeva). The lord Sankara, gratified at her penances, told her himself. 'Ask thou the boon thou desirest' Thus addressed, the maiden repeatedly said unto the boon-giving Supreme Lord, 'I desire to obtain a husband possessed of every accomplishment. Sankara, the chief of the gods, gratified with her, gave her the boon she asked, saying,

'Thou shall have, amiable maiden, five husbands.' The maiden, who had succeeded in gratifying the god, said again, 'O Sankara, I desire to have from thee only one husband possessed of every virtue?' The god of gods, well-pleased with her, spake again, saying, 'Thou hast, O maiden, addressed me five full times, repeating, 'Give me a husband.' Therefore, O amiable one, it shall even be as thou hast asked. Blessed be thou. All this, however, will happen in a future life of thine!'

"Vyasa continued, 'O Drupada, this thy daughter of celestial beauty is that maiden. Indeed, the faultless Krishna sprung from Prishata's race hath been pre-ordained to become the common wife of five husbands. The celestial Sri, having undergone severe ascetic penances, hath, for the sake of the Pandavas, had her birth as thy daughter, in the course of thy grand sacrifice. That handsome goddess, waited upon by all the celestials, as a consequence of her own acts becomes the (common) wife of five husbands. It is for this that the self-create had created her. Having listened to all this, O king Drupada, do what thou desirest.'"

"Vaisampayana said, 'Drupada, on hearing this, observed, O great Rishi, it was only when I had not heard this from thee that I had sought to act in the way I told thee of. Now, however, that I know all, I cannot be indifferent to what hath been ordained by the gods. Therefore do I resolve to accomplish what thou hast said. The knot of destiny cannot be untied. Nothing in this world is the result of our own acts. That which had been appointed by us in view of securing one only bridegroom hath now terminated in favour of many. As Krishna (in a former life) had repeatedly said, 'O, give me a husband!' the great god himself even gave her the boon she had asked. The god himself knows the right or wrong of this. As regards myself, when Sankara hath ordained so, right or wrong, no sin can attach to me. Let these with happy hearts take, as ordained, the hand of Krishna with the rites.'

In short, Draupadi was a special case. Yudhishtira mentions some such special cases in Puranas. Polyandry was uncommon just as it is today. Drupada's initial reaction tells as much.

Karna says during the match of dice that woman married to five husbands is same as a prostitute. It again shows that polyandry was not a regular custom. It was considered weird and degenerate(attitudes similar to today).

Why then, there was no doubt when Sairandhri claimed to have five husbands just like Draupadi?
Hmm, maybe because nobody in Virata's kingdom suspected Draupadi to serve in a small kingdom under a guise.

I mean do you suspect your neighbor to be Osama Bin Laden even if he resembles him... especially if he says that he is a fan of Osama? You would do some other rationalization.

---
BTW, the logic that you applied to the Kuru dynasty in the earlier post: Do you think Sri Rama is a Dasharathi (and a Kshatriya) by that logic or not?

Dhristadyumna(Draupadi's brother) and Drupada(Draupadi's father) are reluctant at this offer of 5 brothers marrying Draupadi. The offer did not come from bride's family, but from groom's side. So, it does not fit here to say that Panchalas followed polyandry. No such thing is mentioned in MB.

Yuddhishtria gives few puranic examples. It is very clear that everyone understands it to be an exception, not a norm. Infact, it is only respect for Veda Vyasa, that everybody agrees to such a marriage.

The next question: Why didn't people in Virata kingdom, doubt Sairandhri to be Draupadi if polyandry was rare?
This is a bit silly to me. Just because a lady follows polyandry just like Draupadi, does not mean people doubt her to be Draupadi... Moreover, Sairandhri claims that her husbands are Gandharvas who are known for their fun and frolic. So, it may not come as much of a surprise to people that some Gandharvas follow polyandry. Anyway, most people were not even aware of existence of Sairandhri. She worked in inner chambers as the personal aide of the Virata queen.

So, only few people saw her and knew about her. If those people did not suspect her, then it is no big deal, as far as I can see.

There are several dialogues in MB that convey that polyandry was considered an unique situation.

>> It is nobody's case that Hinduism is liberal towards women. Hinduism is certainly not egalitarianism nor does it accept equality of sexes. The only 'dharma' that has been prescribed for women, in general, is 'Pativrata-ness'.

How was a person like Satyvati ruling her kingdom with an iron hand after the death of Shantanu? Why didn't men (like Bheesma) argue that women are not capable of governing?

Satyavati's role in Mahabharata certainly goes beyond the boundaries of pativrata-ness.

Even before her marriage, Satyavati forced Shantanu to accept her demands. It appears that she had more than enough powers in her relationship with her husband.

Satyavati, as far as I know, did not even rule the Kingdom(leave alone ruling it with an iron hand). The pre-nuptial agreement was between Shantanu(more precisely, Bhishma) and Satyavati's father. Satyavati, herself, does not give any opinion on this matter at that time.

After the death of Shantanu, the throne is occupied by Satyavati's son Chitrangadha. Chitrangadha is killed by a Gandharva named Chitrangadha(the same Gandharva, later kidnaps Duryodhana after defeating him in a battle. Duryodhana is rescued by Arjuna and Bhima on the orders of Yuddhishtira).

Then, the second son of Vichitravirya becomes the ruler. But, it is Bhishma who actually rules the Kingdom. It is Bhishma who marries Ambika and Ambalika with Vichitravirya. However, Vichitravirya also dies.

Then, Satyavati requests Bhishma to give up his vow of bachelorhood and take up the throne and a wife. Bhishma declines it and instead tells another solution. Satyavati, then, reveals that Vyasa is her son. And Vyasa is asked to revive the Kuru dynasty by blessing Ambika and Ambalika with sons. Vyasa agrees to this proposal.

By Vyasa's grace, Dhritarashtra is born to Ambika and Pandu is born to Ambalika. While, they grow up, it is Bhishma who rules on their behalf. Since, Dhritarashtra is born blind, he is declared ineligible as a ruler and Pandu becomes the King. Pandu expands the borders of Kingdom by several conquests. Dhritarashtra is married to daughter of king of Gandhara(Subala), while Pandu is married to Kunti and Madri. Pandu retires to woods from the royal duties prematurely, leaving Dhritarashtra as the caretaker of the Kingdom. Pandavas are born in the forests and after that Kauravas are born in the palace. Later, Pandu dies when Pandavas are still very young. Madri commits Sati, while Kunti returns to the Hastinapur along with 5 pandavas.

Since, Yuddhishtira is the eldest of all Pandavas and Kauravas, he is seen as the next successor, which evokes the jealousy of Duryodhana(who sees himself as the successor).

An old post of mine on this topic:

Satyavati was the biological daughter of King Vasu(Uparichara) and a cursed apsara who was in the form of fish. King Vasu gave Satyavati to the chief of fishermen for adoption.

Satyavati was also called Kali. She had a strong odor of fish emanating from her body. She used to ply the boat on river Yamuna. Her foster father, the chief of fishermen, maintained a boat for the purpose of Sva-dharma. And to serve sva-dharma, Satyavati rowed the boat.

Satyavati was exceptionally beautiful and virtous.

Parashara Maharshi was enticed by the beauty of Satyavati. He wanted to have her. Note that he did not want to marry her. He merely wanted to enjoy her once. He proposed the same to Satyavati. Satyavati was quite young at the time. Such a proposal from the celebrated Rishi surprised, confused and frightened her. She expressed her fear of censure from the world, her father, ...etc.

The Rishi convinced her that she does not have to fear for anything. He created a dark fog that eclipsed their boat which was in the middle of the river Yamuna with many people standing at both banks. However, due to the dark fog, they could not see the boat.

Then, the Rishi promised that Satyavati would not suffer any loss of virginity. Then, the Rishi asked the Satyavati to ask for anything. Satyavati, who had a strong fish odour asked for a remedy of the same. It needs to be noticed that Satyavati was young and a bit naive. Parashar Maharshi granted her wish.

Satyavati was freed from the fish odour. She now had a pleasant scent emanating from her. Since, Satyavati had already acquired this favour from Maharshi, she consented for Rishi's proposal.

Immediately after Maharshi enjoyed Satyavati, he left her and went away to his Ashram. Satyavati became pregnant immediately and conceived the same day on an island in Yamuna. Her son, who was born on an island, was called Dwaipayana. Since, he was dark, he was called Krishna. The child was also extra-ordinary. He possessed great spiritual splendour. As soon as, he was born, he asked for the permission of his mother for practicing Tapas. Satyavati granted his wish. The child left her and promised that he would return to help her whenever she remembered him.

The child, in future, would edit the Vedas into 4 categories(Rig, Yajur, Sama, Atharva) earning the name Veda Vyasa.

The obviously this incident raises questions about the morality of Satyavati and Parashara Maharshi.

According to Scholars: The simple point is that when a great being is to be born, he needs an extra-ordinary parents. When divine beings are born, people with divine qualities will have to parent them. But great people are not always available. So, great Yogis or Rishis are temporarily deluded by the Mahamaya for the benefit of the world.

What is the speciality of Yogis or Rishis?

Generally, they are urdhva-retas. It gives them a special power according to Hinduism.

Essentially, one who is celibate and practices certain spiritual and yogic excercises, they acquire extra-ordinary powers.

When a great being is to be born, such yogis or divine beings are chosen to parent them. For the birth of a great being like Vyasa, Parashara(the great rishi) was tempted temporarily into embracing Satyavati. It is to be noted that Parashara did not waver in his celibacy either before or after this incident. That shows that this incident was an exception and it was part of a divine plan.

Infact, this can be seen in the birth of many great people in Mahabharatha and Ramayana. Birth of Dronacharya, Kripacharya, Vali, Sugriva, ...etc are all similar.

Actually, come to think of it...even the birth of Satyavati(from a fish) is strange. Satyavati is mentioned as being virtuous. The fact that she was chosen to be the mother of Vyasa itself shows that she was a great being.

She agreed to Parashara Maharshi's proposal partly out of awe(of the great Maharshi and his cursing potential) and partly out of wanting to get rid of her bad odour.

After the incident, Satyavati returned to her home. There is nothing to suggest that anyone other than Satyavati, Parashara and Vyasa were aware of these events. It seems no one knew that Satyavati had already a son.

Now, about Shantanu:

King Mahabisha could not control his desire and looked at Ganga lustfully. Ganga liked Mahabisha. Brahma Deva cursed that they would have to spend their time among mortals. In a way, this curse is fulfillment of their wishes. Mahabisha wanted Ganga, he got her. Ganga also liked Mahabisha. The day, Mahabisha could defy Ganga(i.e. control his love for her and stand up for the right), both Ganga and he would be freed from the curse.

Pradipa was tested by Ganga. Ganga acquired a beautiful form and sat on his right lap and then proposed to him. Pradipa had great self-control. He also recognised and remembered that sitting on the right lap indicated a relationship of daughter, daughter-in-law, grand-daughter..etc. So, Pradipa passed the test. He was blessed by Ganga that his son would marry her.

Mahabisha chose to be born as a son to Pradipa because he was of such great character. Also, the Ikshvaku dynasty was so great.

Pradipa coronated Shantanu. He told him that a beautiful woman would marry him and that he should accept whatever conditions she places for the marriage. Then, Pradipa retired to the forest.

Shantanu met Ganga. He agreed to her conditions and married her. And they enjoyed marital bliss.

7 children were born to Ganga and Shantanu over a course of time. All of them were drowned by Ganga in the river Ganga. Shantanu was not happy with these actions. But he did not protest for the fear of losing his wife. But, he could not bear when the 8th child was being taken by Ganga for drowning.

Shantanu intervened and stopped Ganga from drowning the child. Ganga then revealed her real identity. Till now, Shantanu was not aware that his wife was the river Ganga herself. She was not a human being(unlike Shantanu). She was a celestial who acquired a human form. She was not born to any human parents(unlike Shantanu).

Ganga, then, revealed the secret behind drowning of the children:

Ganga revealed the secret to drowning the children and the past life of Bhishma. According to the pre-nuptial agreement, Ganga left Shantanu. She took the child also with her.

Vasus did not want to be born to ordinary woman or man. So, they requested Ganga to be the mother and chose Shantanu to be their father. This further cements the point that when divine beings have to born on the earth, they need extra-ordinary parents for the purpose.

Ganga returned after several years to give Shantanu the possession of his child(who was now a grown up young man). Shantanu's son was named Devavratha. He was well-educated and greatly skilled.

Shantanu installed his son as Yuvaraja.

Shantanu spotted Satyavati and desired her to be his wife. So, he went to her father with marriage proposal.

Satyavati's foster father places a precondition that only the son of Satyavati should be the royal heir of Shantanu. Shantanu cannot grant it because he already installed his son Devavratha on that post.

The chief of fishermen is very happy with the alliance. He and the biological father of Satyavati believe that Shantanu alone is the right choice for Satyavati. Yet, the foster-father places a condition.

Shantanu cannot accept the condition, so he returns to his palace and remains sorrowful. His son asks for the reason for sorrow. Shantanu gives evasive reply. His son, Devavratha, understands that Shantanu is not telling the real reason for his sorrow. He learns the real reason from one of the ministers.

Then, Devavratha goes to the Satyavati's father and requests him to agree to the marriage. Chief of fisherman reiterates his condition. Devavratha agrees to the condition i.e. relenquishes his right to the throne.

Satyavati's father is still not happy. He raises the point that while Devavratha may give up his rights on the throne, but Devavratha's children may not be so generous. Here, the foster-father is looking out for the interests of his daughter. He is being far-sighted also. But, he is being a bit too greedy and also interfering with the Raj-dharma.

Devavratha, then, takes a vow of celibacy(Brahmacharya) and says that he will not have any children. Such terrible vows earn him the title: Bhishma.

Here, there is an interesting point:
Malladi Chandrashekhara Shastri, a great scholar on Mahabharata, says that Bhishma vowed for celibacy. It does not mean, he was not married. And that, at the time of the vow, he was already married. If that is true, then the vow of Bhishma is so much more extra-ordinary.

However, a possible counter to this claim is that there is no mention of any character in Mahabharata as Bhishma's wife(to the best of my knowledge). This ommission is uncharacteristic. Because, in Mahabharata, all characters, their past lifes, other relatives are mentioned and even their names are given. Then, why would an important character like Bhishma's wife will be ignored?

So, perhaps, Bhishma was not married.

Anyway, regardless of that, Bhishma's sacrifice was great. Note that Satyavati, herself, was not the one wanting the throne. She was just being an obedient daughter.

It needs to be noticed that Shantanu does not seem to know of Satyavati's past(in regard to Parashara Maharshi).

Chitrangadha died on the battlefield. He was fighting against a Gandharva named Chitrangadha.
Vichitravirya was married to Ambika and Ambalika. Husband loved his wives very much and vice versa.

Vichitravirya died when he was still young.

This turn of events makes a mockery of the conditions placed by Satyavati's father. All his foresight could not have predicted the future. And all his greed came to naught.

Bhishma tells many past precedents when royal dynasties which faced extinction were saved by the above method. When Parashurama killed many royalties, this method was used to revive the dynasties.

In modern day, people choose genetics when thinking of insemination. In olden days, people believed that spiritual merit was most important.

An important point is that this method is prohibited in Kali Yuga according to the scriptures. The reason for prohibition is that people of Kali do not have the requisite self-control and lofty character to understand the method.

Another point of note is that this method was a method that was used only during the times of crisis. Normally, people would not even look at a girl who is already wedded(or loved) by another. This point is seen clearly in the case of Amba(the elder sister of Ambika and Ambalika).

Satyavati wanted Bhishma to ignore the conditions placed by her father and rule the kingdom. Bhishma did not agree to that, so they needed some other way of perpetuating the dynasty.

Satyavati, now, reveals that Vyasa is her son. Then, Satyavati asks Vyasa to bless Ambika and Ambalika with children. Vyasa agrees to the request. Bhishma also agrees to this.

It seems according to the Hinduism, there are 4 ways of producing child:
a) Thought
b) Union of eye-sight.
c) touch
d) union of sexual organs.

Earthly creatures reproduce through union of sexual organs. However, the divine beings can produce progeny through thought, union of eye-sight, and touch also.

Rishis and Maharshis also acquire this power through their Tapas. So, Vyasa Maharshi may have blessed Ambika with a son through any of those means. The same is also true of Pandavas' birth.

One example of this phenomenon is found in Lalitha Sahasranama and Lalithopakhyanam. There, Lalitha Devi looks into the eyes of Kameshwara(Lord Shiva). As a result, Lord Ganesha is born.

Also, a son cannot be blind just because mother closed her eyes(if it is a normal sexual activity).

In due course of time, Pandu was coronated as the King. Dhritarashtra was the eldest and therefore he would have been the King if he were not blind. His blindness made him ineligible for the Kingship. So, Pandu was made the King. This remained a thorn in the heart of Dhritarashtra who coveted the throne.

Pandu was an obedient brother. He was a great monarch. He defeated and conquered many Kingdoms and extended the empire. He was respectful to all his elders including Satyavati. Vidhura was his minister.

Then, Pandu married Kunti and Madri. Dhritarashtra married Gandhari.

Once upon a time, Pandu went on hunting expedition and spent a lot of time in the forests enjoying his time with his wives and hunting animals. In course of this time, he earned a fatal curse. As a result, he died.

Before his death, Kunti became the mother of 3 children: Yuddhishtira, Bhima and Arjuna, while Madhri had 2 sons: Nakula and Sahadeva.

Madhri also sat at the funeral pyre of Pandu and immolated herself. So, Kunti brought up all the 5 children.

It seems that Satyavati was a great personality who faced many challenges in her long life but kept steadfast to dharma. The fact that she was chosen as the mother of Vyasa Bhagavan underscores the lofty state of Satyavati.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1273708

Another post on similar topic:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 1#p1259411

[Agnimitra]

Some form of countdown seems to have begun or at least the news has come out in the open. This may imply some form of sign to the people of India.

Pioneer has reported today of a funds freeze for the "cold start" doctrine which means neutering the capability building of IA. The mountain divisions for a two front war have been put in deep freeze. If this is not a sign of retreat then what is?

I've been getting the same feeling over the past few months. Several telltale signs, including chatter in the US policy and media community, as well as Islamist networks.

Fund freezes Cold Start

In a major setback to Army’s operational preparedness, its ambitious ‘Cold Start’ doctrine to speedily overwhelm Pakistan in the first few days of the war has been hampered by the budget cut of more than Rs10,000 crore this year. With little hope of getting more funds in the next fiscal too, the Army is not in a position to put in place its critical plan to raise an operational corps to sustain unhindered logistical supply of ammunition to the advancing forces in Pakistan.

After the mobilisation of troops took more than ten days for Operation Parakaram in the wake of the terrorist attack on Parliament in 2001, the Indian Army came up with ‘Cold Start’ doctrine to achieve the military objectives in the shortest possible time with minimum collateral damage.

Army chief General Bikram Singh is likely to brief Prime Minister Manmohan Singh shortly about the situation arising out of the budget cut and its impact on the ‘Cold Start’ doctrine. The presentation was to take place last week, but had to postpone due to the Prime Minister’s other commitments, sources said.

The Army chief will also brief the Prime Minister about the critical shortages facing the Army in terms of outdated artillery guns, ammunition, night-fighting capabilities, air defence and lack of specialised equipment for the Special Forces.

The Army’s plan to fight a two-front war at the same time on the western and eastern borders with Pakistan and China respectively have also taken a hit due to resource crunch as the Government was unlikely to give funds for raising two mountain strike corps for China front, sources said here on Sunday.

As part of this Rs60,000 crore project, the Army was supposed to raise these two corps over a period of four to five years and the funds were to be allotted in a phased manner over the same time frame.

The Army felt that the implantation ‘Cold Start’ doctrine is urgent because Pakistan has a distinct geographical advantage over India and can mobilise its forces faster. The first format of this doctrine took shape in 2004 with a clear objective that the Army should be able to make an offensive thrust into Pakistan from various sectors within the first 48 hours after the war broke out. The ‘Cold Start’ doctrine emphasised building capabilities for such an endeavour.

The doctrine said the entire purpose of a military option to take out terrorist training camps in POK or deter Pakistan Army from launching a counter-offensive will be defeated if India did not rapidly mobilise it forced to attack its enemy.

Maintaining the momentum of the offensive through uninterrupted supply of ammunition for tanks and artillery, besides bullets for advancing mechanised infantry, was part of the ‘Cold Start’ doctrine.

As part of the doctrine, it was planned to have an operational corps to ensure logistical support to the Strike Corps comprising tanks, artillery, attack helicopters and infantry. These three corps along with battle groups will be there to rapidly advance into Pakistan by overwhelming its forces and holding territory.

The ‘Cold Start’ doctrine got a boost during then Army chief General VK Singh’s tenure, but things came to a standstill when he took on the Government over his date of birth issue last year.

This spat saw the Army’s efforts to reduce its teeth-to-tail ratio by ensuring fast delivery of ammunition to its fighting men. This slowed down in the last one and half years, and don’t see to get better this year. Sources said the budget cut put the Army’s operational plans hovering around ‘Cold Start’ doctrine and training on the back burner.

The operational corps is short of funds for the last two to three years to put in place a foolproof system of delivery of ordnance even when facing enemy artillery fire or air attack, they added.

In this situation, if ordered to fight a war at this point of time, the elite Strike Corps and armoured columns of tanks will not be able to advance more than ten to 15 kilometres in a day in Pakistan, officials admitted.

[arnab]

On Mahabharata - In that period the difference between polyandry and prostitution lay in the number of partners a woman had. At the time the rule was that if a woman lay with more than 4 men - she was considered a prostitute. Which is why Karna referred to Draupadi as a prositute. However, Kunti was not - Pandu was impotent and she had children from four partners (though Pandu was only aware of 3 partners ).

However, the key issue is that males of that period had no such restrictions - they could sleep with as many women without being considered of having low morals.

Similarly on the issue of widow remarriage - Bhishma imprisoned and starved Gandhari's father and brothers (only Shakuni survived and vowed revenge on the kuru clan) when he found out that Gandhari was allegedly a widow. He did this despite being told that Gandhari was married to a tree and the tree cut off to stave of a curse which foretold that Gandhari's first husband would die. Bhishma would not accept a widow in his household and punished the entire Gandhar clan for this 'outrage'.

[brihaspati]

johneeG garu,

I understand why you say "Bji, It seems to me that your view on Indian epics is a 'vakra bhashya'." Actually, I have taken into account your criticism of my phrasing about Tara, and changed my blog post phrase. I cannot do it here.

I will not go too much into the rendering of epics, with all the different versions, their legitimacy or authenticity, and even the different manuscript versions of the same rendition, simply because it will go OT. I think that overlaying of opinions as to what is moral condemnable can be identified as a later overlaying and not contemporary to the incident being described, if there are no solid narrative pointers to opposition to the incident/practice at the time the incident was taking place. The "Hindu" view of morality has to be understood as a different one to that of the western/ME linear view.

I accept your criticism, that my choice of words may appear to be "vakra bhashya". But there is a reason to my presenting the material in that way. I deliberately present our traditions in ways that may seem shocking or morally unacceptable to current generations of the devoted, to show that their disgust or awe at "moral deviations" as laid in past incidents or narrations - could be a result of misappropriation or copying of value systems that did not originally belong to us.

We need to carefully deconstruct our own value judgments as to what is good/evil/bad/wrong and ask ourselves : why do we think this was "bad"? Was it because someone told us it was "bad"? Was it because we were punished early in our lives if we indulged in it or supported it verbally? Is it possible that the description of the incident has been tampered with or overlaid [especially if there are different versions of the same] according to the moralism of the author's views and times and his/her society?

The deconstruction has an important consequence for the future. For the moment, I will just illustrate the internal contradiction in our current moralism based one aspect only, while there are others. The problem of all western philosophies and especially the Judaeo-Christian-Islamo school is that they have to rely and construct only on the basis of a linear history, whose narratives keep recording profound changes and evolutions in human social practices. For example the three Abrahamic traditions progressively edit out the reference to brothers marrying sisters, as evident in the three different renditions of the primary conflict between Cain and Abel. The Abrahamic solves the problem of religious authority and legitimization of existing power structures needs/greeds - by inventing a supreme and inscrutable authority who intervenes from time to time, changing his own earlier dicta completely, and adjusts his laws according to the needs of the hour of the elite or the aspiring totalitarian who become his "voice and hand" on earth.

The "Hindu" has a completely different way of grappling with the problem of obviously unpreventable social change. It keeps a record of earlier narratives of incidents, without trying to edit them out, but simply explaining and justifying them based on the prevailing norms in a way that would not upset the status quo of power relations. The "Hindu" does not need the intervention of the supreme to change its principles - because principles are assumed to remain the same. In one strand of the Hindu, the supreme intervenes to restore principles but not to give new interpretations to suit the prevailing times and desires. But in all of the versions, "dharma" the principle, and not "law", is assumed to go progressively down the drains as time passes within the long period cycles.

If this progressive degradation is accepted, and the last phase of the long cycle, only started with the end of life of Krishna - then whatever is noted down as happening before the period of Krishna represents a less degraded form of "dharma" compared to what followed after. Thus, a criticism of Draupadi's polyandry - which incidentally finds support of Krishna too for this case in particular, or the earlier Puranic incidents I mentioned say about Uttathya-Mamata-Brihaspati and the ones I didnt mention like acceptance of Budha [founder of royal lineages according to some Puranas through a transgender partner] the son of Chandra on Tara, the abducted/eloped wife of Brihaspati, or Swaha taking on the form of the wives of the Saptarshi to mate with Agni who supposedly desired them - found morally disgusting by a later period - is actually a judgment by a later and comparatively morally degraded period.

[P.S. I personally hold a lot of these narratives as coded astronomical observations - but the fact that such memes are used implies that socially the ideas were not so abhorrent at the time of first metaphorical use].

Hindu traditions show a flexible attitude to changing needs of society, as society goes through economic, technological and complex feedback loops reflected in social relations. In the process there has been many confusions or horrors from commentators, who have been unable to account for previous experiences by the standards of their contemporary society. This has also allowed incorporation of value systems from outside the system, that were originally not part of us. I am not saying we have to reject outright all that we hold sacred as tradition now. But it is equally important to understand, whose "values" we are using in judging our past records, and whether those values are consistent with any timeless principle that we can distill out of the collective memory of the past.

[brihaspati]

On Mahabharata - In that period the difference between polyandry and prostitution lay in the number of partners a woman had. At the time the rule was that if a woman lay with more than 4 men - she was considered a prostitute. Which is why Karna referred to Draupadi as a prositute. However, Kunti was not - Pandu was impotent and she had children from four partners (though Pandu was only aware of 3 partners ).

However, the key issue is that males of that period had no such restrictions - they could sleep with as many women without being considered of having low morals.

Similarly on the issue of widow remarriage - Bhishma imprisoned and starved Gandhari's father and brothers (only Shakuni survived and vowed revenge on the kuru clan) when he found out that Gandhari was allegedly a widow. He did this despite being told that Gandhari was married to a tree and the tree cut off to stave of a curse which foretold that Gandhari's first husband would die. Bhishma would not accept a widow in his household and punished the entire Gandhar clan for this 'outrage'.

Can you give the reference to the sloka that defines prostitutes in MB and where Karna uses it? Strictly speaking Pandu was not described as impotent in the current meaning of the word. It was given as that he would fall critically ill and may die if he attempted coitus.

It would be interesting to get the story about Bhisma and Shakuni you refer to in Vyasa's version. A Kuru "prince" did defeat the Gandhar's.

Are you sure you are referring to Vyasa Mahabharta?

[brihaspati]

devesh, Carl and Abhi_G : is it possible to follow in parallel - three centres, the usual concentration in Kerala, the one in Hyderabad, and one in Murshidabad?

[arnab]

Can you give the reference to the sloka that defines prostitutes in MB and where Karna uses it? Strictly speaking Pandu was not described as impotent in the current meaning of the word. It was given as that he would fall critically ill and may die if he attempted coitus.

Don't know the exact shloka, but I recall Karna refering to Draupadi as a prostitute after she was 'won' in the game of dice. Re Pandu - you are correct, but a more rational explanation would be that he was impotent and Bhishma refusing to believe this, acquired a second wife (Madri) for him - assuming she would be able to bear children where Kunti could not.

It would be interesting to get the story about Bhisma and Shakuni you refer to in Vyasa's version. A Kuru "prince" did defeat the Gandhar's.

Are you sure you are referring to Vyasa Mahabharta?

Not sure - these are stuff I read a long time back, will try to research and locate the source.

[ramana]

Isnt this all OT for this thread?

Please all stick to thread title.

Thanks,
ramana

[brihaspati]

yes. OT.
Arnab ji, you can give the ref in the GDF thread on epic/texts. The reason I asked is that the word will probably not be found in the extant version and definitely in the context you mention with numbers. Neither the other stories you mention. These are extracted from later texts of completely different source and not having the name of the original text-narrative.

Just to make sure that people not familiar with the real text may not get a false idea on the open forum, based on what does not belong to the text.

Thanks.

[ramana]

plan to move the posts on epics to GDF.

[member_20317]

Carl ji & Abhi_G ji,

What you are sensing could be a persuasion technique to sell the roll back in Siachen, to the IA.

Though the regularity with which certain types of weapon acquisition/development gets postponed makes me suspicious that even the long term methodology of strategic deflection of India is sought to through a ‘management’ of Indian military by these enimical interests.

Since military in India is a wholly voluntary affair with roots in small towns and villages and since it has withstood great challenges for Indics outshining all other institutions of the republic so I would expect that IA would be targeted that way. Already the members active on Artillery and Siachen thread have voiced their concerns.

[brihaspati]

^^^Are the "withdraw from Siachen" camp expressing their arguments again?

[member_20317]

Siachen discussion is not moving these days as it used to. Basically all the people with Indic interests in mind have already decided against it with IA being at the forefront and so it seems (pointed out by a prominent BRF member and my readings force me agree with him) that a clutch of retd. officers have been roped in to sell the snake oil lending the generic media effort affront an air of legitimacy.

While everybody is entitled to their views but alas at the ground level on the GoI can do anything and that is controlled by people who would want this tamasha rammed down unwilling Indian throats.

[brihaspati]

Can we make a list of all those who came on TV or media, over the last two days on the issue of the mutilation of Indian jawans - and urged "restraint", "not escalating to war", "elements in Pakistan who want hegemony/destabilization and elements in India who want the same must be made common enemies by the people of both countries" etc hubris?

If they can talk of declaring proponents of retaliation as "enemies of the people", why is it wrong for them to be declared enemies of the people of India, because their policy may ultimately lead to Talebani Shariati hegemony over India, in which all cuh brutalites would be divinely and culturally sanctioned - and from whose grip Indian society will never ever be able to come out just as has been proven in every society that could not militarily clean up Islamism?

They, and their identity - clan/family/affiliations/parties/institutions should be marked forever, for the future.

Mutilation of the dead, or slow killing through mutilation - beheading, and mutilation of genitals and private parts - are absolutely typical of Islamic memes.

[brihaspati]

What is this huge hoopla about "cannot let the dialogue and peace process get derailed"? What is the dialogue ultimately aimed at - giving more space to the terrorist state of Pakistan to incrementally increase its reach, and consolidate its grip over populations and areas? More of shariati-insanity? More of withdrawal from "siachen"?

If trade is so much against Pakistan's economic interests, with sly clever-by-half apologists from Indian side winking about how Indian economic power will simply mop up Pakistani economy - then why is there any interest at all from Pak side for trade! Or the Pak side will also gain economically and therefore will have more means to rechannel profits into jihad against India?

Or are hagiographers simply parroting out propaganda lines evolving out of the new lines of funding - maybe even hope of potential political funding coming out of the Gulf - who will be and perhaps are already becoming the prime shapers of India's Pak policy?

[member_20317]

brihaspati ji, apparently IA has replied in kind but without retributory hate motivated mutilations. IA spokes person uses the word 'calibrated response'. So not exactly equal and opposite but they would get the point. This seems to be the bad cop act to push the 'Aman ka tamasha' and withdrawal from Siachen.

Recently there were reports of cut in funding for IA. I take that to mean arm twisting the IA to fall in line on Siachen.

[brihaspati]

ravi_g ji,
there are two ways to reply in kind, either in a language understood by the perpetrator - which is about replying with same methods. Or reply 10, or 100 times more - that is deliberately disproportionate reply not with the same methods as the perpetrators. One life for every mutilation wound. For example. Or 10 lives. A reverse 10=1 argument, on elimination or annihilation cold counts, not just Paki jang or bahaduri.

[member_20317]

brihaspati ji, yes and no.

Yes I have also come to the conclusion a covert war is the only real response. But that will require an understanding amongst the masses that this is a war and a never ending one. Right now and for quite some time now what I have come to observe is that a bunch of the following are playing themselves out, all of which one way or the other take the people away from this realisation and none of which will on its own ever help:

1) Timely Leaks on some big weapon systems being acquired/developed which either never get acquired or are turned into a saas bahu soap opera. A certain kind of personalities get caught up in these matters.

2) The hoi polloi who do not understand these matters and are more concerned with the daily bread, for them there is the soap of kangaroo courts that are designed to make one loose focus. The recent rape trials on the net and media are going to be a great case study. Personally I am more concerned with these. At the same time I am salivating at the possibilities it opens up for Dharmics.

3) I have lately also noticed a third strain running around which is what I believe your exchanges with JohneeG ji on 'values', meant. This is kind of like HIV. One lives a long healthy life but acts as a vector till one day the opportunistic infections get the upper hand. Only the duration of various stages differ. I am less concerned about these. HIV is not the biggest overall population killer but this opens up a new possiblity because this has windows in time kind of like sleeper cells.

W.r.t. the mutilations by PA, while your point about commonality of memes is reasonable but I am afraid you may be somewhat more anxious because you are living far away from your Punyaboomi. Not yielding quarters between IA and PA is the norm. And we have to live with this mutilations by PA till a fit solution is found for the problem. What you are suggesting is acceptable as a matter of principle but as a matter or practice the interested parties will quickly turn into a 'Taat pei paiband' approach and will only be a self-defeating excercise in the long run (the run where we live). Also I have seen claims somewhere (I tend to believe it) that during the height of infestation in a certain part of India IA did lay ambushes about 10-15 km inside the aggressor's territory.

What I have noticed is that our people are great, they are willing to sit and discuss with an open mind. And I have little difficulty in reaching out. The problem is our people (the principle) have been taught by the moronic thekedaars (the agents) to give up their own sense of discretion in favour of a pernicious idea of relying on the 'representations and warranties' and 'boilerplate clauses' instead of relying on plain and simple commercial judgement. And this new system has made our people apprehensive like a crow. One step to another fro not able to recognise the twig for what it is.

Basically I would like to draw your attention to our people in a comprehensive manner.

[devesh]

brihaspati ji,

parallel movement across all the focus points has probably been happening for a long time. it's not just the "Hindus" who have the advantage of modern communications.

with their stated goal being pan-India domination, the Islamics will move as one. there is bound to be coordination and sharing of ideas, tactics, and resources.
I've been trying to understand this process better, and that's why I asked you about the avenues which put out the "deeper" info on the theologians that doesn't exist anywhere else on the net.
if we must remain confined to open source english and non-arabic/non-urdu info, we won't get much at all.
sure, the stuff of about Jihadi persecution will come out b/c of some brave souls who are in the field, but the actual thinking and operational logistics of the networks will not be known.

to be honest, I've hit a big, enforced-by-concrete-and-steel wall on this.
whatever little headway I've made in understanding is based purely on info that I receive from friends and family who visit or are staying in India.

I had noticed the "bigger and better" Arab architecture when I visited 2 years ago.
per latest info, the main routes to the new international airport now feature extensive Arab architecture.
it's as if, you land in the airport, get out and drive to the city, and you start thinking you are in the ME, not India.
also, all that property in Shamshabad, and along the approach routes to HIAL, are all hot cakes.
in short, they will be sitting on prime property, and dominating the public scene.
first impressions are always very solid, and anybody who lands in Hyd will have the impression that they want them to.
namely, the image will be that of an Islamic city, with Arab "cultural richness".

[devesh]

perhaps one avenue is to explore where the funds are coming from, for all this activity?
the usual BS from Owaisi and others is that the Muslims are oh-so-poor-backward-destitute onlee.
then how the hell can you afford to buy up huge amounts of land on prime real estate and build all those mosques?
where is the money coming from?
is the GoAP colluding to sell the land at pennies on the dollar?

[brihaspati]

Concentration [say per unit population per district] shows very interesting patterns. They have a contiguous corridor running north to south on the western half of desh. The other arm starts north and goes across the GV to BD. This was as I expected. That left a long triangle of less density with its apex to the raajdhaani and base on the sea and centred in between AP-Odra.

They have been busy building a narrower corridor connecting midpoint of GV on a NNE-SSW axis passing through Indore, to the western vertical axis. They are now trying to surround the triangle and isolate it form the sea - by moving down SW from WB and up through AP - NE. Hyderabad is a crucial base in that attempted connection.

You will not see this pattern if you think in terms of absolute numbers. But proportions could not be so contiguous unless there was a planned expansion behind this.

Also they have become very careful even on Arabic and Urdu dissemination of material. It is possible to obtain from eyes and ears within. But need to protect sources. Rashtra is also tasked with protecting them from supposed saffron "fanatics". So rashtra itself will eliminate sources. Let us assume that both their friends and enemies are collecting items of proof. But you have to play dead.

[brihaspati]

ravi_g ji,
I have never been anxious in my life. I have faced many critical and possible death situations. My attitude is about calculating very coldly about what needs to be done. I am not rash either - hence I had long been saying about the need to "retreat" for the "core" to conserve strength to expand and surge later. There will be no response that TSPA understands or takes seriously enough - this much can be assured.

They are working on a psychological front of battle - where they are simply needling knowing that the "restraint" showed by the regime is good in the long run to wear down the elimination and erasure mentality in any fighting force. The immediate hatred and anger, if not allowed to be expended in the medium term actually turns inwards over the longer term. That is a deadly demoralizer.

If the regime has to be restrained, and therefore IA has to be restrained forever - no other option will remain other than raising a third completely deniable force. But then of course neither group would like it - for it means arming a section of the nation neither is comfortable about arming.

[Prem]

IMHO, we should realize that ruling elites are the ones who are pushing the above corridors and movement . India is being nudged toward certain Islamic way , all the way from highest office to the many central domestic institutions of goverenence etc. The push to destroy to army cohesive structure also came fro the same quarters. I had long talk with one of my well settled nephew in Delhi . He have been sensing his own alienation with the current prevaling political, social mile and seriously thinking to move out as he dont want his kids to grow up and face the music of the mistakes done by our present politiical BDYs. Very soon Indics will be forced into very precarious situation with terrible consequences. UPA's effort to take India back to 15th Century have been mind boggling. MMS will go down in the history as Mogul Mitr Sakha.

[member_20317]

Calculating is how we would like to see our guru, brihaspati ji. Thanks about that. I should have known from the other thread we spoke on.

[svinayak]

IMHO, we should realize that ruling elites are the ones who are pushing the above corridors and movement . India is being nudged toward certain Islamic way , all the way from highest office to the many central domestic institutions of goverenence etc. The push to destroy to army cohesive structure also came fro the same quarters. I had long talk with one of my well settled nephew in Delhi . He have been sensing his own alienation with the current prevaling political, social mile and seriously thinking to move out as he dont want his kids to grow up and face the music of the mistakes done by our present politiical BDYs. Very soon Indics will be forced into very precarious situation with terrible consequences. UPA's effort to take India back to 15th Century have been mind boggling. MMS will go down in the history as Mogul Mitr Sakha.

People have been noting this more than 20 years ago.
Sudden change in the media and strong lobby to change the education has been building for the last 25 years.

[Abhi_G]

^^^
What is new in that observation? Any concrete suggestion to change the situation?

Retreat will be suicide. Hoping about a repeat of the Jewish Israel story is a mirage. Retreat == Vapourization of Indic society. Where will one retreat to?

[member_20317]

If the regime has to be restrained, and therefore IA has to be restrained forever - no other option will remain other than raising a third completely deniable force. But then of course neither group would like it - for it means arming a section of the nation neither is comfortable about arming.

Wanted to put in a longish post but at this rate I would not even get to say the minimum I want to.

brihaspati ji, the hard arming is not a big deal. Unfortunately it is only a deterrent not the real 'tool' at best usable in Maoist infestation kind of situations. Besides IA at least till Col. level is still very much a citizens army. In fact even at staff level you find good officers and the governance structure too has more then enough Indic options.

The solution to my mind still remains the arming of our people with correct information. 1 billion hindus at one place make for a very potent force. Unfortunately right now we have a situation where a bunch of lazy people &/or vested interests just go on to highjack the agenda with shenanigans that are designed to hoodwink our people. The 'solutions to making India safe' thread is one recent example, where it was clearly discernible. I usually find small time packets during the day which I utilize to type out my concerns here but the most important sections of the forum are available only on loging on. So most lurkers never get to know what is going on. At one point I was thinking of going on to Thobda-pothi but that has a strange format where one feels like one is speaking to himself. With a little coordination, a small force of clear minded people can dominate the Social media. Besides social media is already dominated by internet hindus so the only real thing remaining is joining RSS kind of organisations. Dekhte hein.

[brihaspati]

Abhi G mahashoy,
I think we have had this debate before too. When the rashtra plays a confused and possibly Islamophile or "protect Islamist interests (and not necessarily all Islamists) at all costs" attitude at its core - where the populations taxes are used to maintain coercive forces that can be and will be used to crush resistance against such Islamophile policies, post-British continuance of the British disarming of the general population, possible elite compromise in the domain of funding for electoral purposes, :

staying put means an open confrontation with the combined Islamophile portion of the rashtra and Islmists - both of whom have the means and the legal framework to organize in military preparations. This was exactly how the Brits used their state power to prevent growth of Hindu military resistance capacity while fostering ML action squads - to be unleashed in planned fashion on Punjab and Bengal.

The task is not to be a hero and end your life. Much more important than showmanship heroism is the ultimate long term purpose of preserving enough strength to hit back, reassert, and reconquer. Retreat does not mean giving up. Staying back with no military preparation that can resist military skills and hardware available at the rashtryia level - or resources funded by petro-dollar, is helping the enemy to eliminate the potential of resistance to the enemy.