The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

[RamaY]

^ ShauryaT garu,

Ashrama Dharma applies to Brahmins too. Read about Suka/Vyasa samvada.

[ShauryaT]

^ ShauryaT garu,

Ashrama Dharma applies to Brahmins too. Read about Suka/Vyasa samvada.

Never said it did not. Not all Brahmins are sanyasis. Sanyasis are mukt from Sanskaras. They are life long Brahmacharis in one sense. Grihasta and VanaPrastha does not apply to those who have taken Sanyas. Miniscule numbers even amongst those categorized as Brahmins teaching Brahma gyan.

[ShauryaT]

11) What really is the need of the State to intervene in this process?

If you know of a better model which secures the principles of satyam, ritam and yagnam and a way to use knowledge, wealth and power for the greater good (as defined above) then please share. I have a very specific view of our history, which traces the down fall of SD society to the loss of political control. We have this control back at least for parts of our lands but we are loosing the ideas. I also accept the shrutis for what they are and accept that the smritis and shastras were written for its times and we can take inspiration from them and their design intent and continue on a civilization continuum instead of importing a system from Queendom and christian lands. We have only two choices. Either we rebuild our own framework or use someone else's. Right now, we are using someone else's framework. I do not think we will EVER fulfill the goals of an SD society using the current framework. For, it was never designed with those parameters in mind. I am of the view that we need to throw these foreign frameworks out and rebuild our own.

A varna driven society did not look so bad in a world where economic objectives were simply NOT the main drivers of existence. Loss of political control led to loss of control over state objectives - not the other way around. The objectives of the state are to allow its peoples to pursue their puruSharthas. The social part of chatur dharma are fulfilled only on the basis of Varna. Social laws are precisely the areas in which the state has to play a larger role. The down fall of varnas can be traced to the down fall of the state and of order - the very purpose of Dharma.

[RamaY]

A varna driven society did not look so bad in a world where economic objectives were simply NOT the main drivers of existence. Loss of political control led to loss of control over state objectives - not the other way around. The objectives of the state are to allow its peoples to pursue their puruSharthas. The social part of chatur dharma are fulfilled only on the basis of Varna. Social laws are precisely the areas in which the state has to play a larger role. The down fall of varnas can be traced to the down fall of the state and of order - the very purpose of Dharma.

ShauryaT garu,

I mentioned this in one of my posts...

The Varna driven society can work even when economic objectives are the main drivers of existence; as long as the economic drivers are also mapped to Varna structure. This was the case IMHO.

In current society the economic drivers are deliberately set to conflict with Varna structure in the hope to kill it. The result is birth of Caste-system.

[RajeshA]

Dharmocracy

If you know of a better model which secures the principles of satyam, ritam and yagnam and a way to use knowledge, wealth and power for the greater good (as defined above) then please share.

ShauryaT ji,

I am a firm believer in universal suffrage.

On a series of posts I tried to explore the meaning of the 'Dharmic' as it got defined here:

Anybody who considers that the Atma has intrinsic capacity for direct access to the Supreme, without requiring the intervention of any self-proclaimed intermediary, is a Dharmic.

1. The Aarthic of the Dharmic
2. Dharmocracy
3. The Dharmic Brotherhood
4. The Dharmic Brotherhood
5. Dharmic Views on Competition and Cooperation
6. Investment in Dharmic Individualism
7. Dharmic vs Western Individualism
8. Suggestion (v.0.0.8 ) for the Preamble of a Dharmic Constitution
9. Dharmic Laws

Basically the model envisages empowering each Individual to the maximum through proper education and nurturing with values. That is bringing them as close to what one can term "Brahmin"! That is the crux of the model - to nurture "Dharmicity" in each Bharatiya giving him a solid framework of identity, duties, values, confidence, skills and knowledge!

The second proposal was about giving each Individual, both males and females, some physical training. For girls I wrote about giving them self-defense training, e.g. in martial arts during school years, and for boys I suggested making military conscription mandatory for higher education.

As far as aarthic prosperity is concerned that would have to be done by providing more opportunity for entrepreneurship and stopping monopolies and consolidated big companies for after all it is about empowering the individual.

So if one has knowledge, military training and some prosperity, empowered individuals are much better placed to pursue their "Varna" in terms of specialization, harnessing their gunas and skills and moving in a certain direction of profession and contribution to society.

More importantly I think empowered individuals would be much better positioned to decide who is to lead the country and who deserves a chance and privilege to do so in the various organs of the Rashtra.

In a "Dharmically empowered society", those Dharmics who would shine above others would of course get a chance to serve but only a Dharmically empowered individual is able to better appreciate the "Dharmicity" of another. As such in a Dharmocracy, democracy can function much better! The function of the Dharmic State would as explained in the suggested Preamble.

So instead of the Rashtra trying to assess and manage Varnas and sacrifice of the "Higher Varnics", the responsibility should lie with the Dharmically empowered society. Every "Dharmically empowered citizen" in such a way should be involved in assessing the sacrifice and competence of the candidates.

Some suggestions for reform of the political system are:

1. Candidate must receive 50% or more of the votes to be considered elected.
2. There should be absolute inner-democracy within the parties from bottom to the top. This should be overseen by the Rashtra, and cannot be left to the party.
3. I favor an American style Presidential Political system of elections in addition to Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, who get to vote on the executive choices for ministers. However a precondition for that would be a common link language which should be Sanskrit.
4. The Rashtra should bear the burden of all these elections and campaign financing.

[RajeshA]

Freedom of Religion

Cross-Posted from a suggestion by Surasena in "TIRP" Thread


Published on Nov 25, 2012
By vajrin
sarva dharma samabhAva – an Astika view: Blog

sarva dharma samabhAva is much preached by many modern day Hindus as the very essence of Hindu dharma. In a way, it can be stated that sarva dharma samabhAva is a very old concept and was as such practiced to an extent by the ancient Astikas. But there are clear demarcations regarding which religions must be accorded this respect. Not all religions were given this treatment.

Jayanta Bhat.t.a, in his drama ‘Agamad.ambara’, explains the need for a kind of ‘sarva dharma sammAna’ in a society and in the same breath also states that only certain religions can be accorded this respect. After explaining why all religious texts must have their source in Is’vara, he qualifies this statement as follows (Agamad.ambara, caturtha an~kaH):

After the argument made by DhairyarAs’i in favor of considering all religions as divine in origin, DhairyarAs’i is made to state the pUrvapaks.a as follows -

“nanu caivam atiprasan~ga dos.Ad atimAtram bhuvi viplaveta dharmaH

kva nu nAma na s’akyam etad ittham gaditum yAdr.s’a tAdr.s’e (a)pi vAkye”

Translation: But if we follow this, due to the mistake of unwarranted extension of rule, there will be utter confusion about dharma on earth. Tell me a situation where one cannot say that about any religion (literally “just as that, this as well” – thus, resulting in unwarranted extension).



DhairyarAs’i answers as follows:

“aviccinnA yes.Am vahati saran.iH sarvaviditA

na yatrAryo lokaH paricayakathAlApavimukhaH

yadis.t.Anus.t.hAnam nakhalu janabAhyam na sabhayam

na rUpam yes.Am ca sphurati navam abhyutthitam iva

pramattagItatvam alaukikatvam AbhAti lobhAdi na yatra mUlam

tatha vidhAnAm ayam AgamAnAm prAmAnyamArgo na tu yatra tatra”

Following are the laks.an.as of the religions which can be accorded the respect:

• It must have an unbroken line of teachers
• Aryas (people of noble conduct) are not repulsed by associating with it or discussing its tenets
• Its cherished practices must not be against social norms nor fearful
• It must not be entirely too new in form or a just born religion
• It must not be based on mad ramblings nor must it be too unusual (or even otherworldly – ‘alaukika’ is the word used)
• It must not be rooted in undesirable gun.as like greed (lobha)

Those religions which do not satisfy the above conditions cannot be validated as acceptable nor accorded the respect of being divine in origin.

We must learn these rules for evaluating any religion. We must read the basic tenets and texts of the religion which is to be judged and arrive at a conclusion based on the rules given above.

We can see that Jayanta Bhat.t.a, the great naiyAyika (logician), has given some simple rules to arrive at a logical conclusion about the validity of any religion. Hindus of the present age must follow Jayanta’s footsteps on this issue.

[RajeshA]

The objectives of the state are to allow its peoples to pursue their puruSharthas. The social part of chatur dharma are fulfilled only on the basis of Varna. Social laws are precisely the areas in which the state has to play a larger role.

True that can be done, but the main objective of the Rashtra is to empower the individual, to develop his intrinsic capacity to pursue both his transcendental as well as temporal goals.

[RajeshA]

Proposition: Susceptibility of Non-Dharmics to Islam

Cross-Posting from "India-EU News & Analysis" Thread

Published on Mar 05, 2013
Former far-right Dutch politician converts to Islam: Hurriyet

A former member of the anti-Islamist Dutch politician Geert Wilders’ party and personal friend of his, has declared his conversion to Islam.

Arnoud van Doorn was a member of Wilders’ right-wing Freedom Party until the end of 2011.

He said that he had made a fresh start by announcing his decision to the world and taking his Shahadah [Testimony of Faith] on his Twitter account.

This is a seismic event, isn't it, Carl ji?

Lunacy eventually meets its opposite lunacy, left or right.

The Euros just don't have a solid purva paksha to Islamism, when all they have to fall back upon is a primitive mutation of Christianity crossed with racism and liberal democracy.

Any deracinated philosophy, however sophisticated, cannot combat entrenched fanaticism. It will eventually get sucked into its vortex. Because it does not have any pragmatic that can substitute for that part of the psyche that Islamism appeals to.

India has to develop a purva paksha that has roots not just in a higher philosophy but also an actual sadhana and service of some kind.

IMHO, right now Europe and even India are putting two "left" feet forward in dialogue with Islamism - either pseudo-liberal lefty types, or cranky extreme right-wingers.

Blogged this today:
"Louder" dialogue: Right foot forward

"Citizen diplomacy" is fruitful only if the agents of dialogue are reasonably in sync with their nation's purpose and philosophy. Such individuals from both sides can use the informality and good intentions to create a genuine dialogue and enhance mutual understanding. If India had genuine representatives, I would be all in favour of track II diplomacy and cultural exchange. But an octogenarian Wagah Candle Holder pining for his ancestral aangan in Lahore and trying to keep alive his dhimmi-schooled father's Urdu may not be India's best foot forward.

Nor, in my view, is a "secularist" who is unwilling to acknowledge the depth and real context of India's civilization as a valid (and valuable) starting point in modern times, much less take pride in it. What is he willing to fight and die for? - That question undergirds his qualification to dialogue on behalf of the nation, rather than merely his "pacifist" unwillingness to fight. Or worse. (See this interesting speech by M.J. Akbar on the Idea of India.)

This is all the more important because this generation of warfare has stepped out of the conventional framework of Westphalian states, and its driving force goes beyond a primitive nationalism and even political-economic ideology. In this scenario, there are "countries" today that are not really nation-states in the proper sense of the term, they are sly foxes in the garb of law abiding nation-states. Their behaviour confuses naive observers, who call them "failed states" that are not quite failing. But the fact is that they were never meant to be successful as nation-states. their success lies in something else, something much larger. Taking advantage of the protocols of being called a nation-state and especially a failing one that cannot control "non state actors" is part of that larger war, specifically its diplomatic aspect.

When this is the big picture, a nation that is in a make-believe delusion that it is about nation-states is decidedly out-of-place and a naive oddity, setting itself up for others to play games with it. Therefore, those Indian commentators that try to distract the nation by calling a strangely idiotic "pride" to the fact that India is not considered a "failed state" are deluding the people. They are a direct threat to the future development of India's national purpose, much less ideal representatives for dialogue with others.

As long as India cannot put its "right" foot forward, its probably better to keep transactions limited to covert ops where required, as punishment for specific actions or to cultivate certain trends. At the same time, the need of the hour is for a vigorous discussion (not wrangling, not cavil) within India to clarify and then solidify the idea of India going forward. As actions speak louder than words, this combination of internal dialogue and hard external ops will make for a "louder" dialogue, decency be damned.

The Euros just don't have a solid purva paksha to Islamism, when all they have to fall back upon is a primitive mutation of Christianity crossed with racism and liberal democracy.

Any deracinated philosophy, however sophisticated, cannot combat entrenched fanaticism. It will eventually get sucked into its vortex. Because it does not have any pragmatic that can substitute for that part of the psyche that Islamism appeals to.

Carl ji,

I think what the Euros lack is an integral unity concept like Dharma, and secondly one cannot do a good Purva-Paksha of Islam from a Christian PoV, taking history and theology into consideration.

Both these deficiencies make Europe susceptible to Islam.

Having lived in several "Western" countries, I can only imagine the Christian, closet Christian, and Science-loving atheist being shocked by the headline, so I wasn't being sarcastic, only curious to know your thoughts.

Amongst Europeans I work with, many of them being very friendly and well-meaning, I sense that any gravitas that Hinduism might have earned is undone by the perception of what [little] Hindus typically achieve after all the corruption, superstition, ityadi. So, I'm afraid it would take a few miracles for Hinduism, not more Christianity and not 'all peaceful' Buddhism, to appear as the logically meaningful relief to Islam. In other words, most Europeans I know respect hard work, smart work, and achievements and they don't see much of that in India -they just see people slogging it out in an inefficient system we're too lazy to change, i.e. not admirable.

Having lived in several "Western" countries, I can only imagine the Christian, closet Christian, and Science-loving atheist being shocked by the headline, so I wasn't being sarcastic, only curious to know your thoughts.

Amongst Europeans I work with, many of them being very friendly and well-meaning, I sense that any gravitas that Hinduism might have earned is undone by the perception of what [little] Hindus typically achieve after all the corruption, superstition, ityadi. So, I'm afraid it would take a few miracles for Hinduism, not more Christianity and not 'all peaceful' Buddhism, to appear as the logically meaningful relief to Islam. In other words, most Europeans I know respect hard work, smart work, and achievements and they don't see much of that in India -they just see people slogging it out in an inefficient system we're too lazy to change, i.e. not admirable.

PratikDas ji I agree, we can't expect to expand Dharma abroad when it is tottering at home. Hence a focus on Dharmaarthic development on the Bharatiya thread. I've seen discussions in Western circles over emerging societies such as Chinese Confucian culture, and of course Islamic culture. They are discussed as "alternative" models for growth or stability, etc....and whether there is anything the West could learn and take from them in these times. But India is not seen that way -- rather, India is seen as a reasonably successful though "messy" recipient of Western democracy, with nothing new to offer in modern times. That's because our polity and practical social life is not shaped by intellectual ideas stemming from original Bharatiya culture. Our intellectuals, including those that sell the "idea of India" to Westerners (like Shashi Tharoor and MJ Akbar) do NOT seem to have any pride in original Sanskriti culture, much less think of it as relevant to modern times and the future of India or the world. At best its a museum piece. And when they sell the "idea of India" abroad, their boast is limited to how much less embarrassing India is than Pakistan! With intellectuals like these, we cannot expect to be exporters of culture and ideas. They cannot think originally because their worldview is not Indocentric. They can only think about further implementing Western (or Islamist or Chinese) cultural exports in India, perhaps with "Indianized characteristics". Other cultural ambassadors such as classical musicians or some guru-based organizations do a better job of representing the 'idea of India'. We need a more Indic, Brahminical intellectual movement of ideologues.

No harm in borrowing and learning and implementing good things from other cultures into India right now - I have nothing against that. But in "Indianizing them, we need to make sure that they are aligned and made extensions or revivifications of corresponding memes within India's own past. This is what our current crop of intellectuals are not doing at all - in fact, they do the reverse...they try to show that modern concepts and diversity and "secularism" are endangered by native Indic culture! I wrote about this before: Identity and Learning: Worlds within worlds

For example, democracy and multicultural "secularism" is successful in India because of Hinduism and certain ideas of Dharma within it -- this has to be understood and made known to others, as well as the fact that since ancient times India had republics side by side with monarchies. Republican cities and states were not unique to Greece. Unless these native memes are revivified in the process of adopting and learning things from others (West, China, Japan, Communism, Islamic world, whoever else), they will sit uncomfortably in our incomparably complex society, and end up creating new problems, not least of which is a devolving civilizational life reflected in criminal and corrupt trends.

[RajeshA]

Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies

Islam is actually a pretty history intensive course, where the Talibs are transported to the 7th century Arabia. You have to learn about the Jews hiding under the stones, about the various incidents of compassion and love by the prophet, and and and ... Then there is a course about how Islamics came to India and found stone age idol worshipers drinking cow urine and rubbing their genitals on shivlings. They learn about how the Brahmin Aryans have been exploiting the native Shudras for hundreds of years and how Islam finally liberated them. They learn about Brahmins pouring molten lead into the ears of the Shudras. They hear how the gold hoarded in the temples was redistributed among the people.

So besides all the verses of Qu'ran which speaks of the thousand ways the Kufr will burn in hell, it is the Islamics' hold over the historical perspective of the Muslim that strengthens their hold over them.

Often it does not suffice to be gracious and friendly towards the Muslims to rectify their opinion about the Hindus, because the imagined historical grievances have already been placed deep in their consciousness.

Winning the history battle is one important component of bringing the Muslims into the mainstream.

That is why I am of the opinion that if one wishes to pursue government jobs, any jobs, one should have passed a host of exams on Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies. Actually the subjects below should be compulsory in school. If one desires a Government job, then one would have to show higher level of knowledge of these subjects.

1. Sanskrit
2. Bharatiya Philosophy,
3. Dharma,
4. Bharatiya Mythology,
5. Itihaas (Ramayana, Mahabharata, Puranas),
6. Pre-History (Out-of-India)
7. Pre-Islamic History (Bharatiya Perspective),
8. Indian Scientific & Technological Achievements,
9. Indian Culture - Religious Symbology, Practices & Artifacts,
10. Indian Arts - Sangeet, Nritya, Natak, Chitrakala, Shilpkala, Vaastu, Design
11. Bharatiya Sanskriti's Global Impact
12. Comparative Religion Studies,
13. Human Rights Abuses by Islamic invaders & Hindu Military Resistance,
14. Human Rights Abuses by European invaders & Independence Struggle,
15. Partition History & Crimes of Muslim League,
16. Constitution of India,
17. Bharatiya National Spirit

None of the above is anti-secular. All of it can be taught in school. One needs to overload the Muslim with so much Bharatiya Sanskriti that there is hardly room left for the sands of Arabia and zero allowance for historical revisionism by the madrassas!

[RamaY]

Rajiv Malhotra: Wharton hijack and the new sepoys of colonialism

...
Ironically, these Indian professors specialise in scholarship criticising colonialism, not realising that now they are serving similar American policies on interventions in India. They are extreme leftists when it comes to protesting against imperialist interventions in places like Iraq, Libya, Syria and other failed states. But they switch sides when it comes to India, and play the same role for America in undermining India’s sovereignty as the sepoys did. (The sepoys were Indian soldiers serving the British army to fight against other Indians.)

...

Though American universities are amongst the best in the world, there also exist many compromised academics that promulgate theories on India which are racist, colonial and downright inimical to India’s interests. Many naïve Indian donors have unwittingly sponsored such scholars. My earlier book, Invading the Sacred, analysed how certain professors at top American schools view Indian culture as oppressive and destructive, using outmoded theories; my next book, Breaking India, exposed the nexuses between such academics and civic groups that are promoting separatist identities and schisms in India. I analyse the long-term trend that I have called “breaking India,” in which many colonised Indian intellectuals are funded to dish out divisive and biased materials on India. Such meta-narratives can put Indian business leaders on the defensive in their international negotiations.

...

It is important that Indians must ask the following questions: Why did Wharton’s decision-makers not rely on Indian democracy and India’s legal system as the most important criteria for an Indian leader’s legitimacy? Are the future business leaders being taught the lesson of succumbing to political pressure without doing thorough due diligence of their own? Have the professors behind the ambush done a disservice to American businesses by snubbing the chief minister of a state that is the most sought after destination by multinationals for their Indian manufacturing hubs?

...
For Indian alumni and students, this event should be a wake-up call to lead rather than follow the agenda on India. Indians have enough clout in business circles to not take this quietly. Otherwise be prepared for lobbying to impose US trade sanctions on the grounds of human rights violations! That is a card that US leaders periodically like to show Indian leaders. Unlike the Chinese who thumb their noses, and give their own reports of US human rights violations back to the Americans, Indian leaders have not shown the spine when pressured.

[svinayak]

Ironically, these Indian professors specialise in scholarship criticising colonialism, not realising that now they are serving similar American policies on interventions in India. They are extreme leftists when it comes to protesting against imperialist interventions in places like Iraq, Libya, Syria and other failed states. But they switch sides when it comes to India, and play the same role for America in undermining India’s sovereignty as the sepoys did. (The sepoys were Indian soldiers serving the British army to fight against other Indians.)

...

Though American universities are amongst the best in the world, there also exist many compromised academics that promulgate theories on India which are racist, colonial and downright inimical to India’s interests. Many naïve Indian donors have unwittingly sponsored such scholars. My earlier book, Invading the Sacred, analysed how certain professors at top American schools view Indian culture as oppressive and destructive, using outmoded theories; my next book, Breaking India, exposed the nexuses between such academics and civic groups that are promoting separatist identities and schisms in India. I analyse the long-term trend that I have called “breaking India,” in which many colonised Indian intellectuals are funded to dish out divisive and biased materials on India. Such meta-narratives can put Indian business leaders on the defensive in their international negotiations.

...

It is important that Indians must ask the following questions: Why did Wharton’s decision-makers not rely on Indian democracy and India’s legal system as the most important criteria for an Indian leader’s legitimacy?

What he does not clearly say is that US academic world is controlled by the US govt for its global policies. All those working in the US academics should not be taken seriously by Indians. Non of these academic seminar give anything other than propaganda

The Indian colonial narrative has been absorbed by the US academic and then turned over for US global policies against Indian culture and social narratives. US global media is used for this propaganda and even Pak and PRC groups have joined some of these campaigns.

[RajeshA]

Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies (Cont.)

The question is whether the above can be taught in a secular framework?

Secularism means that the State would not be giving preference to one religion over the other, and would not allow religion to interfere in State's affairs.

Fine!

So the question becomes what is religion, what is not religion and when would the State be giving preference?

In the case of education however, the aim of Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies is however not to convince anybody to change his religion. No religion is being promoted.

What is Religion: Suggestion

Religion is a framework of observance of rituals and rules which accompany one's faith in

• a particular cosmogony,
• a particular nature of reality and consciousness,
• a particular theory of extra-temporal continuation of life,
• a particular set of non-human entities and extra-temporal laws which oversee cosmology and the human life-cycle,
• a particular temporal narrative of how this knowledge was introduced into human society, and
• a number of miracles performed by human participants in the narrative, which underpin this faith.

Any institution which supports the inculcation and the propagation of such a faith system in society and provides services to support the observance of rituals and regulations can be called a religious institution.

So what is Religious Education?

Any education whose aim is to convince that one religious framework is the true one, while the others may be false is religious education. Any education whose aim is to convince that a truth-claim is not just a truth-claim but the Truth itself is religious education. However an education which presents all the truth-claims side by side without endorsing any one of them is secular education.

So how would the subjects in our list need to be presented so that they are not seen as religious education?

• Sanskrit: Sanskrit can be taught without recourse to religious scriptures. In fact one should emphasize that Sanskrit played an important part even outside religious scriptures.
• Mythology: Mythology Studies in school, need not be taught from the perspective of divinity of various deities and the historicity of their interactions with human society. That can be done outside school. Mythology can be taught from PoV of characters and narratives, their associations among each other, but also as a possible knowledge base for cultural symbology, psychohistory, past tribal dynamics, astronomical phenomena, abstract concepts, adhyatmik vidya, fusion of narratives, scientific and historical knowledge encoding, etc. Basically it is a knowledge base and a cultural heritage and this treasure aspect of it can be emphasized!
• Bharatiya Philosophy: Similarly philosophy deals with the nature of reality and consciousness. From the Western perspective these are theories. From the Bharatiya perspective these are theories, partially based on sādhanā, abhyāsa, and kriyā - on experimentation. One can mention that the latter is a truth claim. Since several philosophies from Bharat are explored one cannot claim that one is favored over the others.
• Dharma: We receive our Dharma from the various scriptures which explain to us how to judge right from wrong and which make the connection of these principles with a certain mythology and philosophy. However these scriptures can simply be considered as generic wisdom sources without going into their religious relevance for the followers. In such a case Study of Dharma becomes simply a study of the wisdom embodied in these "wisdom sources" and our Itihaas, which refines our judgmental capabilities. The connective tissue between Dharma and the foundational mythology and philosophy need not be dwelt upon. The focus can be kept on Dharma as a framework for judging right from wrong, and the religious aspects of Dharma, can be dealt with outside school.
• Itihaas: Itihaas means "As it was". However for readers of Itihaas embedded in non-Bharatiya Civilizational framework, parts of this Itihaas sound incredible, especially those parts which verge on mythology, deities, miracles, extraordinary powers and feats, etc. As such many propose that these are religious works and thus not fit for secular education. One can however allay such doubts by introducing the concept of ambiguity, legitimacy as truth-claims and creative embellishments on the part of the authors. One cannot ascertain the truth of such claims but one can treat the overall narrative as Bharat's history, regardless of portions which feel incredulous and one can appreciate the literature as rich masterpieces for which they deserve to be academically explored.
• Indian Culture - Symbology, Practices & Artifacts: Of course much of our culture has a "religious" background, so one can claim that it is religion that one is learning. However the emphasis here need not be that the students are being encouraged to practice this Indian Culture which have a religious background but rather one is being educated in what the religious or social background some cultural practice or artifact is. Bharatiya Festivals, Ceremonies, Dress Codes, Temple Architecture, Murtis, etc. can be studied here, and need not be restricted to one region, jati, sampradaya or ethnicity.
• Comparative Religion Studies: Even though one would be treating only Bharatiya origin material in the other subjects, here one can also learn about various faiths, their tenets, their founders, their scriptures, etc. of course without any rancor. This course can include Dharmic as well as Abrahamic traditions.
• Human Rights Abuses by Islamic invaders & Hindu Military Resistance: This is of course a sensitive subject but one needs to deal with it. One can do so "peacefully" if one sticks to the facts which have been recorded or can otherwise be determined for example archaeologically. Also one need not make the present generation responsible for the acts of the invaders. One can also abstract a bit about the responsibility of Islam itself in these deeds in saying that the invaders used a particular interpretation of Islam and that the present generation should opt for a different one to avoid past mistakes.

The other subjects would be less controversial.

Of course the limitations imposed here on the study of various subjects may seem undesirable for us, but if one has to nudge Abrahamics in India to accept these studies voluntarily, one has to make a case why we are not trying to encourage a particular religion but rather the emphasis is purely on appreciating Bharatiya Sanskriti's rich heritage in Bharat and why all can partake of it.

Naturally Dharmics would be encouraged to study these subjects in much more depth and from a different PoV as well where the supremacy of these concepts can be better emphasized, but that would be outside the realm of "secular education" and would have to be undertaken in a different educational environment in addition to the above "secular education".

The main theme here is that Mullahs and Padres would not be able to distort Sanatan Dharma, practices in Hindu Samaj or our History in the eyes of Muslims, Christians or Confused Hindus. Secondly the Indian Abrahamics may genuinely develop pride and interest in Bharatiya Sanskriti and may decide to follow a different path than what is offered by the Mullahs and Padres. The idea is to occupy the narrative in all the branches of religion without calling any branch religious in itself, so that the Bharatiya Civilizational narrative becomes the dominating narrative, and the non-Bharatiya religious narratives face logical challenges for they would be forced to compete for this space. The idea is to give all Indian students the intellectual tools to analyze non-Bharatiya religious narratives even if they are "pledged" to these.

But we will have to make the case that this is all secular! The trick is to try to isolate the subject from the others!

Of course if one declares the Rashtra as a Dharmic Rashtra, than a more potent version of these studies could be bulldozed through but it is much easier and probable this way!

[member_22872]

From wiki

Because of higher birthrates, the percentage of Muslims in India has risen from about 9.91% in 1951 to 13.43% in 2001 to 14% in 2010.[8] The Muslim population growth rate is higher by more than 10% of the total growth compared to that of Hindus.[9] Muslim growth rate percentage per annum is expected to grow from 14.6% in 2010 to 15.9% in 2030.[4]

Muslim growth rate is unrestrained because Allah wants them to have lot of kids. Now all this discussion of ours rests on Hindus remaining as the majority group in India. With unrestrained population growth, Islamism is going to overwhelm Bharat and the world by quantity. This is not a distant possibility but something more practical.

Take for instance this report:
Israel's Dreaded Tipping Point Has Finally Arrived
By May 2048, when the State of Israel turns 100 years old, the population of this area will be approximately 55 percent Arab and 45 percent Jewish.


If India has to turn into Bharatavarsha, it is necessary that India remain as the land for Hindus first. This is very akin to saying the organism should be alive first. With pacifist policies, if and when sharia comes to India, we can just forget about Bharatavarsha, it will never happen. Not only that, India will also loose it's name. It doesn't always have to be a war to subjugate a country, with rapid population growth among Indian muslim, balkanization and/or islamization are a reality.

Also keep in mind what will happen the instant India turns into a muslim majority nation. The example for such a study is right here in India. The state of J&K. Hindus were driven away by muslim majority. In one of the threads I read that only 4000 hindus remain now in Kashmir valley. yes just 4000. It is like future is unfolding right infront of our eyes. So islam not only has in built, religious, political, ideological ways of life, it also has social engineering in built into it with which it can screw any population which cant keep up with them in producing nanha mujahids.

[member_22872]

So to state in RMji's terms, Kashmiri Hindus soon will become museum specimens. Some have been digested and excreted out, the rest were eliminated. Is this the future of Hindus too in other states if they become a minority in the land of Hindustan?

[member_22872]

Until the coming of foreigners in the forms of Islamists and Christians, with their subversive creed, Bharatvarsha didn't face a problem in terms of it's own sustenance. It was okay for it to be peaceful and mind it's way and let it's samskriti permeate in natural way. No such luxury exists now. Native Americans were eliminated simply by introducing into them a strain of disease they didn't have the ability to combat. Hinduism since it's coming into existence, even now lacks an ability to counter forced conversions, taqiyah, social engineering skills of Abrahamic faiths.

[brihaspati]

Venug garu,

the population strategy can be pursued by Muslim leadership - because, and only if they are allowed their distinction and special-protection claims to carry on their life-styles.

The primary line of disruption is to get their women out into education and productive labour, by financial, legal combined incentive-penalty mechanisms. The mullahcracy gets fanatically violent whenever this is attempted and manage to coerce the more liberal non-Muslim regimes to concede the insulation of the women demanded by the mullahs.

In India, the criminality of planning methods for the new Republic, is shown by the blunder in not pushing a single civil law through the constitution for all citizens. Not only that it also needed a categorical statement of preference ordering between the fundamental rights. In that ordering, the right to religion should have come long after equality of law for men and women, and right as well as duty for education.

A future rashtra should establish this preference ordering. Using that to force Muslim women to go into modern education and join the workforce. Not provide social welfare support for large families either, and penalize drastically such attempts. But the key is to constantly hound out the mullahcracy and constantly undermine the mullahcracy - by whatever means necessary. Its not as if past and current regimes of GOI do not know how to undermine and corner religious leadership and organizational structures. They employ it ruthlessly against whatever they see as "Hindu". So the methods are well known, and has been learned from partially the Sultanate/Mughal techniques as well as the more sophisticated methods of the Brits.

So the methods are known, people also do not suffer from pangs of conscience when they use it on religions - only now it needs to be applied on the mullahcracy.

[RajeshA]

Until the coming of foreigners in the forms of Islamists and Christians, with their subversive creed, Bharatvarsha didn't face a problem in terms of it's own sustenance. It was okay for it to be peaceful and mind it's way and let it's samskriti permeate in natural way. No such luxury exists now. Native Americans were eliminated simply by introducing into them a strain of disease they didn't have the ability to combat. Hinduism since it's coming into existence, even now lacks an ability to counter forced conversions, taqiyah, social engineering skills of Abrahamic faiths.

venug ji,

I don't think that is the case. There is a strong notion of fighting Adharma built-in into the Dharmic narrative.

I think before the British came, the Hindus did not do a good Purva-Paksha of Islam and considered it just as another "Dharmic" Path. However they did put up a strong military resistance.

After the British came, it became difficult as then there were two foes, and the Muslims, many of which were Hindu converts to Islam seemed like the obvious choice as partners against the very foreign looking British. So the military fight against the Muslims subsided.

During the Independence Struggle we had M.K. Gandhi who in order to bring in the Muslims transformed the Hindu narrative of one of tolerant of all ideologies, regardless of their Dharma, and in order to attain moral superiority over the British transformed Hindu narrative by changing the semantics of Ahimsa.

After Independence, power went into the hands of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, and they introduced soft-Islam in the garb of Secularism riding on the aura and martyrdom of M.K. Gandhi.

So in all four phases the struggle against Islam in India has successively weakened.

But Bharatiya Sabhyata carries in its core a strong resistance and fight against Adharma, and this has never really been activated to its fullest strength, and one of the reasons is because there never was a serious effort to do Purva-Paksha of Islam. Of course in addition to Adharma, one also has Bharatiya Rastrabhakti, but that has been difficult to mobilize because the Muslims are in fact mostly converted Bharatiyas.

So the requirement is to do a deep Purva-Paksha of Islam and to determine if it is Adharma or not!

[RajeshA]

brihaspati garu,

in the near future there is also going to be a big dearth of women in suitable age for marriage. The gender ratio is skewed. I think there should be a concerted campaign by Hindu institutions to support Hindu men with mehr so that they can marry Muslim women without needing to convert to Islam.

The dearth needs to be shifted to the green!

[member_22872]

Bji, Rajesh ji:
What I am afraid is even now and in the future there will be more B.Duttas, A.Roys and the DigVijays, people who won't flinch a bit to placate muslim brothers. Unlike fables, Dharma cannot win always, that too when it's hands tied through laws like sharia which will create bubbles which cannot be pierced and that will enable them to 'eat from inside out', weakened defenses can do little to fight. True without purva paksha we didn't understand them and allowed them in. But now no one can pardon us for our own downfall if like Bji has proposed don't take care with laws which don't give them virile bubbles to grow in strength. I am not against them, but the nature of beast is such, it doesn't give space for anything but itself.

[RajeshA]

venug ji,

I think Nehruvian-Secularism has run its course. The dynasty is tired and the Nehru DNA very much diluted.

I think Indians still believe in secularism but have also become aware that we are not operating on that basis. Loss of government control over the media, especially Internet and Social Media, is something Nehruvian-Secularists (Islamo-Christianists), Cultural Marxists, Macaulayites and Yuppies cannot really compensate. The more the urbanization the weaker is Jati-consciousness going to become.

Also I think India has reached a confidence level, where the slavish attitude towards the Gora is fast becoming a thing of the past.

All that means is that Bharatiya Sanskriti would be making a strong comeback. Perhaps in 10 years one would see a lot more of it!

[RajeshA]

Dharmic Agenda in a Secular Setup

Of course on this thread we have indulged in our notions of ideal Rashtra in Bharat, but electoral politics does not really allow for a two-thirds majority for a Bharatiya Nationalist platform and even if they had it, the nation would be hard-pressed to contain the outcry from minorities who would feel threatened and provoked and the nationalist platform may also not wish to precipitate a collapse of law and order.

So I think Dharmic Preambles are a long way off, and a fully Dharmic Rashtra serving a Dharmic population in India still further away.

We have to see how one can bring about a de-facto Dharmic polity even when remaining within a Secular State. I believe we need an intermediate solution which leads to a more stable solution later on.

So what does an intermediate solution entail?

1. Consolidating and uniting the Dharmics
2. A Legal Framework formally secular but which advances the agenda nevertheless.
3. Reorientation in Education, promoting Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies Increasing the budget of Archaeological Survey of India 20 fold and Digitization of Ancient Texts.
4. Making 1 year military conscription mandatory for Higher Studies in India.
5. Stabilizing Law & Order in India. Bumping off Muslim strongmen and mafia. Sidelining Mullahs. Empowering Muslim Women.

[RamaY]

^ I think the mandatory military conscription is limited to Dharmics.

[RajeshA]

^ I think the mandatory military conscription is limited to Dharmics.

RamaY ji,

Within the training itself one can be a little bit discriminatory of course based purely on performance grading, again a process which can be subjective. Better grades can mean more advanced training.

However on the whole I would recommend this for Muslims and Christians as well, because it would instill in them also a spirit of Bharatiya patriotism, and they can work within their respective communities as eyes and ears of the Rashtra, as well as opinion makers.

[RamaY]

Ayyo... I said dharmics saar... Not Hindus

I am already called yindooo fundamentalist...

I would call someone dharmic after they go thru the education you mentioned. That is a starting point. If someone shows asuric behavior even after all that education, they should be killed without any hesitation.

[Prem]

Brahman (Satyakam) by Tagore

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VW3abjIUgQ

[brihaspati]

Dharmic Agenda in a Secular Setup

Of course on this thread we have indulged in our notions of ideal Rashtra in Bharat, but electoral politics does not really allow for a two-thirds majority for a Bharatiya Nationalist platform and even if they had it, the nation would be hard-pressed to contain the outcry from minorities who would feel threatened and provoked and the nationalist platform may also not wish to precipitate a collapse of law and order.

So I think Dharmic Preambles are a long way off, and a fully Dharmic Rashtra serving a Dharmic population in India still further away.

People do not protest when they see defeat inevitable. The problem with the "dhaarmik" is it tries to refine everything before taking a concrete pragmatic yet unified step forward. The clarification of the gavya ghrita takes such a long fussy time that the yagna samidha dies out out from its initial flames. If the dhaarmik itself does not believe it will win and prevail - no matter how many or how much reverses come before - the opponents will notice that hesitation and drive home more intensively in agitation their shrill demands for ideological protection.

Unity is the prime concern, and even in elections votes should be sought to be decided on the basis of us and them. Polarization not just on communities - but based on the ideals and principles we are laying out here. If a Muslim is willing to support those, he/she is a "friend" even if not entirely "us". We shoud be abe to make Muslims feel protected within "dhaarmik" lands as long as they do not do anything in public that hurts the sentiments of the majority and pay their economic dues and not specifically practice religious activities that goes against the basic "dhaarmik" principles. Surely a pseudo/reverse dhimma principle would not be taht difficult to grasp. Dhimma was supposed to be benevolent - so no fear should happen!

[brihaspati]

Whatever be the visions of unchallengeable superior beings in varna constructs who would become advisers and judges etc - and will probably produce more of Honourable justice Katjus by that process - I am solidly siding with the the rights of the aam to challenge all of that, and demand and get the opportunity to develop all those superior being qualities and associated privileges.

We have seen how the superior beings betrayed - their capacity to damage as many times as that of the commoner, as they are supposedly expected to do good for the overall interests of the society. No risking that sort of concentration of power as unchallenged birthrights.

[RajeshA]

Progressive Liberation of the Rashtra

Unity is the prime concern, and even in elections votes should be sought to be decided on the basis of us and them. Polarization not just on communities - but based on the ideals and principles we are laying out here. If a Muslim is willing to support those, he/she is a "friend" even if not entirely "us". We should be able to make Muslims feel protected within "dhaarmik" lands as long as they do not do anything in public that hurts the sentiments of the majority and pay their economic dues and not specifically practice religious activities that goes against the basic "dhaarmik" principles. Surely a pseudo/reverse dhimma principle would not be that difficult to grasp. Dhimma was supposed to be benevolent - so no fear should happen!

I am in fact all for polarization, and I would like it to be at the Dharma-Adharma fault line.

My concern is that at the moment the fault-line is Sickular-Hindutva, making Hindutva the minority with the Jati-conscious taking the side of Sickular. One has to take the extent of Dharmic decay and the Sickular Maya in society into consideration when making the battle-plans.

My suggestion is that we first collect our base which is at the moment under the spell of Nehruvian-Secularism before proceeding to the last phase - the Dharma-Adharma.

In fact I would like more intermediate phases

1. Redefining the Indian Secular platform even as we inject Dharmic Amrit into it as mentioned earlier. This liberates the Jati-conscious, the Macaulayites and the Yuppies from the Sickular coalition. In order to do so, we have to show ourselves as not "trigger-happy" - ideologically speaking. It marginalizes the Cultural Marxists and exposes the Islamo-Christianists triggering a collapse of the Sickular platform. However formally the declared enemy is Macaulayite thinking.
   Goal: Consolidation of Dharmics
2. Shifting to the Indic platform, which involves pushing the Indic identity and patriotism into the Muslim masses. It means creating fragmentation within the Islamic "fortress" weaning away much of Ajlaf through inclusive policies. It means putting up a concerted campaign vilifying the Mullahs, munching off icebergs from the Islamic ice-sheet by encouraging experimentation with the dogma and doctrine in the Islamic ranks. It involves providing protection to rebellion within Islamic society. It involves consolidation of the Dharmics.
   Goal: Fragmentation of Islam
3. Expanding the Bharatiya platform, which involves giving huge swaths of Muslim masses a new identity as Bharatiyas. These masses would have gone through the phases of tolerance of the Bharatiya (Secularism), indicization of the creed (Indic), and here they accept the preeminence of their Bharatiya identity over all other identities.
   Goal: Realignment of Allegiance of Muslim Masses with Bharat
4. Initiating the Hindu platform, which involves a full purge of the Islamic mafia strongholds. The Bharatiyaized former-Muslim masses would in fact help in this regard. Here we recapture the Vijayanagara, Maratha and Sikh Empire spirit.
   Goal: Decommissioning of the Sword-Arms of Islam
5. Asserting the Dharmic platform, which requires a clear ideological polarization on the Dharmic-Adharmic front. Here the Abrahamist clergy is divested of any "religious immunity" and the Aegean stables are washed clean. Bharat is reestablished as a Dharmic Rashtra.
   Goal: Delegitimization of Islam
6. Occupying the Arya platform, and this involves going on the offensive in the international arena, and liberating our neighborhood from the imperialist religious ideologies.
   Goal: Bharatiya & Dharmic Expansion

One can move at different speeds in different regions depending on the maximum speed possible in any given environment.

[ShauryaT]

Whatever be the visions of unchallengeable superior beings in varna constructs who would become advisers and judges etc - and will probably produce more of Honourable justice Katjus by that process - I am solidly siding with the the rights of the aam to challenge all of that, and demand and get the opportunity to develop all those superior being qualities and associated privileges.

Who says they are unchallengable et al. All Varna does is ensure that a justice Katju will not be able to pursue wealth or position of power (outside the courts). In fact the lack of a challenge exists today with the napoonsaks in parliament / executive unable to live up to their constitutional duty to appoint judges, since about 93/94 - including the NDA government.

[RajeshA]

Whatever be the visions of unchallengeable superior beings in varna constructs who would become advisers and judges etc - and will probably produce more of Honourable justice Katjus by that process - I am solidly siding with the the rights of the aam to challenge all of that, and demand and get the opportunity to develop all those superior being qualities and associated privileges.

Who says they are unchallengable et al. All Varna does is ensure that a justice Katju will not be able to pursue wealth or position of power (outside the courts).

But his progeny, his family could pursue? Right?

[ShauryaT]

But his progeny, his family could pursue? Right?

So, now you want to transfer hereditary obligations? What is your point? That, a SC judge can use his position to benefit his progeny? A person, who has sacrificed his pursuit of Artha, will realize that it has all been a waste and the only real value in this world is one of wealth? Ofcourse, in all of this, simple laws that exist to manage conflict of interest cannot be made to work? If your real belief is that wealth and greed is the underlying value for humans and everything else is a "controlled" behavior then I am afraid we will never see eye-eye on a given issue.

[devesh]

Who says they are unchallengable et al. All Varna does is ensure that a justice Katju will not be able to pursue wealth or position of power (outside the courts). In fact the lack of a challenge exists today with the napoonsaks in parliament / executive unable to live up to their constitutional duty to appoint judges, since about 93/94 - including the NDA government.

ShauryaT ji,

sometimes we must go with gut instinct. something within us, which tells us if we are on the right path or not. your insistence on Varna-based division-of-labor evokes a similar feeling in me. And I suspect that it is the same for most of us. many of us (or maybe just a few) have had to wage and continue to wage a stubborn and constantly fought battle to get free from constricting interpretations of Varna-based "appropriate" behavior. and YOU want us all to go back to right where we started ?!?!

have you thought that perhaps it was the weakness in that system which made it possible to sow divisions in the first place. divisions which made it impossible for continuous regions to come together and form a national coalition against foreign invaders? Only one precedent for such a coalition exists. and it was short-lived.

I am inclined to agree with brihaspati ji about the inherent weakness of ever increasing "specialization" of labor. it is good for the elites who can keep everybody packaged into neat little categories, thereby preventing them from coming together on a common platform. but over the long run, it sows deep seeds of disunity.

[harbans]

Polarization not just on communities - but based on the ideals and principles

B Ji, i have been routing for that since months. Yet the provocation, confrontation and polarization that most seek is purely on superficial constructs like ritual, culture, habit. That same sense comes through when Shiv Ji said in the Islamism thread:

Burqas are not a problem. Opposing burqas in my view is like not objecting to garbage being thrown in your backyard except for plastic items. You put up with all the stinking garbage but have a hissy fit because plastic appears with the garbage and then say "I am banning plastic in garbage thrown in my garden"

Yet that understanding is a matter of evolution. And in a society or group it is not simple to get through. Yet also, by going full hog into the superficial constructs type of polarization lie great dangers. Firstly in not galvanizing adequate 'evolved understanding' on one's side and that somehow translates to millions and millions of people. Thus the groups that advocate polarization on such constructs don't naturally get enough push from the communities they seek. So lack of support manifests in the very group where it needs support. So no it does not work unless one has a thug branch to push one's point across. The second result of such approach even if the thug branch comes into play is complete polarization to the level of demanding separate nations. That will result certainly at this juncture in further divisions of national boundaries at great cost and upheaval. So despite any wishlist one may have of any ideal, the superficial basis for polarity is bound to fail unless it's based on some other deeper factors.

Of course people who think more superficially will laugh at value system ideals, principles and possibly rightly point to MKG, JLN. However i would point that there tremendous success was conviction and certainty in some value system, ideal. Conviction certainly gains followers. Yet conviction is something that can belong to any side of the spectrum. But being humans their ideals and values did not stand up to threats and challenges that we now face. So they did lack something and that was in principals, ideals, value systems. Not that they had plenty of that. Ironically it is the contrary that is completely true.

To me personally, i don't want to be bound, i like and admire the Buddha's serenity, the message of the Gita, the intellect of Shankara, the profundity of the Upanishads, the compassion of the Jain, the bhakti discipline of the Hare Krishna follower, and the Dharmic spirit of the Sikh Guru's. And i would venture that except for the loyalist sampradaya followers of each, most in India would be like me. Yet there is a common strand that runs between all these, that is captured only through what i mentioned before. That is common to all the loyalists and the majority like me that like to enjoy the plurality this country offers.

Now some who don't admire even that plurality and want to put excluvist strands within that plurality function that threaten and have very different principles and ideals they fall into a certain category. That category includes those from excluvist setups, even very highly loyalist sampradaya set ups, and assorted leftist groups. Through the principles and ideals of the Constitutional preamble they have made major inroads into our country. The polarization thus cannot be on ritual, sampradaya etc to drive that point more.

The way to crack open and reverse the rot is to define and put up simple value systems, simple ideals that we share and the common man finds no reason to oppose. The next step is only to firmly implement them. Make certain that those are upheld. The State will need all it's might to uphold them, yet it will start reversing excluvist idealogies much faster than what we assume. Every sampradaya may have it's own well defined and rigorous wish list for what the nation should be like in it's own image, yet honoring that is not possible. It is only the broadest and clearest definitions of Dharma that we can truly impose and uphold. Form that alone will come the reversal, the integrations and the true image of Bharat.

[brihaspati]

ShauryaT ji,
it is not checking merely wealth that will prevent the aberrations we are worried about. Wealth is just one tool of power - often an inseparable one. However the main quest is for power - money is useful only as a storage of potential power - that which can be used to buy influence and get things done. Ultimately humans are seeking influence and get things done.

I have watched several "powerful" humans very closely, and I still do have the opportunity to watch their successors currently even in a transnational setting.

As a teen, I observed someone still then able to pull strings in national power circles even after self-exile and "retirement". He himself never dealt with cash. He would simply ask someone to get the thing done - even if it needed "money" after all. I know that he was not super-rich. He lived in a modest old building in the heart of the old city, had just one car, no designer furniture, and lifestyle was very simple. I shared his dinner or lunch on many occasions and was sometimes entrusted with being the messenger or conveyer of cheques or cash - which I realize was initially designed to test me out. I know how merely being the messenger would change the facial expression and behaviour of those I met or conveyed the message or item to. He was teaching me and training me to exercise "power" - without money or tangibles [and ams ure some of the recipients were dummies too - required to give feedback to him as to how I performed and my potential - without me being aware of it].

Do you realize that restricting money alone does not restrict the power to damage or get monetary transactions done to favour significant others?

[brihaspati]

harbans ji,
will reply in greater details later, But for now - I am not one with with Shiv ji on the issue of the burqa. I also think that we need to have a pragmatic compromise with reality, pick on the forms and content based on maximum coverage and mobilization. I have expressed my reservations on basing everything on a few abstract values - which I showed, and have seen extensively in my org days - as being very contextual.

So we may need to fix on long term objectives and goals rather than hard "values" at the present. I do feel the need for simplifying memes and structures - in ideology and organizational principles - even the importance of overt symbols and practices as a means of signalling to both the "other" and the "self". A reinforcing mechanism of self-feedback as a body social and politic. People need to see other such people - in strength - to feel confident.

[RajeshA]

Since we are speaking of values and principles again, I would like to mention one. One of the most fundamental principles many Dharmics follow is to not to wish to control the other, allowing other his due space, not imposing one's views or priorities on the other, i.e. in general.

Something like this expresses itself as a meme in society.

At the Rashtra level, the principle can be used in many areas. In fact, I believe it should be one of the core principles. But can such a principle expressed at the Rashtriya level percolate down to society. No. There are many principles that one uses in one's society which simply cannot be imposed by the Rashtra on the individual. Respect and Deference is one such principle.

So the principles that are expressed at the level of Rashtra, remain at that level. Society goes its own way!

Memes that are practiced in a community cannot be uprooted by putting it down at the Rashtriya level.

So Rashtriya Level principles need not be applicable at the society level and society level principles may not be applicable at Rashtriya Level.

Secondly often it is political concerns of the political class which determines whether and how well a Rashtriya principle is implemented. So the memes of a community, i.e. society level principles can find their expression at the Rashtriya level through political channels. And as we have determined earlier, Rashtriya level principles cannot be applied at the society level (voluntary), but still society level principles (memes) can influence Rashtra and undermine the implementation of Rashtriya level principles.

So putting down some principles at the Rashtra level though desirable are not a guarantee that they would be implemented correctly and have a positive influence on society.

It could even be that society starts considering the Rashtra hypocritical because of this and starts losing faith in it!

So suggestion is put down something in the Rashtriya Constitution and Laws only if one is confident of being able to implements them as well, and there is no community with a systemic tendency to try to undermine it.

[ShauryaT]

Do you realize that restricting money alone does not restrict the power to damage or get monetary transactions done to favour significant others?

Presumes again that greed even if overcome for the self will be compromised by the same entity to benefit significant others. Let us presume that some would, Conflict of interest based checks are quite simple things to legislate and execute. The self sacrifices are in addition. What is wrong with it?

Take the Varna label out and then answer the question. Would you support the idea of wealth holding limits enforced by those who wield power? Would you support the idea that those who take state support to invest in knowledge, should be barred from most positions of power? Would you support the idea of someone with wealth barred from the ability to influence those in power?

[brihaspati]

^It will be impossible, if the two supposedly barred categories are deemed beyond challenge or scrutiny - other than their own level. Your idea was to place these on a pedestal - beyond the dirty hand of elections, or other forms of control by the lower unworthy orders who have not made "sacrifices".

The wealthy-barred-from-politics will provide the wealth in the form of benefits if necessary - to the knowledgeables-barred-from-wealth who take all the rashtryia and political decisions, and the the divine knowledgeable beings will use their unquestioned political power for the benefit of the wealthy. Where is the sacrifice!

The perfect replica model of the older rajanya-purohita alliance, which in its ultimate form - failed to prevent the onslaught from the west. There were reasons that this alliance sapped the strength of the society - because any such model will automatically combine with the tendency to concentrate and perpetuate power in its own hands, to ever increasingly exclude most of society from not only this privilege but will also hide its own faults and perfidies under ever-increasing repression of those dubbed unworthy and lower in the hierarchy.

[brihaspati]

Really ShauryaT ji, the sheer arrogance and humiliation dished out by practitioners of pure-knowledge born-into-dvija personnel in many walks of daily life is a result of such claims of such superiority by birth. I think I once wrote on the forum about my own experience when I first went abroad as a lecturer, and stayed with one such divinity for nearly a year sharing an apartment. He would try not to let me cook on various excuses, but usually would leave the dishes unwashed in the sink. Sometimes he would unnecessarily throw away food which I had handled - knowingly or unknowingly.

Then his mom visited and began to dig out my antecedents from the usual obsession route of the divine classes - births-lineage-families-gotras-sub-subdivisions etc. I reluctantly did own up what mine were. Then the mother began to scold her son before me - as to why had he lied that I was not from the "pure" srenis, as in fact according to her I came from "above" theirs in their reckoning. Thenceforth - it was okay for me to "cook", and dishes were no longer left for me to wash.

I am sorry - I have seen too much of this vicious tendency to devalue humanity on claims of superior knowledge-based and religiously approved superior status from childhood, even around me in my relatives or kin, and on others. I will oppose any such move to revive this or lend any strength to this. They get such a sense of entitlement - that even if they do not match up, or are not really no better than the "aam" - they develop a vicious hatred in reaction, and may and will do anything to get even against the imaginary injustice by their birth-society in supposedly not giving them their birthright.

This sense of entitlement cannot be allowed to grow. Once allowed - it will be made hereditary, for natural family environment will create conditions or demands within the family to continue and extend the privilege to progeny, and on it goes.

All the viciousness shown by honourable judges like Justice Katju in their opinions on the "Hindu", or on other aspects of society, or historians like D.N.Jha, and many many others - come from this disconnect and sense of superiority to the birth society, a detachment from the lower, unworthy others - on whom their divinities can impose stuff in their infinite wisdom with accompanying disdain [one only has to go through the language often used by both the luminaries mentioned above]. No wonder that the same section has produced the collaborators also in the past with foreign invaders and ruling systems - often using their insight into native society to damage the latter further.

I think in terms of the society as a whole, have seen through my own life and extended family experience - that qualities most desirable for our society are usually not genetic and if there is one good person in sibling batch of 10 among the divine - 9 will almost surely be evil. If they fail to achieve their dominance they will often turn vicious while refusing to acknowledge the lack of their own abilities. No,that sort of entitlement psychology really needs to be democratized.

[RajeshA]

On Nature of Power