Why is "Hindu Nationalism" spoken of in a pejorative sense?

[svenkat]

matrimcji,
+108 for your questions.

The hindi cinema(the nice family drama/comedy) is supposed to be inspired by sanskrit nataka with their 'mangala' endings.Ofcourse,the 'new wave' criticise it as unrealistic.

[Vayutuvan]

Two more

hAsya, jugupsa ...

[Vayutuvan]

Shiv and Svenkat: there are several more questions that the westerners can be/should be subjected to. Then the depth or lack there off of their philosophy would be quite apparent.

As for stories told to encourage the youth to exceed their ancestors is that the stories can be dismissed as apocrypha. No idea how to escape that trap, though.

[member_22733]

matrimc garu,

Let me ask you a couple of questions: What tools would you use to decide whether a story is apocrypha (i.e. spurious/false IIRC) or not? Which political, academic, social body would decide the standards which a story has to meet to consider something non-apocrphal?

[govardhanks]

Unbelievable! I am declaring you have no idea about how Hindu temples are constructed/consecrated. You can ask for a list of temples to visit and I can oblige.

Disgusting!!. how many times I have to tell you that do not generalize. DO NOT GENERALIZE to all temples..Your declaration has nothing to do with the discussion, give your view points not conclusions.. I am not going to take your offer of listing temples to visit, you can go and find yourself.

Hmmm..If you really know it.... pray tell how Hindu temples are constructed.consecrated? from day zero to day when main god pooja is done.

But not here please, it will derail the thread!

come here,

http://www.quora.com/Why-are-there-some ... s-in-India

This is the second unbelievable!! Same as your buddy Shiv! When Mahabharata states clearly Vedas were written (shlok given earlier) who are you or Shiv or others on this board who think like you to dispute Mahabharata?

Do notice I never questioned that Vedas were taught in a guru shishya parampara or Vedas were transmitted orally also. Just gave evidence from Mahabharat that Vedas were written down in addition to being transmitted orally.

buddy Shiv.. LOLz... I have my own viewpoint.. similarly he has his. I do not agree to all his view point but for some yes..
Vedas is one among them!!

So what if vedas were written in the era Mahabharata? this is what happens when stick yourself to literature meaning of shlok. ..

So according to you world was not existing before Mahabharata? What about Ramayana, Sathya yuga? Yuga sandhis? Do you even know who composed vedas? how it was composed? which god/goddess stand for each veda?
If you are thinking Veda vyas as answer .. I am going to laugh at you..
He is credited to be compiler, he is not the writer nor author, he divided single veda into four to favor his clans removed some parts put only ones which he felt important and left other clans dry with no importance, which is out of topic here so not going any further.

You again prove you are half-knowledge and ignorant! nothing else..

BTW most should be convinced that stance like yours on Silpa Sastra and evidence form Mahabharat is the reason why Hindus are routinely hit for a six.

They do not need be convinced when Apara gnani like you are there? they would speak out when necessary if my view point are not standing.

Neither you nor me know completely shilpa sastra and Mahabharata.. give your communal mind a rest..

And this is why every westerner/outsider when comes to describe Indian tradition is routinely hit on confusion/mis-understandings..

Regardless of what, I find thread is getting derailed and I don't want be reason for it.. I am not going to reply to your posts any from here onward..

[RajeshA]

Hindutvavadis don't have anything against "Krivanto Vishwam Aryam", but we don't want to end up as Abrahamics and our Sanskriti digested or put in a museum in the West!

You wanted Virya - I gave you Virya as much as is possible for me.

Virya comes from atma-gyaan, this is the most ancient teaching. It manifested itself in martial arts. These teachings went abroad. The Chinese and Japanese developed it beyond the original Indian imports, but the Indian root lives on in their traditions. It is not yet a museum piece, and it is not in the West.

{Obviously we cannot take the word of one western-turned-Okinawan monk for all of this. But it is quite plausible and merits study.}

To make it relevant to this thread on Hindu nationalism - have the organized Hindu nationalists initiated any serious effort to study these Japanese, Okinawan, Chinese traditions? Or are the local fights in India occupying all their effort and time?

This is true. To a large extent survival was the aim, often by keeping your head down! Mostly organization! Very little time, resources, people left for such luxuries as studying Indian influence in far off places. Those who had the resources and the freedom, often chose to do cheer-leading for Nehru and his ilk!

I accept the role of Ādhyātma in Vīrya and Bala, but that was not the crux of my question! Sure whole world should have Dharma. No problems.

I am asking how would the Indics living in India and across the world really see their Dharma. What would they be protecting? Where does their Dharma to protect the Rāṣṭra come from when the sacred geography is detached from Itihas, when the notion, that what is written in Itihas has indeed taken place in one form or another on this land, making this geography sacred, is removed? Where does the Dharma come from that the people of this land are duty-bound to see that Dharma rules over Bharat?

The patriotism in India goes really deep, as deep as Itihas is bound to this geography!

Suitcase-Hinduists can't really be bothered about all that. What they are looking for is some mutual respect from others, perhaps even admiration! Unlike Secularists who are willing to go and attach to any White or Islamic butt, Hinduists want to preserve their pride, distinction and exoticism. All this rootedness in India and patriotism towards Bharat, sorts of disturbs their self-image that they are above tribalism and the dystopic chaos that India has degenerated into. May be it even makes it difficult for those living abroad to fully integrate in their host societies and for those living in India to rub shoulders with the well-to-do Secularists.

Before ""Krivanto Vishwam Aryam", make oneself Arya first is what I would say. Since I'm fed up of the one-track Hindutvavaadi mindset

There are many well-placed "specialists" who have a barely concealed contempt for Hindutvavad and like to keep their distance considering themselves more internationalist and superior, more conversant with the others, more touched by the Western "liberating" and "intellectual" tradition, and looking at Hindutvavadis as some frogs in a well.

If you listen to Rajiv Malhotra as well, he too considers real contribution as debating with Christians and Westerners, and looks down upon other Hindus as useless morons, and acts condescending. I don't question his contribution, just his attitude. But sometimes one wonders, how much is the contribution towards Dharma, and how much is for self-marketing.

Often this intellectual arrogance does not take into consideration how Hindutvavadis have worked on the ground, done the hard part. Today one has a Hindutvavadi PM with an absolute majority at the Center. That is a huge thing. And he has been nurtured in the Hindutvavadi nursery to be the man he is. Suitcase-Hinduists cannot put a Dharmaraj on the throne of Bharat, only Hindutvavadis managed that.

I'll insult you by relaying to you the advise of the Prophet of Islam - seek knowledge even if it be in China. While a good part of Arya Dharma remains in the Indian texts, it is not the whole of it.

That hadith is cited often but many consider it fabricated.

[Agnimitra]

RajeshA ji, I've been reading your critique on Rajiv Malhotra ji's work, and I would like to say that I agree. RM ji is, of course, trying to give form and momentum to an ideological movement rather than a well-rounded philosophy, so his limitations are totally understandable. But last year I had expressed much the same thoughts on BRF. In time, I have no doubt that his movement will become more nuanced.

[RajeshA]

Agnimitra ji,

As the author of "Breaking India", I do think, Rajiv Malhotra is not simply a Hinduist, but he also has interests of Bharat at heart, and thus a bit of Hindutvavad is also there.

Perhaps in 2012, I saw "Being Different" as revolutionary. Today I think, he dealt with differences, more at a morphological level, rather than an anatomical level.

Nevertheless despite my criticism, I have high respect for him and his work.

[shiv]

I am asking how would the Indics living in India and across the world really see their Dharma. What would they be protecting? Where does their Dharma to protect the Rāṣṭra come from when the sacred geography is detached from Itihas, when the notion, that what is written in Itihas has indeed taken place in one form or another on this land, making this geography sacred, is removed? Where does the Dharma come from that the people of this land are duty-bound to see that Dharma rules over Bharat?

The geography is fixed deposit. I live in India and have never been to Badrinath/Kedarnath. But I reserve the right to go there anytime I want. Therefore it must be protected for all Hindus wherever they live.

[vishvak]

I don't know why we are changing goal posts now and then. The Indus Valley Civilization is where all the discussion should be about, rest must be out of scope of discussion. Why do we bother much when there is a whole lot of things to discuss about the Indus Valley Civilization, where a lot of digging, research, and narrative making has been going on for a very long time now anyway. We should focus from there. Rest should be out of discussion here. We can also focus on how the Aryan horse reached other places in Arabia and Europe, which can only add to the importance of building aspects of civilization. Rest can be debated at other places.

[member_20317]

I am asking how would the Indics living in India and across the world really see their Dharma. What would they be protecting? Where does their Dharma to protect the Rāṣṭra come from when the sacred geography is detached from Itihas, when the notion, that what is written in Itihas has indeed taken place in one form or another on this land, making this geography sacred, is removed? Where does the Dharma come from that the people of this land are duty-bound to see that Dharma rules over Bharat?

The geography is fixed deposit. I live in India and have never been to Badrinath/Kedarnath. But I reserve the right to go there anytime I want. Therefore it must be protected for all Hindus wherever they live.

RajeshA ji, I think what is said is not about the link between 'Bharat and its Itihaas', 'Kshetra and Kshetragna', 'Mein aur mera parvaar', 'Desh aur Dharm'.

I think what is being said is that there should be a way to acknowledge the fact that Indian culture traveled outside in all directions and to accept their contributions and perhaps advise also or at least consider it. Japan and China are named merely to make it easy to understand.

Probably the reason you got only a one liner from shiv ji .

Probably you also 'sense' it and don't like it and hence the new word Hinduist (hope you realize it is already too complex with so many classifications). Problem is there is a real difference between what some Hindutivavaadis think and what the rest of the world thinks. For those who do not get it here sample this for yourself http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1757892.

How can I lie? Even if I do not agree with the man I still like his posts. Instead I find it doubly hard to get my mind around things that get spoken by those who are non-Hindutva vaadis (whether Indians or non-Indians, Hindus or non-hindus). The people in the bum patakha threads for instance. How can they not get it. I guess it is in their nature. Must be in their nature. So you see that is how a Hindutvavaadi treats his problems - through the nature of the subject. Once a Hindutva vaadi knows it is in the nature, it gets accepted as a form of existence and no hate there after. For example it is easy to hate the nazariya-e-umrikha and its well deserved (same thing as it not being open to argument for me) but matrimc ji who is an American, still is not deserving of the hate, because it his nature. He is different. Absense of hate however does not mean an absence of agenda. Probably this was the best thing that got exported out of India to know that there is a difference. Probably the Chinese and Japs ne is baat ko unti se bandh li and thus we never find the chinese on here or anywhere telling the Indians why they should or should not buy Rafale. They don't care. Not because we Indians do not worthy of observation. Perhaps because they also accept that we are different and being different is in our nature. Its not like they do not have business interests in India. Its just that they respect their own business better than they care for throwing brochures at us. They do not care for inter-religious dialogues. Neither for world peace. Nor does the poverty ***** makes things exciting for them.

From here on, once a state of affairs is accepted as a form of existence the clarity is achieved on whether we are dealing with a laton ka bhoot or a baton ka bhoot. Which is where the post cross linked above gets rationalized. This is the reason why that post got made. As I said earlier, I liked that post. It has a clarity to it that is not dependent of the posters imposterhood. It is based instead on his own nature. He will get warned for it banned for it and if he has no other place to go he will keep coming back to do exactly that. He is a laton ka bhoot just like the umrikhanis who pest all the world are. One is ours the other belongs to somebody else. Ours is what we fight for, not for the other. It simply doesn't work that way. With what is ours we have a karmic balance that needs to be discharged. With that of others we have none. Actually it can be other way round too where we have a karmic hisab-kitab to be settled, when the time comes. A hisab-kitab that must be extracted.

I agree there are a lot of Hindus that are not strictly Hindutva-vaadi (Hindutva vaadis are in considerable minority). I think both should simply accept the existence of the other. This should be doable for the non-Hindutva-vaadi Hindu esp. considering that even within Hindutva-vaadis there is a lot of variety and the acceptance bhaav comes from within the Hindu tradition that both sides share and understand in depth.

For the Hindutva-vaadis there also is a necessary requirement that they do not pull along non-Hindutva vaadi Hindus without their consent. This also should be easy for the same reason. The practical application for such an advise would be to not get personal and not rant about a persons personality, ascribing motives doubting intentions. If intentions and motives are to be studied it has to be directed towards the foreigners esp. the Mallecha kind among them. Pls excuse the use of the word but things cannot be clarified and things become too broad without using that word. Not designed to irritate people. Mal iccha is the prime consideration for directing the anger towards. Not all foreigners may have a Mal iccha.

[Vayutuvan]

Let me ask you a couple of questions: What tools would you use to decide whether a story is apocrypha (i.e. spurious/false IIRC) or not? Which political, academic, social body would decide the standards which a story has to meet to consider something non-apocrphal?

I used that word on purpose - it is a christian concept. I am sure you have heard of shankarAchArya's parakAya pravEsha to experience gruhastya after he loses the first round of samvAda with manDana mishra. With what we knew in 6th century (or 9th century or even late 10th century according to western indoligists), do you think people would have believed that story? We know even more about the nature of life (and soul in a sense of a conjecture -which can be neither proved or disproved).

I think it was an euphemism for what would have happened which was that he detached himself from his philosophical self and did engage in pysical intimacy with a concubine of the said king. May be he never loved that person but used the experience and the person as a vehicle to understand what it is to be a gruhasta. What would your reaction be if somebody comes upto you and says that he really did enter the body of a king for a few years. This person (who has a terminal degree in Chemistry and interested in hindu scriptures) also expressed another belief of his that during the days of mahAbhArata, people were twice as tall and twice as wide in girth etc. This kind excessive embellishment has quite the opposite effect and spactacularly fails ina message which is both nuanced and delicate.

As in my case, if the person stating these things is trained in hard sciences rather than humanities then we will become laughnig stock. For the latter poetic license is always granted. Not so for the scietifically trained. It is not about "lOg kya kahenge?" but it is about intelectual honesty, learning, scietntific temper AKA rationality.

The same holds for Church or Islam as well. In the west (especially western Europe) chirstianity is in a bd shape and they are trying to increase the flock by converting those they think are uncivilized. The only way to counter that kind of propganda is through inculcating scientifc temper and make the target population educated about their hoary civilaztion.

I put it to you that it is not a short term project.

(I typed the above in a hurry - hope the point came across. I will re-read and correct during the day)

[Prem]

I'll insult you by relaying to you the advise of the Prophet of Islam - seek knowledge even if it be in China. While a good part of Arya Dharma remains in the Indian texts, it is not the whole of it.
hadith is cited often but many consider it fabricated.

The Hadith is true . From the time of King Shaushtatar's Mittani Empire, Hitties to Euripides, Sophocles to Gnostics to all the travellers on Silk road , Chinese Scholars to East african coast , They all knew and came to Bharat for learning , knowledge and wisdom. Muhammad missed it all because he was true Prophet. This ignorance tells the tail of absurdity, stupidity and idiocy knowing well that Chinese themselves were visiting India for knowledge in that era..
We all know the moral of tale that some have heard about Bharat, some have seen Bharat but there are few lucky who have actually lived in Bharta and tasted the nectar.Mo heard about China and became Master of Medieval Wisdumb of Arabia.

[member_22733]

I used that word on purpose - it is a christian concept. I am sure you have heard of shankarAchArya's parakAya pravEsha to experience gruhastya after he loses the first round of samvAda with manDana mishra. With what we knew in 6th century (or 9th century or even late 10th century according to western indoligists), do you think people would have believed that story? We know even more about the nature of life and soul (which is only a conjecture - can it be proved or disproved)?

I think it was a nicer way of saying that he detached himself from his philosophical self and did engage in pysical intimacy with somebody. May be he never loved that person but used as a vehicle to understand what it is to be a gruhasta. What would your reaction be if somebody comes upto and says that he really did enter the body of a king for a few years. Also in the days of mahAbhArata, people were twice as tall and twice as wide in girth etc. Too much embellishment actually loses the nuanced and delicate message. Moreover if the person stating these things is well respected (worse if his/her background is hard sciences rather than humanities) then we will become laughnig stock. It is not about "lOg kya kahenge?" but it is about intelectual honesty, learning, scietntific temper.

The same holds for Church or Islam as well. In the west (especially western Europe) chirstianity is in a bd shape and they are trying to increase the flock from what they think are uncivilized. The only way to counter that kind of propganda is through inculcating scientifc temper and make the educated about their hoary civilaztion.

I put it to you that it is not a short term project.

(I typed the above in a hurry - hope the point came across. I will re-read and correct during the day)

I got an "aha" realization on why scientific "temper" spread through Europe at an enormous pace, it is surprisingly relevant to this thread, but I will come to that in a different (and probably lengthy) post (it has to do with Tyranny and exclusivism)

But to answer your question I pose a few rhetorics: Is "scientific temper" a limitation on the stories you can collect and the stories you can tell? Why can both not co-exist together? Why does it have to be dichotomous: "You can either be a story teller (aka in western language: Mystic), or you can be a fellow with scientific temper"? Why are we trying to get into these boxes ?

Humanity (not just indics) have always used embellishment in their stories. Embellishment serves to propagate stories, it also creates curiosity and fantasy and fires up imagination. All these are required for the story to live on and propagate. They are the "genetic" strength of the story.

The important thing to note is that the embellishments are always grounded in the current state of the culture, just like western fantasy novels that you can read today are always grounded in the western culture. The fantasy in a western novel maybe happening in an alien land at a different time, but the behavior of the protagonists, the norms of the culture, the conflicts between characters, that are displayed will be very much relevant to the "NOW" of the culture that it came from, i.e. the west. Take ANY fantasy/sci-fi novel and try to read it. It will not deviate from various plausible scenarios that can as well occur in the present in that culture.

Thus the embellishments in Hindu texts can be viewed with annoyance, they could also be viewed as reflecting what the culture was at that time, what was the "NOW" of that time. I think that opens a unique window on who our ancestors really were. Not as a line by line story on their lives, but as an abstract representation of their hopes and dreams, their fears, their beliefs etc. They are important and need to be studied.

Here is an example from Star-Trek. Troi (ships counsellor) is for all practical purposes someone who can do exactly what you describe , get into someone elses mind. So can Spock using the mind-meld. These are written by authors who have PhDs in physics and undeniably having a scientific temper. If people can accept these stories, then why can they not accept the story of the Sankaracharya-mind-meld?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Night_T ... episode%29

Crusher noted that Troi can sleep, and Troi notes that she is the only person aboard the ship who continues to be able to dream, perhaps due to her unique telepathic abilities, but that all of her dreams are nightmares.

Troi attempts to communicate their actions to the unknown beings in a dream.

Just after there is no longer sufficient power to maintain the hydrogen stream leaving the Bussard collectors, an explosion erupts in front of the ship, indicating that Troi was successful. Another alien vessel was apparently trapped inside the rift, and used telepathy to communicate with Troi.

If this can be written by the west, why cannot we accept the Shankaracharya story?

[member_22733]

Here is something even more relevant:
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Violations

Tarmin describes the Ullians' project to build an archive of memories from many worlds, calling his group "archaeologists of the mind."

But while getting ready for bed, she has flashes of memory about a romantic encounter with Commander Riker. The memory turns unpleasant when he begins to force himself on her - and then turns into Jev, who also appears elsewhere in the room. She then falls into a coma.

Jev apologizes to Picard for Tarmin's behavior and offers the support of the Ullian legal system. Although Picard says the Federation has no law against telepathic memory invasion, the Ullians do and the penalty is severe, even though the practice has been unheard of for centuries. Picard notes that Tarmin is maintaining his innocence.

[RajeshA]

I think what is being said is that there should be a way to acknowledge the fact that Indian culture traveled outside in all directions and to accept their contributions and perhaps advise also or at least consider it. Japan and China are named merely to make it easy to understand.

The main issue was indeed about Itihas having some historicity (meaning 'Satya about our past'), and thus imparting a certain sacredness to the land where the events described happened.

Some are of the opinion that we can disregard this claim of Itihas being "as it indeed happened" or "thus it happened", and consider it simply as a body of work meant to enrich our Adhyātma.

It is clear that there were exaggerations, embellishments, perhaps multiple layer of semantics in the stories, but the skeleton of the story ought to be considered as "thus it happened".

For Hindutvavadis, it is important that this land is sacred due to its Itihas that took place here. For others apparently less so. I believe we Hindus give ground to others needlessly, even apparently in matters which are the cornerstone of our Rāṣṭra.

This has little to do with accepting the contributions of others. If these are there, why not?!

I agree there are a lot of Hindus that are not strictly Hindutva-vaadi (Hindutva vaadis are in considerable minority). I think both should simply accept the existence of the other. This should be doable for the non-Hindutva-vaadi Hindu esp. considering that even within Hindutva-vaadis there is a lot of variety and the acceptance bhaav comes from within the Hindu tradition that both sides share and understand in depth.

Hindutvavadis are held in contempt by Westerners, Indian Secularists and Hinduists!

What troubles Hindutvavadis is that Hinduists are willing to make core ideological concessions to Western Universalists on "Hinduism", declaring themselves as representatives of it and more intellectual and "shooing away" Hindutvavadis as trouble-makers and ignoramuses.

For the Hindutva-vaadis there also is a necessary requirement that they do not pull along non-Hindutva vaadi Hindus without their consent. This also should be easy for the same reason. The practical application for such an advise would be to not get personal and not rant about a persons personality, ascribing motives doubting intentions. If intentions and motives are to be studied it has to be directed towards the foreigners esp. the Mallecha kind among them. Pls excuse the use of the word but things cannot be clarified and things become too broad without using that word. Not designed to irritate people. Mal iccha is the prime consideration for directing the anger towards. Not all foreigners may have a Mal iccha.

We have seen that nothing can be directed towards Mlecchas due to Secularists in power! Now Hinduists want to speak for all Hindus and "negotiate" how best to build "Hinduism" into a viable religious commodity, in sync with the sensibilities of Mlecchas, though continuing to use the rhetoric of differences!

Basically Hinduists are those who can show the middle finger to Bharat, pack their Hinduism in a suitcase, go abroad and set up a temple, and disparagingly speak of Bharatiyas as Morons! And of course they don't believe in any conflict. Really quite wonderful global citizens!

[Vayutuvan]

LokeshC: I have watched ST:TNG as well as ST (the original series) at least a couple of times and some episodes a few more times.
There is a lot of mumbo jumbo in ST - even the PhDs who wrote it (I think there was an person whose name was Shankar or some such) know that some of the things are just that - unproven and sometimes unsupportable conjectures. It is total trash but certainly good entertainment with some good eye-candy - Troi, Riker, Doctor, and Picard.

ST is the lowest comon denominator of science popularization. Even some of the celebrated science popularizers in the west too dumb it down so much that the essence is lost. They become hagiographies - case in point is Feynman or Glashow or Sagan. They have done some work. But you being an engineer know that the subjects they talk about are lot deeper than what they wrote in their pop science books. Same with "A Beautiful Mind" or "Th man who knew infinty" or "the man who only loved numbers". These books can create a spark in middle schol children or pre-teens. If they have it in them they can go onto become scientists/inventors/leaders/social activists/philosophers. By definition only 1% of the people will be in the 99%ile.

That said, I agree that there is a need for good SF/Fantasy/hostorical fiction retelling of Indian stories from vEda, upanishats, and puranas for the aam.

But what I am objecting to is to dumb it down to a level of knwoledge that was available only during the time of varAha mihira or pANIni.

Here is one example story I read in one story book which one of my friends was using to teach telugu to kids in the community. It goes something like this. There is a village by the banks of a river. During one monsoon, here was a heavy downpour and the river was in danger of breaking the hastily put up sand bags or a temporary mud berm. That night the village priest had dream in which lord shiva (or Durga or Kali - chose your pick) tells him that if a young girl is sacrificed, then the disaster would be averted. He immediately calls for a panhayat of all the residents. No child wants to die except one 10 year old who volunteers. She is sacrificed and the river subsides. That girls is then revered as the savior of the village for generation sto come. I was a little mad at my friend that he had chosen this particular book among many other wonderful boks (reteling of panchatantra, kathA saritsAgara among others) but was taken aback when he told me that this book had the belsseing of one of the ShanakrAchAryas and in fact the story outlined above was suposed to have been his favorite story. Probably iwhat would have happened is the following: Some publisher devote would have put the first copy of the book infront him and would have told him that the stories in the book are based on puranic stories and might have mentioned that this particluarly story is a retelling of the ascrifice made by dhadhichi (say). What probably shankarAchArya had in his mind got distorted and dumebd down to such an extent that it would seem like a superstition to outsiders as well as sceince minded hinidus. Moreover the young minds are being messed with (not unlike pusing under the rug of Islamic brutality during the late 10th century and mughal period in NCERT history books) the results of which are out in the open for all to see.

The story could have been a (bad) retelling of the story Shunahshepa who offers himself as the sacrificial animal in place of Ambarisha's horse that has been impounded by Indra so that King Ambarisha can proceed with his aswhamEtha yagnya.



(got to go - later)

[member_22733]

matrimc,

I am spamming Star-Trek here. But please watch this episode, it describes exactly what happens when two cultures who have completely different set of tools try to communicate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darmok

In this episode the equivalent of what Brishits asked us would be: "Dont you have normal-sentence-construction"? You would have gotten a blank answer back from the aliens who communicate entirely only using metaphors and stories of their culture.

Your second point needs another question to be asked:
What logic or thought process are you using to conclude that the "sacrifice of a girl to save a village" story is a "bad" example as opposed to many other things that could have been chosen to be taught? What makes that a bad choice?

Sorry that I am putting you into a spot, but this is also for my own understanding and genuine curiosity. Is it because the story is not present in any "book" and seems to be a "hoax"? I am just a little confused of your reasoning.

I have to go on a temp-vanvas as well. Will come back to this late next week.

[svenkat]

A confession:
matrimcjis post touched a chord in my mind and I responded with admiration to his post on whiteys samskara,itihaasa etc.On reflection,I am glum.Things like samskara etc are so intangible in a world where survival itself is a competition for a large number of people.Even India,the land where these concepts originated is struggling with modernity etc.What to say about western lands with their emphasis on the 'immediate now' and brute animal instincts honed to a very high level.

[Vayutuvan]

Svenkat ji: samskara are tangible and intangible - garbha dAna, nAmakaRaNa, anna prAshana, chowLa karma, aksharAbhyAsa, upanayana, ..., antyakriya are tangible by the very act of going through the corresponding ritual. The intangible is the deeper meaning which comes with the caveat that one has to answer this question "is there a deeper meaning?" Are they simply ritualistic mnemonic devices to keep track of cyclical events of an ensemble and are celebrated for members of the ensemble? IOW, are they simply a metronome which keep track of milestones in the life of a member of the ensemble?

There is nothing to be glum about any of this. moreover where is the need for confessions? Leave it to the religions [of the book].

[shiv]

A confession:
matrimcjis post touched a chord in my mind and I responded with admiration to his post on whiteys samskara,itihaasa etc.On reflection,I am glum.Things like samskara etc are so intangible in a world where survival itself is a competition for a large number of people.Even India,the land where these concepts originated is struggling with modernity etc.What to say about western lands with their emphasis on the 'immediate now' and brute animal instincts honed to a very high level.

Don't be glum.

Understanding is possible, provided we take the route to open our eyes and there is a deep thinking man who has mostly been cursed on this thread because he is difficult to understand. I mean Balu. He is doing his level best to try and show those Indians who read and speak English, AND who are willing to open their eyes. But the route is not easy.

Concepts like samskara and itihaasa become difficult to explain in the language we use in English because the language itself is loaded with phrases and the idiom of Christianity. Everywhere you turn, every sentence we speak, without our knowledge, often has concepts and origins in Christianity. We think and speak Christian - even those of us who claim to be the deepest and biggest Hindus.

RaviG had earlier posted a reference to his article that mentioned Feynmann with some criticism, and he points out in that article how Feynmann, when he, posing as a scientific minded physicist was critical of "religionists" for arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, did not realize that the very scientific logic that he felt he represents arose from Christian theological arguments of the type that asked "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin". Feynmann probably did not realize that this was one of the arguments used by protestants to dismiss Catholic theology.


Balu points out that the question is deep in two ways
1. Feynmann's probable ignorance of how he is using a Christian metaphor for ridiculing religion and promoting scientific logic
2. How the example itself derived from Christianity disproves many of the tenets of Christianity

Quoting from the article
http://www.hipkapi.com/2011/08/27/does- ... s-culture/

About angels on a pin head. Funnily enough, this is a very serious question that involves the Christian understanding of human beings, salvation, heaven and hell, and also the theories of psychological identity. The issue is about angels: are they purely spiritual beings (in that case how could one say they exist because existence seems to require materiality) or do they merely have tiny bodies? If tiny, how tiny is it? Could all the angels in Heaven be accommodated on a pin head?

What has this to do with human beings? Well, the answer is obvious: what happens to human beings till the day of judgement? How could you be punished in Hell without having your body? What exactly is resurrected during God’s reign on earth? How big is hell (does it have a physical location and is it a physical space) that it can provide space to all the sinners? Are heaven and hell mere metaphors or are they also real places? Etc

What has this to do with psychological identity? Again, the answer must be obvious. How can you say that some person is sent to hell or heaven, if it is the case he does not have his body? After all, having a specific body is essential to being the person you are. So, if committing sins sends you to hell, you must go there with your body. And so on.

There is another article where he points out that subject "ethics" itself is a subject derived from Christianity starting from the laws laid down by God and your obligations to that God, with "Him" being the owner of everything. That ethics has embedded itself in the English language - for example in the word "ought". There is no equivalent word in Indian languages which leads to the conclusion that Indians have no ethics, which is utter nonsense. But even a "secular" person will never know the Christian origin of this.

That is why Balu's research is so significant

[peter]

.....
Is there any society in the world that survives continuously by being ashamed of itself? I would say, no. Societies tend to be proud of themselves. But when one society meets another - either by conquest, or by people traveling from one place to another, then a sense of shame might arise if some aspects of another society are felt to be superior to one's native society.

This is true in India only amongst the "educated". Word of whitemen is considered hard to rebuff for such educated. Let us not forget that the aim of British education policy, that modern India is still following, was to produce babus who will not question. And that is what we have.

There was no need for Hindus to feel ashamed of themselves until India was subjected to invasions and finally controlled by Britain. The shame has started after the British came. As I said earlier, shame is an acknowledgement of inferiority. Many Indians who display shame acknowledge that Indian society is inferior in many ways to British/Western societies and that we need to change.

You are talking about a minority of educated in India. May I please suggest that you travel to country side and ask people for their opinion. You will see/hear diametrically opposite POVs from city dewellwers

[peter]

A colonial myth in your post is highlighted. India has the most number of inscriptions. Even if you put all nations of the world together and India on the other balance we still come out ahead.

Do you mean "manuscripts" or do you mean "inscription" (as in engraved in rock, metal or clay)? If you mean the latter, I don't believe you. The number of inscriptions the Archaeological Survey of India has is of the order of 100,000. Just cuneiform documents in the Middle East number to more than 2 million.

Apples and oranges. Saraswati Sindhu Civilizations encompassed an area much larger then all other ancient civilizations put together. The number of seals from this region was much larger then what you quote.

The rock, brass plate, copper plate, temple, palace, fort, village etc inscriptions of India do surpass all other countries put together. Look at Iran , a great monarchy, how many inscriptions did they have?

[A_Gupta]

I am asking how would the Indics living in India and across the world really see their Dharma. What would they be protecting? Where does their Dharma to protect the Rāṣṭra come from when the sacred geography is detached from Itihas, when the notion, that what is written in Itihas has indeed taken place in one form or another on this land, making this geography sacred, is removed? Where does the Dharma come from that the people of this land are duty-bound to see that Dharma rules over Bharat?

Look at this way, in each cycle of yugas, what is written in Itihaas has happened in India. As the Varaaha avatar says to Bhudevi, "each time I rescue you".... In contrast Emperor Ashoka or Mahatma Gandhi lived only once at specific dates and times, in this Kali Yuga, not in the next one, in principle, using Shiv's term, their lives can be captured as chronicles.

The patriotism in India goes really deep, as deep as Itihas is bound to this geography!

Suitcase-Hinduists can't really be bothered about all that. What they are looking for is some mutual respect from others, perhaps even admiration! Unlike Secularists who are willing to go and attach to any White or Islamic butt, Hinduists want to preserve their pride, distinction and exoticism. All this rootedness in India and patriotism towards Bharat, sorts of disturbs their self-image that they are above tribalism and the dystopic chaos that India has degenerated into. May be it even makes it difficult for those living abroad to fully integrate in their host societies and for those living in India to rub shoulders with the well-to-do Secularists.

I don't think Sanatana Dharma is any of "-ism" and its followers are any kind of "-ists".

Before ""Krivanto Vishwam Aryam", make oneself Arya first is what I would say. Since I'm fed up of the one-track Hindutvavaadi mindset

There are many well-placed "specialists" who have a barely concealed contempt for Hindutvavad and like to keep their distance considering themselves more internationalist and superior, more conversant with the others, more touched by the Western "liberating" and "intellectual" tradition, and looking at Hindutvavadis as some frogs in a well.[/quote]

As illustrated by their actions and their words, it is hard to think otherwise.

If you listen to Rajiv Malhotra as well, he too considers real contribution as debating with Christians and Westerners, and looks down upon other Hindus as useless morons, and acts condescending. I don't question his contribution, just his attitude. But sometimes one wonders, how much is the contribution towards Dharma, and how much is for self-marketing.

You should listen more closely whom R.M. is criticizing as morons. You don't do that homework you will be rightly viewed as a frog in the well.

Often this intellectual arrogance does not take into consideration how Hindutvavadis have worked on the ground, done the hard part. Today one has a Hindutvavadi PM with an absolute majority at the Center. That is a huge thing. And he has been nurtured in the Hindutvavadi nursery to be the man he is. Suitcase-Hinduists cannot put a Dharmaraj on the throne of Bharat, only Hindutvavadis managed that.

Modi as Dharmaraj? Modi has the makings of a good and successful Prime Minister, but Modi as Dharmaraj? Really?

I'll insult you by relaying to you the advise of the Prophet of Islam - seek knowledge even if it be in China. While a good part of Arya Dharma remains in the Indian texts, it is not the whole of it.

That hadith is cited often but many consider it fabricated.

[A_Gupta]

Again, a quote from Swami Vivekananda

A nation that has no history of its own has nothing in this world. Do you believe that one who has such faith and pride as to feel, "I come of noble descent", can ever turn out to be bad? How could that be? That faith in himself would curb his actions and feelings, so much so that he would rather die than commit wrong. So a national history keeps a nation well-restrained and does not allow it to sink so low. Oh, I know you will say, "But we have not such a history!" No, there is not any, according to those who think like you. Neither is there any, according to your big university scholars; and so also think those who, having travelled through the West in one great rush, come back dressed in European style and assert, "We have nothing, we are barbarians." Of course, we have no history exactly like that of other countries. Suppose we take rice, and the Englishmen do not. Would you for that reason imagine that they all die of starvation, and are going to be exterminated? They live quite well on what they can easily procure or produce in their own country and what is suited to them. Similarly, we have our own history exactly as it ought to have been for us. Will that history be made extinct by shutting your eyes and crying, "Alas! we have no history!" Those who have eyes to see, find a luminous history there, and on the strength of that they know the nation is still alive. But that history has to be rewritten. It should be restated and suited to the understanding and ways of thinking which our men have acquired in the present age through Western education.

If Itihaasa is restated and suited to the understanding and ways of thinking obtained through Western education, it will be irretrievably damaged. The first step is correct, if we have rice and Englishmen do not, they won't die of starvation. They may have wheat. But the second recommendation is like saying we should cook our rice like the Englishmen cook their wheat.

[A_Gupta]

^^^ the catalog of Indus Valley seals is of the order of 1000s, and occupies three volumes.

PS: I mean seals with inscriptions.

[Vayutuvan]

Svenkat ji: forgot to add that even if there is no deeper meaning (please note that I am not sayng there is none. In fact I am sure there is something intangible and mystical about some of the rituals like sandhyA vandana , chanting of Om, or listening to an exquisitely rendered keertana, or cook a meal for a few people with as just enough resources no more no less than required - parsimony - has certain calming effct on the mind) I would still perform these samskara.

[RajeshA]

If you listen to Rajiv Malhotra as well, he too considers real contribution as debating with Christians and Westerners, and looks down upon other Hindus as useless morons, and acts condescending. I don't question his contribution, just his attitude. But sometimes one wonders, how much is the contribution towards Dharma, and how much is for self-marketing.

You should listen more closely whom R.M. is criticizing as morons. You don't do that homework you will be rightly viewed as a frog in the well.

Homework? It seems the Moron-Smriti is going mainstream, with all the RM vocabulary!

The word "Moron" would be bandied around a lot, I guess, in the coming future. It reeks of moronity itself. It fails to take into consideration the historical evolution of thinking on the Subcontinent. Yes we have been distanced from our traditional education and for each and every Indian, there are reasons why he has grown up to have the thinking he may have, and his gunas would have formed his attitudes and ideology given the prevalent compulsions, opportunities and ideological offerings. A moron/murkha may considered to be one who even though has the possibility to avail of Ārya Śikṣā, fails to learn the right lessons. But when it was simply not available everywhere supported with the right educators, deracination and stupid ideas are simply in the nature of the environment prevalent in India.

So calling others "Moron" is plain and simple a case of "intellectual arrogance" in order to feed own pride, forgetting that one may have had privileges which others did not!

And not unlike Westerners and Macaulayists, arrogant Hinduists too may be accused of looking down upon Indians, instead of seeing them as people of a noble lineage who may have lost their ways, but who deserve to be shown respect nevertheless.

[svenkat]

matrimcji,
When I read that word 'samskara' what occurred to me what was the meaning that comes from "he has good samskaram or that family has good samskaram" in the sense of values.The 40 samskaras was furthest from my mind.May be theres a story there too.Today samskara-s are seen as a relic of distant ages when men were at the mercy of elements or a symbol of traditions and continuity.Atleast among brahmanas say a hundred years back,the whole life of brahmanas was centred around samsakara-s.Even then it might have been just ritual or tradition for many,many of them.

The immediate reaction in my mind was these are value systems.How can one order them for indviduals in India or West when these are so intangible?

Regarding your specific post,all I can say is "your samskara-s/vaasana-s are so good that you dont need a 'resason" in this kali yuga.I can only do praanams to a noble soul like yourself".Ofcourse there are many who do it out of force of tradition,belief in Ishwara/shaastra-s or combination of factors.

But in a sense this is what is being debated.Why do we have to follow samskara-s(in the sense of rituals)?They are being claimed as useless/irrelevant.It is said we cannot believe them.Also we have the issue of exclusiveness unique to Sanatana Dharma.Theoretically and practically,Islam and Christianity have simpler rituals.Vedic antyeshti,shraadha ceremonies are much more elaborate and intensive extending over the first year and regularly afterwards.

The goras say let us replace all these samskaras by nationalism,schools,colleges,'free press',radio,TV,internet,learning to drive a car,play outdoor sports like football,basketball,develop hobbies,and the like.They say these are the new samskaras enough for modern life to build a strong body and keen mind and a healthy society.Ofcourse,this is their made to order prescription but they say this is enough.

[csaurabh]

If Itihaasa is restated and suited to the understanding and ways of thinking obtained through Western education, it will be irretrievably damaged. The first step is correct, if we have rice and Englishmen do not, they won't die of starvation. They may have wheat. But the second recommendation is like saying we should cook our rice like the Englishmen cook their wheat.

This is a very flawed line of thinking. Currently, Indian history is reeling from problems like 'Aryan' invasion, whitewashing of Islam, overglorification of Gandhi and a complete lack of regional history. We need to correct these problems first by showing how the process of Western history works. A piece of pottery here, some carbon dating there, some coins, relating them to ancient texts and accounts that have survived to this day. This is completely applicable to Indian history as well, and you can see it in museums.

Currently Indian school 'history' is formulated by pulling things out of Romila Thapar's arse. This needs to be corrected. That is the first thing. After we are convinced that we do indeed have a history of our own, we can move on to the itihaasa version where myths and legends are enough for us and we have no need of corraborating evidence.

Indians are not stupid. They know something is really wrong with their school history but there is no one to show the way. It will come in small steps. Such as showing that Baudhayana knew 'Pythagoras theorem' much before Pythagoras and Bhaskara proved it in a very cool way. I try to do this where I can.

Adopting a stance like pushpak rath means that ancient Indians built aeroplanes is a cargo cult position. It is counter productive and stupid.

[A_Gupta]

[
Homework? It seems the Moron-Smriti is going mainstream, with all the RM vocabulary

http://beingdifferentbook.com/wp-conten ... s-Aug4.pdf

[A_Gupta]

Let us start simple. I have excerpted some of your post below:

Speaking for myself, my thought process about this episode would be
"Shri Hanuman transported a whole lot of herbs over a long distance in a short time as he could not discern which herb was the appropriate one to administer to Shri Lakshman for healing his wound"!

"Mountain" can be a misunderstanding of the semantics of the word, an error in transmission, an embellishment, an exaggeration, or have some cultural significance, or it too could be the truth, I don't know, and things that I don't know, one can speculate on it, but there just isn't sufficient data or evidence to determine what exactly was the case, and whatever theory people come up with, it would remain an interesting theory, and nothing more. But since in the text, we read "mountain" that is how I would advocate its further use, because "mountain" semantics has become part of our traditional culture.

It is in the nature of the beast, that Itihas would continue to mean many things to different people, and there is no need to criticize one or the other, as long as the one treating the texts retains a sympathetic disposition towards our Sanskriti.

Just as an example, I accept Nilesh's dating of Rama's birth - Nov 29. 12240. For me that is plausible! There are other Hindus who suggest the date to be 1.2 million years ago, during the Treta Yuga! Fine, that is what they believe in, what their framework of beliefs and assumptions suggests to them! I have no problem with that.

So Itihaas makes no truth-claims seems to be what you are saying. ( If Itihaas makes a truth-claim then the dating of Rama's birth has to be to Nov 29, 12240, or to 1.2 million years ago, or to something else, it cannot be all three. Similarly with the Hanuman story.)

Have I misunderstood?

[shiv]

The most difficult thing about the situation we are in is related to the fact that our view of the world is shaped by language.

Languages are invented by people. People make words and sentences to express their experiences based on their environment and culture, and those feelings are often unique to that culture, expressed in unique words. Literature and memories are then collected up for centuries based on the unique feelings of a particular culture and their unique language. Hindus created a unique set of words and expressions to express their feeling and thoughts. English developed in Northern Europe and for one thousand years has been influenced by Christianity and Christian concepts and idiom. Wen you teach someone a language, you are teaching a long history of feelings and thoughts of the culture that made that language. English is inadequate to convey Indian thoughts, but we are not willing to accept that in a stupendous one billion strong act of collective moorkhta

A particular experience of the same thing in one culture often does not have an exact word in another culture and sometimes the exact same situation is viewed differently by another culture which has a different word for the same experience. For example, there is the Ayurvedic concept of "ushna" - which is very stupidly mistranslated as "hot" in English. There is no word for ushna in English. Hot in English does not come anywhere near what "ushna" is supposed to mean.

Look at how Indians and Europeans view the weather and temperatures. For most of India a temperature of 10 deg C is cold. In the UK a 10 degree C day is described as "mild". On the other hand a sunny day in the UK is "a "fine" day. And because of that we have 3rd std children to this day writing English essays that read "It was a fine sunny day. Me and my sister wanted to go for a picnic. then clouds appeared. We were sad" This is a nonsense colonized mind type of situation that we are putting our children into because of the reading they do. In India a bright sunny day means 40 deg C. You do not want to go out You stay indoors. On the other hand, a rainy day in India is pure, pure joy. Look for songs in Hindi. Rainy day songs are generally happy. In English, rainy day songs are generally misery.

So even words with the same meaning have a different emotion and some feelings and experiences don't have words at all.

That is why Indian languages do not have a separate word for "history", "ethics" or "religion". English has no word for dharma. Dharma is not religion. English has no word for "itihaas" although itihaas has both ethics and history encoded within. Our culture was never called "hindu-ism" by us. We can accept that for want of a better word. But exactly why are we fighting to have it called religion and not cult. Why are we fighting for "recognition" within a framework of language that was made in Britain? We are doing that because we have discarded our own words and we think in English and we want to say things that our culture makes us feel in English. And we do a bad job because we do not understand the Christian origins of many English terms and we are unable to find the words to express what we really mean in English. We are too enslaved mentally to even write our own dictionary. We call English a foreign language, but try to force fit Hindu concepts in a language that carries Christian idiom.

Even the people who claim they are the strongest supporters of Hindutva fall into this rut - simply because they may know English words but do not understand deeper meanings. We use old, faulty expressions that are totally wrong like "religion" history", hot,cold and a thousand other faulty, approximate and inappropriate translations for Indian concepts that simply cannot be expressed using those words.

And because we are simply fu(king around like this no one knows where to turn or what to do.

[shiv]

What is the word for "bath" in Hindi or Kannada?

[A_Gupta]

Read the first twenty-thirty verses to see e.g., what Shiv Purana says about itself:
https://ia601401.us.archive.org/19/item ... 20Vol1.pdf

[csaurabh]

What is the word for "bath" in Hindi or Kannada?

snaana - Sanskrit
nahaana - Hindi
chan - Bengali
Don't know Kannada

Not sure what the point of this particular example is? I see what you are getting at though. Language profoundly influences our culture and the way we think. See for example:

http://www.linguisticsociety.org/conten ... ay-i-think
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB100014 ... 1592767868

[shiv]

What is the word for "bath" in Hindi or Kannada?

snaana - Sanskrit
nahaana - Hindi
chan - Bengali
Don't know Kannada

Not sure what the point of this particular example is? I see what you are getting at though. Language profoundly influences our culture and the way we think. See for example:

In Kannada it is snaana.

The reason I ask is that the English word "bath" means

• noun: a large container for water, used for immersing and washing the body.
  verb: wash (someone) while immersing them in a bath.

But all Indians think "snaan karna"= bath. Of course, it isn't.

When we speak of snaan, we are washing ourselves as part of cleanliness and hygiene . We are NOT talking about sitting in a tub. Bath specifically means sitting in a tub.

The reason I brought it up is once again to illustrate that there are so many concepts that are mistranslated and misinterpreted to vague approximations of the original. Misinterpreting bath does not have serious consequences, only funny ones. I remember two. My father travelled to do his PhD in the US in 1945 in the ship. The Queen Elizabeth". He apparently travelled in luxury because a butler type guy asked him and his mates "Would you like to have a bath sir" on day 1. They all said yes and he got a hot tub ready and they had no clue what to do with it.

Later, when I was doing medicine we learned that standing up after a hot bath can cause fainting. We never realized as students that this referred to tubs and not the bucket-mug "bath" that we were accustomed to having.

these stories are trivial. But the same errors have crept in to say "You have no history", "You have no ethics"

[member_20317]

Funny yes. Also when Indians stand in a dry bath tub for a shower or snaan. English is a timepass language just like urdu before it and persian. All transplants. Most likely will be lost later and in future the speakers would be treated like the speakers of urdu and persian are treated today. Actually I read somebody saying English has its own set of untranslatables. So yes to an extent you are right. But a true untranslatable is basically so because it is 'un-describe-able and yet acceptable' thus we should be able to use or misuse or disuse an artificial untranslatable but still should be willing to put time and effort in saving the human version of a true untranslatable.

[csaurabh]

Let me give one more example.

You do not need to be a Sanskrit scholar to realize that the following words are fairly close to each other:

naitikta ( morality ), niti ( governance ), niyat ( policy ), niyam ( rules ), netritva ( leadership ), nyaya ( justice )

It is implicitly implied that a neta ( leader ) should have or understand all of these things. But this is not intuitively obvious to those who speak only English.

Disastrous things like the Maun Moron Sarkaar happened as a result of trying to run a government without any understanding of these things.

But that is an extreme example. I have seen so many, even good people making poor decisions due to excessive focus on niyam ( rules ) which is something we have imported from the West without understanding the broader picture.

[vishvak]

An example of bath: Tuco's bath.
from the movie: The good the bad and the ugly.