The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

[vishvak]

Let us not miss wood for the trees. The cow is a sacred animal to Hindus in general, and this "same" purpose etc have not come out of vacuum. Cow is venerated as mother and why would Hindus care when western/arap start questioning anything, including Freedom of Worship which is not present in their own society.

We need to put more and more emphasis on freedom of worship as one of many core aspects of Indian culture.

One more thing about 'companion animals' we do not discuss is that colonizers in USA killed off companion animals and animals that were hunted for food by natives. They should not have done that and respected rights of natives too.

[Agnimitra]

We need to put more and more emphasis on freedom of worship as one of many core aspects of Indian culture.

Not a good idea. In this case, this is taken care of by #2 and #4. But formulating policy based on "freedom" of "worship" will raise questions when one form of "worship" contradicts another form - E.g., Shi'as must ritually curse the "Rightly Guided Caliphs" that Sunnis adore, etc.

"Worship" in India has always been predicated on reason and consequences. Indic theory on morality itself is Consequential, not Deontological. So policy formulation should be predicated along those lines only. Definitely don't want some kind of "theocratic logic" taking over India.

[A_Gupta]

http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns ... 713674.ece

T.J.S. George on India and the Phillipines.

As Gatbonton points out, “Japan, Korea and China—being ethnically and culturally homogenous—can take their nationhood for granted.” We don’t have that advantage and so we need a wiser and more understanding leadership than Japan, Korea and China need. Upanishadic India had the wisdom to absorb differences and diversities and turn them into sources of strength. Alone among ancient civilisations, it envisaged progress through the pursuit of “that knowledge by which we hear the unhearable, by which we perceive the unperceivable, by which we know the unknowable”. Our ancestors who listened to those teachings achieved great heights. But eventually the philosophers were replaced by plunderers, constantly deal-making and deal-breaking. We have lost our moorings. Politicians come in different shapes and colours, but all of them pursue their individual ambitions or their narrow, idiosyncratic ideas, with no thought for the larger good of the country. That would explain Gatbonton’s conclusion: “Much is expected from tough-minded, nationalistic Prime Minister Narendra Modi; but I for one feel that even he will find the going hard in any effort to break his country’s democracy of stalemate.”

[svinayak]

http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns ... 713674.ece

T.J.S. George on India and the Phillipines.

As Gatbonton points out, “Japan, Korea and China—being ethnically and culturally homogenous—can take their nationhood for granted.” We don’t have that advantage and so we need a wiser and more understanding leadership than Japan, Korea and China need. Upanishadic India had the wisdom to absorb differences and diversities and turn them into sources of strength. Alone among ancient civilisations, it envisaged progress through the pursuit of “that knowledge by which we hear the unhearable, by which we perceive the unperceivable, by which we know the unknowable”. Our ancestors who listened to those teachings achieved great heights. But eventually the philosophers were replaced by plunderers, constantly deal-making and deal-breaking. We have lost our moorings. Politicians come in different shapes and colours, but all of them pursue their individual ambitions or their narrow, idiosyncratic ideas, with no thought for the larger good of the country. That would explain Gatbonton’s conclusion: “Much is expected from tough-minded, nationalistic Prime Minister Narendra Modi; but I for one feel that even he will find the going hard in any effort to break his country’s democracy of stalemate.”

None of these people talk about social engineering in India in the last 50 years.
It is the Indian english newspaper which is fractious in India than anything else. People who read Indian newspaper may get the wrong image of India. Anybody not visiting India and writing from far away is not getting the truth.

Even this kind of comments are not worth it. What is the status of the education of History in India for the last 50 years. History has been changed for some fake ideology by a party which has lost it purpose. When the generation which is dependent on the false ideology for a long time will feel that the leadership has lost its moorings.

Our ancestors who listened to those teachings achieved great heights. But eventually the philosophers were replaced by plunderers, constantly deal-making and deal-breaking. We have lost our moorings. Politicians come in different shapes and colours, but all of them pursue their individual ambitions or their narrow, idiosyncratic ideas, with no thought for the larger good of the country.

[Agnimitra]

http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns ... 713674.ece

T.J.S. George on India and the Phillipines.

As Gatbonton points out, “Japan, Korea and China—being ethnically and culturally homogenous—can take their nationhood for granted.” We don’t have that advantage and so we need a wiser and more understanding leadership than Japan, Korea and China need. Upanishadic India had the wisdom to absorb differences and diversities and turn them into sources of strength. Alone among ancient civilisations, it envisaged progress through the pursuit of “that knowledge by which we hear the unhearable, by which we perceive the unperceivable, by which we know the unknowable”. Our ancestors who listened to those teachings achieved great heights. But eventually the philosophers were replaced by plunderers, constantly deal-making and deal-breaking. We have lost our moorings. Politicians come in different shapes and colours, but all of them pursue their individual ambitions or their narrow, idiosyncratic ideas, with no thought for the larger good of the country. That would explain Gatbonton’s conclusion: “Much is expected from tough-minded, nationalistic Prime Minister Narendra Modi; but I for one feel that even he will find the going hard in any effort to break his country’s democracy of stalemate.”

This is true. It feels like the C-system was trying to get there too soon (in this new iteration of Indic civilization). It ended up creating a vulgar burlesque of these lofty ideals by selling off bits of the nation to entrenched elites and their influence networks that have roots in the previous adverse historical iterations. They pursued a policy of "deal-making and deal-breaking" in order to put together a semblance of this "unity in diversity", which a shashi Tharoor could then trumpet at international TED talks, about how India has a "Muslim" President, a "Sikh" PM, an "Italian Catholic" leader of the largest party, a "Hindu" so-and-so, and so on. Its a farce.

The only way to create the new Indic order along these lines is to demand that the various stakeholders are rooted in this present iteration of Indic nationhood. For certain elites and their captive communities, that would mean radically re-adjusting their identity moorings that are stuck in a previous adverse iteration - adverse w.r.t. all previous fundamental iterations of Indic civilization. One could easily remove the adverse history-centric moorings and keep the value-centric moorings that are spiritually important.

Identity and Learning: Worlds within Worlds

[Agnimitra]

Framework of Laws to Deal with Religion (Cont.)

Continuing the argument against Religion, the State should ensure that Religions in India are curtailed. Naturally the right to practice faith should be retained.
...
[*] Uniform Civil Code

1. All Religion groups have to abide by the Uniform Civil Code. No exceptions can be made for them. Same is the case for New Age Belief Systems.

A potentially historic judgment, one step close to a UCC -

Supreme Court denies Muslim man right to a second wife

In a historic decision last month, the Supreme Court denied a Muslim man the right to have more than one wife and upheld his termination from employment for committing bigamy.
...
In a catena of cases, the SC has held that the freedom of religion protects only those practices that constitute an “essential and integral part of religion”. Therefore, Muslim personal law can claim the protection of Article 25 only if it is established that marriage, inheritance and the other areas it covers are “essential and integral parts” of Islam.

Islamic theology states, "Marriage is half your deen", and therefore considered essential to religion. However, it is not clear to me whether polygamy is as essential as marriage in general. It appears that the SC has decided in the negative.

[Prem]

http://organiser.org//Encyc/2015/3/14/C ... ative.aspx
The Hindu Grand Narrative

Most major countries have a well-defined grand narrative that projects who they are as a collective identity. This is invariably a positive self-image based on carefully selected historical facts, mixed with exaggerations and even outright falsehoods. For examples, US students learn with great pride of their founding fathers – but Thomas Jefferson’s lifelong practice as a slave owner is not mentioned. Similar narratives of pride are the staple of education and media portrayals in France, Britain, China, Japan and Russia, to name a few. Besides modern countries, the Abrahamic religions each have their own clear-cut grand narratives, each premised on a singular historical event recorded in the corresponding holy book.
Such narratives serve an important function in establishing collective identities, the ideals worth aspiring, and a broad trajectory—both for interpreting the past and guiding the future.
Unfortunately, I find Indians, especially Hindus, confused about this matter, often in denial about its significance, and even outright hostile to the very idea of having such a narrative. Many elites in Delhi have criticised my suggestion for narrative debates and discussions, calling such an activity divisive. They see India through the lens of fragments, with separate and conflicting narratives, and Hinduism as the scourge inflicting our society’s health and viability.
I have written extensively about the Hindu grand narrative as an open architecture. It is adaptive and fluid, accommodating to fresh ideas and new members. It is based on the discoveries made by rishis in their inner laboratories through adhyatma-vidya (inner sciences). The Hindu inner sciences are now at the cutting edge of research in neurosciences in the West, where the Hindu sources tend to be erased as part of the frenzy for appropriation. The fields of medicine, self-improvement and management are each benefiting in major ways from the goldmine of Hindu ideas. Sanskrit is a language of the future, not a museum relic from the past.
Such a profound narrative is more like science (of the inner domain) than like a typical “religion” in the Abrahamic sense. It is free from aggressive mandates by an angry God demanding violence against non-believers. It is free from claims of exclusivity that have caused much of the world’s violence for several millennia. Rather, the open architecture is a network that hosts a multitude of smaller narratives introduced by diverse communities.
For instance, the notion of ishta-devata (“my deity”) is a powerful foundation that supports Hinduism’s broad spectrum of deities and paths in a harmonious manner. I can worship the ultimate reality through my ishta-devata, and I have no issue with someone else worshipping through their different choice of deity. However, such respect must be mutual: the other party must also respect people’s right to choose different deities and paths. This means that exclusivity claims of religions
are to be rejected as dangerous devices that invariably bring tensions, and eventually turn violent.
The open-architecture of Hinduism is an example of Hinduism’s unique and valuable contributions to the modern world. It is not only the fabric for India’s pluralism, but is also exportable as a model for harmonising various other world religions and ideologies.
For instance, neither Christianity nor Islam has the internal resources to reconcile their theological conflicts with one another, without one side defeating the other. Only through an open architecture could they ever expect to achieve the much needed harmony between them. Of course, this would necessitate reinterpreting their holy books without dependence upon exclusivity claims or hostility towards infidels.
Another vital quality of Hinduism is its openness to critiques and change. New smritis are to be developed for each epoch, and old ones reinterpreted and adapted to different contexts. Unlike other major religions, Hinduism has never had a conflict with scientific discoveries. It has not fossilised into fixed dogmas of the kind that enslave the members of many other faiths. Hindus have been able to get out of dilemmas and predicaments by creatively applying their own internal resources.
It is a common misunderstanding that Hinduism does not engage the external world in a positive way. It is alleged to be “world negating” and a form of escapism from the challenges facing society. Hence, the criticism goes, Hindus neglect their poor, sick and other suffering fellow humans, because they are only interested in pursuing an escape from empirical reality. Such interpretations are false. Prominent Hindus have always been deeply concerned about alleviating suffering, and have pursued the development of society in practical ways. That is why there was so much advancement in medicine, sophisticated architecture and civil engineering, as well as in social and political thought. Artha (material prosperity), kama (legitimate desires) and dharma (engagement at various levels) are all included as parts of Hinduism. Moksha is only of the legitimate pursuits.
The name “Hindu” might be relatively modern, but the entity it represents is very ancient and has a long history of continuity. I am writing a book on how Hinduism has already impacted other major faiths profoundly, even though these appropriations tend to get disguised.
We need to introduce texts like Mahabharata, dharma-shastras, artha-shastras and raj dharma discourses into mainstream teaching and debates. Sadly, Hindu leaders have limited themselves too much in what they teach. Much of the vast repertoire of resource material is being neglected.
Without the Hindu grand narrative, it’s difficult to build a viable narrative for India as a unified country. There are many divisive narratives at work in the opposite direction. My book, Breaking India, explains the dangerous nexus between internal fragments and certain foreign entities, which are operating as centrifugal forces pulling India apart.
Meanwhile, the West, China and Islam each have their own powerful grand narratives that are competing for global market share. India is a prime target for each of these nexuses competing to export its own grand narrative worldwide. In fact, India is the largest soft target available to them for expansion. Because India lacks a sufficient consensus on what its grand narrative is, it is highly vulnerable to these forces. Though aspiring to be a global power, India has not invested in the development and public discourse of its core narratives. In fact, there is not enough appreciation among its elites on the importance of this issue.
While China controls the discourse on its civilisation, India has largely abandoned the fields of India Studies and Hinduism Studies to outsiders. The British Orientalists dominated such research in the colonial era. Now it is American Orientalists who have taken over this role. Indian scholars have been bought off as junior partners in this enterprise, supplying their foreign sponsors with data that fits into American theories and agendas. The most prestigious journals and university degrees on Indian civilisation are located outside India, and are under the control of Westerners. The Indians involved tend to be appointed and supervised by Westerners. Many Indian universities take great pride in importing Western models into the humanities and social sciences. This is not a recipe for becoming a superpower, but a recipe for the mental re-colonisation of India. It will produce a nation of mental coolies looking to impress others as a way to feel legitimate.
Far too many Indian intellectuals are basically regurgitating and parroting Western thought which they have been trained to disseminate. Suffering from inferiority complexes, some Indians are uncomfortable articulating publicly what bothers them privately. Those who raise such issues and call for open debates typically get branded in Indian mainstream forums.I see this as a crisis of Hindu leadership. Many of our leaders lack the intellectual sophistication that comes from purva-paksha (reversing the gaze) of the West, China and Islam, and from years of encounters. They thrive in cocoons with “like minded” people. They fail to get out of their comfort zones to get the required experience in the intellectual kurukshetra. As a result, there is shoddiness and lack of rigor in research on civilisations. Such leaders tend to be bombastic and dismissive of opponents, rather than studying them seriously. I find our youth searching for mentors and leaders, and becoming restless about the present state of affairs. Such youth are our hope, provided we can upgrade the caliber of our leaders.The Hindu grand narrative must become a major topic for forums, such as conclaves, literary festivals and television discussions. It is a serious discipline and not a matter of chasing the latest sensational news item. It requires competent intellectuals and think tanks with a long-term commitment to pursue the issues professionally.

[RamaY]

X-Posting. 10 lashes to SwamyG garu for hiding this in GDF

Comer saar... The anchor is not only beautiful but does not belittle Indic traditions and asks good questions. Impressed. There is hope...

[RamaY]

[A_Gupta]

Godse as a remedy for Hindus' self-perceived effeminacy????
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 31292.html

But Mehta suggests that there is a deeper undercurrent in the debate around masculinity and the effeminate nature of Indians, which the Indian sociologist Ashis Nandy has written about. In her book The Clash Within, the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum has pointed out the anger and frustration among many Hindus who believe that Gandhi’s politics of passive resistance and civil disobedience made Hindus an effeminate community.

These Hindus have turned to more militant heroes from Hindu iconography for inspiration. Godse, having shot Gandhi, becomes their natural idol.

[RamaY]

Godse as a remedy for Hindus' self-perceived effeminacy????
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 31292.html

But Mehta suggests that there is a deeper undercurrent in the debate around masculinity and the effeminate nature of Indians, which the Indian sociologist Ashis Nandy has written about. In her book The Clash Within, the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum has pointed out the anger and frustration among many Hindus who believe that Gandhi’s politics of passive resistance and civil disobedience made Hindus an effeminate community.

These Hindus have turned to more militant heroes from Hindu iconography for inspiration. Godse, having shot Gandhi, becomes their natural idol.

It is sad that Hindus have to learn about Hindu society from people like Martha.

Even illiterate Hindus know that Gandhi didn't understand even the basic Hindu definition of Ahmisa to begin with. Was he practicing Ahimsa when is was making those teenage girls to sleep naked next to him? Was he practicing Ahimsa when he went on hunger strike only to stop Hindu fight for self-preserve? What value proposition Gandhi's Ahimsa has to Hindu soceity then, now & in future?

I truly hope there will be a summary ban in BRF on quoting western indologists on Hindu soceity, topics and philosophy except in a single thread that is named "How Abrahamic minds study, understand & view Hinduism".

[A_Gupta]

I truly hope there will be a summary ban in BRF on quoting western indologists on Hindu soceity, topics and philosophy except in a single thread that is named "How Abrahamic minds study, understand & view Hinduism".

I don't understand the attitude "Close your eyes and it will go away". Bans solve nothing.

[A_Gupta]

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 163_1.html

For example, why was the end of imperialism in India not accompanied by a social revolution or, as Winston Churchill predicted, ruinous internal squabbles?

The answer the author picks out is the non-ideological and consensual pragmatism that guided the leaders of Congress, unlike in the neighbouring countries where majoritarianism or exclusivism took early hold. "This was not some kind of aberration. Mainstream Indian politics remains generally pragmatic to this day; yielding little space to truly ideological parties." As proof, he puts forward the fact that even when governments change hands, existing policies largely continue while changes are gradual, as also the fact that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)'s breakthrough to a national majority came in 2014 when it stood on its least overtly religious, and most emphatically materialistic platform ever.

Mr Matthews identifies many reasons for this strain of pragmatism, the first being the importance of Dharma. In Mr Matthews's view, Dharma and pragmatism are very closely linked since "Dharma is an understanding of the world as it is, not as it should be … It is an explanation of what is established, not a critique of it."

He also suggests another reason: the nature of the pre-Independence Congress. "Here was an ad-hoc body striving for practical ends through practical means, while challenging an enemy that raised no insuperable ideological barriers to Indian self-government. The British argument was that Indians were not yet ready to rule themselves; the Indian riposte was to behave responsibly. The ultimate Congress aim was always to take possession of the governmental machine without damaging it, and this acted as a running restraint on the range of actions and attitudes that the movement chose to adopt." Thus, the true legacy of the pre-Independence Congress, says Mr Matthews, was neither Gandhism nor socialism; it was pragmatism.

But if there's one stand-out event that set Indian democracy off to a good start, it was the intensive three-year exercise of making a Constitution - an experience that none of the other countries went through quite in that way, since many of them were gifted a Constitution. What guided the making of the Indian constitution were the principles that Gandhi espoused: that everyone who lived in India was an Indian, regardless of caste, creed or language; none were to be excluded, and none left behind. "The results were not perfect, and many of their aspirations are still only partially fulfilled … but much of what was agreed has worked much better than many expected."

The author paints a vivid contrast between the democratic trajectory of India and that of Sri Lanka, for example - the country that was generally expected to have had the easiest transition to popular democracy. The British had always viewed "Ceylon" as a contented, orderly colony, and its highly Anglicised elite eagerly received self-government in a swift and confident manner. The transfer of power was almost like a gentleman's agreement, and was accompanied by a minimum of protection for minorities. But in this atmosphere of serene tidiness, far too many dangers were ignored that could have been foreseen, writes Mr Matthews. "The result was a political system that was wide open to majoritarianism in a society that was not politically united or culturally uniform."

The very first step that the Sinhalese leadership took was disenfranchising "Estate Tamils" or Indian Tamils, thus effectively making about 10 per cent of the population stateless, and fragmenting a minority that formed 22 per cent of the population. Sinhala was then made the only official language, thus marginalising Tamils even more, and setting in motion events that led to the full-blown civil war that lasted a quarter century. In Mr Matthews's words, "The Sinhalese felt they had got their country back, but they were now armed with a new weapon - the potential bludgeon of majority rule. Few, if any, among the Sinhala elite seem to have recognised that to use their unassailable majority for partisan purposes would be to play with fire."

The danger that the author sees is in the Hindutva project that does not accept India as she is, but as she ought to be. "It is primarily a programme of social conformity and is much more about reducing diversity - by exclusion - than about solving real differences … The central belief is not that we would all be better off if we all learned to get along … it is that many of us are not behaving correctly, and we as a social unit would be better off if we all stuck to the same rules with as little deviation as possible and no dissent permitted."

[RamaY]

I truly hope there will be a summary ban in BRF on quoting western indologists on Hindu soceity, topics and philosophy except in a single thread that is named "How Abrahamic minds study, understand & view Hinduism".

I don't understand the attitude "Close your eyes and it will go away". Bans solve nothing.

I am not asking to "close your eyes". I am asking you to remove "Abrahamic color glasses" that you posted to learn/study Hindu civilization. There is much richer philosophical and analytical body of knowledge developed by Hindus to learn about Hindu civilization. I am recommending THAT to you.

It is in everyone's interest to separate these two things.

1/ Hindus should learn about themselves (history, philosophy, data, analysis, inferences) using their own (Hindu) memes. There is no need for Hindus to learn/describe themselves using Abrahamic memes. This is the ban I hope is imposed on this forum.

2/ At the same time study/learn how Abrahmics are looking/analyzing Hindu society. This is the new thread I proposed.

The difference in these two will enable Hindus to identify the gaps, intentions, strategies and mechanisms that can be used to strengthen themselves and stand up to Abrahmic west.

Try analyzing Abrahamic religions using Hindu memes and start calling them Asuras that they are and propose Hindu solutions (like Rama did to Ravana, Durga did to Mahishasur etc) and see what happens.

[svinayak]

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 163_1.html

The danger that the author sees is in the Hindutva project that does not accept India as she is, but as she ought to be. "It is primarily a programme of social conformity and is much more about reducing diversity - by exclusion - than about solving real differences … The central belief is not that we would all be better off if we all learned to get along … it is that many of us are not behaving correctly, and we as a social unit would be better off if we all stuck to the same rules with as little deviation as possible and no dissent permitted."

This is the colonized mind analysing the Indian democracy and trying to find the answer. His answers will be in the local people of India with their traditions and way of life for centuries.

[RamaY]

The danger that the author sees is in the Hindutva project that does not accept India as she is, but as she ought to be. "It is primarily a programme of social conformity and is much more about reducing diversity - by exclusion - than about solving real differences … The central belief is not that we would all be better off if we all learned to get along … it is that many of us are not behaving correctly, and we as a social unit would be better off if we all stuck to the same rules with as little deviation as possible and no dissent permitted."

Another lump of BS.

It is the Turkik/Islamic and European/Christian invaders/colonizers that didn't accept Bharat as she was and raped/pillaged/robbed/converted their way for centuries. India is nothing but Bharat after all that rape, pillage and robbery. India is nothing but a sickened Bharat.

The Hindutva project is the "process of recovery" of Bharat from that rape, pillage and robbery. This process of recovery (Mrityorma Amritangamaya") can be a wrong/bad thing only for the "virus".

The Hindutva project completes when (sick) India gets well and transforms into a (healthy) Bharat.

Like in any system there will be elements that will lose out when India becomes a healthy nation. Some of these are the viruses and the secular medical practitioners who survive on a sick India.

So-called Indian Minorities are mostly the part of Bharatiya civilization that are infected by the virus or side effects of Secular medicine. They too will get healthy as part of the Hindutva project.

[ShauryaT]

RamaY: You do a fine job of agreeing with the author.

[RajeshA]

RamaY: You do a fine job of agreeing with the author.

How?

[A_Gupta]

[quote="RamaY"
I am not asking to "close your eyes". I am asking you to remove "Abrahamic color glasses" that you posted to learn/study Hindu civilization. There is much richer philosophical and analytical body of knowledge developed by Hindus to learn about Hindu civilization. I am recommending THAT to you.
[/quote]

Thank you, I am well aware of it, as list-owner of "The Heathen in His Blindness" yahoo egroup, and as one of the initiators of the Western Universalism thread on BRF, and so on.

Bans do nothing but blind one to reality.

[RamaY]

I am not asking to "close your eyes". I am asking you to remove "Abrahamic color glasses" that you posted to learn/study Hindu civilization. There is much richer philosophical and analytical body of knowledge developed by Hindus to learn about Hindu civilization. I am recommending THAT to you.

Thank you, I am well aware of it, as list-owner of "The Heathen in His Blindness" yahoo egroup, and as one of the initiators of the Western Universalism thread on BRF, and so on.

Bans do nothing but blind one to reality.

Sir, we both have been on the forum for long. So we know each other.

You repeat the word "Ban"; but societies are better off by banning/containing few things, like rape, terrorism etc. Understanding our own civilization from Abrahamic agenda is no different from (intellectual) rape and terrorism on our soil. It is not our responsibility/concern if the rape/terrorism happen outside our civilization/territory.

If you care to understand what I am saying, you will see that I am not asking for "Ban" on Christian/Islamic/Secular perspective of Hindu society, but I am asking for containing it to one single thread - so we know how they think of us. But everywhere else (in all other threads) we should limit understanding of our Bharatiya society to Bharatiya memes only and nothing else.

Is it that difficult to fathom?

[RamaY]

RamaY: You do a fine job of agreeing with the author.

How?

[ShauryaT]

The danger that the author sees is in the Hindutva project that does not accept India as she is, but as she ought to be. "It is primarily a programme of social conformity and is much more about reducing diversity - by exclusion - than about solving real differences … The central belief is not that we would all be better off if we all learned to get along … it is that many of us are not behaving correctly, and we as a social unit would be better off if we all stuck to the same rules with as little deviation as possible and no dissent permitted."

So-called Indian Minorities are mostly the part of Bharatiya civilization that are infected by the virus or side effects of Secular medicine. They too will get healthy as part of the Hindutva project.

The above sentence alone confirms the authors concerns in you not being able to accept India and Indians the way she is or how Indians are.

Also, why the vagaries in your expressions. What do you mean by so-called? What or who are you referring to as a virus? "side effects of secular medicine" What is that? Why is India Sick? I am sorry, the republic and its peoples are not a raped and pillaged lot by any external entities and if you are pointing to internal rapists and pillagers then please spell out who they and what were these acts.

A poster like A_Gupta is very well read to be given homilies, don't you think?

[RamaY]

^ ShauryaT ji,

What you call "India" is a result of Bharatiya fight against foreign colonization; be it Islamic or Christian. If there was no colonization, there wouldn't be any "India" and "Indians". We all would be Bharatiyas as we always have been; no majority or minority group. India is nothing but a (sick) colonial transformation of Bharat.

What you call as "minorities" is nothing but the scars left on our social fabric by the double colonization of Islam and Christianity. If you envision entire Bharat as a single body, then the minorities appear as scars. (see This and This)

For majority of Bharatiyas, what you call Hindus, the damage was limited to loss of wealth, freedom, culture, children, girls etc., But for few unfortunate Bharatiyas (those you call minorities) the damage extended to their faith and identity. That is the difference.

I accept all Bharatiyas as they are. But it doesn't mean I have to leave the Bharatiyas to their suffering, be it physical, mental, social or identity. This loss of Bharatiya identity is a bigger virus than loss of property/development. Because such virus threatens the "Territorial Integrity" of our nation, like it did in 1947.

Please don't say that you view colonization as a good thing and you support TNT. Then you must also support Many Nation Theory, because if left uncured, these colonial-virus affected Bharatiyas will do exactly that again and again and again.

I used the phrase "so-called" for Indian minorities because I consider all of them Bharatiyas. Indian Muslims and Christians are nothing but product of colonization. Various indic groups such as Parsis, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists, Shaivas, Vashnavaits, Shakteyas, Ganapateyas etc., are considered as part of Hindu pantheon by Supreme Court, hence aren't minorities despite the fact that many of these sub-groups are smaller number than Christians and Muslims.

The side effects of Secular medicine include but not limited to:
- To separate Bharatiyas based on faiths, dharmas, sampradayas in to majority/minority groups
- To decline the Bharatiya ancestry of Indian Muslims, Christians etc
- To think India did not exist before 1947
- To deny Indian Muslims and Christians a right to get rid of their colonial scars, inflicted by external rapists, thugs, colonials and ideologies
- To pander to foreign ideologies to keep Indian Muslims and Christians forever colonized

P.S: Like everyone else, Sri A_Guptaji's posts also have to stand on their own; facts, logic and Indian Interests.

[Agnimitra]

Interesting discussion, folks.

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 163_1.html

The danger that the author sees is in the Hindutva project that does not accept India as she is, but as she ought to be. "It is primarily a programme of social conformity and is much more about reducing diversity - by exclusion - than about solving real differences … The central belief is not that we would all be better off if we all learned to get along … it is that many of us are not behaving correctly, and we as a social unit would be better off if we all stuck to the same rules with as little deviation as possible and no dissent permitted."

This is a howler. The author here is woefully mistaken, doesn't seem to understand the basics of Hindutva. The only "exclusive" demand of Hindutva is Indocentricity, which is the demand of any and every national constitution on the planet. In every other point, Hindutva promotes tolerance and indeed celebration of a diversity of views, practices, names and forms. It excoriates precisely those ideologies (mainly of foreign origin) that do not have a natural tolerance for diversity, and at best smile for political purposes - that is to say, make a show of friendly distance (at best), or unreasonable tantrums at worst while they are still the minority. It is this covert hostility to the flowering of a genuine creative diversity that Hindutva speaks against. This author seems to have it backwards.

1/ Hindus should learn about themselves (history, philosophy, data, analysis, inferences) using their own (Hindu) memes. There is no need for Hindus to learn/describe themselves using Abrahamic memes. This is the ban I hope is imposed on this forum.

Hindus need not "describe" themselves using foreign memes, but they must certainly "learn" to see themselves through the eyes of others. In that sense, I do not understand any call for a "ban" on expressing a viewpoint here.

[RamaY]

Agnimitra ji,

There is a second part to that "hope for ban". It says "a dedicated thread where we collect "Non-Hindu perspective on Hinduism & Hindu Socio-economic-political systems"".

That will ensure that the secularists can learn/debate/theorize about Hindusism from western perspective in a separate thread without murkeying water for everyone else.

This "call for ban" was to first educate Hindu majority about their own Hindu identity and socio-economic-political philosophy from native perspective. This is the "Know yourself part" that makes Hindus self-aware.

The separate thread is where such self-aware Hindus get to learn how others study, learn, understand and project them.

If you read Subbu Swamy's tweets, you will learn that even Indian Muslim Ulema wants to learn what Hindtva means. They had to go to RSS like places because the mainstream intelligentsia doesn't even know what Bharat means and what Hindutva means in a 80% Hindu country. That is the intellectual bankruptcy of our mainstream discourse.

It is in our national interests that all Indians know what Hindutva means because 80% of the population is Hindus and nation cannot move forward without taking 80% of the population into confidence.

Hope this explains.

[Agnimitra]

RamaY ji that is completely reasonable and quite proper.
That word "ban" was like an IED.

[RamaY]

X-posting. Emphasis mine.

IMO, this is important for India to understand and to learn from, for reestablishment of Dharma.

http://www.timescolonist.com/life/globa ... -1.1807249

Historically, the king was the law, appointing judges and acting as the final court of appeal. However, most minor issues were resolved through an informal system of community justice. Village heads acted as arbiters, and cases (both criminal and civil) were heard and decided with the participation of the entire community. There were no lawyers, and plaintiffs and defendants alike usually represented themselves.

As Bhutan modernized and created a formal justice system, the country needed trained lawyers and judges. With no domestic law school, aspiring Bhutanese law students got their education abroad in India, the U.K. or North America. According to Michael Peil, a respected American law professor, they returned thoroughly immersed in western traditions of adversarial, punitive, winner-take-all law.

“They had been thoroughly schooled in a system that said every case has a winner and a loser. Winning is about destroying the other side,” Peil lamented.

Peil said the country’s foreign-trained lawyers lost sight of Bhutanese community law, which emphasizes restorative justice and negotiated settlements with mutually beneficial resolutions. His description reminds us of the traditional community justice practised by many Canadian aboriginal peoples.

In 2013, the Bhutanese government offered Peil a unique challenge: build a law school from the ground up with a tailor-made curriculum merging formal western law with Bhutanese ideals of community law.

The new curriculum will apply a different method for teaching law. Peil explains that western law students learn by studying past cases. “They start by learning from adversarial situations and that sends the message that all law comes from disputes.”

In contrast, Bhutanese students will learn law through practical exercises and simulations that force them to develop their own solutions, and to present multiple options for resolving a case, such as negotiating a settlement instead of launching a lawsuit. It may not sound that novel but this approach means students are learning a different philosophy of law, one that says law is not all adversarial disputes and every case does not have to have a winner and a loser.

[RamaY]

Burkha Dutt tried her best. But Sri Jaggi Vasudev shows her what Hinduism and Bharat are

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... dev/361630

[harbans]

In the last one year or so, there have been a lot of subtle changes. Much of this is due to pressure SM is putting on the narrative that was so far hogged by the Nehruvian left liberal kinds. Basic ideological tenets of Excluvist faiths are being questioned quite objectively. The vast amounts of data being thrown up is flying in the face of libtard kinds who peddle falsehood and lies to keep the flag of their narrative flying. This data is churning many into the so called RW Dharmic camp. This has to sustain till many more find their moorings. The real ghar waapsi begins when one understands the excluvist truth. Along with this ideological counterattack to what the Jihadi's and Evanjihadi's have been unleashing on us Dharmics for eons, it is important we reinforce the basic tenets of the Dharmic/ Dharmic State, without much getting into the nitty gritty of Varna/Caste debate. That too is important and must be sustained to clear airs. But first two points crystallized are important to bring in millions:

1. Ideological counter to Excluvist Doctrine.
2. Simpler Narrative to what following our own Dharmic Tenet means.

The debates on cow slaughter, Art 370, raising awareness on RJB/Krishna Bhoomi/ Shiv Bhoomi Kailash Mansarover must also continue. This is very key and i would put this at No 3. This is simple because only after 1 and 2, is a aam person convinced their is merit in these issues. Without a basic appreciation of 1 and 2, it is nigh impossible to convince anyone on any of these issues. You will get dismissive answers like lets make a hospital or why can't everyone live in peace etc. So when we try and get our message across, we need to understand these basics. Crude Ghar Waapsi is possible at some places due to social and other pressures, but if we are to talk about defeating the existing narrative and bringing tens of millions to stand with the Pluralist Bharatiya Concept under Dharmic Tenet, we have to be following on this order of things depending on who we are addressing. So 3 Keys:

1. Ideological counter to Excluvist Doctrine.
2. Simpler Narrative to what following our own Dharmic Tenet means.
3. Cow slaughter, Art 370, raising awareness on RJB/Krishna Bhoomi/ Shiv Bhoomi Kailash Mansarover.

Further to this to achieve all the above, our development agenda has to be right up there. We can get their faster if clamber to a 8-10 T USD economy. If we remain poor and in the rut, our remote areas, tribals and even common villagers across will fall for simple economic based inducements. People will put poverty and Dharmic thought in congruence, like Nehruvians equated the Nehru rate of growth as Hindu rat of growth.. Thus Point 0 to begin with is the most significant base to commence on the 3 above:

0. Massive Economic Development and Growth.

PS: I would be building upon this simple order of things with more inputs.

[RamaY]

On the topic of the system that existed after independence.....I present a talk by S.Gurumurthy in 1999.
You should be able to find the part 2

Characteristic of educated Indian.
1. Blind adoption of anything foreign
2. Admiration for things/ideas made outside India
3. Very little faith in our own abilities

Who said this? Abdul Kalam!

[ramana]

Godse as a remedy for Hindus' self-perceived effeminacy????
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 31292.html

But Mehta suggests that there is a deeper undercurrent in the debate around masculinity and the effeminate nature of Indians, which the Indian sociologist Ashis Nandy has written about. In her book The Clash Within, the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum has pointed out the anger and frustration among many Hindus who believe that Gandhi’s politics of passive resistance and civil disobedience made Hindus an effeminate community.

These Hindus have turned to more militant heroes from Hindu iconography for inspiration. Godse, having shot Gandhi, becomes their natural idol.

She is no philosopher but a drain inspector in the vein of Katherine Mayo.
All this Fraudian analysis is non-sequitor.

[Tuvaluan]

Nussbaum is part of a "think tank" and "policy group" started by Malini Parthasarathy of the The Hindu and inaugurated by no less than the president of India Pranab Mukherjee, albeit during the despicable UPA regime. So I usually ask myself if such things would be possible without the active collusion of the New Delhi babucracy in supporting and pushing the vile nonsense spread by Nussbaum and her ilk. Nussbaum was also given some Indian award by the Indian Consulate General in Chicago less than a decade ago, not to mention the likes of Nirupama Rao hobnobbing with the likes of agitprop commies like Vijay Prashad of Trinity college. The entire IFS crowd in New Delhi stinks when you look at the pattern of who they think are friends of India, which dissing actual friends of India.

[Vayutuvan]

Their progeny will go to Tufts and do PhD by the time they turn 22. Better still, core courses at Columbia and/or MBA from Wharton to get some minor dynasties going.

[SwamyG]

Burkha Dutt tried her best. But Sri Jaggi Vasudev shows her what Hinduism and Bharat are

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the ... dev/361630

Like he mentions sometimes doing the right thing for wrong reasons is also good. Was it Valmiki who was asked to chant "mara mara mara mara" ? So Barkha ended up doing the right thing for wrong reasons, eh? Hopefully it opened the minds of a few more of her audience.

[RamaY]

Correct example SwamyG garu.

At this point I would like to make an observation.

Looks like the likes of Sarva-Sri Rajiv Malhotra, S Gurumurthy, APJ Kalam, Subbu Swamy, Jaggi Vasudev, Sri Sri Ravishankar, Baba Ramdev, Narendra Modi etc are being and becoming better Thought Leaders of Bharat than the likes of Sarva-Sri Arun Shourie, MJ Akbar, LK Advani Anna Hazare etc.,

The second group are failing day by day for million reasons the first among many being their "Secular-nonsense".

Satyameva Jayate!

P.S: I know you dont trust SS and RM

[SwamyG]

I was impressed with your Jaggi Vasudev video you posted. I am usually not a guru centric person more on the likes of Barkha and Shoma; but will take good points from them all the time. I have attended couple of AoL workshops, have books from Nithyanada, Rajneesh ityadi. Somehow never could get to Jaggi. The followers of these gurus are the biggest stumbling block. At lunch one desi guy - who I was meeting for the first time - within the first 5 mins pushed an invitation card for Jaggi's program. I was like 'dude, you are worse than the Xtian proselytizers'. But the nice guy I am simply smiled and mumbled something else.

Jaggi handled her very well. So now your video got me addicted; and I ended up watching 2 more of his videos. One with Vikram Chandra of NDTV and another moderated by Tehleka fame Shoma Choudhry. She had Jaggi and the pompous ass Javed Akhtar. God, he came off worse. But he got a huge applause for every snide comment he made and seem to have a greater fan following in the crowd. I did not know much about him, but he completely came as the biggest jackass of all times.

No, I trust RM and value his contributions. I support him buying all his books that interest me, watch his videos and give a "thumbs up". It is just that I cannot stand his personality. Sometimes I did think if he was a Cee Eye Aye guy. As far as SS, yes I do not trust him at all.

Though I disagree with them, I never discount their usefulness and they are far better people than moi. I totally agree with your list, we need another 20 odd people to make an impact. I strongly believe if Modi government lasts the full term, there will be more we can add to that list. If Modi makes it to the second term, then we will have even more.

When the soil becomes fertile, plants & trees will grow.

Apart from the intellectual list, there is another category developing - those are the novelists and social entrepreneurs that use Indic memes. Example Amish Tripathi and Devdutt Pattnaik.

[RamaY]

One with Vikram Chandra of NDTV and another moderated by Tehleka fame Shoma Choudhry. She had Jaggi and the pompous ass Javed Akhtar

Please post Link here if possible.

Found 1

[SwamyG]

[Rudradev]

How come rrNDTV especially is giving all this air-time to Jaggi Vasudev hain ji? He has been interviewed by Barkha and Vikram Chandra, separately!

It seems like Jaggi Vasudev is a solid individual with a strong understanding of Dharma, but the very fact that rrNDTV is giving him exposure is a little suspect. Are they trying to raise his profile in the hope of creating an "acceptable" Hindu voice a la Swami Agnivesh, to contest for mindshare against the Hindu voices like Ramdev, Sri Sri etc. whom they do not control?

Whether they fail or succeed, is this some attempt by rrNDTV to get their hooks into the vast ongoing nationwide debate about Hindu identity, narrative and discourse?

[SwamyG]

I am sure there will be a few gurus who will cross over to the evil side and we are likely to lose them. True to the nature of Hinduism, as long as we do not have one central figure or city to take down Bharat/Hinduism there will be new ones. I never thought we would have a politician like Modi even 3 years ago. And look now what we have. The MAD combination seems to offer so much pride and a vision to the people. Vajpayee or LKA never gave us that kind of impression.

We need many layers of gurus and intellectuals; and in each layer we need many of them. So even if a few are compromised the rest will compensate and keep the momentum going. A sound reason for avoiding any homogenization of Hinduism on the lines of Christianity or Islam. Bharat/Hindus are adept at handling chaos.

As they say in chess, do not simplify a position if it benefits the opponent. Keep it complex.

Jaggi seems to be Modi supporter.