The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

[RamaY]

I wonder what is the philosophical foundation for the premise that "The law/justice must not punish a single innocent, even if it lets '000s of guilty go unpunished"?

Is it an extension of "Let the pure among thee throw the first stone" or is it the British way to ensure that their favorite British foot soldiers are let go by the justice system (It is important to note that current Indian Justice system is extension of Briturd colonial justice system)?

No wonder the GoI and its Law/Justice wing found it important to reduce the legal age for consensual sex but did not find it important enough to reduce the juvenile age in rape cases. The delhi rape case accused is still being treated as juvenile even though he is 17.6+ years.

If we observe how USA pursued OBL case, it is evident that their law/justice/Govt went to extreme extents to bring the guilty to justice, even if it resulted in wars, deaths of thousands of innocents etc.,

I think Hindu perspective is no different. Rama, in the process of punishing Ravana, followed same spirit. Ravana must be punished and justice must be done to Sitamaa. If Ravana makes this into a civilizational war, so be it. Same with Pandava/Kaurava yuddha. If Ravana/Duryodhana preferred a one/one fight, I am sure Rama/Krishna would have happily agreed to it. But Ravana/Duryodhana raised the stakes to preempt such a scenario and Rama and Krishna did not show a weak spine in spite of the collateral damage in the pursuit of Dharma. That is the commitment Dharma needs.

Perhaps it is time to rewrite Indian Penal Code and Indian Justice System with a premise that "Not a single Guilty person is allowed to go unpunished!"

Uttistha Bharata!

[RajeshA]

Bharatiyata & Social Policies

Education

The Rashtra must ensure the right of education to all its citizenry. Education is Rashtra's topmost priority, at par with security, which is pretty high. Education is the basis of our civilization, and nothing trumps (Benign) Knowledge as our civilizational priority. So providing education to our children should be a focus of any Bharatiya Agenda.

There have been talk before on the subject of fee vouchers. RamaY ji and shivajisisodia ji have earlier advocated such a solution, and I have supported such view [1] [2], but never came to expressing it more elaborately. RamaY ji has also put forth his recommendations for an education program.

I suggest following components of a school education system:

1. Rashtra defines a particular minimum curriculum for a particular school class level, which includes sciences, skills development, Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies, sports, etc.
2. Private schools in India can register themselves as fulfilling the criteria for this education program. There are no more government schools.
3. Private schools can set an arbitrary amount as tuition fees for a school class.
4. Equal Monthly Fee Coupons for Each Child: Each child in Bharat receives a fee coupon. Each year the government sets this amount. The child has a bank account for his education. Depending on whether a child is enrolled in a school (which he should be) each month a particular sum would be transferred to this account. The school in which he is enrolled, can collect this amount. The rest of the tuition fees the children's parents or guardians would have to bear themselves.
5. Furthermore each child gets an additional equal amount on his account, using which he can pay for school material - tablets, books, writing pads, drawing books, drawing material, compass sets (C.K. Raju says one should not use compasses ), school bags, school clothes, etc. All school items can be marked as such, and vendors who register themselves as shops who sell such items can accept payment through this "student payment card". The student himself however cannot withdraw money from this account directly. If a student shows exceptional merit in inter-school competitions, then he should be able to win more education support credits for this account.
6. The government should help schools acquire land or property on rent for setting them up and provide them with easier credit conditions. If a school promises to not take more than the fee voucher sum from the student, the State can give the schools other benefits.
7. There will be regular checks of these schools by government school inspectors to see whether they are adhering to minimum requirements and standards for hygiene, children's safety, teacher welfare, discipline, required curriculum, character building, etc.
8. There would be a need to have biometric feedback from student attendance in that school at least once a week, perhaps at some terminal where if one sticks in the student card which the student has and allows one's photo to be taken, one's fingerprints to be taken, etc. the student can confirm that he visits the school. The data should be transmitted to the School Supervision Authority. This is to prevent fake schools from collecting fee vouchers from fake students by bribing inspectors.
9. If in a locality there are no schools which accept the child for the standard fee coupon fee, then the child has a right to go to any school in the neighborhood, even one which has higher tuition fees. In this case the school would be forced to take the child without charging extra fees.
10. Bharat should build up a huge virtual library and network to which all teachers and students should get access through their tablets, etc.
11. Effort should be to make school as paperless as possible to save costs. The tablets provided to the student should however have safety standards for maximum radiation emissions, etc.

Providing quality education is priority, and school, teacher, supervisor not seen measuring up would have to answer to the Rashtra.

There is a heavy dose of Sanskriti Education. Specific Religious Education need not be the responsibility of the state. This should be funded by internally collected funds from philanthropists, or as charity to temples, mosques, etc, or through tuition fees. These funds cannot come from outside the country.

Also these schools would have to be physically separate from schools that receive Rashtriya support.

[RajeshA]

RajeshA garu

If you notice I am not talking about timelines. Yes I suggested we need 2 decades of good governance. But the point of that post is that as and when the nation is ready and willing to write a new constitution, it will have a different perspective on majority of these issues we are running in circles about.

As a matter of fact the ground work for a new Constitution would be to remove these very wrong interpretations and perspectives and make the society ready to be a Hindu-identity based, Hindu-confident, Hindu-Assertive world view and future.

RamaY ji,

I believe that it would be some time before one would be able to proclaim India as Bharat, as a Dharmocracy, as a Hindu* Rashtra. That is the triumph. That is one culmination of the struggle. That would be the new Republic Day.

However much before that we need to put forth a vision, like the Independence Leaders put forth the vision of Swatantrata, or Savarkar spoke of a Hindu Rashtra. Similarly we need to have our proposition - What does Bharat stand for, what does Sanatan Dharma include and why it is the right "ideology" for the world, better than what others have on offer.

The Rashtra we want to establish is the Core of the Dharmic Revolution for the World. Both parts are important. We should try to establish a Dharmic Island surrounded by a Sea of Dharma, so that nothing adharmic can even come close to us.

I believe we are saying the same thing here, but from two different perspectives.

JMTs

[RamaY]

Long long time ago (IIRC 2008-09) Bji and I talked about the curricula for schools. Here are my thoughts (posting from memory - Civilizational thread was deleted).

1/ All schools in a given village are merge to make a single school. Many villages (1500-5000 population) have more than one school (often one for upper castes and one in SC section) be it elementary, primary and so on.

2/ Curriculam
- Yoga (I liked a book by Bihar School of Yoga which has 36 classes that cover all different styles of Yoga). Each class should be for 45 days (will become a semester course). By the time a student passes 12th grade they should complete all 36 classes.
- Sanskrit, Local Language mandatory and one language (including English) optional.
- All science subjects are taught in English - Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology
- All humanities subjects are taught in Sanskrit - History, Geography, Economics etc.,
- When the student joins the school/reaches 8th year - Will be done Upanayana samskara
- All students are taught selected Veda topics - includes at least 2 Upanishads
- All students must learn at least one martial arts course - 6-8 3 credit courses
- Each school is given at least 10 acres of land and students are encouraged to grow vegetables, grains and provide them to the kitchen
- Each student (before completing 12th grade) must go on at least 2 national camps (30-45 days); located in other states. They could attend the school there.
- Each student must go thru 4-6 3 credit courses on a engineering vocational course (Mechanical, Metallurgy, Automobile, Aerospace, Civil, Electrical etc.,)

I envision a school year (52 Weeks) split into 5 Mandalas (45/48 days each) with 3 weeks holidays between each one of them. Each Mandala will have 5 3-credit courses. So in a year one can take 5x4 = 25 courses. In 12 yrs (1-12th grade) they can have 300 courses.

Yoga = 36
Vedas = 12
Sanskrit = 12
Vocational Courses = 12
National Camps = 4
Martial Arts = 8
Mother tongue = 12
History = 12
Geography = 12
Economics = 12

Maths = 48
Physics = 40
Chemistry = 40
Biology = 40


P.S: Really appreciate if anyone who has access to 3Mar2013 Andhrajyothy Sunday special book, Please post/link the article on a school in Vijayanagaram/Vizag dist.

[RajeshA]

Bharatiyata & Social Policies

Medical Care

Medical Care costs for a nation can burden it to such an extent that it can crack. Free Health Care would mean inadequate quality. Not free health care would mean the poor receive no health care.

But the Rashtra needs to have some policies on this.

So some suggestions.

1. All health centers and hospitals are private. No government hospitals.
2. Whenever a woman becomes pregnant (she has less than four kids), her health care costs are taken over by the state until the termination of the pregnancy, either with child-birth or premature. Some post-natal care is also available. Again this is for the sake of the child mostly - Rashtra's budding citizen.
3. Whenever a child is born, health care costs for his first 3 years are borne by the state, regardless of which hospital.
4. After 3rd year, he receives a Medical Care Support Account, similar to the way for education. Every month the state pays a sum into this account. With time the savings increase. If the child does not avail of any facilities in the mean time, the savings would continue to grow.
5. These medical monthly vouchers continue to be paid until the child is 21. After that they stop. But this fund remains available to the citizen.
6. Whenever the person takes employment, the employer starts paying into this account, depending on the agreed upon tariff, but at least a legal minimum. If he is self-employed, of course, he would not get anything.
7. Whenever the person requires medical attention or treatment, he can pay from this fund. Only medical institutions and pharmacies have the permission to bill this account. However emergency treatment would have to be provided regardless of whether somebody can pay or not.
8. If the person is afflicted by a lethal infectious disease, then the Rashtra bears the cost of treatment.
9. Besides this mode of payment, one can have medical insurance with insurance companies, but that is all private and the Rashtra has got nothing to do with that. Or one can pay the medical bills from one's own wealth.
10. Direct relatives should be able to transfer funds from their personal Medical Care Support Accounts to those of others. People over 70 cannot transfer funds to any other people from their accounts.
11. If somebody has a disability, the Rashtra would continue to pay some money into his account.
12. When a person reaches 80, he enters into Saṁnyāsa and he is legible for State support, which takes over his medical care costs and the old people's home costs. He becomes the responsibility of the Rashtra. The Rashtra provides a suitable environment in which he would be cared for. His relatives do not have to pay anymore to his costs. It is of course voluntary, and the citizen can continue to live with his family if he wants to. This aggregation of over 80s would help bring down the costs and allow the citizens to remain productive without somebody needing to stay home to take care of the very old. The old do not need to feel like a burden on their children.
13. Rich charitable people can build hospitals which work as non-profit orgs, i.e. they take the lowest price for their services and medications.
14. What this system provides is that one can have the best medical care centers come up in the country. They can compete with each other. Every citizen would be taken care of. Each citizen receives the full flexibility of where to seek medical care and when to seek it. Government is not in the business of building hospitals.

[Atri]

RamaY ji,

Instead of Vedas, I would recommend teaching Ramayana, Mahabharata, Puranas and Panchatantra. Vedas and Upanishads can be learnt by those who have interest. Those who do not have interest will get fair idea about their content through Ramayana and Mahabharata.

I am in talks with one school in my village where children will be taught Ramayana everyday. I will be paying one person to take few lectures everyday in school and teach one adhyaya of Ramayana to kids in primary school. One mandatory lecture of 45 minutes on Ramayana for primary and secondary schools. MBH can take over after 6th-7th standard when child grows up and can handle subtler stories. This way it is easier.

[RamaY]

Atri ji...

I thought some of the History courses cover Ramayana, MB, Puranas etc., But the idea is open. Perhaps the Veda courses (place is there for 12 courses) can be
1. Ramayana
2. MB
3. Puranas (one/two)
4. Pancha Tantra
5. Rigveda
6. Yajurveda
7. Samaveda
8. AtharvanaVeda
9. Upanishad1
10. Upanishad2
11. Foundations of Mantra sastra (bijaaksharas, matrukas and how mantras are formulated)
12. Other.

[RajeshA]

RamaY ji,

The science subjects also I would propose being taught in Sanskrit with some additional English terminology. Most of the European terminology for biology is actually derived from Indian botanical knowledge, Ayurveda, etc.. Sanskrit has to be made again into the language of Science.

Science is the main battlefield the competition of civilizations.

[RajeshA]

Cross-posting a post by akashganga in "Islamism & Islamophobia Abroad - News & Analysis" Thread


Published on Mar 09. 2013
By Mahir Haneef
Arya Samaj weddings legal only for followers: Kerala HC: Times of India

KOCHI: The Kerala high court has ruled that the Arya Samaj cannot conduct marriages between people if they are not followers of the samaj and it will not be legally valid if it takes place.

Arya Samaj mandirs are found in all Indian cities and towns and solemnize love, arranged, inter-religion and inter-caste marriages.

The ruling was given by a division bench of justices Pius C Kuriakose and P D Rajan while considering the case of a Muslim woman and a Hindu man who married at an Arya Samaj mandir in Kozhikode on December 28 last year.

The court was considering a habeas corpus petition filed by father of the girl Raihana (name changed), alleging that his daughter was being illegally detained.

Appearing in court, Raihana told the judges that she was married and was living with the man.

Disagreeing to accept their marriage as valid, the court said, "We have carefully examined the certificate of marriage as well as pramanapathram. Neither claimed before us that they are Arya samajists. The man told us that he continues to be a Hindu while Raihana told us that she believes in both religions. Having regard to the Arya Marriage Validation Act, 1937, it is very clear to our mind that it is not a valid marriage."

When the couple told the court that they were in love and wanted to marry at any cost, they were told to get married according to the Special Marriage Act. It is the statute for solemnization of marriage between people of different religions.

[RamaY]

^ This judgment contradicts so many other laws and constitution of India that these judges must be first lynched and then jailed.

It goes against
1. Freedom of religion - An individual can change their religion at any time they want, for any reason. Even Arya Samaj is a religion. An individual can believe in multiple religions if they want.
2. Freedom of marriage - A boy/girl have freedom to marry anyone as soon as they cross legal age to be adults and marry.

Bharat, even India, can do without such idiotic minds, forget about in judgemental positions.

[RajeshA]

The Colors of Hindu (Cont.)

Atri

I forgot to add one more category of Hindutvavadis - The opportunistic and accidental hindutvavadis. People like Yeddi, Munde, Mahajan, Jaitley etc are opportunistic H-vaadis. Some of their arguments and their attitude look similar to Savarkaraite school, vis a vis, both of them do not give much importance to emotive religious issues, but the reason to do so is drastically different. Savarkaraite is as committed to rebuilding Ram temple, and reclaiming Kashi and mathura and others as a die-hard VHP and Bajrangi is. But once the path for temple construction is cleared, he may move on, perhaps not even visit those temples (or any temples) for darshana - This becomes a adhyatmika choice, not a dharmaarthika choice.

People like Jaitley etc, have gone on the record (available on Wikileaks) saying that BJP is not so serious about Ram mandir and hindutva and that these are only issues of electoral convenience. This is the difference. One should differentiate between Hindutvavadis and pseudo-Hindutvavadis just like we differentiate between pseudo-secularists and secularists. There is a huge lobby of pseudo-hindutvavadis which have entered in the tent of Parivar who really do not believe in the ideology of Hindutva and are in just because of temporary electoral self-interests. I agree one needs to work with them. But How much to yield on core-ideology is the choice which party has to make.

There was an important section which was genuinely suspicious of NM and his commitment towards the ideology of Hindutva (irrespective of stream - The RSS stream OR Savarkarite stream). This Neera-Ksheera vivekabuddhi (intellect to discrminate between milk and water) application is and was in process prior to GJ polls. There are many forces on the move here. There is one force which considers itself as guardian of the core ideology. Like it OR not, this is a tightly knit amorphous group - what we know as the nebulous RSS think-tank. It is but natural, given the stellar rise of NM. The attack on Gadkari forced one of the guys from that nebulous core to come out in open defense of Gadkari, to ward off the close attack. Everyone knows who he is. Usually, such people (his companions) stay far away from lime-light.

Anyways, coming back to the point. As far as I know, this group is now convinced about NM and hence they compromised on withdrawal of Gadkari. At one point, they were seriously thinking of breaking off all the ties with BJP when Bhagwat was made chief. If NM had not assured his ideological clarity, they would have kept Gadkari on as president and allowed hyperventilating people like Yashwant Sinha and all those non-RSS people to leave BJP. There was one important NM-Bhagwat meeting in october 2012 which clarified the issues. Things which were decided around that time are slowly being implemented now. Some wheels moved from within and this was avoided. Split OR no split, NM would have stayed with BJP and RSS along with other CMs.

As far as I know, the factor here for that groups apprehensions was not caste. In fact, the RSS-VHP relations with NM worsened prior to rise of Bhagwat and Gadkari during reign of Sudarshan and presidents Rajnath (first) and Advani (2004-2009). It is after March 2009 (when Bhagwat took over), that these internal malfunctions of party were addressed. Bringing in Gadkari was part of this. This resulted in NM's reassurance in late 2012 along with Subbu Swamy's inclusion in NDA (people may have apprehensions regarding latter). It is only after work of Bhagwat that all this brahmin-non brahmin started in public discourse. This was fueled by Mushrif's Zaid Hamidisque book "Who Killed Karkare". This was happening in much higher frequency in Marathi social media and MSM which started spilling over in Hindi and later English. The originators of this meme were Ajit Pawar's faction of NCP.

There was no "iron curtain"; only much worsened general economic condition of India under UPA-1 (in spite of that 8% growth rate hogwash, which was more or less "swelling rate" and not "growth rate") which made everyone suspicious of everyone else. Pardon me if I sound callous, but thankfully 26/11 helped in many matters - People agreed upon that India was in deep $hit and that it was high-time something was done about it. The issue of corruption, Subbu swamy jumping off in NDA bandwagon, his rattling the cage along with Ramdev and Anna and numerous exposés which brought India to policy-paralysis (nothing good can be done BUT not much bad can be done also, in other words, Minus 1 is better than Minus 10). Without 26/11, it would not have been so fast.

Looking back, from 2005-2008, was worst time for India in recent past. Whatever bad is coming up now, was actually happening then. And Nobody was speaking against it until 26/11/2008 when some people started thinking about resisting.

[RajeshA]

RamaY ji,

do you think you could get in the following list somehow in your syllabus?

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

[Agnimitra]

Long long time ago (IIRC 2008-09) Bji and I talked about the curricula for schools. Here are my thoughts (posting from memory - Civilizational thread was deleted).

1/ All schools in a given village are merge to make a single school. Many villages (1500-5000 population) have more than one school (often one for upper castes and one in SC section) be it elementary, primary and so on.

2/ Curriculam
- Yoga (I liked a book by Bihar School of Yoga which has 36 classes that cover all different styles of Yoga). Each class should be for 45 days (will become a semester course). By the time a student passes 12th grade they should complete all 36 classes.
- Sanskrit, Local Language mandatory and one language (including English) optional.
- All science subjects are taught in English - Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology
- All humanities subjects are taught in Sanskrit - History, Geography, Economics etc.,
- When the student joins the school/reaches 8th year - Will be done Upanayana samskara
- All students are taught selected Veda topics - includes at least 2 Upanishads
- All students must learn at least one martial arts course - 6-8 3 credit courses
- Each school is given at least 10 acres of land and students are encouraged to grow vegetables, grains and provide them to the kitchen
- Each student (before completing 12th grade) must go on at least 2 national camps (30-45 days); located in other states. They could attend the school there.
- Each student must go thru 4-6 3 credit courses on a engineering vocational course (Mechanical, Metallurgy, Automobile, Aerospace, Civil, Electrical etc.,)

I envision a school year (52 Weeks) split into 5 Mandalas (45/48 days each) with 3 weeks holidays between each one of them. Each Mandala will have 5 3-credit courses. So in a year one can take 5x4 = 25 courses. In 12 yrs (1-12th grade) they can have 300 courses.

Yoga = 36
Vedas = 12
Sanskrit = 12
Vocational Courses = 12
National Camps = 4
Martial Arts = 8
Mother tongue = 12
History = 12
Geography = 12
Economics = 12

Maths = 48
Physics = 40
Chemistry = 40
Biology = 40


P.S: Really appreciate if anyone who has access to 3Mar2013 Andhrajyothy Sunday special book, Please post/link the article on a school in Vijayanagaram/Vizag dist.

RamaY ji, thanks. Been looking fwd to this post of yours.

RamaY ji,

Instead of Vedas, I would recommend teaching Ramayana, Mahabharata, Puranas and Panchatantra. Vedas and Upanishads can be learnt by those who have interest. Those who do not have interest will get fair idea about their content through Ramayana and Mahabharata.

I am in talks with one school in my village where children will be taught Ramayana everyday. I will be paying one person to take few lectures everyday in school and teach one adhyaya of Ramayana to kids in primary school. One mandatory lecture of 45 minutes on Ramayana for primary and secondary schools. MBH can take over after 6th-7th standard when child grows up and can handle subtler stories. This way it is easier.

Presumably Ramayana/MBh/Panchatantra and much more would be covered under "Sanskrit" curriculum over 12 years of schooling. Within 2 years of Sanskrit teaching, one can comfortably read BG. Puranas have some grammatical eccentricities, and so that comes next, etc. However, Upanishads would come under "Veda" or "philosophy" class because in that subject matter many fields intersect.

[RamaY]

RajeshA garu,

I think most of the things you mentioned will be individual courses under History, Vedas etc.,

For example each course duration of 45 days would be more than sufficient to cover a given chapter say 2-500 yrs. There will be 45x1 hr classes. So 2-500 yrs of history can be covered in 10days followed by 10 days of comparative history analysis (what happened elsewhere, connections and influencing factors and comparisons etc) followed by 10days of motivations, strategies etc., and the remaining 15 hours for student presentations on selected events (30 students, 15 topics and 2/3 perspectives for each topic) and a simple exam.

I am sure one can come up with a 360degree assessment mechanism combining simple exam; presentations, debates etc., and have students rate their classmates.

[Agnimitra]

RamaY ji,

What are the resources and methodology you are using in these schools? You mentioned land. What about teachers, teacher training, etc? Also will some part of it be via distance education methodology?

[johneeG]

The difference between "necessary" and "sufficient" is intuitively obvious to most people.

For Hindus, accepting and devoutly following sadhana from a guru-paramparaa is sufficient to experience unity with the divine, but it is by no means a necessary condition for the capacity of atma to experience unity with the divine. In fact, the ultimate function of a guru is to remove the disciple's dependence on intermediaries so that the disciple may experience unity with the divine directly:

The Guru's mission appears to be two-fold. The first and most important concern of the Guru is to awaken, elevate and transform the seeker. The second and final purpose of the Guru is paradoxically to help the disciple seeker to transcend this state of complete dependence on the Master, which dependence the Guru himself had taken such pains to foster. The final spurt of realizing his true identity with God is exclusively the Seeker's job.

In Islam the intermediary is absolutely necessary, and remains necessary throughout the life of a Muslim. One cannot be a Muslim without accepting that Mohammed was Allah's sole and only intermediary. Mohammed does not elevate other Muslims to a level where they can seek the realization of Allah without him. Mohammed is, in fact the last and final prophet of Allah. Contesting any of these claims is outrightly blasphemous to Islam.

Therefore, for Hindus, the Guru is sufficient but not necessary. For Muslims, the self-proclaimed intermediary Mohammed is necessary as a permanent, life-long affair, and any doubt in this necessity amounts to blasphemy.

The definition stands.

Harbans ji, you can hastily google a thousand quotes about "Guru" and spout them out of context. It doesn't do your argument one bit of good, because you don't have an argument at all.

Intrinsic capacity of Atma for unity with the divine is the only thing the Guru relies on, when helping a seeker to realize his own unity with the divine. If Sanatan Dharma did not consider Atma to have intrinsic capacity for direct access to the Supreme, as Rajesh-ji's definition says... then there would be nothing a Guru could do, to help his disciple achieve that unity. Clearly you have no idea what a Guru is, if you think he is an intermediary like Mohammed or the Church.

On the other hand, any Muslim who says Mohammed is not required as an intermediary to realize Allah will immediately find himself in front of a Shariah court. Your persistent denial of this is laughable. In fact, the Persian mystic Mansur-al-Hallaj was executed for the statement "Ana-i-haqq" ("I am the truth"), because he was claiming that he could directly experience unity with the ultimate reality, the divine, without Mohammed as an intermediary.

With you it seems the word "intermediary", like the word "truth", is something to be given whatever meaning you please.

Well written, saar.

This is in the Koran itself:

"Say, 'He is Allah, the One;
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begets not, and neither is He begotten;
And there is nothing that can be compared to Him."
Qur'an 112:1-4

In Muslim understanding, God is beyond our sight and understanding, yet at the same time "nearer to us than our jugular vein" (Qur'an 50:16). Muslims pray directly to God, with no intermediary, and seek guidance from Him alone, because "...Allah knows well the secrets of your hearts" (Qur'an 5:7).

"When My servants ask thee concerning Me,
I am indeed close (to them).
I respond to the prayer of every suppliant
when he calls on Me.
Let them also, with a will,
Listen to My call, and believe in Me,
that they may walk in the right way."
Qur'an 2:186

Now how do you spin and twist all this away? Lie, say the above is out of context? Name call? What? Or do something that makes sense, acknowledge that your definition is not enough to separate the Dharmic from the Adharmic. That it creates more confusion and in that definition it rightfully gives Muslims specially the Wahabbi's a clear mandate to be called Dharmics (by your definition).

Harbans,
you want the above assertions to be accepted on facevalue even when they are contradicted?!! Mo himself is the intermediary. This is plain to anyone with common sense. If someone denies it they are trying to deny the obvious. Even this so-called assertion of halla was 'revealed' by Mo only. And there is no independent(of Mo) method to verify if Mo was correct or wrong. So, Mo is not even an intermediary. He is a self-acclaimed(and self-appointed) intermediary whose credentials are unverifiable. You have to take his claims on face value. The scripture quoted by him is created by him. And he makes grand claims on behalf of halla.

Idols, trees, animals, sun, moon, water, ...etc are much better than this kind of intermediary. At least, they don't make any claims on their own.

About Guru: Guru means 'big'. It is an antonym of 'Laghu'(which means 'small'). Yep, in Hindu system(or for that matter in any worthwhile system) the knowledge is passed down to the young from the old, to the small from the big, to the ignorant from the knowledgeable. And the student is expected to respect the teacher. And the teacher is expected to be compassionate to the student. This is the norm.

But, there is a crucial difference between Guru(in Hindu context) and Prophet(in abrahamic context). A prophet creates the scriptures i.e. scriptures follow the prophet. A guru follows the scriptures i.e. scriptures create the Guru. So, a Guru is not really an intermediary. It is the scripture(Hindu) which is the intermediary. The scripture(Veda) itself is the revelation of the God/Goddess. A Guru cannot and does not make any changes in the scriptures. He cannot insert or delete anything. Next, every student becomes a Guru and every Guru was once a student(kyuki guru bhi kabhi chela tha). A prophet, on the other hand, creates the scriptures. He does not accept any other verifiable entity's authority. He acknowledges no teacher. And none of the students of prophet can become a prophet. So, there is no comparison between prophet and guru. It is quite clear that it is those who claim to be prophets who are trying to be intermediaries.

But Muhammad made Allah Goonga, Behra and Andha without him. As Swami Ram Tirath said, "Whats Muhhamad name doing , attached with Allah carrying equal measure , even more importance than the supposed imaginary Boss Itself? Muhamadism is a cult and not true spiritual path by Indian standards of Dharma. The person called Mohamad is the accuser, judge and jury of every practice in Islam and thus no legitimacy outside his cult. Islam disqualify itself from being part of universal or principle based value paradigm which is the common ground of all the spiritual paths of Bharat Bhoomi .

Sudarshan Ji
Agree, its time to launch the Sudarshan Chakra to lay claim on the fatherhood of all legitimate spiritual, moral , ethical, intellectual practices. Onus to be on the present empty Domuses occupied by shallow Domases.

---

1.Yes an all powerful God can do what he pleases...

2.Truth is God

Truth depends on Falsehood , a matter of duality, How can One Beyond Duality be a prisoner of duality ?
Truth is not God but In God , so is falsehood and in Between.

This is a deep concept, saar.

Upanishad describes two versions of Brahman:
a) Nirguna(without qualities) Brahman
b) Saguna(with qualities) Brahman

Nirguna(without qualities) Brahman is without qualities. Thats all. It/He/She has no quality, no gender, no form, no name, no truth, ...etc.

It can be described in the following manner:
satyam gyanam anantam brahma.

Here, satyam means eternal; gyanam means intelligent(or conscious); anantam means unlimited. One may protest in the following manner: "If Brahman has no qualities, then what are satyam, gyanam and anantam? Are they not qualities?"
The answer is,"No, they are not qualities, but refutation of the qualities. Satyam means eternal. It refutes any idea that Brahman may become non-existent at any time/place/event. Similarly, gyanam means intelligent(or conscious). It refutes any idea that Brahman may be inert. Similarly, Anantam means unlimited. It refutes any idea that Brahman may be limited to a particular place/time/event."

So, it is clear that Nirguna Brahman is devoid of qualities. But such a Brahman cannot be worshiped by the people. Because people cannot talk or think (or even imagine) about an entity devoid of qualities. Brahman is beyond all the senses(including the mind).

The only method is the 'neti neti' method.

Since Brahman cannot be directly described, or imagined. A negative method is employed in analysis. It involves, a careful analysis while disqualifying(rejecting) everything which is not Brahman. This is the famous 'Neti Neti' approach. Neti means not this. Here, everything that is not Brahman is rejected. Brahman cannot be seen, touched, tasted, heard, or smelled. So, everything that can be seen, touched, tasted, heard or smelled is rejected(Neti). So on the analysis continues until everything that is not Brahman is rejected. So, what is left unrejected must be Brahman.
Eg: If you boil the salt-water, all the water will evaporate and you will be left with salt.

Adi Shankara shows this method in the following poem quoted by Pranav ji:

Mano Buddhi Ahankara Chitta Ninaham
Nacha Shrotra Jihve Na Cha Ghrana Netre
Nacha Vyoma Bhoomir Na Tejo Na Vayu
Chidananda Rupa Shivoham Shivoham

I am not mind, nor intellect, nor ego,
nor the reflections of inner self (chitta).
I am not the five senses.
I am beyond that.
I am not the ether, nor the earth,
nor the fire, nor the wind .
I am indeed,
That eternal knowing and bliss, Shiva,
love and pure consciousness.

Aham( I ) or Atma ( Self ) is NOT
a) mind(manas)-intellect(buddhi)-ego(ahamkara)-etc Chittas(or other mental/emotional projections);
b) the five sense organs(eyes-sight,ears-sound, tongue-speech, nose-smell, skin-touch)-five elements(akasha/ether, air, fire, water, earth);
and so on...;
Thus, He eliminates all the possibilities. Only two possibilities are left:
1) I (Aham) or Self (Atma)
2) Shiva (Brahman).
The, He understands that
I (Aham) or Self (Atma) == Shiva (Brahman)
i.e.
Shivah Aham or Aham Brahmasmi.

This is the 'neti neti' method. This is the gyana marga. A seeker is expected to identify Brahman as Self(or I) or Self as Brahman. It is not just about knowing, but experiencing this identification. There is no other method, but this for the ultimate realization. But, this realization is the final phase.

This is not such an easy method for obvious reasons. If only this method was available, then spirituality would be limited to only few people.

So, Brahman became Saguna i.e. acquired qualities with the 'help' of His Maya shakti(power). The Saguna Brahman has many good/auspicious(Kalyana) qualities like Satyam(Truth), Sundram(Beauty), Shivam(auspiciousness), Shakti(power),...etc.

The Saguna Brahman has forms and names. There are various such forms: Sri Rama, Sri Krishna, Shiva, Vishnu, Parvati, Lalitha, Surya, Ganapati, Subrahmanya...etc. All of these forms are Brahman(Saguna Brahman). Several ponds and rivers may exist. But all of them are water.

Saguna Brahman performs Leelas. People can understand Saguna Brahman only. People can worship the forms, names and leelas of the Saguna Brahman and be blessed(i.e. progress in the spirituality).

A doubt may arise: "If Saguna Brahman also acts like ordinary mortals, is It/Him/Her not bound by those actions?"

The answer is,"The actions of Saguna Brahman are not same as the actions of ordinary mortals(jeevas). Ordinary mortals are bound by the actions performed by them. While the Saguna Brahman is not bound by the actions performed by It/Him/Her. Why? Because, the ordinary mortals perform actions with desire(for a particular result). It is not the action(in itself) that binds but the desire(for a particular result) which inspires the action which binds the mortals. If an action is performed without any desire or without a selfish desire, then such an action will not bind(or will be easy to unbind). Since, Saguna Brahman performs leelas for the welfare of the world, It/Him/Her is not bound by the actions. So, Saguna Brahman is free, yet performs actions. So, these actions are called 'Leelas'. Ordinary Mortals are not free, so their actions are called Karmas."

One can never understand the nirguna Brahman, one can only experience it in the Moksha(or Samadhi) state.

Samadhi is the highest state in the Yogic meditation. There are two types of Samadhi:
a) Savikalpa Samadhi.
b) Nirvikalpa Samadhi.

In Savikalpa Samadhi, the seeker is still aware of distinction between subject, object and the process. For example, if you are thinking about Goddess Sharada; then you are the subject, Goddess Sharada is the object and thinking is the process. In Savikalpa Samadhi, a seeker experiences the grace of Saguna Brahman.

In Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the distinction between subject, object and process is over. All merge into one or one enlarges into all or more precisely one realizes that the distinctions were confusions/delusions/illusions. Here, the seeker experiences the Nirguna Brahman.

A person who experiences or realizes or 'knows' the Brahman is called Brahmavit. One who knows Brahman becomes Brahman. Corollary: Only Brahman can know Brahman.

Apart from Gyana Marga, there are two other approaches:
a) Karma Marga
b) Bhakti Marga

Karma Marga is a ritualistic approach. A person can perform rituals described in the scriptures and be blessed by them. All kinds of rituals/actions are prescribed in the scriptures for the use of various people. For example, rituals/actions to injure others are also specified in the scriptures(they are called Prayogas). One can use these rituals in offensive or defensive manner.

All these rituals/actions bear results. But the results of all actions are temporary. Any thing that has a start must have an end. Both good results(heaven-pleasure) and bad results(hell-pain) are temporary.

But, any action(and its result) binds its performer. It binds because of the underlying desire for the result. If one wants to be liberated(freed) from the action(and its result), then one must perform the action without desire. This is called Nish-Kama Karma.

This is also a difficult proposition for people. People act for the sake of results. If they are NOT interested in results, then they see no reason to act. So, Nish-Kama Karma is difficult to practice. Also the first thing required to perform Nish-Kama Karma is to have no Kamana(desire). This again is not easy. To have no desire, one needs to control one's senses, most importantly the mind. But, mind is difficult to be controlled and kept without desires.

So, the next proposition to facilitate such people is: They are asked to offer their actions to the God/Goddess(Saguna Brahman). 'Offering the action' means giving up the idea of being the performer of the action i.e. giving up the ego of performing the action. One is supposed to think that the God/Goddess is acting through oneself and one is merely an instrument of God/Goddess.

Giving up the ego of performing an action is also not easy.

So, for those who cannot give up their desire or ego: They are asked to offer the results of their actions to the God/Goddess(Saguna Brahman). 'Offering the result' means one should perform an action to the best of one's ability and leave the rest to the God/Goddess. Whatever the result is, one should accept it as the ordaining of the God/Goddess. This is the elementary level that people are asked to start with.

There are certain rituals/actions that are compulsory according to scriptures. There are certain rituals/actions that are allowed. And there are certain rituals/actions that are prohibited. People are asked to perform the compulsory actions and refrain from the prohibited ones. And while performing these actions, one is asked to offer the result to the God/Goddess(Saguna Brahman).

b) Bhakti Marga
Bhakti Marga is a devotional approach. Instead of focusing on rituals, here the person has an intense like(love) for the God/Goddess(Saguna Brahman). This like(love) can be expressed by listening about leelas(sharavanam), singing eulogies(keertanam), remembering (smaranam), worshiping(archanam), praying(vandanam), serving (sevanam), surrender of ego (dasyam), close friendship (sakyam), and offering the self(atma). It seems to me that the final stage of offering the self(atma) to God/Goddess is same as the Moksha. Here, the seeker is in aham Brahma asmi state.

---
Upanishads describe these two versions of Brahman(Saguna and Nirguna). Similarly, Brahma-Sutras talk of both these version of Brahman. This is the source of lot of confusion.

I wanted to post in this thread for sometime, but didn't because it seemed quite daunting(the sheer scope of the topics is daunting). Finally, I dared to post. Sorry for the belated replies. I'll reply to some other posts from the past...

[RamaY]

RamaY ji,

What are the resources and methodology you are using in these schools? You mentioned land. What about teachers, teacher training, etc? Also will some part of it be via distance education methodology?

I think majority of Villages/schools have most of the resources.

1. Land - Majority of villages have Govt lands. This can be converted for the school.
2. Vedas/Sanskrit/Yoga teacher - The local priest should be trained for this
>> 300hr Yoga teacher training - Rs 50,000
>> Veda/Sanskrit training - Part of Priest qualification
3. All other subjects must have existing teaching staff trained properly. This will happen in phases. When the govt syllabus changes to become Bharatiya, things will change too
4. Additional teaching staff
>> Martial Arts - local experts can become teachers (I recommend local martial arts like - karra/katti/ballem samus as they say in Telugu)
>> Arts - there already exists reasonable dance, music, instruments teachers in majority of places.
and so on...

The schools will have attached hostels (the current nonsense of BC/SC/ST hostels will go away). These hostels accommodate students from national camps courses.

20-30 schools (10-20,000 students) will have a central Akshayapatra style kitchen and food will be sent twice a day. The breakfast comes from local village hotel/cook.

Kindly read the "alternative budget scenarios thread" that RaheshAji linked. I put the numbers there.

[RamaY]

RajeshA garu,

On comparative religions, I always held the PoV that the excesses, excuses we see in Abrahamic stream of thought are nothing new and are nothing but new incarnations of Asuric thought process. There are good Asuras as many bad Devatas; but the religious justification given to Asuric thought is the problem.

Imagine the analysis happens as it does in Puranas. Remember the story of Vena, father of Pruthu on whose name earth got the name Prithvi?

Sunidha was the first daughter of death. She was given to Anga in marriage. Vena, their first born, was the grandson of death and proved bad for the creation. When he was installed on the throne by the sages, he began to proclaim: “No offerings, no charities, no oblations of any type! Nothing is to be done in honour of any God or anyone else except myself. I am the King, the Lord of all sacrifices and to me the whole things goes!”

The sages worshipped him and uttered the following words in the language of Sama Veda:

“O King, Our Lord, listen to us attentively. No doubt, the kingdom contributes to physical enjoyment. But the main purpose of a kingdom is the benefit of the people. We will perform the grand ritual for a prolonged time in the name of the Lord of rituals, who is Hari Himself. We worship him; since He is omnipresent and you also form a part of Him, you receive your lot in the grand ritual. Let Yajna, the work of the Lord, be dedicated to the lord of all works. Let Vishnu, the Lord of pervasion, be pleased through you and through all. Through us all your desires will be fulfilled by the same Lord. In whichever kingdom the Lord of all works is worshipped well, the people of that kingdom will have all their desires fulfilled and the Lord will confer everything upon the ruler and the ruled”.

Then King Veda said: “Do you mean that someone else is a greater ruler than me? Who is more fit to be worshipped than myself? Who is that Hari of whom you speak as the Lord of all works? Do not speak before me about Brahma, Vishnu, Sambhu, Indra, Vayu, Yama the god of death, the sun-god, the fire-god, the god of water, Dhata, Pusha, Bhumi and the moon. There is no end to these gods when you begin speaking about them. All these gods, no doubts, have their powers to bless or curse. But, poor fellows as they are, they have to stand as the various parts of the body of a ruler. Try to understand this and try to do what I say, in obedience. Hence I say no offerings, no sacrifices and no charities to anyone else. Just as it is the duty of the wife to offer hers services to the husband, so it is the duty of the ruled to offer their services to the ruler. Honour the Law. Honouring my word is honouring the law, in your case. You are the twice born and you must understand this”. The sages replied: “All this world, my lord is only the result of the evolution of the oblations of the grand ritual, the sacrifice of offering. Give us orders to accordingly and let there be no breach of the law in your orders.” {It is said that due to Vena's asuric empire the entire earth became essense-less, meaning it became desert and life was unsustainable}

Parasara said: Even though King Vena was induced again and again towards a lawful offering, he did not accept it. Then the sages got furious and talked among themselves: “Let us put an end to this thing. This fellow has the audacity to refuse to accept the existence of the eternal Lord who is without a beginning or an end. Blotted he is by the sin of misbehaviour.” They directed then the sharp edges of the kusa grass against him with the power of great mantras and killed him. When he was dead, they saw a spark glowing and developing into lawlessness all around. Since there was no ruler, the spark of lawlessness worked out in many minds as theft and robbery. Many people in the kingdom began to live as thieves and robbers, growing fond of each other’s possessions. The sages saw the spark ever moving among the many people. They saw that the king had died without leaving a son to take his place as ruler.

They took then the right hand of the corpse of King Vena and rubbed it against his thigh, churning and uttering great mantras. A male was born out of the thigh of the king. He was a curved dwarf, like the scorched, burnt trunk of a tree. In great hurry he asked the sages: “What shall I do?” They replied: “Sit down”, and he was named Nishada. His children were called Nishada as well; they occupied the mountainous areas of the Vindhyas and lived as highwaymen.{By the way, Nala was a Nishada king who married Damayanti. He knew the art of "Aswahridaya". Dikpalakas came to him asking him to negotiate Damayanti's hand for one of them. He was one of the Shat-Chakravartis}

The sages once again churned the right hand of the king against his thigh. A son was born who was valorous and virtuous, shining verily like the pure fire of the sacrifice. He was named Prudhu. A bow, some arrows and a shield fell from the skies and became his. All beings were pleased. Even King Vena, who had left his body, reached heaven thanks to the birth of a good son. {It is a different story how Pruthu cultivated the Land by going around all the four corners of earth using his chariot wheels as the tilling machines.}

Now how can Vena be any different from a modern Asuric religion that says/does the same things?

When we call all these Abrahamic faiths as Misguided Hindu Asuras, we will gain the maturity, authority, responsibility and more than anything confidence to correct/dissolve them.

[ShauryaT]

The very definition of a dharmic human being means our ability to control our animal like passions and desires, which are within our bodies. The very premise of the vow of Brahmacharya rests on abstinence from sex until a Grihasta. I support extending this vow to females too and an Upanaya for them also, which is done in some parts of the country but not most. Individual rights do not and cannot supersede the rights of society is the dharmic view does not mean individual rights do not exist but they cannot trample society and have to be in sync. Similarly society cannot trample and individual's rights, where society really has no business. The very root of Dharma rests on the concept of social stability for humans.

Sex is a procreative activity that impinges on society and not an issue between individuals alone. Hence, making a baby through this procreative activity has ALWAYS been regulated through marriage (speculations on the very ancient past aside) for good reason. It has a direct impact on family and society and most importantly on the child. The idea that sex can be had with the help of safe preventives is not a good enough escape hatch as teenagers who’s testosterone are at high levels and their frontal lobes not fully developed frequently make decisions based on raw animal passions leading to unwanted pregnancies. Teenagers are also not equipped to shoulder the responsibilities of a family. In practice, many of these become single parent homes or worse, the child is sent in foster or government care. Terminating a pregnancy would be considered by most Hindus as a crime. We celebrate the idea of a child coming to this world with a samskara not kill the so called “unwanted” child. Pre-marital sex is a challenge to the foundations of the institution of marriage.

Furthermore SD is a way of life. This way of life is built upon a series of practices that support SD ideas. The practice of marriage and procreation through the process of marriage supports an entire value system of Ashramas and duties, built over centuries. Who is to do samskaras for this out of wedlock child? A child in the SD tradition is not just an individual. The child becomes part of a family and social unit the moment the child is born. Hence, the mitakshara system recognizes even the property rights of this child the moment the child is born. The dayabaga system goes further and recognizes the rights of even the unborn child in the womb.

Individual rights cannot be a veto over what a society as a collective thinks is good for them, except for some fundamental rights of the individual and pre-marital sex is decidedly not one of them. Age limit for sex and its modalities is one such societal issue, not just an individual issue. After all the society is for all these individuals. Also, please no “modernity” nonsense arguments at least for me, for having lived in the west for 20+ years and traveled all over for long, I know what western systems are like and its effects. There is not much to learn on this score, our civilization knows it better. In this aspect, the Christian church has gotten it right, even if their motivations are not guided by the high ideal of SD, which seeks control of animal passions.

Ashrama Dharma and the value system we live by, our very way of life needs protection from the state. Sexual intercourse before marriage should be banned. The legal age to be called an adult should be raised to 21. This lowering of 18 is neither scientifically justified nor socially acceptable and nor is it in tune with the average life spans and general maturity levels for individuals required to function in a society with no undue pressure. Sexual intercourse before the age of 21 should be a crime, with appropriate punishment and atonements. Sex outside of marriage should be a crime (exceptional situations such as missing spouse, etc aside). Again, the mitakshara system, which is an exposition of Yagnavalkya smriti can be suitably modified for today’s use. Sexual intercourse between adults, not married should be discouraged by society and if this activity results in an offspring, the couple should be forced to marry by law, failing which there can be strict punishment. Voluntary termination of pregnancy, where health of the mother is not a question, should be banned. Termination of pregnancy should be made a crime and if done by below 21 years of age, even the parents should be made culpable of this crime.

This idea of consensual sex at age 16 is not a dharmic idea at all. It is even an illegal idea based on current law. How can a “minor” provide consent for such an important adult decision? This law is a direct challenge to Ashrama dharma and has all the deracinated corruptions of the west, in the name of individual rights and seeks to lower man to the position of an animal that has no control over his passions and lust. It is a society that has no “plan” for the individual a free for all, where anything goes. SD does not work that way.

There is a misconception out there that in SD anything goes and it is all jambalaya. Nothing can be farther from the truth. This is not to say all change is bad. SD’s ideas are definite. SD has definite values. These values are backed by systems. These systems are backed by traditions. These traditions are practiced. It is these practices, traditions and systems that get articulated in law for enforcement. The ideas and values stay at the level of the constitution and even higher is a conceptual idea or a set of overarching ideas, which stays at the level of a preamble and can be without definition. Dharma is such a concept. When one seeks to change a practice, one has to think through all the way back to its chain of traditions, systems, values, ideas and ask the question, is this change in line with the values and concepts one seeks to protect?

I do not know, which dharma some people speak of and what values and way of life one seeks to protect but it is not Sanatan Dharma and its traditions that will tolerate age 16 as being permissive for consensual sex outside marriage. The arguments have to be rooted in the values, traditions, practices or ideas of SD, and if someone has an agenda that is ameliorative, It is best that one declares this openly and stops pretending to write for the SD point of view.

[Atri]

RamaY ji,

do you think you could get in the following list somehow in your syllabus?

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

Too many subjects.. kids will curse you.. this is in addition to Science, Mathematics, English and regional language..

Look at the dissemination pattern of Bhakti saints. And Keertankaras. Teach Itihaasa and you teach kids Indic philosophy by default. Teach Ramayana and kids know what Dharma is. Rest is merely adding up more details. Itihaasa contains Indian culture (most of it), Dharma, philosophy, symbology etc. This is beauty of Ramayana, Mahabharata.

[Yayavar]

RamaY ji,


[*] Bharatiya Mythology,
[*] Itihaas (Ramayana, Mahabharata, Puranas),
]

How does one define Bharatiya Mythology?

[RajeshA]

How does one define Bharatiya Mythology?

Well I could have called it Hindu Mythology, but I chose to call it Bharatiya Mythology because it is in a way a heritage of whole of Bharat, and consists of narratives which were spun together bringing all deities under a single Pan-Bharatiya Pantheon and Mythology!

Added Later:

viv ji,

The main reason for formulating the subjects as I did above was to underline their non-religious nature, so that these subjects can be studied in a secular system as India has presently.

See "Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies"!

[RamaY]

Bharatiya = Hindu

[RajeshA]

Bharatiya & Dharma-Aarthik Policies

Summarizing, the Social Policies of the Nation should revolve around the following spokes:

1. Economic: Promoting competition, entrepreneurship, flexibility & justice in labor markets through anti-monopoly, anti-consolidation- and anti-Big Business policies in non-heavy industries.
2. Education: Facilitating high quality education to each child in Bharat through competition and privatization of education and providing a pan-Bharatiya education digital network. Emphasis on Bharatiya Sanskriti Studies, Four-Language Vertical Integration Formula, physical training (martial arts, sports, etc.) and skills development through apprenticeship programs, in addition to the usual subjects. Good education for each child is the most sacred responsibility of the Rashtra.
3. Health Care: Again the state takes all (90%) of the financial responsibility for the health of small children under 3 and give health benefits to children until 18. Those with severe disabilities can partake of state support as well. Facilitating high quality health care to each child in Bharat through competition and privatization of health care. Transfer of "Health Care Credits" enhances inter-familial ties.
4. Saṁnyāsa Support: Senior citizens above 80 become state responsibility.

[RajeshA]

The very definition of a dharmic human being means our ability to control our animal like passions and desires, which are within our bodies. The very premise of the vow of Brahmacharya rests on abstinence from sex until a Grihasta. I support extending this vow to females too and an Upanaya for them also, which is done in some parts of the country but not most. Individual rights do not and cannot supersede the rights of society is the dharmic view does not mean individual rights do not exist but they cannot trample society and have to be in sync. Similarly society cannot trample and individual's rights, where society really has no business. The very root of Dharma rests on the concept of social stability for humans.

I believe this is directed at my post on "Minimum Age for Marriage & Consensual Sex".

I think we should be having two layers of limitations on freedom to indulge in adharma - Rashtriya layer and Samajik layer.

1) Rashtriya Level Laws: These are meant to give the individuals maximum freedoms which do not impinge on the rights of the others, and thus sets the outer perimeter.

2) Samajik Level Guidance: This is where the teachings of Dharma come in, which are meant to exercise control over one's own indranis and baser impulses for the benefit of society and self.

At the Rashtriya level one cannot make laws which criminalizes all behavior which does not conform to the highest standards of living and thinking as demanded by social traditions derived from Dharma, Dharmic society and Bharatiya history. If one goes against Dharmic teachings, then of course society - parents, gurukul, neighborhood, can take upon themselves to guide the individual to the right path, but it need not mean that the individual should be punished by the state.

So these are two different levels of "control" over the liberties an individual may take in society.

[RajeshA]

Now how can Vena be any different from a modern Asuric religion that says/does the same things?

When we call all these Abrahamic faiths as Misguided Hindu Asuras, we will gain the maturity, authority, responsibility and more than anything confidence to correct/dissolve them.

RamaY ji,

The analogy is good, however one should remember that if the Asura is the ideology itself and it dwells in the hearts and minds of people and enjoys the sanction of "freedom of religion" which the Dharmics are being told is inviolable, then it becomes difficult to make the argument that "But the main purpose of a kingdom is the benefit of the people." is not being fulfilled, as the people continue to consider the Asura in the form of ideology as intrinsic to their salvation.

So even as we make call out something as Asuric, we should know that both our rhetoric, argumentation, and strategy would have to be cut to fit the requirements.

The Vena analogy would be difficult to fit onto the present challenges. In the Vena analogy, there was a clear juxtaposition between Asura and people, in the current case that is not so black-and-white.

[ShauryaT]

[*] Saṁnyāsa Support: Senior citizens above 80 become state responsibility.[/list]

The above is in line with Ashrama dharma? Absolving Grihastas of their duty to support the old. Also, it is these duties that bind not independence!

[ShauryaT]

Now how can Vena be any different from a modern Asuric religion that says/does the same things?

When we call all these Abrahamic faiths as Misguided Hindu Asuras, we will gain the maturity, authority, responsibility and more than anything confidence to correct/dissolve them.

We have ALWAYS called them adharmics and mlechas. It has been a 1000 year fight with them which will go on. Calling Islam with an additional tag of dharma to it, likes muslim dharma is misinformation. The lines between dharma and adharma is clear, has always been. It is only those who are not well versed in dharma, who are confused.

That is why I say, teach dharma and half the battle will be won. There will be no need to define ourselves in context of others.

[ShauryaT]

At the Rashtriya level one cannot make laws which criminalizes all behavior which does not conform to the highest standards of living and thinking as demanded by social traditions derived from Dharma, Dharmic society and Bharatiya history. If one goes against Dharmic teachings, then of course society - parents, gurukul, neighborhood, can take upon themselves to guide the individual to the right path, but it need not mean that the individual should be punished by the state.

So these are two different levels of "control" over the liberties an individual may take in society.

You have entirely missed the purpose of a dharmic state. It is to support a dharmic life. You are wrong that the state has no role in social affairs. The very purpose of the state is to shape and support the social behaviors of the country using the help of laws. Laws do not exist in a vacuum. What society has to do outside these laws, individuals will using their judgment.

[member_20317]

If one uses it, one tends to rely on it. If one relies on it, one tends to use it even more. Simple fact of life.

I for one believe the long term good of the Hindus and Dharmics is in circumventing the State:

1) when it is working at cross purpose to us (because our aim should be to infuse good health capable of taking on people who are going to be targeted by Malechas);

2) when it is not working at cross purpose to us (because our aim should be to maintain good health attained in phase 1)

Take this as a proposal of principle not a blind commandment.

But then I must warn you that I have had problems with authority figures all along. Just kidding

[RajeshA]

At the Rashtriya level one cannot make laws which criminalizes all behavior which does not conform to the highest standards of living and thinking as demanded by social traditions derived from Dharma, Dharmic society and Bharatiya history. If one goes against Dharmic teachings, then of course society - parents, gurukul, neighborhood, can take upon themselves to guide the individual to the right path, but it need not mean that the individual should be punished by the state.

So these are two different levels of "control" over the liberties an individual may take in society.

You have entirely missed the purpose of a dharmic state. It is to support a dharmic life. You are wrong that the state has no role in social affairs. The very purpose of the state is to shape and support the social behaviors of the country using the help of laws. Laws do not exist in a vacuum. What society has to do outside these laws, individuals will using their judgment.

ShauryaT ji,

so according to you, when would a state start becoming an totalitarian theocratic state? Perhaps you may like to elaborate on individual rights in Dharma as per your opinion!

[RajeshA]

• Saṁnyāsa Support: Senior citizens above 80 become state responsibility.

The above is in line with Ashrama dharma? Absolving Grihastas of their duty to support the old. Also, it is these duties that bind not independence!

ShauryaT ji,

When one is 80 one would have had lived more or less 20 years after retirement with one's family! So it is not as if a grihasta does not get a chance to look after his parents.

Saṁnyāsa is also not compulsory. Nobody needs to throw out his parents when they turn 80.

But Saṁnyāsa is considered as a stage when people try to renounce their worldly detachments and even their families and devote themselves to spiritual pursuits.

Every person should know that this renunciation would have the support of the Rashtra. This is the Rashtra's way of showing gratitude to the citizen for his contributions to the nation.

[RamaY]

RamaY ji,

The analogy is good, however one should remember that if the Asura is the ideology itself and it dwells in the hearts and minds of people and enjoys the sanction of "freedom of religion" which the Dharmics are being told is inviolable, then it becomes difficult to make the argument that "But the main purpose of a kingdom is the benefit of the people." is not being fulfilled, as the people continue to consider the Asura in the form of ideology as intrinsic to their salvation.

So even as we make call out something as Asuric, we should know that both our rhetoric, argumentation, and strategy would have to be cut to fit the requirements.

The Vena analogy would be difficult to fit onto the present challenges. In the Vena analogy, there was a clear juxtaposition between Asura and people, in the current case that is not so black-and-white.

I disagree.

Every human has both Asuric and Daivic streaks. The education, upbringing etc should focus on increasing the daivic quotient. The role of govt is to control asuric quotient. That is why the state is given the powers it got.

The moment a person's asuric quotient crosses a threshold and manifests into a social interaction (meaning interaction with another individual, nature, animal etc.,) it should be judged and punished.

And no guilty should go unpunished.

As and when this happens, the asuric ideology will stay dormant and controlled.

If we were to consider Malsi is an ideological manifestation of a set of asuric deeds, we cannot punish Malsi (we can ban it but it will manifest in another form with a sub/superset of same symptoms) on its own. We should punish every one who crosses the social threshold, be it Milsum or Otherwise.

This is what makes Malsi is the asuric manifestation of Hindu Adharmics, which has happened million times and was defeated consistently.

[RajeshA]

RamaY ji,

the question you raise is whether by calling out a challenge to the reign of Dharma in the form of an individual, a group, a system or an ideology as Asuric can better help in dealing with it.

There are two aspects of it: the if and the how!

The If: Calling it out as 'Asuric' can help mobilize public opinion or group opinion in dealing with the challenge. It strengthens the resolve.

The How: However if the tendency arises among us to deal with the Asuric challenge in a similar manner as say perhaps explained in our Itihaas, then I think that would be misleading.

Every challenge is unique and would have to have a tailor-cut solution. Especially an ideological challenge needs it own intensive Purva Paksha and thorough meme analysis. So the strategy would have to be developed keeping that in mind. Of course the wisdom inherited by us should be used but we should consider such strategies as only guidance and not a path.

So the strategy has to be looked for independently.

In the case of Abrahamic challenge especially so.

[ShauryaT]

so according to you, when would a state start becoming an totalitarian theocratic state? Perhaps you may like to elaborate on individual rights in Dharma as per your opinion!

See how quickly one starts resorting to marxist language as soon as Dharma makes a stand! Do I need to educate you the word theocratic state is based on a theocracy structure, which does not exists in SD. It is kshatriyas who have always ruled with Brahmins as advisors, exceptions notwithstanding. So, how did this theocracy word enter your vocabulary? Also, totalitarian - if you would actually go through our history and lessons then you will notice that there are instances where even Gods have to bend to man's rules. Since, when has SD systems claimed total control and knowledge to be accused of being totalitarian? What do you expect from a 5000+ year old civilization, that it will not have any systems, values, and traditions to protect?

Social transformation was the explicit goal of the constituent assembly. If you actually read the constitution and sync that up with the lives of the country you will notice a set of elites, deracinated in dharmic ways who made laws for the country. The 1953 hindu code bills is a perfect example of how massive social restructuring was sought to be made with the help of laws?

The individual is part of society. The guiding concept for Dharma should be harming the rights of an individual is akin to harming the larger society. If there is a clash between two dharmas then an issue based judgment call would have to be made to serve the larger good. My position of what I think SD's stand is on the issue of under age and out of marriage sex is clear.

[ShauryaT]

When one is 80 one would have had lived more or less 20 years after retirement with one's family! So it is not as if a grihasta does not get a chance to look after his parents.

Gee, Sanyas is retirement from sansaric obligations.

Saṁnyāsa is also not compulsory. Nobody needs to throw out his parents when they turn 80.

Sanyas is obligatory as per Ashrama dharma and NO it does not mean you leave your house. All it means is your sansaric obligations are over.

But Saṁnyāsa is considered as a stage when people try to renounce their worldly detachments and even their families and devote themselves to spiritual pursuits.

One does not have to "leave" anything. One can continue to perform or not perform their activities and pursue what one may like to do, however the idea is one is must from "sansar".

Every person should know that this renunciation would have the support of the Rashtra. This is the Rashtra's way of showing gratitude to the citizen for his contributions to the nation.

Keep the state out of people's lives as much as possible is the mantra. If anything, any family unwilling to fulfill their obligations should be punished. Not supporting the elderly should be crime.

[RajeshA]

ShauryaT ji,

without going on a tangent on "totalitarian theocratic", the reference was to Iran, as the issue was all about where you have the state interfering in the private lives of people, their sexuality, their relationships, what is allowed and what is not. That is all the context. There is no need to throw a bigger net than this or bring in "Marxism".

So I ask at what point would according to you, your "Dharmic" state start acting like Iran on the issue of sex! Just do a crude comparison. Unless you do the comparison it is difficult to cut through your generic and vague formulations, and I admit the problem with comprehension could lie with me.

The guiding concept for Dharma should be harming the rights of an individual is akin to harming the larger society. If there is a clash between two dharmas then an issue based judgment call would have to be made to serve the larger good.

It is unclear what the "rights of the individual" are, and when they are "harmed". "The larger good" in social issues is a slippery slope and can take one to Talibanism.

My position of what I think SD's stand is on the issue of under age and out of marriage sex is clear.

Well good that you know your position. How does it fit in with the question of "individual rights"?

Keep the state out of people's lives as much as possible is the mantra. If anything, any family unwilling to fulfill their obligations should be punished. Not supporting the elderly should be crime.

I are really missing on the many contradictions in your statements.

You said

You have entirely missed the purpose of a dharmic state. It is to support a dharmic life. You are wrong that the state has no role in social affairs.

On Consensual Sex:
1) When and how people have sex is of relevance to society.
2) State has a role in social affairs.
On Upkeep of Parents:
3) Keep the state out of people's lives as much as possible is the mantra!
4) Not supporting the elderly should be a crime! (Again you bring in the state)

No contradictions there?

ShauryaT ji,

it is indeed difficult to follow what your model is for a Dharmic state, because of the flip-flops and the eloquent vagueness.

[RajeshA]

When one is 80 one would have had lived more or less 20 years after retirement with one's family! So it is not as if a grihasta does not get a chance to look after his parents.

Gee, Sanyas is retirement from sansaric obligations.

Yes and after spending about 20 years of retirement, with 80 it is quite possible that the individual would start renouncing sansaric obligations.

Saṁnyāsa is also not compulsory. Nobody needs to throw out his parents when they turn 80.

Sanyas is obligatory as per Ashrama dharma and NO it does not mean you leave your house. All it means is your sansaric obligations are over.

Saṁnyāsa is not obligatory. It is recommended for the dvijas, and often it is discouraged among Shudras AFAIK. There are no Pan-Bharatiya rules on this. Your rules may not apply to somebody else.

You must give some thought here as to whether you want a Rashtra which acts only according to your own sampradayik understanding of Sanatan Dharma, or the principles be translated into policies for the larger diverse society.

But Saṁnyāsa is considered as a stage when people try to renounce their worldly detachments and even their families and devote themselves to spiritual pursuits.

One does not have to "leave" anything. One can continue to perform or not perform their activities and pursue what one may like to do, however the idea is one is must from "sansar".

Yes and depending on one's own wishes, one can choose to stay with the family or admit oneself to the Rashtriya Saṁnyāsa program.

Every person should know that this renunciation would have the support of the Rashtra. This is the Rashtra's way of showing gratitude to the citizen for his contributions to the nation.

Keep the state out of people's lives as much as possible is the mantra. If anything, any family unwilling to fulfill their obligations should be punished. Not supporting the elderly should be crime.

That is a decision for the "elderly"! If the "elderly" feels comfortable within his family, he should stay there, and if not the State offers him an alternative.

Also it is questionable that the needs of the elderly over 80, especially the health care needs, can be met within the family. An old people's estate can be much more specialized for the purpose. Family can of course visit them anytime.

You may have this vision of some utopian society where every child takes optimal care of the disabled immobile elderly parent but that is often not the case. Somebody who has done so much in life for others, should not at the end of his life feel abandoned and helpless or a burden. The dignity of life is here of primary consideration. The state cannot be overburdened with bureaucracy whose only job is to go around checking if people are taking care of their elderly parents and punishing them if they are not.

Also you seem to ignore the level of not-so-well-off who may not have the luxury of looking after the elderly and still need to go to work!

A much more efficient system would try to give succor and dignity to the elderly rather than get hung up over the question whether the children are doing their duties or not, which promotes only rancor.

[ShauryaT]

ShauryaT ji,

without going on a tangent on "totalitarian theocratic", the reference was to Iran, as the issue was all about where you have the state interfering in the private lives of people, their sexuality, their relationships, what is allowed and what is not. That is all the context. There is no need to throw a bigger net than this or bring in "Marxism".

So I ask at what point would according to you, your "Dharmic" state start acting like Iran on the issue of sex! Just do a crude comparison. Unless you do the comparison it is difficult to cut through your generic and vague formulations, and I admit the problem with comprehension could lie with me.

I will state the issue directly. Your penchant to look at the whole world except to look for guidance on what SD teachings and traditions say is amazing. If you are uncomfortable or want to change the age old institution of Brahmacharya then say so but first do acknowledge that it is where SD streams stand on the issue. You are free to argue what is a better option and how is Dharma better served. But, please this constant compare business smells of being uncomfortable in your own skin.

The guiding concept for Dharma should be harming the rights of an individual is akin to harming the larger society. If there is a clash between two dharmas then an issue based judgment call would have to be made to serve the larger good.

It is unclear what the "rights of the individual" are, and when they are "harmed". "The larger good" in social issues is a slippery slope and can take one to Talibanism.

Spell the issue and if I have a clear view, I shall share. Individual rights is too broad a subject and within that subject, each case and issue is different. For fun sake, go through the cases of free speech rights in say US and India and see what the courts grapple with and how governments handle the issues. It is always a conflict to me managed through a process of law.

My position of what I think SD's stand is on the issue of under age and out of marriage sex is clear.

Well good that you know your position. How does it fit in with the question of "individual rights"?

Individual rights are for adults. A "minor" is not treated the same way as an adult is, so their treatment is different. As a minor, I shall not sign on contracts, so how can I consent to sex? For adults, marriage is the bedrock of an institution that has served and continues to serve the nation well. Individuals do not have any pre-ordained right to have extra marital relationships. Society has a right to protect such institutions and make laws that seek to protect them. Out of marriage relationships can spell havoc and is a sure shot way to destroy society. Making laws to protect the larger good is dharma. The root of dharma is stability and order, which is ritam. I do not know your experiences but I have seen enough of this nonsense from close quarters and the havoc it creates for everyone. The shastras are also clear on this. What is your case?

Keep the state out of people's lives as much as possible is the mantra. If anything, any family unwilling to fulfill their obligations should be punished. Not supporting the elderly should be crime.

I are really missing on the many contradictions in your statements.

You said

You have entirely missed the purpose of a dharmic state. It is to support a dharmic life. You are wrong that the state has no role in social affairs.

No contradiction sir. Laws are needed as a last resort, where required. The idea should be for the environment to be such that laws are needed only as a back stop and the state does not take over "functions" for people. Laws for society that support dharma is what is needed not taking over of functions that people ought to do. So, make a law to ensure punishment to those who do not support their elders but do not take over these functions. Ofcourse, laws do not work just because there is a law an entire soft environment is needed for its success so that the "danda" of the state can fall only on the few who are severely errant.

it is indeed difficult to follow what your model is for a Dharmic state, because of the flip-flops and the eloquent vagueness.

I do not know, how else to make it more specific but no flip-flop on my side. The disconnect IMO is because you have not gotten the pulse of Dharma yet. There is too much purva paksha and less reading of our own works, traditions and systems and more importantly contemplation and thinking through the issues at hand before an articulated view point on behalf of SD. I may have 1000 disagreements with RamaY, but I know he has the pulse of Dharma, his examples, thoughts clearly tell me, where he is coming from. RamaY maybe too harsh for my taste but that is a different matter. With you sir, I have a fundamental disconnect because IMO almost ALL your articulations do not have a dharmic understanding at all. But, no ill intent meant.

[brihaspati]

ShauryaT ji,

some of the elements of your post that involves strict control of "sex", and other aspects involving social responsibilities such as childrens duty to maintain parents, etc. - reminds me of the problem I had when I had explored the origins of our "values" - or so-called "hard values" that are pushed for as principles.

If what you demand is actually "SD" - no consensual sex at 16 - nothing until 21, then most of our ancestors had been breaking SD, for most of existence of SD in India. Almost of us are descended from SD breakers then. It is perhaps important for a certain period of segregation in sexual terms in early childhood and adolescence - even this might actually vary form person to person. Some mature earlier than others - and its also about mental maturity. But fixing it for ever is a "hard value" that is being sought to be established as a timeless principle.

Whenever we do that - we inevitably land up in a situation where the hard value is opportunistically used by the powerful to create guilt, and thereby provide a means of control, exercised selectively. Every religion, dharma sastra, or texts that try to make such things into "everlasting principles", inevitably land up in the twisting position of having to justify deviations from this principle by the powerful.

Abrahamics do this through the convenient mechanism of "order/vision/sudden revelation" by the supra-human authority. SD followers will similarly resort to special visions/ exceptions found by scholars/often made out of dubious interpretations of past incidents. Two of the women of Mahabharata had "premarital" sex. Satyabati's tryst with Parashara has been represented often in euphemistic ways - the so-called non-contact, immaculate conception route. This in itself shows how every ideology that tries to reconcile hard values with reality of even their most iconic figures - ultimately is forced to invent absurdities to maintain their claims of "hard values".

However if we are skeptical about the immaculate conception claims about Satyavati, we do see that it was premarital - since just the coming together of the two even if interpreted as Gaandharva, would imply a divorce later without which she could not have formally married a prince. Or she had two hubbies. So accepting the premarital label is the least problematic one. If you make this illegal - the whole legitimacy of one of the most iconic dynasties of Indian narrative - becomes founded on breaking of SD.

Hard values sought to be made into a timeless universal principle, almost surely represents an agenda of control by an interested subgroup. Because it is dependent on power and agenda of control under subgroup or personal power - it will always be broken by members of the propaganda team, and elaborate exceptions will gradually be found and accumulate. Complicating and problematizing the whole ideology of which the "value" claims to be part of.