Bharat Rakshak

^^^Hakim sahib hits bulls-eye. Again. As usual.

Only nitpick is with the presumption that 'em Yevil Yinduans haven't oppressed/suppressed/depressed their wimminfolk enough, apparently. I say yevil yindics have gone far beyond mere suppression. They've managed elimination altogether - which is what leaves the sex ratio at 850 in districts that otherwise have stellar HDI stats - in terms of income, edu and all that. So no, its not as if more edu will improve matters here much. Of course, Jahjjar in Haryana takes the cake there - gender ratio is like 450 per 1000 males or something like that?

Anyway, nature will find balance. Her own way. Whether we like it or not. Just wait pray and hope, I guess. What other option exists anyway...

shiv wrote:Women are able to handle husband, sons/s and daddy and give them all something. So by importing Packee wimmens we are inadvertently importing/helping Packee mens. Will post more sociological info on this later

Shivji, minor addition to that above. Packee wimmen are able to handle husband, son/s... Packee wimmens are conditioned to be kushpoo number 3 or number 4 and will be fine with that position. Well, when that memes travels, all the stud men in the sample experiment will be adopting to enhance and milk that meme probably. Which means more stud the men are, the more kushpoos they will try to accumulate to their collectibles. Which would mean harem wouldn't be haraam. The system from arab lands would conveniently encourage that trajectory, and will be the choice for all the stud men in the sample. Who is more pious will be the norm. IOW invite pakis (either male or female or inbetween) to anywhere that place is going to be pakified.

And some paki wimmens are going to be as enlightened as this arab motorham. It will be fun till it lasts. After a while, the fight over who has the longest beard will take the center stage. Just as in pakiland.

Quote:
Salwa al Mutairi, who once ran for parliament, argued buying a sex slave would protect decent, devout and ''virile'' Kuwaiti men from adultery or being seduced by other women''s beauty because an imported sex partner would be tantamount to marriage, reports the Daily Mail.

"There was no shame in it and it is not haram'' (forbidden) under Islamic Sharia law," Mutairi claimed.

To justify her claim, she cites an 8th century Muslim leader Haroun al-Rashid, who is rumoured to have had 2,000 mistresses.

Hari Seldon wrote:^^^Hakim sahib hits bulls-eye. Again. As usual.

Only nitpick is with the presumption that 'em Yevil Yinduans haven't oppressed/suppressed/depressed their wimminfolk enough, apparently. I say yevil yindics have gone far beyond mere suppression. They've managed elimination altogether - which is what leaves the sex ratio at 850 in districts that otherwise have stellar HDI stats - in terms of income, edu and all that. So no, its not as if more edu will improve matters here much. Of course, Jahjjar in Haryana takes the cake there - gender ratio is like 450 per 1000 males or something like that?

Anyway, nature will find balance. Her own way. Whether we like it or not. Just wait pray and hope, I guess. What other option exists anyway...

The sex ration in punjab and Haryana is between 870 and 890. It has improved considerably since the last census. Sex ration for India in 940. By 2021 I believe it will be quite comfortable. We dont need influx of women from anywhere . Least of all TSP. In my flight I ll work out further details of demographics using a statistical software and try to calculate the "women deficit." There are other statistical rates that too should be taken into consideration besides sex ration . Like for instance marital rate . Marital fertility rate etc. I ll post graphs and calculations once its ready. Superficially I am convinced that it will not be much of a problem in years to come.

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

The statistical reason why I said that women from cis/russia would marry Indians is because these countries have the highest deficit of men . (problem opposite to India). The following page indicates sex rations from various countries. Note that the stats in following pages are man per women in contrast to women per men in Indian Stats in the preceeding page and most social science texts.

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

wish this clears some misconception.

http://corp.afar.com/blog/2009/08/the-c ... ost-women/

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

shiv wrote:I think this import Paki wimmens topic needs to be seen in its totality.

You see - if you say that India has 1000 men and only 900 of them will have women and the other hundred can get wimmens from Pakistan, the theory is fine but in practice let me speculate on what could happen. In a crowd of 1000 men competing for fewer wimmens - the top 900 men - the stud men, the rich, the well endowed, the more desirable men will get their women. The less desirable men will be left unmarried even if they are good men. The theory states that these "good men" should get Paki wimmens by import.

In practice what will happen is that some of the stud men and rich men will go for some of the more attractive and desirable Packee wimmens. And this will leave the "less desirable" 100 men with "rejected" Indian brides to choose from.

shiv saar,

I'll try to put up an alternate model for your consideration.

The Pakistani Side
Assumption is that "Pakistan==Somalia_x_50" Scenario has arrived. Considering the population of Pakistan is 300 million in 20 years. Poverty level has hit 70%. Low Income Group is around 20%. Medium Income Group is around 8%. Well-Off is around 1.9% and RAPE the rest 0.1%.

Furthermore, axiomizing:

• Parents would marry off their daughters to Indians, either because of money or undesirable Talibanic constraints on lifestyle or better lifestyle in India or due to insecurity.
• Over the next 20 years, 30% of the population is Paki males of marriageable age, 30% of the population is Paki women of marriageable age.
• In each income group, the men are able to find women from either that group or from the lower group.
• Amongst the Pakistani diaspora in Queenistan, Kanada, wagerah, around 40% look for their partners back in Pakistan, 80% of the time, parents marrying off their daughters to some village bumpkins to get them out of Pakistan, usually for reasons of solidarity with the extended family.
• With descending income group, the ability of Pakis to migrate to the West decreases.

The RAPE would be willing to marry off their daughters to Indian men, in order to secure for themselves a beachhead in Indian society. They would not want their daughters to face the music in Pakistan - of social constraints, insecurity, etc. From the 100,000 RAPE women available, around 30,000 could decide to marry Indian men. The religion of Indian Men would not be that important, and the Indian men would not be paying mehr for the RAPE women. Let's say, of these 12000 marry Indian Muslims and 18,000 marry Indics. Mostly RAPEttes would be marrying into the upper middle class in India with a couple of 100 or so to the really rich. 60,000 RAPEttes escape to the West, 30,000 of them with RAPEs, 25,000 of them marrying Pakistanis settled abroad, and 5,000 marrying Westerners, while 10,000 stay back in Pakistan marrying other RAPEs who decide to stay back.

The Pakistani Well-Off women would constitute about 1,710,000. Around 10000 of them will marry RAPE men, who stay back and do not get any RAPEttes. These would be women, who would be very much into Bollywood, Indian fashion, etc. These women too would take the first chance to get out of Pakistan, and their parents too would like to send them elsewhere due to worsening security. Let's say a million stay back and marry well-off Pakistani men due to family ties and love. 200,000 well-off Pakistani women marry into Pakistani diaspora, while 500,000 marry Indian Men. Of these, 450,000 marry well-off Indian Muslims while 50,000 marry Indics. Also in this case, Mehr does not play an important role.

The Middle-Income Group Pakistani Women would constitute about 7.2 million. Around 300,000 marry into the Well-Off layer who have not got any women in that layer. From the middle income group around 900,000 also get to migrate to the West. 4 million of women in this group would marry into the group itself. The rest 2 million would try to migrate to India. The Middle-Income Group would try to supplement their incomes in Pakistan to retain their standard of living with some support from India, and they would like to send their daughters to India. These daughters in India may get to work and they would send some of their earnings back to their families in Pakistan. The Indian sons-in-law too may help out. I presume all of these women would marry into middle-income non-conservative Indian Muslim families.

Low Income Group Pakistani women would be around 18 million. Around 3.2 million of these would marry Middle-Income Group Pakistani men, who could not get a wife from their class. Of the rest 14.8 million, 5.8 million may like to stay home due to promises within the extended family, while the rest would be willing to come to India. Here Mehr would play a very important role, and 9 million of these women would be willing to marry Indians. I presume in this group, the parents would use Taqqiya and tell neighbors and relatives that their daughters have married Indian Muslims but many would be marrying Indics. There may some conservatives here, and they would insist on Indian Muslims, the rest would opt for a better rate of mehr. It would probably be 50-50. 4.5 million would marry Indian Muslims while 4.5 million would marry Indics using taqqiya. The going rate of mehr may be around 3,000 USD for these women, that makes it 27 billion USD.

From the Poor families, they would most probably be willing to "sell" their daughters for some standard price of around 1,500 USD. There would be around 63 million poor women. 5.2 million would marry Low Income Group Pakistani men, leaving 7 million of these men without wives as they would not be able to afford the mehr. Another 7.8 million may marry their first cousins, leaving 50 million for Indians. That means in toto around 75 billion USD would change hands. Religion again would be no problem at all. Only mehr would be important. These women would most likely be like their counterparts in India, simply poor, and most easily able to adjust to poor Indian families.

Around 65.68 million Pakistani women would be available for marrying by Indians. So more or less it comes to around 102 billion USD which would flow from India to Pakistan during this time as mehr, plus remittances over time.

This would leave 27.31 million Pakistani women back in Pakistan.

Over two thirds of the Pakistani men, over 63 million of them, would not be getting any women to make kids. That would be a great achievement in slowing down Pakistani demographic expansion.

Warning: There may be some madrassa Maths in the calculations.

After reading Shiv saar's post on Indian women having not been suppressed enough, question for RajeshA ji - on the lighter side:
Who's going to sell this solution to the Indian wimmens - billi ke gale mein ghanti kaun baandhega (who'll bell the cat) hain ji?

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

Continuing from TIRP Thread!

harbans wrote:at least we will go down holding our values in our hearts!

For somehow our values don't allow us to take the hard decisions!

Agree Rajesh Ji, better to go down with the values intact than compromising on Dharma. Dharma is subtle. Sukshma. And that was Bhism IIRC.

Agree harbans ji,
Dharma is subtle, and still we all presume we can interpret it and know what is right, while we hide our strategic shortsightedness behind some sanctimonious rhetoric and label it Dharma!

My dharma says we should free the subjugated women captives of an adharmic ideology using as little violence as possible, making use of our resources to outwit the adharmics.

I am very interested to know why somebody would call this adharmic?!

My dharma says we should free the subjugated women captives of an adharmic ideology using as little violence as possible, making use of our resources to outwit the adharmics.

Why be gender specific then Sir?

Our aim should be to free all those captive of literalist interpretation of doctrines that bind and not free, irrespective of gender.

Its Kalyugi time so We cant be whole 400% Dharmic in gender discrimination. One thing at a time , first shut down the way of expansion ( Mushharaf tying) and then put the efforts in reforming. No use reforming when litter keep muliplying.

harbans wrote:My dharma says we should free the subjugated women captives of an adharmic ideology using as little violence as possible, making use of our resources to outwit the adharmics.

Why be gender specific then Sir?

Our aim should be to free all those captive of literalist interpretation of doctrines that bind and not free, irrespective of gender.

harbans ji,

I'll try to understand what you're saying:

1) Are you saying, that because you try to save the women, you do adharmic stuff, because that would be gender-specific? If a woman is being molested, a Dharmic should allow it, because otherwise one would be committing gender discrimination Adharma!

2) Or are you saying we should import Pakistani men as well in order not to be doing this in a gender-specific way. Would we be marrying then Indian women to them? Would that be producing hordes of Dharmic offsprings? For after all, in a patriarchal system, the man can determine the religion of the offspring simply due to brute force!

3) Or are you suggesting we simply open up the gates of India and allow every Pakistan in, regardless of gender?

4) When we speak of aims, it provides us a very convenient way of doing nothing.

A kid of seven can say, his aim is to go to college, so he would not go to school. A man can say his aim is to reach the moon, so he would not go to the grocery store! I guess the most Dharmic guy in the world would be a couch-potato!

Can't we "save" the men, "captive of literalist interpretation of doctrines that bind and not free", possibly in a next step, because the first step gives us more room for the second step?!!!!

harbans wrote:at least we will go down holding our values in our hearts!

For somehow our values don't allow us to take the hard decisions!

Agree Rajesh Ji, better to go down with the values intact than compromising on Dharma. Dharma is subtle. Sukshma. And that was Bhism IIRC.

I wonder what kind of Dharma interpretation you have?! Would you rather kill India than save Pakistani women?!

Somehow I think, that besides the WKK, DIE and Commies and Islamists in India, there are other forces as well, who are intent to ensure that we do nothing to ward off the Pakistani threat, for whatever one may suggest, they would simply retort that it does not pass the Dharmic test, so one should rather do nothing.

I'd call this "Dharmic Couch-Potatoism", or may be "Dharmic Couch-Potatriotism"!

1) Are you saying, that because you try to save the women, you do adharmic stuff, because that would be gender-specific? If a woman is being molested, a Dharmic should allow it, because otherwise one would be committing gender discrimination Adharma!

I wonder what kind of Dharma interpretation you have?! Would you rather kill India than save Pakistani women?!


Where did that come from? When did i say anything of the sort??

2) Or are you saying we should import Pakistani men as well in order not to be doing this in a gender-specific way.

I just posed a question to you, why you be gender specific. I'd like no truck with Paki men, women or it's Hijra Fauji's. Complete gender equality == Dharma.

I have consistently maintained that Islamism will have to be ultimately tackled by it's doctrine. Creating awareness that the doctrine itself is the motivator of what we refer to extreme behavior amongst Islamists.

I mentioned a time frame of 150 years for India simply because we will have more number of Muslims than Hindu's in the Indian subcontinent. The population of Pakistan and BD was around 30 m at the time of partition. Today 60 years hence it's approaching 200 million. There will not be enough resources a few decades down the line. A big mental block that has exists is the inability of people to understand the exponential function..towards that a good video for you to enjoy:

The Most IMPORTANT Video You'll ever see

Prem Ji: I agree with the contention that sources of breeding can be stopped with the mail order type of thing. But Paki's are genetically screwed up for generations now due to inbreeding. I don't know if it's a good idea to bring in that pool of genes here. Maybe someone more familiar with genetics can comment.

Since we still seem to be into porki wimmens here is my 2 paise...

In my experience (and I'm sure most you too) I have not seen a single instance where a marriage between Hindu and Muslim/Xtian has resulted in the assimilation of the offspring into the Dharmic way. This is true irrespective of the boy or girl being Hindu. Why? Simply because our dharma does not have a way to ensure the assimilation of the offspring. There no Friday sermon or Sunday mass the kids need to attend to inculcate a pride into the culture of one of the parent. All he hears from the Hindu parents' side is the p-sec stuff that all religions are equal whereas the non-Hindu parents' side is all the more keen to ensure their religion does not lose out.
Famous example of an offspring born to a Hindu father and Muslim mother - Sanjay Dutt

SandeepA wrote:Since we still seem to be into porki wimmens here is my 2 paise...

In my experience (and I'm sure most you too) I have not seen a single instance where a marriage between Hindu and Muslim/Xtian has resulted in the assimilation of the offspring into the Dharmic way. This is true irrespective of the boy or girl being Hindu. Why? Simply because our dharma does not have a way to ensure the assimilation of the offspring. There no Friday sermon or Sunday mass the kids need to attend to inculcate a pride into the culture of one of the parent. All he hears from the Hindu parents' side is the p-sec stuff that all religions are equal whereas the non-Hindu parents' side is all the more keen to ensure their religion does not lose out.
Famous example of an offspring born to a Hindu father and Muslim mother - Sanjay Dutt

.

I personally feel we should leave out this inter marraige related discussion from Paki threads as these personal choices.

Other more famous examples can be the most Powerful Man in India who as of now weilds power without responsiblity. Yuvraj aka RG, his sibling, Mahest Bhatt, Shahid Kapoor. The list is endless.

harbans wrote:

1) Are you saying, that because you try to save the women, you do adharmic stuff, because that would be gender-specific? If a woman is being molested, a Dharmic should allow it, because otherwise one would be committing gender discrimination Adharma!

I wonder what kind of Dharma interpretation you have?! Would you rather kill India than save Pakistani women?!

Where did that come from? When did i say anything of the sort??

I proposed a strategy. You said it was not Dharmic because it involved Pakistani women. I gave a Dharmic reading of a Dharmic-neutral strategy - one can call it saving Pakistani women! You said it was not Dharmic because of gender specificity.

So if strategies are being shot down because of Dharmic tests, then the implication is one is willing to let India go down because of one's narrow interpretations of Dharma, in this case it had to do with "saving" Pakistani women (even though the strategy is Dharma-neutral, as far as I am concerned)!

harbans wrote:

2) Or are you saying we should import Pakistani men as well in order not to be doing this in a gender-specific way.

I just posed a question to you, why you be gender specific. I'd like no truck with Paki men, women or it's Hijra Fauji's. Complete gender equality == Dharma.

So why be gender specific? Well the answer is simply that the proposed strategy is gender specific. Your gender specificity comment was in connection with the strategy of marrying Pakistani women, which implied you were not in favor of the gender specificity of the strategy!

harbans wrote:I have consistently maintained that Islamism will have to be ultimately tackled by it's doctrine. Creating awareness that the doctrine itself is the motivator of what we refer to extreme behavior amongst Islamists.

Nobody here has anything against that mission, even though one could say, there are millions of Islamists poised against you, who would argue the opposite, and these Islamists control the Muslim societies so their message is more likely to reach them than the message you propose to give. So I would call such a mission, a well-intentioned mission but it is not a strategy. The one and a half billion Muslims of the world are listening a different tune and are not in a hurry to change the radio channel.

harbans wrote:I mentioned a time frame of 150 years for India simply because we will have more number of Muslims than Hindu's in the Indian subcontinent. The population of Pakistan and BD was around 30 m at the time of partition. Today 60 years hence it's approaching 200 million. There will not be enough resources a few decades down the line. A big mental block that has exists is the inability of people to understand the exponential function..towards that a good video for you to enjoy:

The Most IMPORTANT Video You'll ever see

Prem Ji: I agree with the contention that sources of breeding can be stopped with the mail order type of thing. But Paki's are genetically screwed up for generations now due to inbreeding. I don't know if it's a good idea to bring in that pool of genes here. Maybe someone more familiar with genetics can comment.

harbans ji,

It is exactly because of the exponential increase in populations in the Muslim world, that we all are knocking our heads together trying to find solutions.

What is not helpful is if those solutions are shot down because of sanctimonious interpretations of Dharma.

For all guys high on Dharma juice , a word of caution:

In Mahabharata, Dharmaraj Yuddhishthira was addicted to gambling. IOW, the moral of the story is that dharma is a game of chance, it depends very much on support from people who are willing to fight for it. IOW, dharma depends on violence and strength.

Prithvi Raj Chauhan's tale should be a cautionary tale for those who think that dharma is silver bullet for all of India's problems.

There are 250 million Han men waiting on the other side of the Himalayas.....

Aditya_V wrote:
I personally feel we should leave out this inter marraige related discussion from Paki threads as these personal choices.

Other more famous examples can be the most Powerful Man in India who as of now weilds power without responsiblity. Yuvraj aka RG, his sibling, Mahest Bhatt, Shahid Kapoor. The list is endless.

Aditya
I am not talking about the personal choice part, just using those alliances as example to prove my point about what happens to offspring in such situations.
As long as we do not have a Dharmic infrastructure to assimilate the offspring whatever Rajesh-ji is suggesting will be counter-productive IMO.

SandeepA wrote:As long as we do not have a Dharmic infrastructure to assimilate the offspring whatever Rajesh-ji is suggesting will be counter-productive IMO.

SandeepA ji,

I will be going into that in my next posts!

Samudragupta wrote:There are 250 million Han men waiting on the other side of the Himalayas.....

We got Bollywood!

abhischekcc wrote:For all guys high on Dharma juice , a word of caution:

In Mahabharata, Dharmaraj Yuddhishthira was addicted to gambling. IOW, the moral of the story is that dharma is a game of chance, it depends very much on support from people who are willing to fight for it. IOW, dharma depends on violence and strength.

Prithvi Raj Chauhan's tale should be a cautionary tale for those who think that dharma is silver bullet for all of India's problems.

Mods, please post in OT or appropriate thread - not sure where this belongs.

Abhishekji, while I agree that the *success* of establishment of Dharma depends on support from people and who are willing to fight for it, I think that 'Dharma is a game of chance' is the wrong inference to draw:

Dharma depends on violence and strength

mental/inner strength yes; physical strength only - no.

Dharma is a game of choice, not chance.
Few examples of commonly understood traits of walking the path of Dharma:
Speaking the truth - choice not chance
Serving the nation - choice not chance
Respect for elders - choice not chance
Helping the needy - choice not chance

If people get inspired by Ravan's and Duryodhan's successes and demotivated by Ram and Arjun's sufferings, they are making a choice.

We can choose to learn from Dharmaraj's 1 fault (gambling) or from his many many more virtues. The results of his fault are for all to see and draw the right conclusions from.

Prithvi Raj Chauhan's name today stands tall. So do the names of the Sikh gurus who made immeasurable sacrifices.
I cannot recall a single name who gained success by crushing Dharma but is revered and respected *in Bharat*, which we consider is built on a Dharmik foundation.
The belief is that successes built on Adharma though quick and easy are short-lived and maligned.

Dharma does not always depend on violence. Chaanakya united Bharat without lifting a sword. He used his vision and thinking to establish Dharma.

Violence should be the last resort to establish Dharma. This is very clearly stated and demonstrated in our scriptures. Most well known examples:
Ramayana: Multiple opportunities, followed by warnings and opportunities given to Ravan before finally attacking Lanka.
Mahabharat: Multiple opportunities and compromises offered to Duryodhan and his dad before finally resorting to violence.

RajeshA ji, at worst, you can accuse the 'Dharmic Couch-Potatriots' of inaction or being unimaginative, not throwing open the gates of India to Paki men nor marrying Indian women to Paki men, nor saying allowing women to be molested is Dharmik. This is unfair.

Dharma is a personal choice one makes based on interpretation. This is what Krishna also tells Arjun during the Bhagvad Geeta discourse. This current conversation is a classic example of the same.
Another example: Killing a deer may be Adharm to one man. To the other, killing the deer is balancing the eco-system and therefore Dharma. Examples abound from Mahabharat - use of a 'woman' shield to kill Bhishma, lie from Yudhishthir to slay Dronacharya, killing Karna while he was unarmed and many more.

To take the decision of what is Dharma and what is Adharma and act accordingly is the choice left to the 'empowered' individual, the society, the nation - the doer.

In the current context, to one man, bringing in a wife who is brought up in a cultural environment which is the anti-thesis of his is risking the survival and propagation of his family values. This is harmful as it does not pass the 'Dharma' test on 2 counts:
1. Family Dharma - explained above
2. National Dharma - because doing this enmasse in numbers significant enough will impact national or even regional demographics

To another man, this is a manageable risk and a viable solution to one of the nation's long standing problems. Therefore it is 'Dharma neutral'.
(Genetic pool / defects considerations aside - that is a related but different point)

I think it is going to be difficult to resolve. As someone rightly said above, this is more of a personal choice.

Saadhak,
Most, if not all, of your examples proove my point:

Speaking the truth - choice not chance

What is the chance that the listener will value the truth as much as the speaker.

Serving the nation - choice not chance

Serving the nation and serving the state are two different things. For example, Acharya Bhishma made a choice to serve the king of Hastinapur for as long as necessary to see that the kingdom become secure. That was his CHOICE. But he never catered for a situation in which the king himself would become the primary security threat to the kingdom. That was his GAMBLE, he was effectively gambling that the king would always be virtuous.

Respect for elders - choice not chance

But what if the elders are the kind that commit honour killing of their children? Would respecting the elders still be Dharmic, or suicidal?

Helping the needy - choice not chance

I am sure you have heard of the story of the Camel and the Arab. How will you discriminate between a needy person and a parasite? And would such discrimination actually constitute adharma?

-----------------------

If people get inspired by Ravan's and Duryodhan's successes and demotivated by Ram and Arjun's sufferings, they are making a choice.

What if I want to be like Krishna? Enjoy lots of women and still be Dharmic?
BTW, do you know these facts -
1. Ravan was the person who started consolidating and compiling the vedas, a task which was completed by Ved Vyas. Rishi Vyas was honourd with the title Ved Vyas for completing the work. Should not Ravan be called Ved Ravan for starting it? And would you consider this act of his Dharmic or not?
2. Ravan was the first Aryan Rishi to teach the vedas to non-Aryans. Is it not worthy of emulation?
3. Ravan was an accomplished musician, poet, architect and scientist.
And he did work hard for his success. He was thwarted many times by the gods in his penance, for which he justly punished them when he became powerful.
4. Duryodhan may have suffered from jealousy, but it was Draupadi's intemperate remark "Blind son of a blind father" which pushed him over the edge.
5. Duryodhan was also an accomplished Yogi in his own right. Krishna used subterfuge to defeat him. Was Krishna being Dharmic or adharmic when he encouraged Bhim to break the rules of combat?

Ram attacked and killed Bali from behind. Was that Dharmic or adharmic?

---------
You have completely missed the point of what I was saying - that Dharm is incomplete, it needs Asuric strength for support. All through our history, we see that Dharma has been protected by adharmic activities. Instead of learning from these examples, we choose to close our eyes and think that a morally haughty stance is all we need to protect ourselves.


-----------

Violence should be the last resort to establish Dharma. This is very clearly stated and demonstrated in our scriptures. Most well known examples:
Ramayana: Multiple opportunities, followed by warnings and opportunities given to Ravan before finally attacking Lanka.
Mahabharat: Multiple opportunities and compromises offered to Duryodhan and his dad before finally resorting to violence.

Really?
Ravan had also sent many proposals for peace, which Ram's side had rejected.
So how come Ravan alone is the bad guy?

And as for Duryodhan making peace calls, I think you already know that the Pandavas made some major mistakes of their own. Including the one that started this debate. I mean, does the Dharmaraj not know that a man who has lost himself in a gamble, can no longer bet anything else, least of all his wife? But he was willing to bet his wife despite becoming a slave?

-----------

There is a reason why I think that the story of Dharma being a gamble has a deeper meaning. Read the first part of this post. In all the statement I made, notice that I highlight success of Dharma depends on the reactions of the other person. IOW, Dharma is a two way street and it needs reciprocation to thrive . This is what I meant by saying that Dharma is incomplete, because usually, the debates about Dharma degenerate into what is the best way I should behave, rather than the best way We should behave.

This perspective (of reciprocity) is missing from the debates about Dharma.

This is what Prithviraj Chauhan missed. If he knew his enemy would kill/imprison him the first chance he got, he would have killed him in the first battle itself, and not forgive him 17 times.

This is what is missing from Nehruvian and secularist approach in India's foreign policy. We made the largest contribution in WTO for opening up western textile markets for developing countries, and then watched China gobble up those markets. We abnegated ourselves the permanent membership on UNSC to allow China to become a member of the UN and then watched that country stab us in the back in 1962. Why? No sense in ensuring reciprocity.

-------
Now, there is a final question. How can Dharma ensure that there is reciprocity to our sacrifices? Can this be done in a 'Dharmic' way?

The answer to both is NO.

The only way to ensure reciprocity is to have leverage and use it - IOW, Asurism.

Chanakya may not have lifted a sword, but his talent was in getting others to lift the sword for him

------------
Same with Gandhi and India's independance. We owe a lot to Hitler and Roosevelt in, respectively, weakening and breaking up the brutish empire. It was not non-violence alone that won our independance.

^^
Dharmaraj was wrong in that one instance. You and I and the whole world agree with it.
Agree also on your point on Chaanakya and Gandhiji. But by no means were their actions Adharmik or Asuri.

One can be like Krishna, but why only the women side of it. One can go ahead and emulate his other actions, become a karmayogi, get the sudarshan chakra, perform miracles, dance on the Kalia nag, become a cowherd, slay asurs in childhood for starters - then can talk about claiming the right of keeping multiple women - If Krishna is to be used at the model.

I will not claim to have read the Ramayan properly. I know people who have read it thousands of times and shy away from making that claim.
But anyway, from what I know, the only 'peace-proposal' Ravan sent was asking Ram to go away surrendering his wife. If this is called a 'proposal for peace', I will excuse myself from this conversation.
Finally, the base assumption of giving the example of Ramayan was there is an agreement of who the good and bad guys are. If the implication is that Ravan alone is not the bad guy and Ram is too, that base assumption is false; in which case, I have no more points to present in this context.

Different wavelengths onlee. No offense, Abhishekji. Thanks.
(Anyways, anticipating BRadmins to swoop down any moment now)

abhischekcc wrote:The only way to ensure reciprocity is to have leverage and use it - IOW, Asurism.

Dangerous option, this is..

One has to understand the currents of Mahakaala (great time). one has to do the tapasya to ensure one is in sync with the mind of mahadeva. (Ram worshipping rameshwara, arjuna obtaining pashupata, etc). Once we are sure that one is in sync with mahadeva and that He is amicable with the way you are and the way you intend to do your further tapasya, one has to do following.

1. understand one's own swabhaava
2. Understand the swabhava and sthiti of the system and decide whether one is better suited to uphold word of dharma OR spirit of dharma. This is very crucial choice. One may wish to be a "krishna", but does one possess the capability to be one? Or one is more akin to Uddhava OR Bhishma OR Shikhandi and doing that role would suite one. This has to be decided. Wrong choices lead to heart-breaks and incomplete tasks. This happens due to wrong judgement of self out of misplaced sense of self-righteousness. This is the first filter where most of the "candidates" fail.
3. understand the swabhava and the sthiti of the Loka (people/target market) whom one wishes to mobilize
4. understand the swabhava and sthiti of recipient. if possible gain the knowledge using all three proofs acknowledged in nyaya and samkhya - Pratyaksha (direct observation), anumaana (intra and extrapolation), shabda (history).
5. do necessary changes and make 1, 2 and 3 mutually acceptable and comfortable.
6. try and judge whether Mahadev requires Dharma to be upheld in Word OR in spirit. This is second filter where many other candidates fail.
7. Once one has accomplished (Siddha artha) these 6 six steps, action must begin. If one has passed through these 6 rigorous steps of self-examination (Aatma-Pariksha), the confusion seldom arises. Of course, one has to keep returning to each of steps 2-5 and check how system is behaving and change 1 accordingly. One cannot change 1 indefinitely (different "jeevas" have different degree of malleability. Once one reaches that point, stop and hand over the reigns to your shishya (disciple/successor).

This is the most important parameter. While one is going through these 6 steps, one has to train disciples and pass on your understanding in them and let them blossom in their own capacity. When one reaches the point when one can no longer remain malleable and hence relevant, one retires. the civilzed disciples take over the mantle and the movement continues. Failure to produce disciples is the third filter.

For establishment of dharma, one may need to indulge in actions which are dharmik OR asurik. The ability of making right choice at right moment depends upon how truly has one made Mahakaala prasanna.

If this is done, the deeds per se do not matter.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSpirit of Dharma followedXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXSpirit of Dharma not followed

Word of Dharma followedXXXXXXXXXXXSri RaamaXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDuryodhana

Word of Dharma not FollowedXXXXXXXXSri KrishnaXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXRaavana/Ashwatthama

And Finally, for dharma to establish, one needs to make examples. And for making examples, Ravana is as important and necessary as Raama.

Asura refers to a compulsive leadership model. Compulsive and seemingly autocratic leadership per se is not Adharmik on its own as long as there is a robust mechanism of relieving the compulsive leader from his responsibilities. This is done is two ways- either by changing the leader OR by changing the behavior of leader. More often than not, it is difficult to let go power after having acquired it so meticulously. This is where being Krishna OR Raama OR Parashurama comes into picture. These "leaders" gave away their power effortlessly after achieving what they had decided of achieving during their tapasya (the 6-step thought process mentioned above). Being Krishna is not enjoying wimmen alone Being Krishna is being able to give everything up in moment and stay "untouched" by any of the attachments. Only such leader can do what Parashurama OR Krishna OR Raama did and digest the "Karma-Fala" arising out of those actions. Otherwise, one descends into being Ghori OR Gazni OR aurangzeb or Stalin OR Hitler OR Sahastraarjuna OR Raavana and countless other Asuras in space and times.

As for what RajeshA ji is proposing, this has happened countless times in history.

One has to study how Chanakya brought about alliance amongst kings from Indus Valley. The Katha, Yaudheyas, Madrakas, Shudrakas, Kaikeya, Gandhara, Takshashila and others indulged in large-scale exchanges of their daughters among each other. The marital alliances forged a strong connection of Sindhu valley and upper Ganga valley kings. The Janapadas which I have mentioned here, half of them are in modern Indian Punjab and Haryana, Jammu, northern Rajasthan, Jaipur, Himachal, Kashmir etc. Half of them are in Pakjab and Sindh. The sense that Punjabis (as a whole) are TFTA are found in behaviour of those kings as well. Katha and Yaudheyas (Johiya clan today) were refusing to indulge in exchanging daughters with "less beautiful" Madrakas (Multanis) and Kaikeyas. They agreed after some persuasion. Katha and Yaudheyas were proud about being beautiful and brave clan and were very choosy about letting a new genepool inside the clan.

This trait is also seen in Vrishni Yadavas where Krishna belongs. So, it is not limited to Punjab. These factors take some persuasion. IN Chanakya's time, the persuasion was invading alexander. IN Krishna's time, the persuasion was invading Jarasandha. But, water finds its way. Although RajeshA ji needs to indulge in lot more "Samudra-Manthana" in his mind, he (in my limited personal humble opinion, take it for whatever it is worth) has placed his hand right on the pulse of Mahakaala.

RajeshA wrote: I wouldn't say, the Pakistanis want to get rid of all culture. There is a lobby in Pakistan which still continues to promote the identification of Pakistan with the Mughal culture and thereby with the Persian culture, and wants to claim that that culture in fact separates Pakistanis from the Indians.

This is how I see it. I would be very wary of using terms like "Mughal culture" - but will expand on that point below.

The first step if for me to say what I believe "culture" to be. Culture is language, art (music/dance/painting/sculpture/poetry), architecture, and cuisine.

Look at the Islamic "core" religion as embodied in the texts of Islam and life of Mohammad recorded in hadiths (written 200 plus years after his death). That core arose within Arab culture. Even Arabs who are Christian (as many were before islam) remain Arab in culture.

Wherever the core texts of Islam spread they acquired a local cultural flavor. In Iran the Persian language and Perasian culture were the outward manifestation of the Musilms of Iran. That Persian culture (and language) is older than Islam. The culture remained - but the religion became islam - or what people call Islam.

Further east - that Persian culture picked up cultural strings from India. The Persian alphabet was brought in but the language blended with Indian words and Urdu was created. The Architecture of Persia - refined from older Roman architecture, came to India and became "Indian islamic architecture" by dint of the use of Indian materials like rock and sandstone which Indian masons were adept at using - unlike the brick of Persia. Persian art was adopted by Indian artists to paint Indian themes including likenesses of kings. Indian dance - Kathak got adapted and applied to courtesans in Islamic courts. Indian music was taken up with gusto - with the contribution of Persian culture by the adoption of instruments like Sitar, Sarod and Shenai. At the end of it all the Muslims of India had a culture that was not Persian. It was not Arab culture either. But a Paki lurked inside this Indian Muslim culture. the Paki wanted purity. The Paki had an Indic brain - he read and committed to memory his Islamic texts and then went ahead and actually understood them rather than just mugging them up and shutting up. And then he compared those texts with his own Indian Muslim life and got the shock of his life.

It was all wrong. All haraam. Everything about India was killing Islam. The music. Haraam. The art. Haraam. Idol worship in fact. Dance. Haraam. Women dancing for men. Haraam!. India was bad baaaaad! It was Indian influence that was killing islam. I am certain this is where the likes of Maududi and Allama Iqbal came from. Everything that was haraam was perfectly OK when Mughal kings were ruling - but once they lost power it was the impurity of Islam that was to be blamed. Pakistan was necessary to purify Islam.

"But wait!" - one might say. Persia had music, art, painting etc. Why didn't someone in Persia suffer from this guilt and self doubt?

That is what I am saying is the Indic revenge. Persians in Persia did not worry about breaking the core rules of Islam and doing haraam things as long as a few token things like "No Pork" were followed. They were happy to declare themselves as Muslims as anyone else despite all that. they were Muslim and human. But in India the kafirs were saying "You do haraam things and pray to Allah by those haraam means. We also do the same haraam things and pray to our various gods who are equal equal to your Allah" The culture that was created in India started appearing very disgusting to the germinal Paki mind.

They reacted by saying "All this culture is ours. Islamic!. We will take the culture and keep it in Pakistan and you will have nothing!" But that was bullshit. Too little. Too late. It wasn't Persian culture any more. It certainly wasn't Arab culture. It was Indian culture now. So Pakistan tried to be India+pure Islam, and when Bangladesh broke away they thought (as Naipaul describes it) - "Heck. We are not pure enough. Islam alone must rule." So Pakis are divesting themselves all culture. Taliban=Islam minus culture. No education. No music. No art. Only jihaaaaaaaard. True Pakistaniyat=Talibaniyat. When you add Indian culture to Islam, you get India. Not Pakistan. Pakistan dies.

JMT

Bingo, Shiv ji.. This exactly what I too am wary off in RajeshA ji's proposal, hence my warning about samudra-manthana. There is really no need to bend over to accommodate the pious.. all the bious who wish to come in india as per RajeshA ji's plan must come prepared to dissolve in dharmik india. One may be a muslim, dharmiks don't care how you pray and by what name. all names and paths are valid as long as you too think so about everybody else as well. this is what dharmiks needs to tell the bious in words and actions. the marriage etc can happen only with those who are prepared to "dissolve".

and bhat is pakistani mughal culture, hain ji? it is as true as invisible pink unicorn. there is punjabi culture, sindhi culture, Hyderabadi culture, awadhi culture. None of the bious give two hoots about bengali culture and their respect for bengali culture was seen in 1971. mughals spoke turkish in home and faarsi at work. which of the either two languages do the bious speak? none. most the potential "returners" don't even speak pushto and hardly understand hindko dialect of punjabi, let alone turkish and faarsi.

a punjabi bious when dissolved will remain punjabi, sindhi will remain sindhi. may be not and get married to a mallu from bangalore, kerala. who knows. no need to accommodate mughal culture or whatever it is. One has to tell the bious to forget all the wet-dreams and accept that they are Pendu Pakjabis and part of Indian punjabi tradition and that their real ancestors are Maharaja Ranjit Singh his warriors. Furthermore, millions who died during raids of gaznavi, ghori, abdali, timur, babar etc too were their forefathers. there has to be a corrective schooling before admitting that genepool in Indian pool. But yes, there is no need to castigate the genepool just because the idea which rides their brain. Who knows, there may start matriarchial systems akin to Nairs in Punjab to accommodate the erstwhile bious-mundas in. possiblities are endless. but with due precautions. In long term, this is the raaja-maarga of making peace. and it is time-tested raaja-marga.

Editing my previous post through an update.

I just went over my madrassa Maths numbers and I was calculating the numbers of Pakistani women available to India against a number of 300 million, but that is obviously BS. Recalculating against a population of 200 million, something that would be the case in the next few years, I am posting the new numbers.

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

shiv wrote:I think this import Paki wimmens topic needs to be seen in its totality.

You see - if you say that India has 1000 men and only 900 of them will have women and the other hundred can get wimmens from Pakistan, the theory is fine but in practice let me speculate on what could happen. In a crowd of 1000 men competing for fewer wimmens - the top 900 men - the stud men, the rich, the well endowed, the more desirable men will get their women. The less desirable men will be left unmarried even if they are good men. The theory states that these "good men" should get Paki wimmens by import.

In practice what will happen is that some of the stud men and rich men will go for some of the more attractive and desirable Packee wimmens. And this will leave the "less desirable" 100 men with "rejected" Indian brides to choose from.

shiv saar,

I'll try to put up an alternate model for your consideration.

The Pakistani Side
Assumption is that "Pakistan==Somalia_x_50" Scenario has arrived. Considering the population of Pakistan is around 200 million. Poverty level has hit 70%. Low Income Group is around 20%. Medium Income Group is around 8%. Well-Off is around 1.9% and RAPE the rest 0.1%.

Furthermore, axiomizing:

• Parents would marry off their daughters to Indians, either because of money or undesirable Talibanic constraints on lifestyle or better lifestyle in India or due to insecurity.
• Over the next 20 years, 30% of the population is Paki males of marriageable age, 30% of the population is Paki women of marriageable age.
• In each income group, the men are able to find women from either that group or from the lower group.
• Amongst the Pakistani diaspora in Queenistan, Kanada, wagerah, around 40% look for their partners back in Pakistan, 80% of the time, parents marrying off their daughters to some village bumpkins to get them out of Pakistan, usually for reasons of solidarity with the extended family.
• With descending income group, the ability of Pakis to migrate to the West decreases.

The RAPE would be willing to marry off their daughters to Indian men, in order to secure for themselves a beachhead in Indian society. They would not want their daughters to face the music in Pakistan - of social constraints, insecurity, etc. From the 60,000 RAPE women available, around 20,000 could decide to marry Indian men. The religion of Indian Men would not be that important, and the Indian men would not be paying mehr for the RAPE women. Let's say, of these 8000 marry Indian Muslims and 12,000 marry Indics. Mostly RAPEttes would be marrying into the upper middle class in India with a couple of 100 or so to the really rich. 30,000 RAPEttes escape to the West, 16,000 of them with RAPEs, 10,000 of them marrying Pakistanis settled abroad, and 4,000 marrying Westerners, while 10,000 stay back in Pakistan marrying other RAPEs who decide to stay back.

The Pakistani Well-Off women would constitute about 1,140,000. Around 10000 of them will marry RAPE men, who stay back and do not get any RAPEttes. These would be women, who would be very much into Bollywood, Indian fashion, etc. These women too would take the first chance to get out of Pakistan, and their parents too would like to send them elsewhere due to worsening security. Let's say a 700,000 stay back and marry well-off Pakistani men due to family ties and love. 200,000 well-off Pakistani women marry into Pakistani diaspora, while 230,000 marry Indian Men. Of these, 200,000 marry well-off Indian Muslims while 30,000 marry Indics. Also in this case, Mehr does not play an important role.

The Middle-Income Group Pakistani Women would constitute about 4.8 million. Around 240,000 marry into the Well-Off layer who have not got any women in that layer. From the middle income group around 560,000 also get to migrate to the West. 2.5 million of women in this group would marry into the group itself. The rest 1.5 million would try to migrate to India. The Middle-Income Group would try to supplement their incomes in Pakistan to retain their standard of living with some support from India, and they would like to send their daughters to India. These daughters in India may get to work and they would send some of their earnings back to their families in Pakistan. The Indian sons-in-law too may help out. I presume all of these women would marry into middle-income non-conservative Indian Muslim families.

Low Income Group Pakistani women would be around 12 million. Around 1.8 million of these would marry Middle-Income Group Pakistani men, who could not get a wife from their class. Of the rest 10.2 million, 4.2 million may like to stay home due to promises within the extended family, while the rest would be willing to come to India. Here Mehr would play a very important role, and 6 million of these women would be willing to marry Indians. I presume in this group, the parents would use Taqqiya and tell neighbors and relatives that their daughters have married Indian Muslims but many would be marrying Indics. There may some conservatives here, and they would insist on Indian Muslims, the rest would opt for a better rate of mehr. It would probably be 50-50. 3 million would marry Indian Muslims while 3 million would marry Indics using taqqiya. The going rate of mehr may be around 3,000 USD for these women, that makes it 18 billion USD.

From the Poor families, they would most probably be willing to "sell" their daughters for some standard price of around 1,500 USD. There would be around 42 million poor women. 3.8 million would marry Low Income Group Pakistani men, leaving 4 million of these men without wives as they would not be able to afford the mehr. Another 5.2 million may marry their first cousins, leaving 33 million for Indians. That means in toto around 49.5 billion USD would change hands. Religion again would be no problem at all. Only mehr would be important. These women would most likely be like their counterparts in India, simply poor, and most easily able to adjust to poor Indian families.

Around 40.75 million Pakistani women would be available for marrying by Indians. So more or less it comes to around 67.5 billion USD which would flow from India to Pakistan during this time as mehr, plus remittances over time.

This would leave 18.64 million Pakistani women back in Pakistan.

Over two thirds of the Pakistani men, over 41 million of them, would not be getting any women to make kids. That would be a great achievement in slowing down Pakistani demographic expansion.

Added Later:
As such Pakistan has around 40 million women already born who could be available to Indian men to marry. In the next 7 years, there will be more Pakistani females born, which too would be available for marriage. Their number would be around 14.65 million and even we again use the two thirds principle for Indian men, around 9.75 more Pakistani women could be available. So in the next 25 years, Pakistan would have around 50 million women to offer Indian men in marriage.


Warning: There may be some madrassa Maths in the calculations.

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

In India the population according to 2011 census is around 1.2 billion. Half of the population is under 25 years of age. The sex ration in India is 914 per 1000. But that is calculating the whole population. Considering that the sex-ratio in the age group above 25 years is more or less balanced, as the sex-determination tests came only later, the major discrepancy would only be found in the under 25 years age group. So in the age group, which would be marrying over the next 25 years, the sex ratio is even more screwed up. It is 835 per 1000!!!! That means there will be around 54 million Indian men who would find no wife in the next 25 years.

All these 54 million Indian men, most of whom would be from the lowest strata in India, would need wives! Would "Dharma" please stand up and help them!

It was all wrong. All haraam. Everything about India was killing Islam. The music. Haraam. The art. Haraam. Idol worship in fact. Dance. Haraam. Women dancing for men. Haraam!. India was bad baaaaad! It was Indian influence that was killing islam. I am certain this is where the likes of Maududi and Allama Iqbal came from. Everything that was haraam was perfectly OK when Mughal kings were ruling - but once they lost power it was the impurity of Islam that was to be blamed. Pakistan was necessary to purify Islam.

Shiv Ji, very true indeed.

Warning: There may be some madrassa Maths in the calculations.

Rajesh Ji did you go through the video? All 8 parts. Whenever you have time, please do if you haven't.. i'm certain it will help you in formulating ideas.

BTW i was just against Paki's being given a free ride into an India. These people have been brought up in a very parochial manner last 60 years. I'm not sure about your proposal really how we could implement it. What if they bring there male relatives too. How do we prevent that. With out WKK and Psec culture do you think India could ever be selective? Too many questions, too little answers. But i do appreciate your trying to work out solutions. They may not be perfect, but they are worth the effort.

Poaks wont object as long as good mehar is promised. After all we are south Asian Beerathers thus the responsibiity of being first cousins must be carried out by Indians and qualify for both Sawab and Shabab.

ignore and proceed to do what is required to be done at home. there are enough problems to solve rather handle paki failure.. now is this not what we wanted? what kind of failure are you talking about?

have open standards and solve local problems first.

Pak is not about to collapse anytime soon. and the women importing project is a long term one. it won't happen in the next 50 years. i'm doubtful even in the next 100 years. this should only happen after Pak state has collapsed, Pak public has stewed in their juices for a good generation in total lawlessness and oppression by Islamists, and eventually spending another solid generation in Indian sponsored reeducation movements.

so, it is a project of 4-6 generations. we can start thinking about women importing from Pak a good 100 years from now. right now is too premature...

we should remember that Pak today is a result of 1000 years of invasions and colonial domination. we should expect that it will take at least 200 years for "independent" Pak to realize *and* come to terms with its fundamental ideological and existential bankruptcy. a 200 years period makes complete sense when we realize that it took 10 centuries to make modern Pak.

Poak collapse is not in our interest as we might end up paying for these millions of vegetated Poaks. Controlled chaos is in every one 's interest. Poakerstan must be made example of their supposed civilization. They must sink deeper than ocean orjump from mountain higher than K2. The show is just about to begin and the audiences (inc 3.5 Guppooz) are just opening their eyes to see the reality.

so, it is a project of 4-6 generations. we can start thinking about women importing from Pak a good 100 years from now. right now is too premature...

we should remember that Pak today is a result of 1000 years of invasions and colonial domination. we should expect that it will take at least 200 years for "independent" Pak to realize *and* come to terms with its fundamental ideological and existential bankruptcy. a 200 years period makes complete sense when we realize that it took 10 centuries to make modern Pak.

No, you haven't seen the most important video you'll ever see yet. I posted it the last page. Islamists have always understood the power of the exponential better than us. See it, all 8 parts. In 200 years the Indic civilization will be finished if you assume that. This is really the end game. Don't think the Poaks or Islamists are losing one bit. Don't believe me? See the video.

Couldn't resist posting my 2 cents on some points regarding Rajesh ji's proposal (pun not intended)

shiv wrote:"But wait!" - one might say. Persia had music, art, painting etc. Why didn't someone in Persia suffer from this guilt and self doubt?

Shiv ji, the obscurantist, nihilist, self-loathing mawali memetic virus is not confined to any particular demographic, though Pakis provide a fertile breeding ground for it. Persia has its fair share of such fervent nutcases. Recently on Persian state TV, one such case even declared that, while Arabic was the language of heaven, Persian was the language of jahannom! What is really remarkable is that there are reliable hadith where the Prophet Muhammad himself told people that Persian was as much a language of heaven as Arabic!

Cultural Genocide in Iran, in the name of Islam

Architecture was destroyed. Many old remaining temples or seminaries in towns and villages have been spared only because the locals quickly disguised them as a shrine to Hossein or something, although the Avestan script is plainly visible. Persian Dastgahi music, rooted in the Zoroastrian Saaman and Gathas, was banned for centuries and survived underground or in Sufi pockets, and emerged after being grafted onto Islamic Sufism and/or Persian national identity. Even then it faced some repression.

Moreover, its not just pre-Islamic Persian culture that was sought to be effaced, it is also Sufi Moslem culture, of which Iran is historically the seedbed. Initially, the Safavi Shi'a split had the open support of Sufi orders and their grassroots networks. Sadly, after the Arab Shi'ite ulema came in and consolidated and formalized the Shi'a church, they turned on the same Iranian Sufi orders and repressed them. Culturally, for example, they banned Persian classical music for centuries. Great Sufi masters were often persecuted and executed. For example, Shahabuddin Suhrevardi (founder of the "Eshraqi" Illuminationist School) was executed on suspicion of being a closet Zoroastrian. Incidentally, one of his disciples, Azar Keyvan, did migrate to India and set up a branch of a Zoroastrian school of philosophy in Gujarat.

Today also, all khaneqahs (Sufi schools and cultural centers) have been closed by the Iranian government and the resident teachers evicted. The main Sufi orders have left the country and are now based mainly in the West (Europe and the U.S.). E.g., the Shahmaghsoudi Order, and the N'ematollahi Order. The khaneqah is the crucible of Sufism and Indo-Iranian spiritual culture. Significantly, the Sikh Gurudwara is modelled on this khaneqahi culture, both, in cultural decorum and in philosophical format. Even if the cultural affiliation of Sufi orders was not suspect, their teachings were incomprehensible - and therefore suspect - in the deaf and dumb minds of the Islamist ulema. The case of Mansour Hallaj is famous but not unique by any means.

The last point is important in this context because the cultural phenomenon of Sufism is an entry/exit point from the fortress of nihilistic, patriarchal, Aristotelian Islamism. India should actively promote and provide a haven for Sufism. This is because Sufism provides a cultural and philosophical platform or medium through which we can interact and execute a dharmic program of assimilation with the larger Ummah. Indian civilization has the comparative advantage on this ontological platform, which is much more sophisticated and has a greater information bandwidth than the narrow binary logic of fanatic Islamism. On this platform, there is a greater probability that an Indic man can take a wife from Pakistan or Iran (which also has a female surplus) and effect a dharmically positive outcome as far as family and offspring is concerned. Sufism is under attack all over the Islamic world today including Pakistan and even amongst Indian Moslems, epsecially in Kashmir. This ought to be countered.

However, there is a finer point of discrimination here. Due to repression even in the Iranian heartladnd, Persian Sufis often found a haven in India. However, some of these Sufis were an instrument of the Islamist ulema. This strain of "Sufism" revealed its true face in the group that now venerates Imam Rabbani (Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi). Therefore, today, one would beware of the Sunni Naqshbandi Sufi Order and its affiliates. But most of the Sufi orders active in India became the target of the Islamist state's wrath, just as much as the Sikhs or Hindus did. During Aurangzeb's time, some of those Sufi masters left India and went back to Iran.

SandeepA wrote:In my experience (and I'm sure most you too) I have not seen a single instance where a marriage between Hindu and Muslim/Xtian has resulted in the assimilation of the offspring into the Dharmic way. This is true irrespective of the boy or girl being Hindu. Why? Simply because our dharma does not have a way to ensure the assimilation of the offspring. There no Friday sermon or Sunday mass the kids need to attend to inculcate a pride into the culture of one of the parent. All he hears from the Hindu parents' side is the p-sec stuff that all religions are equal whereas the non-Hindu parents' side is all the more keen to ensure their religion does not lose out.

Tensun nai lene ka. Like some others here, my family is also an "All-India" melting pot - Punjabi, Oriya, Bengali, UP, Tamil, Telugu, and Parsi; Hindu, Christian, Zoroastrian, and Moslem; upper class, middle class, lower-middle class. In our experience, most mixed marriages had no problem, except when some of us married Muslim girls, whose parents went apesh!t and even made threats. There was some push and pull there, but that was resolved rather easily, with maturity and spiritual direction. All the children of such marriages seem to be non-Moslem (Hindu or Christian), though that is not the point.

To bring the argument full circle, all favorable conditions for deeper demographic engagement through marriage, etc. will not manifest unless there is a change of this loser mentality amongst hypocritically conservative, xenophobic, diffident Hindus. There has to be an expansive, exhuberant, and philosophically clear movement from within, the essence of which is service to a livewire spiritual tradition rather than preserving only cultural forms. There has to be the spirit of appreciating and acknowledging Truth, no matter what cultural form it assumes. A dog recognizes its Master no matter what clothes he wears. That sort of individuation - the ability to recognize truth at the intersection of various categories rather than as a separate exclusive category - is the genius of Indic tradition. There is a difference between culture (since cultures evolve) and Dharma. Find an acharya, a philosophy, a (sub-)mission for yourself, and you will have more than just Friday sermons for assimilation and gravitational pull. Look at some of the Hindu movements even today - Iskcon, Art Of Living, etc.

Unfortunately for many, whether in making love or war, the dhoti-shivering appears to be the same.

In the movie "Om Shanti Om!', a screenplay writer provides a script to the reborn Sharukh Khan and says to include a lot of provocative dances but set to Sufi music to pass thru the censor board as they will let anything Sufi go thru!

Folks in Bengluru swear by Sufi music now. Even those who were brought up in Carnatic music doyens' houses!

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

The Indian Side

Reading some of the criticisms here and gathering my own thoughts on the subject, two arguments, I will not go in this post would be:

• The Pakistani women would be too inbred, and thus would only spoil the Indian gene pool.
• Dharma, as interpreted by some, does not sanction Indian men marrying Pakistani women, for reasons of humiliation of Pakistanis, gender specificity, etc. etc.

Considerations I would like to touch upon would be:

1. The Pakistani men may not allow women to be exported for marriage to India.
2. The Pakistanis may use these cross-border relationships to migrate to India themselves - e.g. parents, siblings, grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, friends, etc hopping over to India in order to escape the social collapse there as well as attracted to the lure of an economically, socially and culturally booming India. The Pakistanis would of course bring in their Pakistaniyat to India as well and try spreading it. Moreover they may increase their numbers here in India bringing about an unpleasant demographic change.
3. As it would be the poorest strata in India, who would not be able to get wives in India, it would be they who would want to import wives from abroad, but they would not be having much in terms of money to do that.
4. Once the Indian man marries a Pakistani woman, she would be rearing the children in a way not compatible with Indian values, with children having identification issues with Indian society and the nation.

The Bride Export Networks
Of course in today's world, with Internet, Dating sites, online payments, several ways of communication, partner-match algorithms, even bidding sites, it has become much easier to arrange matches, and there may come up some such sites which could cater to the middle-income group in Pakistan and the "export" of brides from that class to India. The upper strata - the RAPEs (20,000 Pakeezahs) would be getting to know their husbands mostly directly jet-setting through the world, conferences and various fora; the Well-Off Pakistanis (230,000 Pakeezahs) would have their own networks amongst the elite Indian Muslims, dating sites, relations. The Middle-Income Group of Pakistanis (1.5 million Pakeezahs) would have to depend on cross-border Muslim Matrimonial Agencies. The Low-Income Group of Pakistanis (6 million Pakeezahs) and Poor Pakistanis (33 million Pakeezahs) would have to rely on "Muslim-in-name-only-taqqiya" Matrimonial Agencies.

I am using the word "Pakeezah" simply to refer to Pakistani brides on offer to India and not to cast aspersions on their lack of morality or profession as tawaifs!

These agencies/agents would have partners in India as well, to take care of the issues on the Indian side.

Let's not forget that over the years these agencies by posing as middlemen would be making up to 30 billion USD in commissions. That is a lot of money!!! For an economy, which would not have anything else to export, this may prove to very attractive. Let's also not forget, that Pakistanis have no qualms about sucking their nation dry! So the motivation would be there.

It is also to be expected, that these agencies would have their own protection gangs or would be paying some gangs for protection. Most probably even the palms of the local mullahs would be greased, and everybody would get his cut.

Indian Regulations on Travel between India and Pakistan
The principle should be not to allow any Pakistani into India. None at all, except of course the bride. If she wants to meet a relative, she should be the one to travel to Pakistan. Due to reasons of cost, Pakistani women married to Pakistanis may not be able to travel to Pakistan anyway. Those who wish to should be discouraged to do so. It could be the case that the relatives may not allow her to return or considering the amount of money they may have made when allowing her to marry to some Indian, they could think of "selling" her again. At least amongst the Low-Income Group of Pakistanis and Poor Pakistanis this could happen.

(i) So one way of discouraging people to travel to Pakistan, at least the poor people from India to travel to Pakistan, is simply to put some surcharge on all flights, bus routes, train routes, boat routes, etc. at all land crossings and airports. If one has to pay say 5,000 Rupees just to cross over, many of the poor Pakeezahs once married to Indians would rethink it.

Also it would be somewhat difficult to deny some relatives to travel to India to see their daughters, that they are in good health, being taken well care of, or just to experience the wedding of their daughter.

(ii) So the Indian State should give visas to the parents of the bride to come to India at her wedding. Of course the necessary checks remain. Should one not return back on time, all future visa applications could be rejected.

(iii) Moreover parents of a Pakistani woman married to an Indian should be allowed to visit India for a maximum of two months at a time every once in a year, once they are above 55 years of age. Should some Pakistani stay back in India past that date, he/she would be deported with no further provision of visa. In exceptional cases, the parents of the Pakistani woman in India should be allowed to visit India for medical treatment.

(iv) The Pakistani woman married to an Indian would receive after a period of two years, a citizenship status, not quite naturalized but instead a card called "Indian of Pakistani Origin", and with this card, she would be allowed to enjoy the same rights and freedoms as any Indian including the right to vote, etc. but only as long as she stays married to the Indian.

(v) Should it come to a divorce, she would have to return to Pakistan without her kids (if they under 18), but would be given visas to return to India.

(vi) If an Indian has married a Pakistani woman, and should it come to a divorce, he would not be allowed to marry another Pakistani woman and bring her to India. It is a one time "opportunity"!

(vii) Should it come to a divorce, the Pakistani woman would also not be allowed to remarry another Indian and settle down in India.

(viii) The Pakistani woman cannot sponsor visas for any other Pakistanis, other than the man and woman, she has registered with the Indian Embassy, as her parents, and as mentioned previously, they too can only visit her once they are above 55 years of age. No other relative would be allowed in into India.

Added Later:
Indian Muslims are allowed to practice polygamy. As long as they are poor, they probably would not be able to afford to import extra brides for themselves, thus increasing their numbers through enhanced procreative potential. Still there is a need to codify an abuse of this facility.

(ix) Any Indian who already has children, would not be allowed to import a wife from Pakistan. This may not be fair to Indics, for they would not be able to remarry, this time a Pakistani, but the law stops Indian Muslims from producing children from Indian Muslim women, then divorcing them and remarrying Pakistani women, for more children. An Indic would not divorce his earlier wife as easily.

(x) An Indian Muslim, if he is already married, to an Indian or Pakistani or otherwise, would not be able to get an additional wife from Pakistan, as no staying permit would be given to her! The Indian State does not want to interfere with the Muslim Personal Law, but can still decide questions of migration.

(xi) An Indian Muslim, if he already has a wife imported from Pakistan, should he remarry and get a second wife, as is permitted in the Muslim Personal Law, then the quasi-citizenship status of the Pakistani wife would be cancelled, and she would be deported to Pakistan, and the custody of the children under 18 would be given to the mother! The children would also lose their Indian citizenship!

I am in favor of stopping giving visas to all Pakistanis, other than how I have mentioned here!

The Dharmic Foundation
There would be around 48.33 million Indians who would be availing of Pakistani women from the Low-Income Group and Poor Group, as that would be the availability of such Pakistani women in Pakistan. All of these Indian men would be hard-pressed to find the money to pay for the mehr to the parents and the commission for the matrimonial agency.

I consider a Dharmic act, if the society helps in ensuring that these men also can marry and create families of their own.

So I propose a Dharmic Foundation, funded by donations made in the temples in India, as well as by Dharmic philanthropists. This Dharmic Foundation should offer to give loans to bhakts so that they can marry. Actually such loans would only be approved if the bhakt wants to marry a Pakistani woman. This needs certain guidelines.

(i) Dharmic Foundation would work on the ground and be represented through a network of temples and religious samitis. Their workers can let it be known to the poor that if they fail to find a wife, the temple could help. That is how bhakts would be found!

(ii) In order to show that the new entrant to the temple order is truly a bhakt, he would have to prove some commitment and do regular visits for learning the Dharmic path, as well as doing some service.

(iii) After a year or so of dedication, if he still hasn't found a wife in the meantime, the temple can inform him, that they would provide him a loan, which he can pay back in due time, and with this loan he pay the mehr and commission and get himself a Pakistani wife.

(iv) Should he agree, he will be put in contact with some Indian agents of some matrimonial agency dealing with Pakistan.

(v) Once he has found a proper match for himself through the agency, he will notify the temple committee of his choice, and give the go ahead by signing the papers that he has taken a loan.

(vi) The money would be deposited directly with the matrimonial agency.

(vii) The Pakistani agents of the matrimonial agency would pay a quarter of the mehr to the parents of the Pakistani woman, about to be married.

(vii) Once his fiancé is delivered to him at his door by the matrimonial agency, and they marry, the matrimonial agency would be entitled to their commission.

(viii) Now they would also pay another quarter of the mehr to the parents of the bride.

(ix) The other half of the mehr would be paid to the parents after a duration of 1 year, once the bride has shown herself to be amenable with the marriage.

(x) Now the Dharmic Foundation Associated Temple can let the Indian bridegroom know if his wife visits the temple regularly and also shows dedication, up to third of loan can be waived, and he would not need to pay it.

(xi) Other two-thirds of the loan would have to be paid, but there can be some leniency with time, if he continues to be a dedicated bhakt!

(xii) It doesn't matter how the Indian man convinces his wife to go visit the Temple, but preferably he should do it without coercion.

(xiii) So if the Bhakt and his new family show some dedication, the family would only be gaining something.

This way, Dharmic Foundation could make almost 40 million Indians and 40 million Pakistani brides into Dharmics, taking into account that Indian Muslims too would be importing Pakeezahs from Pakistan.

Thus we would be killing a whole flock of birds with a single stone (I know it doesn't sound very Dharmic )!

^^ Ramana garu, in India "Sufi music" is usually a sort of "pop" music with mystical overtones. But in Persia, classical music is the the music of the Sufi khaneqah, or what we call here "shastriya" sangeet. Even in India, amongst the real Sufi doyens, classical Hindustani music was their Sufi music.

I recall once going through a photo album of Sarod maestro Ustad Ali Akbar Khan. One photo showed his humble dwelling. The front room had a typically austere but graceful Islamic Sufi decor. Then there was a photo of his practice room, a sort of inner sanctum. One whole wall had paintings of Krishna in various lilas

I once had a conversation with an American disciple of Bhaktivedanta Swami (the Iskcon founder). He is a musicologist, and was also taking some lessons from Ustad Ali Akbar Khan, who was at that time resident in California. He asked the Ustad, "Why does music affect humans?" So the Ustad replied, "Its because of what is called zauq or rasa." He inquired, "What is rasa?". Ustad chuckled and said, "For that you should go and ask your Prabhupada."

saadhak wrote:RajeshA ji, at worst, you can accuse the 'Dharmic Couch-Potatriots' of inaction or being unimaginative, not throwing open the gates of India to Paki men nor marrying Indian women to Paki men, nor saying allowing women to be molested is Dharmik. This is unfair.

All those queries were to be understood as Either/OR.

saadhak wrote:Dharma is a personal choice one makes based on interpretation. This is what Krishna also tells Arjun during the Bhagvad Geeta discourse. This current conversation is a classic example of the same.

To take the decision of what is Dharma and what is Adharma and act accordingly is the choice left to the 'empowered' individual, the society, the nation - the doer.

We are not talking about an individual Indian male making the choice whether he wants to marry a Pakistani woman or not! Of course that would remain his personal choice! Nobody will force him to do so!

We were talking about the nation! And when a nation has to decide what is right and what is not in a public debate, then Dharmic interpretation leaves its domain of "personal choice" and becomes an issue to with the nation. Should one's opinion really matter, then one also has to think not simply of his fate but the fate of the whole nation, may be the whole civilization.

saadhak wrote:In the current context, to one man, bringing in a wife who is brought up in a cultural environment which is the anti-thesis of his is risking the survival and propagation of his family values. This is harmful as it does not pass the 'Dharma' test on 2 counts:
1. Family Dharma - explained above
2. National Dharma - because doing this enmasse in numbers significant enough will impact national or even regional demographics

To another man, this is a manageable risk and a viable solution to one of the nation's long standing problems. Therefore it is 'Dharma neutral'.
(Genetic pool / defects considerations aside - that is a related but different point)

I think it is going to be difficult to resolve. As someone rightly said above, this is more of a personal choice.

Yes, it is true that the Pakistani woman has been brought up in a different cultural environment, but hey sometimes a man has to be a man and put his foot down! Why assume that one would have zero authority?

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

Atri wrote:As for what RajeshA ji is proposing, this has happened countless times in history.

One has to study how Chanakya brought about alliance amongst kings from Indus Valley. The Katha, Yaudheyas, Madrakas, Shudrakas, Kaikeya, Gandhara, Takshashila and others indulged in large-scale exchanges of their daughters among each other. The marital alliances forged a strong connection of Sindhu valley and upper Ganga valley kings. The Janapadas which I have mentioned here, half of them are in modern Indian Punjab and Haryana, Jammu, northern Rajasthan, Jaipur, Himachal, Kashmir etc. Half of them are in Pakjab and Sindh. The sense that Punjabis (as a whole) are TFTA are found in behaviour of those kings as well. Katha and Yaudheyas (Johiya clan today) were refusing to indulge in exchanging daughters with "less beautiful" Madrakas (Multanis) and Kaikeyas. They agreed after some persuasion. Katha and Yaudheyas were proud about being beautiful and brave clan and were very choosy about letting a new genepool inside the clan.

This trait is also seen in Vrishni Yadavas where Krishna belongs. So, it is not limited to Punjab. These factors take some persuasion. IN Chanakya's time, the persuasion was invading alexander. IN Krishna's time, the persuasion was invading Jarasandha. But, water finds its way.

Atri garu,
thanks for the many examples of marital alliances being used for strategic purposes.

This was not my first though, in the sense that through marriages with the Pakistanis, Indians and Pakistanis could build strategic alliances and come together, as was the raja marg!

Though I do think, that it becomes much easier to recruit the relatives of a Pakistani woman married to an Indian for all the tasks in which India's intelligence agencies may be interested in in Pakistan.

Atri wrote:Although RajeshA ji needs to indulge in lot more "Samudra-Manthana" in his mind, he (in my limited personal humble opinion, take it for whatever it is worth) has placed his hand right on the pulse of Mahakaala.

Atri garu,

I hope you will guide me in this "Samudra-Manthana"!