Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Would we call 'Hyderabadi Biryani' native to India, or would we say it came from 'Outside' ?
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
This is not new.rkirankr wrote:
Hence you see that there is no outcry when on 26/11 or those who shouted the loudest did not come out on voting day. One common dharma as per today's situation in India is voting. How many do it?
Dumbing down of the population using the media.
Many here in the BRF do not seem to be "dumbed down". Are we in a minority? No the reason is , I find that there is an intellectual laziness in the society to think through an issue. This I have experienced when I interacted with many well educated and well employed relatives and friends.
They look for simplistic answers. It is not they are capable of , it is just seems that a tamasic envelope has covered their thinking capability.Sorry I could not find a better word.
How to get rid of that is the big question?
Read Chomsky to understand what is going on
http://www.chomsky.info/books/power01.htm
http://www.chomsky.info/books/reader02.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufactur ... Mass_Media
After 11/26 Barka Dutt was being interviewed about the mood of the people by the western media folks including NPR. She seems to be the barometer of the what the people are sensing and their anger at the govt instead of Pakistan was reported by her. They have the ability to change the perception of population of the country
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Tantalizingly inviting to go OT. On the risk of being frivolous - do we really have a lot of details stemming from the pre-Islamic period about cooking of meat and mixed rice/meat dishes? "Palanna" would mean meat+rice and some say reduced to "pilau/pulav". Since India was a hotbed of producing spices, and they were well researched by the Vishags leading to Ayurveda, so a rich spicy mixed dish of rice/barley+meat must have been tried out. But also, with Jaina and Buddhist influence all over the place for a long while, could have been obliterated as a menu. As far as I got in the older literature, two types of meat preparation is mentioned in connection with the army - "shulya" and "ukhya" directly referring to the method of preparation. Didnt find the refs to typical slow-cooking styles of "biryani". In the family trove of old manuscripts, there was one that listed ancient dishes separately and always mentioned "biryani" styles separately as "turuk" style.SwamyG wrote
Would we call 'Hyderabadi Biryani' native to India, or would we say it came from 'Outside' ?
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
The issue of native that has set the ball rolling by Shiv and SawmyG can veer the thread moving in a different direction even though technically it is not OT as it address some core values. Further, the information given by Brihaspati is very informative.
One could have a separate thread, but then one wonders how long it will pan out.
If after some time, I find that the thread appears to have taken off on a tangent, I will move the posts to a new thread.
Very interesting information being posted.
One could have a separate thread, but then one wonders how long it will pan out.
If after some time, I find that the thread appears to have taken off on a tangent, I will move the posts to a new thread.
Very interesting information being posted.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Did you know that there are over 26 varieties of biryani made in India?
Or that biryani comes from the Persian word 'birian' which means 'fried before cooking'?
Or that, though it is considered a royal dish of the Nizams and the Nawabs it was never ever served to the royal guests?
<snip>
Biryani is believed to have been brought to India by Taimur Lang, or Taimur, the lame.
One branch of the biryani comes from the Mughals, who got the dish from Persia and subsequently during their reign in India, the biryani entrenched itself in places like Lucknow [ Images ], Hyderabad, et cetera.
The other branch of biryani is supposed to have crossed the Arabian Sea and come to Calicut, brought in by the Arab traders. The Calicut Biryani is served with vinegar pickles and papads fried in coconut oil, is a softer variety and light on the stomach has no relation in terms of taste to the other biryanis in the country.
Almost every community today has its own version of the biryani. In the northwest is the Memoni Biryani (people who inhabited the area between Sindh Gujarat and Pakistan) is an extremely spicy biryani, while the Sindhi Mutton Biryani is distinctly different.
There is also the Turkish Pilaf and the Iranian Biryani. The Bohris have their version of biryani that is normally cooked for their weddings and is flavoured with a lot of tomatoes. The Kashmiri Bhuna Ghost Biryani and the Kashmiri Katche Ghost ki Biryani is the benevolence of the Mughal rulers to the northern-most state of India.
The Lucknow (Awadhi) Biryani is the footprint the Moghuls left on the eastern part of India. From Lucknow the biryani moved to Calcutta when, in 1856, Nawab Wajid Ali Shah was deposed by the British.
His team of cooks moved with him and so did the biryani. In Kolkata [ Images ] the biryani entered poorer homes, which could not afford meat everyday, so the meat was replaced by potatoes.
Aurangzeb is believed to have invaded the South and installed the Nizam-ul-mulk who later as the Asfa Jahi ruler became the Nizam of Hyderabad.
That explains the movement of the Biryani down south, says Shenoy. From the Nizam's kitchen originated the Hyderabadi Biryani and the delicacies that go with it like the Mirchi ka Salan, Dhanshak and Baghare Baingan.
It is not difficult to imagine that the repertoire included 26 types because the Hyderabadi Biryani itself is made in different styles -- Katchi Biryani, where the meat is marinated in curd and then steamed with rice, and the Pakki Biryani, where the meat is cooked with all the accompanying spices and then the rice is simmered with the resultant gravy redolent of mace, ittar and kewra in a sealed handi with saffron and cardamom.
The Vegetable Biryani is the 'tarkari' version, which was originally made for the cashiers and financiers of the Nawabs, who were Mahajan Hindus. The Hyderabadi version of the mixed Vegetable Biryani is the Tahiri.
Marriages between the families of the Nizams of Hyderabad and the Nawab of Arcot explains the journey of the biryani into what is called Arcot Biryani, another distinct type of biryani, which is made with smaller grains of rice.
Biryani
Is it Indian?
I mean what goes today as Biryani.
Thanks to Shiv, SwamyG and Brihaspati, I looked up what is Biryani (even though I dislike eating it as I think it is a lazy way to served a meal with mutton).
Or that biryani comes from the Persian word 'birian' which means 'fried before cooking'?
Or that, though it is considered a royal dish of the Nizams and the Nawabs it was never ever served to the royal guests?
<snip>
Biryani is believed to have been brought to India by Taimur Lang, or Taimur, the lame.
One branch of the biryani comes from the Mughals, who got the dish from Persia and subsequently during their reign in India, the biryani entrenched itself in places like Lucknow [ Images ], Hyderabad, et cetera.
The other branch of biryani is supposed to have crossed the Arabian Sea and come to Calicut, brought in by the Arab traders. The Calicut Biryani is served with vinegar pickles and papads fried in coconut oil, is a softer variety and light on the stomach has no relation in terms of taste to the other biryanis in the country.
Almost every community today has its own version of the biryani. In the northwest is the Memoni Biryani (people who inhabited the area between Sindh Gujarat and Pakistan) is an extremely spicy biryani, while the Sindhi Mutton Biryani is distinctly different.
There is also the Turkish Pilaf and the Iranian Biryani. The Bohris have their version of biryani that is normally cooked for their weddings and is flavoured with a lot of tomatoes. The Kashmiri Bhuna Ghost Biryani and the Kashmiri Katche Ghost ki Biryani is the benevolence of the Mughal rulers to the northern-most state of India.
The Lucknow (Awadhi) Biryani is the footprint the Moghuls left on the eastern part of India. From Lucknow the biryani moved to Calcutta when, in 1856, Nawab Wajid Ali Shah was deposed by the British.
His team of cooks moved with him and so did the biryani. In Kolkata [ Images ] the biryani entered poorer homes, which could not afford meat everyday, so the meat was replaced by potatoes.
Aurangzeb is believed to have invaded the South and installed the Nizam-ul-mulk who later as the Asfa Jahi ruler became the Nizam of Hyderabad.
That explains the movement of the Biryani down south, says Shenoy. From the Nizam's kitchen originated the Hyderabadi Biryani and the delicacies that go with it like the Mirchi ka Salan, Dhanshak and Baghare Baingan.
It is not difficult to imagine that the repertoire included 26 types because the Hyderabadi Biryani itself is made in different styles -- Katchi Biryani, where the meat is marinated in curd and then steamed with rice, and the Pakki Biryani, where the meat is cooked with all the accompanying spices and then the rice is simmered with the resultant gravy redolent of mace, ittar and kewra in a sealed handi with saffron and cardamom.
The Vegetable Biryani is the 'tarkari' version, which was originally made for the cashiers and financiers of the Nawabs, who were Mahajan Hindus. The Hyderabadi version of the mixed Vegetable Biryani is the Tahiri.
Marriages between the families of the Nizams of Hyderabad and the Nawab of Arcot explains the journey of the biryani into what is called Arcot Biryani, another distinct type of biryani, which is made with smaller grains of rice.
Biryani
Is it Indian?
I mean what goes today as Biryani.
Thanks to Shiv, SwamyG and Brihaspati, I looked up what is Biryani (even though I dislike eating it as I think it is a lazy way to served a meal with mutton).
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
A foreigner will act and worship and take pride in what is non native. He is after all, a foreigner with his own native ways!Prem wrote:A foreigner is the one who think, act, worship all that is non native and take pride in it .RayC wrote:
A native is a native when he behave like a native!
Please explain how does one behave like a native and you shall have the answer!
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Rahul Mehta wrote
I do not understand this. My observation is that many in BRF as well as outside BRF(as mentioned in my next post) do not seem to be dumbed down by the media. They still can think to some extent on issues inspite of all the attempted "dumbing down" .Can you explain why or how?Heights of superiority complex and nothing more.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Yesterday I was waiting at a traffic intersection to make a right turn when I saw, just around the corner a woman in a sari facing the wall by the road and touching what seemed to be an idol embedded in the wall. She touched it and then touched each of her eyes as people in a temple might do when offered the flame used for an aarti (or arati in Karnataka). I turned the corner and saw both her children do exactly that and then peeked at the idol. It was a glass encased idol of Jesus and Mary.
Is this lady native?
Is this lady native?
-
Rahul Mehta
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2577
- Joined: 22 Nov 2001 12:31
- Location: Ahmedabad, India --- Bring JurySys in India
- Contact:
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
rkirankr wrote:Rahul Mehta wroteI do not understand this. My observation is that many in BRF as well as outside BRF(as mentioned in my next post) do not seem to be dumbed down by the media. They still can think to some extent on issues inspite of all the attempted "dumbing down" .Can you explain why or how?Heights of superiority complex and nothing more.
Replied in neta-babu thread in General Discussion forum
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Isn't that interesting?shiv wrote:Yesterday I was waiting at a traffic intersection to make a right turn when I saw, just around the corner a woman in a sari facing the wall by the road and touching what seemed to be an idol embedded in the wall. She touched it and then touched each of her eyes as people in a temple might do when offered the flame used for an aarti (or arati in Karnataka). I turned the corner and saw both her children do exactly that and then peeked at the idol. It was a glass encased idol of Jesus and Mary.
Is this lady native?
Indic ways of worship to a non indigenous 'God' (though Jesus and Mary are not Gods).
You can stuff in non nativeness in one, but you can't take the native out of the person.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
I have seen many fishermen families around Mumbai who place Christ's idol/cross in Pooja-ghar along with idol of Ganesh, Krishna and Shivalingam.. They worship the cross along with other "idols" too..
This was a fascinating aspect of assimilation and Indianization of Christ.
I have following points about Indianization and Assimilation of Islam and Christianity
1. In Indian system, Dharma-Artha-Kaam-Moksha are segregated entities. The Moksha-Marga is strictly personal thing to believe in. If Christianity and Islam successfully model themselves as Moksha-Maarga just like Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaakta, Bauddha, Jaina, Yoga, Vedanta etc, then it is Indianized and Native.
2. Furthermore, the adherents of any particular moksha marga should behave like rest of the adherents of other moksha-margis do. Simple things like, if you are a Mallu, dress on different occasions like rest of Mallus dress. Insisting on different dress-code unnecessarily creates a sense of separate identity
3. Use the local language for the purposes of Moksha-Maarga pursuit. If you are a tamil muslim, use tamil to read Quran, not arabic.
4. name the children like all the contemporary natives do. Why could not in 1000 years of co-existence muslims adopt native names? why insistence on Non-Indian names so fervently? Ironically, they prefer persian names which are as infidel as Indian names, but categorically avoid Indian names. Parvez, Farhad, Jamshed, Sikander are all persian names and completely non-Islamic. If these names can work, why not Mohit, Ajay, Atul, Sanjay etc... like rest of natives do.
5. native, in this context, is one who follows a lifestyle which is Indian in origin and which is followed by all those people who's Moksha-Maarga is Indian in origin. The emphasis on moksha-marga is given because Abrahamic religions do not segregate Dharma from Moksha; where as Indic people do (at least in principle).
6. In terms of political allegiance, one who considers Bhaarat as the land of forefathers and hence his land and reveres it, is an Indian/native. He should not support any such external forces, which try to unsettle the Sanskritic equilibrium of various Moksha-Margas in India by introducing and propagating a non-Indic/non-native character and disrupts the segregation between Dharma-Artha-Kaam and Moksha.
** all these points, especially the mundane ones about dress-code, insistence on foreign language for religious and social communications, affect the psychology of a mob. There is nothing religious about the script, yet devnagari has become a "Hindu" script where as Nastaliq has become an Islamic script. Same goes with insistence on particular dress-code. Regarding strict adherence to dress-code, even Sikhs can be indicted. But an image of a Sikh, does not initiate a sub-conscious caution in the minds of other followers of Indian-Non Abrahamic ideologies. An image of a Muslim does. Ever since Sikh Pantha came into existence, there was never a mutual distrust between Sikhs and rest of natives except for short period from 1977-1990. This is because, despite of slightly abrahamic character, Sikh Pantha is essentially a native ideology.
This already existing subconscious cautionary note is further aggravated due to fervent preservation of separate identity so mundanely. Christianity has at least been clever regarding this issue. They teach bible in local languages, they name their children just like rest of natives do, they dress like rest of natives do, hence the threat perception towards them is very lower in minds of Natives as compared to the one towards Muslims and vice-versa.
This was a fascinating aspect of assimilation and Indianization of Christ.
I have following points about Indianization and Assimilation of Islam and Christianity
1. In Indian system, Dharma-Artha-Kaam-Moksha are segregated entities. The Moksha-Marga is strictly personal thing to believe in. If Christianity and Islam successfully model themselves as Moksha-Maarga just like Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaakta, Bauddha, Jaina, Yoga, Vedanta etc, then it is Indianized and Native.
2. Furthermore, the adherents of any particular moksha marga should behave like rest of the adherents of other moksha-margis do. Simple things like, if you are a Mallu, dress on different occasions like rest of Mallus dress. Insisting on different dress-code unnecessarily creates a sense of separate identity
3. Use the local language for the purposes of Moksha-Maarga pursuit. If you are a tamil muslim, use tamil to read Quran, not arabic.
4. name the children like all the contemporary natives do. Why could not in 1000 years of co-existence muslims adopt native names? why insistence on Non-Indian names so fervently? Ironically, they prefer persian names which are as infidel as Indian names, but categorically avoid Indian names. Parvez, Farhad, Jamshed, Sikander are all persian names and completely non-Islamic. If these names can work, why not Mohit, Ajay, Atul, Sanjay etc... like rest of natives do.
5. native, in this context, is one who follows a lifestyle which is Indian in origin and which is followed by all those people who's Moksha-Maarga is Indian in origin. The emphasis on moksha-marga is given because Abrahamic religions do not segregate Dharma from Moksha; where as Indic people do (at least in principle).
6. In terms of political allegiance, one who considers Bhaarat as the land of forefathers and hence his land and reveres it, is an Indian/native. He should not support any such external forces, which try to unsettle the Sanskritic equilibrium of various Moksha-Margas in India by introducing and propagating a non-Indic/non-native character and disrupts the segregation between Dharma-Artha-Kaam and Moksha.
** all these points, especially the mundane ones about dress-code, insistence on foreign language for religious and social communications, affect the psychology of a mob. There is nothing religious about the script, yet devnagari has become a "Hindu" script where as Nastaliq has become an Islamic script. Same goes with insistence on particular dress-code. Regarding strict adherence to dress-code, even Sikhs can be indicted. But an image of a Sikh, does not initiate a sub-conscious caution in the minds of other followers of Indian-Non Abrahamic ideologies. An image of a Muslim does. Ever since Sikh Pantha came into existence, there was never a mutual distrust between Sikhs and rest of natives except for short period from 1977-1990. This is because, despite of slightly abrahamic character, Sikh Pantha is essentially a native ideology.
This already existing subconscious cautionary note is further aggravated due to fervent preservation of separate identity so mundanely. Christianity has at least been clever regarding this issue. They teach bible in local languages, they name their children just like rest of natives do, they dress like rest of natives do, hence the threat perception towards them is very lower in minds of Natives as compared to the one towards Muslims and vice-versa.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Very well said.Chiron wrote:This is because, despite of slightly abrahamic character, Sikh Pantha is essentially a native ideology.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
RayC, SwamyG, B: All this talk of Biryani is fine & dandy. Let us for the moment accept the origins of Biryani as originating from Persia, Central Asia, Arabia. There are 23 types of Biryanis in India, fine. Can you tell me if Biryani exists in Persian, Arab, Central Asian menus? If so, how many types of Biryanis exist in their cooking?
Let me just go ahead and state my issue with so-called "syncretic" culture of India. Almost all claims of syncretism are false. What is claimed as syncretic, meaning that is a mixture of Indian + izlaamic, the Indian component is either 100% or close to 95%. If something is called syncretic, both contributors should be somewhat even in what they bring to the table. I find this seldom the case. The so-called foreign influence (almost always ialaamic) is minmal, or zero. Also what is not mentioned that the iazlaamic cause also destroyed, so the -ive contribution is not spelled out (only the additive component is mentioned). In many cases, the claims are patently false. Additionally, what is ignored is that it is the fertile mind of the Hindu in India that accepts influences & integrates them and helps them flourish & grow---no credit for that.
I can numerous examples to illustrate my point from music, clothes, architecture, language to illustrate my point.
India has become the garage sale of civilizations. Everyone wants to claim a piece of it for cheap.
Let me just go ahead and state my issue with so-called "syncretic" culture of India. Almost all claims of syncretism are false. What is claimed as syncretic, meaning that is a mixture of Indian + izlaamic, the Indian component is either 100% or close to 95%. If something is called syncretic, both contributors should be somewhat even in what they bring to the table. I find this seldom the case. The so-called foreign influence (almost always ialaamic) is minmal, or zero. Also what is not mentioned that the iazlaamic cause also destroyed, so the -ive contribution is not spelled out (only the additive component is mentioned). In many cases, the claims are patently false. Additionally, what is ignored is that it is the fertile mind of the Hindu in India that accepts influences & integrates them and helps them flourish & grow---no credit for that.
I can numerous examples to illustrate my point from music, clothes, architecture, language to illustrate my point.
India has become the garage sale of civilizations. Everyone wants to claim a piece of it for cheap.
-
Vikas
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
- Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
- Contact:
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
OT but this is exactly the reason I find it silly when people brag about Dr. Singh as PM of India.surinder wrote:Very well said.Chiron wrote:This is because, despite of slightly abrahamic character, Sikh Pantha is essentially a native ideology.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Surinder
The greatness is India is that we accept all foreign influences and make it our own with our own tweaks to suit our own ways!
That is why India cannot be crushed!
I rejoice being an Indian!
Biryani can have any origin, but it is the Indian biryani that I have tasted and liked!
It is only today I was offered some package from a 5 star hotel with 50
% off etc. I rejected it. I prefer what my wife cooks and what I cook! Fancy names of food does not impress.
Like tacos/ tortilla. To me they are lousy chapatis! And cost a bomb!
It amazes me how people go gaga over this!
But then, maybe my taste buds are not that sophisticated! Who knows?
The greatness is India is that we accept all foreign influences and make it our own with our own tweaks to suit our own ways!
That is why India cannot be crushed!
I rejoice being an Indian!
Biryani can have any origin, but it is the Indian biryani that I have tasted and liked!
It is only today I was offered some package from a 5 star hotel with 50
% off etc. I rejected it. I prefer what my wife cooks and what I cook! Fancy names of food does not impress.
Like tacos/ tortilla. To me they are lousy chapatis! And cost a bomb!
It amazes me how people go gaga over this!
But then, maybe my taste buds are not that sophisticated! Who knows?
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Surinder,
I guess I am essentially not saying something much different from you. I have been the insistent voice to repeatedly come back to ask the question - if there was a contribution, need to explore how much of a contribution it was. Whether it is irrepleaceable. Whether it has really benefited us. What was the source of that adaptation - genuine mimicing for real advantages or simply adopted to avert pressure from some imposition by a foreign regime?
Biryani, at first sight - is indeed OT and dandy perhaps. But on second sight, not a bad symbolic icon of what we are discussing here. So many questions can be asked. The so-called essential ingredients of biryani - apart form the meat - where were they traditionally grown? There are biryani type dishes all around in central Asia. From the thin Russian component of my SHQ's family, I came to know of what they took on from CA - and pilaf/pulav is a common dish for ceremonial occasions. Interestingly they dont call it biryani! There is only one main type and not 26 different types. Let us be realistic, they dont have such variety of produce. All these variations could only have developed with Indian multiplicity of products and the enormous resources that could be extracted from the peasantry to indulge in such "fne" tastes.
Also note that the rice component of the dish had to go primarily from the subcontinent. The fact that Russians in CA do not use the term biryani that much but the pilau/pilav/pulav/plav which can perhaps be traced to a Sanskritic/Prakrit origin could be an indicator that the dish itself could originally have spread to CA from India and only later did the Islamics make it their icon. The choice of the word "biryani" could have been conscious, the same mentality that is being pointed out here - of preference to flaunt the "non-Indic".
Now there are other interesting and perhaps dangerous questions. Could we survive without 26 different varieties of Biryani? yes perhaps - but then the immediate attack will come that we can also do without many such clearly identifiable "Indic" items too.But more important question will be why the insistence on using the Persian term for it when we could use the "palanna" ("pal"=="mangsa") for it!Did it replace some other similar dish whose preparation details now has been lost? A dish that evolved with greater concern and knowledge about health aspects of food prevalent in India?
This is the main concern, primarily with everything concerning the Abrahamic - the fact that they refuse to adapt preexisting local concepts which probably evolved with generations of natives and best suited for their environment. Their overwhelming drive and need to impose their own historical experience based on quite narrow regional elements of a particular time period - seeks to replace as much of the pre-existing culture as possible. Even if the new element is probably derived from the native culture (copied or sub-copied by the Abrahamic source region in the past) - that element has to be renamed and reassociated with the source of the Abrahamic and cleaned of any possible native connection.
There is joke prevalent in the east: there is some ceremonial cooking going on in the open by Abrahamics. But a crow defecates in the pot while flying by. So the cooks have to go and ask the theologian as to what should be the correct "revelation" approved response. The theologian scratches his beard and looks up texts - but find no direct utterances. So he asks the cooks as to what the local non-Abrahamics do in such cases. The cooks being new converts know what would traditionally be done. So they reply that non-Abrahamics would throw it away. The theologian's face lights up immediately - and he says in joy -"oh then you must stir it all in into the pot" (for those who would understand - "ora ki kore/phalayia daya hujur/de ghaita".
Jokingly narrated - it succintly sums up the theologians attitudes (and not necessarily the common follower).
I guess I am essentially not saying something much different from you. I have been the insistent voice to repeatedly come back to ask the question - if there was a contribution, need to explore how much of a contribution it was. Whether it is irrepleaceable. Whether it has really benefited us. What was the source of that adaptation - genuine mimicing for real advantages or simply adopted to avert pressure from some imposition by a foreign regime?
Biryani, at first sight - is indeed OT and dandy perhaps. But on second sight, not a bad symbolic icon of what we are discussing here. So many questions can be asked. The so-called essential ingredients of biryani - apart form the meat - where were they traditionally grown? There are biryani type dishes all around in central Asia. From the thin Russian component of my SHQ's family, I came to know of what they took on from CA - and pilaf/pulav is a common dish for ceremonial occasions. Interestingly they dont call it biryani! There is only one main type and not 26 different types. Let us be realistic, they dont have such variety of produce. All these variations could only have developed with Indian multiplicity of products and the enormous resources that could be extracted from the peasantry to indulge in such "fne" tastes.
Also note that the rice component of the dish had to go primarily from the subcontinent. The fact that Russians in CA do not use the term biryani that much but the pilau/pilav/pulav/plav which can perhaps be traced to a Sanskritic/Prakrit origin could be an indicator that the dish itself could originally have spread to CA from India and only later did the Islamics make it their icon. The choice of the word "biryani" could have been conscious, the same mentality that is being pointed out here - of preference to flaunt the "non-Indic".
Now there are other interesting and perhaps dangerous questions. Could we survive without 26 different varieties of Biryani? yes perhaps - but then the immediate attack will come that we can also do without many such clearly identifiable "Indic" items too.But more important question will be why the insistence on using the Persian term for it when we could use the "palanna" ("pal"=="mangsa") for it!Did it replace some other similar dish whose preparation details now has been lost? A dish that evolved with greater concern and knowledge about health aspects of food prevalent in India?
This is the main concern, primarily with everything concerning the Abrahamic - the fact that they refuse to adapt preexisting local concepts which probably evolved with generations of natives and best suited for their environment. Their overwhelming drive and need to impose their own historical experience based on quite narrow regional elements of a particular time period - seeks to replace as much of the pre-existing culture as possible. Even if the new element is probably derived from the native culture (copied or sub-copied by the Abrahamic source region in the past) - that element has to be renamed and reassociated with the source of the Abrahamic and cleaned of any possible native connection.
There is joke prevalent in the east: there is some ceremonial cooking going on in the open by Abrahamics. But a crow defecates in the pot while flying by. So the cooks have to go and ask the theologian as to what should be the correct "revelation" approved response. The theologian scratches his beard and looks up texts - but find no direct utterances. So he asks the cooks as to what the local non-Abrahamics do in such cases. The cooks being new converts know what would traditionally be done. So they reply that non-Abrahamics would throw it away. The theologian's face lights up immediately - and he says in joy -"oh then you must stir it all in into the pot" (for those who would understand - "ora ki kore/phalayia daya hujur/de ghaita".
Jokingly narrated - it succintly sums up the theologians attitudes (and not necessarily the common follower).
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
[quote="RayC
A foreigner will act and worship and take pride in what is non native. He is after all, a foreigner with his own native ways!
[/quote]
So true in Indian context, makes it easy to recognize a foreigner and now i hope it is clear who is native .
A foreigner will act and worship and take pride in what is non native. He is after all, a foreigner with his own native ways!
[/quote]So true in Indian context, makes it easy to recognize a foreigner and now i hope it is clear who is native .
Last edited by Prem on 16 Oct 2009 21:49, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
About "syncretic" , it is more like Sin -cretic, like simpleton who is happy to get a Pumpskin in exchange for his millions. A straight forward way to judge is what was lost and what was gained in this so called "sy/incretic" formula and decide if the hoax still continue .surinder wrote:RayC, SwamyG, B: All this talk of Biryani is fine & dandy. Let us for the moment accept the origins of Biryani as originating from Persia, Central Asia, Arabia. There are 23 types of Biryanis in India, fine. Can you tell me if Biryani exists in Persian, Arab, Central Asian menus? If so, how many types of Biryanis exist in their cooking?
Let me just go ahead and state my issue with so-called "syncretic" culture of India. Almost all claims of syncretism are false. What is claimed as syncretic, meaning that is a mixture of Indian + izlaamic, the Indian component is either 100% or close to 95%. If something is called syncretic, both contributors should be somewhat even in what they bring to the table. I find this seldom the case. The so-called foreign influence (almost always ialaamic) is minmal, or zero. Also what is not mentioned that the iazlaamic cause also destroyed, so the -ive contribution is not spelled out (only the additive component is mentioned). In many cases, the claims are patently false. Additionally, what is ignored is that it is the fertile mind of the Hindu in India that accepts influences & integrates them and helps them flourish & grow---no credit for that.
I can numerous examples to illustrate my point from music, clothes, architecture, language to illustrate my point.
India has become the garage sale of civilizations. Everyone wants to claim a piece of it for cheap.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Prem wrote:[quote="RayC
A foreigner will act and worship and take pride in what is non native. He is after all, a foreigner with his own native ways!
India remains spongelike. Takes in everything so to say.So true in Indian context, makes it easy to recognize a foreigner and now i hope it is clear who is native .
Read Shiv's example of the Indian way of worship of non indigenous idols?
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Ray Sir ji,
its true and false in the sense that we cant seem to discard the dirt which come along with absorption. Just like dirty clothe , the sponge needs occasional washing and drying unless we get use to the stink coming from the gathered dirt . Its benefitial to adopt good but harmful to let dirt gather in the system, accounting and balancing act is required to remain healthy .
its true and false in the sense that we cant seem to discard the dirt which come along with absorption. Just like dirty clothe , the sponge needs occasional washing and drying unless we get use to the stink coming from the gathered dirt . Its benefitial to adopt good but harmful to let dirt gather in the system, accounting and balancing act is required to remain healthy .
Last edited by Prem on 16 Oct 2009 23:35, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
A couple of months back, on one of the Indian lifestyle channels (NDTV?) a food show had food travels in India, and Indian Muslim from Tamil Nadu region (dont remember exactly) actually picked up a book which was description of a Pallava military campaign planning, including details of food for war.SwamyG wrote:Would we call 'Hyderabadi Biryani' native to India, or would we say it came from 'Outside' ?
He read out a section and prepared a food exactly like it -- and the end result was an excellent biryani/pulao.
He had lot of info on food origins. Sadly I cant find a archival link of that.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
I would say so. I have tamilian christians in Tamil Nadu who walk & talk like any other Hindu who does not wear his/her religion on the sleeves or blouses. The ladies wear thali (mangalsutra), they wear sarees, wear flowers on their hair, have big pottu (bindi) on their forehead, wear nose rings, wear ear rings ithyadi. Their deity is different, and fully adapted a deity from the middle-east to the local cultural settings. They send treats during Christmas to other houses, and Hindus send 'bhakshanams' to their house during festivals.shiv wrote:Yesterday I was waiting at a traffic intersection to make a right turn when I saw, just around the corner a woman in a sari facing the wall by the road and touching what seemed to be an idol embedded in the wall. She touched it and then touched each of her eyes as people in a temple might do when offered the flame used for an aarti (or arati in Karnataka). I turned the corner and saw both her children do exactly that and then peeked at the idol. It was a glass encased idol of Jesus and Mary.
Is this lady native?
Brihaspati: In tamil they say "valavannukku puLLum aayidum" {to the mighty (or talented) even a grass blade is a weapon}. You have used 'biryani' as a grass blade to make great points.
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
SwamyG,
please don't embarass me. I am also groping in darkness seeking enlightenment.
Regarding adopting "Indic" names, one interesting scene is that in BD and adjoining sections of Muslims in WB. In BD particularly, middle and upper middle "class" have a significant tendency of having a third "Bengali" name - which oftentimes is tragi-comically poignant. Typically they will refer to themselves primarily by their third "Bengali" name which is very loudly Sanskritic. The surname comes out more in official parlance, and its almost exclusively Persian or Arabic.
There is a well known male dancer (who trained in Vishwabharati and in India) whose first name is "Shibali". Ofcourse avoidance of "Ram", "durga", "Sita", is avoided - but "Shibali"!
Imagine Tisha, Disha, Mamata, Aditi, Subarna, Champa, Purnima as first names for females! Then again imagine a Muslim name which goes as Mostafa Bannerjee. 
Typically, Chowdhury is proudly retained - probably forgetting that Chowdhury comes from Chaturdhari (1/4 share of revenues raised) and definitely Sanskritic, Indic and pre-Islamic. So the key is status and pride.
please don't embarass me. I am also groping in darkness seeking enlightenment.
Regarding adopting "Indic" names, one interesting scene is that in BD and adjoining sections of Muslims in WB. In BD particularly, middle and upper middle "class" have a significant tendency of having a third "Bengali" name - which oftentimes is tragi-comically poignant. Typically they will refer to themselves primarily by their third "Bengali" name which is very loudly Sanskritic. The surname comes out more in official parlance, and its almost exclusively Persian or Arabic.
There is a well known male dancer (who trained in Vishwabharati and in India) whose first name is "Shibali". Ofcourse avoidance of "Ram", "durga", "Sita", is avoided - but "Shibali"!
Imagine Tisha, Disha, Mamata, Aditi, Subarna, Champa, Purnima as first names for females! Then again imagine a Muslim name which goes as Mostafa Bannerjee. Typically, Chowdhury is proudly retained - probably forgetting that Chowdhury comes from Chaturdhari (1/4 share of revenues raised) and definitely Sanskritic, Indic and pre-Islamic. So the key is status and pride.Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Institutions are setup by humans. Be it a nation, a state, religion, caste, economic, political, dharma ithyadi. These are setup for the collective benefit as each of these institution helps the individual at some level. If it does not help them, then an individual is ready to move to any institution that will help him or her. The word 'help' is used loosely - it could be at various levels - spiritual, monetary, physical and other needs of humans.So the key is status and pride.
We have the concept of dharma that was expected to be followed by individuals - be it Raja or Praja. The system stabilized the society paving way for individuals to achieve status and pride among other things. "Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You" is a nice dandy line from Kennedy. He claimed, like others, that America stood up for liberty & freedom. Without getting into the foreign policy issues of America - the message was America stood up for something. That was the core.
Now what is our core? How can we utilize those core values or ideas to motivate and nourish the aam admis of India? Is India, a modern institution that was setup in 1947 now adapting the concepts of liberty and freedom as defined by some of the Western countries? We see that India is already trying to fit "secularism" into the Indian milieu.
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Liberty and freedom was also there in Bharatyia long before formal enunciation in the western system. There is a reason, why every Bharatyia we now consider as exceptional characters who stood up against what they felt to be disruption and destruction of the core - like Madhava, Basava, Nanak, Chaitanya, or Vivekananda - all searched for this core in their pre-existing roots. They did not accept everything that was being practised in the name of the core, neither did they accept the claims of forces that they considered "alien" and "incompatible", as potential candidate for the core or replacements for parts of the core.
A reinvestigation and re-exploration of all aspects of our culture, our beliefs, our practices and our history - si important. Out of that will come the realization of what we need to retain, what we need to revive, what we need to reject. And even, a rediscovery of the essential principles of our civilization.
On the practical side - even to carry out that search, we will need to protect our society from physical liquidation. This is a critical dilemma - whether we have the time.
A reinvestigation and re-exploration of all aspects of our culture, our beliefs, our practices and our history - si important. Out of that will come the realization of what we need to retain, what we need to revive, what we need to reject. And even, a rediscovery of the essential principles of our civilization.
On the practical side - even to carry out that search, we will need to protect our society from physical liquidation. This is a critical dilemma - whether we have the time.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
I knew it will be only a matter of time before someone says "we had it" or "we have that too" 
Considering that we had a head start as a civilization one could accept such arguments. But then, one can say anything about India that will be truthful in some context or the other.
If one has to physically protect oneself, why is that a critical dilemma?
Considering that we had a head start as a civilization one could accept such arguments. But then, one can say anything about India that will be truthful in some context or the other.If one has to physically protect oneself, why is that a critical dilemma?
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Well, "liberty" and "freedom" in every society is confined to the context of the societies which talk of such things. Even the roots of western "liberalism" in say Athens, did not encompass the slaves and the women. Whereas a "restrictive" society like the Spartans allowed freedoms and liberties to it women even Athens abhorred! A liberal and democratic Athens had no way but to execute Socrates, while his disciple's disciple took up the job of educating a dictator in feudal Macedonia.
Thus freedom and liberalism etc will have to be seen in the context and scope of perceptions of the society concerned. But what about the explanation given by a certain rishi in a certain Upanishad to his son - that women were free like certain other entities, to go where they liked (in this context to any man) and were not private possessions of individuals? An idea of freedom and liberalism only found in swingers in certain societies perhaps!
Thus freedom and liberalism etc will have to be seen in the context and scope of perceptions of the society concerned. But what about the explanation given by a certain rishi in a certain Upanishad to his son - that women were free like certain other entities, to go where they liked (in this context to any man) and were not private possessions of individuals? An idea of freedom and liberalism only found in swingers in certain societies perhaps!
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
SwamyG,
the critical dilemma is in where to devote time and effort and in what proportion - immediate means of bolstering protection and defence (which could perhaps lead to the discovery that aggression was needed as the best option) or searching and distilling a version of the core relevant (and understood) for the present time.
the critical dilemma is in where to devote time and effort and in what proportion - immediate means of bolstering protection and defence (which could perhaps lead to the discovery that aggression was needed as the best option) or searching and distilling a version of the core relevant (and understood) for the present time.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Freedom existed within various compartments across civilizations. Total unrestrained freedom is not an answer as they act as the proverbial unrestrained horses. The Indic society recognized this "uncheckedness" - be it lust, greed, anger ithayadi. The wise even gave a name to this - dharama.
Is a nation without core ideas equivalent to an individual without life goals? What do core ideas really do for the country and the individuals? How does it help them? From a cultural perspective the goal for an individual was to achieve moksha - getting out of the cycle of samsara. How does the end goal of moksha align or contradict with some of the goals like - liberty, fraternity & freedom as espoused by the French? But are these really goals or just means to achieve something? If that is the case then what would an individual get having these means?
Just more questions.
Is a nation without core ideas equivalent to an individual without life goals? What do core ideas really do for the country and the individuals? How does it help them? From a cultural perspective the goal for an individual was to achieve moksha - getting out of the cycle of samsara. How does the end goal of moksha align or contradict with some of the goals like - liberty, fraternity & freedom as espoused by the French? But are these really goals or just means to achieve something? If that is the case then what would an individual get having these means?
Just more questions.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
I apologize if this is considered a digression:
1) Does the US have a core idea?
2) What is the core idea of the US?
1) Does the US have a core idea?
2) What is the core idea of the US?
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
1) http://www.lewrockwell.com/yates/yates41.html
2) http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/
3) http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
4) http://www.constitution.org/cs_found.htm
Some of the terms that repeat often are Freedom, Liberty, Prosperity, Life and Pursuit of Happiness.
ps: I wish the Constituent Assembly of India debates were so readily available.
2) http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/
3) http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
4) http://www.constitution.org/cs_found.htm
Some of the terms that repeat often are Freedom, Liberty, Prosperity, Life and Pursuit of Happiness.
ps: I wish the Constituent Assembly of India debates were so readily available.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Note that while US remains the most powerful and prosperous nation on earth, they are obsessed with certain things that do not fit in with what could be core indic values. I am specifically referring to insistence on prosperity, life and pursuit of happiness being linked. These three are delinked in Indian tradition.SwamyG wrote: Some of the terms that repeat often are Freedom, Liberty, Prosperity, Life and Pursuit of Happiness.
Freedom and liberty are vital in Indian tradition, but individual freedom is restricted for parts of one's life and devotion to society is demanded - with a mandate that the Indian must marry, must have children and must look after his family. 'Individual freedom" in the US absolves the American from these responsibilities.
Questions that come to mind are:
1.Is it is possible to have American style wealth and power in the absence of American core values?
2. Is American style wealth and power desirable?
3. And if someone deems it undesirable, is it possible to survive as a unique nation on earth without copying the American/Western paradigm of power and wealth?
4. If national survival is difficult in the absence of American/Western style wealth and power is it really possible to keep one's ancient core values intact - given that some ancient Indian core values are diametrically opposite to the powerful American/Western ideal?
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Shiv Saar ji,
Yes all is possible for Indians if they put mind and shoulder to achieve the best of both worlds.
Yes all is possible for Indians if they put mind and shoulder to achieve the best of both worlds.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Prem wrote:Shiv Saar ji,
Yes all is possible for Indians if they put mind and shoulder to achieve the best of both worlds.
Prem the reason I worded my post in that way is because I see a big struggle especially on BRF but to a smaller extent in India on what aspects of so called "core Indian values" to reject and what to keep. India is developing into a hybrid that neither discards old values nor fails to take up new ones that are seen to be essential.
One might ask how two diametrically opposite views are possible simultaneously. But Indians display both value systems at different times and both the old and the new exist simultaneously. Asking that only the old should survive is in view bound to fail and those who demand that can ready themselves for disappointment. And those who demand radical changes too will be disappointed. Above all India has offered freedom of choice - and Indians will choose for themselves.
If and when there is an Indian superpower, it will be nothing like any superpowers the world has seen yet. It will be unique and different. That sentence can be taken in any way that readers may wish to understand it.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Shiv,
If one could adopt the western ways, then would that not clash with the core values of India as is being mentioned here?
While the debate is interesting and tantalising, yet if one sees real life, the Indian scene is nowhere to what is being propounded.
If one could adopt the western ways, then would that not clash with the core values of India as is being mentioned here?
While the debate is interesting and tantalising, yet if one sees real life, the Indian scene is nowhere to what is being propounded.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
RayC the way I see it is as follows.RayC wrote:Shiv,
If one could adopt the western ways, then would that not clash with the core values of India as is being mentioned here?
While the debate is interesting and tantalising, yet if one sees real life, the Indian scene is nowhere to what is being propounded.
According to "core Indian beliefs" every Indian is theoretically given the choice to live his life as he likes. But in actual fact at least 300 million people classified as being Indian do not have any choice in changing anything for themselves. The "choice" and "freedom" that the Indic core is said to provide is unavailable to them.
But this fact is nothing compared to the fact that Indian society has experienced all this and reached a self serving solution to deprivation and lack of choice centuries ago and incorporated that solution into the Indic core.
The solution for lack of choice in this life is to say that it will be restricted to this life and that one may be paying out one's karmic debts in this life and that one must accept what one gets with equanimity and not desire more than one gets. One's next life will change based on one's conduct in this life.
The combination of "freedom" and a philosophy that looks down upon forced change or worldly and material desires while promising that this one life is just one of many before one reaches a sublime higher state results in what we see in Indian society. Poor, deprived, hungry but happy people. And there is, in India, a self serving deification of poverty.
As long as we accept that poor deprived and hungry people are "happy and content" there is no need to change anything. But since "national strength" is dependent on the support and productivity of a large number of people - a reduction of poverty, hunger and misery is necessary even if all Indians are happy in that state. The curious fact is that people who are poor, hungry and miserable (but happy) do not stop being happy if you change their status of being poor and hungry. But changing them means changing an age old outlook in life in which we stop looking at the deprived as living out their karma, ignoring their existence, and start making it our personal, individual duty to change them.
That is when we have to actually start counting how much money we actually have and how much can be spared for lifting several hundred million people out of misery. Some core values become peripheral to this if this task is taken as a core quest in India.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Shiv,
Rather well said and a realistic analysis.
And there is, in India, a self serving deification of poverty (as you so aptly state) justified with religious piety. This is what astounds me!
Rather well said and a realistic analysis.
And there is, in India, a self serving deification of poverty (as you so aptly state) justified with religious piety. This is what astounds me!
-
brihaspati
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 12410
- Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
I am not that sure that pursuit of poverty is part of the core values of Bharat. There is littlle in the main philosophical strands of the Vedic and Vedanta that supports "poverty" as a goal or aim and also directly connected to "bad karma". The fundamental theme in the Vedic literature appears to be pursuit of all aspects of human life - dharma, artha, kama and moksha. Pursuit of artha is never decried and dismissed, same goes for "kama". Those who are painting the core as purely pursuit of "moksha" are either not being honest or being aware.
Moksha is the part that spans multiple lives, and goes beyond the present life. But moksha is not defined as the primary aim in life. Neither is the role of proper pursuit of dharma, artha and kama in this life set to be contradictory to pursuit of moksha. The karma theory when elaborated, will be seen to be affected by a sin-good-deed duality, that is subject to existing, local, customs and beliefs.
Dharma is a loose term now bandied around without having any idea perhaps about how it has been precisely defined or used. Confusion starts when dharma is not used as a framework to derive values appropriate to a given situation, people, time and place - but when the results of such applications by some group, at some point, place and time is taken to be "dharma" also.
From here it should be clear, what we can begin to accept, retain, or reject. The conflict about "poverty" should be immediately resolvable from this viewpoint. For poverty prevents pursuit of knowledge and awareness. On the other hand if we forget that "artha" is not a funadamental aim, but a subsidiary and supportive one, and we pursue it to the neglect of the fundamental aim, and all the other aspects of life that supports this aim, then we are deviating from "dharma". Here dharma is being used in the sense of rules/principles/that enhance or support the supreme aim of obtaining gnana.
Poverty perhaps has been made into a badge of honour because of two things - the historical ruination of the economy starting under the Islamics (every indication that the condition of the Indian commons drastically reduced in economic level after the advent of Islamic rule) - and the people had to learn to e happy with what they had - making a virtue out of necessity. The second reason could be a psychological defiance - a clear statement that "poverty" was consistent with the person's dharma, since according to his values - the way the rich obtained or maintained their wealth was "adharmic", and that the only way left for that person to clim out of "poverty" would be through a complete abandonment of what he considers his principles of life.
There are plenty of questions that I can myself raise against and seeking clarifications to what I have said here! Not raising them myself!
Moksha is the part that spans multiple lives, and goes beyond the present life. But moksha is not defined as the primary aim in life. Neither is the role of proper pursuit of dharma, artha and kama in this life set to be contradictory to pursuit of moksha. The karma theory when elaborated, will be seen to be affected by a sin-good-deed duality, that is subject to existing, local, customs and beliefs.
Dharma is a loose term now bandied around without having any idea perhaps about how it has been precisely defined or used. Confusion starts when dharma is not used as a framework to derive values appropriate to a given situation, people, time and place - but when the results of such applications by some group, at some point, place and time is taken to be "dharma" also.
From here it should be clear, what we can begin to accept, retain, or reject. The conflict about "poverty" should be immediately resolvable from this viewpoint. For poverty prevents pursuit of knowledge and awareness. On the other hand if we forget that "artha" is not a funadamental aim, but a subsidiary and supportive one, and we pursue it to the neglect of the fundamental aim, and all the other aspects of life that supports this aim, then we are deviating from "dharma". Here dharma is being used in the sense of rules/principles/that enhance or support the supreme aim of obtaining gnana.
Poverty perhaps has been made into a badge of honour because of two things - the historical ruination of the economy starting under the Islamics (every indication that the condition of the Indian commons drastically reduced in economic level after the advent of Islamic rule) - and the people had to learn to e happy with what they had - making a virtue out of necessity. The second reason could be a psychological defiance - a clear statement that "poverty" was consistent with the person's dharma, since according to his values - the way the rich obtained or maintained their wealth was "adharmic", and that the only way left for that person to clim out of "poverty" would be through a complete abandonment of what he considers his principles of life.
There are plenty of questions that I can myself raise against and seeking clarifications to what I have said here! Not raising them myself!
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
Shiv:
While at a first glance one might think in America they have core values and people are free to do anything as long as they are Constitutionally approved; and in India people have core values and people are free to do anything as long as they are bound by dharma. The difference is the string that bounds them - Constitution vs Dharma.
1.Is it is possible to have American style wealth and power in the absence of American core values?
American core values are needed for American style wealth and power. They have vast land, and with it vast resources that the land has to offer. If one looks at supply and demand, they have had a high supply of resources compared to the demand. Once oil was found and automobiles started to make roads, it was like no stopping them. Are individuals wealth? It is really tough to tell because there are reports saying that wealth has been gradually transferred from individual to the Corporations. Citizens have been converted to Consumers.
2. Is American style wealth and power desirable?
Don't know. But if I peeked into the next question in the exam, and probably can guess the expected answer
3. And if someone deems it undesirable, is it possible to survive as a unique nation on earth without copying the American/Western paradigm of power and wealth?
It is going to be very tough. Just like Britain modified its laws to allow East Indian Company to do what ever it wanted to do in the sub-contitnent, America is doing its best to keep its Corporations happy. Once the American market is saturated, the Corporations will turn towards potential markets. You can call the American way as the 'least resistance path'; and people are going to be easily attracted to that way. It is but natural. Ah, my answer is after all right, I just peeked into the next question.
4. If national survival is difficult in the absence of American/Western style wealth and power is it really possible to keep one's ancient core values intact - given that some ancient Indian core values are diametrically opposite to the powerful American/Western ideal?
'Clash of the core values'. Some of the core values will remain only in the books and in the minds of few. The logical conclusion is a very harsh and dangerous one, ie. in order for some core values to survive core values of others need to be checked or destroyed or at least sheathed.
Not necessarily. Purushartha lists the four goals of humans as: Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha. Artha and Kama are the components that related to material well being & happiness. It is said that one needs to have artha and kama under the umbrella of Dharma.Note that while US remains the most powerful and prosperous nation on earth, they are obsessed with certain things that do not fit in with what could be core indic values. I am specifically referring to insistence on prosperity, life and pursuit of happiness being linked. These three are delinked in Indian tradition.
While at a first glance one might think in America they have core values and people are free to do anything as long as they are Constitutionally approved; and in India people have core values and people are free to do anything as long as they are bound by dharma. The difference is the string that bounds them - Constitution vs Dharma.
1.Is it is possible to have American style wealth and power in the absence of American core values?
American core values are needed for American style wealth and power. They have vast land, and with it vast resources that the land has to offer. If one looks at supply and demand, they have had a high supply of resources compared to the demand. Once oil was found and automobiles started to make roads, it was like no stopping them. Are individuals wealth? It is really tough to tell because there are reports saying that wealth has been gradually transferred from individual to the Corporations. Citizens have been converted to Consumers.
2. Is American style wealth and power desirable?
Don't know. But if I peeked into the next question in the exam, and probably can guess the expected answer
3. And if someone deems it undesirable, is it possible to survive as a unique nation on earth without copying the American/Western paradigm of power and wealth?
It is going to be very tough. Just like Britain modified its laws to allow East Indian Company to do what ever it wanted to do in the sub-contitnent, America is doing its best to keep its Corporations happy. Once the American market is saturated, the Corporations will turn towards potential markets. You can call the American way as the 'least resistance path'; and people are going to be easily attracted to that way. It is but natural. Ah, my answer is after all right, I just peeked into the next question.
4. If national survival is difficult in the absence of American/Western style wealth and power is it really possible to keep one's ancient core values intact - given that some ancient Indian core values are diametrically opposite to the powerful American/Western ideal?
'Clash of the core values'. Some of the core values will remain only in the books and in the minds of few. The logical conclusion is a very harsh and dangerous one, ie. in order for some core values to survive core values of others need to be checked or destroyed or at least sheathed.
Re: Indian Core: Ideas and descriptions-I
brihaspati ji: I had not read your reply before posting, glad to see that I mention some of the same points that you mention. I am learning Yes there are four sets of goals, but Moksha was unique in itself. As it broke the cycle.
Yes there are four sets of goals, but Moksha was unique in itself. As it broke the cycle.