Missing the point in Sai Baba’s calling on Kalaignar

(adaptation of original post in akandabaratam egroup on 27 Jan 2007)

A well-practised knack for missing the point: this is what the columnist Balbir Punj demonstrates in his report in The Pioneer (26 Jan 2007). By so doing, such writers hope to keep up the illusion that Hindutva is holding its ground. Unfortunately, the reality is that knowledge and society are moving on, leaving the Hindutva elements far behind, as we shall see below.

Punj portrays the Kalaignar - Sai Baba meeting on Saturday 20 Jan 2007 as a "demonstration of the wisdom of the Shankaracharya and the Hindu philosophic ascent from unbelief to belief, from "rationalism" to the acceptance of the divine".

First, rationalism is not premised on opposing or rejecting divinity. It seeks to subject everything, including the divine, to the test of human reason, a unique gift in the entire animate world. In fact, Socrates (5th century BCE), the renowned ancient Greek preacher and practitioner of reasoning, felt he was heeding the voice of God (an inner sign or voice) and serving God by urging Athenians to take to questioning things.

Nearly 2,000 years later, when Western science set out to probe the mysteries of nature using instruments and experiments (while India was still keeping faith with yajnas and mantras), the motivation was to read the mind of God, NOT to deny God. Unfortunately (or, is it fortunately?), it turned out that the more and more science progressed, the more that God receded, conceding more and more ground to Matter! That is, scientists found that more and more of natural phenomena could be explained and predicted without any need to invoke God!! The trend reached an emotional peak point in the mid 19th century when Charles Darwin announced his theory of biological evolution, which dispensed with any role for God in the emergence of life in all the varied forms, including human.

As if extrapolating the developing trend in science, Periyar went the full distance in the social space of the Dravidian world. Unlike Socrates of ancient Greece, Periyar felt NO need for God to tell him what he had to do for his people. He saw for himself that the minds of people around him had been long numbed by superstitions and elaborate rituals spun around puranic conceptions of gods. He, therefore, felt that people had to be first liberated from such mental and emotional fetters before they can be expected to gain confidence in the uniquely human gift - human reasoning. It is by fostering the spirit of reasoning in them that Periyar hoped to bring people to recognize the servile state to which they have been reduced for centuries. Only then would they rise up against the debasing and unjust social order.

Therefore, Periyar, who had started life as a believer (a devout Hindu), openly challenged the Brahmanist doctrine of varnashrama dharma. He urged people to break free of the shackles of the socio-religious order that had been so cunningly imposed on them by the Dharmists in the name of Hindu gods.

Periyar has succeeded spectacularly! The results are already there to be seen in the social landscape of the entire South, though there is still alot more work pending. Understandably so, as it is about dismantling more than 2,000 years of legacy.

DMK, that emerged as a political organization from Periyar's DK (Dravidar Kazhagam), had always operated somewhere along the continuum between the two poles, belief (theism) and disbelief (atheism). Periyar positioned himself right atop the latter pole, in the vicinity of which the Buddha had also been some 2500 years ago.

Anyone who understands change dynamics would be able to appreciate the 'shock value' in Periyar's approach: so would physiotheraphists who administer 'shock therapy' to stimulate healing in selected parts of the human body!

Periyar's atheism may be headed towards its eventual vindication as God seems to be receding ever more as science penetrates deeper into the mysteries of the material world. Increasingly, scientists are finding it possible to account for 'immaterial' (or psychological / spiritual / metaphysical) experiences as emergences from matter! The implications of what is emerging are likely to be very unsettling for both religion and society.

That notwithstanding, DMK's slogan remains "one humankind, one God" (Note 1), and that the best worship of God is through serving mankind.

The reception for Sathya Sai Baba at Kalaignar Karunanidhi's home and at a subsequent public function is for Baba's service to the people: Baba's funding of the water project. It is in appreciation of Baba's service towards (one part of) humanity, not divinity.

The returning of courtesy is only human. Sai Baba came home and he is being received as a guest. That's hospitality, plain and simple. Paying respect to someone mature, whether by age, deed or eminence, even by bowing or touching his feet does not mean abandoning your principles, nor approving all that the guest may stand for.

For instance, in 2001, the then Prime Minister Vajpayee (at his age and health) bowed to touch the feet of a rural woman Chinna Pillai at an awards ceremony in honour of her success in community banking. It showed Vajpayee's greatness and his deep respect for what this ordinary (unschooled) woman from a remote village in Tamil Nadu had achieved, but of which social condition none in government had cared about for more than 50 years of independence. The woman was visibly moved by Vajpayee's act (I think I saw it then on Indian TV news):

http://www.expressindia.com/columnists/nina/20010206.html
Indian Express - 6 Feb 2001

QUOTE
A few weeks back, it was touching to see one of the greatest Statesman of modern times, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, bowing respectfully to a rural leader Chinna Pillai, at an awards ceremony in Tamil Nadu. Chinna Pillai is an illiterate,
schedule caste social worker, who has climbed from the depths of grinding poverty to rise like a Phoenix from the ashes of indented slavery. This grey-haired, fifty-something-year-old, who worked as a manual slave labourer in paddy fields, collecting cow dung, has through a movement called Kalavijayam (loosely translated as ‘woman victory’) made waves in Tamil Nadu. Chinna is exceptional because she believed in herself and, despite being part of the lowest rung of the human ladder, made vital networking links of self-help groups in the villages that formed the block. China Pillai has set in chain motion a movement that is a credit and savings system, which helped to reduce the crippling debt that a lifetime of work could not repay, thus reducing families to a slavery, that really should have no part in a 21st century democracy like India. The Herculean effort apart, Chinna’s success lies in her basic
rudimentary understanding that till you help yourself no one else will. The rest, as they say, is history or her story.
UNQUOTE

(a more recent report on Chinna Pillai appeared in The Hindu, 24 Jan 2007)

But the columnist (Balbir K Punj) has done well to raise the matter of the ring(s) that Baba was supposed to have materialised (from thin air?). It is, indeed, perplexing that two ministers, including the young and dynamic Dayanidhi Maran, were overly impressed by the feat. If so, shouldn't it receive the scrutiny of Indian science. A Nobel Prize may be waiting: a new law of physics may be needed to explain the Baba feat. Except it is limited to rings! Why not uranium? : India could have been saved from its nuclear deal with US!!

There are also deeper issues underlying this Sai Baba episode:

a) Why should it take the intervention of someone like Sai Baba to persuade a state government, in this case, that of Andhra Pradesh, to permit a public project to make progress? It seems that the political process, including the judicial order, is not working too well.

b) The extent to which the lack of financing is holding back many public projects in a country floating on black money.

It is such questions that journalists should be asking.

In conclusion: it has been some time since the Dharmists were shown their place by Periyar. To the disappointment of Hindutva and for the good of the people of India, that fact is not going to change by this visit by Sai Baba to Gopalapuram.


Note 1: (to be filled)


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

அர்ச்சகர்கள் யார்?

துக்ளக் (31.5.2006) :

ஆகம விதிமுறை

“ .... அனைத்து ஜாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகர்கள் ஆகலாம் என்பது ஆகம விதிகளுக்குப் புறம்பானது என்பது நிச்சயம். ஆகம விதிமுறைப்படி பிரதிஷ்டை நடந்து, அதன்படி வழிபாடுகளும், பூஜைகளும் நடக்கிற கோவில்களில், அனைத்து ஜாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகர் ஆகலாம் என்று தீர்மானிக்கப்பட்டால் - அது ஆகம விரோதமே.

ஆனால், ஆகம விதிமுறைகளின்படி அல்லாமல், பிரதிஷ்டை நடந்து, பூஜைகளும் நடக்கிற கோவில்கள் பல உண்டு. அவற்றில் அனைத்து ஜாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகர் ஆவது ஆகம விரோதம் அல்ல.

'பிராம்மணர்கள்தான் அர்ச்சகர் ஆகலாம் என்பது இப்போதுள்ள நிலை' என்கிற எண்ணம் தவறானது. ஆகம விதிமுறைப்படியான கோவில்களில் அன்றும் சரி, இன்றும் சரி பிராம்மணர்கள், அர்ச்சகர்கள் ஆக முடியாது. சொல்லப் போனால், கர்ப்பகிரஹத்தினுள்ளேயே நுழைய முடியாது. விக்ரஹத்தை தீண்ட முடியாது. அப்படி நடந்தால் அது ஆகம விதிமுறை மீறல்.”


சிவாச்சார்யார்கள்

"சிவாச்சார்யார்கள் என்கிற பரம்பரையில் வந்தவர்கள்தான் அர்ச்சகர்கள் ஆக முடியும். இது ஆகம விதி. (இவர்களுக்கும், மற்ற பிராம்மணர்கள் என்று பொதுவாகச் சொல்லப்படுகிறவர்களுக்கும் இடையே திருமண சம்மந்தம் வைத்துக் கொள்ளப்படுவதில்லை. அந்த அளவிற்கு, இவர்கள் பொதுவான பிராம்மணர்களிலிருந்து, தனிப்பட்டவர்களாக இருக்கிறார்கள்.)"


வைணவக் கோவில்களில்

"வைஷ்ணவக் கோவில்களில், இரண்டு வகை உண்டு. ஒன்று - வைகானஸ முறையைப் பின்பற்றுகிற கோவில்கள்; மற்றொன்று - பாஞ்சராத்ர முறையைப் பின்பற்றுகிற கோவில்கள்; இதில் வைகானஸ முறை கோவில்களில் வைகானஸ பிரிவினர்தான் அர்ச்சகர்கள் (வைஷ்ணவ கோவில்களில், இவர்கள் பட்டாச்சாரியர்கள் என்று அழைக்கப்படுகின்றனர்) ஆக முடியும். பாஞ்சராத்ர வழிமுறையில் அமைந்துள்ள கோவில்களில், அந்த ஆகமம் மூன்று நிலைகளைக் கூறுகிறது; இவற்றில் மூன்றாவது நிலையில் எந்தப் பிரிவினர் வேண்டுமானாலும் தகுதி பெற்று பூஜை செய்யலாம்; முதல் இரண்டு நிலைகளில் முடியாது….."


மற்ற கோவில்களில்

"... ஆங்காங்கே வேறு சில வழிமுறைகளைப் பின்பற்றுகிற கோவில்களும் பல உண்டு. சிதம்பரம் நடராஜர் கோவிலில் 'பதஞ்சலி பூஜாஸூத்ரம்' விதிக்கிற வழிமுறைகள் பின்பற்றப்படுகின்றன; அங்கு தீட்சிதர்கள் தவிர வேறு யாரும் கர்ப்பக்கிரஹத்தினுள் போக முடியாது; மத குருமார்களாக இருந்தாலும் சரி, பெரிய ஆச்சார்யராக இருந்தாலும் சரி, அவர்களுக்கும் அனுமதி கிடையாது. மேல்மலையனூர் கோவிலில் பிராம்மணரல்லாத 'பர்வத ராஜ' குலத்தினர்தான் அர்ச்சகர்கள்; மற்றவர்களுக்கு உரிமை கிடையாது. கேரளத்தில், 'பரசுராம கல்பஸூத்ரம்' என்ற நூல் விதித்திருப்பவைதான் வழிமுறை...."


ஆகமமும் சிவாச்சாரியார்களும்

"..... ஆகம சாத்திரத்தின்படி பிரதிஷ்டை நடந்து, கும்பாபிஷேகம் செய்யப்பட்டு, ஆகம விதிமுறைகளின் படியே பூஜைகள் நடத்தப்படுகிற கோவில்களில், ஆகமத்தில் சொல்லியுள்ளபடி சிவாச்சார்யார்களே அர்ச்சகர்கள் ஆக முடியும்; மற்றவர்கள் யாராவது - பிராம்மணர்கள் உட்பட - கர்ப்பக்கிரஹத்தினுள் நுழைந்தாலும் சரி, விக்ரஹத்தைத் தீண்டினாலும் சரி, பூஜை நடத்தினாலும் சரி, புனிதம் கெடும்; பிராயச்சித்தங்கள் செய்ய வேண்டும்.....

அர்ச்சகர் பெற்றிருக்கிற உரிமை 'பரார்த்த பூஜை'; அதாவது மற்றவர்களுக்காக செய்கிற பூஜை. இதைச் செய்ய சிவாச்சார்யார்கள் தவிர, வேறு எவருக்கும் - அவர் எவ்வளவு உயர்ந்த கல்வி, வேத ஞானம், சாத்திர அறிவு, பக்தி எல்லாவற்றையும் பெற்றிருந்தாலும் சரி - உரிமை கிடையாது. இது ஆகம விதி. சிவாச்சார்யார் குலத்தில் பிறந்திருந்தால் மட்டும் போதாது; ஸ்ம்ஸ்க்ருத அறிவு; வேதங்களைப் பயின்றிருத்தல்; ஆகமங்களை முழுமையாக அறிந்திருத்தல்; தர்ம சாத்திரம், மற்றும் கிரியா சாத்திரம் ஆகியவற்றில் நிபுணத்துவம்; சைவ சித்தாந்த தத்துவ ஞானம்; ஆசாரங்களை கடைப்பிடித்தல்; தீட்சை பெற்றிருத்தல்; சைவ மந்திரம், முத்திரைகள், கிரியை முதலியன பற்றிய அறிவு; மீமாம்ஸை, வியாகரணம், தர்க்க சாத்திரம் ஆகியவை பற்றிய அறிவு.... என்று பல தகுதிகளைப் பெற்றிருக்க வேண்டும்; அப்படிப்பட்டவர்கள்தான் அர்ச்சகர் ஆக முடியும். இவை அனைத்தையும் பெற்றிருந்தாலும், சிவாச்சார்யார் தவிர வேறு யாரும் அர்ச்சகர் ஆக முடியாது....."



குமுதம் ரிப்போர்ட்டர் (28.5.2006):

தி.மு.க. அரசின் முதல் அமைச்சரவைக் கூட்டத்தில் முடிவான 'எல்லா சாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகராகலாம்' என்கிற முடிவிற்கு தமிழ் நாடு அர்ச்சகர்கள் சங்கம் கடும் எதிர்ப்புத் தெரிவிக்கிறது. இதுபற்றி அர்ச்சகர்கள் சங்க மாநிலத் துணைச் செயலாளரும் சங்கரன் கோயிலைச் சேர்ந்தவருமான மணிபட்டர் கூறியதாவது:

"...."எல்லா சாதியினருக்கும் அர்ச்சகர் பதவி என்று சட்டம் கொண்டு வந்தால், அர்ச்சகர் பதவிக்குப் புதிதாய் ஆட்கள் சேர்க்கப்படுவார்கள். அப்படியென்றால் இதை நம்பியே பிழைப்பு நடத்தும் 1.80 லட்சம் பேரின் கதி என்ன? கோயில்களில் பூஜை நடத்துவது எங்களின் ஜீவாதார உரிமை. அந்தக் காலத்தில் அரசர்கள் எங்களை தமிழ்நாட்டுக்கு அழைச்சிக்கிட்டு வந்திருக்காங்க. முறைப்படி கோயில்களில் பூஜை செய்யணுங்குறதுக்காக, எங்களை நியமிச்சிருக்காங்க. எங்களுக்குச் சம்பளம் கிடையாது. அதுக்குப் பதிலா அரசர்களே விவசாய நிலம் தந்திருக்காங்க. இதற்கான செப்புப் பட்டயம் எங்ககிட்ட இருக்கு.

சாதாரணமா யாரும் எளிதில் அர்ச்சகர் ஆக முடியாது. எல்லாப் பிராமணனும் அர்ச்சகர் இல்லை. பிராமணன் வேறே, அர்ச்சகர் வேறே. அதை எல்லோரும் புரிஞ்சிக்கணும். ஒரு பிராமின் வங்கி, ஆபீசுகளில் வேலை பார்ப்பான். அர்ச்சகர் வேலை பார்ப்பதில்லை.

குடுமி, கடுக்கண் வைத்துக் கொண்டு எங்கே போய் வேலை பார்ப்பது? கோயிலில் பூஜை செய்வதைத் தவிர, அர்ச்சகருக்கு வேறு தொழில் தெரியாது. எட்டு வயதில் பூணூல் கல்யாணம், அதைத் தொடர்ந்து ஐந்து ஆண்டுகள் வேத ஆகம கல்லூரிகள் படிப்பு. இதற்காக பிள்ளையார்பட்டி, அல்லூர், மாயவரம், தர்மபுரம் உள்ளிட்ட 21 இடங்களில் வேத ஆகம கல்லூரிகள் இருக்கு. இப்படி வேத ஆகமங்களைக் கற்றறிந்தவர்கள்தான் அர்ச்சகர் ஆக முடியும். சாதாரணமா எல்லோரும் அர்ச்சகர் ஆக முடியாது.

இப்போது அரசு, எல்லா சாதியினரையும் அர்ச்சகரா நியமனம் செஞ்சா, எங்களுக்கு மாற்று வேலை என்ன? அ.தி.மு.க. ஆட்சியில் சாலைப் பணியாளர்களுக்கு ஏற்பட்ட கதிதானா?....

அமைச்சரவை முடிவைத் தொடர்ந்து, கடந்த 17-ம் தேதி சென்னையில் சோ தலைமையில் ஒரு கூட்டம் நடைபெற்றது. அப்போது தமிழில் அர்ச்சனை, எல்லா சாதிக்கும் அர்ச்சகர் பதவி ஆகியவை பற்றி விரிவாய் விவாதிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கிறது. அமைச்சரவை முடிவை மட்டும் வைத்துக்கொண்டு ஒன்றும் செய்ய முடியாது. அது சட்ட வடிவில் வந்தால் தானே கோர்ட்டுக்குப் போக முடியும். எனவே, பொறுத்திருந்து பார்ப்போம் என்று அப்போது முடிவெடுக்கப்பட்டது" என்றார் மணிபட்டர்....

எல்லா சாதியினருக்கும் அர்ச்சகர் பதவி என்று அமைச்சரவை கூடி முடிவெடுத்த மாத்திரத்திலேயே அர்ச்சகர்கள் அனைவரும் வீடுகளில் சீக்ரெட்டாய் 108 காயத்திரி ஜெபம் செய்ய வேண்டும் என்று வேண்டுகோள் விடுக்கப்பட்டது. அதிகாலையில் கணவனும், மனைவியும் இந்த ஜெபம் செய்வோம். 'ஆட்சியாளர்களுக்கு நல்ல புத்தியைக் கொடு' என்று ஜெபம் செய்வோம். இதன் மூலம் அதர்மம் அழியும், தர்மம் வெல்லும் என்பது எங்கள் நம்பிக்கை. இதைத் தமிழ்நாடு முழுக்க உள்ள அர்ச்சகர்கள் தினமும் செய்து வருகிறார்கள். தவிர, ஜபஹோம கண்ணீர் அஞ்சலியும் செய்ய வேண்டும் என்று அறிவுறுத்தப்பட்டிருக்கிறது. அதாவது, சிவபெருமானின் சன்னதியில் இந்தச் சட்டத்தினால் நமக்கு ஏற்படும் துன்பங்கள் பற்றிச் சொல்லி, கண்ணீர் விட்டு அழுவதே இந்த ஜெப ஹோம கண்ணீர் அஞ்சலி ஆகும். எங்களின் இந்தக் கண்ணீர் வீண் போகாது' என்றார்."


Related blogs:

Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood (18 June 2005)


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Sen-sing the future of Hindus

As someone who marshals the right combination of words, thoughts and biases (pre-dispositions) to easily pass for a Hindutva ideologue, Dr Gautam Sen laments the non-intellectualism of Hindu activists like the RSS.

In his latest online essay titled ‘The uncertain future of Hindus ’ (click here), Dr Sen is calling out to Hindus to transcend “parochial consciousness” and adopt a larger “national perspective”.

Casting his eyes beyond national boundaries, the online-essayist warns that the religions of Islam and Christianity are competitively engaged “in the race for world conquest and domination”. In the face of such a threat, which will not respect India’s borders, the distinguished academic is understandably concerned about the intellectual deficiencies of what he refers to as “the Hindu movement” (which must be a new name coined for 'Hindutva'):

“….. the Hindu movement is simply not intellectually equipped to deal with the complex situation Hindus face today….. And too many people in the movement remain ignorant about basic issues in the wider world, wielding organisational clout to silence serious intellectual criticism.”

But the essayist disappoints by NOT being able to shed the blinkers of bias and prejudice he seems to wear, and also surprises by betraying a level of ignorance one would not expect from a person of his academic standing.

We will examine below some of the viewpoints expressed in his essay.


Blinkered vision and the fracturing of community

The essayist’s field of vision is broad enough to take notice of atrocities committed against Hindus, within and without India, as can be seen from his decrying them as follows:

“….Their ethnic cleansing from Jammu & Kashmir continues unabated and the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh remains desperate…”

However, the essayist’s visual field seems to be an overly narrow one as it leaves out the Hindus of Sri Lanka whose sufferings are no less – in fact, far worse – than the plight of those in Jammu & Kashmir and Bangladesh. The cause of such blinkered or filtered vision must be his Hindutva conditioning!


Preserving privilege and ignorance

On the other hand, the essayist shocks by a surprising display of selective amnesia (or historical ignorance) when he says:

“Even so-called ‘backwards’ develop a more national sense of their being once they are educated beyond high school; actually two years in higher education seems to do it. This is why the disgraceful HRD minister wants reservations in premier institutions, but is careful to ensure that little education takes place at lower levels at all; nearly nil in much of UP state schools, for example.”

This is how education got derailed in post-Independence India: whilst communist China went for universal basic education, socialist India focused on elite institutions like IITs only to train students for jobs in America and elsewhere!

China was keeping faith with its Confucian tradition of emphasis on education; but India’s successive governments (including that led by BJP), hijacked by the brown sahibs who replaced the white sahibs, paid secret homage to Kautilya by grossly neglecting basic education for its teeming millions.

For further discussion, click on previous blog titles listed below:

Kautilya’s hidden influence on post-Independence India? (February 21, 2006)

India's economy & social justice: responding to Ngiam Tong Dow (July 24, 2005)


Deflecting disgrace

The professorial essayist derides the “disgraceful HRD minister” for wanting reservations in premier institutions (read, IITs and IIMs) (Note 1)

Somehow it escapes the essayist, a political economist, that the real disgrace is rooted in the fact that, even after six decades of independence, the Indian minister responsible for education is being forced into undertaking stopgap measures of rationing out the privilege of higher education (called ‘reservation’) because of (i) severe scarcity (of seats), and (ii) the fact that millions of aspiring Indians, not privileged by birth or money, did not have their fair chance of quality education to acquire the ‘merit’ for admission and as determined by fiercely competitive entrance exams.

It is about time that Tamil Nadu – the spring of the Dravidian social justice movement and Thirukkural (the anti-thesis of Manusmrti and Kautilya’s Arthasastra) - should speak out forcefully on this matter to drive some sense into the likes of Dr Sen and, of course, the striking doctors and protesting students.


Re-constituting India’s politics

The essayist is proposing that India’s Constitution should be amended to pave the way for a Presidential system of government in place of the current parliamentary system of government.

It would be difficult to take him seriously when he seems so ignorant or muddled or both about what really ails India’s education.

In addition, one has to also worry about the essayist’s sense of judgement when he seems to be having the legal troubles of the “Kanchi Acharya” in mind when portraying "elected political leaders" as seeking "to crush" one of the “supreme spiritual leaders" of Hindus. If one were to heed the essayist's call for greater intellectual consciousness amongst Hindus, we may be risking questions like: Who (s)elected the “Kanchi Acharya” ? Who or what does the "Kanchi Acharya" represent ?

The fundamental cause of India’s problem is NOT too much DEMOCRACY, but too little, as eloquently explained by Mr P Chidambaram (currently India’s Finance Minister):

India's economy & social justice: responding to Ngiam Tong Dow (July 24, 2005)


Kautilyan subversion

A pre-condition for democracy is an educated citizenry.

It is NOT India’s Constitution, but nearly six decades of Kautilyan subversion of the intent and purpose of the Constitution that denied (quality) education to hundreds of millions of young Indians.

It is this very same Kautilyan subversion that is the single major cause behind the current mess and weakness in many sectors of India’s economy.

Note 1: (to be filled)


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Band-aid approach to the Sri Lankan ethnic conflict

Just as foreign aid and international financial institutions (IFIs), like the IMF, have made a mess of many economies of developing countries with weak governments without a mind and will of their own, the international community – in its role as a third-party mediator - is about to drive Sri Lanka, once again, over the brink into a deep political abyss.

The decision of the European Union (EU) to ban the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) portends to be a step in this direction. The EU’s behaviour reminds one of the all-too-familiar caricature of the police station inspector in Indian cinema who ‘solves’ a dispute / crime by hushing up the victim (or victim’s relative / witness), who rushes into the police post to report a theft, murder or rape, before or after (mis-)recording a FIR (First Information Report).

The record of the international community in, for instance, Iraq is a sorry one, to say the least, with yet another key coalition partner - Italy’s new Prime Minister Romano Prodi - now being forced into admitting the folly (Note 1). The disconnect between the international community and ground reality is once again showing in the latest EU decision regarding Sri Lanka which basically faults the LTTE and exonerates the Sri Lankan government, thus seeming to apply starkly different standards of conduct to the parties in conflict.

Too many innocent lives have been maimed and lost on both sides of the conflict for far too long.

Instead, a nation that combines the traditions of Buddha’s Dhamma and Thiruvalluvar’s aRam could have made more sense of its independence from colonial rule by articulating an alternative to the excessively materialistic, self-centred, greed-driven, consumption-based Western economic model. (Note 2)

What could have been the nearest thing to paradise on earth is turning into ever more of a cesspool.

Inept moves by the international community can only worsen the situation.

Years of bloody and brutal conflict have only served to both expose and entrench the roots or fundamentals of the problem: it is whether and how two nations (or nationhoods) can be contained within one state.

The stopgap, band-aid approach of ban and freeze (of assets) is not likely to be helpful as it will only address the symptom, not the cause.


Note 1:

Prodi calls for Iraq withdrawal
Thursday, 18 May 2006

"We consider the war and occupation in Iraq a grave error that hasn't solved - but has complicated - the problem of security," Mr Prodi said.


Note 2: (added on 23 May 06)

When Buddhism was a bridge between Lanka and Tamil Nadu
Hindustan Times
May 22, 2006
“The fascinating story of the historical links between the Buddhists of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka was narrated by Dr S Pathmanathan, Professor of History at the University of Peradeniya, in his Fourth Vesak Commemoration Lecture delivered under the auspices of the Deputy High Commission of Sri Lanka at Chennai on May 14.”


Related reports:

EU outlaws Tigers as terrorists
The Times (London)
20 May 2006
THE European Union has agreed to blacklist Tamil Tiger separatists as a terrorist group, despite warnings that this could lead to full-blown civil war in Sri Lanka......The agreement in principle, which was cloaked in secrecy until now, will be formally adopted by EU ministers on May 29.

The Critical Situation in Sri Lanka
20 May 2006
Open Letter to British Prime Minister Tony Blair
Brian Senewiratne (Dr)
Patron of the Campaign for Truth and Justice

Tigers lose advantage gained at Geneva Talks
20 May 2006
D.B.S. Jeyaraj


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Agamism, not Hinduism

The Six Great Traditions of Hinduism
(by Pathmarajah Nagalingam, owner of www.siddha.com.my)


1. Two Literary Traditions

There are two Literary Traditions in Hinduism in which original Hindu teachings have been recorded: the Sanskrit Tradition and the Tamil Tradition. (There is a third Pali Tradition but it focuses on Buddhism only). Of these three traditions, only Tamil is still a living tradition whereas Sanskrit and Pali are dead for all practical purposes.

Most Hindus are not aware that the Tamil texts are equally voluminous as the Sanskrit texts and some parts are thought to be as ancient as the Rig Veda although admittedly most of these old texts have been lost. These Tamil texts are even more profound in its universalist and all encompassing views covering not just Hindus but all mankind, all life as many of you are already aware.

The Tamil texts are approximately half of Hindu literary-shastras. Only now are Hindu scholars beginning to realise this, that all this while half of Hindu shastras are not known to most Hindu scholars, swamis and acharyas in this last century as it is in Tamil. In the last hundred years, most scholars and swamis wrote about Hinduism knowing only about one-half or less of its shastric heritage.

Tamil literature is still growing. More has probably been written on Hinduism in Tamil in the last 300 years compared to Sanskrit and all other vernacular languages in the last 1,000 years! Imagine that.

( Check it out. Here is a part listings of modern Tamil writings at http://www.geocities.com/athens/5180/chrono2.html and be mesmerised by a glimpse of the the extent of growing Hindu shastric heritage!)

2. Two Shastric Traditions

Two bodies of texts govern Hinduism as revealed scripture or shruti; the Vedas and the Agamas, and both are in Sanskrit. The Vedas are well known and is fire-ritual based worship or homas.

The Agamas are far more voluminous (28 Saiva plus 77 Shakta plus 215 Vaishnava texts, PLUS their upa Agamas) than the entire Vedas and all other smirthis together, but nobody knows much about the Agamas or quote from it. This is because it was entirely written by South Indians and maintained entirely in South India, and that it was written in the grantha script, not brahmi, nagari or devanagiri. Grantha is old Tamil script!

Have a look at grantha at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grantha and convince yourselves once and for all of the centrality of Tamil to Hinduism, and NOT Sanskrit.

In other words the Agamas were verbalised in Sanskrit and written in Tamil.

Herein lies the symbiosis of these two great literary and shastric traditions.

Today, Hinduism all over the subcontinent is based on the Agamas, and is not Vedic as Vivekananda too observed. Agama worship is temple, home altar worship, temple ceremonies, holy days and festivals, birth-to-death sacraments, etc. which is what Hinduism is today. While there are commonalities in Agama and Veda worldviews, they are poles apart in rituals. Even more telling is that they are unambiguous and specific in their teachings, unlike the Vedas.

We might as well call our religion the 'Agama Religion' rather than 'Hinduism' which is an Iranian corrupt and now an English word, or even 'Sanathana Dharma' which is a description and not a name, and besides it contains the word 'dharma' which can quite easily be extrapolated to include Varnashrama. I'm wary of that. So we, the followers are 'Agamists'.

However the Agamas are only now being translated into English and will soon be available to scholars.

3. Two Sectarian Traditions

The two great living sectarian traditions are Saivism and Vaishnavism which are embodied in the above four traditions. Of course there are many other traditions, like Shaktism which is related to Saivism, as well as Smarthaism which is related to all the preceding three in its practice, as well as hundreds of other sampradayas and vernacular traditions.

Conclusion

The non availability of Tamil and Agama texts in English is what led Hinduism to be presented in an unbalanced and distorted way to the Westerners as well as the modern Hindus who have been blinded to believe that there is varna in the religion, and it is benign. There is no varna system in Saivism or even in Shaktiism. There is 'supposed' to be no varna in Vaishnavism. (If only they realised that their own saints sang contradictory teachings to those contained in the Varnashrama texts, the BG and SB. That would have to be dealt with separately).

Now what shall we think of the writers from Mueller to Vivekananda right down to Sivananda and everyone in between and after, who studied and wrote based on half the literary traditions, then half of the shastric traditions? Their views as well as those of the Western Indologists was based on about one-third of Hindu heritage, an incomplete, unbalanced and less informed view.

Of interest to us here is that there is no varna in the Tamil and Agama traditions which comprise two-thirds of Hindu heritage, and perhaps our objectives and concerns were, well, unfounded.

If Hinduism was properly and proportionately presented in the first instance varna would have little or no place in Hinduism. The proper and balanced presentation of The Agama Religion would be our goal now, and in that process show the world that our religion, Agamism, is universalist, humane and egalitarian. It always has been!

So it is time for scholars and swamis to study Tamil if they want to know about Hinduism. Reading all those English commentaries and analysis of Hinduism is useless. Its 'garbage in, garbage out' for we already know its only a small part and that too a misinterpretation of Hinduism.

They still have to study Tamil script if they want to read Sanskrit texts! How about that! If not they are not knowledgeable about Hinduism.

This blows away 200 years of Hindu scholarship.

(originally published in akandabaratam@yahoogroups.com on 31 March 2006)

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Prof Elst's muddled defence of 'caste'

An old essay by Prof Koenraad Elst (Hinduism Today, Sep 1994) re-surfaced recently in some e-mail groups. The essay (click here) had been presented as the “verdict from Belgium” on the Hindu caste system: that “for the most part” Hinduism has been “helped rather than hurt”.

More than justifying the above “verdict”, the essay actually shows up the Professor as confused and confusing. It was following the above essay that the Professor is known to have completed a doctoral thesis with the Catholic University of Leuven in 1998, based on which a book titled Decolonizing the Hindu Mind: Ideological Development of Hindu Revivalism was published in 2001 (Note 1).

Prof Elst’s defence of the Hindu caste system reminds one of Dr Annie Besant who served as its apologist during the formative years of India’s Congress Party, which Periyar and others (including Subhash Chandra Bose) would quit, in later years (when Gandhiji had assumed leadership), in disappointment that the Party was being hijacked by the upper castes or ‘vested interests’. Annie Besant’s alignment with the Brahminists led to such perverse arguments as: “here [in India] as well as in Britain they [the lower classes] are a menace to civilisation and were undermining the fine fabric of society….. the danger to the country was not as many imagined from educated India but from these poor miserable classes” (New India, 13 Sep 1915). Besant also believed that an untouchable had to work out his karma in this life in the hope of breaking free from the shackles of untouchability in some future life (Note 2).

Let’s now examine the logic of Prof Elst’s arguments in his abovesaid essay.

1. For instance, Elst asserts:

“…… Everyone is a shudra by birth. Boys become dwija, twice-born, or member of one of the three upper varnas upon receiving the sacred thread in the upanayana ceremony."

a) This Professor is NOT saying how are these boys – who are ALL supposedly born shudra - selected to become ‘dwija’ or twice-born, i.e. to become a member of one of three upper varnas. He seems to be hoping that his reader will be ignorant of the fact that it is only those who are born into one of these three upper ‘dwija’ varnas who will get to receive “the sacred thread in the upanayan ceremony”, thereby being pronounced dwija or twice-born. This learned Professor is simply obscuring the fact that the distinction of being born again (or born twice) is not earned by individual merit but is derived by birth. In making such a presentation, he is either NOT being truthful OR plainly muddled.

b) The Professor also paraphrases the Purushasukta, the creation myth of Brahmanism that might have been interpolated into the RigVeda, as follows:

"….. The youngest part of the Rg-Veda describes four classes: learned brahmins born from Brahma's mouth, martial kshatriya-born from his arms; vaishya entrepreneurs born from His hips and shudra workers born from His feet."

This blinkered Professor seems NOT to care that the above creation story leaves out the origin of those (sub-)humans – the millions of outcastes - who do not belong to any of the four castes of caturvarna (or classes, as he calls, consistent with Hindutva’s revisionist terminology). If these out-of-castes (or outcastes) could not have emanated from Brahma (or, some celestial / primordial being), where else could they have emerged from?

c) Though one may not be impressed by the Professor’s display of knowledge and logic, one cannot fail to recognize that he had mastered the circularity (endless looping) of the home-bred Brahmanists.

2. This Professor, who would himself count as a “mlechha” in the Manusmriti conception of society, offers another muddled opinion about history:

"….The varna system expanded from the Saraswati-Yamuna area and got firmly established in the whole of Aryavarta (Kashmir to Vidarbha, Sindh to Bihar). It counted as a sign of superior culture setting the arya, civilized, heartland apart from the surrounding mleccha, barbaric, lands. In Bengal and the South, the system was reduced to a distinction between brahmins and shudras."

He seems to be lamentably ignorant of the fact that civilization (e.g. the Indus Valley Civilization) existed across the Indian landmass well before the marauding nomads arrived to set up aryavarta.

It seems that Professors like him practically stop learning (about some matters) after they complete school. That shows up in his view of Indian history through the ‘narrow-angle lens’ with which (mentally) he must have graduated some decades earlier. So much water would have flowed through the Thames (rather, the Meuse and the Schelde of Belgium) since then, but he seems to have absorbed little by way of new knowledge.

3. This Professor completes his exposition on Hindu caste(ism) without any mention of the Manusmriti, the source document of Varnashrama Dharma that sets out the four-fold caste order of Brahmanism but based on a fraudulent claim of Vedic authority. Why?

a) It is like finishing a talk on evolution theory without at all mentioning Charles Darwin and his ‘Origin of Species’.

b) At least the VHP was mindful of the Manusmriti in its recent rejection of the Varnashrama Dharma, though it still fought shy of full admission and contrition by prevaricating clumsily: "supposedly written in Manusmrithi" (see VHP rejects `varnashrama', seeks end to untouchability, The Hindu 20 March 2006).

4. Elst refers to the existence of classes in other societies: "In Europe and elsewhere, there was (or still is) a hierarchical distinction between noblemen and commoners, with nobility only marrying nobility." Apparently, he does not understand the difference between the Hindu castes or caste system (as codified by the Manusmriti) and the Western classes or class system. He may benefit from some explanation in:
Social inequalities: the Varnashramic difference


5. Elst’s credits (at the end of his abovesaid essay) include the following disclosure:

"…. Between 1988 and 1993 he spent much of his time in India doing research at the prestigious Banaras Hindu University."

It appears that his research in India did not lift him from ignorance, instead only deepened his prejudice.

Prof Elst also appears to be one of those so-called scholars of Hinduism who know next to nothing about the extant literature in Tamil pertaining to the oldest (Dravidian) tradition of Hinduism. It is literature that will easily match, if not exceed, in volume and quality what exists in Sanskrit. Yet such scholars boldly hold forth on a subject they are ignorant by half, only to turn out as muddled and worse.


Note 1: see Note 7 of Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood

Note 2: Geetha, V. and Rajadurai, S.V., Towards a Non-Brahmin Millenium (1998), p.20-21.


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

‘Dharma’ versus ‘தருமம்’

I have always had a big mental tussle over what goes by the label 'Dharma' ever since I first came to understand the real scriptural (Vedic) meaning of the word (in Sanskrit). Till then, I had mistakenly believed that it was merely the Sanskrit equivalent of the Tamil word 'tharmam' (or, more correctly, 'tharumam' - 'தருமம்') and bearing the same meaning.

Most of my generation would have first drawn the meaning of the Tamil 'tharumam' not from any dictionary (how troublesome!) but from the popular Tamil cinema lyric 'tharumam thalai kaakum..... ' (தருமம் தலை காக்கும்), made famous by our great MGR! It meant being charitable, compassionate and doing good. In that sense, it falls within the scope of aRam (அறம்) expounded by Aiyyan Thiruvalluvar.

But it would dawn upon me only much later that the Vedic 'Dharma' is NOT the same as Tamil 'tharumam'. In fact, Dharma - as Varnashrama Dharma – turns out to be shockingly discriminatory and socially divisive in the way it conceives, structures and administers duty and justice in society.

Even a great treatise like the Bhagavad Gita is convoluted by the need to weave into it the centrality of Dharma (Note 3). Apparently, the same has been the compulsion of all Sanskritic epics and puranas; perhaps, the Upanishads are the only exceptions.

Mahatma Gandhi was straining himself to explain why he was drawing a message of NON-VIOLENCE from the Gita: I didn't understand Gandhiji when I first read him, and I still don't (obviously, I must not have been evolving during all these intervening years!). Perhaps, it is President Bush who is the most evolved soul around today, seeming to have taken to heart Gita's message of non-violence: he bombed Baghdad without anger in his heart AND with detachment (he only wanted to spread democracy & save the world - and, of course, the oilfields - from the terrorists) AND it is next the turn of Iran for some lesson in Bushite non-violence!

IF Dharma falls, as it will AND must for the sake of India and the people of India, it will be Brahmanism / Vedism that will collapse with it. If the Brahmanists/Sanskritists have any sense left in them, they must quickly do some serious soul-searching. It would be laughable to blame India’s encounters with Islam and the British colonialists for the obnoxious caste system, as some Hindutva writers have been doing of late (click here), either out of sheer desperation or massive confusion. For their part, the adherents / inheritors of the Tamil/Dravidian tradition of Hinduism (Note 1) would have to extricate from the Sanskrit texts those parts that are consistent with their (non-varnashramic) tradition (Note 2).


Note 1:

The oldest tradition of Hinduism is characteristically Tamilian / Dravidian, comprising Saivism and Maliyam / Vaishnavism, and precedes Vedism. There are two major disconnects between the Dravidian and Vedic traditions of Hinduism: in terms of doctrine (Varnashramam) and ritual (yagam / yajna). The doctrinal split is the worse of the two, fundamental and unbridgeable.


Note 2:

Mr Pathmarajah Nagalingam ( owner of website www.siddha.com.my ) writes in akandabaratam@yahoogroups.com (13 March 2006) as follows:

"......Most of varnashrama is in the smirthis, which I call the 'varnashrama texts'. The idea is to delink, to separate the shruti from the smirthis. Without the smirthis; that is, the manu shastras and itihasas as well as all late puranas, then Hinduism is varna free!

There are a few sutras, probably about 7 or 8, in the vedas and upanishads that seems to support varna. These 'must have been' later additions, interpolations or misinterpretations - because for every varna sutra in the vedas, we can show ten others that defy such thinking.

To me the vedas and upanishads are clearly saivite texts and not anything else, no matter what other sectarians may wish to see or trace their origins to. Seen in a non sectarian light, it is a very 'saivite' document as it is all encompassing. Besides it quite clearly says the vedas were given by Lord Rudra to Brahma. So its our heritage.

The smirthis are not our heritage."


Note 3: (inserted 14 March 2006)

1. There is no question about the depth and profundity of the Gita. But my anguish and quarrel is over the fact that all of the spell-binding exposition by Lord Krishna turns out - in the final analysis - to be directed towards buttressing the cruel ideology of Varnashramam. It is as if the All-Knowing Lord has willingly (as he is All-Knowing, it canNOT be UNwittingly) become the mouthpiece of a socially divisive and oppressive ideology. It is not unlike talented journalists (even researchers) today who get ‘hired’, ‘commissioned’ or ‘embedded’ by governments or corporate interests to promote a certain cause or line of thinking in their writings.

2. The fundamental difference between the Hindu castes and the classes of other societies (e.g. Western) is set out in an earlier post Social inequalities: the Varnashramic difference. And in the face of the volumes that the Manusmrti talks about varna (caste), how could we hope to escape the odium of castes by merely re-naming them as classes?

3. Gita’s Krishna Himself says that it would be better to perform one’s (inherited) duty badly than perform some other duty excellently. How could one go along with that line of reasoning. Or is this an interpolation? If so, let us take out such interpolations (or, mark them out as worthy of repudiation) so that the Gita will not serve to buttress Varnashramam.


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

European scholars of Tamil versus Sankritists

One cannot resist comparing what many European scholars and Christian missionaries (Note 1) have done for the Tamil language with the damage the home-based Sanskritists have inflicted upon the Tamil language over many centuries before the Europeans arrived, and even thereafter.

In order to salvage Tamil from its Sanskritic corruption (manipravaalam) (Note 2), Maraimalai Adigal launched the Thani Thamizh Iyakkam in the face of great opposition from the Sanskritists. The Tamil we have today and that has been recognized as a classical language (also click here) - with the distinction of being also a living language – indeed owes much to the collective effort of these European / Christian scholars and a series of indigenous Tamil scholars, including Maraimalai Adigal.

The European scholars who were also mostly Christian missionaries took the pain to learn Tamil and its literature so as to, first, understand the cultural makeup and impulses of the people, and then preach the Christian faith in the language of the people (or, what the colonialists referred to condescendingly as the ‘vernacular’). In the process, by sharing and contributing, they helped to re-vitalize the language of the people. Their works marked the beginning of what has come to be recognized as the era of Tamil Renaissance (Note 1).

The mentality of the Sanskritists had been the polar opposite. It was always about appropriation, marginalisation and obliteration. Sanskrit was itself artificially constructed to make it unintelligible to the ordinary people. Pre-existing knowledge / texts in the language(s) of the people were all imported / translated into Sanskrit. The ablest amongst the natives/indigenes were inducted into the folds of the caste system, specifically into its priesthood, as were the kings but who were subordinated to the priesthood as Rajanyas / Kshatriyas. Existing records of knowledge in the people’s language(s) were allowed to decay or disappear, through neglect or design. Education was increasingly de-emphasised for the ordinary people: to be codified as a prohibition under the karma-Dharma of Manusmrti. Wherever the priesthood intruded, the temple deities themselves were distanced from the language of the people.

By gradually establishing Sanskrit as the language for intellectual and religious discourse, Sanskrit became the link language of the educated or the elite / upper class – not unlike Latin in the past (in old Europe) and English today. This could only lead to the impoverishment of the language of the people.

A further detriment suffered by the language of the people was through excessive infusion of Sanskrit words. If it had been limited to the addition of essential new words or new roots, that would have been legitimate and enriching: all languages grow by selective borrowings, including Sanskrit (which has thousands of Tamil / Dravidian language roots). What actually happened was a massive onslaught that led to the unnecessary displacement of even existing and effective words in the Tamil language on a large scale. It is this Sanskritization of the Tamil language that led to its fragmentation into languages like Malayalam, etc. centuries ago. Of more recent times, as late as the early 20th century, we encounter an exceedingly corrupt form of Tamil called ‘manipravaalam’ (Note 2).

Thanks to Maramalai Adigal and the Thani Thamizh Iyakkam, we have a Tamil language today that would be unrecognizable to the manipravaalites. It is these exponents of Thani Thamizh that writer Jayakanthan had recently dared to deride, only to be met by swift and decisive condemnation. It is this Tamil language – salvaged through so much arduous and untiring effort - that has now gone on to earn formal recognition as a classical language. If Tamil had remained stuck in its past corrupt 'manipravaalam' form, this distinction would have eluded her forever. The Tamil world owes eternal gratitude to Maramalai Adigal and such others.

Having come this far, the Tamil language faces a new danger today through the mindless, indiscriminate and unnecessary importation of English words, AND the neglect she suffers in education and governance in the state of Tamil Nadu.

(adaptation & elaboration of my earlier two posts on GT@yahoogroups.com on 17 Sep 2005)

Note 1:

The Contribution of European Scholars to Tamil, by Dr K Meenakshisundram (International Institute of Tamil Studies), University of Madras (1974):


“In the history of Tamil literature the advent of European interest is indisputably a landmark. This era can be considered as the initial beginning for the Tamil Renaissance. It was a reawakening of flagging interest and drowsy talent to the inexhaustible mine of literature and literary capacities.

Before the advent of European scholars into the domain of Tamil literature, prose in the language had been a mere rivulet compared to the vast ocean of Tamil poetry……

Tamil was exposed to the all-permeating influence of Sanskrit. Almost all was either attributed to her or to her dominating influence. She (Tamil) was entangled with Sanskrit and it was left to European scholars to detach her from that gnawing hold when creative Tamil literary activity had nearly reached an impasse and channel her in her own individual courses.

The ways that were paved for subsequent native following, the torches they lit to enlighten those ways, the western methods they profitably introduced and the long vistas opened up for future speculation and research by European scholars form a golden chapter in the history of Tamil literature….. Any study of Tamil literature is irremovably entwined with the perpetual stamps they have left behind. No study of it can be complete, devoid of an honest and candid appreciation of them. They retrieved for us the glories of our past literature, they reawakened in us the sparks of lively interest and they introduced us to the great scientific strides of the west….. Some Catholic Missionaries on arriving in India adopted either Tamil or Indianised names and became known by them. Protestant Missionaries on the contrary gave foreign names to native converts……. These scholars came from many nations – Italy, Portugal, Denmark, Scotland etc., and the influence each different environment had on its respective scholar is interesting and important.

…….. History has never been a fertile soil for Indian minds. History was shrouded by legends and myths, and facts were distorted beyond recognition. It was only after European scholars commenced their labours that a taste for history developed. Their innumerable but regular letters have become the skeletons around which the history of Tamilnad was constructed. These letters depicted conditions prevailing in Tamilnad during those days. It was around these letters that many history books of Tamilnad were written like “The Nayaks of Madura”……” (p.1 -3)


“….. Torn by domestic quarrels and internal strife, perpetually threatened by the Moghuls and other northern forces, frequently ravaged by famine and diseases and devastated by daring robbers, the history of South India was one of turmoil and chaos from the 16th century onwards. In that era of vicissitudes and oscillating alliances, the foreign missionaries had to toil amidst great obstacles (to) advance their cause and to spread the Gospel……. Each force vying with the other to rule supreme and respectively trying to force their culture and language on the conquered was the order of the day. Tamil was over-ridden in turn by Telugu, Urudu, Marathi and last but not least by Sanskrit. There was a day when the bards of Tamilnad shied to write in their mother tongue. One is almost reminded of Bacon who preferred to write his books in Latin so as to preserve them for all posterity. Most of the earlier workds were in Olai (Palm leaves) and were inaccessible. The learned few, jealously guarded what they had. During this dark era, the work of several missions and the missionaries is the redeeming feature and their work ushered in a period of reawakening and enlightenment. Their work is epoch-making history…….

Though through Missionary efforts the printing press had been imported as early as 1577, printing presses were installed both in Bombay and Madras to publish newspapers towards the close of the 18th century (1785-94). “In the 18th century the attitude of Englishmen towards Indians changed from indifference in the beginning to close contact. The days of corrupt Company officials, of ill-gotten fortunes, of oppression of ryots, of Zenanas and of illicit sexual connections, were also the days when Englishmen were interested in Indian culture.”……” (p.22-24)


“A dark cloud descended on the Tamil country and shrouded Tamil. During this age Tamil literature was veritably stagnant. Tamilnad stopped growing politically, economically and socially. With the arrival of European scholars, a new awakening was heralded. Their interest began slowly to seep through the thick cloud of apathy and a revival of literary interest commenced.

The reigning notion prevalent in the south at that time was to trace the origin of Tamil to Sanskrit. It was steadfastly believed that apart from Sanskrit, she could never have an independent existence. Europeans, however, got acquainted with Tamil sooner than with Sanskrit and the reason is obvious, since Tamil was a living language unlike Sanskrit. Their early studies based on Latin and Greek models revealed the baseless assumptions of the origin of Tamil. Many South Indian languages were taken up for individual study and research. Later, a comparison of such studies followed which culminated in the stupendous but admirable work by Dr Caldwell. It was Caldwell who diligently proved beyond doubt, the independent origin and existence of Tamil. She was declared to possess a vast and rich ancient literature. A Dravidian family of languages was asserted by these studies which consisted of cultivated and uncultivated languages of which Tamil was the eldest sister. A comparative and historical study of the affiliated languages also commenced. Dr. Caldwell’s works inspired many successive studies and to this day, they are venerated……

The unique ideas embedded in Tamil were for the first time startlingly released to the western world by translations. The various translations of the great Tamil works into the different tongues of the occident exhibited the peerlessness of the Kural, the exquisitiveness of the Tiruvacakam and other major works which had hitherto remained occult. Natives recognized the value of such translations and began to emulate their methods.

The elusive nature of “floating literature” refused to baffle them. Proverbs and folksongs were collected, edited and translated, saving them for subsequent research and posterity.

A catalogue of the printed Tamil books showed the development and retardation of the language in each branch of literature. It was an eye-opener to the natives.

Manuscripts which would have perished but for the ceaseless efforts of European scholars like Tavarnier, Mackenzie and Brown were unearthed and edited adopting western methods of punctuation. They were later printed and many a work emerged into the limelight.

Inscriptions were read by the scholars like Keilhorn, Fleet and Burnell with a historical sense for the first time. Then the scholars began to decipher and detect from them many an obscure historical facts.

Prose literature was given a new impetus. Geography, science, history and short stories found expression in Tamil. The mighty engine of literature, the press hastened the spread of literature and brought works until then inaccessible within easy reach. Newspapers, dailies, magazines, periodicals etc., began to exert a remarkable influence. Methods of education changed and modern but advantageous changes followed…….

Religious ideas belonging to their own Christian faith were remarkably introduced, garbed in Tamil. Here again, Beschi’s Tempavani has and will stand the test of time.

The non-chalant native attitude towards Tamil and their indiscriminate attraction towards English was mercilessly denounced by these foreign scholars. They decisively showed that for cultural survival, native literature cannot be abandoned. Translating from English to Tamil and vice versa was profitably encouraged…….

To sum up, we have to emphasize the facts that European scholars declared to the world the great culture inherent in Tamil and introduced a new scientific way of studying her. Through Tamil, the great scientific discoveries were introduced to her people and they were awakened from a long slumber to an era of activity and advancement. கன்னித் தமிழ் பாடி காலமெல்லாம் தமிழ் வளர்ப்போம் !” (p.336-338)


Note 2:

Jayankanthan and Tamil language sentiments (9 June 2005), Note 1

Malayalam: Motivated genesis of a language (12 Nov 2005)


Related blogs:

Macaulay continues to rankle the Sanskritists (3 March 2006)

'Sanskritisation': Definition or Deflection? (28 Feb 2006)

Dumbing down of Hindu society (1): 'Mother of All (Open) Secrets' (14 Aug 2005)

Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood (18 June 2005)

Jayankanthan and Tamil language sentiments (09 June 2005)


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Hindutva invents an external cause for social evils

Sandhya Jain in her latest column titled "Sunset in Sacramento" in The Pioneer (7 March 2006) is taking Hindutva’s penchant for history revisionism to new heights.

What can beat the following sentence that is embedded towards the end of her report:

“Most dishonest is the politically motivated attempt to project social evils like untouchability and rigid caste divisions upon India's ancient civilization, when both are products of the medieval encounter with Islam.”

Sandhya acknowledges that untouchability and rigid caste divisions are “social evils”. But she goes on to suggest that these “social evils” were introduced into India by Islam OR came about as result of India’s “encounter with Islam”.

Would this not be denying Manusmrti – undoubtedly a pre-Islamic text – its due (dis-)credit?


Related blogs:

Social inequalities: the Varnashramic difference (18 Feb 2006)

Teaching Hinduism without the facts (14 Feb 2006)

Ancient Tamil society (14 July 2005)

Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood (18 June 2005)


Related reports:

San Francisco Chronicle
How Does California Teach about Hinduism? A different agenda
Romila Thapar, Michael Witzel
Monday, March 6, 2006
….. The textbook revisions whitewash the plight of women and the so-called lower castes. Women's history was reduced to "different" rights while the caste system, which subjugated millions of Indians as virtual slaves in the untouchable caste, was simply a division of labor…….

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Macaulay continues to rankle the Sanskritists

It appears that Mr JG Arora in his essay "Revive Sanskrit" (in the Central Chronicle, Madhya Pradesh, 3 March 2006) is assigning an overly exaggerated role to Sanskrit in the practice and survival of Hinduism by claiming as follows:

“..... But death of Sanskrit means death of Hindu religion, Hindu Sanskriti (culture), Hindu heritage and Hindu identity……..Sanskrit must be revived and taught in schools and colleges since its survival is a must for survival of Hinduism and for rediscovery of hidden treasures of Bharat Varsha.....”

Sanskrit can keep the scholars and priests occupied. But it is in AND by the “languages of the people” that (popular) Hinduism lives AND will live.

It is these “languages of the people”, e.g. Tamil, that have to now play a much greater role in education, in the governance of the Indian States, and in the lives of the people, IF India were to be able to maintain its cultural distinctiveness and vibrancy on the world stage.


The Macaulayan plan for Indian education (1835) was appropriate under the circumstances then:

a) Macaulay was thinking in terms of mass education, though it had to be taken forward in stages in view of the sheer immensity of the task and the needs of Empire-building. This was understandably contrary to the thinking of the exclusivist Sankritists (or Brahmanists) who had always sought to restrict education to the upper castes.

b) Macaulay judged correctly that Sanskrit (or Arabic) would NOT help the people of India to develop intellectually AND operate effectively in a world that would be shaped and driven by modern science and technology. This corresponded closely to the thinking of leading social reformers of India like Raja Rammohun Roy who was already (in 1823) calling for the end of the domination of Sanskrit in Indian education.

c) Macaulay also judged correctly that the “vernaculars” (or languages spoken by the people) were also not as yet ready for the task. These vernaculars were indeed in varying degrees of impoverishment as a result of centuries of marginalization and subversion by Sanskrit(ists). (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3)


In post-Independence India that prides itself being the world's largest democracy, it is the languages of the people that have to be restored to their rightful place. The resurgence of these languages will also lead to Hinduism being retrieved from the suffocating grips of Brahmanism / Varnashramam and eventually regenerated.

To link the revival of Sanskrit to the survival of Hinduism is akin to linking the revival of Latin to the survival of Christianity.

The Sanskritists / Brahmanists, who have appropriated much from the people of India over the ages, should get real. They should now work for the resurgence of the languages of the people. If not, they should at least NOT block the way.


Note 1:

1. Macaulay was certainly NOT worrying about India for altruistic reasons. Instead he was seeking to turn India into a more governable and profitable part of the British Empire, hopefully for all time to come. Fortunately, India was not situated in a region of the world where the Europeans would have had sought to establish white settler communities. In which case they would have proceeded by decimating - NOT educating - the native population, as it had happened in the New World (Americas) where 30 million natives (Amerindians) were eliminated within 30 years (at the rate of 1 million per year).

2. Macaulay was a brilliant son of Victorian England. He knew how Europe emerged from its medieval stagnation to conquer / colonize large parts of the rest of the world. That happened largely because of the production and diffusion of new knowledge: knowledge about the practical world (not of the how-many-angels-can-dance-on-the-pinhead variety!). It was all about the understanding and mastery of NATURE so as to improve the human condition in this world (something that was clearly NOT happening for a long time through the agency of religion).

3. The spread of such knowledge did not have to wait for formal education in schools and universities. The production and diffusion of knowledge was facilitated by the invention of the printing press (remember Gutenberg). This in turn paved the way for intellectual work to break out from the confines of Latin (through which the Church maintained its influence / control) to the vernaculars (e.g. English, German, French, etc.). The ascendance of vernaculars, in turn, led to a situation whereby much of the early inventions / innovations would emerge from practical people, the ’tinkerers’ of society like the artisans, craftsmen, etc. It was a case of PRACTICE leading the way, often leaving behind THEORY.

(What a contrast was the holy India of Vedic chants and elaborate yajnas?!
Here, ordinary but productive people - people doing productive or practically useful work - like all others, were trapped by their respective karmic Dharma, and it was only at the risk of violating their caste Dharma could they seek out better ways of doing their work OR seek doing some different work.)

4. It was this vernacular English (after more than 300 years of rapid development, including Shakespeare) that Macaulay was bringing to India as an imperial language. Such was the rapidity of the rise of vernacular English in status. The vernacular that displaced Latin in England was seen by eminent Indian reformists like Raja Rammohun Roy as a suitable replacement for Sanskrit in Indian education. It was a crucial first step towards liberating India from the age-old Sanskritic stranglehold (India's internal colonization). Without lifting the Sanskritic lid, the revival of the non-Sanskritic languages (or vernaculars) and traditions would be difficult to imagine. Without sweeping aside the stifling social order imposed by the Sanskritists / Brahmanists, India's huge human potential would remain forever grossly underdeveloped.


Note 2: (inserted 10 March 2006)

Dr K Ponmudy’s The Dravidian Movement and The Black Movement (1998) is packed with interesting perspectives on the British role in social change in India, but inexplicably omits any explicit mention or evaluation of Macaulay’s part. This seems to confirm how much of a hot potato Macaulay has proven to be for scholars for a long time. It is time that Macaulay’s role in India gets to be seen in an altogether new light.

Relevant excerpts (without the associated Notes and References / citations, but the headings and emphases are mine) from Dr Ponmudy’s remarkable book that is well-researched and packed with statistics (tables and charts):

Systems of education in India: Traditional vs Modern

“…… Two differences between the traditional and modern system of education, according to M N Srinivas (a noted anthropologist in India) were that the traditional schools had been restricted to upper caste children and transmitted mostly traditional knowledge. There were Hindu Patashalas, Buddhist monasteries and Muslim Madarasas. In all these schools, the curriculum was predominantly religious. They discouraged the spirit of free inquiry and resisted change. They taught in a language or languages foreign to the people at large. In the Hindu schools Sanskrit served as the medium of instruction and in the Muslim schools Arabic. One essential difference between the Hindu schools, and the Buddhist and the Muslim schools was that the former were designed for one favoured class or the community, and the latter were opened for all irrespective of their castes. Education in the Hindu schools was a means of training the pupil in accepting the existing caste structure of the Hindu society, in believing in the infallibility of the Vedas, and of the Brahmins in interpreting the Vedas. In the Manusmirithi it is stated that not only is the Sudra to be disgraced, in his body, but the caste law forbids him to read, or hear, the sacred Vedas. It is narrated in the Mahabharata, when Ekalaiva a person born in a lower caste, learnt archery secretly was caught and his right thumb was cut off. Valmiki’s Ramayana also narrates the story of Shambuka. Shambuka, a Sudra by birth went into deep meditation for twelve years. As the Sudras were not allowed to do meditation, the act of Shambuka was considered as a violation of caste rules and Rama himself marched against Shambuka and beheaded him for his temerity……” (p.29-30)


British rule as a prime mover of social change in India

“….. In India, the establishment of the British rule served as a prime mover of social change. In the USA, the emancipation of slavery in 1863 was the prime mover of social change. These two events caused or increased various other forces of modernization, particularly, affecting the hitherto oppressed or static groups of the society. The new factors introduced by the British rule in India, such as western education, jobs in the administration, urban sources of income, modern means of communication like railways, posts and telegraphs, printing press, adult franchise and local self governments affected the traditional group relations. “One obvious result” of the British rule as M N Srinivas explains, “was that books and journals, along with schools, made possible the transmission of modern as well as traditional knowledge to large numbers of Indians – knowledge which could no longer be the privilege of a few, hereditary groups – while the newspapers made people in different parts of the far-flung country realize they had common bonds, and that events happening in the world outside influenced their lives, for good or ill.” These forces gave a new sense of self-respect and power to low castes. Further, these forces increased social mobility…..

In the field of education in India, the Christian missionaries, the East India Company and the British Government played vital role in modernizing education. Though the primary object of the missionary schools was to spread Christianity, the people in the Sudra and untouchable castes were made to understand the value of education and thus it paved the way for increasing socialization of the lower groups. The minutes of Lord Auckland and Elphinstone written in 1838, states that there were (156) one hundred and fifty six missionary schools and 4944 pupils in the Tamil districts. As stated earlier, the East India Company and the British government in India also took interest in spreading modern education. One essential difference in the objectives of these prime movers is that the missionaries tried to spread education in order to spread Christianity, whereas the latter intended to produce more indigenous servants for the company and the government, ‘a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals and intellect.’ After a long controversy between the Anglicists and the Orientalists over the system of education the government during Bentinck’s Governor-Generalship decided to implement the Western system of education in India. This was a death knell to the hitherto existed traditional system of education based on Hindu religious principles embodied in the Vedas and Upanishads and also to the progress of Sanskrit and Arabic learning. Another event, ‘the famous resolution of 7th March 1853, which stated that the promotion of European Literature and Science was to be the aim of British educational efforts’ henceforth paved the way for rapid advancement in the field of education. The Woods Despatch of 1854 and the subsequent encouragement given by the British government increased the number of schools and colleges in India which turned out tens of thousands of educated Indians versed in modern knowledge…..” (p.52–55)

Note 3: (inserted 10 March 2006)

Vedic conception of education

O.P.Sharma provides a glimpse of the Vedic conception of education in his INDIAN CULTURE: Ancient Glory and Present Gloom (1992):

“….. Adequate arrangements were made to impart education. Kautilya (click here) says, “Brahmans shall be provided with forests for religious learning, such forests being rendered safe from the dangers from animate and inanimate objects”. Education was the responsibility of the State is stated by Yajnavalkya thus: “Having made suitable houses in his city, the King should make the Brahmans settle there and having granted them stipends for learning the three Vedas, he should say “Follow your own Vocation”. To quote Kautilya again, “Those learned in the Vedas shall be granted Brahmadeya lands yielding sufficient produce and exempted from taxes and fines.”

Evidently teachers were held in high esteem by the society and their mundane needs were taken care of by the public and the State. The acquisition of knowledge and its dissemination involved self-restraint, suffering and sacrifice – a sort of penance. No wonder wealth and power paid homage to wisdom of which teaches were embodiment……. By and large, Brahmans adopted teaching as a profession because they had aptitude for this vocation. But here it is worth while to point out that teaching was not the exclusive preserve of Brahmans. Non-Brahmans too who had excelled in intellectual accomplishments could take to teaching. Among non-Brahmans teachers, names of Janak, Ajatasatru and Jaivali are shining examples. These non-Brahman teachers enjoyed no less veneration from their students.

While imparting education to students no discrimination was made on the grounds of sex and Varna. For poor students provision of scholarships and stipends was made…… While imparting instruction to the pupil the teacher took into account his caliber and aptitude. It was not considered worthwhile to waste time and energy on those students who had no appetite for intellectual pursuits. It was the considered view of educationists that heredity was more important than environment. A saying goes: “A bamboo tree cannot blossom into a sandal plant simply because it is assiduously watered and manured”…..” (p.27-28)

The above clearly bears out the discrimination that existed in matters of education, as in all else, in a society organized according to the Brahmanist doctrine of Varnashrama (as extensively codified in the Manusmrti). As education was meant (according to ManuDharma) for the Brahmans, all facilities and amenities were to be provided by the State (or King) to the Brahmans for that purpose. The non-Brahmans were left to their own means to seek cultivation / education in a society where, as stated above, “heredity was more important than environment”, i.e. nature (birth) was more important than nurture. This is diametrically opposite to the Dravidian ideal of society as expounded by the saint Thiruvalluvar (ஐயன் திருவள்ளுவர்) in his Thirukkural (திருக்குறள்). It was the misfortune of Indian society that Manu's Dharma sidelined Kural’s ARam (அறம்) more than 2,000 years ago.


Related blogs:

'Sanskritisation': Definition or Deflection? (28 Feb 2006)

Dumbing down of Hindu society (1): 'Mother of All (Open) Secrets' (14 Aug 2005)

Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood (18 June 2005)

Jayankanthan and Tamil language sentiments (09 June 2005)


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

'Sanskritisation': Definition or Deflection?

The oft-cited definition of Sanskritisation (Note 1) by the late Dr M N Srinivas, an eminent sociologist, appears to be clearly contrived to obscure a far more insidious process. In fact, Sanskritisation is no less than the (cultural) ’colonization’ of society that entails the imposition of a set of beliefs, social structures and practices (Brahmanism) upon the society, allowing it to take root progressively and in a top-down (NOT bottom-up) manner by first inducting the upper / ruling classes of the native population.

How about describing the British Raj as NOT colonialism but Anglicization, and defining Anglicization as a process by which the natives of India sought upward mobility by emulating the ways and manners of the English / British lords who chose to spend some time in India as part of their global mission to spread civilization (and, incidentally, economic restructuring)?

Labels and definitions serve as templates that shape, direct, deflect and/or blinker our thought processes. Extreme care is, therefore, called for. Otherwise we risk missing the elephant by remaining focused on the ants.

Note 1:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskritisation
(last modified 08:56, 17 August 2005)

Sanskritisation is the process by which castes placed lower in the caste hierarchy seek upward mobility by emulating the rituals and practices of the upper or dominant castes. It is a term coined by the late M.N.Srinivas, the eminent sociologist from India. He first propounded this theory in the thesis for his D.Phil degree at Oxford University. The thesis was laterbrought out as a book titled Religion and Society Among the Coorgs of South India. Published in 1952, the book was an ethnographical study of the Coorg Community of south Karnataka, India.

The book challenged the then prevalent idea that caste was a rigid and unchangeable institution. The concept addressed the fluidity of caste relations, and of communities' desires to constantly upgrade and improve themselves. M.N.Srinivas defined sanskritisation as a process by which "a 'low' Hindu caste, or tribal or other group, changes its customs, ritual ideology, and way of life in the direction of a high and frequently 'twice-born' caste. Generally such changes are followed by a claim to a higher position in the caste hierarchy than that traditionally conceded to the claimant class by the local community..."

One clear example of sanskritisation is the acceptance, imitating the practice of twice-born castes, of vegetarianism by people belonging to the so-called low castes, who are traditionally not averse to non-vegetarian food.

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Kautilya’s hidden influence on post-Independence India?

Dr S Kalyanaraman, an indefatigable Hindutva online campaigner, appears to have now stepped into a new role: that of a modern Kautilya seeking to advise the IMF (International Monetary Fund) about what should be borne in mind when dealing with India.

Specifically, Dr Kalyan - in an online message (dtd 20 Feb 2006) distributed to various e-mail groups - advises IMF’s youngest ever Chief Economist Mr Raghuram Rajan as follows: “I suggest that you should read Kautilya's Arthas'astra and study how social capital is sustained in Bharatam and Indian Ocean societies.” (emphasis mine)

The unsought advice was in response to Raghuram’s conversation with Shekhar Gupta, Editor-in-Chief of ‘The Indian Express’ (21 Feb 2006), published under the heading “Licence raj creates privileged industrialists, workers while the real work is done by unorganised labour” (click here).

In fact, Mr Raghuram Rajan is doing just fine by himself and will continue to do so without the help of the Arthashastra of Mauryan-era Kautilya (aka Chanakya).

It is indeed with remarkable insight that Raghuram gets to the heart of the matter when he speaks as follows:

QUOTE
......It was long due that we emphasised primary and secondary education, as you know India has over-emphasised tertiary in the past. But that does not mean that we under-emphasise tertiary now because our over-emphasis on tertiary has created an industry which relies on the skill-based tertiary education that we had.

...... We need to invest more in education. It is high priority for a number of reasons, including the fact we can get more political awareness from people when they are educated. We need to increase the quality of our human capital.
UNQUOTE

Raghuram will NOT derive support for his above views from the Arthashastra. But he certainly would from Thirukkural.

In his conception of a government, Kautilya had provided for various departments, which correspond to the government Ministries of today. There are two ministries that the Manu-tainted Kautilya had pointedly left out: Education and Health.

Hence, it is surprising that someone could seriously suggest that Kautilya's Arthas'astra should be read to understand "how social capital is sustained in Bharatam and Indian Ocean societies".

What "social capital" can a country hope to build based on an ancient Hindu S'astra that does NOT provide for public Education and Health in its conception of society and government?

We may have to search for the answer to that question in the current condition of India. It is a country that is marching into the 21st century (i) with a literacy rate worse than that of sub-Sahara Africa, AND (ii) as one of the world's most malnourished nations with every other child growing up malnourished (which means that half of the generation now growing up in India will suffer from varying degrees of physical and mental retardation / disabilities). (Note 1)

This is the result of the gross neglect that both EDUCATION and HEALTH CARE had suffered from since the time of India's Independence in 1947.

Is this prolonged neglect to be construed as the hidden influence of Kautilya's Arthas'astra on India's post-Independence political leadership - politicians and bureaucrats - who were supposed to be building up a vibrant democracy through socialism?

IF so, one would have to wonder if it were a case of Brahmanism - lurking behind the shadows along the corridors of power - cunningly subverting the "tryst with destiny" that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru had so loudly promised the people of India at the stroke of the first midnight of Independence (15 August 1947).

To hold up Arthas’astra as being relevant to modern India can only be seen to betray dark intentions of continuing the political subversion into the future as well, to the enormous detriment of hundreds of millions of Indians.


“Social capital” versus “Human capital”

This may be a right point to pause for another look at the matter, but from a different angle.

Is there a deeper meaning / intent embedded in Kalyan’s talk of sustaining “social capital” as opposed to Raghuram’s call for increase in “human capital”?

Is the former about preserving (sustaining) the social status quo (i.e. a varnashramic social order dominated by Brahmanism), at least its essential core control structures, whilst the latter is undoubtedly about empowering the individual to break out of the repressive status quo? The latter will certainly lead to the eventual collapse of whatever remains of the age-old casteist social order. And that would be, understandably, a worrisome prospect for Hindutva, which is no more than the modern political face of Brahmanism.

Homo hierarchicus: an endangered species

Hindutva activists should know that Kautilya's Arthas'astra, like the odious Manusmrti, rightly belongs to the rubbish heap of history. It is a S'astra without much artha (meaning) - relevance - for the modern age.

This is an age when scientific formulae matter more than Vedic mantras; fire in the internal combustion engine delivers more power than the flames chanted up in the Vedic yajna (fire sacrificial) pits. This is an age when India is faced with the enormous challenge of quickly transforming its vast breed of homo hierarchicus - the legacy of centuries upon centuries of Varnashramam - for placement in a world that is rapidly flattening out. It is sad to note that India could do no more than merely react to - play catch up with - the emerging new world order with practically no ability to proactively shape the same. This only goes to show how far Varnashramam has hollowed out an ancient civilization.

Raghuram is deservingly acclaimed for his book about "saving capitalism from capitalists". It appears that Indians / Hindus have to make haste to "save India / Hinduism from Hindutva".


Note 1:
see blog: "India's economy & social justice: responding to Ngiam Tong Dow" (24 July 2005)

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Social inequalities: the Varnashramic difference

In the discussion about socio-economic inequalities prevailing in countries around the world, what continues to be overlooked is the underlying fundamental difference between the varnashrama-ordained inequalities (in India) and the social inequalities seen in (non-varnashramic) societies around the world.

A cobbler, say, in France or Russia would tend to understand his station or condition in life as being the result of the accident of birth (e.g. born into a poor family) OR other life circumstances (e.g. unable to receive education because of impoverished childhood, lack of job opportunities because of prevailing economic depression, unjust economic policies, etc.). The French / Russian cobbler could legitimately aspire to change his condition in life: by finding another job or vocation, by learning new skills or relocating to a place with better opportunities, by seeking a change in the prevailing political / economic arrangements of society, etc.

On the other hand, take the case of an Indian cobbler in his varnashramic society (i.e. Hindu society polluted by Brahmanism / Varnashramam). The cobbler has to accept his station in life as his deserving karmic reward (or penance) for his (mis-)conduct in past lives. Birth is not an accident but a purposeful karmic incident. The varnashramic cobbler cannot legitimately aspire to change his station in life. If he were to leave his vocation, it would be breaking his life's DHARMA, and this would only add to his KARMIC bad debts. He would then miss the chance of being born into a higher caste in his next birth. Isn't this the primary message of the Gita and the rest of the Brahmanist / Sanskritic corpus that have shackled and debilitated the Hindu body, mind and soul for so long? (Note 1)

Now, let us visit the French / Russian cobblers. They could legitimately aspire to change their individual circumstances in life by self effort: there are no religious injunctions against this. They could also get together - or be rallied together - to change their collective social circumstances. Remember the French and Russian revolutions.

Now, coming back to the holy land of Varnashramam. We can breathe easy! Our people are not like the unruly - excitable - masses of the West. Our people have been conditioned (or brainwashed) into accepting that WHATEVER happens so happens only because GOD has so willed, a God who acts through the Law of Karma-Dharma.

Marx and Mao were amongst those who, without even visiting India, ruled out the possibility of the Indian masses ever rising together in revolt as long as their minds remain arrested by Hinduism. Hitler didn't know enough to pin it down on Hinduism when he was hesitating over whether or not to oblige Subhash Chandra Bose (whom he did eventually meet after some initial foot-dragging)!

It must be admitted that Western education - particularly, its scientific outlook - is helping to lift the Hindu mind out of its varnashramic trap / stupor. It is also providing a good opportunity for the non-Sanskritic traditions of India to re-assert themselves after being suppressed for so long by Brahmanism / Varnashramam.

The Tamil world can play a big role in the new resurgence, by taking back Hinduism from the suffocating grips of parochial and self-serving Brahmanism, and regenerating the faith for the benefit of all India and the world at large.


Note 1: see previous blog on: Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

The world order: Do people really matter?

The sad fact may be that people are NOT really in control. That may already have been the case for some time now.

People can be persuaded into compliance by stirring or playing up threats (Note 1). They can be cowed into trading freedom / liberty for security.

Much happens with the people sedated (or overwhelmed) into a state of obliviousness (or incomprehension).

The world started to run on fiat money since the gold standard was dropped, thereby effectively detaching wealth creation from real production: the ultimate power is not with the prolific producer but the one who can run the printing press profusely AND make the world accept his paper money. Hence, the need to maintain - at all costs - total military dominance over the entire globe, including space. (Note 2)

The world has been pressed into accepting the new order of "knowledge apartheid" where entire nations can be excluded from types of knowledge and/or their use. The dissenting ones will face the collective wrath of the coalition of the (un)willing: a repeat of the days of slavery when the slavemaster knew that he could rely on his 'loyal' slaves to subdue the errant ones!

The world economy does not run on oil alone, but on wars as well, a compulsion of the military-industrial-academia complex. There shall be a permanent state of war for perpetual peace!

Democracy and freedom shall there be for all people around the world, provided that these people know how to elect governments / representatives acceptable to the true masters of the world.

There is much that the people have already accepted, out of lack of awareness, lack of will or means, or plain indifference.


Note 1: inserted on 19 Feb 06

'There Is No War on Terror', Seattle Weekly, 18 Feb 2006 - interview with Noam Chomsky, MIT Professor and one of the world's greatest living public intellectuals

..... Geov Parrish: How will the U.S. deal with China as a superpower?
Noam Chomsky: What's the problem with China?
Geov Parrish: Well, competing for resources, for example.
Noam Chomsky: Well, if you believe in markets, the way we're supposed to, compete for resources through the market. So what's the problem? The problem is that the United States doesn't like the way it's coming out. Well, too bad. Who has ever liked the way it's coming out when you're not winning? China isn't any kind of threat. We can make it a threat. If you increase the military threats against China, then they will respond. And they're already doing it. They'll respond by building up their military forces, their offensive military capacity, and that's a threat. So, yeah, we can force them to become a threat. ......

Note 2: inserted on 19 Feb 06

'The End of Dollar Hegemony' - speech by Hon. Ron Paul of Texas before the U.S. House of Representatives, 15 Feb 2006

..... Gold no longer is the currency of the realm; paper is. The truth now is: “He who prints the money makes the rules” – at least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority and control over the monetary printing presses.

Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency.....

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Interpreting Thiruvalluvar: fadeout ploys

It has been a long tradition and well-ingrained habit of Sanskritists to (re-)cast non-Sanskrit texts and themes in the Sanskritic / Brahmanist mould. This appears to be part of a much broader game played out throughout history: "eliminate by embrace" and “obliterate by obfuscation”.

Thiruvalluvar (திருவள்ளுவர்) seems to be targeted for such treatment in a website maintained by the Divine Life Society founded by Swami Sivananda. Posted on the site is a biography (click here) of saint Thiruvalluvar and is said to have been extracted from the Swami’s book Lives of Saints. Unfortunately, it turns out to be less of a help to correctly understand Thiruvalluvar but more of a measure of how limited and skewed is the biographer’s (Swami Sivananda’s) understanding of Thiruvalluvar.

For instance, Valluvar had no truck with Vedism / Brahmanism, yet the invented story that Sivananda slips in: “He is regarded as an Avatara of Brahma.”

One cannot help being reminded of the honour bestowed on Gautama Buddha, albeit posthumously. Buddha rebelled against Hinduism, in particular the Brahmanist excesses. There is no place for the concept of God in the Buddhist faith, at best a clear indifference to the concept of God. Yet Buddha was converted back into the Hindu fold as the N-th avatara of Vishnu. {Quiz: How 'manyeth' avatara of Vishnu is Buddha? Answer: see Note 1 below.}

I wonder when Ambedkar / Periyar would begin to be talked of as an avatara of Brahman / Vishnu !?

There is indeed no limit to the inventiveness of these Sankritists / Brahmanists in the matter of myth-making.

Swami Sivananda must be writing for kids. He engages more in stories – of doubtful authenticity - about Valluvar and his devoted wife, and their life together, rather than explain what Valluvar has really said in his 1330 couplets (in Tamil). Of the few that the Swami has selected to mention, one is deciphered or rendered (in English) as follows:

“Learn the Shastras completely and then act according to their injunctions.”


Instead, Valluvar has urged EVERYONE (no exceptions, no exclusions) to:

கற்க கசடறக் கற்பவை கற்றபின்
நிற்க அதற்குத் தக (391)

a) learn / study without fault or doubt (with right understanding) - kaRka kacaTaRa (கற்க கசடற);

b) study what are fit for to be learnt - kaRpavai kaRRapin (கற்பவை கற்றபின்);

c) live by what you have learnt / studied - kaRRapin niRka atharkuth thaka (கற்றபின் நிற்க அதற்குத் தக) .

By no chance would Valluvar have limited learning / education to the Shastras that Swami Sivananda has in mind. It is also most likely that Valluvar would not have included much of the Shastras (infused with / contaminated by Varnashramam) as material fit for learning, least of all to be lived by. And Valluvar wanted ALL to learn (seek education), unlike Brahmanism that sought to impose its heinous doctrine of Varnashrama on society and deny education to the lower castes, thereby trapping large sections of Indian society in eternal ignorance, material deprivation and servitude.

EVEN IF one were to read / hear what are NOT fit to be read / heard, Valluvar has left behind a strong advice for, again, EVERYONE (no exceptions, no exclusions):

எப்பொருள் யார்யார்வாய்க் கேட்பினும் அப்பொருள்
மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்பதறிவு (423)

epporul yaaryaarvaaik kETpinum apporuL meypporuL kaanpathaRivu.
WHATSOEVER you may hear from WHOSOEVER seek out its true meaning / import.


You cannot hope to contain the sage Thiruvalluvar within the parochial Sanskritic / Brahminist mould. He is TOO BIG, TOO PROFOUND, TOO HUMANE and too much of a UNIVERSALIST for that. In fact, the humanist philosophy (Kuralism) expounded by Thiruvalluvar is antithetical to the very grain of Brahminism / Varnashramam in very fundamental ways. Swami Sivananda is clearly ill-equipped to interpret this great Tamil sage.


Note 1: Buddha is regarded as the ninth incarnation of Vishnu, after Ram and Krishna

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Teaching Hinduism without the facts

Hindutva front organizations are trying to convince education authorities in faraway California to downplay – fadeout - the Hindu caste system in school textbooks.

In an essay titled “Academic Hinduphobia”, OUTLOOK India (10 Feb 2006), Rajiv Malhotra and Vidhi Jhunjhunwala are clearly phobic about the truth finding a place in the textbooks. They seek to protect innocent children from the facts and the shame of a social order (chatur-varna or four-fold caste system, and out-of-castes) and the underlying Brahmanist doctrine (Varnashrama) that have sapped the vitality of Hindu society for thousands of years now. The authors of the essay argue as follows:

“….The political activism of a cartel of elitist academicians is invading the psyche of innocent children: It harasses the Indian students in class, making them feel embarrassed and ashamed of their ancestry….”


This makes me recall my first textbook encounter with my religion, Hinduism. That was many years ago when we had to study world history (based on a series of school textbooks suitably titled “The Story of Mankind”) in English during our 7th & 8th years of education (the first two years of secondary school). This would have been the case also for most others during those days. Until then, during the initial six years of primary school, my understanding of my culture / religion - academically and intellectually – was derived from our Tamil lessons. We were then attending English-medium schools, attended by students of different races, and all students had to study their respective mother tongues compulsorily but as second languages (next to English, the medium of instruction).

During the first six years of education (primary level) – which were during times when the child was not yet expected to be able to write his / her name and more on the first day ever in school - our academic / intellectual engagement with aspects of our culture happened during our Tamil lessons. We had our fill of Auvaiyar, Valluvar, Bharathiyar, etc. in verses, songs and stories. There was much stress on good conduct, right thinking, value of education, compassion, diligence, perseverance, and so on. It was in some songs with lines like “caathigal illaiyadi paapaa” (Note 1) that there was any mention of ‘jati’, but always in the context of being something wrong, bad, not to be talked about, and to be done away with.

But it was only upon stepping into secondary school and when we came to study Indian history that we had to read - for the first time – in cold English text, details about the Hindu caste system, including untouchability.

Until that time I had not known that the aiyars / archagars whom we had seen working as priests in some local temples were part of a caste called Brahmins and that they were, according to Hindu holy books (the Vedas, about which I was hearing – perhaps, so distinctly - for the first time), descended from the head of the Hindu God (Brahma) and occupy the top layer of Hindu society.

I was the only one who was of Indian origin and a Hindu in class. My understanding of the matter was not much better than that of my classmates. I could only relate the Tamil word “theetu” (impure) to this concept of untouchability. But “theetu” had been used in such situations like: after returning from the barber shop (but there was also a more rational explanation given as to why one should take a bath: to avoid tiny fragments of hair falling into the food when eating, which explanation had the effect of shifting the focus away from the barber, also from the act of a haircut, to the loose hair fragments left on one’s scalp); when the elders return from a funeral.

Beyond that, I could not reconcile what I was starting to read in my history textbooks with what I had come to know and think of my culture and cultural history over six years of Tamil lessons in primary school. It was also starting to become known more explicitly that the caste system and untouchability were not some vague memory of a distant past (merely history), but a living reality of contemporary India.


The purpose of my sharing the above is to explain why I can fully understand – empathize – when the authors of the abovesaid essay talk about how young Indian students in America today could feel embarrassed and ashamed when they get to read about the Hindu caste system and untouchability in their classrooms.

But is it academically right to shut out from the students of history (or social / cultural studies) - doesn't matter where in the world they may be - so compelling a fact about the Hindu religion that the Hindu caste system surely is, AND which is a matter of practice and observance even today (in India), AND for which full scriptural authority continues to be claimed (and with the late Kanchi Sankaracharya Chandrasekhara Swamigal himself re-affirming – Note 2), AND, therefore, NOT a mere deviation, aberration, excess or peripheral phenomenon, in spite of what the Indian Constitution may or may not say?

And I have more questions:

WHY is there NO corresponding concern for the millions and millions of young (and older) bodies, minds, hearts, and souls in India that are being repeatedly and brutally bruised, violated, maimed and scarred – often irreversibly - by the harsh realities of the varnashramic casteist social order that they have to live out (not merely read about) - day in and day out - EVEN today in the 21st century and EVEN after nearly 60 years of independence?

EVEN after Mahatma Gandhi. EVEN after Ambedkar. EVEN after Periyar.

Are they less human than those who were fortunate enough to have left India or to be born outside India?

WHEN will these downtrodden millions have their release and freedom from the suffocating grip of Varnashrama, indisputably the world’s oldest and longest lasting doctrine of social apartheid?

WHY NOT?

The Hindutva forces should seek to regenerate Hinduism by ridding it of the toxicity of Varnashramam, failing which India may lose the 21st century as well. The battleground is in India, not in faraway California.


Related reports / URLs:

“Now, Multicultural Hindutva”, by Raju Rajagopal, Outlook India (7 Feb 2006)

“Palpable Falsehoods”, letter by Prof Vinay Lal, Outlook India (7 Feb 2006)

“Speaking out Against the Hindutva Assault on California’s History Textbooks” – Friends of South Asia (FoSA)

Indian American Public Education Advisory Council (IPAC)


Note 1: to be filled

Note 2: see blog: "Hinduism: its caste system & priesthood”


Comments:

Kausalya:
Wed, 15 Feb 2006

My humble opinion that I wish to share with you.

I might not be the right person to say on this as I myself never had bothered about the caste system. For me, I feel, the caste system is invented by the human race and not the God. In this case it is right to take it from our history of culture. When this topic is not discussed anymore even as a history, then we might see declining practice and observance of the system. Am I right?

ARUL:

The sad fact is that it is a painful reality that millions are being forced to live out, day in and day out. What is an embarrassment for many of us to even read or hear about, unfortunately, cannot be merely wished away. Each one of us who is so embarrassed is a potential agent for change. It is the pressure of such rising opinion – as a result of growing awareness of the problem - that will help speed up changes in public policy and societal practices, thereby leading to the decline and eventual disappearance we hope for.

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Race to the bottom (1): Khushboo's morality

Actress Khushboo’s remarks that no educated man would expect his bride to be a virgin have sparked off passionate protests across Tamil Nadu. Her offensive remarks appeared in the Tamil edition of India Today weekly magazine (September 28, 2005 issue) which devoted a full page to her interview as part of a cover story on Sex & Single Women.

"காலாவதியாகும் கற்பு" என்ற தலைப்பில் இந்தியா டுடே (செப்டம்பர் 28, 2005) தமிழ்ப் பதிப்பில் (பக்கம் 23) நடிகை குஷ்பு பின்வருமாறு கருத்துரைத்திருந்தார்:

"பெண்கள் திருமணமாகும் போது கன்னித்தன்மை கலையாமல் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்பதுபோன்ற எண்ணங்களிலிருந்து நமது சமூகம் விடுதலையாக வேண்டும். கல்வி பெற்ற எந்த ஆண்மகனும் தான் திருமணம் செய்யப் போகிறவள் கன்னித்தன்மையோடு இருக்க வேண்டும் என்று எதிர்பார்க்க மாட்டான். ஆனால் திருமணத்திற்கு முன்பு செக்ஸ் வைத்துக்கொள்ளும்போது கர்ப்பமாகாமலும் பால்வினை நோய்கள் வராமலும் பெண் தன்னை தற்காத்துக் கொள்ளவேண்டும்."

Translation:

“That a woman has to be a virgin at the time of her marriage is the kind of thinking from which society should be freed. No educated man would expect the woman he is going to marry to be a virgin. But women should protect themselves from pregnancy and venereal diseases if they were to engage in sex before marriage.”

குஷ்பு மேலும் கூறியதாவது:

"நான் காதலித்த நபரை திருமணம் செய்துகொண்டேன். நாங்கள் எங்களது உறவு பற்றி நிச்சயமாக இருந்ததால் திருமணத்திற்கு முன்பே சேர்ந்து வாழ்ந்தோம்..."

Noisy street protests by women were marked by ample display of footwears and brooms. Even lawyers, male and female, staged demonstrations during some of which Khushboo’s effigies were battered and burnt. Her remarks so offended public sentiment that different courts across Tamil Nadu were petitioned. Some went overboard with demands for Khushboo’s banishment from Tamil Nadu, even India.

All of the above are public expressions of outrage at what seemed to have appeared to many in Tamil Nadu as a morally corrupting and culturally demeaning statement. Khushboo’s remarks had come through more as an exhortation than an observation. Coming from a celebrity - cinema personality - whom some overly sentimental fans had even deified as a goddess, resulted in her utterance being perceived as all the more irresponsible. That such an outrage erupted on so large a scale – thanks partly to the orchestration by some political parties – is to be regarded as a healthy sign. It serves to show that Tamil / Indian society still remains attached to some fundamentals in terms of sexual morality. In fact, the same issue of India Today (Tamil edition) bannered the following survey finding across the bottom of the very page containing Khushboo’s interview:

82%: சென்னை பெண்கள் திருமணமாகும்போது பெண்ணின் கன்னித்தன்மை கலையாமல் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்று கருத்து சொல்லியுள்ளார்கள்.

On the other hand, it has been amusing to track the reactions of some sections of Tamil Nadu’s intelligentsia. They appear to be at the tail end of the wave that the Western world – in particular, the USA - had ridden for more than fifty years now – and is trying to get off. These more articulate members of Tamil Nadu society are using the same arguments that the free speech advocates and radical feminists in America had used over the years to talk Americans into allowing the pornification of society, and the rise of strident feminism that has led to de-feminization (in the guise of female empowerment). The consequences to American society are there for all to see: moral decadence and social degeneracy, marked by the undermining of the institutions of marriage and family.

These elements are seeking to portray the uproar over Khushboo’s remarks as a threat to the freedom of expression. Voltaire is being piously invoked to protect Khushboo’s right to express her views. On the other hand, there appears to be many out there who feel that society has to be protected from the sexual mores Khushboo is seeking to propagate.

Both sides of the ensuing debate are expressive in their own ways. The less articulate female members of society express their disgust at Khushboo’s remarks by waving chappals and brooms, which are understandably more readily accessible to them than polished speech. On the other hand, the more articulate section of society expresses itself by verbal rhetoric and exchanges conducted through the mass media and public stages.

Those articulating their support for Khushboo are flogging the ‘freedom of expression’ horse for all its worth. But ‘thinking’ should precede ‘expression’. It is the quality of thinking, particularly in terms of originality, that most of these advocates of ‘freedom of expression’ seem to be lacking. Their arguments are unmistakably direct importations from Western radical feminist discourse. It is a case of servile intellectual mimicry.

In fact, this controversy presents a good opportunity for Tamil / Indian society to explore an alternative to Western radical feminism. The likes of poetess Kanimozhi (Kalaignar Karunanidhi’s daughter) should take up this challenge instead of being limited to the ‘freedom of expression’ mantra. The free speech proponents are mocking the vociferous criticisms of Khushboo’s remarks as moral policing and intolerance. Seeking to reduce the debate to one about free speech will only serve to lose sight of the bigger and deeper issue. The bigger and deeper issue is about VALUES, not ‘freedom of expression’. (Note 1) (Note 2)

The Western world is already waking up to the damage inflicted on society by fanatical / radical feminism. A recent report by the Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) – USA – seeks to expose the hidden agenda of feminist / women’s studies in American colleges and universities. The report is titled: "Sex (Ms.) Education: What Young Women Need to Know (But Won't Hear in Women's Studies) About Sex, Love and Marriage." Ms Carrie Lukas, who authored the report, explains: “Too often, college women are getting a warped perspective on sex, love, and marriage. People might not be surprised to hear that young women get misinformation from much of pop culture, but they might be surprised to know that it can also be found in many college classrooms.” Lukas reviewed women’s studies textbooks and found that feminist authors had a tendency to criticize the institution of marriage as repressive for women and glorify promiscuity.

American society is already seeking to re-trace its steps back to days when values like sexual fidelity and self-restraint mattered. India’s feminists should take note and do some original / independent thinking before rushing out to exercise their right / access to ‘freedom of expression’.

Note 1:

பெண்மையையும் ஒழுக்கத்தையும் போற்றாத மேற்கத்திய தீவிரப் பெண்ணியம் :
கண்மூடித்தனமாகப் பின்பற்றும் தமிழகத்தின் பெண் இலக்கியவாதிகள்

கவிஞர் கனிமொழி (நக்கீரன் 16-11-2005) ஒழுக்கம், கட்டுப்பாடு என்பன தனியார் விருப்பஞ் சார்ந்தன என்னும் விதத்தில்:

"இதனை குஷ்புவுக்கும் சுகாசினிக்குமான பிரச்னையாகப் பார்க்காமல் பொதுவான பெண்ணினத்திற்கான பிரச்னையாகப் பார்ப்போம். இங்கே சிலர் தாங்கள்தான் எதையும் தீர்மானிக்க வேண்டும் என்ற முடிவில் இருக்கிறார்கள். அவர்கள் கருத்துக்கு எதிர் கருத்தோ, புதிய கருத்தோ சொல்லும் பெண்களை 'கற்பு' என்பதை காட்டி பயமுறுத்துகிறார்கள். பெண் எழுத்தாளர்கள் இதனைத் தொடர்ச்சியாக சந்தித்துக்கொண்டுதான் இருக்கிறார்கள். ஒழுக்கம், கட்டுப்பாடு என்பதையெல்லாம் அவரவர்தான் நிர்ணயித்துக்கொள்ள வேண்டும். பொதுவான ஒழுக்கம் எல்லாவற்றிலும் சாத்தியமில்லை."


ஆண் பெண் சமத்துவம் என்பதற்காக ஆணின் ஒழுக்க மேம்பாட்டுக்காகப் போராடாமல் பெண்ணின் ஒழுக்கச் சரிவுக்குக் காரணம் கற்பிற்கும் விபரீதப் போக்கு:

வாஸந்தி (இந்தியா டுடே - தமிழ்ப் பதிப்பு - அக்டோபர் 12, 2005) “கற்பும் கற்பிதங்களும்" என்ற தலைப்பில் எழுதிய கட்டுரையில் 'பண்பாட்டுக் காவலர்கள்' நையாண்டி செய்யப்படுகிறார்கள்:

"தமிழ்ப் பெண்கள் இனி நிம்மதியாக இருக்கலாம். அவர்களது மானத்தை பாதுகாக்க, வீரம் செறிந்த ஆண்கள் படை ஒன்று தமிழகத்தில் தயாராக இருக்கிறது. பெண் இனத்தைவிட அதிகமாகக் கவலைப்படுகிற பாதுகாப்புப்படை அது. எனென்றால் தமிழ்ச் சமூகத்தின் மானம், மரியாதை, கௌரவம் எல்லாமே பெண்ணின் யோனியில் பதுங்கியிருப்பதான அசைக்கமுடியாத நம்பிக்கை கொண்ட படை அது. இந்த நம்பிக்கை வசதியானது. அரசியல் தாத்பர்யம் கொண்டது. ஆண்-பெண் அதிகார சமன்பாடு மாறிவரும் நிலையைப் பொறுக்க முடியாமல் பெண்ணுக்கு எதிராக சாட்டையடி அடிக்கவும், கற்பு, பண்பாடு, ஒழுக்கம் போன்றவற்றை ஆண்கள் தாரை வார்த்துவிட்ட நிலையில் அவற்றைப் பேணிக் காப்பது, பெண்களின் பொறுப்பு மட்டுமே என்று சுட்டிக்காட்டவும் பயன்படும் ஆயுதம்........ தமிழ்ப் பண்பாட்டுக் காவலர்கள் என்று மார்தட்டிக்கொள்ளும் அரசியல்வாதிகளுக்கு தற்காலிக வெற்றி கிடைக்கலாம். அந்த வெற்றி தமிழ்ச் சமூகத்தின் கருத்துச் சுதந்திரத்துக்குத் தோல்வி."


குஷ்புவின் பேட்டி வெளிவந்த அதே இந்தியா டுடே தமிழ்ப் பதிப்பில் (செப்டம்பர் 28, 2005 - பக்கம் 35) கவிஞர் சுகிர்தாணி "ஒழுக்கம் பெண்ணுக்கு மட்டுமா?" என்ற தலைப்பில் எழுதுகிறார். கோபத்தில் நிதானம் இழக்கிறார்:

"……… கற்பு என்னும் மதிப்பீடு வட்டத்திற்குள் ஆண்களை நுழைக்காத அல்லது நுழைக்க விரும்பாத இச்சமூகம் பெண்களின் கற்பு பற்றி உறுதியான எதிர்பார்ப்பை, நிலைபாட்டை வைத்திருக்கிறது. அந்த மோசடி அகராதியிலும் பிரதிபலிக்கப்படுகிறது. வர்ஜின் (virgin) என்ற சொல்லின் பொருள் குறிப்பாக பெண்களின் கன்னித்தன்மையைச் சுட்டிக்காட்டுகிறது. ஒருவனுக்கு ஒருத்தி என்ற பண்பாட்டுச் சாரத்தின் வழி நின்று திருமணத்தில் ஒருவனோடு இணையும்போது கன்னித்தன்மையும் கற்பும் எதிர்பார்க்கப்படுகின்றன. கணவனிடத்தில் கன்னித்தன்மையை இழந்தாலும் அவனோடு தொடர்ந்து வாழும்போது அவள் கற்புடையவளாக கருதப்படுகிறாள். ஆனால் இன்னொரு ஆடவனோடு கூடும்போது கற்பிழந்தவளாக சித்தரிக்கப்படுகிறாள்...................... ஆக கற்பு என்னும் சொல்லாக்கத்தை ஆண்பெண் இருபாலுக்கும் பொதுத்தன்மை உடையதாக இச்சமூகம் மாற்றட்டும். இல்லையெனில் அச்சொல்லையே அழித்தொழிக்கட்டும். இவற்றையெல்லாம் விட்டுவிட்டு கற்பு, பண்பாடு, ஒழுக்கம் போன்றவற்றை பெண்களிடம் மட்டுமே எதிர்பார்ப்பது எந்தச் சமூகத்திற்கும் அழகல்ல. அவசியமும் அல்ல."


ஒழுக்கச் சீரழிவுக்கு எதிரான கருத்துரைகளை "பாசிசம்" என்றும், "பெரும்பான்மைவாதம்" என்றும், "கலாச்சார மீட்புவாதம்" என்றும் திசை திருப்பும் கனிமொழியின் குழப்பவாதம் (இந்தியா டுடே - தமிழ்ப் பதிப்பு - டிசம்பர் 7, 2005) :

"............ நாஜிக்களின் பாசிசம் உள்பட எல்லா கலாச்சார மீட்புவாதங்களும் பெண்களை ஒடுக்குவதிலிருந்து தான் தொடங்குகிறது. பெண்ணின் தோள் மீது கலாச்சாரத்தை ஏற்றிச் சுமக்கச் செய்வதுதான் கலாச்சார மீட்டெடுப்பாக இருந்து வந்திருக்கிறது............. உடைக் கட்டுப்பாடு முதல் குஷ்புவிற்கு எதிரான போராட்டம் வரை அத்தனையும் பெண்களுக்கு எதிரான பேரியக்கமாகத்தான் உருவெடுக்கிறது. ......................"

ஒழுக்கம் பற்றி பேசும் ஊடகங்கள் ஆபாசத்தைத் தவிர்க்கவேண்டும் என்று கோருவதற்குப் பதிலாக, ஒழுக்கக் கேட்டுக்கெதிராக ஊடகங்கள் வெளியிடும் தகவல்கள் வெறும் விற்பனை நோக்கிய பண்டங்கள் என்று தள்ளுபடி செய்கிறார் கனிமொழி:

"....... பெண்களுக்கென்று புதிய ஒழுக்கத்தை வரையறுப்பதில் ஊடகங்கள் ஆர்வத்தோடு முன்நிற்கின்றன. உடைக் கட்டுப்பாடு முதல் குஷ்பு பிரச்னை வரைக்கும் அந்தப் போக்கு, பல ஊடகங்களில் வெளிப்பட்டிருக்கிறது. பெண்களுக்கு மட்டுமேயான ஒழுக்க எல்லைகளை வகுப்பதை அவை ஒருபுறம் செய்து வருகின்றன; குரூரமான ஆபாசம் வெளிப்படும் பெண் படங்களை மற்றொரு புறம் வெளியிட்டு வருகின்றன. ஒரு புறம் இவர்கள் உருவாக்கும் ஒழுங்கை இவர்களே மறுபுறம் உடைக்கிறார்கள். இந்த வினோதமான மனப்போக்கை எப்படிப் புரிந்துகொள்வது? இவர்கள் பல்பொருள் அங்காடி நடத்துகிறார்கள். இதுவரை பெண் உடலை பண்டமாக்கிய இவர்கள் இப்போது பெண்ணின் ஒழுக்கத்தையும் கற்பையும்கூட விற்பனைப் பண்டமாக்கிவிட்டார்கள். இந்த ஊடகங்கள் போதிக்கும் ஒழுக்கத்தை எப்படி சீரியஸாக எடுத்துக் கொள்ள முடியும்?"

கனிமொழி 'சீரியஸாக' போதிக்க விரும்பும் ஒழுக்கம்தான் என்ன?


Note 2:

"திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பு செக்ஸ் .... ஆரோக்கியமல்ல!"

தமிழகத்தின் பிரபல பாலியல் துறை நிபுணரான டாக்டர் நாராயண ரெட்டி (ஜூனியர் விகடன் - 5.10.2005):

"...... திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பு செக்ஸில் ஈடுபடுவதால் ஒரு பெண்ணுக்கும் ஆணுக்கும் நல்லதைவிட கெட்டதே அதிகம்; லாபத்தை விட நஷ்டமே அதிகம். ஒழுக்கத்தையும், புனிதத்தையும் பாரம்பரியமாக மதித்து வரும் நம் இந்தியா போன்ற நாடுகளில், திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பே செக்ஸ் வைத்துக்கொள்வது குற்ற உணர்வையே ஏற்படுத்தும். இதனால் வரக்கூடிய பிரச்னைகளும், மன உளைச்சல்களும் ஏராளம்.

பொதுவாகவே உலகம் முழுக்க செக்ஸ் கலாச்சாரத்தில் பெரியளவிலான சீரழிவுகளும், பெண்ணியம், கற்பு என்கிற விஷயங்களில் தாறுமாறான போக்கும் நாளுக்கு நாள் அதிகமாகிக்கொண்டுதான் போகிறது. கடந்த வருடம் மும்பையில் நடந்த உலகளவிலான செக்ஸாலஜிஸ்ட்கள் மாநாட்டில் பெரிதும் விவாதிக்கப்பட்ட விஷயம், நாடு முழுக்க நடக்கும் செக்ஸ் சீரழிவுகள் பற்றியும்தான். இதில் ரொம்ப ஆச்சரியமாக மற்ற நாட்டைச் சேர்ந்தவர்கள் கவனித்தது இந்தியாவைத்தான். மற்ற நாட்டில் நடக்கிற, நடந்து கொண்டிருக்கிற செக்ஸ் கலாச்சார சீரழிவுகளை விட இந்தியாவில் மிகவும் குறைச்சலான அளவே இந்த சீரழிவு இருப்பதும் அலசப்பட்டது. இந்திய நாட்டின் பண்பாடு கலாசாரம்தான் இதைக் காப்பாற்றுகிறது என்றே பலரும் பேசினார்கள்.

...... திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பு செக்ஸ் அனுபவம் பெற்ற ஆண்கள் இந்தியாவைப் பொறுத்தவரை பெரிய அளவில் இருப்பதாக தெரியவில்லை. ஆண்களோடு ஒப்பிடும்போது பெண்கள் இன்னும் கூட மிகமிகக்குறைவான அளவே இப்படி ஒரு அனுபவத்தைப் பெற்றிருப்பதாக தெரிகிறது. சுருக்கமாக சொல்வதானால், தற்போது சர்ச்சைக்குள்ளாகியிருக்கும் 'திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பே கன்னித்தன்மை இழப்பது' என்பதை இங்குள்ள பெண்கள் பெரிய தவறாகவே நினைக்கிறார்கள்.

இதில் கவனிக்கத்தக்க இன்னொரு விஷயம், மற்ற மாநிலங்களை ஒப்பிட்டு கவனித்ததில் தமிழகத்தில் ஆரோக்கியமான போக்கு இருப்பதாகவே பட்டது. திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பே செக்ஸ் உறவும் செக்ஸ் ரீதியிலான பிரச்னைகளும் கலாசாரச் சீரழிவுகளும் தமிழகத்தில் மிகமிக குறைவான விகிதத்தில்தான் இருக்கிறது. இன்றும் கற்பில் முதன்மையான நாடு நமது தமிழ்நாடு என்பதில் மாற்றமில்லை.

அதேசமயம், கொஞ்சம் கொஞ்சமாக சீரழிவுகள் தலைதூக்க ஆரம்பித்திருக்கின்றன. இதை இப்படியே விட்டால் இன்னும் பத்து இருபது வருடங்களில் நமது தமிழ்நாடும் செக்ஸ் சீரழிவில் முதலிடத்தை பிடித்துவிடக்கூடிய அபாயம் இருக்கிறது. இதை தடுக்க, செக்ஸ் கல்விகளும், அதற்கான விழிப்பு உணர்வுகளும் ஏற்படுத்த வேண்டிய கட்டத்தில்தான் நாம் இருக்கிறோம் என்பதையும் கவனத்தில் கொள்ளவேண்டும்.

பொதுவாக, திருமணத்துக்கு முன்பு செக்ஸ் என்பது தவறு என்பதைவிட, ஆரோக்கியமானதல்ல! இதுதான் யதார்த்தம்."


நிர்மலா பெரியசாமி (நக்கீரன் 16-11-2005):

"சமுதாயத்தில் நடக்காததையா சொல்கிறோம் என்று குஷ்பு, சுகாசினி சொல்வதை ஏற்க முடியாது. சமூகத்தில் எல்லா காலத்திலும் திருட்டுகள் நடந்து கொண்டுதான் இருக்கிறது. கற்பழிப்புகளும், விபச்சாரங்களும் நடந்துகொண்டிருக்கின்றன. அதற்காக, கேர்ஃபுல்லா திருடு, மாட்டிக் கொள்ளாமல் கொலை செய் என்று சொல்ல முடியுமா? ஒழுக்கக்கேடு என்பது கேன்சர் மாதிரி. கலாச்சார கட்டுப்பாடுகள் இருக்கும் போதுதான் தவறுகள் ஒரு எல்லைக்குமேல் நடக்காமல் இருக்கும்."

Related blogs:

American Society: Myths and Realities (1 June 2005)


Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Malayalam: Motivated genesis of a language

Dr P P Narayanan Nambudiri, Retired Professor of History, St. Peter’s College, Kolencherry, Ernakulam writes:

"The origin of Malayalam as a separate language distinct from Tamil and the development of a literature may be assessed as one of the major contributions of the Nambudiris. After introducing the Aryan culture and institutions into Kerala, the Nambudiris refrained from imposing their language, Sanskrit upon the people just as they did not impose upon them their culture in its totality. Instead the Nambudiris made a new language, the Malayalam, by joining Kodum Tamil and Sanskrit.

This was indeed a wise step. The indigenous people were appeased while a barrier was created between Malayalis and the Tamil people. Politically the indigenous people liked the evolution of a new language. For when the new language was created somewhere in the 9th and 10th centuries, the Cera (Chera) or Kerala country was fighting a prolonged war with the Colas who constituted a considerable section of the Tamil people.

To the Nambudiris especially another benefit was there thereby. They could continue as the custodians and authority in regard to the religion and culture they introduced, as they only were proficient in the Sanskritic knowledge (Note 1). As regards the new language as well, they were the authority for long. In course of time, the Nambudiris also adopted this language as their lingua franca. The front tuft of hair, the Malayalam language and the Sambandhom form of marriage were the means by which the Nambudiris had merged with the comity of the Kerala people. With the development of the Malayalam language, the Cera portion of the Tamilakom became the Malayalam land, a separate region with its distinctive culture and were more akin to Bengal or Kashmir.

The beginning of Malayalam language may be traced to the early centuries of the Christian era. But for several centuries this language was nothing more than a provincial dialect of the Tamil language. The 8th or 9th century saw its independent course of development under the patronage of the Nambudiris who became an influential force in Kerala by that time. In dealing with the local people, they found that the local language had to be used. They found that the local language was an admixture of Tamil as can be illustrated by the inscriptions and copper place grants of the times. Under the initiative of the Nambudiris within two or three centuries Malayalam underwent a complete transformation by which it became an independent language. Sanskrit was adopted into Malayalam with reluctance in the early stages but later on more boldly and vigorously. The tatbhava and tasama forms of Sanskrit words in Malayalam bear witness to this fact. Not only the vocabulary, but the morphology of the idioms and to the extent the spirit of the language were also absorbed from Sanskrit. Sanskrit literary forms, its poetical conventions, and ideas were freely adopted into the Malayalam literature. ……………. These linguistic and literary innovations resulted in the evolution of a movement generally called by the name ‘bhasamisra’ or ‘manipravala’.

Bhasamisra or manipravala was the product of an original and sophisticated attempt to create a new language and literature. Just as the Nambudiris had created a new stock of people by their sambandham marriage with ‘trivarnikas’, so they created a language, a hybrid language, the Malayalam by blending it with Sanskrit. Sambandham might have been a novelty in Kerala; but not so was the linguistic formation or development. All the Dravidian languages like Telugu, Canarese (Kannadam) and even Tamil had borrowed much from Sanskrit. Amongst the Dravidian languages, only Tamil can dispense with its Sanskritic influence while others cannot assert independence from Sanskrit. The Aryan Nambudiris who introduced into Kerala the hybrid linguistic style, were well-acquainted with it elsewhere probably.

It was not possible for the Nambudiris to abandon Sanskrit. For it was their mother-tongue; there existed a close relationship between Sanskrit and brahmanical culture; beside the term scholarship came to mean Sanskrit scholarship. But the indigenous people had no knowledge and interest in Sanskrit. Hence the Nambudiris felt the need of conveying their needs to the people through an intelligible medium; thus arose bhasamisra or manipravala.

Bhasamisram and manipravala are not quite distinct terms. If one is the plant, the other is its flower. Manipravalam is refined bhashamisra with a halo of literary efflorescence. The mixed language used by the Nambudiris by blending the native tongue and Sanskrit was bhashamisra or misrabhasa. This style of composition is best illustrated by ancient astrological, medical and asauca treatises. Bhasamisram pertains to the field of non-literary subjects while manipravalam to that of literature.

The origin of bhasamisra or manipravala may be traced to the 9th century A.D., its founding father being Tolan, a courtier or Vidusaka of the Kulasekhara court. The name ‘Tolan’ was a nick-name. According to tradition he was a Nambudiri by name Nilakantan but excommunicated from the caste for having violated the injunction to refrain from sex in brahmacarihood. He was sold to a Buddhist Sanyasi at Mahodayapuram. But later he escaped and by virtue of his resourcefulness became the Vidusaka in the royal court. He was a great scholar. He was the author of the earliest bhasamisra or manipravala works, namely Attaprakaram and Kramadipika. Bhasamisra or manipravala begins with Vidushaka in Kutiyattam, the first Vidusaka being Tolan. Kutiyattam is the Kerala counterpart of Sanskrit drama from which branched off Kuthu and Kathakali, all the three forms forming into the well known classical performing arts of Kerala. The Vidusaka who was a consummate scholar and genius, manipulated words in such a way in his explanations and parodies as to convey humour through sense and sound. He had to babble coherently, meaninglessly, and unnaturally using obscene and vulgar words to create laughter. Sanskrit, Prakrit and Malayalam were at his lips and he used to combine these languages in as many ways as possible as it pleased him, resulting in a curious medly of sounds and phrases. He cared little for grammar. He overlooked conveniently the essential difference between the two linguistic systems and thus while making a grotesque pattern of words, phrases and stanzas, he might not have thought that he was laying the foundation of a new dynamic literary movement, the so-called Manipravala.

In the centuries that followed, Nambudiri scholars and poets one after another so developed and improved the bhasamisra progressively, that by 14th or 15th century Kerala had the good fortune to have a language and literature of its own quite distinct from Tamil and Sanskrit.

The earliest manipravala works were composed in slokas in Sanskritic metre. The first of this kind was ‘Vaisikatantram’ of an unknown author, a manual on the art of prostitution. This was followed by other works such as Unicirutevicaritom, Padyaratnam, Cerumicaritom, and Candrolsavam. The subject matter of these works is love in its sensual and amorous aspects. The term manipravala is used in a general and broad sense and also in a limited sense. In the former case it is bhasamisra and in the latter it should deal with women and theme of love. …………. that only pertains to a particular stage of the development of the manipravala literary movement. Later other themes were also adopted. Several prabandhams and kavyas were composed in manipravala from the 14th to 16th centuries. Besides a further development arose when the indigenous literary form, ‘Pattu’ or ballads was adopted to bhasamisra or manipravala. ………. Thus the Nambudiris (Note 2) created a new language and literature for Kerala…………."

- Aryans in South India (1992), p. 191 - 194

Note 1:

"The Nambudiris had to study Sanskrit; for their mother tongue was Sanskrit for a long time. Their zeal for Aryanizing the land to such an extent to secure for them the high status at least in religion and society was an incentive to them to spread the Sanskritic culture amongst others. Their own duties of studying the Veda, and the manuals of rituals for performing samskaras and sacrifices, interpreting laws and guiding social and religious conduct for themselves, and for others, were other circumstances that necessitated the study of Sanskrit." (p. 184)

Note 2:

"The name or word ‘Nambudiri’ is not found anywhere in the ancient and early medieval records in Kerala as well as outside Kerala…… The word ‘Nambudiri’ seems to be a word belonging to Manipravala or Bhasamisra. The word ‘Nambuka’ is Dravidian, meaning to confide, to advise etc. ‘Tiri’ is a common Sanskrit affix, office, or dignity meaning ‘blessed’, ‘fortunate’, Sri, etc. Hence the word ‘Nambudiri’ originated only late in the later stage of the development of Manipravalam or Bhasamisrom which may be attributed to the 11th or 12th centuries A.D." (p. 135 – 136)

Related blogs:

Cho Ramaswamy & 'Thani Thamizh' (13 June 2005)

Loan Words in Tamil (11 June 2005)

Jayakanthan and Tamilian language sentiments (9 June 2005)

Tamil: Risks of Creolization (23 May 2005)

Social Justice thru ‘Equity’: World Development Report 2006

The 28th Report in the annual series of World Development Reports produced by the World Bank is titled “Equity and Development”.

The Report essentially vindicates the stands of such luminaries from the developing world as Periyar (who joined the cause of social justice in South India – then led by the Justice Party - in the 1920s, and turned it into a mass rationalist & social reform movement), and the economist / academician Prof Amartya Sen (into the latter half of the 20th century and the early years of the 21st century) on the importance of social justice.

The World Bank staged a Press Conference on 20 Sep 2005 in Washington DC to mark the release of the World Development Report 2006: “Equity and Development”. The Press Conference was chaired by Mr François Bourguignon, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank - the Frenchman who had guided the production of the Report. The Report was presented by Mr Francisco Ferreira, one of the Lead Authors (co-authors) of the Report and a long-time economist with the World Bank. Some of his remarks during the presentation and subsequent Q&A are excerpted below:

The influence of caste and stereotyping on performance in India

MR. FERREIRA:

…… an example from an experiment that was conducted with a number of children from villages in India, and it speaks to the influence of caste and stereotyping, according to a social category like caste, on performance.

Let me tell you a little bit about this example. Here, what they did was the experimenters got groups of children, six at a time, always three kids from a high caste and three kids from a low caste, and asked them to fill out a maze, and if you filled out the maze correctly, you got a rupee in the piece rate treatment; or in the determined treatment, you got 20 rupees if you were the guy who filled out most mazes.

The experiment consisted of doing this, sometimes telling the kids what their castes were and sometimes not telling them what their castes were. And the remarkable result is that when you didn't tell them what their castes were, the experimenters found that the high caste and low caste children did exactly the same; whereas when caste was made salient and announced, and the kids knew that they were high caste or they were low caste compared to others in the group, there was a statistically significant difference between the low caste and the high caste.

Notice that the high caste didn't go up very much; it's the low caste that lost. And therefore, in aggregate terms for this society, there is an aggregate loss. There is a loss in performance, there is a loss in productivity, that comes from the impact of stereotyping and segmentation.

If this happens outside the experiment--if it happens in school classrooms, if it happens in factories, shops, and in farms--there is an aggregate loss to productivity in India because of this. And there are experiments like this for other places as well, including the United States.

'Trickle-up' development, instead of the 'trickle-down' (of Reaganism)

QUESTION:

……….While the Vice President (Mr François Bourguignon) tried to underplay the radical nature of these recommendations and findings, some of us feel that we have been fed the trickle-down theory over the years by many of the World Bank economists. We feel that it is quite radical. It reminds one of the old base of North-South dialogue around [inaudible], that kind of era………..

MR. FERREIRA:

Just to add very quickly to that, it's funny that you mention trickle down because we very much see this Report as a reversal of that and a proposal of trickle-up development which sees the poorest people in society not as the recipients of charity but people with enormous potential to contribute in this generation but perhaps in the next generation towards the development of their countries and we see retargeting and refocusing public subsidies and policies in the direction of the poorest people as a sensible investment in trickle-up development.

Brazil: skewed nature of education

MR. FERREIRA:

I think we have described in this Report and in other reports the Brazilian state as a truncated welfare state in the sense that it's been very good at taxing people and redistributing only amongst the rich. So what we've chiefly failed to do in Brazil is to make sure that we spend on the things that the poor people need, and chief amongst them is education where the ratio of expenditure on a tertiary student to the expenditure on a primary student is much higher in Brazil than it is say in Korea. I don't have the exact numbers with me now, but here the order of magnitude is about three or four times larger, that ratio.So we subsidize rich people who have gone to private school and are now going to free public universities as opposed to subsidizing the poor kids who are going to state schools very early on.

So that's one example, but that percolates through a range of types of public expenditure in Brazil. There have been improvements over the last 12 years, but they are small improvements compared to the nature of the problem. Bolsa Familia and a number of other interventions from both the last, the Cordoza government and from the Lula government, have moved in the right direction, but we still have a long way to go in terms of using the state's redistributive power to actually provide opportunities to the poor. (Note 1) (Note 2)

A revolution, but a patient and peaceful one

MR. FERREIRA:

If I could just add to that as well. I think we are asking for a revolution, but it's a revolution that has got to be patient, peaceful and pro-market……and what we're asking for is a joint resolve by developing countries to see their poor people and their masses as resources that are not getting a chance to contribute and to start investing in them in a major way.

It will require some measure of conflict because some of the current subsidies will have to be taken away from elites, but elites should see this as an investment in their children and grandchildren living in a more peaceful society where trust is greater and where more people are productive, and the key thing about being pro-markets is that we'd like, in fact, markets to be more competitive, not less, and by being more competitive, we mean that more people, often poor people, can have access to them and participate in them.

Mr Francois Bourguignon had the following to say, as excerpted from an essay carried by The Business Times (22 Sep 2005):

Equity as the “equality of opportunities”

Equity is not the same as equality. By equity we mean equality of opportunities, where opportunities are the factors that make it possible for people to generate a certain income and achieve a certain level of well-being. In an equitable society, all have the same opportunities to pursue a life of their choosing, whether this is in terms of acquiring an education, obtaining credit, finding a job or participating in the public debate, regardless of their country of birth, the wealth and social status of their parents, or their gender, race, caste, ethnicity or social class.

Equity amidst Inequality

The distribution of incomes, education levels, wealth and other assets will typically be unequal in an equitable society, because people differ in the effort they make, in their desire to bear risks, or in the way they process information. Such inequality of incomes is not only acceptable, but often desirable for the incentives it provides.

What is not acceptable is inequality that derives from lack of opportunities and discrimination. A lower-caste girl born in the slums of Mumbai faces a grim future, unlike a boy born to university-educated parents in a well-heeled neighbourhood of the same city, or the vast majority of people born in the developed world. An Aids orphan in rural Zambia will have fewer opportunities than a child of privilege in the capital.

Citizens of developed countries live on average about 20 years longer, get at least six more years of schooling and have better health, and choose from a wide range of options to fulfill their potential than their peers in low-income countries…….

The huge differences within and between countries are not only morally unacceptable; they also hamper growth and poverty reduction……

Equity fosters growth

There are two main reasons why equity is good for growth. First, lack of opportunities harms initiative and deprives societies of the talent and efforts of some of its members. A poor woman who would like to set up a small shop will generally have a hard time finding credit and may never start the business, however profitable it may be. Bright children from disadvantaged castes may never get a chance to go to school. Poor farmers without access to crop insurance grow safer but less profitable crops. More equal access to credit, education, insurance and so on would lead to greater growth.

Second, equity is good for growth because societies with an equitable distribution of resources tend to have more equitable political arrangements where a majority of the citizens, and not just an elite, participate directly or indirectly in public decision-making. In turn, societies with more equitable political systems have better economic institutions: for example, better protection of personal and property rights, greater rule of law, less corruption that lead to faster growth. This is illustrated powerfully by the contrasting historical experiences of North and South America.

Inequity and its perpetuation

If equity is such a good thing, then why are many societies deeply inequitable? Societies that start off with an inequitable distribution of resources tend to put in place inequitable economic and political institutions. So inequity is perpetuated across generations, because elites control power and capture the benefits from economic activities. This is not only unjust; it is economically inefficient. Elites that capture power to their own benefit prevent large parts of the population from realising their economic potential and therefore slow down the progress of the whole community towards a healthy and prosperous life.

While history is important in determining equity, change is possible. Indeed, history is full of examples of governments effecting change, spontaneously when reforms good for both equity and efficiency are available, or in response to political changes. Where there is a political base for action, many policies and programmes can extend opportunities to the poor. But expanding equity so as to foster growth can also require actions that limit elite capture: opening up the financial system, reducing the concentration of market power in certain sectors, controlling the negative consequences of corporatism, ensuring transparency and accountability of government action at the central and local level, and so on……..

I believe that equity needs to be brought back to the centre of discourse and action in poverty reduction and economic development. Equity matters not only for its own sake, but for its role in shaping a dynamic, innovative and efficient economy both at the national and at the global level.......

Note 1:

The education situation in Brazil is not unlike that in India: see post on India's economy & social justice: responding to Ngiam Tong Dow (24 July 2005)


Note 2: Social justice / Equity, Singapore-style

Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong promised first-class education to ALL during his second National Day Rally speech (marking Singapore’s 40th anniversary as an independent nation) on Sunday 21 August 2005.

It was reported as follows by the Singapore press:

“We must have an education system which offers first-class education to all and not just an elite few at the top ….. We want to develop every talent, not just those who are academically inclined. And we want to prevent the problem of low skills and low incomes from going on into the next generation….. That’s why Singapore works. It is not just because we have a few stars but a strong Singapore team…… We are aiming for a mountain range, not a pinnacle. We want many routes up, many ways to succeed.” - The Straits Times (22 August 2005), quoting PM Lee

“Big strides are being taken to ensure that all Singaporeans, and not just an elite few, are given equal opportunities to receive a first class education. The Government is making it a top priority to push every student to study beyond secondary level, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong promised when he touched on the education system during yesterday's National Day Rally…..” - TODAY (22 August 2005), which headlined its report as 'No child will get left behind'.


Some of the reactions from the public, as reported by the Singapore press:

“The first feature that struck me was how inclusive the speech was. This is truly a Prime Minister for ALL Singaporeans. He went out of his way to emphasise no one will be left behind as Singapore pursues further economic growth and prosperity. He is not going to be happy to just have the elite prosper while the common folk suffer. He went into detail on housing assistance for the poorest and higher education for those who did not do as well in the regular schools, helping those who need help by investing in their future and boosting their drive to do better for themselves. This is a great extension of the vision first enunciated last year; and a fantastic road map moving forward…..”
- Su Guaning, President, NTU (Nanyang Technological University): The Business Times (29 Aug 2005)

“….. I was particularly impressed by PM Lee’s emphasis that the education system should offer a first-class education to all and not just an elite few, and that every talent is important in building up an invincible nation….”
- Chua Thian Poh, Chairman & CEO, Ho Bee Investment Ltd : The Business Times (29 Aug 2005)

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com

Dumbing down of Hindu society (1) – ‘Mother of All (Open) Secrets’

There is this observation that commentaries on Hinduism as appear in this blog are based on quoting selectively about Hinduism.

This blog does, indeed, assiduously seek out selections of information – facts AND considered opinions (by scholars and others) – which tend to be studiously hidden, glossed over or downplayed in much of the popular discourse about Hinduism and its history. Keeping such historical facts and views ‘out of sight’ has the intended effect of keeping them ‘out of mind’ and, thereby, creating / sustaining a superficial, distorted or incorrect perception of important aspects of religion, history and society.

Why should we NOT try to figure out the true underlying causes of what even the respected historian Prof R C Majumdar has referred to as the “degeneration of Hindu society”?

Let us face up to the fact that the greatest damage to Hinduism has been inflicted from within, none more corrosive and toxic than the doctrine of Varnashramam as elaborated by the Manusmriti. It is said that a good measure of one’s character is the company one keeps. If so, let us get to know that Manu had such infamous admirers as Adolf Hitler and Friedrich Neitzche (Note 1).

The greatest threat to Hinduism comes NOT from the proselytizing religions (e.g. Christianity and Islam), but from those like the Sankaracharyas and other Hindutvawadis who are more concerned with the preservation of their religious orders / institutions and caste dominance than the effective regeneration of Hinduism by curing it of its single most debilitating affliction, viz. varnashramam. Nothing in India is more repulsive to modern standards of human rights and dignity than varna casteism.

It is always unsettling when one’s worldview or perception is challenged. But the response cannot be to close the mind to fresh information and insights. Without such additional or alternative viewpoints one cannot hope to account for an India that is marching into the 21st century as one of the most illiterate and malnourished nations of the world. The world’s largest democracy has a socio-economic order that disables and marginalizes a vast majority of its own people, i.e. nearly three quarters of its population (largely, the OBCs and Dalits). The ‘tryst with destiny’ (as Pandit Nehru proclaimed at the first midnight of independence in 1947) appears NOT to have been faithfully engaged for more than half a century after British rule. Why?

The answer is not to be found in what the brilliant sons and daughters of India were taught at the London School of Economics after World War II, a trendy nonsense that too many academics, political analysts, and think tankers have propagated for far too long (the latest being a former senior civil servant from Singapore). Instead, the answer is to be found first and foremost in the indifference and callousness towards the plight of the lesser ones that the age-old casteism of Brahmanical Hinduism, in particular its ‘karma-dharma’ logic, has bred in society.


The seed of Varnashramam in the Rig-Veda

The seed of varnashramam was already sown in Vedic times (a period of history that is said to have ended sometime between 800 BC and 500 BC), as evidenced by the Purushasukta of the Rig-Veda (the oldest of the Vedas). This is the hymn (X.90) of the Rig-Veda that alone enunciates the theory of the divine origin of varnas. It is the first mention in the Vedas of the story of the gods performing an anatomical division of Purusha (a cosmic or primeval being), and translated as follows:

“the Brahmana was his mouth; the Rajanya (later to be known as Kshatriya) was made his arms; the being (called) the Vaisya was his thighs; the Sudra sprang from his feet.”
- R C Majumdar’s Ancient India (8th edition), 1977

There is no mention of varna in the Rig-Veda prior to this hymn. Another Rig-Vedic hymn (IX.112) - believed to be of an earlier date than the Purushasukta – talks of members of the same family taking to different crafts and trades:

“A bard I am, my father a leech,
And my mother is a grinder of corn,
Diverse in means, but all wishing wealth,
Equally we strive for cattle.”

This suggests that the notion of hereditary occupations had not yet developed in society, and there was, therefore, freedom and mobility of labour (Majumdar).

In the early Vedic period the distinction was mainly between the fair-skinned Aryans and the dark-skinned natives (Dravidians) who were referred to, in derogatory terms, as Dasas in the Rig-Veda. It is only later, after the four-fold division of society was conceived (as in the Purushasukta), that the Dasas would be slotted into the varna of Sudras, an extremely degrading term.


The creation of Sanskrit as a language unintelligible to commoners

According to Majumdar, the major change (in Aryan society) that would act as a trigger to all subsequent societal changes was “the growing obscurity of the language of the hymns (the Vedic language)” (Note 2). Majumdar adds:

“The language of the old Vedic hymns was no longer understood by the common people, and a special training was required to master them. The consequences of this natural phenomenon were great and far-reaching. In the first place, need was felt of a class of men, who had special instruction in the old Vedic texts, and thus arose the professional Brahmana (Brahmin) class, destined to develop into a rigid caste at no distant date. Secondly, the Vedic hymns came to be regarded as the Canonical book, to which it was impossible to add, and the religion thus assumed a more or less stereotyped form……… We hear no more of those simple ceremonials of worship, breathing a sense of healthy and intimate relation between God and man. Instead, we find the energy of the priestly class directed to a number of ceremonies, which they developed in endless details, and to which they attached the most fanciful and mystic significance. Indeed the priestly class now devoted their whole attention to find out the hidden and mystic meaning of the rites and ceremonies. These ceremonies comprehend both domestic rites as well as great (fire) sacrifices, and form a body of rituals, probably the most stupendous and complex which has ever been elaborated by man.” (p. 78 - 79) (Note 3)

Majumdar also draws attention to a sacrifice called Vratya-Stoma which consisted of four rites, “by means of which persons outside the pale of Brahmanic fold were admitted into the orthodox society. The existence of this sacrifice conclusively proves that the Hindu society in old days was not so rigid as at present, and opened its doors to all persons.” (p. 83)

While elaborate rites, ceremonies, and ascetic practices (e.g. tapas or meditation accompanied by physical torture) had been taking the place of the simple religious worship of the good old times, an "intellectual section of the people" was inclining more and more towards believing that bliss and salvation were attainable only by true knowledge. Majumdar elaborates:

“They did not altogether discard rites, ceremonies, and austerities, but relegated them to a minor position, and laid down the doctrine, that 'he who knows God, attains to God, nay, he is God.’ Such philosophic speculation was of course no new thing, for its germs are traceable even in the RgVeda, and a distinction between Karma-kanda and Jnana-kanda, i.e. between rituals and knowledge, was always recognized in the Vedas. But it is only towards the close of the Vedic period, that these philosophic speculations were systematized and incorporated in the revealed literature, and thereby assumed an important position.

The general body of early philosophical treatises is known by the name of Upanishad. The number of Upanishads known to us is exceedingly large, about 200 in number, but many of them belong to very late times. The oldest Upanishads like the Brhadaranyaka and the Chhandogya, however, go back to a period anterior to 600 BC, and contain bold speculations about the eternal problems of human thought concerning God, man, and the universe. There was no doubt some sort of antagonism between the devotees of the ritual and the hilosophers, and it is not without significance that the Kshatriyas distinguished themselves in the domain of pure thought. The Brahmanas (Brahmins) were the sole authorities in questions affecting rites and ceremonies, but in philosophical speculations, they had rivals in the Kshatriyas, and sometimes even took lessons from them.

It is impossible to deal in detail with the philosophic speculations of the Upanishads, which are justly regarded as the most important contribution of India towards the world’s stock of spiritual thought. They give evidence of a rare intellectual attainment which has won the rapturous praise of the learned world.” (p. 84 – 85) (Note 4)

The emergence of the class of Brahmanas to interpret Sanskrit texts

An important development in Vedic society was the emergence of two leading classes, viz. the Brahmanas and the Kshatriyas, out of the general mass of population or commoners who came to be known as the Vaisyas (Note 5). According to Majumdar, it is only in the later Vedic period, when the growing obscurity of the language of the Vedic texts required a professional class of interpreters, that a definite class of Brahmanas (or Brahmins) arose. At the same time, a distinct Kshatriya class evolved in response to the growing importance of warriors as the Aryans spread eastwards across the northern stretches of the Indian subcontinent.

Even for the hymn of Purushasukta in the Rig-Veda, there was no rigid caste system as yet:

“There is nothing to show that none but the son of Brahmana could belong to that class. Many passages indicate that the knowledge of Vedic texts and religious ceremonies was looked upon as the primary qualification, and heredity counted for little, in the recognition of a person as Brahmana.…… There is enough evidence to show that the caste was not solely determined by the accident of birth, and the professions normally laid down for the different castes were never scrupulously followed in practice. As to the other essentials of caste, the prohibition of interdining among the different classes was not even thought of, and intermarriage between different classes was in vogue. The marriage of the three upper classes with the Sudras was indeed looked upon with disfavour, but it was not positively forbidden. Lastly, the Brahmanas had not yet attained an unquestioned position of supremacy, the Kshatriyas having successfully contested it for long.

The contrast between the ‘Arya’ and the ‘Sudra’, however, came to be more and more accentuated during the later part of the Vedic period. It was claimed that the Sudras had no right to approach the sacred fire, i.e. perform sacrifice, or to read the sacred texts, although many passages in early texts clearly admit these rights……. marriage with the Sudra gradually came to be looked upon with disfavour. These were portents of evil days (ahead) for the Sudras, but as yet there was no question of relegating them to a position of abject humiliation, such as has since been their fate.” (Majumdar, p. 88 – 89).

In the case of ‘Arya’ women, their general position changed for the worse (Note 6). “…. there are many references to women teachers,
possessing high spiritual knowledge. Even later literature refers to Brahmavadinis, a class of women who devoted their whole lives to study and spiritual meditation. All these offer a striking contrast to the later age, such as that represented by the Manu-samhita (or Manu-smriti) when a woman was forbidden to study Vedic literature.” (Majumdar, p. 91)

‘The Mother of All (Open) Secrets’

It is usual for an overwhelming majority of people to read only abridged / sanitized versions of the scriptures OR commentaries on the scriptures. It is relevant to mention here that until recent times, most Hindus (those referred to by such derogatory labels as ‘Sudras’ and ‘outcastes’) could not even do that because they could have read or heard the Vedas only at the risk of having molten lead poured into their ears! Sheer curiosity makes one wonder as to what treasure of knowledge and wisdom may have been so jealously guarded by the priests for more than two millennia!! We will find out definitively below.

On the other hand, there is no shortage of popular writings that contain heavy doses of fanciful (re-)interpretations or representations of what Hinduism is: by either glossing over some troubling aspects of the ancient texts that are wholly indefensible and offensive to modern sensibilities OR inventing convenient facts in the eagerness to ‘dress up the bride’. It may be argued that these are implicit rejections of objectionable parts of the ancient texts. If so, one should also be prepared to question / reject such other constructs of the texts OR claims about the texts as may be founded on OR (logically) developed from these same objectionable parts.

For instance, the claim of the Vedas being revealed canons (i.e. the claim that all of the hymns in the Vedas were revealed to man by the gods) should be abandoned when large tracts of, say, the Rig-Veda (the oldest and the most important of the Vedas) comprise hymns NOT dripping with divine love or selfless love for the divine (as in the bhakti literature of later years) NOR brimming over with rare knowledge and wisdom, BUT rather seething with contempt for AND invoking the vengeance of the vedic gods (e.g. Indra, Soma) against the natives (Dasas / Dasyus) who were valiantly resisting the Arya intruders into ancient India (see Osho below). It is to be noted that not all of these hymns are pointed against the natives of ancient India: some of these hymns are directed at other rival Arya tribes, seemingly engaged in territorial turf battles.

The malevolence of these Rig-Vedic hymns cannot escape notice. The hymns manifest the darkest of human thoughts and the meanest of human behaviours: opposing human tribes / communities are demonized, and the vedic gods are being tempted (through offerings of ‘food’) to visit the worst forms of destruction upon the ‘enemies’. There is nothing intellectually, morally or spiritually elevating about these hymns: they more appropriately belong to ‘hate literature’. This point finds no mention in popular discourse about the Vedas: it is understandably too embarrassing to talk about or admit.

Yet, there is no hesitation to mindlessly repeat that (all of) the Vedas (with no exclusions) are of divine origin and, therefore, infallible. This premise would then lend support to assertions that varnashramam as elaborated in the Manusmriti is divinely ordained. Such sophistry has to stop. Large sections of Indian society have suffered enough humiliation and disabilities under this parasitic varna-based social order over more than two thousand years.

Few do ever manage to read the entirety of ancient texts, even if available as translations in, say, English. Such reading of the original texts (good translations would suffice) will be to hear directly the actual ‘voice’ of the scriptures (assisted, of course, by glossaries, explanatory notes, and alternative commentaries / interpretations), instead of settling for or relying only on mere ‘voice-overs’, e.g. sermons, commentaries, etc. This also applies to the sacred texts of the ‘faiths of the book’, viz. Judaism, Christianity and Islam. To one who does so with his mental blinkers off, it will most likely be a revealing and unsettling experience. It is an exercise that would, of course, not only take up time, but also require great patience and diligence. But it is something that one should seriously consider doing at some point of time to realize the truth by and for oneself.

One of those who appear to have done such reading of the Vedas is Osho, who has spoken as follows:

“Your holy scriptures are dividing you, because every scripture demands that it be the only holy scripture. That necessarily creates conflict: Hindus cannot believe that The Bible is holy .... great competition. The Vedas are holy because they are the ancientmost scripture in the world; God himself wrote them. It is so stupid to talk this way.

I have talked with learned Hindu scholars and asked them, “Have you ever thought about your Vedas, which you claim that God has written? Just look at the content .... the very content shows that it cannot be written by God; there is an intrinsic impossibility.” And I was surprised – great scholars like Omkarnath Maharaj, who was thought to be the authority on the Vedas, were shocked by my question. He said, “I have never thought about it.”

I said, “You are the greatest authority. Open the Vedas anywhere, at any page. I don’t insist on a certain page – open it at random and read the content. The content will give you the proof that it cannot be written by God.”

He had a copy of Rigveda by his side. He opened it at random, and what was the content? He was so shocked. The content was: “A brahmin is praying to God...” Now, how can God write it? – “A brahmin is praying to God, saying, ‘I pray so much, but you don’t listen; there is a limitation to patience. This year you have proved it: just let your clouds rain on my fields, and not on the fields of my enemies.” This kind of rubbish is written by God? It is intrinsically an absolute proof that some stupid brahmin is writing it.”
- Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 104

“..... brahmins have lived like parasites on people – they don’t do
anything except religious rituals. Buddha was against all religious
rituals; he was against the Vedas, which are full of nonsense.”
- Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 66 (Note 7)

Osho is no ordinary soul. He has been described, for instance, by Mr V N Narayan (Chief editor, Hindustan Times) as “a fountain of wisdom that never goes dry”. He is without doubt one of 20th century’s most radical thinkers. And it is such a great mind that has called the Vedas as “full of nonsense”. It is a big letdown indeed. What the self-serving priesthood has been guarding so jealously for ages is NOT, after all, a treasure-trove of infallible knowledge and wisdom, but a load of “nonsense”, according to Osho who has spoken so emphatically and definitively (as above) on the matter! This must be the ‘Mother of All (Open) Secrets’ !!

Make no mistake. Osho was no less critical about some of the ways of other religions (Note 8).

Note 1:

OSHO, otherwise known as Bhagwan Rajneesh (one of 20th century’s most radical and prolific thinkers):

“There are great criminals, but Manu seems to top them all. Adolf Hitler was very respectful of Manu; Friedrich Neitsche was respectful of Manu – not of Gautam Buddha – and Manu has been a curse to this country. He has taken all humanity from millions of people, they are living like animals……

….. for five thousand years these people have been oppressed, exploited; their whole dignity as human beings has been destroyed – and they are one-fourth of the Hindu population. And they do the ugliest jobs; they should be respected, they should be honored for that. But on the contrary, even their shadow is untouchable. If the shadow of an untouchable falls on you, you have to take a bath immediately to purify yourself.”
- Priests and Politicians: The Mafia of the Soul (1999), p. 9 - 10

As also Wendy Doniger said in the Introduction to the The Laws of Manu (Penguin, 1991), Friedrich Neitzche sang Manu’s praises and used Manu as a stick with which to beat Christianity, which he characterized as ‘the victory of Chandala values, …. the undying Chandala revenge as the religion of love’. Neitzche’s extraordinary interpretation of Manusmrti :

“Here the proposed task is to breed no fewer than four races simultaneously: a priestly, a warrior, and a trading and farming race, and finally a menial race, the Sudras. Here we are manifestly no longer among animal-tamers: a species of human being a hundred times more gentle and rational is presupposed even to conceive the plan of such a breeding. One draws a breath of relief when coming out of the Christian sick-house and dungeon atmosphere into this healthier, higher, wider world. How paltry the ‘New Testament’ is compared with Manu, how ill it smells! But this organization too needed to be dreadful – this time in struggle not with the beast but with its antithesis, with the non-bred human being, the hotchpotch human being, the Chandala. And again it had no means of making him weak and harmless other than making him sick.”

Note 2:

Sanskrit is really an artificial language that was created to serve the purpose of a small self-serving group that was seeking to differentiate itself from the rest of the people. This would lead to a strong reaction many centuries later from Gautama Buddha who:

“introduced the practice of holding religious discourses in the language of the common people, in preference to the highly elaborate Sanskrit tongue, unintelligible to the people at large”. (Majumdar, p. 162).

Note 3:

Vedic Aryan ritual of fire sacrifices:

It was the duty of each householder to set up fire-places in his house to raise sacrificial fires. Offerings of grain, milk, honey, etc. were made into the sacrificial fires. There were also several kinds of sacrifices, e.g. Nirudhapasubandha, which entailed the killing of animals. In the Asvamedha yajna performed for the king, a horse was killed and its flesh roasted. In the case of the more dreadful Purushamedha ceremony, a human being was sacrificed instead of a horse. (Majumdar, p. 82 - 84)

The Vedic conception of a host of gods none of whom could claim to be superior to the other was quite distinct from the theism of Saivism and Vaishnavism that entailed the belief in a supreme deity, viz. Siva / Sakti or Vishnu. The elaborate fire sacrifices (of the Vedic religion) for propitiating gods and gaining favours of them, are in contrast to the personal worship of the images of the supreme deity of Siva or Vishnu in temples dedicated to Him (Majumdar, p. 431).

In contrast, the Dravidian / Tamilian worship involves offering flowers to the deities: hence, it is called ‘poosai’, which has entered Sanskrit and changed into ‘puja’.


Note 4:

“The Egyptians and the Indians were both faced with the common problem of death. ‘Had all ended for the man with the moment in which he had created to breathe?’ was their common enquiry, and to prevent such a horrible thing, their common endeavour. Yet the one found the true solution in the mighty Pyramids, containing the embalmed bodies, while the other was led to evolve the immortal Upanishads. This contrast is interesting and instructive, and not only indicates the true character of Indian civilization, but its superiority to all that preceded it.” (Majumdar, p. 85 – 86)

Note 5:

The Vaisyas, as the remaining Aryans now came to be called, found their position steadily deteriorating, though they were regarded as superior to the Sudras. A passage in Aitrareya Brahmana even goes so far as to say that a Vaisya “is to be lived on by another and to be oppressed at will”, indicating thereby their absolute dependence on the two upper classes. (Majumdar, p. 88)


Note 6:

“They (‘Arya’ women) lost the right to the Upanayana ceremony, and all their sacraments, excluding marriage, were performed without the recitation of Vedic mantras. ……… Polygamy certainly prevailed, and the following hymn in the Atharvaveda (V.17.8) clearly refers to polyandry and inter-marriage:

Even though there were non-Brahmana
previous husbands of a woman,
The Brahmana alone becomes her husband
If he seizes her hand.

Theoretically the wife was still accorded a very high position. Thus the Satapatha Brahmana (V.2.1.10) says that she is half her husband and completes him. But there are unerring signs that her status and dignity were lowered a great deal during this period. Thus many of the religious ceremonies, formerly left to the wife, were now performed by priests. She was not allowed to attend the political assemblies. A submissive wife who would keep her mouth shut and dine after her husband is now held up as the ideal. The birth of daughter was most unwelcome; for she was regarded as a source of misery and a son alone was the saviour of the family.” (Majumdar, p. 89 – 90)


Note 7: (to be filled)


Note 8:

“Religion has done so much against humanity, with good intentions. Those people were not functioning with bad intentions, but they were certainly idiots, not knowing exactly what they were doing, and how human psychology functions. They exploited man.......

The temporal power protects the priest, the priest protects the temporal power..... For example, poverty: all the religions teach, ‘Blessed are the poor.’ It is not only Jesus. Jesus says it very accurately, fully, in one sentence, in one maxim: ‘Blessed are the poor for they shall inherit the kingdom of God.’ But this is the teaching of all the religions: you should accept your poverty as a blessing, as a God-given gift. This is just a test of your faith. If you can pass through this fire test of poverty without grumbling, without in any way thinking that this is unjust, if you can go through it as a God-given gift, then the kingdom of God is yours.

It is a great consolation to Lazarus, when Jesus says to him ..... It happened: Lazarus was very poor; and the richest man in the village was giving a feast on his birthday. Lazarus was hungry, thirsty, and passing through that village he asked for some water. The servants threw him out. They said, ‘Don’t you see that our master is giving a feast and great guests have gathered? You are just a beggar! – you have some nerve to enter the house and ask for water. Go to hell! Go away from here as quickly as possible.

Jesus says to Lazarus: ‘Don’t be worried. You will see: in paradise, you will be enjoying all the pleasures and this man will be suffering in hell-fire, thirsty, and will ask, ‘Lazarus, give me some water.’ Great consolation! – but a great strategy to protect the rich from the poor. The rich are few, the poor are many. Once they get the idea that it s not a blessing but a curse, they will kill all these rich people. It is good both ways: a consolation for the poor, so that poverty is a blessing and a protection for the rich, so that the rich cannot revolt.

Religions have been the reason poverty goes on existing in the world; otherwise there is no reason at all for it, particularly now, when science and technology can transform this whole earth into paradise.

The religious people would not like this earth to be turned into paradise, because then what would happen to their paradise? They would love the earth to remain as poor, as starved, as hungry and as sick as it is, because upon this their whole business depends. The rich donate to the churches because the church protects them. The poor donate, who have not even enough to eat. They donate to the churches because it is the church who gives them guidance. And this life is small, this life is not much; much of it has passed, a little is left – that too will pass. Then there is eternal life, of eternal joys. The church shows the way, Jesus shows the way.”
- Osho, Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 17 - 21

“.... the Catholic church .... is the most organized religion in the world, and the greatest in numbers .... It has burned thousands of women alive, by fictitiously labeling them as witches..... because they were carrying the older and more ancient tradition of the days when the
world was pagan. They were nature worshippers, and for Catholicism that is the worst crime – because that means there is no need of a God, nature is enough. There is no need of a Jesus Christ as a savior, because nobody is drowning. And there is no need for the Catholic priests and confessionals, because nature knows nothing as sin. These women were burned alive because they were pagans......

The church’s power has remained, although its secular power has shrunk to eight square miles in the Vatican. But it is still a kingdom – an independent nation, and the pope is also the head of a state.

Right now the manager of the Vatican’s bank is in hiding, because the Italian government has an arrest warrant against him. But they cannot enter the Vatican. It is an independent country……

Millions of people have been killed in the name of religion and God in the crusades, jihads and other religious wars......

Just a few days ago the pope declared that the church should not take part in any kind of politics; that Christian priests, monks, bishops, and
cardinals should remain beyond politics. And while he was saying all this, he was sending millions of dollars to a political party in Poland to fight against communism. These people have so many faces! If you are not to take part in politics, then why should you be interested in the communist party not remaining in power in Poland? .....

But this is not new. This has been going on since the crucifixion of Jesus. If that poor carpenter’s son had known that this is what was going to be the ultimate result of his teachings, Jews would not have been needed to crucify him; he would have committed suicide himself!”
- Osho, Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 63 - 65

“..... every prophet, every messiah, every avatara, every tirthankara is
claiming that only he is the right one..... Jesus goes on declaring that he is the only son of God. Naturally, he cannot accept Gautama Buddha or Confucius or Lao Tzu or Basho or Bodhidharma – not even as cousins. ....

Six hundred years after Jesus, Mohammed established a new religion – because the Arabs had no religion of their own. They were a nomadic race, wanderers; they had no organized religion. Mohammed collected those Arabs under the name of Mohammedanism. He himself was an Arab, and naturally had great influence. For his whole life he was fighting – war and war, not a single day of rest – and on his sword was his message: “My message is peace.” It was written on his sword!

....... If peace is your message.... and certainly he believed that peace was his message, but it had to follow his conditions: if the whole world becomes Mohammedan there will be peace. But how is it possible? He has named his religion.... Mohammedanism is not the name given by him to his religion; the name that he has given is Islam, and Islam simply means peace. A strange kind of peace! – the prophet of peace fought his whole life .....

...... Jews are one of the races which have suffered most. Of course, they have their part and their contribution in their suffering. They have suffered most because they were the first to claim, “We are the chosen people of God, and it is our basic right to rule over the world. Other human beings are inferior human beings.”
- Osho, Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 105 - 107

“Mohammedans burnt one of the greatest treasures of the world, the library of Alexandria. The library was the greatest in the ancient world. The fire continued for almost six months, the library was so big. It took six months for it to be burnt down completely. And the man who burnt it was a Mohammedan, Calipha………. He came with a Koran in one hand and with a burning torch in the other, and he asked the librarian, ‘I have a simple question. In this big library, millions of books are there…..’

Those books contained all that humanity had learned up to that time, and it was really more than we know now. That library contained every information about Lemuria, Atlantis, and all the scriptures of Atlantis, the continent that disappeared into the Atlantic. It was the ancient-most library, a great preserve. Had it still been, humanity would have been totally different – because we are rediscovering many things which had already been discovered.

This Calipha said, ‘If this library contains only that which is contained in the Koran, then it is not needed; it is superfluous. If it contains more than is contained in the Koran, then it is wrong. Then it has to be destroyed immediately. Either way it has to be destroyed immediately. Why manage such a big library unnecessarily? The Koran is enough. And if you say that it contains many more things than the Koran, then those things are bound to be wrong, because the Koran is the truth.’

Holding the Koran in one hand, he started the fire with the other hand – in the name of the Koran. Mohammed must have cried and wept in heaven, because in his name, the library was being burnt…..”
- Osho, Bauls: The Dancing Mystics (1999), p.110 - 111

The posts to come in this series:

Dumbing down of Hindu society (2) – ‘Manu-doom’

Dumbing down of Hindu society (3) – Work Ethics

and more……

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com