Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2012 Sanjeev Sabhlok's revolutionary blog
Here are extracts from a discussion on FB:
GS Dear Sir, Humbly I must put that I am really pained at this misinformed post of yours which mallignes Hinduism. Caste system is present not just in Hinduism but also Christians, Muslims, Sikhs etc. In fact in Kerala there are separate churches and burial grounds for Dalit Christians…Hindus welcomed a Sikh Prime Minister, a muslim president was more popular than the present Hindu president . UPPER CASTE Hindus will certainly WELCOME A DALIT PM, KR NARAYANAN WAS A LOW CASTE GUY Caste System still survives because of the reservation policies of the government and only free markets and economic progress can eliminate caste system over a period of time
Sanjeev Sabhlok "Caste system is present not just in Hinduism but also Christians, Muslims, Sikhs etc." Let's assume this were true. Does it mean that if a fool jumps in a well, you too should follow the fool? The point is this caste thing is the GREATEST blight on mankind today. It is intolerable that Hinduism has a caste system. It is discriminatory and offensive at all levels.
GS These days it is fashion to malign Hinduism, of course people donot have balls to malign other religions .I have myself read your 'measured posts' on Islam. Caste system is not a product of Hinduism alone and I am not sure how it came up in the first place…but some kind of factions and divisions are present in all societies. I strongly object to you calling hindus racists and against liberty. that is something that can be avoided
Even Krishna said that you donot become a kshtriya by birth and Brahmans fought in the war in Kurukshetra….now for your information…here is the message of Bhagwad Gita ( and tell me if you find a better message from any other religion) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V42dN_z0SCY&feature=related
Hinduism and Buddhism are in my knowledge the only religions that come closest to freedom and liberty….as against Islam, which one of my friend calls (and I agree) a collectivist political ideology
Sanjeev Sabhlok Dear GS re: "I strongly object to you calling hindus racists and against liberty. that is something that can be avoided".
I'm afraid the truth must be spoken. There are many Hindus who are AGAINST caste system and in favour of liberty. But those who want to exploit the caste system for their personal gain are opposed to changing it. They also oppress the "Dalits".
You keep saying (very incorrectly, I may add, but I'll not debate that), that "Caste system is not a product of Hinduism alone and I am not sure how it came up in the first place…but some kind of factions and divisions are present in all societies." The truth is that the caste system with its most obnoxious and hideous discrimination is ONLY found in Hinduism. Social inequality is found everywhere but has never been institutionalised to the extent found in Hinduism.
Please don't quote me the Gita or Vedas. I care for the truth that prevails TODAY. And the truth is very ugly. The sooner you admit it, and start a battle against this evil, you will help India's growth as a free nation. When 30 per cent of India's population is treated almost on par with slaves, India can't become free.
Jayendra Saraswati, guru and chief of the Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam says:
Even Muslims and Christians could now enter some of the major temples in the country if they professed they had faith in Hinduism. He said there should be no discrimination among people. [Source]
Why can't they enter if they have no faith in Hinduism? There is nothing preventing ANYONE from entering a Church or mosque. So why this condition in Hinduism that you can enter a temple ONLY if you have faith in Hinduism?
E.g. someone has asked on the internet:
Can a Christian attend a mosque?
Response:
Mosque is the House of Al-Mighty God Allah Subhanahu Wata'ala. Every mankind are slave of God. Every mankind have the right to be in God's House. During Prophet and Apostle of Al-Mighty God Allah Subhanahu Wata'ala Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu'alaihi Wassalam All meeting with Christians and other religion are done in the Mosque.
Sooner or later the Christians shall be Muslims. Therefore let them be in the Mosque. [Source]
Indeed, if a religion claims to be tolerant but won't even let non-believers enter its temple, then how can it claim to be tolerant?
BJP/RSS is fond of fiddling with textbooks (particularly history books), largely with the implicit aim of increasing communal hatred among Hindus towards Muslims. Pakistan, too, has been altering textbooks to inflame Muslims sentiments against Hindus. Indeed, Pakistan text books blatantly write about Hindus "as enemies of Islam".
"Although an unbiased review of history would show that Hindus and Muslims enjoyed centuries of harmonious co-existence, Hindus are repeatedly described as extremists and eternal enemies of Islam.
Hindu culture and society are portrayed as unjust and cruel, while Islam is portrayed as just and peaceful," USCIRF said in its report.
Pakistan's public schools and privately-run madrassas are not teaching tolerance but are exacerbating religious differences.
I must add that while I was in Los Angeles, my father was invited by a Muslim scholar who teaches comparative religion in one of the minor universities there, to talk about Hinduism. I attended the talk in which the students were first introduced to Hinduism through a totally biased and distorted video. Thereafter my father spoke and largely clarified the meaning of Hinduism and its philosophy. There is a tendency among many people to look very critically at superficial aspects of Hinduism. I'm afraid that approach doesn't do its philosophy justice.
Fortunately, there are people like the former Acting Chief Justice of Pakistan Supreme Court Mr. Mohd Ramde Khalilee who met my father some years ago and expressed considerable interest in the Vedas, particularly since these had originated largely in the area that is now in Pakistan. [Source]
Mixing politics with the teaching of history – to distort the rich history of the sub-continent – is deplorable.
There are both good and bad points in each religion, and in each nation's history. And no doubt there will be different opinions about what happened in the past. The famous story of Shivaji and Afzal Khan is a classic example. Some think that Shivaji was a "hero". Others perhaps think he was a terrorist.
But history books should not make VALUE JUDGEMENTS about such events, merely record them.
Teachers must explain that what Shivaji (or Afzal Khan) did does not matter today, in our life. They must emphasise that this incident occurred a LONG time ago, well before India (or Pakistan) became independent. What matters is what we choose to do with our life. Students need to be taught that they as INDIVIDUALS are responsible for their own actions. And merely because something happened in the past doesn't mean it should prompt any "response" from us today.
Without such wisdom being imparted, the cycle of hatred and vengeance in the sub-continent will continue.
The way out is for both the Islamic and Hindu fanatics to revert to the PHILOSOPHY of their religion, and aim for the good of all mankind.
The BJP President, Gadkari, has said: "I don't go the temple. I don't perform puja," According to him, "Hinduism is a way of life. It is not about a religion".
That means you don't need to understand the Vedanta, don't need to understand Vedic metaphysics, but just because you claim to be a "Hindu" you can become one.
True, the Vedanta does not require anyone to go to temple or perform puja, but Hinduism is NOT such a meaningless concept as Gadkari seems to think. And I doubt if he has the slightest clue about the Vedanta or the Vedas.
I do know only this by now, that when it suits these people, they make the most ghastly aggressive claims about Hinduism – such as the ones that Golwalkar made, or the actions of Advani the nautanki, dressed up as Ram, going about India in a "chariot", leading to the demolition of the Babri Masjid and mass-killing of thousands of people across India.
And when it comes to banning books, these BJP types are the first to block liberty (including the alleged free market supporter – Modi). These were the people who forced Jha to publish his book Myth of the Holy Cow outside India. And till today there is NOT ONE SERIOUS BOOK that refutes the evidence that Jha has provided. These are the people who forced Deepa Mehta to film Water in Sri Lanka. And these are the people (ABVP, the BJP's youth branch) who beat up a professor in Delhi and stopped all discussion about the Ramayana in Delhi university.
I won't go into more detail, but it is increasingly clear that BJP is driven by a weird concept of Hindutva that has NOTHING to do with Hinduism. Gadkari says that Hindutva "is a debatable subject." I don't knwo what it is. All I know is that it has nothing to do with Hinduism but everything to do with aggressive jingoism clothed as Hinduism.
No matter which eminent writer of Hinduism I read, I'm unable to find anything that would justify the FOOLISH HALF-BAKED AGGRESSIVE INTOLERANT ACTIONS of BJP.
Hence I have long concluded that BJP leaders are FAKE Hindus, and are using the PRETENSE of Hinduism to fool millions of Indians.
Many BJP leaders are pure goondas; most are at least pure opportunitists.
But no one can fool everyone all the time. That's why BJP's attempts to fool India are doomed.
Addendum
See also this blog post: Swatantra party reached out to Hindus in a way that Jan Sangh couldn’t
I had discussed Vedic socialism here and shown that it doesn't make sense. Now I've been provided a reference to Vedantic socialism – an essay by Swami Rama Tirtha. [More about Rama Tirtha here]
I've never come across a more confused "Swami"!
To me it is increasingly clear that Hindu thought is 100% compatible with capitalism, not socialism. Anyone who tries to prove otherwise is undertaking a wild-goose chase.
Key extracts, with my comments indented
First of all as to the name, Socialism, Rama would prefer to call it Individualism.
[Sanjeev: So far so good]
The word Socialism gives prominence to the idea of the rule of society, but Rama says the right spirit of Truth is to assert the supremacy of the individual against all the world, all the universe. Then there is no worry, no anxiety. This is what Rama calls Individualism, let people call it Socialism, if they wish.
[Sanjeev: that's where this Swami goes so wrong! You can't mix up names of two extremely contradictory things]
This is Vedantic teaching from the stand – point of the individual.
We see again that the end of so called Socialism, being simply to bring down Capitalism, is so far identical with the end of the Vedanta, which means simply to strip you of all sense of possession, and to cast to the winds all sense of property, all selfish possession. That is the Vedanta and that is Socialism. The ends agree.
[Sanjeev: This is very incorrect. Capitalism DOES NOT require anyone to have possessions (or a sense of possessions). It leaves you free to choose whether you want possessions or not. The main thing is CHOICE.]
The Vedanta preaches equality, and so must the end of true Socialism be no deference, no respect, no regard for any outside possessions.
[Sanjeev: Socialism DOES NOT preach an end to the "regard for any outside possessions" - it preaches EQUALITY of possessions. Big difference in these two ideas. This Swami is super-ignorant. And by no means does socialism seek a situation of "no deference". This article was written in the 1890s, I'm now informed, so he wouldn't have known about Stalin and Nehru. But the socialists did not ever follow a society without "deference".].
This seems to be rather terrible and something very severe but there can be no happiness under the Sun unless a man gives up all sense of property and possessions, clinging and attachment. But Socialism simply wants a man to give up all this, whereas the Vedanta furnishes a great reason for doing the same.
[Sanjeev: Nowhere does socialism want man to "GIVE UP" the sense of possessions! What is this "swami" talking about! Socialism is about ensuring equality of possessions. The socialists thought that it was going to be a quicker way to increase wealth if everyone had equality of wealth as well. They were not preaching poverty!]
So called Socialism has been merely a study of the surface of things and comes to the conclusion that mankind should live on terms of equality, fraternity and love.
[Sanjeev: This swami was not born then, but millions of people were to be killed in ocialist USSR/China/N.Korea - not a sign of "love"]
The Vedanta studies the phenomena from the indigenous point of view. According to it the possession of any individual property is a most sacrilegious deed against one’s Atma or inner Self.
[Sanjeev: This Swami first says that Rama talks about individualism. Ram rajya was NOT the land of poverty but of prosperity. India takes pride that in its past it was the "golden sparrow" of the world. And here we have a "learned" Swami talking about total renunciation - and denial of individual property - as the main plank of Hinduism. I'm done with this man. Nothing to add. Vedantic socialism is simply not a tenable concept. It not only doesn't understand socialism as a concept, it also doesn't understand the Vedanta.]
Extract from the draft DOF – for comment.
* * *
I have argued (e.g. in BFN) that India’s corrupt governance can be attributable to the system of governance which fosters corruption. Some people have claimed, however, that Hinduism fosters corruption. This is clearly false since Hindus who work in the West have a lower rate of criminality than others.
But if this thesis turns out to be true, it would mean that India will remain corrupt as long as Hindus exist in India. So let me examine its key arguments further. N. Vittal and S.S. Gill have both suggested that Hinduism doesn’t treat corruption as a moral failing. N. Vittal writes:
Any number of examples are given in the puranas where a sinner having led a life of sin can get redemption by taking the name of Lord Narayana in his last moments as in the case of Ajamila. In social terms this has come to be accepted. People who lived a life of sin like the prodigal sons return to the straight and narrow path at some stage usually late in life. The sholka Vridha nari pativrata vridha veshya tapaswani probably represents the cynical acceptance of how people change in life from vice to virtue.
At another level, the very basis of Hinduism which believes in rebirth shows that every soul is given innumerable opportunities to improve itself on its onward path. There may be set backs for sins committed but then virtue is also earned. This endless cycle of birth and death leads to the ultimate goal of Moksha. The emphasis of our saints on getting out of the birth and death cycle also is an attempt to persuade people to come to the right path as early as possible. Punarapi jananam punarapi maranam punarapi jananai jathare sayanam iha samsare bahu dustare kripaya pare pahi murare said Adi Shankara in Bhaja Govindam reflecting the toils of repeated births and death.[1]
S.S. Gill states that ‘the numerous deviant actions of …[Hindu] gods are an integral part of Hindu folklore. And it is reasonable to infer that their influence on public morality could not be very wholesome. Such incidents, and there are any number of them, were bound to lower the importance of means used in achieving one’s ends. And coupled with a relatively relaxed concept of sin, their overall impact on social ethics was to enlarge the areas of permissiveness.’[2]
No doubt, Hinduism allows sins to be washed away merely by taking a dip in the Holy Ganges or by bribing the god/s at the local temple. Such cheap forgiveness sits uneasily with the theory of karma, but is widely accepted for the cathartic relief that this provides. (Note that all religions have some methcanism or other to allow an affordable catharsis from guilt). Recall that in chapter 1, I had noted that the Srimad Bhagavatam talks about saama –the process of pacifying; daana–the process of giving money in charity; bheda –the principle of divide and rule; and danda –the principle of punishment.[3]Vivekananda commented favourably on these four principles which were also emphasised in Kautilya’s Arthashastra,albeitin a slightly different form: sama, dama, bheda, danda. Dama represents a two-sided transaction, a trade. Through it we motivate others to do something for us. Daana, on the other hand,is one-sided, without an expectation of a return. Vivekandanda’ model translates thus: persuade, provide economic incentive, divide and rule, and punish. The problem, of course, is this that a focus on economic incentives can, without ethical self-restraint, justify even bribery!
Indeed, Vivekananda asked: ‘Is not doing work, though mixed with good and evil, better than doing nothing and passing an idle and inactive life, and being like stones?’[4] Even evil action, this could be taken to mean, in an extreme case, is presumably preferable to taking no action! To confound matters, he added: ‘Show your heroism; apply, according to circumstances, the fourfold political maxims of conciliation, bribery, sowing dissensions, and open war, to win over your adversary and enjoy the world – then you will be Dharmika (righteous)…. Of course, do not do any wrong, do no injure or tyrannise over anyone, but try to do good to others as much as you can.’[5] (This statement implies that one of India’s major Hindu gurus preached bribery? I hope this is a mistranslation, given its inconsistency with Vivekananda’s overall message.)
Nevertheless, such things do suggest a level of confusion, and some Indians perhaps find ready justification for their own corruption. Enlightened Hindus do insist that Hinduism is an ethical religion. The way out is for Hindu leaders to excommunicate corrupt Hindus and hand them over to the police. Only then can this issue be finally resolved. The other method to resolve it is, of course, for political system reforms to be introduced, as outlined in BFN. If corruption drops rapidly (as it should) then Hinduism would be exonerated.
[1] Paper presented by N. Vittal at Institute of Secretariat Training and Management, New Delhi, on 8 January2002, [http://cvc.nic.in/vscvc/cvcspeeches/sp9jan02.pdf]
[2] Gill, S.S., The Pathology of Corruption, New Delhi: HarperCollins, 1998, p.8-9.
[3] [http://srimadbhagavatam.com/7/5/19/en]
[4] Complete woks, p. 451, vol 5
[5] The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 1989 [1990], vol 5, p. 448.
Recent Comments