Sunday, December 25, 2016

Life is happening right now, even as you are sleeping!

Sleeping is something I really don't like. Some people like to sleep. But anything excess than the required amount of sleep is simply a waste of time.

Better live your life rather than sleeping it away. If there's any lesson I learned from mom's death, it is this:

"All of us tend to postpone our lives. That we'll do this or that... after some criteria is met. All our life, we keep preparing for tomorrow."

What do u gain? Tomorrow is a mirage. Tomorrow is like the bone hanging in front of a dog to keep the sledge moving. Heard of dog carts/sledges? They hang a bone in front of dogs so that the dogs run to get it. Since the bone too moves with the cart, the dog never gets it. Mom kept expecting better days n nvr lived her life.

TODAY, ladies n gentlemen, is the first day of your remaining life. And so is every day until the unexpected end.

Instead of waiting for a better tomorrow or fighting life to control it, just live. Live in whatever way you that you don't hv regrets when the end comes. Live and don't just survive, counting on the next day. How many of you know for sure you'll wake up tomorrow?

(posted via mobile phone)
Read more ...

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Who is a Hindu? Hinduism and Sanathan Dharma - Explained

The term 'Hindu' brings an image of people in India generally. Thus, people across the world consider Indians as Hindu. In India - locally - however, there is a huge confusion. People in India have been categorized as Hindu, Muslim, Christian etc by the lawmakers and intellectuals. It means Hindu is regarded a religion in India, or Hindustan, as it is known.

The elements of Hindustan

Hindustan Explained: Who is a Hindu?

If you deconstruct the word 'Hindustan', you get 'Hindu' + 'sthan' (place). Combined, it means 'place of Hindus'. Here is when the confusion really begins. Certain sections of India (Hindustan) think that the country really belongs to Hindus - a religion called Hindu. But who is a Hindu? How do you define a Hindu?

Prior to Supreme Court's ruling saying Hindu is not a religion, Savarkar came up with the word 'Hindutva' (हिंदुत्व) to represent the way Indians live. A Hindu can be anyone who finds his or her roots in India. The word "Hindu" is based loosely on the river Indu (of Indus valley civilization fame). Thus, people belonging to the place around Indus river should be Hindus - irrespective of their religious beliefs.

Around the same time, when colonial possession of India was in full swing, the British termed the local people as Hindus - and coined the word "Hinduism". They used the word 'Hinduism' to refer to the set of values followed by the locals of India. By then, there were already Muslims and Christians in India - and others like Buddhists and Jains. The same thing but with a different name - Hindustani - was used by Mongols and Mughals who attacked India time and again to loot and ruled it prior to the British.

Thus, Hindustan refers to place in and around Indus valley. In modern context, however, it refers to India. The term Hindustan is used mostly by the Arabic countries and countries around India that were initially part of India before the British divided it. The Eastern and Western world use the name 'India' to refer to this country of multiple religions and beliefs. I hope it explains who is a Hindu.

Summary: Who is a Hindu

Thinking in the above terms, a Hindu is a person who lives or has roots in the Indus valley civilization. The term Hindu has nothing to do with any religion - except that it is highly confused with the "Sanatan Dharma", a religion that most people in India follow. Sanathan Dharma too has its own values and books as is the case with any other religion. There are a set of rules, sacred books and of course, it too is misinterpreted and misused by the powerful for their own benefits.

People inside India confuse Sanatan Dharma with Hindu. But that is not the case as explained above. A Hindu can be a person following Sanatan Dharma, or following Islam or Christianity. A Hindu can be a Buddhist, Jain, agnostic or even an atheist. The only criteria for being a Hindu is that the person should consider the area around Indus valley is where his or her roots lie.

Extremists are there in every religion and they do cause a lot of damage. As such, the misadventures of extremists in Sanatan Dharma has led to the confusion that Hindu is a religion whereas in reality, it is just an identity based on the place to where the person belongs. In other words, Hindu is just a geographical identity.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Friday, September 23, 2016

How To Walk Properly: Men & Women Heels

Given that different people wear different footwear, the sound of footsteps may vary. Imagine you are walking in a huge hall that has almost no noise and you are wearing rugged, metal heeled footwear. I hope you can imagine all eyes turning towards you, making you uncomfortable. Gathering attention is good, but not for wrong reasons!
How do you walk properly without annoying others and with grace? We'll accept that different people have different choice of footwear going by their choice, budget and prevalent fashion. We will not talk about footwear. The aim here is to reduce the noise as much as possible.

Land on your heel gently, instead of putting all the body weight on it at a time and pass it on gently to the toe. (do not hit the ground with force)

That means, instead of landing on the center of your heels, land on the last-most point and pass on the weight to center of feet before passing it on to the toe. That would sound more like using entire foot as a curve. But don't make it look like dancing. Too gentle is not gentle :)

Abrupt landing on heel and then passing body weight straight to toes will create more noise and is not recommended at all. Sometimes it may result in two sounds per step which makes it further awkward.

The above focuses on how to walk properly for men and male - covering only the footwear noise part. This also applies to cases where you are not wearing any footwear ex like walking on grass!

The process may slightly vary for women as their footwear is different, often with higher, pointed heels that tend to make more sound because of less contact area with ground. I won't recommend the above method for girls with extra high heels as they may trip over. But if they wear a low, non-pointed heel, the above would attract dignity.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Tuesday, September 13, 2016


The following is a page from my book on personality grooming and development. In due course, we'll be sharing excerpts from the book so that you get some tips while knowing what the book is about. If you haven't already, read our post on how to position your feet; how to walk properly on this blog.

Coming to perfumes, it is too hard to find a genuine perfume these days, especially if you are looking one for men. All of them are deodorants with high percentage of alcohol.

DON'T TRY TO TASTE IT. This alcohol is pretty different from one you have at bars

Personally, I dislike the smell of AXE; They add mandarin to it; I don't know if that adds to smell, making it intolerant. Science says mandarin attracts females and hence those "falling angel ads" you see on TV and elsewhere. Check the package to make sure what you are buying. If you look carefully, the less advertised deo have lower level of alcohol. For example, Yardley and Park Avenue are more of deo compared to AXE and Wild Stone. Even within the brand, there are groups you'll find repelling. Take Yardley Elegance. It has lower concentration of alcohol. But Yardley Gold, on the other hand, has enough concentration to set your body on fire.

A genuine perfume would be too costly even if you find it. If you are looking for better perfume (+deo combo), check the level of alcohol in it. The higher the level of alcohol, the more it will smell bad once the real perfume wears off.

We do not generally check the ingredients while buying perfume and often confuse deo with perfume. A genuine perfume will never have alcohol - they use other solvents like oil etc. If you find them, do share with others in comments or in message so we put it out for suggestions.

If you are looking for a deodorant or alcohol based perfume, always check for the amount and percentage of alcohol in those spray cans. For example if the packaging says 73pp, you may assume that for every 100ml, you are buying 73% of just methanol alcohol. Not that the remaining 27% is perfume. It could have other ingredients too. Check them out.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Saturday, July 2, 2016

Effects of Bad Karma: Cleansing

The following is taken from my book, "The Teachings of Sri Ramakrishna" available on Amazon. A link to the book is available towards the end of this post. It is just Rs. 61 ( or 96 cents). You can read it on Kindle, Kindle Fire or Kindle apps or any other ebook reader.

Karma is often talked as the results or consequences of whatever you do - good or bad. In its origin, the word "karma" means the deeds you've done, are doing, or will do in future. Whatever you do, you will have to face the consequences. Generally, the term consequences of Karma is replaced by the word Karma itself whereas Karma means "deeds" (work - good, bad, neutral etc.). But since most of us use Karma as consequences, I will also try to use the word in the same context.

There are two general notions:
1. Good karma (work/deeds) will bring you good results
2. Bad karma (work/deeds) will bring you results that will make you repent for what you did or avoided doing

There are other karma (deeds) we do without our knowledge. For example, doing nothing is also a type of deed. If someone requires your inputs to decide on something, and you deny it fearing the outcome, it is also a form of work/deed you've done. You'll be accountable to that as well. So we can say that not doing anything is also a form of deed that will come back to you someday - in this or other life.

According to Swami Vivekananda, a disciple (Student) of Sri Ramakrishna, there are two types of karma:

1. Prarabdha Karma: This means the deeds for which you are already enjoying or suffering the results. This could be the results of deeds you did a while ago, yesterday, years ago or even in your previous births. This is the karma that has already started and you will have to go through it - be it good or bad. Usually, people are so distressed if it is bad that they forget they have methods to reduce the pain. We'll talk about the method in a while.

2. Sanchit Karma: This is the karma that has not yet started. It has been accumulating and waiting for the chance to make you pay for it. It is not that karma is always bad. As said earlier, karma can be either good or bad... or both at the same time. Anyway, since Sanchit Karma is not yet started, you can go for karma cleansing so that you don't have to suffer the consequences or at least, reduce the pain of consequences. This does not  mean that you go kill people and then go for karma cleansing. But if it was unavoidable, probably you can get yourself safely out of the karma (consequences). It depends upon God to weigh your deeds against the repentance or cleansing.

Karma Cleansing - Reducing or Avoiding Consequences

The only method, according to Sri Ramakrishna, the Guru of Sri Vivekananda, is to get back to your origins. Origins refer to your God - in whatever way you can pray to Him or Her. To reduce the suffering for already acting Karma, you have to detach yourself from the suffering and rely on God. You need to praise Him, perform acts of charity and feed the hungry etc. Such noble deeds will wash out your bad karma (deeds) and thus you will be able to avoid the "karma in waiting" also.

This is the only method. Maybe you won't have resources for cleansing of deeds. In that case, you have to rely on God and ask Him for forgiveness. The Almighty will then reduce the suffering or give you resources to clean yourself. The karma in waiting can wait for too long before striking.

King Dhritrasthra of "Mahabharata" had 100 sons. All of them were killed in the famous Mahabharata battle. After the war was over and due rituals were performed, Dritrasthra asked Lord Krishna why all his sons died and that why not even one was spared to carry on his lineage. Lord Krishna replied that Dhritrastra had broken a 100 eggs of a bird some 50 lives ago. 50 lives? Dhritrastra was anxious why it had to take 50 lives. Lord Krishna told him that it takes a good amount of good deeds to get children. The 50 lives allowed him to accumulate enough good karma so that he could have the 100 sons. But since the act of destroying the 100 eggs were also pending, it took toll in his current life.

That is enough to tell us that we must perform good deeds and pray to God regularly. If you know you have done bad deeds, ask Him for forgiveness. Perform as much good as you can. Doing good will reduce the effects of Sanchit (accumulated) Karma. Being good will reduce the pain of Prarabdha (Already in progress) Karma. In both cases, and in cleansing of Karma, you have to depend solely on God and live a lifestyle where you won't even think of harming anything. Don't even kill an ant. Never turn away anyone who asks help. Maybe you don't have much to help but you can always help to the extent you can. It could be as small as directing the needy person to someone who can help.

I hope I made the point clear above. If not, please send a mail to me so that I can further clarify on person to person basis. 

For emphasis again, relying on God, asking Him or Her for forgiveness, and performing as much good as you can will help in reducing effects of Bad Karma; it its cleansing. It may also help in avoiding the results (karma) completely.

Link to Teachings of Sri Ramakrishna on Amazon

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Monday, June 27, 2016

How to walk properly - feet positioning (Personality Grooming Series - Section 1)

This series of personality grooming focuses on your walking style by breaking up the entire process of walking and runs into a number of interlinked blog posts. We focus on foot placement, foot movement, dragging feet, how to send out impressions that you are a confident person, and how does your walking style affect others etc.

For teenagers, it is easier to adapt to the style of walking we present in this book. However, adults too can practice a little longer to gain the style we present in this book. Always practice in isolation to avoid being mocked at. This is because when you practice in public and focus on your feet and legs, you tend to walk in a weird way sometimes that may make you a subject of interest among others who may be watching you.

Also, the style of walking varies between men and women due to their footwear. I have tried to cover both of them in common but have pointed it out when the walking style of women is different and needs to be pointed out. For example, while running on stairs, I would not advise women to run unless they are wearing flat heels. 

What is the positioning of feet? When we talk of how to walk properly, we have to check out how our feet point while walking forward (and backward, if you wish)!

If you apply the previous post while walking, you land up on your heel and then pass body weight to toe. This is about your toes. Have you seen the drunkards walking? Their toe position is at more than 90-degree angle (the center being your heel: meaning flexing outward in "/" fashion). This, positioning, is not good in the world where people interpret you by the style you walk.

If your feet both look like "\ /", stretching outward, you sent out signals that you are short on integrity. That would, in turn, mean that people understanding body language will seldom trust you. If the toes are outwards, as explained above, you tend to seem careless!

If your feet fall below 90-degree angle (taking heel as center), you are very insecure. That is what body language experts will deduce. In this case, people may neglect you - and your opinions - just because your feet positioning is not good enough for them.

The perfect positioning is 90 degree (again taking heel as center). It is difficult to get exact 90 degrees but you sure can make sure it lies +/- 5 degrees within the range. How do you achieve that? By practicing!

NOTE: Do not practice walking in public else you might end up making fun of yourself. If you know people are watching you, it may make it worse in an attempt to get perfect. Practice in isolation. One option is to draw lines or place two straight cloth pieces in parallel while trying to walk on them. Be natural outside as the practice will tend to make it natural in at most three to four days. I will say avoid pointed tips as they give away precision more than broader toed footwear.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Now Trending English Movie Trailers

The following videos are a compilation from Dailymotion - the video curating website. These are only English movie trailers and not Hindi or any other languages. According to Dailymotion, these are trending English movies.

I embedded a code here so that you can find some best English movies to watch this weekend.

More information about each movie is present on iMDB. You may also simply ask us details using the "Send us an Email" option below the videos.

Here are the "Trending English Movie Trailers" for you (Please wait a few moments to let the code load from Dailymotion before it displays the movie trailers.

PS: If you cannot hear sound, check out volume bar in the widget. To see the volume bar, simply hover the mouse pointer on the widget once it appears. You can then correct the audio volume.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

Review: God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy

There are some books that you wish to finish quickly so that you know the end. And there are some books that you don't want to end. You start relating to the characters and wish to live with them forever.

The plot of "God of Small Things" by Arundhati Roy revolves around two kids. It is the story of the twins - Rahel and Estha. Maybe the author also wanted us to check out the untouchables in the then India.

The narration style, writing style is of more importance for which, I can give it more than four stars. It feels like you are actually going through the kids' lives. You can imagine it... and not only that, you can actually feel the emotions the kids go through.

Very few authors have the talent to write in a way that you can go through the feelings of the characters in their book. The last book of this type I read was from F Scott's This Side of Paradise and Virginia's Jacobs Room. They have their own style of narration. More than the story or plot, you are awed by the way they spin up words and sentences.

I haven't read other books of Arundhati Roy but this God of Small Things has its own language. Though English, you'll find it more than just English: her wordplay and some "new" words make it an excellent reading. Check it out. It's worth your time and most probably, you'll miss the characters when you are done with the book.

Please note if you purchase the books mentioned by clicking links in this blog, Amazon may send some commission to Powercut Media (INDIA).

Quotes from The God of Small Things: Review

--> "That's what careless words do. They make people love you a little less..."

--> "...the secret of the Great Stories is that they have no secrets. The Great Stories are the ones you have heard and want to hear again. The ones you can enter anywhere and inhabit comfortably. They don’t deceive you with thrills and trick endings. They don’t surprise you with the unforeseen. They are as familiar as the house you live in. Or the smell of your lover’s skin. You know how they end, yet you listen as though you don’t. In the way that although you know that one day you will die, you live as though you won’t. In the Great Stories you know who lives, who dies, who finds love, who doesn’t. And yet you want to know again. That is their mystery and their magic.”

 --> "And the air was full of Thoughts and Things to Say. But at times like these, only the Small Things are ever said. Big Things lurk unsaid inside.” 
--> "If you're happy in a dream, does that count?”

--> "Only that once again they broke the Love Laws. That lay down who should be loved. And how. And how much.”

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Teachings of Sri Ramakrishna - Intro to eBook by Arun Acharya

Sri Ramakrishna has been called by many names such as sanyassin (one who has renounced the world), mystic, healer and more. For me, he was a dear son of Mother Goddess. I read his Gospel that contains many of his words that I tried to translate into easy words for everyone to understand.
Sri Ramakrishna in Meditation
Before going into details, I mentioned the main teachings of the revered guru Ramakrishna of many, in the first chapter. These teachings have been repeated many times in the Gospel. The main one talks about "Kamini-Kanchan". The Gospel contains literal translation that goes "Woman and Gold". It has been repeated many times in the Gospel. The true meaning of the words, however, is "Lust and Greed".
According to him, the main problems that hinder spiritual growth of a person are "Lust and Greed". Sri Ramakrishna asked people to stay away from Lust and Greed. This has a subtle meaning. He meant all six passions when he said Lust and Gold; the passions including Anger, Shame, Greed and Lust among others. Of course, for people who have to take care of their families, money etc. is needed. But Sri Ramakrishna had told them an easy method to realize and attain God. I explained the method in the chapters titled "Teachings to Householders - Duties towards family and society" and "Paths to Realize God".
Sri Ramakrishna's main teaching is to dust off the worldly desires even as you live in the world. That God is a magnet and people are needles covered with mud or dust where dust means worldly desires. And these desires, according to the teachings of Sri Ramakrishna, keep people away from the love of God. When the dust of desires is removed, people are automatically attracted to the God just as a dustless needle is attracted to the Magnet (God).
He also says that realizing God is easy than one thinks. All one needs to know God and get to God is to create an intense yearning for Him. One can pray to Him in any form he or she desires. One can pray to Him as formless bliss. He never forced anyone to pray. He just taught that repeating the name of God creates a longing for God that, in turn, helps a person in reaching God. Because God cannot keep Himself away from his devotees, if one yearns for God from pure heart, he or she is sure to see God.
Please note that Sri Ramakrishna was not a learned scholar. He did not read scriptures - neither Hindu nor from any other religions. All his teachings are from his own experience. He had the grace of God and the latter showed him how to lead a life to realize Him - in form of Hindu Gods and in form of Gods and prophets of other religions. Sri Ramakrishna practiced other religions also and had divine visions of Christ, Mohammed and Buddha - all of whom merged into him. This, he says, was an indication that all paths lead to the same God. 
Though he did not read any scriptures, Sri Ramakrishna had a lot to teach. He had taught much to many who followed his teachings so realize the path of God and in some cases, God Himself.
The book, Teachings of Sri Ramakrishna, is available at Amazon Kindle Store. You need not own a Kindle ebook reader to read the book. You can download the Kindle app from Google Play or iPhone market, download the book, and start reading the book priced at INR 61 or USD 00.80.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

How To Solve Unemployment Problem In India - Lessons From Ancient India : Part 2

The best method to solve unemployment problem is to give a deep thought to the social structure of ancient India. We need to go back, into the post Vedic history but pre-Mahabharata history. The sources are a little confusing/contradictory. I have tried my best to keep proper dates and duration in this article - based on majority of articles. That means, if more than one research paper cites a particular date, I've picked up those dates. Please note that these dates etc are just for your reference and may not be exact. The article expands on my previous article on how to solve unemployment problem in India - Education Structure.

PART II: Lessons From Ancient India - Social Structure & Society

This relates to the period when society was structured based on caste. Of course, the caste system still prevails in India but the lines are much blurred and the definition of caste nowadays is more hereditary rather than what is defined/explained in the Vedas - the ancient Hindu scriptures. Not only three out of the four vedas: Rig Veda, Yajur Veda and Sam Veda, but scriptures such as Manu Samhita and other scriptures speak of a social structure based on castes. The point to note here is that the classification of castes/varnas was pretty different from what it is today.

Ancient Indian Society: The Main Divisions

In other word, the ancient Hindu scriptures divided the society into four main sections:
  1. Brahmins at the top,
  2. Khsatriyas at second place,
  3. Vaishyas at the third place and finally
  4. Shudras at the fourth place.

The same social structure is mentioned by Lord Krishna in Bhagwad Gita as well. However, there was another section of the ancient society that related to the untouchables.

I do not really understand how and who created this section but I guess that too was based on karma (or work of the individuals).

We'll talk about the untouchables in the ancient Indian society in a while and see why exactly they were considered untouchables. Before that, let us check out the main four sections of the society and how it worked.

The Main Social Structure in Ancient India - Based On Bhagwad Gita

Much after the Vedas were written, Lord Krishna taught Arjuna about the essence of life in the battlefield of Mahabharata. Vedas and Manu Smriti were pre-Ramayana era: i.e. some 900000 years from 2013AD. According to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad books, Lord Rama was born in year 5114BC. It took another yuga (age) for Lord Krishna to appear. According to the same books from Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the year of birth of Lord Krishna is determined to be 3228BC. But these dates are not exact as most scriptures put Lord Ram in Kriti yuga (the first yuga - age).

According to Hindu scriptures, there are four ages: Kriti or Satyuga when people were still honest and lived peacefully. The sins and cruelty perpetuated a little when the age changed to "treta yuga". This was when demons etc rose to fight the good and finally Lord Ram put an end to these demons. Note that Lord Almighty takes birth "avatar" towards the end of each yuga (age) to restore order in the world. Since we are talking about Bhagwad Gita that was recited on the battle ground on Mahabharata, we will have to look at the dates surrounding Lord Krishna, who recited the secrets of life that came to be known as the fifth veda - The Bhagwad Gita. In the Bhagwad Gita, Lord Krishna mentioned about Kaliyuga - the current yuga. Lord Krishna himself belonged to dwapar yuga, the third age/era. It is said Dwapar yuga ended with Lord Krishna leaving for his heavenly abode.

We got a little deviated from the main topic in the above two paragraphs. The point I wanted to make was that what Krishna preached is not much old when compared to the Ramayana era. According to the some sources, the Bhadwad Gita was penned around 3138 BC that is in contrast to the birth year of Lord Krishna as mentioned above. Some sources, such as the Bhagwad Gita Organization, says the battle was fought some 5000 years ago.

The reason why I am trying to bring in dates and years here is to convey something that you might not know: Caste system in ancient India was much different from what it is today. While today's caste system categorizes people based on their birth, Lord Krishna spoke of a system where castes or varnas were decided based on the karma of people. Also note that Lord Krishna never mentioned about the untouchables in his discourse with Arjuna. That means the untouchables could either be lowest of lowest varna/caste or were totally out of the then society.

Flexibility Of Ancient India's Caste System

Unlike today's caste system that ties you to a certain caste throughout your life, the then varna system allowed you to move up or down the varna system - based on the type of work you did. For example, if a Brahmin's son joined army, he would be then Kshatriya. Similarly, if a trader's son spent much of his time studying and educating others, he would be regarded as a Brahmin.

The untouchables were probably not considered part of active society. They would have been people who were not of much education and/or skill. Possibly, the kind of work they did had people keep away from them. For example, cleaning of roads and toilets requires a person to bathe at the end of the day before he or she could go meet other people. I do not think you would shake hand with a person who just comes out of a toilet after cleaning it with his bare hands.

Employment Scenario In Ancient India's Varna System

From the above, it is evident that people had certain skill sets that made them belong to certain caste. They had the option to move over to other castes by improving their skills related to the caste they wanted to move to. There was no restriction on movement among the caste levels. I cannot say the same about the untouchables though as I could not find any related documentation. But I do think the untouchables were pretty poor to afford proper skills required to move up the ladder of the then caste system of India.

That makes you deduce that people were mostly trained for skills rather than just formal education. In other words, not everyone would become Brahmin as their interests and intellect levels would vary. Education and training were provided based on the intellect levels and also on the current caste level of individuals. That made sure everyone had enough skills to earn and to live a decent life (barring the untouchables). I feel the untouchables were the one who engaged in work that was not considered decent and hence were barred from the active society. Examples could be sex workers, crap cleaners, and other odd jobs that were considered unhealthy and contaminating.

To sum up the entire post, the caste system in ancient system was a guide for young to move towards proper education and then expand upon their knowledge. That made sure that no one was unemployed or without work. 

In today's scenario, everyone wants a white collar job. The teachers are paid poorly while the rulers need no training. People are moving from agriculture to cities expecting better paying jobs. Since they cannot impart skill based education and since caste system has become rigid, the government provides reservations for lower castes. Imagine people without proper skills doing jobs that require good training. No need to think too far, just imagine people running the country with no knowledge of what it is all about.

Money could have been the base in the ancient system too but there are references of kshatriyas saving people just because their 'dharma' said so. Likewise, Brahmins of that age were supposed to teach without expecting anything. It was up to the students to pay up whatever they could - after they completed education.

Caste System In Ancient India - Applying Yesterday To Today

There can be many things to understand from the caste system of Ancient India that can help remove the current unemployment scenario from India. To start with, the educators should be given a life that is self sufficient. That also means creating universities for alternative education - not only IITs, Medical and MBAs but anything technical that helps people acquire skills. The facilities should be available to all, irrespective of their economic condition. This is not hard to achieve. I have stressed the importance of skill based education in my previous article on Lessons From Ancient India (see link below).

Then the rulers aka politicians should be properly educated with respect to what they are supposed to do. It is not possible for a single person to learn it all. The academics can be used as consultants. But the rulers can seek consultation only if they know of a problem. Maybe the politicians do not need training in warfare these days but there are many more aspects of politics and humanity where they need good grades. However, education is not a criteria for people to join politics. No need to say everything related to country is in rut.

Finally, the system should be changed a little to support small businesses and agriculture plus crafts. There should be systems in place that not only finance but also guide the aspiring entrepreneurs. Likewise, if proper support is provided to fields like crafts and agriculture, the need for these people to migrate would reduce. This is not difficult and I can see SBA in the US helping out entrepreneurs.

What is happening right now is that the government does not want to help the lower two sections - vaishyas and shudras as they were known. When a govt thinks offering them work only for 100 days a year, you cannot expect progress there. There should be instead training that helps them to start out on things that keep them employed throughout the year. But since the political parties consider them votebank, they will not do anything lest they lose their votes. In addition, oppressing a section of society for appeasement of society further diverts one's mind from constructive thinking. That means, people are stuck with petty problems forever that prevent them from progressing in their life. This is just an outline of current affairs while the above three para gives you an idea of what can be learned and implemented from the ancient Indian social structure.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Analysis of Mahabharata Characters - Bhishma

Bhishma is one of the powerful characters of the epic, Mahabharata that contains and shows a pious way of life to the mortals living on earth. I am starting this Analysis of Mahabharata Characters with Bhishma as he is the oldest character in the epic/saga and has tremendous influence on the other characters of Mahabharata. Bhishma was the son of king Shantanu and Ganga (the river Ganges in female form). Bhishma was considered one of the eight Vasus (rishis) who had to take birth on earth due to a curse. Before we analyze the character, let us take a quick look at the story of Bhishma according to the Mahabharata.

Background Of Bhishma

Bhismha is considered one of the eight Vasus who stole a cow named Kamadhenu from a sage. When the sage cursed them to take birth as humans, all Vasus asked for his forgiveness. The sage, for seven Vasus who helped the main Vasu to steal the cow, reduced the curse to death just after birth. However, the main Vasu who actually stole the cow was to stay on earth as a mortal.

Shantanu married Ganga on the condition that he would not interfere with whatever Ganga does. For each of the first seven children she bore (the seven Vasus), she drowned them in the river form to relieve them of the curse. However, Shantanu could not stop himself when Devvratha was born and stopped Ganga from drowning him in the river. Thus, the eight Vasu had to live. Ganga left Shantanu and took Devvratha with her as well. Devvratha had his education and returned after many years. Meanwhile, Shantanu was in love with a woman named Matsyagandha (Satyavati). Since the father of Satyavati wanted Satyavati's kids to access throne, Devvratha gave up his claim to the throne. Not only that, he took a vow of celibacy so that his sons do not claim access to the throne and kingdom. He further vowed that he will always take care of the person sitting on the throne as he would see his father's figure in the king. The father granted him a wish of Death Upon Wish, i.e., Bhishma (as he came to be known after taking the vows) could take his own time and decide when and where to die. There are many other incidents that formed his character and I will mention them when and where required.

Bhishma's Love For His Father

 Obvious from the above narration, one can find that Bhishma has a lot of love and respect for his father. He gave up not only the claim to the throne, he also took a vow of celibacy so that his sons don't fight for the throne. This shows that he was very caring when it came to his father and his father's desires. He further vowed that he will always protect the kingdom and king by seeing his father's image in the king. The vows brought him the name of Bhishma.

He was not asked to take those vows. He simply came to know that his father wanted to marry Satyavati (Matsyagandha) and based on what the father of Satyavati said to him, he took the vows on his own to please his father's desires.

Renunciation Of Worldly Things

One may consider that Bhishma never had any desire for worldly things. People fall for power and money. However, he gave up all those at a small age and removed himself from claim and accession to the throne. He never married though was asked by many. His vow of celibacy was never broken. He once kidnapped Amba, Ambalika and Ambika from their swamyamwar (marriage) for sons of Satyavati. Amba told him she loved some other king, upon which, he returned her to the king. It was a different matter that the king now suspected Amba and did not accept her. Upon this, Amba pressurized Bhishma to marry her. But stating his vow of celibacy, he did not marry her. Amba went on to become Shikhandi who later was brought into Mahabharata for killing Bhishma.

Bhishma's Commitment To The Throne and King

Bhishma was so committed to the throne and king that he had to oblige for unworthy or rather, bad decisions of the king. In his presence was Druapadi humiliated but since the then king, Dhritrashtra, did not say anything, Bhishma though he knew it would have bad impact later, could not and did not do anything to save her (Draupadi). His commitment to the king made him blind towards the bad going on in the entire epic of Mahabharata.

He had to fight from the side of Kauravas in the grand Mahabharata war as he was committed to the throne. He was under pledge (as mentioned above) to save the king and his throne. Thus, though he knew that what he was doing is wrong, he did it anyway - just because he had to keep his word (vows).

Weakness of Bhishma

The love or the sense of duty towards the person occupying the throne was one weakness of Bhishma. Though one can argue that it was because of his vows, was it wise to keep quiet knowing that the king might come to harm? Bhishma was quiet when Draupadi was insulted. He knew that it will backfire and that Pandavas will avenge the insult. But Bhishma turned a blind eye towards it.

Another case where Bhishma was quiet was when Lord Krishna showed his Vishwarupa (his godly form) to him and others at the court. Krishna had come to negotiate prior to  war. He wanted to prevent the war. Totally understanding that god was on Pandava's side and that the king had no chance of winning the war, Bhishma did not or could not use his influence to stop the war. Instead, he went ahead to wage war on behalf of Kauravas. What can we call such an attitude if not his weakness?

This analysis of Bhishma, the Mahabharata characters, is not complete. Bhishma played a huge role and I will update this post when I find other traits on own and based on your comments. Please comment to inform me if I left out anything.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

What is Secularism - In India?

India is diverse in many aspects. That not only includes lifestyles, cuisines, languages/dialects, fashion, clothing style but also religions. India is home to more than five religions, where four religions: Buddhism, Jainism and Zoroastrianism originated as branches of Hindutva Lifestyle. Even Sikhism has been derived from Hinduism. But this post is not about religions. It is about secularism in India: What is secularism? Who is secular? Is India a secular country? What does Secularism mean? I am trying to answer all these questions by constructing the Hindi equivalent of the word "secularism".

What is Secularism?

Major Religions In India
The Hindi equivalent of the word is "Dharm Nirapekhsta" (धर्म निर अपेक्षता). This Hindi word is actually a combination of three words: Dharma (धर्म), Nir (निर), and Apeksha (अपेक्षा). We take the last word first. Apeksha means "expecting". That translates to expecting anything from anyone. For example, "I was expecting him on Sunday" will translate to "मैं रविवार को उसकी अपेक्षा कर रहा था".

Add "Nir" to "Apeksha" and it becomes opposite: something that loosely translates to non-expectant. Thus, "I was not expecting him" (मैं उसकी अपेक्षा नही कर रहा था) also translates to "he was a non-expectant" (वह निरपेक्षित था). Another better example would be - "This work was unexpected" (यह कार्य निरपेक्षित था).

In short, "nirapeksha" (निरपेक्षा) means "not expecting anything". Add "dharm" (or Religion in English) to it and it becomes secularism. Thus, secularism should mean "not expecting anything from religion(s)". However, not in the Indian context. The above explains what does secularism mean actually and literally. Though "nirapeksha" is more commonly pronounced as "unapeksha" (अन+अपेक्षा), our intellectuals decided to use the former. That means, secularism can also be called "Dharm Anapekshta" (धर्म अनपेक्षता).

I will now pick up another similar sounding word - upeksha (उपेक्षा) to explain secularism in India. Before that, let us take a look at how using the "upeksha" word changes the entire meaning of secularism.

Apeksha vs Upkesha (अपेक्षा बनाम उपेक्षा)

As discussed in previous section, adding "un" or "nir" to most words makes it opposite. For example, "he is wealthy" is "वह धनी है". And "he is not wealthy" would translate to "वह निर्धन है". This is just for your reference that adding 'un' or 'nir' to most of the Hindi words, changes the meaning of a word to its opposite.

Now, coming to Upeksha, it means "Ignoring". It sounds similar to Apeksha (only the first sound being different) that means "expecting". For example, "He was ignoring my talk" would translate to "वह मेरी बात की उपेक्षा कर रहा था".

Secularism In India

It makes a fine combination of Dharm (religion) with Upeksha (ignoring) to reveal the exact meaning of what is secularism. You ignore the religion or you do not have any expectations from the religion. Good so far. But we have the "nir" word that changes the entire meaning. Thus, Dharm Upeksha (धर्म उपेक्षा) stands good for secularism based on the meaning of secularism we derived from the phrase "धर्म निरपेक्षता".

Coming to Indian political scenario, rather than real society and culture that adopts all religions as equal, the meaning of secularism stands different - based on the word "Upeksha". That is, instead of using "Apeksha" (expectance) with "nir" (not), we seem to be using "Upeksha" with "nir". That would make it Dharm Nirupekshata" which, in turn, would translate to "not ignoring dharma or religion". And that is the fact - our political parties just cannot ignore the religion of their voters. For them, different religions are different types of vote banks. They just cannot ignore religions and instead of not expecting from religions, they tend to expect a lot from religions. That is, the whole meaning of 'secularism in India' changes - from non-religious expectant to religions-expectant, based on the phrase "dharm nirupeksha" (religion non-avoidable).

I guess I have been successful in explaining the meaning of secularism as such and also what is secularism in India. If you have doubts or anything to add, please comment or send me a mail using the Contact page.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

How To Solve Unemployment Problem In India - Lessons From Ancient India : Part 1

If we take a look back at ancient India, during its glorified history, we could get lessons on how to solve unemployment problem in India. It is well known that different rulers and even queens took proper care of their society that was based on a system that reduced unemployment during those days. Let us check out how to weed out unemployment problem in India by looking at the days when India was still ruled by kings and queens.

PART I: Lessons From Ancient India - The Educational System

Not only unwanted subjects,
But also a tough competition,
Ruining Kid's Childhood,
Making Them Inferior and Suicidal
I cannot say about the scenario after the entry of Moghuls as I did not do proper research on that. I could not get relevant papers that I could trust so I will go a little back into the history. At that time, people were happier as they could find one or more income sources and that is what we are discussing here.

Present society is like: 1) Go through elementary education that teaches you languages and a little of History/Geography and science; 2) you then specialize in an area of your choice or rather, the choice of your parents and peers; 3) and keep on applying for jobs related to that field of your expertise.

The system of education these days has unnecessary subjects up to the matriculation. I do not mean to say that History, Geography, Math etc should not be taught. They are essential - but only up to certain extent. After you pass the Intermediate and say, wish to get into nuclear physics, you will have to learn Calculus, Alzebra and Geometry as well. And not to mention Chemistry. This is the way the subject choices are provided. While I agree a little math is required for nuclear physics, there is no (I repeat - no requirement) for you to study the details of Chemistry's solutions to learn and deduce from Nuclear Physics.

In other words, the present day education system wastes much of your time that you could have otherwise spent learning just what you want. Imagine you got into physics right after basic education, i.e. after learning the basic math and languages. You would - in this case - get seven more years to study your own preferred subject. That means, by the time you graduate in Nuclear Physics, you have learned many more extra things.

Poor Frog Killed In Name Of Education
For People Not Opting Biology,
Why Force Them To Dissect Animals?
I have been running my business for almost 7 years. I worked as computer technician, writer for Neilson data before starting own venture. I still do not know why I was taught Calculus or for the matter, Algebra - though the latter was a bit interesting, there is no practical use of it in my line of trade. I do not know what I learned by dissecting a poor frog. Rather, if I would have been given an option to study business management and related subjects, I would have been far better.

Because what you study during your formative years, stays with you for rest of your life in case you implement it. And because in most of the cases there is no need for the 'extras' you learned in the present day education system, your just wasted your formative years. Probably, learning languages is the only thing good about the current system. That too, is good up to a limit. They shouldn't force you to learn all the major languages - Hindi, English in addition to regional languages when they know you'll be spending most of your time dealing with something else. If you wish to become a literary person, probably a research into languages and phonetics might help. But for that, you'll have to wait for 10+2 years?! Why? And even after, you have to stress out on some other topics that are mostly irrelevant to the profession you wish to engage in. Right?

Coming to the problem of how to solve unemployment in India, when we look at the ancient system of schooling, the kids were divided according to what they were supposed to do. That means, if someone was to become a soldier, he would get arms training from the very beginning - with some other subjects related and necessary for growth and communication. If someone wanted to become a Vaidya (doctor), she or he would start early - dealing and identifying herbs in forests and assisting other practicing doctors as interns. Thus, they would be preparing themselves for the trade or profession they were willing to pursue.

Image From "Look And Learn" Website
Teaching Different Things To Different Kids
Based Upon Their Interest & Traits

There was also a time when parents of these kids gave them enough choice to choose their profession. If practical training has to start at a tender age - inputs from elders are a must. It happened that kings prepared their offspring to become warriors while doctors wanted theirs to become doctors. In most cases, the guru (teacher or trainer) identified the traits of his/her student and helped him/her select a profession and excel in that. Not like today where you are fed all dishes and for a particular dish, you have take supplements as well. Not like today where you have to excel in all the subjects to pursue further studies in a particular field of interest.

There were two main aspects of ancient India education system:
1. Character Building
2. Skills Training

A Data Aggregation Showing
White Vs Blue Collar Jobs
Note: Self Employed Not Included
Unlike today, where everyone wants a white collar job with big companies, the education system of older days was based on what you were good at. That provided you with omni-options. You could go work for others, with others or start your own trade. I guess there were some good crown sponsored facilities to help the then students start on their own. I've also read of those ancient universities helping out their students in trading or setting up own ventures by way of loans and/or providing security for loans from crowns. All they needed was to demonstrate their skills unlike today where you have to pay certain percent of loan amount as bribe and have influencers on your side to get approval for a loan under any government scheme.

All through the training, you were also made to study the books that helped you build a character suitable for the profession. The character building was probably based on inputs from Vedas and differed for different students pursuing different professional training. For increasing the chances of employment - especially the self-employment scenario - character building is much necessary as it teaches you how to treat others and how to be your best. Naturally, that included communications, showing respect to ladies and elders, loving younger ones, and things like that. That is an art while skills are related to trade.

To emphasize the second point, students were given practical training in skills rather than just a formal educational. The certificates were based on practical exams rather than just formal penning down the answers.

The aim was to provide an education that helped the students get employed rather than get a job. There is a difference between employment and a job. A job is where you work for others. Employment could be a job for others, with others or for self. Self employment, is the best method to remove unemployment.

If such an education system is brought back to India,

1. where the parents and trainers can find out your traits and help you out to select yourself a profession in your early age

2. and you are started early with the trade you want to master,

the problem of unemployment would be solved.

When speaking of how to solve unemployment problem in India or anywhere, I do not mean offering them appointment letters, but helping them shape their career in an early stage and providing them with necessary skills to pursue a profession whether for others or in form of self-employment.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Caste Based Politics in India - POV1

A popular politician said she does not like caste based politics in India and that her party does not believe in caste based society. A day earlier, on July 12 2013, HC banned caste based rallies. Probably, that was the reason she thenceforth does not like caste based rallies. This statement came two days after she addressed a Brahmin rally and one day after HC banned caste based rallies in India. When I called it bluff, a question popped up from somewhere saying what makes me think she believes in caste based society...

Made me think - Maybe she doesn't really believe in caste based politics in India and maybe my views are biased. Let's check it out here. 

The previous leader of that party had a vision to equate all castes in the society. But in the Indian society, caste system is so deep rooted that inter-caste relations often break strongest of bonds and even lead to honor killings. Forget others, even my 'liberal' family saw months of tension when younger brother said his girl friend belonged to a lower caste.

Anyway, we are not talking about the entire caste system in India here. It just cannot be removed by any law or regulation. It cannot be removed in a day or two just by putting some people in jail. If it has to happen, it will be a very long duration - spanning decades - reform. People need to be educated on respecting fellow human beings to remove any kind of divisions in a society - be it caste based, religion based or economy based. People need to be trained mentally in a manner that they don't even think of these divisions. That is possible only if the people leading them - the politicians, intellectual leaders etc - start ignoring caste etc divisions.

However, the way our country is moving, I can see politicians further emphasizing caste system and religion divides thereby creating further rifts. After all, different castes are/were different vote-banks and caste based politics has been in India since pre-independence era! Among the many kingdoms, there were kings who organized elections for different posts even much before India became one huge mess of a democracy. The people were selected by kings and people were to vote for them in a way that the one most preferred would get that post. Even then, people were influenced by caste and voted mostly to "their own" instead of "merit".

Coming back to the present, the above mentioned lady politician came to power more than once in the Uttar Pradesh region of India. Let me make it clear here that I am not a political pundit and I do not have much of statistics. But still, if the vision of a caste-less or rather, equal-rights society of B R Ambedkar was to be carried on, there should have been some work on the issue. Right? All we got was distorted constitution in India, reservations plus widening rift among different religions and then castes. All for sake of politics!

I do not know what exactly this lady did for the dalits, the so called lowest section of caste based society on which - her party depends to get political power. She, if wanted a caste-less society, would have empowered the dalits. I never heard of she implementing any special plans for them and other down-trodden castes of the society.

There are central government schemes already in place: A reservation system that takes care of many things related to down-trodden, lower castes and poor; an employment scheme, a self-employment funding scheme and even some education scheme for downtrodden. If you are a dalit (or for the matter, some scheduled caste or backward caste) and you scored even 1% in the IAS, you are sure to get an administrative job - irrespective of whether you can do it or not. The quota system will make sure you override any brilliant but undeserving general caste person to get that job!

The least that our politician - in question here - could do was to educate the dalit (votebank) about the existing policies and help them enjoy the benefits. But did that happen? And if that itself did not happen, what else schemes did the so called (transformed in 2 days) propagator of caste-less society do? The fire and the feeling that these castes were oppressed in the past is kept burning and I'd say it is these politicians who keep them reminding that they are different, that their great grandfathers were oppressed, that once upon a time, they were untouchables. 

Ambedkar changed many things. Society now has reduced many barriers - though not completely: There is a long way to go before we forget castes and religions to accept our humanity first. That would be possible only if people forget the past. But when they are made to relive their pasts in accounts of political speeches, books and textbooks etc, it is hard to imagine that such divisions will ever be erased. It was "amusing" to note that government school books explained in a chapter about how a person from different religion in India did not get a home on rent until he changed his name.

Coming back to our leader's comment that she does not believe in caste based society, what did she do for the very people of lower caste on whom the party counts for votes? Did they build schools? Did they build better shelters? Did they ensure employment for them? Most of the schemes that they say they implemented are ones run by the central government. And they too, do not provide any kind of respite.

At ground zero, this section of the society still lives in one room houses. Their children suffer due to lack of proper education and some do not even make it to the world because of health problems. All because of the caste based politics in India that keeps them uninformed of the many government schemes they can benefit from. If they know they can get good schooling because the law says so, will they suffer? No. But the information is not provided to them. Rather, they are told stories on how their ancestors were oppressed.

Instead of building schools, ensuring employment etc, this madam went ahead to build parks, statues etc monuments to create a history for "HERSELF". This is the only aspect I saw of her rule - or probably the only aspect projected by media. Every major city has a park named after Ambedkar. The park contains few statues of elephants, the party symbol and of course, a statue of the politician in question.

I may be missing on the schemes she started and the help she might have extended to the dalits, who vote for her. After all, I depend on mainstream media for news and maybe the media neglected her "good" side. If I did miss anything good, please drop me a note so that I can make corrections accordingly. The above is not because of my hate towards politicians or my love towards the downtrodden.

When Will Their Living Conditions Improve?

The post is about how politicians change their colors per the situations. The post is about someone asking me what makes me think that the said politician and her party believes in a caste based society. The post is also about India's HM who right after taking oath, thanked the supremo that he - who is a dalit - was made the Home Minister of India. With such factors, caste system and caste based politics is here to stay for long. With such mentality, all the political parties will sure make use of the castes and caste based politics in India. And not only that, they will make sure the mentality prevails - for eternity.

PS: Not intended to hurt anyone. If it does, I apologize in advance. If you want corrections or your POV added to the above, please contact me directly.

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...

Politicization Of Religion in India - The Hindu Unrest

Someone posted a blog on IBN-LIVE asking why Hinduism should not evolve with current modern world? It further stressed on politicization of Hindu religion and the fact of Hindu unrest by quoting Salman Rushdie. While I do not think Hindu unrest is yet a worrying factor, it may turn out to be a violent movement if politicization of religion in India is not discontinued immediately. I'll attempt to answer why I think so.

Quest is Hindu is Quest

The blog asking if Hinduism/Hindutva amounts to fundamentalism and why are Hindus becoming intolerant etc was penned by some IBN-LIVE journalist named Sagarika Ghose (Twitter Handle @SagarikaGhose).

I will first put up some of her questions that she asked about politicization of Hinduism and its evolution requirements in modern world. I guess she missed quoting other forms of religions politicization such as Muslim Appeasement and special packages for other Muslims and certain Christian communities. I too will leave out those in this blog post and cover them later.

Basically, her blog has three main points:

1. Politicization of Hindutva

2. Rising Hindu Uprising/Intolerance

3. And finally a set of more questions of whether or not Hinduism/Indianism should evolve to become what I comprehended as being more liberal.

I am working on the first two questions in this post as they are more similar and relevent to each other. I will need more space to write about evolution hence will cover it in a different post but the answer is yes, we did evolve. How else do you think Hinduism/Indianism survived all through the time? All other older cultures, Mayans for examples, stuck to their principles and vanished. If arguments are required, I will present them where I discuss evolution of Hinduism - as said earlier, in a different blog post.

When Did Hinduism/Indianism Start?

Maybe carbon dating could have helped.
But we did not keep all records of Hindu culture.
Just that some of them managed to reach
current generation in form of reflections by others

The first two questions about politicization of Hinduism/Indianism and the rising intolerance of Hindus bring up similar arguments. As far as I know, Hinduism has been tolerant for ages. It is only the last few decades that have seen an increased movement in Hindu culture. That is more because of politicization of the Hindus. The Hindu culture dates back to .... well, there is no record for that.

Ramayan was written some 900,000 years ago. This, again, was not determined by the pages of the book but by determining the carbon dating of artifacts mentioned in the Ramayana. Vedas came much before that. We did not keep all the records and much of the knowledge regarding to all that ancient science was lost - they were not handed over to lower generations. I did some research on what probably happened to all that science and will present it a separate blog post.

Politicization Of Hindutva

Coming back to this post, Hindutva/Indianism was unadulterated till some centuries ago. I will not pick up caste etc issues here else it will be a too long post. I am speaking about overall culture that was common across castes. That had been preserved and there were no visible signs (or need) for any kind of religious unrest until people came to know that there are lands beyond their sight and should be captured for benefits. It had been (rather, has been) the tendency of people (in this context, kings and rulers), to gain more. In the greed for more, while the Indian kings moved out of the subcontinent perfectly protected by Himalayas and oceans, people from other parts of the world, especially the Middle-East came attacking Bharatvarsha (as it was called prior to Moghul Invasions).

A Rough Map
Sixteenth Century Bharat Based On Manuscripts

The Middle East conferred the title of Hindustan to Bharatvarsha while the Western (Who was that Columbus?) called us India. We stuck to these two titles and forgot Bharata, even as its original form was distorted due to wars and later by British.

It is when the British entered into the scene did the Hindu politicization started. During the rule of Muslims/Mongols too, it was separate. I mean they did differentiate between their own religion and culture of the then existing Indians, they did more of it for conversions rather than politicizing Hindu for own needs/wants/greed (whatever you may want to call it). Hinduism never called for conversions as it was never considered a religion by those who follow it. We "now" have some people who treat it as a religion, saying you are Hindu if born into a family embedded in Hindu culture and follow certain rules as laid by their religious gurus.

Hindu tolerance can be seen during that rule of Moghuls as well. People who had been following Hindutva/Indianism as a culture are mentioned as working in the courts of these invaders. We also have examples of many a fine art and sculptures that these Hindus built using their skills and culture for the foreign invaders. An example is Taj Mahal. The way it is designed, it is difficult to determine if it was indeed built by a foreign ruler or was just a redesigned temple. There are several documentaries and books on this topic if you wish to pursue the topic.

My basic argument is that politicization of Hindutva/Indianism started only after the British entered Indian soil. They already found more than two cultures and in a bid to take over the country, they divided people on religious lines and used the infighting for their own goals. Later, the same tendency was taken up by leaders of Independent India for partition of the country and is being used continuously to corrode the society.

A corroded and broken system means more power to the leaders. There are religious leaders everywhere from both cultures who kind of dictate what is good and what is bad. They are just there for own profits rather than guidance. The need for a teacher (guru) makes the innocent fall prey to these leaders who are influencers in their area and are used by politicians for many a purposes. The vision of Hindutva/Indianism took a backseat, offering more emphasis to the tools elders used in their pursuit of knowledge and perfection.

Fear Distorts Understanding
Fear Induces Wrong Emotions
Fear Can Make You Kill Others
There have been riots on religious lines ever since the powerful understood it is easy to disinform masses and show them fear. It is hard to tell who provoked whom but the bottom-line of everything was and is fear. This fear is the root of Hindu unrest. Other cultures in India have been using conversions by hook or crook. That is seen as a threat to the Hindu culture and hence the unrest. The religious leaders and politicians hold reigns only as long as people are afraid of losing their culture and pride. Once there is a balance or the fear is eliminated, you will find the normal Hindus as caring as ever.

The current politicians dividing people into minority and majority and assuming that majority has no needs - going to serve the so called minority (but not actually doing that as well) is further distorting the minds of religious leaders. Then, there were/are provocative speeches from other communities regarding elimination of Hindu culture. If I were to say I'll annihilate your family, wouldn't you go to any extent for self defense?

Another example is sharing a house. Initially, it will be difficult for you but you'll adjust. And then I start using your things but you are fine with that too. Then I threaten to throw you out of the house and make it entirely mine. What will be your reaction? Would you tolerate that too? Or would you start preparing to avoid losing your home? Same applies to the Hindu unrest.

There is much more to say and discuss but I will cut it here as the above summarizes politicization of  religion in India, especially distorting Hindutva/Indianism to an extent that there are sections that started believing in violence.


In case I confused you, politicizing Hindutva and Hindu unrest is related to
1. The divide and rule politics of British (say 10%)
2. The continuation of religious politics by post 1947 governments, politicians and religious gurus (remaining 90%).
That means, the system went wrong somewhere that lead, is heating up followers of Hindutva and probably will continue pressurizing them until they explode.

There are few methods by which the unrest can be contained and eliminated completely. The main point is to stop using religions as dividers. And that can happen only in an atmosphere where fear is absent or at the least, is not misused. Given the way world is engaged in appeasement of certain communities and the violent methods of those communities to convert people forcefully, I do not see it happening anywhere in near future. Politicization of religion in India pays off and it pays off just because India has a number of religions scattered throughout the country.

Link To IBN-LIVE Blog: Modern Hindu

Problem with the above post? Send us an email
Read more ...