A version of this Post was published at Andhra Cultural Portal, on July 22, 2015
Much water has flowed down the waterfall south of Mahishmati since we last touched on this topic. Those of you following us on Andhra Cultural Portal would have read our Post 2 years ago when Baahubali-The Beginning was released. Well, unless you were living in one of those caves featured in the film, you would not only be familiar with this phenomenon, but also would have watched it…several times.
And make no mistake, this Andhra movies is not just a national or global phenomenon, but especially a civilizational one for all members of Indic Civilization. It is not for nothing this Telugu language movie was a hit in Nepal. Part 2’s distribution rights have already sold for 3 crores in Prithvi Narayan Sah‘s Hindu Rajya.
So in honour of Srisaila Sri Rajamouli’s digital age epic’s second installment, Baahubali 2-The Conclusion, we give a reprint of our review of Part 1. Enjoy. Watch the movie. And above all…
The scores are in, the box office has reported, and the people have spoken: Baahubali-The Beginning is a box office behemoth. S.S. Rajamouli’s smash hit is truly a magnum opus that has swept all of India, South and North of the Vindhya. Indeed, much ink has already marked the proverbial paper, and a number of columns, cookie cutter top tens, and well-penned essays have made their mark. What’s more, long derided regional Telugu cinema is no longer seen as merely a source for remakes, but as even foreigners note, is a source of jealousy for Bollywood insiders. As Krishnarjun gaaru has written, the industry itself has the potential to go back to its golden age 3-5 decades ago, with classics such as Maya Bazaar and Missamma.
Nevertheless, while ACP typically analyzes movies long after the glitz and glamour of a premiere has passed, there is something special about this film that has come to underscore the present zeitgeist.As such, this post is not our standard cinematic analysis, or a fine study of symbology, or even a well-crafted commentary on the industry’s future. Rather it is about understanding the cultural resonance of Baahubali and why it’s relevant and indeed a revelation at this place and at this time. We have sought to do this with ** No Spoilers** for those of you who have yet to see it.
First, a Rejoinder
Despite all the acclaim— not only in the Telugu rashtras or even just Bharata desa, but also globally—sour grapes from the standard set has been increasing from dribble to a deluge. The bitter wine they swill is in the hopes of poisoning the popular opinion. As such, a rejoinder is in order.
Almost two weeks in, the knives are now out courtesy the usual suspects: “Idea of India” indoctrinues (copyright pending for portmanteau), Dubai-gang ghulams of bollywood, and assorted sordid-sickulars of all sorts are now slashing at this movie, after a proverbial puissant punch to the solar plexus. Gasping for breath, these pill-popping, phillim-hopping philistines have the gall to tear down this movie by hook or by crook. The “un-original” charges (Tarzan this, Lord of the Rings that) are particularly asinine, especially coming from bollywood. After all, Ramesh Sippy’s Sholay drew from Sergio Leone’s Once Upon a Time in the West, which drew from John Sturges’ The Magnificent Seven, which ultimately drew from Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai. It’s invariable that inspiration here and there may come from different sources–the question is breathing new life, new vision, and new context into them, and weaving them into a unique piece. Baahubali has accomplished this to the shame of Bollywood.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Setting aside their ignorance about the Kalakeyas in the Mahabharata (yet another example of what happens when you don’t know your own epics), the question isn’t whether Bharatvarsha, the land of Rama’s friend Guha, Pratap’s friends among the Bhils, or Rani Durgavati’s own in-laws, treated its tribals well, but what happened to the tribes of Europe? Bharat respected the tribal way of life, and even saw its merits by encouraging vana prastha (forest life) for retired kings and other elites.
In any event, the body blow from Baahubali had left them in a week-long stupor that they are only now gurgling back from. Left with little other than Bajrangi Bhaijan to salve their wounds, they have united around this flick touting everything from “sentiment & emotion!” to “profitability” (a.k.a. the Sonam Kapoor defence)—poor dears. And yet, why this movie and why such mendacity? After all, Magadheera showed a native Bharatiya kingdom in a complimentary fashion. It too balanced CGI and Story with dramatic action and theatric performances. Those who point to a display of Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma) in positive light, forget the Kala Bhairava Statue that served as the sentinel of cinematic climax. No, the reason why Bahubaali-The Beginning, this movie, at this time, has stirred up a hornet’s nest of hate, is because it is true cinematic splendour celebrating Dharma.
Despite the laughable claims about Bajrangi Bhaijan touting an emotive ideal, while Baahubali did not, it’s quite clear that this movie was refulgent with an ideal. Dharma, in all its myriad forms, in all its numerous nuances, is immanent throughout this Sistine chapel in celluloid. And unlike that metaphor, the fact that Rajamouli’s Masterpiece drew on native Indic forms (architecture harkens to Angkor, Amaravati, and Avanti) , native Indic fashion (Tamannah’s transformative couture is more the ancient standard), Indic names (Avantika, Baahubali), Indic Sacred History (Rishabhadeva’s sons are an overarching influence), and Indic Geography (Mahismati was the capital of Kartaveerya Arjuna), only roiled our stealth regressive royyalu (that’s Telugu for “shrimp”, btw) further. That it was able to do this by bringing Bharatiyas of all panths (religions) in to enjoy the ride and make them feel a part of the experience, was the last straw.
In a way, it’s almost poetic that a movie so redolent in Dharma Culture was distributed and promoted by Karan Johar’s Dharma Productions. Though obviously written, produced, directed, and lead acted by Telugus, this multi-starrer provided a tale and experience to which all Bharatiyas could relate.
We saw a dharmic society in action. From artistry and architecture to the traditional sastras and functioning of statecraft, it was an image of an India that once was. True, it was balanced by elements of fantasy and drew directly from the Puranas, via the Kalakeyas. But we also a saw a version of how our ancestors lived and the principles that drove them: patriotism, loyalty, self-sacrifice, motherhood, love, and above all Dharma.
What’s more, it was an image of not just how the elites might have lived, but the commoners as well. We see how villagers and elites coexisted honorably. Albeit underneath a fantastic and fantastical waterfall, it was a portrait nonetheless of the idylls of rural and even forest life. It too was replete with Dharma—not the philosophical or intellectual dharma, but the everyday dharma, the common dharma. Society may have different classes, but if the elites behave properly and with humility and a sense of social duty, then society is at harmony. The Brahmanas we see on film present a living memory of such great yet humble men.
In a snub to faux animal welfare activists (who think eating fish is inhumane, but are miraculously pro-beef), a version of Jallikattu is presented as a martial pass time. What’s more we even see an internal rebuttal regarding animal sacrifice. A Right hand Tantra riposte of the Left hand is given, demonstrating that Dharma offers alternatives internally to such practices in the name of Kulacara.
We see shakti in action, with numerous strong roles played by numerous strong women. Rather than being mere chattel, our women, our queens, commanded respect, and Shakti balanced her counterpart. We see glimpses of love and even a version of Gandharva Vivaha, where lovers came together through choice. Rather than merely loving and leaving, it was union of souls. That it was indeed marriage was emblematic when the obligation of the girl also become the obligation of the boy. As such, more than anything else, it was duty, and in particular, Kshatriya duty, that truly made its mark on screen.
The Kshatriya Ideal
Magadheera was certainly a cinematic benchmark, but Baahubali is a cultural phenomenon. The title role is not a common soldier, but a Kshatriya incarnate. As ‘The One with Strong Arms‘ he fights not only with his weapons and fists, but also with his wits. Indeed, we see that the true Kshatriya, the true King, is the one who protects his people and has their interests at heart. What’s more, this embodiment of Kshatriyata was not merely limited to men. We see a true Kshatrani in action, in conjunction with many strong and even warrior women. Ramya Krishnan alone deserves applause for her compelling and moving performance. In many ways it is she who presents the fulcrum of the film. Not only checking ambition within herself and her own family, she asserts that the true Kshatriya is not a usurper, but executes his duty to the ruling house loyally. Indeed, she provides a firm feminine rebuke to pig-headed male ambition.
The great Kshatriya vamsas of old not only had great power but expectations of great responsibility. The Kshatriya ideal of balancing education, training, statecraft, wealth, and power is the need of the hour. Rote-memorization and blind application of and training in the sastras will not win the Kurukshetra. It is for this reason that adhyatmik and laukik knowledge were separated. Adhyatmik vidya is verily the soul of our tradition. But due to the high minded principles it inspires, it requires protection from evil via laukika vidya.
Therefore, Kshatriyas were the natural leaders of society. They had an understanding of and respect for the adhyatmik principles, but the pragmatism to recognize the era of falsehood that we live in, and the improvisation it requires. Hence, the true Kshatriya is not a hot-blooded, hot-head who loses his temper in blind anger, but is a strong willed defender of truth, by whatever means necessary. Varnashrama dharma certainly has degenerated in the past millennium into arrogant and brainless casteism from all ranks, and surely has its issues, but when properly conceived, it is one of balance. A society with an over-sized head, cannot be supported by the rest of its body. The true brahmanas of yore understood that as the teachers and philosophers of society, material living was not for them, and neither sought power nor wealth nor demanded sycophancy or undue influence. The true brahmana after all, is without ego. They also understood the limits of the brahmana varna, and as Parashurama corrected the imbalance of Kshatriyas crossing their limits, so too did Bhagavan Rama correct it with Ravana, and ironically, Parashurama himself.
The traditional partnership of Kshatriyas and Brahmanas is today mired in predation or pretentiousness. Those who aspire to those ideals must remember that Maharishi Veda Vyasa’s own son, the brahmana Suka deva, completed his education under the Rajarishi Janaka. Thus, while Kshatriyas were the natural political leaders and brahmanas the natural spiritual leaders, both required elements of the other to properly conduct their duties.
Competence is not mere aptitude or ability. After all, potential energy exists even in still water. Competence is being good at what you do. Ability too has varying degrees, but competence means you have sufficient ability for the job—not merely on the basis of natural talent, or studies, or even training, but due to habit of improvisation and adaptation confirmed through practical experience.
The sastras afford us with guidance, but it is the job of the general, the job of the Raja to not only learn and understand knowledge, but apply and improvise it. This is not done in the gurukul or ashram, but on the battle map or field of battle. After all, the tactics used by Chhatrapati Shivaji were evolved by Maharana Pratap—who had no Samarth Ramdas.
Therefore, leadership in society requires balance. Of the spiritual with the practical, of the traditional with the necessary, of the brahmana with the kshatriya. That this movie was able to present the kshatriya spirit, the aristocratic ethos, without ridiculing Adarsh liberal’s favourite punching bag—Brahmins—is only fuel for the fire of indigestion they’ve been suffering since July 10th. That is what Baahubali presented—and oh so very artistically at that. Whether it was the One with Thousand Arms or the One with Strong Arms, Mahishmati was the Capital of Kings.
From its waterfalls to its mountains to its maps, this film is pure artistic splendour. The cinematography is truly outstanding and world-beating, and all elements of cinema, from the visual and auditory to the dramatic and literary are in sound balance. A complete movie, it serves as a grand canvas for not only fantasy, but indeed, on-screen poetry.
One of the more interesting aspects wasn’t the research into our Puranas or even the dress and architecture of the ancients, but the subtle inclusion of our classical literature’s approach to drama. Though perhaps not noticeable to our non-Andhra friends, the dialogue features different forms of Telugu, based on orders of society—a practice commonly used by the ancients. Thus, we see literary forms of the language ( granthikam ), along with dialectal ( mandalikam ) and colloquial ( janapadam ).
We are also given a vision of fashion and femininity that is nevertheless strong and full of Shakti. Traditional designs and forms are presented in a manner that is sensuous but not titillating.
Even rati bhava is treated with delicacy in a restrained manner. The artificial is blended with the natural, rather than challenging it. It is not the conquest of nature by man, but the harmony of man and woman with nature.
In short, this movie is a marriage of tradition and tastefulness, form and function, masculine and feminine, elite and common, ancient and modern, art and technology.
Inflection point for the Industry?
Long time readers may recall our early pieces on the Telugu film industry (tollywood no longer) bemoaning the state of the sector. Ironically, one of them actually touched on film and kshatriyata. Rather than being merely seen as an object for derision, it has an opportunity again to rise to its early heights in the 50s and 60s.From kitsch, are we truly seeing a return to art? One hopes that the smashing success of the film will ensure at least a few movies that at least aspire to such a level, even if they do not scale such Himalayan heights. The upcoming release ofRudhramadevi affords an opportunity. Indeed, Baahubali served as an exquisite launch vehicle for Anushka Shetty to a national audience. Whether Gunasekhar is ultimately able to balance CGI with cinematic depth and action with taste, remains to be seen. We remain hopeful.
A Riposte to the “Idea of India” & The Breakthrough of Bharat
This movie was nothing short of a riposte to the ineluctable “Idea of India”—hence its resonance with all classes. This colossus of a success has shown that cheap laughs, titillation and tawdriness, and the apotheosis ofall things non-native, no longer need be the way to box office success, or more importantly, cinema and culture.
Above all, was the sense of belonging to a common society that truly resonated. This wasn’t just a Telugu movie about Telangana or Andhra Pradesh, but an Indian movie about India. The India that once was. What’s more, rather than attempting to pass for Persians or Syrians, the lead actor looked like he might actually be one of them—Indians. Full credit to Prabhas for the physique he developed to give a vision of a royal hero that actually looked like the people—a reality underscored by his own real life pedigree. Rana brought the glamour, but the heart and soul of kingship was played by the first lead.
Indeed, our brothers and sisters in the North have long been deprived of cultural expression of native high culture courtesy Bollywood.They have been taught and even expected to see themselves as part of that spectrum rather than the subcontinent’s as a whole. This movie changed all that. Perhaps nothing emphasized that more when Katappa’s native Indic khadga smashed the prized Persian sword. This scene was fitting not only in an artistic rejoinder to the Idea of India brigade, but in an historical and technological one as well. The famed wootz steel (ukku) ingots of India were what made the finest blades of the era. Indeed, the historical Andhra desa was distinguished for its khandas, and made the Kakatiya kingdom all the more splendrous.
Make no mistake, this was an original movie. Ostensibly, the fairy tale jibes will lead to the obvious Lord of the Rings, Tolkien comparisons. After all, suited simulacra can never see anything beyond the western. But what these indoctrinated ingénues forget was that Tolkien himself drew on Norse and biblical mythology to create one for the English. S.S. Rajamouli had no such need. He was able to draw on the incredible fountain of Classical Indic Literature, with all its epics, sophistication, beauty, and nava rasas, and use his talent, vision, and entrepreneurial courage, to bring them to life and make them relevant to the times. So let the pop-psychologists, Freudian hacks, Lutyens insiders, foreign sympathisers, and serial slanderers run their ignorant mouths…We, the native public, the real public, know the real reason behind The Civilizational Resonance of Baahubali.
Predictably ignorant of the native Literary canon, serial rudaali, PK pablum peddler, and apochryphal activist Aamir Khan is said to have remarked after watching Inception “we [Bollywood] can’t even think at that level [Hollywood]”. Perhaps Bollywood can’t think at that level, PK, but Bahubaali has shown that Bharatiyas—real Bharatiyas—certainly can.
Bharatanatyam artist Prakruti Prativadi recently published a book ‘Rasas in Bharatanatyam’. ICP’s daughter portal shared an interesting introductory article written by the author. I got a copy of the book from Amazon.com a couple of weeks ago and ended up reading it multiple times. The work is an outcome of several years of research and a first-person experience of living the tradition. The book is intended to be the first of a series.
The author states that the book is aimed at the serious Bharatanatyam artist and connoisseur, and is also beneficial to those who want to learn more about Indic art traditions. An in-depth discussion of the different elements of Bharatanatyam including Abhinaya, Rasa, and Bhava is provided. The book also presents a brief and well-researched history of Bharatanatyam and related traditions in Hinduism, a topic which has endured much distortion and confusion in recent years. The author goes deep into the ancient roots of natya, and succinctly explains the concepts relying on primary sources in Sanskrit and Indic languages. The clarity and authority required to write in a crisp question-answer format, the shraddha, the attention to technical detail, and the reinforcement of key learning points give the book a stamp of authenticitythat perhaps only a dedicated practitioner and teacher can produce.
Where to Buy
Readers can set up a discount code ($8.00 off) which is available only from the Createspace page (not the amazon.com page) by following these steps:
Add the Book to the Cart, this will take buyers to the checkout page
Add this discount code: PYTKY7GV in the ‘Discount Code’ field and click ‘Apply Discount’ to get a discount, the price of the book will be $28.99.
Please note: Users will have to sign up for a Createspace account (if they don’t have one). Createspace is owned by Amazon.
Bharatanatyam: Embodied Learning & Direct Experience
Poet, Indic scholar, and computer scientist Prof. Subhash Kak has said that the best way to understand India is through its art , and the book reaffirms this point. Why art? India is the land of Vedas, so can’t one read Vedic text?
The author discusses the worldview underlying Bharatanatyam and notes that direct experience is central to Hinduism. Through sadhana and shraddha, potentially anyone can transcend their ordinary level of consciousness . This is an amazing and powerful discovery by India’s ancient seers. The armchair-acharya (like the theoretical martial artist and air guitarist) tries to convince us otherwise, but Hinduism recognizes that textual knowledge is useful but it cannot fully delineate the scope of Dharma and Vedas, and we provide two independent explanations regarding this.
Prof. Kak quotes Yaaska , the author of the ancient Sanskrit treatise Nirukta: “One who reads the Veda but does not know its meaning is like a draught animal”, and explains that “the idea of knowing the Veda is not merely to read it, but to understand its meaning in one’s heart. This is paradoxical, since one cannot understand the text unless one has already had the experience of its deepest intuitions. The text of the Veda cannot in itself be used for instruction”. We have Bharata Muni’s Natya Sastra, revered as the fifth Veda, that has the wisdom of the four Vedas embedded within, which is available to all people, cutting through all barriers of social and economic status, gender, race, and geography.
In his book Indra’s Net , Rajiv Malhotra poses a related question: “How did the rishis ‘see’ the shruti in the first place? Unlike the Abrahamic religions, in which prophets hear from an external God, in the Vedas there is no external voice. There is no entity equivalent to Yahweh who speaks the Vedas to the rishis… Vedas are a-purusheya, i.e., beginningless and authorless. They existed before the rishis ‘saw’ them…Hinduism does not regard the rishis as inherently different in substance or essence from the rest of us…. each human has the same potential as the rishis, and that this potential is realized through disciplined sadhana (the inner sciences of adhyatma-vidya)”. In the Indian context, Rajiv Malhotra coined the term ‘embodied knowing’ to refer to adhyatma vidya, and Indic art forms that employ this inner science surely occupy a pride of place in India’s grand narrative . The deepest authentic ‘ideas of India’ are embedded in Bharatanatyam. We owe a debt of gratitude to dedicated artists who tirelessly practice, promote, and preserve India’s sacred art forms.
Bharatanatyam as Yajna
The book has a brief but insightful discussion of Bharatanatyam as Yajna, which has been explained as a sacred process that establishes links (bandhus) between the inner and the outer world . The material world is not considered separate and discarded but is harmoniously united with the spiritual within Bharatanatyam. Indic art forms are rooted in this Vedic view where consciousness is the basis of ultimate reality itself . Such a Bharatanatyam is unacceptable to the enticing “sweet-speech” Charvaka School  that totally rejects Yajna, Puja, Bandhus, and the transcendental domain since they believe that consciousness emerges from neural matter . Bharatanatyam is also incompatible with the irreconcilable duality of history-centric Abrahamic dogma that accepts the transcendental and the transactional domains but keeps their existence independent and infinitely apart .
Actively participating in Yajna leads to an internal transformation that is like undergoing a ‘rebirth’ . This leads us to a second, and equally remarkable observation that anysensitive and attuned viewer (Sahridaya) immersed in a Bharatanatyam performance  can also potentially attain a higher state of consciousness and transcendental bliss, and this communication is possible due to Rasa. The book explains this process in-depth.
Dharmic thought employs a finite and limited number of levels to manage quantities/qualities that may appear to be unlimited or huge in number, or even indivisible or continuous. How does it work?
On Rasa, Prof. Kak remarks : “An aesthetic attitude is a combination, in varying measures, of the different essences (rasas) of it. It is one of the great insights of the Indian tradition that these essences are supposed to be discrete, and perhaps this idea emerged from the Vaisesika atomic doctrine as well as the idea of Nyaya that mind operates sequentially”. Like Panini and his rules of grammar, Bharata, using only a finite number of sutras, covered the profound topics of Rasa and Bhava and spanned the virtually unlimited expanse of dance and drama.
Paanini has been credited for a grand unified theory of language, and Bharata too can be credited for a similar theory of aesthetics thousands of years ago. The author notes how a danseuse can skillfully conjugate various dance elements such as movements, gestures, etc. mentioned in the Natya Sastra to generate innumerable permutations and combinations to artistically express the myriad emotions and situations that has occurred, or will occur in the future, and convey that meaning to the audience. Bharatanatyam does not limit but encourages unselfish self-expression.
Rasa Awakening in the Audience
In her book, Prakruti ji takes us on a fascinating journey through the Rasa awakening process in Bharatanatyam. The idea of Rasa is ancient and present in the Upanishads . According to the author “Rasa is the supreme aesthetic experience and absolute aesthetic relish that the audience feels when witnessing an artistic performance… Rasa is a heightened state of consciousness and bliss… This experience is called Rasasvada, which is akin to Brahmasvada, a supreme knowledge… Rasa is a Sanskrit word that no equivalent word in English”. A simplified arrow-diagram view of the Rasa awakening sequence/combination given in the book can be described as follows (the interested reader should refer to the book to obtain a complete and correct picture).
(Author dancing selected Paasurams from the Vaarinam Aayiram)
In Bharatanatyam, for example, the process can be triggered by witnessing the Abhinaya of the skillful artist, and given the right conditions, culminate in a heightened state of consciousness within a receptive audience. In an interview, Dr. Ramachandran Nagaswamy confirms this important point about Rasa while correcting the mistaken conclusion of a western Indologist.
Another crucial point made by the author is that the generation of Rasa in a performance is not guaranteedand it requires the harmonious integration of multiple inter-connected factors. The author likens it to a complex and rich recipe. Rasa is not awakened by sensory stimuli such as personal sadness experienced in mundane life, or by artists using the stage to make purely political and social statements. And even if the performance is of the highest caliber, it still requires an attuned viewer (Sahridaya)  within whom the ‘aesthetic vibes’ of the performance can resonate. The author quotes Bharata “without Rasa, there can be no meaningful communication”.
Engineering Design Example
Natya Sastra ideas can find applications in diverse fields, including entertainment, advertising, public-service messaging, etc. Given its integral view, teaching Natya Sastra concepts authentically in schools and colleges will benefit not only young artists, but also engineers and scientists. As an analogy and example, modern highway design relies on the PIEV theory of driver response to visual stimuli:
PIEV is used to measure the perception-reaction time of a driver. Triggered by observing an event, the driver first perceives (something happened), grasps the implications (danger to self/others), and this triggers one or more emotions (what to do?), before converging on a final, stable action (brake, steer, or accelerate). PIEV duration differs for a distracted versus fully conscious driver. When deciding where and how to install and calibrate a traffic light, one has to evaluate the combination of all inter-related factors – PIEV, visibility, topography, traffic conditions, etc., in order to maximize the percentage of drivers that will have sufficient time to go through PIEV and make the right decision. PIEV and Rasa may be two different things (although when in danger, even the most materialistic passenger and driver will invoke the divine transcendent charioteer to ensure fast PIEV so they can remain in their transactional world); however, there appear to be similarities – the importance of an integral perspective, a scientific approach, and understanding the roles of emotional states, cognition, and consciousness.
Bharatanatyam & Artificial Intelligence
Today, Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems can generate cooking recipes, write mournful poetry, and has even started writing musical scores. Can machine-generated artistic performances evoke Rasa?Can it replicate the transcendental leap  that is possible through a Yajna? These are interesting questions to be answered by experts. Machines are not conscious because they cannot have Bandhus , and their art output appears to be generated by algorithms using preset rules distilled from prior art, which were created by highly skilled human artists, not machines. The book has clearly established that the Rasa awakening process and the dance elements of Bharatanatyam are not mechanical.
While machine art may match humans and eventually do better in terms of purely materialist aesthetics, the sacred Indic art-as-Yajna rooted in an integral unity via bandhus that bind the inner and outer worlds, will not only survive, but thrive and give humanity a sense of hope and a glimpse of divinity. This makes it all the more important that Bharatanatyam and classic Indian art be preserved and taught in their authentic form and context. Prakruti Prativadi’s book is a welcome step in this direction.
The essence of character is willingness to stand up for your principles and endure in safeguarding the principles you support. High-minded thinking may appeal to all or even most; but it is fortitude, and the willingness to endure in order to safeguard these principles, even sacrificing oneself in the process, which is the hallmark of character, and shows the calibre of the principle.
For Romans it was Virtus, for the Chinese its Tianxia, for Indians it is Dharma. The character of a nation or civilization is determined by the driving principle. It is an ideal that gives courage in dark days, high minded thinking in peaceful ones, and moral thinking in prosperous ones. Above all, it not only gives a nation its character, but builds character among its nationalists.
Our previous articles on the Global Crisis of Character and Why Character is so Important, were composed so that people, especially self-declared civilizational saviours, understand that their personal character is ultimately what deprecates or elevates National Character. Before you can save your civilization, before you can save your society, you must first save your own character. Spelling bees, IQ tests, entrance exams, College placement, or even delusional “genetic superiority” all come to naught if your character is atrocious. There have been many intelligent sellouts like Alcibiades and many farmer-soldiers of high character like Cincinnatus. Who is celebrated as saviour in the end? It is the one with character.
The starting point of character is self-respect. Respect yourself, and show it by respecting others. Between shameless, servile obedient sycophancy and arrogant non-compliance is the middle ground of self-respect. Find it, and no matter who you are, what your role is, or what your caste is, keep it and never let it go. It’s possible to respect or admire something and adapt it without putting yourself down or losing your identity completely—learn this. It is right to learn, even from the enemy…but do not lose who you are.
Learn the concept of “other people”. There is undoubtedly a concerted campaign to smear Indians, especially “Hindu Males”, as was seen with documentaries like “India’s Daughter”. Statistics are ignored in favour of individual stories. At the same time, while pushing back against such unjustified stereotypes, it is also important to avoid playing to stereotype. Undoubtedly this article too had an agenda, and to maintain credibility, some understanding was given at the beginning. The words at the very end however are the grain of truth in a heap of chaff. Due to Nehruvian Babooism, more than even casteism, a sense of self-entitlement and self-absorption drives far too many Indians. “Pata hai mera baap kaun?…He is the assistant secretary shoeshiner to the congress party president!”—ergo special privileges. This status obsession and self-centeredness have already been discussed here.
Not everything is a matter of short term, personal ROI. One generation plants the tree, another gets the shade. Furthermore, if you see a tree full of fruit, you don’t just feed your face, then cut down the tree to take back to your immediate family. Take what you need, and a few for your dependents, and leave the rest for others, who also rely on it. Live on the interest, not the principle of your inheritance.
Invest in public institutions. If you only support your caste/clique/social circle, if you only care about what affects you, no one will be there for you when you need their help. Most people think they’re very smart when they take advantage of someone else. But that only assumes you never bump into him again, or your circumstances don’t change. Don’t just win today, to lose tomorrow. Focus on winning tomorrow. Public institutions help here.
Learn the difference between a rival, an adversary, and an enemy. Indiots treat their enemies like rivals (or even friends) and their rivals like enemies. A rival is merely someone with similar talents who may be in competition with you—but is still part of society, and may even be your friend (after all, there is such a thing as friendly competition). A rival becomes an adversary when he is someone who is directly facing off against you, but whom you may need latersince you are in a common society. An enemy is someone who is a severe threat to you, and possibly even your family, society, and civilization. More often than not, such people have made up their minds.
Introspection.There is plenty of blame to go around. Singling out a single person for all the ills in your family, singling out a single community for all the ills in your nation, is not going to achieve anything. Some may be more culpable to others, but there is always something we each can correct, or at the very least, do better at.
Introspection doesn’t mean public self-flagellation. It means sitting down, every once in a while (every week/month & year), to think about what you have done, what you shouldn’t have done, what you should have done, and what you should do better. This is the danger in asinine theories of “genetic superiority” or molecular perfection—they ignore the place of character and taking responsibility for results. If your attitude is “things worked because I am genius/things failed because others are terrible”, then no wonder you’ve perfected the formula for national disaster. You are not that special. Most of you are morons—especially the IQ-obsessed among you priding yourselves on divining blog ramblings. Real intelligence lies in adapting to change, in adapting to our circumstances, and finding ways to correct course. Any idiot can give meaningless gyaan or vent on twitter or knock off memes from phoriegn. Take responsibility for your actions, be a man, and look for solutions.
Cultivate yourself. It doesn’t matter if you are only 10th pass (or LKG), it is never too late to start reading. Reading doesn’t mean reading only what popinjay gyaanis prefer. Reading means making an effort to teach yourself. It can be as simple as learning about different varieties of birds, teaching yourself a new language, mastering a new cuisine to cook, or even enjoying popular literature. The Classics are an excellent pursuit for those with the inclination. Make an effort if you can. But no matter what your age, cultivate yourself by picking up the practice of reading both the practical and the recreational.
Cultivating yourself also means developing other sides of yourself with hobbies. Merely watching serials or cricket or idiot bollywood movies is no way to spend all your free time. Some tv time is ok, but the rest of it, spend on developing your artistic or musical side. Pick up gardening, or a sport—a real sport—like wrestling, archery, or field hockey. It also means, not devolving to the emotional equivalent of a child. From godforsaken gameshows to stupid serials and soap operas to infantile cartoons, the modern middle class adult (young and old, male and female) has literally become infantalised through a life of idle pleasure-addling.
A life of pleasure-addled delusion and pain-avoiding pill-popping leads to the requiem for a dream. Don’t be dependent on pharmaceuticals. Take what you absolutely need, but when possible rely on a healthy lifestyle, traditional medicine, and non-fast-food diet.
I have actually seen women in advanced middle age watch lullaby cartoons for infants because “it makes them feel calm & happy“. You know the infantilisation of adults is complete when people reach such a stage. Women who should be matriarchs and role models have devolved to this state—and the less said about their menfolk the better.
Become practical.Whether you are a Pandit, Philosopher, IT worker, or loafer, we are of this world and in this world. It is good to keep an eye on the next one, but what you do in this life, beyond the puja room, beyond the office, is ultimately how you will be judged…in this life and the next. Being able to organise an Akhanda Bhajan anywhere in the world within 24 hours may be an impressive feat of Bhakti and logistics, but it is not fundamentally going to safeguard your cultural and civilizational inheritance. Bhakti (or ritual or jnana or what-have-you) is primarily about your personal spiritual path. Your true work in this world is outside the puja room, and is the legacy you leave behind for the public good.
[Ram Raj] was not built in a Day. Ram Setu was not built by a single individual, but by a team of individuals working together towards a common goal. Ram did honour Varuna deva, and did puja by the seashore, but he also oversaw the construction of the bridge. Gyaan is cheap, action is expensive. Unless you have “skin in the game” , keep your useless gyaan to yourself and start contributing in a useful fashion. You get out what you put in, and the value of your advice is determined on the basis of the competence of your record. Fortitude, endurance, and willingness to bear pain are all required for those wishing to become physically fit. For the nation to become physically and mentally fit, the same fortitude is required. Cowering gyaanis braying about “hypermasculinity” or “genetic superiority” will be given the ridicule they deserve, especially if they lack the courage and competence to lead by example.
Take responsibility. This means not only contributing to the national cause in some meaningful way, but in making it a point to safeguard that which you are immediately responsible for.
If you haven’t done any of these things in your spoiled little existence, start today. This is why we wrote of the importance of critical thinking. Gyaani-ism results in living in your own made up world of assumptions. Critical thinking necessitates understanding the world as it actually is. Dharma is not assumption-based. Dharma is reality-based, and reality changes based on circumstances . Modern/Post-modern living may make it seem like you are just a mall or a single-brand retail store away from food, fashion, and water, but what happens when the power goes out? 1 hour or 1 day power cuts are the norm in less densely populated towns and villages, and even many cities, but what do you do if you live in a crime-ridden metro? Gated community or not, foreign or domestic, these are things to consider.
Puja, Ritual, Havan, Bhakti, all are good—but not enough. God helps those who help themselves. Unless you are a pujari, you have no excuses. As a praja (as a responsible citizen) you have a responsibility think about these things we listed above.
Science is organised Knowledge. Wisdom is organised Life.—Immanuel Kant
Value wisdom over knowledge. Knowledge isimportant, but not what is pivotal in the end. Learn the differences. Debasing yourself like a gunga din, following orders, taking instructions, or just taking advice (or saying you’ll think about it) are not the same thing. Being an argumentative and opinionated idiot doesn’t make you smart—it makes you an idiot. Just because your mummy says you’re smart doesn’t mean you can spout off like buffoon. Just because you did well in school doesn’t mean you can actually read/listen to understand what someone said rather than just read/listen to argue to live in your opinions. Just because something was written in a book doesn’t mean its true. Sabda pramana is primarily rooted in Divine authority—not some native or foreign fraudacharya playing false guru. Learn from real Acharyas who live in Agraharas and Mathas.
This leads into the next point. While it’s good to differentiate between those who openly attack our culture and those foreigners who openly support it, understand that you don’t always know who’s doing what covertly. A traitor is still a traitor, but understand that there still is a difference between native and foreign. Foreigners can be allies and friends, but regardless of the behaviour of casteists, only natives are your real family. There are some things only natives can do. Have the self-respect to understand this.
Gandhi remains controversial, and this movie ever less appreciable by the day. Nevertheless, every now and then, there are some relevant scenes, and this is one of them.
It is good to appreciate friends, but your friends cannot run your own household.It is good to acknowledge well-wishers, but they cannot lead your way. It is good to be a good global citizen,but start by being a good national citizen first. Then, not only will you find that you will be more successful in attaining your objectives, but that your circle of friends (foreign and domestic) will increase, not because you are likeable, but because you are respectable.
Stop being useful idiots. If you don’t know, shut up. MTV veejays may have taught you to be loud or obnoxious or like these “bindaas” buffoons, but that’s the single best way to play into your opponents’ hands. It is the mark of an educated mind to consider without accepting. Learn from a real Mahatma, Mahatma Vidhur.
Next, understand who you are. Perhaps the biggest problem facing us today is that caste identity has become the be-all-and-end-all. This is in part due to reservations, but let’s not kid ourselves, is primarily driven by our own history. Now it’s one thing to wish to preserve your jati identity, which most Hindus do today, and its another thing to only care about it. A Jati group is but an extension of your family group, beyond that may be varna, but beyond that is the common religious community and the nation in general. Be able to flow in and out of these multiple identities rather than just spend 24 hrs a day in caste battles.
Those who think casteism is dead are fooling themselves—it has merely morphed with one side using AIT based genetics theories and another using AIT based oppression theories. Those who want unity must understand that they can’t pretend nothing bad never happened 2000 years ago or 200 years ago. Most people won’t say much if you wish to marry within your own caste, or preserve and pass on your identity, but stop being a jackass about it. Prove yourself on your own merit, not your clan’s. Taking pride in something is one thing, being a prideful idiot is another.
On that note, by now most of you are familiar with our own house blend of searing internal criticism (you just had a sample above). Unlike some, we don’t lay responsibility at the doorstep of one community, but recognise that there’s plenty of blame to go around. Advocating against self-flagellation (especially the public variety) doesn’t mean license to avoid responsibility. Enough buck-passing. The buck stops here. Take responsibility. Man up. And if you wish to rebuild the national character, start with your own character. Young or old. Upper caste, Lower caste. Man or Woman. Ph.D or only LKG. All individuals have a role to play in the days ahead. The days of treating others like dirt are over.
Start with yourself, and show you have self-respect by treating others with respect. This is the first step to rebuilding personal character.
1. Reject casteists and casteism.
If there is a single overarching obstacle to our unity today it is casteism. It is the biggest single problem facing us today due to its stakes, and it is not just something found in rural India. It has assumed a more subtle character in urban India, even among the professional middle classes. Most things aren’t said in polite society (unless doors are closed), but you can easily tag the casteists on twitter. They are found both in lower castes & upper castes, but all are societal termites. They can easily be identified by their genetics obsession and continued promotion of AIT on the one hand or hatred of a particular community on the other. They will even misquote shruti and smriti to that end, such is their shamelessness.
And for the caste obsessed, we also didn’t say varnashrama dharma. Caste endogamy or practicing your basic kulachara is not what makes you a casteist. Shamelessly feeling entitled to things which your character or your incompetence disqualifies from, does.
If you don’t believe in Varna Samkara, fine—free country . But remember, in Manu’s time itself there were many cases of inter-caste marriage; in fact, so much so, he himself gave a scheme of the new sub-castes created. Understand the difference and stakes between inter-caste, inter-religious, and inter-national. I am not against someone’s personal or familial beliefs. Marriage after all, is a personal/familial matter. But if you think inter-caste is the same as inter-religious or inter-national, you probably need to have your head examined. Have your priorities straight and distinguish between nice to have and need to have (yes, there is such a thing even under the strictest most conservative interpretation of Dharma). In times of aapaada, Aapad Dharma applies, irrespective of your caste-conceits.
So if there is a single thing you take away from this article, let it be this. If you can’t let go of your ancient views, at least have the intelligence to shut up about them in public—we don’t need pseudo-intellectuals like ruining the national cause with prejudice. This leads to the next point.
2. Emotional Discipline. Time and time again we have written of the importance of social discipline in general and emotional discipline in particular. Between uncontrolled joy and unsustainable anger, is the middle path of equanimity. Just because someone disagrees with you on 9% doesn’t mean you sacrifice the other 91% by engaging in a to-the-death online argument with them. Just because someone said something positive of your society, doesn’t mean they’re your friend. Just cause someone does all the rituals doesn’t change the fact that his actions are destroying the rashtra and its native culture. Don’t get fooled by appearances. Don’t be Gullible. Those who have strong personal religious beliefs frequently use them to further their own selfish public ambitions.
3. Plan & prepare for contingencies. Develop Survival skills.The ironically named Ramachandra Seuna provides a profile in foolishness on how failing to be vigilant results in ignominy. The great fortress of Devagiri (now ignominously renamed) was famed as the most impregnable in the Dakshinapatha. Despite being constructed upon an imposing hillock, it fell within weeks due to failure to keep account of adequate provisions in case of surprise siege. It would be centuries before the land of the Marathas would produce a Shivaji, who ensured a network of well-provisioned forts throughout Marathwada. If every man’s home is his castle, then the same applies to your house (or temporary shelter).
Just because you earned good grades/marks in school and went to a good school, doesn’t mean you are cultivated. Just because you “earn job make money” doesn’t mean you are finished with school. Your real education begins after graduation.
Don’t just watch tv/kircket/movies, develop your God-given abilities. Learn new languages, read books on topics that interest you and topics that help you grow. Try to better yourself as a person at least an hour a week. Everyone has at least 15 minutes a day to do something useful to grow or contribute (ideally both).
5.Develop standards for yourself.If anything goes, if hedonism is your compass, don’t be surprised if you become depressed by emptiness down the road. Ask yourself what type of person you wish to be, then make your decisions, rather than make a poor choice and rationalise it later. In our previous article we pointed out that along with Sita & Rama, there was Kunti & Pandu, and even Ahalya & Gautama. The only true judge is Divine, but ask yourself now what type of person you wish to be remembered as, rather than be short-sighted in your choices. Modernity may mean complicated romantic pasts for many, but it doesn’t justify ignominous romantic presents and futures. Some are men of honour, others are women of principle. Whether you can follow the rigid Dharma of Rama or not, there is no excuse for not having his Sabhyata, Saujanya, & Maryada.
6.Accomplishments over Credentials.Credentials and degrees and jobs are important. But prestige is ultimately a nice-to-have. At the end of the day, the Harvard/IIT grad who amounted to nothing is forgotten, and the Chaiwala who became CM & PM is remembered.
If you are intellectually gifted, cultivate your physical fitness. If you are physically fit, cultivate your intellect. Clever talk and even subject-matter expertise are good, but promote those who are actually using their gifts for the common good.
Develop physical fitness, crowdsource movies by struggling but culturally rooted directors, go to the theatre to see real drama (not bollywood), give patronage to struggling small business. These are the real things that make a difference at the end of the day. Accomplish something yourself, or support those trying to accomplish something.
7.Prioritise Family. Giving respect to elders. Looking after your children. Sheltering relatives and friends in need. These all may prevent your overall “utility maximisation”, but are critical for a common society.
This also means recognising the due place of women not just as mothers but as wives and co-equals and partners in society. Real men not only fulfill their duties, but know how to interact and behave around women, and enjoy the company of others in a respectful way. Become skilled conversationalists (rather than just idle gossips or grunting neanderthals).
1. Bharatiya Moms, stop raising Mummy’s boys. Learn from this mother about what it takes to raise a real man. Notice we didn’t say stop loving them or stop showing love. But stop being so unctuously permissive of all their misbehaviour. Treating them special at home is one thing, spoiling them so rotten that they act like they’re special in public is another. Time to bring an end to the Dhritarashtra and Gandhari Syndrome.
Raise men and women of character. It is not just sons who are spoiled but even daughters now. This is what happens when you don’t emphasise samskara and sadacharam at a young age. Philosophy and “choose your own way” is for when they are young adults. Children don’t have a vote in a democracy. They thrive in structure.
Rear your son affectionately till he is five yeas old then admonish him strictly for the next ten years. When he turns sixteen, start treating him as your friend. [1, 23]
Your grown children are your best friends. Good marks are good, good living is better, good character is best of all. Raise men and women of character.
2. Prioritise family over the individual.Yes, a repeat point. Yes, there is such a thing as individual dignity (something that has been lost to those promoting things like madde snanam…). But the head of family or the head of society has no right to degrade the dignity of others or engage in tyranny. But just as societal needs come before individual needs, so do family needs come before individual needs. Being the head of a household does not mean trampling all over members of your family, and being an individual does not mean you can willfully ignore family needs. Balance is the key.
3. Understand that that rights come with duties. As adults you may have freedom to act as you please. But actions have consequences. As we remarked in our previous article, lives of hedonism may seem appealing with their exterior gloss, but with agency comes responsibility. Take responsibility for your actions and use what freedoms you’ve been given to act responsibly.
1. Start doing something to improve the community around you. Complaining on twitter is easy, actually doing something with your spare time is hard. Swachh Bharat is more than just another government programme. It is a national call to action. Cleanliness begins with you. Change begins with you. Temsutulu Imsong is now a celebrity for her Shramdaan effort.
When you are focused on trivia, you only attain the trivial. Real action isn’t ritualism. Real action is improving the world around you directly. Unless you are a pujari, you have no excuses. Plenty of people just like you are tired of just talking and are actually doing useful things. Don’t just RT and praise, follow their example, intelligently.
2. Be considerate to those around you.Time and again we have written about the importance of Sabhyata, Saujanya, and Maryada. Ironically, those most obsessed with kulachara seemed to have forgotten these components of Achara. Acharais good conduct, all-round good conduct. Part of it is ritual, but most of it is your own behaviour. Be considerate to those around you (young and old alike). You may expect the Temsutulas of the world to clean up after you, but do these national gems a favour and reduce their workload by ceasing your littering and inconsiderate behaviours.
3. Prioritise business to small business. So what if you might pay a few paise more. So what if the other guys have an app. Like it or not, trust is a critical part of the commercial relationship. Giant mega-corporations and malls may look slick and shiny, but it’s small and medium enterprise that employs the most people. Yes, there are crooks who do things like adulterate milk, but how does that compare with the plastic and cadmium rice of corporations in India’s neighbour to the east?
4. Have a plan for succession. Team, Family, Community, Business, Army, Government, all need depth not just in the ranks of enlisted man or common member, but depth in leadership as well. From Dahirto Anandapala to Hemu, too many battles have been lost because a cause was personality-focused. Personalities do matter, but institutions matter more. Have a plan for succession, and develop talent to replace you if you should fall. This point is also why loyalty is so important. If the person below you is too personally ambitious, then the more incompetent, but loyal person often gets promoted, affecting the whole team/system. Plan for succession.
Because the sons of Dasaratha were loyal to each other and put their desa dharma first, Bharatacould keep the throne ready for Rama, when he returned. To get loyalty from your subordinates show loyalty and respect (not the same as subservience) to seniors.
5. Invest in Team Sports.Contrary to the Olympics gyaanis, Kreeda is in our Culture. But stop obsessing about individualistic kircket, and start playing team sports like field hockey and football. If you are an older person, start coaching local youngsters so they know how to play well as a team. Take a page from Bhaichung Bhutia.
Many patriots pride themselves in being “nationalists”. But nationalism isn’t just “Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan“. Each state has its own heritage and even language that is worth treasuring as well. If we have written in support of Shuddh Hindi as rajbhasha it is out of necessity. Our own love for own state and language is the reason Andhra Portal was launched in the first place. All other states beyond the Telugu states deserve a Portal. All states, no matter how big or small, have a culture worth celebrating and preserving. That is true Samskruthi. Don’t just tweet on anniversaries of state figures, actually take pride in your actual heritage by taking tangible steps to preserve it.
To rebuild the character of the state necessitates leaders.Real leaders, not just entitled buffoons who like to boss people around or boast of credentials, but real people of action. Real action is not in producing hackneyed memes that mimic analogues from the West, but in actually taking tangible steps in collaboration with like-minded people. There are too many Dhritarashtras and Gandharis who have become too comfortable in their middle class palaces and pleasure-addled lives of mall food and bollytrash movies. We have written about this complex before, but now an article was written on this very issue in a mainstream paper.
To rebuild the character of state necessitates people willing to work across caste lines.If you truly believe in merit, you recognise only your caste doesn’t have it. If you truly believe in courage/manliness, you recognise only your caste doesn’t have it. Put the genetics-obsessed individuals in their place and out to pasture, and gather together people who recognise character makes men and women of worth. And simply 1 word here or there is not enough.
This of course works the other way too. Whatever caste issues there were a hundred or a thousand years ago, “payback” benefits no one but anti-nationals. It will simply be a matter of cutting off the nose to spite the face. Don’t be a parrot of propaganda and a sucker for atrocity literature and drumbeater for reservations in everything. Self-respect is not just a slogan—show it. Empower yourself with your own hard work and God-given intelligence—and prove yourself to shut up the casteists. Many have already done this and have proven themselves in multiple spheres of life. Follow their example, and not the DMK’s. Picking on defenseless men and women is easy. Doing the hard work to correct societal problems is…yes…hard. If you are surrounded by casteists, ignore them, and reach out to us, or other like-minded people.
Once you have a group of like-minded folks, sit down, and discuss the issues of your state.In our case, we did this with individuals from our now bifurcated state. In addition, understand that women have an exceedingly important role to play—and if Jijabai is any indicator, an even more important role to play. Evaluate people’s strengths with an unbiased eye. Yes, we will have to place trust eventually in people. Some will let us down, so it is best to do filtering at the beginning.
This also means those who wish to participate and contribute must be patient. If you don’t get noticed right away, there is probably some reason. There are a million things going on and a crore Kalnemis in our ranks. It will take time. Rather than seeking to compete in resentment, build up your own repertoire in the mean time, via study or useful promotion of others. Show you are a team player. Those of you who compete anyways, at least have the responsibility to do your own thing and not get in someone else’s way.
Recognise core groups and peripheral groups. Example: In Karnataka, these would be Kannadigas, Kodavas, and Tulus,etc for the core. All other groups are peripheral.
1. Some of you have reached out to us.Most of you didn’t have the character to, and prefer to read in cowardly silence. Fine. But it’s never too late to course correct. If you want to do for your region what we didfor ours and another one, reach out. It may take time, we may not say yes, we may not even respond, but that is not the point. There are many ways to revive the character of the state. Such a platform is but one of them, and not everyone is suited for it. If you’re not, find something else and make your mark positively. There are still ways to work collaboratively without being part of the same sub-team.
2. Reach out to the local traditional Pandits.You can find ways to give qualified ones patronage or support the events they and others like them hold to teach all children. There is a lot of junk colonial history out there and junk colonial scriptural interpretation out there. It is only the traditional panditwho can give the correct interpretation and advise your effort to properly restore your regional history and culture. Only orthodox Pandits are the authorities on our scriptures anyway—not some beef-eating baboo, foreign or domestic, from the ivory tower.
3. Promote native/regional language & language bookstores.“But it’s cheaper on amazon” isn’t an excuse. That should be a last resort not a first one. Give patronage as much as you can and suggest book titles to your friends and family and followers. There’s no point whining about how your kids or the younger generation doesn’t speak your mother tongue when you didn’t make it a point to show them what to read, and why.
For a community that has suffered terribly, the greatest counter-move Kashmiri Pandits could make is to preserve & pass-on their knowledge of Sharda script. KP’s should teach their children Sharda (and of course, Koshur). This will safeguard not only the ability to read the treasure of Sanskrit literature that came from the Land of Maharishi Kashyap, but that there will be motivation to re-collect the many lost manuscripts of our civilizational heritage that are in that lipi.
Our Sikh brothers in Dharma have provided an excellent example in preserving not only the Punjabi language, but the Gurmukhi script. The linguistic aspect is all the more relevant in how they have kept it current. Not only did they infuse modern pop-music with Punjabi lyrics, but they updated a native folk-dance for international audiences . The traditional folk dance and language remained in harmony with the exigencies of contemporary reality.
On that note, other groups, such as many a Sindhi I know who did not learn her or his mother tongue, should do so now while the older generation is still around. Those speaking various Hindi dialects should begin emphasising them as well. We touched on that issue here. There is no reason why the purveyors of a persianised pidgin patois should look down upon the venerable bhashas of Braj and Avadh and Mithila.
4. Culture isn’t static.You can’t just regurgitate whatever traditional learning you were taught. Nor is it 1 dimensional or only religious in character. The next step is to revive cultural equities not just by documenting them,but by supporting artists, dancers, weavers, craftspeople, fashion designers, poets, etc etc.
Give patronage to the arts. Not just the occasional Odissi performance, not just the occasional Carnatic Katcheri, but giving 15 min a day or an hour a week to reviving Arts & Crafts. Find 1 or 2 things, and stick with the issue. Handloom workers across Bharat are in desperate need of business (and honest investment, from people who don’t take advantage). What is pocket change for you is a month’s livelihood for them. Give support to handloom. Even if you are not a “mercantile”, you can make a difference in helping these people update their fashion to current trends. Foreigners are constantly studying India to remake native styles and motifs for overseas sale. Indians end up buying from the same foreign brands. Don’t you think it makes more sense to just buy locally? Do you really think Levi’s or DKNY needs a few thousand more rupees? You don’t have sacrifice your entire wardrobe—but a kurta here and outfit or purse there, goes a long way. Don’t just Make in India, Wear from India.
And patronage is meant for not only the classical arts but for the folk arts as well. Harikatha, Burrakatha, Naga dolls, Madhubani, etc, all are deserving of investment and promotion. Kudos to Punjabis and Gujaratis who already showed the way with their embrace of Bhangra/Gidda & Raas/Garbha. Folk is not just for villages. It can be updated for contemporary metro kids as well—see the NRIs who created a new music/dance genre.
If you are fed up with bollywood insulting our culture, give the parallel vision, the real vision of real India. Enough talk. Put your money where your mouth is. They are plenty of short film directors and film students looking for funding online. Crowdsource. Pool your resources and give the ones with the right vision and right attitude the funding they need. One small film can lead to bigger ones.They are all one google-search away.
This also means investing in your regional language industry. If your own state industry produces mindless mass masala like Sandalwood, fear not. Tollywood (now TFI) was even worse—so much so that I swore off of it. It has now returned full swing beyond Bahubali. Yes there are still back-bencher flicks, but it has finally made a name for itself and is Tollywood no more. There is no reason why Bhojpuri films can’t do the same in the North.
If you see a director who goes against the grain, support him (or her). Crowdsource movies or prove to producers that your state too has the audience to make a Baahubali of its own. Culturally-relevant cinema should be the criterion. Move beyond the caste-agendas and prioritise the common state culture. Move beyond the regionalism, and prioritise the common national culture.
Also understand how the game is played. Overcompensating bravado, caste prejudice, and even overt religious bigotry are merely going to ensure you play directly into our shatrus’ hands with quotable soundbites—many of you are experts at this already…And misogyny is downright suicidal. We at this site reject it prima facie, but if you don’t reject it on principle, at least have some sense. Political sense. When your shatru is trying to pit women against men, you don’t play into his hands.
It is also means putting regionalism in check. The contributors to this site hail from different states, and even love their native languages dearly. At the same time, it is important to understand that a common native language, accessible to all, is required. We have already addressed this issue here. It is possible to support shuddh Hindi for national purposes while supporting local efforts like Kannada Baruthe.
Requiring all medium and long term residents of a state to learn the local language is the minimum courtesy for other regions like mine to accommodate another language for national governmental communication. If you disagree with this, at least disagree without being disagreeable, and give practical alternatives (neither universal translators…nor english). English is a colonial holdover, the time has come to start transitioning to the native. States like mine have accommodated the national interest. Migrants to my state can accommodate the state interest.
1. Buy native. Ask your salesman or merchant where your murthi comes from. If you have the money, give patronage to local murthi/diya artisans. Price and popularity aren’t the only things that matters. If you have the budget, have the sense to not buy from your “number 1 strategic threat”, or don’t be surprised when this happens.
2. Give patronage to Civilizational bookstores.They may not be perfect. They may have vsnl-era websites, but these publishers ensure that our common national and civilizational heritage is passed on to anglicised metro youth.
3.Be an ambassador for yourself, your family, your community,your state& your nation.Like it or not, people are constantly judging each other. The impression you make on someone else may be your prerogative, but also influences their impression of you and where you come from. You have freedom to act as you please, but don’t complain if your family or community then feels ashamed of you. Have fun, but be responsible. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. But all play and no work makes Jack a rotten boy. Rotten boys can’t contribute to the national cause, just as rotten wood cannot be carved.
4. Put aside personal ambition and focus on the National Need.
Counted the old names of their descent dearer than the names of their sons
The days ahead will be tall and terrible. So much so that even the heretofore spoiled and brattish will wake up and be shaken from shirking obligation. While they will separate the boys from the men, but they will also make men, real men.
Different Dharmas exist for different people. Nevertheless, there is a Saamaanya Dharmaand a Bharatiya Dharma that exists above Kulachara and Varnashrama Dharma. Nothing is possible unless there is this unity. Not a feigned, falsely professed unity. Not a nationalism of convenience to advance own-side caste interests. Not apologia to justify power grabs or government jobs or party doles. But a genuine unity, that preserves nation, then state, then community, (then caste), then family, then individual.
The episode earlier this year where Rajiv Malhotra was attacked by a concerted casteist effort is a prime example of these issues. Under the obvious feigned pretence of “criticism” and “intellectualism” someone who had actually stuck his neck out for all castes was targeted by a section of casteists, ostensibly bought out by anti-nationals. Similar pseudo-intellectualism was seen in an attempt to pin the of blame on baniya communities for invasions. Casteism is no caste’s monopoly, and RM has been and still is defended by many from the same caste who oppose own-side casteists. The same occurred in the case against baniya community members. And that is the point. To be effective against casteists, inter-caste battles are not the way. Intra-caste battles must be fought to root out these societal termites, whether they are found among the clique that attacked Malhotra or the Periyar supporters that drove out most of a community from Tamil Nadu. If you don’t have the anatomy to do this, don’t whine when you and your caste are on the receiving end.
“A man is great by deeds, not by birth.”– Chanakya
What has a person actually done? What solutions have they actually provided? A poet or “evolutionary biologist” is not a strategist, and should know his place in the scheme of things or be put back in it. Put aside caste conceits,genetics rants& entitlement complexes. Such charlatans may be gone cases, but those of you who have been tricked into supporting such nonsense, introspect and rather than ask whether you are doing the socially profitable, ask whether you are doing what is societally responsible. Ask what your “saviours” have actually done. Ask whether you are doing the right thing.
For once in your lives, recognise we’re all in this together.Emotional discipline, cultured behaviour, professional competence, personal character, all these qualities, all this background literature was composed so that the one thing you truly lacked was the one thing you’d finally recognise you sorely needed: the right Attitude.
I believe the single most significant decision I can make on a day-to-day basis is my choice of attitude.
It is more important than my past, my education, my bankroll, my successes or failures, fame or pain, what other people think of me or say about me, my circumstances, or my position. Attitude keeps me going or cripples my progress. It alone fuels my fire or assaults my hope.
When my attitudes are right, there is no barrier too high, no valley too deep, no dream too extreme, no challenge too great for me. 
Attitude is everything. It is the spark of character. It is the preserver of unity. It is the sail of culture. Your attitude stinks. We have spent the better part of 3 years explaining how and why. Without the right attitude, revival is doomed to fail.
Successful revival is only possible when the right number, of right thinking, right acting, righteous people with the right attitude come together. Either unite and rise to be taller than all your forefathers, or fall because you failed to put aside your personal ego. That is what makes character. These are the stakes of character. That is why we must rebuild it.
Chaturvedi, B.K. Chanakya Neeti.Diamond: New Delhi. 2015
This is a question that has dogged many a patriotic Bharatiya, and has been gleefully theorised by many a con-artist Videshi—the British most of all.
Assorted sordid theories of all sorts have been proffered psycho-analysing Indians using various fraudulent Freudian and now neo-Marxist theories (ostensibly aimed at digesting the Hindu cause into a new “hindu Left”…as if Marx & Mao haven’t done enough damage). Nevertheless, this is an aspect of the modern Indian that is very troubling as we live in very democratic times, and cannot afford such gullibly selfish, sanctimonious, stubborn, stupidity. Much of the gullibility is due to the sanctimony of some sections. But ancient Brahmanas understood the difference between Vidya and Jnana. Obedience to a guru after completion of one’s studies was not absolute—and primarily due to respect and gratitude for the one who educated an individual. But there is a long history of sishya reluctantly but eventually and out of necessity revolting against his guru, when he believed his guru was wrong. Arjuna vs Drona is the most famous example, but Bhishma vs Parashurama was another . Bhishma was respectful throughout the engagement, but defeated Parashurama, and was prevented by the Devas from humiliating him with final use of an astra. Parashurama, after all, is a future Saptarishi.
But Guru-moha is still moha. One must use Viveka (distinguishment between right and wrong) to determine when genuine rna and prema degenerate into Moha (delusion/attachment). As we wrote in our preceding article, this Guru-sishya complex has expanded far beyond the original purvey of the spiritual. If you decide to take a spiritual guru, then be give reverence to him/her. But remember, in the Kali Age, there are many a Kalnemi, many a fraudulent guru, and many a fraudulent Brahmin. Mere ritual, yajnopavitha, or even a smattering of sanskrit is not the way to separate the wheat from the chaff. Even the venerable Acharya Chanakya, an orthodox Brahmin who is often critiqued via modern lenses due to his views on women and lower castes, wrote as follows about different types of Brahmins:
Akrishta Phalamoolaani vanavaasarathah sadhaa
Kuruthe aharahah shraddhamrushirviprah sa uchyathe |73
“The Brahman who eats only roots and bulbs produced from the land untilled, who ever dwells in jungles and performs the Shraddha [of his departed ancestors] everyday is called a Rishi (sage).”[1,31]
Laukike Karaani rathah Pashoonaam Paripalakah
Vaanijjyakrishnikarmaa Yah Sa Vippro Vaishya uchchyate.|74
“The Brahman who ever remains busy in the mundane work, who owns and tends to cattle, who tills the land and does farming is known as Vaishya (Merchant class) Brahman. [Chanakya is trying to assert that one’s social category is not defined by birth but by one’s profession.]” p.31
“The Brahmin who steals the things belonging to the Gurus and gods, copulates with other’s wife and is able to [dwell] amongst the beings of any species is called a Pariah-Brahman”. P.32
Vaapeekoopat daagaanaa maaraama sukhe lashvanaam
Ucchedane niraashanka se vipre mleccha ucchyate |77
“The Brahman who recklessly destroys the temples, wells, ponds, orchards without any fear of social repercussion
Is verily a Mleccha [barbarian] Brahman”p.32
Parakaaryavihanthaa cha daambhikah svaarthasaadakah
Chhaleedveshee sadhukrooro maarjaar ucchyate|78
“The Brahman who puts hurdles in other’s ways, who is deceitful, scheming, cruel bearing ill-will for others, sweet by tongue but foul by heart is called a Tom-Cat Brahman”p. 32
Thus, it is character and conduct that is the mark of the true Brahmana, and it is by character and conduct we must judge people, not mere birth, and character and conduct that we are missing today. This obviously applies to other castes beyond Brahmin as well, but Chanakya’s remarks are particularly important in determining whom to seek let alone anoint as an AchArya.
But while it’s important to have healthy criticism, it must not devolve into self-loathing or blaming only one community. It is imperative that people of all varnas and jatis introspect, to correct not only their own respective misbehaviours, but also their own gullibility. Along with “Surpanakhas Daughters” there are many Sons of Ravanatoday who are failing in their Dharma. Rather than latching on to clownish foreign cliches about “neo-patriarchy“, understand your own civilization and what makes it strong. The Real Man is not the one who shouts the loudest or is the most aggressive or who RT’s knock off memes to feel good. The real man is one who is neither passive nor aggressive but assertive and knows when to use force, when not to use force, when to speak up, and when to shut the heck up. A number of Dharmic Women have spoken up on behalf of Men, but it is important that those men who claim to uphold the mantle of Dharma, first understand what Nara Dharma is in the first place.
Rather than obsess about whether the Bharatiya Nari is doing her Dharma, first evaluate whether you are doing yours. More than anyone else, men cannot afford to be careless and gullible.
How many times have Indians of all stripes fallen for the sweet talk of foreigners, only to be surprised and assassinated (rather than defeated in battle). Kings, ministers, and even today, with Prime Ministers vis-a-vis the Arabs, Turks, British, and today with Pakistanis. This is the cost of being gullible, of not taking precautions, of not doing your homework, of not focusing on action rather than sweet talk, in not thinking of both intentions and capabilities, in not asking about alternatives. This is why we have emphasised the importance of Niti. Rule number 1 of Rajneeti is Shut up and Be aware of your surroundings.
“Awareness is Life“. How many make it a point to be aware? It is understandable to be fooled every now and then—after all, even the very wisest do not see or know all things. Fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me. Indians are fooled time and time again. But Indians can’t even shut the heck up, let alone make an effort to avoid being fooled. To fail like this is not only a failure of Niti, but a failure of Dharma. After all, preservation of Dharma is the most important Dharma—everything else comes after it.
Before teenage and twenty something alt-right half-wit half-men start making a nuisance of themselves lecturing on Dharma which they don’t even understand, it is imperative for them to comprehend that the stepping stones to Dharma begin with Sabhyata (civility), Saujanya (etiquette), and Maryada (propriety/courtesy).
“Red pill”/rohypnol Alpha-Beta BS won’t make real men out of you (the heads of those “movements” for morons aren’t even real men). Following them and their puerile politics and regurgitating their jargon even after they repeatedly insult your culture and womenis emblematic of a lack of self-respect. This is all the more so, when these eminently unmasculine masculinity ‘theorists’ have middle eastern and western backgrounds that can be easily mocked. Have some shame. Reject “Red pill” and read about Rama instead. Not ctrl-v “Rama” in place of whatever wrathofgnon meme you are ripping off of, but the real Rama, as he was in the Ramayana. Sri Rama was a peerless King, mighty warrior, and the uttama Purusha, but he also practiced all of these principles, which is why he was called Maryada Purushottam.
If you practice none of these, shut the “[c]uck” up, listen, and learn.
This is Dharma. This is Achara. This is Rta. This is Satya. Understand these first before lecturing people decades older than you and who outrank you on the basis of sheer anubhava (experience). Rather than bray about the “The Return of Kings” learn from a real One. Improper behaviour around women or seniors is not the mark of a mensch or an “Alpha”, but that of a dumbass. A true gentleman, as Rama showed, behaves civilly even around Surpanakha, not because of what it says about her, but what it says about him. Defending yourself and love ones is one thing, perennial and perpetual indecorum is another. Confidence is not shown through abrasiveness, but exuded through accomplishment, behaviour, character, and regal bearing. “60% of all human communication is non-verbal”…for a reason.
Grow up, behave properly, and treat people with respect to get respect. Disagree without being disagreeable, and weigh proportionality in response to offence & issue importance.
Make yourselves useful rather than alienating your own people.And if you don’t know what to do…ASK! Find an established elder or senior and ask how you can be of use rather than pretend like you have it all figured out. If they tell you they don’t have any solutions or they’re “not here to educate people”, they probably aren’t the right guide, are they?
As we wrote previously, find a mentor—life is not a Quiz Show or a Trivial Pursuit (pun intended). At your age, you don’t know jack. Most of you even failed at finding the right Acharya (hint: real acharyas aren’t online giving gyaan…). As Acharya Chanakya wrote, not every person born a brahmin is a true Brahmana by Guna and Dharma. Especially when this is the case in the Kali Yuga, each sishya also has a responsibility to Dharma that is greater than whatever Rna is owed to his Guru. This does not mean impudence or ingratitude to our instructors (or initiatiors into history), but rather, it means understanding the difference between a spiritual guru, an Acharya (a realAcharya), a professor, and a mere teacher or mentor.
A guru, a true spiritual guru convicted of no crime, is owed obedience for those wish to walk the path of moksha and receive Brahma-jnana. An Acharya is one who embodies the laws that are gathered (achinoti)and given to us as Achara. While he is given reverence, obedience to him is not absolute, as Sri Krishna asserted to Arjuna to urge him to fight and defeat Drona. A professor (praadhyaapaka or praadhyapikaa (woman)) is owed discipline in the classroom, propriety (Maryada) and respect as superior both inside and outside the classroom—but he (or she) is not owed subservience. A teacher (sikshaka or adhyapikaa(woman)) can be an instructor on any topic, and formal deeksha is not even often given. This is because only a fool thinks he knows everything, and thus, should give basic respect and saujanya (etiquette) to an instructor, be it in a formal course, or informally as a favour or for fee.
A mentor is not even a teacher, but is one’s own senior from whom we seek advice over the long term. He or she gives guidance to a mentee/protégé who, in all likelihood, is very naïve (and gullible about the ways of the world). A mentor is not owed obedience, but he too is owed basic respect and saujanya (etiquette). Seniors invariably outrank juniors purely on the basis of age. When someone goes out of their way to give you guidance, show humility and behave properly. Whatever knowledge you may have gained, they are wiser than you out of sheer anubhava (experience), whatever you think you may have absorbed via osmosis or inhaling the fumes from some fraudacharya’s throne.
Finally there are peers and juniors. They may not be owed maryada or even saujanya, but basic sabhyata (civility) is a mark of your own good breeding. Behaving disagreeably, being obnoxious, and making a general nuisance of yourself is the mark of the very barbarism many claim to themselves be fighting. When we stare into the abyss, we must remember that it stares back into us.
Nevertheless, the binary complex of guru-sishya, know-it-all/know-nothing, complete submission/total non-compliance must end. This giving of Gyaan is the result of this complex. But what happens when the majority are merely peers?—Infighting.
This infighting wastes an ungodly amount of time, and is driven by the unjustified egos of emotional children, whatever their social rank. This must end henceforth.
The Indian disinclination to deal with uncertainty is the great problem that faces us today.That is why so many of our self-proclaimed “polymaths” and “learned acharyas” are so pathetic when it comes to strategic thinking. How do we face the problems confronting our society…as a society? For this they not only have no inclination to properly answer, they have no answers, only lust for influence and lust. Reliance on them based on “sabda” pramana alone is absolute foolishness. They are neither spiritual gurus nor true acharyas, and only arrogant casteist cretins and well-meaning but naïve people anoint them so.
The childish desire to initiate and to “feel included” in one of these dimwit digital paramparas is misguiding more and more people by the minute, and is symptomatic of the asymptotically asinine binary behaviours of the modern Hindu(internet or otherwise). Inability to strategically, or even at a basic level, critically think is the result of this. A slogan is created, ideas are crudely and uncritically copied and pasted, and voila, a new movement of the month is born (usually inspired by one of these foreign philistines). Rather than taking time to strategically study one’s own tradition, information matching one’s own confirmation bias (“Only we can be smart, Saheb is smart, we must be genetically descended from Saheb“) and book clippings are used to substitute for critical thinking. Book clippings and quotations are good supplements, but not without independent analysis and verification and useful application. Develop Strategic thinking, or at the very least, basic critical thinking, which even lawyers “defending the man” and scientists “working for the man” have.
Imagination is not the same as myth-making or fiction-writing. Imagination is greater than this and includes improvisation and strategic thinking. Indians may be good at the first (jugaad) but are terrible at the latter. And this is the main problem today. Rather than systematically and methodically studying whatever uncertainty faces us, individuals prefer to live within the security of their own biases.
To be uncertain is to be uncomfortable, but to be certain is to be ridiculous. -Chinese Proverbs
It is why a Pollock (or his equivalents on the “Ritual Right”) merely have to grow a beard, don a dhoti, quote a few scriptures, and voila, gullible Indiots promote them left and right and alt-right. It is so predictably profitable, it has practically become a recipe even among Internet Hindus. Have you people no shame? No sense of self-respect? The British beat you in basically the same way. They pretended to be one thing, and did another, and you indiots went along thinking “they are my business partners…why will they betray me?“.
Similarly, we see the creation of new “saviours” even within the Indian-by-blood ranks. Does it no occur to you naifs that you are being given exactly what you want? Does it not sound too perfect for that? Do you honestly think someone employed by a phoreign sarkar in their national laboratory could do anything on the internet without his employer knowing? How gullible are you?
Just because someone looks the part, doesn’t mean they are playing it. They may be commissioned to play another part altogether.
Worst of all, is that over-specialisation has bred a new breed of social species who in fact likely believes himself to be a separate genetic species. He enjoys lording over others, and thus, must find a new theology now that Varnashrama Dharma’s emphasis on guna has been asserted. No wonder he is wowed by a little ritual here, a lot of genetics there, and citation of gotra everywhere—it is precisely what he wishes to believe, and he laps it up like the lapdog he is. “Are hindus prepared to find out the truth?” he asks—the question for these dolts is, are they?
When the genetics is contested, when the history is documented, and when the Veda itself contradicts the fraudulent interpretations of foreign employed frauds, how stupid do you have to be to believe this? It takes a special kind of stupidity to advocate AIT… a kind that masquerades as over-secure omniscience but is steeped in the worst kind of (insecure) nescience—one that believes more in the separateness and division of Hindus and that all good things can only come from outside. Only losers lacking self-respect forever sift for foreign origins–no wonder they adopt foreign fads. It is one thing to argue genetics (though even that is contested, and genetics != language), it is quite another to garb one’s self in the sacred Veda, when the Vedic tradition clearly contradicts this. This is why ritualists are rubes—not because ritual isn’t important—it’s very important. Rather it’s because ritualism is embrace of ritual uber alles and ignores essential, practical aspects of our Dharma such as Truth and even survival. The ritualist is not a pragmatist—he is a buffoon with only partial knowledgewho believes that if only he does some ritual, he need not change, he need not worry about saving his tradition and civilization.
A person who uses Vedas for temporary advantages is like an animal, says the Upanishad.#Periyava
“Follow the fraudacharya and his ritual, and we will be saved.” Assert AIT based on questionable genetics and fraudulent Vedic interpretation and we have neo-hindutva eugenics. Regurgitate the Red Pill and develop “neo-patriarchy”. Have some shame and get some sense. No, you are not smarter than everyone else, you are dumber. This is because even with the acquisition of (some) knowledge you have become even more ignorant and more gullible. Grow a pair, ask tough questions and deal with the uncertainty. No one, and that means no one, on social media is what they seem. Digital facades are just that, digital. And rather than just argue for the sake of it, or because you’ve invested years of reputation in it, and staked credibility on it, be a real man, and own up to your mistakes. But don’t take it from me, take it from a real Acharya.
Nowadays, Vadam is mistakenly thought to be, to stubbornly insist that one's own view point is right and all others are wrong. #Periyava
When real acharyas have written copiously about how the Vedas only support OIT (whatever the genetics says on a given day), how can you trust a fraud who garbs himself in Veda and Vedic ritual, giving “Vedic” support to AIT and origin in central asia?
For argument’s sake, assume for a second the genetics might favour AIT: has not the wool been pulled over your eyes on the Veda? Ask yourself why? Who benefits? Scientists aren’t qualified Vedic authorities, only Brahmanas from agraharas living the traditional way are. One has already answered this.
It was a confirmed British Strategy to identify,create & expand as many differences as possible, at each level of the fabric of our Society
Different varnas do not mean your are a different species or different race. Historically, varna and jati provided for the passing down of tradition from father to son & mother to daughter, ensuring not only specialisation, but also a legacy to live up to and to take pride in. But because a small set of a small section of people crave power and influence they don’t deserve, they are prepared to give up their self-respect vis-à-vis foreigners, so that they may oppress their own native countrymen. Such people pervert and corrupt varnashrama dharma for their own ends, and whether they are “mercantiles”, “feudals”, or “clericals”—sellouts are sellouts.
This is the cost of gullibility vis-à-vis adharmic foreigners. After all, what ultimately happened to Purniah, who supported the Persian-language imposing Tipu? It is why those incapable of strategic thought have no place in politics. It is why those who crave power and wealth are forbidden from interpreting the sacred Veda. It is why only traditional Brahmanasin mathas, agraharas, and devalayas are the ones qualified to give definitive interpretations of the Vedic tradition, and not “by-birth” poets and scientists who are susceptible to material inducement courtesy their “patriarchal” patrons. If writers today get paid by the word, don’t you think they can also get paid by the interpretation? When all this has been documented about how academics and even laukika “traditional scholars” are given employment and patronage if they toe a certain line, why do you gullibly accept whatever it is you read? The only reason you do so, is because you are not comfortable asking uncomfortable questions.
This fear of uncertainty is the bane of modern Indians, but this is not our traditional way. Perhaps that is why some sections are forever searching for foreign inspiration, they prefer the fake certainty, the fake certitude, and fake superiority foreign ideology in turn confers. As Shivoham has written, comfort with uncertainty is very much a part of the native Indic tradition—indeed, it is a built in protection against absolutism.
Indian civilization & culture are all just concepts for discussion now. We have all become pseudo orientals.#Periyava
That is why tradition exists to balance science and why science & pragmatism exist to balance tradition. That is the key to survival and meaningful existence. Not andh bhakti, not hero worship or personality cults, not [alt movement of the day], and sure as hell not eugenics.
If something is too perfect, it probably is. For all you japanophiles out there, learn to ask the right questions rather than give all the wrong gyaan.
e.g. in Indian context, mentally colonized mindsets build math models using limited data & claim to have proved AIT *beyond doubt*
Excess of certitude is based on several possible though not necessarily mutually exclusive: 1.Deceit (due to agendas or desire to appear smart) 2.Fear of uncertainty, since admission of doubt destroys existing model, and model-based thinking 3. Middle Manager Mindset (academics included as routine tasks obviate need for strategic thinking) 4. Inability to strategically think since one’s life is based around only sabda pramana.
conditioned to refer to books as the source of their knowledge. They have thus internalised the idea of treating the printed word and assertions they hear from “authoritative sources” as the ultimate truth. 
Books are good. But not weighing the validity of a Book or the applicability of the knowledge in it, is not at all good. It is in fact, disastrous. And Path dependency frequently leads to political dependency.
This is why mere shows of knowledge are ultimately useless, and due to disinformation and misinformation, can even be dangerous. Institution building, team building, critical and strategic thinking, solution providing…these are what ultimately prepare individuals, citizens, societies, and civilizations for problems that face them. If you are wasting your time in dimwit digital salons that stroke unjustified egos, don’t make pretense to being civilizational saviours with IQ’s of 8 billion.
When asked what his IQ was, Stephen Hawking said "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers." pic.twitter.com/e7wCLIIxmU
“The greatest minds” don’t obsess about IQ , don’t waste time in perennial navel-gazing, and certainly don’t provide intellectual cover for colonial origin theories on Veda contradicted by the Veda itself. Look for those focused on tackling societal problems rather than fall for frauds who just tell you what you want to hear and look and sound the part.
No one is ever what they seem, especially on social media. This is the value of critical thinking, and more importantly, strategic thinking. Rather than getting caught up in self-serving models and self-selecting data, you pay attention to motives and ask…
That’s the problem with internet hindus, tweeting about Vijayanagara days nostalgically while failing to counter efforts of new bahmanis and preparing the ground for new Talikotas. Still can’t unite for common cause—either distracted by trivial pursuit and the trivial or busy finding new ways to advance their own respective casteism/regionalism under nominally nationalist brand.
Such people may make you feel good through pseudo-archaeological pictures or pride in the ritual of your forefathers, but like Nobili, are activated at the specified time of their videshi master’s need usually to take down a real Pro-Dharma challenger to Breaking India forces, like Rajiv Malhotra. One should not be gullible and even a Malhotra is not perfect, beyond reproach, or above question—but at least he has a proven record of useful action to safeguard society…what do his jealous, casteist haters have?—poetry recitation?
This is the” intellectual yet idiot”. Focused more on shows of knowledge than actually being useful by wisely tackling issues facing society and providing actionable solutions. Focused more on pulling down rivals than facing common adversaries or defeating outright common enemies, Ahankari-Shikandis don’t care for such things. Ironically, these eugenics advocates would be first to be culled by their videshi masters due to their barely & questionably genetically male status.
For God’s sake, when all this is going on, when there are open attempts to recreate medieval colonial kingdoms not only through cultureor historical apologia, but even outright political division, do we have time for games of Trivial Pursuit and “Kaun banega bada ritualist?”. Do we have time for your selfish spoiled brattiness? If you want to brag about proficiency in ritual, join the matha where real traditional brahmanas do useful things for society and actually understand the Veda. But if you are getting in the way of people doing useful things, like Malhotra, then cry “Parashurama!” all you want, you will end up like Ravana. Society and posterity will not forgive the dunces who cared more about their own (undeserved) egos than doing practical things for society and prioritising common interest over individual interest. If you can’t even put aside the trivial for the common good and common safety and well-being of your nation’s womenfolk, there is no point in braying “neo-patriarchy”. Wisdom is seen in the application of knowledge, not in public shows of it.
The now famous piece “Intellectual yet Idiot” doesn’t just apply to Lutyens or their Rajaji Reciprocals on the econ RW, but also in key parts to the new breed of modern “ritualists”, aka the ritual right. They demand people like the Prime Minister “Pay attention” to their juvenile rantings, yet they can’t detect obvious sophistry in their own opinion leaders claiming outright falsehoods about the Vedic view on AIT.
Beware the semi-erudite who thinks he is an erudite. He fails to naturally detect sophistry. The IYI pathologizes others for doing things he doesn’t understand without ever realizing it is his understanding that may be limited.
They cant tell science from scientism — in fact in their eyes scientism looks more scientific than real science.
If you still don’t have the moral courage to do that, perhaps you should find a different game to play, and even a different line of work. After all, “History is the School of Princes” , not navel-gazing academics and phoreign employed poets and scientists.
Is this an outgrowth of generations of ICS & IAS lineages, Rao Bahadurs, and Princes under Subsidiary Alliance, forced to take a Resident’s “guidance” in critical matters, bereft of all critical powers?—possibly. But it has also been 7 decades since Independence. Even with the albatross of a Macaulayite education, the internet has made possible education beyond the official curriculum at a rapid pace. The problem is again, the refusal of people to move beyond their little comfort zones and their carefully constructed “fan-fiction”, and seek to understand the world for what it really is. Understanding the truth doesn’t mean knowing everything. Understanding the truth means willingness to examine new information, and make policy, or even strategic changes after evaluating validity. It’s not that instinctually people don’t know that something’s wrong–even the very dumbest (sic) have a gut feeling on some level. Rather it’s because they’re afraid of what it means they’ll have to do. Rather than take responsibility, they prefer to be spoon-fed, like middle-managers: A nice cushy job, “money for children’s marriage”, membership in a twitter brotherhood/sisterhood, magical change in society via tweeting with ALL CAPS, pleasure without responsibility.
This desire, this pathological need to be liked by everybody in a desired group might be alright in secondary school, but it is absolutely execrable in adulthood, let alone, at the babu & businessman-level. Politicians may have to win votes in this day and age, but Netas, Nayaks, and Amatyas are not there to be popular, nor are they there to be self-interested/self-promoting brats. They are there to do the business of the people and society. Until civic duty, the practical Raja and Praja Dharma returns to the fore, you will continued to be led by the worst—a term familiar to you alt-righters: “kakistocracy”.
Idling your hours merely re-circulating staid tweets on the basis of sentiment or trivial pursuit or to play pretend archaeologist rather than useful sharing of information put towards institution-building and comprehensive action, is emblematic of the small minds and small values that continue to plague our society. What Mahaperiyava said was profoundly true: we need people of nobility, not iq obsessed but brainless baboos or middle managers only concerned about their next promotion and misery loving company.
It was the nobility of the brahmana Charudatta that earned him the respect and goodwill of all and saved his life. It was the nobility of Yuvaraja Rama to accept his exile for collective good and the nobility of Bharata to return Rama’s throne to him. Where are such men today? Instead we have slogans and small minds and gasbags substituting for this greatness. If you are where you are at this moment, you have only yourself to blame. Collectively selfish stupidity and gullibility in whatever small amounts adds up to foreboding civilizational disaster. When the criteria becomes “My right!” or “Biggest gasbag bloviator” rather than “My Duty” and “Most competent”, then we have lineage obsessed idiots lusting for power.
To return your civilization to greatness, you must again be worthy of the legacy of the great Rishis and Rajas who built it—not just idle the days discussing your descent from them, while indecently patterning yourself after videshis.
These deficiencies in character are even more problematic than mental colonialism that jnu types undergo. This is because the Marxist deconstructionist at least knows how to be effective in countering the other side. Our guys know only how to chest thump, make a brave emotional show of knowledge, then slink away when facing organised opposition. What is required is a sustained intellectual opposition than can’t be done by a single person. It takes teams to counter teams.But how is this possible with selfish spoiled brats who don’t even like team sports? You’d rather live in your samurai anime fantasies than demonstrate true Kshatriyata via intelligent action. No wonder you are all referred to as paper tigers.
To bring things full circle, all this is a mark of Tamas. But it is also a mark of something else: Lack of Character. National character.
Once we have begun to follow Britisher's habits and way-of-life, how does it matter whether we have home-rule or foreign-rule?#Periyava
At this stage, of course, our alt-right supporting mummy’s boys will spray out their bournvita or ovaltine (they are growing boys after all…), and say “how can you say this, we have greatest moral character and chastest women“. All this may have been true, once upon a time. But look around today, is that really the case? How easily you are all fooled by a little show of knowledge, a little dropping of gotra, a little Vedic chanting, a little flattering small talk.
Moral of the Story: Don’t be Gullible. Don’t believe Everything you read on the Internet.
That’s why it’s important to stop believing everything you read on the internet, and above all, stop being so gullible. Even the greediest and slimiest of characters in India was ultimately fooled because he thought a videshi would stay loyal to him.
Learn to live with doubt. Be comfortable with doubt. Doubt is your friend, because by doubting everyone and everything (even yourself and your “AchArya”), you’ll always be on guard against absolutism. Power Corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We live in an era where Knowledge is Power.
If you’re already a lawyer or a scientist or a whatever with critical thinking skills, prove it.Not by get mired in the intricacies and details, but by taking a step back and evaluating your source, even your peer, even your mentor or professor or “AchArya”. Even fellow lawyers pull a fast one andfellow scientists doctor the data.
A 2005 journal article cited nearly 3800 times titled 'Why Most Published Research Findings Are False' https://t.co/oSMJ0aEe0n
Use your critical thinking skills to evaluate not only what is being said, but whom it would benefit, whether other experts (i.e. traditional authorities) validate this, and whether in fact it is true at all.
Surely that’s something even you alt-right termites can comprehend.
Chaturvedi, B.K.Chanakya Neeti.Diamond: New Delhi.2015
Shri S.Gurumurthy wrote in an article from 2015 that we are creating a Shameless Society. While he did cite statistics of divorce, and in subsequent articles, childbirth outside of marriage, being a respectable gentleman, he didn’t dwell on it, and examined other aspects causing shamelessness as well. We, however, are more visceral in such matters, and will pick up where he so graciously left off.
The core issue facing Mankind today is not merely stupidity, or selfishness, or stubbornness, or sanctimonious hypocrisy. It isn’t even about being spoiled, but rather, the core issue facing mankind today is the society of bastards.
“A Proud Tradition” of Bastardy
History has had many famous Bastards. Some of them constructively influential, many of them, not so much. One of history’s most famous bastards is British, not by birth, but by invasion. In typical brit fashion, this aspect is usually dealt with in an understated manner; nevertheless, William I may be called “the Conqueror”, but to the French this Anglo-Norman Duke will always be Guillaume le Batard (William the Bastard).
Now as history has it, things worked out rather well for William the Bastard. This Frenchified Viking Duke of Normandy managed to defeat the actual English King, Harold Godwinson, at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. But the net effect was the air of illegitimacy that stained and continues to stain English “royalty” ever since. After all, Anglo-Normans or (as evidenced by the Battenbergs and Saxe-Coburg Gothas) Anglo-Germans, aren’t really English, are they? In fact, one of the reputed reasons for the American Revolution was the illegitimacy of the German King George (House Hanover) in the eyes of many colonial Englishmen of America. But since then, due to the wonders of marketing, Battenbergs became Mountbattens and Saxe-Coburg-Gothas became Windsors. Quite a rebrand.
But like all bastards, when it came to the Aryan Invasion Theory, the British were always better at analysing others than analysing themselves.
Bastardy isn’t always a direct consequence of illegitimacy. There are a number of children born out of wedlock who have gone on to productive and respectable lives. Whatever origin in gentleman’s clubs or high societies or rahasya societies, the much vaunted college fraternity is no longer the august dining club of the Porcellian era, or assorted post-graduate colonial holdovers. Indeed, it too, in its official and unofficial form, has also devolved into a society of mutual bastardy. Nevertheless, Bastardy’s root origin remains in the behaviour of most bastards, either as a result of resentment from it, or in the case of children born within wedlock, under the social influence of irreverent and ingrate bastards.
Many Indians think that modernity means fashionable clothes and western manners, urban habits and the English language. But it means far more. It is the intrusive ideology of the West. It even calls upon the Rest to give up its traditions as a precondition for economic growth. 
This theory, better known as ‘Western anthropological modernity’, mandated the Rest to become a carbon copy of the West. But things have drastically changed after 2008 and the West has now conceded that its model may not be as good for the Rest. But the psychological damage done to the Rest over hundred years cannot be easily undone. Modernity, which was marketed as a must for growth, has by now become a habit and fashion. 
As S.Gurumurthy has analysed, and as Western commentators are now analysing, out-of-wedlock birth may seem fashionable and even within the norm, but it has consequences, for both the West and the Rest. Even our sacred Dharmic texts speak of the consequences of children being born as a result of lust, rather than love, in sacred marital bond. Due to the mutual effect of bastardy and fashionability, however, attitude is king and spoiled children the queen.
The Bastard society doesn’t just promote mediocrity by happen-stance; it promotes obnoxiousness and “unlimited confidence” rooted in simple self-apotheosis or in security in numbers. But these are not wolf packs, doing something useful like thinning the deer population, but jackal packs that only occasionally assemble for general nuisance. The Bastard society promotes mediocrity on principle. Because the bastard is perennially dissatisfied with himself, his desire is to promote those beneath him, so he can (by contrast) look good, or engage in sycophancy and flattery of those far above him, that he may benefit from association & osmosis, or eventually be dubbed “legitimate”.
So what then is the opposite of Bastardy? It is Nobility. No, not the nobility of title, not the nobility of lineage, but the nobility of Character. That is why the Bastard is ever concerned with titles of nobility and “peerages” emphasising status because the reality is it is not titles that honour men, but men that honour titles. Those who lack good qualities are always the quickest to point out their titles and lineages and “rights”.
Sri Rama too was an Ikshvaku(Ikshvaku himself being a great king in his own right), but it is Rama who is referred to as the Ikshvaku-kula-tilaka (ornament of the Ikshvaku dynasty). He needn’t have name-dropped as his nobility of character was its own character reference. Rather than his greatest possession, his lineage was a responsibility to fulfill. Rather than Satya Harishchandra’s sacrifice being a point of braggadocio, it was a legacy to live up to. But bastards (real or by character) know no such burdens.
They take initiation into the “cult” of their patron, and then purvey that tradition without thought to ramification. Many may laugh at such notions, but the model has been more widely successful on an organised basis too. Such Whiney Brotherhoods/Sisterhoods are always built upon a myth of grievance and hand-wringing at present circumstances in contrast to past glory.
This is why the anglicisation of Indian society is exceedingly problematic.Not only due to the issues with any attempt to recreate Indic society on the blueprint of another, not only because of the cultural annihilation that would occur, but because there is a psyche of bastardy in British society dating back to William the Bastard. While it is useful to distinguish between the British (an artificial people based on the Union of distinct cultures in Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and England) and the English, even the history of English society has roots in such ingratitude. “The Venerable Bede’s” Ecclesiastical History of the English People is illustrative here.
The Angles are invited to Britain. At first they repel the enemy, but soon come to terms with them, and turn their weapons against their own allies. [6,62]
They engaged the enemy advancing from the north, and having defeated them, sent back news of their success to their homeland, adding that the country was fertile and the Britons cowardly. [6,62]
These new-comers were from the three most formidable races of Germany, the Saxons, Angles, and Jutes. [6,63]
It was not long before such hordes of these alien peoples vied together to crowd into the island that the natives who had invited them began to live in terror. [6,63]
Perhaps that is why they are always projecting the image of the “Central Asian Aryan” taking over the birthright of the materially civilised Indus Valley “Dravidian”—did they not do the same to the Romano-Britons?
The Celtic Brython is in fact the true native of the Island of Britain (along with the Picts and Scots of Scotland), but they were pushed to the small corner of Wales—where the Welsh and their unique language survive today (Sound familiar?). In fact, the entire history of the British (distinguished from Brythons/Britons) is one of such usurpation and Bastardy. They arrived as Anglo-German & Saxon soldiers and soon in-laws, took advantage of the situation and imposed their own rule. Is it any wonder this blueprint has been successfully imposed elsewhere?—not only India, but even on poor and innocent Ireland.
Perhaps that is why the English (and their intellectual children ) are forever projecting this “history” of usurpation and bastardy via “Central Asian Aryan Brahminism”, they themselves are usurpers and bastards…historically speaking, of course.
Whether it was usurpation of the land of the Celtic Britons or the legacy of Anglo-Norman William the Bastard, the Ecclesiastical History of the English People is ironically exactly that which they seek to project on to India. Only not satisfied with the demise of their official colonial empire gained not through “leonine” valour but through patient political bastardy, they and their acolytes now seek to usurp the role of Traditional Adhyatmika Brahmanas in Agraharas & Mathas, by usurping their authority to interpret and pass on our Vedic Tradition. They have even recruited nominal “Laukika” Brahmanas (better termed as Bhogi Brahmanas) by Birth, to betray the tradition their ancestors once preserved. Some such use discredited Freudian frameworks, others Marxist methodology, others the debunked Aryan Invasion theory, and now even some sepoy’ed “traditional scholarship” to invert and pervert our Sanskriti. Such is the blastoma of British Bastardy. The bastard is ever jealous of the legitimate child, so he seeks to usurp that which is not his. He may put on airs, he may take etiquette lessons, he may dub himself a gentleman, he may wear fine clothes, but he never manages to get character.
But this is not over. Post-modern society is itself an outgrowth of this “bastard intellectual” lineage. As Rajiv Malhotra has prolifically studied, uncovered, disseminated, and written, the perverse undercurrents of Post-Modern society are undercutting the very root of our Sanskriti and Identity.
A Clockwork Orange
For all those who believe bastard societies to be benign, here is Stanley Kubrick’s vision of a dystopic Post-Modern society, and the delinquents who characterise it. While this scene itself is relatively tame, a general advisory to those of more genteel sensibilities about the movie A Clockwork Orange, in general. It is not for the faint of heart (or not yet old enough), but this scene illustrates the end game of bastardy: delinquency-driven sadism.
Many of our fashionably ignorant may protest, saying “It was just a movie, yaar“. But was it? Setting aside the fact that the film itself was based on an earlier book, modern Britain itself is beginning to see the rise of a class of youth with similar propensities, borne of nihilism, and yes, bastardy.
The Disgruntled Child
The Chavsof the UK are not a new phenomenon, and date back to at least the early 2000s, though likely even the 90s. Classist overtones aside, there is the more concerning aspect of disgruntled and alienated youth, leading directionless lives of short-term thinking and short-term “kicks”. Cheap thrills may be all the rage today, but they eventually lead to sensory-fueled rage. The proclivity of disaffected and maladjusted youth to violence is well known, and threatens the very existence of decent society.
Of course, our half-read half-wits may blurt in a tamasic haze “Vell, so what, who cares, they deserve it“. Be that as it may, the contagion is spreading, and the disease, like it or not, is part and parcel of the very post-modernism that you associate with your prosperity today. Even the wealthiest country in the world is now at the edge of that precipice.
Coming Apart is a book by noted conservative commentator Charles Murray. In it, he examines the unraveling of “White America”, due to a decline in values, moral character, and sense of overall nationhood. A key factor here was illegitimacy, and he studies the effects at great length. Murray has been criticised for earlier studies on race and genetics, but his views on illegitimacy were also echoed by a recent nobel prize-winner, as discussed in this video.
The African-American community is unfortunately demonised by many of the same voices aghast at Charles Murray’s study above . Nevertheless, the unfortunate state of that community was predicted by Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the 1960s itself. Tracing the effect of narcotics on destroying the family unit, this former Senator from New York predicted the current epidemic of illegitimacy and absent-fatherhood (doubly exacerbated by the “New Jim Crow“). Above all, however was the destruction of culture, resulting in the rise of crime (as seen in the clip above). Whatever culture might be there is a mere veneer, but the overall loss of High Culture, evident.
Thus, the main aspect of the Bastard, of whatever race/ethnicity, is that he is a disgruntled child. Naturally filled with resentment at having an absentee father (or not even knowing who he is) fills him not only with shame, but also anomie. Perhaps that is why our rootless wonder are forever seeking to remake India in the image of another. But more concerning than that, is the false confidence of “unlimited confidence”. This is not only borne from unlimited internet, but also unlimited permissiveness. After all, if anything goes, then the most outrageous behaviour is the most refreshing and most socially rewarding. This toxic cocktail has even filtered into the rohipnol heavy circles of “red pill” pick up artists and even accidental yuppies. Again, if confidence is currency, then unlimited confidence, solipsism, and obnoxious behaviour is deemed the highest good. There is nothing more solipsistic than the absolute certitude demonstrated by dweebs.
They may garb themselves in ritual as the pirate Brit did in title, but the reality is they do not appreciate its sanctity or malleability. Make no mistake, ritual is important. But it is not ritual that makes civilization or even religion. A spiritual society is the product not of ritual; ritual is only its outgrowth, confirmation, aspect of (cosmic) participation, anda means of cultural preservation. But the origin of our society is in Tapasya. It is not philognosis, but philosophy, the love of wisdom that made, as the ancient Greeks referred to them, the ancient brahmanas the wisest of men, and ancient Indic society, the wisest of all civilizations. It is tapasya that was the origin and tapasya that is the first leg of dharma, and tapasya that is missing today. We have “traditional scholars”, but they lack sadhana. We have young, commited men, but they behave as though they have been committed to the lunatic asylum.
So what is the opposite of the society of bastards, it is the society of nobles. No, not necessarily Arya Samaj (though pun intended). Rather, a society of nobility, rooted in actual Tapasya, Saadhana, and Shraddha. But it is Tapasya that is the marker, not ritual. Ritualists have come and gone since the age of De Nobili (and before). It is genuine Tapasya, as Tapasya is one of the 4 legs of Dharma in our tradition (the other 3 being Saucha(Cleanliness), Krupa (Mercy), and Satya (Truth)). It is no wonder Tapasya is rarely prized by this set of lil bastards, after all, in the Kali Yuga, Dharma only stands on 1 leg (Satya), and even that too is now bent.
But as before, it is not illegitimacy that makes every bastard. After all, Satyakama Jabala was the son of a prostitute (or a woman who lived like one), but through his character and love of the truth, he proved his nobility. Today, we see young men fighting for the dignity of their mothers, and demonstrating their own nobility in the process.
Whether you believe in Lord Shiva and consider him the origin of not only Dharma but the Universe itself, or you are a nirishwarvadin who believes our tradition to be the inheritance of the collective wisdom of Rishis, it is Tapasya that is the basis for not only Ritual, but our entire tradition. Thus, ritual is important, but shraddha is higher. Shraddha is important, but Saadhana is higher. Tapasya is the means of Saadhana.
Most famous Hinduphobics are well-trained in Indian languages & texts. What is lacking is shraddha, not book knowledge
The problem is there is a batch of ritualists who have neither Shraddha nor Saadhana nor time for Tapasya, and thus, having been initiated into this society of bastards, they are working as termites to undermine our society from within. That is the danger of casteism, because it is assumes your caste to be above question and above trial. But a teacher can only punish an errant child for so long. At some point, a society must come together to pronounce the sentence for aparaadhis.
When tapasya drops, saadhana can sustain. When saadhana drops, shraddha can sustain, when shraddha drops, ritual can sustain. That is why ritual is important. But when ritual drops, or worse, becomes infected with asatya due to self-interest or selfishness that prioritises ritual above all, then society is on track to oblivion. It’s only defence then becomes Satya. Satya, Truth, that not only expresses itself as Rta, which is upheld by Dharma, but Satya that evaluates the validity of ritual to reinforce it. It is Satya discovered by Tapasya, enshrined by Saadhana, and revered by Shraddha that makes ritual (Kalpa) what it is. But bastards, by their very nature, are selfish, and thus, despite living in the material world, garb themselves in ritual and Rna, ignoring or minimising Satya.
And nothing minimises Satya more than Post-Modernism. After all, according to Po-Mo theorists, “there is no truth”.
The nihilism of Postmodern society has been evaluated by many. But one need not be Bazarov to be subject to its influence. As deconstructed by Rajiv Malhotra, the core danger of nihilismis not that it doesn’t deconstruct effectively, but rather, that it fails to “provide the foundation for a positive existence“.
 Being Different. ‘Audacity of Difference’, subsection ‘Postmodern Evasiveness’
That is why it is important to de-construct the deconstructionists, as Malhotra has done. Those that demand tearing down the existing model without creating an alternative first are those who are hiding something. Much like Napoleon the Pig in Animal Farm, the Agenda of Cultural Marxists (and their unscrupulous co-operators), slogans of Equality and “uncompromising” fight for freedom are all cover for more authoritarian (socialist or otherwise) agendas . But the great irony of course is that in this story, they are not napoleon the pig, but snowball, who is eventually driven out. Cultural Marxist cooperators, like all traitor/useful idiots, are the first to face a firing squad.
That is the danger of the masters of the small picture. It is not that detail doesn’t matter, it’s who controls the details? Who controls the data? What is kept, what is left out, what is even recorded? That is why Dharma must be the model forward, and not “anglicisation”, or “socialist-authoritarianism”, or “alt-right”, or or “neo-nippon”, or “nava-hindutva eugenics”, and a laundry list of other hare-brained schemes that all ultimately orient India toward foreign models. The latter one, in particular, is a hold out of Aryan Invasion aficionados, but the net result of eugenics theories is that they invariably pigeon-hole people and create inferiority complexes (taking you out of the game even before it begins). Sadly, even some well-meaning people have now bought into this under the weight of scientism. Perhaps this gang should watch Gattacaand mull over their position.
Even more incredulous however are the emotional children blissfully following cultural Marxist pied pipers off the deconstruction cliff. Like lemmings, they fall for a little pro-Indian, pro-Hindu talk about “uncompromising this” and “uncompromising that”, but forget that “politics is the art of compromise”. This doesn’t mean selling out, but means you can’t always be a martyr like Subhas Chandra Bose, whose honourable attempt at freedom ultimately failed. It’s the figure who lives to fight another day, like Shivaji, who ultimately wins you freedom—not the uncompromising. “A great man can bend and stretch“. To be uncompromising on nothing (but your ethics) in this day an age, is not only “plain dumb”, but “plain suicidal”. Of course, cultural Marxists always know or believe they will escape, and it is only the workhorses who will get sent to the butchery. But why take my word for it, here’s what an eminent authority himself said.
All this is ultimately why any deconstruction of any mythos built around any Indian figure must be on our terms, using our approach, not foreign ones.
Was Gandhi the “Father of the Nation” like Subhas Chandra Bose himself said in 1944? Are the rumours about Gandhi true? Is there more to Gandhi than we know? All these questions shouldn’t be dusted under the carpet, as they have been for the last 70 years, but should be asked not under a foreign methodology like cultural Marxism, but under a native one like Dharma. That is how Gandhi’s callousness towards Hindu suffering can be assessed. But agenda-oriented ideologues have no such interest in deconstruction on such terms, because ideology refuses to ask questions that obviate itself. After all, nothing is more self-contradictory than cultural Marxist derived Critical Race Theory and even Feminism ultimately originates from the same cultural Marxism.
All this is ultimately why whether it is Anglobalism, cultural Marxism, post-modernism, scientism, or fraudacharya-ism, foreign frameworks all lead to the creation of a bastard society. Not just one where illegitimacy may be rife, but one where a bastardised, inauthentic India is the aim (open or otherwise). One cannot properly understand a culture without being immersed in it. One cannot properly provide alternatives without understanding its originating principle. And the core framework of our culture is Dharma, and the originating principle Satya(Truth).
Yet today, there are not just attempts to Anglicise India, but attempts to Arabise it, Persianise it, Japanicise it, and even Sinicise it.
There are of course, many reasons for all this, all very meticulously studied by Malhotra, but there is another aspect here too that merits study.
The Indian over-emphasis of the Guru-Sishya relationship remains one of the core reasons for the lack of self-respect. For half-read 20 somethings who have trouble reading, read again carefully. I did not say emphasis, but over-emphasis.
The Guru-Sishya parampara is one of the great traditions of Bharatavarsha.It truly must and should be celebrated and preserved in our gurukulas, agraharas, devalayas, and mathas. But if all the relationships we have can only be Guru-Sishya, Father-Son, Mother-Daughter, Raja-Praja, then relating to and working with peers becomes difficult. Further, if teachers from phoreign are given the same status as our gurus, then the net result is videshis taking advantage.
It is the height of bastardy that a foreign institution, educational or not, could appropriate the sacred name of Sri Adi Sankaracharya. Yet, this proposal was only stayed because someone of Malhotra’s strategic sense, discovered and stalled it.
Intellectual Kshatriya project results in: 1. More knowledge, less opinions 2. More action, less advice 4 others 3. More tapasya, less show
Not every educational relationship is that of Guru-Sishya or Raja-Praja. Nor is there perfect equality between peers. After all, each individual has his or her set of strengths, and seniors outrank juniors even in college. But a senior is not a guru. When there is no longer the danda of ragging (or punishment from administration) to keep juniors in line, juniors run amok like school-children at recess….that is unless the prism of mentorship becomes pervasive under the aegis of Dharma.
A society bereft of self-respect basks in sycophancy on one end and tyranny on the other. For all its great accomplishments, Indic Civilization is presently facing a deficit of self-respect. Whether they are anglicised, persianised, arabised, or even patriotic or anti-national, Indians are lacking in self-respect, and sycophancy (ji-huzoori) has become the common currency.
The best way to stem the advance of bastardisation, be it anglicisation or otherwise, is through mentorship.Not everyone can be a guru, and not everyone has time to be a sishya. But the value of the mentor-protege relationship lies in the existence of a mild status differential, without the total surrender and dedication demanded by a guru. A mentor is there not to shape you and save you for soulful salvation, but to guide you, to give you hints, and to help you grow as an individual and a contributor.
Be a mentor to someone younger, and seek a mentor in someone older.This professional “parampara” is the best way to establish not only an efficient chain-of-command/unity of purpose/cultural cohesion, but to also grow and help others grow in the process. Demanding that all things emanate from you and be credited to you may often be symptomatic of a guru complex. So if you are not one, don’t pretend to be. The mentor, on the other hand, recognises that even the most modest and most illiterate of persons has something to teach. It will also end this dichotomy of total obedience or complete non-compliance. Be obedient to your guru, but be respectful to your seniors and mentor your juniors.
That is the importance of Dharma. Not only as a framework, but also as the origin of civility (sabhyata), etiquette (saujanya), propriety/courtesy (maryada). But in a society obsessed with kulachara and kula, these three have gone by the wayside.
The problem today with Indians (particularly a demographic of half-read twenty somethings, and their feckless forty-something fellow travelers) is that they are spoiled brats, and well, probably something comparable to the title of this article.
There is no point in trying to save the world if you yourself don’t even know how to behave and organise. Selective reading and willfully ignoring nuance is easy. Petulant and rude behaviour is even easier. Closing your ears to retain the efficacy of ideology easiest of all. But the truly knowledgeable person is not the ideologue. He is the one who realises he knows nothing, and seeks wisdom instead. That is the basis of philosophy, not love of knowledge, but love of wisdom.
Philosophy vs Philognosis & Phil-ideology
The love of ideology is one of the great dangers facing human society. This is because ideology, unlike philosophy, demands compliance and reduces honest, critical thinking. The combination of ideology with bastardy is quite possibly the most combustive of all. It marries (pardon the pun) the worst of the certitude associated with an ideology, any ideology, with the worst of the bastard (anomie, alienation, constant need for self-assertion, sniveling and spoiled brattiness). When the rootless wonder finds his [imagined, Central Asian] roots, then a new persona is assumed. Filled with the zeal of a new convert, all worthiness is judged on the basis of conformity (to the ideology) and sycophancy (to a pseudo-clerical sovereignty). On the basis of by-birth brahminhood, real Brahmanas in the agraharas and mathas are being sidelined, their interpretations dismissed as “unscientific”, and their authority usurped by “by-birthers”. But a true Brahmana, born or otherwise, is known by guna, sattva guna.
All this is ultimately why we must reject Ideology and Philognosis for Philosophy. It is the love of wisdom and the love of truth (the origin of wisdom) that makes it possible to live not only well-meaning, full-filling, and prosperous lives, but also practical ones that preserve us and our society.
This is ultimately why the Post-Modern Society is a Bastard Society and must be rejected. And this is why our culture is the cure for Post-Modernism. It is not rigid, as other civilizations are, nor is it a black hole of self-annihilating nihilism (as is post-modernism). Our culture is based on Dharma consisting of uncompromising principles, but flexible application.
The Dharmic tradition shows the importance of Philosophy over Ideology, any Ideology.
In the aftermath of a recent furor over his remarks in Africa, some have unfairly remarked that Gandhi was fundamentally oriented towards “Eurocentrism”. But this is fundamentally flawed.
Gandhi and Gandhianism are deserving of a great many criticisms. His never-ending accommodation of never-ending series of unjust demands and his callous behaviour towards the ethnic cleansing of Hindus in partition era W.Punjab and Bengal is emblematic of what happens when you dedicate yourself to ahimsa, instead of Dharma.
Are the rumours about Gandhi true? Maybe all, maybe only some. Was he propped up specifically to serve as an albatross on the Hindu neck, only to gut him and our culture later on?—wouldn’t be the first time (there are certainly some such today). But who knows for sure?—only God. But as usual, the problem in our ranks is not uncertainty, but excess of certainty and certitude. Some of our guys and gals read a few books and blogs, and apparently have it all figured out. In the realm of binary-ism and false dichotomies, it is easy to set it up as Gandhi vs Godse or Gandhi vs Bose. But perhaps that is in fact the problem. Hindus are foolishly and forever making false choices between two extremes.
Whatever Gandhi’s sins (his “experiments with truth” certainly qualify as carnal), whatever the influence of christianity on his thinking, whatever the incredulity of his apologia for razakars and moplahs, there, nevertheless, were clearly strong streams of essentially Indic thought in his ideology that were crucial in an eminently un-Indic time: sanctity of the cow, vegetarianism, village economy as building block, and even varnashrama dharma (only with upliftment of dalits).
Funny how some side-remarks of Gandhi that are racist in our era must be publicly excoriated for the benefit of foreign platforms, but the core philosophies of Marx that are revolutionarilyracist in any era are explained away or ignored. Whatever Gandhi’s peccadilloes against Hindus, Marx was an outright enemy of Hinduism. Only a hypocrite carps and cavils about one while deftly utilizing the other sub rosa.
Similarly, today there are voices treating the legacy of Subhas Chandra Bose as beyond question. Netaji’s singular contributions to Indian independence are undeniable. Both British and Indic voices (even spiritual ones, have attested to this). But as always, the devil is in the details. Were the solutions and philosophies upon which Bose rode Indic in nature? Would India have traded feudal agrarians, mercantile compradors, and clerical hypocrites for totalitarian Marxists or Maoists, who would have betrayed Bose?
The rehabilitation of the Socialist Authoritarianism that drove the INA of Bose as merely “revolutionary” is a clever rebranding effort, but a rebranding effort nonetheless of fundamentally alien Marxist ideology. The Reds of Russia were “Revolutionary” too, but their fellow travelers wreaked havoc in the 20th century. Here is the fate of women in Post-“Revolutionary” Russia. Do we want this for our young women too?
Gandhi’s abandoning of Pakistan’s Hindus to their fates may have been un-Hindu, but Bose’s choice of Revolutionary Socialist Authoritarian ideology was downright un-Indian. Had he succeeded in totality, would Totalitarianism have been the agenda of the nation and the state of its political economy? Would the accompanying vast accretion of central powers have overturned native Indic social structures (Panchayats, Mathas, Devalayas, etc) even more than inefficient and federal Nehruvian Socialism?—these are the intelligent questions that must be asked, rather than merely trading one patron saint, one “father of the nation”, for another.
Hindu Leftism, Hindu Marxism, or even Hindu “Revolutary-ism” are all ultimately as un-Indian and un-Hindu as “Hindu Fascism” or Hindu Feminism or Hindu Patriarchy. Rather than promoting either only Bose-ian revolutionaries or Patriarchal “Pitr-bhoomi” advocates, perhaps our Mathrubhoomishould look within instead. Whether Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, or Hindu, it is Dharma (and the philosophies and approaches that emerge from or respond directly to the Vedas) that makes India Indian.
SC Bose was a patriot, and he deserves his due credit for creating conditions that made India’s Independence not only possible, but in inevitable. But this is the danger of personality-driven movements and personality-dependent ideologies. Whether Gandhi or Bose (or any one else…), when a personality becomes larger than life and beyond question, we don’t examine policy or play counterfactual. When Bhagavan Ram himself is questioned and even mocked today as a “misogynist” by secularly misbegotten mongrels, who are Gandhi and Bose before him? So question Bose we must: What would have happened if Bose succeeded? Would the Bharat we would have seen resembled Mao’s China more than Nehru’s India? For those who have no problem with this, I kindly direct you to China’s “Cultural Revolution” as exhibit A.
We saw the level of caste violence and violent targeting of Brahmins under the half-baked Dravidian theory in Periyar’s Tamil Nadu. How much more havoc would have been wreaked under “Revolutionary ” (i.e. Socialist Authoritarian) thought in a putatively Independent India?
Like it or not, whatever the true story of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, his philosophy gave a stream of Indic thought that allowed a physically and mentally colonised India to make its way back to the spiritually liberating Dharmic Common Culture of its ancestors. Those who pretend as though everything was perfect in Hindu society 200 years ago or even 1200 years ago, ignore the very real problems of ill-treatment of dalits and very real corruption resulting from general casteism, which are well-attested. Does this justify the atrocities and atrociousness of atrocious foreign rule—no. But it explains why it took so long to attain success against its various forms, and why we still have yet to fully succeed.
Any political movement, any Civilizational Revival is only possible if there is a common civilizational culture and a common set of priorities…rather than mere ambition checking ambition…or lying in expedient wait. Pretending as though this was and is “mere violence among lower castes” ignores the fact that the buck stops at the head of society, not the arms or feet. Philosophical justification for the ill-treatment or exploitation of communities is even more criminal, because like socialist authoritarianism, it provides pretext for violence. It may not wield the blade, but it points out the target for it.
But varnashrama dharma was not about exploitation. The caste systems of feudal Europe or colonial Spanish America may have been, but varnashrama dharma was and is about de-centralisation, specialisation, and accountability—with the topmost being the mostaccountable and living the mostdifficult lives. Those that violated the dharma were outcasted (this is the origin of untouchability, at least originally). Trading the downtrodden Dalit for the impoverished Brahmin as a target for exploitation is no solution, particularly for Periyarites and Razakars who talk of “final solutions”. But how could this be explained in a nation that still believed Aryans invaded India? –(some scientism advocates moonlighting as “ritualists” still believe this despite orthodox Brahmins clearly stating that per our Vedic tradition, Aryas originated in India, and Dravidas were Aryas).
Were there individual cases of Dalits rising in status in pre-colonial India?—yes. But as a whole, corruptions had certainly entered into varnashrama dharma, and many scheduled castes were indeed very wary of how an independent India would affect them. Ambedkar himself was concerned at the legal status and situation of Dalits in a post-independence India. After all, all the dalits of the desh could convert to Buddhism as he did, but what ultimately mattered was the fundamental consensus that governed the country.
The reality is, before Indira Gandhi amended the preamble to insert “socialist, secular” to the republic, before Nehru said Dams were the new temples where Indians would worship, it was Mohandas Karamchand’s Gandhi’s views that served as guiding principle for the inter-regional and inter-religious consensus. Like it or not, Socialism is ultimately an outgrowth and transition period to Communism. Both ultimately have authoritarian and even totalitarian undercurrents, particularly when they become not only economic frameworks but outright political ideologies. Thus, Gandhian philosophy, whatever its merits, served as a sort of halfway house back to dharma. That many of Gandhianism’s proponents belong in a halfway house is another matter altogether, but to completely deride it and him in favour of Socialist Revolutionary ideology or hyper-masculine European memes of patriarchy, only demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of today’s opinion-leaders, older or younger.
Dharma wasn’t about patriarchy or hyper-masculinity (see ancient Greece or medieval Japan for some of the externalities of this ). Dharma was and is about complementarity and balance of the genders. This is the problem even with patriotic Indians—they are mimic men of a different sort, but never authentically Indian. Forever propping up foreign models and foreign saviours in native garb, they have egotists, ideologues, and superiority complexes aplenty, but never any self-respect. Scientism, Japanism, and even the asinine “cuck heavy” Alt-right to justify casteism is the m.o. for these “cucks” and […] of foreign fads and ideologies.
Either Central Asia, East Asia, the Middle East, or the West, Indians can only ever come come from or look to inspiration from somewhere else. New left, alt-right, neo-nippon, medieval mongol, laurasia, gondwanaland…never anything authentically Indian or even really Hindu, for this bunch. This is why they are forever adopting the jargon and memetics of the very white nationalists, racist leftists , or middle eastern race supremacists who either openly spit upon them, or do so after the veneer is scratched (they even promote such bigoted blogs…buffoons). It is a patina, a veneer of Hinduism, or in the case of the left, a version of perversion in colonised medieval India, but never the true, unvarnished clarified essence of authentic India. This is because unscrupulous and ambitious people are ever only focused on empowering vehicles that empower their ambitions, or in the case of pathetically over-compensating frat-boys—their fantasies. “Mimic men”, as V.S. Naipaul wrote, only ever exist for securing their own position, authority, and enjoyment.
The same voices that correctly identify propaganda as a tool of British imperialists, must remember that pen has still not run dry, and the wielders of said pen have skeletons in their own closets. So perhaps the answer then is neither Gandhi nor Bose, but maybe selective aspects of both. The uncompromising national commitment of Bose that allowed him to fight for independence and the fundamentally Indic streams of thought that either intentionally or unintentionally emerged from the personage of Gandhi.
Was the “Mahatma” merely patterning Hinduism on a Christian template—maybe, maybe not. But whatever it is, his Gandhianism gave a common unifying political philosophy for a religiously riven, cultural cleaved post-Independence India to make its way back to its authentic self. Was Gandhianism obstructed by the obstructionist “Idea of India” brigade from the Fabian Church of Nehru…yes, but it eventually brought about a common sense of Bharatiyata nonetheless. Whether Gandhi himself was an authentic original or merely an instrument himself, is another matter altogether. But allowing him to be used as a means to caste (spelling intentional) Indian culture, and by default, the Hindu religion as racist, is emblematic of the veryintellectually pinheaded stupidity that has been an albatross for Indians for the past millennium. When your enemy is trying to fit you into a box, “racist/rapist/misogynist”, you don’t step into it and play to stereotype, or in the case of alt-right “cucks and […] embrace it. If you do, you yourself are a “collaborator” of a different sort, or yet another of one those unscrupulously ambitious amatyas Kalhana condemned.
Rather than forever alternating like schoolchildren between contrasting shades of whites and blacks, understand the greys that define our era. The jury may still be out on Gandhi, if not Bose, but whatever he did or was, we must understand what Gandhi represents or is today. He remains a global symbol of India and its native culture and philosophies, whether we like it or not. Native historical re-assessment and re-allocation of his legacy must be done internally, not serving as a vehicle for agendas emerging externally. That is true Swadeshi and true Poorna Swaraj.
One of the great controversies in “Indology” has been the term “Yavana”. But our Itihasa-Purana long ago expressed itself clearly. As usual, rather than speaking in one voice, Bharatiyas, especially our two clever by half half-wits in their philognostic navel gazing have made matters worse by further associating the term with Indo Greeks.
Fortunately, our real Acharyas, such as Pandit Kota Venkatachalam, trenchantly established the truth.Whatever the later usage towards Persianised Turks and Arabs, “Yavana” (especially in the Puranas) refers to degraded Aryas who later became the Kambojas, Sakas, and Parasikas (Persians). Some of the Yavanas became Ionian-Greek, but the Yavanas referenced in the Puranas were not Greeks. “Yavanacharya” and “Yavaneshwara” were not Greek. Milinda from Milinda Panha was not Greek.
Pandit Chelam categorically denies that the Greeks had any kingdoms East of the Indus River. In his “Plot in the Indian Chronology” he wrote that the British fabricated much evidence and even forged coins. Indo-greek history constructed primarily on the basis of coins (numismatics). Were these forgeries?—worth scientifically investigating.
Per the Vishnu purana, Maharaja Sagara (ancestor of Sri Rama) of the Ikshvakus defeated and banished the Yavanas. He made them cut their hair and shave their beards, hence the fashion of the western-most variety. Of course, western “Indologists” are careful to omit this part, but happily use the Garga Samhita and its alleged attachment, the Yuga Purana, to advance the claim that the Indo-Greeks successfully campaigned in Northern India. Pandit Chelam has questioned the authenticity of this “Yuga Purana” saying that it does not appear to be the work of Vriddha-Garga.
That is the stupidity of our band of half-wits because what they find “fascinating” and gleefully promote in their half-knowledge is actually used by westerners, western wannabes, and mid-east wannabes to mock them. Milinda was not Menander, but was a Yavana-Kshatriya of Balhika (Transoxiana). As degraded kshatriyas they had been banished from India, but were promised by Ishvara that they would successfully invade Madhyadesa later in the Kaliyuga (see Medieval Period). Their time is now over.
While Astika Brahmanas abandoned them, as they had abandoned the Vedic rite and Sadachara, these Yavana-Kshatriyas nevertheless had their own Yavana-Brahmanas, Yavana-Vaishyas, and Yavana-Sudras. Per the Vedic Arya estimation of Madhyadesa (that is the Gangetic core), all these had the status of Mleccha only.
Therefore, the “Yavanacharya” and “Yavaneshvara” of the Surya Siddhantha, are none other than these exiled vratya Indians, who later joined with the various borderland tribes and became their rulers. That is why Yavana Astronomy is praised. That is what Yavana actually means. And that is why “Silence is Golden”, because these self-same morons-archaeologist who just discovered the topic in their Wikipedia research, have gone so far as to bring this to the attention of troll magazine and its resident olog-hai. That is why knowledge is not wisdom.
The reality is, Western Indology knows damn little about the Indo-Greeks, and a recent European scholar admitted as much. It took the work of native Bharatiya historians, and many decades, to push back against the colonial narrative established by the British, which imagined Demetrios and Menander as an ancient Clive & Dalhousie. Luckily for us, our ahankari-shikhandis lost no time to bring a broken narrative to the attention of all the wrong people, and help them revive it. But hey, who cares when we can give gyaan to grow follower counts and engage in half-knowledged speculation!
So next time you come across something that could be misportrayed and misused against your own people, make use of that dm option, do further research, or simply remember the value of “shut up”.
As for the full account of the Yavanas, here is some of what Bharatiya Charitra Bhaskara, Sri Kota Venkatachalam, wrote on the matter [Emphasis and Proofing ours]:
The following Post was originally published at True Indian History on April 28, 2009
Reference to Yavana countries:
To the west of Kashmir there were five Yavana countries. Some of them are now part of Kashmir Empire. These Yavanas were not Greeks but they belonged to the Kshatriya race of India. As these disregarded and neglected the performance of vedic duties and rites they were called Mlechchas. In those Yavana regions lived four castes of people. As all these castes relinquished Vedic rites, their caste-names were merely nominal.
Among the people of the Yona kingdoms, Rajatarangini relates that there were castes called Yona Brahmins, Yona Kshatriyas, Yona Vaisyas and Yona Sudras.
Yona or Yavana Kingdoms:
(Vide the Map of western India in post ‘The Empire of Kashmir’).
“Abhisara” consisted of two regions namely “‘Darva” and “Abhisara.” The kings of these Yavana regions were Kshatriyas who became Mlechchas, were subordinate and paid tribute to Kashmir Kings. We find in Rajatarangini many instances, when these Yavana rulers revolted and became independent and the Kashmir monarchs subdued the rebels and brought them again under their sovereignty. Some of these five regions are part of Kashmir and others are on the western border. In the list of the Kashmir Kings, during the reign of 130th ruler, Kalasa Maha Raja, there was the description of Yona Brahmin as follows,
“There was a Brahmin born in the Yona Village who begged alms of paddy. His name was “Loshtaka” and he was considered to be an Astrologer of that village.” So says Rajatarangjni.
From this, it is evident that the Kshatriyas residing in the Yona regions, on the borders of Kashmir, though they were firstly Kshatriyas, were treated as Mlechchas, on account of their disregarding their vedic duties; the other caste people also were called Mlechchas. Therefore, Rajatarangini relates that there were caste differences even among the Mlechchas. The yona Brahmins were experts in Astrology. The ‘Yavana. Rishi’, the author of “Yavana Siddhanta”, was a ‘Bharatiya Yavana Brahmin’, but not a Greek.The territory “Ionia” which got that name, on account of its conquest by the Yavanas of india, was later called Greece from its contact with the savage Greek tribes.
The Bharata Yavanas were of a very ancient origin. They took the sciences of Astrology and others, on their migration to ‘Ionia’(modern Greece) from India, but India borrowed nothing from Greece. On the otherhand. the western writers turned matters topsy-turvy and proclaimed that all the arts and sciences flowed from Greece to India. The histories containing this inverted information were introduced as Text-Books and our children were taught these packs of lies in the schools and colleges.
As the students were manufactured to be disciples of the Greeks, as a result, they cultivated a love for Greek lore and learning and developed a hate for Bharatiya knowledge and wisdom. Until and unless correct and true history of Bharat is written and these authentic books are prescribed as Texts for study in the schools and Colleges, these wrong and baneful notions cannot be torpedoed and the minds of future generations of young men cannot be diverted from the tinsel glamour of west to the true glory of the East, the hearth and home of culture and civilisation from time immemorial.
The following Post was originally published at True Indian History on July 4, 2009
Pandit Chelam provides an excerpt from a correspondence. Following that, he responds to the questions with his answer on Yavanas.
The two questions: The learned Dr. Sirkar (Govt. Epigraphist for India,Ootacamund, South India) asked in a letter in February,1955 after receiving a copy of a booklet “The age of Buddha from Pandit Chelam) :-·
On the basis of your (Puranic) Chronology how do you account for
1. The Yavana king “Milinda” of Sakala mentioned in the “Milinda Panha” who flourished 500 years after the Buddha’s Parinirvana?
2. The Yavana Monarch “Amtiyoka” whose dominions bordered on the empire of Asoka, grandson of Chandragupta Maurya, according to Maurya inscriptions? To answer the questions raised, we felt the need for further investigation of allied history and historical research and came upon an essay by the learned Dr. D.C.Sircar himself on ‘The Yavanas’ in Vol.II of “The History and Culture of the Indian People” published by the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. We acknowledge that we found the essay also very useful for our purposes in this connection in furnishing our answers to his questions.
In Vol II of the “History and Culture of the Indian People” Dr. D.C. Sirkar writes about the Yavanas :-
“One of the factors that led to the extinction of the dynasty of the Imperial Mauryas was the advent of the Yavana invaders through the North—western gate of India. Indeed the most interesting feature of the post Maurya period of Indian history is the establishment of foreign supremacy in Uttarapatha, Aparanta Paschaddesa, and the adjoining region of Madhyadesa successively by alien powers, and the Yavanas were the first among them.
The word ‘Yavana’ was used in medieval Indian literature as a synonym of Mlechcha and indicated any foreigner. But as late as the early centuries of the Christian era it meant to an Indian, the Greeks only. The word was derived from the old Persian form ‘Yauna’ signifying originally the Indian Greeks and later, all people of Greek nationality. The Greeks of Ionia in Asia Minor, between the Aegean Sea and Lydia, and the people of North Western India, certainly came into contact with each other as subjects of the Achaemenion emperors of Persia since the time of Darius I (522-488 B.C.) Vide p. 101, Ch. VII of Vol. II of Dr.Sircar’s “History and Culture of the Indian people”, of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan series.)”
[Pandit Chelam’s Response to Sirkar]
It is not a fact that foreigners established supremacy in ‘Uttarapatha’ in the post-Mauryan period. It is not correct to say the Sanskrit word “Yavana” is derived from the Persian form ‘Yauna’. 70% of the vocabulary of ancient Persian consists of Sanskrit words. The Persian language is itself a Prakrita(Vernacular dialect) derived from Sanskrit. The original Persians constituted a branch of Bharatiya Kshatriyas. Along with some others they were Kshatriyas excommunicated from the Kshatriya caste of Bharat on account of the non-observance by them of the regulations and rituals prescribed by the Vedas for the Kshatriya caste.
The regular Kshatriyas refrained from social and marital association with the excommunicated branches. One [o]f such excommunicated branches was known as the ‘Parasaka’ and they settled down in Eastern Persia. The region was named after them and came to be known as ‘Paarasika’. As they had originally belonged to the Aryan race, the country was also known by the more ancient name of Iran. Sanskrit was the parent language from which was derived the dialect known as Persian. The contention that the Sanskrit word ‘Yavana’ is derived from the Prakrit word ‘Youna’ of the derived Persian language is entirely baseless. The Sakas, Yavanas, Barbaras, Bahlikas and others were all branches of Kshatriya caste belonging originally to the Aryan race and the Hindu fold, but known generally as Mlechchas, having been excommunicated for their non observance of the prescribed caste regulations and duties, but they were severally referred to by their separate Kshatriya subsect names whenever necessary.
The Sakas, Yavanas, and others had their own Kingdoms in ‘Uttarapatha’ for thousands of years before the Mahabharata War (3138 B.C.). Thev were Hindus (excommunicated) and not at all foreigners.
The Mauryas were not emperors, sovereigns over an empire. From the time of Chandragupta Maurya. Chandragupta Maurya was able to establish himself on the throne of the Magadha kingdom, only with the help of the famous Chanakya. His son Bindusara also was only the king of M[a]gadha and not an emperor. In his time Magadha extended as far as ‘Taxila’ in the west. His son Asoka appears to have extended his dominion by conquest and got recognised as an emperor. Even for his empire the western boundary was only at Takshasila and there were the Yavana kingdoms and Gandhara to the north west and west of it, Kambhoja and Kashmir to the north. His descendants were not so formidable and so in a few generations after him the empire dwindled gradually and came to be confined once again to the Magadha kingdom only. In 1218 B.C. Pushya-mitra-Sunga murdered the last king of Magadha of the Maurya dynasty, himself became king of Magadha, conquered and brought under his suzerainty the neighbouring kingdoms and performed the Aswamedha to establish his claim to the status of an emperor.
The Maurya empire was disrupted on account of the weakness of the successors of Asoka which led to the independence of the feudatory kings and not on account of the invasions of foreign ‘Yavanas.’ Yavana kings were perhaps crossing the frontiers (river Indus) with small armies and indulging in marauding activities in the villages and towns across the border. But they were returning to their countries at the approach of the armies of Magadha.These Yavanas across the border of the Maurya empire were of Bharatiya Kshatriya descent and were neither Greeks nor foreigners. There were no Greeks at that time.
It is wrong to identify the word ‘Yavana’ with the ‘Greek.’The ancient Yavana kingdoms now comprise modern Afghanistan. The Yavanas and the Yavana kingdoms were in the northwestern region of Bharat from times immemorial and not of foreign advent. There was only one (Bharatiya)Yavana invasion in the time of the Maurya emperors and then it was repelled. lt is erroneous to contend that the Maurya empire was disrupted by the Yavana invasions. It is not a fact. There is no historical evidence whatsoever in support of such a contention.
Sir william Jones, one of the most intellectual of the European critics of Sanskrit literature, pronounced the Sanskrit language to be ‘of a wonderful structure, more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either. (Vide Asiatic researches, Vol I, p, 422)
While thus innumerable reputed scholars unanimously declare that Sanskrit is the most ancient and the parent language of all the languages on the earth, from which all the other languages [w]ere derived, and in particular Zind, the ancient Persian language, is 70% Sanskrit and derived from Sanscrit it is surpriseing that Dr. Sirkar should suggest that the Sanskrit word “Yavana” is derived from the ancient persian word ‘Yauna’. The word ‘Yavana’ is frequently in use in Sanskrit literature, from times immemorial. To say that it has recently been imported into the Sanskrit language, argues little acquaintance with Sanskrit language and literature. There is a lot of information and innumerable references in Sanskrit literature to the Yavanas and other Bharatiya Kshatriya races which subsequently spread all over the world.
The following excerpts are from a Post at True Indian History on July 4, 2009
Question II of Dr, Sirkar:- About the age of ‘Amtiyoka’, the Yavanah monarch mentioned in the edicts of Asoka.
[Pandit Chelam’s Response to Sirkar]
The above mentioned ‘Amtiyoka’ belonged to a branch of Bharatitya Yavana Kshatriyas. He was the ruler of ‘Simhapura’ one of the five Yavana kingdoms 1. Abhisara. 2, Uraga 3. Simhapura 4. Divyakataka 5. Uttarajyotisha.
The other four rulers were subordinate to him. These five kingdoms were all beyond the borders of Asoka’s empire on the North-west and a group stretching in sequence from west to northeast. Now we find them included 1. in Kashmir, 2. in the North- west Frontier Province and 3, 4. 5, in Afghanistan. They were very small kingdoms. The people of these regions were Yavana Kshatriyas and martial people who lived on their arms i.e. served as mercenary soldiers under any ruler who paid them. Their women were very beautiful and they were employed as body-guards in the royal (harems) households of several Indian princes.
These mercenary soldiers were very loyal to the masters under whom they served and sacrificed their lives if necessary for the safety of their masters. They were Kshatriyas of Solar descent. But they were excommunicated from the Aryan Kshatriya fold on account of their disregarding and discarding the Vedic rituals and observances.(Manu 10-43, 45) They were regarded as Mlechchas. When they could not secure employment under wealthy masters who could maintain them, they used to live upon theft and banditry, raiding peaceful villages and carrying away loot to their mountain regions
So “Amtiyoka” was a Bharatiya Yavana prince, not an Iono-Greek or Greek prince. He was the contemporary of Ashoka. His age was from 1472-36 B.C. The “Yavana” of Northwest Bharat became Ionian in Asia minor and Greece and mixing with the Greek the Ionian became Iono-Greek and then by the order of the Government of Ionia or Greece, the Iono-Greek became “Greek” and the country became “Greece”.
The following excerpts are from a Post at True Indian History on August 1,2009
That Menander was a great Indo·Greek prince was recorded by the historian Strabo whose authority for the statement was a reference to him by the ancient writer Appolodorus. Periplus is another book assigned to 70-80 A.D., but of unknown authorship. But it is stated in this Periplus that coins with Greek letters and devices were current in the neighbourhood of Broach on the west coast of India in the first century A.D, ‘These coins resembled the insignia of Appolodorus and Menander, Greek Potentates who were in power after Alexander. Hence it is inferred that the neighbourhood of Broach might have been included in the Greek dominions in the times of Demetrius, Appolodorus and Menander. All this is entirely in the sphere of conjecture. It seems Appolodorus and Menander are mentioned in the list of Bharatiya Yavana princes in the writings of Justin, the historian. But his writings are now extinct and not available for verification.
It seems Plutarch also mentioned Menander as renowned for justice and that when he passed away the various cities in the neighbourhood contested for the privilege of holding his remains. This Menander is further identified with Milinda of the Milinda Panha (questions of Milinda), a Buddhist text containing the several questions raised by Milinda and the answers furnished to them by the Buddhist monk Nagasena at the end of which the prince, satisfied embraced Buddhism. This prince is spoken of as ‘Milindra’ in Avadana-Kalpa-lata by Kshemendra. In the Shinkot inscription the name is given as ‘Menadra‘ and so it may be identified as ‘Minendra’or ‘Menandra’. This name might be read into the devices on the coins, we are told.”
The following excerpts are from a Post at True Indian History on August 1,2009
“In Hieun-Tsang’s writings there is scope for the current provisionally accepted date of 486 B.C, If we count 500 years from the provisionally accepted date of Buddha Nirvana we get 14 A,D. So Menander should belong to after 14 AD.,ie. Ist century A.D. But even this is pure conjecture and based on the assumption of the identity of Menander with the Milinda of Milinda panha, Even the provisionally accepted date of Buddha Nirvana is itself based on the wrong assumption of the contemporaneity of M[a]urya Chandragupta and Alexander of 324 B.C. How can we expect the superstructure to yield correct dates when the basic assumption is itself questionable and a mere conjecture? As soon as the hollowness of the original foundation of the entire structure is exposed and recognised the entire edifice topples down with a crash and the time for it is approaching. It is wrong to identify Menander with Milinda. Menander even according to the author of the essay, Dr. Sirkar. belongs to the 2nd century B.C. It will he proved in the pages that follow that Milinda belongs to the end of the 14th century B.C.”
True Indian History. [Various Blog Posts]
Kota, Venkatachalam Paakayaji (Pandit). The Age of Buddha, Milinda, and Amtiyoko. Guntur: Sri Ajanta Printers.1956
Acknowledgement to Sri G.D. Prasad garu, Grandson of Pandit Sri Kota Venkatachalam, for his kind permission to reprint these Excerpts and Blog Posts.
For writers, editors, and scholars alike, it is critical to be honest not only about what the tradition says, but what they are competent to do. Per our tradition, there is a sharp division between Adhyatmika and Laukika. Those of us from Andhra know the division between Vaidiki and Niyogi for example. As such, it is imperative that those of us from the Laukika sphere, whatever may be our birth varna/jati, refrain from interfering (let alone corrupting) the Adhyatmika sphere. For far too long have self-appointed armchair acharyas attempted to play the role of Vedic seer, pushing as Shivoham has written, concocted model-based theories based purely on imagination.
The Vedas are apaurusheya, and thus, not the realm for “original thinking”, statistical and cliometric analysis, leave aside creative interpretation or reinterpretation. Only traditional Brahmanas who specifically lead the traditional way of life in agraharas and mathas have the authority to interpret what the Vedas actually say. Increasingly, Bharatiya Sanaatanis of all Varnas (all castes) have been granted Veda Adyapana and some have become Brahmanas not by birth but by Guna and Dharma, and this too is accepted in our era, provided they follow the traditional lifestyle and guidelines laid before them.
But foreign “indologists” and their native sepoys and their sycophants do not have such authority. Merely bearing a yajnopavita and performing rituals robotically does not make a Brahmana.Those are mere accoutrements.Preservation of the truth makes a Brahmana.
Brahmin or not, Initiate or not, Indian or not, those earning their living in foreign employ do not have authority to assert let alone pervert what is in the Vedas. Only degree-factory fools seek them out as some sort of “rishi”. Therefore, rather than presenting myself as some sort of authority, I too will follow this rule and simply report what an actual and public Adhyatmika Brahmana, Pandit Sri Kota Venkatachalam, has himself written.
Pandit Chelam was uniquely qualified, not only being born and brought up in an agrahara, but being competent in both traditional Vedic learning and Western history—particularly Indology. Pandit Chelam has categorically rejected & refuted the Aryan Invasion Theory(AIT) and diligently catalogued all the high crimes and misdemeanors of British Colonial Indologists and their sepoys—many of those comprador lineages exist among our ranks today.
Over the course of a lifetime until his retirement at age 72, this true Brahmana did his Dharma by preserving the truth when Bharat itself was prostrate and powerless under foreign colonial rule. The time has now come for his life’s work to be vindicated, and the Vedic Truth in all our hearts to be asserted, not through my scholarship, but his. My pranams to him. Here is what he has written [Emphasis and Proofing Ours]:
The following Excerpts are from various Books by Pandit Chelam
In the beginning, there was only one race, the Aaryan race. In the ancient times, when the Aaryans were spreading all over the continent of Bharat, the different regions and parts were named after the Kings that ruled over them. The people too were named by the names of these regions and came to be considered different races.
In those remote times in Eastern Bharat was known as ‘Praachyaka Desa’ and ruled by a king named Bali. After his death, several of his sons divided his kingdom, and each named his part after himself, one of them being Aandhra. The kingdom of prince Aandhra being known as Aandhra Desa and the Aaryans (of the four castes) inhabiting the region were called Aandhras. Thus only one group or division of the Aaryans came to be known as Aandhras. The Aandhras were not a separate race from the Aaryans.
It is all one race known as Aaryans in the beginning, some of them later coming to be known as Aandhras from the name of the region inhabited by them. It is the same case with the Aaryans inhabiting the other different parts of Bharat, all of them of the same Aaryan stock but developing into various branches and coming to be considered different peoples and named after the different regions occupied by them.
But all of the Aaryans of Bharat from the Himalayas to Cape Comorin [Kanyakumari] belong to the same racial (Aaryan) stock. This axiom should be kept steadily in mind in the study of the history of the Aandhras from the beginning of creation, attempted in this volume.
The Process of Creation
In the beginning the five elements evolved naturally [f]rom primordial nature or Prakriti, and from earth, of the five, living matter and living beings of all kinds. The first among the living creatures was Prajapathi. He is the first Aaryan. Rigveda 4 26 2-2, 2-11-18. He resolved on the creation of the human race and first created the ten Praja-pathis (the Devarishis). Then he himself residing in the region enclosed by the rivers Saraswati and Drishadvati, and cohabiting with his wife Sataruupa gave birth to two sons ‘sons Priyavrata and Utaana paada and three daughters Aakuuti, Devahuuti and Prasuuti. The region he first lived in came to be known as “Brahmavarta“.
The human race first appeared in Bharat only.To the west of the present Jamuna in North India there flowed in ancient times Sara-swati and to its west a tributary by name of Dru-shadvati. The region between these rivers Saraswati and Dri-shadvati was known as ‘Brahmavarta’ from time immmo-rial [immemorial]. The name indicates that the Swayambhuva Prajapati named Brahma resided there in gross physical form to cre-ate the human race on the earth.
At the beginning of every cycle of creation, this place where Swayambhuva Prajapati, the first man resides on the earth in his gross physical body, to create the human race is known as Brahmavartam’. In Rigveda-3-33-4 we hear ‘Yonim Deva Kritam’ and ‘Tam Deva Nirmitam Desam’ in Manu 2-17. This region is bound by the river Sara-swati on the east the junction of Sarasvati and Drushad-vati on the South, Drishadvati on the West and the Hima-layas on the North.
The First Migration— Brahmarshi Desa.
The Aaryans thus born in Brahmavarta left the place of their origin and inhabiting the region to the west of it gave it the name ‘Brahmarshi Desa’ (Manu 2-19). These migrations and colonisations were led by Brahmarshis of established spiritual eminence who settled down in the new regions with their disciples and hence it was called ‘Brahmarshi Desa.’In later times this region came to comprise the kingdoms of Kuru, Matsya, Panchala, Surasena & Uttara Madhura.
The Second Migration— Madhya Desa.
According to Manu, the region bounded by the Vindhyas in the South the Himalayas in the north, Allahabad [Prayag] in the east and the river Saraswathi in the West, was called Madhya Desa. (Manu 2-21). This was the region colonised by the second migration of Aaryans after the Brahmarishi Desa was fully occupied.
Aryavarta (The Third Migration)
Thereafter the Aryans, on the advice of the sages and under the leadership of the kings, started on the third migration and spread all over the plains between the Hima-layas and the Vindhyas and settled down in permanent homelands. At that timealmost all the surface of the earth was uninhabitedand even in Bharat there were no people other than the Aryans.
Fourth and Fifth Migrations.
Thereafter, a king by name of Videha Madhava, on the advice of his teacher Gautama Rahuguna, accompanied by the Aaryans who were rapidly increasing in numbers, orga-nised a great migration from the Brahmavarta and neigh-bouring regions and proceeded “to the east of Saraswati upto the river Ganges and established Aaryans settlements at several places. But confronted by the river Sadanira, the progress was halted and villages and towns were constructed all along the march up to the river Kubha or Kabul, and extended their settlements so far. These details of the migration are available in the Satapatha Brahmana, the Rigveda and in the Manu Smriti
The land in which the Aaryans are born, grow and die and are born again is known as ‘Aaryavarta’. Thus it is clear the Aaryans were living in this region from the beginning of creation, according to the Manu Smriti.
The sixth migration “Dakshinapatha”
In those days this part of the country was uninhabited. After rendering habitable and fit for colonisation, the neighbourhood of the river Sadanira and proceeding through the regions to the east of it, Viz. Vanga, etc, they spread to the south along the coast. The south eastern coast lands of Bharat, which were thus occupied by the Aaryans gradually down to modern Madras and below, were then known as ‘Prachyaka Desa’ and this region beyond further south to the sea ‘Dakshina Desa’ and the west coast and adjoining tracts ‘Paschima Desa’. Thus the Aaryans spread in course of time over the whole of the Southern peninsula and the Aryans who came to occupy the whole of Bharat from the Himalayas in the north to the Indian ocean in the south were the followers of the Vedic culture and the social order of the fourfold division of society) which formed an integral part of it.
Many, may naturally, aver that while the Vedic Tradition asserts that humanity was born in the Brahmavarta (Sarasvati-Indus Valley) modern Science states that Africa is the origin. My response to that would be, that is fine. Let Science be Science and let Tradition be Tradition, rather than mix and mess up the two. The problem is when Science becomes Traditional Culture and Traditional Culture becomes Science—the result is Scientism.
Traditional culture provides values & historical memory that give guidance to a people.Science helps humanity understand the material world. Current Scientific Evidence does show the preponderant weight behind The Theory of Evolution, and the origin of humanity in Africa. But Science cannot dictate what our Tradition actually said. There was only Aryan. Dravida was a subgroup of Arya.
In fact, the Genetic Evidence for AIT is severely questioned, the Archaeological evidencefor AIT non-existent, and the Vedic Tradition outright contradictory. Pandit Chelam’s own charges against the British for fabricating evidence to concoct the current Chronology (including outright destruction of evidence) only injure AIT even more. In fact, other than the compromised Academy, only a clique of casteists and their clueless sycophants (as well as a few naive, but well-meaning people) seek to preserve it. On what basis?Some blog ramblings? This article is not based on my work, but the scholarship of an actual and authentic Brahmin Pandit, Sri Kota Venkatachalam, who is also a western educated historian. His word on the Vedic Corpus of Texts, and the Puranas in particular, carries preponderantly more weight than social media personalities and cliques. Enough!
Aryan Invasion Theory is AVAIDIKA. The Aryan Invasion Theory violatesVedic Tradition. Those asking “what if”, the answer is “it’s not”. Those saying, “but I learned from such and such”, the answer is guru-moha is still moha. And those fools with a smattering of Vedic Sanskrit attempting to engage in “original thinking” putting forth noxious nonsense theories, and all and sundry, should be well-advised of the severe, multi-lifetime penalties of Smriti-vibhrama. Certainly, all true Brahmanas are apprised. No ritual will protect you from this paap.
That it has gained any credence at all is testament to the sad state of what passes for “intelligence” in ‘modern’ Hindus, who are spoiled Brats. As we’ve written before, the highest form of material intelligence is not some asinine, poodle pedantry or analysis-to-paralysis that offers no viable solutions. The highest form of material intelligence is strategic intelligence, because it understands how to efficiently and effectively deploy all other intelligences, even the over-emphasised quantitative intelligence. Quantitative intelligence and even good memory are important and have their applications, but memory tricks and math problems do not save civilizations, strategic intelligence and societal coherence does. The Vedic Tradition gave us such coherence through Dharma—do not violate it. All this is why time and again we have given example after example of why Wisdom is more Important than mere Knowledge. But some are children in adult bodies, so they childishly and stubbornly refuse to get the message, because for all their book clippings, they are in fact like the very masses they condescend to, following only what is “popular”. Principle comes before Popularity.
Sanaatana Dharmikas have enough to deal with regarding foreign disinformation, misinformation, and inculturation. It is bad enough ridiculous things are said about Brahma and Sarasvati. Any real Hindu familiar with Ardha-Nareeshvara knows that that just as Shiva-Shakti are equal halves of Para-Brahman so too are Brahma and Sarasvati equal halves of the same soul. Thus Svaymbhuva Manu’s wife Satarupa is not his daughter but his other half, just as each human husband refers to his wife as his ‘other half’. This is not just an expression, but a statement of Dharmik philosophical reality. Monogamy is advocated for this precise reason. But rather than making themselves useful, these fake acharyas and dushta brahmanas specialise in pedantry, which fools only rascals or rubes. The latter can be forgiven for foolishness, but the former must be punished. Murkha-panditas can be forgiven, dushta-brahmanas must be punished. If bahishkar (outcasting) existed, it is because of these dushta-brahmanas and their chamchas.
“Aryan Invasion Theory”, “Beef in Vedas”, “Dharmasastra is ok with Same-gender love”, “Rna determines Dharma” all these are the work of genuine casteists (courtesy their videshi paymasters to whom they are “rnis”), as these nincom poops are prepared to pay any price to fulfill their adharmic ambitions and assume videshi “rna”. True Brahmanas know that whatever their personal rivalries (inter-caste or intra-caste), it is mahapaapa to corrupt the Vedas, and therefore, they keep their Egos in check, in order to preserve the integrity of the inheritance bestowed upon them by their forefathers for intellectual guardianship.
Materialistic fools and casteist frauds who defile sacred threads, do some ritual as show, and haughtily drop their gotras at the first opportunity, cannot hide behind their janeus when real adhyatmika Brahmin Panditsof authentic lineage have asserted what is actually in the Vedas. Here is what one wrote about AIT, directly:
Pandit Kota Venkatachalam, is an actual Acharya, and has spoken. Let there be no more confusion. AIT RIP…
Aryan Invasion Theory violates Vedic Tradition.
Kota, Venkatachalam Paakayaaji (Pandit). Chronology of Ancient Hindu History Part I. Vijayawada: AVG. p.121-133
Hi, I’m Nilambari and I’m here to share my ideas on a few subjects from Carnatic music and Kerala to Cinema and Historical math & science . Born a Mallu but having lived variously in Andhra, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu, I am fairly comfortably multilingual and enjoy exploring languages (such as Telugu) and the cultural nuances transmitted through them.
While I enjoy our classical musical tradition (Nilambari is one of my favorite ragams), it must also be said that I do enjoy other forms of melodious music. However, rap or heavy metal is not my cup of tea or more correctly filter kaapi. I enjoy movies too but am a bit picky and choosy about the kind of movies I will watch. In general, I have a very high level of curiosity on most subjects which stems from a wish to understand what is at the root of the various topics that interest me. I will try and share with you my thoughts on various areas that pique my interest and hope you will enjoy the journey and be a fellow traveler.
Today I start with sharing a few thoughts on the question of identity with reference being only to the geographical territory of India. A great ancillary read for this essay is Why India Is A Nation.
Below is one of the popular links from a movie, which glorifies the legacy of our mathru bhoomi’s Sanskriti, and my own native Kerala.
Now, let’s start…
What is identity?
To me, identity is intimately connected to geography and language.I believe it is good for both to be in agreement so that the identity formed is secure right from childhood. When I say agreement, I believe that if one is a Malayalee for instance, it is good that the formative years or childhood years are spent in the geography that is the birth place of Malayalam and the resulting culture. This means that a Malayalee child is better served if s/he spends childhood in Kerala. In earlier times, that was indeed the case for the large part of the population of India. However, post independence, the need to earn a livelihood meant that many people left their land of birth to look for livelihood options elsewhere and eventually ended up making a life in their karma bhoomi and not janma bhoomi. Their children were born in the new home. The parents carried the culture and language of their janma bhoomi and hence had a secure identity. Their children however, being born in a new place did not have it easy. They spoke the language of their parents at home and followed a culture that was passed on to them from their first generation displaced parents. At the same time, the children were exposed not only to the culture of the new place, but also various other influences some of which will be discussed below.
A child born to immigrant parents learns to adapt and interact seamlessly when moving between the inherited culture and the lived culture. The negative, though, is that over time a sense of rootlessness about intrinsic identity starts creeping in. Added to this sense of confusion is the acquiring of English skills as a pre-requisite to a “good education”. The newly immigrant parents working hard to fend for themselves and their small families generally gravitate to schools offering English as the medium of instruction since they believe they are providing for a bright future for their child. They believed that “English opened doors“.
The small and nuclear family is one of the first departures from the culture of their original land. Immigrant (not extremely poor), reasonably educated parents are most often found staying as a nuclear family without the traditional Indian joint family support structure. This forms a significant break with the parent culture since the joint family is an absorbing and cushioning medium for the shocks that life deals out to people. It must be understood here that the entire family is coping with the changes that the move away from the homeland forces individuals to make.
It is inevitable that in time, the parents also adopt certain ways of the local culture into their own lifestyle thus beginning to modify the primary identity. This adoption happens either through necessity or through own volition. For instance, if a Malayalee lives in say a place like New Delhi, s/he is forced to make certain eating habit changes. For example, coconut oil is an essential ingredient in Malayalee cooking for that is the oil that is geographically abundantly available in Kerala. However, the Malayalee in Delhi would not be able to cook with coconut oil since it is not widely available and even if one can procure it, it is rather expensive and cannot be an everyday option. Thus, it becomes an adaptation out of necessity. So, a dietary change has already happened in the displaced Malayalee household.
The parents with fond nostalgia for the coconut oil of their culture adapt to the locally available oil for cooking. The children, being used to the local oil right from birth either begin to consider coconut oil as an exotic indulgence or even begin to dislike it. Thus, there is a subtle shift away from the original culture.This is highlighted as an example to say that there are multiple small shifts away from the original culture that eventually becomes a blend of various ingredients locally available in the new place adapted to the original one.
Indeed the cross fertilization makes for an interesting study and does shape the individuals of the first generation immigrants differently from the origin culture. In many ways, it exposes the children of such displaced parents to pluralism early. The child learns to navigate between different worlds and this is a precious skill that stands her/him in good stead in adult life. The flip side of course is that a certain rootlessness begins to make itself apparent in the child which can create disorientation regarding a secure identity. This rootlessness starts getting accentuated when the child begins schooling thereby getting introduced to English to add to the mother tongue and the local language exposure. Soon, the three language formula in Indian schools and the insistence on English in urban, upmarket schools starts working on the child. The thought processes start getting framed in English–another step away from the parent culture.
While the child usually does follow and speak the mother tongue at home, more often than not, reading and writing in the mother tongue is not learnt. Thus, another link to parent culture via literature in the mother tongue is lost to the child. Access to the local culture and language is also alienated as a result of the imposition of English. English literature and English discourse starts replacing original or even local culture and discourse. Slowly, the narratives favored by English speaking peers and intellectuals start to seep into the mindset and psyche of the child. The result is a growing alienation from the roots and a growing disdain for the original culture. This happens because English language discourse hardly respects the regional language’s intelligence or culture.
As the child grows and as English replaces the original tongue as a medium of expression, the child begins to inhabit a world rather divorced from the reality on the ground. Thoughts, ideas, ideologies and worldviews begin to resemble what the English narrative propagates. The result of this slow indoctrination is that the child becomes confused about his/her identity. At home, parents still live according to some of the customs remembered from older times from their land of birth. The child on the other hand picks up some amount of the old homeland narrative, but increasingly also believes in the English narrative that is shaping his/her thoughts. This rootlessness created as a result then leads to a quest for identity for a small minority. Most go through life without resolving this confusion which leads them to commit many blunders along the way. The few who address the problem start out with a directionless, general quest. However, they finally find out the reasons for their restlessness and then work towards correcting that imbalance. If they are persistent, they eventually work back towards their original roots.
However, sometimes the journey back to roots can also leave one dissatisfied because the root culture has also been exposed to the vagaries of time and has changed complexion. Those who eventually retrace their steps back to their roots then look for those elements in the root culture that can be adopted by them. In a way, the displaced seeker has a much wider angle view of his/her original culture and is able to see the distortions and changes that have happened to the original culture.A person still immersed in the original culture is more prone to accept changes without much questioning thinking that change is the only constant in life.
In conclusion, displacement from original culture has both positives and negatives. The positive is that for those who understand that they are grappling with a rootlessness, it is a rather enriching journey to get back to the roots. They have the wider exposure to be able to appreciate better their own traditions but for those who do not understand or study this restlessness that they experience, they live a life where they are continually trying to grasp at an identity that will neither be wholly theirs nor be fulfilling. It’s a privilege to be born and to spend your life in your homeland. However, if you are displaced, see it as an advantage to understand your mother culture better. Make sure you recognize your restlessness as actually the manifestation of rootlessness. Be a seeker and find your true identity. Love your motherland and the language and culture that defines it; for ultimately you are defined by it whether you like it or not.
Before I end, here is an excellent talk byShri. Rajiv Malhotra who touches on some other aspects of identity especially among the urban youth of India who today are going through some very confusing times as a result of the shrinking of the globe and the pervasiveness of a global culture.
I Leave you with a montage that certainly defines who I am. Until we meet again…
As the natural next step to our previous article on Stree Dharma, is its complement, Nara Dharma.
Traditionally, The Dharmasastra and Puranas have provided man with insight on what Dharma is, and both confirm the Veda as the ultimate authority of the Dharma which they express [1,4]. While Dharmasastra provides injunctions, Purana provides examples and demonstrates context-sensitivity. These were further illumined by various Commentaries such as the Mitakshara and formal law digests such as the Vyavahara Nirnaya. Nevertheless, much has changed since the composition of the last major Dharmasutra (Apasthamba). As such, it is imperative that in the present time, rather than inventing Dharma out of thin air, the Principles of Dharma are restated appropriately for modern context. While it is true that a number of Sampradayas (paths/communities) and Panths (religions) have had Swamis and Saints do the same, the time has come for the declaration of a modern Saamaanya Dharma, the common and foundational dharma, across caste and creed.
We cannot turn back the clock and we must understand that society has changed, and we cannot force-fit stone tablets from another Millennium or Yuga into the present one. Dharma must adapt to the present time.
With that in mind, having reviewed Sastra, Smriti, Itihasa, and Purana, we present a Dharmic guidebook of Principles for Young Bharatiya Men, of all castes and creeds, to ensure society guides them, and also educates them on being ethical citizens, equal stakeholders, and responsible leaders in the Revival of our Civilization.
Historically, Dharmasutra was appended to the Grihyasutra, itself ultimately part of the greater corpus known as Kalpasutra. [1,11] The historic division of Kalpasutra (ritual) into Grihya (domestic rites) and Srauta (yajnic offering) naturally was focused on a more limited audience, in a less universally literate time. Nevertheless, the Dharma of all four traditional classes of society was in fact described, just with varying degress of expansiveness and attention. The traditional phases (ashramas) of brahmacharya (student/celibate), grihastha (householder), vanaprastha (hermit), sanyaasa (renunciate) still apply based on one’s jati, varna, or panth and modified for the present context. They are described in great detail by Apasthamba and his predecessors. While Varnashrama Dharma was the focus there and then, none of that obviated the existence of a Nara Dharma. In fact the traditional name for this has been Purusha Dharma, dharma of the Male. But in the present time the word Purusha has been affected in its meaning, and the word Nara implies the complete human male, including the family man.
As such, while there is varnashrama dharma, there is also dharma of the nara. Before a male is a brahmana, a kshatriya, a vaisya, or sudra, he is first a man. And to be a good brahmana, or kshatriya, or vaisya, or sudra, one must first be a good man. That is the foundational dharma applicable to all jatis, varnas, sampradayas, and panths which we focus on today.
At a time when Bharatavarsha is beset by bands of barbarians of all sorts, those who call themselves Dharmikas, must first break the barbarity within themselves imposed by wrong practice and frequently foreign fashion. In the quest for modernity, we have forgotten our morality. In prizing knowledge, we have forgotten wisdom. In seeking development and sophistication, we have forgotten character. It is time to remember who we once were, and revive the ideal of men we have the potential to be.
II. Nara Dharma
Sukhasya Moolam Dharmam. The root of Happiness is Dharma.
Maathru Devo Bhava. Mother should be treated as God. She is the first Guru.
Streeya Maryada Uttama. Honouring women is the Best Path.
Pithru Devo Bhava. Father should be treated as God.
Acharya Devo Bhava. Acharya (spiritual educator) should be treated as God.
Atithi Dharma. Today rather than treat as God, observe Dharma with Guest.
Uddaret atmana atmanaam. One should elevate one’s self through education in & beyond school.
Sadacharam leads to cultivation of good qualities in individual and all. Nithya & Naimittika Karma facilitate the fulfillment of Svadharma. Practice them.
Knowledge is not Wisdom. Ergo, respect those who are elder to you, so that you may gain their wisdom and in turn be respected by those younger to you.
Vedic knowledge is Not for Sale. Those who study the Vedas should observe the spiritual guidelines it requires during and beyond the student phase.
Discretion is the better part of Valour
Greed is Not Good. Practice daya, dama, dana.
Selfishness is the real root of all evil
Silence is Golden
Culture is the Cure for Stupidity
Duties balance Rights.You are not just an Individual, but part of a Society.
Jyestha braatha dvitiya pitra. Elder brother is as a second father.
Yatha Raja tatha Praja. Yatha Praja tatha Raja. Lead by example. Be the change you want to see.
A place for Everyone and Everyone in his Place. Win as a Team.
Pursuance of academic goals with intent to be useful not just to self but to society at large is a must. Studies are good. Study of Niti is better. Study of Dharma best of all.
Traditional dharmic principles are not in favour of either drinking or smoking. Even today it is advisable to follow these injunctions, but if one chooses otherwise, then it should be done responsibly with consideration for health, safety and reputation.
Traditionally, it is not advisable to indulge in pre-marital sex. In the age of STDs, cancers and unwanted pregnancies, it is still the best advice but if a young man chooses otherwise, then the same advice as given for 23 above holds the same.
Conjugal relations between the husband and wife have to be mutually respectful and fully consensual. A man who pressures his wife into immoral acts, sins. Pursuit of Kama should be in line with Dharma.
Conjugal relations while being for pleasure should not lose sight of the procreation aspect. Sex for pleasure only is not the goal of a marriage and procreation has to also be a goal so as to bring forth and/or raise progeny to preserve society.
Financial decisions and planning for the future has to be joint exercise between the husband and the wife. Saving for a rainy day should be the goal in order that those in your care do not suffer hardship.
In-laws & Parents have to be respected and consulted on decisions that impact them. They have to be looked after with respect & dignity if they are staying with you.
Grihastha dharma Sampoornaha
Prathama kumara uttaradhikarin
Age gracefully and see to it that you withdraw respectfully from your children’s lives once they become independent and start their own lives. Advise but don’t interfere.
Karmanye vadikaraste, ma phalesu kadachana
Why was Bhagvan Ram called Maryada Purushottam? It is not just because he practiced Maryada (propriety & courtesy), or that he was the ‘Best of Men”(uttama purusha), but because he was the embodiment of Nara Dharma. Jatis and Varnas may vary, but through his life we understand the nuances of Dharma and the various dilemmas he faced. Kshatriya or not, all can learn from his example and understand through him that society comes before self. That is the dharma he taught.
However, per our sacred history, Sri Rama was born in the Treta Yuga, thousands upon thousands of years ago per our reckoning, to say the least. His actions were conducted given certain assumptions, indeed iron principles, of his time, which we do not find today. Honour of women was held in higher sanctity than it is in the present time, so concern for the safety of women was not as high as it must be now. Younger brothers were far, far more loyal in his time, than they are now. And citizens were far better in his time than they are now. As such, his dharma must be restated and adapted to the present time. Nevertheless, he remains the ultimate example for all time.
Before we commence with the exegesis of these principles, we will actually present a separate section focused specifically on principles two and three. These have been expanded to discuss a sub-dharma under Nara Dharma: Nara Dharma to Naari. Of late, there has been a movement to over masculinise all things in the name of reviving masculinity. Reviving Masculinity is indeed an exquisite goal, particularly in an era of Mama’s boys.
But reviving Masculinity doesn’t mean showing contempt to women. I wonder, when did the Itihasas and Puranas refer to the “Fatherland”? When did we consider women as weak? True, average males are said to have 3 times the upper body strength of the average female, and modern armies absolutely should realise this before placing women in frontline combat. But as Swami Vivekanananda, another advocate of strong minds and strong, masculine bodies, said, “which man can give birth?”. Inner strength and outer strength are complementarities and not mutual exclusivities.
It is Bharat Mata, as Bharatavarsha is our Maathru Bhoomi. It is the same even in my Maathru Bhasha. In countering our enemies, let us not seek to become like them. Our Civilization represents mankind’s cause precisely because it respected womankind.
Stay true to our tradition. By respecting women, boys become real men. By understanding how to interact with ladies, we become real gentlemen. And here is that Dharma.
III.Nara Dharma to Naari
If there is a Naari Dharma, then surely, there must be a Nara Dharma to Naari. If rights come with responsibilities, then men who seek to assert their rights must remember that they too have responsibilities under the Dharma, especially to women, their other half. Therefore, here we summarise Nara Dharma to Naari.
Maathru Devo Bhava
Streeya Maryada Uttama
Protect thy society. Neglect not thy wife.
Daughters are Music of the home
§. Maathru Devo Bhava
Man’s relationship with Woman is not 1 dimensional, as it may be in other modern societies. In fact, in our Tradition, we view women first and foremost as mother.
It is first Maathru Devo Bhava…then Pithru Devo Bhava…then and then only Acharya Devo Bhava…and in this era, depending on his character and cultural origin, maybe Atithi Devo Bhava. But above all a mother. Because even if she is not our mother, she is a potential one, or a mother to someone else. This is the foundation of respect for women in our society.And it has been since time immemorial.Though modesty (of demeanor and dress) are advisable for both genders, it is mentality that matters more. Also, it ensures healthier relationships with the woman who will be the mother of our kids. Mother is the storehouse of all good things.
This doesn’t mean being a mummy’s boy. It means understand that to have not just the love but the respect of a real mother is to be on the side of goodness itself.
§. Streeya Maryada Uttama
Those of you familiar with Sanskrit and Sanskrit-enriched languages (like my own honey sweet Telugu) know that a single phrase, can mean many things. So it is with this one.
Firstly, Streeya Maryada Uttama
Honouring of women is the best path. The first lesson we are taught is Mathru Devo Bhava, and for good reason. Mother is the first guru. How can we not honour her? In our tradition, there is no lower form of life than an ungrateful student. A criminal may not be able to help his criminal tendencies, but even a thief looks after his mother. But like the Rakshasa who immediately seeks to use his boon against Mahadev, so too is the son who fails to respect and look after his mother. Showing honour to women, especially the one who gave you birth, is the best path not only for men, but for women, and for civilization itself.
Secondly, Streeya Maryada Uttama
Protecting a woman’s honour is of highest importance to man. More than his, more than his family’s, more than even his religion’s, is protecting a woman’s honour. In fact, it is the essence of all true religion. A society that fails to fight for its women’s safety, a society that seeks not to safeguard its stree, is no society at all. Dharmena heenaha pashubhih saamannaha. One without Dharma is like a beast.
In the great divide between “honour societies” and honourless societies are various questions about whether honour itself should be honoured. But whether a woman is honourable or not, the Shakti within her should be honoured through man’s good behaviour.
This means first and foremost controlling himself around her and not behaving like an animal. Man’s own civilization spouts from and depends upon his relationship and treatment of women. A man who barters his own woman’s honour or preys upon the women of others, is no real man. Whether she’s his woman, she’s someone else’s woman, or she’s her own woman, a man is not his own man if he cannot seek to protect women.
Rakshabandhan exists for a reason. Every woman who is not your wife is your sister (or mother or daughter). Safeguard her, welcome her, and above all cherish her.
Thirdly, Streeya Maryada Uttama
In the presence of women, being honourable is best. Here, Maryada means not just honour, but also propriety. Man should not simply content himself with not being a criminal.
Uddaret atmana atmanam. One should elevate one’s self. This means behaving appropriately in the presence of women. This neither means being an uxorious wimp nor a rude, crude, ruffian. It means being a man who respects others because he respects himself. For a woman to lose respect for a man is the kiss of death and a quest for cuckoldry. So man must respect himself. But, a true gentleman treats women well, not because of what it says about her, but because of what it says about him.
Finally, Streeya Maryada Uttama
For women, honourable courtesy is best.
Bhagvan Ram was known as the Maryada Purushottam not just for his propriety around women, but for his courtesy. A true gentleman of gracious mien. Whatever “Surpanakha’s Daughters” may say Ravana’s sister was not punished for being a wanton woman or a “liberated lady”. Lakshmana punished her for attacking Sita. Rama had been courteous to her up until that point.
Sri Rama was not only only proper in the presence of women and elders, but was also courteous and pleasant to all. It is chivalry and gentlemanliness that delights young and old or mother of your children and your mother. It is not just good manners or due courtesy, but that rare charm of friendly decency, to high and low, man or beast. It is not over-sophistication, but cultivation, of not just manners, but personality & prudent ideals.
So yes, accept the exhortations of the Smritis and be like Ram! But also be, the Ram…of the times. Yudhisthira attempted to be the Satyaharishchandra of the Dvapara, but Draupadi paid the price via dice as she was not born in the Treta. True Dharma lies in honouring women, safeguarding women’s honour, being honourable in the presence of women, and honouring through courtesy. Streeya Maryada Uttama.
§. Protect thy Society. Neglect not thy Wife.
Do your duty as a citizen, as a leader, as a protector, and as a father, but also as a husband.Do not neglect your wife.
If protecting one’s society first means protecting one’s womenfolk, then it also means not neglecting them. If Selfishness is the Real Root of all Evil, then neglect is its CO2. There is no greater poison in a relationship than neglect. There is no worse emotional feeling than feeling alone when you’re in fact with someone.
Not being a neglectful husband is more than just asking how her day was, or taking her out once in a while, or listening to her for 15 minutes then tuning her out the rest of the day. Neglect is also emotional distance, isolation, and cold-hearted selfishness: brutishness. If you can’t think of someone before you think of yourself, then you are not doing your dharma to your marriage, and your society.
This isn’t to say women are perfect. Nilambari has described at great length how ill-treatment of men and abuse of marriage laws is a precipitous path for society. But she and others like her have stood up for men. It is time we stood by such women, and not neglect our good fortune.
§. Daughters are Music of the Home
Sons may carry on lineages. Sons may carry on names. Sons may even carry us on to the afterlife (all per the Smritis). But daughters are the music of the home.
For far too long has the place of daughters been diminished in our own eyes as a dowry burden. Researched and presented by Nilambari in the first of our Shakti Series of Posts, dowry is adharmic, stridhaan is not. Stridhaan is not a profitable asset for greedy bridegrooms, but a gift to a bride from her own family, for her own security and maintenance. Even the Dharmasutras permit a young woman to choose her own suitor if one cannot be found by her father. If there are only greedy, money hungry would-be matches, better to let her be, and make her own choice and meet her own match.
Therefore, the birth of daughters should no longer be a financial calculation, let alone a burden. Daughters are in fact the music of the home. If we encourage a young man to marry a wife to add colour to his life, then we should encourage him to welcome daughters to bring music to his home. From laughter, to singing, to dancing, to innocence, to sweetness, more than his own wife, it is his own little girl that softens a man, and his own rough edges.
At a time in the dread Kali (5117), when daughters more than sons are increasingly looking after parents, the veritable dhvani for any true garhapati is his putri and dauhitri.
We are the Civilization of Satakarni and Samudra Gupta who proudly styled themselves as Gautami-putra and Licchavayah. Streeya Maryada Uttama.
Thus spake Nripathi on Nara Dharma to Naari.
IV.Nara Dharma Principles & Explanations
Maharajadiraja Samudra Gupta with veena & vaana
Uddaret atmana atmanam. One should elevate oneself. One should cultivate oneself. Not just spiritually, not just morally, but also culturally. Our tradition never condemned the man of the arts. In fact, it praised warrior poets, and cultured Kings. Maharajas like Paramara Bhoja and Maharajadirajas like Samudra Gupta were famed not only as Kings, generals, and warriors, but also as patrons of the arts & learning and musicians or men-of-letters in their own right. They held the veena in one hand and the vaana (bow) in the other. Do not be a sybaritic and overly refined poppinjay, but do not be a dour and brutish troglodyte either. Neither be a bookish wimp nor an uncultured ruffian. It is an art, an art as simple as Calligraphy, that disengages man from the severity of his duty, so that he can meditate on the right course of action.
A real man is not 1 dimensional. He has many dimensions to him. His jati or state origin are only 1 aspect. His varna is only 1 aspect. His marital status is only 1 aspect. His interests/desires are only 1 aspect. His talents are only 1 aspect. As such, his personal duty, his svadharma, is to ensure all these aspects are in harmony, and in harmony with his society’s needs. it also means knowing how to interact with others especially women, as we showed above, and understanding the nava rasa of life, especially Sringara rasa.
Some malefactors of dharma have characterised svadharma as something subjective and capricious. But this is false. Svadharma is evaluating the needs of society and understanding one’s talents and obligations, to determine the optimal course of action or duty to society. How can you best contribute?That is how svadharma is determined. Not everyone can be a King or captain. Not everyone can be a purohit or teacher. Not everyone is good at business. And not everyone is a good craftsmen or farmer or construction worker. Rather than being jealous of others, understand your current competence and overall potential, avoid the Arishadvargas, and put society before self. That is how svadharma is determined and achieved.
The Root of Happiness is Dharma. The root of Dharma is Artha.
The Root of Artha is Rajyam [Power]. The root of Power is Victory over the Senses [10,129]
That is the key to happy living and the basis for all the Yama & Niyama (do’s and don’ts) that characterise the Dharmasastra and are advocated by the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.
Human life is a rare privilege in our tradition, and so, must be used wisely. Purusharthas are the aims of life: Dharma (righteousness), Artha (wealth), Kama (pleasure & love), Moksha (liberation). Of these, Dharma is the best, as it guides the next two and ultimately makes possible the last.
Nithya and Naimittika Karma facilitate the fulfillment of Svadharma. This is due to the spiritual discipline and hygiene that is promoted. Traditionally referred to as the more expansive Ahnika, Nithya Karma refers to daily rituals and rites, generally based on one’s station in life. Certain varnas, especially Brahmana, require more time dedicated to spiritual discipline, and the Apastamba, Baudhyana, Gautama, and Vasishta Dharmasutras all describe those associate rituals in greater detail (from Achamana (rinsing with water) and Dantadaavana (brushing teeth) to Snaana (daily bath) on) . Naimittika Karma is more expansive, but done more periodically. It deals with rituals and prescribed rites based on phase of life. i.e Namakarana, Annaprasana, Upanayana, Vivaha, etc. All these are again better dealt with in the Apasthamba Grihyasutra, among others. Naimittika Karma is in turn determined by and is part of the more expansive Kulachara and Achara. Because there is Kula and Desa Achara that are very dependent on context, the more general Achara refers to Good Conduct.
Foods forbidden per one’s station or varna or desa should be avoided. Go-mamsa in particular is forbidden to all classes as the cow is aghnya (that which should not be killed). Cow leather, therefore, should be avoided when possible. If these and other infractions or moral transgressions occur, the Dharmasutras of Apastamba et al, should be consulted for appropriate prayascitta. Apastamba also asserts that if engaging in one’s traditional vocation is not possible, another one can be followed while maintaining kulachara. However, in the present time, it is advisable for all varnas to learn the arts of self-defence, exercise regularly, and have plans in place and be ready to take up arms to defend their families. The safety of their womenfolk should be the foremost concern on their minds.
Man is not only a performer of karma (Nitya and Naimittika) and Yajna, but he is also an upholder of dharma, a protector of streeya (women), a sustainer of Kutumba (family –young and old), and a pillar of Samaaja (society). Boys forever seek frivolity and fun. While there is indeed a stage for such things, (Snataka) it is short and sweet, and cannot last for too long after completion of his studies. The best course of action is to take a wife after preparation for Grihasthashrama and after ensuring he has sufficient Artha (wealth) or source of income to provide for his family and progeny.
Live by a simple code. Whatever vocation or occupation, or dharma you pursue in life, remember, Bharat is Mother to us All…
b. Grishastha Dharma
Grihastha Dharma Sampoornaha. Grihastha ashrama is in fact considered dharma in fullness, not because it is the complete totality of it, but because it is a microcosm of complete dharma and creates complete men. In fact, none other than Maharishi Yajnavalkya advocated it to his own eventual wife Maitreyi (who sought brahmajnana). While yogis and swamis may choose the path of brahmacharya and eventual sanyaasa, Grihastha Dharma is the forerunner that provides grounding for performance of higher duties, as man learns to provide for dependents.
Svadharma finds a balance between a man’s duties, talents, and aspirations/hopes. But Grihastha Ashrama, and the associated Dharma, are predicated on balance between a mans’ Svadharma and his immediate obligations to society. He cannot neglect either himself or those who depend on him. Balance must be found.
True, man does marry, let’s face it, because he loves woman, all aspects of woman. The Dharmasutras encourage man to marry after his studies to beget sons to bear his name and perform his last rites. But Purana also asserts that marriage is man fulfilling his duty to his society and even mankind, by having children. He fulfills his duty to society by looking after a woman of his generation, ideally his own spiritual other half. While the best course is to abstain from physical relations prior to marriage (the lifestyle of the traditional brahmachari), those who failed to wait should neither exploit women, nor give false promises of marriage, and they should provide financial maintenance when children result. Bhrunahatya (abortion) and Sisuhatya (infanticide) are Mahapatakas (terrible sins) per the Dharmasastras. No matter what his accomplishment or learning, a man too will share in the sins of a woman who, due to his counsel or pressure or desertion, undertakes in abortion. That is why Grihastha ashrama is the best time for kama and rati bhava (love and erotic pleasure).
Manu asserts that a man remains spiritually unclean for 2 days after emission, and should take bath and avoid sacred places til this time passes. Varahamihira in his Brihat Samhita advises that couples avoid relations during certain sacred festivals, pujas, and phases of the moon. By regulating the frequency of relations, he writes that there will be no need to resort to dreadful measures (i.e. abortion, etc) for family planning. Hence moderation, as in all things, is advised for dharmic enjoyment of conjugal relations.
It is true that the ancients, especially since the Treta Yuga, practiced polygamy. But this comes with qualifiers. These was primarily made available to Kshatriyas for obvious reasons. As for the remaining varnas, a second wife was permitted only if the first one was barren (or the more archaic rule that the couple is sonless). It should also be noted that the most recent of the Dharmasutras (Apasthamba) condemned Niyoga (levirate) and banned it in the current Yuga. This is due to the weakness of the flesh that both men and women have in the present time. Rather than taking matters into our own hands, it is best to accept one’s fate (or the decision of God), rather than opportunistically marrying and divorcing (a worst case scenario) or undertaking assorted abominations.
Therefore, whatever natural (and of course, wholly normal) urges a man has, marriage is ultimately about procreation and learning to live for others. That is the heart of dharma. This baseline knowledge then transfers to higher and higher families (samaaja, rashtra, desa, bhoomi), ultimately leading to the concept of Lok Kalyan.
Prior to this stage, it is advisable to study selections of the Kamasastra. The Kamasutra of Vatsyayana touches on many topics, of which rati bhava (erotic pleasure and positions) is only 1 of 10 traditional chapters (or presently 7 chapters). In fact, the entire text was composed as advice to a gentleman of the nagara who has completed brahmacharya and was looking to learn how to be a worthy match to and win the affection of a loving wife. Some of the ancillary chapters are only there for descriptive purposes and for those involved in State Espionage. They should not be studied by the common man as they may corrupt public morals.
Just as a Nara is not a Kliba, neither is a Naari, nor especially, his dharmapatni. Therefore, whatever nonsense others may be purveying, while an aspect of sexual congress is about each spouse physically enjoying the other for pleasure, it is best to follow the advice of the sastras and only engage in traditional maithuna that, even if that is not the intent, has the potential to lead to reproduction. Kautilya and Manu both condemn the behaviour of catamites, and punished exploitation of minors.
If one strays from the traditional path, he should be aware that there are karmic implications for these infractions. Therefore, rather than condemning others or believing yourself to be condemned for all time, it is best to return to the traditional path. Failing that, attempt to graduate to the next higher level of dharmic sexuality, and limit behaviour to the least detestable. Behaviour that harms or exploits the vulnerable must be immediately given up. The purpose of Indriyavijayam (conquest of the senses) is not because mortification or denial is a virtue. The purpose is to gain control over the senses, so that you do not become a slave to them or oppress and degrade your spouse (or others in general).
Apramattho daaraannireekshet | 358
“Examine the potential wife with utmost care.” [10,169]
This is the advice of Chanakya to carefully evaluate the character of a woman before marriage. Character should be the key qualification; beauty, wealth, learning, and family name are secondary factors. This is because a man must not be a cuckhold. His self-respect ensures respect from others. While the laws of adultery may have been severe among the ancients, liberal among the medieval legal commentators, they are downright oppressive in the present time.
Kautilya and Vatsyayana both assert that it is in fact difficult to fully ascertain a woman’s character prior to marriage. Both assert, however, that once married, past conduct is no basis for a man to pressure his wife into moral corruption. Sastra asserts that the best guarantee to a wife of good character and family name is through perfect duty.
Nevertheless, a man should be wise and weigh the circumstances. As the Mahabharata writes, unhappy wives (through neglect or otherwise) destroy lineages. In a tragic era of degradation, even Dushasana pales in comparison to what the Ravanas born in human form have been doing to women, married or not. As the legal texts provide guidance on remarriage, maintenance, or forgiveness, they will be covered at the appropriate time. But where a woman was obviously innocent and a victim, relations may return to normal after 1 full lunar cycle. A woman who has been a victim should not be ostracised by the family or her husband. In fact, they should evaluate how to better ensure the safety of women in oppressive circumstances or asuric vicinities. Streeya Maryada Uttama.
If your blood doesn’t boil at this, you’re not a real man.
Here the Maharanas of Mewar stand as paragons in the protection of women. Above all, Maharana Pratap. From Chittor to Kumbalgarh to Gogunda, they stood as the foremost successful examples in always ensuring the safety and honour of their womenfolk. And I bow my head to their example. Namostute.
c. Pithru Dharma
When children are first born, it is natural for a new father to have boundless affection for them. Very often, no request or wish is not granted in order to respond to the normal impulse. But fatherhood is not just about providing for dependents, its also about creating an environment of structure and discipline so as to educate sons and daughters about the (frequently dangerous) world at large.
The Dharmasastras traditionally discuss fatherhood in terms of rites and rituals and customs. They are mentioned here only in so far as they should be passed on from father to son (and where relevant, daughter). Nithya (daily) and Naimittika (periodic) Karma provide rituals that not only encourage civilised living via hygiene and special care for loved ones, but also to help guide us during periods of liminality. That is, during periods of uncertainty where circumstances change, such as birth or death or marriage, Naimittika Karma provides us with structure to help navigate through such a period of ambivalence and emotional turbulence. As listed above, the stepping stones to dharma should be inculcated and Achara encouraged. Kulachara will vary from family to family and jati to jati, but the common Achara of Good Conduct, trains Good family members and Good citizens.
But as we commenced above so we end this section. Dhritarashtra is the textbook case of what kind of father not to be. An indulgent father who stokes his sons bad qualities to further his own ambitions and delusions, is not a good father. In fact, the Elder Kuru is a metaphor for the blindness of moha (attachment). Attached to his ambitions of securing the throne for his family, attached to his dangerously selfish son, and attached to achieving his own odd quest for vengeance against fate, he ultimately lost them all. That is the danger of being an indulgent father who puts what is pleasant to his children above what is good for them, and what is good for them, above what is good for his society.
That is why Grihasthashrama completes us. Dhritarashtra proved by being a terrible father he was also a terrible king. So how then to properly execute Pithru dharma? It comes from understanding the needs of society, the traditions of the family, and the talents of one’s children and planning for their harmony. If a son lacks Satvika guna, he should not be pressured into Vedic study as he does not have adhikar. If a daughter shows artistic talent, it should not be stifled, but channeled so that duty to society and family are fulfilled while the talent given expression and outlet. Above all, as with one’s wife, so it is with progeny. Children should not be neglected, and each child has his or her own level of confidence and social skills. It is best for a father to reach out and find an area of common interest where both can consistently bond at an early age. Chanakya provides excellent advice, suggesting play from 1-6, discipline from 6-16, then friendly counsel from 16 on. 
Finally, it is important to ensure that a strong team structure is in place. Those who make for terrible team players at home tend to be terrible team players outside. If the father is the team president, the eldest son or daughter is the team captain in managing family matters and overseeing family property.
Prathama kumara uttaradhikarin. Primogeniture was the traditional rule for kings and unpartionable ancestral property and last rites. Only exceptional circumstances circumvented this rule. While this does not apply to modern inheritance law, this principle at home exhorts younger brothers and youngers sisters to respect their elders, creating harmony and stronger family in the process.
The eldest son is not the only adhikarin or heir. Wealth and other property should subdivided equally per Medatithi and Apasthamba, who do not permit a special share (uddhara) to the elder. If stridhana is not given to a daughter, then she too can claim a share in her father’s property. The status as uttaradhikaran has other qualifers, however. These include responsibility to marry off sisters and sororal nieces. It also means that, should the elder be found obviously incapable or even malevolent, primary family authority can be granted to the younger. However, given the traditional role of elder brothers, it is best to assuage feelings and proverbially “kick him upstairs”, meaning providing a higher titular place with limited actual role or involvement (Chairman vs CEO). However, a wise father takes steps to ensure good familial relations, chastises the rebellious and ungrateful, and counsels the imperious. A family should be governed gently.
d. Kutumba Dharma
The tragic reality is, in what was once the Land of Lakshmana, Indian men have become horrible lieutenants. Make no mistake: they are grade A chamchas and have become filmi tyrants (when opportunity permits). But they have forgotten the first lesson of leadership: “He who wishes to command, must first learn to obey“.
It is not for nothing our tradition has advocated Primogeniture and even states that Elder brother is a Second father. Is that not how Lakshmana viewed Rama? Did he not obey Sita like a son does a mother?
In this disgusting time, a degenerate who does not respect his own sisters-in-law, let alone daughters-in-law, is no real man. And a clown who attempts to usurp the place of his elder brother (second in command to his father), is swine . Buffoons who point to Michael superseding Fredo, forget that the Corleones were a crime family. What kind of family is yours? Ahankaris drunk on Ambitionlook for any excuse and any example to take what is not theirs. That is why our archetype is not Michael Corleone, but Bharata of the Ikshvakus.
By respecting your elder brother, or your team leader, or your political leader, he in turn will respect you, and grant additional responsibility. That is the path to leadership and success. Not through ambitious and opportunistic backstabbing when his luck is down, but through loyality and selflessness that puts family and society above self.
Before putting on noble airs, before annointing yourself “best of brahmins”, remember, true Kshatriya nobility and true Brahminhood is through nobility of spirit…and respecting the chain of command.
Chandra Gupta II Vikramaditya and Adi Sankaracharya were all exceptions to the rule. Before citing them as examples, understand whether your circumstances are similar straits, and your qualities truly exemplary.
While it is true that not all fathers and elder brothers are like Rama and behave honourably, in the present time, it must be remembered that those who have the best reason to rebel are the least likely to do so. Where fraternal or familial relations cannot be congenial, rather than openly and publicly war, it is best for alienable inheritances to be civily divided, and have each go his own way. Even in the worst of situations, steps should be taken to avoid mahapatakas. Younger brothers and sons cannot be run roughshod over, but their cooperation and, where justified, obedience, should be expected. Rather than fight over parents and inheritances, it is best to follow the more basic aspects of dharma, such as achara (good conduct), maryada (maryada), saujanya (etiquette), or at least sabhyata (civility)
Chanakya provides the best guidance in this regard:
Vinayasya moolam vruddhopaseva | 6
The root of humility is in the service of the seniors—elderly or old persons. When one renders honest service to elders one learns the worth of humility. [10, 129]
Indriyaani jaraavamsha kurvanthi| 279
“(Over) Indulgence in sensory pleasures expedites the onset of the old age.”[10,162]
Naasthyahamkara samah shatruh | 287
“Arrogance is one’s greatest enemy.” [10,162]
e. Samaaja Dharma
Some Dharmas explain themselves. Or, more appropriately, are best explained with simple explanations, many of which already exist.
One such explanation was provided by Shri Swaminathan Gurumurthy who quoted the Mahabharata as follows.
“Tyajet ekam Kulasyarthe, Gramasyarthe Kulam tyajet; Gramam Janapadasyarthe, Atmarthe prithivim tyajet”. It means that [rights of] individuals are to be sacrificed for the family; [rights of] families are to be sacrificed for a village; [rights of] villages are to be sacrificed for the country; and when it comes to realising God, the entire everything can be sacrificed.”
The meaning is that the individual owes duties to families, families to village [neighbourhood] village to the country. So the relation between the individual to the nation is interlinked and integrated by a sense of duty to one another. The traditional society is relation-oriented which binds everyone to duties to families, near and dear, community and society, even to nature and animals. This sense of duty is comprehended in the concept of Dharma.
But being a community leader is more than just being a dictatorial member of your jati sangham, or holding an important sounding title on your city council or wearing gleaming uniforms as an officer, it is about standing up for more than just your own rights or your family’s rights or even your own sacred vow. As written in our article on selfishness, the greatest adharma is facilitated not through conscious choice to join with adharma, but through failure or refusal to prioritise correctly…even when obvious and informed so. Should a vow to serve your king bind you to stand silently through this?
Do not bother calling yourself a community elder, or a leader or a “pitamaha” if you failed to do your duty here. Do not pretend as though such things do not go on today…in fact, they are infinitely worse. Draupadi was saved by Sri Krishna. Who stood up to save this common woman? Certain dharmas may be rooted in varna, but no dharma permits such treatment to any woman of any varna, whether brahmin or dalit. If you engage in such behaviour today, no matter what your caste or creed, prepare to face the sword.
Streeya Maryada Uttama. Learn from a King who understood this….
f. Rashtra/Desa Dharma
Interestingly enough, Rashtra and Desa dharma are connected. In previous eras, what we called rashtra was in fact referred to as Desa (i.e. Kosala mahajanapada, Vanga desa, Andhra desa) and modern desh referred to as Bharatavarsha or Bharatakhanda. This is because modern India (like the Maurya Empire and the Gupta Empire, and to a lesser extent the Maratha Confederacy) is a civilizational state or polity. Federalism being ingrained in Indian political philosophy, the system of saamantas (i.e. subordinate kings) under the Guptas was similar to having a Rajpramukh or governor under the Mauryas. Therefore, rashtra dharma cannot be in isolation from desa dharma.
It is good to do your dharma, it is good to advocate for your state’s interests, but this must be done in understanding the greater good of the nation or civilization.
g. Bhoomi Dharma
While patriotism remains of utmost importance in the present time, rashtra or desa dharma cannot be done in ignorance of or in dereliction to bhoomi dharma. There is a dharma of the earth, that all living beings must bear in mind.
Greed and Selfishness have destroyed man’s character and are now destroying the environment and the very land on which he lives, water he drinks, and air he breathes. Pseudo-philosophies, and piratical economic theories have been disseminated so widely and so insidiously, that they have been accepted as blind truths. But all truths can and must be examined and either validated or discarded in order to determine if they are actually Truth.
Modernity and modern warfare requires the technological infrastructure to defend one’s Desa. In order to do so, however, the desa itself must not be destroyed. Arthasastra and Vidura Niti should be studied to understand the timeless principles of economic prosperity and environmental harmony. These can then inspire modern variations and adaptations to eternal economic realities.
The ultimate motivation for Dharma is not profit, but Lok Kalyan. This necessitates Nishkama Karma, selfless duty and work. The greatest good for the greatest number should be considered.Note: it is the good (shreyas), not pleasant (preyas). The good of society, civilization, and the world should be man’s ultimate pursuit. To do so, he must ultimately put aside immediate individual profit, and look at Lok Kalyan. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad posits daya (compassion), dama (self-restraint), and dana (charity) as pillars to civilised life.[8, 289] Man must learn to show respect and courtesy to all form of life and all classes of society as Bhagvan Ram showed Shabari. The fruit of karma may not be ultimately reaped by you, but will benefit all in the process.
Karmanye vadikaraste| ma phalesu kadachana
Ma karmaphala hetur bhu|ma te sangostvakarmani 
You have the right to work only
but never to its fruits.
Let not the fruits of action be your motive.
Nor let your attachment be to inaction.
This is the highest dharma, that is pursued when all others are understood.
All this is ultimately why we pray for Lok Kalyan as the ultimate Nara Dharma, after all others have been attained.
Loka Samasta Sukhino Bhavantu
V.Teaching Nara Dharma
Instruction in Nara Dharma may no longer be able to proceed along traditional lines universally. Nevertheless, it remains the best. This is because when children and young men are taught by fathers, male relatives, and Acharyas through both instruction and example, they absorb the best.
Nevertheless, it is imperative that rather than merely having them rote-memorise injunction and mechanically conduct ritual, both should be explained to children (in tandem with their regular primary, secondary, and collegiate studies). By having them understand meaning and importance and relevance, they are more likely to not only appreciate but preserve and pass on their Dharmic heritage. In the present time, Nithya and Naimittika karma should be performed when possible. They may not always be. Ritual is important, but safety of one’s family and society takes precedence. Students should therefore be taught to prioritise correctly based on time and place. Basic weekly education in self-defence, and or, training in sastra and suhstra is advisable today for all classes and varnas.
Accordingly, at a time when hypocrisy is rampant, teaching by example is the best method, as children are keen observers. Fathers and elder brothers must themselves properly study and implement Nara Dharma to properly teach. While kulachara may determine the pursuit of Adhyapana by a student and traditional rites and studies associated with it, all should pass on the basics of pranayama, puja, nithya and naimittika karma, and study of itihasa-purana. In the present time, viewing of Pandit-advised serials such as the Ramanand Sagar Ramayan and B.R.Chopra Mahabharata are excellent supplements to individual study of Purana, Itihasa, Veda, Vedanga, and Sastra. Above all, it is best to pass on Buddhi (wisdom) which encourages Viveka (distinguishment) between right and wrong, which is facilitated by Niti (lessons). This arms the individual to be self sufficient and encourages him to pursue self-driven study and self study (svadhyaya), which is best of all.
Thus spake Nripathi on Nara Dharma.
Team, unit, discipline, chain-of-command, unity-of-purpose, strategic action, all these things are crucial for the victory of any family, any community, any state, and any civilization. All these are things Bharatiya men currently lack. Inflated with pseudo-intellectual arrogance, rotted by idiotic films, or addicted to the playboy lifestyle, they have become spoiled mummy’s boys.
This Sutra on a Modern Nara Dharma was composed to educate them on what they need to inculcate. But at present time, the slightest challenge to their ill-deserved egos results in a combustion of buffoonery (unless there are tangible consequences), making them easily manipulable. A real man is not the one with the most notches on his bedpost. A real man is one who has the self-respect to stand up for himself, the strength to defend himself, the forbearance to provide for and maintain his family, the maryada to be a pillar of his communty, and the courage to do his Dharma.
In the Andhra bhasha, there is a saametha (saying): Bharinchey vaardu Bhartha. It is the man who can bear all burdens who is the Husband. That is true manliness. Do you have it?
Kane. P.V. History of Dharmasastra. Vol.1. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research.1930. https://archive.org/stream/HistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLawV.1/Kane_A-History-of-Dharmasastra-v1_1930#page/n0/mode/2up
Kane. P.V. History of Dharmasastra. Vol.2.P.1. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. 1941. https://archive.org/stream/HistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLawV.1/Kane_A-History-of-Dharmasastra-v1_1930#page/n0/mode/2up
Bhagavad Gita. C6.S2, C2, S47
Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli. The Principal Upanisads. London: Unwin Brothers.1968