Indian politics remains one of those intriguing contradictions. Young nation-Old Civilization, Land of Dharma-Many Sampradayas, and with the commencement of Navaratri, it is key to note that it is also a nation of both Kaali and Sita. Yet no dichotomy remains more pertinent than Politically Independent-Mentally Colonised. Part of this is due to the nature of macro-politics, but much of it is due to the simplistic and even childish approach many Indians take to what is a strategic and highly sophisticated game.
Politics is not so simple as “Kalki Avatar!”. For starters, many of the self-proclaimed traditionalists themselves don’t realise that Kalki Bhagavan isn’t scheduled to arrive for another 427,000 years. What will you do until then? Many of the same ‘traditionalists’ are anointing Hindu beef-eating promoters as ‘pure satvic‘, so perhaps the time has come for people to look within.
Perhaps the problems are so great that not a single government—elected or otherwise—is capable of actually ensuring Dharma samsthapana. How is this possible you ask? Look no further than the world’s oldest democracy, and understand the debate that is going on there.
To properly understand the nature of sub-national, pan-national, and international politics, one must understand the nature of macro-politics. If you still believe this is a clash of civilizations rather than a clash for civilization, you are still clueless. If you still believe that prime actors are national actors rather than transnational actors, you are still clueless. If you still believe that only your caste, and no other caste will restore Dharma, than you are dumber than a post . Rather than doing 24/7 tom-tom (or supporting those who do), shouldn’t you being doing or promoting useful things?
The British were famous for the sociopathic pleasure that took in insulting people to their faces…and Indians, for their unique talent in being oblivious to that. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
If Bharatiyas, and other nations of humanity, are in the doldrums today, it is their own rejection of Virtue all while wearing their religiosity or anti-religiosity on their sleeves.
Problems specific to Indians in general and Hindus in particular have already been diagnosed here and here. But the main problem is an international one. It is one that plagues humanity as a species. Rather than not getting enough pleasure, it is getting too much of it.
Head-up-your-ass-itis may be a universal condition, but its Indian strain is particularly virulent. Exhibit A: Moron hindus RT’ing non-Hindus referring to “moron hindus”, albeit, by quotation.
Supporting people who proffer apologia for the well-known and well-documented British role in the Partition of India only shows how the so-called “RW” is as colonised as the “LW”. Ceding space to outsiders to a degree where they actually call you morons to your face while arrogating the position to lecture you on how to “decolonise” only shows RW Hindus are no less moronic than their “left” or “Hindu Left” counterparts. Getting respect starts with self-respect.
Far be it from me to support anything he writes, but it is the height of stupidity for RW’ers to knee-jerk respond by publishing the self-same british partition apologist’s mockery of not only Pattanaik’s thesis, but any Hindu calling into question the role of Foreign Saviours—a well-documented phenomenon even in the West. This left-wing bigot’s caste caricature should be condemned, but isn’t his general point about “Right-wingers” here correct?
Having to discuss nationality is unseemly & unfortunate when one is faced with not a clash of civilizations but in fact a clash for civilization; nevertheless, it is necessary. One cannot ignore the historic, well-documented and well-known role of De Nobili and other such foreign saviours used by foreign “universal” institutions to co-opt and ultimately replace first native “spiritual leadership”
Perhaps that is the greatest oddity:The worst casteists are often the biggest foreign slaves. That is the true danger of Aryan Invasion Theory. It pits Indian against Indian, while giving justification for wannabe Indian elites to become mental, spiritual, and ultimately political slaves of supposedly more “genetically pure” Aryan foreigners…Just as FC Casteist needs BC Casteist, Right Wing needs Left Wing. All this is Liberalism anyway (Classical Liberalism (RW) vs Progressive Liberalism (LW). All this is why the casteist Right Wing is as colonised as the casteist Left Wing, and why a true Dharma Paksa—a Bharatiya Dharma Paksa—is what is required.
It is fine to question our Acharyas—particularly in this questionable era—but even this must be done with respect and Maryada…or at the very least Sabhyata.
True, “holy men” aren’t above the law (let alone Dharma), but the standards of law vis-à-vis men of the cloth must be equally applied. Are they? More than that, society should not be so quick to judge those who are ministering to others—and rebuilding Rta in their own way. That is also why—contrary to ambitious casteists of all kinds—there is a distinction between religio-spiritual leadership and politico-strategic leadership. Each has its role to play and its own variety of intellectualism to embody. Let the real Bharatiya Acharyas do what they must to spread the Dharma, and let those creating risible mythologies of “greatest political genius” leave politics to the competent professionals. But that is precisely the problem—a surplus of Ego that focuses on ambitionsand (alleged) rights rather than necessities and duties.
Bharatiyas are infected by a pestilence of petulance so puerile that even a 1% disagreement with their own side results in a rhetorical (or actual) fight-to-the-death. The self-same hypocritical do-nothings whine about westerners misinterpreting our texts but don’t call out “native” Indians misinterpreting them to further Aryan Invasion Theory. The self-same hypocritical do nothings will whine about Bose’s promotion of urdu but then then double back and furnish apologia for M.F.Hussain’s bigoted and perverted paintings of Hindu goddesses. The very same M.F.Hussain’s who sins against Hindus go beyond overrated art (his initials are certainly apt). Funny how those who whine most about “cuckoldry” end up supporting those who further such an agenda. This is why your friends cannot be anointed to run your own homes. The great Kashmiri satirical writer Kshemendra wrote of such unwelcome guests who abuse and overstay their own welcome—despite coming in the guise of ‘acharyas’. That is why in the Kali Yuga, Atithi Devo Bhava does not apply. Observation of Atithi Dharma (by both sides) does.
There was a well-known criticism of Nehru that applies to self-appelled RW’ers and “trads” today: the type of intellectual pinhead who didn’t know which way was up. If you don’t know your interests, if you don’t’ know friend from foe—or at least have the sense to put someone in the “can’t be too sure/not one of us” category—then what business do you have giving advice to all and sundry?
Acharyas of old were of the mold of Acharya Vishnusarman. They had not only the command of spiritual texts, but had the practical sense to detect and distinguish the native from the foreign, friend from foe, the Daivik from the Asuric.
Rather than falling for threads and textual recitation, they had the good sense to understand capability and intentions—that is true realism. Rather than supporting Philip Goldberg & Sheldon Pollock over Rajiv Malhotra, they would have the good sense & virtue to prioritise Dharma over Rna.
Politics ain’t beanbag, and macro-politics ain’t for amateurs, intellectual or otherwise. The first qualification for this is the ability to shut up.
And this is single-biggest thing “moron hindus” lack understanding of today: the value of ‘shut up’.
Videshis aren’t here to save you because videshis aren’t interested in saving you. That is why they are always saving each other’s asseseven while on opposite sides of the same Indian dispute. Does this mean all of them are malevolent?—No. But it does mean a guest is just a guest—and not a family member. It does mean you can’t afford the risk of replacing your leadership, your primary advisors, with them. Kaakollukiyamwas written by Acharya Visnusarman—yet you recite his Panchatantra with out actually applying its lessons.
One set of morons exult in their own self-loathing embrace of English (in the name of ‘egalitarianism!’) and another set make matters worse by insulting the locals whose state in which they are living.
This childish need for external validation/inclusion is emblematic of esteem issues. This type of falling over each other to defend all things foreign, including foreigners poking their nose in your own politics, is part of the problem. Foreign friends have their politics and we have ours. It is fine to exchange notes in the clash for civilization. It is good to appreciate friends, and India does have many foreign friends of all shades who genuinely appreciate India and support its culture. But your friends cannot run your own house. They have their own house (which they must set in order) and you have yours. Many people choose to marry within their own castes—fine. But if you consider inter-caste marriage to be the same as inter-religious or inter-national marriage, no wonder many of you think you have more in common with other nations. Each nation has its own house.
Let foreigners practicing Dharma revive it in their own nations rather than ministering to India. If the above movie clip is emblematic of the real views in avowedly equality-oriented immigrant societies, what of non-immigrant societies like India? India and Europe are not immigrant societies, but old societies with their own long-established cultures or peoples. For all the talk of universalism, funny how the foreign commentators chased by LW and RW Indian publications are always North of the Equator…but never South. Leave aside African Acharyas, would an African Sonia Gandhi have been as successful among Indiots? Wouldn’t that be true internationalism and true racial non-discrimination?
Comparing notes is one thing, “outsourcing” leadership is quite another. Will this spark off xenophobia?—No, it’s just a healthy skepticism and self-respect that is required if all nations are to preserve their uniqueness. Rather than raising racial rhetoric, it will draw more attention to institutions making slaves of all races. In the guise of “freedom”, human beings are unwittingly being subjected to a hierarchy of slavery. Contrary to casteists, varnashrama dharma is not a hierarchy of slaves, but a framework for duties. No caste or class can be “respected without exception”—hypocrites and criminals of all castes and classes will be punished. If the most “classless” of communist societies simply ended up creating 3 new classes, then what is fundamentally the problem is classist and casteist attitude. So long as your approach is “kick the one who licks and lick the one who kicks”, hierarchy of slavery is all you’ll be re-establishing. So which are the institutions subjecting mankind of all colours to slavery? As Voltaire wrote, find out whom you cannot criticise, and that is who rules you…directly, or indirectly.
And that is what makes the ahankari-shikandi outrage over the Pradhan Mantri to so laughable. For all the claims of “political genius” they are utterly clueless of the macro-politics Modi faces. Many of his government’s policies are wrong: aadhar, gst, non-repeal of RTE, and yes, even demonitisation. But are many/most of these unique to him?—or part of the chillar-mukht policies proliferating around the world. Rather than threatening to vote for congress, perhaps clueless casteists should dismantle their own (substantial) ignorance and start asking…
This is why it is time for Bharatiyas to set aside nationalism and start promoting patriotism. Desa Dharma isn’t the same as Nationalism. Nationalism is “help my country, right or wrong”. Patriotism is “help my country distinguish right from wrong”. Nationalism is about superiority complexes; Patriotism is about loyalty to one’s native land. That is why the true patriot respects patriotism in others. It’s why a Scipio Africanus could meet Hannibal on the eve of Zama. Often times opposing generals, warriors, and even diplomats express admiration for the other side, and wonder how they might be have been friends were they on the same side.
There are many reasons to be upset at the Centre. But what are the international politics? What are the macro-politics? If the Centre is doing what it can do to buy you time—what are you doing with that time? Are you continuing to cavort in caste-cliques spreading asinine propaganda, or are you working together or with others to do your part for Dharma?
Daily news cycles and social media free-for-alls only accomplish so much. They are simple reactions to the greater strategic action of those subjecting you to slavery. Rather than asking “why not me?” when looking at others doing something you wish to do, ask “why me?”—to see if you are even qualified. What’s worse, is if you spend day in day out RT’ing videshis poking their noses into our own politics—what self-respect have you?
Subsequent to our preceding article on why the “Hindu Left” is an Oxymoron by Morons, it consequently became apparent that a methodical deconstruction of the origin & nature of this proposed political alignment would be required. This incipient movement by the insipid is neither something entirely new nor something entirely native.
To understand precisely why this re-igniting of the Left-Right dichotomy in the Hindu/Indic body politic is so dangerous, we will have to study the history of Socialism and Communism, which colour the connotation of “Left”, whether those ideologies are publicly professed or not.
A Case against the “Hindu Left”
The Case against the “Hindu Left”, an inchoate social media movement numbering in single digits, necessarily begins by studying the history behind not only it, but also the political ideologies that are intended to be revived by it. The funny thing about many socialist/communist revolutions is that they don’t always state upfront that their “Revolution” is meant to bring about Communism. After all, totalitarian forms of politics centrally and oppressively controlling every aspect of the citizenry isn’t exactly appealing. Vague calls for “Revolution” by label-less “Revolutionaries”, on the other hand, catch the interest of the disenchanted and disaffected. If things aren’t working, much simpler to just tear it all down.
Therefore, to properly understand exactly what the implications of a putative “Hindu Left” are, one must first study the history of this nebulous concept of “Leftism”.
A Brief History of “Leftism”
As with many phrases, labels, and typologies, concepts are not only purposefully opaque, but origins are often obscure and inapplicable to other contexts. As discussed by many intellectuals, the term Leftism originates in circa Reign of Terror Revolutionary France. It came to embody not only peasant interest or democracy & socialism, but also anti-clericalism. Hence our point in our previous article about how the inchoate Hindu Left’s demonisation of Hindu “mercantiles” will invariably be followed by demonisation of Hindu clericals. The bloody reign of terror in Revolutionary France also shows memetics affiliated with words such as “Revolution” and “Social Justice” and “Classless society”. The radical republicanism of France was soon followed by the even more virulent concept of socialism.
Often couched in literal utopian terms such as “utopian-socialism”, the origins and definitions of socialism are somewhat nebulous—likely by design. Though socialism, and some assert even communism, predates Marx, he and his associate/sponsor/sugar daddy Friedrich Engels would give these concepts a life and memeplex of their own. With the publication of the Communist Manifesto in 1848, the ground was paved for history’s bloodiest political movement. The pen truly is mightier than the sword.
A memorial to the victims of communism in Prague. There really should be a lot more of these all over Europe. pic.twitter.com/o6JwbauT4D
“In the later 1830s and 1840s the German-born Marx was as obsessed with the leg-acy of 1789 as any French intellectual, and he even planned to write the revolution’s history.” [2, 17] Thus Marx was plainly inspired by the French Revolution, showing the bloody inheritance of not only Marxian Communism, but even Napoleonic liberalism. The Reign of Terror (and the later Red Terror of Bolshevik Russia) are the norm, not the exception.
Though the more famous (and more successful) October Revolution of Russia is well-known today, there were two other months where “Revolutionaries” attempted to overturn the established order. First there were the Decembrists (of December Revolution fame in 1825). These pre-Marx “Revolutionaries” were in fact inspired by the “classical liberalism” of Post-Revolution Napoleonic France. This shows not only the etiology of socialism, but also the nature of even “classical liberalism” in overturning order and setting society aflame. It may be difficult to digest in the present time, even up until a few years ago, but it is worth considering. Along with this was the February Revolution of 1917 that resulted in Tsar Nicholas’ abdication, which immediately preceded the October Revolution in the same year. This is important because one sees the perpetual demands that are a part of perpetual revolution. As one will see later on with Critical Theory, it’s not about achieving objectives or even solving society’s problems, but applying a method. It’s the method that unites disparate objectives and motivations to form an overarching Revolution.
Ironically, Russia was considered the least likely candidate for successful Revolution by Marxists as it was not a fully developed capitalist/bourgeois society. Long considered semi-feudal, due to the only recent abolition of serfdom, Russia (which became the USSR under Lenin) was ill-positioned to implement Marx’s theory. Nevertheless, primarily due to the 5 year plans of Stalin, a massive and inhuman industrialisation drive took place. Though considered partially successful, the human toll was terrible. Above all, certain difficult facts also were suppressed.
Food productivity (meaning the ability to generate greater amounts of food) was actually higher on smaller privately-owned plots of land than on large collectivised farms. Industrialisation partially succeeded, but Soviets were barely able to feed themselves. For all the talk, Marxist theory did not deliver—but the person who discovered this in totalitarian socialist (sorry, I mean communist) Russia, was summarily shot. Incidentally, he had been arguing that the small farmer was not a “capitalist”. As we can see from our own “Hindu Left”, it’s a slippery slope with mercantiles, with mathas and small farms also being labeled so—as political expedience demands.
The spread of Communism into China (with its Maoism and Cultural Revolution), and Post-World War II, into Eastern Europe is well known. Various movements to assert even independence from Russian domination, such as in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, were summarily crushed. Moderate Socialists were displaced in Afghanistan, eventually setting the stage for the rise of the even more abominable Taliban (also showing how the “Left” and “Right” feed off each other, first eliminating true alternatives (such as the Afghan Monarchy) before falling upon each other).
Perhaps Cuba offers the most interesting case. As is typically the case with communists, they usually don’t begin by pursuing true Communism. It’s usually something more innocuous. But eventually, due to the requirements of expedience and pressures from big brother Mother Russia, Cuba went communist. That is the danger of any “Left Movement”. It starts off as one thing, but whether in France, Russia, China, or even Cuba, it eventually ends up another.
India, of course, is no stranger to ‘Leftism’. The very mention of the word conjures up images of not only the anti-national CPI (M) of “China’s Chairman is our Chairman” fame, but also the brutal Naxalites, originating from Bengal’s Naxalbari. Corporate interests have a pre-Independence History in India (the British East India Company, after all, was a Multi-national Corporation). Therefore, it is possible to oppose corporate/imperialist exploitation without allying with Leftist/Naxal movements. That’s the true meaning of Swadeshi (desa Dharma, which opposes not only corporatism and mercantilism, but also foreign imperialism).
Regardless, while links can and are made to the Ghadar “Revolutionary” movement and even great Independence fighters & veer-balidanis such as Bhagat Singh, it is Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose who has come to represent the Left’s greatest impact on India. Rather than an extensive bio, here are key insights into Neta ji’s vision for India, often in his own words.
It’s quite apparent, Netaji was not content merely with liberating India through his “Revolution”, but had every intention to use his powers under Socialist Authoritarianism to “mould farmers and workers according to socialism“. In short, rather than simply attaining independence and restoring a traditional Indic polity with some changes, his purpose was to change the very nature of Indic society itself. The desire to implement such ideas is seen in his own proposed solution.
Many would then argue that Nehru (hardly a profile in Dharmic leadership) also desired to establish “dams as the temples of modern India” and aimed to establish secularism in a religious country. True, but whatever asinine policies Nehru pushed through, they were done so in a parliamentary manner with some attempt at consensus. Opposition had at least some hope of legal or constitutional recourse. Nehru himself also was an advocate of democracy and individualism. Even if we think of them as both extensions of western liberalism, an elected socialist democrat is certainly less oppressive than a socialist authoritarian dictator.
Rather than turn to Dharma as his guiding political philosophy, it appears Neta ji had other philosophies in mind.
Would Subhas Chandra Bose have been a Lenin or a Stalin? Or perhaps a ‘kindly’ Benito Mussolini? Those who fancy dictators and dictatorships should consider the body count they also come with.
Ideologies of “Leftism”
As discussed in the previous section, the etiology of “Leftism” is itself rooted in the reactionary. That is, it is premised more about reacting against an existing order, be it feudalism or industrialised capitalism. That is why it targets specific classes to generate a class-war. Ironically, many “socialists” expressly chase after utopian ideals, because utopia actually means “nowhere”. Because such a workers’ paradise is possible nowhere, perpetual revolution becomes the only way forward. Hence the war against “mercantiles”, then “clericals”, then “aristocrats”.
Aristocracy does mean “rule of the best”—the problem is, it’s become associated with degenerate idiots from Bollywood. But the question of the best is premised not on the basis of nepotism, genetics or assorted luxury perversions the film industry is known for, but historically, premised on virtue (Dharma).
It was the most virtuous who had the right to rule. It was why whatever the legalities of the succession crisis of Hastinapura, the matter should have been settled the moment the question of “who is the most virtuous” came up. This need not be read as justification for monarchy, but rather an explanation of what aristocracy meant and means in the first place. Even American Revolutionary Thomas Jefferson spoke of a “natural aristocracy”. This is because the American concept of Revolution was something quite different than the one envisioned by Marx—and also communism proper hadn’t been invented and popularised yet.
De Tocqueville asserted that Lawyers were the natural aristocrats in the United States. The legal profession is one not premised on birth, but on qualification (specifically passage of the bar exam, and ideally, earning a Law Degree). One possibility for a Dharmic Polity would reorganise varnashrama dharma along qualification lines rather than pure birth lines—with individual merit being premised on the virtue (rather than coaching centre/genetic network based “merit”)—and banning birth-based “untouchability”, which discriminates against whole communities of Hindus. Whether one agrees or not, it is at least some viable solution that preserves both freedom and dignity.
That is the Danger of the Hindu Left and the case against the Hindu Left. “The desire to turn unique human beings into identical socialist bricks explains why socialist regimes are often totalitarian [or authoritarian in Subhas Chandra Bose’s case]—because it is the only way they can make a serious attempt to achieve their aims. The socialist obsession with equality has always been at war with the division of labor and knowledge that comes naturally” [1, 32]
If varnashrama dharma (misnomer: caste) is a key part of Vedic Dharma, then the Hindu Left will forever be at war with “the division of labor”.Perpetual Revolution is built into the Hindu Left concept.
“Karl Marx, the most famous of socialism’s found-ing fathers, harshly condemned the division of labor and the inequality it produced, and sought to elimi-nate it precisely in order to destroy existing societies so that they could be replaced by presumed Commu-nist utopias. Marx and Marxian socialists sought (and seek) to use the coercive powers of government to stamp out all human differences, differences that Marx himself called a “contradiction” of the socialist ideal.” [1, 37]
The fundamental problem with socialism that in its obsession with Inequity it promotes Iniquity.
“Socialism can lead to the ‘end of truth,’ as Hayek called it, because socialists believe in indoctrinating people into ‘The Truth’. This is why socialists regimes have made us familiar with ‘reeducation camps’ and rigid, totalitarian ideological conformity. Socialists believe that there are no legitimate, alternative view-points.Socialists’ propaganda must dominate the educational system and the mass media so that, in Hayek’s words, ‘a pseudoscientific theory becomes part of the official creed’ which ‘directs everybody’s actions.” [1, 58]
Finally, India is a Truth-based society. It’s national motto is, not for nothing, Satyameva Jayate. It is the land of Satya Harishchandra who would not tell a lie, and Lord Rama, who ensured his father’s promise did not become a lie. Even when Krishna made Yudhisthira tell one small lie, the purpose was to protect the greater Truth. And even here, Yudhisthira accepted the sin associated with telling even a ‘white lie”. Red lies, on the other hand, are an whole other story.
“’Truth’in a socialist society is not something to be debated; it is mandated and enforced by the Social-ist regime, from which there is no alternative and no appeal.Once socialist ideology takes over and respect for actual truth is destroyed, wrote Hayek, then all morals are assaulted because all morality is based on respect for the truth.” [1,58]
Now Hayek and his Austrian school are no Saints. His Free-market Capitalism theories have also come under the scanner, not only in the aftermath of the 2008 Financial Crisis, but even through the association with Chile’s Pinochet. Again we see how LW and RW feed off each other, but capitalism can be critiqued at another time. If communism through Marx provides the most accessible critique of capitalism, capitalism through Hayek does the same for communism. Hence Hayek.
Irrespective, the following should now be clear:
“Socialists, of all varieties, tolerate no opposition, allow no competing authorities, and are at continual war with individuals, families, private organizations, churches, businesses, and local and regional authori-ties that might oppose or interfere with their grand vision for reordering society. Socialists believe in total control. They want to control you.” [1, 76]
But if a “Hindu Left” can be packaged and posited by those who promote the achievements of the “Revolutionary Socialist Party”, perhaps a brief overview of the various forms of Socialism is in order.
The most fundamental characteristic of socialism is an obsessive commitment to the creation of an egalitarian society, based on solidarity and collectivism. There is a general drive to remake the world, usually in their own image, by controlling the means of production. The term itself is thought to date back to Revolutionary France, with the first type:
Utopian-Socialism: Where has it ever been applied successfully? “Nowhere?”. It is a theory of social transformation of society, solving various issues in the vaguest of terms with some nebulous notion of universal equality. Etienne Cabet, Henri Saint Simon, and Charles Fourier were all utopian-socialists focused on revolutionising society. Saint-Simon agitated against idlers (such as the nobility, and surprise… the clergy). He was a French aristocrat himself. Self-loathing socialist hypocrisy did not start with Engels.
Anarchism: This particular form should send shivers down the spine of any WWI buff. It was an anarchist who assassinated Franz Ferdinand setting off the ‘Great War’. Though it does cover a wide range of views, it is embodied by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Mikhail Bakunin. Interestingly, Proudhon was anti-feminist, anti-homosexual, and very puritanical, but was also anti-property—securing his socialist credentials, despite his hatred of government. Bakunin’s main disagreement with Marx and Engels was on centralisation and on whether the Russia was the most likely candidate for Revolution, because its peasantry was more oppressed than factory workers in the West.
Communism (International Socialism):“a political system in which men live cooperatively and hold property in common“. [2, xxii] It offers a critique of capitalism putatively to provide a replacement. Its major proponent, often termed originator, is Karl Marx. He provided a simplistic analysis of history based on a simplistic linear progression from slave society, to feudalism, to capitalism, to socialism, to communism. Marx himself insulted Hinduism, likely resulting in the deep-seated hatred Indian Marxists, Communists, and Leftists have for Hindu Dharma.
Maoism: A form of Communism based on the stipulations of Mao Tse-Tung. He developed a theoretical justification for the establishment of Communist power in non-industrial societies based on the backs of peasants and the petty bourgeoisie. Interestingly, Capitalists are known above all for turning small businessmen (petty bourgeoisie)into impoverished workers, creating a built-in base of alienation. Mao is also significant for his prioritisation of National over International Communism.
Fascism(National Socialism): Contrary to most people who view Fascism as the polar opposite of Socialism, it is in fact a form of socialism (a middle class socialism rather than a working class socialism). It is an internal dichotomy within socialism itself. In the communist form, workers take control directly and establish a dictatorship. In fascism, corporate interests capture the government and again ensure specific, sweeping policies are pushed through and concentrate resources in the hands of a few. Above all, like communism, it establishes a tyrannical centralised bureaucracy that eliminates power at the state and local levels.
“fascism is just another form of socialism” [1, 13]
Social Democracy: Most often characterised by Sweden and Swedish Social Democracy. In true Bastiat fashion, the regulative tyranny of the Bureaucrat replaces the tyranny of the Politburo.
…ostensibly what Indira Gandhi had in mind when she inserted “Secular” and “Socialist” into the Indian Constitution. Interestingly, she later suspended democracy to establish the “Socialist” Authoritarian Emergency in India.
No matter what the form, all you need to know is that 100 million people have died from Socialism. [1, 59]
Feminism: Though not a form of government (yet…), it seems to have taken on elements of perpetual revolution through its eventual pursuit of not only political equality but ostensibly biological equality. Interestingly, Friedrich Engels (sugar daddy of Karl Marx) could be considered the First modern Feminist due to his express desire to emancipate women through the destruction of private property. While the downsides and flipsides to Feminism are discussed here, the implications of Radfem should be jarring to all.
Critical Theory refers to the Frankfurt School of Marxism. It sought to effect cultural change through “social critique” and reexamination through the Marxist method. It is deeply rooted in Marxist notions of historical materialism. This arose out of Marx & Engels’ criticism of utopian-socialism’s inability to deal with the present based on use of the past.
Study of History is Important. But how it’s done, and how it’s even defined also matters. Those who mock the Indian approach to Itihaasa and life as “supernatural” deserve to be questioned on whether they are really Hindu at all. After all, all they seem to be doing is merely passing off the etic as the emic. Within the Marxian theory of history itself is a theory for change, and ultimately, the seeds for Revolution.
History to them is mere agit-prop.
This list is of course not exhaustive. But it is meant to show just how many-headed this Hydra truly is. It will also help readers understand the actual origin behind the “Hindu Left”, and why it is simply repackaging old (poisonous) wine in a new (saffron) bottle.
Origin of the “Hindu Left”
The origin of the “Hindu Left” is a curious case, much like that of Benjamin Button. It is an old concept that seems to be getting only younger with time.
Although many twitterati seem to be under the impression that the term originated with 3 “incorruptibly incorruptible chankian” uber-patriots of bose-ian Hindu dispensation, the overt call for a Hindu Left starts with a publicly “out”, formerly Christian, currently cultural marxist lesbian who inserts Freudian interpretations into Hindu texts. While alternative lifestyles shouldn’t be an issue in discussing the origin of such ideas, there has been a noted pattern of individuals with such an orientation seeking to change the traditional interpretation of Hindu texts(often with videshi or evangelical sponsorship).
Ruth Vanita is a well-known author of books on queer studies, specifically in the Indian context. Interestingly enough, it is she who appears to have been the origin of this (polish the gold trumpets…) clarion call for a “Hindu Left”. On what basis, this is not clear. Though Dharma does not persecute people of alternative lifestyles it does not promote such lifestyles either. So if not Dharma, what could such an ostensibly “Hindu” Left entail? Here is an illuminating section from her Post:
“No one seems surprised that Hinduism is perhaps the only religion in the world today that is supposed to have a Right but not a Left. In Europe, the US, Canada, and in South American countries, there is a secular Right and Left, and also a Christian Right and Left. While the Catholic orthodoxy opposes abortion and homosexuality, there are many vociferous Catholic groups that support both. There is an organization of gay Catholics called Dignity. Almost every major Protestant sect has a left wing and a right wing. The tradition of organized Christian feminism dates back to the nineteenth century and many earlier Christian writers are clearly proto-feminist. Today, the secular, that is, atheist or agnostic, left routinely works and organizes in cooperation with the religious left.1 Both constitute a visible presence in left-wing demonstrations. Gay Pride parades, for instance, always have substantial contingents of gay Christians and Jews. Similarly, in most Islamic countries, there is a Muslim Right and a Muslim Left. In India, however, there is almost no Hindu organized Left.2 What does this mean and why is it so? Does it mean that there are no leftists who are practising Hindus? Not at all. It is well known that even in their most militant days, Calcutta’s communists migrated en masse to Durga Puja celebrations, and I personally know Marxist academics at Delhi University who are pious Hindus at home, regularly fasting and performing puja. But at the level of public theorizing and organizing, this aspect of their lives remains invisible and unspeakable. The number of Indian thinkers today who try to integrate religious and leftist thinking can be counted on the fingers of one hand – Ashis Nandy and Ramchandra Gandhi are among the very few who make this attempt with Hinduism.”
Ah, yes, Ashis Nandy, famed worthy of Leftism parodied here, is making an attempt at concocting a “Hindu Left”. Interestingly enough, the unofficial bio of Mr. Nandy shows his affiliation with the Bengali Christian community, despite being a “non-believer”. So these are the eminence grises, the delicate geniuses behind the “brilliant” idea of “Hindu Leftism—an oxymoron apparently originated by morons who aren’t even originally Hindu.
Naysayers may argue that there are many “sincere conversions into Hinduism”, and that may be true, but for both to come from an avowedly Abrahamic background and then seek to influence the Hindu body politic does strike one as more than a bit convenient. This is the case all-the-more so when one realises its aim at merely replicating the Abrahamic experience of Left vs Right, in India. Irrespective, one thing is clear, despite the Hindu label, based on this excerpt, the Hindu Left is meant to be non-Dharmic in orientation. Indeed, this is apparent in one of the concluding lines of her message:
If more liberal and leftist Hindus begin to acknowledge their Hindu identity and speak in defense of Hindu heritage, this can only strengthen, not weaken, the secular left.
Is this the real definition of “Hindu Left”. Will they bring the “true socialism” that the USSR and PRC failed to provide?
So the Hindu Left is merely a roundabout means to “strengthen, not weaken, the secular left.”How lovely. After all the hard work of cultural Hinduism exerting itself in the last 30 years, a plan b for the secular left to impose its politics on India has emerged in the form of, drumroll please, the ‘Hindu Left’.
Code words and Catchphrases include such common bon mots such as revolutionary, solidarity, worker vs bourgeoisie, peasant vs mercantile, solidarity, etc.
While the modus operandi of this triumvirate was discussed in our previous article, the first triumvir seemed to have picked up the baton (or proverbial hammer and sickle) from Ruth Vanita just after the LiveMint article was published. Her ‘nationalist credentials’ were established with her “timely” support for Narendra Modi to speak at UPenn. She soon allied with like-minds, including the previously mentioned slippery eel, and one ironically Kalhana-quoting dushtamatya. Opportunism, after all, needs no ideology, only a means to (academic) self-promotion. From there, she would then have the foundation from which to lead an effort to revive Leftism under a rebranded Hindu Left.
All these personalities and the movements or parties they were a part of speak of revolutionaries, socialism, and humanism—even if they don’t expressly support communism. The Bengali Rosa Luxemburg (the original one was a ‘revolutionary’ Marxist who led an abortive ‘revolutionary uprising’ centered around the German Communist Party), seems to pretend that Revolutionary is some innocuous, ideology free term.
Colour Revolutions are, of course, not a new concept. There was a “Cedar Revolution” in Lebanon, an “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine, and even a “Saffron Revolution” in Myanmar. What makes them concerning is not necessarily the degree of violence associated with them or the ideology, but rather, the questions of extra-national financing. That is the reason why any call for “Revolution” or “Revolutionaries” must be carefully examined. This is because any overturning of the existing political order (krama) benefits external actors (paradesis). Matsya Nyaya naturally breeds Marxists. Dharma, on the other hand, is about upholding order (Rta), which is the expression of Truth (Satya).
But for historical materialists such as this maven, anything dharmic or spiritual is invariably supernatural. Even fellow Bengali, Sri Aurobindo, does not escape critique from our resident Bengali Chauvinist.
Make no mistake, the Hindu Left is not some haphazard movement that came together by coincidental and happy circumstance. It is a concerted push to derail the return of cultural Hindus to political Dharma proper.
Cultural Marxism is a pestilence because it deconstructs (aka tears down) the status quo without offering a viable alternative. Sound familiar?It doesn’t take responsibility for providing solutions that can actually work, or for building a “pro-Hindu” party beyond the BJP—no, that would mean actual accountability. It’s why the brilliant idea to themselves work to build a transparent platform and new nationalist party never occurs to these delicate geniuses. Delicate genius can’t be bothered to see if its theories actually work in real life. Hence the need for simplistic agitprop, implicit support for Socialist Revolution, and explicit calls for a nebulous Hindu Left (meant to actually strengthen the Secular Left).
Nationalism is nothing new for socialism.As the Chinese and Vietnamese have shown, nationalism is nothing new for communism either. Socialists have in fact called for combining it with other traditions (such as the Hindu tradition) to make it and Marx relevant again.
Identity politics is nothing new to Marxism, Socialism, or Communism—Revolutionary or otherwise. Engels (the other half of the Marx-Engels Communist Manifesto) himself argued for the ‘emancipation of women’ through the elimination of private property (the Sex and the City lifestyle is apparently much more accessible if Carrie Bradshaw’s Manohlo Blahniks belong to all women…). Though the American Civil Rights movement featured many who drew upon the philosophy of Jefferson and Madison rather than Marx, a number of Marxist/Communist radicals would coopt or even spearhead anti-racist movements (sadly, the term racism itself owes its origin to the despicable Trotsky, who spoke the language of racial equality but had no respect for the sanctity of human life, unborn or adult).
"For us, we were never concerned with the Kantian-priestly…prattle about the 'sacredness of human life." Leon Trotsky pic.twitter.com/UCSU9BnArV
And the close association of Cultural Marxism with the RadFem and LGBT movements needs no introduction. If all these movements could be co-opted (or even engineered), why can’t an Identity politics for Hindus? After all, all the requirements are there:
The reason is because to openly tout communism or even Socialist Authoritarianism would immediately alienate important and specific sections of the population. It is far easier to speak in vague terms about “revolutionaries” and “left” or even “hindu left” without providing an alternative to the common man. Thus, gradualism and communism are not strangers, but go hand in hand. Like certain religious extremists, they begin to assert that the problem was not too much socialism, but rather “not enough socialism or not real socialism”. The problem with socialism is that if you keep adding more and more socialism you eventually end up with communism. That is why socialist gradualists must be kept at arm’s length or even ostracised (along with their pinhead recommendations)—the end goal of these leftist movements is communism, plain and simple. They just can’t spell it out for you…yet.
Revolutionary martyrs such as Che in Cuba are invoked in a familiar template celebrating the “Revolutionary Spirit” and “Revolutionary Psyche”. Proponents will obviously draw comparisons with the American Revolution—but communism had not been created yet. The term Communist doesn’t even always appear in Party names.
The Communists Party in Russia formed around the “Social-Democratic Labour Party” (Bolshevik itself means ‘majority’), East German Communists relied on the Socialist Unity Party, Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge had the Kampuchean People’s Revolutionary Party, and Poland had the Polish United Worker’s Party
“Indian academic Ruth Vanita posed the same question in an essay in Seminar magazine (2002) , titled Whatever happened to the Hindu Left?”
“What all this means is that there is still a huge political vacuum – a need gap, in free market terms – for the Hindu Left. A political formation that combines a genuinely Hindu religiosity – marked by pluralism and a respect for minorities – with an economic agenda oriented towards employment-generation rather than creating “an ideal investment climate”, is bound to resonate with an electorate tired of having to choose between Tweedledum and Tweedledee at the national level.”
Most jarring is the history of appropriating unrelated Hindu Dharmic figures into the Hindu Left, starts from the very beginning.
“And the Hindu Left has a long and worthy tradition – going back to the Bhakti movement, with a continuous lineage all the way from the Nayanmars and Alwars to Kabir, Meera Bai, Surdas, Tulsidas, Namdev, Tukaram, Tyagaraja, and many others right till the arrival of Ramakrishna Paramahansa in the 19th century.”
Apparently Saints like Tulsidas and Thyagaraja are now Hindu Left “Revolutionaries” too!
Everyone can be a Revolutionary (ideological consistency need not be required!).Only a Hindu label and a leftist politburo or a socialist utopianism, and voila, a new party of political interests dedicated to the destruction of traditional culture!
Just as the “Hindu right” has been created to trot out Friedmanesque, Reagan-lite, objectivist drivel all in the name of “animal spirits” and the “miracle of capitalism”, so too is the other face of this Liberal Janus being debuted recreating the Left within the Hindu body politic
But since the days of Manu, same-gender relations have not been advocated. Whether or not they should or shouldn’t be criminalised in modern India is another matter, but pretending as though Dharma protected or even advocated same-gender relations is specious reasoning at its finest. Ruth Vanita, Saswati Sarkar and their “Hindu Left” embody everything that Dharma is not.
One need not speculate whether these 3 individuals of the Bose triumvirate lead such alternative lifestyles (hence their advocacy of “the Hindu Left”). Nevertheless, it is important that gullible Hindus easily falling for slogans, sloganeering, and slow-witted ideologies understand the ramifications of “Revolutionary” changes to society that would be brought by an ostensible “Revolutionary Socialist Party” or oxymoronic “Hindu Left”.
The Hindu Left is merely the agenda of liberalism in newly stitched garb. Old (poisoned) wine in a new (saffron) bottle. Once upon a time “classical Liberalism” appeared to stand for something. It has now become apparent that liberalism is nothing but libertinism—a tool for the destruction of society and social morays.
If India is to remain the Land of Dharma,it must reject not only the oxymoronic”Hindu Left” of Ruth Vanita and the Bose Brigade, but must reject Liberalism (which is nothing but progressive initiation into Libertinism). All of these foreign ‘philosophies’ ultimately, like secularism, have their root in Protestantism. Do tell us, ye revolutionaries, if the “Hindu Left” project fails, will you bring about “Hindu Protestantism” next? Inquiring minds wish to know.
Is it any wonder the leader of the Bose Brigade called for the prostitution of women (royal or otherwise). Despite their undeserved arrogance on history, they even got the history wrong, as the Chachnama story of the Sindhi Princesses is considered apocryphal, and no “seduction” is required if one is sent to be a sex slave. As one can see here, Socialist countries place no value on the honour and dignity of women—who were degraded as sexual objects by men…and often other women. Is this the “Hindu” society that these “revolutionaries’ wish to recreate? That is why the word dharma/dharmic generally only appears in their dialogue sarcastically. Hinduism not being our word, it is only natural that these phoreign-sponsored “revolutionaries” would degrade our Dharma. Bhadralok is of course a sacred term—but Dharma? Who needs that? Since when is Dharma ‘revolutionary’?
And that is precisely the point. Dharma is not revolutionary, because Dharma itself seeks to uphold order Rta, which is the expression of Satya. The order may be adjusted to time and place, but the fundamental Saamaanya Dharma is common to all, and has a common interest of preserving Truth (in all ages). In contrast, Communists and Socialists are famous not only for their political assassinations, but also for their assassination of Truth. Can such a people be trusted to uphold Dharma, Rta, and Satya in their soon to be revived Revolutionary Socialist Party?
The recent deaths during the post-Dera Sacha Sauda ruling are truly tragic. The lives of people of all castes and communities matter and should be treated with dignity. Use of force must be restrained save in the gravest of circumstances, as there are non-lethal methods of crowd control as well. Sensitivities to the Dalit community in particular are crucial not just to Hindu society’s future, but to the true principles of Dharma.
Socialism is mealymouthed and ambiguous enough for them to attempt to weasel out of the fundamentalist and tyrannical baggage accompanying communism and totalitarianism. And yet, their hero Subhas Chandra Bose himself advocated Socialist Authoritarianism. Is it therefore not logical to infer that they too are advocating the same? Naturally, our three (J)eeniuses (with a capital J) would presumably be on the politburo, dictating to “mercantile” (if any will be left), feudal, and clerical alike. The peasant, of course, would already have been easily fooled like the animals on Orwell’s farm. Because after all, no socialist society ever achieved perfectly equal, classless society. They only managed a “more equal” society. With various classes such as the “intelligentsia” forming to “guide” the worker and farmer alike.
Many people may be quick to aver that National Socialists in fact represent the Right rather than the Left. But this is why it’s called False Dichotomy. It’s a false choice between an International Socialism and National Socialism. The end result is still Socialism (itself a nebulous utopian concept that ensures those with the power have no accountability). Capitalism paves the path for oligopoly and monopoly, with Communism leading first to national expropriation then international expropriation, preferably by a suitable international body.
"@menkris:There is something of the oxymoron in Hindu right or left.Hinduism renders itself to the Absolute,not absolutism." Vry gd obs-
That is why both Leftist and Rightist rejects must be rejected.They both represent different brands of the same crummy product. The Hindu Left is simply creating a different starting point. While the Communist Party (Marxist) was very clear that “China’s Chairman is our Chairman”, the newly proposed “Hindu Left” merely mimics the original position of the Communist Party of India, in asserting the need for a Hindu Chairman. The Hindu Left still wants a Chairman, specifically a Socialist Authoritarian one.
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. The “Hindu Left” is nothing but another hare-brained attempt to revive Socialism, except this time, rather than an anti-national socialism, the aim of these nitwits is a “National Socialism”. That is why their tactics, behaviour, & ill-conceived literature matches a certain Austrian circa 1920.
It has often been said that if fascism were to return, it would be in the guise of anti-fascism. Here is the face of the “hindu antifa”. Therein lies the problem with only focusing on “social justice”—such movements ignore the importance of other established aspects of Justice, such as forbidding crimes against humanity—whether in the name of socialism, etc. But when it’s socialism and social justice uber alles, it’s not simply Stalin vs Hitler, but Stalin & Hitler. What Hinduism, Hindu culture, or even Hindu dharma actually is risks becoming the sole purview of one man’s whims, beef-eater or otherwise.
That is the danger of super-imposing foreign typologies without regard for native philosophies. A square peg is force-fitted into a round hole, with predictable results. Contrary to critical theory, (Hindu) Poetry did not die with WWII and its accompanying atrocities. Hindu Philosophy was not debunked with the discrediting of the (European Christian) Enlightenment. And Hindus need not struggle to harmonise the material with the metaphysical.
Long ago, Acharya Chanakya spelt out the prime directives of Rajadharma in his Arthasastra. These are:
Raksha (Protection from External Threat)
Palana (Internal Law & Order)
Yogakshema (citizen well-being).
Of course, many self-appointed Subandhus believe themselves to be Chanakya and attempt to rule by proxy due to “authority”—ending up burnt like both. Ministers, as even Chanakya notes, are servants of the King. Raksha, Palana, and Yogakshema are the responsibilities of Kshatriya Dharma, and that core aspect of Kshatriya Dharma (Raja Dharma). Kshatriyas (by character, not necessarily birth) are not mere warriors, but traditional aristocrats who are responsible for protecting their people. This is the danger of separating the “intelligentsia’ from politico-military functions. Those who govern must understand the implications of the policies and even “political movements” that are being advocated.
The opposite of an aristocracy (rule of the best) is kakistocracy (rule of the worst). If the original notion of aristocracy was rooted in virtue or Dharma, then it is only natural that kakistocracy be rooted in Adharma.
“Government becomes more and more a government of the worst, by the worst, and for the worst. That is what socialism delivers.”[1, 63]
Socialism is nothing but kakistocracy in a supposedly ‘non-racist, non-misogynist, non-homophobic, non-transphobic, and non-whatever else you can [insert here]” form. The worst sanctimoniously assume the moral high ground by highlighting discrimination against increasingly micro-minorities, despite the bureaucrat or politburo collective effectively rejecting morality. Theories of racism or ill-treating people of other races or backgrounds is indeed unethical. But there are greater crimes, such as mass murder, about which socialists have no compunction .
Ironically, even Communist government was not free of class. Most socialists don’t even claim to have eliminated inequality, only to have formed a more equal society with less ‘antagonism’ between classes. Workers and peasants remained two classes of society with the ‘Intelligentsia’ forming the main component of a third called ‘stratum’. So 3 classes to replace 4?
Hindu society has come along way from the various forms of discrimination. But if its systems have become associated with pejorative words such as “collaborator”, “hypocritical”, “greedy”, and keeping the “chote log” down, it is due to the fall of cultural and political elites from their own values. It is adherence to values that determines virtue in society. The path to correction is not jumping from the frying pan into the fire via Revolution.
The plight of the Dalit is better today and there is a path for young and talented Dalit boys and girls to rise to see their potential come to fruition and succeed alongside others with dignity. But is the path to ensuring this to all Dalits through internally-driven reform or externally-funded revolution? These are the questions right-thinking Hindus of all castes must ask.
False dichotomies are nothing new to socialists of all sorts. “Joseph Stalin, engineered a rhetorical/propaganda coup (with the help of the worldwide socialist movement) by repeating the notion that the only alternative to Russian socialism was fas-cism”. [1, 65]
After all, there is no centralised Church or Papacy in Sanatana Dharma. True culturo-spiritual (adhyatmik) authority lies not with Nagpur, but in Dvaraka, Badrinath, Sringeri, Puri, and a panoply of other peethas, mathas, and even agraharas of different sampradayas. Each traditionally trained acharya is vedic voice of 1 by virtue of the deeksha and adhyapana they’ve undergone and the achara they are oath-bound to live. It is they who (together) clarify what traditional Vedic Dharma is, not Savarkar or even Swami Vivekananda for that matter. The sangh is merely a political organisation, whatever the relief work and social service of well-meaning karyakartas. That is the difference between RW “Hindutva” and actual Sanatana Dharma.
Thus, as we stated before, there is a clear basis for a proper Dharma paksha. A Contemporary Dharma paksha is what is required, not some anti-national left, or now notionally nationalist hindu left vs a nationalist hindu right. A Civilizational Dharmic fight is what we face, and a pragmatic and Contemporary Dharma Paksha is what we need. One not rooted in rhetoric or foreign invention or repressive ritualism or hide-bound traditionalism, but one that recognises the exigencies of the time while remaining rooted in and protecting the tradition and those who live it. It is one that neither scapegoats specific varnas nor discriminates against specific Bharatiyas nor imposes foreign ideologies, but respects Hindus (and Bharatiyas of all backgrounds) while restoring and preserving Dharma.
Merely applying a saffron teeka onto Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose will not paint over the background of accompanying red. The end goal of Socialism is Communism.Those arguing that the BJP’s philosophy was termed “Gandhian Socialism” ignore three key points.
Western Theory was the default characterisation of the time. Even until recently.
The BJP and ostensibly Gandhian philosophy both support Democracy
Subhas Chandra Bose not only favoured Socialist Authoritarianism, but expressly sought for something between Hitler’s Fascism and Stalin’s Communism
Many have assumed trappings of rajas without following true rajadharma, just as many have assumed trapping of Hinduism (as a mask for leftism) without following true Hinduism (more properly called Sanatana Dharma).
Nehru’s and Gandhi’s sins are well-known and deserve condemnation. Patel deserves fresh re-evaluation. The culture of hero worship itself should cease, and a culture of self-respect created rather than a perennial reliance on avatar-hood (genuine or otherwise). But Bose’s own words speak for themselves
And that is precisely the point. Both these totalitarian typologies of government, fascism and communism, are merely forms of socialist authoritarianism. The end goal of socialist authoritarianism is always in the end, totalitarian communism.
Socialism, Communism—and especially since 2008—Capitalism, have all become increasingly discredited systems of Political Economy. Whether it is Neo-Leftism or Neo-Liberalism, they all find their origin in Western Liberalism and ultimately Protestantism. But Hindus have their own basis for Economics and Political Economy (Arthasastra). Irrespective of the origin of Western Parliamentary Democracy, Ancient Hindus even had many forms of government, primarily Rajya (monarchy) and Ganarajya (republic). The present Republic of India is called Bharat Ganarajya.
That is why the time has come for native Indic Systems inspired by native Indic Philosophies guiding native Indic Political Movements. Whether it is the Niti of Krishna, the Niti of Vidhura, the Niti of Chanakya, the Niti of Shivaji, or the Niti of Banda Bahadur Singh ji, there are many schools of Rajaniti in the Dharmic System of Governance: Rajadharma. Attempting to appropriate them into foolhardy rebranding movements is disingenuous in the least and despicable at the worst.
The time has come, not for Neo-Liberalism, Hindu Leftism,nor even Pseudo-Traditionalism, but rather, a Contemporary Dharma that treats with dignity all Bharatiya jatis, that preserves core tradition, but pragmatically faces the Exigencies of the Timeunder the civic mandates of Rajadharma:
Raksha, Palana, Yogakshema
DiLorenzo, Thomas J. The Problem with Socialism. Washington D.C.: Regnery. 2016
Priestland, David. The Red Flag: A History of Communism. London: Penguin. 2009
Bhalla, Praveen.The Life and Times of Subhas Chandra Bose. New Delhi: Ocean. 2016
Why Soopa Sastra? Elsewhere cooking is referred to specifically as Paaka, in Sanskrit. The rationales for this are manifold. The first Sanskrit text known to us on the culinary arts is in fact called Soopa Sastra, and is credited to Sage Sukesa. In addition, “The cook went by many names, such as alarika, soopakaara, odanika, bhojanadatr, and sudas”. [1, 108] Further, much like Dhanurveda refers to the Military Arts (despite Dhanur being ‘bow’), Soopa Sastra refers to the Culinary Arts despite soopa meaning only Soup (or broth). Finally, Paaka refers to cooking, but Soopa is a broader term encompassing Cuisine in general. Thus, Soopa Sastra is Culinary Science which encompasses not only Cooking, but Civilized Dining as well.
For all these reasons, Soopa Sastra is the more preferable phrase for the present time.
What did our ancestors eat? Was it similar to what we eat now? Is it all a patchwork of regional cuisines or are there Pan-Indian commonalities?
More importantly, as one culinary author asks, “What do you mean by ‘good food’? Good to the taste? By ‘good’ do you mean food which has inherent values, i.e. values which are good for the well-being of the eater?”. [7, 16] Or does this merely mean food which satisfies? As in all things, the key to life is balance. It is only when there is imbalance that man either becomes deprived or depraved. Between being dull and being diseased is the middle path.
“Food was also part of the ‘discipline’ in daily living of the Hindu way of life….The peak of ascetic glory was to be able to live on air and water and the perfect ‘yogi’ was revered because he had taught himself to subsist on a mi[n]imum of food. The bogi learnt the pleasures of eating, and descended to eating two meals a day, while the rogi was the gourmet given to self-indulgence and excess which resulted in ill-health. Hence the same word rogi is used for a man sick with disease (from roga=disease).” [7,17]
Thus, one need not be a yogi to live a healthy life. The wise man or wise woman finds balance and eats in moderation—knowing to generally eat healthy, while responsibly indulging on special occasions. Thus, between the yogi and the rogi is the bhogi. Herein lies the importance of the Rajbhog.
Whether it was the Rajabhoga (King’s meal) or the saamaanya bhojana, food was so important that cities themselves have been named after food items. One such prominent example is Vidarbha‘s Amraoti (not to be confused with Andhra’s Amaravati). The original name of this Maharashtrian municipality was in fact Audambaravati, named after the Indian fig (udambara). [1. 35]
Vegetarianism is also a frequent flower in the garland of Dharma. Not only those following the Sattvic way of life, but also The Buddha favoured ahimsa to animals, though he permitted non-veg in cases of unintentional slaughter. [1,55] Jainism of course stands as the most dedicated to the concept of non-injury to animals, and many Sikhs observe vegetarianism (except in times of war).
Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism crystallized out of a Hindu matrix. In terms of food practices they have naturally many features in common with the Hindu ethos. [1.70]
Despite the large contingents of vegetarians (sakaharis) and non-vegetarians (maamsahaaris), one dietary thread is common to them: the sanctity of the cow.
the Rigveda has a whole hymn to nutrition (peelu) in which only vegetable foods are listed, and carries two verses in praise of ‘the cow, Aditi, the sinless’. The word gau is used for the cow, and the term aghnyaa (‘not to be eaten, inviolable’) is employed no less than sixteen times, in contrast to three references to the bull, using the masculine form aghnya [1, 55]
These go-bhakshaks advocating a go-mamsa theory of Dharma are high on Ego and low on Sattva guna. This age old food restriction characterises our Dharmic way of life, yet nevertheless leaves a wide variety of not only other meats, but also a myriad of fruits, vegetables, grains, beverages, divine dishes, and savoury sweets. Whether veg or non-veg, let us all survey together what is common in their presentation and preparation.
“May for me prosper, through the sacrifice, milk, sap, ghee, honey, eating and drinking at the com-mon table, ploughing, rains, conquest, victory, wealth, riches. May for me prosper, through the sacrifice, low-grade food, freedom from hunger, rice, barley sesame, kidney beans, vetches, wheat, lentils, millets, panicum grains and wild rice. May for me prosper, through the sacrifice, trees, plants, that which grows in ploughed land, and that which grows in unploughed land.” —Yajurveda [1, 28]
The influence of the Vedas on disparate spheres of life is so widespread that even food and agriculture are not untouched by it.We see from this quote from the Yajur Veda that agriculture was very much a part of Vedic Society. Rather than a Central Asian pastoral culture, we see the mark of an agricultural one. This centrality of settled life would be seen in later periods as well, and we see the sophistication of irrigation driven farming.
In the Ramayana, the land of Kosala is eulogized by Rama as adhsvamatrakah, that is, as relying on irrigation rather than rainfall for its fecundi-ty. The Arthashastra of Kautilya (c.300 BCE) has many references to an extensive system of irrigation. [1, 29]
What’s more, one notes the antiquity of rice consumption in Indic Society. Various texts attest not only to its import, but also to the technical details of cultivation and crop protection.
“The Kashyapa Samhita (c.200BC) has detailed accounts of every aspect of rice cultivation: sowing, irrigation, seed transplanting, weeding, watering, protection from birds like parrots (us-ing buffalo skeletons as scarecrows), defence against vermin like rats, locusts and borer in-sects, reaping and finally threshing. Even the conditions needed to take a second crop are elaborated. The collection of cowdung (sarishaka or sakrit) is noted in the Rigveda…Fodder crops are silaged as early as the Rigveda, the process being called sujavas.” [1, 29]
As such, it is only natural that the predominant Pan-India aspects of Subcontinental cuisine be driven by the native approach to agriculture. Ironically, it is that honoured bovine whose meat is forbidden that provides us with the most Civilizational of ingredients. More than any other animal, it is the dhenuh, the Indian Cow, whose produce embodies the most central ingredients to Classical Indic Cuisine: milk (ksheera), curd (dadhi), butter-milk (thakram), butter (navaneetham), and ghee (ghrtam).
In addition to the lactic aspects of core Indic food, are the grain (dhaanya) aspects. Staple is very important to virtually any urban/semi-urban cuisine. Here are the traditional grains.
“The Brihadaranyaka Samhita states that there are ten foodgrains. These were rice, barley, sesame, kidney beans, (masha), mil-let, panic seed (priyangu), wheat, lentils (khalva) and horsegram (khalakhula, later kulattha, now kulthi. The Arthashastra lists sugarcane and mustard (both known from much earlier, but not mentioned in ritual lists), linseed (atasi), safflower (kusumbha), and kodhrava.” [1, 31]
Chickpeas, aman rice, wild rice, and Bengal gram are also listed, as are Pumpkins, other gourds, grapes, and long peppers (pippali). Spices include turmeric (haridra), fenugreek (methi), ginger, and garlic. “Others like pepper and cardamom came from south India, and asa-foetida from Afghanistan.” [1,33]
Speaking of sugar, one notes the dietary superiority of traditional sweeteners such as cane sugar, honey, and jaggery, versus the current obsession with visham-variety refined sugar(and the diabetes/obesity epidemic sweeping India & the rest of the world). Incidentally, “Sushruta’s observations suggest that as sugar products became purer and whiter, they also became ‘cooler’ but more difficult to digest.” [1,85] Health must come before Taste, but as traditional Indic cuisine (real Indic cuisine) shows, the two need not be antipodes (especially with the guidance of Ayurveda).
While simple Sattvic fare is indeed “sresth“, it is also important that Dharmic society begin rolling out the Ancient Indian Red carpet, and its Royal Rajbhog of Rajadhirajas.
Kingly Texts on the Culinary Arts
There were many masters of food preparation, perhaps none more famous than that mighty Pandava Bheemasena. His appetite for feats of strength was matched only by his literal appetite for feasts of savories. Those familiar with the film Maya Bazaarmight enjoy this song, which captures the spirit (though Ghatotkacha will stand in for his father here).
While Bheemasena is credited with a text called Bheema Paaka Sastra, it is the Paaka Darpana of King Nala (of Damayanti fame) that is the most ancient text we have recovered to date.
Nala wasn’t the only King with culinary sophistication. King Somesvara III of the Western Chalukya dynasty of Karnataka wrote the well-known work Abhilashitartha-chinthaamani. Better known as Manasollasa, meaning ‘refresher of the mind’, it is a veritable tome on not only knowledge, but also the pleasures of Royalty—with food naturally included in it. At 100 chapters divided among 5 books, it is a topic for another article. Nevertheless, there is a chapter titled Annabhoga stipulating varieties of dishes and methods of preparation (still common today throughout the Dakshinapatha).[1,89] King Basavaraja of Keladi (also in Karnataka) was another such who wrote on a wide range of topics, including food, in his Shivatattvaratnaakara. There is also the Soopa Sastra of Mangarasa III, King of the Kannada state of Kallalli, who wrote in Old Kannada.[1,88] It appears the Kings of Karnata were exemplars at promoting the culinary arts. Nevertheless, Nala set the original standard.
Paaka Darpana of King Nala.
Nala & Damayanti may be famous for their love story (poetically recounted by Sriharsa in his Naishadha Charita), but the Nishada King was legendary for more than being merely a love-lorn lover. Before the great Bheemasena himself, was Master Chef King Nala. His conversation with Maharaja Rtuparna of Ayodhya and subsequent employment in Kosala’s Royal Kitchen gives us insight into not only a mature and even Imperial Indic Cuisine, but also the continuity of tradition from that ancient time to present-day.
Paaka Darpanam means Mirror of Cooking, and it is an ancient book on culinary science. It has 761 sanskrit slokas contained in 11 chapters (paricchedas).
In this wonderful book the author has described the recipes of vegetable & non-veg. preparations. Dishes preparated from Neem, Mandan, Guduchi, Jackfruit etc. become cures also besides being very tasty, the dishes are made fragrant before being served.[2,1]
The cook is referred to as sooda and the waiter as parivesaka. Both are required to have good qualities and practice the utmost cleanliness. [3, 8] Nala then outlines the work discussing various aspects of food taxonomy, dividing his work into 16 aspects: boiled rice (odana), pulses/broths (soopa), clarified butter (sarpis), curries (vyanjana), meat (maamsa) and vegetables (shaaka), semi-hard food (bhaksya), sweet rice dish (kheer), elixir (rasaayana), syrup (paana), soup (yoosa), lickable foods (lehya), beverages (paaneeya) milk (ksheera), curd (dadhi) , and butter-milk preparations (thakra). [2,9]
He also states that “Food is primarily said as sustainer of vital force (Praana) of all living beings. Food, containing the sixtythree types (on the basis of combinations & permutations) of rasa (tastes) is factually personi-fied as Brahma (creator of the universe). The best food is that which is devoid of eight types of impurities.” [2,10]
Nevertheless, of all the notable aspects of Nala’s treatise on Paaka, none more is important than that most healthful of Sciences: Ayurveda.
Person, who relishes the aforesaid dishes (chitrapaaka) with care and prepared by me, gets positive sound health. If this preparation is taken even once, alleviates the diseases caused by Vaata, Pitta and Sleshman as Lord Siva (Tryambaka) had killed the demon Tripura.” [2,3]
Certain fundamentals are obvious from the outset. We see that even in this most ancient period, Ayurveda is a driving factor. The mention of Vaata, Pitta, and Kapha (Sleshman) are clear demonstrations of the theory motivating the Classical Indic philosophy of Cookery.
The Classical Indic Approach to food not only managed to balance the needs of the ascetic yogi with the royal bhogi, but also balanced health with taste. Nutrition and satisfaction need not be diametrically opposed. What matters is what you have, how you have it, and how it balances with not only the rest of your diet, but also with the rest of your lifestyle.
“‘There is no disaster in life’ the adult is admonished, ‘if one eats in mod-eration food that is not disagreeable. As pleasure dwells with him who eats mod-erately, so disease is the lot of the glutton who eats voraciously.’ Moderation in Ayurvedic terms is designated tripti, liter-ally satisfaction, but here connoting the appeasement of hunger and thirst. In contrast is atisauhitya meaning overeating to satiety.” [1, 79]
Texts such as Charaka Samhita and Sushruta Samhita are classic works on Ayurveda (the science itself said to originate from Brahma, via Dhanvantari). Does this in fact work? Well, as they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Shadruchi: The six tastes are sweet (madhuram), sour (aamla), salty (lavanam), bitter (tikta), pungent (kaatu) and astringent (kashaaya). Incidentally, among Telugu families during New Year (Ugadi), it is common to have Ugadi Pacchadi (New Year Chutney) featuring the six tastes to symbolise all the aspects of life to be experienced in the coming year. Some families are known to rig the system by adding more sweet!
While there are 6 pure tastes (shadruchi), there are as many as 63 mixed tastes according to Charaka. [1,79]
Regarding alcohol, Charaka counselled moderation, since alcohol increases pittha (the mental principle) while lessening both kapha (the physical principle) and vaatha (the vitality principle). 
Due to the importance of Pavitrata (purity) and suchi and muchi, the kitchen is considered a near consecrated portion of the orthodox Hindu household. Various rules are stipulated in the grhyasutras. Nevertheless, long story short, cleanliness is next to godliness. Many examples of traditional and modern wisdom have been passed on today.
Food taxonomy is typically divided into foods not requiring fire and those that require fire. Various other aspects are also mentioned, but these are the key ones. As seen above, King Nala gave us a more detailed division of foods as well.
Several cooking operations were in use since very early times. These were thaalanam (drying), kvaathanam (parboiling), pachanam (cooking in water), svedanam (steaming), bhavita (seasoning), apakva (frying), bharjanam (dry roasting), thandooram (grilling) and putapaaka (baking). Devices for these operations developed in parallel. [1, 101]
Various methods of meat preparation also existed. Sour meats were marinated with ghee, curd and fermented rice gruel, along with acidic fruits and various aromatic spices. Meat when dried and roasted was called parisukamaamsam, while minced meat was called ulluplamaamsam. [1,54]
An ancient history! The earliest documentation of the beverage #tea being consumed in India, is given in the epic Ramayana (750-500 BC) pic.twitter.com/tdTj6hJrwR
Beverages (alcoholic and otherwise) could also be a Blog Post in and of themselves. But for our “Madyam, apeyam, adeyam, agrahyam!” types…fear not! —I will commence with the non-alcoholic first.
“Buddhist texts enjoin the use of pure rain water for consumption. Water meant for drinking had to be ‘clear, cool, shining like silver, health-giving and with the fragrance of the lotus’. In fact, the lotus was frequently grown in tanks to purify the surrounding water.” [1, 39]
Beyond water there were a variety of juices. These refreshing drinks include mango, jamoon, banana, grapes, phaalsa, coconut, edible waterlily roots, and diluted honey. There was also sugarcane juice and licorice leaf along with a host of others.
Although the brits (and their Indian leftovers (pun-intended)) would have us believe they brought Indians tea, present research appears to indicate otherwise. The specific varieties may have varied, but tea in some form did exist (with the word chai itself having a sanskrit equivalent via chaayam). Kashmir has its own distinct aromatic kaahwaah tea brewed in a khandakari (samovar). [1,107] Coffee is, of course, an Ethiopian import, via middle easterners. Nevertheless, it has taken a special flavour in South Indian “filter kaaphi” (As Nilambari would attest).
Different types of alcoholic beverages are also listed. The famous Soma is one such intoxicant, reputedly brewed from the ephedra plant for yagnas, particularly for those whom intoxicants are otherwise prohibited. Suraa is the most common name for alcoholic beverage. The word for wine usually from grapes is madhya. Wines from honey, rice, palm, flowers, and jaggery were also known. The spiced wine maireya is also mentioned in the Ramayana. While abstention from alcohol was and is considered a virtue, its restrained consumption was nevertheless permissible to most classes of society. Some examples of ancient liquors:
Madhira—Wine of high quality
Kaadambaree—Distilled liquor made from kadamba flowers
Thaallaka—Wine made from palm fruit juice
Haarahooraka—”Wine made from white grapes, imported from Haarahur, Afghanistan“[1,59]
Khajooraasava—Wine from dates
Shahakaarasuraa—Wine brewed from the juice of Mango
Mahaasuraa—”Mango juice win with a high proportion of fruit extract, perhaps modified with spices” [1, 59]
While reading all this one must remember what a middle eastern traveler wrote on the Indic view of Alcohol:
“The Indi-ans abstain from drinking wine, and censure those who consume it; not because their religion forbids it, but in the dread of its clouding their reason and depriving them of its powers.” [1, 60]
With apologies to oenophiles, as there are many more aspects that can be discussed at another time, we must move on to that other guilty pleasure…open to all classes!
Honey is considered the earliest sweetener. “Guests were welcomed to a household with madhuparka, a honey-sweetened concoction of curd and ghee.” [1, 37] Rock sugar (kand) is thought to have been known at least by 800 BCE, with modern exemplars such as Gulkand (Rose-jam) being used to this day. Confectionary may date back to the Vedic period with different combinations including cardamom, ginger, and ground barley/wheat with jaggery to make abhyusa.
“Some of these confections were artisti-cally shaped. The rice-flour sweet preparation, modaka or madhugolaka, looked like a fig, and the barley flour confection, shastika, was cone-shaped and had delicate surface markings. By late Buddhist times, some sophisticated sweets are mentioned. The mandaka, now called mande, was a large parata suffed with a sweetened pulse paste, which was then (as now) baked on an inverted pot: madhusarika was a sweet cake; morendaka, made from khoa, was shaped like the eggs of a mora (peacock); gulala-laavaniya was perhaps the modern gole-papadi, a tiny fully-expanded puri…Rice cooked in milk and sugar was payasa, a popular sweet even now“. [1, 39]
Rice, of course, is so central to Indic cuisine that it was cooked in a variety of ways and forms. Rice cultivation has been radio-carbon-dated at Prayag going back to at least 5000 BCE, though terraced fields for rice cultivation have been dated to 10,000 BCE in Kashmir. As for types of rice, the most common is Oddana (boiled rice). Pruthukam is beaten rice (poha) and neevaraa is wild rice [1,184]. Then there is laajaah, the ritually pure form of parched rice, mentioned in the Ramayana as well.
“The early canonical literature of the Buddhists and Jains (c.400 BC) again reveals extensive use of fine rice (shaali) or ordinary rice (vreehi), either boiled, or cooked with til seeds, or made into gruel (yaagu).” [1, 34]
Chaayam (now Chai)—Tea
Vataka—Vada(these are mentioned in the Dharmasutras as being fried in ghee)
This article will naturally focus more on the traditional native fare of Bharatavarsha. While it is true that food, like most aspects of culture, is not static, it is also important for native identity to not be lost to syncretism. It is possible to admire what is good about others while appreciating your own uniqueness.
If at all u want to promote ur state cuisines.. U have to stop this appeasement 😑 Building a brand needs continuos effort for years. https://t.co/bNA7MKWNvK
Therefore, rather than hewing to the hyperactive hungama of invented “Ganga-Jamuni Nautanki“, this Post will focus on the core Indic aspects that can be traced back with continuity to Ancient India. These elements are very much alive today, and in regions such as Andhra and Odisha, predominant.
§ Focus on Food as part of an holistic System of health. Application of Ayurveda pervades Paaka Darpana of King Nala.
§ Use of Mustard seeds, Turmeric, Cumin. These essential ingredients to “Curries” are as ubiquitous in ancient Harappa as they are in modern Himayatnagar.
§ Tandoor (originated in either Rajasthan or Punjab ). [1,107] The word comes from the Sanskrit “Kandu”. Thandoora is the word for grilling.
§ Khichadi/Khichdi/Khichri. In the Vedic period, rice cooked with milk and sesame seed was called krsaara, and is considered to be a forefrunner to khichdi, which is made from rice and dhaal. [1,33]
§ Thali is the common word for the round plate of plenty throughout India. The word comes from the Sanskrit ‘Sthaalikaa’.
There, of course, countless other culinary aspects to discuss. But food history (as with history in general) is subject to great controversy. In order to separate the genuinely Indic from the colonially syncretic, we will discuss some of the issues here:
Biryani is foreign origin (coming from the Persian Beryan), but…
Pulao is definitely native to India and comes from the Sanskrit word Pulaka.
…meat cooked with rice is referred to in the Yagnavalkya Smriti as pallao-mevach, and the word palao also occurs in early Tamil literature [1, 54]
Other varieties of savoury meat & rice dishes are mentioned in the Ramayana. One such dish was called maamsabhutaudana: rice cooked with deer meat, vegetables, and spices. The Mahabharata mentions pishthauddana, another rice dish, this time cooked with minced meat (other kinds include, sour meat, fried meat, ground meat, grilled meat, and meat for stuffing). [1, 54] In fact, rice being the major staple, it is only natural it was cooked in many forms. Odana is rice boiled in water or milk, often along with curds and honey. When this combination is cooked with meat it was called mamsaudana. Khichadi is another common denominator throughout most of India. So much so is this the case that the term “Khichadi couple” has been invented by NRI/PIO desis to refer to couples coming from “2 States” or more, but being 100% Bharatiya.
Traditional Indic sweets are called madhuraani in Sanskrit (or mithai in Hindi). Some sweet items such as Rooh Afza and Jalebi (zlabia) are obviously foreign origin. But many, many more are local (and given foreign origin by sepoys). In fact, the whole assortment of traditional Bengali sweets are said to be “phoreign” because apparently “yeverything kayme from mughal!”. This is of course ridiculous. Many have argued that Kulfi is a recent addition, and that is probably a fair assessment, though iced dishes were certainly well-known in snowy Kashmir. It is, therefore, here that we shall begin:
Each region (indeed, state) of historic Bharatavarsha has evolved unique aspects of aahaaram while hewing to integral aspects of Saastric gastronomy that unify the Subcontinent. While all can’t be covered in a single (digestible!) article, here are some highlights to give a Gastronomical Survey of India (GSI).
From Rogan Josh to its eponymous Pulao, Kashmiri Cuisine is rightly appreciated by sophisticates of all sorts. Although the ancient nobility of this famous region is now diminished, Kashmiri Pandits have maintained most of the traditional fare, with rare dilution. Known for its Wazwan (multi-course) meals, the Crown of India’s cuisine features such spices as asafoetida, methi, and ginger. Nevertheless, as evidenced by Kashmiri Pulao, saffron (kesara) is the signature spice, and has been cultivated here since ancient times. Though arguments are often made supporting foreign introduction, it’s fairly clear the use of saffron is indigenous. Here are some of the finer points of this cuisine:
“The Kashmeerees have been bons viveurs and are proud of their cuisine which is justly famous. ‘Snigdha’ sug-gests the use of oil to which the Kash-meeree chef de cuisine still adheres in preference to the melted butter (ghee) used in the Panjaab. The Kashmeeree Brahman is a lover of meat and fish and in ancient times grape wine was in common use. The Nilamata Puraana mentions the use of wine for ceremonial purposes.” [5, 555]
“The nobility and courtiers in the typical bon viveur style enjoyed the Kashmiri cuisines which is justly famous; they had ‘fried meat’ and ‘delightful light wine cooled with ice and per-fumed with flowers.’…As for the common people, they subsisted on rice and hakh (Kashmiri greens)” [5, 23]
One “could not do without the soft and unctuous fare of Kashmeer, which is easy to digest when washed down with sugared water whit-ened with chunks of ice.” [5,555]
Interestingly, the lotus is not just a symbol of prosperity, but also a focus of the dietary.“Vegetables start in the Rigveda with the lotus stem (visa) and cucumber (urvaaruka), fol-lowed in the later Vedas by lotus roots (shaaluka)“. [1, 35]
“Lotus roots is a favourite dish of the Kashmeeree Brahmans. In the plains of India the dried roots from the homeland are imported as a delicacy. Seeds of the lotus…are also eaten.” [5,459]
Regardless, conventional staples are also popular in Svarga’s own Aahaara. Plain rice and assorted sweet pulaos (featuring fruits and nuts) are popular, as are breads such as kulcha, tsachvaru, and girda.
Jammu and Ladakh, naturally have their own notable contributions. Dogras typically eat wheat, bajra, and maize along with rice as staple.
Andhra Cuisinestands out for a number of specialities, first and foremost is the use of spice. While mirchi is a near-Pan India practice, it reaches its fever pitch in Bahubali’s own Country, hence the justifiable reputation of having the spiciest food.
In fact, it packs suchgharam dharamthat the following saying has become a saamethaof sorts about Andhra men.
Andhra men like their food as they like their women: Presentation is very important…and they prefer a little Spice.
Roselle leaf (gongura) is another key ingredient. While use of the green gram (mudga) dates back to King Nala’s time, it has taken a unique incarnation in that Andhra specialty known as Pesarattu:
Though tamarind is used widely in the rest of the South as well, it is a critical part of the Telugu dish known as the pulusu ( a tamarind sauce/stew).
The new state of Telangana also has some regional, yet truly native, specialities, such as sarvapindi and sakinalu. But these snacks, and more robust entree-fare, can be covered separately. The notable aspect is what unifies undivided Andhra in the food department.
The South (in General)
Beyond Andhra, the regions of Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu all have that have their own local specialities. Whether it is the Bisi-bela-baath of KT, the Coconut Aviyal of KE, or the Chettinad Chicken of TN, special dishes for each state can be found. Nevertheless, for the sake of brevity, this article will provide a general discussion instead (though native Kannadigas, Keralites, & Tamilians are welcome to comment on their states below).
The use of pickles (uragaaya/urakai) is quite common throughout the south, and are the ideal complement for daddojanam (curd rice), preferably with a little mustard seed.
That all-India favourite, Dosa, is seen as Udipi-derived (so there’s a win for Karnataka), but if that’s the case, you Kannadigas will have to take the blame for Bisi-bela-baath (sorry guys…it’s true…). Before the other side of that great Kaveri war gets upset, yes Idli is very likely a Tamizh contribution (though our sepoys are doing their utmost toinvent an Arab origin…probably while smoking some pretty powerful hookah). Though it should be noted that the Manasollasa mentions both the dhosaka (dosa) and idarikaa (idli).
And before our Mallu friends think I’ve forgotten them, there is much that Kerala has to offer—especially when it comes to all things coconut. Unni-aapam (jackfruit-rice pancake) and coconut aviyal are two must haves from the land of Kalaripayattu. The ancient Chera country was also famous for its pepper.
The Kodavas of Coorg also have a distinctive cuisine, and are known for their preparation of pork-based dishes. Tulu cuisine is embodied by various Mangalorean fish curries.
South Indian fare is not all vegetarian as has popularly come to be believed. In fact, the most carnivorous (or more correctly omnivorous) states are found south of the Vindhyas, with Kerala leading the pack. Rasam is of course common to pretty much all the Southern states, but I would argue that Andhra’s Tomato Chaaru is the most sophisticated form of this savoury soup of Soopa Sastra.
Core components of Maharashtrian cuisine are discussed below; nevertheless, Amba Kesari Bhaat is one signature dish. Maharashtra is likely the place of origin for Shrikand (in its present form). The etymology of the word comes from, yes, Sanskrit. “Shikar-ini, the modern shrikhand, also employed strained curds, crystal sugar and spices.” [1, 35]
Konkani khaana is close related to Maharashtra’s, though distinctive in its own way. Tambli (bondi chutney) and Banana flower chutney are standouts. There is also Amlechi Uddamethi, which is a raw mango curry. Fish is an important component as well.
Though Madhur Jaffrey has posited it as “Haute Vegetarian Cuisine”, something that Rajasthanis and Vegetarian Punjabis will contest ipso facto, there is a distinct variety of dishes that come from this ancient commercial entrepot.
Arguably the most entrepreneurial region in India, this partially dry but mostly coastal state in India has given and taken influences throughout the millennia and developed its own style of foods too. Dhokla and Rotli are common markers of the Gujju menu (as is sweetness even in staples), and Daakor na ghota (spicy fried dumpling) is another gujarati item. Saboodana shakes are recent addition too. Namkeen is the notable western Indian snack specialty, one which Gujaratis raise to a high artform with various kinds of Chaat that reach their peak in heavily Gujarati Mumbai (take that, Thackerays!).
Rajasthan features many different varieties of food. Its vegetarianism is predominant, though not universal. It has produced many popular traditional items such as Baati (Rajasthani bread) and Bikaneri Pulao and Bhindi Jaipuri. Kalakand is considered a native Rajasthani mithai. Undhiu is undoubtedly a western Indian dish, but Rajasthan and Gujarat can fight over it.
And because regional jokes (when tasteful & clever) are the flavour of the month, here is one proffered by Marwaris themselves:
If you are born in a Marwari household, 30% of your body fluid is water and the remaining 70% is Ghee. My Blood Group is Ghee Positive.
Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, and Jharkhand all have their own flavours and cultures. MP itself prominently features two key regions: Malwa (ancient Avanti) and Bundelkhand (ancient Chedi). Jowar has traditionally been common in this part of the country. For the sake of article limitations, a few quick mentions will be made here, to be expanded upon at a later date:
Admittedly this is a very large region to cover, particularly if one includes now separate state Uttarakhand in the mix. Nevertheless, distinctions can be discussed in a different Post as there are some broad similarities in this core Gangetic region that has traditionally grouped them together (those hailing from this parts are welcome to give their thoughts via comments). Roti, barley, and even raagi are all in use. Baath (boiled rice), however, seems to be the core staple. “Boiled rice flour cakes were termed khir-aura, phara meant steamed rice balls, and phu-lauri was a steam-cooked roll of coarse flour.” [1,140]
As for Bihar in particular, a plump rice known as shaali was grown in ancient Magadha and was served to honoured guests. Sattu (flour of roasted pulses) is commonly used as are barley grits, combined with salt or sugar. Sattu as drink is considered the marquee beverage for Biharis.
Other dishes include laai (parched rice), chiuri (parched barley), lawaa (parched maize), and lapsi (flour of any grain boiled in milk and sugar). As for desserts, various laddoos are favoured, such as fine-grained motichoor and sesame-seed tilkut.
Nepali cuisine shares much in common with Pahari food. The standard Nepali Thali is Dal-Bhaat (rice and dhaal). Dhido is a traditional wheat staple from Nepal made from water and grains like buckwheat.
Due to the long-running (and justifiable!) Odisha irritation with Bengal claiming Rasagolla (and Jayadeva!), we shall begin with the Land of the Lingaraja Temple and their unique cuisine. The Kalingas may have Konark and Kharavela, but the state famous for Jagannath Swami of Puri also packs a punch in the food department. Indeed, the origin of the Rasagolla is said to be Lord Vishnu’s way of saying sorry to Lakshmi Devi for his going on yatra without her granting leave (an abject lesson to all the non-divine husbands out there!).
Nevertheless, as in most other states, rice, wheat, and barley are all state staples. Pakhala (boiled rice covered with water and kept over night) is one item unique to Utkala.
And if you’re in the mood for something more casual, the state has plenty of snack foods to offer as well
The very mention of Bengal and Food may bring to mind not only “jal pushp”—better known to the rest of us as fish—but one of the most celebrated varieties of sweets on the subcontinent: Mishti-doi (sweet curds for dessert), malpua, khoa, Sitabhog,nadu, and of course, the state sweet, Sandesh. Another notable confectionary factoid: “Krishna Chandra Das invented the rasamalai, flattened chhaana patties floating in thickened milk”.[1,132]
These are just some of the scintillating sweetmeats and salivational (portmanteau) savouries south of the Siliguri. These confections are well-known to most Indians, though some are the subject to squabbles (such as the now confirmed Odia claim to Rasagollaalready mentioned). In any event, there are other aspects that merit mention as well.
There are two distinct styles: East and West Bengali. East Bengali is low on dhaal and high on fish, while the West is known for use of poppy seeds (posto). [1,129]
Barley’s importance in the Vedic period is preserved in modern Bengali cuisine.
It was fried and consumed in the form of cakes dipped in ghee, or as sweet cakes called apupa fashioned out of the flour, boiled in water or fried in ghee, and then dipped in honey. The modern Bengali sweets pua and malpua preserve both the name and the essen-tials of this prepartion. [1, 33]
Rice is a big part of the Bengali diet, with a medieval text (Shunya Purana) stating there were 50 varieties grown in Bengal. [1,128]
The Seven Sisters of the Northeast have their own offerings of civilizational savouries to offer, starting with Assam (The other sisters being Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura, Meghalaya & Arunachal Pradesh—though we can include Sikkim so no one is left out).
While distinct dishes exist in the various cuisines here, pork is common throughout. Rice is the staple for the most part and fish very popular. Given the diversity of offerings, they are best treated in a separate piece.
The good people of Sinhala are very much Indic in blood and culture, and so, their food also deserves a mention here.
While rice is also a staple, the island of Ceylon features many heavy influences, notably South Indian, Indonesian, and European. Seafood is obviously a key component. Some unique dishes include Pittu (cylinders of steamed rice mixed with coconut) and kokis (coconut biscuits).
With a taste that will make you say “Jai Jhulelal!” even when it’s not Chetichand, Dal Pakhwan is one of the most beloved breakfasts in India. Rice is obviously a staple of Sindhi food, but flat-breads such as roti and koki are also common.
Hilsa fish curry is a signature dish and Thadal is a signature beverage. Sanha pakoras and chola dhabal are other notable food items. There is also a special Sindhi Papad that is well-known among most Indic gourmets.
Last but certainly not least is the Land of the Five Rivers (surely, Punjabi mundian aur kudian, you didn’t think we’d forget you?!)
Punjabi khaana deserves a separate article (or series!) of its own. Along with the putative trend of Punjabification throughout India since the 90s (some would say for better or for worse), Apna Punjab has been at the forefront of marketing Indian Culture. But while Bollywood, Bhangra dance, and Punjabi Pop music can be discussed at another time, Punjabi food is very much a topic for the present. In fact, as recent research has determined (and as many Indians have long suspected), much of much-vaunted “Mughlai cuisine” is in fact from Apna Punjab originally. One Professor from the University of California Los Angeles wrote that:
“There are a hundred different cuisines all over the country, each claiming to be the best in the country, if not the world, yet two styles have become popular among visitors to most major cities and towns countrywide: Mughlai, which is vegetar-ian and nonvegetarian, largely Punjabi, with a somewhat liberal use of ghee (clarified butter) and the use of a tandoor (an oven usually implanted in the ground), and South Indian vegetarian cuisine, which is somewhat less oily but spicier.” [8, 6-7]
Rich in butter, such favourites as mattar paneer, murgh makhani, and makkhi roti all hail from the Pancha-naada. As such, perhaps the time has come to give credit where credit is due. Surely kheema and and haleem are not native, but paneer, paratha, bhatoora, tandoori, along with that Punjabi favourite, Lassi, definitely are. In fact, the most ancient tandoor to date dates back to it.
The word Paneer (like the word Kalamkari) may have foreign word origins, but both are very much native Indic and very ancient. Whether it was common throughout ancient India or not, it has certainly come to refer to the Punjabi farmer’s cheese that is beloved by vegetarians the world over, and certainly within Bharat.
Perhaps most interesting is the question of whether the conventional wisdom itself has things correct. Is a paradigm shift required on recently ascribed beliefs regarding the origins of many Indianised foods? One example is the kebab. Noted Indian food authority K.T. Achaya writes:
Meat roasted on a spit (shula) is graphically described in the Mahabharata…and in south Indian literature…The modern kabab has therefore a long history in India [1,101-102]
As seen above, whether it is crediting for biryani or for falooda, the truth matters more to us than any nationalistic claim. And yet, as we have seen with the idli, appropriation has been the frequent aim of Non-Indian Residents (NIRs). Is the kebab actually bhaditraka as one Oxford press pustakam prescribes?—or is it qualitatively something else? The time has come for Food Historians (and Tandoori Nationalists) to do serious research into these issues. Contrary to “yeverything kayme from mughals” types, Ancient Indian Culinary texts do exist (much to their dismay, no doubt). But it is equally important to carefully study claims (whether pro or anti) so that the authentic is revived from the quagmire of the syncretic. The best way to appreciate other cultures is to first appreciate your own—that is true cosmopolitanism.
Are chillies and tomatoes and potatoes all foreign origin? Evidence would suggest that chillies may not be (it was known to Purandara Dasa [1,227]), tomatoes likely are, and potatoes almost definitely so. In fact, in the Andhra-bhasha, potatoes are referred to as bangal-dhumpa (or Bengali rhizome) indicating their arrival via British-ruled Bengal. Nevertheless, the very likely foreign origin Aloo has certainly been Indianised over the years. Yams were likely the native precursors to it. And what about that modern favourite, Samosa? Sorry folks, evidence points to the mid-east. But that being said, Pakoda, Bhajji, and Bhelpuri are all Bharatiya…pakka.
Nevertheless, appropriation of all things Indian under the neo-construct of “Mughlai” is well known. One can see here that malpua, phirni, and pulao (all Classical Indic classics) are being appropriated under the “mughlai” label. This doesn’t mean going the other way and not acknowledging obvious imports (falooda, jalebi/zlabia, biryani), but it does mean intelligent and discrete people must start asserting rightful claims over their state’s cuisine culture. Odias have shown the way with rasagolla.
All Indians, vegetarian and non-vegetarian, should come together to preserve their ancient claims to pulao, tandoori, and a litany of other culinary contributions to world cuisine. Just because some foreign or foreign-sponsored professor wrote a food book, doesn’t mean everything in it is true. Appreciate what is native, acknowledge what is foreign, and reserve judgment on what we genuinely don’t know. That is the proper path not only for wise people, but also connoisseurs of all kinds—culinary or otherwise.
Since others are trying to serve us humble pie on a platter, let us show them our capacity for good digestion. So rather than say bon appetit, we sign off with that signature line from that sacred Saptarishi Agasthya Mahamuni: Jeernam vaatapi, vaataapi jeernam.
Annam means food. According to Hindu scriptures, annam is a form of Brahman (annam parabrahma swaroopam). Hindu… http://t.co/MkphQ9q6xK
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.
India, Indic Civilization, and Bharatiya Sanskriti have produced many noble and spiritual figures. But as those of us who grew up Indian know, it is very much work hard & play hard.
Colonial stereotypes were convenient for those who were trying to change the religion of the people of Bharatavarsha. They failed because those who know our tradition know fun and frolic and yes even Romancehas always been very much part of our traditional culture and festivals (perhaps that is why they are trying to doing everything they can to take away the fun…only for Hindu festivals of course).
Therefore, perhaps it is time to not just play defence and preserve what we have, but to go ahead and revive what was originally part of it. The youth of today very much exercise freedom, and naturally when they become college-age, it is only natural to be more interested in spending time with the opposite gender. Indeed, this too is ok, provided it is done respectably and with good intentions. As we wrote in our article on Sringara, Romance—real romance—is not just a pretext to “consume” or “purchase” love from hallmark or godiva. Love is not merely a “veneer” to give respectability to serial and animal lust. This is the danger of de-sacralisation (removing the sacred), whether it is removing Dharma from Yoga, taking the Veda out of Ayurveda, or turning Vasant into some sufi-bolly “Basant”.
In fact, lost in all of these efforts has been the fact that from ancient times itself we had something our Valentine’s day obsessed youth don’t know—our own Dharmic Festival of Romantic Love: Madan Utsav.
Contrary to Valentine’s lovers who swear by the Catholic St.Valentine as the embodiment of Romance, Ancient India long had a festival that celebrated Shringaar. Vasanta Utsavawas the traditional multi-day Spring Festival. Holi has come to represent two such days (with the burning of Holika during Choti Holi the night before). While Kama is associated with Spring, Madan Utsav begins on Chaitra Shukla Trayodasi, and thus is a month later than Holi. This is due to the discrepancy between the Purnimanta Calendar in most of the North and the Amanta/Amavasyat Calendar in Peninsular India. Thus, the reason why Holi and Madan Utsav (currently a month apart) would have been celebrated as part of the two-week Vasanta Maha Utsav is because of the general use of Amavasyat in all of India at one point. Restoring Amavasyat would restore the continuity of the two week Spring Festival, starting from Holi and ending with Madan Utsav. That is why Madan Utsav was traditionally synonymous with Vasant Utsav (and perhaps should be again).
In fact, it has historical precedence in many parts of the country, but especially Andhra. In fact, one king of the Reddi Dynasty, which presided over the Romantic Age of Andhra, came to embody the spirit of Spring, and also personally inaugurated Madan Utsav. It was a festival of great festivity and cheer.
Madan Utsav is also mentioned by our great poets, Kalidasa and Sriharsa, in their plays. Jayamangala, a commentator on the Kamasutra, in fact gives primacy to this day over the other constituent parts of Vasant Utsav, and mentions the name Madhanamahotsava. [1, 353] This is a festival devoted to Madhana or Kama Deva, god of Love, assisted by his friend and ally Vasant, the presiding deity of the spring.
Madan Utsav celebrates the return of Madan to his wife Rati.
“It was primarily a romantic festival involving fun and frolic, music and dance, song and play, swinging, and swimming and all kinds of amusements.” [1,354] “Both men and women, young and old took part in this festival and marched in procession in streets, singing love songs and dancing to the accompaniment of music. Generally dancing girls and their paramours took an active part in these frolics” [1, 354]
That’s right. Hinduism, or more correctly, Sanatana Dharma, was never only just about ritual, or caste, or boring severity, but very much achieving a balance between fun and duty. Dharmato guide Rasa (sentiment), and Rasato enrich Dharma. Morals, and laws, and virtuous examples don’t exist to restrict the fun of men and women (or boys and girls). They exist to protect individuals from each other and also to protect us from ourselves and from our greed.
Romance and love in the right context (marriage…or at least the path to it) very much makes life worth living and contains the full spectrum (erotic, romantic, & spiritual). But Romance without restraint ends up being, well, the disastrous state of affairs we have now. When no respect or regard is given to sacred relationships between the genders or even between family members—then isn’t what is being called “love”, really lust?
Love is seeking to give pleasure to someone you love. Lust is trying to extract pleasure for yourself. Lust is selfish, Love is selfless.
That is the reason why Madan Utsav is the real Festival of Love for Bharatiyas, rather than some corporate “Global” spend-fest. There was a great carnival and the King (or Civic Leader) would go to a park specially decorated for Vasant. There would be a pandal for Kama & Rati, Vishnu & Lakshmi, Siva & Sakti, and Indra & Sachi. Perfumes such as camphor, musk, civet, saffron, sandal were used, rosewater was freely sprinkled on people along with water mixed with turmeric. A bamboo water soaker was used (like in Holi). People mixed freely and the kings gave it royal grandeur . [1,357]
There is in fact broad evidence to the existence of Madan Utsav beyond Andhra’s Reddi Kingdom, or even the Vijayanagara Empire.
There are accounts for its existence in the Madhyadesa (modern Uttar Pradesh) and Kashmir as well as discussions in the Puranas, about the festival and its origin.
Here is what the ancient Kashmiris celebrated:
Then there was the Madana Trayodashi, a festival dedicated to the god of love. On this occasion a husband would demonstrate his love for his wife by personally giving her a bath with sacred water scented by herbs.[4, 87]
Madana Utsava is frequently referred to as Madana Trayodasi, as it is celebrated on the 13th day of the Shukla Paksha of the Month of Chaitra (Early April). Being celebrated in the bright half of the moon, it can even extend to next day and thus, there is even a Madana Chaturdashi, which is the 14th day of the Month of Chaitra (for all you 14th of February fans).
The record of Madan Utsav in Kashmir’s ancient Nilamata Purana testifies to this as well.
The reason for this lies in the festival’s origin:
Vasant Utsav and Madan Utsav have often been referred collectively. And yet, elsewhere we see a clear distinction between the two festivals with Vasant. Thus, traditionally, Madan Utsav seems to have been synonymous with Vasant. But given the divergences and exigencies of the time, perhaps its more appropriate to distinguish the two, while preserving the importance of both.
Here is the traditional story of the origin of Madan Utsav:
“This festival of Madanamahotsava is described by Hemadri in his Vratakhand, wherein he narrates the following story about its origin. After marrying Gauri, Siva, observing Pasupatavrata, lost himself in meditation. Gauri’s desire for maternity remained unfulfilled.
Brahma and other gods held consultations and sent Madana to disturb Siva’s meditation, with the hope that he alone could divert Siva’s attention. Madana accompanied by Vasanta, went in front of Siva who was then in deep contemplation, and having drawn his sugarcane-bow, discharged his missiles of flowers on Siva which disturbed his deep medi-tation and caused mandonmada or love madness.
Siva burst into a rage and opened his third eye of fire reducing Madana to ashes. Madana’s wife, Rati, seeing her husband burnt to ashes, was stricken with great grief. Then with a heart softened by seeing her pitiable condition, Gauri said to Siva, ‘you have burnt up Kama who had come here for my sake. Pray, take pity on his wife Rati, and bring Madana, her husband, back to life.’ Siva replied, “How could Madana, once burnt to death by me, come to life again?”
“However, I shall grant your request. In the spring season, on the thirteenth day of the light half of the month, he would reassume his bodily form.” Having granted this boon, Siva is said to have gone to Kailaasa. So the lunar thirteenth day of the bright fortnight was the day of Madana coming to life again. Hemadri does not specify the month; but simply states that it is in the spring time. It is evident that it is the lunar thirteenth day of the bright half of the month of Caitra. This spring carnival is therefore called Madanamahotsava or Vasantotsava” [1,355]
This also aligns, of course, with the Spring Festival of Holi, which features the Holika Dahan. This is referred to as Kamuni Dahamu in parts of India, where a bonfire is lit to burn away attachments.
How to celebrate Madan Utsav? While jnu “global” types suggest finding a random partner and running off to the nearest park or motel, Bharatiya sanskriti is more sophisticated. As we saw above, whether in Kashmir or Kosta (Coastal Andhra), Madan Utsav was celebrated by the entire society. Not just Kings and Queens, but traditional Brahmins, fun-loving masses, and everyone in between. The only difference is that achara (good conduct) and sabhyata (etiquette) were observed. In public, one must behave with respect/courtesy (maryada) to elders and senior citizens.
Public celebration of Madan Mahotsav, specifically in the context of Vasant Utsav, is mentioned in both the Malavikaagnimitram and one of Sriharsa‘s famous plays celebrating the famed Manmatha of Madhyadesa, King Udayana—better known as Vatsaraja. Here is an excerpt from Ratnavali on the public celebration and all it entails:
“His Majesty has started for the palace to witness the merriment of the citizens, heightened by the Madana Festival. (Looking up) Ah, how now! The King has ascended the palace! He, The lord of Vatsa, like the flower-bowed god (Madana) in person, as it were, with all talk of Vigraha (the war-body) ceased, having Rati (love of the people—his wife), living in the hearts of the people and one to whom Vasantaka (his companion—Spring), is dear, is advancing, eager to behold this great festival.“[7, 120]
“Just behold the beauty of this great Madana-festival, in which curiosity is excited by the citizens (or gallants), dancing as they are struck by the water from the syringes [pichkaris] taken up, of their own accord, by the amorous women intoxicated with wine; which is attractive on account of the openings of the streets resounding with the sound of charchari songs (or clapping of hands) deepened by the tabors beaten all round, and which has rendered the faces of the ten directions yellowish-red by means of the heaps of patavasa [flowers] scattered about.” [7, 121]
“By heaps of scented powder scattered about, yellow with saffron dust and imparted to the day the appearance of the dawn, by the glitter of gold ornaments and by the wreaths of Ashoka flowers that cause the heads to bend low by their weight, this Kausambi, which has surpassed all the treasures of the Lord of wealth by its opulence apparent from the dresses (of the people), and which seems to have its inhabitants covered with liquid gold as it were, appears all yellow. Moreover, In the courtyard which is flooded all over with the continuous streams of water ejected by the foun-tains and where sport is carried on in the mud caused by the simultaneous and close treadings, the yon pavement is reddened by the people with the imprints (lit.plantings) of their feet, red with the colour of the vermillion” [7, 122]
Kaushambi is in modern Uttar Pradesh. Thus from Kashmir in the Uttarapatha to Kaushambi in the Madhyadesa to the Kosta in Andhra Pradesa, Madan Utsav was celebrated throughout classical Bharatavarsha.
By the way, although this is a legendary love story involving King Udayana and Princess Ratnavali, there is war and adventure, so there’s something in it for the guys and girls.
“The Pujavidhana or the mode of worshipping Madana is also described by Hemadri. It is said that, on the thirteenth tithi of the bright half, a representations of the Asoka tree should be made after taking a bath, and the floor should be decorated with kolams. Images of Kamadeva, Vighnesvara, Siva and Vasanta and Apsarogunas made either of gold or of any other metal or material, should be worshipped with incense, sandal paste, and flowers at midday by the king, along with his ministers, ladies and others. After the completion of worship, offerings of cakes of different kinds should be made to them and betel be distributed among brahmin couples with daksina.” [1,355]
Couples should offer new clothes, gifts, flowers and ornaments to each other. “Those who observe this Madanamahotsava are enjoined to keep holy vigil that night, and perform rasa-mahotsava or love-dance. Lamps should be lit, and wine should be offered to sudras [or rather those who drink], and camphor, kumkuma powder, sandal paste and other perfumes and betel should be distributed.”[1, 355]
Thus while the wife would worship her husband on his return (as the embodiment of Kama Deva), the husband in turn would worship her after her sacred bath, as we saw in Kashmir.
This mutual reverence demonstrated not only respect for both genders but also gives the correct understanding of matrimony and even sex as sacred—in contrast to modern consumer society where it is lust on demand and for the highest bidder. Lust is not Love nor is Lust even Erotic Love or Erotic Desire. Lust is selfish greed for sex. Erotic desire is not condemned (in the right context). Lust is condemned (in any context).
While contemplating material and sensual objects, persons become attached to them. Such attachment develops lust and lust generates anger. Anger leads to delusion and delusion to mental bewilderment. When the mind is bewildered, intelligence and discretion is lost. Loss of intelligence and discretion leads to downfall of the person.” 
Kaameswara – Lord Shiva Conquers Lust 
Kama (pronounced Kaama) is a very interesting word. Like many words in Sanskrit its meaning is context sensitive. In some contexts it means pleasure, in others it means love, and in this situation it means lust (kaama-moha or kaama-unmada). It is because of this danger (which Sri Krishna warns about) that Lord Shiva had to show us the importance of conquering Lust.
The reason why there are so many regulations and rules and such detailed morality regarding sex is because it is the most powerful of aspects in life.This is the case not only for its creative power, but due to its attractive power, its physical power, and even its spiritual power. The key to conquering lust, therefore, is not through celibacy-sans-saadhana, but by correctly connecting sex with love (if you do take the oath of celibacy, you must follow the saadhana that our sadhus do to succeed). Love comes in many forms. When you are capable of real romantic love, however, then the selflessness it demands, opens the door to Divine Love.
That is why the Madan Utsav itself is signified by Lord Shiva destroying Kama. He is referred to as Kaameswara and Maara-ripu because he conquered lust. When lust is conquered, then the full spectrum of love from the erotic to the romantic to the spiritual can be properly enjoyed. It was only after this that Mahadev and Parvati Devi endeavored to create the God Kartikeya.
That is why, unlike Valentine’s Day, Madan Utsav signifies the sanctity of the bond between woman and man, and especially, Wife and Husband. So yes, there is the erotic (rati), yes there is the romantic (sringara), but Madan Utsav is also about the spiritual (adhyatmika), which makes the erotic & romantic healthier and more meaningful . When wife is viewed as sacred, the husband refuses to exploit her (and vice-versa—yes ladies, what’s good for the gander…).
That is why you should celebrate Madan Utsav: the whole society comes together to celebrate Love in happy abandon, and all participate in their own way.Less orthodox castes used to be gifted wine while traditional brahmanas were gifted betel leaf. The day would begin with all of society coming together in respectable but enthusiastic celebration, with the night obviously ending between wife and husband.
In contrast to the consumer-driven, hallmark inspired veneer of romance for lust that is Corporate Valentine’s Day, Classical Indic Society celebrated the full spectrum of love in the proper context. Yes, dancers and actresses and singers, etc had their paramours and inspired people to celebrate, but the engaged (or about to be) and the married were naturally the core of the festival. Young and old, upper caste and lower caste, elite and mass, woman and man, all celebrated what we all know to be part of our nature…but in the right context…in the right way…in the right time.
It has been many centuries since the days of Ancient Kashmir or Medieval Andhra, so how can a beautiful festival be celebrated today? If you are reading this and are unmarried, you can tell people in your college or organise a group of friends your age and go to the park and sing your favourite love songs (they can be from Indian movies or popular music). If you are even more adventurous you can make (safe) flower-head arrows using a children’s bow or slingshot and pretend to be Kamadev, returning. You can distribute the traditional bamboo water soakers from Holi for rose-water or sandalpaste water (saving the colours for that special Festival of Colours).
If you are not single, then you know to exchange gifts, express love and affection, recite Poetry, and of course, dance the Rasa Mahotsav and the dance of love however you see fit.
But most importantly, if you care about our culture and tradition, be sure to tell your friends and family about Madan Utsavand how they can celebrate on Madan Trayodasi (Thirteenth day of the bright half of the lunar month of Chaitra, which is in Early April, see below for this year’s date).
Celebrate Madan Utsav!
April 9th, 2017
§ Spread the word in your College or Social Group. Hand out flyers explaining the day.
§ Greet or Yell “Shubh Madan Utsav!”. Find a public place or reserve one for celebrations.
§ Spray rosewater/sandalwood paste waster with pichkaris or gently throw flowers.
§ Sing your favourite love songs as a group and/or via Shringaar-themed Antakshari
§ Play Romantic instruments like the flute or hire professional musicians
Family Activities: Extended family can celebrate by lighting lamps, singing songs, giving tambula to those in home, colony, apartment or housing development. Of course, those of you who drink wine, will know whom to give it to, whom notto give it to, & whento drink it.
§ Draw Rangavali/Rangoli/Kolam during the Day. Light lamps at night.
§ Have a great feast in your community. Make garlands and swings of flowers. Play music.
§ Give gifts depending on how orthodox you or others are (betel leaves for some, wine for others)
§ Sing, Dance,use a safe (children’s toy bow)/slingshot for soft flowertip arrows or flowers.
Married Couples: Exchange gifts, express affection in preferred manner (see above).
§ At the start of the day, wife welcomes husband as embodiment of Kama Deva
§ During the day is the chance to express love (rather than PDA) either in public celebrations or private, via music, song, poetry, dancing, etc.
§ At end of the day, husband returns favour and gives gifts & shows love for wife (see “Kashmir option” above)
Kama is the embodiment of Romance and his wife Rati is the embodiment of well, rati.
So Happy Festival of Love, in advance. Or as we should say in Bharat…
After our preceding article on Romantic Sanskrit Poetry, it is only natural for people to ask whether our illustrious culture should be romantic, let alone, romanticised. Indeed, the current dispensation in the natural discourse seems to believe that everything but the legitimately native and authentically Indic, can be associated with such a feeling.
While we previously established not only the contours for Classical Indic Literature and provided redolently romantic examples of its high culture poetry, it is also important to understand the place of Romance in our culture. If there is opposition from libertine liberals to anything Sanskritic on the one end, there is opposition from Krypto-conservatives and their dour dreams of dreary duty only, on the other. But a marriage and a relationship between a man and woman is more than just about duty.
Dharmaprovides the basis to govern and preserve a relationship, and even makes a marriage meaningful, but it is the sentiment of Sringara that nourishes it. Even our greatest Kings, Warriors, and Avataras knew that Sringara (Romance) is also Part of our Culture.
Sringara, or as it is said stylishly in Shuddh Hindi, “Shringaar“, is of central importance not only in Indic Civilization, but in Dharmic culture as well. After all, the society that celebrates Siva-Sakti, and the equal halves of one soul that make a marriage of man and woman, can never be far from the Sringaaric.
Sri Rama‘s incarnation as Maryada Purushottam was the Perfect man doing Perfect duty, to the point of self-denial and self-abnegation. In our callous and foolish era, libertines disrespectfully refer to him as “misogynist”, despite his proper behaviour and even charming gentility around women. But selfish creatures cannot be expected to understand the self-sacrificing. Perfect Dharma demands that a King’s duty places his subjects before his own family, even his own wife. But that degree of perfection was only possible in an era of perfection, or near perfection (the Treta Yuga). In the Kali Yuga, even great and self-sacrificing men should not be expected to give up their faithful and loving wives today due to idle gossip, because subjects themselves have become corrupt and immoral.
Sita could expect the protection of a Maharishi like Valmiki—but where are such venerable elders today? As such, it is important to understand that, beyond the Dharma of Ram, beyond the Sacrifice of Ram, was the Romantic Nature of Ram. In an era when Kings commonly took many wives, Rama restricted himself to only one…why?
Chahe rajsinghasan par ho ya kusha ke asan par, har sthan par, Ram Sita ke bina adhora rahega.
Whether on the Throne of Kings or the Seat of Ascetics, in whatsoever place, Ram without Sita, is incomplete
Dharma does not mean denying our emotions and feelings. Dharma means relying on duty to channel and refine our feelings, so that we take the course of action that benefits the most people, rather than just the few, or ourselves.
A handsome, narashardula (tiger among men), peerless warrior, and great Emperor, lived the rest of his life in loneliness, pining over Sita, the only woman he ever loved, and ever married. He even commissioned the fashioning of a gold statue of her in remembrance.
As such, while Veera-rasa predominates throughout the Ramayana, there is undoubtedly a strong element of Sringara-rasa. The Romantic Love Sita and Rama shared for each other transcended not only their time, but inspires for all time. In an era when people fall in and out of relationships, or due to android applications—don’t even need them, how insolent to cast aspersion on such transcendental lovers? If newly wedded couples today are blessed with the benediction that they be like Sita & Rama, it is not merely so that they do their duty for society together (although that too is important). Rather, it is so that they too may have such a love.
Fraternity boys may not have time for such a conception of women. Red pill retrograde reading may be the present fraternal fashion. But to be properly prepared for marriage, a more sophisticated understanding of the opposite gender is required. To deny women love, is to deny women life. Abuse is certainly criminal, but neglect is truly sinful. Different women may have different natures, and not all women may be hopeless romantics (some may in fact exploit that sentiment, courtesy 498A, etc), but to not understand their general need for romantic love, and to perennially obsess over the anatomical and chemical, without contemplating the emotional, is foolishness. Lust is fleeting, and Duty is lasting, but it is Romantic Love that inspires and renews.
Ironically, the many pretenders to “player-hood” and catatonic khiladis who tom-cat about, fail to recognise precisely why the much-married Sri Krishna was so successful with women, even in his youth. Lust and the carnal are ephemeral; romantic love, when sought with skill is transcendental. Six-pack abs and well-heeled fabs may get attention, but it is charm that captivates it, and character that keeps it.
Confident attitude may be important, but charming disposition and gentlemanly conduct are crucial. Brutish behaviour may get attention, but it is not always good attention. The brazen braggart and boorish bouffon, are mere infants in the eyes of women, who prefer men to mere boys. Krishna was an invincible warrior, a cunning strategist, and a clever king among men, but he was also a cultivated gentleman, a charming conversationalist, an intoxicating instrumentalist, and above all, a cultured romanticist. Funny how would-be “hypermasculine”, self-declared “defenders of Dharma” forget that today. That is why it is important to study Nara Dharma properly, rather than merely concoct uni-dimensional understandings of Dharma and Nara and Naari.
Lord Krishna was the complete man, that is why women craved him.
The true defender of Dharma, is thus, neither brutish nor churlish, nor is he a braggart nor a bouffon. Rather than stomp about in aggressive assertion of his alleged greatness and “proficiency in ritual”, he exudes his values through his conduct, character, and conversation. The Redpill movement, personified by such storied lotharios as this lout, may have plenty of wrong ideas, but they are right about one thing: how you project yourself is more important than what you say.
How ironic that the most misogynistically medieval of forces, and the most oppressive of ideologies, have come to occupy the romantic space in the Indic mindspace today, due to bollywood. But while anti-national producers are to blame, the public at large bears its share of responsibility. After all, what measures has it taken to rollback this romantic monopoly marketing attempt? What of the volcanic growth of revolting “item dances”. Why must we look elsewhere, when Bharatiya Sanskriti perfected Romance?
A culture that knows not the import of courtship is a culture that has collapsed. When Romance becomes a mere veneer for Lust, when it too becomes a commodity for one day of candy sales, then lovers become nominal, replaceable, and interchangeable. Sringara is not mere Rati bhava (erotic feeling). Kama deva and Rati are indeed wedded together, but it is the combination of both that gives us the full spectrum of romantic love. It is why grihasthashrama is Dharma in fullness, not merely because of rati-bhava, but because of Sringara.
Premacomes in many forms: Vatsalyam, Bhakti, Mitrata—all are important. But as great as these all are in their own ways, Sringara is the most ecstatic. It is not for nothing that the author of the Natya Sastra, the great Sage…
…Bharat consecrated ‘Shringara’- love, as the apex of all ‘Rasas’, as if he was pre-determining the course of Indian arts – painting and sculpture, which later discovered their relevance and prime thrust mainly in love. If anything, Bharat said, was ‘sacred, pure, placid and worthy for eye’, it would be some aspect of ‘Shringara’. 
Arranged marriage has been the traditional model in our society, but that has never denied the importance of either romance or consent.Rukmini’s letter to Krishna asking him to rescue her, is a prime example of this. This is the society of the Svayamvara, where women cannot be seen as mere pawns for political alliances courtesy of the marital. They have their own adhikara too. Yes, they must choose wisely(something many aren’t doing of late), and Arranged Marriage with Consent, offers one such avenue, which is certainly less risky than commercialised industrialised “live-in” arrangements, which maybe start “in love”, but usually end up in “the clinic”. As such, there must be a balancing of interests:
1) Preserving the societal fabric for the next generation, 2) Providing a healthy environment for the nurturing of children, and yes, 3) Romantic compatibility.
The rights of women cannot be trampled upon in the matter of marriage. True, difficult times reduce freedoms for both men and women. But there is a difference between filtering eligible suitors from which to choose, and taking away choice completely. Rukmini was herself put in such a desperate position. This is where this daughter of Vidarbha demonstrated her strength as a woman and wrote a letter to Krishna declaring her love for him.
But Rukminichose wisely, not merely based on fleeting caprice, but on character (and yes, charm). She exercised her rights responsibly. It is important to consider character compatibility along with eligibility and mass-marketed marriageability. Match-making must not be a simple meat-market or political calculation that makes pawns of progeny. It is also a sacred union of souls and a sentimental bond. The Lord himself answered her call, and respected her choice.
Why wax nostalgic over DDLJ, when our Ancient Civilization already produced the real deal?
Main Yoddha bhi hoon!
For a long time, poets and commentators have used the wrong term, haranam to refer to the Rescue of Rukmini, when it is Rakshanam. The correct word is rakshanam or nistaaranam, because as Krishna himself says, he did not kidnap her, Rukmini called him. He responded to her letter asking him to rescue her and take her away from Vidarbha.
Lord Krishna’s example, in Rukmini Rakshana, was emulated by none other than that most Ideal of Rajputs: Maharana Pratap. Mewar’s greatest son chivalrously rescued a Rajput Princess who wrote a pleading letter to him. She was despicably being forced to marry a mughal. He heroically liberated her from her foolish relatives, and taking her back to his kingdom, he then married her, with all religious rites. Thus we see not only the intersection of Legend with History, but Duty with Romance. Dharma and Sringara are not polar opposites or antipodes, but are complements. Sringara gives Dharma sentiment, and Dharma gives Sringara meaning.
“Romance is the glamour which turns the dust of everyday life into a golden haze” – Elinor Glyn
All this is naturally causing indigestion to our krypto-conservatives on the dolt-right, so let me properly contextualise this for their edification:
Compatibility is not based on fleeting fancy or temporary lusts of the moment. Romance is not a mere veneer or hallmark style commodisation of sentiment. Sringara is meant to ennoble us beyond the everyday erotic. Where others see mere biology or TFR, Sringara in its full sense, exhorts good character and great conduct. Rukmini, Sita, and Savitriall sought out Sringara, but they pursued it the right way, looking for the right match based on long-term interests, societal good, and yes, noble romantic sentiment.
Savitri’s own choice showed her superiority over the women of today (and the less said about the men of today the better…but I digress). This Princess of Madra chose a man down on his luck but with good character to marry. She then became the veritable Lakshmi of the House by not only restoring him to his family’s ancestral kingdom, but restoring him to life. Sita herself forever abided by duty, but not only did she resist the lustful seduction attempts of Ravana in the face of imprisonment, inducements, and threats over the course of a year of torment, but she also sought out her Romance with Rama the right way.
Even the tale of Usha, and the grandson of Krishna named Aniruddha (a chip off-a chip off-the old block), is a romantic one. Usha sees the handsome Aniruddha in her dream, has her friend draw pictures of the illustrious princes of her time, and falls in love with this Prince of Dvaraka after hearing of his good qualities.
Thus, the surrender of Sringara is the single biggest strategic blunder by our Samskruthi Senapatis. Even more vile, has been the venal conflation of it by these copycats with mere “sensuality” and prioritisation of the ever compounding, compound-hungry, self-serving pedantry to pervade it. Before teaching others to certify them in their little social media certificate programs, it’s important to actually learn our culture & history correctly.
Sringara, therefore, is a critical aspect not only to revival of culture and civilization, but revival of civilized life and the beauty of life itself.
The Kashmiri commentator Anandavardhana wrote in his Dhvanyaloka : “In the shoreless world of poetry, the poet is the unique creator. Everything becomes transformed into the way he envisions it. If the poet is emotionally moved (lit. ‘in love’) in his poems, then the whole world is infused with rasa. But if he be without an interest in the senses (vitaraga), then everything will become dry (nirasa). (Dhvanyaloka, III. 43). [2,156]
The game of life must not only be played with discipline, and skill, but also with style, and in the right places, occasional sentiment.
Those identifying with the Dharmic view in India typically fall into two camps with respect to this topic. On the one hand we have those looking to create a drab and charmless society, where culture is only about mechanical karma, and Prema is only valid for Bhagavan (God). On the other we have the hippie free spirits or libertine liberals who, despite their undoubted patriotism, are tribalists (i.e. modern global types who nevertheless cheer for their home team) who seek to map their “liberal”/”feminist”/”new age Male” views on to Hindu Dharma, and frequently see sex detached from love.
Despite their diametrically opposing views, both of them fail to understand the importance of Sringara to our tradition. To the paleo-conservatives, romantic love is seen as a valentine’s day derived western import and an impediment to their dream society of boring severity. To others, romance is seen onlythrough western rom-coms or bollywood buffoonery, where “love” is a commodity, and thus, not truly romantic, nor specifically, “True Love”. In the wake of all this, we chart the middle path.
Whether it’s Sita-Rama, Savitri-Satyavan, Indumati-Aja, Malati-Madhava or even the nameless Yakshi & Yaksha of Meghaduta, Romance has always been an inseparable part of our Indic Culture, Tradition, and Civilization.
It has, in fact, been a part of it from the very beginning. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad tells us in the Fourth Brahmana, of how the Supreme Being became lonely and wished for a second. Dividing into 2, what once had no gender, re-emerged as two lovers: a man and woman in eternal embrace. That is the beginning of creation. [8, 164]
And, for all the attempts to brand Hindu culture as regressive towards women on account of Sati, how many people know of King Aja who inconsolably climbed upon his wife’s funeral pyre? He had to be dragged down, because he had a responsibility to rule. As soon as his minor son came of age, he starved himself so as to reunite with his beloved Indumati. Separating cases of societal misconduct on Sati (anyways barred by Dharmasastra in the Kali Yuga) from the nature of certain ideals is important; otherwise, it is emblematic of a desire to misconstrue and misportray. Aja, by the way, was none other than the grandfather of Rama.
Classical India was replete with such famous pairings. Even great romantic heroes such as Udayana Vatsaraja (the King of Vatsa) appeared in numerous romantic escapades that would put Don Giovanni to shame. But while the latter featured in eponymous operas, whither the Vatsaraja in bollywood? Dramas abound in his name, with such classical works as Svapnavasavadatta and Ratnavali, and yet, no knowledge, let alone mention of this Romantic Hero. It’s why this article by sickularatti is so ignorant. Ancient India did have such figures, but Lutyenswallahs simply refuse to acknowledge this, due to their own agendas.
Sringara Rasa is Romantic Love and Romantic Sentiment. In fact, so sophisticated was Bharatavarsha’s approach to romance, that our literature even divided it into two main categories: Vipralambha & Sambhoga.
Vipralambha Sringara—Love in Separation
This is further divided into two kinds:
Ayoga- the Non-consummation of marriage, and
Viprayoga-the Separation of the lovers deep in love (after marriage). “The former which arises from the dependent position of one or the other of the parties through distance or the intervention of adverse fate, has ten stages, ‘abhilasha, chinthaa etc.,..; the latter occurs through maana, pravaasa or some such cause.‘” [2, 3]
Sambhoga—Love in Union
Sambhoga is Love in Union. Vivaha is naturally the best form of this, and birth of a child, also part of the romance. After all, what demonstrates the love of another than wanting to join your qualities together?
Sambhoga has many elements including seeing, conversing, embracing, kissing, and consummation. In fact, the word Sambhoga literally means “mutual enjoyment”—which characterises not only the Indic view of love but also of sex…so whose society is chauvinist now?
This topic, in fact, will merit a deeper discussion in future articles already prepared. In any event, all this is well and good for a “classical” construct. But what of modernity? What about the here and now?
Many of you may be concerned. Parents may be bewildered at the notion of their children being distracted, and college boys fretting that their anime fantasies may now be spoiled. But look around, youth are already distracted, and are increasingly becoming depraved. Modern media, be it movies, TV, or most powerful of all, the internet, has made it possible to not only mould young minds, but to misinform and even misguide them. Is it any wonder divorce has sky-rocketed, and fidelity has plummeted? Many are having more sex than ever before, with more ‘lovers’ than ever before, but how many actually love? More importantly, how many are actually happy?
Romance is best when it is balanced with responsibility. Charisma is a passing fad, but Character is timeless. Character & Charm best of all.
If men are guilty of superficiality based on looks and lust, then women are guilty of weighing only material gains and fashionability. Just because bollywood portrays pardesis as “romantic” doesn’t mean that is the case. Just because you only see a particular medieval set of monarchs doesn’t mean they embody nobility. Stop doing merely what you are told is trendy, and use your own judgment to judge what is right for you.
Looks fade, and even Romance ebbs and flows, it is a common Dharma rooted in a common ideal of character, and a common lifestyle, with common loyalties, that binds couples.Romance is most meaningful when we admire not only looks, but also inner nobility. True, individuals can enhance their looks & appeal (marketing is in fact not all that new after all), and can put their best foot forward. They can even become accomplished like Ravana was. But it is character that is the true bond of any relationship. Superficialities are a means of catching and keeping interest.
But as with weapons of war, these Suhstras of Sringara are not to be used irresponsibly. To seduce is sinful, as it is deceit with ill-intention. It is superior to charm and to in turn, be charmed. Suhstra too requires Sastra, and wiles must be wielded as weapons are…with care. Woman too, wields many weapons, none more devastating than her eyes. But before you can get to the intermediate and advanced levels, learn the basics.
Learn how to wash properly
Learn how to dress properly
Learn how to behave properly
Learn how to charm properly
What is charm? It is the implicit appreciation of the presence of another. It is assuredness, without imposition. It is social grace and charisma. This does not always require song, and dance, or painting or a Versace wardrobe or a huge performance. It can be as simple as knowing how to have a conversation, or to interject it periodically with poetry. It’s not so much what you say…but…how you say it.
Much may be made of the scene ending here, but for those who know Dharmasastra, Gandharva vivaha was also a legitimate form of marriage. Though usually preceded by rounds around the fire or at least garlanding or giving of rings, Gandharva vivaha (gandharva style of marriage) required no rituals and results in union of mutual consent. Though it is not recommended, as men in this era duping women have shown, in the ancient times, it nevertheless resulted in commitment, as those who have seen Baahubali know both characters effectively considered themselves married after this song.
Since we’re on the topic of the Romantic, I thought I might use this as a segue to a little advice to all the would-be womanisers and wannabe Carrie Bradshaws out there.
As we’re now well into the era of “Love Marriage” I thought I might bring a healthier perspective to those of us who have dipped their toes (or dived headfirst) into the dating scene. I know there are plenty of working professionals today who continue to go the “Arranged” route and others who go the dating route—I am not judging either way, just giving helpful advice for both. This applies especially for guys PIO, NRI or even NIR —but also to gals as well. Whatever you decide to do, it’s always better to first learn from those older to you. Then make your own choice.
1. Do Not take rejection personally.
I can’t stress this one enough, whether it’s an arranged Match that didn’t work out or a college girlfriend/boyfriend. It’s admittedly very hard to do (especially when we are young and obsessed with what others think (early vs late 20s)), but most people aren’t told this early enough. There are several ways to cope with this. One is the tried and tested “plenty of fish in the sea”/ “your loss”. Another, per Ovid, is to take a trip with a trusted friend to some safe place, and gain perspective. But perhaps the all time best, in my opinion, is that the other person simply isn’t “the One”. Many people may not believe in soulmates, but for those who navigate the treacherous waters of the dating world—this is the best defence when a romantic escapade doesn’t work out. Even if you don’t believe in “The One”, accept the fact that you weren’t right for each other, because no matter how much sense it makes in your head, your theory is invalid if it doesn’t work in practice.
Not constructively processing rejection is fraught with dangers. We’ve all heard the old adage “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”, and the frequent and tragic cases of acid throwers in South Asia are simply horrid. While strong punishment may deter some of this, it is imperative that fathers, uncles, and elder brothers/friends need to dissuade their idiot juvenile sons/nephews/brothers from such ideas by telling them this factoid from day 1.
A real man, knows how to control himself. Same goes for you ladies.
Unfortunately, the romantic scene has become something of an extra-curricular activity or time pass. Courting and Courtship was once a high art, which has now devolved into the hookup culture or irresponsible and frequently unprotected sex. Rather than the rare exception, the one-night stand has, for all too many people, become the rule.
This one is appropriate especially for the gals, because, well, let’s face it, the biological clock starts ticking earlier for you (you don’t have to take my word for it) . This makes #1 easier, since the approach is to find the person you should marry. In essence, girls and guys should focus on Mr/Miss Right rather than Right now.
Ladies, I hate to say it, but this one is up to you. So if you’re not going the arranged route, and decide early on to put yourself in the market for a boyfriend-en route to-husband—don’t date recreationally in an endless relationship to nowhere, or have a string of affairs to the bottom if you break up, but make him court you with long-term intentions.
There is plenty of nonsense out there, especially in this post-SATC world that makes the Carrie Bradshaw lifestyle glamorous—but check in with your single female friends/cousins in their late 30s and 40s—and ask if what the third wavers call “sex-positive” really is all that fulfilling.
And to all the wannabe khiladis, look no further than one of the all-time great fictional playboys, Sam Malone. The latter years showed just how empty his life was, no matter how many women filled his social calendar. The allure of fast times, fast women, and fast cars runs out real fast when father time comes knocking. So find a path that works for you, maybe even at your own pace, but don’t get suckered in by fashionable puffery in cosmo, playboy, MGTOW, jezebel, or whatever other intellectual cul-de-sac in which you find yourself.
3. Guys, don’t complain, Up your game
One of the reasons arranged marriage has been emphasised by elders for so-long is because expectations are never the same. Many women can expect the world and, well let’s face it, we guys are lazy.
If you think boorish behaviour and being a jackass will get you far, you need to get your head examined, or at least see a different kind of doctor.
There is a difference between self-assured confidence, and off-putting crudity. You may gain the fleeting fancy of the lowest common denominator, but if you a looking for a quality girl, of good character, that is not the way.
Learn the fine art of charm. Don’t just awkwardly sing or poorly play the guitar. Master the fine art of conversation, refine yourself. Learn Poetry.
What is charm? It is the tacit expression of pleasure in the company of another. In contrast to self-serving sharks and self-involved screechers, a charming person is neither looking to “dominate” nor lead on a person, but is self-assured, confident, & calm. Exude charm.
4. Put your Best Foot forward
There’s a difference between trying to be the best version of yourself or doing a little brand-building, and out and out pretending to be something you’re not.
It’s why Vatsyayana stresses the importance of the 64 Arts. Graduating from a good school is good, so is having a great job or “high iq”. But finding the right person to marry isn’t simply a matter of exchanging genome charts. This is where cultivating yourself (something we have stressed throughout many topics) comes in handy. If you want to spend the rest of your life with someone, merely finding “a girl who likes playing playstation” is probably not the way to go.
Also, hygiene is very important—and yes ladies—that means you too…
5. Be courteous
Guys, don’t get into this moronic trend of “negging” where you openly insult girls to catch their interest. But do be playful and politely joke around with them. The point is for both of you to have fun . If you’re not interested in the girl, don’t be mean and destroy her already fragile ego ( girl world is ruthless enough as it is—and photoshopped magazines certainly don’t help).
Learn to listen.Don’t just hear what the other person is saying, listen and digest it.
And ladies, politely let down guys you are not interested in. It’s the best way to ensure (though not necessarily guarantee) they don’t end up walking on the dark side or enter the forbidden land of Darr. But, also do recognise that some people are unfortunately obsessive groupies or creeps or mentally ill—so do be careful, and if it becomes apparent, then avoid and take action to distance and protect yourself.I should note that, this is yet another reason why many advocate and even prefer the arranged courting/marriage path.
Your relatives and family friends can already do a decent job of filtering out most people with such issues. They can certainly do this much better than WhatsApp, Tinder, OkCupid, and whatever else you kids are on this days.
6. Don’t lead people on
There was recently an internet meme that asked men and women to break the cycle of players/jerks and [rhymes with witches]. It showed how debutante-ingénues and blue-eyed boys are taken in by these characters and turned into the very thing that once harmed them.
The single easiest way to break this cycle is to not lead people on. If you’re not interested, or you simply don’t see a future, break it off early—or best of all, don’t get involved in the first place. Yes, every now and then we run into a hottie who captivates us, but self-restraint is part of being an adult as well.
7. Think long term
I’m not saying declare your love on the first meeting itself, or ask what the other would name a first child on the first date, but don’t be a flake either.
Don’t put off the tough questions till after you’re deep into a relationship or reached a point of no return (i.e. engagement, moving in, etc). Questions about a future child’s religion, culture, language—or your future place of residence are all important.
These should be anyways factors in deciding whom you enter into a relationship with either right away—or where appropriate, after a few weeks/ months in.
In fact, one particular case merits mentioning. An NRI college girl a long time ago was known to not date at all. When asked by the boys and girls in her friends circle why, she said she just couldn’t bear the idea of going through serial and pointless heartbreak without any commitment. To go through serious emotional pain without any certainty of some commitment seemed to dilute the potential of marriage in her mind. She figured she’d be better off focusing on her studies, and then have her family suggest eligible suitors from which she could choose. This may not be everyone’s view, and certainly there are those who find their spouses in college, etc. Nevertheless, it is a useful anecdote to explain why even if you choose to enter into relationships, make sure they’re ones with serious long term potential.
8. Be age appropriate.
Dating in high school is generally not advisable, whatever the stories may be coming out of DPS. I’m not saying go crazy in college when the cage door is opened, but it’s a good idea to focus on your education and discipline yourself before you go off to University (it’s why our ancient texts referred to student life as “brahmacharya”). True, a bachelors’ is often itself a stepping stone to a masters’ degree or beyond, but there’s no point in distracting yourself even before you’ve secured that first step (college admission) in your career/profession.
A degree of emotional maturity too is also advisable. And the whole May-December Romance thing is a mirage. Don’t waste your time pursuing something that clearly has no chance at long term viability (just ask Demi Moore or the countless old millionaires with gold-digging wives).
9. Be careful. Looks can be Deceiving.
Sometimes, parents of a boy or girl don’t know, sometimes they try to pass them off as something else.
I hate to break it to you boys and girls, but not every woman with a pretty face is a lady and not every man with seductive sophistication is a gentleman. There are goldiggers and players/cads out there who play with your hearts to advance their own agendas and vanities. That’s why it’s important not to fall head over heels—but to use your head and evaluate and even test whether the person who has so enamoured you really is what he or she claims to be. It’s also additional reason to not get too intimate too quickly (or further reason to wait until you’re married, if you feel that’s best as our sastras do). “Everyone is doing it” is not a reason to start, especially if you’re a girl. Actions do have consequences, so choose wisely. (If you’re a girl, test the guy to see if his profession of love is genuine. Make him wait…best of all…until marriage). Just to give you girls a bit more help, there is a saying among “Modern” men today that you may not like, but that you probably need to hear, so here goes : ‘Why buy the cow, when you get the milk for free‘. It is rude, it is crude, but it is a little insight into the male mind. Draw your own conclusions.
All too many innocent girls end up not only breaking ties with their family, but engaging in a life that they would not otherwise embark on because an abusive boyfriend takes predatory advantage of their love. Remember, if he really loves you, he won’t make you degrade yourself, or do something you feel would compromise your character, or end up in some internet video (like poor Miss Hilton)…he may walk off and sulk or grumble, but will thank you (years) later and admit you were right—if he actually loves you. If he doesn’t love you, then well, he’ll drop you faster than you can say “Mujhse Shaadi Karoge”.
What’s more, due to the influence of some malignant fundoos (guys and girls), not every person out there is harmless either and may shower you with attention and affection one minute, then withdraw it the next if you don’t go along with them—repeating the process with several other partners, sometimes simultaneously. So please use your best judgment when you meet someone new—and take care to keep your friends (and ideally families) in the loop as well. This is the best way to make sure you find your someone special—while staying safe.
10. Be Honest
This of course is within reason, but the general principle does hold. If you don’t want to move or you don’t want kids, say so from day 1. Don’t fudge the issue so as to make someone commit on false pretences. While those who go the arranged route aren’t as (generally) encumbered by questions of romantic pasts, this is a factor for those who date. Again, better to be honest—within reason of course.
There is of course plenty more advice I could proffer—but I can’t give away all the crown jewels of House Nripathi …I will conclude with this though: The most important thing is to try to have a good time, and remember if it isn’t meant to be, it isn’t meant to be, and if it is—it is…
It is symptomatic of the topsy-turvy age that we live in that concerted attempts have been made to remove the Romantic from the Indic. How ironic that the civilization which practically invented the concept of soulmates (see the symbolism of a Hindu marriage) is asked by sepoys if it knows how to love?
Yes, bollywood sickulars, Indians (real Indians) know how to love. Bharat perfected romance millennia ago. Excerpt from Dasakumaracharita, regarding the love of Princess Avantisundari for Rajavahana:
“There, in the course of conversation with regard to her lover, she, coming to know his family and name from Balachandrika, was overcome with intense love (with the fall of Cupid’s arrows), and began to grow emaciated day by day, like the crescent of the moon in the dark half of the month, from the pangs of separation.
She gave up taking food and her other daily pursuits, and in her secret chamber restlessly rolled her creeper-like (slender) frame on a bed formed of (tender) leaves and flowers wetted with sandal-juice. Her female friends, seeing the delicate princess in that state withering with the fire of love, and feeling very sad, tried to cool her body, with materials for relief from the torment, such as water prepared for her bath, mixed with sandal, usira and camphor and kept in gold vessels, garments of lotus-fibres, and fans of lotus-leaves. Even that application of cooling reeds simply [causes] fire to appear on all sides in her body like water dropped in heated oil…”[1, 50]
Subhaga kusuma sukumaaram jagadana vadhyam vilokya te roopam |
Mama maanasa mabhila shathi tvam chinttam kuru tathaa mrudulam ||
[she spoke;] ‘only the prince [Rajavahana], who surpasses even Kamadeva in masculine beauty, can successfully cure this heat of the fever of love. But he is beyond my reach; what am I to do?’ [1, 69-70]
Prince in Dasakumaracharita:
“There is no real happiness for those who lead a single life, or for those who have no wives of corresponding virtues. How then shall I obtain an accomplished consort?” [1,158-159]
So enough. Don’t degrade yourself with Fifty Shades of Grey, and don’t be prey for those who just want a lay. Be wise, be smart, and think long-term. Forgo the False Dichotomy of Pleasure vs Family life. Responsible marriage choices and Romance are not diametrically opposed. Sringara (Romance) is also Part of Our Culture—you must only learn it correctly.
Whether it is Kamadeva or Kalidasa, Ratidevi or Radha, Indic Civilization perfected the Romantic. Sanskrit, Prakrit, Braj, Telugu all were languages of love.
The time has come again to not only dream & converse in our own languages, but to love in them as well. The masses mastered Prakrit & desa bhasha, but Sanskrit was the elite’s.
Sringara is not an obstacle to Dharma. In fact, Sringara can inspire it. The most beautiful of women, after all, inspire men to climb the most difficult of mountains.
To reconstitute a Dharmic Indic elite, its romantic aesthetic, courtly etiquette, and noblesse oblige must all be reconstituted as well and adapted to the present time.
But crooked kupamandukas and selfish gyaanis bereft of nobility cannot revive the romantic with their bumpkin aesthetic—they forever dream of the erotic and pass off sringara as merely sensual.
Sringara is more than just sensuality: it is the self-sacrifice and refined affection and cultivated commitment of the gentlemanly and ladylike alike. These couples live on not only in each others arms, or in the pages of history, but in the hearts and souls of a people.
Kale, M.R. Dasakumaracarita of Dandin. Delhi: MLBD. 2009
Vatsyayan, Kapila. Bharata: The Natyasastra. Sahitya Akademi.2007
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
Good character is not formed in a week or a month. It is created little by little, day by day. Protracted and patient effort is needed to develop good character.
Like many words in our post-modern dystopia, character is one that has increasingly become of receding importance. It too, like virtue, has been mentioned here and there by the ever more reticent and the socially brave. It is the great tragedy of our times that to mention the words character or virtue (or lady or gentleman) has become a curiosity at best or an offence on the “rights” of others at worst.
We have created a society that thrives on Politically Correct protection of Characterless-ness. We have created a society that valorises IQ-obsessed hoop-jumpers who are nothing but glorified poodles performing tricks to the applause of fellow canines. This is touted as the purpose of our education: “Get job, earn salary, have money for children’s marriage, retire”. But
the End goal of Education is Character.
Why do we learn? What is the value of learning?
A quick google-search demonstrates that “crisis of character” remains more of an eye-catching book title, and “Global crisis of character” an even more circumscribed, circumvallation of religious, new-age’y bent.
Shouldn’t the test for merit be capability in your circumstances, character to apply your education to useful things, and competence to do the job properly & honourably?
That is the problem today. Generally, the Elite School Grads in the US have wanted to be “Bankers, Consultants, & Lawyers”, and in India, primarily engineers (or unemployable Humanities graduates) desiring to go abroad to make money…generally doing the same. The Reservation system is admittedly broken—after all, government positions exist to ensure competent officers to do the work of the public…not as a socio-economic experiment. Past injustices should be remedied, but not to the extent that the purpose of a job or a position is forgotten. And this applies for our so-called “merit” candidates as well. Merely demonstrating ability to take a test is not demonstrative of competence for the position. The present poor reputation of IAS babus is emblematic of that. For all their read and regurgitate, the only real capacity most have demonstrated is capacity to secure sinecures. Even the much vaunted scientist ultimately works for someone, generally more strategically intelligent than they are. What then is the purpose of education?
Is it merely to create individuals substituting one form of power (analytical) for another (wealth or lineage?). What happens when alleged “high iq types” sellout the national interest, because they have calculated that to be the most “efficient” course of action? What kind of society does this create?
Once upon-a-time, societies the world over would have families that sacrificed themselves for the nation, or individuals who would sacrifice themselves for families. That was the meaning of nobility, true nobility. Today we have families that sacrifice the nation for themselves, and individuals who sacrifice their own families for their own egos.That is the meaning of bastardy, true Bastardy.
This is the crisis of character we face today. And make no mistake, for all our cutting criticism of India and Indians, this is a global crisis. In India it is in fact least obvious due to Bharat remaining one of the last refuges of traditional, family-oriented culture—but this too is flailing fast.
The characterless have inherited the Earth, And they hide in many forms to justify their bastardy: Beauty, Wealth, Caste, Ritual, IQ, and now, of course, Genetics. But Might, in whatever form it is found, doesn’t make Right. If knowledge is power, so is beauty. If money is power, so is (caste) privilege. When elites (of whatever type) are formed for their own enjoyment, when power for its own sake becomes self-justifying, when no higher ideal beyond “cause we are” or “cause I can” is appealed to, then not only is the Kali Yuga deep, but the characterless have inherited the earth.
That is why the means of their power becomes sanctified as the most important quality, rather than merely another cog in the wheel. “Because she’s hot”, “Because he’s rich”, “Because they’re my caste”, “Because Holy Ritual”, “Because High IQ”, and now “Because Good Genes”. Character, what makes the world livable, what makes burdens bearable, what makes romance meaningful, what makes an individual trustable…character itself is near nowhere to be found, let alone, emphasised. The removal of racial quotas in American universities is well and good, but the removal of character as a qualifier has wreaked havoc.
It is because teleology has gone by the way-side our society has become inert and ineffectual. Addled not-only by sensual pleasure but by over-indulged ego, we have lost sight of why we do things at all, and do them for their own sake, or because others are doing it to.
Why do we eat?
Why do we sleep?
Why do we have sex?
Why do we live?
But perhaps, most important of all, why do we learn?
Many may ask, why learning has become more important than living, and that is because we live in an era where quantity of life has become more important than quality of life. Similarly, quantity of learning has become more important than quality of learning (wisdom). Lack of learning, true learning, is emblematic of this. The pedant of myriad memory tricks has become more important than the practicing pandit. The philognostic more important than the philosopher. Mere quantity of learning, mere quantity of knowledge, and competitions to showcase it in unseemly ego displays to the applause of the clueless and the tasteless, has resulted in wisdom being sidelined.
What is Character
Before one can construct character, or even understand how crucial it is, one must first learn what it means in its full sense. Moral character is only one aspect of personal character. Purity of conduct is important, but only one element. In our era, one of the all too tragic tragedies is that women (and men) who may have stumbled once on the moral purity aspect, wonder what at all the point is in preserving the rest of their character. But that is unfair (to them) and all too dangerous for society. Everyday you have a choice as to whether you decide to be a good person or a bad person. It’s upto you whether you want one fall to multiply into many.
Admittedly, it is very difficult to negotiate the treacherous waters of college popularity, and pressure to preserve relationships often leads one to do things one may not wish to do. But rather than a binary of 1 and 0, think of character as a spectrum. Even if you cannot be that absolute sterling character in kathaor purana, keep the essence of who you are, and try to be some modern version of the ancient standard.
Strength of character allows you to carry out your will freely, while enabling you to cope with setbacks. It assists you to accomplish your goals in the end.
It allows you to inquire into the causes of ill-fortune, instead of just complaining about it, as many are inclined to do.
It gives you the courage to admit your own faults, frivolousness, and weaknesses.
It gives you the strength to keep a foothold when the tide turns against you, and to continue to climb upward in the face of obstacles. 
More than Trivial Pursuit, GK games, IQ obsession & Eugenics theories to preserve your favourite perspective, wisdom and intellectual humility are needed to do the intelligent thing. That can only come from character. Udhaarabhaava (good character) or Aryabhava (Noble character). That is what is lacking today. Instead we have people full of Kusheela or Paapasheela (Bad and Ignoble Character). The Rishi has been replaced by the Marjaar.
Character (especially Noble Character) is about having integrity to do the right thing when obvious, even when difficult.It’s about who you are when no one else is watching.
Character is about building a community, not using people and throwing them away after.
Character is about “dancing with the one that brung you”, not running off with the one who shows up later in the fancy car.
Character is about building institutions for the common good, not just promoting your own brand or clique.
Character is about having the courage to do the right thing, even if it is the difficult thing. It is in putting societal duties above personal obligations. It is in looking after the common welfare rather than merely private social-climbing.
Character does not consist of putting up dp’s and gravatars showcasing severity to hide behind. Real character is not tough talk or braggadocio. It is about setting aside one’s ego to come together for the common good.
And yet, what do we have today. The self-same self-anointed saviours of society don’t even have the character to introspect, and ask whether they are doing the right thing or supporting the wrong voices, stubbornly hold on to illogical colonial theories. In their culture of “bros before hoes” they have forgotten what it means to be gentlemen of noble character (Aryabhava). They talk of “red pill” manliness, while failing to have the thumos to defend women.
Worst of all, they don’t even have the character to intelligently and intellectually confront those fundamentally harming the common interest, leading the innocent internet hindu off a cliff. Content to merely troll each other, the intellectual descendants of Tilak don’t even have the manhood to intellectually counter neo-Revolutionary views that would destroy their society. And forget introspection, that is the least of their worries. Follower counts are far more important. So much for thumos. So much for the self-anointed “The Best and the Brightest”.
Best and the Brightest
In our IQ and genetics obsessed era of error, the examples of history, even recent history, are often forgotten. Credentialed hoop-jumpers are quick to point out that they must axiomatically be “the best and the brightest”. But what they forget is that, this term has actually acquired a duly negative connotation. But it is not just politicians who are worthy of censure and condemnation.
The laundry list of professional doctors, lawyers, MBA’s, and yes, even scientists, have set aside their responsibility & duty, in their money or sinecure-snorting state of hubris.
And yet, how quickly we forget the lessons of ethics. How quickly we forget the responsibility of knowledge. When you only ask whether you can or could without asking whether or not you should, this is what happens. “The Best and the Brightest” indeed…
Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote that simplicity is better than complexity, but if we must have a sophisticated culture, let it celebrate virtue:
It is by following this example that the truly great monarch…drew from the very bosom of the arts and sciences…the dangerous trust of human knowledge…yet the sacred guardians of morals…
Those Academies also, which, in proposing prizes for literary merit, make choice of such subjects as are calculated to arouse the love of virtue in the heart of citizens…not only by agreeable exercises of the intellect, but also by useful instructions. [1,92]
We have physicists, geometricians, chemists, astronomers, poets, musicians, and painters in plenty; but we have no longer a citizen among us
But compare his example to what we have today. Perennially mocked, our self-proclaimed “high iq types” crave power…if only their sheer genius could be appreciated.
Even beyond the obsession with mathematicisation, model-based thinking has produced “erudite” but common sense lacking solutions such as this:
The council of “Alphas” vs “Sub-Omegaloids”. Food for thought for our “High IQ Types”. Why mere “analytical horsepower” isn’t enough for developing and implementing practical, strategic solutions to societal problems.
The intelligent, IQ, EQ, or multiple-intelligent, all can be corrupted by power. It is not a dearth of genius that destroys societies, but a dearth of character.
Dearth of Character leads to Death of Societies. And perhaps that is the greatest tragedy of our times. Sarasvati is sought by those craving learning—yet they forget that she is venerated above all as the apotheosis of the Truth.Vagdevi is Speech personified, and that speech is that which is true. Sarasvati is the Truth, and rather than mere learning, it is preservation of the Truth that is most sacred, and automatically brings prosperity and power, but most importantly, gives us purpose. But today the pleasant lie is preferred to the unpleasant truth. Individuals hold on to what they have been taught so they can see themselves as “learned”, failing to ask whether what they have learned is in fact erroneous. Ego has become more important than reality.
He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods… – Thomas Jefferson pic.twitter.com/oCpNRolOk8
It is not “high IQ types” who guide society. IQ is a limited and increasingly questionable measure of intelligence–even among those with the highest of IQ’s. In fact, the multiple intelligence model is increasingly taught in the Western Academy. What good is IQ if the position requires management of individuals? What good is IQ if reading of emotion is required? What good is IQ if strategic thinking is required to pull disparate bits of information across disciplines? Suitability for position is determine beyond test-taking ability.
Make no mistake, subject-matter understanding is required. But mastery of theory is one thing, competence in practice is another.
Do you take the candidate who gets 100% marks but is characterless and will engage in corruption?–or do you take the candidate with 90% marks, but who has a reputation for honesty and competent job performance? What good is your (self-proclaimed) IQ if you are a coward, and cannot withstand pain or pressure (or even momentary discomfort), to safeguard the common good? That is the problem today. India (and other parts of the world) are training “high iq” hoop jumpers who excel as slaves, rather than as citizens of character. But a high iq slave is still a slave.
In our era of Jan Lokpal and entitled hypocrites of all sorts attempting to anoint themselves guardians of society, the eternal question is not just rhetorical, it has an answer:
Characterless-ness may seem to be cost-free to those without character, but that is because they tend to be the primary beneficiaries. In fact, they freely engage in it only until the costs are visited upon them–at which point, they become the loudest (and most hypocritical) of bemoaners. We all know that person.
Then of course, there are those voices who will proclaim, “Well, that’s to be expected, we have to maximise utility, and all I am doing is utility maximisation”, or “Ayn Rand tells me its ok to be selfish”. This is what happens when consumer culture (yes, even experiences and love can be consumed–just ask expedia.com, yatra, or hallmark) becomes the driving guide rather than relationships. We have become so driven by fear of “missing out” and “YOLO [which any thinking Hindu should axiomatically reject]”, that having that experience or doing what you want becomes more important than who you are doing with.
Social media and mobile phones have made it even easier to bail on our friends and family (when something better comes along). This too is characterlessness. True, there is a difference between skipping out on your friend’s 30th so you could see Coldplay, and missing a family event because you have a rare chance to meet the President. But proportionality has long ago gone out the window, especially for Indians. Sentiment and consumption based-living devolves into precisely that animal instinct of doing something because it feels good (or not doing something because it hurts bad). That is calculation not consideration. Consideration for others is at the heart of character, because we ask what is the best for all or most, rather than what is just pleasant for ourselves. When man (or woman) cares more about how much, rather than, with whom, this is the end result.
Others may demur, saying “Well, it’s what’s fashionable”. True, media-messaging across the spectrum has been promoting the fast-based consumer life-style. False dichotomies are presented across the board (i.e. old fashion vs hyper-modern). But one can live in the modern world while maintaining some semblance of ethics and morality. The problem is, that there is no support for voices that use the medium of modernity to support traditional values. For all the stereotypes of the African-American community and their music, it was never just “gangsta rap” or “bitches and hoes”. This is a song from the late 90s when all that was at its height.
What was the message for young men & women alike?
Girls: Who you gon’ tell when the repercussions spin?
Showing off your ass ’cause you’re thinking it’s a trend
Guys: How you gonna win if you ain’t right with them?
This Lauryn Hill ‘feat is in many ways a lament of Post-Modernity and the tragic downfall of her community (mentioned here). The obvious contrasts between 1967 and 1998 are clearly seen in split-screen. She soulfully sings of how easily women are prepared to “give it away” for material things and how men are prepared to take advantage of women for “that thing”. She asks men, how can they think they win if they don’t treat women right? But no, that’s ok, gangsta rap, red pill, and racist IQ theories are more important to hide behind to slander a race or community.
The reality is, such songs as Lauryn Hill’s are ignored by those who only want to be told what they want to hear. If you don’t value the right thing, if you don’t have the right moral aesthetic, you embrace a soulless one [particularly if you understand subtext]. Before people complain about “moralising”, bear in mind, even yester-year songstress Lauryn Hill sang that she’s not perfect, and was once young and in the same shoes, the “same predicament” as today’s young ladies. But character is not about falling for the trend if you ever fall, but in bucking the trend if it lacks aesthetic, especially moral aesthetic.
The reality is, it’s not a false dichotomy, a false choice between fun vs tradition(-al boredom), between barefeet vs high heels, or dhotis vs blue jeans.
The choice is between no respect and know respect.
Character is about not only respecting others and their genuine interests/well-being but also about respecting yourself. Self-respect.
Everyone wants fun, but the question is, what are they prepared to do to get it?Everyone prefers to avoid pain, but what are they prepared to do to avoid it? Any idiot can knock up a girl, but it’s taking responsibility for your actions that separates the men from the boys.
“Any fool can have a child, that doesn’t make you a father“. Being a man is about taking responsibility for your actions. A real man isn’t the one who “gets with as many chicks as he can“. A real man, is one who shows character in looking after those from whom he is responsible, and not just following fashion, but bucking the trend when necessary. And for those who argue, “Vell, vee are all animals, so we should not be ashamed of instinct”, well, there’s this to think about too:
At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst. ~ Aristotle
Ladies, of course, are no less innocent. They too have made poor choices. If men have become obsessed about sex, women have become obsessed about material possessions–each gender tormenting the other over having “more”. Character isn’t about not wanting to have fun. Character is about not wanting to hurt others in order to have fun. Do you value the experience, do you value “that thing”, more than the human being?
And when others are hurting those for whom you are responsible, standing up and doing the right thing to defend them, is also character. In fact, it is national character.
The Global Crisis of Character is also reflected in the Comity of Nations. A nation is nothing but a community, a family, writ on larger scale. It is national character that determines national priorities, and even the willingness to prioritise properly. The problem invariably comes when individuals want to have all the exceptions, all the tax deductions, all the national service exemptions, while others must do their duty with due diligence. Do as I say, not as I do.
Declining national character is increasing even in the most powerful of nations. How to secure the national character? The strategically clueless continually look for any excuse to drum up ritual. Their latest theory is that “holy ritual” is the origin of the martial–joke. Perhaps that may be the case for the characterless, but the origin of the martial is in Rajo guna. Those who fail to value rajas are usually mired in tamas (whatever their claims to the sattvic). It is Rajo guna that drives the martial and Rajo guna that is required to secure the national character. It is what drives individuals to endure, to not cave in when facing terrible odds, and to hearken to their allies when common interests are threatened. No wonder the ritualistic are confounded…they practice none of these things. This is a Jaichand complex in the making.
Loyalty to obvious Jaichands whose treachery is exposed is as good as being a Jaichand yourself. Arjuna was very loyal to Drona, who was his “AchArya”. But as Krishna conveyed to him, Drona was on the side of Adharma, and he had his own hidden agenda. Whatever past goodwill or Rna, the needs of Dharmaare higher. That is how character is demonstrated. Not by sacrificing the vulnerable like Yudhisthira did to Draupadi, so that he could keep his word on the wager, but by making the difficult decision to set aside your own Rna, your own personal obligation, for the common good.
For 1000 of years India was defeated, occupied, looted & ruled by the invaders not because India was weak but there was always a Jaichand. pic.twitter.com/bZJ8IYHdsv
India’s record is actually slightly better than that, as there was resistance and even rollback throughout the 1000 years (which is closer to 5-600 years if one thinks of all of India, rather than just Northwest India). But the point of the honourable Minister is spot on. In our obsession for IQ, we are forgetting the need to evaluate character. Do you hang tough and stand by your countrymen when the going gets tough–or do you cut a side deal to keep your ill-deserved kingdom or because you feel he wronged you.
More than the Jaichands, it is the selfish crab who, despite repeated calls to unite by Shivaji, preferred to slink in his own lair, feigning ignorance or arrogance. The British too did not even require every Indian king to betray his fellow Bharatiya; John Company only needed them to not give support to their countrymen at crucial times.
Failing to join together to preserve the common interest is not only a recipe for common slavery, but indicative of a loss of character. The ability to endure pain is the sign of the statesman. It is the sign of the kshatriya (intellectual or otherwise), and that incidentally gave away Karna’s true birth. But in our era, whatever your birth caste, if you play a role in civic affairs, if you wish to have a hand in the destiny of the nation, you must have the character to make the painful decision, when it is clear that it is the right decision.
Enjoying the bonhomie of the decade-old digital salon is easy. Recognising a Jaichand in your midst and disavowing when apparent is the sign of true character…not dp’s of grave looking old men.
The Romans had many intelligent slaves to serve as tutors in intellectual matters—yet, they remained the rulers. After all, “High IQ” slaves are still slaves.
Alcibiades too was “high iq”, but ultimately betrayed his nation. Carthage had the more brilliant general in Hannibal, but Rome’s character & citizenry ensured Scipio had the support to defeat him.
Talent is good. But talent, plus hard work, plus character is even better. Great talent will be defeated by medium talent with better character.
More than that, the desire to coast on talent, the desire to rely merely on clever talk, rather than concerted and consistent efforts is what threatens the national cause. Parables and Panchatantrafables abound over the value of consistent and concerted action rather than coasting on talent. From the tortoise and the hare to the grasshopper and the ants, many a children’s story emphasises this importance. Even the career of Vijay Amritraj is emblematic of this. That is because…
The Power of Character
The Sanskrit drama Mrcchakatika is famous in Classical Indic Literature for many reasons. The author Sudraka was himself a king, but the story is notable for the character of Charudatta, who was noted for his…character.
The archetypal dhiroshanta, Charudatta was a Brahmana of famed noble characteristics. So great was his character and virtue, that the courtesan Vasantasena fell in love with his qualities and gave up her life of luxury, pleasure, and comfortable wealth, for the mere chance at marrying such a good man. Charudatta underwent many difficulties and injustices in his life, and even came very close to death. But his character was his guide throughout it all, and he endured terrible risks in order to preserve it. That was why he was respected by all and venerated for his wisdom and advice…tested by circumstance and demonstrated by example.
To conclude, there is a famous legend about King Vikramaditya of Ujjain. The ever vigilant Maharaja was also a famed adherent of the truth. One night, when he was silently guarding his capital incognito, he saw a beautiful woman, verily a Devi, clad in red, leave the city. He stopped her, asking, “Oh Devi, who are you and why are you leaving?“. She responded, “I am the Goddess of Power. I am leaving this city as the citizens have become criminal, and it is no longer a fit abode for me”. “I understand“, replied Vikramaditya .
Then, another beautiful lady, clad in gold, began leaving. Vikramaditya asked her too “Oh Devi, who are you and why are you leaving?“. She replied, “Oh Maharaja, I am the Goddess of Wealth. I am leaving your capital as the citizens have become corrupt, and it is no longer a fit abode for me”. “I understand“, he relented again.
Finally, a third beautiful lady, clad in white, began leaving. Vikramaditya asked her too, “Oh Devi, who are you and why are you leaving?” She replied, “Oh Rajan, I am the Goddess of Truth. I am leaving your people as they have become immoral“. This time Vikramaditya said “Oh Devi, please do not leave. I can live a life without Power and Wealth, but I cannot live a life without Truth. I beg you, please stay in my kingdom“. The Goddess smiled, and said “So, be it”.
Soon, the Goddess of Wealth returned. Surprised, Vikramaditya asked “Oh Devi, why have you returned?“. She replied “I am the Goddess of Wealth, I reside where Truth resides”. Then finally the Goddess of Power returned. Amazed, Vikramaditya asked “Oh Devi, why have you returned?”. She replied “I am the Goddess of Power, I reside where Wealth resides”.
The moral of the story, of course, is that power, wealth, pleasure, all can be given up in the name of Truth (of which Dharma is the expression), because they are dependent upon it. This is because men and women of character can lose every material possession in the world, every opportunity for pleasure, every right of power, but their character is in their own hands.
If wealth is lost, nothing is lost. If health is lost, something is lost. But if character is lost, then all is lost.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract and Discourses. BN. 2007
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.