Manu Smriti : An Amazing Origin

I have chanced upon this remarkable reduction of Manu Smriti @ http://satyavidya.org … The treatise contains a set of codified, socially agreed laws to regulate human society, right through the reigns of successive Solar dynasty kings upto Rama Daasratha of Ayodhya and thereafter, until the rise of Lunar dynasts that came to overwhelm the subcontinental firmament around the Mahabharata times.

The laws, framed anytime between 12000 – 8000 BC at the origin of Sanatan civilisation, seem astoshnishingly contemporary except for contradictory portions that appear to have been appended later, perhaps after the dominance of Solar kings was on the wane and during the chaos of several rising Lunar principalities around 4000 – 3000 BC.

The entire text can be accessed @ http://sanskritdocuments.org/all_pdf/manusmriti.pdf

DR VIVEK ARYA helpfully points out … (Manu 2/8)

“But a learned man after full scrutiny with the eye of knowledge should perform his duties in accord with the intent of the revealed texts.”

The exhortation encourages due situational analysis and agreeability with values prevailing in the age.

Let us then inquire into the common unfavourable perception that the Smriti text supports casteism, inferior status of women, meat eating, etc. The book is considered by many as having a bias in favour of the upper castes and is often selectively quoted to establish that women were an inferior gender, to be chastised and put down, and that casteism was prevalent in Vedic times.

Swami Dayanand, the great Vedic scholar of the 19th Century, writes : “I believe in that part of Manu Smriti which is not interpolated (appended later) and is in accord with the Vedas.” He concludes that the Manu Smriti we read today is not as originally laid down by Swayambhu  Manu, the first Chief of Humanity. As it now is, he found the text as self contradictory and against the values espoused in Vedas, and hence injudicious. He therefore rejects those prejudicial texts which advocate discrimination against populations with alleged inferior status.

Let us look up the text itself pertaining to women and the “lower” castes …

Smriti Text … On Women

3/56. Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they are not, no sacred rite yields the desired result.

9/26. Women who bear (our) children secure many blessings (for the family and the society at large); they are worthy of worship, who suffuse (their) dwellings with prosperity; there is no difference between them and goddesses of good fortune.

2/138. Way must be made for a man in a carriage, one who is above ninety years old, who is diseased, who carries a burden, and for a woman, the learned, the king and for a bridegroom.

3/114. A person may offer food without hesitation, even before serving the guests in one’s house, to newly-married women, infants, the sick, and to pregnant women.

3/60. Where the husband is pleased with his wife and the wife with her husband, happiness will assuredly be lasting in such families.

3/62. Where the wife is radiant and happy, the whole house is heaven-like; but if she is unhappy, all will appear as hell.

3/59. Hence, men who seek (their own) welfare, should always honour women on holidays and festivals with (gifts of) ornaments, clothes and  food (as desired by them).

3/55. Women must be honoured and well – adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands and brothers-in-law, who desire (their own) welfare.

9/13. These six causes spell ruin for women : drinking (spirituous liquor), associating with wicked people, separating from their husbands, rambling abroad, sleeping (at unseasonable hours), and dwelling with other men.

3/57. Where the female relatives live in grief, the family wholly perishes soon; where they are not unhappy, the family ever prospers.

3/58. Houses perish completely, as if destroyed by magic, on which female relatives pronounce a curse, upon not being duly honoured.

9/28. Upon one’s wife alone depends the welfare of the offsprings, due and fruitful performance of religious rites, faithful service of all in the family, superior conjugal happiness and the blissful existence of our ancestors in heaven and of ourself.

4/180. Let no man quarrel with his parents, his female relatives, brothers, his son and his wife, and with his daughter and his servants.

8/389. Neither a mother nor a father, nor a wife nor a son shall be cast off; unless guilty of a crime causing loss of caste (or social status earned over one’s lifetime), he who casts them off shall be fined six hundred (panas).

9/130. A daughter, who is even (as) oneself, (such a daughter) is equal to a son; how can another (heir) take the family estate, while such (an appointed daughter who is even as oneself) lives ?

9/131. The property of the mother is the share of the unmarried daughter alone and the son of an (appointed) daughter shall take the whole estate of (his maternal grandfather) who leaves no son of his own.

9/192. But when the mother has passed away, all uterine brothers and sisters shall have equal share of their mother’s estate.

Smriti Text … On Marraige and Remarraige (Of Women)

9/176. If she be (still) a virgin or has returned (to her first husband) after leaving him, such a woman is worthy to again perform the (nuptial) ceremony with her second (or first deserted) husband.

9/90. Three years let a damsel wait, though she is marriageable; but after that time let her choose for herself a bridegroom of her choice.

9/89. (But) the maiden should rather stay in (her father’s) house until death, though marriageable, than that be given to a man without good qualities.

8/28. In like manner, care must be taken of barren women and those who have no sons, as of those whose family is extinct, of wives and widows faithful to their lords, and of women afflicted with disease.

8/29. A righteous king must punish those relatives who appropriate the property of such females during their lifetime, as is due to thieves.

3/52. But those (male) relations who, in their folly, live on their woman’s property, their beasts of burden, carriages and clothes, commit sin and will sink into hell.

8/367. But if any man through insolence forcibly contaminates a maiden, two of his fingers shall be instantly cut off and he shall pay a fine of six hundred (panas).

8/323. Men stealing from a noble family, especially women, and precious gems, deserve corporal (or capital) punishment.

8/352. Men who commit adultery with wives of others, the king shall cause to be marked by punishments which cause terror, and they shall be banished thereafter.

9/232. The king shall put to death forgers of royal edicts, those who corrupt his ministers, who slay women, infants, (learned) Brahmins, and those who serve his enemies.

 9/96. Women were created to be mothers and men to be fathers; religious rites, therefore, are ordained in the Veda to be performed (by the husband) together with the wife.

4/149. She must not seek to separate herself from her father, husband, or sons; by leaving them she would make both (her own and her husband’s) families contemptible.

Contradictory Provisions In Smriti Appended Later …

2/213. It is the nature of women to seduce men in this (world); for that reason the wise are never unguarded in (the company of) females.

5/ 154. Though destitute of virtue, or seeking pleasure (elsewhere), or devoid of good qualities, (yet) a husband must be constantly worshipped as a god by a faithful wife.

5/ 157. At her pleasure let her emaciate her body by (living on) pure flowers, roots, and fruit; but she must never even mention the name of another man after her husband has died.

9/ 17. (When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct.

As against these, Manu Smriti mentions equal status, good conduct, equal rights, freedom of choice and the right to remarriage.

Clearly, these interpolations are to be rejected.

Smriti Text … On The Under Privileged

Manu proposes varn vyastha — which was based on merit and not on account of one’s birth.

2/157. As an elephant made of wood, as an antelope made of leather, such is an unlearned Brahmana; those three have nothing but the names (devoid of virtues respective to their kind).

2/28. This (human) body is made fit for (union with) Brahman by study of the Vedas, by vows, by burnt oblations, by (recitation of) sacred texts, by (acquisition of the) threefold sacred science, by offering (to gods, sages and manes), by (procreation of) sons, by great sacrifices, and by (the Srauta) rites 

(The above texts lays the qualifications to be acquired, with great dedication and effort at specified works, in order to become a Brahmin, and not merely by being born to a Brahmin father.) 

The varn of a person (caste or status in society) was decided after completion of his education.

Two births were considered for a person in Vedic period : first, when he was born to his parents, and, next, when he completed his education with due thoroughness. It was after second birth (twice born) that the varn of person was determined.

The following text from Manu Smriti makes it even more clear.

2/148. But that birth which a teacher acquainted with Vedas entire, in accordance with the law, procures for him (the student) through the Savitr (Sun), is real and exempt from his birth, age or death.

2/146. Between him to whom one is physically born and him who gives (the knowledge of) the Vedas, the giver of the Veda is the more venerable father; for birth through arising in the knowledge of the Veda (ensures) eternal (reward) both in this (life) and that (afterlife).

A person who remained uneducated and devoid of the knowledge of Vedas was considered a Shudra.

That is, the Shudra varn was not based on birth but on merit.

10/4. Brahmana, Kshatriya and the Vaisya castes (Varna) are twice-born (educated) but the fourth, the Shudra, has one birth only; there is no fifth (caste).

2/172. He who has not been initiated with teaching of the Vedas is like a Shudra.

Manu also advises not to insult a person of lower Varna.

4/141. Let him not insult those who have redundant limbs or are deficient in limbs, nor those destitute of knowledge, nor very aged men, nor those who have no beauty or wealth, nor those who are of low birth.

Why Manu started varn vyastha?

1/31. But for the sake of the prosperity of the worlds he caused the Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya and the Shudra varn origin in form of the body of the society : as its mouth, its arms, its thighs and its feet, respectively.

(Only the ignorant consider the shudra as being originated from the feet of god.)

1/87. But in order to protect this universe He (God), the most resplendent one, assigned separate (duties and) occupations to those as done in a body by mouth, arms, thighs, and feet.

1/88. To Brahmanas He assigned teaching and studying (the Vedas), sacrificing for their own benefit and for the welfare of others, giving and accepting (of alms).

1/89. The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Vedas), and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual pleasures;

1/90. The Vaisya to tend cattle, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Vedas), to trade, to lend money, and to cultivate the land.

1/91. One occupation only the Lord prescribed to the Shudra : to serve these (other) three castes.

Manu considered anyone who is without knowledge or capacity for skilled deeds as a Sudra; so any uneducated person is fit only for being in the service, under the guidance, of others who have the requisite knowledge and skills.

Isn’t that how we are organised even today ?

Manu also advises people to exert in order to acquire a higher varna, and change his or her allotted Varna.

The advisory leaves varn vyastha changeable, fluid, and not based on birth but on merit alone.

10/65. (Thus) a Shudra attains the rank of a Brahmana, and (in a similar manner) a Brahmana sinks to the level of a Shudra; and know that it is the same with the offspring of a Kshatriya or of a Vaisya.

9/335. (A Shudra who is) pure, accompanies his betters and is gentle in his speech, free from pride, and always seeks a refuge with Brahmanas, attains a higher Varna (Brahmana, Kshatriya or Vaisya) based on his qualities.

4/245. A Brahmana who always connects himself with the most excellent (ones), and shuns all inferior ones, (himself) becomes most distinguished; by an opposite conduct he becomes a Shudra.

Is it not said : the company one keeps makes a man better or worse ? 

2/103. But he who does not worships in morning, nor in the evening, is like a Shudra and he shall be excluded, just like a Shudra, from all the duties and rights of an Arya (one of noble qualities).

2/168. A twice-born man who, not having studied the Vedas, applies himself to other (and worldly study), soon falls, even while living, to the condition of a Shudra; and so do his descendants (after him).

2/126. A Brahmana who does not know the form of returning a salutation, they must not be saluted by a learned man; they must be considered as a Shudra.

A Sudra too can teach the other castes.

2/238. He who possesses faith may receive pure learning even from a man of lower caste (Shudra), the highest law even from the lowest, and an excellent wife even from a base family.

2/241. It is prescribed that in times of distress (a student) may learn (the Vedas) from one who is not a Brahmana; and that he shall walk behind and serve (such a) teacher, as long as the instruction lasts.

Superior rights given by Manu to shudras.

2/136. Wealth, kindred, age, (the due performance of) rites, and, fifthly, sacred learning are titles to respect; but each later-named (cause) is more weighty (than the preceding ones).

2/137. Whatever man of the three (higher) castes possesses most of those five, both in number and degree, that man is worthy of honour among them; and (so is) also a Shudra who has entered the tenth (decade of his life).

In above text Manu gives respect to any Shudra who is in tenth decade of life.

That is, anybody who lives long enough transcends the varna vyavastha.

3/116. After the Brahmanas, the kinsmen, and the servants have dined, the householder and his wife may afterwards eat of what remains.

Householders are advised by Manu to dine after sudras or the servants !

8/335. Neither a father, nor a teacher, nor a friend, nor a mother, nor a wife, nor a son, nor a domestic priest must be left unpunished by a king, if they do not keep within their duty.

8/336. Where another common man would be fined one karshapana, the king shall be fined one thousand; that is the settled rule.

8/337. In (a case of) theft the guilt of a Shudra shall be eightfold, that of a Vaisya sixteen fold, that of a Kshatriya two-and-thirtyfold …

8/338. … that of a Brahmana sixty-fourfold, or quite a hundredfold, or (even) twice four-and-sixtyfold; (each of them) knowing the nature of the offence.

Manu advises strict punishment for a higher varna : punishing the Brahman many times more than a lower varn, say, a Shudra.

The above text is evidence of Manu’s unbiased social hierarchy and structure.

He considered a behavioural error as being more unpardonable in case of the learned one than for the ignorant.

Following are the examples of changing of varn vyastha in past.

Rishi Brahma, son Manu Swayambhu himself, was born to a Brahmana but became a Kshatriya king.

Manu’s eldest son, Priyavrat, became a king, a Kshatriya.

Out of Manu’s ten sons seven became kings while three became Brahmanas. Their names were Mahavir, Kavi and Savan. (Ref Bhagwat Puran Chap. 5)

Kavash Ailush was born to a Shudra and attained the highest varna of a Rishi. He became mantra-drashta to numerous hymns in Rig-Veda : 10th Mandal.

Jabala’s son, Satyakaam, born from unknown father became Rishi by his qualities.

Matang became a Rishi after his birth in low varna.

Maharishi Valmiki was born in inferior varna and became a Rishi.

Mahatma Vidur was born to a Dasi (maid) and became the prime minister to king Dhritarastra.

Raja Vishvanath, a Kshatriya, became a Brahmana – Rishi Vishwamitra.

There are many examples of varn vyastha to inferior level.

Ravan king of Lanka was son of a Brahmana Rishi Pultasya became a rakshasa.

Shri Ram’s ancestor, Raja Raghu’s son, Pravidh, was declared of inferior varna due to lack of qualities.

Shri Ram’s ancestor, Raja Samar’s son, Asmanjas, was declared a Shudra due to his bad qualities.

I leave the contradictory appended textsfor now … the ones that make the varna structure hard and fast, as indeed happened later.

Advertisements

A Poet In Afghanistan

A Young Poet Exiled From Her Village

By: Fahim Khairy, KHAAMA PRESS

Source : http://www.khaama.com/a-young-poet-exiled-from-her-village-9887

 

Persian poetry has a long history of fighting injustice and discrimination, dating back centuries. From Jalaluddin Rumi Balkhi and Rabia Balkhi to modern poets such as Foroogh Farokhzad, many have raised their voices through poetry to attack injustice. These poets often touched on taboos that no one dared speak of, fearing punishment from kings and other rulers.

Karima Shabrang is a new sword in the battle for justice and equal rights for women in Afghanistan. Shabrang soon came up against people who do not believe women should be equals. Shabrang was born in Baharak in the Badakhshan province. She studied Farsi/Dari literature and poetry at Kabul University. After graduating, she moved back to her village and started to work as a school teacher.

Shabrang was not yet known as an Afghan poet. She never showed her creative work to anyone until her first book hit the market and shocked everyone who read just a few pages. In Baharak village, Shabrang had enjoyed a peaceful life. She had the chance to publish her first poetry book titled Beyond Infamy.

Her work breaks taboos and carries a depth and darkness. As leading Afghan poet and professor Partaw Nadery said, Shabrang writes in pain and blood. In much of her work, Shabrang shows what it is like to be a victim of sexism. She was working as a teacher when her book was first published. She did not realize how people would react to her poetry.

My hair was saved for you

But destiny left it in the hands of a stranger

Who uses it to fuel his own desire’

* * *

Leave the buttons of your shirt open

Allow me to look at your eyes

And a little lower, let me feel the heat

and understand the warmth of the sun in your chest

In Afghan society, women cannot speak of their love desire, not even in poetry. It’s considered criminal, shameful, and dishonorable to do so, but Shabrang courageously broke this taboo. When asked about the message of these lines, she said that “being in the arms of the opposite gender is a need for everyone, including women. This was an empty spot in our society, and I wanted to fill it in and show the feelings and sensations of a woman.”

Soon rumors reached her entire village, and Shabrang became famous. Finally the religious Mullahs got their hands on her book. Day by day, the peaceful and green village that had inspired Shabrang became like a prison for her. She was harassed on the way to school every day and her entire family felt the effects. The Mullahs called her an ”infidel” who wanted to put Afghan women on the wrong path, teaching them to be immoral and shameless.

The harassment escalated until the Mullahs were sending Shabrang death threats. She had no choice but to leave her village and come back to Kabul which she says is a little more modern and safe compared to the remote provinces.

Karima Shabrang is now homesick and homeless. She stays at nights in her brother’s house. During the day, she wanders around Kabul, searching for her future.

Sometimes, I miss myself

My house and the birds that sing in my village

And the stories I used to hear

Now suffering, misery, and I are friends

Mom, oh my dearest mother

Who told you to give birth to such a sad traveler?’

Karima Shabrang is a poetic star that is falling from the sky.  Breaking such taboos is not an easy thing to do in Afghanistan. Shabrang risked her life by publishing her poetry, and now she is on the run trying to escape the wrath of the Mullahs.

Those who are interested in getting in touch with Karima Shabrang can reach me at fahim.khairy(at)yahoo.com

English: Rabia Balkhi High School (Afghanistan)

Islam – Prehistory, Myths & Present (II)

The Damning Case Against Islam 

Gay muslims
Gay muslims (Photo credit: hebedesign)

Those who are familiar with this blog also know my antipathy

for the Islamic belief – system; not for the people who live with

the same physiology as the rest of humanity, experience the

same emotions, work, laugh and cry, and aspire as we all do.

Indeed, there is a need to understand why Muslims behave as they do; and the followers of Islam need that realisation the most !

Ali Sina, who was born to Muslim parents, writes @ http://alisina.org/about-ali-sina/ :

“We believe that only truth will set mankind free. The truth about Islam is so ugly that no one wants to look at it.  We did and revealed that truth with brutal honesty. The fact is that Muhammad was a psychopath. He was a liar, a pedophile, an assassin, a rapist, a thief, a lecher, a narcissist, a terrorist, a mass murderer and a madman. Muslims emulate a criminal and this explains the madness in the Islamic world.”

Islam divides mankind between Muslims and kafirs – a derogatory term that deniers of truth, blasphemers. And it instills hatred for the unbelievers among its believers, pitching them at a perpetual war, since no one has the authority to erase those canons from Islamic texts. 

We can never have peace when a fifth of mankind adheres to an ideology of hate and worships a psychopath who said non-Muslims are …

  • najis (filthy) (9:28),

  • don’t befriend them (9:23), 

  • let them find harshness in you (9:123),

  • instill terror in their hearts (8:12),

  • slay them wherever you find them (9:5),

  • and their property and women are made halal to you, enjoy them, they are lawful and good (8:69).

This faith of hate must be eradicated for humanity to survive and find its peace. Muslims must be read out the truth to wean them away from the barbaric exhortations of their books. (That indeed is the scope of this series of blog posts.)  The fact that more than a billion benighted souls worship a thug does not make this cult and its founder deserving of respect. The ‘Prophet’ is more of an unhinged cultist like Hitler, Stalin, Jim Jones, Shoko Asahara and Charles Manson, than an enlightened soul as Jesus, Buddha or Zoroaster. His is not a religion but a very dangerously misguided cult.

The hour is come to tear down the wall of distrust between Muslims and the rest of mankind. The men who effected over 21000 terror attacks since 9/11 are not a ‘few bad Muslims who have misunderstood Islam and Jihad’. According to Maltus Swiss Research, they have killed 9856 non-Muslims every day on an average in the period between year 2O10 and 2012 alone. It is a political script they following to terrorise others into submission and gain power for themselves.

It is no sane god that raises a religion to divide mankind and institute a never-ending war. Speaking of which, it needs mention that Allah is not God.  Originally known as the Moon god Hubaal (HaBaal in Hebrew),  Muhammad carved this deity in his own image. Like his creator, Allah is a narcissist.  Muhammad described ‘his’  Allah thus : 

khairul mâkerin (best deceiver)  3:54,

al mutakabbir (proud and haughty) 59:23 ,

al jabbâr (compeller, oppressor, tyrant) 59:23,

al qahhâr (subduer)  13:1614:4838:6539:440:16 ,

al khâfid (abaser) 95:5,

al mudhell (humiliator) 3:26,

al mumit (death giver3:1567:15815:2357:2,

al muntaqim (avenger32:2243:4144:16,

al mua’khkhir (delayer71:4 and

ad-dârr (harmer, afflictor6:17.

These are satanic attributes that underscore the threat of triumphant evil residing in man. They already reflect in how Muhammad acted in his own lifetime, treated women and children, and condemned his hordes to a life repressed.

Women, Before And After Islam

33.30 O Consorts of the Prophet !

If any of you are guilty of evident unseemly conduct,

the Punishment would double upon you,

and that is easy for Allah.

31.  But any of you that is devout in the service of Allah and His Messenger, and works righteously,

to her shall We grant her reward twice : and We have prepared for her a generous Sustenance.

That is how Muhammad would often remind his several wives to behave, in ways as to not attract the attention of other men and cover themselves up so they do not evoke desire among strangers.

32.  O Consorts of the Prophet !

Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear (Allah), be not too complacent of speech, lest one whose heart is diseased should be moved with desire : but speak ye a speech (that is) just.

33.  And stay quietly in your houses and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. For Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.

Are these verses from God or worries of an impotent aging man with a bevy of young and attractive wives ? Muhammad needed to control his wives and that is the reason behind the Islamic veil.  What was originally meant for the wives of the Prophet became part of Sharia, and is now imposed in all Islamic countries with ludicrous justifications.

That women in Arabia had more liberty and authority before Islam than after can also be evinced from the fact that Khadijah, Muhammad’s first wife, had a business of her own and had many men at her service. Muhammad was but one of her employees. Do we have any instance of a common woman in Islamic society who ran their own business and hired men to work for them ? 

Ironically, there is no mention of men going to suffer any consequence for mistreating their wives. As a matter of fact, men are instructed to abuse their wives verbally, emotionally, and physically.

Q.4:34 Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others; and because they spend out of their property; good women are therefore obedient (to men), guarding the unseen (their private physiology) as Allah has guarded; and (men,) (as to) those women on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places, and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High and Great.

If anyone has any doubt about the position of women in Islam, the above verse should make it clear. It takes away the woman’s independence and leaves them subservient to men. The verse suggests that men are the masters and owners of the house because they are the breadwinners. It implies that women are incapable of, and should not be allowed to, work and become providers. It assumes that a woman’s work at home, their taking care of children and the household, is worth nothing. And the a woman must be grateful for the piece of bread that her husband provides to her.

The entire train of explicit and implicit is worth a recount : First, the women are relegated to the rank of a slave. Then Muhammad goes further… He instructs men to punish their wives verbally, sexually and physically, downgrading them to the level of animals. In a world in which one could pay a fine for cruelty to animals and square up with calls for justice, the teachings of Quran are too obvious to swallow. It is unthinkable that a just God would pronounce such insults on women and condemn them to a life of such horror. The superiority of men over women is also ratified in verse 2:228 where it says : and men are a degree above them (women)”.

Plainly, Muhammad used these scare mongering tactics to collect money from his foolhardy women who gathered around him and listened to his stories because he held the power to shelter them or cast them to the wolves.

In another place the Prophet of Allah compares women to devil.

“Jabir reported that Allah’s Messenger saw a woman; so he came to his wife, Zainab, as she was tanning leather and had sexual intercourse with her. He then went to his Companions and told them : THE WOMAN ADVANCES AND RETIRES IN THE SHAPE OF A DEVIL, so when one of you sees a woman, he should come to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart.

~  Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301

Of course, the seer was speaking of the loins when he spoke of the heart. One empathises with how a wife feels while knowing that her husband is fancying another woman and is using her anatomy to merely relieve himself ! The morality of the Prophet of 1.2 billion followers of Islam is stark.

There are numerous verses in the Quran and Hadith that are similarly outrageous. Observe the sense in the following Hadith…

Abu Huraira narrated :

Allah’s Apostle said, “If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning.” ~ Bukhari Vol 4, Book 54, Number 460

It would seem from these verses that Allah has nothing better to do than worry about the sexual pleasure of his male servants. It is quite absurd that God would employ so many angels to sit around and curse the women who do not please their husbands sexually. Hadiths like these are repeated so frequently that one begins to suspect whether Allah is a dirty old pervert – a voyeur who obtained his pleasure through ensuring that men had their fill of pounding sex with their kept women.

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying : By Him in Whose Hand is my life, when a man calls his wife to his bed, and she does not respond, the One Who is in the heaven is displeased with her until he (her husband) is pleasured by her.

~ Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3367

It is easy to see that the Prophet of Islam was excessively concerned with sex. He was an old man with decaying teeth and foul smelling mouth, but with wives who were attractive courtesans. They must have enjoyed their status as the wives of the Prophet and the first ladies of Arabia, but may not have been keen to share the bed with an old man. Were the warnings about angel’s curse and Allah’s wrath were to coerce his wives to sleep with him ?

How can Muslim women endure so much insult and still trust the Prophet ? The following is a very obscene, derogatory and offensive statement from a man regarded as holy…

Narrated Usama bin Zaid :

The Prophet said, “After me, I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women.”

Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 33

The moral values and ethical benchmark of Muhammad are revealed in the following story…

Narrated Abu Usaid :

We went out with the Prophet to a garden called Ash-Shaut till we reached two walls, between which we sat, and The Prophet said, “Sit here,” and (himself) went in (the garden). The Jauniyya (a young girl from Bani Jaun) had been brought and lodged in the house in that date-palm garden, in the home of Umaima bint An-Nu’man bin Sharahil. Her wet nurse was with her. 

When the Prophet entered upon her, he said to her, “Give yourself to me (for sex) as a gift.” She said, “Can a princess give herself to an ordinary man ?”

The Prophet raised his hand to pat her so that she might become tranquil. She said, “I seek refuge with Allah from you.” He said, “You have sought refuge with One Who gives refuge.”

Then the Prophet came out to us and said, “O Abu Usaid ! Give her two white linen dresses to wear and let her go back to her family. 

~ Bukhari Volume 7, Book 63, Number 182

Didn’t Muhammad have enough women already ? Did he have to mount every beautiful woman, even girls under 10 years of age, whom he met ? We observe his wilful and uncontrolled temper : in a mere moment, he is overtaken by lust and compelled to ask the little Jauniyyah to “give herself to him as a gift”; when refused, he becomes violent and raises his hand to beat her; then, when she screams and seeks refuge with Allah, the brute in him comes to sense and feels guilty for his despicable behavior. To mollify his conscience, he decides to compensate the girl by bribing her with clothes. 

Is this the profile of a mentally stable man ?

For more, visit http://alisina.org/blog/2010/11/11/women-before-and-after-islam/

I Joke Because I Need Your Steam

Woman r guilty

|

Of course not, but the point made was as follows :

If women go for vaginaplasty or other ‘lotions’ to tighten up the vulva

to please the men or themselves,

or go for younger ‘studs’ to literally fill themselves up,

they actually are underscoring the value of size, the rub,

and virility or hotness of vitality for themselves …

|

Which is fine in itself, for themselves. Except that it is not.

For, why then is the society shocked or hold men guilty

when they go for their preference for size and softness,

when they fall for younger gals or have mistresses,

or when 60 year old Saudis marry 10 – 12 year olds

( it’s legal in their country ),

or when 1% of men can’t contain their desire overdrive

( any statistical distribution curve would be their alibi )

and grab girls in manner they legally should not…

such as kidnap, molestation or rape ?

 

I have to agree that ‘women’s lib’ trend should allow women the same statistical allowance

for some of them to kidnap, molest or rape men.

 

But, of course, I find myself covered with stupidity :

Society rightly want men to desist;

but from how it’s going, by the time men reform or even before,

women would need to be handed the same advice, to “desist.”

Untill there is no one to advise or listen.

 

Would the wiser ones, especially women, clarify the argument ?

For me, the issue might start with men or women, or both,

but its resolution must end in the family.

Anything, act or value, that harms the family,

breaks or erodes trust, or creates an unbridgeable distance,

should be unacceptable … inelectable, howsoever pleasureable

or legal it be, or legitimate and right it may seem !

|

English: Young Saudi Arabian woman wearing Isl...
Young Saudi Arabian woman …

Journal : Removing The Original Sin

Adding My Voice Against Circumcision …

In 1650, English physician John Bulwer in his study of body modification, ‘Anthropometamorphosis: Man Transform’d, or the Artificial Changeling,’ wrote of the loss in sexual pleasure resulting from circumcision: ‘the part which hangeth over the end of the foreskin, is moved up and down in coition, that in this attrition it might gather more heat, and increase the pleasure of the other sexe; a contentation of which they [the circumcised] are defrauded by this injurious invention. For, the shortnesse of the prepuce is reckoned among the organical defects of the yard, … yet circumcision detracts somewhat from the delight of women, by lessening their titillation.’

circumcision

According to Darby, it was also seen as a serious loss of erogenous tissue: ‘During the Renaissance and 18th century the centrality of the foreskin to male sexual function and the pleasure of both partners was recognized by anatomists Berengario da Carpi, Gabriello Fallopio and William Harvey, in popular sex manuals like Aristotle’s master-piece, and by physicians like John Hunter, who also appreciated the importance of the foreskin in providing the slack tissue needed to accommodate an erection.’

The English historian Edward Gibbon, author of The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, referred to the practice as ‘a painful and often dangerous rite,’ and a ‘singular mutilation’ practiced only by Jews and Turks.

The first formal objection to circumcision within Judaism occurred in 1843 in Frankfurt. The Society for the Friends of Reform, a group that attacked traditional Jewish practices, said that brit milah was not a mitzvah but an outworn legacy from Israel’s earlier phases, an obsolete throwback to primitive religion. With the expanding role of medicine came further opposition; certain aspects of Jewish circumcision such as periah and metzitzah (drawing the blood from the circumcision wound through sucking or a cloth) were deemed unhygienic. Later evidence that syphilis and tuberculosis – two of the most feared infectious diseases in the 19th century – were spread by mohels, caused various rabbis to advocate metzitzah to be done using a sponge or a tube.

Dr. John Harvey Kellogg recommended circumcision of boys caught masturbating, writing: ‘A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering anaesthetic, as the pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment.’ But he was opposed to routine circumcision of infants …

An early British opponent of circumcision was Herbert Snow, who wrote a short book called ‘The barbarity of circumcision as a remedy for congenital abnormality’ in 1890. But as late as 1936, L. E. Holt, an author of pediatric textbooks, advocated male and female circumcision as a treatment for masturbation. The first serious questioning of the practice did not occur until late 1949 when Gairdner published ‘The Fate of the Foreskin’ in the ‘British Medical Journal’; according to Wallerstein this began to affect the practice of circumcision in Britain. According to Darby and Cox, the persistence of circumcision in the US has led to more vigorous protest movements. A 1980 protest march at the California State Capitol was reported in an Associated Press article. The National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers (NOCIRC), was formed by Marilyn Milos, R.N., in 1985. The organization’s stated objective is to secure the birthright of male, female, and intersex children and babies to keep their sex organs ‘intact.’ Protest rallies have been held in the US and other areas. NOCIRC have consistently criticized the American medical community’s circumcision guidelines. According to Milos and Donna Macris, ‘The need to defend the baby’s right to a peaceful beginning was brought to light by Dr. Frederick Leboyer in his landmark work, ‘Birth Without Violence.”

An area of continuing dispute is the effect of circumcision on penile sensitivity. In 2007, the ‘British Journal of Urology’ published a study that stated it ‘conclusively shows that circumcised males have a significant penile sensory deficit as compared with non-circumcised intact men’ and that ‘the most sensitive regions in the uncircumcised penis are those removed by circumcision.’

Current laws in many countries, and United States Federal Law as well as laws in several U.S. states, prohibit the genital modification and mutilation of female minors, with some exceptions based on medical need. Opponents of male circumcision assert that laws against genital modification and mutilation of minors should apply equally to males and females. Many anti-circumcision groups have joined the International Coalition for Genital Integrity and endorsed its declaration, which was adopted by the First International Symposium on Circumcision, in 1989, at Anaheim, California. (There have been nine such further symposia held since, with the proceedings of several subsequently published in book form.) ‘Intact America,’ founded in 2008, lobbies organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Civil Liberties Union, and Centers for Disease Control to alter policy and change attitudes toward male infant circumcision.

However, linking male circumcision to female genital mutilation (FGM) is itself highly controversial.Organizations actually involved in combating FGM have been at considerable pains to distinguish the two, as a UNICEF document explains: ‘When the practice first came to be known beyond the societies in which it was traditionally carried out, it was generally referred to as ‘female circumcision.’ This term, however, draws a direct parallel with male circumcision and, as a result, creates confusion between these two distinct practices.’ This stance has been largely echoed by Western medical and political authorities. The Australian Medical Association states: ‘The AMA rejects the euphemism ‘female circumcision,’ sometimes used to describe the various forms of female genital mutilation, because the use of this phrase trivializes the severe and often irreparable physical and psychological damage occasioned to girls and women by these practices.’ In the United States, the organization MGMbill.org sent a proposed bill to the US Congress and 15 state legislatures between 2004 and 2007 to extend the prohibition on genital modification and mutilation of minors to include male and intersex children. The proposed bill has not been endorsed by any member of Congress.

While circumcision debates are often dominated by the concerns of Anglophone countries, very different controversies over the procedure regularly erupt in other cultural contexts. In South Asia, Pakistan has long used circumcision status as a definitive marker of Indian covert involvement in its internal affairs. But this assumption was thrown into confusion when it was discovered that large segments of its own Muslim male population, specifically from western tribal areas, were themselves uncircumcised. Opposition to circumcision exists among Jews in Israel. Even though there is often pressure from family to circumcise their sons, a small but growing number of Jews are choosing to forgo the procedure. Islamic anti-circumcision groups, such as Qur’an Alone (the principle that by universal agreement of Islamic scholars puts one out of fold of Islam), have also emerged, arguing among other things that routine circumcision is an insult to Allah since it tries to improve on his perfect creation.

In 2012, a court in Cologne, Germany ruled that circumcision was ‘inflicting bodily harm on boys too young to consent,’ deciding that the practice contravenes the ‘interests of the child to decide later in life on his religious beliefs.’ The decision of the court in the city of Cologne, that a child’s right to physical integrity trumps religious and parental rights, is non-binding and does not apply to the whole country.

Adapted from : http://fe.gd/44W

circumcision map

Journal : Being Different

This is to introduce Rajive Malhotra’s recent work ” Being Different.”

Source : https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9jySISONeKibTItNU51QU52RkE/edit?pli=1

In the course of it, I would also adapt from observations about Albert Camus‘ works.

Source : http://www.enotes.com/albert-camus-essays/camus-albert-vol-9

And from Kartick Mohan’s article

@ http://www.hinduwisdom.info/articles_hinduism/52.htm

 *    *    *

Rajive Malhotra’s work, ” Being Different,” is a challenging book. If literary classics are especially vested with riches that enable them to be read at different levels, Rajive’s matter-of-fact psycho-spiritual non-fiction demands a subsumation of all levels to a very specific understanding of the Indian way of life and thought, and how if differs from that in the West. The universe he lays on the table has an entire history to contend with, the evolution of values along it and how they express today in acts, thoughts and utterences of typical Hindu and Western or West-imbibed individuals today. 

It reminds me of Albert Camus’ works and my own growing up in a partially Western scheme, if not values. His works show a subjectivity cut off from the supernatural paradigms in Judeo-Christian context and its alienation from the absurd world about him. His protagonist acts but only as drawn by situation and events and, very tellingly, fails to express the being he is privy to, of himself. 

What value abides in a world without order ? What do we make of this existential chaos ? These questions preoccupy Camus through every one of his works, wherein he intuits answers while feeling the presence of the cosmos in his own being, and in the being about him. This mode is extraordinary, compared with how the Western laity and leadership dwell within the monotheistic framework laid out and imposed by the Church. But for the poetic souls who embrace the irrational, with capacity for extended sensibilities, it is especially uncommon among linearly inclined atheists, materialists, logicians and rationalists, scientists, politicians and businessmen. 

Camus is different within the Western mainstream, as is the Hindu without it. Rajive’s Being Different juxtaposes the Western mainstream mind and the Hindu mainstream ways : the former caught up in its imposed Judeo – Christian orientation and Greek linear order, which collapsed with Bruno, and the latter with a sense of continuum anchored to reaffirmed cosmic truths and with guidelines to an illustrated way of life in dharmic tradition. The two are different, as the author details in the following terms : 

  • History Centrism vs Embodied Knowing

  • Synthetic Unity vs Integral Unity

  • Anxiety Over Chaos vs Comfort With Complexity And Ambiguity

  • Cultural Digestion vs Sanskrit Non – Translatables

 

In the Indian context, Dharma is both morals and ethics, and is rooted in Truth that is not apart from our Self, God, Pervasive Energy and Conscious Immanence.

To the Hindu, Truth is said to underlie existence entire; it is consciousness itself, of which our I-sense is constituted and which illuminates our mind and intellect. It is the vitality flowing in the body, operative in sense organs and interfacing the mind with feelings and emotions. It is the undifferentiated bliss we experience in deep sleep and is the undeniable power of existence in each being.

Positioned between the mundane and the divine, the dharmic tradition envelops the Indian soul in the same inclusive reality that at once and directly links him ever with the cosmos and the world about him, even if one has not perceived it for oneself. There is always someone in the present, or not so long ago, who has refreshed the same truth announced in antiquity and has periodocally enunciated it in contemporary terms. In sum, the call is same : We live in truth and die in truth. 

In contrast, truth in the Judeo-Christian scheme is either in the book or equated with phenomenal facts, knowledge about the other – the truth of the moment – discovered and known by those with some claim to scholarship. The Bible is community interpreted, compiled, edited and ordained, though of words issued by supposedly historic individuals. Deviations from the laid terms are generally considered blasphemous. Alternate notions, unless reinforcing that stated in the book, have no validity and acceptance. There are human arbiters, representatives of God whose word is final, with assumed authority of biblical historic characters. They have a right over a fraction of the fruits of one’s income and are empowered to channel the Lord’s forgiveness in confession boxes.

Everybody is a sinner and is exiled in the ungodly realm, to be finally judged at the end of history and take his place in Heaven or Hell till eternity. 

In his works, Camus shows the Western mind in the order that prevails. He does not strive to create an illusion of reality, for it is precisely the real which is being questioned. His strange protagonist is tweaked to reflect the bizarre gulf between the inner self and outward acts. His work gives the sensation of fragmentation, the incoherence of a world which has lost its nuts and bolts… with just a hint of the answer that will later be arrived at in several treatises.

But not everyone is an artist or an intellectual; in fact very few are. How do the rest cope ? By chasing dreams where few succeed, mostly by creating opportunities by hook or crook. It doesn’t really work though : there are 42 – 45 milion poor people in the USA, the land of opportunities ! The West has the best of medical cures but few can afford some of that state of art . The UK is on the way to dismantling its National Health System. And EU will soon find it hard to sustain its mandatory welfare programs. 

Since chaos and uncertainty is forever upon us, insecurity and anxiety is our base human condition. How would the man in psychological exile, without anchor and deeply alienated, handle it ? And that isn’t the end of it, too. God is dead and the world is unforgiving. It is legal to hoard and go for the kill : everybody has the right to make the most of opportunities. It’s a free market. Every cure, pain alleviating advance, or scientific research comes with a mountain of “opportunity” cost or royalty, to people who need them the most but have the least capacity to pay. Typically, cancer treatment drugs in the West cost 50 to 100 times of that which prevails in India. 

A life led by truth, even while striving, is markedly different from a mind lit up to facts. Truth, in its universally inclusive meaning and indescribable form, infinitely deepens the mystery and magnifies the wonder. Facts, the ‘information or knowledge about,’ seek to quench the wonder and kill the mystery.

” It’s a wonder ! It’s a wonder !! It’s a wonder !!! ” says the enlightened one in Chandigya Upanishad. The culture nurtured for the path of enlightenment is quite apart in their values, concerns and behaviour, from one that is restricted to rationality.

“Concepts create idols; only wonder comprehends anything. People kill one another over idols. Wonder makes us fall to our knees,” explains St. Gregory of Nyssa. 

Camus’ narrator has lost the key to his own secret : he has become a stranger to his own life. He holds only facts, and facts are nothing. Therefore, he cannot give his existence a meaning which would establish its unity. Having neither past nor future, he has only a present which is crumbling away and does not become memory. Time, until the final revolt, is nothing for him but a succession of distinct moments, which no Cartesian God pieces together, which no vital impulse spans, which no remembrance transfigures. Camus has rendered admirably this fall of the present into insignificance through a paradoxical use of the first person narrative. 

We would be ascetics though if, I believe, our alienation was complete. A stranger to ourself and others, we forever have a homeland in sensation. Finding nothing within to engage ourself, we still have the body to ourself. We indulge then to find and have our bagful moments of happy sensation, in food and porn. Its excessive pursuit in the West is not only a protest against the false seriousness of pulpit morality but also a proof of the victory of the values – system that the Church, even the catholic one, dare not speak against.

Thus is the injustice of having been cast rootless in spirit, mind and body, addressed. Nothing is sacred anymore before the meaning that sensations offer. It is I and my sensations, my indulgence … take it or leave it. Cultism is preferable, family could be discarded or corrupted, and marriages annuled, but I must have it and you got to take it. In the age of freedom, the world must order itself among feminists, misogynists, sadists and masochists, leaving the middle ground to be ordered by the shrink ! Abuse, violence and arbitrary cruelty is never far away and an unspeakabe slavery, formed of freedom all about it, prevails. 

Individual freedoms anywhere tend to prompt either getting carried away or being rooted in indifference. It gets exacerbated in the West in the absence of something greater than the individual to moderate it, or to urge him to step up. The family makes it clear that it is not going to provide or take care of anybody beyond a point. One needs to do that for himself; others might chip in then, not before.

To that extent, the family in the West is also not heeded to, beyond a point. As to community and society … the less said the better; it’s wholly optional. There are laws but they, as everywhere, would almost always kick in after the horse has bolted. The United States police and FBI do have the vision of preempting the excess, but getting organised and empowered to that extent also brings in the spectre of a Police State. As some will vouch, it already does. 

* * * 

In a direct head on, historically and especially from the Hindu’s perspective, Christianity is hardly a religion – it has a political agenda in spiritual guise. Its end is subjugation of non-Christians, in common with the other Semitic derivative, Islam. To achieve that end, it has relied on propagation of lies and falsification of history – not to mention manipulation of our very notion of what is right and wrong. 

For instance, Judeo-Christian religions cannot get over the idea that Hindus worship the male organ, as the Shiv Ling idol is perceived. The vertical cylindrical form is in fact placed over the Yoni ( vulva ) of Shakti, and the two together symbolise the transcendent Matter-Intelligence power, of which all being is manifest. The symbol connects the individual with the wonder of creation, in very everyday terms, and calls upon each to regard all life as sacred. 

I believe, even Christians and Muslims are exhorted to have the same value; so, why is the most characteristic feature of life, the act of progenition, any the less sacred ? Why do they, in practice, consider it to be sin, dirty and unclean ?

It is not only the act of sex in focus here but the union of vast and qualitatively different energies, male and female, of which the Shiv Ling is a symbol. It acknowledges and celebrates the fact that mankind has two genders, each with its unique attributes and qualities; and, that, when they come together, they create MORE life of their own kind, becoming in the process more than the sum of their individual parts. 

Many ancient civilisations recognised this wonder of creation. The Chinese represent it somewhat abstractly in their symbols of Yin and Yang. Such transcendent and sacred wonderment set in our awareness the idea of something pervasive, with which we can relate to through what we each are and have.

The perspective of someone with such extended consciousness beyond his individual idea of exclusive self, based on biology and not on creed or community affiliation, is wholly different from a faith limited to religious fantasies of a personal God or historical Prophet walking upon water or miraculously curing a cripple or a blind. The former lends to us a unity with faraway cosmos in our very being; the latter wrenches us away from close-at-hand life and baptises us into this belief in fiction. 

Let us consider the assumptions that cause us to think of sex as something “unclean”? Why is a joke about sex or pictures of the naked human body labeled as “dirty” ? Because we have since been conditioned into thinking of it as something wrong and impermissible, by the pervasive manipulations of this nature-abhorring “ethics” imposed by western clerics and brain-washed laity. Islamists, of course, were simply barbaric during their 500 year rule in Indian subcontinent : they destroyed every institution or temple arm remotely connected with education.

However, the British occupiers and Christian missionaries more than made up with their sophisticated cultural onslaught. They started schools, not to teach but to school the unsuspecting young ones into their lies which, among others, included their cardinal belief that sex was evil, unclean and inherently immoral, in and of itself – perhaps their oldest lie of all. And like all of its lies, it was meant to serve a “control” agenda in spiritual guise. 

India since antiquity has always had a central place for Mother Goddess. Hindus know her as Shakti and, in her manifestations, as Durga / Kali / Parvati. Akkadians worshipped Gingira. Sumerians had Inanna. North-eastern Semites knew her as Astarte. In Assyria, Babylon and Egypt, as Ishtar. In ancient Greece, as Hecate or Demeter, and later as Anaitis or Aphrodite. In Persian culture, which widely prevailed before the rise of absurdly puritanical Islam, people knew the Goddess Mother as Anahita. In Rome, as Vesta. Even in the New World, American civilisations of that era had temples and representations of Mother Goddess. 

Israelites seem to be quite the odd tribe there, back then. They had a different kind of god altogether : a male god, with a Capital G. They called him Yahweh, and he is the direct antecedent of the ” Lord Our God ” of the Christians, and Allah of the Muslims. He was not about fertility or caring at all. He was wrathful, vengeful, jealous and angry god, full of violence, hatred and intolerance. He spoke out of a “burning bush” and instructed Moses that his followers must not worship false gods, that HE was the One True God, and then asked Moses to go with his staff and smite another people who believed in false gods.

It was their belief, stronger than any other, that the non-believer is a lesser human being than one of them … a belief that was later copied by Christians and Islamist. This signified a political agenda that was truly unprecedented untill then, exhorting, ” Go forth, multiply, and kill whatever stands in your way, because I Am That I Am and I am on Your Side.” 

We know the bloodshed that followed from Old Testament times, from pages of history after Christ, and upon Mohammed’s proclamation in Mecca. The Jews did not go about converting people with the rabid fervour of Christians, but they had the same political agenda. They reviled other people in neighbouring civilisations of Egypt and Babylon, especially by discrediting their principal deity – the Mother Goddess.

In practice, they brought in their male dominated values and made it popular to despise and subjugate women, than treat them with respect as equals. The culture put an end to worship of any Goddess in societies where Jews and Christians, and Muslims, became predominant. They denounced fertility and procreation itself, declaring it as not miraculous but sinful affair. For them, the male – female intimacy, and sex, was the Original Sin; the human body in its natural state was dirty and unclean. 

The world had not seen a fanatic until the Judeo-Christian paradigm had set in. Slowly but with unmatched doggedness, the anti-female script was enacted … It began with the murder of Queen Jezebel, described in Old Testament. The Temple of Astarte in Jerusalem was razed to ground, and one for Yahweh was raised by King David in its place.

The conversion of Roman Emperor Constantine I to Christianity in AD ca. 300 was a great advance to the cause. He led codification of the Bible as we know it today. However, recent finds have thrown up alternate forms of the gospels included in it and a few that were found as not appropriate.

The fall of Rome in 480 AD was followed by the Dark Ages, rise of Papacy and the blood-soaked Crusade centuries, degrading Colonialism and murderous Inquisition eras. The faith that had sprung from the Israelites spread like a metastizing cancer over the face of the earth and holds its sway even today, despite the feminist movement through the 20th Century … now more particularly in the Islamic world, where a monotheistic intolerant God descended from Yahweh sits high up yonder in his most perverse caricature.

We know how women are treated in Muslim countries : the recent Malala incident is symbolic and the Saudi order, which informs husbands every time the woman leaves or enters the country, is a telling symptom. 

The world knew of the Mother Goddess once. The dharmic tradition in India alone continues with it today. It is the only one that has survived since antiquity. The civilisations of Persia, Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome and the Americas, have all fallen to Judeo-Christian uniformity…Later, parts of Asia fell to the Islamic monstrosity.

All those cultures that have disappeared were marked with the same tolerance that makes the Hindu standout today. While the Western and Islamic worlds are today looking to cook up a humanism by the rivers of blood they have caused to flow, the true heirs of the tolerant, accepting and inclusive ways of yore are preserved in India, among the native Hindus who the world knows as “being different.” 

* * * 

And we in India, who follow the dharmic tradition, must never forget this : we are different. We are hiers of this spiritual legacy of the most ancient civilised era, of which we are the last surviving inheritors.

One day, Christianity’s mighty edifice will fall under the weight of its own contradictions, just as Islam is falling today. Till then, we must bear the torch of the legacy of pagan humanism that will ultimately prevail.

From Moses to Jesus to Mohammed to Marx is a logical – and inevitable – progression on the road to tyranny. India and Japan are the only major cultures that have successfully resisted this onslaught.

 *   *   * 

Some Of The Ways We Are Different : 

  • The Dharmic tradition is derived from Truth anchored at once in the cosmos and the humanity at large, in the pre-historic and the pre-mundane man !

  • We are a secure, sharing, tolerant, accepting and inclusive people !

Extending between the ephemeral and the eternal, the Dharmic tradition occupying the Indian mind not only permits but encourages a joyous acceptance of contradictions between potential truths and manifest facts. It has no qualms about setting in our awareness mutating facts, as truths of the moment, and immutable truths, being the facts for eternity. 

The dharmic tradition declares : There is not an iota of diversity, not even the least trace, in the ultimate substratum of all being. And, equally, there is no truth without abundant and unending diversity in the manifest world.

We is free to be calm in truth, with peace deep in our heart, while dancing in step with the rapid transience about us or pacing to moves in an engaging combat with the enemy before us. 

As a consequence, the Hindu is incomparable : there is no soldier like him, none more forebearing under occupation, more gracefully vigourous a dancer or a more completely immersed singer gliding over the scales with restrained speed for hours.

Each one of us are informally skilled at playing with raging waves while being anchored to the depths of the sea. That is the unacknowledged secret behind the unusual success of Indian managers and entrepreneurs globally. On the other extreme, it explains why the Indian remains unmoved despite the ugliness he has and has had to put up with. 

* * * 

Asked what he thought of freedom, Camus said : “What freedom can there be in the fullest sense without assurance of eternity ?” Hence, Camus built up a sense of freedom that lies in an assumed one : as if it were; as if it were already there. 

In contrast, the Hindu’s freedom is for real. The Indian dharmic tradition comes in the wake of infinite – existence, knowledge and bliss – and ushers an unending karmic journey.

It situates the individual in an entire tri-ply scheme : That (mental) is infinite. This (material) is infinite. The Infinite derived of Infinite leaves the Infinite (spiritual). It needs mere observation of the cosmos, and a discovery in oneself, to experience the reality of absolute freedom. 

Of course, the karmic laws are incontrovertible in material space : we are free to act but not free to choose the immutable consequence it invites.

Our freedom in mental space is more liberal : we are free to know and outgrow the limitations that circumscribe our current station.

And, finally, we are free to shed this individuated awareness of our self and cease to be, as we were, for ever. There is nothing anymore, as we ever knew – not the material world of beings and things; not the mental world of sensation, will, meaning and knowledge; and no longer the ego-I-sense dilating through sleep, dream and wakeful being. There is nothing anymore animal, human or divine.

It’s truth itself, alone, without a second. 

This spirit to outgrow is natural to the Indian dharmic tradition. It occurs along various generic attributes. First, in human goal over a lifetime : dharma, artha, kama and moksha … loosely translated as Right Knowledge, Thought and Conduct; Income and Wealth; Sensuous and Sexual Fulness; and, Supreme Yoga and Liberation Absolute … in that general order. The process allows for endless variations of the same theme, because the outgrowing process itself is not strictly compartmentalised in practice. 

The stepping up is more obvious in relief when viewed against the age – axis and values system respective to each :

0 – 7 years, with parents in an atmosphere of love and tender care;

7 – 25 years, celibate life with the teacher, away from parents, in utter simplicity, given to study and service to others, without any priviledge or exceptional treatment over others;

25 – 50 years, leading a vigorous householder’s life, living by right knowledge, honing skills and applying effort to become a useful citizen in the community, with moderated but full-blooded sensuousness, marraige and raising a family in the light traditional morals and exemplary ethics, excelling at one’s chosen profession in accord with aptitude;

50 – 75 years, gradual withdrawal from worldly pursuits and possessions, handing over all to next generation, disengaging from sensuous calls or sexual acts and generally from householder’s duty, engaging in spiritual company, education and practice; and,

75 – 100 years, complete withdrawal from worldly and household affairs, given over entirely to reclusive life, engaged pointedly in prayer, thankfulness and at inviting spiritual fulness, in ever – prepared state of readiness to shed the body and depart for the next. 

The sense of outgrowing pervades a Hindu’s lifetime, even in other ways. It is common for to hear of outgrowing the ways of physical animality and take to mindful human values and pursuits, and then to preparations for inviting the divinity upon one’s heart and mind.

It is common worldwide to see the eagerness to evolve through one’s age while we are young or our worldly stations in adult life. In India, however, sages are on record advising people to outgrow external signs of identity in favour of internal ones; from rituals or audible chant to their mental equivalent; from godhead with form to the truth formless; from religion itself to the a-religious perspective. 

But to outgrow means to give and take anew; and for that to happen, we need to turn away from merely deepening our anchor in history and, rather, to rescue ourself from it and restore ourself to ethics arising from our morals, not merely from the law in our statute books.

That would place us precisely in the otherwise non-linear dharmic tradition, with which the Hindu has remained connected through the millennia after Ice Age,

the Bronze Revolution,

the Great Bharata War,

the end of urban Sarasvati Civilisation,

the rural Arya resurgence, the Iron Age,

Buddhism and Jainism religious reform movements,

transformation of democracies into monarchy,

the great Maurya and golden Gupta eras,

the reign of mighty Harshavardhan and his extreme generosity at Kumbha gathering at Prayag,

the brilliance of pure monism of Adi Shankara,

the centuries of Islamic onslaught and Muslim rule,

the Age of Devotion and poetics,

the British occupation and long period of Christian upmanship,

and the chaos of post-independent India. 

The Indian has seen too much with a surfiet of extreme stupidity and barbarism, of utter beauty and complete harmony. He stands balanced with his wealth and secure in his poverty, patient with peace and hopeful of growth in chaos.

The cosmos is stil there… how wrong can things go ?

Bhimbhetka 2

Journal : Musings

There’s nothing special about today.
It just indelibly seems so, and that has my whole-hearted support.

#Govts need to acknowledge that allowing speculation is inflationery … a -ve in terms of public good and a crime not categorised yet. Buying up natural resources – land, water, forests, coastal fronts, foodgrains, housing, etc – in order to hoard or do as one pleases, or raise a buiness to serve the Profit Motive, should be regulated to ensure ban, moderation or re-orienting the motive. Without delay…

#BigBiz needs to acknowledge that Promoter’s Profit is not a public good of the same order as wages and affordabilty of the products : Wages signify a social value and are the only honourable method to spread surplus income of a collective enterprise.

What ? Every business is one, if you are still wondering.

And affordability, without compromising on quality, expands out real GDP, gives businesses a real footing in the market and not the fake one pushed up by ads and PR taht crashess every couple of years. Above all, that’s eminently is the very purpose of any enterprise … to produce goods and offer services that will bought and subscribed to by greatest numbers.

Again ? If you doubt…

Retweet if you refuse to shop at @Walmart until they pay workers a living wage! #WalkoutOnWalmart
Look at this : People lie as convenient. What a mess ? A man can quote Rs.37000 crores in one place and Rs.2500 crores somewhere else. And, it is allowed !
#Kasab‘s hanging has spurred #Pak dailies and ppl to issue calls 4 speedy conclusion of trial and exemplary punishment to the 26/11 accused. But how wud this rat #UPAGovt have guessed ?
#RBI makes it clear : #IslamicBanking, whatever eff it means, is impossible under existing laws. Thk God, the stupidity will remain @ bay !

Now #RamchandraGuha, the ‘gr8 intellectual’ says democratic institutions have been undermined by successive #Cong govts. N that, #MMS, the 2-term Prime Minister, a doctor of philosophy and widely acclaimed economist, has been tragic !

#Muslim beware ! Circumcision couldd lead to need for surgical bobbitisation. Stories of female clittorical mutilation r too awful to recall !
Good. The public knew and rued. Now the courts have certified : @DelhiPolce2 is poor at collecting evidence n prosecution is awfully stupid.
The infamy I’ve gained, of sleeping soundly in theatres, was acquired during visits to #Calcutta planetorium in 80s. It’s night time there !
All set to watch #LifeOfPi this Sunday. A rare initiative by me.
See ya …
Vamadevananda –

Transcending the ManBox …

Transcending the ManBox — The Good Men Project.

The biggest obstacle facing men today is their own conditioning.

Sadly, instead of growing up to be a healthy human being, men are conditioned to grow up to be “men,” which immediately limits their options to an incredibly narrow range of masculine ideals and behaviors and how the culture defines being a “man.”

The main conditioning influences for boys are:  other boys/men, their dads, TV/internet, movies, politics, and sports. Most of which still define masculinity as :

Tough, strong, powerful, brave, figure it out on your own, suck it up, man up, stop whining or crying about it and get on with it, lead,

don’t be a pussy,

don’t act like a girl, don’t act gay,

don’t act weak, don’t whine, don’t cry,

money equals success,

win at all costs,

competition is good, be a good man, etc etc.

So for a boy to survive and not be rejected by his peers and culture, he has to conform.

As these boys grow up into men, they allow someone else to define who they are and how to be. As a result, men abandon and disconnect from themselves, which calcifies slowly over time.

A common remedy is to medicate away this truth through addictive behaviors such as porn, drugs, alcohol tv, and technology. Men then buy what’s expected of them as their ability to listen to their own inner authority fades and thus the hamster wheel continues.

If a brave man sees through this trap, he can realize that the culture’s version of masculinity doesn’t fit for him and he can then choose to be the author of his way of being. Ironically though, if a man decides to leave the gender box behind, he will face the same gauntlet of judgment he experienced as a boy that put him in the box in the first place—more conditioning. He will be a threat to other men who want him to conform. It’s almost cult-like to remain in the gender box.

Most gender-compliant men and women want other men to stay in the man-box club.