[Reader-list] National Shame

[Pawan Durani]

And I thought I had shared a news about a tourist being raped in
India. The pathetic insensitivity shown and ending up in Hindu bashing
again is simply deplorable. I used a slogan which is also the official
slogan of Govt Of India in "Incredible India" campaign ,to highlight
an alleged rape of a tourist.

But then , world consists of strange unwanted things as well.....like
the mail below

Regards

pawan

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 4:30 PM, anupam chakravartty <c.anupam at gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's see what Dr B.R. Ambedkar had to say about Upanishads:
>
> http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/17.Philosophy%20of%20Hinduism.htm#q7
>
> The philosophy of the Upanishads can be stated in very few words. It has
> been well summarised by Huxley[f29]  when he says that the Upanishad
> philosophy agreed:—
>
> "In supposing the existence of a permanent reality, or `substance', beneath
> the shifting series of phenomena, whether of matter or of mind. The
> substance of the cosmos was `Brahma', that of the individual man `Atman';
> and the latter was separated from the former only, if I may so speak, by its
> phenomenal envelope, by the casing of sensations, thoughts and desires,
> pleasures and pains, which make up the illusive phantasmagoria of life. This
> the ignorant, take for reality; their `Atman' therefore remains eternally
> imprisoned in delusions, bound by the fetters of desire and scourged by the
> whip of misery.
>
> Of what use is this philosophy of the Upanishadas? The philosophy of the
> Upanishadas meant withdrawal from the struggle for existence by resort to
> asceticism and a destruction of desire by self-mortification. As a way of
> life it was condemned by Huxley[f30]  in scathing terms :—
>
> "No more thorough mortification of the flesh has ever been attempted than
> that achieved by the Indian ascetic anchorite; no later monarchism has so
> nearly succeeded in reducing the human mind to that condition of impassive
> quasi-somnambulism, which, but for its acknowledged holiness, might run the
> risk of being confounded with idiocy."
>
> But the condemnation of the philosophy of the Upanishads is nothing as
> compared to the denunciation of the same by Lala Hardyal[f31]  :—
>
> "The Upanishads claim to expound `that, by knowing which everything is known
> '. This quest for ' the absolute ' is the basis of all the spurious
> metaphysics of India. The treatises are full of absurd conceits, quaint
> fancies, and chaotic speculations. And we have not learned that they are
> worthless. We keep moving in the old rut; we edit and re-edit the old books
> instead of translating the classics of European social thought. What could
> Europe be if Frederic Harrison, Brieux, Bebel, Anatole France, Herve,
> Haekel, Giddings, and Marshall should employ their time in composing
> treatises on Duns, Scotus and Thomas Aquinas, and discussing the merits of
> the laws of the Pentateuch and the poetry of Beowulf? Indian pundits and
> graduates seem to suffer from a kind of mania for what is effete and
> antiquated. Thus an institution, established by progressive men, aims at
> leading our youths through Sanskrit grammar to the Vadasvia the Six
> Darshanas! What a false move in the quest for wisdom ! It is as if a caravan
> should travel across the desert to the shores of the Dead Sea in search of
> fresh water! Young men of India, look not for wisdom in the musty parchments
> of your metaphysical treatises. There is nothing but an endless round of
> verbal jugglary there. Read Rousseau and Voltaire, Plato and Aristotle,
> Haeckel and Spencer, Marx and Tolstoi, Ruskin and Comte, and other European
> thinkers, if you wish to understand life and its problems." But
> denunciations apart, did the Upanishad philosophy have any influence on
> Hinduism as a social and political system? There is no doubt that it turned
> out to be most ineffective and inconsequential piece of speculation with no
> effect on the moral and social order of the Hindus.
>
> It may not be out of place to inquire into the reasons for this unfortunate
> result. One reason is obvious. The philosophy of Upanishad remained
> incomplete and therefore did not yield the fruit, which it ought to have
> done. This will be quite clear if one asks what is the keynote of the
> Upanishads. In the words of Prof. Max Muller[f32]  the keynote of the
> Upanishads is `Know thy Self". The `Know thy Self of the Upanishads, means,
> know thy true Self, that which underlies thin ego and find it and know it in
> the highest, the eternal self, the One without a Second, which underlies the
> whole world."
>
> That Atman and Brahman were one was the truth, the great truth which the
> Upanishads said they had discovered and they asked man to know this truth.
> Now the reasons why the philosophy of Upanishads, became ineffective are
> many. I will discuss them elsewhere. At this place I will mention only one.
> The philosophers of Upanishads did not realise that to know truth was not
> enough. One must learn to love truth. The difference between philosophy and
> religion may be put in two ways. Philosophy is concerned with knowing truth.
> Religion is concerned with the love of truth. Philosophy is static. Religion
> is dynamic. These differences are merely two aspects of one and the same
> thing. Philosophy is static because it is concerned only with knowing truth.
> Religion is dynamic because it is concerned with love of truth. As has been
> well said by Max Plowman[f33]  :—
>
> ". . . .Unless religion is dynamic and begets in us the emotion of love for
> something, then it is better to be without any thing that we can call
> religion; for religion is perception of truth and if our perception of truth
> is not accompanied by our love for it then it were better not seen at all;
> The Devil himself is one who has seen the truth only to hate it. Tennyson
> said "We must love the highest when we see it". It does not follow. Seen in
> pure objectivity the highest repels by its difference and distance; what we
> fear it, and what we fear we come to hate. . . . ."
>
> This is the fate of all transcendental philosophies. They have no influence
> on the way of life. As Blake said "Religion is politics and politics is
> Brotherhood. Philosophy must become Religion that is it must become a
> Working Ethic. It must not remain mere metaphysics. As Mr. Plowman says—
>
> "If religion were a Metaphysic and nothing else, one thing is certain, it
> would never be the concern of the simple and humble men.
>
> "To keep it wholly in the realm of Metaphysic is to make non-sense of it.
> For belief in religion as in something not directly and vitally effective of
> politics is ultimately belief that is strictly speaking idiotic; because in
> the effective sense such a belief makes no difference, and in the world of
> time and space what 'makes no difference' does not exist."
>
> It is for these very reasons that the philosophy of the Upanishads proved so
> ineffective.
>
> It is therefore incontrovertible that notwithstanding the Hindu Code of
> Ethics, notwithstanding the philosophy of the Upanishads not a little not a
> jot did abate from the philosophy of Hinduism as propounded by Manu. They
> were ineffective and powerless to erase the infamy preached by Manu in the
> name of religion. Notwithstanding their existence one can still say
> "Hinduism! Thy name is inequality!"
>
> **********************************************************************
>
> Inequality is the soul of Hinduism. The morality of Hinduism is only social.
> It is unmoral and inhuman to say the least. What is unmoral and inhuman
> easily becomes immoral, inhuman and infamous. This is what Hinduism has
> become. Those who doubt this or deny this proposition should examine the
> social composition of the Hindu Society and ponder over the condition of
> some of the elements in it. Take the following cases.
>
> First as to the Primitive Tribes. In what state of civilisation are they ?
>
> The history of human civilisation includes the entire period of human
> progress from Savagery to Barbarism and from Barbarism to Civilisation. The
> transition from one to other has been marked by some discovery or intention
> in some department of knowledge of Art resulting in advancing the onward
> march of man.
>
> The development of articulate speech was the first thing which, from the
> point of view of human progress, divided man from the brute. It marks the
> first stage of savagery. The Middle period of the state of savagery began
> with the knowledge of the manufacture and use of fire. This wonderful
> discovery enabled man to extend his habit almost indefinitely. He could
> leave his forest home, go to different and colder climates, and increase his
> food supply by including flesh and fish. The next discovery was the Bow and
> Arrow. This was the greatest achievement of primitive man and marks the
> highest state of savage man. It was indeed a wonderful implement. The
> possessor of this device could bring down the fleetest animal and could
> defend himself against the most predatory.
>
> The transition from Savagery to Barbarism was marked by the discovery of
> pottery. Hitherto man had no utensils that could withstand the action of
> fire. Without utensils man could not store nor could he cook. Undoubtedly
> pottery was a great civilising influence.
>
> The Middle State of Barbarism began when man learned to domesticate wild
> animals. Man learned that captive animals could be of service to him. Man
> now became a herdsman, no longer dependent for food upon the precarious
> chase of wild animals. Milk procurable at all seasons made a highly
> important addition to his dietary. With the aid of horse and camel he
> traversed wide areas hitherto impassable. The captive animals became aids to
> commerce, which resulted in the dissemination of commodities as well as of
> ideas.
>
> The next discovery was of the Art of smelting iron. This marks the highest
> stage of advancement of barbaric man. With this discovery man became a
> "tool-making animal" who with his tool could fashion wood and stone and
> build houses and bridges. This marks the close of the advancement made by
> barbaric man. The dividing line which marks off Barbaric people from
> Civilised people, in the fullest sense of the word Civilisation, is the art
> of making ideas tangible by means of graphic signs— which is called the art
> of writing. With this man conquered time as he had with the earlier
> inventions conquered space. He could now record his deeds and his thoughts.
> Henceforth, his knowledge, his poetical dreams, his moral aspirations might
> be recorded in such form as to be read not merely by his contemporaries but
> by successive generations of remote posterity. For man his history became
> safe and secure. This was the steepest assent and the climbing of it marks
> the beginnings of civilisation. Stopping here for the moment let us ask in
> what state of civilisation are the Primitive Tribes.
>
> The name Primitive Tribes[f34]  is expressive of the present state of people
> who are called by that name. They live in small-scattered huts in forests.
> They live on wild fruits, nuts and roots. Fishing and hunting are also
> resorted to for the purpose of securing food. Agriculture plays a very small
> part in their social economy. Food supplies being extremely precarious, they
> lead a life of semi-starvation from which there is no escape. As to clothes
> they economise them to a vanishing point. They move almost in a state of
> complete nakedness. There is a tribe, which is known as “Bonda Porajas”
> which, means "Naked Porajas". Of these people it is said that the women wear
> a very narrow strip which serves as a petticoat almost identical with what
> is worn by the Momjak Nagas in Assam, the ends hardly meeting at the top on
> the left thigh. These petticoats are woven at home out of the fibre of a
> forest tree. Girls wear a fillet of beads and of palmyra leaf and an
> enormous quantity of beads and neck ornaments extremely like those worn by
> many Komjak women. Otherwise the women wear nothing. The women shave their
> heads entirely. . . . . Of these Chenchus, a tribe residing near Farhabad in
> the Nizam's Dominions it is said that "their houses are conical, rather
> slight in structure made of bamboo sloping to the central point and covered
> with a thin layer of thatch..... They have very little, indeed, in the way
> of material effects, the scanty clothes they wear, consisting of a langoti
> and a cloth in the case of men, and a short bodice and a petticoat in the
> case of women, being practically all, besides a few cooking pots and a
> basket or two which perhaps sometimes contains grain. They keep cattle and
> goats and in this particular village do a little cultivation, elsewhere
> subsisting on honey and forest produce which they sell". Regarding the
> Morias, another Primitive tribe, it is stated the men generally wear a
> single cloth round the waist with a slap coming down in the front. They also
> have a necklace of beads and when they dance put on cock's plumes and
> peacock's feathers in their turbans. Many girls are profusely tattooed,
> especially on their faces, and some of them on their legs as well. The type
> of tattooing is said to be according to the taste of the individual and it
> is done with thorns and needles. In their hair many of them stick the
> feathers of jungle cocks and their heads are also adorned with combs of wood
> and tin and brass.
>
> These Primitive Tribes have no hesitation about eating anything, even worms
> and insects, and, in fact, there is very little meat that they will not eat,
> whether the animal has died a natural death or has been killed four days or
> more before by a tiger.
>
> The next groups of the people he will come across are the Criminal
> Tribes.
>
> The Criminal Tribes live not in Forests as the Primitive Tribes do but in
> the plains in close proximity to, and often in the midst of civilised life.
> Hollis in his "Criminal Tribes of the United Provinces" gives an account of
> their activities. They live entirely by crime. A few may be ostensibly
> engaged in agriculture, but this is only to cover up their real activities.
> Their nefarious practices find largest scope in dacoity or robbery by
> violence, but being a community organised for crime, nothing comes amiss to
> them. On deciding to commit a dacoity in any particular locality spies are
> sent out to select a suitable victim, study the general habits of the
> villagers, and the distance from any effective aid, and enumerate the number
> of men and firearms. The raid usually takes place at midnight. Acting on the
> information given by the spies, men are posted at various points in the
> village and by firing off their guns attract attention from the main gang
> which attacks the particular house or houses previously appointed. The gang
> usually consists of 30 to 40 men.
>
> It is essential to emphasis the great part played by crime in the general
> life of these peoples. A boy is initiated into crime as soon as he is able
> to walk and talk. No doubt the motive is practical, to a great extent, in so
> far as it is always better to risk a child in petty theft, who, if he is
> caught, would probably be cuffed, while an adult would immediately be
> arrested. An important part is also played by women, who, although they do
> not participate in the actual raids, have many heavy responsibilities.
> Besides being clever in disposing off stolen property the women of the
> Criminal Tribes are experts in shop lifting.
>
> At one time the Criminal Tribes included such well-organised Confederacies
> of Professional Criminals as the Pindharies and the Thugs.
>
> The Pindharies were a predatory body of armed gangsters. Their organisation
> was an open military organisation of freebooters who could muster 20000 fine
> horse and even more. They were under the command of brigand chiefs. Chitu
> one of the most powerful commanders had under his single command 10000
> horse, including 5000 good cavalry, besides infantry and guns. The
> Pindharies had no military projects for employing their loose bands of
> irregular soldiery, which developed into bodies of professional plunderers.
> The Pindharies aimed at no conquests. Their object was to secure booty and
> cash for themselves. General loot and rapine was their occupation. They
> recognised no rulers. They were subjects of none. They rendered loyalty to
> none. They respected none, and plundered all, high and low, rich and poor,
> without fear or compunction.
>
> The Thugs[f35]  were a well organised body of professional assassins, who,
> in gangs of from 10 to 100 wandered in various guises throughout India,
> worked themselves into the confidence of wayfarers of the wealthier class,
> and, when a favourable opportunity occurred, strangled them by throwing a
> handkerchief or noose round their necks, and then plundered and buried them.
> All this was done according to certain ancient and rigidly prescribed forms
> and after the performance of special religious rites, in which was the
> consecration of the package, and the sacrifice of sugar. They were staunch
> worshippers of Kali, the Hindu Goddess of destruction. Assassination for
> gain was with them a religious duty, and was considered a holy and
> honourable profession. They had, in fact, no idea of doing wrong, and their
> moral feelings did not come into play. The will of the Goddess, by whose
> command and in whose honour they followed there calling, was revealed to
> them through a very complicated system of omens.
>
> In obedience to these they often travelled even the distance of hundred
> miles in company with, or in the wake of, their intended victims before a
> safe opportunity had presented itself for executing their design; and when
> the deed was done, rites were performed in honour of that tutelary deity,
> and a goodly portion of the spoil was set apart for her. The Thugs had also
> a jargon of their own, as well as certain signs by which its members
> recognised each other in the remotest part of India. Even those who from age
> or infirmities could no longer take an active part in the operations used to
> aid the cause as watchmen, spies or dressers of food. It was owing to their
> thorough organisation, the secrecy and security with which they went to
> work, but chiefly to the religious garb in which they shrouded their
> murders, that they could continue for centuries to practise their craft. The
> extraordinary fact was that Thugee was regarded as a regular profession by
> Indian Rulers of the day, both Hindu and Mahomedans. The Thugs paid taxes to
> the state and the state left them unmolested.
>
> It was not until the British became rulers of the country that an attempt
> was made to suppress the Thugs. By 1835, 382 Thugs were hanged and 986 were
> transported or imprisoned for life. Even as late as 1879 the number of
> registered Thugs was 344 and the Thugee and the Dacoity department of the
> Government of India continued to exist until 1904 when its place was taken
> by the Central Criminal Intelligence Department. While it is not possible
> for the criminal tribes to live by organized bodies of criminals, crime
> continues to be their main occupation.
>
> Besides these two classes there is a third class which comprises a body of
> people who are known as Untouchables.
>
> Below the Untouchables there are others who are known as unapproachable.
> Untouchables are those who cause pollution only if they touch. The
> Unapproachable are those who cause pollution if they come within a certain
> distance. It is said of the Nayadis—a people, who fall into the category of
> the Unapproachable, "that they are the lowest caste among the Hindus—the
> dog-eaters.
>
> They are the most persistent in their clamour for charity, and will follow
> at a respectful distance, for miles together any person walking, driving or
> boating. If any thing is given to them, it must be laid down, and after the
> person offering it has proceeded a sufficient distance, the recipient comes
> timidly forward, and removes it. "Of the same people Mr. Thurston says, "The
> subject (i.e. the Nayadis) whom I examined and measured at Shoranus, though
> living only about three miles off, had, by reason of the pollution which
> they traditionally carry with them to avoid walking over the long bridge
> which spans the river, and follow a circuitous route of many miles". Below
> the Unapproachable are the Unseeables. In the Tinnevelley District of the
> Madras Presidency there is a class of unseeables called Purada Vannans. Of
> them it is said, "that they are not allowed to come out during day time
> because their sight is enough to cause pollution. These unfortunate people
> are `compelled' to follow the nocturnal habits, leaving their dens after
> dark and scuttling home at the false dawn like the badger, the hyena, the
> avordvark."
>
> Consider the total population of these classes. The Primitive Tribes form a
> total of 25 million souls. The Criminal Tribes number 41/2 millions and the
> Untouchables number 50 millions. This makes a grand total of 791/2 millions.
> Now ask how these people could have remained in the state of moral,
> material, social and spiritual degradation surrounded as they have been by
> Hinduism. Hindus say that their civilisation is older than any civilisation,
> that Hinduism as a religion is superior to any other religion. If this is so
> how is that Hinduism failed to elevate these people, bring them
> enlightenment and hope; how is it that it failed even to reclaim them ; how
> is it that it stood with folded hands when millions and millions were taking
> to life to shame and crime? What is the answer to this? The only answer is
> that Hinduism is overwhelmed with the fear of pollution. It has not got the
> power to purify. It has not the impulse to serve and that is because by its
> very nature it is inhuman and unmoral. It is a misnomer to call it religion.
> Its philosophy is opposed to very thing for which religion stands.
>
> ENDS
>
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Pawan Durani <pawan.durani at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> What happened to our teachings in Upanishads  where it is written
>> Matru devo bhava, Pitru devo bhava, Acharya devo bhava, Atithi devo
>> bhava". Means One should worship Mother, Father, Teacher and Guests as
>> God. ...What happened to our "Atithi Devo Bhavah". This act is a
>> National Shame.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.hindustantimes.com/Japanese-tourist-gangraped-in-Bodh-Gaya/H1-Article1-532395.aspx
>>
>> A 25-year-old Japanese tourist was gangraped by five unidentified men
>> at Bodh Gaya in Bihar, police said on Saturday.
>>
>> The five pulled the woman out of an auto-rickshaw, carried her to the
>> Gaya railway station before committing the crime at an isolated place
>> on Friday night, Superintendent of Police, Sushil Khopade said.
>>
>> The victim lodged an FIR with the Amawa police station this morning, he
>> said.
>>
>> The Japanese woman is a resident of Itabolutachi in Tokyo and is
>> currently on a tour of various Buddhist pilgrim towns in India.
>> Two persons have been detained for interrogation, Khopade said, adding
>> that raids are on in the area to arrest the criminals.
>> _________________________________________
>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> Critiques & Collaborations
>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>> subscribe in the subject header.
>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>