[quote name='ramana' date='16 May 2011 - 11:32 PM' timestamp='1305568487' post='111603']
Book review in Pioneer.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/338673/Quest...hatma.html
[...]
in 1946 he [color="#800080"](Gandhi)[/color] insisted for the new temple on the BHU [color="#800080"](Benares Hindu University)[/color] campus not to contain an ââ¬Åidolââ¬Â.
[...][/quote]
In a comment by Sharan on the above Pioneer piece by Elst reviewing Rajan's book on Gandhi:
https://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/201...raad-elst/
So:
- Gandhi booed and shooed at Hindu vigrahas - they're but "idols" to him
- Gandhi kept an idol ("picture") of the non-existent jeebus
At some point in the deheathenising process, it gets hard to distinguish between the subverted/de-heathenised and the successfully converted. I'm thinking the difference is one of consciousness/awareness in the minds of the victim (convert) concerning their converted state.
There was a time I would have steered clear of taking pot-shots at others' (other Indians') heroes - back when I was labouring under the notion that taking away others' heroes must be mentally damaging to some extent (and therefore "bad" perse) - but it's people's own fault for having such lousy judgement as to fall for unworthy and frankly scary characters. And you're eventually either going to find out the negatives and be disappointed anyway, or you're going to continue to delude yourself and defend the indefensible or you're going to stagnate yourself by keeping unworthy entities as the standard you aspire to.
The first of these 3 likely consequences is temporary and affects only the disillusioned, the remaining 2 consequences bode a longterm hazard to the rest of society.
To any of Deepak Patel's opinion: Gandhi wasn't who you imagine he was. You're blinded by your unreal image of him. Among his "greatest" accomplishments is his emasculating our nation by making militant pacifism of victims (alone) into a prominent ideology/mindset, which further encouraged the violent to be more violent (since they know they may act with impunity).
If an unknown had argued for the same let alone attempted to foist it on the Dharmics of the nation as Gandhi had done, people would see it for the villainy it was.
In contrast, Gandhi's idea of "peace and serenity" was of the self-extinction variety: to be obtained by Dharmic men literally getting themselves willingly (and happily) massacred by islamaniacs and by Dharmic women getting themselves willingly (and happily) assaulted (then massacred/enslaved) by islamaniacs. By reading others' posts on Gandhi in this forum, you will learn the extent of the literalness of this.
Book review in Pioneer.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/338673/Quest...hatma.html
[...]
in 1946 he [color="#800080"](Gandhi)[/color] insisted for the new temple on the BHU [color="#800080"](Benares Hindu University)[/color] campus not to contain an ââ¬Åidolââ¬Â.
[...][/quote]
In a comment by Sharan on the above Pioneer piece by Elst reviewing Rajan's book on Gandhi:
https://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/201...raad-elst/
Quote:[...]
But the most shocking story about Gandhi is that the only picture he kept in his Sabarmati Ashram room was a picture of Jesus.
[...]
So:
- Gandhi booed and shooed at Hindu vigrahas - they're but "idols" to him
- Gandhi kept an idol ("picture") of the non-existent jeebus
At some point in the deheathenising process, it gets hard to distinguish between the subverted/de-heathenised and the successfully converted. I'm thinking the difference is one of consciousness/awareness in the minds of the victim (convert) concerning their converted state.
Quote:[color="#800080"](Deepak Patel wrote[/color] i liked the Gandhi ji ideology so its because of what ever the peace and serenity are which are still in India its because the great the person Mahatma Gandhi...
There was a time I would have steered clear of taking pot-shots at others' (other Indians') heroes - back when I was labouring under the notion that taking away others' heroes must be mentally damaging to some extent (and therefore "bad" perse) - but it's people's own fault for having such lousy judgement as to fall for unworthy and frankly scary characters. And you're eventually either going to find out the negatives and be disappointed anyway, or you're going to continue to delude yourself and defend the indefensible or you're going to stagnate yourself by keeping unworthy entities as the standard you aspire to.
The first of these 3 likely consequences is temporary and affects only the disillusioned, the remaining 2 consequences bode a longterm hazard to the rest of society.
To any of Deepak Patel's opinion: Gandhi wasn't who you imagine he was. You're blinded by your unreal image of him. Among his "greatest" accomplishments is his emasculating our nation by making militant pacifism of victims (alone) into a prominent ideology/mindset, which further encouraged the violent to be more violent (since they know they may act with impunity).
If an unknown had argued for the same let alone attempted to foist it on the Dharmics of the nation as Gandhi had done, people would see it for the villainy it was.
Quote:because of what ever the peace and serenity are which are still in India its because the great the person Mahatma Gandhi...No. Whatever peace and serenity there is in Bharatam was paid for with the blood of our ancestors who had purchased with it some time (some centuries) for us and this last bit of our ancestral land that we still call our homeland.
In contrast, Gandhi's idea of "peace and serenity" was of the self-extinction variety: to be obtained by Dharmic men literally getting themselves willingly (and happily) massacred by islamaniacs and by Dharmic women getting themselves willingly (and happily) assaulted (then massacred/enslaved) by islamaniacs. By reading others' posts on Gandhi in this forum, you will learn the extent of the literalness of this.