I had spoken about "conflicting narratives" for a reason.
There are two goals here
a) Bringing forward the positive Hindu narrative that has been suppressed
b) Equally exposing the negative Christian and Islamic narrative that has been suppressed.
This has nothing to do with opposing nice people.I love all nice people who are my brothers and sisters no matter what their religious, sexual or dietary persuasion might be.
This has everything to do with the fact that
a) The "visible" Hindu narrative is all negative and is available to people to beat Hindus with if there is a whiff of a Hinduism mentioned. That visibly negative narrative is always contarsted with the "egalitarianism" of Islam - and the "love" of Christianity.
b) For Hindus in India the the Hindu narrative automatically exposes the manner in which both Christianity and Islam have been pushed into India.
These represent the conflicting narratives.
Islam came in with murder, looting and wanton destruction
Christianity has used more subtle methods of coercion and blackmail - except in Goa where it has been Islamlike murder, looting and destruction
Why is it difficult for Muslims and Christians to face that if Hindus can face their own history?
May I point out with respect that there is no point in talking of "dharma' if Hindus feel embarrassed to speak facts. On the other hand, if a Hindu does feel embarrassed in speaking these facts - then he should not be treated with contempt. Contempt only attempts to show that "I" (who do not feel embarrassed) am superior to "you" (who is feeling embarrassed to speak the truth and may be a dhimmi). Contempt at dhimmi Hindu is laughable - like a slave ridiculing at another. We are in the same boat and should not be against each other. The dhimmi has to be converted. And he can be converted only if you show confidence and affectionate conviction. Not uncertainty and contempt. It is easy to suppress contempt, but uncertainty can be removed only with knowledge of your own narrative.
Equally important is not to attempt to show anger or triumphalism at Muslims or Christians because that often puts off Hindus who are a sensitive people - who look for visible justice. You may score a "victory" over Islamic or Christian narrative -but if you laugh or mock - you are offending the sensitive Hindu who believes that such behavior is not mandated by proper Hindus. A vulgar display of anything - be it anger or triumphalism will often push Hindus to take the other's side because Hindus are brought up to see everything as a balance of good and bad, darkness and light, sorrow and happiness. If you create sorrow for the Christian and create joy for yourself, you will not win allies among Hindus as you will be seen as doing an injustice NOW, You will not be seen as righting a historic wrong. Until you have worked on the Hindu so that he understands that it is not your intention to "wrong" a Christian or a Muslim, but only to set right a historic misconception about the badness of Hindus and the goodness of other faiths. This is a game that needs more finesse than I have seen displayed by many well meaning and concerned Hindus.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Damn right shiv !
Subtlety is key. And subtlety is what touches the soul. Leave the folks to draw their own conclusions and they will draw better ones than what we might impress upon them with.
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Apr 15 2007, 01:33 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Apr 15 2007, 01:33 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If there are important things, that new members should be aware of apart from the forum guidelines, please do let me know. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just pick up a few threads and make them your own. I joined after UPA came to power and needed some reassurances. Never waited for a committee welcome. We're all well wishers of Bharat here.
[right][snapback]67113[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was referring to any "conventions" in place here. My mistake, I should have been a little clear, as to what I meant.
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Apr 15 2007, 06:50 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Apr 15 2007, 06:50 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Recalling this is when my sister realised that what western scholars say about fairy tales originating in India was true.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can you dwell on this further ? I would like to learn.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Apr 16 2007, 12:20 AM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Apr 16 2007, 12:20 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Funnily enough, even Naipaul sensed it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shivji, why do you say 'funnily'?
[right][snapback]67114[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Funnily" because a lot of Hindus themselves have doubts about the skeins of common attitude and action that run through Hindu-sphere. I wonder if travelling widely in India is the common denominator.
<!--QuoteBegin-narayanan+Apr 15 2007, 05:59 PM-->QUOTE(narayanan @ Apr 15 2007, 05:59 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
4. [b]I[/I]f an "ABCD" youth asks me where s(he) can find the inside scoop on what Hinduism says, in particular, to treat depression arising from, say, being in the middle of a Hurricane-hit city, where should I guide him/her? (yes, question arises from urgent need).
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sadly there is no alternative to our being Evanjehindus ourselves.
I would say
If Hinduism were a cake, then Christianity is one slice of that cake. Christian thought essentially restricts you to one shape and size of cake, like mass produced cupcakes. One only has to remove one's blinkers to see that the whole cake, of which you can sample ANY part is yours to have. That is the freedom of choice that Hinduism offers you.
For an older generation of Hindu DIE here is something to mull over. It's about thelyrics of the Beatles song, "And your bird can sing".
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You tell me that you've got everything you want
And your bird can sing
But you don't get me, you don't get me
You say you've seen seven wonders and your bird is green
But you can't see me, you can't see me
When your prized possessions start to wear you down
Look in my direction, I'll be round, I'll be round
When your bird is broken will it bring you down
You may be awoken, I'll be round, I'll be round
You tell me that you've heard every sound there is
And your bird can swing
But you can't hear me, you can't hear me<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All sorts of people have attributed all sorts of meaning - but here is one that fits in with the Beatles finding peace in Hinduism at the height of their popularity ("More popular than Jesus")
You have everything you want - but you don't get peace. "Your bird can sing" might refer to angels in the Christian tradition who have wings and harps and are associated with sweet music.
You can see all the wonders of the world and still not see reality. When your prized possessions - when your worldly goods weigh you down - look in my direction - Ill be around. I never go away , I am always there and will always be there.
The lyrics have never been explained and I believe they sum up the peace and essence of Hinduism in what I personally consider a classy piece of music.
Just think of what the words must mean in another Beatles song that has the words "Jai Gurudeva Om" Think like a Hindu and explain it:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Words are flowing out like endless rain into a paper cup,
They slither while they pass, they slip away across the universe.
Pools of sorrow waves of joy are drifting through my open mind,
Possessing and caressing me.
Jai Guru De Va Om
Nothing's gonna change my world
Nothing's gonna change my world.
Images of broken light which dance before me like a million eyes,
That call me on and on across the universe,
Thoughts meander like a restless wind
Inside a letter box they
Tumble blindly as they make their way
Across the universe
Jai Guru De Va Om
Nothing's gonna change my world
Nothing's gonna change my world.
Sounds of laughter shades of earth are ringing
Through my open views inciting and inviting me.
Limitless undying love which shines around me like a million suns,
It calls me on and on across the universe
Jai Guru De Va Om
Nothing's gonna change my world
Nothing's gonna change my world.
Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I believe the key to the meaning is in
Jai Guru De Va Om
Nothing's gonna change my world
Nothing's gonna change my world.
Reality DOES NOT CHANGE. It is unending and unchanging
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Apr 16 2007, 12:20 AM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Apr 16 2007, 12:20 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shivji, why do you say 'funnily'?
[right][snapback]67114[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Naipul, if I'm not mistaken is from W.Indies. A lot of Indians/Hindus settled in Windies (Mauratius etc) have jealously protected/guarded the traditions their ancestors took from India. Recently in Florida, in a co-operative condo-complex, one elderly retired couple from Windies were given eviction notice by condo-management since they had a traditional family/cultural flag flying outside their door (supposedly no-no per condo-by-laws, but some hindu-religious tradition for these folks).
Now this elderly retired couple (translation: limited income kinda folks) took the matter to court and won. It's amazing that traditions which even most Hindus aren't aware off, were observed and held so dear by people.
04-16-2007, 08:03 AM (This post was last modified: 04-16-2007, 08:09 AM by Husky.)
Post 124:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I[/I]f an "ABCD" youth asks me where s(he) can find the inside scoop on what Hinduism says, in particular, to treat depression arising from, say, being in the middle of a Hurricane-hit city, where should I guide him/her?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->If an authentic situation, then guide them to the Gita.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->That would be exactly the wrong thing to do, and yet so typical of the attitude that too many Hindus take towards practical application of our religion.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Weren't you the one <i>asking</i> what to do? My suggestion to you has worked for all young Hindus I know, so it's not at all 'the exactly wrong thing to do'. Of course, have to allow that your circle of friends could well be very different.
My Hindu acquaintances are like me: they're all born and brought up in India and have very knowledgeable Hindu parents (Karnatakan Coorgis, Bunts and Veerashaivas; Sri Lankan Tamil Pillais and others, Reddys from Andhra, Kerala Nairs and Menons, Jats from NW, and a whole host of Tamil communities). Maybe that is what is needed for the average Indian to have an understanding of their Dharma: a Hindu upbringing and atmosphere, which gives them an inbuilt sympathy for Hindu material and the right state of mind to understand their heritage correctly.
Perhaps without the proper Hindu upbringing, chances are a bit slimmer not to turn out like a stunted tree?
You admitted by your question that you don't know what works. From experience, I know the effect the Gita has on Hindus who want to know more about Hindu Dharma. I lent out a simple translation that I have in my book collection first to two and then later, on request, to so many of my Hindu friends. They think it made Hindu Dharma very clear to them, although not all bits are equally instantly comprehensible IMO.
Most of them now understand it better than I ever did <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> - but then, let's face it, they <i>are</i> all cleverer.
Then I lent out other shloka books I had (which include English translations) and some of them photocopied it, scanned it - some even typed it out by hand - and sent it off to their friends. They treasure this stuff as their rightful heritage. A few then looked about and acquired translations in their own language and passed that around their community. And I'm still talking about people around my generation and younger.
My shloka CDs (including all my Tamil ones!) and often my sister's - hope she never reads this - have been borrowed by countless friends and were avidly listened to. People ended up buying copies, as too also that brilliant Telugu 'Sampoorna Ramayanam' film I'd lent around.
Since my initial 'sharing', others have been sharing equally valuable Hindu materials with me. So my own collection of shlokas has been growing thanks to them. A number of them have learnt all kinds of complicated things: like how to properly do Navarathri and Shivarathri puja (the way our grandparents' generation did!); a number have started to learn Samskritam (not me - I will someday).
Maybe giving the Gita <i>is</i> a sink or swim issue: perhaps some do take to it like a duck to water and some don't. I recall that the Gita itself says something about that. You won't know unless you try, best not to discount it prematurely.
<!--QuoteBegin-narayanan+Apr 14 2007, 08:16 PM-->QUOTE(narayanan @ Apr 14 2007, 08:16 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Do we rich people ever consider that no Almighty worthy of that name, would ever be impressed by someone paying a Rs. 2000 bribe to the temple money-collectors, to save time in making the "darshan"?
Once I was snuck inside the Guruvayoor temple, skipping maybe half an hour of queue, by some friend of my relative who had accompanied us. On compassionate grounds, no bribe, reasoning that "US-retarned" wimps would probably faint if they had to stand on their own feet for a few minutes.
Took me a year to get over the shame of that line-jumping. Long training should have automatically made me refuse the special consideration, very firmly and with no "ifs" and "buts". But the moment for that came and went, and I just "acquiesed".
[right][snapback]67045[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I had similarly "acquiesed" recently paying some local temple <i>guide</i> for a fast-track in-out of a temple. Felt really bad on the way there, but when I met this guide and his family during a simple lunch and shade at his place, my 'guilt' disappeared. They lived hand-to-mouth in a dilapitated structure. I'd do it again if I had to. Better than seeing hard earned money go to our hundi-chor netas and babus.
04-16-2007, 08:33 AM (This post was last modified: 04-16-2007, 08:38 AM by dhu.)
There is nothing wrong with competition between the various dharmic narratives, per se. In fact it is a healthy sign. The problem arises when the Indian forms of competition are jettisoned in favor of abrahamic forms of competition which invariably revolve around the familiar lines of ethnicity, language, and "religion".
The West, ME, and other abrahamized regions also have multiple conflicting and competing narratives, yet they will reinforce each other when needed; one ideology will cede territory to the other and vice versa. They expect same the type of competition from the Indian narratives.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Caste and Territoriality by SN Balagangadhara
I would now like to speculate that one of the results of the Indian âcaste systemâ has been the creation of ethnies cutting across linguistic and territorial differences. A Brahmin is one, irrespective of where he lived or what language he spoke. âTerritorial behaviourâ, it could be said, was minimized by trans-forming the nature of interethnic relations. It is as though the aggression between such groups re-sembles not an intra-species aggression, but an inter-species one, i.e., aggression between different âcaste groupsâ took the form of aggression between members of different species.
A Brahmin and a sudra could share the same territory in the same way a dog and a cow can; a basic tolerance (or, if you prefer, indifference) coupled with overt aggressive behaviour every now and then. A very familiar example to all of us in India is the existence of shops and restaurants, all in the same street, catering to different âcaste groupsâ living in the same territory. The extraordinary signifi-cance of this will become apparent to those of you who know Europe a bit: Turkish cafes and shops in areas hardly populated by the indigenous people, Indian restaurants and shops in areas where only Indians live, etc. I am aware of the presence of all kinds of eating houses in the big shopping streets of Europe. This post-war phenomenon, which is due to the rise of the opulent middle classes in Europe, does not provide a counter-example to what I am saying. The ghetto formation along ethnic lines is a typical phenomenon of European culture and not, I submit, of Asian culture. It is difficult even in our modern day cities to come across a phenomenon so typical of, say, America: Puerto Ri-cans, Mexicans, or Hispanics generally, Blacks, Vietnamese, Chinese, etc., all have their own ghettos, territories and turf. I submit that the only thing that resembles such territories in our cultures are the cantonments â a British creation. The separate living quarters of the different âcaste groupsâ are only superficially similar to the kind of territoriality of ethnies that we are talking about.
I do not like to be misunderstood for what I have said so far and what I will be saying soon. I am nei-ther attacking nor defending the ill-understood âcaste systemâ in India. All I am saying is that, <b>in our cultures, ethnies require(d) neither linguistic nor territorial boundaries to be one. </b>Therefore, the idea that Van Den Berghe proposes could turn out to be profoundly alien to our intuitive world models. It is possible that we conceive ethnies differently, socio-biology or no socio-biology.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
04-16-2007, 08:39 AM (This post was last modified: 04-16-2007, 09:05 AM by Husky.)
Post 124 again - forgot to add following:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Note that the Catholics, given the same question, did not tell him/her:
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Go Read the Bible. Old Testament and New Testament. In Aramaic and Latin.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->And with good reason! Have you read that manual for terrorism lately? In whatever language, whatever (accurate) translation? It never comes out looking good. Nothing can save that drivel and make it look shiny.
(See http://freetruth.50webs.org/B4.htm for instance)
No wonder many former christians swear that reading this book is what turned them into utter apostates. This is similar to the effects that actually reading the Koran had on islamics: they became ex-adherents.
I mean, what kind of 'merciful, loving' gawd would be advocating genocide of men, women, including old people, children and <i>livestock</i> for some puny transgression. Heavenly retribution upto the nth generation, which, if gawd's feeling momentarily benevolent, might be reduced to a sentence of 3 generations. Yay.
That throws to the wind all of that lovely 'self-sacrifice' jeebus supposedly made to himself (he is gawd after all) to satisfy his own anger at humanity. Yawn.
The hysterical jeebus character's repeated threats of 'eternal damnation' in the NT is also another something they don't tell you about until you read the 'Good' book... Then we wonder where the communists learned their double-speak from.
Is it any wonder why catholic schools in Europe make sure kiddies only get access to the 'Kids bible'? Or why christianity is doing a lot of PR for their latest catch-phrase: 'christianity isn't a religion, its a personal relationship with gawd-jeebus-holy spook'. This is certainly something the original streams of christianity never contended and in fact vehemently opposed (as 'personal relationship with Gods' was always a heathen thing). The mainstream churches still admit that the 'personal relationship' spin is an entirely recent invention. More fool the evangelicals who are ignorant of their own religion.
Reading the babble was the finishing touch for me to realise that it wasn't 'some christians who were evil and behaving unchristian'. No, it's their ideology that's evil and has made so many of its adherents behave miserably, whilst the others are bad followers for not following suit. I quote someone I know: "Reading the babble is the fastest cure to christianity". I wouldn't say 'fastest' - it took me a hell of a long time to get through that compilation of horrors.
04-16-2007, 10:43 AM (This post was last modified: 04-16-2007, 10:56 AM by Husky.)
Post 129 (Sengotuvel):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Islam came in with murder, looting and wanton destruction
Christianity has used more subtle methods of coercion and blackmail - except in Goa where it has been Islamlike murder, looting and destruction<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->You're slightly wrong about christianity. It has been as genocidalas islam, and has only recently reduced it in some parts of the world. In other places it still operates faithfully like the culling machine it always was.
I agree with most of what you have said in your posts in this thread.
I disagree partly with something that you wrote in <b>post 64</b>. In fact, it's likely I'll be disagreeing with every other Hindu on this.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->When you talk of a Hindu narrative, it is important not to get tied up in knots about who is a Hindu.
A Hindu is anyone who thinks he is one. His story is his narrative. If it is his story, it should not be disputed - it becomes part of the narrative.
If, for example, a person who is a Hindu laments that Hindus are intolerant and that they should should not be antagonistic towards Islam or Christianity - this person's narrative is a powerful tool in the Hindu narrative.
Even if you classify this person as a Dhimmi or a psec, his narrative, as part the Hindu narrative ... The strength of such a narrative lies in the fact that the person with this narrative claims to be a Hindu (he has not converted) and looks askance at other Hindus whom he feels are showing intolerance. Showing intolerance to this view is a tactical blunder. The Hindu narrative cannot exclude narratives from any Hindu. The act of rejecting this narrative as that of a dhimmi or "not a true Hindu" only thins the ranks of Hindus and encourages alliances with others.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I will explain a little further on, why I disagree with some of this.
I do not accept everyone as Hindu who merely say they are. In my view, a Hindu is one who (1) says they are Hindu AND (2) has a sympathy for Hindu Dharma, they consciously choose to be Hindu.
I don't know how to more accurately define (2). Will try describing:
Innate sympathy should make them instantly cautious of dawaganda. Rather than immediately jumping to the side of the media/christoislamic accusations, they should always choose to examine facts from all perspectives, not disregard the Hindu perspective.
They have to think well of overall Hindu Dharma, and wish to clarify at least to themselves misinterpretations, misconceptions and outright slander (perhaps to expose it for others as well), while also wish to improve all negative things there might be in present-day Hindu society.
In short, they have to think of Hinduism not as a lost cause and a shame to live with, but something alive, worth living, worth defending, improving and a source of happiness. Hindu Dhimmis are only Hindus by nature of passivity: they more often find it a source of shame, something they're 'stuck with', they can't be bothered changing to something else. (Such mindsets wouldn't be an asset to any religion, IMO.)
The reason I differentiate between Hindus who merely say they are so, and my definition of what a Hindu is, is simple:
There is a class of Indian that is Hindu only when it comes out to accuse Hinduism in defense of christoislamism or due to some profound misunderstanding of what secularism means. Examples:
- 'As a Hindu, I feel ashamed that they are trying to hang Afzal Guru. How inhumane!'
- 'As a Hindu, I march against the random terrorists who regularly attack temples and against the so-called Hindus who might protest against islamic terrorism. Terrorism is not islamic or christian, it is random. Some individuals may be terrorists. For example, there are Hindu terrorists too - like in the (BJP/RSS/VHP/bla bla bla). Okay, I can't think of any concrete examples, but I leave that to you as homework.'
- 'As a Hindu, I want to say it was wrong for those Kar Sevak Hindu women and children to have been in the Godhra train. It was their own fault and they got accidentally burnt for it.'
- 'As a Hindu, I stand with shabana azmi, teesta seetalvad and a host of other secular Hindus and Indians against the protests organised against MF Hussain's beautiful art work.'
- 'I am swami agnivesh, a Hindu Swami - note I'm a swami. Are you listening? Who better than me to speak for Hinduism, I have swami credentials - self-conferred of course, but swami credentials, I say! As a Hindu, I have to say, Hinduism is an evil religion because .... (list of missionary stories)'
- 'As a Hindu I have to oppose the mistreatment of the Kashmiri terrorists. How can India do such a thing. No wonder they are now terrorising the rest of India.' (Meanwhile, terrorised and exiled Kashmiri Hindus don't get any sympathy.)
- 'As a Hindu, I have to ask, why can't we be friends with Pakistan? What does it matter that they regularly terrorise India? If we become friends, it will all become better.'
- 'I'm Hrithik Roshan. As a Hindu, I am ashamed of being an Indian when people claiming to be Hindus accuse my friend Aamir Khan's terrorist film as being sympathetic to terrorism.'
The list is endless. Thankfully, many such people who'd have still <i>claimed</i> to be Hindus 5 or 10 years ago openly say they are not Hindus at all nowadays. They stick to only 'secular'.
Some unwitting people may actually be real dhimmis who don't know better and remain Hindu out of pure inertia or not thinking about what they want to be.
But as I said, there are also many frauds who like to pose as Hindus when it suits their agenda. Why do these people's narratives count at all in the Hindu narrative and if they have to, why should their versions contribute equally to it? Why should all Hindu narratives be weighted equally?
Does a Shankaracharya's understanding of Hindu Dharma deserve equal consideration as mine? And should it get equal consideration as say Mallika Sherawat (doesn't know anything) or mira nair (married to islamoterrorist) or teesta seetalvad (same) or deepa mehta or some other anti-Hindu 'Hindu' secular?
Because such a Hindu narrative is not at all representative of Hindu Dharma, and let's face it, by that time, large amounts of christoislamic missionary tales would have crept into it courtesy of such people.
In fact I think we should follow in the footsteps of the Lakota, Dakota, Nakota and a few other N American native American Nations. They have rejected all those even among themselves who are destroying their heritage. In this point, I feel we should take their example. (They've also rejected converts from non-native American people, but we need not imitate them in that). They've seen what insidious damage has been done by the 'macaulayites' amongst themselves and have drawn the line. Awesome.
I say, leave the dead wood alone before it rots the whole. Who knows, some dhimmi Hindus may well turn around and stop being passive when they see what active Hindus believe in (when they learn of the narrative you suggested). But I don't know that they ought to be courted beforehand, when you'll have to carry their unwilling selves around to get anything done anyway.
Just switched on TV and heard the news that Star TV was attacked by some people.
As Usual, Star TV comments were some 'Hindu organization' whose name they had not even properly heard of before was responsible for this attack.
Ok, even if we believe they were Hindus, Star claims this attack was because Star TV tries to show news, which is secular in nature. Well, Star TV views are not shared by millions of Hindus as Hindus feel Star TV is part of a 'pseudo-secular' brigade with a view that when it comes to Muslims and Christians the view taken by leftist media is 'always innocent even if proved guilty' while when it comes to Hindus the view is 'guilty even when proven innocent'.
Reminds me of a Sher:
Woh (IMs) Qatl bhee kartay hain to koi charcha nahin
Hum (Hindus) Aah bhee bhartay hain to ho jaatain hain badnam
Try keep stretching & stretching the elastic as see what happens. But the felling is Hindus are expected to not only take punishment but also not even cry out in pain in the process. This is precisely what we are discussing in Hindu narrative that Hindus are not even allowed to air their views with an excuse that this is not good for 'communal harmony'.
Well, how long does one expect Hindus to be at the receiving end of political parties, mullahs, missionaries, anti-Hindu propaganda by foreign and leftist media etc all the time and not react at all?
If such incidents happened as what happened at Star today (I personally condemn this incident and more so if it was connected to Star TV sheltering the young couple in their office) but even assuming some Hindus were behind the attack, well why always expect 100% responsible behavior all the time only from Hindus? Surely even media has a responsibility to show balanced, non-biased news. That is not to say what happened today was right(no, it was not) but high time media also started being a bit more balanced in their news and views.
Instead of trying to introspect, media resorts to the same old strategy of defaming the entire Hindu community and try to put all Hindus on the defensive. Some idiot reporter on Star TV has already come to the conclusion that this attack indicates 'Talibanisation of India' and he keeps drawing parallels to attack on GEO TV. This moron can't see the difference between state sponsored terrorism of Pakistan and a group of a local people attacking Star TV in Mumbai.
Now watch the other worms lead by anti-national Vinod Mehta(Outlook) come crawling out to launch an attack on Hindus.
There are two aspects to the narratives here. One aspect of the Hindu narrative can be associated with, the Geo-political construct of states and nations. This aspect of the Hindu narrative is closely alligned with the Hindu nation, which has a certin geographical construct.
The other aspect of the Hindu narrative is more universal. It is a construct primarily of values, morals and spiritual systems. There is no need to limit this aspect of the Hindu construct to its geopolitical aspects and self interest governed polity.
In fact one re-enforces the other. The universal construct needs an anchor to thrive in. The universal hindu construct cannot exist, without first, ensuring that construct survives and thrives in the core nation itself.
Both aspects of the Hindu narrative are bounded by Dharma.
04-16-2007, 11:26 PM (This post was last modified: 04-16-2007, 11:33 PM by ramana.)
Shiv, I studied at RECW that had 50% students from outside Andhra Pradesh and thus came into contact with lot of people. It helped that I was in student politics and had to know two batches before and after me in order to be relevant. Also we had five different messes - Andhra veg, Andhra NV, South India(veg & NV), North India (veg & NV) and a composite PG mess. The students from each region would register for their respective messes and the wardens would also push them to that decision. Taking advantage of a hostel near bankruptcy situation, I helped push the idea that students could register for the mess of their choice and not the warden's choice. This way those messes that had good food would survive as they atttracted more students. And not to mention National Integration which was a good ideal being regional college. So familiarity with regional food also helps.
Later on life I have travelled the length and breadth of India except Gujarat and NE. It breaks a lot of sterotypes and you realize the unity of India. The differences are superficial but are drummed up by chauvinists to gain control.
Also w.r.t. <!--emo&n^3--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/n3.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='n3.gif' /><!--endemo--> post #121 about the origin of world folklore etc., Joseph Jacobs did pioneering research in this area in the late 1800s and wrote numerous books. His conclusions are that the majority of folklore in the West comes from India. he traces the many iterations of the various tales.
Based on his book I once wrote an article on how the Brer Rabbit tale of the tar baby is related to the tale of the Buddha. It was in soc. culture. india in the mid 90s when I came across JJ. Will see if I can find it.
Here is an link to his book about the various tales:
In generalization of any narrative, we lost many "truth values" in the subject of analysis. The same holds true even for news reports, organizational projections, political representations, etc. Unfortunately, the term "Hindu" gets applied to events that should be considered extraneous religion or religious issues.
Until proven guilty, representatives of racially insulted people can and should protests agains such organizations like DDM (media), high ranking individuals, politicians and bad guys.. who have taken the route of generalization, and attack a particular community or religion with race/caste/religion as social handle., and thus work on the psychology of the weak and meek (sadly a large number).
Setting aside the emotions, its of paramount importance to get the extraneous events and unwanted projections as subject-to-legal proceeding, and thus showing the psy op-ers are countered in a manner that uses more brains than emotions. Putting the media on the dock, would be hindu organizations must ensure, they revert back with brains rather emotions. Instead of getting agitated, ensure the psy-oper is agitated. Once, the enemy is agitated.. he tends to lose his brain and there ends his attack.
The same is true for EJs and Islamic orgs. In the happiness of our self-boasting qualities of our religious theories, we forget the collective intelligence in our Hindu society is vulnerable to attacks. What Hinduism and its narratives need to point, and ponder is what collective narration helps make our social structure robust, and further channelizing our concepts and constructs to be augmented for the future.
Miracles are stories.. that can be taught to our kids. When we need action, it has to be karmic in nature. Let the positive projections later down the years be termed Miracle..say, from the Internet world. A new kind of messiah-ism is born.. A collective mind setup, that helps solve issues.
This is were we are vulnerable and weak. Hindu narrations get hackled and shackled cause it fails to theorize and conceptualize social and group activities, for the purpose of the group, and not individual gains. One of the major works of EJ-ists is the very fundamental theory of using "community service", love thy neighbor, and enemy, and use that to over power and empower EJ backbones.
Half done thesis of augmented advaita needs further studies.. and needs advancements for the future living. hindusim would be under attack, and soon, Every Hindu becomes a terrorist feeling is very much on the horizon.
Meena,
Why do you have to have an appropriate answer for the views of Christian believers? Why should you need to find validation for your views, in their opinions? They are believers of a different religion. Why should you seek a congruence of views?
<!--QuoteBegin-vishwas+Apr 17 2007, 04:31 AM-->QUOTE(vishwas @ Apr 17 2007, 04:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Meena,
Why do you have to have an appropriate answer for the views of Christian believers? Why should you need to find validation for your views, in their opinions? They are believers of a different religion. Why should you seek a congruence of views?
[right][snapback]67182[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These are the views which they use to convert people. When they go to a tribal and tell him/her their way of living is incorrect and is devil worship. Then after the conversion he/she joins them to go after his original co-religionists. One is not looking for congruence but one must be able to stand up to them.
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> - but then, let's face it, they <i>are</i> all cleverer. 
