Post 6/?
A few actual statements Rajeev made. Have found the relevant comment in someone else's twit feed:
https:// twitter.com/SumukhNaik/statuses/478784444900196354
Going back in time, the source where Rajeev imbibed such views from (and made them his own in the meantime) becomes clear:
www.rediff.com/news/sep/22rajeev.htm
At the bottom of the page it says: "Copyright 1997 Rediff On The Net", but can't determine if that's the date of the article itself.
www.firstpost.com/ideas/the-karna-syndrome-and-rahul-dravid-as-the-hero-60411.html/2
The following paragraph is Rajeev's, he's speaking about his book choice in 2011:
On:
The answer is simple - and right there in the Mahabharatam: there's clearly no love lost between the two.
(That's not even considering that Draupadi is IndraaNi Devi who will marry Indran alone.)
Yet he's the one who described Draupadi as "gender oppressed". So subversionist views - of the same class as those Rajeev is criticising - are forgiven when he finds them to be convincing.
Ironic, considering that he wrote an article IIRC called "Surpanakha's Daughters" where he criticises other views that are in this line albeit more extreme. I suppose the same stuffs when diluted or when peddled by the 'right' persons - a.o.t. the wrong persons - will succeed in subverting. It's a pattern that could be observed for at least the last 1.5 decades.
The following is an exchange concerning Vamana and Bali between Rajeev and another oft-seen Hindu nationalist ("Witan") at Rajeev's blog. The comments are very... insightful about their owners:
rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2012/12/today-vamana-avatara-yesterday-more.html
About the statements such as those highlighted in blue above: these are emitted by self-professed "Hindu nationalists" by the way.
Clearly Witan's bought the Dravoodian propaganda against Hindu religion as much as Rajeev's internalised the Bauddhising propaganda against Hindu religion. Hook, line and sinker - both. If hijacking of Hindu religio-history for Buddhism is admissable, so should the Jain and Dravoodian attempts to this end be. Each make identical arguments, after all, but with each in turn projecting themselves as the maligned victims of Hindu religion in what is actually a Hindu narrative concerned exclusively with Hindu cosmology (and which doesn't know of Jainism/Buddhism/Dravoodianism/whatever). Already discussed in earlier posts in the Buddhism thread.
From the above, it's evident that Dravoodian propaganda eventually got to Witan and Bauddhising propaganda got to Rajeev. (BTW, there's a very palpable passive-aggressive undertone against Hindu religion that these - and quite a few others of this kind - have going on.) Oryanism succeeded with yet others. And Doniger-class statements seeped into further others, although usually when parroted by persons less objectionable. Etc. Etc. Every visible vocalist seems to succumb to some idea or other.
A few actual statements Rajeev made. Have found the relevant comment in someone else's twit feed:
https:// twitter.com/SumukhNaik/statuses/478784444900196354
Quote:rajeev srinivasan ââ¬Â@RajeevSrinivasa ÷Jun 15 (2014)
why aren't draupadi (gender oppressed) and karna (caste oppressed) kindred souls? she 'crushed' him? @TedhiLakeer @yoginisd @SandeepWeb Details Expand Collapse
Going back in time, the source where Rajeev imbibed such views from (and made them his own in the meantime) becomes clear:
www.rediff.com/news/sep/22rajeev.htm
At the bottom of the page it says: "Copyright 1997 Rediff On The Net", but can't determine if that's the date of the article itself.
Quote:Rajeev Srinivasan picks his favourite Indian fiction of the last fifty years
[...]
Ini Jnan Urangatte (... And now I must sleep), P K Balakrishnan, Malayalam.
A strange and wonderful work, this is the retelling of portions of the Mahabharata from the points of view of its two most wronged characters: Draupadi and Karna; yet Balakrishnan is able to show they are the true centres of the epic -- the woman and the putative low-caste man. Both exploited, both put upon by the powers that be; yet the epic revolves around them.
Truly, Karna is the hero of the Mahabharata, a man with his human failings, yet one who always strives, one who remembers his roots, and one who is honourable. Particularly well done are Karna's conversation with Kunti when she reveals that he is her son; and Draupadi's interior monologue, without the feminist rhetorical excess that seems to afflict other such attempts. Another Sahitya Akademi winner.
www.firstpost.com/ideas/the-karna-syndrome-and-rahul-dravid-as-the-hero-60411.html/2
The following paragraph is Rajeev's, he's speaking about his book choice in 2011:
Quote:The Karna Syndrome and Rahul Dravid as the hero
Aug 13, 2011
[...]
There is a remarkable Malayalam book by PK Balakrishnan, Ini Jnan Urangatte (And now I must sleep), which retells the epic from the point of the putative low-caste man, Karna, and the woman, Draupadi. It is a forceful and insightful retelling, a paradigm shift.
On:
Quote:rajeev srinivasan ââ¬Â@RajeevSrinivasa ÷Jun 15 (2014)
why aren't draupadi (gender oppressed) and karna (caste oppressed) kindred souls? she 'crushed' him? @TedhiLakeer @yoginisd @SandeepWeb Details Expand Collapse
The answer is simple - and right there in the Mahabharatam: there's clearly no love lost between the two.
(That's not even considering that Draupadi is IndraaNi Devi who will marry Indran alone.)
Quote:"without the feminist rhetorical excess that seems to afflict other such attempts. Another Sahitya Akademi winner"
Yet he's the one who described Draupadi as "gender oppressed". So subversionist views - of the same class as those Rajeev is criticising - are forgiven when he finds them to be convincing.
Ironic, considering that he wrote an article IIRC called "Surpanakha's Daughters" where he criticises other views that are in this line albeit more extreme. I suppose the same stuffs when diluted or when peddled by the 'right' persons - a.o.t. the wrong persons - will succeed in subverting. It's a pattern that could be observed for at least the last 1.5 decades.
The following is an exchange concerning Vamana and Bali between Rajeev and another oft-seen Hindu nationalist ("Witan") at Rajeev's blog. The comments are very... insightful about their owners:
rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2012/12/today-vamana-avatara-yesterday-more.html
Quote:Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Today vamana avatara. Yesterday more appropriate: narasimha. #namo. But vamana too sent asuras to underworld
Posted by nizhal yoddha at 12/19/2012 05:02:00 PM
Reactions:
5 comments:
witan said...
Nizhal Yoddha, who is a Malayalee, ought not have highlighted the Vamana avataram. People in Keralam still worship Mahabali: RIGHTLY!
Actually, this illustrates the fallacy of drawing moral lessons from epics as different from scriptures.
12/19/2012 8:37 PM
nizhal yoddha said...
not quite, witan. kerala people do not *worship* mahabali, we are just fond of him as a good king. and incidentally, we know good kings -- when others were laboring under the british yoke, travancore was ruled by exemplary kings: considerate, frugal, imbued with foresight.
so i don't know what you mean by "RIGHTLY". it is also kerala hindus' prerogative to worship anybody they feel like; and in fact we do worship vamana as an avatara of vishnu.
there are many moral lessons in the epics. one is that the gods might have information not available to the mortal man, and that they might upon that in ways that might befuddle mortals.
on the other hand, the entire vamana story is a metaphor for the buddhists of kerala (thus 'asuras') being defeated by brahmins. being a descendant of said asuras, i am not sure i have a good enough rationale to rant against something that happened some 1200 years ago as part of the Counter-Reformation in hinduism, following up on the Reformation circa 2500 years ago that resulted in the creation of buddhism and jainism. i am pretty sure you don't have anything concrete either, just some conjectures.
12/20/2012 1:34 AM
witan said...
ââ¬ÅVamana is ... the younger brother of Indra.ââ¬Â
ââ¬ÅThe Bhagavata Purana describes that Vishnu descended as the Vamana avatar to restore the authority of Indra over the heavens, as it had been taken by Mahabali, a benevolent Asura King. Bali was the grandson of Prahlada, the son of Hiranyakshipu. ... Just before King Mahavali was pushed out of this earth, he was given permission by Vamana to visit his people once a year. The Onam festival is a celebration of welcoming Mahabali home to his lost kingdom. During this festival, beautiful floral decorations are made in every house and boat races are held throughout Kerala. A twenty-one-course feast is the most important part of the Onam festival.ââ¬Â [wikipedia]
The decorations and celebrations are to make Mahabali think that the people are happy and prosperous. The people did not want their erstwhile king to feel sad.
I repeat, ââ¬ÅMahabali, a benevolent Asura Kingââ¬Â. IOW, the Vamana ousted Mahabali for no other reason than as a personal favour to Indra, ââ¬â blatant Nepotism. What moral lesson can one draw from this?
12/21/2012 6:12 AM
nizhal yoddha said...
i repeat, you were wrong, we do not *worship* mahabali, but we respect him as a great king. thank you for keenly supporting my statement with your wikipedia quote.
this idea of mahabali as a victim of some conspiracy is a vestige of 'dravidian' tamil garbage, which i reject in its entirety. except for a few communists, so do most kerala people. and, i repeat, as a descendant of the so-called asuras, i have no problem with the reality: buddhists were overthrown by hindus in that episode. buddhism had, by that time, degenerated to being merely an atheist version of hinduism (much like communism is today an atheist version of christism). it had lost its intellectual and emotional charm due to a) sankara's counter-attack and B ) the alwars/nayanmars of tamil country with their ecstatic worship of personal gods.
it is a matter of great sadness that tamil culture, which was of such a high caliber 1200 years ago, has degenerated into this vile 'dravidian' crap today. thank you, padre caldwell (the inventor of 'dravidianism') and the dmk.
12/21/2012 5:44 PM
nizhal yoddha said...
i love witan's tamil-imperialist urge to tell me what to think. we malayalis are obviously vassals to the great tamil nation.
i don't have to read the wikipedia to understand what onam is: i *live* it. it is my festival. just as i don't presume to tell tamils what their jallikettu or pongal is, it would be best that you tamils don't tell me what onam is.
there is a malayalam phrase that describes this sort of behavior: "kanda nee avide nilkoo, ketta jnan parayatte" meaning, "you who saw the incident keep quiet, let me, who heard about it from someone, pontificate about the incident".
presumptuous, i believe the word is.
About the statements such as those highlighted in blue above: these are emitted by self-professed "Hindu nationalists" by the way.
Clearly Witan's bought the Dravoodian propaganda against Hindu religion as much as Rajeev's internalised the Bauddhising propaganda against Hindu religion. Hook, line and sinker - both. If hijacking of Hindu religio-history for Buddhism is admissable, so should the Jain and Dravoodian attempts to this end be. Each make identical arguments, after all, but with each in turn projecting themselves as the maligned victims of Hindu religion in what is actually a Hindu narrative concerned exclusively with Hindu cosmology (and which doesn't know of Jainism/Buddhism/Dravoodianism/whatever). Already discussed in earlier posts in the Buddhism thread.
From the above, it's evident that Dravoodian propaganda eventually got to Witan and Bauddhising propaganda got to Rajeev. (BTW, there's a very palpable passive-aggressive undertone against Hindu religion that these - and quite a few others of this kind - have going on.) Oryanism succeeded with yet others. And Doniger-class statements seeped into further others, although usually when parroted by persons less objectionable. Etc. Etc. Every visible vocalist seems to succumb to some idea or other.