tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-40960107234390988112023-11-16T16:43:36.845+05:30idiadian expression of my views and ideas on anything and everythingVChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.comBlogger216125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-21590732617742232542020-07-19T17:00:00.000+05:302020-07-19T17:00:08.862+05:30The Depth of Sanatana Dharma - Srirama - Part 3<div style="text-align: justify;">This is part of a series I have been writing. Here are <a href="https://idiadi.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-depth-of-sanatana-dharma-srirama.html" target="_blank">part 1</a> and <a href="https://idiadi.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-depth-of-sanatana-dharma-srirama_24.html" target="_blank">part 2</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the third part I am actually approaching the topic of the series.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As is well known, the Ramayana was written by Valmiki Maharshi. The epic begins with the sage questioning the divine sage, Narada. From a surface perspective Valmiki asks Narada whether there existed at that point of time a person with sixteen qualities. However, all of these can be interpreted in a different way to apply to the Supreme Lord. Thus, in essence what Valmiki had asked was whether God was present at that time on earth (as an incarnation). This is another example of the flexibility and beauty of the Sanskrit language.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">After this, Valmiki comes upon a hunter who slays one out of a pair of birds in the forest. He bursts out in a metrical shloka surprising himself. This is said to be the first human-made shloka because of which Valmiki is honoured as Adikavi (आदिकविः, ఆదికవి) or first poet. It is famously said that the shloka was born out of shoka (sorrow). It goes like this.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">मा निषाद प्रतिष्ठां त्वमगमः शाश्वतीः समाः |<br />
यत् क्रौञ्चमिथुनादेकमवधीः काममोहितम् || <br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">mA niShAda pratiShThAm tvamagamah shAshvatIh samAh</div><div style="text-align: justify;">yat kraunchamithunAdEkam avadhIh kAmamOhitam</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">మా నిషాద ప్రతిష్ఠామ్ త్వమగమః శాశ్వతీస్సమాః <br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">యత్ క్రౌఞ్చమిథునాదేకం అవధీః కామమోహితం <br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This shloka can be translated as cursing the hunter to not gain fame (or to gain infamy) for eons due to his act of a killing one bird out of a passionate couple. If the first two words are coupled it becomes mAniShAda which means one in whom mA (not the Hindi word), Lakshmi resides. This word is now the sane as Srinivasa, which is another name for Vishnu. From this perspective, the meaning changes completely. It now praises Rama to have fame for eons as the killer of the passionate (lustful) one out of the (rakshasa) couple (of Ravana and Mandodari).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Now let us come to his name itself. There are many meanings to the name of Rama. I will just talk about 1 or 2.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The name Rama is said to be derived from two letters, each of which is a prANAkSharam (प्राणाक्षरम्, ప్రాణాక్షరం) of two famous mantras, one of Vishnu and one of Shiva. What is this? It is a letter which is like life to that mantra.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Vishnu's mantra is namO nArAyaNAya (नमो नारायणाय, నమో నారాయణాయ) and Shiva's is namah shivAya (नमः शिवाय, నమః శివాయ). Each mantra means salutation to that particular deity. Rama is derived from ra in the first mantra and ma in the second one. If rA is removed from the first one it becomes "na ayanAya" which means without refuge or direction. If ma is removed from the second one, it becomes na shivAya (or for not the auspicious, or for the inauspicious). Thus the name Rama combines the essence of two great mantras. I will share a few more details in the forthcoming post.<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">References:</div><div style="text-align: justify;">1. Discourses by Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma</div><div style="text-align: justify;">2. https://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/baala/sarga2/bala_2_frame.htm<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Transliteration: <br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">1. https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_devanagari.htm</div><div style="text-align: justify;">2. https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/telugu.htm</div><div style="text-align: justify;">3. Blogger<br /></div>VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-85600091923420712702020-04-13T00:21:00.000+05:302020-04-13T00:21:17.595+05:30Another post on Hanuman<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I wanted to post this on Chaitra Shukla Pournami (five days back) which is widely celebrated as Hanuman's birthday. Anyway, better late than never. I am actually in the middle of a series on Srirama and Sanskrit. However, I am sure Srirama will forgive this detour to talk about his bhakta. In this post as well, I will illustrate the beauty of Sanskrit's multi-layered personality.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This post can be read in continuation with <a href="https://mysandhyavandanam.blogspot.com/2018/04/on-angry-hanuman.html" target="_blank">an earlier one</a>. I had written about how Anjaneya personified humility. I want to share a few more details here. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let us first come to his name, Hanuman. Many people will be aware of the story where Hanuman as an infant lunges for the sun and is struck down by Indra. The injury on his jaw (hanu in Sanskrit) gives him the name Hanuman. Now this is one meaning. We use the jaw when we speak. Thus Hanuman also means one who speaks well. It in fact goes a step beyond that. To speak well, it is critical for good knowledge to be present. Thus Hanuman also means one with knowledge. When Hanuman first meets Srirama in the Ramayana he asks certain questions. Srirama remarks to Lakshmana how his speech bears Hanuman to be one who is well versed in all the shaastras.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now in the older post we have discussed how Hanuman personifies humility. Let me share once again what I wrote there. When Hanuman is about to leave for Lanka he magnifies his form and utters a sloka.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<i></i><div style="text-align: justify;">
यथा राघवनिर्मुक्तः शरः श्वसनविक्रमः <br />गच्चेत्तद्वद्गमिष्यामि लङ्कां रावणपालिताम् </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
యథా రాఘవనిర్ముక్తశ్శరః శ్వసనవిక్రమః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
గచ్ఛేత్ తద్వద్ గమిష్యామి లంకాం రావణపాలితామ్ <i> </i></div>
<i> </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>yathaa raaghavanirmuktah sharah shvasanavikramah</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>gachchhet tadvad gamiShyaami lankaam raavana paalitaam</i></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Srirama is described by Vishwamitra as Satyaparakrama, one whose valour is unchallenged. Srirama's arrow that way is unstoppable. It also has the quality of coming back to him once it hit the target. Hanuman says he is like that. He does not give any credit to himself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Later, in Lanka he proclaims who he is. This is popularly called jayaghosha. In the Ramayana, the Sundarakaanda holds a very special place. One reason for it is that it encapsulates the entire Ramayana, till that time, and afterwards. Hanuman narrates what has happened till that time to Sita and promises her Ravana's end which is what happens next. This jayaghosha is said to carry the essence of the Sundarakaanda itself. Even here, he initially proclaims to be Srirama's <i>daasa</i>. Then, since he is in enemy territory, he proclaims his strength.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
जयत्यतिबलो रामो लक्ष्मणश्च महाबलः<br />राजा जयति सुग्रीवो राघवेणाभिपालितः<br /> </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
दासोऽहम् कोसलेन्द्रस्य रामस्याक्लिष्टकर्म्णः<br />हनुमान् शत्रुसैन्यानाम् निहन्ता मारुतात्मजः</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
न रावणसहस्रम् मे युद्धे प्रतिबलम् भवेत्<br />शिलाभिस्तु प्रहरतः पदपैश्च सहस्रसः<br /><br />अर्दयित्वा पुरीम् लङ्काम् अभिवाद्य च मैथिलीम्<br />समृद्धार्थो गमिष्यामि मिषताम् सर्वरक्षसाम् </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
జయత్యతిబలో రామో లక్ష్మణశ్చ మహాబలః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
రాజా జయతి సుగ్రీవో రాఘవేణాభిపాలితః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
దాసోహం కోసలేంద్రస్య రామస్యాక్లిష్టకర్మణః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
హనుమాన్ శత్రుసైన్యానాం నిహంతా మారుతాత్మజః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
న రావణసహస్రం మే యుద్ధే ప్రతిబలం భవేత్ </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
శిలాభిస్తు ప్రహరతః పాదపైశ్చ సహస్రసః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
అర్దయిత్వా పురీం లంకాం అభివాద్య చ మైథిలీం</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
సమృద్ధార్థో గమిష్యామి మిషతాం సర్వరాక్షసామ్</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
jayatyati balo rAmo lakShmaNasca maHabalah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
rAjA jayati sugreevo rAghaveNAbhipAlitah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
dAsoham kosalendrasya rAmasyAkliShta karmaNah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
hanumAn shatrusainyAnAm nihantA mArutAtmajah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
na rAvaNa sahasram me yuddhe pratibalam bhavet</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
shilAbhistu praharatah pAdapaisca sahasrasah </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
ardayitvA pureem lankAm abhivAdya ca maithileem</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
samruddhArtho gamiShyAmi miShatAm sarvarakShasAm</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Broadly: Victory to Rama the almighty, victory to Lakshmana the strong. Victory to King Sugreeva, who is ruled over by Rama. I am the servant of the ruler of Kosala, Rama, he who removes difficulties. I am Hanuman, destroyer of enemy armies, born of the Wind. Even thousands of Ravanas cannot face me in battle. I will torment this city of Lanka with </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Further, if one observes the Ramayana closely, those who served Srirama benefit in one way or the other. Sugreeva befriends Srirama to win back his wife and kingdom. Vibheeshana, though he reaches Srirama out of devotion, also benefits from the kingship of Lanka after Ravana's demise. It is only Hanuman who does not materially benefit in the Ramayana. He is the only one who truly serves Srirama without asking for <i>anything</i> in return. He exists to serve Srirama.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In fact Hanuman actually helps the main characters in the Ramayana. He brings the mountain of herbs to resuscitate Lakshmana. When Hanuman finds Sita she is about to commit suicide by hanging herself with her long hair. He gives her hope. He aids Srirama in his quest and helps him in multiple ways. In fact, Srirama admits in the Ramayana that he cannot offer anything to Hanuman in return for his help. Tulasidas says in his Hanuman Chalisa that Hanuman resides in the heart of Srirama, Sita and Lakshmana. Is it surprising in any way?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Ramayana is unique in an (among many) aspect. There are words spoken by (at least initially) negative characters that have become famous in a positive manner. There is a famous statement, rAmo virahavAn dharmah (रामो विग्रहवान् धर्मः, రామో విగ్రహవాన్ ధర్మః). It means Srirama is Dharma personified. Do you know who utters these words? Maareecha, the rakshasa Ravana employs to play the role of the golden deer! </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is one similar thing for Hanuman. There is a part in the Sundarakaanda where Hanuman comes across Lankini the guardian deity of Lanka. When he defeats her, she asks him to be pleased with and protect her. This has become a mantra. The second line of the sloka below is taken verabtim from Lankinis' words in the Ramayana (not the first part mind you). This can be chanted especially by those who have mental/psychological problems they wish to be rid of.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
सन्जीवपर्वतोद्धार मनोदुःखम् निवारय<br />प्रसीद सुमहाबाहो त्रायस्व हरिसत्तम</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
సంజీవపర్వతోద్ధార మనోదుఃఖం నివారయ </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
ప్రసీద సుమహాబాహో త్రాయస్వ హరిసత్తమ </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
sanjeevaparvatoddhAra manoduhkham nivAraya</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
praseeda sumahAbAho trAyasva harisattama</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In Sanskrit, the word Hari can mean Vishnu, a lion or a monkey. Thus the broad meaning of this sloka is, "Oh one who bore the Sanjeevani mountain, please prevent/remove the sorrow of my mind. Be pleased with me, one with great arms, protect me, the strongest among the vanaras."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Those who wish to overcome certain difficulties or are looking to achieve a certain objective are also asked to chant the following mantra four times - sree hanumAn jaya hanumAn jaya jaya hanumAn (श्रीहनुमान् जय हनुमान् जय जय हनुमान्, శ్రీహనుమాన్ జయ హనుమాన్ జయ జయ హనుమాన్). The total works out to chanting his name 12 twelve times.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hanuman is a chiranjeevi. Technically, unless I am mistaken this does not mean actual immortality but an <i>extremely</i> long life. We find Hanuman in the Mahabharata. He first comes up when Bhima roams in the Himalayas during the Pandavas' exile. He cautions him against disturbing the peace and sanctity of a certain place. He later manifests in the flag (dhwaja) of Arjuna's chariot.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Tulasidas is said to have come upon Hanuman. He was able to recognize and catch hold of Hanuman after a recitation of the Ramayana. Even today whenever Ramayana is recited or spoken about anywhere there is one seat reserved for Hanuman. Imagine how many times the Ramayana would have been spoken about over hundreds and thousands of years. He is still said to hear every Ramayana recital with tears of joy in his eyes. Let me end this post on this note.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
यत्र यत्र रघुनाथकीर्तनम् तत्र तत्र कृत मस्तकान्जलिम्<br />बाष्पवारिपरिपूर्णलोचनम् मारुतिम् नमत राक्षसान्तकम्</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
యత్ర యత్ర రఘునాథకీర్తనం తత్ర తత్ర కృత మస్తకాంజలిమ్ </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
బాష్పవారిపరిపూర్ణలోచనం మారుతిం నమత రాక్షసాంతకమ్ </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
yatra yatra raghunAthakeertanam tatra tatra kruta mastakAnjalim</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
bAshpavAri paripoorNa lochanam mArutim namata rAkShasAntakam</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Broad meaning: I salute Maruti, who is to be found with his head bowed and eyes full of tears (of joy, on hearing his Lord's praise) wherever there is praise of Srirama.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
References:<i> </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Ramayana discourse by Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. https://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/sundara/sarga1/sundara_1_frame.htm<i> </i></div>
3. https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_devanagari.htm</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
4. http://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/sundara/sarga43/sundara_43_frame.htm</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-65245599654465085562019-12-26T18:44:00.003+05:302019-12-26T18:45:29.208+05:30The Six-pointed Star<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I am taking a slight detour from the earlier topic on Srirama. I will come back to it in my next post.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We have a star shape seen very commonly around this time of the year. This is commonly called the Star of David. This post is on the symbology behind it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, many if not all religions have some layers of meaning built into their holy books and teachings. However, I am not sure how many of them have retained this knowledge at all, or at least to the extent Sanatana Dharma i.e Hinduism has.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For example, there is a book called The Holy Science. This showcases how similarities between certain concepts given in the Bible and Hinduism's saamkhya (सांख्य, సాంఖ్య) philosophy. The interesting aspect is, this was written by Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri, the guru of Paramahamsa Yogananda.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, I come to what is commonly called the Star of David. Those who read The Da Vinci Code may remember certain aspects of the divine feminine. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In Hinduism, this has some interesting concepts behind it. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>The upward pointing triangle denotes Shiva and the downward pointing one Shakti. The union of these two, produces a six-cornered triangle. This denotes Shanmukha (षन्मुख, షణ్ముఖ), the six-faced one, also known as Subrahmaya (सुब्रह्मण्य, సుబ్రహ్మణ్య) or Arumugam/Murugan.</li>
<li>Shiva and Shakti are two forces which come together to create this universe. Without their union the universe would not exist. There are two opposites that denote Shiva and Shakti respectively - heat and cold - agni and soma (सोम, సోమ).</li>
<li>The upward-facing triangle denotes sacrificial fire (heat). The downward one, the offering/fuel (cool). The union of the sacrificial fire and the offering is the yagnya itself. Thus Subrahmanya is the very sacrifice personified.</li>
</ol>
The star in this way denotes Subrahmanya or the yagnya or this creation itself, depending on how you wish to see it. </div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-334348719780710402019-11-24T13:51:00.000+05:302019-11-24T13:51:30.751+05:30The Depth of Sanatana Dharma - Srirama - Part 2<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Continuing from my <a href="https://mysandhyavandanam.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-depth-of-sanatana-dharma-srirama.html" target="_blank">earlier post</a>, I want to spend some time on the Sanskrit language here. This is especially relevant today in the context of a Muslim professor being appointed to a specific post at Benaras Hindu University. There is a Twitter handle called @TIinexile which is the new handle of a guy who goes by the name True Indology. Paraphrasing what he said, in Sanskrit, the divine and the language are intertwined. Once you take away the divine, the language loses its essence, its beauty. This is a surefire way of killing it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The depth of Sanatana Dharma, this whole topic, in fact is primarily due to this language. Look at the English language. I am not sure if anyone knows <i>why</i> the alphabets are arranged from A to Z. Sanskrit and its derivative Indian languages have a clear logic. This applies whether it is a North Indian or South Indian language. In fact, possibly South Indian languages have preserved features of Sanskrit better. Definitely, in my personal opinion, a South Indian <i>poojari</i> pronounces mantras much better than a North Indian one. The Hindi version of Sanskrit has to many <i>halants</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The language is a phonetic language. What we write is what we pronounce and vice versa. The alphabet starts with vowels which form the base sounds. Consonants do not have existence independent of the vowels. As we cross each <i>varga - ka cha Ta ta pa</i>, the sound moves from the back of the mouth to the lips. Thus there is a beauty and logic to the structure. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The very alphabets are said to have been derived from the sound of Lord Siva's <i>dhamarukam</i> or <i>damroo</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sanskrit also has the concept of beejaakSharaam (बीजाक्षरम्, బీజాక్షరము) or "seed letter". I do not have enough knowledge to elaborate on these. Further this is not a topic that must be publicly discussed. The base concept is that sound has power. This is the concept behind <i>mantraas</i>, and why they should not publicly broadcast or spoken. For that matter, one must not even utter these without proper initiation.There is the Sanskrit shloka shared by the PM some time back.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
amantram akSharam naasti naasti moolam anauShadham</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
ayogyo purusho naasti yojakah tatra durlabhah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
अमन्त्रम् अक्षरम् नास्ति नास्ति मूलम् अनौषधम् </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
अयोग्यो पुरुषो नास्ति योजकः तत्र दुर्लभः</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
అమంత్రం అక్షరం నాస్తి నాస్తి మూలం అనౌషధం </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
అయోగ్యో పురుషో నాస్తి యోజకః తత్ర దుర్లభః </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is no letter (of the alphabet) that is not a mantra. There is no root that is not medicinal. There is no man (person) that is unworthy. However, it is extremely difficult to find the one that can put them to use.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thus the presence of a lot of hidden meanings in Hindu literature is <i>precisely</i> because of Sanskrit. This is obvious in a way. There is a message that must be conveyed. Unless the medium offers that flexibility it is not possible for the message to have multiple meanings. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, in any language there may be words with multiple meanings (if I remember what an old Guinness Book of World Records said, the word "set" in English has the maximum meanings). There are also multiple words to convey the same meaning (synonyms basically, fire, blaze, conflagration etc). What sets Sanskrit really apart is that the meaning of an entire sentence or <i>shloka</i> can change.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I will explain this with an example and get into the Ramayana in the next post.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
References:</div>
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_devanagari.htm</li>
<li>http://vadirajaacharya.blogspot.com/2006/06/making-anything-happen_03.html</li>
</ol>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-91113476388394671242019-11-09T21:16:00.000+05:302019-11-09T21:19:01.477+05:30The Depth of Sanatana Dharma - Srirama - Part 1<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have been thinking about writing on this topic for some time. Today seemed to be an especially good day to start this. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Due to various reasons, many Indians, especially Hindus today have no idea about Sanatana Dharma, today known as Hinduism. Our education system is completely "secular". We have "educated", "modern" Indians who think it is wrong/are scared to be publicly religious or proud. I remember a relative telling me a story in an airport, possibly outside India. The guy was asked by the immigration officer whether he was a Hindu. He adamantly kept responding he was an Indian. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We have people like Devdutt Pattnaik who write literally what they want in the name of Hinduism. We have the leftists who actively hate anything Hindu. I do not even want to get started about evangelicals and fundamentalists.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hinduism is VAST in the scope of its literature. It is not dependent on one book or one prophet. The Vedas take precedence as the central texts. Everything else is ultimately based on what is said in the Vedas. Abrahamic religions do have underlying themes for which the outer words are allegorical. However, I am not sure how many followers are left who get these meanings. For example, there are certain sections of the Bible which mirror concepts in <i>saamkhya</i> (साम्ख्य, సాంఖ్య) philosophy of Hinduism. This was revealed by a Hindu Guru, Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri. He was the guru of Paramahamsa Yogananda, author of Autobiography of a Yogi. Islam has Sufism which mirrors some <i>advaitic</i> concepts. The song bulla ki jaana for example is an expression of the advaitic na iti (न इति, న ఇతి) concept. Hinduism says that every soul is divine. It states that every soul has the potential to reach the state of a Jesus or a Mohammed. Even (today's popular versions of) Christianity and Islam do not say so.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After at least 10 centuries of invasions, Hinduism still retains the knowledge of these hidden concepts. It is not for nothing that the actual name of Hinduism is <i>sanaatana dharma </i>(सनातन धर्म, సనాతన ధర్మము). The first word means eternal. These are concepts that are timeless. Hence, Hindu texts cannot and should not be translated using just a dictionary. In some cases this can give wrong interpretations. This is the problem created by Devdutt Pattanaik, western Indologists etc. There are people like the Americans Dr David Frawley and Dr Robert Svoboda who understand this. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What is being given here is just a sample of the treasure trove that Hinduism has.Imagine how big a library on Hinduism would need to be.</div>
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li>Central texts are <i>vedas</i>, also called <i>shrutis</i> (श्रुति, శృతి). They were and are passed down by hearing. Also, these were heard by people called rishis in a state of consciousness you and I cannot even understand. They convey some ideas in a very brief format.</li>
<li>These concepts are elaborated upon by the <i>puraanaas</i> (पुराण, పురాణము) so that the general public can understand concepts discovered by the rishis.</li>
<li>They are further simplified by the <i>itihaasaas</i> (इतिहास, ఇతిహాసము). The term literally means, it so happened.</li>
<li>There are the vedaangaas which are needed to be learnt to translate the Vedas. These are shikSHa (शिक्षा, శిక్ష), vyaakaraNa (व्याकरण, వ్యాకరణము), chhandas (छन्दस्, ఛందస్సు), nirukta (निरुक्त, నిరుక్తము), jyotiSHa (ज्योतिष, జ్యోతిషము) and kalpa (कल्प, కల్పము).</li>
<li>We have the concept of <i>yoga</i>. Concepts in this have been elaborated upon by the sage Patanjali in his <i>yoga sootraas.</i></li>
<li>The <i>mantra shaastra</i> (मन्त्र शास्त्र, మంత్ర శాస్త్రము) explains the concepts and applications of <i>mantraas</i> which are basically dependent upon the power of sound and repetition.</li>
<li>Well know <i>aayurveda</i> is related to health</li>
<li>Concepts of scultpure, architecture, buildings etc. are covered in <i>shilpashaastra</i>, <i>aagamashaastra</i> and <i>vaastushaastra</i>.</li>
<li>Even the names of Hindu gods and goddesses have multiple layers of meanings to them.</li>
<li>There are explanations on why Hindu gods and goddesses are portrayed in specific ways.</li>
<li>There are specific meanings even to the items that they hold in their hands. </li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One word Hinduism uses to describe these underlying concepts and essence is <i>tattva</i> (तत्त्व, తత్త్వము). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I started this post wanting to write about meanings of the name of Srirama. However, the introduction itself has taken up so much space that I will take this up in the next post.<br />
<br />
References: Discourses by Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma<br />
Sanskrit transliteration: https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_devanagari.htm </div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-54178576114193599022019-10-19T01:43:00.002+05:302019-10-19T01:43:47.528+05:30Sutras of Secularism<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
All praise to Nehru and Indira, the torch bearers of Indian secularism. Having meditated upon their glory I attained secular enlightenment. <br /><br />Hereby I give you Sutras of Indian Secularism that were bestowed unto me in deep prayer. Spread them far and wide. May you attain peace!<br /><br />1. Thou shalt bend over backwards for minorities (to be defined in the forthcoming lines).<br /><br />2. Thou shalt not ask for equal rights for all Indians. This shalt be construed as a communal act. If thou want to ask for greater privileges to Hindus as this is the only country in the world they can call their home, thou shalt be committed to an institution and the key shalt be thrown away.<br /><br />3. Only two communities which cometh from outside this land shalt be considered to be minorities. Any community of Indian descent, however minuscule may be the number of its adherents, shalt not be considered to be a minority.<br /><br />4. The left shalt make all possible attempts to prove that Hinduism came from outside India, lest any communal Hindu ask questions like the one above. This shalt include the right to create outlandish conjecture-based theories for which there be no proof, or for which there be proof proving the opposite.<br /><br />5. As Hindus form the majority of India's population, even in states like Meghalaya, where their population proportion be lower, they shalt not be considered minorities. Hence, no privileges afforded to members of aforementioned communities shalt be extended to Hindus in such states (what were you smoking?).<br /><br />6. Any death of a member of the aforementioned communities shall be construed as an attack on the secular fabric of this country, the truth be damned. However, no killing of a Hindu shall be construed this way. In fact the Hindu was probably asking for it, and definitely deserved what he got.<br /><br />7. Any animal killing/tree felling by members of aforementioned communities shalt be allowed. However, Hindus shalt have no right to do ritualistic killings (seriously, what were you smoking?). Any mass animal killing by minorities shalt be acceptable.<br /><br />8. If any Indian (especially Hindu) sayeth anything against a specific minority, its members art free to kill this Indian.<br /><br />9. Any Indian is free to deride Hinduism and insult and abuse its Gods. There shalt be no consequences apart from declarations of support from the left about freedom of expression.<br /><br />10. Any event involving fasting by Hindu women, ghunghat etc. shalt be considered regressive and patriarchal. Thou shalt blindly accept the right of minorities to keep fasts and dress up their women such that nobody can even make out the gender of the person.<br /><br />11. Minority community members shalt use public areas for their worship, irrespective of the inconvenience caused to others. Hindus shalt not claim rights to any place for which there be historical and/or archaelogical evidence that a temple was destroyed.<br /><br />12. "Savarna" Hindus shalt be indefinitely held guilty for perceived and actual discrimination against "backward" castes. This shalt be written and taught in history for eternity.<br /><br />13. No atrocity however brutal, no genocide however massive, no destruction however widespread shalt be mentioned even in passing in history if it was against Hindus. It shalt be acceptable to deify those who commit such acts against Hindus.<br /><br />14. A minority community shalt have the freedom to convert a Hindu to its fold by any means possible - monetary inducements, threats, copying Hindu rituals etc. Hindus shalt not have any right to protest (come on, we are secular!).<br /><br />15. Members from foreign countries from a certain community shalt be free to come in as "refugees". They may have committed any atrocity in their home country. This shalt be overlooked. They may be settled across the country. <br /><br />16. Kashmiri Pandits shalt not ask to go back to Kashmir. There were no atrocities committed against them (come on, if there was even one incident they were asking for it). Persecuted Hindus from other countries shalt not be given refuge in India.<br /><br />17. If it be a matter of Hindu faith, the legal system shalt pronounce judgement, and quickly, such that Hindu rights be trampled upon. However, if said matter involves a minority communities, the legal system shalt take a few decades to deliberate, and shalt ask for mediation. The legal system shalt also be free to consider this a matter of faith that the legal system cannot adjudicate upon.<br /><br />18. The state shalt extract money from Hindu institutions. It shalt be free to spend this on members of all communities. It shalt be free to even provide benefits to Hindus who convert to a minority community.<br /><br />19. The state shalt not interfere in any religious matters of the aforementioned minorities. It shalt not collect money from them in any way.<br /><br />20. Any scripture of Hindus, however humane or scientific it may be shalt be considered for public teaching (really, I want the stuff you keep smoking).<br /><br />21. Any Indian shalt be free to raise insulting and outlandish questions against any Hindu God. For this they shalt not need any prior reading of Hindu texts. No religious scripture or personality of a minority community shall be commented upon as these are matters of faith and law and order.<br /><br />22. Only crackers burst during Deepavali shalt be considered polluting. <br /><br />23. Common laws shalt apply mostly to Hindus. Minorities shalt be free to have their own civil laws.<br /><br />24. All literature, history, laws, policies etc. shall be created in such that the Hindu loses all sense of his civilisational history and prominence.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-62105009780418025032019-10-12T16:55:00.001+05:302019-10-12T16:55:27.396+05:30Do the Dasavataras Portray Evolution?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
India has provided many things to the world from times long past - the decimal system, simple numbering scheme, Yoga etc. It has often been claimed that ancient Indians knew a lot of things which are being rediscovered now - like nuclear weapons(?). It has also been said that many things that Indians discovered have wrongly been attributed to foreigners, for whatever reasons - calculus, the Pythagoras theorem etc. There are also people who have claimed things like the presence of plastic surgery, taking Ganesha's story. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Certain points are readily available for people to check. Some are conjecture-based. Some are obviously purely chauvinistic. I get a bit surprised when I see these chauvinists. Hinduism and Vedas are not so weak that they need western confirmation on every point. While rightly defending what must be attributed to Hindus it is also foolish to claim that everything originated here.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Often, there are people who feel very proud when they see something mentioned in the scriptures find scientific confirmation. While this is obviously nice, people should also note that what is considered "science" or "scientific information" keeps changing. So, if the aforementioned "scientific fact" is later disproved, will they lose their faith also? Hindus consider the Vedas infallible as these are <i>apauruSheya </i>(अपौरुषेय, అపౌరుషేయ), not written by man. Hence, it is kind of self defeating to keep on trying to find validation in the material world.<br />
<br />
One such thing is that the Hindu <i>dashaavataaraas</i>, the ten incarnations of Lord Vishnu portray the concept of evolution. The logic is that they begin with a fish, move to an amphibian, land animal and then man. I disagree. Let me explain why.<br />
<br />
1. Contrary to popular belief, Lord Vishnu did not have only ten incarnations.<br />
2. The <i>SreemadbhAgavatam</i> itself lists many more (I think 25) like Kapila, Vyasa et al. It also mentions that His incarnations are countless. Other well known incarnations are Mohini and Dattatreya.<br />
3. The ten listed incarnations are not in chronological order. For example, Parashurama was a precursor to Rama. However, in the list Rama comes before Parasurama.<br />
4. There are different kinds of incarnations. For example the incarnations of Rama and Krishna are considered to be <i>paripoorNa </i>(परिपूर्ण, పరిపూర్ణ)<i> avatArAs</i> which means the "entire essence" of God descended to the earth. Parasurama's is said to be an <i>aavesha</i> (आवेश, ఆవేశ) <i>avataara</i> wherein only a part is said to have descended.<br />
<br />
Now if someone were to ask me whether Hinduism has a problem with evolution, my personal opinion is that it does not. My personal belief is that the end result of evolution is <i>mukti</i>. I have dealt with this earlier. This is not the Abrahamic heaven or hell but is something beyond these. Many may have heard of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Interestingly he himself later added a fifth one related to spirituality. In the <i>bhagavadgeeta</i> Lord Krishna says the following:<br />
<br />
बहूनाम् जन्मनाम् अन्ते ञानवान् माम् प्रपद्यते<br />
वासुदेवः सर्वमिति स महात्मा सुदुर्लभः<br />
<br />
బహూనామ్ జన్మనామ్ అంతే జ్ఞానవాన్ మాం ప్రపద్యతే<br />
వాసుదేవః సర్వమితి స మహాత్మా సుదుర్లభః <br />
<br />
<i>bahoonAm janmanAm ante gnyAnavAn mAm prapadyate</i><br />
<i>vAsudevah sarvamiti sa mahAtmA sudurlabhah</i> <br />
<br />
At the end of many births, the enlightened one attains me. That great soul who thinks Vaasudeva is everything, it is immensely difficult to find.<br />
<br />
I know, this is not the same as the "scientific" concept of evolution. In evolution there is no continuity of the same entity. It is the genes that are passed down. I feel science has not yet discovered (or publicly acknowledged sufficiently) certain concepts. The theory of karma allows for a soul to take birth as the simplest (lowest?) life form and then ultimately become a human being (I hope to discuss karma a little later). The ultimate aim of human life is again, <i>mutki</i>.<br />
<br />
Thus ends this post.<br />
<br />
References:<br />
http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-07-19.html<br />
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs<br />
<br />
Sanskrit transliteration: https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_devanagari.htm</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-89459013302475756792019-04-06T15:37:00.000+05:302019-04-06T15:52:34.661+05:30On debating<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This post was inspired by a discussion I had with a junior from my engineering college who currently works with the leftist portal Scroll.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Omar Abdullah recently spoke about "PM" of J&K which was countered by Modi in one of his speeches. This reminded me of a scene from the movie "Leader". Telugu people will understand this. A wannabe CM (Raghubabu) of the state laments about what he would do in the aftermath of a terror attack. The actual CM (Rana Daggubati), simply reminds the press that he IS the CM. The aforementioned article, while being quite informative seemed to be sympathetic to Abdullah Jr. I questioned him on what the point of the article was and he said it was to generate a debate. Then he said that is all there is to human life. To debate and then to die.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Is that all there is to life? To debate and to die? Nothing else? That statement somehow seems typically communist. West Bengal, a state long under communism has this concept of "adda" where people gather, maybe smoke and drink tea, debate and then disperse. Amartya Sen, another Bengali wrote an entire book, <i>The Argumentative Indian</i> (I have not read it). "Kerala, another state that has seen a lot of communist rule also seems to have these local (sort of) one-room clubs where people play carrom. I have nothing against leisure and debate, I am all for them! Just that, is there nothing else?<br />
<br />
Indian culture definitely welcomes debate. But debate is only a means to an end, not the end in itself. The ultimate debate for a Hindu is about what the self is and how to attain liberation. One of the many paths to reach God (not religions, inside Sanatana Dharma itself) is <i>gnyaana yoga</i>, the path of knowledge. In this there is a continuous quest for what the self is. The <i>advaitin</i> questions, is it the body, is it the mind, so on and so forth. There is the concept of <i>na iti</i> or <i>neti</i> (न इति, नेति, న ఇతి, నేతి). It means, not this. The seeker debates continuously, whether a certain thing is God or not and then ultimately after a great time attains self-realization. Obviously there are other things he has to do other than debate!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There is a Sanskrit sloka:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम्<br />
व्यसनेन तु मूर्खाणाम् निद्रया कलहेन वा</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
కావ్యశాస్త్రవినోదేన కాలో గచ్ఛతి ధీమతామ్ </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
వ్యసనేన తు మూర్ఖాణాం నిద్రయా కలహేన వా<br />
<br />
The intelligent ones spend their time in the enjoyment of <i>kaavyaas</i> and <i>shaastraas</i>. Foolish ones spend it in vice, sleep or quarrel. The term <i>kaavya</i> here might mean epics or poetry. However, in one sense the terms is applicable to the Veda.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
References: Speech by Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sanskrit transliteration: https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_latin.htm<br />
<br />
श्रीगुरुचरणारविन्दार्पणम् अस्तु</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-36484035500558105292019-03-30T14:32:00.001+05:302019-03-30T14:32:37.316+05:30Joey Tribbiani the philosopher?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ok, I am guilty. The headline was click-bait. However, this post does build on what the character Joey says in an episode of the massively famous sitcom, Friends. I am not sure who was the writer of those lines. But s/he unveiled a profound philosophical thought.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I am adding Telugu transliteration in deference to a request I received in a comment earlier. I apologize for having missed seeing that. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Paraphrasing, in an episode, Joey tells Phoebe, another character that there is no selfless action in this world as ultimately anything one thinks is selfless actually makes one happy. This may seem a very simple thing to say. But reflect on it. It is true.This is not to say that altruism is bad or useless. No, that is not the intention of this post.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Normally people think of <i>rishis</i> as men. Yes, true. However, Hinduism mentions numerous women as well who were of that stature. Hinduism does not deny liberation or for that matter knowledge to anybody based on gender, class etc. All are capable of attaining liberation, <i>mukti</i> (mind you, I am not talking about being saved and going to heaven), if they prove themselves worthy of it. There was one such lady named Gargi (गार्गी గార్గి). There was a debate between her and Yaagnyavalkya (याज्ञवल्क्य యాజ్ఞవల్క్య) on what it is, that is dearest to us.Yaagnyavalkya says it is the Self. Please note that Self here does not refer to the body, or to the I-ness (identification). It refers to the soul that is within all of us.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Say, you disagree. No, you love your husband or wife the most. Let us restate that. Your spouse is the one that is most dear TO YOU. Hence, says Yaagnyavalkya, the self is that which is dearest to us in the entire creation. Hence, self-realization is the ultimate aim of a Hindu, not heaven. You can apply this logic to anything in this wide world. Everything boils down to you liking that.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, does this mean we should stop doing "selfless" acts? An emphatic no! We should always be available to serve as needed. However, what must go is the ego, that I helped someone. This is what Lord Krishna refers to as <i>nishkaama karma</i>. Action without the anticipation of result. Action that is submitted to the Lord. Action where the doer is identified as the Lord, and where the own self is only seen as an instrument. The self is the flute through which the divine wind must flow to produce beautiful music. Hindu rituals also end with the phrase "<i>om tat sat, sarvam sree parabrahmaarpaNam astu" (</i>ॐ तत् सत् सर्वं श्रीपरब्रह्मार्पणं अस्तु ఓం తత్ సత్ సర్వం శ్రీపరబ్రహ్మార్పణం అస్తు). Everything done as part of the ritual, <i>including the result/merit gained via it</i> is offered to the Lord.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me close this post with the famous sloka from the Gita</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
karmaNyevaadhikaaraste maa phaleShu kadaachana</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
maa karmaphalaheturbhooh maa te sangostvakarmaNi</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
कर्मण्येवाधिकारस्ते मा फलेषु कदाचन<br />मा कर्मफलहेतुर्भूः मा ते सनगोऽस्त्वकर्मणि</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
కర్మణ్యేవాధికారస్తే మా ఫలేషు కదాచన </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
మా కర్మఫలహేతుర్భూర్మా తే సంగోऽస్త్వకర్మణి </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Your right is only to act, not attaining the result. Do not be motivated by the results of your action. (But) do not find interest in not acting at all.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The last portion is a warning that being idle is also an action, and not a good one.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
References: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma's discourses</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-02-46.html</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-81545284372107783852018-12-22T23:03:00.000+05:302018-12-23T20:23:59.870+05:30The hubris of an atheist<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This post was prompted by a show I saw on the Discovery Science Channel - How the Universe Works. This was around the so-called dark matter. What struck me was how much of what we call "science" is conjecture, without proof (a scientist would claim it is proof that has not yet been discovered). Further, where physics is concerned, specifically particle/theoretical physics, <i>nothing</i> is intuitive. There is <i>nothing</i> which can be grasped by traditional human senses. The physicist/mathematician comes up with all kinds of mathematics and the rest are asked to just believe.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, at the risk of being accused of committing blasphemy against science, I argue that this is not so different from a spiritual seeker. Mind you, I am not using the term religious, but spiritual. The western world is mostly familiar with Abrahamic religions, which are highly anthropomorphic in their concept of God, or are at least highly centred around humans. This may be among the points (apart from God being jealous, or favouring a certain sect over others) that turn a westerner towards atheism. If an Indian becomes an atheist it possibly means he has not explored the land's spiritual principles fully. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Vedas say <i>parabrahman</i> is indescribable, without form, shape or qualities. This <i>parabrahman</i> is said to take form (any God) for the sake of the spiritual seeker's convenience. A child cannot reach its mother. The mother has to bend down and pick up the child in her arms. The Hindu believes it is the same with God. I am using God and <i>parabrahman </i>interchangeably in this post, and I do not mean a personal God in the Abrahamic sense. The Abrahamic God is what a Hindu would consider <i>saguna brahma</i>, or <i>saakaara</i>, with form. The Islamic concept of Allah is closer to that of <i>nirguna brahma</i>, (without attributes) or <i>niraakara</i> (without form). However, Islam insists God is male. The Hindu says <i>parabrahma</i> has no gender, as that is also an attribute.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, a spiritual person seeks God. A scientist seeks truth behind/underlying creation/existence. By <i>definition</i>, God is beyond the senses. So it is deemed futile to prove the existence of God by any material means. Science by definition is within the parameters of this universe. Hence, science can never prove the existence of God. The atheist takes the easy way out and says there is no God. Now, as the common saying goes, absence of proof is not proof of absence. The physicist/atheist does not understand the physical world itself. Nobody knows <i>why</i> something as fundamental as light/radiation behaves as both a wave and a particle. However, the same physicist atheist wants to have proof that God exists. The atheist, who cannot understand the known universe itself wants proof of the energy behind the universe. That is what makes me laugh at the hubris of an atheist. Now an atheist is entitled to his views. But so am I!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The seeker embarks on a long process to realise God. Please note that Hinduism does not talk only about reaching God, but <i>realising</i> God. It says that each and everything in creation has the spark of the divine. <i>Moksha</i> is simply <i>realising</i> this fact. That is all there is to it, nothing else. One must note that realising and knowing are two entirely different things. What separates knowing from realising is <i>avidyaa</i> or <i>maayaa</i>. I say an atheist is lazy. He does not have the patience to embark on the spiritual path to realise God. He takes the easy way out. Now the counter claim would be that he would waste time on embarking on a process which he <i>knows</i> is doomed to fail as there is no God. This is where one laughs again at the hubris.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me end with a few poems from the Telugu version of the <i>bhaagavata puraana</i> (apologies upfront for mistakes). This is a translation (with some differences from the Sanskrit original) bt Sri Bammera Potana (पोतना - Hindi transliteration is very painful, does not do justice to Sanskrit or Telugu). Many think that the <i>bhaagavata puraana </i>is a <i>vaishnava</i> <i>purana. </i>It is. However, there is a huge amount of <i>vedaanta</i> and (<i>advaita</i> contained therein) in the <i>puraana </i>(like any Hindu literature)<i>. </i><br />
<i></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>evvaniche janinchu jagamevvani lOpalanundu leenamai</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>yevvaniyanduDindu paramESwaruDevvaDu moolakaaraNambevvaDu</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>anaadimadhyalayuDevvaDu sarvamu taanainavaaDevvadu</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>vaaninaatmabhavu neeSwarunE SaraNambu vEDedan</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I seek refuge in him, from whom the world arises, in whom it exists, in whom it merges and rests, he who is the supreme lord, he who is the primordial cause (behind creation), he who is without beginning, middle or end, he who is everything (creation is his form), he who is self-existent, he who is the lord.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i> </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>lOkambulu lOkESulu lOkasthulu tegina tudi</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>alOkambagu penjeekatikavvala evvanDEkaakruti velugu</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>atani nE sEvintun </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I serve him, who shines as One (even) in the unworldly immense darkness after the worlds, their rulers and their denizens cease to exist. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Do these verses call upon a personal God? No. Do they call upon a God with form? No. They talk about the essence and energy that is behind everything that we know as the universe, and is beyond it. Hinduism says, as is the microcosm, so is the macrocosm. Is everything, from me to the universe not made of the same particles? And can a physicist deny the universe is conscious? The physicist is himself part of the universe and is conscious. Human life (without considering others) is conscious. Thus, is the universe not conscious of itself? Hinduism asks the seeker to realise the greater consciousness behind everything. Simple. <br />
<br />
I seriously request physicists and atheists to explore <i>vedaanta</i> and then see whether they still retain their concept of atheism.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h4>
<i>Originally published on 22 December, 2018. Modified on 23 December. </i></h4>
</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-40892854077096669352018-07-18T23:55:00.000+05:302018-07-18T23:55:44.909+05:30On the Sandhyavandanam, part 2<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is in continuation with the earlier <a href="http://idiadi.blogspot.com/2018/06/on-sandhyavandanam.html" target="_blank">post</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In this post I want to share the broad meaning of the <i>gaayatri</i> mantra. I will not even attempt to go into the multiple meanings. I am not aware of them, and I am sure there are many. An interesting thing about Vedic <i>mantras</i> is the layers of meanings that come with most if not all of them. Vedic knowledge is also referred to as <i>trayee vidya</i> (त्रयी विद्या). One reason for this is the three layers of meanings present in these <i>slokas</i>. These are referred to as <i>adhibhautika</i> (अधिभौतिक), <i>adhidaivika</i> (अधिदैविक) and <i>aadhyaatmika</i> (आध्यात्मिक). These correspond to aspects pertaining to living beings, cosmic forces and our own body.<br />
<br />
Also related to this is why <i>shaanti mantras</i> end with <i>shaantih, shaantih, shaantih </i>(शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः). We are said to have three types of troubles - <i>taapatraya</i> (तापत्रय), pertaining to the points mentioned above - those caused due to living beings (infections, bites etc.), due to cosmic/natural forces (earthquakes, floods etc.) and those that generate in our body itself (allergies, diseases etc.).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now coming to the <i>gaayatri</i>. One meaning of the <i>mantra</i> which is commonly referred to as the <i>gaayatri</i> is the following:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We meditate upon that ultimate/superior radiance of Lord Savita, which energises our intelligence.<br />
<br />
Now coming to the <i>gaayatri</i> that I mentioned everybody can chant (<i>sarva chaitanyaroopaam...)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
We meditate upon that primordial knowledge, she who is the embodiment of all consciousness/energy, she who energises our intellect.<br />
<br />
If you notice, both have a similar meaning. It is not, "I pray", but "we pray". I had mentioned earlier, that a person who has had the <i>upanayana samskaara</i> (sacred thread ceremony) must perform <i>sandhyavandanam</i> for the sake of all creation. This is an illustration of that. Further, if we notice both the public <i>gaayatri</i> (<i>sarva chaitanyaroopaam..) </i>and the received (from a <i>guru</i>, today the <i>purohita</i> performing the ceremony) <i>gaayatri </i>carry similar meanings. Let me reiterate that the received <i>gaayatri</i> must NOT be chanted by all, but by only those who wear the sacred thread. The public version is literally free-for-all.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Now what does it actually mean? We will analyse it in phases. I will talk about the general version.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>The <i>mantra</i> extols the intelligence/consciousness/energy <i>behind</i> ALL creation. In this <i>mantra</i> we refer to the deity in the feminine gender. A sidenote for all the feminists out there. This is an example of the exalted position actually given to women in Hinduism. This deity is also referred to as <i>vidyaa</i> (विद्या), which is the opposite of <i>avidyaa</i> (ignorance). Now these two terms are related to <i>maayaa</i>, which I will talk about later. For now, let us simply say that we are referring to the deity as the ultimate knowledge. The <i>mantra</i> also refers to the deity as <i>aadhyaa</i> (आद्या). This is because the deity is the origin of all that was, is and will ever be in the entire creation.</li>
<li>Now, why should this ultimate consciousness energise our intellect? It actually means to energise the intellect to move in the right direction. To guide us onto the right path. It is only by our intellect/mind that we decide which path we take. Unless one is a psycopath or someone like that, an average human being has a well-functioning conscience which points out what is felt to be right or wrong. This is irrespective of what we ultimately end up doing. Via the <i>mantra</i> the practitioner or <i>upaasaka</i> (उपासक) asks for his intellect to be guided such that he always chooses what is morally right and beneficial to him.</li>
</ol>
I will end this post here. In the coming posts, I will share my thoughts around concepts like <i>karma</i> and <i>maayaa.</i><br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
References: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Adhibhautika,_adhidaivika,_%C4%81dhy%C4%81tmika<br />
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gayatri_Mantra </div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-55667332852036794162018-06-17T13:18:00.001+05:302018-06-17T13:29:11.197+05:30On the Sandhyavandanam<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In an earlier post, I had talked about how Hinduism is actually a monotheistic religion, as it considers all Gods representations of the One Truth, <i>Parabrahma</i>. The basic end objective of a follower of <i>sanaatana dharma </i>is not heaven, but <i>moksha</i> or liberation. I will talk about this in another blog post.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, as part of life man is supposed to have broadly three kinds of devotional activities - <i>nitya </i>(नित्य)<i>, naimittika </i>(नैमित्तिक) and<i> kaamya</i> (काम्य) - those which are to be followed daily, on special occasions (festivals for example) and for fulfillment of desires respectively.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Of these the <i>nitya karma</i> component includes basic <i>pooja</i>, the <i>sandhyaavandanam</i> and many other activities, which are today followed as an exception rather than as the rule (I know a few names - <i>agnihotram, brahmayagnyam, vaiswadevam</i> et al). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The most basic practice of a Hindu's life is the <i>sandhyaavandanam. </i>I want to focus on this in this post. Everbody knows about namaaz, and how Muslims religiously follow it. Many Christians compulsorily go to church every Sunday. Many, if not most are not even aware of the Vedic <i>sandhyaavandanam</i>, or have major misconceptions around it. And I am talking about Hindus themselves.<br />
<i></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This practice takes primacy over any other ritual activity. According to the Vedic scriptures, a person that does not do the <i>sandhyaavandanam</i> becomes unclean and unfit to do any other <i>pooja</i> or ritual or <i>vratam</i>. Thus, without doing this basic practice no benefits will accrue via going on pilgrimages or doing any other ritual - <i>vratam, yagnyam</i> or <i>abhishekam</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another important point to be noted is that one's <i>varna</i> does not matter. There is a misconception that only Brahmins, or maybe those who wear the sacred thread can do the <i>sandhyaavandanam. </i>Wrong, EVERY Hindu MUST do the <i>sandhyaavandanam </i>ideally thrice a day. The difference is in the methodology. Those who wear the sacred thread have a prescribed format in which they must do it. Those who do not can actually chant a specific mantra at least thrice, or for that matter recite anything of their choice at the prescribed times. Further, it is said that those who wear the sacred thread must do it not only for their sake, but for the sake of everyone's welfare. The Vedas constantly talk not just about personal welfare. They go beyond that, and talk about humanity's welfare and that of all living creatures and the universe itself. Various <i>shaanti mantraa</i>s talk about peace across the universe, and not for just the person chanting the <i>mantra</i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another example of this is borne out by the plural (not singular, as in for the worshipper) term used in the <i>gaayatri mantra</i>. This is the core/heart of <i>sandhyaavandanam</i>. Again, there are many misconceptions and erroneous practices around this. </div>
<ol style="text-align: justify;">
<li>What does <i>gaayatri</i> actually mean? Crudely, it means that which protects the <i>praana</i>s in us (गयान् त्रायते इति गायत्री). It also means that which protects the person that chants it, in the prescribed method (गातारम् त्रायते इति गायत्री).</li>
<li><i>Mantra</i> means that which protects by continuous contemplation/chanting<i> </i>(मननात् त्रायते इति मन्त्रः).</li>
<li>So, one thing that must be followed, is that a <i>mantra</i> must NOT be said out aloud. So there is no way, it should be recorded and broadcast on loudspeakers. </li>
<li>What is commonly referred to as the <i>gaayatri</i> is not meant for everyone. Each <i>varna</i> can have its own <i>gaayatri</i>. What people commonly think of as the <i>gaayatri</i> is actually to be chanted only by Brahmins (and maybe by those who wear the sacred thread). Those who do not wear it can chant the following <i>mantra</i> thrice. The meaning is the same as that of any <i>gaayatri</i>. They can also recite anything of their choice at the prescribed times.</li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
sarvachaitanyaroopaam taam</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
aadhyaam vidhyaam cha dheemahi</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
buddhim yaa nah prachodayaat<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
सर्वचैतन्यरूपाम् ताम् <br />
आद्याम् विद्याम् च धीमहि<br />
बुद्धिम् या नः प्रचोदयात् </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It is the chanting of the <i>gaayatri</i> that is heart of the ritual. <i>Parabrahma</i> is invoked in the form of <i>gaayatri</i>. This is an example of how the feminine aspect is given the highest respect in Hinduism. <i>Gaayatri</i> is called the <i>veda maata</i> (वेदमाता). </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For those who wear the sacred thread, the ritual, when done in entirety has three components. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Purification of oneself and invitation to <i>gaayatri</i> to enter the practitioner - <i>shuddhi </i>and<i> aavaahanam </i>(शुद्धिक्रिया, आवाहनम्)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. Chanting of the <i>gaayatri mantra </i>- <i>mantra japam</i> (मन्त्रजपम्) <br /><i></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
3. Bidding farewell to <i>gaayatri - upasthaanam</i> (उपस्थानम्)<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The broad meaning of the <i>gaayatri</i> (any version) and other topics will be covered in the next post.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Reference: Speech by Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma (Telugu video): Link <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tqRPKQCy4U" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sanskrit keyboard from: https://www.lexilogos.com/keyboard/sanskrit_devanagari.htm</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i></i></div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-50717587329090063132018-05-19T21:46:00.002+05:302018-05-19T21:46:34.649+05:30How Rahul Gandhi can help the BJP increase its membership<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The readers of my posts would have gathered by now that I have a distinct right wing tilt. Some of my family members have been associated with the RSS for decades. My studies till class 10 were in a school run by an organization which is part of the overall RSS umbrella.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
However, till date, I have never been a member of the RSS or the BJP. I attended a few <i>shakhas</i>, but always because someone took me there, and not out of my own volition. However, today I took the decision to become a formal member of the BJP. I in fact paid money to become a formal member. Not that I will become politically active or participate in <i>dharnas</i> etc. It was a knee-jerk reaction, my personal way of protest when I saw Rahul Gandhi's press conference today.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I do not want to go into the morality or legality of whatever has transpired after the latest assembly elections in Karnataka. I do confess that I wanted a BJP government to come to power, though in retrospect, it looks as if the BJP would have been better off sitting on the sidelines, and let the drama play out.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What pushed me towards my symbolic protest was the <i>sheer entitlement</i> that was oozing from Rahul Gandhi. According to him, the Congress would have "let" the BJP come to power had they won the majority on their own. Let? Does this guy think he owns the country, its Constitution, its institutions (which he claims are being decimated and/or hijacked by Modi and team) and its citizens? Does he think all of them exist to serve at his pleasure? Let us look at what all he did during these elections. He campaigned, in multiple constituencies. I understand that the Congress lost most if not all the seats where he campaigned. He in fact queered the pitch for an INC-JD(S) tie-up by calling the JD(S) a B-team of the BJP (he apparently apologised later to Deve Gowda). Imagine, the party president <i>apologised</i> due to his goof-up. The team which ran to the Supreme Court, and also handled the situation on the ground in Karnataka was not his team. It was managed by Sonia Gandhi, who seems to have been forced to enter the arena.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As soon as it became apparent the Congress was losing, there were obvious attempts to shield him. He was in hiding all the time, from counting till recently. Suddenly, one saw him with a smug smile, delivering a sanctimonious lecture <i>after</i> the events of today. And my God, the sense of entitlement! The way he seemed to insist that the RSS and BJP were destroying "institutions" without any regard. If one were to point out the falsehoods that were peddled by the Congress about the "murder of democracy", the text would possibly run into pages. On top of that were congratulations pouring in from various quarters. The AP CM, who till recently, was part of the NDA, and suddenly started claiming that nothing was being done for the state was one. Another was Mamata. In the recently concluded Panchayat elections in Bengal there have been multiple reports of booth capturing, rigging, rapes, murders etc. which were not even covered in the mainstream media. I understand that in many seats, the election was unanimous as <i>there was no competition to the TMC candidate.</i> After all this, the lady has the gall to lecture about how she believes in democracy. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As many people pointed out, the coming elections in 2019 seem to be clearly demarcated as competition between Modi and the rest of the media and political parties, who seem to be unanimously against him. The BJP has various points in its favour due to whatever it has done till date. Possibly, for the first time, a bankruptcy case has been successfully settled via the new Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). There are scores of Modi supporters on social media who provide points against the competition. In parallel with whatever populist/welfare schemes are being taken up by the central government, the success of the BJP will also depend upon how Modi and team explain to the population, what they see as injustice being meted out to the country because of the current opposition. Modi and team, do not have a strong ecosystem to convey their view. The Congress does. Hence, if Modi wants to retain power, it all depends on how effectively his work is conveyed to the people, and also on how effectively the opposition's version is countered. This is one reason I titled the post the way I did.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Also, interestingly, there were howls of protests when Yeddyurappa was given two weeks to prove his strength. Now Kumaraswamy has been given the same time. Everything is silent, no protests any more. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As for Bengaluru and Karnataka, assuming the INC-JD(S) government lasts for some time, one must hope that lakes continue to be rejuvenated, something is done to reduce the traffic congestion, and the white-topping of roads, which I believe was halted before the elections, restarts and finishes. It would also be interesting to see how long the government would last.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-50055112544336641072018-05-06T22:31:00.003+05:302018-05-06T22:31:38.160+05:30Why I think people like Kamal Haasan are wrong<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There has been a controversy over a Sanskrit song sung during an event at IIT Madras some time back. The criticism ranged from why a Tamil song that was sung "routinely" was not sung, to "imposition" of Sanskrit and Hindi. I actually wanted to have a stronger headline, then I toned it down.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me say that I have nothing against the Tamil song, which personifies the language as a mother. I admire Tamilians for the love they have for their language and always hope Telugu people learn this from them. Now, onto my points.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First of all, for those talking about an insult to Tamil. The Tamil song is sung at state government functions. However, as far as I know the IITs come under the Ministry of HRD, GoI and is not a state government body. So, this argument does not hold.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Next, for those talking about imposition of Hinduism and Sanskrit, I have a longer response. People who still believe Tamil is completely unrelated to Sanskrit or Hinduism are fooling themselves. These are the characters who still stand by the discredited Aryan Invasion Theory. Sanskrit and Hinduism are irrevocably intertwined with India. This guy, Kamal Haasan, who is espousing "Dravidian identity", himself is an Iyengar Brahmin by birth, and get this, has a Sanskrit name. Thus, in both ways he is part of the "ecosystem" from which he is so desperately trying to dissociate himself.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Next, Hinduism is the only major religion that believes in a Mother Goddess. What exactly one names the Goddess is up to one's choice. However, going by the Tamil belief that Tamil was handed down by Murugan (Skanda, Subrahmanya, Kartikeya, whatever you wish to call him, and given that his mother is Parvati, one can safely assume Tamil is a personification of her. Also, Lord Siva is called <i>vAgeesha.</i> So this also supports my theory. The only other name I can think of is of Saraswati, the Goddess of Learning. If anyone believes otherwise I believe he is being delusional. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
All the so-called Dravidian parties and now Kamal Haasan, are basically Tamilian. To my knowledge no other state of south India espouses "dravidianism" as much as some Tamils. They treat Tamil as a pure language that was completely independent of Sanskrit and "Brahmanism". Obviously all these people can be assumed to be extremely proud of the language. I have news for these delusional people. The five great epics of Tamils are (forgive me for the transliteration errors) <i>silappadikAram, sivaka chintAmani, maNimekhalai, valayapathi </i>and<i> kunDalakesi</i>. Without even getting into the contents of these (I am unaware of these) and names of characters, <i>four</i> out of these five epics have Sanskrit names. One can also refer to videos available of Dr Nagaswamy, a renowned Tamil scholar who again and again debunks the arguments of these dravidian opportunists.<br />
<br />
Now, one explanation for the popularity of the dravidian hypothesis is provided by Rajiv Malhotra in his writings. This is one of the many tools employed by the British and missionaries - to subjugate India, and to convert more people to Christianity. Tamil, from outside seems different in some ways. These differences were played up historically to whip up sentiments of Tamils that they were dominated by the so-called Aryans. There are schools of thought that have claimed the Tamil philiosopher Thiruvalluvar to be a disciple of Saint Thomas (whether he ever came to India is a separate debate).<br />
<br />
On top of that, broadly speaking, major Indian languages have the same alphabets. I am leaving out certain tribal and north-eastern languages which may have a different origin.<br />
<br />
This list can go on and on. So, those Tamil chauvinists who claim <i>Tamilakam</i> (do look that up) is separate from the rest of India, need to get their agendas or sources checked.<br />
<br />
References: Works of Rajiv Malhotra - Being Different, Breaking India.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-6516011609760648612018-04-07T10:52:00.001+05:302018-04-07T10:52:36.937+05:30On an angry Hanuman<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There has been a recent article in leftist website "The Wire" on an angry Hanuman. This post is based on that.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
According to the author Nilanjana Bhowmick, "Hanuman 2.0" is no longer benign but is threatening. She has a problem because people are putting up saffron flags, putting up stickers of Hanuman and are treating Hanuman as a symbol of manhood/machosim. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I have a few queries for this lady. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Does she have anything to say about fans of our film heroes (particularly relevant today, of Salman Khan) who treat them as heroes and idols? There is a moron who posted a picture on social media of himself with a tied up (killed?) deer saying he supports Salman Khan. Does anyone in our media have the guts to speak out against this kind of blind, stupid idol worship? </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. Do they have anything to say about overt displays in any other religion? There are places in India where till recently (even now?) police feared to tread because they were dominated by people of a certain faith. Touching them would invite political wrath. Do our "journalists" have the guts to talk about situations like these?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I normally do not support use of derogatory terms like aaptard or presstitute. But, seeing people of late, I am beginning to tilt more and more in favour of using these.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I respect all religions. As a Hindu I have the broadmindedness to accept that there are multiple ways to reach God. I do however have a problem with those that denigrate my religion, and with those who try to convert people. These two activities clearly show the hypocrisy of people who say they respect all religions. As per our seculars, any other religion is free to have overt displays of faith. Hinduism cannot. A few examples of our journalistic hypocrisy:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Nobody has a problem if kids carry sharp weapons and hurt themselves in a Muharram procession. They however, have a problem, even if adults carry weapons in a Hindu procession. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. Nobody, even PETA or our film stars talk against mass animal slaughter during Id/Christmas celebrations. They however pity dogs during Deepavali. They are against <i>Jallikattu</i>, though this sport does not end with the animal being killed. The animal is in fact worshipped after the event.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
3. Income of temples is appropriated by the government. No one has the guts to touch or administer non-Hindu places of worship. Recently, a priest in Kerala who is being investigated for some illegal land transactions had the guts to say that he is behind the purview of Indian law. I am not sure how many secular journalists spoke up against this.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
4. Shekhar Gupta has reached the conclusion that Hindus are more likely to defecate in the open. Sagarika Ghose has the ability to tell the faith of a man by seeing his semen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
5. The Supreme Court recently was talking about how flowers in certain temples must be used. Do they have the guts to say the same about other faiths?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
6. Under the Right to Education Act drafted by the earlier UPA government, minority institutions are not needed to take in poor students. Why is that so? No wonder, some <i>Lingayats</i> are supporting they being recognised as a minority religion because that will offer them many benefits not available to mainstream Hindus.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
7. Manmohan Singh went so far as to say that minorities have the first claim to resources. Did he have the guts to designate Hindus in Kashmir and some parts of the north-east as minorities (they are) and offer them benefits?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The list goes on and on. Let me reiterate that I have no issue, and I should have no issue, with how people of any other faith follow their religion. However, this should not affect people of other faiths. Also, I should not be told by these journalists how to follow my own faith.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now let me come to Hanuman. Hanuman is not just a <i>bhakta/daasa</i> (I prefer these to servant) of Lord Rama. An analysis of Hanuman's personality, words and actions will offer multiple things we can learn from him. How to speak, self-control, single-mindedness in his quest etc. are all qualities we find in him. He is not a docile, quiet character in the Ramayana. While he does exhibit these qualities, he is terrible against his enemies (not random enmity, but with those who work against Dharma) when roused to action. It is beyond my ability to encapsulate the qualities attributed to Hanuman. However, let me share one sloka from the <i>Sundarakaanda</i> in the Ramayana which encapsulates multiple meanings beautifully.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>yathaa raaghavanirmuktah sharah shvasanavikramah</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>gachchhet tadvad gamiShyaami lankaam raavana paalitaam</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I shall go to Ravana-ruled Lanka, like an arrow released by Rama, with wind-like power.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>RamabaaNam</i>, the arrow of Lord Rama, is said to be invincible. Once released it will hit the target without fail. It has the ability to return to Rama once its task is achieved. Also, the power of the arrow is not its own, but is that of Rama. Thus Hanuman beautifully says that he will achieve his task and return without fail. He conveys confidence in his strength and ability. At the same time, he attributes this power not to himself, but to Rama. Thus he shows confidence while being humble and without being arrogant. This, you ignorant Nilanjana, is Hanuman.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Many (most?) journalists today have agendas. They want to curry favour with the powers that be. These people in all probability have no clue, and most definitely have not read our holy books. They simply write whatever comes to their mind and suits their agenda without giving any thought to the truth. Today's news is no longer about reporting and letting the audience form their opinions. It is about <i>moulding and conveying</i> the <i>journalists'</i> opinion. Who gave these rights to the journalists? How dare one ask this question! How dare one ask journalists to be informed? How dare one ask journalists to be neutral! </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
References:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. Ramayana discourse by Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. https://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/sundara/sarga1/sundara_1_frame.htm</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-60040467781653299102018-02-18T15:26:00.002+05:302018-02-19T00:53:53.649+05:30On misinterpretation of Hinduism, and on Vatapatrasaayi<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First, an apology. My knowledge of Sankrit genders is
limited. Hence while I will try to present a correct transliteration,
those who know better must forgive me for my apses. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are many reasons that Hinduism is not doing as well as it could be or should be. I will elaborate over a few posts. One simple reason is misinterpretation - either wilful or by mistake.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There have been many who have set out to present Hindu thought to the world - from the old authors of the <i>bhashyaas</i> or commentaries, to the much later colonial Indologists, to the Devdutt Pattanaiks of today's world, to spiritual speakers like Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma and Sri Chaganti Koteswara Rao. The reasons also have been many, genuine intellectual curiosity, intention to make money, to get fame, dissemination of knowledge to seekers, a drive to remove misconceptions etc.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In an open letter to DP that I had written earlier I mentioned how he seemed to be lacking in basic Sanskrit knowledge. Now, reporting what has been read is one thing. However, trying to <i>interpret</i> the basic meaning of Hindu scriptures without the necessary knowledge is like trying to do a surgery by reading a manual - the patient will end up dead.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Knowledge of Sanskrit, while being a necessary and basic prerequisite is not sufficient. To truly interpret and understand the Vedas a person needs to be an expert in the <i>Vedaangaas</i>. There are six of these - <i>shiksha (शिक्षा ), chandas (छन्दस), vyaakaran</i> (व्याकरण), <i>jyotish (ज्योतिष), nirukta</i> (निरुक्त) and <i>kalpa (कल्प)</i>. All these are needed to correctly interpret Vedic slokas. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Further, even words can have multiple meanings.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For example the word <i>go</i> (गो) can mean a cow, the 5 sense organs or even the sun's rays. Thus <i>Govinda</i> (गोविंद) can be a protector of cows (Krishna), ruler of the senses (God) or even the Sun God as he is the Lord of the rays.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Similarly, <i>giri</i> (गिरि) can refer to both slokas of the Veda, and to mountains.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hence, trying to do a literal interpretation of a Vedic sloka will not give the complete meaning. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Additionally, Hinduism is rich in symbolism. There is a tale where after the <i>pralaya</i> (प्रलय), i.e. dissolution of creation, only the primordial waters were left. Markandeya is said to have seen Vishnu or Krishna come floating on a banyan tree leaf on these waters. He was in the form of an infant. As infants tend to do, he had his toes and fingers in his mouth. What is the symbolism? We <i>do</i> our actions using the hand. Thus the hand is a symbol of creation. We walk with our legs, which indicate movement. This indicates the movement of this world, what Hinduism calls sthiti (स्थिति) after creation. This is basically a state of maintaining the world as it is. We use the mouth to eat. For the Lord, the mouth indicates where he takes in creation when he decides to end it. Thus it signifies dissolution (I prefer not to use the word destruction). Thus the image of an infant is used to explain the concept of the almighty God who is responsible for creation, maintenance and dissolution.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now, tell me if any person who does not know about these multiple layers of meanings should ever try to interpret Hinduism!</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-49317130229151829962018-02-11T13:48:00.000+05:302018-02-11T13:48:14.235+05:30On idol worship<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is in continuation with my earlier <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4096010723439098811#editor/target=post;postID=8395053640282579083;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=1;src=postname" target="_blank">post</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Before writing this post I glanced through a Wikipedia article on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idolatry" target="_blank">idolatry</a>. I would recommend that you read this as well. Broadly speaking Abrahamic religions discourage (some sections,
radically and violently) reverence to any physical idol, while Hinduism
does not. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When we mention an idol what comes to mind more often than not, is a physical image or portrait that is treated with reverence and to which worship is offered. However, here I want to extend the concept of idol beyond just this over-simplified concept. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Let us first understand why Hindus offer worship to actual physical images. In my earlier post I spoke about Hinduism believing in both <i>saakaara</i> (साकार) and <i>niraakara</i> (निराकार) worship. It allows the devotee to approach God as either with form or without form. It offers that flexibility. Why? For the average human mind it is not possible to visualize a formless, shapeless object of devotion. We are material and physical creatures. We cannot wrap our heads around the concepts of quantum physics which at the end of the day, according to today's scientists are part of our physical, "rational" world. How can one understand and revere something which has no shape or form? This is the reason Hinduism encourages reverence of physical images, to begin with. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The devotee however, is asked to progress from worship of God with form to the next level, without form. Also, whenever he worships a <i>murti</i> the devotee is asked to understand that the ultimate receiver of this worship is the shapeless and formless<i> parabrahma</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
This is also a reason for the importance giving to the worship of a <i>Sivalingam</i>. I will cover that later.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another aspect, possibly not known to many is that the <i>murtis</i> in Hindu temples are not necessarily simple images. Any temple worth its name is supposed to have a <i>yantra</i> installed under the main deity. There is a process called <i>praana pratiShtha (प्राणप्रतिष्ठा) </i>through which divine energy is invoked and is asked to enter the <i>yantra </i>and hence the <i>murti</i>. I have read that a mirror placed in front of such an "idol", into which energy has been invoked, will break. Only then is the process said to be complete. I am not sure how many people are left in this world today who can achieve this.<br />
<br />
Now let us consider the Abrahamic religions. We have seen how hardline interpreters or Islam have been against what they think is idolatry. Destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas comes to mind immediately. However, as I said earlier even these religions are not above idol worship, at least as far as their own religions and their own concept of God is concerned.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Christians, even Protestants pray in front of the cross. Many have a portrait of Jesus in their homes. I believe the Christian concept of God has been influenced by Greek and Roman imagery (old man with white beard etc.).</li>
<li>Muslims, of all denominations pray facing Mecca, where the Kaaba is present. This is reverence to a physical image.</li>
<li>Many Muslims have verses from the Koran framed and kept in their shops and houses. This is reverence to an image. Many in fact have the number 786, which I understand is a numerical representation of Allah written down.</li>
<li>The Parsees worship fire.</li>
</ol>
Hence, irrespective of religion, an average human being needs <i>some</i> image/imagery using which he can revere God.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-83950536402825790832018-01-31T00:30:00.001+05:302018-01-31T00:30:46.031+05:30Is Hinduism a polytheistic religion?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As mentioned in my earlier post, I will from this post onwards, write occasionally about Hinduism and try to answer some questions that people may have. The words that I put down here are not from my own knowledge. They come from reading and listening to people like Sri Rajiv Malhotra (RM), Sri Chaganti Koteswara Rao garu (CKR), Sri Samavedam Shanmukha Sarma garu (SSS), Paramahamsa Yogananda (PY), Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev (SJV) et al. As always, please feel free to add questions when I post this on Facebook. And as always, I am open to (hopefully constructive) feedback.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I want to put forward certain points on Hinduism that are either not known or are misunderstood. If my writing helps people to better understand and appreciate the culture they are born into, I would be happy with that. Going by certain conventions followed by the aforementioned people, I will mostly refer to Hinduism as Sanatana Dharma, or SD and Judaism, Christianity (the Biblical version) and Islam as Abrahamic Religions, or ARs. For convenience most references will be masculine - he, him etc. Feminine references can be assumed as necessary.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me start now. If you were to pick an average Hindu and ask him the question in the blog post title, he would in all probability say yes. He would not be wrong either. Going by SD's own scriptures, the number of gods is 33 million, yes 3.3 crores. Now please note that I did not say Gods with a capital G but gods with a g. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Most of you may have heard the following sloka.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
gururbrahmA gururvishnuh gururdevO maheshwarah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
gurussAkShAt parabrahmA tasmai sree guravE namah</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
गुरुः ब्रह्मा गुरुः विष्णुः गुरुः देवो महेश्वरः </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
गुरुः साक्षात्परब्रह्मा तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This sloka extols the importance of a <i>guru</i> and salutes him. Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwara (Siva) are ok. Who is this <i>Parabrahma</i>? This <i>Parabrahma </i>is the true concept of God in SD. According to SD, <i>everything</i> - which includes all gods, this creation, the universe(s) and time - are manifestations of something greater. To give an example, a woman can wear bangles, rings, ear rings, anklets etc. However, all of these will be made out of gold. So the gods that Hindus worship in daily life are but manifestations of this <i>essence</i> and universal consciousness called <i>brahman</i> (not the caste, which is brAhman) but <i>brahman</i> or <i>parabrahma</i>. From this perspective SD is very much monotheistic. ARs think that there is only one God. For SD, EVERYTHING <i>is</i> God. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is one reason there is no Satan or purely evil force in SD. There is no need for one. What we perceive as evil is only a different manifestation of what is ultimately God. Now, before you protest, let me state that I will cover this later. So, do let this point rest for now.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
ARs also like to think of God as male. Today, only Roman Catholics seem to have some reverence left for Mary. Else, all ARs follow a strictly male God. It is probably blasphemy to think of a Goddess in place of God in ARs. Hindus have gods and goddesses. However brahman is beyond everything. As I mentioned earlier, by definition <i>It</i> cannot be defined and is beyond comprehension. <i>It</i> does not even have a gender. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So, the obvious question that will come to mind is, what about the 33 million number earlier and why so many? I will answer this by taking another example. Do we not use electricity to power various electrical items like fans, lights, TV etc.? However, is it not the same electricity powering everything? Is not the same potato consumable as <i>chokha</i>, French fries or <i>tikki</i>? As Paramahamsa Yogananda put it, Jesus liked the fatherly aspect of God. So to him God became male. However, to a Ramakrishna Paramahamsa the motherly aspect of God was of supreme interest. So he worshipped Goddess Kali. As SJV puts it, SD is not a religion of
believers but one of seekers. A seeker in SD is given the freedom to
approach God the way he wishes. SD is a "religion" that allows its followers maximum flexibility. Let us think logically. When a devotee or seeker says that God is infinitely capable, almighty and beyond comprehension by humans, who is this seeker to impose any attribute to God and insist that <i>his</i> interpretation alone is true? By doing this are we not imposing <i>human</i> restrictions on God? <i>This</i> is the true beauty of SD. There are no such restrictions needed. However, to quote RM, SD does <i>not</i> say all paths to God are the same or are of the same merit. This is merely an interpretation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
God in SD is said to be approachable as both with form and without form - <i>sAkAra</i> and <i>nirAkAra. </i>God is to be with attributes and without - <i>saguNa and nirguNa.</i> Here is where "idol" worship comes into the picture. I will cover this shortly. However, the important point is that whenever a Hindu performs his worship, whether it is at home or in a temple he has to remember this parabrahma as the power/essence behind the god or goddess that he is worshipping. All offerings are ultimately to this essence and not just to the god/goddess that is a manifestation of this essence. The ultimate aim of worship is freedom from the cycle of births and union with this parabrahma. I will cover idol worship in my next post.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-31504029935682853642018-01-20T22:56:00.001+05:302018-01-20T22:56:15.670+05:30An open letter to BBC Knowledge on an article by Devdutt Pattanaik<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
I saw an article in BBC Knowledge written by Devdutt Pattanaik and wrote a letter to them. I would like to reproduce the same here. </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
Dear Ms Monteiro-D'Souza,</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
I am an avid reader of BBC Knowledge and have been seeing a few articles being written by Devdutt Pattanaik (DP). </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
While I am happy that he has reintroduced Hindu tales to a wide audience, I would also like to share that </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<ol style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<li>his articles are more tuned towards a western audience. </li>
<li>He conveniently twists points to suit his narrative. </li>
<li>He is often wrong</li>
<li>I
find it insulting to me personally and to the millions of Hindus
worldwide when he refers to the Ramayana, Mahabharata et al as myths. </li>
</ol>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
I
wonder whether he or your magazine would have the audacity to write
about stories from the Bible and the Koran and describe them as
Christian and Islamic myths respectively.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
Let me give you a few examples of what I mean by saying he twists points and is wrong.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<ol style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<li>Kubera's
father is Vaishrava - This is wrong and betrays a basic lack of
understanding of Sanskrit. I shudder to think of a person who dares to
describe Hinduism without understanding Sanskrit. Kubera's father is
Vishrava, which is why Kubera is called Vaishravana. Similarly, Krishna
(the son of Vasudeva) is called Vaasudeva, Rama (the son of Dasharatha)
is called Daasharathi. In the same way, Paarvati is so named as she is
the daughter of Himavat Parvata.</li>
<li>Kubera is no longer worshipped
in India - This is false. My own mother has undertaken a vrat that is
specifically performed to propitiate Kubera. Towards the end of every
Hindu ceremony, the Mantrapushpam is recited. This has a specific phrase
- Kuberaaya vaishravanaaya, mahaaraajaaya namah. Please ask DP to
understand Hindu rituals before he makes comments.</li>
<li>He talks
about scholars deciding things in multiple places in the article. Who
are these scholars? Western scholars who have no idea about the layers
of meaning inherent in all Hindu scriptures? Those who are arrogant
enough to think mere bookish knowledge, interpreted through their
western and Christian upbringing is enough to comment on material they
do not even understand? He does not even mention who these "scholars"
are. Does he think he is one of these scholars?</li>
<li>He talks about the Yaksha prasna in the Mahabharata. He conveniently omitted that the "yaksha" turned out to be Dharma (or Yama) at the end of the episode.</li>
<li>Yakshas and especially Yakshinis are still mentioned in Tantra. Please ask him to read Robert Svoboda's books.</li>
<li>He
talks about "tension" between yakshas and rakshasas, tribal practices
being picked up by "Brahmanism". These smack of western arrogance that I
spoke about earlier. </li>
<li>He talks about yakshas and rakshasas being "associated" with Siva rather
than with Vishnu. DP, being a Brahmin himself is supposed to do the
Sandhyavandana on a daily basis. I am not sure if he has even heard of
this practice. Towards the end of the Sandhyavandana comes a verse which
talks about the unity of Siva and Vishnu. DP so conveniently sees a
dichotomy between the two. I am just curious if he is aware of this unity.</li>
</ol>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
I hope I have made my point. How you want to act further, is up to you.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div id="Signature" style="text-align: justify;">
Regards,<br /> V Chaitanya<br /> </div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-42296958098376922262018-01-13T17:41:00.000+05:302018-01-13T18:19:24.176+05:30On a life-changing experience<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On 4 June 2017, I was in the thirty third year of my existence in this life. I was under the impression that with my general exposure to the world I had hardened enough to be no longer very emotional, or at least no longer was prone to breaking down in tears. This was when fate decided to spring a surprise on me.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This was the day my daughter was born. Unfortunately for me, I was out of town on some work and could not be present at the exact time of her birth. I had gotten out of the flight and was on a call with my brother-in-law. He told me my wife had gone into labour a little while before and as he was speaking to me, he suddenly told me that the child was born and that I was the father to a daughter. To my utter surprise I broke down in tears of happiness and gratitude. With the quantum of tears streaming down my face, I am quite sure I was noticeable to other travellers. I immediately called my parents and boss to update them. My boss, who knew we were expecting, was initially worried as he could only hear sobs at the other end of the line. A few seconds later he understood they were the outcome of too much joy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
My mother and father still dote on me and my sister. I used to make fun of my mother when she used to be very caring and protective of my sister and me. Now in an interesting twist she makes fun of me for the attachment I have towards my daughter (I still make fun of her that I take after my mother). My father used to tell me that for parents, a thorn that hurts a child's foot is like a thorn in the parents' heart. Now I understand what he meant. She is a few months old. I am already planning to get her husband to stay with my wife and me when she gets married. Recently there was a possibility that I my wife and my daughter to stay away from me for a few months. I was surprised by the sadness I felt (thankfully, the need no longer looks to be there). My wife keeps asking me how we used to spend time, especially on weekends before she was born. I do not have a specific response as such!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
On a lighter note, an anecdote. My mother, mother-in-law, wife were in a room and my daughter was playing on the bed. My mother stood up on the bed to adjust a malfunctioning tube light. I immediately asked her to be careful so that she did not fall on the little one. My mother-in-law remarked tongue-in-cheek that the father was more worried about his daughter getting hurt than the son was worried about his mother losing her balance and hurting herself! True, no? :D<br />
<br />
On a related note, a man can only wonder about the pain a woman goes through in her life. There is the monthly pain they experience for most of their lives. On top of it is the pain of childbirth. If I as a father who plays no physical role in the actual birth of the child can be so attached, one can only wonder about the love and attachment of a mother.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I occasionally read spiritual stuff. I am not saying I am a spiritual person, but I do read stuff. One thing that keeps cropping up a lot is how we build attachments and that is the root of our misery. Recently when my daughter was sitting in my wife's lap and refused to come to me, it hurt. It makes me wonder, how petty can one be? I obviously could not remain angry with her but that kind of reminds me of a <i>sloka</i> from the <i>Bhagavad Gita.</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>dhyaayato viShayaan pumsah sangasteShoopajaayate</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<i>sangaat sanjaayate kaamah kaamaat krodhobhijaayate</i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When one constantly thins of worldly things, one gets attached to them. From attachment arises desire. From (unfulfilled) desire arises anger.<i> </i></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Is this not true in our daily lives as well? We have expectations from the people in our life. These may be our "loved one" - spouses, parents, friends, relatives etc. in our personal lives or our bosses, colleagues etc. in our professional lives. When they do not meet our expectations, we become angry with them.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Starting from this post I am planning to write up stuff on Hindu dharma and philosophy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For the moment, my daughter is 7 months old, and I am already wondering how I will survive sending her off after marriage!</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-91286380092879668532017-07-08T23:49:00.001+05:302017-07-09T09:52:51.345+05:30On the language divide in India - part 2<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Continuing with my <a href="http://idiadi.blogspot.in/2017/07/on-language-divide-in-india-part-1.html" target="_blank">earlier post</a> here I want to address the potential reasons for the anger against the "imposition" of Hindi.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li style="text-align: justify;">The theory that is easiest to discount is the Aryan-Dravidian divide. Just to give one example of the long-standing unity of the country - Agastya who is said to be the father of all things Tamil is an "Aryan" rishi. Tamil Sangam Era literature talks about the Ramayana. Adi Sankara who was from what is today Kerala was the key figure in rallying together Hindus after the impact of Buddhism. The strongest constituency for this reason would be Tamils who are steeped in the ideology of "Dravidian" politics. On the other hand there are Tamil scholars like Dr. Nagaswamy who themselves are debunking this divide.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The second reason is to put it simply, money. There is no <i>monetary incentive</i> for a non-Hindi speaker to learn the language. English on the other hand is today the lingua franca not only in India but across multiple developed nations. It is felt to be one of the few positive outcomes(?) of the British <i>Raj</i>. I do not need to dwell on the importance of English in the contemporary world. Let me give you another example. For reasons best known to them a lot of people mistake me for a north Indian (at least till I open my mouth, and occasionally even after that - I am grateful to my BIT Mesra batchmates who taught me the language!). When I had newly moved to Chennai on work, one day I hailed an auto. Even before I opened my mouth the much-maligned <i>Chennai auto driver</i>, started speaking Hindi! Further in places frequented by tourists, and in Marwari enclaves I am sure you will find local shop keepers speaking the language even in non-Hindi areas.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">A very, very important factor that I feel is a reason is that the imposition, perceived or real, is one-way. Nobody can dispute this fact. I do not think there is any school in north India which offers a south Indian language as an elective. Our leaders need to remember that our states are formed largely or completely around languages, and that is good. We need to nurture the diversity that we have. However, in this scenario, where only non-Hindi states have Hindi imposed on them there is justified anger on why a non-Hindi language is not offered in the north. </li>
</ol>
<span style="text-align: justify;">My personal sympathies lie with the third point. Hence let me dwell on this point. </span><br />
<br />
<ol style="text-align: left;">
<li style="text-align: justify;">First of all people staying north of the Vindhyas seem to be utterly, and I mean <i>Utterly</i> ignorant of those to the south of the range. I am sure all my south Indian friends, especially the non-Tamil ones will agree that being called a <i>Madrasi</i> is one of the most irritating things. Why? Because the ignorant person calling me that is erasing an identity that I am proud of and is confusing with something that I am not! Many north Indians probably may not even be able to <i>name</i> the four major south Indian languages. And for crying out loud, the linguistic basis of statehood that we have today, is because of the south Indian states, especially (erstwhile) Andhra Pradesh. Even for those who know a little, my mother tongue is "Telegu". For God's sake, it is TelUgu. Hence if Hindi is made compulsory unilaterally consciously or unconsciously the government is furthering ignorance and possibly giving rise to a (potentially) false sense of superiority as well.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Further, our languages are wonderful and logical. How many people know that the consonants in our languages form sounds from the back of the mouth, the throat to the lips? Try pronouncing <i>ka</i>, <i>cha</i>, <i>Ta</i>, <i>ta</i> and <i>pa</i> if you have not tried this earlier. I am not sure if anyone knows why the English alphabet extends from A to Z in that order with vowels randomly thrown in. There is a lot that our languages can communicate to one another. For example <span style="text-align: justify;">only two languages (in my knowledge) - Sanskrit and Telugu have an event/performance called an <i>avadhaanam</i>. This is a fantastic feat of scholarship and memory that I am not even sure how many other languages can reproduce. How many non-Telugu speakers have even <i>heard</i> of this? I myself have very little knowledge. I am sure the current generation, even in Telugu families are not aware of this. By giving greater and greater importance to one language we risk giving a quite burial to some of these fantastic inheritances of ours.</span></li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I respect the sentiment that is often cited - it is better to learn a common or widely spoken Indian language than English, which is a foreign tongue, that too of an oppressor. I agree to that. In fact if I know the other person knows Hindi and English both, I would like to speak Hindi. <i>However</i>, I have one request to anyone who gives this reason to me. You show equal respect to something which is not your own and learn a language. It need not be mine. But this removes the feeling I have of something being pushed down my throat without <i>reciprocity</i>.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now I move to the third part of this topic. What can the government do? There is no short term solution to this. I would suggest that in <i>every</i> state there must be an elective to learn make the student learn a language that is NOT the student's mother tongue and one that s/he is familiar with. Benefits?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Students get to know firsthand the diversity of our country and can gain new respect for other cultures. We will hopefully have less usage of <i>Madrasi</i> and Telegu.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Learning a new language is one of the things <i>scientifically</i> proven to improve brain function and keep it active. And I do not need to say this is important to a kid.</li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For those who will blame me for further loading, burdened students I do have a response. Let this not be a single year language. There is no use to doing that. Let it be spread over a few years. Let the child understand the language in its majesty and beauty. Let him not fear it as another subject to be learnt by heart. Also, I understand there are multiple approaches to teaching any language. Learning by starting with grammar is definitely going to be painful. Let us try to find one that is not painful, by teaching use first, and hardcore grammar later.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In choosing electives, at whatever level it may be, we suffer from the tyranny of large numbers. I cannot choose to learn an elective I like unless there is a certain minimum number of students who also want that. This need not be a constraint in today's world where video conferencing/lectures and learning apps are increasingly becoming the norm. NPTEL is already present. Why can't we have something like that for languages?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So to summarize the last section:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<ol>
<li>Make the student compulsorily learn a non-familiar language.</li>
<li>Do not restrict it to one year, let the child take time to learn it.</li>
<li>Give the child the freedom to choose any language of his or her choice.</li>
<li>Instead of every school maintaining a dedicated pool of teachers for all languages, these can be taught remotely.</li>
</ol>
<div>
This concludes this topic. I look forward to writing more. I eagerly await the vistas that the train of my thought will unravel in the days to come.<br />
<br />
Edit: I just read an article on <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/education-to-go-digital-with-swayam/articleshow/59509319.cms" target="_blank">Swayam</a>. This further strengthens my point above about teaching languages via video lectures - real time or recorded.</div>
</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-63908126023619668162017-07-06T20:13:00.002+05:302017-07-06T20:13:32.196+05:30On the language divide in India - part 1<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A long break from writing. I recently discovered that there ARE people who read my posts :) I anyway have stuff to share. Hence I am back!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This article is based on the recent arguments over "imposition" of Hindi on south Indian states. In the interest of brevity I am dividing what I have to say it into multiple portions. Also, as mentioned in an earlier post, apart from commenting about the present state, I will also suggest what I feel is a resolution to the issue.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As always, I am open to being corrected if I am wrong. Let me state at the outset the following: </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<ol style="text-align: justify;">
<li>My mother tongue is Telugu. I am extremely proud of being born into it. Sanskrit is another language I respect immensely (maybe more than Telugu?). I am decently fluent in Hindi and English apart from Telugu.</li>
<li>I am one of the increasing number of Telugu speakers who lament about the increasing usage of English in daily Telugu speech. Today a majority of Telugu speakers seem to be more comfortable inserting English words (Hindi/Urdu in Telangana) into their daily speech. I am sure this is the case throughout India, with other languages as well. In fact I recently saw an interview of an important Hindu religious leader who is supposed to have been educated in Telugu medium. His speech was possibly peppered with more English than mine! Funnily enough Christian preachers and evangelists seem to be sticking to an almost outdated mode of Telugu, what is called, <i>graanthikam</i>, or one that is found in books.</li>
<li>Chronologically, Hindi is a relatively new language compared to the south Indian languages. Hence the amount of "classical" literature in this is less than that in the south Indian languages.<i> </i>I am clubbing dialects like Awadhi (with apologies to the speakers of these "dialects") with Hindi as we know it today. </li>
<li>Due to geographical reasons the northern part of the country has had immense damage caused via invasions from outside - Mongols, Turks, Greeks et al. This has had impact on multiple facets of what we call north India today - language, food etc. For this reason, I believe that what one gets to see in the southern part of the country is actually closer to what was the original Indian version of that cultural aspect. For example, there are certain Vedic rituals which are not retained in memory by anyone outside Kerala. </li>
<li>I believe the Aryan-Dravidian hypothesis is hogwash and is just an attempt to drive a wedge in a land that is culturally one. Point 4 above is another reason I believe the theory is rubbish. </li>
<li>Further, I believe many of the so-called "Indologists", especially westerners are not fit to comment on Indian texts. I will explain why. As many would know, the Vedas were passed down orally for thousands of years without putting them in writing as the pronunciation is almost if not equally important as the text of the slokas. There are Vedic scholars called <i>Ghanapaathis</i>, especially in Andhra (I have not seen them elsewhere) who have committed Vedas to memories. I believe that a lot of Vedic scholars DO NOT KNOW the meaning of what it is they are reciting. The simple reason is that to truly know the meaning one has to be well versed in <i>nirukta</i> and that is a different subject altogether. Also, Sanskrit is a language where the same word can mean different things in different contexts. And to borrow from Rajiv Malhotra's books, the same thing has multiple names depending on the characteristics. For example, the word <i>maa</i> can mean "to me" or it can mean negation. On the other hand <i>paavaka</i>, <i>agni</i>, <i>havyavaahana</i> are all terms used for fire. Also, India's many texts are interlinked. Hence without truly understanding the multiple meanings and multiple sources it is foolish to claim to be an expert on anything related to Indian culture.</li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Having laid this foundation I will next proceed to build my case as to WHY (in my opinion obviously) south Indians seem to be prefering English over Hindi. I will also put forward suggestions on HOW to remove some apprehensions. Some of the suggestions I have in mind are really long term-oriented, in the sense that they cannot be implemented overnight. I will share these in the forthcoming posts.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-1388020150822749082016-05-14T12:06:00.000+05:302016-05-14T12:09:47.058+05:30Why I abhor the idea of Rahul Gandhi coming to power<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This article was prompted by <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-05-12/gandhi-heir-emerges-as-threat-to-india-s-modi" target="_blank">this article</a> I saw being shared on Facebook member, Chaitanya Chinchlikar. Of late I have been in two minds on writing about politics. However this article really got my ranting juices flowing.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As Chinchlikar pointed out it very much looks as if the writer has his head in buried beneath soil. However what really got my goat was the entitlement or inheritance that the author seems to be talking about. It fills me with disgust that we have people like Rahul Gandhi as part of our "leaders" today.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rahul Gandhi has never held any public position of responsibility in the country till date. His government was in power for ten years. He had a golden opportunity to work as a minister and learn the ropes of administration. His family has been in politics for much longer. He could have been a minister in any of the Congress state governments. Had he asked for it, possibly he would have been the Chief Minister of a state also. But no, he shirked all responsibility. To Congress sycophants this may seem to be abstinence from power. Sorry, to me it seems to be arrogance to hold the top post in the country without the humility or willingness to serve at any lower level.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He insists on speaking out on topics that seem populist to him. He spoke about Dadri, JNU etc., wherever he had an opportunity to target the ruling dispensation. He did not speak a word on the recent Kerala rapes. He has not commented anything on the recent murders of a student and a journalist in Bihar. He is visible typically only when he has an opportunity to target the government, that too which is not manned by his party. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He does not seem to have a clue about international affairs. I do not recall any statements worth remembering having been made by him on the Italian Marines affair (I even did a quick Internet search). Though some foreign leaders seem to meet him in occasion I am not sure what is his actual awareness of what happens on the international stage. He seems to want to become a messiah for the masses. While the masses have to be addressed he should remember that there are today a huge middle class and educated youngsters who do want his dole. They want opportunities. They don't want huge statements. They want things to change. They want the situation to improve. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rahul Gandhi has lent his voice in support to the JNU agitation. It is now coming out that the protests which also spoke about Rohith Vemula in Hyderabad were funded by the Congress and the Left. ISIS recruits arrested recently are also revealing how they are mingling with these crowds to foment unrest. So is this guy doing anything productive? I do not think so.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
We have had three major changes in the recent past which offered a ray of hope to many disillusioned Indians. One was the victory of the Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi. However, now the less said about Kejriwal, the better. While there seems to be some good work (with regard to school fees) being done, Kejriwal is making a spectacle of himself by targeting the PM at every available instance and with his daily theatrics. The other was Nitish Kumar who first came to power with the BJP's help, promising change from Lalu's administration. He either miscalculated Modi's appeal or wanted to become the PM himself and broke up with the BJP. He is now an ally of the much-maligned Lalu. Lalu's sons seem to be getting more press of late today than the CM. It will be interesting to see what happens during the next state elections. I hope Bihar does not slip back into its erstwhile lawlessness. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The third was Narendra Modi coming to power. There have been occasional weird outbursts from extreme right wing elements which Modi has not said much/anything about. However in general the government seems to be trying many new things - reforms in bureaucracy, making it accountable, reducing red tape and corruption, renewed focus on energy savings, reforming the railways etc. Shrill voices from the opposition, and absolute non-cooperation from the Congress are putting a spanner into the works. Many Indians will be happy if Rahul Gandhi uses his "power" and cooperates with the government to bring out changes in the country. Let him claim credit after that. That seems to be one department where he needs absolutely no training.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The aforementioned article seems more akin to a paid news article which has a semblance of balance thrown in to avoid exactly this kind of accusation. I hope the writer analyses better before he writes such stuff.</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-71368971106531053562015-12-05T16:17:00.002+05:302015-12-05T16:18:22.014+05:30Can this technology reduce traffic offences?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As an Indian living in a large city I am a daily victim of traffic jams. Funnily enough in the midst of the national debate on "intolerance" someone did point out that we are actually very tolerant as we live peacefully with our roads and traffic. Also India is an impatient country. How often do we see people jumping queues and vehicles jumping lanes often even in the wrong way?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Like any large city Chennai implemented a lot of one-way routes to manage traffic. There is one such bridge/flyover in Chennai, a Y-shaped one. The leg is two-way while one is supposed to only go up one arm and only come down the other - which increases the distance. I have seen autos, two-wheelers and even heavier vehicles happily go down the up-route which used to irritate me to no end. I did see a few police personnel a few times, however the offenders were mostly free to do as they wished. The genesis for this post was this irritation.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The Delhi AAP government is also in the news about its proposed measures to curb pollution in the national capital. One question being raised is that how this would be implemented, especially given that Kejriwal has no control over the Delhi Police. The odd-and-even registration plate rule being proposed needs a big increase in the police force for it to be effectively enforced.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Given the above two scenarios I suggest the following tracking solution. As I am not very savvy electronics-wise I will not be able to go into details. I will try to address a few concerns which may be raised.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
1. EVERY vehicle sold will have a certain chip/RFID tag containing certain information - owner's name, vehicle details etc. This has to be implemented by each manufacturer. Today every vehicle has a unique chassis number and engine number. However this information has to be transferred to a readable device. There should be certain designated devices only which can write information onto these chips/tags.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
2. The second step would be to implement a sensor network. These sensors should be able to only read the information from the chips/tags. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
3. The third is to integrate the data read in this way to a back-end network. To avoid privacy concerns users should not be able to browse through the data stored. Alternatively data access should be controlled via court warrants etc. The system should only be able to generate alerts based on certain events.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
a. A stolen vehicle's registration number turns up</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
b. Two consecutive sensors detect a vehicle going in the wrong direction</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
c. The vehicle is not supposed to be on the road</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
4. Implementing the sensor network will definitely be expensive, especially given the number of sensors that have to be implemented. One idea is to mount these sensors onto street lights. True, there are many places which do not have street lights. However via this method the government can implement two solutions. The sensors can be powered via solar panels mounted on the light towers. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
5. Obvious parameters to be covered:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
a. The power consumption should be low</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
b. Devices should not be removable from vehicles</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
c. Write access to the chips/tags should be available only with designated people like vehicle manufacturers, RTOs etc. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
d. Personal data will be stored in the system, so privacy safeguards should be watertight.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
e. This is an obvious candidate for an IoT application. However to keep cost and power requirements low technology like RFID should also be involved.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
6. This solution will obviously not work if the tag/chip is removed. So the solution should also involve measures to prevent this.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
a. random checks on vehicles</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
b. the chip/device being able to send an alert when it is removed</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I end this post here. Hope to see something like this on the roads, for that matter anything that will better our lives!</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4096010723439098811.post-10068871653139855782015-10-23T13:21:00.000+05:302015-10-23T13:21:14.234+05:30Why the country can't afford fringe elements now, and why the government has to act, now<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Politically I am a moderate right winger. I support causes like stopping cow slaughter, putting an end to forced/induced conversions etc. However I prefer dialogue rather than banning things outright, or taking law into our hands. Hence the moderate qualifier to my right wing tilt.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Today we have a government whose Prime Minister is admired by many people, both inside and outside the country. The young in India especially seem to believe in him, that he can bring about a change. I don't think I would be wrong in saying that the mandate which brought the present government into power was more in favour of Narendra Modi than the BJP or the NDA. Also the electorate was fed up with the perceived corruption and inefficiencies of UPA 2 and booted them out. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Thus Narendra Modi was the right person at the right time and place. Hence he has a delicate balance to maintain. After a long time there is a strong central government. After a long time there is a government which is not left or left-of-centre-leaning like the Congress. There is a real chance to make a break from the past and chart new paths. Things are beginning to change. Piyush Goyal has made a lot of changes at his ministry - power, coal and renewable energy. There are visionary goals ready for the government - Make in India, Digital India, Swachh Bharat etc. The Defence Ministry is a different animal today as compared to the past. Government clearances and file movement are much faster today. It is almost like Modi knows that he does not have much time and is a man in a hurry. Only God knows for how long he will remain productive. However he is being hampered by fringe elements, whether from the BJP, the Sangh Parivar or from other sections of the society bent on creating mischief. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Today the government has to face issues on two fronts. On the one hand there are many who seem to have a permanent foot-in-the-mouth. These include people part of the ruling dispensation/government (General VK Singh, certain sadhus and sadhvis et al). They talk about highly charged and avoidable topics, embarrass the government and give ammunition to the opposition to bay for the government's blood. On the other hand there is the entire opposition and news-hungry media. They pick up issues, both significant and trivial and give major coverage. Some sections are either so blindly anti-government or pro some other side that they have to make mountains out of molehills also.<br />
<br />
The people of this country, especially the young, and the hopefully-not-blindly-biased have to decide what is good for it. For the sake of the future, for the sake of the country the PM and government need to pull their act together. If a few heads have to roll, let them. But it is high time that the PM and government stop non-issues from derailing an agenda of good governance.<br />
<br />
Let Modi not go down as a person who could have done a lot, but did not!</div>
</div>
VChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16472277101703017688noreply@blogger.com1