EVEN WELL MEANING NON-HINDU DEFENDERS OF HINDUS FALL SHORT ON COMPREHENDING HINDU SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND ARE FAST & LOOSE PONTIFICATORS

New post on Bharata Bharati When non-Hindus try to defend Hindus – Vijaya Rajiva "Dr. Elst's major motivations are a highly developed sense of ethical justice and a certain type of abstract rationalism that prevent him from seeing that Hindus have their own methods in confronting the asuric forces. It would be useful if he could in various forums consistently continue to pursue the lines that he advocates that Hindus follow, namely actively propagate the work that is already being done and provide a well honed thesis of the merits of the caste system and its origins and its contributions to India's prosperity in the past and even at the present time." - Dr. Vijaya Rajiva Dr. Koenraad Elst is well-known in Hindu circles for his service to the Hindu cause dating back at least two decades or more and it is with some hesitation that the present writer has embarked on a critique of his article "Dalits and Racism in anti Hindu Propaganda" (Voice of Dharma, 2007) now reprinted in Bharata Bharati (28 Aug. 2012). Like Mark Tully the well-respected British journalist (whom he quotes in the article) both are non-Hindus and it is difficult for them to understand why Hindus take the approach they do when countering the propaganda of asuric forces (they are not included in this group) concerning the so-called failures of Hindu society. Recently, there has been an accelerated focus on India's violation of human rights by hostile groups in the US, in Africa and Europe, especially the question of Dalit rights and the attendant brouhaha about the Hindu caste system. In order to clear the decks and so that we are not talking at cross purposes, we Hindus do believe that the Veda and the Agama (which includes the Village Agama) cannot be defeated (even though social reforms are called for). The present writer has written several articles on the subject in Vijayvaani.com. Now, Dr. Elst might consider this far-fetched, since he is not a Hindu and cannot speak about the Veda in the same manner as a Hindu does. He cannot declare that he considers the Veda as being apaurusheya (not of human origin). He would be laughed out of court, especially in the circles in which he carries on his defence of Hindus. Hence too, he believes that Hindus are being smug in their convictions and also losing out in the arguments against the asuric forces. But this attitude may be flying in the face of facts. If he paid attention to much of the work of Hindu intellectuals in the last few years this false belief will fade away. There have been innumerable articles in blog sites, publications etc. which are evidence that Hindus take the question of Dalit rights seriously (for instance). Less than two years ago Dr. Rakesh Bahadur (a Hindu in the diaspora) published his path breaking work Equality and Inclusion: Progress and Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes In Independent India (2010). Then there was the controversial HAF Report on Caste, which with all its shortcomings was a public attempt to reject the view that Hinduism endorsed Untouchability. Part of the reason also that Dr. Elst castigates Hindus for being smug and self-complacent is that he is still in the confines of the controversies that erupted during the early period that he was writing in and in which he rendered yeoman service to the Hindu cause. It is in the interests of these circles that he unfortunately has to contend with to see that these outworn disputes are kept alive so that they can be used to whip the Hindus with. Having been unsuccessful since prior to the colonial period and throughout that period to defeat Hinduism, the Church has found new ways to enter by the back door as it were. One such method is to engage scholars such as Dr. Elst in worn out causes that will keep the Hindus distracted and demoralised. The present writer has already mentioned another recent example of a non-Hindu trying to help out in the Hindu cause. In response to the article in Vijayvaani.com "Village Agama: A contiguous tradition with Veda and Agama" (18 Aug. 2012) a respondent who called himself/herself Vas, suggested that intellectual Hindus should propagate Yoga in the US so that the aliens could come to understand Hinduism better. While this is a laudable cause and many Hindus are doing just that, there are also Hindus who have distanced themselves from the Hindu roots of Yoga, thus inviting misunderstanding and misrepresentations of Hinduism. In addition, the suggestion had nothing to do with the main themes of the article. This example has been quoted merely to highlight the difficulties that non-Hindu supporters present. While well-intentioned, they simply do not understand the Hindu ethos. In the case of Dr. Elst his major motivations are a highly developed sense of ethical justice and a certain type of abstract rationalism that prevent him from seeing that Hindus have their own methods in confronting the asuric forces. It would be useful if he could in various forums consistently continue to pursue the lines that he advocates that Hindus follow, namely actively propagate the work that is already being done and provide a well honed thesis of the merits of the caste system and its origins and its contributions to India's prosperity in the past and even at the present time. The family connections and links provided by this system is what makes retail trade in India so vastly important and which is the reason why the US wants a piece of the action. FDI in retail is a disaster for the Indian small and medium trader and is profitable for Walmart. Retail trade in India provides a greater share of the GDP than either the manufacturing or the agricultural sector (see the professional work of economist Professor R. Vaidyanathan of the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore, India). Dr. Elst's advice to Hindus may be well-meant but falls short of the present realities. This suits the asuric forces who then use these statements with effect to demoralise the Hindus and gain entry by the backdoor. That their plans will not succeed (owing to the strength of the Vedic Agamic tradition) is beside the point. It will save both Dr. Elst a lot of time and energy if present realities are heeded. Social reforms are under way and the Dalit situation specifically has improved, though more needs to be done. The shocking existence of 3 lakhmanual scavengers must not only be publicised as the Salman Khan film has done, but it must be addressed. And the Sangh organisations are continuing to do a sterling job in bringing the SCs and STs back to the Hindu fold. If all this is not acknowledged and Dr. Elst continues to lecture the Hindus, what we have is a counter productive approach. And so, Dr. Elst notwithstanding, Hindus must continue to attack the injustices of colonisation, the economic imperialism of the West, masquerading as 'globalisation' and the realities of political subversion going on under the aegis of an Italian Catholic. These are not irrelevant. » Dr. Vijaya Rajiva is a Political Philosopher who taught at a Canadian university. See the article by Elst below.

New post on Bharata Bharati Dalits and racism in anti-Hindu propaganda – Koenraad Elst "Hindu polemicists talk about “white racism” as if they are totally oblivious to the torrent of anti-racist re-education that has swept Western society in the past half century.  The problem is not just that Hindus cultivate an anachronistic world-view, apparently drawing a good feeling about themselves from pretending to live in the colonial age and occupying the moral high ground of the anti-colonial struggle.  This is bad enough, for movements based on self-deception stand defeated from the very start; but in the present case, it also blinds them to the transformation of anti-racism from a force working in favour of the standing of non-European peoples to one that actually makes things worse for them.  Or at least for those among them who have a solid reputation of racism, viz. the Hindus." - Koenraad Elst  The abolition of the slave trade in the British empire (1807) is being used by Christian missionary circles as an occasion for Hindu-bashing through the theme of caste oppression as a still-existing form of slavery.  Hindu polemicists typically react by highlighting the human rights abuses committed by Christians or in the name of Christianity through the centuries: witch-burning, persecution of pagans and heretics, racism, apartheid and of course the slave trade itself.  The intended implication is that Christians are morally in no position to berate Hindus for their social injustices and had better not meddle in inter-Hindu matters.  This may be a correct and convincing position to take in front of a neutral or as yet uninformed audience, but with Christians who know their religion, it is hopelessly ineffective. Whereas Christian missionaries have invested heavily in studying Hindu society and its subsets as defined by language, caste or social class, most Hindus including anti-conversion activists are unfamiliar with the Christian mentality.  Hindu polemicists listen to their own and each other's words and then think: how great, how clever.  But if you want to get a message across to an audience, you should listen to the effect you're having on this audience.  So, as an ex-Christian and still daily in touch with Christian circles, I would like to point out certain beliefs and attitudes that immunize Christians against the charge of being no better than Hindus with their caste oppression. First of all, the historical facts and present eyesores which you want to shove into their faces and of which you expect that they will shock and awe Christians into silence about caste, are already widely known and acknowledged.  On the 900th anniversary of the Crusades, a perfectly justified Christian reaction against Muslim imperialism, numerous Christians indulged in a guilt trip and said sorry to the Muslims.  But most of all, they impressed it upon themselves (far more thoroughly than you could hope to do) what evil sinners they had been back then, and how this should spur them into being nice to today's Muslims.  To Christians, past sins are a matter for repentance vis-à-vis God, but ultimately only the normal course of things, since we're all sinners.  So they are not uptight about having sins on their record and won't be blackmailed about this. Secondly, repentance about sins past is proven precisely by a commitment to avoid and combat similar sins in the present.  It is not enough to say yourconfession of sins, you have to resolve to undo the sins' consequences and go out of your way to remove them from this world.  So, precisely because Christians have been guilty of slave trading etc., they have a duty to combat similar inequality now.  And this must not be limited to their own backyard, for sins are both by commission as by omission, i.e. standing by passively when others get away with committing them. Because of their past sins, they feel obliged to meddle in your sins today.  Just as after abolishing the slave trade and then slavery itself in the British Empire, the British felt obliged to go out and impose its abolition on the Ottomans, the Arabs and others.  This is a moral imperative.  In missionary-speak: "We have been part of the problem so now we must become part of the solution." Hindus could have guilt-tripped modern Westerners into leaving the injustices of Hindu society alone if they had been Africans or Muslims.  More perceptive Westerners would not be inhibited versus these two either (Muslims traded black, white and Indian slaves; while Africans enslaved and sold off their own brethrento Arab and European slave-traders), but most of them, and especially politicians, don't dare to speak against those two groups.  But Hindus are a different matter altogether. Hindu polemicists talk about "white racism" as if they are totally oblivious to the torrent of anti-racist re-education that has swept Western society in the past half century.  The problem is not just that Hindus cultivate an anachronistic world-view, apparently drawing a good feeling about themselves from pretending to live in the colonial age and occupying the moral high ground of the anti-colonial struggle.  This is bad enough, for movements based on self-deception stand defeated from the very start; but in the present case, it also blinds them to the transformation of anti-racism from a force working in favour of the standing of non-European peoples to one that actually makes things worse for them.  Or at least for those among them who have a solid reputation of racism, viz. the Hindus.  It is precisely anti-racism that makes Westerners self-righteous vis-à-vis Hindus.  Whereas social injustice in Western or even in Muslim society is duly recognized, it doesn't have the extreme stigma of the caste system because the latter is conceived as a form of racism.  In the past, I have argued left and right that the basis of caste is not racial, but who am I?  International organizations and influential observers keep on repeating that the caste system is a huge instance of racial apartheid.  And this much must be conceded, that it is at any ratehereditary inequality, so that castes can be considered as micro-races.  The mega-scale and mega-age of Hindu society add to the image of the caste system as the most monstrous racism in world history. Indeed, if caste is arguably (though few would argue even this much) preferable to outright slavery, even anti-racists consider it a few notches worse than the apartheid as it existed in South Africa.  The whites oppressed the blacks, but they also provided some elementary services to them, such as modern medicine and "the liberating message of Christianity", they gave black elites the sop of becoming government officials in the "homelands", they did not totally neglect them.  For all its exploitative ruthlessness in practice, the apartheid philosophy (like post-slavery colonial policies elsewhere in Africa) was not to ignore the blacks but to treat them as children who would benefit from white supervision.  By contrast, the international image of caste society is one of extreme callousness, in which upper-caste people see lower-caste people dying on their doorstep and remain unmoved.  Apartheid was an institution within which human exceptions existed, with some whites sympathizing with the blacks -- whereas in the international perception, caste is so ugly and cruel because it is totally heartfelt, with the upper-caste people persisting in caste-racist discrimination even after its formal abolition as an institution.  Doesn't everybody outside India "know" that a Mother Teresa was needed to pick up the paupers from the gutter where the smug upper-caste Hindus left them to rot? As Mark Tully has testified: "Whenever I go and give a talk on Hinduism, and when I say something nice about it, invariably someone from the audience will object: 'I think Hinduism is a disgusting religion because of the caste system.'"  And this from modern people sufficiently educated to know that all societies have their problems and iniquities, their own not excepted.  In their perception, the uniquely evil thing about Hindu caste-racism is how deep it has gripped and moulded the Hindu mind, by virtue of being a religiously-justified doctrine, not just a worldly circumstance but entirely intertwined with deep philosophical stuff about dharma and karma.  Christianity has in fact managed to shed slavery because slavery is not of the essence of Christianity, or so the perception goes; whereas caste is of the very essence of Hinduism. Another common anachronism in the Hindu position is to identify the Christian missionary apparatus as "white".  This does of course have a basis in historical reality but is becoming increasingly inaccurate.  Christian missionaries in Asia are now typically Koreans or Filipinos or Keralites, not whites.  And don't say that they are only the infantry: in most Churches you see them rising through the ranks.  Remember how in the Anglican Church, conservative African bishops formed a formidable bloc opposing the Anglo-American progressives on issues of women priests and acceptance of homosexuality.  At any rate, these non-white converts have internalized the faith and the missionary zeal, just as the white North-Europeans (the demographic mainstay of the US Baptists and other missionary powerhouses) had at one time internalized Christianity after learning it from Mediterranean missionaries, who in turn had it from the Jewish-born "first Christians".  It is no use denying that Christianity has morphed across racial frontiers several times already, and that it is repeating this process right now.  Even the remaining white Church leaders are clever enough to send coloured Church spokesmen to interreligious forums where race could be an issue, so Hindus won't be able to use the anti-white line against them. As for the anti-caste mobilization, millions of blacks too have accepted the idea that caste is a form of slavery and racism.  Just as millions of Scheduled Casteconverts who had never thought of caste in terms of race have by now internalized the idea that caste is the ultimate in racism.  You won't shock them into silence with references to white injustice.  On the contrary, to them the struggle against caste oppression is simply the continuation of the historical struggle against slavery and apartheid. So, that in my opinion is what Hindus are up against.  The Christian missionariesare nothing if not clever.  They sail with the opinion winds and have ably made the switch from colonial racism to postcolonial anti-racism, and now they are using this new line with good effect against Hindu society.  Digging up the dirt on "white Christian" history will only evoke a yawn, as that dirt has been dished out already all over the official textbooks and media in Christian countries.  If Hindus want to stop the gains continually made by the Christians in the battle for the souls, there is no alternative to the laborious task of (1) informing the world about the more complex and less extreme reality of the caste system in history and in the present; (2) actually reforming society to the point where caste oppression is only a memory -- and ensuring that the world knows about this; and (3) refocusing the Hindu-Christian struggle to its proper doctrinal level, where the defining Christian teachings can be exposed as the unhistorical claims and irrational beliefs that they really are.  Plus, of course, reaching out to the converts who are willing or eager to return to the Hindu fold.  These are big and demanding jobs, but carry a better promise of success than locking yourself in a smug self-assurance of how evil Christians are. - Voice of Dharma, 2007 » Dr. Koenraad Elst distinguished himself early on as eager to learn and eager to dissent. He studied at the Catholic University of Leuven, obtaining MA degrees in Sinology, Indology and Philosophy. After a research stay at Benares Hindu University he did original fieldwork for a doctorate on Hindu nationalism, for which he obtained magna cum laude in 1998. As an independent researcher he has earned laurels and ostracism with his findings on hot items like Islam, multiculturalism and the secular state.

DEVASTATING NEGATIVE EMOTION PROVOKING PAK-PERCEPTION OUTSIDE PAAK IN FOUR MUSLIM COUNTRIES AND IN MAJORITY OF CHINESE AND JAPANESE, AND NOW IN IRAN TOO REVEALS POLITICALLY INCORRECT BUT UNDENIABLE TRUTH ABOUT PAKISTAN'S DECAY!!!

Why Muslims and Chinese hate Pakistan

Pakistanis evoke highly negative emotions worldwide, including in Muslim majority countries, says a US survey. Not just the elites but the common Pakistani too is culpable in the country’s spectacular failure.

Ahmadiyya Times | News Watch | Int'l Desk
Source/Credit: Rushia & India Report
By Rakesh Krishnan Simha | July 3, 2012

It has never been easy being a Pakistani. Pick a terrorist act committed anywhere in the world and chances are it has Pakistani fingerprints all over it. In many places, the word ‘Pakistani’ is a four-letter word.

So it must be a nasty kick in the guts for the Pakistanis to learn that their only allies, the Chinese, as well as the majority populations of several Muslim countries, including Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan and Lebanon, see them as a bunch of baddies.

A survey of 21 countries released on June 27, 2012 by the United States-based Pew Research Center suggests that Pakistan is not only a universally disliked country but the Pakistanis themselves have learnt nothing from their history, continuing to support the very actors who are responsible for their country’s negative image.

It is a measure of Pakistan’s penchant for exporting terrorists, counterfeit currency and drugs that India has constructed a 2043 km long steel fence across its border with its wayward western neighbour. The floodlit fence is so bright it can be seen from space as a bright orange line snaking from the Arabian Sea to Kashmir.

Now Iran is building a 700-km steel and concrete security fence along its border with Pakistan “to prevent border crossing by terrorists and drug traffickers”. When complete it will make Pakistan the most fenced-in country in the world.

You get the picture. Pakistan is not exactly a popular tourist destination.

In four of the five predominantly Muslim nations covered by the American survey, over half give Pakistan negative ratings. Jordan (57 percent), Lebanon (56 percent), Tunisia (54 percent) and Egypt (53 percent) had an unfavourable opinion of Pakistan. The only exception is Turkey, where attitudes are divided (43 percent negative and 37 percent favourable).

In East Asia, 52 percent of Chinese see Pakistan unfavourably, as do 59 percent in Japan and 59 percent in India. The Chinese response is not surprising as Pakistan-trained Uighur Muslims have launched terror strikes in China. Japan, a nation historically distrustful of foreigners, decided not to take chances and deported more than 15,000 Pakistanis after 9/11.

Runaway military most loved

Every country has an army but the Pakistan Army has a country. The Pakistani military runs a $20 billion commercial empire that includes interests such as milk processing plants, bakeries, banks, cinemas, heavy industry and insurance. Plus a good chunk of the billions of dollars in American aid goes straight into the pockets of the generals.

This corrupt empire is walled off from civilians. Defence analyst Ayesha Siddiqa, author of Military Inc: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy, says there is little accountability and widespread siphoning of funds. The Pakistani military operates a virtual apartheid where an increasingly poor civilian population faces discrimination at virtually every level of national life – from jobs to pensions.

Also, the Pakistani military has lost four wars against India. After each of these wars Pakistan lost territory and the generals their credibility. But bizarre as it sounds, this military is the most respected institution in the country. As many as 77 percent say the military has a good influence on the country, nearly the same percentage (79 percent) as last year. The Pakistanis are either very tolerant or very brainwashed.

Sure, the military’s ratings have slipped from a high of 86 percent in 2009, but all it takes is one border flare-up for the ratings to travel north. The generals always oblige.

The media comes next with a 68 percent rating, followed by religious leaders at 66 percent.

President Asif Ali Zardari receives the most negative reviews. Only 12 percent believe he has a good influence, while 84 percent dislike him. Attitudes about Zardari are particularly negative in Punjab (96 percent bad influence) and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (95 percent).

Why is he so unpopular? Well, Zardari has done more than any previous leader to normalise trade and diplomatic relations with India. His mending fences approach lacks the customary anti-India sting.

Attitude towards militancy

Militant groups such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban have limited appeal among Pakistanis. Relatively few Pakistanis express a positive view of either Al Qaeda (13 percent) or the Taliban (13 percent). Attitudes toward groups affiliated with the Taliban fare no better in the eyes of the Pakistani public. Tehrik-i-Taliban, an umbrella organization of Taliban-linked groups in Pakistan, and the Afghan Taliban are viewed positively by only 17 percent and 14 percent of Pakistanis, respectively. The secretive Haqqani network, which is also associated with the Taliban movement, is viewed favourably by only 5 percent of Pakistanis.

The attitudes toward Lashkar-e-Taiba are somewhat more positive – 22 percent say they have a favourable opinion of this militant group. This is hardly surprising because the Lashkar mostly targets India.

How Pakistanis see India

When asked which is the greatest threat – India, the Taliban, or Al Qaeda – a clear majority named India. Roughly a quarter cited the Taliban and only 4 percent say Al-Qaeda. This is despite the fact that Al Qaeda blew up the Karachi naval base last year.

Only 22 percent of Pakistanis have a favourable view of India, although this is actually a slight improvement from 14 percent last year. Supporters of the two major opposition parties – former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) and cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) are much more likely to name India as the biggest danger (71 percent and 61 percent, respectively) than those that affiliate with Zardari’s governing Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP), where this view of India is held by 46 percent.

Pakistanis in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa regions are more likely to dislike India. For example, 84 percent in Punjab and 90 percent in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa see India as a serious threat, while 64 percent in Sindh and 61 percent in Baluchistan say the same.

This should alert liberal Indians who rush to the border to hold “candlelight vigils” for peace. Most Pakistanis are united by their hatred and fear of India – it is only a matter of degree; some hate more, others less.

Biting the hand that feeds

India does not get any aid from the United States and yet among all 21 nations Pew surveyed, Indians seemed most favourably disposed towards it. Only 12 percent said they had an unfavourable opinion of the United States.

On the other hand in Pakistan, which is heavily dependent on American cash and weapons, 80 percent had a negative opinion of America, with 74 percent regarding it as an enemy country. Around four-in-ten (38 percent) said US economic aid is having a mostly negative impact on Pakistan, while just 12 percent believed it is mostly positive.

Curiously, 40 percent said American military aid is having a mostly negative effect, while only 8 percent said it is largely positive. Pakistan’s military stockpile is largely American supplied. Do the Pakistanis believe their North Korean knockoffs will do a better job?

Be Pakistani, act Indian

One of the ironies of Pakistani life in the West is that they pose as Indians, the very people they hate so much. According to Asghar Choudhri, the chairman of Brooklyn’s Pakistani American Merchant Association, a lot of Pakistanis can’t get jobs after 9/11, and after the botched Times Square bombing, it’s become worse. “They are now pretending they are Indian so they can get a job,” he told a US wire service.

That is because Indians are among the highest educated and best paid ethnic groups, besides being highly integrated immigrants. Pakistanis, on the other hand, have been accused of honour killings, cousin marriages, child sex rackets, and terrorist activities in the very lands that gave them shelter.

From Ramzi Yousef, who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 (eight years before Osama Bin Laden) and is now serving a 240-year prison sentence to Mir Aimal Kansi, who shot dead two CIA agents and was later executed by lethal injection, to Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square “Idiot Bomber”, there is a long list of Pakistanis who have left a trail of terror.

Terror on course

The Indian mask that many Pakistanis wear is to get around Western suspicions. Back home, it’s business as usual. Two incidents amply demonstrate that Pakistanis have learnt nothing about the dangers of flirting with terror. One was the widespread outrage across the country over Bin Laden’s killing by American commandos. The other was the unholy fracas over Kansi’s execution.

The day after a Virginia, United States, court handed the CIA shooter the death sentence, four Americans were shot dead on the streets of Pakistan. After his execution in 2002, Kansi’s funeral was attended by the entire civilian administration in his hometown Quetta, the local Pakistani Corps Commander, and the then Pakistani ambassador to the United States.

Thousands of mourners turned out as Quetta city shuttered down. Kansi’s coffin, draped in black cloth with verses from the Koran embroidered on it in gold, was carried on the shoulders of young men some 10 miles from the airport to his family’s home in Quetta.

In Islamabad, the capital city, lawyers and university students poured out on the streets in support of their newest ‘martyr’.

Veteran’s view

Veteran Indian writer Khushwant Singh is hardly the sort of person you would call anti-Pakistani. In fact, he’s been accused of “trenchant secularism” because he often backs the Muslim view against the Hindu-Sikh narrative. For decades, Singh’s house has been a watering hole for many of his Pakistani friends, who come to vent their frustrations. His mostly tabloid rants aren’t taken too seriously but he has a finger on the Pakistani pulse.

In November 2008, 10 Pakistani terrorists raided the Indian city of Mumbai, killing 166 people – mostly innocent civilians. How did the common Pakistani react when confronted with the fact that it was an operation planned and executed by their countrymen?

On the first anniversary of the attack here’s what Singh wrote in his column in the daily newspaper Hindustan Times: “To begin with, there was blank denial of any Pakistani being involved in the crime. This was tinged with apprehension that India may retaliate by carrying out similar operations in Pakistan and trigger off yet another mutually destructive war. When that fear proved baseless, it was replaced by a sense of achievement, a feeling of pride that their countrymen could plan and execute such a daring exploit with such finesse…Even the fact that among the innocent victims over 40 were Muslims was brushed aside. The sense of false pride in performing a foul deed still persists.”

This is a snapshot of Pakistani society where the arrow of time is travelling backwards, taking it into a spiral of medieval madness. Where the death of a terrorist merely means he will be instantly replaced by a hundred clones.

Is it any wonder that Paki is a four-letter word?

Read original post here: Why Muslims and Chinese hate Pakistan

MORE ON "ONE GODISM" AND DEVAS & DEVATAS FOR SURVIVAL OF HINDUS AND OTHER INDEPENDENTLY THINKING POPULATIONS OF THE WOLRD THAT DO NOT NEED TO BE FOOLED ANY MORE.

VEDIC AGAMA AND DEVAS & DEVATAS 
(DEVIS VERY MUCH INCLUDED)

by

Achintyachintaka

The recent articles on Vedic Agama, Village Agama, Hindu Polytheism, and "One Godism" seem to have confused a few of the
readers of www.sookta-sumana.blogspot.com

So, it would be imperative to search for the basic assumptions on which there is an agreement.

Brahman of Vedanta and Purusha of Sankhya are described as the offshoots of many discoveries of Vedas. Both are described as basic "realities" from which all realities emerge and are accepted widely as "Sat-Chit-Ananda," when combined into one word, "IT" is addressed as "SADCHIDANANDA."

Sat stands for existence meaning "It Exists". That adjective then
asserts that "IT" exists and is real. It is not an imaginary entity.
(Please note that "IT" (Tat) is not a "male" God as in the Abrahamic God)

Chit (Chid) means Consciousness. It is an assertion that Brahman is pure Consciousness and has no attributes of material world, like dimensions, (energy, mass, space, time, and other dimensions) Such consciousness, if accepted as the nature of reality
outside the brains, makes IT a sentient energy when Brahman acquires the attributes of energy. (See "Hinduness for World Peace and Harmony" on this blog www.sookta-sumana.blogspot.com and
"Demystifying Shri Ganesha" on this blog by placing the titles on google search engine). That is the primordial (sentient) energy with no mass, but only "vibrations," "wave form," or OM, when IT becomes the sentient energy. Mass is a magnificently concentrated energy which emerges much later in Vedic Cosmogony.

Ananda can be translated as Bliss. Those who experience this entity of Brahman describe experiencing the ultimate bliss.

All other devas and devatas are accepted as manifestations of this Brahmnan.

Since Brahman is consciousness as described above, all devas and devatas (including devis) are phenomena of consciousness.

Therefore, all "Devas" and "Devatas" (including Grama Devatas) must also be "Sat" and not imaginary entities. They exist spontaneously just like Brahman and all devas and devatas, and of course, Brahman itself is "Swyambhu" meaning spontaneously existing. 

All devas and devatas are experienced as "bliss" when the devotee recognizes them at experiential level in an experience that is described as "Sakshatkaara." ("Sakshatkaar" may be remotely translated in the spiritual parlance as "actualization" at the level of consciousness, as if consciousness itself perceives itself or an aspect of itself with full intensity in appreciating its true nature)

Human beings have to reach a stage of evolution of their consciousness to realize the presence of devas, devatas (davis), and recognize them as realities. Such recognition must not be confused with imagining their presence. If imagined and if they do not really exist they are "ASAT" and no Hindu would want to worship anything that is "ASAT." 

If any God or "Gods and Goddesses" that are purely figments of imagination, they have no place in Hindu polytheism.  "One Godism" based on a concept of "Imagined One God outside of Nature" "creating and controlling Nature" has no place in Vedic Agama Hinduism. That concept must be dismissed as pure imagination although some Hindu scholars have compromised by accepting such concept of One Godism as part of Hinduism or equivalent to Vedic concept of God. There is no GOD of that type in Vedas. 

Vedas preexist by many millennia the concept of "God" conceived by other cultures, meaning other than the Vedic Cultures. Such concept of God was pronounced as dead by Nietzsche. Stephen Hawking declared such "God" was not necessary for this Universe to be "created." Hindu view of cosmos and cosmogony must not be obfuscated by the Western and Middle Eastern concept of Abrahamic God that "created this world" because Vedas preexisted emergence of such primitive concept and are more realistic in comprehending the nature of Universe or Universes. Vedas by definition are knowledge of reality, with poetic elaborations.

The Vedic sages were not just discrete but realistic and quite wise in not anthropomorphizing Brahman, and for that matter also Purusha, its equivalent, described in Sankhya Darshana.

All that exists, exists in Brahman, which is Consciousness. Devas and Devatas are, therefore, by their nature phenomena of Consciousness.

Since there is no duality in Brahman there is no place for worship,
for all consciousness flows, like rivers flowing into ocean and merging with it, into Brahman. Likewise Purusha is present in all that exists including the individual consciousness.

This UNDIFFERENTIATED REALITY  appears to become differentiated as soon as mass, energy, space (and "time," the function or dimension of space) become manifest. Such differentiated manifestation is eternally and cyclically occurring and the senses perceive these as palpable reality, which is called "Maya," as it is measurable (Maya from the Sanskrit root "mi" to measure). This is also called Prakriti in Sankhya. 

A 180 degrees turn has to occur now in the frame of reference here to, in a manner of speaking, change the gears to view that the senses are themselves conduits for perception of palpable reality and reside in the realm of palpable reality which is springing from the undifferentiated REALITY. Each of the (five) senses have limited range of perception (tanmaatra) of their spectrum of reality for each species. Therefore, in order to perceive the reality beyond their reach or scope, there is a need for extension of senses (like electron microscope, or Hubble telescope, etc., for example.) Nevertheless, with all such extensions human brain may not even completely perceive a fraction of reality that "exists." Human brain may mathematically predict the presence of some aspects of reality that is beyond human perception (e.g. bosons) which may later be verified as to their existence when more acute extensions of senses become available.

Vedas are knowledge about what exists and not what can be imagined and are not limited to only what can be perceived by the senses. Anything that is purely imagined and therefore does not exist is "ASAT."

When it comes to what exists there is an assertion in the Vedas
that there was no time or place when there was any "ASAT" except in the imagination of human beings. 

BRAHMAN IS ALL THAT EXISTS, EVER EXISTED, AND WHICH WILL ETERNALLY EXIST. (Please do not confuse this statement with the time limited existence of this Universe or rather the Universes that can emerge and dissolve over billions and billions of years.) The thesis of no possibility of a state of "ASAT" ever present in the Universes anywhere means something that exists does not come up or spring from "NOTHING." That is the thesis of "Nasadeeya Sookta" in the Vedas. 

So far word "God" is not necessary at all to understand what is 
stated above. "God" was not necessary for the existence of Brahman. Branhman always existed without any God creating IT. That is where the confusion in semantics occurs when scholars equated Brahman with God. Vedas never did use the word God but the word "Isha" was used as an equivalent of Brahman in "Ishavasyopanishada" in Vedanta. Some scholars have mistranslated the word "Isha" as "God or Godhead." Sooner Hindus understand that they have nothing to do with "God" and "Gods" and "Goddesses" described in Western literature and Western and Middle Eastern Religions better off all of the Hindus will be. 

Hindus never needed "God" from the time of Vedas. The word "Deva" was unfortunately mistranslated by some as "God" and it is time to cast it out. Let Hindus stay with Brahman, Purusha, Prakriti, Prana, and their Devas and Devatas and "Devis", of course. Let them not buy any God any more as they have been badly damaged by the Western and Middle Eastern concept of God that is still being widely sold to Hindus to their peril. Let the God salesmen leave Hindus alone, Hindus have no use for "him". Study the nature of what is "God" that is being sold and why "One Godism" is a political ploy to build empires for the two dominating religions of the world, to further dominate over the entire population of the world and control and use all the natural resources for those who sell these "Gods" as God and Allah as "One God", Abrahamic God. Hindus need to stop being gullible and be proud they have the Vedic Agama as their system of spiritual advancement. They do not need any imported "God." 
THERE IS A CONCERTED EFFORT TO SMUGGLE IN ONCE IMMATURELY JEALOUS FOREIGN ABRAHAMIC GOD WHO DECLARED HE WAS "THE ONLY TRUE GOD AND ALL OTHER GODS ARE FALSE" INTO INDIA AS HINDU GOD; HE NOW WANTS TO SAY HE IS THE SAME AS THE GODS OF PAGANS LIKE THOSE OF HINDUS, TAOISTS, CHINESE INCLUDING "KRISHNA"; HE IS AN ASTUTE POLITICIAN INDEED MOTIVATED BY HIS IMPERIALISTIC INSTINCTS NOW WANTING TO CLAIM ALL PAGANS ARE WORSHIPPING HIM and no one else, IF SO, WHY THERE IS A NEED TO PROSELYTIZE? THIS GOD TALKING WITH A FORKED TONGUE WILL NOT BE ABLE ANSWER ALL THESE SIMPLE QUESTIONS, BUT GULLIBLE HINDUS FEEL PRIVILEGED THAT ABRAHAMIC GOD FINALLY RECOGNIZED KRISHNA AS HIMSELF AFTER TORTURING THOUSANDS OF HINDUS AS IN THE GOAN INQUISITION 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goan_Inquisition) TO GIVE UP KRISHNA AND ACCEPT HIM AS THE GOD OF CHRISTIANS REPRESENTED BY JESUS. HINDUS REMAIN GULLIBLE, SEE FOR YOURSELF AT : onegodism.com/index.htm

The invaders of India have done enough damage and it is time that after the 65th Independence Day Hindus realize that they still do not really have independence because the One Godism powers owned India and contaminated it for many centuries and are still at work to own India and weaken the 80% majority Hindus by infiltrating their society physically like termites and corrupting them at intellectual level ("inculturation") which is worse because then Hindus will again go back to "Ishwar Allah Tero Nam-Stupidity," "all religions and all gods are equal/one" kind of stupidity, without using their intellect. Hindus have been so badly abused by these "One Godism" "believers" for several centuries and yet misinterpret it to their own peril. Secularism must not lead to such "STUPIDITY."


(To be continued.)