tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4160064815613449047.post6452569265885118126..comments2024-03-05T12:44:37.415-08:00Comments on Sookta Sumana: WISER THAN MAHATMA GANDHI, RAMDAS LAMB-HAF ADVISORnokidding---http://www.blogger.com/profile/03403515418075019046noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4160064815613449047.post-36139722728729172902011-10-09T03:43:28.425-07:002011-10-09T03:43:28.425-07:00Dear vijaya,
Can u say MK Gandhi was Lord Ram, no...Dear vijaya,<br /><br />Can u say MK Gandhi was Lord Ram, no, but he helped the community by large in his own ways.<br />So similarily DR. lamb is doing his part has he understand. you believe or not untouchability is still an harsh truth of hindu india.even this low caste who get converted in other religion, the jati still exists...<br />also u are contradicting his view saying hes not born hindu, so does that mean those born hindus will understand the subject more???A C Randeriahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17036062298518510342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4160064815613449047.post-27700477834449993572011-03-03T22:35:10.292-08:002011-03-03T22:35:10.292-08:00Dear Chitra Raman:
Your comments on both the nega...Dear Chitra Raman:<br /><br />Your comments on both the negative and the positive aspects of the HAF Report were useful.<br /><br />In my opinion, the achilles heel of the Report is the absence of a clearly worked out statement on Varna and Jati which would explain the historical success of India's prosperity and fame in the ancient and medieval worlds, until the two Occupations (Islamic and British).<br /><br />Secondly, both Varna and Jati have no connection with Untouchability. It used to be that Western scholars (and following them Indian scholars also) thought of Varna as the beginning of rigid stratification. That <br />approach no longer exists except among some fundamentalist thinkers who want to use that stick with which to beat Hinduism.<br /><br />Jati has not yet been fully explored. As I say in my article Jati was the basis of ancient and medieval India's enormous success. It was the framework to structure the society. And <br />there was mobility within the system. Neither Varna nor Jati have anything to do with the <br />oppression of the Untouchables.<br /><br />The Report by not addressing these questions has weakened their (HAF's) defence of Hindu India. My guess is that they (HAF) were influenced in this direction both by Dr.Lamb's lack of understanding of the Hindu ethos and by Navya Shastra's extremism; also HAF Report was not based on a proper understanding of Indian history.<br /><br />It is still a mystery why a supposedly Reform group like Navya Shastra would have an anti- Indian associate like Pathmarajah <br />Nagalingam. In his case his malafide intentions are crystal clear.<br /><br />HAF has probably publicly distanced itself from such undesirable elements as surmised by you but it has not been that widely publicised. Most critics do not think that HAF has done that. Yet, I do hope that in their revised version of the HAF Report they will make an effort to refocus their work on the importance of Varna and Jati to Hindu society in its economic functioning. The work on the CONTEMPORARY significance of Jati in the <br />Indian economy has been amply elucidated by people like S.Gurumurthy.<br /><br />I can cite one easily accessible article by him which was published in The Hindu:<br /><br />"Is caste an economic development vehicle?" S.Gurumurthy, The Hindu, Jan.19,2009.<br /><br />http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/01/19/stories/2009011955440900.htm<br /><br />Dr. Vijaya Rajivanokidding---https://www.blogger.com/profile/03403515418075019046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4160064815613449047.post-74138455356799704242011-03-02T08:04:18.785-08:002011-03-02T08:04:18.785-08:00PART TWO ( continued from Part one )
I am aware ...PART TWO ( continued from Part one ) <br /><br />I am aware that NavyaShastra’s worldview has permeated this report and their members are acknowledged as partners and contributors to it. But let me remind all that it is the SUBSTANCE of the report that is being debated. And that substance has been thoroughly examined and critiqued. So now, unless HAF officially announces a merger with NavyaShastra, why should NavyaShastra’s baggage be used to punish HAF? <br /><br />NavyaShastra is a sovereign group with a clearly articulated mission and agenda distinct from HAF. When HAF makes it clear that they had no knowledge of inflammatory statements made by a member of NS, there the matter should end. If the NS member in question is absorbed by HAF in some capacity, then we should worry. Otherwise, it is a non-issue. <br /><br />It is one thing to warn of the consequences of certain actions and judgment calls. It is quite another to work up a frenzy of conjecture as to what caused those actions, generating a tsunami of reactive speculation that subsumes reality. <br /><br />I appeal to all concerned to strive for more objectivity and graciousness. In construing HAF's current silence on the matter as hostility, some of HAF's detractors come across as both vocally and destructively hostile. You cannot challenge HAF to heal the original schism while opening up fresh rifts! <br /><br />HAF also was criticized for its “hubris” in not consulting with older and more experienced members of the community before going public with the report. What about HAF’s critics? Have some of them not displayed a Rambo-esque lack of anger management and proportionality? Who among us can honestly say that our egos have no bearing on our actions? <br /><br />I appreciate Dr. Vijaya for signing her name to her personal views on Dr. Ramdas Lamb. I would respectfully urge "nokidding" to shed the anonymity, pick up the phone and have a direct, civil conversation with Dr. Lamb. That is what I would do if I were genuinely interested in answers, rather than fuelling the feeding frenzy. <br /><br />Chitra RamanChitrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04298805997996531230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4160064815613449047.post-55800712703478269972011-03-02T07:58:57.230-08:002011-03-02T07:58:57.230-08:00PART ONE
Dear Friends,
The critiques have been ...PART ONE<br /><br />Dear Friends, <br /><br />The critiques have been published, the dueling emails have coursed the web like live magnesium wires, and the readers of the readers of the report have weighed in. <br /><br />We are in agreement that the report in its original form was unacceptable; that it harbored serious contradictions in its content – in that on the one hand it emphatically denied that Hinduism condoned caste and on the other, called for "rejection" of certain texts; that it presented a catalogue of horrors perpetrated on "lower" castes while failing to correspondingly highlight equally specific instances of actual progress in India’s social uplift that the west is clueless about; and that overall, it communicated more as work of self-flagellating expiation than as a blueprint for positive change. <br /><br />I share my perspectives here as someone who has both criticized the report AND acknowledged in all fairness portions of it that are laudable in their clarity and substance. <br /><br />Among its positive qualities: The report lucidly describes caste dynamics as a political rather than a religious phenomenon. It also addresses and dismisses another popular perception in the west -- namely, that the oppressor class is exclusively "brahmin." It incorporates well-chosen quotations from Hindu texts that promote a mindset of insight-based mutual tolerance equal to, if not unparalleled by any other faith tradition. <br /><br />To prevent a forest fire from advancing, firefighters set off small controlled fires to clear swathes of vegetation that might feed the blaze's carnivorous advance. When the fire is in your own home however, you would not expect firefighters to respond by setting off fires in different corners of your house. Nor would you expect them to call a wrecking crew to demolish the home in order to contain the fire. No, you would expect them in that situation to PRESERVE lives and CONTAIN the damage. <br /><br />HAF has made a gesture towards CONTAINING the damage by taking their report offline. We, the critics of the report, should contribute to the PRESERVATION angle by not engaging in personality-assassination. <br /><br />Why not just wait for the revised version? It is not just an imperfect report that can hurt the Hindu image and cause, you know. The relentless public skewering of those involved in the report, the insulting presumptions of an ulterior agenda, the reckless disregard for the feelings of HAF office-bearers who have a history of shared activism that predates this report – what does this achieve, other than to exacerbate an already polarized climate? <br /><br />( to be continued)Chitrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04298805997996531230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4160064815613449047.post-28709368281390683402011-02-28T22:16:12.529-08:002011-02-28T22:16:12.529-08:00What other entities is Ramdas Lamb an advisor to? ...What other entities is Ramdas Lamb an advisor to? Is he an advisor to RISA? Is he an advisor to US congress or Congressional Commission on Human Rights? Is he an advisor to UN? Is he an advisor to Navya Shastra? How did he do his root-cause analysis of the injustice suffered by the Harijans to come with his answer? He started his career studying Indian society in 1969. Did it take him 31 years to make this unique discovery to sell it to HAF and Navya Shastra or may be five years earlier when the secret deliberations on writing the HAF report started? Is he also a politician? Who is financing his trips to India for thirty one years? Is he going to discuss now withdrawn HAF report with members of RISA? For what purpose? Why is RISA not inviting Indian and Hindu American scholars of Hinduism if Ramdas Lamb is to discuss HAF report in RISA?nokidding---https://www.blogger.com/profile/03403515418075019046noreply@blogger.com