The Middle Kingdom Wallas

Kabuli,

Even Hinduism does not have a caste system. Your caste is determined by your karma as is said in Gita.

If you found one Brahmin friend of yours to be that repugnant there are 100 others who care nothing for caste.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

kabuliwallah:
Are you aware of any sermon by the Buddha where he condmned the varna sanstha or the Sanatan dharma? And I dont mean innocuous statements like Gandhi and others like him made, but a real attack of the type Ambedkar did.
This is not a rhetorical question but curiousity on my part, and a laziness to go to the orginal sources to satisfy it?

It`s amazing: a civilization is finally branded merely as a kingdom. It tells more about the participants on this board. These ``courtiers`` ``dhar`` (hold tight) fianlly a kursi/guddi and never the real Sri.


It`s hard for the courtiers who convert and seek royal patrinage (la tansen becoming Muslim or even Birbal) to see the world without the dark glasses of re-legion. Yes! these are legions first for subjugation and exploitation of others.


Ambedkar did not live in bhangi colony and lifted others excreta. Ambedkar did not start schools for the downtrodden like Mahatma Phule. Ambedkar did not pray ``Allah Ishwar Tere Naam, Sabko SanMati De Bhgwan.`` Ambedkar did not start SatyaShidhak Samaj for making progressive changes in terms of eradicating social ills such as child marriage, women illieracy and true empowerment of oppressed by strengthening community. He was a great man, but these kabulis with one eye on Gaddi never mention his making and contribution to it by Maharajas of Kolhapur and Baroda. As a 13 year old we knew from which holes these snakes (Jinnah proping Wolpert, Cohen and delusional kabulis) pop up . Ambedkar has great contribution in terms of choosing Buddhism for protest the oppression, a ``Dharma``, a way of life completely rooted in Indian culture and language. This wiseness is his immense contribution. That is why we do not see Dalit Liberation Force in London or DupliCity. He was a great constitutional Stae builder and a great India community builder. His Bramhin Nurse wife is as great as him. What is Bramhinsm? If it is similar to Mullahism then I can understand. Sanatan Dharma is/was never Bramhinism, just as spiritual teachings of Jesus, the Yogi, is never same as catholic christianity. BTW this writer is not upper caste. He did BTech (EE , 1979) in IIT because he studied for JEE with a Saraswat Bramhin (we were not conscious) friend, in a small mofussil town (Marathi medium educationexcept one year of college) in Maharashtra.


Bottom line: Instead of kingdom makers give credit to the community builders.


Kabuli, please see the good side also: BabaSaheb Ambedkar was
a Dalit, a Bramhin nurse married him in 1940. No
fatwa no honor killing. Last CM of
Maharashtra Sushilkumar Shinde was a Dalit. Agian a Bramhin girl married
him when he was mere Constable in Maharashtra Police.
he was an honorable honest policeman and a CM.
Maharshatra had a Muslim CM in seventies and a Dalit
Depputy CM and a Muslim Governor at the same time.


When I was looking for home in White Plains, NY the
realtor was discouraging me to move into the area.
America is beutiful, free and just society than many
societies but it is a uphill task for african
americans, hispanis and even white dispossed (white
trash). Now you check the roster of weekly deads and
maimed in Iraq, disproportioantely you will find this
group. Now please check out enrolement of Yale,
Harward and other Ivys.


Point is: spread any isms and mind broadening thoughts
but do not create legions and destroy local
communities. Help Dalit Rams but his real problems
are not solved by making him Rahman or Raabert,
changing his garb, depriving his language, ancestors
and even lineage to Dnyaneshwar, Gora Kunbhar, Chokha
Mela, Sena Nhavi, Shimpi Namdev, Sheikh Muhammad and
Shirdi Sai Baba (a faqir originally a a Bramhin boy
adopted by a Muslim Faqir). These in last millenium
and befor innumerable ones such as Gorakhnath,
Valmiki, Vyasa, Gargi (a lady sage and mathematician)
and innmerable sages built community called India.
President Kalam is one such community India builder.
Presently President is Muslim, Prime Minister is Sikh,
King Maker is Christian (foreign born) and PMO is a
dalit. Last president was a Dalit. It`s because
India has a Hindu ethos and civilizational foundation.


Since living in west for more than 20 years and
succeding materially immensely I feel the world can be
saved if India and to some extent China rise and lead.
It is going to happen in our life time inspite of
innumerable needle pricks from pakistan on behalf of
its colonial handlers. The reason is ``secular`` force
of technology and India/China will lead in it.
Enlightened leadership of both coutries are aware of
it and are coming close to each other. Immediate
sense gratification culture wont penetrate India/China
as much as it could west or midwest (generally called
semetic arab land). Pakistan (Ambhi) needs to join Porus
(India) and push back the greek marauder, before it
destroys itself.


It`s new millenium. I wish
you peace and health. Peace which makes you
aware the reality as it is and more important
equanimity to face it. For too long the recent
converts spewed fanatism and took pride in foreign
brutes who raped your ancestors. Have sympathy for
those ancestors who got raped or converted to foreign
culture or so called religion for keeping the land
holding or their head intact. Dont hate who saved the
community and gave their lives (Rana Pratap, Shivaji,
number of Sikh Gurus) for keeping their honor and ones
who empowered the people (Guru Nanak, Kabir, Tukaram,
Dnyaneshwar, Chaitanya etc). Till you accept the
bracketed great souls as your ancestors and
acknowledge their contribution in building Community
India, you in Pakistan will not have peace and go on
fighting others wars.

Now, Isph-Vani, (Bani, Bania), in your post 162, you said ``subko sampat de bhagwon`` It`s not Sampat (Dhan of Bania) but SanMati (Sat-Buddhi, trueth seeking mind/intellect). When you have thrown all local good, made distant land sacred, lost your mother`s tongue and go on reciting 7th century book you will become proverbial mad Dhobi Ka Kutta Na Ghar Ka Na Ghat Ka. This kutta can never have the mind which wrote that 7th century or 4th century book. These ``legions`` of mad Kuttas is the bane to the world as community where brotherhood and freedom thrives.


It seems Pakistanis either say - ancestors of their coreligionists in distant Arabic land were great or distant Chinese are great to Indians. No vision for there own future. Visit goodnewsindia.com. Stop being Ambhis and helping the distant Greek.


Please read the thought beyond angwish ranting. Thanks!

re: # 148

How could Buddhism not be a savior of low-castes, when the Buddha and his sangha preached compassion, peace and ahimsa? Wasn`t that what the low-castes needed? By all means, overwhelmingly it was a savior of the low-castes if it enabled them to live with respect and without fear. The canonical works may have been penned by ex-Brahmins. The moment they converted to Buddhism, it meant that they left their Brahmanic past behind and chose to enter the sangha and Buddhist community as equals. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Its like saying Christians were once Jews and so they are in fact Jews or Sikhs were Hindus (Guru Amar Das was a Brahmin) and so they are in fact Hindus. That reasoning does not hold. Once Nagarjuna and other Brahmins accepted Buddha`s teachings (the primary one being of equality of man), they ceased to be Brahmins. Buddha spoke of Brahminhood as a state one attained through good deeds and thoughts, not through birth, like Brahmins claim. The Brahmin version makes Brahminhood exclusive to themselves, with all the privileges it entails. The Buddhist version of Brahminhood is a state of being, open to everyone and does not discriminate. It is just a term denoting a state of being. Caste has no place in Buddhism. There was no bar on the entry of untouchables and lower castes into the sangha. They were freely taught and there was no shame in eating food with them or from them. Tell me, can you say the same of Adi Shankara or other Brahmin reformers/teachers? To this day, in the Balaji temple in Tirupathi, the Brahmins performing the puja cannot be physically touched, lest they become impure. How can your compare a religion like that with Buddhism? or Brahmins with Buddhist monks?

Regarding the assimilation of Buddha as an incarnation of Vishnu, if Hindus really believe that, tell me, how many Hindus do you know worship Buddha? go to a Buddha temple? or know the name of his wife or his son? or the kingdom he was born? or the place he attained nirvana? Do you get my point? It was malicious strategy adopted by Brahmins to assimilate Buddha into their religion. The same is being done today in the case of Sikhs and calling the Gurus as keshadhari Hindus.

I do not mean to nitpick, but I do not think Brahmins and upper castes realize the utter devastation that caste has caused India. If you are a Brahmin, I mean no disrespect. Just recently a Brahmin friend came down to Houston from Michigan for the holidays. I took him home for lunch and we were just chatting. Somehow the discussion veered towards caste (he is very proud of being a ``ucch-koti Brahmin``). He asked my caste. I replied I have no caste as I do not believe in it. ``Tu chamar hai kya?`` was his query with a sarcastic grin. That is the kind of attitude prevalent to this day. If MBA-educated Brahmins have this attitude and most of my Brahmin friends do, I do not think a thousand Adi-Shankaras or Shankaracharyas can reform Brahmanism/Hinduism and it will come nowhere near Buddhism in terms of social upliftment and equality.

Having said all that, I have really enjoyed this discussion with you. Has been a pleasure really.

regards

Kabuli

PS. Chandragupta Maurya converted to Jaina Dharma and ended his life by pulling out his hair and fasting to death. Bindusara, also I believe, converted.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

rsridhar #149 I agree with the rest of your post, but I dont think that the fact that the chinese are reliable or unreliable friends is relevant. What I think is relevant is (as Margaret Thatcher said of Gorbachev) whether or not you can ``do business`` with them. And that I think you can - because whatever else they may be, the chinese are not stupid and can be counted on to keep their strategic interest in view. And I think the Indian policy makers see this too as well - and that is why there have been moves towards greater cooperation between India and China.

Of course, we Pakistanis knew this all along - and even helped the Americans (led by Secretary Kissinger) break the ice with our chinese friends. :-)

re: Indo-Chinese relations
Just because India and Indians are wary of China does not mean they do not try to have a good relationship with China. On the last count, Sino-Indian trade was worth 13 billion dollars and climbing. India and China have been engaged in border talks to resolve all issues and have recently started some strategic dialogue.
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=63099
The point i was trying to make was: be wary of China. This holds true for any country i guess. Pakis would be more wary of Indians than of Chinese, given our history.
Sridhar

Re:tahmed32#154

Agreed. India learnt the lesson of its life time in 1962, not to get swept away by emotions. In fact, since then India has dealt with everyone including the Chinese in a pragmatic way. The only exception is Pakistan with whom we have a love-hate relationship. It is the same way for the Pakistanis as well. We both know our relationship is not based on realpolitik, rather it is an emotional roller coaster.

Our main concern is that during one of the low points on that roller coaster, Pakistan does not get blinded by its emotions and approach China to do something foolish to India, which can backfire on Pakistan as well. I am sure you heard of how Rana Sanga and the Afghan nobles in Lahore approached Babar to help them against Ibrahim Lodhi. Babur agreed and the rest is history!!

tahmed32 #154,
You are right when you say that emotions should never drive diplomacy. I also agree that Pakistan needs to have good relationship with China. But again one must remember that no large country would treat a smaller one as its equal. China would also like to build its relationship similar to the US-Pakistan relationship. The Pakistani leadership seems to accept and understand it, then why does Pakistan expect India to treat it as its equal? Why is India wrong if it wants a strategic control along its border states?

Ofcourse, Indian leaders and VIPs should stop talking nonsence like Ind-Pak are one people etc., understandly Pakistan being the smaller state is unnerved by such statements.

re: # 143 dost-mittar

I agree that Ambedkar`s theory might be one of many...but the fact remains that Buddhism became extinct in the land of its birth, while it flourished and continues to flourish outside India. What made it disappear in India? It cannot be as simplistic as Islamic invasion. It might have been the last straw, but the structure was eroding from much before. This story needs to be told and it is not just restricted to India. What happened to the Buddhist civilizations in Afghanistan, Central Asia? Were they all killed or converted? Someone must have escaped. Where did they go? That would be make for a fascinating story.

I think Ambedkar is paid only lip service in India, that too only during election time. He is treated more or less like the choorah who acted uppity. He deserves a lot better. He is one of the few Indians of his day who had the courage to call a spade a spade. The reason I think he chose Buddhism from all the choices available to him was because it was the only religion that did not have a hierarchy, theoretically or in practicality. I no longer believe in conversion for spiritual reasons, but I think Buddhism is the only religion where conversion is justified, because of the societal implications within Buddhism and without. Buddhist philosophy is not concerned with God or spirituality, but is more about common sense, a heavy dose of which Indians can benefit a lot from.

regards

Kabuli

tahmed32 #154,
You are right when you say that emotions should never drive diplomacy. I also agree that Pakistan needs to have good relationship with China. But again one must remember that no large country would treat a smaller one as its equal. China would also like to build its relationship similar to the US-Pakistan relationship. The Pakistani leadership seems to accept and understand it, then why does Pakistan expect India to treat it as its equal? Why is India wrong if it wants a strategic control along its border states?

Ofcourse, Indian VIPs should stop talking nonsence like Ind-Pak are one people etc., understandly Pakistan being the smaller state is unnerved by such statements.

re: #144 nazarhayatkhan

Apart from the conflict between Buddhism and Brahmanism and conflict it was despite the best efforts of caste apologists, there was also the conflict in more recent times between Gandhi (advocate of the caste-system) and Ambedkar (champion of lower-castes and dalits). This story too needs to be told. Gandhi was hell bent against Dalits converting to another religion and wanted to bring them into the mainstream while clinging on to the caste system. He held Ambedkar under hostage with threats of fasts. Ambedkar could not risk an internal religious civil war at that stage of India`s struggle for independence. Ambedkar did eventually convert to Buddhism along with his followers after independence but unfortunately did not live long enough to bring about a more significant transformation of Indian society. If I get the time in the midst of working full-time and attending graduate school part-time, I will try to tell both stories.

regards

Kabuli

amit #138 I dont subscribe to the theory that one nation is more ``cunning`` than another. In fact, as they say in urdu ``bewaqoof dost say aqalmand dushman behter hai`` (``better to have an intelligent enemy than to have a foolish friend``). Nor do I give much importance to issues of who looks down upon whom - thus whether the chinese or other orienteals look down on south asians or look up to them is not important. These are very subjective things, and vary greatly by individual: I doubt, for example, if there are very many south koreans who could look ``down`` even if they wanted to upon a nephew of mine (since he is 6 foot 4) who is in south korea nowadays. ;-)

While Indians may have felt let down by the chinese attack in 1962 - but this merely proves the irrelevance of emotions in inter-state relations (``hindi-chinee bhai bhai`` may have warmed the hearts of indians on the streets of delhi, but it obviously meant nothing to the at least the chinese policy makers who decided to settle the border problem militarily). The strategic realities are clearly the driving force in international relations. As I wrote in my response to bbabu just now, economc progress is also an aspect of strategic reality, and for this reason it will be in the interest of India and Pakistan to have improved political relations in future as well - and indeed, it would be in the interest of China and India as well. The simple fact is that land is becoming less and less important as a factor of production or as a source of military advantage.

bbabu #137 There is no question that economically progressive countries have a stake in political stability - and for this reason, China and South Korea and Japan are able to put aside the bitternesses of WW II (when Japan was the undeniable aggressor, and an incredibly brutal one). For the same reason, there is every reason to believe that India and Pakistan will proceed along this path as well, since this is part of global trends that are transforming traditional societies the world over and increasing growth rates (at 7% in case of India, and Pakistan is not too far behind at 6%).

As for India and Pakistan being competitors in the economic arena - to the extent there is competition it is healthy competition. And economic cooperation between the Pakistani and Indian private sector is far greater - thus, the outsourcing boom to India has had very positive spillover affects in Pakistan as well. Both countries have an increasing stake in peace in order for the region to attract foreign investors.

wrt Taiwan, they do have a powerful military backed by the US nuclear umbrella - but Pakistan has its own umbrella. :-) The basic point I was making was that while both Chinas (Taiwan/Mainland) agree ironically that there is in fact only one China - the situation in the subcontinent is different, with both India and Pakistan agreed on partition. In a way, the situation is much healthier and stable in case of India and Pakistan, whereas for China the future remains uncertain.

aquaris
//...why am I getting this distinct feeling that the Indians On this board are trying their level best.... to make it a ZERO-SUM Game wiz a Pakistan-China Friendship..?.... ///

Who knows man - who knows why you get such weird ``feeling``? you must be smoking soemthing strong.:)

All we are saying is that Pak-China ``friendship`` is more like a client-master setup. It`s a ``strategic`` relationship which lasted long because of that ``strategic`` consideration. Now that dynamics have changed, this so-called ``friendship`` going to to be strained. Bottomline -don`t take the chinese for granted as your ``steadfast friend of 40 years``.