RE: The Hoax Called Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam ï¿½ I

September 5, 2008

Respected Bharat Gupt Ji,

I can do nothing better than forward to the list the below response from Dr. Koenraad Elst.

Having done that, as the luminaries like Dr. Elst and yourself speak, I am now inclined to follow the recommendation of bhartR^ihari for the likes of myself, which is to sit back silently when the learned are talking. ("Brahma has handed to idiots such valuable art called silence, by which they can attend a sabhA of learned and still hide their stupidity" -- nItishataka)

I thank Dr. Elst for taking time for pitching in.

I also assure you I am not from the ranks of John Dayal and Zakir Nayak, although that would not have taken away the merit of the subject raised.

sAdar namaste,Sarvesh Tiwari

PS: Dr. Elst does not seem to be a member of this list, but I shall forward to him if there is a response from you.

From: koenraad.elstDate: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 19:39:11 +0000 Re: The Hoax Called Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam ï¿½ I

, "kishore patnaik" <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:>> [i am posting the reply by Bharat gupta who has done imporatnt research in> Indian theatre.]In front of an authority like Prof. Bharat Gupt, I hesitate to dissent. Then again, dissent comes easily to me. So here goes.> > > Shri Sarvesh K Tiwari on August 30, 2008 in the posting on> Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, has taken an entirely erroneous> road about interpreting the text/ shloka.> I haven't noticed any obvious errors, and neither does Prof. Gup point out an error. Instead, he points to an omission or oversight:> I wonder why he overlooks the fact that Pancatantra is a> niti text, that is instruction in worldly wisdom for administrators> by saama, daana, danda and bheda.> Exactly. Both Pancatantra and Hitopadesha are full of stories counseling against trusting strangers. Thus, even in a situation where the scorpion is totally dependent on the frog for his own survival (sitting on his back in mid-stream), he nonetheless stings him, thus causing the death of both,-- because unlike frogs, and disregarding any calculation of the consequences, scorpions have it in themselves to sting and kill. The listeners are taught to shun strangers and develop ways to outwit them, like the monkey escaping from the crocodile by telling him his heart is not in his chest but hanging in his home tree where he has to go get it. The worldly wisdom taught to the lazy princes in these fables is very largely the opposite of trust in everyone as if he were a brother and part of the universal family.> It is not going to display high ideals of conduct> for their own sake and hence it will> be using all the subhaashitas, the good sayings, to support practicality> and caution. But does that mean that any high ideal mentioned> in the niti text is to be seen as irrelevant and ineffectual.> If the cunning jackal can use Vasudhaiva Kutumbakan to fool his prospective victim in a manner credible to the story's audience, it is because the phrase enjoyed a certain authority already. Clearly there must be some truth in it, or so te fable's author acknowledges. But he also, and primarily, teaches the limits of this vision.> There are so many sayings, preceeded by the expression,> "uktam ca" in sanskrit texts which have> an important status are found in not one but several texts.> There authors or sources are known not.> They are used according to the need of various texts but> they do not loose their instrinsic worth.> They all dont have to be from Smritis or the most famous> of texts in order to be authentic.>Unlike many scripture-worshipping Hindus, i don't particularly care whether the fable has the status of smrti or shruti or itihasa or kavya or any other. But the Hindu babas who intone VK tend to make those distinctions and to pretend or (usually) to believe that the phrase VK does have scriptural authority. > It is perverse to say that vasudhaiva kutumbakam should be> interpreted as an injunction of ironical intention, that is,> let us be cautious and not be gullible enough to think that the> whole world is one family, as it is full of kapatiis, kutilas> and dhuurtas.<Let us indeed be cautious, for there are indeed scoundrels out there scheming to abuse our trust.> Just because scoundrels exist, there is> no need to believe in the earth family. Just because there are> charalatans, so let not believe in Gurus, or no more in Vedas because> they were monopolized by some casteists brahmins at certain times.>That's not the same thing. One point that is entirely part of the fables' lesson in distrust is the need to discriminate between friend and enemy. Transposed to scriptures and gurus, this means the need to discriminate between trustworthy and false authority.> To call this ideal a hoax is to dismantle a good and sensible vision> that the world needs today and Hinduism can claim it as an orginal> idea.> It is one truth, yes, but its opposite is also true, viz. the need to be wary and cautious.> I am wondering if Sarvesh is not going to be quoted by Zakir Nayak> and John Dayal soon to show the 'real meaning' of Hindu texts.> Or is he one of them?> It is indeed possible that those snakes will use Sarvesh's findings. But then not Sarvesh is to blame but those silly babas who used this phrase without checking its total meaning, those who extolled it into the creed or shahada of Hinduism whereas it is only a double-edged witticism, those who failed to see the utter banality of its superficial meaning in an era when universalism is professed by Christians, liberals and socialists.> Mr. Ronald Bhola please circulate my comments on other lists in defence> of Vasudhaiva kutumabkam.> Idem.svasti,KE Hottest news and in-depth analysis that goes beyond the headlines. Only on MSN News Check it out!