Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
suryaz

British in India: religion and socio-politics

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by jndas:

Jai Hind! Posted Image

 

 

Hind: a female deer

 

Yes !

All glories to the Golden Hind

of Dear India !

See how she ranges across Her land

Crossing pathetic man-made borders drawn

in the sand .....

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jndas:

Just to make this discussion even more meaningless, I would like to know whether the India we are discussing includes Pak Occupied Kashmir. Because if it doesn't I won't take part in the discussions. Jai Hind! Posted Image

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 11-19-2001).]

 

Don't know about Kashmir. One of us will have to look that bit up - Humm just to get things right

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gauracandra:

Where is India?

 

Are we talking about the pre-1947 India ruled by the British? Or the post-1947 India? Does it include Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Pakistan? or maybe it is the 13th century India of hindu kingdoms? or the India based on the Act of 1858? or maybe the india of 5000 BC? Or maybe there is no India, but only the land of Bharata?

 

India, India where are you?

No there is no "India" as such pre 1947. There was the land mass but it was not technically call “India” although it was in short often referred to as India. What we call India today, that was part of a bunch of British colonies on the Indian or Asian - sub-continent for a while. Before that it was a landmass of separate Hindu kingdoms until the Muslims came

 

Yes you are right Gaurachandra,

 

- in the Bhagavat it is referred to a Bharat-vas

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jndas:

If you would read Srila Prabhupada's Bhagavatam commentaries, he makes it clear how the westerners are descendents or Aryans. They are descendents of kings who fled from India.

 

Srila Prabhupada does not accept the Aryan invasion theory, and none of our ancient texts speak of such a thing.

So Jndas is it your premise that the landmass that is today called "India" originally belonged to the whites, Ooops - the Aryans?

If so what of the Dravidians? How, why and when did they arrive in “India”?

 

But remember:

 

“…Padma Puraa.na points to a southern origin for bhakti, and provides a clue to the geographical location of some Puraa.nic traditions as well” (Demmitt & van Buitenen 1978:11).

“ ‘Bhakti was born in Draavidha, grew up in Kar.naataka, became worn out in MaharaaS.tra and Gurjera, sought refuge with her two sons Knowledge and Dispassion in Vrindavana, and regained her vigor there… Enough of vows, sacred fords, disciples, sacrifices, discourse about knowledge, faith alone bestows release!(Padma 6.189.51; 190.22)’” (Demmitt & van Buitenen 1978:11).

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 11-19-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely no way can Kashmir be part of India. If it is, the Pakistanis won't support the U.S. in getting Osama Bin Laden out of Afganisthan Posted Image

 

Actually I'm thinking the United States is actually India... there were so many Indians living here until Christopher Columbus showed up.... Hey maybe ole Chris Columbus was the Aryan Invasion... the spaniards and such.... Stop the presses, I've now figured it all out Posted Image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by suryaz:

No there is no "India" as such pre 1947. There was the land mass but it was not technically call “India” although it was in short often referred to as India. What we call India today, that was part of a bunch of British colonies on the Indian or Asian - sub-continent for a while. Before that it was a landmass of separate Hindu kingdoms until the Muslims came

 

A bit like the land mass of Europe ?

A land mass with a mass of peoples and traditions no doubt ?

Ever heard of "European Culture",

"European History" etc ?

When did Europe become <u>A</u> country ?

Does it have to be a country to exist ?

Huh ?

 

You just don't get it, do you ?

Ah well .....

 

BTW, you didn't mention the <u>Portuguese</u>

and

the <u>French</u> colonies in India.

Probably, too much of a big picture issue.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Jndas is it your premise that the landmass that is today called "India" originally belonged to the whites, Ooops - the Aryans?

You are a confused person. Please read through this thread again.

 

Just because some western races have decended from fallen Aryan kings does not mean "Aryan" refers solely to the whites.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 11-19-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gauracandra:

Absolutely no way can Kashmir be part of India. If it is, the Pakistanis won't support the U.S. in getting Osama Bin Laden out of Afganisthan Posted Image

 

Actually I'm thinking the United States is actually India... there were so many Indians living here until Christopher Columbus showed up.... Hey maybe ole Chris Columbus was the Aryan Invasion... the spaniards and such.... Stop the presses, I've now figured it all out Posted Image

Europeans called all brown skinned peoples Indians. The term did not identify a nationality. In fact when the word Indians was first used this way, the French revolution had not happened and nationalism did not exist. As such South American as with North American natives were described as Indian. Australian Aboriginals etc. etc. were initially described as Indians.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 11-19-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the use of the term "Aryan"

on this thread appears to revolve

around a 19th century usage of it to denote

a racial or genetic grouping and such usage culminated

in the unfortunate turn the term had under Nazism.

The modern usage of the term is to denote

those <u>languages of Indo-European origin</u>

ie. from Sanskrit, Ancient Persian,

Ancient Greek, Latin, Old German etc

 

Please see a good dictionary.

See also a MODERN anthropology text book

of your choosing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jndas:

According to Srila Prabhupada, the world "Arya" refers to those who followed the Vedic teachings. By comparing them against Dravidians you are comparing apples and oranges. Dravidians who followed the Vedic culture were also Aryans.

Yes.

And this usage of "Arya[n]" is

consistent with the Sanskritic usage

which, again, is not a racial based usage.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jndas:

According to Srila Prabhupada, the world "Arya" refers to those who followed the Vedic teachings. By comparing them against Dravidians you are comparing apples and oranges. Dravidians who followed the Vedic culture were also Aryans.

According to Prabhupada whites are Aryans. I was sitting no more than 2 metres away from him when he said it.

 

According to Bhaktivinoda “the Aryans first entered India from the North West and subjugated the indigenous tribes around 4463 B.C. ..." (Shukavac).

 

So what of the Dravidians? What of the following Padma Puranic view

 

“…Padma Puraa.na points to a southern origin for bhakti, and provides a clue to the geographical location of some Puraa.nic traditions as well” (Demmitt & van Buitenen 1978:11).

“ ‘Bhakti was born in Draavidha, grew up in Kar.naataka, became worn out in MaharaaS.tra and Gurjera, sought refuge with her two sons Knowledge and Dispassion in Vrindavana, and regained her vigor there… Enough of vows, sacred fords, disciples, sacrifices, discourse about knowledge, faith alone bestows release!(Padma 6.189.51; 190.22)’” (Demmitt & van Buitenen 1978:11).

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 11-19-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please look closer at the teachings of Srila Prabhupada in this regard. I am not saying Prabhupada did not say westerners were descendents of Aryans. The problem is Prabhupada's definition differs from the definition you choose to accept. (Refer his Gita commentary to chapter 2, text 2("The word Aryan is applicable to persons who know the value of life and have a civilization based on spiritual realization.")

 

You are taking the indologist's definition of Aryan (which refers to a race), and then trying to put it in the mouth of Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why did she steal all the jewels from the temples in India for her "crown jewels"? Even today they refuse to return them. Of course, seeing the indian government I don't think it would be a very good idea anyway. Originally posted by jndas:Then why did she steal all the jewels from the temples in India for her "crown jewels"? Even today they refuse to return them. Of course, seeing the indian government I don't think it would be a very good idea anyway.

What "crown jewels" is inferenced here? If they were stolen they need to be stolen back and installed back when they are from.

 

Regards.

#&$#(&*(CaitChan)#E$&*#

 

[This message has been edited by Caitanyachandra (edited 11-19-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jndas:

Bhaktivinoda Thakur wrote several books targeted specifically at the british educated Indian, in which he makes statements which contradict traditional teachings. For example he says that the Srimad Bhagavatam was written 1,000 years ago by a brahmana in South India (i.e. it was never authored by Vyasa), that Krishna, Shiva and other Devas where nothing but tribal kings of the past, that there is no such thing as hellish planets, that the Aryan's invaded india, etc. His purpose was to not waste time debating what the British Indologists had implanted in the minds of the educated Indians, but to just bring them to the point of devotion by speaking a language they understood.

Jndas, what makes you so sure Bhaktivinoda's aim was this?

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 11-20-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Janus:

"What is PBS?"

 

Ah, that is better. Submissive and relevant inquiry.

 

 

Janus

 

What makes you believe "relevant inquiry" is "better" when a "submissive" component is present?

 

What is wrong with impartial, reasonable, unbiased and/or objective relevant inquiry?

 

Why promote as “better” a behaviour that when promoted functions to, and/or leaves room for the dis-empowerment of another.

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 11-20-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jndas:

 

You are taking the indologist's definition of Aryan (which refers to a race), and then trying to put it in the mouth of Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Yes you are right Jndas - Prabhupada makes reference to both "Aryan-family" members (eg fair skinned people) and those who become Aryan by cultural conditioning.

 

It is also interesting to note what he mentions about other races as well – all of whom can become “first-class” cultural members “with the proper training” even if they do not have the shastricly defined “skin” colour (eg brahamanas). The examples are as follows:

 

 

TEXT

 

kaka-krsno 'tihrasvango

hrasva-bahur maha-hanuh

hrasva-pan nimna-nasagro

raktaksas tamra-murdhajah

 

TRANSLATION

 

This person born from King Vena's thighs was named Bahuka, and his complexion was as black as a crow's. All the limbs of his body were very short, his arms and legs were short, and his jaws were large. His nose was flat, his eyes were reddish, and his hair copper-colored.

 

TEXT 45

 

TEXT

 

tam tu te 'vanatam dinam

kim karomiti vadinam

nisidety abruvams tata

sa nisadas tato 'bhavat

 

TRANSLATION

 

He was very submissive and meek, and immediately after his birth he bowed down and inquired, "Sirs, what shall I do?" The great sages replied, "Please sit down [nisida]." Thus Nisada, the father of the Naisada race, was born.

 

PURPORT

 

It is said in the sastras that the head of the body represents the brahmanas, the arms represent the ksatriyas, the abdomen represents the vaisyas, and the legs, beginning with the thighs, represent the sudras. The sudras are sometimes called black, or krsna. The brahmanas are called sukla, or white, and the ksatriyas and the vaisyas are a mixture of black and white. However, those who are extraordinarily white are said to have skin produced out of white leprosy. It may be concluded that white or a golden hue is the color of the higher caste, and black is the complexion of the sudras.

 

TEXT 46

 

TEXT

 

tasya vamsyas tu naisada

giri-kanana-gocarah

yenaharaj jayamano

vena-kalmasam ulbanam

 

TRANSLATION

 

After his [Nisada's] birth, he immediately took charge of all the resultant actions of King Vena's sinful activities. As such, this Naisada class are always engaged in sinful activities like stealing, plundering and hunting. Consequently they are only allowed to live in the hills and forests.

 

PURPORT

 

The Naisadas are not allowed to live in cities and towns because they are sinful by nature. As such, their bodies are very ugly, and their occupations are also sinful. We should, however, know that even these sinful men (who are sometimes called Kiratas) can be delivered from their sinful condition to the topmost Vaisnava platform by the mercy of a pure devotee. Engagement in the transcendental loving devotional service of the Lord can make anyone, however sinful he may be, fit to return home, back to Godhead. One has only to become free from all contamination by the process of devotional service. In this way everyone can become fit to return home, back to Godhead. This is confirmed by the Lord Himself in Bhagavad-gita (9.32):

 

mam hi partha vyapasritya

ye 'pi syuh papa-yonayah

striyo vaisyas tatha sudras

te 'pi yanti param gatim

 

"O son of Prtha, those who take shelter of Me, though they be of lower birth--women, vaisyas [merchants], as well as sudras [workers]--can approach the supreme destination."

Thus end the Bhaktivedanta purports of the Fourth Canto, Fourteenth Chapter, of the Srimad-Bhagavatam, entitled "The Story of King Vena."

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by talasiga:

 

Try:

"A History of India"

Herman Kulke & Dietmar Rothermund

ISBN 0-415-04799-4

(edited 11-19-2001).]

Thanks, Talasiga

 

 

Yes it is true, the "big picture" is important in the history of religious traditions

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 11-20-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Talasigaji: BTW, you didn't mention the Portuguese

and the French colonies in India.

Probably, too much of a big picture issue.

 

Satyaraj: Actually it is not easy to deal with Islam. People from Iberian (like Portuguese, Spanish and Latin Americans) heritage who had a deep contact with the Moors invasions for more than 8 centuries can understand that point a little better than other Europeans and their descendents who had never faced any relationship with Islam.

 

Can one imagine the fear caused by Vasco da Gama’s letter to Dom Manoel informing the king that at a short distance of land in the Indian Malabar coast like between Calicut and Cochim, one could find more Moors than in the whole African coast between Alexandria and Ceuta?

 

At that time Portugal and Spain were the richer and powerful countries of West, and were only beginning the discovery and trade expeditions around the world. Colonialism was the only solution they could imagine at that time to avoid Moor’s revenge. They would never expect to find Moors all over the world as they had done.

 

The Moor’s revenge actually has came. The Sultan from Cairo and his Islamic friends had declared a jihad against Portuguese and a powerful Armada was sent from the Red Sea to the Malabar. Dom Francisco de Almeida who was the Portuguese Almirante at that time had defeated the Armada, but the Moors took shelter at Goan shore and were trying to have another revenge.

 

The Portuguese had defeated the Moors at Goa and had established a colony, trying to avoid Moors advance. Some Hindu Kingdoms at Malabar also had helped the Portuguese against the Moors.

 

There were only a few soldiers and traders from Portugal traveling to India every year. Never more than a few thousands. No women and children to develop a colony. The Portuguese had married some Indian ladies and a mixed generation of Portuguese/Indian people were the main inhabitants of Goa until the Indian invasion in 1961.

 

These people considered themselves as Christians, actually as a rampart of Christianity against Moors. After the Indian invasion of Goa, many of them (specially the richer and learned) had transferred themselves to Portugal and Brasil.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by suryaz:

What makes you believe "relevant inquiry" is "better" when a "submissive" component is present?

 

What is wrong with impartial, reasonable, unbiased and/or objective relevant inquiry?

 

Why promote as “better” a behaviour that when promoted functions to, and/or leaves room for the dis-empowerment of another.

 

 

This is very well put Suryaz.

 

However one may note that some SUBMIT

to invite greater powers .....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by suryaz:

Yes it is true, the "big picture" is important in the history of religious traditions

 

 

Yes, and

sometimes one has to close one eye

and squint the other to see the big picture through a telescope .....

 

 

.

.

.

 

 

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by suryaz:

Talasiga, Janus and all

 

in correlation to the above

 

this "Study of Evidence in Christianity (Powell 1860) is so cool –

 

http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/1860-essays-reviews/scanned-images/096.jpg

Are we missing each other ?

 

I cannot see a correlate -

just some VERBOSE consonance.

 

Brava Europa !

Jai Hind !

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...