Apropos the plight of M/s Husain, Nasrin and Rushdie, the BJP strategist cum columnist Swapan Dasgupta offers this comment in today’s Telegraph:
“60 years of a democratic Constitution should have witnessed a steady expansion in the lakshman rekha of tolerance, and more so because the Hindu ethos is inherently accommodating and non-doctrinaire…. The opening up of the economy and the rise in prosperity did help shift the focus from the overweening preoccupation with sectarian concerns but there was no automatic drift to a more open society.
“In the past decade, the threshold of tolerance in India has been lowered considerably — thanks in no small degree to the takeover of the internet by competitive extremists. ‘Sensitivity to faith’ has come to mean accommodation of organized blackmail.
“The successful anti-Husain and anti-Taslima protests have to be seen in the context of a progressive shrinking of the enlightened public space. India imagined it would be a world player on the strength of its ‘soft power’. Today, that power is being steadily undermined by the clash of rival ghettos. The nonsense has gone on far too long and has touched dangerous heights. It’s time the country extends democratic rights to those who offend fragile sensitivities.”
Read the full article: Sensitive blackmail
Also read: ‘The lone ranger of loony Hindutva’ versus…?
Don’t laugh. Do journalists make good politicians?
For the BJP, is the pen mightier than the trishul?
Hello Mr. Swapan Dasgupta, you great intellectual, kindly explain what is the meaning of tolerance and what are democratic rights. in our country. Also, very kindly explain who in our country should be tolerant and who should not be and to whom the democractic rights apply and to whom do not. As far as I understand, democractic rights do not mean that one can dance nakedly in the middle of the road, take a mike and abuse anybody, go on insult ing others (mind it, I am not talking about any particular caste, religion, region or language). Tolerance does not mean, in spite of all these nonsense, nobody (whether a group of people or authorities) should question him or her, leave alone taking appropriate action against such person (except shameless hypocrites, who are supposed to be intellectuals lacking in intelligence and common sense).
The problem with India is that we have a mob culture. The moment someone says or does something, a crowd takes to the streets, burns stuff and beat people up. Our enforcement machinery is so bad that everyone knows you can gang up, destroy property beat up or kill people and get away with it.
If one needs to protest against an article on Burkha, or a painting by M.F. Hussain or people celebrating Valentine’s day there is a civilized way of doing it. But civic sense, respecting other people’s right to express their views and respecting the laws of the land are all unknown to us. Whoever can take a mob with him and throw stones at people can hold anybody for ransom in this country. People in this country, trouble makers in particular, need a strong message from both the society and the government that blackmailing doesn’t work and acts of violence will attract swift action. They deserve a kick on their backsides, not democracy.
i love swapan’s artful phrase, “clash of rival ghettos.” :P
but india’s “enlightened public space,” evolved over thousands of liberal years, is too deeply rooted to be felled by a gale of the ghettos. anyone who has read swami vivekananda, pandit nehru, or deen dayal upadhyay appreciates that.
Bongali writeups rarely make sense in karnataka.
This whole issue of India, Indians should first be shattered.
one guy cries foul over something in some state and another submits a perfectly opposite argument to it in some other part. result – nothing.
There is a strong silence in BJP now a days. Some conspiracy is going on still in inner circles across party lines. May be Manmohan’s money has swept BJP.
This article with a liberal tone proves it.
For all Congies who believe in transparency, right wing, open markets , shares, and all virtues of money take this –
PM wants to change RTI – CJI out of purview and no frivolous queries.
It’s time that everything anyone asks will become frivolous.
PM defends price rise.
Seems like after Saudi visit he is growing in confidence for an all time disaster. Every Cong in second term has had brought great disasters.
You are of course correct that vulgar nudity in public spaces in generally not permitted in our society (though even that may be questioned given nude protests such as “Breasts not Bombs” – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_and_protest).
However, to create an equivalence between rational discourse questioning the existence of Allah or Ram, the truth of holy books, and display of public nudity for no particular reason is rather simplistic and, lets face it, an inappropriate analogy. The bedrock of human intelligence and progress lies on uncovering truth, be it through art, literature or science. As such, it is generally understood that freedom of expression is vital in this regard. Whereas provocative vulgar nudity without reason (protests do NOT fall in this category) do not really promote enhanced understanding, art and literature do.
If art and literature offends you, may I suggest that it is rather *your* closed minded mentality that creates this. Furthermore, I suggest that you learn to deal with critiques of religion in all its forms, because, lets face it, you seem to believe in the supernatural and that, frankly, you need to be woken from your intellectual slumber.
Yes the tolerance level has gone down,
This has primarily because the apparently intolerant have got a place (in form of Web) to vent their thinking.
But why does he think that an increase in prosperity imply opening up of society. Isn’t right-conservatism(read GOD-friendly ideologies and parties) meant to be pro-business.
“the Hindu ethos is inherently accommodating and non-doctrinaire…. ”
Yeah, only after Christianity and Islam broke the back of the caste system and the inherent racist system which it was based on.
Otherwise hinduism was accommodating if you belonged to the right caste and had it good. To an extent this is the ‘ethos’ even today. We havent found anything better to replace it with yet.
WTF is this guy trying to say? The anti-anything protests have been a mark of Indian public life since anyone can remember. And before that is all a hoary past which no one can agree on, since we had a knack for turning facts into legends and twist real events to their own advantage. Before the history of India before the Mughals was established in a factual manner only after the British started digging it up and studying it in their cold-eyed manner.
the problem is that religion has been reduced to a collection of certainties with no scope for doubt or questioning. it has become a set of rules to follow. rather than a search for spirituality. then in addition to it there are personalities associated with religion who are above scrutiny.
this is now increasingly true of even of indian religions.
the problem of understanding the nature of existence and whether to place its origins to a point source or a diffused source is an old one and has by no means been completely solved. india used to be a fertile land for the study of these types of questions which produced many seminal contributions containing a diverse set of profound and well developed theories, many of which have relevance to this day. indeed many of the methods used in tackling the spiritual problem now find use in scientific study. again many of these methods indians made seminal contributions.
however as result of the current trend, india is in the danger of becoming a desert of dogmas and obscurantistism.
Hindu religion for whatever reason is trying to emulate the cults from sandland, which is very unfortunate. Everything has to conform the Semitic standards. Given the fact that sanathana dharma is more complex to comprehend, it becomes all the more easier to understand if it is reduced to one book, one profit, paradigm.
>>And before that is all a hoary past which no one can agree on, since we had a knack for turning facts into legends and twist real events to their own advantage. Before the history of India before the Mughals was established in a factual manner only after the British started digging it up and studying it in their cold-eyed manner.>>
Really…you mean like Max Muller, of the famed Aryan Invasion Theory fame ;)
No kavitha, I meant people like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Prinsep without whom you and I would know little about King Ashoka, or even how to read the Brahmi script.
Or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hubert_Marshall who excavated Taxila and laid the foundation for archaelogy in India.
Or even the men who re-discovered harappa and mohenjodaro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization.
At least their theories have some proof to back it up – unlike empty words that you have to offer in terms of your Sanathana Dharma and its theoretical beauty.
BTW Max Mueller was a scholar of the school of thought know as romanticism. And he was not British, though he moved to England after some time.
An interesting incident of Max Mueller was that he didn’t want to visit Varanasi or the holy cities he felt so much for. When asked why, he said that the realities of the day would shatter all that he held dear about the city in his head.
Talk of past glories and an past which you have to relate to only through fairy tales.
BTW why is the sanathana dharma is so complex to comprehend? Do you comprehend it?
semitic way is the most profitable… monopoly is the best way to do any business. Our indian religious businessmen are learning it only now/ trying to protect their established business and hence the reduction in tolerance.
>> Yeah, only after Christianity and Islam broke the back of the caste system and the inherent racist system which it was based on >>
Yeah right. Christians and islam followers are equally as racist as us. just ask the brother or paki living in Arabia.
Stupid and ignorant people will always be taken advantage of irrespective of the religion. You control the g-man and/or money and you control the stupid :)
Dasaguptaspeak: “India imagined it would be a world player on the strength of its ‘soft power’. ”
Are we a godnation among nations!!!!!
Soft powers ability to attract followers was tested in 1960 before Indo China war and proved beyond doubt that this was all hogwash. “Soft power” status on India was conferred by western nations only to pit India against China.
India fought an useless war with China and soured its relations with her neighbor because of this soft power illusion. I recommend reading Neville Maxwell’s book on Indo China war to understand how Nehru was taken for a ride by British copybook tactics. The rightwingers in India came up with soft power theory in sixties. Is Dasgupta still smoking weed from sixties!!!
C, what I mean is the lectures, admonitions, sermons about the need to be tolerant are aimed only at Hindus. Again, the democratic rights are not applicable to Hindus. This is the simple bitter truth in our country. If one says yes, there is no harm in holding such views and it is correct, then there is no point in debating over any issue. Nobody says mob culture is correct. But one should be careful in limiting himself/herself within the decent and reasonable boundaries. When the laws and regulations become mute and unequal, the mob gets vocal and at times it becomes shrill. When the country is governed by laws based on religions and laws based on constitution side by side, different sets of voices, dissents are heard leading to avoidable clashes.
>Tolerance does not mean, in spite of all these nonsense, nobody should question him
Questioning and proposing anti-thesis is at the foundation of Rationality. Logic is a basis of Tarka Shastra. All philosophies have foundation in logic. A faith, without the foundation of Logic is blind belief.
Would you pay an entire payment for your home purchase without an agreement, without verifying documents and facts? I am sure there will be people who’d do so on the basis of a spoken word, but that doesn’t mean others should follow them?
All faiths, religions, philosophies, cultures once originated as a thought in someones mind and his expression of that thought. If everyone kept all our ideas to ourselves, we would indeed be roaming around naked today! Who is to say dancing nakedly isn’t a better culture?
Oh BTW, We do have Digambara sect, who walk naked in the middle of the street, and believe even clothes are earthly attachment. One of our most revered saint’s statue stands naked not too far from Bangalore.
>Yeah, only after Christianity and Islam broke the back of the caste
Wondering what you are basing this thought on, and Why do you suppose we still have caste system thriving?
Hinduism was inclusive of all thoughts, beliefs and practices originating in India – including a social stratification system that divided people into innumerable sections (not just 4 castes as mentioned in Manu Smriti).
But, What a Caste/racist system (which is a way of social stratification) have to do with religious inclusiveness?
After all, Blacks were Christians – without voting rights till about half a century ago and were slaves in South Africa till recently! So, can we say Christian faith itself was racist?
How about the practice in Islam with its stratification of men into believer/non-believer? Doesn’t it make a believer a ‘Brahmin’? and a non-believer an out-caste?
Christian religion itself didn’t cause slavery around the world, even if Christians did so.
Caste system was opposed from within the Hindu framework, for over a thousand years (Buddha, Adishankara, basavanna etc. ).
If majority social norms (even today) didn’t follow these good teachings, it is just part of that same inclusive system, which allows a sinner and saint to co-exist.
Caste-ist segregation among the christians of kerala is among the worst and even worst than the one prevalent in hindus. Do you know dalit christians in kerala worship in separate churches and do not have common cemetery grounds? The funny thing is that the hindus of the region openly acknowledge the practice while the christians try to keep the practice as secret as possible. Who are they fooling?
“the problem is that religion has been reduced to a collection of certainties with no scope for doubt or questioning”
doubtsu questionsu keli keli tale kedisikondu koodalu udurisikondru enu artha aagade janaru certainties kade vaaliddare.
hogli bidi – atleast budhdhi kalithare.
examge ondu book kodbeku. nooraru book baredare heege aagodu. elli nodidru agnaana andhakaara.
there is a major difference between nasreen and hussain.
hussain worked on symbols of hindu spirituality. nasreen worked on doctrine of muslim spirituality.
hussain pure art. no agenda/social concern. nasreen no art pure agenda/social concern.
bajrang dal offended by the challenge of art from outsider. (i am not even sure hussain wanted to challenge anything. he prolly just wanted to shock people.)
muslim groups offended by challenge to doctrine from insider.
H-BD conflict is only about militant hindus.
N-MG conflict is about militant muslims + a social residue.
in H-BD conflict if militant hindus are taken out. the issue is done.
in N-MG conflict even if militant hindus are taken out, there is still a basic core unresolved issue.
that is why N-MG is more difficult than H-BD.
“the problem is that religion has been reduced to a collection of certainties with no scope for doubt or questioning. it has become a set of rules to follow. rather than a search for spirituality.”
“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ”
— Bertrand Russell
First let us get all the Muslim women photographed (Just their face) for the electoral role and then think of calling Hussain back. We the Hindu’s are very tolerant to allow such paintings but national interest and requirements are forgotten to appease minorities.
With him back in India is not going to bring the food prices and inflation down, at least let us see the faces (only) of all the people in India (not necessarily Citizens)
Sure the tendency to form in-out groups and then exploit the outsiders ruthlessly same is inherent to our behaviour and survival instincts.
And sure followers of Christianity and Islam were/are racist. But unlike what was codified in the hindu laws and system, there is a core concept of anyone being able to be a christian or a muslim by their actions and not by birth. However what was (and to a large extent still is) practised in hinduism is an all pervasive system driven by birth. The probability that can a person born of the lower caste move up the hierarchy by some normal process of good deeds etc. is small. On the other hand a upper caste person retains all her/his rights and advantages from birth.
It is great and all normal if you arent ‘born a lower caste’. And in the past when education was controlled fully, even the lower caste could be fully trained to believe in his unchangeable fate.
Okay there were reformers in India – is a great strength. But that didnt make that much difference for the people who were at the lower strata of the caste system – with a few notable exceptions over the millenia – like our Basavanna, whose amazing philosphy for some reason did not spread like wildfire (wonder why? because status quo always helps?). Only in the later day reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy (and the whole reformist movement in India) had a much larger effect to start actually making a big dent in the caste system. But you cant deny that these reformers were as effected by Western (and hence Christian) ideas as by existing Hindu ideas.
So about the effects of Christianity and Islam – why did so many people stay converted (now spread all over Pakistan, India, Bangladesh). If you belonged to a lower strata of society and was given a place in a system which (at least by its basic percepts) does not put you in a lower place from birth and restrict your life from the start – would you stay in that system or move back (even if initially you were converted by coercion or bribery)?
The caste system (or any other racist system) may have advantages, but as we have seen, most modern societies which do well are based on a system which reduce the amount of racism and discrimination from birth and allow everyone at least one fair chance.
Look, I am not bashing one religion (Hinduism in this case) – but what is the point in denying a basic problem. If you belong to a lower caste in India – the system is biased towards the minute you are born – more so in the villages, I have seen when I was a kid the way people treated the people from the lower castes in our village. I wont be surprised if the people we treated (and treat) so badly join movements like the Maoists who at least give them an alternative.
I dont care if this is the case for blacks in USA or Christians in kerala or someone else somewhere – that does not make our basic problem go away. What is the problem in accepting a problem and solving it in every way possible – after all we have made big steps in terms of laws and life in the cities.
And I believe a big disservice that is being done to India and Hindus is from people like Swapan Dasgupta who base their writings on a hypocritic statement like: “the Hindu ethos is inherently accommodating and non-doctrinaire…”. Sure, for him it may be, but I would like this coming from the writing of someone who hasnt had it good from birth, say one who joined the Maoists.
>education was controlled fully
I can’t agree. The only education that was departed to the upper castes were of Vedas. Any other education, indeed all technical education, was mostly the preserve of lower castes. Be it Metallurgy, civil construction, interior designing (Carpentry), machines & tooling, Textiles even agriculture and even medicine!!
It was considered impure for a Brahmin to touch a lower caste so, practice of medicine itself was left to other castes. Learning and practicing Ayurveda to practice vaidya caused the vaidyans not pursuing education of Vedas and pooja rituals.
It is the modern myth that upper castes denied education to lower castes. What was denied was knowledge of Veda (not sanskrit or literacy itself).
It can’t be anybody’s case that Veda’s are education??
>what was codified in the hindu laws and system
Again, I don’t subscribe to the narrow view of Hindu system. In fact, I have an objection to the Vedic system being called a “hindu” system.
I have learnt veda through a gurukul in my childchood. For three years I spent my summer holidays learning vedas and the gurus stating their meanings. I challenge anyone to point out even a single stanza in Rigveda or Yajurveda (I don’t know much of Sama, Atharva) that identifies a Caste system. In fact,
There are many ancient texts of India, on which Hindu’s base their overall practices on. But vedas are considered the basis of this faith, how wrong that is!
It is only after Manu smriti, varna system came in, but even that doesn’t make it by birth.
Bhagavadgita contains reference to Varna system.
chātur-varṇyaḿ mayā sṛṣṭaḿ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ |
tasya kartāram api māḿ viddhy akartāram avyayam ||
So, lord Krishna makes it clear that it is the Guna (nature) and Karma (Actions) that determines the varna, not the birth.
Further in Mahabharata:
ekavarṇama idama pūrvaṃ viśvama āsida yudhiśthira
karmakriyāviśesena caturvarṇyama pratiśthitama
So, Even the distinction between castes is artificial – and karma determines what profession you’ll belong. In other words a classification system, that’s not a by birth discrimination system.
Some people exploited this as a license for a by birth caste discrimination and developed a very cruel subjugation mechanism. Today the same is being used in reverse.
But, lets make no mistake – There is no foundation in religion itself for that.
Thanks for the quotes from the bhagvad gita – that clarifies some things for me. My knowledge of the actual content of holy Hindu books (besides tales from Ramayana, Mahabharata etc.) is almost zero – hope to get to reading them some day.
Could you enlighten me on the manu smriti and what it has to say about the varnas – and why you dismiss it and say that there is no foundation in religion for the caste system.
BTW I stand by my previous statement that Islam and then Christianity broke the back of the caste system.
Belief in karma is double edged. Cause and action and value given to competency over birthright is great. But add the concept of re-birth, and it becomes sophistry and a clever justification for a henious system. So if you are born to an upper caste, it is due to the good karma in a previous life and if you are born to a ‘lower being’ it is due to your bad karma. So it was your fault that you were born to a lower caste, and your own deeds which gave you an upper caste birthright. Fine argument!
the one verse in Purushasukta(10.90 of the Rigveda),
bahu rajanyah kritaha
uru tadasya yadvaishyaha
padhyagam shudro ajayata”
has been made out to be the source of the caste system by quite a few, simply because it mentions ‘sudra’. Manusmriti is basically bs, so if anybody follows that then they are justified in getting exploited.
As harkol has mentioned it is just exploitation of the ignorance of the general populace that has allowed the caste system to flourish.
AG, your argument of caste system leading to maoism will make Arundhati Roy blush. You have gullible people who have been manipulated by various folks and for the time being the maoists are the most successful among the lot.
BTW your stance of christianity breaking the back of caste system is quite hilarious. Just visit one of the modern churches in TN. On Dec 25, Jan 1 the folks convert to christianity, they dress up the virgin mary as their ritual amman and carry on with their tradition which is mostly caste based :) And just lookup the Shia, Sunni, Wahhabi, Deobandi and other sundry sects sucking the blood out of each other all over Arabia.
Thanks for bringing up Purusha Sukta (one of the first shlokas every student learns while learning vedas). You are right that it doesn’t describe a ‘caste system’. It mentions from which parts of purusha’s (brahma, some say vishnu) body various types of people came from. As Yudhistira says in Mahabharata, it is impossible to determine the varna of a person by birth, as it is possible for children to be born by mingling of people of different varnas. The great philosophers/masters of Hindu faith, always said the varna system is karma related.
This posting is going to be long winding.. :-)
Vedas are said to be the foundation of Hindu faith, and knowledge. And Krishna is supposed to be the biggest exponent of Vedas, who interpreted the Veda Sara in Bhagavad Gita for ordinary people, and thus he is called “maha bhagavata”. Sadly, the practice of Hindu faith is not always as per what they taught.
Vedas are said to be of divine origin (Brahma) revealed to men, thus they are called ‘shruti’ (heard) and are kept intact as a whole. Vedas are the oldest of any texts in India (historians argue it to have been written down/frozen around 4000 years back). These were the texts of ultimate authority of ‘sanathana dharma’ and describe eternal principles of nature.
‘Smriti’ on the other hand is the recollection of interpretations and traditions, by certain people, on the practice of Vedic faith. Manu smriti is just one of 18 known smritis.
Most importantly – Manu smriti itself states that where smriti is ambiguous or differs from Veda, the veda is to be considered supreme, not his interpretation.
Manu Smriti is said to have been written about 1,800 years back (CE200), when the casteist exploitation began to peak in India, and Buddhism and Jainism gained ground in India.
So, Manu Smriti is just an codification , thus laying it down as a religious law (mostly like the fatwas by muftis) – written by one man (just as any other single man made rules, it too is flawed). Smritis are known to be contradicting each other.
Take for example the concept of Murti puja (idol worship). Vedic system prescribes a method of Yagna for pleasing gods. pooja, which is a later day creation, calls for idols and temples. Which is why temples are more recent phenomenon in Hinduism (perhaps about 1500 years old).
India’s Hindu law accepts smriti’s and Sutra’s as part of overall Hindu religious faith and system. But it recognises that Hinduism is very inclusive and makes provision for variations in practice of Hinduism.
For eg. Brahaspataya sutra speaks of non-existence of god. In fact, Buddhism and Jainism belong to the same school of atheistic thougt. There are other sects in India even today, who don’t accept the existence of god, but are part of Hindu faith in rebirth and Nirvana/moksha.
Finally – Vajrasuchi Upanishad (part of 108 upanishads said to be part of Sama veda, about 2500 years old) says :
Janmana jayate shudro, vratabandhat dvij uchyate
Vedabhyasi bhaved vipro, Brahma janati brahmanah.
So, varna system started out as codification of society, not based on birth, but based on Karma (work) and Jnana(wisdom), but got corrupted along the way.
It is anyones guess as to when and how…
>you are born to a ‘lower being’ it is due to your bad karma
AFAIK, It is buddhism (and even Jainism) that brought in a concept of Karmic connection to your status of birth. They don’t support a caste system, but they do speak of you being born as lowly animals as punishment for bad karma.
I don’t know of any text that says you get born as Dwija for good karma and as Shudra or Chandala for bad karma. There may be – There are thousands of ancients texts, but not all of them are authoritative basis of ‘sanathana dharma’ (or vedic dharma).
In our mythology, There are instances of Karma/Guna based change in caste of people, which is sufficient for us to know, Caste is not necessarily by Birth. Sacred Hindu calendar (called Shalivahana Saka) is based on a King called Shalivahana, who was born to a Kummari (potter) family. Harishchandra became a Chandala (out caste), Parashurama became a Kshatriya, Vishwamitra, Valmiki became Brahmanas, who even conducted Yagnas.
Krishna was a Yadav (Shudra), Lord Shiva an Outcaste (Chandala) and was even thrown out of a Yagna once for that reason. How about Vyasa, who was born to a lower caste mother?
However, there are big examples of discrimination too. Ekalavya was denied education , Karna was denied right to fight. Lord shiva was kicked out of a Yagna for being a Chandala.
So, our texts speak in many voices. But, what they all agree on is – Veda is the source of all wisdom in sanathana dharma. If so, then there is no basis for a by birth caste system at all. It says “We are all born shudras”.
“But, what they all agree on is – Veda is the source of all wisdom in sanathana dharma”
“These were the texts of ultimate authority of ’sanathana dharma’ and describe eternal principles of nature.”
First point is all these points of self-praising itself shows the worth of vedic readers contemporarily.
There are Aagama and Shaivism – (not the shiva of trinity but a nirakara shiva )which does not consider veda at all , but somehow they bring those names into their philosphy .
And there are hundreds of other varities and faiths which are prevalent in various corners of the world depending on natural circumstances.
Most of principles of nature were discovered in west where there’s no veda.
All these 4000 years and all are simple misguidance to ignorants.
Vedas are not prime to all. Infact they even say vedas are from gods and given from europeans and then aryan theory. Just they want more publicity like ISKCON.
These people will even make sanathana as brahma’s son and create stories.
Sanathana is eternal and not hinduism. so don’t go with vedic patent.
There are hundreds of ways to be a gentleman and lady – and those who want to be godmen will end up being nityananda.
There is nothing great about krishna or vishnu . Vishnu is by large considered a wife sharing pimp – with two wives – sridevi and bhoodevi.
his son is kaama – sex god.
he is always asleep and veda says woman as shayaneshu veshya. so he sees every woman as veshya in his sleeping position. You can see those lust in every brahmin’s eyes. Majorly in practice, vedas turn out to be derogatory science and propels itself which they again call sustenance by Vishnu. One practical truth is majority of high class society don’t care about chastity by citing Vishnu’s habits.
Typical brainwash for higher end ignorants just like nityananda did for lower end ones.
All religions are a ‘brainwash’. They ask you to ‘believe’ rather than ‘question’. That wasn’t the point we were discussing.
>Sanathana is eternal and not hinduism. so don’t go with vedic patent.
That is exactly what I said! You haven’t read all my posts.
Sanathana Dharma (Eternal rule/law) is the name for the vedic faith as mentioned in the Kahtopanishad, about 2500years back. Sanathana Dharma is not= modern Hinduism. The word Hindu itself is about 150years old, encompassing various forms of philosophies and practices of India.
However, All Hindu philosophies had common roots in Vedic religion, but mutated to become different. It is almost like so many languages being born of Sanskrit, but appearing to have no connection at all.
Consider Shaivism itself – It derives its concepts of Shiva from the Sri Rudram (Rigveda/Yajurveda) – both Akara and Nirakara.
So, my point is – there is no authoritative text in Hinduism, but if at all one has to be considered, then Vedas are it as that’s the only text said to be from the gods and authenticated to be the oldest.
>All these 4000 years and all are simple misguidance to ignorants.
Dismissive eh? We are cursed to be ignorant, for it is unlikely we’ll ever know the truth of the universe. Our small brains will be incapable of comprehending it all. All religions are nothing but attempts at putting order to chaotic universe that surrounds us.
And of course no religion can be absolutely right, for that’s again conceived in a human brain! ;-)
>vedas turn out to be derogatory science
Science and Veda are two words for the same thing – Knowledge. :)
Vedas is Knowledge as was defined thousands of years back. Principles you speak of (were they discovered by Europeans?) is knowledge as accepted today.
These principles are proved eventually wrong – Newton by Einstein and Einstein by quantum theories. So, It turns out Newton may not be entirely wrong, and Einstein may not be entirely right!
So, it is with Veda.
>There is nothing great about krishna or vishnu .
What that has to do with anything? And, where does Veda talk of Vishnu’s wifes and Kaama is Vishnu’s son?
Where do you get your information on Vedas?!
>veda says woman as shayaneshu veshya
Again, In which Veda, Where was this said?
Don’t confuse the Smritis and Puranas with Veda. These are later day texts (mostly in Christ Era), typically written by a single author as stories or as rule books.