« How to infer good news from media | Main | Skype virtual call center for Katrina refugees »

September 04, 2005

Comments

Nitin Hanwadikar

i agree to what ashish is trying to state.

i think the pure fantasies of our sadhus are coming to reality in modern age.

Hindus have almost talked, thought, discussed abt everything that we experience as the Technology of today.

for airoplane we had pushpak viman but surprisingly we didnt know abt bicycle!

solarpetal

hi atanu dey,
i am told you are a wise man. i assume your disclaimer was a momentary lapse. i would categorize your statement as 'reactionary' to a perceived line of attack. in general reactionary statements of defence/attack are exaggarted and sometimes border on ridiculousness. and the response to reactionary statements are usually even more reactionary statements. and it doesnt take much to figure out the end result. i am sure you will agree, it is better to avoid the trap.
btw, i think you have 'reacted' a little too much in your disclaimer.

solarpetal

ashish,
good to hear your response.

[It is called hypocrisy if you advocate one thing and indulge in exact opposite behavior. But you are accusing me of being a marxist and hyper-capitalist at the same time. That means, I hold two opposite viewpoints at the same time in a full public view! I think you should decide what exactly you are accusing me of.]
hey! thanks for pointing out. you dont mind whether a civilization is called hindu or indian. you concentrate on ideas and not the labels western thought or hindu thought. let me repeat: you dont mind the labels and concentrate on ideas. why exactly do you bother when i label you a marxist or hyper-capitalist or a liberal or intellectual. does that look like applying different standards to yourself and others. probably not for you, but yes for most. btw, it is not accusation. also, i have requested you in my previous post to concentrate on the argument and not the labels knowing fully well yours will be a natural reaction. but comrade, you seem to get frittered over the labels. i care whether you call the ancient civilization hindu or indian. most people do. and when i ripped you apart, you have shown you care too. oh yes! in full public view, please wriggle out of this hypocrisy.


["india too did not exist at that time. rather than trying to address the issues raised, you are trying to obfuscate by intermixing words and the reference timeframe. eg: india/hindu, ancient/past, secularism/religion."
Read carefully what I wrote:]
ashish, you are really mixing it up here. i have clearly quoted your text above my argument and stated my objection in simple terms.
there was no christianity in ancient india - yes.
nor was there buddhism - yes.
hinduism also came much later - objection. the word hinduism came much later. and i told you it is not organized religion like other -isms and didnt bother to give it a name. it was probably called 'sanatana dharma'. now it is upto you to prove that the hinduism as we know today did not exist it at that time.
so i am right to use indian and hindu interchangeably. - wrong again. the term india too came later. but it is only those who identify themselves as hindus in present india who relate to that civilization and who adhere to the beliefs of that civilization. to further substantiate this, chiristians and muslims do not hold this view in india.
it has nothing to do with being secular or not - true but a little comment. 'secular' in the present indian scenario is distorted to mean minority appeasement and hindu bashing. the 'secular' people blame all ills on hindus and any achievement of hindus is represented as indian. brainwashed hindus in the name of this sickularism follow similar pattern owing to padres and macaulayism. these elite intellectuals and eminent historians are called psecs. congrats comrade, you have consistently displayed 'secularism' and deserve to be felicitated as ace psec.

[People can see for themselves who has the arrogant attitude based on the comments. I suggest you focus on the actual arguments rather than the ad hominem attacks.]
call me whatever you want. it has also been my request to you to give cogent arguments.

[Otherwise, I will ban you from commenting.]
oh my god, i am scared. i am pissing in my pants. please comrade, spare me. you are not going to send the chinese after me, are you.

[...a broken clock gets it right occassionally not because of effort. ...No, the broken clock analogy means that ...]
let us first evaluate the analogy. a statement can be time-dependent statement or a time-independent statement. dont confuse this because the object in our statement happens to be a clock. earth has gravitational pull is time independent. the temperature today is 70f is time dependent is only true for today. it is more likely that the temperature will not be 70f tommorrow. the hindu thought on cosmology is time-independent view and once true is true forever as long as objects (not time) in question remain - in this case cosmic universe. the clock is showing the current time now is time-dependent. it doesnt mean that the clock will be right next moment. to compare time-dependent truth of clock with time-independent hindu view on cosmology is ridiculous.

now evaluate the statement 'stagnant philosophy is like a broken clock'. comrade ashish, please stop writing nonsense and dont try to twist your arguments to suit your purpose. the psecs can really get funny.


[So the beyond-the-modern-knowledge achievements of ancient hindu philosophy are now being measured by its consistency with the modern science? Help me out here. What's exactly are you saying?]

i will be glad to elaborate.

ancient hindu civilization is hindu and not india, south asian or indo-european.

donot discredit hinduism just because the word hindu came only recently.

your statement that hinduism also came later. obviously you meant that by this statement you meant that the present hindus are different from that ancient civilization and hence hinduism evolved later. only the traitor marxists subscribe to this view.

secularism does not mean calling hindu achievements as indian. this view on cosmology as with several other hindu thought is held high only by hindus and not my muslims or christians.
your implied assumption that studying hindu philosophy is not progressive. [What I find intriguing that many pundits asserts that ancient Hindu philosophy contains great ideas and repeatedly point out how they are relevant in the modern times. Instead, I advise that they continue study of good ideas and carry them forward.] why do you want to advise them not to study hindu philosophy especially when they find it relevant in modern times. do you think you are better than the pundits. do you think hindu philosophy is not good. do you think it is not compatible with modernity. what exactly is your objection. why the unfound hatred/objections towards hinduism while acknowledging superficially that it is good. is that the label hindu that is turning you off. it is you who needs to come out with honest answers. banning me - my foot. you dont have the courage to face yourself. and you give that sportwoman lecture on what should be her career choice. i think i made the right call on you and your attitude. and yes, i am arrogant and i dont give a damn. i dont get all beaten-up and threaten to censure.

[I don't see any benefit in clinging to something just because it is ancient.] may i ask what exactly are your credentials to judge the benefit of something ancient. specific to the context of hindu philosophy, why exactly do you use the word clinging. do you think people who are trying to retain this knowledge are morons. do you think the world would be better off by killing the hindu thought. what exactly is your objection when you say the hindu thought must be butchered especially given that it is in congruence with modernity. do you have a subconscious assumption that hinduism is a drag on modernity. please comrade, list down your objections. i am also willing to selectively consider your personal experiences but dont miss out on the objections.
and here is another position of yours which is contradictory to the above - [What I lamented is the fact that people simply praise ancient hindu philosophy like a museum piece. They don't spend any time on actually trying to advance the good ideas in there.] aha, see we agree that people must not simply praise ancient philosophy but try to advance the good ideas in there but why does anyone cling on to that ancient hindu philosophy of barbarians. i see that you dont have any objection to appropriating the ideas and propogating it as western. but please dont appreciate the hindus, dammit.

[by labeling it with religion it diminishes its stature.Because religion is generally associated with stagnant, dogmatic ideas. In fact, modern western philosophy grew in opposition to the dominant christain view and is still at war with it.] again, please elaborate why labelling it with religion dimishes the stature. stature of religion or idea? is it because the religion is hinduism. or is it because good ideas cannot be associated with religion.

abrahmic religions are associated with stagnant, dogmatic ideas. hinduism is neither stagnant nor dogmatic. it is continously changing and does not have any centralised structure or individual to codify it. and it is based on experience much as modern science is. your perceptions on hinduism are either seriously flawed or you hold a eurocentric view of the world. and for that reason, hindu thought is not in conflict with religion, philosophy or science. the ones stuck with dogmas have a conflict but it is due to personal limitations or poor interpretation of the religion.

and stop telling people what their career goal should be

shall continue later...

enjoy.

Ashish

"marxists propose marxism to the masses while they conviniently indulge in hyper-capitalism. communists woo investors in bengal while crying foul at the center. so is the last bastion of communists, china. the communist double standards are evident even in their core ideology."

It is called hypocrisy if you advocate one thing and indulge in exact opposite behavior. But you are accusing me of being a marxist and hyper-capitalist at the same time. That means, I hold two opposite viewpoints at the same time in a full public view! I think you should decide what exactly you are accusing me of.

"india too did not exist at that time. rather than trying to address the issues raised, you are trying to obfuscate by intermixing words and the reference timeframe. eg: india/hindu, ancient/past, secularism/religion."

Read carefully what I wrote:
"But sometimes I wonder if Hindu (ancient Indian) philosophy is more like a broken clock."
If you prefer to call it hindu philosophy it is fine with me. I doesn't change a thing for me. In fact, by labeling it with religion it diminishes its stature. Because religion is generally associated with stagnant, dogmatic ideas. In fact, modern western philosophy grew in opposition to the dominant christain view and is still at war with it.


"you with your inflated ego and 'holier-than-thou' attitude are not interested in progressing ideas as you claim. you are just making pompous remarks. when i have presented you the flaws in your arguments, you have not worked on the ideas and did not come up with cogent arguments. instead you have chosen to address the entertainment value in the contradictory position of communists. i too find the communists funny stock. but that is not the issue here."

People can see for themselves who has the arrogant attitude based on the comments. I suggest you focus on the actual arguments rather than the ad hominem attacks. Otherwise, I will ban you from commenting.

"ancient hindu civilization achievements are far beyond the modern knowledge. the comparison with broken clock suggests it is a chance. a broken clock gets it right occassionally not because of effort. is that how we should summarize these past achivements."

No, the broken clock analogy means that the clock could have been working perfectly earlier but it has now stopped. In other words, I acknowledge whole-heartedly the achievements of the ancient hindu philosophy. I am impressed about many things mentioned in the article I linked to. What I lamented is the fact that people simply praise ancient hindu philosophy like a museum piece. They don't spend any time on actually trying to advance the good ideas in there. That's why I wrote that we are responsible for not making it move.

"ancient hindu civilization achievements are far beyond the modern knowledge."
...
"there is sufficient evidence to prove consistency in the achivements and it is not in conflict with modern science"

So the beyond-the-modern-knowledge achievements of ancient hindu philosophy are now being measured by its consistency with the modern science? Help me out here. What's exactly are you saying?

solarpetal

ashish,
the bulk of the argument against what you said still remains. obviously, you have chosen to conviniently ignore it and focus on the entertainment value of my calling a marxist hyper-capitalist. not to divert the topic but there is nothing contradictory in this. marxists propose marxism to the masses while they conviniently indulge in hyper-capitalism. communists woo investors in bengal while crying foul at the center. so is the last bastion of communists, china. the communist double standards are evident even in their core ideology.

[When we are talking about ancient India there was no christainity as such. Nor there was Buddhism or any other religion. Hinduism also came much later. So I am right to use Indian and Hindu interchangeable considering the time in question. It has nothing to do with being secular or not.]
poor argument. india too did not exist at that time. rather than trying to address the issues raised, you are trying to obfuscate by intermixing words and the reference timeframe. eg: india/hindu, ancient/past, secularism/religion.
you with your inflated ego and 'holier-than-thou' attitude are not interested in progressing ideas as you claim. you are just making pompous remarks. when i have presented you the flaws in your arguments, you have not worked on the ideas and did not come up with cogent arguments. instead you have chosen to address the entertainment value in the contradictory position of communists. i too find the communists funny stock. but that is not the issue here. ancient hindu civilization achievements are far beyond the modern knowledge. the comparison with broken clock suggests it is a chance. a broken clock gets it right occassionally not because of effort. is that how we should summarize these past achivements. there is sufficient evidence to prove consistency in the achivements and it is not in conflict with modern science. how do we explain this. and what exactly has secularism got to do with saying ancient 'hindu' civilization has great achivements to its credit. to point out that hinduism didnot exist at that time is the psec 'detoxified' history. it was not organized into -isms. it was probably called 'sanatana dharma' or it did not have a name. in modern times, it is called hinduism. does that change anything.
it is fair to acknowledge the ancient achievements as 'hindu' because that is the modern day's name to it. besides, it is hindus and hindus alone who continue to believe in those set of ideas. it is because they have propogated it across to their descendents from that reference time frame. to further substantiate this, non-hindus in modern india do not subscribe to this hindu thought.
if you are really serious about what you said, let us talk about ideas. i have challenged your ideas and if you dare, you have the option to substantiate your position.

Ashish Hanwadikar

solarpetal,
I think you are getting too personal for my test.
But you provided me a great deal of entertainment when you called me a marxist, and hyper-capitalist at the same time!

Ashish Hanwadikar

When we are talking about ancient India there was no christainity as such. Nor there was Buddhism or any other religion. Hinduism also came much later. So I am right to use Indian and Hindu interchangeable considering the time in question. It has nothing to do with being secular or not.

solarpetal

[Thirdly, I don't care if Hindu or Western philosophy is carried forward or not. I only care if good ideas are carried forward.]
another psec high-positioning, superflous moral stand and argument by diversion. reminds me of the 'eminent historian' romila thapar says all excavations should be stopped because the evidence is contradictory to her position on AIT. i am right because i hold the high moral ground that good ideas should be carried forward. sorry mate, lets give credit where it is due.
[I don't see any benefit in clinging to something just because it is ancient.]
the hyper-capitalist that you are, you dont see any credit in clinging to something just because it is ancient. so you must be an advocate of euthanasia, believe in economic value of everything, judge antiques by utility, discourage archealogy like your mata romila thapar, believe in the marxist view of religion as opium of masses... oh, the list just goes on. btw, your utility value/benefit is negative.

[What I find intriguing that many pundits asserts that ancient Hindu philosophy contains great ideas and repeatedly point out how they are relevant in the modern times.]
you will have it to find it intriguing and perhaps shocking and other expletives which can better express your outrage. how can anyone dare say that hindu philosophy has good things and point out that its achievements are way beyond barbarians. surely, the european aryans must have come and taught them. no AIT? - oh, they just migrated. dna studes prove migration from out of india? - let us label them, shout at the top of our voices that they are hindu fascists, secularism is dying, minorities are being slaughtered, toxification... meanwhile let us work on a new theory to discredit them.

[Instead, I advise that they continue study of good ideas and carry them forward.]
yes, yes... let us all study the ideas while our 'eminent' persons try to obscure the sources in vague indian/south asian/aryan-european sources. a commonsense approach would be to see how hindus could concieve such ideas and see the applicability of them in present scenarios. anyone would be equally interested in knowing how hindus could arrive at such conclusion, especially when much of it is not in contradiction with the advanced scientific knowledge available today. but then you have the right to dictate the approach because of your high moral ground that ideas matter.

[A stagnant philosophy is like a broken clock. Modern ideas may seem like converging to it just like actual time matches with the time shown by a broken clock twice a day.]
sic

solarpetal

this is another classic case of psec ranting.
more reputed persons are accepting hindu viewpoint and you have given the most inane comparison i have come across in a very long long time - a broken clock (sic).
civilizations have their own up and down cycles. you can judge the greatness of one by what they achieved in their peak. to marginalize any achievement bcos it hit the downturn is foolish. the modern and much hyped western civilization still cannot fathom the cyclical nature of cosmology. being a psec that you are, you start with two assumptions, one that western civilization is far superior and two that hindu civilization is barbaric. wake up macualay-putra.

- the second psec mantra: to club hindu with india when it is good and to blame hindu when it is not. ofcourse carl sagan did not have any problem calling it hindu idea but the 'oh-so-secular' psec that you are have to call it indian philosophy. if your padres have not tutored you yet, it is fashinable to call it 'south asian' these days. and you further espouse your 'secular' credentials in your comments. so you are telling us all that indian christians believe that universe is billions of years old and was not by created by god in 7 days. so indian chrisitians dont believe in adam/eve and all that creationism. good work gunga din.

and why use a sanskrit word in your heading. it might affect your 'secular' credentials. but isnt that the hallmark of a psec indoctrinated self-flaggellating-hindu. you stand as a masterpiece of marxist, missionary work.

SANDY SINHA

Indian Philosophy has always been the mirror of the times in which they were developed. Presently, we are in desperate need of a philosophy a new and a dynamic one that will make India a vibrant society and will lead us to
development and happyness.

Ashish

First, secularism is relevant only for the government. It does not apply in the private sphere.

Secondly, I was not refering to the religion at all. Notice that I used Hindu and Indian philosophy interchangeably.

Thirdly, I don't care if Hindu or Western philosophy is carried forward or not. I only care if good ideas are carried forward. I don't see any benefit in clinging to something just because it is ancient.

What I find intriguing that many pundits asserts that ancient Hindu philosophy contains great ideas and repeatedly point out how they are relevant in the modern times. Instead, I advise that they continue study of good ideas and carry them forward. A stagnant philosophy is like a broken clock. Modern ideas may seem like converging to it just like actual time matches with the time shown by a broken clock twice a day.

gaurav

Ummm,

How can some one advocate secularism and then rue over the fact that Hinduism is stagnating.

Ashish

You are right, I don't see anything that way in your article. But I will bet you that some people will wrongly interpret and cite Carl Sagan and try to make that point. These people are looking for such, however weak, connections.

Atanu Dey

I would just like to stress that I DON'T claim some mystical connection between ancient Indian thought and modern cosmology. The convergence I noted was just that the time scales are long in both cases.

Claiming that modern cosmology had been anticipated by ancient people is as silly as claiming that ancient astronauts came to the earth to build all sorts of stuff a la von Daniken.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ads




Tip Jar



  • Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More
Blog powered by Typepad

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter