the basic question where this discussion started whas who united india as it is today?
you said if the british didnt do it then somebody else would have. thats not how we approach a problem. be specific, who else? there must have been 4-5000 countries in this land when the mughals broke up. who could have united them.
a colonialist takes over a country for his own interests . not charity. india took over kashmir and sikkim for its own benefit not for charity. inspite of that as sri said the british cared to reform what they could. the presidency college in chennai stared by the british has produced 2 nobel laureates. one before freedom and one after.
thats why i asked you a question whose rule was better? today you live under a chief minister who denies the existence of your very god. i dont think the british ever went to that extent.
you live in a country where the government employs goons to thrash and kill people in 17,000 acres, rape their women, burn their houses because the communist( ha ha) government have sold the land to a foreign company. is this any better than jallinwalla bagh.?
I have given enough proofs for my points, and please refer to them.
"We should see history as it is, and NOT As we are"
If we judge history by our own morals, then it would not be history. but bunch of facts to be hated by us.
I feel, you havent countered my arguments, in particular.. rather you have been replyin in general, that we should accept our wrongs, and should not hide it under the guise of patriotism..
I agree.. and we are not hiding any thing.. But, your generic (& generous) branding of our history as barbarious without british, is not only offensive, but of highly ill taste.
I would like to know the morals in which you brand a thing as right & wrong. Or, on what basis did you term those things as problematic or barbaric.
So, the basic question itself is not answered..
By the way, in your own arguments, that we have to accept our wrongs of ours.. Agreed.. But shouldn't we accept the atrocities, and barbaric activities of the britishers too?
What i understood from your point is "Britishers did lot of wrong.. but let's praise them for their goodness.. whereas, we too had lot of wrongs, and let us criticise us" ..
I dont know how far, this argument is valid and just..
You are so easily terming sati (which is almost voluntary ) as barbaric, and yet, look down upon the Jallianwala bagh killing as a mere historic incident.
You are ought to treat untouchability as barbaric/evil, and yet, the Goa Inquisition, where the most brutalities and barbaric atrocities (like inserting knife in to the YOni of Hindu women, raping them in front of their husband) by the dutch christians doesnt appear big enough to you..
You ought to treat devdaasi system as barbaric, but failed to agree the fact, that Red-light prostitution were introduced by the britishers in Mumbai and calcutta... (You might feel, the red-light prostitution of mumbai would be better than devdaasi system)..
And for your info, in christian culture, the a virgin women should accept jesus as her husband, before entering in to the state of nun.. (this is exactly the same as devdaasi system, where our women accepted god as their husband and inturn developed various arts and dances).. And this accepting of jesus as husband goes on till today in Europe.. Would you term them as Barbaric? (you may say it happens in europe.. but certainly they donot illtreat themselves out of it.. and also the fact, that the nuns are produced & misused in india too)
So, where lies the problem? THe problem of selective reading of history, and the problem of choosing positives for the british and negatives for our country?
I have given you enough links in my previous mail.. Please go through those links for once, and then counter them with facts, rather than vague opinionist argument.
We are ready to accept our faults.. But, not in terms set by you.. but in a term, based on true understanding of india. (we are really becoming lame dumb at this very argument, that we should accept our mistakes.. a clever argument propogated by the western media controlled still by the colonial rulers)
I accept your view, that the entity of india was british creation.. we are lands of small kingdoms, which existed under large kingdoms.
But, i would like to emphasize that we are culturally united, and the common masses in our ancient india existed as separate entity than the political entity. Political fights are regarded as normal between the kshatriyas, and whoever wins over, taken over the control, and the people accepted their rule, as long as they followed dharma.
The britishers, united the whole of india, because, not for the purpose of uniting us, but for their consolidation for the administrative purposes.
I would like to highlight one of Gandhiji's reply to such question.
The britishers colonised Africa, middle east, and southeast asia.. But they could not establish a single state for the whole of africa or the middle east? Instead they created government of rwanda, congo, southafrice etc etc.. on the other hand, they established Government of India, rather than government of bengal, or government of madras..
Could you please explain why?
Its because, the people of the whole india rallied behind the half-naked man.. and how is that possible? Because, the people of india regarding rishis and saints in high respect, and they saw gandhi as a saint and hence rallied behind this.
now this culture of people is the uniting force, that made britishers to see the unity among whole of india.. and the reason for this culture is that people were largely existed as separate entity than the political entity.
Ok.. coming to your point, should we thank them for creating a single india? (ofcourse, its not them who integrated india, but our great sardar vallabhai patel.. if it had been nehru, then it would be total chaos)..
Infact, they are the ones, who separated the nation in to two with the aim of checkmating such a great nation rising as super power in future.. The partition was opposed by majority of people in pakistan itself, but because it suited britishers, they divided it.
Secondly, the kashmir was their own creation, and it was exposed in the recent news article, that mountbatted used his wife to influence nehru to accept kashmir's reference to UN..
Thirdly, till 1990's the british conspired with americans and made all attempts against india to contain it..
Inspite of all these recent historic facts, do you want to get excited at their so called goodness to us?
After all, the very reason they left india was, that there was nothing left over to exploit us.
1. The British accomplished a Unified India. 2. Rulers prior to that - including Mohammedans & contemporary Rajas - were still worse. 3. Detailed accounting on Mahatma Gandhi, his accomplishemtns and assassination.
Vijay- Veerasamy added : Comparison with Indonesia.
It is London based Sridhar's views make me revisit this subject again. His mail is put below for quick reference. I share his views.
More or less he has covered all the aspects related to the topic.
Sentil Raja's mails - with supporting links - definitely motivate us to look at things from another plane.
Satish added certain points.
Ravi - emotional has taken certain (extra ) liberties in stressing his view .. He is ardent Arunagiri Bakthar.. and in Business.. Knows how to preseent things in a corum.
In School books we have read of : GUPTHAPPERARASU MAGATHAPPERARASu
Almost equivalent to this CHOZHAPPERARASU was established and was functioning for about 80/85 years (985 to 1070 )in a span of about 400 years.
During this period Bhojan and others ruled North. Gazni invasion .. Mohammedan rule almost in the entire India.
In-fighting among Rajputs paved way for Mohammedan rule and subsequently the British rule..
Same way infighting among Paalaykkarar's (there was hardly any king in Southern India) when the British landed.. and Nawab of Arcot could hardly resist.
Anandarangam Pillai's diaries are discussing more of this time..
This unification process snow-balled from the North to South.. Recall the Leaders : Except Rajagopalachariar - Sathiamurthy - Kamaraj who else was mentionable (Kodikaatha Kumaran - VOC - Bharathi did not live to see the freedom movement unfying the Nation ).
And Mahatma Gandhi was that force which retained that Unification process.. which process could not be retained by any of his followers including Nehruji.
Take today's Tamilnadu ? Can we think of voicing anything in singular voice? take this discussion : how many varying views. But Mahatma could achieve this in the entire length and width of the Nation.
Molasting the modesty of women or a Nation is common in any War..
We have discussed extensively on patriotism earlier.
Today Japanese automobiles - Arab Oil - Satellites by Grown nations etc., etc., have become part and parcel of our life..
We have been exporting BRAIN to the WEST ..
We are seeing the Whites taking Idli - Vada in Kaiyendhibawans in Chennai !
Our guys are travelling in Tyoto Corella ..
God has never been unkind to us.. and the scars are also getting healed ..
Very dense discussion .. I almost share Dr. Sridhar's views .. ============================== Lighter side ::
> > > Forgive me for being knaive. > > Does CHINA do have so much of linguistic divisions ? > > sps > script is almost the same, though the dialect are varied. main is madarin. the dialects are mostly tonal variations - the others are wu,min, cantonese,hokkien..
food is also diverse - ranging from really spicy ( chilli spice) to bland.
more below from wiki ( of course)
As a language family Chinese has an estimated nearly 1.2 billion speakers; Mandarin Chinese alone has around 850 million native speakers, outnumbering any other language in the world.
Spoken Chinese is distinguished by its high level of internal diversity, though all spoken varieties of Chinese are tonal and analytic. There are between six and twelve main regional groups of Chinese (depending on classification scheme), of which the most populous (by far) is Mandarin (c. 850 million), followed by Wu (c. 90 million), Min (c. 70 million) and Cantonese (c. 70 million). Most of these groups are mutually unintelligible, though some, like Xiang and the Southwest Mandarin dialects, may share common terms and some degree of intelligibility. Chinese is classified as a macrolanguage with 13 sub-languages in ISO 639-3, though the identification of the varieties of Chinese as multiple "languages" or as "dialects" of a single language is a contentious issue.
The standardized form of spoken Chinese is Standard Mandarin (Putonghua/Guoyu), based on the Beijing dialect. Standard Mandarin is the official language of the People's Republic of China, the Republic of China in Taiwan, as well as one of four official languages of Singapore. Chinesede facto, Standard Mandarinis one of the six official languages of the United Nations. Of the other varieties, Standard Cantonese is common and influential in Cantonese- speaking overseas communities, and remains one of the official languages of Hong Kong (together with English) and of Macau (together with Portuguese). Min Nan, part of the Min language group, is widely spoken in southern Fujian, in Taiwan (where it is known as Taiwanese or Hoklo) and in Southeast Asia (where it dominates in Singapore and Malaysia and is known as Hokkien).
We are Hospitable .. but will not allow intrusion..
We are capable learning and appreciating others Faith.. without submitting ourselves..
And We reinforce the ESTABLISHED ANCIENT FAITH : HINDUISM is a way of LIVING .. Without a beginning since it existed from time immemorial..
And NANDHINI - Kamadenu's daughter ..is a Mythological Cow - Rishi Vashister's - capable of Blessing with every rightful thing sought for and depicted with Wings ..
when Viswamithra saw this, he sought for this .. which paved way for DURUVA STAR - in sequence !
Karpaga Vritcham (Tree) is also believed to have such qualities ..
MYSORE MAHARAJA PALACE used to amaze me.. A British Architect has designed this Palace .. budgetted at Rs. 15.00 Lakhs.. Tastefully designed with Lavishness that does not irritate.
See the collections they had about 100 years back..
Royalty in Blood appears to be something very different ....... !
Saw Helen of Troy recently ..
The War sequence was excellent ..
During Seize, they rolled down oil-dipped chute-balls from high points and set fire which caused death several in the lower plains !
Viyugams were well planned..
Reminded me of several Wars we read of our Emperors ..
With linguistic barriers in alien territories 1000 years back our Emperors could fight and Win Battles and hold the Territories for about a Century atleast !
Congress which Party fought for the Freedom of our Nation could not hold on even for 30 years in one go !
With little bit of exposure to World History - I found that Chinese History was something remarkable and the Whites could hardly keep them suppressed for long time!
European History was something similar to ours - like our several smaller Rajs with heavy infighting - succumbed to mightier Nations - Hunger caused by the extravaganze of Rulers turned Revolution - Pre & Post Nepoleon Era etc., etc.
American History is interesting to study, particularly the Land Developments by Migrants .. away from the Coast - in lands / plains - then mountains / coasts .. North South devide .. etc. in a span of less than 300 years .....
Japanese History was similar to Chinese - traditional yet more open to adaption..
Chinese History appears to be mystry shrouded .. !
China was united under Qin, the dude who started the Great wall which was completed by Ming dynasty. They were not speaking different languages (dialects were different) but for most part they were big time clan based (even now). The reason why I thought they were a closer possiblity were a. Beliefs ( ancestor - pithru based prayers - hence the clan possesive model). b. Area - larger than India and the larger the territory - the more difficult to rule. c. Good literacy foundations and evolved humanity. d. Many cultural similarities.
PS: Bogar & his Guru (chinese) and disciples- had migrated back and forth with China - not my theory, but documented - in palani temple walls too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogar - which also makes me wonder how come these dudes in BC could speak chinese where as my neighbors here are chinese and I cannot understand their english to start with :-) ....
Chinese martial arts was to have come from India... according to one belief. We look at them with awe where we are losing the ancient art to modern forms of Karate etc.. During time of Budha the map was totally different of what is china or what is india. Kailasam was in India then I believe...
- the vajra find repeated mention in various cultures
- Zeus resorted to his famous keraunós to defeat Typhon and the Biblical Yahweh subjected Leviathan or Yamm with a similar device
- indra weilds it ( interesting account of how it was made - will post it later) - the japanese call is Kong - buddha holds the Rdo-rje - scandanavia - Thor's Hammer
The form of the vajra as a sceptre or a weapon appears to have its origin in the single or double trident, which arose as a symbol of the thunderbolt or lightning in many ancient civilizations of the Near and Middle East. Parallels are postulated with the meteoric hammer of the Teutonic sky-god Thor, the thunderbolt and sceptre of the Greek sky-god Zeus, and the three thunderbolts of the Roman god Jupiter. As a hurled weapon the indestructible thunderbolt blazed like a meteoric fireball across the heavens, in a maelstrom of thunder, fire and lightning."
what strikes me is the design of the vajra and its usage - the commondality spans the entire earth/ with its uniformity in design. ofcourse it is a thunderbolt making machine but it does have anusual shape for a lightning thrower, some people describe this design as a manifestation of the visible world axis during one of its most complex phases. The little sphere in the centre represented the seed from which the universe was thought to have arisen and the two `lotus blossoms' at the opposite ends symbolised the poles of the universe connected by the central axis mundi.
Lightning is one of the primary manifestations of plasma in the ionosphere and the atmosphere of the earth. It is intriguing, therefore, that the complex morphology displayed in the vajrá and other ancient forms of the thunderbolt is matched by laboratory experiments involving a high-energy z-pinch plasma discharge. This striking convergence poses the question if ancient societies could have correctly remembered some of the most complex stages of a real display of plasma in the sky.
Vajras may have nine, five or three spokes. The spokes of a peaceful Vajra meet at the tip whereas those of a wrathful vajra are slightly splayed at the end. When paired with a bell their length can vary from four finger-widths to twenty-eight finger widths.
Vajra in design
The upper sets of spokes of a five-spoked vajra symbolize the five wisdoms, which are:
1) The mirror like wisdom-that which reflects all sense perceptions is purified when one attains enlightenment and becomes the mirror like wisdom. 2) The wisdom of equality-arises after all the feelings of pleasantness, unpleasantness and indifference have been purified. 3) The wisdom of individual analysis-arises when the factor of discrimination, which distinguishes one object from another is purified. It enables one to benefit each sentient being according to his or her needs and disposition. 4) The wisdom of accomplishing activity-arises when the basic ability to perform acts according to particular circumstances is purified. 5) The wisdom of the sphere of reality-arises when consciousness is purified and becomes the mind that is the seed of the wisdom truth body of a Buddha. The five lower spokes symbolize have five mothers.
Vajra in Hinduism
Indra - the holder of vajra
"More than 250 hymns have been dedicated to Indra in Rigveda. Another fifty plus hymns sing the praises of Indra in combination with other gods like Vayu, Varuna, Agni, Vishnu, Soma and Brihaspati. Vedic sages do not get tired of describing the glorious deeds of Indra. More than one fourth of the Rig-Vedic verses are about Indra.
Rig-Veda 2.12
13. For whom earth and heaven bow, whose strength mountains fear, who drinks and protects Soma, who holds Vajra in his hand, he, O people, is Indra.
Rigveda 1.32
1. Now I describe the glorious deeds of Indra, who holds Vajra. He killed the serpent and made waters flow. He broke the hearts of mountains.
5. Indra severed and killed the great coverer Vritra by mighty devastating Vajra. Like a trunk of a tree cut down by axe, serpent was lying on earth.
15. Indra, who holds Vajra in his hand, is the king of moving and stationary, of peaceful and horned animals. He is the king of men. He is enveloping like the felly of wheel surrounds spokes."
Vajrayana Buddhism
Sanskrit: Vehicle of the Diamond [or Thunderbolt], also called Tantric Buddhism, important development within Buddhism in India and neighbouring countries, notably Tibet. Vajrayana, in the history of Buddhism, marks the transition from Mahayana speculative thought to the enactment of Buddhist ideas in individual life. The term vajra (Sanskrit: "diamond," or "thunderbolt") is used to signify the absolutely real and indestructible in man, as opposed to the fictions an individual entertains about himself and his nature; yana is the spiritual pursuit of the ultimately valuable and indestructible.
we can also make use of other threads from Viswa complex archieves - by Dr. Jaybee ::
Iraamappaiyan Ammanai, Sethu Nadu Wars, War of the Noses, The War That Changed Tamil History, Sundara Pandya and PattinaPaalai Mandapam, Sengguttuvan's Paalzi Campaign, and Peruvalzudhi's AsvamEdha.