3 K worded; This article was written just now, in other words these ideas haven’t been told ever yet, in this article form, by me.
Some views on Indian culture.
I have wanted to talk about 3 snippets of my views on what I think of 3 popular aspects of Indian culture, which any Indian who is a globe trotter is bound to be found in discussion with an international diaspora, because of their sheer popularity. I will mention 4 but leave out that one.
1. Indian women when married, wear a red mark, called “mang ki sindur” or vermilion on forehead. (No I am not going to talk about lipstick, its a modernized version)
2. Indian temple walls, popularly called now as Hindu temples walls, are replete with sexual imagery, but as far as we know, it only immediately precedes the Mughal and British influx. Were the Hindus always conservative, ancient antiques say otherwise.
3. Indian or Hindu temple walls have been defaced to a large extent. Mostly an act of dishonor on the artifacts, with their noses being disfigured. What causes this shameful act.
4. Brahmanism, (and caste system) Basically Brahmanism is a religion separated from Hinduism, but now mixed, a “fact” you will not see so well mentioned, as would be well mentioned, Brahmanism vs caste system, we discuss things based on our agenda about them.
I have had my thoughts spared on most of these, on and off, and have had slight differences of opinion with majorly held views, except point-1. But lately when I relaxed myself, I realize that these thoughts are still prevalent in my mindscape and they have slightly matured, as to how I am seeing them now, a slight difference of opinion with even myself. I am not anyone’s agent, trying to give the value of scholarship to otherwise disqualified people. I will talk about that a little as well.
So lets go point-by-point.
1. Vermilion mark is circular and in older ways, slightly, bigger than how it occurs now a days. The moderner woman has wanted to reduce the size of the spot, gradually to insignificant proportion. The industry has invented the more so wearable bindi, a reduced and modern version, with glue, so you can take it on and off. Also unmarried women wear bindi, although wearing sindur circle, on forehead, would spell disaster, why would they keep off potential dates, or in the ensuing gender politics, do they even care for such advents.
Here is what I think, why vermilion circle is worn on forehead, by married women, from ancient times, well as ancient as we would like to believe, since there is no research, to my knowledge, which is out there.
Also, instead of reading Gandhi-Nehru history, we should have scholars tell us, such interesting facts from ancient India, based on actual and factual research, but lets be disappointed; that we live in a massively sponsored democracy. A lot of money is sprayed like DDT, (DDT kills malarial parasite, but this money kills scholarship to where it exists) to capture the Indian Political Market, then we take Rahul Gandhi as the fellow, who deserves to be in textbooks of Indian History.
This is something, which I have observed, since high school, my high-school texts were replete with Indira Gandhi and Nehru’s letters, perhaps more, than Mahatma Gandhi’s. Its worse than reading intelligent design on science texts. See how this cuts across party lines, now each and every major and minor political party, can be blamed of such a plagiarism. How shamelessly they name the research and academic centers and medicals and airports and streets and chowks, all by their chosen political statesmen.
Why then complain about defacing of Hindu Gods and demi-Gods on temple wall? India, perhaps we have zero hopes with academic sanity, because, nobody cares, and we have a negative credit line, when it comes to this, we can never hope; to get to even zero level.
This all began in modern Indian History with Congress Party’s hijacking the Indian Academia, a reason why you see stooges of all major parties, in Indian Academics, who by their qualifications, for that particular field of study, even wouldn’t be janitors. In order to create fortune for a few, we have demolished the fortune of every one including the future of the country. Which is why you see Indian Academics as a 3rd world academia, like this or not.
So lets get back to deal with our lack of knowledge, believing that; vermilion circles are just there from old age India. Its representing the red Sun, the morning sun is a red sun. “That my Lord is my honor, the first person I honor, is my husband, my Lord.” Husband being denoted by word “Lord” such a concept is to be found across the world, but its in the sense of Land Lord, Land Lady, than Lord of the Lady. An equity between this marital relation was perhaps, there since old age, but like caste system, has been abused often, where; husband becomes the supreme Lord of the wife.
Thus the red spot marked if the Lady is married or not. Such a distinction might already be a begin of the malice of the society in which it lived, hence in moderner times, we don’t see many women following such a ritual. But, I also like to see women wearing jeans more often than not, and shun the mentality of wearing sari, to work place and colleges. Ours has been a totally malicious society in not giving women the liberty they are entitled to, if they judge it so for themselves. India will be modern in another 100 years, or not, I don’t know. But, such is, intimately connected to the subject matter of point 2.
So lets go to point 2. Why there is so much sexual imagery on Indian Temple Walls. Saying Indian Temple Walls is more correct than would be saying Hindu Temple Walls, Hindu is as opposed to how we see Islam, Judaism etc, and represents social malice, but Indian is what actually existed, in the sense of geography encircling the then society and cultural practices, the malice is not purged, but it does not bring more malice, because, all religion are but the veiled forms of the same malice, but now; much more nourished from their applications in different society across time and space lines. And; were Hindus this conservative back then? Hindus: in the sense of the then Indian Geography Residents, who all are known as Hindu in today’s terms, might not all be Hindu, in the same sense of today, but immigrants also.
Ok, so in conservative or orthodox mentality, the Hindu of today, is as bad, as the orthodox Islam, Judaism and Christian proponents are. They are self seeking behemoths, who would be good, only if we restrict that definition to; what society accepts and what it does not. But our future generations, won’t have a constraint, in judging, who is what. Hopefully.
But my point is, perhaps the Hindu was not as orthodox, before the influx of Mughal, Islam and Europe, to the then geography of India, as they are now. And why? And this I have pronounced years before; not for the first time I am thinking so. I pronounce something when I realize something, in its deeper renditions of my subconscious mind, which is why I keep my door shut most of the times, I don’t want “observation affects reality”, let my thoughts enjoy more peace than they are getting.
I realized the “non”orthodox nature of Hindu, from, what the society was depicted like, in ancient times, I have visited the famous Konarka Temple (Sona Raxa, that is Jurisdiction of Sun, somarajya etc) since when I was 8 years old, but my “gyana danta” (wisdom teeth, gyana is evidently sun, 2ndary meaning knowledge, but danta is a janta which comes from jayanta = sun, 2ndary meaning teeth) was not sensitive, until I revisited them, in 2005. Back in 2005 I might have, apart from Konarka, from many other temples in Bhubaneswar, realized, the social thinking of the then times. So, my point is, those were days of my real inspiration, 2002 – 2005, when I became quite more enamored, by Indian and Asiatic culture, which mostly we call as Hindu culture, when it comes to India. (Focusing on what we call as Hindu culture or temple now)
My reason of why the Hindus then, would be less orthodox in ancient times, is this, a mixed populace is far less conservative than one which is a monotonous socio-religious layer. When we try to make or project something as an united socio-religious phenomena such as “a Hindu” or “an Indian”, “after all a Jew”, “You Indians” they have become conservative and orthodox and totally bereft of reason and logic, in most senses than not.
So the Hindu or Indian as they existed back then, were, but less conservative and therefore less Hindu or Indian, hence a mixed populace, before the advent of Islam and Mughal and British.
The British, or Islam or Mughl in their paranoia, would like to depict, the then mixed populace as pagan, or less advanced; in order to assimilate them with the new influx of culture. A social tension brews, which causes a great deal of Renaissance; among the tribes of the then society. A newer form of Hindu up-rise would occur. But, it also, in countering the evil, becomes evil, hence more and more conservative and orthodox. What begins as a confrontation, makes the more powerful who could stop such conversions, the messiah or the priest of further conversion.
In other words, a hindu king who is capable of preventing Islamic conversion, would according to his interest and choice; convert the mixed populace, internally. He would convert a Hindu of one type into a Hindu of another type. A Brahman, could be converted into a Xatriya, and a Xatriya would be converted into a Brahman. An Anandamargi (I know they did not exist in 12th century, But I am just analogizing) would be rendered into a Vaisnava and a Vaisnava would be into a Shaiva and so on. What we begin out preventing, we inculcate into ourselves. Tell me, if the BJP and BJD didn’t corrupt themselves totally, in preventing the corrupt, history manipulating, academic slandering, congress?
The mixed Hindu populace were therefore, lesser Hindus and hence, better people, than more conservative, orthodox, influenced by later day mixing, with Islam and British, who might not have known the sexual imagination of the older people. Its a mixing of sort. You give hot and cold, they will mix. You give British and French they will mix. You give Hindu and Islam they will mix. Now they call it “interracial” in urban dictionary slang. What we have really, is a mixed rendering of everything. India and Europe mixed. To depict it as pure and Vedic is but a selfish agenda based paradigm. The British didn’t realize the grandeur of the Islamic civilization, the Islamic influx didn’t realize the grandeur of sexual and artistic renditions of social aspirations of the preceding mixed populace, that we call Hindu now, and so on. The new is monotonous, the monotonous ways are a religion. Religion destroys inner harmony, when it become social arbiters.
Why then sexual depictions on temple walls. Ok, first, we realize that the older people were mixed, in older ways, before mixing in newer ways, but from that older mixing they had become more mature and less orthodox. Just like America is today, far better than when it began slandering the American Indians. What begins as a corporate and imperial force to reckon with, in the 15th CE, becomes mature with time, there is mixing and saturation.
The sexual depictions, the real point 2, I wanted to bring, is “its an artistic rendition of prevailing sexual practices of the society”. Imagine this. A mixed, advanced, the then society; that knows no morality like the Greek did not know. Total incest and total no holds barred; when it comes to sex. It leads to violent crimes and rapes. Mayhem. Its a capitalistic rich society, that knows no morality, except perhaps to preach morality on to others. Society bleeds and suffers.
That must give rise to creativity; that tries to steer the society out of such malice and dangers. The only way the psyche of vast majority of society members, that indulges in violent sexual imagery, can be averted, is; by rendition of such acts and fantasy into artistic glory. First off, it takes away the energy, action, effort, indulgence from the proponents of idle adherents of sexual actions, towards artistic indulgence. A stone artifact takes you, lets say 10 years, you have been corrected into a better citizen, than indulging in addictions of sex and violence.
The kingdom found it more educating, correcting and rewarding towards its citizens, the whole idea of making sexual imagery into walls of temples. We see them now as temples, but they were not. They were merely the central attractions, the theme parks, the civic centers of the kingdom. Everyone would go there, the religion idea was yet to gain momentum, like every time it does in a time line, comes and goes, its a mixed advanced paganist society, that didn’t believe in being glorified for one way of thinking, that religion is.
Make a good stone art work and the king will give you a prize of 10 grands. Well, if its good, it will be placed in the next upcoming civic center. Period. God and Priests came later, to temples. King was helpless, from such negative forms of democracy; as are religion, God and Priests have been. Thats the story that makes more sense to me.
Now point-3. Point-2 was connected therefore to point-1. Point-1 led to some deeply disturbing aspects of social injustice, as might have been propagated, by asking only the married woman to wear vermilion and to this day, only the women to wear sari, and; jeans and drinking and smoking are punishable by the law of the Pramod Muttaliks. The central idea is not Pramod, but the malice in our society, which prevents us from being moderner, because, it does not suit their purpose, they would keep us hooked up; to how they would like us to be depicted or actuated upon. In such a similar way, point-3 also follows, one thing leads to another, and we hit Mahadeva. The phrase from my nativity, “allu khollu khollu … mahadeva”, “Digging a potato leads to the Lord”, in the ground, what that Lord notwithstanding, a meaning, a gold pot or an artifact.
Since point-2 leads to society having malice, in terms of sexual indulgence and violence, for which reason, creatively so, society might have invented ways, to reward the artists, that make the best sexual artifacts, and place them on civic centers, that are now known as temples of Hindus, it automatically leads to the idea; these civic centers, were they destroyed by Islam, or they were simple acts of terrorism?
Who then defaced the “Hindu” artifacts on temple walls. (Or civic centers?) The popular theory, or POV?
(POV, Point of View; so If I am on your POV, you won, you sexist, how about you leaning on my POV? By the way internet novices, a POV is not a SUV or MUV, its not about vowels either, its about human thought and imagery, a deeper subject that we are discussing in this article now.)
I think you already have your answer. The Islam did not necessarily deface the Hindu artifacts on temple walls. We have to learn how to unmix. We are mixed, like our society was mixed even in 12th CE. Our Hindu is not equal to the then Hindu. Our Islam, not equal to the then Islam. Our temple not equal to the then temples.
Mixed society. Religion is a perverted one way, of looking at everything.
A mixed society is wise enough to not fall prey into religion, although often, thats exactly what has happened, evil is too slick. A temple is a civic center of an ancient kingdom, which is not necessarily Hindu in the present rendition of the term. In other words, the evil that terrorism is, will totally run against the interests of the Kingdom, and come in the dark, and deface and loot as much as it would want.
Religion wants us to believe otherwise, simple thing, religion is the evil. Its in the veil of religion, evil can come. In the veil of our parents our enemy can attack us. It was not Islam against Hindu, it was the enemy of the Kingdoms, who wanted to slander and bruise the kingdoms, in their interests. These are mere marks of those terrorism struck days.
And no, 9-11 is not the first act of terrorism, neither it is an Islamic act. That Islam is the mask. Who created all the terrorism in the Middle East? The axis of the evil syndrome. When evil can ask: “you are either with us or evil”. What if Evil is speaking so? What if the Hindu is the terror kingpins? What if when their selfish agenda is not satisfied they can go and break the “Hindu temples”, the same way they can break the Islamic heritage? (or any type for that matter) We know the answers.
In 25th CE, our future generations, will not be completely free, from malice, like we are, but they will certainly judge better than us, who is the real evil. One can say “I am an Indian, be with me” but its that Indian who will first off, cut all your chances with everything. It can also be a Canadian or an American, or a German, but it can also be an Indian.
Nationalism and Religion makes us forget such basic facts, because it serves their agenda, then they bruise us and go, if their purpose was not satisfied. Which is what had been happening since 12th CE and before. A civilization does not get bruised by simple proportions.