The real danger for Children in India are parents

Have been watching news of parents in Bangalore storming school. They rightly want the perpetrator of this heinous crime to get punished. I mean, what kind of beast would sexually molest/rape a 6 year old girl. Must be punished and made an example. Children are our future, they are our bloodline, immortalise our DNA, enabling us to live through them once we are gone. Must be nurtured, protected and loved.

A month back saw a video of a 10-12 month old child being beaten by housemaid. parents got to know the treatment through CCTV they installed. There are many such cases of 3/4 year olds raped/exploited. what have we come to? However, I have a deeper question. Why are such incidents rising? Where are the parents/Grand parents?

Ah, they are busy making money to maintain their lifestyle, Pay EMIs, buy the next iPhone or paying for next European holiday. Parents are too busy; and parents simply do not care any more.There certainly is a perception that more parents are not as involved in making themselves a part of their children's  upbringing as would have been the case in years past. Personally, I fear there is validity to this perception and I don't like the societal changes that I see behind it in terms of impact on families and children. Young couples don't want their parents to live with them, women resent it citing lack of freedom & constant toka-taki of Mom-in-law. A lot of them don't want to have child too, calling it a responsibility they are not geared for.. They get a DOG home, Happier picking Dog POOP, ticks but not human children. Yes Dogs can't be raped/Molested, or can they?

Even if such couple do have children, within 10-12 months child goes to day care for almost 12 hrs or put under maid but not grand parent. At 2-3, child is sent to Play school for 10-12 hrs while parents are busy conquering the world in boardrooms in the name of "giving best to their child..". They buy expensive brands for few month old babies.. poor kid finds difficult to understand man from women but expected to appreciate the brands parents buy.. Still no grand parent in sight. While at home too they bring back work, plan official trips, fight over each other's friends and yes they have to go out for a few drinks on weekends once in a while..

The future, most precious treasures are put into the hands of day care teachers/Creche attendants or play school teachers. Ever wondered what kind of people get into teaching? Mostly who could not make it elsewhere or the really committed. The committed are harassed for lack of facilities or mix of poor kids by Congress' Right to education act. They are closing down fast.

So these modern, liberal young english speaking gents/ ladies want the government to step in. There is a growing number of citizens who want Big Brother government to control their lives. The tone of education reform puts all of the burden on teachers. There are too many factors beyond a teacher's control: the child's nutrition, attendance, sleep patterns, and many other home life factors. But, a teacher is expected to get all students on the same level without these circumstances ever being considered. Education reform mentions nothing about what students and parents should do; excepthow they should continue to evaluate and recognize the teacher's shortcomings.

Primary school teachers, work 65-hour weeks. In addition to her actual classroom duties, she teaches her own children, she teaches a standardized test the school mandates in order to qualify for funding under the Right to education. She spends another ten hours a month meeting with parents. She supervises extra- curricular activities, goes on overnight class trips, cleans and disinfects toys, coaches. She teaches fire drill safety procedures, healthy eating habits, she's certified in first aid and food sanitation.

Ten to twenty percent of our high school students have chronic medical or social problems.we want our cars to be safer, so we hit the manufacturers with a judgment that makes it more cost-effective to install the airbag. The problem here, as a teacher correctly stated, is we have more and more special needs kids (single parents) going into our public schools, 

So, who do we heap this responsibility on? Who else? The teachers. The average annual starting salary for a teacher is Rs300,000. For that, we ask them to teach, police, provide emotional and social guidance. In some schools, they actually have to clean the toilets. Now, let's throw in healthcare.

One teacher i knew at school was so overextended that when her own father had to undergo a life-threatening medical procedure, she couldn't be at the hospital. So she called to see if he had lived. Which he hadn't. She then turned away from her students, so as not to traumatise them with her grief, which as a teacher she was expected to internalise.

Private school teachers are young, educated, ambitious, have no savings ... no house. And today they are increasingly being sued because, they are overworked , emotionally stressed and with poorly brought up, undisciplined children she looses cool once in a while. This western disease of not touching child has reached urban india shores. When teacher is expected to do everything, why not disciplining them?

 They are being publicly prosecuted for trying to discipline mentally fragile children (emotional brokes) by parents who had the means to implement a multitude of safeguards. They implemented none of them except a teacher.

Is it any wonder half our teachers are quitting the profession outright within five years? Never mind who's going to handle the rapes. Who's going to teach? 

For my son, I am glad he lives with his grand parents/Uncles/Aunts/elder-younger cousins. Lifestyle is when he is visibly elated being allowed a Nokia Phone (Rs800) for him to make calls from school. Consumerism is killing families... Until one parent drops out to raise a family, be ready to make sacrifices, learn to accept & respect parents, things will only get worse. Sad for the young girl raped..

Distortion of Indian history - post by Janamajay

For the benefit of those who have not read my earlier tweets on History entitled "Preface" I reproduce them below;

My tweets on Secularist distortions of Indian History – Preface

The Western scholars have not only bungled facts & tampered with texts, they even went on hurling abuse at our ancient historians & sages.

Long Before Kota Venkatachelam, Prof.M.Troyer raised his voice of protest against modern historians. Mr.T.S.Narayana Sastry also was another.

Chandragupta Maurya lived in 1534 BC but was brought down to 323 BC to coincide with Alexander of 326 BC.This is the faking of Indian history

It was Gupta Chandragupta who was contemporary of Alexander and not Maurya Chandragupta. Max Muller did this to suit Greek chronology.

Jones was determined to reduce the antiquity of Indian history. He fixed the chronology of the different dynasties in an arbitrary way.

Prof.M.Troyar who translated Kalhana's Rajatarangini pointed out the necessity to follow Yudhishtira era of 3138 BC (contd.)

Prof.M.Troyar insisted on identifying Alexander's Chandragupta with Gupta Chandragupta but in vain.

Kota Venkatachalam collected astronomical evidence in support of Kali Era.
Kota Venkatachalam exposed the reasons that prompted the Western scholars to discard puranic chronology and the Kali Era of 3102 BC.

The antiquity of Indian history was reduced by 12 centuries by identitying Chandragupta Maurya of 1534 BC with Gupta Chandragupta of 323 BC.

Prof. Max Muller's plan was to reduce Indian chronology to suit Greek chronology.

We get the Aihole inscription of Pulekesin II mentioning Yudhishtira Saka of 3109 BC and Saka Era of 550 BC.

Ravi Kirthi built a Jain temple in 5 BC & both Kalidasa & Bharavi must have lived before that date in 57 BC during Vikramaditya's time.

Reigning periods of 3 contemporary kingdoms of Nepal, Magadha and Kashmir refer to Kali Era of 3102 BC & Mahabharata war of 3138 BC.

Even Jones had given the chronology of dynasties till end of Ashoka as given in Bhagavata PuraNa. But he did not adopt in toto.

It is our duty as a Hindu to rescue our history from the distortions & rape committed by the colonialists & their neo-colonial successors.

The overthrow of this alien rule & banning this Congi hoodlums from Bharatvarsha is first priority in rescuing ourselves as historical people.

India has sufficient historical evidence in the following 12 records. 1) Vishnu Purana 4th Amsa. 2) Bhavishyothara Purana 3) Kaliyuga Raja Vrintanta (giving a fairly detailed account of Andhra and subsequent Gupta dynasty), 4) Rajatarangini of Kalhana (contd.) 5) Cutch-nama (almost accurate account of Sind history) 6) The Gauda-Vaho 7) Nepala Raja Vamsavali 8) Jain Patvalis 9) Silasanas 10) Tamra-saasanas (Stone and copper plate inscriptions 11) Prasatis (eg.Samudhragupta's Iron Pillar) 12) Various Mutt records etc.

It is sacrilege to discard puranas. Besides there are histories like Harsha Charitha of Bana.

It is a pity that all old records of the world except that of India were given credence to in computing our history by secular indologists.

Innumerable errors & deliberate distortion of facts are now passed as Indian history driven by the sheer prejudices of alien historians.

All the vile historians didnt compile our history independently but have drawn evidence only from Puranas while twisting 2 suit their view.

Sir William Jones who swallowed the 1200 years of history between Chandragupta Maurya and Gupta Chadragupta acknowedges Puranas!

It is clear that without Puranas that even the secular distortions could not have a basis. Vie on those who poo-poo our Puranas!

U have to question why the indologists try to distance themselves from Puranas. The answer is to conform to the biblical idea!

U have to know the root of this putrid secularism which swears against religion but cannot stand without its bible!

The European historians who were accustomed to the idea of Greek & Roman histories of less than 3000 years were stunned at our antiquity!

Our Puranic history to the amazement of these miopic historians dealt with lakhs and crores of years history!

These Puranas of such ancience were therefore considered a astronomical fiction than actual history by the biblical idiots of sec history.

Crores of yrs of history were sudddenly compacted into mere 1000s or even 100s of years of history.All becas we've become a subject nation:(

A superiority complex in this still subject nation wud lead to a rebellion against these vile masters and lead us to regain our glory!

Sri Kota Venkatachalam has proved the genuineness of the 3 post-Mahabharata eras and his logic is irrefutable.

Yudhishtira era, Kali era and Saptharishi era have been continuously and consistently followed in our country.

What prevents historians from pursuing in the lines of the eras we consistently follow? Of course, it is the secularist fear of our Dharma.

It was only by repudiating these real eras that they were able to swallow the 1200 years of our missing history.

Sri Kota Venkatachalam had exposed the hollowness of these secularist distortions & by sheer logic reinstated our proud history.

Admirably Sri Kota Venkatachalam attacked the false history of Buddha and Adi Sankara.

Damage done 2 our history by false historians are really temporary. We will consign these false prophets in2 dubstins where they belong.

For every country of the modern world, except Bharat, the recorded history of the people goes back to 5 r 6 centuries before Christ.

The history of these non-Bharatiyas before 600 BC is not available and they are absolutely in dark of their original home.

Only Bharat provides such ancient history of its people to a hoary past of 195 crores of years & to the beginning of creation.

This history has been recorded & preserved safe and pure in the ithihaasas and puraanas, our historical ancient treatises. This great stretch of historical life has been divided into the different Manvantharas. In the current Brahma kalpa we are now in the time of the 7th Manu 195,58,85,113 years after the beginning of creation. The period of six Manus, each 30,67,24,000 years long have been left behind, and in the period of the 7th Manu Vaivasvat, 27 Mahayugas have passed away, each of 43,20,000 years duration. In the 28th Mahayuga of Vaivasvatha Manu, the Krita, Treta, Dwapara yugas together account for 38,88,000 years and towards the end of Dwapara, 36 years before the commencement of the current Kali yuga there took place the Great Mahabharata War.

We may designate as the ancient period of our history, the period from the commencement of the Vaivasvata manvanthara to the beginning of its 28th Mahayuga to the end of the Dwapara yuga and the Mahabharata War which occured thereabouts, as the medieval period of our country's history. The period from Mahabharata War, up to date, will then constitute the modern age in our history.

The 'very ancient period' would cover from the time of creation to the 7th Manu.

"Ancient Period" would cover from the beginning of the 7th Manvanthara to the end of 27th Mahayuga therein.

"Medieval Period" would be the beginning of the 28th Mahayuga to the end of Mahabharata War ie. 36 years before Kali.

"Modern Period" would be from Mahabharata War to the present day.

With regard to the modern period of our history from the time of Mahabharata war ie. 36 years before Kali started - 3138 BC - we find mentioned in our Puranas, not only the prominent royal dynasties which gained ascendancy and the total duration of their reigns, but also the names of the several kings of each dynasty in order and the duration of the reign of each king. We are used to take the history of Imperial Magadha for the history of Bharat. King Jarasandha of Magadha was killed by Bhima the Pandava hero before Mahabharata war. His son Sahadeva was killed during the war. After the war while Yudhishtira was crowned emperor of Bharat, Sahadeva's son Marjari alias Somadhi was crowned King of Maghadha and he was the first of Barhadradha dynasty of Magadha. All puranas unanimously declare that 22 kings of this dynasty ruled over Magadha for a period of 1006 years. Thereafter 5 kings of Pradyota dynasty reigned for 138 years. Then 10 kings of Sisunaga dynasty reigned for 360 years. After that 9 kings of Nanda dynasty reigned for 100 years. In all (1006+138+360+100) = 1604 years passed since the end of Mahabharata war. The end of Nanda dynasty and the coronation of Chandragupta of Maurya dynasty took place in the year 1534 BC (3138-1604=1534).

The secularists, colonial and neo-colonial fraudster historians gloss over this fact and assert that this Chandragupta Maurya was the contemporary of Alexander 1200 years later.

The four dynasties lasting 1604 years of Magadha emperors and their reigns specified in the PuranNas viz. Barhadradha dynasty of 22 kings lasting 1006 years, Pradyota dynasty of 5 kings for 138 years, sisunga dynasty of 10 kings for a period of 360 years and Nanda dynasty of 9 kings lasting 100 years are all accepted even by the European historians of our country. But they ignore the basic date of Mahabharata war and identifying Maurya Chandra Gupta of 1534 BC as the Chandra Gupta mentioned by the Greek historians who accompanied Aleander the Great when he invaded India in 326 BC pretending to be unaware of the later Chandra Gupta of the Gupta dynasty who was in fact the contemporary of Alexander and assume the coronation of Maurya Chandragupta to be 322 BC and proceeding on the basis of this fictitious and false starting poiint to determine the date of the various dynasties and kings of Magadha before and after it with reference to it. Thus arises the discrepancy of 1212 years (1534-322).

Sir William Jones was the first European Orientalist to attempt in 1774 a reconstruction of ancient Indian history and prof. Max-Muller, the great scholar who lent his authority to the current accepted history of ancient India in 1859 AD, declared that they had no alternative to the course adopted by them, of identifying Maurya Chandragupta as the contemporary of Alexander and baing the chronology of ancient Indian history on this assumption.

When Mahabharata war ended and Yudhishtira was coronated in 3138 BC Yudhishtira Era began. 36 years later in 3102 BC Kaliyuga commenced and Kali Era started. 26 years later in 3076 BC a new era called Saptarshi Era or Loukikabda Era was inaugurated and has been popular and still current in Kashmir. These are well known to Hindus. If the history of our country had been constructed on the basis of these eras a true history would have resulted. But the European Orientalists discarded the three well-known indigenous eras and relied on assumed contemporaneity of Alexander the Great and Maurya Chandragupta of Maghadha as the basis for chronological determination and thus arrived at a false history.

The inscriptions of Ashoka and the Yona kings mentioned therein has been conclusively proved to be the Yavana Kings of Bharathiya origin on the frontiers of Bharat in the west in the 15th century BC and not the Greek Princes of Western Asia of the 3rd century BC as alleged by the European orientalists. Incidentally it has been established that the Yonas or Yavanas on the one hand and the Greeks on the other were two distinct races and they had migrated to Greece called Ionia earlier at different times (first the Ionians and then the Greeks in 800 BC), settled down there and the modern Greeks are the descendents of the mixed origin of the two races.

Not all the inscriptions published (by the secular historians) in the Indian Antiquary are absolutely reliable. Several of them are mere forgeries. Several others are tampered with and interpolated and distorted and arbitrarily interpreted in self-serving manner.

Arguments and conclusions of Sri Gopala Iyer referring to planetary positions and conjunctions show internal astronomical evidence that Mahabharata war took place in the year 3138 BC.

On Aihole inscription the letters have been tampeted with to push forward the times of the great poets Kalidasa and Bharavi to the 7th Century AD. It is proved that with reference to the original letters of the inscriptions that if the inscriptions is correctly read and interpreted the poets will be dated in the first century BC in conformity with the indigenous tradition of their adorning the courts of the epoch-making emperor Vikramaditya, on the contention that of the two eras mentioned in the inscription, one is the Yudhishtira era of 3138 BC, the year of the Mahabharata war and the other the Saka era of 550 BC(of Cirus the Great, the Saka king) and the inscription itself belongs to 5 BC.

Monotheistic Religion a criminal syndicate by other name?

The literal meaning of monotheism, namely, that God is one and not many does not interest me.
What bothers me is the monotheism known to history Christianity and Islam, religions which have prompted aggression, massacres, plunder, pillage, enslavement and the rest. Histories of Christianity and Islam tell the full story. Honest gangster do all this in a straightforward manner, "I want your land, your wealth, your women and children and you yourself as my slaves. Surrender or I will kill you." Dishonest gangsters have done the same in the name of the 'only true God'. God is not needed by them except as an alibi. Communists have done the same in the name of History, and the Nazis in the name of the Master Race.
Christianity and Islam do not need any supernatural scaffolding for doing what they have been doing. The mainstay of their monotheism is gross materialism.

I do not regard Christianity and Islam as semitic. The semites of west Asia were Pagans with pluralistic religious traditions before the Biblical God appeared on the scene. I, therefore, call both Christianity and Islam the Biblical creeds. Both of them have their source in the Bible.

And as I do not view them as religions at all, I refuse to compare them with Hinduism. I have found it quite apt to compare Christianity and Islam with Communism and Nazism.

 'Paganism' was a term of contempt invented by Christianity for people in the countryside who lived close to and in harmony with Nature, and whose ways of worship were spontaneous as opposed to the contrived though-categories constructed by Christianity's city-based manipulators of human minds.
In due course, the term was extended to cover all spiritually spontaneous culture of the world - Greek, Roman, Iranian, Indian, Chinese, native American.

It became a respectable term for those who revolted against Christianity in the modern West. But it has yet to recover its spiritual dimension which Christianity had eclipsed. For me, Hinduism preserves ancient Paganism in all its dimensions. In that sense, I am a Pagan.
The term "Polytheism' comes from Biblical discourse, which has the term 'theism' as its starting point. I have no use for these terms. They create confusion.

I dwell in a different universe of discourse which starts with 'know thyself' and ends with the discovery, 'thou art that'.


 I have no use for God. In fact, the very word stinks in my nostrils. This word abounds in the Bible and the Quran, and has been responsible for the greatest crimes in human history.
On the other hand, saints who have used this word in a spiritually wholesome sense have seldom warned us against its sinister use; most of the time they have been confused by the criminal use of this word, and have confused others. I do not feel the same way about the word 'goddess' because the monotheist who happen to be male chauvinists, have not used this word for their purposes.
In fact, the only thing which softens me towards Catholicism is the figure of the Virgin Mother even though theology has not permitted her to soar up to her highest heights.
Having been a student of Hinduism, I find that our tradition knows no God or Goddess as the creator and controller of the Cosmos.

The Vedas know no god or goddess in that sense, nor the Upanishads, nor the six systems of philosophy, nor Buddhism, nor Jainism. It is the Puranas which speaks for the first time of a paramatman (Highest Self), or a purushottama (Highest Persona). But that is not the extra-cosmic and blood-thirsty tyrant of the Bible and the Quran.
We do have in Hinduism the concept of ishtadeva, the highest symbol of a person's spiritual aspiration.
In that sense, I am devoted to Sri Krishna as he figures in the Mahabharata, and the Goddess Durga, as she reveals herself in the Devi-Bhagvata Purana. I feel free and shed all fear when I meditate on them.
They promise to clean up the dross that I carry within me.
They prepare me for battle against forces of darkness and destruction.

Extracts of Sh Sita ram goel's views

Hollow understanding of religion & failure of secularism

A state wanting to be secular has to 1st ask the Q, are all religions of the same kind, but following would tell us tht Sanatan is not..

1. Unlike most religions, Hinduism doesn't regard concept of god as being central to it .Hinduism does not venerate any particular person as its sole prophet or as its founder.

2. Not recognize particular book as absltly authoritative scripture or sustained by ecclesiastical organisation

3. Hindus refused to accept falsity of either their religion or any other, while the converse was never true wrt to semitic religions.

4. For semitics,religion revolves around truth of its doctrine,while hinduism holds truth & falsity predicates don't apply to human traditions

5. Means Hindus believe there are no false Gods but different deities.

6. However Semitics hold theirs is the true religion, while others are false & God has a plan revealed through their doctrine alone.

7. They claim exclusivity on truth.1st Jews claimed that exclusivity & have not given up, then X'tians.

8. Now youngest of Semitics child Islam claims sole right over truth & willing to fight to enforce their views

"For Hindu followers, the traditions followed by humans is unsettled, they argue that, truth in human traditions doesn't make sense, a westerner might wear trousers and pants, that is his tradition and it doesn't make sense to call this tradition true or false, it need not hold true for all humans for example."

Therefore if one supports conversions, it only means that one is converting from something false to something true.Consequently, the secular state that allows for the possibility of conversion is compelled to choose between the following: (a) both the Hindu traditions and the Semitic religions are epistemic candidates with respect to truth and falsity; or (b) they are not.

The Abrahamic self-description contains a claim of universal truth, which gives rise to acts of proselytisation as duty on the zealots & foot soldiers. The Sanatan/Tradition bound or Pagan view, on the other and, implies that every ‘religion' is a tradition—that is, a specific set of ancestral practices—characterising a human community. These traditions are followed not because they contain some exclusive truth binding the believer to God, but because they bind a community together. 

Any attempt at interfering with the tradition of a community from the outside will be seen as illegitimate, since all traditions are part of the human quest for truth. 

"Consider the situation in India. Say a citizen x is a Hindu who endorses the pagan claim that all traditions are part of a human quest for truth; while citizens y and z are a Muslim and a Christian respectively, who believe that their religion is the true revelation of (the biblical) God, while all other ‘traditions' are false religions. The value of non-interference is central to the tradition of citizen x and it is unethical for him to allow Muslims and Christians to interfere in the traditions of human communities. Thus, he opposes convrsion. At the same time, the value of proselytisation is central to the religions of citizen y and z."

How can the Indian state be neutral with respect to the attitudes of the citizens x, y and z? Either the state agrees with citizen x that ‘religion' is a human quest, no ‘religion' could be false, and, therefore, bans conversion; or it will have to agree with citizens y and z that religions could be the revelation of (the biblical) God, therefore, some ‘religions' could be false, and thus allow for conversion."

A state that claims to be secular can't treat all of the traditions or faiths on the same platform as that would amount to active discrimination by giving free hand to the aggressor and not protecting the rights of people holding tradition. When a cornered Tradition fights back in defence or anger at being left holding the secularism blabber, State in compulsions of vote banks decry it.

Quotes from a note by VenuG on Bharat Rakshak

Shrishti (Creation) ,its reasons - explanation of Chhandogya Upanishad

Very interesting discussion, I stumbled upon today. The topic f discussion was, "What is the reason for Shrishti (Creation), what was before and what will be in the end"

Hearing this conversation, I forgot all my human issues, pain of failure, rejection & joys of achievement. I tried to explain, Indic (Sanatan) point of view.
With age, memory fails me often & I struggled to remember what I had read vaguely.

Sad (Sat) is the reason of Shrishti(शृष्टि) in karta as well as Kaaran (कारण ) roop (form)

शृष्टि और प्रलय क्रमिक रूप से चलते है! हम अवयक्त से शूक्ष्म और शूक्ष्म से शथूल मैं जाते हैं तो सृजन होता है और उल्टा जाते हैं तो प्रलय! 

sad eva, saumya, idam agra asid ekam evadvitiyam,
taddhaika ahu, asad evedam agra asId ekam evAdvitIyam,
tasmad asataH sat jayata 

Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.1

saumya: dear boy
idam: this (universe)
agre: in the beginning (before creation)
ekam: one
eva: only
advitIyam: without a second
sat: existence
eva: only
AsId: was
tad: about that
ekeha: some
Ahu: say
idam: this
agre: in the beginning
ekam: one
eva: only
advitIyam: without a second
asat: non-existence
eva: alone
asid: was
tasmad asat: from that non-existence
sat: whatever exists
jayet: arose (was born)


In the beginning, dear boy, there was existence alone,
one only without a second. Some people say that, in the
beginning, there was non-existence alone, one only without
a second. From that non-existence (they say), arose whatever
exists.


SAT (existence, truth): SAt is which is self-evident and
does not require any proof and does not need anything else
to exist. e.g. I exist irrespective of anything else and
this does not require a proof. Also, SAT is that which exists
the same in all three periods of time (past, present and
future) trikAla abadhitam satyam.

Now, let us look at world and creation. Creation is the name
(nAma) and form (rUpa) with qualities (guNa) in time (kAla)
and space (desha). That which exists before creation must be
nameless, formless and attributeless and not bound by time
and space. Such is SAT. SAT stands for that which is mere
existence, extremely subtle, all-pervading, ekam, pure
consciousness, and indivisible.

EVA (only): That which exists before creation of name and
forms must be beyond time and space and must be infinite.
There cannot be two infinities, and therefore SAT *alone* (eva)
existed before creation.

IDAM (this): The world that is experienced and known to us is
referred to as idam (compare with pUrNamadaH pUrNamidam). SAT is
adaH beyond purview of thought and cannot be known as this. Also,
SAT cannot be objectified by thoughts.

AGRE (before): We should recognize 'when', 'where', 'before' are
all time and space concepts and are parts of creation.

AsIt (was): The question can be raised why the word 'AsIt' (was)
was used here in the past tense. SAT is there even now and is ever
exstent, not only before creation. The word 'was' is used with
reference to our present experience of the world.

ekam eva advitIyam (one only without a second): i.e. it (SAT)
has no svajAtIyabheda (no generic difference, i.e. no difference
within the same species), no svagatabheda (no intrinsic difference,
i.e. no difference within one self), or no vijAtIyabheda (no extrinsic
difference, i.e. no difference between species). Thus, it (SAT) is
homogeneous, only one and without a second.

It is also suggested here, that some say that before creation
there was only non-existence and from that non-existence arose
existence. But, that idea is refuted in this and the next mantra.

Tat sat! 

Kejrinomics, Economics challenged middle class & impending economic doom

My grandfather used to say, we are a knowledge civilisation. We deeply appreciate knowledge (Gyan) and thus the reverence or social status for brahmins before it ran out of fashion under the Islamic/Colonial vilification. We may have vilified brahmins and put all responsibilities of social ills on them, even though 2/3rd of Indian kings have been what we call OBC today, but we continue to worship Saraswati. 

I brought out Brahmin vilification deliberately to bring out an ugly side effect of our reverence for Knowledge, everybody claims to have knowledge on every subject under the sun. Ask any decently literate person on street and pose any theoretical question on any subject, he will have an answer. We simply can't accept our ignorance on any subjects.  

The Point being, If you are an expert at one subject or recognised degree of acceptance, you are assumed to have complete understanding of every subject issue that this great civilisation faces. As a result we have a Shoba De giving views on Philosophy, Some Rabid Mullah talking on Caste system/Hinduism and Kejriwal talking on economics. while the faithful adding points of their own.
In the new age, Brahmins have changed but the ethos remains. Nowdays, Sh Kejriwal is espousing his strange vision of India. No no no.. I am not against his ideas of corruption less society though I absolutely disagree with the methods. Any sane person with a modicum of intelligence would agree that the root cause of corruption is 'Discretion' & clause of 'discretion' rests in hands of bureaucrats & their political bosses. It means more government= more corruption. 

Restrict the government to the areas which they were originally contracted to fulfil i.e. Law and order, security, rule of law and some more, areas of public good like primary education, public transport  which require massive mobilisation of resources along with general good. Now put this understanding to test Sh Kejri's solution to rid of corruption - More bureaucracy. Have you wondered why Kejriwal utterances, no matter how archaic or disastrous they come out to logical minds, get so much of credibility? Yes, you guessed it right, our love for knowledge and equating them with degrees, IIT in this case.

I was one of the first to call him an anarchist and urban maoist. All his talk on fighting corruption is just  a ruse to heighten passion of common people against the state or its arm that protects law and order, maintains order, Police. No doubt police indulges in petty corruption being overworked & underpaid. The goal is not removing corruption but bring down the state and fill it with Maoist lackeys.

I have some questions for the enlightened souls blowing Kejri horn. 

The first important question : Do Kejriwal offer an alternative that is economically, socially and politically viable and achieves targets that appear to be set by the existing rashtryia framework? If we take economic development and prosperity for all citizens - then what are the methods that Maoists/Kejri offer? They can only work with two models - one is the capitalist road to growth and the other a pre-capitalist form (which by classical Marxist theory as well as the experience of the Mao proper - was to accumulate capital to provide the basis for futrure capitalist development). But eitherway, they are theoretically commited (and so far have not provide any alternative) to the capitalist road.

This is a key question which all Kejri sympathisers or Maoists themselves must be asked. Do they or do they not subscribe to eventual capitalist mode of the economic growth? They can claim that such capital will not be private - but it will then mean either state capitalism, or oligarchical trusteeship of such capital. How do Kejri/Prashant/Gopal Rai (avowed Marxists) ensure that such control does not inevitaly lead to growth of virtual private capital? If capitalism is the end target, why go through the regressive semi-feudal-to-fedual-capitalist primitive capital accumulation method - and not go for more direct grassroots capitalism? Where small amounts of capital appropriate for the skills level of the small producer are forwarded by the state?

Second, do the Maoists offer an alternative form of governance and rashtryia structure that helps all citizens achieve objectives of economic prosperity and pursuit of "fulfillment through creativity" (the key hope in Marx that future development of social productive forces will free up the time of an individual so that he can get over the alienation that capitalism produces - the disjunction between the man and his creation)?

The known models put forward from the Marxist repertoire, are that in USSR, PRC, Cuba, East European ex-communist COMECON block, Angola, Benin, parts of Yemen for a time, assorted countries in some regions of Africa, Chile and Nicaragua for a short while, Spain and Portugal briefly, Iraq and Iran very briefly, North Korea, Vietnam, Kamupchea and Laos briefly.

Out of the surviving regimes with still some claims of communism/Marxism - the ones in some degree of control over their respective rashtryia apparatus - China, Cuba, Vietnam, NK - with the exception of NK, all appear to have made various degrees of compromise with overtly private-capitalist forms. Is the answer to such an eventuality going to be a crucial dependence on the establishment of "communism" and its success all over the world? (The ultimate anathema to the Stalinist derivatives including Maoism - the theory put forward by the Trotskytes)

What are the measures that teh Maoists can propose that guarantees the success of "communism" within India without the "global revolution" and without taking the "state capitalist" road?

Why do I ask Kejriwal/AAPtards these question related to economy? That is because his rhetorical driven, publicity seeking open letters on gas pricing sent to Rahul & Narendra Modi. As he is a politician, I won't show displeasure n his publicity biz however, what takes my goat is whether Narendra Modi will go ahead with the UPA government’s decision to raise gas prices to $8 per mmBtu. 

Narendra Modi & even Rahul gandhi, rightly so, have not responded to the idiotic question. None of them are neither gas pricing experts nor business managers/Economists. That matter should be left best for experts to answer. However, as someone who has managed businesses let me state  few facts..

The question whether will NaMo/Rahul accept gas prices from1 April to $8 per mmBtu, is actually irrelevant: the question is not whether this is the right price or the wrong one, but whether this is the right way to price gas at all. You should know that hydrocarbon resources are scarce, and India is not well-endowed with huge untapped hydrocarbon potential. We import 80 percent of our crude oil, and around 40-50 percent of our gas. The oil and gas imports are the main reason why our current account deficit is damaging the rupee and our economy. Now the question..

1. In case you are short of some good and are forced to import it by paying hard earned tax payer $, should you not leave the pricing free to find it's own level?

2. Should you not stop subsidising the good so to wean away populace from excess consumption/wastage & reduce the subsidy bills restricting them to medical/education. Remember Money does not grow on trees. There is always choice to make.. there is no free lunch, someone has to pay.

3. In case you want to reduce the dependence on imports & save precious $, should you not encourage local sourcing, creating of resource? 

4. And pray,tell how will someone feel encouraged to invest/time/effort/money to source/find that precious resource - in this case gas, without promise of profits.

My own thought is that we should free gas prices to find their own level and must simultaneously incentivise fresh exploration and bring in greater competition in gas exploration and supply so that over time gas prices become reasonable. US natural gas policy is a great example. US Prices at the Henry Hub hit $10 in the middle of the last decade, before falling to just over $4 now following high shale gas production driven by private players. By artificially pegging gas and pump prices of oil low in India, we have become more dependent on imported oil and gas.

Anyone who prices gas cheap is thus acting against the national interest. He is making us dependent on the oil sheikhs of the Saudi peninsula. I am sure, Mr Kejriwal, you do not consider yourself a pal of Saudi and Qatari gas interests.

Now coming to gas exploration cost of Reliance raised by Kejriwal. it’s not as if Reliance was handed a well where it could just put a pump and sell the oil coming out. It had to explore, lose money, invest, create the infrastructure, and then get the gas out. It has taken all of nine years so far. it is also costlier to produce gas offshore. 

The profit margin on any commodity cannot be calculated on the marginal cost of a commodity – the cost of raw materials plus some profit margin – but its entire cost, including overheads, financing costs, and marketing costs.Now, let’s come to another point you made the other day. Joker said the cost of producing gas from Reliance’s Krishna-Godavari offshore fields can’t be more than $1-1.5 per mmBtu, and so the price paid to Reliance as the contractor should not be more than 10-20 percent more than that. That is, less than $2. What about the cost of infrastructure that reliance put up to explore, loose money and time?

Moreover jokers, in case reliance makes some profit, government of India takes away 85% of those profits as it's shares that too post taking hefty royalty from Reliance. Imagine the jobs that this venture sustains & profits GOI makes apart from saving $, generating taxes. If we can't incentivise entrepreneurship, risk taking then economy will wither and we are next in line to be next North Korea. We all be pushed into arms of more and more PSU's who not only are inefficient in terms of ROCE but also firmly in grip of bureaucracy/Politico complex and utterly corrupt.

Who is fighting corruption?

A fantastic article by R Jaggi on first post is on same lines.