Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm Merlyn

Should Allow All Women In Sabarimala Temple, Kerala Tells Supreme Court

Recommended Posts

Jahan tak mujhe samajh aaya hai, wo mahila bhakt jo sach me is mandir me Pooja karne jana chahate hai, unhen is niyam se koi aapatti nahin hai.

Lekin dusri taraf @Muloghonto ke bhai bahan feminazi balak aur balikayen who probably won't ever step foot in the temple premises are itching to get this law overturned.

Kya koi bhai seedhe shabdo me ye samjha sakta hai ki esa kyu ho raha hai?

Aur @Muloghonto please aap na samjhayen.

Dhanyawad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Jahan tak mujhe samajh aaya hai, wo mahila bhakt jo sach me is mandir me Pooja karne jana chahate hai, unhen is niyam se koi aapatti nahin hai.

Lekin dusri taraf @Muloghonto ke bhai bahan feminazi balak aur balikayen who probably won't ever step foot in the temple premises are itching to get this law overturned.

Kya koi bhai seedhe shabdo me ye samjha sakta hai ki esa kyu ho raha hai?

Aur @Muloghonto please aap na samjhayen.

Dhanyawad.

Uhm, pretty sure i have been in more churches, mosques & temples than 99.9% of humanity.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stradlater said:

Yeah for sightseeing probably.

Yahan mudda alag h dhondu.

And that is not a valid reason because ?!


You sure everyone who goes to a temple to pray are there so they can commune with said God/Gods and isn't just there coz their moms dragged them along ? You cannot judge intent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Muloghonto said:

And that is not a valid reason because ?!


You sure everyone who goes to a temple to pray are there so they can commune with said God/Gods and isn't just there coz their moms dragged them along ? You cannot judge intent.

See Mulo you have problems with subtle distinctions which is understandable considering senility has probably started catching on.

Thing is a religious place/shrine has some rules of it's own which should be respected by everyone. If they don't want you to enter then you should probably get along with it since every law has some reasoning behind it and also out of respect.

Their religious sentiments should be prioritized over someone's inner travelling urges so that they can upload their pics on Instagram with hashtags of wanderlust and borntotravel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

No. Government has always superceeded religion and still does. Power lies with the government - whether its the 11th century king/sultan with an army, 18th century privateers with charters or modern military.  And when government chooses to - it dictates what religions can/cannot thrive, what kind of power religion will have etc. The goverernment has always been a superior body of power to religion. This is a historically attested fact.

This is completely unrelated.Iask you this - which liberal democracy has allowed - women to worship with men in mosques by superseding religion ? Or superrseeded the Catholic church to allow women as cardinals? Religious institutions have the right to exclusion and segregation for religious services and that is why they are religions. Interference with that , unless absolutely necessary, makes a state less secular and not more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

See Mulo you have problems with subtle distinctions which is understandable considering senility has probably started catching on.

Thing is a religious place/shrine has some rules of it's own which should be respected by everyone. If they don't want you to enter then you should probably get along with it since every law has some reasoning behind it and also out of respect.

If they are a completely private property and private entity, sure. But they are not. This is not someone's personal temple, this is a public place. Therefore, i refuse to recognize any such restriction to a public building. 

10 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Their religious sentiments should be prioritized over someone's inner travelling urges so that they can upload their pics on Instagram with hashtags of wanderlust and borntotravel.

Nope. You have no right to dictate what the purpose of a public building is or why people should go there. Nobody does. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

This is completely unrelated.Iask you this - which liberal democracy has allowed - women to worship with men in mosques by superseding religion ? Or superrseeded the Catholic church to allow women as cardinals? Religious institutions have the right to exclusion and segregation for religious services and that is why they are religions. Interference with that , unless absolutely necessary, makes a state less secular and not more. 

Turkey during Ataturk's early years, allowed such for females. 

The cardinal question is inapplicable, since it is a title granted ONLY by the said religion. I am talking about access and civic rights. I am not saying who gets to be purohit or mullah or bishop, etc. 

The way i see it, as long as all religions are treated the same and has no influence on the government, it is secular. Doesn't matter if they are treated well or treated poorly. Secularism is not about good or bad treatment of religions, its simply about equal treatment of all religions and them having no influence over government functionings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If they are a completely private property and private entity, sure. But they are not. This is not someone's personal temple, this is a public place. Therefore, i refuse to recognize any such restriction to a public building. 

Does that mean Saudi govt should lift the restrictions on non Muslims to enter M&M and let people of all creeds to wander about the holy cities, interfering with religious rites of Muslims and disturbing the whole haj decorum? 

Thankfully the world doesn't think that way and never would.

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Nope. You have no right to dictate what the purpose of a public building is or why people should go there. Nobody does. 

You are a chutia and I'm done debating with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Turkey during Ataturk's early years, allowed such for females. 

The cardinal question is inapplicable, since it is a title granted ONLY by the said religion. I am talking about access and civic rights. I am not saying who gets to be purohit or mullah or bishop, etc. 

The way i see it, as long as all religions are treated the same and has no influence on the government, it is secular. Doesn't matter if they are treated well or treated poorly. Secularism is not about good or bad treatment of religions, its simply about equal treatment of all religions and them having no influence over government functionings. 

I asked for a liberal democracy which does it . Atatürk's Turkey was not a liberal democracy by any stretch of the imagination not by contemporary standards anyway. If the Supreme Court indeed does open ALL religious institutions to women that would be a first i think for a secular democracy and would be , truly,  a secular decision. but frankly that is not gonna happen and we all know why. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If they are a completely private property and private entity, sure. But they are not. This is not someone's personal temple, this is a public place. Therefore, i refuse to recognize any such restriction to a public building. 

Nope. You have no right to dictate what the purpose of a public building is or why people should go there. Nobody does. 

I can see some merit in this argument that since this is a public place it should be open to all and that is ok. But im firmly against the government running any religious institution and i consider it immoral if the government to run temples especially Tirupati , sabarimala etc. simply because they  generate somuch revenue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

I can see some merit in this argument that since this is a public place it should be open to all and that is ok. But im firmly against the government running any religious institution and i consider it immoral if the government to run temples especially Tirupati , sabarimala etc. simply because they  generate somuch revenue. 

Well i am firmly for the government running everything that is a public space and public property. Religion is no exemption- the government is ultimate authority in charge of running a land, creating its laws and dispensing justice. Religion falls under those categories. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Does that mean Saudi govt should lift the restrictions on non Muslims to enter M&M and let people of all creeds to wander about the holy cities, interfering with religious rites of Muslims and disturbing the whole haj decorum? 

I'd say yes. 

49 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Thankfully the world doesn't think that way and never would.

You are a chutia and I'm done debating with you.

LOL at name-calling. The world is trending towards putting all these hocus pocus religious nonsense in the dustbin, buddy. Because the world is slowly waking up to the reality that just like how we don't let amazon tribals to dictate how we should live our lives, the same applies for religions who's founders/major figureheads are all high school flunkies by today's standard. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Well i am firmly for the government running everything that is a public space and public property. Religion is no exemption- the government is ultimate authority in charge of running a land, creating its laws and dispensing justice. Religion falls under those categories. 

Would agree only if government runs all temples, churches and mosques not a select few as they please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

I'd say yes. 

LOL at name-calling. The world is trending towards putting all these hocus pocus religious nonsense in the dustbin, buddy. Because the world is slowly waking up to the reality that just like how we don't let amazon tribals to dictate how we should live our lives, the same applies for religions who's founders/major figureheads are all high school flunkies by today's standard. 
 

They were thinking about how we came about to exist and the meaning of time, your scholars are busy involved in kiki, tide pod and ice-bucket challenge. :phehe:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

They were thinking about how we came about to exist and the meaning of time, your scholars are busy involved in kiki, tide pod and ice-bucket challenge. :phehe:

today's scholars think of the same and today's high school kids have a better understanding of the universe and how we came to exist than those illiterate 'sages'. Thats a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

I was commenting on the Christian core belief of a Virgin birth of Jesus. If it was not for birth from a Virgin mother, Jesus would not be born out of sin like all of us and hence he can't deliver us out of our born sin. This is the core belief. Scientifically, the only way a mother can give birth and still be a virgin is if Mary was a hermaphrodite. Forcing such beliefs would be blasphemous as well as unconstitutional.

 

May I know who are the two deities that I offended with virgin birth remark? Ganesha ? 

You didnt offend me at all. No worries there. I said questioned which is ok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

today's scholars think of the same and today's high school kids have a better understanding of the universe and how we came to exist than those illiterate 'sages'. Thats a fact.

You are incorrigible. You don't know anything about mind-sciences and talk through your rear most of the time. Waste of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

You are incorrigible. You don't know anything about mind-sciences and talk through your rear most of the time. Waste of time. 

Pfft. Mind sciences are 1000 times more advanced today than the age of so-called rishi-munis who did not even know how many planets are in the solar system, nevermind meaning of existence. Give me a clinical psychiatrist any day of the week over the hocus-pocus mumbo-jumbo speaking half-literate rishi-munis. 


You just can't handle the fact that children know more about our existence, biology, dna, the universe etc. than the writers of your religion. 

 

An average university science graduate knows more about math and sciences than the sum total of ancient Indian civilization. 

The average psychology graduate knows more about how the mind works than the totality of every single 'rishi muni, gyaani' of the past talking about mental faculties.


So tell us, how are the thoughts of those with 0.00001% knowledge as us, are fit to be followed as an example ?

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Pfft. Mind sciences are 1000 times more advanced today than the age of so-called rishi-munis who did not even know how many planets are in the solar system, nevermind meaning of existence. Give me a clinical psychiatrist any day of the week over the hocus-pocus mumbo-jumbo speaking half-literate rishi-munis. 


You just can't handle the fact that children know more about our existence, biology, dna, the universe etc. than the writers of your religion. 

 

An average university science graduate knows more about math and sciences than the sum total of ancient Indian civilization. 

The average psychology graduate knows more about how the mind works than the totality of every single 'rishi muni, gyaani' of the past talking about mental faculties.


So tell us, how are the thoughts of those with 0.00001% knowledge as us, are fit to be followed as an example ?

Mind-science is not about Psychology/Psychiatry. Basic 101. Read about how western mind-scientists learnt the craft from yogis in India in the 60s and have digested it with their invented nomenclature. Search for Vipassana and how it is appropriated into what they call as Mindfulness etc. with some mumbo-jumbo modern words. I don't have the time to spare for you to cut and paste. These were thought about more than 2000 years ago. 

 

This is like arguing present day high school students know more than Galileo or Newton. BS. It is called learning what is already known, while we are talking about who pioneered the knowledge. Thinking was initiated by Indian civilization. Go figure!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

But you do see replies. Not good. It should work like Twitter blocks where you can't even see the replied. :phehe:

i feel content with small things. more the better but what i have is enuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Mind-science is not about Psychology/Psychiatry. Basic 101. Read about how western mind-scientists learnt the craft from yogis in India in the 60s and have digested it with their invented nomenclature.

Mind science *IS* psychology, psychiatry and pure biology.Anyone who says otherwise, is saying pure bakwaas. 

And so what they learnt the nomenclatures and frameworks from others ? They learnt it, they improved upon it 1000 folds and now we know how the brain and mind works 1000x more than your half-literate rishis thousands of years ago. 

Quote

Search for Vipassana and how it is appropriated into what they call as Mindfulness etc. with some mumbo-jumbo modern words. I don't have the time to spare for you to cut and paste. These were thought about more than 2000 years ago. 

i used to be a practicing buddhist. So i know the concept. Still doesn't change the fact that what we know today via science, about the mind, is 1000x more than those half-literate rishi-munis did. 

Quote

 

This is like arguing present day high school students know more than Galileo or Newton. BS. It is called learning what is already known, while we are talking about who pioneered the knowledge. Thinking was initiated by Indian civilization. Go figure!

Yes, they do know more than Galileo and Newton. Newton and Galeleo were great minds, just like those rishi and munis, but the fact remains that their knowledge is less than what a science grad possesses in their little finger. Therefore, they are not fit to instruct us or lead us. Simple logic. 

As the saying goes ' knowledge is power'. Not ' brilliance is power'. You could be a brilliant illiterate (just like those muni-rishis) and you have nothing to offer. You could be someone not so smart but with entire encyclopedia memorized and you have a lot to offer. Kids today have more knowledge than those self-declared sages. Simple. 

 

LOL at thinking being initiated by indian civilization. Such insecure nonsense belongs in the dustbin. You need to learn history more if you think we invented how to 'think'. 

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Mind science *IS* psychology, psychiatry and pure biology.Anyone who says otherwise, is saying pure bakwaas. 

And so what they learnt the nomenclatures and frameworks from others ? They learnt it, they improved upon it 1000 folds and now we know how the brain and mind works 1000x more than your half-literate rishis thousands of years ago. 

i used to be a practicing buddhist. So i know the concept. Still doesn't change the fact that what we know today via science, about the mind, is 1000x more than those half-literate rishi-munis did. 

Yes, they do know more than Galileo and Newton. Newton and Galeleo were great minds, just like those rishi and munis, but the fact remains that their knowledge is less than what a science grad possesses in their little finger. Therefore, they are not fit to instruct us or lead us. Simple logic. 

As the saying goes ' knowledge is power'. Not ' brilliance is power'. You could be a brilliant illiterate (just like those muni-rishis) and you have nothing to offer. You could be someone not so smart but with entire encyclopedia memorized and you have a lot to offer. Kids today have more knowledge than those self-declared sages. Simple. 

 

LOL at thinking being initiated by indian civilization. Such insecure nonsense belongs in the dustbin. You need to learn history more if you think we invented how to 'think'. 

Yes, when meditation/mind exercises were practiced by rishi-munis 5000 years ago while others were killing each other for wealth/food in other parts of the world, is evidence enough that Indian civilization was advanced. Sanskrit was the first language to be built for 'rasa', Epics Ramayana and Mahabharata are Maha Kavyas full of 'rasa'. Just because it is not relevant anymore, you can go about claiming modern day kids are better than Valmiki/Vyas!  Your history is influenced with western thought and those of victors only, so it is not credible anymore. Become Decolonized first .

 

What is this logic , present day kids >>> Innovators of medieval period. They know more because of continuous advancement of knowledge they had pioneered. If old days innovators had such education and training, they would be the present day stephen hawkings and pioneers of today.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Well i am firmly for the government running everything that is a public space and public property. Religion is no exemption- the government is ultimate authority in charge of running a land, creating its laws and dispensing justice. Religion falls under those categories. 

Then it won't stay secular anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Then it won't stay secular anymore.

Ofcourse it will, if the government treats them all equally and does not let them interfere in the government. That is the more standard and common definition of 'secularism'. The indian style is psuedo-secularism (ultimate pandering, on paper, to all religions by the govt.):it is definitely violating the seperation of church and state axiom of secularism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Yes, when meditation/mind exercises were practiced by rishi-munis 5000 years ago while others were killing each other for wealth/food in other parts of the world, is evidence enough that Indian civilization was advanced.

That does not mean Indians invented how to think, as you claimed. Mesopotamians were also plenty advanced. So were the Greeks. Oh and Indians never stopped killing each other for wealth and food either pretty much right until the British conquered ALL of India. That much, is objective, archeological and historical fact.

Quote

Sanskrit was the first language to be built for 'rasa', Epics Ramayana and Mahabharata are Maha Kavyas full of 'rasa'.

The first language to have epic tales, is Sumerian, the language in which Epic of Gilgamesh is recorded. 

If you mean Sanskrit is the first engineered language - its true for classical, Panini Sanskrit that is somewhere in the 800BC-400BC range. Prior to that, aka Vedic Sanskrit, is not one of 'Rasa' at all. Its another Indo-European language. So far, what we can tell from its structure, its atleast the second-oldest of all Indo-European languages ( Nesite, aka Hittite, has an older/more archaic form to it) in its 'Vedic' form. 

Quote

Just because it is not relevant anymore, you can go about claiming modern day kids are better than Valmiki/Vyas! 

Modern day kids know more about their own existence, their own body, the universe, etc. than Valmiki or Vyas. Authors who's books are used to 'recommend to us' how to live our lives should know more than the kids of today, don't you agree ? 

 

Quote

Your history is influenced with western thought and those of victors only, so it is not credible anymore. Become Decolonized first .

Pffft. You don't know enough history to comment on my level of history. I have the classic misfortune of being an 'Indian biassed history buff' to the largely ignorant history folks in the west as well as being the 'Firangi Lutyen' to the Chaddi idiots back home like yourself. 


India, is an underrated civilization- that is true. But India is not the inventor of thinking.
 

As far as Indian history is concerned, the best way to know you are on the right track is when you piss off the RSS types as well as the die-hard anti-indian racists out here like Witzel.

 

Quote

 

What is this logic , present day kids >>> Innovators of medieval period.

 

Quote

They know more because of continuous advancement of knowledge they had pioneered. If old days innovators had such education and training, they would be the present day stephen hawkings and pioneers of today.

In terms of knowledge, yes. Its knowledge that leads to the correct conclusion - decisively. Give enough knowledge to a monkey and the monkey will make the right call eventually. Deny knowledge to even some of the most brilliant and they will believe in nonsense. 

This is pretty much testable in lab condition. 

 

What is also an empiric fact is the technological, scientific and existential knowledge of species homo sapiens is getting greater and greater with time. With the most educated population in history of mankind (as a % of mankind that is educated), we are at a point, where our kids know more about where the universe comes from, what we are made of, what species homo sapiens IS- than Valmiki, Vyaas, Mohammed and such.

 

  A good, objective measure of blind reverence to an idea being out-dated, is when the author of the idea has less empiric evidence about what he/she is talking of, than most of the kids of a much later time. 

 

So we should pay no attention to what their ignorant extrapolations were about 'life'. If they bumbled upon a greater truth, because they were smarter than the rest, despite being far less educated than our kids, yay- congrats.


I am sure if i knew the name of the dude who first figured out how to make a fire, I'd think he is a pretty freaking smart guy and deserves rememberence. 

People telling us how to live our lives and what is true/not true about the universe from 1000s of years ago, fall in that category.

 

I will happily admit, they were some of the smartest, brightest minds of their time. But they are also lilliputs in actual knowledge today. So i have less reason to listen to their extrapolations, than those of far better educated and equally smart people of modern times. 

Just like how Valmiki and Vyas were much, much more advanced than the guy who invented fire and wouldn't think much of this guy's (or the spiritual guru of his times for eg) idea of 'existence', Valmiki, Vyas etc. are at that level to us. 

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dial_100 said:

Government should do everything. You just find a bride and get married .... thats it. Government should do the rest. 

Because individuals are incapable while the government with western influenced documented rules (constitution) will do everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Because individuals are incapable while the government with western influenced documented rules (constitution) will do everything.

western influenced, eastern influenced or northern influenced is all irrelevant red herring. An idea either stands on its own merit or is dismissed due to its flaws. Doesnt matter what part of the world it comes from. 

If you profess to be Hindu, try believing in the concept of Vasudeva Kutumbakam, instead of warping hinduism as a cheaper, less effective copy of Islam (which is what the Sanghis really do).


PS: Facts show us that the highest standards of living for a society are accomplished by societies that allow personal freedom with a lot of social responsibilities and programs, such as many EU countries. Get on with the program, bud.

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

western influenced, eastern influenced or northern influenced is all irrelevant red herring. An idea either stands on its own merit or is dismissed due to its flaws. Doesnt matter what part of the world it comes from. 

If you profess to be Hindu, try believing in the concept of Vasudeva Kutumbakam, instead of warping hinduism as a cheaper, less effective copy of Islam (which is what the Sanghis really do).


PS: Facts show us that the highest standards of living for a society are accomplished by societies that allow personal freedom with a lot of social responsibilities and programs, such as many EU countries. Get on with the program, bud.

Ok, guruji.

It is Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, it is incorrectly referenced to mean a pacifist world family by Modi/Nehru and the idiots from the left.  In the original panchatantra story, it hass the opposite meaning. When the deer was trying to make friends with the fox, the intelligent bird says a "Vasudaiva Kutumbakam" shloka/hithopadesha and warns the deer not to think that the whole world world is your family, else the fox will kill you. 

 

India was much richer in the Gupta empire/Vijayanagara Empire, and it has been reduced to 1/3 it's original land. If we don't protect our heritage/traditions, we will become part of museums in the west , like what they have done to some "pagan" communities. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

It is Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, it is incorrectly referenced to mean a pacifist world family by Modi/Nehru and the idiots from the left.  In the original panchatantra story, it hass the opposite meaning. When the deer was trying to make friends with the fox, the intelligent bird says a "Vasudaiva Kutumbakam" shloka/hithopadesha and warns the deer not to think that the whole world world is your family, else the fox will kill you. 

Well said, it's weird how the complete opposite of the meaning of the story is spread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

PS: Facts show us that the highest standards of living for a society are accomplished by societies that allow personal freedom with a lot of social responsibilities and programs, such as many EU countries. Get on with the program, bud

This is a clear myth. 

 

The highest living standards are in countries with the freest economies. Even ME countries with low personal freedom have large economies. There is zero evidence that personal freedom = living standards. 

 

This is further proven by the fact that Europe has been the leader of living standards for the last several hundred years despite the concept of personal freedom, in the  "modern" European context of the word, existing for less than half a century in most places. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

This is a clear myth. 

 

The highest living standards are in countries with the freest economies. Even ME countries with low personal freedom have large economies. There is zero evidence that personal freedom = living standards. 

 

This is further proven by the fact that Europe has been the leader of living standards for the last several hundred years despite the concept of personal freedom, in the  "modern" European context of the word, existing for less than half a century in most places. 

Yes, the myth is western economic policies is the only way to personal wealth growth, when the global western economy came down crashing in 2008, other countries started to feel, aping the west is not the best way to go about. 

 

p.s: You included the wrong person, I didn't quote that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Yes, the myth is western economic policies is the only way to personal wealth growth, when the global western economy came down crashing in 2008, other countries started to feel, aping the west is not the best way to go about. 

 

p.s: You included the wrong person, I didn't quote that.

My bad, I saw that part in the post and quoted it but it sent the notification to you some reason...

 

 

Edited by Tibarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Ok, guruji.

It is Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, it is incorrectly referenced to mean a pacifist world family by Modi/Nehru and the idiots from the left.  In the original panchatantra story, it hass the opposite meaning. When the deer was trying to make friends with the fox, the intelligent bird says a "Vasudaiva Kutumbakam" shloka/hithopadesha and warns the deer not to think that the whole world world is your family, else the fox will kill you. 

 

India was much richer in the Gupta empire/Vijayanagara Empire, and it has been reduced to 1/3 it's original land. If we don't protect our heritage/traditions, we will become part of museums in the west , like what they have done to some "pagan" communities. 
 

1/3rd its original land ?! Where did you ever get that number from ?

Only three political entities based in South Asia were EVER bigger than Republic of India : Mauryan Empire, Mughal Empire from Shah Jahan-Aurangzeb and British India. 

 

Oh and another thing: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasudhaiva_Kutumbakam

 

PS: Its a matter of time before ALL religious hocus pocus becomes part of history and museum only. Those ideals are far too antiquated and made by far too inferior knowledge-based people to survive much into the future. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tibarn said:

This is a clear myth. 

 

The highest living standards are in countries with the freest economies. Even ME countries with low personal freedom have large economies. There is zero evidence that personal freedom = living standards. 

 

This is further proven by the fact that Europe has been the leader of living standards for the last several hundred years despite the concept of personal freedom, in the  "modern" European context of the word, existing for less than half a century in most places. 

Standards of living is not just Per capita income. Its GINI coefficient, wealth distribution, access to education, services, etc. as well.

You'd rather be a rich or a poor guy in Germany than in UAE: unlike in UAE, you end up with public funded healthcare, education, infrastructure, social welfare etc. As well as having greater creation of wealth. 

 

As for modern european concept or not, Europe has had the highest level of property & personal rights enforced, compared to ANYWHERE in the world, for the last 1000-odd years. Even in medieval times, despite king of England conquering parts of France or vice versa, the properties of the people were far more secure, protected etc. than anywhere else. 

 

Western Europe succeeded for a 1000 years, where India and China failed after just a couple of hundred years : from the end of Viking invasion till start of WWII, Western Europe hardly ever saw cities being razed, properties being seized by the conquerors, disposessing the conquered, etc. Indians have been razing their rivals cities since pretty much the fall of the original Magadh Empire ( Kanva Dynasty), where we find mention of the Guptas, Palas, Rashtrakutas, Cholas, Gurjaras, etc all razing cities and China had its periodic collapse every 150-300 years after each major dynastic collapse. 


Europe by 1700s had 3-4x the literate population than India or China. This is the main reason - Europeans being much, much nicer to each others civillians in warfare and property rights - that is the KEY to Europe giving us the modern age and their sum total accomplishment of the last 500 years- in every field- being orders of magnitude greater than that of the sum total of much older civilizations like India or China or West Asia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Yes, the myth is western economic policies is the only way to personal wealth growth, when the global western economy came down crashing in 2008, other countries started to feel, aping the west is not the best way to go about. 

 

p.s: You included the wrong person, I didn't quote that.

Get over your inferiority complex. The simple truth is, Europe's contribution to practically every technological,scientific, economic and philosophical field over the last 500 years is much, much greater than the entirity of Indian or Chinese history. Its not even close, its like comparing a termite to an elephant. 

Accepting this does not make us any less proud of our history. If the world's proudest and most honor-driven culture, the Bushido based Japanese culture could learn that during Meiji restoration, so can anyone else. And just as Japan's acceptance of reality has gotten them to western standards of living and yet preserved their culture, so can we. 

 

We owe the modern life we live, to European culture. That, is an undeniable fact and credit should be given where credit is due. They did all this, because they preserved their knowledge and property rights far better than India or China ever has. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Standards of living is not just Per capita income. Its GINI coefficient, wealth distribution, access to education, services, etc. as well.

You'd rather be a rich or a poor guy in Germany than in UAE: unlike in UAE, you end up with public funded healthcare, education, infrastructure, social welfare etc. As well as having greater creation of wealth. 

 

As for modern european concept or not, Europe has had the highest level of property & personal rights enforced, compared to ANYWHERE in the world, for the last 1000-odd years. Even in medieval times, despite king of England conquering parts of France or vice versa, the properties of the people were far more secure, protected etc. than anywhere else. 

 

Western Europe succeeded for a 1000 years, where India and China failed after just a couple of hundred years : from the end of Viking invasion till start of WWII, Western Europe hardly ever saw cities being razed, properties being seized by the conquerors, disposessing the conquered, etc. Indians have been razing their rivals cities since pretty much the fall of the original Magadh Empire ( Kanva Dynasty), where we find mention of the Guptas, Palas, Rashtrakutas, Cholas, Gurjaras, etc all razing cities and China had its periodic collapse every 150-300 years after each major dynastic collapse. 


Europe by 1700s had 3-4x the literate population than India or China. This is the main reason - Europeans being much, much nicer to each others civillians in warfare and property rights - that is the KEY to Europe giving us the modern age and their sum total accomplishment of the last 500 years- in every field- being orders of magnitude greater than that of the sum total of much older civilizations like India or China or West Asia. 

Lies Lies more lies on your part.

European cities were razed and burnt during religious reformation wars. The rift between Protestants and Catholics lead to millions of lives getting lost whereas none such phenomenon on this scale happened in India. Heck even the early Turk Invaders and later on Mughals didn't indulge in looting as much the medieval European monarchs.

I have seen you repeatedly bringing up Indians destroying each other's cities argument so as to portray it as some sort of a common occurrence whereas reality couldn't be farther. While Indians did fight internecine warfare with each other, the magnitude of destruction wasn't nearly at the same level as 100 years war between France and England or 30 years war or the incessant battles fought between various Germanic states.

Last but not the least: No matter how hard you try to paint Medieval Europeans but the way they treated original inhabitants of Americas was extremely barbaric and despicable which no civilized Nation could dream of.

Heck why go even farther, check out the early Portuguese history in Goa where Catholic inquisitions led to millions of Indians getting hanged on stake or burnt.

Even the much reviled Muslim Invaders of India didn't indulge in such cruelty as the European Christians.

 

You are nothing but an insecure, self hating liar who is ashamed of his roots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All hail Thomas Macaulay for giving us self loathing, eurocentric modern Bengali pseudo historians.

The rascal must be smiling somewhere in the purgatory looking at the condition of India's "intellectuals" who are products of his education programme which was aimed at producing "Brown Sahebs" who were English in everything but the blood.

 

@Muloghonto is one such machine product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stradlater said:

Lies Lies more lies on your part.

European cities were razed and burnt during religious reformation wars.

Which cities were razed ? name them. 

Just now, Stradlater said:

The rift between Protestants and Catholics lead to millions of lives getting lost whereas none such phenomenon on this scale happened in India. Heck even the early Turk Invaders and later on Mughals didn't indulge in looting as much the medieval European monarchs.

Yes. On the battlefield. Dude, we have European property rights record going back to the 1100s that is pretty much untampered with. You are completely incorrect about European monarchs. Which monarch razed cities like practically all of the Delhi Sultans did ? name them and the cities they razed. 

Just now, Stradlater said:

I have seen you repeatedly bringing up Indians destroying each other's cities argument so as to portray it as some sort of a common occurrence whereas reality couldn't be farther. While Indians did fight internecine warfare with each other, the magnitude of destruction wasn't nearly at the same level as 100 years war between France and England or 30 years war or the incessant battles fought between various Germanic states.

False. the 100 years war mostly saw pitched battles. Cities hardly were affected. Whereas Indian monarchs THEMSELVES left inscriptions of razing each others cities. 
German states continuously fought each other. On the battle-field. Much like the Magadh wars of expansion, where Magadh continously fought Kosala, Vrijji, Panchala, Kuru, etc. on the battlefield but left their cities alone. However, this was last seen when Magadh empire reigned, over 2000 years ago. 

Just now, Stradlater said:

Last but not the least: No matter how hard you try to paint Medieval Europeans but the way they treated original inhabitants of Americas was extremely barbaric and despicable which no civilized Nation could dream of.

That is 100% true. But it does not change the fact that Europeans treated EACH OTHER better than any other group of people have treated each other. This is why Europe has universities from the 1100s AD still standing and property rights respected from that period till WWII. 

Just now, Stradlater said:

Heck why go even farther, check out the early Portuguese history in Goa where Catholic inquisitions led to millions of Indians getting hanged on stake or burnt.

Even the much reviled Muslim Invaders of India didn't indulge in such cruelty as the European Christians.

 

You are nothing but an insecure, self hating liar who is ashamed of his roots.

I am someone who's read and researched history all his life - longer than you have probably been alive and its a simple fact that the reason European way is the way of the modern world is because they preserved their property rights & knowledge base better than any other region on this planet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stradlater said:

All hail Thomas Macaulay for giving us self loathing, eurocentric modern Bengali pseudo historians.

The rascal must be smiling somewhere in the purgatory looking at the condition of India's "intellectuals" who are products of his education programme which was aimed at producing "Brown Sahebs" who were English in everything but the blood.

 

@Muloghonto is one such machine product.

Says the guy who knows jack $hit about history. Do you want me to post articles on European property rights and countless instances of property passing within families of even the nobility, despite them losing nobility status when conquered by others ? Because unlike Indians, European record-keeping of the last 1000 years is vast. 

 

As i said, learn from the Japanese. They had more honor and courage than the bravest and most honorable Rajputs, Arabs-heck anyone else in the world. You don't top bushido code for honor-based behaviour, where bodyguards routinely commit suicide if they fail to protect their lieges. And they learnt that the European system is superior, adapted and yet retained their culture. If they can, so can we. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Which cities were razed ? name them. 

Yes. On the battlefield. Dude, we have European property rights record going back to the 1100s that is pretty much untampered with. You are completely incorrect about European monarchs. Which monarch razed cities like practically all of the Delhi Sultans did ? name them and the cities they razed. 

False. the 100 years war mostly saw pitched battles. Cities hardly were affected. Whereas Indian monarchs THEMSELVES left inscriptions of razing each others cities. 
German states continuously fought each other. On the battle-field. Much like the Magadh wars of expansion, where Magadh continously fought Kosala, Vrijji, Panchala, Kuru, etc. on the battlefield but left their cities alone. However, this was last seen when Magadh empire reigned, over 2000 years ago. 

That is 100% true. But it does not change the fact that Europeans treated EACH OTHER better than any other group of people have treated each other. This is why Europe has universities from the 1100s AD still standing and property rights respected from that period till WWII. 

I am someone who's read and researched history all his life - longer than you have probably been alive and its a simple fact that the reason European way is the way of the modern world is because they preserved their property rights & knowledge base better than any other region on this planet. 

Wow never seen a bigger liar on internet before. You are even worst than Arab brainwashed Al Bakistanis.

But since you won't budge let's have a look at the treatment meted out by Medieval European Monarchs on civilians.

 

1) Persecution of Jews:  

A) West Europe(1348) Jews killed as scapegoats for Black Death:

Trager, People's Chronology: 2,000 hanged in Strasbourg.

Davies: 2,000 in Strasbourg; as many as 12,000 in Mainz.

Paul Johnson A History of the Jews (1987): 2,000 in Strasbourg; 6,000 in Mainz.

B) As stated in the Boston College Guide to Passion Plays, "Over the course of time, Christians began to accept … that the Jewish people as a whole were responsible for killing Jesus. According to this interpretation, both the Jews present at Jesus Christ's death and the Jewish people collectively and for all time, have committed the sin of deicide, or "god-killing". For 1900 years of Christian-Jewish history, the charge of deicide has led to hatred, violence against and murder of Jews in Europe and America."

 

During the High Middle Ages in Europe there was full-scale persecution in many places, with blood libels, expulsions, forced conversions and massacres. An underlying source of prejudice against Jews in Europe was religious. Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade  (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine  and the Danube were utterly destroyed, a prime example being the Rhineland massacres. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251  and 1320. The Crusades were followed by expulsions, including in 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland.

 

I suppose these Jews weren't civilians? 

 

2) Witch Hunts:  An estimated total of 30,000-60,000 people were executed during the witch trials.[7][8] Among the best known of these trials were the Scottish North Berwick witch trials, Swedish Torsåker witch trials and the American Salem witch trials. Among the largest and most notable were the Trier witch trials (1581–1593), the Fulda witch trials  (1603–1606), the Würzburg witch trial (1626–1631) and the Bamberg witch trials (1626–1631).

 

Shock!! Horror!!

How could the civilized Europeans indulge in such barbery against their own civilians? I thought it was only an Indian phenomenon.

 

3) Spanish Inquisitions:  Juan Antonio Llorente, General Secretary of the Inquisition from 1789 to 1801, estimated that 31,912 were executed between 1480-1808.

Hernando de Pulgar, secretary to Queen Isabella, estimated 2,000 burned before 1490.

An unnamed "Catholic historian" estimated 2,000 burned, 1480-1504, and 2,000 burned, 1504-1758.

Flexner, Pessimist's Guide to History: 8,800 deaths by burning, 1478-1496

Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (1910): 8,800 burnt in 18 years of Torquemada. (acc2 Buckle and Friedländer)

Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic: 10,220 burnt in 18 years of Torquemada

Britannica: 2,000

Aletheia, The Rationalist's Manual: 35,534 burned.

Fox's Book of Martyrs, Ch.IV: 32,000 burned

Paul Johnson A History of the Jews (1987): 32,000 k. 

by burning; 20,226 k. before 1540

Wertham: 250,000

Rummel: 350,000 deaths overall.

MEDIAN: 8,800 under Torq.; 32,000 all told.

Punished by all means, not death.

Fox: 309,000

P. Johnson: 341,000

Motley: 114,401

 

4) Peasants' Wars:  The German Peasants' War  was a widespread popular revolt in some German-speaking  areas in Central Europe from 1524 to 1525. It failed because of the intense opposition by the aristocracy, who slaughtered up to 100,000 of the 300,000 poorly armed peasants and farmers (Bad Bad Germans!!).

 

5) Ivan the Terrible:  Novgorod Massacre, 1570: 60,000 people killed. (Flexner, Pessimist's Guide to History).

Decimated boyars, "killing hundreds, probably even thousands" (Richard Dunn, The Age of Religious Wars 1559-1715).

Henri Troyat, Ivan the Terrible toward the end of his life, Ivan drew up lists of all the victims he could remember and sent these to monasteries for prayers. One listed 3,148 people killed; another 3,750.

Novgorod Massacre (various estimates):

Kurbsky: 15,000

3rd Chronicle of Novgorod: 18,000

Taube & Kruse: 27,000

1st Chronicle of Pskov: 60,000

Troyat says that Ivan's gang of special thugs, the oprichniki, numbered 6000, and lasted for seven years.

 

6) Persecution of Waldenese: Halley's Bible Handbook, 24th ed. (1965): 900,000 k. in 30 years (1540-70).

The Cambridge Modern History by Acton, et al. (1904) p.290: 3,000 massacred and 22 villages destroyed in 1545.

 

More coming in the next post. Stay tuned!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Continued

7) Dutch Revolt: (1566-1609)

Gibbon Decline & Fall v2: 100,000 executed under Charles V, in Netherlands.

 

John Lothrop Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic (1855) Alva boasted of 18,600 executions in Netherland.

 

Here comes the interesting part.

8)  France, Religious Wars, Catholic vs. Huguenot (1562-1598) 3,000,000 .

Robert J. Knecht The French Religious Wars, 1562-1598 (2000): Deaths during the wars estimated at 2M to 4M.

 

9) St Bartholomew Massacre:  Was a Christian mob violence against Huguenots. Around 30,000 civilians butchered.

 

10) Russo Tatar War (1571): 

The Burning of Moscow: The English ambassador, Giles Fletcher, reported that 800,000 Muscovites died in the fire and panic. More realistically, the peacetime population of Moscow had been counted as 100,000; then after the fire, in 1580, the papal ambassador reported only 30,000 inhabitants. 

Jesus Mary Joseph!! HOW CAN PEACEFUL EUROPEANS SLAUGHTER THEIR OWN CIVILIANS SO MERCILESSLY!!

 

11) The Thirty Years War  R.J. Rummel: 11.5M total deaths in the war (half democides).

Norman Davies, Europe, p.568: 8 million.

Richard Dunn, The Age of Religious Wars 1559-1715: After the war, the empire was 7-8 million fewer than before.

 

 

There were many other such incidents of cruelty which I'm too lazy to list.

Anyway I think have conveyed my point well here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Wow never seen a bigger liar on internet before. You are even worst than Arab brainwashed Al Bakistanis.

But since you won't budge let's have a look at the treatment meted out by Medieval European Monarchs on civilians.

 

1) Persecution of Jews:  

A) West Europe(1348) Jews killed as scapegoats for Black Death:

Trager, People's Chronology: 2,000 hanged in Strasbourg.

Davies: 2,000 in Strasbourg; as many as 12,000 in Mainz.

Paul Johnson A History of the Jews (1987): 2,000 in Strasbourg; 6,000 in Mainz.

B) As stated in the Boston College Guide to Passion Plays, "Over the course of time, Christians began to accept … that the Jewish people as a whole were responsible for killing Jesus. According to this interpretation, both the Jews present at Jesus Christ's death and the Jewish people collectively and for all time, have committed the sin of deicide, or "god-killing". For 1900 years of Christian-Jewish history, the charge of deicide has led to hatred, violence against and murder of Jews in Europe and America."

 

During the High Middle Ages in Europe there was full-scale persecution in many places, with blood libels, expulsions, forced conversions and massacres. An underlying source of prejudice against Jews in Europe was religious. Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade  (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine  and the Danube were utterly destroyed, a prime example being the Rhineland massacres. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251  and 1320. The Crusades were followed by expulsions, including in 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland.

 

I suppose these Jews weren't civilians? 

 

2) Witch Hunts:  An estimated total of 30,000-60,000 people were executed during the witch trials.[7][8] Among the best known of these trials were the Scottish North Berwick witch trials, Swedish Torsåker witch trials and the American Salem witch trials. Among the largest and most notable were the Trier witch trials (1581–1593), the Fulda witch trials  (1603–1606), the Würzburg witch trial (1626–1631) and the Bamberg witch trials (1626–1631).

 

Shock!! Horror!!

How could the civilized Europeans indulge in such barbery against their own civilians? I thought it was only an Indian phenomenon.

 

3) Spanish Inquisitions:  Juan Antonio Llorente, General Secretary of the Inquisition from 1789 to 1801, estimated that 31,912 were executed between 1480-1808.

Hernando de Pulgar, secretary to Queen Isabella, estimated 2,000 burned before 1490.

An unnamed "Catholic historian" estimated 2,000 burned, 1480-1504, and 2,000 burned, 1504-1758.

Flexner, Pessimist's Guide to History: 8,800 deaths by burning, 1478-1496

Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (1910): 8,800 burnt in 18 years of Torquemada. (acc2 Buckle and Friedländer)

Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic: 10,220 burnt in 18 years of Torquemada

Britannica: 2,000

Aletheia, The Rationalist's Manual: 35,534 burned.

Fox's Book of Martyrs, Ch.IV: 32,000 burned

Paul Johnson A History of the Jews (1987): 32,000 k. 

by burning; 20,226 k. before 1540

Wertham: 250,000

Rummel: 350,000 deaths overall.

MEDIAN: 8,800 under Torq.; 32,000 all told.

Punished by all means, not death.

Fox: 309,000

P. Johnson: 341,000

Motley: 114,401

 

4) Peasants' Wars:  The German Peasants' War  was a widespread popular revolt in some German-speaking  areas in Central Europe from 1524 to 1525. It failed because of the intense opposition by the aristocracy, who slaughtered up to 100,000 of the 300,000 poorly armed peasants and farmers (Bad Bad Germans!!).

 

5) Ivan the Terrible:  Novgorod Massacre, 1570: 60,000 people killed. (Flexner, Pessimist's Guide to History).

Decimated boyars, "killing hundreds, probably even thousands" (Richard Dunn, The Age of Religious Wars 1559-1715).

Henri Troyat, Ivan the Terrible toward the end of his life, Ivan drew up lists of all the victims he could remember and sent these to monasteries for prayers. One listed 3,148 people killed; another 3,750.

Novgorod Massacre (various estimates):

Kurbsky: 15,000

3rd Chronicle of Novgorod: 18,000

Taube & Kruse: 27,000

1st Chronicle of Pskov: 60,000

Troyat says that Ivan's gang of special thugs, the oprichniki, numbered 6000, and lasted for seven years.

 

6) Persecution of Waldenese: Halley's Bible Handbook, 24th ed. (1965): 900,000 k. in 30 years (1540-70).

The Cambridge Modern History by Acton, et al. (1904) p.290: 3,000 massacred and 22 villages destroyed in 1545.

 

More coming in the next post. Stay tuned!

what part of this is about destroying cities and property rights ?

Nobody denies that people suffered a lot in Europe during medieval period, there were lots of witch-hunts, lots of deaths. BUT CITIES WERE VERY RARELY RAZED, PROPERTY RIGHTS WERE VERY RARELY VIOLATED.

This is what i said. Not that Europeans were pacifists. There were more wars in Europe in the last 1000 years than rest of the world put together. Through all this, the overwhelming majority of their cities remained standing, owners of properties got to pass it to whom they wanted to and knowledge along with wealth was largely preserved.

 

Cities were where property, knowledge and skills accumulate, throughout human history. The rise in urbanism in EVERY PART of the world sees corresponding rise in wealth, technology and sciences.  This is where western Europe, over the last 1000 years, has had a decisive advantage over rest of the world - their cities were left largely intact, their properties passed genealogically largely, regardless of who got conquered by whom. 

PS: This is mostly about WESTERN EUROPE. Where the fount of modern day world comes from. Eastern Europe/Balkans being a 

$hithole is pretty much self-evident. Lands west of the whole 'iron curtain' zone, is where such acts were extremely rare and thus, they got to preserve their knowledge, their wealth and pass it forward. 

 

If you persist in your ignorant inferiority complex-fuelled nonsense, i shall be forced to post you legions upon legions of European documents detailing how property rights were respected, even when titles were taken away/re-distrubuted due to changing borders/conquests. 

 

 

PPS: Your inferiority complex is easily seen by the fact that you are hell-bent on disputing the fact that western European cities & property rights remained largely unscathed in the last 1000 years. Yet, when i said the same thing about Magadh's expansion, you chose not to dispute it. And i bet my bottom dollar you know jack $hit about Magadh's expansionary wars either. As i said, take off your racist, inferiority-complex driven glasses and see history for what it is. Europeans have invented more things, advanced sciences, property rights and wealth in the last 500 years than Indian civilization's sum total. How can you dispute this ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×