Tuesday 27 June 2017

29. INDIA,, THE MOTHER !


29. INDIA, THE MOTHER!

WHY should we love the motherland? What does it involve?

Patriotism V. Nationalism




Usually we speak of patriotism or nationalism. But both words do not mean the same thing. George Orwell explained  patriotism and distinguished it from nationalism in a famous passage:


"By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality." 

[ From: Notes on Nationalism, 1945 ]



He has clearly brought out the essence of patriotism- devotion to a place and its culture, defensive militarily and culturally.

Mother and Motherland

This was beautifully stated millennia ago in a few words by Rama in the Ramayana. After the battle is over, Vibhishana invites Rama and company to enter Lanka and spend a few days. Rama  declines the invitation and utters words which will remain immortal:


"Janani Janma-bhoomi-scha Swargadapi Gariyasi" 

 जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी

Mother and motherland are superior to  even heaven!







It is  the national motto of Nepal! 







World as home?

There are many who would consider such sentiment to be pure jingoism or chauvinism. But why should it be so? Is not a normal person attached to his/her mother? Is not the bond with the mother something special? Does it imply dislike or hatred of others?

Many people today would say, sincerely, that they are above such low and limiting notions, that the whole of humanity is one, that they are citizens of the world, the world is their home. This is indeed a noble sentiment and high ideal. But is humanity ready for it, really? How many countries would welcome you, and let you remain as you are, there? Will you continue to be welcome in case hostilities break out between the two countries? Why do countries have Visa regulations and continue to tighten them?

And within modern India how many states will welcome you if you speak a different language? They just suffer you!

Leave  the world alone. Take the European Union. It is remarkable that countries which were traditional enemies and fought many wars came together in some arrangement. But do the people of  those countries  feel emotional and cultural unity, apart from economic and political interests? Do they feel like one people? Are the English, the French, the Germans the same or alike? Are they really comfortable with each other? Do they feel Greece is really their equal? Do the Greeks feel so, in turn? Would be citizens of the world, knowing only English, should visit France and Germany and experience what it is like there! After all, they all follow the same religion, at least nominally, even if it is secularisn? Perhaps, only real scholars would be welcome across borders. Even there, modern universities have erected ideological barriers among themselves.  

 The concept of motherland holds something more than all these earthly ideas. Ethnic identity still matters, as the aftermath of the fall of the USSR has shown. There is an invisible chord which binds you with the place of your birth. Who ever left his native place without a lump in the throat? Nationality does mean something- however it may be defined, whatever may be its basis.

There have been violent and ugly manifestations of nationalism in the past. This has happened with every ideology- religion, socialism, democracy, beginning with liberty, equality , fraternity, etc. It does not invalidate   the ideology as such.

Orwell's words imply that there is something more than defence of space: it is defence of culture! And culture has evolved in response to and in the soil of a place! It is not narrow-mindedness to love one's own culture, or nationality any more than it is to eat the food one is accustomed to. It becomes a threat and a problem  only when it leads to a superiority complex and  a hatred of and the urge to  dominate  or eliminate others. It is a problem only if it breeds prejudice.

Aggressive nationalism and peaceful culture

 Unbridled Nationalism, in the service of ambitious politicians, usually leads to  aggressive postures and attitudes, often culminating in war, as we saw in the two world wars. Ethnic nationalism often leads to attempts at genocide. This is due to the Western idea of 'nation' as 
being mainly a political unit- a State. However, the people also constitute a society, and such societies may exist in any State!  [Rome conquered the Greeks, but adopted Hellenistic ideas! Roman youngsters were sent to Athens to study!] In India, Rabindranath Tagore gave expression to it. He talked of society- 'samaja', and not in terms of political nationalism. [Ironically, in contrast to the Romans, India became free of British rule, but has become more Anglicised or Americanised thereafter. Modern Indian education thoroughly de-Indianises everyone.]



Einstein and the French savant Romain Rolland also disliked the idea of nation states and nationalism. However, Einstein felt a deep attachment to his Jewish heritage, though he was not a Zionist, practising Jew or outwardly religious.








If we consider nation as a society, then it becomes a cultural unit/unity sharing common values. Each such society is unique and need not pose a threat to others, so long as there is no intention of one to dominate others. The history of the last two thousand years unfortunately shows that both Christianity and Islam have forced themselves on other people and nations! It is their belief that they alone are the true path and their prophet alone is the true one! How can they let others live in peace, then?

INDIA IS DIFFERENT

But this is not our view. India differs in two vital respects from the rest of the world, especially the West. Nationalism has risen in the West on the concept of Nation-State, a political dispensation.  India has never felt this. We have felt a broad cultural unity, a philosophical unity as the more fundamental value.  Nor do we force our ways on others, or enforce uniformity everywhere.

 Diana Eck , western academic ( with the usual  western prejudices ) and no 'Hindutva' advocate, writes of :

"a particular idea of India  that is shaped not by the modern notion of  a nation-state, but by the extensive and intricate interrelation of  geography and mythology......The fact that the people of ancient India.....gave a single name to the whole of this diverse subcontinent is itself noteworthy. The name is Bharata. ... This is an indigenous name... India like Japan, China, and Greece links its modern identity  with an ancient and continuous civilization."

[India, A Sacred Geography, Harmony Books, 2012. p.45-46]

INDIA, THE MOTHER

Is India then a mere geographical entity? NO, say our scholars and savants. 

India is not a mere congeries of geographical fragments, but a single, though immense organism, filled with the tide of one strong pulsating life from end to end.

-Radha Kumud Mukherjee: Nationalism in Hindu Culture, 1921.

Our highest ideal of love and devotion to our country is to be found in our conception of our land  as Mother....... We addressed our land not merely as ......mother country, but simply as Mother.

This Mother is the spirit of India. This geographical habitat of ours is only the outer body of the Mother. The earth that we tread on is not a mere bit of geographical structure. It is the physical embodiment of the Mother....Our history is the sacred biography of the Mother.





- Bipin Chandra Pal in " The Soul of India."






BANDE MATARAM:
Salutations to the Mother!






That is why Bankim Chandra Chatterjee sang  "Bande Mataram!" He addressed India as Mother, not just mother country!






वन्दे मातरम्
सुजलां सुफलां मलयजशीतलाम्
शस्यशामलां मातरम् ।
शुभ्रज्योत्स्नापुलकितयामिनीं
फुल्लकुसुमितद्रुमदलशोभिनीं
सुहासिनीं सुमधुर भाषिणीं
सुखदां वरदां मातरम् ।। १ ।। वन्दे मातरम् ।

“Vande Mataram!
Sujalam suphalam, malayaja shitalam,
Shasyashyamalam, Mataram! 
Shubhrajyotsna pulakitayaminim,
Phullakusumita drumadala shobhinim,
Suhasinim, sumadhura bhashinim,
Sukhadam, varadam, Mataram! Vande Mataram!




तुमि विद्या, तुमि धर्म
तुमि हृदि, तुमि मर्म
त्वं हि प्राणा: शरीरे
बाहुते तुमि मा शक्ति,
हृदये तुमि मा भक्ति,
तोमारई प्रतिमा गडि
मन्दिरे-मन्दिरे मातरम् ।। ३ ।। वन्दे मातरम् ।

Tumi vidya, tumi dharma,
Tumi hridi, tumi marma,
Tvam hi pranah sharire!

Bahute tumi ma shakti,
Hridaye tumi ma bhakti,
Tomarayipratima gari mandire mandire!
Mataram Vande Mataram!

I bow to thee, Mother
richly watered, richly fruited,
cool with the crops of the harvests,
the Mother!

Thou art knowledge, thou art conduct,
Thou our heart, thou our soul.
For thou art the life in our body,
In the arm thou art might, O Mother,
In the heart, O Mother, thou art love and faith      

It is thy image we raise in every temple.

I bow to thee, O Mother!

Nation has a destiny!




While Tagore was against the ugly aspects of political nationalism, he was aware of the distinct role and destiny each nation carried. He said in his first English speech in India, in Madras, in 1919:





On each race is the duty laid to keep alight its own lamp of mind and its part in the illumination of the world.

Thus each nation has a distinct role to play and it is by being itself, and not by imitation of others, that a nation fulfills itself and its duty to the world community at large. How different this is from the ugly display of aggressive political nationalism!

Bharat Mata Ki Jai !

Before Gandhi entered the political scene, the country was reverberating with the joyous song of Vande Mataram, and the cries of "Bharat Mata Ki Jai ",made famous during the days of Bengal Partition.  How did this song achieve such a status?  How did it capture the hearts of the people? It was not a sudden development. As Diana Eck records:

"  .... we glimpse something essential about the land of India itself. The land, in this vision , is the dismembered and distributed body of Shakti, providing the soil for a strong sense of the translocal belonging.
"Mother" is the name - both powerful and affectionate- by which Hindus call Shakti, be she Kali the frightful or Ganga  the beneficent....it is also the name by which they call the land of India- "Bharat Mata, Mother India."
Seeing India as Mother is both spiritual and geographical. It is grounded in Hindu affection for the land itself.
"Vande Mataram" has been able to take hold so powerfully in modern India not because it was fabricated and instrumentalised in the colonial context by Hindu nationalists old and new, but because of the widespread  associative meanings that have long linked the land and the goddess."  (p.297-299)
 India as Goddess







No Indian leader has brought out the distinct nature of India in modern times as Sri Aurobindo. In very clear words he said:







Mother India is not a piece of earth; she is a Power,  a Godhead.
India is not the earth, rivers and mountains of this land, neither is it a collective name for the inhabitants of this country. India is a living being, as much living as , say, Shiva. India is a Goddess as Shiva is a god. If she likes, she can manifest in human form.
The Soul of India is one and indivisible. India is conscious of her mission in the world.

India is the guru of the nations, the physician of the human soul in its profounder maladies; she is destined once more to new-mould the life of the world and restore the peace of the human spirit.
We now can understand what is the meaning of India, and what it means to love India. It is more than political attachment. How can one who does not subscribe to and bow down to the Mother that is India be  considered an Indian?

Westerners and westernised Indians cannot understand this idea of India- nor can they like it! They fancy to think that India was not a nation before the British invented it!  What utter idiocy! I quote Diana Eck again:

"The resistance to ideas of India's unity is embedded in colonial thought and often in postcolonial thinking as well. Even the many books that address the idea of India in recent times seem to acquiesce to largely Western constructs.

What are some of the ways in which India has seen itself and enacted its regional and pan-regional identities? Political analysts do not touch this question.Postcolonial studies do not reach very deep into the premodern  subsoil of India to inquire whether there have been alternative ways of imagining the complex collectivity of India in a distinctively Indian idiom."

".....geography of this kind is more than a map. It is a three-dimensional sacred landscape. " (p.47,49)



BHARAT MATA

Indians have always considered their land as more than geography. She is Bharat, Bharat Mata. She is Mother, not just Motherland. Mother cannot be changed or exchanged. That is the basis of true love of India. Any one who cannot consider India his or her Mother and bow down in love and reverence is simply not Indian. It is not mere political allegiance that makes one a true Indian.





India is not merely the motherland. She is Mother.

Vande Mataram!






Note:
1.While 'Jana Gana Mana'  of Tagore has been adopted as the National Anthem, it can be seen that it merely celebrates the physical features of the land of India, and lacks the psychological depth and emotional richness of Vande Mataram! Vande Mataram expresses the genius of India.

2. It is good to remember that India attained Independence on  15 August- the birthday of Sri Aurobindo! This is the seal of Divinity on the work of Sri Aurobindo for Indian Independence.

3.Modern Indian Republic is a political mechanism on foreign models. Real India is an Organic , living Entity. 

Friday 23 June 2017

28. HEROES: SUNLIGHT AND SHADOW


28. HEROES: SUNLIGHT AND SHADOW




History as commonly taught and understood celebrates the hero. Alexander and  Caesar are the heroes of ancient history, universally admired. Then we have Napoleon , the founding fathers of the United States of America, Abraham Lincoln, Churchill and  Franklin Roosevelt. Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao - they were also big names with huge following; but today only lunatics will consider them heroes. A stage was when the leader was, ipso facto, accepted as a hero ; today we have become more critical  and sensible, and have more facts and information. Not all the above heroes will pass muster today. 

It is not only in political history that we have heroes. In every field of human endeavour, we have men of vision and action who can be considered heroes. Most original scientists like Einstein or  Max Planck are surely heroes. Many people consider Darwin to be a hero.


Heroes and Hero worship



In 1840, Thomas Carlyle gave a series of lectures in which he propounded the idea that history is the result of the work and vision of heroes and so they deserve to be worshipped. And among heroes, he considered mythological figures, prophets, poets, priests, men of letters and kings and revolutionary figures. Carlyle lived at  a time when England was at its height as an imperial power, and the idea of 'progress' pervaded the atmosphere. The Industrial Revolution was progressing, but Carlyle was critical about its impact on society. He was not impressed by materialism and was more transcendental in his views, like Emerson in America, whose friend he was.

Carlyle did not talk as a research scholar , as modern scholars tend to do. He was not critical about those he considered heroes! He merely gave expression to a broad idea in the spirit and manner of old scholars whose liberal education enabled them to be proficient in different subjects. Modern research has shown that most historical figures whom we have admired as heroes for long had feet of clay. Few stand critical scrutiny. Heroes were achievers in some fields, but were not necessarily great as human beings or even as leaders.




 We know now that John Kennedy, for all the loyalty he evoked, was certainly not another Abraham Lincoln. Yet, we should not fall into the trap of discounting   greatness itself , just because we have some  cynics among us who raise doubts.





Anti-hero wave!

But on the whole, the  world trend is the opposite today. While we have any number of "instant celebrities" as Alvin Toffler once wrote, there are no lasting heroes! We live in an age of equals, and greatness is not easily admitted; and even when once admitted, it does not take long for 'research' to unearth new facts and call the whole enterprise into question. The modern age has shown that anyone can hold any high office without being personally great in any way! Could we think of any great men among the Presidents of India other than Dr.Rajendra Prasad, Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and   Dr. Abdul Kalam?


India's unworshipped heroes

Sri Aurobindo, 1907
We in India are great hero worshippers. Our history is full of heroes, though most heroes of the Hindu period are not given due recognition under the pseudo-secular dispensation. During the freedom struggle, we had many great leaders with all India following. But after Independence, when the country was divided on linguistic basis, the youngsters are not even aware of the old heroes. How many now know of Lal-Pal- Bal, Sri Aurobindo, Netaji Subhas Bose and their contribution ?  How many even know of Bankim Chandra, Vivekananda, Tagore, Jagdish Chandra Bose, C.V.Raman, P.C.Ray, S.Ramanujam? The heroes of the present generation of youngsters are some sport or cine stars. Fortunately, politics has sunk so low that there are no heroes among them anywhere. There may be local cult figures so long as they are in power, but their appeal is mostly limited to their community. In India, it is so easy to raise a crowd in the name of language or community or some petty local issue.



Lala Lajpat Rai- Bal Gangadhar Tilak- Bepin Chandra Pal. Lal-Bal-Pal.

Gandhi-Nehru Maya! 

Post Independence, the Congress ruled for long and so has made Gandhi- Nehru name the standard. And Nehru's daughter started dynastic rule with the 'Gandhi' name! In the name of secularism. the leftists have captured our  institutions of higher learning and they have obliterated or marginalised the earlier great names. Our educational institutions are so thoroughly controlled by  leftist doctrinaire elements that a critical perspective or objective analysis  with regard to Gandhi-Nehru era is still not possible. The irony is that even the leftists who detested Gandhi  when he lived and ridiculed his ideas and did not follow him in any manner take his name as a shield to smuggle in their own baggage! Gandhi and Nehru are taken to be like demi-gods, beyond critical scrutiny. And those who shout their names do not follow any of the teachings of Gandhi!

Role of media

This demi-god  image is reinforced by our educational system, the governing cliques and the media. The media today plays a dubious role. It can boost anyone it takes a fancy for, suppress vital information, project a bad image of those it does not like, and generally acts in a partisan manner. We witnessed this recently in the US where in days leading to the Presidential election, leading newspapers like The New York Times and The Washington Post openly bad-mouthed Donald Trump, painting him as the very devil! The problem is that it is all done in the name of 'freedom of the press' or freedom of expression. To find the truth amidst the (mis)information explosion in the media is like finding a needle in the haystack. Even the leading newspapers do not provide complete information on any issue, do not provide space for dissenting views or even acknowledge a factual error when pointed out. This is especially so in India. Our mainline newspapers never report the negative aspects of figures like Mother Teresa or Sonia Gandhi, while the whole world knows them! See how our media suppressed the facts about the Bofors deal or other Scams during the Man Mohan Singh era !

Problem-ridden India

Since India was ruled for so long in the name of Gandhi-Nehru combine, we have to hold them accountable for the major ills that the country suffers from. And a list of such ills can be easily drawn up by any well-informed person, without dispute. It will include, for instance:

- poverty
[ In 2012, Govt of India said that 22% of the people were below the official poverty line. The World Bank estimated it at 23.6% in 2011. About 27.6 crore people.]

- education
[ Education has become costly, quality has declined. 50% of the graduates are reportedly unemployable. The system has become unmanageable, with Universities unable to even conduct exams and evaluation of results properly, reliably.]

-  public health 
[ Govt has abdicated its responsibility. Private hospitals are fleecing the public. Health care is proving beyond the means of vast sections of the people]

Both in education and public health the govt has a vast formal presence, which is totally ineffective, counter productive, burden on the public exchequer,  and only benefits the bureaucracy and the politicians, whose pocket boroughs they have become.

- state of agriculture 
[ India has compromised food security. The ( American inspired ) Green Revolution has flopped and back fired. Chemicalisation of agriculture, benefiting MNCs immensely, has led to diminished returns, long term health hazards, heavy increase in the cost of inputs, heavy subsidization which burdens the tax payer, uneconomic returns for the farmer- especially the small and marginal ones. Thousands of farmers have committed suicide, unable to bear the burden. The govt has succumbed to the pressure of the MNCs in the matter of GMO crops, and farmers have lost their traditional right to their own seeds. The soil has lost its natural fertility, and water is polluted. Biodiversity is seriously threatened. Thus our food security is seriously compromised. Even educated people do not have an idea of the gravity of the situation.]

FARMER suicides in the country spiked by over 40 per cent between 2014 and 2015. While 2014 saw 5,650 farmer suicides, the figure crossed 8,000 in 2015, government sources told The Indian Express.
Indian Express, August 19, 2016.

Wikipedia notes:


As of 2017, one Indian farmer commits suicide every 30 minutes, due to a number of reasons including inadequate prices at the market, lack of government support, an extremely low government MSP (Minimum support price) and the vicious spiral of private money lenders and loans that the farmer is unable to pay back due to the above. In May and June 2017, this resulted in near civil war conditions in India with the government turning to shooting its own poor people.

The intensity of distress in a country where about 65% of the population depends on agriculture can only be imagined! 


In the last 20 years, nearly 300,000 farmers have ended their lives by ingesting pesticides or by hanging themselves. Maharashtra state - with 60,000 farmer suicides - tops the list.

Al Jazeera, 18 May, 2015

[Modi govt talks of development but is absolutely muddle headed on agriculture. The nationalised banks are worse than the traditional money lenders. When industry fails, they write off loans; when the rains fail and crops fail, they have no sense to understand this. Absolute rascals. And yet these same banks lose thousands of crores in bad loans in other sectors and the senseless govt pumps in more money at public expense!]

Things are seriously wrong with our agricultural policy. How many Indians care?

- Kashmir problem - Article 370.
[ The Kashmir problem was created by Nehru alone. He stopped the process when our troops were successfully repulsing Pakistan invasion and referred the matter to UN. He bypassed Sardar Patel who was the Home Minister. And he brought in Art.370 to please Sheikh Abdullah. Its clauses were drawn up secretly, in consultation with the Sheikh,  without the knowledge of Sardar Patel.]

- Border disputes with China 
[ Entirely due to Nehru's foreign policy. China still occupies large tracts of Indian territory.]

- Imposition of Hindi on non-Hindi speaking people [ Pet idea of Gandhi. Nehru's assurance on the subject remains without Constitutional backing. Non-Hindi speaking people have naturally become second-class citizens.]

- Linguistic states and consequent linguistic jingoism and chauvinism 
[ Pet idea of Gandhi . Patel integrated India, Nehru destroyed it.]

-River water and border disputes among States. (These have existed for over half a century.]

- Corruption
[ Nehru and Indira Gandhi encouraged it. Indira Gandhi even justified it saying it was an international phenomenon. It is as natural to us now as breathing. It pervades every aspect of Indian life.]

-Loss of economic independence under WTO dispensation. 
 [India was outwitted and fooled in the negotiations. Our participants went without preparation, and gave in  without muscle.]

India: multi-organ failure

 All these issues  are based on undisputed facts. Political parties  are not even aware of the full dimensions of the issues. How then are they going to find solutions? If we reflect on them seriously,  we find India resembles a patient with multi- organ failure, with the doctors having lost their wits. India seems to have lost the secret of its vitality.




The policies advocated by Gandhi-Nehru combine and their dynasty is responsible for all these problems. How can we then accept Gandhi-Nehru as heroes, really? Critical re-evaluation of their role is necessary.

Thursday 22 June 2017

27..VARIETY IN BELIEF


27. VARIETY IN BELIEF




School of Athens : galaxy of philosophers! Painting by Raphael.

Human nature is not uniform. We see this displayed in the food we eat, in the way we dress, in the manner we entertain ourselves, in our habits of thought and manners. And nothing is more glaring than the gamut of political views we hold! It is only Communism, Fascism and modern Leftism even in nominal democracies that do not freely allow variety in thinking. 

When it comes to religious belief, we find that the ancient world was rich in variety, with multiplicity of gods, doctrines, philosophies.  Only Judaism, Christianity and then Islam were Monotheistic, not allowing variety or even differences to exist. But history reveals that each of those religions were also subject to numerous divisions! What was not allowed officially by ruling groups could not be prevented in practice!


We  see this rich variety flourishing in ancient Greece and Rome. Millennia before them, this doctrine was  recognised and proclaimed in the Veda , the oldest scripture in the world, which said: 

Truth is One. Sages call it variously. 

 एकं सद्विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति

Ekam Sat.Vipra Bahudha Vadanti.

Pre-Socratic Philosophers

The West reckons its intellectual history from the ancient Greeks. We see a bewildering variety of gods and philosophies there already. Western philosophy proper begins with Socrates. But there is a mind-boggling variety and depth in the philosophers who preceded Socrates. The earliest attempt of the human mind to understand Nature and the world around it has been through Mythology. When some individuals were dissatisfied with this position and started raising questions  such as, 'Where does everything come from, from what substance do they arise, why is there such variety in the world, etc ', philosophy proper was born! Many systems or 'schools' of philosophy are identified before Socrates. And they all existed along with him, and survived after him!


Slideplayer.com


- Milesian School:

Thales, Anaximander

- Pythagoras and his followers:

Philolaus, Alcmaeon, Archytas

-Ephysian School

Heraclitus of Epheseus



-Eleatic School from the town of Elea

Xenophanes
Parmenides
Zeno
Melissus of Samos


- Pluralist School:

Empedocles
Anaxagoras


                            



-Atomist School:

Leucippus
Democritus (460-370 BC) ........>>>>








-Eclecticism:

Diogenes of Apollonia (c.460 BC )

As can be seen, these schools are named after the places of their prominent leaders or the philosophies they advocated. Many of these names are weighty.

Sophists

As we have weed among the crops, we do have psuedo- philosophers! They talk well, but that is all they can do! In ancient Greece they were called Sophists! Sophism is not a philosophy but a method of employing rhetoric to win a political or legal argument. We in India call it " Vidanda vaadam"- argument for argument's sake! But it had some brilliant advoctes: Protagoras, Gorgias, Hippias, Thracymachus. Well, some of them ran into Socrates as we learn from the dialogues of Plato!

Ancient Names count

These names were not just ancient names. They continued to inspire later philosophers in surprising ways. Hegel was influenced by Parmenides, Karl Marx obtained his Ph.D by writing his thesis on Democritus and Epicurean ideas on Nature, Oswald Spengler's doctoral thesis was on Heraclitus!
Sri Aurobindo has also written on Heraclitus! Karl Popper gave a call for the pre-Socratics!

For Indians studying the pre-Socratics, there is a pleasant surprise! Like in India we have the "Sapta Rishis"= Seven Rishis, the pre-Socratics had 'Seven Sages of Greece' !



Solon (c. 594 BCE)  Nothing in Excess
Chilon of Sparta (c. 560 BCE)  Do not desire the impossible.
Thales (c. 585 BCE)   Know Thyself
Bias of Priene (c. 570 BCE)  Most men are bad.
Cleobulus of Rhodes (c. 600 BCE)  Moderation is best in all things.
Pittacus of Mitylene (c. 600 BCE)   Know thy opportunity
Periander (625–585 BCE)   Be farsighted with everything.



Wikipedia.

In India, we have a group of different 7 in each Yuga. See how close they lived in Greece too! Most of them appear to be contemporaries!  There are some who think that these seven were not really philosophers, but only clever people! There were three other philosophers too!

- Aristeas of Proconnesus
- Pherecydes of Syros ( 540 BC)
-Anacharsis  (590 BC )

Flourishing variety

However, Diogenes of Apollonia is regarded as the last of the pre-Socratics. Nietzsche said that Socrates destroyed the pre-Socratic philosophical science! Of course, this is not correct. The ancient philosophies do find advocates in the modern day. In fact, every new thought in philosophy can be related to the old in some way. Only, some modern writers are too clever to disclose their sources of inspiration!

The beauty of the Greek system is that all these different schools of philosophy flourished while people worshipped the same pantheon of gods! More or less the same system prevailed in Rome later which became Hellenistic in spirit. As Wikipedia notes:

The Romans gained from the Greek influence in other areas: trade, banking, administration, art, literature, philosophy and earth science. In the last century BC it was a must for every rich young man to study in Athens or Rhodes and perfect their knowledge of rhetoric at the large schools of philosophy. It was also a must to speak Greek as well as one's mother tongue in Rome.


  Plurality of gods and faith was freely permitted so long as the State gods were honoured ! We have the following words of Edward Gibbon on this:

The various modes of worship, which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by the people, as equally true; by the philosopher, as equally false; and by the magistrate, as equally useful.

 - Edward Gibbon (1776) The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol.1, chapter ii 

(This idea is attributed  to Seneca and also Lucretius but I could not find the sources )



This ideal situation was disturbed and destroyed by the Christians after they captured  Rome and became the State religion. They systematically went about destroying all the old philosophies and religions. Muslims too later followed the same method- wherever they went, they destroyed the existing faiths.  However leading Christian theologians St.Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas were influenced heavily by Plato and Aristotle, respectively and attempted to reconcile Christian faith with Greek thought.  But Greek thought is too rich to fit comfortably in the Christian theological well.

Hindu Philosophical Bazar

In India, we have such bewildering variety of philosophies and theologies, the modern mind could easily lose its way. The Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita,and BrahmaSutra   are the three sources of our philosophies, called 'Prastana traya'. But they have not forced us to believe any one theory or interpretation as "the only true " view. For us Hindus, the ultimate authority is personal experience of the Truth. (aparoksha anubhuti ) We are not required to subscribe to any system as a matter of faith, though we may begin with some as a working proposition. We are born into a family holding on to one or another, but that is how the journey begins. Theology is one thing, philosophical insight is another.

Way through Variety




How to make sense of all this variety and find our way? How to retain our sanity amidst all these rival claims? Dr. V.Raghavan gives a beautiful method:

( Dr.Raghavan in the middle with Dr.S.Radhakrishnan  )

"There are several schools of philosophy and by their very name Darsana , these present themselves as so many  different visions of the one truth,  the 'Ekam Sat'.
To analyse scientifically all these variations:
There are only two fundamental points on which the schools  make their different approaches; and all the approaches on these two points could be reduced to three possibilities.
Now, the first point relates to the theory of causation, and three forms of it emerged, as 'Arambha, Parinama and Vivarta'.  
The second is the relation between the Supreme Soul on the one hand and the individual soul and the world on the other, which again could be seen in three ways: Abheda, Bhedhabheda, and Bheda.
Another triad of ideas which could help us to make a scientific analysis of the diverse forms of worship and approach towards the realization of the spiritual goal is the three paths of Jnana, Bhakti and Karma.
If we can get away from the overweighing burden of the historical  and cultural background , the anthropology, of  the religions of the world,we should be able to look at them all from the above mentioned  analytical points of view in an objective manner.
All the religions known to us could  be reduced scientifically into the three paths of  Jnana, Bhakti and Karma. The Lord tells Uddhava in the Bhagavata that these three answer to the three psychological needs in the human make up, an explanation which includes the doctrine of personal taste, eligibility and equipment- Ruchi, Adhikaribheda and Paripaka."

[ An Anthology on Aspects of Indian Culture, Dr.V.Raghavan Centre For Performing Arts. Chennai-20, 2002, page 98-99 ] 

Cultural pluralism?

In the modern day, we talk of "Cultural pluralism". But the reality is that the two monotheistic religions- Christianity and Islam are based on the notion of world domination. As such, they are incompatible with each other, and intolerant of other religions. Wherever they go, they convert. It so happens that the educated Westerner is becoming secular and is turning away from Christian theology, while Islam does not permit its members the liberty of free thinking. There is strife in every Muslim country in the world, even among sects within Islam. Ironically, Muslim refugees from troubled areas do  not go to other Muslim countries but seek asylum in the democratic secular West. Such is their 'brotherhood'! But Muslim faith is such that it does not let them integrate smoothly with the host communities, fully accepting their civic laws. This has caused tension throughout Western Europe though the ruling groups are keeping studied political silence. Bless the Oil!

Real multiculturalism is possible  only when the monotheistic religions truly concede that all faiths are equal and deserve unrestrained and unconditional acceptance. Neither the Pope of the Catholics, nor the authorities of Islam have accepted this position. As such, they resort to conversion. Pope John Paul II did specifically ask the Church to concentrate on conversions in Asia in this millennia ( as they did in Europe in the first millennia, and Americas in the Second millennia) Consequently, passive faiths such as Hinduism and Buddhism become soft targets and suffer.

 Pope John Paul II today told Roman Catholic bishops in Asia to respect other religions, but not to lose sight of their  " call to conversion "  in the next millennium.
In the twilight of his papacy, the ailing 79-year-old pope has made the renewal of evangelization throughout developing countries one of his highest priorities. Today, he issued a document that serves as a pastoral guidebook for Asia, where Catholics remain a tiny minority. The pope noted that other faiths can lead to salvation, but stated that Christianity is the true path.   ''Respect,'' the pope explained, ''does not eliminate the need for the explicit proclamation of the Gospel in its fullest.''
New York Times, November 7. 1999.

The monotheistic faiths, militant or not, are fundamentalist in the sense that they are based on the fundamental idea that they alone are the true path. They have acted on this belief since they came into existence. This is the greatest threat to the variety and freedom in the world of philosophy and faith today.