Chennai Rains: What The World Must Learn From India

Chennai folks, from every echelon of society, embraced technology (or whatever was left of it), to express solidarity with those in dire need of help.

The worst rains in a century battered Chennai and literally submerged the city under water. Virtually every road was cut off. Many homes were flooded. Chennai was without electricity, telephone, and other essentials for several days. The airport was shut down and the planes in the hangar were partly submerged. Nearly 250 people died.

katrinaYet, the indomitable spirit of the Tamil people was in full display. The great sage Tiruvaḻḻuvar wrote that one should face suffering with a smile. Virtually every Tamil did that. Even though the city had been crippled, there was no crime. Contrast this with America, where, opportunistic crime becomes rampant whenever natural calamities such as the Hurricane Katrina strike. Instead, the people of Chennai, and Indians in general, responded to the natural calamity in the most heroic manner. A few examples are worthy of mention although I can only humbly add that these are merely representative of the millions of deeds of generosity that were done.

Chennai folks, from every echelon of society, embraced technology (or whatever was left of it), to express solidarity with those in dire need of help. The finest example of crowdsourcing in the 21st century was implemented within a matter of hours. A crowdsourced site called http://chennairains.org/ came up. Thousands of Chennai residents offered their homes for strangers that had been stranded. They listed their phone numbers so anyone could contact them. It was all done spontaneously without any top-down guidance. A close friend living in the Silicon Valley was in panic because his wife and infant daughter were stranded in Chennai and were inaccessible. Their house was in a low-lying area. He went on the crowdsourcing site, picked up the number of a random person (a complete stranger) who he thought lived in the same area as his wife did, and called him. It was 1 a.m. in India.

The stranger not only responded to the call but immediately offered to search for my friend’s wife and daughter and report back on their safety. He waded through chest-deep water, which was contaminated because sewer lines had burst open, for an hour to locate the woman and the infant. They were safe but were without milk and other necessities. He then again waded through sewage water located a pharmacy, got some dried milk powder and water bottles, returned and gave it to them. He had been soaking in sewage water for nearly four hours by then. He then called my friend to report on their safety. I can never think of westerners (barring honorable exceptions) listing their phone numbers in public domain and inviting strangers to live with them. If the West is guided by paranoia, India seems to be guided by trust.

An organization called http://www.foodrelief.org/ is run by a young white American Hindu that has settled down in Chennai. This man and his band of volunteers marshaled every resource at their disposal to cook food and serve the people. They obtained grocery on credit without hesitating for a moment as to how they would repay the loan.

This is not about race or ethnicity. It is about the worldview that Indians have inherited and internalized. A great Tamil poet that lived two millennia ago wrote that we are related to everyone on this planet. Hindu traditions have always taught that we are obligated to everyone else in this world. They called this obligation ṛṇa. An expression of charity, called dāna, is how ṛṇa is fulfilled. I can say with pride that Indians, regardless of how well-read or articulate they are, have internalized these great ideals. That is what inspires them to act spontaneously and selflessly when Mother Nature overwhelms our ephemeral existence.

A common thread of high-thinking selflessness connected those who opened the doors of their homes for strangers to live in and the techie that setup crowdsourcing channels. If a calamity were to strike, I would prefer to be stranded amidst Indians than anyone else. However, the Western media persons or their Indian minions did not deem it fit to report on these exemplary acts because they would’ve portrayed India positively. However, the same media, be it the BBC, NYT, or TOI, never hesitates to exaggerate an isolated act of crime or even fabricate stories to portray India negatively. I am certain that these wolves that never cared to credit the average Indian or resident of Chennai for their lion-hearted deeds would be waiting for the opportunity to credit the missionary outfits and western-funded NGOs for the same.

chennai rainIndian Army, as usual, led the rescue efforts. I salute this finest and most humane force in the world. Army officials remarked that Chennai is the only place where they saw more volunteers than victims! Thank you Chennai folks. Since the army is made of folks from everywhere in India, thank you every Indian. You have the most valuable lesson to offer the rest of the world.

I do not know which media would report this though.

 

Kalavai Venkat is a Silicon Valley-based writer, an atheist, a practicing orthodox Hindu, and author of the book “What Every Hindu should know about Christianity.”
  • Dina

    Good article though singling out the western media and the west is not needed and I believe we shouldn’t generalize. Why should we really care about what the west thinks ? For that matter most of the reporting media in the west operate on a right wing agenda (I stopped watching US news TV a long time back). Also the expectations of the people are different in the west and India. For example, the administration functions in US during events of disaster and the people expect that. However in India it is the other way. People don’t expect the administration to function jumped in whatever way they can to help and showed/taught the world about helping peopled in need. The way people of Chennai responded makes me very proud to be from Chennai. It showed and taught the world how quickly people can get together, figure out the issue, use social media in dire circumstances. One of the reasons the flooding went out of control is due to the gross negligence of officials in managing the Chembarabakkam lake. (http://thewire.in/2015/12/09/how-official-negligence-turned-a-natural-crisis-into-a-human-made-catastrophe-16938/) The rampant opportunistic crime is very aptly portrayed in the article “http://www.dnaindia.com/india/comment-i-will-never-be-the-same-after-the-chennai-floods-says-danseuse-anita-ratnam-2153405” where it says “A week later, the vultures are out. The looting has begun”.

    My biggest fear is people tend to forget these things after a couple of months and they shouldn’t.

  • Suchitra

    Thanks for this excellent and timely report of the humble Indian response to the Chennai rains calamity Kalavai ji.

    Japanese suffering Tsunami also behaved somewhat similarly and received a lot of positive world wide press due to it but not so with Indians.
    Why! We must all ask ourselves.

  • kyzylkumkohlrabi

    Proud to be a Hindu, and a Tamil, in that order.*

    *I don’t say Indian, because, ideally, Indian and Hindu would be synonymous terms, in that, in an ideal parallel universe, India is a geographic entity (I don’t care enough about democracy to say ‘republic’) that is by the Hindus, for the Hindus, and of the Hindus. In our modern world, however, the demonym ‘Indian’ has little meaning, apart from ‘a citizen of the Republic of India’, and thus by definition, merely someone who is bound by the Indian constitution, a document formulated less than a century ago (with its ideological origins in the West). Yes, that is what it means to be an ‘Indian’. ‘Indian’, as it stands today, is an artificial epithet, with no fundamental roots in our organic identity as Hindus, as individuals whose ancestors, gods, sacrifices and oblations are intertwined with the landscape of Bharatavarṣa. That is what it *should* mean to be Indian, but sadly, that is not what ‘Indian’ means in modern parlance. A random Moslim or Christian from some corner of the country can claim to be a “proud Indian”. What does that mean? What is that individual proud of exactly? Certainly not of his ancestors, who would 1) probably view him with contempt if they were alive today and 2) likely have been propagators of ‘Jahiliyya’ in the eras preceding the Moslem jihads/Christian crusades. Such individuals do not even show reverence for their ancestors as Hindus do during the Pitru Paksha. So no, I am a Hindu, I am a Tamil, and I feel solidarity with all fellow Hindus, but the identity the term ‘Indian’ has taken up in the past ~70 years is about as meaningful as the identity donned by such terms as ‘Canadian’ and ‘Brazilian’. We are more, our nation is more.

  • Rama

    Kalavai, I hate to disappoint you regarding the looting. Have a look at this article and my minor comment at the bottom.

    http://www.dnaindia.com/india/comment-i-will-never-be-the-same-after-the-chennai-floods-says-danseuse-anita-ratnam-2153405

  • Gowrishankar V

    Dear Kalavai Venkat, nice article but the picture in the article above with some military guy looking down seems like it is not from chennai. If so, could you please update it with a real aerial picture of chennai?

  • Sridhar Kaushik

    I hope this is a wake up call for young Indians to unite and fight politicians, religious bigots who continue to divide India. Above all, Hindus need to unite under one banner.

  • Rangachary [email protected]

    thanks sir. everyone one of us did our bit of volunteering. My place, west mambalam was worst affected and on thursday and there were so many people volunteering to do help of any kind, be it big or small and it showed the community mindset of the people. Muslims making food inside the sri parthasarathy temple and so many such acts are normal to us,but unfortunately these things have to be mentioned with the emphasis on religion nowadays amidst the intolerance debates being spread by the MSM

  • Aparna

    Such a touching article. Yes in the tragedy, what came shining through was this help that the people of India and Chennaiin particular gave to others. Selfless and sans motive. The true spirit of India

  • Anfauglir

    The reason is because Tamil Nadu is still among the most heathen places in India (despite attempts by crypto-christian dravidian movements and overt monotheist attempts). Contrary to the impression deliberately created by the minority monotheist/dravidianism rabble crying anti-Indian and anti-Hindu and/or anti-northern Indian statements, most Tamil natives–being heathen Hindus–are naturally very pro-India and pro-Hindu nationhood and don’t at all distinguish between Hindus from other states and local ones. (This non-differentiation is quite like how the ancestors of Hindus from all over the subcontinent felt.) Tamil Hindu auto-drivers have Bharatmata images on their windscreens, tiny stores have Vedic mantras streaming from their cassette players despite the devoted Hindus only understanding Tamil, and pooja rooms of the average Tamil Hindu have images of temples and moorties from kShetras all over India into Nepal.

    Tamil Nadu’s heathens are some of the most heathen people on the planet. The fact that they’re still the majority in the state, and not the so-called rationalists, dravidianists, other monotheists or post-heathen Hindus is the cause. The region is one of the last bastions of concentric undiluted heathenism in this part of the world.

    (You can see similar positive pack behaviour among heathen villages in east Asia too.

    Also, in southeast Asia, Taoists even have drives to collect food and money for local Hindu heathen charities since these serviced all in need for the purpose of humanity alone, so the Taoist temple priests were encouraging their Taoist laity to donate, saying these Hindu charities were for common purpose and “unlike missionaries”.)

  • Shubhangi Raykar

    Kalavai Venkat, your report made me feel proud of the Chennai Indians and their spirit in the face of the heart rending and devastating situation. Thanks for the report.

    • Anfauglir

      You’re from Maharashtra, am I correct?

      Someone had once posted what seemed to be essentially primary sources on how Shivaji, the King of all the Hindus, on liberating parts of Tamil regions, announced he had come to put an end to the christian Portuguese selling off “his Hindus” [Shivaji’s Hindu subjects] of Tamil Nadu to islamic slavery in the Middle-east. (The Portuguese, being christians, had advanced into the tactic of offering Hindus the option of conversion or enslavement-into-islam then: presumably since this way they could make money off stubborn heathen Hindus, unlike with the usual convert-or-kill procedure of the monotheists where the dead heathen victim would not result in cashflow.)

      The keywords here being that Shivaji said Tamil Hindus were his. His people. (Since he was the rightful king of all the Hindus, being a Hindu heathen himself.) I remember feeling so proud. Not of Shivaji–since he is awesome as a rule, so one can’t be more proud of him than is already the case–but of myself, for being regarded one of his own kind.

      • Shubhangi Raykar

        Why do you use the word ‘heathen to describe Hindus? Just get rid of this Christian, derogatory description.We are Hindus. That is all. Shivaji’s father had a Jagir in Tanjavur- Tanjore and the Bhosale dynasty continues to live there. They are supporters of art forms like painting, drama and dance. Shivaji was a Hindu King. That is why Muslims were safe in his kingdom.He was called ‘गो ब्राह्मण प्रतिपालक’ and his stamp read प्रतिपद्चंद्र रेखेव वर्धिष्णूर्विश्व वंदिता .शाहसूनो शिवस्येषा मुद्रा भद्राय राजते. Ever increasing like the crescent moon on the first day the shukla fortnight, and revered by all in the world, this stamp (seal)of Shivaji the son of Shahaji is for the good ( well being ) of the the state ( its people). He was a visionary King.

        • Anfauglir

          “Why do you use the word ‘heathen to describe Hindus? Just get rid of this Christian, derogatory description.”

          I can’t use the word pagan: it is a Roman heathen word for ethnically Roman heathens. The later meaning derives from christians using it derogatorily for all heathens.

          Heathen means pagan in a general sense, and is used as a self-descriptive by actual heathens of the northwest of Europe, so it does not only have negative connotations.

          The heathen qualifier to Hindu has become necessary in recent years, since everyone has started claiming the word Hindu: and I’m not just complaining about monotheists (Indian christians were reported referring to themselves as “Hindu by culture, christian by religion” whatever that means). But there’s also the countless people of once-heathen Hindu ancestry who are “Hindu atheists”, “Hindu agnostics”, “Hindu charvakans”, and of course Hindu nationalists’ tendency to lump heathen Hindus with Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs under an umbrella term, so that heathen Hindus have lost any established words in English to self-reference themselves.

          The heathen qualifier makes it clear that I refer to those of the religio Hinduism (those for whom the Vedic Gods remain central) not the post-heathens who also call themselves Hindu. All the encroachers try to secularise Hindu heathenism, so they can claim it belongs to them too. (See their attempts on everything from the itihAsas to the Vedas, and their referring to the heathen religious practice of BharatanATyam and carnatic music as “dharmic metaphysical activity” when it is exclusively Vaidika Dharma, in worship of the Hindu Gods, not anything belonging to “Hindu atheists” et al.) The delineation has become imperative, more so as many cultural “Hindus” call themselves Hindu so they can love jihad heathen Hindus.

          Shivaji was a heathen Hindu, not any other kind. Just like emperor Julian was a heathen (Hellene).

          Indian nationalists calling themselves “Hindus” were attacking the Vedas, and attacking Hindu acharyas, scholars and laity for their adherence to heathenism. These nationalists were also lying that history has shown that Hindus could never fight the monotheisms and that only de-heathenisation can. They wanted to redefine Hindu for heathen Hindus and remove heathenism.

          But Shivaji is a heathen Hindu, not their kind, as are all the heroes of our itihAsas and purAnas etc. (and the texts themselves). Yet these are the very matters that such anti-Hindu “Hindus” continue to covet and continue to pretend is part of their “inheritance” (they use words like “civilisation” to conceal that these are matters of heathen religion). But they can’t claim any of it and should stop encroaching. Else the monotheists–who are also non-heathens–have an equal right to encroach.

          Hindu heathens–what used to be called Hindu before everyone stole the word for themselves–have factually more in common with other heathen populations like Taoists, Shintos, ancient Graeco-Roman Hellenes and the rest, than with non-heathens calling themselves “Hindu”.

          “We are Hindus. That is all.”

          Only if the word exclusively means heathen Hindus, not anything else. In Arabic it just means Indian. To “Hindu nationalists” it just means Indic.
          Heathen Hindus–that is, those of “Hinduism”/Vaidika religion/Sanatana Dharma, i.e. following the original, Vaidika definition of Dharma–have lost all English terms of self-reference. Inimical forces and unrelated entities are hijacking and diluting their identity. They are reducing Shivaji to a secular nationalist and itihAsas to mere history texts, they read atheism into the Vedas, taking them away from their heathen Hindu identities and proper heathen perceptions. Their subversion of the Vaidika Dharma is ultimately the same as that attempted by the monotheisms, but they have a greater success rate. Because they have piggy-backed on the term Hindu (because their ancestors were Hindu, i.e. heathen Hindu). They want to pretend “civilisational” continuity, but they’re post-heathens calling themselves Hindus. There is no continuity. They’re broken.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            heathen
            ˈhiːð(ə)n/
            noun
            derogatory
            noun: heathen; plural noun: heathens; plural noun: the heathen
            1.
            a person who does not belong to a widely held religion (especially one who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim) as regarded by those who do.
            “my brother and I were raised, as my grandma puts it, as heathens”
            synonyms:pagan, infidel, idolater, idolatress; unbeliever, non-believer,disbeliever, atheist, non-theist, agnostic, sceptic, heretic;
            rarepaynim,nullifidian
            “he said non-believers were wicked heathens”
            antonyms:Christian, believer
            a follower of a polytheistic religion; a pagan.
            synonyms:pagan, infidel, idolater, idolatress; unbeliever, non-believer,disbeliever, atheist, non-theist, agnostic, sceptic, heretic;
            rarepaynim, nullifidian
            “he said non-believers were wicked heathens”
            antonyms:Christian, believer
            informal
            a person regarded as lacking culture or moral principles.
            “eat your chips, you little heathen!”
            synonyms:philistine, boor, oaf, ignoramus, lout, yahoo, vulgarian, plebeian;barbarian, savage, beast, brute;
            informalpleb, peasant;
            informaloik;
            informalhoon
            “heathens who spoil the flavour of good whisky with ice”
            antonyms:civilized person
            adjective
            adjective: heathen
            1.
            relating to heathens.
            “heathen practices”
            synonyms:pagan, infidel, idolatrous, heathenish; unbelieving, non-believing,atheistic, agnostic, heretical, faithless, godless, irreligious, ungodly,unholy;
            barbarian, barbarous, savage, uncivilized, uncultured,unenlightened, primitive, ignorant, philistine, brutish, barbaric;
            rarenullifidian
            “it is a heathen practice to worship idols”
            antonyms:Christian, civilized
            Origin
            Old English hǣthen, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch heiden and German Heide ; generally regarded as a specifically Christian use of a Germanic adjective meaning ‘inhabiting open country’, from the base of heath.

            antonyms:Christian, civilized

            Let me understand this your trying to suggest that Heathen Hindus are Vaidik Hindus hence are Real True Nationalist Original Hindus.With all the so called Justifications that you gave for calling HEATHEN it still does not make sense,you can just use the words Vaidik Dharma.Unless you like being categorised by others as worshipper of False Gods.About the continuity and discontinuity are you suggesting that anyone who does not fit your definition of Vaidik Dharma is not a Heathen Hindu thereby raising question marks about their credentitals with regards to loyalty towards Bharat and isn’t that definition of yours supporting the Neo Hinduism claims.Anyways I see you using this Heathen Hindu a lot it could also be a Sarcastic twist with reference to SRG “Communal Hindu” but the word Heathen has negative connotations not that me or Shubhangiji here telling you would have any impact on you.

            A phobia is a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational.

            People need to be aware that the danger posed by Islam is in proportion to the deeds committed by Muhammadians hence the fear of Muhammad’s Islam is Rational which is completely opposite to the fear of Hindus.Look at the crimes committed in name of Religion all across the world Hindus are not there on the top of the list even if one were to do an analysis on a daily basis still Hindus would not find a place in list of crimes committed in the name of Religion.Hindus are by far the most lawbiding citizens so this fear that Westerners have with regards to our Dharma and the projection of Hinduism as Grotesque is in itself an Irrational disproportionate fear thus making it HINDUPHOBIA.If I am not wrong I think it was Malhotra who might have coined this word and not Vamsee Juluri

          • Anfauglir

            #1

            1. The English dictionary definition for “pagan” would be the same for all intents and purposes.

            But “pagan” in Latin/Italic is originally a pre-Christian Roman heathen term exclusively for ethnically Roman heathens of the Olympic religion. Since that word “pagan” is genuinely reserved by another set of heathens for their own heathenism, “heathen” is therefore the only general equivalent for identifying people of the ancestral religions centred on ancestral Gods.
            Whether connotative or not, the heathen qualifier makes “Hindu heathen” the only applicable term in English, since the word “Hindu” has been universalised.

            The lesson invoking dictionary definitions is unnecessary. I’m quite aware of these words and their meanings, and while I have long agreed that these can’t be genuine self-appellations to insiders (and they certainly aren’t in the native languages), they are necessary for demarcation purposes when speaking with outsiders in English. (Outsiders to heathenism in general and to the specific heathenism in question, including non-heathens who also use the term “Hindu” for self-appellation.) This unpleasantness of having to grope about for self-explanatory terms–exclusively for use in English language contexts, obviously–for clearly designating ancient native identity is forced on heathen Hindus by the facts that a. non-heathens use the term “Hindu” too, and b. the need for the distinction between heathen and non-heathen to be preserved (since the dialogues involving “Hindu” are entirely about identity).

            2. As for your attempt to understand what I said about nationalism in relation to heathens in general (with Hindu heathens as the particular case), my own meaning as intended is very simple:

            Nationalism (loyalty) in heathens to a heathen nation is not in question. It has to do with the definition of all heathenisms and how these view the combination of geography and divinity (where the word “divinity” refers to the Gods, not some new age emotion) and its influence in the formation of heathen perception and identity. (The ethnic character of heathens and why they do not aim to proselytise.)

            Nationalism in post-heathens is circumstantial and subject to many factors. Their allegiances in general are circumstantial: so some are nationalist, others are not. Meaning no guarantees, non-predictable.
            Heathens’ allegiance to their heathen nations is predictable: it has a lifespan that matches that of their allegiance to their heathenism. When the latter is eroded, there is no longer a guarantee of the former. While the latter exists, the former is guaranteed as an innate quality.

          • Anfauglir

            #2

            “Hindus are by far the most lawbiding citizens so this fear that Westerners have with regards to our Dharma and the projection of Hinduism as Grotesque is in itself an Irrational disproportionate fear”

            Others also concluded–and they echoed my own thoughts on the subject–that the west is not at all afraid. Which is why the west is destroying Hindus. They’re afraid of islam. Christians are certainly afraid of islam. (There is longstanding christian thought, see also Lewis’ Last Battle, showing that christians think that islam will ultimately defeat christianity “in this world”.)

            In contrast, muslims/islam do actually fear Hindus and Hinduism to some extent. Because (historically) Hindus never conceded.

            The christian west does not fear any heathens living, though if it did, it should be those closer to home: western heathenism.

            The west already knows they can genocide heathens in India, south America, Africa and southeast Asia with impunity. And it’s because they don’t fear Hindus that Doniger types, ELM and other (crypto)monotheists know they can lie against Hindu heathenism with impunity. Because they don’t fear Hindus, they plot Hindu heathenism’s demise with impunity.

            Hinduphobia is simply a bad choice of word. Regardless of whoever coined it. At least the way it is used or intended to be used.

            The west’s fear of islam manifests in their mass-silence (at government levels even) about the elephant in their living room. They will talk about terrorism, islamism, “south Asians” or even Pakis, but not about the actual elephant: islam. They dare not identify that as the problem. That is the true islamophobia.

            In contrast, they will pin lies on Hindus and Hinduism readily, invent atrocities that Hindus never committed, declare that Hindu and other nationalist organisations are “terrorist like the taliban” and other nonsense.

            Western blatant lying against Hindus and pinpointing Hindus and constant meddling against Hindus shows there is no fear.

            As far as heathenism is concerned, what the christian west fears–rightly–is a revival of heathenism in their backyard. (A revival of the proper perceptions of native European heathenisms, a.o.t. the carefully inculcated christian subversive views on native heathenisms: christianity pulled the Doniger trick on European heathenisms since a long time back). The christian west fears–wrongly–the hippy tendency of some westerners to temporarily “convert” to Hinduism and Taoism. But many of these go straight back to christianity, others move on to parasiting on the next heathen religion once they’re done mangling and murdering the previous one.

            The real threat to the christian “identity” of the modern west would be a proper revival of western heathen religions, but that has not been very successful (yet). If it were to ever be successful however, the christian west should very much fear it.

            Instead of speaking of the mythical “Hinduphobia”, what the west has is an odium against Hindu heathens and Hindu heathenism, for the crime of these being heathendom. This is a christian and consequently christian-conditioned odium the modern west has. (The less visible part of the spectrum of the west that is attacking Hindus covets heathenism–especially Hindu but also Taoist heathenisms–for itself, having already murdered their own: their ancestral religion is lost to them, but not to the native heathens in the west.)

            Western foreign policy has a larger target of keeping all India down, but the christian west’s particular target is heathenism, which is why Doniger lies about heathenism in an attempt to subvert proper perception of the Gods (which perception christianity knows is the key to all heathenisms). It’s also why christianity conspires with islam where India is concerned: the reasoning is that any monotheism may have India, including total alienation from religion by means of secularising, rather than that India remain the heathen “abomination” that it is, flying in the face of the primary biblical commandment as it does. It is also why christians in the west tried to tie the “rape” stories back to “Hindu tradition” specifically–i.e. a direct allusion to heathenism–not to non-heathen Hindus who are not actually in christians’ crosshairs at all, though these pointlessly pretend they are and play at being fellow victims when they have never lost anything: it is nothing truly dear to them that christian Doniger-class lies and christian temple theft are attacking and destroying. Several of the non-heathen Hindu nationalists eat beef–specifically sounding like the kind that adopted beef-eating themselves rather than that their ancestral community does the same–and insist they are Hindu too: they’re not the targets of the monotheist murder of Hindu cows, which are of utmost divinity to heathen Hindus (like Shivaji), who feel the loss entirely unlike anyone else.

            The post-heathen/non-heathen Hindus want to determine what Hindu identity and Hinduism must mean to heathen Hindus. They want to dictate proper heathen perception to heathen Hindus. Yet they are not heathens and have no right. Despite the nomenclature of “Hindu” now being common–by enforcement–to both kinds, the non-heathen and heathen types are entirely different. Yet the former encroach in every way, with more success than the monotheists, who have tried the same albeit for their own ends. The non-heathen Hindus try to erode the right heathen perceptions of heathen materials with their novel post-heathen perceptions/interpretations. They pretend they have a right to heathen materials, as if it is equally their inheritance (when it ceased to be, the moment they ceased to be traditional heathens: no different from how heathen stuffs cease to belong to other ex-heathen Indians such as those who convert to monotheisms).

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            Ok lets agree to disagree on the Hindu Heathen and Hinduphobia part.As I mentioned Phobia is an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.Where as being of afraid of Islam is like asking a normal person are you afraid of Terrorism.From what we see and read ISLAM is Synonym for Terrorism +Al Taqiya,if someone was to stand close to a cliff should he/she be afraid of falling and dieing obviously yes so it cannot be categorized as a Phobia hence I dont agree with the word Islamophobia.

            Something or someone whose not harmed you has not intention of harming you and you still want to finish them of this obviously means you suffer from some kind of Phobia as your fear is irrational and disproportionate.Lets end the discussion about Hinduphobia here cause I know you will give me a long reply which would still not change my stand and neither would my stand change your stand.

            You can try and justify Heathen Hindu in n number of ways I still dont agree with you except that its true that the Abrahamics twist certain words and make it derogatory which might have originally meant something completely different.

            Now the main part about Shivaji being a Heathen Hindu and being a protector of Cows,I believe that you are referring to Vaidik Dharma when you say Heathen Hindu.

            The rivers, usually named dhenavah. , fostering cows, are
            here described as a´sv¯ah. , Mares, because while the Cow is
            the symbol of consciousness in the form of knowledge, the
            Horse is the symbol of consciousness in the form of force.
            Ashwa, the Horse, is the dynamic force of Life, and the rivers
            labouring over Agni on the earth become the waters of Life,
            of the vital dynamis or kinesis, the Prana, which moves and
            acts and desires and enjoys. Agni himself begins as material
            heat and power, manifests secondarily as the Horse and then
            only becomes the heavenly fire. His first work is to give as the
            child of the Waters its full form and extension and purity to
            the middle world, the vital or dynamic plane, raja ¯atatanv¯an.

            He purifies the nervous life in man pervading it with his own
            pure bright limbs, lifting upward its impulsions and desires,
            its purified will in works (kratum) by the pure powers of the
            super-conscient Truth and Wisdom, kavibhih. pavitraih.. So he
            wears his vast glories, no longer the broken and limited activity
            of desires and instincts, all about the life of the Waters

            Sometimes the prayer is not for luminous delight or luminous
            plenitude, but for a luminous impulsion or force; “Bring
            to us, O daughter of Heaven, luminous impulsions along with
            the rays of the Sun,” gomatı¯r is.a a¯ vaha¯ duhitar divah. , sa¯kam˙
            su¯ ryasya ras´mibhih. , V.79.8. Sayana explains that this means
            “shining foods”, but it is obviously nonsense to talk of radiant
            foods being brought by Dawn with the rays of the Sun. If is.
            means food, then we have to understand by the phrase “food
            of cow’s flesh”, but, although the eating of cow’s flesh was not
            forbidden in the early times, as is apparent from the Brahmanas,
            still that this sense which Sayana avoids as shocking to the later
            Hindu sentiment, is not intended—it would be quite as absurd
            as the other,—is proved by another verse of the Rig Veda in
            which the Ashwins are invoked to give the luminous impulsion
            that carries us through to the other side of the darkness, y¯a nah.
            p¯ıparad a´svin ¯a jyotis.
            mat¯ı tamas tirah., t¯am asme r ¯ as ¯ath¯am is.am
            (I.46.6).
            We can perceive from these typical examples how pervading
            is this image of the Cow of Light and how inevitably it points to a
            psychological sense for the Veda. A doubt, however, intervenes.
            Why should we not, even accepting this inevitable conclusion
            that the cow is an image for Light, understand it to mean simply
            the light of day as the language of the Veda seems to intend?Why suppose a symbol where there is only an image?Why invite
            the difficulty of a double figure in which “cow” means light of
            dawn and light of dawn is the symbol of an inner illumination?
            Why not take it that the Rishis were praying not for spiritual
            illumination, but for daylight?
            Reference-The Secret of the Veda Sri Aurobindo

            Ok so what I have read of the Vedas I think one can only know the Vaidik Gyan if they themselves reach the Rishi Stage which seems unlikely in todays world.I think there are two many interpretations as in Sayana in the 14 Century refuses to interpret it as Beef eating so even if you were to learn the Vedas from a Gyani Panditji I am doubtful that he will interpret it contradictory to Sayana if you take other interpretations some are just Vulgar and hence cant be accepted.The language can be a mixture of poetic metaphor along with literal meanings hence can be confusing thus Manu suggested that Vedas are not for everyone.Apart from Beef eating the interpretation of blaim it on the Non Heathen Hindus might not be entirely correct while not completely wrong either,as in there are too many places where the cow is almost attained a status of being Puajaniya.Hence these mentioning of Cow in such high status might have led to it attaining Godly status.Anyways coming back to cow worship I think its the Vaidiks who might have later on started giving it a status of Mother it had to happen with the way Vedas describe the cow.I have never seen a nonvegetarian describe a chicken or pork or mutton or beef in the way the Rishis described the cow.The only things I hear from NonVegetarians is juicy,yummy,tasty basically the descriptions are embodiment of Gluttony unlike the Vaidik description of the cow.I some how feel the Vaidik truth might have been lost to us unless we ourselves are able to reach that state.

            So tell me whose the Heathen Hindu the one who would eat beef during the Vedic Era or the ones who stopped it while continuing many of the Vaidik Dharmik ways.

          • Anfauglir

            #3

            “heathen

            synonyms:pagan, infidel, idolater, idolatress; unbeliever,
            non-believer,disbeliever, atheist, non-theist, agnostic, sceptic,
            heretic; rarepaynim, nullifidian”

            Note that in the early christian invectives, the use of “atheist” and the like did not refer to general non-believers/non-religious, but were specifically invectives directed against the pagans (“polytheistic idolators”) of the empire. This, as much else–including the inversion of “pagan”, from a respectable Roman heathen self-appellation into a christian connotation against them and the Greeks–was reactionary on christianity’s part:

            An important Graeco-Roman definition for atheist meant christian. Christianity was specifically referred to as atheismos.
            Hence, with the triumph of christianity, “atheist” as a synonym for pagan [and heathen] was merely another christian inversion of pagan accusations: christians reactively accusing the Graeco-Roman heathens of what these heathens had rightly denounced christians with (viz., christians’ denial of the true, Olympic Gods, with the invented mono entity of the bible as replacement. Yet the demonstrably false god was actually the biblical one.) Stung to the quick, christianity tried to wrest a semblance of authenticity by illegally turning the tables, like children or those who can’t argue logically still do. As a result–and even though christianity had originally been equated with atheism (as all denial of the Olympic Gods had been)–“pagans” and “atheists” became synonymous in christian parlance early on. But in that initial formation of christian vocabulary, both words referred to Graeco-Roman worshippers of the Olympic Gods–i.e. referring to Graeco-Roman heathens–not to “people who didn’t believe in any god”.

        • Anfauglir

          “He was called ‘गो ब्राह्मण प्रतिपालक'”

          Yes, I’m aware of it.

          “That is why Muslims were safe in his kingdom.”

          Shivaji’s a good man which is why. And I’m not at all criticising him in the following, just like I don’t criticise the Roman emperor Julian for a similar stance vis-a-vis [correction] christians. (Though Julian certainly plotted the demise of christianity and was determined to bring it about.)

          But otherwise this statement is not something for Hindus to promote as an example. I’d rather the monotheists lived in fear of all heathens the world over (like Taoists, Shintos, Hindus, etc), so that such a fear would keep them from genociding and ethnically cleansing heathens and otherwise trampling all over heathens. Hinduphobia doesn’t exist–contrary to Vamsee Juluri coining this phrase–but if it did, it would be a good thing: monotheists only respect strength. And only fear, or violence, restrains their terrorism. I’d rather they have a permanent fear than that violence is needed to keep them from harming the natives.

    • Anfauglir

      Hindu civilians in the state were rescuing stray dogs, wading about carrying the animals to safety rather than their personal property (even though dogs are generally great swimmers).

  • Sumathi Megavarnam

    There was a Sarcastic message in Whatsapp ,On the xtian converted Soul thieves like ” Lost & Not found ” during the Chennai floods & rains , the people are none other than Mohan lazarus , paul dhinakaran , Sadhu sundar, & many others whose names i dont know & also dont care too…..sic…..these Soul rapers , converted beggars not only demeaning themselves as well as the whole country in front of the bloody whitemen by licking their boots for their sh*&&^ Crumbs they through on their faces have gone into hiding during the worst calamity , while they have amassed wealth in the disguise of xtian minority organisations , trusts etc