Rammohun Roy suggested European (English?) education for Indians before Macaulay recommended it.
kuri...@gmail.com
college in Calcutta. As directed by the British Parliament the
college was to be funded with the money that the East India Company
was required to pay. Raja Rammohun Roy opposed this decision because
he knew very well –himself a Sanskrit scholar- how Sanskrit was the
chief means of the Brahminical stifling of the Indian mind. Roy
advocated an education patterned after the European model. One of the
his objectives was to liberate the Indian mind from the slavery to
Brahminism. Although he did not succeed in his objective right away
he seemed to have influenced other reformers who came later.
Following is a letter Rammohan Roy wrote to the Prime Minister
William Pitt on 11 December 1823. This happened 12 years before
Macaulay’s minute was presented to the British Parliament.
Here is the letter he sent to Prime Minister William Pitt.
_____________________________________________________________
His Excellency the Right Hon'ble WILLIAM PITT,
LORD AMHERST
MY LORD,
I HUMBLY reluctant as the natives of India are to obtrude upon the
notice of Government the sentiments they entertain on any public
measure, there are circumstances when silence would be carrying this
respectful feeling to culpable excess.
The present Rulers of India, coming from a distance of many thousand
miles to govern a people whose language, literature, manners, customs,
and ideas are almost entirely new and strange to them, cannot easily
become so intimately acquainted with their real circumstances, as the
natives of the country are themselves. We should therefore be guilty
of a gross dereliction of duty to ourselves, and afford our Rulers
just ground of complaint at our apathy, did we omit on occasions of
importance like the present to supply them with such accurate
information as might enable them to devise and adopt measures
calculated to be beneficial to the country, and thus second by our
local knowledge and experience their declared benevolent intentions
for its improvement.
The establishment of a new Sangscrit School in Calcutta evinces the
laudable desire of Government to improve the Natives of India by
Education, - blessing for which they must ever be grateful; and every
well wisher of the human race must be desirous that the efforts made
to promote it should be guided by the most enlightened principles, so
that the stream of intelligence may flow into the most useful
channels.
When this Seminary of learning was proposed, we understood that the
Government in England had ordered a considerable sum of money to be
annually devoted to the instruction of its Indian Subjects. We were
filled with sanguine hopes that this sum would be laid out in
employing European Gentlemen of talents and education to instruct the
natives of India in Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, Chemistry,
Anatomy and other useful Sciences, which the Nations of Europe have
carried to a degree of perfection that has raised them above the
inhabitants of other parts of the world.
While we looked forward with pleasing hope to the dawn of knowledge
thus promised to the rising generation, our hearts were filled with
mingled feelings of delight and gratitude; we already offered up
thanks to Providence for inspiring the most generous and enlightened
of the Nations of the West with the glorious ambition of planting in
Asia the Arts and Sciences of modern Europe.
We now find that the Government are establishing a Sangscrit school
under Hindoo Pundits to impart such knowledge as is already current in
India. This Seminary (similar in character to those which existed in
Europe before the time of Lord Bacon) can only be expected to load the
minds of youth with grammatical niceties and metaphysical distinctions
of little or no practicable use to the possessors or to society. The
pupils will there acquire what was known two thousand years ago, with
the addition of vain and empty subtilties since produced by
speculative men, such as is already commonly taught in all parts of
India.
The Sangscrit language, so difficult that almost a life time is
necessary for its perfect acquisition, is well known to have been for
ages a lamentable check on the diffusion of knowledge; and the
learning concealed under this almost impervious veil is far from
sufficient to reward the labour of acquiring it. But if it were
thought necessary to perpetuate this language for the sake of the
portion of the valuable information it contains, this might be much
more easily accomplished by other means than the establishment of a
new Sangscrit College; for there have been always and are now numerous
professors of Sangscrit in the different parts of the country, engaged
in teaching this language as well as the other branches of literature
which are to be the object of the new Seminary. Therefore their more
diligent cultivation, if desirable, would be effectually promoted by
holding out premiums and granting certain allowances to those most
eminent Professors, who have already undertaken on their own account
to teach them, and would by such rewards be stimulated to still
greater exertions.
From these considerations, as the sum set apart for the instruction of
the Natives of India was intended by the Government in England, for
the improvement of its Indian subjects, I beg leave to state, with due
deference to your Lordship's exalted situation, that if the plan now
adopted be followed, it will completely defeat the object proposed;
since no improvement can be expected from inducing young men to
consume a dozen of years of the most valuable period of their lives in
acquiring the niceties of the Byakurun of Sangscrit Grammar. For
instance, in learning to discuss such points as the following: Khad
signifying to eat, Khaduti, he or she or it eats. Query, whether does
the word Khaduti, taken as a whole, convey the meaning he, she, or it
eats, or are separate parts of this meaning conveyed by distinct
portions of the word? As if in the English language it were asked, how
much meaning is there in the eat, how much in the s? and is the whole
meaning of the word conveyed by those two portions of it distinctly,
or by them taken jointly?
Neither can much improvement arise from such speculations as the
following, which are the themes suggested by the Vedant:- In what
manner is the soul absorbed into the deity? What relation does it bear
to the divine essence? Nor will youths be fitted to be better members
of society by the Vedantic doctrines, which teach them to believe that
all visible things have no real existence; that as father, brother,
etc., have no actual entirety; they consequently deserve no real
affection, and therefore the sooner we escape from them and leave the
world the better. Again, no essential benefit can be derived by the
student of the Meemangsa from knowing what it is that makes the killer
of a goat sinless on pronouncing certain passages of the Veds, and
what is the real nature and operative influence of passages of the
Ved, etc.
Again the student of the Nyaya Shastra cannot be said to have improved
his mind after he has learned from it into how marry ideal classes the
objects in the Universe are divided, and what speculative relation the
soul bears to the body, the body to the soul, the eye to the
ear,
In order to enable your Lordship to appreciate the utility of
encouraging such imaginary learning as above characterised, I beg your
Lordship will be pleased to compare the state of science and
literature in England before the time of Lord Bacon, with the progress
of knowledge made since he wrote.
[Sanskrit education is best calculated to keep the Indian mind in the
bondage of darkness]If it had been intended to keep the British nation
in ignorance of real knowledge, the Baconian philosophy would not have
been allowed to displace the system of the schoolmen, which was the
best calculated to perpetuate ignorance. In the same manner the
Sangscrit system of education would be the best calculated to keep
this country in darkness, if such had been the policy of the British
Legislature. But as the improvement of the native population is the
object of the Government, it consequently ought to promote a more
liberal and enlightened system of instruction, embracing mathematics,
natural philosophy, chemistry and anatomy, with other useful sciences
which may be accomplished with the sum proposed by employing a few
gentlemen of talents and learning educated in Europe, and providing a
college furnished with the necessary books, instruments and other
apparatus.
In representing this subject to your Lordship I conceive myself
discharging a solemn duty which I owe to my countrymen and also to
that enlightened Sovereign and Legislature which have extended their
benevolent cares to this distant land actuated by a desire to improve
its inhabitants, and I therefore humbly trust you will excuse the
liberty I have taken in thus expressing my sentiments to your
Lordship.
I have, etc.,
RAMMOHUN ROY,
CALCUTTA; The 11th December 1823
ker...@gmail.com
Typical Gangadin, loyal running dog. They were ready to do whatever
Brits wanted and acted as spys and espionage hacks for Brits. It is
such foolhardy idiots and their contempt for everything native that
Hindu Bengal got chopped up into Jehadi Bengal and communist Bengal
and typical missionary/western boot-lickers.
ravimpillay
.....???
all they can do is chant """cholbe na , cholbe na cholbe na cholbe
na , , hobe na hobe na hobe na hobe na ....???
they have been fucked by the muslims in 1948 when more than 20000
were killed in 3 days and now are getting screwed by goondas from
comunist party and bangladeshi bastards and they have no guts to
resist them
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
prevailing
situation in Bengal where rural folks were totally controlled by the
Sanskrit
wielding brahmins. To get a grasp of the situation please watch Aparna
Sen's
film Sati, based on 1828 rural situation in Bengal.
Arjoe
ker...@gmail.com
Hinduism can not survive where Brahmins and Kshtriyas lose their
strengths and sway. We know traitors like Roy worked with Brits to
finish them off. As a result, only thing that could grow and control
Bengal has been pro-british babus, Jehadi Islamists and commie
bastards and hindu refugees. We do not rely on commies or Bollywood
for our history.
anal...@hotmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
can you be sufficiently introspective and admit that a lot of North
Indian and Bong Hindus went gaga (along with deep self-hatred of
course) when they saw the Brits and saw reflected in them their own
primordial "aryanness" and wanted to revert to a pure Vedist
Christianity (shameful crap such as Brahmo Samaj and Arya Samaj) to
replace the messy, multi-faceted, amorphous Hinduism that they started
to find disgusting, since they were seeing it with the White man's
eyes?
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
>
> can you be sufficiently introspective and admit that a lot of North
> Indian and Bong Hindus went gaga (along with deep self-hatred of
> course) when they saw the Brits and saw reflected in them their own
> primordial "aryanness" and wanted to revert to a pure Vedist
> Christianity (shameful crap such as Brahmo Samaj and Arya Samaj) to
> replace the messy, multi-faceted, amorphous Hinduism that they started
> to find disgusting, since they were seeing it with the White man's
> eyes?
Analyst41, don't think like a ullu ka pattha! The Sanskrit College
that Rammohun
had opposed was actually established later. But, it never got much
popularity
amomg the people, they all wanted to study english and european
science,
and, of course, develop the Bengali language through intense literary
efforts.
To think that all external influences are bad is to think like
Jarwahs! Also, if the
prevailing hinduism was "amorphous" what is your problem if someone
increases
that amorphousness by creating a couple more branches!
Arjoe
ker...@gmail.com
>
> read more »
I would not be surprised if activism of RMR laid the ideas and
foundation for Macualey to come up with euro-centric education
kuri...@gmail.com
> Thanks for posting Rammohun's comments! He had reacted to the
> prevailing
> situation in Bengal where rural folks were totally controlled by the
> Sanskrit
> wielding brahmins. To get a grasp of the situation please watch Aparna
> Sen's
> film Sati, based on 1828 rural situation in Bengal.
>
> Arjoe
Following is an incident of Sati that Rammohun Roy witnessed that
changed his life and made him a lifelong reformer.>
"The turning-point in his religious life came in 1811 A. D.,
when he was obliged to witness the "sati" of his brother's wife. He
had
tried, all in vain, to persuade her relations to refuse to allow this
inhuman act to take place. At first the poor girl herself, goaded on
by
the Brahman priests, was ready to undergo this self-immolation. But
when at last the flames actually reached her, there followed a scene
which haunted Ram Mohan Roy till the day of his death. She struggled
to
get up and escape from the torture of the fire; but the Brahman
priests
and her own orthodox relations forced her down with long bamboo poles
while the drums and horn were sounded louder and louder to drown her
dying shrieks."
"The sight of the cruel murder of his sister, which he was
unable to prevent, made Ram Mohan Roy take a solemn vow to devote the
rest f his days to an unceasing effort to overthrow these terrible
abuses. The patient and resolute determination with which he strove
to
accomplish this end, crowned as it was at last, with success may well
be
compared with the great struggle of Wilberforce, his contemporary in
the
west, to abolish slavery"
From "The Renaissance in India" by C. F. Andrews, published in 1912.
Pages 108-109.
Arindam Banerjee
> Thanks for posting Rammohun's comments! He had reacted to the
> prevailing
> situation in Bengal where rural folks were totally controlled by the
> Sanskrit
> wielding brahmins. To get a grasp of the situation please watch Aparna
> Sen's
> film Sati, based on 1828 rural situation in Bengal.
>
> Arjoe
I don't see how a film can replace the role of genuine research or
personal experience in this field. To learn about history from a
film, is perilous for one is easily open to propaganda and other
manipulation. However, if we are talking about learning history from
films, there is the movie "Heat and Dust" by Merchant-Ivory, where
this social practice is shown as the duty of, or expectation from, the
widowed queen, who was at that time as widow the absolute ruler.
There was no question of anyone making her do it. It was her personal
choice to go out in a blaze of glory, showing her love for her
husband, and her courage to the people who worshipped her for her
heroism. Thus setting the highest possible standards for female
virtue - which by definition made her a sati. Such was satif-daaha,
or the volunatary self-immolation of a noble and faithful woman, in
both theory and practice. Many queens of Rajasthan did that, as I
found when I visited Chittaurgarh in 1980. RabindraNath Tagore had
written a poem in his Kotha-o-kahini to extol this practice.
About the practice of sati in India, I was fortunate to find a mention
of that practice in a book on human sacrifice in a library here.
Unfortunately I cannot give the reference. One of the chapters dealt
with sati, and it was an eye-witness account by a British officer.
The officer wrote that the widow assented to sati. It was simply a
suicide, which was sanctioned by the priests, whose main role was to
ensure that it was being done voluntarily. The woman was certainly
not tied up (as witches were tied to the stake in Europer), nor did
she run away. It was perfectly voluntary, according to the account.
Well, so far as anti-brahminism is concerned, brahmins faced
opposition not just from Christians, and other relgions and sects, but
from the envious lordly kshatriya-wannabe non-Brahmins as well! Only
the shudras consistently supported the brahmins, and maybe some
vaishyas. And why not, priestwork properly done is really difficult -
nothing less than weaving or tanning
Arindam Banerjee.
Arindam Banerjee
The introduction of Sanskrit elements into the Bengali language by
Vidyasagar moshai gave it the present form. Similarly modern Hindi
owes practically everything to Sanskrit influences.
Fashions change with time, and maybe Sanskrit will experience a
comeback. I think this will happen, within the next 20-30 years.
Maybe sooner. Basically, it depends upon how well or ill people wish
to communicate, and understand, the subtleties of life...
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
then
comment. Even other serious historians (many of them brahmins) did
not
find much positive in those rituals. Vidyasagar, himself a brahmin,
fought
against the brahminical prohibition on widow remarriage!
Sanskrit is very unlikely to make a comeback. Simply because it is
much
more difficult to learn and communicate with. I have learnt Sanskrit
and
German, they have similarity in the level of difficulty. In contrast,
Bengali
and English are very easy and relaxed.
Arjoe
anal...@hotmail.com
Look, I'm all for the Bengal Renaissance in so far as it led to the
flowering of Bengali literature. But doesn't it make you cringe to
see the craven servility of Roy's letter? Has the attitude of Keshub
Chandra Sen (who allegedly saw the advent of the Brits in India as the
reunion of lost ("aryan") cousins ) and other giants of the Bengal
renaissaince towards the Brits been studied from our present day
vantage point? The line
"BhArata BhAgya VidhAtA"
in the national anthem doesn't make sense unless it is addressed to an
entity above and separate from India. Did Tagore in any way promote
the idea that he was an Aryan - because the New York Times saw fit to
justify his Nobel to its white readers with words to the effect
"Tagore, if not exactly one of us, is, as an Aryan, a distant relation
of all white folk."
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
When one section of the local population becomes so crooked as to
continuously suck the blood of another, then aliigning with
foreigners
on issues is not a matter of servility, it's just an attempt at
achieving an
improved social situation! Rammohun's contribution to social reform
has been so huge, nobody likes to nitpick the style of his letter and
so on!
He was just being humble in his writing. Obviously, he was not a boot-
licker
to the brits, otherwise they would not stop his weekly paper Koumudi.
Arjoe
Arindam Banerjee
I was making a general comment about the doubtful usefulness of films
as showing history. For anyone can make any sort of film. It was you
making the error of using a film to analyse the past in realistic
terms. Anyway what was she trying to show? That sati was like witch-
burning, or what? I have seen her Paroma (where she makes a slut out
of a respectable Bengali housewife in a reputable joint family) and
based upon that film, and my knowledge of women of that type, I cannot
take her directorial work seriously.
Even other serious historians (many of them brahmins) did
> not
> find much positive in those rituals.
There has always been a conflict between serious historians trained by
Europeans, and those following traditional Indian thought, in India.
One of the chief areas of disagreement relates to the dating of
Kalidas. The western historians date him after 400 AD, and he is BC
for the traditionalists. Now, our entire view of world history will
change if the latter viewpoint holds sway. As it may, in the future.
If you as a brahmin do not find any use in rituals, then you cannot be
called a brahmin. You are at most descended from brahmins. For
rituals are standard methods of worship. To demean them, is the first
step towards atheism. Certainly many of brahmin descent are now
atheists, but not all.
Vidyasagar, himself a brahmin,
> fought
> against the brahminical prohibition on widow remarriage!
His point was that those opposing widow remarriage were not following
scripture - this Sanatan Dharmic scripture makes no sanctions against
widow remarriage. As a brahmin and a scholar, the greatest of his
time, he was thus making his brahminical point *for* widow
remarriage. With ultimate success.
> Sanskrit is very unlikely to make a comeback. Simply because it is
> much
> more difficult to learn and communicate with. I have learnt Sanskrit
> and
> German, they have similarity in the level of difficulty. In contrast,
It all depends upon how and when you are taught the language, and who
teaches you Sanskrit. German kids evidently have no difficulty in
learning German. I do not see how things should be more difficult for
Indian kids learning Sanskrit from childhood (as Israeli kids learn
Yiddish, in recent times).
Sanskrit should make a comeback if the Indian masses want Sanskrit -
to speak beautifully, have noble thoughts and ideas, have higher
morality, better music, romance. The best Hindi and Bengali songs and
literature were written by people who had a strong Sanskrit
background. With their generation gone, we have the current
wasteland. Now, once this is realised, there should be renewed effort
to make Sanskrit education more popular. In any case, the DAV and
other Hindu schools should still be teaching Sanskrit. So I doubt if
this will go away, despite the ill wishes of the antagonists. It is
true that the elite Indians (Macaulayites/Marxists/atheists/Christians/
etc.) are anti-Sanskrit, as they benefit from the West accordingly in
various ways - so the real hope of this great language lies in the non-
elite masses. It is really their call - what should they be? Should
they be happy with crumbs, be second-rate for ever like the elites, or
should they try for first-rate-ness like the upcoming Eastern
neighbours?
> Bengali
> and English are very easy and relaxed.
It is very difficult to teach English to English kids - which is why
they spell so poorly and talk so badly. Indians speak and write
English correctly because they have had learnt English from earlier
knowledge of Hindi/ Bengali, that have Sanskrit-based structures.
This point (that the English cannot speak their own language, unlike
say the French and Germans) was well made by Bernard Shaw in
"Pygmalion".
> Arjoe- Hide quoted text -
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
Sometimes you have to see historical events and situations through the
eyes of an artiste. You do not want to dwell on the details of the
situation,
too boring and uninteresting. Like Picasso's Guernica encapsulates the
horrors of Nazi bombing on Spain, similarly Aparna Sen's Sati is a
human
document of the brahminical stranglehold on the rural situation of
the
early 19th century Bengal. She is a very fine film-maker, and most of
her
films are of very high quality, and are very realistic. And, in Sati,
Shabana
Azmi put up a sterling performance.
Arindam Banerjee
>
> - Show quoted text -
One has the liberty to present, and the other has the liberty to
reject, in any free-thinking society.
Arindam Banerjee
Your talk of Guernica made me do some little research on the
Internet. Googling informed me about the Spanish Civil War of
1936-39, when 500,000 people died. Most of them were simply murdered
by the two contending parties - Republican socialists and communists,
and Nationalists (conservative elements). The Republicans killed the
priests and nuns, and the Nationalists killed the school teachers!
Well, that was all done in the rural areas.
Well ther rural people of Bengali worshipped brahmins no doubt, as
living gods, for the rural brahmins were both priests *and* teachers,
and story-tellers and counsellors too, leading simple and austere
lives. So the chance of Bengal ever becoming a Spain (where people
having same language, culture and even religion hated each other and
killed each other most brutally) was averted! All the problem Bengal
has had, then and since, cannot be traced to brahmins. Brahmins like
Shri Ramakrishna and Vidyasagar were the pioneers of what can be
unfortunately now seen as a short-lived awakening.
She is a very fine film-maker, and most of
> her
> films are of very high quality, and are very realistic. And, in Sati,
> Shabana
> Azmi put up a sterling performance.- Hide quoted text -
harmony
"Arindam Banerjee" <adda...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:9e050ed8-dd8d-4b05...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
i read this with interest.
can you you expand and explain this very interesting point?
thanks.
<<<If you as a brahmin do not find any use in rituals, then you cannot be
called a brahmin. You are at most descended from brahmins. For
rituals are standard methods of worship. To demean them, is the first
step towards atheism. Certainly many of brahmin descent are now
atheists, but not all.>>>
powerful entities in india such as the jnu (and the media) have a good hold
on indian psyche.
you should speak at the jnu. i think david frawley once got invited there,
and his listeners although could not disagree on such fine points yet
dismissed him as "radical".
totally agreed with this wonderful post.
Wanderer
> Sanskrit should make a comeback if the Indian masses want Sanskrit -
> to speak beautifully, have noble thoughts and ideas, have higher
> morality, better music, romance.
Wtf would you know about that, you hate-mongering shitbag with the IQ of
a flea?
Chet
> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:9e050ed8-dd8d-4b05...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 31, 10:45 pm, arya.raychaudh...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>> On Aug 31, 3:39 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 31, 6:21 am, arya.raychaudh...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>>
>> > > Thanks for posting Rammohun's comments! He had reacted to the
>> > > prevailing
>> > > situation in Bengal where rural folks were totally controlled by the
>> > > Sanskrit
>> > > wielding brahmins. To get a grasp of the situation please watch Aparna
>> > > Sen's
>> > > film Sati, based on 1828 rural situation in Bengal.
>>
>> > > Arjoe
>>
>> > I don't see how a film can replace the role of genuine research or
>> > personal experience in this field. To learn about history from a
>> > film, is perilous for one is easily open to propaganda and other
>> > manipulation.
...
>> > Arindam Banerjee.
I agree. Most films and even novels are created to further the viewpoint of
their creator.
>
>> You should first watch the film I mentioned (Aparna Sen's Sati) and
>> then
>> comment.
>
> I was making a general comment about the doubtful usefulness of films
> as showing history. For anyone can make any sort of film. It was you
> making the error of using a film to analyse the past in realistic
> terms.
I agree with this. I don't see how one particular film can be the only source
for information related to any topic. Nowadays, even documentaries, which are
supposed to be factual, also try to bring out the facts in accordance with the
beliefs of its creator.
>> Even other serious historians (many of them brahmins) did
>> not
>> find much positive in those rituals.
>
> <<<There has always been a conflict between serious historians trained by
> Europeans, and those following traditional Indian thought, in India.
> One of the chief areas of disagreement relates to the dating of
> Kalidas. The western historians date him after 400 AD, and he is BC
> for the traditionalists. Now, our entire view of world history will
> change if the latter viewpoint holds sway. As it may, in the future.>>>
>
> i read this with interest.
> can you you expand and explain this very interesting point?
> thanks.
I believe it is immaterial today what any of the historians may have said. What
matters is what is being said today. I don't see anyone so far saying that the
happenings under discussion have merit today and needs to continue. Any further
discussion on the topic indicates that there might be other not so obvious
reasons at work. It is also true, unfortunately, that historians project the
facts in the light they want their readers to see.
It isn't clear what kind of rituals are claimed to be not much positive, so I
wouldn't comment now.
> <<<If you as a brahmin do not find any use in rituals, then you cannot be
> called a brahmin. You are at most descended from brahmins. For
> rituals are standard methods of worship. To demean them, is the first
> step towards atheism. Certainly many of brahmin descent are now
> atheists, but not all.>>>
>
> powerful entities in india such as the jnu (and the media) have a good hold
> on indian psyche.
> you should speak at the jnu. i think david frawley once got invited there,
> and his listeners although could not disagree on such fine points yet
> dismissed him as "radical".
> totally agreed with this wonderful post.
I see now. It is riduculous to claim that all rituals fit into the same
category. As far as I see, there is no society where they don't have *any*
rituals. If there is one, I can imagine it is a very boring one, indeed.
Religious rituals also have their reasonings, it is just that most people don't
know why they are doing what they are doing. Marriage, in all religions, is a
ritual as well.
> Vidyasagar, himself a brahmin,
>> fought
>> against the brahminical prohibition on widow remarriage!
>
> His point was that those opposing widow remarriage were not following
> scripture - this Sanatan Dharmic scripture makes no sanctions against
> widow remarriage. As a brahmin and a scholar, the greatest of his
> time, he was thus making his brahminical point *for* widow
> remarriage. With ultimate success.
I agree. However, as I said before, I don't see any point in elaborating this
now.
I am not sure if there was something said about relevance of Sanskrit
today. However, a lot depends on what kind of comeback one is talking about. I
have no doubt that there need to be Sanskrit scholars in India who are able to
read and understand the ancient manuscripts. One is able to read and understand
the material thousands of years after it was written because of the precise
nature of the language. This made learning all the nuances of the language
somewhat difficult, limiting its use among the educated. Traditional method of
teaching Sanskrit was also based on this goal. Clearly, that does not work for
teaching the masses. However, there are other teaching methods, that can make
it easier, at least to learn the basics. What is possible for the masses is
only dependent on what the masses put their effort on. My own opinion is that
knowing the basics of the language are good for learning any other Indian
language. There is always going to be a section of the masses that would be
against teaching of Sanskrit, due to various reasons, one of them being, they
would not like to put in the effort required in learning an additional language
and/or would not like others to benefit if they actually do so. But at the same
time, there is no reason to deny the opportunity to those who do want to learn.
It became fashionable to be "English wielding" during the rein of the British
and that was by their design.
>> Bengali
>> and English are very easy and relaxed.
>
> It is very difficult to teach English to English kids - which is why
> they spell so poorly and talk so badly. Indians speak and write
> English correctly because they have had learnt English from earlier
> knowledge of Hindi/ Bengali, that have Sanskrit-based structures.
> This point (that the English cannot speak their own language, unlike
> say the French and Germans) was well made by Bernard Shaw in
> "Pygmalion".
>
>> Arjoe- Hide quoted text -
>>
What is easy or difficult depends on individual circumstances. Vernaculars came
into being because they have relaxed rules and structure. I think it is easier
for one to learn another Indian language, if one already knows one, than it is
to learn English. But proficiency comes from practice and that is where English
seems to have an advantage in India today.
Chetan
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
Civil war is a sign of life! When one section of the population
cleverly
dominates another for generations, and then a civil war happens it
is a welcome break. When some crucial professions get monopolized
by a group whose members are all maritally linked, that's not a good
situation anywhere. For example, I live in Sunnyvale which is south
of San Fran by about 45 minutes drive. San Francisco is an
interesting
city, very vibrant and full of activity. Yet I seldom go there! Why?
Once during a visit there, I saw fire trucks full of only white fire
personnel!
It was kinda shocking, considering the fact that the city has a rather
diverse population. Felt like the Sati village of 1928 Bengal, where
all
priests and teachers were brahmins.
Arjoe
Arindam Banerjee
I suppose it is so for those inhuman idiot-intellectual types who are
not personally involved in it, who seek to gain from it, or who get
pleasure or power or both from innocent people getting killed and
tortured for no reason at all. Like, in the Spanish Civil war,
ordinary people got murdered, if they merely strayed from one line to
another. I personally did not find the terrorism in Delhi, or the
terrorism in Kashmir, which may be looked upon as civil wars, to be
anything welcome. Life was much better before all that happened.
Like, I have wonderful memories of life in Kolkata in the later
fifties and early sixties, before the useless Naxal movement which
only impoverished West Bengal.
When some crucial professions get monopolized
> by a group whose members are all maritally linked, that's not a good
> situation anywhere.
I don't see how civil war of horrendous proportions constitutes any
sort of remedy. A profession by definition cannot be racially or
caste based, so there is contradiction in your statement.
For example, I live in Sunnyvale which is south
> of San Fran by about 45 minutes drive. San Francisco is an
> interesting
> city, very vibrant and full of activity. Yet I seldom go there! Why?
> Once during a visit there, I saw fire trucks full of only white fire
> personnel!
Fighting fire is probably the bravest thing one can do these days, if
you are a civilian. Here in Australia we do it mostly on a voluntary
basis - the CFA or Country Fire Authority is managed by volunteers.
They are a very fit, dedicated people, and they defy extreme hardship
and danger. Recently three of them died bravely. So here it is not a
profession, it is a vocation. When the fires get too hot to manage,
they import USAn professionals. I do not know if you have to have
certain racial affiliations to be a firefighter in San Francisco.
> It was kinda shocking, considering the fact that the city has a rather
> diverse population. Felt like the Sati village of 1928
So just because you have seen only white firefighters in San
Francisco, that means civil war anywhere is a welcome break!
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
>
> read more »
Why, you dont like civil war! Lets say all the would-be fresh widows
who
would be thrown to the pyre formed a group and started an armed
rebellion
against those that would preside over the sati ritual, would you
not support
it!
Arjoe
Arindam Banerjee
I would most certainly support so-called witches about to be burnt by
fanatics, or women charged for adultery from death by stoning.
If I found that widows were getting *murdered* as satis, I would most
certainly support their cause.
However my investigation (in Chittaurgarh, Tagore's poem, and in a
library book) has shown me that sati-daaha was in the most part a
*voluntary* process. Thus, it was not murder, it was suicide. It was
certainly murder when the widow did not want to do it. The role of
the brahmins was to ensure that it was in fact a voluntary process -
this is from the first-hand account I read from a British officer who
saw the process. I read a Hindi book I bought when I was in
Chittaur. That book dealt at length on this subject. The gist was
that it was customary for widowed queens to practice sati-daaha, and
it was a great and very rare honour indeed. To see so much courage
and heroism in the female form, such a public display of conjugal love
(the ultimate mixing of bodies) would confer blessings upon the
onlookers - this was the popular superstition/belief. In the recent
past, there has been practice of sati in Rajasthan (Roop Kanwar), and
while that action has been widely condemned, no one says that the sati
was murdered, or that her action was anything but voluntary.
As to whether I would support this suicide, I would most certainly
say, no. My reason would be that they should not follow the example
of the great widowed queens and lovers of the past - no one should be
so presumptuous. As for benefitting the (normally whore-chasing)
public through glorious personal example, that is not necessary as we
already have got enough glorious examples from the past. The examples
of Promilla (the first sati, wife to Indrajit), Madri, Padmini and
many others are enough to suffice for all time! Thus I am like the
gods, who strongly dissuaded the goddess Rati to not commit self-
immolation, when Madana was incincerated by the wrath of Shiva...
(Kumarasambhava, by Kalidas).
Arindam Banerjee.
>
> Arjoe
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
Chet
So far it looks like you are the only one who insists on getting widows thrown
to the pyre and then benefitting by forming a "union" - as typical dishonest
union leaders are likely to do.
arya.ray...@sbcglobal.net
Leader of a union of fresh and hungry widows, sounds interesting to me!
Arindam Banerjee
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48bd8b5e$0$4015$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
I have in front of me right now three books on the subject:
1. The Abhijnanasakuntalam of Kalidasa, M R Kale, Sept 1898, Motilal
Banarasidass Publishers, New Delhi 10th ed 1969
2. Raghuvamsa of Kalidas, C R Devadhar, First Ed 1985 Delhi, Motilal
Banarasidass Publishers, New Dehi, Reprint 1997
3. Meghduta of Kalidasa, G R Nandargikar, First Ed 2001 New Bharatiya Book
Corporation, Delhi
1. pg xxx, Kalidasa's date. (I will quote selectively)
"The earliest mention of Kalidasa by name is in the Aihole Inscription dated
634 AD.. tradition mentions Kalidasa as a contemporary and a court-poet of
king Vikramaditya. One king of that name founded the era known after him,
which is accepted as commencing from 57 BC. Some antiquarians once did nto
accept this date as the correct one, but brought down Vikramaditya down to
AD 544 propounding what was known as the Korur theory. The battle of Korur
marked a turning point in Indian history, Vikramaditya having defeated the
Mlenchchas in it. Mr Fergusson held that to commemmorate the battle an era
was invented, and that its beginning was placed back 600 years. So he put
the true date of Vikramaditya at 544 AD, and this theory for a time held
sway, since no inscription was discovered bearing a date prior to 600 of the
Vikrama era. But the discovery of the Mandasor Inscription which is dated
Samvat 529, made this theory untenable, and the traditional date remained
unshaken"
2. pg. ii "Already, in the days of Kanishka (78 AD) Asvaghosa wrote his
Buddhacarita in the artificial style and called it a Mahakavya... Not only
is there a close parallelism between a few isolated passages and
descriptions, but between ideas and expressions fairly distributed over the
poem. As Prof R N Apte has observed these close resemblances warrant the
conclusion that "one of the poets is using the other". It must be remembered
that Asvaghosa is philosopher first and a poet afterwards; while Kalidasa is
an original poet. The probability, therefore, is that Asvaghosa is the
borrower and Kalidasa is the original."
3. pg 27 "Sir William Jones places Kalidasa in the first century preceding
the Christian era. This date rests on no other foundation that that of
tradition, which runs to the effect that there was once a king named
Vikramaditya who after defeating the Sakas or Scythians establised the
Samvat era which commences 57 years before Christ."
>
>
> <<<If you as a brahmin do not find any use in rituals, then you cannot be
> called a brahmin. You are at most descended from brahmins. For
> rituals are standard methods of worship. To demean them, is the first
> step towards atheism. Certainly many of brahmin descent are now
> atheists, but not all.>>>
>
> powerful entities in india such as the jnu (and the media) have a good
> hold on indian psyche.
> you should speak at the jnu. i think david frawley once got invited there,
> and his listeners although could not disagree on such fine points yet
> dismissed him as "radical".
I believe I will be called much worse things! But I did present some of my
mathematical modelling and computer simulation work in Calcutta University
in 2006, when I was an invited speaker to their 150th centenary
celebrations. It was well received, but I did not get any offers.
> totally agreed with this wonderful post.
Thanks!
Arindam Banerjee.
Arindam Banerjee
"Chet" <Chet....@xspam.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:uabequ...@myhost.sbcglobal.net...
Not so much written as memorised in painstaking detail, and carried down
that way from generation to generation by voice and ear.
This made learning all the nuances of the language
> somewhat difficult, limiting its use among the educated. Traditional
> method of
> teaching Sanskrit was also based on this goal. Clearly, that does not work
> for
> teaching the masses.
True, so Sanskrit learning by its very nature had to remain with a special
group, the Brahmins. The masses always had their natural languages, which
were based upon Sanskrit to varying extents.
However, there are other teaching methods, that can make
> it easier, at least to learn the basics. What is possible for the masses
> is
> only dependent on what the masses put their effort on. My own opinion is
> that
> knowing the basics of the language are good for learning any other Indian
> language. There is always going to be a section of the masses that would
> be
> against teaching of Sanskrit, due to various reasons, one of them being,
> they
> would not like to put in the effort required in learning an additional
> language
> and/or would not like others to benefit if they actually do so. But at the
> same
> time, there is no reason to deny the opportunity to those who do want to
> learn.
Exactly. I did not like learning Sanskrit when I was at school, but now I
feel I should have paid more attention in the classes. We were taught the
language compulsorily from Std.4 to Std8 (5 years). My teacher was an
Adivasi Christian gentleman - so much for the charge of elitism! I think we
were not taught correctly - there was too much emphasis on the grammar, and
too little on the literature. Still, such literature and phonetics that we
learnt, has been, from their intrinsic worth, of the greatest use in my
personal and family life. So if we talk in economic terms, the gains from
not getting divorced (and paying alimony and lawyers), not having badly
brought up children, etc. are simply incalculable.
> It became fashionable to be "English wielding" during the rein of the
> British
> and that was by their design.
>
>>> Bengali
>>> and English are very easy and relaxed.
>>
>> It is very difficult to teach English to English kids - which is why
>> they spell so poorly and talk so badly. Indians speak and write
>> English correctly because they have had learnt English from earlier
>> knowledge of Hindi/ Bengali, that have Sanskrit-based structures.
>> This point (that the English cannot speak their own language, unlike
>> say the French and Germans) was well made by Bernard Shaw in
>> "Pygmalion".
>>
>>> Arjoe- Hide quoted text -
>>>
> What is easy or difficult depends on individual circumstances. Vernaculars
> came
> into being because they have relaxed rules and structure. I think it is
> easier
> for one to learn another Indian language, if one already knows one, than
> it is
> to learn English. But proficiency comes from practice and that is where
> English
> seems to have an advantage in India today.
Well certainly one can get jobs in call centres. But I am not sure if that
market will last for ever. Sooner or later Indians have to become truly
self-reliant. English will be useful as a link language, and getting
information from overseas. So its place will not go away. However, unless
higher education is given in the vernacular, we cannot have people who are
truly committed to their region and culture - they will always be looking to
emigrate for better opportunities, and thus serve external interests more
than national/local interests. Also, English is often used to dismiss and
bar talented people who would be better off in the vernacular. Finally, to
gain recognition and success in the West as an English writer one has to be
treacherous to the Indian/native interest, like say Rushdie. So, no
culturally Indian person of integrity should seek any commercial use or
renown for real proficiency in English. Michael Madhusudan Dutta found this
out, long ago. His works in English (he wrote a lovely poem, The captive
lady) was ignored by the native speakers of English, so he started to write
in Bengali, and wrote Meghnad-bodh-kavya, considered by many the greatest
and most influential literary work in the Bengali language.
Arindam Banerjee.
>
> Chetan
Chetan
> "Chet" <Chet....@xspam.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:uabequ...@myhost.sbcglobal.net...
>> "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9e050ed8-dd8d-4b05...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
Ah, yes. I only meant it figuratively. However, it was this need to commit vast
amount of knowledge to memory, verbatim, was another reason why learning was
not possible for everyone. That need also dictated how the language was taught.
This is where I differ, as I had mentioned earlier. The difference is
not so much in the goal as in emphasis, but I would let it pass.
>>
>> Chetan
Arindam Banerjee
> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> writes:
> > "Chet" <Chet.xs...@xspam.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message> >>> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
It was possible for everyone who was so interested. The Brahmin
scholar had to host in his house and train as a shishya anyone really
interested in the scriptures, and sufficiently talented. His children
had no choice but to learn them, and this is how the knowledge was
passed down the ages till we had the print medium for public
transmission - and this posed perils of misunderstanding them,
deliberately or otherwise.
I am not sure where we differ, and if you have better ideas and
strategies, I would most certainly like to know of them.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Chetan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Arindam Banerjee
Tactical and limited military action for a good cause does not amount
to civil war.
I support the cause of not having civil wars - that means either the
enlightened multi-party democratic process, or the benevolent god-
king. Following Plato, I also believe in prayer when you have
bastards ruling you. What I do, in my spare time, is to work for the
sciences and the arts in the purest possible sense; for better arts
and sciences make better human beings, thus negating the need for
civil war.
Arindam Banerjee.
harmony
thanks. my teacher had taught me that kalidasa had written 4 books of poems.
of which you identified above two in 2 and 3.
the other two were: kumaasambhava and ritusamhara.
and he also wrote 3 dramas: shakuntala (which probably is same as no.1 you
indicate), malavikagnimitra and vikramorvashi.
does that match with your understanding?
thanks. i think the modern indian scholars are having to use eucliadian
method of reductio ad absurdum in disproving a lot colonial speculative
mischivous nonsense passing off as "history". however, i was focussing on
your point that "Now, our entire view of world history will
>> change if the latter viewpoint holds sway. As it may, in the future". I
>> would like you to elaborate that point which is of particular interest to
>> me.
Arindam Banerjee
> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> news:y8vvk.33665$IK1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:48bd8b5e$0$4015$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
>
I was talking about the books in my collection, not about all the
works attributed to him. These books I named have the original
Sanskrit verses, and both Sanskrit and English elaborations and
translation. In the introduction to these books, the authors talked
about the possible times of Kalidasa. I took out suitable quotations
from them, in order to explain the point I was making earlier as per
your request. The history books taught in school put Kalidas around
400-500AD, while according to these authors he is 57BC. Hope this
makes things clear!
> >> me.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
The Deep
I have following this thread on and off, but haven't had the time
to sit down and put my thoughts down. Mercifully the exchanges have
been civil (a refreshing change for which I am truly grateful). I
thought I'd throw in my (unsolicited :-)) two cents into the
discussion.
(1) Whatever be Macaulay's intentions, I cannot deny the fact that the
education that I received is what lets me converse with you all today.
If India had stuck with the old brahminical (not used as a pejorative)
gurukul system, lots of people (including me) would have been left out
of the system probably. The system, in some sense, has been a better
equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge. This is especially
true of urban India. The downside of the system has been that the
vital link between urban and rural people has been strained, if not
severed completely. This is my experience. I did not go through any
elite public school, and completed all my schooling in a government
institution. We had the strangest of systems in the south, we had to
learn English, Hindi, and Sanskrit as languages in the regular
curriculum, Social Studies in Hindi (a compromise with southern
hardliners who were dead set against imposition of Hindi as the medium
of instruction for _all_ subjects), and one's mother tongue (not part
of the curriculum, and no exams :-)). Maths and science were taught in
English. To me, it would have made the most sense to displace Hindi in
favor of the language of the state. Then again, students did not have
much choice - the only choices offered (on rare occasions) were a cane
across the palm or across the calf :-)
(2) Even though it has been a hindrance in establishing a pan-Indian
identity, division of states on a linguistic basis has been a real
blessing (as I see it). It truly has gone a long way towards giving
people an identity, a sense of belonging, and a sense of pride in ones
roots. This is especially true of rural India. More importantly, it
has allowed literature in every language to flourish. Yes, this has
largely been due to government patronage, and despite all its faults,
the Sahitya Akademi has done much to encourage literature in various
languages. I have had the good fortune to read translations of works
in many languages, although I cannot vouch that the translations
capture the tone and intent of the original. Again, this is my limited
perspective. My own sense of it is that Kannada literature has grown
tremendously, largely due to people like Kuvempu, Bendre, Karanth, ...
The only dissonance in here is the political activism of U R
Anantamurthy, and V K Gokak. The latter headed the commission that
recommended Kannada be imposed on the state as the first language. The
early agitation in the '60s because of Gokak led to all kinds of lower
life forms to emerge from the woodwork, and now that state suffers
from all kinds of chauvinists - a real pity given Kannadigas are very
very hospitable people. This is the key issue. Should one go down the
path of using the local language as the medium of instruction, and
more importantly, the language of government? If perfectly implemented
(yeah, a big if), the latter gives the government greater reach into
rural areas, while the former makes people less competitive in the
modern world (personal perspective). In an insecure setup (esp. in
urban areas) that we currently have in India, linguistic divisions
have led to regionalism, chauvinism, and intolerance, and in those
educated primarily in English, it has led to elitism. I don't believe
this is the fault of a system implemented by Macaulay. It is the
complete failure of educational establishments to foster respect and
tolerance, and show the world on a larger canvas (maybe TV/Internet
addresses this to some extent).
(3) What should be the way out? I think English, mother tongue,
religious tongue is the right three-language formula. The first is the
great equalizer that gets "caste" out of the equation (I'm a tad picky
about that), the second establishes the link to one's rural roots, and
the third establishes one's links to the language of liturgy and
scripture. For Hindus (4-varna or not), that religious tongue is
Sanskrit. Classical Sanskrit is not hard to learn, esp. since almost
all Indian languages have been influenced by Sanskrit in one way or
another (Arindam moshaai has pointed this out too), but should be good
prep for the harder Vedic Sanskrit. This my "prescription" is for
Standards 1 through 10. In Standards 11 and 12, the three-language
formula should be replaced by a two language one - English and a
"classical" language. To me, the "classical" languages are either
Vedic Sanskrit(or even Advanced Classical Sanskrit), or Tamil (for
southerners this is a must as all languages have their roots in
Tamil), or Arabic or Persian. Knowledge of the vernacular and
grounding in Standards 1 through 10 will make the transition easier, I
think. Eleventh and twelfth graders should be mature enough to handle
tough subjects, no?. Surely there is something more than prepping for
engineering or medical schools :-) I think that languages should
continue through engineering and medical schools too - no grade (only
pass/fail). What my solution does not figure in is the mobility of
people. Most people, esp. in government employees in banking,
administrative services, and "law enforcement", seem to be on the move
constantly (for good reasons too - striking roots usually leads to
corruption) all over India. What is the link language then? Hindi as
that link is a real tough sell (for me).
(4) Education in India (at least when I was growing up) was dreary
(punishments, home work, tests, in that order, is what I
remember ;-)), and emphasized rote learning. Links to one's history/
culture cannot be made firm without reinforcing material learned.
School trips to historical sites are a must. This is where the
government can give real leg up to kids, esp. in rural areas, by
subsidizing travel. Even a day trip to some near by site (a real win-
win, students get to dodge an otherwise dreary day, and some
percentage will benefit for the experience), will get people to "move
out of the well" and see the larger picture - a much richer experience
than static images in a book. I wasn't rich by any standards, but
frequent travel across the length and breadth of the country (large
extended families are a blessing :-)) gave me a much better
perspective, and made me richer from the experience. It is a real pity
that a reservation-obsessed government, and one committed to building
more and more IITs, has completely neglected school education (the
formative years that really matter). All successful village schools
(in the South) are largely dependent on the dedication of the teachers
and the principals who run them for a pittance as salary. Despite this
dedication, schools are still unable to be egalitarian and unable to
eliminate the caste (jaati) system. In the 21st century, is this
acceptable? To me, Macaulay or not, it simply isn't acceptable
anymore.
Sorry to be so long winded. If you've gotten this far, you deserve a
prize for patience :-) To sum, I'd say this, Macaulay is dead, and I
couldn't care less about his legacy. Education (whatever be the system
followed) should be the one that binds and not one that excludes. It
is a real pity to see so many "educated" Indians choose to exclude
rather than find common ground. After 60 years of independent
existence, it is about time to take responsibility for moving forward
instead of being completely imprisoned in a different historical era
(sometimes mythical). That choice comes down to the individual. The
choice I made is to learn as many Indian languages as I could. Not so
much for getting deep into the literature of those languages, but as a
ordinary human to be able to have a conversation with other ordinary
humans for a completely extraordinary experience (go travel about
rural areas if you want to meet real flesh and blood humans, the city
slicks are too wrapped in themselves). Besides, I find all Indian
scripts to be fascinating. I do read and write in 6 Indian languages -
all mostly self taught. If I can do it, so can you. Quit blaming
Macaulay or someone else for your shortcomings.
Cheers
Dinesh
PS: I have taken out rec.arts.books from the distribution as I did not
see the relevance of my "babble" to that particular newsgroup.
ravimpillay
SIR
Romanise
> Hello all,
>
> I have following this thread on and off, but haven't had the time
> to sit down and put my thoughts down. Mercifully the exchanges have
> been civil (a refreshing change for which I am truly grateful). I
> thought I'd throw in my (unsolicited :-)) two cents into the
> discussion.
>
> (1) Whatever be Macaulay's intentions, I cannot deny the fact that the
> education that I received is what lets me converse with you all today.
> If India had stuck with the old brahminical (not used as a pejorative)
> gurukul system, lots of people (including me) would have been left out
> of the system probably. The system, in some sense, has been a better
> equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge. This is especially
> true of urban India. The downside of the system has been that the
> vital link between urban and rural people has been strained, if not
> severed completely. This is my experience. I did not go through any
> elite public school, and completed all my schooling in a government
> institution. We had the strangest of systems in the south, we had to
> learn English, Hindi, and Sanskrit as languages in the regular
> curriculum, Social Studies in Hindi (a compromise with southern
> hardliners who were dead set against imposition of Hindi as the medium
> of instruction for _all_ subjects), and one's mother tongue (not part
> of the curriculum, and no exams :-)).
If you were in a Central School no language other than 3 mentioned
could have been part of curriculum. I know no Marathi was taught in
any Central School in Maharashtra or no Gujarati was taught in any
Central School in Gujarat. It would be strange if CBSE made money
available to get Kannada, Malayalam, etc taught in south in any
Central School.
Doubt if Kannada replaced Hindi in Central Schools of Karantaka. You
are not saying that Kannada is the only language used in state
business in Karnataka.
> If perfectly implemented
> (yeah, a big if), the latter gives the government greater reach into
> rural areas, while the former makes people less competitive in the
> modern world (personal perspective). In an insecure setup (esp. in
> urban areas) that we currently have in India, linguistic divisions
> have led to regionalism, chauvinism, and intolerance, and in those
> educated primarily in English, it has led to elitism.
I thought you praised forming of states on the basis of language
above.
> I don't believe
> this is the fault of a system implemented by Macaulay. It is the
> complete failure of educational establishments to foster respect and
> tolerance, and show the world on a larger canvas (maybe TV/Internet
> addresses this to some extent).
>
> (3) What should be the way out? I think English, mother tongue,
> religious tongue is the right three-language formula. The first is the
> great equalizer that gets "caste" out of the equation (I'm a tad picky
> about that), the second establishes the link to one's rural roots, and
> the third establishes one's links to the language of liturgy and
> scripture. For Hindus (4-varna or not), that religious tongue is
> Sanskrit. Classical Sanskrit is not hard to learn, esp. since almost
> all Indian languages have been influenced by Sanskrit in one way or
> another (Arindam moshaai has pointed this out too), but should be good
> prep for the harder Vedic Sanskrit. This my "prescription" is for
> Standards 1 through 10. In Standards 11 and 12, the three-language
> formula should be replaced by a two language one - English and a
> "classical" language. To me, the "classical" languages are either
> Vedic Sanskrit(or even Advanced Classical Sanskrit), or Tamil (for
> southerners this is a must as all languages have their roots in
> Tamil), or Arabic or Persian.
Foe one to enter professional colleges grades in Languages, one I
believe in Maharashtra and 2 I know in Gujarat are not counted, so
what harm can come if languages are not taught at all at 10+ level,
not at least at public money cost.
> Knowledge of the vernacular and
> grounding in Standards 1 through 10 will make the transition easier, I
> think. Eleventh and twelfth graders should be mature enough to handle
> tough subjects, no?. Surely there is something more than prepping for
> engineering or medical schools :-)
Not for quite a long future time.
> I think that languages should
> continue through engineering and medical schools too - no grade (only
> pass/fail).
That would be sadist. Language teachers as it is are least respected
and they are giving back as best as they could. Gujarati teachers have
proved themselves so snooty in Gujarat that even children with
Gujarati parentage in Gujarat opt for Hindi at 10+ level to have esay
pass. To get a pass in Gujarati students started having private
coaching in fifties with well "connected" teaCHERS.
> What my solution does not figure in is the mobility of
> people. Most people, esp. in government employees in banking,
> administrative services, and "law enforcement", seem to be on the move
> constantly (for good reasons too - striking roots usually leads to
> corruption) all over India. What is the link language then? Hindi as
> that link is a real tough sell (for me).
>
> (4) Education in India (at least when I was growing up) was dreary
> (punishments, home work, tests, in that order, is what I
> remember ;-)), and emphasized rote learning.
It has not changed, has got worse.
> Links to one's history/
> culture cannot be made firm without reinforcing material learned.
> School trips to historical sites are a must. This is where the
> government can give real leg up to kids, esp. in rural areas, by
> subsidizing travel.
For that to happen, first the better off parents of Urban areas will
have to shoulder full burden of educating their own children.
Politicians will have to be forced to let them shoulder that burden.
Romanise
Civil Servant telling Humphrey to prove he is worth for moving up the
ladder, get the move to improve Education System scuttled to save jobs
of bureaucrats in the Department of Education, the move admittedly was
in the interest of school going children and their parents.
The situation in India is compounded by every educated person being
content with the system, the system where only children with couple of
generations of service class culture behind them.
On Sep 5, 6:52 am, The Deep <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote:
Romanise
> The other day watching a bit of "Yes Minister" witnessed higher up
> Civil Servant telling Humphrey to prove he is worth for moving up the
> ladder, get the move to improve Education System scuttled to save jobs
> of bureaucrats in the Department of Education, the move admittedly was
> in the interest of school going children and their parents.
>
> The situation in India is compounded by every educated person being
> content with the system, the system where only children with couple of
> generations of service class culture behind them.
Read
children with couple of generations of service class culture behind
them benefit (in a crooked way).
The Deep
Rats, Prof. Joshi went through my patented cure for chronic insomnia,
and even replied :-) I owe some clarifications on the points raised.
Yes, Central Schools were the ones with the n-language formula (n
greater than or equal to 3). The last bit on a fourth language was a
scheme dreamed up by the principal - a truly dedicated and enlightened
lady. I wouldn't have the details of who paid whom how much, and
neither did it matter. It was completely voluntary, only for the
teachers, I'll hasten to add :-). Since the school had a good mix of
both students and teachers from across the country, it was possible to
divide into several language groups (I remember 4 southern languages,
Punjabi, and Bengali were the main ones). Kids were taught the
alphabet and regular primers, albeit at an accelerated pace. Needless
to say, almost all kids got to read and write their mother tongue. The
small minority of kids that did not fall into any of the major groups
were the only ones who did not benefit probably. But they had the
choice of learning something new. The selling point for the kids was
that there were no exams :-) I don't know how the teachers were co-
opted into the scheme. A volunteer spirit does transcend money, no?
Yes, the recommendation of the Gokak commission was to make Kannada
the language of government business. It went further in demanding
facilities to make that happen. That meant starting from school level
- making Kannada the medium of instruction (of _all_ subjects) in all
schools run by the state government. Central government institutions
were exempt from that, which is real pity.
> > If perfectly implemented
> > (yeah, a big if), the latter gives the government greater reach into
> > rural areas, while the former makes people less competitive in the
> > modern world (personal perspective). In an insecure setup (esp. in
> > urban areas) that we currently have in India, linguistic divisions
> > have led to regionalism, chauvinism, and intolerance, and in those
> > educated primarily in English, it has led to elitism.
>
> I thought you praised forming of states on the basis of language
> above.
Yes, I still believe that division based on language was the right
thing to do. That is my personal perspective. I have merely observed
that the division is implemented imperfectly, which causes slime to
ooze from the cracks :-) One can either complain or perhaps choose to
seek to implement the idea more meaningfully. One thing for sure,
despite my Central School background, Hindi is completely alien to
people south of the Vindhyas, and simply cannot be foisted on
southerners as a "national language." I have the greatest respect for
the language, but I'll be damned if that language is the one of
governance in the southern states. This argument is tangential to the
"Macaulay system" thread, and probably can be saved for another day
and another thread :-)
What is the medium of instruction in the scenario that you envisage?
Is that an urban point of view? What happens in rural schools?
> > Knowledge of the vernacular and
> > grounding in Standards 1 through 10 will make the transition easier, I
> > think. Eleventh and twelfth graders should be mature enough to handle
> > tough subjects, no?. Surely there is something more than prepping for
> > engineering or medical schools :-)
>
> Not for quite a long future time.
This is a real pity. Money is squandered on more IITs/IIMs/engineering/
medical schools, but a pittance is spent on shoring up other colleges
and universities, esp. liberal arts and science. Do we continue to
blame Macaulay for that, or is it simply government ineptitude?
>
> > I think that languages should
> > continue through engineering and medical schools too - no grade (only
> > pass/fail).
>
> That would be sadist. Language teachers as it is are least respected
> and they are giving back as best as they could. Gujarati teachers have
> proved themselves so snooty in Gujarat that even children with
> Gujarati parentage in Gujarat opt for Hindi at 10+ level to have esay
> pass. To get a pass in Gujarati students started having private
> coaching in fifties with well "connected" teaCHERS.
I am sure this is in an urban setting, and is probably different in
rural schools.
>
> > What my solution does not figure in is the mobility of
> > people. Most people, esp. in government employees in banking,
> > administrative services, and "law enforcement", seem to be on the move
> > constantly (for good reasons too - striking roots usually leads to
> > corruption) all over India. What is the link language then? Hindi as
> > that link is a real tough sell (for me).
>
> > (4) Education in India (at least when I was growing up) was dreary
> > (punishments, home work, tests, in that order, is what I
> > remember ;-)), and emphasized rote learning.
>
> It has not changed, has got worse.
>
> > Links to one's history/
> > culture cannot be made firm without reinforcing material learned.
> > School trips to historical sites are a must. This is where the
> > government can give real leg up to kids, esp. in rural areas, by
> > subsidizing travel.
>
> For that to happen, first the better off parents of Urban areas will
> have to shoulder full burden of educating their own children.
> Politicians will have to be forced to let them shoulder that burden
I don't disagree with your point. Freeing up people from ever
increasing (and often archaic) laws and offering a choice is wonderful
- maybe less corruption if there are fewer archaic laws to enforce :-)
Indian legislators are mostly uneducated criminals, and getting them
to legislate anything in the field of education is highly unlikely.
The closest that will come to education is to approve an engineering
or medical school (maybe a temple or mosque or church or two) at every
street corner with nary a thought on the quality. As long as some
caste/religion criterion has been met, the "social justice" agenda has
been served. I don't think Macaulay has anything to do with this
criminal enterprise. Criminals will be so regardless of which system
(Macaulay or gurukul or streets) they come from.
Dinesh
Romanise
A drawing teacher in Central School pleaded with me to write in news
papers to make his subject compulsory at all levels, so he too can
corner some children in his private tuition classes which he will die
dreaming for whole his life.
In a society where every one hired on public funds tries to create
opportunity for earning tax free money, one cannot blame a lowly
teacher of course.
English has been removed from State Business in Karnataka? In Gujarat
High Court I have heard Advocates using Gujarati before the Bench, but
still it is the English that has the highest place.
> > > If perfectly implemented
> > > (yeah, a big if), the latter gives the government greater reach into
> > > rural areas, while the former makes people less competitive in the
> > > modern world (personal perspective). In an insecure setup (esp. in
> > > urban areas) that we currently have in India, linguistic divisions
> > > have led to regionalism, chauvinism, and intolerance, and in those
> > > educated primarily in English, it has led to elitism.
>
> > I thought you praised forming of states on the basis of language
> > above.
>
> Yes, I still believe that division based on language was the right
> thing to do. That is my personal perspective. I have merely observed
> that the division is implemented imperfectly, which causes slime to
> ooze from the cracks :-) One can either complain or perhaps choose to
> seek to implement the idea more meaningfully. One thing for sure,
> despite my Central School background, Hindi is completely alien to
> people south of the Vindhyas, and simply cannot be foisted on
> southerners as a "national language." I have the greatest respect for
> the language, but I'll be damned if that language is the one of
> governance in the southern states. This argument is tangential to the
> "Macaulay system" thread, and probably can be saved for another day
> and another thread :-)
>
The hypocrisy of our ruling class has not allowed Indian languages to
be an effective tool for educating masses. Very crude example will be
ignoring of local languages in as basic as literacy education in so
called Hindi belt. Marwadi is not used at any level in education.
Splitting UP, Bihar, MP and earlier Punjab (to an extent) has not been
on linguistic basis.
As far as school level education goes, starting with literacy, it has
to be in the language the child has learnt in its mother's lap. When
it comes to college level, since all Indian languages have failed to
absorb Science and Technology it has to be in English. Writing a good
text book in English is most fruitful money wise in the world today
and so it is useless to translate English Text books and get M. Sc.
reading them.
harmony
disservice to hindus and a plus for jesus.
Wanderer
> all reasonable people agree that attmepting to romanize hindu languages is a
> disservice to hindus and a plus for jesus.
Are your "reasonable people" your fellow congregants in Jay's cavernous
anus?
There are no such things as "hindu languages", you moron. Language does
not have a religion.
The Deep
>
> A drawing teacher in Central School pleaded with me to write in news
> papers to make his subject compulsory at all levels, so he too can
> corner some children in his private tuition classes which he will die
> dreaming for whole his life.
>
> In a society where every one hired on public funds tries to create
> opportunity for earning tax free money, one cannot blame a lowly
> teacher of course.
Yeah, administrative service folks are the real trailblazers and
teachers here :-) The school teachers are simply garden variety
scamsters these days. However, back in my day teachers did have
integrity and dedication, and no "after hours business." I believe
that craze started after the demand for engineering and medical school
seats really heated up. Now you have "professional schools" at the two
corners of a block and "tutorial colleges" on the other two. The real
colleges are meant for the "social needs" of teenagers, I guess.
Hardly a Macaulay-ian vision of producing "clerks" for the government
administration. Damn, but we need some white guy to blame for our
ineptitude.
>
> English has been removed from State Business in Karnataka? In Gujarat
> High Court I have heard Advocates using Gujarati before the Bench, but
> still it is the English that has the highest place.
>
Nope, not at the High Court. However, at the district court level, I
think, Kannada is it. Even the most savvy "dehaati" (read non-English
speaking) is unlikely to get any justice from these courts. Here is
where Macaulay runs amok. Nothing to do with linguistic divisions, and
more to do with English-speaking elitism :-)
>
> The hypocrisy of our ruling class has not allowed Indian languages to
> be an effective tool for educating masses. Very crude example will be
> ignoring of local languages in as basic as literacy education in so
> called Hindi belt. Marwadi is not used at any level in education.
> Splitting UP, Bihar, MP and earlier Punjab (to an extent) has not been
> on linguistic basis.
>
The only "culture" in the Hindi belt is agriculture (yeah, I have no
prejudices :-)), and trishul making and temple building are about the
only viable industries. Punjab is very different from the rest of
these cow belt states - Sikhs (particularly) have worked real damned
hard to make the state prosperous.
>
> As far as school level education goes, starting with literacy, it has
> to be in the language the child has learnt in its mother's lap. When
> it comes to college level, since all Indian languages have failed to
> absorb Science and Technology it has to be in English. Writing a good
> text book in English is most fruitful money wise in the world today
> and so it is useless to translate English Text books and get M. Sc.
> reading them.
Don't disagree with this. I wish lawmakers (actually lawbreakers, but
cut me, and them, some slack) would stop acting coy and accord English
the status of an official language (no different than the dozen plus
that make up the current list). The patriotic types might want to name
it Hindlish. Indian English is an "apabhramsha" after all. :-)
Dinesh
Romanise
> Nope, not at the High Court. However, at the district court level, I
> think, Kannada is it. Even the most savvy "dehaati" (read non-English
> speaking) is unlikely to get any justice from these courts. Here is
> where Macaulay runs amok. Nothing to do with linguistic divisions, and
> more to do with English-speaking elitism :-)
Has Gokak ( I travelled with him once a short distance and was trying
to tell him about the "high" quality of literary creation (Gujarati)
of fellow who was my classmate(1/4) at M.A.) succeeded to remove
English Medium Schools from Karnatak? They have been coming up in
rural Gujarat with teachers from south with very little command over
English.
> > The hypocrisy of our ruling class has not allowed Indian languages to
> > be an effective tool for educating masses. Very crude example will be
> > ignoring of local languages in as basic as literacy education in so
> > called Hindi belt. Marwadi is not used at any level in education.
> > Splitting UP, Bihar, MP and earlier Punjab (to an extent) has not been
> > on linguistic basis.
>
> The only "culture" in the Hindi belt is agriculture (yeah, I have no
> prejudices :-)), and trishul making and temple building are about the
> only viable industries. Punjab is very different from the rest of
> these cow belt states - Sikhs (particularly) have worked real damned
> hard to make the state prosperous.
India has spent disproportionately on Punjab, particularly on its
irrigation facility. Farmers every where in India are damn hard
working. I could not make the grade beyond grazing buffalos, cows and
bullocks for my father.
Romanise
> > > Knowledge of the vernacular and
> > > grounding in Standards 1 through 10 will make the transition easier, I
> > > think. Eleventh and twelfth graders should be mature enough to handle
> > > tough subjects, no?. Surely there is something more than prepping for
> > > engineering or medical schools :-)
>
> > Not for quite a long future time.
>
> This is a real pity. Money is squandered on more IITs/IIMs/engineering/
> medical schools, but a pittance is spent on shoring up other colleges
> and universities, esp. liberal arts and science. Do we continue to
> blame Macaulay for that, or is it simply government ineptitude?
For long Education in India is going to be applied kind. Professors of
Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Mathematics who are Ph.D. guides are
seeking to tutor 10+ students for good fees. Psychology was craze
subject in late fifties in colleges. It has practically disappeared.
Geography was removed from even a optional level from 10th in Gujarat
Board to make way for "Social Change" a-la India Gandhi's proposal to
teach History of contributions of Nehru family to Independent India.
Socilogy Department of the Universities of Gujarat appointed Chiman
Patel's widow as president of Gujarat Sociologist Association. She
managed to get the "Subject" push away Geography. Now the heads of
Sociology Departments could have students who will have jobs in
schools. Most University Departments survive on job opportunities for
their students in schools. An internationally known Sociology Research
Institute made one of its research staff resign because he was not
agreeing with the IASs (mostly non-gujarati) of the state on certain
controversial irrigation project.
> > > I think that languages should
> > > continue through engineering and medical schools too - no grade (only
> > > pass/fail).
>
> > That would be sadist. Language teachers as it is are least respected
> > and they are giving back as best as they could. Gujarati teachers have
> > proved themselves so snooty in Gujarat that even children with
> > Gujarati parentage in Gujarat opt for Hindi at 10+ level to have esay
> > pass. To get a pass in Gujarati students started having private
> > coaching in fifties with well "connected" teaCHERS.
>
> I am sure this is in an urban setting, and is probably different in
> rural schools.
Well off rural people rent accommodation in towns and cities to get
their children through Secondary and Higher Secondary. It gets tough
from 9th onwards.
> > > What my solution does not figure in is the mobility of
> > > people. Most people, esp. in government employees in
>
> ...
>
> read more »
Romanise
> > > Links to one's history/
> > > culture cannot be made firm without reinforcing material learned.
> > > School trips to historical sites are a must. This is where the
> > > government can give real leg up to kids, esp. in rural areas, by
> > > subsidizing travel.
>
> > For that to happen, first the better off parents of Urban areas will
> > have to shoulder full burden of educating their own children.
> > Politicians will have to be forced to let them shoulder that burden
>
> I don't disagree with your point. Freeing up people from ever
> increasing (and often archaic) laws and offering a choice is wonderful
> - maybe less corruption if there are fewer archaic laws to enforce :-)
> Indian legislators are mostly uneducated criminals, and getting them
> to legislate anything in the field of education is highly unlikely.
Wish Indians instead of wasting their intelligence on finding faults
with the cultures where they have taken refuge or are dying to take
refuge will spend time in exposing Indian law makers on the way latter
drag their feet on pushing for desired change. Two MPs Mrs Kiran
Maheshwari from Udaipur and Suresh Prabhu (a former Union Minister
assured me a year back that they will work for a tiny change I am
asking to make in regulations. They have done nothing inspite of
several reminders.
The Deep
>
> Has Gokak ( I travelled with him once a short distance and was trying
> to tell him about the "high" quality of literary creation (Gujarati)
> of fellow who was my classmate(1/4) at M.A.) succeeded to remove
> English Medium Schools from Karnatak? They have been coming up in
> rural Gujarat with teachers from south with very little command over
> English.
Nope. Recently the Karnataka High Court put paid on the late Prof.
Gokak's dream.
http://www.thehindu.com/2008/07/09/stories/2008070950410100.htm
Unaided educational institutions were given a free rein. However, the
State government has decided to appeal to the Supreme Court to hear
the case. The drama goes on :-)
What Prof. Gokak (a scholar of both Kannada and English) really
succeeded in doing was to get slimebags to ooze out from the cracks.
Scholars and writers should stick to what they do best and stop
dabbling in politics (U R Anantamurthy is a poster child for this sort
of activity). Every third-rate uncouth lowlife is suddenly a "Kannada
Abhimaani". Their command of the language will make any decent
Kannadiga cringe (maybe not in Bangalore, but in many areas of the
state), and their favorite sport is baiting Tamils. Yeah, Maharashtra
Chaluval (former name of the Sena) is Kannada Chaluvali - same
criminal outfits but different languages. This has nothing to do with
Macaulay or his progeny. These are pure and simple "Made in India"
criminals, who feed on insecurity.
Learning English/Kannada can be a real comedy. In the rural areas you
have English taught in Kannada, and in the urban ones you have Kannada
taught in English. Doesn't surprise me that lots of things might get
"lost in translation." :-)
> India has spent disproportionately on Punjab, particularly on its
> irrigation facility. Farmers every where in India are damn hard
> working. I could not make the grade beyond grazing buffalos, cows and
> bullocks for my father.
>
Maybe so, but people have put in the toil too.
Yes, all farmers work bloody hard (I know my own cousins do). However,
does our language-obsessed government reach them or educate them? The
focus is on urban areas. Lots of us had to get out of the village to a
city to get a real education after 3rd standard. I ended up in a
government school, which incidentally had rules (not often enforced)
on the exclusive use of Hindi within the school compound. Anyways, the
first rocks of the anti-Hindi agitation altered all that, and we were
permitted to speak in Kannada (or English) if we so chose. Hindi,
being alien to me, was awfully hard (at least the first couple of
years), and I was enrolled in the Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha
to improve my "skills." Yeah, nothing like having Hindi taught in
Kannada. :-)
Dinesh
The Deep
>
> Wish Indians instead of wasting their intelligence on finding faults
> with the cultures where they have taken refuge or are dying to take
> refuge will spend time in exposing Indian law makers on the way latter
> drag their feet on pushing for desired change. Two MPs Mrs Kiran
> Maheshwari from Udaipur and Suresh Prabhu (a former Union Minister
> assured me a year back that they will work for a tiny change I am
> asking to make in regulations. They have done nothing inspite of
> several reminders.
>
> www.dmjoshi.org
>
Ek BhaJaPa ki MP aur ek Sena ka, lekin niyyat bilkul Congressi.
Reminder se kaam naheen chalega. Ek do peti ki zaroorat thi kabhi,
lekin aaj kal khoka se kaam chalta he ;-)
Dinesh
Romanise
Whether of BJP, Shivsena, Congress, Communists, well meaning Indians
with education will have to pester them for Public good, instead like
Bholu Mian (90+ now) wanting to bomb parliament.
The Deep
>
> Whether of BJP, Shivsena, Congress, Communists, well meaning Indians
> with education will have to pester them for Public good, instead like
> Bholu Mian (90+ now) wanting to bomb parliament.
>
> www.dmjoshi.org
In principle, I don't disagree with you having tried the "work with
the elected official" before (at least at legislator level, mere
mortals don't see MPs :-)). By now you've found that it is the wrong
approach. Any change is initiated from the bottom up. You have work
through the "poojari" who communicates with the elected "deity." The
poojari/babu (who belongs to a whole separate caste irrespective of
religious background) "channels" our "visionary" legislators, and
implements their "visions." [you've seen this in our newsgroup and in
the "Yes Minister" series]. Getting into the inner sanctum of our
elected deity is a long and winding road, with many an outstretched
hand to shake and fill. No language is necessary, no education
(Macaulay or otherwise) is necessary, nothing. The language of money
is the only one that works anymore. Although our well-educated,
competitive exam pass "poojaris" are supposed to be neutral, and meant
to chant the right mantras upwards (and curses downwards), there
usually is some taint - political leanings do affect the god-poojari
relation. In any case, supplications of both the poojari and elected
deity are necessary for a win. :-)
My cynical $0.02
Dinesh
karthika
>
> - Show quoted text -
Education is a need to serve people of their country. But in India, or
in some other countries earlier enslaved by the Brits still think
English education take them to Moon!
Romanise
> On Sep 6, 5:50 am, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 6, 9:05 am, The Deep <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 6, 12:28 am, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Wish Indians instead of wasting their intelligence on finding faults
> > > > with the cultures where they have taken refuge or are dying to take
> > > > refuge will spend time in exposing Indian law makers on the way latter
> > > > drag their feet on pushing for desired change. Two MPs Mrs Kiran
> > > > Maheshwari from Udaipur and Suresh Prabhu (a former Union Minister
> > > > assured me a year back that they will work for a tiny change I am
> > > > asking to make in regulations. They have done nothing inspite of
> > > > several reminders.
>
> > > >www.dmjoshi.org
>
> > > Ek BhaJaPa ki MP aur ek Sena ka, lekin niyyat bilkul Congressi.
> > > Reminder se kaam naheen chalega. Ek do peti ki zaroorat thi kabhi,
> > > lekin aaj kal khoka se kaam chalta he ;-)
>
> > > Dinesh
>
> > Whether of BJP, Shivsena, Congress, Communists, well meaning Indians
> > with education will have to pester them for Public good, instead like
> > Bholu Mian (90+ now) wanting to bomb parliament.
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Education is a need to serve people of their country. But in India, or
> in some other countries earlier enslaved by the Brits still think
> English education take them to Moon!
You from India or some other country enslaved by the Brits?
If you are to be taken where you took English education?
The Deep
Uh, oh! Bad questions from Prof. Joshi. Methinks modesty prevents the
"free and noble" Pallavan from answering your questions, and permit
this immodest parayan to answer them on behalf of nobility.
HRH Himsa Vishnu (a dyslexic like me cannot write Simha Vishnu
correctly, except in this one instance) of direct Pallava descent was
never part of any British terrortory (I cannot spell territory
either). So he is neither Indian (in the modern usage of the word) nor
educated (in the Macaulay system, that is :-)). He is simply a
Pallavan, darn proud of it, and has healthy contempt for any non-
Pallavan beings.
The noble Pallavans were the only ones in all of humankind's recorded
history that established Rama Rajya for the second time on the planet
(in the punyabhoomi of India no less). Their motto was "every home is
a temple, and every subject is God." Having established Rama Rajya
without shedding a drop of blood, it was but natural to expand the
kingdom (peacefully, of course) and make very rapid advancement in
science and technology (funding from the Pallavan Academy of Science
and Technology, PAST, was never an issue). The arrival of mlechhas
(outsourced warriors from barbaric countries?) in the punyabhoomi
drove all of this magnificent research underground, and a large number
of palmyra leaf journals (records of research) were either destroyed
or eaten (by persecuted and/or hungry researchers). However, records
of some of the more esoteric technologies are still in the possession
of HRH Himsa Vishnu (who is now older than Methuselah, lifespan-wise),
and details of "Pushpaka vimana" technology, jet packs and anti-
gravity devices (to move people and mountains), etc, recorded on tea
leaves (Pallavan equivalents of microfiche) are available to him. Once
Rama Rajya is established for a third time (Toronto, Canada has been
identified as the new Kanchipuram), all of these technologies will be
available to deserving (non-Macaulay) subjects. Crossing the Atlantic
will be a cinch. Relocating large numbers of people, mountains, in
unbelievably short time intervals will dazzle all. Until the Pallavan
ideal of converting every house in Toronto into a temple, and making
all residents Gods is achieved, divulging such technology will have to
wait.
Dinesh
Romanise
> On Sep 7, 1:28 am, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 6, 7:47 pm, karthika <mud...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > > Education is a need to serve people of their country. But in India, or
> > > in some other countries earlier enslaved by the Brits still think
> > > English education take them to Moon!
>
> > You from India or some other country enslaved by the Brits?
>
> > If you are to be taken where you took English education?
> Uh, oh! Bad questions from Prof. Joshi.
Sorry, my English was not good enough to frame the question clearly.
I think I meant to ask " If you are to be taken anywhere, where would
you want your English education to take you"?
karthika
Simha Vishnu was older than your asshole Allah and Mohamed who used
women as slaves. Further you are a product of Islamic Brothel. Shutup
your farts!
karthika
Hey Ass
Pallavas never mention this RAMA anywhere!
\
Now you cry like ..sorry bark like a dog!
The Deep
> On Sep 7, 6:36 pm, The Deep <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 7, 1:28 am, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 6, 7:47 pm, karthika <mud...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > Education is a need to serve people of their country. But in India, or
> > > > in some other countries earlier enslaved by the Brits still think
> > > > English education take them to Moon!
>
> > > You from India or some other country enslaved by the Brits?
>
> > > If you are to be taken where you took English education?
> > Uh, oh! Bad questions from Prof. Joshi.
>
> Sorry, my English was not good enough to frame the question clearly.
>
> I think I meant to ask " If you are to be taken anywhere, where would
> you want your English education to take you"?
>
I didn't imply that the questions were poorly worded. I meant to say
that the questions were rather inconvenient for the Teakonda Pallavan
Himsa Vishnu. The replies from him clearly show that he is a
completely uneducated and crude idiot, who was sold a "Pallava" title
(most likely by the Tamil "Messiah" M Karunanidhi and his ilk). Wish
he had the technology to go to the moon, the intelligence level of
_both_ celestial bodies would increase.
Dinesh
The Deep
>
> Hey Ass
> Pallavas never mention this RAMA anywhere!
> \
> Now you cry like ..sorry bark like a dog!
Yeah, Rama Rajya was used in a figurative sense - I should have said
"Bheema Rajya" to describe "peaceful" 4th-6th century Indian kingdoms.
I'll remember to spell out ideas more clearly so that even a 1st
grader would have no trouble understanding what I write.
Having access to these newsgroups does not necessarily mean you can
post one-line garbage about 20 to 30 times a day - posts that are
mostly contemptuous of anyone and everyone that disagrees with you.
All anyone has ever seen from you is stupidity and ignorance, although
in your (not so humble) opinion you think that you've contributed to
the knowledge pool. One thing though, your ignorant and wild claims
have helped me revisit my history knowledge bank and examine my own
experience, and for this I am truly grateful. I had hoped to put forth
my reading/interpretation of history, and counter some of your claims
(if necessary). All this with a view that you would look into issues a
little more deeply yourself. This seems to have not gotten very far.
Any chance that you will make the earnest attempt to actually go to a
library or even trawl the internet to broaden your knowledge horizon?
Or do I take it that you know it all. The "not invented here" attitude
is appalling, and does not really help anyone. I too like slanging
matches once in a while, but the ones with you are particularly
tiring. The only thing that I get from them is the momentary
satisfaction of having spited someone, and nothing particularly useful
that I'll retain. I do take quite a bit of time and put in the effort
to compose a reply (like this one), although lately I have lapsed into
your kind of behavior (not particularly helpful). So, take a deep
breath, mull over what is written, and compose your thoughts before
you hold forth. One long article (containing as much invective and
personal slurs as you want) is worth a lot more than the "sound bites"
that you post several times a day. Just a thought. Unless you change
your mindset to actually see another's point of view, it is unlikely
that I'll continue any conversations with you. I personally think that
you are capable of deeper thought than you let on. Prove me right!
Dinesh
mud...@sympatico.ca
Simha Vishnue was not a Muslim ass like your father who was born in a
brotal!
mud...@sympatico.ca
Muslims in India who were born after RAPE bettter avoid this Ramarajya
or any Hindu things!
Wanderer
> Shutup your farts!
I believe you have a sphincter control problem that you are trying to
project onto Usenet readers. You should see a doctor. And buy a crapload
of deodorizers.
Arindam Banerjee
"The Deep" <dinp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fb786472-a5d5-4ce7...@n38g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I have following this thread on and off, but haven't had the time
> to sit down and put my thoughts down. Mercifully the exchanges have
> been civil (a refreshing change for which I am truly grateful). I
> thought I'd throw in my (unsolicited :-)) two cents into the
> discussion.
>
> (1) Whatever be Macaulay's intentions, I cannot deny the fact that the
> education that I received is what lets me converse with you all today.
> If India had stuck with the old brahminical (not used as a pejorative)
> gurukul system, lots of people (including me) would have been left out
> of the system probably.
Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction to
begin with, then over time the vernaculars would have improved and with that
the lot of everyone. The ruins of Sanskritic and Arabic cultures would not
have so much hatred today. They could have developed Western science and
technology in Eastern terms long ago, the way the Far Easterners are doing
now.
> The system, in some sense, has been a better
> equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge.
If anything, it has increased hatred and misunderstanding on religious
lines, political lines, caste lines, regional lines, social lines... it has
kept India very poor, without direct foreign exploitation, and will keep
Indian very poor living on crumbs such as call centre work... if most are as
a result clerks and snobs and reverse-racists, then how could they have the
wits or guts to acknowledge anything worthwhile that would have been a
better alternative?
This is especially
> true of urban India. The downside of the system has been that the
> vital link between urban and rural people has been strained, if not
> severed completely.
Well, there you are. Such is not the case for the non-Macaulay-influenced
Japanese and Chinese. They do have disparities, but they do not have such a
great foreign-derived cultural barrier between the haves and have-nots as
the English language and its associated (usually snob) values.
It is not as if this barrier cannot be breached. It has to happen. But in
the meantime one has to lick the wounds.
This is my experience. I did not go through any
> elite public school, and completed all my schooling in a government
> institution. We had the strangest of systems in the south, we had to
> learn English, Hindi, and Sanskrit as languages in the regular
> curriculum, Social Studies in Hindi (a compromise with southern
> hardliners who were dead set against imposition of Hindi as the medium
> of instruction for _all_ subjects), and one's mother tongue (not part
> of the curriculum, and no exams :-)). Maths and science were taught in
> English. To me, it would have made the most sense to displace Hindi in
> favor of the language of the state. Then again, students did not have
> much choice - the only choices offered (on rare occasions) were a cane
> across the palm or across the calf :-)
I don't see why the South children needed to learn Hindi. This is pure
Hindi imperialism. If you learn Sanskrit, there is no need for Hindi if
your mother tongue is not Hindi. Rather, I think Sanskrit should be made
available in all the vernacular scripts (specially upgraded to take into
account the matrix-oriented phonetic notations) to make it easier to learn.
> (2) Even though it has been a hindrance in establishing a pan-Indian
> identity, division of states on a linguistic basis has been a real
> blessing (as I see it). It truly has gone a long way towards giving
> people an identity, a sense of belonging, and a sense of pride in ones
> roots. This is especially true of rural India.
And also true outside India, where social grouping is usually on the
linguistic or regional basis. It does not mean being anti-Indian, it only
means that India is made up of linguistic states who do unite and prosper on
a co-operative basis.
- snip -
The Deep
> "The Deep" <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > (1) Whatever be Macaulay's intentions, I cannot deny the fact that the
> > education that I received is what lets me converse with you all today.
> > If India had stuck with the old brahminical (not used as a pejorative)
> > gurukul system, lots of people (including me) would have been left out
> > of the system probably.
>
> Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction to
> begin with, then over time the vernaculars would have improved and with that
> the lot of everyone. The ruins of Sanskritic and Arabic cultures would not
> have so much hatred today. They could have developed Western science and
> technology in Eastern terms long ago, the way the Far Easterners are doing
> now.
My _personal_ perspective is that Hindu education, always dominated by
Brahmins, would have remained in the hands of a few if Sanskrit had
become the medium of instruction (at any level). A more optimistic
mind would likely see more positive outcomes of this hypothetical
case. The fact remains that the Indianized Macaulay system is the one
that I know and grew up with after 3rd Std. To me, to move to a city
and acquire some command over English was the ticket out of a very
constraining system. Again, this is a _personal_ experience. Many will
surely have different opinions/experiences. But this experience in no
way breaks my links to my roots or diminishes my love of Indian
languages. That said, what I am not willing to concede any ground on
is the need to blame all current ills in India on the education system
that I went through. The governments (Union and State) have had at
least 58 years (since the first republic was declared) to improve
education standards, but have failed to do so everywhere - especially
in the rural areas, where literacy should have been the first order of
business.
>
> > The system, in some sense, has been a better
> > equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge.
>
> If anything, it has increased hatred and misunderstanding on religious
> lines, political lines, caste lines, regional lines, social lines... it has
> kept India very poor, without direct foreign exploitation, and will keep
> Indian very poor living on crumbs such as call centre work... if most are as
> a result clerks and snobs and reverse-racists, then how could they have the
> wits or guts to acknowledge anything worthwhile that would have been a
> better alternative?
I cannot relate to this very well. In the milieu that I grew up,
command of English was key to peer acceptance (a real tremendous force
compared to anything else). In some ways this is bad I guess, because
one ends up acquiring two personas - one amongst peers and one amongst
kin. I think a lot of the blame for this really belongs to the
administrative services (civil servants). The system of privilege and
patronage is the only one "the steel frame" (or framelets) of India
understands and seeks to perpetuate. This pampered, and completely
unaccountable, tribe is totally disconnected from the rest of the
country, and does not really understand what needs to be done to move
the country forward in the area of education. What started off as a
very efficient system degenerated by the late '70s, and the nexus of
administrators and politicians is the one driving the country down the
tube. Just my thoughts.
I wouldn't really run down call centers, etc. A job is a job is a job.
It provides money. One can put that money to good use (few do) or one
can squander it (many do). For people from poorer (or lower caste)
backgrounds, that money gives them _some_ dignity and a chance to get
out financial dire straits in an otherwise pernicious system.
>
> This is especially
>
> > true of urban India. The downside of the system has been that the
> > vital link between urban and rural people has been strained, if not
> > severed completely.
>
> Well, there you are. Such is not the case for the non-Macaulay-influenced
> Japanese and Chinese. They do have disparities, but they do not have such a
> great foreign-derived cultural barrier between the haves and have-nots as
> the English language and its associated (usually snob) values.
>
> It is not as if this barrier cannot be breached. It has to happen. But in
> the meantime one has to lick the wounds.
In the case of Japanese and Chinese, I think homogeneity has helped
them. Each linguistic state in India has that homogeneity and
opportunity to breach the barrier, and will happen in time. All of
this provided people elect as legislators enlightened people who have
a more holistic grip on the issues - highly unlikely!!. Until then,
English is the link language between diverse people.
>
> I don't see why the South children needed to learn Hindi. This is pure
> Hindi imperialism. If you learn Sanskrit, there is no need for Hindi if
> your mother tongue is not Hindi. Rather, I think Sanskrit should be made
> available in all the vernacular scripts (specially upgraded to take into
> account the matrix-oriented phonetic notations) to make it easier to learn.
I quite agree with you that Sanskrit taught in the North Indian
vernaculars will make it easier to learn. The fly in the ointment are
southern languages which have their roots in Tamil. Although Telugu,
Malayalam, and Kannada have a large number of Sanskrit loan words,
their basis is Tamil (as great a classical language as Sanskrit and of
the same antiquity).
>
> > (2) Even though it has been a hindrance in establishing a pan-Indian
> > identity, division of states on a linguistic basis has been a real
> > blessing (as I see it). It truly has gone a long way towards giving
> > people an identity, a sense of belonging, and a sense of pride in ones
> > roots. This is especially true of rural India.
>
> And also true outside India, where social grouping is usually on the
> linguistic or regional basis. It does not mean being anti-Indian, it only
> means that India is made up of linguistic states who do unite and prosper on
> a co-operative basis.
>
Quite true!
Dinesh
Romanise
> Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction to
> begin with,
They were not to begin with?
> then over time the vernaculars would have improved
Westerners had no trouble to touch unimproved vernaculars, why did the
Easterners?
Know any Easterners before British who pushed for universal literacy
through vernaculars?
> and with that
> the lot of everyone. The ruins of Sanskritic and Arabic cultures would not
> have so much hatred today. They could have developed Western science and
> technology in Eastern terms long ago, the way the Far Easterners are doing
> now.
Is it the case that British should have first worked for Higher
Education through Sanskrit and Arabic in Indian subcontinent which
then naturally would have improved vernaculars to become capable of
taking Western Science to Himalayan Hights?
Romanise
> > The system, in some sense, has been a better
> > equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge.
On Sep 9, 2:48 am, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> If anything, it has increased hatred and misunderstanding on religious
> lines, political lines, caste lines, regional lines, social lines... it has
> kept India very poor, without direct foreign exploitation,
Without British introduced school education India would have been
profiting even today with "direct foreign exploitation"?
I am in a position to blame British for not removing untouchability in
schools. Had FREDERICK LELY done so I would not have left mainstream
education in 1949 halfway through fifth standard and would have been
spared a lot of trouble trying to get back in. Had to learn English
myself starting with alphabet in 1956.
Arindam Banerjee
On Sep 8, 6:48 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> "The Deep" <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > (1) Whatever be Macaulay's intentions, I cannot deny the fact that the
> > education that I received is what lets me converse with you all today.
> > If India had stuck with the old brahminical (not used as a pejorative)
> > gurukul system, lots of people (including me) would have been left out
> > of the system probably.
>
> Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction
> to
> begin with, then over time the vernaculars would have improved and with
> that
> the lot of everyone. The ruins of Sanskritic and Arabic cultures would not
> have so much hatred today. They could have developed Western science and
> technology in Eastern terms long ago, the way the Far Easterners are doing
> now.
My _personal_ perspective is that Hindu education, always dominated by
Brahmins, would have remained in the hands of a few if Sanskrit had
become the medium of instruction (at any level).
AB: My personal experience was to learn Sanskrit from a Christian Adivasi
(tribal) gentleman in a Catholic school, so it evidently differs from yours.
Personal experiences are not the best way to come to conclusions affecting
everyone, unless everyone (or the majority) relates warmly to that
particular sort of personal experience. Also it has been my personal
experience to know of Hindus who were proficient in Persian, and Muslims
proficient in Sanskrit. Really, if there was no choice but to learn
Sanskrit or Arabic or the vernacular, and if education was really open to
all who wanted it or could afford it, I do not see how Sanskrit learning
could have remained in the hands of a few. In fact, by not giving it a
universal status, it was forced into an unwanted exclusivity.
A more optimistic
mind would likely see more positive outcomes of this hypothetical
case. The fact remains that the Indianized Macaulay system is the one
that I know and grew up with after 3rd Std. To me, to move to a city
and acquire some command over English was the ticket out of a very
constraining system. Again, this is a _personal_ experience.
AB: The point is that without English as a necessity there would have been
alternatives. To me English was also a passport to success but I believe
that I would have been much better off if everyone's including myself had
higher education verncular - not just for a few who would ultimately belong
nowhere, neither in the East nor in the West. Just think of all those who
unlike you did not know so much English. Do you really think they are so
much stupider than you, for that they have done worse?
Many will
surely have different opinions/experiences. But this experience in no
way breaks my links to my roots or diminishes my love of Indian
languages. That said, what I am not willing to concede any ground on
is the need to blame all current ills in India on the education system
that I went through. The governments (Union and State) have had at
least 58 years (since the first republic was declared) to improve
education standards, but have failed to do so everywhere - especially
in the rural areas, where literacy should have been the first order of
business.
AB: Why do you thinik so? I mean, what makes you think that you as a
literate are a better person than those illiterate? The illiterate are on
the whole virtuous, hard-working, simple and trustworthy people. Why cannot
education or at least information be given in the non-literate medium that
is universal - through speech, television, sign-language, by making the
country far more illiterate-friendly? All that will help them obtain
skills, and jobs - and then in their mature age and with higher prosperity
and leisure, they can be literate if they so choose. Also, if you do blame
the current ills in India on the education system, then I do not see why you
refuse to notice the root of it all.
> > The system, in some sense, has been a better
> > equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge.
>
> If anything, it has increased hatred and misunderstanding on religious
> lines, political lines, caste lines, regional lines, social lines... it
> has
> kept India very poor, without direct foreign exploitation, and will keep
> Indian very poor living on crumbs such as call centre work... if most are
> as
> a result clerks and snobs and reverse-racists, then how could they have
> the
> wits or guts to acknowledge anything worthwhile that would have been a
> better alternative?
I cannot relate to this very well.
AB: You think too much on a "personal experience" basis. Maybe with time,
and deeper thought, you will get my drift. I too once thought the world of
the English language once, and how necessary it was for every Indian to know
it, in order to succeed. However, with time my opinions have changed. I
see the Eastern countries like Korea, Japan and China managing perfectly
well without being second-rate Englishmen (which is what Macaulay thought it
most necessary for Indians to be, for any positive change in their
situation).
In the milieu that I grew up,
command of English was key to peer acceptance (a real tremendous force
compared to anything else). In some ways this is bad I guess, because
one ends up acquiring two personas - one amongst peers and one amongst
kin. I think a lot of the blame for this really belongs to the
administrative services (civil servants).
AB: Let us see, what have they done.
The system of privilege and
patronage is the only one "the steel frame" (or framelets) of India
understands and seeks to perpetuate. This pampered, and completely
unaccountable, tribe is totally disconnected from the rest of the
country, and does not really understand what needs to be done to move
the country forward in the area of education.
AB: They are expected to be clever, idealistic and incorrupt, and carry out
the will of their political masters, who are in turn expected to heed the
needs and wishes of the people. Actually their pay and privileges (ICS-IAS
officers) have gone down by at least a factor of 10-20 since India got
independence, in real terms. Basically their salaries enshrined in the
Indian constitution was not indexed with inflation, which is the norm in say
Australia. In the 70s, their lot was really bad but I suppose it is
slightly better now, in salary terms at least.
What started off as a
very efficient system degenerated by the late '70s, and the nexus of
administrators and politicians is the one driving the country down the
tube. Just my thoughts.
I wouldn't really run down call centers, etc. A job is a job is a job.
It provides money. One can put that money to good use (few do) or one
can squander it (many do). For people from poorer (or lower caste)
backgrounds, that money gives them _some_ dignity and a chance to get
out financial dire straits in an otherwise pernicious system.
AB: Again, I was trying to explain *why* the system was/became/is
pernicious, rather than simply stating same and lamenting about it. Call
centre jobs are too easy, not that paying, and looks like the top end of
Indian aspiration, unfortunately. There are lots of opportunities out there
in the field, one has just got to go and find them. Like, I gave Rs10,000
to my mother who donated it to three local families (tribals, Doms). They
bought a rickshaw-cart with a glass show-case. My mother had taught them to
make jams, jellies, pickles, etc. but they could not market it. Now, they
can push it to some place of activity and make good business and good
profit. Three families, who had absolutely nothing, now can work and feed
themselves and hopefully start a trend in a part of India where the per
capita income, whichever way you measure it, is as near $0.00 as makes
little difference.
- snip -
Arindam Banerjee
"Romanise" <jos...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7a90daf1-aef9-4aaf...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 9, 2:48 am, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction
> to
> begin with,
They were not to begin with?
AB: Thanks to Macaulay, no.
Romanise
>
> news:7a90daf1-aef9-4aaf...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 9, 2:48 am, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction
> > to
> > begin with,
> > "Romanise" <josh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> They were not to begin with?
> On Sep 9, 12:10 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> AB: Thanks to Macaulay, no.
How did Macaulay stopped Higher Education of Takshashila and Nalanda
being carried out through medium of Sanskrit?
harmony
the mommdans did. m = a hindu problem; 3m = big hindu problem.
Arindam Banerjee
Did the Buddhists care much for Sanskrit?
Arindam Banerjee
> "The Deep" <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > The system, in some sense, has been a better
> > > equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge.
>
> On Sep 9, 2:48 am, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > If anything, it has increased hatred and misunderstanding on religious
> > lines, political lines, caste lines, regional lines, social lines... it has
> > kept India very poor, without direct foreign exploitation,
>
> Without British introduced school education India would have been
> profiting even today with "direct foreign exploitation"?
If you mean as I suspect Muslim/Arabic domination prior to British
rule, then please remember that at the time of Akbar India was #1 in
the whole world.
Chetan
That perhaps depends on the context. Most of the Buddhist literature was
in Pali, but some very important scholars have also composed in
Sanskrit. For secular or religious purposes, for common folk, (either
Hindu or Buddhist), perhaps it did not matter much - they could get by
without knowing any Sanskrit. For a student of Buddhism, it would have
been possible to study only using the literature in Pali. But Sanskrit
was the language of scholars and for higher studies, so it would have
been a requirement, irrespective of the religion, for secular
studies. There are records of visiting foreign students having studied
Sanskrit at the universities, even when their primary interest was
Buddhism.
Before English, any other foreign language is unlikely to have been the
medium of instruction for higher studies, because the direction of
transfer of knowledge was the other way round (if there was any interest
in higher education at all). The official language of record keeping
differed at times, depending on who the ruler was, but not for *higher*
learning.
It is unlikely Macaulay had a big influence on the universities, as they
had been destroyed much earlier by the invaders. I don't know if they
were functioning at the time, but even if they were, it was on a much
smaller scale.
Chetan
Romanise
> > How did Macaulay stopped Higher Education of Takshashila and Nalanda
> > being carried out through medium of Sanskrit?
>
> Did the Buddhists care much for Sanskrit?
Why else would Dharmakirti write Nyabindu in Sanskrit. Even in recent
times any Jain wanting to be recognised a scholar of Nyaaya would
first be a scholar of Sanskrit, Check it out on Pandit Sukhlalji,
Dalsukh Malavaniya. Both trained themselves in Varanasi and nearby.
The issue really is your expectation that education that British
started in India for everybody should have been through Sanskrit and
Arabic (not even Persian). I am just curious as to how would the
teaching of Physics and Chemistry would have begun in India through
Sanskrit and Arabic.
Romanise
> If you mean as I suspect Muslim/Arabic domination prior to British
> rule, then please remember that at the time of Akbar India was #1 in
> the whole world.
I am not a scholar of Industrial revolution, but despite there not
being any one as powerful as Akbar in Europe, it was in Europe that
Industrial revolution took place. Fruits of that India began to taste
after British enslaved us and slowly after Independence. I will not be
surprised if even today lift irrigation in India depends on animal or
human power at many places.
Romanise
> "Romanise" <josh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:eb5dd0a2-8c6a-480a...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> >>news:7a90daf1-aef9-4aaf...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Sep 9, 2:48 am, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher
> >> > instruction
> >> > to
> >> > begin with,
>
> >> > "Romanise" <josh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> They were not to begin with?
>
> >> On Sep 9, 12:10 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >> AB: Thanks to Macaulay, no.
>
> > How did Macaulay stopped Higher Education of Takshashila and Nalanda
> > being carried out through medium of Sanskrit?
>
> the mommdans did. m = a hindu problem; 3m = big hindu problem.
Because Hindus were rendered inpotent by Ramarajya?
Romanise
Vasubandhu, Asanga, Dignaga precede Dharmakirti by couple of centuries
and Acharya Dharmottara followed him.
Chetan
You can only speak for yourself.
The universities suffered the same fate at the hands of cruel and
illeterate, yet powerful people that library of Alexandria had suffered
much earlier. The Indians did not show the same degree of cruelty that
the invaders were quite comfortable with. There was no dearth of
bravery. But the reasons for failure against the invaders were mainly
two: infighting (resulting in lack of cohesive response) and a few bad
apples who sold out to the invaders. This continues till today.
Chetan
mud...@sympatico.ca
> dont you know the benghalis are the lowest kind of cowards in india
>
> .....???
>
> all they can do is chant """cholbe na , cholbe na cholbe na cholbe
> na , , hobe na hobe na hobe na hobe na ....???
>
> they have been fucked by the muslims in 1948 when more than 20000
> were killed in 3 days and now are getting screwed by goondas from
> comunist party and bangladeshi bastards and they have no guts to
> resist them
Just try to know Netaji!
Romanise
Dear fellow,
Was I asking you?
Has dis-harmony requested you to intercept a message to him?
You will save yourself a lot of unease if in future keep to responses
to your posts.
Arindam Banerjee
There were Buddhist scholars (monks) who wrote in Sanskrit it looks.
Vasubandhu, Asanga, Dignaga precede Dharmakirti by couple of centuries
and Acharya Dharmottara followed him.
On Sep 10, 7:43 am, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 10, 4:12 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > How did Macaulay stopped Higher Education of Takshashila and Nalanda
> > > being carried out through medium of Sanskrit?
>
> > Did the Buddhists care much for Sanskrit?
>
> Why else would Dharmakirti write Nyabindu in Sanskrit. Even in recent
> times any Jain wanting to be recognised a scholar of Nyaaya would
> first be a scholar of Sanskrit, Check it out on Pandit Sukhlalji,
> Dalsukh Malavaniya. Both trained themselves in Varanasi and nearby.
One or two exceptions (like Asvaghosha) do not make the rule. Of course
they would know Sanskrit and use it to make their points appear more
substantial - they were great scholars and thinkers, like say Karl Marx.
But the bulk of Buddhist teaching and literature was in Pali.
>
> The issue really is your expectation that education that British
> started in India for everybody should have been through Sanskrit and
> Arabic (not even Persian). I am just curious as to how would the
> teaching of Physics and Chemistry would have begun in India through
> Sanskrit and Arabic.
Same as in Japanese, Chinese, German, Italian, Yiddish, etc. one would
suppose.
Arindam Banerjee
AB: Yes, India did get railways, telegraphy, modern military, and some
industries like jute and tea thanks to the British. But that happened well
after 1858 (when the Crown took over after the rule of the East India
Company), not before. Macaulay was 1835, at the time when the rapacity of
the East India Company was at its highest. The real hero of the European
technical triumph was Switzerland - they worked hard for centuries after the
Renaissance to make say the cuckoo-clock. That means they got for the
Europeans the superb technical skills relating to miniaturisation, assembly,
etc. - the true basis for engineering success. The piano was another great
triumph. And of course powerful guns and rifles. Even Nehru laments that
Akbar with all his money and power did not use them to advance India in the
technical sense.
Romanise
> One or two exceptions (like Asvaghosha) do not make the rule. Of course
> they would know Sanskrit and use it to make their points appear more
> substantial - they were great scholars and thinkers, like say Karl Marx.
> But the bulk of Buddhist teaching and literature was in Pali.
Is there a feeling that Buddha did disservice to India by preaching
and teaching through language he and his audience was comfortable
with? If yes Macaulay and the officials of British Raj did disservice
to India by starting their universal literacy (and further) in
Bengali, Marathi, Tamil, etc (and further in English).
> > The issue really is your expectation that education that British
> > started in India for everybody should have been through Sanskrit and
> > Arabic (not even Persian). I am just curious as to how would the
> > teaching of Physics and Chemistry would have begun in India through
> > Sanskrit and Arabic.
>
> Same as in Japanese, Chinese, German, Italian, Yiddish, etc. one would
> suppose.
I suppose Physica and Chemistry in these languages began to be taught
by the nativs of these languages, not by any enslaving foreign rulers.
Starting With Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya (now Sampurnanand
Sanskrit University) in early sixties at least 6 more Sanskrit
Universities are run by UGC. It should make you feel good if you find
out that they are teaching Physics and Chemistry in their Acharya
degrees and are producing PH.D.s in the same.
Do not know if UGC is running any Arabic University but there are
couple of them in India. Wonder what they are teaching. One at Surat
has all the money they can think of using. Look at it in picture at
http://www.smartsurat.com/surat/suratphoto1.htm.
Romanise
> Macaulay was 1835, at the time when the rapacity of
> the East India Company was at its highest.
If there was a sinister motive behind the way universal literacy and
further education got introduced in India by British led by Macaulay,
and British failed to carry out any repairs during their rule,
question remains, what repair Indians have made in 61 years of
independence.
Survey carried out by Naveen Surapaneni in 2005 (under the auspices of
Transparency India headed by Admiral Tahiliani) says that Government
run schools are higher in corruption compared with Indian Police.
Chetan
If you want to conduct a private conversation, email is available. If
you want to ridicule a whole bunch of people in public then you should
be prepared for responses. It wastes everybody's time if personal
messages are sent on the newsgroups.
Chetan
Romanise
Be my guest and display your butting in behaviour repeatedly.
harmony
Read http://www.petitiononline.com/kilgraft/petition.html
----------------------------
of course, you are painting, unwittingly but inevitably, the natural
consequence of the anti-hindu 3m dominated psecular congressi et al rule.
all have failed; time for back to raamrajya with sanskrit as top priority.
akbar wasn't the best time for india with his rule of kill-n-loot (which
acounts for his rich treasuries). this is commie propaganda. commie-english
written history of india needs a fresh look. history of india is being
catalogued by the hindu researchers. they have already debunked aryan
invasion theory, and now akbar too will be debunked. the best time for
india, the last time, was when india led the world in literature, math,
music and other arts and that would be pre-mommedan era. the hindu ingenuity
is yet to be re-unleashed in all its splendor. but 3m has to go first.
harmony
--------------------------
this _is_ butt-in place. nobody gets invited to post, including you. your
monotheism is so, shall we say monotheistic?
Romanise
> of course, you are painting, unwittingly but inevitably, the natural
> consequence of the anti-hindu 3m dominated psecular congressi et al rule.
> all have failed; time for back to raamrajya with sanskrit as top priority.
Ramrajya that rendered Indianns impotent so that Takshashila and
Nalanda were allowed to get destroyed and burnt?
harmony
-------------------------
we will analyse the cause at the right time - which is wholly unrelated to
your monotheist analysis. however, at the moment thanks for admitting
montheists' misdeeds. now, romila thapars of the world will not be happy
that a monothiest got recoverted out.
harmony
"Chetan" <Chet....@xspam.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:usks8b...@myhost.sbcglobal.net...
in my experisnce today 3m is the biggest problem. lot of foreign
missionaries are led into the soul-killing fields of conversion by some
local resident kirastani convert feeding off of local hindus until
yesterday.
Romanise
> > of course, you are painting, unwittingly but inevitably, the natural
> > consequence of the anti-hindu 3m dominated psecular congressi et al rule.
> > all have failed; time for back to raamrajya with sanskrit as top priority.
> "Romanise" <josh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Ramrajya that rendered Indianns impotent so that Takshashila and
> Nalanda were allowed to get destroyed and burnt?
> "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> we will analyse the cause at the right time -
You mean when your in-laws give you smoke time from doing pochaa(wet
wipe) of their motel rooms? And who are these we, some more smuggled
in through containers?
Arindam Banerjee
> On Sep 10, 1:48 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > One or two exceptions (like Asvaghosha) do not make the rule. Of course
> > they would know Sanskrit and use it to make their points appear more
> > substantial - they were great scholars and thinkers, like say Karl Marx.
> > But the bulk of Buddhist teaching and literature was in Pali.
>
> Is there a feeling that Buddha did disservice to India by preaching
> and teaching through language he and his audience was comfortable
> with?
No. I don't understand what you are trying to say. That Buddhism
ultimately disappeared from mainstream Indian life is a fact, and why
that happened, is a very big and controversial issue. The main point
is that Pali was not around in Macaulay's time, so Pali at any rate is
a non-issue. Just as the Christians found decreasing use for Latin,
the Buddhists would have found decreasing use for Sanskrit, had they
not been wiped out. Buddha preached atheism, and I do not see why
theists of any sort should have use for Buddhism.
> If yes Macaulay and the officials of British Raj did disservice
> to India by starting their universal literacy (and further) in
> Bengali, Marathi, Tamil, etc (and further in English.
Macaulay's point was that Sanskrit was inferior, and Sanskritic
learning barely amounted to one shelf of Western learning.
> > > The issue really is your expectation that education that British
> > > started in India for everybody should have been through Sanskrit and
> > > Arabic (not even Persian). I am just curious as to how would the
> > > teaching of Physics and Chemistry would have begun in India through
> > > Sanskrit and Arabic.
>
> > Same as in Japanese, Chinese, German, Italian, Yiddish, etc. one would
> > suppose.
>
> I suppose Physica and Chemistry in these languages began to be taught
> by the nativs of these languages, not by any enslaving foreign rulers.
There was no reason why the English-learning natives could not have
translated the Western science texts into Sanskrit and vernaculars
long ago, and taught them universally, save for political reasons,
which exist to this day. Those political reasons did not and do not
exist in other countries. What they show is that when you are really
free you can do all your learning in your vernaculars. This has been
my earliest point, which you seem to have accepted.
Wanderer
That you are one of the most stupid fvckwits on Usenet is a given, but
even you should know some of the basics of Hinduism. Yet you don't,
which makes you an outright imbecile.
Monotheistic theology is an inherent part of Hinduism which teaches that
the many forms of God, i.e., Vishnu, Shiva, or Devi merely represent
aspects of a single or underlying divine power or Brahman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_views_on_monotheism
Articles related to Hindu monotheism:
http://www.experiencefestival.com/hinduism_monotheism
Yes, that is correct: Hinduism is a monotheistic religion. - Dr. Murli
Nagasundaram
http://www.mazeministry.com/worldviews/worldreligions/hinduism/nagi.htm
You must be wise and recognise the fact that as a Hindu you know that
there is only one God.
http://www.sivanandaonline.org/graphics/discourses/swami_chidananda/hinduism_monotheism_and_polytheism_reconciled.html
...a number of authorities agree that the original principles of
Hinduism advocate monotheism.
http://www.submission.info/perspectives/monotheism/monotheism_since_ancient_times.html
Romanise
> harmony aka pradipshit parekh, the zero % hindu, wrote:
>
>
>
> >news:6517cce1-3eb7-4eb2...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> > On Sep 10, 5:26 pm, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> of course, you are painting, unwittingly but inevitably, the natural
> >> consequence of the anti-hindu 3m dominated psecular congressi et al rule.
> >> all have failed; time for back to raamrajya with sanskrit as top priority.
>
> > Ramrajya that rendered Indianns impotent so that Takshashila and
> > Nalanda were allowed to get destroyed and burnt?
> > -------------------------
>
> > we will analyse the cause at the right time - which is wholly unrelated to
> > your monotheist analysis. however, at the moment thanks for admitting
> > montheists' misdeeds. now, romila thapars of the world will not be happy
> > that a monothiest got recoverted out.
>
> That you are one of the most stupid fvckwits on Usenet is a given, but
> even you should know some of the basics of Hinduism. Yet you don't,
> which makes you an outright imbecile.
>
> Monotheistic theology is an inherent part of Hinduism which teaches that
> the many forms of God, i.e., Vishnu, Shiva, or Devi merely represent
> aspects of a single or underlying divine power or Brahmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_views_on_monotheism
I had to study Shaankarbhashya of Brahmasutra and pass examinations.
Have lived in a Pathshala run by moneybags and the Sanyasis on Ashram
Road of Ahmedabad.
Brahma (not Brahmaa) is not a GOD, it is the UNIVERSE.
Those whose champion is Shankaracharya are atheist, bit higher than
Buddhists or Jains.
> Articles related to Hindu monotheism:http://www.experiencefestival.com/hinduism_monotheism
>
> Yes, that is correct: Hinduism is a monotheistic religion. - Dr. Murli
> Nagasundaramhttp://www.mazeministry.com/worldviews/worldreligions/hinduism/nagi.htm
>
> You must be wise and recognise the fact that as a Hindu you know that
> there is only one God.http://www.sivanandaonline.org/graphics/discourses/swami_chidananda/h...
>
> ...a number of authorities agree that the original principles of
> Hinduism advocate monotheism.http://www.submission.info/perspectives/monotheism/monotheism_since_a...
Romanise
> On Sep 10, 11:39 pm, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 10, 1:48 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > One or two exceptions (like Asvaghosha) do not make the rule. Of course
> > > they would know Sanskrit and use it to make their points appear more
> > > substantial - they were great scholars and thinkers, like say Karl Marx.
> > > But the bulk of Buddhist teaching and literature was in Pali.
>
> > Is there a feeling that Buddha did disservice to India by preaching
> > and teaching through language he and his audience was comfortable
> > with?
>
> No. I don't understand what you are trying to say. That Buddhism
> ultimately disappeared from mainstream Indian life is a fact, and why
> that happened, is a very big and controversial issue. The main point
> is that Pali was not around in Macaulay's time, so Pali at any rate is
> a non-issue. Just as the Christians found decreasing use for Latin,
> the Buddhists would have found decreasing use for Sanskrit, had they
> not been wiped out. Buddha preached atheism, and I do not see why
> theists of any sort should have use for Buddhism.
>
> > If yes Macaulay and the officials of British Raj did disservice
> > to India by starting their universal literacy (and further) in
> > Bengali, Marathi, Tamil, etc (and further in English.
>
> Macaulay's point was that Sanskrit was inferior,
Did he say that?
> and Sanskritic
> learning barely amounted to one shelf of Western learning.
What was there in Sanskrit of Macaulay's times that could have trained
the workforce required for the time?
What is there in Sanskrit of today's India (with 61 years of
independent existence) that can train the workforce for taking India
ahead (and above say China)?
> > > > The issue really is your expectation that education that British
> > > > started in India for everybody should have been through Sanskrit and
> > > > Arabic (not even Persian). I am just curious as to how would the
> > > > teaching of Physics and Chemistry would have begun in India through
> > > > Sanskrit and Arabic.
>
> > > Same as in Japanese, Chinese, German, Italian, Yiddish, etc. one would
> > > suppose.
>
> > I suppose Physica and Chemistry in these languages began to be taught
> > by the nativs of these languages, not by any enslaving foreign rulers.
>
> There was no reason why the English-learning natives could not have
> translated the Western science texts into Sanskrit and vernaculars
> long ago, and taught them universally, save for political reasons,
> which exist to this day. Those political reasons did not and do not
> exist in other countries. What they show is that when you are really
> free you can do all your learning in your vernaculars. This has been
> my earliest point, which you seem to have accepted.
I would like literacy being imparted through language that child has
acquired from mother, in the houshold, on the streets.
When it comes to teaching that is textbooks based economics prevail.
Gujarat started teaching Physic, Chemistry, Mathematic, Biology from
day one. One of its three university produced M.Sc.s who wrote their
examinations answer books in 1963 or couple of years before that.
Another University produced them both in Gujarati and Hindi. Only
Maharaja Sayajirao University kept up English at that level.
These M.Sc.s did not have text books written in Gujarati. Everything
was from notes taken in classrooms. First major effort at translation
took place when 10+2 was implemented. Wise Maharastrians grabbed +2 in
affiliated Colleges while stupid Gujaratis left it to Secondary
Schools. In late seventies School Text Book Board of Gujarat took upon
translating. Halliday & Resnick was translated (for English Medium
Students, Gujarati translation was translated back into English)
To cut short.
It is the educated class (with service background of couple of
generations) that is unwilling to take India into a society that is
egalitarian and truely productive.
As I wrote before I blame British not getting untouchable children
into government run schools before I was enrolled in school in 1944.
Arindam Banerjee
> On Sep 11, 12:14 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 10, 11:39 pm, Romanise <josh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 10, 1:48 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > > > One or two exceptions (like Asvaghosha) do not make the rule. Of course
> > > > they would know Sanskrit and use it to make their points appear more
> > > > substantial - they were great scholars and thinkers, like say Karl Marx.
> > > > But the bulk of Buddhist teaching and literature was in Pali.
>
> > > Is there a feeling that Buddha did disservice to India by preaching
> > > and teaching through language he and his audience was comfortable
> > > with?
>
> > No. I don't understand what you are trying to say. That Buddhism
> > ultimately disappeared from mainstream Indian life is a fact, and why
> > that happened, is a very big and controversial issue. The main point
> > is that Pali was not around in Macaulay's time, so Pali at any rate is
> > a non-issue. Just as the Christians found decreasing use for Latin,
> > the Buddhists would have found decreasing use for Sanskrit, had they
> > not been wiped out. Buddha preached atheism, and I do not see why
> > theists of any sort should have use for Buddhism.
>
> > > If yes Macaulay and the officials of British Raj did disservice
> > > to India by starting their universal literacy (and further) in
> > > Bengali, Marathi, Tamil, etc (and further in English.
>
> > Macaulay's point was that Sanskrit was inferior,
>
> Did he say that?
That was the gist. Nothing could be more incomparable that English
poetry! He himself was a mediocre poet.
> > and Sanskritic
> > learning barely amounted to one shelf of Western learning.
>
> What was there in Sanskrit of Macaulay's times that could have trained
> the workforce required for the time?
Macaulay was not talking about training the workforce. He was talking
about creating a breed of Indians who would be English in every way
except the colour of their skin. Knowing English half-well, and
throwing out Sanskrit and the vernaculars, was the way that was to be
done.
> What is there in Sanskrit of today's India (with 61 years of
> independent existence) that can train the workforce for taking India
> ahead (and above say China)?
What independent existence?
> > > > > The issue really is your expectation that education that British
> > > > > started in India for everybody should have been through Sanskrit and
> > > > > Arabic (not even Persian). I am just curious as to how would the
> > > > > teaching of Physics and Chemistry would have begun in India through
> > > > > Sanskrit and Arabic.
>
> > > > Same as in Japanese, Chinese, German, Italian, Yiddish, etc. one would
> > > > suppose.
>
> > > I suppose Physica and Chemistry in these languages began to be taught
> > > by the nativs of these languages, not by any enslaving foreign rulers.
>
> > There was no reason why the English-learning natives could not have
> > translated the Western science texts into Sanskrit and vernaculars
> > long ago, and taught them universally, save for political reasons,
> > which exist to this day. Those political reasons did not and do not
> > exist in other countries. What they show is that when you are really
> > free you can do all your learning in your vernaculars. This has been
> > my earliest point, which you seem to have accepted.
>
> I would like literacy being imparted through language that child has
> acquired from mother, in the houshold, on the streets.
> When it comes to teaching that is textbooks based economics prevail.
Let us talk future tense for higher education. What I would like is
for Indians to learn from Koreans and the Japanese, about how they
made it to where they are.
> Gujarat started teaching Physic, Chemistry, Mathematic, Biology from
> day one. One of its three university produced M.Sc.s who wrote their
> examinations answer books in 1963 or couple of years before that.
> Another University produced them both in Gujarati and Hindi. Only
> Maharaja Sayajirao University kept up English at that level.
>
> These M.Sc.s did not have text books written in Gujarati. Everything
> was from notes taken in classrooms. First major effort at translation
> took place when 10+2 was implemented. Wise Maharastrians grabbed +2 in
> affiliated Colleges while stupid Gujaratis left it to Secondary
> Schools. In late seventies School Text Book Board of Gujarat took upon
> translating. Halliday & Resnick was translated (for English Medium
> Students, Gujarati translation was translated back into English)
So Gujaratis learnt the value of imparting higher education in the
vernacular before other Indians. They haven't done too badly as a
result, what?
> To cut short.
> It is the educated class (with service background of couple of
> generations) that is unwilling to take India into a society that is
> egalitarian and truely productive.
By educated I suppose you mean Macaulay generated.
> As I wrote before I blame British not getting untouchable children
> into government run schools before I was enrolled in school in 1944.
Good point.
>
>
>
> > > Starting With Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya (now Sampurnanand
> > > Sanskrit University) in early sixties at least 6 more Sanskrit
> > > Universities are run by UGC. It should make you feel good if you find
> > > out that they are teaching Physics and Chemistry in their Acharya
> > > degrees and are producing PH.D.s in the same.
>
> > > Do not know if UGC is running any Arabic University but there are
> > > couple of them in India. Wonder what they are teaching. One at Surat
> > > has all the money they can think of using. Look at it in picture athttp://www.smartsurat.com/surat/suratphoto1.htm.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Arindam Banerjee
They are monists, not monotheists. Shankaracharya writes "gatee stvm,
gatee stvm, tvmay ka bhavani" which does not sound anything atheistic,
Buddhist or Jain to me.
>
>
>
> > Articles related to Hindu monotheism:http://www.experiencefestival.com/hinduism_monotheism
>
> > Yes, that is correct: Hinduism is a monotheistic religion. - Dr. Murli
> > Nagasundaramhttp://www.mazeministry.com/worldviews/worldreligions/hinduism/nagi.htm
>
> > You must be wise and recognise the fact that as a Hindu you know that
> > there is only one God.http://www.sivanandaonline.org/graphics/discourses/swami_chidananda/h...
>
> > ...a number of authorities agree that the original principles of
> > Hinduism advocate monotheism.http://www.submission.info/perspectives/monotheism/monotheism_since_a...- Hide quoted text -
The Deep
> "The Deep" <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e08954dd-9065-4b2f...@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 8, 6:48 pm, "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "The Deep" <dinpra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > (1) Whatever be Macaulay's intentions, I cannot deny the fact that the
> > > education that I received is what lets me converse with you all today.
> > > If India had stuck with the old brahminical (not used as a pejorative)
> > > gurukul system, lots of people (including me) would have been left out
> > > of the system probably.
>
> > Why? If Sanskrit and Arabic could have been media for higher instruction
> > to
> > that
> > the lot of everyone. The ruins of Sanskritic and Arabic cultures would not
> > have so much hatred today. They could have developed Western science and
> > technology in Eastern terms long ago, the way the Far Easterners are doing
> > now.
>
> My _personal_ perspective is that Hindu education, always dominated by
> Brahmins, would have remained in the hands of a few if Sanskrit had
> become the medium of instruction (at any level).
>
> AB: My personal experience was to learn Sanskrit from a Christian Adivasi
> (tribal) gentleman in a Catholic school, so it evidently differs from yours.
> Personal experiences are not the best way to come to conclusions affecting
> everyone, unless everyone (or the majority) relates warmly to that
> particular sort of personal experience. Also it has been my personal
> experience to know of Hindus who were proficient in Persian, and Muslims
> proficient in Sanskrit. Really, if there was no choice but to learn
> Sanskrit or Arabic or the vernacular, and if education was really open to
> all who wanted it or could afford it, I do not see how Sanskrit learning
> could have remained in the hands of a few. In fact, by not giving it a
> universal status, it was forced into an unwanted exclusivity.
>
I don't disagree with you regarding personal experiences being
inadequate to draw broad conclusions. However, the there a
couple of things that I do disagree with. Firstly, I don't
think it is particularly useful to play out "what if" scenarios.
To me, Macaulay is some dead white guy, and I don't really
care for his "legacy". It is best to deal with what currently
exists as an educational system in India, and move forward from
there. Secondly, by the time Macaulay got down to executing his
"conspiracy," Sanskrit was already on the wane - vernaculars
had already taken deep roots, and Sanskrit was reduced to the
language of Hindu liturgy and/or the domain of Brahmin scholars
(both things not particularly conducive to earning a living :-)).
By the time Sanskrit was losing its place in the educational
system prevalent at that time, there were really no advances
in sciences and technology. Mathematics, once preserved in
Kerala, ended in the 17th century. The primary reason for that
change is the rigidity of the caste system - a system exploited
to the hilt by both the Muslim rulers and the British. One can't
really blame them as they were looking out for their own
interest. After all, they were not driven by "altruism". As far
as Arabic scholarship goes, the less said the better. All studies
were directed from a religious angle, and not so much a "secular"
and/or "scientific" one - "The Book" contained all the "truths".
> A more optimistic
> mind would likely see more positive outcomes of this hypothetical
> case. The fact remains that the Indianized Macaulay system is the one
> that I know and grew up with after 3rd Std. To me, to move to a city
> and acquire some command over English was the ticket out of a very
> constraining system. Again, this is a _personal_ experience.
>
> AB: The point is that without English as a necessity there would have been
> alternatives. To me English was also a passport to success but I believe
> that I would have been much better off if everyone's including myself had
> higher education verncular - not just for a few who would ultimately belong
> nowhere, neither in the East nor in the West. Just think of all those who
> unlike you did not know so much English. Do you really think they are so
> much stupider than you, for that they have done worse?
Regarding education in the vernaculars, _all_ subjects (including
English :-)) are taught in Kannada in rural/semi-urban Karnataka.
This is all the way through the pre-university level. People
educated in this system are as smart as the ones taught in English
in the cities. People from this system are initially handicapped
in professional courses (engineering/medical), but do overcome the
barriers in less than a year. I have never once claimed or stated
that anyone who doesn't know English is stupid. However, the lack
of good command over English can be a handicap in a competitive
global market. It is not just in India, English has made inroads
into Europe as well.
>
> Many will
> surely have different opinions/experiences. But this experience in no
> way breaks my links to my roots or diminishes my love of Indian
> languages. That said, what I am not willing to concede any ground on
> is the need to blame all current ills in India on the education system
> that I went through. The governments (Union and State) have had at
> least 58 years (since the first republic was declared) to improve
> education standards, but have failed to do so everywhere - especially
> in the rural areas, where literacy should have been the first order of
> business.
>
> AB: Why do you thinik so? I mean, what makes you think that you as a
> literate are a better person than those illiterate? The illiterate are on
> the whole virtuous, hard-working, simple and trustworthy people. Why cannot
> education or at least information be given in the non-literate medium that
> is universal - through speech, television, sign-language, by making the
> country far more illiterate-friendly? All that will help them obtain
> skills, and jobs - and then in their mature age and with higher prosperity
> and leisure, they can be literate if they so choose. Also, if you do blame
> the current ills in India on the education system, then I do not see why you
> refuse to notice the root of it all.
Regarding literacy, with the wider availability of television,
I guess that is moot :-) I grew up without a TV, almost all the
way through college (the last couple of years had the most
idiotic drivel that only a state-sponsored channel could deliver
to the "masses" - not that the private channels are any better
today). The emphasis should be on adult literacy (most kids,
except the poorest ones probably have access to some level of
schooling). Literacy hasn't got anything to do with personal
dumbness. Simply look at the level of scholarship of "literate"
people that "contribute" to this newsgroup - most of them are
literate idiots. Anyways, people should be able to read newspapers
and documents (esp. legal ones pertaining to land ownership).
Yeah, one can dream up ideal scenarios in which everyone is happy
being illiterate, but virtuous. How practical is that? If wishes
were horses, beggars would ride.
>
> > > The system, in some sense, has been a better
> > > equalizer than most are willing to acknowledge.
>
> > If anything, it has increased hatred and misunderstanding on religious
> > lines, political lines, caste lines, regional lines, social lines... it
> > has
> > kept India very poor, without direct foreign exploitation, and will keep
> > Indian very poor living on crumbs such as call centre work... if most are
> > as
> > a result clerks and snobs and reverse-racists, then how could they have
> > the
> > wits or guts to acknowledge anything worthwhile that would have been a
> > better alternative?
>
> I cannot relate to this very well.
>
> AB: You think too much on a "personal experience" basis. Maybe with time,
> and deeper thought, you will get my drift. I too once thought the world of
> the English language once, and how necessary it was for every Indian to know
> it, in order to succeed. However, with time my opinions have changed. I
> see the Eastern countries like Korea, Japan and China managing perfectly
> well without being second-rate Englishmen (which is what Macaulay thought it
> most necessary for Indians to be, for any positive change in their
> situation).
>
The only thing that I can do is relate my personal experience,
and solicit other views and opinions. Based on an exchanges here,
I will be able to rethink my positions, and perhaps present a
a broader view. Unlike most of the netizens here, I am not as
gifted as you all are to dream up generalities. Despite my
knowledge of English (I wouldn't dare say command of English :-)),
I don't think that it is any more special than _any_ of the
Indian languages. I am as comfortable in it as I am in South
Indian languages. The same for literature in these languages.
I don't really worry about being labeled a "second-rate
Englishman" or a "first-rate somebody". The examples of Japan,
Korea, and China doesn't really work for me. These are fairly
homogenous societies (equivalent to a single state of India).
If all three of these societies were one nation, the perspective
would be very different.
> In the milieu that I grew up,
> command of English was key to peer acceptance (a real tremendous force
> compared to anything else). In some ways this is bad I guess, because
> one ends up acquiring two personas - one amongst peers and one amongst
> kin. I think a lot of the blame for this really belongs to the
> administrative services (civil servants).
>
> AB: Let us see, what have they done.
>
> The system of privilege and
> patronage is the only one "the steel frame" (or framelets) of India
> understands and seeks to perpetuate. This pampered, and completely
> unaccountable, tribe is totally disconnected from the rest of the
> country, and does not really understand what needs to be done to move
> the country forward in the area of education.
>
> AB: They are expected to be clever, idealistic and incorrupt, and carry out
> the will of their political masters, who are in turn expected to heed the
> needs and wishes of the people. Actually their pay and privileges (ICS-IAS
> officers) have gone down by at least a factor of 10-20 since India got
> independence, in real terms. Basically their salaries enshrined in the
> Indian constitution was not indexed with inflation, which is the norm in say
> Australia. In the 70s, their lot was really bad but I suppose it is
> slightly better now, in salary terms at least.
>
In principle, IAS officers are supposed to be paragons of
virtue. Are they? Or should one take a more nuanced approach?
As far as pay and privileges go, much has changed with the many
"Pay Commissions" in India. IAS officers have made sure that
they are the best-paid civil servants in India. That the
taxpayers get any return on their investment in these people
is secondary. Almost all of them are corrupt, incapable of
identifying with common people, and make full use of their
elevated status to achieve personal goals. This is at the
Union level. The State administrative services are even
worse. Unless you are well heeled or well connected, you will
not be able to accomplish much for the community that you
live in. You'll have to trust me on this one. Yeah, I am
relating my personal experience.
> What started off as a
> very efficient system degenerated by the late '70s, and the nexus of
> administrators and politicians is the one driving the country down the
> tube. Just my thoughts.
>
> I wouldn't really run down call centers, etc. A job is a job is a job.
> It provides money. One can put that money to good use (few do) or one
> can squander it (many do). For people from poorer (or lower caste)
> backgrounds, that money gives them _some_ dignity and a chance to get
> out financial dire straits in an otherwise pernicious system.
>
> AB: Again, I was trying to explain *why* the system was/became/is
> pernicious, rather than simply stating same and lamenting about it. Call
> centre jobs are too easy, not that paying, and looks like the top end of
> Indian aspiration, unfortunately. There are lots of opportunities out there
> in the field, one has just got to go and find them. Like, I gave Rs10,000
> to my mother who donated it to three local families (tribals, Doms). They
> bought a rickshaw-cart with a glass show-case. My mother had taught them to
> make jams, jellies, pickles, etc. but they could not market it. Now, they
> can push it to some place of activity and make good business and good
> profit. Three families, who had absolutely nothing, now can work and feed
> themselves and hopefully start a trend in a part of India where the per
> capita income, whichever way you measure it, is as near $0.00 as makes
> little difference.
>
Lamenting about the caste system (something real and tangible
even in the present day - check out the flood relief efforts
in Bihar) is no better than lamenting about some dead white guy.
The time for theory has long passed. As an independent nation,
India has had 60 years to work on the problem. Anymore theory
will make me nauseous. It is about time that the government
stopped pandering to narrow interests and obscurantists, and
dealt with the problem. An IIT and an IIM at every street corner
is not the answer. It is about time that the government took
a good hard look at all the archaic (and an enormous number of)
laws it has to keep the people dumb and illiterate. If the
government and its agents are really that interested in
social justice as it claims, it it high time that primary
education (Standards 1 through 10) in the vernaculars becomes
the highest priority. If further, the government backs down
for forcing Hindi down the throats of people south of the
Vindhyas, progress in all of the South will be really rapid.
BTW, I like that your mother showed the local families that
they could achieve something on their own. I too hope that
humble beginnings to a cottage industry will eventually grow
to a larger enterprise.