It takes a lot to let go of entertainment and go for education and intellectual growth. Subscribers on channels such as these and the mass following of "influencers" today is indicative of kind of people we have in our society.
@@amit_anand_jha "It takes a lot to let go of entertainment and go for education and intellectual growth." Why is it necessary to abandon the former, in order to benefit from the latter?
Great discussion. Loved the samudra manthan analogy. My interpretation: Evolution itself is that process that has a will to maximize its existence in time. Its objective is to become Sanatan and hence both genetic and memetic evolution are sub processes of Sanatan Dharma. In this evolution the dharmic memes and adharmic memes are having the samudra manathan. The bias of ishwara towards the Devas and then them getting immortality is akin to physics and universe enforces a structure on these dharmic vs adharmic battle and the dharmic memetic evolution would be the Sanatan (immortal).
Good to hear Ashish after a long gap, either driven by TH-cam's Tecnocractic Algorithm or hibernation Ashish loves for reasons I'm not aware of 😊. Nevertheless, please continue to preach Buddy 😊 and do so in Hindi (which actually is more of Urduwood's lingo now) too for a larger reach.
Important discussion. Here is my cross-cultural list of the characteristics of "tradition" that seems to fit with your discussion of the Dharmic/Indic tradition: 1) traditions arise in the context of a world that is understood to be living, conscious, personal, and relational; modernity understands the world to be dead and mechanical 2) traditions are organic, holistic, and highly integrated in all their “parts” (food, housing, religion, marriage, family life, music, art, education, medicine, politics, and so on); modernity attempts to rationalistically figure out the “best’ approach in each area of life taken in separation from the others (which is why the parts are usually in conflict with each other) 3) traditions seek overall relational balance and harmony across a broad range of persons (human, plant, animal, divine, and so on) and integrate the full range of individual desires (purusharthas) into this overall balance; modernity primarily pursues individualistic desires of a much narrower, mechanical-material type and at the expense of overall balance and harmony 4) traditional culture is received, in its integral wholeness, from higher persons; modern society is not open to receiving in this way and does not create true culture at all Based on these four characteristics, we can describe traditional or Dharmic people as: participating in a personal world and receiving a culture appropriate to that world. From what I've seen, "trad" people want to revive mostly just a semblance of tradition, but they typically express modern attitudes and few-to-none of the traditional attitudes. That confusion is exactly why this discussion of tradition is so important.
Sir you should make a video on the amazing and extraordinary things Gautam Buddha said about woman's in Kunal Jatak of Tripitak!,that video is needed specially for all the Neo Buddheists in Bharat who only want to blame and disrespect Hinduism and pretend how huge feminist Gautam Buddha was,that video is needed!🙏🕉️
@@deepeshbajpai4423 Aba Gajput Gautam Buddh puru tarah sa ek misogynistic insan tha!,mai yaha nahi bol sakta kyuki pakka tab mara comment delete ho jayga,isliya tu jakar Sanatan Samiksha ki videos dakh la Kunal Jatak par tab pata chalaga ki kitni wahiyat soch Gautam Buddha Mahilayo ka liya rakhta tha!🤡😂😂😂
Insightful full podcast. Loved the content and really loved the presenters. So good to see such young minds exploring intricate and complex topics as this❤
What is Upword’s stance on H resistance against placing Sai Baba statues in temples next to the murtis of H devi and devtas. Do you consider SB worship to be a dilution of dharma or do you support it ?
1:14:20 the most obvious counter question now is "we can apply for jobs and work now, so what should we do NOW in modernity. Does the corpus reject Shudras or not? Does it allow for mobility and if yes then HOW?" These are the questions on modernity. These need to be answered today. To bring sense to it. If a family of Brahmins has been in carpentry for the last 5 generations should they lose their right to the Vedas? Those in Bangal who worked for the Mughals and secularised are denied this privilege today, even if they revert to their ancestral occupation. So what now? How will traditions make sense of this? I would love to hear Dhar talk about it over any of the raitacharyas. But this question is dodged so much it is a cause for concern or at least a voidness emerging from it.
@Himanshu_Khichar After reading your comments, one thing is clear to me that you have a "very serious" comprehension issue ! (especially regarding your understanding of the scope of reasoning) You don't yet understand that the eternal truth revealed by Vedas are eternal because they are transcendental in nature and regarding your empirical truths, it is by definition cannot be eternal in nature ! Advaitin has 'great' competence in Nyaya philosophy. (The word 'great' is operative here) The very emergence of Nyaya darshan is inspired by the Upanishadic dictum, "the Self should be realised through hearing, 'reflection' (reasoning) and meditation". The word 'reflection' is operative here ! And you can keep your imagined "theory of diminish of Rationalism and emergence of Mysticism" with yourself (seriously 😂😂) Overall, had I known your incompetence in the form of lack of comprehension skills, I would have never wasted my time in these discussions. But, just as you understood the topics surrounding 'Aparusheya' of Vedas (hopefully), one day you will understand these things as well. Keep trying but don't waste my time by further commenting !!!
Disappointed to see the number of views. I have watched (or listener) this video more than 10 times now. Each time I learn something new (or maybe I wasn't paying attention the previous time?). Lol. No but seriously, this was deadly. Little views are fine, we need only one Sankaraycha to bring us back to our traditional!
Great and interesting video. As a Hindu conservative (see below to know what conservatism is), let me offer some comments. A general comment: Ashish and Aditya mahodaya, don't use formal English with rare formal words like telos, paraphernalia, etc. I know that you have read many English books in formal English and so, such style of English may naturally come. However, I don't think we should give English that kind of excessive respect. We should just use it for mere communication as required for the time being and use simple standard English as required. And, I support the use of English by your channel since its purpose as stated by you is to move the overton window and as such, the anglicized elite may be the preferred target. General comments on traditionalism: I am not a traditionalist. I am a Hindu conservative and would characterize myself as a aspiring Hindu scripturalist and follower of mahatma and saints who have attained mukti, rishi, deva, Ishwara and the Veda. I value tradition and my tendency as a conservative is to conserve and promote tradition. But, one of the reasons that I am not a traditionalist is that the injunctions of the Hindu scriptures, deva and rishi override any Hindu tradition which has been going on for thousands of years even if the practitioners of the tradition disagree and say that their local practices override the former. Now, when I say that the former authorities can override a Hindu tradition, I mean that they can override in the sense of being more correct or being more moral and not necessarily in the sense that the tradition has to be wiped out through coercion, top-down imposition or law. In many cases, they may be able to continue practicing their tradition in an ideal Hindu monarchy but that may not make the tradition correct or moral. I may agree with an actual traditionalist on most of the issues but recognize that some sacred authorities can override tradition. To illustrate, if hypothetically some Hindu communities have been practicing cannibalism in the normal context for thousands of years and justify that by saying that in their local tradition, their practice of cannibalism overrides the injunctions of scriptures and rishi just because this practice is the ancestral tradition, it is clear that in this case, their tradition is immoral from a Hindu scriptural perspective. I, obviously, do not agree at all neither with the reformists of the last 200 years nor with modern-day Hindu liberals since many of their actions and ideologies go against the instructions of the Hindu scriptures, rishi, etc. So, on most issues, I may agree with a Hindu traditionalist. Contd. in replies to this comment
1:36 Dhar mahodaya, try to go on podcasts like that of Ranveer and Vaad, which have a normie audience. You appeared on Vaad before. You are likely not so controversial that you cannot get there. 8:45 Economic Right and Cultural Right actually seem to be completely different things. That they were/are tightly correlated in the West and in Western-influenced circles in India, are, in my view, a matter of coincidence, partly due to, if I were to guess, the reality that communism as an ideology combines the economic far-left and cultural far-left, and many in the right perceive themselves as being opposed to communism. 11:13 What you are describing is about a majority of elite self-identified conservatives but not all. Conservatism simply means that one should have a tendency towards conserving. In that way, it is a big-tent ideology. Since the European Enlightenment values, the French Revolution values and communism do not have that tendency to conserve, they are not within conservatism. I would consider traditionalism to be under conservatism too, although I am not a traditionalist (for reasons I have stated above). Self-identified conservatives may not necessarily be actually conservatives. 21:37 I would say and I think Ashish mahodaya may agree that theorizing and rationality in the usual sense have a part in the Hindu religion, but their domain is very limited and well-defined. After all, we did have Hindu mathematicians, logicians, etc. We do not have the distinction between the secular space (in the formal sense of the word secular) and the religious space, in the Hindu religion.
23:02 A child when he/she is born is likely not horrified by whatever he sees. He/she is likely both horrified from some things that he/she sees (that he/she does not need to be horrified from and that adults would not be horrified from) and not horrified by some things that he/she sees. Raw nature is both frightening in some aspects and not frightening in some other aspects. Life is happiness and suffering (in the usual sense) combined, and this would apply generally, in some form, in all stages of a person's life after he/she is born. Life is not only suffering in the usual sense. 24:27 We don't have the power of the gods neither will we, humans, ever have in the future. The Deva, even if we leave out Ishwara, are very very very very powerful compared to whatever technological power that we have or acquire in the future. The term "power of the gods" may have originated in the West because some of them think that the old pagan gods of their ancestors were simply mere forces of nature like lightning, etc. personified as weak false gods. But, in the Hindu conception, the deva, even if we leave out Ishwara, who control the forces of nature or are the forces of nature, are not merely that and are very very very powerful. 25:08 I think that many liberals do actually define what harm is and they define it by using the concept of consent. Of course, in my view, that's a bad way of defining harm and many liberals who define harm in such a way may be hypocritical with this concept of consent (like the situation in case of incest between two homosexual adult brothers, consensual suicide thorough murder, etc.) 32:18 I would not consider tradition as barely surviving. While it is true that Hindu society is under siege and many traditions have been wiped out from most of Hindus, most Hindus, most of whom are still rural, still worship the gods in a vibrant way and follow most of their ancestral culture. Hindu traditions are still vibrant.
37:28 It would be more accurate to characterize the modern classes as being a framework where your eligibility for membership in a social class is not based on birth. This is because economist Gregory Clark claims in his book "The Son also Rises" and his recent papers that the rate of social mobility in the long term has not increased from pre-modern society to modern society both in the West and outside the West, and this rate in the long term is very slow in virtually all societies including modern societies of the West. So, if these claims of Clark are true, social class in all modern societies can be said to be mostly based on birth (but the eligibility is not.) 39:18 Actually, in pre-modern Hindu society, although it was mostly agricultural, Hindu hunter-gatherer communities were living, thriving and were happy. They had a harmonious and strong relationship with the Hindus living in agriculture-dependent society. So, pre-modern Hindu society was not completely agricultural. It is, now, in the modern Indian state that these Hindu hunter-gatherers have to leave their way of life. Read the paper: Gardner (2013), “Understanding anomalous distribution of hunter-gatherers”, Current Anthropology. 39:59 Diversity is neither inherently good nor inherently bad. It is just that good and sustainable frameworks of culture generally produce diversity and not homogeneity. Diversity is not a useful signal. That is to say, a culture that has more diversity is not necessarily better. But, homogeneity is a useful signal of a unsustainable or bad framework for a society. So, I would not say that the war on diversity and establishing homogeneity is itself a problem but would say that homogeneity in a society is a signal for a unsustainable or bad framework being applied for a society. These are subtle points. 42:10 Can we say that democracy is anarchic in a sense (partly because of the doctrine of separation of powers, etc.) and thus weakens the state even in a military way? Well-designed autocratic one-party non-communist states with non-hereditary leaders may be generally more stable in this modern era of exponential technology and economic growth, all other unrelated things being equal. Modern education in schools, etc. has also a role to play in promoting the ideology and behaviour that supports democracy, among people.
45:44 I disagree that Hindutva cannot be applied in social life. Hindutva can mean many things to many Hindus, and in my view, Hindutva is conservative and not under liberalism. Self-identified followers of Hindutva do not constitute its actual representatives. In my opinion, traditionalists like you should not abandon being under the label "Hindutva" and should adopt that label. To illustrate, you may end up agreeing with what Chandranath Basu wrote about what Hindutva is. To give another example, if hypothetically some Hindus, even the majority of Hindus, use the term Arya in a racial sense, that does not mean traditionalists like you should abandon that term. Hindutva seems to be a beautiful name, and it may not be wise to abandon this term. 50:15 This is not the dichotomy between nature and culture. Hindu culture existed in a nature-culture continuum, and there, both nature and culture are under Dharma. 50:22 In my view, both the terms "monotheism" and "polytheism" may not be useful for describing the Hindu religion and, in my view, should not be applied to the Hindu religion. These terms originate from the Abrahamic context anyway. Many Hindu followers of many Hindu sects may be correctly simultaneously able to say that “I believe in and worship only the only one true god (i.e. Ishwara)” and “I believe in and worship many gods (who are forms of Ishwara)”. So, “monotheism” and “polytheism” may not be useful terms for describing the Hindu religion and maybe many other non-Abrahamic religions like maybe some of those in China and in ancient Egypt. "Primary religions" and "secondary/counter religions" (terms likely coined by Jan Assmann) may be more useful terms. The Hindu religion is a primary religion like many pagan religions, etc. Secondary religions include the doctrine of the prophet Zarathustra (on which Hindus for whatever reason tend to not focus on; it is a religion that seems to claim that the deva are basically false gods and its follower(s) seems to have persecuted the Hindu religion in Gandhara under the rule of Xerxes; many scholars say that it had a profound influence on Judaism during the Babylonian exile of Jews; the Parsis in India don’t try to proactively convert Hindus as of yet partly because the Hindu king who gave them shelter in India gave them an explicit condition that they have to not engage in proactive conversion), Atenism and the three Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. But, I believe in Hindu exceptionalism among the primary religions. 55:00 This may not be the correct picture in the case of the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. If we take Judaism, for example, features of many other gods like Baal may have been assimilated to YHWH and then, YHWH was made the omnipotent God of the entire universe and his earlier features of being associated with the land of Israel, being associated with storms, etc. were made very less relevant.
1:06:26 All sects of the Hindu religion do not accept the Veda as apaurusheya and eternal. Nyaya, Vaisheshika and Shaiva Siddhanta did not/does not seem to accept the Veda as apaurusheya, although the former two accept it as the highest authority. Yoga and Samkhya seem to accept the Veda as apaurusheya but not eternal. I don't know the views of the Kashmiri Shaiva sect. (I accept the Veda as apaurusheya.) 1:06:38 Was it really common sense in ancient India? Would a 17th-century follower of Vedanta really agree that it is common sense to say that the Veda was written by a man? Likely not. 1:07:05 Many rishis like maybe Janaka, Vishwamitra, Jamadagni and Panini were not likely born as rishi. Panini additionally was born in Kali yuga, according to tradition. 1:09:35 As far as I know, Madhvacharya in Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya seems to claim that there are interpolations in the text of Mahabharata (I am not a follower of the Madhva sect). And, many present-day acarya also seem to say that the text of Bhavishya Purana is interpolated. So, such claims of interpolations seem to be have been made by acarya (although such claims seem to be not for reformist aims.) 1:12:50 Satyan Sharma (Twitter: @sharmasatyan ) says that there was no bar on reading the Veda in the written form. And, we did have manuscripts of the Veda even before the promotion of the printing press. 1:15:32 The ideologies derived from the European Enlightenment and the French revolution may be better described as heresies of Christianity as Islam is likely a heresy of Christianity (to illustrate, Islam is likely a heresy of but not a form of Christianity.) 1:17:47 Doesn't this seem contradictory to your statements in other videos where you cite the work of Sufiya Pathan et al to say that SC/ST are very safe in India, and your retweet of the tweet of Neha Das some days ago also claiming that SC/ST are very safe in India? You should clarify this point a bit more.
@@mrsubramanian-hy9xbNo Ashish Dhar doesn't make sense..acknowledging they were written by humans at some point in the past, then calling them eternal 😂😂
@@mrsubramanian-hy9xb Anyone can write a book containing known and objective truths and then claim that his book is eternal. What's unique about the Vedas? If Vedas' teachings are eternal and there are thousands of books in human history which can be called eternal.
@@Himanshu_Khichar Why did you make the assumption that if the Vedas hold eternal truths, then that other bookes can't? The Vedas contain information regarding rituals, spiritualism, mantras, rules and more, essentially a meant for people to live and learn through. In Hinduism, they are the most important texts. If you don't accept them, then sure I'm no one to police you but don't go around embarrassing yourself and making unfunny jokes in an effort to spite people. It just reflects on you or your insecurities.
If the Vedas are eternal because they supposedly contain eternal truths, then a math textbook listing out theorems of a particular field of mathematics is also eternal in that sense of the word😂😂😂😂
You mean axioms, and not theorems. The interpretation of mathematical axioms is subject to relativity. Eg. The curvature of space-time is due to the distribution of mass and energy, which is relative to the observer's frame of reference. Sit down.
@@Upword No saar....I don't mean "axioms" by "theorems", why are you deliberately being ignorant? For example, a simple theorem of elementary geometry like "the sum of lengths of any two sides of a triangle is greater than the third side" is a theorem, and I believe it's an eternal truth independent of humans knowing it, and so if there is a book which has description of all such theorems of elementary Euclidean geometry is, by your understanding, "eternal". So what's different about the Vedic eternality?
Axioms, not theorems, because theorems are not self-evident. We were steel-manning your position. What is valid for axioms is obviously valid for theorems derived therefrom. If the axioms are interpreted based on the observer's frame of reference, so are the theorems. In other words, Euclidean theorems are obviously valid for Euclidean space ONLY. In any case, it is not hard to observe that this video is not about Euclidean geometry. It is about the Hindu tradition, whose epistemology is entirely different from the epistemology of geometry. We empathise with you for not being able to grasp this fundamental difference but it is what it is. For starters, Vedas are the supreme pramana, which implies that they are not dependent on sensory data. As a Nastika, you are well within your right to not accept this claim but we were discussing the astika tradition. This may be out of syllabus for you and we strongly recommend going back to your math textbook.
@@Upword *"Euclidean theorems are obviously valid for Euclidean space ONLY"* Sure...but within the Euclidean space, those theorems are independent of humans or any other observer..the statement that "the sum of any two sides of triangles is greater than the third side" was true when there were no humans and will be true when there are no humans, so it's "eternal" in your sense. *"If the axioms are interpreted based on the observer's frame of reference..."* Says who? Axioms, as defined in mathematics, are self-evident statements, what makes you say they are interpreted in the observer's frame of reference? The axiom "a+b=b+a for any two real numbers a and b" depends on the observer according to you? Plus, the same fact applies to your Vedic statements as well, and it's more applicable to that because once you go to a different culture outside of India, they don't accept Vedic claims or perform rituals prescribed in the Vedas, so how come the Vedas are eternal and a math textbook is not? *"this video is not about Euclidean geometry*" Yeah sure, lol...I brought its example to counter your argument.😒😒 *"whose epistemology is entirely different from the epistemology of geometry"* Yeah and Islamic and Christian epistemology too is different from that of the Vedic...it doesn't prove that it's the right epistemology just by being different. *"Vedas are the supreme pramanas"* "...for Hindus", yes. "they are not dependent on sensory data" What does that even mean? And anyway, French philosopher Rene Descartes gave the statement "I think, therefore, I am", which also doesn't require any sensory data but is purely based on rational contemplation. And I can give many such examples. But nobody goes around saying "I think, therefore, I am" is an eternal truth.
@@Upword *"Euclidean theorems are obviously valid for Euclidean space ONLY"* Sure...but within the Euclidean space, those theorems are independent of humans or any other observer..the statement that "the sum of any two sides of triangles is greater than the third side" was true when there were no humans and will be true when there are no humans, so it's "eternal" in your sense. *"If the axioms are interpreted based on the observer's frame of reference..."* Says who? Axioms, as defined in mathematics, are self-evident statements, what makes you say they are interpreted in the observer's frame of reference? The axiom "a+b=b+a for any two real numbers a and b" depends on the observer according to you? Plus, the same fact applies to your Vedic statements as well, and it's more applicable to that because once you go to a different culture outside of India, they don't accept Vedic claims or perform rituals prescribed in the Vedas, so how come the Vedas are eternal and a math textbook is not? *"this video is not about Euclidean geometry"* Yeah sure, lol...I brought its example to counter your argument.😒😒 *"whose epistemology is entirely different from the epistemology of geometry"* Yeah, and Islamic and Christian epistemology too is different from that of the Vedic...it doesn't prove that it's the right epistemology just by being different. *"Vedas are the supreme pramanas"* "...for Hindus", yes. "they are not dependent on sensory data" What does that even mean? And anyway, French philosopher Rene Descartes gave the statement "I think, therefore, I am", which also doesn't require any sensory data but is purely based on rational contemplation. And I can give many such examples. But nobody goes around saying "I think, therefore, I am" is an eternal truth.
Why so less subscribers. We all should support such kind of TH-cam channels we should learn from others. No doubt why we are so behind.
So less subscribers because most Hindus are not casteist , sexist and regressive like Ashish Dhar.
Yes.. heart breaking….
It takes a lot to let go of entertainment and go for education and intellectual growth.
Subscribers on channels such as these and the mass following of "influencers" today is indicative of kind of people we have in our society.
@@amit_anand_jha regressive stone age trad 😂
@@amit_anand_jha
"It takes a lot to let go of entertainment and go for education and intellectual growth."
Why is it necessary to abandon the former, in order to benefit from the latter?
Its a relief to see youngsters like Aditya being in touch with Ashish Dhar ji.
Great Episode, Please continue this series. I'm totally in awe by how articulate Ashish Dhar is commendable.
I am so fortunate to listen to Ashish Dhar.
Great discussion. Loved the samudra manthan analogy. My interpretation: Evolution itself is that process that has a will to maximize its existence in time. Its objective is to become Sanatan and hence both genetic and memetic evolution are sub processes of Sanatan Dharma. In this evolution the dharmic memes and adharmic memes are having the samudra manathan. The bias of ishwara towards the Devas and then them getting immortality is akin to physics and universe enforces a structure on these dharmic vs adharmic battle and the dharmic memetic evolution would be the Sanatan (immortal).
Good to hear Ashish after a long gap, either driven by TH-cam's Tecnocractic Algorithm or hibernation Ashish loves for reasons I'm not aware of 😊.
Nevertheless, please continue to preach Buddy 😊 and do so in Hindi (which actually is more of Urduwood's lingo now) too for a larger reach.
Ashish Dhar has exceptional knowledge and wisdom
Important discussion. Here is my cross-cultural list of the characteristics of "tradition" that seems to fit with your discussion of the Dharmic/Indic tradition:
1) traditions arise in the context of a world that is understood to be living, conscious, personal, and relational; modernity understands the world to be dead and mechanical
2) traditions are organic, holistic, and highly integrated in all their “parts” (food, housing, religion, marriage, family life, music, art, education, medicine, politics, and so on); modernity attempts to rationalistically figure out the “best’ approach in each area of life taken in separation from the others (which is why the parts are usually in conflict with each other)
3) traditions seek overall relational balance and harmony across a broad range of persons (human, plant, animal, divine, and so on) and integrate the full range of individual desires (purusharthas) into this overall balance; modernity primarily pursues individualistic desires of a much narrower, mechanical-material type and at the expense of overall balance and harmony
4) traditional culture is received, in its integral wholeness, from higher persons; modern society is not open to receiving in this way and does not create true culture at all
Based on these four characteristics, we can describe traditional or Dharmic people as: participating in a personal world and receiving a culture appropriate to that world.
From what I've seen, "trad" people want to revive mostly just a semblance of tradition, but they typically express modern attitudes and few-to-none of the traditional attitudes. That confusion is exactly why this discussion of tradition is so important.
Really happy to see the young host in the discussion. We truly need young new voices.
Congratulations❤️👍
Sir you should make a video on the amazing and extraordinary things Gautam Buddha said about woman's in Kunal Jatak of Tripitak!,that video is needed specially for all the Neo Buddheists in Bharat who only want to blame and disrespect Hinduism and pretend how huge feminist Gautam Buddha was,that video is needed!🙏🕉️
Why would Gautam Buddha say anything about women?
@@deepeshbajpai4423 Aba Gajput Gautam Buddh puru tarah sa ek misogynistic insan tha!,mai yaha nahi bol sakta kyuki pakka tab mara comment delete ho jayga,isliya tu jakar Sanatan Samiksha ki videos dakh la Kunal Jatak par tab pata chalaga ki kitni wahiyat soch Gautam Buddha Mahilayo ka liya rakhta tha!🤡😂😂😂
@@Anubhavsengupta1902 ok dekhta hu
@@Anubhavsengupta1902 Buddheists - now THERE'S a new word for you!
@@deepeshbajpai4423bro... U need to Learn the truth of the King of Misogynists n Casteists also called as Buddha ☸🐘 - The Gajaputra. ., 🤣
Insightful full podcast. Loved the content and really loved the presenters. So good to see such young minds exploring intricate and complex topics as this❤
Dhanyawad Ashish Dhar ji for sharing nuanced insights into Tradition / Dharma.
❤❤❤ Congrats aditya bhaii
Jai Sanaatan Dharma, in our Birthdays also we should follow hindu tradition instead of western culture of cake cutting.
Stop wearing tshirts, stop using mobile phones, stop using technology given by abrahamic people.
Mind blogging podcast ❤
Asish dhar you are truly great
Excellent session
41:34 how do we make sense of this with modernity? Can mobility work in the reality of Dharma and how?
Please invite Nityanand Misra on upclose with upword.
What is Upword’s stance on H resistance against placing Sai Baba statues in temples next to the murtis of H devi and devtas. Do you consider SB worship to be a dilution of dharma or do you support it ?
Ashish Dhar is brilliant
1:14:20 the most obvious counter question now is "we can apply for jobs and work now, so what should we do NOW in modernity. Does the corpus reject Shudras or not? Does it allow for mobility and if yes then HOW?" These are the questions on modernity. These need to be answered today. To bring sense to it.
If a family of Brahmins has been in carpentry for the last 5 generations should they lose their right to the Vedas? Those in Bangal who worked for the Mughals and secularised are denied this privilege today, even if they revert to their ancestral occupation. So what now? How will traditions make sense of this?
I would love to hear Dhar talk about it over any of the raitacharyas. But this question is dodged so much it is a cause for concern or at least a voidness emerging from it.
1:24:56 and what if I am training myself since birth because my traits are recognised as such? Then who do we turn to?
Sir, where are you? Please uploaded more videos like these. Thank you. Jai Shree Ram🙏🕉️
It's out :) th-cam.com/video/3ujsofNBLSA/w-d-xo.html
This is just amazing
Great conversation 👏
@Himanshu_Khichar
After reading your comments, one thing is clear to me that you have a "very serious" comprehension issue !
(especially regarding your understanding of the scope of reasoning)
You don't yet understand that the eternal truth revealed by Vedas are eternal because they are transcendental in nature and regarding your empirical truths, it is by definition cannot be eternal in nature !
Advaitin has 'great' competence in Nyaya philosophy. (The word 'great' is operative here)
The very emergence of Nyaya darshan is inspired by the Upanishadic dictum, "the Self should be realised through hearing, 'reflection' (reasoning) and meditation".
The word 'reflection' is operative here !
And you can keep your imagined "theory of diminish of Rationalism and emergence of Mysticism" with yourself (seriously 😂😂)
Overall, had I known your incompetence in the form of lack of comprehension skills, I would have never wasted my time in these discussions.
But, just as you understood the topics surrounding 'Aparusheya' of Vedas (hopefully), one day you will understand these things as well.
Keep trying but don't waste my time by further commenting !!!
Great
Congratulations. Jai sanatan.
Can there is possibility of discussion about Edward Röer the translator of Upanishads.
Very good initiative...👌👌
We want Rajarshi Nandy back pls 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 Jay Bhairav 🌺
Disappointed to see the number of views. I have watched (or listener) this video more than 10 times now. Each time I learn something new (or maybe I wasn't paying attention the previous time?). Lol.
No but seriously, this was deadly. Little views are fine, we need only one Sankaraycha to bring us back to our traditional!
Please make a video with Rajarshi Nandy sir ❤
Consciousness is universal, purna, and the opposite of ahamkar
The moment tradition is translated as Dharma, well meaning reformist would be on back foot.
🕉️🕉️🕉️🕉️🕉️
Please invite nityanand mishra
Great and interesting video. As a Hindu conservative (see below to know what conservatism is), let me offer some comments.
A general comment: Ashish and Aditya mahodaya, don't use formal English with rare formal words like telos, paraphernalia, etc. I know that you have read many English books in formal English and so, such style of English may naturally come. However, I don't think we should give English that kind of excessive respect. We should just use it for mere communication as required for the time being and use simple standard English as required. And, I support the use of English by your channel since its purpose as stated by you is to move the overton window and as such, the anglicized elite may be the preferred target.
General comments on traditionalism: I am not a traditionalist. I am a Hindu conservative and would characterize myself as a aspiring Hindu scripturalist and follower of mahatma and saints who have attained mukti, rishi, deva, Ishwara and the Veda. I value tradition and my tendency as a conservative is to conserve and promote tradition. But, one of the reasons that I am not a traditionalist is that the injunctions of the Hindu scriptures, deva and rishi override any Hindu tradition which has been going on for thousands of years even if the practitioners of the tradition disagree and say that their local practices override the former. Now, when I say that the former authorities can override a Hindu tradition, I mean that they can override in the sense of being more correct or being more moral and not necessarily in the sense that the tradition has to be wiped out through coercion, top-down imposition or law. In many cases, they may be able to continue practicing their tradition in an ideal Hindu monarchy but that may not make the tradition correct or moral. I may agree with an actual traditionalist on most of the issues but recognize that some sacred authorities can override tradition. To illustrate, if hypothetically some Hindu communities have been practicing cannibalism in the normal context for thousands of years and justify that by saying that in their local tradition, their practice of cannibalism overrides the injunctions of scriptures and rishi just because this practice is the ancestral tradition, it is clear that in this case, their tradition is immoral from a Hindu scriptural perspective. I, obviously, do not agree at all neither with the reformists of the last 200 years nor with modern-day Hindu liberals since many of their actions and ideologies go against the instructions of the Hindu scriptures, rishi, etc. So, on most issues, I may agree with a Hindu traditionalist.
Contd. in replies to this comment
1:36 Dhar mahodaya, try to go on podcasts like that of Ranveer and Vaad, which have a normie audience. You appeared on Vaad before. You are likely not so controversial that you cannot get there.
8:45 Economic Right and Cultural Right actually seem to be completely different things. That they were/are tightly correlated in the West and in Western-influenced circles in India, are, in my view, a matter of coincidence, partly due to, if I were to guess, the reality that communism as an ideology combines the economic far-left and cultural far-left, and many in the right perceive themselves as being opposed to communism.
11:13 What you are describing is about a majority of elite self-identified conservatives but not all. Conservatism simply means that one should have a tendency towards conserving. In that way, it is a big-tent ideology. Since the European Enlightenment values, the French Revolution values and communism do not have that tendency to conserve, they are not within conservatism. I would consider traditionalism to be under conservatism too, although I am not a traditionalist (for reasons I have stated above). Self-identified conservatives may not necessarily be actually conservatives.
21:37 I would say and I think Ashish mahodaya may agree that theorizing and rationality in the usual sense have a part in the Hindu religion, but their domain is very limited and well-defined. After all, we did have Hindu mathematicians, logicians, etc. We do not have the distinction between the secular space (in the formal sense of the word secular) and the religious space, in the Hindu religion.
23:02 A child when he/she is born is likely not horrified by whatever he sees. He/she is likely both horrified from some things that he/she sees (that he/she does not need to be horrified from and that adults would not be horrified from) and not horrified by some things that he/she sees. Raw nature is both frightening in some aspects and not frightening in some other aspects. Life is happiness and suffering (in the usual sense) combined, and this would apply generally, in some form, in all stages of a person's life after he/she is born. Life is not only suffering in the usual sense.
24:27 We don't have the power of the gods neither will we, humans, ever have in the future. The Deva, even if we leave out Ishwara, are very very very very powerful compared to whatever technological power that we have or acquire in the future. The term "power of the gods" may have originated in the West because some of them think that the old pagan gods of their ancestors were simply mere forces of nature like lightning, etc. personified as weak false gods. But, in the Hindu conception, the deva, even if we leave out Ishwara, who control the forces of nature or are the forces of nature, are not merely that and are very very very powerful.
25:08 I think that many liberals do actually define what harm is and they define it by using the concept of consent. Of course, in my view, that's a bad way of defining harm and many liberals who define harm in such a way may be hypocritical with this concept of consent (like the situation in case of incest between two homosexual adult brothers, consensual suicide thorough murder, etc.)
32:18 I would not consider tradition as barely surviving. While it is true that Hindu society is under siege and many traditions have been wiped out from most of Hindus, most Hindus, most of whom are still rural, still worship the gods in a vibrant way and follow most of their ancestral culture. Hindu traditions are still vibrant.
37:28 It would be more accurate to characterize the modern classes as being a framework where your eligibility for membership in a social class is not based on birth. This is because economist Gregory Clark claims in his book "The Son also Rises" and his recent papers that the rate of social mobility in the long term has not increased from pre-modern society to modern society both in the West and outside the West, and this rate in the long term is very slow in virtually all societies including modern societies of the West. So, if these claims of Clark are true, social class in all modern societies can be said to be mostly based on birth (but the eligibility is not.)
39:18 Actually, in pre-modern Hindu society, although it was mostly agricultural, Hindu hunter-gatherer communities were living, thriving and were happy. They had a harmonious and strong relationship with the Hindus living in agriculture-dependent society. So, pre-modern Hindu society was not completely agricultural. It is, now, in the modern Indian state that these Hindu hunter-gatherers have to leave their way of life. Read the paper: Gardner (2013), “Understanding anomalous distribution of hunter-gatherers”, Current Anthropology.
39:59 Diversity is neither inherently good nor inherently bad. It is just that good and sustainable frameworks of culture generally produce diversity and not homogeneity. Diversity is not a useful signal. That is to say, a culture that has more diversity is not necessarily better. But, homogeneity is a useful signal of a unsustainable or bad framework for a society. So, I would not say that the war on diversity and establishing homogeneity is itself a problem but would say that homogeneity in a society is a signal for a unsustainable or bad framework being applied for a society. These are subtle points.
42:10 Can we say that democracy is anarchic in a sense (partly because of the doctrine of separation of powers, etc.) and thus weakens the state even in a military way? Well-designed autocratic one-party non-communist states with non-hereditary leaders may be generally more stable in this modern era of exponential technology and economic growth, all other unrelated things being equal. Modern education in schools, etc. has also a role to play in promoting the ideology and behaviour that supports democracy, among people.
45:44 I disagree that Hindutva cannot be applied in social life. Hindutva can mean many things to many Hindus, and in my view, Hindutva is conservative and not under liberalism. Self-identified followers of Hindutva do not constitute its actual representatives. In my opinion, traditionalists like you should not abandon being under the label "Hindutva" and should adopt that label. To illustrate, you may end up agreeing with what Chandranath Basu wrote about what Hindutva is. To give another example, if hypothetically some Hindus, even the majority of Hindus, use the term Arya in a racial sense, that does not mean traditionalists like you should abandon that term. Hindutva seems to be a beautiful name, and it may not be wise to abandon this term.
50:15 This is not the dichotomy between nature and culture. Hindu culture existed in a nature-culture continuum, and there, both nature and culture are under Dharma.
50:22 In my view, both the terms "monotheism" and "polytheism" may not be useful for describing the Hindu religion and, in my view, should not be applied to the Hindu religion. These terms originate from the Abrahamic context anyway. Many Hindu followers of many Hindu sects may be correctly simultaneously able to say that “I believe in and worship only the only one true god (i.e. Ishwara)” and “I believe in and worship many gods (who are forms of Ishwara)”. So, “monotheism” and “polytheism” may not be useful terms for describing the Hindu religion and maybe many other non-Abrahamic religions like maybe some of those in China and in ancient Egypt. "Primary religions" and "secondary/counter religions" (terms likely coined by Jan Assmann) may be more useful terms. The Hindu religion is a primary religion like many pagan religions, etc. Secondary religions include the doctrine of the prophet Zarathustra (on which Hindus for whatever reason tend to not focus on; it is a religion that seems to claim that the deva are basically false gods and its follower(s) seems to have persecuted the Hindu religion in Gandhara under the rule of Xerxes; many scholars say that it had a profound influence on Judaism during the Babylonian exile of Jews; the Parsis in India don’t try to proactively convert Hindus as of yet partly because the Hindu king who gave them shelter in India gave them an explicit condition that they have to not engage in proactive conversion), Atenism and the three Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. But, I believe in Hindu exceptionalism among the primary religions.
55:00 This may not be the correct picture in the case of the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. If we take Judaism, for example, features of many other gods like Baal may have been assimilated to YHWH and then, YHWH was made the omnipotent God of the entire universe and his earlier features of being associated with the land of Israel, being associated with storms, etc. were made very less relevant.
1:06:26 All sects of the Hindu religion do not accept the Veda as apaurusheya and eternal. Nyaya, Vaisheshika and Shaiva Siddhanta did not/does not seem to accept the Veda as apaurusheya, although the former two accept it as the highest authority. Yoga and Samkhya seem to accept the Veda as apaurusheya but not eternal. I don't know the views of the Kashmiri Shaiva sect. (I accept the Veda as apaurusheya.)
1:06:38 Was it really common sense in ancient India? Would a 17th-century follower of Vedanta really agree that it is common sense to say that the Veda was written by a man? Likely not.
1:07:05 Many rishis like maybe Janaka, Vishwamitra, Jamadagni and Panini were not likely born as rishi. Panini additionally was born in Kali yuga, according to tradition.
1:09:35 As far as I know, Madhvacharya in Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya seems to claim that there are interpolations in the text of Mahabharata (I am not a follower of the Madhva sect). And, many present-day acarya also seem to say that the text of Bhavishya Purana is interpolated. So, such claims of interpolations seem to be have been made by acarya (although such claims seem to be not for reformist aims.)
1:12:50 Satyan Sharma (Twitter: @sharmasatyan ) says that there was no bar on reading the Veda in the written form. And, we did have manuscripts of the Veda even before the promotion of the printing press.
1:15:32 The ideologies derived from the European Enlightenment and the French revolution may be better described as heresies of Christianity as Islam is likely a heresy of Christianity (to illustrate, Islam is likely a heresy of but not a form of Christianity.)
1:17:47 Doesn't this seem contradictory to your statements in other videos where you cite the work of Sufiya Pathan et al to say that SC/ST are very safe in India, and your retweet of the tweet of Neha Das some days ago also claiming that SC/ST are very safe in India? You should clarify this point a bit more.
Yes vedas are eternal but were written 5000 years ago....😂😂😂
You don't make any sense
@@mrsubramanian-hy9xbNo Ashish Dhar doesn't make sense..acknowledging they were written by humans at some point in the past, then calling them eternal 😂😂
@@Himanshu_Khichar Their teachings mate not the what they were written on. It's not that hard to understand.
@@mrsubramanian-hy9xb Anyone can write a book containing known and objective truths and then claim that his book is eternal. What's unique about the Vedas? If Vedas' teachings are eternal and there are thousands of books in human history which can be called eternal.
@@Himanshu_Khichar Why did you make the assumption that if the Vedas hold eternal truths, then that other bookes can't?
The Vedas contain information regarding rituals, spiritualism, mantras, rules and more, essentially a meant for people to live and learn through.
In Hinduism, they are the most important texts. If you don't accept them, then sure I'm no one to police you but don't go around embarrassing yourself and making unfunny jokes in an effort to spite people. It just reflects on you or your insecurities.
If the Vedas are eternal because they supposedly contain eternal truths, then a math textbook listing out theorems of a particular field of mathematics is also eternal in that sense of the word😂😂😂😂
You mean axioms, and not theorems. The interpretation of mathematical axioms is subject to relativity. Eg. The curvature of space-time is due to the distribution of mass and energy, which is relative to the observer's frame of reference. Sit down.
@@Upword No saar....I don't mean "axioms" by "theorems", why are you deliberately being ignorant? For example, a simple theorem of elementary geometry like "the sum of lengths of any two sides of a triangle is greater than the third side" is a theorem, and I believe it's an eternal truth independent of humans knowing it, and so if there is a book which has description of all such theorems of elementary Euclidean geometry is, by your understanding, "eternal".
So what's different about the Vedic eternality?
Axioms, not theorems, because theorems are not self-evident. We were steel-manning your position. What is valid for axioms is obviously valid for theorems derived therefrom. If the axioms are interpreted based on the observer's frame of reference, so are the theorems. In other words, Euclidean theorems are obviously valid for Euclidean space ONLY. In any case, it is not hard to observe that this video is not about Euclidean geometry. It is about the Hindu tradition, whose epistemology is entirely different from the epistemology of geometry. We empathise with you for not being able to grasp this fundamental difference but it is what it is. For starters, Vedas are the supreme pramana, which implies that they are not dependent on sensory data. As a Nastika, you are well within your right to not accept this claim but we were discussing the astika tradition. This may be out of syllabus for you and we strongly recommend going back to your math textbook.
@@Upword *"Euclidean theorems are obviously valid for Euclidean space ONLY"*
Sure...but within the Euclidean space, those theorems are independent of humans or any other observer..the statement that "the sum of any two sides of triangles is greater than the third side" was true when there were no humans and will be true when there are no humans, so it's "eternal" in your sense.
*"If the axioms are interpreted based on the observer's frame of reference..."*
Says who? Axioms, as defined in mathematics, are self-evident statements, what makes you say they are interpreted in the observer's frame of reference? The axiom "a+b=b+a for any two real numbers a and b" depends on the observer according to you?
Plus, the same fact applies to your Vedic statements as well, and it's more applicable to that because once you go to a different culture outside of India, they don't accept Vedic claims or
perform rituals prescribed in the Vedas, so how come the Vedas are eternal and a math textbook is not?
*"this video is not about Euclidean geometry*"
Yeah sure, lol...I brought its example to counter your argument.😒😒
*"whose epistemology is entirely different from the epistemology of geometry"*
Yeah and Islamic and Christian epistemology too is different from that of the Vedic...it doesn't prove that it's the right epistemology just by being different.
*"Vedas are the supreme pramanas"*
"...for Hindus", yes.
"they are not dependent on sensory data"
What does that even mean? And anyway, French philosopher Rene Descartes gave the statement "I think, therefore, I am", which also doesn't require any sensory data but is purely based on rational contemplation. And I can give many such examples. But nobody goes around saying "I think, therefore, I am" is an eternal truth.
@@Upword *"Euclidean theorems are obviously valid for Euclidean space ONLY"*
Sure...but within the Euclidean space, those theorems are independent of humans or any other observer..the statement that "the sum of any two sides of triangles is greater than the third side" was true when there were no humans and will be true when there are no humans, so it's "eternal" in your sense.
*"If the axioms are interpreted based on the observer's frame of reference..."*
Says who? Axioms, as defined in mathematics, are self-evident statements, what makes you say they are interpreted in the observer's frame of reference? The axiom "a+b=b+a for any two real numbers a and b" depends on the observer according to you?
Plus, the same fact applies to your Vedic statements as well, and it's more applicable to that because once you go to a different culture outside of India, they don't accept Vedic claims or
perform rituals prescribed in the Vedas, so how come the Vedas are eternal and a math textbook is not?
*"this video is not about Euclidean geometry"*
Yeah sure, lol...I brought its example to counter your argument.😒😒
*"whose epistemology is entirely different from the epistemology of geometry"*
Yeah, and Islamic and Christian epistemology too is different from that of the Vedic...it doesn't prove that it's the right epistemology just by being different.
*"Vedas are the supreme pramanas"*
"...for Hindus", yes.
"they are not dependent on sensory data"
What does that even mean? And anyway, French philosopher Rene Descartes gave the statement "I think, therefore, I am", which also doesn't require any sensory data but is purely based on rational contemplation. And I can give many such examples. But nobody goes around saying "I think, therefore, I am" is an eternal truth.
I think a conversation with @acharyaprashant is need of the hour
That's needed urgently