Race empowerment

In meditation, one’s aim is to surpass duality and attain non-attachment. However, the possibility of doing so is utterly dependent on your bio-frame confinement and limitation. Racial pigment and DNA dictate bio-frame confinement insofar as advanced meditation is concerned. There are ofcourse several other configurations that control DNA, but secular science has not figured them out yet, and I am not permitted to indicate them.

The meditation pathway is a very precise one. Non-human animals are in many cases superior to human-animals in as much as experience and maintenance of awakening state is concerned. The human-animal is caught in the illusionary frame, where it seeks to maintain superior awakening; while a veil is thrown over the consciousness of its psychology and its physical ability, predilection for desire, envy, and greed. These, in connection with the most vile ideas, produce new human lows that become the new normal.

Where a human does advance – maintaining detachment and aloofness while remaining kind, thoughtful, and selfless in their endeavours – then they move from the raw skin of the race-Europeans into a semi-pigmented skin tone. However, they retain their deeply negative hate psychology. Such development conjoined with hate refers to a group called the Muslims and/or the ultra right-wing orthodox.

However, if a Muslim or ultra right-wing orthodox advancing person continues to maintain a detached, aloof, selfless and thoughtful demeanour, it is reborn within the global influential sphere-space known as the landmass of India.

Having birthright in India, initially in northern India to be precise, the same obstacles have to be surmounted as before. The human-animal advances to the next birth-stage, which takes place in the south India genetic framework. Advancement from here moves into the darker skins associated with African and Aboriginal genetic frameworks.

Yet those of advanced genetic framework – Africans, Aborigines, and Indians among them – have in recent centuries been brutally conquered by vulgar and thoughtless race-European killing mechanisms and armaments. Globally, brutality was the byword of the race-European presence across the world, in exactly the same way as the ultra-orthodox Muslim presence is perceived today. It was ‘our way or death’.

But India has never seen the invader as an invader. The victims may be the Indians, but according to their psyche the humiliation is the invaders’ alone. Low level, un-evolved, fresh out of the mire of the marshes – this is how Indians historically have seen the invader; something to be pitied rather than a source of advanced theosophical concepts and realism.

Race-European ideas of imposition and subjugation are regarded by the Indian psyche as alien and retrograde. India’s maturity affords it the possibility of regarding the invader as a friend from whom to learn, and who no doubt will become part of the land as s/he learns about it. But make no mistake, while the British Raj is seen by British people as an exercise in power, to Indians you came as a bunch of idiots, and you left having learned very little about personal spiritual progress.

Now, Indians’ inner psyche tenders two options for dealing with the invader in their midst: (1) lose their advanced awakening state by mimicking the behaviour of the invader, and thus give up countless lifetimes of progress to accommodate and mirror the ignorance of the disdained and lowly invader, or (2) maintain their hard-earned advanced meditation status, and stay true to the ethos that is instilled in them from birth, namely, that each life has a purpose as well as its own reasoning complex.

And herein lays my current problem with Indians who land high positions in any given sector of a race-European institution. They attempt (very badly) to mimic race-European attitudes and behaviours. Their psyche counsels against this, which is why you often hear them exasperatedly proclaim that ‘the goras (whites) just don’t get it’. But regardless, these Indians continue to mimic the race-European. In doing so, they are forced into limiting their own ecological and spiritual solutions to the drive for enhanced productivity, where profits are not the sole criteria and responsibility to nature is paramount.

Take, for example, crime and punishment. Prior to the annex of Panjab, and India in general, the concept of theft didn’t exist. Sikhism and its kingdom was founded upon the concept of no wrong-doing at a personal level, such that even a murderer was exempt from prison but was made to work on his emotional state while working and living within the community. In the same historical period, people were hung for stealing an apple or a loaf of bread in Britain. Imprisonment without trial was unheard of in non-Muslim India and during the Sikh Raj of Panjab; whereas in Britain people were thrown in dungeons without trial for the most frivolous of reason.

Indians in the UK police force must bring the Indian mindset and viewpoint to bear on tackling crime here. So, for example, a person driving over the speed limit on a clear motorway should not be penalised, since nobody other than the driver and/or car occupants are affected. This is the kind of common-sense and humanity-based approach that Indian police officers should strive to instill in the police force, rather than mimicking their race-European colleagues. They must become vocal about applying commonsense interpretations and judgments when dealing with an incident.

The problem with breaking a problem down into it core elements, rather than taking a holistic and contextual approach, is that humans end up treating each other like machines.

We are not machines.

We require laws that reflect humanity, and human subjectivity in all matters. English law is geared for organizing society like a machine whose parts must be kept in good working order, but which is automated and un-human. It accepts only right or wrong; there is no grey area. This is perfect for running and maintaining an automated production line, but not for dealing with humans.

My call to Indians – and indeed other races – is not to mimic race-Europeans. You may think that in doing so you’re on a fast-track to equality. But as I argued in my previous post on female empowerment, equality is a nonsense; dignity must be the aim of all.

I leave you with one question – and be honest with yourself when answering: Precisely how materially and spiritually evolved do you think race-Europeans, including Anglo-Saxons, can possibly be after four hundred years and counting of killing darker skin-toned people across the globe?

And you want to be equal with them?!

No, me neither.

Advertisements

MYTH: UK’S INTEGRATION HYPE INCITEMENT TO MURDER

Having lived in the United Kingdom for over 50 years I thought I had seen all the good, bad and ugly that Great Britain has to offer. Yet since the mid-70s I have held the view that I am living in the UK on borrowed time, as integration is solely dependent on the indigenous people’s willingness to allow dignified cultural and religious disparity to take place while maintaining equal access to resources and amenities for all.

I recall vividly the degrading and disgusting names Sikhs were called regarding their turban, as well as in reference to their brown colour skin and their consumption of garlic, onion and ginger-enriched food.

In those days, out of sheer politeness and maturity in the face of what they recognised as the retarded mentality of the locals, the Asians in the UK kept their opinions about the natives to themselves.

Then race laws were introduced, banning racist references. Equality became enshrined in law. Cooperation and coexistence seemed feasible and, on the whole, tolerance, understanding and mutual appreciation evolved over the ensuing decades.

On 7th Oct 2017, I ventured into the social media platform of Facebook for the first time. Using a photo of myself and an Indian nickname that also sounded a tad anglicized, I joined several groups. One of these was called “ALL JOKES, ONE LINERS AND GREAT GAGS WITH REASONABLE ADMIN”. The group had 18,600 members, made no bones about the fact that it was a hard-hitting, over-the-top, no-holds-barred, adult humour group. I was happy joining since my humour and second-rate wit can on most occasions hold their own; and of course, the group wasn’t likely to throw anything at me that I had not heard before. Approval to join the group came through and I began to read the posts.

As promised, the FB group was hyper-racist, homophobic and misogynist to the core. Reference to female genitalia was an accepted and standard norm in the construction of any given sentence by the contributors, who were white men. I only came across two women: one with a sensible, middle-of-the-road humour and wit, and the other engaging in badly disguised full-on race hatred.

I introduced myself to the group, my profile image visibly establishing me as a Sikh gentleman with a full grey beard and a white turban. I wrote that I had already heard most, if not all, of the stuff they were likely to hurl at me, and that rest assured I would give as good as I got.

Right from the start, my religion and turban were targeted. Indeed, an initial remark used the exact same wording we Sikhs used to hear in the 1960s. This means that although racism was successfully removed from open public dialogue decades ago, it has been passed down the generations, from great-grandfathers through to great-grandchildren. Without hesitation, I retorted with a frank put-down, which silenced the guy who made the racist remark. He never made a comment to me again. I, in my social media naivete, thought he had gone on holiday until I was told he had blocked me. It became clear to me that I was dealing with grown men who could dish it out but became cry babies when it came to taking it.

Generally, I would make an observation, draw people into responding, and then fend them off with a sophisticated put-down, leaving a third person who was observing the exchange to smile and ask the other person, ‘What does it feel like to be played?

Rather than take it all in good grace, once the members of the FB group realised I could match their observational humour, the gloves came off. Explicitly degrading and disgusting religious, racial, cultural and dietary remarks came thick and fast.

By this time, I was on my third day into this experience. Concerned that there were zero non-white contributors, I scoured the list of group members and found pages and pages of people with African and Southeast Asian images and names – who had never participated in the group at all and seemed, to all intents and purposes, to be fake accounts. They were a front for the UK natives to spout their vitriolic race-hatred could flourish unbounded. The penny dropped that this was the real underbelly of the ordinary natives of Great Britain: their race hatred had flourished throughout the decades, and been passed down through the generations. It did not begin with Brexit.

The attacks on me by members of the FB group became more personal and direct. Seven days later, I decided to write my first post. I informed the group that in many cases their names, when translated into Asian languages, have explicit toilet meanings; and that they, like the rest of the animal world, have disgusting body odour, bad breath and stinky homes. In fact, if they were to meet an honest South-east Asian, this person would tell them that the average European’s freshly-washed smell is like sick.

Well, I could not believe it, my post disappeared. I inquired about what had happened to it. Terrance Ward, one of the group administrators, wrote back: ‘Didn’t you get the message?’ ‘What message is that?’ I asked in all innocence. I had been blocked. Given that the FB group was advertised as an adult, no-holds-barred humour group and its members posted the same, why block me when I had suffered a whole gambit of racial, cultural, religious and dietary abuse?

I left it there, trying to see the funny side of the group’s hypocrisy. My last exchange with them was on 13th October 2017.

Since then, I and my 70 yr old sister have suffered an onslaught of race-hate intimidation, leaving both of us in no doubt that we, and especially me, are going to be killed. The type of race-hate that was the norm in the 1960s is alive and well in our locality. All the Anglo-Saxons of our area check out the car when we are out driving, then the car registration number, and me with my white turban. In the initial days following the final denouncement of my FB group experience, a volley of venomous racial abuse spewed from their mouths. The underlying violent intent was immediately evident, and required only a trigger to be unleashed.

We reported the matter to the police. They noted the details of our case and our genuine belief that we are going to be murdered. The local community police officers contacted us subsequently, and set in motion the requisite procedures.

Like all people, our days follow a set itinerary. It is incredibly easy to log our movements and target us. Thus, regardless where we travel in our locality we are targeted. They, the rednecks, work in teams via multimedia mobile phones: logging the time they see us, they pass the message onwards about the direction we’re traveling, and as soon as we reach a certain landmark another two lookouts are already there waiting to check us out and pass the information further down the line. This has now translated into the message going out to a collective and who-so-ever thereafter notices us feeds back our movement information.

We take photos of them, and their car registrations numbers. WE HAVE THE NAMES AND PHOTOS OF THE CONTRIBUTORS FROM THE FACEBOOK GROUP “ALL JOKES, ONE LINERS, AND GREAT GAGS WITH REASONABLE ADMIN”… AND WE WILL NOT HESITATE TO PUT THESE ONLINE ACROSS SEVERAL MEDIA SITES IN ORDER TO OUT THESE RACIST PSYCHOPATHS.

Now, the question for Anglo-Saxons is this: If you, the indigenous can dish out racist toilet humour then how come you guys can’t take it?

All of a sudden the British bulldogs have turned into pussies? Integration and tolerance means verbal abuse is a two-way street. But for you Anglo-Saxons it just seems to mean that you get to rant, rave, and blame ‘others’ for everything without showing any modicum of maturity. You dish out abuse but can’t take the truth that comes your way. And an inferiority complex and low self-esteem leads you to kill rather than accept that, to others, perhaps your names do reference toilet habits, and you do smell.

You’re a race of psychopaths.

The media who represent you – e.g. The Daily Mail, The Daily Express and a selection of LBC radio presenters – should do the honourable thing for once and publicly announce what you and they really believe: that integration is bullshit (before returning to their usual racial venom).

Because real integration means that if you’re going to indulge in degrading racial abuse towards others, you have to accept the same back.

Bandi Chor – Divali

Until very recently, the late 20th century to be exact, Divali was celebrated by Sikhs in the same manner as Hindus. Divali, in fact, is a very old tradition that pre-dates the Vedas – recalling a time where Arya, coming from India, had dominion over the planet and indeed the solar system.

So it was deeply saddening to see ardent Sikhs desperate to make the Hindu (Indian) government see sense, and stop them labeling everyone a Hindu…a term which is now publicly acknowledged by Hindu academics to be a far worse pejorative than the ‘N’ word of north America, as it was used by Arabs and Persians to denote dwellers of old India prior to and after its conquest.

That the federal states of the Arya landmass stretched from Iceland to Moscow and from the top of Scandinavia to the north of Africa, and incorporated countless countries, languages, cultures, and independent histories that at times have been interwoven, does not mean that Hindus can now claim all dwellers within the artificial federal collective are Hindu…as if retrospectively adding Sikhs into the Hindu mix could repair the latter’s utter lack of self-worth and add a glamorous component.

It is the Hindu lack of self-worth that has led the Hindu Government to insist that Sikh marriage is a Hindu ceremony, and that Sikh culture, linguistics, rites, rituals, spirituality and divinity are Hindu too. It is insulting, abusive, and hurtful, and irrational to claim that my unique separate identity makes me a Hindu.

Therefore, speaking from a platform of free education and unfettered by Sikh material research, I can fully understand the Sikh demand for separation from the Hindu Government. Just to avoid the pain of being labelled Hindu, Sikhs have developed an entirely new – incorrect – calendar, attached to a solar cycle that utterly goes against the writing of their Guru Granthsahibji.

In their bid to escape the stigma of false identification as Hindu, Sikhs have also evolved a separate Divali festival. Divali for Sikhs now stands for freedom from oppression and incarceration. It has become rooted in the story of an illegally incarcerated person’s selfless demand to accept amnesty only if the same were extended to his fellow political prisoners. His jailor agreed that anybody who could hold on to his clothing would be freed along with him.

The innovative Sikh prisoner requested fresh clothes to wear ahead of his release from his lengthy prison sentence. His fellow Sikhs arrived with a newly sewn coat, which as his fellow prisoners gathered to bid him farewell they were encouraged to hold onto. Fifty-two prisoners were thus granted freedom.

How was this possible?

The Sikh prisoner requested that fifty-two very long tails be sewn into the coat’s natural design.

This Sikh is non other than the sixth Sikh Guruji, Guru Hargobindji; and his jailor Emperor Jahangir. The fifty-two prisoners released with him were royal heads of states. Some of their descendants went on to play a pivotal behind-the-scenes role in India’s independence.

The prison where Guruji was held was located in a garrison town called Gwalior, about 800km south of Amritsar. His journey back to Amritsar would have taken him anywhere from 80 to 100 days, whether on horseback or on foot. He would have traversed a mostly jungle- but also hilly terrain, marked by dirt roads in the best case scenario; and his entourage would have swelled and dwindled along the way, as it passed through various villages and towns.

Guruji’s estimated arrival in Amritsar would have been mid to late January. The event itself would have been marked with a comprehensive diva-lit welcome as was, and remains, the tradition of India.

Thus, for Sikhs, Divali is a longer event than just a one day festival. It begins at Divali as we generally know it, and culminates on the night of Guruji’s arrival at Darbarsahibji, Amritsar – a date which the panth through its research must eventually decide upon, and which will in future years herald the end of the Sikh celebrations of Divali.

Sikh Turban, Women & Dasam Granth

The turban of old signified authority, supreme evolved thought, balanced judicial judgment, chivalry, integrity, gallantry, graciousness, politeness, honesty, and deference to higher authority and thought.

In the same way that the system of female global leadership, supported by male life-partners, fell into disarray, so the prestige of the turban fell from grace… until the Sikh elite (the Khalsa) was formed and made to bear secular responsibility.

Following the last evolutionary realignment, seers and sants were unequivocally instructed to shed their aloof dispositions, and instead live their lives of advanced awareness while also fully participating in the secular world, lest their spiritual progress be permanently stopped. This strata of the secular sant is embodied in the Khalsa – the elite of advanced awakening.

The first five Khalsa were beheaded. They lay prone, until Guriji fused together heads and bodies (not in their original configurations, it should be noted) and administered amrit, produced and infused with female energy via Mataji. The beheaded came back to life. But they were not yet invested with the ethical responsibility required of them and that was to be part of their hyphenated secular-spiritual existence moving forward.

The investiture of secular roles and responsibilities for the Khalsa came in the form of the five articles of faith. The first of these, unshorn hair, signifies creation, which is protected and celebrated by the five-metre long male turban and the three-metre long female chunni. The male turban and the female chunni are therefore one and the same.

The turban signals to others that the wearer is ready to defend and protect the weak and oppressed; and women need only wear the turban if no men are available to carry out their responsibility, and only in a context of war and hand-to-hand combat.

For a woman to wear a turban outside of these conditions is an insult to men; it questions the latter’s capacity to fulfill their secular responsibility and it casts aspersions on their valour.

‘Educated’ Sikhs, however, have argued that the turban may be worn by women as well as men. Indeed, they positively demand this ‘freedom’, stating that Guruji instructs the very same. Their claim refers to a poem written by one of the Gurujis. Now, poems as we know are full of metaphor and allegory. They are artistic productions in which poets – like the particular Guruji noted here, who wrote fluently in five languages – take liberties with language to produce certain lyrical and rhythmic effects. And when rendering this in multiple languages… well, we all know the innate untranslatability of words across different languages… then the task becomes one of reaching for a sense and meaning that fits with that language.

So, those who call upon the particular poem in question here to support their claim and ‘right’ for females to wear the male turban, and who see in the poem an injunction to do so, in fact see nothing of the poem beyond their own imperfect interpretation – itself a dynamic product of their individual, social, cultural, political and ideological milieu. To fully know the poem, they really ought in fact to master poetry and the five languages in which Guruji wrote – leaving their own literal reading of the poem, which reflects nothing more than their own desires, at the door.

An important point here: the poem is attributed to a particular Guruji despite being penned in a language whose vocabulary and syntax made use of diacritical marks that post-date the Guruji. This along with several individual theses, pothis and books was eventually brought together into a single volume in 1890. This volume is the Dasam Granth. It contains Jaap Sahibji and Benti Chaupeeji – both of which are inaccurately attributed to Guru Gobind Singhji. These poems (for they are not banis) were subsequently integrated into morning and evening Sikh prayers – confusing and needlessly so.

The alleged poetry by Guru Gobind Singhji forms part of the Dasam Granth and sits side by side with poetry that embellishes eroticism, including BESTIALITY, along with five extremely erotic practices written in detailed pornographic terms alongside mantric and tantric material (which would include kundalini yoga). The entire volume appeals neatly to those within Hinduism who are on the cusp of leaving it in dissatisfaction, and who are mesmerised by the pure subjective Sikhism of Sri Guru Granth Sahibji. And in this volume, long hair or a full untrimmed beard is not a prerequisite; however, ‘keski’ the smaller under-turban, is sanctioned. Based on this misinterpretation contained in Dasam Granth indication is apparently given to wear a turban as one of the five Ks instead of hair – or so it is argued by the likes of the Akhand Kirtani Jatha amongst others. In that case, bestiality is also acceptable, is it?

It is a red herring to assume that the term ‘Dasam’ invokes Guru Gobind Singhji’s authorship of the material contained therein. Sikhs have been thrown, and erroneously shepherded, into this assumption because the word is associated with the number 10, and of course Guru Gobind Singhji was the tenth Guruji. Not wishing to dishonour the elaborate work of Dasam Granth, the Sikh hierarchy gave the publication respect, as they would any other scripture. This accommodation then became the platform for the dissatisfied exiting Hindus into Sikhism to argue in favour of the alleged poems of Guru Gobind Singhji to be formally included into the mainstream Sikh prayers.

One has to consider the period in which this took place. Sikhs had faced an almost total wipeout, with more than forty percent of its population killed during two encounters against an overwhelming army. Thus, any new recruits into Sikhism were positively welcomed, and they held sway. It was a pivotal moment, therefore, when compromises were made including acknowledging the alleged poem – that is the crux of the argument by those favouring female turban-wearing – by Guru Gobind Singhji as a formal bani. In the case of Jaap Sahibji and Benti Chaupeeji, once these attained bani status their integration into formal morning and evening prayers was a mere formality. Unfortunately, until Sikh authority does not officially rescind the Dasam Granth banis to their original status as poetry, their controversial use and attribution remains.

Reverting….

The second point: the saddest part is loyalty to a thought, and inability to give up a cherished ideal, such as that of the under-turban as the formal arbiter of Sikh identity.

Additionally, why, I ask (up to this moment in time), are Sikh women using a literal (mis)reading of a poem to configure their self-worth around the right to wear the turban in place of the chunni, or even – as is happening – underneath it? Why adopt a form of purdah whose removal Guru Nanakdevji was pivotal in championing along with other freedoms and respect for women?

Guru Nanakdevji successfully championed the thought that only a free and trusted woman was capable of giving birth to a child born into freedom of thought and freedom from a slave mentality. Indeed, only with a woman’s permission could a child, especially a boy, be born. He maintained that women, of all races, ought to be responsible for their own sexuality and sense of sexual integrity. He impressed upon Sikhs that men had possessions, and women belongings; and that no man possessed the women in his life, but that they belonged to these women.

Guru Nanakdevji impressed about Sikhs that man is answerable to woman, not the other way around. It may often look like women take a back seat in public and let men run the show; but in Sikhism, ultimate authority lies with women.

So, why, I ask as a Gursikh who takes pride in dressing as chicly as possible, do exquisitely beautiful Sikh women feel the need to emulate men, and forego their natural beauty as women?

The very purdah that Guru Nanakdevji fought to bring you out of, you are now throwing back in his face. You are hell-bent on assuming the Muslim woman’s head-to-toe covering – yet, the Sikh fought to free women in India from slavery and from the religious injunctions of successive empires. Now, living in a free land, you chuck the valour and deaths of your ancestors back into their faces.

In times to come, medical procedures will make surgically attached fully-functioning penises available – will you demand those too, in order to feel fully human? It is not Sikhism which maintains gender inequality – but you are using Sikhism as the battleground for fighting the hierarchies and inequalities of the world around you…. and unfairly so.

Look to Sikhism. Understand that therein women are regarded as life’s teachers; men as life’s students. A man, having reached the highest echelons of inner awareness possible for man, can only aspire to the next layer of progress if he is born into the female phenomena. That is, man has to be born as woman in order to evolve further. This is a highly simplified version of a deeply complex, sometimes contradictory and confusing system, so I am keeping it simple… but consider this: religion tends to focus on men rather than on women, on teaching men of the faith rather than women.

As I said: women are life’s teachers; men, life’s students.

And yet, here you are – so many of you Sikh women today – fighting for a right to be like your men, when you’re already so much more advanced than them. But, go on, please, trample over all the hard-won struggles of your forbears in the Sikh faith, seek out turbans today, penises tomorrow.

Sister/Brother responsibility, India style: “RAKHRI”

Psychically, women are superior to men and embody considerateness, forgiveness, and tolerance. However, at the conscious level – a level that cannot unmask the psychic layer – it is the brute strength of man that dominates. Men are rustic, manual, multi-dimensionally unskilled, emotionally limited, and bereft of inter-personal skills

Thus, in marriage and cohabitation, whether arranged or love-based, women always accommodate male intrusion and direction.

The situation is more marked for young girls who are married off. A young girl married off into a new setting, a new environment, a new family structure is at the bottom of that family’s pecking order in every way. She is, to all intents and purposes, defenceless and powerless.

To balance this inequality, a mature thought-based mechanism was put in place, whereby a woman’s opinions and thoughts could be represented by a male who had known her since childhood. The person had to be from her age group, and was usually her brother or her first male cousin.

The brother, acting both as his sister’s representative, and as his father’s ambassador, would appeal to his sister’s in-laws. If the appeal fell on deaf ears, then the woman’s paternal uncle’s would make the representation instead. And if that failed, then her father came and spoke privately to her husband’s father to resolve matters.

Representations and interventions by a woman’s paternal uncle signaled that the matter was serious. For her father to get directly involved signaled that the matter was nigh-on intransigent and insurmountable.

The role of the brother in assuming his sister’s or cousin-sister’s welfare is, by contrast, part of everyday social relationships. He counters his brother-in-law’s physical threat, safeguards his sister, acts as the link between two families, and assumes a critical role and set of observational responsibilities towards the welfare, rights and education of his sister’s children.

The day that commemorates this responsibility is called Rakhri, or Rakhari, or Raksha.

On this day, a sister ties a thick, symbolic, coloured cotton thread on her brother’s right wrist, and she feeds him barfi – a sweet made from milk, ghee, and honey/sugar. He in response, promises to protect and safeguard her interests in the coming year.

Originally, the promise took the form of a promissory note. In time, this was replaced by a nominal amount of money.

By the way, it is worth noting that Rakhri is not a Hindu festival. It is and always was a global, communal, mature, ancient festival that pre-dates the advent of Vedic concept.

The annual gesture of acknowledgement and promise, by sister and brother, indicates divine ethos and humanity. Arguably, a culture that finds such gestures inimical to their own belief degrades their own humaneness and divine connection. So, I ask those of you who are anti-brother/sister celebration of Rakhri – which this year took place on 7th August – what exactly is your problem???

Reflections on proposed caste discrimination legislation: or ‘What is this thing called caste?’

The question I put to the British parliament is this; Why is her Majesty and the entire stratum she occupies not included in the proposed caste law, and why is it limited to race and aimed only at South Asians as it is currently tabled?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary definitions of caste are as follows:

  • One of the hereditary social classes in Hinduism that restrict the occupation of their members and their association with members of other castes.
  • A division of society based on differences in wealth, inherited rank, or privilege, profession, occupation or race.
  • The position conferred by caste standing.
  • A system of rigid social stratification characterized by hereditary status, endogamy, and social barriers sanctioned by custom, law, or religion.

My argument:

Please read Caste, Class and Community in India: An Ethnography Approach by Balmurli Natrajan (William Paterson University).

The article’s argument supports my view that we are confusing class/economic distinctions with caste, such that the economic status of social groups is being projected onto, and even conflated with, social caste.

The fact is that like-minded social groups gel and function together as they have intimate nuanced understanding that cannot be accessed by other groups. To put it another way: we humans are neither psychologically nor socially identical, and do not share the same life experiences. This does not, at least in various Indian cultures, emerge as prejudice but is rather a form of snobbishness verging at times on hostility.

Precisely because of this, it makes sense therefore that individual social groups practice social endogamy and establish their own kinship clubs – Gurdwaras are a case in point. And they should be encouraged in doing so.

My point is that caste is a paradigm encased in structured cosociality rather than in subjugation and unequal power relations.

(And if we are talking about the latter, it is worth noting that I have repeatedly experienced rejection by well-to-do so-called lower castes – which blows apart the idea that oppression works in one direction only!)

The problem with the proposed legislation against caste discrimination is that it is embedded in the notion that caste is a form of unequal class/economics relations. It simply does not recognise the cosociality of caste as a valid, necessary and comforting form of in-group identity.

But consider this: in playgroups, babies can clearly be seen exhibiting strong likes and dislikes towards each other; they congregate in like-minded groups. Who taught them such prejudice? No-one. We human-animals psychologically attach ourselves to, and associate and intermingle with like minds.

This is not prejudice. What precisely it is, we have yet to sort out.

Now, for those who say caste as practiced today – in the form of class/economic inequality and hostility – is a historical phenomenon within South Asian societies… go learn your history!

Buddhism, Sikhism and Vedism in earlier times – before Bharat lost her substantial lands and succumbed to successive periods of colonization – did not apply caste divisions as we understand them today.

Indeed, caste division is not ‘Indian’ at all. It began in the west as a form of rigid social organisation whereby people were not permitted to work outside the occupational bandwidths set by the state, as happening to trades people in the United States. The Roman Empire relied on this to protect itself from implosion. Thus, caste refers in this sense to established western practices of restricting people to certain occupational domains, which restricted them socially and economically.

Such casteism continues to operate in the west today, as a cursory examination of recent English history illustrates. The cost of moving beyond the barriers of one’s caste was experienced by King Edward VIII when he deigned to marry Wallis Simpson – he had to abdicate. Even Prince Charles was not permitted to marry at will, but was shepherded into a marriage of convenience.

All of this is not to say that caste is not an aspect of Indian cultures. But as I noted earlier, it was certainly not a feature of earlier Buddhist, Sikh or Vedic societies, especially not in the western form of restricting people to particular occupational bandwidths.

Originally, in Bharat, children were given into the care of faith-teachers whose task was to find the appropriate occupation and role of their wards, and to encourage them to fulfil that. So, a farmer’s child with artisan skills would be encouraged in that direction, while the child of unskilled workers would move into farming if they exhibited the abilities for such work. It followed that people did not necessarily follow in their parents’ footsteps; they moved across groupings freely based on their skills-set.

It also follows that parents did not prize financial solvency when looking for life-partners for their children, rather they laid greater store by a prospective son- or daughter-in law’s capacity to manage their affairs responsibly and maturely.

However, older western societies have come to exert a strong influence on the modern construct that is Hinduism, which is itself the product of a socio-political revolution against the perceived rigidities of Vedic practices. Ironically, Hindusim has curated the kind of casteism for which the whole of India has become renowned, and which it erroneously embraces as an inalienable and intrinsic aspect of itself.

Consequently, we forget that caste refers to a bandwidth of in-group intimacies that in fact have been vital in enabling the successful transnational flow of people. Sikhs and others who moved to East Africa or to the United Kingdom were intrepid aspirants, but they were only able to ease the isolation that migration brings by congregating with others who shared their language, diet, rites and rituals, and who could advise them of local mores and provide a network of support.

Against the cosociality that caste traditionally referred to in older Indian societies and cultures, is the highly stratified system of difference which it exhibits in the west and which we forget to call out because we are so busy misunderstanding and denigrating our own eastern cultural heritages and practices.

And if we are in doubt as to the rigid boundaries that caste builds in the modern western world, let’s consider how our kids from North America and England emerge from university with degrees – equipping them to practice some trade or other, but which actively preclude them from switching trade or following another occupational strand. For that, they have to go right back to university and re-train, and get re-certified.

The same restrictions apply ofcourse to trades-people. Since the emphasis is on economic security and socio-economic mobility, very few people get to change occupational track despite showing flair and having accumulated skill-sets that make them ideal for jobs other than those they’ve been certified to do. The moral degeneracy of this situation is that it stratifies people, restricting them ‘to their own kind’. Yet, when they embody such stratification and hierarchy, we call them out and propose anti-caste legislation. When the system itself enforces this, why blame the people for imbibing it?!

And to what degree will anti-caste legislation be enforced? Will Gurdwaras have to provide a register of how many people of other castes (cosocial cultural groupings, as they themselves see it) attend in order to stay on the right side of the law? What counts as discrimination? Will I, as somebody who has repeatedly experienced discrimination from so-called lower castes, be safe-guarded and be able to pursue my case under law?

Will the British monarchy be allowed to continue to exist in its closed forms, while the average person on the street gets vilified for belonging to a group they know intimately and feel a sense of support, security and belonging with?

Clearly, I am missing the point of the anti-caste legislation, because it feels to me very much like a stick with which to beat Indians. And the best thing is, we Indians are culpable in this, because we know nothing of our own history or that of caste as a phenomenon.

Manufacturing fear

This essay was written in January 2015 after the French terrorist attack on satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, in which 22 died and a further 17 were injured. The core of the essay is easily transposed onto the terrorist events at Manchester Arena in May 2017.

For your information please google Wikipedia for the following:

i. List of terrorist incidents in France from 1800 to present day

ii. List of terrorist incidents in Great Britain

You will be shocked at the sheer scale of terror activities listed in Great Britain from 1960s to present day. It is as if we in the UK are living in a war zone, where Islamists are but pin-prick amateurs.

Over the course of the past few days Paris, France has experienced terror at the hands of five people. These included two brothers, an associate of theirs and his wife, and a teenager who initially drove the car for the two brothers. A few weeks earlier, in another mindless terror attack, grown men – probably fathers themselves – gunned down and killed innocent children and teachers at a school in Pakistan.

To make sense of the islamist terror attacks, I need to take you back in time, to Jerusalem.

A guy named Hazrat Muhammad was taking his locality by storm. (The Sufis – mystics beyond faith – were coerced and compelled into joining Hazrat’s movement). Hazrat himself was a psychic-medium of excellent quality, albeit not advanced in the awareness layer. His aim was to secure for the wandering caravan people of his time, people without limitation or boundary, a shared identity that would bind its members without them falling by the wayside or preventing them converting to religion. His community up to that point had a fluid conception about what passed for ritual and religion, as did Sufism until it was brought into the Mohammedan faith under force, duress or necessity. Then Sufism too became rigid and inflexible as time went on.

Hazrat’s vision for a central identity required that someone contrive a book of rules, basic tenets, to help guide a fledgling sect as it transformed into a society hoping to realise a dream. So, he penned his ideas.

In old India (Aryadesh) each aspirant announcing their inner awakening attended one of several centres of advanced learning (e.g. Varanasi) to test their theory, idea and concept. At these centres they were ridiculed, abused, called names, verbally attacked, or beaten, and imprisoned. These centres were the place where you either made your mark or failed. In Hazrat’s time, cities of advanced awareness existed in Tashkant in Uzbekistan, Baghdad in Iraq, and Tehran in Iran; whereas Kabul in Afghanistan and Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan were too far out. Lesser known cities of advanced awareness also existed in areas we now call Jordan, Abu Dhabi, Lebanon, Syria, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman – countries which were invented by the British, in conjunction with the French, after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire. As Makkah was nearer to Jerusalem, Hazrat headed to Jerusalem to test his ideals for a new kind of society.

The Hebrews, also known as Yahu-be, held sway in Jerusalem, and looked down on the nomadic communities, in about the same attitude and manner in which Untouchables in India are viewed. Hebrews were of the opinion that culture and civilisation stemmed from them, as did the Europeans much later with their belief that human civilisation began in some cave in France. Both were flummoxed when faced with evidence contrary to that belief; but their modern weaponry meant the locals of the new countries into which the Europeans ventured allowed the debate to rest in the latter’s favour. In the same way, Australian aborigines with their dream-time were and are to this day laughed at by Europeans, when in fact the aborigines are talking of actual facts of a bygone time and series of events; similarly, the Sikh in India are dismissed as wholly wrong along with their Sikh scriptures. And Hebrews in Jerusalem dismissed the caravan communities around them as a backward sub-human community.

Hazrat faced an uphill struggle to get his book stamped and accepted as a base guideline for his people’s development. Like all newcomers, Hazrat was badly treated. In fact very badly…

Allow me to digress for one moment…

Hebrew history has many a distortion to fact. Globally, we are told one Hebrew played a pivotal role in crucifying another Hebrew. In fact, the latter was a married man with two wives and several children, who retained regal authority and left the area. His family traveled through Europe and settled along the way, with some subsequently reaching Scandinavia. At each place they became the region’s rulers.

Oft quoted books, the Torah and New Testament, written by lawyers who were part of the religious elite as well as the homeopaths of the day, rewrote history and slotted in the argument of crucifixion in order to carry weight and secure pity in establishing their own creed. A creed based on victimisation and forgiveness, in which truth was, and is, a necessary casualty. Moreover, in fact, the tribal nature of the Hebrew people is evident in the manner Christianity evolved specifically, as a tool and vehicle of genocide laced in intolerance. Mirroring Hebrew idealism, Islam spews the same fanaticism. The Israel of today exhibits openly its intolerance and its use of the victim card. However, as a Sikh I have to accept and defend the Hebrew peoples’ right to behave and express their emotions as they see fit.

Back to Hazrat…

Hazrat was on a losing streak to begin with. Encouraged to convert and become Hebrew, he declined. His people had always suffered at the hands of the elite, as happens the world over to this day, so his refusal did not go down too well. To cut a long story short, Hazrat, a very sincere and determined fellow rewrote his book twice in order to appease the temple stalwarts in Jerusalem. Each time, the hierarchy found reasons to withhold approval. So, Hazrat re-worked his book yet again, but this time just left amongst his own people.

Hazrat’s initial writing is lost, or its pages eaten away by paper mites; whatever the reason, his initial book no longer exists. What we now have is interpretation, based on personal assumptions and concepts, of what the author wrote and meant. And the interpretation itself has several schools of thoughts in any case. Eventually, a newer book was devised; but the scions, stoked by compelling interpretation and infighting, turned to the kind of radical and polarized position we witness in Islam today. We read a reactionary set of rules of do’s and don’ts.

But Islam is not the only faith to have reinvented itself some time after the demise of its founder.

Buddhism has also divided itself into two opposing groups over the interpretation of its initiator’s original writings, which have been lost in antiquity. Furthermore, a third trend has evolved over time to include women as a separate independent entity wrapped in the hue that presents itself as original ethos Buddhism.

For further proof of how faiths have diverged from their original conception we can study Sikhism. Less than two hundred years after its establishment, it had three veins running and co-existing simultaneously. The fracture is papered over, but the division remains. One of the veins, the Namdhari Sikh movement, are like the later day European Christians who cobbled together a mixture of Celtic nature worship (a Brahma worship identical to Vedic ‘Hindu’ ritual) and Christian ethos, resulting in the confused notion of Christmas, and ‘new year’.

The Namdharis pay full respect to the Sikh scriptures, but interweave it with their own Brahmic, nature-based ritual. A further Sikh division evokes another fanatical aspect: revolving around the baptised Sikh. This new ‘sect’ is a group of angry people of both genders, who view all other Sikhs with disdain and contempt. The group is so fanatical that the women of this ‘sect’ wear turbans, mimicking the men, as if without that turban they would be denied their identity as Sikh. They also have a version of heaven, where their concept of heaven does not really exist, but the symbolism remains in their mind.

This new ‘sect’ within Sikhism in time will become intolerant of all other Sikhs, resulting in a massive fracture within Sikhism if emotions are not controlled. Their idea of meditation is repeatedly shouting a selection of mystical words from the Sikh scriptures. The energised, angry shouting depletes their bio-system of oxygen, and they experience the lack of oxygen as the experience of a deeper connection. They give me the hardest time, such that I refrain from visiting a gurdwara when I know they are going to be present in large numbers. It is simply not worth the argument, nor the hassle to get involved with their ‘awareness’ as they call it.

The study of how Sikhs are evolving gives us a very good insight in how faiths in general, and Islam in particular, developed.

Reverting…

The Quran is a product of the ignorance of a Hebrew hierarchy that was so frightened by Hazrat and by the deep and dangerous purity of his original work, they had to find a way to stop its publication, lest Hebrews converted in droves. The powers that be assumed the masses were gullible and stupid. They were not; they had enough common sense to work out a position for themselves.

But the Hebrew hierarchy, regardless in which area of society it lords over, even to this day deems us stupid. Yet, no one ever studies this disease, stupidity, with which you and I are apparently contaminated, as an aspect or characteristic of the very elites that rule us!

Reverting to France…We are supposed to accept that individuals associated with the Charlie Hebdo attack secured their weapons and bullets using units of mass communication, and that the authorities had no idea?

What nonsense.

The entire drama is an exercise by the spooks who build into the equation collateral damage (people dying), as we witnessed during the Sydney mess. Innocent humans will die; in fact they have to die in order to instill fear of what a terrorist can do.

In France, however, the French over-refined the drama, and miscalculated. They knew the gunmen were heading to the head office of magazine Charlie Hebdo. They arranged a Muslim police officer to confront them. Now, go and do some basic research about how many of the French police are Muslim. Not many. Yet we are to believe that on that day, at that time, a Muslim police officer was at hand to confront the two brothers?

How convenient.

Then, the next day, during the next incident an ethnic police officer just happened to run into one of the group, and she got herself killed.

And the chance of two Muslims police officers getting killed in such a situation?

Guys, you and I have a better chance of scooping the lottery than these two events having two Muslims, or ethnic officers, facing an armed gunman – gunmen whom the spooks of all NATO countries, the ANZAC countries, and good old Mossad, would have been following in minute detail.

I know from experience that our house is ‘visited’ virtually each time we leave home. They go through our entire house room by room, and cupboard by cupboard. Am I supposed to accept that the houses of these guys were not ‘visited’? I know from experience that spooks in the UK also use illegal Indians who are trying to gain permanent residence in the UK to trail us if we are in a predominantly Asian area.

What has happened in Sydney and Paris is that the spooks and the governments knew beforehand about the events, but the French screwed matters by deploying Muslim police officers to confront the gunmen in both the Paris incidents. They also were of the opinion that the gunmen in the first incident would not get access into the building. They thought an armed confrontation would take place on the street resulting in the death of the Muslim police officer. Then the main armed response unit would arrive and take out the two brothers.

Err, it backfired big time.

The brothers had a rocket launcher and it seems an arsenal of weapons. Where and how were these obtained? As I know, my family and I cannot breathe without the spooks’ knowledge. In fact, we purchased five extension leads with individual switches in order to better control electrical units plugged into them. These extension leads were to replace 15 year old extension leads. And guess what? The UK police harassed us for weeks after that purchase. So do not tell me that these guys were able to secure heavy duty arms and the spooks did not track each and every (cash) purchase. What next, these guys are going to purchase a tank and the authorities are going to tell us they knew nothing of the fact?

We are endlessly told how each keystroke of our computer is monitored, and each phone call listened to in real time. So please, we may be the ordinary people, but we aren’t stupid.

We will mob-protest one day, and insist that Israel give Palestine people their independence, and not use the area as a shooting gallery or an open prison camp. We will insist that European powers leave the Arabs to their own arguments and devices. What they do in their own back yard is none of our business. Our ordinary lives have enough pressures. We do not need to be used as cannon fodder by the spooks who seek additional funds to secure a better pension plans for themselves.

But will things change?

Not a hope in hell.

At times, I wonder: would Hazrat, the Great Prophet, have written his theory and handed that ‘awakening reason’ to the caravan dwellers, if he had known of the manifesting result?

What he initially wrote was deep indeed, it still is in a few passages; but unfortunately, to understand the depth one also needs depth. You do not climb a cloud-enveloped snow-covered mountain whilst lying on the ground in the valley looking up at its peak.

Religion is a tad more complicated.