Jackals & Tigers

In numerous societies, jackals have betrayed their own kith and kin, allowing outside powers to subjugate their race, culture, language, and heritage.

I am going to use Sikh examples and indicate to others how they may take steps to safeguard their cultural integrity and dignity.

Dr Rami Ranger & Dr Kapoor

Today’s essay endeavours to illustrate the mechanics invoked at a psychic level to hamper the independence of individuals, communities, and societies. I will use two from within the UK Sikh community to make my point. The first person is Dr Rami Ranger and the second Dr S. S. Kapoor.

Backgrounds of the characters

Raminder Singh Ranger, born July 1947, is Chairman and Managing Director of Sea Air and Land Forwarding Ltd, and the winner of a Queens Award for Export. He secured his PhD from the then newly established Khalsa College, Harrow, London, which was run by a Dr S. S. Kapoor, OBE, D.Litt., PhD., M.Comm (Hons), M.A. (Law), FCCA, FCMA CGMA.

I have to own up to the fact I have not read Dr Rami Ranger’s thesis, nor for that matter Dr Kapoor’s. I do, however, have a copy of the latter’s English translation Sukhmani Sahibji (2007).

Sukhmani Sahibji is an elaborate work by the fifth Sikh Guruji, Guru Arjandevji. If Dr Kapoor’s translation is indeed ‘A Dynamic Look into the Meaning and Philosophy of Sukhmani Sahib’, as boldly claimed on the front of the book, then heaven help us. One of Dr Kapoor’s PhD students presented me with the book. If I had received a pre-publication copy for review, then quite frankly I would have dismissed the author as a simpleton who lacks internal awakening, inner growth, and humility. The work reads as the articulation of ideas cobbled together from the internet, and suffers thereby from a lack of philosophical depth and insight.

Dr Kapoor claims he has published fifty books to date. If his translation of one of the cornerstones of Sikh thought, held in unqualified esteem by Sikhs, is an indicator of his philosophical depth and internal awakening, then I feel embarrassed. Based on that book, I would unflinchingly dismiss his entire published oeuvre as asinine and superficial, unequal to the philosophical heights he has set himself, and that Sukhmani Sahibji demands.

Now, if the principal of the college produces such work of staggering ignorance and a regurgitation of others’ work, then what quality and depth can be ascribed to his students’ productions?

To put this into perspective, one of Dr Kapoor’s students who interacted with me to produce their thesis, was repeatedly questioned about the source of their insights, so advanced were they in comparison with any sources Dr Kapoor used. Ofcourse, the student was under strict instructions not to divulge my input to Dr Kapoor or his cohort, and passed their PhD, but not without some interrogation.

Focus of this essay

Dr Ranger and Dr Kapoor are Chairman and General Secretary of the British Sikh Association respectively. Together, they are in the process of raising one million pounds sterling to fund the creation of a Sikh regiment in the British Army. Furthermore, Dr Ranger has stated that he is against the creation of an independent Sikh state, citing the ‘fact’ that the Sikh Gurus themselves never asked for or advanced the idea of such a state.

It is with this statement on the Sikh state, made by Dr Ranger, that I take issue in this essay titled ‘Jackals and Tigers’.

I do so by way of sharing some basic historical facts as well as the precise meanings of (many an) inaccurately translated words.

Misinformation has led ‘Singh’ to be translated as ‘lion’, when in fact it means tiger. A tiger is larger, bigger, stronger, more intelligent, and exemplifies a thoughtful predator, in comparison to a lion.

(Babbar) ‘Sher’, is the word for lion in the north Indian languages. ‘Singh’ refers to a tiger in the same languages. Thus, it is extremely embarrassing to hear ardent forthright no-nonsense Sikhs laying claim to a higher value by proclaiming themselves as ‘(Babbar) Sikhs’. In doing so, they concede to being weaker, less powerful, and less intelligent than the tigers they really are.

The Sikh confederacy following the death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh was identical to the confused, contradictory, self-indulgent, and obstinate Sikh groups of today (including across the diaspora).

These fragmented and egotistical groups are very easy to manipulate. Praise and aloofness pay dividends in further dividing such groups and, historically, we can see this in the massive Sikh losses during the two Anglo-Sikh wars.

Tigers became jackals, readily accepting praise, gifts, and promises of glory-rule before the Anglo-Saxons first war against them. After that the second Anglo-Sikh war was a foregone conclusion. In-fighting, self-importance, finger-pointing, and a holier-than-thou attitude meant that regardless of all the prayers offered up the Sikhs got their butt smacked.

For many years now, I have been at pains to amalgamate the various Sikhs groups within the UK, and I feel honoured and privileged to see such a configuration finally taking shape. This began with the dismantlement of the Khalistan movement, and then the formation of the Sikh Consultative Forum (now the Sikh Council). The process of getting the Sikhs to operate under one umbrella is organic, but it is slowly taking shape.

I always have to remind myself that Sikhs are not born hypocrites. They are born honest, sincere, and truthful, even when being so is to their own detriment. Thus, diplomacy does not come to them naturally. However, diplomacy is what is needed immediately and urgently.

In the 1970s, when Sikhs sought their own country, I stood on the sidelines and realised that lions were once again about to be betrayed by jackals. Each group within the Khalistani movement was back-biting the other. Each uttered phrases from the Sri Guru Granthsahibji (Sikhism’s living Guru [their holy scriptures]) parrot-fashion, and tried to out-manoeuvre the others. Standing on the sidelines, I could see how easily they were going to be broken apart from within, and betray others.

Ignorance led the movement, arrogance dug the graves, and the naive became the corpses.

As a Sikh, standing on the outside looking at the massacre the Khalistani movement triggered on its own defenseless people in Panjab, there is an immovable pain seated deep in my psyche.

A self-trained army that out-manoeuvred the raider Abdali Shah after he almost decimated them is the legend heard and spoken about as far as Vietnam – whose own forces took sustenance from Sikh valour, and who deployed similar small-group attack tactics in their success against the Americans.

But what happens when Sikhs have to work together as a large unified group?

During the setup of the Sikh Consultative Forum I strenuously indicated that the formula I supported and advocated was one in which there was a formal head (at the time it was my nomination Bhai Mohinder Singhji of Soho Road Gurdwara,) and a figurehead, to whom the former would be answerable. Albeit that the figurehead of the organisation would hold no power within the constitution, the formal head would not be able to deliver the agreed consensus of the Forum without the prior approval of the figurehead.

Sadly, the position of figurehead was never established. But, just as I imagined, and as is the norm with such things, the Forum underwent – and will continue to undergo – reformation and realignment, and of course renaming, I also indicated at the time the Sikh Consultative Forum was established – and still do – that each Sikh who wishes to interact with government must lodge an agenda with the Sikh Consultative Forum and share the outcome of the meeting with it.The Forum must then distribute this information, and all such updates, to each constituent gurdwara. Did this ever happen? Like hell it did. But I live in hope.

If my indications had been followed through with, and such a structure established, then today I would not need to reprimand Dr Ranger and Dr Kapoor.

Admonishment

The United Nations’ definition of a country stipulates that it must have its own currency, language, law, and defence, amongst other things. Twice, once during the time of Guru Arjandevji (the 5th Guruji) and then again during the time of Guru Tegbahadurji (the 9th Guruji), the exact emblems of an independent country were established and flourished for the time.

So, for Dr Rami Ranger to state on his webpage that he does not support a Sikh independent state and that the Sikh Gurus never had or argued for an independent state amounts to rank ignorance masquerading as self-indulgent importance. This is the same Dr Ranger who has a doctorate from Khalsa College, Harrow, under the aegis of Dr Kapoor’s. And let’s not forget that this is the same Dr Kapoor who is the general secretary of the organisation Dr Ranger set up. One does not need an ‘ology’ to evaluate the veracity of the doctorate in question.

If either of the two gentlemen feels I am wrong, then they are welcome to take me to court, and we’ll examine their literature using current anti-plagiarizing software to determine the veracity of their work.

I humbly suggest that Dr Rami Singh Ranger remove the ignorant remarks attributed to the Sikh Gurus and Sikhism’s desire to enjoy self-determination.

And let’s not lose sight of the fact that Indian states are, and to date function as, independent sovereign countries within a federal framework called India.

Dr Rami Singh Ranger’s remarks on his website are more to do with selling himself as a poodle of the British government via whom he receives plaudits and accolades.

Why is it that I as a Sikh do not need a British Empire honour to make me feel a sense of self-worth?

If both gentlemen’s self-worth is only measured by how many accolades they can secure from the British then my best wishes are with them.

However, can they please be kind and considerate enough not to make factually inaccurate statements in order to curry favour with their British masters?

Tangible Common Constitution

Life is difficult when, like me, you are under constant surveillance: having my home raided virtually every time it is empty, and on top of that having my writings, concepts, impact statements and sound-bites stolen, only for them to then appear in some shape or form in the UK’s leading right-wing newspaper and on a talk radio station whose presenters use the same – all of this stamps and seals how highly valued, incisive and thought provoking my writing is.

On Tuesday 16th May 2016, I went to visit the Harmony Of The Seas docked at Southampton, UK. Upon arrival in the city and making my way to the open public park adjacent to where the ship was docked, I was surrounded by security personnel, and was even afforded the high respect of having a security helicopter circling overhead. Wow, just for me. I along with everyone else present photographed the ship. Later, while visiting the opposite side of the narrow sea inlet I was stopped by plainclothes officers in an unmarked car who wanted to see my camera and the photos I had taken. They know I am a keen photographer. This has now become a routine for me. They always tell me it is not personal; however, they look ashamed when I ask them how many indigenous natives they have stopped and searched.

A renowned British journalist in his article has already used a sound-bite from this essay in a right wing newspaper…

As indicated by the canon of our human heritage scripture (which regrettably has been commandeered by one national religious group) there was a time when female rule and authority superseded the male perspective and involvement in politics. It was a time when faith communities, along with army and security personnel, the governing community, and the business community, were not allowed to vote because they had influence beyond their station and remit; whereas the common person was allowed to vote precisely because they lacked pre-existing power.

The balance between those with power, and those without, which differentiatial voting rights established, was founded upon certain realities.

Might we able to re-establish this ethos today? And if so, what would it take? Can past practices have currency and be meaningful in today’s climate? Certainly, a sense of representation, having a voice with which to champion a cause, and being able to protect and promote one’s personal concerns seem key to communal well-being.

Frequently we hear and learn about unresolved issues and complaints, where the mechanisms devised to protect the common woman – rather than the common man – are found wanting or are themselves ill-intentioned.

A country’s constitution should foremost protect, enhance, and prescribe (without prohibitions) the ongoing concerns of women – be they young females or fully matured pensioners.

“Thou shalt not…” should not, and in a mature Tangible Common Constitution would not, limit or cast females to subordinate roles. Without a woman no man can be born and subsequently find meditational peace. Therefore, any set of governing rules must not conflict with the essence of female sensibilities. Indeed, the rules that govern ought to be anchored to, and guided by, female sensibilities.

Let me elaborate.

Women are far more inclined to react to situations with circumspection. This is a trait and a modality of behaviour that could have far-reaching and positive implications for everything from earth-rape activities to inter-group warfare.

Why?

Circumspection encases degree of movement and action that are tri-directional – one may push forward, retreat, or hold one’s position. These options are not zero-sum, they can be modified, changed and enacted in ways that do not offend one’s opponent.

Circumspection – careful, thoughtful, considered behaviour – renders inane the male perspective that every action has one, normatively aggressive, possible reaction. Insult and injury thus become sources of reflection rather than inciting immediate reactive action. Furthermore, female circumspection-based political power dovetails neatly with other forms of power, notably economic and social.

Another redeeming feature of womanhood is that of not pigeon-holing each and every thought and idea. In this, women have similarities with some non-western states.

Consider how, in the West, for example a penchant for classifying things leads to the development of categories, typologies, and formal structures that define some activities as corrupt (which needs to be stamped out); meanwhile formalizing a system that by these rules ought to be considered corrupt but which instead allows people to engage in legally corrupt activities, as for example, when they set off expenses against tax liabilities.

In other countries, where labeling and pigeon-holing is not a national pastime, and where activities are evaluated in terms of complex social contexts and relationships, corruption is a largely foreign concept. But these countries of honest barter and exchange are deemed by the classification-loving countries to be corrupt, while their own deceitful cunning masquerades as honest brokerage.

The same distinction can be applied to male and female power. The former is aggressive, evasive, classificatory, imposing value judgments on others while assuming superiority for itself. The latter has an affinity with social realities and relationships, and is focused on maintaining these while pursuing balance and accord, transparency and accountability.

Male power negates female power by overpowering it with shoddy unkemptness and bully-governing, where rules are made up as one goes along to maximize benefits to one’s self and one’s own power. Sure, a woman might make it to a governing council seat within a male power framework – may be ‘allowed’ to sit at the table of power – but she does so as window-dressing, and is consistently talked down, her voice drowned out, subjected to mansplaining. Because, male power is no more than a school-boys adventure club, its rules and practices conjured up on platforms high up in secret tree-houses.

Male power discards the fact that female governance is satisfying, fulfilling, elegant even; to do otherwise would be to accept that they (men) by comparison are valuable primarily as beasts of burden, and as the brawn to the female brains of warfare. In the current configuration, male power in analogous to a military coup-let government whose power has been secured without the formal vote. Femalehood, in this analogy, corresponds to the population ruled by threat of death at the hands of the armed man.

So, how to achieve natural high-grade female governance?

A Tangible Common Constitution

Its features would follow the female power ideal, in which the disenfranchised are incorporated as functioning and valuable members of society, their invigorated self-esteem renewing family and extended-family relationships in positive ways, their self-worth inspiring a happy and balanced sociality that extends beyond the personal and communal to the national and international. Concomitantly, characteristics of male power and governance subside, such as the merciless pressure to always compete and win, to be a relentless social climber, to pursue thinly veiled dictatorship as a panacea to crippling lack of self-esteem.

Governance and social structure in this mould would render the ego of male power subservient to the sociality of female power. Power would not be attained through first-past-the post or proportional representation electoral systems. Power would reside instead with the social group whose duty it is to govern – those who, importantly, regard it as a duty rather than a right. Similarly, the army would comprise the social group that coheres around the ideal of social protection, the business community would comprise that group which most closely aligns with the traits and ideals of that role, and so on and so forth.

Yet, the boundaries would be porous; individuals whose talents lie in particular directions would be able to follow the corresponding occupation. Overall governance would rest with female leaders, selected-elected by the population; and neither the military nor the business or other occupations and social roles would intervene but would function instead within and according to their own respective remits and talents.

On one hand, the Tangible Common Constitution negates the concept of majority rule; on the other, it safeguards the concept of a society that functions without fear of victimisation or marginalisation.

Is this not more redeeming than the current system in which the ‘free world’ has been overrun by idiots and buffoons for the past thirty years? Britain had a common-garden con-artist, liar, and murderer in Tony Blair, who hung on to the coat-tails of the U.S president, George W Bush, as they committed mass murder of innocent people instead of simply taking to task individual regime leaders.

I feel deeply appalled and disgusted that in my name innocent lives were taken in order to satisfy the bloodlust of two egotistical men who would hide under the table or indeed in the toilet if a bar-room brawl broke out. The truth is that these two sub-five inchers are not street fighters, yet they engaged in a proxy street fight using other women’s sons and daughters as their military.

Some of you may point to British prime minister Mrs. Margaret Thatcher as either an example of, or indictment against, female power. The thing with Mrs.Thatcher is that she was competing in a mans world, and she had to have bigger balls than the men around her in order to attain power and be seen by the population as legitimately doing so. But what does it means to have balls, other than being prepared to be more heinous than the next guy. She is the exact opposite of the model and pathway of the Tangible Common Constitution I have described. She remains in my memory “Mrs. Thatcher, milk snatcher”, having stopped the daily distribution of milk to schoolchildren in the U.K. (made mandatory after the European war of 1939-45). Milk was a vital part of the diet. In stealing it, and thereby saving mere pennies on behalf of her beloved conservative government, Mrs. Thatcher showed she had balls. Her policy set in motion the removal of free school dinners by subsequent governments.

An entire social edifice brought down as the result of one person proving they had bigger balls than another person. Maybe an economist out there can tell me precisely what wealth was created, or has been enhanced, by stealing milk and food from the U.K’s schoolchildren, and thereby forcing them to consume cheap junk food, that causes health problems, which ends up burdening the NHS, impeding quality of life, contributing to sick days, leading to the development of mental health problems that compound the physical ones, systemically eroding any sense of self-worth and social value of a young growing child might have had?

Echoing the way that breast feeding is not frowned upon, but is seen as a natural rather than a sexual act in many countries outside Europe, a Tangible Common Constitution would redefine human dignity along the lines of femalehood and remove the spectre of malehood’s mindlessness in the process.

Is any of this possible?

Yes, in small stages.

Will I see it happen?

Yes.

Where?

In one of the States in India.

Meditate and Improve Finance

 

The latest fad in the financial markets is meditation to improve finance. This fad is about fifteen years old now. Each year a new adventurer arrives on the scene scamming the financial centres with the latest newly learned meditation technique to enhance wealth. Glossy literature is sent, fishing for a taker within the HR department, which will either invite or reject the promised idea. So, the question is: Can meditation help you gain a fatter income, or just do enough to stabilise your problem?

The problem with new adventurers, upon returning after ‘finding themselves’, is that they do not understand that meditation can poison everything. Defenders of meditation, a group of biased and radical self-censors, over-rationalise their irrational creativity as if they were Dr Zhivago, and as if watching men die is all part of self-realisation. Infused with the culture of outlandish hipsters, marinated in meditation, they assume that it is a sure-fire way to amass easy money. After all, greed is rock-and-roll. A philosophy so old, that the two oldest professions are pushed to the limits of a falsely assumed apotheosis. Greed is that powerful.

As a German psychologist, reluctant to admit his knowledge is based entirely on Sanskrit, would say: Avtar, enough of the flowery words, just get to the end note, please. But, hey, Avtar loves and excels in nothing else if not word foreplay. So word foreplay is how this essay too will unfold…ok, perhaps, this time maybe it will be a quickie. But do indulge me, please, requests Avtar.

So, how, if at all, can mediation help you with your finances?

The first point to remember is that you are born into a template. It is set in place by your ancestors. It cannot be changed, amended, broken, or replaced. This is the first truth of meditation. If meditation was the panacea to lack of wealth don’t you think India, a master race of meditators, would be the wealthiest on this planet? So, the first truth of meditation is that it will not attain for you that which fate – the template you’re born into – has not designed for you.

Now, if you can come to terms with the reality that this is your lot in life, you have moved up one rung of self-understanding. Not self-realisation, just self-understanding, which is a fantastic privilege, since it allows you to calm down, take a step back and rationalise what may now be possible to achieve. The flights of fancy have been set aside. You are now a new beginning. Your new self-discovery is far more realistic than the allure of the silver-screen greed-quickie you dreamt of. For, your desire for mega wealth makes you nothing more than a prostitute, used and abused by the master wheeler-dealers to make a massive financial killing for themselves. Your success or failure is not their problem, nor is it a concern to their inner self. They have no shame. You are a commodity: expendable, a meaningless piece of fresh meat to be dined out on, then thrown away with the rest of the uneaten food on their plate.

So, you have learned a truth: that your lot in life will remain as it is now. Meditation will not secure for you whatever it is you so desperately want.

Yet, anecdotal evidence exists where members of the financial market maintain that an hour long, early morning meditation allowed them to focus and attain better results at work for both themselves and their clients. Can it be true? And if it is true, then how and why?

Let me begin with the basics. You are wired up a certain way well before your birth, contained within a restrictive field of biological DNA ancestors. You are the sum total of your own previous engagements as a corporeal Being and of your ancestors. Each of us is wired just like any machine, to function in a particular market place and in a limited manner. The internal components can be identical, the layout and connection of each can be identical, but their functionality can, and is, usually limited or controlled by a pre-determined strategy.

Take the example of a mobile handset. The more you pay, the greater the privileges you get; while somebody who pays the minimum tariff using an identical handset will have several services blocked. Humans are similarly wired, and for generations. Thus, the cannon fodder remains the cannon fodder, while the sods at the luxury end remain so until the cows come home.

Meditation allows you to come to terms with this fact.

But what else can meditation do for you?

More than 20 years ago, financial market individuals would seek me out, and I held meditation classes for them. One among them was a woman who was popular, welcoming, and had a warm open-hearted personality. It was clear that she would reach heights denied to others. Before attending class she would stop off at a restroom. I asked her why she needed to visit the restroom prior to meditation. Before she could say anything, I answered the question myself. Shocked at my insight she admitted to having an unbelievably high sex drive and a constant need to masturbate during the day; and she admitted that her financial decision-making improved drastically after each session. So, what then did she imagine meditation would contribute to her career success? The same as meditation: better decision making and management, she replied. When I told her meditation would not do that, and that in fact her sex drive was the reason for her intuitive success, she felt rejected, as if I considered her unworthy of meditation. It took me several sessions to reassure her that meditation is not an inductor of a righteous, balanced, non-purgatory state. Meditation is a means to an end. It is a mechanism that allows clarity by defusing the mind of competing thoughts which might otherwise confuse decision-making. That is all meditation at the basic level can do and does.

Guys, people in the financial market are designed to accumulate wealth. In fact, if they placed bets on a donkey, chances are they will have better returns than Joe Bloggs down the road. That is a reality. Yes, of course, they can practice meditation and claim it helps to detach them from the sheer endless mass of information hitting them from all sides, and from which they have to sift the negative from the positive in order to maximize the benefit to themselves. But if the men watched porn for an hour prior to starting work, they would still make the same good decisions as if they had meditated. However, watching porn is looked down on, so no one in their right mind is going to own up to that practice. Instead give people the excuse of meditation and many will jump on the bandwagon, because unlike masturbation it is shrouded in pseudo-piety.

The reality is that any activity not connected to your actual work and which allows your mind and thoughts to be merged into calmness will aid your activity – because closing down all connection with your work worries gives you a release that subsequently will increase your productivity. That, guys, is meditation in progress.

However, the meditation of India is a totally different entity.

Indians meditate in order to experience and then attain detachment, permanently. It is an attitude that removes all and any need to be wealthy, healthy or otherwise materially satisfied. You, as race-Europeans, are not Indians from India, however, so such meditation is not within your goal, remit or capabilities.

Is it really the case that meditation can help the poor come to terms with their perceived financial plight?

Yes, absolutely.

Why?

Because if the poor or financially deprived master the thought of managing within their financial limitations, this would enable them to recognise that their wants are not important, but that their sense of peace is paramount. It is the ability to know what is important, to organise one’s priorities accordingly, which meditation grants you.

I have experienced first-hand how the filthy rich complain endlessly about not having and needing some kind of divine intervention so they don’t sink financially. Why the pessimism? Because they are all living a life of ‘want’. And ‘want’ is never satisfied. Whenever they attain one want, another comes along. Want is an endless train of desire. The richest are the saddest people I have ever met. Whereas, the destitute of India I have found to be some of the happiest people.

Why?

Because, for all that they lacked, they were happy with their lot in life. ‘Want’ was not a demon driving them to distraction. They attained better results in meditation. The rich, I am sorry to say, never even make it to the base of meditation.

To the fool, I say: Meditation will grant you unbelievable wealth. To the balanced, I have no need to say anything.

So, will meditation grant you financial wealth? No, not if your ancestral template is not designed for that purpose.

Sorry guys, but truth is truth.

Mirror Mirror On The Koran Wall…A Mirage To Confound Them All.

Paintings cannot, it is claimed, teach us about painting as much as literature about paintings can. Whiskers, it is claimed are an economic indicator. Harvard scholar’s Snoopy world-view, debatably dysfunctional, depicts his own mental relationship with himself.

Humans historically engage one great talent, to vivify their own narrowness; where wealth and sex appeal – domineering like anti-uncomfortable truths seconded to selfishness and cruelty, disfigure and open cracks, providing incremental mental comfort while pretending serendipity – marrowed in humbleness of piety.

At a practical everyday level, I have observed the following three examples: I came across a person with severely inhibited communication skills, who deemed it appropriate to use profane language to impress a lady he was trying to chat-up. On another occasion, I witnessed youths mocking a very old person who suffered from mobility restrictions, and who had taken offence at the insults by announcing that he was capable of taking them out physically. And to top this, I have come across many a car driver who thinks they are capable of passing through a gap that an anorexic person would find impossible.

Why the distorted value, and misappraisal of a situation, that in the main most ordinary people would automatically understand, and would respond to by reconsidering their options?

Over-simplification, or misunderstanding of the dynamics of the situation?

I am at pains to explain to newbies that spirituality cannot be understood or explained unless one is a fully fledged member of the dharma society. Dharma, as many of you who read my essays will recall, is a station of awareness well beyond the rustic requirements of religion. From religion one goes into rite and ritual. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are religions. Hinduism is neither a religion nor a dharma. Sikhism, Buddhism, Chen (Zen), Vaidism and Jainism are Dharma. The dictates listed in the Torah, Bible and the Koran are an evaluation of a given moment in a given society’s biography.

The dictates have the form, structure and pronouncement of what passed for law at the time. Lawyers of that time were well-versed in the lore of their given social structure, and were therefore considered capable of collating information guided by senior theologians and philosophers, culminating in a list of guidelines; they also answered queries, problems and indeed misapprehensions. Future-proofing these guidelines was an art that bypassed them totally. Thus, the cause of the sieve-laced ambiguity of the gold-plated reservoir walls of their religion; the leaks from this causing the outright confusion, misunderstanding and mayhem we see on today’s global stage.

The massacre conducted by the Euro-Race Christians of the races in the Americas and the Antipodes, along with the brutal massacre meted out to the nation-races of Africa, as well as the Hiroshima atomic bomb, are underpinned by the then Bible-bashers in precisely in the same manner as conducted by the Koran-bashers.

Now let me put some sense into this mess.

At a very advanced inner growth awareness, the futility of what is deemed ‘life’ is the bedrock of one’s initial stepping stone. Life, it is agreed, by those at this level, is in fact a prison, a death, a limitation to what one can and is capable of enjoying if freed from the chains holding him to the mortal coil. While I agree with the reality of this awakening, I have to impress upon the reader that at no time is it considered irrelevant, or a confinement, to be chained to the mortal coil. In fact, the very environment is a space for education, and for refining one’s sensibilities and sensitivities; preparing the inner self to live as a non-mortal Being aimed at being an Essence rather than corporeally limited.

However, the problem engulfing the naive listener, albeit an ardent practitioner of the disciplines and rigours of the rite-ritual environment, is that they only understand according to these limited parameters.

A seven year old makes assumptions about the wonders awaiting him at age eleven. An eleven year old dreams about the wonders awaiting him at age eighteen. And within each age group they share, discuss, encourage, dethrone and recreate the illusions awaiting them.

Each time I read the Torah, I am struck by the sheer number of Vedic concepts contained therein. I am struck further by the fact that the explanation of the concepts is distorted out of all recognition. The Bible, based on the Torah, is equally confused.

Take the simplistic concept of female-covering in Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. It is only in recent decades that Christian European women have thrown off the shackles that required them to be covered lest they trigger ‘unhealthy’ responses in men. It was only in the late seventies that showing a bra-strap stopped being vulgar, cheap and shameful. However, each of these religions, and Islam in particular, fails to mention that gay men should also demand that men in general be covered head to toe, because the sexual allure triggering erotic thoughts, leading into eroticism, is present whensoever one sets one’s eyes on a person who triggers a sexual desire.

Of course, the simple answer is that the person who is attempting to walk a religious path, who cannot control his sexual impulses, should have his eyes gorged out, or at least in public he should wear a bandage over his eyes lest he see something that may trigger a sexual desire. However, covering one’s eyes is far too honest an appreciation of one’s own problem, and it is much grander to announce that one is pure and in control, and (this is the best part) that it is the person who inflames your own uncontrollable sexual hunger who has defiled your purity!

Confused? I certainly am.

So why the confusion?

Yes, it is accepted that to advance in the realms of dharma one has to have full control over one’s sexual emotion and triggers. In dharma, a male orgasm has to be as exciting and fulfilling as the sensation one experiences by tenderly stroking an index finger over the back of one’s hand. This state is reached as a byproduct of meditation where one is learning and mastering one’s own nervous system, such that the concept of sexual allure is incapable of effecting one’s own physiology. Sexual trigger and the resultant waste of a very valuable nervous energy is thus contained, and that energy is available for use in one’s inner refinement.

However, at the religious level, the well-intentioned surmise that in order to bypass the hard rigours of male meditation women should instead cover themselves up. Consequently, pressure is placed on women who do not comply, and their bodies are consigned to hell.

The seniors of Semitic religions jump ship and change their colours as it suits their needs: at times, they say the body houses the soul, and it is the soul that enters paradise or anti-paradise; at other times, and when admonishment is given, they talk about the body entering paradise or anti-paradise.

How convenient.

So, this means that Muslim men will enter paradise physically. So, where does their soul reside? And pure Muslim women who even for a moment become uncovered in public will physically enter anti-paradise. Well, what of their soul?

By this reasoning the great Allah has a physical body… but cannot be given a physical body here on earth. Now I really am confused. To me, the great Allah is an essence in which is merged a soul, so the soul will not enter anti-paradise, but a physical body will?

The Torah is equally contradictory. Hence the related contradiction in Islam. For, when I read the Koran and Torah side by side, I find very little that separates them. So I ask, why do the current Muslims not rewrite the Koran, separating their reliance on and attachments to the Torah, and create a more factual reality representing their own rules rather than copy-saluting another’s set of dos and don’ts?

In dharma, it is accepted that one can enter a realm of non physical confinement – paradise. However, the environment is utterly different from what is found here on this iron-ore rust bucket we hypocritically call Mother Earth. Guys, when was the last time any of you chopped your mother’s hand off finger by finger? Mother Earth indeed…Reverting: in dharam, ‘paradise’ is a non-corporeal environment. No physical presence here. Can you imagine how CCTV business would be a non-starter there?!

So, why the confusion regarding paradise?

Because people do not listen, let alone understand. You nod your head in deep agreement when we speak, but you go away with your own version and summary of what we say. This in a nut shell is what has happened in the ‘books’ of the Semitic religions.

Another confusion I hear constantly…

Islamic boys are told that there is no need to have a girlfriend since in paradise there awaits an unending line of the most gorgeous girls, that life really begins in paradise, and the best way to enter paradise is to become a martyr. So, how in hell did these sexually alluring, unbelievably desirable, irresistible girls enter paradise when here on earth those types of girls are told they will only enter anti-paradise? What, the two realms share a communicating door? A back alley? A doorman who holds the key and decides which girls from anti-paradise are allowed into paradise for the insatiable appetite of the sexually hungry youth? Explain for me please, when one enters either realm is one born as a baby and have to grow into adulthood, or is one a fully grown adult and ready to sow his oats?

Muslim women who enter paradise, are they gifted an endless supply of young handsome men with six-packs who never tire? And in paradise are Muslim women utterly wrapped in wanton and insatiable lust, when here on earth they are threatened with the anti-paradise if they refuse sex to their husband!

At this moment in time, I suspect that the lawyers who penned the thoughts of the theologians and philosophers forming the Torah, the Bible, and the Koran took the silver for their services but failed to deliver hardcore theology in return. Guys, the lot of you have been mega duped. Thus, I suggest a total rewrite of all the three books to bring them in line with modern sensibilities.

As an outsider looking in I find all three Semitic religions trying to put square pegs into round holes. My opening paragraphs were apt in defining the problem. In the case of these three religions, application and aptitude are not merely misaligned, they are not even on the same page.

The followers of all three Semitic religions should take a long hard lookat themselves in the mirror, and I hope you are sensitive enough to recognise the ignorance glaring back at you. Your religions are trying to mimic and mirror Vedic dharma of India, but have failed miserably. The annihilation of races the Semitic group has conducted globally is shameful, and there is no end in sight.

The Euro-Race Christians are equally as dim as the Islamists.

And why will they not listen to reason? Because stupidity has one great weapon, it cannot recognise its own stupidity.

On 20th November 2015, I watched Senator McCain of America in a televised interview justifying yet another attack on Muslims, this time on ISIS, by differentiating Christianity from Islam and claiming that Christians hold true to their belief “love thy neighbour”. Yeah, Senator, try telling that to the first settlers whose land you have stolen, conquered and arrogantly call your land and home. No mate, you are as mentally deranged as the Muslims of this day, and like you, they have been mentally unstable since their inception.

To the Christians of today I say, granted, your forefathers in their ignorance and arrogance divided the Ottoman Empire into what we see as today’s Middle East. Why, oh why, do you, today’s Christians not let the dwellers of that area decide for themselves how they wish to redefine their landmass? Have you Europeans forgotten the hundred years war you so deliriously enjoyed?

Simultaneously, the modern day Christians should sit with India and Pakistan and undo the mess their forefathers created there. To the Christians of today I ask, ‘Why do you not have the conscientiousness to lead and amend your forefathers’ stupidity?’ Unless you are as arrogantly stupid as were they.

Casting my net wider, I invite the whole of humanity to look into the mirror. However, to see the mirror one needs eyes. And humans no longer have eyes. They have delusions of grandeur where once existed eyes. And in the delusion of grandeur, one thing is certain: the carousel of illogical killing goes round and round.

Shameful.

Stop putting India down…..(An Uncertain Glory: India and its Contradictions, by Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen, review Despite its much-vaunted economic success, India is still held back by poverty, argues Alex von Tunzelmann)

I haven’t read the book reviewed by von Tunzelmann. My views emerge from a reading of the review itself, and my arguments are those of a person brought up, and living, in England for the past five decades. My psyche is English. But I have the advantage too of natural attunement to my ancestral genetics and to (north, rather than south) Indianism.

I articulate Englishness with an internal Indian eye.

European writers, well-intentioned and cognisant of warding off accusations of ignorance about India, sometimes have an Indian in tow. Indian writers, meanwhile, lack the English quality of giving offence, and are unable to confront the master race’s value-laden discourse – and self-congratulatory tone – about the imperative of material advancement while conveniently forgetting about the psychopathic annihilation of indigenous peoples and their cultures, and the subjugation of those who escaped genocide or who were enslaved.

This unsavoury and despotic European past continues at best to be a blind spot in European-self analysis and at worst to incite impatience and anger towards those who will not let go of the past. That whole, ‘I am not responsible for the actions of my forefathers’ thing.

Well, here’s some news for those ‘leave the past in the past’ rhetoricians. The past is very much alive and kicking here in the present. The methods and banner ads may have changed; the labels too: but the global imperative of democracy is just a newly packaged version of what came before (and don’t think that democracy as defined by the west represents the end of history; it’s a catchy word that entails a worthy ideal, but standing alone it does not, cannot, represent the apex of human social-political achievement).

Freedom is another watchword packaged up alongside democracy and farmed out as a global imperative. Arab Springs abound to demonstrate that the non-west wants freedom…oops, wait, did I hear you whisper that actually the Arab Spring isn’t quite so straightforward, and isn’t a revolution in the relationship between politics and society so much as a cyclical dynamic?

Let’s be honest. Nobody is under the illusion that the European psychopathic, bloodletting past has magically disappeared. Freedom, democracy etc – these are just European greed for power by another name. And the non-west meanwhile sits and waits, knowing that for all the democracy and freedom it’s currently being sold, the European bloodletting needs only the flimsiest of excuses to be unleashed.

Psychopathy does not beget sainthood. And when it sets out to value another culture, it doesn’t do so from an emic perspective, but from within the parameters set by its own psychopathic bio-signature. Poor India, that it must be assailed by such gross misunderstanding and incomprehension, that it’s bio-signature, its unique emotional and psychical equations should be sullied by being judged from a psychopathic-steeped perspective.

Defecation in the open? It’s rife in India and much less practiced elsewhere in the world. Thanks von Tunzelmann for this insight, which is implicated in a whole set of assumptions about the civilisational backwardness of defecating in a squatting position in the open air. Far more civilised by far to defecate, and then smudge and paste the stuff all over one’s backside, pull up one’s underpants and go away to eat with the same hand. Funny how defecating in the open comes attached with value-judgements, but we rarely hear – from the time of Naipaul down through the decades – of the hygienic action of washing one’s backside that accompanies this.

And while we’re on the subject, how super-civilisationally advanced it is to contort one’s body into an unnatural position to accomplish the act of defecation – on a  porcelain bowl, no less – whereby the majority of one’s waste remains shored up inside one’s body causing accelerating disease within. Damn those people who defecate in a position that is naturally and most efficiently conducive to eliminating the body’s waste.

I wonder which is the more intelligent culture? Which the more civilisationally advanced? And why, in a test of intelligence, advancement and refinement is the method and means of eliminating body waste a stronger indicator than, say, one’s predilection for waging war and genocide and triggering one race-hate war after another?

We all know the long-held European thing about how the brown stuff is the same colour as the fully-developed skin tone of the non-Europeans. What a bedrock of race-supremacy that in-joke has been and no doubt continues to be.

Right, so we have porcelain bowls to defecate in – let’s forget the eating with the same hand that you clean your backside with, that’s really beside the point. Now, let’s see, what other great wonders of advanced civilisation and consciousness has the rest of the world received from the Europeans? All those original inhabitants of North and South America, Australia, New Zealand who have been near annihilated….

I’m sure anybody who reads the Dreze/Sen book will learn a lot about western superiority, if van Tunzelmann’s review is anything to go by. And they will undoubtedly glory in it in a more befitting manner than the new Chinese Ambassador to the United States recently did, when in his inaugural speech he let slip (?!) that India dominated China for over a thousand years, yet not a single Indian soldier set foot on Chinese territory in all that time. Bit of a slap in the face of European civilisational supremacy…

To return to India and her unique features, it’s a pity that van Tunzelmann’s review didn’t scratch the surface of these beyond the ‘they defecate in the open’ sensationalism (the prevalence of which, by the way, I challenge a current visitor to record in a little notebook as they make their way around the country).

Last year, I revisited India for the first time in three decades. I didn’t find it polarised and mired in contradiction. In fact, I found a template, a model, for others to emulate and value. Here is a country in which sophisticated and tolerant drivers exhibit not an iota of road rage, granting and receiving passage in turn as they negotiate the road system with relish and commonsense and an innate understanding that it is everybody’s right to access and use.

The car horns may blare, the cars themselves may skim through the flimsiest gaps – but to regard these things as dangerous, as somehow uncivilised, is to assess them from a European psychopathic bio-signature perspective, and misses the maturity and negotiation and non-psychotic values that underpin the Indian bio-signature. No floppy-bellied drivers there going red in the face and starting seriously meant middle-finger debates about rights of way.

The shop assistants don’t demand your gratitude that they are on the shopfloor, and shock-horror, there to serve you. The generosity and hospitality of strangers is humbling, reconnecting me to a sense of shame about how much of a clone I am of English rudeness and self-centredness. The deprived smile openheartedly, refuse wads of rupees and accept in their integrity only the token few rupees that will see them through. Nobody seeks bribes, and railway baggage handlers return excessive tips.

So, let’s leave the romantic cynicism beguiled as discreet narrative hysteria, wrapped in selective analysis and centuries-old anecdotes to one side. And let’s focus on the madness that needs amending on this continent before we venture to lecture a mature advanced continent about her sensibilities and sensitivities – the like of which we can frankly never match.

Social Responsibility

The Beveridge report recommended comprehensive health and rehabilitation services for the prevention and cure of disease. Additionally, consideration was to be paid to the destitute and vulnerable in society. These led to the establishment of a welfare system in the UK by 1948, which fairly copied Bismarck’s blueprint for reform in Germany.

Back in Emperor Ashoka’s time, Aryadesh (India) also laid down plans catering for the lowly and dispossessed. Its population had a moral responsibility to cook enough to share with those less fortunate themselves. To do otherwise was ethically evil, decreasing the collection of positive points that one could use to barter upon one’s death for a more financially, healthy, peaceful, meaningful and self-aware birth next time around.

If today’s western ‘modern’ mind considers such emotional bargaining for an improved future birth to be a load of claptrap, so be it. But there if we step back and examine the actual effects of the Aryadesh peoples moral and ethical responsibility towards the less advantaged, then it is clear that the whole exercise paid dividends. Scholars of Emperor Ashoka maintain that poverty and hunger did not exist in Aryadesh under his rule – a well-fed populace, they argue, suffered concomitantly fewer health concerns.

Why then, if the concept was so beneficial in practice, and the wider repercussions of a well-fed and healthy population able to work meant increased State revenues, did it cease soon after the end of Emperor Ashoka’ dynasty?

The answer lies in cycles. Life, like this planet and its creation, is cyclic. It has a heartbeat. Creation has a heartbeat. The sun has a heartbeat. Earth has a heartbeat. Everything in creation and nature has a heartbeat. That heartbeat is cyclic. But the heartbeat is not identical across all matter. Each heartbeat differs. Each beat of the drum creates a different vibration, and each vibration creates a different slipstream in its wake.

Everything modulates with the touch of each vibration, its resonance rippling out as it interacts with its surroundings. Like a domino effect, everything in creation changes. What it was, is not what it is now. And what it is now will change too under the sway of the forthcoming beat of the drum.

Vedic knowledge, or Hindu mythology, calls this drumbeat Shiva’s Dance. Many of you will have seen the bronze statue of Shiva dancing in Hindu Mandirs and the homes of devotees. Shiva’s Dance represents the heartbeat of creation. The silent aspect of the heartbeat details non-creation. Non-creation is not silent, however. The reverberation of the preceding heartbeat can still be ‘heard’.

Human affairs are cyclic in much the same way. Caring times follow uncaring times. Welfare follows warfare. Everything has its opposite. Duality. Creation and non-creation is duality at work. And in duality, bad walks hand in hand with good.

It is in forgetting this simple truth that humans foment trouble. The powerful manufacture wars in the arrogant belief that they will prevail. Of the many things that human history teaches us, one is that the powerful always instigate one war too many. That war is their downfall. They become the subjugated; while their formerly weak opponents, their formerly enslaved peoples and nations become the lord and master of global events.

The cycle never stops.

Another thing human history teaches us is that of the once-powerful, those who beguiled their citizens into caring for their fellow human and other animals while powerful are respected and looked up to for guidance and instruction after their downfall.

Aryadesh fell from power a long time ago. Its golden age is but a memory. Nevertheless the India of today is still revered globally for its dharmic, moral and ethical behaviour. This respect and reverence derives from the age of Emperor Ashoka and his law calling upon Aryadesh’s citizens to care in whatever way necessary for those less advantaged than themselves.

Again, the modern western mind from its wonderful position of privilege can assail all of this as claptrap. But without the advantage of the machines they have created to replace human work, would any other civilisation bother to consider the western lifestyle and life pattern worth as one worth emulating? No, it wouldn’t; because other than creating mechanical means to ease the human burden of labour, the western consciousness has added what to human consciousness? Precisely nothing.

Even the welfare system announced and set up in the middle of the last century, with the usual chest-puffed-out bulldog mentality of the English, is being broken apart. It was set up without the powers-that-be realising that they were extending a programme of welfare to a psychically ill people wrapped in negative consciousness, and that the system would end up eking out a miserable existence, defined by extending aid to a number of adults who’ve never worked a day in their lives in any income-generating, tax-paying activity though they are capable of doing so; or who do not consider it their duty to pay tax on their infrequent income. Not all of them, but a number of them.

The Coalition government of 2013 seems to want to cut off its nose to spite its face in dismantling the welfare system. It doesn’t realise it has a golden opportunity to sustain the welfare system, and to take care of rather than vilify the underprivileged. Its members and leaders instead believe that if they are able to create and accumulate untold wealth and riches, then every Joe Bloggs can achieve the same.

What the conservatives forget is that their wealth is founded on the cheap labour of non European peoples who don’t have a welfare system to give their workforce a dignified living standard or dignified existence.

I challenge the UK Conservative-led government to stop all welfare payments and government funding of the NHS with one stroke.

With this move, it will create an untouchable class so impoverished that its members will take any job going in order to feed itself, will work zero-hours with relish, will slave away in sweatshop environments for pittance – and it is on the hard labour of this new indigenous untouchable class, so long chided for being work-shy, that Conservative MPs’ wealth will derive.

The wholesale and immediate removal of the welfare state and of the NHS will also stop immigrants coming to these shores, as well as creating mass employment and rejuvenating the dying manufacturing industry – doing away with the need to import sweatshop-made goods from abroad, when these can so effectively be produced here at the same cost.

Somehow, I can’t see the Conservatives, however much they foam at the mouth about the degeneracy of the work-shy masses – who they conveniently forget are comprised of the indigenous and not immigrant masses – having the balls to go to such extremes

So, what’s the alternative?

Well, we in this country must encourage and bring to bear the Emperor Ashoka model of care and community – in which the well-off share their wealth openheartedly with the less well-off. Let’s position the Little Englander as a beacon of moral and ethical responsibility for other nations’ peoples to emulate.

Prestige, like honour, has to be earned. It cannot be manufactured out of fear for the repercussions of one’s actions. It has to be achieved through earnest goodness.

The question is: Is Conservative wealth ready to move on to the next level of advanced awareness, or will it perish like another bully who died unceremoniously and over whom no tears where shed?

Re-evaluating bribery and corruption

One of the most amusing things I’ve encountered is the idea that without giving a ‘bribe’, which is deemed as corrupt, nothing could be achieved in India. However, as a child watching the act of passing money or goods to another person who could facilitate or fulfil a desired request, I observed just how invaluable an asset that ‘gift’ was for the recipient, how gratefully received it was, how prayers were offered for the benefit of the benefactor.

Despite elders bemoaning the transaction as a bribe, the gift of money exchanged for a need fulfilled seemed to me a vital element in people’s lives: it covered kids’ schooling, family medical bills, a daughter’s dowry, in fact a host of everyday things.

Set this against the Wikipedia entry for bribery: an incredibly long list that, if we were to measure it against the everyday lives and activities of the European world, points a fat finger of bribery at the Western world – that somehow gets ignored in favour of tainting the older, more mature and civilised parts of the world with the stigma of bribery. If you give the transaction a formal title it becomes a legally and morally acceptable form of exchange between two parties; take the aura of legitimacy away by refusing to give the exchange a title, and hey presto, it is bribery and corruption.

Transactions in mature civilisations are as old as the human race and form part of a barter system, even though the exchange is not of goods – my lathe for your horse – but of money and fulfillment of a desired outcome. It is no less a barter just because the commodities involved have changed, because money is involved. In fact, the giving of a ‘gift’ to facilitate a desired or necessary outcome is an honoured tradition in all mature civilisations.

The western world has colluded to overlook the societal impact of this rite, its place in the pantheon of societal development, and to ignore the gratitude and humbleness that is mutually existing between both giver and recipient.; it discards too how this form of exchange symbolises both parties’ (predominantly the recipient of the ‘gift’) freedom from greed and accumulation and rank materialism.

To have a ‘gift’ refused is the height of insult, a judgement on your presumed moral and ethical inferiority. The rite persist today, but unfortunately is neither recognised nor accepted as an elevated form of bartering that makes both parties complicit in an attitude of mutual gratitude and communalism.

Part of the demise of the honourable aspects of the rite of ‘gift’ exchange must be laid at the door of the Indians as well as of European hegemonic value-making that criminalizes the Other and its values – for abusing the system, which is one of relationality as well as of expectation, beyond its capacity to sustain such a haemorrhage. By embedding the practice in greed accumulation, the foundations of a normal service transaction have been rent asunder.

If we are to reinvigorate the true relevance and importance of a transactional system whereby gifts are made of goods and/or money in exchange for fulfillment of a desired outcome, and stamp out the false taint of illegitimacy around mature civilisations and their practices, then we could do worse than asserting the origins of the transaction practice – save it from clutches of revisionist history-making; and, in the spirit of current parlance and values on entrepreneurship, denote each person as having simultaneously a salaried career and one as a service entrepreneur.

Wikipedia’s entry on bribery is not mired in fact, it is an attitude and a value-system posing as fact. The real fact is that transactional systems have existed for millennia and that within them money is one among many possible bartering goods, not merely – as it has become – a symbol of greed and corruption.