Sanskrit 2.0 and Diversity Policy - 2

As regards globalization, whether people are willing to notice it or not the choice is actually between Succumb via haphazard Anglicization, and Control via methodical Sanskritization.

Since independence, India and other countries with Sanskrit as classical base language have not put in any effort to reconnect with it. Rather, they have preferred a strategy of patronizing the various Prakrits, along with assigning English the status of a lingua franca for modernization. Given the circumstances, perhaps this strategy had some benefits. But clearly, it has run its course and hit a wall, creating a cultural crisis of sorts. Development and modernization is under way, but the Prakrits are hardly able to stand their ground or develop without losing their footing, their cultural character. 

The Prakrits try to fabricate indigenous terminology using Sanskrit root words (when they can avoid absorbing an English word directly), but the end result for the speaking populace is a language that sounds rather artificial and stilted - partly because of an artificial methodology of Sanskritization, and partly because the populace is no longer connected with spoken and written Sanskrit directly. 

Rather, the better way is to have Sanskrit revived as a parallel language, whose usages then seep into the Prakrits via a natural process - just like how English words are currently trickling into the Prakrits. The natural process that works with English will then work with Sanskrit, too; but with English it leads to a strange, miscegenation - a creole - whereas with Sanskrit it will be a native, classical upgrade.

Another effect of Anglicization is that the Prakrits are forced to become uniform and "modern" in their cultural tenor. They are unable to remain in their cultural orbit, but are forced to reflect - however awkwardly - the affectations of "modernity". With Sanskrit as a platform to manage modernity, a multi-orbit cultural system within Indic civilization can persist without distortion, and each Prakrit can remain comfortably at a desired distance from "modernity".

With Sanskrit in the saddle, India will be able to embrace globalization much better, without losing its own cultural footing. Moreover, it will make available the tremendous knowledge resources buried in Sanskrit, to itself and the world at large. The Prakrits - and English - can then flourish each in their own spheres, with Sanskrit as a platform.

Presented below are thoughts put together by a friend along with other participants at a forum (BRF). The model below is civilizational, not national. That means it is scalable to many countries and regions outside India that have a historical civilizational connection with Sanskrit, or aspire to re-establish a lost connection with Sanskriti, or aspire to create a new relationship afresh. The rest of this post reproduces his summary of thoughts on guiding principles for a policy framework for Sanskritization:

I have earlier often spoken of the need to have a Bharatiya language as India's Operating System if India hopes to be able to position itself as an independent civilizational pole in the world, and I have long favored Sanskrit 2.0 to take up that role.

The only way to preserve diversity in India is to provide the people of India with a platform which ensures its preservation.

What we have built today in the form of ethno-linguistic states is an acknowledgement of this diversity among the major ethno-linguistic groups, but within the region of authority of these ethno-linguistic groups we have allowed a process of reckless homogenization to the detriment of all smaller ethno-linguistic groups. One could even say, we have thrown the sheep to the wolves.

Now the problem is that the concept of federalization that we have started with the Center-State paradigm with respect to linguistic issues, we have failed to pursue the principle any further. Every ethno-linguistic group in India should have been given the authority and resources to preserve its literature, its stories, its music, its songs, its linguo-cultural heritage. However for all minority ethno-linguistic groups within the various states this has not been assured.

It is true, that within a certain region, the people need to deal with the administrative system in a standard medium, so as to make the functioning of the state run smoothly, but that in itself is no reason to emasculate the lingual heritage of a people, to let it die.

Each ethno-linguistic group should have the fundamental right to preserve its culture and the state needs to ensure that through the provision of suitable laws, their implementation, provision of resources and sufficient infrastructural encouragement.

However in order to get there, there is a need for various parties to understand a few principles:

I. "Principle of Respect for One's Language" - One has a right to demand respect for one's ethno-linguistic autonomy from a higher level of political authority, only if one is willing to give the same level of autonomy to ethno-linguistic groups within one's own sphere of political authority. If a state wishes that its language be given due respect by the Central Govt. then it too should respect the language of the various ethnic minority groups within the state, and provide the group with the resources to maintain their own language.

II. "Principle of Need for Upward Compatibility" - Every individual should be empowered to be upward compatible with all levels of cultural-political environments of which he is a part of. As such it is important to enable the citizen to learn all of the following languages: "Four-Language Vertical Integration Formula"!

Community-Language for (e.g. Tula, Toda, Maithili, Brij, Haryanvi, ...)
State-Language (e.g. Bengali, Marathi, Hindi, Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam, ...)
National Language (e.g. Sanskrit 2.0)
Mandatory Foreign Language (e.g. English)

III. "Principle of Need for Cross-Peer Administrability" - One needs to work together with one's peers with whom one shares an environment, a common language being an essential feature of that environment and an essential condition for smooth working. Again every granular environment has peer granular environments which all share a higher environment. It is the higher environment's responsibility to be able to administer the granular sub-environments with minimum level of problems arising out of linguistic incompatibilities. The environment may be a village, a state, the nation or the world.

IV. "Principle of Recognition of Linguistic Dominance" - If we go about creating a federal structure consisting of regions of various levels of political granularity like nation, states, districts, tehsils, villages, etc., there would be some dominant ethno-linguistic group with a smattering of minorities in the given region. Even as it is important that minority rights be accepted, ethno-linguistic minorities would have to agree to recognize the dominant status of the majority ethno-linguistic group and thus to allow the official language of that political granularity level to be based on the language of the dominant group. Depending on the size of the minorities, the official language may have to concede some space to the minority languages as well and to integrate some part of their vocabulary into its own vocabulary and structure.

V. "Principle of Linguistic Neutrality" - In environments where it is not possible for some dominant ethno-linguistic group to politically assert its claim to define the official language of a certain region of political granularity over the objections and potentially resistance from other ethno-linguistic groups, all the linguistic stake-holders should agree to adopt a neutral language as the common official language. Neutrality can be accepted based on the "Principle of Equal Disadvantage in Learning". If all ethno-linguistic groups must exert a more or less equal effort in learning the language, then it could be considered neutral. Such a language can come from various sources - a foreign origin, a common ancestral classical language, or a language of small ethno-linguistic minority from among the group such that a maximum number of people among those concerned would have to exert themselves.

VI. "Principle of Common Cultural Space" - When there is a need to have common language mediums applicable across various ethno-linguistic groups, the commonality should be searched for in some common platform which allows the reproduction of the linguistic psyche of the various ethno-linguistic groups involved rather to be searched in an equally foreign language, a language too alien to reproduce the thought patterns of the people involved.

VII. "Principle of Classicism" - When there is a need to have common language mediums applicable across various ethno-linguistic groups, then one should also try to adopt a language through which much of the past glory of a culture and its literature can be made accessible. It is also important to choose a language where its rules of grammar have been written down.

VIII. "Principle of Linguistic Purity" - It is obvious that with time languages change. New technologies, new scientific research, new paradigms of organization, new forms of cultural expression, new products for consumption, all necessitate an enlargement of vocabulary. Many of these novelties may arise in other language spaces. If the foreign words or expressions have an etymology based on functionality or references to nature, then it may be possible to reproduce those foreign words using a similar etymological process in one's own language. However if the etymology was culturally based, it would be much more difficult to reconstruct the words or expressions in own language. In this case, one should simply import these foreign words into one's own language. Unless some foreign word or expression has no equivalent in the own language, or one wants to express some nuance which can only be expressed through the use of the foreign term, the foreign word or expression should be discouraged in the own language.

IX. "Principle of Love for Vernacular Language" - Every individual should feel proud of his mother tongue, so much so that the individual should try to preserve his own family's particular variant of his mother tongue. One should be cognizant that the official language of the area may not be the vernacular language, and if the moment is opportune, then one should always try to converse in one's own mother tongue.

X. "Principle of Consideration for Protocol" - One is often confronted with situations where multiple contexts are applicable - work place language, language of the political unit, languages of the higher levels political granularity, presence of community members, presence of guests from other language spaces, etc. Everyone has to make a call which language to speak based on all these factors. An understanding of such protocols in society does help.

Just a little effort to bring some clarity to the confusion!

Sanskrit 2.0 and Diversity Policy - 1

There are numerous reasons why individuals and groups anywhere in the world have chosen to make the Sanskrit language a part of their lives and societies. Curiously, in India one would expect a much greater appreciation of its value and potential than one currently finds, but fortunately a self-corrective grassroots movement is already afoot. Perhaps until this generation the time was not right. Now it appears that its time is come.

Founding Vision
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, who chaired the drafting committee of the Constituent Assembly and shaped modern India's Constitution, strongly favoured Sanskrit as the national language. He was a lifelong Sanskrit enthusiast, and was also the first Member of Parliament to speak briefly in Sanskrit in the House. Newspaper report posted here. 

A friend pointed out: 

REPORT OF THE SANSKRIT COMMISSION 1956-1957

The move to have Sanskrit had support in three crucial quarters, during the discussions in Constituent Assembly and within the Congress:

1) Scheduled Castes: B.R. Ambedkar was strongly in favor of making Sanskrit as India's National Language.

2) Muslims: Shri Naziruddin Ahmad (formerly Muslim League) made a strong appeal to have Sanskrit.

3) South India: Many Tamil members were also in favor.

Reproduced below is a quote from the above linked report:

As already indicated, the Constituent Assembly did not give a smooth sailing to the Bill on Hindi as the Official Languages. The majority which decided such a vital issue was one of the narrowest. During the few stormy days of the Constituent Assembly's discussion of this question, the impasse was sought to be solved by some members by proposing Sanskrit as the Rastrabhasa; and the late Dr.B.R. Ambedkar, who as the Law Member, was piloting the bill, was also reported to have favoured that proposal. In the course of the discussion of this question in the Assembly, several members, including some ardent protagonists of Hindi, paid due homage to Sanskrit. Apart from all this, the only other Indian languages for the adoption of which as the Rastra bhasha a regular amendment was moved, and discussion on which took a good part of the time of the Assembly, was Sanskrit.
As Shri Naziruddin Ahmad, advocating Sanskrit, put it on the floor of the House, a language that is adopted for the whole country, where so many languages are spoken, should be impartial, a language which is not the mother-tongue of any area, which is common to all regions, and the adoption of which will not prove an advantage to one part of the country and a handicap to all other parts. The late Lakshmi Kanta Maitra, who moved the amendment seeking to replace Hindi by Sanskrit as the Official Languages, observed in the Assembly, that, if Sanskrit was accepted, "all the jealousies, all this bitterness will vanish with all the psychological complex that has been created ............. there will not be the least feeling of domination or suppression of this or that". Thus, neutrality (or not being the spoken language of any section) has been urged as the first criterion of a National Language. That is why efforts were being made to create in Europe quite a new languages like Esperanto, to be used as the International Language perfected for this very purpose of all-India use through all these centuries, why throw it away? The neutrality of Sanskrit is not a mere negative quality; it is also the positive virtue of having grown by incorporating into itself elements from all other languages of the country. In this respect again, Sanskrit, which, as has been pointed out elsewhere, is a synthesis of the best in all the cultural constituents of India, can truly claim to have been developed and enriched by every part of India.

My friend adds: I think that one vote by President Rajendra Prasad which clinched the choice in favor of Hindi, really changed the whole course of world history (if I may be so bold as to say that)! I am trying to retrace the steps. If Sanskrit had been adopted, English would not have been necessarily continued after its foreseen initial 15 years! However the report deserves to be read regardless of the above reason!

If there is one leader whose persona, ideas and preferences encompassed all the tremendous  practical socio-political changes of 60 years of  Indian independence, it is not Mahatma Gandhi, not Sardar Patel, not Nehru, but rather is Dr. Ambedkar. Many of his more talked about ideas on social reformation have created the greatest realignment of social forces in any nation in modern history - through the ballot rather than the bullet. His ideas on economic policy are still relevant, and the intention behind the Constitution's diversity policy are spelled out in the Preamble - to create a confidence and freedom in India that would lead to a fresh round of consilience of subcultures and a re-standardization of the civilizational discourse at a new normal, for a new age. A critical part of this standardization process was a linguistic platform that could serve the civilizational bandwidth. In this, he was not alone in identifying that Sanskrit is the natural choice, and he advocated an aggressive Sanskritization of India as a critical medium of bringing great value and deeply buried resources back onto the worktable, as well as to level out cultural iniquities across the land.

Because of Ambedkar's visionary advocacy of Sanskrit, it is not surprising that a biography of the father of India's Constitution has been written in Sanskrit - in verse!- a distinction not owned by any other national leader. The report below is heartwarming because of the story it tells, the penitent inspiration felt by the author, his devotion, and the pains borne in accomplishing the task...

Ambedkar’s first biography in Sanskrit

Many of Ambedkar's ideas in other spheres have borne fruit, or are in the process of bearing fruit. But the renaissance of Sanskrit lags behind the rest. Along with some governmental agencies, grassroots organizations such as Samskrita Bharati are actively bridging the gap, and this is a revolution that gives every individual citizen the rare opportunity to personally be part of a history-changing aspect of civilization-building.

Self-Improvement

Note that Sanskrit serves not 'nation-building' but 'civilization-building', because Sanskrit by its very nature as a meta-language is global in its bandwidth. Internationally, several countries already use it as a root language, and several more can sign up at whatever level of affiliation they feel comfortable with. Therefore, an individual living anywhere can contribute to this civilization-building by partaking of it, for it is a part of an interpersonal process of one's own self-improvement.

In his survey of the entire spectrum of human intelligence, the philosopher and political mentor Vidyaranya put down Sanskrit grammar and linguistics as one of the grades of knowledge and training in a hierarchy of 16 steps that lead from the base to the sublime in human semantics (see Sarva Darshana Sangraha). For Sanskrit grammar not only gives better form to an evolving natural language, but attempts to model speech itself according to the fullest scale of semantic expression. Therefore, it is a civilizing medium for  the edification of the human mind.

Sky and Earth: Sanskrit and Other Languages
Because of this, Sanskrit has a unique relationship to all Prakrits. The Prakrits are vernacular languages in India or any other country that participates in Sanskriti (a culture of refinement). Since its most ancient times, Sanskrit has itself borne the mark of all Prakrits who participated in the culture of Sanskriti. Even the language of the Vedas is considered distinct from nearby Iranic languages because it bears the stamp of "Dravidian" phonetics from South India in its very rudiments. Conversely, a classical Dravidian language like Tamil reveals in its heart an inseparable contribution from Sanskrit in all its aspects, even in its word for "yes" (आम्) / ஆம்)!

Sanskrit does not compete with Prakrits for mindshare, but instead it absorbs their matter and distills it - and then returns the favour by enriching them with a more refined product. Consider an analogy:

Under the warmth of a shared sun, water evaporates from the various rivers, seas, ponds, even the most contaminated gutters, marshes and swamps, and forms clouds in the skies. Depending on the direction of the winds of time, the clouds move and discharge their distilled product. Similarly, Sanskrit has traditionally always absorbed material from all the subcultures that formed part of a shared sphere of civilization, and dispensed its influence on communities related to those fields of human endavour that most absorbed that civilization in any particular era. It re-formed, crystallized and standardized words and meanings according to the best knowledge of the day, and replenished those same Prakritic sources with semantically adjusted words that were standardized across the civilizational span at any given point in time.

Therefore, the Prakrits contribute to Sanskrit, and vice versa. They have a mother-father relationship, and enhance not just one another, but contribute differently and in parallel to the psychological and intellectual development of the children that speak both. May this union revive and prosper.

Reasons, reasons, reasons
Most of the reasons given above are applicable to anyone on the planet, any society that is searching for a methodical approach to globalization, a psycho-linguistic superstructure that can encompass and re-crystallize its diverse cultural patterns without threatening the integrity of their local native culture and language. This is a real challenge in today's world. Languages propagating by sheer economic influence compete for mindspace and cannot interface very well with local languages, or if they do it leads to an ugly creole replacing the original. No wonder there is quite a bit of...er...kolaveri among cultural vigilantes everywhere about the watered-down pop culture.

One landmass colliding with another will lead to distortions or submergence. But a language that intrinsically operates at a higher human level than the bazaar would answer the need. A sky and earth relationship; the sky does not interfere with the diversity underneath, and yet influences it substantively via changes in states and modes.

Of course, many of the people of India have no need for reasons to learn Sanskrit any more than they have a reason to love their fathers. It is directly connected with their identity, their Asmita. Or one could say that the people of India have a special reason to learn Sanskrit - because the sky is so high!

Owais and Owaisi: Two halves of Jarasandha

What sort of civilizational context can best manage its form and contents? Are some civilizational contexts better than others at this?

Doctrines or dogmas, priesthoods and caste-collectivization...these are part and parcel of any scientific, religious, or aesthetic tradition. How is this political and ideological creation best related with the undercurrent of knowledge and cognition itself? When does it protect and facilitate the growth of the tree of knowledge, and when does it merely feed off of and eventually suffocate its own host?

Recently, there was outrage over an incendiary hate-speech by Akbaruddin Owaisi close to Hyderabad city in south India. Basically, he portrayed Hinduism as a ludicrous and crass religious culture that was violent towards Moslems without any provocation, and he threatened that angry Moslems would overrun India if Hindu self-assertion develops any further traction.

The moniker "Owaisi" is used in Islamic Sufism to refer to a spiritual method named after one Hazrat Owais al-Qarani, a contemporary and devotee of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). "Owaisi" means someone who can be in the presence of and take teachings from the Prophet directly, across space and time, without an intermediary teacher. Taken as an individual, Owais is one of my favourite spiritual exemplars from any tradition. But odd as it may seem, Owais-like spiritual power and violent Islamism have not necessarily been antithetical to one another, ever since the very first generation of Islamic history. Its not even too strange  a coincidence that this hate-monger bears Owais' name. 

Pause for thought. Isn't it interesting that any spiritual movement observed in any tradition tends to yield two bifurcated social products after the passing of its founder - one connected to the founder by some structured physical association and an authorized, historical 'caste' setup to preserve and propagate; and the other a free-zone of emulation and continuous experimentation and seeking. Depending on historical circumstances, the movement can fuse these two halves, and expand and consolidate. But it inevitably keeps creating certain imbalances and problems. In fact, the greater the persistence it derives from the purushaarthic dynamics, the more trenchant the future sociological problem can be. Must this dogma-driven or caste-collectivized daemon be annihilated once it serves its purpose? If so, are the circumstances for its own annihilation created and set in motion by the enlightened founder? How?

The Vedas and most of its branches comprising Hinduism, Sikhism, etc. do speak of a spiritual potency that must go hand-in-hand with temporal strength. This is the basis of the purushaarthas, of the twin swords of miri and piri. But in which forge they are conceived and in whose hands these two swords become one...can make a world of difference. Conceived one way, a Dharmic context will contain and manage the dogmatic evolution and/or caste-order, and keep existing schools as mere portals to the ever-flowing stream of Dharma. But conceived another way, an Adharmic context will keep causing a series of convulsions to justify its dogma and/or collectivized caste-order, and it can be contained (or better annihilated) only by an outside force.

Recall the story of Jarasandha. Brihadratha was the king of Magadha. His wives were the twin princesses of Varanasi. While he led a full life, he was unable to have children for a very long time. Frustrated, he retreated to the deep forest, approached and served the sage Chandakaushika. The sage took pity on him and gifted him a fruit, telling him to give it to his wife who would then become pregnant. But the sage did not know that the king had two wives. In a schizophrenic turn of mind, as it were, Brihadratha split the fruit in half and gave it to both of them. Soon both the wives became pregnant and gave birth to two halves of a human body. These two lifeless halves were very horrifying to view. So Brihadratha ordered these to be thrown in the forest. A demoness (rakshasi - one who is compulsively 'protective') named "Jaraa" found these two pieces and held each of these in her two palms. Incidentally, when she brought both of her palms together, the two pieces fused  together giving rise to a living child. The child cried loudly which created panic in Jaraa. Not having the heart to devour a living child, the demoness gave it to the king and explained to him all that had happened. The father named the boy Jaraasandha (literally meaning "joined by Jaraa").

The Prophet Muhammad, even at the height of his spiritual and temporal power, was heckled by backbiters for being "abtar" - a frayed end, a lineage "cut off" - meaning one who has no living son to become his heir. It was an issue that frustrated the Prophet, and an entire short chapter of the Qu'ran was ostensibly revealed by Allah assuaging the Messenger and reflecting that same spite back on those detractors. (Qur'an, Chapter 108). 

انا اعطینک الکوثر
"Lo! We have given thee al-Kawthar (the refreshing fount at the gates of Paradise)"

فسل لربک وانحر
"So pray unto thy Lord, and sacrifice."

ان شانیک هو الابتر

"Lo! it is thy insulter (and not thou) who is cut off (without posterity)."

But politically, the issue of succession was to eventually devolve into dispersion and schism immediately after the Prophet's death (a saga still playing out in Sunni-Shi'a violence). In fact, the prospect of Islam as a living tradition was stillborn. Horrific internecine war, plague and general dispersion followed. To resolve this death spiral the Islamic community was forged as a regimented Khilafat (Caliphate) under the iron hand of the first two Caliphs, especially Omar Ibn al-Khattab, who used to walk the streets of Medina with a whip in hand. Thus regimented, he successfully diverted that aggression outward, attacked neighboring Persia and hit the jackpot. The rest is history.

What are the traces of bifurcation here? The obvious one is well-known: 'Ali, the Prophet's son-in-law and father of his grandsons, had claimed the mantle of, both, spiritual and temporal leadership. But the other senior Companions (who were also related to the Prophet, having given their daughters in marriage to him) claimed that they had the senior right to political leadership. Indeed, some of the later founders of the Sunni schools of jurisprudence said that in terms of fadheelat (excellence of virtue), the order of precedence puts Abu Bakr at the highest, Omar second, Osman third, and 'Ali fourth; but 'Ali was first in a separate spiritual category all by himself. Thus, according to this line of thought in the dominant school of Islam, the legacy of the Prophet could be split into two parts, and they were given to two different spiritual lineages connected to him by family ties. 

But there is a further, more interesting, and more subtle trace of bifurcation: Much to the consternation of all present, before passing away the Prophet actually bestowed his cloak on a completely different person with no family relationship - Owais al-Qarani, a camel-herder and a saintly personage in Yemen who had never met the Prophet in person, but was supposedly in communion with him telepathically. Not only did Owais have no tribal or family relation with the Prophet, he is not even considered a Companion by any Sunni school, since a Companion must by definition have been in the physical association of the Prophet and/or have served in the association of other Companions at least once. We will come back to Owais again later in this post.

The uneasy cleavage of the spiritual and the temporal was always problematic throughout Islamic history. For a long time, "Sufism" was a continuation of pre-existing spiritual cultures from the surviving remnants of Mithraic, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, neo-Platonic and Christian traditions of the Middle East, Egypt and India. Most Sufism at one time was considered outright heresy, and throughout its history its cutting-edge spiritual teachers were honored with the cutting-edge of the Caliph' temporal sword slicing their necks. Then the revered Imam Ghazali came and brokered a theoretical truce, claiming to show that Sufism could be fused with Islam, and that in fact the two could execute a very useful twinship. Thereafter, just as Guns and Bibles would later pioneer European colonialism, so did Swords and Sufis first set that template for expansion and consolidation.

But what makes this twinship a Jarasandha? The Bhagavad Gita, too, was spoken on a battlefield, so how is that different? Well, Ghazali wanted to fuse spirituality with Islam only insofar as it subordinated itself to the absolute dominance of the regimen of shari'ah and its supervising priesthood, its caste-collective, and its dogmas. He still attacked most spiritual schools of the time with vitriol. He wanted the spiritually packaged "Sufism" to be a cooling fount of ablution, with which the devout could soothe their agitations and refresh mind and spirit before re-entering the mosque.

Now the shari'ah is fundamentally based on the idea that in the person of the Prophet and his ways is the truth, and the perfect duplication of the truth is the true method. In the ways in which different Companions of the Prophet did this are reportedly found paths to the truth, and the shari'ah models them perfectly. Most often, this duplication of the truth is of the form of imitation. In fact, the satisfaction of simply imitating the behaviors of the Prophet was considered the greatest and most complete stage of self-realization according to the next great teacher who gave Islamism its ideological form - Imam Rabbani, or Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi, who lived in India during Moghal times. Thus, given matching circumstances, there is no sin in the devout committing apparently graceful or terrifying actions, as long as he does so in the consciousness of its alignment with the calculus of shari'ah, just like an automaton servant. Indeed, there is merit in performing all such apparently beautiful or terrifying acts with the force of an intention without reservation.

But most Indic traditions would consider a different permutation - that religious and social regimen, and case studies of the behaviors of spiritual exemplars, are at best a parallel track to individual spiritual knowingness, and that the inter-relation between the two is the subject of ethics. Emulation, not imitation, is emphasized - in fact, imitation is considered dangerous in Vedanta, which says that acts must be based on adhikara, spiritual qualification. Imitation of the amoral acts of higher beings is spiritually harmful, like a form of 'spiritual pedophilia':

धर्म-व्यतिक्रमो दृष्ट

ईश्वराणां च साहसम् ।

तेजीयसां न दोषाय

वह्नेः सर्व-भुजो यथा ॥ 

"The transgressions of Dharma observed, by the Great Controllers seemingly audacious...To such spiritually potent beings this is no blemish, like the fire that devours all and remains pure." - Srimad Bhagavatam, 10.33.29

Owais al-Qarani was someone who had only heard of the Prophet and his new religion, and became a devotee at heart. He had a blind mother to take care of, and so he would herd camels for part of the day and use the proceeds to lead a simple life. Before his death, when the Prophet Muhammad said that he wished to bequeath his mantle to a man named Owais in Yemen, all the Companions were shocked, most had never even heard of him. They inquired, "If he is such a great devotee of Allah and His Messenger, why has he never even come to see you once, where was he to serve the cause of Islam during all the battles?" It is said that the Prophet defended Owais' absence on the grounds of some provisions of shari'ah law, saying that since he had a blind mother to care for, he was exempt. As unconvincing as this was, the Companions couldn't object, and the Prophet sent his cloak with Omar and 'Ali - along with a request to Owais to intercede and save all Muhammad's followers on Judgment Day. Both of them found Owais in the wilderness of Yemen, in a state of meditation. (It was later said that Owais would spend hours in such meditation, and would sometimes be so absorbed in his Prophet that when the Prophet lost a tooth at the Battle of Uhud, Owais's own tooth reportedly dropped off at that very moment.) They gave him the cloak along with the Prophet's request. Owais reluctantly accepted it and asked for some time to meditate alone. He took his time, and heard a voice say, "We have forgiven most of the Companions". But Owais was persistent with his Lord: "I want forgiveness for all his believers." He continued to meditate on the Lord. But it is said that curiosity and impatience got the beter of Omar and he started to walk up to Owais. Seeing him approach, Owais was distracted. He told Omar, "If you had not disturbed me, I would not have worn this cloak until God had bestowed all of Muhammad's followers to me."

Later many second generation Moslems would come to Owais to see him and ask him for spiritual advice. Once they told Owais of an old Companion who had now dug his own grave and was residing in it day and night waiting for his time to arrive, so he could pledge allegiance to Allah and His Messenger one all-important, final time. Owais went to see the man, and found him weak. Owais said: "You have given 30 years to your coffin and your grave, allowing them to come between you and God. They have become your idols." It is said that the man saw the light of Owais and through him realized how much time he had wasted; with a cry he lay his head down and passed on from this world.

Haram Ibn Hayyam said, "I went to visit Owais al-Qarani. He asked the reason for my visit. I explained that I felt a peace in his holiness' presence. To which Owais replied: 'I have never seen anyone who knows what is God, and yet finds more peace and comfort in the presence of another being.'"

Haram Ibn Hayyam requested Owais, "Give me a hadith from the holy Prophet." He replied, "Though I have heard a great deal about him, I never met him. I would not want to engage in story-telling and hadith. I have far too much work to get on with and this is not among them."

"And choose a friend who is able to free you from all else."

"An aim is required before embarking on an action. Therefore, if your aim is to find God and His Messengers, then surely you will reach your aim."

Owais said, "I wanted a high position in life, I found it in modesty. I wanted leadership, I found it in giving advice. I wanted dignity, I found it in honesty. I wanted greatness, I found it in poverty. I wanted lineage, I found it in virtue. I wanted majesty, I found it in contentment. I looked for peace and found it in asceticism."

Later on in old age, after his mother had passed away, Owais went and joined the faction of 'Ali. He volunteered at the Battle of Saffein. Apparently, he wasn't much of a warrior. He was martyred there. They say:

شود رد ابد بو جهل در دامن پیامبر

اویس در بیابان یمن گردد به حق بینا

"Even so close to the robe of the Messenger, 'Bu Jahl passed Eternity by;

While Owais witnessed the Truth in the wilderness of Yemen!"

Jarasandha had a persistence, power and vitality that was preternatural. In the end he was killed by Bhima, the son of Vayu (vitality itself), who was Hanuman in a previous life, and the great teacher Madhva claimed to be his next incarnation.  Bhima was the most certain of the five Pandavas, never hesitating in doubt, and had an intention that was without any reservation, especially when it came to annihilating an enemy. Bhima could marry a demoness and produce a devotee of Dharma from that union who would martyr himself for the Lord. Bhima would satisfy himself by drinking the blood of the slain Duhshasana. Bhima's intention was clear and without reservation, even though many of his actions inspire horror or disgust in lovers of Dharma.

After an interminable fight and numerous unsuccessful methods to handle Jarasandha, Bhima eventually killed Jarasandha by a method insinuated by K. - Bhima tore Jarasandha's body into its two unfused halves. Then he flung each half cross-wise in the opposite direction. Thus, the two halves could not merge back into one and resurrect.

The Dasyu-Dāsa dynamic vs. "class struggle" theory

What is the relationship between conflict and service? Anything on social justice and political transformation in the Vedas (supposedly accused of feudal casteism)? Actually I think understanding the injustices of politics, economics and ideology/religion as a Dasyu-Dāsa dynamic from all angles is far more enlightening as a theory than the demagoguery of half-baked "class struggle" semantics found in Marxist historiography. The former offers an insight, the latter only incites. The former is a truer observation and is psychological, the latter is opportunistic and based on justified thought conceived in an unstable condition.

There is a prominent sentiment in the Veda that calls upon the divinity Indra, Thunder-wielder, for help in liquidating those corrupt crackpots who play power games solely on the strength of being high-born, exclusive esoteric mystics, saviors from an oppressive foe, charismatics, fortuitous chosen races, and whatnot, and who instigate or mobilize large numbers of brainwashed orcs to wield political power:

Rg Veda 6.42.04:
अस्मा अस्मा इदन्धसोSध्वर्यो प्र भरा सुतम् ।
कुवित्समस्य जेन्यस्य शर्धतोSभिशस्तेरवस्परत् ॥

"To him, Adhvaryu! yea, to him give offerings of the juice expressed.
Will he not keep us safely from the spiteful curse of each presumptuous high-born foe?"

Rg Veda 6.19.12:
जनं वज्रिन्महि चिन्मन्यमानमेभ्यो नृभ्यो रन्धया येष्वस्मि ।
अधा हि त्वा पृथिव्यां शूरसातौ हवामहे तनये गोष्वप्सु ॥

"Give up the people who are high and haughty to these men and to me, O Thunder-wielder!
Therefore upon the earth do we invoke thee, where heroes win, for sons and kine and waters."

This "high-born" foe is apparently the "Dasyu", who often lead the "Dāsas". A friend explained: The problem starts with development of personality-cults, whether in the form of deities or their spokespersons on earth. Elite sense of entitlement to power, but marginalization within the elite, leads to search for mobilization outside the elites. Once the non-elite has been mobilized to destroy intra-elite competitors, the new-power goes back to older elite drives. This is when personality cult develops - and a new elite base forms, often accompanied by sequential purges to reduce the number of competitors for power, and a coterie reinforces the personality cult. Net result - a society of "dāsas" under an elite super-personality. A slave society in more ways than one.

[Later in the Pauranic shift of Indian civilization, Indra is humiliated and sidelined, especially in the Vaishnava tradition which is historically associated with a birth-based, feudalistic, agrarian, hierarchical caste order. I wondered whether this change in Indra's popular image has anything to do with changing sociological circumstances or necessities of the time, but I am not qualified to comment on it.]

But "dāsa" in the Veda doesn't always mean the enemy, though it most often refers to an enemy. Yet, its greatest heroes also have "dāsa" in their names. The central Bhārata protagonist of the War of Ten Kings is called Sudās, and his illustrious father is called Divodāsa. The Vedic root "dās" (दास्) is understood by most to have the sense of "being used up" or "to yield up". A friend explained: "Dāsa" has a self-deprecating connotation when used in a proper name. But original usage for 'dāsa' is not as a collective noun meaning captive slave who provides service. It's originally used for enemies in Rg Veda. Even the root of this verbal noun is 'dāsati' which is used in the sense of destroy/assail/attack. The verb used in RgVeda for captive or fettered is gṛbhīta; and it's never used for 'dāsa'.

He adds: Leave alone the question of religious sanction for slavery; even if someone were to use secondary texts to assert slavery as a mainstream institution in Vedic India, the burden of proof is on them to corroborate it with actual archaeological evidence. Just compare the pictorial evidence of slavery in Pompeii for instance; evidence in Egypt; Scythian slave trade. There is just no comparison in India. Since Vedic India did not have monumental construction; instead it had strict rules for food and ritual and other spiritual disciplines, what could these hypothetical slaves do for the owners?

In Vedic spirituality, there seems to have been a warning against associating any permanent material property with a so-called divine significance. No grandiose stupas, temples, mosques, cathedrals. Even the custom altar for the Fire ritual was itself burned down after the exercise was completed. Ritual was drilled and performed as a sensory training routine and an interpersonal objective process. Thus, the spiritual foci of Vedic civilization were logical and honest, and not meant to be based on ways and means of priest-craft, politics, and mass hypnotism.

The Vedic foci were not merely elevationist, nor mainly salvationist, but rather noetic - i.e., it has components for regressive, progressive, linear and cyclical motion on the Time line, and is therefore able to be holistic in its understanding and holographic in it mental map and imagination. This is different from those spiritual/ideological cultures or cults (religious or Marxist, etc.) built around just an elevationist-salvationist dipole. The political dynamics of Vedic civlization was meant to be a discourse around holistic civilizational purpose rather than solely around economic gain, or social stability, or annihilation in a metaphysical ideal.

But how would one connect the transformation of the root dās'  meaning from "destroy/assail" to "servant", especially when humble servitude is different from humiliating, forced slavery? My sense is that dās has the sense of 'to punish' or 'to use up'. Just like in English one can say, 'to punish a jar of whiskey'. So then dās could mean either to destroy something by force, or to use it up in willing service. So "Divodāsa" would mean 'one who is used up in service by the divinities'. After all, this body is wasted by Time anyways, better to offer it to be used up in conscious service by the divinities, for the sake of Divine Civilization.

What one feels one cannot "have" (possess with satisfaction), one must make better use of. What one feels one is unable to even use freely, one must first be made able to waste. The perspective of knowledge is that there is no scarcity of bodies (or material) - though Life is precious. The perspective of Ignorance is that all economics is based on scarcity and that in turn influences psychology.

My friend corroborates: I agree with you. Turns out dāsa' isn't the only word with this dual meaning. Even the word 'aryaḥ' (plural) and 'ariḥ' (singular) are often used in two ways:
- devout or suppliant when used for oneself before Gods
- then in some verses as a generic collective for enemies.

E.g., Rg Veda 8.48.8: ... mā no aryo anukāmaṃ parādāḥ
Addressed to Indu: "Give us not to our enemy's will/wish."

Rg Veda 2.12.6 ... so aryaḥ puṣtīrvija ivā mināti
"He (Indra) diminishes the possessions of the enemy like (a gambler) reduces the stake."

Now that's interesting. Usage of "ariḥ" as enemy is common, but I don't often come across it used for devotee!

Coming back to the point - So "dāsa" can be good or bad. How so? It depends on who/what is being served, or rather who or what is using up one's resources and body. If the Dasyu is your master, then surely it is a negative term in the Veda. If the Devas are one's beloved, then it is positive. (See also a previous post on this blog: "Human command potentials and roles in Civilization".) So every mobilization, religious or not, has a particular context and an undercurrent that deserves attention. One cannot draw a false moral equivalence.

Given that in its Vedic fundamentals, Hinduism has a clear antipathy to the Dasyu-Dāsa dynamic, it is strange that one finds so many manifestations of this dynamic that crept into Hindu civilization over the last 14 centuries. Something went rotten at the political heart of the civilization, some ethical Condition was mis-handled, something was displaced, first subtly from within, and later overtly and brutally under foreign occupations. It has been a long and humiliating 14 century exile, but one which has its treasures of devotion, purpose, identity, learning and being able to discriminate good from evil.

Some more on these fundamentals:
- Agniveer: Vedas and Dāsa.
- Agniveer: Vedas and Dasyu in Hinduism.

Lastly, as tiresome as it is, one can't put the pen down without a note about the spurious "Aryan-Dravidian" Apartheid race theories used by European colonial historians to misinterpret the Veda. "Dāsa" doesn't mean a "Dravidian" race. In fact, the heroic King Sudās calls several of his enemies "dāsa", including those who are "Arya". Arya was a cultural term. Thus, the large coalition of enemy nations ranged against our Sudas were depicted as an army of Dāsas lead by Dasyus, and they included some clans that were Arya and some that weren't. Whereas Sudās' own allies included Arya and non-Arya too. The Veda is far too complex and subtle for the tendentious interpretations of baser motivations to fly too far for too long.

...aaand the necessary disclaimer - All this is assuming one can reasonably assign Sanskrit meanings to the sonic data stream of the Veda - in itself a highly creative and speculative exercise based on cognitive states and scientific observation, as well as the strictest grammatical analysis of sound patterns. In one sense one can say that the poor speculative Vedic derivations of older colonial Western Indologists and Indian Marxists is also valid, as a reflection of their own metacognitions on life and the world and its interpersonal semantics.

Thus again, understanding the Dasyu-Dāsa dynamic from all angles is far more enlightening as a theory than the incitement of half-arse "class struggle" semantics found in Marxist historiography. This Marxist narrative is used by all manner of inimical forces in India today, to attack the core. (See a previous blogpost on this: "Psychohistory vs. Dumb Dialectics".) In India, the field of work associated with the political Left is ripe for an injection of better ideologies, and the emergence of a genuine "Hindutva" Left is much needed.

Already a lot of grassroots work is being done. K.N. Govindacharya, after he withdrew from the BJP and took a sabbatical, has been involved in a certain direction which is noteworthy. Per Wiki: Today he believes that challenges before the nation have to be confronted on three fronts - creative, intellectual and agitational. Therefore, he founded three organizations to fight on the following fronts:

1. Bharat Vikas Sangam: This is a working for needed model of economic development directed towards swadeshi and decentralisation.
2. Kautilya Shodh Sansthan: This is a research organisation working in the civilization context of Bharat.
3. Rashtriya Swabhiman Andolan: This organisation opposes the anti people and anti nature policies of the governments without having any political aspiration of its own.

One hopes such efforts proliferate. There are a lot of sincere individuals doing grassroots work to relieve social and economic injustices, but they are often duped into swallowing the narrative woven by well-funded NGOs and their ideological networks that are frankly ignorant or actively inimical to India's civilizational interests. Therefore, ideological creativity and better networking are essential. Vedic textual memes such as the Dasyu-Dāsa dynamic offer a more mature narrative for the benefit of all.

Here is an elaborate sculpture at Thailand's Bangkok International Airport, depicting the churning of the Milk Ocean by the tug of war between the Devas and the Asuras. [Would funding such a public cultural artifact be possible for the Government of India? Or is only a photo of the Taj Mahal "secular" enough to be included in all its cultural advertisements?]

The Resurrection of the Karma Kanda

Happy Easter to all.
Is it better to have a fundamentally progressive or hidebound Constitutional framework for civilization, law, spiritual life, etc.? In what matters does one adopt a liberal Policy, and in what is conservatism better sense? When are permissive and draconian Acts justified? Can a permissive or draconian Act telescope into a conservative or liberal Policy respectively? And can all relevant combinations of these be used to serve a fundamentally progressive (or alternatively a fundamentally hidebound) Constitution?

The proposal here is that the Semantics of any Data depends on the Condition or Phase of the 'organism' relative to Time, and so the Action taken on Data depends on the Condition. (An 'organism' here can be the individual, family, clan, organization, portion of an organization, nation, civilization, the Earth taken as a whole - or any stream of data, etc..)

In understanding Constitutional purpose, one could consider Prakriti and Purusha and their interrelationship. Purusha may have considerable residual knowledge of its own...but the knowledge in which an 'organism' is interested is information concerning the Laws of Purusha and Prakriti as they apply to the composite 'organism'. The Laws of this interaction are known as Maya, which spans the gamut of Realism, from empiricism to magical realism. Each and every organism develops in the ratio that it understands and utilizes these laws correctly. All Learning of these laws springs from a disorderly entanglement where Purusha has impinged too suddenly or sharply on Prakriti with little regard for the advice of Time. As Purusha withdraws and frees itself of this entanglement, the Data of Prakriti's virginal states and its effects upon those becomes observable - and thereby converted to Experience. In the process, entrapped Life-force is also freed - and so Learning of these Laws occurs. Further, all of the philosophical reasoning behind Policy (the use of these Laws in proper order relative to Time) is made when Purusha returns over Prakriti for an orderly and harmonious winning over.

Very few knowledge-cultures have tried to model these organismic Laws via a Purusha-Prakriti model. This ought to be an area of special interest to observers of trends in world affairs today, its problems and proposed solutions from different cultures. Islam models its Laws via its own science of jurisprudence (usool ul fiqh), and the laws of what it considers the "subjugation" (taskheer) of Prakriti by Purusha. Therefore, the priesthood of fiqh and shari'ah proposes and disposes along the lines of this model, and the semantics of the Islamic model gives an indication of its purpose and Constitutional tone. Western jurisprudence, and in particular Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, is of a different Constitutional tone from Islamic shari'ah, but due to a particularly painful and confused historical experience with religion, it has shied away from boldly including certain metaphysical angles in its co-ordinates, and therefore it lacks 'altitude' and relies on compartmentalization. What does the Veda say of the laws of Policy and Activity, and what is the wingspan of its semantics?

Since Vedic sound is fundamentally a stream of Data, its Semantics and therefore its application would change based on the Condition of the organism in question. But for over a millennia in India, the Vedic stem of Acts (कर्मकाण्ड) has come to mean solely the acts of ceremonial and sacrificial rite. That's from Vedic commentators like Sayana (14th c. AD), Mahidhara (16th c. AD) and Uvata (11th c. AD), who were all very recent interpreters from the 'medieval' era. External shocks to India's body politic had begun by the 5th century AD. By their times, key centers and flows of Vedic civilization were already under occupation and continuous life-threatening attack, and it was in political retreat, fighting deep on its own home turf for survival. It was, as explained below, in a condition of Non-existence in several parts of the subcontinent, a condition of Treachery in several crucial areas, even co-opted into a condition of Covert Liability or Active Enmity in key areas, and generally in a condition of Danger in the subcontinent as a whole. Therefore, that medieval assignment of meanings to Veda must be seen as very contextual - for a lockdown of Veda into words and action, or the lockdown of political economic organization into hereditary caste duties, could be an appropriate mechanism in one or two of those Conditions, but not most others.

Ethics (Dharma) itself is unconditional and therefore eternal, sanatana. But its ethical laws of application depends on time, place, and the cultural maturity of stakeholders. A wrong-headed application is unethical, because it doesn't benefit the greatest number of stakeholders in the greatest number of ways (in a given circumstance), and therefore endangers personal or social integrity.

Wrong-headed applications are fundamentally due to improper understanding, though an incomplete understanding is often most eager to take an entrenched 'principled' stand. Wrong-headed applications can be due to venality and corruption. Here, opportunity, expediency, threats and worries aren't entities that come knocking - rather, they occupy the castle and inform it. Wrong-headed applications can be due to ignorance or apathy. "'Tis is not ours to question why," they say. Or a fatalistic misunderstanding of 'Karma' and other metaphysical angles.

In all cases wrong-headedness is a crooked combination of all three above. Set right, real Karma can be performed with true purpose - for Karma Yoga is the enactment of Dharma, and is always a felicitous joy [BG 9.2], a spirited challenge and a love affair. Its primary components are Spiritual sacrifice (यज्ञ), Material giving (दान), and Psychological annealing (तपस्) [BG 18.5].

I've heard that over 2000 years ago there was a massive shift from from the Vedic to Pauranic Hinduism in Greater India - probably following the divorce of the Iranic stem from the Indic core. I've heard some knowledgeable people think aloud that the time is come for a shift back to the Vedic. Therefore, the significance of the theory and application of the Karma-kanda of Purva Mimamsa as given in the Vedangas must be revitalized, reinterpreted in its broadest sense, and made a foundation for nation-building. For a few centuries, it had become fashionable in populist Pauranic schools to deride it publicly and keep it as the preserve of the priesthood. Almost 2 centuries ago, the first sentiments for modern Indian freedom and internal reform began when Swami Dayananda gave the call 'Back to the Vedas'. Even before that, Sikhism took some decisive steps in that direction that changed India's history as well as the Middle East / C. Asia. (It would be an interesting exercise to see in which Conditions below both these movements succeeded and in which they faltered.)

The following is a series of Conditions of the ethical integrity of the 'organism'. As given by the rules of shiksha and other Vedangas, the basic task is to be able to:
1. First estimate (ऊहा) the current ethical Condition and trend-line of the 'organism' in question.
2. Apply the correct formula for that Condition thoroughly, until it ceases to be applicable and there is a change in Condition.

One can estimate what Condition formula to apply only by closely observing trends. This is done by inspecting stats over time. (A single stat is meaningless.) If the correct Condition is not estimated and some wrong formula is applied, or the correct formula is misapplied, then the organism drops one Condition lower.

The Conditional formula is the Code of Conduct to be used to stay healthy and maintain the integrity of the 'organism' under that Condition, and prevent it from going into a dwindling spiral. The steps of the formula are to be applied energetically, in the same exact order and sequence, and without adding needless or redundant steps. Cease to apply when stats indicate it.

One can wreak an organism by applying the wrong formula in the wrong Condition. The universe is made that way. An example of this would be Arjuna's pseudo-wisdom in the 2nd chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, which K. dismisses as प्रज्ञावादांश्च भाषसे, and "not a heaven-bound" (अस्वर्ग्यं) code of action in the present circumstance. Arjuna was about to fall into a dwindling spiral. Conditional formulae are part and parcel of the Activity of the universe.

Applying the right formula always works, no matter how dull or stupid the person who is applying it. Intelligence and brilliance can change the speed of recovery or expansion, but the end phenomenon itself is an inevitable product of acting on the formula and nothing else. The humble idiot who applies it correctly is better than the blooming genius who deviates from the laws of Action due to his egotistical fancy. This is the essence of karma-kanda philosophy as I understand it. Of course, the dull one who is unable to estimate the Condition and apply the formula exactly will naturally be remiss.

If the organism lacks the ability to observe its own Conditions and use the formulae, then expansion and survival is entirely a matter of chance or fate - regardless of how good its ideas are. Ideas alone do not attract Grace and Mercy.

An attempt to list the Conditions in ascending order, from lower to higher. In another sense, all 12 Conditions or Phases are equal, especially in Meditation. Corrections and feedback is welcome:

Condition	Indicators	Formula
Chaos अनवस्था (as opposed to वर्णव्यवस्था)	·  Total chaos and dispersion. ·  Any set of factors or circumstances which do not seem to have any immediate solution. ·  Random motion of all ‘particles’ of the system. No factor is clearly understood. ·  Unpatterned flows. All particles randomly interact and stay in the area. No particle leaves the area and hence there is no product. · It is a basic cause of dullness and stupidity.	Control resolves Confusion. 1. Locate oneself in Present Time and Space. “Realize where you are and what space you deserve to occupy.” To be able to fix attention on even one factor or particle of the system, and then seeing other particles in some relation to it is enough to remove this condition. Confusion can be conflated with Treachery (below). First apply group formula for Confusion, then apply Treachery formula (below) and continue on all the way up.
Treachery by Inaction स्वधर्मत्याग	·  Betrayal after trust - by inaction. ·  A failure due to lack of will to fulfill the roles and responsibilities one has within the organism, and betrayal of the functions and purposes of the group.	1. Remedy criminal inaction by finding a sense of being. “Realize that you are.” Asmita  is Sanskrit for “I am-ness” and signals pride and identity.
Active Enemy अरिः	·  Avowed and knowing enemy to survival of an individual, group, project or organization.	1. Focus and resolution of identity and othering. “Find out who you really are.” Would include political defections, religious conversions, etc to remove this condition.
Uncertainty संशय	·  Crisis of belonging. ·  Cannot make up one’s mind about an individual, group, project, etc. ·  Being a cause of uncertainty, which complicates decisive action with cloudy details or sham profundity.	1. Inform oneself honestly of the actual intentions and activities of that group or person, without bias or rumours. 2. Examine the stats of that person or group. 3. Based on the greatest good for the greatest number of universal purushaarthas, decide whether it is best to attack, harm, contain or help that person or group. 4. Evaluate oneself or one’s own group as to intentions and objectives. 5. Evaluate one’s own stats and group stats. 6. Join or remain in or befriend the one which progresses towards the purushaarthic summum bonum. Announce the fact publicly to both sides. 7. Do everything possible to improve the stats of the person or group one has remained in or joined. 8. तपस् - Suffer on up the Conditions in the chosen group if wavering in it or harming it earlier has lowered its status.
Covert Liability द्रोह	·  The being has ceased to simply be Non-existent and irrelevant (below), and has taken on the colour of an enemy. ·  Careless or malicious and knowing damage caused to projects, activities, etc. ·  This Condition is assigned after a long, unchanging pattern of conduct is detected and observed. ·  Often covert. Being cannot be trusted.	1. Have that being decide who its real friends are. 2. Offer that being the opportunity deliver an effective blow to enemies of the group it has been pretending to be part of - despite personal danger in taking this action. 3. Make up the damage one has done by personal contribution far beyond the ordinary demands of a group member. 4. Apply for re-admission to the group by asking personal permission of each member, and rejoining only by majority permission. If refused, repeat steps 1-4 until one is allowed to join again.
Non-existence असत्	·  Not mattering. Not affecting matter, energy, space and time. Becoming non-existent or fossilized or merely nominal. ·  Every new appointee begins in this Condition. He tries to start off in a Condition of Power because he is self-aware of the position he holds - but other terminals have no reality on this yet.	1. Find all communication channels related to one’s post. 2. Make oneself known on all comm channels. Find out from other terminals what’s going on, limited by security pledges and NTK rules. 3. Study the system and discover what is needed or wanted. Do a detail survey and appraisal. 4. Do, produce or present, as the case may require. If formula is applied intelligently, one enters the Bypass zone of the Condition of Danger. Then one must apply that formula. The inhale and exhale of an organism is the give and take of vital particles such as information, skills, leadership roles, wealth, research knowledge, and genetic heritage – in decreasing order of velocity.
Danger संकट	·  Danger is assigned when a Condition of Emergency (below) has lasted for too long. ·  Or a statistic plunges very steeply. ·  Or a senior post finds itself wearing the hat of another activity because it is in trouble.	1. Bypass – ignore the agencies normally in charge and handle under direct control. 2. Handle situ and any danger in it. 3. Publicly assign Danger condition to the area. 4. Assign each individual in the Danger area a personal Danger condition and have them apply the individual Danger formula (derived below) in their personal spheres. 5. Reform - reorganize the activity so that condition does not recur. 6. Recommend firm Policy so that in future the condition will be better detected and/or prevented. Personal Danger formula: 1. Bypass habits and normal routines. 2. Handle the situ and any dangers in it. 3. Consciously assign self a Danger condition. 4. Examine personal ethics, identify out-points, use self-discipline to straighten it out. Write-up a confessional of out-points searching proper memory of time, place, form of deviation, and actual event. This action usually produces a small to medium miracle in life – and one becomes acutely and ecstatically aware of all-pervading metaphysical powers and forces of ethics in the universe. 5. Reorganize your life so that Danger condition is not continually happening to you. 6. Formulate and adopt a firm policy that can detect and prevent in future.
Emergency आपत्काल	·  Stats are declining. OR Stats are not changing.	1. Promote the group/organization. In case of individual – produce more efficiently. 2. Change the operating basis. Working harder on same operating basis and expecting change is Lahori logic. If one promotes one’s group and idea but does not change operating basis, one will head for another Emergency condition. Another positive example: Over the past 1000 years, Indian civilization changed one aspect of its operating basis by moving to Prakrits, and later even assimilated foreign Prakrits to some extent (Persian, English). That was in a different Condition. Today the Condition is again changing, and it is time to create a new operating basis again and bring in Sanskrit 2.0. 3. Economize. 4. Prepare to deliver. 5. Stiffen discipline/ethics against corruption, improve work culture and commitment. Ultimately life itself will discipline the individual, so might as well save oneself and one’s dependents some trouble.
Normalcy सामान्य	·  Routine or gradual increase in stats. ·  It comes close to “stability” (निर्विकार), but static stability (no increase, no decrease) does not exist in the universe. Therefore, if there is no gradual increase, there will be no stability.	1. Don’t change anything. Monitor stats and maintain system. 2. Justice factor is mild and reasonable. No draconian action. 3. Everytime a stat changes for the better, find out what caused it. Then incorporate that without abandoning anything else that was being done before. 4. Everytime a stat worsens slightly, find out why and remedy it systemically. 5. Keep jockeying between 3 and 4 – when some change happens, get the change factor off the lines.
Prosperity समृद्धि	·  Positive statistical line goes steeply up. ·  Affluence in isolation or in partnership or as subordinate to another. ·  Prosperity is the most risky of all Conditions. If one does not spot it and apply the formula, one can fall off the roof and fall splat on the street below. Spotted and handled well, it can be a leap over the moon.	1. Economize. Don’t buy or devote any money, time, energy or faith to anything that has a future commitment to it. a. Remove all needless or dispersed actions that did not contribute to present Condition. 2. Pay off every bill and debt possible. Fulfill as many obligations as possible reasonably. 3. Invest the remainder in service facilities, service readiness. Make it more possible to deliver. a. Make every action count and don’t engage in useless actions. Every new action must be of the same kind as those that did contribute. Consolidate gains, don’t let complacency set in. No downhill or roller-coaster. 4. Discover what caused the Condition of Prosperity and strengthen it for the time being.
Power प्रभुः	·  Stats in a very high range - a Normal trend in a higher octave, so to speak. ·  Power is not a short-term stat . It is a trend that can be relied upon. ·  It is a Normal in such high range, that it is total abundance. ·  In this range, there may be a slight dip here and there, but it is still Power. ·  Creates leisure and security.	1. Don’t disconnect from past associations from previous Conditions. Take ownership and responsibility for one’s past friends, family, mates, caste, inter-caste buddies and acquaintances, and all other connections. 2. Write up one’s record of one’s service role and its details. This is essential for the next incumbent in same role. Next incumbent for the post must know what not to change. 3. Make the post occupiable by someone else who is qualified. This is the Condition for Relinquishment (त्याग / संन्यास).
Transfer of Power संक्रान्ति or परम्परा	·  Handing over power or being overtaken by another in a mutually beneficial transaction. ·  Only 2 circumstances require transfer of power – very successful or very unsuccessful. This Condition is for the very successful case. One takes over a new or collapsed post in a Condition of Non-existence. But a going concern is taken over in Transfer of Power. ·  This is the Condition for Meditation (ध्यान) and Devotion to the Supreme Being (भक्ति).	1. Don’t change anything. All pressure points may come in on the new incumbent at once. Resist them in the same way the predecessor did (appropriate varnic शमो दम). Don’t do anything. 2. Keep learning and observing. Apply Normal Condition formula if necessary. 3. Study the Policy docs and Admin record. Learn and follow patterns and activity. 4. Issue no orders that are not instructed as routine by predecessors. 5. Innovate nothing, change nothing. 6. Write up one’s own record of observations. “Change nothing until you are thoroughly familiar with your new zone of power.” Special Note: A Danger Condition can occur by a violation of the Transfer formula. To remedy it: 1. Observe, question, and draw up a list of what was previously successful in one’s zone of control. 2. Observe, question, and draw up a list of what was unsuccessful in one’s zone of control. 3. Get the successful actions in. 4. Knock off all unsuccessful actions. 5. Shrug off all tendencies to frantically cope or “defend”. 6. Sensible get back into a working structure.