On Thursday 11 Jun 2009 11:04:33 am Indrajit Gupta wrote: > Anthropologically, sociologically, it is amazing that a culture that got > down to defining distances from different types of animal that were safe to > maintain, to defining complications of physical disposition during > intercourse that are brutally frank in their depiction of the > possibilities, that can minutely subdivide which sub-caste may marry which > other finally fails to lay down laws relating to community cleanliness. > > Any clue, Shiv, what this huge gap might signify?
IG I can say this to you safely, although this is a publicly archived list. My view on tis causes offence in some quarters. But, whether you like it or not, the Indian (Hindu?) thrust has always been towards emancipation and release of the individual. It is always about keeping oneself pure, keeping oneself safe, keeping oneself above all bad things. It is very much a set of guidelines to look after yourself in person, with very little to tell you what to do about your neighbor other than shun him if he does things that may sully your personal purity. As far as my (possibly limited) knowledge goes, one's main duties to society are laid out. A child undergoes the rites of initiation into brahmacharya, after which he must look after one's Guru's and his own interests. Later he must look after his family. But what does he do about his neighbor? His village? These appear to be fundamental lacunae that nobody has managed to explain to me - which only means that I may well be right and that there are no rules that tell you what to do in terms of "civic order". To this day Indian behavior seems to me to illustrate just these attitudes. When an Indian sees a man defecating off a walking path, there is no indignation, no sense of wanting to tell the man off. Instead the Indian tendency is to skirt around the man and avoid looking at him or referring to him. Any reference to such a man (shitting by the side of path) is dismissed with the admonition that one must avoid such dirty talk. Groundnut shells and orange peel are just chucked on the floor. Let me be frank and up front. Some aspects of human behavior in India show remarkable similarities to non human primate behavior or other animal behavior. If you see a monkey eating peanuts, the shells are chucked in a manner similar to the woman in the railway carriage. Watching a herd of cattle head out of a narrow gate is like watching a crowd of Indians at a post office counter. If I was non Indian and white my words would surely be called racist. Even now I can accuse myself of fractal recursive behavior in which I take on the role of a foreigner and choose to be racist. The archetypal "coconut" - who is brown on the outside, white on the inside. But I will accept such criticism in the interest of saying thoughts that come to my mind. Perhaps the definition of "racism" is wrong and Indians are just diffeernt. Chucking groundnuts and orange peel on the ground has served the animal kingdom well for millions of years, as has the way cattle queue up at narrow exits. It is only a sense that humans should behave different from "animals" that makes us mock humans who appear to behave like other animals. The answer may well be that despite protestations, a huge number of Indians have not changed or been compelled to change their behavior from one that is acceptable in a jungle society, or a small isolated habitation in the wilderness, where "dirt" can appear anywhere and it is up to you to avoid it. And above all, all the "dirt" is biodegradable - being here today and gone in a few days or weeks. But such behavior cannot be allowed on tarmac and concrete, and in large cities. But Indians take offence to being told that their actions may be wrong (in India). They will comply in Singapore though. Indian society has to get past the anger and denial of facing the truth before changing. It matters little if all the rules were perfect and society perfect 5000 years ago. It needs to be set right now. shiv
