From: A.Raman@massey.ac.nz (Anand V Raman)
Subject: Indhist (shar) part 4 of 4
Organization: Massey University Computer Centre
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 04:26:12 GMT

# --- Cut here and throw this line away --- Indhist part 4 of 4 begins ---
X 
X I agree that  our  archetype ancestor  set no  value   upon  life [8]  and
X despised history.  Historians are prompt to point out  the anomaly that of
X all the civilizations that were ever known to  exist, the Indian alone was
X unique in that  it made deliberate  effort  to suppress  the recording  of
X historical information.  Spengler says that even the Indian institution of
X cremation was a singular departure from the norm, and was  directly linked
X with this intentional indifference   to  history  [9].  Indians, he  says,
X pioneered the total destruction of the  corporeal  body such that no trace
X of it was ever left behind to act as a record of its existence.
X 
X But  we  cannot   afford  to do   so  today.   Our  ancestors  lived  in a
X civilization which was filled  with youthful exuberance.  If there  is one
X thing  that is  inconceivable to  Youth,  it   is  a  picture  of its  own
X vulnerability  to old age  and  death.  In a  sense, this is valuable.  It
X permits the accomplishment of great feats without being overly  mindful of
X one's  impending fate.   In a   civilization, it builds   solidarity and a
X certain will  to live  and achieve.   But  we not young any  more.  We are
X spent and exhausted.  We cannot afford to do as they did. We cannot afford
X to ignore our Past.   Besides, if we  are to assimilate  into the dominant
X culture of today, we are expected to adapt to it  in various ways.  One of
X these ways, assuredly, is also to share its interest in History,  which by
X the way, can promote solidarity among a people who are fast losing it.
X 
X With this in mind, I wish to make available  to those who  like, a project
X called Indhist,  the Beta version of  which is currently under test.  It's
X purpose is not to glorify Indian heritage  beyond  recognition.  Nor is it
X to encourage a certain kind of arrogant chauvinism.   On the  contrary, it
X is  to show that  the  great Indian  civilization,   like the Chinese  and
X Ethiopian before it,  was no more profound a  civilization than any other,
X and certainly not  any more than the  mighty   European, but  on the other
X hand, no less either.
X 
X - & (anand v raman)
X 14 June 1992
X 
X Notes:
X ~~~~~~
X [1] Temple, Robert: "Chinese Genius," Touchstone Edition, Simon & Shuster,
X     New York, 1989, p.9
X 
X [2] Wells, Herbert. G: "The Outline of History," Cassell and Company Ltd.,
X     London, 1956, p.402
X 
X [3] I will try to provide a justification for this in the following
X     article - "The problem of the destitute East."
X 
X [4] Pallis, Marco: "Peaks and Lamas," A.A.Knopf, N.Y., 1940, as quoted in
X     F.S.C. Northrop, "The Meeting of the East and West," Macmillan, 1958,
X     p.358
X 
X [5] Yajnavalkya's "Prayas'citta," Book III, Translated by Williams, Sir
X     Monier: "Indian Wisdom," Chowkamba Sanskrit Series, Varanasi, 1963,
X     p.302
X 
X [6] Nachiketa in "Kathopanishad," I.26 Translated by Hume, Robert. E:
X     "The Thirteen Principal Upanishads," Oxford University Press, 2nd Ed.,
X     1931, p.345
X 
X [7] Schrodinger, Erwin: "Mind and Matter," Cambridge University Press,
X     London, 1959, p.55
X 
X [8] Clemens Alexandrinus (3rd Cent): "Stromateis," III.194, Translated by
X     McCrindle, John. W: "Ancient India," Philo, Amsterdam, 1971, p.183
X 
X [9] Spengler, Oswald: "The decline of the West," A.A.Knopf, N.Y., 1939,
X     Vol I, p.13, also p.133-134
X 
X --
X # The following record is a random selection from Indhist1.0
X # For more information about Indhist contact A.Raman@massey.ac.nz
X --
X ...This  same  writer says  that   none of  the    Indians  employ slaves.
X Onesikritos however says that the custom was peculiar to the people in the
X country of Mousikanos.  He speaks of this as a  right thing,  and mentions
X with  like approbation  many other things  to  be  found in this  country,
X resulting from the excellent laws by which it is governed.
X 
X - Strabo Book XV:I.54
X --
End of readme.2nd
echo Extracting readme.3rd 1>&2
sed 's/^X //' >readme.3rd <<'End of readme.3rd' && chmod 644 readme.3rd
X Subject: The problem of the destitute East
X Keywords: Civilizations, History, Metaphysics.
X 
X 1. INTRODUCTION
X 
X 	     Do you have enough food for everyone in India?
X 	     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
X 
X    Admittedly, it  doesn't  help much  to  reply "No.   But we  did have
X plenty of food  way back  a few thousand   years ago."  But  I'd like to
X point out   that  this is  still  a   much better  answer  than one that
X implicitly denies that fact.  Suppose one replied "Look, I know we don't
X have enough food in India.  But then,  we are adopting the (your) modern
X Western method of farming.  We  should  soon have a radical agricultural
X revolution which will bring enough  food to all  Indians," then not only
X is that person apologizing for the poverty  of  the starving millions in
X India, but he  is also  confirming  the questioner's  possibly  implicit
X assumption that the current western method of farming  is the only truly
X successful one there is, and that without it there could never have been
X enough food in India.  But this is clearly mistaken;  as mistaken, to be
X sure, as one that blindly  insists that the  West has  got it all wrong.
X History   points unambiguously  to the existence   of   highly  affluent
X civilizations in the East when most of Europe  was still in its infancy.
X Sir Monier Williams observes of India, for example:
X 
X    It will not,  of course, be supposed that  in our Eastern  Empire
X    we have  to deal with  ordinary races of men.   We  are not there
X    brought in  contact with savage tribes who  melt away  before the
X    superior  force and intelligence  of  the Europeans.  Rather  are
X    we placed  in the midst of  great and ancient  peoples, who, some
X    of them tracing back their origin to the same stock as ourselves,
X    attained a high degree of civilization  when our forefathers were
X    still  barbarians,  and  had  a   polished language, a cultivated
X    literature, and abstruse systems of  philosophy, centuries before
X    the English existed even in name. [1]
X 
X A similar observation about China is made by Prof. Joseph Needham:
X 
X    During the first fourteen centuries of the  Christian  era, China
X    transmitted to Europe a  veritable  abundance of discoveries  and
X    inventions  which were often received by  the West with  no clear
X    idea of where they had originated. [2]
X 
X    So what is it that  has turned the  tables now?  How come exactly the
X same things that once used  to flourish  in  the East have  now migrated
X to the West, especially as
X 
X    between the second  century  B.C. and the   sixteenth century A.D.
X    East Asian culture was much more efficient than  the European West
X    in applying human knowledge of Nature to useful purposes? [3]
X 
X Why has the East  degraded to such an extent  that the average Westerner
X today has  developed  a powerful   psychological resistance against  any
X identification with it whereas just a few thousand years ago, the Greeks
X identified even their  gods with those of the  East? [4] Why  is it that
X even  a   benevolent scholar like   Schrodinger who concedes   a certain
X profundity of   insight to the   East is  careful  not  to (mis)identify
X himself with it, by repeatedly stressing the value of Western methods in
X logic and reasoning [5] which, I'm sure, he also knew  to be appropriate
X to the other hemisphere?
X 
X    It is very hard   to give   convincing  answers to  these  questions.
X Almost every one of the attempted solutions grinds to  a halt when faced
X with the terminal question - Why should there be so  much poverty in the
X East today if it was really  as good  as  they say it was?  Needham, for
X instance, after   careful  analysis   of the   prevailing socio-economic
X conditions in  the eastern  civilizations, attributes the  degeneracy of
X the  East to failed social systems  that became excessively bureaucratic
X [6].   Some people say that while  his answer could  well be correct, it
X still hasn't answered the basic question at hand as  it has only shifted
X ground to a different  issue.   "If  the East  was really so clever, how
X come they couldn't come up with  a successful  social system?"  would be
X the next most obvious question that would spring up in this context.
X 
X 2. INADEQUACY OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD FOR SOCIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS:
X 
X    The truth is, Needham's answer is about the best we can  ever hope to
X get for this problem within our empirical framework.  We currently don't
X have a good scientific explanation for it.   And sadly, there is none in
X sight either.  Although a  scientific solution  to this  problem  is not
X evident, that a  purely scientific  solution  cannot  be found is.   The
X reason is that the problem involves the workings of the human  mind, and
X the  way in which  our  desires, or  the predominant  desires  of  whole
X communities within a given cultural backdrop are formed.  When one talks
X about Desires, talk about Freedom is inevitably seen to follow.  This in
X turn leads to talk about Personal Identity, at which point it is usually
X safe to say that the scientific arena has been left far behind.
X 
X    Consequently, far from directly observing the cause of degeneracy, or
X even inferring it, we are forced to speculate upon it.  What we then end
X up  with is not  a Science of history.  Nor  even  is it a Philosophy of
X history.  It has become the  Metaphysics  of  history.  And  born out of
X this    kind of metaphysical     speculation   is  the  conjecture  that
X civilizations must be likened to living  organisms, with a consciousness
X and identity of their own, people being  to them  what specialized cells
X in our body are to us.  Among the older philosophies of  history, we see
X one version of this view at least among the ancient  Greeks  and Indians
X [7].  Among the more recent ones, Oswald Spengler is seen to advance it.
X I even venture so far  as  to say that such  a theory is also completely
X compatible with the modern claims of Strong AI [8].
X 
X 3. OBJECTION FROM COMMON SENSE
X 
X    Now,  this  hypothesis  is  not  inherently  unfalsifiable.   So   it
X possesses a  viability even  in scientific  circles, depending upon  the
X amount of confirmation it  receives.  From this  point of view, however,
X it  appears  highly implausible   at  first  sight because  it   is  not
X corroborated by  common sense.  Social  progress, it  seems to  us, is a
X one-way street - successful social systems, like  democracy for example,
X once instantiated, could never go out of existence.
X 
X    The reason we think so is because we find  it extremely  difficult to
X imagine one of us `unlearning' useful  things.   That is, forgetting the
X value of tested information is seen to  be unnatural.  We generally tend
X to believe that dynamically  useful knowledge is  learnt  for good.  But
X that is false.  Sometimes  what common sense  tells us cannot be farther
X from the truth.  That is because common sense is largely a collection of
X inductive conclusions  which  don't always   hold  good under   rigorous
X philosophical testing.  We do happen to forget things in many ways other
X than just the atrophy of our knowledge of them.  Senility, accidents and
X amnesia are examples.  While some  of these attacks can be  prevented by
X careful protection of the memory banks of an organism,  some  others are
X not.  Natural death is an example  of an inevitable process  by which an
X organism's memories are irreversibly destroyed, a scientific explanation
X for which is still lacking.
X 
X    Before I am  misunderstood, let me quickly clarify  that last point a
X little further.  I am   not  saying that  there   can be  no  scientific
X explanation for the phenomenon  of death.  I'm  only saying that even if
X there  is one, it would be  so complex  that it would  be  far easier to
X speak of the phenomenon  at the level  of metaphysical abstraction, just
X as even  though   we  know  that  the weather can  be  deterministically
X predicted, the formidable complexity of the initial states and governing
X laws forces us to use statistical methods.
X 
X    Thus, even though a society could have once had a flourishing culture
X and a successful social system that encouraged the growth of science and
X the arts, it is still subject, for a variety of complex reasons which we
X might never fully know at one time, to lose the knowledge  which  it had
X known to  work in its  favour.   Alexander Fraser Tytler is  supposed to
X have   said  that even  a  system like democracy, (which, by the way, is
X essential  for the progress of modern  science according to Needham [9])
X cannot  last although it    receives confirmation   every day   of   its
X existence:
X 
X    A democracy cannot exist as  a permanent  form of government.  It
X    can  only  exist until  the voters  discover   that they can vote
X    themselves money from the  Public Treasury.  From that moment on,
X    the majority  always votes  for the candidates promising the most
X    benefits from the Public Treasury with a  result that a democracy
X    always  collapses  over loose fiscal   policy always followed  by
X    dictatorship. [10]
X 
X 4. OBJECTION FROM THE PSYCHOLOGICAL FRONT
X 
X    Our hypothesis also makes an interesting prediction that lends itself
X to  testing.   It is  the claim  that  people   of cultures in different
X cultures which are in  various stages of civilization have intrinsically
X different desires.    But  psychologists are quick   to  object to this.
X Prof.  Toynbee,  who  had perhaps already  thought of the possibility of
X this kind of  hypothesis informs us  of the  results of a  psychological
X investigation as follows:
X 
X    ...in our   common human  nature, there  are   variations that
X    constitute so  many distinctive `psychological types'; but the
X    evidence indicates  that the representatives of  each of these
X    different types are to be found in approximately equal numbers
X    in  any sample  of mankind.  There  is no  indication that the
X    types   are   sorted  out  and   segregated  from   each other
X    geographically. [11]
X 
X    But correct as  the  objection  is, I  have to  say that it  does not
X falsify the hypothesis simply because it is not  directed  at it.  Taken
X in isolation, as is usually done in a psychological test, humans exhibit
X a common behaviour  and disposition pattern that  is consistent with the
X above observation.  But our hypothesis is  concerned with the behavioral
X dispositions  not of individual persons,  but  of individuals  within  a
X given cultural backdrop.  Obviously  their desires in  relation to their
X societies is different from what it would have  been in different social
X arrangements.  As a migrant, I can attest to such a distinction at least
X in my own case.  Also, it is precisely because  individuals taken out of
X their cultural context revert to standard behaviour that assimilation is
X made possible.  Thus we see an Indian, Ethiopian,  Latin  American, or a
X Greek be a high achiever in the culture of the United States, but not in
X his own country.  A  more holistic  picture than just  of singular human
X beings  is necessary   to   account for    such  behavioral  variations.
X Unfortunately, psychology does  not cater for  such  an analysis  of the
X person because it involves extra-personal causes and effects.
X 
X 5. POSTULATION OF EXOMNESIA OR EXTRA-PERSONAL MEMORY
X 
X    It might seem  here that I am postulating  a  kind  of `exomnesia' or
X extra-personal memory for this  to work.  How  else can the desires of a
X given individual  be  of one kind  in one  country  and of  a distinctly
X different kind in another?  But before being branded as a mystic, let me
X say that  there is  indeed empirical evidence for  the kind of exomnesia
X that this hypothesis requires.  You can see what I mean when you go into
X any library today.  Libraries,   newspapers, schools,  ethical precepts,
X social taboos  and stigmas all  constitute confirmation   for exomnesia.
X Man is largely conditioned by the society he lives in  and by the things
X he learns from others before him.  Without exomnesia, we would each have
X to start with a  clean slate.  There would be  no ready-made professions
X we  could fit neatly  into.  There   would not even be  these apparently
X tailor-made natural  languages  which  we learn  to speak.  Simply  put,
X without exomnesia  there would  be no progress.  But if  it is exomnesia
X that  initially causes  progress, it is  also  exomnesia that eventually
X causes degeneracy.  Knowledge of the futility of  the striving  of one's
X forefathers  after  material  accomplishment,  faithfully    handed down
X through the generations via libraries and word of mouth, forces a person
X into complacency, indifference and  eventually into inactive acceptance.
X To quote Tytler again:
X 
X    The average  age of the  world's greatest  civilizations has been
X    200 years. These nations have  progressed through  the  following
X    sequence:
X 
X    From bondage  to spiritual faith;  from  spiritual faith to great
X    courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from
X    abundance to selfishness; from  selfishness to  complacency; from
X    complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency
X    back into bondage. [12]
X 
X 6. IMPLAUSIBILITY OF THE WEST BECOMING PASSIVE AND PESSIMISTIC
X 
X    There  is one more implication  of   this  hypothesis  that could  be
X disturbing  to both Easterners and Westerners.   It is that the  West is
X different from the East in  the same way  that a youth is different from
X his grandfather.  
X 
X Northrop writes:
X 
X    They (The  East and  the West) can   meet, not  because  they are
X    saying the same thing, but because they are  expressing different
X    yet complementary  things, both of  which   are required  for  an
X    adequate and true    conception  of   man's    self     and   his
X    universe...Each also needs the other. [13]
X 
X    We might agree with him  that the  achievements of the  East and West
X are complementary things.  But our  hypothesis here precludes the second
X statement that each needs  the other,  because it predicts that the West
X will one day   attain  what Northrop calls  the  aesthetic component  of
X knowledge   even  unaided by  the  East, for  that   is the most natural
X outcome of the mature phase of any progressive civilization.
X 
X    This is, of  course, shocking and  difficult to digest.  How can what
X is usually called the  metaphysical and sometimes pessimistic philosophy
X of  the  East be the   final product  of   the  empirical and optimistic
X philosophy that characterizes the West today?  But it is true.  A little
X reflection  will  show why.  For  the  most  part,  we will  understand,
X technological breakthroughs have  not  really improved the average state
X of mind of human beings at all.  I can only think of Professor Toynbee's
X penetrating observation that is so appropriate here:
X 
X    Our lives continue  to  be painful  because  the worst   pains and
X    difficulties of human life are spiritual, not physical.   Surgery,
X    anaesthetics,   plumbing, and  central   heating cannot   diminish
X    spiritual suffering. [14]
X 
X    Our strifes  and sufferings still remain  very much the  same as they
X were thousands of years ago.  Only, technology  has changed the level at
X which we encounter them.  The way to fill a cracked  jug is not to empty
X more and more water into it with increasing rapidity.  It is to seal the
X crack first.  If our ancestors desired  newer, faster chariots, today we
X desire newer, faster  race cars.  Sure, we can  cure  far more  diseases
X today than  before.  But even  that to me, is  not  why  we  should call
X ourselves any more  advanced than   our ancestors.   There is still  the
X unavoidable    problem  of  death,  of unsatisfiable    desires, and the
X everpresent likelihood of losing the ones we love.  Even should these be
X solved, there is the terrible problem of boredom resulting from too much
X leisure  [15].  Technological breakthroughs  are only stepping stones on
X our way to realizing that the end which is currently not in  sight, does
X not really exist  at all.   This   is the  realization  that  marks  the
X completion of a cycle within a civilization.
X 
X 7. CONCLUSION
X 
X    The West, then, with all its  technological superiority, is  still in
X its infancy as far as real progress is concerned,  just as the East once
X was during its time  of  technological pre-eminence  centuries ago.  (Of
X course, being an infant is a  far healthier  alternative to being senile
X or incapacitated; so  one can't  say  that today's East is  better  than
X today's West.)   If  this is the case,  however, the  prognosis  for the
X human race appears to  be rather dim.  The highest  state a civilization
X can ever attain is that which has already been attained hitherto and can
X be seen below the massive shambles of the East today.
X 
X    Homo Sapiens, or `Thinking' Man is on the last rung of the  ladder of
X intellectual  evolution.    Reflection  on   human suffering,   and  the
X realization  of its    omnipresence   is the  high water   mark  of  any
X civilization.  Thereafter, although it  might hold  the  stage  a little
X while   longer, it cannot  develop  the  play    any further.   It  must
X eventually quit and let it's successor start all over again.  And so the
X cycle of relentless reorganizations  of matter, of the incessant  births
X and deaths  of  consciousnesses  and sub-consciousnesses   continues  on
X forever.
X 
X    While  this apparently pessimistic  picture  is very   distressing to
X believe, we must not overlook the grain  of consolation in it which says
X that  we  aren't really  missing out  on  anything  in  the twenty-fifth
X century.  It also says, besides, that we will never be to some allegedly
X super-civilized aliens what dogs and cats are to us.  Should such beings
X one day decide to invade us and colonize our planet, I'm sure we will be
X able  to ask  them some serious questions  that even  they can't answer.
X What's still more satisfying to our ego, I believe we will  even be in a
X position to suggest to them some  very  compelling solutions to the most
X abominable problems that any consciousness is prey to.
X 
X - & (anand v raman)
X 20 September 1992
X 
X Notes:
X ~~~~~~
X 1.  Williams,  Sir Monier: "Indian Wisdom,"  Chowkamba  Sanskrit Series,
X     Varanasi, 1963, p.xvi
X 
X 2.  Needham, Joseph: "The Grand Titration,"  George Allen &  Unwin Ltd.,
X     London, 1969, p.57
X 
X 3.  Ibid., p.16
X 
X 4.  Strabo: "Geography," Book XV:I.69, Translated by McCrindle, John. W:
X     "Ancient India," Philo, Amsterdam, 1971, p.74
X 
X 5.  Schrodinger,  Erwin: "Mind and  Matter," Cambridge University Press,
X     London, 1959, p.55
X 
X 6.  Needham, Joseph:  "The Grand Titration,"  George Allen & Unwin Ltd.,
X     London, 1969, p.175
X 
X 7.  Toynbee, Arnold, J: "Surviving the Future," Oxford University Press,
X     London, 1971, p.73
X 
X 8.  Strong AI (Artificial Intelligence) is  a theory that postulates the
X     existence of consciousness  in all things.   One of the most popular
X     examples  used by  Strong AI  advocates  is  the thermostat which is
X     said to  exhibit conscious behaviour in   responding  to temperature
X     changes.  It was originated by John McCarthy in his paper "Ascribing
X     Mental qualities to  Machines," in   "Philosophical  Perspectives in
X     Artificial  Intelligence," Ed. Martin  Ringle, Harvester,  Brighton,
X     1979.   For  arguments  against Strong AI  you  could  look  at John
X     Searle's (in)famous Chinse Room experiment, which  is also discussed
X     in  some detail in Roger Penrose's  "The Emperor's New Mind," Oxford
X     University Press,  NY,  1989.   Douglas Hofstadter presents  several
X     views in favour of Strong AI in  his books  "Godel, Escher and Bach:
X     An Eternal Golden Braid," Harvester  Press, Hassocks,  1979 and "The
X     Minds I," Harvester Press, Brighton, 1981.
X 
X 9.  Needham, Joseph:  "The Grand  Titration," George Allen & Unwin Ltd.,
X     London, 1969, p.152
X 
X 10. This passage is supposed to be found in (the book?) "The Decline and
X     Fall of the Athenian  Republic." by Alexander  Fraser Tytler (1748 -
X     1813).  It  was mailed to me  by a  friend some time ago.  I haven't
X     managed to locate the book or a reference to Tytler's works yet, but
X     have reason not to doubt its authenticity.
X 
X 11. Toynbee,  Arnold, J:  "Change and  Habit,"  Oxford University Press,
X     London, 1966, p.74
X 
X 12. See Note 10 above.
X 
X 13. Northrop, F.S.C:  "The meeting of   the  East and West,"  Macmillan,
X     1958, p.454
X 
X 14. Toynbee, Arnold, J: "Surviving the Future," Oxford University Press,
X     London, 1971, p.53
X 
X 15. Toynbee, Arnold, J:  "Change and  Habit,"  Oxford University  Press,
X     London, 1966.  The boredom that results from excessive mechanization
X     and   leisure     is  discussed in   Chapters   XII  "Mechanisation,
X     Regimentation, Boredom"  and Chapter XIII  "Affluence and  Leisure",
X     p.212-227
X 
X --
X # The following record is a random selection from Indhist 1.0
X # For more information on Indhist, mail A.Raman@massey.ac.nz
X --
X Their [the Indians']  span of  life is not less than  forty years, and for
X all this time they are in the bloom of youth and they know neither old age
X nor disease nor want.  But though  India is actually in  the  enjoyment of
X all  these blessings, there are  nevertheless   men called Brahmans,  who,
X bidding adieu to the rivers and turning away from those with whom they had
X been thrown in contact, live apart, absorbed in philosophic contemplation,
X subjecting their bodies  to sufferings of  astonishing severity, though no
X one compels  them, and submitting   to terrible endurances.   It is  said,
X further,  that they possess a  remarkable fountain --  that of truth -- by
X far the  best and most  divine of all -- and   that any  one  who has once
X tasted it can never be satiated or filled with it.
X 
X - Dion Chrysostom (1st cent) Oratio XXXV.434
X 
X 
X A Postscript
X ~~~~~~~~~~~~
X 
X    I didn't think this would  have been necessary.   But it appears that
X some users  have misunderstood the intent of  Indhist.  In particular, I
X gather the  impression that a few  have thought of it  to be yet another
X attempt to denounce Western civilization.  It's a real pity that  such a
X thing should happen, since Indhist is actually an  attempt to do exactly
X the opposite. So I'd like to  clarify  it's purpose  once again before I
X post the archive tomorrow.
X 
X To reiterate the last paragraph of the first essay:
X 
X    The purpose of Indhist is  not to glorify  Indian heritage beyond
X    recognition.  Nor is it  to encourage a  certain kind of arrogant
X    chauvinism.  On the contrary, it is to show that the great Indian
X    civilization,  like the Chinese and  Ethiopian before  it, was no
X    more profound a civilization than  any other,  and  certainly not
X    any more than the mighty European, but on the other hand, no less
X    either.
X 
X    That is what it is for.  This, in turn, is hoped to aid the Easterner
X in assimilating into the dominant,  young and successful Western culture
X today by providing  him with the  necessary tools.  To reuse our earlier
X analogy, cell transfusion is a  tricky process.  If  it isn't  performed
X carefully, a transplanted organ or cell is likely to be  rejected by the
X new tissue.  To make it  stick  on, some kind  of glue is necessary.  In
X our case this glue happens to be History.  No true assimilation can take
X place between  non-equals.  And  the value  of History in  exposing this
X equality is paramount.  Robert Temple says of the Chinese:
X 
X    It is now time for the Chinese contribution to be  recognized and
X    acknowledged, by  the East and  West  alike.  And, above all, let
X    this be recognized  by   today's schoolchildren, who will  be the
X    generation  to absorb it  into their most fundamental conceptions
X    about the world.  When  that happens, Chinese and Westerners will
X    be able to look each other in  the eye,  knowing themselves to be
X    true and full partners. [1]
X 
X    With a   minor change  of  wording from  Chinese  to    Eastern, that
X paragraph  can be said  to be topically  applicable.  If there is hatred
X between two ethnic groups today, it is largely  due to  ignorance on the
X part of the groups not only about  the  achievements of their peers, but
X also about their own.  This ignorance  creates a  feeling of inferiority
X and xenophobia that provokes a  defensive mechanism which  seeks to keep
X the alien at bay through a display of belligerence.
X 
X    I  concede that this  is only a conjecture,  but it is one  that  has
X served me well over the last few years.  When  I decide to hate someone,
X I usually sit down to do a little homework first to research information
X about the person   or thing that  I  want to  hate.  How can   you  hate
X something without knowing  what it   is you   hate?  Most of   the time,
X however, after my  homework had been done, I  find that there is so much
X desirable  about the  thing  that  I  wanted to   hate, that  even on  a
X comparative scale, the hatred wouldn't have been justified.
X 
X    I realize this could sometimes be hard and time consuming.  But it is
X a far better alternative to  feeling ashamed  of unfounded hatred later.
X More importantly, it saves  me the severe  embarrassment that could have
X resulted if someone should have   asked  how  it is   that I could  hate
X something so  adorable.  Even on purely  pragmatic grounds, then, aren't
X Indians  such as those who hate  the British, themselves  the poorer for
X being unable to appreciate the genius of Shaw or Shakespeare?
X 
X    Also, I have noticed, the hatred builds a  sub-conscious mental block
X towards  understanding your contemporary.  Gandhi   is supposed to  have
X refused to  start his Salt  Satyagraha until his  followers were able to
X kill  the  hatred  they  felt  towards  the  British  and  start feeling
X compassion   towards them.  For  unless  an  objective view unclouded by
X emotion is taken on an issue, how can one  even begin to see what either
X side really wants?
X 
X    It is indeed disappointing that an essay which I  hoped would promote
X a better  understanding between the  East and West hasn't  done  its job
X very well.  Maybe, as John McCarthy points out, this is a sensitive area
X and essays on this subject must be worded very carefully.  Before I pack
X the project  into a shell archive tomorrow,  I will  try to rewrite some
X parts of it so as to make its non-judgmental nature more explicit.
X 
X    Meanwhile I'd  like to thank  you for your  interest in Indhist, your
X patience in waiting for it (if you have), and for the several letters of
X encouragement I received since I posted about it four weeks ago.
X 
X - & (anand v raman)
X 2 October 92.
X 
X Notes:
X ~~~~~~
X [1] Temple, Robert: "Chinese Genius," Touchstone Edition, Simon & Shuster,
X     New York, 1989, p.12
X 
X --
X # The following record is a random selection from Indhist 1.0
X # For more information on Indhist, mail A.Raman@massey.ac.nz
X --
X ...Of the several remarkable customs existing among the Indians,  there is
X one prescribed by their ancient philosophers which one may regard as truly
X admirable:  for the law ordains that  no one among   them shall, under any
X circumstances, be a slave, but that, enjoying  freedom, they shall respect
X the equal right to it which all possess: for those, they thought, who have
X learned neither to domineer over nor cringe to others will attain the life
X best adapted for the vicissitudes of the lot.
X 
X - Diodoros Siculos Bib.III.39
End of readme.3rd
chdir .. || exit 1;
# --- Cut here and throw this line away --- Indhist part 4 of 4 ends ---
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian