Indra was castrated for your sins:

The previous post must have reminded you of similar stories of Hindu Rishis being seduced by Apsaras. But who did the rishis blame for the appearance of these Apsaras? Was it a Devil or ... a God?

It was none but Indra, the King of Gods!

Thus, if a Rishi were to bend before Indra's will, it certainly wouldn't be on account of lack of fortitude on his part, for what mere mortal could resist the power of the King of Gods?

Thus, for the transgression of giving into lust, the Rishi stands vindicated, but Indra stands accused.

Does that equate Indra with the Devil?

No, the effect of Indra's action is that a misled renunciate is lured back to the righteous path of the householder, and gives birth to progeny that can continue his family tradition, (all while, freeing the misled youth of his guilt).

The monk from the previous post is so consumed with the Devil's guilt that not even in his hallucinations can he give in to his desires.

But Indra does not only favour men, he fulfills the desires of women as well, like he did for Ahalya, Gautama Rishi's wife.

It is unfair to a married woman to be deprived of her desires by her abstinent husband. For her part Ahalya was as chaste as a woman could be expected to be, but no mere woman can resist the power of the King of Gods. As a result, when Gautama discovers his wife's infidelity, he curses Indra with a loss of testicles.

The moral of the story is, if a wife desires sex, her husband should oblige her.

Indra of Ancient Fame, how deeply have we misunderstood your character in your twilight years! You took upon yourself the greatest indignities to answer even our most desperate needs, what a noble soul!

Truly a God worthy of presiding over the Divine throne!

//They demonise desire itself, because their own desires are demonic.//

It is predators like these who project their own desires upon others and as a result grow fearful of them.

This fear convinces them that unless everyone else is converted to their religion, ie. purified of their desires, they will always run the risk of being preyed upon.

Desire manifested as Gods:

Had Lord Ram skipped the Agnipariksha after killing Ravan, and before leaving for Ayodhya with Sita, what difference would it have made to the story?

The modern reader may find it insignificant, but by the standards of the Old Kshatra norms, without the inclusion of this particular episode, the story would have been deemed completely unacceptable.

While, it is obvious that the driving force behind the story is Ram's desire to reunite with his wife, how could Old norms accept a man, who allowed an impure woman to return to his home, as an ideal man, much less a God?

The epic resolves the conflict between Ram's unflinching desire and the societal restrictions placed upon him, by overpowering the conventions, through the literal deification of his desire.

Essentially, it's Ram's own desire that speaks through the agency of Gods, when they declare Sita's purity. As a result, the objection of the convention is pacified and Ram's desire is fulfilled.

In other words, the Agnipariksha is inserted as a plot device to vindicate Lord Ram & Sita of their supposed vices, and to sanctify their love.

"Rajputs are only Hindus when they win battles, but when these Hindus lose battles they are only Rajputs"

No one wants to associate with Dalits, because there's nothing about them worth associating with. Rajputs, on the other hand, should be glad people actually consider them worth associating with.

//Resentment of followers is the price you pay to lead them.//

This axiom is especially true in case of Rajputs, because the groups most resentful to them, (eg. Jaats, Gujjars, etc.) are themselves the most rajputised.

To feel victimized by one's own followers is a sign of a squandered leadership. Had Rajputs known this, their followers too would have learnt it from their example.

Jaats do well at sports and the rest of India tends to celebrate their victories as "Indians", but now if Jaats turn around and say, "These are exclusively Jaat achievements, because the rest of India is nothing before us", the rest of the India will begin to reconsider its support for Jaats in international competitions.

[Ref: https://t.me/kalagni/2870]

Wouldn't it be better, to not have to worry about whether your own nation is praying for your victory or your defeat, when you compete at the international level?

Telegram

रुद्राग्नि

Tantra mantra is usually done for the contender's success.

Prakritisation:

Some 10 years ago, BJPigs made a huge controversy when Muslims refused to say "Vande Mataram",

"Why can't they say Vande Mataram, it's our National song? It's associated with our freedom struggle, it was a part of Anandmath, which has an important mention in our literary history, etc."

Despite all these arguments, in the past 10 years of BJP rule, I've only noticed the rise of "Bharatmata ki Jai!" as a nationalist slogan, at the expense of "Vande Mataram!" which clearly has the greater historic value.

Which freedom fighter said, "Bharatmata ki Jai!"?
Can you even find a decent/ non-autotune song on "Bharatmata"?

[Ref: https://youtu.be/-JfuHAoC_9Y?si=hg71UQjvfB1Uu4D8]

What was the logic behind this? Was "Vande Mataram" deemed so Bhadralokic; so Sanskritic, for the average voter by the BJP, that they had to democratise it to "Bharatmata" instead?

Did BJP intentionally secularise the image of "the mother" from a Goddess, to the image of the Nation to make itself more palatable to a prospective "Bahujan" voter base?

YouTube

Hindu Anthem | Pukarti Maa Bharti | Hindi Song

#DkamProduction Present- Song Name –Hindu Anthem | Pukarti Maa Bharti | Hindi Song 2017 ***▶️*** Contact Us On ---- ***▶️*** http://www.Dkam.in ***▶️*** https://www.facebook.com/DkamProduction ***▶️*** https://twitter.com/DkamProduction ***▶️*** https://www.instagram.…

Haven't we heard this before?

"The sooner we realise we are not Hindus or Indians, the better"

Take a minute to reflect upon the communities who said this in the past, and what kind of reputation they have today ...

This is a slippery slope, anyone who goes down this line ends up with the same relevance as bhoj.

The attitude of the nation-builders was the exact opposite of this.

The literate elite of the colonial period, were acutely aware that they were writing of their own historical achievements, but they intentionally extended their achievements to the ones who lacked a history, to forge a national consciousness among the weaker sections. This enabled them to lead the masses.

[Ref: https://t.me/kalagni/1353]

One thing should be clear, people are under no obligation to associate with failures of others, it's only when you do something worth associating with, that others want to join you.

Axiom of the Day:
Resentment of followers is the price you pay to lead them.

Don't boast accusatory terms like "Manuvaadi" in your Bio, just say something like "follower of Manava Dharma".

When they defame "Manusmrti", you insist on calling it "Manava Dharmashastra",
If they say "Manuvad", you call it "Manava Dharma".

In Maharashtra, Chimps have been saying, "Hindu dharma is a kalank on the name of humanity (Manuski)", this will eventually be repeated up North as well, under the name of "Insaniyat".

Your only response to this should be, "Hindu Dharma hi Manava Dharma hai".

If Xtianity can designate itself as "Religion of love", while hating heathens,
and Islam can call itself "Religion of Peace", while blowing people up,
why can't Hinduism claim to be the "Religion of Humanity", even while being casteist?

They are on the right track but are using the wrong words.

I just call them "Rapists".