Collated by Tusar Nath Mohapatra
"The world is what it is; men who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it."
This opening line from Naipaul's novel "The Bend in the River" has always resonated with me b/c by disposition I spurn fixation on external circumstances. They should be accepted and understood, yes, but never obsessed over to the extent that one loses sight of their own agency. Bemoaning the state of the world is futile and unmanly. What matters is how one reacts.
It's for this reason that I see the recent upsurge in anti-Indian animus in America as a blessing in disguise. For too long those of us in the diaspora have simply floated along, confident that our material success would insulate us from the trials and tribulations faced by every other immigrant group who came to this country. This was always a delusion.
The question of whether Indians deserve this hostility is irrelevant, and is premised on a fundamental misunderstanding of human behavior. The need of the hour is clarity: How do we want to be defined in the American socio-political landscape? What is the nature of our connection to the "old country"? What distinguishes those of us who were born here from the more recent crop of immigrants from India?
These questions are of particular import for Hindus, given the close link between Hindu tradition as received and India. For those of us who belong to this tradition, we must determine for ourselves to what extent this link should be preserved, if at all. And if not, what does the preservation of Hindu spiritual heritage look like? With respect to this question, we have great luminaries like Tagore, Aurobindo, and Vivekananda from whom we can seek guidance.
These are all questions that were debated at length by immigrant groups who came here in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Jewish newspapers from this period were filled with well-considered arguments from assimilationists, Zionists, socialists and reconstructionists, each of whom had their own view on the role of American Jews. Were they a distinct people? Or solely a religious community? Or representatives of a civilization not tied to a single nation?
Our trajectory will no doubt be unique, but it's incumbent on those of us who live in and love this country and our heritage to answer these questions for ourselves. This requires creating a healthy separation from nativists (who will resent us no matter what) and Hindu Nationalists in India, who see the diaspora as little more than a projection of their own political fantasies.
https://x.com/vjgtweets/status/1964016370041180352?t=QZjPS3SZyfwn0QscfzalBw&s=19
The idea of Jews comprising a distinct ethnoreligious group has ancient roots within the tradition itself in a way that's markedly distinct from the Hindus, who are better understood as a conglomeration of various racial groups bound by a shared civilization. Tagore described it as "a United States of a social federation, whose common name is Hinduism"
https://x.com/vjgtweets/status/1964433065138409502?t=Ak62TOgVfTsUxcgPd-Jlyw&s=19
I know we Indians like to think of religion as an ethnic identity
Christians don't...for them it is about faith. sincere faith. Which can (and should) transcend ethnic and geographic boundaries
Indians aren't equipped to fight this. V v few of us even in India take the religion seriously or study doctrinal differences etc. Our religion is a matter of habit.
Once we are faced with an aggressive religion like this, we don't know how to counter.
Even simple differences like dualism vs non dualism (which can help counter their critique of polytheism) is not known to normie Hindus...
https://x.com/shrikanth_krish/status/1983854271809360199?t=CHuYrBp-6-LSk5tjz3p-iA&s=19
Just finished @DouthatNYT’s “Believe.” My second recent book on religion and a compelling, propulsive read.
He argues that the major religions, both Abrahamic and Indic, share common ground. Not only in mysticism, but also in sexual ethics and moral teaching. He presents a form of perennialism that goes beyond Aldous Huxley, who focused mainly on an alleged mystical core.
Douthat uses many religious traditions and scientific viewpoints to argue against a materialist worldview. He points to the anthropic principle, which claims the universe is fine-tuned for life. He then follows William James, who noted common features in mystical experience across cultures.
Up to this point, the book is a broad case for a shared religious inheritance.
But in the final chapter, Douthat states that Christianity is the truest path, and he has placed his “bet” on it.
https://x.com/vik1857/status/1984027187066896459?t=70_-PEkkbGo7vOmNCefQsQ&s=19
As to Christianity's historical impact, don't forget the long and living tradition of Christian antisemitism. That's clearly an important input for today's proto-fascist "groyper" movement inside the "MAGA" coalition.
https://x.com/MilanBrahmbha11/status/1984077111582437401?t=bnvmid99pUkO72nzdLIkcA&s=19
reading my first Brecht play, Galileo
Initially had a neg reaction bc it does blunt point-making with no surrounding characters having any liveliness or personhood
then I realized this wasn't shakespeare, this was drama in the morality play lineage. considered that way, it works
https://x.com/AmitMajmudar/status/1983660620546502858?t=3j44WFcn2zMP1XQ-Qt8uvQ&s=19
Sri Aurobindo saw the crisis of our age before it arrived.
In ππ©π¦ ππ¨π¦ π°π§ ππ³πͺ ππΆπ³π°π£πͺπ―π₯π°, Pariksith Singh revisits the vision of one of the most prophetic minds of modern times. Over a century ago, Sri Aurobindo warned that humanity stood between two futures - one ruled by the Machine, the other awakened through Consciousness. He reimagined India’s freedom not just as political liberation, but as the beginning of a deeper, spiritual evolution. This book explores his call to transcend our limits and take part in the birth of a new, conscious civilization.
Order your copy today: amzn.in/d/7kE1803 @PariksithSingh
https://x.com/BluOneInk/status/1983899774177997101?t=sJBxrD2GmCH0jX_pQyu3SQ&s=19
