It is common for not only Hindus themselves but even those opposing Hindus and Hinduism to conflate Hindutva with Hinduism. While in the former case it is more born out of ignorance, the latter is almost always born out of the need for a euphemism to clumsily mask a motivated hatred for all things Hindu. For instance to give just one example, one person in this comments thread gives the example of Paul Courtright and in a blanket statement paints all those who raised their voices against his fraudulent scholarship as Hindutva. To my knowledge, those that I know of, who raised their voices against Courtright did so in a very erudite manner. Indeed one only needs to look at Vishal Agarwal and Kalavai Venkat’s elaborate expose in Invading the Sacred of Courtright’s outright mistranslations, manipulations and even blatant concoctions to force fit into his perverse fantasies and diabolical agenda. Instead of a civilized reply to the scholarly takedown, all we got was the boogey of Hindutva. And we still do. But of course, we shouldn’t be surprised to see those dedicated to suppressing the survival and revival of Hinduism, dedicated to criminalizing Hinduism, be it a Courtright, Kumar or Karim, use the euphemism of Hindutva to further their agendas when in fact, more often than not, it is Hinduism itself that they target.
Sagarika Ghose, Deputy Editor at CNN-IBN, where her husband Rajdeep Sardesai is Editor-in-Chief, recently made an interesting remark on twitter.
Ms. Ghose’s tweet provides some food for thought. We won’t go into the politically loaded allusion to “minorities”. However we certainly need to consider a few other other important points.
- Does being a devout Hindu (self-proclaimed or otherwise) preclude one from performing actions detrimental to Hindu society and Hinduism?
- Does any public self-proclamation of supposed devout Hindu origins preclude one from any critical inquiry into whether and how their actions may be inimical to Hindu interests.
- Who defines the yardsticks for being a “true” Hindu? We can safely assume Ms. Ghose has taken upon herself to save Hinduism from the evil, ugly Hindus. Except perhaps those with devout origins such as herself and her political, ideological fellow travelers. So, no doubt, she in this case gets to define the yardstick and characteristics for being a “true” Hindu. This however, is somewhat tangential to the focus of this post, so we will put it aside for another time.
The answers to the first two questions can be found in a historical inquiry. An inquiry which unequivocally reveals the fact that some very critical, if not the biggest, blows to Hindus were delivered from within. In what can be described as a twist of delicious irony, Ms. Ghose unintentionally actually only adds to what we have long held. That the biggest enemies of Hindus are Hindus themselves. Indeed, Hindus did not lose to non-Hindu invaders and colonizers. Hindus lost to Hindus themselves. Peering into history reveals how at some very critical junctions Hindus were put on the back foot not due to Muslims or Christians, but due to traitors who were Hindus. There should be no doubt that traitors like Silhaditya, Veerbhadra Tiwari, Ambhi Kumar, Jaichand Rathore, who betrayed their country and community for petty personal reasons would have, just like you-know-who, most likely called themselves proud or devout (origin) Hindus. Then there were also another class of devouts who took employment from the marUnmatta-s. As Sarvesh Tiwari rightly notes,
such Hindus were joked about by mullAh-s, as kAfIrs spreading the reach of Islam.
The marUnmatta Badaoni proudly reports of one such traitor ,
through the generalship of Man Singh, the meaning of this line of mulla Shiri became known, “A Hindu wields the sword of Islam”
This situation hasn’t really changed much since the time of Badaoni. In more recent past, we had Subhash Chandra Bose, who spared no effort to ally with staunchly anti-Hindu elements, including rabid Jihadis.
Indeed, as Sarvesh Tiwari, in his stirring series on Bose, says
Bose is really an uncomforting case in point, that even deeply religious Hindus, of excellent intellectual gifts, untiring patriotism and great leadership acumen, can remain utterly gullible to the Islamic propaganda and keep causing self-injury to the nation.
Of course, we should not flatter those merely projecting their political and ideological drivel on sundry social media fora by comparing them with someone like Bose. But nonetheless, as we have seen, supposed devout (origin) Hindus have historically delivered critical blows to Hindu survival and revival. Discerning Hindus committed to dharma surely are already aware of this fact and will no doubt be specially wary of those who self-proclaim their devout origins in public fora.
Update (19 Aug 2012): Turns out, Ms. Sagarika Ghose is not only of self-proclaimed devout origin, but is also self-proclaimed attractive and intelligent.
 Badouni, Muntakhabut Tawarikh II pp 238-39 (cited by JL Mehta in Advanced study in the history of medieval India Vol 2)
[Preface: This post was the result of thoughts triggered by some messages in an email list, so certain references should be considered in the context of an e-group.]
There is no doubt that unlike Judeo-Christian society, dharma traditions are very comfortable with chaos. However, too much comfort with chaos (coupled with a lack of discipline) can often lead to a false sense of security and can be exploited by hostile forces within and without.
Western society has for a very long time overwhelmingly comprised of (White) Christians. While that is slowly changing, it is still largely true. Western (Christian) society never faced existential external threats the way Hindu society did, and further, it fattened itself on the blood and sweat of its various colonies around the world. To top that off, most dangerously, in the post-colonial period it has injected sundry constructs into non-Western(/Christian) societies that may seem like universal but are actually its own memes that dutifully serve the interests of the Christian West. Secularism (specially as practiced in India) is a perfect example of such a meme.
Hindu society however has always consisted of diverse elements, reflecting the inherent pluralism of Hinduism. Of course, there was always the unifying thread of dharma, but that is besides the point. In a diverse society, a decentralized, distributed power structure is more successful.
- It has the ability to self-organize
- It is vastly adept in handling large amounts of noise without being too disturbed
- It is difficult to completely destroy since some vestige of one power structure may seed another
All of these points are validated by historical and extant instances of Hindu/dhArmika society.
The now corrupted varNa system, in its original, pristine form as devised by our wise ancestors, was a wonderful conception of a distributed, fluid power structure which while being comfortable with chaos still encapsulated discipline. Notwithstanding what ideologically motivated historians would have us believe, the varNa system wasn’t entire a liability and played a part in resisting the Mohammedan whirlwind. Christianity however is way more sophisticated than Islam in exploiting any perceivable chinks in the heathen armor. Under these circumstances and in its current corrupted form, the liability of the varNa system cannot be stressed enough. Indeed, the corrupted varNa system is largely responsible for the lack of political leverage for Hindu interests in India. It is also worth pondering over how much this corruption of varNa system has contributed towards decadence in Hindu society. There is not only too much chaos, but also a very high degree of laziness. Further, due to pervasiveness of Christian memes like secularism and liberalism, several members of Hindu society have actually become rabid Hindu-hating zombies who dutifully serve interests of the anti-dharma block, specially the Christian West. This in turns leads to increased chaos in dhArmika society coupled with a disconcerting lack of guiding and disciplining influence. The lack of discipline is even more dangerous since in a society as diverse as the Hindu society, chaos can be turned centrifugal with the right push at the right places. Forces inimical to dharma and India are already very active in doing this. “Breaking India” provides ample evidence of such inimical forces at work. And when the centrifugal chaos gains enough momentum, fragmentation is very likely to happen.
While the importance of discipline even in seeming chaos is undeniable, the question that arises is, who enforces or inculcates this discipline? Western (Christian) society does enforcement from an organizational level. The best example being the Church. However, Hindu society is more dependent on capable, influential individuals. There isn’t really an established mechanism for discipline (or even dharma for that matter) being inculcated from an organizational level. This of course is tied to the comfort with chaos in dharma traditions. At some point(s) of Hindu history, temples played an important organizational role (as the savant RC Mazumdar has demonstrated), but even so, the individualist element has always been very strong. There are sampradAya specific organizations like svAdhyAya parivAra, Chinmaya Mission, ammA trust, etc. (Swapan Dasgupta calls this folk Hinduism). But when considering hard ground realities, even their collective influence over Hindus is still very limited. So, in the want of capable, influential individuals, dharma suffers. In my humble opinion, AchArya sha~Nkara probably realized this and in his short but momentous life-span sought to rectify it by establishing the various matha-s. Unfortunately, today those who claim to be his spiritual heirs are deep in stupor and hardly have the AchArya-‘s monumental vision or sharp, incisive acumen. But I digress. We need not look further from this e-group to see the overwhelming dependence on individual rather than organization at work. Contrast this to the militarily efficiency with which Christian organizations; both missionary and memetic (secular, liberal, progressive, humanist,…) forms; advance their interests. The different seminaries, theological colleges, secular social science programs that regularly churn out well-trained agents who actively propagate the smokescreen of sameness to aid their unscrupulous mining of dharma knowledge systems are fine examples of the organizational approach. As are the extremely organized evangelical missions. I once saw a video of an Indian Christian who heads an evangelical program in India, reporting to a largely White Christian gathering on the different conversion tactics, the number of converts gained in India, etc. The presentation, the data mined and the methods employed for conversions, gave the impression of a meticulously planned militarily operation. That video is probably still available on YouTube. Interestingly, that Indian Christian is also employed in a public institution supported by the secular Indian government, that explicitly propounds Christian mores for gaining converts. But, I again digress. While I do not make claims of this contrast of order vs. chaos, organizational vs. individualist being either good or bad, it does presents ample food for thought.
I have had these sort of discussions with some folks who sadly, more often than not, fall back on a Utopian sapta–sindhu/Gangetic valley Vedic past. Perhaps to avoid confronting uncomfortable, bitter truths about extreme dharma-hostile agents within and without. Or perhaps simply out of laziness, or a false sense of security. Some of these folks are also what I like to call “Safe Hindus“. Nonetheless, the point being, harping on what has long since gone is hardly helpful for survival and revival of Hinduism. To quote shrI Aurobindo, “…the body must change to suit its changing environments if it wishes to live.”
A person I highly admire rightly points to leadership training being a solution to address the problem of excess chaos and lack of discipline. But who trains these leaders and more importantly, who sustains and supports them? Perhaps, the ostensible deficiency of an extant inherent organizational support mechanism presents a more fundamental problem.
Over the last year, I have made a new acquaintance. We shall call him Shriman Savadhan. Shriman Savadhan presents a perfect example of what I like to call the safe Hindu. This individual shows every indication of having some awareness of the sorry geo-political state of Hindus. He displays some modicum of knowledge of how the farce that is Indian secularism is simply a euphemism for official government sponsored shenanigans to suppress a Hindu revival. He also displays some awareness of the machinations of the Marxists and their occidental Eurocentric associates against the Hindu civilization of India. However, that is the extent of his involvement in Hindu affairs.
When I bring up the matter of certain scholarly books that provide detailed critiques of these dangerous paradigms, he gets disinterested. When I mention certain venues where he could get involved (like volunteering in Hindu missions) to further Hindu causes, he gets even more disinterested. When I mention certain political developments which if comes to fruition will lead to an even worse state for Hindus, he just doesn’t seem to care. Like for instance, Shriman Savadhan is simple not interested in reading books by Sita Ram Goel, Koenraad Elst, Ram Swarup, RC Mazumdar, etc. He sees no reason to read Rajiv Malhotra’s Breaking India. Even though he does seem to have some concern about the foreign funded change of religious demographics in India. He supports the Christian evangelist Rick Perry to become the American president in 2012, for reasons connected to, get this, Mexicans in US! Shriman Savadhan however does realize, in no uncertain terms, that Mr. Perry is backed by vociferous religious fanatics, and his becoming president of USA will herald a huge convert-heathens-in-India campaign.
Shriman Savadhan is not a fool, a communist, a Hindu-hater or a crypto-convert to the rAkShasamata or pretamata (credit to the learned blogger at mAnasa–taraMgiNI for coining these apt terms). He very strictly follows certain Hindu dietary norms and has on more than one occasion, in private conversation, spoken out against some of the dangers that hang over Hindus in India. Yet, he very assiduously avoids taking any meaningful action like reading books to educate himself and his friends and family, or getting involved with any Hindu organization. Unfortunately, there are countless such characters who are simply not interested in doing anything meaningful for Hindu causes, even though they have some awareness of the issues. Question is, why?
Because of the Marxist-secularist toxicity pervading India since the start of Nehruvian Stalinism which has subverted school textbooks and popular/news media, any sort of pride and involvement in advancing Hindu causes has been colored as politically incorrect. The success of the left establishment lies in subverting the discourse such that their ideological interests have been colored as politically correct, and anything contrary is laden with secular self-consciousnesses and imagined guilt. Unfortunately, this has pervaded very deep into the native psyche. As can be seen in the case of Shriman Savadhan. Which is why you will find many well-meaning folks going out of their way to shed very public tears for the “secular” stone pelters while giving lip service to the “communal fascistic” Hindus driven out through a campaign of rape, murder and mayhem. Never mind that in private they might very well feel otherwise. This sorry situation is kept running through a systematic campaign of manufactured outrage, hyperventilated sanctimony, history and social science academic departments and textbooks as brainwashing tools, and other such shenanigans. The latest in this series is the proposed Communal Violence Prevention bill which in no uncertain terms is reminiscent of Nazi laws against Jews, and has the single objective of keeping suppressed and eventually obliterating Hindus from India. No wonder, over generations, countless people like Shriman Savadhan have cultivated the need to be very negated and defensive about their Hindu identity. No wonder they feel uncomfortable working with Hindu organizations or even studying scholarly works that explain matters of critical importance to Hindus. No wonder they feel the need to keep their Hindu identity locked up in a closet. No wonder they are more comfortable taking “safe” positions of subservience and non-involvement by not risking epithets like communal, fascistic, etc, that are often thrown at those who assert their Hindu identity or speak up on matters of importance for Hindus. These people are the safe Hindus.
The safe Hindu phenomenon is also observed in case of some public figures who have sympathies for Hindu causes, or who had themselves started out as avid, assertive Hindus. It is common for some of these folks who themselves seemingly start out as assertive, proud, unabashed Hindus to take positions against their former constituency for careerist compulsions. It does however also reflect a certain snobbishness that many acquire with power, success and publicity. This particular brand of safe Hindus will be dissected in another post.
The problem in case of the safe Hindus is that they will do everything not to do anything, even if that involves reading a book connected to revival and survival of Hindus. This is largely due to an aversion for potentially being associated with a cause that has been over the years cunningly colored as politically incorrect, never mind that the cause itself is veracious and of crucial importance. As one commentator astutely said, the need for these safe Hindus is to don the mantle of a collective Shiva and drink the poison of being painted as villains and “fascists”, so that future generations can breathe the air of freedom and dignity as worthy inheritors of the Vedic civilization.
Tulsi Ram, a professor from the “Kremlin on the Yamuna” Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi provided a nice insight into the scholarship of the Marxist intellectuals at JNU when he; according to TOI news service ; accused gosvAmi tulasIdAsa, the author of rAmacharitamAnasa of plagiarizing the vAlmIki rAmAyaNa. Excerpts below.
Had Tulsidas composed his Ramcharitmanas in modern India, he would have landed in a jail on the charge of plagiarism as his book was nothing, but a copy of Valmiki’s Ramayan.
I don’t believe this consummate moronic assertion even deserves any comment. So lets move along.
JNU professor Tulsi Ram said that the orthodox Hindu society popularized Tulsidas creation because he was a Brahmin. But Valmiki’s creation was ignored by the people simply because he was a Dalit.
It really can’t get more asinine than this. mahAR^iShi vAlmIki is one of the most revered sages in Hinduism, and was highly respected by shrI rAma himself. He is also credited with with the first shloka in saMskR^ita. The incident which sparked this is as follows.
One day, mahAR^iShi vAlmIki was proceeding to take a dip in the tamasA river when he saw a couple of lovely krouncha birds in the vicinity of that river’s foreshore, flying about in togetherness and calling charmingly. Even as vAlmIki was peacefully observing the beautiful birds, the male one was suddenly shot by an arrow. Seeing its mate writing in pain, the female bird cried out in heart-wrenching agony. vAlmIki was very touched by this scene and felt anguished for the birds. Looking around he saw the hunter who shot the arrow at the male bird, and uttered the following shloka in the anushhTubh meter of 32 syllables.
मा निषाद परतिष्ठां तवम अगमः शाश्वतीं समाः ।
यत करौञ्चमिथुनाद एकम अवधीः काममॊहितम ॥
mA niShAda paratiSThAM tavama agamaH shashvartI samAH .
yata karau~ncamithunAda ekama avadhIH kAmamohitama ..
(O Ill-fated hunter, by which reason you have killed one male bird of the couple, when it is in love and unsuspecting, thereby you will find no rest for ages to come.)
After saying that, he pondered for a while and realized the beauty of the saMskR^ita liturgical gem he had just come up with. And so it was that vAlmIki used this format (of shloka) to compose the eternal rAmAyaNa. As a recognition for his genius vAlmIki is said to be the first saMskR^ita poet (Adi kavi) and his work the rAmAyaNa the first saMskR^ita poem (kAvya). Along with the rAmAyaNa, vAlmIki is also the author of the the mammoth treatise on yoga, the yoga vashiShTha, and is considered as the father of saMskR^ita poetry.
In rAmacharitamAnasa, tulasIdAsa acknowledges vAlmIki’s momentous contribution in numerous verses. In fact during the invocation section itself, one is supposed to worship mahAR^iShi vAlmIki.
श्रीवाल्मीक नमस्तुभ्वमिहागच्छ शुभप्रद।
उत्तपुर्वयोर्मध्ये तिष्ठ गृह्नीष्व मऽर्चनम् ॥२॥
ॐ वाल्मीकाय नमः।
shrIvAlmIka namastubhvamihAgacCha shubhaprada .
uttapurvayormadhye tiShTha gR^ihnIShva mae.arcanam .. 2 ..
AUM vAlmIkAya namaH .
(Obeisance to you, O vAlmIki! Pray come here, O bestower of blessings ! Take your seat in the north-east and accept my homage. Obeisance to vAlmIki.)
In the bAla–kANDa section of rAmacharitamAnasa, tulasIdAsa again pays homage to vAlmIki as the supreme poet.
वन्दे विशुध्दविज्ञनौ कवीश्चरकपीश्चरौ ॥४॥
vande vishudhdaviGYanau kavIshcarakapIshcarau ..4..
(I pay homage to the king of bards (vAlmIki) and the chief of vAnaras (hanumAn), of pure intelligence, both of whom sport in the holy woods in the shape of glories of sItA and rAma.)
tulasIdAsa further says, again in the bAla–kANDa,
बंदउँ मुनि पद कँजु रामायन जेहिं निरमयउ ।
सखर सुकोमल मंजु दोष रहीत दूषन सहित ॥१४ (घ)॥
baMdau.N muni pada ka.Nju rAmAyana jehiM niramaya u .
sakhara sukomala maMju doSha rahIta dUShana sahita ..14 (gha) ..
(I bow to the lotus feet of the sage (vAlmIki) who composed the rAmAyaNa, which though containing an account of the demon khara (a cousin of rAvaNa), is yet very soft and charming, and though faultless, is yet full of references to dUSaNa (another cousin of rAvaNa).)
There are other instances as well in the rAmacharitamAnasa where tulasIdAsa pay homage to vAlmIki which for the sake of brevity I won’t dwell upon here.
Now if tulasIdAsa, a brAhmaNa did intend to overshadow mahAR^iShi vAlmIki, another brAhmaNa, why would he be so mellifluous in his reverence of the latter? In certain traditions, tulasIdAsa is in fact considered as an avatAra of mahAR^iShi vAlmIki . When tulasIdAsa in the 16th century embarked upon writing the rAmacharitamAnasa in avadhi, a commonly spoken language, he had to face objections from some orthodox brAhmaNas who preferred to keep rAma’s eternal life story in saMskR^ita, the language in which vAlmIki has composed the rAmAyaNa. If the brAhmaNa community indeed wanted to put-down mahAR^iShi vAlmIki, why would they oppose tulasIdAsa in the first place? I am sure our eminence from JNU, Prof. Tulsi Ram didn’t have time to dwell upon such questions before proving us a glimpse into his scholarship.
Even though vAlmIki wasn’t born to brAhmaNa parents, his is considered a supreme brAhmaNa (as is evidence from the very respectful appellation mahAR^iShi bestowed upon him), due to his momentous accomplishments and the way he lived his life. This is completely consonant with most revered scriptures which repeatedly assert that a person’s varNa is determined by his/her karma (actions) in life and not janma (birth). Fortunately, the likes of Prof. Tulsi Ram weren’t around back in vAlmIki’s time to throw around terms like “Dalit” or there probably would have never been a mahAR^iShi vAlmIki and we wouldn’t have had the vAlmIki rAmAyaNa.
The only reason tulasIdAsa’s rAmacharitamAnasa is more popular than vAlmIki’s rAmAyaNa is because of the languages in which they were composed. While rAmAyaNa was composed in saMskR^ita, by the 16th century, saMskR^ita was hardly the spoken language of the masses. So when tulasIdAsa composed the rAmacharitamAnasa in avadhi, a commonly spoken language in Northern India during his time, it became wildly popular. But our eminence, presumably only views this through parochial lenses of the kind found in places like JNU. Which forces him to provide outrageously twisted arguments.
Consider this other pompous assertion regurgitated by our eminence.
…the ancient Gurukul system was also meant to provide education only to the wards of Brahmins and Rajputs. No Gurukul ever allowed the entry of Dalits and other weaker sections of the society. The then society had conspired to keep the downtrodden away from education…
Given that our eminence so eagerly pontificates on the rAmAyaNa and the authors of its different versions, his knowledge of its characters seem abysmal. guha the king of the niSAda tribe, was a good friend of rAma and studied together with him in the gurukula under mahAR^iShi vashiShTha. The woman ascetic shabarI belonged to the bhil tribe and was a student of mahAR^iShi mataNga. shabarI was in fact highly respected by rAma. The very thesis that gurukulas only educated brAhmaNas and Rajputs (kSatriyas), is debunked by the aforementioned instances from the rAmAyaNa. mahAR^iShi veda vyAsa who is credited with authoring vast portions of the vedas, the oldest of Hindu scriptures, was neither a brAhmaNa nor a kSatriya by birth. Another fine example is that of satyAkAmA (from the ChAndogya upaniShad)  who was excepted as a student by gautama R^iShi even though he didn’t know his varNa or gotra. vidura from mahAbhArata also comes to mind. In more recent times, AchArya viSNugupta, or chANakya as his is more popularly known as, accepted chandragupta as his student even though chandragupta was neither a brAhmaNa nor a kSatriya by birth. Incidentally chandragupta under chANakya’s able guidance went on to establish the mighty Mauryan empire. There are many such wonderful examples which I am sure our eminence Prof. Tulsi Ram either doesn’t know or willfully avoids. Even if we graciously allow him the benefit of doubt and assume that his bile was indeed the result of genuine ignorance, his puke worthy assertions still don’t stand the test of any moral or well meaning societal intent. The example of mahAR^iShi vAlmIki should be proudly put forth as in indicator of the inherent egalitarianism in Hindu society that all Hindus should strive for. mahAR^iShi vAlmIki along with other aforementioned examples can be great unifying factors and can help rid social evils that have crept into Hindu society due to both external and internal influences. Instead our eminence choses to make some absolutely outrageous divisive statements. Sadly, this phenomenon of making some ridiculous blanket statement directed at Hindu dharma, without any sort of logical or scriptural aegis to back it up has taken root in Indian society, particularly among the self-proclaimed left-liberal-secular brigade. Many of whom can be found in the labyrinths of places like JNU. Not surprisingly in many instances such pontification is in fact rooted in ideological agendas and political predilections. To make matters worse, it is considered by many as a yardstick for liberalism, secularism or social justice. Even the honorable Supreme Court is not untouched by this phenomenon . Another blogger has aptly deconstructed most of the facets of the SC issue . One “observation”   by the honorable court however really struck me.
The tribals were called ‘rakshas’ (demons), ‘asuras’, and what not.
With due respect to the honorable court, this comment is simply astounding. Tribals in Hindu society have always been respected. I have already mentioned the instances of guha and shabarI. Nowhere in the rAmAyaNa or in any scripture or epic are the niSAda, bhil and other tribes referred to as rAkSasa or asura. In fact the tribals have always been an inseparable part of Hindu society and played a seminal role in opposing foreign invasions. Some examples are that of the bhils fighting alongside mahArAnA pratApa (as the honorable court itself observed  ) and the tribal kings in Dang, Gujarat decisively defeating the British. It is hard to miss how the “tribals-hounded-by-Hindus” theme fits perfectly into the Goebbelsian Marxist-missionary propaganda. That a consummate mendacity was propounded which bolsters this theme truly reflects how deep the rot it. Speaking of rot, it would be pertinent to mention the questions being raised in certain quarters regarding the recently retired CJI and his family members’ disproportionate assets    . Readers can draw their own inferences.
While it is very disheartening to see the sort of apocryphal, malicious pontifications being thrown at Hindu dharma by all and sundry, the insidious agendas of the eminences and their bedfellows, and the fallacious assertions must be unequivocally countered and exposed.
As svAmI rAmadAs said in the manAce shloka
मना सर्वथा सत्य सांडूं नको रे।
मना सर्वथा मिथ्य मांडूं नको रे॥
मना सत्य ते सत्य वाचे वदावें।
मना मिथ्य ते मिथ्य सोडूनि द्यावें॥
manA sarvathA satya sA.nDU.n nako re .
manA sarvathA mithya mA.nDU.n nako re ..
manA satya te satya vAche vadAve.n .
manA mithya te mithya soDUni dyAve.n ..
(Oh, dear Mind! give up never the eternal truth;
Oh, dear Mind! cling to never the eternal falsehood;
Truth alone speak, with truthful speech, oh Mind!
Untruth hold never, falsehood ever abjure, oh Mind!)