She didn’t pack much. Maybe a small murti of Ganesha wrapped carefully in the folds of a sari. A handwritten copy of the Hanuman Chalisa. A few photos of her parents and siblings. And yet, she carried everything.
The full note is below but we wanted to share a few short thoughts as well. Q posted a tweet on the parallel thread arguing that Islam is the last holdout against total Westernisation. It is a serious claim and worth answering. Superficially he is right. The visible global resistance to Western moral universalism is largely Muslim, and the Manosphere is paying heed.
But the deeper claim is more complex, and the Hindu American Foundation’s letter illustrates why.
Islam resists by hardening. Hinduism resists by evolving. Those are different operations and they produce different kinds of civilisations.
The Hindu mother in the suburb of New Jersey, lighting a diya in a kitchen, is doing the work that has kept her civilisation alive during a thousand years of darkness. The diya goes on the granite counter next to the espresso machine and neither object loses anything by sitting beside the other.
This is also why the divine feminine matters and why we keep returning to it. A civilisation that imagines its goddesses as sovereign does in fact produce women who carry sovereignty in ordinary life. The first female prime ministers in South Asia came from the Dharmic traditions, Sirimavo Bandaranaike in Sri Lanka in 1960 and Indira Gandhi in India in 1966, decades before the Indo-Islamicate states of the region could produce theirs. That is not coincidence. A civilisation that lets women be goddesses also lets them be heads of state.
The Hindu woman has been a resistance fighter for a thousand years inside her own family unit, holding the dharma together within an intensely patriarchal household while ensuring that household survived hostile forces outside. She is feminist and traditional simultaneously, modern and ancient simultaneously, mother and matriarch and scientist and leader simultaneously, because the cosmology permits it. The goddess sits at the centre of the room and the woman in the room takes her seat from her.
She didn’t pack much.
Maybe a small murti of Ganesha wrapped carefully in the folds of a sari. A handwritten copy of the Hanuman Chalisa. A few photos of her parents and siblings.
And yet — she carried everything.
She carried the festivals, prayers, stories, and values. She carried the smell of incense and the sound of bhajans through an apartment in a new city, and Diwali into suburban houses that had never known the glow of a diya. And she carried the faith that her children would one day know their roots.
For many of us, that woman was our mother. For others, it was a grandmother, a great-grandmother, or an ancestor whose name we speak with reverence. And for others still, it is a woman who came to Hindu Dharma not through birth, but through calling — who chose this path and carried it forward with just as much love and devotion.
They made sure we knew every word of the aarti. They cooked prasad in kitchens far from the land where the recipes were born.
They taught us that being Hindu and American were never in conflict.
We could be both, fully and proudly. Our ancient traditions were NOT a burden to hide, but a gift to share. And the values passed down through thousands of years — dharma, seva, ahimsa — are very much needed today.
This Mother’s Day, the Hindu American Foundation pauses to say:
Thank you to every Hindu American mother who carried a civilization in her heart. Who held her culture close when it would have been easier to let it go. Who made sure the next generation could stand in their faith with confidence and pride.
You are the original builders of our community. The first teachers. The quiet architects of everything we are.
Today, we celebrate you — with the full depth of gratitude you have always deserved.
Happy Mother’s Day.
The first female prime ministers in South Asia came from the Dharmic traditions,
Sirimavo Bandaranaike in Sri Lanka in 1960 and Indira Gandhi in India
XTM
Please you want to keep dragging Sri Lanka into the “Dharmic Traditions”. India rejected the agnostic teachings of the Buddha. Worse India erased Asoka and the Pali Language from India. Sri Lanka embraced thos tradition and preserved it for 2,300+ years
Sirimavo Bandaranaike was a Buddhist married to a Christian, Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike. Sirimavo studied in a Catholic Convent and if anything a very Westernized Education and Western thinking (not very Dharmic). Her mother was Rosalind Hilda Mahawalatenne Kumarihamy and father Barnes Ratwatte, both thoroughly westernized of the old chieftain class
A civilisation that lets women be goddesses also lets them be heads of state
India has goddesses, but treats its women as second class citizens in Indo Aryan regions of India. Specially by Hindu edicts like Manusmriti. It was only after British Rule some restrictions on women eased.
In contrast before British rule in Sri Lanka women owned property and were legally entitled to an equal share of parental property even after marriage. The Brits changed that and a married woman’s property belonged to her husband
What is SL if not Dharmic?
What is SL if not Dharmic?
It is not India with its Institutionalized and “Dharmic” Casteism and discrimination of women thru much of its history
When Brahminism (Dharmic?) and the Varna Dharma took over India it became a highly unequal society with poor exploited. Worse the poor were even prevented from learning reading and writing.
It was only after the Brits that some equality for the poor was put into place.
Note: SL did not have Dharmic Brahmins because of the belief that they lost caste when they crossed the sea.
As per Grok —
Here are major shared elements between Hinduism and Buddhism:
What is more important is what is not shared.
eg Institutionalized Castesim of Hinduism
Second class status of women
Brahminism
Why do Hindu Indians want to drag Sri Lankan Buddhists into their fold.
We don’t want to drag you. You are free to let go of Buddhism and its core teachings. But we will highlight the fact that it evolved from broader dharmic tree. You can keep flogging the straw man of brahminism.
highlight the fact that it evolved from broader dharmic tree.
Yeah the tree with
a) casteism still prevalent in India
b)Treatment of women as chattels (Manusmriti)
c) Brahminism
You are free to let go of Buddhism
The core tenet of the Buddha is the equality of all human being.Then there is tolerance I embrace that core tenet, of equality and tolerance. Contrary to Hindu teachings.
Buddhism is a Dharmic religion is not a controversial statement by any stretch of imagination.
A couple of more points :
1) a clergy is developing. We increasingly see bhikus in weddings, secular meetings to bless, in funerals of ambedkar Buddhists. Similar to Hinduism.
2) the language of liturgy is pali, which is very similar to Samskrutam.
Use of pali in worship etc is insisted.
There are instances where the new authors after quoting a sutta (sutra) in pali, write it’s translation in Samskrutam for all to understand.
India rejected the agnostic teachings of the Buddha. Worse India erased Asoka and the Pali Language from India. Sri Lanka embraced thos tradition and preserved it for 2,300+ years
Didn’t Fly Die comprehensively school you on this point just last week?
Didn’t Fly Die comprehensively school you on this point just last week?
The only thing you Naam de Guerre schooled me is the foaming in the mouth Hate of Hindus for Muslims
Worse the use of racist termInstitutionalized Islamic supremacy for a country far better than India, Malaysia
Anti-Muslim hate is unfortunately so normalized in India it’s not even a surprise anymore.
I have a strong suspicion that NDG is an alias of our old friend Indosaurus. That would explain the specific animus he has for me and you.
Keep seething while you get called out for making stuff up which I will continue to do.
If preposterous assertions of Buddhism not being Dharmic – I mean how ridiculous?!! Dhammam sharanam gacchaami anyone? – is not evidence enough of pure straight up anti-Indian/anti-Hindu animosity, what ever will be?
Oh yeah of little knowledge
The Buddha rejected Caste, Bramanism and Inequality from the get go.
Your verse is in Pali written by a Sanskrit speaker
eg the Pali word is Saranam
Pali sounds like Sanskrit but is a different language and a different SCRIPT
Thats why There were no Indians who could read Asokas Edicts which are in Pali
The was deciphered by two English, one in India and one in Ceylon
The story of how Lankan chronicles helped British orientalists discover India’s lost emperor Ashoka (second part of post)
https://www.brownpundits.com/2018/06/01/lanka-and-kalinga/
// The Buddha rejected Caste, Bramanism and Inequality from the get go. //
Is that the case ?
https://www.academia.edu/18881474/Buddhism_Brahmanism_and_Borderlines
Also there are parts of Buddhism which are either shared or even require parts of Hinduism to be understood, e.g. –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKXy_saMqZU
Academia itself notes modern demarcation of Indic beliefs –
https://www.academia.edu/9433063/_Relics_Lingas_and_Other_Auspicious_Material_Remains_in_South_Asian_Religions_
Note – privileges Buddhist approaches that parallel Christian examples while downplaying continuities with other South Asian religions
Buddhist fascination? Some notes on cultural archeology during the British Rajhttps://www.academia.edu/128459748/Buddhist_fascination_Some_notes_on_cultural_archeology_during_the_British_Raj
Interestingly, Buddha will reincarnate in a Brahmin or Kshatriya family.
Crediting India having female prime minister to dharmic religions and not the fact that Pakistan government itself was unstable for most of its independence and bangladesh did not exist is convenient. We have not had a female prime minister since Indira Gandhi while Bangladesh until recently has only been governed by female prime minister, does that mean Bangladesh is more feminist than India? And many of these women in politics are where they are because of their privelege, and family background not some feminist impulse in society.
Furthermore for all world religions women are the backbone and supporting structure.
Finally, Q is wrong about Islam being the only holdout to westernisation, the evangelical christisn movements, traditional catholic movements, and broader christian nationalist movement are much more successful holdouts to the same forces that Islam is resisting under ‘westernisation’ and much more successful as well. Not that this is something I am proud of, but bears mentioning that much of this opposition is neither unique to Islam nor has it seen the success socially or politically that the others have
Somehow I agree with the broad thrust of both yours and XTM’s arguments. We also put too much stock on political set-ups. Female heads of states don’t really mean much in countries like ours but it does allow women in those states to dream and aspire to something. That’s a luxury women in Iran or Afghanistan cannot really afford. Conversely, you can have a free society like Italy or Switzerland and not give women even voting rights till fairly late (1945 and 1970s respectively).
Female representation (even if elite and even if it is lip service) matters. Despite all her sins, many women were loyal voters of Mamta because they saw someone they could relate to and someone they thought was looking after them. Baby steps are better than nothing.
On a side note, some great minds were planning to celebrate in 1994, 500 years of vasco da Gama’s arrival in Goa.
Many prominent goan Catholics lead by Charles correa opposed it vehemently, saying that colonisation need not be celebrated.
They were also supported by latha mangeshkar and others.
First of all, Happy Mother’s Day to all.
I do question the choice to post this note from what is essentially a right-wing Hindu organization. Here’s Wiki:
On the point about female prime ministers: Calvin has already pointed out below that all the female PMs in the subcontinent were the wives or daughters of prominent politicians. This very much includes Pakistan’s Benazir Bhutto. Benazir was groomed to be her father’s heir and basically inherited the PPP after ZAB’s execution. Had she not been ZAB’s daughter, she would have gotten nowhere near power.
The same applies to Maryam Nawaz. Had she not been Nawaz Sharif’s daughter, there is no way she would have become Chief Minister of Punjab.
So all these female leaders came from extreme privilege and don’t really reflect how patriarchal India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are for the vast masses of women.
The fact that both Benazir and Maryam Nawaz use their father’s last names as opposed to their husband’s reflects their own understanding that their power flows (or flowed in Benazir’s case) entirely through their fathers. “Benazir Zardari” was nothing. “Maryam Safdar” is nothing. Bhutto and Nawaz on the other hand are names to conjure with.
To you any self-expression of Hindu identity is RW. Epitome of Flying Donkey Syndrome.
Wikipedia is a neutral source–not something created by Pakistanis or Muslims.
An organization linked to the RSS and the VHP is objectively right-wing.
If I had posted a similar Mother’s Day message from the Council of American-Islamic Relations, I can foresee the reaction on this forum.
“Flying Donkey Syndrome” is Islamophobic.
It never ceases to amaze me that those who complain of Hinduphobia have no problem being Islamophobic. So ironic!
Why?
You have no right to tell other people how to feel. My feelings are not in your control.
Flying donkeys disgust me. It disgusts all rationally thinking humans.
The point is that this doesn’t need to matter to you.
I don’t care if you call me “Islamophobic”. You can do it every day for all I care. You’ve made many comments on here demonstrating that you are an anti-Hindu bigot. So we’re in the same boat.
Like I said, I really don’t care what you think of me. You are a rando on the internet.
You need to look in a mirror, you are basically the Hindu RW version of whatever you accuse me of being.
This is an increasingly pointless conversation. Carry on.
You need to look in a mirror, you are basically the Hindu RW version of whatever you accuse me of being.
At long last some acknowledgement of what you are. At least I never masqueraded as a “Centre-Left” intellectual. So, can I now claim that a so called Hindutvadi is at best a Centre Left intellectual if not for being Hindu?
First of all, I said that I am Center-Left in the Pakistani context. Every country has its own political spectrum.
Secondly, you are not an intellectual. How many books have you published?
I have published a book (in both Pakistan and in India). My academic pieces have been published in reputed journals.
I write here under my own name. You are hiding behind a pseudonym. We are not the same.
First of all, I said that I am Center-Left in the Pakistani context. Every country has its own political spectrum.
Literally what BB, RNJ and I said a few weeks ago and you vehemently opposed. Pakistan is inherently far to the right of India. Glad you finally accepted this.
Wow! You’re so smart.
Pakistan is an Islamic Republic. India is constitutionally a secular state.
However, India is fast regressing and becoming a Hindu majoritarian state. You can choose to hide from this fact but it’s obvious to any neutral party.
Pakistan People’s Party is not to the right of BJP. Wiki calls PPP a center-left party. BJP is a right-wing party.
You can argue otherwise but this is not a serious claim.
I think we need to look beyond PMs;
Mamata Banerjee was a Congress worker who rose the head of new party and remained CM for more than a decade.
Mayawati was protegee of Kashi Ram and became CM of UP {essentially same as Pak or BD CM} 4 times – despite coming from a Dalit background.
J Jayalalita become a CM after being MGR’s mistress.
These 3 carry more weight than all the PM’s in subcontinent combined.
That said India needs to go a long way for women in politics
What makes you say that Chief Ministers carry more weight than Prime Ministers?
Genuinely curious.
Maryam Nawaz is the Chief Minister of Pakistani Punjab– a province which has a larger population than many sovereign nations.
no you misunderstand me;
I mean these {CMs} not CM in particular are more linked to power women rising from ground up yield – not a token of women empowerment optimally- but a better example than Indira or Hasina or Benazir – who became PMs as daughters of PMs – whereas these CMs are more signal to improving conditions for women in politics {as i say there is still a long way to go}
17-18 years ago i would have bet a reasonable amount of one of Jayalalitha, Mamata or Mayawati becoming CM ahead of Modi {i would have been wrong but those ladies still carried a lot of power}
Agreed.
Though since you say that Jayalalitha was MGR’s mistress wouldn’t that be equivalent to a PM’s wife becoming PM after him?
yeahh – maybe she had an advantage – but yet it isnt as easy as a daughter or a wife – being illegitimate mistress;
Also don’t forget JJ was a Brahmin who ascended to power in the state with most vehement anti Brahmin polity. So her ascent to power was slightly more difficult.
Even JJ has never had a Brahmin minister in TN – It took a 5 decades Christian film star CM for TN to get a Brahmin minister.
Also its the caste handicap that makes Mayawati’s rise even more noteworthy – both JJ and MB carry the caste privilege {though that was actually a privilege in WB but a setback in TN}
This is also why the divine feminine matters and why we keep returning to it. A civilisation that imagines its goddesses as sovereign does in fact produce women who carry sovereignty in ordinary life.
Indo Aryan Hindus in reality do not treat women as divine. Male Chauvinist Father, Brothers extended tribe want to control their daughter and wives sexuality. Women are not free to express or select their sexual partners. Not very divine, just sexual chattels of menfolk
The same goes Muslims in Northern India. Hence the vitriolic Hindu Muslim animosity