The Kushana Empire was founded by Mahārājādhirāja Kujula Kadphises, a Shaivite Hindu convert from his ancestral Steppe religion of the Yüeh-chih. He was not a Buddhist, as popularly believed.

A thread on the Hindu Emperors of the Kushana Dynasty.

Dr. BR Ambedkar says that the doctrine of equality is glaringly fallacious. Men can never be equal. They are born with different genetics, education etc. However, he says adopting the idea of equality is the only way a statesman can proceed in politics. (Realpolitik)

Dr. BR Ambedkar says he has wondered for long the SC/STs never rebelled, never spoke up or raised their voice for millenia. He says this question troubled him a lot. He says the lower castes were completely broken & accepted servitude as their only fate in life.

He says legislation or moral advice to "inter-dine" wont do anything to remove caste. The Hindus are a deeply religious people he says. Caste has divine sanction. To annihilate caste, you must annihilate the authority of the shāstra, the veda & destroy the Hindu religion.

Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar says "The wall built around caste is impregnable. Inside this wall stands the army of Brahmins, Brahmins who are there not as mercenaries but as an army fighting for its homeland. Breaching the wall of caste is well-nigh impossible."

Dr. Ambedkar says that secular Brahmins & priestly Brahmins are kith & kin. It is useless to make any distinction between them. Ideology of a Brahmin is irrelevant. They are joined by birth & will never fight against the existence of the other. They are two arms of the same body.

Navayana (The religion founded by BR Ambedkar) rejected all the core doctrines of Buddhism

- Rejected law of karma, rebirth in a new life, the concept of samsara, the 4 noble truths

How is this religion still called “Buddhism”? It rejects every core tenent Buddhism believes in.

To give an example - this is like a man who rejects the soul, rejects the law of karma, rejects transmigration of the soul, rejects the doctrine of mokṣa call himself a “Hindu”

It is an internal inconsistency that makes no sense.

Hinduism and Buddhism both believe in karma & rebirth. They also believe in liberation from samsara. The chief disagreement is whether the soul exists or not.

I’d say Hinduism & Buddhism are much closer to each other than Navayana is to any Buddhism.

In Sundarakāṇḍa (38) a celestial crow (son of Indradeva) in Chitrakūṭa eats the flesh of the Goddess Sītā & torments her. This son of Indra is spared from certain death despite the rage of Bhagavān Rāma on him.

But the demon king Rāvaṇa is killed.

Why? A thread..+

To summarize the event. This incident happens on the Chitrakūṭa mountain. The crow is a celestial son of Indradeva. He does not leave Sītā alone despite her numerous attempts to ward him away. He eats the flesh of her bossom, pierces them with his sharp claws...+

Lord Rāma (whose lap Sītā was sleeping on) wakes up and sees the the torn bossom of Sītā. Upon finding the crow was guilty, he releases a brahmāstra on him. The crow tries to seek shelter but all the devas turn him away. He comes back to Rāma & falls on his feet..+

..he is spared by the lord but he has to loose one eye because a brahmāstra once casted cannot be taken back. (मोघम् कर्तुम् न शक्यम् तु ब्राह्मम् अस्त्रम्).

Now, why was this? Let us see the exegesis of Achārya Parāśara Bhaṭṭa of this incident.

Both the celestial crow & rāvaṇa transgressed against the Goddess. But the crow's transgression was unique because it was in the presence of the divine couple of Rāma-Sītā together. Due to the mere sannidhi (proximity) of the divine mother - Bhagavān bestowed his grace.

According to Sanatana Dharma, all men are somatic descendants of The Gods (via the lineage of our forefather Manu Vaivasvata, descendant of God Vivasvant [Surya])

It is because of this lineage, our ultimate ancestors are The Gods & we fulfill this relationship with their worship

Mankind very literally is divine born, descendant of The Gods in the lineage of our all-father Manu.

Therefore, the Mahabharata says

मार्तण्डस्य मनुर्धीमानजायत सुतः प्रभुः
मनोर्वंशो मानवानां ततोऽयं प्रथितोऽभवत्

Translation..+

"To Lord Vivasvant was born a son Yama. To Lord Yama was born Mārtaṇḍa. The wise father Manu was born to Lord Mārtaṇḍa. The race [vaṃshaj] born from Manu is the Mānavas . It is this clan that became famous as the clan of mankind."

Then the Mbh says,

ब्रह्मक्षत्रादयस्तस्मान्मनोर्जातास्तु मानवाः

"Brāhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas, Shūdras - all these were descended from Manu. Therefore they are Mānavas."

In India, Manu was also the foremost divine lawgiver of mankind. In Greece, King Minos of Crete (Son of Zeus & Europa) was the divine lawgiver to mankind who received the law from Zeus.

Plato says this in

Thread on best books + readers to learn Sanskrit. I will list only books I have read & their pros and cons.

1. Samskrita Bharati (4 Part Series)

This is by far the best structured english course to learn to read, speak & write Sanskrit. The material is well-structured.

... and grammar is introduced at apt phases. There is enough Sanskrit text to immerse yourself & best part is they have accompanying online/in-person courses entirely in Sanskrit. This is the best method to learn spoken Sanskrit.

2. Svayam Sanskrit Shikshak (Hindi)

This is the second best immersive-learning series. There are 2 parts and progression is gradual. The advantage is it is entirely in Hindi, so the 1:1 syntax + vocab connect for native speakers is instant, Hindi being a daughter of Sanskrit.

this however is also it's only disadvantange. It's language restricted & not suitable for say a Telugu with poor Hindi or for an American or European learner. There is enough reading material here to "learn" Sanskrit.

3. The Sanskrit Language – Walter H Maurer

This is an amazing course. The best to learn Sanskrit for Americans/Europeans & an excellent one for Indians to use to learn the western grammar terminology. Best part about it? It is extremley long & has at least 100 pages of Sanskrit.

A thread on Wallelign Mekonnen’s 1969 essay “On the Question of Nationalities in Ethiopia” - which catalyzed the student movement that overthrew Ethiopia’s Solomonic dynasty in 1974 (Wallelign was killed in 1972 while hijacking an Ethiopian airlines plane) https://t.co/Ol0ElagLJq

Wallelign wrote that, while some call the question of nationalities "tribalism" - it is in fact "nationalism." Ethiopia is not one nation, he wrote, “it is made up of a dozen nationalities with their own languages, ways of dressing, social organization and territorial entity.”

Culture is nothing more than the superstructure of an economic basis that presupposes subjugation of the peasantry and proletariat. To be a “genuine Ethiopian” one has to speak Amharic and adhere to their culture. One must “wear an Amhara mask”- to use Frantz Fanon's terminology.

A common refute to the Neftegna system, whereby Abyssinian elites took lands from southern peoples, was that there are Amhara and Tigray masses in poverty. Another centred on representational politics. In reality, the feudal system oppressed all, but some groups more than others.

While Abyssinians are not dominant because of inherent imperialist tendencies, this is no excuse to perpetuate this situation. The only way forward is a state where every nationality is given equal opportunity to preserve and develop its language, culture and self-administration.

So I have a funny story about Governor General Jules Leger. I was working in the gardens on the grounds as a summer student in 1972 (might have been 1973, I can't quite remember, but it was the first year that women were hired as labourers by the NCC).1/

One of the things that we had to do was rake The pebble gravel on the paths and that was my task this particular day. I was out raking when I saw a Columbo type man dressed in a fedora and a crumpled raincoat approach me.2/

At that time the grounds were open to the public so it wasn't particularly surprising to have someone wander up and we chatted. I realized that he had recently had a stroke and that his English, while fluent, was a little slow. 3/

Anyway, we had a very nice chat and the next time I saw him in the garden, I showed him some baby rabbits that had a nest in the front rotundra. He thought they were pretty adorable.4/

I was able to pick one up for him to hold, but it was difficult for him because one of his hands was quite paralyzed. Anyway, he thought this was very lovely and our regular chats continued.4/

In 1937, a trucker got frustrated waiting for his cargo to be unloaded. He later sold his company for $1.1 billion.

Here’s the story of how Malcom McLean made a billion dollars and which startup could be following in his footsteps. (Inspired by our episode with @laurabehrenswu)

In the early 1950s, the shipping industry was a dying business.

New York’s docks were handling half as much domestic cargo in the early 1950s as they had been in the depressed 1930s.

In thirty years, no one had invested significant money in coastal shipping.

Why?

As McLean found out, loading ships was difficult and slow.

A truck or train would deliver items to the port. Each item was unloaded separately, recorded, and carried to storage.

When a ship was ready, each item was taken from storage, counted again, and hauled on-board.

The cost of this labor was significant. As one expert at the time explained:

“A four-thousand-mile voyage for a shipment might consume 50 percent of its costs in covering just the two ten-mile movements through two ports.”

Yet, despite the industry’s issues, it felt little pressure to change.

Foreigners were barred from operating domestically. Cartels ran international routes. And gov. subsidies eased the pain of labor costs.

Reshaping the industry needed an outsider.

Enter Malcolm McLean.

Act of 1871
This is Long but it will end with a BOOM

With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten-mile square parcel of land (see, Acts of the Forty-first Congress,”

Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).
The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move by foreign interests (international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers

and neck of America.
Congress cut a deal with the international bankers (specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their

foot in the door of the United States.
The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin.

With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was defaced — in effect vandalized and sabotage — when the title was capitalized and the word “for” was changed to “of” in the title.

Ancient Egyptians didn't have one name for their country... They only had one name for cities like Memphis or Thebes. Ancient civilizations in general lived only in cities.

Ancient Egyptians named different parts different names:

North land
Sedge land
Ta-mery
Deshert
Kemet

- North land: the North or lower Egypt.

- Sedge land: the South or Upper Egypt.

- Ta-mery: The land of the river bank (where they lived).

- Deshert: The desert or the red land.

- Kemet: The black soil land (Agricultural land).

The cities:

- Memphis or White Walls.

- Thebes or Waset.

Unroll
@threader_app Compile
@rattibha