In this thread, I will discuss a deadly serious issue: the fate of rivers. But with some speculative ideas in a light-headed vein.
This is Bhāgīrathi (the Ganges), the most sacred river in India. Perhaps, no other river has been venerated as much by humans all through history.
Due to global warming and severe changes in rainfall, as well as due to excessive water consumption and pollution, the fate of Bhāgīrathi is now an open question. Indians cannot imagine this river to run dry. But can it happen?
The answer may be in the very origin of Bhāgīrathi.
Perhaps unlike any river in the world, Indian culture remembers this river to have materialized during the memory of human civilization. This region was once supposed to be dry.
The Purāṇas say, owing to the penance of Bhagīratha, the Ganges came down to earth from the heavens.
Can a giant river like the Ganges appear out of nowhere? The drainage patterns of rivers do shift over time. As recently as 1787, a giant flood caused the Teesta river to join the Brahmaputra, instead of the Ganges.
But how can a great river appear suddenly into a dry landscape?
The answer could be in the warming up of the planet from the last glacial maximum, which occurred somewhere between 30,000 to 15,000 years ago.
Fresh water that was locked up in the Himalayan ice might have been liberated. Tipping points in the ice-melt could cause giant floods.
There are many flood myths around the world. What makes the story of Bhagīratha unique is that an unwilling river was cajoled into appearing on land.
The river was resurrected at least 2 times, from the matted hair of Shiva and from the pot of Rishi Jahnu, where she got stuck.
Indeed, the story of Bhagīratha is so dramatic that any effort that requires such immense courage & perseverance is termed "Bhagīratha Prayatna".
So what could have been the real world event behind this? I think it was engineering of a kind that we don't know how to do any more.
I say this because we currently don't know how to model closed ecological systems at the scale of the earth. Rainfall patterns, soil erosion, oceanic currents & winds etc. are all connected. Where exactly the rain-bearing winds hit the mountains will determine the flow of rivers.
Now the tricky unsettling thought. Did the ancient Indians know how to do this? I think the answer is yes and no. No, because there is no evidence of such computational sophistication then.
Yes, because the earth may not be a mechanical system, but a living thing that listens.
The second conclusion is not preposterous at all. Even in the human brain, free-will is not established. People's behavior can be molded into predictable manners. Putting a few coins in a cap will let a street musician collect more from passers by.
How about collecting a river?
Translated into Indian culture, it means pacifying and pleasing the Dēvas, who are the hidden actors of causality in this universe: both inside the human brain and outside in nature.
In Indian terms, who the musician is aiming to please are not the people, but the Dēvas behind.
In order to gain the crowd's appeal, the musician has to play his music with skill and sincerity, but it is also okay to precondition the crowd into favorable disposition e.g, by placing a few coins in the cap already.
In Indian terms, that would amount to pleasing the Dēvas.
Now, what exactly was done to cajole a river to appear on dry land? I think the clue is in the name Bhagīratha. The word "Bhaga" भग means luck, prosperity, beauty, sexual passion, happiness, dazzling sun etc.
It also means female sexual organs.
It points to fertility of land.
In today's world, it is hard to imagine calling female sexual organs as the "dazzling sun". But figurines of mother goddess are common in many cultures. They usually appear with agricultural practices.
I call them "Bhagavati" figures. This worship is a living tradition in India.
The word "Ratha" means a chariot. "Bhagīratha" means he who is driven by the force of "Bhaga". In Bengal, the myth is reinforced by calling "Bhagīratha" as the child of the union of two female partners - the two queens of his father Dilīpa. The one who is born only of "Bhaga".
"Bhaga" appears in many Indo-European languages. "Bog" is the word for deity in many Slavic languages. The city "Baghdad" (Baghadatta) literally means that which is gifted by Bhaga.
This comes from Persian influence from the east, where the word "Bagha" also means a garden.
This enables a nice interpretation. The dry land was slowly made cultivable by a network of gardens. Each garden stored a local reservoir of water (the "Bhaga" or the female sexual organ). With vegetation taking root, more rainfall was collected. Ultimately it became a river.
Is this possible? I think the answer is yes.
Rainfall increased in the interglacial period. But if all this rain falls into the ocean, rivers will not form. Moisture in the rain-bearing winds need to be maintained. Over a desert, they evaporate quickly (like in Sahara today).
So we have a chicken and egg problem. Until there is sufficient greenery, rains will not fall. India is blessed with the high peaks of the Himalaya, which catch all the bounty of the monsoon winds. But they should come till there.
The penance of Bhagīratha got them till there.
The sad thing is that we are reversing it today. Giant dams like the Tehri are stopping the flow of the Bhāgīrathi. The water levels are dripping alarmingly. "Smart" people say that they are doing everything "scientifically". Like the Soviet scientists who drained the Aral lake.
Rivers are not geological features. They are fickle goddesses that need to be cajoled into flowing.
"Bhāgya" (fortune) and "Bhagavān" (God: one with properties of "Bhaga") will not come to us if we don't nourish forests, freshwater lakes.. something to trick "Bhaga" to come by.
If we play our cards right, we can actually benefit from the warming temperatures and gain time before we fix climate change. Increased rainfall can be collected into freshwater lakes. Soil erosion can be checked.
Deserts can be turned green. May Bhagīratha inspire us. (END)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There is a great gap between the spoken “Hindi” and the literary Hindi. Unfortunately, few people have the reading habit in Hindi, especially for books.
It would really help if we prepare word lists to extend the used vocabulary in Hindi, like those in English for the GRE exam.
The same can be said for other Indian languages. The reading habit in Hindi is perhaps a bit stronger than other Indian languages, which are at a still more advanced state of decay. Focused interventions and supporting material, like word lists, grammar and composition will help.
I lost count of the number of times I started listening to a Hindi conversation on a podcast or video, and got put off by the obscene adulteration of language by the speakers. Sometimes half the sentence is in English. How is that acceptable to native speakers, I don’t know!
Today, I realized that I know several Telugu people who talk to their children only in English. They don’t even live abroad in an Anglophone country. Just in India. The children talk to the parents in English. These are the elite section of the society. I’m pissed off man!
A lot of the times, it is just about showing off their Anglobabies. Every middle-class Telugu family has a dozen people in the circle of relatives or friends who are settled abroad, mostly in the USA. It is all about trying to identify with that in-group of Phoren kids.#facepalm
I get so annoyed just thinking about these Anglo-wannabes. Why!? The children can easily pick up English if they spend a couple of years abroad at some time. They are the fricking elite. But they are raising deracinated children who will be clueless and lost in life afterwards.
We have our fair share of stupid fanatical Islamists in India, but this assessment is way off the mark. There are dozens of countries in the world which are ~ 100% Islamic: Iran, Uzbekistan, Egypt and so on. Would it be ok for those people if their country collapses? Not at all.
We should seriously take a chill pill in India and reason with the Muslims like they are Indians. Being Indian is what they are. They cannot rub it off. If they go to the Gulf, they are called Hindi (Indians). Heck, even Pakistanis are called that. They cannot rub it off.
Despite the fanatical idiots, the vast majority of Muslims in India are quite comfortable in their Indian skin and want to see their country progress as a civilization. If we look east, they will see Indonesians, Malaysians who all own up to their full civilizational history.
Hijab, in contrast to Burqa, is something so trivial and accepted every single place in India that there is no point asking for permission for it. India is not like Europe where covering the hair of a woman makes her stand out.
I mean, we have to credit the authors of this psyops for making the requisite effort for choosing the right vocabulary & associated toolkit. In other news (which is not even news anymore), a girl in Tamil Nadu committed suicide on account of the pressure to convert. Nobody cares.
ASI is doing its job precisely as it was expected to, and in line with the intentions with which it was set up. It was set up by a crooked British racist, Alexander Cunningham, with the objective of distorting India’s past and separating Buddhism from Indian living culture.
General Cunningham set the precedent for how the ASI is supposed to operate: he himself ransacked and looted a wide array of archeological artifacts, which are now in the possession of the British museum.
“This notion of a Buddhist golden age as having preceded the corrupt Hindu present ultimately served as a ‘legitimizing discourse about Britain’s civilizing mission in India’.”
This is precisely the motive for which the ASI was established.
But anyway, the Indian concept of Chakravarti is not similar to the Chinese concept of Heaven’s throne, or the Islamic concept of the Caliph, or the European concept of Ruler of Christendom. They are all different. We must understand how the Indian kings called themselves.
See this example of Raghu’s Digvijaya, that is narrated by Kālidāsa in his Raghuvamśa. The Chakravarti typically reinstates the same kings as rulers in the territory that is conquered by him. See the examples of Raghu’s exploits in Vanga and Kalinga.