xuan zang_📑

at the outset, this movie is worth-to-be-watched. It has a comprehensive visual graph of xuan zang's journey and the contemporary socio-cultural, geopolitical, and philosophical glimpses that existed in the 19 years of the storyline that the scriptwriter and the director have chosen to show in this movie.

the immediate vibrations that i felt while resembling a few words and subtitles from the film were "dharma", "slaves," etc. it was astonishing to interpret whether they are taken the same as "dhamma", "untouchables/achoot"? if yes, why are they being replaced interchangeably? likewise, the usage of the word "god" by xuan zang was a point to consider in the same line of inquiry.

what is more interesting i saw, which i was expecting more descriptively, but the movie restrained only to two points, was the debate between mahayana and hinayana. the film emphasized more on xuan zang's scholarly understanding that 1) hinayana is more individualistic and abstract. in contrast, the mahayana is more extensive in assimilating 'others' into the 'self'. 2) hinayana believes that the 'universe' is material. but 'perception' is illusionary. while mahayana believes both are mutable and illusionary.

mahayana sees the universe's true face_ all is mutable, and all is illusionary. this point was profound for me, and i think i need to follow them through readings and processes. the missing thing i felt within this debate was pranagupta's critique of mahayana. it was mentioned but not explained.

📑 xuan zang_
🖋 @dnyanesh_____
🌱 read this piece on blogspot, link is in the bio.

The movie, Xuan Zang.

On Post-Structuralism

When it comes to post-structure; to my knowledge from the sociological point view, it appears as a perspective that deconstructs and decodes the "meta-narrative" of existing paradigms that originated in the land of hegemonic epicentres of knowledge. Be it functionalism, symbolic interactionism or even the Marxist paradigms.

What evolved in my mind during this lecture was that there is a more deep vacuum in btw that has to be understood. Articulating conventional and analytical school of thoughts as ontological and epistemological processes respectively, brought more clarity on my understanding about what a 'post-structure' is and what it intends to be. I need more cultivation of mind to process it further. However, a general idea premise I saw in the lecture but was too more focused on the 'metaphysical' and 'normative' arena of post-structure.

The reflection came from an article that I read a few weeks ago in a "science" magazine, which forced me to look at whether a similar debate exists in physical science also? It is still in bits and pieces in my mind but I will try and explain it with best of my capacities.

The idea of binaries in general and its epistemological processes, i.e. signifier and signified, linguistic dynamics etc. might be seen in the realm of the debates that are currently happening in the contemporary modern science (physics), specifically in the recent studies on quantum physics.

The research indicates that quantum physics essentially studies what consists in an atom and even deeper micro-universe within now exist differently in 'strange-metals'. Which proves that there are linkages between 'quantum physics' and 'entanglement' for which cascade of electrons is the best evidence.

Now, The historical practice of looking at quantum from microscopic lenses has been questioned and is turning into understanding quantum in the macroscopic dynamics also. Here, the question comes in between, how is the physical science addresses the macroscopic quantum or the quantum criticality in 'strange metals'. There might be no conventions that are existing ontologically or no analytics can explain its epistemology. It is yet to find whether there are and are no binaries in them. Let us hypothesized that there is no binary, then it proves that post-structure flops here!

Reflection is still moving and changing just like a process that doesn't end!

Savitribai Phule (1830-1897]_🌿

Apart from being an educationist, Savitribai was a poetess too. Today, two collections of Savitribai's poems are available. One of them is 'Kavyaphule'. It had written in 1854, and the second one is the 'Baavannakashi Subodh Ratnakar' written in 1882. It is assumed that there might be more such writing pieces of Savitribai but yet to be available. However, there also exists the controversy whether the literature was written by Savitribai Phule.

Along with her husband, Savitribai started a social movement named 'Satyashodhak Samaj' or 'Truth Seekers Society'. The focus of the society was to awaken Shudra and Ati-Shudra about their oppression in the castes system and untouchability in particular. The movement had also tried looking into more specific issues of women in these groups. They encouraged 'Satyashodhak marriages' in which the bride or groom did not have to give dowry for marriage. They fought against the priestly domination by organising social-religious ceremonies without them.

After the demise of Jotirao Phule in 1890, Savitribai took sole responsibility of the 'Truth Seekers Society' and became the leader of the movement. She continued the schools and worked for the movement till her last breath. In a letter to Sayajirao Gaikwad, Mama Parmanand says,

"More than Jotirao, his wife deserves praise. No matter how much we praise her, it would not be enough. How can one describe her stature? She cooperated with her husband completely and along with him, faced all the trials and tribulations that came their way. It is difficult to find such a sacrificing woman even among the highly educated women from upper castes. The couple spent their entire life working for people."

~ Narayan Mahadev alias Mama Paramanand (31stJuly 1890)

📑 Savitribai Phule (1830-1897]
🖋 @dnyanesh_____
🌱 Read this piece on blogspot, link is in the bio.

Mukta Salve [1841-1855]_🌿

In times, when the society in Pune was at the highest peak of caste orthodoxy and super rigid about untouchability in its inhuman form, a 14 years old girl child, Mukta Salve wrote an essay titled 'Mang Maharachya Dukhvisayi' or About the Grief of the Mang and the Mahars". The title Salve can be found in most of the families of Mang sub-caste in the former “Ati-Shudra” and today's Dalits and Nav-Buddhists in Maharashtra. The essay was published in a fortnightly journal namely 'Dnyanodaya'; in two parts. The first part was released on 15th February 1855 and the second was on 1st March 1855. [Narake, 1998]

Mukta Salve was a student of one of the three girls' schools that were started by Savitribai and Jotirao Phule. The essay was penned in the form of a memoir, an autobiographical piece in which Mukta Salve nailed out the monopoly of Brahmins in Hindu religion and Vedas in particular, whose imposition has led to the plight of Mang and Mahar Castes (the Ati-shudra and untouchable castes).

Mukta's essay precisely articulates the monopoly of Brahmin over Vedas. The non-Brahmin castes are not allowed to see the Vedas. The sub-castes within “Ati-shudra” such as people belonging to the Mang and Mahar castes were not even allowed to see Vedas. Being a person from an untouchable caste, she didn't have those rights; if not, she smartly questioned her people considering Vedas to be their religion, where they could neither know nor have the right to know what they follow and believe. Authoritative castes like Brahmin only have the right to study Vedas. She brings clarity to the matter of social locations of “Ati-Shudra” within the Chaturvarna and asserts that if the Mang and Mahar don't have the right to even see the sacred text, she says not to follow such religion.

In the essay very critically, Mukta Salve looks at the castes system where the untouchables don't have a religious identity like others. She protests to God for vanishing the existence of such a religion from the earth where only one person is privileged, and the rest are deprived.

📑 Mukta Salve [1841-1855]
🖋 @dnyanesh_____
🌱 Read this piece on blogspot, link is in the bio.

Fatima Sheikh (1850s*]_🌿

Fatima Sheikh was an educationist, gave her own house to Savitribai and Jotirao Phule to start the first-ever school called "Indigenous Library" in Bhidewada, Pune. 

Her brother Usman Sheikh supported Fatima for her decisions to work with the Phule couple. Only handful of literature recognises her contribution to the social changes that took place then. Fatima Sheikh and Savitribai, both took the forefront role in establishing schools and taught to the girls as well as boys. Not only has she fought against castes Hindu-Brahmins in her association with Phule couple but also the orthodox Muslim who stood against the education of girls and untouchables. [Khan, 2017]

Due to the presence of Fatima Sheikh and Savitribai Phule, the number of girls students had increased in schools. For example, in Chiplunkar Wada, they started a school on 3 July 1851. Initially, the number of girls students was only 8. Very soon the number increased to 48 in 1852. It can also be said that due to the presence of Fatima Sheikh, the education could reach especially to girls of Muslim families. [Narake, 1998]

📑 Fatima Sheikh (1850s*]
🖋 @dnyanesh_____
🌱 Read this piece on blogspot, link is in the bio.