Podcasts about Hindus

Ahead of her new book What's So Great About the Great Books? coming out in April, Naomi Kanakia and I talked about literature from Herodotus to Tony Tulathimutte. We touched on Chaucer, Anglo-Saxon poetry, Scott Alexander, Shakespeare, William James, Helen deWitt, Marx and Engels, Walter Scott, Les Miserables, Jhootha Sach, the Mahabharata, and more. Naomi also talked about some of her working habits and the history and future of the Great Books movement. Naomi, of course, writes Woman of Letters here on Substack.TranscriptHenry Oliver: Today, I am talking with Naomi Kanakia. Naomi is a novelist, a literary critic, and most importantly she writes a Substack called Woman of Letters, and she has a new book coming out, What's So Great About the Great Books? Naomi, welcome.Naomi Kanakia: Thanks for having me on.Oliver: How is the internet changing the way that literature gets discussed and criticized, and what is that going to mean for the future of the Great Books?Kanakia: How is the internet changing it? I can really speak to only how it has changed it for me. I started off as a writer of young adult novels and science fiction, and there's these very active online fan cultures for those two things.I was reading the Great Books all through that time. I started in 2010 through today. In the 2010s, it really felt like there was not a lot of online discussion of classic literature. Maybe that was just me and I wasn't finding it, but it didn't necessarily feel like there was that community.I think because there are so many strong, public-facing institutions that discuss classic literature, like the NYRB, London Review of Books, a lot of journals, and universities, too. But now on Substack, there are a number of blogs—yours, mine, a number of other ones—that are devoted to classic literature. All of those have these commenters, a community of commenters. I also follow bloggers who have relatively small followings who are reading Tolstoy, reading Middlemarch, reading even much more esoteric things.I know that for me, becoming involved in this online culture has given me much more of an awareness that there are many people who are reading the classics on their own. I think that was always true, but now it does feel like it's more of a community.Oliver: We are recording this the day after the Washington Post book section has been removed. You don't see some sort of relationship between the way these literary institutions are changing online and the way the Great Books are going to be conceived of in the future? Because the Great Books came out of a an old-fashioned, saving-the-institutions kind of radical approach to university education. We're now moving into a world where all those old things seem to be going.Kanakia: Yes. I agree. The Great Books began in the University of Chicago and Columbia University. If you look into the history of the movement, it really was about university education and the idea that you would have a common core and all undergraduates would read these books. The idea that the Great Books were for the ordinary person was really an afterthought, at least for Mortimer Adler and those original Great Books guys. Now, the Great Books in the university have had a resurgence that we can discuss, but I do think there's a lot more life and vitality in the kind of public-facing humanities than there has been.I talked to Irina Dumitrescu, who writes for TLS (The Times Literary Supplement), LRB (The London Review of Books), a lot of these places, and she also said the same thing—that a lot of these journals are going into podcasts, and they're noticing a huge interest in the humanities and in the classics even at the same time as big institutions are really scaling back on those things. Humanities majors are dropping, classics majors are getting cut, book coverage at major periodicals is going down. It does seem like there are signals that are conflicting. I don't really know totally what to make of it. I do think there is some relation between those two things.Ted Gioia on Substack is always talking about how culture is stagnant, basically, and one of the symptoms of that is that “back list” really outsells “front list” for books. Even in 2010, 50 percent of the books that were sold were front-list titles, books that had been released in the last 18 months. Now it's something like only 35 percent of books or something like that are front-list titles. These could be completely wrong, but there's been a trend.I think the decrease in interest in front-list books is really what drives the loss of these book-review pages because they mostly review front-list books. So, I think that does imply that there's a lot of interest in old books. That's what our stagnant culture means.Oliver: Why do you think your own blog is popular with the rationalists?Kanakia: I don't know for certain. There was a story I wrote that was a joke. There are all these pop nonfiction books that aim to prove something that seems counterintuitive, so I wrote a parody of one of those where I aim to prove that reading is bad for you. This book has many scientific studies that show the more you read, the worse it is because it makes you very rigid.Scott Alexander, who is the archrationalist, really liked that, and he added me to his blog roll. Because of that, I got a thousand rationalist subscribers. I have found that rationalists at least somewhat interested in the classics. I think they are definitely interested in enduring sources of value. I've observed a fair amount of interest.Oliver: How much of a lay reader are you really? Because you read scholarship and critics and you can just quote John Gilroy in the middle of a piece or something.Kanakia: Yeah. That is a good question. I have definitely gotten more interested in secondary literature. In my book, I really talk about being a lay reader and personally having a nonacademic approach to literature. I do think that, over 15 years of being a lay reader, I have developed a lot of knowledge.I've also learned the kind of secondary literature that is really important. I think having historical context adds a lot and is invaluable. Right now I'm rereading Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. When I first read it in 2010, I hardly knew anything about French history. I was even talking online with someone about how most people who read Les Miserables think it's set in the French Revolution. That's basically because Americans don't really know anything about French history.Everything makes just a lot more sense the more you know about the time because it was written for people in it. For people in 1860s France, who knew everything about their own recent history, that really adds a lot to it. I still don't tend to go that much into interpretive literature, literature that tries to do readings of the stories or tell me the meaning of the stories. I feel like I haven't really gotten that much out of that.Oliver: How long have you been learning Anglo-Saxon?Kanakia: I went through a big Anglo-Saxon phase. That was in 2010. It started because I started reading The Canterbury Tales in Middle English. There is a great app online called General Prologue created by one of your countrymen, Terry Richardson [NB it is Terry Jones], who loved Middle English. In this app, he recites the Middle English of the General Prologue. I started listening to this app, and I thought, I just really love the rhythms and the sounds of Middle English. And it's quite easy to learn. So then, I got really into that.And then I thought, but what about Anglo-Saxon? I'm very bad at languages. I studied Latin for seven years in middle school and high school. I never really got very far, but I thought, Anglo-Saxon has to be the easiest foreign language you can learn, right? So, I got into it.I cannot sight read Anglo-Saxon, but I really got into Anglo-Saxon poetry. I really liked the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Most people probably would not like the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle because it's very repetitive, but that makes it great if you're a language learner because every entry is in this very repetitive structure. I just felt such a connection. I get in trouble when I say this kind of stuff, because I'm never quiet sure if it's 100 percent true. But it's certainly one of the oldest vernacular literatures in Europe. It's just so much older than most of the other medieval literature I've read. And it just was such a window into a different part of history I never knew about.Oliver: And you particularly like “The Dream of the Rood”?Kanakia: Yeah, “The Dream of the Rood” is my favorite Anglo-Saxon poem. “The Dream of the Rood” is a poem that is told from the point of view of Christ's cross. A man is having a dream. In this dream he encounters Christ's cross, and Christ's cross starts reciting to him basically the story of the crucifixion. At the end, the cross is buried. I don't know, it was just so haunting and powerful. Yeah, it was one of my favorites.Oliver: Why do you think Byron is a better poet than Alexander Pope?Kanakia: This is an argument I cannot get into. I think this is coming up because T. S. Eliot felt that Alexander Pope was a great poet because he really exemplified the spirit of the age. I don't know. I've tried to read Pope. It just doesn't do it for me. Whereas with Byron, I read Don Juan and found it entertaining. I enjoyed it. Then, his lyric poetry is just more entertaining to read. With Alexander Pope, I'm learning a lot about what kind of poetry people wrote in the 18th century, but the joy is not there.Oliver: Okay. Can we do a quick fire round where I say the name of a book and you just say what you think of it, whatever you think of it?Kanakia: Sure.Oliver: Okay. The Odyssey.Kanakia: The Odyssey. Oh, I love The Odyssey. It has a very strange structure, where it starts with Telemachus and then there's this flashback in the middle of it. It is much more readable than The Iliad; I'll say that.Oliver: Herodotus.Kanakia: Herodotus is wild. Going into Herodotus, I really thought it was about the Persian war, which it is, but it's mostly a general overview of everything that Herodotus knew, about anything. It's been a long time since I read it. I really appreciate the voice of Herodotus, how human it is, and the accumulation of facts. It was great.Oliver: I love the first half actually. The bit about the Persian war I'm less interested in, but the first half I think is fantastic. I particularly love the Egypt book.Kanakia: Oh yeah, the Egypt book is really good.Oliver: All those like giant beetles that are made of fire or whatever; I can't remember the details, but it's completely…Kanakia: The Greeks are also so fascinated by Egypt. They go down there like what is going on out there? Then, most of what we know about Egypt comes from this Hellenistic period, when the Greeks went to Egypt. Our Egyptian kings list comes from the Hellenistic period where some scholar decided to sort out what everybody was up to and put it all into order. That's why we have such an orderly story about Egypt. That's the story that the Greeks tried to tell themselves.Oliver: Marcus Aurelius.Kanakia: Marcus Aurelius. When I first read The Meditations, which I loved, obviously, I thought, “being the Roman emperor cannot be this hard.” It really was a black pill moment because I thought, “if the emperor of Rome is so unhappy, maybe human power really doesn't do it.”Knowing more about Marcus Aurelius, he did have quite a difficult life. He was at war for most of his—just stuck in the region in Germany for ages. He had various troubles, but yeah, it really was very stoic. It was, oh, I just have to do my duty. Very “heavy is the head that wears the crown” kind of stuff. I thought, “okay, I guess being Roman emperor is not so great.”Oliver: Omar Khayyam.Kanakia: Omar Khayyam. Okay, I've only read The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam by Edward Fitzgerald, which I loved, but I cannot formulate a strong opinion right now.Oliver: As You Like It.Kanakia: No opinions.Oliver: Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson.Kanakia: Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson. I do have an opinion about this, which is that they should make a redacted version of Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson. I normally am not a big believer in abridgements because I feel like whatever is there is there. But, Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson, first of all, has a long portion before Boswell even meets Johnson. That portion drags; it's not that great. Then it has all these like letters that Johnson wrote, which also are not that great. What's really good is when Boswell just reports everything Johnson ever said, which is about half the book. You get a sense of Johnson's conversation and his personality, and that is very gripping. I've definitely thought that with a different presentation, this could still be popular. People would still read this.Oliver: The Communist Manifesto.Kanakia: The Communist Manifesto. It's very stirring. I love The Communist Manifesto. It has very haunting, powerful lines. I won't try to quote from it because I'll misquote them.Oliver: But it is remarkably well written.Kanakia: Oh yeah, it is a great work of literature.Oliver: Yeah.Kanakia: I read Capital [Das Kapital], which is not a great work of literature, and I would venture to say that it is not necessarily worth reading. It really feels like Marx's reputation is built on other political writings like The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte and works like that, which really seem to have a lot more meat on the bone than Capital.Oliver: Pragmatism by William James.Kanakia: Pragmatism. I mean, I've mentioned that in my book. I love William James in general. I think William James was writing in this 19th-century environment where it seemed like some form of skepticism was the only rational solution. You couldn't have any source of value, and he really tried to cut through that with Pragmatism and was like, let's just believe the things that are good to believe. It is definitely at least useful to think, although someone else can always argue with you about what is useful to believe. But, as a personal guide for belief, I think it is still useful.Oliver: Major Barbara by George Bernard Shaw.Kanakia: No strong opinions. It was a long time ago that I read Major Barbara.Oliver: Tell me what you like about James Fenimore Cooper.Kanakia: James Fenimore Cooper. Oh, this is great. I have basically a list of Great Books that I want to read, but four or five years ago, I thought, “what's in all the other books that I know the names of but that are not reputed, are not the kind of books you still read?”That was when I read Walter Scott, who I really love. And I just started reading all kinds of books that were kind of well known but have kind of fallen into literary disfavor. In almost every case, I felt like I got a lot out of these books. So, nowadays when I approach any realm of literature, I always look for those books.In 19th-century American literature, the biggest no-longer-read book is The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper, which was America's first bestseller. He was the first American novelist that had a high reputation in Europe. The Last of the Mohicans is kind of a historical romance, à la Walter Scott, but much more tightly written and much more tightly plotted.Cooper has written five novels, the Leatherstocking Tales, that are all centered around this very virtuous, rough-hewn frontiersman, Natty Bumppo. He has his best friend, Chingachgook, who is the last of the Mohicans. He's the last of his tribe. And the two of these guys are basically very sad and stoic. Chingachgook is distanced from his tribe. Chingachgook has a tribe of Native Americans that he hates—I want to say it's the Huron. He's always like, “they're the bad ones,” and he's always fighting them. Then, Natty Bumppo doesn't really love settled civilization. He's not precisely at war with it, but he does not like the settlers. They're kind of stuck in the middle. They have various adventures, and I just thought it was so haunting and powerful.I've been reading a lot of other 19th-century American literature, and virtually none of it treats Native Americans with this kind of respect. There's a lot of diversity in the Native American characters; there's really an attempt to show how their society works and the various ways that leadership and chiefship works among them. There's this very haunting moment in The Last of the Mohicans, where this aged chief, Tamenund, comes out and starts speaking. This is a chief who, in American mythology, was famous for being a friend to the white people. But, James Fenimore Cooper writing in the 1820s has Tamenund come out at 80 years old and say, “we have to fight; we have to fight the white people. That's our only option.” It was just such a powerful moment and such a powerful book.I was really, really enthused. I read all of these Leatherstocking Tales. It was also a very strange experience to read these books that are generally supposed to be very turgid and boring, and then I read them and was like, “I understand. I'm so transported.” I understand exactly why readers in the 1820s loved this.Oliver: Which Walter Scott books do you like?Kanakia: I love all the Walter Scott books I've read, but the one I liked best was Kenilworth. Have you ever read Kenilworth?Oliver: I don't know that one.Kanakia: Yeah, it's about Elizabeth I, who had a romantic relationship with one of her courtiers.Oliver: The Earl of Essex?Kanakia: Yeah. She really thought they were going to get married, but then it turned out he was secretly married. Basically, I guess the implication is that he killed his wife in order to marry Queen Elizabeth I. It's a novel all about him and that situation, and it just felt very tightly plotted. I really enjoyed it.Oliver: What did you think of Rejection?Kanakia: Rejection by Tony Tulathimutte? Initially when I read this book, I enjoyed it, but I was like, “life cannot possibly be this sad.” It's five or six stories about these people who just have nothing going on. Their lives are so miserable, they can't find anyone to sleep with, and they're just doomed to be alone forever. I was like, “life can't be this bad.” But now thinking back over it, it is one of the most memorable books I've read in the last year. It really sticks with you. I feel like my opinion of this book has gone up a lot in retrospect.Oliver: How antisemitic is the House of Mirth?Kanakia: That is a hotly debated question, which I mentioned in my book. I think there has been a good case made that Edith Wharton, the author of House of Mirth, who was from an old New York family, was herself fairly antisemitic and did not personally like Jewish people. What she portrays in this book is that this old New York society also was highly suspicious of Jewish people and was organized to keep Jewish people out.In this book there is a rich Jewish man, Simon Rosedale, and there's a poor woman, Lily Bart. Lily Bart's main thing is whether she's going to marry the poor guy, Lawrence Selden, or the rich guy, Percy Gryce. She can't choose. She doesn't want to be poor, but she also is always bored by the rich guys. Meanwhile, through the whole book, there's Simon Rosedale, who's always like, “you should marry me.” He's the rich Jewish guy. He's like, “you should marry me. I will give you lots of money. You can do whatever you want.”Everybody else kind of just sees her as a woman and as a wife; he really sees her as an ally in his social climbing. That's his main motivation. The book is relatively clear that he has a kind of respect for her that nobody else does. Then, over the course of the book, she also gains a lot more respect for him. Basically, late in the book, she decides to marry him, but she has fallen a lot in the world. He's like, “that particular deal is not available anymore,” but he does offer her another deal that—although she finds it not to her taste—is still pretty good.He basically is like, “I'll give you some money, you'll figure out how to rehabilitate your reputation, and later down the line, we can figure something out.” So, I think with a great author like Edith Wharton, there's power in these portrayals. I felt it hard to come away from it feeling like the book is like a really antisemitic book.Oliver: Now, you note that the Great Books movement started out as something quite socially aspirational. Do you think it's still like that?Kanakia: I do think so. Yeah. For me, that's 100 percent what it was because I majored in econ. I always felt kind of inadequate as a writer against people who had majored in English. Then I started off as a science fiction writer, young adult writer, and I was like, “I'm going to read all these Great Books and then I'll have read the books that everybody else has read.” In my mind, that's also what it was—that there was some upper crust or literary society that was reading all these Great Books.That's really what did it. I do think there's still an element of aspiration to it because it's a club that you can join, that anyone can join. It's very straightforward to be a Great Books reader, and so I think there's still something there. I think because the Great Books movement has such a democratic quality to it, it actually doesn't get you to the top socially, which has always been the true, always been the case. But, that's okay. As long as you end up higher than where you started, that's fine.Oliver: What makes a book great?Kanakia: I talk about it this in the book, and I go through many different authors' conceptions of what makes a book great or what constitutes a classic. I don't know that anyone has come up with a really satisfying answer. The Horatian formulation from Horace—that a book is great or an author is great if it has lasted for a hundred years—is the one that seems to be the most accurate. Like, any book that's still being read a hundred years after it was written has a greatness.I do think that T. S. Eliott's formulation—that a civilization at its height produces certain literature and that literature partakes of the greatness of the civilization and summarizes the greatness of the civilization—does seem to have some kind of truth to it.But it's hard, right? Because the greatest French novel is In Search of Lost Time, but I don't know that anyone would say that the France in the 1920s was at its height. It's not a prescriptive thing, but it does seem like the way we read many of these Great Books, like Moby Dick, it feels like you're like communing with the entire society that produced it. So, maybe there's something there.Oliver: Now, you've used a list from Clifton Fadiman.Kanakia: Yes.Oliver: Rather than from Mortimer Adler or Harold Bloom or several others. Why this list?Kanakia: Well, the best reason is that it's actually the list I've just been using for the last 15 years. I went to a science fiction convention in 2009, Readercon, and at this science fiction convention was Michael Dirda, who was a Washington Post book critic. He had recently come out with his book, Classics for Pleasure, which I also bought and liked. But he said that the list he had always used was this Clifton Fadiman book. And so when I decided to start reading the Great Books, I went and got that book. I have perused many other lists over time, but that was always the list that seemed best to me.It seemed to have like the best mix. There's considerable variation amongst these lists, but there's also a lot of overlap. So any of these lists is going to have Dickens on it, and Tolstoy, and stuff like that. So really, you're just thinking about, “aside from Dickens and Tolstoy and George Eliot and Walt Whitman and all these people, who are the other 50 authors that you're going be reading?”The Mortimer Adler list is very heavy on philosophy. It has Plotinus on it. It has all these scientific works. I don't know, it didn't speak to me as much. Whereas, this Clifton Fadiman and John Major list has all these Eastern works on it. It has The Tale of Genji, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Story of the Stone, and that just spoke to me a little bit more.Oliver: What modern books will be on a future Great Books list, whether it's from someone alive or someone since the war.Kanakia: Have you ever heard of Robert Caro?Oliver: Sure.Kanakia: Yeah. I think his Lyndon Johnson books are great books. They have changed the field of biography. They're so complete, they seem to summarize an entire era, epoch. They're highly rated, but I feel like they're underrated as literature.What else? I was actually a little bit surprised in this Clifton Fadiman-John Major book, which came out in 1999, that there are not more African Americans in their list. Like, Invisible Man definitely seemed like a huge missed work. You know, it's hard. You would definitely want a book that has undergone enough critical evaluation that people are pretty certain that it is great. A lot of things that are more recent have not undergone that evaluation yet, but Invisible Man has, as have some works by Martin Luther King.Oliver: What about The Autobiography of Malcolm X?Kanakia: I would have to reread. I feel like it hasn't been evaluated much as a literary document.Oliver: Helen DeWitt?Kanakia: It's hard to say. It's so idiosyncratic, The Last Samurai, but it is certainly one of the best novels of the last 25 years.Oliver: Yeah.Kanakia: It is hard to say, because there's nothing else quite like it. But I would love if The Last Samurai was on a list like this; that would be amazing.Oliver: If someone wants to try the Great Books, but they think that those sort of classic 19th-century novels are too difficult—because they're long and the sentences are weird or whatever—what else should they do? Where else should they start?Kanakia: Well, it depends on what they're into, or it depends on their personality type. I think like there are people who like very, very difficult literature. There are people who are very into James Joyce and Proust. I think for some people the cost-benefit is better. If they're going to be pouring over some book for a long time, they would prefer if it was overtly difficult.If they're not like that, then I would say, there are many Great Books that are more accessible. Hemingway is a good one and Grapes of Wrath is wonderful. The 19th-century American books tend to be written in a very different register than the English books. If you read Moby Dick, it feels like it's written in a completely different language than Charles Dickens, even though they're writing essentially at the same time.Oliver: Is there too much Freud on the list that you've used?Kanakia: Maybe. I know that Interpretation of Dreams is on that list, which I've tried to read and have decided life is too short. I didn't really buy it, but I have read a fair amount of Freud. My impression of Freud was always that I would read Freud and somehow it would just seem completely fanciful or far out, like wouldn't ring true. But then when I started reading Freud, it was more the opposite. I was like, oh yeah, this seems very, very true.Like this battle between like the id and the ego and the super ego, and this feeling that like the psyche is at war with itself. Human beings really desire to be singular and exceptional, but then you're constantly under assault by the reality principle, which is that you're insignificant. That all seemed completely true. But then he tries to cure this somehow, which does not seem a curable problem. And he also situates the problem in some early sexual development, which also did not necessarily ring true. But no, I wouldn't say there's too much. Freud is a lot of fun. People should read Freud.Oliver: Which of the Great Books have you really not liked?Kanakia: I do get asked this quite a bit. I would say the Great Book that I really felt like—at least in translation—was not that rewarding in an unabridged version was Don Quixote. Because at least half the length of Don Quixote is these like interpolated novellas that are really long and tedious. I felt Don Quixote was a big slog. But maybe someday I'll go back and reread it and love it. Who knows?Oliver: Now you wrote that the question of biography is totally divorced from the question of what art is and how it operates. What do you think of George Orwell's supposition that if Shakespeare came back tomorrow, and we found out he used to rape children that we should—we would not say, you know, it's fine to carry on to doing that because he might write another King Lear.Kanakia: Well, if we discovered that Shakespeare was raping children, he should go to prison for that. No. It's totally divorced in both senses. You don't get any credit in the court of law because you are the writer of King Lear. If I murdered someone and then I was hauled in front of a judge and they were like, oh, Naomi's a genius, I wouldn't get off for murder. Nor should I get off for murder.So in terms of like whether we would punish Shakespeare for his crime of raping children, I don't think King Lear should count at all, but it's never used that way. It's never should someone go to prison or not for their crimes, because they're a genius. It's always used the other way, which is should we read King Lear knowing that the author raped children, but I also feel like that is immaterial. If you read King Lear, you're not enabling someone to rape children.Oliver: There's an almost endless amount of discussion these days about the Great Books and education and the value of the humanities, and what's the future of it all. What is your short opinion on that?Kanakia: My short opinion is that the Great Books at least are going to be fine. The Great Books will continue to be read, and they would even survive the university. All these books predate the university and they will survive the university. I feel like the university has stewarded literature in its own way for a while now and has made certain choices in that stewardship. I think if that stewardship was given up to more voluntary associations that had less financial support, then I think the choices would probably be very different. But I still think the greatest works would survive.Oliver: Now this is a quote from the book: “I am glad that reactionaries love the Great Books. They've invited a Trojan horse into their own camp.” Tell us what you mean by that.Kanakia: Let's say you believed in Christian theocracy, that you thought America should be organized on explicitly Christian principles. And because you believe in Christian theocracy, you organize a school that teaches the Great Books. Many of these schools that are Christian schools that have Great Books programs will also teach Nietzsche. They definitely put some kind of spin on Nietzsche. But they will teach anti-Christ, and that is a counterpoint to Christian morality and Christian theology. There are many things that you'll read in the Great Books that are corrosive to various kinds of certainties.If someone who I think is bad starts educating themselves in the Great Books, I don't think that the Great Books are going to make them worse from my perspective. So it's good.Oliver: How did reading the Mahabharata change you?Kanakia: Oh yeah, so the Mahabharata is a Hindu epic from, let's say, the first century AD. I'm Indian and most Indians are familiar with the basic outline of the Mahabharata story because it's told in various retellings, and there's a TV serial that my parents would rent from the Indian store growing up and we would watch it tape by tape. So I'm very familiar with it. Like there's never been a time I have not known this story.But I was also familiar with the idea that there is a written version in Sanskrit that's extremely long. It is 10 times as long as the Iliad and the Odyssey combined. This Mahabharata story is not that long. I've read a version of it that's about 800 pages long. So how could something that's 10 times this long be the same? A new unabridged translation came out 10 years ago. So I started reading it, and it basically contains the entire Sanskrit Vedic worldview in it.I had never been exposed to this very coherently laid-out version of what I would call Hindu cosmology and ethics. Hindus don't really get taught those things in a very organized way. The book is basically about dharma, the principle of rightness and how this principle of rightness orders the universe and how it basically results in everybody getting their just deserts in various ways. As I was reading the book, I was like, this seems very true that there is some cosmic rebalancing here, and that everything does turn out more or less the way it should, which is not something that I can defend on a rational level.But just reading the book, it just made me feel like, yes, that is true. There is justice, the universe is organized by justice. It took me about a year to read the whole thing. I started waking up at 5:00 a.m. and reading for an hour each morning, and it just was a really magical, profound experience that brought me a lot closer to my grandmother's religious beliefs.Oliver: Is it ever possible to persuade someone with arguments that they should read literature, or is it just something that they have to have an inclination toward and then follow someone's example? Because I feel like we have so many columns and op-eds and “books are good because of X reason, and it's very important because of Y reason.” And like, who cares? No one cares. If you are persuaded, you take all that very seriously and you argue about what exactly are the precise reasons we should say. And if you're not persuaded, you don't even know this is happening.And what really persuades you is like, oh, Naomi sounds pretty compelling about the Mahabharata. That sounds cool. I'll try that. It's much more of a temperamental, feelingsy kind of thing. Is it possible to argue people into thinking about this differently? Or should we just be doing what we do and setting an example and hoping that people will follow.Kanakia: As to whether it's possible or not, I do not know. But I do think these columns are too ambitious. A thousand-word column and the imagined audience for this column is somebody who doesn't read books at all, who doesn't care about literature at all. And then in a thousand-word column, you're going to persuade them to care about literature. This is no good. It's so unnecessary.Whereas there's a much broader range of people who love to read books, but have never picked up Moby Dick or have never picked up Middlemarch, or who like maybe loved Middlemarch, but never thought maybe I should then go on and read Jane Austen and George Eliot.I think trying to shift people from “I don't read books at all; reading books is not something I do,” to being a Great Books card-carrying lover of literature is a lot. I really aim for a much lower result than that, which is to whatever extent people are interested in literature, they should pursue that interest. And as the rationalists would say, there's a lot of alpha in that; there's a lot to be gained from converting people who are somewhat interested into people who are very interested.Oliver: If there was a more widespread practice of humanism in education and the general culture, would that make America into a more liberal country in any way?Kanakia: What do you mean by humanism?Oliver: You know, the old-fashioned liberal arts approach, the revival of the literary journal culture, the sort of depolitical approach to literature, the way things used to be, as it were.Kanakia: It couldn't hurt. It couldn't hurt is my answer to that question.Oliver: Okay.Kanakia: What you're describing is basically the way I was educated. I went to Catholic school in DC at St. Anselm's Abbey School, in Northeast, DC, grade school. Highly recommend sending your little boys there. No complaints about the school. They talked about humanism all the time and all these civic virtues. I thought it was great. I don't know what people in other schools learn, but I really feel like it was a superior way of teaching.Now, you know, it was Catholic school, so a lot of people who graduated from my school are conservatives and don't really have the beliefs that I have, but that's okay.Oliver: Tell us about your reading habits.Kanakia: I read mostly ebooks. I really love ebooks because you can make the type bigger. I just read all the time. They vary. I don't wake up at 5:00 a.m. to read anymore. Sometimes if I feel like I'm not reading enough—because I write this blog, and the blog doesn't get written unless I'm reading. That's the engine, and so sometimes I set aside a day each week to read. But generally, the reading mostly takes care of itself.What I tend to get is very into a particular thing, and then I'll start reading more and more in that area. Recently, I was reading a lot of New Yorker stories. So I started reading more and more of these storywriters that have been published in the New Yorker and old anthologies of New Yorker stories. And then eventually I am done. I'm tired. It's time to move on.Oliver: But do you read several books at once? Do you make notes? Do you abandon books? How many hours a day do you read?Kanakia: Hours a day: Because my e-reader keeps these stats, I'd say 15 or 20 hours a week of reading. Nowadays because I write for the blog, I often think as I'm reading how I would frame a post about this. So I look for quotes, like what quote I would look at. I take different kinds of notes. I'll make more notes if I'm more confused by what is going on. Especially with nonfiction books, I'll try sometimes to make notes just to iron out what exactly I think is happening or what I think the argument is. But no, not much of a note taker.Oliver: What will you read next?Kanakia: What will I read next? Well, I've been thinking about getting back into Indian literature. Right now I'm reading Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. But there's an Indian novel called Jhootha Sach, which is a partition novel that is originally in Hindi. And it's also a thousand pages long, and is frequently compared to Les Miserables and War and Peace. So I'm thinking about tackling that finally.Oliver: Naomi Kanakia, thank you very much.Kanakia: Thanks for having me. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk

Join me for a transformative live in person event in Maui on May 14-17 https://www.brianscottlive.com/hawaii-2026   Join The Reality Revolution Tribe

IANR 2608 022126 Line Up 4-6pm INTERVIEWS (Guest host Gautam Sinha in for Pramod)Here's the guest line-up for Sat, Feb 21, 2026 from 4 to 6pm CST on Indo American News Radio (www.IndoAmerican-news.com), a production of Indo American News. We areon 98.7 FM and you can also listen on the masalaradio app.By Monday, hear the recorded show on Podcast uploaded on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, Radio Public and Breaker or go to our website and click on the IANR link. Our Podcast has been rated #2 among 100 Podcasts in Houston by feedspot.com. We have 6 years of Podcasts and have had thousands of hits.TO SUPPORT THE SHOW, SELECT FOLLOW ON OUR FREE PODCAST CHANNEL AND YOU'LL BE NOTIFIED OF NEWUPDATES.4:20 pm Although Rishi Bhutada was born and raised in Houston, he has been rooted in Indian culture and his Hindu heritage. He is an active member of the Hindu American Foundation which has advocated to correct items that depict Hindus in a terrible light. The State Board of Education has passed the Bluebonnet Learning lessons rule to teach Biblical studies in K through 5 classrooms across the state. He joins us to explain why Hindus should oppose this and also talk about the annual HAF gala to be held on Saturday, April 11.4:50 pm We are out of the Annual Open Enrollment period to sign up for Medicare policies but there are still extenuating circumstances that may allow you to sign up for Medicare Advantage plans. We are joined once again by Medicare Insurance Broker Kaushi Shah who will explain what those circumstances can be and how to go about enrolling now, what the costs may be and why it is so important for us to pay attention before signing up.5:20 pm Many of us have never even heard of the field of Epigenetics which deals with the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself. Sheetal Kohli, a teacher at Harmony Public Schools, has devoted herself to strengthening STEM education across Houston and encouraging inquiry-based learning. We turn to her to explain how Epigenetics can influence health and disease of an individual.Also stay tuned in for news roundup, views, sports and movie reviews.TO BE FEATURED ON THE SHOW, OR TO ADVERTISE, PLEASE CONTACT US AT 713-789-NEWS or 6397 or at indoamericannews@yahoo.comPlease pick up the print edition of Indo American News which is available all across town at grocery stores. Also visit our website indoamerican-news.com which gets 90,000+ hits to track all current stories.And remember to visit our digital archives from over 18 years. Plus, our entire 45 years of hard copy archives are available in the Fondren Library at Rice University.

A Great Victory for Hindus - Next Target Taj Mahal Truth | Bhojshala Survey Result | Vishnu S Jain

Big Win for Hindus After Court Decision | Masjid Made out of Hindu Temple Reamins | Sanjay Dixit

There is a common idea in history, in humanity that we are all seeking the same God. We have different names, different ways of getting to this God; but in the end we are going to find out we were all working toward the same God. It is a polite and tolerant idea. It is just not true. The person who affirms this idea knows very little of the god they follow or that others follow. He is God the Father, a title that implies a relationship with a son or daughter. God reveals Himself as the Father of Jesus in 1 Peter 1:3. That is not the God of the Hindus, Muslims, and it is the God the Jews are currently rejecting.

After months in prison for sharing the gospel with Hindus, Pastor Paul's health was failing. He offered a desperate prayer: he asked God to allow another pastor to be arrested who could come to the prison and encourage Paul.  "Lord, arrest one pastor and bring him to be in prison so we can have fellowship." God answered Paul's prayer, and four days later, he read in the newspaper that a pastor had been arrested. Two weeks later, that pastor was with Paul in the prison, and he brought him great encouragement: "My church has been praying for you!" After his fellow pastor arrived to the prison, Paul says his tired faith became, "like concrete." They began to pray together in prison. Soon, other prisoners were asking for prayer. The two pastors would often raise their hands in prayer, claiming spiritual victory. When prison guards asked what they were doing, the two pastors said, "We are praying for you!" The two pastors had the opportunity to pray with 70 other prisoners who came to them asking for prayer and to know more about Jesus. One of those was an American prisoner named Daniel. He went to India on a quest for spiritual enlightenment; inside that Indian prison, Daniel found what he sought—in Christ. You'll also hear how the Lord moved pastor Paul's wife to bring his bail application to the Supreme Court, and how God answered their prayers that a specific judge would hear his case. Hear how you can pray specifically for Pastor Paul, including that all charges against him will be dropped, and go to www.PrisonerAlert.com to learn how you can pray for other persecuted Christians still imprisoned for their faith. The VOM App for your smartphone or tablet will help you pray daily in 2026 for persecuted Christians in nations like North Korea, Nigeria, Iran and Bangladesh, as well as provide free access to e-books, audiobooks, video content, and feature films. Download the VOM App for your iOS or Android device today.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, on Karl and Crew, we kicked off our weekly theme of “Disciples Making Disciples” with a discussion with Christopher Yuan, who shared his story of freedom from homosexuality and of understanding gender and sexuality according to God’s design. Christopher is a leading authority on biblical sexuality and gender, known for his clear, gospel-centered teachings. He is also the author of “Holy Sexuality and the Gospel”. His expertise is uniquely informed by his personal experiences, advanced health sciences studies, and rigorous theological education. He is the creator of The Holy Sexuality Project, a groundbreaking video series that empowers parents and grandparents to confidently disciple their teens on biblical sexuality and gender at home. Then we had Larry McCall join us to discuss how to pursue a walk like Jesus. Larry is the Founder and Director of Walking Like Jesus Ministries, a Bible-teaching ministry focused on helping Christians understand, in practical ways, how the Gospel of Jesus shapes life’s most important relationships. He has also written several books, including “Walking With Jesus”. Then we had Dr. Samuel Naaman join us to discuss the purpose and meaning of Ramadan. Dr. Naaman is a Professor of Intercultural Studies at the Moody Bible Institute. He is also the Vice President of Call of Hope. He is also the President and co-founder of the South Asian Friendship Center, which serves Muslims and Hindus. You can hear the highlights of today's program on the Karl and Crew Showcast. If you're looking to hear a particular segment from the show, look at the following time stamps: Christopher Yuan Interview [10:29 ] Larry McCall Interview [28:48 ] Dr. Samuel Naaman Interview [41:18] Karl and Crew airs live weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. Central Time. Click this link for ways to listen in your area! https://www.moodyradio.org/ways-to-listen/Donate to Moody Radio: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Subscribe to Dostcast Clips:https://www.youtube.com/@dostcastclips?sub_confirmation=1Listen to Dostcast on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/70vrbHeSvrcXyOeISTyBSy?si=be05dbdd564245d9Join the Dostcast Janta Party on WhatsApp for regular updates: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbAZwo5D8SDs5kf94N3TWant to suggest a guest?Fill this form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ft_-1QDs7XpsSWnaPOeF21yUlhk9bzKvwHSyh4hHfBU/edit?usp=drivesdk====================================================================Are the Vedas still relevant in 2026?Has astrology replaced Yajna?Did Krishna actually reject the Vedas?This conversation dives deep into the foundations of Sanatana Dharma — beyond ritualism, beyond social media spirituality, and beyond surface-level interpretations.We explore:• Why Ami wrote her book and the challenges behind it• The true purpose of Yajna in Vedic culture• Pancha Rina (the five debts of life) explained• Chaturvidha Purushartha — Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha• The categories of Hindu granths• The reliability of India's oral tradition• The 4 Upavedas and Dharmashastra• Whether Krishna discarded the Vedas• And Ami's powerful advice to VinamreIf you want to understand Hinduism structurally — not emotionally — this episode is for you.Pre order “Why Are We This Way: A Guide to Hindu”: https://amzn.in/d/0ie9sM3BFollow Ami Ganatra on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/amig_insta?igsh=MXFvcWJ1em0wZHM4Timestamps00:00 – Coming Up01:19 – Why she wrote the book10:46 – Why is Yajna actually performed?19:09 – Astrologers have replaced Yajna24:31 – Pancha Rina Explained34:01 – Chaturvidha Purushartha Explained43:56 – Are the Vedas relevant in 2026?56:51 – Categories of Hindu Granths1:08:55 – Reliability of Oral Cultures1:13:40 – Insane World Record by 19 Year Old1:17:35 – The 4 Upavedas & Dharmashastra Explained1:28:45 – Difficulties while writing the book1:33:00 – Ami's Suggestion to Vinamre1:39:35 – Does Krishna Discard the Vedas?1:41:38 – Conclusion====================================================================Vinamre Kasanaa is a writer at heart, podcaster and entrepreneur by craft.He spends a significant part of his time reading and researching.With over 500 podcasts under his belt, he's interviewed everyone—from HNIs and industry leaders to everyday superheroes.Follow Vinamre:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vinamre-kasanaa-b8524496/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/vinamrekasanaa/Twitter: https://twitter.com/VinamreKasanaaDostcast: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dostcast/Twitter: https://twitter.com/dostcast====================================================================Contact Us:For business inquiries: dostcast@egiplay.com

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode features a conversation with the founding members of the Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, also known as the Auntylectuals. We began with each of them reflecting on their pathway into Hindu Studies and how the questions of caste and gender shaped their approaches to this field. We then discussed their motivations for starting the collective and what interventions they hoped to make through it. This took us deeper into some thorny topics: caste as a form of embodied knowledge that is often accompanied by the denial of its continued social power; the politics of Hinduism in North America where Hindus are both predominantly upper caste and a racial minority; the relationship between Hinduism and Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism; the traffic in language and tactics between Hindutva and Zionism; and the efforts to push back against the movement to make caste a protected category in U.S. anti-discrimination law. Guests: Shreena Gandhi: Professor of Religious Studies, Michigan State University Harshita Kamath: Professor of Telugu Culture, Literature, and History, Emory University Sailaja Krishnamurti: Professor of Gender Studies, Queen's University Shana Sippy, Professor of Religion, Centre College Mentioned in the episode: Rajiv Malhotra: an ideologue of the Hindu nationalist movement in the U.S. and founder of Infinity Foundation Harshita Kamath, Impersonations: The Artifice of Brahmin Masculinity in South Indian Dance Amar Chitra Katha: an Indian comic book publisher whose comics are hugely popular and widely available in India and the Indian diaspora. Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Learning about Hindu Religion through Comics and Popular Culture,” David Yoo and Khyati Y Joshi eds. Envisioning Religion, Race and Asian Americans, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 207-226, 2020. Babri Masjid: a 16th century mosque that became the target of Hindu nationalist mobilization and was destroyed by vigilante mobs in December 1992. Marko Geslani, “A Model Minority Religion: The Race of Hindu Studies,” American Religion, forthcoming. Thenmozhi Soundarajan, The Trauma of Caste Sarah Ahmed, Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Feminist Critical Hindu Studies in formation” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hindu fragility and the politics of mimicry in North America” Feminist Critical Hindu Studies Collective, “Hinduphobia is a smokescreen for Hindu nationalists” Shana Sippy and Sailaja Krishnamurti, “Not all Hinduism is Hindutva, but Hindutva is in fact Hinduism” Shana Sippy, “Strange and Storied Alliances: Hindus and Jews, India and Israel,” manuscript in progress Shana Sippy, "Victimization, Supremacism, Solidarity, and the Affective and Emulative Politics of American Hindus" Tomako Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions, Or How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism Shreena Gandhi, “Framing Islam as American Religion Despite White Supremacy” Equality Labs is a South Asian Dalit civil rights organization. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/indian-religions

Pastor Paul was doing gospel outreach in Northern India when he was arrested by police and accused of "forcing" Hindus to convert to Christianity. He wasn't forcing anyone but only sharing with people who expressed a hunger to hear the truth. When police arrived, Paul and his coworkers weren't having a service or studying the Bible; they were eating a meal. Still, it was considered a crime. "Which god are you praying to?" police asked. Little did Pastor Paul know that his faith would be tested as he heard that question repeatedly over the coming weeks. Pastor Paul and his three gospel coworkers suffered tremendously in police custody. Police threatened them constantly, putting fear in their hearts. They were repeatedly offered freedom if they would only renounce their faith in Jesus Christ. Police put the four Christians in a filthy prison cell that also served as the police station latrine. They allowed a mob of radical Hindus to beat them. Paul prayed that God would strengthen him. "Lord, please help me not to fear their words because You are in charge of every situation," Pastor Paul prayed, "You controlled the lion's mouth when Daniel went inside." As Pastor Paul fervently prayed, the Lord provided him many opportunities to share his faith in Christ and the strength to stand firm against the enemy's schemes. Listen as he shares his prayer for a forgiving heart when police threatened to beat him, stories of times the Lord gave him moments of relief, and how God sustained him even when his coworkers renounced Christ and turned their backs on him. The Lord opened fellow prisoners' hearts to hear more about his faith as they watched Pastor Paul. Living out 1 Peter 3:15, he made the most of every opportunity to share the hope of Jesus Christ. Mistreatment and terrible prison conditions impacted Paul's health; he thought he was going to die. When his wife was finally allowed to visit, he assumed it would be the last time he saw her on earth. He encouraged her to continue forward with Christ and not turn back, even if he died in prison. Paul had two final requests as he cried out to the Lord: to see revival in Uttar Pradesh state, and for the Lord to allow another pastor to be arrested and come and encourage him in prison. Tune in next week to hear the rest of Pastor Paul's story and whether God answered his request. Pray this week for the Lord to give our brothers and sisters in India strength and courage to withstand Christian persecution and hold fast to their faith in spite of anti-conversion laws and unjust treatment by the Hindu nationalist government. The VOM App for your smartphone or tablet will help you pray daily in 2026 for persecuted Christians in nations like North Korea, Nigeria, Iran and Colombia, as well as provide free access to e-books, audiobooks, video content, and feature films. Download the VOM App for your iOS or Android device today.

Modi Plays Secret Game in Bangladesh - How Hindus Voted Pro India Govt to Power | Map Explanation

There are so many vulnerable populations around the world, and it's hard to keep up with them all. One group that sustained very serious abuse is the Hindu community in the Asian nation of Bhutan. Oddly, for centuries there existed a comity between Hindus and Buddhists that was inspiring to see. In Nepal, many people practice both. So it's quite disheartening to learn that over 20 years ago, the despotic Buddhist king of Bhutan expelled over 100,000 Hindu citizens of Nepali heritage. For 2 decades these hardworking people lived in cramped huts in refugee camps in Nepal before being dispersed to welcoming countries. In these episodes we talk with Narad Adhikari from the Global Bhutanese Hindu Organization about this travesty that he, his family and many dear friends survived and ultimately thrived. This one is a heartbreaker, kids. But very inspirational. Theme music "Nigal."

Guest: Saarang Narayan (Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Mohali) Host and Producer: Maria Bach (University of Lausanne) A political poster issued by the Bharatiya Janta Party in recent years, promoting the Swadeshist message as part of their “Ghar Ghar Swadeshi” (Swadeshi in Every Household) campaign. A list of key terms with short explanations discussed in the episode Swadeshi is a Hindi/Hindustani word that literally means ‘of one's own country' (swa=one's own/self; desh=country). The slogan gained popularity in the early twentieth century, especially in the popular movement against the partition of Bengal in 1905, and went on to inspire the founding of domestic institutions and the production and consumption of goods as modes of anti-colonial politics. Although it remained part of the discourse around developmentalism and economic planning in the mid-twentieth century, it regained popularity in the context of the public debates about globalisation and neoliberalism in the 1980s and 1990s. While it is comparable to slogans like ‘Buy British' or ‘Buy American', there is a characteristic ethical and socio-cultural dimension that separates Swadeshist principles from simple autarky or protectionism. This ethical and socio-cultural dimension concerns the definition of the Swadeshist ‘self' along religious and cultural lines, often limiting it to Hinduism. Hindu Nationalism is a broad term used here to encapsulate those visions of nationalism in India that define the Indian identity and history through the lens of Hinduism. This is to say that Hindu Nationalists often link the modern nation-state to a primordial Hindu past, where the religious and cultural practices of the supposed ancient Hindu peoples defined their identities. While India's contemporary Hindu far-right has spearheaded this form of nationalism, there have been other actors who subscribe to such a vision of the Indian nation. What makes the Hindu far-right different from other such actors is the former's palingenetic, Islamophobic, and xenophobic interpretations of Hindu Nationalism. The Hindu far-right describes its mode of Hindu Nationalism as ‘Hindutva' or Hindu-ness, as outlined in the works of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (National Volunteers' Union) was founded in 1925. It is the apex body of the Hindu far-right with the goal of (re-)establishing India as a Hindu Nation. The RSS was founded by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar as a para-militaristic body of Hindu men to arm Hindu society against its cultural enemies. The second supreme-leader of the RSS, Madhavrao Sadashiv Golwalkar, identified these enemies in order of the threat that they posed to Hindus as follows: Muslims, Christians, and Communists. The RSS primarily functions through local chapters (shakhas or branches) and is comprised of volunteers (swayamsevaks) and led by preachers (pracharaks). Although Swadeshist ideas were primarily popularised by political actors who were summarily opposed to the politics of the RSS, the RSS adopted Swadeshi in the 1950s, and it has remained at the core of its economic thought ever since. Throughout its century-long existence, the RSS has faced three major bans and, despite its majoritarian, fascistic goals, has adapted strategies of dynamism and flexibility in its tactics, ideas, and political language to meet these challenges. The first two decades of independent India were the lowest point in the RSS's public and political presence, and it gained increasing popularity and political ground in the mainstream from the mid-1970s onwards. Part of its strategy of expansion has been the creation of smaller affiliate organisations, geared towards specialised tasks. This conglomerate of far-right organisations headed by the RSS has come to be known as the Sangh Parivar (Family). The current ruling party in India, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is the electoral wing of the RSS, and many of its members (including Prime Minister Narendra Modi) started out as swayamsevaks in the RSS before joining the BJP.

Have you ever noticed how various religions have their own unique idols or objects that people bow down to and worship? Take India, for instance; it's fascinating to think that there are around 330 million gods that the Hindus hold dear to their hearts. Have you ever thought about the idea that these so-called gods might actually be demons and fallen angels in disguise? Today, Pastor Mark dives into the intriguing topic of why folks find themselves bowing down to false gods. Satan likes to keep people stuck in the confines of misleading beliefs. As a believer, it's important to stay mindful and steer clear of any of these false deities. 

It's Friday, February 6th, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus 21 of 22 churches destroyed in Christian town in Myanmar since coup On January 30, the Burma Research Institute released a scathing report detailing destructive attacks, murders, and harassment of Christians and churches since the military coup in 2021 that forcefully took control of Myanmar, reports International Christian Concern. Some of the key findings include: 21 out of 22 churches in Thantlang Town, a majority-Christian town, have been destroyed and the town's population displaced since 2021. More than 340 churches and Christian buildings have been destroyed. 149 Christians murdered and 218 imprisoned from 2022 to 2025. One unnamed church leader, who is still living inside Myanmar, testified powerfully that the faithful are now scattered across jungles, remote areas, and informal shelters, struggling to preserve their faith and communal life under constant threat and insecurity. Pastor in India forced to eat cow dung After accusing a pastor in Odisha, India of forcefully converting Hindus to Christianity, a group of Hindu nationalists forced him to eat cow dung and drink sewer water, reports International Christian Concern. The incident occurred on January 4th, but only became widely known in recent days, prompting nationwide outrage and criticism. A mob of 40 people, reportedly affiliated with the Bajrang Dal — the militant wing of the Hindu nationalist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh — stormed a home during a prayer meeting in Parjang village, and accused the pastor of conducting “forced religious conversions.” Pastor Bipin Bihari Naik was dragged from the house and beaten with sticks. His face was smeared with red vermilion. Sandals were hung around his neck. He was then paraded through the village for nearly two hours. Pastor Naik was eventually taken to a local Hindu temple, where his hands were tied to a metal rod, and he was forced to consume cow dung and drink water from a sewer. They also tried to force the pastor to chant Hindu slogans, but he refused to do so. In a statement on X, Pinarayi Vijayan, the chief minister of Kerala, wrote, “Forcing a human being to eat cow dung is a deeply inhuman act, emboldened by the silence and complicity of BJP-led governments.” Landslide in Congo kills 200 miners A landslide last week collapsed several tunnels at a major coltan mine in eastern Congo, leaving at least 200 people dead in the rebel-controlled site, reports the Associated Press. The collapse occurred  Wednesday at the Rubaya mines, controlled by the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels, after heavy rains caused several hand-dug tunnels in the unregulated mine to cave. The M23 rebels and the Congolese government traded accusations over responsibility as reports from the remote region began to emerge. The collapse is one of the deadliest disasters in years in an area already facing a humanitarian crisis and ongoing conflict. Trump announced prayer gathering to rededicate America to God Appearing at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Donald Trump explained that the Department of Education will protect the right of public school students to pray. TRUMP: “Today, I'm also pleased to announce that the Department of Education is officially issuing its new guidance to protect the right to prayer in our public schools. That's a big deal.” (applause) President Trump also announced that Americans are invited to attend a special prayer event on the 250th birthday of America in our nation's capital. TRUMP: “In the last 12 months, young Americans attended church at nearly twice the rate as they did four years ago to support this exciting renewal. This morning, I'm pleased to announce that on May 17, we're inviting Americans from all across the country to come together on our National Mall to pray. We're going to rededicate America as one nation under God.” (applause) Psalm 33:12 says, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people He chose for His inheritance.” NBC anchor Savannah Guthrie addresses kidnappers of her mother In a tearful video posted Wednesday on Instagram, “Today” co-anchor Savannah Guthrie — flanked by her sister, Annie Guthrie, and her brother, Camron Guthrie, pleaded for more information from the possible kidnapper of her 84-year-old mother, saying her family is “ready to talk,” reports NBC News. GUTHRIE: “Our mom is our heart and our home. She is 84 years old. Her health, her heart is fragile. She lives in constant pain. She is without any medicine. She needs it to survive. We need to know, without a doubt, that she is alive and that you have her. We want to hear from you. And we are ready to listen.” In the Instagram video, Savannah thanked the public for “the prayers for our beloved mom,” Nancy Guthrie, who was last seen Saturday night in her home outside Tucson, Arizona. She was reported missing after she did not show up for church.  Nancy had no cognitive issues, and her disappearance was not linked to dementia. Blood was found on the front porch of Guthrie's house. DNA analysis has confirmed the blood belongs to Nancy Guthrie. A doorbell camera to her home was disconnected and removed at 1:47 local time and at 2:28, Guthrie's pacemaker was disconnected from her phone, an app shows. Fox10 TV reports that investigators are taking seriously a ransom note sent to a handful of media outlets connected to her disappearance. Heith Janke, the FBI chief in Phoenix, announced that they have arrested Derrick Callella in Hawthorne, California. Shocking lessons taught on college campuses today And finally, according to Students for Life's January newsletter, college students are being taught shocking lessons – often paid for by our tax dollars. * Harvard University has a class called, "Come hammered. Get Nailed: Safe Sex Under the Influence.” * Ohio State University features a class entitled, "Fighting Abortion Stigma with Planned Parenthood." * And Grand Valley State University has one called “Breaking Up with Purity Culture.” If that's not enough, they'll be encouraged to write Valentine's Day “thank you” cards to abortionists! The truth is many colleges have turned into little more than recruitment centers for Planned Parenthood's bloody business by first encouraging students to experiment sexually and then funneling vulnerable young women to abortionists to “take care of” or murder the natural consequences of sex – precious little babies. Campus missionaries with Students for Life are confronting the Culture of Death with three outreaches. First, setting up Cemetery of Innocents displays that visually expose the gruesome reality of abortion featuring 1,102 bright pink crosses commemorating the preborn babies aborted by Planned Parenthood every day. Second, hosting table events that spark one-on-one conversations with pro-abortion college students. And third, screening the pro-life movie Unplanned which tells the incredible conversion story of Abby Johnson, who was a Planned Parenthood director-turned-staunch-pro-life-activist, after she witnessed a preborn child squirming for its life away from an abortionist's tools during an abortion. Learn more about the great work of Students for Life at StudentsForLife.org. Proverbs 31:8 says, “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Friday, February 6th, in the year of our Lord 2026. Follow us on X or subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

In this episode of Thats So Hindu, Mat McDermott speaks with Fred Stella (HAF) and John Morehead (Foundation for Religious Diplomacy). The conversation explores the complex dynamics of Christian-Hindu relations, focusing on proselytization efforts in India and the reactions from the Hindu community. They discuss the ethical boundaries of evangelism, the importance of understanding different religious perspectives, and the need for interfaith dialogue that respects both beliefs. They emphasize the significance of educating young Hindus about their own faith to better engage in discussions with Christians and navigate the challenges posed by missionary activities.TakeawaysChristian evangelism often overlooks the perspectives of those being evangelized.Hindus feel their spiritual identity is often treated as a problem needing a solution.Interfaith dialogue can foster understanding and respect between different faiths.Ethical evangelism should avoid coercion and respect individual beliefs.Education is crucial for Hindus to articulate their beliefs in interfaith discussions.Not all Christians share the same approach to evangelism; there are diverse perspectives.The Great Commission is a fundamental aspect of evangelical Christianity.Interfaith discussions should focus on storytelling rather than debate.Creating alliances with other faiths can help address anti-Hindu sentiment.Respectful dialogue can lead to greater understanding and cooperation among religions.Chapters00:00Setting the Stage for Christian-Hindu Relations05:59Understanding Hindu Perspectives on Proselytization16:49Navigating Differences in Evangelism and Understanding18:21The Nature of Evangelization23:44Understanding the Great Commission24:17Exploring New Perspectives on Other Religions27:14Sharing Spiritual Beliefs Ethically33:28Experiences of Unethical Evangelism39:03Ethics of Evangelism in Interfaith Contexts45:16Finding Common Ground in Diverse BeliefsKeywordsChristianity, Hinduism, proselytization, interfaith dialogue, evangelism, ethical boundaries, cultural relations, religious identity, Great Commission, spiritual beliefs Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

First, The Indian Express' Sukrita Baruah explains how Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma asked BJP workers to file complaints against the inclusion of Bengali-origin Muslims in voter lists, and called on the public at large to “trouble” the community.Next, The Indian Express' Aiswarya Raj recounts the incident in which a man named Deepak Kumar stepped in to stop a mob of Hindus from harassing a 70-year-old man (13:08).And finally, The Indian Express' Asad Rehman shares the key highlights from Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's appearance before the Supreme Court yesterday (22:20).Hosted, written and produced by Shashank BhargavaEdited and mixed by Suresh Pawar

In this episode of Thats So Hindu, Mat McDermott speaks with Fred Stella (HAF) and John Morehead (Foundation for Religious Diplomacy). The conversation explores the complex dynamics of Christian-Hindu relations, focusing on proselytization efforts in India and the reactions from the Hindu community. They discuss the ethical boundaries of evangelism, the importance of understanding different religious perspectives, and the need for interfaith dialogue that respects both beliefs. They emphasize the significance of educating young Hindus about their own faith to better engage in discussions with Christians and navigate the challenges posed by missionary activities.TakeawaysChristian evangelism often overlooks the perspectives of those being evangelized.Hindus feel their spiritual identity is often treated as a problem needing a solution.Interfaith dialogue can foster understanding and respect between different faiths.Ethical evangelism should avoid coercion and respect individual beliefs.Education is crucial for Hindus to articulate their beliefs in interfaith discussions.Not all Christians share the same approach to evangelism; there are diverse perspectives.The Great Commission is a fundamental aspect of evangelical Christianity.Interfaith discussions should focus on storytelling rather than debate.Creating alliances with other faiths can help address anti-Hindu sentiment.Respectful dialogue can lead to greater understanding and cooperation among religions.Chapters00:00Setting the Stage for Christian-Hindu Relations05:59Understanding Hindu Perspectives on Proselytization16:49Navigating Differences in Evangelism and Understanding18:21The Nature of Evangelization23:44Understanding the Great Commission24:17Exploring New Perspectives on Other Religions27:14Sharing Spiritual Beliefs Ethically33:28Experiences of Unethical Evangelism39:03Ethics of Evangelism in Interfaith Contexts45:16Finding Common Ground in Diverse BeliefsKeywordsChristianity, Hinduism, proselytization, interfaith dialogue, evangelism, ethical boundaries, cultural relations, religious identity, Great Commission, spiritual beliefs Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hindus have long whitewashed Shivaji as a paragon of ethics while demeaning the tenth Guru. The reality is very different. Today, as Sikhs push back against Hindu imposition, the Guru is insulted and disparaged both academically and on social media. Yet their own hero Shivaji was once the fiercest nemesis of their people, a vassal of Muslim states who even begged Aurangzeb for the same privilege. Guru Gobind Singh Ji stood higher than any patriot, teaching the oppressed to stand up for themselves without ever compromising on their dignity. This episode exposes the truths Hindus tries to hide.

In this episode of That's So Hindu, Mat McDermott, Pawan Deshpande, and Devala Rees discuss the intersection of AI and Hinduism, exploring how AI can be integrated into devotional practices, the biases present in AI systems, and the implications of misinformation in educational contexts. They delve into the philosophical questions surrounding consciousness and AI, and the potential future of AI in relation to Hindu traditions. The discussion emphasizes the importance of accurate representation and the opportunities AI presents for spreading knowledge about Hinduism.TakeawaysAI images can be used in Hindu practices but with caution.Hinduism encompasses over 300 distinct traditions.Misinformation in educational materials about Hinduism is prevalent.Caste is often misrepresented in AI outputs.AI can mimic human-like features but lacks true consciousness.The optimization function in AI influences its responses.AI performs better when users interact positively with it.Hindus are significant users of AI technologies like ChatGPT.AI presents opportunities for accurate representation of Hinduism.The future of AI in Hinduism raises important philosophical questions.Chapters00:00Introduction to the Guests and Their Backgrounds02:54AI in Hindu Devotional Practices05:49Understanding AI: Definitions and Implications11:59Bias and Misinformation in AI17:52Educational Challenges and Misrepresentation of Hinduism23:44The Role of AI in Cultural Representation29:45Consciousness and AI: A Philosophical Exploration35:57The Future of AI and Hinduism41:45Conclusion and Final ThoughtsKeywordsAI, Hinduism, Devotional Practices, Misinformation, Bias, Education, Cultural Representation, Consciousness, Philosophy, Technology Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of That's So Hindu, Mat McDermott, Pawan Deshpande, and Devala Rees discuss the intersection of AI and Hinduism, exploring how AI can be integrated into devotional practices, the biases present in AI systems, and the implications of misinformation in educational contexts. They delve into the philosophical questions surrounding consciousness and AI, and the potential future of AI in relation to Hindu traditions. The discussion emphasizes the importance of accurate representation and the opportunities AI presents for spreading knowledge about Hinduism.TakeawaysAI images can be used in Hindu practices but with caution.Hinduism encompasses over 300 distinct traditions.Misinformation in educational materials about Hinduism is prevalent.Caste is often misrepresented in AI outputs.AI can mimic human-like features but lacks true consciousness.The optimization function in AI influences its responses.AI performs better when users interact positively with it.Hindus are significant users of AI technologies like ChatGPT.AI presents opportunities for accurate representation of Hinduism.The future of AI in Hinduism raises important philosophical questions.Chapters00:00Introduction to the Guests and Their Backgrounds02:54AI in Hindu Devotional Practices05:49Understanding AI: Definitions and Implications11:59Bias and Misinformation in AI17:52Educational Challenges and Misrepresentation of Hinduism23:44The Role of AI in Cultural Representation29:45Consciousness and AI: A Philosophical Exploration35:57The Future of AI and Hinduism41:45Conclusion and Final ThoughtsKeywordsAI, Hinduism, Devotional Practices, Misinformation, Bias, Education, Cultural Representation, Consciousness, Philosophy, Technology Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hey All, we've got ourselves a blast from the past! For those of you who have been following us for a few years you might recall that not long after we started podcasting we decided to go into The Vault and grab as many old analog recordings that survived over the decades, digitize them and add to our podcast library. So if you're not aware already, keep scrolling down and you'll see episodes from as far back as the late 90s. I really thought we were done with all that, but in cleaning out a desk drawer I found a few more. This one dates back to 2009. Here we interview Stephen Knapp, a brilliant writer on Vedic culture. We discuss his new (at the time) book called "The War Against India." Here's how he explains it: India has one of the oldest and most dynamic cultures in the world. Yet, many people do not know of the countless attacks, wars, atrocities, and sacrifices that Indian people have undergone to protect and preserve their country and spiritual tradition over the centuries. Neither do many people know of the numerous ways in which this profound heritage is being attacked and threatened today, and what we can do about it. Therefore, we should carefully understand: How there is presently a war against Hinduism and its yoga culture. The weaknesses of India that allowed invaders to conquer her. Lessons from India's real history that should not be forgotten. The atrocities committed by the Muslim invaders, and how they tried to destroy Vedic culture and its many temples, and slaughtered thousands of Indian Hindus. How the British viciously exploited India and its people for its resources. How the cruelest of all Christian Inquisitions in Goa tortured and killed thousands of Hindus. Action plans for preserving and strengthening Vedic India today. How all Hindus and concerned people must stand up and be strong for protecting the universal spiritual traditions of Vedic culture. Theme music "Nigal."

This podcast episode brings several eye-opening facts to light about how Gandhi misled the Hindu community into supporting the Pan Islamic Khilafat Movement. It was Gandhi who unilaterally glorified the bigoted Ali Brothers as nationalists and freedom fighters. Few people today know that Mohammad Ali got a Fatwa issued by 500 Ulemas throughout India to rebel against the government. Mohandas Gandhi endorsed this Fatwa from the official platform of the Indian National Congress. In a parallel development, the Khilafat Committee in Malegaon, Maharashtra, began making violent speeches, which eventually led to unprovoked violence committed by Muslims in the town. For three days in April 1921, the Muslim community set Malegaon on fire leading to a mini pogrom of Hindus, temple destruction, vandalism and large scale looting. This is a horrific chapter of recent history that has been largely untold. Listen to the full episode containing precious insights and hidden details of this incident and the career of Mohandas Gandhi.Support Our PodcastsIf you enjoyed this episode, please consider supporting The Dharma Dispatch podcast so we can offer more such interesting, informative and educational content related to Indian History, Sanatana Dharma, Hindu Culture and current affairs. It takes us months of rigorous research, writing and editing and significant costs to offer this labour of love.Ways you can Support The Dharma Podcast:* UPI: ddispatch@axl* Wallets, Netbanking, etc.* Take a paid subscription. Get full access to The Dharma Dispatch Digest at thedharmadispatch.substack.com/subscribe

Politics: Jan. 6 Plaque Still Not On Display @2:10 News: The ‘Donroe doctrine' sows new division across the Americas @7:12 Trump Ramps Up Threats Against Colombia And Mexico @17:28 Stephen Miller Asserts U.S. Has Right to Take Greenland @22:13 President Orders Cannabis Rules Relaxed, Easing Research @29:21 Health/Medicine/Science: Summary of RFK Jr's actions @32:17 The MAHA Pipe Dream Is Going to Hurt MAGA the Most @33:25 Pharmaceutical companies or RFK? @34:16 Trump admin drops childhood vaccination reporting requirement @36:16 Religious Nonsense: As if one needed any more reason to avoid the Ark Encounter… @37:49 Bangladesh saw 71 blasphemy-linked attacks on Hindus in 6 months @39:19 Pseudoscience: 2025 psychic forecasts @41:40 Jurassic Park talk @46:18

Episode #57 of The Hindu Parenting Podcast features a conversation with Esther Dhanraj, who has published a book called “Unbaptised: Why I Left Christianity and Returned to My Roots”.In this podcast, we explore religious conversion and the danger of Evangelism to Hindus, especially Hindu children. How can parents recognise if their children are being groomed for conversion? What are the signs and how does the process happen?How are Hindu children turned against their own heritage? What are they told about Hindu devis and devathas, their parents, ancestors and the ancient Indian civilisation?Can Hindu parents teach their children to resist and counter Christian evangelists?Don't miss this episode “Up Close and Candid with Esther Dhanraj - Part 1”Listen and share with all Hindu parents. Stay tuned for Part 2 coming up soon!Link to buy the book “Unbaptised: Why I Left Christianity and Returned to My Roots”.Hindu Parenting is a community for Hindu parents worldwide. We carry articles, podcasts, reviews, classes for teens and various other resources to help you in your parenting journey.Please support us by signing up for our newsletters to get the latest articles and podcasts in your e-mail inbox. Our podcasts (The Hindu Parenting Podcast and The Authentic Valmiki Ramayan Podcast) can be heard on Spotify, YouTube, Apple and Google Podcasts too.Leave a note, DM or send email to contact@hinduparenting.org if you'd like to share your viewpoints, experiences and wisdom as Hindu parents, or if you wish to join our community! You can also follow us on X (Twitter) or Instagram. Our handle is “hinduparenting”The opinions expressed by guests on The Hindu Parenting Podcast are their personal opinions and Hindu Parenting does not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, completeness, suitability or validity of anything shared on our platform by them.Copyright belongs to Hindu Parenting. Get full access to Hindu Parenting at hinduparenting.substack.com/subscribe

Gissele: [00:00:00] was Martin Luther King, Jr. Wright, does love have the power to transform an enemy into a friend. We’re currently working on a documentary showcasing people doing extraordinary things such as loving. Those who are most hurtful in this documentary will showcase extraordinary stories of forgiveness, reconciliation, and transformation. You’d like to find out more about our documentary, www M-A-I-T-R-I-C-E-N-T-R-E com slash documentary. Hello and welcome to the Love and Compassion Podcast with Gissele. We believe that love and compassion have the power to heal our lives and our world. Don’t forget to like and subscribe for more amazing content. Today we’re talking with Larry Rosen about whether enemies can come together in dialogue. Larry is the founder of a mediation law practice. Through understanding he has helped thousands craft enduring solutions to [00:01:00] crippling conflicts, millions have watched this popular TEDx talk with secret understanding humans whose insights informs the enemy’s project. From 2024, Larry completed writing the novel, the Enemy Dance, posing the question, must the society riven by tribalism descend into war or can it heal itself? Larry is a graduate of UCLA School of Law, where he served as editor of the Law Review and received numerous academic awards. Growing up, Larry was both the bully and the bullied. The one who was cruel and the one who was kind, he was sometimes popular. And sometimes friendless. He had many fist fights with kids who became his friends. He had his very own chair at the principal’s office. He believes that his peacemaking today is born out of the callousness and empathy that he knew as childhood. [00:02:00] Please join me in welcoming Larry. Hi, Larry. Larry: Hi there. That, it’s funny because that la last piece that you read about my, you know, the, the principal’s office that’s on my website, I’ve never had someone read that back to me and it brought me a little bit to tears, like, oh, that poor kid. Yeah, I, I don’t hear that very often. So anyway, Gissele: yeah. Oh, I really loved it when I saw it, and I could relate to it because I’ve also been both. when we hurt other people, we wanna be forgiven, but when people hurt us, you don’t always wanna forgive, right? Mm-hmm. So it gives you the different perspective. I’m so thrilled to have you on the show. And how I actually came to know about your project is, so I’m a professor at a university and I teach research and ethics. And, what I had discovered about my students is that many of them don’t come with the ability to do the critical thinking, to be able to hold both sides. Many of them come thinking there’s gotta be a right answer, and there’s a right way of doing things. Just tell us what the answer is. [00:03:00] And so for my students, I get them to write a paper where they tell me the things they feel really strongly about. Then they’re researching the opposing perspective using credible sources. because trolls are easy to dismiss, right? So credible sources, the opposing perspective, and then they are supposed to, so tell me what are their main points? You know, like why do they believe what they do? And and are you really that different? Right? And then the last part of the paper is. Talk about the emotions you feel and throughout the year I prepare them in terms of being able to handle it. So I teach them mindfulness, I teach them self-compassion so that they can hold because it’s really difficult to hold posing perspective. What? It’s research and ethics. I do it for my, ’cause one of my research interests is compassion. And so, and I was a director of one of the departments I had was hr. And what I noticed was when people had conflict, it was the inability to regulate themselves, to sit in a [00:04:00] conversation that prevented them from going anywhere. And so what I do in my classes, like I’ll do like a minute, like maybe five minutes, three minutes, right before the start of class, I’ll teach mindfulness or like a self-compassion practice and we talk about it all year. And then at the end of the year they’ll do a, a paper where they do the opposing perspective. Then at the end they talk about the emotions they feel. So, and, and they can do that through music. They could do that through a photograph. They could do that through an art project or they just use text. They say, oh, I felt this. I felt that. And so it was in my students researching for their papers that they encountered your project. And they were blown away. They were so, so happy about it. And I like, I’ve watched the episodes. They were amazing . And so that’s why I wanted to have you on the show. And so I was wondering if you could start by telling the audience a little bit about the Enemies project and how you got inspired to do this work. Larry: So the Enemies Project is a [00:05:00] docuseries where I bring together people who are essentially enemies, people of really dramatically different viewpoints, who pretty much don’t like each other. And so an example is a trans woman and a, a woman who is maga who believes trans people belong to mental institutions a Palestinian and a Zionist Jew and, and lots of other combinations. And the goal is not to debate. There are lots of places where you can see debates and I allow them to argue it out for a few minutes to, to show what doesn’t work. And then I bring them through kind of a different process where they. Understand each other deeply, which basically means live in each other’s viewpoint, really ultimately be able to, like you’re trying to do in your class as well. Have them express each other’s viewpoint. And that is a transforming process for them. Usually when they do it in each other’s presence. And it, you know, it has hiccups which is part of the process, but it goes really [00:06:00] deep. And so ultimately these people who hate each other end up almost always saying, I really admire you. I like you. I would be your friend. And sometimes they say, I love you. And usually they hug and there’s deep affection for each other at the end. And they’re saying to the camera or to, you know, their viewers, like, please be kind to this person. This person’s now my friend. And that is for me important because. Like you probably, and probably most of your listeners, I’m tired of what’s happening in society. I am tired of being manipulated. I think we’re all being manipulated by what I call enemy makers. People who profit from division financially, politically they’re usually political leaders and media leaders. And we’re all being taken. And the big lie at the center of it is that people on the other side, ordinary people on the other side are bad or evil. That’s the, the dark heart lie at the [00:07:00] center of it. And if we believe that we’ll follow these leaders, we’ll follow them because we all want to defeat evil. We all must defeat evil. And so what I’m trying to do in this project is unravel that lie by showing that people on the other side are just us. Yeah. And they too have been manipulated and we’ve been manipulated. So and it’s gone well, it’s gone really well. You know, there have been, we’ve been, we’ve done eight or nine episodes and we have in various forms of media, been seen tens of millions of times in the last five months. And we have, I think, 175,000 followers on different media. And the comments are just really, from my perspective, surprisingly, kind of off the chart powerful. Like this has changed tens of thousands of comments of just this is, this is in. Sometimes I’ve, I cried throughout or it’s actually changed my life. I see people differently. So it’s, it is been really, it’s really great to have that feedback and, and then we have plans for the future, which I can tell you [00:08:00] about later. But yeah, but that’s, that’s the basic background. The reason I got into it I don’t know if you have kids, but for me, kids are the great motivator. You know, the next generation, probably people who don’t have kids also are motivated for the next generation as well. We, I care deeply about what I’m leaving my kids and other people’s kids, you know, they all touch my heart and I, I feel really terrible about the mess we’re believing them in, and I feel terrible about what humanity is inheriting. And so I want to have an influence on that. Gissele: Yeah. Yeah. And one of the things I love about your docuseries is that the intent isn’t to change anyone’s mind. The intent is for people to feel heard and seen, and that is so, so powerful. It makes me think of Daryl Davis about how he went. Do you know the story of Daryl Davis? I don’t like jazz musician. So he’s a black jazz musician who when, since he was little, he wondered why people were racist. So what he did was actually go [00:09:00] to KKK rallies and speak to KKK leaders. Yeah, Larry: I have heard, yeah. Gissele: Yeah. He didn’t mean to change anyone. He just wanted to offer them respect, which you, as you say, is fundamental and just wanted to understand. And in that understanding, he created those conditions too that led people to change . And so I think that’s the same thing that your docuseries is offering. Larry: Absolutely. I mean, you can see it so easily that Yeah, as soon as one person hears the other person, the person who was heard is the one who changes. you don’t change the other person by telling them your story and by convincing them of anything. It’s when you hear them and hear what their true intention has been and what’s going on in their life, that’s when they change. It’s the fastest road to their change really. But if you go in with that objective, then they won’t change. So there’s kind of a, you know, an irony or a paradox embedded in this, but usually both people move [00:10:00] toward each other, is what happens. Yeah. Gissele: I want the audience to understand how brilliant this is because, I don’t know if you know Deeyah Khan, she’s a documentarian and she interviewed people from the KKK And one of the things we noticed in all those interviews was that many people hate others. They’re people that they’ve never met. They’ve never met people in that group, but they hate them. So, Larry: yeah, that’s, that’s really interesting just to hear that. Yeah. Gissele: Yeah. So how does the Enemies project help challenge misconceptions about groups that have never met each other, carry beliefs about the other? Larry: Well, so far really hasn’t because everybody who we’ve done a show with has met people from the other side. Gissele: Oh, Larry: okay. You know, it’s not like because thus far with the, with I think one or two exceptions, everyone’s been an American. So in, in the United States, everybody’s gonna meet somebody else. they’re not friends with them, they’re not deeply connected with them. But from my perspective it, it doesn’t [00:11:00] matter. You know, you can be from the most different tribes who’ve never met each other, we’re all gonna be the same. the process never differs. we don’t start with politics. My view is that starting with politics, which is how some, some people who try to bring others together to find common ground, start with politics, and that’s not going to work. What I start with is rapport. You know, as soon as you start with something that a person is defensive over, you’re gonna put up, they’re gonna be wearing armor, and they’re going to try to defeat the other person. So we exit that process and we really just help them understand what’s beautiful in each other’s lives, what’s challenging in each other’s lives, and they, there’s no question that as soon as you see what’s beautiful in someone else’s life or challenging, you’re gonna identify with it because you’re gonna have very similar points of beauty and challenge yourself. And then we fold. Politics into it about why politics really are important [00:12:00] to the other person. And we do it in a way where it’s a true exploration. And once that happens, people connect deeply. so it doesn’t matter from, in my experience, how different the people are, how extreme the people are. you’re going to be able to bring them together, you know? And so if they haven’t met each other, it’s really interesting what you said that people hate, people a haven’t met, which is like a, such a obvious statement. And it is really profound just to hear that, like, it’s so absurd. Yeah, and I would say that in my experience, the most profound or the deepest sessions are with people who are really dramatically surprised that the other person’s a human being. So if they, if they haven’t met each other, if they haven’t met someone like that, it’s gonna be an easy one. Yeah. ’cause because the shock is gonna be [00:13:00] so huge. Speaker 4: Mm-hmm. And Larry: so, and so full, it’s when the people have had experiences with the other side that it’s, that it is, it’s still powerful, but it can be a little bit more intellectual than, than in the heart because when you’re shocked by someone’s humanity, because you couldn’t imagine it at all, it, it really crushes your thoughts about them. Gissele: What I love about the process is that that’s the part you really focus on. You masterfully, are able to get people to really get to the root of their humanity and make that connection and then reengage in the dialogue , which is, is amazing. So who individuals selected and what’s support needs to happen before they can engage in the dialogue? And I ask that because each individual has to be able to hold the discussion. Because sometimes it’s, sometimes it can feel so hurtful, and I’m thinking in particular, even Nancy. So they’ve gotta be able to regulate enough to stay in the dialogue. Otherwise, what [00:14:00] I have seen is people will eject, they’ll fight, they’ll just kind of flee. So what preparation needs to happen and how do you select people? Larry: So on the selection front, it’s different now than when I started, you know, when I started filming about a year ago, I didn’t have any choices. You know, it wasn’t like anyone knew who I was or they had seen my shows, so I would go, I would live in the Bay Area and it’s really hard to find conservatives in the Bay Area, but all the conservatives in, in the San Francisco Bay Area congregate, they have like clubs. Mm-hmm. And so I would go on hikes with, in conservative clubs and I would speak to them and I just would try to find people who were interested. There were no criteria beyond that. Now, having said that, it’s not entirely true. I did interview some people who I just were like, they’re two intellectual, they just wanted to talk about economic issues or stuff, something like that. and then for liberals, it was actually harder, [00:15:00] believe it or not, to find people in the Bay Area who wanted to participate. I could find tons of liberals and progressives, but they had zero interest in speaking to a conservative person. And I wasn’t sure if that was a Bay Area phenomena, because liberals are so much in the majority, they don’t really care to speak to the other side, whereas the other side wants to be heard, or whether that’s a progressive kind of liberal thing. I have my views that have developed over time, but it was hard to find liberal people. And so really at the beginning it was just people who were willing to do it. There weren’t criteria beyond that. At this point, you know we’ve received some that people know what we’re doing and people want to be on the show and we receive applications and my daughter. Who runs this with me, my daughter Sadie, who’s 20 years old and in college. She is the person who finds people now, and you might have seen the episode a white cop and a black activist. I don’t know if you’ve seen that one, but, you know, she found those two people and they were [00:16:00] great. And the way she found them is she searched the map on the internet. It’s a little different now because by searching people on the internet, we find people who have a little bit of an audience. Mm. And that could be a bit of a problem. But it’s also like so much less time consuming for us. And so. You know, if we had a lot of money, we would spend more money on casting, but we don’t, and so mm-hmm. But we were able to find pretty good people. I’d say the main criteria for me, in addition to them having to have some passion about this, this particular show that they’re on, whether it’s about abortion or Israel, Gaza, the main criteria for me that’s developed is, do I want to hang out with this person? Because if I do, if the person, not whether they’re nice. Okay. Not whether they’re kind. That’s not it. I want them to have passion and I want to like them personally, because if I, it’s not that I don’t like the, some of the people, I like them all, but I don’t [00:17:00] want to hang out with them. If I do, it’s gonna be a great show because I know that they’re gonna be dynamic people and that their passion will flip. they’re gonna connect in some way and people who are really cordial and kind, they’re not, they’re not going to connect as deeply. The transformation’s not going to be as powerful for them or for the audience. Gissele: Hmm. Really interesting. I wanna touch base on something you said, you know, like that most people listen to debate. And I like Valerie Kaur’s perspective, which is to listen, to understand is to be willing to change your mind and heart. And I also like what you said, which is listening is to love someone. Can you explain what you mean by that? Larry: I think it more is the, it’s received as love than it, than necessarily it’s given as love. It doesn’t mean that you love the other person when you’re listening, but all of us, I would say if we think of the people [00:18:00] that we believe love us the most, they get us. Yeah. We receive it that way and, and they don’t judge us. And so when an enemy does that for you, the thought that they are a bad person melts away. Because if somebody loves us, and that’s the way it’s received, it’s not really an intellectual thing, we just receive it that way. They can’t be a bad person. Like somebody who loves me cannot be a bad person. And so it’s probably the most powerful thing that you can do to flip the feeling of the other side, is to listen to them, not to convince them of anything and to listen to them with curiosity, not just kind of blankly to listen to them without judgment. That’s a real critical piece. And if you do, you know, you can see on the show, it’s just like, you can see the switch flip. It’s really interesting. You can almost watch when it [00:19:00] happens and all of a sudden. The person likes the other person and now they’re listening to each other. It was really interesting. I was on a show one of the episodes is called I forget what it’s called. It’s the Guns episode. How To Stop The Bleed or something. It was these two women, and one of them has a podcast that she had me on and she said what was really interesting to her was that given how the show was laid out, like the first part of the show, they’re arguing, like usually doing a debate and they don’t really hear each other. But she said, given how the show was laid out, she was not preparing her responses in her mind like she always does. When speaking to somebody else, she was not thinking about what she was going to say. Her job in her mind was to understand the other person, to really get the other person. She said it was a total shift in the way she was acting internally. Like, like, and she said she noticed it. Like, I am not even thinking about what I’m going to say. And then she said afterwards she thought a lot about it, [00:20:00] and that was a dramatic shift from anything she’s been involved with. And that’s another way to put it. You know, I don’t, I didn’t think of that when, you know that the people wouldn’t be preparing for their response like we usually do. But that is definitely what happens when you concentrate on listening, and so yeah, it’s received really warmly and it’s transforming. Gissele: Yeah, and I think it, a lot of it has to do with how you manage the conversations, right? Like the tools that you use. I noticed they use the who am I right? To try to get people to go down to their core level to talk about themselves, the whole flipping side, identity confusion, which we’ll talk about in a minute. So are these based on particular frameworks that you use to mediate conversations since you have a history of mediation? Or is this something that you sort of came up on your own? Larry: It is something that I came up with on my own for the most part. I mean, I do a type of mediation in the law. I’m a lawyer where it’s unusual because [00:21:00] I’m doing like a personal mediation in a legal context. It’s kind of weird. for people. Yeah, but I only do the types of mediations where people know each other, like I don’t do between two companies, because there’s not really a human element to it. It’s, it really is about money for the most part. But, but when it’s two human beings, the money is a proxy for something else, always. Mm-hmm. Yeah. and so I’m used to being able to connect people. I do, you know, divorce founders of companies, neighbors family members who are caring for another family member. People who, where there wouldn’t be a legal issue if their relationship wasn’t broken. And so they already know each other. I don’t have to do that really deep rapport building. I do have to do some, but not really deep. but my theory was that when starting this project, which is mostly political, and people who don’t know each other, that there would be a piece missing. You know, like I wasn’t sure if what I’d do would do would work. What I do with clients would work in this. Political context, and I want them to [00:22:00] know, my thought was how do I build that rapport, even if it’s broken in the personal relationship, like they’re craving that they want that healing, but here, like they don’t know the other person. So it was really just me think thinking about how do powerful things that I want to know about other people. Speaker 3: Yeah. Larry: And so I really just tried it. I mean, like, you know, what is most, what would I most powerfully want from another person? and I develop a list of questions that really worked well, but I’m really practiced in keeping people focused on the questions at hand and not allowing them to deviate from what it is that I’ve designed. So that’s something that, you know, I’ve been doing for 20 years, and it takes some skill to even know whether the person’s deviating, whether they’re sneaking in their own judgment or they’re, you know, they’re asking a question, but it’s [00:23:00] really designed to convince the other person. So I’ve good at detecting that from, from a fair amount of experience, and I’ve developed skills in how I can reel them back in without triggering them. Gissele: Yeah. I’ve watched it, like you’re very good at navigating people back and it’s very soft and very humane. can I just bring you back here? So there’s no like judgment or minimizing of what they say. They’re just like, well, can I just get you back on this track? It’s, it’s very beautiful how you do that . Larry: Thank you. and you ask how I prepare people. It’s interesting because what I do is I interview them for an hour and a half to see if they’re a match for the show, an hour and a half to two hours. And I get to know them during that and, and me asking all these questions, gets them liking me. Right. The same process happens between us. Yeah, Gissele: yeah, yeah, yeah. Larry: Smart. [00:24:00] and then before the show, I spend another, hour with them again over, it’s over video. I’ve never met these people in person, just repairing them for what’s going to happen, what my objectives are helping them understand that we’re going to start with conflict. It’s not where we’re going to go. Just really helping them understand the trajectory and answering their questions. And so they come in with some level of rapport. For me, it’s not like we know each other really well, so a lot of times it’s just us starting together. But they do trust me to some extent. There’s no, like, and you said, how do I get them to regulate? I don’t. there’s no preparation for that. It’s just that I, from so much experience with this, you know, thousands of conversations with people over the years, it’s easy to get a person to calm down, which is, you know, you just take a break from the other person to say, hold on a second, I’m gonna listen to you.[00:25:00] And then they calm down. And, those skills, you know, the whole, the whole identity confusion and the layout of the questions, that’s kind of my stuff. But the skills that I use are not mine. I’ve developed them over the years, but a lot of them come from nonviolent communication. Mm-hmm. And Marshall Rosenberg. And I got my first training in nonviolent communication probably 25 years ago. But I remember well the person’s saying, you’re moderating a conversation between, between two people. You prov you apply emergency first aid ’cause one person can’t, can’t hear. And you as the intermediate intermediary can apply that. And it, so it becomes quite easy, you know, with that thought in mind that I can heal in the moment, whatever’s going on. Gissele: Mm, mm-hmm. Beautiful. I wanna talk a little bit about the flipping side. ’cause I think it’s so, so important. Why do you get people to, with opposing [00:26:00] perspectives, to flip sides and then just reiterate the viewpoints from their perspective. I know sometimes it can be confusing to the people themselves, but why do you get them to flip sides? Larry: Yeah. So, so it might be helpful to view it through, you know, a real example. Let’s take. Eve and Nancy, which is, you know, a really powerful episode for your, wow. Your listeners who haven’t watched or heard any, any of these, Eve is a transgender woman. Fully transitioned. Nancy is what, what she called a gender fundamentalist wearing a MAGA hat. She comes in and she’s saying stuff like people who are trans belong in mental institutions. She tells Eve to her face that you’re a genetically modified man. Eve is saying, you know, you people don’t have empathy for other people. They’re really far apart. Let’s just say it’s not gone well. [00:27:00] Eve is very empathetic, however, you know, like she is unusually empathetic. And able to hear Nancy, and that is transforming for Nancy. I mean, I can’t express the degree to which Eve’s own nature and intention transformed this. You know, I helped, but it is an unbelievable example of me listening to you will transform you. And where I take them ultimately is I’m preparing them as they’re understanding each other for switching roles. Because what happens when we switch roles? I mean, my thought is that human beings can easily, you might, it might be weird to this, this point, but we, we often say you can walk in the shoes of another person. How is that even possible? If you, if you think about it, we, we have totally different upbringings, you know, how can you experience what another person experiences if we have totally different upbringings, [00:28:00] different philosophies. Like, how is that possible? And yet almost everybody can do it. And it’s because we have the same internal machinery, we have the same internal drives. We just have different ways of achieving them. And so if you can slowly build your understanding of a person’s history and their beliefs, like a belief might be that there’s Christ who is love and will save me. That’s a belief. If you identify the person’s history and their beliefs and you occupy that belief, you can understand why it’s important to them. If you have that be, why would that be? Well, it’s important to me now if I really believe that, because I wanna live forever. I can be with the people I love forever, I can help save other people. Like can there be anything more powerful than saving somebody’s soul? Like once you enter their belief, and the reason we’re able to do [00:29:00] that is because we are the same internally, we have the same desires. So the whole show is a buildup toward getting them to understand each other’s beliefs and experience and then occupy them. And once we do and we start advocating on the other person’s behalf, we become confused who we are. And that’s really powerful. Like, I don’t even know who I am and I’m doing this legitimately, like I’m totally advocating for you. I’m saying stuff you didn’t even say. Yeah. And then you are listening to me do that, and you’re blown away like you’ve never been heard so deeply. And particularly not by someone you consider an enemy. And so that is transforming. What I will say is that I use this process a lot in mediation. For a different reason. My mediations are not meant to repair relationships. This is meant to repair relationships my mediations are meant to solve issues. Gissele: Hmm. Larry: In, in this show, I [00:30:00] specifically tell them, you are not here to solve the issues. Like, how are they gonna solve the Palestine Israel issue? Yeah. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. And it’s too big of a burden and no one’s gonna listen to them. Mm-hmm. The goal is to show the audience that people should not be enemies. That they’re the same people on the other side. That’s my goal. So I try to keep them away from solution seeking because they will be disappointed. People won’t listen to them and things could fall apart. And that’s, it’s not the point of the show. But what’s interesting is that in my mediations, I use this tool of having them switch identities to solve issues because once they do occupy the other person’s perspective fully, they are then. Solving the issue because they understand that an internal level, the other person and what drives them, and they have no resistance to that and they understand themselves. They already understand themselves. And so during that process, solutions emerge because [00:31:00] they’ve never been able to hold both perspectives at the same time. And I heard you say that when we were opening the show, I don’t remember what the context was about holding both perspectives at the same time. But you, you said that, that that’s something that you do. Yes. Gissele: So so when, when students are taught research or even like thinking about ethical considerations, right? When you’re doing research, you’ve gotta be able to hold differing perspectives, understand differing views, understand research that might invalidate your perspectives, right? And so if you come already into the conversation thinking that there’s a right way or there’s a right perspective, and I heard you say this in your TEDx talk, I think you were talking about like, we can only win if we defeat the other side. That perspective that there’s only one side, one perspective prevents us then from engaging in dialogue and holding opposing views. Larry: and the holding the opposing views for, in my mind is not an intellectual process. Like you might think that if I, if I list all the [00:32:00] desires and the goals on both and on a spreadsheet, then I’ll be able to solve it. No chance. Yeah. It’s not a conscious intellectual process. It’s when you get it both sides deeply without resistance that your subconscious produces solutions. So we don’t consciously produce solutions. And what I found is that that is the most powerful tool to bring people to solutions where they are themselves and the other person at the same time where both people are doing this and then one person just suggests something that never occurred to any of us. And it solves it. Gissele: Yeah. Yeah. Now, that doesn’t Larry: happen in, in the show because I’m specifically telling them not to seek solutions, but it does happen in mediation. Gissele: Hmm. Yeah. And What you’re doing is so fundamental too, sometimes it’s not even about finding a solution. Sometimes it’s even just about finding the humanity in each other. And that is such a great beginning. You know, people wanna solve war. Yeah, of course we all wanna [00:33:00] eliminate war, but sometimes there’s war within families with neighbors. So why are we worried about the larger war where we’re not even in able to engage and hold space for each other’s humanity within our homes? And so I think what you’re inviting people to do is, can we sit with each other in dialogue without the need to change each other, just with respect, which you’ve mentioned is fundamental, just with presence, just remembering each other’s humanity. And I think that’s all fundamental. Larry: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Gissele: Yeah. I wanted to also mention, you know, one of the things that I noticed in, the conversations is how you focus people on disarming, and one of the ways that you get them to disarm is to take their uniforms off. Can you talk about a little bit about how uniforms show up in these conversations? Larry: Yeah. Some people come with like a MAGA hat or a pin or bracelets or something like that, that show which side they’re on, and I don’t discourage that. You know, [00:34:00] it’s part of the process for the audience from my perspective, because at a certain point, if they do come that way, I ask ’em not to wear a shirt that they can’t take off, but they might wear a hat. And if they, when they do take that off, eventually when we, when we stop the argument, when we stop the debate portion and we enter into another. Portion of the discussion, you can see the effect on the other person. And you can even see the effect on the person who took like the most dramatic is Nancy. Gissele: Yep. Nancy is wearing a, that’s the one I was Larry: thinking. MAGA hat. Yeah. And then she puts on Nancy is is from Kenya and she puts on a Kenyan headdress because her hair is, that’s so beautiful. A little messed up from the hat. And she’s like, I’ll put this on. and I asked her like, wow, you look really happy when you have that on. And she’s like, yeah, this is my crown. And she is almost like a different person and you know, uniforms basically divide, I mean they announced to the other side [00:35:00] essentially. I don’t care about you whether consciously or not. it’s interpreted as I will defeat you at any cost. You just don’t matter. I am on this side and I will crush you. And, and when she took that off, you could really actually see the difference in her and in Eve. Gissele: Yeah, absolutely. It was truly transformative. ‘Cause I noticed that when she had the hat you can even see it in the body language. There was a big protection. And she use it as a protection in terms of like, well, my group but when she used her headdress, it was so beautiful and it was just more her, it was just her. It wasn’t all of these other people. When I think about, you know, the Holocaust and how people got into these roles. ’cause you know, in my class we talk about the vanity of evil, right? Like how people, some people were hairdressers and butchers before the Holocaust. They came, they did these roles, and then they went back to doing that after the war. And it’s like, how does that make sense? And, and to put a uniform on, to [00:36:00] put a role on and then fully accept it, like you said, creates that division, creates that separation between human beings. Whereas what you’re doing is you’re asking them to disarm and to go back to the essence of their own humanity, which I think is really powerful. But it was really interesting the whole discussion on, on uniforms, right? Larry: Yeah, yeah. it is one of the many ways we separate ourselves, that we separate ourselves, that we perceive ourselves as different than them, and that they view us as a threat. Gissele: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I heard you say that enemies are not enemies, it’s just us on the other side. What do you mean by that? Larry: I mean the ordinary people of the enemy. I believe enemy makers, if you can think of who you might consider an enemy maker. They are political leaders and they are media leaders. And they wouldn’t exist. They wouldn’t have any [00:37:00] power. People wouldn’t vote for them. People wouldn’t watch them if they didn’t create an enemy. If they didn’t foster the idea that there is an enemy. And the enemy has got to be broad. It can’t just be one person. It’s got to be a people that I’m fighting against. It’s gotta be a big threat. And so they paint people who are ordinary people on the other side as a threat. All the time. Yeah. and so that’s the, big lie at the center of it, that they’re a threat. And what happens is, there’s the psychological process that the, brain goes through. The mind goes through that where once we’re under threat, that’s a cascade that is exists in every human being. And that results in us going to war with the other side once we’re under threat. But this is an us choosing a leader. But this is a very fundamental basic process and [00:38:00] fundamental, basic lie that that autocrats and demagogues and people who just want power have been using forever with human beings, I imagine. And it’s extremely powerful. And so what I intend to show is that that is a lie. Gissele: Hmm. Larry: That is just not the truth because at the core of this psychological process is the thought that you’re a threat to me. And then this whole cascade happens internally for me. If I no longer believe you are a threat, the cascade unwinds and the power of the enemy maker unwins, it can all flip on that one lie. And so I want people to understand that ordinary people on the other side are just them. Like, I can’t tell you how many times people on the show are, are just like, holy cow. Yeah, I see myself in you. Like I, that’s exactly what I’m experiencing. And it’s revelatory for [00:39:00] them. Like how could that be? Like how could we be opposed to each other? This is crazy. Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah. Gissele: And you know, it’s amazing how when we truly understand somebody’s reasons for believing what they do, their history, their beliefs, why they believe makes sense, right? Yeah. Like, I saw it a lot in children in care, in the child protection system. Their behaviors seem reallymisbehaved. they shut down. They, act out. in some cases, that’s how those kids survived, these abusive homes, right? And so to them they’re still always on survival mode. Yeah. Makes sense. That’s what helped them survive. And so you, when you understand the other person’s perspective makes sense. Yeah. And you know, as you were talking, I was thinking what is going on for those demagogues and those authoritarian people that believe that that’s the only way that they can get what they need. you mean the leaders themselves? The leaders themselves, like so powerful people, people that are in their power, feel, love, feel [00:40:00] fulfilled, don’t need to disempower others, they don’t. In fact, the more that you love yourself at least that has been my experience, the more I have compassion for myself, the more I love myself, the more I’m in that state, the less I wanna hurt other people. The more I care about other people actually. So what is going on for them? That they think that this is the only way to get their needs met? Larry: I’ve thought a lot about this, you know, because the goal of this show is to show that people aren’t enemies, but there are enemy makers. And to me they are the enemy. like of all of the rest of us, all of us who are just trying to exist in the world, who prefer a world where we’re working together, you know? Yeah. It’s these people on the extreme who are, who are basically consciously sucking the goodwill out of society that I couldn’t care less about that because they get power. So is there something different about them? Is there, I have a few conclusions. One is [00:41:00] that there are people who are different that, that they are born, you know, all of us are born with the same internal desires and almost all of us get pleasure from seeing other people happy. That’s just born into us. Like, you know, almost everyone who’s an activist who comes onto the show, everyone actually is doing it because they want to other people to be happy. They, they don’t want people to experience the same pain that they’ve been in their life, but there are people who are born without or have extremely dialed down the pleasure that they get, the happiness that they get from seeing other people happy and healed. It’s not that the rest of us always want to see other people happy, but it, it’s one of our greatest sources of pleasure. There are people who are born without that. We call them sociopaths, Some leaders are sociopaths. They, don’t, I believe, obtain pleasure from other people’s happiness and they’re able to manipulate us quite often very well. And it’s these people who in peace time, [00:42:00] we wouldn’t even sit next to, we wouldn’t invite them over for Thanksgiving. Those are the people we choose, that it’s, it Gissele: doesn’t make biological sense. Larry: Well, they’re the people we choose when we’re at war, they are the people we choose. So, so think about this, okay? There is a virus, and the virus will kill 95% of human beings. And you have a leader who says there’s someone in power who says, we understand that people who are infected are going to infect other people, that as a society, we need to euthanize them. We actually need to do that as a society to save other people. Mm-hmm. There might be a leader who is empathetic, who says, I can’t do that. That, that feels wrong to me. almost all of us turn to the someone else who is a tyrant. Gissele: Who’s willing to do [00:43:00] what needs to be done to save us, right, exactly. Larry: To defeat evil, to kill, you know, when there’s a big enough threat, we will turn to the tyrant. And so people who are sociopaths and who in normal society would be rejected as a person who’s extremely dangerous, are the very people we turn to in times of war, when evil needs to be defeated. And so if you’re a sociopath and you want power, there’s no other way to power, you’re not going to follow the route of cooperation. You’re not going to follow the route of, you know, building alliance with the other side. You’re, if it, you’ll go the route of creating an enemy. And so that’s what we’ve, we’ve found. In our society, there are people who rise to power, who are the very people we would want nothing to do with in peace time. And that [00:44:00] people turn to, because they believe the other side is an enemy. They believe they are the virus that will kill 95% of people. So you can think of any leader and you might say, how could people follow this person? How could they possibly, what kind of evil is in people that they would follow this person, given what this person is doing? And the answer is obvious. They’ve been convinced that the other side is evil. Gissele: Yeah. Larry: And they truly, truly believe it. Gissele: This makes me think Hitler would’ve been a lone nut if 10 million people hadn’t followed him. Right? Larry: Right. And they believed, right. Gissele: They believed, I Speaker 4: mean. Larry: That, that Jews were, were incredible danger. They also ignored it and, you know, wanted to get along in society and, and be with the people they cared about. But, they truly believed that Jews were evil. Yeah. And if you, if you can convince them of that, you can lead a people. Gissele: Yeah. So the, it goes to the [00:45:00] question of like the reflexivity, like, so what is people’s own responsibility to constantly examine their own biases, beliefs, and viewpoints? Right. I gotta applaud the people that are on your show because they have to be willing to engage in a dialogue. So there’s an element of them that is willing to be wrong, right? or willing to kind of engage in that perspective. And we struggle so much. Yeah, with being wrong, like the mind always wants to be, right. We want to be on the side of good. And that’s one of the things that I was so reflecting on, I think I was listening to the conversation with, proud Boy, and the, in the progressive. The, yeah, progressive And that’s one of the episodes, by the way, for people. Yeah. That’s one of the episodes. And, and I, I love the follow up by the way. That was also amazing. It’s so funny because I was like, oh, is there a follow up? And I were like, went to search for it. Just to see how both sides feel that they’re right. And on the side of good, on the side of like positive for humanity, I think was really puzzling to me we have different ways [00:46:00] of getting there. You know, the people that for Trump really truly believe that some of the stuff he’s doing is very beneficial. The people that are against, they truly believe that what he’s doing is horrible. And to see those perspectives that at the core of it is a love or a care about humanity was really kind of mind blowing. Larry: Yeah, that is mind blowing. Gissele: Yeah, Larry: it is mind blowing. And what is infuriating to me is that we are manipulated to not pair with these other people because then these leaders would lose their power, you know, it’s a huge manipulation. Gissele: So this is why it’s up to each of us to do that work, to do the coming together, the engaging in the conversation, even though sometimes it feels difficult. And, having a willingness to listen And that’s the thing, that’s the thing about your beautiful show, which is like, you don’t have to agree at the end. You just have to see each other’s humanity, right? to let go of enemies, let go, to let Larry: go of that we have to agree that’s a real problem for me as well. Like when I get into a conversation with someone, [00:47:00] it’s like, how do we conclude the conversation if we don’t agree? It’s almost like it’s, it’s a forced imperative that is a mistake. Like that’s the point of the conversation. Yeah. for the most part, let go of that because I see now that that was just a mistake. Like we never had to agree. Gissele: Yeah. I so let’s talk about then, since we’re talking about disagreement, let’s talk about censorship, So because of the class that I teach, because I want them to understand different perspectives. One of the things I say in these papers is like, look, you can be pro-choice or pro-life. You can be pro Trump or against, I’m not judging you. That doesn’t matter. The exercise is to view the other side. That’s it, right? But it’s amazing how some of these dialogues in institutions have been diminished because there’s the belief that if we have these conversations, we’re supporting it, right? But the truth of the matter is that dialogue goes underground. It doesn’t disappear. It [00:48:00] doesn’t mean like, oh, everybody now believes this. It just goes covert, right? And these dialogues about these opposing perspectives are happening. And so I think I’d rather have these conversations up. And so that we can engage in dialogue and see what people are believing. I mean, there’s this undercurrent of racism, it seems, from my perspective, it it that that has existed for such a long time. It used to exist very, like visually in terms of slavery, but now there is still underground racism, right? Like it’s covert people may be able to vocalize the importance of diversity, but some people don’t believe it. So let’s talk about it rather than kind of like try to get those people to disappear and pretend it’s not there. What are your thoughts? Larry: Yeah. You know, there’s been a criticism that comes from the left a lot on the show, from people, from in comments is that we platformed bad guys. Like, you should not, you should not be giving a [00:49:00] stage to a proud boy. Well, if you listen to the Proud Boy’s perspective, this guy is like completely reasonable. He, he, you know, from people on the left, they’re even confused that he’s a proud boy. I think he might be confused about why he is a proud boy, I’m not sure. but he’s completely reasonable. So to, to just reflexively reject this person. He’s not there to represent the proud boys. He’s there to represent himself and to reflexively reject this person is to miss out on really a, a beautiful person and an interesting perspective. I’ve given a lot of thought to the criticism, however, because there’s a guy I’m considering having on the show who is a self-described fascist, a white supremacist, and I’ve had conversations with him and it is amazing how. The reason he is a white supremacist is he truly believes that white people are in danger and that he will be rejected. There will be no opportunities for them, and that he [00:50:00] is possibly in physical danger. He truly believes this. And if I believe that, you know I might do the same thing. And, I had a three hour interview with him where I really liked him, but I’m probably not gonna put him on the show. And, I’ve really thought a lot about whether to platform people and, I’ve kind of developed my own philosophy on whether it’s worth whether I should be airing viewpoints or not. And my thought is that a bridge goes both ways. So I can build a bridge where I walk him back. I am confident that I can have someone hear him out and him develop a relationship with them where he then becomes less extreme in his viewpoints. Gissele: I was gonna say, I think you should have him on the show. here’s is my perspective. Okay? Again, this is so similar to what Darrell David said, right? his intent wasn’t to change. It was to [00:51:00] understand, I think if we understood why people were afraid of us or hated, I’m Latino, by the way, right? We understood then we, can have the dialogue. The thing is like. People are giving like a one-sided propaganda. And it’s true, like if you actually hear the rhetoric of many separate groups is the fear of the other. Even though when you look at the population stats, right, even in the US black people make up 4%. Indigenous people make up 2% of the population. Like I think white people make up 57% of the population of the US and it’s higher in Canada. But it’s the fears, even though they might not be based on reality. That’s the rhetoric that these groups use. They use the rhetoric of we’re in danger, that these people are out to get us to destroy us. Thatsomehow it’s better for us to be isolated and separated. And they use the rhetoric of belonging. They use the rhetoric of love. They [00:52:00] use a co-opt it I don’t even think it’s rhetoric Larry: for them. It’s truth for them. Okay, Gissele: thank you. Yeah, so if you have people who are engaging in those different dialogues, like Darrell did, people don’t understand why they believe that the way that they do. Right? Because, because it’s real. Right? Now that rhetoric is happening, whether people wanna face it or not, that’s the problem. So Larry: I you completely, and when I first started this, I said to myself, there’s no question that I’m gonna have a Nazi on the show. There’s no question. But as I’ve thought about the critique that’s been offered, I’ve kind of drawn a line for myself at least present. And, and that’s fair. but I’ll tell you why I haven’t, I haven’t said why yet, which is A bridge goes both ways and, while I believe it’s really important to hear people, them out, because you walk people on both sides back from the extreme, toward the majority when you hear them out because they don’t see people as a threat anymore. As much. [00:53:00] What happens is by building the bridge, you provide an opportunity for many people to walk out toward them. When you give them an opportunity to hear, hear them out publicly, and my thought is that I will hear anybody out who has a large following because they already are being heard. Mm-hmm. They already have people walking out to them, and my goal is to bring them toward the rest of us so that we can function as a society. Mm-hmm. But I’m not gonna hear somebody who’s 0.1%, who’s because. Mm-hmm. Gissele: Okay. Larry: I understand me walk because they’re, I can walk them back, but maybe I walk 20 people out to them. Gissele: And it creates Larry: a bigger problem. And so, in my own view it’s about how big their following is already. Mm. Even though, yes, it’s, we can walk them back by hearing them. Gissele: Mm. Yeah. So, yeah. It’s, [00:54:00] it’s so interesting. I was just thinking about Deeyah Khan And Darryl David’s the same. And one of the things I noticed about their work is that, and I noticed it in yours too, is sometimes what happens in these sort of circumstances is that the people that they are exposed to might become the exception to the rule. Have you heard of the, the exception to the rule? So let’s say I meet someone who’s anti-Latino, but they’re like, but then they like me. And so they’ll do, like, you are all right. Speaker 4: Yeah. Gissele: I still don’t like other Latinos. Right. And so in the beginning that used to irk me so much. Right? Then I realized after watching all of this, information and I observed it in your show and I thought about it, is that’s the beginning of re humanization. Larry: I agree with that. It’s like it’s a dial, it’s not a switch. Yeah. Gissele: Yes. And so it begins with, oh, this is the exception to the rule, and then this next person’s the exception to the rule, and then this next person, and then, then the brain can’t handle it. Like how many exceptions to the rule can there [00:55:00] be? They couldn’t hold the exception to the rule anymore. Right. It had to be that their belief was wrong Right. Which is, it’s really interesting. And, and Larry: it’s another, another interesting thing I often say, which I get negative feedback about this statement that we don’t choose our beliefs. we don’t have any power over them. They just exist. Mm-hmm. And we can’t choose. Not if I think that. A certain race is dangerous to me. I can’t just choose not to. You can call me racist, whatever. I just can’t choose my thought about it. I have an experience. People have told me things. That’s my belief. That belief gets eroded. It doesn’t get changed. Gissele: Mm-hmm. It, Larry: it happens not consciously. Life experiences change our beliefs, we don’t just suddenly love white people. if we’ve experienced, brutality from white people or from white cops, you don’t just change your belief about it. You have to get, you have to slowly be [00:56:00] exposed. You have to, or be deeply exposed. so these types of things erode our other beliefs. Gissele: Mm-hmm. Larry: And, and my goal is not, you know, like Nancy came in, I would say as a nine or a 10 with her. Dislike for trans people when she left. Just to be clear, ’cause people I think are mistaken about this, who watch this show, she does not think still that trans people should be around kids. She still thinks it’s dangerous, but she thinks trans people themselves are okay. That they can be beautiful, that they do not belong in mental institutions. And as she said, I would drink outta the same glass from you Eve and I would protect you. So she went from a 10 to a seven, let’s say? Yeah. Gissele: Yeah. Larry: And she’s still out there. She still there. She used the word Gissele: she. Larry: Mm-hmm. Yeah. She used the word SHE and she’s still out there advocating for keeping trans people away from kids. and [00:57:00] people are like, so she’s a hypocrite. She’s, no, she has moved so far and. Eve moved toward, I shouldn’t paint Nancy as the wrong one. Eve moved toward Nancy understanding that Nancy really is worried about kids, and Nancy brought up some things that really concerned Eve when she heard it, about the exposure that kids have to various concepts. I guess my point is that people who get dialed down from a 10 to a six or a seven can deal with each other. They can run a society together. Mm-hmm. They don’t, they don’t invest all of their energy in defeating the other side, which is where all of our energy is now. I call it issues zero. You care about climate change, or you care about poverty, you care about mass migration, you care about nuclear per proliferation, you care about ai. Forget it. None of these are getting solved. Zero. Yeah. Unless we learn to cooperate with each other, and if [00:58:00] we’re dedicating all of our energy to defeating the other side, every single one of these issues goes unaddressed. And so my goal is to dial the vitriol down so that we can actually solve some human problems so that the next generation doesn’t inherit this mess that we’ve created. Gissele: Mm-hmm. You once said, I, I may be misquoting you, so please correct me. Revenge is a need for understanding. Can you explain that further? Larry: Yeah. I said that in in my TEDx, mm-hmm. if someone has been hurt by another person, they often seek revenge. And that desire for revenge will go away actually when they’re understood. If you’re under and you deny that you want to be understood by your enemy. You’d say like, that is baloney. they deserve to be punished and they need to be punished to provide disincentive for other people in society so that they don’t do this terrible thing. People [00:59:00] would deny that they want understanding from their enemy, but when they receive it, the desire for revenge goes away. I mean, I’ve seen that innumerable times. So how does the need for understanding help us live beyond the need to punish one another? Well, I think that if someone’s seeking revenge against you, if someone’s trying to injure you, you can unravel that by understanding them, whether we, people agree that that human beings seek revenge as a need or not, you can unravel it pretty, not easily, but you can pretty reliably. Very often people who seek revenge against each other, like in my mediations, once they’re understood by the other person, once they have some connection, They go through some kind of healing process with the other person. They don’t even understand why they were seeking revenge themselves, like they are [01:00:00] completely transformed. they were like, that would be a total travesty of justice if you were hurt Now. Gissele: Yeah. I love the fact that these conversations get at the core of human needs, which is they need to be seen, they need to be understood, they need to be loved, they need to be accepted, they need to be long. And so I think these conversations that you’re facilitating get to those needs, you kind of like go through all of the, the fluff to get to the, okay, what are the needs that need to be met? and how can we connect to one another through those needs? And then, and then from that, you go back to the conversation on the topic. And really it’s about fears at the core of it, right? Like the fear that my children are gonna be confused or forced into something or, the fear that somebody’s gonna have a say over my body and tell me that I have to do something. All of those fears are at the core and conversations get at those needs, not at the surface. Yeah. It’s not to say Larry: I should say that. It’s not to say that the fears are irrational. Yeah. They might be rational. But you know, it’s also a [01:01:00] self-fulfilling prophecy that if we fear somebody, they’re going to think of us as a threat. We’re gonna do stuff that creates the world that we fear. And it’s obvious with certain issues like between two peoples. You know, like if you fear that the other people are going to attack you, you might preemptively attack them or you might treat them in a, in a way that is really bad. And, and so you start this war and that happens between human beings on an individual basis and between peoples, yeah. It’s less obvious, with an issue, let’s say abortion. my fear is not creating the issue on the other side. but many of our interactions with other human beings, it is our fear that triggers them. We create the world we fear. Gissele: Yeah. And I think that goes back to the self-responsibility, right? to what extent are we responsible for looking at ourselves, looking at our biases, looking at our prejudice, looking at our fear and how our [01:02:00] fear is causing us to hurt other people. What responsibility do we have to engage in dialogue or be willing to see somebody’s humanity, right? It’s Larry: just this better strategy. Even if you think of it as, yeah, you know, people sometimes say these two sides. I get this criticism a lot, and this, by the way, these criticisms come from the left mostly that these two sides are not, are not Equivalent. Oh, okay. how could you equate Nancy and Eve, Eve just wants to live. Nancy’s trying to control her, the left views, the right is trying to control them and oppress them and so they’re not moral equivalent. And my point is always, I’m not making a point that they’re morally equivalent. That’s for you to decide, okay? If you want to. I’m saying morally judging them is not effective. It’s just not gonna produce the world that you want. So, you know, it’s just really effective [01:03:00] to hear them out, to take their concerns seriously, even if you think that it’s not fair. But you’ll then create the world you want. And if you don’t do that, if you poo poo them, even if they’re wrong, you believe they’re completely wrong, and you think that mm-hmm you know, there is good and evil and they are completely the evil one, you are going to exacerbate their evil by morally rebuking them. And I want to say that like as clearly as possible, I haven’t made this point e enough on the show. I’m really kind of building a base before I go into more sophisticated, what I would consider a more nuanced. Philosophy, but if you judge somebody, it is the greatest threat to a human being. Just understand that we evolved in groups and moral judgment was the way we got kicked out of groups. If you were a bad person, you were gone, you were dead. [01:04:00] And so all of us respond very, very negatively to being judged as selfish. I’ve had clients threaten to kill each other. Not as powerful

In this monologue, Kushal talks about the trend of competitive bigotry in India. Whether it is Bajrang Dal goons attacking Christmas celebration or Islamists pelting stones at Hindu processions or Christians trying to convert Hindus using fraudulent methods India has a system where politicians encourage bigots for votes. Is competitive bigotry a solution? #bajrangdal #christmas #islamism ---------------------------------------------------------- Listen to the podcasts on: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/kushal-mehra-99891819 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1rVcDV3upgVurMVW1wwoBp Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-c%C4%81rv%C4%81ka-podcast/id1445348369 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-carvaka-podcast ------------------------------------------------------------ Support The Cārvāka Podcast: Buy Kushal's Book: https://amzn.in/d/58cY4dU Become a Member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKPx... Become a Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/carvaka UPI: kushalmehra@icici Interac Canada: kushalmehra81@gmail.com To buy The Carvaka Podcast Exclusive Merch please visit: http://kushalmehra.com/shop ------------------------------------------------------------ Follow Kushal: Twitter: https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra?ref_... Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KushalMehraO... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarvakap... Koo: https://www.kooapp.com/profile/kushal... Inquiries: https://kushalmehra.com/ Feedback: kushalmehra81@gmail.com

In our second episode on the Ramayana, which began to be written down in Sanskrit c. 350 BCE, we dive deeper into the theme of dharma. We explore some of the many different meanings of this term and trace the development of the three oldest dharmic faiths: Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. We also compare how Buddhist and Jain retellings of the Ramayana differ from the one revered by today's Hindus. Finally, we fangirl out over Hanuman a little more. Want to read the transcript? Click here. Don't forget to subscribe, rate, and review us—and share with your friends! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Humayun Kabir for Mamata न उगलते  बने न निगलते | Babari is a Trigger for Hindus Too | WB Theatre

Big Trouble for Yunus in Bangladesh - Modi Playing his Cards? | TariqueRahman | No relief for Hindus

On this episode, Razib talks to Vishal Ganesan and Anang Mittal, two Indian-American Hindus who have been thinking about the role of their faith in the present, and past, of the American social landscape. Ganesan is a California-based attorney and writer who focuses on the history, identity, and representation of the Hindu diaspora in the United States. He is best known for his project "Hindoo History" and his writing on the "Frontier Dharma" platform, which attempts to conceptualize what an American, as opposed to Indian, "Hinduism" might look like. Anang Mittal is a DC-based political communications professional who recently worked for Senator Mitch McConnell. Mittal grew up in India before moving to the US at a young age about 25 years ago. Ganesan, in contrast, was born to an earlier generation of Indian immigrants to the US. He grew up north of Austin, TX. Though their perspectives differ, they both believe that Hinduism and Indian-American identity cannot simply be ported over with no changes into the American cultural landscape. The conversation is centered on two essays, Ganesan's The Meaning and Limits of "Hinduphobia" Discourse in the Diaspora and Mittal's What Hindu Americans Must Build. While Ganesan explores and articulates what it means to be Indian-American and Hindu today in America, and what might mean in the future, Mittal's argument is framed by a deep understanding of American history and how Hindus fit into the bigger arc of history. Razib, Ganesan and Mittal discuss the past, present, and potential future of Hindus and Indians, two separate categories, in America over the course of two hours. Their discussion was triggered by the online controversy over the fact that Vice President J. D. Vance's wife is a Hindu, and he has encouraged her to convert to his Roman Catholic religion (in which their children are being raised). But the discussion extends far beyond matters of contemporary politics, probing what it means to be American, and what it could mean to be a Hindu.

In this episode HAF Board Member psychologist Dr Kavita Pallod Sekhsaria and HAF Executive Director Suhag Shukla have a wide ranging discussion about parenting as Hindus, the book Bad Therapy, how we can raise resilient children, the differences in parenting across the generations, and more.This show was originally published on September 5, 2024 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode Suhag Shukla speaks with historian Vikram Sampath (author of the two volume definitive biography of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar) about the origins of Hindutva and misunderstandings about, its relevance for Hindus living outside of India, and more.This show originally was published on September 26, 2024. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Episode 2692 - High energy must listen Ted goes off the chain with a total rant for thirty minutes. Covers smart dust, transhumanism and the control grid. Ted names names and tell all of us who has done this. Samuel Untermeyer and Woodrow Wilson discussed in detail. President Kennedy discussed in detail. Main stream churches are discussed in detail. Including the Christians, Jews, Hindus and the Buddhists. Bilderberg, Bohemian Grove and secret societies discussed. Tell puts the blame where it falls. Incredible high energy must listen Rant Trying to take guns from Florida residents goes full tilt.. Green show

“I’m Not Catholic Because I’m Hindu” This episode explores the intersection of modern teachings and biblical truths, addressing questions like why some Hindus feel they can’t embrace Catholicism and concerns about Catholics adapting to contemporary views. We also delve into the deeper purpose of creation, offering a thoughtful examination of faith and belief. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 02:15 – I'm not Catholic because I'm Hindu. 22:14 – I'm not Catholic because Catholics are conforming to modern times instead of teaching what the bible says? 44:30 – What is the point of God making all of this?

In India, carrying a Bible to a meeting—or even offering a Hindu tea and cookies—could be construed as illegally "enticing" that Hindu to change his or her religion. Under anti-conversion laws currently enacted by 12 of India's states, such "enticement" can result in a long prison sentence. And once charges are filed against a pastor or other Christian, there is no presumption of innocence; it is up to the accused to prove their innocence. Sister "Joti," a human rights lawyer in India, has worked on numerous religious freedom cases. She will tell listeners about 80 pastors currently in prison, accused of "forcible conversion." Listen as Joti shares how the courts have tried to navigate the seeming opposites of a constitutional promise of the freedom to practice and propagate one's religion and state laws that require a person to notify the government, in advance, of their conversion. She'll also tell how she and her coworkers are advising pastors and churches to document interactions with Hindus and even record their sermons in order to create an evidence trail against possible future legal challenges. Joti knows her work could put her in danger, yet boldly continues in what God has called her to do. "The work impacts real lives and real people," she says. "I am here to serve, for as long as I can." Pray for Christians in India to be bold in showing love to their neighbors, and for lawyers like Joti on the frontlines serving persecuted Christians in the court. The VOM App for your smartphone or tablet will help you pray daily for persecuted Christians throughout the year, as well as provide free access to e-books, audiobooks, video content and feature films. Download the VOM App for your iOS or Android device today.