Indian Politics: A Stage for Religious Drama, Not Much Else

 If you’ve ever tuned into the chaotic symphony of Indian politics, one thing becomes abundantly clear: religion isn’t just a subplot—it’s the entire script. From fiery speeches to street protests, the pulse of political discourse in India beats to the rhythm of communal tensions, hurt sentiments, and sacred cows (sometimes literally). Contrast this with a place like the United States, where people are currently up in arms over Trump’s proposed tariffs or socioeconomic policies, and you’ll see a stark divide. In India, it’s rare to see a protest that isn’t tethered to a temple, mosque, or a provocative remark about someone’s god. So, why is Indian politics so overwhelmingly consumed by religion, while the rest of the world seems to march for broader, more tangible causes?

The Indian Obsession with Religious Identity

Let’s start with a recent example. In February 2025, a politician’s offhand comment about a revered saint sparked outrage in Uttar Pradesh. Within hours, roads were blocked, effigies burned, and hashtags trended. The issue wasn’t unemployment, inflation, or crumbling infrastructure—it was a perceived slight to religious honor. This isn’t an anomaly; it’s the norm. Whether it’s the Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir saga, cow vigilantism, or debates over “love jihad,” Indian politics thrives on communal fault lines.

Compare that to the U.S., where protests in early 2025 have centered on Trump’s tariff threats against China and Mexico. Americans are worried about jobs, prices, and economic fallout—practical, bread-and-butter issues. Sure, religion pops up in U.S. politics, especially around abortion or LGBTQ+ rights, but it’s rarely the sole driver. Even in polarized times, the American public rallies around tax cuts, healthcare, or racial justice more than, say, a pastor’s sermon gone wrong.

In India, socioeconomic grievances—poverty, healthcare, education—exist in abundance, yet they’re sidelined. Protests over these issues, like the occasional farmer agitation, do happen, but they’re often overshadowed by the louder, more emotionally charged communal clashes. Why? Because religion in India isn’t just faith—it’s identity, history, and power, all rolled into one combustible package.

A Global Comparison: Protests with Purpose

Look beyond the U.S., and the contrast sharpens. In France, the Yellow Vest movement was about fuel prices and economic inequality. In Chile, mass demonstrations in 2019 erupted over subway fares and spiraled into demands for systemic reform. Even in authoritarian states like Russia, dissent often focuses on corruption or political repression, not just Orthodox Church dogma. These movements aren’t devoid of cultural or historical undertones, but they’re rooted in material concerns—things governments can measurably fix.

In India, though, the trigger is almost always symbolic. Someone insults a deity, a mosque loudspeaker blares too loudly, or a Bollywood film dares to reinterpret history—cue the outrage. The 2021 protests over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) were a rare exception, blending socioeconomic fears with religious identity, but even then, the narrative quickly devolved into Hindu-Muslim binaries. It’s as if India’s political imagination can’t escape the gravitational pull of faith.

Why Religion Reigns Supreme in India

So, what’s driving this? History offers some clues. India’s partition in 1947 left scars that still bleed, embedding religious identity into the national psyche. Decades of vote-bank politics have only deepened the divide, with parties like the BJP, Congress, and regional players mastering the art of stoking communal fires for electoral gain. Add to that a diverse population—Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, and more—each with their own festivals, grievances, and pride, and you’ve got a tinderbox ready to ignite at the slightest spark.

Then there’s the media. Indian news channels thrive on sensationalism, amplifying every religious controversy into a national crisis. A U.S. network might spend days debating tariff impacts on the auto industry; in India, it’s wall-to-wall coverage of a cleric’s fatwa or a temple’s consecration. Social media, especially WhatsApp, pours fuel on the fire, spreading rumors faster than facts.

Contrast this with the U.S., where economic debates dominate because the nation’s founding myth is tied to individualism and prosperity, not divine mandate. India’s story, from ancient epics to colonial resistance, is steeped in spirituality—making it fertile ground for religious politics to flourish.

The Cost of a One-Note Democracy

This obsession comes at a price. While the world protests for jobs, climate action, or equality, India’s energy is spent policing sentiments. Infrastructure crumbles, unemployment soars, and healthcare lags, yet the spotlight stays on the next communal flare-up. It’s not that Indians don’t care about these issues—surveys consistently show economic concerns top voter priorities—but the political machinery keeps redirecting the conversation to faith.

Imagine if the fervor of a religious protest were channeled into, say, fixing India’s broken education system. Or if the outrage over a blasphemous remark fueled a movement for clean water. It’s not impossible—look at the 2011 Anna Hazare anti-corruption protests—but it’s rare. Religion, with its emotional immediacy, drowns out everything else.

Can India Break the Cycle?

Breaking free won’t be easy. Religion’s grip on Indian politics is both a symptom and a cause of deeper fractures. Secularism, enshrined in the Constitution, feels more like a buzzword than a practice. Political parties have little incentive to pivot when polarizing pays off at the ballot box. And the public, conditioned by centuries of communal coexistence and conflict, responds viscerally to religious cues.

Yet, there’s hope. Younger Indians, especially in urban centers, are increasingly vocal about jobs, climate, and governance on platforms like X. The challenge is turning that chatter into street-level momentum—something religion has mastered but socioeconomic causes haven’t.

For now, though, Indian politics remains a theater of gods and grievances. While the U.S. protests tariffs and France riots over pensions, India’s streets will likely stay ablaze over the next hurt sentiment. It’s a democracy as vibrant as it is myopic—where faith isn’t just a part of life, but the only game in town.

The Fragile Pride of Nationalism: A Reflection on India’s New Wave

The Fragile Pride of Nationalism: A Reflection on India’s New Wave

Nationalism is a curious thing. It’s a fire that warms some and burns others, a banner waved with fervor by those who believe it defines them. In India today, a new wave of nationalists has emerged — louder, prouder, and more assertive than ever. From saffron flags dotting the skyline to social media timelines brimming with slogans like “Bharat Mata Ki Jai,” this resurgence feels both intoxicating and inescapable. But the more I think about it, the more I wonder: what’s the point of pride in something you didn’t choose?

Let’s start with a simple truth: none of us picked India — or any country — as our birthplace. I didn’t sit in some cosmic waiting room, flipping through a catalog of nations, weighing the pros and cons of monsoon seasons versus maple syrup. I was born here, in this sprawling, chaotic, beautiful mess of a country, because that’s where the dice of fate landed. So were you, probably. And yet, nationalism asks us to take this accident of geography and turn it into a cornerstone of identity, a source of chest-thumping pride. It’s like bragging about your eye color or the shape of your nose — arbitrary traits handed to you by a lottery you didn’t enter.

In India, this new wave of nationalism often cloaks itself in history and heritage. The argument goes that we must honor the sacrifices of those who fought for independence, that we owe it to our ancestors to protect the idea of “Bharat.” Fair enough — gratitude for the past is noble. But what begins as reverence quickly morphs into something else: a demand for conformity, a rejection of dissent, and an us-versus-them mentality that feels less like unity and more like division. The nationalists of today aren’t just celebrating India — they’re gatekeeping it, deciding who gets to belong and who doesn’t. If you question the script, you’re a traitor. If you point out flaws, you’re anti-national. It’s a brittle kind of pride, one that crumbles under scrutiny.

The irony is that nationalism thrives on the very randomness it ignores. India’s borders, like those of most nations, are the product of history’s messy scribbles — colonial conquests, partitions, and treaties drawn by people long dead. The idea of “India” as a sacred, eternal entity is a modern construct, not a timeless truth. And yet, we’re told to treat it as sacrosanct, to pledge our loyalty to a concept that’s younger than some of our grandparents. Why? Because we happened to be born within these lines on a map? That’s not a reason — it’s a coincidence.

This isn’t to say there’s nothing worth loving about India. The diversity of languages, the resilience of its people, the sheer audacity of its democracy — these are real, tangible things. But they don’t need nationalism to shine. In fact, nationalism often dims them, flattening a kaleidoscope of cultures into a single, monochrome narrative. The new wave in India loves to talk about “one nation, one identity,” but what does that even mean in a country where every state feels like a different world? Forcing unity through pride risks erasing the very things that make India worth caring about.

And then there’s the practical side. While nationalists wave flags and chant slogans, the birth lottery keeps spinning. Some Indians are born into privilege — urban, educated, connected — while others land in villages without clean water or schools. If we’re so proud of our nation, why aren’t we angrier about that gap? Nationalism often feels like a distraction, a way to rally people around an abstract idea instead of fixing the concrete problems staring us in the face. It’s easier to blame outsiders or “anti-nationals” than to admit that the system we’re so proud of fails millions of its own.

The more I see of the world, the more nationalism feels like a relic — a story we tell ourselves to feel special in a universe that doesn’t care. People are starting to notice. Travel, the internet, and global crises like climate change are peeling back the illusion of borders. We’re all just humans, products of chance, trying to make sense of our little corner of the planet. The pride of nationalism falls apart when you realize how little control you had over the thing you’re proud of. It’s like a child boasting about a toy they were given — cute, but ultimately meaningless.

India’s new nationalists might disagree. They’ll say I’m missing the point, that pride in nationhood binds us together, gives us purpose. Maybe. But I’d rather find purpose in what we choose — our actions, our kindness, our efforts to build something better — than in the accident of where we were born. The flags can wave, the slogans can echo, but at the end of the day, they’re just noise. True strength doesn’t come from shouting about the lottery you won — it comes from what you do with the hand you’re dealt.

The Indian Habit of Touching Elderly Feet: A Tradition That Needs Rethinking

 In India, touching the feet of elders is a gesture so ingrained in the cultural fabric that it’s almost instinctive. Walk into a family gathering, a wedding, or even a casual meeting with someone older, and you’ll see it: a younger person bending down, fingertips grazing the feet of an elder, often followed by the elder’s hand raised in blessing. It’s framed as a sign of respect, humility, and reverence for age and wisdom. But as India strides into a modern, globalized era, it’s worth asking: Is this practice still relevant? Or does it carry regressive undertones that we’ve overlooked for too long?

What Does It Mean to Touch Someone’s Feet?

At its core, the act of touching an elder’s feet—known as pranam or charan sparsh—is a physical manifestation of hierarchy. Age, in Indian tradition, is equated with wisdom, authority, and moral superiority. By bending down, the younger person symbolically places themselves beneath the elder, acknowledging their subordinate status. The elder, in turn, blesses the younger, reinforcing their role as a benevolent guide. It’s a ritual rooted in the ancient guru-shishya (teacher-student) dynamic and the broader framework of familial and social order.

But let’s unpack this further. The gesture isn’t just about respect—it’s about submission. The physical act of lowering oneself to the ground, often in front of others, signals deference in a way that’s starkly visible. It’s not a mutual exchange; it’s a one-way street where the younger person humbles themselves, and the elder accepts that humility as their due. In a society that historically prized obedience and conformity, this made sense. But in 2025, as India grapples with individualism, equality, and a youth-driven cultural shift, the symbolism feels increasingly out of step.

The Regressive Underbelly

The problem with touching feet isn’t the act itself—it’s what it represents in a modern context. First, it assumes that age inherently deserves reverence, regardless of merit. An elder could be wise and kind, or they could be petty, abusive, or out of touch—yet the ritual demands the same respect. This blind veneration dismisses the idea that respect should be earned through actions, not granted by default based on years lived.

Second, it reinforces outdated power dynamics. In a country where patriarchy and gerontocracy (rule by the elderly) have long held sway, the practice subtly upholds the notion that the young—especially women and marginalized groups—must bow to those above them in the social ladder. It’s no coincidence that you’re more likely to see a daughter-in-law touching her in-laws’ feet than a son-in-law doing the same. The gesture, while framed as noble, often doubles as a tool to keep certain groups in their “place.”

Compare this to other parts of the world. In Western cultures, respect for elders exists but rarely takes such a submissive form. A handshake, a nod, or a verbal “thank you” suffices—gestures that maintain dignity for both parties. In Japan, bowing is common, but it’s a mutual act, calibrated by context and not exclusively tied to age. Even in China, where Confucian values emphasize filial piety, physical prostration is less routine in daily life today. India’s foot-touching stands out as uniquely hierarchical, a relic of a time when questioning authority was taboo.

Why It Must Go

Tradition isn’t inherently bad—many Indian customs, like hospitality or community celebration, enrich life. But not every practice deserves to survive unchanged. The habit of touching feet clashes with the values of a progressive society: equality, agency, and mutual respect. It’s a silent endorsement of the idea that worth is tied to age rather than character, competence, or contribution.

Imagine a workplace where a young, innovative employee must touch the feet of an older, less capable boss. Or a family where a teenager with bold ideas feels compelled to bow to a grandparent who dismisses them outright. These aren’t hypotheticals—they’re the quiet tensions playing out across India. The practice doesn’t just burden the young; it infantilizes them, stunting the kind of dialogue that could bridge generational gaps.

And let’s be honest: it’s often performative. In urban India especially, the gesture can feel like a rote obligation—done to avoid judgment rather than from genuine reverence. If the sentiment behind it is hollow, why cling to the form?

A Path Forward

Ditching the habit doesn’t mean disrespecting elders. Respect can be shown in countless ways—listening to their stories, seeking their advice, or simply spending time with them. These acts honor their humanity without requiring anyone to literally or figuratively lower themselves. India’s youth, who are already challenging norms around caste, gender, and authority, deserve a culture that reflects their aspirations—not one that tethers them to an unequal past.

The world isn’t bending down to touch India’s feet anymore—it’s engaging as an equal. Maybe it’s time we did the same within our own borders. Let’s stand tall, look each other in the eye, and build respect that doesn’t demand anyone kneel.

Patañjali: Pioneering Contributions and Notable Inconsistencies

 

Introduction

Patañjali, traditionally credited with authoring the Yoga Sūtras, has significantly influenced the philosophical foundations of yoga. This collection of 196 aphorisms serves as a guide to the theory and practice of yoga. While the Yoga Sūtras have been revered for centuries, they exhibit certain ambiguities and inconsistencies that merit critical examination.​Wikipedia

Authorship and Historical Uncertainty

The true identity of Patañjali remains a subject of scholarly debate:​

• Multiple Attributions: Patañjali is also associated with significant works in Sanskrit grammar (Mahābhāṣya) and Ayurveda. The distinct subject matter and style of these texts have led scholars to question whether they were authored by the same individual or by different persons sharing the same name. ​Wikipedia

• Compilation of Pre-existing Traditions: Evidence suggests that Patañjali may have compiled and systematized pre-existing yogic traditions rather than introducing entirely original concepts. This raises questions about the originality and coherence of the Yoga Sūtras. ​Integral Yoga

Philosophical Inconsistencies

The Yoga Sūtras integrate concepts from various philosophical systems, leading to potential inconsistencies:​Wikipedia

• Samkhya and Buddhist Elements: The text incorporates elements from Samkhya philosophy, such as the dualism of purusha (spirit) and prakriti (matter), alongside Buddhist notions like the impermanence of the mind. This blending can result in philosophical tensions and ambiguities within the text. ​

Relevance to Modern Yoga Practice

The applicability of the Yoga Sūtras to contemporary yoga practices has been questioned:​

• Emphasis on Meditation Over Physical Postures: The Yoga Sūtras primarily focus on meditation and mental discipline, with minimal reference to physical postures (asanas). This contrasts with the posture-centric emphasis of modern yoga, leading to debates about the text's relevance to current practices. ​

• Complexity and Accessibility: The aphoristic and terse nature of the sutras makes them challenging to interpret without extensive commentary, potentially limiting their accessibility to contemporary practitioners. ​

Conclusion

Patañjali's Yoga Sūtras have undeniably shaped the philosophical underpinnings of yoga. However, the text's authorship ambiguities, philosophical integrations, and its alignment with modern yoga practices present areas for critical reflection. Engaging with these aspects allows for a more nuanced understanding of the Yoga Sūtras and their place within the evolving landscape of yoga

Sushruta: Pioneering Contributions and Notable Inconsistencies

 

Introduction

Sushruta, often hailed as the "Father of Surgery," authored the Sushruta Samhita, a seminal text in ancient Indian medicine and surgery. This compendium offers extensive insights into surgical techniques, anatomical knowledge, and medical ethics. While Sushruta's contributions have been groundbreaking, certain aspects of his work exhibit inconsistencies and limitations that warrant critical examination.​

Anatomical Knowledge: Constraints and Misconceptions

Sushruta emphasized the importance of anatomical knowledge for surgical proficiency. However, due to religious prohibitions against cutting dead bodies, direct dissection was limited. Instead, bodies were submerged in water to facilitate natural decomposition, allowing for the study of anatomy without incision. This method, while innovative given the constraints, resulted in an incomplete understanding of internal structures. Consequently, the knowledge of nerves, blood vessels, and internal organs remained rudimentary, leading to misconceptions in physiological functions. ​Springer

Integration of Superstition in Medical Practices

Despite the scientific approach evident in many of Sushruta's surgical techniques, certain recommendations within the Sushruta Samhita reflect the influence of contemporary superstitions:​

• Longevity Oil: The text claims that a specific oil can grant a lifespan of a thousand years, a notion lacking empirical support.​NewsClick

• Protective Footwear: It suggests that wearing shoes can shield individuals from evil spirits, intertwining medical advice with supernatural beliefs. ​NewsClick

These examples highlight the coexistence of empirical observations and mystical beliefs in ancient medical practices.​

Surgical Ethics and Error Classification

Sushruta was ahead of his time in recognizing and categorizing surgical errors, classifying them into four types:​Jaims

1. Insufficient Procedure: Incomplete surgical intervention.​PMC

2. Excessive Procedure: Overly aggressive surgical intervention.​Jaims

3. Incorrect Technique: Deviation from established surgical methods.​

4. Surgeon's Injury: Harm incurred by the surgeon during the procedure. ​Wikipedia

While this classification underscores a sophisticated understanding of surgical practice, it also reflects the challenges and limitations faced by ancient surgeons in ensuring consistent outcomes.​

Ophthalmological Practices: Early Insights with Limitations

The Sushruta Samhita dedicates sections to eye diseases, detailing classifications, symptoms, and treatments. Sushruta describes procedures resembling early forms of cataract surgery. However, without advanced tools and a comprehensive understanding of ocular anatomy, these procedures had variable success rates and carried significant risks. ​PMC

Conclusion

Sushruta's Sushruta Samhita stands as a monumental work in the history of medicine, laying the foundation for numerous surgical techniques and medical principles. However, it is essential to acknowledge the inconsistencies and limitations within the text, stemming from the socio-cultural and technological constraints of the time. A critical examination of these aspects not only provides a balanced perspective on Sushruta's contributions but also underscores the evolution of medical science through the ages.

 

Bhaskara II: Pioneering Contributions and Notable Inconsistencies

Introduction

Bhaskara II, also known as Bhaskaracharya, was a prominent 12th-century Indian mathematician and astronomer whose work has significantly influenced the development of mathematics and astronomy. His seminal treatises, the Lilavati and the Bijaganita, encompass a wide array of mathematical concepts, including arithmetic, algebra, and geometry. While Bhaskara II's contributions were groundbreaking, certain aspects of his work exhibit inconsistencies and misconceptions that merit examination.​Medium

Division by Zero: A Conceptual Misstep

Bhaskara II made significant strides in understanding mathematical operations involving zero. He correctly identified that dividing a number by zero results in infinity, a concept that was ahead of his time. However, he also asserted that zero divided by zero equals zero, which contradicts modern mathematical principles where division by zero is undefined. ​

Perpetual Motion Machine: A Misconception

Bhaskara II conceptualized a perpetual motion machine known as Bhaskara's wheel. This design featured a wheel with curved or tilted spokes partially filled with mercury, intended to maintain continuous motion as the mercury shifted within the spokes. While innovative, this concept reflects a misunderstanding of physical laws, as perpetual motion machines violate the principles of thermodynamics and are considered impossible. ​Stanford, Wikipedia

Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem: The "Behold!" Legend

A popular legend attributes to Bhaskara II a succinct proof of the Pythagorean theorem. According to the tale, he presented a diagram demonstrating the theorem and simply exclaimed, "Behold!" before leaving without further explanation. While this narrative underscores the elegance of his proof, its historical accuracy is uncertain, and it may be apocryphal. ​GeoGebra

Conclusion

Bhaskara II's contributions have left an indelible mark on mathematics and astronomy. His work laid the foundation for many modern concepts, despite certain inaccuracies and misconceptions. Examining these inconsistencies offers valuable insights into the evolution of scientific thought and underscores the importance of continual inquiry and refinement in the pursuit of knowledge.

Brahmagupta: Pioneering Contributions and Notable Inconsistencies

 

Introduction

Brahmagupta, an eminent Indian mathematician and astronomer of the 7th century CE, made significant strides in the fields of mathematics and astronomy. His seminal works, the Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta and the Khaṇḍakhādyaka, have profoundly influenced subsequent scientific thought. While his contributions laid foundational stones for various mathematical concepts, certain inconsistencies and inaccuracies in his work merit examination.​

Division by Zero: A Conceptual Misstep

Brahmagupta was among the first to treat zero as a number and establish rules for arithmetic operations involving zero. However, his interpretation of division by zero deviates from modern understanding:​

• Zero Divided by Zero: He posited that zero divided by zero equals zero. In contemporary mathematics, division by zero is undefined, as it leads to contradictions and lacks a meaningful interpretation. ​San José State University, Wikipedia

Astronomical Assertions: Debates and Disputes

Brahmagupta's astronomical models and critiques of contemporaneous theories exhibit both innovation and contention:​

• Lunar Distance Debate: He challenged the prevailing notion that the Moon is farther from the Earth than the Sun. Brahmagupta argued that the Moon's illumination by the Sun indicates its closer proximity to Earth. While his reasoning was based on observable phenomena, it sparked debates among astronomers of his time. ​Wikipedia

Conclusion

Brahmagupta's contributions have undeniably shaped the trajectory of mathematics and astronomy. His pioneering work on zero and negative numbers provided a framework for future developments. However, the inconsistencies in his interpretations, particularly regarding division by zero and certain astronomical assertions, underscore the evolving nature of scientific understanding. Examining these nuances offers valuable insights into the progression of mathematical and astronomical thought.