Sadgun Vikratti:
India is the only country in the world, substantial part of which was under foreign rule for over 400 years. It makes one ponder what was wrong with it’s people who suffered for such a long period of time. No single factor factor can be attributed for all that went wrong but there is one interesting factor. In Sanskrit it is called Sadguna Vikratti. The Sanskrit term Sadguna means good quality. Vikratti means bad quality. It goodness to the point of a fault.
India’s 500-Year Mistake
India spent 5,000 years perfecting sadguna. Non-violence as DNA. Universal brotherhood as prayer. Noble warfare as duty. These qualities let Indian civilization sustain the world’s largest population without mass killings. These same qualities cost India 400 years of subjugation.
Good qualities became fatal weaknesses. The story of how this happened reveals something uncomfortable about civilization itself. Sometimes what makes you great also makes you vulnerable.
The Philosophy
Indian prayers from 5,000 years ago asked for harmony. Not just between humans. Between two-legged and four-legged creatures. The entire creation deserved peace. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam means earth as one family. Not world as one family. Earth. Everything on it belongs together. Trees, rivers, mountains, animals. All sacred. All worthy of praise. Every prayer call for peace to every element on earth.
This philosophy produced unprecedented peace. From the 5th century BCE to the 13th century CE, India experienced 1,800 years without massacres. One scholar traced mass killings globally and found nothing in India until invasions began. The rest of the world killed 618 million to 1.2 billion people in the same period. Indifferent to outside wars. Just massacres.
India lived differently. It had no doctrinal enemies. No gods that required other gods to be false. Hinduism accepted all paths of worship. If your neighbor worships a different god, that’s fine. You both belong to the same earth family.
Jean-Pierre Lame noticed this. He said India taught the world how to worship thousands of gods. When you accept many gods, you accept your neighbors. The idea that only my god is superior caused all the blood in history. India completely avoided this trap. The result was Centuries of peace and the largest sustained population in human history. But this came with a cost nobody saw coming.
The Strategy Problem
Unless you have an enemy, you don’t have a strategy. Strategic thinking requires identifying threats. Building defences. Preparing for conflict. India’s philosophy made this impossible. How do you prepare for war when you see everyone as family?
India developed no strategic culture before Alexander invaded in 326 BCE. The encounter shocked Indian scholars. Alexander came with a large army and simply took territory. No notice. No declaration. No ritual preparation.
Kautilya, a teacher at Taxila University, asked Alexander a simple question. Why didn’t you give notice that you wanted to conquer us? Dharma requires warning your adversary. You can’t attack people unaware.
Alexander had no answer because the question made no sense to him. Conquest doesn’t work that way. You don’t warn your enemy. You surprise them. This moment changed Indian thinking forever.
The Arthashastra
Kautilya wrote the Arthashastra in response. It detailed ruthless statecraft. Aggressive warfare. Empire building. Revenue extraction. Territory conquest. He argued that Dharma Vijaya (righteous war) wouldn’t work. Virtuous conquest sounds noble. It gets you killed. India needed power, not purity.
The Arthashastra worked. The Mauryan Empire rose. Then the Gupta Empire. Then Harsha’s kingdom. India became a global economic power. By the first century CE, Romans complained that hundreds of Indian ships hung around Egypt. All Roman gold was flowing to India.
For 1,700 years, India and China together held 60% of global GDP. India maintained 24-26%. England and America combined had only 2% as late as 1750. This prosperity came from abandoning pure dharma for strategic realism. Kautilya’s harsh methods built the stable society that generated wealth.
But India couldn’t sustain this shift.
Banabhatta’s Reversal
In the 4th century CE, a Sanskrit scholar named Banabhatta became King. He condemned the Arthashastra. He called Kautilya a rascal. Unethical warfare had corrupted Indian civilization. India must return to Dharma Yuddha (Virtuous war or noble combat). Prosperity made this this argument reasonable and it became consensus. The Arthashastra disappeared from circulation.
One manuscript survived in the Mysore Maharaja’s library. It was discovered in 1909 and translated by 1913. Suddenly the British realized India had sophisticated strategic thought 2,300 years old. Too late. The damage was done. Before arthashasta was discovered, the British didn’t know it existed. They concluded India had no strategic culture. No concept of state. No understanding of governance. They called Indians a semi-barbaric race.
Banabhatta’s victory in the 4th century meant India entered the 13th century invasions without any strategic preparation. The country had spent 900 years perfecting noble warfare while the rest of the world practiced treachery.
The Cost of Nobility
The rules of Dharma Yuddha (noble war) sound beautiful. Never attack an adversary without warning. Never fight at night. Never use poison weapons. Never harm non-combatants. Never destroy agriculture. Never enslave prisoners. If your opponent drops his shield, stop fighting. If he’s injured, treat him as wounded, not enemy. Warriors should prefer death to victory without honor.
Megasthenes, a Greek historian, documented this in the 4th century BCE. He wrote that Indian farmers worked peacefully even when battles raged nearby. Combatants made carnage of each other while leaving cultivators alone. Nobody burned fields. Nobody cut down trees.
These rules persisted into the 16th and 17th centuries. During wars between Kerala’s Zamorin kings and the Portuguese, fighting only happened in daylight. Opposing camps pitched near each other. Soldiers from both sides mingled at dawn. They chatted, chewed betel, gossiped together.
When drums beat, they separated and formed ranks. Then they fought. At sunset, they stopped. This wasn’t primitive. It was civilized beyond anything Europe practiced. But it only worked when both sides followed the same rules.
The Portuguese didn’t follow any rules. Not for long, anyway.
Prithviraj’s Fatal Honor
Prithviraj Chauhan embodied this nobility perfectly. He defeated Muhammad Ghori 17 times. Each time, he captured Ghori and released him with honor. A defeated king deserves respect. You send him home safely.
The 18th time, Ghori won. He killed Prithviraj immediately. This pattern repeated across centuries. Indian rulers applied noble rules to barbaric enemies. They considered valor more important than victory. Personal virtue mattered more than strategic success.
Rana Pratap fought with honor while his enemies used every advantage. Indian warriors hid when necessary, retreated when needed, but always felt ashamed. Victory through deception seemed worse than honorable defeat. This wasn’t wisdom. This was noble suicide.
Shivaji’s Revolution
Chhatrapati Shivaji finally broke this pattern. He declared victory more important than valor. If you need to surrender, surrender. If you need to hide, hide. If you need to run, run. The goal is winning, not maintaining perfect honor. Adjust tactics to your enemy. Don’t apply noble rules to those who respect no rules. This worked. Shivaji restored strategic thinking to Indian warfare. He proved that dharma could include deception when facing dishonorable opponents.
But even this lesson didn’t stick permanently.
The Colonial Repetition
After independence in 1947, India’s first Prime Minister considered disbanding the army. The British-appointed commander asked about defense policy. The answer was non-violence. India had just won freedom through non-violent resistance. Mahatma Gandhi’s Satyagraha worked because it targeted British claims to nobility. The British called themselves civilized and democratic. Gandhi forced them to defend that claim while beating peaceful protesters. Brilliant strategy against that specific enemy. Fatal strategy against enemies who don’t care about appearing noble.
Tjey forgot the Gadaar Party. They forgot the death of thousands in resistance. They also forgot the Kala Pani or transportation for life. Only Satyagrah stuck in memory.
China taught a lesson in 1962. India entered that war unprepared because it believed in Panchsheel. Five principles of peaceful coexistence. China signed the agreement, then invaded. India finally began building strategic capability after that humiliation. The 1971 Bangladesh war showed new thinking. The 1998 nuclear tests demonstrated growing will to power.
But the civilizational instinct toward nobility never fully disappeared.
The Deception Strategy
During British rule, some Indian scholars adapted differently. They didn’t fight the British directly. They fed them false information instead. Colonial translators claimed to translate 37,671 pages of Sanskrit between 1840 and 1910. The math doesn’t work. That’s 1.47 pages daily for 70 years with quill pens. Impossible. But it was Operation Sanskrit Mill.
Indians did the actual translation work. Unnamed. Unaccredited. And they deliberately mistranslated.
Namaskara means salute to cosmic energy. The British translated it as worship. This made Hinduism look like primitive polytheism. Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva represent creation, preservation, and transformation. The British turned them into rival gods competing for followers.
Indian scholars saw through this fraud. They didn’t correct it. Why teach your enemy to rule you better?
Real knowledge survived in networks the British never penetrated. Astronomy, medicine, philosophy stayed hidden. Al-Biruni studied India in the 11th century with respect. He got truth from common people. The British ruled for 200 years and stayed ignorant. This looks like clever resistance. It’s actually another form of vikratti.
If you’re smart enough to deceive your enemy, you’re smart enough to defeat them. Indian scholars chose survival over victory. They preserved knowledge while accepting subjugation.
Deception without liberation is just sophisticated surrender.
The Physical Evidence
British exploitation left marks on Indian bodies. Systematic extraction drained 45 trillion dollars between 1765 and 1938. That’s 17 times the current UK GDP.
This wealth transfer created widespread malnutrition. Average height fell below 5 feet. Grandfathers in today’s families were slightly over 5 feet tall. Centuries of starvation shrunk the population.
Signs across British India read “Dogs and Indians Not Allowed.” The British equated Indians with animals in their own homeland. They mocked both the small size caused by malnutrition and the dark skin they considered inferior.
Two generations after independence, Indians recovered their height. Today’s youth routinely reach 6 feet. Average height is now 5.5 feet instead of 5 feet. This recovery proves the damage was environmental, not genetic. Remove oppression and human potential returns within decades.
The Indian diaspora demonstrates this even more clearly. Indians make up 1.2% of the US population. They contribute 6% of revenue. That’s 500% above their demographic proportion. These are descendants of people who were starved, humiliated, and called semi-barbaric. Within two generations in a free environment, they outperform by 5x.
This isn’t accident. It’s civilizational resilience.
The Ayurveda Factor
How did Indians survive 500 years of systematic starvation while maintaining genetic potential?
Ayurveda.
The same medical knowledge the British mocked as superstition kept Indians alive under impossible conditions. Sanskrit texts documented vital minerals. The British appropriated this knowledge and renamed it vitamins. Then they banned Ayurveda while using its principles.
English kings died young throughout history. William at 59. Henry VIII at 55. Edward VI at 15. Queen Elizabeth II was the first British monarch to reach her 90s. Meanwhile, India sustained the world’s largest population for 5,000 years. But there’s more. Indians also lived longer because Ayurveda worked better than European medicine.
Today, the Queen Consort travels to Bangalore for Ayurvedic treatment. Officially, British authorities still don’t recognize it as legitimate medicine.
The pattern holds. Mock what’s superior. Appropriate its benefits secretly. Maintain the lie publicly.
The European Comparison
While Macaulay in 1835 declared Indian knowledge worthless, Europeans were literally poisoning themselves. Wealthy Europeans built stone burial vaults. Multiple bodies decomposed together in sealed chambers. Gases couldn’t escape. Water seeped in. Disease spread through contaminated groundwater.
London’s cholera outbreaks killed 14,137 people in 1832 and 1849. Another 10,739 died in 1853-54. Investigators traced contamination to burial grounds leaking decomposition fluids into water supplies. Paris suffered similar disasters. Yet wealthy families refused to change. They preferred status symbols to public health.
Hindu cremation eliminated these hazards immediately. Fire reduced bodies to ash within hours. No contamination. No disease spread. No poisoned water. Europeans called this primitive while their burial practices killed tens of thousands. The hypocrisy was nauseating.
Macaulay mocked Indian texts for teaching people what Vedic verses expiate killing a goat. Meanwhile, his civilization couldn’t figure out that rotting corpses contaminate drinking water.
The Translation Fraud
The British needed India to appear backward. This justified extraction. You can’t claim to bring civilization while admitting the conquered society is more advanced. So they corrupted the translations systematically. Max Müller, H.H. Wilson, and R.T.H. Griffith got credit for work Indians performed. The translations twisted meanings to make Hinduism look polytheistic and superstitious.
Griffith translated “pishtah” as roasted corn. Ancient India never grew corn. It’s a New World crop. This wasn’t scholarship. It was propaganda.
By the 1870s, Sanskrit’s sophistication became undeniable. European linguists realized it was the root of most European languages. The grammar was more complex and systematic than Greek or Latin. Too late. Two generations of Indians had already learned through Macaulay’s education system to see their civilization as inferior. He succeeded in creating people Indian in blood but English in taste and opinion.
The timing matters brutally. If Sanskrit had been recognized in 1670 instead of 1870, British attitudes might have been different. By 1870, colonial extraction systems were already entrenched. Racist hierarchies were already established.
Economic necessity trumped intellectual honesty. Britain needed India’s resources. So India had to be primitive, regardless of evidence.
The Kalyug Framework
The Mahabharata warned about this age. Kalyug. The age when deception wins and fairness loses. For 900 years, India tried honest dealing with invaders. Islamic conquerors came. Then European colonizers. Each time, India offered philosophy while enemies brought swords.
Some scholars argue India finally learned the Kalyug lesson. Hide your strength. Feed enemies false information. Let them underestimate you while you build power secretly. This sounds strategic. It’s actually acceptance of permanent weakness.
Real strategy defeats enemies. Deception without victory is just clever subjugation. Indian scholars preserved knowledge in hidden networks during British rule. Impressive. But the British still ruled for 200 years.
Hiding truth from fools doesn’t help if the fools control your government. Feeding Britain false information didn’t prevent 45 trillion dollars in extraction. It didn’t stop famines that killed millions. It didn’t prevent Indians from being shrunk to 5 feet through systematic starvation.
The deception strategy preserved knowledge but failed to preserve sovereignty. That’s not success. That’s sophisticated failure.
The Modern Recovery
India regained strategic thinking gradually after independence. The 1971 Bangladesh war showed military capability. The Indo-Soviet defense pact of 1971 marked entry into global power games. The 1974 “peaceful” nuclear explosion began weapons development.
The 1998 nuclear tests made India’s power explicit. The 2015 Burma cross-border strike changed rules. When Pakistan-based terrorists hit India, India hit back. The 2016 surgical strikes continued this pattern. The 2017 Doklam confrontation stopped Chinese expansion. The 2019 Balakot strike hit deep into Pakistan.
Between 2020 and 2022, India signed 25 strategic agreements with different powers. It broke the G7 by dealing individually with France, America, and Russia. It bought Russian S-400 missiles despite American sanctions threats.
In May 2025, Operation Sindoor hit nine sites in Pakistan. The Akashteer defense system stopped Pakistan’s drones and missiles completely. Its automation likely stems from ancient Indian astronomical calculations. The same math that enabled Mars missions.
The West missed all of this. Intelligence agencies still use frameworks built on 19th-century mistranslations. They expect India to behave like a “developing nation.” They don’t see the sophisticated civilization re-emerging.
This is poetic justice. The lies Britain used to rule India now blind the West to India’s power.
The Core Problem Remains
India suffers from “civilizational catch.” It’s intrinsically against violence. It doesn’t consider anyone an enemy. But it lives in a world of violence where others consider India their enemy. This ambivalence still dogs Indian strategic thinking.
The sadguna remains. Non-violence as DNA. Universal brotherhood as philosophy. These qualities built a civilization that sustained the largest population for millennia without mass killings.
The vikratti remains too. Noble instincts that become fatal weaknesses when facing enemies who respect no nobility. The tendency to value honor over victory. The preference for philosophical purity over strategic adaptation.
The fact that India lacked it for so long, that it had to consciously cultivate it, that it still struggles with the concept, proves the sadguna-vikratti dynamic never fully resolved.
Analysis
Every civilization has both sadguna and vikratti. The question is whether you recognize when your good qualities become weaknesses. India’s non-violence worked perfectly in its own context. Sophisticated philosophy. Advanced medicine. Complex mathematics.
But this same non-violence created zero strategic culture. India couldn’t recognize enemies because its philosophy said enemies don’t exist. When invaders arrived, India had noble rules for adversaries who respected no rules.
Indian scholars who fed the British false translations didn’t resist colonialism. They accommodated it while preserving knowledge. Real resistance would have prevented 200 years of subjugation. Clever survival while accepting domination is still domination.
The modern celebration of deception as Kalyug dharma misses the point entirely. Deception is a tactic, not a solution. You deceive enemies while building strength to defeat them. You don’t deceive them for centuries while remaining conquered.
The Uncomfortable Truth
India’s greatest qualities caused its worst disasters. This isn’t poetic irony. It’s civilizational tragedy.
The same philosophy that prevented internal massacres prevented external defense. The same nobility that created 1,800 years of peace created 500 years of subjugation. The same universalism that accepted all religions made it impossible to identify religious fanatics as threats.
India worshipped the entire creation while invaders worshipped only power. India saw earth as one family while colonizers saw territories to extract. India valued dharma while enemies valued victory.
When these worldviews collide, power wins. Every time. Unless the philosophical civilization develops equal power. Which requires abandoning some philosophy.
To fully embrace strategic realism would mean becoming something other than Indian civilization. The cost of survival would be losing what makes survival valuable.
This dilemma has no clean resolution.
The Modern Trap
Today’s India faces the same tension. It has nuclear weapons and space programs. It conducts surgical strikes and develops advanced defense systems. It plays great power politics and balances relationships with Russia and America.
Yet the civilizational instinct toward non-violence remains. Political leaders still reference Gandhi. Philosophical traditions still emphasize universal brotherhood. The idea of permanent enemies still feels uncomfortable.
This ambivalence shows in contradictory behaviors. India hides military capabilities, then gets surprised when enemies attack. It builds power, then hesitates to use it. It develops strategy, then questions whether strategy betrays dharma.
The lecture speaker calls this “civilizational catch.” That’s too gentle. It’s civilizational paralysis. The inability to choose between sadguna and strategic necessity means choosing neither fully. You end up with compromised philosophy and compromised power.
Half-hearted non-violence isn’t peace. Half-hearted strategic thinking isn’t security. The middle path sounds wise until you realize it’s just permanent confusion.
What India Must Face
The sadguna-vikratti problem has no comfortable solution. India must choose.
Either embrace strategic realism completely. Accept that enemies exist. Build power to defeat them. Use that power when necessary. Stop pretending universal brotherhood works with those who want your destruction.
Or embrace non-violence completely. Accept whatever consequences come. Don’t build weapons you’re too philosophical to use. Don’t conduct strikes you’ll immediately regret. Don’t develop power while feeling guilty about it.
The current approach satisfies neither path. It builds power while apologizing for it. It strikes enemies while immediately seeking peace. It develops strategy while calling it unfortunate necessity.
This produces neither peace nor security. It produces constant anxiety. The civilization that once sustained 1,800 years of internal peace now can’t decide if external peace is possible or desirable.
The oscillation continues. The ambivalence persists. The question remains unanswered.
That’s the core point. Everything else is supporting evidence.