What are some of the best Kali Maa temples in India?

 I haven’t made a survey of the best Kali Maa temples all around India, but the best ones I personally have been to are:

• Kalimath Temple, said to be the place where Kali slew the great demon Raktabija by ripping him open and drinking his blood to the last drop. I found that Kali Maa’s presence was very lively there. My mother saw it in a vision as a bright red light from far away. I personally know the head priest there, Sanjay Bat; he is really an excellent priest of Kali Maa, and performs excellent pujas.

• Amritapuri Kali Temple. This is really a great temple, containing a perfect replica of the famous Dakshineshwar Kali Murti that Ramakrishna Paramahansa worshipped. It’s an excellent place for meditation. This temple has elaborate Pujas for Navaratri, and serves amazing Prasad dinners to all comers. I had one of my most exquisite spiritual experiences of my life while meditating in this temple.

• Maya Devi Temple in Haridwar. While not strictly a Kali Maa temple primarily, Kali is worshipped there among all the Dasha Mahavidya Goddesses. Another excellent place for meditation or do perform your own Kali Puja. It is a powerful Shakti Peeth.

I have also been to some excellent Kali Maa temples in Nepal, but the question specified India. However I must give at least an honorable mention to the Dakshin Kali Temple in the forest outside Pharping, Nepal; it is really a potent and intense temple.

What do Hindus in India think of Balinese Hinduism?

 I was A2A. However I am not a Hindu in India, I’m a Hindu in the United States. But I’m overwhelmingly more familiar with Indian Hinduism than Balinese Hinduism - almost all my Hindu influence comes from India, my parents lived in India, my Guru is from India, all my Hindu teachers have been from India, I’ve spent time in India but never been to Bali, etc. So with that caveat, here is what I think of Balinese Hinduism.

My second caveat is one I share in common with the vast majority of Hindus in India: I have no firsthand knowledge of Balinese Hinduism. I’ve never been to Indonesia or even met a Balinese person. I know some people who have been there, and I’ve read about Balinese Hinduism and watched some videos out of curiosity.

I share Balinese Hinduism’s belief in One Supreme Being (which they refer to with Balinese names as the Inconceivable Unitary Divine Order, but It is the same as Brahman in Indian Hinduism) of which all the Gods are manifestations. Balinese Hinduism follows the Smarta tradition with significant Shaiva leanings/background, and follows the Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Ramayana, and Mahabharata. They have the four goals of human life, Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha. To reach Moksha, they recognize the Bhakti Marga, Gnyana Marga, Karma Marga, and Raja Marga, of which Bhakti Marga has the largest following. They worship a range of Gods, Goddesses, and spirits (Dewata and Hyang), mostly the Trimurti, and most of all Siwa (Shiva). Other popular deities include Ganesha, Dewi Sri (Lakshmi), and Saraswati. They hold a deep reverence for nature and a belief in the interconnectedness of all living beings, and most of their rituals are based on striving for harmony and balance. All of this is very familiar from Indian Hinduism.

In principle I highly approve of Balinese Hinduism’s incorporating local animism, and embracing the local and ancestral spirits of Bali. This is something I love and generally encourage in Hinduism. It’s something I greatly appreciate in local, rural traditions of Hinduism in parts of India where I’ve spent time. I also fully endorse Balinese Hindus’ worship of Indonesian Gods and Goddesses not found in India.

As I understand it, most of the details of Balinese Hindu rituals are based on indigenous elements and they differ in expression and presentation from Indian Hindu rituals.

Balinese Hinduism also draws a lot from enlightened Saints who lived in Indonesia over the past thousands of years; I know very little of these Indonesian Saints.

I also think that Balinese Hinduism’s reverence for Buddhist Bodhisattvas, there use of some Mahayana Buddhist writings, and their incorporation of some Buddhists in their priesthood are, at least in principle, valid and I’m fine with it. Again I’m used to this, I grew up with a fair amount of Bodhisattva reverence and such and I’ve also seen it in Nepali Hinduism.

Balinese Hinduism is legally forced to present itself as monotheistic and otherwise more acceptable to an Islamic view of religion due to the Indonesian government, which I think distorts it somewhat from its natural and traditional form. If Balinese Hindus were free to practice as they wish without Islamic government oppression, I think there would be some significant changes.

I think Balinese Hinduism remained a lot more free from some of the worst, oppressive corruptions of caste that occurred in many parts of Indian Hinduism.

I think Balinese Hinduism seems a bit heavy on the animal sacrifice for my tastes. Also, as I understand it they widely consume chicken and seafood; I prefer Indian Hinduism’s far higher prevalence of vegetarianism. But at least many Balinese Hindus avoid beef, that’s something.

Balinese Hinduism has many unique artistic traditions, like their dance performances, bell-based music, shadow puppets, etc., which I find fascinating and beautiful. I really admire the devotional care they put into the presentation of offerings.

Also Bali has over twenty thousand Hindu temples, and all those I have seen look exquisite.

I have read that there are no Ashrams in Bali for people to study at. If true I think this is a shortcoming of Balinese Hinduism.

I think Balinese cremations sound in some cases unnecessary expensive, I don’t think they need to be so elaborate.

I am particularly interested in the strong Balinese traditions of worship of the goddess Danu.

As I understand it, the Balinese observe almost completely different festivals from those of Indian Hinduism. However they are functionally similar: celebrations of the triumph of Dharma over adharma, battles in which good triumphed over evil, and days devoted to certain deities like Saraswati (during which books are worshipped) and so on.

What is your favourite part in India?

 Well I love being with my Guru, which draws me to her Ashram at Amritapuri on the coast of Kerala.

But for the place itself, rather than a person in it, my favorite part of India that I have seen so far is Uttarakhand.

Truly is Uttarakhand called the Devbhumi, the Land of the Gods; it is so full of ancient temples and sacred sites at every turn, with some of the holiest shrines in all of Hindu Dharma, referenced in scriptures, and the natural environment of the Himalayas is the most beautiful and inspiring place I’ve ever seen, especially Chamoli District.

Multiple waterfall streams plunge many hundreds of feet from the snow-clad mountains.

86% of Uttarakhand is covered by the Himalayan mountains, including many high peaks and glaciers, and 65% of it is still covered by forest.

Good hiking trails abound. Great rivers flow through it, like the Ganga and Yamuna.

A profound Animism centering on river worship and tree worship is often the predominant spirituality of Uttarakhand, and it is no surprise that the village women of Uttarakhand created the worldwide non-violent tree-hugging environmentalist/eco-feminist movement for forest conservation. The population in the hills and mountains of Uttarakhand is almost entirely Hindu, and palpably devout.

The entirety of the hill country never at any time came under the influence of Muslim rule, and you can really feel the power of the undisturbed millennia of worship of the deities in every forest, every river, every mountain, every ancient temple and shrine.

The food in Uttarakhand is primarily vegetarian; it is hearty and satisfying.

The villages of Uttarakhand are beautiful, with intricately carved designs of floral patterns, deities, and geometrical designs adorning the doors, windows, walls, and ceilings, all nestled in the glory of the hills and rice terraces.

Houses and temples alike are decorated with paintings, murals, and local Likhai woodcarving.

I especially love Garhwali art, so close to nature.

The bustling markets of Uttarakhand brim with handcrafted gold and jewelry, comfortable wool hats and shawls, and local handiwork of all sorts.

By far my favorite pilgrimage I have performed is the Chota Char Dham Yatra in Uttarakhand, to Yamunotri, Gangotri, Kedarnath, and Badrinath.

Badrinath Temple is my favorite temple for pure spiritual qualities, and my favorite single spot that I’ve been to anywhere on Earth.

But in terms of a more overall place, I deeply love Haridwar, Uttarkashi, and Gangotri.

Vedic chanting resounds through the river valleys, and people are practicing Yoga everywhere.

The pure, cool energy of Ganga fills the air in those towns, and countless ancient temples and shrines abound almost literally at every turn. Rishikesh is very nice too, though not my favorite.

So this is my favorite part of India, the India that I know and love.

What is black hole tragedy in india?

 The Black Hole tragedy took place at Fort William in Calcutta in the year 1756.

The Background:

The Nawab of Bengal gave The East India Company certain special rights as traders in Calcutta and allowed them to build a small fort (the Company named it Fort William) and maintain a small army. A few years later, the Britishers, fearing an aggression from the French, started to strengthen the fortification of Fort William. They also started to increase their army and mounted guns on the walls of the fort.

Siraj-ud-daula, who was the Nawab of Bengal at that time, did not like it. He asked the Britishers to stop the fortification and scale down their military. They plainly refused the Nawab's request. Seeing his authority being flouted, that too in his own dominions, further compounded the Nawab's anger.

He launched an attack against the Britishers. After a feeble resistance of five days, the Britishers surrendered. By that time, most of them had managed to escape. Those few, who remained, were caught and taken as prisoners.

The Black Hole Tragedy:

These English prisoners, which included some women and children too, were lodged in the prison room of the fort for a night. The prison room was 18 feet long and 14 feet wide. The number of prisoners is told to be 146 and clearly the room was too small to hold such a large number of people.

Yet Nawab's army shut up these many prisoners in the room. They cramped for space. In the scorching heat of June, excessive perspiration and suffocation took a heavy toll. Many died in the night itself. The next morning, when the prison window was opened, these suffocating prisoners trampled one over another to get near the window.

It is said that out of 146, only 23 came out alive.

According to J Z Holwell, one of the survivors, those who came out alive were "either stupefied or raving. The remaining were corpses who were thrown into a ditch."

The East India Company used this episode as a propaganda device to further win support of the British public in favour of their war of aggression in Indian lands.

I have read somewhere that this incident was an inspiration behind NASA scientists naming the black holes in space as black holes.

Edit: There has been a lot of controversy regarding the number of prisoners being 146. This number is believed to be far lower.

Many historians are of the opinion that JZ Holwell's account is too exaggerated. And he was further encouraged by the British government as they were just looking for an excuse to wage war against the Nawab.

A few months later, Robert Clive and his troops were sent to 'retaliate'. They fought a war (which we know as battle of Plassey) and defeated the Nawab. This marked the beginning of British rule in India as in the coming years they slowly expanded their hold to the rest of the Indian land.

Unfortunately, apart from Holwell's account, no other source mentioning the incident exists. But many historians believe that the number of prisoners was far lower than what Holwell claimed.

What is wrong with corporate culture in India?

 My brother recently joined Google

A day, he invited me to visit his workplace.

While we were hanging out in the cafeteria, a guy walked past, waved, and said, "Let me know when you're free, we'll connect right here."

My brother nodded with smile.

I was a bit confused and asked, "Wait, you have a meeting? And why would you meet here? It’s so noisy.”

To which he answered “No, it's just a casual catch-up to bond and get to know the team."

Apparently, his manager specifically told him to just sit with people, chat, and see how well they connect.

Man, it really made me think about those, micromanaging managers who lose their minds if they see employees chatting.

Epics of India: Is it really true that we have found Dwarka (City of lord Krishna) ?

 In 2001, Murli Manohar Joshi, the Minister of Human Resource development announced that there have been discovered the ruins of an ancient civilization off the coasts of Gujarat that predate the Indus Valley Civilization. Further descriptions of the site by Joshi describe it as containing regularly spaced dwellings, a granary, a bath, a citadel, and a drainage system.

The National Institute of Ocean Technology was conducting pollution tests and their sonar stumbled upon some regular geometric structures.
A follow-up investigation was conducted by NIOT in 2001 and then again in 2002-03. Artifacts discovered were a piece of wood, pottery sherds and weathered stones claimed to be tools. Artifacts were recovered by means of dredging, including pottery sherds, microliths, wattle and daub remains, and hearth materials.

A few of the artefacts retrieved from the Gulf of Khambat: 1. A piece of wood; 2. A jaw-bone and a tooth; and 3. Semi-precious stones :

"The finds comprise a piece of wood measuring approximately 25 cm in length and 20 cm in diameter, an assortment of pottery sherds, stone pieces presumed to be tools, fossilised bones, and a tooth. Sonar images showed what appeared to be a vast area of regular structures on the sea-bed and a submerged river-bed. No archaeologist, nor diver, has seen the underwater site. No underwater photographs were taken. The artefacts were recovered by a mechanical dredge that trawled large sections of the sea-bed. The decision to dredge the sea-bed was made by the Department of Ocean Development."

The piece of wood was dated at two different labs, the NGRI in Hyderabad returned a date of 7190 BC and the BSIP in Hannover returned a date of 7545-7490 BC. But a single piece of wood does not imply presence of an advanced civilization.

Dr. D.P. Agrawal, chairman of the Paleoclimate Group who is responsible for establishing Carbon-14 laboratories in India states:

"To date a city on the basis of a dredged sample of wood is irresponsible and ridiculous. I have worked with the Paleoclimate Group on the changes in climate over the ages. It is a known fact that during the Ice Age, about 20,000 years ago, the Arabian Sea was 100 metres lower (than its present level). Entire forests are buried beneath the sea in this area. It is not extraordinary to find a piece of wood going back to 7500 B.C. or 5000 B.C. There is no way it can be used as evidence to date this so-called city."

Prof K.V.Raman :

"Most of what I could see were not man-made, they were naturally rolled pebbles. They deceptively look like tools but are not."

The 'excavation' has been accused of not following the standard archaeological procedures. But the findings cannot be altogether ignored. There is absolutely something around there, but it has been taken too enthusiastically. Furthermore, it won't be right to be certain that this was exactly the Dwarka city mentioned in the Mahabharata.

Why is India so heavily populated despite being not very large in size compared to China or Russia?

 India is barely a third the size of China and a fraction of Russia, yet it is the most populated country on Earth. The stunning paradox? India has more farmable land than either giant.

The reason lies in a geographic illusion: sheer landmass does not equal livable space. While China and Russia look massive on a map, the majority of their territory is unsuited for agriculture.

Over 88% of China consists of mountains, deserts like the Gobi and Taklamakan, and the high-altitude, barren Tibetan Plateau. Russia is even more extreme. While it spans 16.3 million square kilometers, most of that area is locked in the frozen taiga and tundra of Siberia. Only 7.4% of Russia's land, and 11.6% of China's, is arable.

India, by contrast, was dealt one of the most favorable geographic hands on the planet.

A satellite view shows the stark contrast between the arid, high-altitude Tibetan Plateau and the lush green Indo-Gangetic Plain directly below the snow-capped Himalayas. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

An astonishing 51.7% of India's total land area is arable. In absolute numbers, that equates to over 153 million hectares of agricultural capacity, compared to just 108 million in China and 121 million in Russia. The defining engine of this fertility is the Indo-Gangetic Plain, a vast sweep of flat land stretching across northern and eastern India.

The Himalayas act as a massive water tower, catching moisture from the Indian Ocean and funneling it into enormous perennial river systems like the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Indus. These rivers carry rich silt down from the mountains, constantly renewing the soil of the plains below.

Combined with a tropical climate and the annual monsoon cycle, Indian farmers can often harvest crops two or even three times a year on the same plot of land. In colder regions like Russia, the growing season is strictly limited to a few short summer months.

Because India can produce so much food so consistently across a large percentage of its territory, it has been able to support dense human populations for millennia. The density of modern India is not a recent anomaly, but the direct result of a landscape uniquely built to sustain life.

What was the reason for India choosing British to write its first draft for a new Constitution instead of the USA or France?

 No British person wrote India's Constitution. But after winning independence, the Indian framers deliberately chose to copy their former colonizers over the US or French republics.

The document itself was drafted entirely by Indians over a grueling period of two years, eleven months, and eighteen days. The Constituent Assembly of India, an elected body of nearly 300 Indian representatives, took on the task. The initial working draft was prepared by the Constitutional Advisor, B.N. Rau, an Indian civil servant and jurist who traveled globally to study other constitutions. The critical job of debating, refining, and finalizing the text fell to the Drafting Committee, chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.

The misconception that the British wrote the Constitution likely stems from the fact that the final document borrowed heavily from the Government of India Act 1935, legislation previously passed by the British Parliament. When India gained independence in 1947, it needed a functional administrative framework immediately. The 1935 Act provided a detailed blueprint for the mechanics of government, including provincial autonomy, the federal structure, and the judiciary. Because Indian politicians and civil servants had already spent over a decade working within the confines of this Act, incorporating its structural elements provided vital administrative continuity during the chaotic period of Partition.

This decision to adopt a British-style parliamentary system over a presidential model was fiercely debated in the Constituent Assembly. Dr. Ambedkar championed the parliamentary system, arguing that a democratic executive must satisfy two conditions: stability and accountability. He noted that the U.S. presidential system provides high stability but lower daily accountability, as the President is elected for a fixed term and does not sit in the legislature. The British parliamentary model, however, ensures constant accountability. The Prime Minister and the cabinet must retain the confidence of the legislature and face direct questioning in parliament. For a deeply diverse and newly independent nation, the framers concluded that daily accountability was far more critical than a highly stable, independent executive.

Furthermore, India did not blindly copy the British system; it wove together the strongest elements of multiple democracies. While the parliamentary structure came from Britain, the framers looked to the United States for the concept of Fundamental Rights and an independent judiciary capable of judicial review. They borrowed the Directive Principles of State Policy from Ireland, the ideals of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity from France, and the federal framework with a strong center from Canada. The result was a uniquely Indian synthesis tailored to the country's specific needs.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, chairman of the Drafting Committee, presents the final draft of the Indian Constitution to Dr. Rajendra Prasad on November 25, 1949. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

Why can't India produce its own crude oil?

 India actually produces 29 million tons of crude oil a year. The real issue is a brutal geological mismatch: a nation burning 5.6 million barrels a day sits on just 0.3% of global reserves.

With a rapidly growing population of 1.4 billion people, India is the world's third-largest oil consumer. Domestic production only covers about 13% of this demand, forcing the country to import the remaining 87%.

The root of this shortfall is the earth itself. The Indian subcontinent is not endowed with the large, easily accessible sedimentary basins found in the Middle East, Russia, or the Americas. India holds an estimated 4.9 billion barrels in proven oil reserves. This ranks the country 22nd globally, meaning there simply is not enough crude buried under Indian soil to fuel an economy of its size.

The oil that India does have is concentrated in a handful of regions, and many of these fields are well past their peak. The nation's most productive asset has historically been Mumbai High, an offshore oil field in the Arabian Sea.

The ONGC offshore oil platform in the Mumbai High field. First discovered in 1974, this aging offshore complex remains one of India's primary sources of domestic crude oil. Photo by Unknown author is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Discovered in 1974, this offshore complex has been heavily tapped for decades and is now in natural decline. Newer onshore discoveries like the Mangala field in Rajasthan and deepwater projects in the Krishna-Godavari Basin add valuable output, but they are only enough to soften the decline of older fields rather than reverse the overall trend.

Because it lacks raw crude, India executed a strategic pivot to become a global leader in oil refining. Instead of relying on foreign nations for finished fuels, India imports unrefined crude and processes it domestically. The country is home to facilities like the Jamnagar Refinery in Gujarat—the largest oil refining hub on the planet.

The Jamnagar Refinery complex in Gujarat at night. Because India lacks vast crude oil reserves, it focuses heavily on processing, importing raw crude and refining it into finished petroleum products at an industrial scale. Photo by Reliance Industries is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.

This infrastructure satisfies India's domestic need for gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel, and it turns the country into a net exporter of finished petroleum products, helping offset the cost of buying the raw crude in the first place.