|
|
|
Demographic Challenge to the Hindu Homeland
Today the naxilites are busy hampering several states of Bharat, and thus far the government has been less than impressive in its response to this neo-terrorism. The separatist movement in the North-East is getting stronger by the year, China has begun to claim Arunachal-Pradesh with more ferocity and impunity, and without soliciting any reaction from the Indian government, and the Kashmir issue still stands unresolved. So, when the RSS or any other Hindu org talks of Akhand Bharat once again materializing in to reality, and shed tears over the sorrowful loss of one-third of the motherland to Asuric forces, it is almost tragically comical. The RSS and Hindu Mahasabha inspired BJS which morphed in to the BJP did not enact any policy to prevent India’s disintegration during its stint at the center. This separatist problem began with a small insignificant Muslim minority demanding separate electorates with the national leadership bowing down to the demands, and now it has burgeoned in to a colossal calamity. Now we have every group from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the Kalistani movement, to the different religious minorities demanding their own states carved out of the Hindu homeland. Needless to say, no substantial solution is in the offing, no firm measures have been taken to curtail this separatism, let alone put a stop to it. The only solution to this kind of nuisance is to pass strict legislation that would efficaciously bar illegal infiltrators from entering the country. This means that the infiltrators should not be provided ration cards and voting opportunities; they should immediately be deported. The government should jettison its vote-bank politics, and get serious about national security and integrity. No self-respecting nation hoping to survive from the onslaught of the Islamic high birthrate, should not allow such breeding in its borders. It is obvious when people from Bangladesh cross over to India, they are likely to procreate and this worsens the problem.
Why should all this be done? Does it matter if India becomes an Islamic or even Christian state? Of course it does! The fact is that Sanatan Dharm has always stood for Satya, and the creeds masquerading as paradigms of equality, and peace, are considered and sanctified as pregnant with a progressive futuristic aura, are nothing more than the crassest and most ignoble desires of humankind. If the current trend of Muslim population explosion continues, the country will soon become an Islamic state. An UP official, in an unambiguous bid to get Muslim votes, promised a group of Muslim women that they would not have to follow the two child-norm. He encouraged the women to produce as many healthy children as they wanted. As aforementioned, this kind of vote-bank politics must immediately stop. What the general public can do at the moment is to inform uniformed masses, or people who are semi-aware of the dangers of this population explosion. This will at least make people more cognizant of the problems that are being merrily ignored by the “secular” media in India and abroad. Hindus: we should wake up, it is our homeland that is being attacked from all sides. We should try to the best of our ability to prevent the Hindu homeland from becoming a hunting ground for Asuric forces.
Demythifying Reality
In academia, when a myth is punctured through empirical analysis, credited scholars are allowed to come on stage to propound their contradiction and alternatives to the evidence that has been disproved. Well, not according to the Indian secularists and apologists for Christian missionaries and the quotidian disquisitions dished out as absolute truth even though it has been confounded again and again. The scholars propounding alternatives to a popular myth or theory are quickly dubbed as Hindu fanatics. These apologists are not just unwittingly supporting the anti-Indian cabal, but they have a long standing agenda, i.e. to malign anything Hindu or concerning India"s true history.
From time immemorial, the Christian missionaries in cahoots with colonialists have devised maleficent designs to discredit the hi story of Sanatan Dharm, falsely plant Christianity in Bharat, and aggrandize so-called Saints for their charity which had an ulterior plan of its own. These designs have become more pernicious and pronounced, because they now not only exist in India to poison people's mind but have transgressed beyond its borders.
Origins of Sanatan Dharm
A very good transnational example of this venom masquerading as history is the recent furor over the proposed edits by the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF) and Vedic Foundation (VF) to the California school Board of Education concerning the prejudicial portrayal of Hinduism in school history textbooks.
Here Michael Witzel and Steve Farmer tried to argue that the Aryan invasion theory is indeed veritable, why? By claiming that the Aryans brought Hinduism, wrote the Vedas, and subsequently ruled by force. This is not only denying Sanatan Dharm its rightful place in shaping the history of Bharat, butt it is also with all intent and purpose gratuitously pitting the putative indigenous Dravidians of the southern part of India against the supposed foreign Aryans.
The theory posits that Hinduism was really imported from central Asia by nomadic Indo-Aryan tribes that conquered the Dravidians an advanced society around 1500-100BC. It goes on to claim that the Dravidian people were defeated, subjugated and pushed to the south by the light-skinned Aryans. This noxious theory was engineered by a Christian chauvinist named Friedrich Max Muller during British rule in the early nineteenth century. It is ironic that texts such as the Bible and the Quran that have no standing in the scientific world are not refuted, but a religion that has produced a large corpus of not only literary and Dharmic ideals, but has also provided us with sufficient proof that a civilization"s existence in the particular places that are being haughtily disputed today were indeed its homeland is not taken seriously.
Now, anyone even remotely familiar with the Aryan migration premise, knows that it is spurious. there is ample archeological, linguistic, anthropological, literary, astronomical, and historical evidence that turns this theory on its head. For instance, Vedic scholar Dr. David Frawley in his article titled “Solid Evidence Debunking Aryan Invasion”, summarizes that this couldn"t possibly be true for the following reasons: first, according to Dr. Frawley, many propagators of the Aryan migration premise have claimed that the Aryans used Horse-drawn chariots and had sophisticated weaponry like iron that the Dravidians eventually succumbed to. The refutation is that there was no evidence of iron in the excavation of the Indus Valley sites. However, horses were discovered not only in the Indus valley sites, but also in the pre-Indus sites, this according to Dr. Frawley means that horses were very much a part of ancient Indian economic life.
Furthermore, chariots can not travel over mountains and deserts, they are more suited for flat lands. Second, the claim is that there is a prevalent and sustained conflict between the light-skinned Aryans against the dark-skinned Dravidians. Some fatuous secularists have even gone as far as to claim that the Dravidians are the modern day untouchables. They have gone on to say that the attempt to dispute the Aryan Migration Premise stems from a desire by Hindutva proponents to make an Aryan nation modeled on the hitlerian concept of a supremacist Aryan race fashioned in the 1930s by the Nazis. The first claim is false because there is a constant theme of light and dark in the Vedas. But this has nothing to do with Aryan racism; it simply means a struggle between good and evil. The Sanskrit word Arya did not even explicitly or implicitly suggest race or ethnicity, but the word Aryan of the Nordic concept had nothing but race in mind. It is probably made to look like a race struggle because many Westerners upon seeing the words light-skinned versus dark-skinned immediately shun Hinduism, and all intellectual gumption is quickly jettisoned, and hence this ploy was an excellent conversion tool for the Christian missionaries. Racism is an ethnocentric concept that only the Europeans can claim credit to. We usually are weary of anyone tagging us as racists, obscurantist, or fanatics, so, this was a clever trick on the part of Muller and today's propagators of this vicious lie and it puts many Hindus on the defensive. Therefore, it becomes facile to alienate the Hindus from the cradle of their civilization by telling them that Bharat was never their true homeland to begin with.
It is likely that the Indus valley civilization was destroyed by floods as discovered in the excavation by the (National Institute of Oceanography in India). Dr. Frawley also states that the inhabitants of Gujarat and Punjab are more or less the same ethnically and linguistically as they were before the so-called Aryan invasion.
Still, anti-Hindu academics whearring the garb of scholarly research like Ramila Thapar, Michael Witzel, Steve Farmer, and Wendy Doniger continue to float lies as truths. In the face of more than sufficient evidence, they keep repeating that there is not enough evidence that shows Hinduism was indeed an indigenous religion to India; it seems that these "scholars are suffering from what is known in psychology as confirmation bias. This is when the victim ignores all the proof that he/she finds in conflict to their point.
When elementary school children learn about the Aryan migration premise and other malicious concoctions, they only have one thing in mind i.e. Hinduism is a foreign and intolerant religion imposed forcibly on a people, that were coerced in to the rigid fold of a discrimination oriented creed.
The book titled "Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate" by European historian Dr. Koenraad Elst offers contradiction to the Aryan migration premise and discusses just why such a theory was floated by the British, present day Western Indologists, and Indian "secularists" in full cooperation with Muslim and Christian theologians.
The reason given by Dr. Elst for the expeditious acceptance of the theory is that at the time of its concoction there was no disputation proffered by anyone, it seemed like the right thing to do. Another more sinister aspect according to the author is the abrogation of Sanskrit as an Indian language by Indian politicians to be taught as school subjects under the pretext that it is a foreign language brought by foreign peoples (Elst, 33). The second reason is, to mobilize the Dravidians to hate everything that represents traditional Brahmanism (46). An example sited by Dr. Elst is that many Dalit organizations have published vitriolic writings on the so-called blatant arrogance and opulence of Brahmans; it is wholly specious and propagandistic to say that the Brahmans are the only wealthy class in India (50). The author states, "It is legitimate to criticize caste; but it is perverse to do so on the basis of false history (64)."
The astronomical evidence presented in Dr. Elst"s book explains how the Rg Veda described the exact location of the Indus valley civilization. It also says that the dates propounded by the Hindu astronomers during the Vedic age were more or less correct (89). When John Playfair, a European historian put forth the supposition that the Rg-Veda was as old as 4300 B.C., it was considered to be inordinately insane. But it was not disputed by any scientists of the day, and presently, it is a powerful counterpoint to the Aryan migration premise.
Saint Thomas in India?
Just as the Aryan invasion theory has done its damage in history, so has another myth decorated with variegated frosting of clever ploys with an obvious purpose. This particular creativity comes from the Christian Theologians/missionaries in India, and it is the myth of St. Thomas. This so-called apostle St. Thomas, according to popularized missionary propaganda, came to India around 52 A.D., he founded the Syrian Christian community, and was murdered by" fanatical" Hindu Brahmans in 73 A.D. This not only served to vilify the Brahmans but it is also used to play the lower Christianized castes against the upper castes. Christianity"s history abounds with self-victimization and self-imposed and most of the time false martyrdom. I was shocked to learn
from a peer belonging to the (Bible Society) on campus who told me that, "The only way to discover Christ, was from suffering, and that it was good that people were suffering." "That way they will discover Christ"s love." How can a faith that supposedly inculcates fear and a fervent desire to suffer, uplift the so-called uncivilized peoples of the world? Christianity"s flocks, it seems have stuck to its dogmatic doctrine not out of devotion, but from fear.
The Saint Thomas story is not a novelty at all; in fact it is a long running exercise to indigenous and sanitize the fanaticism of Christianity more specifically Roman-Catholicism in India. This most likely is a sustained effort to efface the outrageous enormities perpetrated by the Portuguese
in the 16th and 17th centuries in places such as Goa and the Malabar coast. In his piece "In Memory of a Slain Saint", which appeared in the Indian Express in December 1989, C.A. Simon emphatically contended that Saint Thomas really did exist and his visit to India was a blessing to the downtrodden and oppressed classes. He further aggrandizes St. Thomas by claiming that there were miracles performed everywhere, and sure enough many converted. Does this line of
reasoning sound all too familiar? Of course, the downtrodden were just waiting for a cultured and "egalitarian" faith like Christianity to rescue them from the evils of Hinduism. This reasoning is as old as Christianity"s exclusivist existence is.
In a rejoinder to C.A. Simon, titled "The Legend of a Slain Saint to Stain Hinduism", by Swami Tapasyananda states that this pernicious legend was contrived by the Portuguese to hide their glaring fanaticism, because they occupied Mylapore from 1522-1697. It was in the 16th century when the decimation of the Kapaleeswara temple occurred. The Santhome church was built and was often repaired. It also challenges the very existence of such a saint and whether he came to India or not. Furthermore, Catholicism and Christianity in general has always claimed full rights where ever it has ventured, and this myth fits perfectly in that mold of claiming land and more land for Christ.
Mother Teresa"s "altruism"
It is unfortunately a sad fact that many Hindus have forgotten Seva or selfless service to society, that is perspicuously prescribed in the Bhagavad-Gita by ShriKrishn. But, it would also be a lie to sublime those who have only by clever publicity stunts managed to give the misleading impression of altruism. On October 19th 1999, a much popularized and overrated woman was beatified as a saint by the late Pope, and this "saint" was mother Teresa.
Mother Teresa came to India to administer to the poor and ill, however, her actions are indicatory of anything but selfless service to the poor and ill. She was, like many of her critics have pointed out, a friend of the wealthy; her extreme opposition to abortion does not help her image much either. Ensuing the Union Carbide disaster in Bhopal in 1984, mother Teresa rushed to the scene and said, "Forgive, forgive, forgive." Forgive? After investigations, it was amply clear that the corporation had pre-warnings about the disaster, so why should the victims forgive? Another unduly foolish answer to a question of what she was planning to do in regard to housing and jobs for the victims by a Bhopal resident, was "First, we must learn to love one another." It is
excruciatingly painful to believe that such a willfully ignorant person was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. It is even more astonishing that no "savant" found it worth their time to criticize such an asinine and unwholesome decision made by the committee. Mother Teresa did not treat poverty as a disease that needs to be eradicated but as a blessing. She blamed Colcata"s poverty on the people"s refusal to accept Christ. Again, we see that Christ comes to those who are hopelessly suffering, sort of like a drug that only induces a desperate person, not a healthy one.
However, not everyone has been hypnotized by an overdose of falsities, Christopher Hitchons in his book titled "The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice, through thorough investigation evinces a completely different and less flattering side of the putative saint. In the book Hitchons meticulously expatiates about the total and complete lack of proof of Mother Teresa"s charity to the poor. For instance, although Mother got the finest medical treatment for herself in the West, there isn"t any substantial proof of any hospitals or orphanages that were indeed built by Mother Teresa (Hitchons 37). Of course, she received millions, but what happened to them, is the question. The author also denounces her as a right-wing Christian fundamentalist, who went out of her way to varnish the atrocious actions of the Contras and death squads in Nicaragua, endorsed the Duvalier in Haiti the cause of much poverty in that country, and her extreme opposition to abortion under any circumstance.
We must realize that these myths are making us forget the greatness of our culture, and the people who have rendered selfless service to the nation which, incidentally do not ask nor get any attention from any media outlet. If some of these myths and other such falsehoods can be corrected, then there can be a greater focus on issues more concern. Actively challenging these myths is also intellectual and it silences the "secularists" who are only apt at hurling invectives and nothing else. One can ignorantly argue that what"s done is done, but unless we make a concerted effort to erase these lies they will grow like bacteria, and become clogged and solidify in the arteries of history.
Secularism: A Conspectus of its Consequences
A retaliatory attack on Muslims after hundreds have been killed, an isolated attack on a Christian after thousands have been fraudulently proselytized; the former bit of information makes headlines, the latter people barely know of. Sounds awfully familiar, doesn`t it? Whose fault is it? The Islamic terrorists? The Christian missionaries? Before we can point the finger of blame at any group, we must realize the cold fact that people among our own midst are fomenting anti-Hindu anti-India hatred and spreading spurious information.
Over the last few decades, a leftist, self-styled clerisy has emerged with an ideology that is a detriment to the survival of Hinduism in India or anywhere in the world. This farrago also known as secularists consists of politicians, academia, religious figures, human rights activists, journalists, and the most likely incognizant hoi polli whose main objective whether conscientiously or unaware is to stay away from and denigrate anything remotely resembling Hinduism or Hindutva. This is all usually done in the name of so-called secularism and impartiality. With these anti-India secularists leading the way, Islamic terrorists, and Christian missionaries follow the example with celerity.
Secularism`s essential pillar is indifference to or exclusion of religion. Through examining events that were highlighted most in the media, this essay endeavors to challenge and prove that the secularists network of worldwide anti-India propaganda is a detriment to the survival of Hindus. It came as no surprise then, when the "secular" crowd went livid with rage ensuing the Babri mosque demolition on December sixth 1992, the fact that the mosque stood on the site of a decimated temple, one of Hinduism`s most sacred places was of no importance to this crowed. Nor did they care about the ample evidence in favor of Ram temple`s previous existence. This proof included the archeological survey of India in 1975 and again in 2003 which excavated the site and found revealing artifacts proving the temple`s existence from past centuries. Another incrimination is that Muslim invaders themselves wrote gleefully about the destruction of Hindu temples not just at Ayodhya but also at Kashi and Mathura. From
another perspective Babri Mosque was emblematic of Muslim domination and brutality because Ayodhya is just one place that the Muslims destroyed in their conquest of India. In a way by demolishing the mosque, Hindus have shortened the list of places where Islamic intolerance was glaringly perspicuous nothing of this sort is mentioned in any "secular" writings. The only thing that is stressed ad nauseam is how India`s secularity and its "helpless" Muslims are increasingly becoming a target of the purported Hindu extremists.
A question that these "secularists" have still not answered is, where were they when 300,000 Kashmiri Hindus were ethnically cleansed from their homes, and hundreds killed, their properties looted or burned. All of the support for this terrorism comes from the "helpless" Islamic countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Also, no one was killed on December sixth 1992. But what about on March 12, 1993 when several bombs exploded in Mumbai seriatim killing 257 people and injuring more than 1,400. How can any sane person condone such an outrageous and unprovoked act of terror! Some blamed it on Babri demolition; what is the sense in that? The recent attacks on the makeshift temple in July did not get any condemnation from the "secularists" at all. The Indian foreign minister himself assured everyone that, "The peace process with Pakistan would continue unimpeded unless there is a terrorist attack like the one witnessed in
London". Gems of wisdom from India`s own homegrown anti-Indians. Clearly, from this and many other unwise statements on something as serious as terrorism how can the world take India seriously? Leadership matters within the borders of a nation, but to an extent it is even more pivotal when it comes to making a wholesome international impression. The queen of secularism Mrs. Sonia Gandhi went on the offensive and said that the event should not be politicized or publicized by the Sangh. So now it is a crime to publicize the truth, but it is fine to highlight lies.
Then, from 1998 to 2000, reports of attacks on Christian missionaries made sensational headlines and got the world`s full condemnation and outrage at the Hindu right and its associates who had recently won elections. One such case was where nuns were raped in Jhabua district of Madhya Pradesh in 1998; this was quickly blamed on the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP). Another event that was blown completely out of proportion was the murder of Australian missionary Graham Stains and his two children in Orisa in January 1999. Several bomb attacks on churches in Kerala were also blamed on Hindu organizations. The obvious pattern here is that no matter what the crime is, if it affects the minorities, Hindu activists automatically without any substantial evidence are denounced. Now, with further investigation and personal testimonies, it turned out that all of the attacks were all carried by Islamic
terrorists, tribals who were fed up with perpetual conversion attempts by the missionaries, or they were inter-Christian feuds. Even with this evidence some tendentious human rights organizations such as the U.S. commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) and New York based Human Rights Watch (HRW) continued to blame Hindu organizations for anti-Christian activities.
While the world especially the Indian "secularists" shed tears over putative minority harassment, Hindus continue to be the real victims of terrorism. No one really seems to be paying much attention to the terrorism that was and still continues to go on in the Northeast. For instance, in may 1999 four Rashtrya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) workers were kidnapped by the national Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) and were taken to forests in Bangladesh. Ransom was demanded from the organization which refused to pay, and the four were put to death around December 2000. What was their crime? They were preaching Hinduism among the tribals! Other terrorist organizations operating in the Northeast include, Darjeeling Gorkha, Naga, Manipuri, Tripuri, United Liberation Front of Assam (Ulfa) Bodo with assistance from Pakistan`s Inter-services intelligence (ISI). More attacks by NLFT followed in January 2001 where 13 people were shot dead while they shopped. Also, during that year the NLFT killed around 20 Hindus because they refused to become "believers". These brutal killings did not even get one eighth of the "secular" media`s sympathies that the minorities enjoy.
How many times have we heard from organizations like Gospels for Asia (GFA) and World Vision asserting that missionary work is strictly circumscribed to humanitarian work? But (GFA) is not interested in just helping the poor, they and the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), the largest and richest denomination in the U.S., were very upset over anti-conversion laws passed in several states, thus exposing their own ulterior motive.
They assert that Hindus themselves come to inquire about Christ. Maybe this is true for some, but overall the assertion is completely false. From time immemorial missionaries have been trying to Christianize India going back to when the Portuguese set foot on the Malabar coast. Today India has the fourth largest population of Catholic priests, and that shows something. Money, fraud, and in some case sheer force is a major factor in conversions. The Indian "secularists" and the anti-India cabal sloughs over this aspect of the situation. The tribals like so many others were furious with Graham Stains, so they resorted to
desperate measures. That murder was given maximum attention by the media but what about the enormities committed against the innocent Hindus in the Northeast, in Kashmir, and the never-ending conversion attempts?
Infamous people like Angana Chatterjee and Marxist Ramila Thapar constantly accuse Hindu organizations of infiltrating in to tribal society and preaching Hinduism. The fact is that the practices by tribals are much closer to Hinduism than the monotheistic faiths. These people are also forgetting one important fact that missionaries do the same thing. Do they understand that the actions of the Sangh is not harming Hindu society but the missionary proselytizing is because the proselyte is isolated from Hindu culture and is hence used as a vehicle to spread the "good news" to other unaware persons? The proselyte is also taught to hate the cultural/social way of life (Hinduism) which is the single thread that holds the nation together.
In addition to conversions and the Kashmir dispute, the religious
demography of the Northeast region due to Christian terrorism and Bangladeshi infiltration is changing at an alarming rate. According to the 2001 census, Christian population has gone from 39 percent in 1991 to 45.5 in 2001. States such as Mizrom, Tripura, and Nagaland have almost completely been Christianized. Manipur, Meghalaya, and Arunachal Pradesh previously unaffected are now also quickly being proselytized. In Assam and West Bengal where Bangledeshi infiltration goes on unhindered, the Hindu population has declined by 3 and 2 percent respectively. In Uttar Predesh and Bihar, the population has declined by nearly 1 percent from 1991-2001, and the Muslim population has steadily gone up. These figures come as no surprise given the missionaries insatiable rapacity for new "believers", and the high birthrate among Muslims. It is also no secret that aside from seeking a better living, the illegal infiltrators have a subversive agenda which is to inundate border states and propagate Islam.
While Kashmiri Hindus are evicted from their 5,000 year old homeland, the facts about Ram temple at Ayodhya skewed, and the demographic changes in religious makeup of the Northeast all demand immediate attention and action, the "secularists" and the anti-Indian cabal go on condemning spurious acts, and ignore or significantly play down the real problem. After all, every life is precious, right? Wrong! If this was the case for every atrocity committed against Christians there are ten atrocities against Hindus that should get equal media coverage but are not.
It is also an unfortunate thing that separatism is intrinsic to both Islam and Christianity; If Hindus do not wake up and realize this unsavory fact, then 1947 and 1971 are ineluctable.
The offensive called secularism continued. On February 27 2002, 59 Hindu pilgrims (mostly women and children) returning from Ayodhya by train were burnt to death by a Muslim mob at Godhra town in Gujarat state. A cycle of violence followed the attack where 254 Hindus and 790 Muslims were killed. It was an unprovoked attack and that caused the subsequent rioting. The "secular" media`s reaction to this was disturbing to say the least. Just as the Stains Murder was exaggerated, this event also had more than its share of slanted reporting. If there was nothing sensational about a news item, tails were invented to create that sensation and garner sympathy from an unsuspecting world.
Malefic canards were and still continue to be disseminated through bogus one sided human rights organizations and the media. One such lie was that 2,000 people (mostly Muslims) were killed in Gujarat riots. Absolutely False! The figures released in March prove that there were around 1,000 killed in riots. Despite these
figures, many continue to satisfy themselves with a game of reality and fact distortion. Its an incontrovertible fact however, that the Muslim death toll was indeed higher, but who killed 59 innocent people in the first place? The state Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) government led by chief minister Narendra Modi is accused of complicity in the riots, for fomenting, and justifying them. In its 2002 report "We Have No Orders to Save You" - state participation and complicity in communal violence in Gujarat HRW alleges that the Modi government and the police force were doing exactly what the report`s title says. It did not provide an iota of evidence to substantiate its wild allegation however.
Some reasons why this allegation is likely false is that, firstly, the fact remains that the violence was not a one sided affair; both Hindus and Muslims were victims. If the Hindu nationalist government truly wanted to do what it is accused of doing, then there would be no Hindu death toll to account for. Secondly, assistance from the army was sought within 24 hours after the Godhra attack to stop any further violence. Although, the chaos continued, one has to understand that there are limits to everything; this attack was probably one too many. For a long time, Hindus have been victims of Islamic terrorism. Some instances include: the Mumbai blasts in 1993 killing 257, the attack in Coimbatore in 1998 killing 40, the attack on Delhi parliament in 2001 killing
8, the attack on Akshardham temple in 2002 killing 39, constant attacks in the Northeast and the incessant harassment of Hindus in Kashmir. All these events have one essential commonality, which is that there was absolutely no reprisal! The third reason is as mentioned earlier, there is no proof that the state government really fomented riots. HRW then describes in painstaking detail, the attacks against Muslims, but when describing attacks on Hindus, it brushes them aside as being retaliatory! So, with this logic, the violence that ensued the Godhra incident should also have been considered retaliatory. The media behaved as if these riots had never taken place before. The truth is that there are innumerable examples of riots that have claimed many more lives in the last 50 years. What was special about these riots, was that the secularists and anti-Indians had presaged the worst scenarios for the minorities if BJP came to power, but to their dismay they were wrong. But now the riots were an opportune moment to once again make gloomy forecasts and once again they were back in the propaganda business!
Furthermore, some anti-Indian propagandists have
transgressed the limits of respectable falsehood and have shamelessly termed what may very well be called a mere reaction to a brutal attack as being
genocide or ethnic cleansing. These propagandists do not comprehend the dire implications of genocide or ethnic cleansing at all. Perhaps, they
should all take a trip to Pakistan or Bangladesh and report on the plight of the Hindu minorities, there they might understand the true definition of
the term they abuse with impunity. Genocide means when people are deliberately and systematically exterminated because of their religious, political
or social beliefs. What took place in Gujarat most certainly does not amount to genocide, even if the term was to be used in its broadest sense. In
Pakistan, Hindus that constituted 20 percent of the population, now they constitute around 2 percent. Similarly, in Bangladesh the Hindu population
was 30 percent in 1971; today it is less than 10 percent, a perfect instance of genocide.
An apotheosis of ethnic cleansing is when 300,000
Hindus were kicked out of Kashmir. But these are venial matters and can easily be explained away with excuses. Besides, "secularists" and human
rights organizations are too preoccupied with reporting untruths and have no time to pay any attention to issues of real concern. Instead of using
their famed names to expose real and not fabricated enormities committed against humanity novelist, Arundhati Roy and human rights activist Teesta
Setalvad are too preoccupied with their anti-India agenda. For instance, Arundhati Roy expatiated about the abuses against women during the post-
Godhra riots, which turned out to be nonexistent and recently she had the nerve to demand the complete withdrawal of Indian troops from Kashmir. How
about demanding the complete withdrawal of terrorism from the region!
But for how long can lies last for? Recently, in the Best Bakery Case
in which the star witness Zahira Sheik accused a mob of 21 men of entering her family`s bakery and killing 14 people. It turns out that the ,best
Bakery Case was indeed a best fakery case, Sheik does not know who the real culprits were; she has changed her testimony about three times which
spells incredibility. Of course, Teesta Setalvad has a role to play in defending human "rights". It just so happens that last November Sheik admitted
that Setalvad had tutored her on what to say in court. Sheik also revealed that Setalvad had threatened to kill her if she did not say exactly what
Setalvad wanted her to. This is the "secularists" concept of human rights; so, now we have witnesses being taught to manufacture and recite untruths.
Unchallenged, "secularists" continue their manipulation games even outside of India. These U.S. based organizations such as Federation of
Indian Leftist (FOIL) Sabrang, Coalition Against Communalism (CAC), Indian Muslim Council of USA (IMC), Association of India`s development (AID),
Association of Indian Muslim of USA (AIM), Promise of India (POI), Federation of Indian-American Christian organization of North America (FIACONA),
and the newly formed coalition Against Genocide (CAG) have formed to fulfill their hate driven agenda of Hindu bashing. They write in meticulous
detail and hold seminars about topics like Gujarat riots and imaginary Christian persecutions. Terrorism in Kashmir, Christian militancy in the
northeast, literal annihilation of the Hindu population in Bangladesh and Pakistan, and the perpetual massacres of Hindus is never a cause of worry
for them.
So as one would expect, in 2003 U.S. based organizations Sabrang and (Foil) released what they called a fact finding report on the
funding of so-called Hindu fundamentalist groups in India after the Gujarat earthquake by a charitable organization India Development and Relief Fund
(IDRF). These recipient organizations that were targeted by Sabrang/Foil were namely VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS, and Ekal Vidyalaya (Single teacher
schools) which were all accused of fomenting communal hatred; strange that at least IDRF does not fund organizations that engage in killing innocent
people, indulge in fraud conversions, or pose a threat to the nation`s security and integrity but the organizations that actually fund hate are free
to do what they please.
The Sabrang/Foil allegations according to the rejoinder titled A Factual Response to the, hate Attack on the India
Development and Relief Fund are false because the material in question was cited from biased sources, and taken from websites and manipulated to fit
a longtime campaign of calumniation of Hindu groups by the propaganda agenda of Sabrang/Foil. IDRF was also accused of funding sangh programs whose
supposed agenda is Hinduization of tribals, and what about the less than benefic agenda of Christianization or Islamization, all of which is being
completely elided. But what is not false is the simple fact that the Kashmiri terrorists get support from across the Islamic world and much of the
weapons used by the Christian militancy in the northeast are by in large funded by Churches especially of the Baptist denomination here in the U.S.
The motive is all too obvious, this was purely a diversionary tactic so the needy won`t get help and at the same time once again the world realizes
how the "poor" minority is in great peril. Improving lives is not even a priority on these people`s list of evils, but it is to obstruct India`s
development in any way possible. These orgs have strongly opposed India`s acquisition of nuclear weapons, arguing that this move further endangers
the Islamic world which already faces an ostensible threat from Israel. Not a word was uttered when Pakistan also acquired nuclear weapons. It is
never the security of India, of Hindus but the security of Muslims whose thirst has ‘till not been quenched by the taking of hundreds of thousands of
lives.
In March, Coalition Against Genocide and Indian Muslim Council of USA claimed to have pressured the U.S. State department to deny Mr.
Modi a visa. It is disturbing that with a law oriented maxim of (innocent till proven guilty), our government would yield to such allegations by
dubious organizations. Modi has not been indicted let alone convicted by an Indian or the international court. Uscirf`s International Religious
Freedom Act (IRFA) was used to justify this unjust action by the U.S. government; the act states that any government official who engages in
violation of religious freedom in his/her nation, is ineligible for a U.S. visa. It is odd that this act was in existence for seven years but was
used for the first time in March; there were countless occasions where it could have been applied. For instance, in the case of any government
official from Bangladesh, Pakistan, or China would all fit in to this category of the act the secularists never make a sound when the terrorist
President of Pakistan comes to the U.S. This is also yet another manifestation of the U.S. human rights organizations proclivity to be pro-Christian
no matter what the situation is. The neo-conservatives that have grown more powerful with Bush`s reelection probably could not stand the fact that
the chief minister opposed conversions and took appropriate measures to neutralize them in his state. (Justice for all, appeasement of none).
Along with distorting, manufacturing, and ignoring facts, another problem in India is minority appeasement. Now, any democratic country that
indulges in placating any section of the population based on religion can not be considered secular in its actual sense. Last year when the Indian
government foolishly repealed the Prevention of Terrorism (POTA), it clearly wanted to please the minorities, and it is just one example of the
secularist`s way of justice. The U.S. government will never discard the Patriot Act simply because a section of the minority population feels that it
is being unfairly discriminated against. The question, who is responsible for most of the terrorist activity around the globe, is not an esoteric one
at all.
Another example is, after the death of Pope John Paul 2 in March, the Indian government declared three days of official mourning.
Mourning for the head of an institution (Catholic Church) that refused to apologize for the Goa inquisition that was responsible for the death of
more than 100,000 people! In a predominantly Hindu nation, three days of official mourning were declared, when in countries such as Ireland, and
France did not declare even a single day of mourning.
A couple of months ago Andra Pradesh government announced five percent reservations in
education and employment for Muslims. What’s more is that about a month this same government also was willing to grant Muslims five percent
reservations in political representation. These activities are clearly antipodal to the true ideals of secularism. How many Islamic countries accord
Hindus reservations in living a fear-free life let alone in political representation, education, or employment? In Saudi Arabia Indians were warned
against carrying religious scriptures to the country.
While churches across the country have acres and acres of lands, the Communist Party of
India (CPI) demands that Hindus give up their temple lands to the poor. Of course the needy should be taken care of, but with land that belongs to
the Hindus? Another classic example of appeasement! These communists will not dare demand lands from any other religious community. So, this overview
evinces only a fraction of how a concept that should serve as equipoise between different religious communities, has been permanently turned in to a
deleterious situation for a society that had given a warm welcome to all humanity that came to its shores.
It is truly astonishing that
people who make claims and then are proven wrong, people who display flagrant disregard for facts, people who willfully distort information, and
people who indulge in appeasement to ensure their own political success, are held in high esteem, and with the slightest incidents, are consulted for
answers they obviously do not have.
Now, the way to stop or greatly reduce this propaganda networks damaging affect depends on what options
are employed; the best option is to create awareness among the masses, and that is the single most powerful counteraction that will actually work.
Awareness, in the sense that educational/informational seminars should be held both inside and outside of India. The second part to awareness is a
media outlet where events and viewpoints are analyzed objectively. Only then can the "secularists" and their anti-Hindu, anti-Indian cabal be
defeated at the intellectual level which is probably the most consequential level. For example, to counter American hegemony, a few Latin American
countries have united and have come up with a television channel whose primary goal is to air the Latin American perspective. The Hindus would do
well to emulate this noble example. Of course it will take some hard work and a fairly long time but the eventual outcome will surely be
rewarding.
Offensive Verses in Hinduism?
We, Hindus have done so much harm to this world and humanity. In the past, we have spared Mughal kings and kissed British
bum and in the modern time, we have killed eachother. Therefore, we owe a big apology to humanity. These things are true.
However,
by judging the actions of Hindus, you cannot really conclude anything about Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma. The Hindus are not the perfect followers of
Sanatana Dharma. If they were, then today the world would have been a much better place.
The concept of Sanatana Dharma is that the nature
(God) always exists and it can never be destroyed. Nature is composed of universe(s), galaxies, planets, organisms and everything else. We, all
humans are also part of this nature but not separated from it. Therefore, if something goes wrong in the nature, we will be affected. It is our duty
to preserve the nature and life for the sake of the betterment of ourselves. Therefore, killing a non-Hindu or a female will affect us because being
a Hindu does not make you different than a non-Hindu. The concept of Sanatana Dharma is pretty broad and cannot be explained in a few lines. This
concept of Sanatana Dharma came up in Gita. The Lord Krishna, specifically told us to give up desire and work for the betterment of humanity and
nature. In the seventh chapter, twentieth verse, He said, “Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and
follow particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures.” However, praying to demigods is actually famous among Hindus.
Therefore, Hindus are not following the true essence of Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma.
The closest to essence of Sanatana Dharma, are the
followers of ISCKON. Therefore, if you have talked to them, then you might have noticed their
peaceful approach towards life and spirituality.
Some people have pointed out some offensive verses in the Vedas such the verse encouraging
Sati Daho, caste system, and discrimination against women. I do not know if these verses really existed in any version of the Vedas. However, I can
assure that these verses never existed in the first version of the Vedas that were written more than 5000 years ago. The reason is because, Hinduism
has always been a religion, which does not care anything about materialistic desire. Its ultimate goal is to create a spiritualistic behaviour among
people. However, these verses are talking about human pleasure and looking down at women for the sake of sexual and spiritual (in the case of Sati
Daho) pleasure. The Vedas has been changed so many times after it first came out. The Lord Krishna says in Gita that He at first told the Vedas to
Manu and then he told other people and then those people taught the normal people. Therefore, the Lord Krishna says that the Vedas have been changed
so many times and were corrupted. That’s why He told Arjuna about the true teachings of life. From the teachings of the Lord Krishna, the Gita was
composed. Therefore, Gita is the latest and purest form of book for the teachings of human life according to Sanatana Dharma. Mahatma Gandhi once
said, “When doubts haunt me, when disappointments stare me in the face, and I see not one ray of hope on the horizon, I turn to Bhagavad-Gita and
find a verse to comfort me; and I immediately begin to smile in the midst of overwhelming sorrow. Those who meditate on the Gita will derive fresh
joy and new meanings from it every day.”
However, slowly the Hindus started becoming really greedy. Concepts such as, “Ghi-vaat-er jonno parle
shob kicho beekree kore daao.” (“Sell everything if you can for the sake of good foods) came up. Therefore, pleasure started to become an important
concept of the life. As a result, people started to change the Vedas for the sake of own pleasure. Around that time, many offensive verses such as
burning women, the concept of looking down at the Sudras etc came up. In Gita, not in a single place, it talks about pleasure, sex, burning women,
killing Sudras etc. Therefore, it proves that Hindus have changed the Vedas for the sake of their own goal or ambition.
In addition, if you
have read Hindu scriptures, then you might have noticed that sex is never important in the life of Lord Krishna. However, we talk about the love epic
of Radha-Krishna. This is actually one of those pleasure oriented made up extensions of Hindus during the old times. Krishna had only one wife, which
is Rukshini and no one else. Krishna even at the end of his life destroyed all his descendents because these people will destroy the world using
their pride for being descendents of the Lord. Therefore, having a family or having sex is never encouraged among through Krishna’s
life.
Let’s see how Hinduism gives respect to women.
In Gita it says, “Mother and motherland is greater than the heaven.” Do you think
the same Hinduism talked about burning women????
In Ramayana, the Lord Rama vigorously disrespected Sita when He asked her to take “Agni-
Porikhha” twice. It was in Ramayana to prove that “perfect” people like the Lord Rama can also make mistakes and we are all discouraged from doing
the same mistakes in our lives. Anyways, this mistake of Lord Rama is actually the reason of his downfall. His sons didn’t know about their father
and therefore, attacked Rama’s soldiers.
In Mahavarata, one of the reasons of the downfall of Kurus are that they tried to disrespect Droupadi. In addition, after the war of Kurukshetra, the wife of Dhritarashtra (father of Kurus) cursed Krishna by saying that all of His descendents will be destroyed. As mentioned
earlier, the Lord Krishna at the end of his life destroyed all of his descendents. Therefore, it proves that the curse of a sad mother can even
destroy the power of the heaven!!!
Some intellectuals such Ms. Mehta and others talked about how Hindu women are being mistreated now for
dowry and others. I actually agree with them. Adding more with their accusations, we have also seen how other Hindu women are mistreating the widows.
They have this misconception that the widows might take their husbands away from them. This is actually part of South-Asian culture. Even in
Bangladesh, the Muslim women in villages are tortured because of dowry. You cannot possibly blame Islam for it because it’s part of the culture and
the culture needs to change.
Another thing that’s important in Hinduism is the cycle of change and we, Hindus have to change and give equal
rights to our women.
I hope you can understand that these offensive verses are not part of the true essence of Hinduism but some Hindus, who
believe in pleasure.
I am not really a Hindu fundamentalist. I am a normal Hindu trying to follow the essence of Hinduism through the essence
of Gita and the teachings of Lord Krishna. I find sticking to religion helps me to improve my moral and increase my confidence in my everyday life.
Therefore, I have tried to explain some essence of Hinduism. However, I do agree with you that we need to provide the women with equal rights no
matter what their religions are. We also need to understand the fact that we Hindus have done so much harm to the nature (which is totally against
the values of Sanatana Dharma described by the Lord Krishna in Gita) and we need to apologize for it.
- a Bangladeshi Hindu
Origin of the Aryan Invasion Myth
Friedrich Max Mullen [1823-1900] was a German professor of Modern European Languages and Comparative Theology. Earlier discoveries of the Indo-
European language had lead him to further speculation.
He believed in Biblical chronology, which placed the dawn of Earth, around 4000 BCE. Later, based
on his Indo-European discoveries he defined “Henotheism”, which means monotheistic in principle and polytheistic in fact. He has coined the word
“Aryan” to describe the people of Indo-European language. “Aryan” comes from the Sanskrit word “Arya” which can be translated into English as “noble”
“priestly” or “lord”. The usage was applied to a racial and linguistic group when propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself
refuted his own theory.
“I have declared again and again that if I say Aryans, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair nor
skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language… To me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great
a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammer.”
- Friedrich Max Mullen
Perfection explained through science
We always hear about the term about being perfect. However,
people have different perceptions about this perfection. Some people think as long as you have a strong belief on God, you are perfect. Some people
think if you are good at your studies you are perfect. However, most probably the best viewed perception of human perfection is the shape of the
body. Even though there are so many definitions of perfections among human minds, everyone wants to achieve his/her own perfection.
However,
my point is that human perfection is not possible. Human perfection is like an ideal situation, which cannot exist. We always need to differentiate
the ideal situation and real situation. Ideal situation is a situation created by the scientists to test their theories. In an ideal situation, the
scientists just concentrate only a few variables to create a situation. Here are some examples of ideal situation vs real situation
In an
ideal situation, if we throw a man out of an aircraft, his acceleration due to gravity will always 9.8 m/(s.s). However, in a real situation, it
would be different because air resistance and other factors will effect the acceleration. In real life, the acceleration due to gravity in this
situation can be anything. It is rather a random quantity.
According to Hooke's Law of ideal Spring, F=kx. Here F is the magnitude of the
spring force, K is the force constant and x is the distance in meter the string compresse/stretched. In an ideal situation, this equation holds
because there would be straight line relationship between the force, F and distance, x. However, in a real situation after a certain amount of force
is exerted, the spring will break down and this equation will become invalid. I mean it is obvious that the length of the spring can not have an
infinity value. However, it does have an infinity value for an ideal spring. Therefore, the ideal situation here is perfect.
In an ideal
situation randomness cannot exist. The reason is because in an ideal situation, you are just concentrating on some variables while ignoring the
others to make your theory works as mentioned earlier. For instance, in a real situation, we all know that flipping coins will give us random
results. However what does it mean to get random results? It does not mean H or T appears because of no reason. It appears because of the angle you
threw your coin up, the energy you used to do so, air resistance etc variables contributed. There is a reason behind each and every action of this
universe. In an ideal situation, randomness cannot exist. The reason is because you can do the flipping coin experiment with perfection by using
identical situations to always get a certain result. Therefore, randomness dissapears. However, in a real situation, so many things contribute that
it seems like randomness. Randomness is rather combination of many reasons that come together. Therefore, it seems like randomness.
In a
similar way, human perfection is an ideal situation. We cannot acheive perfection because there are so many variable involved in real life. It's just
an ideal situation and there is no point to hunting for perfection because it only exists in the pages of books and human minds. Just like ideal
situation is important for scientists to construct theories, the idea of perfection is important to achieve higher morality in lifestyle. However, we
should keep in mind that it is just an idea not a real life situation.
The Non-violent Destruction of Akhand Bharat part I
"If you come, with you, “if you don't, without you; and if you oppose,
in spite of you—the Hindus will continue to fight for their
national freedom as best as they can." - Vinayak Damodar Savarkar
"However pure Mr. Gandhi"s character may be, he must appear to
me, from the point of religion, inferior to any Mussalman even though he be without character." - Maulana Mohammed Ali
"I do regard
Islam to be a religion of peace in the same sense as Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism are." - Mohandas Karamkhand Gandhi
"We have
heard Muslim leaders declare that if the Afghans invaded India, they would join their fellow-believers, and would slay the Hindus who defended their
motherland against the foe; we have been forced to see that the primary allegiance of Mussalmans is to Islamic countries, not to our motherland." - Annie Besant
Delving in to the pages of primeval history, we observe that it is replete with the theory of primordially, which postulates that
people will invariably remain the way they are due to the repeated actions of their past. Their attitudes towards each other are influenced by a
prescribed and rigidly controlled edict that has given its followers a sense of identity, and an unchanging worldview. When expounding on religion
and aspirations of a group of people, this theory gives way to constructivism, which claims that there is a definite hand of humans in ensuring
actions of other humans. After all, monotheistic cults have been created by psychopathic individuals with an over inflated ego, and not because these
individuals received any kind of divine message for the betterment of the world. Therefore, one is compelled to conclude that monotheistic faiths,
that have been constructed and fueled by self-seeking humans, are responsible for much of the gory actions of the past rather than the innate nature
of mankind. For instance: the Romans, due to the instigations by the emperors, did not stop quarreling among themselves to prevent the formation and
solidification of a Christian empire, the Spaniards did not abandon their inhumane ways to live amicably with the native American population in the
hope of discovering new lands, and the Muslims did not miss out on a chance to extirpate Hindu property and to maraud innocent people, just because
Bharat aspired to becoming an independent nation.
Background Analysis
On August 15th, 1947, Bharat gained independence from the
British. This “propitious” day is celebrated with much fanfare. But there is another less celebratory fact and that is Bharat was vivisected
forcefully by the silent consent of people who put themselves in positions of protecting the Hindu homeland, but who in the end cowardly surrendered
one-third of the territory to Islam. Something went terribly wrong somewhere, and with the right kind of maneuvering and the right amount of
concessions, the Congress came in to power to reek havoc on the Indian polity with its brand of secularism which is In full force even
today.
“A strategy based on self-deception, stands defeated from the very start”. It is interesting when the secular polymaths professing to
know all the answers to the historical communal problems that lead to partition, quickly point the finger of blame to British ploys and later to
Hindu communalism of the Hindu Mahasabha. But they will never part with the notion they so dearly cherish,, i.e. the British created the rift between
Hindus and Muslims. The message we get from this specious reasoning is that, Hindus and Muslims were the best of neighbors before the wily British
came around. This is false and misleading; the uncouth invaders who were unquestionably pious Muslims had never made it a priority to befriend the
Kafirs of Bharat, instead they had expressly come to efface paganism altogether. The fact is that separatism is as intrinsic and fundamental to
Islam, as an adhyatmik quest for eternal Satya is to Sanatan Dharm. Of course, like smart opportunists, the British did their part by exacerbating
the already existing grave ideological disparities between Hindus and Muslims by offering Muslims favors to keep them aloof from the freedom
struggle. This entailed offering well-placed jobs, favoring Urdu over Hindi, ignoring the Hindus demand for a ban on cow slaughter, granting special
rights under the pretext of minority protection, and encouraging the already inherent separatist proclivities with the prospect of a separate Muslim
state. We can sum up British attitude as: (divide and rule). As far as Hindu communalism being the culprit is concerned, there was no movement to
divide Bharat, no question of surrendering territory to Islam, and there was certainly no concerted effort to appease one community at the expense of
another.
The Muslim League also played its part by fomenting hatred and violence and overtly indulged in direct action also known as the
Great Calcutta Killings which left thousands of Hindus dead or homeless. The Muslim League never truly supported the freedom struggle; the Hindus
were its main enemies, not the British. The riots that took place in late 1946 and early 1947 could have been avoided. And, of course, before this
tragedy, the Muslim League had been making absurd demands.
So, is there another more subtle but equally important factor that tipped the
scales towards an ineluctable vivisection of the Hindu homeland? Yes. That factor is Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and the Indian National Congress.
Now, it would be completely unfair and an insult to the memory of Gandhiji to say that his contributions were negligible. He had extraordinary appeal
to the hoi-polloi, he transmuted the freedom-movement in to a mass-movement, and the idea of Swadeshi revolutionized the way the Bharatiya people
viewed the British Empire from an economic perspective. In order to defeat Britain, Bharat would have to establish economic self-reliance, and Gandhi
understood that very well. Gandhi’s principle of non-violence has influenced many personalities such as Martin Luther King Jr. in the fight for civil
liberties for the Black community, and Nelson Mandela’s struggle to rid South Africa of apartheid.
It would also be pure exaggeration to claim
that Gandhi and the Congress were not honestly for a united Bharat. But the truth is, the national leadership simply could not expect a community
whose essential belief is to eliminate Dar-ul-harb land of (infidels), and to establish Dar-ul-Islam to constructively participate in an essentially
pagan nation’s aspiration for freedom. Gandhi’s distorted knowledge of the Quran and its anti-humanity message was a major factor that determined
Bharat’s blood-soaked fate. In two parts, this essay attempts to explain a series of avoidable blunders made in the hope of achieving unity with the
Muslims which left Bharat bleeding, its Hindu population fleeing from death and destruction, and the leaders silently and heartlessly watching their
mistakes burgeon but too proud to admit that they indeed were wrong for entertaining even the slightest possibility that Muslims would abandon their
slake for Hindu blood.
After the first war of independence of 1857, the British realized that they would have to grant India a level of
limited autonomy. So, in 1885, the Indian National Congress was formed by a British civil servant with the objective of granting Indians some rights
at the local and even state level, but to have central British rule continued unhindered. The Congress eventually split in to distinct ideological
camps. The moderates: were the ones who believed that if they complied with the British authorities and worked on expanding the meager reforms
offered, it would sooner or later lead to freedom. The extremists believed in a less forbearing method; they asserted that freedom could only be
achieved through conventional violence. Patriots such as: Bipin Chandra Pal, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Orobindo Ghose, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the
Chafekar brothers, Kudiram Bose, Madanlal Dhingra, Dadabhai Naoroji, Lala Hardayal, Rash Behari Bose, Udham Singh, Shiam Krishna Verma, Sarat Chandra
Chatargee, Virendranath Chatopadhyaya, Ulhaskar Datta, Bhagat Singh, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat rai and later Subhash Chandra Bose who took an
invigorating initiative by infusing national pride in the populous and created an exhilarating ambience of infectious aspiration for complete
Svarajya.
It wasn’t until 1914 when Gandhi was excommunicated from South-Africa. Upon reaching Bharat, he immediately plunged in to political
life. The struggle for freedom however, was begun much earlier by more assertive and discerning revolutionaries. It was only during Gandhi’s reign
that the concept of Satyagraha (civil disobedience) was formulated and put in to practice, and that is when the placation method commenced
culminating in an event drenched in so much blood that it can only be likened to the Holocaust.
Separate Electorates: a Solution?
Although Lord Dufferon the Viceroy of India in 1888 was the first to spur Muslim separatism by suggesting separate electorates and
communal representation, which became an unfortunate reality with the introduction of the Moorley-Minto reforms, the Congress too, quietly accepted
the terms of the Lucknow Pact conceived at its 31st session on December 29th 1916, and later agreed upon by the All India Muslim League on the 31st.
After the unsuccessful partition of Bengal in 1905, a tactic initiated by the governor General Lord Curzon, and its annulment in 1911, the Muslims
wanted some kind of special perquisites because of their supposed delicate position in the Indian polity. Muhammad Ali Jinnah although still
belonging to the Congress, was the chief architect for cementing one outrageous and destructive demand after another eventually precipitating to the
partition. The pact’s main clauses were increased self-government for Indians at the provincial and central level, and more sinisterly the granting
of separate electorates and communal representation to the Muslims. One of the first seeds of certainty that Akhand Bharat would no longer exist as
concrete reality had been sowed. Muslims did not have to fear the Hindus at all, because the provinces in which the Muslims were a minority, weight
ages were granted to them. This was a gargantuan mistake fore a united nation having separate electorates for each community is unheard of and
usually spells doom as far as harmony between different religious groups is concerned. How can a section of the population that is allowed special
treatment in such a blatant and partisan way be loyal to a state whose very political mechanism it is being divided against? The Lucknow pact not
only sanctioned the intrinsic separatism of Islam, but it also let loose a juggernaut of increasingly irrational Muslim demands, that made it
impossible for Gandhi and the Indian National Congress to refuse.
In Punjab Muslims were to represent as much as One-half of the electorate!
In Bombay One-third, in Madras 15 percent, in the central provinces 15 percent, in bihar 25 percent, and in Bengal 40 percent. In 1918, placating the
implacable went further, the communal representation was expanded to include Muslims not just in the legislative and local bodies but also spread to
the cabinet. The Montague Chelmsford reforms which were devised by Mr. Edwin Montague the secretary of state for India and the Viceroy Lord
Chelmsford, lead to the Government of India act in 1919. Here, communal representation was increased, especially in Bengal where Muslims got more
than what had been surrendered by the Lucknow Pact. The craven attitude of kowtowing to Muslims by surrendering vital issues that the Congress
adopted did not help Bharat to move towards a self-governing eventuality; rather it emboldened certain minorities to look out for their self-serving
and partisan interests instead of being collective citizens. There was more to come.
Khilafat Agitation = Mopla Rebellion
Turkey
was expeditiously becoming a secular state, and the Sultan of Turkey or the Khillifa was losing power. The Khilafat was an extra-territorial pan-
Islamic movement that sought to align Muslims with Turkey. This movement had nothing to do with Svarajya, but it was a detriment to Bharat; the
Hindus would not gain anything at all by assisting the Muslims. In a last bid to preserve Muslim domination, the Muslim League invited the Congress
to join in the Khilafat agitation in its meet in December 1919. Gandhi was positively elated at the prospect of Hindu and Muslims amalgamating to
achieve the “primary” goal, Svarajya. He was deluded however. The Congress also lent its support to the Khilafat movement and from 1919 to 1921,
precious time was squandered to expedite an impracticable and anti-national cause. Arvind Lavakare, a Rediff columnist, in an article titled Of
Sabarmati secularism & non-violence, quotes Gandhi from VB Kolcarni’s book “India and Pakistan”, as saying: "If the Hindus wish to cultivate
eternal friendship with Mussalmans, they must perish with them in the attempt to vindicate the honor of Islam." It is worth asseverating that when
the secularists hurl vituperations at the Hindutva parties for mixing religion with politics, they would do well to remember that it was the “Father
of the Nation” who began the deleterious practice.
The leaders of the Khilafat agitation in India were Maulana Mohammed Ali and Maulana
Shaukat Ali also known as the Ali brothers. Gandhiji of course, showered encomiums upon the Ali brothers, forgetting that not only was Khilafat
Andolan far removed from the goals of independence, butt was also a violent movement that sought to bring the entire world under the aegis of Islam.
Gandhi thought that he could intricately intertwine the non-cooperation movement, which he started in support of the Khilafat, with Islam’s desire to
rule Bharat once again. The two movements were diametrically opposed to each other.
It is indubitable that Gandhi did not fully understand the
implications or repercussions of what he was doing, or that what he was trying to accomplish, i.e. (Hindu-Muslim unity), could not be achieved as
long as Islam retained its fundamentals of inequity between the believer and the “unbeliever”. In a book titled: “Pakistan, or, the Partition of
India”, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar perspicuously elucidates the irrational positions that the Congress and Gandhiji adopted in order to defend their formula
of Hindu-Muslim unity. For instance: they had no qualms about defending a violent movement that without any doubt was against Ahimsa. The author
states, that when the Hindus expressed their doubts about supporting the Khilafat on the grounds that:
The Muslims would never support a ban
on cow slaughter. There was a good possibility that the Amir of Afghanistan might invade bharat. Finally, the main concern was Muslims might gain
political dominance over the Hindus.
But Gandhiji had explanations for all these valid concerns. For the issue of cow slaughter, he advised
the Hindus to assist the Muslims without placing any conditions in supporting the Khilafat (Ambedkar 109). Regarding concerns over the Amir’s
invasion of Bharat, Gandhi informed his faithful followers that he would certainly assist the Amir of Afghanistan if he were to wage war against the
British (109). In short, this statement was a clear endorsement of the invasion of Bharat. Finally, regarding the possibility of the potential for
political dominance of the Muslims, he simply said that the Hindus were right to raise these concerns, but the Muslim position was irresistible. He
suavely asserted: “If I deem the Mahomedan to be my brother, it is my duty to help him in his hour of peril to the best of my ability, if his cause
commends itself to me as just (110).” So, supporting Khillifat movement was just? But was it not the complete antithesis of what Gandhi’s non-
violence was all about? Ambedkar further evinces how Gandhi not only lent his support to the Khilafatists but was also their one and only
enthusiastic Hindu guide. In a fruitless attempt to win eternal friendship with the Muslims, Gandhi forgot the real goal of the Bharatiya people
which was to win freedom.
Another blunder that Gandhi made was like all things, he over-emphasized Ahimsa, and the Chauri Chaura incident was
no exception. When the enraged mob burned down the police station after being provoked by passing constables, Gandhi hurriedly withdrew the non-
cooperation movement. This incident was relatively minor compared to some of the sanguinary history and more grim incidents that would occur in the
near future. In short, Chauri Chaura did not merit a cancellation of a movement whose aim was freedom, and not allegiance to a gross
misinterpretation of Ahimsa.
The Khilafat agitation failed and the Khilifa in far off Turkey was defeated. Furious at being thwarted by the
British regime in the attempt to reestablish the Khilafat, the Muslims vented their anger on the Hindus of Malabar. Thousands of Hindus were killed,
their property looted, women raped, and many more were forcibly converted to Islam. British troops were called to quell the unprecedented bloodshed.
Gandhi also called an immediate halt of hostilities, against the Hindus? No. Gandhi wanted the British troops to suspend hostilities against the
Moplas! As proof of Gandhi’s and Congress’s soft-corner for Muslim intransigence and barbarism, Dr. Ambedkar presents the resolution passed by the
Congress Working Committee (CWC), which claimed that, the reports published on behalf of the government were very one-sided and exaggerated accounts
of Mopla enormities against the Hindus. The resolution was very carefully worded, so as not to hurt Muslim sentiments. The CWC still urged the
Khilafatists to adopt the message of non-violence; if the CWC and other national leaders had bothered to study Islamic theology, they would have
known that non-violence against the infidels did not figure in the Quranic vocabulary. The CWC was blissfully incognizant of the seriousness of the
attacks on Hindus, or, perhaps, if such enormities were acknowledged, then that would patently suggest that the Muslims were at fault. For the sake
of Hindu-Muslim unity, no atrocity against Hindus could even be alluded to, let alone acknowledged. Another interesting instance cited by Dr.
Ambedkar is the CWC’s reaction to the massive bloodshed. While mildly condemning the pernicious actions of moplas, the congress asserted that the
blood of the Hindus had been spilled due to provocation. This was pure and unadulterated casuistry, because there was no provocation by the British
government or the Hindus. Today, going by the logic that the Congress employed during the Mopla massacres, we can safely conclude that the post-
Godhra incident is also pure exaggeration, just as the enormities committed by the Moplas were one-sided and exaggerated. The Muslims and their
Mullahs and Maulvis think of it as a divine right to slaughter the Kafirs (unbelievers). It is not difficult at all to locate the Quranic Ayats from
which this divine inspiration to eliminate Kafirs came from. But Gandhiji did not like to face reality, instead he clinched the matter by saying,
"They are brave and god-fearing people who were fighting for what they consider as religion, and in a manner which they consider as religious.”
Although the forcible conversions and assaults on Hindus of Malabar were widespread, Gandhi and the Congress were mum on the matter. It is
time to question the whole idea of Gandhi’s version of Ahimsa, which becomes glaringly patent even in an early stage of this essay that it was
applied selectively, and was reserved exclusively for the Hindus. Gandhi was no specialist in Islamic theology, and therefore did not realize that
the sudden interest in defeating the British patrons was simply fugacious, and had ulterior pan-Islamic motives.
However, not everyone had
fallen victim to Gandhiji’s sophistic logic, and Dr. Annie Beasant was certainly not impressed by the slogan of "Ishwar Allah Tere Naam". In a report
titled: Malabar’s Agony that appeared in New India on November 29, 1921, she criticized the stance of Gandhi on the plight of the Hindus of Malabar.
She rightfully claimed that the predictable outcome was due to Gandhi’s impolitic idea of supporting the Khilafat movement, and mixing it up with
non-cooperation. Dr. Beasant described the sufferings of the Malabar men, women, and children At the hands of the “God fearing” Moplas. For instance:
the report sites an instance where a Muslim asked the Doctor if he would live, when the answer was in the negative, the Mopla’s reply was: "Well, I"m
glad that I killed fourteen infidels", but of course this was the true and righteous Mopla spirit and religion according to Gandhi.
Despite
these sharp observations recorded by Dr. Beasant, and the report by the British government, the CWC put the number of forcible conversions at only
three. The Moplas did not hesitate even a second to slay innocent Hindus, and Gandhi’s attitude vis-à-vis the Moplas reflected anything but
condemnation for the savage acts sanctioned by Islam.
More Fruits of Hindu-Muslim Unity
In spite of Gandhi’s tireless efforts
to encourage the so-called nationalist Muslims to participate constructively in the national struggle, nothing was achieved as far as Hindu interests
were concerned. Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, there were ferocious riots that claimed a high loss of life. These riots were usually started under
pretexts such as: a Muslim holiday, around a mosque, or over Hindu religious processions passing through Muslim dominated neighborhoods. The book
“Pakistan, or the Partition of India” further clarifies Gandhi’s hazardous obsession with Hindu-Muslim unity. In 1924, Gandhi fasted for 21 days to
bring about unity among Hindus and Muslims; this fast was taken under the roof of a Muslim house (233). The fast produced unity conferences, which,
were superficial and ephemeral to say the least. There was heavy rioting from 1924 to 1926. As Bharat’s struggle for achieving freedom unfolded, so
did the results of Gandhi’s misguided and stubborn policies.
The Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dayananda Saraswati, was proactive in removing
untouchability, promoting widow remarriage, denouncing animal sacrifice, discouraging Sati (widow immolation), and most crucially, the founder of
this pioneering reformist organization actually bothered to examine Islamic dogma and was one of the few Hindu revivalists to recognize the cult for
what it really is. But of course, this novel and liberating approach did not stand a chance, when Gandhiji and the Congress were so busy overdosing
the Hindu Samaj with otiose “all religions are equally true" slogans.
The Arya Samaj was also active in the Shuddhi program started by Swami
Shraddhananda that sought to bring the alienated Muslims and Christians back to the Hindu fold. This movement gained tremendous popularity in the
early 1900s, and at the same time Mullahs began to denounce this movement and openly called for the elimination of Swami Shraddhananda. The call was
taken up by one Abdul Rashid, a Muslim youth who assassinated the Swami in his sick bed. Rashid was hanged for his untenable crime, but the Muslim
community treated him as a martyr. Gandhi as usual went a step further, and pronounced that he considered Abdul Rashid to be a brother.
From
1926-1930, several prominent Hindu leaders were killed or severely injured, and the death toll from rioting also rose exponentially. The Muslim
community defended these acts by simply asserting that the Quranic law sanctioned the killings of Kafirs. The Congress under the leadership of
Gandhi, did not condemn Muslim aggression; no protestation at all was expected from the Muslim leaders.
In 1927, the Simon Commission was set
up to monitor and proffer suggestions regarding the constitution, the Muslims quickly rushed forth with yet another set of intemperate demands, which
entailed: autonomy for all provinces, central legislature to constitute one-third Muslim representation, more safeguards for Islamic personal law,
culture, and religion, raising the North-West Frontier Provinces and Baluchistan to the status of self-governing provinces, weakened authority of the
central government, and the separation of Sind from the Bombay presidency. Ironically, along with the Hindus, the Simon Commission also opposed the
importunities, but when push came to shove, the British gave in and each of the desires was fulfilled.
Thus far we have observed an abysmal
pattern of: the Muslims make a demand, the Congress and Gandhi rise magnificently to meet that demand, which is then ensued by sanguinary acts by the
Muslims. Was this constant surrender necessary, was it called for? Gandhi frequently invoked the Bhagavad-Gita as his divine inspiration. Although
the Bhagavad-Gita does focus on Ahimsa as a virtue to be emulated, however it does not put a premium on the aggressor’s excesses regarding morality.
Shri-krishna urges Arjun to fight; he does not advise the Pandavs to lay down their arms and lead a protest against the outrages of the Kauravs.
In the English translation of the Bhagavad-Gita by A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami, Shri-Krishn asserted that Arjun should perform his duty as a
Kshatriya, and advises Arjun not to hesitate in defending Dharm against Adharm. ShriKrishn further affirms: “Do thou fight for the sake of fighting,
without considering happiness or distress, loss or gain, victory or defeat -- and by so doing you shall never incur Sin”. Simply from a few verses of
the Gita, we can patently observe that it’s essential meaning is not full surrender to the forces of evil, but rather it is a call to defeat this
evil, first by dialogue, than if necessary by force.. Ahimsa does play a prominent role in dissuading the enemy from their unjust deeds, but the Gita
does not rule out all other alternatives. If Gandhi had really comprehended the clarion message, than he would not have spent all his time trying to
enlist Adharmic forces in support of Bharat’s independence, and that Adharmic force is Islam.
With separate elections firmly established, the
Mopla uprising being a success in once again terrorizing the Islam incognizant Hindu samaj in to making more concessions, and the subsequent street
riots playing an efficacious role, the Muslim League with each successive election became increasingly powerful. One sagacious step that Gandhi and
the Congress could have taken, was to join the Hindu Mahasabha to check the alarming growth of the Muslim League and its irrational demands. However,
as we have observed and will continue to observe, Gandhi had very little time or patience with anyone opposed to his scheme of Hindu-Muslim unity and
his distorted version of Ahimsa. Finally, we are left with the rhetorical question: if valorous Hindus like the Marathas, the Rajputs, the Sikhs, and
the Jats had followed Gandhi’s interpretation of the Bhagavad-Gita in dealing with Islamic invaders, would Bharat still be predominantly Hindu at
present?
|
|
