Pseudo-Secularism

Hindu dharma is implicitly at odds with monotheistic intolerance. What is happening in India is a new historical awakening... Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening.

Friday, June 30, 2006

Imam's Hateful Talk Hurts Hindus

By RON BANERJEE

Multicultural Canada is about to welcome British imam Sheik Riyadh ul Haq as a visitor so he can speak at a Toronto conference of Muslim youth this weekend. This Islamic cleric has made headlines for comments vilifying Jews and Hindus, among others, calling Hindus in particular the "chief idolators."

Islamist fanatics have used this type of reasoning to justify atrocities against Buddhists and Hindus through the ages. According to American historian William Durant, South Asia from 700 AD onwards suffered the worst genocide in history at the hands of Muslim invaders, with an estimated 80 million people slaughtered over seven centuries. This invasion was marked by the systematic destruction of an estimated 50,000 Hindu temples, as well as the enslavement and conversion of millions to Islam.

Conquerors used Hadith scripture, where Mohammed is quoted as saying that Allah shall protect the conquerors of India, as justification.

Clearly, unscrupulous usage of Koranic verses has been used to justify heinous acts. For example, Hindus use idols (as symbols) in worship; Islamic fanatics denounce this practice as "sinful idolatry" and use it to stir up hate.

Since 1947, the Islamic state of Pakistan has steadily reduced its Buddhist and Hindu minorities from 15% to less than 1% of the population. U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy in 1971 described the genocide of Hindus by Pakistani troops in East Pakistan: An estimated 2.4 million were slaughtered in one year.

Recently, Pakistan-backed Islamist terrorists in the Indian state of Kashmir have driven 400,000 Kashmiri Hindus into exile in refugee camps in other parts of India. This ethnic cleansing is being perpetrated by religious Islamic terrorist groups such as the LeT. These groups base their recruitment on Pakistani religious madrassas, where imams use scripture as a basis to stir anti-Hindu hate.

In Canada, news reports indicate that the 17 terrorist suspects arrested recently were allegedly using images of Hindu gods as target practice. In 1991, three members of the Pakistan-based group al-Fuqra were arrested while crossing from the U.S., allegedly planning to bomb Hindu temples in Toronto.

Hindus have been the community hardest hit by terrorism in Canada to date. Most of the casualties in the Air India terrorist bombing were Hindu. This attack, the worst in Canada's history, resulted in part from the indifference of Canadian authorities towards hate-spewing extremists entering the country.

The local Muslim community has asked for government funding to attempt to divert Canadian Muslim youth from the path of terrorism. It seems ironic that at the same time that this request is being made, Haq has been invited to address a youth conference hosted by the Islamic Foundation of Toronto.

As Canadians, we ought to consider whether we should allow Haq, who appears to support the same venomous ideology against Hindus that has historically inspired numerous atrocities, to enter our country. This should be viewed in the context of the record of oppression and genocide against Hindus in South Asia, past terrorist outrages against Hindus in Canada, as well as the current danger to Canadian Hindus.

Demolition of Hindu esteem

Sunita Vakil

Pakistan has again thrown the gauntlet at India by demolishing the only Hindu temple in Lahore. However, this was not the first instance of minority bashing in that single religion-based country. Minorities, especially Hindus, continue to be hounded in both Pakistan and Bangladesh. The latest atrocity is but one more example of religious persecution of this marginalised community in an Islamic nation.

Incredibly, the temple at Sarafa Bazaar in Lahore's Rang Mahal area was ordered to be demolished by the very civic body that is meant to protect the properties of minorities, namely, Pakistan's Evacuee Trust Property Board. The body also manages Sikh shrines in coordination with Pakistan Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee. Incidentally, this was not the first time that ETPB permitted the demolition of a temple. Last year, it had sanctioned the razing of a Hindu shrine at Vehari in Punjab. This indicates that the nefarious gameplan of targeting religious bastions of Hindus has the wholehearted approval of the Pakistan Government.

What is more puzzling is the fact that while there were massive demonstrations against the demolition of the disputed Babri Masjid, Gujarat riots and relocation of a Muslim shrine in Vadodara, no 'secular' party worth its name made even a whimper of protest when the Hindu shrine was razed in Pakistan.

Considering the Congress's obsession with Muslim vote-bank, on account of which it is granting them quotas and concessions on a platter, it would seem a waste of effort to comment on its endeavour of joining issues with Hindus. In fact, nothing can be expected of a party that cannot differentiate between secularism and minorityism.

The feedback from the Left has been similar. While the UPA's attitude is understandable, an inaction of the BJP on such issues is even more baffling. But across the border, while most Pakistani newspapers have criticised the demolition, there was no protest either from the political parties or the so-called secular media in this country.

There have been reports that the facts about the property were concealed from the authorities who had no inkling that they had given the go ahead for razing a temple in order to build a commercial complex. If this is true, the Pakistan Government should make all efforts to restore the Hindu shrine at the earliest.

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Reservation: Break casteist formula to save the nation

By M.V.Kamath

Both Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are very busy persons and may not have much time to read old documents and hence this respectful attempt to help them out.

First, may one point out to a paragraph in a circular to the presidents of all Pradesh Congress Committees issued by none else than Jawaharlal Nehru, on 26 May 1954? That paragraph said: “In particular, we must fight whole-heartedly against those narrow divisions which have grown up in our country in the name of caste, which weaken the unity, solidarity and progress of the country....” When the British Government sought to give separate electorates to the Scheduled Castes, Gandhi went on a hunger strike that is old history now which ended in the Poona Pact in 1932.

Some seven and a half decades later, on 6th September 1990 Rajiv Gandhi made a similar, though not as sensational, effort to promote national unity in a speech in parliament criticizing the Mandal Report, lasting, to his eternal credit, some two and a half hours, Rajiv Gandhi, like the Mahatma before him, was not opposed to enabling the Scheduled Castes, make progress in all fields.

Addressing the Lok Sabha he said: “If you believe in a casteless society, every major step you take must be such that you move towards a casteless society. And you must avoid taking any step which takes you to a caste-ridden society.

Unfortunately, the step that we are taking today (accepting the Mandal Report), the manner in which it has been put, is a casteist formula. While accepting that is a reality, we must dilute that formula and break that formula by adding something on to it”.

Attacking the then Janata Prime Minister V. P. Singh whom he charged with not having the guts to stand up and say whether he believes in a casteless society or not, Rajiv Gandhi said: “This government is creating a vested interest in casteism and the country is going to pay a very high price for it”.

The Mandal Commission had recommended that “with a view to give better representation to certain backward sections of Other Backward Castes (OBCs) like Gaddis in Himachal Pradesh. Neo- Buddhists in Maharashtra,fishermen in the coastal areas, Gujjars in Jammu & Kashmir, areas of their concentration “may be carved out into separate constituencies at the time of delimitation”.

An angry Rajiv Gandhi shot out: “Does the government subscribe to the Mandal Commission view that political constituencies should be carved out on a caste basis? Are we going back to the Round Table Conference for having separate electorates? That was designed to break our country, Sir”. Warming up in his address, Rajiv Gandhi said that “even at this late hour (and this was in 1990) there is time to pull the country back from this caste division....Ministers are provoking caste wars”.

Continuing, he said: “The Raja Saheb’s (V. P. Singh’s) statement doesnot command wide acceptance in the country. They (the Ministers) have weakened our national fabric and to add to that, the Central Government, the Ministers, have deliberately provoked the caste confrontation and caste wars....”. Rajiv Gandhi said that “an issue like reservation cannot be treated in a piecemeal manner. We must look at the whole picture.”

He quoted Mandal himself who had said that “the aim is to overcome historical and geographical handicaps, not to create new vested interests” and admitting that “the categorisationA of backward classes has always been difficult”.

The concept of “Other Backward Castes” has always been a joke. Attacking the Mandal Report, Rajiv Gandhi has said: “I know for a fact that Reddys are included, Vakkaligas are included,Kammas are included, Lingayats are included, Gounders are included, Chettiyars are included.

Are these Backward Castes? Do they need help?” Mr Chidambaram was not around then but were he there, he would no doubt have had a good laugh.He would properly have been described as belonging to the OBCs.

Asked Rajiv Gandhi : “On what basis has the Mandal Commission defined caste? How has the Mandal Commission reinterpreted the Constitution and changed Backward Classes to Backward Caste?”

Rajiv Gandhi noted even the Mandal Commission Report had noted that of those whose views were sought on the reservation issue, only 28 per cent of the respondents favoured caste as the sole criterion and that nearly 70 per cent were in favour of evolving “multiple criteria based on social status, political influences, educational attainments, economic level, employment status” etc.

Even, according to Mandal, “most of the respondents who were OBCs have said that they do not want caste as the single definer...” Rajiv Gandhi reminded the Lok Sabha of an earlier Kakasaheb Kalelkar report which had said that the upliftment of the Backward Classes are extremely wideranging and comprehensive and covered such diverse fields as extensive land reforms, re-organisation of the economy, Bhoodaan Movement, development of livestock, dairy farming, cattle insurance, bee-keeping, piggeries, fisheries, developmentof rural and cottage industries, rural housing, public health, rural water supply, adult literacy, university education etc.

And for good measure he added: “Do we want the benefit that the Government is giving to be cornered by the Ministers or the sons of Ministers or the families thereof? Do we want the benefits that are being given by the Government to be cornered by big landlords and people who have a lot of property? Why do we not exclude the people with a certain number of properties from such benefits? Do we want these benefits to go to high senior Government officers who have already got that privilege?

The Government is aiming these benefits at a particularly privileged group and not looking at the really poor”. This is Rajiv Gandhi’s much-interrupted speech in summary. Rajiv Gandhi quoted V. P. Singh as having told a newspaper that implementation of the Mandal Commission Report “was purely a political strategy”.

And he went on to say: “Raja Saheb’s (V. P. Singh’s) policies are not very different from what the Britishers were doing. “It was the British who tried to divide our country on the basis of caste and religion and today it is Raja Sabheb sitting there, who is trying to divide our country on caste and religion... Already you are taking this country towards religious electorates. First you are dividing into reservations in jobs.

This government is taking the country in this direction”. Are you reading this, Soniaji? Are you reading this Dr Manmohan Singh? Kindly read the parliamentary proceeding in full, and carefully. Rajiv Gandhi believed in the unity of this country. Are you?

Spirituality is the basis of ancient Indian science

—K.S. Sudarshan

RSS Sarsanghachalak Shri K.S. Sudarshan has said the ancient Indian science and knowledge available in Sanskrit epics have originally developed from spirituality. He said our ancestors for the welfare of the society developed this scientific knowledge. Therefore, we should be proud of that. He was releasing a book, Pride of India at a function held at Dattopant Thengadi auditorium in Nagpur recently. The function was organised jointly by Sanskrit Bharati and Bharatiya Bauddhik Sampada.

Appreciating the publication of the book, Shri Sudarshan described it as the work of God and said it is we Indians who do not pay proper attention in bringing forth our own wisdom. “Our knowledge and science extincted during the 1000 years’ rule of slavery and the foreigners promoted only English to learn science, which continues even today,” he said. Talking about the western scientists he said the western science is based on only body, mind and wisdom. “They could not go beyond it even now. But our ancestors went far beyond it and presented the view of dharma, artha, kama and moksha based on atmatatva,” he said.

Speaking on the occasion, noted geologist Dr Janardan Negi said India has a rich legacy of ancient scientific knowledge, which must be propagated. He hoped that India would become a super power in the next 20 years. Shri Virag Pachpore, senior journalist of Nagpur, said the book would bring forth various hidden facts. He suggested that the name of the book should have been ‘Pride of Bharat’ instead of Pride of India. Shri Padam Kuamr, Dr Chamu Krishan Shastri, Shri N.R. Kumaran, author of the book and Dr Pradip Kolhe were also present at the function. Shri K.S. Sudarshan also inaugurated an exhibition on science. (VSK, Nagpur)

We are educating the country on the lies, bias and mistakes in textbooks

—Dinanath Batra

With the NCERT submitting in the Delhi High Court that it has decided to delete 37 objectionable passages from the textbooks, the agitation by Shiksha Bachao Andolan Samiti (SBAS) against distortion of history textbooks has registered a major success. Shri Dinanath Batra, convener of the SBAS, is leading this agitation. Organiser correspondent Pramod Kumar spoke to him in New Delhi to know the present status of the movement. Excerpts.

It has been almost two years since the SBAS was launched. Where does the movement stand now?

It is a matter of satisfaction that our agitation is getting success step-by-step. We organised over 100 seminars all over the country to highlight the distortion of history. There were agitations in every district and state capitals. Memorandums were submitted to the Governors.

Our first step was to strengthen the organisation. I along with my team toured the whole country and went to all the states. We have now 26 branches all over the country. The conveners of all the branches met in Bhopal for two days to decide future course of action.

The second step was bringing about awareness and awakening. For that we published 30 books and sent them to 6000 distinguished people all over the country. The efforts of publishing the books were widely appreciated by the readers. We have now a regular programme on Sadhna TV in which leading dignitaries are invited for discussion. Former CBI director Sardar Joginder Singh is the anchor of this programme. Besides this, conventions of various communities like Jats, Sikhs, Brahmins, Jains, etc. whose sentiments have been hurt in the NCERT books, were also organised. All these communities leaders registered their strong protest against the NCERT.

What is the status of the petitions field in various courts?

Four petitions were field in the courts—three petitions in High Courts and one civil petition in a lower court of Alwar. The petition in Chandigarh High Court was against the insult of Swami Dayananda, Arya Samaj and the freedom fighters who have been described as terrorists in the books. In this case, first there was no response from the NCERT. We sent a notice. Even then there was no response from them. Then the court issued notices by names to director of NCERT (Shri K.K. Sharma), Chairman of CBSE (Shri Ashok Ganguli) and Secretary of Education (Shri Banerjee) asking them why a contempt petition should not be initiated against them.

In Alwar, we have won the case. In that case the judge delivered a remarkable judgment. The judge said the NCERT should see that there is nothing damaging in the textbooks, which hurt the feelings of any community. The court also asked the NCERT to withdraw the objectionable portions and to see that these portions should not reappear in any book. The NCERT has withdrawn the portions and has also given alternative passages also. These portions were about Jains. Again a writ was filed in Allahabad where the High Court has admitted the writ and will come for hearing after the summer vacations.

In Delhi High Court, the case is at the last stage. The NCERT counsel on May 23 told the court that the NCERT had deleted 37 portions of the total 70 portions mentioned by the petitioner. Among the 29 remaining portions whom the expert committee has justified, there is the mention of cow eating, calling freedom fighters terrorists, calling Jats plunderers, insult of Guru Tegh Bahadur, Guru Govind Singh, etc. We would not stop till all these portions are deleted. We are fighting the battle both in courts and also in public.

The passages in the new books are highly damaging and demean Hinduism. They also ignore the pride of the country. They downgrade our seers, sages and also the freedom fighters. In every page of the book one finds the mention of Left, caste conflict, etc. Very derogatory words have been used for people of certain communities. The grammar has been thrown out. The rhymes that the students sing or learn are not only meaningless and directionless but also poison their thinking.

How is the public response?

Public response is quite overwhelming. People have come forward with donations also. The attendance in the meetings, seminars and conventions has been very impressive. Big institutions have also joined hands with us. An awakening is there. Not only the public but students also have come forward in good number.

How is the response of the communities whose sentiments have been hurt in the books?

They have come forward and have intervened in the High Court also. The intervention is from Jats, Jains, Arya Samaj, etc. Leaders of all such communities have joined the petition. Now it is a joint petition by these leaders and Shiksha Bachao Andolan Samiti.

But the government claims that the books are according to the NCFSE-2000. Comment.
This is a lie. The NCFSE-2000 is still in force and so is the syllabus framed pursuant thereto. But the books, which have been reintroduced by the UPA government in schools, are neither in accordance with the NCFSE-2000, nor in accordance with the syllabus framed pursuant to implementation of NCFSE-2000. These are old textbooks published during the seventies, which had been removed/withdrawn by the previous government pursuant to the implementation of NCFSE-2000. The government took this decision arbitrarily with malafide intention and without following the due procedure, without consulting CABE and without getting the approval of general council of NCERT. It amounts to violation of Fundamental Rights, NCFSE-2000 and the Supreme Court judgment dated September 12, 2002.

Aryan Theory Junked

27 June, 2006 by pravakta

People in north and south India belong to the same gene pool: ICHR Chairman

T.S. Ranganna

He says studies prove this; conclusion that Aryans came here 15,000 years before Christ does not hold water

BANGALORE: Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) tests of blood samples from people in the Indian subcontinent have confirmed that the human race had its origins in Africa and not Europe or Central Asia as claimed by a few historians.

The test has classified the people in north and south India as belonging to one gene pool, and not different ethnic groups such as Aryans and Dravidians.

Giving the information to The Hindu here, Chairman of the Indian Council of Historical Research D.N. Tripathi said geneticists from Pakistan had collected samples for genetics analysis of the people of Indian subcontinent and sent them to cellular and molecular biology laboratories in the U.S. Scientists in Pakistan concluded from the test results that the human race spread out of Africa 60,000 years before Christ. They settled in the subcontinent. Geneticists in Pakistan concluded that people living in the northern and southern regions of India and those in the West Asian region were from the same gene pool, he added.

Asked about the argument of many historians tracing the lineage of people in north India to Aryans, Prof. Tripathi said test results had proved this wrong. "We have the results of studies. The conclusion of some historians that Aryans came here 15,000 years before Christ does not hold water," he added.

Publications released

Earlier, Prof. Tripathi presided over a function at which lecture-series publications of the ICHR's southern regional centre were released. He appealed to Vice-Chancellor of Bangalore University H.A. Ranganath, an expert in genetics, to encourage research and lectures on the subject. The ICHR, he said, was ready to cooperate.

Prof. Tripathi said the ICHR was engaged in genetics and linguistic studies on inscriptions from the days of the Vijayanagar Kingdom. Inscriptions collected from south India would be made available in six CD-ROMs, he added.

M.G.S. Narayanan, former ICHR Chairman, released publications.

Prof. Ranganath advised students and members of faculty of all the university departments to interact with historians to preserve their knowledge for future generations.

Professional colleges Bill anti-Hindu: RSS

6/27/2006 7:05:55 AM www.newindpress.com

KOTTAYAM: The two-day state delegates’ meet of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) which concluded at Ettumanur on Monday has described the Professional Colleges Bill introduced in the Assembly as totally anti-Hindu which may even openly abet conversion.

A resolution adopted at the meet demanded that the Bill should not be approved since it will impede the development of the state’s education sector. The resolution called for launching agitations against the private managements which are hell-bent on “commercialising “ education.

NCERT books disparage the Indian heritage

27 June, 2006 by pravakta
By Dr Maheep Singh

"We are told that Aurangzeb was annoyed because the Guru had converted a few Muslims to Sikhism." Who told this story to Satish Chandra? He has not given the source of his information. Historians like Sir Jadunath Sarkar, Dr Indu Bhushan Banerjee, Dr Hari Ram Gupta or Dr Ganda Singh have not mentioned that Guru Tegh Bahadur had converted some Muslims to Sikhism.

It is unfortunate that the History textbook prepared by NCERT for the students of class XI written by Prof Satish Chandra is full of distortions and wrong statements. In the previous edition of Medieval India, prescribed for class XI, Shri Chandra, referring to the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur quoting some Persian source, had written that after his return from Assam, the Guru in association with one Hafiz Adam, a follower of Shiekh Ahmed Sirhandi, had resorted to plunder and rapine laying waste the whole province of the Punjab.

There was a lot of protest from the historians, well conversant with the Sikh history against this statement. Dr Hari Ram Gupta in his book, History of the Sikhs (Part-1) has written on page 205 that Sayyed Ghulam Hussain of Lucknow wrote in his Persian book in 1782 that Guru Tegh Bahadur and Hafiz Adam, a disciple of Shiekh Ahmed Sirhandi, had collected a large body of men. They moved about in countryside and seized money and material by force. Prof. Satish Chandra based his statement on this source, which was written more than one hundred years after the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur totally ignoring the contemporary evidence.

Moreover, Hafiz Adam was banished by Shahjahan in 1642—33 years earlier. Hafiz went on pilgrimage to Mecca and Madina where he died in 1643. How could Guru Tegh Bahadur join hands with such a person? With such superfluous knowledge of history, Satish Chandra not only belittled the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur, but also showed his bias for Sikhs and their history.

After that Satish Chandra modified his writing a little, keeping his bias and frivolousness. In the edition of 2005 (Page 297-299) of the same book, he say, "We are told that Aurangzeb was annoyed because the Guru had converted a few Muslims to Sikhism."

Who told this story to Satish Chandra? He has not given the source of his information. Historians like Sir Jadunath Sarkar, Dr Indu Bhushan Banerjee, Dr Hari Ram Gupta or Dr Ganda Singh have not mentioned that Guru Tegh Bahadur had converted some Muslims to Sikhism. Secondly, he fully denies the historical fact that there was a large-scale religious persecution of Hindu Pandits in Kashmir under the governorship of Iftekhar Khan. In his previous version he fully refuted the fact that Kashmir Pandits visited Guru Tegh Bahadur at Anandpur and gave him the details of the situation in their state. Changing his previous view Satish Chandra in the new version of the book states, "However, there is evidence to show that the Guru received a delegation of Brahmins from Kashmir and promised to support them."

It is strange that Prof. Chandra always tries to save Aurangzeb, for his policy of religious persecution. In the case of the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur, he does not accept the truth of holding Aurangzeb responsible for it. The great historian Sir Jadunath Sarkar has clearly mentioned this fact in his famous book, History of Aurangzeb (Page 313) in following words, "He (Guru Tegh Bahadur) encouraged the resistance of the Hindus of Kashmir to forcible conversion to Islam and openly defied the Emperor. Taken to Delhi he was cast in prison and called upon to embrace Islam and on his refusal was tortured for five days and then beheaded on warrant from the Emperor."

Dr Indu Bhushan Banerjee in his book, Evolution of Khalsa (part 2, page 60-61) has said that it was a self-sought martyrdom for the cause of protecting Kashmiri Pandits from the religious persecution.

The references given in the NCERT book regarding Guru Gobind Singh are not only misleading but also show the utter lack of knowledge and perspective of the Sikh history.

There is no doubt that after facing the attack of the joint forces of hills—Rajas and Mughals—for several months the Guru decided to leave the fort of Anandpur. The commanders of Mughal forces were regularly sending messages to the Guru that if he left the fort, no harm would be done to him. Guru Gobind Singh left the fort with his family and a few hundred Sikhs. The Guru's convoy had hardly covered a few miles, when Mughal and allied forces, forgetting their promises, attacked the Guru. The saga of the battle of Chapkam is well known. While crossing the swollen river Sirsa, the Guru got separated from his family. His two elder sons, Ajit Singh and Johar Singh separated from his family. They died fighting the enemy. Two younger sons, Jorawar Singh and Fateh Singh were captured by the Subedar of Sirhand and on their refusal to embrace Islam, were bricked alive at Sirhand.

It is also not historically correct that while the Guru was staying at Talwandi, he was not disturbed. In this period Guru Gobind Singh fought his last battle with Mughal forces at the field of Khidrana (now known as Muktasar) where enemy forces were badly beaten.

As I have mentioned earlier, Satish Chandra is very kind to Aurangzeb (equally unkind to Sikh history). In the latest edition of Medieval India, he says, "It is doubtful whether the dastardly action of Wazir Khan against the sons of the Guru was carried out at the instance of Aurangzeb." Why this is doubtful? Guru Gobind Singh himself had blamed Aurangzeb for the killing of his four sons in his letter written to him while he was in Deccan.

The problem with Satish Chandra is that he totally lacks historical perspective and always bases his statements on hearsay. His arguments start with the phrases like, "it is doubtful", "according to some", "We are told", etc. Such phrases are not used in writing the history. The history is written on the basis of credible evidences. The absurdity of the notions of Prof. Satish Chandra is proved by the statement made by him in the book when he writes, "According to some, he (the Guru) had hoped to persuade Aurangzeb to restore Anandpur to him."

No historian has mentioned such a thing. If Satish Chandra had read the full text of Zafarnama, the letter written by Guru Gobind Singh to Aurangzeb, he would not have committed this mistake. In his letter the Guru had rebuked the emperor for his inhumanly behaviour towards his father and brothers and condemned him for his lifestyle.

I feel extremely sorry that NCERT should engage a person like Prof. Satish Chandra, whose intellectual integrity is so much under question to write a history book for our young children and misguide them.

(The author is a noted historian and columnist.)

Do you want your children to study this?
  • Our ancestors were beef-eaters.
  • They were foreign invaders.
  • The great martyrs who sacrificed their lives for freedom of the country were terrorists.
  • The students of 11th class will study a lesson on Maqbool Fida Husain, the bigot painter who displayed goddess Durga, Saraswati and even Bharatmata in nude.
  • Mira, a symbol of liberated Indian womenhood, used to dance in the streets.
  • Swami Dayananda was called a hired preacher of Christians, anti-religious and atheist.
  • The NCERT books have all this and much more
  • Is it not the insult of our history, dharma and national heroes?
  • If it is, should it be tolerated silently?

Sacrilege at Tirupati hills

by Sandhya Jain

The current initiative of Sri Swarupanandendra Swami of the Visakhapatnam-based Sri Sarada Peetham to mobilise Hindu seers to protect dharma in the face of rising depredations by evangelists has not come a day too soon. While religious conversions are innately offensive, the rising political eminence of an Italian-born Roman Catholic has witnessed a corresponding growth of aggressive proselytising at famous Hindu pilgrimages and holy sites.

Ms Sonia Gandhi has reinforced missionary muscle by sponsoring the rise of Christians in Congress State Governments and party units on an unprecedented scale. Non-Christian Congress Chief Ministers have been made to acquiesce in missionary activities, and outrageously 'leaky' welfare schemes have been floated for the benefit of the tax-free NGO industry, most of which is anti-Hindu.

The latest affront to India's civilisational ethos comes from missionary activities at Tirumala and Simhachalam, where police were compelled to take the offending preachers into custody. This has forced the normally quiescent authorities of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (TTD) to urge Chief Minister YS Rajasekhara Reddy to enact legislation to prohibit propaganda by non-Hindu faiths on the seven Tirumala hills, traditionally regarded as the sacred body of Sri Vishnu.

It is inconceivable that the TTD authorities are unaware that the Chief Minister avidly promotes the activities of his Seventh Day Adventists sect, and has even built a church upon his family lands. They must be at the end of their tether to appeal to a proselytiser to respect their faith and ban physical and psychological encroachment upon their sacred spaces. The TTD is demanding a two-year jail term and fines for violating the law it wants enacted. It is pertinent that while the State Government does not permit panchayat elections in Tirumala in view of its spiritual eminence, predatory faiths are permitted a free run of the hills. It would, therefore, be in the fitness of things if the Government steps in before matters deteriorate further and declares all seven hills as the TTD zone, where politics or alien faiths cannot enter.

Actually, both conversion activities and willful trespass by missionaries upon the sacred spaces of other faiths can be prosecuted under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, provided the authorities are willing to punish the offenders. It is undeniable that the determination to convert devotees of a faith(s) maligned as "false" by the proselytiser is an intentional insult to the said creed. This cannot be condoned and disguised as "freedom of religion" in order to facilitate the missionary agenda, which is almost wholly funded by Western Christian nations. Secondly and more seriously, deliberate intrusion into the holy spaces of other faiths for proselytisation and conversion to one's own dogma falls squarely within the gamut of a "malicious intention to outrage religious feelings." The growing temerity of missionaries at the Golden Temple, Tirupati and other Hindu temple towns calls for speedy redress by the law.

Sadly, it is fairly certain that neither the UPA regime at the Centre nor the Congress State Governments will act to mitigate the victimisation of the Hindu community. Indeed, sinister plans are reportedly afoot to bolster the conversion industry by a backdoor capture of SC/ST reserved seats in Parliament and the State Assemblies, by surreptitiously making these available to converts (so-called Dalit Christians). This could seriously erode the political empowerment of historically deprived sections of Hindu society, and Bahujan Samaj Party leader Ms Mayawati would do well to take cognisance of this move to forge a new minority-based electoral vote-bank in Uttar Pradesh.

Briefly, the National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities (NCRLM) is currently (but quietly) seeking public opinion on extending "constitutional benefits" to SC/ST converts. In the prevailing reservation-prone atmosphere, I initially thought this meant that the UPA intended to include Dalit Christians in the SC/ST reservations in government jobs and educational institutions. Had this been the case, however, the issue could have been simply framed in such terms.

The coy usage of the term "constitutional benefits," instead of specifying caste or community-based reservations, suggests that the NCRLM's real objective is to recommend a blanket extension of all constitutional benefits of Hindu SC/ST groups, to Dalit Christians. This will provide backdoor political reservations for Dalit Christians by helping them to contest from and grab the existing SC/ST parliamentary and Assembly seats.

This would be consistent with the UPA agenda of fragmenting the nation by privileging non-Hindu social groups. It also explains Ms Gandhi's indiscreet overtures to the Muslim community on the issue of reservations in Government (Andhra Pradesh's failed attempt), educational institutions (Aligarh Muslim University), and armed forces (Mr Sachar's infamous but aborted head count). Worse, like Minto-Morley, she recently instigated Muslims to demand greater representation in public life, which certainly suggests communal reservation in Parliament and the State Assemblies.

Of course, Ms Gandhi does not actually intend to empower the Muslim community. Repeating the familiar Western political subordination of Muslim communities all over the world, her intention is to create a Christian oligarchy in India, with Muslims serving as beasts of burden (captive vote-banks). Hence the mollycoddling of the Muslim community in a manner designed to raise the hackles of Hindus, with obvious repercussions for the 'winability' of Muslim candidates. This is expected to drive the community back into the Congress embrace. An NCRLM recommendation to extend SC/ST constitutional guarantees to converts will, therefore, mainly benefit the Christian community.

If there is no resistance to this diabolical scheme, Ms Gandhi could soon have a significant Christian lobby in Parliament, through a fraudulently procured amendment altering the basic structure of the Constitution. An East Timor-like situation could develop in any part of the country where Western Christian nations have a geo-strategic or purely economic interest. Their lust for the mineral-rich north-east predates independence and is fostered by insurgency movements backed by various church denominations.

Indians need to acknowledge the abiding kinship between the Church and political power in the West. Christianity underwrites Western civilisation, a fact its ruling elite never loses sight of, unlike India, where it is fashionable to use Euro-centric slogans to undermine the native ethos. Little wonder Ms Gandhi's Indian ascent has seen the appointment of Indian Catholic theologian Ivan Dias as ex-Cardinal Ratzinger's heir to the (renamed) office of Grand Inquisitor. It is almost midnight for India's Hindu community.

Exposing The Ploy To Mislead Young India

Organiser Special Report

Save Education, Save India


THE POLITICS AND CONSPIRACY BEHIND UPA’S DISTORTED EDUCATION POLICY
Lies as facts, bias as comments and left ideology as academic toxin
EXPOSING THE PLOY TO MISLEAD YOUNG INDIA

By Dr J.S. Rajput

Even the universally respected and honoured academics and scholars were not spared. The first and the most prioritised innovation was thus being implemented as if the victimisation of individuals and demoralisation of institutions were the only priorities before the education system of India.


Never before, education in India was put to such political siege as during the last two years. The ruling combine of the political parties diametrically opposed to each other emerged on the basis of the eternal political principle of ‘power at any cost’. Those out of power for nearly six years were impatient and had only one goal before them: to return back to the coveted positions and towards that end, were willing to sacrifice not only the professed principles but even their self-esteem. The entire nation now watches how the stalwarts of the ‘support from outside’ arm-twist the present alliance in power practically on daily basis. Education and culture stand totally surrendered to the select group of ideologically trusted academics who follow the ‘party line’.

Cloning History, Marxian Style

By Dr S.P. Gupta

Romila Thapar in her book, Ancient India, for class VI writes about cow eating. She says on page 40-41, “In fact, for special guest beef was served as a mark of honour (although in later centuries Brahmanas were forbidden to eat beef). A man’s life was valued as equal to that of a hundred cows. If a man killed another man, he had to give a hundred cows to the family of the dead man as a punishment.”

Commenting on it the expert committee while quoting Man and Environment, 1994 Volume XIX, Nos. 1-2) says, “That, beef eating was widely practiced in early India is widely accepted and has been mentioned by various historians, not just non-Indian historians. Among the most respected historians who wrote on this theme are Rajendra Lala Mitra, whose The Indo Aryans (1891) has a chapter on the prevalence of this practice, and P.V. Kane, whose Definitive History of Dharmasastra also cited passages concerning beef eating and cow slaughter. Additionally, the literary and archaeologist evidence for beef eating was discussed by the most wellknown archaeologist of post-Independence India, H.D. Sankalia (Seminar, 93, 1967). Since then, two other Indian archaeologists, P.K. Thomas and P.P. Joglekar, have summarized the data on cattle bones that are found at archaeological sites in India and have drawn attention to the substantial contribution of cattle in the form of meat, apart from their uses as draught animals and in agricultural operations.”

Archaeology, like the Vedas themselves, is the primary source to reconstruct the history of the past communities. Unfortunately, all archaeological reports on bones found in archaeology use the term ‘cattle bones’ and not ‘cow bones’. ‘Cattle’, according to Oxford and all other dictionaries include ‘cow’ and ‘bulls’. Paleontologists cannot distinguish one from the other. Romila Thapar makes mention of cows. So also other NCERT authors. In archaeology even buffalos’ bones are often included in cattle bones. But buffalo has not been as sacred to Hindus as the cows. The article by Thomas in Man and Environment (Vol. XIX, 1994) is also not at all specific when it comes to cow.

It may also be mentioned here that Dr R. L. Mitra’s work was published and conceived much before the discovery of the famous Indus valley civilization site called Harappa. Besides Dr. Mitra’s research is entirely based on literary references and sources. P. V. Kane’s work was also written on the basis of literary sources. He has not used a single archaeological source to substantiate the arguments that the ancient Indians were cow eaters.

It may also be categorically mentioned that there is a specific reference with regard to the bone analysis of the cows specially from the Indus valley sites or Harappan sites showing the cut marks on the bones recovered from the excavated stratum which generally is the key to distinguish the natural death and deliberate killing of cows for the purpose of beef eating. It is merely a conjecture to assert that the cattle bones found from the Harappan sites justify that the ancient Indians were cow eater. Beside there has been no cut bones studies which is an exclusive study conducted by the palaeo-pathological analysis of the bones from the excavated sites of Harappa, Mohen-jo-daro and other sites.

Interpretations of the original texts by historians have been cloned to a variety of reasons—colonial bias, Marxist bias, caste bias, etc. We have to be hundred per cent sure about ‘cow’ which is considered mother by Hindus. Taking shelter under the terms ‘beef’ and ‘cattle’ will hardly do. Bull or ox do belong to the cow family but it is not cow.

No one needs defending any secondary source, the writing of scholar, to the original. As pointed out earlier, secondary sources, which have interpreted the term gau as ‘cow’ in English, is not correct. ‘Beef’ also includes meat of cows as well as of ox or Bull. It is a clear case of the burden of two languages.

(The author is a noted archaeologist.)

Labels:

Detoxify the youth of India

By Bulbul Roy Mishra

Our secular education system simply weighs the learning and does not teach its value. Students are told that degrees are required to get a job and higher degrees will fetch higher income. The thought of service to the poor, the nation or the humanity is summarily dismissed as Platonic and nonsensical.

“The ass carrying the load of sandalwood” so says an ancient Sanskrit proverb, “knows only the weight and not the value of the sandalwood.” Its animalistic instinct nevertheless helps it find out the equation—heavier the weight larger the meal. I am tempted to draw a parallel of the above to our current education system, which teaches students to bear the load of studies with the refrain—better the performances higher the return. Like in the case of the ass, our secular education system simply weighs the learning and does not teach its value. Students are told that degrees are required to get a job, and higher degrees will fetch higher income. The thought of service to the poor, the nation or the humanity is summarily dismissed as Platonic and nonsensical.

I am, therefore, not surprised that our education system has produced errant and arrogant kids like Manu Sharma, Jagat Singh, Vikas Yadav, Amit Jogi, Sanjeev Nanda, Fardeen Khan and many others, all of whom got the best of education—thanks to their parental affluence and influence—but were not taught humility and dedication, which were fundamental to our traditional education system. It is not that only the scions of celebrities and the affluent freak out and the rest are okay. As a matter of fact, the alma mater that discriminates the poor from the rich, the powerful from the commoner, sows the seeds of arrogance, hatred and complexes in impressionable minds, thereby causing distortion in the society.

It is no body’s case that the aim of a sound education system is to create perfect equality among students or to raise their merit to even height. As a matter of fact, the Vedantic philosophy that envisions the ultimate unity in Tat tvam asi (Thou art that) does not also envisage perfect equality in a phenomenal world. According to it, when the three gunas (sattva, raja and tama) get into the position of perfect equilibrium, involution results and creativity comes to an end. The universe evolves as a result of disturbance in this balance when any of the three gunas becomes predominant. The above philosophy applies to human life as well, as the key to liberation is stated to be perfect equanimity.

Both Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi stressed on spiritual education simultaneously with secular education. In the words of Vivekananda, “Our life blood is spirituality.” If it flows clear, no disease germ can possess it. The spirituality does not mean worship of a particular god, but selfless concern for welfare of all beings. Totally rejecting the colonial education system, Gandhiji echoed Vivekananda when he wrote in True Education: “We assess the value of education in the same manner as we assess the value of land or of shares in the stock exchange market. We want to provide only such education as would enable the student to earn more… As long as such ideas persist there is no hope of our ever knowing the true value of education.” Gandhiji was totally against state interference in educational sphere.

A materialistic thinker may snigger at the idea of injecting spirituality in secular education, as he is unable to segregate spirituality from religion. Once convinced that spirituality has nothing to do with any particular religion, I am sure, even the staunchest materialist will see merits in the proposition that students must be taught to think more for the suffering multitude, the nation and the humanity, than for self-promotion.

The reason why Indian civilisation survived despite the fall of the empires and kingdoms in the face of foreign invasions was its impregnable education system. Its foundation was laid by gurukuls in numerous hermitages as mentioned in the Mahabharata, where pupils from distant parts gathered for instruction. It is pertinent to mention that the Rig Veda named 23 women sages for their contribution and a hermitage near Kurukshetra produced two noted women hermits, thus establishing that women were considered eligible for studying the Vedas and also running gurukuls.

By the 9th century BC, university education almost on modern lines was founded in Takshasila (Taxila), the capital of Gandhara, followed by Ujjain, Nalanda, Benares, Ballavi, Ajanta, Madura and Vikramsila. Panini, the famous grammarian of the 7th century BC, Jibaka, the noted physician of the 6th century BC and Kautilya, the author of Arthasastra of the 4th century BC were students of Takshasila. We find mention of women’s hostel called chhatrisala in some of those universities.

Even though the University of Takshasila was destroyed by the barbaric Huns in the 5th century AD and that of Nalanda by the Khilji invaders in the 12th century AD, the Indian education system survived owing to resilience of the scholars who took it as their mission to impart what they learnt to the posterity. It is no wonder that Sir Monier Williams found Indian education system unparalleled in history. In his words: “Invader after invader ravaged the country with fire and sword but the simple self-contained township had preserved its constitution intact, its customs, precedents and peculiar institutions unchanged and unchangeable amid all other changes.” (Brahmanism and Hinduism). India survived because Indian educationists never treated material progress as the end in itself but as a means to the end that was spiritual growth.

The overdose of self-centric materialism sans spirituality, borrowed from colonial and alien thoughts, commenced the process of transformation from man-making into money-making education. The blame, in the first place, goes to successive governments which, contrary to Gandhiji’s prescription, relentlessly interferred with the governance of universities and academic institutions. The blame also goes to the political parties, which strived to impose their political thoughts or ideology on students. The socio-religious organisations also share the blame for doing precious little to arrest the rot.

I am, however, incurably optimistic, being a firm believer in what Swami Vivekananda said over a century back: “A mighty tree produces a beautiful ripe fruit. The fruit falls on the ground, it decays and rots, and out of that decay springs the root and the future tree, perhaps mightier than the first one.” (Refer: The Complete Works, vol. 3, pp. 286).

Labels:

UPA’s operation destroy India

By M.V. Kamath

Are you reading this, Soniaji? Are you reading this Dr Manmohan Singh? Kindly read the Parliamentary proceedings in full and carefully. Rajiv Gandhi believed in the unity of this country. Are you?

Both, Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh and Congress President Smt Sonia Gandhi are very busy persons and may not have much time to read old documents and hence this respectful attempt to help them out.

First, may one point out to a paragraph in a circular to the presidents of all Pradesh Congress Committees issued by none else than Jawaharlal Nehru, on May 26, 1954. That paragraph said: “In particular, we must fight whole-heartedly against those narrow divisions which have grown up in our country in the name of caste, which weaken the unity, solidarity and progress of the country...”

When the British government sought to give separate electorates to the Scheduled Castes, Gandhi went on a hunger strike —that is old history now—which ended in the Poona Pact in 1932. Some seven and a half decades later, on September 6, 1990 Rajiv Gandhi made a similar, though not as sensational, effort to promote national unity in a speech in the Parliament criticising the Mandal Report, lasting, to his eternal credit, some two and a half hours.

Rajiv Gandhi, like the Mahatma before him, was not opposed to enabling the Scheduled Castes, make progress in all fields. Addressing the Lok Sabha he said: “If you believe in a casteless society, every major step you take must be such that you move towards a casteless society. And you must avoid taking any step which takes you to a caste-ridden society. Unfortunately, the step that we are taking today (accepting the Mandal Report), the manner in which it has been put, is a casteist formula. While accepting that caste is a reality, we must dilute that formula and break that formula by adding something on to it.”

Attacking the then Janata Prime Minister V.P.Singh whom he charged with not having the guts to stand up and say whether he believes in a casteless society or not, Rajiv Gandhi said: “This government is creating a vested interest in casteism and the country is going to pay a very high price for it.”

The Mandal Commission had recommended that “with a view to give better representation to certain backward sections of Other Backward Castes (OBCs) like Gaddis in Himachal Pradesh. Neo-Buddhists in Maharashtra, fishermen in the coastal areas, Gujjars in Jammu and Kashmir”, areas of their concentration “may be carved out into separate constituencies at the time of de-limitation.” An angry Rajiv Gandhi shot out: “Does the government subscribe to the Mandal Commission view that political constituencies should be carved out on a caste basis? Are we going back to the Round Table Conference for having separate electorates? That was designed to break our country, Sir.”

Warming up in his address, Rajiv Gandhi said that “even at this late hour (and this was in 1990) there is time to pull the country back from this caste division... Ministers are provoking caste wars.” Continuing, he said: “The Raja Saheb’s (V.P. Singh) statement do not command wide acceptance in the country. They (the Ministers) have weakened our national fabric and to add to that, the Central Government, the Ministers, have deliberately provoked the cast confrontation and caste wars...” Rajiv Gandhi said that “an issue like reservation cannot be treated in a piecemeal manner. We must look at the whole picture.” He quoted Mandal himself who had said that “the aim is to overcome historical and geographical handicaps, not to create new vested interests” and admitting that “the categorisation of backward classes has always been difficult.”

The concept of ‘Other Backward Castes’ has always been a joke. Attacking the Mandal Report, Rajiv Gandhi had said: “I know for a fact the Reddys are included, Vakkaligas are included, Kammas are included, Lingayats are included, Gounders are included, Chettiyars are included. Are these Backward Castes? Do they need help?”

Shri Chidambaram was not around then but were he there, he would no doubt have had a good laugh. He would properly have been described as belonging to the OBCs. Asked Rajiv Gandhi: “On what basis has the Mandal Commission defined caste? How has the Mandal Commission reinterpreted the Constitution and changed Backward classes to Backward Caste?” Rajiv Gandhi noted even the Mandal Commission Report had noted that of those whose views were sought on the reservation issue, only 28 per cent of the respondents favoured caste as the sole criterion and that nearly 70 per cent were in favour of evolving “multiple criteria based on social status, political influences, educational attainments, economic level, employment status” etc. “ Even, according to Mandal, “ most of the respondents who were OBCs have said that they do not want caste as the single definer...”

Rajiv Gandhi reminded the Lok Sabha of an earlier Kakasaheb Kalelkar report which had said that the upliftment of the Backward Classes are extremely wide-ranging and comprehensive and covered such diverse fields as extensive land reforms, reorganisation of the economy, Bhoodaan Movement, development of live-stock, dairy farming, cattle insurance, bee-keeping, piggeries, fisheries, development of rural and cottage industries, rural housing, public health, rural water supply, adult literacy, university education etc. And for good measure he added: “Do we want the benefit that the government is giving to be cornered by the ministers or the sons of ministers or the families thereof? Do we want the benefits that are being given by the government to be cornered by big landlords and people who have a lot of property? Why do we not exclude the people with a certain number of properties form such benefits? Do we want these benefits to go to high senior government officers who have already got that privilege? Government is aiming these benefits at a peculiarly privileged group and not looking at the really poor.”

This is Rajiv Gandhi’s much-interrupted speech in summary. Rajiv Gandhi quoted V.P.Singh as having told a newspaper that implementation of the Mandal Commission Report “was purely a political strategy”. And he went on to say: “Raja Saheb’s (V.P.Singh’s) policies are not very different form what the Britishers were doing. It was the British who tried to divide our country on caste and religion and today it is the Raja Saheb sitting there, who is trying to divide our country on caste and religion...Already you are taking this country towards religious electorates. First you are dividing into reservations in jobs. This government is taking the country in this direction.” Are you reading this, Soniaji? Are you reading this Dr Manmohan Singh? Kindly read the Parliamentary proceedings in full and carefully. Rajiv Gandhi believed in the unity of this country. Are you?

Labels:

UPA to bless Minority Commission with more powers

6/27/2006 2:00:49 PM HK

New Delhi : The UPA government seems to be conducting research on how all one can appease the minorities in a nation.

As per new discovery Minority Commission lacks enough power and The Ministry Of Minority Affairs headed by A.R.Antulay is considering a proposal to make the National Commission for Minorities a constitutional body with more teeth.

The Govt is also planning to empower the NCM with authority to summon individuals accused of acts against religious minorities. At present the NCM can summon Govt and Police officials if they do not act on its directions. The Commission may be given more powers through a parliamentary legislation, in which the draft is prepared.

Minority Educational commission under the NCM, which recently gave Minority status to 6 institutions in Kerala had created much controversy, both opposition and Kerala government opposes this move of NCM to grant Minority status without discussing with State government.

Educational Minister of Kerala alleged that Minority Educational commission had acted hastily and he has told that the Minority Education Commission had sent the official papers to government in the hands of an officials of a Minority Institution based in Kozhikode. It was AWH institutions owned by Muslims who managed to get these papers in hand itself inorder to expedite the procedure.

This itself shows to which extend these Minority commissions will bend if pressurized by Minorities.This allegation by the Education Minister of Kerala is very serious and wonders how a government body can send the official papers by hand of the applicant itself of a State government.

Labels:




Home | Syndicate this site (XML) | Guestbook | Blogger
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments, posts, stories, and all other content are owned by the authors.
Everything else © 2005 Pseudo-Secularism