Shri Jogendra Nath Mandal – A tragic hero

In my earlier post with respect to the Marichjhapi massacre by the then Communist government in West Bengal – I had made the following observation on how Dalit ideologues lead Dalit masses down the garden path:

A later twist – Referenced here and here

I mentioned earlier that this incident was referenced in a Dalit youth magazine. This is mainly because Dalit ideologues see the refugees as mainly Namasudras of the Ati-Shudra Castes of the Bengal province. This group is reported to have been quite assertive politically and this includes alliances with Muslims in undivided Bengal, against so-called upper Caste Hindu landlords.

The throwback in the narrative is to perceived commonalities between untouchable Castes and Muslims that allowed for such easy alliances. Then, as it is seen as self-evident, now.

(I have, in my discussions with Dalit ideologues rejected any such alliance as lasting and have asserted that these are in fact harmful to Dalits themselves)

Surprisingly whilst rightfully taking to task a Bengali bhadralok (mainly composed of Brahmana and Shudra – Kayasthas & Vaidyas) dominated Communist organization for the massacre, Dalit ideologues unforgivably forget to point even an accusing finger toward East Pakistan (later Bangladesh) Muslims for hounding out their “natural comrades-in-arms”, namely the Namasudras. On the other hand they have failed to acknowledge that the vast majority of refugees of all Castes including the Namasudras were accommodated in the Hindu country.

While we remember those killed by the Communists, it is important to remind anti-Hindu ideologues of inconvenient facts too. (End Quote)

At the time of writing the above referenced post I did not know about Shri J.N. Mandal let alone his searing letter of resignation to the then Pakistan premier Liaquat Ali Khan. This information was brought to my attention on twitter.

Its a very long letter full of irony marinated in tragedy.

Shri J.N. Mandal is a heroic figure from whose experiences Hindus – both the so called upper and lower castes, can learn with much benefit.

- Namaste

 

Night-soil anyone?

That’s almost a pretty term.

I spent most of my reading time past week trying to get past the stench of the articles I read. The stench, for once, was not caused because of the lies I read but because of the truths they contained.

What got me started was this moving piece in Insight Young Voices. The motive for the article was Shri Praveen Swami’s insensitive and rather thoughtless observations:

“Working upwards of fourteen hours a day — not counting the typically three hours spent commuting — constable Kamble earns a basic pay of Rs. 5,200 a month. Sanitation workers employed by the Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation are paid less — Rs. 4,440 a month — but end up taking home similar wages, because of overtime. Indeed, until the Sixth Pay Commission recently upgraded the categorisation of police work as semi-skilled from skilled, sanitation workers actually made more money. Little has been done to upgrade the police’s living standards and training.”

This attracted a stinging riposte:

“This article by Pravin Swami hints to question the “higher earnings” of sanitation worker than that of security personnel.

Higher wages for sanitation worker can help them choose better education and provide better health facilities for their children and family. Although it is highly improbable, higher wages might encourage people from other castes to also join these services. In reality the working conditions and wages of sanitation workers in Mumbai is not sufficient to protect their lives. Maharashtra police personnel have comprehensive health insurance; however nothing exist of that sort for sanitation worker who are equally or more vulnerable to health crisis than police personnel.”

The point is a lack of sensitivity, or awareness. Or both.

There are many causes for the curse of manual scavenging of human waste. Shri Dr. Bindeshwar Pathak says :

“The scavengers are also known as Bhangis (considered derogatory), Balmiki, Chuhra, Mazhabi, Rangreta, Lalbegi, Hela, Hari, Dom, Dhanuk, Thoti, Pakay, Mukhiyar, etc.

The names of scavenging castes suggest that they are a functional community recruited from many different racial and social groups. It is very likely that one of the reasons that may have led people belonging to the lowest strata to take to the profession of scavenging especially in the urban areas was the compulsion, arising due to economic necessity. The great variations in the physical features of the different sections of this community, and also the varied recruitment from higher castes of “broken men*”, outcasts, destitutes, etc. show that the members of various castes have joined this profession at different points of time obviously owing to economic compulsions. It is also generally believed that after the advent of the Muslims in India ‘sweeping and scavenging’ seems to have taken the form of a formal profession. It is said that the system of bucket privies was designed and constructed by Muslims for their women in ‘pardah’. Those who were made captives, were forced to clean latrines, bucket privies and throw off the night-soil at distant places. These captives when freed, were not accepted by the society and they formed a separate caste and continued the work of scavenging. During the British period with the setting up of army cantonments and municipalities, a large number of people were required to do these services on a regular basis. How could the imperial masters suffer the indignity of being seen going out to answer the call of nature! The white man’s burden, a-la-Kipling, which a white burdened himself with, became the headload of scavengers.”

Some allied observations:

1. It is understandable that Dalits (untouchable castes) would distrust those from other castes and would instinctively shoot down offers to help.

2. The Dalit agenda and goal of a caste-less society, shared amongst others by folks such as Shri Dr. Pathak above is and will always be rejected by Hindus of other castes.

3. It is understood that the anti-caste angst of the Dalit arises out of hatred for his condition but that is not a strong enough argument for folks of other castes to discard their castes altogether. They do not see the connexion.

4. When we speak of caste today, we no longer speak of the occupational basis of caste but of the cultures and traditions built around castes. As for occupations, we have people from diverse castes involved in similar occupations.

5. Therefore, in my view, it is a better goal for Dalit castes to throw off the yoke of “current occupation” and take up “better occupations”.

6. Their fight, ideally, should be also for space for their traditions and cultures that they can take pride in.

Read what Ms Manjula Pradeep says:

Who was Veer Megh Mahya?

It is said that once there was a severe drought during Siddhrajsinh Solanki’s reign and people were dying without water. The court astrologer advised the king to find a man with 32 good qualities and sacrifice him to end the drought. The hunt for the perfect man ended with Mahya, an untouchable, who hailed from Ranoda village (in present Dholka taluka, Ahmedabad).

Mahya agreed to sacrifice himself but with three conditions – the untouchables from then onwards would not carry brooms tied behind their backs, they would not tie pot around their necks for spitting and would not carry extra pocket or third sleeves on their upper garments. These were the markers of being an untouchable during those times and were strictly enforced by dominant castes. The king had to agree to these conditions and then Mahya was killed.

It is unfortunate that modern historians have never recognised him and his struggle but his memories are being kept alive by the Dalits in Gujarat.  In the rural areas, they keep a copper pot in the foundation while constructing their houses and tie a green festoon (chundadi) at their doors in memory of Veer Megh Mahya. I feel it is very important for all of us who are engaged in fighting against caste discrimination to remember the lives and struggles of our forefathers.

7. But is Hinduism not the culprit? I will say it is not Hinduism but circumstance that is the culprit. Dalit ideologues are fond of claiming Muslim and British saviors for themselves. If they had been a little more honest to themselves, they would realize that the Muslims and British have not been far behind in exploiting them and perhaps making their conditions worse.

There is the fact of the municipality of Punjab regulation that fined a scavenger Rs 10 (at the turn of the 20th century)on pain of complaint received from any “inconvenienced” house owner whose toilet was neglected or cleaned inappropriately! These rules were framed by the British.

8. Yes. One must admit that certain caste notions of purity and pollution have worked toward exacerbating an earlier notion of impurity (only). To one’s great dismay and surprise(?), it is very likely that the cause was Buddhism and not really the Hindu framework that caused this curse of untouchability to occur. (meat-eating and animal sacrificing Brahmana castes would have no reason to keep out the Chamars/Chandalas out of fear of pollution).

Scavenging human waste came much later.

9. Can not conversion help? It is best that Dalits themselves decide this question. The clamor for recognition of Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims is coming from such converts.

10. Is it possible within Hinduism? I dislike the term ”Hinduism” that means nothing. However, it is certainly possible within the Hindu Dharmic framework. This can be speeded up with helping hands from other caste-folks. It cannot be done by resorting to blind hate, abuse and threats of annihilation of cultures and traditions that have sustained and nurtured other Hindu castes. The propaganda that other castes have fed, parasite-like, on Dalits and so-called OBCs is self-defeating apart from being patently untrue. Even if that were true the Dalits will never have allies in their fight for who will want to commit suicide but cutting off their life-lines?

11. It says something about a lack of intellectual honesty amongst Dalit ideologues but not limited to them – that a person like Dr. Bindeshwar Pathak is completely blind-sided and in fact accused of subverting the Dalit cause.

12. Hindus are often accused of many evils and I think one of those evils is that they remain silent in the face of outrageous slander.

13. This filthy blot of scavenging human waste must shake the conscience of all Hindus. I request readers to please read articles from Insight and I have placed an additional link to Dr. Pathak’s Sulabh International movement.

My personal imploring to all readers:

1. If you have hired anybody to clean your toilets, please stop. Clean them yourselves daily.

2. If you have children, please make it part of their grooming to teach them how to clean and keep clean toilets.

3. If you are running schools and/or offices, please consider rostering teachers, senior students and interested colleagues to take up the cleaning of latrines. Please release janitors from this task and let them spend that time in adult education/vocational training of a better kind.

4. If you feel so inclined, please circulate this post as widely as possible.

- Namaste

 

The phenomenon of the “slut” in Hindusthan

My motivation for this post was Smt Laura Wood’s excellent post on the subject of Female Immodesty and its Effects.

Readers might have come across the following observations from liberals and feminists when the Mangalore pub incident broke:

1. Desperate thugs

2. Ugly no-goods waiting for an opportunity to grab a woman

3. Lousy lechers who would never have otherwise dreamed of touching good-looking women

4. Losers

5. These assholes want to deny others the fun they cannot have

6. Etc, etc

The “pink underwear” campaign that got started as one reaction to this incident also revolved around the theme of, “I know you want to – try mine”.

The bare-to-dare culture amongst young women in urban Hindusthan seems to have tentatively arrived. From most indications, it appears that parents acquiesce or are in the dark about such behavior. The latter condition seems to be in majority.

Our society being male dominated and the male not really willing to let go (of his power) that easily; repercussions would not be pleasant. I’m not advocating anything here, but simply making a pertinent observation based on facts. On the other hand, a certain amount of emasculation also has occurred amongst a minority of Hindu males, largely due to the “aggressive slut” phenomenon. (It’s funny. There is talk of a generation Y and that’s because the kind of trousers/jeans worn by the young partially reveals their butt-crack that takes the shape of the letter Y). It can happen that humor such as this may yet help limit frivolous behavior to the barest (no pun intended) minimum population.

I also observe another kind of change, a desirable change in Hindu women who call themselves ”liberated” after their American sisters. That change alludes to a certain assertion of identity/personality whilst at the same time acknowledging  boundaries. One would be hard-pressed to see these women in revealing clothes and suggestive body language; in short, behaving irresponsibly. These women feel comfortable with mild feminist “language” but at the same time hold themselves from going over fully. They still speak and desire of a good, hard-working husband, children getting educated and family life in general. Yes, there is a distancing from in-laws that can be observed in these women – that’s largely due to working women, but the damage is minimal. The larger family stays in touch somehow.

The issues of easy divorce decisions, single “parenting” etc are directly related to working females. Still in it’s infancy there is little hope that they (these issues) will actually accelerate their pace given all the ready information available about the negative impact of such “progress”. The innate aggression retained in the Hindu male will also act as a check.

I also feel there is an undercurrent of reason-from-awareness in Hindu youth of today. My own niece who is 15, is hardly enamoured of the “slut brigade” and stays pretty sober. The percentage of those who feel the way she feels is still good. I’m speaking strictly from personal observations only.

Constant and frank communication with facts based reasoning is what will ultimately clinch victory, for everybody’s good, in this ongoing never-ending debate. That’s a paradox isn’t it?

- Namaste 

 

Shri Sunil Khilnani’s “An imperfect union” – some thoughts

An aside first - The technique of latching onto and writing is so much like how a creeper or a climber (my daughter’s lesson to me) plant grows by latching onto another plant or tree and drawing sustenance from the “mother” all the while retaining and/or developing it’s own character. Warning - The “parasite” plant can kill the sustainer too just like how a “latching writer” need not at all agree with the primary author.

In any case, I find this technique has it’s uses.

I suspect my own relationship with Shri Khilnani’s writing may be a bit more benign and I may not yet, “kill”.

- Namaste

In this piece, Shri Khilnani (SK) is discussing Hindusthan’s many problems and how we may move forward on the best possible path. For some reason he seems to want to start at 1975, the year of the Indira emergency. SK tries to locate the sources of all our major problems with the advent or in any case, the “turning” of Smt Indira Gandhi (IG). I don’t necessarily disagree that IG made things a lot worse but that’s what I said, she made it worse. The rot had started a lot earlier in the manner Shri Gandhi (MK) was foisted upon an unsuspecting Congress and thereafter the manner in which MK went about consolidating his position and mercilessly hoisting party (the fabled “founding fathers”) and people on his specific petard. In this respect MK was no less ruthless than IG.

However, the memory of (somewhat) interregnum seems to bring tears to SK eyes because he views it as a deviation from Shri Jawaharlal Nehru’s (JN) grande’ design for this country. Therefore his gory contrast of father to daughter that supposedly qualitatively nosedived in 1975.

Briefly, it would be an honest reflection to admit that our “founding fathers” of whome no consensual list is available; left us horribly wounded and betrayed – if after-effects are anything to go by. The effort at creating a democratic society that SK hinges his thesis on, was left gasping for breath when JN was thrust over a popularly elected Sardar Patel (SP) – by MK. So, there wasn’t any glorious beacon IG could or would have followed.

I should remember to ask some of my older relatives how life was prior to ‘75. How did JN actually perform on the domestic front?

From SK’s para – “As the polity was losing its foundational identity, the economy too was dysfunctional, plagued by shortages and systemic inefficiencies, presided over by corrupt administrators, and directed towards providing revenues for a state unable to fend for itself. We were a society that had allowed ourselves to be cowed by fear-fear of political leaders and operatives, fear of tale-telling friends and neighbours, fear of shortages and outages.”

It does seem JN’s rule was brighter and bereft of all these deficiencies.

Let’s do some rational thinking. JN took over from the British colonials. Post war, much of the world was in disarray. Hindusthan could not have been in better shape but certainly worse. JN was enamored of the Soviet “planned” economy model and sought to ride that animal. Mercifully, he seemed not to go the whole hog and adopted a “mixed economy” model that allowed for some private enterprise. Since these were early days and this is a big country, results may be said to be late in coming. But and this is my question - was this foundation conducive for IG to go rogue or could it have helped obstruct her path? That’s the economy.

Coming to temperament, was IG less of a “democrat” than JN? JN went almost his entire tenure (17 years) without any strong opposition to his “made” position. He lived under a halo. The few who could have crossed him were dead or outside of the Congress. He could afford to be democratic. That observation is not uncharitable given JN’s record of stealing from SP.

On the other hand IG was left under the shadow of something called the “Syndicate”. A bunch of old and powerful men who thought they could have IG do their bidding. IG was without any JNite halo. However, JN’s legacy of economic (non?) performance and cult-hood helped IG go several better on him – for the worse. This country had no better model to look upto.

So, SK’s foundational reasoning does not impress.

‘75 being a very low point, SK goes on to list 1984, 1992 and 2002 as other terrible years. The Sikh slaughter, Babri demolition and Gujarat riots. He then tells us that these were disastrous because the state became a tool that was used against it’s own people. He blames the “educated urban elite, the supposedly alert defenders of democracy and civil rights” for remaining silent whilst all this was going on. I get the distinct feeling SK does not have the Muslim minority in mind when he apportions blame on ”the urban elite”. On the other hand, it is easier to see Hindus are common factor across these turbulent listed years. I will not go into each episode but SK’s thought process is interesting. He’s building an unnecessarily weak case for what he wants to say eventually. There is a slight spark of realization, barely felt by himself I’m sure, of the nature of the well-spring when he asks, “How exactly we managed to avoid becoming a mediocre authoritarian regime-an overblown, oversized Philippines or Bangladesh-remains an enigma.” There is no enigma. The evidence is all around us; has been for centuries upon centuries of years.

In any case, SK sees the emergency and it’s aftermath as manifestation of an assertive – people? – no, courts. He claims IG’s call for the ‘77 elections were not the result of popular resistance (perhaps in line with his earlier criticism of the somnolent “urban elite”). He does not tell us the reason for this decision, otherwise.

Note - So the “urban elite” (a turn-key euphemism for Hindus) remain the bad guys thus far in the story. Surprisingly, SK has some good words for the courts, another arm of the same state’s infrastructure that is reviled by liberals as “urban elite” oriented.

There are some after effects that SK says, arose out of the post-emergency situation. Rise of regional political formations, economic revival (which btw did not really take off until PV Narasimha Rao’s (PVN) regime)  and the arts. I can relate to the rise of regional parties as due to the passing of JN and IG, both pan-Hindusthan personalities. However, I don’t see how the arts got any freer than they were already. Perhaps a reader can tell.   

The next few lines SK makes some surprisingly contradictory observations – He see ‘75 as not a stand-alone that suddenly erupted upon us from inside the mind of IG. He sees it as a result from something. He says, “What brought us to that crisis? It was at once a real structural tension, and a blockage in our ideas and imagination.” 

Still shielding JN, the writer gives us some reasons -

First of all, there was an unmanageable disjunction between the demands of politics and requirements of longer-term reflection and vision to coordinate as well as direct economic and social development. Since the late 1960s, politics was being redefined in a populist direction, with politicians offering immediate satisfactions in return for electoral support. (JN, of course did not have to worry about this vagary)

Indira Gandhi hoped to by-pass the pesky demands of a short-memory electorate and of dissident voices (the demands, that is, of a functioning electoral democracy) in favour of the more considered social schema of would-be intellectuals. She was guided, as was the fashion of the times, by Leftist notions of plan-perfect societies, and had it not been for a fateful June morning flight over Safdarjung airfield, we might still be having to enact those deluded visions, or undo them. (Astonishingly, SK satisfies himself by blaming IG instead, really, for her father’s economic legacy of whatever worth and then goes on to drag in another ballooned non-entity, Sanjay Gandhi (SG))

I was wrong, SK was not being contradictory. He’s still JN’s man. He’s still missing the more real reason.

Possibly sensing disquiet in his readers, SK tries to redeem his argument -

“It has become conventional to locate the blame for the authoritarian swerve of the Indian state in the mid-1970s on some quirk of Mrs Gandhi’s psychology: to reduce the Emergency to an effect of biography. But the basic dilemma that she sought to resolve by authoritarian means remains ours: how to connect the validation of power by numbers (the vote) with the justification of power before the tribune of reason (the use of power for purposeful, public and legitimate ends)?” (That was a difficult one to follow but this is what it means – IG, basically an authoritarian, sought to resolve the problem of retaining democratic power for (positive) ends by authoritarian means. This still keeps IG as stand-alone)

“The Emergency experience inoculated us against the Mussolini syndrome, and took us full-tilt into the democratic way-so that now, the winning of elections, licitly or not, seems to absolve the winner of any other obligation besides using power for personal ends. The result: over the past 35 years, we have created an imbalanced form of democracy, defined purely as the winning of power, with little demand for accountability.”(Very nice. Flawed but nice. SK is trying to show us how IG’s return to winning politics post emergency sort of made it possible for future politicos to claim legitimacy for their unwholesome actions, if they won in the hustings. Is this really true? How would he account for Shri Krishna Menon (Jeep scandal) and TT Krishnamachari (LIC scandal) – both working for JN after the scandals broke?)

Till this time SK’s burden has been IG and her so called self-created legacy. He does not accept that the rot started earlier.

To carry on, SK asserts that the exercise of democracy by the electorate deepened because of IG’s emergency initiative and her overall authoritarian streak which in turn brought about greater political action in the states and amongst the populace. This makes sense. The emergency sort of alerted the voters to potential future mischief. However, they were left, effectively, without the power to “recall” the corrupt and the incompetent. SK does not delve into this latter and inherent institutional failure. How would the voters have behaved with a constitutional power to recall, is worth considering.

Instead, he leaves us with a rather bland – “The hope of the founders was that elections and politics more generally would bring the best of Indians into leadership positions. Yet over the past 35 years, as elections took hold of the Indian imagination, they brought into office not the best, but the already powerful or the entrepreneurs of power. We are now rightly committed to electoral democracy: and if the results, the venal, self-serving leaders, are a little dismaying, we shall not be rescued from this fact. Great modern democracies are condemned to survive with mediocre leaders.” (Why?)

“The Nehrus or Roosevelts are the rarity, the Deve Gowdas and Berlusconis the norm. This is why democracies must depend less on individuals and more on ideas and institutions: ideas to orient and chart out where they wish to go and to chart out how to get there, institutions to filter the effects of individual political mediocrities and so to help enable the ideas to be realised.”(Even if I were to ignore the irritating examples of the “Nehrus” (who? what?), it does not make much sense for SK to claim sustained democratic mediocrity only helped along by “ideas” and “institutions” unless he comes clear and tells us he’s talking about an efficient bureaucracy at the back-end. If that is what it is, how is he not advocating a subversion of democracy? Surely a solution for the ills of “IG” cannot mean an “IG” by any other means?)

SK then slips very badly when he holds up Shri Manmohan Singh (MMS) as his example of “ideas and reason” amidst and as a panacea for “numbers driven mediocrity”. He should have known that MMS is not his own man and lives on the say so of higher Lords and Ladies. He can afford not to think of the democratic hum-drum. How does he (SK) propose to “institutionalize” the MMS model unless he also proposes to institutionalize the Ms Sonia Gandhi (SoG) model which is the same as saying – “bring back IG!”

But SK is still looking for a solution for his “democratic numbers sans ideas and reason” dilemma. Why does he not dwell on the MMS way? Interestingly he doesn’t.

Now, SK takes a slight turn in the essay and speaks of a “second dimension” that ‘75 supposedly induced. He calls it the exhaustion of a compelling national story. He claims that something in us broke and we started to ask ourselves, post ‘75, why we must stick together inspite of our diversities.

For some reason SK thinks our national story was different before ‘75 than what it became post ‘75. What he means by this “national story” is left unsaid just yet. Shortly, he tells us that JP Narayan’s movement formed part of the olde’ story that was broken by IG’s personality based ‘India is Indira and Indira is India’.

This is unreal.

Whilst not denying that Hindusthan has it’s share (some would say more than) of personality based politics it remains untrue to assert that such personalities make the politics they want – divorced from the people’s inherent needs and wants (whatever they might be). The “personality” is the most important driver of the message. The “personality” is a propitious mixture (in space and time) of message and the medium that captures the popular (mediocre?) imagination and elevates him to power. MK and JN were such personalities. How are we any different today except for the fact that we have chosen to attribute great qualities to the likes of MK and JN? For instance, SK never questions JN’s questionable legacy.

Continuing his thesis, SK tells us IG molded the nation on the basis of fear rather than that of anything positive – unlike the pre-IG era. There is no question that IG played dangerous and dirty politics. She propped up Bhindranwale of Khalistan fame for one. However, it is also true that the general environment in the neighborhood had grown more dangerous. A lot of what IG was involved in wrt the Sikhs can be traced to the failures of the yet undefined “founding fathers”. Ref: Master Tara Singh and his relations with Congress leaders. There are never any effects that are without causes.

Similarly, Shri Rajiv Gandhi (RG) succumbing to agitated Muslims on Shah Bano and his consequent and ”balancing” unlocking of Shri Rama Mandir in Ayodhya has deeper reasons than SK acknowledges. The mere assertion of “fear politics” does not take away real and underlying basic problems that were present or sown at the time of founding.

The fact that the Supreme Court had no business to interpret the Shar’ia in it’s style, in the first place, is ignored by liberal do-gooders like SK who then in turn lament the inevitable withdrawal of the said judgment. There was simply no way the then government could have stuck to it’s guns (that is, against the Muslim popular opinion) and still supported Personal Law. Then, there is no alternative to Personal Law apart from a highly nebulous Uniform Civil Code that would have displeased the liberals because that would have certainly displeased the Muslims!

Similarly, the case for the Shri Rama Janmabhoomi was made much before the locks gave way in the ’80s. It was made when the idols appeared within the Masjid precincts. The idols appeared there in response to the popular but local claims of Janmasthan. The JN government blundered by not taking a Somanath type action wrt important but lost, Hindu sites. This inaction again relates directly with the blinkered “national” vision of the undefined “founding fathers”.

SK seems to be taking the easy way out by resorting to the bogey of “politics of fear” while trying to make his point – which is? I shall soon come to it.

This bogey of a “politics of fear” of which Hindutva, SK says, is an important component is faced off against an admittedly younger and more optimistic generation seemingly self-involved with their economic progress. This sends SK signals of a want for a “nationalism of hope” as against a “nationalism built around cultural and religious insecurities”.

I have often reflected on this “break from the past” that one notices in the newer generations. Are they really that detached? Or are we missing the whole picture? Economic growth brings with it it’s own priorities and anxieties. Anxieties arise from uncertainties – There is plenty of that going around. These uncertainties are not just economy related; they are also a fall-out of existing precarious security situations. How does one assure the youth and indeed how does the youth assure itself peace and prosperity with so much turbulence all around? This turbulence is due to unresolved issues of the past. Just like SK’s “politics of fear” was a fall-out of earlier unresolved issues.

It will be wrong to look at unresolved issues in terms of, what is popularly but wrongly called, “communal” issues alone. There are things Hindu society as a whole needs to confront and start to set right. The Hindu framework – and this is the name of SK’s “enigma”, this Hindu framework that allows for so much of diversity to flourish without them getting alienated must be made healthy again. Castes, tribes, religious groups etc. Minorities like the Parsees and some non-evangelical Christian denominations, Sikhs, Jains and Bauddhas – all must be able to share a common National Hindu platform. Castes that form the former untouchables must be uplifted through concerted social action apart from guaranteeing reservations until they (the untouchables) see no need for it. Taboos against beef and cow slaughter must be removed as recognition of traditions that untouchables had built around their disabilities.

Our states formed out of languages have awoken inherent sub-identities that need not be thwarted by ridicule. These linguistic identities can and should be harnessed in the services of the national Hindu society. Each part and each segment becoming self-confident will work towards these components getting into healthy relationships with each other and working in harmony.

What is required is great imagination and greater courage.

There is much to be done and unless the Hindus begin to repair and work their famed “enigma”, no amount of intellectualizing the problems we face, will work.

Happily, there are signs that this is happening. It is not so evident at the levels of the elite; however, society at large is coping with pulls and pressures admirably. And this society does not shy away from it’s identity – SK’s optimistic nation.

SK touches upon these subjects in his own far away language. I have few issues with that. It’s for us, Hindus, to fill in the blanks.

I end this longish post with a sad observation – The new generation of Hindu elite doesn’t want to identify themselves as Hindus. They hide behind “Indian” templates and pretend they will be taken seriously as non-partisans. I want to tell them that they are committing the same blunders that were committed by the “founding fathers”. The world sees us as Hindus and we must recognize that reality and own it. Else the world, in it’s own harsh way will keep reminding us of this reality and of our folly in disowning it.

 

Uniform Civil Code?! How many times have you beaten your wife today?

When I disagreed with Shri Sandeep earlier, I had realities like these in mind.

Some folks may be quick to jump on the fact that the information pertains to Kashmir - the Muslim part of the state of J & K - I’m not denying that greater approval for wife beating in Kashmir may have it’s basis in such traditions, but the larger point is that men in general do have a stronger tendency to use their hands to settle an argument with their wives.

To deny this would be untrue.

I do not know of a comparable Hindu caste or tribal tradition that would allow or sanction such behavior and in fact, there are plenty of traditions that inculcate respect for the woman of the house – but still I would not vouch for a Hindu man to be completely free of such vice. Nevertheless there is always hope that better education will reinforce respectful traditions toward women.

Some people will say implementing a Uniform Civil Code will take care of positive religious sanction – as seen in the link above – for the act of wife beating, since such a code will negate Personal Law – a Law that provides sanction for traditional laws such as this. I disagree.

As the survey shows so clearly, a majority of the women support or in any case do not disapprove of wife-beating. This reaction may be due to conditioning – as the article says or and much more likely due to the need not to disagree with tradition. Of course it is very likely that these Muslima women would have heard of the Koranic allowance; not likely many would disagree if questioned.

So my point is that under such circumstances, any wishful thinking that a Uniform Code will “free” Muslim women from their male “bondage” will most likely backfire and harden support for traditions – good and bad.

If I were to use this reasoning for society/ies in Hindusthan – then my opposition to the UCC agenda makes greater sense.

We must rely on tradition to evolve a better society for ourselves. There is little one can do for those societies that will not evolve for the better.

- Namaste

 

Why I disagree with Shri Sandeep

In his latest post Shri Sandeep takes to task the AIMPLB (All India Muslim Personal Law Board) for expressing it’s disapproval of the Supreme Court’s judgement in a recent divorce maintainance case -

This is the jist of the court’s decision Shri Sandeep carried:

“In the recent judgment, delivered on December 4, a Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Deepak Verma and Sudarshan Reddy upheld the right of a divorced Muslim woman Shabana Bano to get maintenance from her husband.”

This is the rebuke from the AIMPLB:

“The Supreme Court judgment is a direct interference in Muslim personal law. It is also against the Shariat, which states that marriage is a contract between two individuals and it becomes null and void after divorce,” said Maulana Khalid Rashid, a member of the board.”

- Namaste

–Varta–

Palahalli S – I am of the opinion that Hindus as such have no say in the matter. The rationale and logic of Personal Law dictates this course, and it is most sensible in the situation Hindusthan finds itself.

Hindusthan is a religious society which is deeply traditional and conservative – no matter what the liberals say otherwise. Hindu Personal law has been codified and it’s family laws have been amended and altered a number of times without incident. This is not true of Muslim Personal Law. The gate-keepers, self-appointed or state nurtured, of Muslim Personal Law are fairly adamant that it is Muslim authority that must decide or be consulted with, before re-interpreting what has been already decided. I find little that is wrong with their argument since they are merely following the logic of Personal Law.

Now, since Hindusthan is also “liberal heavy” in it’s establishment-side, it (this establishment) every now and then feels the itch to interpret laws that it sees as regressive, progressively. The latest case of Shabana Bano is pertinent to this theme.

It would have been perfectly alright for the likes of AIMPLB - who have the obvious support of the Muslim minority in Hindusthan – to have interpreted or re-interpreted Muslim Personal Law as per their lights. However, for an institution of the state (Judiciary) that is widely seen as Hindu or in any case inimical to the interests of the Muslim minority to take it upon it’s honorable self to do this deed is downright arrogant.

There are some basic changes that need to be brought about whereby the Judiciary, composed of non-Muslims, who are lacking in the relevant theological authority/credibility, must make way to Muslim judges and allow them to decide cases pertaining to issues under Muslim Personal Law. If this should logically lead to Shari’a courts, then so be it.

I have linked to several relevant references and this is enough to prove the kind of footsie non-Muslims are forced to play just so that Muslim women maybe protected from the depredations of Muslim men – all of which ultimately lead to no good for the non-Muslim.

Ref : One

Ref : Two

Ref : Three

Ref : Four

 

Good to be back!

That was a long hiatus! The sad part is that none of it was restful – work, commenting and tweeting – all of this and quantitatively loads of it all!

I’ve linked to my tweets (wordpress.com does not allow, I think, to display two-way conversations) so that readers may click in and join the conversation.

I’ve been debating the pros and cons of legalizing prostitution at The Acorn – Some very bright gentlemen there in Shri Murthy, Oldtimer etc

I’ve really muddied the waters at Sandeepweb over linguistic states (not the topic of the main post though). I’ve been defending my argument against some excellent minds in Shri Siddharth and Shri Rajiv Chandran.

Please do read these debates – I apologize for my thoroughly rough and provocative style but this is more than offset by the erudition of my debating partners.

I will be posting more regularly henceforth

- Namaste

 

Dalit woman priest works silent revolution in Nepal

Readers may recall a previous post -

Does not Smt. Sukmaya Rokaya qualify to be known as a Brahmani? Who else if not her?

- Namaste

Kathmandu, Sep 22 (IANS) As Nepal’s parliament remains paralysed due to bickering among the major parties and the task of drafting a ground-breaking constitution by next year seems doomed to fail, a stone’s throw away from the august house Sukmaya Rokaya is working a silent but real revolution.  

The 43-year-old is the priest at the Chhakkubakku Bhagwati temple in the busy Baneshwor area of the capital, hemmed by shops and pavement stalls. Besides being a woman, she is also a Dalit, a community that stands at the bottom of still-conservative Nepal’s rigid social ladder and is ostracised as untouchables even now.  

The mother of four comes from the Sarki clan who were originally cobblers and once forced to live on the carcasses of dead cows when Nepal was a Hindu kingdom with a ban on cow slaughter.  

Before her marriage at the age of 18, when she came to live in Kathmandu, Rokaya remembers how she was not allowed to enter temples in the village in Kaski district where her parents lived. She also remembers the humiliation of not being allowed to attend any social function, especially those involving feasting.  

‘My heart used to grieve,’ Rokaya told IANS. ‘I would wonder, why did this happen to us? My heart still grieves at the memory of the discrimination.’  

But in Kathmandu, she was amazed to see that her mother-in-law, Chauki Rokaya, was working as the cleaner at the Chhakkubakku Bhagwati temple, the 7th century shrine of a Hindu goddess said to have been built by king Narendra Deva of the same Lichhavi dynasty that produced Indian emperor Chandragupta Maurya.  

As the illiterate but hardworking Rokaya slowly took up the chores of her mother-in-law, her dedication won the esteem of the president of the temple preservation committee, Shyam Prasad Aryal.  

‘I would come to the temple early morning every day and it would be sparkling,’ said the 64-year-old Brahmin, whose clan is regarded to be at the top of the hierarchy and the arch enemy of Dalits.  

‘I was impressed with her dedication. I thought, we have so many Brahmins who violate their calling and yet are regarded as upper castes; and yet, this woman, whose diligence outrivals many others, is being treated as an outcast.’  

‘So many Europeans are beef eaters. And yet we court them. But we are ostracising this woman because her ancestors were forced to live on dead cows for survival,’ Aryal told IANS.  

Aryal had the revolutionary thought of asking Rokaya to start officiating as the priest, doing the simple things that did not need learning.  

‘I clean the temple and worship the deity in a simple way, offering flowers,’ says Rokaya. ‘I don’t chant mantras because I don’t know any. At night, I also do the aarti (worship with lamps) before the deity.’  

When the unusual practice started, temple goers were aghast. Many even thought of boycotting it and throwing Rokaya out.  

However, despite the pressure and intimidation, Aryal stood his ground and gradually, she was accepted.  

‘I go to her house regularly,’ says Aryal. ‘I eat the food she offers me. I don’t see any stigma in it.’  

While neither Rokaya nor any of her three sisters went to school, all her four children three daughters and a son are educated. The youngest has just completed school and the eldest taken training in education so that she can become a teacher.  

Though Nepal officially banned untouchability in 1963, the practice is still strong, especially in the remote villages.  

Over 20 percent of the nearly 29 million population are Dalits and more than half of them are women.  

Ironically, Chhakkubakku Bhagwati is said to be the sister of power goddess Bhuvaneswari, who has her temple on the grounds of the revered Pashupatinath shrine in Kathmandu.  

The 5th century Pashupatinath temple, one of the holiest Hindu shrines and declared a World Heritage Site by Unesco, employs only Brahmin priests while non-Hindus are not allowed inside the temple. Even late Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi was not allowed inside the Pashupatinath temple as he was a Parsi.  

(Sudeshna Sarkar can be contacted at sudeshna.s@ians.in )

 

Is it not time we arm ourselves?

There are two pieces of information in this link.

The first report pertains to a Dalit drummer who was shot for not beating his drum hard enough at a wedding in Uttar Pradesh.

The second report (blurb)refers to a Dalit youth enjoying a musical show (part of a wedding to which apparently he was not invited), sitting on a chair for guests - being shot to death after he identified himself as a Caste-man belonging to the Musahar Caste. This was in Bihar.

Without getting into too many technicalities or details of who?, whence?, what?, I’d like readers to think of if this would have ever happened if the shooters knew their victims had guns on them or at their homes.

Is it not time we re-win the right to bear arms and ensure our government allows it’s sale at affordable cost?

Think.

- Namaste

 

What a woman!

Sometimes I feel we get so engrossed in stupid things like minarets that we forget to honor those who truly deserve it.

I’m very thankful to @centerofright on twitter who carried this piece of information about a very very brave, courageous and selfless young female teacher of 21 who died in the process of saving children from drowning.

Remarkably, she did not know how to swim.

At 21 years, she had her full life ahead of her and yet she threw it away for many more lives.

It’s my honor to present this honorable deed of Ku. Suganthi.

- Namaste

Brave teacher saves seven children before drowning

Fri, Dec 4 04:58 PM

Porayar (TN), Dec 4 (PTI) The 21-year-old lady teacher, who died along with nine primary school students in the van mishap in Nagapattinam district yesterday, helped save seven children before drowning, attempting to rescue more. When the van plunged into the temple pond at Kathiripulam village near Vedaranyam in the district, the driver Mahendran, cleaner Subramanian and the teacher Suganthi came out of the vehicle breaking glass windows.

They immediately started pulling out the children through the window, eye-witnesses said. Though the driver, who was reportedly talking over his mobile when the mishap took place, fled fearing public reprisal, Suganthi and Subramanian managed to save about seven children, they said.

Finding that more children were getting drowned, Suganthi, who did not know how to swim, jumped into the water to rescue them and drowned, they added. Villagers and police later fished out her body along with the bodies of nine children.

Suganthi could have survived if she had not plunged into the water to rescue the children, eye-witnesses said. .

 

Shri Kancha Ilaiah via the ToI and Churumuri

Let me start by quoting from the blurb before the actual interview -

Kancha Ilaiah, professor of political science at Osmania University, is known for his outspoken views on the caste system in India. In his first and most famous book, Why I Am Not A Hindu, he dissected the Hindu social system in an earthy style, though often taking liberties with historical validity. In Delhi recently for the release of his latest work, Post-Hindu India, he spoke to Subodh Varma:

It would be interesting to  know why Shri Ilaiah’s “liberties with historical validity” are not such a problem for a major newspaper and a popular blog that advertises this ideologue. I’m not propagating censorship, but querying if there have been or are any efforts to question the liberties Shri Ilaiah takes. As one will shortly see wrt this interview and linked blog post at least; there are no such efforts by the liberal media/authors to get at the truth.

Please see the rest of this interview with my notes alongside:

- Namaste

 

Some thoughts on the Swiss Minaret issue

I just posted the following response in on ongoing debate at The Acorn generated by Shri Vishnu Som’s (NDTV) incredible observations: Those interested, kindly visit The Acorn to read the rest of the debate.

- Namaste

I’d like to debate Shri Tejal’s views and not necessarily limited to his last post -

This has to be the first time I appreciated getting my head bitten off, simply because it demonstrates that IM’s do not see themselves as different from the cultural fabric of India.>>

I disagree with the convenient assumption that Hindusthan’s Muslims do not see themselves as different from this cultural fabric. I disagree because (1)this flies in the face of liberal insistence that this country is multicultural. I.e. Many cultures existing in one country. There is no one fabric. (2)This country’s Muslims have NEVER voiced their opinion against aggression on Hindu symbols of culture anywhere in the world, including this country.

So, there are in fact two fabrics of culture.

Trickey, JaiC – However, I am an expat, and outside India, there is still a huge gap in acceptance and understanding of Islamic culture. To insist that this gap does not exist is a little bit like sticking your head in the sand.>>

I cannot understand why a National society must be forced to accept and understand (not necessarily in that order) something they do not wish to. Something they witness as *distasteful* elsewhere. Something they see as a threat to their own culture.

I don’t agree with commenters who try to deny that such instincts of *defense” exist. Merely looking at the *vote* and not at the “instinct” that generated the vote is not sensible.

I stand by my argument that if we see a scenario where the liberal section of the Muslim world fails to react with a measured and logical response to counteract the bad blood created by terrorists, this will pose a danger to the peace and security of India as well. It is not only a Babri Masjid that can lead to riots in Mumbai, a Nazi style attack on European Muslims will stoke flames in the streets of India too.>>

I don’t know of any “liberal section” of the Muslim world. All such “liberal sections” ultimately rationalize such Muslim behavior. Theologically they stand miserably defeated. They cannot even oppose the unsophisticated Taliban on merits.

What I find interesting but not uncommon is the view that reaction to Islamic violence leads to “Nazi-like” acts against Muslims. This is amazing because (1) It’s a reaction. Not pro-active action (2) should the victim not possess a threat perception at all? Why are the victims of Islam being disarmed like this?

In my view, KSA and Muslim countries have the right to their culture in their own lands. I will not argue against their Shar’ia – Civil and Criminal – In their own lands. Since we do most certainly have two nations in Hindusthan, I’m all for Muslims having their Shar’ia – Civil and Criminal. They can retain their Mosques and Minarets too. However, any interference with Hindus and their culture must receive appropriate and reciprocal responses.

Muslims in Hindusthan are a minority (whole numbers)and must appreciate their position. I agree with Shri Chidambaram when he said the safety of the minority is vested with the National majority.

A word for the unreal Hindus – Please realize that human instincts to survive is very strong. Each will fight to protect their culture which is verily their own mother, their home. Please do not mislead those of us who have retained this instinct by providing a *scent* that is alien – and then ask us to defend that instead. This is true for all castes and tribes and groups of Hindu society.

 

Brahmana – Caste or Varna?

I find the difference is between an endomagous group and an ideal.

Any good book on Hinduism will speak of the Brahmana as “ideal” rather than as a Caste group per se. If it does speak of the Brahmana as Caste group then it speaks of the group as a carrier and preserver of the ideal of the Brahmana Varna.

I think we should remind ourselves that the Brahmana Varna, just like the other Varnas - Kshatriya, Vyshya and Shudra is composed of many castes or endogamous groups of people who either due to their existing occupations, identified with the appropriate Varna or chose the Varna by adopting the appropriate occupation.

This seems the only logical manner to unravel the Caste and Varna “puzzle”.

PS – (We) should test each claim by an individual or a Caste group to be Brahmana/nical by what the individual or the asserting Caste group does for a living. If it is not in accord with what the Brahmana Varna stipulates, then he/they cannot be of a Brahmana Varna. In Kannada there is a term that is used half in jest – “Kalla Brahmana” (False Brahmana). This is used for a person who claims to be a Brahmana but conducts himself differently. Actually the correct manner would be to recognize that individual within the Varna that his actions/occupation is most suited.

- Namaste

 

A conversation with Shri Alamsha Karnan

I had a brief and interesting chat with Shri Karnan on twitter yesterday – I think he was basing his line of argument along these two posts in his blog:

1. Vande Mataram ?. We will NEVER NEVER NEVER sing.

2. My Answer for 26/11:

Now, many folks I know would dismiss Shri Karnan as a crank. I don’t.

Shri Karnan not just has important arguments (misguided they may be in my opinion) but “he” is listened to intently. Therefore he should be accorded the respect of an opponent who gathers listeners around him for the opinions he expresses.

Since I’m not able to link to my twitter conversation here, I will try and reproduce what transpired:

Broadly from what I could gather, Shri Karnan would like to know Hindu (Brahmin – in his eyes) opinion on Muslim opposition to Vande Mataram and the insistence on wearing the Burkha. Apart from this, if Hindus would go the Swiss way in banning Mosques/Minarets.

My response was to assert that the difference between Muslims in Hindusthan and let’s say, the West was that here they were not immigrants. However, they are Minorities and not Nationals. Therefore how the Muslims wants to live and worship should be of no concern to the National society. They can wear their Burkha, they can keep off Vande Mataram and keep their Mosques and Minarets – They will only have to live as Minorities and have no part in the life of a National society with important say in National policy.

Next Shri Karnan wanted to know if, as his response to the Mumbai slaughter (26/11), he could become a Brahmin. – He says he is a Muslim now.

I informed him that to the best of my knowledge there is no Brahmin caste. There are castes who were traditionally Brahmana - I.e. They conducted themselves in the rigor of what was required per this Varna. I told him I myself was more of an Arvel Niyogi - Vyshya. However, he could certainly have a Upanayana conducted for himself. All Hindus, irrespective of caste are entitled to the Yagnopavita. It does not change their Caste.

To be a Brahmana was up to his capacity and inclination. I told him his teacher would be a Brahmana since he/she acquires knowledge and interprets/disburses the same, more so if he/she has earned the respect of students.

Therefore Caste and Varna are two different categories and they need not overlap.

Shri Karnan wanted to know if he could have the Sankaracharya preside over his Upananaya.

My response was that the Sankaracharya is not important to this ceremony. That I had never seen him myself. That his role was not similar to the Pope or Khalifa.

Our conversation went along similar lines of questions asked and clarifications rendered.

I hope I could clear Shri Karnan’s doubts about the Dharma he wants to return to.

- Namaste

 

A simple proposal

How many times have we not heard Hindus complaining about how the Mainstream Media (MsM) treats their concerns – rather anything that concerns Hindus as in their culture and/or security?

How many times have we not witnessed the ease with which representatives and spokespersons of Hindu organizations have been played around with and otherwise taunted by the MsM in their studios – on their so-called “talk shows”?

How many times (too many in fact) have we not witnessed Hindu spokespersons constrained at the knees and at the tongues with self-imposed requirements of political correctness – unable to evenly express their concerns and thoughts without fear of being labelled “fascists”, “communal”, “anti-democratic” etc etc?

Indeed how many times have we not witnessed the blanking out of all Hindu views from print and electronic media only because these have been inconvenient for Muslims and other favored minorities to accept? That they (the minorities) would feel threatened and “would feel hurt”?

Finally, how many times have we not heard powerful Hindu leaders whimper about the lack of a Hindu media? It’s unbelievably true.

Isn’t there a simple solution most times, to complex issues? Here it is – Boycott the MsM.

I propose that Hindu organizations – Cultural and political; and individual Hindu intellectuals, boycott any and every media that ignores or plays truant with Hindu concerns. Boycott the media that will be unfair to Hindu views and will not allow it’s spokespersons to speak freely.

I note that the only Hindu leader who had the courage to do this has been Shri Narendra Modi. His dignified (to the MsM it is “arrogant”) behavior with this media clique has earned him tremendous respect amongst Hindus. He does not care about feelings of hurt. His habit has been to call a spade a bloody shovel. His is a win-win formula for Hindu nationalists.

Why can he not be emulated? Think about it.

On the other hand watch this (readers will have to choose the correct video) discussion on the fatwa against Muslims singing Vande Mataram. Even though the Hindu side was represented – it was hardly heard and was much constrained by political correctness. At least this is my understanding of what went on in that discussion. Watch Shri Kanchan Gupta, an upright no-nonsense journalist himself, not even raising an alert over the fact that Vande Mataram was truncated at the insistence of Muslims. It was a critical early surrender by the Congress under Gandhi. Still not a blimp on the Hindu radar.

Note also the new twist that was carried so very simply by everybody – Yea sayers and the so-called “Nay” sayers.

That twist was the “new” discovery about the first two stanzas of the song having been penned by Bankim Chandra much earlier to his authorship of Ananda Matha - the novel that carried the soul stirring song. Apparently the later stanzas (those that the Muslims object to) were penned along with the book to suite it’s militant mood. Here’s the delicately played out mid-game  Shri Kanchan Gupta witnessed but would not counter – Since the first two stanzas were in any case separate from the “whole” poem that also contained the “objectionable” stanzas, it is not really a truncated song but the whole song of two stanzas in itself.

The inherently immoral force of this logic seemed to sweep all possible and probable Hindu objections and protestations aside. A Hindu spokesman not concerned with niceties would have bluntly said that at the time the song was being cut-up to meet Muslim demands, no one knew that they were separately composed by Bankim. Therefore in essense and in fact, it remains a Hindu surrender to Muslims gangsterism.

Coming back to my proposal, this is the way I would see it played out:

1. All Hindu organizations and Hindu elite of all orders boycott noted MsM – A set of “fair-play” demands are made and presented to their ombudsmen.

2. Hindu discourse moves into the streets and into the neighborhoods. Into small towns and villages.

3. Hindu leaders, big and small, conduct meetings open air amidst the lay populace. Media is not invited but they can be there. It’s a free country.

4. Any contesting spokesperson from the opposing camp may engage the Hindus side only on the latter’s turf. That’s the street. The populace again will bear witness.

5. Any Hindu who surrenders and/or bends to MsM seduction must be called out a quisling.

This state of affairs must continue until such time as media is truly representative of all kinds of views – until proper structures are in place to ensure this.

In my thinking there is no way this action can hurt the Hindu position. On the other hand it will provide much-needed positive publicity and connect. Also it will provide an opportunity for many more bright Hindus to hone their media skills from grass-roots – comperes and conductors of discussions. A possible strong grounding to a future Hindu media.

Think about it!

- Namaste

 

A short note to a Dalit ideologue

Here’s what I wrote to Shri Anoop Kumar, a much respected and conscientious person who however cannot seem to fathom opposition to his views.

Namaste,

I just noticed that you’ve blocked (from Shri Anoop Kumar’s facebook profile where I had been contesting his “truths”) me. I’m not at all surprised.

This means your scared of contrarian views deflecting the tunnel vision of those who follow you and/or your views blindly. It’s also kind of ironic that you should practice untouchability. No issues.

I will carry a link of your blog on my profile (facebook) and on my website. Ask your “followers” to visit it to comment even if you yourself are too ashamed to do so. All the best.

Thank you

As promised I have posted the link to the blog in both places. On Kone Nakshatra, the (sidebar)link is represented by Dr. Ambedkar’s picture. (I tried to avoid using the picture because I believe Dr. Ambedkar was a true scholar and not a false ideologue.) Still this action of mine is not impulsive not is it made to prove a point. I have gone through the blog and can say with some conviction that the contents are thoughtful even though be highly debatable in their conclusions and assertions.

My hope is that readers may care to read the blog and comment as per their lights.

Palahalli

 

Babri Masjid Update – The Liberhan Commission Report & ATR

From previous – here

Here’s the appropriate link to the material at the website of the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Enjoy reading!

- Namaste

 

How to prick a liberal, gently – Tsubba at Churumuri does it well

I’ve found Shri Jyotirmaya Sharma to be a classic gas-bag people avoid pricking only because it’s likely to leave a terrible stink. But an esteemed commenter at a liberal blog I love to hate does the pricking quite well.

You’ll need to read Shri Sharma’s article first.

Then look inside the fold…Thank you Tarlesubba!

 

Babri Masjid – Update

The beginning of this episode – here

It looks like the Justice Liberhan Commission Report investigating the demolition of the Babri Masjid will be tabled today in parliament. Fresh updates here.

More interestingly the UPA has come out with an ATR that’s actually a mish-mash of nothingness. Classic mass of red herrings designed to perpetually miss the target.

(Start Quote)”Even when the Liberhan Commission has indicted 68 BJP and Sangh Parivar leaders for Babri Masjid Demolition, the government has, surprisingly, no names in its action taken report (ATR) on the issue.The ATR says that the government will work towards expediting the ongoing trial in the lower courts in Uttar Pradesh.

The ATR has not named any individual against whom fresh action needs to be taken – on the basis of the Liberhan report – for the demolition of the Babri Masjid demolition in Ayodhya in 1992. No fresh charges will be formed against ‘anybody’.

Importantly, the 13-page ATR has proposed a new law, ‘No political leader who holds a position of power in the government will not be allowed to simultaneously hold any position in religious bodies’.

With regards to the action to be taken against those who were behind the demolition, the government thinks it would not be prudent on its part to register fresh cases as there are multiple cases still running against the accused in courts.

The government is also contemplating a bill to check communal violence. The government feels the law would be useful to prevent the dangerous mix of politics and religion.

It also suggests giving statutory powers to the National Integration Council to tackle to communal violence. (End Quote)

The reactions from the BJP itself have been true to type so far with Shri Rajnath Singh firmly anchored to his mental numbness and still shocked about Shri Vajpayee’s name being mention.

From so far there appears to be two likely folks who have shown the requisite balls and not surprisingly, both are currently outside the BJP. Sadhvi Uma Bharati and Shri Kalyan Singh.

Here’s what the Sadhvi said – “I take a moral responsibility for whatever happened in Ayodhya that day and I will face the test in the court of law.”

Here’s what Shri Kalyan Singh said – “Dhacha gaya to gaya” (“If the structure was destroyed, so it was”)

Here’s a report from the Financial Express that talks about how the Uttar Pradesh administration was primed to meet the onslaught against the Masjid.

A note – For long, secular liberals (inside and outside of the Sangh Parivar) have claimed that the issue of the Babri Masjid is dead and no one cares about it any more. The fact that a simple report whose conclusions were long known, generates so much heat, is testimony to the fact that this issue is not simply about a Sri Rama Temple that will be built over the demolished Babri Masjid – It is so much more.

Shortly it touches upon a very raw and unhealed nerve in our Hindu National body politic. That nerve will be healed only when this country’s Hindu basis and ethos is finally and officially recognized. This does not depend on any particular party in power. We have all seen the wretchedness of the BJP and the confusion in the Sangh Parivar as a whole.

All that the polity needs do is to follow the pole-star, i.e. the mass of Hindu people and what grips their hearts and minds.

As further evidence of what I have just said, one needs to hear the pained emotion in Shri Kalyan Singh’s voice when he exclaims - ”I was a swayamsewak of the RSS and will always be. I want to see a grand Ram temple coming up at Ayodhya in my lifetime and neither SP nor Congress can make it happen”.

The movement is about Hindu rebirth and resurgence. It is in dire need of selfless, able and courageous leadership.

A movement waiting for a leader. A nation waiting to be heard. Will we be betrayed again?

- Namaste

 

Gadhimai sacrifice in Nepal – A Hindu right

I have said it before and will say it again. Animal sacrifice is not alien to our Hindu ethos. If slaughter of animals and meat-eating caused pollution and thereby gave rise to untouchability, it is not Hinduism that should be blamed. We should look elsewhere for cause.

If any Hindu wants to sacrifice animals in order to propitiate his Gods and Goddesses according to his tradition, he must retain the right to do it. It is not the business of the State and other busy-bodies to lecture him about the rights and wrongs of his manner of worship.

It is more than ridiculous that the very same people who accuse the Hindus of practicing untouchability will do everything in their power to enforce rules, laws and notions that will perpetuate this heinous practice and alienate our people even more.

Some Hindu castes already wage battles for their religious right to sacrifice animals in Hindusthan. Ironically here’s what happens when governments ban animal sacrifice to please the so called animal lovers amongst Hindus and their enemies. Hindu society gets blamed for being casteist! And yet look at who’s opposing the Hindus’ sacrifice in Nepal.

If there was some way I could contribute an animal or monies for Gadhimai now, I would.

- Namaste

–Varta–

Palahalli S – Here’s a more detailed piece on the controversy.

A reader responds -

First & foremost my subsequent comment is only from a curiosity perspective (notwithstanding if it’s right or wrong)…with that said: What do you mean by having to propitiate/conciliatory offering to a god/act of placating a said God/Goddess “by sacrificing animals for him/her and distributing meat to her devotees” as a potential act of redemption? Do you mean that atonement for a sin can come at such a cheap and dispensable price (as sacrificing meat), without having to go through the course of often steep/long process of redemption,Salvation, realization and subsequent cleansing of oneself, before the “Divine one” forgives in his/her mercy & magnitude???

The history of human beings and their transition from the erstwhile barbaric rituals to the current day sanity & compassionate coexistence as i know, “sacrificed” animals for atonement only in “mythological history” (almost all
religions included).  Are you and your statements proposing to go back to the dark ages???

Please Clarify???

My reply -

Let me respond; Some Hindus are being denied their right to worship their Goddess as per their traditions. Assorted animal-rights activists, Buddhists including the actress Bridgette Bardot and I should add those “Hindus” who see themselves as having somehow attained a higher plane simply because they don’t sacrifice animals for worship and/or
don’t consume meat.

So you see, your not alone in your conclusions or doubts.

I believe all acts for human redemption save one’s own death for a just and righteous cause, is “potential” and temporary. It should be understood that the possibility of one going back and doing wrong always exists.

The act of animal sacrifice should be seen in similar light. Why is it being viewed differently? What is so barbaric about it? Is the act of slaughter barbaric? If so then I should say there is nothing more truly barbaric than industrial scale slaughter of animals on a daily basis. Why is that slaughter not seen as barbaric? Because it is meant for human consumption? Albeit via departmental stores? (I have a theory and an idea about this that I shall share shortly)

The sacrifice for Devi Gadhimai is comparatively very benign. It is held once in five years. About 200,000 animals are sacrificed. The meat from slaughter is distributed to devotees and the hide sold to tanners.

Now my theory and idea – I believe in the sanctity of life. I also believe that there are no greater believers in the sanctity of life than these and such devotees of Devi Gadhimai.

Let me explain.

Today, when I want to eat meat for a meal all I need to do is walk into a store and buy the meat like I buy some coke or chocolate. I don’t rear the animal, witness the process of slaughter, the slaughter itself and the carving of the slaughtered animal that I or someone else reared. Today’s urban meat eaters are sham artists who cannot actually
bear the sight of blood. Impotent and shallow.

Here’s my idea emanating from this theory. Why not make all acts of meat consumption a sacrifice to our God/s? This way the procedure of slaughter will be adhered to. The rearing, the slaughtering (perhaps taking it to the abbotoir) and the consuming will be limited to the needs of the family’s worship. Therefore limited in time and scope – more meaningful too. Best of all this will stop the daily slaughter of millions upon millions of animals headed for the department stores.

Don’t you think this is true value for life?

Come to think of it – the devotees of the Devi are teaching the so called more civilized and more evolved a lesson of their lives.