Untenable Narrative of Islam: A Video


What is the “Narrative of Islam”? Is this narrative tenable? Does it not breed terrorism? If this narrative is pushed as an Islamic Agenda, will the world not come to war? If the war is to be fought, will it not be fought with the atomic weapons, with which many countries are armed today? If this narrative is not quickly changed into some peaceful alternative narrative, is it not a matter of “short time” that this war will be thrust upon the humanity? Watch this video and decide yourself the answers to these questions.

Make Military Service Compulsory – Why His Sons Only?


By : Wing Comdr Venki Iyer (with addition by: Shreepal Singh)

The helicopter appeared over the late morning horizon. We were to receive Mr Lachhman Singh Rathore who was visiting our Flight Unit to perform the last rites of his son, Flying Officer Vikram Singh.

Only the day before, I had sent the telegram, “Deeply regret to inform that your son Flying Officer Vikram Singh lost his life in a flying accident early this morning. Death was instantaneous.” It was the first time for me to meet and manage the bereaved next of kin, in this case the Father of the brave officer.

While most of the desolate family members insist on seeing the body, many a time there isn’t a body to show !! Flying Officer Vikram Singh’s remains were only a few kilos – scrapped from what was left in the cockpit. We had to weigh the wooden coffin with wood and earth.

The pilot brought the helicopter to a perfect touchdown. Soon Mr Lachhman Singh Rathor was helped down the ladder. A small and frail man he was, maybe of 80 years, clad in an immaculate dhoti.

As I approached him, he asked in a quiet and dignified whisper, “Are you Venki, the Flight Commander?” “Yes Sir.” “Vikram had spoken to me about you. I’d like to speak to you alone for a minute.”

We walked to the edge of the concrete apron. ‘I have lost a son, and you have lost a friend. I’m sure that you have taken great care in arranging the funeral. Please tell me when and where you want my presence and what you want me to do. I’ll be there for everything. Later, I would like to meet Vikram’s friends, see his room and, if it is permitted, visit his work place. I then would like to return home tomorrow morning.”

A commander couldn’t have given me clearer instructions.

The funeral, with full military honours, was concluded by late afternoon. After the final echoes of the ‘Last Post’ faded away, Lachhman Singh spent the evening talking to the Squadron Pilots. Vikram’s roommate took him to see Vikram’s room. Lachhman Singh desired to spend the night in his son’s room instead of the guest house we had reserved for him. Early next morning after a tour of the squadron area, my boss took him to his office.

A while later, the staff car took Lachhman Singh to the civil airfield two hours away.

As the car disappeared round the corner, I remarked to my Boss, “A brave man he is. Spoke to me like a General when he told me exactly what he expected from us during his stay here. I have never seen a more composed man on such an occasion. I admire him.”

“Yes, Mr Lachhman Singh Rathore is a warrior in his own way. He sired three sons and has laid to rest all three of them.

His first son Captain Ghanshyam Singh of the Gurkha Rifles was killed in Ladakh in 1962 War. His second son, Major Bir Singh, died along the Ichogil Canal in 1965 in an ambush. His youngest, Vikram Singh, who had the courage to join the Air Force, is also gone now.

It is more to our country’s defence than All of us combined.”

Yes, he is indeed a brave Indian; in fact he is more Indian than anyone else. His sacrifice can never ever be repaid by the country !! He is almost a martyr himself !!

But our Great Nation does not know this simple Giant — India only knows that super rich cricketers need to be conferred BHARAT RATNA while a bunch of actors and actresses need to be conferred PADMA VIBHUSHANs and PADMASHREEs !!

But what about the ‘ Losers ‘ ? Those who have SIMPLY LOST their EVERYTHING to the nation. Like this Father of Three Brave Soldiers.

Addition by: Shreepal Singh

India – that is we all together – can never repay for what Lakshman Singh Rathore, besides his three sons, has done to serve this nation. Shaming cricketers and the government that conferred Padam Bhushan and other Bhushans on them is simply not enough. The question is: Why should we be allowed to live in peace and Lakshman Singh Rathore’s sons be deployed to guarantee our peace? Why should we all be not forced to contribute our lives and our dear sons’ lives to guarantee the peace that we enjoy?

To lessen the pain of Lakshman Singh Rathore, to repay for the services of the likes of his sons and to do justice to the brave sons and daughters of Mother India, my suggestion is this:

Make the military service for every Indian for a few – 2 or 3 – years compulsory. It should be made a precondition for getting the Right to Vote and the Right to Contest Election. Our forces are not “Bhade ke Tattoo (available to give their life only for money)” but the proud sons and daughters of Mother India. One who does not dare to sacrifice his life for peace and security, does not have the right to enjoy his life in peace at the cost of somebody else life. Justice demands it.

There are many persons in this country who enjoy their life in peace and make it a mission of their life to destroy India – remember JNU slogans ‘India Tere Tukade Honge Hazar’, politicians sympathisizing with China or Pakistan, anti-national inhabitants of this country. They have no right to enjoy peace unless they pay for this peace.

The voting Right is the most valuable right of a citizen and the most valuable duty of a citizen is to guarantee the peace and security in this country – even if one has to sacrifice his or her life to secure this guarantee.

A Prophesy about India and Modi


[Note: This article was published on October 1, 2014. It is a repeat publishing]

By: Shreepal Singh

October 1, 2014]:

What is the worth of a prophecy! Is it not a nonsense exercise indulged in by crooks since ages? Prophecy is foretelling what would happen in future. Is it ever possible for a human being to tell in advance about the events that are going to take place in future? And more than this, is it possible to foretell about a nation, which is composed of crores of individuals? Any rational person would say it is never ever possible; it all is humbug!

Let us have a second look about this subject as a rational person. Can one foretell what would happen to a thing at a given time in future?

We all do it daily. We board a train bound to a destination, foretelling it would reach by the appointed time its destination. It does reach so in 99% of the cases. We calculated and foretold about one year in advance that India’s Mars Orbiter Mission/module would reach its destination; and, it did reach so.

In a way, we plan all our activities for today determined by our foretelling about what would happen tomorrow. Life’s all activities are goal oriented and the goal is always an object lying in the unknown future. Unless we are able to foretell, and foretell correctly, it is not possible for life to plan in the present so that progress is achieved in the future.

This type of foretelling is called prediction; and it is based on our scientific calculations, of which accuracy is vouchsafed by our uninterrupted human experience. It is not prophecy. What is the difference between a prediction and a prophecy? Let us see the difference.

All kinds of forecasting or foretelling involve an exercise that is akin to processing. This processing is nothing but the cumulative outcome of the inter-action of all the parametric conditions influencing an “object”, about which the foretelling is made. We can very well say that prediction, foretelling, forecasting and prophecy, all the four, have these elements in common: one – ascertaining “all the parametric conditions” (that would influence the object); two – knowledge or information about the “inter-action” of those conditions with the object (about which forecast is made); three – calculation of the “cumulative outcome” (of such inter-action).

Why does many a times a train bound for a destination not reach its destination; a space rocket programmed to hone in at a particular station not reach its desired spot; or, a person making efforts to achieve a goal in life not secure the same?

The answer is simple: There are too many parametric conditions out there in Nature under which events happen; it is not within the human-capacity to know all these conditions (even with the aid of all the available Super-Computers). Moreover, in laboratory these conditions may be ‘controlled’ and ‘duplicated’ again and again to test their cumulative effect; but it is not possible to do so in Nature.

We are not always able to “ascertain” all the parametric conditions (e.g., railroad may be broken, flooded; rocket may be pulled off way by an unknown gravitational pull; a person may miscalculate about his or her prospect; etc.). And / or, we may not know about the “inter-action” that may be involved (e.g., there may be outbreak of war disrupting train’s movement; cosmic radiation may damage navigational panels of the rocket; a person may fall ill making him or her fail in the goal). And / or, we fail to calculate the “cumulative outcome” of the influencing elements (e.g., broken or flooded railroad may even kill the passenger; rocket may be lost in the outer space; a person may win a fabulous lottery / be robbed and injured).

We know so much about these conditions and calculation and, still, we know almost nothing about them.

Here lies the mystery of prophecy and its efficacy. The correctness of a prediction is tested by its fulfillment and, likewise, the accuracy of a prophecy is tested by its coming true in the future as foretold.

Science knows the truth about many things; and it admits also that it does not know about many things yet. It is only because of this admission that science is still searching and progressing. What is the ratio between the things that science knows and the things that it does not know?

Science does not have any answer on this point.

The reasonable speculation is that science knows very little in comparison to what it does not know.

Opposite to science, there are Yogis who claim they know the secrets of this creation visible to us as universe. They claim that they can see the “parametric conditions”, “inter-action” of the elements involved and the “cumulative outcome” of this whole processing.

There is no way to verify the truthfulness of this claim of Yogis except by testing them through the realization of their prophecy in concrete reality.

It is very interesting to refer to a prophecy made about the future of India by the Mother of Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry.

Those who have read Sri Aurobindo and the Mother need no introduction of them. To those who have not heard about them, it is suffice to say that Sri Aurobindo represents the soul of spiritual India in our modern materialist age and the Mother, a disciple of Sri Aurobindo, was a Divine instrument to fulfill the assigned work of her Guru and Master. Great yogis, like her, completely identify their consciousness with that of the Divine and get vision of three dimensions of time, that is, past, present and future.

Yogis, like them, are able to envision the kaleidoscopic possibilities of events in the life of a nation depending upon the choice of acts/moves, which the people of that nation make on the crucial things and at the crucial moments.

The Mother saw the future of India. She told this vision to her secretary Sri Udar Pinto, who is now no more. The date of this vision about the future of India is not known, as Sri Pinto did not indicate it. But we can guess and make some rough estimate of it. The Mother left her body in 1973 and Sri Pinto revealed the prophecy after her physical death. It might have been made some time before her death in 1973.

It is what Sri Udar Pinto says: “I will try to give here what the Mother has said about this in Her own words, as far as I can…

“The Mother said that India would pass through a very difficult time. One Government after another would come but each would fail in solving the problems that would face the country in greater and greater intensity.

“One party after another would fail.

“There would be an attempt at a sort of dictatorship but this too, would fail and the people would become desperate.

“Then, finally, there would come the breaking point and at that time, if the people were not given the right lead they would take a wrong turn and India’s soul would suffer for centuries.

“So they must be correctly guided at that point.

“This is more or less in Mother’s own words and so we can see how what she said is happening and how important it is for us to be ready. (Unquote of Sri Udar Pinto)”

We can identify certain important points in time in the recent history of India and co-relate events that took place since then.

This spiritual vision was seen by the Mother before 1973 and at that time there was no possibility of speculating about the instability in Indian national life (which took place thereafter) or the desperate act of ‘attempting at a sort of dictatorship’ in India (which was done by Smt. Indira Gandhi by imposing an emergency in 1975).

Perhaps we may be justified in saying that India as a nation has seen instability, on one after another occasions; has seen our political leaders taking desperate steps by way of moving towards dictatorship.

Also, perhaps, we may be justified in saying that, in spiritual significance, a breaking point had been reached in the life of India as a nation during the ten-year long UPA regime when this nation was sought to be put by its political leaders on to the path of cultural and political debauchery.

Did it not amount to India “taking a wrong turn” as envisioned by the Mother? As usual, some will not agree.

In the vision, there is a warning: “At that time, if the people were not given the right lead they would take a wrong turn and India’s soul would suffer for centuries”!

What do you make of these words? Where do you put Modi, after his getting a stunning victory over the UPA?

Is Modi giving a right lead in the life of this nation? One may again disagree.

But one thing is certain, and perhaps there cannot be any disagreement on this, that if India, as a nation, had a culture rooted in spiritualism; if India, as a nation, had a soul; it certainly would have suffered for centuries had the UPA got its way; got its “India is an idea” imposed on this nation.

But mercifully that eventuality has been warded off.

It is because the people of India are being given the right lead by Modi.

(Addition on January 22, 2018: By taking into accounts of all the efforts that Modi has put in since 2014, this prophesy seems to be mercifully fulfilling.)

An idea that Can Destroy the Humanity!


There was recent news that in Varanasi – a holy Hindu city of India and the electoral constituency of the Indian Prime Minister – the police have discovered the activity of constructing a vast underground facility near a mosque – known as Langda Masjid. The underground area of the complex is quite wide: about 4000 square yards. It may be a small news but a few big questions arise: Why was it an underground complex? Why was it being constructed secretly? Obviously, the authorities were not informed, let alone seeking permission to construct the facility. Why was it being constructed? What was the intended use and purpose of this complex? Why was it being constructed clandestinely?

The answers to these questions could be: It was being constructed underground because there was scarcity of land over ground. But the answer could well be: It was to be used to store arsenal – dynamite, rifles, tenguns, rocket launchers and the like. Then, it was being constructed secretly because money by way of illegal gratification would have been demanded by the authorities to allow this construction. But the answer could well be:  It was being constructed secretly because the persons responsible for this construction did not want the police to know this complex.

To find out the correct answer out of the two alternatives, one has to look around to find out what is happening in many neighboring countries today; and to look into the past to know what had happened because of such illegal activities and preparations, to assess the likelihood for future.

And, if one is to err, it is better to err on the right side.

There is also recent news that China in one of its Muslim populated areas has banned the students from attending religious programs and even banned the reading of the religious books. Why China did so ban its students? The answer could well be: China so banned its students from attending religious activities because it is a Communist country, which ideology does not permit the belief in any religion. But the answer could as well be: China so banned its students because its authorities thought that such religious teachings and gatherings spread dangerous ideas.

Our world is a fast changing small village today and to survive one must learn from everywhere and quickly.

In the case of Varanasi, was it a preparation for civil war propelled by an idea? It is more probable than not. And the preparations propelled by such an idea are not confined today to one city or one country alone. Almost the whole world – U. S. England, France, Russia, China, almost all the peaceful countries of the world – is within its sweep.

We human beings live in the world of ideas. An idea can be more lethal than a weapon.

Every man is like another man. All the people are alike. All persons are equal. There should not be any discrimination between person and person. Equality is the buzz word in our civilized world today.

But are all persons alike? Let us come to the real world.

All the persons are alike but they have different ideas. It is the idea that makes them different. It is as plain as it could be. All ideas are not alike and so are the persons holding them.

It is only an idea that makes a person – holding a gun in his hand, braving the vagaries of weather, heat and cold, hazards of crawling snakes and security forces chasing him in the Naxal infested Chhattisgarh – different from another person carrying on his daily life – being happy or unhappy – in a peaceful way. It is an idea that makes all the difference between person and person in our world where we humans live.

It is an idea that you must believe, what I believe. It is immaterial whether this idea is true or not.

It is an idea that I must force all those others – who do not believe in what I believe in – to believe in what I believe.

It is an idea that if those others do not succumb to my demand, they must be killed by me.

It is an idea that if I succeed in my attempt to kill those others, I will be rewarded for this act.

It is an idea that if I – in making such an attempt – am killed, I will be rewarded, rewarded not in this world but in the next world to which I am dispatched by the victor in the duel.

All persons are good. But all ideas are not good. One should be aware that killing is not done today by swords only but also by atom bombs – and certainly by atom bombs, if this duel reaches to its logical conclusion.

If one compares the idea that propels a human being waging war in the Chhattisgarh forests to the idea that propels another human being carrying his war in every nook and corner of this world, one would find that the later idea is more lethal in its capacity to destroy our peaceful world. We know that the idea homing in the mind of the Chhattisgarh’s person offers reward only if he succeeds in killing his enemy to the last man – reward in the form of a State of his Communist idea, in which event he could be at the top in that dispensation. But the idea finding home in the mind of the person of the second category offers reward even if that man dies attempting to fulfill his idea.

It is really a very dangerous idea. But all persons are good – it is only the idea that is dangerous.

But how would one spot the difference between a person and a person holding that idea?

In the instance of the Chhattisgarh thing, one can identify a person holding that idea by spotting a red flag hoisted atop his house, which eventuality is almost always absent; for, holding that idea is not a fool. Nobody holding that idea would hoist a red flag atop his house – for the red flag would connect him to his idea. For the security forces it would be really difficult to spot a person holding that idea.

In the case of the second instance, it is not so. One who holds that idea must – as a mandate – display that idea by flaunting the symbols associated with that idea. It is like hoisting a red flag atop one’s house to certify that he holds that idea. No one needs any effort to spot the beholder of that idea.

The world must come to its senses to grasp this reality and find out the ways and means to deal with this reality without much delay. The terrible events taking place around the world in the recent past indicate that our world is coming to its senses but still hesitant to deal with the danger facing it.

It is not the human beings but the idea that the world should find ways and means to deal with. All human beings are born innocent – and they come to hold ideas later on.

All nations throughout the world must protect their children and their innocence against the onslaught of such dangerous idea. How can children – the next generation of humanity – be protected from the poison of such an idea?

It can be done and must be done by the world to avert the possibility of a fearful destruction of humanity. The world must unite to outlaw the teaching to children of only one religion in segregated gatherings – and promote teaching of all religions to them simultaneously in the common gatherings – or, alternatively, prohibit the religious education to them before they become of an adult age and of the mature thinking mind.

 

 

Emphatic No to Togadia! We Stand United With Modi


  • By: Name withheld

The hatred of Praveen Togadia for our honorable Prime Minister Narendra Modi is not new. I would just come to the current issue and, for that, recall some facts.

  1. In 2002, after Narendra Modi won the elections and became the CM, the first thing he did was sidelining Praveen Togadia (PT) by removing Gordhan Zadafiya (the closest aide of PT) as Home Minister. Modi ensured that there was not even the slightest interference of PT and VHP when it came to official works of the government and issues related to ministries. This was the beginning.
    .
  2. With time, PT was sidelined and his influence on Gujarat government literally became zero due to strong governance of Modi.
    .
  3. In 2005, about 300 VHP leaders who had gathered to protest and create chaos in cities of Gujarat were lathicharged on the orders of Home Ministry (Gujarat Government) to ensure there was no bandh, curfew and chaos. This had angered Togadia and he wanted to teach Modi a lesson.
    .
  4. In 2007, Praveen Togadia, other VHP leaders and workers were dealt with very strongly when they interfered with government’s anti-encroachment drive and other development programs. More than 200 VHP workers were beaten when they tried to stop demolition of illegal structures.
    .
  5. Also, police used to beat and arrest VHP members who created chaos in cities of Gujarat during Valentine’s day in the name of moral policing. In 2011, Praveen Togadia had alleged that Modi was pursuing “secularism” and had dumped the Hindus.
    .
  6. In 2012 elections,Praveen Togadia and Gordhan Zadafia fielded more than 50 candidates to split the Hindu votes in order to teach Modi a lesson. The trick did not work, and Modi won 2012 elections comfortably. Once a strongman, Togadia had no influence left whatsoever. Modi and Shah had made sure that there was no external interference when it came to running government.
    .
  7. CCTV footage has emerged and it exposes all the lies peddled by Togadia since yesterday. The CCTV footage shows Togadia silently entering the house of his friend.
    .
  8. Senior Congress leader Arjun Modhwadiya and Hardik Patel met Praveen Togadia yesterday. Soon after meeting them, today he made a claim that the central and state governments are planning to get him killed. This is another well scripted drama.
    .
  9. Congress is using every single person who has personal difference with Modi to polarise and split the Hindu votes – first it were the Patidars (loyal supporters of Modi) and now it is supporters of Togadia. They are all being used by Congress to split.
    .
  10. This is the strategy of turning the so called “Hindu extreme right” against Modi by portraying him as anti-Hindu and secular.

  11. Praveen Togadia is just trying to divide Hindus for his personal interest in power and ego clash with Narendra Modi. Wake up and see through his evil game.

Indian Genius: ‘Decimal’ and ‘Place Value’ – Used in Math and Language, Both!


By: Shreepal Singh

Sanskrit is an ancient language – really very ancient one. It is regarded as the mother of all the so-called ‘Family of Indo-European languages’. Which are these European and Indian languages today?

Almost all the languages of Europe are included in this family. All these languages have some surviving traces of their Mother Language – Sanskrit or Proto (the original) Sanskrit– still available in them. The abysmally low amount of these traces available in these languages indicate that none of the European languages could preserve their mother language as its body part.

But it is not so with the Indian part of this family. Which are the languages of the Indian part of this family? Almost all the modern Indian languages are included in this family. While the European languages have these little traces in some of their words only in the form of phonetic similarity with Sanskrit words, in the case of Indian languages it is not so.

In the Indian languages still a large number of words are used in their either pure or impure Sanskrit forms. Apparently these Indian languages are the descendants of the Sanskrit, founded on Sanskrit roots with some distortion. However, there is one exception in this descent: None of these Indian languages uses the Sanskrit grammar. In the resemblance of derivative words, Hindi language is the most notable and widely spoken in India.

‘Decimal’ and ‘Place Value’ in Numbers:

Let us first consider the application of the concepts of ‘Decimal’ and ‘Place Value’ in mathematics since ages – since the very origin of Sanskrit language itself, which is shrouded in the mist of past. We all use the system of ‘Decimal’ in our day today life, without realizing the genius of ancient Indians who invented this system.

We know ‘decimal’, an English word, is derived from the Sanskrit word ‘Dashamlav’ (दशम् लव), where दशम is ‘Ten’ and लव is ‘Positioning or Placement’. दशम लव is the system of ten. Decimal system in mathematics is the incremental gradation of anything from 1 through 9, with an additional number as 0 (Zero). What is the purpose and intent of this incremental gradation? For example, what is the meaning of 1 and 2? It simply means that whatever quantum 1 holds, twice of that quantum is held by 2. Likewise, it goes on increasing always in relation to 1, up to 9 in count. Plainly, numbers 2 through 9 is a comparison with 1. It is a relation of 2 through 9 with 1. Conceptually, number 1 may have in it an amount, a quantity.  Whatever this amount or quantity may be, is immaterial. Numbers 2 through 9 are only a comparison with what number 1 holds. It is a relation, where 1 is the unit.

In Sanskrit language, the scheme of ‘Decimal’ deals with ‘relationship’ only and, incidentally, the scheme therein of alphabets coupled with sounds deals with ‘things’ only. So far as this material world – ney, universe – is concerned, from the human perspective it is only a bundle of things and their relations. Beyond this, there is nothing here. Sanskrit language is so perfect an instrument in the hands of humans that it takes care of their concern of things and these things’ relations with one another. In fact, Sanskrit is the embodiment of human speech and mathametical numbers!

In decimal system, one can go on increasing this gradation comparing 1 with any number up to the infinity and still it will be only a relation with 1 of all those individual numbers up to infinity.  But if you want to record this relationship by using some signs – or numerical script – up to any significantly high number, let alone up to infinity, you would be forced to invent a very large number of symbols in that script – or, at least, using the symbol of 1 as many times as you want to count. We know the difficulty of writing numbers by Romans numerals, which we still use for a few special purposes. It is a crude method of writing numerals. It needs a large number of symbols or, alternatively, large amount of space to put a few numerals!

We all know it.

To circumvent this difficulty, India invented a device ages ago, not only the relational concept of 1 with 2 through 9 but also an additional symbol of 0 (Zero). This 0 also is nothing but again a relation with 1. The purpose and intent of 0 is to compare it with 1. This comparison states that whatever amount or quantity (of anything) this 1 contains in it, this amount or quantity is absent in 0. It is simply a relation of 1 with 0. In the decimal system invented by the genius of ancient Indians, the only material number is 1. Rest of the numbers – up to infinity – are only the individual comparison – relation – with 1. This number 1 is the only definable entity, which could be anything, and all the rest of the numbers are relational with this number 1. You can compare this 1 with any number up to infinity.  The number 1 is a unit.

But how does one record these relational numbers in a script? Here again ancient India excelled in its genius. Its genius invented another use of 0, in addition to its (zero’s) use as a relation with 1. This 0 was utilized to denote a specific place to these numbers 2 through 9. For example, number 2 is not only a relational quantum, that is, 2 is not always twice in amount or value of 1. In relational value, number 2 is always twice the value of number 1 but by assigning a definite place to this 2 in the script with respect to other numbers used there, this 2 changes its value. Depending upon the place assigned to this 2 in a sum, this 2 may be increased or decreased in its relational value with 1. It is not all. This ‘increase’ or ‘decrease’ in the value of 2 depending its place in the whole sum is again ‘ten-fold’. By the use of ‘0’ this ‘2’ could be increased or decreased ìn its value ten-fold at the each use of ‘0’ – in any number of steps that one may like – upto infinity.

The particular place assigned to ‘a digit’ in a sum with the aid of ‘0 digit’ is itself a value, which is again a relation with 1. In this scheme of ‘decimal’ system, the only material concepts are: ‘1’ (i.e., a unit to be compared with by any number up to infinity, which is only a relation); ‘0’ as a device (i.e. a device to assign a digit any place in the sum, which again is a relation – increasing or decreasing the value of that digit); and, ‘0’ as a relation (i.e. holding a negative value of 1, which is again a relation with 1). Indeed, it an amazing invention made by the Indian genius!

‘Decimal’ and ‘Place Value’ in Sanskrit Language:

Another wonder of the genius of ancient India is the utilizing these concepts of decimal and place value in the Sanskrit language.

Sanskrit language is written in Devanagari script. In the matters of the descent from the Sanskrit language and the popularity in modern India, Hindi language inherits the legacy of Sanskrit. Hindi is spoken by millions of people in India. Hindi, like Sanskrit, is too written in the Devanagari script. Hindi is recognized as the national language of India by the Indian Constitution. Let us consider Sanskrit and how this language utilizes the concepts of ‘decimal’ and ‘place value’ in its alphabets. While considering these aspects of Sanskrit language, to highlight these specialties, the author will compare the position of English language in this respect.

Sanskrit alphabets have classes and categories. The classes are: क च ट त प and the alphabets of conjunct-ed voice. The categories of the former class of alphabets are: Soft, Hard and Swift. The Soft category, and followed by the Hard category, of these classes of alphabets are:

Soft: क Hard: ख

Soft: ग Hard: घ  (Next note of sound in musical ascendance of क and ग ): ङ
Soft: च Hard: छ
Soft: ज Hard: झ (Next note of sound in musical ascendance of च and ज ): ञ
Soft: ट Hard: ठ
Soft: ड Hard: ढ  (Next note of sound in musical ascendance of ट and ड ): ण
Soft: त Hard: थ
Soft: द Hard: ध
Soft: प Hard: फ

Soft: ब Hard: भ

The Swift category of alphabets is made by making them ‘Half’ for sounding them swift when written in conjunction with the next following alphabet, like this: ग्वाल, कथ्था, मक्खन, चमच्च, क्लास, ख्याल, पत्थर; This is the way of Sanskrit to make the sound of an alphabet Swift. But it is made possible by writing an alphabet ‘half’ and then reading it in ‘conjunction’ with the next following alphabet. But if there is an alphabet that needs to sound swift but not in conjunction with any other alphabet but independently, how do you do it? For this ‘halant’ symbol is used, like क् ; ह् ; etc. This making a ‘half’ of one alphabet is a novel invention of Sanskrit language, which is not found in any other language, and serves to control the speed – swift or slow – of the sound of the alphabet concerned. For example, there is phonetic difference among words कलास, कालास and  क्लास in Sanskrit but in English you can write and sound ‘class’ but cannot accurately write and sound कलास and कालास words. English is handicapped in this matter.

The class of alphabets of the conjuncted voice are: क्ष ॠ त्र ज्ञ श्र and they respectively pronounced as in:  क्षत्रप ॠषि त्राटक ज्ञानी श्रीमान .

In addition to these divisions, this language creates fine nuance to the sound of र by adding it as a sound or ‘Matra’ above, below or with an alphabet, like this: वर्तमान, पृथ्वी, प्रयोग, वृक्ष, कर्म, प्रथम;

The genius of ancient Indians, who crafted Sanskrit language, lies, firstly, in the fact that there is a certain relation of frequency (or pitch) of sound contained in each alphabet of these classes and its categories to the next following alphabet. For example, a) क has frequency or pitch relationship with ख b) क has again a relation with ग c) By finding the pitch relation with क and ग one can assess the pitch of the last alphabet of this class, that is, ङ . The same holds true for all the other classes and categories, viz.: च छ, ज झ  and ञ; ट ठ, ड ढ and ण; त थ, द ध; प फ, ब भ;

Incidentally, this property of phonetically two classes of Sanskrit alphabets can be exploited in computer compilation program by assigning one extra digit to the Soft class or Hard class.

In English language, there is no knowledge of such difference of the ‘Soft’, ‘Hard’ and ‘Swift’ categories of its alphabets. Also, in English there is no awareness of the ascendance of the musical notes in the sequence of its alphabets. For example, a, b, c, d, e, f etc. have neither pitch connection and difference nor any sense of ascendance of sound. In this language, these alphabets look unconnected, at random and crude in sound.

In fact, all the fine nuiences of different sounds written in Sanskrit alphabets cannot be accurately written in English language. For example, b of English is ब of Sanskrit; but English has no alphabet भ of Sanskrit (which is Sanskrit’s ‘Hard’ category of ‘ब ‘). English has to somehow make do this deficiency by joining b and h like ‘bh’. Or, t of English is ट  of Sanskrit but English has no alphabet ठ of Sanskrit (which is Sanskrit’s ‘Hard’ category of ‘ट’) and English has to somehow make do this deficiency by joining t and h like: ‘th’ etc. But unfortunately for English, if ठ of Sanskrit is written as ‘th’, then there is no way of writing Sanskrit’s थ (Hard of  त), as it would again be written in English as ‘th’. In fact, English’s ‘th’ is neither ‘ठ’ nor ‘थ’ of Sanskrit. Likewise, there is no sense of difference of ‘sound nuance’ in English language of Sanskrit alphabets: ख, घ, ङ, छ, झ, ञ, ढ, ण, ध, श, ष, स, अः, अं, अः, ऋ, क्ष, ज्ञ, त्र, श्र, ॠ etc.  and absolutely no way to accurately write them.

In Sanskrit language, there is a difference in pronouncing पृथ्वी, प्रयोग and कर्म, in all of which र (or R) is used, but English cannot make out this fine difference of the pitch of sound.

In addition to these alphabets of Sanskrit, this language has ‘Short’ and ‘Long’ sounds or vowels.

The ‘Short’ sounding vowels are: अ इ उ ए ओ अं

The ‘Long’ counterpart of these ‘Long’ vowels are: आ ई ऊ ऐ औ अः

These ‘Short’ and ‘Long’ sounding vowels can be used in two ways: Firstly, as independent alphabets. Secondly, for giving a particular sound to ‘Soft’ and ‘Hard’ alphabets.

However, the sound of अ by default is already integrated with each of the alphabets. Thus, for example, ट is  ट +  अ;  ल is ल + अ; etc. This addition of  अ  to every alphabet by default gives them the stability and depth of sound and provides a word made out of these alphabets a sonorous or musical tone. To add the tonal effect of ’emphasis’ to an alphabet, the sound of vowel  अः is put to the front of an alphabet, like चः कः नः; etc.

The genius of ancient Indians, while crafting Sanskrit, lies, secondly, in the fact that all the sound vowels available in Devanagari script are added by utilizing the space available above, below, back and front of these alphabets while hanging with their head from the top of limiting straight line. In Sanskrit, alphabets are not written by putting them one after another in a row, as is done in English. For utilizing the available space above, below, back and front of an alphabet, alphabets in Devanagari script are written like ‘hanging down at their head’ from a top straight line. Every alphabet, as a rule, has to be written below this line. The space above this line is reserved for adding a ‘Sound’ or ‘Matra’ to the alphabet hanging just at that point below the line.

Thus, for example, the sound of इ  is added to the alphabet क by going above the limiting line – just above this क – to make it look like, कि or to add another sound of उ by going just below the limiting line, like: कु

All the sounds are added to the alphabet: like प – प पा पि पी पु पू पं पो पौ पे पै; like त – त ता ति ती तु तू तं तो तौ ते तै; etc.

The advantage of this scheme is that, in Sanskrit language employing Devanagari script, one can write and pronounce any alphabet, word or sentence of any language of the world with the mathematical accuracy. But the reverse of this not true. There is perhaps no language in the world, except the Sanskrit language, that can accurately write and pronounce all the possible sounds of alphabets, words or sentences so accurately.

For example, in Sanskrit one can accurately write and pronounce: रावण; तट; तत् सत;  त्रोटक; षौडष; सिहं, शीस, सीसा, शशिकला etc. But in English there is no way to accurately write or pronounce these words. In English these words would be written like this: Ravana, tat, tat sat, trotak, shodash, singh, sheesh, seesa, shashikala, which in Sanskrit would be read as रावणा, टट, टरोटक, शोडाश, सिघं, शीश, सीसा, शाशिकाला etc. (which words have meanings different from their original Sanskrit counterparts!)

Sanskrit language is mathematically accurate and precise in its scheme of the arrangement of these alphabets. This accuracy and precision of the Sanskrit’s scheme of arranging alphabets contributed to the discovery of the Periodic Table of Elements by Mendeleev. In making his discovery of the Periodic Table of Elements Mendeleev was inspired by the arrangement of alphabets in Sanskrit.

Sanskrit Language is Music:
 

Sanskrit is a music producing language. It has everything to do with ‘दशम लव’ or the number 10. In this language there are only 10 alphabets each in its two categories, viz, soft and hard. The alphabets in soft category, as stated above, are  क ग च ज ट ड त द प and ब. Each one of these 10 alphabets in Soft category has its equivalent in the Hard category, thus adding 10 more alphabets. These 10 hard counterparts of their Soft cousin are: ख घ छ झ ठ ढ थ ध फ and भ.

Now, there are 10 more alphabets that have no Soft or Hard categories. These are:  न म य र ल व श ष स and ह. Thus, in all there are 10 basic alphabets in the Soft category plus 10 as their counter part in the Hard category and 10 more alphabets without category. In all they become 30 in number.

Apart from these alphabets, as stated above, Sanskrit language has 5 vowels of Short sound and 5 vowels of Long sound: अ इ उ ए ओ (of the Short sound); आ ई ऊ ऐ औ (of the Long sound). Apart from these, there are 2 more sounds or vowels, which have no Short and Long forms, viz.: अं अः . When these Short or Long sounds are added to the Soft or the Hard alphabets, they produce a peculiarly accentuated kind of sound for every Sanskrit word. In addition to the joining of these sounds to Soft and Hard alphabets, these sound are also used as independent alphabets.

The tone, nuance and sound vibration of every alphabet and word of the Sanskrit language is so precise that learning and speaking this language is the best speech therapy.

The wonderful thing that one finds in this language is that, when spoken, these notes of sounds embedded in Sanskrit words and sentences produce a rhythmic sound or music, apart from the meaning that these words – producing such music – convey.

What is a musical sound? A strongly regular waveform of any sound is a musical sound. The pitch of a sound is determined by the frequency of the vibration of that sound.

If one is able to recite the Sanskrit prose or poem accurately, it is a music. Now, music creates a positive impact on human mind. The musical impact of Sanskrit speaking nourishes the human brain and enhances its memory retention power.

Sample of Sanskrit speaking:

Sample 1:

Sample 2:

Sample 3:

Sample 4:

It has been found that if Sanskrit text – prose or poem in Slokas – is spoken regularly by a person for a sufficiently long period, it produces a change in the biological structure of the brain of that person. A neuroscience researcher conducting experiment on the effect of Sanskrit speaking on the human brain has found that regular Sanskrit speaking enhances one’s memory and the concerned part of the human brain is biologically changes its shape by increasing its area.

This research paper is published in the Scientific American HERE.

Also have a look at this article on this subject HERE.

Sri Aurobindo on Gita: Duty to Fight – Against ‘Unjust’ and For ‘Just’ Cause!


Sri Aurobindo was no exception to the rule. But before writing his famous Essays on the Gita in his monthly Arya between 1916 and 1920, he had had a long acquaintance with the Song of the Lord. That was no mere intellectual or philosophical inquiry, for, in the true tradition of yoga, Sri Aurobindo always was an experimenter before anything else—he even rejected the label of “philosopher” : “[Modern] philosophy,” he said, “I consider only intellectual and therefore of secondary value. Experience and formulation of experience I consider as the true aim of philosophy.”[1]

From his return from England to India in 1893, at the age of twenty, and until 1905, Sri Aurobindo worked in the Baroda State Service. That left him enough leisure to immerse himself in Sanskrit scriptures, since, having had a completely Western education, he wanted to rediscover his roots. Among his favourites were the two Epics, the Upanishads, and Kalidas.

He translated large portions of the Ramayana and Mahabharata into English, though only a few survived his later tribulations. Romesh Chandra Dutt, whose own adaptations of the Epics were popular in those days, asked to see Sri Aurobindo’s translations at Baroda, and remarked that had he seen them earlier, he would never have published his own.[2]

In that very first study of the Gita before he was even thirty, the one thing that struck Sri Aurobindo was its bold “gospel of action” [3] and its stress on the Kshatriya’s “duty to protect the world from the reign of injustice,”[4] a virile and distinctive Indian message as he immediately saw :

“The Christian and Buddhistic doctrine of turning the other cheek to the smiter,” he scribbled in his notebooks, “is as dangerous as it is impracticable. [It is] a radically false moral distinction and the lip profession of an ideal which mankind has never been able or willing to carry into practice. The disinterested and desireless pursuit of duty is a gospel worthy of the strongest manhood ; that of the cheek turned to the smiter is a gospel for cowards and weaklings. Babes and sucklings may practise it, because they must, but with others it is a hypocrisy.”[5]

The Gita and the Nationalists

The Gita’s stress on true manhood and “desireless duty” or nishkama karma was to be Sri Aurobindo’s prime inspiration during his revolutionary days. It is little known that Sri Aurobindo was, in 1906, the first Indian to openly call for complete independence from the British Empire,[6] at a time when the Congress Moderates were busy praising the “providential character” of British rule in India and swearing their “unswerving allegiance to the British crown.”

Through the pages of the English daily Bande Mataram and in his speeches, Sri Aurobindo exhorted his countrymen to find in themselves the strength to stand up to their colonial masters. He soon became the leader in Bengal of those whom the Moderates contemptuously called the “Extremists.” In April 1908, a few days before his arrest in the Alipore Bomb Case, he wrote :

A certain class of minds shrink from aggressiveness as if it were a sin. Their temperament forbids them to feel the delight of battle and they look on what they cannot understand as something monstrous and sinful. “Heal hate by love, drive out injustice by justice, slay sin by righteousness” is their cry. Love is a sacred name, but it is easier to speak of love than to love…. The Gita is the best answer to those who shrink from battle as a sin and aggression as a lowering of morality.[7]

Clearly, Sri Aurobindo anticipated here the rise of non-violence as a creed ; but he took Sri Krishna’s admonition of Arjuna literally and, like Swami Vivekananda, put his faith in strength, not in ahimsa. Shortly after his release from jail the following year, Sri Aurobindo developed this point in a speech on the Gita at Khulna :

The virtue of the Brahmin is a great virtue : You shall not kill. This is what Ahimsa means. [But] if the virtue of Ahimsa comes to the Kshatriya, if you say “I will not kill,” there is no one to protect the country. The happiness of the people will be broken down. Injustice and lawlessness will reign. The virtue becomes a source of misery, and you become instrumental in bringing misery and conflict to the people.[8]

The teaching of the Gita, he said in his concluding words, “means perfection of action. It makes man great. It gives him the utter strength, the utter bliss which is the goal of life in the world.”[9]

Indeed, the revolutionaries in Bengal and Maharashtra drew such inspiration from the Gita that the colonial authorities came to regard it as a “gospel of terrorism,” and it became one of the most sought-after pieces of evidence in police raids ; it is also one of the chief influences cited in the 1918 Rowlatt Sedition Committee Report, side by side with Swami Vivekananda’s works.[10] Sri Aurobindo himself is said to have given initiation to several revolutionaries by making them swear on the Gita that they would do everything to liberate India from the foreign yoke.[11] But in the columns of the Karmayogin, he took objection to this summary characterization of the Gita :

We strongly protest against the brand of suspicion that has been sought to be placed in many quarters on the teaching and possession of the Gita—our chief national heritage, our hope for the future, our great force for the purification of the moral weaknesses that stain and hamper our people.[12]

The Yoga of the Gita

Though he drew strength from the Gita, Sri Aurobindo knew better than to see in it “a mere gospel of war and heroic action, a Nietzschean creed of power and high-browed strength, of Hebraic or old Teutonic hardness.”[13] During his year-long solitary imprisonment in the Alipore jail, he intensively practised the yoga spelt out by Sri Krishna. Soon after his unexpected acquittal in May 1909, in his famous speech at Uttarpara he recounted something of his experience :

He placed the Gita in my hands. His strength entered into me and I was able to do the Sadhana of the Gita. I was not only to understand intellectually but to realise what Sri Krishna demanded of Arjuna and what He demands of those who aspire to do his work..[14]

To “realize,” let us note again. And what he first realized was the divine Oneness described in the Gita : “The man whose self is in Yoga, sees the self in all beings and all beings in the self, he is equal-visioned everywhere. He who sees Me everywhere and sees all in Me, to him I do not get lost, nor does he get lost to Me.” (VI.29, 30) In Sri Aurobindo’s words :

I looked at the jail that secluded me from men and it was no longer by its high walls that I was imprisoned ; no, it was Vasudeva who surrounded me. I walked under the branches of the tree in front of my cell but it was not the tree, I knew it was Vasudeva, it was Sri Krishna whom I saw standing there and holding over me his shade. I looked at the bars of my cell, the very grating that did duty for a door and again I saw Vasudeva. It was Narayana who was guarding and standing sentry over me.

Or I lay on the coarse blankets that were given me for a couch and felt the arms of Sri Krishna around me, the arms of my Friend and Lover…. I looked at the prisoners in the jail, the thieves, the murderers, the swindlers, and as I looked at them I saw Vasudeva, it was Narayana whom I found in these darkened souls and misused bodies.

When the case opened … I was followed by the same insight. He said to me, “When you were cast into jail, did not your heart fail and did you not cry out to me, where is Thy protection ? Look now at the Magistrate, look now at the Prosecuting Counsel.” I looked and it was not the Magistrate whom I saw, it was Vasudeva, it was Narayana who was sitting there on the bench. I looked at the Prosecuting Counsel and it was not the Counsel for the prosecution that I saw ; it was Sri Krishna who sat there and smiled. “Now do you fear ?” He said, “I am in all men and I overrule their actions and their words.”[15]

Such was the supreme experience Sri Aurobindo received in jail, which never left him afterwards. And such is the supreme paradox of the Gita, that we must act and act boldly and sometimes fiercely, knowing and seeing all the while that all is He, that there is nothing in this entire universe that is not essentially the Divine.

I stress the word “essentially,” because there lies, according to Sri Aurobindo, the key to the apparent paradox : all is essentially divine, but until it is manifestly so, this creation will remain a Kurukshetra and it will be our duty to fight for the truth. For the Gita is not concerned with our shallow and too often hypocritical “human rights” ; it deals rather with our human duties : we are human beings only if we are prepared to fight for the truth, not otherwise.

In his Essays, Sri Aurobindo expounded at length, and never in a dry metaphysical manner, every aspect of the Gita, ethical and spiritual : its stress on action, its karma yoga based on true equality, non-attachment and renunciation of the ego, culminating in the abandonment of all dharmas, its broad synthesis of Vedanta, Sankhya, Jñana, Bhakti and even Tantra, its deep insights into the workings of Nature, into human nature with its divine as well as diabolical possibilities, its call to go beyond morality and the three gunas to the supreme truth…. I cannot even outline here these profound expositions which go to the roots of almost every problem of life and yoga which Indian thought and practice has faced.

But, at the cost of incompleteness, there is one core teaching of the Gita we need to look into, one that Sri Aurobindo lays particular stress on, and the very one that had inspired him during his revolutionary days—that is, the problem of action and the use of force to defend dharma.

The Gita, the Gospel of Strength, and Non-Violence

It is customary nowadays to hear that Hinduism is at bottom a “message of tolerance and non-violence”—that has become a kind of slogan which our politicians and media people alike are fond of mouthing without even stopping to think about it. Let us for now pass over the question of tolerance, except to recall these words of Sri Krishna : “Even those who sacrifice to other godheads with devotion and faith, they also sacrifice to Me…. I am equal in all existences, none is dear to Me, none hated” (9.23, 29)—this, along with the famous Vedic affirmation about the many names of the One Existent, contains much more than what is ordinarily meant by “tolerance,” and it is an assurance we are not likely to encounter in any Scripture of the three Semitic religions.

But let us rather dwell on the point of non-violence. Our first observation is that, unlike Buddhism or Jainism, Hinduism never made a universal doctrine of ahimsa, which remained limited to the Brahmin’s dharma, even then with qualifications. True, we have in the Mahabharata the maxim ahimsa paramo dharmah, “ahimsa is the highest law,” but that is never intended for the Kshatriya. There is even a very sensible observation made to the Brahmin Kausika : “When the earth is ploughed, numberless creatures lurking in the ground are destroyed…. Fish preys upon fish, various animals prey upon other species, and some species even prey upon themselves….

The earth and the air all swarm with living organisms which are unconsciously destroyed by men from mere ignorance. Ahimsa was ordained of old by men who were ignorant of the true facts. There is not a man on the face of the earth who is free from the sin of doing injury to creatures.”[16] Then there is the humorous episode in the Devi Bhagavata (skanda 4), in which Brihaspati (in the guise of Sukracharya) preaches ahimsa paramo dharmah to the Asuras and enjoins them “not to injure even those who come to kill you”—but this he preaches to the Asuras so as to disarm them, not to the Devas !

Finally, let us note that even Jainism, which made the maxim one of its central teachings, allows monks to attain liberation by fasting to death—an undeniable act of himsa. There is clearly nothing absolute about the much-abused saying.

There is also nothing non-violent about the wars in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, about some of the Veda’s fierce gods, or Durga’s and Kali’s pitiless destruction of Asuras. Sanskrit texts, as also the Sangam literature and folk legends, resound with heroes and heroic deeds, and Sri Krishna echoes them when he declares : “I am the strength of the mighty” (10.36).

As was his wont, Sri Aurobindo faced this central problem squarely :

Unless we have the honesty and courage to look existence straight in the face, we shall never arrive at any effective solution of its discords and oppositions. We must see first what life and the world are…. Our very bodily life is a constant dying and being reborn, the body itself a beleaguered city attacked by assailing, protected by defending forces whose business is to devour each other….War and destruction are not only a universal principle of our life here in its purely material aspects, but also of our mental and moral existence…. It is impossible, at least as men and things are, to advance, to grow, to fulfil and still to observe really and utterly that principle of harmlessness which is yet placed before us as the highest and best law of conduct.[17]

Significantly, this passage from his Essays was published in the December 1916 issue of the Arya, in the middle of the First World War, but also when Mahatma Gandhi had joined the national movement and started propagating his doctrine of ahimsa. Sri Aurobindo continues :

This world of our battle and labour is a fierce dangerous destructive devouring world in which life exists precariously and the soul and body of man move among enormous perils, a world in which by every step forward, whether we will it or no, something is crushed and broken, in which every breath of life is a breath too of death.

To put away the responsibility for all that seems to us evil or terrible on the shoulders of a semi-omnipotent Devil, or to put it aside as part of Nature, making an unbridgeable opposition between world-nature and God-Nature, as if Nature were independent of God, or to throw the responsibility on man and his sins, as if he had a preponderant voice in the making of this world or could create anything against the will of God, are clumsily comfortable devices in which the religious thought of India has never taken refuge.

We have to look courageously in the face of the reality and see that it is God and none else who has made this world in his being and that so he has made it.

We have to see that Nature devouring her children, Time eating up the lives of creatures, Death universal and ineluctable and the violence of the Rudra forces in man and Nature are also the supreme Godhead in one of his cosmic figures.[18]

In these days when, again, easy and noisy slogans have taken the place of thinking and discerning, and when we are constantly told that “All religions are the same and speak the same truth,” mark how Sri Aurobindo never fails to point out the distinctive traits and contributions of the Indian genius :

It is only a few religions which have had the courage to say without any reserve, like the Indian, that this enigmatic World-Power is one Deity, one Trinity, to lift up the image of the Force that acts in the world in the figure not only of the beneficent Durga, but of the terrible Kali in her blood-stained dance of destruction and to say, “This too is the Mother ; this also know to be God ; this too, if thou hast the strength, adore.” And it is significant that the religion which has had this unflinching honesty and tremendous courage, has succeeded in creating a profound and widespread spirituality such as no other can parallel. For truth is the foundation of real spirituality and courage is its soul.[19]

Bracing words these, but lest one might imagine that Sri Aurobindo is advocating some blood-thirsty cult, let me add this conclusion of his :

A day may come, must surely come, we will say, when humanity will be ready spiritually, morally, socially for the reign of universal peace ; meanwhile the aspect of battle and the nature and function of man as a fighter have to be accepted and accounted for by any practical philosophy and religion.[20]

Examples from India’s Recent History

Note the word “practical.” It should now be clear that Sri Aurobindo radically differed from the Mahatma on the practice of non-violence, and as this difference is glossed over in conventional scholarship, I think we should examine it, since such differences, far from being awkward, are in fact fecund if faced honestly.

It is true that in April 1907, Sri Aurobindo had exposed in a series of brilliant articles in the Bande Mataram his “Doctrine of Passive Resistance” intended to become a mass movement against British rule, and that the series, which was read throughout the country in those days, seems to have influenced Gandhi on his return from Africa.

But Sri Aurobindo never made a cult of ideology either, and in those same articles he had also spelt out the limits of non-cooperation and passive resistance, which he saw as the only practicable policy of the day in the face of the rulers’ crushing military superiority and the Congress Moderates’ lack of support for the ideal of independence :

Every great yajña has its Rakshasas who strive to baffle the sacrifice…. Passive resistance is an attempt to meet such disturbers by peaceful and self-contained brahmatejas ; but even the greatest Rishis of old could not, when the Rakshasas were fierce and determined, keep up the sacrifice without calling in the bow of the Kshatriya. We should have the bow of the Kshatriya ready for use, though in the background. Politics is especially the business of the Kshatriya, and without Kshatriya strength at its back, all political struggle is unavailing.[21]

Nevertheless, considerable similarities in the practical aspects of the two leaders’ policies prompted some scholars to paint them with the same brush. When, at the time of Independence, a biographer of his fell victim to such facile parallels, Sri Aurobindo protested in the following note (written in the third person) :

In some quarters there is the idea that Sri Aurobindo’s political standpoint was entirely pacifist, that he was opposed in principle and in practice to all violence and that he denounced terrorism, insurrection, etc., as entirely forbidden by the spirit and letter of the Hindu religion. It is even suggested that he was a forerunner of the gospel of Ahimsa. This is quite incorrect. Sri Aurobindo is neither an impotent moralist nor a weak pacifist.

The rule of confining political action to passive resistance was adopted as the best policy for the National Movement at that stage and not as a part of a gospel of Non-violence or pacifist idealism.

Peace is a part of the highest ideal, but it must be spiritual or at the very least psychological in its basis ; without a change in human nature it cannot come with any finality. If it is attempted on any other basis (moral principle or gospel of Ahimsa or any other), it will fail and even may leave things worse than before…. Sri Aurobindo’s position and practice in this matter was the same as Tilak’s and that of other Nationalist leaders who were by no means Pacifists or worshippers of Ahimsa.[22]

It may appear hard to accept that the gospel of Ahimsa “may leave things worse than before.” But can we for a moment picture what would have happened if, in the middle of the Second World War, with much of Europe including France under German occupation, Britain had given way to the Nazi wave ?

And yet that is exactly what the Mahatma exhorted the British to do in his famous 1940 open letter “to every Briton,” in which he called for the British to lay down their arms “because war is bad in essence,” “to fight Nazism without arms or … with non-violent arms,” and to “invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take … possession of your beautiful island.”[23] No doubt Hitler would have been delighted had Britain followed such advice, just as Duryodhana would have been highly pleased to see Arjuna lay down his bow. But in both cases, what would have been the result for mankind ?

By contrast, in September 1940, Sri Aurobindo sent the Governor of Madras a contribution and a message in support of the Allies during the War :

We feel that not only is this a battle waged in just self-defence and in defence of the nations threatened with the world-domination of Germany and the Nazi system of life, but that it is a defence of civilisation and its highest attained social, cultural and spiritual values and of the whole future of humanity. To this cause our support and sympathy will be unswerving whatever may happen…[24]

Or let us consider the case of the 1942 Cripps mission. Harried by Germany, increasingly pressured by the U.S.A., a proud and reluctant Churchill, who had sworn ever to protect the Empire, was compelled to present to India on a gold platter an offer of dominion status, so as to secure her support during the war. (That was the third such offer since the start of the War, but in more explicit terms than ever.)

In spite of messages from Sri Aurobindo to the Congress urging them to accept the proposal which amounted to virtual independence at the end of the War, and although others (including Nehru and Rajagopalachari) favoured it, Gandhi told Sri Aurobindo’s messenger he found it unacceptable, once again “because of his opposition to war.”[25] (Churchill also, I should add, forbade Sir Stafford Cripps to show the slightest flexibility.) The result of Gandhi’s dogmatic stand on the evil nature of war—a dogma Sri Krishna rebuffs in the Gita—was to be tragic for India.

It not only meant an unnecessary postponement of Independence, but it made India’s bloody vivisection unavoidable, even as the Mahatma promised it would happen only “over his dead body” ; it also meant three wars with our neighbour and the continuing war of attrition and terrorism in Kashmir.

In his History of the Freedom Movement in India, the distinguished historian R. C. Majumdar was forced to reject “the generally accepted view which gave Mahatma Gandhi the ‘sole credit for the freedom of India’.[26] He noted :

It has been my painful duty to show that … the popular image of Gandhi cannot be reconciled with what he actually was…. It will also be seen that the current estimate of the degree or extent of his success bears no relation to actual facts.[27]

Today we find that more and more scholars are rallying to those views and, while giving due respect to the Mahatma, are beginning to whisper that his rigid insistence on an impracticable non-violence may have cost the country dear.[28] Such a reassessment can only be healthy, for there is nothing more debilitating than to draw a righteous veil over errors of the past.

Still, we should note that Gandhi did try to understand Sri Aurobindo’s viewpoint ; in 1924, for instance, he sent his son Devadas to Pondicherry to sound him on non-violence. Sri Aurobindo simply replied, “Suppose there is an invasion of India by the Afghans, how are you going to meet it with non-violence ?”[29]

We all know what happened when Kashmir was invaded immediately after Independence, or when Chinese troops poured into India in 1962, or even ( 1999) when Pakistani troops occupied peaks in Kargil. And I am afraid there are more Kargils to come. It is a moot point what the Mahatma’s advice would be in such cases : to lay down arms and meet the enemy with non-violence ?

The following words of Sri Aurobindo, written in December 1916 in his Essays on the Gita, appear prophetic in retrospect :

We will use only soul-force and never destroy by war or any even defensive employment of physical violence ? Good, though until soul-force is effective, the Asuric force in men and nations tramples down, breaks, slaughters, burns, pollutes, as we see it doing today, but then at its ease and unhindered, and you have perhaps caused as much destruction of life by your abstinence as others by resort to violence…[30]

Non-Violence and Shakti

If, therefore, we mean the Gita’s teaching to be a practical one, which is what Sri Aurobindo did, we have to reject non-violence as a creed—it may remain an individual’s choice, for every individual is free to follow his preferred path, but anyone who has to wage a battle for dharma or for the truth—which comes to the same thing—will find a better ally in the use of shakti which the Gita advocates.

Arjuna is of course something of all of us, the symbol of “the struggling human soul,” in Sri Aurobindo’s words, and Kurukshetra is the “battle of life,” even of our humdrum everyday life if we take the trouble of living for a purpose. Resist a corrupt official and a Kurukshetra opens in front of you ; let a women’s group take on liquor barons and you can hear the twang of the Gandiva ; if a few villagers or tribals oppose a timber mafia, you will see a hundred Kauravas rise ; or simply try to keep your street clean and learn what ghoram karma is all about !

Now, a frequent misconception is that if we reject non-violence, we must fall into violence—there is no alternative beyond those two opposite poles. That is a terrible and costly confusion, which the Gita goes to great pains to dispel : between blind, asuric violence and noble but impotent non-violence, there is conscious, detached shakti, which can remain powerfully still or also wage war, as circumstances demand.

True, in the world’s history, most aggressive expansions, especially the Christian and Islamic, followed the asuric path and washed the earth with blood—there is at least one notable exception, though, and that is India, whose sole weapon of conquest was always her culture.

Yet she was by no means non-violent. Alexander was confronted by Paurava’s armies ; the Pratihara empire, the last Hindu empire of Northwest India, checked the progress of Islam into India for three centuries ; we know well enough the great deeds of a Shivaji or a Lakshmibai and countless other heroes of this land, including those who fought and often died for India’s freedom. Sri Krishna’s injunctions as to the Kshatriya’s dharma were therefore no dead letter in India’s past.

As to the present, it is a frequently heard complaint that Mahatma Gandhi’s teaching of non-violence is no longer followed in India ; but it rather seems to me that it has penetrated the collective Indian consciousness deep enough to make it wince at the very thought of force and put a brake on its use even when and where it is patently needed.

Certainly no other country would have tolerated with so little reaction the amount of aggression India has suffered since Independence, and at what terrible cost.

India’s one tragedy is that she has not had the courage to put to effective use the elements of strength in her heritage. The Gita provides a telling case in point. Here is a brief and accessible text, with nothing esoteric to it, which has evoked the admiration of countless thinkers outside India, from Emerson to Aldous Huxley and André Malraux, here is the best possible guide of ethics (though not merely that), which disentangles with miraculous ease some of the most knotty questions humanity has asked—and, except for a course or two of philosophy, our schools and colleges will not teach it to our children. And why not ? Because, so far as I have been able to make out, it is a “religious” text.

A more thoughtless aberration would be hard to come by, and I wonder how those who drafted India’s education policy arrogated the right to deprive young Indians of their heritage. No, the Gita is not a “religious” or even a “Hindu” scripture, it belongs to all humanity and its very text repeatedly makes this universality plain :

“I am the path and goal,” says Sri Krishna, “the upholder, the master, the witness, the house and country, the refuge, the benignant friend ; I the birth and status and destruction of apparent existence, I the imperishable seed of all and their eternal resting-place…. I am the silence of things secret and the knowledge of the knower…. Nothing moving or unmoving, animate or inanimate in the world can be without me.” (9.18, 10.38, 10.39)

Is this a sectarian declaration ? Moreover, the Gita is about dharma and dharma is not religion, it is ethics in the deepest sense. If we decide that education is only intended to prepare children for getting jobs and has nothing to do with making better human beings out of them, then we admit that there is no more meaning to a man’s life than to an ant’s.

The Gita’s message is a practical tool : it gives a purpose in life, and a purpose is something practical ; it gives strength, and strength is something practical ; it gives self-confidence, elevation in thought, a broader view of life, a deeper understanding of human nature, and those are all practical things.

I believe India would be in a better shape today had the Gita not been kept out of sight and hearing of young Indians, except for some abstract study of the Sankhya philosophy or a few slokas for burials and other ceremonies. Was Sri Aurobindo’s depiction of the Gita as “our chief national heritage, our hope for the future” just so many empty words ?

Permit me to quote Swami Vivekananda too, in whose name we are gathered today. Speaking in Calcutta to a few young aspirants, he said :

In order to remove this delusion which had overtaken Arjuna, what did the Bhagavan say ? As I always preach that you should … draw [a man’s] attention to the omnipotent power that is in him, in the same way does the Bhagavan speak to Arjuna : “Thou art that Atman imperishable, beyond all evil… Yield not to unmanliness.” If you, my sons, can proclaim this message to the world, “Yield not to unmanliness,” then all this disease, grief, sin and sorrow will vanish from the face of the earth in three days…. Proclaim to the whole world with trumpet voice, “There is no sin in thee, there is no misery in thee ; thou art the reservoir of omnipotent power. Arise, awake, and manifest the divinity within !”[31]

Because they insisted on building a new, rejuvenated India on the great truths of her ancient heritage and not on the fleeting destructive values of the West, neither Sri Aurobindo nor Swami Vivekananda are in favour with current thinking, if it can be called that. In fact, today they would probably be labelled “revivalists” by our hypnotized intelligentsia, and they would certainly find themselves swimming against the cheerless tide, at loggerheads with almost every direction the country has taken since Independence, and with the educational system in particular.

They would never have imagined that education in free India could have rejected anything having to do with Indian culture, preferring to go on with Macaulay’s denationalizing methods. Is Indian culture then something so shameful, so ignoble that it has to be concealed from our children, except in the privacy of the home ? Well, perhaps it is after all, but if it is, let us have the courage to declare so openly and have done with it rather than brandish it just to attract foreign tourists to a few temples and ruins.

I cannot resist the temptation of mentioning a case in point : it is significant that none of our successive education ministers thought it worthwhile to give Swami Vivekananda’s or Sri Aurobindo’s names to just one out of the 216 universities spread over the country ; Mahatma Gandhi has two universities in his name, one of which is of course this one here ; Dr. Ambedkar has six, Jawaharlal Nehru three, and a number of much lesser Indians have one.

But no “Swami Vivekananda University,” no “Sri Aurobindo University”—Swami Vivekananda who shook India awake, Sri Aurobindo who in 1906 became the first principal of the newly opened Bengal National College, Sri Aurobindo the Nationalist leader, the editor and chief writer of Bande Mataram and Karmayogin, Sri Aurobindo who laid the foundations for an original Indian perspective in so many fields of yoga, thought, action, and life.

This omission may be a small thing in itself, but it is revealing of the unease the establishment feels towards these awkward personalities. Which Indian student ever learns anything of substance about Swami Vivekananda or Sri Aurobindo ? Either we find them worthy of being taught to our children for their greater benefit as human beings, in which case we should roll up our sleeves and set to work, or there is no point in making them objects of hollow praise as is too often the case.

Sri Aurobindo had and still has a message for his country, and a practical one, for he was no effete dreamer. Whether calling for India’s independence, supporting the Allies, urging acceptance of Cripps’ proposal, he practised what he called “spiritual realism.”[32] It is India’s misfortune that he was not heard, and her continuing misfortune that he and Swami Vivekananda are shoved aside like museum pieces.

Of course, it would be a mistake to equate Sri Aurobindo’ entire teaching and yoga with the Gita. As he said,

I regard the spiritual history of mankind and especially of India as a constant development of a divine purpose, not a book that is closed and the lines of which have to be constantly repeated. Even the Upanishads and the Gita were not final though everything may be there in seed….[33]

But in all his actions, Sri Aurobindo faithfully followed the spirit of the Gita. His life is, in my opinion, the best commentary on the great Scripture.

“If one is among the … seekers of [the] Truth,” he once wrote to a disciple, “one has to take sides for the Truth, to stand against the forces that attack it and seek to stifle it. Arjuna wanted not to stand for either side, to refuse any action of hostility even against assailants ; Sri Krishna, who insisted so much on samata, strongly rebuked his attitude and insisted equally on his fighting the adversary. ‘Have samata,’ he said, ‘and seeing clearly the Truth, fight.’ … It is a spiritual battle inward and outward ; by neutrality and compromise or even passivity one may allow the enemy force to pass and crush down the Truth and its children.”[34]

By Michel Danino

Keynote address delivered by Michel Danino at a seminar on  Relevance of Bhagavad Gita in the New Millennium  on January 12, 2000, at Kottayam s Mahatma Gandhi University. This seminar was part of Vivekananda Jayanthi and National Youth Day celebrations, as a valediction of the Vandematharam programme of the Department of Culture, Government of India, and was organized by the Mahatma Gandhi University unit of the Bharateeya Vichara Kendram.)

References
N.B. : In references to Sri Aurobindo’s works (‘Centenary Edition,’ Pondicherry : Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1972), the first number refers to the volume, the second to the page number.

Sri Aurobindo’s India’s Rebirth (3rd ed., 2000; also in Hindi, Malayalam, Telugu, Oriya, Tamil and Gujarati translations) is co-published and distributed by:

[1] Evening Talks recorded by A. B. Purani (Pondicherry : Sri Aurobindo Society, 1982), p. 105
[2] Mother’s Chronicles—Book Five : Mira Meets the Revolutionary by Sujata Nahar (Mysore : Mira Aditi, 1997), p. 97
[3] Notes on the Mahabharata, 3.169.
[4] Ibid., 3.178.
[5]Ibid.
[6] See India’s Rebirth (Mysore : Mira Aditi, 3rd edition, 2000), p. 19.
[7] FrIbid., p. 46.
[8] Karmayogin, June 25, 1909, 2.427.
[9] Ibid., 2.430.
[10]See Sedition Committee 1918 Report under Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rowlatt (reprinted Calcutta : New Age Publishers, 1973), p. 17 & 23.
[11] R. C. Majumdar, History of the Freedom Movement in India (Calcutta : Firmal KLM, vol. 3, 1988), vol. I p. 408.
[12] Karmayogin, 12 January 1910, 2.401.
[13] Essays on the Gita, 13.52-53.
[14] Uttarpara Speech, 30 May 1909, 2.3.
[15] Ibid., 2.4-5.
[16] Mahabharata, Vana Parva, Ch. 207, adapted from K. M. Ganguli’s translation (Delhi : Munshiram Manoharlal, 2000), vol. I p. 431-432.
[17] Essays on the Gita, 13.38-39.
[18] Ibid., 13.367-368
[19] Ibid., 13.42.
[20] Ibid., 13.45.
[21] Bande Mataram, 23 April 1907, 1.122.
[22] On Himself, 26.22.
[23] Amrita Bazar Patrika, “Method of Non-violence—Mahatma Gandhi’s appeal to every Briton,” July 4, 1940. See a longer extract and Sri Aurobindo’s reaction to the open letter in India’s Rebirth, p. 227.
[24] On Himself, 26.393.
[25] See India’s Rebirth, p. 235-236.
[26] R. C. Majumdar, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 3, p. xiii.
[27] Ibid., p. xviii.
[28] See for instance N. S. Rajaram, Gandhi, Khilafat and the National Movement (Bangalore : Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, 1999).
[29] Evening Talks, p. 53
[30] Essays on the Gita, 13.39.
[31] The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda (Almora : Advaita Ashrama, 1948), vol. IV, p. 105-106.
[32] The Human Cycle, 15:228
[33] On Himself, 26.125.
[34] Letters on Yoga, 23.665-666.

(This matter was originally posted by HHR at THIS place)

Escapism of many Hindu Swamis and Gurus!


https://twitter.com/hhrLondon (Heavily edited by Shreepal Singh)

Even though it looks that most of the Hindu Gurus, Swamis, preachers and teachers do a great job by serving fellow humans and show them the correct – spiritual – path, nevertheless one would not fail to notice that what they preach is most often escapism and impractical. Surely, they teach and encourage ‘seva’ or service in the society but hardly would one hear them – from the Hindu point of view – talking about the subject of ‘real threats’ extended to their faith and this faith’s followers, let alone teaching these followers about the way to thwart such threats to their faith.

Without doubt, this approach of these Hindu Gurus and preachers is sheer timidity and escapism. Because of such timid attitude and approach of these Gurus and preachers, the ordinary mass of Hindus gets confused. These ordinary Hindus think that any talk, act or effort on their part to defend Hindus or Hinduism against any attack against their faith is nothing but a political thing, which Hinduism does not teach. Most of us have witnessed – and at the most of times – this attitude of these Hindu Gurus and preachers and, the resultant, Hindu mind-set of the ordinary followers of this faith.

If one confronts these Gurus and preachers with the absurdity of this approach towards their Dharma, he or she most often would get a curt response from these faith leaders in somewhat this style: Well, if you wish to do some service of Hinduism, why should you be an activist? Why do you not put your life on the spiritual path, renounce this world and become a ‘sadhu’ instead?

Many young Hindus, because of such teachings of these Hindu Gurus and preachers, often would say that their parents discourage them in taking interest in Hinduism for the reason of the fear of their children becoming ‘sadhus’!

One may look around on twitter or face book to find out what kind of Hinduism is mostly being promoted by such Gurus, Swamis and preachers. On their blogs and websites too, one would never fail to find such escapist attitude in interpreting Hindu Dharma. There they, in their writings and speeches, would often just go in ‘verbose’ deep philosophy about the inner self and of the things beyond this world. They sound utterly impractical for the realities of this world and hardly ever promote Hindu scriptures – like Gita – to teach how to deal with the threats and dangers extended to their faith or how to defend Hindus and Hinduism at the hands of the enemies of their faith.

One cannot but wonder at the way in which the holy Hindu book Gita is taken by these Gurus, Swamis and preachers out of its context (the context that Gita was narrated by Krishna to Arjuna at the momentous event of war of Mahabharata to confront the reality and fight without attachment or fear for the just cause) and turned into an escapist holy book teaching only the search for ‘inner self’! These Hindu religious teachers would just love to gloss over the hard fact that Lord Krishna taught Arjuna in the battle field (of Kurukshetra) to bring Arjuna out of his mental turmoil by making him understand that the ‘inner self’ of a human being never dies and to teach him (Arjuna) to do his duty, as a Kshtriya, to fight in the war without any attachment or ill will to his opponents for the right cause against the injustice.

Do you ever hear Hindu Gurus or Swamis bring this aspect of Gita to their audience? Hardly ever!

We asked a few Gurus about the justification of their pitiable stand in this respect. They came out with confusing answers like the Mahabharata is really about the inner Mahabharata.

We asked them further: So, according to you, Krishna stopped Arjuna from renouncing everything to avoid war in the battlefield of Kurukshetra simply because he (Krishna) actually wanted him (Arjuna) to renounce everything!! Again their answer was like: The teaching of Gita is ‘inner Dharma Yuddha’ or ‘inner Jihad’!

Such answers of these Gurus do not make any sense in this world – the world which is a battle field, where the war is going on and where there are ‘right cause’ and ‘wrong cause’ to fight for and to fight against!

We can see how much confusion is being promoted in Hinduism today and because of this confusion so many Hindus – who want to be active in the way of Gita to defend Hindus and Hinduism – take such war for the ‘right cause’ and against the ‘wrong cause’ as only ‘a politics’ and ‘being unlike Hindus’.

It is here where the ‘inner self’ ends up! It is here where this world becomes an illusion! It is here where one is prompted to renounce the world, become a ‘sadhu’ and get ‘Moksha’! This is the Hinduism being promoted today by a large number of Swamis and Gurus.

At a Hindu event that we attended a Guru was telling a whole crowd of young Hindus that they should only focus on ‘Bhakti’, do the `Mala’ and chanting the Mantras; that they should not be taken in by the material world; and that they should rather reject it!!!

We asked him, ‘What are his views on the ‘Kashmiri Hindus’ who were killed in and kicked out of Kashmir, which is the Abode of Shiva?’

Amazingly, he did not like the question. As if this was not enough, one of his chief followers jumped in the dialogue and said, ‘This is not the place to ask such questions’. According to the Guru this question was not about the Dharma!

How divorced from reality this Guru is!!

We insisted that this is the proper place to put such question and seek answer from the teacher of Hindu Dharma. He suddenly started saying: Well, Indian soldiers have caused too many problems there. We objected: What nonsense it is to say so! Why are you avoiding the question about the Kashmiri Pandits?

Then he started  blurting:  Well, don’t get attached to the material world, if you want to evolve spiritually. We said: Pass over your bank accounts, your flash car parked outside and give your house over to prove how unattached from the material world you are and how spiritually evolved you are!!

Now the whole place turned into a commotion. We said in the face of large number of people gathered there that if there is no India left any more, which India these soldiers protect with their lives, this kind of Gurus would not be able to visit Hindu holy places; set up their Ashramas; or enjoy the Hindu mass following like the present one.

This is one incident of a Hindu Guru but there are many more such Gurus, Swamis and preachers to experience of. Today much of the Hinduism being promoted by such persons is distorted and the most confusing to ordinary Hindus. It inflicts an immense injury to the cause of Hinduism and this Hinduism’s struggle to survive in the face of the onslaught on it by many belligerent religions.

Surely, many Gurus, Swamis and preachers do good work also but what they preach often turns many Hindus into lambs waiting to be slaughtered. This is why the enlightened Hindu intellectuals should focus on the correct teachings of Hinduism, as it is here (its correct interpretation) where the real power of Hinduism lies.

Enter Rajinikanth: What to Expect in Tamilnadu Politics?


By: R. Veera Raghvan

(Written at the eve of new year 2018)

As 2017 was closing, Tamil actor Rajinikanth let the thunder out of the clouds, having led the people of Tamil Nadu to expect the big sound for over two decades.

Rajinikanth, or Rajini as he is well known, firmly announced last 31stDecember that he was entering politics. He further declared he would contest all the 234 TN assembly seats at the next polls – due in 2021 – and would form a political party prior to that election.

DMK and AIADMK, the two major Dravidian political parties – as also a few active smaller ones – of Tamil Nadu, now fear that some support ground is slipping under their feet. They know that Rajinikanth has captured the imagination of Tamil moviegoers and the Tamil public, more than any other actor, and that it could yield him huge votes. They know that their leaders have no great attraction about them and that Rajini’s fans and admirers are unlikely to switch camps – at any rate in significant numbers. As for DMK leader Karunanidhi who had for long charmed his party men with his communication skills and guttural oratory, he has now lost sheen with old age and illness.

By his announcement, Rajini has also served an advance warning to all other political parties functioning in TN – that Rajini’s new party would oppose all their candidates in each of the 234 assembly constituencies in the state. He has clearly messaged all other parties: “I enter politics not to align with any of you, but to fight and defeat all of you in all assembly seats at election time and keep you out of government”.  This warning and message are specially meant for DMK and AIADMK.

Rajini’s December 31 disclosure has disheartened leaders of other political leaders or groups in TN who are aiming to be the chief minister or some other influential player in the next state government, and beyond. Being out of power in Tamil Nadu could also mean a huge financial deprivation for some aspirants who know the scale of their potential loss.  Facing ill luck and lesser hope, they have good reason to wish Rajini had kept away from politics.

After late MGR parted ways with Karunanidhi and founded his political party AIADMK in 1972, Tamil Nadu votes have been largely shared between DMK and AIADMK.  At the last 2016 TN assembly polls, AIADMK secured a vote percentage of nearly 41%, DMK got about 32% and the balance was split between more than fifteen other parties along with independents and NOTA. With Rajinikanth now entering the fray, even this should be seen as an exaggerated picture of the popular backing for DMK and AIADMK in the changed political scene. In 2016, Rajinikanth was not present on TN’s political landscape, nor did he lend support to any party during that assembly election.  So his fans and admirers had given their votes to other parties, mostly to DMK or AIADMK.  Those Rajini votes, at least most of them, are hence built into the 2016 vote share percentages, viz., AIADMK’s 41% and DMK’s 32%. These two major parties should now witness an erosion in their 2016 score of votes, with Rajini poised to claim much of the votes of his fans, supporters and admirers.  But the woes of DMK and AIADMK, and some smaller parties, do not end here.

In the personality-cult based DMK and AIADMK, their chiefs Karunanidhi and Jayalalithaa were the principal vote gatherers for their parties.  With Karunanidhi out of action and Jayalalithaa not alive, many supporters of the two parties who fancied those leaders more than their parties – especially those of AIADMK – could be looking elsewhere.  For those drifting voters, Rajinikanth will be more beckoning than DMK’s M. K. Stalin and certainly more alluring than the lackluster leaders left in AIADMK.  In fact, one reason why Rajinikanth announced his party at this time, is the comfort of nil competition from Karunanidhi and Jayalalithaa in harvesting votes during elections.

There are also some broader facts about a nation’s or region’s political life, and some hard realities close to its ground, which Rajinikanth will be aware of.  Let’s take a look.

Voters elect their leaders, but they can choose only from men and women coming forward to lead. Voters do not themselves create a good stock of leaders and then make their pick. So luck plays a key role in people getting a good political leader in a democracy to head their government.

In a mature democracy, a chosen state leader may turn out to be extraordinary or just good or an also-ran, but as the country’s CEO he generally guards its financial resources and interests and does not deviously squander them or divert national funds into private hands. This is because a mature democracy largely produces vigilant citizens and nurtures a decent crop of leaders, and ensures law enforcement. In an evolving democracy like India, for lack of choice in leaders and out of ignorance too, people often end up electing leaders who do their worst for public welfare and the very best in self-interest, sycophants’ interest and in their family interest, law enforcement always remaining slack. Indians have greatly suffered in this manner in the recent past. For decades, Tamil Nadu has taken the worst beating on this front, and Rajinikanth knows this well.  While declaring his entry into politics he also spoke on the sorry plight of Tamil Nadu, as directly as he wished when he said, “In the name of democracy political parties that come to power are looting people in different ways, different modes and different methods…… This needs to change”.

If Rajinikanth had felt that DMK was all good and AIADMK alone was guilty of serious wrongdoing in TN, he need not form a new party and could have stopped with lending his support to the ‘good DMK’, and if it was the other way he could have stopped with backing the ‘good AIADMK’.  It is clear that he viewed both these parties, being in power alternatively over the past fifty years in Tamil Nadu, as incorrigibly bad on key issues of governance, making a mockery of democracy – and so he felt both of them must be kept out of power.

In deciding to fight both DMK and AIADMK, Rajinikanth must have taken heart from the experience of another Tamil actor, Vijayakanth, who also entered politics and formed his political party, DMDK, in 2005. DMDK contested the 2006 assembly elections in Tamil Nadu, in 232 constituencies without any alliance partner.  His party won just one seat, but scooped an impressive 8.5% of votes polled.  That showed there was a large of body of voters who were against both DMK and AIDMK, and so Vijayakanth tapped their votes.  Three years later he exposed the continuing keen preference a good many voters had for him, and their sustained distrust of DMK and AIADMK.  That was in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections when Vijayakanth’s party contested, again without an alliance partner, across all 39 seats in Tamil Nadu (equivalent to 234 assembly seats) and captured a good 10% of votes polled in the state, though his party did not win any seat.

Vijayakanth could not, however, build on his laurels because he lost focus, faltered and ultimately aligned with AIADMK in the 2011 state elections in Tamil Nadu. He has other leadership deficiencies too, and of late his health has fallen – he is moving about but is less active. In comparison, Rajinikanth speaks and behaves in a mature way, has better composure, and has a greater potential to take on both DMK and AIADMK.

Vijayakanth has his fan base, but it is certainly much less than Rajinikanth’s.  One measure of their current reach to people and people’s present hopes on them, could be their Twitter following.  It is 44 lakhs for Rajinikanth, and 47 thousand for Vijayakanth.

There are questions whether Rajinikanth will be up to the demanding role of a chief minister. As the head of a state government, will he wisely choose his advisors? Can he appreciate and handle intricate issues of development and governance? Can he keep a check on his ministers and party MLA’s to ensure they don’t go wayward?  Well, surely these are not easy tasks, and Rajinikanth also does not look naive. He is capable of learning, correcting and improving.  But first things first.

There is none visible in our midst, or in the near future, except Rajinikanth, with the best of capacity, goodness and daring to halt both DMK and AIADMK on their continuous march to the seat of power –  an action for which TN’s people in sizeable numbers gave a hearty thumbs-up when Vijayakanth attempted it in 2006 and in 2009.  Let the poisoned body politic of Tamil Nadu be first detoxified and rescued. It could then be nursed to better health, step by step.  Tamils, if you love your land welcome Rajinikanth and wish him well.

(This article is originally published HERE)

Copyright © R. Veera Raghvan

A Sanskrit Book, if “Words Read in Correct Direction, it is Ramayana” and “if Read in Reverse, it is Bhagwat”!!


1 of 3:

By: Shreepal Singh

Can you imagine? Is it ever possible? But before that here is a hint: It is about Sanskrit language; it is about the genius of a 17th century Sanskrit scholar from South India – from Kanchipuram; it is about the greatness of Sanskrit language; also incidentally it is about the meanness of those fake or ignorant Indologists who are out to prove to the world that Sanskrit language has been the vehicle in the hands of ‘kings’s sycophant poets’ to lend legitimacy to the power of those kings; it is about correcting the misconception created by such Indologists – like American Indologist Sheldon Pollack – about the true value and beauty of Sanskrit language.

There is a Sanskrit book titled “Raghavyadviyam” written by “Venkatadhwari” living in 17th century in Kanchipuram situated in South India, which has an unheard of quality. If one reads in this book words in the normal direction – from left to right – it is about the life of Lord Rama and if the words are read in the reverse direction – from back to front – it is about Lord Krishna. It contains  30 Sanskrit Slokas and when you read the words of each Sloka in the reverse direction, they become 30 more. In all, thus, there are 60 Slokas. This book is also called “Anulom-Vilom Kavya”, that is, a “poem that is read in right and reverse”.

2 of 3:

By: Sanjay Vaidya

Amazing Sanskrit verses: It is so dismaying that we live in ignorance of our own wonderful literary heritage. I wonder how many of us have heard of the following mind blowing book.

The sentence ‘Able was I ere I saw Elba’ is often quoted as a great example of a palindromic sentence in English as it can be read in reverse too. This is said to be created in the 17th century.

Now, consider the following:

A Sanskrit poet by name Daivagjna Surya Pandita wrote a Sanskrit work by name “Ramakrishna Viloma Kaavyam” in the 14th century (English-equivalent of the word ‘viloma’ is ‘inverse’). This book is supposed to have 40 slokas (a sloka is a Sanskrit poem). Each sloka makes sense both when read in from the beginning of the sloka to the end AS WELL AS from the end to the beginning of the sloka (a sort of palindrome).

Now comes the best part. When each sloka is read in the forward direction, the book deals with the story of Ramayana and when each sloka is read in the reverse direction, the book deals with the story of Maha Bharata.

One sloka is given below (in devanagari font)

तां भूसुता मुक्ति मुदारहासं
वंदेयतो लव्य भवं दयाश्री

The same sloka, read in backward direction is given below:

श्री यादवं भव्य लतोय देवं
संहारदामुक्ति मुता सुभूतां

In the first sloka, भूसुता implies Sita and hence, Ramayana story and in the second sloka, श्री यादवं implies Lord Krishna.

The meaning of the first sloka is “I pray to Sita, the incarnation of Lakshmi who is affectionate towards a smiling Lava (Sita’s son)”.

The meaning of the second sloka is “The teachings of Gita, bestowed upon us by Lord Krishna who draws people towards him with his benevolence, destroy evil and are close to our heart”

And there are 39 more shlokas like this.

Need one say more about Sanskrit or the people who created many wonders in ancient India?

3 of 3:

By: Vaibhav K. Vashishtha

क्या ऐसा संभव है कि जब आप किताब को सीधा पढ़े तो रामायण की कथा पढ़ी जाए और जब उसी किताब में लिखे शब्दों को उल्टा करके पढ़े तो कृष्ण भागवत की कथा सुनाई दे।

जी हां, कांचीपुरम के 17वीं शदी के कवि वेंकटाध्वरि रचित ग्रन्थ “राघवयादवीयम्” ऐसा ही एक अद्भुत ग्रन्थ है।इस ग्रन्थ को ‘अनुलोम-विलोम काव्य’ भी कहा जाता है।

पूरे ग्रन्थ में केवल 30 श्लोक हैं। इन श्लोकों को सीधे-सीधे पढ़ते जाएँ, तो रामकथा बनती है और विपरीत (उल्टा) क्रम में पढ़ने पर कृष्णकथा। इस प्रकार हैं तो केवल 30 श्लोक, लेकिन कृष्णकथा के भी 30 श्लोक जोड़ लिए जाएँ तो बनते हैं 60 श्लोक।

पुस्तक के नाम से भी यह प्रदर्शित होता है, राघव (राम) + यादव (कृष्ण) के चरित को बताने वाली गाथा है “राघवयादवीयम।”

उदाहरण के तौर पर पुस्तक का पहला श्लोक हैः (Example – first Sloka):

“वंदेऽहं देवं तं श्रीतं रन्तारं कालं भासा यः ।
रामो रामाधीराप्यागो लीलामारायोध्ये वासे ॥ १॥”

अर्थात:
“मैं उन भगवान श्रीराम के चरणों में प्रणाम करता हूं,

जो जिनके ह्रदय में सीताजी रहती है तथा जिन्होंने अपनी पत्नी सीता के लिए सहयाद्री की पहाड़ियों से होते हुए लंका जाकर रावण का वध किया तथा वनवास पूरा कर अयोध्या वापिस लौटे।”

(Meaning): “I bow myself with reverance in the feet of Lord Rama, in whose heart is seated Sitaji and who had, by crossing the mountains of Sahayadri, gone to Lanka, killed Ravana and (who) on completing the exile had come back to Ayodhya.”

विलोमम्: (Reverse):

“सेवाध्येयो रामालाली गोप्याराधी भारामोराः ।
यस्साभालंकारं तारं तं श्रीतं वन्देऽहं देवम् ॥ १॥”

अर्थात:
“मैं रूक्मिणी तथा गोपियों के पूज्य भगवान श्रीकृष्ण के
चरणों में प्रणाम करता हूं, जो सदा ही मां लक्ष्मी के साथ
विराजमान है तथा जिनकी शोभा समस्त जवाहरातों की शोभा हर लेती है।”

(Meaning): I bow myself with reverence in the feet of Lord Sri Krishna, who is worshiped by Rukamani and Gopis, who is always seated along with Mother Laxmi, and whose beauty is more than the beauty of all the jewels.”

” राघवयादवीयम” के ये 60 संस्कृत श्लोक इस प्रकार हैं:- (60 Slokas from ‘Raghavyadaviyam’):

राघवयादवीयम् रामस्तोत्राणि
वंदेऽहं देवं तं श्रीतं रन्तारं कालं भासा यः ।
रामो रामाधीराप्यागो लीलामारायोध्ये वासे ॥ १॥

विलोमम्:
सेवाध्येयो रामालाली गोप्याराधी भारामोराः ।
यस्साभालंकारं तारं तं श्रीतं वन्देऽहं देवम् ॥ १॥

साकेताख्या ज्यायामासीद्याविप्रादीप्तार्याधारा ।
पूराजीतादेवाद्याविश्वासाग्र्यासावाशारावा ॥ २॥

विलोमम्:
वाराशावासाग्र्या साश्वाविद्यावादेताजीरापूः ।
राधार्यप्ता दीप्राविद्यासीमायाज्याख्याताकेसा ॥ २॥

कामभारस्स्थलसारश्रीसौधासौघनवापिका ।
सारसारवपीनासरागाकारसुभूरुभूः ॥ ३॥

विलोमम्:
भूरिभूसुरकागारासनापीवरसारसा ।
कापिवानघसौधासौ श्रीरसालस्थभामका ॥ ३॥

रामधामसमानेनमागोरोधनमासताम् ।
नामहामक्षररसं ताराभास्तु न वेद या ॥ ४॥

विलोमम्:
यादवेनस्तुभारातासंररक्षमहामनाः ।
तां समानधरोगोमाननेमासमधामराः ॥ ४॥

यन् गाधेयो योगी रागी वैताने सौम्ये सौख्येसौ ।
तं ख्यातं शीतं स्फीतं भीमानामाश्रीहाता त्रातम् ॥ ५॥

विलोमम्:
तं त्राताहाश्रीमानामाभीतं स्फीत्तं शीतं ख्यातं ।
सौख्ये सौम्येसौ नेता वै गीरागीयो योधेगायन् ॥ ५॥

मारमं सुकुमाराभं रसाजापनृताश्रितं ।
काविरामदलापागोसमावामतरानते ॥ ६॥

विलोमम्:
तेन रातमवामास गोपालादमराविका ।
तं श्रितानृपजासारंभ रामाकुसुमं रमा ॥ ६॥

रामनामा सदा खेदभावे दया-वानतापीनतेजारिपावनते ।
कादिमोदासहातास्वभासारसा-मेसुगोरेणुकागात्रजे भूरुमे ॥ ७॥

विलोमम्:
मेरुभूजेत्रगाकाणुरेगोसुमे-सारसा भास्वताहासदामोदिका ।
तेन वा पारिजातेन पीता नवायादवे भादखेदासमानामरा ॥ ७॥

सारसासमधाताक्षिभूम्नाधामसु सीतया ।
साध्वसाविहरेमेक्षेम्यरमासुरसारहा ॥ ८॥

विलोमम्:
हारसारसुमारम्यक्षेमेरेहविसाध्वसा ।
यातसीसुमधाम्नाभूक्षिताधामससारसा ॥ ८॥

सागसाभरतायेभमाभातामन्युमत्तया ।
सात्रमध्यमयातापेपोतायाधिगतारसा ॥ ९॥

विलोमम्:
सारतागधियातापोपेतायामध्यमत्रसा ।
यात्तमन्युमताभामा भयेतारभसागसा ॥ ९॥

तानवादपकोमाभारामेकाननदाससा ।
यालतावृद्धसेवाकाकैकेयीमहदाहह ॥ १०॥

विलोमम्:
हहदाहमयीकेकैकावासेद्ध्वृतालया ।
सासदाननकामेराभामाकोपदवानता ॥ १०॥

वरमानदसत्यासह्रीतपित्रादरादहो ।
भास्वरस्थिरधीरोपहारोरावनगाम्यसौ ॥ ११॥

विलोमम्:
सौम्यगानवरारोहापरोधीरस्स्थिरस्वभाः ।
होदरादत्रापितह्रीसत्यासदनमारवा ॥ ११॥

यानयानघधीतादा रसायास्तनयादवे ।
सागताहिवियाताह्रीसतापानकिलोनभा ॥ १२॥

विलोमम्:
भानलोकिनपातासह्रीतायाविहितागसा ।
वेदयानस्तयासारदाताधीघनयानया ॥ १२॥

रागिराधुतिगर्वादारदाहोमहसाहह ।
यानगातभरद्वाजमायासीदमगाहिनः ॥ १३॥

विलोमम्:
नोहिगामदसीयामाजद्वारभतगानया ।
हह साहमहोदारदार्वागतिधुरागिरा ॥ १३॥

यातुराजिदभाभारं द्यां वमारुतगन्धगम् ।
सोगमारपदं यक्षतुंगाभोनघयात्रया ॥ १४॥

विलोमम्:
यात्रयाघनभोगातुं क्षयदं परमागसः ।
गन्धगंतरुमावद्यं रंभाभादजिरा तु या ॥ १४॥

दण्डकां प्रदमोराजाल्याहतामयकारिहा ।
ससमानवतानेनोभोग्याभोनतदासन ॥ १५॥

विलोमम्:
नसदातनभोग्याभो नोनेतावनमास सः ।
हारिकायमताहल्याजारामोदप्रकाण्डदम् ॥ १५॥

सोरमारदनज्ञानोवेदेराकण्ठकुंभजम् ।
तं द्रुसारपटोनागानानादोषविराधहा ॥ १६॥

विलोमम्:
हाधराविषदोनानागानाटोपरसाद्रुतम् ।
जम्भकुण्ठकरादेवेनोज्ञानदरमारसः ॥ १६॥

सागमाकरपाताहाकंकेनावनतोहिसः ।
न समानर्दमारामालंकाराजस्वसा रतम् ॥ १७ विलोमम्:
तं रसास्वजराकालंमारामार्दनमासन ।
सहितोनवनाकेकं हातापारकमागसा ॥ १७॥

तां स गोरमदोश्रीदो विग्रामसदरोतत ।
वैरमासपलाहारा विनासा रविवंशके ॥ १८॥

विलोमम्:
केशवं विरसानाविराहालापसमारवैः ।
ततरोदसमग्राविदोश्रीदोमरगोसताम् ॥ १८॥

गोद्युगोमस्वमायोभूदश्रीगखरसेनया ।
सहसाहवधारोविकलोराजदरातिहा ॥ १९॥

विलोमम्:
हातिरादजरालोकविरोधावहसाहस ।
यानसेरखगश्रीद भूयोमास्वमगोद्युगः ॥ १९॥

हतपापचयेहेयो लंकेशोयमसारधीः ।
राजिराविरतेरापोहाहाहंग्रहमारघः ॥ २०॥

विलोमम्:
घोरमाहग्रहंहाहापोरातेरविराजिराः ।
धीरसामयशोकेलं यो हेये च पपात ह ॥ २०॥

ताटकेयलवादेनोहारीहारिगिरासमः ।

हासहायजनासीतानाप्तेनादमनाभुवि ॥ २१॥

विलोमम्:
विभुनामदनाप्तेनातासीनाजयहासहा ।
ससरागिरिहारीहानोदेवालयकेटता ॥ २१॥

भारमाकुदशाकेनाशराधीकुहकेनहा ।
चारुधीवनपालोक्या वैदेहीमहिताहृता ॥ २२॥

विलोमम्:
ताहृताहिमहीदेव्यैक्यालोपानवधीरुचा ।
हानकेहकुधीराशानाकेशादकुमारभाः ॥ २२॥

हारितोयदभोरामावियोगेनघवायुजः ।
तंरुमामहितोपेतामोदोसारज्ञरामयः ॥ २३॥

विलोमम्:
योमराज्ञरसादोमोतापेतोहिममारुतम् ।
जोयुवाघनगेयोविमाराभोदयतोरिहा ॥ २३॥

भानुभानुतभावामासदामोदपरोहतं ।
तंहतामरसाभक्षोतिराताकृतवासविम् ॥ २४॥

विलोमम्:
विंसवातकृतारातिक्षोभासारमताहतं ।
तं हरोपदमोदासमावाभातनुभानुभाः ॥ २४॥

हंसजारुद्धबलजापरोदारसुभाजिनि ।
राजिरावणरक्षोरविघातायरमारयम् ॥ २५॥

विलोमम्:
यं रमारयताघाविरक्षोरणवराजिरा ।
निजभासुरदारोपजालबद्धरुजासहम् ॥ २५॥

सागरातिगमाभातिनाकेशोसुरमासहः ।
तंसमारुतजंगोप्ताभादासाद्यगतोगजम् ॥ २६॥

विलोमम्:
जंगतोगद्यसादाभाप्तागोजंतरुमासतं ।
हस्समारसुशोकेनातिभामागतिरागसा ॥ २६॥

वीरवानरसेनस्य त्राताभादवता हि सः ।
तोयधावरिगोयादस्ययतोनवसेतुना ॥ २७॥

विलोमम्
नातुसेवनतोयस्यदयागोरिवधायतः ।
सहितावदभातात्रास्यनसेरनवारवी ॥ २७॥

हारिसाहसलंकेनासुभेदीमहितोहिसः ।
चारुभूतनुजोरामोरमाराधयदार्तिहा ॥ २८॥

विलोमम्
हार्तिदायधरामारमोराजोनुतभूरुचा ।
सहितोहिमदीभेसुनाकेलंसहसारिहा ॥ २८॥

नालिकेरसुभाकारागारासौसुरसापिका ।
रावणारिक्षमेरापूराभेजे हि ननामुना ॥ २९॥

विलोमम्:
नामुनानहिजेभेरापूरामेक्षरिणावरा ।
कापिसारसुसौरागाराकाभासुरकेलिना ॥ २९॥

साग्र्यतामरसागारामक्षामाघनभारगौः ॥
निजदेपरजित्यास श्रीरामे सुगराजभा ॥ ३०॥

विलोमम्:
भाजरागसुमेराश्रीसत्याजिरपदेजनि ।स
गौरभानघमाक्षामरागासारमताग्र्यसा ॥ ३०॥

॥ इति श्रीवेङ्कटाध्वरि कृतं श्री ।।

(English part by: Shreepal Singh)

धमॆ परिवतॆन करने आये ईसाई “फादर” को एक हिदूं ने कैसे हराया !


अशोक

अभी कुछ महीने पहले ही नई यूनिट में ट्रान्सफर आया हूँ। चूँकि पिछली यूनिट में कई लोगों ने मेरी छवि एक सांप्रदायिक कट्टर हिन्दू की बना दी थी और कुछ लोगों ने मुझे इस्लाम और क्रिश्चियनिटी विरोधी बता दिया था,
सो इस यूनिट में मैं काफ़ी शाँत रहता था किसी भी धर्म पर मैं कोई भी बात नही करता था।

मेरे साथ एक सीनियर हैं जो 4 साल पहले हिंदू से क्रिस्चियन में कन्वर्ट हुए हैं, वो दिन रात क्रिश्चियनिटी की प्रशंसा करते रहते और हिंदुत्व को गालियाँ देते रहते थे, चूँकि उन्हें मेरे बारे में कोई जानकारी नही थी और नाही उन्होंने मेरी हिस्ट्री पढ़ी थी।

सो कल रविवार को बातों ही बातों में उन्होंने मुझे क्रिश्चियनिटी में कन्वर्ट होने का ऑफ़र दे दिया और क्रिश्चियनिटी के फ़ायदे बताने लगे।

मैं कई दिनों से ऐसे मौके की तलाश में था क्योंकि मेरे दिमाग में क्रिस्चियन कन्वर्शन वाले मुद्दे को लेकर बड़ा फ़ितूर चल रहा था, मैं उसके ज्ञान का लेवल जानता था मैं जानता था की उसे क्रिश्चियनिटी और बाइबिल में कुछ भी नही आता है इसलिए मैंने उससे बहस करना जायज़ नही समझा।

मैं बाइबिल को लेकर बड़े क्रिस्चियन फादर से बहस करना चाहता था सो मैंने उनका ऑफ़र स्वीकार कर लिया।

कल शाम को मैं अपने आठ जूनियर और उस सीनियर के साथ चर्च पहुँच गया, वहाँ कुछ परिवार भी हिन्दू से क्रिस्चियन कन्वर्शन के लिए आये हुए थे, और धर्म परिवर्तन कराने के लिए गोआ के किसी चर्च के फादर बुलाये गए थे।

चर्च में प्रेयर हुई फिर उन्होंने क्रिश्चियनिटी और परमेश्वर पर लेक्चर दिया और होली वाटर के साथ धर्मान्तरण की प्रोसेस शुरू की।

मैंने अपने सीनियर से कहा की वो फ़ादर से रिक्वेस्ट करें की सबसे पहले मुझे कन्वर्ट करें। फिर फ़ादर ने मुझे बुलाया और बोला ” जीसस ने अशोक को अपनी शरण में बुलाया है मैं अशोक का क्रिश्चियनिटी में स्वागत करता हूँ”

मैंने फ़ादर से कहा की मुझे कन्वर्ट करने से पहले क्रिस्चियन और हिन्दू को कम्पेयर करते हुए उसके मेरिट और डिमेरित बताएँ। मैं कन्वर्ट होने से पहले बाइबिल पर आपके साथ चर्चा करना चाहता हूँ कृपिया मुझे आधा घण्टे का समय दें और मेरे कुछ प्रश्नों का उत्तर दें।

फ़ादर को मेरे बारे में कोई जानकारी नही थी और उन्हें अंदाजा भी नही था की मैं यहाँ ईसाइ मिसनरीयों की कपटी चाल की पोल खोलने और अपना लक्ष्य पूरा करने आया हूँ और उन्हें पता ही नही था की मैं अपना काम अपने प्लान के मुताबिक़ कर रहा हूँ। उस फ़ादर को इस बात का अंदेशा भी नही था की आज वो कितनी बड़ी आफ़त में फ़ंसने वाले हैं, सो फ़ादर बाइबिल पर चर्चा करने के लिए तैयार हो गए ।

मैंने पूछा फ़ादर ” क्रिश्चियनिटी हिन्दूत्व से किस तरह बेहतर है, परमेश्वर और बाइबिल में से कौन सत्य है,अगर बाइबिल और यीशु में से एक चुनना हो तो किसको चुनें”

अब फ़ादर ने क्रिश्चियनिटी की प्रसंशा और हिंदुत्व की बुराइयाँ करनी शुरू की और कहा:

  1. यीशु ही एक मात्र परमेश्वर है और होली बाइबिल ही दुनियाँ में मात्र एक पवित्र क़िताब है। बाइबिल में लिखा एक एक वाक्य सत्य है वह परमेश्वर का आदेश है।
    परमेश्वर ने ही पृथ्वी बनाई है।
  2. क्रिश्चियनिटी में ज्ञान है जबकि हिन्दुओँ की किताबों में केवल अंध विश्वास है।

  3. क्रिश्चियनिटी में समानता है जातिगत भेदभाव नही है जबकि हिंदुओं में जातिप्रथा है।

  4. क्रिश्चियनिटी में महिलाओं को पुरुषों के बराबर सम्मान हैं जबकि हिन्दुओँ में लेडिज़ का रेस्पेक्ट नही है , हिन्दू धर्म में लेडिज़ के साथ सेक्सुअल हरासमेंट ज़्यादा है।

  5. क्रिस्चियन कभी भी किसी को धर्म के नाम पर नही मारते जबकि हिन्दू धर्म के नाम् पर लोगों को मारते हैं बलात्कार करते हैं हिन्दू बहुत अत्याचारी होते हैं।

  6. हिंदुओ में नंगे बाबा घूमते हैं सबसे बेशर्म धर्म है हिन्दू।

अब मैंने बोलना शुरू किया की फ़ादर मैं आपको बताना चाहता हूँ कि:

  1. जैसा आपने कहा की परमेश्वर ने पृथ्वी बनाई है और बाईबल में एक एक वाक्य सत्य लिखा है और वह पवित्र है:-
    (क) तो बाईबल के अनुसार पृथ्वी की उत्त्पति ईशा के जन्म से 4004 वर्ष पहले हुई अर्थात बाइबिल के अनुसार अभी तक पृथ्वी की उम्र 6020 वर्ष हुई जबकि साइंस के अनुसार (कॉस्मोलॉजि) पृथ्वी 4.8 बिलियन वर्ष की है जो बाइबिल में बतायी हुई वर्ष के बहुत ज़्यादा है।

(ख) आप भी जानते हो साइंस ही सत्य है अर्थात बाइबिल का पहला अध्याय ही बाइबिल को झूँठा घोषित कर रहा है।

(ग) मतलब बाइबिल एक फ़िक्शन बुक है जो मात्र झूँठी कहानियों का संकलन है, जब बाइबिल ही असत्य है तो आपके परमेश्वर का कोई अस्तित्व ही नही बचता।

2.आपने कहा की क्रिश्चियनिटी में ज्ञान है:-

(क) तो मैं आपको बता दूँ की क्रिश्चियनिटी में ज्ञान नाम का कोई शब्द नही है।

(ख) याद करो जब “ब्रूनो” ने कहा था की पृथ्वी सूरज की परिक्रमा लगाती है तो चर्च ने ब्रूनो को ‘बाइबिल को झूंठा साबित करने के आरोप में जिन्दा जला दिया था और गैलीलियो को इस लिए अँधा कर दिया गया क्योंकि उसने कहा था ‘पृथ्वी के आलावा और भी ग्रह हैं’ जो बाइबिल के विरुद्ध था ।

(ग) अब आता हूँ हिंदुत्व में तो फ़ादर हिंदुत्व के अनुसार पृथ्वी की उम्र ब्रह्मा के एक दिन और एक रात के बराबर है जो लगभग 1.97 बिलियन वर्ष है जो साइंस के बताये हुए समय के बराबर है।

(घ)  साइंस के अनुसार ग्रह नक्षत्र तारे और उनका परिभ्रमण हिन्दुओँ के ज्योतिष विज्ञानं पर आधारित है , हिन्दू ग्रंथो के अनुसार 9 ग्रहों की जीवनगाथा वैदिक काल में ही बता दी गयी थी। ऐसे ज्ञान देने वाले संतो को हिन्दुओँ ने भगवान के समान पूजा है नाकि जिन्दा जलाया या अँधा किया।

(च) केवल हिन्दू धर्म ही ऐसा है जो ज्ञान और गुरु को भगवान से भी ज़्यादा पूज्य मानता है जैसे
“गुरुर्ब्रह्मा गुरुर्विष्णु गुरुर्देवोमहेश्वरः
गुरुर्साक्षात परब्रह्मा तस्मै श्रीगुरूवे नमः।।

(छ) और फ़ादर दुनियाँ में केवल हिन्दू ही ऐसा है जो कण कण में ईश्वर देखता है और ख़ुद को “अह्मब्रह्मस्मि” बोल सकता है इतनी आज़ादी केवल हिन्दू धर्म में ही हैं।

  1. आपने कहा की ‘क्रिश्चियनिटी में समानता है जातिगत भेदभाव नही है तो आपको बता दूँ कि:

(क) क्रिश्चियनिटी पहली शताब्दी में तीन भागों में बटी हुई थी जैसे Jewish Christianity , Pauline Christianity, Gnostic Christianity.
जो एक दूसरे के घोर विरोधी थे उनके मत भी अलग अलग थे।

(ख) फिर क्रिश्चियनिटी Protestant, Catholic Eastern Orthodoxy, Lutherans में विभाजित हुई जो एक दूसरे के दुश्मन थे, जिनमें कुछ लोगों को मानना था की “यीशु” फिर जिन्दा हुए थे तो कुछ का मानना है की यीशु फिर जिन्दा नही हुए, और कुछ ईसाई मतों का मानना है की “यीशु को सैलिब पर लटकाया ही नही गया”
(ग) आज ईसाईयत हज़ार से ज़्यादा भागों में बटी हुई है, जो पूर्णतः रँग भेद (श्वेत अश्वेत) और जातिगत आधारित है आज भी पुरे विश्व में कनवर्टेड क्रिस्चियन की सिर्फ़ कनवर्टेड से ही शादी होती है।

(घ) आज भी अश्वेत क्रिस्चियन को ग़ुलाम समझा जाता है। फ़ादर भेदभाव में ईसाई सबसे आगे हैं हैम के वँशज के नाम पर अश्वेतों को ग़ुलाम बना रखा है।

  1. आपने कहा की क्रिश्चियनिटी में महिलाओं को पुरुष के बराबर अधिकार है:-

(क) तो बाईबल के प्रथम अध्याय में एक ही अपराध के लिये परमेश्वर ने ईव को आदम से ज्यादा दण्ड क्यों दिया, ईव के पेट को दर्द और बच्चे जनने का श्राप क्यों दिया आदम को ये दर्द क्यों नही दिया अर्थात आपका परमेश्वर भी महिलाओं को पुरुषों के समान नही समझता।

(ख) आपके ही बाइबिल में “लूत” ने अपनी ही दोनों बेटियों का बलात्कार किया और इब्राहीम ने अपनी पत्नी को अपनी बहन बनाकर मिस्र के फिरौन (राजा) को सैक्स के लिए दिया।

(ग) आपकी ही क्रिश्चियनिटी ने पोप के कहने पर अब तक 50 लाख से ज़्यादा बेक़सूर महिलाओं को जिन्दा जला दिया। ये सारी रिपोर्ट आपकी ही बीबीसी न्यूज़ में दी हुईं हैं।

(घ) आपकी ही ईसाईयत में 17वीं शताब्दी तक महिलाओं को चर्च में बोलने का अधिकार नही था, महिलाओं की जगह प्रेयर गाने के लिए भी 15 साल से छोटे लड़को को नपुंसक बना दिया जाता था उनके अंडकोष निकाल दिए जाते थे महिलाओं की जगह उन बच्चों से प्रेयर करायी जाती थी।

(च) बीबीसी के सर्वे के अनुसार सभी धर्मों के धार्मिक गुरुवों में सेक्सुअल केस में सबसे ज़्यादा “पोप और नन” ही एड्स से मरे हैं जो ईसाई ही हैं।

फ़ादर क्या यही क्रिश्चियनिटी में नारी सम्मान है?

अब आपको हिंदुत्व में बताऊँ। दुनियाँ में केवल हिन्दू ही है जो कहता है ” यत्र नारियन्ति पूज्यन्ते रमन्ते तत्र देवता” अर्थात जहाँ नारी की पूजा होती है वहीँ देवताओं का निवास होता है,।

  1. फ़ादर आपने कहा की क्रिस्चियन धर्म के नाम पर किसी को नही मारते:-

(क) तो आपको बता दूँ ‘एक लड़का हिटलर जो कैथोलिक परिवार में जन्मा उसने जीवनभर चर्च को फॉलो किया उसने अपनी आत्मकथा “MEIN KAMPF” में लिखा ‘ वो परमेश्वर को मानता है और परमेश्वर के आदेश से ही उसने 10 लाख यहूदियों को मारा है’ हिटलर ने हर बार कहा की वो क्रिस्चियन है।

(ख) चूँकि हिटलर द्वितीय विश्वयुद्ध का कारण था जिसमें सारे ईसाई देश एक दूसरे के विरुद्ध थे इसलिए आपके चर्च और पादरियों ने उसे कैथोलिक से निकाल कर Atheist(नास्तिक) में डाल दिया।

(ग) फ़ादर मैं इस्लाम का हितेषी नही हूँ लेकिन आपको बता दूँ क्रिस्चियनों ने सन् 1096 में ने “Crusade War” धर्म के आधार पर ही स्टार्ट किया था जिसमें पहला हमला क्रिस्चियन समुदाय ने मुसलमानों पर किया। जिसमें लाखों मासूम मारे गए।

(घ) फ़ादर “आयरिश आर्मी” का इतिहास पढ़ो किस तरह कैथोलिकों ने धर्म के नाम पर क़त्ले आम किया जो आज के isis से भी ज़्यादा भयानक था।

(च) धर्म के नाम पर क़त्लेआम करने में क्रिस्चियन मुसलमानों के समान ही हैं।

(छ) वहीँ आपने हिन्दुओँ को बदनाम किया तो आपको बता दूँ की “हिन्दू ने कभी भी दूसरे धर्म वालों को मारने के लिए पहले हथियार नही उठाया है, बल्कि अपनी रक्षा के लिए हथियार उठाया है।

  1. फ़ादर आपने कहा की हिन्दुओँ में नंगे बाबा घूमते हैं “हिन्दू बेशर्म” हैं:-

(क) तो फ़ादर आपको याद दिला दूँ की बाइबिल के अनुसार यीशु ने प्रकाशितवाक्य (Revelation) में कहा है की ” nudity is best purity” नग्नता सबसे शुद्ध है। यीशु कहता है की मेरे प्रेरितों अगर मुझसे मिलना है तो एक छोटे बच्चे की तरह नग्न हो कर मुझसे मिलों क्योंकि नग्नता में कोई लालच नही होता।

(ख) फ़ादर याद करो यूहन्ना का वचन 20:11-25 और लूका के वचन 24:13-43 क्या कहते नग्नता के बारे में।फ़ादर ईसाईयत में सबसे बड़ी प्रथा Bapistism है, जो बाइबिल के अनुसार येरूसलम की यरदन नदी में नग्न होकर ली जाती थी।

(ग) अभी इस वर्ष फ़रवरी में ही न्यूजीलैंड के 1800 लोगों ने जिसमे 1000 महिलाएं थी ने पूर्णतः नग्न होकर बपिस्टिसम लिया। और आप कहते हो की हिन्दू बेशर्म है।

अब चर्च के सभी लोग मुझ पर भड़क चुके थे और ग़ुस्से में कह रहे थे आप यहाँ क्रिश्चियनिटी में कन्वर्ट होने नही आये हो आप फ़ादर से बहसः करने आये हो, परमेश्वर आपको माँफ नही करेगा।

मैंने फ़ादर से कहा की यीशु ने कहा है ” मेरे प्रेरितों मेरा प्रचार प्रसार करो” अब जब आप यीशु का प्रचार करोगे तो आपसे प्रश्न भी पूछे जाएँगे आपको ज़बाब देना होगा, मैं यीशु के सामने बैठा हुआ हूँ और वालंटियर क्रिस्चियन बनने आया हूँ ।

मुझे आप सिर्फ़ ज्ञान के सामर्थ्य पर क्रिस्चियन बना सकते है धन के लालच में नही।

अब फ़ादर ख़ामोश बैठा हुआ था शायद सोच रहा होगा की आज किस से पाला पड़ गया।

मैंने फिर कहा फ़ादर आप यीशु के साथ गद्दारी नही कर सकते “आप यहाँ सिद्ध करके दिखाओ की ईसाईयत हिंदुत्व से बेहतर कैसे है?”

मैंने फिर फ़ादर से कहा कि फ़ादर ज़वाब दो; आज आपसे ही ज़वाब चाहिए क्योंकि आपके ये 30 ईसाई इतने सामर्थ्यवान नही है की ये हिन्दू के प्रश्नों का ज़वाब दे सकें।

फ़ादर अभी भी शाँत था, मैंने कहा फ़ादर अभी तो मैंने शास्त्र खोले भी नही है शास्त्रों के ज्ञान के सामने आपकी बाइबिल कहीं टिकती भी नही है।

अब फ़ादर ने काफ़ी सोच समझकर रविश स्टाइल में मुझसे पूछा ‘आप किस जाति से हो?’

मैंने भी चाणक्य स्टाइल में ज़वाब दे दिया, “मैं सेवार्थ शुद्र, आर्थिक वैश्य, रक्षण में क्षत्रिय, और ज्ञान में ब्राह्मण हूँ। और हाँ फ़ादर मैं कर्मणा “फ़ौजी” हूँ और जाति से “हिन्दू”।

अब चर्च में बहुत शोर हो चूका था मेरे जूनियर बहुत खुश थे बाकि सभी ईसाई मुझ पर नाराज़ थे। लेकिन करते भी क्या मैने उनकी ही हर बात को काटने के लिए बाइबिल को आधार बना रखा था और हर बात पर बाइबिल को ही ख़ारिज कर रहा था।

मैंने फ़ादर से कहा मेरे ऊपर ये जाति वाला मन्त्र ना फूँके, आप सिर्फ़ मेरे सवालों का ज़वाब दें।

अब मैंने उन परिवारों को, जो कन्वर्ट होने के लिए आये थे, कहा ” क्या आप लोगों को पता है की वेटिकन सिटी एक हिन्दू से क्रिस्चियन कन्वर्ट करने के लिए मिनिमम 2 लाख रुपये देती है जिसमें से आपको 1लाख या 50 हज़ार दिया जाता है बाकि में 20 से 30 हज़ार तक आपको कन्वर्ट करने के लिए चर्च लेकर आने वाले आदमी को दिया जाता है बाकि का 1 लाख चर्च रखता है।

“जब आप कन्वर्ट हो जाते हो तब आपको परमेश्वर के नाम से डराया जाता है फिर आपको हर सन्डे चर्च आना पड़ता है और हर महीने अपनी पॉकेट मनी या फिक्स डिपाजिट चर्च को डिपॉजिट करना पड़ता है, आपको 1 लाख देकर चर्च आपसे कम से कम दस लाख वसूल करता है, अगर आपके पास पैसा नही होता तो आपको परमेश्वर के नाम से डराकर आपकी जमीन किसी क्रिस्चियन ट्रस्ट के नाम पर डोनेट(दान) करा ली जाती है।

“अब आप मेरे सीनियर को ही देख लो, इन्होंने कन्वर्ट होने के लिए 1 लाख लिया था लेकिन 4 साल से हर महीने 15 हज़ार चर्च को डिपाजिट कर रहे हैं, अभी भी वक्त है सोच लो।

“आप सभी को बता दूँ की एक सरकारी रिपोर्ट के अनुसार भारत में धार्मिक आधार पर सबसे ज़्यादा जमीन क्रिस्चियन ट्रस्टों पर हैं, जिन्हें आप जैसे मासूम कन्वर्ट होने वालो से परमेश्वर के नाम पर डरा कर हड़प लिया गया है।”

अब मेरा इतना कहते ही सारे क्रिस्चियन भड़क चुके थे; तभी यहाँ के पादरी ने गोआ वाले फ़ादर से कहा की 11बज चुके हैं चर्च को बन्द करने का टाइम है।

मैंने फ़ादर से कहा कि आपने मेरे सवालों का ज़वाब नही दिया; मैं आपसे बाइबिल पर चर्चा करने आया था,
आप जो पैसे लेकर कन्वर्ट करते हो वो बाईबल में सख्त मना है! याद करो गेहजी, यहूदा इस्तविको का हस्र, जिसनें धर्म में लालच किया। जिस तरह परमेश्वर ने उन्हें मारा ठीक उसी तरह आपका ही परमेश्वर आपको मारेगा। आप में से किसी भी क्रिस्चियन को, जो पैसे लेकर कन्वर्ट हुआ, फ़िरदौस ( यीशु का राज्य) में प्रवेश नही मिलेगा।

अब चर्च बंद होने का समय हो चूका था। मैंने जाते जाते फ़ादर को “थ्री इडियट” स्टाइल में कहा, ” फ़ादर फिर से बाईबल पढ़ो समझों, और जहाँ समझ ना आये तो मुझे फ़ोन करके पूछ लेना क्योंकि मैं अपने कमज़ोर स्टूडेंट का हाथ कभी नही छोड़ता!

और आते आते मैं सारे क्रिस्चियनों को बोल आया कि “मेरे क्रिस्चियन भाइयों अपने वेटिकन वाले चचाओं को बता दो कि भारत से ईसाईयत का बोरी बिस्तर उठाने का समय आ गया है; उन्हें बोल दो अब भारत में हिन्दू जाग चूका है; अब हिन्दू ने भी शस्त्र के साथ शास्त्र उठा लिया है, जितना जल्दी हो यहाँ से कट लो”

In 1993, A Few Young Persons Felt Concerned About the Impending Future of India …. (Prediction That Came True)


In the year 1993, the year when free India for the first time was made to embark by the then political power onto the path of economic liberalization and the western way of life without realizing that these would create catastrophic consequences for Indian national life, a few young persons felt concerned about the impending future of this country.

They realized that such economic liberalization and western way of life – unless there was proper guidance and control of human conduct by a moral sense founded on an enlightened spiritual wisdom – would be nothing but forcing the Indian society onto a path where the low level human tendencies of a few people who are rich – but who live on a very low level of human consciousness – would play their shameless naked dance.

They felt that the money power generated by such economic liberalization would percolate down step by step to a large number of middle and higher sections of the Indian society, which sections in turn, with the help of their money power, would eat away the purity of all democratic institutions of national governance, viz., political parties, Parliament, judiciary, bureaucracy etc. It was the foreboding of a coming corrupt India……. (continued)

 “काल चक्र के पथ पर, जिसे हम इतिहास कहते हैं, बहुत सी सभ्यताएं उभरी हैं और नष्ट हुईं हैं। उन सभ्यताओं के समक्ष कई बार संकट के भयावह क्षण आये।  कई बार उन संकटों को हल कर लिया गया और कई बार उनको हल नहीं किया जा सका और वे नष्ट हो गईं।  लेकिन हर बार वे सभ्यताएं केवल कुछ जातियों या राष्ट्रों तक ही सीमित रही थी।  आज एक बार फिर हमारी सभ्यता के संकट ग्रस्त होने के स्पष्ट संकेत मौजूद हैं।  यह संकट पहले से अधिक व्यापक और संहारक होगा।  समूची मानव जाति इस संकट की चपेट में आ सकती है और पृथ्वी पर जीवन का अस्तित्व ही दांव पर लग सकता है।

“आज का संकट उस मानव के पतन का संकट है जिसके हाथ में जन संहारक शस्त्र हैं ; यह उसकी सभ्यता के पतन का संकट है।  यह उस संधिकालीन युग का संकट है जहाँ एक ओर तो आधुनिक सभ्यता अपने सार रूप में जर्जर हो कर अपने जीवन के सांध्यकाल में पहुँच गयी है लेकिन दूसरी ओर एक ऐसी बेहतर और नयी सभ्यता जन्म नहीं ले पाई है जो पुरानी का स्थान ले सके। इस संकट के निवारण पर ही मानव जाति का भविष्य निर्भर करता है। …..(continued)

“लेकिन अभी रात्री का अन्धेरा है। सवेरा होने में अभी कुछ देर है।  मानव मन की गहराईयों में आधुनिक सभ्यता के प्रति एक अस्वीकृति का भाव है ; उसके मनोवैज्ञानिक अस्तित्व के अंतस्थल में एक छटपटाहट और बैचेनी है।  ये भाव ही नयी सभ्यता के जन्म लेने की तैयारी के संकेत हैं।  नयी सभ्यता के जन्म को संभव बनाने के लिए आधुनिक विज्ञान उर्वर भूमि तैयार करने में लगा है।  आधुनिक सभ्यता के इस संकट काल में – दो सभ्यताओं के इस संधिकाल में – विज्ञान और उसके द्वारा उद्घाटित सत्य ही अस्थिर मानव-मन के लिए सहारा और आशा की किरण हैं।

“इस युग परिवर्तन की बेला में, आओ , हम भारतवासी जागृत हों, संगठित हों और पहल करें राष्ट्रीय और अंतरराष्ट्रीय स्तर पर मानव जाति के भविष्य को गढ़ने में, नयी बेहतर और स्वर्णिम सभ्यता के स्थापन में ! ….. (continued)

“राजनीति का उद्देश्य बदलें : भारत में आज राजनीति एक दिशाविहीन और उद्देश्य रहित व्यवसाय है।  राजनीति में वे सभी लोग आते हैं जिनके सामने अपने जीवन का कोई उद्देश्य नहीं है।  ऐसे लोगों का अपना व्यक्तिगत आंतरिक जीवन भी अव्यवस्थित होता है।  ये नेता न तो किन्ही आंतरिक प्रेरणाओं को पूरा करने के लिए राजनीति में प्रवेश करते हैं और न ही इनके सामने समाज को और उससे भी बढ़ कर मानव जाति को किन्ही उच्च्तर लक्ष्यों की तरफ ले जाने का कोई कार्यक्रम होता है। आज के अधिकांश राजनीतिक नेता बहुत निम्न स्तर का जीवन जीते हैं।  उन्हें अपने मनोवैज्ञानिक भावों को विश्लेषण करने और उन भावों को सही दिशा में मोड़ देने का न तो समय होता है और न ही इच्छा होती है।  ऐसे में राजनीति एक बहुत घटिया स्तर का व्यवसाय और पाशविक प्रवृत्तियों को संतुष्ट करने का एक साधन मात्र बन कर रह गयी है।  क्योंकि राजनीति का सम्बन्ध सत्ता और शक्ति से होता है इसलिए निम्न मनोवृति के लोग राजनीति में इसलिए आते हैं कि वे धन, ऐश्वर्य और शक्ति को प्राप्त कर सकें।  इस तरह से भारत में आज चोर, डाकू और बदमाशों की मनोवृति रखने वाले लोगों के लिए राजनीति एक आदर्श व्यवसाय बन गयी है।” …..(continued)

“आत्मिक रूप में जागृत व्यक्ति राजनीति में आएं : राजनीति को एक घिनोने व्यवसाय की श्रेणी से निकाल कर मानव विकास के एक यंत्र के रूप में स्थापित करने के लिए यह जरूरी है कि भारत में राजनीति में पूर्ण परिवर्तन लाया जाय।  राजनीति में ऐसे लोगों का पदार्पण होना चाहिए जो अपने अस्तित्व के विषय में आत्मिक रूप में सजग और सचेतन हों।  ऐसे लोगों को यह ज्ञान होना चाहिए कि मानव एक विकास करता हुआ प्राणी है।  उन्हें यह सत्य स्पष्ट रूप में मालूम होना चाहिए कि मानवजाति विकास के उच्चतर लक्ष्यों को प्राप्त करने की ओर बढ़ रही है।  राजनीति में आने वाले लोगों को आंतरिक रूप में सचेतन मनुष्य बनना चाहिए।  यदि ऐसे लोग यह जान लें कि मनुष्य के अंदर चेतना के भौतिक स्तर के अतिरिक्त प्राणिक , मानसिक  और आत्मिक स्तर भी होते हैं तो वे लोग अपनी भौतिक और प्राणिक मांगों को पूरा करने के लिए यानि धन , ऐश्वर्य , सत्ता को हासिल करने के लिए राजनीति में नहीं आएंगे।  भारत में आज इतनी गिरावट होने के बावजूद भी ऐसे आत्मसचेती लोग विद्यमान हैंऔर भारत को गन्दी राजनीति की दलदल से निकालने के लिए उन्हें आगे आना चाहिए।”……(continued)

“राजनीति एक गरिमा पूर्ण सेवा बन सकती है : लेकिन राजनीति एक व्यवसाय नहीं है।  राजनीति मानव समाज को नियन्त्रित करने का और उसे किन्ही आदर्शों की ओर ले जाने का सबसे ताकतवर यन्त्र है।  राजनीति और राजसत्ता ऐसे सामाजिक यन्त्र हैं जिनका भारतवासी आगामी विकास की मंजिल को हासिल करने में उपयोग कर सकते हैं।  यदि राजनीति को किन्ही उदात्त लक्ष्यों को हासिल करने का साधन बना लिया जाये तो राजनीति एक गौरवपूर्ण सेवा ही नहीं बल्कि उच्चतम कोटि के इंसानों का एक गरीमापूर्ण और साहसिक प्रयत्न बन सकती है।” ….. (continued)

The Party advocated that India should come out of her decades-old stupor of corrupt rule; put her national house in order by making a fair approach to safeguard the economic interests of India as a nation, of the weak and the exploited lot, and by showing her example of a path that was better than the proposed one, was progressive in nature and just to the exploited and agonizing people’s world over.

The Party’s clear stand was that its ideology should explain to the humanity in plain and simple way that her evolutionary destination was of a supra-human nature and not of a degrading consuming animal. The Party held the opinion that this path towards life’s evolutionary destination passed through the check-posts of social justice, economic justice, and real democracy of the poor people of a country who are always in majority.

The Party held the position that in a democracy the majority should over-rule the minority to resolve the irreconcilable differences and that majority consisted in poor, uneducated and exploited lot of any country, while the rich and moneyed-men were in minority. ….. (continued)

Finally, it was decided that the party should bring out a comprehensive and objective document dealing with these subjects: ….(continued)

The party notes with satisfaction that the scope, depth and concerns of this document {Vision Document} reflect the genuine aspirations of the people of India in particular and the Peoples living in different countries of the world in general.

This document also brings out to the fore that India as a country has the potential to lead a world-wide spiritual revolution, only if she is steered onto the correct path. ….(continued)

(To read the full matter, please CLICK HERE)

%d bloggers like this: