Petrol is Costly … Is it?

(1 of 2)


Many of us curse high price of petrol – gasoline! Some of us even ‘vow’ to ‘teach’ a lesson to Modi on that account in the up coming parliamentary general election of 2019. Is petrol really costly? Please feel cool, calculate a bit and check the reality.

Over the weekend, I filled up my car’s fuel tank, and I thought fuel has really become expensive after the recent price hike.

But then I compared it with other common liquids and did some quick calculations, and I felt a little better.

To know why, see the results below – you’ll be surprised at how outrageous some other prices are !

Petrol Rs.80 per litre.

Coca Cola 330 ml can : Rs.27 = Rs.81 per litre.

Dettol antiseptic 100 ml Rs.20 = Rs.200 per litre.

Radiator coolant 500 ml Rs.160 = Rs.320 per litre.

Pantene conditioner 400 ml Rs.165 = Rs.413 per litre.

Medicinal mouthwash like Listerine 100 ml Rs.45 = Rs. 450 per litre.

Red Bull 150 ml can : Rs.75 = Rs.500 per litre.

Corex cough syrup 100 ml Rs.57 = Rs. 570 per litre.

Evian water 500 ml Rs. 330 = Rs. 660 per litre.

Rs. 500 for a litre of WATER !!!

And the buyers don’t even know the source.

By the way, ‘Evian’ spelled backwards comes to ‘Naive’ – are we not naive for paying Rs. 500 for one litre of water and cursing for paying Rs. 80 for one litre of petrol?

Kores whiteout 15 ml Rs. 15 = Rs. 1000 per litre.

Cup of coffee at any decent business hotel 150 ml Rs. 175 = Rs. 1167 per litre.

Old Spice after shave lotion 100 ml Rs. 175 = Rs. 1750 per litre.

Pure almond oil 25 ml Rs. 68 = Rs. 2720 per litre.

And this is the REAL KICKER:

HP deskjet colour ink cartridge 21 ml Rs.1900 = Rs. 90476 per litre!!!

Now you know why computer printers are so cheap? They have hooked you for the ink !

So, the next time you’re at the pump, don’t curse – just be glad that your car doesn’t run on cough syrup, after shave, coffee, or God forbid, printer ink !

(2 of 2)

By: K.I.P.

Assume you commute to office in you car.

Assume drive 30 km one way. Hence 60 km per day for 25 days=1500 km. Assume a mileage of 15. That makes it 100 litres of petrol per month.

Only additional cost imposed is excise duty increased by Rs.10 per litre. If we consider consequential VAT on excise duty, it works to Rs.12 to Rs.14 per litre. Rest, all components of price build-up is due to international oil prices would remain same irrespective of Govt in power.

So, effectively you are end shelling out Rs.1200 to Rs.1400 per month on petrol more.

Salaried class got decent tax cuts in 5 Budget. These work out to Rs.57500 pa for those in 20% tax bracket and Rs.77500 pa for those in 30% tax bracket.

This works out to Rs.4500 pm to Rs.6500 pm. Add to this savings in home loan interest and EMIs.

If excise duty on fuel had not been raised, you would be shelling out more income-tax now ie at 2013 levels.

That would not have helped bridge fiscal deficit. Inflation would have continued unabated and you would be having home loan rates of 13% instead of sub-9% rates now.

So do you still want to complain about price of petrol and lose everything else you have gained?

Democracy was NOT in danger then: NOW democracy is in danger!

Vinesh Nair

  1. Democracy wasn’t in Danger, when just a mere MP Rahul Gandhi tore in front of Indian people the ordinance passed by their own Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh.
  2. Democracy wasn’t in Danger when Kashmiri Pandits were tortured & killed, their women were raped & thrown out of Kashmir.

  3. Democracy was not in Danger when Congress leader Mr. Mani Shankar Iyer on Pakistani TV asked for the removal of Narendra Modi as India’s Prime Minister and when the Pakistani anchor asked him whether he ( Mani Shankar ) was requesting the ISI to help assassinate the Indian prime minister.

  4. Democracy wasn’t in Danger, when Congress aligned with Lalu Prasad Yadav, a convict of millions of loot in Bihar.

  5. Democracy wasn’t in Danger when innocent Sikhs were massacred in 1984 by Congress cadres and leaders.

  6. Democracy wasn’t in danger when 50 MPs of Congress openly wrote to US President with their signatures requesting him not to allow a US Visa to Chief Minister of Gujrat.

  7. Democracy wasn’t in Danger, when innocents like Col Purohit and Pragya were locked in prison and tortured to give a narrative of Hindu terror.

  8. Democracy wasn’t in Danger, when banks granted loans in 2012 (and thereafter till 2014) to kingfisher, Nirav Modi and hundreds of others like them without any security due to the pressure of political bosses of Congress.

  9. Democracy wasn’t in Danger, when Gov’t forced SC for a late night hearing of mercy petition to save Yakub, a terrorist who killed and destroyed families in Mumbai, simply to garner Muslim votes.

  10. Democracy wasn’t in Danger, when in one day finance minister made crores at the expense of poor investors with his P Note drama.

  11. Democracy was not in Danger when Rahul Gandhi secretly met the Chinese Ambassador Luo Zhaohui and two Chinese intelligence Agents in New Delhi in July 2017 – when the Doklam standoff was at its height – without  even informing the Indian Govt.

  12. But Democracy suddenly came under Danger, when the Governor of Karnataka invited the Single Largest party to form the Government there.

  13. Democracy wasn’t in danger when Rahul Gandhi met “thukde gang” in JNU.

  14. Democracy wasn’t in danger when Deva Gouda was removed from Prime Minister post to save Qatrochi, an absconding criminal (# see the note below).

  15. Democracy was not in danger when Congress sacked 88 duly elected state governments since 1952:

Nehru – 8
Shastri – 1
Rajiv Gandhi – 6
Indira Gandhi – 50
Narasimha Rao – 11
ManMohan Singh -12

And see the audacity of Congress!
It is crying hoarse that now Democracy is in danger !!

(# Note: Sonia had withdrawn her support to Deva Gowda and brought down his Govt. What was the reason? Deva Gowda as Prime Minister had sent CBI to arrest Quattorochi in Malaysia.

When CBI went to arrest Quattorochi in Malaysia, the Italian, smilingly sent back CBI saying that there is no extradition treaty between India and Malaysia. Quotrocchi fingered at CBI saying, ” By the time you reach Delhi your PM who sent you here would be gone.”

As stated by Quotrocchi, Sitaram Kesari as President of Congress Party was forced by Sonia to withdraw support to the Deva Gowda Government. An Italian Quotrocchi had the power to sack the Prime Minister of our Great Country !!

Under the brute money and muscle power of the Italian Signora Sonia our Constitutional posts like Prime Ministers were mere puppets.)

रतन टाटा: एक (पारसी) भारत मां का सपूत – आनंद शर्मा: एक (हिंदू) भारत मां का द्रोही !!

यहां दो नाम हैं: रतन टाटा और आनंद शर्मा। रतन टाटा भारत के प्रसिद्ध उद्योगपति  हैं और आनंद शर्मा कांग्रेस पार्टी के बडे नेता और संसद के सदस्य हैं।

हम भारतवासियों की दो बुरी आदतें हैं: एक तो यह जानने की कोशिश न करना कि हमारे आसपास और दुनिया में सचमुच मे क्या कुछ घटित हो रहा है – क्या कुछ पक रहा है जो कल हमारे सामने आयेगा; दूसरी बात यह कि हम याद नहीं रखते कि कल हमारे साथ क्या हुआ था – हम यह भूल जाते हैं कि थोड़े समय पहले ही क्या हुआ था; इतिहास को याद रखने की बात तो छोड ही दीजिये। यही दो बातें हमारे भारत को शताब्दियों से पिछड़ा बनाये हुए हैं।

आओ, हम कुछ बदलने की कोशिश करें – कुछ याद करने की कोशिश करें।

सन 2008 की बात है। देश के आर्थिक राजधानी मुम्बई पर पाकिस्तान के आतंकवादियों ने हमला किया। उसमें खास कर होटल ताज को निशाना बनाया गया। आतंकवादियो का एक ग्रुप उसके अन्दर घुस गया और चुन चुन कर लोगों को मारा और पूरे होटल को बर्बाद कर दिया।

2 दिन चले कमांडो ऑपेरशन के बाद सारे आतंकवादियो को मार दिया गया और एक को ज़िन्दा गिरफ्तार किया गया।

यहाँ तक का सारा किस्सा आप लोग जानते ही हैं, क्योंकि घटना बहुत भयानक थी और कुछ वर्ष पूर्व ही घटी थी।

उस आतंकवादी घटना के बाद ताज होटल के मालिक श्री रतन टाटा ने होटल ताज की मरम्मत के लिये ग्लोबल टेंडर निकाला। (ज़िसमे पूरे विश्व के देश हिस्सा ले सकते थे)

अब उस टेंडर को पाकिस्तान की कम्पनी ने भी भरने की कोशिश की, पर श्री रतन टाटा ने उस पाकिस्तानी कम्पनी को इसकी अनुमति नहीं दी और उनसे मिलने आये कम्पनी के मालिक पाकिस्तानियों से मिले बिना ही उनको अपने दफ्तर से भगा दिया था।

बात यहीं खत्म हो गयी होती लेकिन दो दिन के बाद टाटा द्वारा रिजेक्ट हुए कम्पनी के पाकिस्तानी मालिक दिल्ली पहुंच गए। कोंग्रेस की सरकार थी, अतः सीधे काँग्रेस के एक बहुत बड़े नेता के पास गए और उसे सारी बात बताई।

उस बड़े नेता ने तुरंत श्री रतन टाटा को फोन लगाया और बोला की यह पाकिस्तान के अच्छे बिजनेसमैंन हैं, आप अपना काम इन्ही को दीजिये।

इतना बोलना था कि श्री रतन टाटा जो बिना गुस्साये हुए बोलते हैं उन्होंने उस कांग्रेसी नेता से कहा कि…

(आप बेशरम और बेगैरत हो सकते हो, मैं नहीं ) और फोन काट दिया।

जानना चाहेंगे वह कांग्रेसी मंत्री कौन था ?

तो जानिए कि वो कांग्रेसी मंत्री वही आनन्द शर्मा था जो आजकल संसद में देशभक्ति की बड़ी बड़ी बातें कर के राज्यसभा में कांग्रेसियों से भयंकर हंगामा करवाता है। राज्यसभा चलने नहीं देता है और दावा करता रहता है कि उसको देश की बड़ी चिन्ता है। इसी आनन्द शर्मा ने श्री रतन टाटा को फोन कर के ताज होटल की मरम्मत का ठेका पाकिस्तानियों को देने की सिफारिश की थी।

यह एक हिंदुस्तानी का – जो अपने को शर्मा और हिन्दू लिखता है – हमारे देश भारत के साथ द्रोह है, गद्दारी है। यह द्रोह एक अकेले व्यक्ति का – आनंद शर्मा का – नहीं है; यह द्रोह एक विचारधारा का – एक राजनैतिक पार्टी की विचारधारा का – है , जिसका सदस्य यह आनंद शर्मा है।  यह घटना यह दर्शाती है कि यदि यह पार्टी और शर्मा जैसे सदस्य इस देश की सत्ता पर कब्ज़ा कर लें तो इस देश के साथ कुछ भी अनहोनी – बुरी से बुरी बात – हो सकती है।

और दूसरी तरफ कमाल देखिये ! रतन टाटा – जिनके पुरखे कभी ईरान से आये थे – कितने महान भारतीय हैं !! उन्होंने भारत को अपनाया है, वे भारत माता के सपूत हैं।  भारत को उन पर गर्व है।

आज जब उपरोक्त मैसेज वाट्सएप पर मिला तो सहज ही विश्वास नहीं हुआ। अतः पहले इसकी सत्यता की पुष्टि की। यह सत्य है। आप भी इस लिंक पर इस सत्य की पुष्टि कर लें।

An Open Letter to Archbishop Couto of Delhi by Savio Rodrigues of Goa

An open Letter has been addressed to Archbishop Anil Joseph Thomas Couto by Savio Rodrigues, the Editor-in-Chief of Goa Chronicle. This letter reads thus:

The Holy Bible in the Chapter 11:11 of Gospel of Luke, “Jesus asks, “What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead.”

It is with extreme disappointment that I have to once again write on a topic that disturbs me because the values of peace, love and hope that I have imbibed in me comes from my unflinching beliefs in the teachings of Jesus.

Unfortunately its the Catholic Church who acts as custodian of Jesus’s teachings that appears to be walking the path that is completely opposite to the lessons in humanity that Jesus expressed through his teachings. Instead of offering a fish are we attempting to offer the child a snake.

With due respect to your office and your vocation as Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Delhi, I am shocked, disappointed and downright angry reading the contents of your pastoral letter.

Here is an extract of that letter that has disturbed me the most:

“We are witnessing a turbulent political atmosphere which poses a threat to the democratic principles enshrined in our Constitution and the secular fabric of our nation.”

This country has witnessed immense communalism, terrorism and rampant corruption in every corner of democracy from Emergency to communal riots under the watch of different political parties in power and every Indian knows this to be true. But are you categorically stating India is currently witnessing a turbulent political atmosphere that is different from any other political year in the past?

Please tell the people of India what is your view on the Emergency that took the very principle on which the country was formed on and threw it in the dustbin because one particular political leader thought it was her birthright to do what she felt was right for her political party in the guise of doing it for the country. I was not even born when it happened, I would like to know what was official stand that the Catholic Church took at that time.

Please tell the people of India when innocent Kashmiri Pandits were raped and killed by Kashmiri Muslims driven out of their home and left to fend for themselves, what was the stand of the Catholic Church and did it official condemn the rape and murder of innocent Indians. Was there not a political turmoil at that point of time?

Please tell the people of India more recently what is stand taken by the Catholic Church in the numerous killings of Hindus on the grounds of religion and politics in different parts of India. Do I, as a Christian turn a blind-eye to this truth or does the Church see only Christians and Muslims as victims of atrocities?

Please tell the people of India the stand of the Catholic Church of the media reports and cases filed against Priests abusing minors in different parts in India and the world; is that not turmoil in the innocent minds that have been brutally violated by a representative of God?

The game that the Catholic Church is playing of division is devious and demonic in nature. The democratic principles of this country is not only for us minority but for the majority as well.

Look at the India around you and don’t go by media reports, its a Hindu at St Michael’s Church in Mahim, a Christian at the Ajmer Dargah and a Muslim at the Shantidurga Temple in Goa. This exists because they understand the true meaning of secularism.

Secularism is not acceptance of all religion in governance, it is the acceptance of no religion in matters of governance.

I agree with you that we should fast and pray but this must be done to eradicate all those who on the basis of religion divide us Indians.

I am proud of my Hindu lineage, it has helped me understand the message of Jesus and the purpose to my life.

It is my belief in the teachings of Jesus that I have the courage to stand up and tell you that as Christians we must unite all, even those that we think are the sinners; but repentance must come from us first before we go to change others.

The Bible says, “I have carved you on the palm of my hands”. I was taught by my parents that, that line in the Bible was for every single human creation of God and not only those who follow the Catholic Church.

India is a nation of unity in diversity, I believe we are more spiritual a nation than religious.

How India is Fast Changing under the Leadership of Modi!

Why India Needs Modi in 2019 Again!


By: Dr Ashok Anand, President – Yorks College, Birmingham, U.K

There had been, and there would be many great leaders in India. But in the current scenario, India needs Modi. Why?

Reasons are many and I list a few of them hereunder:

  1. He is not corrupt like almost all the politicians of all the political parties are/were. This fact can be established only by looking at the condition of his brothers and other family members, while seeing the fortunes other Indian politicians and their families have accumulated. For example, compare it with Vadra, Lalus, Akhilesh’s 22 family members, billionaire Dalit queen Mayawati and scores of others.
  2. He is bold enough to take even unpopular decisions for the sake of the future of this nation; yes, only time will tell whether his decisions were right or wrong.

  3. I live abroad and know what the reputation of India four years ago used to be. It was at the bottom. But today Modi’s PR has got some of our reputation back. We feel that clearly while living in international community.

  4. I don’t think any of his ministers have looted the country in the last almost four years, the way Congress had been doing it for 67 years. This itself is a ‘First Thing’ in  the history of ‘India-since-1947”. This single achievement of Modi is enough to make him entitled to be PM of India again in 2019.

  5. His strong image before China, Pakistan and other nations would certainly be getting India a better treatment at the international platform. This will benefit India on many national and international fronts.

  6. Ask the poor people of this country who have seen the banks first time in their life!  Today their accumulative savings have touched over Rupees 40,000 crores. This figure speaks for itself and how these people feel today.

  7. About 1500, 18th century laws have been removed from the statute books in India. These antiquated laws were being used selectively and in discriminate manner by the officialdom to harass the poor and illiterate people in India.

  8. Subsidies are reaching direct to the bank accounts of the poor while in Congress raj, all the money used to be pocketed by the middlemen – that is, by local netas and Panchayati heads.

  9. 30 million women are enjoying cooking gas and now not burning their own bones to cook for the family.

  10. Forget Demonetization and GST at the moment, next generation will understand what good Modi has done for India by his tough and unpopular decisions.

I can cite several such examples and small things which this government has done and is doing continuously. But keep in mind, seventy years of slush cannot be cleared in mere three years.

However, never forget, that this country, with a history of corruption, religious bigotry, enmity, greed, jealousy, intolerance and full of traitors, would not be easy to control even by a Dictator.

And finally, this is not the question whether BJP or Modi is doing good or bad, the million dollar question is, if Congress was tolerated for 6 decades, why not Modi for at least One?

I think if he wins 2019 elections, India – and you – would have many more plesant surprises in store to encounter.

“Britain Imitated Education Model of India,” Said East India Company!

By: Shreepal Singh

Today the Western world has a self-sustaining education system, which attracts best of the brains as scholars from around the world. After getting this education, most of these scholars are absorbed in the host country as a matter of well calculated policy. It is a brain-drain for the country sending these scholars. These highly educated and talented emigre contribute to the wealth of technology and economy of their adopted homeland and take their erstwhile host to ever newer height in our competitive world. This has been one of the chief reasons of their supremacy and empire.

But how did the western countries come to invent such a self-sustaining superb education system? The truth is they did not invent it; they simply copied it from India! Is it not a jingoistic nationalist claim on the part of India? No, it is stated so by the East India Company in 1823.

Just consider these facts. Before the end of World War II, the British empire had the leadership of the Western world. This empire led the path in many fields, including education, and the rest of the Western world followed in its footprints.

It was the British empire – following in the the footsteps of its precursor East India Company – that imitated its education system from the natives of India; and from the British empire it spread to other western countries, because of the utility of this Indian education model.

Here we are reproducing an extract from the report of one A. D. Campbell. Esq., The Collector of Bellary, Dated Bellary August 17, 1823, upon the Education of Natives. It reads thus:

“16. The economy with which children are taught to write in the native schools and the system by which the more advanced scholars are caused to teach the less advanced, and at the same time to confirm their own knowledge, is certainly admirable, and well deserved the imitation it has received in England. The chief defects in the native schools are the nature of the books and learning taught, and the want of competent masters.

“17. Imperfect, however, as the present education of the natives is, there are few who possess the means to command it for their children. Even were books of a proper kind plentiful, and the master every way adequate to the task imposed upon him, he would make no advance from one class to another, except as he might be paid for his labour. While learning the first rudiments, it is common for the scholar to pay to the teacher a quarter of a rupee, and when arrived as far as to write on paper, or at the higher branches of arithmetic, half a rupee per mensem. But in proceeding further, such as explaining books which are all written in verse, giving the meaning of Sanskrit words, and illustrating the principles of Vernacular languages, such demands are made as exceed the means of most parents. There is, therefore, no alternative but that of leaving their children only partially instructed, and consequently ignorant of the most essential and useful parts of a liberal education: but there are multitudes who cannot even avail themselves of the advantages of the system, defective as it is.

“18. I am sorry to state, that this is ascribable to the gradual but general impoverishment of the country. The means of the manufacturing classes have been of late years greatly diminished by the introduction of our own English manufactures in lieu of the Indian cotton fabrics. The removal of many of our troops from our own territories to the distant frontiers of our newly subsidized allies has also, of late years, affected the demand for grain; the transfer of the capital of the country from the native government and their officers, who liberally expended it in India, to Europeans, restricted by law from employing it even temporarily in India, and daily draining it from the land, has likewise tended to this effect, which has not been alleviated by a less rigid enforcement of the revenue due to the State. The greater part of the middling and lower classes of the people are now unable to defray the expenses incident upon the education of their offspring, while their necessities require the assistance of their children as soon as their tender limbs are capable of the smallest labour.

“19. It cannot have escaped the government that of nearly a million of souls in this District, not 7,000 are now at school, a proportion which exhibits but too strongly the result above stated. In many villages where formerly there were schools, there are now none and in many others where there were large schools, now only a few children of the most opulent are taught, others being unable from poverty to attend, or to pay what is demanded.

“20. Such is the state in this District of the various schools in which reading writing and arithmetic are taught in the vernacular dialects of the country, as has been always usual in India, by teachers who are paid by their scholars. But learning, though it may proudly decline to sell its stores, has never flourished in any country except under the encouragement of the ruling power, and the countenance and support once given to science in this part of India has long been withheld.

“21. Of the 533 institutions for education now existing in this District, I am ashamed to say not one now derives any support from the State.

“22. There is no doubt, that in former times, especially under the Hindoo Governments, very large grants, both in money and in land, were issued for the support of learning.

“23. Considerable alienations of revenue, which formerly did honour to the State, by upholding and encouraging learning, have deteriorated under our rule into the means of supporting ignorance; whilst science, deserted by the powerful aid she formerly received from Government, has often been reduced to beg her scanty and uncertain meal from the chance benevolence of charitable individuals; and it would be difficult to point out any period in the history of India when she stood more in need of the proffered aid of Government to raise her from the degraded state into which she has fallen, and dispel the prevailing ignorance which so unhappily pervades the land.” (Extracts from the report of A. D. Campbell, Esq., the Collector of Bellary, dated Bellary, August 17, 1823, upon the Education of Natives: pp. 503-504 of Report from Select Committee on the affairs of the East India Company, Vol. I., published 1832).

When Rome was Counting in I, II, III etc., India was Counting in Trillions!


In his book ‘On India’, Alberuni  (AD 1030) recorded his neutral opinion about India and her people as he observed them. He says, “In arithmetic all nations agree that all the orders of numbers (e.g. one, ten, hundred, thousand) stand in a certain relation to the ten; that each order is the tenth part of the following and the tenfold of the preceding. I have studied the names of the orders of the numbers in various languages with all kinds of people with whom I have been in contact, and have found that no nation goes beyond the thousand. …..

  “Those, however, who go beyond the thousand in their numeral system are the Hindus, at least in their arithmetical technical terms, which have been either freely invented or derived according to certain etymologies, whilst in others both methods are blended together.  They extend the names of the orders of numbers until the 18th order for religious reasons, the mathematicians being assigned by the grammarians with all kinds of etymologies.

  “The 18th order is called Parardha, i.e. the half of heaven, or, more accurately, the half of that which is above. For if the Hindus construct periods of time out of Kalpas, the unit of this order is a day of God (i.e. a half nychthemeron). And as we do not know anybody larger than heaven, half of it (Parardha), has been compared with a half of the greatest day. By doubling it, by uniting night to day, we get the whole of the greatest day. There can be doubt that the name of Parardha is accounted for in this way, and that parar means the whole of heaven.

 “The following are the names of the eighteen orders of numbers:

  1. Ekam ….. (In digit by editor: 1

  2. Dasam ….. (10

  3. Satam …… (100

  4. Sahasram ….. (1000

  5. Ayuta …… (10000

  6. Laksha ……. (100000

  7. Prayuta ……. (1000000

  8. Koti …… (10000000

  9. Nyarbuda ……. (100000000

  10. Padma ……. (1000000000

  11. Kharva ……. (10000000000

  12. Nikharva …….. (100000000000

  13. Mahapadam ……. (1000000000000

  14. Sanku …….. (10000000000000

  15. Samudra ……. (100000000000000

  16. Madhya ……. (1000000000000000

  17. Antya ……. (10000000000000000

  18. Paradha …… (100000000000000000- end of edit)’ “

Congress, Answer These Questions First – Before Questioning Others!

By: Raviasha

Congress and its allied ‘make-believe secular or liberal` elements often ask this question: “Who gave BJP / RSS the right to represent Hindus in India?”

This question is answered by Neil Mezi on quora thus:

Not that I am any RSS fan!

But who gave you the right to steal and claim all of India’s freedom struggle as gift/charity to Indian masses by the sole family/nepotistic dynasty – The Gandhis?

Aren’t you erasing, white washing, mocking the sacrifices of millions of freedom fighters, mass heroes like Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekar Azad, Subash Chandra Bose etc that laid down their lives for the country?

Who gave you right to loot India for 60 years? Who gave you right to name all airports, ports after your nepotistic family? Is India your personal property?

Who gave you right to donate India’s land coco Islands etc to other nations without seeking Indian masses permission? Is India’s land your personal property?

Who gave you right to declare Muslims as minority when Parsis, Jains, Jews, Buddhists, homosexuals, trans-gendered are actual minority and Muslims the second largest majority?

Who gave you right to tax Hindu temples and shrines and use the money for government and expenditure for all religion masses, but exempt tax on Muslim and Christian shrines in name of appeasement? Are you punishing Hindu faith believers for being Hindus?

Who gave you right to segregate common laws meant for all? You reformed Hindu law but did not touch other religions’ laws, why?

Who gave you right to allow Muslims to practice polygamy etc but ban other faiths to do it, isn’t this sheer hypocrisy and open bias towards one religion’s followers under the pretence of being secular party?

Who gave you right to spend Indian tax payers money on madrassa’s religious education when you don’t pay same amount of funds to other religions’ followers education?

Who gave you right to fund Haj subsidies, provide minority quota etc to them when you don’t provide same subsidies to other faiths to visit their shrines or provide minority quota to Kashmiri pandits in JK or other 8 states where Hindus are in a minority?

Who gave you right to send / use Indian navy frigate to lay wreath on sea burial of Edwina Mountbatten by her love interest Nehru in his personal capacity at British’s South Coast? Is Indian Navy machinery your family members’ personal property?

Who gave you right to provide secret/safe passage to criminal Warren Anderson, Union Carbide CEO who was charged with manslaughter by Indian court and put in custody?

Who gave you right to allow to flee a person from custody who was responsible for blinding and deaths of lakhs of people in Bhopal gas tradegy, whose generation after generation still suffer deformity and yet received no compensation from them? Wasn’t that betrayal and criminal on your part to India?

Who gave you right to mock 26/11 tragedy, strikes at border etc from the likes of Digvijay Singh, Sanjay Nirupam etc?

When Congress can answer all these questions, they can bother questioning others. Before that, Congress has not moral right to ask others any question. A culprit cannot point a finger at others!

‘इंडिया’ से ‘भारत’ की ओर: मिट्टी की हांडी मे पकाने के लाभ

Urban Planning in Ancient India

Source: Know Your Bharat

There is an interesting information about Urban planning in ancient Bhārat, especially  during the Maurya Period. Its source is @vajrayudha11.

We all know that Harappan civilization had well developed tradition of urban planning, especially its trademark ‘grid planning’ of streets.

But a common perception is that this tradition of urban planning died along with the decline of Harappan civilization. It is a wrong perception. The truth is otherwise.

Both literary and archaeological evidence strongly suggest the survival of this urban planning well into the Maurya period and beyond.

Ancient treatise such as Arthaśāstra & Vāstuśāstra texts put great emphasis on – and talk in detail about – various aspects of urban planning.

For example, we find a well laid out network of streets running perpendicular to main road in the excavated portion of the ancient city of Takshashila. Just see this image to appreciate this truth:

The sketch of this excavated site looks like this:

One of the best examples of the tradition of urban planning in ancient Bhārat comes from a small Mauryan town of Vichhigrama (modern Bhita) in UP. The image of this excavated site is reproduced here:

The sketch of this excavated city looks like this:

A Kid Tells his Daddy, What is Pakistan!

By: Sudarsh V.

Note: This hilarious item of Nadeem F Paracha is published by DAWN, a leading English Daily newspaper of  Pakistan. It truly depicts what is taught to kids in their schools in Pakistan and what is shown there on television chennels to the immature minds of ignorant masses.

It is a culture – a mindset, which is propagated not only in the geographical Pakistan but also in ‘cultural Pakistan’, which is existing in many parts of India. This culture – this mindset – has completely ruined Pakistan seemingly beyond redemption and slowly spreading its tenecales in many states within India. For these dark corners, ignorance is the bliss.

This item is in the form of conversation between a kid and his father, in which the father tries his best to inculcate some commonsence in the mind of his child but the child rebuffs his father’s attempt, upholds the supremacy of the blind religious ideas that are filled to the brim in his little mind and even threatens his father. This conversation goes like this:

Son: Daddy?
Dad: Yes, son.

Son: Are we going to have a war with India?
Dad: Perhaps.

Son: Oh, goody. We will thrash them, right? Like we did in 1857!
Dad: It wasn’t in 1857, son.

Son: Oh, okay. But whom did we thrash in 1857?
Dad: The British, son…

Son: And the Hindus too, right?
Dad: Well…

Son: Did Quaid-i-Azam fight in that war along with Muhammad bin Qasim and Imran Khan?
Dad: No, son. The Quaid and Imran were born much later and Muhammad bin Qasim died many years before.

Son: Then who ruled Pakistan in those days?
Dad: There was no Pakistan in those days, son.

Son: But there was always a Pakistan! It has been there for 5,000 years!

Dad: Who have you been talking to, son?                                                          Son: No one. I’ve just been watching TV.
Dad: It figures.

Son: Daddy, why are all these people against us Arabs?
Dad: Arabs? But we aren’t Arabs, son.

Son: Of course we are because our ancestors were Arabs!
Dad: No, son. Our ancestors were of the subcontinental stock.

Son: Sub-what?
Dad: Never mind. You seem to like wars, son.

Son: Yes. I like to watch them on TV.
Dad: But real wars are fought outside the TV, son.

Son: Really? How is that possible? What sort of a war is that?
Dad: Never mind.

Son: Daddy, you look worried.
Dad: Of course, I am, you little warmongering punk!

Son: Daddy! Why are you scolding me?
Dad: Because TV is talking rot and so are you!

Son: Daddy, are you supporting Hindus?
Dad: No!

Son: Daddy, have you become a kafir?
Dad: Keep quiet! No more TV for you! Go watch a movie on DVD or listen to a CD.

Son: Can’t do that.
Dad: But we have so many DVDs and CDs, son.

Son: Not any more.
Dad: What do you mean?

Son: I burned them all.
Dad: What?!

Son: I burned them all.
Dad: I heard that! But why?

Son: They spread obscenity.
Dad: Oh, God. Son, go do your homework. What happened to that science project you were working on?

Son: It’s almost complete.
Dad: Good boy. What are you making?

Son: A bomb.
Dad: What?!

Son: A bomb.
Dad: I heard that! But why?

Son: Because I am a true Muslim who hates America.
Dad: But only last week you wanted to go to Disney Land.

Son: That’s different.
Dad: How come?

Son: Mickey Mouse is Muslim.
Dad: No, he isn’t.

Son: Is so. He converted when he heard azaan on the moon.
Dad: On the moon?

Son: Yes. Because the earth is flat and…
Dad: What??

Son: The earth iss…
Dad: I heard that!

Son: Daddy, do you want to see my science project, or not?
Dad: Gosh, that bomb? But your science teacher will fail you.

Son: No, she won’t.
Dad: Really?

Son: Yes. I plan to blow her up as well.
Dad: God, what is wrong with you? Go call your mother!

Son: She can’t come.
Dad: Why not?

Son: I’ve locked her in the kitchen.
Dad: But what for?

Son: A woman’s place is in the kitchen. I will not let her out until she covers herself up properly!
Dad: But she’s your mother!

Son: She’s also a woman!
Dad: So?

Son: So she should be hidden.
Dad: Hidden from whom?

Son: The whole world and Tony.
Dad: Tony?

Son: Yes, Tony.
Dad: But Tony’s a cat.

Son: Yes. But he’s male.
Dad: Son, have you gone mad?

Son: No. By the way, I’ve made sure Kitto starts covering up as well.
Dad: Kitto?

Son: Yes, Kittto.
Dad: But Kitto’s a cat!

Son: Yes. But a female cat.
Dad: But she’ll suffocate.

Son: Oh, she’s already dead.
Dad: What?

Son: She’s already dead.
Dad: I heard that! But how?

Son: I buried her alive.
Dad: You what?

Son: Yes. To avenge Tony’s honour. But now I will behead Tony.
Dad: But why?

Son: To save mom’s honour!
Dad: Oh, God!

Son: Don’t say that. Always say Allah.
Dad: What’s the difference?

Son: Daddy, do you want to be beheaded too?
Dad: No!

Son: Do you want to be stoned to death?
Dad: No!

Son: Do you want to be flogged?
Dad: No!

Son: Do you want to get your arms chopped off?
Dad: No!

Son: Then stop asking silly questions. By the way, I won’t call you daddy anymore.
Dad: What will you call me then?

Son: Whatever that is Arabic for daddy.
Dad: I don’t know any Arabic, son.

Son: That’s because you are a kafir.
Dad: Who the heck are you to tell me who I am, you little fascist twit!

Son: What’s a fascist?
Dad: An irrational, violent, self-righteous mad man!

Son: W… aaaaaaa…
Dad: Why are you crying?

Son: You scolded me.
Dad: Okay, I’m sorry. You have to be tolerant and rational, son. Now be a good boy and go read a book instead of watching TV.

Son: I have no books.
Dad: Of course, you do. I bought you so many books.

Son: I burned them.
Dad: What?

Son: I burned them.
Dad: But why?

Son: They were all in English.
Dad: So?

Son: It’s a non-Muslim language!
Dad: But we are speaking English, aren’t we?

Son: W… aaaaaaa…
Dad: What now?

Son: Zionists made me forget my Arabic.
Dad: But you never knew any Arabic, son.

Son: W… aaaa… yes, I did until you and mommy gave me the polio dropss… aaaaa…

Dad: Okay, tell me, can you do me a favour?

Son: Sure, dad.

Dad: Can you blow up something for me?
Son: Oh, goody! Of course, dad. What should I blow? A CD shop, a hotel, a school…?

Dad: No, no, something a lot more sinister.
Son: Mom?

Dad: No, no…
Son: What then?

Dad: The TV set!
Son: What?

Dadd: Blow the TV set.
Son: I heard that! But why?

Dad: Just do it!
Son: I see. Dad?

Dad: Yes.
Son: You’re so unconstitutional!

(By. Nadeem F Paracha)

What is the moral of this ‘conversation between a kid and his father’? Any moral; any lesson?

There is a lesson for ‘political Pakistan’ – the neighbor of India and `cultural Pakistan’ within India. This lesson is:

  1. Use your commonsense to come out of the darkness, whatever its source may be;
  2. Move forward; live in peace; let others live in peace; co-exist in this already volatile world;
  3. You are the inheritors of a great past, be proud of your past and cherish it; do not befool yourselves by believing that your past history was a period of ignorance – “Jahilya Daur”; that your ancestors – Porush (who fought Alexander) or Ashoka or Milind ( in Greek Menandros) – were Jahils;
  4. History does not go backward, it moves towards future; be wise, look around to your country, your children, your future and move forward to the light and not backward to the darkness;
  5. To appreciate this reality, you require only commonsense and nothing else.

Serbian People Came From India With Trinity Gods ‘Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva’!!!

Serbian Irish
(Note: This article is borrowed with thanks from HERE:)
Triglav , Trojan, Trinity, Trimurti, Agni

The book of Veles has this riddle:

Jer tajna je velika, kako to Svarog biva u isto vreme i Perun i Svetovid.

Translated into English it means:

Because it is a great secret how come Svarog (hevenly and earthly fire) is at the same time Perun (thunder) and Svetovid (Sun).

The answer to this riddle is Triglav (three headed), trojan (triple), Hromi daba, Crom Dubh – Lugh, Grom Div, The Thunder Giant, The Sky Father.

According to Branibor (now Brandenburg ) chronicles written in 1136 ad, the ruler of the area, Prince Pribislav destroyed a statue of Triglav after he was baptized. This statue of Triglav has previously been highly respected. No detailed description of the statue survived, and there is no description of rituals related to the veneration of this Statue. The only information that the chronicle gives us is that the God had three heads.

In the biographies of the Bishop Otto fon Bramburg, who converted Western Slavs (Sorbs) in the South Baltic, in Pomerania we can find more information about the god Triglav (Dabog, Hromi Daba). All three biographers ( Ebo , Herbord and an unnamed monk from the monastery of Priflinger ) have witnessed the existence of a three-headed idol in Volyn and Šćećin. Ebo said that the city of Volin is situated on the slopes of three hills, and that it has a temple dedicated to a deity with three heads, which was called God Triglav („…deo Triglavo dicitus, tricapitum habebat…“). According to Ebo, Triglav is the highest Slavic God ( ” summus Deus ” ), the ruler of the three worlds (heaven , earth and the underworld). The statue was made of wood, that it’s three heads were encrusted in silver, and that it’s heads were covered with the “tiara” or some kind of a hat made of gold, which covered the idol’s eyes.

In the town of Stettin were three hills, the central one being dedicated to Triglav, the chief local deity. This idol was of gold and had three heads, while its eyes and lips were covered with a golden veil. The pagan priests declared that Triglav (“Three-Heads”) was tricephalous because he wished to make it known that he ruled over three realms, i. e., heaven, earth, and the underworld; and he covered his face because he would not see the sins of men. The temple of Triglav was built with wonderful skill. On the inner and outer sides of the walls were various embossed figures of men, birds, and animals, so well made that they seemed to live and breathe. Their colour was always fresh and durable, and could be damaged neither by rain nor by snow. According to the custom of the ancestors one tenth of all booty was stored in the treasury of the temple, and there was, moreover, an abundance of gold and silver vessels used by the chieftains on festive occasions, as well as daggers, knives, and other rare, costly, and beautiful objects. In honour of and in homage to the gods colossal horns of wild bulls, gilded and adorned with precious stones, were kept there, some serving for drinking vessels, and some for musical instruments.

Otto von Bamberg destroyed the idols, by chopping the heads off with an axe. He then sent the three silver coated heads to the pope Calixto II in Rome, as evidence that his mission of converting Polabian Slavs (Sorbs) was successful.  In Szczecin Bishop Otto fon Bamberg did manage to destroy the temple dedicated to Triglav, but the priests removed the statue of God which was entirely made of gold and managed to hide it in a hollow tree near the city. It is said that the Bishop did not manage to find this statue.

Same authors ( Ebo , Herbord and monk from Priflinger) tell us that the animal dedicated to god Triglav was a black horse , which was used for divination. Triglav was also associated with spear and sword and was considered to be one of Slavic war gods. Some reports say that Triglav had three goats heads.

Among thousands of Serbian folk songs and ceremonial prayer songs collected by ethnologists during 19th century, we find many which talk about Triglav. The description of god Triglav from Serbian folk tradition corresponds closely to references to Triglav which we find in the Book of Veles. They both identify Triglav as main deity and the oldest deity that there is.

From the book: “Триглав у старим српским народним песмама и молитвама“:

… Ti junaci mladi hrabri,
Velji vojni Triglavovi,
Triglavovi silna Boga,
Silna Boga najvećega,
Boga stara Pra Pra Boga…

Translated into English this means:

…Those heroes young and brave
great solders of Triglav
Triglav, the mighty god
Triglav the greatest god
Triglav the “pra pra” (oldest) god…

Book of Veles:

…Molimo se i klanjamo se prvom Triglavu i njemu veliku slavu pojemo…To je suština Triglava jer svi od njega potiču i njemu se opet vraćaju…

Translated into English this means:

We are praying to and we are bowing in front the first Triglav and we are singing great praises to him…This is the essence of Triglav, because all there is comes from him and all to him returns…

The following excerpts are from the book called “Pesme i obicaji ukupnog naroda srpskog” meaning Songs and Customs of all Serbian people. This is a collection of ceremonial songs collected throughout the Balkans in the 19th century by ethnographer M.S.Milojevic. Serbian folk tradition tells us that Triglav is the ruler of all space and all time. He is the god of three worlds: the sky , the earth and the underworld.

…Sa njegove tri velike glave,
Sa tri glave velikim Triglavom,
Što mi drma svetom tim prebelim,
Na sve strane i ta sva vremena…

Translated into English this means:

…With his great three heads
With three heads the great Triglav
shakes (rules) this white world
In all directions and in all times…

This next song tells us that Triglav is also the god of the past the present and future.

…Silen bora Triglavomu,
Što mi sedit, ni zboruva,
Dlgo mnogo što minuva,
Dlgo mnogo što ća bidne,
Dlgo mnogo što živue,
De im imat do tri sili,
Prva sila na nebesa,
Druga sila na pod zemje,
A treća mi na ta zemja…

Translated into English this means:

Mighty god Triglav
Who decides
What happened
What will happen
what is happening
And who has three forces
First in the sky
Second under the ground
And third on the ground…

Serbian folk tradition tells us that Triglav is the holy trinity. This means that for Serbs, Triglav is “the holy god, father, son and holy spirit”.

This next song, talks about the passing of the flower wreath, from St George (Yarilo, 6th of May, young sun, beginning of summer), to St John (21 of Jun, the summer solstice, middle of summer), to St peter (July), to Triglav (2nd of August, end of summer). The flower wreath represents the sun during spring and summer months. Triglav here is actually St Elijah. His feast day (2nd of August) falls at the end of Summer when sun’s heat is at its maximum. St Elijah is known i Serbia as Sveti Ilija (Sveti can mean saint but also shining) the thunderer, which shows that in Serbian tradition the Sun is associated with the thunde. St Elijah is actually Svetli Ilios, Shining Thundering Sun, Perun and his day is 2nd of August, Crom dubh – Lugh day, Perun day.

…Ivanjsko cveće petranjsko,
Petrovsko cveće ivanjsko!
Ivan ga bere te bere.
Petar ga plete te plete.
Daje ga silnu Triglavu,
Triglavu svetoj trojici…

Translated into English this means:

St John’s flowers to St Petar’s flowers
St John picks the flowers
St Petar makes wreath from them
And gives the wreath to mighty Triglav
Triglav the holy trinity…

This is another song which refers to Triglav as the holy trinity:

…Ko prevari svoga druga,
Svoga druga pobratima 
Satreo ga silni Ljelju:
Svojim ocem strašnim Bogom.
Strašnim Bogom Triglav Bogom, 
Triglavom svetom Trojicom…

Translated into English this means:

…Who betrays a friend
A friend or a blood brother
May mighty Ljelju (Perun) destroy him
With his father terible god
Terible god Triglav
Triglav the holy trinity…

This next song tells us that Triglav is the Creator, the Protector and the Destroyer of everything that there was, there is and that there will be:

…Naš gospodar Trigljav velji, 
Naš Stvoritelj i Držitelj 
I veliki Umoritelj…

Translated into English this means:

…Our lord Triglav the great
Our creator, our protector (upholder, maintainer) 
and our great destroyer…

And this song tells us that Triglav is the highest god, the greatest god and that he is the three headed trinity, at the same time the Creator, the Protector and the Destroyer:

…Veliča smo Višnjega!
Previšnjega i jasnjega! 
Triglav Boga najvećeg. 
Svetu Trojcu najjasnu. 
Stvoriteljicu najjaču. 
Održateljicu najkrepku. 
Rušiteljicu najstrašnu….

Translated into English this means:

…We celebrated Višnjega (The high god, the sky god)
The highest and the brightest
God Triglav the greatest
Holy trinity the shiniest
Creator, the strongest
protector (upholder, maintainer), the most robust
Destroyer, the most terrible…

This next ceremonial song (prayer) actually identifies, gives names to the three faces of Triglav:

…Da nam stoka bude zdrava
Ta goveda i te ovce
Ti jarići i jaganjci.
Doratasti velji konji
Što no nose te junake
Mile borce Triglav bora5
Triglav bora te Troice
Višnjeg boga Stvoritelja
Jakog Žive rušitelja
I Branjanja Branitelja…

Translated into English this means:

…May our cattle be healthy
All the cows and all the sheep
All the kids and all the lambs
All the great big horses
Which carry our heroes
Dear solders of the god Triglav
god Triglav the holy trinity
Vishnji god, the creator
Strong Živa the destrojer

and Branjanj the protector…

In Indian mythology, Trimurti consists of Vishnu, Shiva, and Brahma. In Serbian mythology, Triglav consists of Višnji, Živa, Branjanj.

In Serbian the meanings of the names of the holy trinity (Trimurti, Triglav) members (Višnji, Živa, Branjanj) actually correspond to their role in Serbian Trinity:

Vishnji (meaning “one who is up high”, from vis “high”), the sun.
Branjanj (meaning the protector, supporter, from bran “protection”, braniti “to protect”), the fire.
Živa (meaning alive, living from Živ “alive, life”), the giver and taker of life.

Serbian folk tradition also tells us that Triglav lives in India and that India was the home of the Serbs, which Serbs had to leave because of a huge political or religious upheaval of some kind, probably a religious civil war which plunged India into chaos.

How old is this folk memory? What time and what migration from India to Europe does it describe? We don’t know for sure. The racial memory these folk songs preserve could either be the memory of the original migration of the “Indo Europeans” to Europe, or the Skythian migration to Europe or any other one in between or after. Either way they are thousands of years old. The fact that Serbs have preserved, in their folk tradition, the memory of the migration from India through all these millenniums, is astounding, and another proof that culture and language are a lot more resistant then most people think. The fact that some of the songs recorded by ethnographers are actually prayers to Triglav, is even more amazing. This means that Serbs have managed to preserve the actual Agni (Triglav) cult for thousands of years outside of India.

Here is one of the folk songs which tells the story about the Serbian exodus from India. The song is called “The saints are dividing the treasure” and in it Ognjena Marija (Fiery Mary) sister of St Petar, St Nicolas, St John, St Ilia and St Pantelija tells her brothers why she is crying:

Al’ govori Blažena Marija:

A moj brate, Gromovnik Ilija!

Kako ne ću suze proljevati,
Kad ja idem iz zemlje Inđije,
Iz Inđije iz zemlje proklete?
U Inđiji teško bezakonje:
Ne poštuje mlađi starijega,
Ne slušaju đeca roditelja;
Roditelji porod pogazili,
Crn im bio obraz na divanu
Pred samijem Bogom istinijem!
Kum svog kuma na sudove ćera,
I dovede lažljive svjedoke
I bez vjere i bez čiste duše,
I oglobi kuma vjenčanoga,
Vjenčanoga ili krštenoga;
A brat brata na mejdan zaziva;
Đever snasi o sramoti radi,
A brat sestru sestrom ne doziva.
Translated into English this means:
…And kind Mary (Holy Mary) replies:
O my brother, Thunder god Ilija
how can i not cry
when i am coming from country of India
from India the accursed country.
In India there is complete lawlessness:
young are not respecting the old,
children are not respecting parents,
they have black cheeks before the god of truth,
a godfather is betraying godson,
brother is fighting brother,
brother in law is sleeping with sister in law,
and brother does not call his sister a sister…
And here is another song, which is actual Christmas time ceremonial prayer song (Winter solstice, the birth of young sun). This is one of the songs collected by Vuk Stef. Karadžić. Srpske narodne pesme, Knjiga druga, u kojoj su pjesme junačke najstarije.
Siva Živa siva silna,
Siva silna golubice!
da kuda si putovala?
Odgovara Siva Živa
Siva silna golubica:
„Ja sam tamo putovala
U Inđiju našu zemlju.
Prolećela Hindušana
I tu Globu Tartariju
Crni Hinduš i Tartaru.
Letila sam Gospodaru
Našem silnom Triglav boru
Te gledala što nam čini
Što nam čini zapoveda.”
Što činjaše naš gospodar,
Naš gospodar Triglav velji,
Naš Stvoritelj i Držitelj
I veliki Umoritelj?
Odgovori Siva Živa
Bela silna golubica:
„Naš gospodar lepo čini
Trima kola u zučinje
I četvrto zlato meri.
Da pravimo zlatne čaše
Zlatne čaše i srebrne
Da molimo mladog Boga
I Božića Svarožića
Da nam dade svako dobro
Ponajveće dugi život.
Dugi život dobro zdravlje
I bogatstvo što ga nosi.
Božić poje po svu zemlju
Ne boji se Hindušana
Niti crnog Tatarana
Ni goleme te pustare
A proklete Globe crne
Globe crne Tartarije,
I te gadne Mandžurije.
Slava mu je do nebesa,
Do prestola Triglav Boga.
Brada mu je do pojasa,
Do pojasa sredi zemlje
Srpske zemlje Raške svetle.
Da se rode muška deca
Ljuti vojni Davorovi
Davorovi i Jarila
Translated into English this means:
…gray Živa, mighty gray,
mighty gray dove!
where did you travel?
and gray Živa, mighty gray dove, answers:
“I traveled all the way
To India our country.
I flew over Hindustan
And over Tatarstan
Black Hindus and Tatarus.
I flew to our Master
Our mighty God Triglav
And I watched what he was doing
What he was doing and ordering.”
What did our lord do
Our master Great Triglav,
Our Creator and Maintainer
And Great Destroyer?
Replies gray Živa, 
White mighty dove: 
“Our Lord is doing good…
He is weighing gold
for us to make the gold cups
Gold and silver cups
So we can pray to the young God
Young God Svarožić (Winter solstice sun, baby sun, Dabog, the Giving god)
To give us everything good
Most of all long life.
Long life good health
And wealth that God Dabog carries with him.
Young god Svarožić (Dabog) sings in all the land
He is not afraid of Hindustan
Neither is he afraid of black Tataria
Nor the immense wasteland
A bloody black Globa
black Globa Tataria (I don’t know what Globa means, but it could be Gobi desert),
And that nasty Manchuria.
His Glory (Dabog’s) rises to the skies,
All the way to the throne of God Triglav.
His beard is down to his waist,
To his waist which is in the center of the land
The Serbian bright land of Ras.
May it (Serbia, Ras) give birth to male children
Great solders of Davor
Of Davor (God of War) and of Yarilo (God o youth and war)…
It is incredible to think that Serbs managed to preserve the memory of their life in India and the belief in Triglav, Trimurti and to preserve its worship in the middle of Europe until 20th century.
There were some subtle differences though between Indian Trimurti and Serbian Triglav. In Indian mythology, Brahma is the creator whereas that role in Serbian Triglav is played by Vishnji bog (Vishnu). Both Shiva and Živa seemed to have the same role in both Trinities.I decided to go and investigate the whole thing more. Why was there a difference? Who got it right and who got it wrong? And who brought Crom Dubh – Lugh, the three headed god to Ireland? I will talk about this in one of my next posts.

Birthday of Sambhaji – Know Your History!

(This article is borowed with thanks from ‘@trueindology’)

Today, the 14th May, is the Birthday of the great Hindu king Sambhaji Maharaj. After the death of Shivaji in 1680, his 23 year old eldest son Sambhaji ascended the Maratha throne.

Aurangzeb was greatly relieved at the news of Shivaji’s death.

By 1681, Aurangzeb reached Burhanpur intending to uproot Maratha race, destroy temples, crush Hindu resistance for good and go back to Delhi as victor within 1 year.

The most powerful and richest person in the world came with 5 Lakh Mughal troops, largest army in the world.

But Aurangzeb had little idea he’d spend next 27 years of his life in Deccan and would ultimately fail his objective and meet a sad death.

Aurangzeb also enlisted the services of Sidis (African slaves) and Portuguese who attacked Marathas from West while Mughals attacked them from North and East.

Sambhaji was encircled and death of newly formed kingdom of Shivaji, the hope of millions of Hindus, was imminent. But he would fight fire with fire. His small bands of soldiers dispersed and battled them in all directions.

In his first year, he invited subedar Bahadur Khan for a battle.

In 1682, Mughal army at Ramsej (Nasik) was defeated and repulsed by Marathas. This defeat dealt a death blow to the Aurangzeb’s prestige.

In 1683,Sambhaji attacked Portuguese Goa and successfully captured Ponda fort. He was on his way to annihilate Portuguese traces in India for the good.

Just then, Mughals came in support of Portuguese and attacked Sambhaji from East. Heavily outnumbered and encircled, Sambhaji still managed to hold onto his territories and invaded/successfully raided Mughal-held Gujarat in 1685.

Even the Mughal base at Aurangabad was not safe from the Maratha forces.

At that time, Sambhaji invited other Hindu kings to join his dharmayuddha.He wrote to them:

“We can’t bear the persecution Aurangzeb is inflicting upon Hindus. We’ll sacrifice our lives to capture Aurangzeb so we can practice our religion without molestation. Muster courage and nothing can stop us.”

In his short reign of 9 years, Sambhaji and his troops ruling over a tiny territory of Konkan had atleast 15 battles with Portuguese and 69 battles with Mughals.

That they still held on is one of the greatest stories of Hindu resistance.

In 1689, Mughal troops suddenly fell upon a resting Sambhaji and captured him. He was  put on a ‘wooden cap’ on his head as the token of a condemned criminal and his trusted followers were dressed as buffoon and paraded. Their wife and daughters were captured and enslaved.

Aurangzeb offered to spare Sambhaji’s life if
1) He converted to Islam;
2) Surrendered forts, men and treasures.

“I wont convert to Islam even if Aurangzeb offered his daughter to me” thundered Sambhaji.

Sambhaji’s eyes were plucked out. His tongue was cut out. His skin was peeled with tiger paws. After a fortnight’s physical torture, his limbs were hacked into pieces and fed to dogs.

“Maasir I Alamgiri” is the official Mughal-sponsored history record of Aurangzeb and the photos of some of the pages of its English translated version are given here.

While describing ISIS-like punishments meted out to “Kafir” Sambhaji with glee, it says Aurangzeb did it “out to his devotion to Islam so that Muslims might be heartened and (Hindu) infidels disheartened”.”

Crimes Committed Against India by the British!

By: Commander V. K. Jaitly

The following extract is from a book “British Raj in India” written in 1930 by an American Historian Will Durrant. Make out yourself the crimes that were committed by the British against India. No reparation is enough! It reads thus:

But I saw somethings in India that made me feel that study and writings were frivolous things in the presence of a people – one fifth of the human race – suffering poverty and oppression bitterer than any to be found elsewhere on the earth…..

I came away resolved to study living in India as well as the India with brilliant past; to learn more of this unique Revolution that fought with suffering accepted but never returned; to read the Gandhi of the today as well as the Buddha of long ago.

And the more I read the more I was
filled with astonishment and indignation at the apparently conscious and deliberate bleeding of India by England throughout a hundred and fifty years.

I began to feel that I had come upon the greatest crime in all history.

My knowledge trifling and fragmentary in the face of a civilisation 5000 years. old, endlessly rich civilisation in philosophy, literature, religion, art and mathematics, appealing in its ruined grandeur and its weapon less struggle for liberty.

I write to all not only because I feel deeply about India but, but because life cannot wait till knowledge is complete….

I have seen a great people starve to death before my own eyes and I am convinced that this not because of exhaustion, over population or superstition as the English claim, but due to most sordid and criminal exploitation of one nation by another in all recorded history.”

Full book is available in PDF form, it is not copyright protected and is free to download by anyone HERE or at link below:

Maxmuller Exposed: At the Service of Christian Missionaries to Distort Rigveda’s Tranalation!

By: Dr Vivek Arya

  1. Who was Maxmuller?

We know Maxmuller as a great Sanskrit scholar and a friend of India in general and Hindus in particular who had translated and / or editted Rig Veda from Sanskrit language to English, as part of his magnum opus 50 volume series of the ‘Sacred Books of the East.’ For his supposed service to India, he is greatly admired in India. What is the truth of the matter?

Maxmuller was a fugitive from Germany who in his youth was in extreme difficulty to earn even two square meals for him. (…Had not a penny left, and that in spite of every effort to make a little money, I should have had to return to Germany-ref –the life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p.61, London edn.) He was a scholar extraordinary but his situation made him easy tool in the hands of Britishers. Maxmuller who had continuously suffered from want and youthful zeal and an insatiable ambition willingly agreed to prostitute his pen, intellect and scholarship for the filthy lucre the new job promised him plenty. (I am to hand over to the company, ready for the press, fifty sheets each year-the same I had promised to samter in Germany; for this I have asked 200 pounds a year, 4 pounds a sheet- ref. the life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p.60-61, London edn.) He soon launched himself upon the project with the zeal and devotion that can be expected only from a religious zealot. He did his best to equate Hinduism with polytheism even though he had to invent for this purpose a new Jesuitical definition for the religion of the Rigveda.

2. Boden chair and its motives:

Col. Joseph Boden one time Bombay colonel with the army of the East India Company wanted to do whatsoever lay in his power to help Christian missionaries to Christianize India in general and the Hindus in particular. So, after his retirement (in 1807) he donated 25,000 pounds to the University of Oxford to enable it to found a chair of Sanskrit, which the university, justifiably and as a mark of gratitude, named after him. Boden objective was to enable his countrymen to proceed in the conversion of the natives of India to the Christian religion by providing translations of the Bible into Sanskrit.

As Christianity is founded upon and wedded to trinitarianism it would not give up its belief in three gods except at grave peril to its very existence. The Christian missions wanted therefore as the only other alternative available to them, to show someone to the world at large that Hinduism was a polytheistic religious faith. Since the Hindus traced their monotheism back to the Vedas, to the Rig in particular, it was considered absolutely necessary that the concocted evidence in order to be readily acceptable to the Hindus must have behind it the sanction and authority of the Rigveda. Once the decision had been made and the target fixed the only thing that remained to be done was to find the right marksman. The search for the right man continued till Maxmuller happened to come their way. Maxmuller was a German and was not at all well versed with English, Sanskrit was far off. But he was a youth of 24 and this task assured him bread and butter for next eight years. In addition he had at his back the combined might of all those Christian missionaries who wanted to convert the Hindus of India to Christianity. These missionaries readily and willingly broadcast to the world whatever Maxmuller said and wrote and this went a long way to enhance Maxmuller’s prestige as a scholar.

3. Maxmuller meets Macaulay and its impact:

Macaulay was born in a Presbyterian family and brought in rigid clapham sect of Christians so he was having a strong bias in favor of Christianity to the exclusion of all other religions – a prejudice from which he was not able to free himself even when he had grown into a matured man of 55 years. He came to India in 1834 with plans in his mind to introduce European education in combination with Christian doctrines so that Indians could more easily be made to accept the religion of Christ.

In Feb. 1835 he made English language the compulsory medium of instruction in all Indian schools. Very gleefully he writes to his father in his letter dated Oct. 12, 1836: “Our English schools are flourishing wonderfully. We find it difficult – indeed, in some places impossible – to provide instructions for all who want it. At the single town of Hoogle fourteen hundred boys are learning English. The effect of this education on the Hindoos is prodigious. No Hindoo, who has received an English education, ever remains sincerely attached to his religion. Some continue to profess it as a matter of policy; but many profess themselves pure deists, and some embrace Christianity. It is my firm belief that if our plans of education are followed up, there will not be a single idolater among the respectable classes in Bengal thirty years hence. And this will be affected without any efforts to proselytize; without the smallest interference with religious liberty; merely by the natural operation of knowledge and reflection. I heartily rejoice in the prospects. Ref. the life and letters of Lord Macaulay, pp. 329-330”

In 1851 Maxmuller met Macaulay for the first time for a short while in a party in London. He met him second time only in Dec. 1855 when he had with him long interview. In between Maxmuller wrote a pamphlet “Suggestions for the assistance of officers in learning the languages of the seat of war in the East” in which he had stressed importance of learning oriental languages especially Sanskrit. Macaulay a mulish Christian and a rabid enemy of oriental languages and literature did not like the idea of Maxmuller. Maxmuller went to plead Macaulay the case for oriental studies forgetting the historical fact that it was Macaulay who had imposed on the Indian people English language with the covert purpose of language being used as a vehicle for converting people to Christianity. Maxmuller wrote to his mother about this encounter as, “…I made acquaintance this time in London with Macaulay, and had a long conversation with him on the teaching necessary for the young men who are sent out to India. He is very clear headed, and extraordinarily eloquent…I went back to Oxford a sadder, and, I hope, a wiser man. Ref. –the life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p.162, London edn”

Maxmuller profited very little because while he gathered pelf in accepting the company’s assignment he had, in the bargain, lost his soul. His writings took a different trend in as much as he became more active and less inhibited in praise of Christianity; of the Bible and of Jesus Christ.

4. Maxmuller revealed himself as a Christian zealot:

Maxmuller’s encounter with Macaulay left an indelible impact on him. Despite his constant endeavors to hide his moves behind the secular mask of scholarship, he too often gave himself away as a Christian proselytizer and evangelist. He had written a letter to Bunsen saying, “ …nevertheless I of course shall be glad if the Rigveda is dealt with in the Edinburgh review, and if Wilson would write from the standpoint of a missionary, and would show how the knowledge and bringing into light of the Veda would upset the whole existing system of Indian theology, it might become of real interest. ” (The life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p. 117, London edn.)

Maxmuller’s hidden mission even received support of influential missionaries and ecclesiastics like Bishop of Calcutta and Dr. Pusey.

Bishop of Calcutta wrote to him (Maxmuller), “I feel considerable interest in the matter, because I am sure that it is of the greatest importance for our missionaries to understand Sanskrit, to study the philosophy and sacred books of the Hindus, and to be able to meet the pundits on their own ground. Among the means to this great end, none can be more important than your edition and professor Wilson’s translation of the Rigveda. It would be most fitting in my opinion for a great Christian university to place in its Sanskrit chair the scholar who has made the Sanskrit scriptures accessible to the Christian missionary.”
(The life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p. 236-237, London edn.)

Dr. Pusey wrote to Maxmuller, “I cannot but think that your lectures on the Vedas… are the greatest gift which had been bestowed on those who would win to Christianity the subtle and thoughtful minds of the cultivated Indians.”
(The life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p. 237-238, London edn.)

Monier-Williams who had become second professor of Boden Sanskrit chair revealed more in being a proselytizer than a scholar of Sanskrit. In his preface to a Sanskrit- English dictionary which he compiled he boastfully gave vent to his Christianish zeal and aspirations in these words: ‘in explanation I must draw attention to the fact that I am only the second occupant of the Boden Chair, and that its founder Col. Boden, stated most explicitly in his will that the special object of his munificent bequest was to promote the translation of the scriptures into Sanskrit so as to enable his countrymen to proceed in the conversion of the natives of India to the Christian religion.’

Today even people think Maxmuller as friend of Hindus; a scholar extraordinary in Vedas, the letter of Maxmuller written to his wife in 1866 exposed his aspirations. He wrote,

“I hope I shall finish that work (translation of Rigveda), and I feel convinced, though I shall not live to see it, that this edition of mine and the translation of the Veda will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India, and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion, and to show them what that root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung up from it during the last 3000 years”. (The life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p. 328, London edn.)

“…The missionaries have done far more than they themselves seem to be aware of, nay, much of the work which is theirs they would probably disclaim. The Christianity of our nineteenth century will hardly be the Christianity of India. But the ancient religion of India is doomed – and if Christianity does not step in, whose fault it be?”
(The life and letters of Maxmuller, vol.1, p. 357-358, London edn.)

In spite of the fact that the Vedas sing monotheism, Christian missionaries tried to show polytheism in Vedas. Maxmuller wrote, “… When I undertook to publish for the university press a series of translations of the most important of these sacred books, one of my objects was to assist Missionaries. What shall we think if a Missionary who came to convert us, and who had never read our Bible? …. But, it will be said, you cannot deny that the Hindus are polytheists, that they worship idols. But let us look at their own Bible, at the Veda, older than any other book in India. No doubt we find there many names for the divine, many gods, as we are accustomed to say. But there are also passages in which the oneness of the deity is clearly asserted.”
(The life and letters of Maxmuller, appendix D p.455, London ed.)

This is the height of dishonesty on the part of Maxmuller to have first admited, “No doubt we find there many names for the divine, many gods, as we are accustomed to say. But there are also passages in which the oneness of the deity is clearly asserted” and, then, notwithstanding this admission proceeding in his translation of Rigveda to project this sacred book as advocating ‘polytheism’.

The world at large now knows it too well that this scholar extraordinary who masqueraded all his lifetime from behind the secular mash of philology was more a Christian Missionary than a scholar of the Vedas.

5. Maxmuller as a scholar of Vedas:

Maxmuller is considered as one of the foremost scholar of Vedas worldwide. But was his level of knowledge in Sanskrit and English (both were not his mother tongue) sufficient to complete this task? He himself has agreed with Swami Dayanand that it was not an easy matter to interpret the Vedas. The language of Vedas is different from the classical as well as colloquial Sanskrit.

Maxmuller himself was aware of his limits so he started making impressions that his translations were genuine, flawless and correct. When he revised his first edition, he reaffirmed, ” he believed that the translators (of the Rig-Veda) ought to be decipherers. ( Ref- Sacred Books of the East, vol. 12 introduction, p.9).” He even confessed his utter failure as translator by saying, “No one who knows anything of the Veda would think of attempting a translation of it at present. A translation of the Rig-Veda is a task for the next century. He further added, “not only shall we have to wait till the next century for such a work, but I doubt whether we shall ever obtain it ”(Ref- Sacred Books of the East, vol. 12 introduction, p.9)”.

Maxmuller was even unaware of Panini grammar who was constantly referred to by Sayana in his commentary of the Rig-Veda. He writes in his autobiography, p.94, “he (Boehtling) could have done the whole work himself, in some respect better than I, because he was my senior, and besides, he knew Panini, the old Indian grammarian who is constantly referred to in Sayana’s commentary, better than I did”. Maxmuller admitted his shortcomings as a scholar of Vedic Sanskrit as “over and over again was I stopped by some short enigmatic reference to Panini’s grammar or Yasaka’s glossary, which I could not identify… how often I was in prefect despair, because there was some allusion in Sayana which I could not make out, and which no other Sanskrit scholar, not even Bournouf or Wilson could help me to clear up. It often took me whole days, nay weeks, before I saw light” (ref- my autobiography, p.108-109).

Maxmuller played another plank by saying, “the great difficulty in all discussions of this kind arises from the fact that we have to transfuse though from ancient into modern forms. In that process some violence is inevitable (ref- Lectures of the origin and growth of religion, p.245, fifth Hibbert lecture).”

It’s not uneasy to understand that violence was inevitable because all the while Maxmuller had been pre-resolved to translate the Rig Veda from the standpoint of a Missionary. And a Christian missionary’s standpoint is, nearly always, only to denounce and denigrate every other religious faith except his own brand of Christianity.

6. Maxmuller and Swami Dayanand:

Great Vedic scholar Swami Dayanand Saraswati in Satyarth Prakash says at p.278, “the impression that the Germans are the best Sanskrit scholars, and that no one has read so much of Sanskrit as Prof Maxmuller, is altogether unfounded and has exposed Maxmuller. Yes, in a land where lofty trees never grow, even recinus communis or the castor oil plant may be called as oak…. I came to learn from a letter of a principal of some German university, that even men learned enough to interpret a Sanskrit letter are rare in Germany. I have also learnt from the study of Maxmuller’s history of Sanskrit literature and his comments on some mantras of the Veda, that prof. Maxmuller has been able to scribble out something by the help of the so-called tikas or paraphrases of the Vedas current in India.”  Swami Ji was supported in his view by famous German scholar Schopenhauer that our Sanskrit scholars do not understand their text much better than the higher class boys their Greek or Latin.

In the context of the commentary / translation of the Vedas by Max Muller, it will be relevant to point out the opinion of Mr. Boulanger, the editor of Russian edition of The Sacred Books of the East Series as follows:

“What struck me in Maxmuller’s translation was a lot of absurdities, obscene passages and a lot of what is not lucid.

“As far as I can grab the teaching of the Vedas, it is so sublime that I would look upon it as a crime on my part, if the Russian public becomes acquainted with it through the medium of a confused and distorted translation, thus not deriving for its soul that benefit which this teaching should give to the people”.

Swami Dayanand’s translation of Vedas is based on Yasaka’s, Nirukta and Panini Ashtadhyyayi that have been considered and accepted throughout the ages and throughout the world as indispensable for correct comprehension. He specially elaborated spiritual meaning of Vedas.

Maxmuller with fear of being exposed started attacking Swami Dayanand after his death, not like the way of a scholar, but like a shrewd clever mind. He writes to Malabari that he had “wished to warn against two dangers: that of undervaluing or despising the ancient natural religion, as is done so often by your half-Europeanized youths; and that of overvaluing it, and interpreting it as it was never meant to be interpreted, of which you may see a painful instance in Dayanand Saraswati’s labors on the Veda. (Ref- the life and letters of Maxmuller, vol. 2, p.115, New York edn).”

He thought Dayanand had interpreted the Veda as they ought not have been interpreted; and, that the interpretation had to be from the standpoint of a Missionary so that the translation would be of help in uprooting Hinduism and in the conversion of the Hindus to Christianity. He like a coward tried to smear Dayanand’s name after his death in these words, “…but he indulged for a time in the use of bhang, hemp, which put him into a state of reverie from which he found it difficult to rouse himself.” (ref- chips from a German workshop, vol.2, p.178). In a postscript Maxmuller added, “from what has come to light after Dayanand Saraswati’s death, I am afraid that he was not simple-minded and straightforward on his work as a reformer as I imagined.” (ref- chips from a German workshop, vol.2, p.182).

Though Christian Missionary backed government of India purposefully to ignore Swami Dayanand in his times but it did not deter the lion-hearted Dayanand from his mission of reviving the Vedic Dharma.

It’s very clear that Maxmuller was a Christian Missionary but only in secular garb of a philologist, whose main aim was to denounce the Vedas to clear way for Christian Missionaries. Maxmuller masqueraded all his life from behind the mask of literature and philology and mortgaged his pen, intellect and scholarship for money to wreck Hinduism but Swami Dayanand exposed his cruel plans.

Crime Against India and her Heritage!

(1) of (2) By: Commander V. K. Jaitly; (2) of (2) By: Shreepal Singh

(1) of (2):

Do you know that there is an IAS officer as head of almost every temple of renown in India but none for any of the Masjids or  Churches in this country? The chances are most of Indians do not know this fact. Why is it so? Of this later, first only about the facts.

In this respect, a foreign writer opens our eyes – most of us sleeping buddies in the matters that concern India, her past and future!

The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act of 1951 allows State Governments and politicians to take over thousands of Hindu Temples and maintain complete control over them and their properties. Does our so-called secular Constitution allow such interference in the religious matters of Hindus? Does it similarly treat the religious places of other religions, say Churches and Masjids? Again, of this later and first about the facts.

It is claimed that the government officials appointed to head Hindu temples can sell the temple assets and properties and use the money in any way they choose. This charge has been made not by any Temple authority, but by a foreign writer, Stephen Knapp in a book “Crimes Against India and the Need to Protect Ancient Vedic Tradition” published in the United States that makes shocking reading. See:…

Hundreds of temples in centuries past have been built in India by devout rulers and the donations given to them by devotees have been used for the benefit of the (other) people. If, presently, money collected has ever been misused (and that word needs to be defined), it is for the devotees to protest and not for any government to interfere. This is what has been happening currently under an intrusive law.

There is a popular belief that since the temples are controlled by the government now, the funds can be used for any social purpose at least. Please note that none of the devout kings who constructed these temples claimed any right over the temples. Many of them have not even left their names behind. Let alone not controlling the temples and their funds, these kings, in fact, consigned lands and other properties, including their jewels, to these temples.  They only facilitated and did not claim any rights over these temples.

That is the only acceptable attitude. None of the big temples (barring perhaps a handful) have been constructed by the governments of today and they have no right over any of these temples – funds, administration or over the way in which the worship is to be conducted. The funds of these temples should be used only for the administration of these temples, their repairs, the emoluments, the infrastructure and facilities around these temples and the surplus for the upkeep of other less known temples especially the old ones.

It would seem, for instance, that under a Temple Empowerment Act, about 43,000 temples in Andhra Pradesh have come under Government control and only 18 per cent of the revenue of these temples have been returned for temple purposes, the remaining 82 per cent being used for purposes unstated.

Apparently even the world-famous Tirumala Tirupati Temple has not been spared. According to Knapp, the temple collects over Rs 3,100 crores every year and the State Government has not denied the charge that as much as 85 per cent of this is transferred to the State Exchequer, much of which goes to causes that are not connected with the Hindu community.

Another charge that has been made is that the Andhra Government has also allowed the demolition of at least ten temples for the construction of a golf course. Imagine the outcry writes Knapp, if ten mosques had been demolished.

It would seem that in Karanataka, Rs. 79 crores were collected from about two lakh temples and from that amount, temples received Rs 7 crores for their maintenance, Muslim madrassas and Haj subsidy were given Rs 59 crore and churches were given about Rs 13 crore.

Because of this, Knapp writes, 25 per cent of the two lakh temples or about 50,000 temples in Karnataka will be closed down for lack of resources, and he adds: The only way the government can continue to do this is with the indifference and tolerance of the Hindus.

Knapp then refers to Kerala where, he says, funds from the Guruvayur Temple are diverted to other government projects denying improvement to 45 Hindu temples. Land belonging to the Ayyappa Temple, apparently has been grabbed and Church encroaches are occupying huge areas of forest land, running into thousands of acres, near Sabarimala.

A charge is made that the Communist state government of Kerala wants to pass an Ordinance to disband the Travancore & Cochin Autonomous Devaswom Boards (TCDBs) and take over their limited independent authority of 1,800 Hindu temples. If what the author says is true, even the Maharashtra Government wants to take over some 450,000 temples in the state which would supply a huge amount of revenue to correct the states bankrupt conditions

And to top it all, Knapp says that in Orissa, the state government intends to sell over 70,000 acres of endowment lands from the Jagannath Temple, the proceeds of which would solve a huge financial crunch brought about by its own mismanagement of temple assets.

Says Knapp: Why such occurrences are so often not known is that the Indian media, especially the English television and press, are often anti-Hindu in their approach, and thus not inclined to give much coverage, and certainly no sympathy, for anything that may affect the Hindu community. Therefore, such government action that play against the Hindu community go on without much or any attention attracted to them.

Knapp obviously is on record. If the facts produced by him are incorrect, it is up to the government to say so. It is quite possible that some individuals might have set up temples to deal with lucrative earnings. But that, surely, is none of the government’s business!

Instead of taking over all earnings, the government surely can appoint committees to make the temples accountable especially for the funds – received and earned –  so that the amount discovered is fairly used for temple purposes only.

Says Knapp: Nowhere in the free, democratic world are the religious institutions managed, maligned and controlled by the government, thus denying the religious freedom of the people of the country.

But it is happening in India. Government officials have taken control of Hindu temples because they smell money in them, they recognise the indifference of Hindus, they are aware of the unlimited patience and tolerance of Hindus, they also know that it is not in the blood of Hindus to go to the streets to demonstrate, destroy property, threaten, loot, harm and kill – generally or Normally.

Many Hindus are sitting and watching the demise of their culture. They need to express their views loud and clear.

Knapp obviously does not know that should they do so, they would be damned as communalists. But it is time some one asked the Government to lay down all the facts on the table so that the public would know what is happening behind its back.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not secularism. And temples are not for looting, under any name.

One thought that Mohammad of Ghazni had long been dead. But did he? Seems, no – of course in another guise!

(2) of (2):

How is it possible that under a secular Constitution, that our Constitution is, this discriminatory treatment is meted out to Hindu temples and not to Christian Churches and Muslim Masjids? After all, there is a constitutional mandate in this country to treat all equally – whether they be religious or not religious matters.

There is a catch here and it is in the Constitution itself; it is a discriminatory provision, which applies to Hindus only. It needs to equally apply to all, including Christians and Muslimz; or else it must go out of the Constitution.

What is this provision that gives power to the States (being in the State List of 7th schedule of Constitution, “State” means state governments) to interfere in Hindu religious affairs? Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees equal freedom to all religions in India. But what freedom has been given to all religions under this Article, it has been effectively taken away from Hindus by another hand under clause (b) of sub-article (2) of Article 25. Here Hindus are defined in its broader sweep that include Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs but very cleverly Muslims and Christians are not included there.

Article 25 (2) of Indian Constitution reads:

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law:
(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;
(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Article 25 (2) (b) of Constitution discriminates against Hindus by allowing the State governments to make any law in their matter for social welfare and reform of Hindus. This restriction is only on Hindus (courtesy Nehru). By this constitutional empowering provision, any state government can make laws to appoint administrator(s) for Hindu temples but cannot do so with mosque or church. It is all done in the name of reform and social welfare of Hindus, as if Christians and Muslims do not need “reforms” or “welfare” however  archiac they may be.

Why should the word “Hindus” finding place in Article 25 (2) (b) of the Constitution be not substituted by the words “any religion”? Equality, which is the soul of Indian Constitution, demands that either this interference by the States in religious affairs in the name of social reforms should be equally applicable to all religions or to none.

Kapil Sibal, Congress and Impeachment Drama: A Crime Against Indian Republic!

(1) of (2) By: Shreepal Singh: (2) of (2) By: R. Veera Raghavan, Advocate Chennai

(1) of (2):

Now that the challenge to the ‘rejection’  order on ‘impeachment notice’ by the Rajya Sabha Chairman has been ‘Dismissed as withdrawn’ by the Supreme Court of India on May 8, 2018, it is apt time to go to the root cause why this ‘impeachment drama’ was enacted by Kapil Sibal and his Congress party. It has all the more become necessary because this antics played by this party and its lawyer has caused an irrepaiable harm to one of the great pillars – like a spinal cord – of the Indian republic. It is a crime of gigantic proportion committed against the people of India and their unflinching faith in the Indian judiciary, which crime must not go unpunished when the time of reckoning comes.

But first let us see the substance of the posture adopted by Kapil Sibal in the court on May 8, 2018 before his case was dismissed as withdrawn by the court. As soon as the case was taken up, the court demanded Kapil Sibal to argue his case on merits. In the court parlance, the words ‘on merits’ mean the person or a petitioner has to tell and satisfy the court what is his grievance for which he has come to the court and what is the law that supports his right to get the redressal from the court.

A court is a court and the only right that a litigant has is to address the court about his grievance. The rest of the matter – the decision etc. – is in the domain of that court. It is a very well settled law that even a wrong ‘judgment’ of the court is a ‘judgment’ and is binding on the litigating parties in that case.

The normal course open to Kapil Sibal was to argue his case in the court, before which it had been listed for arguments. Kapil Sibal did not chose this course. In substance, his argument was: “I do not recognize this court to be a proper court, which can hear my case!” This was the substance. It was said in a cunning and manipulative manner: Let me know who has constituted this court (e.i. this Bench); give me a copy of the order by which this court is constituted; may be, I will challenge that order!

What is the meaning of this argument? The meaning of this argument is: I do not recognize this court; I do not submit to this court! The court mildly reminded him that as the four senior most judges had something to do with this episode, and the fifth one is the CJI himself (which are excluded from hearing this case), this is the court of next five senior most judges.

But Sibal prostrated: There is no ‘judicial’ order to constitute this court; it is constituted by an ‘administrative’ order of the CJI!

What does it mean? In substance it means: Give me the court of my choice! No court would ever succumb to such browbeating tactics. The court proceeded to dismiss Sibal’s case, and Sibal requested to withdraw his case. The court dismissed it as withdrawn.

Now let us see why this whole drama of impeachment and a verbal ruckus in the highest court of the land was done by Congress and its lawyer in the first place.

(2) of (2):

Why should a political party be so venomous, and its leader so mischievous, towards a chief justice in the supreme court?

The Congress and Kapil Sibal could answer: “That’s our hope for survival”.

On the 20th of this month, 64 members of Rajya Sabha got together and presented a proposal – called a motion – to Rajya Sabha Chairman Venkaiah Naidu, for removing Justice Dipak Misra, the current chief justice in the supreme court. It is a tough long-drawn process to remove a serving judge of the supreme court or of a high court by force of law.

Newspapers call that process impeachment.

The Constitution permits removal of a judge of the higher judiciary on grounds of “proved misbehaviour or incapacity”.

The 64 proposers who sought removal of Chief Justice Misra were drawn from seven Opposition parties, led by the Congress party. Supreme court lawyer, Congress leader and Rajya Sabha member Kapil Sibal who was one of those 64, looked a chief architect and proponent of the impeachment move.

Chairman Venkaiah Naidu consulted some experts in law and quickly rejected the motion for impeachment. So that proposal died.

The Congress party, principally led by Kapil Sibal on this issue, has dared a dubious act doomed to fail anyway.

First, there was no cause for removing Chief Justice Misra, no “misbehaviour or incapacity”.  Second, the Opposition parties can never gather the needed special majority of members in either House of Parliament to approve the impeachment motion, if the voting day comes.  Third, there is something to be noted in passing but it is real. Chief Justice Misra will retire on 2nd October 2018, in less than six months – mostly resulting in the dropping of any impeachment proceedings midway because of his retirement.

Then why did the Congress party and Kapil Sibal go ahead on their idea of removing the Chief Justice of India? Because the party has turned vicious and its MP villainous. They have their reasons.

Anyone sees that some observations, orders and judgements rendered by the supreme court, especially Justice Misra, in recent times are not relished by the Congress party and its lawyer Kapil Sibal.  They are upset because if the court had done things or issued orders they wished, they would be politically benefitted and could also make propaganda against the ruling BJP which has been widely winning elections across India.

The Congress is now angry and frustrated with the ruling party and with the supreme court headed by its present chief justice.

So the Congress would surely and stealthily be behind the 64 members of Rajya Sabha in their action against Chief Justice Misra. Of course, Kapil Sibal says that those members were not acting at the bidding of their parties and were exercising their Constitutional rights to seek removal of a judge.

Are you not laughing?

The Congress party knows that the very commencement of impeachment proceedings against a judge of the higher judiciary, especially a straight judge, will deeply disturb and embarrass him. The judge might also stay away from the court room during the pendency of those proceedings.

That is what the Congress party wanted Chief Justice Misra to face, and perhaps do, with a mere beginning of the impeachment process if Chairman Venkaiah Naidu would admit the notice of motion.

The Congress and Kapil Sibal could attempt what they wished because the present law gives them scope for it. Here is how.

Under the law 50 members of Rajya Sabha, or 100 members of Lok Sabha, may sign and present a notice of motion for removing a judge.  After the Rajya Sabha Chairman or Lok Sabha Speaker admits that notice of motion, it is not put to vote in either House straight way. The Chairman or Speaker is required to form a three-member inquiry committee consisting of a sitting judge of the supreme court, a sitting chief justice of a high court and a jurist.  Keeping in view the notice of motion, the inquiry committee will frame specific charges against the judge and consider his defence. Finally, the committee will report if the judge is guilty of any charge or not.

If the inquiry committee reports that the judge is not guilty of any charge against him, the proposal for impeachment cannot continue and that is the end of it. If the committee reports he is guilty of any charge, then Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha will vote to say if the judge is to be removed or not.

For a successful impeachment, both the Houses need to vote separately and favouring the removal, after which the President issues a formal order removing the judge.

The law prescribes a tough special majority of members in each House for impeachment to succeed.  First, at least a simple majority of the total membership of that House should be present when the vote is taken.  Next, approval of a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting is needed to consider the motion as passed in a House.

Rajya Sabha has 245 members and Lok Sabha, 545 members. All the members of each House of Parliament would be present in their House when voting on impeachment takes place, since that moment is important.

With the ruling NDA on the other side, the Congress party and its allies can never get anywhere near winning numbers in either House on an impeachment motion.  So their attempt to bring down Chief Justice Misra was destined to fail.

The Congress party and Kapil Sibal knew it well. So did the ruling party and everyone who studied law. Still the Congress party could abuse the law and try its luck for a wicked purpose.

We should now discover that our law for impeachment of judges is imperfect in one aspect, and it can be cured with just one change in The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.  That change, when done, will require that the 3-member inquiry committee for investigating any charge against a judge is to be appointed only after both Houses of Parliament, at their separate sittings, call for the constitution of that committee by passing resolutions with the support of a simple majority of members present in each House.

Such a change in the law will disable any attempt by small irresponsible groups of politicians who certainly cannot secure a two-thirds majority support in Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha to remove a judge, but yet file a notice of motion for his removal.

They do it to give the targeted judge an embarrassing prospect of a needless investigation by an inquiry committee.

The present law cannot stop any such malicious notice of motion coming from an inconsequential group of MP’s, and leaves it to the wisdom of one person – the presiding officer of Rajya Sabha or Lok Sabha – to reject that notice and keep out an inquiry committee.

This is not the best way of protecting an honest independent judge. The suggested change in the law will do it effectively.

The changed law will also bring it closer to the protection given to the President of India in the Constitutional provisions which prescribe when and how the President may be impeached.  Actually, a judge of the higher judiciary also needs such an assured protection from harassment.

Numerous politicians, from ruling parties and from the Opposition, would be interested in many court cases with high stakes, which are often decided by high courts and the supreme court. These men and women would be upset with judicial decisions that hurt them, their close relatives and associates and their benamis.

So politicians could often have their grouses against bold, independent and upright judges, but not against the President who has chiefly ceremonial duties. That means, judges of high courts and the supreme court are likely targets of frivolous and vengeful moves of impeachment.  Hence the law must give them firmer pre-emptive protection against such assaults, like the President has.

Even a single incident of a motivated impeachment action  against a judge, if it makes some headway, is a serious blow to India’s institution of pride and honour, its judiciary.

So the change in the law for removal of judges, outlined above, is crucial.  After all, when criminals outsmart policemen, policemen should quickly get the better of criminals.

No one may imagine that this opinion is unduly harsh on the Congress party or its member Kapil Sibal.

They could not think of or ask for any action for the removal of Justice C. S. Karnan of the Madras High Court whose “misbehaviour” till his retirement was prolonged and well known. At least in a few instances, his misbehaviour was also affirmed by a seven-judge bench of the supreme court when last year it convicted him, still a high court judge, for contempt of court.

You will correctly guess why the Congress party wanted to be inactive in his case. But the party has a different approach towards the respectable Chief Justice Dipak Misra because this judge remains inconvenient and, more over, for subtle reasons this judge can also be coolly treated as a political untouchable in today’s India.

There was also an instance of impeachment proceeding against a supreme court judge in which the Congress party and Kapil Sibal showed peculiar disinterest and interest, and that must be remembered. That supreme court judge was Justice V. Ramaswami.

In 1993, impeachment proceedings against Justice Ramaswami had crossed the inquiry committee stage also. The 3-member inquiry committee had found that judge guilty of misbehaviour on 11 counts, mostly financial misdeeds.

Before voting took place in Lok Sabha that judge was assisted by Kapil Sibal who, as his lawyer, addressed the House for 5 hours to defend the judge. During voting in the House, the ruling Congress party, together with its allies, rescued that judge in a special way.  Their 205 members were present inside Lok Sabha to raise the number of votes needed for a two-thirds majority of members present, but abstained from voting.

And that ensured the collapse of the motion for impeaching Justice V. Ramaswami.

Do you now have a full  view of the diabolic double standards of the Congress party and Kapil Sibal when it comes to preserving independence and uprightness among judges of the higher judiciary?

This article was originally published HERE. Copyright © R. Veera Raghavan 2018

India, Aryan, Iran, Veda, Zend Avesta: ‘Aryan Invasion’ Questioned!

(1) of (6) By: Dr. Koenraad Elst, Orientalist

As a basic introduction to my thoughts on the issue of India-Iran relations in the past the first thing to note is that the name Iran itself was formalized only in 1935. So I wonder why western historians who have no hesitation in talking about Assyria, Media, Sogdiana, Mesopotamia, Bactria or Anatolia are at pains to describe anything between Baluchistan and Syria as “Iran”. I am not ascribing any ulterior motives but I am not going to rule out a less than honest reason for this. In fact the name Iran does not occur at all in any ancient Indian reference.

Vedic does have the word “Arya”, and “Iran” is nothing but a derivative therefrom: Iran ‘Airyanam Khshathra,’ “domain of the Aryas”. In 1935 it was revived as the name of Persia, probably under the influence of the “Aryan” craze in Europe at that time. In English texts, Iranian-speaking peoples still use “Aryan” in the sense of “Iranian in the large-sense”, e.g. in the 2006 Aryan Conference in Tajikistan (a somewhat Zoroastrian-revivalist regime) bringing together Ossetes, Kurds, Tajiks, Afghans, Persian, Baluch, Paki Pathans, and Parsis. It is an ancient term attested in Achaemenid sources, as in Cyrus’ self-description as an “Arya of Arya descent”. “Arya” was a self-description among Indo-European tribes, attested among Iranians, Vedic Pauravas, and Hittites, just possibly also among the Celts.

The meaning “noble”, always held up as the real meaning by Hindus to teach Orientalists a lesson, is actually only a later meaning. It shows exactly the same semantic development as German “edel” and French/English “noble”: from “sociologically upper-class” to “morally upper-class”. But two connotations that Hindu reformers since the Arya Samaj don’t like, are definitely in it: the ethnic meaning (though relative-ethnic, self-referential, so that the Iranians called themselves Arya while the Vedics called them Anarya but themselves Arya), and the elitist meaning. The elitist meaning was emphatic among the Iranian Scythians who expanded in > -1000 from Bactria across Eurasia (from the Balkans to northern China, with some of their myths even incorporated in Japanese mythology), and imparted it to the Chinese border state of Zhao, in a form that became “Hua”, that was ultimately adopted by all the Chinese as an elitist as well as, again, a self-referential ethnic term, “the civilized ones” (as against all others, “the barbarians”), hence “the Chinese”. The term is still used for “Chinese”, as in Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo, “People’s Republic of China”, or in Vietnam the Hoa, the ethnic Chinese minority.

In the case of early Buddhism, the morally elitist meaning “noble” still connotes the sociological meaning “elitist”, as in the Catvari Arya Satyani, the “four superior (“noble”) truths”. The Buddha himself was an elitist par excellence, and is so remembered in Mahayana Buddhism, unlike in present-day India, where Ambedkarites and Nehruvians ludicrously make him into a Dalitist social revolutionary. By his time, the term Arya also connoted “Vedic”, which is why the Buddha’s Arya Dharma explicitly confirms its essentially Vedic orientation. This connotation also confirmed its elitist meaning, because only the upper varnas received the Vedic initiation.

The original meaning of “us”, “fellow tribesmen” can perhaps be traced even further. It seems to be a derivative of Ari, a word often used in a negative sense, e.g. Ari-hant = “enemy-killer”, but also used in the sense of “leader”. Here we leave the certainties behind and start speculating. Apparently Ari originally meant “leader”, and therefrom “Arya” was derived, “those related to the leader”. He was obviously part of the tribe, thus a relative of the hereditary tribe members, and given that every elite family made sure to intermarry with the king’s family, an elderly king ended up being a family member of the whole tribe. Thus, “relative of the tribe’s chief” was synonymous with “fellow tribesman”. Ari, however, came to mean something like “front-runner”, then “the front-running man to be beaten”, therefrom “the one to be defeated” and therefrom “the enemy”. Thus far my bit of speculation.

As for Avestan, of course the language existed. Denying this sounds like “Euclid never existed” (CK Raju), when the ancient Greeks already had and applied a geometry book signed “Euclid”. Maybe he went by another name, just as Vyasa is only a nickname, and just as Dirghatamas, “(vision in) long darkness”, is often taken to be a nickname; but whatever his real name, and wherever he may have borrowed some of his knowledge, he must have existed. It seems that Hindus instead of proving the reality and ancientness of their own contribution to science, prefer to belittle and minimize that of others.
Of Avestan, we do have a text corpus, which was transmitted orally just like the Vedas, and was committed to writing only by the 8th century, in a specially designed new and perfect alphabet, when the Zoroastrian priests feared for their tradition’s survival because of the Muslim conquest. The language is clearly related to but a bit younger (though here and there also more conservative) than Vedic, and is just as clearly ancestral to Pehlevi, i.e. imperial Persian. We should be glad that the Zoro priests were just as meticulous as their Vedic colleagues in preserving their sacred language, not just till the 8th entury but even till today. At the same time, that corpus is far smaller than the Sanskrit or even the purely Vedic one, and it is difficult to decipher it without a knowledge of Sanskrit. I took a course of Avestan in Leiden University (before it whittled down its once-famous Oriental department), and two-thirds of the texts we translated were Vedic, which often provided literal parallels to Avestan expressions. When read in conjunction with the relevant Vedic data, it provides surprising data on the persons of Zarathustra and his royal patron Vishtaspa, as explained by the Parsi scholar SK Hodiwala and by Shrikant Talageri.

(2) of (6) By: Bhalchandrarao C Patwardhan

The Avesta refers to ‘Airayana Vajjo’, i.e. Aryavarta as the homeland of the Zoroastrians. The ancient Persian sources also know the famous Dasharathi Rama of Ayodhya and his teacher Vasishttha, who is mentioned in the Avesta as Vahishta! There is even a gatha to him – the Vahishta-Ishti-Gatha. There is a reference in the Vedas about a decisive conflict, known as the Battle of Ten Kings, in which King Sudas is reported to have inflicted a crushing defeat on the Prthus (Parthians) and the Parsus (Persians), an event that may have caused a geographical and cultural rift between the Indians and the Persians.

Zoroaster himself is known to have lamented in the Avesta, “To what land shall I flee? Where bend my steps? I am thrust out from family and tribe; I have no favour from the village to which I belong……”. (See p.51 in J.P.Mallory’s, ‘In Search of the Indo-Europeans : Language, Archaeology and Myth’, London: Thames and Hudson). Is it possible, then, that the Zoroastrians were originally from India to which they returned after the Islamic conquest of Persia? Refugees in their own land, so like the Pandits of Kashmir!

The three basic tenets of Zoroastrianism are “Humata” or Good Thoughts, “Hukhta” or Good Words and “Hwarsht” or Good Deeds. I have been able to link the first two words with their Sanskrit originals, but have failed with the third. “S” in Sanskrit, through a variation in aspiration peculiar to Persian, becomes “H”. Hence “Humata” is actually “Sumati”. ‘Su’ is ‘good’ and ‘Mati’ is ‘Budhhi’ or thought! Similarly, “Hukhta” is actually “Su-ukta”. Again ‘Su’ is ‘good’ and ‘ukta’ is speech! “Hwarsht” has so far not yielded to me a clue to its origin. Perhaps some scholar from the Vaidika Samshodhan Mandala could elaborate upon this. [Author’s Note: I have since realised that the word derives from “Suvratastha” or ‘committed to good conduct’ – April 20, 2003]

There are innumerable other words appearing in the Avestan that have an unquestionable Sanskrit origin. To cite but a few : Manthras (incantations, or simply ‘mantras’), Ushahin Gah (dawn – Sanskrit “Usha”), Navjote (Sanskrit- Nava Jaat, or rebirth), and many others.

There is thus sufficient evidence that there has been a common point in our hoary history when the two persuasions were one. Research being undertaken at Institutions like the Vaidika Samshodhan Mandal is certain to yield the truth.

(3) of (6) By: Shivasankar Sastry

The average reader can be excused for wondering what on earth Avestan might be and why anyone should be interested. Avestan is a language that ancient Zoroastrians (Parsis) are said to have spoken. If this is enough information for the reader – the rest of this article may not interest you. But it should be of interest to the general question of ancient Indian history and the history of Indian languages.

To simplify the story let me relate what philologists (scholars of the history of languages) of the 19th and 20th centuries said about Avestan. They theorized that there was some mother language in Russia (or Europe) that was carried by migrating (or invading) people towards India. On the way – some people broke off from this group and became Zoroastrians, going towards Iran, inventing and speaking “Avestan” and the rest went to India and started speaking Sanskrit and composed the Vedas. Because the “Avestan” speaking people, the Zoroastrians, were in Iran – it was called an “Iranian language”. According to this theory, Sanskrit of India and Avestan of Iran were “sister languages” – having both sprung from an imaginary mother language.

So how was the name “Avestan” given to this language? There are no ancient Zoroastrian texts that refer to their language as “Avestan” In fact no one knew of any original Zoroastrian language of any name, be it Avestan or any other name. But here is how the name was given. In the late 1700s a man called Anquetil du Perron came to India and lived for a few months with Parsi priests in Surat, who taught him what they knew of Zoroastrian chants (gathas) and rituals. Perron also collected some Zoroastrian texts and returned to Europe where he wrote a book in French called “Zend Avesta – Ouvrage du Zoroaster” meaning “Zend Avesta – the work of Zoroaster”. Perron’s work was initially dismissed but 60 years later it was validated and corrected by a man called Eugene Burnouf. To make the corrections Burnouf used a 13th century Sanskrit book by an Indian called Neryosangh Dhaval. That book was a Sanskrit translation of a Pahlavi language version of Zoroastrian holy texts. So whatever is written about the  3000 plus year old “Zend Avesta” is derived from verbal accounts of 17th century Parsi scholars, contemporary texts and a 13th century book that was written in Pahlavi language and translated to Sanskrit. A 3000 year gap between the original language and the translation does not inspire confidence about the linguistic theories regarding the identity of the original Zoroastrian language.

The meaning of “Zend Avesta” itself has been the subject of confusion – with scholars and linguists thinking that it means Zoroastrian holy text, or alternatively, commentary in the Zoroastrian language.  “Avestan” was simply named as a language that existed 3000 years in the past spoken by Zoroastrians in Iran.  However the minor issue of a 3000 year gap did not discourage linguists from making up their own language and a story to go with it.  And linguists proceeded to “reconstruct” the ancient language from fragments of texts that were written 3000 years later. And since the main source of reconstruction was from a 1300 AD Sanskrit text they ended up with a language that sounded somewhat like Sanskrit but had some differences such as the sound “sa” being replaced by the sound “ha” and some other changes. Linguists called this language Avestan; claimed that it was spoken 3000 years ago by Zoroastrians and made up a story of how a mother language came from somewhere and split into Avestan that went to Iran and Sanskrit that developed in India

Here the reader would be justified in asking that if Avestan did not exist as a language, and was simply cooked up by linguists by a process of guesswork which they called “reconstruction”, what language did Zoroastrians speak?  Is there an alternate story and is there any proof for an alternate story?  Yes there is.

First, what does “Zend Avesta” mean? Modern scholars now claim that the word “Avesta” represents the texts and that “Zend” are commentaries on the texts. It is notable that Zend is also pronounced as Zand. In fact in French, the language of Perron’s translation, Zend would be pronounced as Zand. The greatest 20th century scholar who has translated the Zend Avesta is Jatinder Mohan Chatterji who points out that in Sanskrit “zand” has a cognate word “chhand”.  Zand Avesta corresponds to chhand upastha which simply means Vedic hymns.  Chatterji quotes Panini as evidence of authenticity of this meaning. The great grammarian Panini knew of the existence of these Zoroastrian texts. The connection between the Zend Avesta and the Vedas are profound and seminal.

The links between the Vedas, particularly the Atharva Veda and the Zend Avesta are critical to the question of what language the early Zoroastrians may have spoken and whether it was a “sister language” of Sanskrit that developed independently while a group of Euroasians migrated separately to Iran and India as postulated by theories proposed by linguists.

Jatinder Mohan Chatterji notes that the Gopatha Brahmana (a commentary on the Atharva Veda) speaks of five Vedas. The Mahabharata too mentions five Vedas. But all standard references to the Vedas speak of only four Vedas. So what is the missing “fifth veda”? Chatterji points out that the last and most recent Veda, the Atharva Veda was known as the “Bhrigu-Angirasa Veda” where Bhrigu and Angirasa are the names of ancient rishis (priestly scholars) associated with that Veda. However the modern Atharva Veda is associated only with the rishi Angirasa. It transpires that the Zend Avesta is the fifth Veda – the Bhrigu Veda or Bhargava Atharva Veda. This explains the great commonality in the two texts, with chanting in a characteristic meter as well as oral transmission over centuries.

These are not radical new revisionist constructs, but facts that have been published in multiple works by a series of scholars in the west.  But they are fatal to the theories of language spread favoured by linguists and hence lie buried in large and unopened volumes. Fortunately, in the age of the Internet, these volumes can be accessed and searched.

In his book, “The Zend-Avesta” first published in 1880 James Darmetester says: ”the Vedas come from the same source as the Avesta”.  Darmetester further records that other scholars too had noticed this. He writes “Roth showed after Burnouf how the epical history of Iran was derived from the same source as the myths of Vedic India, and pointed out the primitive identity of Ahura Mazda, the supreme god of Iran, with Varuna, the supreme god of the Vedic age.”  What Darmetester is trying to say is that the Vedas and the Zend Avesta arose from the same source. The statement is interesting because European scholars have always considered the Zend Avesta as the history of Iran as opposed to the Vedas representing an Indian past.

Dr. Martin Haug, in his book on the Zoroastrian religion notes that the Zend Avesta has references to the Atharva Veda, showing that the Atharva Veda already existed at the time of composition of the Zend Avesta.

In her book, “A History of Zoroastrianism (Volume 1)”, Mary Boyce includes a chapter on the “pagan gods” that existed before Zoroaster. Boyce describes in great detail how every one of these gods is also mentioned in in the Vedas. In other words, all pre-Zoroastrian gods that are mentioned in Zoroastrian texts and absorbed into the Zoroastrian tradition are also mentioned in the Vedas. There can be no better evidence of the origin of the Zoroastrian pantheon from an earlier Vedic one. Boyce and other scholars choose to term the earlier common pantheon as “Indo-Iranian” gods that were known before Zoroastrian and Vedic gods. There is no factual basis for this terminology, although it is semantically accurate. A fact that is consistently ignored by linguists is that at the time of the Vedas and Zoroaster – there was no separate country called “Iran”. Western India formed a continuum from Punjab, to Balochistan, Afghanistan and Iran. Common geographical references exist within the Vedas and the Zend Avesta.

The same gods find earlier mention in the Indian Vedas and later mention in the supposedly Iranian Zoroastrianism. These so-called Indo-Iranian gods are unknown outside Zoroastrianism and the Vedas. The evidence that Boyce presents points to the Vedic gods having existed earlier and Zoroastrian gods were selected as a later development from the Vedic pantheon. The name “Indo-Iranian gods” might as well be replaced by the perfectly accurate name “Vedic deities”.

The facts clearly point to the following conclusions:

  1. The Vedas and the Zend Avesta have a common source
  2. The Vedas date from an era earlier than the Zend Avesta
  3. The last Veda (the Atharva Veda) and the Zend Avesta have a contemporaneous origin

Now we come back to the theory made up by linguists that the Vedas and the Zend Avesta represent separate religions that split off from a common source, with the Vedic people going toward India, and the Zoroastrians going towards Iran, and each developing a similar but distinct language.

Here is the problem. The three earlier Vedas, Rig, Yajur and Sama Veda were composed and existed before the Atharva Veda. All these works are in Sanskrit. There is evidence found by comparing the Atharva Veda with the Zend Avesta that the early Atharva Veda preceded the Zend Avesta. At some time in the remote past the Atharva Veda consisted of works of two “fire priests” – or Atharvans, named Bhrigu (Bhargava) and Angirasa. At that remote time the Atharva Veda was also known as the “Bhrigu-Angirasa samhita”. But the modern Atharva Veda as known to Hindus is associated only with Angirasa.  The Zend Avesta is associated with the rishi “Bhrigu” (or Bhargava).  The Atharva Veda and the Zend Avesta are both orally transmitted hymns chanted to a characteristic “meter” – a rhythmic pulse within the beat of the chant. The main part of the Zend Avesta are called “gathas” which is a word recognizable by almost any Indian as relating to music or chanting.

In detail, the Zend Avesta appears to consider all the gods mentioned in the Atharva Veda as evil, or as enemies. This appears to have been a philosophical split within an existing Vedic group.

The “sound changes” indicating differences in pronunciation between the Zoroastrian holy texts and the Vedas – such as Vedic “soma” being Zoroastrian “haoma” cannot irrefutably indicate a separate people and separate geography. In fact the main Atharvan priest of the Zend Avesta – Bhrigu has an ancient town bearing his name in the Indian state of Gujarat – namely Bharuch. The historic name of Bharuch was “Bhrigu-kaksha”. Even today – “Bharucha” is a well-known name among Parsis. That apart there are certain areas of modern day Gujarat where the people speak Gujarati with the exact same “sound changes” of “sa” to “ha” – which linguists claimed is a special change that occurred among Zoroastrians in Iran. Obviously that sound change is no Iranian specialty.

From these facts it is impossible to claim that the language of the Zend Avesta developed separately in Iran in parallel to a separate development of Sanskrit in India. The holy texts have a common origin, with the Vedas being earlier. It is most likely that the early Zoroastrians spoke Sanskrit or a dialect of Sanskrit rather than the “reconstructed” and patently artificial imagined language that linguists created and called “Avestan”. The Zoroastrian language probably split off from Sanskrit as the Zoroastrians migrated further towards Iran, and is more likely to be a daughter language of Sanskrit than a sister language. The idea of Avestan as a “sister language” of Sanskrit is needed only to support a particular theory of migration of languages that is favoured by linguists but is increasingly being shown to be false by archaeological and genetic evidence. But even without these modern developments it is clear that the linguistic story is contrived and untenable. There was never a language called Avestan.

(4) of (6) By: Shivasankar Sastry

Darmetester and Mary Boyce (separately)  have both recorded that there are close links between the Vedas and the Zend Avesta. Vedic deities find mention in the Zend Avesta and were “known” to the “Iranians” from their earliest days. There is no ancient record of any language called Avestan. (We know that Euclid has a name. It was Eukeides)

The theory is that a proto-Indo Iranian language split into separate Iranian and Indian groups who went their own way. Now here is a paradox that no one seems to want to explain. If the Avesta and the Rig Veda were composed while the speakers of proto-Indo-Iranian language  were migrating towards India and Iran it would certainly explain how the Avesta knew about the Rig Veda. However the theory states that the composition of the Rig Veda came in Punjab, after the so called “Aryans” arrived there and that linguistically speaking the Avesta is older then the Rig Veda. How then does the Avesta know about something that was composed after the Avestan speakers split away in far away Punjab rather than Iran?

The other assumption that needs to be stated is how a body of people migrating to India and Iran, and were yet to settle there managed to compose, while on the move, a complex metrical set of verses that describe a settle life in a geographic area that they had not yet reached?

These questions are never addressed and because many of them have been “settled” even before the oldest among us was born it is very difficult to get answers for what I see as glaring holes in the current theories

(5) of (6) By: Shivasankar Sastry

The ancient history of Persia is inextricably linked with the Zoroastrian faith. The religion was mentioned by Herodotus and Plutarch (50 AD) has a remarkably accurate description of Zoroastrianism. Mary Boyce has written extensively on Zoroastrianism about this and she has some interesting, if controversial, insights.

I will not enter into the controversies now.

As a general pointer towards where the search must go in terms of the relationship between India and Persia, there are three possible routes:

1. Controversial: Theories about migrations of “Indo-Aryans”. I do not want to enter into this now because the controversy will consume everything else – although it may be unavoidable in the end.

2. Uncontroversial (or mildly contested) : Geography – the common geography shared by ancient Indians of the Vedic era as mentioned in ancient Indian texts correlated with the geography of the ancient Zoroastrians which find mention in ancient Greek texts including Strabo, Ctesias and Herodotus.

3. Unknown: There are a large number of “hints” and suggestions where we find descriptions of Zoroastrian culture matching the idea that it was actually a remarkably close split form Vedic India.

I want to simply collect and collate these without trying to claim that they serve as proof. They will, for the time being only, be pointers. We cannot take correlation to be the same as causation even if this has been done time and again in the past. Therefore, so please do not consider any correlation that I point out here as proof of anything.

I place them here for the record. At least here I can hope for some inputs from others.

There are plenty of textual references to 1 and 2 above, so it is number 3 that I believe needs further investigation from western, Indian textual and Parsi sources.

Interestingly there seems to be a meeting point between Greek accounts (western), Christian lore (The Magi) and links with Vedic India.

I will try and summarize the correlations very briefly. They are interesting but unproven:

a. Indian sources claim that the Atharva Veda was in two recensions – an earlier one that included work from two rishis Bhrigu and Angiras known as the Bhargava-Angirasa samhita and the modern Atharva veda which is only the Angiras version. It is stated that Bhrigu (Bhargava) also an “atharvan” may have been the founder of Zorastrianism. However I have not been able to discover the name Bhrigu in any Zoroastrian source.

b. Within the Zoroastrian texts there is an entity called “Angra Mainyu” the embodiment of evil who stood opposed to the goodness of the Zoroastrian Ahura Mazda. Some Indian sources (I have yet to find this reference) claim that Angra Mainyu is the same as Rishi Angirasa. I have been unable to find (as yet) any reliable sources for this. Angirasa does not seem to appear in Zoroastrian texts.

c. Rishi Bhrigu, who is said to have become one of the pioneers of Zoroastrianism (or Zoroaster himself) had written a treatise on Astrology called “Bhrigu samhita”, which is still in use although much is apparently lost. The Magi of Zoroastrianism were reputed to be astrologers and predictors of astronomical events.

d. There are references to warrior and priestly castes (and IIRC a third caste) among Zoroastrians from Greek sources.

There seem to be compelling parallels with an Indian narrative but these are only correlations. I must point out that alternative explanations about Indo-Iranians seem to have equally flimsy arguments.

The only way forward at this point in time might be to build up hypotheses where one hypothesis is the current theory of Iranian origins and an alternative hypothesis that posits a Vedic connection breaking away and moving east towards Iran.

(6) of (6) By: Come Carpentier

The analysis of the evolution and permutations of the term ‘ari-arya’ is similar to the those of the term ‘hos’ ‘ hostis’ in Latin, which covers the meanings of hosts, enemy and army.

Philology Debunks ‘Aryan Invasion’ of India!

 Credit: 1 (and 2) of 3 by: Shreepal Singh. Credit: 3 of 3 by: E. Pococke – London, 1855

1 of 3:

Google has done a great service for the advance of knowledge by bringing rare, ancient and almost lost books to the public domain. One such book is ‘INDIA IN GREECE’ by E. Pococke published in 1855 from London. It is a masterpiece of philological research and knowledge.

It was a lost book. Thanks to Google, we can now utilize this treasure-trove to enhance our knowledge of the ancient world. It establishes beyond any shadow of doubt that it were a large numbers of Indians who under some unknown circumstances had migrated in prehistorical times from India to Greece speaking Sanscrit language; that they culturally colonized ancient Greece; shaped the classical Greek, and Latin languages; and thereby influenced the ancient dialects of other European languages!

In comparison to this philological research, which is based on the concrete reality of ‘words of languages that we still use in our daily life’, the recent reconstruction of the migration of ancient people on the basis of their DNA’s mutations etc. is nothing more than a speculation! The genetic sequencing of peoples’ DNA backward in time and their mutation over time, will show the mixing of the concerned two peoples but NOT THEIR MIGRATION ROUTE!

This alleged discovery of the MIGRATION of Aryans into India by applying the scientific tool of the genetic mutation has become a convenient political weapon in the hands of ‘Breaking India’ forces. They are crying hoarse to turn a ‘speculation’ into an ‘established fact’ and trying to divide India into ‘Aryan India’ as against ‘Dravidian India’!

{Now, as of September 7, 2019, a new research based on DNA study of Indus Valley Civilization – IVC – (Harappa in Pakistan, Mohenjo Daro in Pakistan, Rakhigarhi in Hissar, Haryana India) has shown that people of South Asia find their ancestry in IVC people and not in an imaginary invading Aryan people. Enough DNA was retrieved from the skeleton of an individual who lived in Rakhigarhi (IVC) settlement 3000 BCE.}

Their alleged discovery is debunked by the philology – standing on the surer foundation of living languages. People speak languages and languages also mutate, preserving traces of their parent language. Nobody can deny that Sanskrit is an ancient language; that it is still spoken with all its purity in India; and that Greek, Latin and all other European languages still have traces of their mother ‘Sanskrit’ language in them.

A language is a living thing, like humans. It also undergoes mutation over a period of time, just like people’s genes!

The question crying for answer is: How did Sanskrit come to influence Greek, Latin and other European languages?

This question is answered by the philological research of E. Pococke. We are reproducing here Pococke’s  ‘Introduction to the second edition‘ of his book, with special thanks to Google, at No. 3 of 3 of this write-up.

2 of 2:

There is an observation of long standing time that says, “Fish are not aware of the water in which they live, until they are taken out of the water!” Often times, we do not pay attention to normal things, howsoever great the significance their presence might mean. It is so with the philological significance of the ‘quality’ of Sanskrit that is spoken in India as a commonplace thing. Everybody knows that ‘brother,’ a word of English language, is phonetically and in its meaning similar to the Sanskrit word ‘bhratra” but nobody pays any attention to the fact that it is ‘brother’ that is similar to ‘bhratra’ and not ‘bhratra’ that is similar to ‘brother’! What is its significance in philology?

This fact debunks the artificial theory of the existence of the so called ‘proto Sanskrit’ language. If there was a ‘proto Sanskrit’ language, out of which have developed Sanskrit (as we know it) and also other languages of Indo- European family, then it is not possible that Indian Sanskrit alone becomes so developed a language as to have a precise grammar and phonetics, while leaving all other languages of Indo-European family comparitively undeveloped in their grammar and phonetics, as they in fact are.

The much touted ‘proto Sanskrit’, if it was the mother of all the languages of Indo-European family, must have equally developed into all the languages of a common family.

The fact is that a language retains its maximum purity at the place of its origin and degrades as it radiates further away from the place of its origin.

The quantum of purity of a language is maximum at its place of origin and decreases as it travels further away from there. Sanscrit is at its maximum purity in India – since its formation in prehistoric times – and all other languages of Indo-European family have never developed to be anywhere near it. This fact is the proof that all these languages have only been remotely influenced by this Indian Sanscrit sometime in the past. In other words, it means that Sanscrit – that is, Sanscrit speaking people – has migrated from the place of its origin in India to those forein lands. It had in fact so happened, as brilliantly pointed out by E. Pococke in his INDIA IN GREECE.

European languages have a few significant similarities to – but are not as pure as –  Sanskrit, which is still spoken in India.

There was no ‘proto Sanskrit’ but an ancient Sanskrit. Its origin was ancient India. It spread with the migration of people speaking this language in ancient times from India to Iran, Greece, Rome, Scand and European countries.

The existence of finest form of Sanskrit in India – since antiquity – philologically proves that Sanskrit speaking Aryans – noble people – had spread out of India and not invaded India from somewhere outside. Of course, ancient India was much larger a place than today’s India and included almost all of Central Asia of today, faintly hinted at by Herodotus and classical Greek writers before and after Alexander.

3 of 3:

E. Pococke says:

An illustrious geographer has well observed that the names which geography, and particularly physical geography, has consecrated, may be considered the most important documents of primitive history, or of history anterior to chronology. Men, long before they thought of computing years, or arranging events according to their date, designated by local denominations, taken from the dialects in which they were surrounded – the mountains that bounded their horizon, the rivers in which their thirst quenched, the villages that gave them birth, and the family tribe to which they belonged. Had that graphical nomenclature been preserved pure and entire, a map of the world might have been obtained, more valuable by far than all the Universal Histories (Malte Brun, Geog. Univ.). It is impossible for the reflecting mind to concede the derivation of the Hellenic from the Sanscrit type of the Arian tounge, a subject now established beyond controversy, without, at the same time, granting the probable existence within the boundaries of the tribal and typical evidences of this fact. Such evidences are particularly strong in the case of mountainous regions. Those fortresses of nature formed so many points of jealous isolation. Here weaker tribes might hold their own against superior numbers. A congeries of rugged defiles, mountain passes, and craggy heights, became securely tenanted by bands almost as numerous and as diversified as the natural strongholds that received them. Hence, like the Caucasus, not a few of these highland strengths remain to this day the imperishable textbooks of the ethnologist and philologer. Here human speech, faithful as the most impartial historian, tells of the settlement of Fins, of Medes, of Celts, of Tartars, and Alans, demonstrating in the most precise and simple manner the infiltration of these races and its just amount.

But the higher we ascend the stream of time, the earlier do we discern the evidences of this fact. Nowhere is this more evident than in the most ancient ethnic titles of Greece.

It would undoubtedly be somewhat unreasonable to expect that a Greek logographer, however zealous for the antiquity of his country, should be able to interpret Sanscrit, Sclavonic, and Celtic terms, whilst acquainted only with his native language.

Let us for a moment examine the process of Greek geographical affiliation, and we shall find that a geographical son is generally the offspring of a Coelicolite, thus forming the boundary of Greek history, hence, –

Macedon is the son of Zeus,

Lacedaemon is the son of Zeus,

Targitaus is the son of Zeus,

Dardanus is the son of Zeus,

Scythes is the son of Zeus,

Corinthus is the son of Zeus,

Thrax is the son of Ares,

Boeotus is the son of Poseidon.

No sagacity is requisite to perceive that a terminology of this description is a virtual confession of inability to communicate the historical facts standing in connection with it; at the same time, this may be taken as a valid evidence that, however fictitious such tales may be, the names themselves are not fabulous, but belong to an era antecedent to the Ario-Hellenic settlement in Greece, and to a nation other than the purely Hellenic.

The Tamar, and the Thames, and Britain itself, are names undeniably English; but they are names which no Englishman – quoad Englishman – can interpret; they belong to an ancient race, and he is thus the inheritor of a title, not of an estate that he can enjoy. Just so was it with the Greek: before him came the Arian and the Celto-Arian, and then the pure Ario-Hellenic stock.

It will now be apparent that the ethnography of Greece lies within no narrow sphere. To the same purpose is the following:- “Let Greece, under the leadesrship of of Agamemnon, be as truly Hellenic as Kent and Essex were Anglo-Saxon in the reign of Alfred, what does it prove in the way of the occupants being aboriginal? As little as the English character of the countries in question at the time referred to. Four centuries, or even less, of migration, may easily have given us all the phenomena that occur; for the area is smaller than the kingdom of Wessex or Northumberland, and the country but little more impracticable. Hence, if we sufficiently recognize the smallness of the Hellenic area, no difficulties against the doctrine of an original non-Hellenic population will arise on the score of its magnitude. It was as easily convertible from non-Hellenic to Hellenic as Cumberland and Northumberland have been from British to English (Dr. Latham’s Ethnology of Europe, p. 129).”

We are then to view the Hellenic as that dialect of the great arian tounge, which formed the universal solvent by which, while tribal titles remained unchanged, all these various clans were marvelously blended into a people speaking one general language; yet each, as Boeotians, Athenians, Laconians, and Ionians, retaining those peculiarities of dialect which were once still more distinct.

History has not left us to doubt as to the wonderfully Hellenizing effect of the Greek language wherever it gained a footing. (“The facility,” writes Niebuhr, “with which the Pelasgian tribes were moulded into Greeks was a characteristic of their race, and a main cause of their dissolution and extinction. It is natural to look upon this as resulting from the original affinity between the two races, which, nevertheless, were essentially different; and so I believe it did. We may observe, however, that the Greek language and national character often exercised a magical power over foreign races that came in contact with them, even where there can have been no such affinity. The inhabitants of Asia Minor began to be Hellenized from the time of the Macedonian conquest, though very few genuine Greeks settled amongst them.” – Nieb. Vol. I. p. 56).

Nor, on the other hand, has Thucydides failed to notice that era of the early small communities of Greece, when not only provinces, but cities also, had a distinct name expressive of the resident tribe.

“Hekataeus, Herodotus, and Thucydides,” writes Grote, “all believed that there had been an ante-Hellenic period, when different languages, mutually unintelligible, were spoken between Mount Olympus and Cape Malea.” Many of these ancient races long continued ….. (a Greek word), as we are informed by Strabo. (vii. 327). Again, speaking of the modern highland population to the north-west of Greece, Malte Brun has acutely observed, that “to ascertain the Celticisms and Germanisms in the Albanian is by no means an unprofitable task; these cannot be attributed to accidental causes, for these words form a part of a numerous class in different languages. It is difficult to account for these facts from the migrations of different people; but they may be easily explained, if we admit that the ancient population of the Haemus was made up of Celtic, Sclavonic, and German tribes, as well as Pelasgian, Hellenic, and Asiatic. (Malte Brun, Univ. Geog. Vol. iv. P. 197)”

Isolation in special localities, protracted through a long series of ages, and acting upon the language of fragmentary sections of one and the same great family, has proved the powerful matrix out of which younger dialects were moulded; yet all are stamped with the truthful impress of the parent original. Hence, tribal and topical titles follow the regular system of lingual mutation from an older to a younger dialect.

The great connecting links of the Indo-Germanic family, with which Europe is now filled, have been ably portrayed by an excellent authority; and they bear so immediately upon the principles involved in the ethnic titles of antiquity, that they may be appropriately introduced in this place.

“Although,” observes the author, “we cannot trace the first colonization of Greece, which is beyond the period of historical records, the analysis of the Greek language and its comparison with the Sanscrit, of which we have seen that the Zend and the Parsi are derivatives, have afforded a proof of near affinity between the Pelasgic and Asiatic nations already described, which, to all those who have entered on the subject, has appeared fully conclusive.

“It seems that colonies of one original people established themselves in remote times on the Ganges, in Persia, and on the shores of the AEgaean. In the former station, their speech was gradually moulded into the Sanscrit, and they became subject to the power and superstition of the Brahmins; in the second, they became the disciples of the Magian Hierarchy, and their dilects were the Zend, the Parsi, and the Pehlvi; in Greece, their mythology and language acquired a more graceful character; but the proofs of a common origin are still equally clear and indelible. (Dr. Prichard’s Nat. Hist. of Man, vol. ii. P. 31).

The following brief extract from the methodical work of the illustrious Bopp (Comparative Gram. of the Zend, Lithuanian, Greek, Latin, &c.) will form a powerful parallel to the Zendo-Arian nomenclature of early Greece, and will, at the same time, demonstrate the fact, that where great lingual principles harmoniously pervade human speech, they must be equally applicable to the tribal and topical titles of the speakers, wherever they may have resided.

Such records form a self-interpreting lexicon of ethnology, as cpious as it is faithful. The following is a brief table of numerals:-


Sanscrit = Zend. = Greek (Doric.) = Latin. = Gothic.

Prat’hma  = Frat’hema = Prota = Prima = Fruma

Dwitiya = Bitya = Deutera = Altera = Ant’hara

Tritiya = Thritya = Trita = Tertia = Thridyo

Chaturtha = Tuirya =Tetarta = Quarta = Fidvordo

Panchama = Pugdha = Pempta = Quinta = Fimfto

Shasta = Catva = Hekta = Sexta = Saishto

Saptama = Haptat’ha = Hebdoma = Septima = Sibundo

Ashtama = Astema = Ogdoa = Octava = Ahtudo

Navama = Nauma = Ennota = Nova = Niundo

Dasama = Dasema = Dekata = Decima =Taihundo

To these numerals we subjoin a brief conspectus of the



Sanscrit. = Zend. = Greek. = Latin.

Dad-a-mi = Dadha-mi = Dido-mi = Do

Dada-si = Dadha-si = Dido-s = Da-s

Dada-te = Dadha-te = Dido-ti = Da-t


Dad-mas = Dade-mahi = Dido-mes = Da-mus

Dat-t’ha = Das-ta? = Dido-te = Da-tis

Dad-te = Dade-nt = Dido-nt = Da-nt


First Person.

Tishtami = Histami = Histemi = Sto

Dadami = Dadhami = Didomi = Do

Asmi = Ahmi = Emmi = Sum

Bharami = Barami = Phero = Fero

Vahami = Vazami = Ekho = Veho

Second Person.

Asi = Ahi = Essi = Es

Tishtasi = Hisht’hahi = Histes = Stas

Dadasi = Dadhahi = Didos = Das

Bharasi = Barahi = Phereis = Fers

Tisht’hes = Histois = Histaies = Stes

Dadhyas = Daidhyao = Didoies = Des

Bhares = Bharois = Pherois = Feras

Second Person Plural.

Sanscrit. = Zend. = Greek. = Latin.

Tisht’hat’ha = Hist’hat’ha = Histate = Statis

Bharat’ha = Barat’ha = Pherete = Fertis

Tisht’het’ha = Histaeta = Histaiete = Stetis

Dadyata = Daidhyata = Didoiete = Detis

Bhareta = Baraeta = Pheroite = Feratis

Third Person.

Asti = Ashti = Esti = Est

Tishtati = Histati = Histate = Stat

Tishtati = Histati = Histate = Stat

Dadati = Dadhaite = Didote = Dat

Barati = Baraite = Phere(t)i = Fert

Bharet = Baroit = Pheroi = Ferat

Dadyat = Daidhyat = Dedoie = Det


Santi = Hente = (S)enti = Sunt

Tishtanti = Histenti = Histanti = Stant

Dadati = Dadenti = Didonti = Dant

Bharanti = Barenti = Pheronti = Ferunt

Vahanti = Vazenti = Ekhonti = Vehunt



Zend = Greek

Histami = Histami

Histahi = Histas

Histaiti = Histate


Histamahi = Histamen

Histat’ha = Histate

Histenti = Histanti



Atarp-a-m = Eterp-o-n

Atarp-a-s = Eterp-e-s

Atarp-a-t = Eterp-e


Atarp-a-tam = Eterp-e0ton

Atarp-a-tam = Eterp-e-ton

Atarp-a-tam = Eterp-e-ton


Atarp-a-ma = Eterp-o-men

Atarp-a-ta = Eterp-e-te

Atarp-a-n = Eterp-o-n



Zend = Greek

Da-syami = Do-so

Da-syasi = Do-seis

Da-syati = Do-sei


Da-syat’has = Do-seton

Da-syatas = Do-seton


Da-syamas = Do-somen

Da-syat’ha = Do-sete

Da-syanti = Do-sonti


Sanscrit = Latin

St’ha-tum, to stand = Statum

Da-tum, to give = Datum

Jna-tum, to know = No-tum

Pa-tum, to drink = Potum

E’-tum, to go = Itum

Stra-tum, to strew = Stratum

Ank-tum, to anoint = Unctum

Svani-tum, to sound = Son-i-tum

Sarp-tum, to go = Serptum

Vami-tum, to vomit = Vomitum

Pesh-tum, bruise = Pistum

Jani-tum, to beget = Gen-i-tum

It is impossible to contemplate such a marvelous accord of language – such a mirror-like reflex, as is here shown in the case of Sanscrit and the Hellenic – without granting an historical value to the personal agency of the parent tongue in early Greek.

AREA, whence the modern name of Iran, takes its name, as is well known, from the ARII, an ancient Median people. It is a name derived from the Sanscrit vocal “Arya”, “venerable,” hence descriptive of the “Noble Race,” – a term which has even penetrated the Celtic tounge under the form of “Aire” and “Aireach,” expressive of an ancient privileged nobility, as well as of the class possessed of wealth. Nor is the vocable less distinct in the German Ehre, Ehren.

This name included the whole of the Persian race, as well as those who spoke dialects of the Median. Among the towns of antiquity, closely connected with the fortunes of the old Pelasgic populations of Greece and Italy, is that of Tanagra.

An interpretation of this and similar local titles will give us a clear view of the ethnology of this mighty people, and will, at the same time, demonstrate their identity with the great Arian family. “Tanagra,” writes Leake, “was advantageously situated in the centre of a fertile Champaign, consisting of plains and undulating ground, included between Mount Parnes and the Euboeic frith, and extending in the other direction from the Thebaea and Oropia. Standing at the eastern extremity of the ridge of Mount Soro, and not far from the root of Mount Parnes, which stretches to Dalium or Oropus, it was placed exactly in the point of communication between the plains at the foot of Parnes, and those towards Aulis and the sea.” (Leake’s Morea, ii. 455)

This appellation is, in itself, one of the most interesting accords of the early identity of the Eastern and Western Arians, of the Pelasgians, and their Indian conquerors.

Ta-Nagara signifies literally “THE CITY,” and it is in every respect identical with the numerous districts and towns in India bearing the name of Nagari and Nagore. Of such a nature are Nagari in Bengal, Nagara in Carnatic, and the well-known Chander-Nagore, or “city of Chandra.”

The student of classical history will now perceive that he has ascended to a period so ancient in Greece, that the name of a Greek city has become lost to the Greek language, just as that of “Stow” or “Wick” in Saxon England had become obsolete in the English.

We learn from Strabo and Stephanus Byzantius, that, in distant ages, Tanagara bore the name of Poimandria or Poinandar. This is another designation of extreme interest to the student of primitive Hellenic history, and is in itself one of the most decisive evidences of the parent stem of the Hellenes. “Poimandria” is compounded of …. (some Greek word) and ….(another Greek word), the latter an enclosed space, a fold, or pen for cattle. “Poimandria,” therefore, signifies the “sheepfold.” But the Greek ….. (Greek word) itself is derived from the Sanscrit “Mandir,” a house, dwelling; from the root “mad,” to dwell, to inhabit, to surround, encompass; and hence are derived both “mandir” and ….. (Greek word); just as the Latin “vallum,” a rampart, is from the Sanscrit “val,” to enclose, surround – the true source of the French “ville.” But the interest of the inquisitive mind is yet more deeply excited on learning that “Ta-nagara” bore a name still more ancient than the title of “Poi-mander,” – it was that of “Graia.” It will now be seen that this latter is purely Arian.

“Griha” is a Sanscrit vocable, signifying a house or habitation in general; and “Grihya” is expressive of a village adjoining a city. Hence the form “Graihya,” or “Graia,” as simply descriptive of a village or small town, and thus not very dissimilar from that of “Ta-nagara.”

Nor is the intimate Celto-Arian position of the earliest colonies of Greece and of the coast of Asia Minor less distinct, and they are rendered obvious by such topical titles as Scheria or Phoeakia, Corax, Cragus, and Cassius.  “Sceir” is a Celtic term, signifying a sharp sea-rock or cliff; and Scir-it is the well known rugged mountain region of Peloponnesus, whose cognate English vocable is a ”Scaur,” another form of which is the Greek “Scyr-os.” The Pheacians appear to us as a people half fabulous, half historical. Their wealth, luxury, and maritime enterprise – their marvelous possession, if not manufacture, of the most elegant works of art – naturally excite our wonder.

   “Fixed thrones the walls through all their length adorned.

With mantles overspread of subtlest warp,

Transparent, work of many female hands,

On these the princes of Phaeacis sat,

Holding perpetual feasts; while golden youths

On all the sumptuous altars stood; their hands

With burning torches charged, which, night by night,

Shed radiance over all the festive throng.” (Cowper’s Odyss. Vi. 85-102.)

     Of this ethnic the “Phikins,” Mons of southern Greece, is thoroughly exegetical: it simply implies the “PEAK,” in the same manner as we apply the term to the “PEAK” of Derbyshire; hence its name is precisely in accordance with fact. Leake observes, that Phikium “is a single bare and ragged PEAK,” thus unconsciously giving the exact value of the Greek form. The Celtic form is Feighe, (quasi …… 😉 and Phaeak is absolutely the aspirate variant of the English Peak, with which the Celtic “Peac,” any sharp-pointed thing, is identical: its application to the well known “Pic du Midi” is familiar to the reader.

“The Thraco-Pelasgi, the Heracleidae, and Achaei,” writes an esteemed ethnologist, (Col. Hamilton Smith’s Nat. Hist. of Man) “seem to have been Celto-Scythae, that is likewise of Illyrian or Gaeto-Finnic affinity belonging to the giant races; who, as far as the two first mentioned, came round from the Kuban and Don, along the shores of the Euxine, and then sought conquests towards the south, as all the more northern nations were impelled to undertake.”

Notwithstanding the immense swarms of the Celtic family that had passed onwards in their migratory course from the East, though Italy and Gallia into the British isles, a very considerable portion of these tribes, with a stronger Medic element than at present exists in the members of that race, remained in Thrace, Macedonia, Illyria and on the coasts of Asia Minor, and in a more Hellenized form in Epirus and Thessaly.

The more ancient topology of Greece demonstrates this Celto-Arian innervation in its earliest colonies. Thus we know that the primitive name of the isle of Salamis was Scheria, identical with that of the well known island off the Epeirotic coast. In addition to the thoroughly Celtic name of Cragus, (Carac, a rock, cliff; Caraig, a crag.) as the representative of the Craig, we place that of Sigaeum. (Sigh, a “hill,” a promontory.) When, further we read of the Alban fathers, we must not lose sight of the historical fact contained in the very name given by the colonists of Alba (Alb, a height, a mountain.) Longa.

Nor does the appellation of the classic Tyber fail to link the onward movement of this mighty emigration. The Celtic “Tobar,” ”Tibhir,” and “Tibra,” a fountain or spring: Tibbreadh, “flowing,” give certainty to these historical and ethnological deductions. “Tobar Seagss,” or the “Majestic River,” was an ancient name of the Boyne.

The true root, however, is found in the Sanscrit original under the forms of Tep and Tepri, to be wet, to sprinkle, to pour out, to flow. But further; the great poet of Rome has unconsciously preserved the fact of this Celto-Arian origin, in his allusion to the “Grinaeus” Apollo. As a Latin word, the attributive of the god possesses no signification; as a Celto-Arian term, it is highly descriptive. The god of day is, in Celtic, “Grian;” its Sanscrit original is “Ghrini,” the sun, from “Ghran,” to shine.

Here, then, we have a highly expressive term lost to the classic languages of Greece and Rome, and preserved in the Celtic and Sanscrit.

Nor do the most important oreological titles of Italy fail to corroborate these facts. Such names as Alpes, Pen-innus, A-penn-inus, Cim-inus, together with the established fact of the very early separation of the Celtic stock from the great Arian family, powerfully demonstrate the nature of perhaps the earliest population that reached the Italian peninsula. (Such is the Celtic emigrant track seen in the term “Alpes.” Celt. Alp, a hill; the Peninus, from Pen, a hill, and in, a country. “A,” the old Celtic article, corresponding to the Greek ‘..” or Doric ‘..’. so again, Ceim-inus Mons, or the ‘hill country,” from Ceim, a top, summit, and in, a country. Conf. French “Cime.”)

Pictet has acutely remarked, on a subject in which history is involved in philology, as follows:-

“A subject of research still more attractive is the state of civilization which the present stock of all the European race had attained. I do not hesitate to affirm that the Celtic languages will present numerous and important elements for the solution of this problem.  A very interesting example, which may furnish an approximation indicative of the geographical position of the cradle of the human race, is found in the Irish tolg, a bed, tyle, couch, identical with the Greek …, mattress, cushion.

“All these words have a direct affinity with the Sanscrit tulikha, mattress, bed. Now this substantive is a derivative of the Persian “tula,” one of the Sanscrit names of cotton. These mattresses, then, were made of cotton, in the country (indeterminate let it be) which was the cradle of the race. The result is, that this country must have been situated within, or at least very near the limits of the growth of cotton; for a material of which mattresses were made must have been abundant and of very trifling cost. Now the cultivation of cotton does not go beyond Persia; this would seem, then, to indicate that the cradle of the family was more southerly than is generally supposed.” (Pictet, Jour. Asiatique, 1836).

To this term we would add that  of the significant Celtic vocable Bed, signifying “a book;” the origin of which is distinctly seen in the Sanscrit “Ved,” or locally, “Bed.” What a spectacle does this present of the juxtaposition of the Celts with the Arians of the East. The Tans-Scindic regions, in truth, were no strangers to the Celtic family of mankind, to their altars and their tombs, their priests and their warriors. The following is from a competent eye-witness:-

“Near a village lying about three miles eastward of Kotagherry, at the extremity of a field, beyond the village, and overlooking a ravine, rises an artificial terrace, twenty-one paces in length by ten in breadth, supported by slabs and masses of stone.

“Along the western side of this platform, I found a row of those remarkable relics of antiquity, belonging essentially to the Druidical region, called Cromlechs.

“There are twelve still standing, – ten on the side of the terrace, and two in the centre of it. The ruins of several others are apparent. Most of the entire ones consist of three upright slabs planted firmly in the earth, and supporting a fourth, which is passed horizontally on the top of them. Four of the Cromlechs are larger than the rest, being about four feet square and five high, the length of the upper slab measuring seven feet. Inquiring of the people what they knew respecting these remarkable structures, I was told, with much gravity, that they had been constructed by a race of men, not a foot high, who existed before mankind were destroyed by a flood which overwhelmed the earth. An account remarkable as manifesting the universal belief in fairies; and important as exhibiting a tradition of the deluge among the lower orders of the Hindoo peasantry, who cannot have access to the Brahminical accounts of the cataclysm.

“It is very remarkable that not only are the Cromlechs of the Neilgherries facsimiles of those in Europe, but that the same legend is attached to both.

“The one perhaps best known is called Kits Cotty House, near Aylesford in Kent, and consists of three flat stones containing a fourth. A drawing of this Cromlech in my possession is an exact representation of the one of the most conspicuous at Alcheny on the Neilgherries.” (Capt. H. Congreve, Madras Journal, 1847.)

The singular and very interesting connection once subsisting between the pure Arian and the Celto-Arian races has been thus stated by the learned Pictet, in a profound and critical treatise which has stamped his authority with the highest authority:-

“I here terminate,” he thus writes, “this parallel of the Celtic idioms with the Sanscrit, I do not believe that after this marked series of analogies, a series which embraces the entire organization of their tongues, that their radical affinity can be contested.

“The Celtic languages belong, then, to the Indo-European family, of which they form the extreme western link.

“The Celtic race established in Europe from the most ancient times must have been the first to arrive there, and, in all probability, it separated from the common stock before the rest.

“The decisive analogies which these languages still present to the Sanscrit carry us back to the most ancient period to which we can attain by comparative philology, and thus become one of the most important bases to investigate what degree of development the mother language of the whole family has attained.” (Letters M. Humboldt. Jour. Asiatique, 1836, p. 455).

Hence it is not a little singular, that although the most brilliant philological discoveries of our day have distinctly proved the affiliated descent of the Hellenic, Sclavonian, Celtic, German and Gothic dialects from the Sanscrit type of speech; – the speakers of these dialects have been overlooked as the ancient brethren of the Greeks, who themselves, as before noticed, spoke a branch of this mighty and wide-spread language.

London, August, 1855,    

Love of ‘Jinnah-Portrait’ Reflects ‘Jinnah-Mentality’: Exterminate it to Save India!

By: Parmanand Pandey  

It is shocking beyond words to find such people, and that too in a large number, who shamelessly defend the portrait of MA Jinnah in AMU, a person who was responsible for the vivisection of India, killings of more than two million people, large rape and rapine and displacement of many millions in the name of an Islamic country, Pakistan. Love of Jinnah portrait reflects the love of one for the Jinnah-mentality. What is  the Jinnah mentality? The Jinnah-mentality is represented by his views about Muslims and Hindus. Those who had agreed with his views had gone to their ‘exclusive Muslim country’ called Pakistan and those who did not agree with his views opted to remain in India. It is logical to expect that those who did not go to Pakistan – and now their progeny included in the footsteps of their forefathers – do not agree with the views of Jinnah about Hindus and Muslims. What were Jinnah’s views?

Way back in 1940 MA Jinnah had said, ‘The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs. They neither intermarry nor inter-dine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Musalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other hand, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built for the government of such a state.’

Again in 1944 Jinnah said, ‘We maintain and hold that Muslims and Hindus are two major nations by any definition or test of a nation. We are a nation with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of values and proportions, legal laws and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and tradition, and aptitude and ambitions. In short, we have our own outlook on life and of life’.

Loving by some people of the portrait of Jinnah in India uncovers in their hearts a soft spot for his views. In fact, Jinnah’s views about Muslims and Hindus are incompatible for the ‘remaining’ India – India that is secular. Jinnah because of these views about Muslims and Hindus deserves not to be respected in India but detested. To love Jinnah, his views and his portrait in India is to love the Jinnah-mentality, which justified creation of Pakistan in 1947 and would justify creation of another Pakistan in future out of the present – or ‘remaining’ India. No Indian citizen worth his name – be he or she a Hindu or Muslim – would allow the existence in India of such a mentality.

Although the seeds of the partition of India were sown by Allama Iqbal in 1930 itself, Jinnah was the person who translated their dreams into reality by playing with the passions of illiterate and dogmatic Muslims.

It is a moot question even today – as it was in the pre-partition days of a united India – whether Muslims and Hindus are two different nations, which cannot live together in single nation. The very existence of this question – reflected in the love of some for the portrait of Jinnah – in today’s India in fact gives birth to a lurking suspecian in the mind of those who think that Muslims and Hindus are not two nations, that they both can live together as single nation and that, despite many differences between them, they have something in common, which is vital and joins them together. It is this lurking suspecian in the mind of these secular Indians that forces them to make an unfortunate demand on these people of questionable loyality to secular India to prove of themselves that it is not so.

This issue – this question – was as vital before 1947 for both Hindus and Muslims as it is vital today; and this issue – this question – cannot be hushed up or put under the carpet by labeling it a communal thing, simply because it concerns with the very existence of the ‘remaining’ India as a nation. Though this issue – this question – is a straight forward one and can be answered in a straight forward ‘No’ but in reality it has become a most complex one to answer for one reason: There is an unfortunate religious injunction binding on those who are so suspected, which not only allows them but even justifies them to ‘play smile on their face, but contempt in their heart’ for the time being and till they are weak in power – till they get sufficient power to do what they are injuncted to do.

Fortunately for the rest of humanity, in this internet age – in the age of information revolution – nothing can be kept hidden; now everybody knows everything. The only solution to this complexity is that instead of waiting for others to ‘suspect, question, doubt’, the initiative – the answer – should come from them who are so suspected to denounce the ‘two nations Jinnah mentality’ in the secular India. It is not that this answer is not coming; this answer is coming in many voices; there are many secular Muslim people – like Hassan Nissar, Tarek Fateh, Zakaria etc. – in India, Pakistan and other countries in the world who are answering this question in an effective and positive way. They are answering this complex question in a straight forward way. Such people are showing the way forward out of this complex situation. The rest – who love Jinnah, his portrait and his mentality – need to take cue from these wise Muslims.

It is strange that some, due to their hatred for Veer Savarkar, try to lay blame on him for two nation theory, but nothing can be farther from the truth. In his famous speech in the Calcutta conference of Hindu Mahasabha in 1939 Veer Savarkar had said, ‘India shall not be divided into two parts, one for Muslims and the other for the Hindus; that the two nations shall dwell in one country and shall live under the mantle of one single constitution.

Dr. BR Ambedkar in his book ‘Pakistan or Partition of India’ has said that ‘he (Savarkar) does not propose to suppress the Muslim nation. On the contrary, he is nursing and feeding it by allowing it to retain its religion, language, and culture, elements which go to sustain the soul of a nation. At the same time, he does not consent to divide the country so as to allow the two nations to become separate, autonomous states, each sovereign in its own territory.

Another preposterous logic is put forward that Jinnah belonged to undivided India; therefore, there is nothing wrong to have his portrait. But will such people tell that if there is any university in Pakistan which adorns the portrait of Gandhi, Nehru, Patel or Bose? The reply will be emphatic ‘no’. Then why should any Indian university have the photograph of a megalomaniac like Jinnah on its walls?

Those, who say that Jinnah was a freedom fighter, are either knaves or fools or an amalgam of both. Jinnah never went to jail even for a day and never participated in the freedom struggle as he was in the good books of Britishers and was used to get all facilities and comforts from the Raj.

This is an altogether different matter that by raising the passions of foolish and dogmatic Muslims, he had dwarfed the stature of the likes of Abul Kalam Azad, Rafi Ahmad Kidwai, Zakir Hussain and others. The problem, with these Congress leaders, was that they tried to prove themselves to be more Muslim by their conduct than Pakistan supporting Muslims. Jinnah, on the contrary, was never a practicing Muslim and yet he had a tremendous spell over the Muslims.

The sooner it is removed from the AMU the better. Those who are opposing it must be crushed with iron hands otherwise such elements will snowball into the disease of cancer, the emperor of maladies, leading to unimaginable catastrophe for India.Jinnah is not  a person, it is a mentality. Need is to exterminate this mentality, as ruthlessly as possible, to keep India united.

How Nehru Helped Convert NE to Christianity!

By: K. I. P.

The spread of Christianity in the North East States of India between the years 1901 and 2001 has seen a sea change. It is a phenomenal growth from almost nil to almost 100% in 2001. In 1901, there was almost nil presence of Christianity in these States and in 2001, they are nearing 100% of the population. First have a look at the religious demographic data of these States in an ‘Illustrated Presentation on Religious Demographics in India by A P Joshi, M D Srinivas, and J K Bajaj’ –

Imperialism invades and occupies other countries not merely by military and political means. It is a mentality of the power of a people that persuades it to invade and occupy other people’s lands. Imperialism adapts itself to suit the changed circumstances and utilizes all means at its disposal, including religion, culture, language etc., to secure its imperial ends. When it is no longer possible for it to attack and occupy other countries with military power, imperialism adapts itself, changes it color and invades from within – within in the form of dubious religious conversion of other people. This technique makes that foreign land a soft ground – a pulp ground – ready to welcome those outsiders, allowing them to do what they could not have done with the assistance of their military.

Today, see the situation of these Indian States of North East! There the Christian Church leaders are openly exhorting their followers to get united to defeat Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, in the ensuing electoral battles. In a liberal democracy, like India, is it a religious work of such leaders or a sabotage of democracy from within? It is precisely for this reason that countries like China keep a strict vigil and check over the unwanted Christian religious propagation activities.

But, first let us see how this sea change has been made in India between 1901 and 2001 and who is primarily responsible for the same.

The Christian memetic virus entered the Northeastern states of India in 1871. However, the progress was slow. In 1931, the Christian population in the NE states, barring Mizoram, was around 15%. In Mizoram, it was 47% – although it appears that the Mizo were only namesake Christians or there was a reporting error because the 1941 census didn’t find any Christians there. There could’ve been a sort of ghar wapsi as well.

In Nagaland, the freedom fighter Rani Gaidinliu strove to revive the traditional animist religion. I am unaware of any such concerted effort in Mizoram. However, the British (and hence American) stranglehold in NE was weakening during WW2. So, the missionary parasites, lacking imperial backing, left the region. So, the local Mizos might’ve abandoned Christianity.

In any case, the decline of Christianity in NE between 1931 and 1941 is well recorded. There were hardly any Christians in Nagaland, Mizoram, or Meghalaya whereas Manipur had a 5% Christian population in 1941.

However, in the very next decade, Christianity spread like the plague in these states. Mizoram had become 90% Christian whereas Nagaland had become 46% Christian. The reason for this spread is two-fold.

First, it was primarily American Southern Baptist variety which spread in these regions. It is closest to the original form of Christianity and is a nasty memetic virus. It is the same variety which is spreading in Tamilnadu and Andhra these days. In my forthcoming speech on May 12, I will explain why this virus is cancer-like in its metastasizing capability and hence cannot be ignored as anything but an existential threat.

Second, Nehru facilitated the rapid evangelization of NE. In 1942, Reginald Coupland had accompanied Cripps to India. He strove to ensure that the missionary agenda in the NE states continued uninterrupted. Nehru acquiesced.

So, in the subsequent years, when the constitution was written, tribal rights in these states were made nonexistent and the missionaries were given a free hand. Missionaries advised Nehru and he followed their diktats. Durga Das writes about this in India: From Curzon to Nehru & after see especially p. 274. That was the period when Christianity virtually decimated Hinduism and tribal religions in NE.

Nehru was not merely a white man’s asslicker but he was a self-loathing scumbag. He hated everything Indian and Hindu. He once wrote his father that he wanted to move from Cambridge to Oxford because there were too many Indians in Cambridge. He was the one responsible for the rapid Christianization of the Seven Sisters.

Reviving Hinduism and confronting Christianity would necessitate recognizing Nehru as the vanguard of the Christian memetic virus. Nehru must be criticized for what he had actively helped to achieve.

However, it is a simple fact that virtually all leaders including Sardar Patel, Rajaji, Rajendra Prasad, and Ambedkar turned a blind eye towards Nehru’s schemes in the proselytization of NE. This is why I find it extremely hard to respect any of them without reservation. The only man who stood like a lion was S. P. Mukherjee. His influence was limited to Bengal though.

Of course, there is hope. The waning of Christianity between 1931 and 1941 gives us precious insights into how we could accomplish the same results now.

A personal experience of someone who has toured Karnataka just before May 2018 Assembly Election:

Copying my personal experience while campaigning door to door in Karnataka. This matches with my exact experience in last 5 years of a very close observation.

Christians are some of the most bigoted people in India and have a visceral hatred of Modi as they think he somehow represents Indic pride.

The conversion process trains the brain at very subliminal levels to start hating Indic culture more than any guy else. The worst part is that most Christians hide behind progressive / cool/ modern /liberal tag & innocent Hindus are unable to call them out on their bluff in public forums & general whatsapp groups.

Read on to know more of my observations during this #DoortoDoor campaign:

  1. PM @narendramodi enjoys a huge fan following amongst children. They adore him. They know about him. Though still not voter base or though Modi ain’t a actor, dancer.
  2. Women: So many women admire & respect the PM. They do go to vote.

  3. Christians: A large percentage dislike PM @narendramodi. They see no good in him and just refuse to vote for him or BJP and the teachings of this come from Church/priest down.#KarnatakaElections

  4. Church takes special interest in elections and funds elections if candidates are Catholics.

  5. They are ready to vote for other religions’ candidate from another party but not for a Hindu candidate from bjp. That can’t seem to be changed at this moment. #KarnatakaElections2018

  6. I did meet Muslim families who do vote for bjp. A tiny % but not a single Christian family yet that would vote for bjp.

  7. But of course Hindus are all divided among Congress, bjp, communists! #KarnatakaElections2018


Court-fixing Corruption: Solution is to Employ ‘Artificial Intelligence’!

By: Parmanand Pandey, Advocate Supreme Court

Can there be any plausible reason for the senior Supreme Court judges to make a spectacle of the great institution by holding the Press Conference? If at all there was any, it could be described to be a ludicrous one at the worst and frivolous at the best!

There have always been differences, and even squabbling, among the judges but never before they had openly expressed their inclination for the assignment to them of particular types of cases, although it has been a common complaint for long that in the high profile cases forums are fixed. 

The senior most puisne judges have not set a good example by creating brouhaha about the ‘assignment of cases’. If their example is followed, then there would hardly be any District Court in the country where ASJs or ADJs will not be dissatisfied on this account with their District Judges and the High Court judges dissatisfied with their chief Justices. But can they hold a press conference to air their dissatisfaction?

If the same logic is stretched further, then can the executive officers in the districts be allowed to hold a press conference against their District Magistrates or can the police officers be allowed to hold press conferences against Superintendents of Police? No, it can never be permitted.

Nonetheless,  the simmering discontentment of the Supreme Court judges, which has now flared up as a red flame of fire,  should be used as an opportunity to set everything right in the Supreme Court, High Courts and all other courts in the country. 

Justice in our country, as justice Krishna Aiyar has said, is somnolent. Former President K R Narayanan was so piqued with the justice delivery system in India that he compared it with a casino, a gambling.

This is the most acidic but a truthful comment on the state of affairs of justice in India.

Legal luminary the late Chandra Kishan (CK) Daphtary, the former Attorney General of India, had written that a client from Bombay came to him and he wanted him to file a case in the Supreme Court. He told him after going the case file that there was absolutely no chance for him of getting any relief.  But on his insistence, Shri Daphtary most reluctantly filed the case. After hearing the case the for a few minutes, the judge granted him the relief. He was astounded so astounded that he could not believe in himself. His client later told him that it was a miracle of an astrologer, who told him that if you got the case filed and argued through Mr. Daphatry and you would certainly get the relief. Daphtary told him that your astrologer then knew more law than him.

If a legal luminary of Shri Daphtary’s stature did hold such an opinion in the nascent years of the Supreme Court, then one can imagine how much deterioration has taken place in the successive years. 

The only glimmer of hope is the maximum use of the modern technology of artificial intelligence to wipe out the corruption, favoritism and forum shopping. The live streaming of the court proceedings can also be introduced, in addition to the use of this measure, to ensure more transparency so as to instill people’s faith in the judiciary.   


%d bloggers like this: