We hate Congress

Wednesday, 29 June 2011

Interview with Dr. Robert E. Svoboda

Who is Dr. Robert E. Svoboda ? Like many of us don't know who he is, right.. His books Aghora 1 At the Left Hand of God, Aghora 2 Kundalini shakti, Aghora 3 The Law Of Karma are famous worldwide. Just few of his books. When we Indians are unaware of its rich culture and start seeking the western ways of living, and just living just for the sake of living, Many men and women across the globe come to India to explore its rich cultural heritage and learn to master their souls.

Dr. Robert E. Svoboda, B.A.M.S., is the first Westerner to have completed a full education in an Indian Ayurvedic medical college. His love of travel and the exotic first took him to India, away from a planned future of becoming a Western physician, where he then lived for more than a decade. Dr. Svoboda has also mastered the esoteric and complicated elements of astrology (Jyotish), as have many Ayurvedic physicians, and he is conversant in Hindi, Gujarati, Maranthi and Sanskrit. Author of 11 books on Ayurveda, he is also known in India as one of the world's foremost experts in Ayurveda. Julie Deife spoke with him this fall in Palm Springs, CA, at the Southwest Yoga Conference.

Julie: Where did you begin this journey?
Dr. Svoboda:
I was often sick as a child. I'm sure part of it had to do with having been born in what they called at that time, an oil camp. Let's just say I've been around hydrocarbons for a long time. And so I had various physical challenges when I was younger.

Julie: You became interested in medicine because of not being well as a child?
Dr. Svoboda: Yes, finding out in what ways I was not well and how might I get better and just the whole question of the nature of wellness and ill health.

Julie: Was a doctor someone who you thought had control over your health condition?
Dr. Svoboda: I'm not sure that I ever projected onto a physician an aura of some sort. It was more the attitude of being able to on the one hand evaluate a situation, come to a quick and hopefully efficient conclusion about a diagnosis and a treatment plan and then put it into effect that interested me.

Julie: Are you still the only Westerner ever to have graduated from an Ayurvedic College in India?
Dr. Svoboda: No, there are two or three others, there's, I think, a Spanish guy. There was a Japanese women, who I grant you was not a Westerner but still an alien. And then there is Kristofer Edlund from Sweden, who has just graduated from a college in Varanasi.
Julie: But it's still that unusual, even though this was twenty years ago?
Dr. Svoboda: Yes, it's still unusual, but it's not so difficult anymore. Before, there was no provision for having foreigners around. Who knew what they might do, or would they study properly, or would they all go berserk at an inopportune moment and then create some problem for the institution.
Julie: Who do you consider your teachers to be?
Dr. Svoboda: Dr. Lad was a convenient person for them to shove me off onto because he spoke English and he had recently been made the residential medical officer at the hospital. So they introduced him to me in early February of 1974. But Dr. Lad and I both regard Vaidya Nanal as our teacher. Vaidya Nanal was the son of the doctor who had established this particular college in the first place, and for many years Vaidya Nanal was the most eminent Ayurvedic doctor in Pune.

Julie: Can you talk a little about studying Ayurveda in India at that time?
Dr. Svoboda: The mode of teaching was shifting from focusing on a more strictly guru/student disciple relationship to one that was more focused on, at least externally, replicating a British style of education. Therefore they had the college, the various classes and teachers teaching those classes according to what the syllabus said they should teach. There was another group in the college who focused on the more traditional approach and there was a general sort of sense of struggle between the two. What it boiled down to was whether Ayurveda should be preserved as a system of medicine, or new knowledge and techniques from allopathy, homeopathy, etc. imported into it. Or whether in fact ideas and techniques and substances from Ayurveda should be exported into other medical systems and everything sort of integrated into one system.
Julie: Isn't that the same debate today? What do you think?
Dr. Svoboda: That is very much the same sort of debate today. You see, if there were something for Ayurveda to integrate into, if modern medicine was actually a system, instead of simply a group of therapies, then that would potentially, at least, offer the possibility of some sort of debate. But as far as I can see, there is no system of modern Western medicine. There is no clear idea of what causes health. There is no overall theory of how humans fit into the environment in which they live and as there is in Ayurveda or Chinese medicine. Ayurveda and Chinese medicine are so much more than the sum of just their therapeutic parts.
Julie: Would Western medicine be more appropriately, embraced by Ayurveda?
Dr. Svoboda: Why not? It's not like Ayurveda has not done that in the past. After all, surgery has been a part of Ayurveda from the beginning. It's a well-known fact, even among plastic surgeons, that plastic surgery was invented in India. The first plastic surgical application still appears in surgery textbooks.
Julie: Does Western reductionist thinking hamper the ability of Westerners to understand Ayurveda?
Dr. Svoboda: While reductionist thinking may have been pioneered and perfected in the West, it's certainly not anymore, if it ever was, limited to the West. Wherever people think in a reductionist manner, they will have the same sorts of problems of understanding the whole of a science like Ayurveda or yoga or whatever because they are not provided the context that is essential for encouraging all those parts to come together into one organic whole. So certainly reductionist thinking is something that is perhaps more widely practiced here and perhaps it is practiced more homogeneously here because you will not always have people and a culture as complex and detailed as India. You have people thinking in many different modes there, sometimes at the same time. Whereas over here, people try to simplify so that their thoughts are very linear. That makes it difficult to connect the various pieces of Ayurveda together for people who are studying it in a way that is not consistent with its traditional mode of being portrayed.
Julie: As Ayurveda is fairly new to Westerners seeking treatment, do Ayurvedic doctors here feel compelled to discuss the system of Ayurveda with their patients?
Dr. Svoboda: I don't know. I think what is important is that the patient should get well. And I think that it is undeniably true that some patients do better with lots of information and some patients do better with none. So it's quite possible that even though the tradition in India suggests that the doctor doesn't really communicate a lot to the patient, there will certainly be conditions where it would be better if the doctor was communicating more with the patient. I think what the most important thing is - and this applies to Ayurveda, Chinese medicine, any kind of medical system - is that the physician should be trained, first of all, that there is a difference between disease and illness. Disease is what the physician sees objectively. Illness is what the patient sees and experiences subjectively. So a good doctor will always want to compare the disease with the illness. Find out where the disease/illness has come from. Find out what is a reasonable expectation of where the person might be able to go, whether there is a radical cure possible, is it only possible to manage or is it time for the person to consider exiting or whatever.
Julie: How would you suggest communicating this to the patient?
Dr. Svoboda: A doctor can create a narrative, something that's also very important in astrology or any other kind of profession in which you are giving someone advice. The narrative explains to the person where they are today; how they got to where they are; where they are headed; whether headed is a good direction or not; what can be done about where they've headed to change the direction and the momentum so that where they've headed at least be in a good direction; and the expectation that they might have of in proceeding in that good direction and to what end. And when you add all these things together, then coming out with a plan that the patient can follow. The hope is to actualize the potential that is present, that hopefully the physician has portrayed.

Julie: What would you recommend to those just starting to learn about Ayurveda and are told that Ayurveda says you can eat meat?  Dr. Svoboda: Personally I'm a vegetarian, but I do eat dairy and eggs occasionally and I've been a vegetarian for not quite 30 years. It has been okay for me. And I believe that there are many things to be said for vegetarianism. I believe that when it is possible for a person to be a vegetarian it is better for the body of the individual, it is better for the earth as a whole and it is certainly better for all of the animals that don't need to be slaughtered. That being said, at least from what I've seen in my personal perspective, there are some people who do not do well on a diet of plants only, or plants and minerals only. I think that there probably are a certain substantial percentage of people who do better with some form of animal protein. Animal protein is also dairy and eggs.

Julie: How can those of us who choose to be vegetarian be assured that what we're doing is good for our bodies?
Dr. Svoboda: The average person is quite unaware of whether the food they are eating is digesting well or not. And if not, in what ways is it not digesting well and how can they change that. And in fact, what kind of food does the body really want? So I think even before you start asking yourself a question of should I be vegetarian or should I not be vegetarian, I think that you need to be asking yourself the question of what is it that will nourish my body most efficiently. Ayurveda is very interested in longevity, and modern science has conclusively proved, that if you take the minimum amount of food, not insufficient to what you require, but the minimum amount of food that you require, you will definitely live longer. So I think people should be first asking themselves what is the minimum amount of food that I require. What should my baseline be for that amount of food? Once you have that quantity down, what is the minimum quality of the food that I require. How much fat do I actually need, how much protein do I actually need? Of that protein, what form is that protein going to be delivered to me most efficiently? And then, how can I combine the various different portions of my diet together and deliver it to myself and how frequently during the day, at what time, in what way so it can provide me what I require.

Julie: Do you have a professional or life plan now?
Dr. Svoboda: Yes, as a matter of fact, I have a definite plan. Five years from now I have every intention to be retired. Instead of traveling as much as I do now, I will go to one place and I will sit quietly and write and study. I have many things that I still want to study, the I Ching, (and) I want to learn more about homeopathy and Chinese medicine.
Julie: What closing thoughts would you like to share?
Dr. Svoboda: I believe that people in this country need to go out and see more of the world, because people over here know almost nothing about what's going on in the rest of the world. They need to see how other people live, hear what other people think. It is too easy for us over here to believe the image of the world that the media feeds us, an image that too frequently does not have much to do with reality. And even before people go abroad, let them spend some time in solitude, preferably out in nature, the better to remember how to see and hear for yourself.
Dr. Svoboda can be reached through www.drsvoboda.com.
Two of his recent books are Ayurveda for Women (David
and Charles, Newton Abbott) and Greatness of Saturn
(Sadhana Publications).

Monday, 13 June 2011

Sonia Gandhi Ripped Apart (Part-3)

The Conspiracy 
(Click on Images to enlarge)
The bottom line observed in Sonia’s mindset is that she can disregard Indian laws with impunity. If cornered or if she becomes vulnerable to prosecution, she can always run back to Italy. In Peru, President Fujimori who all along claimed to be “born Peruvian”, when faced with a corruption charge fled to Japan with his loot and reclaimed his Japanese citizenship. That is Sonia’s bottom line fall-back option too.

In 1977, when the Janata Party defeated the Congress at the polls, and formed the government, it widely known and published that Sonia with her two children abandoned Indira Gandhi, and ran to the Italian Embassy in New Delhi and hid there. Rajiv Gandhi was a government servant then[as an Indian Airlines pilot], but he too tagged along and hid in that foreign embassy ! Such was her baneful influence on him. Rajiv did snap out Sonia’s influence after 1989, but alas he was assassinated before he could rectify the situation.

Those who have no love for India will not hesitate to plunder her treasures. Mohammed Ghori, Nadir Shah, and the British scum in the East India Company such as Robert Clive, made no secret of it. But Sonia Gandhi has been more discreet, but as greedy, in her looting of Indian treasures. When Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi were Prime Ministers, not a day passed when the PM’s security did not go to the New Delhi, or Chennai international airport to send crates and crates of Indian antiques and other treasures, unchecked by customs, to Rome. Air India and Alitalia were the chosen carriers. For organizing all this, Mr. Arjun Singh first as CM, later as Union Minister in charge of Culture, was her hatchet man.

Indian temple sculpture of gods and goddesses, antiques, pichwai paintings, shatoosh shawls, coins, and you name it, were transported to Italy to be first displayed in two shops owned by her sister, Anuskha alias Alessandra Maino Vinci. These shops located in blue-collar areas of Rivolta [shop name: Etnica] and Orbassano [shop name: Ganpati] did little business because which blue collar Italian wants to buy Indian antiques ? The shops were there to make false bills, and thereafter these treasures were taken to London for auction by Sotheby’s and Christies.

Below An article in Hindu dt.3.2.98 regarding Antique shop run by Sonia Gandhi’s family in Orbassano and Proceeings in the Delhi High Court regarding the Antique smuggling case by Dr.Subramanian Swamy.

Some of this ill-gotten money from auction went into the bank accounts of Rahul Gandhi in the National Westminister Bank and Hongkong & Shanghai Bank, London branches, but most of it found it’s way into the Gandhi family account in the Bank of America in Cayman Islands. Rahul’s expenses and tuition fees for the one year he was at Harvard, was paid from that Cayman Island account.

Below Dr.Subramanian Swamy’s letter to the then Union Finance Minister Mr.Yeshwant Sinha regarding Rahul Gandhi’s foreign bank a/c and the acknowledgement of the letter by the Minister.

What kind of people are these Gandhi-Mainos that bite the very hand of Bharat Mata that fed them and gave them a good life? How can the nation trust or tolerate such greedy thieves of national treasures?

The Maino family have had extensive business dealings with Saddam Hussein, and surprisingly since 1984 with the LTTE [“the Tamil Tigers”]. Sonia’s mother Paola Predebon Maino, and businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi are the main contacts with the Tigers. The mother used the LTTE for money laundering and Quattrocchi for selling weapons to earn commissions. Sonia’s conduit to the LTTE has been and is through Arjun Singh who uses Bangalore as the nodal point for contact.

Below Dr.Subramanian Swamy’s letter to Director, CBI enclosing a news item in Indian Express regarding receipt of funds by Congress Party from Saddam Hussain.


There is a string of circumstantial evidence pointing to the prima facie possibility that the Maino family may have contracted with the LTTE to kill Rajiv Gandhi. The family may have assured the LTTE that nothing would happen to them because they would ensure it is blamed on the Sikhs or the evidence so much fudged that no court would convict them[ the LTTE intercepted transcripts show this expectation of the LTTE]. But D.R. Karthikeyan of the CBI who led the SIT investigation got the support of Narasimha Rao, cracked the case, and succeeded in getting the LTTE convicted in the trial court, which conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1999.

Although on the involvement of some members of the Congress Party in the assassination, DRK soft peddled it ignoring a number of leads perhaps because he did not want political controversy to put road blocks on his investigation as a whole.

Sonia is quite unabashed in having political alliance with those who like MDMK, PMK, and DMK praise Rajiv Gandhi’s killers. No Indian widow would ever do that. Such circumstances are many, and raise a doubt. My investigations into Sonia’s involvement in Rajiv’s assassination is therefore necessary.

Is it not significant that the political career graph of Sonia Gandhi advances concomitantly with a series of assassinations and apparently accidental deaths?

How did Sanjay’s plane on June 23, 1980 nosedive to a crash and yet the plane fuselage failed to explode upon impact? There was no fuel ! How was that possible since flight register shows full tank before take-off ? Why was there no inquiry conducted ?

Is it not a fact that Indira Gandhi died because of loss of blood from the wounds and not directly due to a bullet impacting her head or heart ? Then is it not strange that Sonia had insisted that the bleeding Indira be driven to Lohia Hospital-- in the opposite direction to AIIMS which had a contingency protocol set up for precisely such an event ? And after reaching Lohia Hospital, did not Sonia change her mind and demand that they all drive to AIIMS thus losing 24 valuable minutes ?

The same kind of mystery surrounds the sudden deaths of Sonia’s other political roadblocks such as Rajesh Pilot, Jitendra Prasad, and Madhavrao Scindia. Such untimely deaths happened in the dark ages in Italy. Should we allow it to happen in India like dumb cattle going to slaughter?

Sonia Gandhi Ripped Apart (Part-2)


(click on images to view enlarged)
Ms. Sonia Gandhi’s background as publicized by her and her Congress Party is based on three lies in order to hide the ugly reality of her life.

First, her real name is Antonia not Sonia. This was revealed by the Italian Ambassador in New Delhi in a letter dated April 27, 1983 to the Union Home Ministry which letter has not been made public. Antonia is Sonia’s real name as stated in her birth certificate. See the Certificate No.1918 from Ambassador of Italy in India regarding Sonia’s renunciation of citizenship.

Sonia is the name given to her subsequently by her father, Stefano Maino [now deceased]. He had been a prisoner of war in Russia during World War II. Stefano had joined the Nazi army as a volunteer, as many Italian fascists had done. Sonia is a Russian not Italian name. While spending two years in a Russian jail, Sonia’s father had become quite pro-Soviet, especially after the liberating US army in Italy had confiscated all fascists’ properties including his.

Second, Sonia was not born in Orbassano as she claims in her bio data submitted to Parliament on becoming MP, but in Luciana as stated in her birth certificate. She perhaps would like to hide the place of her birth because of her father’s connection with the Nazis and Mussolini’s Fascists, and her family’s continuing connections with the Nazi-Fascists underground that is still surviving in Italy since the end of the War. Luciana is where Nazi-Fascist network is headquartered, and is on the Italian-Swiss border. There can be no other explanation for this otherwise meaningless lie.

Third, Sonia Gandhi has not studied beyond High School. But she has falsely claimed in her sworn affidavit filed as a contesting candidate before the Rae Bareli Returning Officer in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections, that she qualified and got a diploma in English from the prestigious University of Cambridge, UK. See below the Sonia Gandhi’s sworn affidavit before the Rae Barelly Returning Officer in 2004 Lok Sabha elections indicating her educational Qualification etc.

 Earlier, in 1999 in her biographical data given under her signature to the Lok Sabha Secretariat and which was published in Parliament’s Who’s Who, she had made the same false claim. Below is Sonia Gandhi’s bio data to Lok Sabha Secretariat.

But later she wrote to the Lok Sabha Speaker, after I had pointed it out to him in a written complaint of a Breach of Ethics of the Lok Sabha, that it was a “typing mistake”. This qualifies her for inclusion thus in the the Guinness Book of World Records as the longest typing mistake in history.

The truth is that Ms. Gandhi has never studied in any college anywhere. She did go to a Catholic nun--run seminary school called Maria Ausiliatrice in Giaveno [15 kms from her adopted home town of Orbassabo]. Poverty those days had forced young Italian girls to go to such missionaries and then in their teens go to UK to get jobs as cleaning maids, waitresses and au pair. The Mainos were poor those days. Sonia’s father was a mason and mother a share cropper [now the family is worth at least $ 2 billion. Below are extracts from magazine Schweizer Illustrierte of Nov. 11, 1991, issue regarding Rajiv Gandhi’s numbered Swiss bank a/c amounting to 2 billion dollars.


Sonia thus went to the town of Cambridge UK and first learnt some English in a teaching shop called Lennox School [which has since 1990 been wound up]. That is her “education”--- enough English language to get domestic help jobs.

But since in Indian society, education is socially highly valued, thus to fool the Indian public, Sonia Gandhi wilfully lied about her qualifications in Parliamentary records [which is a Breach of Ethics Rules] and in a sworn affidavit [which is criminal offence under IPC, severe enough to disqualify her from being MP]. This also violated the spirit of the Supreme Court judgment requiring candidates to reveal their educational qualification on an affidavit. Below an Article from Frontline regarding Supreme Courts direction to Election Commission to make information on candidates background wealth and education available to voters.

These three lies indicate that Ms. Sonia Gandhi has something to hide, or has a hidden agenda for India to brazenly fool Indians for some ulterior purpose. We therefore need to find out more about her.

After Sonia married Rajiv, she and her Italian family aided by friend and Snam Progetti’s New Delhi resident Ottavio Quattrocchi, went about minting money with scant regard for Indian laws and treasures. Within a few years the Mainos rose from utter poverty to become billionaires. Pioneer article on Ottavio Quattrocchi’s money laundering (Sonia’s close friend) dt. 21.12.2000.
There was no area that was left out for the rip-off.

The Supreme Court Justice A.C. Gupta Commission set up by the Janata Party government in 1977 came out with a voluminous report on the Maruti Company then owned by the Gandhi family, and has listed eight violations of FERA, Companies Act, and Foreigners Registration Act by Sonia Gandhi. She was never prosecuted, but can still be prosecuted because under Indian law, economic crimes are not subject to the statute of limitation.

In January 1980, Indira Gandhi returned as Prime Minister. The first thing Sonia did was to enroll herself as a voter. This was a gross violation of the law, enough to cause cancellation of her visa [since she was admittedly an Italian citizen then]. There was some hullabaloo in the press about it, so the Delhi Chief Electoral Officer got her name deleted in 1982. But in January 1983, she again enrolled herself as a voter even while as a foreigner [she first applied for citizenship in April 1983]

More recently, A.G. Noorani is his book: Citizen’s Rights, Judges, and State Accountability records [page 318] that Ms. Sonia Gandhi had made available to a foreign national the secret papers of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru obviously illegally in her possession, and comments as follows:

“Sonia Gandhi has no right to hold them in her possession at all, let alone decide whom to accord permission for access to them”

Such is her revealed disdain for Indian laws and that is her mindset even today. She suffers from a neo-imperialist mentality.

Sonia Gandhi Ripped Apart (Part-1)

Lets start from from the beginning..

Introduction to India

Ms. Sonia Gandhi upon learning enough English, became a waitress in Varsity Restaurant in Cambridge town. She first met Rajiv when he came to the restaurant in 1965. Rajiv was a student in the University, but could not cope with the academic rigour for long. So he had to depart in 1966 for London where he was briefly in Imperial College of Engineering as a student. Sonia too moved to London, and according my information, got a job with an outfit run by Salman Thassir, a debonair Pakistani based in Lahore, and who has a export-import company headquartered in Dubai but who spends most of his time in London. This fits the profile of a ISI functionary.

Obviously, Sonia made enough money in this job to loan Rajiv funds in London, who was living beyond his allowances [Indira herself had expressed anguish to me on this score in late 1965 when I was a young Harvard professor of economics. She had invited me to a private tea at the Guest House in Brandeis University where she was staying].

Rajiv’s letters to Sanjay filed in Delhi High Court by P.N. Lekhi clearly indicate that he was in financial debt to Sonia because he requested Sanjay also in UK then, and who obviously had more access to money, to pay off the debt.

However, Rajiv was not the only friend Sonia was seeing those days. Madhavrao Scindia and a German by name Stiegler are worth mentioning as other good friends of Sonia. Madhavrao’s friendship continued even after Sonia’s marriage to Rajiv. Scindia in 1982 was involved in a traffic accident near IIT, Delhi main gate while driving a car at 2 AM. Sonia was the only other passenger. Both were badly injured. A student of IIT who was burning midnight oil was out for a cup of coffee. He picked them up from the car, hailed an auto rickshaw and sent an injured Sonia to Mrs Indira Gandhi’s house since she insisted in not going to a hospital. Madhavrao had broken a leg and in too much pain to make any demand. He was taken to hospital by the Delhi Police who had arrived a little after Sonia had left the scene.

In later years, Madhavrao had become privately critical of Sonia, and told some close friends about his apprehensions about her. It is a pity that he died in mysterious circumstances in an as yet uninvestigated aircrash of his private plane in the year 2001. Mani Shankar Aiyar and Shiela Dikshit were to be on that flight too, but were asked to stay behind at the last moment.
The circumstance under which Rajiv hastily married Sonia in a Church in Orbassano is controversial, but that was his personal matter which has no public significance. What however is of public significance is that Indira Gandhi who was initially dead set against the marriage for reasons known to her, relented to hold a registry marriage with Hindu ceremonial trappings in New Delhi only after the pro-Soviet T.N. Kaul prevailed upon her to accept the marriage in “the larger interest of cementing Indo-Soviet Friendship”. Kaul would not have intervened unless the Soviet Union had not asked him to.

An Article by Taslima Nasreen

Kolkata/18 Nov

Banished Within and Without

Although I was not born an Indian there is very little about my appearance, my tastes, my habits and my traditions to distinguish me from a daughter of the soil. Had I been born some years earlier than I was, I would have been an Indian in every sense of the term. My father was born before partition; the strange history of this subcontinent made him a citizen of three states, his daughter a national of two. In a village in what was then East Bengal, there once lived a farmer by the name of Haradhan Sarkar, one of whose sons, Komol, probably driven to fury by zamindari oppression, converted to Islam and became Kamal. I belong to this family. Haradhan Sarkar was my great-grandfather’s father. Haradhan’s other descendents obviously moved to India either during or after partition and became citizens of this country. My grandfather, a Muslim, did not. When I was a child, the notion of the once fashionable theory of pan-Islamic had been exploded by East Pakistani Muslims fighting their West Pakistani coreligionists. Our struggle was for Bengali nationalism and secularism.

Even though I was born well after partition, the notion of undivided India held me in thrall. I wrote a number of poems and stories lamenting the loss of undivided Bengal, indeed undivided India even before I visited this country. I simply could not bring myself to accept the bit of barbed wire that kept families and friends apart even though they shared a common language and culture. What hurt most was that this wire had been secured by religion. By my early teens I had forsaken religion and turned towards secular humanism and feminism which sprang from within me and were in no way artificially imposed. My father, a man with a modern scientific outlook, encouraged me to introspect and as I grew older I broke away not just from religion but also from all the traditions and customs, indeed the very culture, which constantly oppressed, suppressed and denigrated women. When I first visited India, specifically West Bengal, in 1989, I did not for an instant think I was in a foreign land. From the moment I set foot on Indian soil, I knew I belonged here and that it was, in some fundamental way, inseparable from the land I called my own.

The reason for this was not my Hindu forebear. The reason was not that one of India’s many cultures is my own or that I speak one of her many languages or that I look Indian. It is because the values and traditions of India are embedded deeply within me. These values and traditions are a manifestation of the history of the subcontinent. I am a victim of that history. Then again, I have been enriched and enlivened by it, if one can call it so. I am a victim of its poverty, colonial legacy, faiths, communalism, violence, bloodshed, partition, migrations, exodus, riots, wars and even theories of nationhood.

The intolerance, fanaticism and bigotry of Islamic fundamentalists forced me to leave Bangladesh, herself a victim of the subcontinent’s history. I was forced to go into exile; the doors of my own country slammed shut on my face for good. Since that moment I sought refuge in India. When I was finally allowed entry, not for an instant did I think I was in an alien land. Why did I not think so; especially when every other country in Asia, Europe and America felt alien to me? Even after spending twelve years in Europe I could not think of it as my home. It took less than a year to think of India as my home. Is it because we, India and I, share a common history? Had East Bengal remained a province of undivided India would the state have tolerated an attack on basic human freedoms and values and the call for the death by hanging of a secular writer by the proponents of fundamentalist Islam and self-seeking politicians? How would a secular democracy have reacted to this threat against one of its own? Or is the burden of defending human and democratic values solely a European or American concern? The gates of India remained firmly shut when I needed her shelter the most. The Europeans welcomed me with open arms. Yet, in Europe I always considered myself a stranger, an outsider. After twelve long years in exile when I arrived in India it felt as though I had been resurrected from some lonely grave. I knew this land, I knew the people, I had grown up somewhere very similar, almost indistinguishable. I felt the need to do something for this land and its people. There was a burning desire within me to see that women become educated and independent, that they stand up for and demand their rights and freedom. I wanted my writing to invigorate and contribute in some way to the empowerment of these women who had always been oppressed and suppressed.

In the meanwhile, a few Islamic fundamentalists in Hyderabad chose to launch a physical attack upon me. The decision to attack me was motivated by the desire to gain popularity among the local masses. “A woman by the name of Taslima Nasrin has launched a vicious attack upon Islam and is all set to destroy the tenets of the faith. Therefore, Islam must be protected from this woman and the only way to do so is to kill her. Her death will bring many rewards: millions as fatwa bounty in this world, salvation and unparalleled delights in the next.” This is the manner in which Islamic fundamentalists in secular India are attempting to entice poor, uneducated, uninformed Muslims while simultaneously looking to solidify their vote bank within the community. After hearing of the incident in Hyderabad, fundamentalist leaders in West Bengal, where I live, became so excited that they wasted no time in issuing fatwas against me and calling for my head. Students from madrases who did not even know of my existence joined the fray. They knew of my blasphemy without having read a single one of my books. How did they know? Because their leaders had assured them that I had made it my mission to destroy Islam. Therefore, it was their individual and collective responsibility to protect and preserve their faith. Can one find a more perfect example of brainwashing? While their knowledge of my work may be infinitesimal, their knowledge of Islam is equally so and they have turned their faith into a commodity for their own base ends. Almost twenty per cent of India’s population is Muslim and, unfortunately, the most vocal representatives of this considerable community are fundamentalists. Educated, civilized, cultured and secular people from the Muslim community are not regarded as representative of the community . What can be a greater tragedy than this? A greater tragedy, arguably, is that I may have to endure in progressive India, indeed in West Bengal, what I had to endure in Bangladesh. I live practically under house arrest. No public place is allegedly safe for me any longer. Not even the homes of friends are above suspicion, nothing is above suspicion. Even stepping out for a walk is considered unsafe. It is felt that I should spend my days in a poorly lit room grappling with shadows.

Those who threaten to kill me are allowed by the state to spew their venom. They have tacitly been given the rights to do whatever they desire from disturbing the peace with their demonstrations to terrorizing the common man in the name of their faith. Those that oppose them and their unholy brand of communalism, those who take a stance against injustice and untruth are silenced in invidious ways. I am warned both implicitly and explicitly that, for example, a fundamentalists’ demonstration is about to take place and it would be best for all concerned if I quietly left the city. Of course, do return by all means, but only when the situation has calmed down, I am advised. But will the situation ever calm down? For the last thirteen years I have been waiting for the situation to calm down. I was told the same thing when I left Bangladesh to go into exile. I refuse to leave because to leave would be to accept defeat and hand the fundamentalists the victory they have always desired. It would spell defeat for the freedom of expression, independence of thought, democracy and secularism. I simply refuse to allow them this victory. If they are eventually victorious, the loss will be as much mine as India’s. If India gives in to the fundamentalists’ demand to deport me, the list of demands will become an endless one. A deportation today, a ban tomorrow, an execution the day after. Where will it cease? They will pursue their agenda with boundless enthusiasm knowing that victory is certain. And, of course, the secular state and its secular custodians will bow down to every fundamentalist’s every whim and fancy. Giving in to their demands is not a solution and any attempt to appease them makes them even more dangerous and pernicious.

Even in my worst nightmares I had not imagined that I would be persecuted in India as I was in Bangladesh. Persecuted by the majority in one and a minority in another, but persecuted just the same. The bigotry, the intolerance, the death threats, the terrors: all the same. I often wonder what good it would do them to kill me. The fundamentalists are very well aware that it may bring them some benefit but will do nothing for the cause of Islam. Islam will remain as it has always remained. Neither I nor any other individual has the ability to destabilize Islam. The face of fundamentalism, its language and its intentions are the same the world over: to grab civilization by the scruff of its neck and drag it back a few millennia kicking and screaming.

My world is gradually shrinking. I, who once roamed the streets without a care in the world, am now shackled. Always outspoken, I am now silenced, unable to demonstrate, left without the means of protesting for what I hold dear. Film festivals, concerts and plays all continue around me but I cannot participate. I spend my existence surrounded by walls: a prisoner. But I refuse to acknowledge this as my destiny. I still believe that one day I will be able to resume the life I once enjoyed. I still believe that India, unlike Bangladesh, will triumph over fundamentalism. I still believe that I will find shelter and solace here. The love and affection of Indians is my true shelter and solace. I still believe I will be able to spend the rest of my life here free of cares and worries. I love this country. I treat this land as my own. If I were to be ejected from this country it would amount to the cold-blooded murder of my most cherished ideals, perhaps a fate far worse than I could meet at the hands of any fundamentalist. I have nowhere to go, no country or home to return to. India is my country, India is my home. How much more will I have to endure at the hands of fundamentalists and their vote-grabbing political allies for the cardinal sin of daring to articulate the truth? If the subcontinent turns its back on me I have nowhere to go, no means to survive. Even after all that has happened, I still believe, I still dream, that for a sincere, honest, secular writer, India is the safest refuge, the only refuge.

Babri Masjid - Another non-sense on our soil

The real Truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Babur and Babri

I will not get into the debate of whether a Ram Mandir actually existed on the spot of Babri Masjid.

I will also not debate whether Sri Ram – the greatest icon for entire humanity – was actually born here or somewhere else.

I will also not argue if a Ram Mandir should be constructed here or a hospital should be made as suggested by many intellectuals.

These are points which are completely irrelevant to this issue. Unfortunately these have been the points over which time has been wasted for years and they still continue to be in prime focus.

The bottom-line however is that even if one proves that there was no Mandir on this spot or Ram took birth in some other country, still Babri Masjid would have deserved outright destruction the moment India got independence. Kar Sewaks merely did the work that government should have done 45 years ago.

And the reason is that Babri Masjid is NOT a masjid or mosque in first place. Because Babur was not a Muslim in first place. He would long have been stoned to death if he were to live today in any Muslim country!
In reality, Babur was a disgrace in name of Islam. To know Babur better, let us not depend on claims of Hindu ‘fundamentalists’ or biased ‘right-winged’ historians. Let us instead hear from the horse’s mouth. Let us review the autobiography of Babur – Baburnama – which is available in all prominent languages.
For purpose of this article, we shall refer to the English translation by Annette Susannah Beveridge published in 1922. This translation was done directly from whatever portions of original Turkish manuscript were available. These suffice to establish the true character of Babur. You can download a scanned copy from http://www.archive.org/details/baburnama017152mbp

Babur – the homosexual drunkard child molester
The autobiography clearly establishes Babur as a compulsive homosexual child molester. So those defending Babri Masjid should first clearly explain if Islam justifies homosexuality and child-molestation. If not, Babur was a disgrace in name of Islam and hence any structure constructed by him is also a disgrace in name of Islam.

1. In Page 120-121 of the biography he says that he was not much interested in his wife but was maddened by a boy named Babri. He confesses that he had not loved anyone like he was mad for this boy. He used to compose verses in love of the boy. For example: “There has been no lover except me who is so sad, passionate and insulted. And there is no one more cruel and wretched than my lover!”

2. He says that Babri used to come ‘close’ to him and that used to make Babur so excited that he could not even utter a word. Because of being intoxicated, he could not even thank Babri for his show of love.

3. Once Babur was roaming with his friends when Babri came in front of him in a lane. Babur had loss of speech and could not even look at him due to excitement. He narrated:”I get embarrassed looking at my lover. My friends leer at me and I leer someone else.”

4. He admits that in passion and desire of youth, he got mad and used to roam around naked head and naked foot without even looking at anything else.

5. He writes, ”I used to get mad in excitement and passion. I could not think that lovers have to face this. I could not go away from you, nor can I stay with you due to high level of excitement. You have made me completely mad, O my (male) lover!”

Now this proves beyond doubt that:
A. Babur and his gang were homosexual and child molesters. Punishment for these, as per Islamic Shariat, is death by stoning. This is prevalent even today in Islamic countries.

B. Babri Masjid is nothing but a memoir in name of Babur’s sex-partner.

Does Islam consider monuments created by or named after such sexual perverts to be mosques or symbols of shame?
Hence, it is clear that Babri Masjid was nothing but a symbol of homosexuality and child-molestation. I do not know who were the people behind its destruction. But whosoever they may be, they have destroyed a structure of shame for Hindus and Muslims alike.

It is a matter of greatest shame that a structure which is symbolic of India being defeated by sexual perverts was considered to be a heritage site. If this be so, then perhaps the Mumbai CST where Pakistani terrorists fired openly on innocent crowd would be the next ‘heritage’ spot to be named ‘Kasab’ bhoomi!

Babur – the barbaric killer, looter, rapist, drunkard and drug-addict
(Only a few samples from this barbaric vulgar autobiography of Babur are being provided as it is too brutal and gross for detailed reading.)

- Page 232: He writes that his gang beheaded the innocent Afghans who came to him for truce, and then created a pillar from these heads. The same feat was repeated in Hangu where 200 Afghan heads were killed to create a pillar.

- Page 370: Because people of Bajaur did not believe in Islam, more than 3000 people were murdered and their wives and children were taken as captives.

- Page 371 – Several heads of captured people were sent to Kabutl, Balkh and other places to spread news of victory.

- Page 371 – A tower of cut heads was setup on ground to celebrate victory.

- Page 371 – There was a wine party on Muharram where we drank whole night. (Translator notes here that Babur was a heavy drunkard till end of his life). A large portion of Baburnama describes these wine parties.

- Page 373 – Babur took such intoxicants once that he could not go even for prayers. He further says that had he taken such intoxicants today, he would not have produced half the intoxication.

- Page 374 – Babur fathered several children from several women in his brothel. His first wife promised to adopt all these illegitimate children, whenever they are born in future, because several children born to her could not live. It looks as if Babur’s brothel was akin to a poultry farm for chicken production!

- Page 385-388 – Babur was so happy with birth of Humayun that he went to a boat with his friends and drank wine whole night and ate narcotics. Then they fought with each other due to intoxication and party broke up. After a similar party, he vomited a lot and forgot everything by morning.

- Page 527 – A party was given in the pillared porch of the domed building in Agra (referring to Taj Mahal falsely associated with Shah Jahan)

Almost all pages of his autobiography describe how he looted, threatened, murdered and plundered wherever he went and ate ‘haram’ meat. Note that the way Babur includes all this in his autobiography implies that he was proud of all this. One would shudder to imagine what all other crimes he had committed that do not form part of this self-eulogizing biography.


A. Babur was anything but follower of Islam, going by his misdeeds that can put any human to shame. And if indeed some perverts assert that Babur was still a Muslim as per their definition of Islam, then there can be nothing more disgusting than that definition of Islam.

B. Babri Masjid, named after Babur’s homosexual partner Babri, is a symbol of sexual perversion of a murderer and rapist. To call it a ‘heritage’ and implicating those who destroyed such a symbol of ‘barbaric perversion’ demonstrates how wretched we have become down the course of history. What can be said of a family that glorifies the person who r**** their ‘mother’, makes him part of their textbooks to glorify their history and resolves to protect those sites as ‘heritage’ which relate to incidents of that r***. (Am sorry for harsh language, but nothing else could describe this worship of looters better.)

C. Muslims should embrace those forces who created a movement for destruction of this symbol of ‘shame’ which was a slur in name of Islam for centuries.

D. Muslims lost a big chance by failing to destroy Babri Masjid to safeguard their dignity as religion of ‘peace’ and ‘character’. But now they should be proactive and destroy the other two symbols of shame at Mathura and Kashi, followed by thousands of others fake mosques/ tombs erected by other pervert sex-maniac, barbarics, looters, killers and criminals like Aurangzeb, Shah Jahan, Jahangir, Akbar, Humayun and all other terrorist rulers from Muhammad Bin Qasim onwards who had NOTHING to do with Islam.

E. Muslims should stop associating themselves with perverted misdeeds of these looters and terrorists who were anything but followers of Islam. They should stop calling these criminals Muslims and their noble ancestors. Instead they should associate with our true noble ancestors like Ram and Krishna which most common Muslims actually do. They should stop visiting all those fake mosques and monuments that were constructed by these perverted terrorists. And stop believing that these perverted psychopaths did any artistic construction and realize that all these monuments in name of these invaders were actually ancient buildings captured by them.

And finally, initiate a movement to start demolishing all those fake mosques which were constructed by these terrorists as this is greatest insult to all-powerful Allah.

Q: Does it mean you justify destruction of Babri Masjid and the violence that happened afterwards?

A: Let me ask you, do you justify deeds of Babur? If not, then why have soft corner for preserving his heritage that only denigrates Islam?

Further, we are discussing a post-event scenario. This does not mean we justify the event in itself. In a mature society, this destruction would have happened peacefully and with full cooperation of Muslims. But in a society where vote-bank politics abound, this completely secular issue got colors of communalism. This is most unfortunate.
Well, if you ask us that would you destroy say, the Kashi or Mathura mosques today, our answer would be an emphatic NO. This is because we don’t want unnecessary disturbance of peace and victimization of innocents. Same goes for Ayodhya. Agniveer is completely against anything that causes torture of innocents or rise of fanatics. We believe in battle of minds played with weapons of love, rationality and compassion. Other physical weapons are too primitive for our army. So we would, on contrary, promote the true perspective so that Muslims themselves stand up to destroy these insults of Islam. That is the right way – peaceful, intellectual and just. For us Muslims and non-Muslims are artificial classifications. Everyone is our family member and this issue is anything but religious.

However given that the destruction has already happened, we believe that it was a symbol of anti-Islam that was destroyed. And hence, now that whatever has happened cannot be changed, we better leverage the most by promoting this destruction as Solidarity Day.

So instead of blowing the event out of proportion and shed crocodile tears, true well-wishers of Muslims should attempt to differentiate Islam from deeds of these perverted rulers who mocked every basic tenet of Islam. If Islam means Peace, there is no place for having soft-corners for butchers like Aurangzeb, Akbar, Babur, Ghori, Ghazni etc. Instead noble Muslims like Ashfaqullah and Hakim Suri should be made icons of Islam. Their birthplaces should be made heritage locations rather than trying to defend symbols of shame erected by homosexuals, serial killers and rapists.


 Who is RSS, are they any militant group or any terrorist group? The answer is NO. The RSS is Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Where in these three letters you find a violence? The corrupt media and politics has framed it as a millitant and communal group. It is definitely not a communal group and is a national group who work for the welfare of the nation and its citizens. What have they done which you find is anti national? India is a Hindu nation. And Hinduism is not any religion as like Islam or Christianity. It is a way of life. The rich culture of India and the Hindu ideology need to be preserved. And RSS members are just those volunteers who are working to execute it. If Hindus have still their heads high, its because of the RSS and the BJP govt and of course certain prominat Hindu Spiritual gurus.

Read about Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (Sangh or RSS as it is popularly known)was founded in 1925 by Dr. Keshava Baliram Hedgewar on Vijaydashami day. Its influence is growing ever since it was established in 1925, before India got its independence. It is one of the biggest voluntary organizations of the world having over 50 lakhs Swayamsevaks. It is engaged in uniting Hindus and thereby is aimed at taking India to its pinnacle of glory.

Dr. Hedgewar was puzzled that Mughals and British could enslave Bharat, a superior nation with its matured civilization having courageous people who were ready for sacrifices. Most of the leaders at that time were of the opinion that slavery is the root cause of all the problems of Indian society and that independence would resolve all the issues. But Dr. Hedgewar realized that independence alone can not solve all the problems of the Indian society. Dr. Hedgewar was trying to find out the problems that led to slavery. He started analysing the reasons for slavery during his participation in freedom movement. He came to the conclusion that a disorganized society incapable of responding to the challenges coherently is inherently weak and would eventually loose freedom.

As a remedy, he envisioned the need of systematic efforts towards organizing the society. Unity among the disorganized society (units) could be achieved only on a firm ground. Indian society is astonishingly diverse with many religions, language and regional differences. But it is also true that Indian way of life could achieve material prosperity combined with spiritual advancement peacefully. Social harmony is very natural among diverse groups in our society. The uniqueness of India -rooted in spiritual heritage and cultural homogeneity - is essentially Hindu. Sanatana-Dharma literally meaning 'eternal law' is seen by Jndians as that which is sustaining the universe from the time immemorial. For Hindus, all activities including public affairs is guided by all encompassing Dharma. Democracy, Secularism and Social Harmony becomes by­products of Dharmic way of life. In India, these realizations were cherished from a very long time. Therefore, nationalism in the context of India is nothing but Hindu way of life. Dr. Hedgewar foresaw the need of creating awareness and pride about Indian culture and spiritual heritage among newer generations. He decided to start a dedicated organization for this noble cause.

Dr. Hedgewar clearly articulated the nature of the organization. "It is not for attacking others, nor is it aimed at annihilating some groups. Idea is not to become prosperous by snatching others wealth. The organization would put an end to the unjust, aggressive tendencies of others. So far, looking at our weakness, others were attracted to plunder us. To ensure that nobody ever has the courage to attack us, we want to make this organization strong. If other societies do not attack us, our strength will be no harm to them. Protection of Dharma, Society and Culture is the aim of Sangh. Looking at our strength, miscreant nature of aggressor will dwindle and they shall never dare to attack us again"
Secondly, adherence to Dharmic principles is the only way to ensure lasting peace and harmony in the world. The one who is weak can not protect Dharma. Therefore the Sangh has taken up the responsibility of building a strong organized society. This is the very work of Dharma. According to Dr. Hedgewar, "Other objectives, apart from this are secondary in our view".

The RSS objective is also stated in several one liners. "Uniting Hindus", "Organizing Indian society", "Protecting Dharma", "Hindutva", "Man making", "Character building", "Commitment to take India to the highest glory" - convey different aspects of the same task taken up by the Sangh. The essential characteristic of India is referred by many terms-   Hindu, Sanatana, Vaideeka, and Bharateeyata - meaning the same in essence. Elaborating further, Jains, Buddhists are being interpreted as Hindus in the wider sense. Logically extending any Indian national - Muslim and Christian included - harmoniously mingling in the Indian society is a Hindu - according to RSS ideologues. Social Harmony is one of the fundamental principle based on which the operational direction of the Sangh is determined. Exclusive religions - insisting on single God - create social tensions. Similarly, discriminations based on castes like untouchability and atrocities in the name of caste also are harming the society. Regional and linguistic exclusivist attitudes too are affecting the social harmony. Political immaturity and corruption affect the national security. Sangh rejects them completely without any compromise. Divisive politics, unsustainable social, political, economical and environmental policies are detrimental to social fabric as well as to national security. Sangh discourages all these perversions. In particular Sangh has relentlessly opposed jihadi terrorism, religious conversions and materialistic naxalism.Sangh is committed to universally applicable value system-   believes that the entire universe is one family - "Vasudhaiva kutumbakam". The rubric of Dharma should be reflected in all facets of life is a founding principle of Sangh. A constant endeavor of Sangh and all its other organisations have been the propagation of Hindu values as the guiding principles in all sectors ranging from education to labor, sociology to economics.

Sangh is a unique social organization - in its structure and methods. Its working style looks exceptionally simple, yet appealing. It is very interesting to understand its organizational structure and working style.
Shakha - the basic unit.The basic work of Sangh is carried through Shakhas -literally meaning 'branches' in Samksrita. Shakhas are held in each iocality at a designated place - usually in the open ground - at a specified time for duration of one hour. It is a programme of daily get together. People of the locality and near by areas participate in the Shakha. They are Swayamsevaks. The place where the Shakha is conducted is called as Sanghasthan. Depending on the convenience of the people of the locality, Shakha is conducted either in the mornings or in the evenings. The Shakha activity is very structured. It starts with hoisting Bhagawadhwaj, the saffron flag. After saluting the flag, physical exercises - Surya namaskar, Yoga and other suitable ones - are practiced. Games are played by kids {Bala), boys (Kishora), youth (Taruna) and elderly (Praudha) in separate groups. Route march and martial arts are also practiced. After about 30-40rr,inutes, swayamsevaks sit in a circle on the ground and sing a patriotic song in chorus. They reflect on good sayings {Subhashita) and on quotes from great people. Issues of national importance and issues of current affairs are discussed. Finally, they pray Almighty for the upliftment of the nation to its highest glory. Bhagawa flag is lowered ending the daily Shakha. After wards, they visit neighbors and friends as part of the regular contact programme (Samparka).

Although very simple in its structure, Shakha education is very useful. It has been found that Swayamsevaks are benefited individually in the following ways.
1           Development of intimate friendship among Swayamsevaks
2           Inculcating discipline through structured activities of Shaka

3.          Improving physical stamina through physical exercise and games
4.          Broadminded thinking through Subhashita and quotes from great people.
5.          Exposure to the issues of current affairs and issues of national importance
6.          Training people in analysing the above issues from national perspective
7.          Developing communication and interpersonal skills - Public speaking, writing, reading, persuasive skills
8.          Providing an understanding of the society; its strengths and weaknesses.
       9.          Equipping Swayamsevaks to work for the society.
       10.       Leadership development

Sangh conducts yearly training camps which are residential in nature. In these training camps, Swayamsevaks live a very disciplined life from early morning to the night. They undergo structured physical and intellectual training making them better citizens. Participating Swayamsevaks take up organization and management of the camps. They cook, wash vessels, wash their clothes and participate in food distribution. Every Swayamsevak irrespective of his social, financial and educational background or irrespective of his official status participate in the training camp in the same way.

This approach has many social benefits. The diversity of caste, religion and language will not become a reason for disunity among Swayamsevaks. They find the common ground for unity - devotion to motherland, common culture, heritage and values.
Inculcation of noble personal virtues which are held high in the Hindu tradition has always been an inseparable part of the mission of Hindu consolidation. As such, qualities like personal integrity, mutual trust, respect for elders, reverence for women, devotion to God and holy men, uprightness in the dealings of public money, law-abiding nature, simplicity in living style, and absence of vices, etc., are ingrained in the Swayamsevaks as a natural outcome of Sangh training.

Admission to Sangh

Admission to Sangh is very simple. Any one could just walk in to Sanghasthan and participate in the Shakha activities wholeheartedly abiding guidelines of the Mukhyashikshak / Shikshak. Debates and discussion on issues of public affairs is always encouraged is the Shakha.

Organizational structure

There are three vertical structures in Sangh. The first one is structure needed to run daily Shakha activities. Each Shakha will have Ghatanayaks (group leaders) who inspire Swayamsevaks to attend Shakha regularly. Shikshaks (meaning instructors) conduct the activities of the daily Shakha. Mukhyashikshak (literally chief instructor) takes care of one Shakha. Shakha-Karyavaha (meaning secretary) provides guidance and help to Mukhyashikshak in conducting the Shakha activities. A group of Shakhas in a particular area is looked after by Mandal-Karyavaha. For an area larger than Mandal in rural areas there are Khanda-Karyavaha and Tehsil-Karyavaha. In urban areas, they are called Nagar-Karyavaha. Few Nagara (or Tehsil) form a Bhag (or Jilla). There will be many Bhagas (or Jillas) in a Vibhag. Prantha is formed combining many Vibhag units. Few Pranthas constitute a Kshetra.   One Karyavaha looks after each of these units.
From Tehsil or Nagar unit onwards, Sanghachalaks (Presidents) guide the activities of the organization in their respective areas. Usually, eminent people with respectable status in the society are chosen as Sanghachalaks.
Pracharaks (literally meaning - one who spreads the message) are the full time Swayamsevaks. They form the backbone of the RSS organization. They remain bachelors and ensure that they are free from their personal family responsibilities. They are not Sanyasis in the strict sense. But they dedicate their time, talent and energy for the benefit of the society and organization.   It is a lifetime mission for them.
Apart from Pracharaks, some Swayamsevaks dedicate few years of their life to the society.
One of the very senior pracharaks is elected by Akhila Bharat Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS) as Sarakaryavaha (General Secretary) who is executive chief of RSS. The term of Sarakaryavaha is for three years. The Head of RSS is Sarasanghachalak who will be nominated by his predecessor. He holds the position for lifetime or till he decides to nominate his successor.
Sarakaryavaha nominates the members of Akhila Bharata Karyakari Mandal (ABKM). He acts as Chairman for the ABKM. It is the coordinating body of all Shakhas in the country to carry out the programmes and policies laid down by ABPS. It also frames rules and by-laws in consonance with the constitution of Sangh for regulating its own affairs and also general functioning of Sangh. Akhila Bharat Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS) is the elected representatives from all states.
Flag of RSS

The flag of RSS is Bhagawadhwaj. It is saffron in color symbolizing the flames of Yagna. It is a symbol of sacrifice and valor. Sangh has accepted Bhagawadhwaj as it Guru. Swayamsevaks are guided by the high principles represented by the Bhagawa and not by any individual. It is hoisted respectfully every day during the Shakha period.

On Vyasapurnima day, Bhagawadhwaj is worshipped. Swayamsevaks perform Gurupooja and offer Dakshina to the Guru. The RSS is sustained by this offering called Gurudhakshina. In this way, the Sangh is self funded and help from any other source is not sought.
Growth of Sangh

Sangh is constantly growing from the day of its inception. Its multifaceted growth is influencing the society in a positive way. Its role in ever expanding service activities is providing impetus to the stability of the Indian society. An outline of the growth of Sangh is provided in this section.
Flexible approach of Sangh towards growth

The Sangh approach towards growth is very flexible and open minded. During initial days of Sangh, Swayamsevaks used to visit Akharas at Nagpur Vyayamashala. In 1926, formal Shakha was started in Mohitevada. Nomenclature of RSS was adopted in a meeting held on April 17, 1926. Dr. Hedgewar was elected as Cnief of Sangh unanimously on 19th December, 1926. Later in 1929, he was nominated as Sarasanghachalak. After some years, Pracharak system was introduced. Annual Training Camps were conceived to educate growing number of Swayamsevaks. Initially, the Sangh Prayer was partly Marathi and partly Hindi. Later in 1940, as Sangh expanded beyond Maharashtra, a new prayer in Sanskrit was adopted. Important Karyakartas used to meet once or twice in a year. Later, ABPS and Kendriya Mandal were created. Now Kendriya Mandal is renamed as 'Akhila Bharatiya Karyakari Mandal'. There were some modifications in the processes that are followed in the last several decades. Minor modifications in uniform, structure and approach are adopted.

Sunday, 12 June 2011

These Things Can Happen Only in India an article by Dr. Bhyrappa

Novelist, essayist, thinker and philosopher, Dr. Bhyrappa, 74, is one of India's foremost modern-day writers. Immensely popular both within India and abroad, he has been among the top-selling authors of Kannada, Hindi and Marathi, for the past several years.  Dr.Bhyrappa's works do not fit into any specific genre of contemporary Indian literature, because of the range of topics they deal with. His major works have been the centre of several public debates. His latest novel ‘Avarana’ has seen 17 reprints in a matter of a few months, since its publication. The novel deals with sensitive religious issues, including the tenuous Hindu-Muslim relationship. All his novels are well-researched and thought-provoking.

These Things Can Happen Only in India MUST READ!!!!!!!!!!

Proselytizing activities of Christian missionaries have been going on in India for four long centuries. The political ascent of Sonia Gandhi in the recent years has, however, brought much vigour into these activities -- a fact known to everyone, but deliberately overlooked by the main-stream media, both print and electronic. But a few sporadic reactions to these proselytizing activities, especially in the states of Orissa and Karnataka, have, however, received enormous, front-page publicity. National news papers and television channels, self-styled secularists and so-called intellectuals, the leftist press have, between them, so distorted and blown these reactions out of proportion that one would think that India today is on the brink of a communal catastrophe. The tenor of the media reports and the coverage makes it obvious to everyone that the representatives of the media are working in tandem with proselytizing agents. The followers of Sonia Gandhi, ‘secularists and intellectuals’ have all made the pitch shriller and done everything possible to paint Hindu organizations, Hindu institutions, Hindu religious heads, and the BJP governments black and to put India in a bad light, internationally. The central government, controlled as it is by Sonia Gandhi, is only too keen to take political advantage of the situation and to dismiss the BJP governments. The fear of a political back-lash that is likely to re-install the dismissed governments is the only thing that is holding it back.

The central government and the leftist press (especially the English press) are both quick to blame the Bajrang Dal for every communal fracas. But what precisely is the role of the Bajrang Dal in these disturbances? How many such incidents get blamed on the Dal? How many of them are the inevitable expressions of the pent up feelings of the people who have been witness to the missionary activities that lured their neighbours into Christianity through inducement and false propaganda? Answers to these pertinent questions have never been sought.

Francois Gautier, a French journalist living in India, has this to say of large-scale Christianization that is taking place under Sonia Gandhi’s dispensation.

“I am a westerner and a born Christian. I was mainly brought up in catholic schools. My uncle, Father Guy Gautier, a gem of a man, was the parish head of the beautiful Saint Jean de Montmartre church in Paris; my father, Jacques Gautier, a famous artist in France and a truly good person if there ever was one, was a fervent catholic all his life, went to church nearly every day and lived by his Christian values. Yet, I am a little uneasy when I see how much Christianity is taking over India under the reign of Sonia Gandhi: according to a 2001 census, there are about 2.34 million Christians in India; not even 2.5% of the nation, a negligible amount. Yet there are today five Christian chief ministers in Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh.

“One should add that the majority of politicians in Sonia Gandhi's closed circle are either Christians or Muslims. She seems to have no confidence in Hindus. Ambika Soni, a Christian, is General Secretary of the Congress and a very powerful person, with close access to Sonia Gandhi. Oscar Fernandes is Union Programme Implementation Minister. Margaret Alwa is the eminence grise of Maharashtra. Karnataka is virtually controlled by AK Anthony, whose secretaries are all from the Southern Christian association. Valson Thampu, a Hindu hater, is Chairman NCERT curriculum Review Committee, John Dayal, another known Hindu baiter, has been named by Sonia Gandhi in the National Integration Council ; and Kancha Ilaya, who hates Hindus, is being allowed by the Indian Government to lobby with the UN and US Congress so that caste discrimination in India is taken-up by these bodies.

“I have nothing personally against Sonia Gandhi….. But nevertheless, since she is at the top, Christian conversions in India seem to have gone in overdrive. More than 4,000 foreign Christian missionaries are involved in conversion activities across different states. In Tripura, there were no Christians at independence; there are 120.000 today, a 90% increase since 1991. The figures are even more striking in Arunachal Pradesh, where there were only 1710 Christians in 1961, but 1,2 million today, as well as 780 churches! In Andhra Pradesh, churches are coming-up every day in far flung villages and there was even an attempt to set-up one near Tirupati. Many of the North-East separatist movements, such as the Mizo or the Bodos, are not only Christian dominated, but also sometimes function with the covert backing of the missionaries…..More than 20,000 people have lost their lives to insurgency in Assam and Manipur in the past two decades. This is an India where you see today Swami Avimukteshwarananda Saraswathi of Dwarka Peeth, made to disembark from an Indian Airlines flight for carrying his holy dand, a thin bamboo stick which is a symbol of their spiritual designation, inside the aircraft cabin.

“In my country, France, a Christian majority nation , it would be unthinkable to have Hindus - or even Indian born French for that matter - in so many positions of power. Impossible also to find a non-elected, non French, non-Christian person being the absolute ruler of the country behind the scene as Sonia Gandhi is in India. Indians like to say that the greatness of India is that it accepts a foreigner and a Christian like Sonia Gandhi. But is it not rather a weakness, and an aberration? Can't we find a worthy leader amongst one billion Indians?” (Here I have quoted excerpts from his article. For the complete text please visit www.francoisgautier.com)

The pope’s visit to India was greatly celebrated in the mass media. The press and the television channels made the visit seem like a national festival. The President, the Prime Minister and his cabinet colleagues all lined up to receive the pope and gave him the kind of reception reserved for visiting heads of state. When some Hindu organizations objected to the official reception on the ground that the pope was a religious head visiting India to propagate Christianity, the English press and some pretentious groups that called themselves progressive branded these organizations fundamental. What did the pope say? He openly stated: “Just as in the first millennium the cross was planted on the soil of Europe and in the Second in that of Americas and Africa, we can pray that in the Third Christian millennium a great harvest of faith will be reaped in this vast and vital continent.” The pope made no bones about the purpose of his visit; but the press and the progressive groups that had called the Hindu organizations fundamental now maintained a studied silence.

The spread of Christianity in the countries that had earlier been following their own faiths with quiet dignity is as follows: Angola (90%), Burundi (78%), Cameroon(35%), Central African Republic (82%), Chad (33%), Congo (62%), East Timor (98%), Ethiopia (52%), Equatorial Guinea (94%), Gabon (78%), Kenya (25%), Liberia (68%), Mozambique (31%), Nigeria (52%), Papa New Guinea (97%), Philippines (84%), Rwanda (69%), South Africa(78%), South Korea(49%), Sudan (30%), Tanzania (20%), Togo (23%), Uganda (70%), Zaire (90%).

Every year about USD 145 billion comes from the US alone for Christian proselytizing work. The world over, USD 1.1 billion gets spent on proselytizing research. This research covers about 180 topics, in 300 different languages. Around 1,75,000 related books and articles get published in 500 different languages. The cost of each conversion is USD 33,000. Not that every person who gets converted to Christianity gets this money. This amount includes various items of expenditure such as research, propaganda, administration, and planning. In 1500 AD, the number of people engaged in the missionary work was 3,00,000. Today it is 64.80 crore. Of these, about 54% are non-whites. In other words, the whites have, using their vast financial resources, recruited and trained non-whites to carry out the proselytizing work, much the same way the British paid handsome salaries to Indian soldiers and used them to rule India.

In the final analysis, what end do these conversions serve? The Hindu can never grasp this question. For him spirituality is a quest for enlightenment. He seeks this enlightenment in solitude – in the hermitage in a forest glade, in a cave atop a hill, in the freezing chillness of the snow-capped Himalayan peaks. For him spirituality is not reaching out; it is a solitary inward journey. He believes that he cannot speak of a truth that he himself has not realized. Moreover, what does he preach? “Withdraw into yourself.” “Know yourself.” The only way the Hindu can get his ideas across is not through propaganda, but through discussion, which he calls Jignasa. This approach is completely alien to Christianity.

To understand Christianity, one has to know a little about prophetic religions. Each of these religions traces its origin to a prophet. Judaism, founded by Prophet Abraham, is the earliest of these religions. Christianity, founded by Jesus Christ, is modified Judaism. Islam, founded by Prophet Mohammed, has adopted many things from Judaism. There is a common thread running through these three prophetic religions: “God is not directly accessible to you. You are all sinners. God is cruel and mighty. He metes out punishment without any mercy. If you believe and follow me, you will escape eternal hell. The alternative is endless suffering in hell. You must believe and make other people believers too. Do everything you can, use force if necessary, but increase the number of believers. This is your religious duty as well as moral obligation.” Prophet Mohammed sanctioned the use of extreme force, including slavery and death, to punish the non-believers. The use of force against non-believers is an integral part of the Koran and is mentioned in it in several places. No prophet can tolerate the gods of other faiths. I have profiled this mindset in my novel ‘Avarana.’

No Satisfactory Reply:

Christ, too, is a prophet. It is generally believed that he spoke of a love and a tolerance different to Prophet Abraham’s. Some research scholars, however, doubt Christ ever existed. Even if he did, he was, they believe, nothing like the Christ portrayed in the New---------------- Testament. These doubts got compounded after the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The fact is it was Paul who structured Christianity the way it is practised today. Whatever may be the historical facts, the Bible and the Koran are the same, in their underlying principle that those who did not accept them in totality would suffer eternal hell. On the wrong assumption that Jews were responsible for the crucifying of Christ, Christians, who later became powerful, began to persecute and convert Jews. Those who refused to convert were tortured. Jews suffered heavily at the hands of other religions; they are still suffering in a way – this is, perhaps, the reason why they are not into conversions themselves. When Hitler killed nearly six million Jews in gas chambers, Pope Pious the VIII, who was aware of what was happening in Germany, did not utter a word. The Pope – now known as the Hitler Pope – could have wielded his influence and checked the unspeakable atrocities committed by Hitler, a fellow-Christian. The allegation that Pope Pious the VIII acquiesced in the killing of Jews is strong. So far Christians have not been able to give any satisfactory reply to this allegation.

The Goa Inquisition is another example of church-sponsored cruelty. The atrocities committed by the Portuguese clergy during the 250 years between 1560 and 1817 have been well documented. The Inquisition-related statute ran into 250 pages. Those who refused to become Christians would be given up to the Goa Inquisition. These people would be mercilessly tortured in a house set apart for this purpose, right in the presence of their relatives. They would be badly beaten, their eye lashes would be pulled out, their bones would be broken, and finally they would be slowly dismembered. Their cries of anguish and pain would cut through the stillness of night and fill the neighbourhood. (The horrors against humanity perpetuated by Stalin, too, can be traced to the Christian Inquisition.)

Diogo de Borba, a Christian priest, and Miguel Vaz, the Vicar General of Goa, had prepared a 41-point code to persecute Hindus. In the year 1566, Antano de Noronha, the Viceroy of Goa, issued an official proclamation to make the code operational. The proclamation was made applicable to entire Portuguese Goa. As per the proclamation, no new Hindu temple could be built in the region of Goa under the Portuguese King. No one could carry out any work relating to the upkeep of any existing Hindu temple. The penalty of violating this order was the demolition of the temple and the confiscation of all its wealth. The proclamation also authorized the spending of this wealth on any pious work.

The other stipulations included prohibition against the use of musical instruments in Hindu weddings; complete ban on the worship of Hindu deities, at the time of marriage; ban on wedding related activities, such as distribution of veelya (betel leaves, arecanut, fruits and flowers), distribution of wedding invitations and preparation for the wedding repast. There were restrictions on the wearing of the dhothi by Hindu men and the blouse by Hindu women, on observing the fortnightly ekadashi fast, on performing Hindu obsequies (including the 12th day rite), on growing tulasi in the back or the front yard of any house.

An official declaration dated September 22nd, 1570, exempted Hindus who became converts to Christianity from paying taxes for 15 years, so long as they did not use their Hindu family names or Hindu surnames.

This article is too short to list everything that went on during that time. Further details and particulars can be had from The Goa Inquisition by A.K Priolkar (Voice of India, New Delhi.) The pages 79 to 84, ibid, give all the particulars relating to the Hindu temples destroyed under the Portuguese rule. The well-researched book contains a long list of reference material chronicled or authored by the contemporary Portuguese. So far as the destruction of the Hindu temples and the cruelty meted out to Hindus, Christian rulers of India were as bad as the earlier Muslim rulers. Unable to tolerate the relentless persecution, hundreds of thousands of Hindus fled to neighbouring Kerala, Maharashtra and Karnataka. These Hindus now identify themselves as Konkani Hindus. Brahmin sub-sects such as Saraswaths and Gowd Saraswaths too fled from Goa to save themselves as well as their faith.

In his work Malabar and the Portuguese (Voice of India, New Delhi, 1997 reprint) famous historian K.M.Panickar writes about Syrian Christians (in the 12th Chapter, titled Portuguese Religious Policy in Malabar). The Hindu kings gave full freedom to Syrian Christians to practise their religion. This fact has been recorded by the Portuguese travellers of that time themselves. But the same Christians switched their loyalty to the Portuguese King, at the first opportunity, and turned against their Hindu kings who had till then sheltered and protected them. They gifted their holy insignia and ancient religious documents to Vasco da Gama, and advised him to usurp Hindu kingdoms. They promised him their complete help and suggested that he build a fortress at Granganur. For their tolerance and generosity, this is the reward the Hindu kings got from Christians. Portuguese Viceroy was later instructed to get the Cochin king himself converted to Christianity.

To State the Obvious:

Renaissance did have a civilizing effect on Christianity. The establishment of colonies in different parts of the world, the growth of technology, science and related developments brought about a change in the thinking of upper-class Europeans. They became aware of different faiths and beliefs and began to question the authority of the church. Political powers that challenged the authority of the church encouraged Protestantism. The birth of modern sciences such as physics, biology and sociology brought about new intellectual awareness and people began to reject theology. For its very survival, the church re-christened its beliefs as Christian Science and advanced an argument that faith cannot be analyzed through scientific methods.

The British, who colonized the entire Indian sub-continent, broke away from the Vatican and founded the Church of England. The British rulers were not ready to antagonize the Indian masses by directly meddling in religious affairs. For political expediency, they made it seem that the missionary activities in India had no official support. Both the Government and the missionaries, however, had a single object: to destroy the true identity of Indians, so that they could rule India without hindrance. Macaulay’s education policy, the theory that Aryans invaded India; the twisted interpretations of Indian history, varnashrama system and the smruthis that regulated social conduct; the argument that Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs were not Hindus; the Aryan-Dravidian theory, alienation of Muslims -- all these became part of the curricula at the schools and the universities. Soon a new crop of Indians, completely ignorant of the real India, grew. Missionaries, who were quick to harvest this crop, began to denigrate, quite freely now, the Hindu beliefs and practices and went about mass conversions. Those who became converts to Christianity were given government employment, out-of-turn promotions and pay increments. Meanwhile, schools, colleges and hospitals -- which were in fact tools of religious conversions -- were allowed to come-up everywhere. Large tracts of government land were given free of cost to these institutions. Indian rulers too were compelled to support these institutions. Allopathic system replaced traditional systems of medicine. The converts were conditioned by both the church and the administration to be more loyal to the British. The church ensured that the converts totally changed their names, morals, mores, outlook and life-styles to be in consonance with the Christian thinking. Unfortunately, many Indians were na├»ve enough to admire the ability of the British to build huge educational institutions, hospitals and such. (Are we not building better and bigger institutions now?) Let me, however, not overlook one point: they used and are still using their hospitals mostly to impart medical education to Christians and to help them acquire specialized knowledge.

One example will suffice to illustrate the kind of massive support the British citizens had to do everything they did. When I was young, I used to hear many elders admire the efficiency, and the spirit of adventure of the British planters, who turned, according to them, impregnable jungles into coffee estates. “How adventurous these people are!” they would loudly wonder. “Can we ever do anything like this?” they would ask. One day, a senior retired revenue officer explained to me how the British established their huge plantations. The Resident in Bangalore would send a letter to the local administration, with a ‘request’ that the planter named be given a suitable piece of land to set up a plantation. The Deputy Commissioner would forward the letter to the amildar concerned. The amildar in turn would instruct a revenue inspector to accompany the planter – or Bili Dore (the white king), as the British were commonly called -- on a horse back to identify a suitable piece of land. From the vantage point of a hill top, the Bili Dore would indicate, with his finger, the extent of land he needed. The revenue inspector would then get the land surveyed and send a report of this to his official superiors. In a matter of few weeks, the land would be conveyed to the planter. The planter would then cut all the good trees, sell the timber, and, with that money, go about establishing the plantation. The Imperial Bank of India would give him a generous loan at 1% interest per annum which the planter would repay only after the plantation began to yield. In the meantime, he would build a huge British Bungalow at a lovely spot and enjoy himself. This way, each planter came to own thousands of acres. How adventurous! Could a cowardly Indian ever think of such an adventure! Some elderly people still remember seeing the Natives and Dogs Not Allowed sign at the entrance to the Sakaleshpur Planters’ Association.

There is a vast difference between the three desert-born prophetic religions and the faiths that took birth in India. Every prophet asserts: “I am the sole representative of God and what I say is the Truth. If you do not accept the word of God expressed through me and surrender yourselves completely to me, you will suffer forever in hell. Spread the word far and wide, using force, if necessary. This is your fundamental duty as well as the only true measure of your obedience.” Prophetic religions are thus, by definition, bigoted. The Indian faith, on the other hand, has its roots in the hoary Vedas, which proclaim ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti (the truth is one; the wise speak of it in different ways.) This tenet, so completely open in its outlook, has found expression in the later faiths that branched out of the Vedic faith. Syadvada (may be/ perhaps) is, for example, one of the principles of Jainism. Nobody can ever claim that his viewpoint is the only correct viewpoint, because another viewpoint may be just as valid. Two conflicting viewpoints can, thus, be equally valid, at the same time. Jainism, in fact, recognizes the possibility of the existence of at least seven different and differing points of view, in any given context. This reasoning is just another expression of ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti. All Indian faiths accepted this tenet as valid: bigotry, the principal trait of prophetic religions, therefore, has no place in Indian thought. The Vedic rishis were not prophets. Keonaard Elst, a Belgian scholar of comparative religion, makes a mention of this fact in his Psychology of Prophetism. In the last chapter of the book, he writes that prophets, who claim a special kinship with God, are egotists; where as the Vedic rishis spoke of the universal truth that anybody could realize, at a higher level of consciousness. This higher level of consciousness, writes Keonaard Elst, can be attained by anybody, through sadhana, a structured effort that involves physical and mental training. All those who are seriously interested in the topic must read this book. Buddha, too, was not a prophet. He was a rishi who belonged to the Vedic tradition. His enlightened views are not opposed to Upanishadic thought. For more information on this subject, one can read the book A Constructive Survey of the Upanishadic Philosophy, by R.D.Ranade. It is significant that Upanishads and similar systems of thought such as Buddhism and Jainism speak of a way of life, rather than a belief: dharma as opposed to dogma.

This Is No Way to Asses the Worth of A Religion:

Ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti tenet had made the Indian mind so mellow that when the predatory religions launched their attacks on India and her beliefs, Indian religious leaders were in a state of torpor. When the soldiers of the predatory religions killed and maimed countless people, when our women and children were subjected to unspeakable atrocities, Indian religious leaders went about saying that only the attackers were bad, but not their religions – so wrapped up were they in ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti.

A story is often told of Jagadguru Sri Chandrashekara Bharathi, the pontiff of Sri Sringeri Sharadha Petham during the early part of the last century, to illustrate the tolerant attitude of Hindus. When a westerner expressed to the Swamiji his desire to embrace Hinduism, the Swamiji told him, “If you want to be a Hindu be a good Christian.” Did not the Swamiji realize the simple truth that a good Christian is one who goes about converting others to Christianity, with zeal? Was the Swamiji so completely steeped in the ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti tenet? Or was he unable to break out of the Hindu tradition of not letting non-Hindus into its fold? These questions will remain unanswered. When Muslims were engaged in forcible conversions, when the Goa Inquisition was subjecting Hindus to horrors, when the British missionaries were engaged in proselytizing work (disguised as social service), Hindu religious leaders did not bother to subject the religious texts of these predatory religions to critical examination. Vidyaranya, the principal force behind the establishment of the Vijayanagar kingdom, was aware of the cultural and political crisis India was going through, in those days; but, to the best of my knowledge, he has not analysed and written any critical commentary on the predatory religions. The only two Swamis who took up the task were, so far as I know, Swami Dayananda Saraswathi and Swami Vivekananda.

The ignorance about the predatory religions on the part of earlier as well as contemporary Hindu religious heads is shared by the majority of educated Hindus. This ignorance has acted as a stimulant to the Jihaadis willing to sacrifice their lives for a religion and the missionaries engaged in relentless proselytizing work in remote underdeveloped villages and tribal hamlets.

From the point of view of economy and equity it is, perhaps, acceptable to measure the worth of a faith by its utility value. In the West, welfare states exist. These states take care of the basic needs of their citizens, such as education, health, employment and the welfare of the aged. This situation led to the perception that religion and service were two different things. The situation in India, however, is different. When the state here has failed to meet the basic needs, the religious institutions are trying to do what the state has failed to do. A few decades ago, our people used to admire the Christian institutions saying, “Look at them. How deeply they are involved in social work. They so efficiently manage schools, hospitals and orphanages. What is our religion doing?” Now many Hindu institutions too are managing such establishments. But is it truly the responsibility of religious institutions to promote economic and social well-being? It is no doubt a laudatory thing that these institutions, at least, are doing what the state has failed to do. But what about the primary purpose of religious institutions? How many of them are promoting spiritual well-being? How many of them are the centres of philosophy? There is a void in man which material wealth cannot fill. How successful have our religious institutions been in filling this void? Spirituality is the lamp that gives out the light of morality. It is the function of religion to keep this lamp glowing. We must, therefore, measure the true worth of religion not by its utility value, but by its spiritual value.

In 1975, I was in Tokyo as an Indian representative at a UNESCO sponsored month-long seminar, on moral education. One of the activities included a visit to a few Japanese schools to study how well they were imparting moral education. One of the schools visited was a missionary school. Having got all the relevant particulars, I asked the principal of the school, a Japanese Christian, how different or special his school was, when it came to imparting moral education.

“A good question,” he said. “Our school is very special.”


“About thirty of our students embraced Christianity, after they became adults.”

Where is the courage?

For these people morality is Christianity and a non-Christian can, therefore, never be moral. A well known Muslim once said this of Mahatma Gandhi: “He may be a Mahatma but he is inferior to the worst Muslim, because he is not a Muslim.” It is difficult to convince such people that morality is independent of one’s religious beliefs. Nor can these people grasp the subtle concept that it is wrong to use money or muscle power to expand their religions.

Mother Teresa, who had won world-wide acclaim in her life time, is now on the verge of being declared a  Saint by the Vatican. I have a question about her. Did she allow the orphans in her orphanages to learn and follow their respective faiths? After her death, I visited her ashram, Missionaries of Charity, at Kolkatta, seeking an answer to this question. All the orphans sheltered in their orphanages were Christians. Evidently, every non-Christian among them had been converted to Christianity. Wasn’t Mother Teresa’s social service a proselytizing tool? With the financial help from the Vatican and the enormous publicity generated by the western media and their Indian counterpart, which merely echo the views of their western masters, Mother Teresa became larger than life-size. For a person to be declared a Saint, he must have worked at least a few miracles in his lifetime. To fulfil this Vatican requirement, a few nuns belonging to the Missionaries of Charity gave a statement that they were witness to the miracles performed by Mother Teresa. When these nuns made the statement, our intellectuals, who had publicly challenged Sai Baba to prove his credibility, kept a meaningful silence.

What I am about to narrate is what I had seen, as a boy in my village, about sixty years ago. On hearing a drum, mounted on a bull, the villagers would come out of their houses in hordes shouting, “Siddaganga Swamy has come for alms.” Sri Sri Sivakumaraswamy, who has just turned hundred and was about forty years old then, would come by a bullock cart to collect alms. The villagers would bring out sacks of millet, chillies, pulses and other farm produce, load them on to their carts and take them to Siddaganga Mutt which was about forty miles away. Large quantities of grains would, this way, reach the Mutt. The Swamiji never asked anybody for grains: the contribution was voluntary. The Swamiji would, however, say, “If there are any poor children in your village, please send them to me. We will feed and educate them.” The Mutt did not have many children then. It gradually grew in size and there are about 8,000 children, at present. True to his vow of poverty, the Swamiji would visit three to four villages a day to seek alms. What he collected went into Dasoha, the mass feeding of the poor and the hungry. The Swamiji fed and educated children belonging to all faiths, including Muslims, but he never tried to impose his faith on them. His principle was not to change their faiths, but to shape their character. Recently, when he turned hundred, the newspapers, that too local newspapers, wrote a little about him. He never got the kind of publicity that Mother Teresa got. There is, however, no need to feel bad about this. A true Yogi does not seek publicity: he is a disinterested worker. He looks on himself as an agent of god: he thinks that things get done not by him, but through him. To think that he is the doer is to inflate his ego and an egotist cannot go up the spiritual ladder. This detached approach to work is called Ishvarapranidhaana, one of the five principles in the second stage of the Yogasadhana. Malladihalli Raghavendra Swamy, Baba Amte, Dr. Sudarshan of BR Hills are a few examples of Ishvarapranidhaana. Though these people have served humanity with far greater distinction than Mother Teresa, they have not got a fraction of publicity that she got. It is understandable: their work was not the glorification of Christ, was it?

Who is there to implement?

Thousands of Christians who believe that a true Christian has to engage in conversions are today busy in proselytizing work in far flung villages and tribal areas. The foreign Christians behind them are always ready to provide money, training and political and public support, if something were to go amiss. Hindus know only to lose and they have never known what it is to gain. There is a law to regulate conversions.

This law has been upheld by courts. But who is there to enforce this law? If Hindus complain against proselytizing work, the media will immediately project them as fundamentalists. The police refuse to act. Christian organisations of various denominations, political parties having different ideologies, various organisations and pretentious intellectuals of different shades, all come together to condemn those who complain. The government will label these people anti-social and have them arrested. Right from the days of Nehru, the Congress has trampled on the feelings of Hindus with impunity and defended itself brazenly. Mahatma Gandhi’s grip on the party had loosened even before the independence. Nehru’s outlook and ideology had always been opposed to Gandhi’s. Currently this party is being controlled by a Christian lady from Vatican. It is impossible for any Congress man to survive in the party, unless he is willing to kowtow to Sonia Gandhi. When the sole aim of every Congress politician is to stay in power and to amass wealth, how can anybody expect them to have the courage to speak against Christianization under Sonia Gandhi’s leadership or to condemn conversions?. It is one of the principles of Indian communists to hate Hindus. The so-called intellectuals have been trained in the Macaulay tradition.

Non-Congress politicians like Deve Gowda, Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lallu Prasad Yadav have their eyes glued to the votes of the religious minorities. They all share an irrational hatred of the BJP, generally perceived as a pro-Hindu party. A few of these politicians have mastered the art of suspending their deeprooted religious beliefs, for petty political gains. They visit, with great fervour, temples where Vedic worship is conducted; they surreptitiously sacrifice animals to propitiate their Gods; they spend lakhs of rupees and get 21 or 51 or 101 Vedic priests to perform homas; they smear their foreheads with holy ash; and, in the end, visit a mosque to lament the fact that they are Hindus and express their desire to be born as Muslims in their next lives. If they cannot practise double standards, how can democracy survive in India? This is their concern. They fast until lunch-break in front of the statue of Mahatma Gandhi to register their opposition to those who oppose conversions.

The Dalits oppose the anti-conversion law, because they think that once such a law is in place, they can no longer threaten that they will get converted to Christianity or Islam, en masse. They, however, oppose the efforts of the church to get the benefit of reservations to Dalit Christians, because they are not willing to share the benefit with the converts. The Dalit intellectuals, having induced ordinary Dalits to discard the pictures of Hindu Gods, including that of Goddess Maramma, and to embrace Buddhism, get themselves registered as Hindu Dalits in government records. Having extended the benefit of reservation to Muslims, Samuel Rajashekar Reddy is now scheming to extend the same benefits to Christians. When Hindu religious heads present a petition for anti-conversion law, all these schemers advise the Hindu religious heads to mind their business. What exactly is the business of these religious heads, anyway? Is it just to bless innumerable politicians who fall at their feet at the time of elections and to pose for photographs with the right hand in the blessing posture?

Whose Moral Responsibility Is It?

In these circumstances, when some Hindu youth and Hindus from the regions where Christianisation is rampant try to check proselytizing activities, the media will whip themselves up into frenzy. Christians, who have, globally, established economic and military hegemony, raise this issue in every possible international forum and scream that Christians are under threat in India. In France, for example, children cannot wear religious symbols to school. To foster a sense of oneness among children, the government there has banned the wearing of head scarves by Muslim girls and the turbans by Sikh boys. When Manmohan Singh recently visited France, he requested President Sarkozy to allow Sikh boys to wear their religious symbols to school. There is nothing wrong in this. But the same man agreed with the French president that Christians in India were under threat and assured him that he would initiate stern action against the people behind communal disturbances, on his return to India – he did not even attempt putting things in perspective. He is now scheming to impose the President Rule in Orissa and Karnataka and bring his party back to power in these two states, through the back door.

In a situation like this, if a few Hindus reach the conclusion that violence is the only way to safeguard Hindu interests and later go underground to escape the law, who is to blame? When the government and the political parties lack the political will to contain Muslim terrorism, a few people might readily allow themselves to be persuaded that they have to take the initiative to protect Indian culture. After 9/11 attack not a single terrorist-related incident has taken place in the U.S., whereas in India people die in terror attacks on a daily basis. It is, perhaps, unrealistic to expect our politician, whose only aim is to cling on to power using every available means, fair or fowl, to act. It is the objective of the terrorists to unnerve the country completely through repeated terrorist attacks and then to seize power. This, indeed, was the method used by Lenin and Mao Tse-tung. Prachanda of Nepal and our home grown naxalites, too, have similar strategy. Many Hindus feel frustrated today. If a few of them take to acts of desperation, can mere orchestrated condemnation set things right?

It is time our casteist politicians and the media and the intellectuals who share this casteist mindset pondered this question and acted with a little sincerity.

Francois Gautier concludes his article with these words: “Are we heading then towards a Christian India under Sonia Gandhi's helm? It would be a tremendous loss not only to India, but also to the world. For in India, you find the only living spirituality left on this planet.”

Those interested in this subject can peruse the following works: