Even ancient Indian history, a golden period for them, was manipulated to show the Aryans, their ancestors were the indigenous people of this land. Coming to the freedom movement they first focused on Nehru, the colossus who articulated and practiced secularism in India. He was aware that practicing secularism in India is not easy as large sections of Indian society are in the grip of blind religiosity. He was the one to see the threat of majortarian (Hindu) communalism and equated it to fascism. He said minority communalism was at worst separatist. His mentor Gandhi, though murdered by the one who was trained by RSS and was working for Hindu Mahasabha, could not be demonized easily. Gandhi’s place in the global arena and in the heart of Indian people was at its peak.

Now as the communal right wing feels it is on firm feet, its ideologues are beginning the exercise of over projecting some of his shortcomings and undermining his contribution to freedom. This 30^th January 2025 as the nation was paying tributes to the father of the nation many portals were relaying videos to propagate that Gandhi’s was just one of the efforts in India getting freedom. In various podcasts and social media channels they are propagating that Gandhi’s efforts had just a marginal effect on the British leaving India.

From the last few years glorification of Godse in the form of Twitter storms for ‘Mahatma Godse Amar Rahen’ (Long Live Godse) have been witnessed painfully. Ilk of Poonam Prasun Pandey have been enacting shooting of Gandhi’s effigy and then blood dripping from it have been a common site. Observing national mourning on 30^th January by siren being sounded at 11 AM on 30 January for two-minute silence has been muted. This year the Maharashtra state circular on two-minute silence at 11 AM, did not mention even the name of Gandhi.

As we observed the Gandhi Martyrdom Day on this 30^th January many of these irritants flashed to our minds. He was given the honorific Mahatma by none other than Guru Ravindra Nath Tagore. It is propagated that Gandhi-Congress ignored Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. The fact is that Bose and Congress had some differences on strategy but the core agenda of freedom from British rule remained the same. It was Netaji who addressed Gandhi as ‘father of the Nation’. He also named one of his battalions of Azad Hind Fauz (Free India Army) as Gandhi battalion. It was Gandhi-Congress who fought the cases of prisoners of Fauz by forming a committee with top lawyers like Bhulabhai Desai, Kailashnath Katju and Jawaharlal Nehru.

Also, the propaganda that Gandhi did not do anything to save Bhagat Singh’s hanging is being instilled into the social common sense. They hide the fact that it was Gandhi who wrote to Lord Irwin to cancel Bhagat Singh’s hanging. Irwin showed his inability to accept this request as all British officers in Punjab had threatened to resign if Gandhi’s request was accepted. Most interestingly Bhagat Singh requests his father Kishan Singh to support ‘General’ of the Freedom movement (Gandhi), which his father did by working for Congress.

The attempt to undermine Gandhi comes in the form of nit-picking the three major movements which Gandhi launched. The non-cooperation movement of 1920 which was the first real attempt to involve the average people in the struggle against British, as per them was ineffective as it was withdrawn due to the Chauri Chaura incident, where the crowd had burnt to the police station killing many policemen. Also, they allege that Gandhi’s support for Khilafat was demoralizing, as it related to supporting the restoration of the Ottoman Empire in Turkey. Let’s remember it was this move which brought in Muslims in large numbers into the vortex of popular anti-British struggle. Also, Mappila (Moplah) rebellion is supposed to have been an aggressive move by Muslims against Hindus. The fact is this rebellion was a rebellion of poor Muslim farmers against Janmis (Landlords, who were mostly Hindus), and the British authorities were protecting the interests of landlords.

As far as Civil disobedience of 1930 the counter is that it just led to Gandhi–Irwin Pact. This pact was a major step in furtherance of the pressure by Indian freedom Struggle. The accusation is that the Salt March did not lead to abolition of the salt tax which it aimed at. The fact is people could produce salt after this, its illegality was lifted.

As far as the 1942 ‘Do or Die’, ‘British Quit India’, it is true that as Gandhi and the major leaders of Congress were arrested; the movement did take a violent turn. The point is, it created a huge awareness about getting freedom from the British, it came as a culmination of the long process of creating mass consciousness which began picking up after the 1920’s Non-Cooperation movement.

There is no denial that revolutionaries, Bhagat Singh and his likes, Subhash Bose’s Azad Hind Fauz and revolt of Naval ratings, were valuable add-ons to the whole process of rising consciousness among people towards longing for freedom and cementing the bonds of Indian-ness. Gandhi’s contribution is monumental as it created the fraternity, Indian-ness among the people. As Surendranath Bannerjee very aptly described it as “India: nation in the making”.

These were twin aspects of the freedom movement. One was to struggle against the British and two to ‘build a Nation: India’ through this. Gandhi understood that bringing people together is the core of the process of getting freedom. A Recent flourishing attempt by Right wing communalists totally ignores the process of people, masses waking up and constituting India, as a nation. This was the greatest endeavours for which Gandhi is really the ‘Father of the Nation’.

Also Read:

Between Hope and Despair: 75 Years of Indian Republic

When did India Get Independence?

Is Narayan Guru Part of Sanatan Dharma?

The post Attempts to Undermine Gandhi’s Contribution to Freedom Movement: Musings on Gandhi’s Martyrdom Day appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The directive principle of promoting scientific temper was being followed till late, though with lots of lacunae. Despite the massive tragedy of India’s partition and migration of lakhs of Hindus and Muslims across the border and terrible violence, the country was steered towards improvement in the basic necessities like, hunger, health, education and employment. This was the foundation which Indian leaders firmly planted in the country. The communal groups while doing their work behind the curtain and sometimes orchestrating violence still were a marginal force till 1980. The firmness in promoting social justice was appreciable, but it still could not eradicate the caste system and there was a deep-rooted bias against the Dalits.

The other major flaw was the spread of misconceptions against religious minorities, mainly Muslims, and later Christians who were also drawn into the orbit of ‘Hate and consequent’ violence. After the Shah Bano fiasco the communal forces made big strides on the pretext of appeasement of minorities (particularly Muslims). The implementation of the Mandal Commission report giving 26% of reservations to OBC’s was used as an occasion for Hindu nationalists to show their deeper designs. They pushed forward the issue of Ram Temple being underneath Babri Masjid and so Ram Temple should be built there. On this issue massive mobilization of Hindus was done. The social perceptions about Ram temple being underneath the mosque was articulated and spread far and wide by the vast network of RSS Shakhas and its affiliates. This led to the demolition of Babri mosque and orchestration of violence against Muslims, particularly in Mumbai, Surat and Bhopal.

This massive violence was to be followed by carnage in Gujarat (2002), Delhi (2019), UP (2013) and Kandhamal (2008). In Keonjhar Orissa Father Stains was burnt by Rajendra Pal (Dara Singh) of Bajrang dal and massive anti-Christian violence was unleashed in Kandhamal later. The issues of Holy Cow, beef eating and love jihad and innumerable other jihads have been floated and the intimidated Muslims are forced to live under tremendous fear. Muslim ghettos are the order of the day in many cities. Post communal violence the phenomenon which was observed was that in these areas, where the violence had taken place, BJP became stronger in the electoral arena. A sense of fear is also building up among sections of Christian community.

This trajectory from the beginning, where democratic values, pluralism were to be the core of the country, was gradually undermined. Last ten years in particular have seen the worst situation with the rule of BJP. Though nominally this rule has been under the cover of NDA, it is BJP and its agenda of Hindu Rashtra which has been ruling the roost. This period has seen the state institutions like ED, IT, Intelligence agencies, Election Commission and to some extent judiciary, have been internally fallen prey to the influence of Hindu Right and this has weakened the values of our Constitution to no end.

The increasing poverty, income disparity, worsening of education and health is extremely disturbing. The minorities are being relegated to second class citizenship. The political representation of Muslims has fallen dismally. There is not a single MP from ruling BJP and no Muslim minister in the Cabinet. Scientific temper, the part of our directive principles of Constitution, has gone for a toss. The top academic institutions are organizing lectures on producing something like ‘Master race’ (Garbh Sanskar knowledge). Various such centres have come up dishing out such advice. Even IIT Madras director praised the use of cow urine as a panacea for many diseases. The rise of Babas dishing out all round wisdom is a worrying phenomenon. Many such Babas are promoted indirectly by the state.

The values of the Constitution are being mauled subtly, with the claims that India got real Independence not on 15^th August 1947 but on 22^nd January 2024 when Ram Temple was inaugurated. The claims that the Constitution does not conform to our Civilizational principles is picking up and demand to scrap the acts like ‘Freedom of Places of Worship’ (1991) are becoming stronger by the day. This act states that the status of old places of worship will be retained as was on 15^th August 1947.

In this dismal scenario, where is the hope? The atmosphere of relief began partly with ‘Bharat Jodo’ and ‘Bharat Jodo nyay yatras’. (Unite India for Justice) There is a growing realization amongst a large section of the population that the party which promotes and uses religion for political goals is the real danger to our democracy and our Constitution. This rising awareness is running parallel to many political parties trying to form INDIA coalition.

To add on to these multiple campaigns to promote harmony and amity are being undertaken by social groups. Many of the social groups which have massively contributed to the rights of people are coming together as platforms to raise the popular awareness about dangers of misconceptions being promoted by communal parties and its parent organization. They are also trying to spread awareness about the real meaning of Constitutional morality and what it should mean for the country. The general awareness about these issues in the society is very heart-warming. These novel efforts which aim to promote fraternity and other core values of the Constitution are moving in the positive direction.

Our neighbouring countries which have followed ‘fundamentalism-communalism’ have been in a dismal condition. The communal forces are trying to push us in that direction. Need is to reinforce the values of our Constitution today with greater vigour.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Also Read:

When did India Get Independence?

Does Babasaheb’s Ideology Match With Hindu Nationalist Politics?

The post Between Hope and Despair: 75 Years of Indian Republic appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To cap it all now the new date has been thrown up for the real freedom of the country by none other than RSS Sarsanghchalak, Mohan Bhagwat. While addressing in Indore he stated that 22 January 2024 was the day when we got Independence, “the date should be celebrated as “Pratishtha Dwadashi” as the true independence of India, which had faced “parachakra” (enemy attack) for several centuries, was established on this day. The ideals and life values presented by Lord Ram, Krishna, and Shiva are included in the “self of India” and it is not at all that these are the Gods of only those people who worship them, he said.

Bhagwat further said that the invaders destroyed the temples of the country so that the “self” of India also perishes. Projecting Ram Temple Pran Pratishta (Life installation) as the panacea of all our social problems he further added, “I used to ask those people that despite talking about socialism after independence in 1947, giving slogans of ‘Garibi Hatao’ (eradicate poverty) and worrying about people’s livelihood all the time, where did India stand in the 1980s and where have countries like Israel and Japan reached?” The RSS chief said he used to tell these people that “India’s livelihood path goes through the entrance of Ram temple and they should keep this in mind.”

Bhagawat’s constructs are taking the story further and he wants to legitimize the criminal act of demolishing the Babri Mosque. Overarching the diverse cultural and religious traditions he wants to present only Lord Rama as the sole cultural symbol of this country. Even in the broad spectrum of Hinduism there are Lord Shiva, Lord Shrikrishna, Goddess Kali among others. Then we have the glorious traditions of Lord Mahavir, Gautam Buddha, Nanak and Kabir as the part of the great canvass, which India is.

While the population genetics studies clearly show that Aryans were also the migrants, before them there were other natives here. And diverse people coming here can either be seen merely as aggressors walking the path of ways of Kingdoms. Chola Kings ruled in Srilanka, or Alexander tried his best to win over India. Different dynasties and people like Shaka, Hun, Ghulams, Khalji and Mughal rules  were ‘part’ of the subcontinent. This is seen by sectarians as an attack on ‘our’ civilization while those who struggled for Independence of India from the British saw it as an intermixing of historical process; leading to the foundational diversity of the country. Jawaharlal Nehru most aptly describes it as, “some ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed, and yet no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written previously.”

As per RSS chief the aggressors wanted to demolish our soul by demolishing our temples. The temple destructions in Medieval and late early India were purely for the sake of power and wealth. The earlier attacks and conversions of Jain and Buddha places of worship were due to reaction from Brahminism. To demonize particularly the Muslim rulers, this formulation of temple destructions and many other myths have been propped up. Two examples will suffice while Aurangzeb destroyed nearly 12 temples; he also gave donations to nearly hundred Hindu temples. The eleventh century ruler of Kashmir, Raja Harshdev, appointed a special officer to uproot the idols of Gods and Goddesses, which were made of Gold and Silver or studded with diamonds and rubies.

Bhagwat and his ilk see the country through a narrow Brahminical prism. It was during the colonial period that Indian boundaries emerged. It was the colonial period which was a period of slavery. The previous conquers who ruled settled here and became a part of our national and cultural life. The British ‘Policy of Divide and rule’ planted the notion of earlier rulers being the plunderers and temple destroyers. The previous rulers who ruled did not take away our wealth outside, while the British plunder project led to impoverishment of India. The slavery was imposed by the British and the struggle against them was the freedom movement which culminated in Independence on 15th August 1947, with our Constitution being implemented on 26 January 1950.

Those deviating from this date are the followers of nationalism under the garb of religion, who are uncomfortable with the values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity of the Constitution which emerged from the freedom struggle.

He needs to introspect what the countries like Japan and Israel achieved through demolishing old holy places and building the one’s of their religion. He also needs to know that after the Ram Temple movement has picked up India’s growth and unity has seen a downward trend. There is a consistent fall in the various indices related to health, nutrition, educational status with increase in poverty levels.

The massive foundations for economic, educational, scientific and industrial prosperity were laid much before the divisive politics of Ram Temple got a boost in the decades of 1980 and 1990s. Bhagwat’s statement totally ignores the massive anti colonial movement. The reason for this is that those who stood for Hindu and Muslim nationalism were not the part of it. In a way his statement is a great insult to all those who sacrificed their live for the freedom of the country from the clutches of colonialism, the period of our slavery.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

The post When did India Get Independence? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Vijayan also pointed out that Guru’s life and work is very relevant today as violence is being orchestrated by instigating religious sentiments. Guru was not merely a religious leader, he was a great humanist. His critics are also criticizing Vijayan that during his tenure as Chief Minister Hindus are being troubled. They give the example of Sabrimala where the ruling party decided to support the Supreme Court ruling of entry of even menstrual age women to the sacred temple. BJP spokespersons are up against Vijayan for insulting Sanatan Dharma in this instance also.

The debate around Sanatan seems to have come to the fore for the second time. First it came up when Dayanidhi Stalin spoke against Sanatan. BJP-RSS is stating that Santan can’t just be reduced to caste and Chaturvarnya. Incidentally in 2022, Kerala had submitted a float for republic day parade. It displayed Narayan Guru. The jury from the Defence ministry stated that the Kerala float should display Shankarachaya from Kaladi rather than Guru. This was a major reason for rejecting the float.

As such Sanantan stands for eternal and has been used for Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism. Hindu is a religion, which has no single prophet or no single holy book. Word Hindu does not find mention in its holy scriptures. It has two major streams, Brahmanism and Shramanism. Brahmanism is based on graded inequality and patriarchal values. Ambedkar renounced this Hinduism as he felt that Hinduism is dominated by Brahmanical values. The Shramanic traditions include Nath, Ajivikas, Tantra, Bhakti traditions which are away from the values of inequality.

Today in popular parlance Sanatan Dharma and Hindu dharma are interchangeable. Some of the ideologues claim that Hinduism is not a religion but a way of life based on Dharma. As per them Dharma is not the same as religion. As such Sanatan Dharma stands for primarily Varna system, caste inequality and sticking to these traditions. Dharma is best understood as religiously ordained duties. What is being opposed by social reformers is rejection of a religion which is based on inequality.

If we take the example of Ambedkar himself, he regarded Buddha, Kabir and Jotirao Phule as his Gurus. What matters to him is rejection of inequality of caste and gender. In medieval India the saints Kabir, Tukaram, Namdeo, Narsi Mehta and their likes harped on opposition to the caste system and some of them had to face attacks from upper caste rulers. As such Narayan Guru comes in as a great social reformer against the caste system and transcends religious divides. No wonder the present ruling Government, guided by Brahminical Hinduism, can’t accept the float from Kerala which shows Narayan Guru.

Narayan Guru was a deeply humane person. During the course of his growing up he went into a deeper engagement with spiritualism and the practice of Yoga. During the course of his philosophical journey in 1888, he visited Aruvippuram where he went in meditation. It is during his stay there, that he took a rock from the river, consecrated it and called it as an idol of Shiva. This place since then has been known as Aruvippuram Shiva Temple. This act later came to be known as Aruvipuram Pratishta. It created a lot of social commotion and opposition especially from amongst the upper caste Brahmins.

They did not accept Guru’s right to consecrate the idol. He replied to them “This is not a Brahmin Shiva but an Ezhava Shiva”. This quote of his later became very famous and has been used against casteism. To fight against casteism he committed his life. His steps were a big practical means in challenging the deep set caste system. The revolutionary understanding of Guru was ‘one caste, one religion, one God’.

He goes much beyond the caste and religious divides to proclaim, single humanity. Later on he went on to open the school, which was open even to low castes, quite on the line of what Joti rao Phule did in Maharashtra. Like the principles of Ambedkar’s Kalaram Temple movement he went on to build temples which were open to all the castes.

The recent suggestion of Swami Satchitanand supported by Pinarayi Vijyan also argues that a bare torso may be medically bad as it may transmit diseases. There are many practices which need to change with time. One recalls that women did not have the right to cover their breasts. There was a breast tax if women covered the top. It was Tipu Sultan, when he annexed Kerala, when he abolished breast tax and women gained their dignity as they were permitted to cover their breasts.

Temples are a part of our community life. Such changes in dress code have to accompany the changes in social patterns. The opposition to this is like putting the clock back. The politics in the name of religion at most of the places is against the social changes and change in political values. Kerala also shows many contrasts in diverse fields. It was here that on one hand the Acharya from Kaladi Shankar countered the Buddhists in debate. The Buddhists argued on materialist ground to focus on the issues of this world, while roughly speaking Shankar tried to argue the World is an illusion supporting the idealist philosophy.

At present times in India, Kerala included, we need to follow the path of Saints like Narayan Guru and Kabir, whose humane values gave a direction of amity to the society. The conservative ‘status quo’ in most matters retards social progress.

The author is the president of the Centre for the Study of Society and Secularism. The views are personal.

The post Is Narayan Guru Part of Sanatan Dharma? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

They go on to quote Ambedkar that Swami Shraddhanand was the “the greatest and most sincere champion of the Untouchables”. They ignore the fact that that same Swami was involved in Shuddhi, ‘Conversion of Muslims to Hinduism’. This is what annoyed the Muslim clerics.

On this Shuddhi, Ambedkar responded, “If the Hindu society desires to survive, it must think not of adding to its numbers but increasing its solidarity and that means the abolition of caste. The abolition of castes is the real sangathan of the Hindus, and when sangathan is achieved by abolishing castes, shuddhi will be unnecessary.” This was parallel and opposite to Tanzim by Tablighi Jamaat, which was trying to convert Hindus into Islam. Though Shraddhanand later became part of the Indian National Congress, he was also part of Hindu Sangthan, a part of the revitalised Hindu Mahasabha committed to establishing a Hindu Nation.

New constructs are now being floated that Ambedkar and Savarkar are two sides of the same coin. True that Savarkar started the Patit Pavan temple that allows entry of Dalits into temples. As per Babasaheb, this will create a separate temple where only Dalits will visit. “An editorial in the April 12, 1929 issue of “Bahishkrit Bharat” states that Ambedkar had opposed the construction of the Patit Pawan temple from the very beginning. He believed that these temples would later be called temples for the untouchables.” However, Ambedkar did appreciate Savarkar’s efforts. Though he felt they were irrelevant.

These are some points that are being raised by Hindutva ideologues. They go hyper while describing Ambedkar’s relations with Congress. Some of them argue that after the death of Gandhi and Patel, Nehru became authoritarian and ignored the Opposition. BJP leader and Union Home Minister Amit Shah said that Ambedkar resigned from the Nehru cabinet due to “differences” with Nehru on the issue of Article 370, foreign policy and on the condition of SC/STs (Scheduled Castes/Tribes).

The crux of the issue is that the major reason for Ambedkar resigning from the cabinet was his disappointment with the shabby treatment given to the Hindu Code Bill. A huge opposition and meetings against the Bill were organised by RSS. Their volunteers demonstrated in front of Parliament. The peak of this was the massive protest in Ramlila Maidan on December 11, 1949, in which effigies of Ambedkar and Nehru were burnt.

Opposing the Hindu Code Bill, The Organiser (mouthpiece of the RSS), December 7, 1949, wrote: “We oppose the Hindu Code Bill. We oppose it because it is a derogatory measure based on alien and immoral principles. It is not a Hindu Code Bill. It is anything but Hindu.” The result of this aggressive campaign by RSS on the Hindu Code Bill was that it had to be delayed and diluted. This was the painful moment for Babasaheb, that led him to resign.

The question of Manusmriti, the Chaturvarnya, was a crucial part of the differences between Ambedkar and Savarkar to BJP. While on December 25, 1927, Babasaheb burnt the Manusmriti, the second sarsanghchalak of RSS, M.S. Golwalkar went on to write eulogies on Manusmriti.

Savarakar also detailed his support to Chaturvarnya and praised Manusmiriti: “Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshipable after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law. That is fundamental.” And “The worst [thing] about the new Constitution of Bharat is that there is nothing Bharatiya about it… [T]here is no trace of ancient Bharatiya constitutional laws, institutions, nomenclature and phraseology in it”.

The central point of difference that Ambedkar had with the Hindutva ideology is being pushed under the carpet. On October 13, 1935, Ambedkar spoke in a meeting in Yeola near Nasik, dropping a ‘bombshell’ when he said, “I will not die as a person who calls himself a Hindu!” As per him, this religion has no place for liberty, compassion and equality. In the revised edition of his book, Thoughts on Pakistan, he opposed the formation of Islamic Pakistan as that may pave the way for Hindu Raj or Rashtra and that will be a “big calamity” for its people.

As he declared this, there were many pressures on him to embrace Sikhism or Islam. Dr. Moonje from Hindu Mahasabha struck a pact with Ambedkar that if he avoided conversion to Islam, Hindu Mahasabha would not oppose his move. Babasaheb’s own deeper studies led him to choose Buddhism.

Today, the BJP is trying to project that they have “honoured” Babasaheb by erecting his statues, raising an International Museum in his memory and other symbolic things. These are identity-related issues, while the crux of Babasaheb’s values remains undermined. When the Mandal Commission (on reservations) was implemented, the BJP resorted to kamandal (Hindutva) politics. As veteran BJP leader L K Advani was arrested during his Rath Yatra (as a part of kamandal politics), BJP, which was part of the parties supporting V P Singh’s government, withdrew its support and the government fell.

Congress, along with Hindu Mahasabha, opposed Ambedkar in Lok Sabha elections. Yet, it was Congress again that ensured that he was made a Rajya Sabha member. He was made a member of the Interim Government and also Chairman of the drafting committee of the Indian Constitution.

BJP’s anxiety to prove that Ambedkar was part of Hindutva politics is, therefore, a pure concoction to derive legitimacy from the memory of a person who stood totally against their very ideology of a Hindu Nation.

What an irony, that those who stood/stand for a Hindu Nation are today trying to project Ambedkar, who was opposed to Hindu Rashtra and wanted to have democratic, secular republic, as a part of their ideological parivar!

The writer is a human rights activist, who taught at IIT Bombay. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Does Babasaheb’s Ideology Match With Hindu Nationalist Politics? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

For Cow vigilantes Modi had given a statement that murder in the name of cow is not acceptable, and just a few hours later a Muslim man was done to death on this issue. Apart from the phenomenon which is continuing. “Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday said that the significance of love, harmony, and brotherhood is central to the teachings of Lord Christ. He also urged people to strengthen these values.” Just a couple of days later the vigilante groups and even Bajrang Dal groups attacked a person in Ahmedabad who had dressed as Santa Clause and was distributing gifts. A video is going viral where two men dressed as Santa Claus being beaten up by hooligans at the Kankaria Carnival in Ahmedabad. This probably is the first year where people dressed as Santa Clause are being hauled up.

Already we had seen that Carol Singers were beaten up and since BJP came to power Carol singing has been stopped in Rashtrapati Bhavan. Bajrang Dal has also issued warnings to Hindus for their attending Christmas parties. How come these acts at the time of Christmas are seeing a new low currently?

Recently we also saw the claims on mosques that there was such a temple so it must be dug up a la Babri Masjid style. Seeing the spate of such made up claims, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat himself said that we should not keep looking for Shivling under every mosque. It is amazing that the claim is made, and dispute created in Kashi where a fountain looking structure is claimed to be a Shivling and demand for converting the mosque into a temple boosted. After the Sambhal claims, the violence followed.

Probably shaken by this and the feeling that the Supreme Leader of the supra political outfit felt it will bring loss of face for ‘RSS Combine’ and so he gave a sane looking call, “The Ram Temple was about faith, and Hindus wanted it built. But raising disputes about new sites out of hate is unacceptable,” he said. “Some people think they can become leaders of Hindus by creating new controversies. How is this allowed?”

And lo and behold most of the fringe organizations of Hindutva politics are coming forward to oppose it. One knows that RSS is a strict disciplinarian organization, and its members do not violate the commands of its leader. So who are these Senas, Dharma Sansads springing up by a dozen and going against the appeal of Bhagwat?

To cap it all, RSS’s unofficial mouth piece Organizer itself came forward to articulate the fringe elements’ demands and wrote that “Temple restorations are a quest for our identity! (TOI Dec 27, 2024). It also claims that temple restorations are for our national identity and to seek civilizational justice.

How come the hate is so pervasive that it is crossing the limits set by its own leaders? Is it that the leaders like Prime Minister Modi want the actions leading to hate to continue, as it strengthens their politics? If not then why are the perpetrators of violence are enjoying impunity? Why does the whole system from spreaders of hate speech, to those responsible for maintaining law and order and even to some extent even the judiciary have a soft corner for these criminal elements.

Having enjoyed the impunity for destroying Babri Mosques and lynching in the name of cow/beef or on killings and torture on the charge of ‘love-jihad’, now they know they can get away with their illegal acts. They feel that law may be bent to ensure that they are exonerated.

The phenomenon of Organiser opposing Bhagwat arouses curiosity. Is there a split within RSS on the issue? Bhagawat trying to talk peace and harmony and the managers of Organiser feeling that the path of Hate and violence should be pursued to its fullest depth.

There is another aspect which needs to be understood. When such phenomenon’s are unleashed for political benefits, initially the leaders congratulate themselves for their success in the electoral arena. From top to bottom diverse elements spring up and as Mr. Bhagawat said some of them ape for higher political position and influence. They are the one’s continuing their earlier political roots of which were sown by their leaders. One recalls that previous top RSS leader K. Sudarshan, who later became RSS Chief, was on the stage when Babri mosque was being demolished. This has been a classical case of crime and no punishment.

All the guilty of this dastardly crime of Babri demolition were finally given ‘not guilty’ chit and the judge who did this for the communal politics, got a plum job after his retirement.

As they say, ‘as you sow, so you reap’, the demolition of Babri process as a whole tells us that it was not just a spreading of fake narratives of temple destructions, and many myths against Muslims. The result is there for us to see, where even the Supreme authority of RSS is not being listened to. The anti-Christian campaign is just a continuation of the decade’s old propaganda against Christians that they are converting by force, fraud and allurement.

The likes of Bhagwat and Modi are witnessing right in front of their eyes that the Genie can be unleashed from the bottle, but to put it back is a task, which is close to impossible.

Related:

75 Years Down the Line, Whither Indian Constitution?

Promoting love or instilling hate and fear

Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics

The post Hate transcending the boundaries: Whither dictates by Supreme Leaders appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The ruling dispensation, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), leaders within Parliament and its ideologues outside Parliament, argued that all the ills of society and violation of constitutional values began with Jawaharlal Nehru (amendment to stop hate speech), via Indira Gandhi (the Emergency), via Rajiv Gandhi (the Shah Bano Bill) to Rahul Gandhi (tearing the Bill) have been the violators of the values of Constitution.

BJP leaders and Hindu nationalist ideologues are stating that the Indian Constitution has been based on Western values, a colonial imprint on our society; it is a break from India’s civilisation and culture. They also argue that the Constitution and its application is the appeasement of Muslim minorities for vote bank purposes that has been done by the Congress party.

As we know, the Constitution was the outcome of the values that emerged during the freedom movement. It also kept in mind the long tradition of our civilisation. The understanding of our civilisation is very different for those who participated in the freedom movement, those who stand for its ideology, and those who kept aloof from the anti-colonial movement and bowed to the British rulers.

While the freedom movement saw India as a plural nation with rich diversities, those who stood aloof saw the civilisation as Hindu civilisation. For them, pluralism is a diversion and imposition by the educated, modern leaders.

Even the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) combine forgets that what they call as Hindu civilisation is undermining the contributions of Jainism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and Sikhism to our civilisation. Even the interpretation of Lord Ram, their major icon, is so diverse for Kabir, who saw the Lord as a Universal spirit, for Gandhi, who saw Him as protector of all the people, irrespective of their religion in his famous: Ishawar Allah Tero Naam (Allah and Ishwar are same).

Jawaharlal Nehru saw India, Bharat Mata, in his book, The Discovery of India, as an “ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed, and yet no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written previously.” With great pride, he recalled the rule of Emperor Ashok, who in many edicts etched on stones, talked of equal treatment for Vedic Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Ajivikas.

This is the core difference between the RSS combine and its ideologues who see India as exclusively Brahmanical Hindu, and those like Gandhi and Nehru, as a country belonging to all the people.

The Indian Constituent Assembly mainly represented the stream that struggled against the British, the national stream, while RSS was a marginal stream sticking to “India as Brahmanical Hindu nation”. This started getting reflected immediately after the draft of the Indian Constitution. B.R Ambedkar and Nehru were cautious and stated  that the implementation of its basic structure should be ensured by those ruling the country.

Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee of BJP, in 1998, formed the Venkatachaliah Commission to review the Constitution. K.R. Narayanan, the then President of India, aptly remarked: “It is not the Constitution that has failed us; it is we who have failed the Constitution!”

This is so true, particularly after the rule of the Narendra Modi government (2014 onward). It is during this period that though the Constitution has not been changed as such, though many from the RSS camp have expressed their wish to do so, without getting reprimanded from the top leadership. This was most blatantly stated to back up their slogan of ‘400 Paar’ (More than 400 seats in Parliament in the 2024 elections), meaning that ‘we want so many seats so that we can change the Constitution.’

The blatant rise of hate speech, lately most clearly stated by a sitting Judge of Allahabad High Court, Shekhar Kumar Yadav, when participating in a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event, saying: “The country will run as per the wishes of its majority.”

Justice Yadav made the remarks while delivering an address on “Constitutional Necessity of Uniform Civil Code”. “Only what benefits the welfare and happiness of the majority will be accepted,” Yadav said.

Worse than his stating so, has been the statement of BJP’s Yogi Adityanath, the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister, who supported Yadav’ utterances. Mercifully, the Supreme Court has taken cognizance of Yadav’s communal hate speech. But, who will take cognizance of Yogi supporting him?

Commenting on the current state of affairs, Justice Aspi Chinoy made a very apt comment. He said, “The BJP being the government at the Centre and having an absolute and overwhelming majority in Parliament, sees no need to alter the de jure status of India as a secular country and Constitution. Being in control of the state and its diverse instrumentalities it has been able to achieve its goal of undermining India’s secular constitution and introduce a Hindutva based ethnocracy, even without amending and altering the de jure secular status.”

This sectarianism of the ruling BJP goes back to the time when the draft of Constitution was released. A couple of days’ later, the RSS mouthpiece (unofficial) Organiser stated on November 30, 1949. “The worst [thing] about the new Constitution of Bharat is that there is nothing Bharatiya about it… [T]here is no trace of ancient Bharatiya constitutional laws, institutions, nomenclature and phraseology in it”. Meaning that Manusmriti has been ignored by makers of the Indian Constitution!

The father of Hindu nationalist politics, V D Savarkar, was quoted by Rahul Gandhi while participating in debate, “The worst thing about the Constitution of India is that there is nothing Indian about it. Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshippable after Vedas for our Hindu nation and from which our ancient times have become the basis for our culture, customs, thought and practice.”

The crux of the matter comes to the surface when we compare the chief of the drafting committee of Indian Constitution, Ambedkar, and one of the RSS sarsanghchalak, K. Sudarshan. Ambedkar burnt the Manusmiriti and drafted the Indian Constitution. The RSS chief went on to label the Indian Constitution as being “based on Western values” and called for the need to draft the Indian Constitution based on the Hindu Holy book!

The writer is a human rights activist, who taught at IIT Bombay. The views are personal.

The post 75 Years Down the Line, Whither Indian Constitution? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is true that the degree of intensity of the policies of these two, Hindu Nationalism and Taliban, are very different but if one digs deep into the issue one can see the basic similarities in these types of politics. The Taliban policies towards women, the attitude of many Gulf countries and Iran are similar but not exactly the same. No two countries express their policies on ditto lines. Still one can discern the similarities at the level of principles. This phenomenon, fundamentalism in these countries has come up mainly from the decade of 1980s, with Ayatollah Khomeini coming to power in Iran; he changed the social landscape drastically. While at superficial level fundamentalism means going to the fundamentals, it is not just that. Fundamentalism is an imposition of selected parts of religious traditions on the society through state power. Many times this is done even not by the government which is ruling; but by dominant political tendencies.

These impositions are most conservative, backward looking and oppressive not only to women but also to the other weaker sections of society. Fundamentalism always strengthens itself by creating an internal or external enemy. In most of the Gulf countries it is women which are the main target. At places “Satan” (devil) America is so presented as the main. To this enemy all the ills of society are attributed to. In that way the Fascism which developed in Germany in particular shares this trait with fundamentalism, where Jews were labeled as cause of Germany’s ills and were targeted to the extent of Genocide, to strengthen the power of the leader, who was supreme in the state.

The traits of fundamentalism and fascism are also seeing some overlap. In Germany, women were dictated to be the beings whose role is in ‘Kitchen, Church and Children’. Depending on different countries these roles are patterned on similar lines, even in fundamentalism.

Hindu Nationalists’ most overt attack is on the Muslims (and lately Christians also). We have witnessed horrific communal violence increasing in quality and quantity over the last few decades. Beginning from the ghastly tragedy of demolishing a Mosque in Ayodhya and the consequent violence now questioning the existence of mosque is proliferating like a malignant cancer. In addition there is cow-beef lynching becoming the order of the day. Cow vigilantes are proliferating dime a dozen. The word Jihad to target the Muslim minorities has picked up and starting from love jihad, corona jihad to now land jihad has been added to the ever proliferating list!

No doubt compared to the targeting of Muslims the other implications of this fundamentalism get dwarfed in India, though they are very much similar. As far as women are concerned the Sati system has been prohibited, the last one being that of Roopkawar in the 1980s. In the Bhavari Devi case the upper caste rapist were released with the honorable Court opining that how can the upper caste accused be raping a low caste women! That’s the reflection of prevalence of caste system.

If we analyze the attitude of Hindu nationalist policies, the very notion of love jihad is very much anti women. This gives the handle to the male members of the family, to keep a watch on ‘their’ girls. The Same tendency which has been opposing the love jihad is opposed to the wearing of jeans by girls. The attitude regarding violence is best reflected in the Bilkis Bano case, where those found guilty of rape and murder were honored once they got relapsed. Mercifully they are back in jail to serve the sentence. A woman professor from Goa who wrote that Mangal Sutra is like a chain for women was hounded badly. To cap it all at theoretical level Manu Smiriti is eulogized as the ideal to be followed.

Calling all this as Hindu religiosity as she calls the present offensive of Hindu nationalists is very much off the mark. She herself cites the example of three Muslims being beaten with slippers to shout Jai Shree Ram. Here labeling all this in the category of religiosity hides the commonality of all this as having its similarity with fundamentalism. Calling Muslim fundamentalism as jihadi Islam falls too short and away from the commonalities, which is prevailing in many countries. It prevails in Egypt and many other countries as Muslim Brotherhood. Then there is the Ayatollah regime in Iran.

Hindu religiosity is practiced by millions of Hindus, who have been living with people of other religions for centuries, making India a really plural, diverse country. What began as an ideology articulated by Savarkar and Golwalkar is the base on which the present actions and policies of Hindu nationalism stand. These were totally opposed to Indian Nationalism which emerged as the part of anti colonial struggle. The greatest Hindu of the twentieth century, Mahatma Gandhi had to take three bullets on his chest for standing as a Hindu standing for plural India.

Singh is right in detesting this ‘religiosity’ but she needs to delve deep to understand this is the same pattern which ‘Jihadi Islam’ and Islamic Fundamentalists followed. Here politics derives its legitimacy from religion and mauls the society under the clothing of religion. And that is precisely what is going on in India today, be it the claim over most of the mosques, or use of bulldozers or to beat the Muslim Children in the class a la Tripta Tyagi of locking the child in the store for bringing non vegetarian food in the school, or beating the girls coming out from a pub in Mangalore!

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia

Also Read:

Sambhal Mosque, Ajmer Dargah: how deep do we plunge into the abyss?

Promoting love or instilling hate and fear

Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics

The post Taliban, Women’s Equality and Hindutva Nationalism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court judgment on the Babri mosque dispute case upheld this law, even directing that its sections must be seen as part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. The PWA is and was an important legislative measure for ensuring lasting peace then, now and in future. The act of demolition of Babri was declared as a crime in the November 2019 judgement which also opined that there was no evidence of a temple below the mosque.

An  article in SabrangIndia  says “A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there “no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

At the time of demolition led by the extreme Hindu right wing, slogans were violent and threatening. The mob that climbed on to the mosque shouted “Yeh to kewal Jhanki hai, Kashi Mathura Baaki Hai” (This is just the beginning, Kashi; Mathura will be next). Some years ago the issue of both Kashi (Gyan Vapi Masjid) and Mathura (Idgah) was brought to the fore for “surveying”, despite the Places of Religious Worship Act, 1991 being in place. Ironically, Justice Chandrachud, himself one of the autthors of the Babri-Ayodhya judgement, opened the floodgates for future “disputes” by opining that the mere prayer of a survey below an existing place of worship is not prevented by the Act!! He added that Hindus have the “right to know the ancestry of the place.” Through this cynical wordplay, the Supreme Court itself allowed those perpetrating a distorted history, to gain legitimacy.

These forces, which had previously claimed that if the three shrines at Ajodhya, Kashi and Mathura are given to them, they will close their demands for other places of Hindu worship (lying under mosques) were not to be deterred by their own assurances. Currently, over 12 cases for survey are pending in the courts. Other issues like Kamaal Maula moque, Baba Budan Giri Dargah, Haji Malang Dargah and many more mosques areal so being pursued for claims by Hindus. There is a long list. As Sambhal Jama Masjid came under hammer, the centuries old Ajmer Dargah is also being claimed by Hindu Sena, which has sprung up to claim more and more sites to be given over to Hindus.

In these cases some doubtful documents are highlighted. In many of these the role of British officials is notorious, for example Mrs. Beevridge in translation of Babarnama,puts a footnote stating without any evidence that there might have been a temple underneath the mosque. There have been numerous examples of distorting history and multiple reasons for destroying temples, plundering wealth, humiliating the rival king being the main.

If we go a bit back in history the major cause of destroying Buddhist Vihars was religion. Swami Vivekananda shared the fact that, “The temple of Jagannath is an old Buddhistic temple. We took this and others over and re-Hinduised them…”. Swami Dayanand Saraswati while describing the contribution of Shankaracharya in his tome, Satyarth Prakash wrote: “For ten years he toured all over the country, refuted Jainism and advocated the Vedic religion. All the broken images that are now-a-days dug out of the earth were broken in the time of Shankar, whilst those that are found whole here and there under the ground had been buried by the Jainis for fear of their being broken.”

According to the Buddhist narrative of ancient Indian history the last of Maurya dynasty’s Buddhist king (Ashoka being one), Brihadratha was assassinated by Pushyamitra Shunga, a Brahmin in 184 BCE thus ending the rule of a renowned Buddhist dynasty and establishing the rule of Shunga dynasty. DN Jha, outstanding ancient Indian historian, referred to Divyavadana, a Buddhist Sanskrit work from the early centuries which described how Buddhist and Jain religious places were destroyed by Pushyamitra Shunga, a great persecutor of Buddhists.

“He is said to have marched out with a large army, destroying stupas, burning monasteries and killing monks as far as Sakala, now known as Sialkot, where he announced a prize of one hundred dinars for every head of a Shramana (opposed to Vedas).”

Jha tells us that at Mathura, a flourishing town in western Uttar Pradesh during the Kushana period, some present-day Brahminical temples, such as those of Bhuteshwar and Gokarneshwar, were Buddhist sites in the ancient period.

History which has today been made the part of popular common sense is the one propagated by Hindu nationalist forces, simply because of the force of their organisation and resources. The roots of this lie in the British policy of ‘divide and rule’ which promoted Communal Historiography. In this the kings are presented as representatives of their religion. The focus is mainly on the medieval period where many Muslim kings ruled. During this period many temples were plundered for wealth and many others were demolished to humiliate the defeated kings.

What is forgotten and erased from memory is that even a ruler like Aurangzeb gave donations to Hindu temples (Kamakhaya Devi temple and Mahakal temple in Ujjain, being few of them) and Hindu Kings like Raja Harshdev appointed a special officer (Devottapatan Nayak) to plunder the wealth of temples (Kalhan, Rajtarangini). Maratha kings destroying a temple in Srirangpanam are ignored, this narrative swept under the carpet. During this period religion had very little role to play unlike the post Mauryan Period when to wipe out Buddhism, Buddha Viharas were destroyed.

Indian polity and judiciary have opened a Pandora’s Box which is deepening religious divides in the society. What is the need of the hour? To search for temple underneath every mosque or to build the ‘temples of Modern India’ as defined by Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, “while starting the construction of the Bhakra Nangal Dam to describe scientific research institutes, steel plants, power plants, dams being launched in India after independence to jumpstart scientific and industrial progress.”

The direction that India chooses will define its destiny.

Related:

Rising Tensions: Muslim Religious Sites face renewed attacks, demand for survey in Delhi’s Jama Masjid and Hanuman Chalisa

Safeguarding our shrines

How the Ajmer Shrine Brings Alive the Spirit of Ramzan & Islam

The post Sambhal Mosque, Ajmer Dargah: how deep do we plunge into the abyss? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In contrast to this the streams basing their nationalism under the mask of religion not only kept aloof from anti colonial struggle but also sowed the seeds and nurtured the plants of Hate and divisiveness. Golwalkar, the second Sarsanghchalak of RSS, wrote, “German race pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.” – We, or Our Nationhood Defined (Bharat Publications, Nagpur, 1939). This set the tone for RSS to propagate hate against Muslims and Christians in India.

This Hate was the marginal tendency for decades but has emerged as the dominating ‘social common sense’ leading to series of anti-Muslim violence, their intimidation, lynching and what not leading to the phenomenon of ghettoisation, and relegating them to secondary position in society. The process is still on and different RSS-BJP leaders have used all their ‘innovation’ to create more hatred, they have kept adding on to the catchy slogans to demonize the Muslims. ‘They can be identified by their clothes’, ‘Shamshan-Kabristhan’, series of Jihads ‘Vote jihad’ being probably the latest among them. There is a long list of these. To cap it all two of their top leaders have peaked this phenomenon in recent times.

One of them is Giriraj Singh who is amongst those leading the pack of Hate promoters. Recently he stated, “If a Muslim/Ghuspetiya (infiltrator) slaps you once, everyone should come together and slap him 100 times….Keep a sword, spear and trident in the house, worship it and if someone comes, protect yourself from him…”

Immediately, this reminds us of the father of the nation who went on to say that if someone slaps you on one Cheek put forward the other cheek. The two ideologies of Gandhi’s Indian nationalism, amity and love are being totally countered by the ideology of Hindu Nationalism by provoking violence, and hate. The downslide of amity and rise of Hate have run parallel with the divisive politics of sectarian nationalism, particularly after demolition of Babri mosque, followed by series of divisive campaigns. With BJP coming to power at center, the various wings of RSS and foot soldiers of divisive nationalism have felt that now they can enjoy impunity to the fullest extent.

Around this time another divisive leader Yogi Adityanath, the introducer of bulldozer (in)justice has also thrown up a phrase ‘Batenge to Katenge’, i.e. Hindus should remain united else they will be slaughtered. This slogan has various dimensions, and the peak organization of Hindu nationalism has approved it. “The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Saturday (October 26, 2024) backed Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s controversial remark — ‘*batenge to katenge*’, claiming that Hindus ‘will be slaughtered if divided’ — with RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale saying that the slogan, calling for unity among Hindus, is the lifetime pledge of the Sangh.”

This has multiple dimensions. One is that RSS strategists feel that the decline of BJP fortunes in last Lok Sabha elections was due to shift of dalit votes to the INDIA coalition which stood solidly with the concept of social justice and demanding the caste based census. The threat that if dalit-OBC go to INDIA coalition Hindus will be slaughtered! By whom? As per this slogan it will be by the Muslims. On the contrary they have been left in the lurch during the last 75 years. RSS combine may even prop up the non-applicable example of plight of Hindus in Bangladesh after the uprising (2024). Pakistan is always an evergreen (pun intended) example of the worsening plight of Hindus there.

We must unite as Indians were the central plank of the freedom movement. Indian was the core theme of our unity during anti colonial struggle and it gets reflected in our Constitution. Gandhi, the greatest Hindu of 20^th Century, never called for unity as Hindus. Neither the likes of Maulana Azad, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan called for unity as Muslims.

For the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is not concerned about the welfare of ‘person standing last in line’, all its ideology, actions and utterances are contrary to what united India. It ridicules Rahul Gandhi’s (RG) call for ‘Mohabbat ki dukan’ (Shop of love) and questions as to why Rahul Gandhi does not meet RSS. Counter question is, why RSS wants to meet RG? RSS knows its politics is based on Hate (Muslims, Christians and those opposed to Hindu Nationalism), while RG is trying to put life back into the Indian National ethos of love and amity as underlined in our Constitution. Why should RG be interested in ideologues against whose ideology he is trying to raise his voice?

If the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) RSS wants to RG to meet RSS, it has to drastically change its ideology of division and adopt the values of Indian Constitution, the core of which is unity as Indians and fraternity between people irrespective of their religion. It is precisely for this reason that Nehru, Gandhi’s disciple, never gave importance to RSS, it is for this reason that Indira Gandhi refused to concede RSS Chief Balasaheb Deoras’s request to meet her. RSS as per its character wants to derive its legitimacy even from those who oppose its politics.

Related:

Restating the agenda of Hindu Rashtra: RSS chief sets the tone for BJP politics

Combating Islamophobia: A task overdue

Caste Imbroglio: Changing Narrative of Hindu Right

The post Promoting love or instilling hate and fear appeared first on SabrangIndia.