रविवार, 16 मई 2021

Misappropriation of National Symbols

 Misappropriation of national symbols is the first sign of fascism to exploit national feelings, emotions and sentiments. Their names are packaged for sale in the name of nationalism, culture and religion. Some convenient scapegoat is invented to shift the blame for misdeeds committed in the society by the vested interests.

In India fascism can assume a very ugly form. Hitler invented the myth of the Aryan race and took the drastic steps to eliminate non-Nordic from the German soil. Hitler gor inspiration from Nietzsche and the Teutonic Knights when he selected Swastika for his flag as an emblem of his Nazi Party.

But in India, heros apotheosised by the R.S.S. are the ones who had been opposed or cold-shouldered by custodians of the culture R.S.S. pretends to represent Rana Pratap, Shivaji and Guru Govind Singh, are merely the misappropriated heros in whose name it exploits the national and religious feelings of Hindus. Golwalker blames Jaichand, Man Singh and Natu, who he says, betrayed Prithvi Raj, Rana Pratap and Peshwas respectively and brought about the slavery of India.

Golwalkar further says that the caste system was not the cause of India's slavery. Iran, Egypt, Rome & Europe succumbed to Muslims invasion even though there was no caste system.

Blaming Jai Chand

In "An Advanced History of India" authored by three professors, R/C. Majumdar, H.C. Ray Chaudhari and K. Dutta, write, "This is said to have added to the bitterness of their relation (Kidnapping og Jai Chand's daughter) so that Jai Chnad did not ally himself with Prithvi Raj when Muhammad of  Ghur appeared on the scene. There is no reason to believe that Jai Chand invited Muhammad of Ghur to invade India. The invasion of this country was an almost a corollary to Muhammad's complete victory over the Ghaznavids in the Punjab."

 Blaming Man Singh, but not Shakti Singh

The ruler of Amber (Jaipur), Biharimal, offered the hand of his daughter, Yodha Bai, to Akbar without asking. She exerted great influence of Akbar and his policy. She become the mother of Jahangir, Prince Salim of Anarkali fame. Akbar took Bhagwan Dass and Man Singh, son and grandson of Raja Biharimal, in service and treated them as his most trusted relatives. Bhagwan Dass married his daughter to Jahangir. Akbar also married two other Hindu Princesses of Bikaner and Jaisalmer.

In his book, "History of India" Prof. A. L. Srivastava writes, "Many a Hindu would not have his break fast without having seen the emperor's face (Darshan) in the morning. Some flattering Pandits went further and sought to establish that Akbar was the king of the world and fountainhead of religion. Akbar repaid compliment by trying to assimilate Hindu thought and by conforming to the Hindu mode of life."

Prof. Srivastava opines, "Had Hindu Pandits and princes been broadminded enough to accept him (Akbar) as a member of the Hindu faith and had made an attempt to rid Hinduism of idolatry and our society of caste system, Akbar would probably have embraced Hinduism. It is pity that our forebearer of the second half of the 16th century betrayed reluctance to receive even Akbar as a member of their creed."

Is it Man Singh to blame or is it that the Pandits are to blame? 

... Ranade was excommunicated by the Shankaracharya for criticizing the caste system and idolatry, Dayanand was administered poison and Gandhi was assassinated.

As a matter of fact, the Brahaminism cannot do the away with caste system and idolatry. The caste system bestows on them the superior status and idolatry a means of livelihood. Both together give them economic, social and political power to tule over the gullible masses so that they have to invent some imaginary foes to divert the attention of the common people away from the real bane of Indian society.

Wasn't Man Singh's allegiance to the Mughal Emperor as impeccable as R.S.S. allegiance to the British Crown? How can Golwalker blame Man Singh and exonerate himself for treason against India? What about Shakti Singh, Maharana Pratap's own brother, who joined Akbar's forces and fought against his own brother? There is no complements to Hakim Khan, a Muslim who fought against Man Singh and Shakti Singh, as a general of Maharana Pratap's army!

 Blaming Natu

 Golwalkar writes, "Even in the last-ditch battle between the Hindus and the British at Poona in 1818, it was a fellow casteman of the Peshwas, Natu by name, who lowered the Hindu flag and hoisted the British flag. There was a veritable race of such traitors but they were so because they fell prey to other temptations and for other reasons. Caste never came into the picture." 

Golwalker hides the truth and takes recourse to fallacious reasonings. ... Natu is the "castemen of the Peshwas!" Were the Peshwas not Brahmins?

Misappropriation of Chhatrapati Shivaji

Golwalkar himself admits that all the battles Shivaji fought against the Mughals and Bijapur were manned and led by our valiant brothers-untouchable. But after the crushing defeat at the third battle of Panipat and after the sad-demise of valiant Sadashive Rao and especially under the later Peshwas, "the valiant brothers of ours" were treated most inhumanly. The laws of Manu Smriti in worst form were enforced against them in Maharastra.

Shivaji's throne was usurped by the Peshwas from his descendants and the Peshwas became the rulers. Untouchables become the direct victims of this rule. The Peshwas apprehended a threat to their power if untouchables and Shivaji's descendants, who were declared Shudras, joined hands.

What the later Peshwas did to untouchables is depicted by Prof. G.S. Ghurye, "The Mahars and Mangs (untouchables) were not allowed within the gates of Poona after 3 p.m. and before 9 a.m. because before nine and after three their bodies cast long a shadow, which falling on a member of the higher castes - especially Brahmins - defiles him. A Mahar - one of the untouchables - might not spit on the road lest a pure caste Hindu should be polluted by touching it with his foot, but had to carry an earthen pot, hung from his neck, in which to spit. Further, he had to drag a thorny branch with him to wipe out his footprints and to lie at a distance prostrate on the ground if a Brahmin passed by, so that his foul shadow might not defile the holy Brahmin."

Nathu is a scapegoat. The real culprits are those who still define and practice Dharma as a corporate social existence and not as love for humanity. They have not learnt any lesson from history - if you enslave fellow members of the society, you are bound to be enslaved by others!

After carving out a vast Maratha Empire, Shivaji announced his desire for coronation in 1672. In the eyes of Mughals and other kings, Shivaji was a rebel, a successful usurper and not a king. The high caste Marathas considerd him a Shudra and not a Kshatriya. 

A conqueror without crown and a wielder of power without the sceptre of royalty neither could convince the unlettered masses to acknowledge his sovereignty, not could he enter into treaties with other kings.

Moro Pant Pingle, Shivaji's Prime Minister was a leading Brahmin. He persuaded the Maharashtrian Brahmins not to perform coronation ceremony for Shivaji as he was a Shudra.

When Shivaji come to know about this conspiracy, he bribed Gaga Bhatt (the most learned and renowned Pandit of Banaras). Gaga Bhatt then, invited other learned Brahmins to find out way to perform coronation ceremony of a Shudra. Eleven thousand Brahmins, many uninvited, assembled at Raigarh and they were shortly joined by their families. For four months, fifty thousand Brahmins were fed and entertained by Shivaji!

For four months, the eleven thousand 'learned' Brahmins regaled in religous hunts to find out a way to give Shivaji the sacred thread as he had passed the Upanayana age.

On 25th June, 1674 the eve of the coronation ceremony, was spent by the king in self-restraint and mortification of the flesh. On this day Gaga Bhatt was given 5000 hun and other learned Brahmins a hundred gold pieces each.

On the day of the coronation (June 16), Shivaji got up early in the morning, worshiped his house=hold gods and other adored the feet of Balam Bhatt, his family priest, Gaga Bhatt and other eminent Brahmins who all received gifts of ornaments and cloth.... He took his seat on the throne amidst the chanting of hymns and music of the band. Gaga Bhatt held the royal umbrella over the enthroned monarch's head and hailed him as Shivaji Chhatrapati. Shivaji then gave large sums of money to the Brahmins, other people and beggers...

Shivaji was obliged to undergo a second coronation ceremony on the 4th Oct 1674 on the suggestion of a well-known Tantrik, named Nishchal Puri Goswami who said that Gaga Bhatt has performed the ceremony at an inauspicious hour and neglected the spirits adored in the Tantra.

Karvir Shankaracharya declared that in Kaliyug, there were no Kshatriyas; only Brahmins were left as twice born. Shivaji's descendants had to contend with Puranic rites and confine themselves in their quarters when real power went in the hands of the Peshwas.

After all that the priestly class had done to Shivaji and his descendants, R.S.S is now packaging Shivaji for sale to this nation. Do the custodians of the Hindutva culture have any answer for their conduct?

Misappropriation of Guru Govind Singh

Golwalkar writes, "The great religious Guru Nanak and his successors had the foundations of the Hindu upheaval exhibiting itself in the war like Sikhs under Guru Govind Singh and Banda Bairagi. Thus once again, the great national consolidation centred around Dharma and the vicious, anti-national forces were put to rout and the flag of national victory flown triumphantly from Attack to Calcutta and from Kashmir to Kanyakumari."

The center exercise of Golwalkar looks like a master bluff of a bluff master to bluff the gullible followers. The history of Sikh Gurus does not testify the authenticity of what he harps on dharma.

A constant companion of Guru Nanak was Bhai Mardana, a Muslim. Dharma of Guru Nanak, was a revolt against the ancient Brahmanical caste system, it was a revolt against Sanskrit, the confined and monopolized language of the priestly class, and he preached his new Dharma in the simple and straight forward language of his people, it was a dharma based on Fatherhood of God and Brotherhood of Man and not on Golwalkar Bhagwan Manu's callous and inhuman code. For Guru Nanak, Allah and Ram are the same.

The gurus broke the caste barriers. The concept of pollution and untouchabiltiy, the cornerstones of Manu's Dharma, lay shattered beneath the ground of community kitchen (Langar). They gave us a new set of values and a new social vision.

When Guru Govind Singh was born in Patna in 1666, a Muslim Fakir, Sayyad Bhikkam Shah, saw a strange light in his village. He declare that, "God has sent a new light on the earth." Following the light he tried to test the new born 'prince'. He purchased two jars of sweets, one from a Hindu vendor and the other from a Muslim vendor and placed before the baby to know his preference. Smiling baby clutched the both jars and he was acknowledged the mentor of both the faiths.

Guru Govind Singh was considered as enemny of Hindu kings of northern India. Guru Govind Singh when asked why Hindu Kings were against him, he said, "The Idol worshipping hill-men want to kill me because they are idol worshippers and I am an idol breakers."

In his fight against fifteen Hindu kings of hill states, Guru Govind Singh was supported by Pir Budhu Shah, a Muslim of Sadhaura, now in Yamuna Nagar District of Haryana. He sent a contingent of seven hundred soldiers under the command of his four sons, two of them died in the battle of Bhangani. The Guru was victorious.

After his defeat at Chamkaur Sahib, Guru Govind Singh escaped. His last companion, a Sikh, Dalla by name, also deserted him. At this critical juncture the Guru was escorted, helped and saved by the Muslims.

Guru Govind Singh's family took shelter in the home of their cook, Pandit Gangu. One night Pandit Gangu stole the entire treasure of the Guru and betrayed his family to Wazir Khan, Governor of Sarhind. Both the sons of the Guru Zorawar Singh and Fateh Singh were asked by the governor to embrace Islam. They refused. On the intervention of Nawab of Malerkotla who was present at that time in the court, they were pardoned and let off. But another courtier, Pandit Sucha Nand, summoned the princes back and asked them what they would do when they would grow up. They replied that they would fight the tyrant Mughal emperor. This question was further repeated twice and their reply was the same. On this, Pandit Sucha Nand told the governor that they were the sons of a snake and deserved the death and they must be bricked alive in the wall.

The entire Sikh community is still grateful to the Muslims of Malerkolta. During the communal frenzy in the wake of the country's partition in 1947, not a single Muslim of Malerkolta was harmed in any way!

It is difficult to presume how Guru Govind Singh and Sikh Khalsa could fit in the R.S.S. ideology and Golwalker's ancient dharma. Guru's five deliverances are an anti-thesis to the R.S.S. ideology:

1. Dharam Nash or freedom from previous religious practices and customs

2. Karam Nash or the obliteration of the past bad deeds.

3. Janam Nash or giving up the family influences and caste effects

4. Sharam Nash or the disappearance of hereditary professional distinctions.

5. Bharam Nash or discarding the rituals prescribed by previous practices.

In Akal Ustat the Guru says:

"Some are HIndus while others are Muslims. Of the latter some are Shias and others are Sunnis. Man's caste should be considered as one."

"Karta, Karim, Rajak, Rahim is the same, no other distinction should be recongnized at all."

"Temples and Mosques are the same. Hindu worship and Muslim prayers are the same. All men are alike but they are under delusion."

Sikh gurus' dharma is love of humanity, which is anti-thesis of Golwalkar's definition of Dharma. Golwalkar's sixteen Samskars, without which a Hindu is not a HIndu, are in direct conflict with the five kinds of Nash of Guru Govind Singh.

The question arises why Golwalkar is trying to apotheosise and glorify Guru Govind Singh when he knows the Guru's religion does not conform to R.S.S. Hindutva.


<< Assassination of the Mahatma  Contents  God's Wrath >>

कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:

एक टिप्पणी भेजें