
It is also only in India where the snake gods (Nagas) are consecrated under an Aswatha tree that grows in close proximity to the Neem tree.
This blog aims at bringing out the past glory and history of India, Hinduism and its forgotten values and wisdom. This is not copyrighted so as to reach genuine seekers of these information. Its my prayer that only genuine seekers - and not vandals & plagiarists - come to this site.

A surprise article published in TOI on success of Modi model in Gujarat! Written by an Economist teaching in a University in the West, there is perhaps less scope for allegations of Hindutva' motives behind this article. But these days there is no guarantee that one would be spared of a Hindutva motive because not long ago I read a bunch of Indo Eurasian scholars under the guidance of Witzel blasting at a finding on cellular science as a Hindutva propaganda! Their focus of attack was a long known and repeatedly revealed finding of a research that said that the earliest life of the entire earth is found in the Vindhyas! That was seen as a Hindutva talk by these 'scholars'! Even hard evidenced scientific findings, if they support anything of ancient India – an India that was prior to Moghal and Christian influence – would be termed as Hindutva propaganda by these people.
In political India, the same picture can be seen. If anyone has a passion for 'my land' and 'my country' and see people as 'one people' of 'my land', that is 'Communal'. But if one wants to be 'secular', one must pick out Muslims and Christians from the 'one people' concept of population. From media anchors to Mulayam-likes the mantra is to keep 'communal forces' at bay in order to be 'secular'. This brand of secularism has no connection to good economics or growth as the statistics of the Modi model shows. The growth is both vertical and horizontal when you have 'one people' concept. If the nation wants good economics and growth, let them follow the Gujarat model. The author wants this model for his native state of Rajasthan. When it will spread to India as a whole remains with the people who know this difference and are mature enough to see thorough the games of 'secular' politicians. Have the people reached the threshold of such maturity?
- Jayasree
*******************
From
The Gujarat miracle:
There is no denying the major economic advances the state has made under Narendra Modi
By
Arvind Panagariya
The writer is professor of economics at Columbia University.
I recently wrote about why the accomplishments of chief minister Nitish Kumar - that at last bring hope to Bihar - could not be underestimated. Today, i turn to Gujarat, which has been generally more prosperous in the post-Independence era and has performed impressively under chief minister Narendra Modi. Critics who insist on viewing everything related to Modi through the 2002 lens and, thus, fail to separate their economics from politics have fallen short of 20/20 vision.
Begin with growth. The relevant comparison here is with larger, richer states. Based on per-capita Net State Domestic Product (NSDP) in 2009-10, Gujarat ranks third, behind Maharashtra and Haryana but ahead of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab and Karnataka in that order.
Modi came to office in October 2001. In the following eight years spanning 2002-03 to 2009-10 (2002-10), NSDP grew at 10.5% annual rate in Gujarat and at 10.1% in the nearest competitor, Maharashtra. The rate during the preceding eight years, 1994-02, was 5.9%, behind only Haryana's 6.3%. Modi inherited a vibrant economy and has taken it to new heights. Gujarat had ranked sixth in terms of per-capita NSDP in 2002-03. Outperforming Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Punjab, it moved up to the third spot in 2005-06 and has remained there.
While the performance in agriculture has received the greatest attention, perhaps the most exceptional feature of Gujarat's success has been the performance of manufacturing. Compared with the national average of 15%, manufacturing in Gujarat accounted for 27.4% of the Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) in 2009-10.
Critics might say that this proportion has risen only one percentage point since 2002-03. But given the uphill battle manufacturing faces in India, even maintaining the share at this high level is a challenge. In all comparator states, this share has been below 20%. Moreover, with the exception of Punjab, none has been able to raise it by more than a percentage point during 2002-10.
With a high and rapidly rising per-capita income, it should come as no surprise that Gujarat has a significantly lower poverty ratio than India as a whole and it is fast declining. Based on the Tendulkar poverty lines and methodology, overall poverty in Gujarat fell by only six percentage points during 11 years between 1993-94 and 2004-05. But during just five years between 2004-05 and 2009-10, it fell an impressive nine percentage points. In 2009-10, the poverty ratio in Gujarat at 23% was almost seven percentage points below the national average.
The decline in poverty has been observed across all major social groups. My ongoing rese-arch with Megha Mukim finds the poverty ratio for the scheduled castes tumbling from 40.1% in 2004-05 to 21.8% in 2009-10. The decline has been less sharp for the more numerous scheduled tribes (ST) - from 54.7% in 2004-05 to 47.6% in 2009-10. Given the continued high absolute level of ST poverty, the state must think of imaginative ways to bring the fruits of growth to the tribal belts.
Critics frequently deride the exceptional growth in Gujarat by pointing to its lack of achievement in the social sectors. But they often do so by focussing on selective indicators. A consideration of a broad set of indicators hardly offers an indictment of the state even in social sectors.
The critics' case is particularly weak in education. Gujarat added 10 percentage points to the literacy rate during 2001-11, more than any other comparator state. At 79.3%, the literacy rate now stands one percentage point behind Tamil Nadu and three percentage points behind Maharashtra. Indeed, once we take into account the low literacy level of Gujarat at Independence, its progress looks more impressive than that of even Kerala.
To eliminate the bias that may result from differences in initial levels of literacy in evaluating the improvements in literacy, compare the three-decade progress in Gujarat during 1981-2011 to that in Maharashtra during 1971-2001 and Kerala during 1951-81. The initial literacy rates in these states during these periods were almost equal: 45% in Gujarat in 1981, 46% in Maharashtra in 1971 and 47% in Kerala in 1951. But three decades later, larger improvements by Gujarat had taken it ahead of both Maharashtra and Kerala.
On a longer-term basis, Gujarat's gains in the vital health statistics are nothing to scoff at either. If the levels of these statistics compare unfavourably, it is because it began the race with a disadvantage. In life expectancy, it began a year below the national ave-rage during 1970-75 and remained exactly there in 2006-09. Infant mortality rate per thousand live births in Gujarat exceeded the national average by 15 in 1971 but fell below it by two in 2009. Under-five mortality and maternal mortality rates in 2006-09 were, likewise, well below the national average.
Data do show Gujarat performing worse than the national average in child nutrition between 1998-99 and 2005-06, the latest period for which consistent data are available. The government can do much social good by targeted action in this area. The good news is that with high growth, the state has the necessary revenues to successfully address the problem.
While one can selectively poke holes in nearly every success story, taken as a whole, it is difficult to remain unimpressed by what Gujarat has achieved. I would be only too happy if its economic success spread next door to my home state, Rajasthan.
Himachal Freedom of Religion Act
By
Dr Subramanian Swamy
The Himachal Pradesh High Court Bench has handed down a landmark judgement on the HP Freedom of Religion Act (HPFRA) holding it to be Constitutional. The Act was challenged by Christian missionary organisations as against the Constituiton and secularism.
The Bill to enact the Act was in fact moved by a Congress-led Government of Virbhadra Singh, the maverick Chief Minister in the Himachal Pradesh Assembly, and it was unanimously passed in 2006. It received Governor's Assent on 18.2.07.
The Object for the said Act was framed in the Preamble as a "prohibition of conversion from one religion to another by the use of force or inducement or by fraudulent means and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto".
In 2011, two Writ Petitions were filed in the HP High Court by two Christian missionary organisations challenging the constitutionality of the Act and the Rules framed under the Act. There was no explanation given for this long delay of four years between the Bill's enactment and the Christian missionaries approaching the High Court.
The main point that the two Petitioners sought to make was that the Act was unconstitutional since it sought to deter the Christian missionaries from exercising their fundamental rights of propagation and conversion activities, which they said was guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution.
They also charged that the HPFR Act was to frighten a citizen from freely exercising his or her fundamental right to convert to Christianity.
I decided to intervene in the case at the urging of the VHP. The Court permitted me to lead arguments, which I did at length. I raised five main objections to these Writ Petitions.
First, I argued that the petitioners had no locus standi, because they had not adduced any legally valid evidence that anyone has been aggrieved by this newly enacted statute, viz., HPFRA. It was also apparent from that none of the three Petitioners were not personally aggrieved from any infringement of their fundamental rights to get converted.
Second, the major flaw in the two Petitions was that there has been a failure of the Petitioners to distinguish their respective cases from the Constitutional Bench judgement of the Supreme Court in the Rev. Stainislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 1977 SC 908 Vol II, p.55), and which judgement holds the field today.
This was a serious flaw since most of the Sections and Rules of the HPFRA were identical to such Acts in other States, which were considered by the Supreme Court Constitutional Bench and were upheld as constitutional. Thus, there is no question of considering the ultra vires of the Act or the Rule making power under it.
Third, the Supreme Court [Bennet Coleman case (1972) 2 SCC 788] had held that the test in determining the question whether a legislation or executive action infringes the fundamental rights is to examine its effects and not its object or subject matter. The Petitioners failed to do so in this regard.
Although the Petitioners have sworn in their affidavits that all the facts in their respective Petitions are to their "personal knowledge" yet it is obvious that the violent incidents and instances of intimidation cited in the Petition and alleged to be a consequence of enacting the impugned legislation, could not have been to their personal knowledge since they have not sworn that they were at the site of the said incidents.
Fourth, the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court Court held in the Stainislaus Case that such Freedom of Religion Acts fall within the purview of Entry II of the Seventh Schedule of Article 246 of the Constitution "as they are meant to avoid disturbances to the public order by prohibiting conversion from one religion to another in a manner reprehensible to the conscience of the community".
The Apex Court in the said Stanislaus Case also observed that "it cannot be predicated that freedom of religion can have no bearing whatever on the maintenance of public order or that a law creating an offence relating to religion cannot under any circumstances be said to have been enacted in the interest of public order".
This ruling has since been re-affirmed in recent judgements of the Supreme Court. In Rabindra Kumar Pal @ Dara Singh v. Republic of India [in (2011) 2 SCC 490 at para 97], the Court said, "There is no justification for interfering in someone's religious belief by any means".
In the Stainislaus judgement, the Supreme Court held that (para. 22) "if forcible conversion had not been prohibited, that would have caused public disorder in the States (of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa)".
Thus, I argued, the Petitioners had been derailed by focusing on the right to convert when in fact they ought to have been concerned about public order that would be disturbed by fraudulent forced or induced conversions.
Induced or forced religious conversions, thus, arising from demeaning other religions have impacted on pluralism in society, and on the religious demography of the nation and hence there are dire consequences for public order, public health and public morality. The State thus has to act as a deterrent.
Fifthly, the necessity for placing reasonable restrictions on the right to propagate religion in Independent India was emphasised during the freedom struggle by Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.
Hinduism, which is the only theology which explicitly accepts that all religions lead to God is thus inherently committed to secularism and hence tolerant of other religions. In the Vedas, it is repeatedly stated Ekam Sat Vipra Bahuda Vadanti. No other religion states this. Parsis, Jews, Syrian Christians, and Moplah Muslims in India testify to this.
But Christianity and Islam are not inherently secular and are fundamentally predatory proselytising theologies that do not accept any other religion.
Hence, an underlying concern of modern India's founding fathers of the Constitution has been how to ensure that there is a stable religious demography in the country and thus continued plurality in worship in modern India.
For this objective and concern, in Jammu & Kashmir for example, Article 370 was incorporated in the Constitution to prevent migration of people from the rest of India into the state and disturb the religious demography.
However, in Kashmir Valley, being majority Muslim, we have witnessed forced emigration of Hindu Pandits and Sikhs, out of the State leading besides forcible conversions to Islam.
The said Article failed thus to provide protection for forced emigration of Hindus from the State. In varying degrees, this has been the fate of Hindus wherever they are in a minority.
The Indian Republic therefore can preserve a liberal religious outlook only if the Hindus remain in overwhelming majority in the country. Any rapid change in religious demography will therefore cause a huge public disorder.
That is, to safeguard secularism, we cannot allow the present religious demography to be wholesale altered by induced, forced or fraudulent conversions to Christianity and Islam.
Democratically elected state governments have thus been constitutionally empowered to take pre-emptive action to deter any kind of forced or bribed conversion because it de-stabilises the religious demographic structure of the nation.
Much noise has been made by the Evangelists about the High Court direction to delete Section 4 of the Act. The fact is that the Congress government which passed the Act had poorly drafted it, and I had agreed that the BJP HP government must bring an amendment to replace Section 4 as presently drafted. Section 4 only required that anyone intending to convert should first inform the police. The word "intend" if replaced with "decided" will make it acceptable.
The important result is that banning of induced conversions has been held to be constitutional. This is a total defeat of the Christian missionaries.
http://www.freepressjournal.in/news/85024-retail-fdi-creating-political-storms.html
Retail FDI- Creating political storms—Free Press Journal
· Sep 17, 2012
R. VAIDYANATHAN,
( The author is the Professor of finance at IIM- Bangalore.)
The announcement by the government about cabinet decision on 51% FDI in Multi Brand Retail and 100% in single brand has created significant debate among political parties even to the extent of affecting the stability of this Government.
Trade constitutes the largest segment of the economy with a nearly 16.7 % share in NDP in 2010- 11, that is, in the aggregate NDP of Rs 43.2 lakh crore that year trade accounted for Rs 7.2 lakh crore [at 2004- 05 constant prices] higher than the share of manufacturing [ at 13.4%] and Agriculture [at 15.0%]. (National Accounts Statistics of the CSO, New Delhi 2011).
Trade is conducted mostly [more than 80%] by partnership / proprietorship firms with active involvement from members of family and community. More than 125 lakh kirana stores provide a source of livelihood to nearly 16 crore people. Retail trade has grown faster than the economy: it registered a compounded annual growth rate ( CAGR) of 9.2% between 2004- 05 and 2010- 11 when the Indian economy grew at 8.6%. The retail trade comprises all kinds of people and formats - from street vendors to departmental stores of various types, shapes and characteristics.
More than 80% of trade is accounted for by partnership and proprietorship forms - often called the " unorganized"
sector. The kirana shop adjacent to my home opens at 7am and closes at 10pm every day, 365 days of the year. It is very efficient, and one can order through a mobile. The owner knows the tastes and price preferences of our family, but his business is classified as " unorganized" by our experts and economists.
THE retail trade suffers from two major handicaps. One is the non- availability of credit at reasonable rates from institutions; the other is the bribe one has to pay to the government babus to leave him in peace.
Two main arguments are given for this decision. One it will improve logistics/ supply chain and enhance agricultural efficiency and the other is it will bring down prices to help consumers since middlemen are eliminated.
My vegetable vendor carries half a truck- load of vegetables on his TVS 50 at morning 5am. In India small businesses use capital more efficiently than big ones- So supply chain if at all will be more expensive. As far as consumer prices - they may come down initially but global experience suggest after " predatory pricing for some time" global companies will hike it to much higher levels since they need to increase returns.
The other argument is that the MNCs bring " funds" and " efficiency" . An MNC does not normally bring funds from outside sources as it can access them in our market by showing " comfort letters" from their parent companies.
Many financial institutions, both government and private, are ready to lend to them below the prime rate as they are " Global". That the MNC will bring funds from abroad is largely a myth.
Remember, Enron which was supposedly bringing Rs 10, 000 crore from outside. The final result is that Indian FIs are holding more than Rs 6,000 crore of worthless paper.
Has anyone studied the " aggregate cost" of these global retail chains? Most American homes have a retail store in their basement.
In the US, it is an issue of labor shortage but in India there is surplus that is part of the large self- employed group. For the economic expert goods held by household is consumption but held by mom- and- pop store is inventory.
Hence, inventory reduction has been achieved in the economy. Not much space is available in Indian houses to convert them as " retail stores". Another aspect is the fuel cost of driving long distances to the super- market and spending thousands of man- hours between aisles. Plus mobile phones are useful in placing orders from our Mata- Pita stores [also known as mom and pop stores in USA].
All petroleum services and products, rice, tobacco, salt, alcoholic beverages and fresh food traded at public markets are excluded in Japan from any " distributional aspect" by companies of other countries. Australia, Japan, South Korea do not allow trade services in petroleum, its products, rice, tobacco, salt, milk, fertilizers etc by foreign companies.
French using their Loi Royer simply restrict any development of hypermarkets to protect what they call the " centres of French towns and villages and the living of small shopkeepers". Germany has legislative constraints on outlets above 1200 sq. m.
Very cleverly, the Central government has allowed the State governments the final say in allowing FDI in retail. This may to some extent pacify those State governments opposed to big retail. We are signatory with more than 70 countries on to Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements ( BIPAs), India has to provide national treatment to the investors. State governments therefore, may have to open up for big retail. Industries will use the legal option to force the States to comply.
The paan- chewing, dhoti- clad, English- ignorant retail trader should not be seen as an inefficient entrepreneur who needs to be bleached by globally- accepted detergents. What he needs is a level playing field, in the full sense of the term, with access to affordable credit and the abolition of inspector raj in the form of harassment by various arms of the government. Let us remember that we are still a savings based, family- oriented economy.
From
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/jugglebandhi/entry/promoting-quotas
Promoting quotas
by
13 September 2012, 09:58 PM IST
A highly-placed source in the PMO, on conditions of anonymity, revealed to the TOI today that a special team of mathematicians and economists from Harvard Business School has formulated a new branch of statistical economics specifically for use in India where quotas for promotions in government jobs have created another bone of contention in a Parliament already gridlocked over the ongoing Coalgate issue.
Called 'quotanomics' by its inventors, this pioneering economic model seeks to solve the contentious and intractable problem of quotas. "The problem as was presented to us was that of a fundamental mismatch between demand and supply: demand for too many quotas and supply of too few jobs," said a member of the Harvard team, which is scheduled to officially present its quotanomics theory for approval to an interministerial group of ministers (IGM) next week.
Tracing the roots of the problem back to the Mandal Commission, which they said was India's greatest contribution to the realm of mathematics since the invention of the zero, a spokesperson for the Harvard team said that the solution devised to solve it had borrowed extensively from diverse disciplines and fields of science, including the General Theory of Relativity, quantum mechanics, Stephen Hawking`s string theory and Murphy`s Third Law of Impenetrability.
"Basically, what we are dealing with here is a situation where not just jobs, but also promotion in those jobs, had to be quotafied, to use the proper scientific term. The quotafication had to include not just SCs/STs and OBCs but also had to provide for similar demands in future from HBCs (higher backward castes) and BHCs (backward higher castes)," a quotanomics researcher explained.
However, the seemingly endless caste calculus did not end there. For every day new caste formations seemed to spring up like mushrooms out of nowhere. For instance there was a self-created caste of people who did not believe in the caste system as such but did believe in caste quotas. So how were all these professedly casteless people to be given caste quotas? Then there was another group of people who had got themselves clinically certified as having split, or multiple, personalities which meant that each of them claimed simultaneously to belong to several castes, one for each separate personality. How could caste quotas be assigned to them? Should there be a cut-off quota for the number of quotas each person was entitled to?
"This was where Hawking's string theory, which postulates a space-time continuum comprising up to 16 dimensions, came in very handy," a team member said. "How did one fit a limitless number of quotas into a limited number of jobs, while at the same time ensuring that everyone in those jobs also got promoted according to his/her quota specifications? We hit upon the answer purely by chance when one of the team members left his seat to go to the restroom and another team member took the vacant seat. That was the eureka moment that gave birth to quotanomics: Interpenetrative Mobility, also known as Musical Chairs," the spokesperson elucidated.
Quotanomics will ensure social justice by making all government jobs, from peon to PM, rotational in nature, with any given individual holding that seat, or job, for no more than 15 minutes before passing it to a successor, and so on, ad infinitum.
When asked to elaborate on the details of this scheme, the highly-placed source in the PMO apologised that this would not be possible as the source's allotted 15 minutes were up and the relinquished post had yet to be occupied by the designated badli.
http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2012/09/dr-ambedkars-views-on-islam-and-indian.html
Dr. Ambedkar's views on Islam and Indian Muslims
by
A. P. Joshi (To appear in Bharat Speaks, 3rd quarter 2012).
After Gandhiji, Doctor Ambedkar is probably the most revered icon for Indians. The Dalits especially regard him as another Buddha. But it is unfortunate that his opinions on various issues are being quoted selectively. For example there appears to be a hush-hush about what he had written about Islam and Indian Muslims. But the fact remains that when he decided to quit Hinduism along with his followers, in spite of several appeals and enticements by Muslim and Christian clergy and leaders, he chose to embrace Buddhism, another dharmic faith. No one seems to bring this fact to the attention of the public.
Unlike most Hindu leaders, both pre-Independence and post- Independence, Dr. Ambedkar was very clear about the danger posed by Islam and Muslims to this country. He clinically examined the nature of Muslim psyche and society and the role that will be played by them after independence. He clearly foresaw that Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist and hence British India had to be partitioned after an exchange of population into two separate Hindu and Muslim nations . He has developed this thesis in his well known book, 'Pakistan or The Partition of India' 1. We give below a few excerpts from this book to show that Dr. Ambedkar was well aware of the various problems posed by Islam and Muslims to the Indian society and polity.
But even before he wrote this book he had written about this problem. During 1927- 29, Dr. Ambedkar owned a Marathi newspaper called 'Bahishkrut Bharat'. In it he maintained that the dispute in this country is not between two societies but between two nations. He was very critical of the Nehruvian plan of separating the Sind from the Bombay province and not giving equivalent minority rights to Hindus where they were in minority. He was quite worried about the fact that in undivided India the Muslim majority provinces were on the border. He felt that due to this the borders were not safe in case of any threat to our security by a Muslim power as the Indian Muslims had no loyalty for Hindusthan. He also strongly condemned the pardah system in Islam.
Coming to his book, in Chapter Four he has traced the history of Muslim invasions and the butchering, forced conversions and rape of Hindu women and the destruction of Hindu temples and monuments. He has clearly brought out the truth that the invaders were not interested merely in looting, but also in conversion of the 'kafirs'. He is very forthright in his description of the atrocities committed by the Muslims and has extensively quoted from historical records. He has quoted scholars who state that the Hindu peasants had to part with half of their produce as Jiziya as well as pay a large tax on their cattle. (P.62)
Chapter VII
" It is a notorious fact that many prominent Hindus who had offended the Muslim susceptibilities of the Muslims either by their writings or by their part in the Shuddhi movement have been murdered by some fanatic Musalmans … But Mr. Gandhi has never protested against such murders. Not only have the Musalmans not condemned these outrages but even Mr. Gandhi has never called upon the leading Muslims to condemn them" (P. 156)
" But there are others who … believe in the possibility of Hindu-Muslim unity. This belief of theirs seems to rest on two grounds. Firstly they believe in the efficacy of a Central Government to mould diverse set of people into one nation. Secondly, they feel that the satisfaction of Muslim demands will be a sure means of achieving Hindu-Muslim unity". (P. 187). Dr. Ambedkar subsequently shows that both presumptions are not valid.
Chapter X:
In this chapter titled as 'Social Stagnation', Dr. Ambedkar has analysed the social evils amongst Muslims and comments as follows:
" One may well ask if there is any social evil which is found among the Hindus and is not found among the Muslims? … Take child-marriage ... [quoting from 1931 census statistics] Can the position among the Musalmans so far as child-marriage goes, be considered better than the position among the Hindus?" (P. 225-6)
" Take the position of women. It is insisted by Muslims that the legal rights given to Muslim women, ensure them a greater measure of independence than allowed to other Eastern women … the Muslim woman is the most helpless person in the world … her fate is 'once married, always married'. She cannot escape the marriage tie, however irksome it may be. While she cannot repudiate the marriage, the husband can always do it without having to show any cause. Utter the word 'Tallak' and observe continence for three weeks and the woman is cast away … This latitude in the marriage in the matter of divorce destroys that sense of security which is so fundamental for a full, free and happy life for a woman. This insecurity of life, to which a Muslim woman is exposed, is greatly augmented by the right of polygamy and concubinage, which the Muslim law gives to the husband" (P. 226-227)
" Take the caste system. Islam speaks of brotherhood. Everybody infers that Islam must be free from slavery and caste. Regarding slavery nothing needs to be said. It stands abolished now by law. But while it existed much of its support was derived from Islam and Islamic countries … But if slavery has gone, caste among Musalmans has remained " (P. 228). Dr. Ambedkar then quotes the 1901 census report for Bengal to show that Muslims there have several castes including Arzal or untouchable castes with whom no other Mohamedan would associate and who are forbidden to enter the mosque to use the public burial ground. He also quotes from the same Report about the panchayat system of each caste which extends to social as well as trade matters resulting in castes which are as strictly endogamous as Hindu castes. He concludes, "the Mohamedans observe not only caste but also untouchability" (P. 230)
"There can thus be no manner of doubt that the Muslim Society in India is afflicted by the same social evils as afflict the Hindu Society. Indeed, the Muslims have all the social evils of the Hindus and something more. That something more is the compulsory system of purdah for Muslim women". Listing all the implications of purdah he concludes "they are usually victims to anemia, tuberculosis and pyorrhea. Their bodies are deformed, with their backs bent, bones protruded, hands and feet crooked. Ribs, joints and nearly all their bones ache. Heart palpitation is very often present in them. The result of this pelvic deformity is untimely death at delivery ... the process of moral degeneration must and does set in. Being completely secluded from the outer world, they engage their minds in petty family quarrels ... The physical and intellectual effects of purdah are nothing as compared to its effects on morals ... a social system which cuts off all contacts between the two sexes produces an unhealthy tendency towards sexual excesses and unnatural and other morbid habits and ways ... It is responsible for the social segregation of Hindus from Muslims which is the bane of public life in India ... Not that purdah and the evil consequent thereon are not to be found among certain sections of the Hindus … But the point of distinction is that among the Muslims, purdah has a religious sanctity which it has not with the Hindus." (P. 230-32)
"The Muslims have no interest in politics as such. Their predominant interest is in religion ... Muslim politics is essentially clerical and recognizes only one difference, namely, that existing between Hindus and Muslims. None of the secular categories of life have any place in the politics of the Muslim community and if they do find a place - and they must because they are irrepressible - they are subordinated to one and the only one governing principle of the Muslim political universe, namely, religion." (P. 232)
"The existence of these evils among the Muslims is distressing enough. But far more distressing is the fact that there is no organised movement of social reforms among the Musalmans of India on a scale sufficient to bring about their eradication ... The Hindus have their social evils ... and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims on the other hand, do not realise that they are evils and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in the existing practices." (P.233)
Dr. Ambedkar then goes on to analyse the reasons for this attitude. He feels that it is due to "the fundamental assumption made by all Muslims that Islam is a world religion, suitable for all people, for all times and for all conditions ... that this uniformity is deadening and is not merely imparted to Muslims, but is imposed upon them by a spirit of intolerance which is unknown anywhere outside the Muslim world for its severity and its violence and which is directed towards the suppression of all rational thinking which is in conflict with the teachings of Islam." (P. 234) Although its rigidity is being challenged elsewhere in the world, the Indian Muslim community is still clinging to it. The reason for this is due to the peculiar position he occupies in India as he is placed in a predominantly Hindu social and political environment which he feels is encroaching on his existence. The Muslims think that the Hindus and Muslims must perpetually struggle.
"How Muslim politics has become perverted is shown by the attitude of the Muslim leaders to the political reforms in the Indian States. The Muslims and their leaders carried on a great agitation for the introduction of representative government in the Hindu State of Kashmir. The same Muslims and their leaders are deadly opposed to the introduction of representative governments in other Muslim States. The reason for this strange attitude is quite simple. In all matters, the determining question with the Muslims is how it will affect the Muslims vis-a-vis the Hindus … The dominating consideration is how democracy with majority rule will affect the Muslims in their struggle against the Hindus. Will it strengthen them or will it weaken them? If democracy weakens them, they will not have democracy." (P. 236-7)
CHAPTERS XI and XII
Dr. Ambedkar discusses the causes behind the behaviour and political aggression of the Muslims in these chapters. "How the Muslim mind will work and by what factors it is likely to be swayed will be clear if the fundamental tenets of Islam which dominate the Muslim politics and the views expressed by prominent Muslims bearing on Muslim attitude towards an Indian Government are taken into consideration … Among the tenets the one that calls for notice is the tenet of Islam which says that in a country which is not under Muslim rule, wherever there is a conflict between Muslim law and the law of the land, the former must prevail over the latter and a Muslim will be justified in obeying the Muslim law and defying the law of the land." (P. 292). He quotes the Muslim leader Maulana Mahomed Ali, " the only allegiance a Musalman, whether a civilian or soldier, whether living under a Muslim or under non-Muslim administration, is commanded by the Koran to acknowledge is his allegiance to God, to his Prophet and to those in authority from among the Musalmans … But the unalterable rule is and has always been that as Musalmans they can obey only such laws and orders issued by their secular rulers as do not involve disobedience to the commandments of God who in the expressive language of the Holy Koran is 'the all-ruling ruler'." (P.293)
"According to Muslim Canon Law the world is divided into two camps, Dar-ul-lslam (abode of Islam) and Dar-ul-Harb (abode of war). A country is Dar-ul-lslam when it is ruled by Muslims. A country is Dar-ul-Harb when Muslims only reside in it but are not rulers of it. That being the Canon Law of the Muslims, India cannot be the common motherland of the Hindus and the Musalmans. It can be the land of the Musalmans - but it cannot be the land of the 'Hindus and the Musalmans living as equals'. Further, it can be the land of the Musalmans only when it is governed by the Muslims. The moment the land becomes subject to the authority of a non-Muslim power, it ceases to be the land of the Muslims. Instead of being Dar-ul-lslam it becomes Dar-ul-Harb. It must not be supposed that this view is only of academic interest. For it is capable of becoming an active force capable of influencing the conduct of the Muslims. It did greatly influence the conduct of the Muslims when the British occupied India. The British occupation raised no qualms in the minds of the Hindus. But so far as the Muslims were concerned, it at once raised the question whether India was any longer a suitable place of residence for Muslims. .A discussion was started in the Muslim community, which Dr. Titus says lasted for half a century, as to whether India was Dar-ul-Harb or Dar-ul-lslam. (P. 294).
He then points out another injunction, Jihad (crusade) by which it becomes "incumbent on a Muslim ruler to extend the rule of Islam until the whole world shall have been brought under its sway ... Technically, it is the duty of the Muslim ruler, who is capable of doing so, to transform Dar-ul-Harb into Dar-ul-lslam … there are instances showing that they have not hesitated to proclaim Jihad. The curious may examine the history of the Mutiny of 1857 and if he does, he will find that, in part, at any rate, it was really a Jihad proclaimed by the Muslims against the British, and that the Mutiny so far as the Muslims were concerned was a recrudescence of revolt which had been fostered by Sayyed Ahmad who preached to the Musalmans for several decades that owing to the occupation of India by the British the country had become a Dar-ul-Harb. The Mutiny was an attempt by the Muslims to reconvert India into a Dar-ul-lslam … Not only can they proclaim Jihad but they can call the aid of a foreign Muslim power to make Jihad a success, or if the foreign Muslim power intends to proclaim a Jihad, help that power in making its endeavour a success. (P. 295-6)
He then draws attention to the third tenet "that Islam does not recognise territorial affinities. Its affinities are social and religious and therefore extraterritoria ... this is the basis of Pan-Islamism. It is this which leads every Musalman in India to say that he is a Muslim first and Indian afterwards … To the Muslims a Hindu is a Kaffir. A Kaffir is not worthy of any respect. He is low-born and without status" (P. 301). Dr. Ambedkar goes on to show that this concept of Kaffir was extended even to Mahatma Gandhi by quoting his comrade-in-arm in the Khilafat movement, Mr. Mahomed Ali who said, " However pure Mr. Gandhi's character may be, he must appear to me from the point of view religion inferior to any Musalman, even though he may be without character" and " Yes, according to my religion and creed, I do hold an adulterous and fallen Musalman to be better than Mr. Gandhi." (P.302)
Dr. Ambedkar also quotes prominent Hindu leaders who were alive to the problem. For example "Mrs. Annie Besant says …The world has gone beyond such so-called theocracies, in which God's commands are given through a man. The claim now put forward by Musalman leaders that they must obey the laws of their particular prophet above the laws of the State in which they live, is subversive of civic order and the stability of the State … Malabar has taught us what Islamic rule still means, and we do not want to see another specimen of the 'Khilafat Raj' in India … there is no place in a civilised land for people who believe that their religion teaches them to murder, rob, rape, burn, or drive away out of the country those who refuse to apostatise from their ancestral faiths … Such 'Laws of God' cannot be allowed to override the laws of a civilised country … In fact, Muslim sects are not safe in a country ruled by orthodox Muslims [italics ours]" (P. 274-5)
He also quotes Lala Lajpatrai expressing apprehensions about Hindu-Muslim unity and also an interview with the poet Dr. Rabindra Nath Tagore, "another very important factor which, according to the poet, was making it impossible for Hindu-Mohamedan unity to become an accomplished fact was that the Mohamedans could not confine their patriotism to any one country ... The poet said he had very frankly asked many Mohamedans whether, in the event of any Mohamedan power invading India, they would stand side by side with their Hindu neighbours to defend their common land. He could not be satisfied with the reply he got from them. He said that he could definitely state that even such men as Mr. Mahomed Ali had declared that under no circumstances was it permissible for any Mohamedan, whatever his country might be, to stand against any other Mohamedan." (P. 276)
Dr. Ambedkar has also written, " Hinduism is said to divide people and in contrast Islam is said to bind people together. This is only a half truth. For Islam divides as inexorably as it binds. Islam is a close corporation and the distinction that it makes between Muslims and non-Muslims is very real, very positive and very alienating distinction. The brotherhood of Islam is not the universal brotherhood of man. It is brotherhood of Muslims for Muslims only ... The second defect of Islam is that it is a system of social self-government and is incompatible with local self-government, because the allegiance of a Muslim does not rest on his domicile in the country which is his but on the faith to which he belongs … In other words, Islam can never allow a true Muslim to adopt India as his motherland and regard a Hindu as his kith and kin." (P. 330). Also "The Muslims are howling against the Hindu Maha Sabha and its slogan of Hindudom and Hindu Raj. But who is responsible for this? Hindu Maha Sabha and Hindu Raj are the inescapable nemesis which the Musalmans have brought upon themselves by having a Muslim League. It is action and counter-action. One gives rise to the other." (P. 359)
From this book it is not clear if Dr. Ambedkar had studied the Islamic scriptures since he does not quote from them. Hence one can only speculate what he would have written in this book about them and which passages he would have quoted from them. Perhaps he would have strengthened his case for partition considerably! As it is he believed that the solution to this problem lay in the partition of British India along with a systematic exchange of population.
The first part of his proposal was ultimately hurriedly carried out in spite of vehement denials of the Congress leaders. Unfortunately no action on the second part i.e. the exchange of population was undertaken by our leaders. Their (criminal) negligence is clearly reflected in the census figures released by the Pakistan census which show that according to the 1941 census the proportion of dharmic faiths in Pakistan was steadily increasing since 1900 and was 19.7% in 1941. The 1951 census figures for this group show a figure of 1.6% implying a massive genocide and/or deportation of Hindus and allied faiths in the 1947 carnage which accompanied Independence. In comparison the Muslim decrease in India was quite mild - from13.4% in 1941 to 10.4% in 1951. In India the Muslims who remained were also given full constitutional rights as well as concessions in several fields. And what they have lost in 1947 has been fully made up by now since their proportion in the 2001 census is again 13.4% and is likely to increase further in the 2011 census. The Indian census data also shows that they are present in large numbers in several border regions of the country and whispers of further partitions are frequently being aired. Dr Ambedkar's observation in this book that Muslim and Hindu societies cannot coexist together in turning out to be uncannily accurate!
It is also very surprising that when Dr. Ambedkar was so clear about Islam and Muslims, his present followers are bending over backwards to appease this community for its votes, instead of using their influence to educate them and bring them within the national mainstream. Nor have our nationalist leaders, even after partition, asked the Muslims to give up their outdated theology and concepts. In this context it may be mentioned here again that when Dr. Ambedkar decided to make Buddhism his religion after much deliberation, and in spite of several inducements, he refused to embrace Islam or Christianity and instead chose another dharmic faith. When will his followers understand his logic behind this decision?
REFERENCE
Pakistan or The Partition of India, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Vol.8, Education Dept, Govt of Maharashtra, Bombay, 1990
Related post:-