Dalits have been subjected to most barbaric treatment for centuries for no fault of their own.Their misery still continues even today.This Blog will deal about the plight of Indian Dalits in their own motherland.
Both are considered as nobel profession.Doctors aim is to save life and Lawers aim is to bring out the truth.The cause is very nobel.But today both the professions have been corrupted to the core.Both have only one motive....earn money.The amount that they will earn depends a lot on their good name in the society and their success rate.More the number of patients a doctor cure, higher does his fees get.Similarly more the number of cases a lawer wins, higher is his fees as well.And if a hopelss case comes to them, both dont hesitate to turn it down.If a terminally ill patient goes to some hospital he is turned down by them for the fear of loss of reputation.Similarly if a case which is sure to be lost is brought in front of an established lawer, he just turns it down.
Such cases are forced to seek the fullfiulment of their desires( namely treatment or some one representing them) with some small time practitioners.
A similar criminal case has turned up in indian court of justice..Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab.The writting is on the wall as to what is going to happen.No lawer can hope of saving him from the gallowes.And anyone who would represent him was bound to face the public wrath.But the Indian judicial system is such that every criminal, how ever hieneous his crime be, has to be represented by a lawer.Kasab didnt have anyone to represent him, So according to the law it was up to the court to appoint him a lawer.Knowing fully well that who ever the court appointed would be facing public fury, the court had a dirty job to do...and that job had to be done.
Corth appointed a lawer for Kasab.First it was Anjali Waghmare and due to some complications it is now Abbas Kazmi.Both had a losing cause to defend.When Anjali was appointed some party organisation even stoned her house.It was an expected public reaction as well.
But what is interesting to note is that who does this court appoints to do the dirty job.
First one is Anjali Waghmare... A Dalit
Second is Abbas Kazmi... A Muslim.
Where are the talented and meritious Brahmin Advocates?Why cant I hear any one talking about their loss of chance to face a challenging case?Did the court not find a single talented Brahmin?Why?Are there no talented Brahmins available?
Why is it that only the minorities are the selected choice for the dirty work and loosing cause?
There was this foolish mail which was circulated by the Anti-Reservationists few months back. It was during the AIMS drama. I am putting up the story and the reply given to it by one of my intelligent friend on her blog:
OLD STORY:
The Ant works hard in the withering heat all summer building its house and laying up supplies for the winter. The Grasshopper thinks the Ant is a fool and laughs & dances & plays the summer away. Come winter, the Ant is warm and well fed. The Grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.
Promoted version:
The Ant works hard in the withering heat all summer building its house and laying up supplies for the winter. The Grasshopper thinks the Ant's a fool and laughs & dances & plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering Grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the Ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving. NDTV, BBC, CNN show up to provide pictures of the shivering Grasshopper next to a video of the Ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.The World is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be that this poor Grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?Arundhati Roy stages a demonstration in front of the Ant's house. Medha Patkar goes on a fast along with other Grasshoppers demanding that Grasshoppers be relocated to warmer climates during winter. Mayawati states this as `injustice' done on Minorities. Amnesty International, UN, EU and World Human Rights Organisations criticize the Indian Government for not upholding the fundamental rights of the Grasshopper. The Internet is flooded with online petitions seeking support to the Grasshopper (many promising Heaven and Everlasting Peace for prompt support as against the wrath of God for non-compliance).Opposition MPs stage a walkout. Left parties call for ' Bengal Bandh' in West Bengal and Kerala demanding a Judicial Enquiry.CPM in Kerala immediately passes a law preventing Ants from working hard in the heat so as to bring about equality of poverty among Ants and Grasshoppers. Lalu Prasad allocates one free coach to Grasshoppers on all Indian Railway Trains, aptly named as the 'Grasshopper Rath'. Finally, the Judicial Committee drafts the ' Prevention of Terrorism Against Grasshoppers Act' [POTAGA], with effect from the beginning of the winter. Arjun Singh makes 'Special Reservation ' for Grasshoppers in Educational Institutions & in Government Services. The Ant is fined for failing to comply with POTAGA and having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, it's home is confiscated by the Government and handed over to the Grasshopper in a ceremony covered by NDTV. Arundhati Roy calls it ' A Triumph of Justice'. Lalu calls it 'Socialistic Justice '. CPM calls it the ' Revolutionary Resurgence of the Downtrodden '. Ban Ki Moon invites the Grasshopper to address the UN General Assembly. Many years later..... The Ant has since migrated to the US and set up a multi-billion dollar company in Silicon Valley. 100s of Grasshoppers still die of starvation despite reservation somewhere in India.
AND As a result of losing lot of hard working Ants and feeding the grasshoppers, India is still a developing country!!!
True Version :
The Ant works hard in the withering heat all summer building its house and laying up supplies for the winter. The Grasshopper thinks the Ant must toil in the fields that he doesn’t own, clean the toilets of grasshoppers because of the ant’s past life sins, and laughs & dances & plays the summer away. Sometimes, when the grasshopper meditates he remembers what a great game his ancestors have played and crushed the hardworking ants under them! Come winter, the shivering Grasshopper, as usual, calls for a yagna to please the gods and tries to take away all the resources that the ants have painstakingly earned over centuries, braving the inhuman crimes of the grasshoppers, such as casteism, untouchability, rape, land grabbing, and lies। However, this time, the ants do not come to the yagna; they found a new god!
This scares the grasshopper to no limit! How can the ants go to another God! His mind starts working। In no time, the ants will realize the lies of the Grasshopper’s ancestors. They would realize that untouchability is hogwash! They will also start studying and perhaps even stop doing the ‘polluting’ work. What if they become lawyers, doctors, engineers! The ants have all the labor force; in no time they will build a self-sufficient society. They will have no need for the grasshoppers, who can only after all spout prayers, conduct business, and ‘own’ land!
The grasshoppers realize the imminent downfall of their kind and start plotting! They fall back on their age-old philosophy of divide and rule through lies-mongering!
They float lies through popular media about how certain religious communities are growing. They cause rifts between happy ant families and make them kill each other! They move from one ant society to another and cause more and more butchery, laughing all the while when rivers run red with the blood of ants.
The World is stunned by the deviousness of the grasshoppers.
Repentant grasshoppers, unable to stomach the violence, demonstrate with the very few enlightened ants. Some try and force their way and write the rules to follow. They finally agree that every one must work to earn their wage. But, what they don’t realize is the grasshoppers are still guarding every profession! And, so they ensured the safety and comfort of the grasshoppers for the next 60 years, despite the special provisions for the hardworking ants!
After 60 years…
The 15% grasshoppers rule the 85% ants! Yes, even after the provisions through affirmative action, the grasshoppers through their lies, which the only thing they are great at, hoodwinked the country to believe in pollution, and in the inherent ‘intelligence’ of the grasshoppers!
The grasshoppers take to novel ways in spreading their lies; they make some totally, lies-based e-mails and forward them to all their no-brain communities.
The ants, who have been watching, especially the enlightened ones have been working and slogging. They set up learning centers, they consciously choose another religion, fight elections, question the systems that subjugate people…
The ants are at work…
Just you wait, the ants tell the grasshoppers…now, that could be construed as a threat and so…
Grasshoppers come up with laws every second to kill and butcher the ants, but, with every ant killed, 1000 such ants are born!
Yes, slowly, but steadily the Indians (85% of the total population) are developing….that’s why India is a developing country!
What Ambedkars birth means to common man is very very very beautifully captured by Lok Shahir Wamandada Kardak..the man who had the guts to kick of Brahmin Lata Mangeshkar's Offer... in this following Song.
उद्धरली कोटि कुळे भीमा तुझ्या जन्मामुळे एक ज्ञानी ज्योति ते कोटि कोटि ज्योति तळपतात ती ज्ञानी तुझ्या धरतिवरती अंधार दूर तो पड़े भीमा तुझ्या जन्मामुळे
दगड बंद पायातील साखळदंड तडा तडा तुटिले तू ठोकताच दंड झाले गुलाम मोकळे भीमा तुझ्या जन्मामुळे
तुझे वृक्ष तैसतिल होताच वाद हिरवी हिरवी पाने अन तया लाच आज अमृताची पाली पड़े भीमा तुझ्या जन्मामुळे
काळी कवडी मोल जीने वाटत होते आज जुले जगताशी प्रेमाचे नाते बुद्धा कड़े जग हे वळे भीमा तुझ्या जन्मामुळे उद्धरली कोटि कुळे भीमा तुझ्या जन्मामुळे
Lyrics of Bhima Tujya Janma Mule provided by Tushar Ingle.
Watch this Wonderful song Here :
Just cant find words to express my gratitude to this man Bigger than all the Gods put together !!!
One more Wonderful Song Paying tribute to this great Man :
Actually I cant stop praising this great soul...So Non stop Tributes. :
There is hardly any hindu who doesnt know this above personalityHe claims himself to not only be the incarnation of Shirdi's Sai Baba, but also have gone overboard at times calling himself the incarnation of God Himself....With 1,638 centers in 137 countries,Satya Sai Baba guides the worlds largest Hindu Organization.
And yet, it pains to say that this worlds largest Hindu Organization is nothing but a Fraud.
The number of alligations against him are more than against any individual I have ever heard....Here are few of them followed by Satya Sai Baba's Video Proofs.
Robert Priddy, one of the ardent bhakt of Sai Baba was presented by Sai Baba with a dimond ring, which Sai Baba claimed to have made to appear.This is the same author who wrote a book glorifying baba titled "The Power Of Dreams" in which he had told about the ring being a dimond one.Sai Baba signed this book for him as well.Knowing fully well that the book claimed that the ring is indeed a dimond one without objecting.But on latter examination found out that the dimond was nothing but synthatically manufactured imitation...
Sai Baba probably has forgotten that it is very simple to tell lies, but very difficult to remember...One of the oldest teachings in India.He in his discourse in Sanathana Sarathi, June 1998, p. 142-3 talks about visit to his body by his late mother, Easwaramma and his late grandfather Kondama Raju.Then he himself says that these people are liberated one.With so much convictions he tells that his mother is indeed liberated one that 6th May is being celebrated as Easwaramma Day by his organisation through out the world.And then in his own publications book Vision of he Divine Pg 98 he says completely contradictory statement that it is impossible for any liberated souls after death to make any worldly contact...Now try making sense of this if you can, for it beats me.
But this above charges are very trivial as compared to the some deeds of Sai Baba...Yes he is a homosexual child abuser.He himself have admitted sleeping with 3 boys in the same room as a custom.These are the priviledged boys who get the opportunity to massage his foot.
Read the extract of what the victims had to say :
Jens and Gurprit Sethu :
"On 20th January 1996 I got the second interview. Already days before, he had established a strange eye-contact with me indicating the coming interview. My wife and I went to the interview and he acted very disappointed at seeing me together with my wife. He took me alone into the interview room and said, “She is diseased and much older than you. Please separate from her.” I was really shocked and replied, “She is attached to me.”I asked him to give her some spiritual instruction, which he readily agreed to do, but he had something else on his mind.
Without asking permission, he started kissing me on my lips for some time, and later asked me to open my trousers and “materialised” some oil which he rubbed on the skin above my genitals. I felt very bad about all of this, but accepted, as I fully trusted Sai Baba.
Then he took my wife into the private interview room alone, and told her “Either you separate from the boy or I throw you out of Puttaparthi!.” He appeared wild and furious (my wife told me afterwards) and she shivered all over. When she reappeared in a very short time, looking red faced and very scared, nobody dared ask her what happened in there.....
Then his mood totally changed and I did have some fear. He commanded me to remove my trousers, unzipped my fly and went with his right hand into my underpants. Sathya Sai Baba the divine touched and massaged my genitals unasked. He expected some erection, but this didn’t happen for I didn’t feel any sexual excitement, no lust in the presence of a seventy years old man. I was really disgusted. Then he had the impudence to say, “It is very weak, don’t waste energy.” "
Abuse of a 15 yrs old boy :
"He lifted my penis, put his fingers at the base of it, and started rubbing the oil into me. It didn't hurt, but he was making a motion as if he was pinching me there repeatedly with his fingers...
He lifted my penis, put his fingers at the base of it, and started rubbing the oil into me. It didn't hurt, but he was making a motion as if he was pinching me there repeatedly with his fingers..."
And now for some of his cheap magic tricks....Its all there for you to see...If he indeed was an avatar as he and his organizations claim then why would he resort to such foolish tricks?
There are hell lot of videos available on the net about this fraud man.And yet no one can deny the ground reality that he runs the worlds largest hindu organization.So am I wrong when I say that worlds largest hindu organization is nothing but a massive fraud???
One can simply stare in awe at what all is possible under the name of Hinduism...Sex, Molestation, Homosexuality, Murder...and god knows what not.And yet if any action were to be taken against these fraud man people would come down defending him in the name of Hinduism.
The truth is that this man is still at large and even after knowing that he is a fraud,his organization still runs and that too at the expense of people's money !!!
When will this stop?It has been 56 yrs since this cheat is duping people..when will enough be enough?
A recent opinion poll stated that the urban youth are petrified of one result of the forthcoming elections. Mayawati as PM. The scorn that Mayawati draws from the urban youths is unparalleled in India. No other political leader has been as much hated as Mayawati is one amongst the many candidates in the race for PM. Mayawati’s chances of being the PM are very outside one and not realistic. But then we have often seen her pulling a rabbit out of the hat. So I thought it might be worthwhile to look at the possible reasons for her being hated so much.
Following were the reasons that seemed to be the reasons for it.
1. She is a dalit.
2. She is corrupt…the Taj corridor.
3. Her lavish birthday bash and life style.
4. Her lack of sophistication and typical bhenji image.
5. She is power hungry.
Apart from this no other reason seems very obvious to me. Of course I may have skipped out some and hence if there are any left out, readers are requested to tell. I would really like to examine them as well.
Now let us examine each of the reason closely to pin-point where exactly is the origin of this hatred.
She is a Dalit: As a dalit sympathizer, I almost wanted to believe that this is the reason why she is hated. I wanted to believe this because it is very convenient for me to put the blame on the so called upper caste and accuse them of caste discrimination. But if I even attempt to say this, there would be no bigger liar than me. Look at the past..we have had some, though very few but still we have had some dalit leaders like Babu Jagjivan Ram, K R Narayanan, Sushil kumar Shinde all of them Dalits and yet not hated for their castes. So the accusation that Mayawati is hated just for being a dalit can not hold many waters. If the Indian public could accept the above 3 with dignity then why wouldn’t they do the same to Mayawati? So this isn’t the prime reason.
She is corrupt : But then who isn’t? Even the first family of Indian politics, the Gandhi family is having bofors case. I remember once George Fernandis was asked when BJP and the allies came to power, that could he saw with absolute guarantee that their Govt is a corruption-free govt. George replied, “Corruption is like a beauty of women. All women are beautiful, its just that some are more beautiful”. All govt are corrupt, its just that some are more corrupt.And yet if one were to compare the Taj case with the other cases that our country has seen, the Taj case doesn’t even raise one’s eyebrows. This country has seen worse corruptions…corruption in coffins, guns and other defense mechanism of the very soldiers who protect us, we have seen frauds in the stamp papers, stock markets and many things like that which have made millions of mens go from riches to rags. What impact did the Taj matter have on common man? None in comparison to them. So even this reason has to be ruled out.
Her lavish birthday bash and lifestyle : While it is true that many people wouldn’t be exactly ecstatic by seeing her squander so much wealth over nothing, still it is a strictly personal affair. If she earns she spends. After all she is the highest tax payer politician of this nation. And yet again in her lavish lifestyle she isn’t alone.Amma Jayalalita spends far more than Mayawati. The count of her sarees, chappals and watches wouldn’t even be necessary to talk about Amma’s lifestyle. And yet Amma doesn’t even draw half the wrath as much as Mayawati does. If there were no choices and Mayawati and Jayalalita are the only two option left for the PM’s post there is no doubt that Jayalalita would be the uban people’s choce. People actually get amused when one talk about Amma’s birthday bash and are disconnected towards her. But when one speaks about Mayawati, the attitude is of passionate hatred .So even lavish lifestyle can be safely ruled out as the sole reason for hating Mayawati.
Lack of Sophistication and the typical bhenji image : Now just compare her with Laloo !!!Laloo has been carrying this typical Unpad image for so long in politics. Rabri’s image is even worse when it comes to sophistication in comparison to Laloo or Mayawati…yet they are not only not hated, but you would even find some urban youths adoring them. And looks in it self can not be accepted as the sole reason for political hatred. After all it is politics and not any beauty contest.
She is power hungry : But then again who isn’t? We see Advani almost begging the voters to vote BJP into power so that he can be PM at least once before he calls it a day from politics. Modi is knocking on the doors vigorously. Here we have Pawar making his intentions very clear. And there we see Rahul as the PM in waiting. Every party is fighting the elections for that seat of PM. And may leaders have made their intentions very clear as well. So can Mayawati be singled out for the power hungry attitude? This also can not be accepted as the reason for hating her.
So if none of the above qualifies as the reason for hating her then why is she hated?
Well the reason lies in her mandate. Mayawati has given her full frontal face to the age old caste discrimination problem of the country. Caste discrimination is still alive in this country. Mayawati has made no secrete that she is going to tackle that problem as well. In fact Mayawati is the only one who has admitted very openly that caste is still a problem. This has not struck very well the youth of urban India. While many of the youths want caste problems to be hushed about there are still a score of men who want Caste system to be alive and still see the dalits as their slaves.
But the biggest reason for hating Mayawati doesn’t come from her, but it comes from the educated minds of the people themselves.
The moment any one utters the word Dalit, (Sadly) the next word that pops up in the mind of these youths is Reservations. They just can not seem to separate these two issues. Reservations and Dalits have become synonyms for them. So when Mayawati speaks about Dalits the immediate thought in these minds is that if she comes to power, there will be rise in Reservations. And this is the biggest reason for hating her. The inability of separating Dalit issues from Reservations by the educated youth is the reason why Mayawati is so abhorred in the urban area. And this is despite the fact that Mayawati’s party is the only party which has attempted to integrate the Brahmins and the dalits. All other parties till date have been (successfully) creating a rift between different castes. But then if one looks at the situation the only solution for this problem lies in acceptance….Dalits accepting Brahmins as leaders and Brahmins accepting Dalits as leaders. Mayawati’s BSP has attempted to do just that. She might have taken that step this step for very selfish reasons…for her lust for power, but yet this is a step in right direction. And one must adore it…but alas…the educated youth…will they be able to separate caste discrimination from Reservations???
I had a lot of debates with different hindus on as to is meat eating allowed or prohibited in Hinduism...Well I have had a lot of talk on that already...now you see the video and decide for yourself what is the truth.
Yesterday was Ramnavami...the birthday of Lord Rama.So I thought an article about true nature ofRama would interest some of you.Here is an Extract from the great man himself.
Quoted from: Appendix No.1 of Part 3 of the book Riddles of Hinduism 1995 By Dr. Babasaheb B.R.Ambedkar
Ravana was a Buddhist and considered by Dalits as a great hero. He did so much for Sita, who herself had praised Ravana. But the Hindu scriptures have called him a Rakshasa attributing all evils to him. Not only that. Every year during the Ram lila. Ravana is burnt. Dalits have tolerated all of this. They have also tolerated the Ramayana TV serial ridiculing their other tribal hero, Hanuman, as a monkey. The Riddles in Hinduism is a scholarly work by the greatest intellectual of India, though an Untouchable. The text of his writings on Rama and Krishna are based on Hindu scriptures.
THE RIDDLE OF RAMA
Rama is the hero of the Ramayana whose author is Valmiki. The story of the Ramayana is a very short one. Besides it is simple and in itself there is nothing sensational about it.
Rama is the son of Dasharatha, the king of Ayodhya, the modern Banares. Dasharatha had three wives, Kausalya, Kaikeyi and Sumitra besides several hundred concubines. Kaikeyi had married Dasharatha on terms which were at the time of marriage unspecified and which Dasharatha was bound to fulfill whenever he was called upon by Kaikeyi to do so.
Dasharatha was childless for a long time. An heir to the throne was ardently desired by him. Seeing that he was unable to have a son with any of his three wives he decided to perform a Putreshti Yajna and called the sage Shrung at the sacrifice who prepared pandas and gave the three wives of Dasharatha to eat them. After they ate the pandas the three wives became pregnant and gave birth to sons. Kausalya gave birth to Rama, Kaikeyi gave birth to Bharatha and Sumitra gave birth to two sons, Laxman and Satrughana. In due course Rama was married to Sita.
When Rama came of age, Dasharatha thought of resigning the throne in favour of Rama and retiring from kingship. While this was being settled Kaikeyi raised the question of rendering her satisfaction of the terms on which she had married Dasharatha. On being asked to state her terms she demanded that her son Bharata should be installed on the throne in preference to Rama and that Rama should live in the forest for 12 years. Dasharatha, with great reluctance, agreed. Baharata became king of Ayodhya and Rama accompanied by his wife Sita and his step brother Laxman went to live in the forest.
Ravana, the king of Lanka, kidnapped Sita and took her away and kept her in his palace intending to make her one of his wives. Rama and Laxman than started search of Sita. On the way they meet Sugriva and Hanuman, two leading personages of the Vanara (monkey) race and formed friendship with them. With their help they marched on Lanka, defeated Ravana in the battle and rescued Sita. Rama returned with Laxman and Sita to Ayodhya. By the time twelve years had elapsed and the term prescribed by Kaikeyi was fulfilled, with the result that Bharata gave up the throne and in his place Rama became the king of Ayodhya.
Such is the brief outline of the story of the Ramayana as told by Valmiki.
There is nothing in this story to make Rama the object of worship. He is only a dutiful son. But Valmiki saw something extraordinary in Rama and that is why he undertook to compose the Ramayana. Valmiki asked Narada the following question:
Tell me Oh! Narada, who is the most accomplished man on earth at the present time?" And then he goes on to elaborate what he means by accomplished man. He defines his accomplished man as:
"Powerful, one who knows the secret of religion, one who knows gratitude, truthful, one who is ready to sacrifice his self interest even when in distress to fulfill a religious vow, virtuous in his conduct, eager to safeguard the interests of all, strong, pleasing in appearance with power of self-control, able to subdue anger, illustrious, with no jealousy for the prosperity of others, and in war able to strike terror in the hearts of Gods."
Narada then asks for time to consider and after mature deliberation tells him that the only person who can be said to possess these virtues is Rama, the son of Dasharatha.
It is because of his virtues that Rama has come to be defied. But is Rama a worthy personality of deification? Let those who accept him as an object of worship as a God consider the following facts:
Rama's birth is miraculous and it may be that the suggestion that he was born from a pinda prepared by the sage Shrung is an allegorical gloss to cover up the naked truth that he was begotten upon Kausalya by the sage Shrung, although the two did not stand in the relationship of husband and wife. In any case his birth, if not disreputable in its origin, is certainly unnatural.
There are other incidents connected with the birth of Rama the unsavory character of which it will be difficult to deny.
Valmiki starts his Ramayana by emphasizing the fact that Rama is anAvatar of Vishnu, and it is Vishnu who agreed to take birth as Rama and be the son of Dasharatha. The God Brahma came to know of this and felt that in order that this Rama Avatar of Vishnu be a complete success, arrangement shall be made that Rama shall have powerful associates to help him and cooperate with him. There were none existing then.
The Gods agreed to carry out the command to Brahma and engaged themselves in wholesale acts of fornication not only against Apsaras who were prostitutes, not only against the unmarried daughters of Yakshas and Nagas but also against the lawfully wedded wives of Ruksha, Vidhyadhar, Gandharvas, Kinnars and Vanaras and produced the Vanaras who became the associates of Rama.
Rama's birth is thus accompanied by general debauchery if not in his case certainly in the case of his associates. His marriage to Sita is not above comment. According to Buddha Ramayana, Sita was the sister of Rama, both were the children of Dasharatha. The Ramayana of Valmiki does not agree with the relationship mentioned in Buddha Ramayana. According to Valmiki, Sita was the daughter of the king Janaka of Videha and therefore not a sister of Rama. This is not convincing for even according to Valmiki she is not the natural born daughter of Janaka but a child found by a farmer in his field while ploughing it and was presented by him to king Janaka and brought up by Janaka. It was therefore in a superficial sense that Sita could be said to be daughter of Janaka.
The story in the Buddha Ramayana is natural and not inconsistent with the Aryan rules of marriage. If the story is true, then Rama's marriage to Sita is no ideal to be copied.
In another sense Rama's marriage was not an ideal marriage which could be copied. One of the virtues ascribed to Rama is that he was monogamous. It is difficult to understand how such a notion could have become common. For it has no foundation in fact. Even Valmiki refers to the many wives of Rama. These were of course in addition to his many concubines. In this he was the true son of his nominal father Dasharatha who had not only the wives referred to above but many others.
Let us next consider his character as an individual and as a king.
In speaking of him as an individual, I will refer to only two incidents - one relating to his treatment of Vali and other relating to his treatment of his own wife Sita. First, let us consider the incident of Vali.
Vali and Sugriva were two brothers. They belonged to the Vanar race and came from a ruling family, which had its own kingdom the capital of which was Kishkindha. At the time when Sita was kidnapped by Ravana, Vali was reigning at Kishkindha. While Vali was on the throne he was engaged in a war with aRakshasa by name Mayavi. In the personal combat between the two, Mayavi ran for his life. Both Vali and Sugriva pursued him. Mayavi entered into a deep cavity in the earth. Vali asked Sugriva to wait at the mouth of the cavity and he went inside. After sometime a flood of blood came from inside the cavity. Sugriva concluded that Vali must have been killed by Mayavi and came to Kishkindha and got himself declared king in place of Vali and made Hanuman his Prime Minister.
As a matter of fact, Vali was not killed. It was Mayavi who was killed by Vali. Vali came out of the cavity but did not find Sugriva there. He proceeded to Kishkindha and to his great surprise he found that Sugriva had proclaimed himself king. Vali naturally became enraged at this act of treachery on the part of his brother Sugriva and he had good ground to be. Sugriva should have ascertained, should not merely have assumed, that Vali was dead. Secondly, Vali had a son by name Angad whom Sugriva should have made the king as the ligitimate heir of Vali. He did neither of the two things. His was a clear case of usurpation. Vali drove out Sugriva and took back the throne. The two brothers became mortal enemies.
This occurred just after Ravana had kidnapped Sita. Rama and Laxman were wandering in search of her. Sugriva and Hanuman were wandering in search of friends who could help them regain the throne from Vali. The two parties met quite accidentally. After informing each other of their difficulties, a pact was arrived at between the two. It was agreed that Rama should help Sugriva to kill Vali and to establish him on the throne of Kishkinda. On the part of Sugriva and Hanuman it was agreed that they should help Rama to regain Sita. To enable Rama to fulfill his part of the pact it was planned that Sugriva should wear a garland around his neck as to be easily distinguishable to Rama from Vali and that while the duel was going on Rama should conceal himself behind a tree and then shoot an arrow at Vali and kill him. Accordingly a duel was arranged, Sugriva with a garland around his neck, while the duel was on, Rama, standing behind a tree, shot Vali with his arrow and opened the way for Surgiva to be the king of Kiskinda.
This murder of Vali is the greatest blot on the character of Rama. It was a crime which was thoroughly unprovoked, for Vali had no quarrel with Rama. It was a most cowardly act, for Vali was unarmed. It was a planned and premeditated murder.
Consider his treatment of his own wife Sita. With the army collected for him by Sugriva and Hanuman, Rama invades Lanka. There too he plays the same mean part as he did between the two brothers, Vali and Sugriva. He takes the help of Vibhishana, the brother of Ravana, promising him to kill Ravana and his son and place him on the vacant throne. Rama kills Ravana and his son Indrajit. The first thing Rama does after the fight was to give a descent burial to the dead body of Ravana. Thereafter he interested himself in the coronation of Vibhishana and it was after the coronation that he sends Hanuman to Sita to inform her that he, Laxman and Sugriva have killed Ravana.
Even when the coronation was over he did not go himself but he sent Hanuman. And what was the message he sent him with? He did not ask Hanuman to bring her. He asked him to inform her that he was hale and hearty. It was Sita who expressed to Hanuman her desire to see Rama. Rama did not go to see Sita, his own wife who was kidnapped and confined by Ravana for more than 10 months. Sita went to him and what did Rama say to Sita when he saw her? It would be difficult to believe any man with ordinary human kindness could address his wife in such dire distress as Ram did to Sita when he met her at Lanka if there was not the direct authority of Valmiki. This is how Rama addressed het:
"I have got you as a prize in a war after conquering my enemy, your captor. I have recovered my honour and punished my enemy. People have witnessed my military powers and I am glad my labours have been rewarded. I came here to kill Ravana and wash off the dishonour. I did not take this trouble for your sake."
Could there be anything more cruel than this conduct of Rama towards Sita? He does not stop there. He proceeded to tell her:
"I suspect your conduct. You must have been spoiled by Ravana. Your very sight is revolting to me. Oh you daughter of Janaka! I allow you to go anywhere you like. I have nothing to do with you. I conquered you back and I am content for that was my object. I cannot think that Ravana would have failed to enjoy a woman as beautiful as you are."
Quite naturally Sita calls Rama low and mean and tells him quite plainly that she would have committed suicide and saved him all this trouble if when Hanuman first came he had sent her a message that he had abandoned her on the ground that she was kidnapped. To give him no excuse Sita undertakes to prove her purity. She enters the fire and comes out unscathed. The Gods satisfied with this evidence, proclaim that she is pure. It is then that Rama agrees to take her back to Ayodhya.
And what does he do with her when he brings her back to Ayodhya? Of course, he became king and she became queen. But while Rama remained king, Sita ceased to be queen very soon. This incident reflects great infamy upon Rama. It is recorded by Valmiki in his Ramayana that some days after the coronation of Rama and Sita as king and queen, Sita conceived. Seeing that she was carrying some residents of evil disposition began to calumniate Sita suggesting that she was in Lanka and blaming Rama for taking such a woman back as his wife. This malicious gossip in the town was reported by Bhadra, the Court joker, to Rama. Rama evidently was stung by this calumny. He was overwhelmed with a sense of disgrace. This is quite natural. What is quite unnatural is the means he adopts of getting rid of this disgrace. To get rid of this disgrace he takes the shortest cut and the swiftest means - namely to abandon her, a woman in a somewhat advanced state of pregnancy in a jungle, without friends, without provision, without even notice - in a most treacherous manner. There is no doubt that the idea of abandoning Sita was not sudden and had not occurred to ram on the spur of the moment. The genesis of the idea, the developing of it and the plan of executing are worth some detailed mention.
When Bhadra reports to him the gossip about Sita which had spread in the town, Rama calls his brothers and tells them of his feelings. He tells them Sita's purity and chastity was proved in Lanka, that Gods had vouched for it and that he absolutely believed in her innocence, purity and chastity. "All the same the public are calumniating Sita and are blaming me and putting me to shame. No one can tolerate such disgrace. Honour is a great asset; Gods as well as great men strive to maintain it. I cannot bear this dishonour and disgrace. To save myself from such dishonour and disgrace I shall be ready even to abandon you. Don't think I shall hesitate to abandon Sita."
This shows that he was making up his mind to abandon Sita as the easiest way of saving himself from public calumny without considering whether the way was fair or foul. The life of Sita simply did not count. What counted was his own personal name and fame. He of course does not take the manly course of defending his wife and stopping the gossip, which as a king he could have done and which as a husband who was convinced of his wife's innocence he was supposed to do. He yielded to the public gossip and there are not wanting Hindus who use this as ground to prove that Rama was a democratic king when others could equally well say that he was a weak and cowardly monarch. Be that as it may that diabolical plan of saving his name and his fame he discloses to his brother but not to Sita, the only person who was affected by it and the only person who was entitled to have notice of it. But she is kept entirely in the dark. Rama keeps it away from Sita as a closely guarded secret and was waiting for an opportunity to put his plan into action. Eventually the cruel fate of Sita gives him the opportunity he was waiting for. Women who are carrying exhibit all sorts of cravings for all sorts of things. Rama knew of this. So one day he asked Sita if there was anything for which she was craving. She replied that she would like to live in the vicinity of the Ashrama of a sage on the bank of the river Ganges and live on fruits and roots at least for one night. Rama simply jumped at the suggestion of Sita and said, "Be easy my dear, I shall see that you are sent there tomorrow". Sita treats this as an honest promise. But what does Rama do? He thinks it is a good opportunity for carrying out his plan of abandoning Sita. Accordingly he called his brothers to a secret conference and disclosed to them his determination to use this desire of Sita as the opportunity to carry out the plan of abandoning her. He tells his brothers not to intercede on behalf of Sita, and warns them that if they came in his way he would look upon them as his enemies. Then he tells Laxman to take Sita in a chariot next day to the Ashram in the jungle on the bank of the river Ganges and to abandon her there. Laxman did not know how he could muster courage to tell Sita what was decided by Rama. Sensing his difficulty Rama informs Laxman that Sita had already expressed her desire to spend some time in the vicinity of an Ashram on the bank of the river and eased the mind of Laxman. This confabulation took place at night. Next morning Laxman asked Sumanta to yoke the horses to the chariot. Sumanta informs Laxman of having already done so. Laxman then goes into the palace and meets Sita and reminds her of her having expressed the desire to pass some days in the vicinity of an Ashrama and Rama having promised to fulfill the same and tells her of his having been charged by Rama to do the needful in the matter. He points to her the chariot waiting there and says, "Let us go!" Sita jumps into the chariot with her heart full of gratitude to Rama. With Laxman as her companion and Sumanta as coachman, the chariot proceeds to its appointed place. At last, they were on the bank of the Ganges and were ferried across by the fishermen. Laxman fell at Sita's feet, and with hot tears flowing from his eyes he said, "Pardon me, O, blameless queen, for what I am doing. My orders are to abandon you here, for the people blame Rama for keeping you in his house".
Sita, abandoned by Rama and left to die in a jungle, went for shelter to the Ashrama of Valmiki, which was near about. Valmiki gave her protection and kept her in his Ashram. There in course of time, Sita gave birth to twin sons, called Kusa and Lava. The three lived with Valmiki. Valmiki brought up the boys and taught them to sing the Ramayana which he had composed. For 12 years the boys lived in the forest in the Ashrama of Valmiki not far from Ayodhya where Rama continued to rule. Never once in those 12 years this 'model husband and loving father' cared to inquire what had happened to Sita - whether she was living or whether she was dead. Twelve years after Rama meets Sita in a strange manner. Rama decided to perform a Yagna and issued an invitation to all the Rishis to attend and take part. For reasons best known to Rama himself no invitation was issued to Valmiki although his Ashram was near to Ayodhya. But Valmiki came to the Yagna of his own accord accompanied by the two sons of Sita introducing them as his disciples. While the Yagna was going on the two boys were used to perform recitations of Ramayana in the presence of the Assembly. Rama was very pleased and made inquiries, and he was informed that they were the sons of Sita. It was then he remembered Sita and what does he do then? He does not send for Sita. He calls these innocent boys who knew nothing about their parents' sin, who were the only victims of a cruel destiny, to tell Valmiki that if Sita was pure and chaste she could present herself in the Assembly to take a vow and thereby remove the calumny cast against herself and himself. This is a thing she had once done in Lanka. This is a thing she could have been asked to do again before she was sent away. There was no promise that after this vindication of her character Rama was prepared to take her back. Valmiki brings her to the Assembly. When she was in front of Rama, Valmiki said, "O, son of Dashratha, here is Sita whom you abandoned in consequence of public disapprobation. She will now swear her purity if permitted by you. Here are your twin-born sons raised up by me in my hermitage". "I know", said Rama, "that Sita is pure and that these are my sons. She performed an ordeal in Lanka in proof of her purity and therefore I took her back. But people here have doubts still, and let Sita perform an ordeal here that all these Rashis and people may witness it".
With eyes cast down on the ground and with hands folded Sita swore "As I never thought out of anyone except Rama even in my mind, let mother Earth open and bury me. As I always loved Rama in words, in thoughts, and in deed, let mother Earth open and bury me!" As she uttered the oath, the earth verily opened and Sita was carried away inside seated on a golden simhasana(throne). Heavenly flowers fell on Sita's head while the audience looked on as in a trance.
That means that Sita preferred to die rather than return to Rama who had behaved no better than a brute. Such is the tragedy of Sita and the crime of Rama the God. Let me throw some search light on Rama the King.
Rama is held out as an ideal King. But can that conclusion be said to be found in fact?
As a matter of fact Rama never functions as a king. He was a normal King. The administration, as Valmiki, states, was entrusted to Bharata, his brother. He had freed himself from the cares and worries about his kingdom and subjects.
Valmiki has very minutely described the daily life of Rama after he became King. According to that accounts, the day was divided into two parts, up to forenoon and afternoon. From morning to forenoon he was engaged in performing religious rites and ceremonies and offering devotion. The afternoon he spent alternately in the company of Court jesters and in the Zenana. When he got tired of jesters he went back to the Zenana. Valmiki also gives a detailed description of how Rama spent his life in the Zenana. This Zenana was housed in a park called Ashoka Vana. There Rama used to tale his meals. The food, according to Valmiki, consisted of all kinds of delicious viands. They included flesh and fruits and liquor. Rama was not a teetotaler. He drank liquor copiously and Valmiki records that Rama saw to it that Sita joined with him in his drinking bouts. From the description of the Zenana of Rama as given by Valmiki it was by no means a mean thing. There were Apsaras, Uraga and Kinnari accomplished in dancing and singing. There were other beautiful women brought from different parts. Rama sat in the midst of these women drinking and dancing. They pleased Rama and Rama garlanded them. Valmiki calls Ram as a 'Prince among women's men'. This was not a day's affair. It was a regular course of his life.
As has already been said Rama never attended to public business. He never observed the ancient rule of Indian kings of hearing the wrongs of his subjects and attempting to redress them. Only one occasion has been recorded by Valmiki when he personally heard the grievance of his subjects. But unfortunately the occasion turned out to be a tragic one. He took upon himself to redress the wrong but in doing so committed the worst crime that history has ever recorded.
The incident is known as the murder of Sambuka, the Shudra.It is said by Valmiki that in Rama's reign there were no premature deaths in his kingdom. It happened, however, that a certain Brahman's son died in a premature death. The bereaved father carried his body to the gate of the king's palace, and placing it there, cried aloud and bitterly reproached Rama for the death of his son, saying that it must be the consequence of some sin committed within his realm, and that the king himself was guilty if he did not punish it; and finally threatened to end his life there by sitting on a dharana(hunger-strike) against Rama unless his son was restored to life. Rama thereupon consulted his council of eight learned Rishis, and Narada amongst them told Rama that some Shudra among his subjects must have been performing Tapasya (ascetic exercises), and thereby going against Dharma(sacred law), for according to it, the practice of Tapasya was proper to the twice-born alone, while the duty of the Shudras consisted only in the service of the "twice-born". Rama was thus convinced that it was the sin committed by a Shudra in transgressing Dharma in that manner, which was responsible for the death of the Brahmin boy.
So, Rama mounted his aerial car and scoured the countryside for the culprit. At last, in a wild region far away to the south he espied a man practicing rigorous austerity of a certain kind. He approached the man, and with no more ado than to enquire of him and inform himself that he was a Shudra, by name Sambuka who was practicing Tapasya with a view to going to heaven in his own earthly person and without so much as a warning, expostulation or the like addressed to him, cut off his head. And lo and behold! At that very moment the dead Brahman boy in distant Ayodhya began to breathe again. Here in the wilds the Gods rained flowers on the king from their joy at his having prevented a Shudra from gaining admission to their celestial abode through the power of theTapasya which he had no right to perform. They also appeared before Rama and congratulated him on his deed. In answer to his prayer to them to revive the dead Brahman boy lying at the palace gate in Ayodhya, they informed him that he had already come to life. They then departed. Rama thence proceeded to the Ashrama, which was nearby, of the sage Agastya, who commended the step he had taken with Sambuka, and presented him with a divine bracelet. Rama then returned to his capital.
The debate on reservation paints Dalits and backward communities as devoid of merit
and upper castes as meritorious.
A high-profile business tycoon recently argued, "We compete with global companies and are primarily people-dependent. We've no alternative to hire the best talent available".
What about merit of the upper castes? Upper castes can be evaluated by assessing their performance on the basis of duties prescribed by the traditional social structure. Brahmins had the privilege of teaching, Kshatriyas of protecting all creatures and Vaishyas of living by commerce. Dalits can ask Brahmins that if they were so meritorious, why is half the country's population illiterate. If Kshatriyas were so meritorious, why did they fail to defend our borders from time to time?Shaka, Huns, Tartars, Mughals, Dutch and British defeated them and subjugated us. If Vaishyas were so meritorious why is India's trade and commerce in a shambles?
In the same vein, if Arjuna of Maha-bharata was so meritorious then why did Dronacharya demand Eklavya's thumb?
Returning to contemporary times, our low Human Development Index (HDI), 127 in a group of 174 countries, tells a story. In the Corruption Perception Index for the year 2004, India was ranked 90 in the group of 146 countries, according to the report of Transparency International in 2004 If meritorious economists and administrators manage the affairs of the country without any reservation, how are we so economically backward? Why do farmers commit suicide as if it were rural India's ritual? Why do we have hundreds and thousands of legal cases pending at higher levels of our meritorious judiciary?
Science and technology are consi-dered the realm of super speciality and kept out of the bounds of reservation in India. Professor Nian Chai Liu and his colleagues at the Shanghai Jio Tong University in China spent two years collating and analysing the output of 2,000 universities worldwide and published their results by ranking 500 universities. Only three universities and institutions from India figured in the top 500 — Indian Institute of Science at 260 and Indian Institutes of Technology at Kharagpur and Delhi, respectively, at 459 and 460. IIT Madras, Kanpur, Mumbai and Roorkee did not figure at all. There is, of course, no reservation for OBCs at these centres for learning. There is something intriguing about the relationship between merit, commitment and contributing to the nation. Why does career become more important than service to nation to many IITians and IIMians, who cannot wait to go abroad?
Let us look at the merit of doctors working in prestigious hospitals in the country. If Indian doctors and medical specialists are meritorious why do most VVIPs run away to foreign countries at the faintest hint of illness? Former prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, an ardent supporter of swadeshi, had to call an NRI orthopaedic surgeon for his knee operation.
Is it not logical to evaluate the merit of professionals passing out from private universities, engineering, medical and mana-gement colleges, where a seat can be bought for a few lakhs? Despite no reservation in sports, a nation of over a billion has failed to produce a single individual gold medalist in Olympics. Is it really a case of merito-cracy that all progenies of film
stars are given a chance to act and sing in films even as they lack experience? Are these cases of merit or pedigree reservation?
The private sector makes up just 0.7 per cent of world exports. If Indian industries are so meritocratic, why have they not produced a single global brand? Industrialists who call themselves meritorious have inherited their business from their parents. Almost no top industrialist is a first generation entrepreneur. Not surprisingly, a number of social scientists argue that rewards in the educational and economic system are not based on merit. Educational and occupational attainments are related to family background and a number of circumstantial parameters rather than talent and ability.
Hence, people with the same educational qualification do not get same kind of jobs and those in the same jobs do not get equal remuneration.
राष्ट्रीय स्वयंसेवक संघ, किवा RSS, National volunteers organization याची सुरवात डॉ. हेडगेवार यानि सन १९२५ साली केलि. सघाने आपल्या स्थापने पासून आजपर्यंत आपले उधिष्ट कधीही लपवून ठेवले नाही. ते उधिष्ट म्हणजे भारताला हिन्दुराष्ट्र बनवने किवा भारतात हिन्दू राष्ट्राची स्थापना करने. यासाठी संघाने साम, दाम, दंड या तिन्ही नितिंचा वापर कसा केला ते या उतार्यात आपण पाहणार आहोत. वास्तविक पाहता हिन्दू हा शब्द हिन्दू धर्माच्या कुठल्याही ग्रंथात आढळत नाही. या देशाला हजारो वर्षापासून भारत असे सम्बोधान्यत आले आहे. भारताच्या सविधानत याचा उल्लेख भारत किवा इंडिया असाच आहे. परकीय अक्रमकानी या देशाचा उल्लेख सिधु किवा सिन्धु पलीकडचा त्याचाच अपभ्रंश होउन हिन्दू किवा हिन्दुस्थान असा केला. हा उल्लेख आजही अनेक एतिहासिक दस्तावेज मध्ये उपलब्द आहे. असे असतानाही संघ नेहमी हिन्दुराष्ट्र किवा हिन्दुस्थान असाच उल्लेख करतो, खर तर त्यांच्या आचारण हून हे स्पष्ट होते की त्याना धर्मधिष्टित राष्ट्र निर्माण करायचे आहे.
संघ परिवाराने हिन्दू राष्ट्राची भूमिका मांडताना कधी सामाजिक सुधारने बद्दल विचार केला असेल असे दिसून येत नाही. हिन्दू धर्माचा आत्मा म्हणजेच सामाजिक विषमता निर्माण करणारी चतुर्वर्न्यावर आधारलेली जतियाव्यवस्था, यावर हिन्दू धर्माचा पाया भक्कम आहे. असा संघाचा विश्वास आहे. संघाच्या गोलवलकर गुरुजींच्या विचारधन या पुस्तकात त्यानी रुग्वेदाच्या आधारे चतुर्वर्न्याची व्याख्या स्पष्ट केलि आहे. त्यांच्या दृष्टीने हिन्दू समाज एकत्र करण्यासाठी आतंरिक मतभेद व विषमता दूर करने हा मार्ग नसून बाहेरून येणार्या ह्म्ल्यांची भीतीच समजला एकात्म बनवते. यावर उपाय म्हणुन पार्धार्मियांचा द्वेष करने, इतर धर्माच्या मठावर हल्ला करने, धर्मौपदेशाकाना धमक्या खून हे सर्व प्रकार सर्रास हिंदुत्वाच्या नावाने संघ परिवार करीत आहे व् केल्यानातर महनत ही आहे की यात आम्ही नाही. भारतीय सविधानाने भारतीय नागरिकास कोणत्याही धर्माचे अनुकरण करण्यास स्वातंत्र्य दिले आहे. आज भारतात असे अनेक लोक आहेत ज्यांच्या पुर्वजनी कही कालावधि आधी धर्मान्तरण केले होते, परन्तु संघाला ह्या धर्मान्तरित गोष्टीचा बिलकुल विश्वास नाही, त्यांच्या मते हिन्दू धर्मं परधमियांस प्रवेश देण्यास कधीच अनुकूल नव्हता. कारन मनुष्याला त्याच्या जन्मतिल कर्मानुसार वर्ण व् जात मिलते अशी हिंदूंची श्रद्धा आहे. जरी कुणास हिंदुत घेतले त्रि त्याला कुठल्या वर्नात टाकायचे ही फार मोठी अड़चन आहे. इतर धर्म प्रसराकांची भूमिका फक्त कांगावा आहे असे संघ परिवारस वाटते. तरीही आज बल्जबरिने बजनाग दल व श्रीराम सेना सारख्या कट्टर संघटना ख्रिस्ती व् मुसल्मानस हिंदुत प्रवेश घेण्यास भाग पडत आहे. अर्थात आपले उधिष्ट साध्य करताना व आपली संघटना वाढविण्यात त्यांचे मार्ग सरल नाहीत हे स्पष्ट होते. हिंसा, कपटनीति, खोते बोलने, अफवा पसरावाने, निंदा नालस्ती करने इ सर्व विपरीत काम संघ परिवार बिनधास्थ पणे करतो व यासाठी ते कृष्णनीति व कौटिल्यनितीचा वापर करतात.
संघाची राजकारण बाबत एक निश्चित आणि सुस्पष्ट अशी भूमिका आहे. ते जरी स्वतः ला सांस्कृतिक संघटन म्हान्वुन घेत असले, तरी हिन्दुराष्ट्र स्थापनेचा निश्चित असा राजकीय विचार त्यांच्या जवळ आहे. संघ परिवारातील भाजप मागे सत्तास्थानी होता. अमेरिकेत वाजपेयी यानि संघाची कार्यक्रम पत्रिका थोडक्यात सांगितली त्यात राम मंदिर, सामान नगरी कायदा, व काश्मीरचे ३७० वे कलम हटवाने हे होते. संघप्रनित भाजप ला ४० वर्षं पर्यंत राम कुठे सापडलाच नाही. परिषदेने हिन्दू मतांपोटी राम मंदिर चा मुद्दा उचलला त्यासाठी अडवाणी नि राम-सीता रथयात्रा काढली त्यात कित्येक निश्पापांचे बळी गेले परन्तु यात संघाची संजुत वेगलीच होती असो. सत्तेवर येवुन्ही सामान नगरी कायदा त्याना पेलावाला नाही खर तर गोलवलकर गुरुजीनी स्वतः हिन्दू कोड बिल व सामान नगरी कायदा यांचा विरोध केला. संघाचा भाजप प्रणित सरकारने केलेल अधम कृत्य व् मुस्लिम नरसंहार हे लिबर्हन आणि जस्टिस कृष्ण अय्यर यांच्या अहवालामुले स्पष्ट झाले आहे. यावरून संघ प्रणित राजनीती किती धोकादायक आहे हे स्पष्ट होते
संघ परिवाराच्या दृष्टीने राखीव जागा हा एक मोठा अडथळा आहे. चातुर्वर्ण्य परिस्थिथि मुले बहुजन समजला जाणीव पूर्वक मागे ठेवण्यात आले आहे. बहुजनाला मागे रेटून ब्राम्हण समाज मात्र सर्व सुख सोयी, सवलती व राखीव जागा लाटत राहिला आहे. आजही हजारोंच्या संखेने उभारल्या जाणार्या मंदिरांचे भटजिपद हे त्यांच्या साथी राखीव आहे. मंदिर मिळाले की उपजीविका सुरु असे त्यांचे सूत्र आहे. भाजप सत्तेवर आल्यावर त्यानी नेटाने आर्थिक धोरनाची तरफदारी केलेली आहे. त्यात त्यानी सार्वजनिक उद्योग धन्ध्यांचे खाजगीकरण झपाट्याने केले. त्यात संचार अणि विमा कंपन्या आघाडीवर आहेत. खाजगिकरानाचे बिल संघाने कांग्रेस च्या मदतीने मंजूर केले, इतकेच नव्हे त्र विदेशीकरण सुकर व्हावे म्हणुन १५६९ वस्तूंचे संरक्षण रद्द करून ती यादी जनरल केटेगरी मध्ये धकलाली. भाजप सरकारने परदेशी वस्तुंच्या अयातिला पुरजन वाव दिल्याने साखर, सोयाबीन, तंदुल, वाटाणा, त्याच प्रमाने दूध, नारळ, सफरचंद हे घर उपयोगी वस्तु मोठ्या प्रमाणावर आयत होऊ लागल्या व शेतकरी वर्गापुधे महासंकट उभे राहिले. त्यामुले शेतकरी वर्गात अत्म्हात्येचे प्रमाण वाढले आहे. संघप्रनित भारतीय किसान संघ आज आवाज करतो पण तो विचारपूर्वक दाबला जातो. भाजपच्या या खाजगिकर्नाचे एकाच ध्येय म्हणजे, खाजगी कारन झाले की राखीव जागांचा प्रश्नच उत्भावत नाही.
धर्मनिरपेक्ष राष्ट्रवाद हा तर संघाचा मोठा अडथळा आहे. हिन्दू धर्मं हच मुळत धर्मं निरपेक्षता मनानारा आहे अशी संघाची समजूत आहे. संघ परिवार जेव्हा भारतातील धार्मिक उदार्पनाचे दाखले देतो तेव्हा छत्रपति शिवाजी महाराज हे धर्मनिरपेक्ष होते पण त्यांच्या सैन्यात असलेले हजारो मुस्लिम सैनिक मात्र सांगत नाहीत. अकबर सारख्या थोर राजाचा सर्वधर्म संभव सांगत नाहीत, संताच्या उल्लेखत कबीर आणि शेख मोहम्मद त्याना दिसत नाहीत. मदर टेरेसा सारख्या व्यक्तींचे कार्य हे संघाच्या दृष्टीने कड़ी मोलाचे कार्य होते, कारन धर्मनिरपेक्ष राज्यशासन हे त्याना मुलीच मान्य नाही.
संघ परिवाराने आपले उधिष्ट साध्य करण्यासाठी मार्गातील सर्व अडथळे दूर करण्याचा कृत निश्चय केला आहे. त्यांच्या मार्गातील एक मोठी अड़चन म्हणजे भारतीय राज्यघटना. स्वातंत्र्य चळवळीच्या पाश्वभुमिकेवर घटना समितीची निर्मिती झाली. घटनेच्या आराखड्याचे काम प्रामुख्याने डॉ. भीमराव आंबेडकर यांच्यावर सोपविले याचे प्रमुख कारन असे की, राष्ट्रीय स्वातंत्र्याच्या चळवळीतील सर्व नेत्याना ज्या मुल्यावर अधरून घटना करने अभिप्रेत होते त्यांच्यासाठी डॉ. भीमराव आंबेडकर यांचे विचार अत्यंत सुसंगत होते. डॉ. आंबेडकर यांच्या नेतृत्वाखाली जी घटना बनाली तीच्या प्रस्तावानेतच घटनेला अभिप्रेत असलेली मूल्य व्यवस्था मांडलेली आहे. घटनेचे एकून स्वरूप हे संघराज्यव्यवास्थेचे आहे आणि ह्या राज्यव्यवास्थेचा आधार म्हणुन कोणत्याही धर्माला अजिबात महत्व नाही. याचा अर्थ असा की, भारतीय घटना धर्मनिरपेक्ष राष्ट्रवादावर अधर्लेली आहे. पण संघ परिवाराला हे कदापि मानाने शाक्य नाही. त्यामुले गोलवलकर गुरुजीनी नेहमी भारतीय घटनेचा उपमर्द केला. संघ परिवारातील मंडळींनी भारतीय सविधानस गोठाडी ची उपमा दिली आहे. संघ परिवारातील विश्व हिन्दू परिषदेने चंडीगढ़ येथील आपल्या अखिल भारतीय अधिवेशनात भारतातील सर्व अधपतानाचे मुळ भारतीय राज्य घटनेत असल्याचा दावा केला आहे. ही घटना बदलून मनुस्म्रुतिवर आधारित राज्य घटना बनवण्याची गरज आहे. पण हे भारतातील बहुसंख्या बहुजानना कदापि मान्य होणार नाही, इतकेच नव्हे तर विश्व हिन्दू परिषदेने अलीकडच्या काळात धर्मं संसद निर्माण केलि आहे व् तिचे स्थान हे भरतिया संसदे पेक्षा उंच आहे अशी संघाची भावना आहे, किंबहुना भारतीय राष्ट्र भारतीय संसद व न्यायव्यवस्था याना आदेश देण्याचे सर्व हक्क या धर्मं संसदेस आहे, असे त्यांस वाटते हे पाहता जरी ते म्हणत असतील की आम्हास धर्म धिष्टित राष्ट्र निर्माण करायचे नाही तरी धर्म धिष्टित शासनाची पयाभारानी ते कळत नकळत करीत आहेत, यावरून संघाचा असली चेहरा स्पष्ट होतो.
संघ परिवराची आणखिन एक अड़चन म्हणजे भारतीय इतिहास. भारताचा इतिहास हा मुसलमान राज्वातिनी भरलेला आहे. हेच मुळत त्याना पतात नाही. त्यांच्या राजवटी मधला चंगुल्पना त्याना कधी दिसला नाही. जगातील सात आश्चार्य पैकी एक ताजमहल हा हिन्दू सेनापतिंचा तेजो महल होता असे मंडन त्याना आवश्यक वाटते. छत्रपति शिवाजी महाराज हे गेब्रम्हान्प्रतिपलक होते, म्हणजेच गयी आणि ब्रम्हानाचे प्रतिपालक होते, शिवाजी आणि रामदास यांची प्रत्यक्ष भेट झाली नसतानाही त्यांचे राजगुरु होते व त्यांच्या मार्गदर्शनाखाली स्वराज्य स्थापन झाले असे मांडने त्याना हिताचे वाटते. वेड निर्मिती करणारे आर्य हे भारताचे मुळ रहिवासी नाहीत ते मुसलमाना प्रमाने बाहेरून आलेले आहेत, ही बाब हिन्दू राष्ट्र संकल्पनेच्या दृष्टीने अडचणीची ठरते, म्हणुन संघ प्रणित इतिहासकार मोहन्द्जदेरो व हरप्पा ह्या संस्कृति अर्यांच्याच असे नवे शोध लावतात. अयोध्येत शेकडो राम मंदिर असताना व इतिहासाचा जरासाही आधार नसताना बाबरी मशिदाची जागा हेच राम जन्म स्थान होते व त्यासाठी इकडून तिकडून बनावट पुरावेही ते गोला करू शकतात, अश्या प्रकार हिन्दू राष्ट्राच्या मार्गातील इतिहासातील अडचणी ते दूर करतात.
सध्याची शिक्षण पद्धति हा सुद्धा हिन्दू राष्ट्र निर्मितीत एक अड़चन आहे असे संघास वाटते. संघाच्या मतानुसार भारतीय शिक्षण पद्धति ही पारलोकिक व अध्यात्म्यावर अधर्लेली असावी. वेड, उपनिषदे, गीता इ अध्यात्मिक ग्रंथावर अधर्लेली असावी. जुन्या गुरुकुल पधातिचा ते स्वीकार करतात. ज्या प्रमाने उच्च्वार्निया रुशिमुनिन्कडून घेतलेले शिक्षण पूर्णपणे हिन्दू संस्कृतीवर अधर्लेले असावे असे त्यांस वाटते व त्यासाठी ते तश्या प्रयत्न ची शर्त करतात. वनवासी कल्याण आश्रम व संस्कार भारती या सारख्या संघ प्रणित शाखेकडून हिन्दू धर्माचे संस्कार व गीतापठन करावेत असा त्यांचा आग्रह असतो, संधि मिल्ताच संघ परिवार भारताची शिक्षण पद्धति बदलण्यास मागे पुढे पाहणार नाही.
संघाचे हिटलर बद्दल छे प्रेम कधीच लपून राहिले नाही. शिवसेनेचे बाळ ठाकरे हे एकेकाळी संघात होते, तय वेले पासून त्यांचे हिटलर प्रेम हे शाबूत नसून ते भारताचे हिटलर बनण्याची आपली महत्वाकांक्षा त्यानी अनेक वेळा बोलूं ही दाखवली आहे. गोल्वल कर गुरुजीनी आपल्या विचारधन या पुस्तकात हिटलर बद्दल छे प्रेम व् भूमिका स्पष्ट केलि आहे. हिटलर ने जसे जर्मनीची घटना, त्यांची लोकसभा, इतर राजकीय पक्ष, व् ज्यूँ समाजाबद्दल जो तिरस्कार व्यक्त केला होता तोच तिरस्कार संघ परिवार भारतीय घटना, भारतीय संसद, अन्य राजकीय पक्ष व गैर हिन्दू समाजाबबत व्यक्त करत आहेत.
जर संघ प्रणित हिन्दू राष्ट्राची निर्मिती भाविश्यकालत झाली तर या देशाचे भवितव्य नक्कीच उज्वल नसणार. हजारो वर्षाच्या पारतंत्र्यातुन आणि गुलामगिरितुंन हा देश १९५० साली स्वतंत्र झाला तो नव्या राज्य घटने मुले, जर भारताचे हिन्दू राष्ट्र झाले तर पुन्हा गुलामगिरी आणि पारतंत्र्य भोगावे लागणार व पुन्हा स्वातंत्र्यासाठी कबीर, तुकाराम महाराज, छ शिवाजी महाराज, म फुले, डॉ. आंबेडकर यान सारख्या महापुरुशाना जन्म घ्यावा लागणार.
आता १५ व्या लोकसभेचे रणशिंग फुकले आहे. तर बहुजनानी ठरवावे की संघ प्रणित भाजप सरकार हवे की, समता, बंधुता, आणि स्वातंत्र्य या त्रिसुत्रिवर आधारित राज्य प्रशासन हवे.
India is a conjeries of communities. There are in it Parsis, Christians, Mohammedans and Hindus. The basis of these communities is not racial. It is of course religious. This is a superficial view. What is interesting to know is why is a Parsi a Parsi and why is a Christian a Christian, why is a Muslim a Muslim and why is a Hindu a Hindu? With regard to the Parsi, the Christian and the Muslim it is smooth sailing. Ask a Parsi why he calls himself a Parsi he will have no difficulty in answering the question. He will say he is a Parsi because he is a follower of Zoraster. Ask the same question to a Christian. He too will have no difficulty in answering the question. He is a Christian because he believes in Jesus Christ. Put the same question to a Muslim. He too will have no hesitation in answering it. He will say he is a believer in Islam and that is why he is a Muslim. Now ask the same question to a Hindu and there is no doubt that he will be completely bewildered and would not know what to say. If he says that he is a Hindu because he worships the same God as the Hindu Community does his answer cannot be true. All Hindus do not worship one God. Some Hindus are monotheists, some are polytheists and some are pantheists. Even those Hindus who are monotheists are not worshippers of the same Gods. Some worship the God Vishnu, some Shiva, some Rama, some Krishna. Some do not worship the male Gods. They worship a goddess. Even then they do not worship the same Goddesses. They worship different Goddesses. Some worship Kali, some worship Parvati, some worship Laxmi. Coming to the Polytheists they worship all the Gods. They will worship Vishnu and Shiva, also Rama and Krishna. They will worship Kali, Parvati and Laxmi. A Hindu will fast on the Shivaratri day because it is sacred to Shiva. He will fast on Ekadashi day because it is sacred to Vishnu. He will plant a Bel tree because it is sacred to Shiva and he will plant a Tulsi because it is dear to Vishnu. Polytheists among the Hindus do not confine their homage to the Hindu Gods. No Hindu hesitates to worship a Muslim Pir or a Christian Goddess. Thousands of Hindus go to a Muslim Pir and make offerings. Actually there are in some places Brahmins who own the office of a hereditary priesthood of a Muslim Pir and wear a Muslim Pir's dress. Thousands of Hindus go to make offerings to the Christian Goddess Mant Mauli near Bombay. The worship of the Christian or Muslim Gods is only on occasions. But there are more permanent transfer of religious allegiance. There are many so-called Hindus whose religion has a strong Muhammadan content. Notable amongst these are the followers of the strange Panchpiriya cult, who worship five Muhammadan saints, of uncertain name and identity, and sacrifice cocks to them, employing for the purpose as their priest a Muhammadan Dafali fakir. Throughout India many Hindus make pilgrimages to Muhammadan shrines, such as that of Sakhi Sarwar in the Punjab. Speaking of the Malkanas Mr. Blunt says that they are converted Hindus of various castes belonging to Agra and the adjoining districts. chiefly Muttra, Ettah and Mainpuri. They are of Rajput, Jat and Bania descent. They are reluctant to describe themselves as Musalmans, and generally give their original caste name and scarcely recognize the name Malkana. Their names are Hindu; they mostly worship in Hindu temples: they use the salutation Ram-Ram: they intermarry amongst themselves only. On the other hand, they sometimes frequent a mosque, practise circumcision and bury their dead: they will eat with Muhammadans if they are particular friends. In Gujarat there are several similar communities such as the Matia Kunbis, who call in Brahmans for their chief ceremonies, but are followers of the Pirana saint Imam Shah and his successors, and bury their dead as do the Muhammadans: the Sheikhadas at their weddings employ both Hindu and a Muhammadan priest, and the Momans who practise circumcision, bury their dead and read the Gujarati Koran, but in other respects follow Hindu custom and ceremonial. If he says that "I am a Hindu because I hold to the beliefs of the Hindus" his answer cannot be right for here one is confronted with the fact that Hinduism has no definite creed. The beliefs of persons who are by all admitted to be Hindus often differ more widely from each other than do those of Christians and Muhammadans. Limiting the issue to cardinal beliefs the Hindus differ among themselves as to the beliefs which arc of cardinal importance. Some say that all the Hindu scriptures must be accepted, but some would exclude the Tantras, while others would regard only the Vedas as of primary importance; some again think that the sole essential is belief in the doctrine of karma and metempsychosis. A complex congeries of creeds and doctrines is Hinduism. It shelters within its portals monotheists, polytheists and pantheists; worshippers of the great Gods Shiva and Vishnu or of their female counterparts,.as well as worshippers of the divine mothers or the spirits of trees, rocks and streams and the tutelary village deities; persons who propitiate their deity by all manner of bloody sacrifices, and persons who will not only kill no living creature but who must not even use the word 'cut '; those whose ritual consists mainly of prayers and hymns, and those who indulge in unspeakable orgies in the name of religion; and a host of more or less heterodox sectaries, many of whom deny the supremacy of the Brahmans, or at least have non-Brahmanical religious leaders. If he says that he is a Hindu because he observes the same customs as other Hindus do his answer cannot be true. For all Hindus do not observe the same customs. In the north near relatives are forbidden to marry; but in the south cousin marriage is prescribed, and even closer alliances are sometimes permitted. As a rule female chastity is highly valued, but some communities set little store by it, at any rate prior to marriage, and others make it a rule to dedicate one daughter to a life of religious prostitution. In some parts the women move about freely; in others they are kept secluded. In some parts they wear skirts; in others trousers. Again if he said that he is a Hindu because he believes in the caste system his answer cannot be accepted as satisfactory. It is quite true that no Hindu is interested in what his neighbour believes, but he is very much interested in knowing whether he can eat with him or take water from his hands. In other words it means that the caste system is an essential feature of Hinduism and a man who does not belong to a recognized Hindu Caste cannot be a Hindu. While all this is true it must not be forgotten that observance of caste is not enough. Many Musalmans and many Christians observe caste if not in the matter of inter-dining certainly in the matter of inter-marriage. But they cannot be called Hindus on that account. Both elements must be present. He must be a Hindu and he must also observe caste. This brings us back to the old question who is a Hindu? It leaves us where we are. Is it not a question for every Hindu to consider why in the matter of his own religion his position is so embarrassing and so puzzling? Why is he not able to answer so simple a question which every Parsi, every Christian, and every Muslim can answer? Is it not time that he should ask himself what are the causes that has brought about this Religious chaos ?
London School of Economics's list of 10 great economists of all times(2007):
1. Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations 2.Ricardo - International Competion and Comparative Advantage 3.Svenson - Fluidity and Money Supply 4.Galton - Mean Reverting Systems 5.Keynes - Effect of Interest Rates on Economic Systems 6.Ambedkar - Empowerment of Disenfranchised and Public Policy 7.Paul Samuelson - Utility Curves 8.Kenneth Arrow - Public Choice 9.Scholes - Option Pricing and Brownian Motion 10Fischer - Inflation, Expectations and Real Value of Money
Adam Yauch Alanis Morissette Alice Walker Allen Ginsberg Angelina Jolie Becky Johnston Belinda Carlisle Brad Pitt Brett Kirk Bruce Lee Buster Williams Cora L. E. Christian Courtney Love Dadon Dawadolma Demi moore Diane di Prima Ernestine Anderson Ernestine Anderson Frank Herbert George Lucas Goldie Hawn Harrison Ford Herbert Von Karajan Herbie Hancock Jack Kerouac Jennifer Lopez Jet Li Joanna Lumley John Cage Jung-si Park K.D.Lang Kate Bosworth Keanu Reeves Kylie Kwong Larry Coryell Laurie Anderson Leonard Cohen Leonardo Dicaprio Lindsay Crouse Mark Wahlberg Melissa Mathison Michael Stipe Nathaniel Dorsky Nestor Torres Nick "Brash" Bradley Oliver Stone Orlando Bloom Pamela Stephenson Patrick Duffy Peter Moores Phil Jackson Phillip Glass Richard Gere Ricky Martin Rob Cohen Roberto Baggio Ruby Wax Sharon Stone Steven Segal Sting Susan Blackmore Susanne Vega Tano Maeda Tiger Woods Tina Turner Uma Thurman William Ford Jr.
