Riddle of Bhagvad Geeta.

Geeta is without doubt one of the more important texts of Hinduism....infact for certain sect it is the most supreme text, so much so that even in the court today Hindus have to say "Main Geeta par Haath Rakh ke Kasam khata hoon...".Well but does this book pass the test of clarity/logic???

To begin with even the origin of Geeta is unknown.Every one knows that Geeta is a dialog between Arjuna and Krishna in the Mahabharata.But the question is that how did it reach us? The talk between Arjuna and Krishna was strictly verbal.No one except Arjun could see the "Virat roop" of Krishna because the latter had given him some sort of spiritual sight.But there is no mention of Arjuna taking down any notes on paper (or whatever writing material that was used at that time).The happenings on the battlefield were visible to only one another person in the whole world and that was Sanjay through the spiritual powers bestowed upon him by some sage.But again whatever he saw he narrated to Drhitarastra.There is no mention of him writing it down either.So naturally the question arises, who penned down the Geeta??When only 2 persons on this earth could possibly know what was happening there at kurukshetra and neither of them noted it down or assisted anyone to write it then just how the hell did Gita turn into a book?Even Ved Vyasa who wrote down the epic didnt include the contents of Gita in his Mahabharata. So in all probability Geeta in an latter inclusion to the epic, authenticity of which is unknown.And this doesnt end here.One can easily say if he studies gita that the composer is himself a confused man and probably so desperate to get a divine status to his creation that he didnt want to risk hurting anyone and hence included diametrically opposite things and argued that both are the truth.The result is that Gita is in itself full of contradictions.Just take a look at the amount of self contradictions:

At one point, Krishna tells Arjuna that action is the most important thing and without action one will be nowhere. But after that He tells him that action is all right but knowledge is better! Then Krishna says, ‘‘You must become a yogi and drop everything around you.’’ Then Krishna tells him: ‘‘He is intelligent who sees ‘action’ in ‘inaction’ and ‘inaction’ in ‘action’.’’ What does this mean? It means even if you don't do something you have acted — simply by ‘not doing’.
If you do something then too you have not acted, for in your not acting here, something else could have happened — you could have done something else. Even though you have acted, there is ‘inaction’; because you did this, you couldn't do something else. So every ‘action’ has ‘inaction’ and every ‘inaction’ has got an ‘action’ connected to it.

And then Krishna takes Arjuna towards Dhyana Yoga — meditation. In the sixth chapter of the Bhagvad Gita, he tells Arjuna that since he is confused, there is no use talking. He asks him to meditate. Finally, Krishna says, ‘‘Arjuna, he is the greatest amongst the yogis who keeps Me in his heart whether he meditates or not. He is the real yogi, because I am with him in whatever he is doing.’’

The contradictions don’t end there. At one juncture, Krishna says, ‘‘Arjuna, there is nobody dear to me, nobody whom I love.’’ And then gives a whole list of qualifications for those He really loves!

In another instance, Krishna tells Arjuna to act without looking for the fruit of action. Later He asks Arjuna to act properly, according to natural law. Then He tells him the way he ought to fight if he wants to win the war. So, at this point He is bringing Arjuna's attention to the fruit of action, but then He also tells him not to worry about the fruit of action.

Krishna was like a dear friend to Arjuna. In Bhagavat, you will see that except for Vidura and Udhava, nobody even thought he was enlightened; they all thought that he was just very smart. Of course, there were the Pandavas and the gopis who knew who Krishna was and how total He was from all angles. But many of them, including Arjuna, did not see him that way.

But then Krishna shows him, in one minute, that He is infinite. He tells Arjuna, ‘‘You can't see without the eye of knowledge; so now I will give you a special eye of knowledge, which I have haven't given anybody in ages. I am giving it to you now because it is time.’’ With that, He gives him a vision, a flash. For that one moment the universe appears as a manifestation of Krishna to Arjuna. Arjuna’s mind is shattered that moment. He sees all of creation, everything — the mountains and the rivers, the past, the present and the future — dissolving in Krishna. He sees that Krishna is that space, that infinity, into which everything is coming in and dissolving. For an instant, the whole life, the whole universe, all the memory and all that was associated with it just plays out like a movie and it frightens Arjuna.
Then Arjuna pleads, ‘‘Oh! Please show me your simple, natural and friendly face. I like your simple smile and I want to see my friend. I don't want to see anything beyond. It is too much for me.’’ This is called Vishva Roopa Darshana — the vision of the universal.

Thereafter, Krishna tells Arjuna about the yagyas and all the principles and the laws under which the society and universe works. Then He talks about sanyasa and how to be really centered.

For instance, an event or an instance should be seen as just that — an event, an instance or a happening. But it sticks to the mind and you try to get rid of it. The event assumes importance and the mind is caught up in it — ‘‘Oh! He said that, they said this, they didn't say this, etc.’’

Once the event goes away, then you feel a sense of great relief. You suddenly discover peace inside you.
Your very nature is peace. In the centre of you, you are peace. The moment this disturbance gets thrown out, you can actually feel it — all the brain cells, and the entire brain becomes so calm and settled the moment this garbage goes out.

And deep inside you can really smile as a flame of peace. Arjuna asks Krishna, ‘‘What you say is very magical and joyful. But it's not easy. This mind is difficult to control. It's like controlling air — can anybody control air?’’

Then Krishna says, ‘‘I agree with you. It is difficult but not impossible. Abhyasena tu Kaunteya — with practice, dispassion and by getting to the centre again, you will succeed.’’ You will see that Krishna tried everything.

Finally it was the display of the universal vision that worked on Arjuna. People cannot change just by visions also. Krishna does not really bring about the realization totally from outside — it needs something more.

That is why after Krishna led Arjuna to the infinite vision, he speaks on what is dear to him, on devotion, and then he comes on all the other things you know —about creation and even about food.

But when Arjuna says, ‘‘I give up,’’ Krishna says, ‘‘I can't do anything; you think and do whatever is best for you. First ponder on whatever I have said and then act.’’ Arjuna says, ‘‘No, now I am clear in my mind. I'll do whatever you will say.’’ So, Krishna had to speak through 18 chapters to get him to that point and interestingly gave all these knowledge in the middle of battle field. Krishna could have done it at the very first chapter. But it is beautiful the way(sic) this knowledge has flown.

Everything may appear to be all contradictory, if seen from all angles. But that is in fact reality.......and some of which is so fundamental ....for instance Krishna being the incarnation of Lord Himslef, is at least expected to be sure of things before giving sermons and yet there are numerous places where Krishna starts his dialog with "It appears that..." or "It seems so ...." or even "I think it is ...."

No wonder that poor Arjuna is more confused than what he was in the beginning and ends up saying to Krishna "Now I am clear in my mind(obviously about what to do)" and then says "I will do what ever you say(coz I dont have a clue as to what to do)"...Can anyone say this is logical????

आमचा वाटा !

The agony of the dalits was very accurately depicted by this great man time and again in his immortal poems.Read one of his great work :

लोकशाहीर वामनदादा कर्डक

सांगा आम्हाला बिर्ला बाटा टाटा कुठाय हो?
सांगा धनाचा साठा आमचा वाटा कुठाय हो?

घाम शेतात आमचा गळे, चोर ऐतच घेऊन पळे
धन चोरांचा हा पळण्याचा फाटा कुठाय हो?

न्याय वेशीला टांगा सदा, माल त्याचा की आमचा वदा
करा निवाडा आणा तराजु , काटा कुठाय हो?

लोणी सारं तिकडं पळं, इथं भुकेनं जिवडा जळं
दुकानवालेदादा आमचा आटा कुठाय हो?

इथ बिऱ्‍हाड उघड्यावर, तिथं लुगडी लुगड्यावर
या दुबळीचं धुडकं-फडकं धाटा कुठाय हो?

इथं मीठ मिरची अन् तुरी, तिथं मुरगी काटा सुरी
सांगा आम्हाला मुरगी कटलेट काटा कुठाय हो?

शोधा सारे साठे चला, आज पाडा वाडे चला
वामनदादा आमचा घुगरी घाटा कुठाय हो?

Why Babri Masjid was destroyed on 6th Dec only?

Babri Masjid's destruction was the beginning point of India's tryst with terror, a meeting which refuses to get over.So lets get into more detail on as to why 6th Dec was only chosen....This is an article especially for my Bahujan friends.



Was it a mere coincidence that the Babri mosque was demolished on December 6? Of course, there are strong reasons to believe that the event was not an act of spontaneous mob frenzy but rather an outcome of a high-level conspiracy. No wonder the issue was utilised by the Sangha Parivar to generate communal euphoria across the length and breadth of the country. Moreover, this euphoria was manufactured and nourished sequentially and saw its logical culmination in the ultimate levelling of the mosque. However, the pertinent question is: what drove the saffron forces to chose this particular date for their heinuous act? What was so especial about this particular date that it overrided all other options in the 366 days of that year (1992 being a leap year)? A scrutiny of this question, I posit,would unveil the true character of Hindu communalism or Hindutva completely.

As we are all aware the class struggle between the exploiters and exploited sections continues unceasingly in all human societies. Though at certain critical junctures in history this struggle manifests itself in violent forms most of the time it is fought unabated at the psychological level. This psychological war is fought between the collective/folk memory of the people and the institutionalised memory of the oppressors. The strategy of the ruling classes everwhere and at all times has been to efface this folk memory of the people which is nothing but an historical record of the resistance offered by the people and their heroes to the powers that be. Of course, the oppressors are aware that the oppressed sections get more agitated listening to the tyranny meted out to their ancestors than the fact of actual oppression that they face themselves. Hence the powerful use all the instruments at their disposal to erase this collective memory—from the organs of the state to all the institutions of indoctrination (education) and propaganda (media/cinema). They are also often successful at that.

On the other hand the subject classes strive to eternalise this collective memory by bequeathing it to the successive generations through its own literature, culture, art and folk traditions. In our own times the autobiographies being penned by Dalit authors exemplify this best. They also celebrate and observe the decisive dates in their history or those associated with their leaders (their birth and death anniversaries for instance) to keep the flame of their cause alive. How this memory of tyranny unleashed against their ancestors inspires the oppressed to do something remarkable can be glimpsed in one of the statements by Vivian Richards, a reknowned Black cricketer from Antigua in West Indies. Richards, as we all know, was not only a sportsman par excellence but also a vocal crusader against racial injustice. He once said:

Every member of my team is haunted by the memory of white oppression faced by our ancestors for centuries. When we bowl lethally at them or bat explosively it is as if we are extracting revenge from them for those misdeeds and consequently restoring prestige for our race.

Hence, we can see how this collective memory often acts as the chief weapon in the armoury of the oppressed sections. However, there are certain memories which the powerful can never erase despite their best efforts. In such cases they take recourse to adulterating this memory and channelising it for their own nefarious ends. I contend that on December 6, 1992 when the Babri mosque was razed to the ground similar efforts were made. But I will come back to it later. First a few words on the true character of Hindutva.

The paramount feature of the Hindu faith is the caste system. Moreover, the ideology of Hindutva only nurtures and sustains this system. In Gita, which is accorded the highest place in the corpus of Hindu scriptures, God animated as Krishna states that the varna system is His creation. Besides, all the scriptures of Hindu faith unequivocally support the caste system. It can be further asserted that those sitting pretty at the top of the varna hierarchy have their dominance, superiority, privileges, heaven, salvation, or for that matter everything, secure so far as the varna system operates. How the superiority of the twice-born and their social, political, economic and cultural hegemony can be perennially maintained seems to be the primary concern of the sanatana dharma. Otherwise why do proponents of Hindutva go berserk on the question of 27% reservation for the Other Backward Classes (OBC’s)?



The real history of India is yet to be written. The central role of the struggle against the caste system in the historical development of this land has not yet been rigorously investigated. This will only become a reality once the Dalit-Bahujan masses undergo a process of cultural revolution or, dialectically speaking, it is the very writing of this history that will inaugurate the cultural revolution for Dalit-Bahujan masses.

The history of India is an account of the struggles against the caste system. The emergence of Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism or the influx of Islamic and Christian faiths and their acceptability would not have been possible but for the caste system. One may also propose that it is this very exploitative system which is responsible for the historical stagnation of the productive forces and development of knowledge and science in this country. This historical stagnation was however, consciously or otherwise, arrested by the advent of the British colonial state. In this respect the formulations of Karl Marx, Raja Rammohun Roy and Jotiba Phule bear remarkable similarity. In the mediaeval ages many a dalit-bahujan took a sigh of relief at the demolition of the Hindu temples by the Muslim invaders as these temples were also centres of social power parallel to the state. In these temples the entry of shudra-atishudra was prohibited quite unlike the mosques, churches. gurudwaras or monasteries which were more or less open to general masses and they could pray there collectively without a thought of high and low pervading the sacred premises. Even during the heydays of the struggle against British colonialism the banner of revolt against social imperialism was hurled high by people like Jotiba Phule, Narayana Guru, Periyar, Shahuji Maharaj and Babasaheb Ambedkar. Organisations like Bihar’s Triveni Sangha multiplied in all parts of the country.



The developments since Independence also narrate the story of this struggle—the protagonists being Dr. Rammanohar Lohia, Karpuri Thakur, Kanshiram, Annadurai, BP Mandal and VP Singh.

The anti-caste proclivities received a great boost when VP Singh government announced its decision to implement the Mandal Commission recommendations. In the wake of this move by VP Singh the challenge posed by Dalit-Bahujan masses to the caste elite multiplied tenfold times. Thus they unleashed the genie of kamandal to counter the politics of Mandal. Advani subsequently stormed the nation on his ‘Ram-rath’ leaving behind a trail of blood whereever the rath crossed. When Laloo Prasad finally arrested him BJP withdrew support from the VP Singh government thereby ‘chastising’ him for attempting the unpardonable. Communal polarisation and galvanisation by the Hindutva forces gained momentum resulting in the ultimate demolition of the Babri mosque. No wonder, the ‘Brahmin’ and Brahminist Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao kept himself busy with an afternoon siesta on a wintry day and by the time he woke up the mosque had been razed to the ground.

There seem to be many reasons behind the demolition of the mosque. First, to counter the influence of Mandal by the valour of demolition. Second, to transform the feeling of defeatism plaguing the Hindu psyche due to repeated defeats at the hands of invaders (a consequence of the divisive caste system one may add) into a feeling of glory. Third, to dilute the social contradictions and varna struggle arising out of the assertion of the dalit-bahujan masses by a wider Hindu resurgence and unity. Fourth, the consolidation of the Hindu vote bank by arousing communal passions for BJP in order to achive the ideal of the so-called Hindu Rashtra and so on. However, when we investigate the reason behind a particular choice of date (December 6) we are informed of at least one more reason.

In the twentieth century the major challenge to Hindutva has been indisputably presented by Dr. BR Ambedkar. This challenge, albeit political at first sight, is largely an ideological one. Along with Ambedkar two other names can be shortlisted for having contested Hindutva effectively—namely, Ramaswamy Naicker (or Periyar) and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia. It is unfortunate that Periyar’s influence remained restricted to South India only. Lohia’s slogan pichda pawe sau mein sath (let the backward bag sixty out of hundred) effectively challenged the political power of the proponents of Hindutva. The process of social change and consciousness we witness in North India today, especially in UP and Bihar, would have been scarcely possible without the contribution of Lohiaite ideology. However, one can surely find grounds to critique the contradictions and inconsistencies in his thought regarding Hindu religion, philosophy and tradition. Despite his powerful slogans this lacuna in his thought severely hampers the march of the caravan of social justice towards any meaningful destination. A harmonious integration of Lohiaite and Ambedkarite ideology is therefore imperative to give the much required edge to the politics of social justice.

The Saffron brigade trembles when it hears the names of Ambedkar or Periyar. Afterall, it is they who have bitterly exposed the reality of Hindu faith and have established beyond doubt that this faith is nothing but Brahmanism or the varna system. Both urged their followers not to stop before the complete destruction of this religion. While Periyar swithched to atheism for this purpose Ambedkar advocated disowning of Hinduism and adoption of Buddhism respectively. It is another matter that even Buddhism is silent on the concept of God.

Despite being a constitutionalist Dr. Ambedkar often finds a pride of place in the league of the world’d greatest revolutionaries. He stood up to combat a system that had been reigning undeterred in this country for the last three thousand years. He could not have urged the voiceless and powerless untouchables leading a life worse than animals for attempting an armed insurrection. That is why he was a constitutionalist. By investigating meticulously the Hindu religious scriptures and authoring powerful tracts (like Riddles in Hinduism, Annhilation of Caste and Revolution and CounterRevolution in Ancient India), and, also by such powerful symbolic gestures like setting Manusmriti on fire and articulating and voicing the concerns and demands of the untouchables in various round table conferences, he laid bare the hypocrisy, contradictions and inhumanity of the Hindu religion and society in front of the whole world. He did not even deter from engaging in a vitriolic polemic and conflict with a personality like Gandhi in order to secure an independent identity and place for Dalits in the Indian political landscape. On the one hand he managed to pocket a few concessions for the dalits by making his way into the Constituent assembly, on the other he also criticised the Indian Constitution on various counts in no uncertain terms. When he became the first law minister in independent India, he strived and struggled to ameliorate the condition of Hindu society, and especially the pitiable condition of its women, by drafting the ‘Hindu Code Bill’ and making efforts to get it passed in the Parliament. However, his efforts came a cropper due to the influence of fanatic Hindus in the Congress party and government which were against modern and radical reforms. Now he saw no point in continuing as a member of Hindu society. During all these years he had been postponing the actualisation of his call to leave Hindu religion that he gave twenty years back. All this time he had been genuinely working at reconciliation with his adversaries. But now he could take it no longer. He converted to Buddhism with lakhs of his followers and reestablished the faith that had been exiled from the country of its origin some fifteen centuries back due to the inexcusable crime of challenging the caste system. In other words, Dr. BR Ambedkar now donned the mantle of a modern Buddha.

Until the day the Indian society liberates itself from the tentacles of the caste system his legacy shall continue to inspire the dalit-bahujan masses. It would be a parochial stance if we recognise Ambedkar only as a champion of shudras-atishudras. He is the leader of all Hindus because his primary concern was to liberate the entire Hindu society by breaking innumerable divisive caste walls. The path of liberation, for a Brahmin as well as a scavenger, from this inhumane caste system is ingrained in the theoretical insights of Ambedkar.

This is the only reason why Dr. Ambedkar’s life, actions, thoughts and struggle pose such a great challenge for Hindutva. His ideology is a guide to action for th dalit-bahujan masses. However, the efforts to destroy his legacy continue to proliferate. It is to meet such sinister objectives that books like Worshipping False Gods are written by Saffron theoreticians like Arun Shourie. Surely, for them a memory which cannot be erased, a legacy which cannot be vanuished can be surely mitigated by aduleration, illusions and sleight of hand pure and simple.

On December 6, 1992 when the nation was observing the death anniversary of Dr. Ambedkar, the Sangha Parivar was engaged in demolishing the Babri mosque with the aid of thousands of its cadres and supporters. A countervailing ‘Hindu glory’ was being forged opposed to Dr. Ambedkar’s memory. Hindutva was making unholy inroads into the dalit-bahujan psyche generally permeated with Ambedkar’s legacy till then. An intense psychological war was witnessed which was no less lethal or violent than the organised and frequent pogroms against dalits and Muslims.

One may well ask why was Ambedkar’s birth anniversary (14 April) not chosen as a date for demolition? The answer is simple. In comparison to his death anniversary his birth anniversary is widely celebrated with much vitality and grandeur. It would have been a risky proposition because then their anti-Ambedkar ideology would have been brought out into broad daylight. They could not have afforded such a big risk at that time. Babri mosque is afterall not the last mosque to be levelled. There are other mosques on their hit-list as well. Whenever they find themselves powerful enough to take such a risk they will show the temerity to do so. Why only Ambedkar there are many other icons that give sleepless nights to the Hundutva forces.

In the end, the explanation rendered above is purely theoretical. No concrete proof was available for this assumption. However, later I happened to discover a somewhat similar proof in some extracts of Malay Krishna Dhar’s book Open Secrets: India’s Intelligence Unveiled published in Outlook (Hindi, 7 Feb 2005):

On 25th December K. N. Govindacharya called me on phone and expressed his desire to come over for dinner to my house along with two of his friends…After dinner the conversation continued till midnight. I shivered from what I got to learn from my friends. They gave me sufficient indications that the Sangha Parivar was not obverse to the demolition of the mosque and putting in its place a temple-like structure…Why only December? I asked. Gurumurthy promptly replied that I should read history once again. Did not Mahmud Gaznavi destroy Somnath temple on December 1025?

It is strange that the author did not ask why only on a particular day in December. It is also possible that the author may have asked the question and would have been promptly replied back that because it is the death anniversary of Dr. Ambedkar, and that he did not share this part of the conversation with his readers for the fear of completely unmasking the mindset of the saffron brigade..Who knows?

I would just like to end this article with the poem of Kaifi AazmiRead it and Think.

Doosra Banwas

raam banwaas se jab lautke ghar meiN aaye
yaad jungle bahut aayaa jo nagar meiN aaye
rakh-se diivaangii aaNgan meiN jo dekhaa hogaa
6 disumbar ko shrii raam ne sochaa hogaa
itne divaane kahaaN se mere ghar ko aaye
jagmagaate the jahaaN raam ke kadmoN ke nishaaN
pyaar kii kahkashaaN letii thii angRaaii jahaaN
moR nafrat ke usii rahguzar se aaye

dharm kyaa unkaa hai kyaa zaat hai yeh jaantaa kaun
ghar naa jaltaa tou unhe raat meiN pahchaantaa kaun
ghar jalaane ko meraa log jo ghar meiN aaye

shaakaahaarii hai mere dost tumhaaraa khanjar
tumne baabar ki taraf pheNke the saare pathar
hai mere sar kii khataa zakhm jo sar meiN aaye

paaNv saryu meiN abhii raam ne dhoye bhii naa the
ki nazar aaye vahaaN khuun ke gahre dhabe
paaNv dhoye binaa saryu ke kinaare se uThe
raajdhaani kii fizaa aayii nahii raas mujhe
6 disambar ko milaa duusraa banvaas mujhe