Hinduphobia, Secularism & other Vices that afflict India

One should clearly know the history of Forty-second amendment act 1976 that made some series of changes to the constitution of India, to understand how an alien concept (Secular) has been systematically used to perpetuate Hinduphobia. Modern day politicians, at least since independence used this word without explaining to the masses the necessity to have it. 

The political liberty which we have got after enduring the slavery of 1200 years from alien occupiers is indeed a different paradigm that we should have approached with a practical outlook, instead Congress tried to straight jacket things through a regressive ideology called Socialism/Communism. Pt.Nehru in the AICC (All India Congress Committee) session that held in Avadi (Chennai, TamilNadu) in 1955 declared that Socialistic Pattern of society was the goal of Congress, hence the goal of India. 

Few years ago in an interview , Sadhguru Vasudev said that people who didn't have the courage to call themselves Communists defined themselves as Socialists. He also said that Karl Marx may have known much about Economics, but he knew nothing about Human being. Banditry became a philosophy in the name of communism. Probably one reason why socialists would not call themselves as Communists is because of the mindless violence that is normally associated with Communism. Millions of innocents perished due to Communism. In Russia alone more than 25 million people died, more than the combined death toll of World War II. Image from this link

Even if we have to disagree with Pt. Nehru on Socialism, he should be given credit for the wisdom he had; else the AICC session should have declared that “Socialist”, “Secular” is our goal. Because Pt.Nehru knew that Hindus who belonged to this ancient civilization are inherently secular and they never needed an alien import which is irrelevant to the Indian society. 

In the modern parlance, if a law has to be passed first its necessity has to be ascertained. It cannot be passed to further the agenda of a single political party or a leader. To the least, adherence to Constitutional morality is essential. The requirement shall arise as a demand from society or from a legitimate source. For eg: - ban on Cow Slaughter is a direction that constitution gives to the State, hence such laws may be passed and would stand the judicial scrutiny.

The question one has as to why Indira Gandhi when she had no Legitimate Political Authority would pass a Constitutional Amendment in a hurried manner? What was she trying to prove? If we have to take Congress party’s democratic credentials at its face value, then we shall go by what it has always preached to others i.e., democracy is incomplete if there is no opposition. Then the question is how a constitutional amendment be called a legitimate exercise of authority when the whole opposition was locked up in Jail during Emergency? Readers are encouraged to read - Tom Christiano's "Authority", from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy to understand what is authority and its legitimacy. Image from Google.

Just like Article 25 of Indian Constitution is used aggressively by Abrahamic faiths for conversion activities through questionable means, the variety of Indian Secularism in its current form, is used to perpetuate Hinduphobia or bluntly Hindu hatred successfully. All groups that are engaged in this task have their individual goals to be met, but there is a consensus on the method that has to be applied, i.e., institutionalizing and legitimizing Hindu Hatred or Hinduphobia.

Hence in the popular political culture terms such as Secular Muslim vote, Secular Christian vote are accepted as correct. And any reference to Hindu vote is communal. There can never be a term called “Secular Hindu Vote”, it has to be “Communal Hindu Vote. Such ideas assisted some political parties to perpetuate their rule. The victim is indeed a poor Hindu.

One should know the actors that are systematically engaged in spreading Hinduphobia.

1.    Missionaries

2.    Islamists

3.    Communists

4.    Media

5.    Leaders of Dalit Politics

If you closely analyse the relationship between these actors in isolation, they are staunch opponents to each other; importantly the protagonists (Missionaries, Islamists and Communists) of the story, the rest just follow them mostly because of their ignorance or they are compromised.

Some Important Questions:

1.    How successful are the actors in spreading Hinduphobia, what are the gains so far?

2.    Did Hindus themselves take part in furthering Hinduphobia because of their rational ignorance?

3.    Is Hinduphobia affecting social cohesion?

4.    Are the self-proclaimed liberals and secularists winning the argument?

5.  Is it correct to assume that the compulsions of electoral politics forcing the mainstream political parties to turn a blind eye to the destabilizing effects of Hinduphobia?

If answer to each question listed above is a resounding yes, then we are definitely in for a serious trouble. It is incumbent up on every Hindu to work relentlessly and turn the situation around.

Explaining the objectives:

For Missionaries conversion is their main focus, through hook or crook. Their target group is Hindus. Their regular tricks would not work with Muslims as a social group, for the reaction will be too much for the missionary agents to bear. When it comes to Islamists their target is to increase the numbers mainly through unrestricted child bearing. Hence any talk on family planning shall be instantly termed as something against Secularism. No Democratic Country in the world has a separate civil code based on religion, if some one talks about Common Civil Code, then it is anti-Minority/anti-Secular even though Directive Principles of State Policy states it. The most dangerous of all the other actors are Communists; the technique employed by them is to build narratives of Hindu Hatred under the garb of discussing reason and rationalism through derogatory interpretations of Hindu Philosophy. 

As if aboriginal ideologue Karl Marx advised Communists that “Hinduism is Opium of Masses” not “Religion is Opium of all Masses”, Communists perform the ritual of spreading venom against Hindus at regular intervals. They do it by wearing a gloves of rationalists but wouldn't raise their finger against superstition in Christianity and Islam, because it is against their goal of spreading Hinduphobia.

The Christian Missionary Psyche is best explained by a letter Francis Xavier wrote to Jesus Society, Rome in 1543. Here is what he says about Hindus.

“… the great majority of their idols are as black as black can be, and moreover are generally so rubbed over with oil as to smell detestably, and seem to be as dirty as they are ugly and horrible to look at …  “ 

In Abrahamic faiths there is a Doctrinal sanction to abuse other faiths and ways of life.

In a lecture I have recently attended, the speaker quoting Professor Rummel said that more than one Billion people are killed mercilessly because of arguments such as “Your God is not better than mine” , “Your god is no god”, “There is only one god, that is my God”, “ Only those who believe in my God will go to heaven, others are packed to hell” , “believers are good, non-believers are bad” etc.,

But look at the fundamental philosophy of Hindu which says "Your God is good for your and my God is good for mine and we shall co-exist peacefully". Now who is bombarded with lectures on secularism? Who gets to lecture whom?

Since time immemorial, long before the west re-discovered Democracy, state apparatus and other things which they call modern, in India there was a perfect harmony between State and Religion. Both did not trample on each other’s foot. The sphere was clearly defined. Contrast this with the clash between Christianity and State power. Or for that matter how Islam is used a political tool to control and gag people since its origin. 

People could not bear the atrocities of Roman Catholic Church in the name of religion; hence they revolted against it to fight for their basic Human dignity and liberty. Often the ill-informed who is getting converted in India because of some allurements or indoctrination has no clue about the bloody history of the Abrahamic faiths. 

The very fact that the time frame in which people risen up against the organized church and won is called as “Age of Reason” is proof enough that Christianity had no reason then and no reason now.

After the ordeals a common man had to endure through two centuries of struggle between him and the church, there was compromise that from now on Church will mind its own business and it will not impose its writ on individuals and shall not interfere in their private affairs, either on its own or through state. Such a phenomenon understandably is called Secularism, separation of state and religion.

Such a demarcation was there in India since ages with the exception of King Ashoka the Great who embraced Buddhism as a state religion in addition to some minor skirmishes in South between Vaishnavas & Shaivaites. But Ashoka never killed a man because some one did not agree with Buddhism.

An individual always had the basic freedom to decide about his life subject to some community ethics. For example one can be an Atheist and still can call himself as Hindu. Such a liberty is not available in Abrahamic faiths. If you don’t believe Allah or Christ, you are either Kuffar or Pagan (simply heathens, a derogatory reference used to describe people who did not believe these gods of Middle East).

Such is the bloody history behind the origin of concept called Secularism in Europe. Hence, it was purely an alien and is definitely not necessary in India. All injustices are committed to an average Hindu in the name of this alien import called secularism. Swami Dayananda Saraswati would always say that Secularism means “State should stay aloof from all religions”. On the contrary it is used to appease certain religious sections because they represent a particular vote bank. 

Additionally in the name of Secularism Hinduphobia is legitimized to facilitate Missionaries of alien cultures to meet their sectarian goals. Hence sending Muslims on Hajj pilgrimage using the tax money paid by Hindu is Secularism and if a Hindu asks others to respect his cultural sensitivities and stop the cow slaughter is termed anti-Secularism and Communal. Hence Yoga becomes Communal because of its Hindu Origins and terrorism inspired by Islam should not be called as Islamic Terrorism.

The successful propagation of Hinduphobia in a land where Hindus live in majority defies logic. Can we imagine Islamophobia in a Muslim majority country? Impossible. But how Hinduphobia in a Hindu majority country is working? It is here the systematic coalition between Missionaries, Islamists & Communists works. The communists have successfully worked on Dalit fault lines to further divide the Hindu society. This is simply to prohibit a political mobilization of Hindus.

Be it current day Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan or some extreme north - western parts of China, significant amount of territory of Hindu civilization has been lost to alien cultures and ideologies because of the lack of social & political mobilization of Hindus.

To save what is left out is only possible through a two pronged approach one is legal and the other is social, the latter is more important. If Hindus become socially and politically vigilant and throw their artificial barriers/differences like caste, creed, language, regionalism etc., in the Indian Ocean that separate them at the moment and proclaim to the world that “I am Hindu, I belong to Bharathvarsha (i.e., India) “, that alone will solve 90% of the problems.

At the earliest the government should initiate a process to remove statutory and legal obfuscation that is used to legitimize Hinduphobia. Start with removing the word “Secular” from the preamble of the constitution. It was inserted without giving any regard to constitutional or legal morality, removing it only means restoring the respect to constitution. We should know that all that is western is not modern.

Responding to a Misleading Article - " Why Christianity failed in India ? "

My feeling after reading this:  Whoever wrote that piece appears to be under serious pressure of meeting monthly conversion targets.

Few facets of the arguments mentioned were deliberately given a spin to meet some perverted desires of the writer.  It would appear as if Missionaries are doing this job because they are trying to bring heavens on the earth by next month and this is being obstructed by Hindutva Groups.

I am not discussing on this entire article, but only on few segments.

1. Comparison of Hindu population in UK with that of the Christian population in India by %age is an attempt to fool the gullible reader. Are we comparing two countries one being India which has a billion plus population and UK which has a population of 64 Million? 2% of 64 million is not as same 2% of billion. The writer is well advised to take some statistics classes instead of hiding behind percentages.

2. Proselytizing as such is not the issue. But when you do it at an industrial scale by fooling uninformed but good hearted people by giving those crumbs and preaching them to abuse Hindu culture to prove the worthiness of Christianity is an issue. The whole North-East insurgency is directly linked to Christian-Missionary activities. Additionally the writer is well advised to read about the views of Ambedkar & Gandhi on Christian missionary activities.

3. On the question of whether Hinduism was also proselyted or not. It is not in the culture of a Hindus to slit the throats of people belonging to other cultures either because they have not converted or did not agree with Hinduism. The bloody history of Christianity is an open secret and is there for all of us to see. We have had Popes splitting the world in to two giving one part to Portuguese and the other to Spain as if they have inherited it from their grandfathers. Hindus believed in global commons. Long before the world knew who Jesus was we have had a thriving civilization in India which is still on.

4. On Hinduism's spread in South East Asia - People have voluntarily accepted Hinduism. Nobody was slaughtered to accept Hinduism.

5. The emergence of Buddhism only proves the Liberal qualities of Hinduism. For Hindus Buddha is another yogi, another rishi who attained salvation. There are hundreds of such accomplished yogis in Hindu culture. Hinduism is a religion of thousand prophets. Hindus have never felt the need to go around lying and giving money & other allurements to convert a poor guy in to Hinduism for the purposes of political control. Another advise for the writer is to know how Adi Shankara brought India from Buddhism to Hindu fold with out raising a finger, but through debates and arguments.

6. In post-colonial world Christianity is a tool to spread Imperialism. Its only business is Political Power. Hence it assists in the spread of imperialism in a benign way as the papacy believes that it cannot hold inquisitions or slaughter millions just like it did in USA for the purposes of conversion any more.

7. Hindutva is only a reaction to the murderous activities of missionaries, be it Christianity or Islam. It urges Hindus to organize politically so as to save themselves from the cheap tricks of Christian missionaries and Islamists.

Rescuing India's Secularism

Incidentally few days ago, (as we are in the midst of discussing about Theresa) I have been in a post office to send a register post. When I was standing in queue I have noticed the one standing before me in the queue with some money order forms. Then I casually looked in to his forms to see where he was sending as he asked for my pen to make some corrections, it appeared to be two orders each 50 RS is being sent to two churches in Kolathur, Chennai. Though I knew what this business is all about to an extent, I asked the person, to whom this meagre amount is being sent? He said, church.

Then he started saying Jesus is the saviour and every month we have to pay the money to the Church etc., Looked like he wanted a chance. Then I took my turn and informed that this concept of monthly contribution to church comes from tithe which is in line with old testament. ie., people should pay one-tenth of their earnings to church and there is no compromise on that, it was compulsory once up on a time in Europe, tithe was also considered to be one of the reason that sparked French Revolution. By now he appeared to be not interested any more in extending the conversion and he conveniently said that he had to go. He must have understood that this guy is a waste candidate and cannot be converted.

But in my I my mind I had larger questions, such as does the Govt. has any idea of how much money is collected and where and how it is being spent? Why cannot the Govt. take control of the finances of church and audit it ? Church is managed by Christians directly controlled by foreigners / Missionaries and Waqf property is managed by Muslims, but Temples are managed by Govt. mostly through religious endowment acts, then how can we can call India as a secular state ? Please understand what secularism is.

Missionaries seek donations from the natives and local population to make sure their psychological commitment is affirmed. Christian Missionary's dirty job does not end with converting a Hindu through crumbs, they have to make sure that the converted Hindu must remain a Christian. Hence getting money as a contribution to the church from the converts is an important strategy to sustain them. Ie., once you start paying on a monthly basis your association is further hardened.

To remain a Christian means you should possess some essential qualities, the convert should first denounce his hinduness completely. For example you have to give up all that you have been doing so far relating to Hindu religion and call Hindu gods as satans and say that people who go to temple are possessed by satans etc.,

I have seen it from close quarters when people do it. For example, in my in-law's house there use to be a maid, she is already 70 years old and a very staunch Hindu, all the time we can see her chanting a Hindu deity's name. Suddenly one day I heard that she threw all deity images from pooja rack on the road claiming that she has converted to Christianity, I really had no idea how these missionary crooks could do it. I am proud Hindu, in my pooja rack I have the photo of Jesus this never affected my routine at all. This dirty job of missionaries is possible with sustained campaign which is supported by liberal funding, sources are domestic & abroad mostly US and Europe. Rural India is directly threatened by Missionary activities. They are guillable but good and kind hearted people, this is used as weakness against them. The whole North-East insurgency movements have a direct to link to Christian missionary's activities.

As on the other day Prof. Vaidyanathan was talking about Stern magazine claim of 100 Million dollars which Mother Theresa collected in India was sent to vatican's bank ie., money collected in India apparently for which there is no accountability and congress Govt.. refused to look in to the details because it's motto has been to rule this country with the coalition of minorities.
Be it Tirupathi or other big temples, all revenues are accounted for then why not the money that goes in to church and Waqf?

The task of the current generation is to make this great nation of ours a secular country once again, as India's secular credentials were eroded by Nehru & Jinnah type politicians and Christian Missionaries. Hence the Govt.. should start by taking over the control of finances of church & waqf, at least audit the transactions and sources, too many things would tumble out of the cupboard once this is started. Secularism is a fundamental right, you know ?

Religious Conversions – The Real Purpose

The process of conversions could be traced back to time of Jesus Christ when he told his apostles to make disciples in all nations (Matthew 28:19-20). Jesus definitely would not have told some one to kill people if a mortal is resisted to convert (as in case of massacres in Cuba when it was colonized by Spaniards, where thousands of tribals were killed by the army sent by church).It has been in practice for many missionaries who decided to employ what ever means they want to convert people to one religion.

In Indian context right from the time of Muslim invaders forcible conversion was the order of time and later came the forcible conversions to Christianity. In his words of Sri Sathya Sai Baba (India’s spiritual leader) “I have not come to create another new religion, but to make a Muslim a better muslim,a Christian to a better Christian and a Hindu to a better Hindu”. Converting from bad to good and better character is important than converting to a new religion. We belong to a land where polytheism is a way of life. The unstable mind must be changed to stable instead of converting the religions. We know Muslim conversions were ruthless in the early days. We have examples like Nithiyanandan, and pedophiles in Europe. They are Hindus and Christians respectively then why they have committed this shameful act understandably with no remorse, simply because they are not better Hindus or better Christians. Now the matter is not with religion but with their character and the state of mind. If a human being cannot believes himself but a religion surely he is degenerating. The Indian subcontinent is predominantly a Hindu Rashtra. Who ever lives beyond the banks of Sindhu River are called Hindus (according to a theory). It is surely against the universal principles if outsiders are allowed to forcibly (or through any other means) convert the residual population to some other religion. The erstwhile church which ruled the whole Europe wanted to spread the Christianity for many reasons, one prominent reason is the tithe. One of the main reasons for the eruption of French revolution is the religion, when the common man had no bread to eat on one end and on the other church was extracting the tithe from the beleaguered population. It is only when the nation states were created in Europe the influence of church actually waned. Conversions made countries to secede (Sudan a case in point). We need to retrospect how poor Africans were forced to embrace Christianity. There are many examples to quote. Nigeria and Sudan is a case in point. While the polytheistic religion asserts that there are multiple ways of reaching god (i.e., attaining the salvation) but the religions with monotheistic inclinations propagates the contrary and that is the reason why we have crusaders and Jihadists. 

We may need more revolutions like the one happened in France(French revolution) in the 19^th century to defend the inherent culture and tradition from the alien and invading forces (I am talking about people who misunderstood Jesus and the great prophet).In regional sense few  state governments in India created laws which declares forcible religious conversions as an offensive act. But stealth of money power is terrifying. A tribal living in a remote village in Orissa does not really bother about any religion; he might be interested to convert if there is an assurance of material returns a chance which missionaries would not want to miss. And these hapless beings think that they could come out of the poverty yoke. A religion means a civilization and also a culture. It is only the power of culture which gave a stiff resistance to British occupation forces as they were stymied with this unprecedented strength which they have never come across in other continents. Imagine a hypothetical situation a Hindu organization (missionary) as invincible as a missionary of any other religion sent to Europe to convert people to Hindu religion, the European dwellers would definitely be unyielding and I think we in this sub-continent deserve to show the reaction to those who want to convert religions. The aliens and the invaders were able to find a place in this vast land only because our ancestors were truly non- xenophobic as in Persia or Maghreb for example. After all we live in a secular, democratic, republic set up and religious freedom is enshrined in our constitution, but forcible conversion is against this grain of the constitution. I think we should include a clause in the ninth schedule of the constitution or in IPC that forcible conversion is an act equal to disturbing the harmony of the society.