Archive for the ‘history’ Category

Black magic, transfer of spirit and all sorceries carried on in the Land of Dravidanadu, where Periyar was born (1)

March 28, 2017

Black magic, transfer of spirit and all sorceries carried on in the Land of Dravidanadu, where Periyar was born (1)

 lord-sri-rama-1971-dk-chappal-garlanded

The Dravidian totalitarian and rationalistic rule during 1960-70s: In Tamilnadu, the Dravidian politicians used to claim about their “rational atheism”, “analytical wisdom” and so on, but in actual life, most of them have been God-believers worshipping God stealthily or by proxy i.e., through their mothers, wives, sisters and daughters. Some of them used to worship gods stealthily in their houses also with puja rooms. However, they say that “I am an atheist, but, I do not interfere with the belief of our family members”. How then, they could interfere with belief of crores of people of Tamilnadu? In public and platform, they pour abuses with the worst filthy language on Hindu religion, Gods and Goddesses and practices that no woman could bear. Yet, they have earned the titles of “Periyar” [big / great person among others or all], “Aringnar” [the only person who knows all], “Kalainjar” [the person who has been expert in all arts / subjects] and so on! Thus, the superiority complex that has been working in their mind set, makes others always to listen to them, accept what they say and none should or could ask any question. During the 1960s, if anybody would question them would be thrashed down.

 DK celebrated Ravana Leela in 1974

During the LPG regime / Internet age, questioning started: This is the way, they have been reigning supreme for the last 60 years. Only their views made public and circulated authoritatively[1]. However, when, internet came, the people started understanding their ambiguous dogma, hollow philosophy and dubious ideology of these groups. The youngsters could easily understand their selective, biased and pre-conceived propaganda carried against one particular religion i.e, Hindu religion[2]. As a ruler, the Dravidian or atheist Chief Minister has to administer and perform his duties as per the Constitutional and other statutory provisions treating all believers. However, in the case of Hindu religion, temples, temple administration, lease and rental of temple and mutt properties, conduct of rituals, rites and ceremonies, they interfered and spoiled many times. Though, the recent past is suppressed, the beating of Rama with chappals and other incidences make the youngsters to realize the duplicity of the Dravidian protagonists. The ganging up of splinter groups of Communists, anti-Hindu ideologists, particularly the Christian and Muslim groups joining them raise questions and they have understood that it is only anti-Hindu and secular or “Paguttaravi”, as being claimed. Under such circumstances, the recent happenings in Tamilnadu exposes their another ugly face of them.

 DK celebrated Ravana Leela in 1974- burned

Annadurai suddely died in 1969: C. N. Annadurai from high caste Mudaliar community was in power during the period 1967 – 1969. However, he fell ill due to excessive usage of tobacco substances. In September 1968 Annadurai went to New York for medical treatment and admitted in the hospital. After diagnosis, it was found out that there was malignant growth in his gullet and hence he was operated for Cancer in the gullet at the Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Center. He returned to Chennai in November 1968 and continued to address several official functions against medical advice. His health deteriorated further and he died suddenly on 3 February 1969 within three months returning from USA after sugery and treatment. His cancer was attributed to his habit of chewing tobacco. However, some of the family members doubted about his sudden death. When Karunanidhi immediately took over as CM, people resented about his haste action.  They questioned why the senior pontiff Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati of Kanchi Mutt wore spectacles as to why God could not have rectified his eyesight without glasses. But, here, none questioned as to why the science allowed man to die in that way in spite of the treatment etc. Later, MGR was also subjected to similar conditions. M. R. Radha attempted to kill MGR (on January 12, 1967), of course, he was not in power. After becoming CM, he was also not having proper health (in 1983 kidney problem developed), admitted to Brooklyn hospital US, returned after kidney transplant on February 4, 1985, but had to get treatment again and again in US and died on December 24, 1987.

Fire walk by the DK

Dravidian brand of astrologers, predictors and magicians: When the DMK came to power, the first thing, they did was to legalize the marriages performed under the “Pakuthtarivi” / “Suyamariyadhai” categories, as such marriages were held null and void in the courts. The rationalism did not work with the scientific judiciary system. Thus, they became cautious in dealing with social issues. The Dravidian politicias have been interested in astrology, auspicious time and date, black magic and all sorts of such superstitious practices, irrational rites and credulous rituals. Though, they denounce everything in public, in private, they practiced and hence their brand of Dravidian astrologers, predicting experts and magicians have been developed in due course and they have to keep the secrets in person, not to tell anybody in public and carry on their business, to safeguard their interests. That is why Karunanidhi used to hesitate to enter the Brahadheswarar temple, but wear yellow shwal as per the advice of his “asthana jyodhidar”, court / personal astrologer. Under such circumstances, the current events are to be analyzed.

Dravida fire-pot imitating

The antics, gimmicks and counter-rituals of of Dravida Kazhagam and allied groups: The Dravidar Kazhagam used to play gimmicks by imitating the  ritual of coconut breaking, fasting during eclipses, firewalk, carrying pots of burning coal, spiking one’s tongue and body with iron hooks, the concept of auspicious time, astrology, palm reading etc[3]. Though, they used to criticize only Hindu religion for the so-called “ritualism”[4], they close eyes, when they themselves follow such “ritualistic” practices, i.e, respecting the statues of EVR, Maniammai, celebrating birth and death days, garlanding and showering the idols with flowers. However, they never reenact the “crucifixion” of the Christians and bleeding beatings of “Shia Muslims” exposing their hypocrisy. Again, when Jayalalita was in hospital, the followers carried on all devoted rituals and rites praying all gods to save her. Incidentally, they were carried on in the most “secular” way, in the sense, Christians and Muslims have also participated. Therefore, tactfully, the DK groups kept silence to prove their ideology!

Was black magiv involved inn the death of Amma

Was Jayalalita died because of black magic?: The Daily Mail, UK carried a news item as follows[5]: “A leading astro guru in Chennai has said that Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa is a victim of black magic which has left her hospitalised since September, 2017. Not willing to identify himself for security reasons, the spiritual guru said Jayalalithaa has suffered from bad health because she has too many rivals. “It’s not just people from the rival party (DMK) who have spent huge money on tantriks to damage Jayalalithaa’s health. “I have no hesitation in saying that she has detractors even within her own party (AIADMK) who wanted to see her suffer,” he said. News on the health condition of Jayalalithaa is being kept a top secret. She is admitted in Apollo hospital in Chennai. Apart from a team of in-house specialists, doctors from the AIIMS New Delhi and a critical care specialist from London, are also involved in ensuring the CM is now stable. The astro guru also said it was quite possible Jayalalithaa’s arch rival M Karunanidhi could also be suffering from bad health due to tantrik spells. “Rivalry in political circles is very common and it would be wrong to say only one political party indulges in black magic and sorcery. This is noholds barred…,” he said”.

Was black magiv involved inn the death of Amma-2

The position and condition when Jaya was not feeling well (September to December 2016): What we can understand from this, are the following points[6]:

  1. Not willing to identify himself for security reasons, the spiritual guru said Jayalalithaa has suffered from bad health because she has too many rivals.
  2. “It’s not just people from the rival party (DMK) who have spent huge money on tantriks to damage Jayalalithaa’s health.
  3. “I have no hesitation in saying that she has detractors even within her own party (AIADMK) who wanted to see her suffer,” he said.
  4. News on the health condition of Jayalalithaa was being kept a top secret.

Thus, the nexus between the Dravidian politicians and the tantriks came out publically in the media. Ironically, none of the Dravidian ideologists like K. Veeramani, Kali Pungundran, “Viduthalai” Rajendran, Kolattur Mani and others refuted this, but, kept quite. Whom they were meeting, how the money paid, where the rituals taking place – the details – nothing known or revealed to anybody. Under such circumstances, the black magic affairs of one Karthikeyan came just after the death of Jayalalitha on 05-12-2016.

© Vedaprakash

28-03-2017

[1] In 1956 August first, Dravidia Kazhagam asked the volunteers to bum pictures of Lord Rama as the organization considered Ramayana as anti-women and anti lower castes etc. one Dravidia Kazhagam leader in the name of Thiruvarur Thangarajan wrote a new version of Ramayana way Rama was portrayed as a villain. The Dravidia Kazhagam film star M.R. Radha staged the play throughout the state. The Government led by the Chief Minister Kamaraj immediately banned the play but Dravidia Kazhagam after obtaining court’s pem1ission staged the play in selected towns.

[2]  At the instigation of Thiru E. V. Ramaswami Naicker, the Leader of Dravida Kazhagam, several tableaus depicting the picture of Gods Rama and Muruga were being beaten by a chappal in a procession held at Salem on 23rd and 24th January 1971. When one individual printed the photos of the procession, the DMK government banned and seized the posters.  The Government of Tamil Nadu issued a Notification G. O. Ms. No. 491 Home dated 12-2-1971 directing the posters to be forfeited to the Government on the ground that the said posters contained matters which promote or intend to promote the feelings of enmity and hatred between different classes of citizens of India or which is deliberately or maliciously intended to outrage the religious feelings of any such class by insulting the religion or the religious feelings of that class.

Madras High Court – Chinna Annamalai vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 24 February, 1971; Equivalent citations: AIR 1971 Mad 448, 1971 CriLJ 1569, (1971) IIMLJ 158; Author: K Reddy; Bench: K Reddy, Ganesan, Maharajan.https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1710030/

[3] Frontline, Going backward, R. Krishnakumar in Thiruvananthapuram and In Dravidian land, R. Ilangovan in Chennai in Frontline, Print edition : October 4, 2013.

[4] http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/thriving-business/article5137608.ece

[5] Daily Mail, ‘Her enemies are making her suffer’: Top Astro Guru says CM Jayalalithaa is a victim of BLACK MAGIC, By MAIL TODAY BUREAU, PUBLISHED: 23:52 BST, 26 October 2016 | UPDATED: 00:16 BST, 27 October 2016

[6] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3875860/Her-enemies-making-suffer-Astro-Guru-says-CM-Jayalalithaa-victim-BLACK-MAGIC.html

Advertisements

Shah Bano and Jallikkattu: How BJP has gone in the Congress way to bend the law!

January 21, 2017

Shah Bano and Jallikkattu: How BJP has gone in the Congress way to bend the law!

shah-banu-venkaiya-naidu-jallikattu-act-amendment

Venkaiah Naidu citing “Shah Bano” case precedence (10-01-2017)[1]: Venkaiah Naidu hinted that in the view of strong emotional connect of the people of Tamil Nadu with jallikattu, the Centre was mulling over a way out after the Supreme Court banned it.  He claimed that Centre is mulling the idea of amending the law to nullify Supreme Court order on Jallikattu.  “We are getting suggestions (to amend the law). After all, we did it in the Shah Bano case,” said Naidu adding[2], “But, we will have to see. We will have to discuss. We will have to weigh what court thinks.” However, Naidu was non-committal about bringing an ordinance to deal with the Supreme Court order on Jallikattu, saying[3], “I am not dealing with the subject in the government.” Speaking at the India Today Conclave South in Chennai, Venkaiah Naidu said[4], “Personally, I feel that Jallikattu is a traditional art. It is a traditional sport in Tamil Nadu. Nobody should have problem with this.” But, Naidu also added, “I don’t know whether I should be saying this as a minister.” So just like Rajiv Gandhi, the BJP has also decided to politicize the issue, by bending the law by creating another bad precedence of law. In fact, the so-called “India Today” conclave had given much focus to the “Jallikkattu” issue, calling opinion from others. Now, let us note, what the “Shah Bano” case brought out in Indian judicial, political and religious arena.

shah-banu-venkaiya-naidu-jallikattu-act-amendment-modiThe brief of Sha Bano case[5]: Though, the details of the “Shah Bano case” are known, they are briefed here as follows[6]:

  • Shah Bano, who was 62 years old in 1978, was divorced by her husband using the triple talaq law.
  • Bano, who was left with five children, approached the court to seek justice.
  • The Madhya Pradesh High Court had instructed Bano’s husband Mohammed Ahmed Khan to provide Rs 179 per month as maintenance.
  • The case reached Supreme Court, with the bench announcing a verdict in 1985, instructing that Shah Bano should be provided all the benefits which divorced women from other religious communities are entitled to.
  • The observations of court drew sharp reaction from conservative Muslims, who called it a violation of their religious affairs.
  • Fearing ire from the Muslim community, Congress government at Centre led by Rajiv Gandhi amended the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The amended legislation nullified the Supreme Court’s order.

At that time, a lot of criticism was made against Rajiv Gandhi and Congress for yielding to the Islamic fundamental forces by reversing the Supre Court judgment.

jaggi-ravishankar-modi-jallikattuJallikkatu issue goes in the Sha Bano route: The political solution to this public demand in case of Jallikattu is to pass an ordinance, overturning and reversing the Supreme Court ban, is well understood, but, bad in the law. The job of the apex court is to simply interpret statutes and constitution provisions. The Apex Court enters the arena of traditions, religious practices or even cricket administration, only when such issues come to the court. In the Shah Bano case, the apex court’s verdict was overturned by Parliament (which had the brute majority of the ruling party). The utopia that the voice of “the people” is supreme too works with the ruling politicians. Unfortunately, there is a thin dividing line between robust democracy and mobocracy, or mere capitulation by politicians to mass hysteria and this is what happened in the Jallikkttu case. Who has whipped up mass hysteria to generate short-term political advantage, is yet to be known clearly, though, the sudden surge has been claimed as “spontaneous and apolitical”. It is, therefore, worth recalling incidents when the brute power of elected governments was thwarted by sound legal principles, and even the power of ordinance was blunted by the apex court. Whether the “emotional blackmail”, “ideological extortion”, “cultural counter threat”, definitely, it has shown a bad way for such incited, provoked and encouraged groups again bargain, so that the judiciary becomes a mockery of democracy.

anti-modi-demo-2017-vaikoPoliticians are interested in safeguarding their interests[7]: Of course, the most celebrated case is the Keshavanand Bharti case, fought so successfully by Nani Palkhiwala, which has ever since protected the basic structure of the Constitution of India. It cannot be amended by the legislature. A more recent example is from May 2002, when the Supreme Court decreed that all candidates who stand for elections must declare, via sworn affidavits, their criminal antecedents (if any), their wealth (ill begotten or not), and their education status. This was based on the voters’ right to know before they cast their vote. The Union Cabinet in its wisdom sought to nullify this verdict through a hastily drawn up ordinance in June 2002, as the entire political establishment did not want to disclose any information, or details of their candidates. But citizen activists across the nation got together and asked the then President Abdul Kalam to refuse to sign that ordinance. He had to sign since the Cabinet refused to budge, or dilute its ordinance. Hence, this ordinance (even before it could be presented to Parliament) was challenged in the Supreme Court as being un-constitutional. Denying information to voters was akin to denying freedom of expression (as casting a vote is like expressing yourself). Remember the Right to Information was passed in 2005, three years later. In March 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that the said ordinance seeking to gag information about candidates was unconstitutional and hence null and void. Hence the ordinance was defeated. As for Jallikattu, it’s a wholly different animal and the polticians may bend the law again[8].

jallikattu-cruelty-involvedRequesting Supreme Court to delay the judgment and passing the Ordinance (20-01-2017)[9]: Hours after the Central government requested the Supreme Court to delay its judgment on the legality of Jallikattu, citing “huge unrest” in Tamil Nadu, it approved a draft Ordinance by the state government to make an exception for bulls in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. Earlier, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told a bench led by Justice Dipak Misra that there were “immense problems” in Tamil Nadu due to the interim ban on Jallikattu and that the circumstances warranted delaying the judgment at least by a week. “If this court pronounces the judgment in one way or another, it (judgment) would inflame passions…there is already social unrest in the state. The Centre and the state are in talks to find a way out in the matter and our request is that the court should not deliver the judgment and hold back for a while,” submitted the AG. At this, Justice Misra asked Rohatgi how many days he wanted the judgment to be delayed. “At least for a week,” replied AG. To this, the judge responded[10]: “Okay.”

© Vedaprakash

21-01-2017

peta-modi-morphed-photo-pig-faced

[1] India Today, Law was amended after Shah Bano case, can do it for jallikattu too: Venkaiah Naidu at India Today Conclave, IndiaToday.in | Posted by Ruchi Dua,New Delhi, January 10, 2017 | UPDATED 18:16 IST.

[2] http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/india-today-conclave-south-venkaiah-naidu-jallikattu/1/853680.html

[3] The Hindu, Centre exploring options on jallikattu, says Venkaiah, CHENNAI JANUARY 11, 2017 01:47 IST;  UPDATED: JANUARY 11, 2017 07:47 IST.

[4] http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/Centre-exploring-options-on-jallikattu-says-Venkaiah/article17020612.ece

[5] India.com, Like Shah Bano case, Centre may nullify Supreme Court order on Jallikattu: Union Minister Venkaiah Naidu, By Mohammed Uzair Shaikh | Updated: January 10, 2017 1:36 PM IST; Published Date: January 10, 2017 1:28 PM IST | Updated Date: January 10, 2017 1:36 PM IST

[6] http://www.india.com/news/india/like-shah-bano-case-centre-may-nullify-supreme-court-order-on-jallikattu-union-minister-venkaiah-naidu-1750572/

[7] Pune Mirror, WHEN SC TURNED DOWN AN ORDINANCE, By Ajit Ranade, Pune Mirror | Jan 21, 2017, 02.30 AM IST

[8] http://punemirror.indiatimes.com/columns/columnists/ajit-ranade/when-sc-turned-down-an-ordinance/articleshow/56693786.cms

[9] Indian Express, Centre clears TN draft for Ordinance to allow Jallikattu, Written by Utkarsh Anand , Manoj CG | New Delhi | Updated: January 21, 2017 4:29 am

[10] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/jallikattu-ban-centre-asks-sc-to-delay-order-4484017/

Why Dhulagarh riots have been communalized, secularized and neutralized, as if nothing happened from 13-12-2016 to 31-12-2016? (1)

January 4, 2017

Why Dhulagarh riots have been communalized, secularized and neutralized, as if nothing happened from 13-12-2016 to 31-12-2016? (1)

dhulagarh-mamtas-suppression-of-facts

Secularizing the riots – both Hindus and Muslims suffered, but Muslims suffered more[1]: The reports coming after riots and printed in the newspapers appear strange, as they do in a more secular way pointing out that both Hindus and Muslims suffered, but Muslims suffered more and so on. Thus, the Indian express reports as follows: A fortnight after violence and arson brought nondescript Dhulagarh, at the heart of Howrah’s micro small and medium enterprises (MSME) growth story, to national discourse, locked doors, shuttered windows and burnt walls unite the neighbouring localities of Pollepara and Munshipara. They are dominated by Hindus and Muslims, respectively. Of many families that fled after the clashes on December 13 and 14, 2016 some Hindus returned this week (before 31st December). Most Muslim neighbourhoods still remain deserted. The reporter however has not exposed the secret or explained the significance of “some Hindus” returning back homes and “Muslim neighbourhood” looking deserted. District officials said more than 100 houses and shops were attacked over those two days[2].  Thus, obviously, the suffered Hindus would have returned to assess about their loss, whereas, the safely gone Muslims would return happily, when everything was normal.

dhulagarh_ndtv

“Some Hindus returned this week. Most Muslim neighbourhoods still remain deserted”: Whether Aniruddha Ghosal had written this as directed by the editor of Indian Express or by the State authorities, it is evident that the tone and tenor or drafting, editing and approved text printed in the newspaper proves that the “communal riot” is interpreted as “secular” and “economic loss” is secularized, as if the insurance companies do not pay for the insured machines, etc., owned by the Muslims, but not by the Hindus. What happens to the uninsured houses and shops of the poor Hindus? Is it communal for them not to be insured, because of poverty? Here, the point is after the “communal riots”, December 12 and 13, 2016, nothing was reported in the print and electronic media. After the details spread through “Social media”, the elite, eminent and professional press woke up and started reporting guardedly, as Zee-TV colleagues were clamped with police action. Ironically, the fellow media people did not condemn the State government’s action for throttling the freedom of press, but, now, Indian Express gathered strength, but, reporting differently.

riots-erupted-after-milad-ul-nabi-yatra

Secularizing the loss: “More Hindu homes and shops were attacked, but the financial damage done to Muslim-owned factories is far more: “More Hindu homes and shops were attacked, but the financial damage done to Muslim-owned factories is far more,” an administration official said. Superintendent of Police, Rural (Howrah), Sumit Kumar said, “There have been 56 arrests. Violence took place on December 14 and since then it’s been peaceful. Investigations are on.” About 30 km from Kolkata, Dhulagarh’s MSMEs focus on embroidery and garment-manufacturing. Already dealt a big blow by demonetisation of Rs 500 and Rs 1000 notes, many units in the area have now downed shutters following the violence. According to local officials and unit owners, equipment averaging around Rs 5 lakh per unit has been destroyed, raw material burnt, and workers left unemployed. The economy of Dhulagarh has been crippled. State government statistics say there are 350 functional units in the Howrah clusters, of which locals estimate about 100 are in Dhulagarh. The Howrah units employ more than 9,000 people, and the average investment in each plant and machinery is calculated at Rs 5 lakh.

dulagarh-attacked-on-14-12-2016-times-now

Most of the garment manufacturing unit are owned by the Muslims: “I have seen at least 10 factories gutted in the last few days,” said Zakir Sardar. “Most units were owned by Muslims, and were in areas where people from both communities lived in equal numbers. These have been targeted.” Zakir’s factory, which employed 40 people, was destroyed, along with parts of his house. Why not the Hindus could not have any factory, though, they were also in equal numbers in that area is not known. Sheikh Allaudin claimed his factory, surrounded by homes of Hindu families, was targeted on December 14. 2016. Here, it is clear that unless the surrounding Hindus were attacked first, his factory would not have accessed to. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the rioters wanted to attack the Hindus and the damage caused to Muslim factory was incidental. “We had got new machinery from abroad with loan amounting to Rs 18 lakh per unit. We were hoping to start exports from next year. We have now taken a loss that could touch Rs 1 crore. That essentially puts us out of business.” Alima Begum, another factory owner, said, “With demonetisation, we suddenly didn’t have cash to pay workers, and they understandably left. Most work in the garment sector is done in cash, especially with traders from Gujarat and Maharashtra. They stopped buying from us. And then the violence…” Here also, if their intention was business, then there would not have been provoking procession etc.

dulagarh-attacked-on-14-12-2016-victim-explains-times-now

Had they really interested in manufacture and income, they would not have indulged in rioting: As reported by “Indian Express”, as the Muslims were having embroidery and garment-manufacturing units, they must have concentrated only in the production, sale and earning profit out of the business. But, their involvement in politics, communal orientation and vote bank polity prove their intentions have been different. In other words, they have been exploiting the riots as a factor to increase the business, by making the Hindus poor. As the administration official said, “More Hindu homes and shops were attacked, but the financial damage done to Muslim-owned factories is far more,” then, the fact exposes their modus operandi. They have been pumping the profit or black money (as they used to sell without bills, accounting etc), for orchestrating riots. By displacing Hindus fro that area, they would settle more “Banglasesh Muslims” there, so that to increase their percentage easily. The idea of communalizing the loss in terms of “financial damage” is also intriguing, as to how they could think in such lines. In other words, the running riot project has become so profit making and this exploiting everything

charred-remains-of-the-households-at-dulagarh

Hindus attacked the Miladi Nabi procession – now the story turns 1800 U-turn!: On December 13, 2016, a religious procession on the occasion of Milad-un-Nabi was attacked. That is what many people from both communities in Dhulagarh agree on — and where their divergence starts. While the Muslim community alleged that their procession was stopped and Muslim youths were forced to chant names of Hindu gods, and then attacked, people from the Hindu community blamed “outsiders” for the attack. They alleged Muslim youths came prepared with weapons. The spark began near Annapurna Club at Dewanghat. Sheikh Narul Alam, one of the elders in the procession, said, “We had loudspeakers in our procession, and some people from the Hindu community objected to that. We turned off the loudspeakers. But some youths demanded that we chant names of Hindu gods. We refused. They started throwing stones.”

dulagarh-14-12-2016-mamta-could-answer

The Hindu community has a different version: Indian Express says, that “The Hindu community has a different version”! Rabin Das, whose house at Banshtala in Dhulagarh was a few metres from the spot, said many youths in the procession were carrying “swords and bombs”, and then a crude bomb was hurled at his house. “We fled,” he said. Das said — and several locals concurred — his house was one of the first to be burnt. An embroidery factory abutting the house, owned by brothers Kamal and Jamaluddin Sheikh, was also gutted in the attack. “Who knows whether they (attackers) were Hindus or Muslims…. They were just out for blood,” Das said. Ujwal Das, a local worker, said: “The violence began outside the Allahabad Bank branch, where people had been in queue for long to withdraw cash. Tempers were already frayed,” said. It started with a stray fight, and became big, he added. On December 14, violence spread to hitherto unaffected areas — the primarily Muslim-dominated prosperous area of Haishar Para and Munshipara, and Hindu-dominated areas of Banerjeepara and Pollepara. The BJP has alleged that the whole incident was made worse by the TMC. Last week, BJP MP Roopa Ganguly alleged that a TMC legislator was behind the arson and looting, and that “minority appeasement” politics of TMC was responsible for the violence. TMC has denied the allegations.

© Vedaprakash

04-01-2017

dhulagarh-location-google-map

[1] Indian Express, WB: Its economy crippled by clashes, Dhulagarh picks up the pieces, Written by Aniruddha Ghosal | Dhulagarh (howrah) | Updated: December 29, 2016 7:23 am

[2] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/west-bengal-dhulagarh-violence-economy-crippled-4449637/

 

The politics of burning effigies in 2016 by the Congress cons, Dravidian dons and JNU junkies!

October 14, 2016

The politics of burning effigies in 2016 by the Congress cons, Dravidian dons and JNU junkies!

ravana-lila-english-bannerDravidar Kazhagam’s racial approach continues even in 2016:  The misguided Dravidar Kazhagam, of various banners still, believes in Aryan-Dravidian racial hypotheses and theories” and work emotionally with raid radicalism. The day after Dussera was celebrated with the burning of effigies of King Raavan in many parts of the country on 12-10-2016, as announced, about 40 members of the Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam [TPDK] landed at the Sanskrit College at Mylapore in Chennai on 13-10-2016 Wednesday to burn effigies of Ram, Sita and Lakshmanan[1].  The group had originally planned to hold the event outside the Madras Sanskrit College of Chennai to protest against the institution’s version of the Ramayana, but it was later shifted to a spot about a kilometre away due to police intervention[2]. While 11 of them were remanded under Section 285 of Indian Penal Code, 12 members of a Hindu group were detained near Sanskrit college in Mylapore[3]. Thus, the media differed in reporting the event.

ravana-lila-tamil-bannerPDK’s attempt to hold Ravan Leela flops[4]: Deccan Chronicle reported wth this caption. The attempt by Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam members to celebrate the Ravan leela deifying the demon king and projecting him as Dravidian stalwart, while belittling Lord Ram, turned into a fiasco with the police taking 55 persons of PDK into custody on Wednesday. Even before the members could assemble and burn an effigy in front of Sanskrit College, Mylapore, in the city on Wednesday evening, the police pre-empted their move and arrested 55 persons. The PDK had announced to stage Ravan leela as the outfit believed that Ravan was a Dravidian and burning his image during Dusshera celebrations in many parts of India amounted to “mocking” the Dravidians. “This is only a bid to stoke controversy and is intended to insult the Hindu gods and hurt the sentiments of the believers,” Hindu Makkal Katchi state president Arjun Sampath said reacting to the development. The staunch Hindu outfit has demanded the police to detain the PDK members under NSA and prevent such incidents in future. “The PDK is taking things a bit too far. The attempt to hold Ravan leela is an assault on our culture and it is highly condemnable,” Mr Sampath said[5].

lord-sri-rama-1971-dk-chappal-garlandedWhy Ravan leela? – the racist question asked by modernists!: The pro-Muslim media “Scroll.in” reported differently. This was the Periyarist group’s answer to Ram Leela – Ravanan Leela to demonstrate their opposition to the Ram Leela celebrations that depict the victory of King Ram over Raavan, who, according to Indian mythology, had kidnapped Ram’s wife Sita[6]. Amidst tight security, and all efforts of the police to stall the event, the members of the fringe group did manage to burn a few effigies, including that of Lord Ram[7]. Kumaran / Tinker Kumaron, a member of the TDPK said, “Every year, in North India, Ram Leela is celebrated by burning effigies of Raavan, This is being done to insult South Indians. We consider Raavan to be a Dravidian….As per our plan we broke the police chain around us and burned the effigy. 11 persons who were involved in burning effigies have been remanded by police.”

%e0%ae%a4%e0%af%8b%e0%ae%b4%e0%ae%b0%e0%af%8d-%e0%ae%a4%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%b0%e0%af%81%e0%ae%95%e0%af%8d%e0%ae%95%e0%af%81%e0%ae%ae%e0%ae%b0%e0%ae%a9%e0%af%8d-%e0%ae%9a%e0%af%86%e0%ae%a9%e0%af%8dWhy is the President participating in Ram leela programme?: Speaking to The Hindu[8], G. Ramakrishnan, general secretary, Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam, said that the act was a reaction to the celebration of Ram Leela as a part of Dusshera celebrations across North India, a festival in which the effigy of mythological character Ravanan is set on fire symbolically to represent victory of Lord Ram over Ravanan. “To us, Ramayana, though a mythological story, was a Aryan-Dravidian conflict where Lord Ram was shown to have won against Ravanan, who we consider as a Dravidian. The epic represents Ram as a God and Ravanan as a monster. This is the basis of our opposition,” he said. Criticising the recent celebrations at the Red Fort lawns, which was attended by several high-profile dignitaries including President Pranab Mukherjee, and Congress president Sonia Gandhi, Ramakrishnan wondered if India really was a secular country. “Why is the President participating in such a programme? He is the president to whole of India,” he said. It is evident that these people are behaving in this way, knowing the truth that the whole country has been celebrating for many years. Even hundreds years back, it was celebrated in Asfganistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and other countries.

%e0%ae%a4%e0%ae%aa%e0%af%86%e0%ae%a4%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%95-4Belief in race, racism and racialism: Condemning Ramayana’s ‘racist portrayal’ of ‘Dravidians as demons’, the TPDK said that the Ravanan Leela was their way of protesting against Hindu cultural hegemony. “It does not matter that ‘Ram Leela’ is not celebrated in Tamil Nadu. In Delhi, effigies of Ravanan and his two brothers are burnt, we believe that they are Dravidians and burning their effigies is mocking us. So to stop that, we have decided to celebrate ‘Ravana Leela’ in which we will be burning the effigies of Ram, Sita and Lakshman,” S Kumaran, another TDPL leader had told TNM earlier. He also added that they had written a letter to Prime Minister asking him to stop Ram Leela in Delhi but they did not get any response from his office.  “It is clearly proven once again that the rulers of India will never care to respect the feelings of the Southerners,” said the group. “If they have cared so, then they would not have ventured to burn the effigies of the three choicest heroes of the Dravidian race in the guise of honouring a hero of religious epic.” Kumaron said that this protest against Ram Leela celebrations gathered momentum in 1974, when the group sent a letter to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi demanding a stop to the festivities. But at that time too, they received no reply. Over the next few decades, there have been at least three instances when the group has burnt effigies of Ram, and and been arrested for this.

%e0%ae%aa%e0%af%8b%e0%ae%b2%e0%af%80%e0%ae%9a%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%b8%e0%af%8d-%e0%ae%aa%e0%af%82%e0%ae%9f%e0%af%8d%e0%ae%b8%e0%af%8d-%e0%ae%95%e0%ae%be%e0%ae%b2%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%b2%e0%af%8d-%e0%ae%aeSplinter groups playing dangerous games: Veeramani and “Viduthalai” Rajendran had a break and Rajendran started “The Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam” in 2012, claiming that they would follow the teachings of social activist and politician EV Ramaswami Naicker or Periyar, who had also questioned the portrayal of Raavan in the popular version of the Ramayana. As reported in Outlook, some of the questions posed by Periyar were, “Isn’t it true that Ravaan abducted Sita as an honourable revenge for the insult heaped upon his sister? Isn’t it a Brahminical ploy to give the colour of lust to a most honourable kidnapping?” The DK spinter groups have always been attacking the soft target – the Brahmins! They cruelly cut a poor Brahmin at West Mambalam some years ago with aruval (study sword), and another Brahmin in Mylapore last year (April 2015)[9].

%e0%ae%a4%e0%ae%ae%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%b4%e0%ae%95%e0%ae%a4%e0%af%8d%e0%ae%a4%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%a9%e0%af%8d-%e0%ae%aa%e0%ae%be%e0%ae%b0%e0%af%8d%e0%ae%aa%e0%af%8d%e0%ae%aa%e0%ae%a9%e0%ae%bf%e0%ae%af-%e0%ae%8eSplinter DK groups attack Brahmins following the path of Periyar: MT Saju writes that in the 1970s too, Periyarists conducted Ravanan Leelas. He reminds us that after Periyar died, his wife Maniyammai burnt the effigy of Ram at Periyar Thidal in 1974[10]. But since then, it has not been a popular event. Thus, for some reason, some people want to create ruckus now. Dravidian movement analyst K Thirunavukarrasu said that this anti-Ram sentiment has existed since the beginning of the Dravidian movement in the 1920s. The 1940s saw the publication of works such as Raavana Kaviyam (Raavana Epic) by Pulavar Kuzhandhai and Iranyan Allathu Inayatra Veeran(Hiranya or the Unparalleled Warrior) by Bharatidasan, which eulogised the characters Raavan and Hiranyakashyap, who had been depicted as asuras in popular versions of Indian mythological stories. “The asuras have been depicted in these stories in a manner that denigrates Dravidians,” said Thirunavukarrasu. As Periyar used to say, “If you see a snake and Brahmin, leave snake but kill Brahmin”, these goons are following such bloody method.

jnu-modi-effigy_2016Dravidian King Ravana was a Brahmin: The atheist Dravidian ideologists do not believe Puranas, yet, they believe them for their myth-making. As they believe Aryan-Dravidian race theories, at one side they claim that Ravana was a Brahmin! “The intention of the Dravidian movement is to oppose the depiction of Dravidas as asuras in all these plays.” Tamil writer D Ravikumar said that according to the version of the Ramayana written by medieval Tamil poet Kambar, Raavan was not a Dravidian King but a Brahmin. “If you look at this from the lens of Kambar’s Ramayana, it is hard to say how he came to be associated with Dravidian identity,” said Ravikumar. Ravikumar said that around the 1960s, Tamil Nadu politics was based on antagonism towards North India, Brahminism, Aryans and Hindi. The protest against Ram Leelas rode on this sentiment, he said. But in the 1970s and 1980s, the issue became irrelevant. When the main parties in power were all Dravidian parties, it was no longer a vote-catching subject. “Now, this has been revived by some groups after the BJP has come to power,” said Ravikumar. “Raavan acts as an anti-BJP symbol. But we don’t know how successful it will be.”

%e0%ae%b0%e0%ae%be%e0%ae%ae%e0%ae%9a%e0%af%87%e0%ae%a4%e0%af%81-%e0%ae%95%e0%ae%b0%e0%af%81Karunanidhi playing Ravana (1998): On October 1, 1998, Anoor Jagadeesan, president of PDK and 16 others were arrested when they tried to burn the effigies of Rama and Lakshmana in Chennai[11]. On October 18, 1998, Karunanidhi asserted that[12], “….if you insult Ravana, you are insulting me”. In Ramasethu issue also, he passed remarks asking “In which engineering college Rama studied” (so that he could build a bridge). Even, Kamal Hasan also used to utter that he came from Ravan geneology or something like that!

r-s-manohar-as-ravanaIlangeswaran vs Ravana Leela: R. S. Manohar (1925-2006) used to portray all Asuras as heroes – Surapadman, Sisupalan, Narakasuran, Indrajit, Sukrachariyar etc., in his characteristic projection in his dramas, which were successful in 1970-80s. He too projected Ravana as “Ilankeswaran”, the Lord of Lanka, but, not the Dravidian way of contempt, hatred and blasphemy. In fact, he followed the Puranic narration and other hagiographical details. Understandably, he was never supported or honoured by the Dravidian leaders or even Periyar for his donning Asuras! And now, the fringe elements have started the old game, when the Dravidian CM, that too, a lady has been ailing in hospital.

the-ravan-effigy-burned-at-jnuModi effigy burned by the Congress and JNU students[13]: A group of students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) on 11-10-2016 Tuesday burnt the effigy of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, BJP chief chief Amit Shah, Mahatma Gandhi’s killer Nathuram Godse and others to mark the “victory of truth over falsehood” on the occasion of Dussehra. Members of the Congress-backed National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) on Tuesday night celebrated Dussehra by burning the effigy of Modi and others to protest against the growing interference of the Centre in universities and attacks on Dalits.“We celebrated the victory of truth over falsehood in a modern and democratic country by burning effigies. For us Modi and RSS are symbol of untruth,” said Sunny Diman, an NSUI member[14]. So, the Congress party too has taken such method of politics of burning effigies exploiting the occasion of “Viyayadasami”. Ironically, the Congress leaders have been questioning the successful surgical operations on these days at one side and indulging in such cheap and vulgar activities at another side.

© Vedaprakash

14-10-2016

the-ravan-effigy-burned-at-jnu-with-students

[1] The News Minute, Dravidian Ravanan Leela: Periyarists burn Ram effigy even as police try to stop them, by TNM Staff, Thursday, October 13, 2016 – 11:31.

[2] Scroll.in, Why a Dravidian fringe group burnt effigies of Ram and Sita in Chennai this year, by Vinita Govindarajan. October 13, 2016, 8 pm.

[3] The Hindu, TPDK Cadres arrested in chennai for burning effigy of Lord Ram, Chennai 13, 2016, Updated: October 13, 2016 07:23 IST

[4] Deccan Chronicle, PDK’s attempt to hold Ravan Leela flops, Published Oct 13, 2016, 7:00 am IST, Updated Oct 13, 2016, 7:01 am IST

[5] http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/in-other-news/131016/pdks-attempt-to-hold-ravan-leela-flops.html

[6] http://scroll.in/article/818922/why-a-dravidian-fringe-group-burnt-effigies-of-ram-and-sita-in-chennai-this-year

[7] http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/dravidian-ravanan-leela-periyarists-burn-ram-effigy-even-police-try-stop-them-51281

[8] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/tpdk-cadres-arrested-in-chennai-for-burning-effigy-of-lord-ram/article9213004.ece

[9] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/six-dvk-men-held-for-attacks-on-priests-in-chennai/article7127953.ece

[10] http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31807&articlexml=TWIST-TO-THE-TALE-Reviving-Ravanlila-to-counter-13102016006020

[11] Ajith Pillai and A. S. Paneerselvan, Good Or Evil? The  Politics Of  Ravana, Outlook, Novemver.2, 1998.

[12] http://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/good-or-evil-the-politics-of-ravana/206444

[13] The Hindustan Times, Delhi: Students burn effigy of Modi, Shah, Godse at JNU campus on Dussehra, HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times, New Delhi, Updated: Oct 13, 2016 10:08 IST

[14] http://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/students-burn-effigy-of-modi-shah-at-jnu-campus-dubbing-them-as-ravana/story-twLk2C05xBVCRaVR5ScVvO.html

What has been happening at JNU? – Can it be liberated from controversies, ideologies and politics?

August 24, 2016

What has been happening at JNU? – Can it be liberated from controversies, ideologies and politics?

JNU-Anmol-Ratan

JNU with controversies: Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) started in 1969 has been embroiled, enmeshed and entangled with many controversies, because of political affiliation of the students for the last 50 years. Generally, the JNU professors, Assistant professors etc., behave, as if they have come from heavens or the others who invite them foe talks, treat them in such a way, they might be tempted to behave like that. Any way, during the last decades, definitely, they have been pampered in many ways that they themselves accustomed to be treated so. Amidst the ongoing unrest in the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) over ‘anti-national’ slogans, there is a BJP MLA who had gone one step forward in defaming the varsity and its students[1]. According to BJP MLA from Ramgarh in Rajasthan’s Alwar district Gyandev Ahuja, those studying in JNU are involved in activities including ‘sex and drugs’ among others[2]. He commented in February 2016. A dossier 200-page report prepared by a group of teachers of the Jawaharlal Nehru University is likely to add more fuel to the fiery controversy surrounding the prestigious academic institution[3], which has been put together by a group of 11 JNU teachers, describes the university as a “den of organised sex racket.” The document, which was prepared in 2015 and released only recently – in April 2016 – to a few journalists, has been submitted to the JNU administration[4]. In May 2016, a student was arrested for raping his classmate[5]. Now, news has come that one JNU student raped another student!

Anmol Ratan CSDE student

CSDE research student booked for rape: A JNU student, an activist of the All India Students’ Union (AISA[6]), has been booked for allegedly drugging and raping a 28-year-old research scholar at his university hostel room on Saturday 20-08-2016[7].  Anmol Ratan is a student at the Centre for the Study of Discrimination and Exclusion (CSDE) under the prestigious School of Social Sciences (SSS), while the alleged victim is a PhD student[8]. Incidentally, the Centre for the Study of Discrimination and Exclusion has been involved in producing negative issues with selective interpretation on social issues. The sole representative of ABVP in an otherwise Left-dominated JNUSU, Saurabh Sharma, told Mail Today that he had already written to the V-C demanding stern action against the accused, including his immediate rustication from the varsity[9].

JNU-Anmol-Ratan

The rape victim complained to the police: According to the complaint filed by her at Vasant Kunj (North) police station, she had posted on her Facebook profile that she wanted to watch ‘Sairat’ movie and asked if anyone had a CD of it. It said Ratan apparently messaged her saying that he had a copy. Thereafter, he picked her up 20-08-2016 on the pretext of giving her a CD of the film and took her to Brahamputra Hostel, where he stays. She said in the complaint that he offered her a spiked drink and allegedly raped her[10]. He also threatened her and asked her to not report the matter[11]. However, the woman approached the police on 19-08-2016 and a case of rape was registered and further investigation is underway[12]. The police took the woman to hospital for a medical examination on Sunday 20-08-2016, after she filed the case[13]. “We have questioned several students of Brahmputra Hostel where the accused stays. We have also contacted senior officials of the university for assistance in our investigation,” said a senior police official.

jnu-anmol-ratan-aisa-state-secretary-accused-of-rape

The police version of what happened: Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police-I (South) Nupur Prasad said that on Sunday 21-08-2016, the purported victim approached the police with her complaint and stated that she had been raped by Anmol Ratan, a student of JNU and an activist of student organisation AISA[14]. The victim is in the first year of her Phd in one of the JNU schools. “She alleged that in the month of June, she had put a statement on Facebook that she wanted to watch a film called Sairat and had asked if anyone had a copy. She alleged that Anmol messaged her that he had a copy of the film. She further added that on Saturday, Anmol picked her from her hostel on the pretext of providing her the film and took her to his Brahamputra Hostel room where he offered some drinks to her and after that committed sexual assault with her,” said Ms. Prasad. She added that initially the accused had kept the woman confined and had not allowed her to go, even threatening her against revealing the incident to anyone. The following day she visited the Vasant Kunj (North) police station and shared her ordeal. “On the basis of statement of complainant a case under sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code has been registered and further investigation is in progress,” said Ms. Prasad. The accused had not been arrested till late Sunday night. “We stand by the complainant and will extend all possible support in her fight for justice,” the AISA said.

sucheta AISA President

AISA expels anmol Ratan: When contacted AISA said it has taken strong note of the allegations and has expelled Ratan from the membership. “AISA takes serious note of the fact that Anmol Ratan, a leading activist of AISA, is facing a criminal complaint of sexual assault. He is, henceforth, expelled from the primary membership of AISA[15]. “AISA will reflect on and deal with this issue with all the firmness it deserves. AISA will be unflinching for the principles of gender justice even if it involves a leading member of the organisation. We stand by the complainant in her fight for justice,” Ashutosh Kumar, AISA Delhi State Secretary, said[16]. Condemning the incident as a blot on the varsity’s image, the JNU authorities urged the community in the varsity to remain vigilant against such incidents. “JNU always stands for dignity of the individual, respect for women and democratic values. The administration strongly condemns an incident of heinous rape in a campus hostel. It has completely shaken the JNU community and has tarnished the image of the university,” an official statement said[17].

Anmol Ratan -jnu-rape

AISA president’’s note: “Two days have passed since the report of sexual violence against Anmol has come. Anmol was an AISA leader. We have expelled him from primary membership and told all our units not to remain in any contact with him. He is also presently a JNU student. JNUSU has demanded immediate suspension of Anmol. But no action has been taken from the JNU administration. He has also not been arrested yet. Anmol should be given no opportunity to use his position as an erstwhile student leader in his defence.The responsible institutions must not leave any space for that. He must not only be suspended immediately but also declared out of bounds from JNU. He must also be arrested immediately. Let us all demand immediate action from responsible institutions to ensure the process of justice isn’t hampered” – Via Sucheta De[18]. Incidentally, there has not been any condemnation from Kavita Krishnan, Kanhaiya and other comrades. Generally, they come to roads or at least in New Delhi or within JNU campus, conduct some demonstration, but, now, they keep silence.

Anmol Ratan - facebook details

Anmol Ratan applies for bail and dubs the complaint is false: The PhD student who was allegedly raped by a fellow student from JNU recorded part of her statement before a metropolitan magistrate Tuesday 23-08-2016, while the accused, Anmol Ratan, moved a pre-arrest bail application in a sessions court[19]. His advocate Rajiv Mohan argued that the complaint was the result of a “political rivalry” as Ratan belonged to AISA, while the complainant was a part of the Collective and they had “ideological differences”. He also cited the forthcoming JNU elections as one of the reasons, given the “political rivalry” between the two outfits[20]. But, a girl-student, just like that give a complaint that “she has been raped by so and so”? On 20-08-2016, she was taken to medical examination and thereafter only, complaint registered. As last May 2016 also a student was arrested, the JNU intellectuals should think about the reality and change themselves, as they are answerable to the society. It is not that NDA or UDF is ruling ideology alone cannot be imposed on people or students for a long time.

© Vedaprakash

24-08-2016

Police have put up a notice on Anmol’s sealed room at JNU saying Vasant Kunj Police must be contacted to open it

[1] Times of India, BJP MLA’s shocker, terms JNU a hub of ‘sex and drugs’, ANI | Feb 23, 2016, 01.18 PM IST.

[2] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/BJP-MLAs-shocker-terms-JNU-a-hub-of-sex-and-drugs/articleshow/51104667.cms

[3] Indiatoday, JNU is a den of organised sex racket, says dossier prepared by university teachers, New Delhi, April 27, 2016 | UPDATED 13:00 IST

[4] http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/jnu-is-a-den-of-organised-sex-racket-says-dossier-prepared-by-university-teachers/1/652719.html

[5] http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/rape-jnu-student-held-for-raping-classmate-at-party-in-december-say-delhi-police-2814473/

[6] http://www.aisa.in/

[7] The Hindu,  JNU student booked for raping research scholar in campus, New Delhi,  August 21, 2016

[8] Mail.online.india, Protests erupt at JNU after AISA leader Anmol Ratan is accused of raping a fellow student… and the rival ABVP starts a door-to-door campaign, By Siddhartha Rai and Astha Saxena, PUBLISHED: 00:47 GMT, 23 August 2016 | UPDATED: 00:47 GMT, 23 August 2016.

[9] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3753586/Protests-erupt-JNU-AISA-leader-Anmol-Ratan-accused-raping-fellow-student-rival-ABVP-starts-door-door-campaign.html

[10] Times of India, JNU student files rape case against fellow student, PTI | Aug 21, 2016, 10.55 PM IST.

[11] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/JNU-student-files-rape-case-against-fellow-student/articleshow/53800673.cms

[12] http://zeenews.india.com/news/delhi/aisa-activist-anmol-ratan-raped-jnu-phd-student-from-pretext-of-giving-sairat-movie-cd-to-spiking-her-drink-know-details_1921176.html

[13] http://www.asianage.com/delhi/jnu-rape-accused-still-run-497

[14] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/jnu-student-booked-for-raping-research-scholar-in-campus/article9014813.ece

[15] http://www.ndtv.com/delhi-news/28-year-old-jnu-student-files-rape-case-against-fellow-student-1446745

[16] NDTV-news, 28-Year-Old JNU Scholar Allegedly Drugged, Raped By Fellow Student, Delhi | Agencies | Updated: August 22, 2016 09:49 IST

[17] http://www.asianage.com/delhi/jnu-rape-accused-still-run-497

[18] https://www.facebook.com/officialaisa/?fref=nf

[19] Indian Express, JNU rape case: Charges false, result of political rivalry, says Anmol Ratan, Written by Aamir Khan | New Delhi | Published:August 24, 2016 5:27 am.

[20] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/jnu-rape-case-charges-false-result-of-political-rivalry-says-anmol-ratan-to-court-2993350/

 

Thomas myth spread by Historians – Historian-liars on the increase in India!

October 17, 2015

Thomas myth spread by Historians – Historian-liars on the increase in India!

I was surprised to see an article / paper written by one Dr. K. Sadasivan, Professor & Head. Department of History, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli appearing in the “Journal of Indian History and Culture” (JIHC) March 2003, Tenth issue, published by C. P. Ramaswami Iyer Institute of Indological Research, The C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar Foundation, 1, Eldams Road, Chennai – 600 018. The journal is edited by Dr. G. J. Sudhakar and the editorial board consists of –

  Dr. K. V. Raman,

  Dr. R. Nagaswami,

  Dr, T. K. Venkatasubramanian and

  Dr. Nandita Krishna.

The editor in his note recorded –

“Dr. K. Sadasivan, of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University has added his scholarship to this issue through his paper “Early Tamil oral, Literary and Archaeological traditions and St. Thomas Christians

The learned editor’s complimented paper is appearing in the journal spreading to twenty pages (JIHC, pp.17-38). What and how the Professor has added his scholarship? Anything new? NO.

The learned Professor has just vomited what the propagandist missionaries and fraudulent group has already aided and abetted with the unscrupulous Archbishop & fundamentalist elements. Dr. Sadasivam has ironically not read what Dr. N. Nagaswamy has written about “the doubtful Thomas”. He has happily concluded as follows:

It can be understood from the foregoing study that even in the absence of any documented history, the universal and local Christian traditions are unanimous in their views that St. Thomas arrived in India in 52 A. D., reached Mylapore via the west-coast (Thirivithancode-Aralvaimozhi pass), performed there his apostolic service in converting the natives to his religious fold and suffered martyrdom there at the hands of a native in A. D. though there are differing versions are there about his killer(s) and the place of his martyrdom. Moreover, the presence of a strong St. Thomas community, the tomb, the Chapel and the Cross, and the architectural remains, makes us believe that St. Thomas was living among the Tamils of first century A. D. however, it is premature to postulate a theory of Christian influence in Tamil works, particularly, Tirukkural, though it seems to display the possibility of having been influenced by the Bible or Christ/s Sermon on the Mount. But, a spark of Christian influence on the Tirukkural is not impossible as this didactic work is believed to have been written in the second century A. D., when St. Thomas Christians in the West Coast were still entrenched and began spreading the Gospel of Christ” (pp.33-34).

   So the cat is out. Denying Christian influence on Tirukkural is to place it in 2nd century and accept it! This makes one to remember what M/s. Arulappa and Acharya Paul Company has done in early 1980s. Now who is doing that to make Sadasivam to come to the same conclusion?

   He asserts to conclude: “the universal and local Christian traditions are unanimous”. What is that universal tradition? Something alien or superman-type? Came from heavens or sent by Christ and revealed to Sadasivam? And that too the traditions are unanimous! It is unfortunate that as an historian should he lie like this.

   . Moreover, the presence of a strong St. Thomas community, the tomb, the Chapel and the Cross, and the architectural remains, makes us believe that St. Thomas was living among the Tamils of first century A. D. Are the historians so naïve and gullible to believe instead of asking for historical evidences? Definitely, something has happened to this gang of historians who decided to accommodate such false, that too, already well-known forgery and fraudulent act. Who gives such dating of first century A. D and all? Not only his dating is wrong but also the notation, as now only BCE and CE are used. The learned historian has been so “christianic” to follow Anno Domini! Any way to follow fraudulent and forge history such dubious dates have to be followed.

    “But, a spark of Christian influence on the Tirukkural is not impossible as this didactic work is believed to have been written in the second century A. D., when St. Thomas Christians in the West Coast were still entrenched and began spreading the Gospel of Christ”. Very well indeed. Had Arulappa been alive, he would have generously funded to Sadasivam of Tirunelveli,  as he did to Acharya Paul of Sri Rangam. How e gets the same “research methodology” of Arulappa and Co.?

   The acknowledgement of Dr. G. J. Sudhakar is unbelievable: “Dr. K. Sadasivan, of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University has added his scholarship to this issue through his paper “Early Tamil oral, Literary and Archaeological traditions andSt. Thomas Christians“. He has been a history Professor of Loyola College, editor of several history-journals, office-bearer of IHC, SIHC, TNHC etc. So his admission and appreciation of “scholarship” aiding and abetting false history, fraudulent history etc., is intriguing and appears to be heading for dangerous situation.

   Dr. Nandita Krishna has been of course not new for the spread of myth, as she has already contributed her mite in “The Hindu”. For details: See www.hamsa.org However, being a great-daughter of C. P. Ramaswami Iyer in his name the Foundation runs and publishes this journal, this is something unfortunate, as she could have avoided it. At least, she could have told Sudhakar not to publish it. But, what is done becomes history!

   Anyway, why Indian historians have been becoming liars? One has to study this aspect.

The so-called 300 / 3000 Ramayanas: The Dravidian propaganda

March 6, 2012

The so-called 300 / 3000 Ramayanas: The Dravidian propaganda

 By Sri Vedaprakash, March 16, 2008
 
Note: This topic is again and again brought to the notice of the readers. However, the atheists, the Dravidian propagandists, Communists, Christians and Muslims hiding under such banners again and again rake up the issue without reading Ramayana. Unfortunately, they even do not read what these Ramanujan, Paukla and others have written. Yet, they go on rehash the stuff. Therefore, I have to point out their hollowness to plant such mischievous postings appearing then and there.
Ramayana once again[1]!:Ever since the Sethu-Samuthram controversy has cropped up, the Dravidian ideologists, Karu’s Court Historians[2] and others ganged up together circulating the old-stories as authentic histories. Of course, the propaganda carried on by this hysterical gang has parallel only in Hitler’s camp. Of course, any reader can note it is the Black Parivar[3] and the Red Parivar[4] would very often take the Hitler-stick to beat others, but they do not realize that they have been following only Hitler. Coming to the point, now their main attack has been against Rama and Ramayana and therefore, the Karu’s Court historians started digging up old polemical writings, scurrilous pamphlets and anti-Hindu literature to serve their perverted purpose.

The “Viduthalai” [5] (March 14th and 13th dated), the DK-mouth piece, but with the blessings of Karu has brought out one brief of A. K. Ramanujam’s paper “Three Hundred Ramayanas”. T. R. Balu has made a visit and met Karu on 14th. Therefore, the coincidence can be noted and there would be raking up the issue again. The Communist super intelligent leaders have also started the nonsensical blabbering that Ramayana is myth and so on.

The Dravidian Love for Paula Richman: Recently, the Dravidian protagonists have again started their blasphemy against Sri Rama under the guise of historical research, analytical wisdom, Aryan-Dravidian race hypotheses[6] , their (Aryan-Dravidian) continuous struggle-for- ever in India and other ideologies. Incidentally, now, one way or the other, as they have drawn attention to Paula Richman’s book, “Many Ramayanas”, it is imperative to read what exactly, she mentions about the subject, which has been so fascinated to these atheist rabble-rousers. I have read the book carefully and particularly, the interpretations, many times to understand the psyche behind it. Actually, the whole story has not been new Indian scholars, researchers and at least, those who know about the origin of Ramayana[7]. A. K. Ramanujam’s paper[8] “Three Hundred Ramayanas” appears in “Many Ramayanas” of Paula Richman.

The book is nothing but compilation of articles of different personalities, purportly to look into the diversity of a narrative tradition in South Asia. Narrative, rendering, oral tradition, from oral to writing and vice versa, translation etc., can be entertained only literary criticism, when such liberality of literature is there in a society. Where, the thought process is control, such exercise cannot be undertaken. In fact, in many non-Indian societies, such narrative, rendering, oral tradition, from oral to writing and vice versa, translation etc., had been done away long back. Even today in the so-called modern, civilized, advanced, progressed, etc., times, such exercise is not possible in other non-Indian literature. Therefore, the literary critics should understand and appreciate the nuances, before criticizing the “many Ramayanas” or sending wrong signals.

Paula Richman has stories of A. K. Ramanujan, Frank E. Reynolds, Kathleen E. Erndl, David Shulman, Velcheru Narayan Rao, Clinton Seely, Staurt H. Blackburn, Paula Richman, Patricia Y. Mumme, Philip Lutgendorf, and Ramdas Lamb discuss about such narratives etc., and it appears as English rendering of any Tamil Pattimandram discussing the very old questions of mutilation of Surpanaka, Sita’s fire ordeal, etc. Unfortuinately, the sole aim of the compilation appears to deride, disparage and denigrate by choosing the topic under the guise research with historical camouflage.

300 or 3000 Ramayanas?: That there are “300 Ramayanas” as exactly counted has not been the original idea of A. K. Ramanujan, but, as he himself confessed that it belongs to one “student of Ramayana”, Canille Bulcke[9], who only counted so – exactly 300! Then to add his contribution, A. K. Ramanujan mentions[10] that according to a Kannada scholar[11] there are more than a thousand Ramayanas in Kannada! Then, adds that according to a Telugu scholar[12] there are more than a thousand Ramayanas in Telugu! At least, the Telugu scholar appears to be probably reasonable, as he said “more than a thousand”! It is not known why the learned scholar stops with, as he could have consulted Malayali scholar, Marathi scholar, Oriya scholar, Bengali scholar, Gujarathi scholar, Rajasthani scholar, Hindi scholar, Kashmiri scholar and so on.

So here, the point is that Ramayana story has been so popular among every society of the ancient civilizations and accepted by the members of different societies, each member wanted to recognize and transform such Ramayana character to the identified members of society or vice versa for exhibiting similar or same characteristics. When one asks, “Ey, why are you sleeping like Kumbakarna?” , it does not imply that his brother is like Ravana and so on. It has been used figuratively to drive out the point as such characterization has been known to everybody. Thus, he cannot be considered to have created one more Ramayana!

The so-called freedom of thought expression and opinion: The existence of 300 or 3,000 or 30,000 Ramayanas has been the credit to the popularity of Ramayana as a human-literature, Universal literature long back and it does not discredit as the existence of more Bibles[13] or Quarans or Korans[14], as the very mention would be anathema. Perhaps, the persons, who talk about “300 Ramayanas” do not know the existence of more Bibles or Korans., but the faithful believers destroyed many or all according to their own estimate and accounting and finally have one “printed version”, declared as infallible and revealed through God as the “Word of God”, so none could change anything thereafter. But they do not explain why there were hundreds of Bibles and Korans and why they were destroyed. How they could have selected the existing version only as the exact tract as revealed to their respective prophets to be accepted as authentic and authorized. How such divine grace had descended on the chosen group to decide and do accordingly.

Indians have not leaned the art of editing, expurging and interpolation of verses of books, as done by the non-Indians. They have not learned the art of destruction of earlier, differing or opposing versions and to claim that this is the only “Authorized version” or “Revealed Book”.

The Arabic tradition of rendering Poetry and Koran: The Arabic tradition has been that the Arabic poets would only recite their poems, be listened and enjoyed and appreciated by others and they were never written down. Particularly, in the case of Koran, it was strongly believed that as it was revealed by Allah through Jibreal / Gabriel to the Prophet Mohammed (PBCH), it has to be learned by heart by listening to the recital by the experts. There had / have been groups exclusively for the purpose of recital of Koran. Only later, the writing down of Koran and its translation into other non-Arabic languages started. As Ibn Warraq has elaborately dealt with about it, it is not discussed here. In fact, Mohammed Mamaduke Picthall[15] in his foreword clearly records the following points:

1.. It may be reasonably claimed that no Holy Scriptures can be fairly presented by one who disbelieves its inspiration and its message.
2.. The Koran cannot be translated. That is the belief of old-fashioned sheikhs and the view of the present writer (H. M. Pitchall).
3.. …the Glorious Koran, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy.

In India, the society has been liberal, democratic and egalitarian, so the members have liberty to pursue their literary pursuits. Thus, they make one God to many Gods; make male and female Gods with child God also; many times lover; employer and slave; chieftain, king and emperor and so on. It increases his thinking and creativity. The painter and sculptors too follow such pattern and depict Gods and Goddesses accordingly. This is the real freedom of thought, expression, and exhibition of artistic talent. That is why the negative characterization is opposed and condemned. Nowadays, it has become fashion for elite artists, eminent historians and social activists to come out and support such errant perverts, but it is not correct, as could be seen. For example, A cannot of sleeping with B’s wife, just because, he has the freedom of thinking. Having such freedom of thinking, he cannot express openly to B, because he has freedom of expression. As B too have such rights and starts exercise his rights of freedom of thought and expression the consequences are well known. Therefore, there are individual rights which should not violate the rights of others. If this fundamental is not known or knowingly, continuously violated, definitely the peaceful people may react one day. Therefore, it is better to live amicably instead of provoking others. In such situations and conditions, only the provoking forces are barbaric, medieval, lumpen and so on.

Any other world literature does not have such elasticity, flexibility, liberality, democracy, egalitarianism proves that they are controlled and suppressed. Therefore, there cannot be any freedom of thought, expression and opinion entertained in such societies. Even, there is no freedom to tell the fact that there were 300 / 3000 Bibles and Korans, but they were destroyed and now there is only one! Here, Salman Rusdie and H. F. Hussain can be contrasted in the context; Ibn Warraq and EVR; Karunanidhi and Taslima Nasreen; Bertrand Russell and Thomas Paine; and so on.

Ramayana characters could be human beings of any age: As mentioned, because of the flexibility of the characterization of Ramayana, it is applicable to any time and place. Ramayana and Mahabharata are played everywhere by the people with their available men and materials. Therefore, in such depiction, dramatization and adapted-rendering, there would variance in all aspects. Taking these literary critics cannot make big fuss out of it. Now Rama and Ravana may come with pants and shirts also. If it becomes, popular, it would be carried on enjoyed by a group. Can it we say, it is 301th Ramayana or 3001th? Yes, it is correct, “as long as there are many Ramas, there would be more Ramayanas”.

But no other literature could be subjected to such process, as in the non-Indian tradition, the very such thought might be unthinkable. We cannot have many non-Indian heroes or Gods. Can Paula Richman produce an edition of “Many Bibles”, “Many Qurans”, like that or any narratives and oral traditions of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Mohammed, Fatima etc.(just for example, it is asked). Believers of the respective lands and countries know the existence of such narratives, renderings and oral traditions available here and there, but Paula cannot compile. Why even the New Testament apocrypha or Hadis renderings are not discussed, debated and papers presented.

Who can analyze the non-Indian characters (including heroes and heroines, deified heroes and heroines and Gods and Goddesses themselves), criticize or justify their acts of omission or commission, and bring all renderings along with Thomas Paine, Robert Ingersol, Salmon Rushdie, Taslima Nasreen etc. Even Tembavani[16] and Sirappuranam[ 17] cannot be rendered in English, as the orthodox might oppose some verses. In fact, they had already objected to “Kesadhipada varnanai” (= the Tamil traditional narrative of a woman character whoever may be from head to feet, part by part) and removed such verses. Therefore, without going into the details, the western scholars go on commit blunders under the guise of research and it is totally wrong. They should ponder over. As they have big-big University labels, our Dravidian friends immediately, take their renderings and they produce their own renderings to blaspheme Hindus. Here only, the problem comes.

SUN-TV and Ramayana: In SUN-TV group of companies, Karunanidhi and his family members have shares. So why SUN-TV all of sudden start broadcasting “Ramayana”, that too, the much hated, criticized and blasphemed one. Why not the “Ravana Kaviyam” of Kulandai? It is promoted, looked. Loved and considered as “divine” by the Dravidian protagonists including Karnanidhi. He has already accepted that he supports Ravana and he belongs to such clan! Of course, even Kalainjar TV cannot be prevented in broadcasting Ramayana or Mahabhrata, but what about the ideology? They cannot abuse Hindus and cater them with this tamasha. They cannot kill Hindu culture and do this nonsense. They cannot soil the sanctity of temples and try to do some gimmicks. Of course, we know they do not follow the dictum of “Padippathu Ramayanam, idippathu Pillaiyar koil”, but, they meddle with Ramayana and demolish the Temple of Ramayana. That is why now the target is Ramar-palam!

References

[1] Today when I started typing this, SUN-TV of the Black Parivar has started broadcasting “Ramayana”! Even Kalainjar TV broadcast Ramayana!

[2] Vedaprakash, Why Tamilnadu Historians tell lies?, http://www.indiainteracts. com

[3] DK-DMK-PMK-Viduthal ai Puligar, their affiliated parties, associations and ideological subsidiaries.

[4] Al Communists parties CPI-CPI(M), CPI (ML) their affiliated parties, associations and ideological subsidiaries.

[5] It is only summarized one, of course with abusive language used characteristically in the Tamil translation.

[6] In spite of the fact that the Aryan-Dravidian hypotheses and Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) have been proved unhistorical and baseless, these ideologists continue to believe and carry on the propaganda and rouse passion in the same language as they used to speak some 40 to 60 years back.

[7] In the Journals of Royal Asiatic society, All India Oriental Conference and others, enough has been discussed and debated about Valmiki Ramayana and the Jain and Buddhist version of their Ramayanas.

[8] A. K. Ramanujam, “Three Hundred Ramayanas”, Many Ramayanas, edited by Paula Richman, 1991, University of California Press, USA, pp.22-49.

[9] A. K. Ramanujam, opt.cit, p.24.

[10] Ibid, however, he does not mention the name of the Kannada scholar who could count exactly 1000!

[11] This “According to….” makes one remember, “The Gospel according to St. Matthew”, “The Gospel according to St. Mark”, “The Gospel according to St. Luke”, “The Gospel according to St. John”, and so on!

[12] Ibid, here also, he does not mention the name of the Telugu scholar who could count more than 1000!

[13] H. G. G. Herklots, How the Bible Came to us?, Penguin Books, UK, 1959.

[14] Ibn Warraq, Why I am not a Muslim, Promethecus Books, New York, 1995, p.20, 73-76.

[15] Mohammed Mamaduke Picthall, The Meaning of the holy Quran, Crescent Publishing Company , New Delhi,

[16] A Tamil literary work produced on the lines of or rather imitating Kamba Ramayanam.

[17] A Tamil literary work produced on the lines of or rather imitating Kamba Ramayanam, but some Mohammedans claim that it is even superior to Kamba Ramayana, of course, they do not talk about the editing, expunction and removal verses and other modifications done.

Historians as witnesses and Sunni Wakf Board Experts!

October 16, 2010

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid, evidences and Court or

Hisorians as witnesses and Sunni Wakf Board Experts!

Vedaprakash

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid and eminent hisorians: The eminent historians would appear immediately, whenever “Rama” appears in the headlines of Indian media. They start interpreting historicity of “Ramayana” according to their own way without any regard for the other view or perspective[1]. Even in the case of Sethu-samuthram, they started writing in “the Hindu” and EPW grinding their mills as usual[2]. Of course, the left media does / did not want the opinion of the others[3]. They vociferously lecture and write that they would appeal against the judgment and so on, but disappear thereafter. They exploit every forum like IHC etc., only to project their viewpoint[4]. Romila Thapar roared, “We would appeal against this jugment”, when the so-called “Hindutva judgment” came[5], but nothing happened! And the faithful readers of “The Hindu”, Frontline, EPW and the devoted members of IHC etc., also do not bother as to why their eminent historians tell lies or play such dubious games? Why they believe the eminent historians, because of their eminence or for their duplicity? Have they ever thought about them as to why they behave like that? Now, again these left / eminent intellectuals / historians have been busy with issuing statements. Besides, historians and experts others too join!

130 experts sign – ASI report should be made public, says appeal to Chief Justice[6] (14-10-2010): Now 130 experts have come out with an open letter addressed to the Chief Justice of India! The news reports say like this, “The Allahabad High Court based a significant part of its judgment in the Ayodhya case on the evidence provided by the Archaeological Survey of India’s report on its excavations at the site, submitted to the court in 2003. They accuse that the report is still hidden from the public eye, and a virtual gag order placed on archaeologists who acted as observers during the excavation[7]. Now that the judgment has been pronounced, a group of 130 academics, activists and intellectuals have demanded that the ASI report be published. In an open letter[8] to the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, they urged that the report “be made available for scrutiny in the public domain, especially to scholars, as it is now a part of the public judicial record.” The ASI report, which concluded that a temple had existed at the site, has been criticised by many archaeologists for ignoring evidence such as animal bones, which would not have been found in a temple for Ram, and the existence of glazed pottery and graves at all levels which indicated Muslim residence”[9].

Shereen Ratnagar and D. Mandal were slapped with contempt of court charges by the Allahabad High Court: “In May, archaeologists Shereen Ratnagar and D. Mandal were slapped with contempt of court charges by the Allahabad High Court for sharing their observations in a book, titled “Ayodhya: Archaeology After Excavation”, published by Tulika in 2007. The orders in that case have been reserved”. That means they know the implications of the law. That is why they have been keeping quite since 2003!

The open letter and signatories: “The open letter notes that, “the world at large is equally constrained to silence. Such a judicially ordained zone of uncertainty curbs freedom of expression and fair comment.” Indians have never seen them in other caes where such issues have been involved. Thus, they want to selective!

Signatories: “The letter was signed by well-known Indian academics such as Sumit Sarkar, Uma Chakravarti, K.N. Pannikkar, K. Satchidanandan, Ajay Dandekar and filmmakers such as Anand Patwardhan, as well as less well-known Indian citizens – a software engineer, a textile design consultant, a teacher[10]. Academics from abroad – including those from universities in London, Chicago, Stockholm and Copenhagen – have also signed the letter, as friends of India”. This type of letters have been issued since 1992 and many times, the so-called signatories say that they have simply agreed to include their names in such letters. In some cases, they did / do not know also about the inclusion of their names!

Romila Thapar and others: Statement issued through Sahamat (01-10-2010): Another report goes like this: “Questioning the verdict of the Allahabad High Court on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suits, a group of left-leaning intellectuals on Friday said the judgment was “yet another blow to the secular fabric of the country” and the “repute of our judiciary”.  The scholars, including Romila Thapar, K M Shrimali, K N Pannikar, Irfan Habib, Utsa Patnaik and C P Chandrasekhar, said in a statement through the platform of Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (SAHMAT) that the verdict had raised “serious concerns” because of the way history, reason and secular values had been treated in it. “The view that the Babri Masjid was built at the site of a Hindu temple, which has been maintained by two of the three judges, takes no account of all the evidence contrary to this fact turned up by the Archaeological Survey of India’s own excavations — the presence of animal bones throughout as well as the use of ‘surkhi’ and lime mortar (all characteristic of Muslim presence) rule out the possibility of a Hindu temple having been there beneath the mosque,” the statement noted.

The verdict on Ayodhya: a historian’s perspective[11] (01-10-2010): Under this caption, the view of romila thapar appeared in “The Hindu”. It goes like this, “It has annulled respect for history and seeks to replace it with religious faith.

“The verdict is a political judgment and reflects a decision which could as well have been taken by the state years ago. Its focus is on the possession of land and the building a new temple to replace the destroyed mosque. The problem was entangled in contemporary politics involving religious identities but also claimed to be based on historical evidence. This latter aspect has been invoked but subsequently set aside in the judgment.

“The court has declared that a particular spot is where a divine or semi-divine person was born and where a new temple is to be built to commemorate the birth. This is in response to an appeal by Hindu faith and belief[12]. Given the absence of evidence in support of the claim, such a verdict is not what one expects from a court of law. Hindus deeply revere Rama as a deity but can this support a legal decision on claims to a birth-place, possession of land and the deliberate destruction of a major historical monument to assist in acquiring the land?

“The verdict claims that there was a temple of the 12th Century AD at the site which was destroyed to build the mosque — hence the legitimacy of building a new temple.

“The excavations of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and its readings have been fully accepted even though these have been strongly disputed by other archaeologists and historians. Since this is a matter of professional expertise on which there was a sharp difference of opinion the categorical acceptance of the one point of view, and that too in a simplistic manner, does little to build confidence in the verdict. One judge stated that he did not delve into the historical aspect since he was not a historian but went to say that history and archaeology were not absolutely essential to decide these suits! Yet what are at issue are the historicity of the claims and the historical structures of the past one millennium.

“A mosque built almost 500 years ago and which was part of our cultural heritage[13] was destroyed wilfully by a mob urged on by a political leadership. There is no mention in the summary of the verdict that this act of wanton destruction, and a crime against our heritage, should be condemned. The new temple will have its sanctum — the presumed birthplace of Rama — in the area of the debris of the mosque. Whereas the destruction of the supposed temple is condemned and becomes the justification for building a new temple, the destruction of the mosque is not, perhaps by placing it conveniently outside the purview of the case.

“Has created a precedent[14]: The verdict has created a precedent in the court of law that land can be claimed by declaring it to be the birthplace of a divine or semi-divine being worshipped by a group that defines itself as a community. There will now be many such janmasthans wherever appropriate property can be found or a required dispute manufactured. Since the deliberate destruction of historical monuments has not been condemned what is to stop people from continuing to destroy others? The legislation of 1993 against changing the status of places of worship has been, as we have seen in recent years, quite ineffective.

What happened in history, happened. It cannot be changed[15]. But we can learn to understand what happened in its fuller context and strive to look at it on the basis of reliable evidence. We cannot change the pas[16]t to justify the politics of the present. The verdict has annulled respect for history and seeks to replace history with religious faith. True reconciliation can only come when there is confidence that the law in this country bases itself not just on faith and belief, but on evidence”.

Earlier stand – Irfan Habib (01-10-2010): “With the three judges pronouncing differing opinions on the historical and archaeological aspects of the case in the Allahabad High Court’s judgement on the disputed land in Ayodhya, many leading historians have been left bemused. “It’s not a logical judgement with so many parts going 2-1. One does not accept the logicality of the judgement,” said Irfan Habib, a noted historian and a former Chairman of the Indian Council of Historical Research who earlier taught at the Aligarh Muslim University. He noted that the verdict seemed to legitimise the events of 1949[17], when an idol was placed inside the mosque, by constant references. On the other hand, by minimising any mentions of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the court seemed to be disregarding it, he said. He also expressed surprise that two judges questioned the date of construction of the Babri Masjid, as well as the involvement of emperor Babar or his commander Mir Baqi, since there had been clear inscriptions to this effect before the demolition. “Things that are totally clear historically, the court has tried to muddy,” he said[18].

D. N. Jha: “The historical evidence has not been taken into account,” said D.N. Jha, history professor at the Delhi University. Noting the judgement’s mention of the “faith and belief of Hindus” in reference to the history of the disputed structure, Dr. Jha asked why the court had requested an excavation of the site.“If it is a case of ‘belief,’ then it becomes an issue of theology, not archaeology. Should the judiciary be deciding cases on the basis of theology is a question that needs to be asked,” he said.

Supriya Verma, one of the observers: Professional archaeologists also noted that the judges did not seem to rely heavily on the Archaeological Survey of India’s court-directed excavation of the site in 2003, at least in the summaries of their verdict available on Thursday evening. “Somewhere, there is doubt about the credibility of that report,” said Supriya Verma of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, who acted as an observer during the ASI excavation. She noted that neither Justice Sudhir Agarwal nor Justice Dharam Veer Sharma even referenced the ASI report to support his conclusion on the existence of a temple on the site before the mosque was built. “It is almost as though they themselves were not convinced by the evidence. They are clearly conceding that there was no archaeological evidence of a temple or of its demolition…It is a judgement of theology,” she said.

Jaya Menon, one of the observers: Another observer of the ASI excavation, Jaya Menon of the Aligarh Muslim University, noted that the ASI report itself did not provide any evidence of a demolition, and only asserted the existence of a temple in its conclusion. “So I don’t know on what basis they made their judgements,” she said. The ASI report had been criticised by many archaeologists for ignoring evidence such as animal bones, which would not have been found in a temple for Ram, and the existence of glazed pottery and graves which indicated Muslim residents.

The eminent historians as witnesses of Muslims in the Allahabad case: The eminent historians, historical experts  and leftist manufacturers never bother about their secular credentials.  It is not known as to why these coteries should always support for the Masjid or Muslim cause. Ironically, the following have been the witnesses of the case in question, which is criticised by them:

Sl.No Witness no Name of the witness
1 Witness No. 63 R.S. Sharma
2 Witness No. 64 Suraj Bhan
3 Witness No. 65 D.N. Jha[19]
4 Witness No. 66 Romila Thapar
5 Witness No. 70 Irfan Habib
6 Witness No. 72 B.N. Pandey
7 Witness No. 95 K.M. Shrimali
8 Witness No. 99 Satish Chandra
9 Witness No. 102 Gyanendra Pandey

Then, where is their loci standi in criticising the judgment and Court? As witnesses, definitely, they could have deposed before the judges presenting their “historical facts” as they only know how to interpret! The public perhaps, even today do not know that in secular India, these historians stood witnesses to the Muslims! Why none has appeared for Hindus or temple cause? When the cold-blooded terrorist and heinous killer like Kasab is given legal aid, why none appeared for the non-Muslim and non-mosque group? Where is secularism? Would they come out in the public what they told to the judges in the Court? However, the poor show showed in the court by them raises many questions.

HC judge exposed experts espousing Masjids cause: Waqf Board Line-Up Accused Of Having Ostrich-Like Attitude:  The role played by independent experts, historians and archaeologists who appeared on behalf of the Waqf Board to support its claim has come in for criticism by one Allahabad High Court judge in the Ayodhya verdict. While the special bench of three judges unanimously dismissed objections raised by the experts to the presence of a temple, it was Justice Sudhir Agarwal who put their claims to extended judicial scrutiny. Most of these experts deposed twice. Before the ASI excavations, they said there was no temple beneath the mosque and, after the site had been dug up,they claimed what was unearthed was a mosque or a stupa. During lengthy cross-examination spread over several pages and recorded by Justice Agarwal, the historians and experts were subjected to pointed queries about their expertise, background and basis for their opinions.
To the courts astonishment, some who had written signed articles and issued pamphlets, were withering under scrutiny and the judge said they were displayed an ostrich-like attitude to facts. He also pointed out how the independent witnesses were connected one had done a PhD under the other, another had contributed an article to a book penned by a witness.

The vociverous historians could not give evidences properly as witnesses with all their extertise[20]: Some instances underlined by the judge are[21]:

  • Suvira Jaiswal[22] deposed whatever knowledge I gained with respect to disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others told (other experts). She said she prepared a report on the Babri dispute on basis of discussions with medieval history expert in my department.

  • Supriya Verma[23], another expert who challenged the ASI excavations, had not read the ground penetration radar survey report that led the court to order an excavation. She did her PhD under another expert Shireen F Ratnagar.

  • Verma and Jaya Menon[24] alleged that pillar bases at the excavated site had been planted but HC found they were not present at the time the actual excavation took place.

  • Archaeologist Shereen F Ratnagar has written the introduction to the book of another expert who deposed, Professor Mandal. She admitted she had no field experience.

Normally, courts do not make adverse comments on the deposition of a witness and suffice it to consider whether it is credible or not, but we find it difficult to resist ourselves in this particular case considering the sensitivity and nature of dispute and also the reckless and irresponsible kind of statements…[25] the judge noted. He said opinions had been offered without making a proper investigation, research or study in the subject. The judge said he was startled and puzzled by contradictory statements.When expert witness Suraj Bhan deposed on the Babri mosque, the weight of his evidence was contradicted by anotherexpert for Muslim parties, Shirin Musavi, who told the court that Bhan is an archaeologist and not an expert on medieval history[26]. Justice Agarwal noted that instead of helping in making a cordial atmosphere it tends to create more complications, conflict and controversy. He pointed out that experts carry weight with public opinion.

When the matter is subjudice, one has to obey law: It is a simple matter that whenever, any issue / case is pending with the Court, as the matter is subjudice, it should not be discussed or the decisions cannot be drawn in favour of anybody. However, these left historians etc., have been always speaking and writing supporting for Muslim cause or against Hindus, as is evident from their own recorded / printed statements / articles always published in the selected in few journals / ndewspapers. Unfortunately, they have even agreed to be witnesses for the Wakf Board in the Allahabad Court as their names are figuring. Ironivcally, they are called as Sunni Wakf Board experts![27]

When religions rely upon belief system, so also secularism historians too belive so ignoring objectivity: Like believers and dis-believers historians too believe and compel others to believe their perspective without any objectivity. As their objectivity differes, their perspective also differ, but try to argue with ideology, as could be understood by others. With belief system, no two ideologists could come together; with objectivity no two historians could accept the same historical event in the same view or pwerspective; here, the media has been projecting only one view. So what about the other view and why the media does not provide opportunity to accommodate their view? Should “audi alteram partem – hear the other side and decide” be applicable only to the Courts according to the principle of natural justice or the historians do not want to follow?

The same pattern as noted in the case of DK, DMK and other rapid atheists and radical experts is noted in the case of these eminent historians or Sunni Wakf Board experts: As it is pointed out in the case of DK[28]-DMK[29] radicals and rabid atheist groups that they do not come to Courts or face courts, though, they used to cry and roar that they are not afraid of Courts and so on. Here, also, suppressing the facts, these historians talk and write one thing in the dailies and cover up their mumbling and bungling in the court. The court recordings of the witnesses have been actually exposing their hollowness of expertise, deceptiveness of historical knowledge and their dubious role as witnesses. That they accuse even without seeing, even without reading or just discussing with others etc, prove their capacity of manoeuvring and manipulation of academics. How they get PhDs etc., only prove such academic degradation and professional pampering without any shame or remorse. It is open secret that the JNU, AMU, DU, IHC, ICHR and others at one side and BMAC, Sunni Wakf Board, AIMPLB at the other side have been playing communalism under the guise of secularism. Just by accusing others they cannot live, survive and continue their careers in this competitive world.

Why the eminent historians and Sunni Wakf Board experts did not respond to the remarks of the Judge? Definitely, the remarks of the Judge have been questioning the integrity of the eminent historians and Sunni Wakf Board experts, who deposed before the court as witnesses! They cannot simply brush aside such exposure, as it casts aspersion on their position. The English reading Indians and Indian students may doubt their veracity, reliability and uprightness, as they read their writings or listen to them. Therefore, they should go to court to clear the mess instead of shooting out letters to the Chief Justice just like politicians.

Indians and Indian youth should note as to whether these Sunni Board experts should teach history. Very often, it is said, claimed and propagated that India is / has been secular. Yes, how then the eminent historians professional archaeologists acted as Sunni Wakf Board experts and deposed as witnesses to the Muslims? Why these retired historians, senile professors and their working agents always make clamor about history, historicity and historiography in India, as if they are the sole selling agents of such stuff? Nowadays, the fact is that a few have been takers for history and most of the universities have dispensed with history subject. Definitely, the so-called historians have lost their importance and thus they tried to struggle for survival with the political and communal support. Now, the documents are available to all and the facts are known to everybody who access them through internet or otherwise. Common people may not know or understand the deceptive talkings and writings of the eminent historians or Sunni Wakf Board experts, but slowly they come to know. They easily understand that who want to settle the dispute and who want to continue the dispute for their stakes. Definitely, Muslims and Hindus want to settle the issue once for all, but these history gamblers and politicians want to continue. Therefore, the will of people prevail.

Vedaprakash

16-10-2010


 

[2] Romila Thapar, “Where fusion cannot work – faith and history” (the Hindu, dated September 28, 2007).

…………………., Historical Memory without History, in Economic and Political weekly, VOL 42 No. 39 September 29 – October 05, 2007, pp.3903-3905.

K. N. Panikkar, Myth, history and politics, Frontline, October 5, 2007, pp.21-24.

Suraj Bhan, “Government should have stood by ASI”, Ibid, pp.19-20.

[4] During the 2007-IHC session, Suvira Jaiswal was making such satatements. Then, in Delhi also they tried take up the matter. Now, in February 2011 at Malda, they may raise the issue. However, the Indians have to weait and see.

[5] In “the Hindu”, as usual, the news appeared with her photo and all, but after that everbody would have forgot about it! However, their warrior-like talk, veiled threatening and tactics of suppression of facts cannot be acquired by others.

[6] The Hindu, ASI report should be made public, says appeal to Chief Justice, Published: October 14, 2010 01:54 IST | Updated: October 14, 2010 02:03 IST; http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/14/stories/2010101464751800.htm

[7] How this has been a blatant lie has been exposed by the judge and that is why these guys have now tried to save their image by writing such letters. Of course, the media gives due publicity to such hypes and gimmicks.

[8] However, their mumbling, jumbling and bungling deposes before the Court have been kept as closed secret!

[9] Thus the eminent historians look for a non-vegetarian kitchen of Muslims there instrad of a temple. The same experts declared that the 16” inscription was planted by the Karsevaks in 1992.

[10] When Bharatiya Itihasa Sankalana Samiti works on the same lines, the same eminent historians make fun of having such diversified experts, but now they themselves have such signatories, just to project their strength.

[11] The Hindu, Published: October 2, 2010 00:41 IST | Updated: October 2, 2010.

[12] There is nothing new in Romila’s argument, as she repeats the same matter again and again. The unfortunate thing is that she like her friends always want others should accept their views!

[13] How they contradict in their views legally can be noted in such statements. When convenience comes, they forget law, when law is against them, they start talking generalization or raise the bogey of “Hindutva”!

[14] Law precedence is created in the Court. Yes, definitely, the judges are the persons to create and others have to accept. Of course, the appealable legal remedy is there.

[15] But whatever happened also cannot be forgotten. When the same historians want to whitewash the temple destruction of the Muslims and accept only the Muslim contribution, such type of exclusivist logic is not explained. Why the students should not know the facts? In law it is said audi alteram partem – hear the other side and decide. How then historians want to decide without knowing the other side?

[16] Why then the interpretation of the past is always different for different historians? Nowadays, historians do not want objectivity also. How then they woerry about accuracy, when they themselves are not worried about it?

[17] Acts and Rules are within the time frame work. All know that Places of Worship Act is there and it e3xempts only this place and not others. Why then they talk about pre-1947 and after 1947, when law its4elf  cannot do so?

[18]The Hindu, Historical evidence ignored, say historians, dated October 1, 2010, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article805087.ece

[23] It is interesting to note that the ASI report talks about a shrine followed by a temple with different structural phases, it also talks of “animal bones recovered from various levels of different periods”. If any shrine and a temple existed how can anyone account for the animal bones, Supriya Verma asks? She also maintains that stones and decorated bricks could have been used in any building, not necessarily only in a temple. Also, the carved architectural members have come from the debris and not from the stratified context.

[24] She got appointment in the AMU after she started supporting the cause of mosque and appeared as Sunni Wakf Board expert!

[25] The historians who deposed as witnesses and as well as others should carefully read this and understand their postion. They cannot pretend as if nothing happened or pose as great authorities and roam here and there in historical forums and conferences. Now Indians have also understood their double-games, double-speak and double-standards.

[26] Nowadays, just like medical experts or specialized doctors, these historians ad archaeologists trading charges like this – so-and-so is an expert in that field and he alone can know the truth and others cannot know the truth. Such type of exclusive mind-set exposes their arrogance and weakness and not the real expertise.

[27]Asghar ali Engineer, Archaeological Excavations and Temple, September 1-15, 2003,  http://www.csss-isla.com/arch%20150.htm

[28] Vedaprakash, Old Judgments and  New thoughts in the present context: S. Veerabadran Chettiar vs E. V. Ramaswami Naicker  others., http://vedaprakash.indiainteracts.in/2008/08/09/old-judgments-and-new-thoughts-in-the-present-context-s-veerabadran-chettiar-vs-e-v-ramaswami-naicker-others/

Karunanidhi way of Meddling with Chronology and History – II

January 17, 2010

Karunanidhi way of Meddling with Chronology and History: Part – II

Vedaprakash

In Indian history, there have been instances, where the Mohammedans and Christians had meddled with Indian chronology and history.

In that notorious meddling tradition, the dravidian concoctor, meddler and forger – Karunanidhi has joined and spoliing everything.

I have already pointed out in my earlier posting as to how this senile man has stooped down to concoct the tradition, heritage and civilization:

http://vedaprakash.indiainteracts.com/2008/04/29/karunanidhi-way-of-meddling-with-chronology-and-history/

Karunanidhi way of Meddling with Chronology and History
Published on April 29th, 2008 In Blogging, Careers-Life, Parties, Philosophy, Writing-Poetry, Politics | Views 95

However, he has determined to play mischief, as evidenced from his nonsensical talk made as appearing in “Viduthalai”.

கிருஷ்ணனுக்கும் – நாரதிக்கும் பிறந்த 60 குழந்தைகள் –
தமிழ் ஆண்டுகள் என்றால் ஏற்றுக்கொள்ள முடியுமா?
“தமிழ்ப் புத்தாண்டை”க் கோலாகலமாகக் கொண்டாடுவோம்!

http://files.periyar.org.in/viduthalai/20090116/news02.html

http://files.periyar.org.in/viduthalai/20090116/thalai.html

முதல்வர் கலைஞரின் இன எழுச்சியுரை

சென்னை, ஜன. 16- தைமுதல் நாள் தமிழ்ப் புத்தாண்டுபற்றியும், இதுவரை இருந்துவந்த தமிழ்ப் புத்தாண்டுபற்றியும் முதல்வர் கலைஞர் அவர்கள் எடுத்துரைத்தும், தைமுதல் நாள் புத் தாண்டை சிறப்பாகக் கொண்டாட வேண்டும் என்று வலியுறுத்தியும் இன எழுச்சியுரையாற்றினார்.

கருணாநிதி கலைவாணர் அரங்கத்தில் நடைபெற்ற திருவள்ளுவர் திருநாள் மற்றும் தமிழக அரசின் விருதுகள் வழங்கும் விழாவில், விருது பெறும் ஒவ்வொருவருக்கும் விருதுத் தொகை ஒரு இலட்ச ரூபாய் பொற்கிழி வழங்கி, தங்கப் பதக்கம் அணிவித்துச் சிறப்பு செய்து, சிறந்த நூலாசிரியர்களுக்கும், பதிப்பகத்தார்க்கும் பரிசுகள் வழங்கி, அகவை முதிர்ந்த தமிழறிஞர்களுக்கு நிதியுதவி ஆணைகள் வழங்கி, விழாச் சிறப்புரையாற்றினார்கள். இவ்விழாவில், மாண்புமிகு நிதியமைச்சர் பேராசிரியர் க. அன்பழகன், மாண்புமிகு செய்தித்துறை அமைச்சர் பரிதி இளம்வழுதி மற்றும் முக்கியப் பிரமுகர்கள் கலந்துகொண்டனர்

தமிழ்ப் புத்தாண்டு தொடங்குகின்ற இந்த நாளில் – நேற்றையதினம் புத்தாண்டு – ஏழையெளியவர்களுக்கு எல்லாம் – எல்லோருக்கும் சமத்துவப் பொங்கல் சாப்பிட இந்த அரசின் சார்பாக அவர்களுக்கெல்லாம் தேவையான பொருட்களை வழங்கிய அரசு – இந்த அரசு – இந்தப் புத்தாண்டை இதற்கு முன்பு நாம் கொண்டாடினோம். வருடப் பிறப்பு என்ற பெயரால் கொண்டாடினோம். அந்த வருடப் பிறப்பு எப்படி புத்தாண்டாக மாற நேரிட்டது என்றால் – தந்தை பெரியார் போன்றவர்கள், பேரறிஞர் அண்ணா போன்றவர்கள், புரட்சிக் கவிஞர் பாரதி தாசன் போன்றவர்கள், மறைமலை அடிகளார் போன்றவர்கள், திரு.வி.க. போன்றவர்கள் அத்தனை பேரும் சேர்ந்து – நம்முடைய தமிழனுக்கு ஒரு ஆண்டு வேண்டும், அந்தத் தமிழ் ஆண்டு, புத்தாண்டு தை முதல் நாளாகத் தான் இருக்க முடியும், தை பிறந்தால் வழி பிறக்கும் என்று அந்தச் சொல் வந்ததற்குக் காரணமே, தை பிறந்தால் தான் தமிழனுக்கு, ஏழைக்கு, விவசா யிக்கு, உழவனுக்கு, பாட்டாளிக்கு வாழ்வு பிறக்கின்றது. ஆகவே அந்த நாளை நாம் புத்தாண்டு என்று வைப்போம் என்று வைத்தார்கள். அதற்கு முன்பு இருந்த புத்தாண்டு, வருடப்பிறப்பு – அது வேறு, இது வேறு. அய்யோ, அதை ஒழித்து விட்டீர்களே என்று யாராவது சொன்னால், நீங்கள் கேளுங்கள். நீ எந்த வருடம் பிறந்தாய் என்று – என்னையே கேளுங்கள் -அவர்களுடைய கணக்குப்படி-நான் ரக்தாட்சி வருடம் பிறந்தேன். அப்படியென் றால் இப்போது எனக்கு என்ன வயது? ரக்தாட்சி வருடம் பிறந்த வனுக்கு அட்சய வருடத்தில் என்ன வயது என்று கேட்டால், ரக்தாட்சி, குரோதன, அட்சய – ஒரு வருடம் – ஏனென்றால் அறுபது ஆண்டுகள் – பெயர்கள் சுற்றிக் கொண்டே வரும். பிரபவ, விபவ, சுக்ல, பிரஜோபத்தி, ஆங்கீரச, ஸ்ரீமுக, பவ, யுவ, தாது, ஈஸ்வர, வெகுதான்ய, பிரமாதி, விக்கிரம, விஷூ, சித்திரபானு, சுபானு என்று இப்படி அறுபது ஆண்டுகள் சுற்றிக் கொண்டே வரும். அப்படி சுற்றிக் கொண்டு வரும்போது இந்த அறுபதில், 1924ஆம் ஆண்டு பிறந்த நாள் – இந்த வருடத்தின் சுற்று முடியும் போது – யாராலும் சரியாக வயதைக் கணக்கிட்டுச் சொல்ல முடியாது. 1924இல் பிறந்தவன் என்று சொல்கிற போது, இப்போது என்னுடைய வயது 85 என்று சொல்ல முடியும். எப்படி வந்தது இந்த வருஷம்.? ஒரு நாள் கிருஷ்ணனைப் பார்த்து நகர் வலம் வந்த நாரதர் – கிருஷ்ணா எனக்கொரு ஆசை என்றார். என்ன ஆசை நாரதா என்றார். நான் கதை சொல்லவில்லை. இது திரைக்கதை வசனம் அல்லவே அல்ல. இது திவ்யமான புராணம். அந்தப் புராணத் திலே நாரதர் வீணையோடு வந்து கொண்டிருந்தார். அப்போது கிருஷ்ணனிடம் எனக்கொரு ஆசை, அதை நீ நிறைவேற்ற வேண்டுமென்றார். ஒரு அழகான பெண்ணோடு நான் ஒரு நாளா வது வாழ வேண்டும் என்றார் நாரதர். கிருஷ்ணனுக்கு கோபம் வந்து விட்டது. இவர் யார், நாம் யார்? நம்மைப் பார்த்து இப்படி கேட்கிறாரே என்று, சரி உனக்கு நான் இந்த வரம் தருகிறேன், நீ இந்த ஊரில் எல்லா வீடுகளுக்கும் போ, எந்த வீட்டிலேயாவது அழகான ஒரு பெண் உனக்காக இருந்தால், நீ அவளை ஏற்றுக் கொள்ளத் தடை இல்லை, அவள் உன்னோடு வருவாள், போ என்று அனுப்பி வைத்தார். நாரதர் போனார். ஒவ்வொரு வீட்டி லும் ஒரு புருஷனோடு பெண் இருந்தாளே தவிர, தனியாக ஒரு பெண்கூட இல்லை. திரும்பி வந்தார் நாரதர். ஏன் என்று கிருஷ்ணர் கேட்டார். எல்லா வீடுகளிலும் பெண், ஆணோடு தான் இருக்கிறாள், அதனால் எனக்கேற்ற பெண் எங்கும் கிடைக்கவில்லை, என்னை விரும்புகிற பெண்ணையே காணவில்லை என்றார். சரி என்ன செய்யச் சொல்றே? நானே பெண்ணாக ஆகி விடுகிறேன், நீ ஆணாக இருந்து என்னை சந்தோஷப்படுத்து என்று நாரதர் கிருஷ்ணனைக் கேட்கிறார்.

ஒரே நாளில் 60 பிள்ளைகள்

சரி உன் இஷ்டப்படியே ஆகட்டும் என்று நாரதரைப் பெண்ணாக்கி, நாரதர், நாரதியாகி – கிருஷ்ணன் நாரதர் இரண்டு பேரும் சந்தோஷமாக இருந்து – அதைத் தான் படம் பார்த்திருப்பீர்கள் – பல ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பு திரைப்படம் வந்தது – பாட்டிகளுக்கெல்லாம் தெரியும் – கிருஷ்ணன் நாரதி என்று படமே வந்தது. நான் பொய் சொல்லவில்லை. அவர்கள் இருவருக்கும் சேர்ந்து 60 பிள்ளைகள் பிறந்தன. கடவுளுடைய காதல் அல்லவா? அவர்கள் இருவருக்கும் ஒரே நாளில் அறுபது பிள்ளைகள் பிறந்தன. அந்த அறுபது பிள்ளைகளுக்கும் வைத்த பெயர்கள் தான் பிரபவ, விபவ, சுக்ல என்று ஆரம்பித்து அட்சய வரையிலே உள்ள வருடங்களின் பெயர்கள். அந்த வருடங்கள் தான், அந்தக் கடவுளர்கள் தான், நமக்கு ஒவ்வொரு ஆண்டிற்கும் வைக்கப்படுகிற வருடங்கள், ஆண்டுகள் என்றிருந்தால் தமிழன் அதை ஏற்றுக் கொள்ள முடியுமா? அவன் தமிழனாக இருக்க முடியுமா? தமிழனாக இருப்பதற்கு அவனுக்கு எப்படி ஒரு கலை, கலாச்சாரம், நாகரிகம், பண்பாடு இவைகள் எல்லாம் வேண்டுமோ – பண்பாடு வேண்டும், அவனுக்கு வருடம் வேண்டாமா? அவனுக்கு ஒரு ஆண்டு வேண்டாமா? அவனுக்கு ஒரு திங்கள் வேண்டாமா? மாதம் வேண்டாமா? கிழமை வேண்டாமா? அதைத் தான் ஆய்ந்தாய்ந்து 500-க்கு மேற்பட்ட புலவர்கள் கூடி, 1921ஆம் ஆண்டு எடுத்த முடிவு தான், நேற்றையதினம் நாம் கொண்டாடிய நாள், தமிழர் புத்தாண்டு நாள் – இந்த ஆண்டு நாம் இதை ஓரளவு மகிழ்ச்சியோடுதான் கொண்டாடியிருக்கிறோம். ஏனென்றால் தமிழர்கள் வேறு ஒரு பக்கத்திலே சங்கடப்பட்டுக் கொண்டிருக்கிற நேரத்தில் நம்மால் அவ்வளவு தான் கொண்டாட முடிந்தது. அந்தத் தமிழர்களுக் காக நாம் இங்கே அந்த விழாவினை ஓரளவு தான் கொண்டாடி னோம்.

அடுத்த ஆண்டுமுதல்….

அடுத்த ஆண்டிலேயிருந்து அமெரிக்க சுதந்திர தினம் எப்படிக் கொண்டாடப்படுகிறதோ – இங்கிலாந்திலே எப்படி சுதந்திரம் தினம் கொண்டாடப்படுகிறதோ அதைப் போலவே தமிழர்களுடைய ஆண்டு தினம் – முதல்நாளைக் கொண்டாட வேண்டும். கடற்கரையிலே வாண வேடிக்கைகள் – ஒவ்வொரு மாவட்டத்தின் தலை நகரத்திலும் – குளக்கரையிலே, தெருக் களிலே, மைதானங்களிலே வான வேடிக்கைகள் நடைபெற வேண்டும். அப்படி கோலாகலமாக இந்த விழாவை நாம் கொண்டாட வேண்டும் என்று கேட்டுக்கொண்டு, விருது வழங்கப்பட்ட இந்த விழாவிலே இந்த விளக்கங்களைத் தருவதற்கு நேரம் கிடைத்த காரணத்தால் உங்களையெல்லாம் சந்திக்கின்ற வாய்ப்பு கிடைத்த காரணத்தால் – என் நோய் பறந்தது என்ற எண்ணத்தோடு மகிழ்ச்சியைத் தெரிவித்துக் கொள்கிறேன்.

One should have the knowledge of astronomy, mathematics and connected textual knowledge to understand any subject matter.

We were taught that the “earth was like that of the shape of an orange” to impress upon that its polar diameter is lesser than that of equitorial diameter. Thus, we do not still believe that the earth has neither the shape nor the size that of an orange.

We were taught about atoms as “indivisible” based on Dalton”s atomic theory. But, many years later Rutherford, Bohr and others disproved with their experiments that “atom” can be divided into sumatomic particles like proton, neutron, electron, neutrino etc. Thus, the word “atom” has become redundant and meaningless, however, as Western / Greek legacy, we still use.

However, here, the attempt of Karunanidhi has been shere idiotic, mischievous and spiteful, as he has been bent upon to malign Indian tradition, heritage and culture.

He should have some basics when he knows to mention the names of the so-called 60 years!

Jupiter conjoins Saturn in 19.859 years at an advance of about 123 degrees. After three conjunctions, 59.577 years, it recurs at a mean advance of 8.93° – the first order recurrence cycle of Jupiter-Saturn. With this 9-degree advance every 60 years, in 40 conjunctions the advance moves around the circle and in 794.37 years returns to within 0.93° of the starting point – the second order recurrence cycle. This 1° discrepancy would thus locate a third order recurrence cycle in 360 times 800 years, roughly speaking, a period too far in excess of recorded history to be useful as a frame of reference.

The cycle of Jupiter now in general use is a cycle of sixty years, the samvatsaras of which bear certain special names, Prabhava, Vibhava, Sukla, Pramoda, “c., again in accordance with certain rules. This cycle exists in three varieties. According to the original constitution of this cycle, the samvatsaras are determined as in the second or mean-sign variety of the 12-years cycle: each samvatsara commences when Jupiter enters a sign of the zodiac with reference to his mean motion and longitude; and it lasts for slightly more than 361.02 days. This variety is traced back in inscriptional records to A.D. 602, and is still used in Northern India.The names of 60-year Jupiter cycle are found in the South Indian inscriptions – Chalukaya.

Mere rhetoric cannot serve the purpose.

Senility may be a trait of, relating to, exhibiting, or characteristic of old age <senile weakness> ; especially : exhibiting a loss of cognitive abilities (as memory) associated with old age, but, here in his case, it cannot be accepted as he talks nonsense, only when anything Indian / Hindu has to be attacked, he has been very clear.

Karunanidhi way of Meddling with Chronology and History – I

January 17, 2010

Karunanidhi way of Meddling with Chronology and History

VEDAPRAKASH

Traditional names of Tamil calendar knocked off[1]: All official communications will henceforth avoid the 60 names given to the Tamil years. Instead, they will merely give the year in terms of ‘Thiruvalluvar era’. The order follows another controversial step that the government had taken recently when it changed the Tamil New Year from the first day of the month of Chithirai (mid-April) to the first day of Thai, also celebrated as Pongal, the Tamil harvest festival (mid-January). A government order issued early this month by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department has instructed all departments, including collectors and district judges, not to mention the present Tamil year Sarvajit in government orders, official letters, communications, and other publications. And in future, all departments have been told not to mention the 60-years in the Tamil calendar, from Prabava to Akshaya at any time in future. Only the Tamil month, date and Thiruvalluvar year should be mentioned alongside the Christian year, the order says. The 60-year cycle, in which each year has a name, is sequenced in the traditional Tamil almanac (panchangam). Interestingly, the names of the years in the Tamil calendar are in Sanskrit. And this is what seems to have irked Dravidian patriarch and chief minister M Karunanidhi. “Is it rational to take refuge in the age old panchangam?” Karunanidhi had asked in a recent poem when there was a debate among Tamils on the rationale behind shifting of Tamil New Year. Enquiry with Tamil scholars reveal that the Tamil months and days find reference in Tholkappiam and Sangam literature but the names of 60-years have no reference in Tamil texts anywhere. “The non-Tamil names of the years are not found in the same sequence in any of the North Indian calendars,’’ say officials in Tamil Development Department. Besides, the confusion over the occurrence of an event in a given year, say, Sarvajit, cannot be avoided as there would be more than one Sarvajit years in a century, officials point out. By numbering every year under the Thiruvalluvar era, like the Christian era, it will be easy to relate to a particular year without any confusion, officials said, explaining the rationale behind the order. For instance, this year is Thiruvalluvar year 2039. The era has been named after the ancient saint-poet and author of the Thirukkural. However, the Dravidian leader is clear that this is not the place for Aryans. In the same poem, he had questioned the validity of giving such names for the years. “I am not against those who want to uphold Aryan values, but I will not allow anyone to stand in the way of my objective of giving importance to the kural-based Tamil era,” he said. Thus, it is imperative to analyse the issue and find out the truth.

Karunanidhi carries on the British legacy: Many times, researchers, social-analysts, political-forecasters, religious-prophets assert that enemies need not come from outside, but they are created within themselves or in a particular society or nation by others, so that they carry out and fulfil their expected or anticipated acts. Thus, the British sowed the seeds of unhistorical hypotheses and theories of Aryans and Dravidians and other blabbering[2]. In Indian historical tradition, there had never been such mention about two different races existing and fighting with each other always in the ancient Bharat. In fact, the Sangam literature mention about “Aryans”, but no whisper about “Dravidians”.  In fact, such mentioned “Aryans” were never considered or treated as coming from outside Bharat, but people of part of Bharat. Though historians have accepted that there were neither Aryans nor Dravidians and the AIT is a myth[3], the only creed on the earth believes, nurtures and carries it have been the Dravidian groups of all sorts. They still believe in race, racism, racialism, blood and other pseudo-scientific and discarded race hypotheses and theories[4]. Ironically, though they carry on and survive on such idiotic, unhistorical and anti-human belief and doctrines and dogmas, the westerners support them directly and indirectly[5]. Karunanidhi and others of the Black Paryivar have been always talking, discussing and writing only in terms of racist language inciting hatred among the people.

Recently, the acts of Karunanidhgi reveal a single point agenda – oppose everything that is Hindu. It is very open, perhaps, as his utterances and actions prove. Starting with his blasphemous attack on Rama, his anti-Hindu tirade has increased with aggressive geometrical progression and astronomical proportions. The recent one being interfering with the celebration of Tamil New Year’s Day by forcing temples not to follow the Pancangam and all. This is blatant interference of the government with the practice of crores of believers of the country and he has no locus standi to do that. As the British tried to destroy or suppress the Kali Era, Karunanidhi (b.1924) is trying to bury the glorious past of the Tamils under the guise of opposing Sanskrit and Hindu calendar, which is totally incorrect. In fact, people have forgotten his own appreciation of such 60-year cycle incorporating in his poem (for details see below). The DK and other Black Parivar has been evidently pressurising him to do such nonsensical acts of meddling with history and chronology of the Tamils. It is evident that the advisers or the propounders that Tamil literature had no reference to sixty-year cycle have no basic knowledge of Indian Tamil tradition, astronomy and history as explained below.

Sowiyanukkup Piragu Intha Sadharanan: C. N. Annadurai (1909-1969) had a name “Sowmiyan”. As he died in 1969, he came to power and at that time, he composed a song, “Sowiyanukkup Piragu Intha Sadharanan” came for ruling! At that time, the Government AIR / DD used to broadcast the New Year poem recital by VIPs and others. Karunanidhi composed a poem and recited in his usual way. Annadurai had a pen name “Sowmiyan”. Ironically or incidentally, he died in the year “Sowmiya”! If you go through the list of 60 years, the year Sowmiya precedes Sadharana. When Annadurai died in the Sowmiya Andu (1969-70), Karunanidhi became CM in the Sadharana Andu (1970-71). Making it figuratively, he composed the lines that, “Sowiyanukkup Piragu Intha Sadharanan” came to rule! What happened to his ideology at that time? He did not think about Tiruvalluvar Andu at that time, but gleefully singing song as mentioned. How is that the years which were acceptable to him 38 years back became suddenly anathema? As a CM also, he did not bother to remove such names and not to use such 60 years – starting with Prabhava and ending with Akshaya! Is it not shame to call himself so as Sadharanan and his predecessor-mentor as Sowmiyan? Thus, it is evident that something happened to him or controlling him to act like this.

Can any Era be introduced just like that? In the history of humankind, era is introduced, because of the good acts of a person on his capacity as a master, teacher, ruler, king, empire and so on, that too, buy the beloved people. Era has not been just age of reason, epoch of achievement, period of conquests or time of wisdom, but it is human past recorded in the memory and passed on to the progeny for practice. It is connected with chronology of people to be recorded for history. Chronology and history are connected, though the methods may differ in the respective fields because of human bias. Thus, history can be meddled with differing historiographical methods, but chronology cannot be meddled, even if meddled, such meddling would get exposed immediately. Chronology is a combination of method applied using mathematics, astronomy, cosmology and geology. At one side, it is the study of time, time measurement and time recording techniques, but at the other side, the time recording of humanity, human activity and human achievements also.

The cognition and calculation of day and night, observed solar and lunar effects and movements, vernal equinoxes, periodic rotation of planets, asterism, zodiac, and calendar – all are involved in it. Man has observed such events and recorded with diligence over period of time and therefore, the past astronomical recordings cannot be brushed aside, unless, astronomically and scientifically something is proved wrong in such past observations and recordings. In fact, such exercise was carried out then and there, as could be seen from the criticism of methods of one astronomer by another. The correction carried on has been an accepted standard, it such corrective methodology is aimed at perfection of time recording. So if any era is introduced, the introducer takes all factors into consideration. It is not just like insertion of one month each in ten-month calendar making twelve-month calendar.

Just look at the names of the months now we follow: January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December. Scholars have pointed out September, October, November, and December clearly point to – seventh month (sapta = seven), eighth month (octa = eight), ninth month (nava = nine), tenth month (dasa = ten). The westerners claim that the months July and August have been the intruders because of Julius Caesar[8] and August Caesar[9]. So an intelligent student can ask what happened to the first to sixth months? Why their names were changed? Could they be known as Ekamber, Dwiamber, Triamber, Caturambar, Panchamber, Hastamber?[10] Just by introducing two months, they cannot adjust the calendar. Then, we are explained that not only, they inserted two more months in the ten-month calendar, but to show off their superiority, they made their months with maximum days i.e, 31 days! If Julius Caesar could have done it, why not by August Caesar? And how it was done? Just by grabbing days from other months[11]. It appears so wonderful, so astronomical and so scientific. Thus, we follow the wonderful calendar throughout the world, as forced by the colonial rulers.

Chronology – Its relation to Astronomy and Astrology: It is said that the system of reckoning time and hence that of historical events has been a modern concept, but it is modern even among the westerners. Different westerners or Europeans were using different systems of time reckoning in their respective countries based on the prevalent culture, tradition and heritage. Suddenly, they were stunned to receive astronomical tables received from
India.

Gregorian calendar: Pope Gregory XIII (1572-1585), who decreed in 1582 a calendar with fasts and feasts to be adopted by the Roman Catholics, heavily depended on the Indian astronomical tables. However, it (the Catholic calendar) contained many inaccuracies: 1.      The year 1582 had only 355 days.2.      The concept of leap year. 1600 was made leap year, but not 1700, 1800, 1900, 2100, 2200, 2300 and so on.3.      There was no leap year between 1896 and 1904, and 1900 was not considered as a leap year.4.      Ten days were dropped and 5th October 1582 was called 15th October.5.      The error accumulation is one day in about 3,320 years.

Though, the Greek Church and Protestant nations did not recognize and follow it, in 1752,
England fall in line by calling 3rd September as 14th! The year was made commence on January 1st instead of March 25th! In fact, the chronologization of events based on the new calendar has created many problems. They started mentioning the dates followed by O.S (Old System) and N.S (New System). For example, the date of birth of Newton himself was subjected to dispute – Dec.25, 1642 O.S or January 4, 1643 N.S!

Here, the Church played a crucial role in imposing Gregorian Calendar (1582) on the Christian
States to be followed for political and civil purposes. Then came James Ussher (1581-1656), the famous Christian chronologer. He went to England in 1640 and took part in the ecclesiastical questions raised in the Long Parliament[14]. He was the first to attempt the Biblical chronology and declared that the God, Jehovah created the Universe and the world on October 23, 4004 BCE! All the Church and other historians faithfully followed his works Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates (1639) and The Annals of the World (1658). Accordingly, almanacs, annals erc., were compiled with the new Calendar. The Christian scholars, historians or scientists had strong belief that the Ussher’s system should be adhered strictly. The essential of the biblical version of creation and the world’s history was not seriously questioned during the 18th century[15]. An almanac is a year book of dates and tables, giving a calendar of days and months, ecclesiastical fasts and feasts, the age of the moon, the tides, and the exact time of sun’s rising and setting etc. The name almanac is derived from al-manah in Arabic, as the Europeans obtained such tables from the Arabs, but the Arabs, in fact got them from Indians.  Al manah means the sundial, because, all the measurements of time were made principally associated with the Sun. This is nothing but panchangam used in India since time immemorial (the extant work Vedanga Jyotisa of Lagada c.1400 BCE[16]). According to the claim of westerners, Regiomontanus was the fist-published almanac in Latin in 1475. When this has been the history of Panchangam, Karunanidhi criticizes it with his poetry!

How Karunanidhi did it? Does Karunanidhi know any astronomy? Does he have any committee of astronomers or such experts? How then, he simply could have done away with the “sixty year” cycle reckoning of years? As fanatic Dravidians do not like Sanskrit named months, just like that they can be removed? But, could they change the past chronology and the history connected with it? He is considered as an authority in Tamil literature. So at least, he could have gone into the Sangam literature to find out what era, they followed, what calendar, zodiac or year-cycle followed etc., instead of simply changing the starting of Tamil year or discarding the sixty-cycle notation.

Did the People of Tamizhagam Followed a Jupiter Cycle? The discussion about the Zodiac based on Inthimai or Inthinai Zodiac points to a possibility that the people of Tamizhagam might have followed a Jupiter cycle for the calculation and recording time and events[17]. Here, taking a cue from the Sangam literature, the symbolism used, charts were prepared with the Inthinai mentioned. The literary references are converted into numbers. Thus, time of a day is divided into five equal parts = 24 / 5 = 4.8 hours, a year is divided into five parts = 12 / 5 = 2.4 months per division and thus, the zodiac is divided into 5 parts, thus 360 / 5 = 720. 1.      The number 72 appears to be significant in the context. 2.      For the precession of the equinoxes to cover up one degree in the zodiac, Jupiter takes 72 years approximately. 3.      It has 12 satellites. 4.      There are two Jupiter cycles one consisting of 60 years and another 12 years. The sixty year cycle is used throughout
India since the days of Vedic period (Vedanta Jyotisha dated to c.1400 BCE). 5.      This is the time taken by Jupiter in passing one sign of zodiac and also known as Jovian year.

Surya Siddhanta[18], the ancient astronomical work extant defines and the method of calculation of Jupiter cycle:“Multiply by 12 the past Jupiter revolutions of Jupiter, add the signs of the current revolution, add and divide by sixty; the remainder marks the year of Jupiter’s cycle, counting from Vijaya [Surya Siddhanta – I.55].In Vaishaka etc., a conjunction (yoga) in the dark half-month (krishna), on the 15th lunar day (thithi), determines in like manner the years Karttika etc., of Jupiter, from his helical setting (asta) and rising (udaya) [Surya Siddhanta – XIV.17]”.The first verse clearly points to the existence of sixty year cycle that is still followed throughout India. The second quoted verse points to the Skanda Shasthi festival / birth of Viskhaka / Karttikeya. Then what is the relation between the 60 year cycle and 12 year cycle? Mathematically, it is 60 / 12 = 5.

If in any year, the helical setting of Jupiter takes place in the month Vaishaka, then the asterism with which the moon is found to be in the conjunction at the end of that month, which will be, of course, the asterism of the year, which is Krittika. Thus, here, the relation between Vaishaka and Karttika is explained. Therefore, the connecting factor of these two months and as well as stars is Muruga and his worship.

Astronomically, the connecting factor of two Jupiter cycle is 5 and it is Inthinai-Zodiac[19]. Therefore, the poet or poets who had been familiar with the three important aspects – Surya Siddhanta / Vedic Astronomy, myth of Vaishaka and Karttika and Inthinai-Zodiac and of course Tamil (perhaps Sanskrit too) could have only conceived such Zodiac and presented such astronomical myth through his / their poetics and poetry. And this historical process could have taken place only about the period in which the Tamizhagam was reigning supreme in all aspects. The following is a note from the D.  C. Sircar book[20].

Jupiter Cycle of sixtry years[21]: The duration of Jupiter’s stay in a particular zodiacal sign is called Jupiter’s year which lasts for 361 days, 2 ghatikas or dandas and 3 palas. This year is thus shorter than the solar year by 4 days, 13 ghatikas or dandas and 26 palas. That is why one Jupiter’s year becomes suppressed in 85 solar years.

There is a name for each one of the 60 years of Jupiter’s cycle, and the years are mentioned by their names. But the 60 names are counted in North and
South India in two different orders.

The sixty years of Jupiter’s cycle are as follows:

1.      Prabhava2.      Vibhava3.      Sukla4.      Pramoda

5.      Prajapati

6.      Angiras

7.      Srimukha

8.      Bhava9.      Yuvan

10.  Dhatr

11.  Isvara

12.  Bahudhanya

13.  Pramathin

14.  Vikrama

15.  Vrsa

16.  Citrabhanu

17.  Subhanu

18.  Tarana

19.  Parthiva

20.  Vyaya

21.  Sarvajit22.  Sarvadharani23.  Virodhin24.  Vikrit

25.  Khara

26.  Nandana

27.  Vijaya

28.  Jaya

29.  Manmatha

30.  Durmukha

31.  Hemalamba

32.  Vilambin

33.  Vikarin

34.  Sarvarin

35.  Plava

36.  Subhakri

37.  Sobhana

38.  Krodhin

39.  Visvasu

40.  Prabhava

41.  Plavanga42.  Kilaka43.  Saumya44.  Sadharana

45.  Virodhakri

t46.  Paridhavin

47.  Pramadin

48.  Ananda

49.  Raksasa

50.  Nala / Anala

51.  Pingala

52.  Kalayukta

53.  Siddharthin

54.  Raudra

55.  Durmati

56.  Dundhubhi

57.  Rudhirodgarin

58.  Raktaksa

59.  Krodhana

60.  Ksaya / Aksaya

Varahamihira applies the name Vijaya (No.27) to the first year of the Kaliyuga era while later writers like the author of the Jyotisatattva gives it as Prabhava (No. 1).in North India, Jupiter’s year is theoretically begins from the planet’s entry into a particular zodiacal sign, though in actual practice Caitrasudi 1 is regarded as its first day.

According to Varahamihira[22], to find out the name of a particular Saka year after the North Indian system, one has to multiply the number expired Saka year by 11 and the product again by 4;  to the product 8589 has to be added, and the sum has to be divided by 3750; the quotient has then to be added to the number of the Saka year and the product has to be divided again by 60. The remainder thus received would be the number of the expired year in the cycle beginning with Prabhava[23].

In South India, Jupiter’s year is regarded as the same as the solar year. The first year of the Kali era is Pramathin (No. 13), and the year is taken to begin with from Caitra-sudi 1.

The rule for finding out the name of a particular Saka year according to Zsouth Indian cycle of Jupiter is as follows: 12 has to be added to the number of the expired Saka year; the sum has to be divided by 60; the remainder would be the number of the current year of the cycle beginning from Prabhava. Another rule is as follows: 12 has to be added to the number of the expired Kali year; then the sum has to be divided by 60 and the remainder would be the number of the year of the cycle beginning with Prabhava[24].

The names of the years according to Jupiter’s 60-year cycle are only occasionally met with the records of North India. But they are very popular in the South India even today. It was formerly believed that the earliest epigraph mentioning such a name is the Mahakuta pillar inscription of Calukya Mangalesa (597-610 CE) of Badami, dated in the year Siddharth (Sidharthin)[25]. But frecently the name of the cyclic year Vijaya has been traced in two Nagarjunakonda inscriptions, one of the time of the Iksvaku king Virapurusadatta (second half of the third century CE) and another of his son Ehuvala Santamula (close of the 3rd and early part of the 4th century)[26]. Vijaya was originally the first year of the Cycle.

Thus, it is clear that the 60-cycle year with their names have been so popular among the
South India than North India. As the ancient Tamils must have been using such cycle in consistent with the Inthinai Zodiac, such tradition cannot be suppressed because of the present misguided fanaticism and chauvinism. Actually, under vthe guise of promoting Tamil, the actual Tamil culture is destroyed, that too, meddling with the historical evidences, which cannot be allowed. Ironically, the historians, who very often make hue and cry, keep quiet for Karu’s meddling with chronology. Romila Thapar, who came to defend Karu by writing two articles one in “The Hindu” and another EPW keeps quiet.

How can a ruler go against the people? Karnanidhi has been given mandate for all the people of Tamilnadu and he cannot go against the tradition, culture, heritage and civilization of Tamilnadu, India. If Karunanidhi wants that he wants to be a Dravidian fascist, Tamil fanatic, linguistic chauvinist, blatant racist, rabid communalist etc., that is entirely different from the person ruling TN as CM. But, very often, he forgets this and behaves like Karunanidhi instead of CM of TN. First he ordered that Tamil new year’s day should not be celebrated on April 14th in the sense that Panchangam should not be read in the temples on that day. Now, he passes another order that the sixty-year notation would be discarded and such named-years should not be used in the government documents etc. This is Hitlerism aided and abetted by his group of Goebbelism. Definitely, he has exceeded the Constitutional, legal and democratic limits.

The Calendar Reform Committee under Government of India appointed in November 1952 had gone into the details of prevalent divergences and introduced a national calendar[27] wef March 22, 1957.  Therefore, the introduction of Tiruvalluvar Andu may serve the sentiments of the Tamil chauvinists, but it has no historical or astronomical basis. None could produce any historical document, epigraph or any other evidence to this effect. Mere sentiments are alone not enough to introduce an era or epoch. No doubt, every one respects the Great Tamil Poet Tiruvalluvar, but, with him such controversy need not be carried on. Therefore, misusing the official power, that too, with anti-Hindu, anti-national ideology, they cannot bugle with everything.

VEDAPRAKASH

29-04-2008.


[1] B. Arvind Kumar, Traditional names of Tamil calendar knocked off, Times of India, April 28, 2008, Chennai edition, p.5.

[2] Now there have been a lot of source materials available and there is no doubt about the British who gave a last kick to Indians, before giving the so-called Independence.Max Mueller has long back withdrew his theory.Even Ambedkar in his books has refuted the Aryan-Dravidian theories.Leon Poliakov, The Aryan myth, Chapter.9, The Quest for the new Adam, London, 1974. The author gives the background of the creation of “Aryan myth” and implications.

[3] Even Romila Thapar has confessed and other Marxists in their own way to save their ideology.

[4] The racist views, speeches and writings of the Dravidian ideologists, protagonists and politicians even today, as is revealed through print and electronic media has been a standing evidence but glaring contradiction in the democratic and secular polity of India.

[5] Take the American and European researchers, they unwittingly or wittingly accommodate and encourage their racist, racialist, communalist views and perhaps enjoy, as they are used to beat the Indians themselves again through their methodology.

Eugene Irshchick, Politics and social cionflicts in South Asia: The non-Brahmin movement and Tamil separatism, 1916-1929, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1969.

Marguerite Ross Barenett, The Politics of Cultural Nationalism: The DMK in Tamilnadu, South India, unpublished Ph.D dissertation, University of Chicago, 1972.

[6] Thousands of articles are available in Epigraphica Indica, Journal of Royal Asiatic Research, Indian Antiquary, Asiatic Researches etc.

B. L. Van der Warden, The Conjunction of 3102 B.C, Centarus, 1980, Vol.24, pp.117-131.

Kailash Chandra Varma, The Kali Era and Ignored Glimpses of Indian Antiquity, ABORI, Vol.LVII ” LVIII (Diamond Jubile), 1977-78, pp.1025-1047.

J. F. Fleet, The Kaliyuga Era of 3102 B.C, JRAS, pp.479-496; 675-698.

K. V. Ramakrishna Rao, Kali Era – The Lively Controversy Among the Western Scholars, Aryabhateeya’99, Thiruvananthapuram, 1999, p.16.

……………………….., Historicity, Astronomy and Kaliyuga, The proceedings of a seminar held at Chennai in October 2002 on Ancient History of India through Vedic Astronomy, ISIAC, Chennai, 2003, pp.44-57.

………………………..,Kali Era as Gleaned from the Literary and Epigraphical Evidences, Ibid, pp.58-70.

[7] B. Arvind Kumar, Traditional names of Tamil calendar knocked off, Times of India, April 28, 2008, Chennai edition, p.5.

Dinamalar, Implementation of Tiruvalluvar Year and no more “Sarvadhari, April 28, 2008, Chennai edition, p.5.

[8] He is credited with introduction of one calendar in 45 BCE.Keith Gordon Irwin, The Circle of Days: Measurement of Time, A Ladder Publication, 1965, USA, pp.56-58.

[9] Ibid, pp.58-62.

[10] The ten-month year had Martius, Aprilis, Marius, Iunius, Quintilis (five), Sextilis (six), September, October, November and December.

[11] Thus, both months July and August have 31 days!

[12] John Playfair, Some Remarks on the Astronomy of Brahmins, in  Edinburgh Review, U. K, 1789. He has discussed about the astronomical tables taken away from India and Siam respectively by the Jesuit missionaries to Europe, their study by the European scientists and astronomers pointing to an epoch starting with 3102 BCE, the Kaliuyuga.

[13] K. V. Ramakrishna Rao, European Scientists: Indian Chronology and Historiography, XXth Session of South Indian History Congress held at Tiruvananthapuram from Feb.25-27, 2002.

……………………………………….., The Interest of European Scientists  in Indian Chronology and Historiography, UGC Seminar on Situating Historical Writings in Post-Independence India (Abstracts volume), held at Bharathidasan University on March 23 ” 23, 2002, Tiruchirappalli, pp.16-17.

………………………………….….., The Interest of European Scientists in Indian Calendar and Chronology, in Indian Calendar and Chronology (Seminar papers) held at Central Mining Research Institute, Dhanbad on August 9 ” 10, 2003, pp.1-20.

[14] The so-called Long Parliament discussed so many issues particularly, the eccelestical issues connected with science, astronomy etc.

[15] R. N. Stromberg, Religious Liberalism in Eighteenth-Century England, Oxford, 1954, pp.26-27.

[16] Vedanga Jyotisha authored by Laghadha has been the oldest astronomical extant text dated to c.1450 BCE with the internal evidences, which specifically talks about the 60-year cycle followed.Laghadha, Vedanga Jyotisha, Text with English translation published by the Indian
National Science Academy, New Delhi.

[17] K. V. Ramakrishna Rao, Zodiac and Murugan Worship, in ‘The Antiquity of Worship of Skanda-Karttikeya-Subramanya’, Bharatiya Itihasa Sankalana Samiti, Chennai, 2001.………………………………………., The Zodiac of the Tamils or the Zodiac Depicted in the Sangam Literature or Inthinai Zodiac of the ancient Tamils, a paper presented during the Tamilnadu History congress, Poondi College, Thanjavur, October 10-12, 2003.…………………………………….., The Worship of Murukan and the Zodiac and Mrukan, a paper presented at the Skanda-Muruga International Conference held at Malaysia, November 3-5, 2003.

[18] Surya Siddhanta has been the oldest Indian astronomical work dealing with many astronomical concepts, planetary theories, formulae, rules etc., ahead of others. Thus, the westerners tried to meddle with its dating. In short, they always try to prove that the Indians derived or borrowed or rather copied every thing from the Greeks, if not from the Babylonians, Egyptians and others.

[19] K. V. Ramakrishna Rao, Iraiyanar Agapporul Chronology – myth or Reality, a paper presented during the Tamilnadu History Congress, October 13-14, 2001, held at Chennai.

[20] D. C. Sircar, Indian Epigraphy, Motilal Banarasidas, New Delhi, 1996, pp.267-269.

[21]Ojha, Bharatiya Pracin Lipimala, pp.188-189.

[22] Brahatsamhita, VIII, 20.

[23] Surya Siddhanta – I.55 and Surya Siddhanta – XIV.17, as mentioned and discussed above. Thus, it is evident that Varaha Mihira was following the Surya Siddhanta. Incidentally, this proves the dating of Surya Siddhanta in later period is wrong.

[24] Same as above sl. No. 22.

[25] Indian Antiquary, Vol.XIX, p.18.

[26] Epigraphica Indica, XXXV, p.1 ff.

[27] S. K. Chatterjee, Indian Calendric System, Publications Divisions, Government of
India, New Delhi, 1998 (Saka 1920)