Archive for the ‘Vedaprakash’ Category

ICHR – the politicization started with the Congress, Communists and Mohammedans and continues!

December 26, 2019

ICHR – the politicization started with the Congress, Communists and Mohammedans and continues!

ICH politics 2019

The Politicization of ICHR and Savarkar: The politicization of ICHR has been started by historians themselves since early 1960s with the connivance of the Marxists and Mohammedans. This has been blatantly revealed through their manipulation of the proceedings of the ICHR itself. The proceedings of the IHC, particularly, the business session exposed many times, how the so-called great historians have been more unruly than the politicians in shouting and even ready to fight. Even in the recent Savarkar issue, they get exposed. Days after the Rajasthan Congress government removed “veer” from references to VD Savarkar from its textbooks, Rajasthan University has now declined a request from the Indian Council for Historical Research, an autonomous academic body funded by the Government of India, to have a seminar on the Hindutva figurehead[1]. The event, part of a multi-city talk series planned by the ICHR, backed by the history-rewriting wing of the RSS affiliate, Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana, “The truth about Savarkar” was launched, on the occasion of National Education Day, commemorated every year on India’s first education minister Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s birthday[2]. The talk series will mainly focus on “confronting lies about Savarkar and his writings on the 1857 war of independence”, ICHR officials said.

Indira Gandhi fecognized Savarkar

Rajasthan University versus ICHR for conducting a seminar on Savarkar [November 2019]: Rajasthan university officials confirmed to ET that they had “declined” the request for space for the seminar as “certain aspects of Savarkar were deeply controversial”. The other seminars of ICHR on Savarkar were to be held in Jaipur, Guwahati, Port Blair, Pune and some other cities. “We had sought space and permission from the Rajasthan University to hold a talk series on Savarkar in their campus but they got back saying we could choose any other topic,” an ICHR functionary told ET. Pramila Poonia, head of the department of history and culture, Rajasthan University, told ET that they had not agreed when ICHR had presented them the proposal on hosting a seminar on Savarkar. “We didn’t refuse entirely but we asked them for time for a month, and more details because we need to consult others on this. There are aspects of Savarkar that are controversial and we did not want any problem.”

Mahathma Gandhi fecognized Savarkar
Historians biased on Savarkar: Recently, during the Maharashtra campaign, BJP had promised a Bharat Ratna for Savarkar that had led to a lot of debate. Rajasthan chief minister Ashok Gehlot had specifically criticised this, and had called the BJP “a party with a fascist ideology” with no regard for anyone’s sentiment. Balmukund Pandey of the ABISY, who looks after the Sangh Parivar’s “rewriting history from the Indian perspective”, project told ET that it is high time “the country got to know about the sacrifices made by Savarkar and his brothers”. “His ideas are important for the country to be on the right track.” At the ICHR, four research professors talked about ways to “confront the character assassination” of Savarkar, particularly about his mercy petitions to the British, which they said, “was typical of the language used by many leaders then”. “He was a trained legal mind who was aware of his rights, and he ended it every time saying if not him, at least his companions should be released”, Raghuvendra Tanwar, professor, Kurukshetra University, told the audience, adding the conspiracy to keep Savarkar out of mainstream politics was designed by the British because, he, unlike Swami Vivekananda or Lok Manya Tilak looked at the political revival of Hindutva. “He was the first leader who brought out the truth about the independence struggle of 1857 on a global platform with his book in 1909. For him, the essentials of Hindutva were the essentials of nationalism. We must never forget that Bhagat Singh had a lot of respect for him and was instrumental in getting his book published in Lahore.”

How leadrers perceive recognize Savarkar
The left and Savarkar: Another speaker Himanshu Rai, who is a researcher at the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, took on the writings of authors Tanika Sarkar, Shamshul Islam and AG Noorani, on Savarkar calling them “divisive”. “The left always had a problem with him, because even in jail he started the process of Shuddhi, of encouraging prisoners not to convert…” Rizwan Qaiser, professor, department of history, Jamia Millia Islamia, said it was inappropriate of the ICHR to honour Savarkar on Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s birthday. “Azad was always very critical of the Sangh Parivar’s divisive politics and in 1952, in Rampur, he openly blamed them for driving the Muslims to the corner which led to the partition. Savarkar’s writings have always been exclusionary of the Muslims. Even his book on 1857 represents the struggle as a pan-India uprising which it was not. Some facts cannot be changed.”

Veer Savarkar and Hindutwa

Modi and Shah filling ICHR “historian with little or no professional standing” [December 2019]: Most importantly, they [Modi and Shah] have deployed their newfound and growing power with an alarming clarity of vision. To that end, they have appointed individuals with dubious intellectual qualifications to key governmental institutions with the explicit goal of promoting and disseminating a radical Hindu ideology[3]. For example, the government, even during its first term, chose a historian with little or no professional standing, to head the apex Indian Council of Historical Research. Since the council is responsible for directing the content of history textbooks, this appointment was fraught with significance[4]. Can columnist write in this way, as if she knows everything about ICHR and what has been going on since 1960s?

ICHR dissolved committee

When government changes, all the departments and institutions, rearranged: As the political parties have been ruling, it is quite natural that their appointees occupy positions in every department, institution, courts and other places. ICHR has been thus dominated by the Communists and Mohammedans of all sorts, whereas, the paper says, that “the Indian Council for Historical Research (ICHR) has disbanded the advisory committee of its journal comprising 21 eminent historians from around the world”, including Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib[5]. The council’s member-secretary Gopinath Ravindran opposed the decision taken during a meeting of the journal’s editorial board held this week, people familiar with the matter told ET[6]. That means it is only between him and the paper. The decision to “disband the committee” is among the first taken by the country’s top historical research body after it was reconstituted by the NDA government in January, 2015. Yes, as UPA did and earlier Congress did. The Indian Historical Review is the refereed journal of the ICHR that has been publishing research work in history since 1974. It is one of the few Indian journals found on the prestigious Thomson Reuters list. The panel was disbanded in a meeting of the journal’s editorial board, headed by ICHR Chairman Y Sudershan Rao, on Tuesday, May 15, 2015.

Romila thapar versus YS Rao
Advisory Committee and all are just ornamental and they do not do any work – a known fact [2015]: The membership of the new advisory committee is now limited to the 18 historians on ICHR’s governing body. The advisory committee included Satish Chandra, Muzaffar Alam from the University of Chicago, Richard M Eaton of the University of Arizona, BR Tomlinson from London’s School of Oriental and African Studies and JS Grewal, former vice-chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University in Amritsar. Although the advisory members are not actively involved in producing the biannual journal, they help in reviewing articles that appear in it. “A panel of eminent historians lends lustre to the journal. It adds to its credibility,” said Professor BP Sahu of Delhi University, a former ICHR member. Ravindran, who also serves as the managing editor of IHR, opposed the decision on the grounds that it wasn’t backed by any “academic logic”, one of the persons cited earlier said. Ravindran, a professor of history at Jamia Millia Islamia in New Delhi, who was appointed as ICHR’s member secretary under the previous UPA II government, declined to comment on the matter. Rao, however, defended the decision saying the appointment of the advisory panel for IHR is purely the prerogative of the journal’s editorial board. “There is nothing unusual or wrong about this,” he said.

ICHR the leftist monopoly
Professor Dilip Chakrabarti of Cambridge University is the new chief editor of the journal: Thapar told ET that Romila Thapar had received no official communication about her removal from IHR’s advisory panel. Asked if she was surprised by the news of her removal, she said, “Not really. One can see from the membership of the new council which direction they are heading into.” Reacting to the decision to limit the panel’s membership to just ICHR members, she said, “The whole point of the advisory board is that you can search far and wide for people who have expertise in various subjects. If you limit the membership of the advisory board to just members of the ICHR, you are, in a sense, annulling the purpose of the advisory board, which is to get as wide an opinion as possible on what to put into the journal.” This development comes close on the heels of historian Sabyasachi Bhattacharya’s resignation from the post of chief editor of the journal last month. Although Bhattacharya gave no official reason for quitting, media reports suggested he was unhappy with the “direction” the ICHR is taking. Professor Dilip Chakrabarti of Cambridge University is the new chief editor of the journal. What is the problem for Romila Thapar or Irfan Habib? Do they expect that they should e there forever!

ICHR the leftist monopoly-dominance

Left versus Right: If the left now feels that they are getting less postings, it is natural because, they have been enjoying government postings, grants and all other facilities since 1960s. As they have monopolized ICHR, ICCSR, UGC etc., now they feel so. It is also corruption and sickness of their highly intellectual minds to insist and persist that they should continue. There is no meaning in accusing BJP or RSS, as they have been working with their outfits that have been dominating since 1960s. The regulars of IHC and ICCSR conferences and seminars have noted the fact. How the grants for publication and foreign travel were distributed among themselves also consciously noted. Now perhaps, their share would get reduced and that is why they start crying and shouting. Had they been real historians, they would be contended and quite without raising noise and crating controversies getting exposed in this way. When all are retiring, these people should also retire, as they have become senile.

© Vedaprakash

25-12-2019

ICHR the leftist monopoly-dominance versus right

[1] Economic Times, No space for Savarkar: Rajasthan University tells ICHR, By  Vasudha Venugopal, ET Bureau, Nov 12, 2019, 09.14 AM IST.

[2] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/no-space-for-savarkar-rajasthan-university-tells-ichr/articleshow/72016518.cms

[3] Foreign Policy, Secularism Is Dying in India, by Sumit Ganguly, December 11, 2019, 7:41 PM.

[4] http://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/11/secularism-is-dying-in-india/

[5] Economic Times, ICHR dissolves advisory panel comprising Romila Thapar & Irfan Habib, By Ritika Chopra, ET Bureau, May 16, 2015, 04.00 AM IST

[6] https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/ichr-dissolves-advisory-panel-comprising-romila-thapar-irfan-habib/articleshow/47303073.cms?from=mdr&fbclid=IwAR0WvTbTLm1xr_wAjaOgUI7sikO_m0CXCJZVJwhGVpFG00JHf4nGDR9rByQ

EVR’s atheism, Deivanayagam’s petition, Veramani’s counter and the Judgment!

September 8, 2019

EVR’s atheism, Deivanayagam’s petition, Veramani’s counter and the Judgment!

WP 2017 filed by Deivanayagam

2017 petition heard and decided in 2019: That the petition W.P. No.28021/2017 was heard two years later and the judges to deliver judgment on 04-09-2019 has been intriguing. None reacted to the judgment or protested to remove any paragraphs from the judgment arguing that they offend their belief or so.  Perhaps, most of them are not interested at all. The duo Rajiv Malhothra and Aravinda Neelakantan[1] made much fuss about their favorite duo Deivanayagam and Devakala[2] also keeping quite! Though from 2014 onward, many Hindutwa advocates, lawyers and legal experts have been out, it appears that they do not bother such cases. Of course, they might write in their own websites and journals, read by hundred or two hundred, applause and enjoy time otherwise.

Duo vs duo

Thanthai Periyar, had advocated both atheism and self respect[3]: Emphasizing the right to propagate views questioning existence of God, the Madras High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation which sought to remove atheistic inscriptions below the statues of Thanthai Periyar in Tamil Nadu[4]. The bench comprising Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that followers of Thanthai Periyar, in exercise of the rights under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, has a right to disagree with the existence of God.

There is no God, no God, no god,
Those who preached God is fool
Those who spread God Rogue
Those who pray God are Barbarians

These inscriptions below the statue of Thanthai Periyar erected all over the State of Tamil Nadu, offended Dr.M.Deivanayagam[5] who filed a PIL seeking to remove them on the ground that it is an offensive language, and against the ‘Universal God’. According to Dr. Deivanayagam, Periyar had always advocated self-respect and not atheism. He further contended that Periyar had not uttered such words offending people[6]. He contended that during his lifetime, Periyar had never uttered these words, inscribed below the statues, and it was the Dravidar Kazhagam, led by its president K. Veeramani, that had inscribed these lines[7]. A division bench of Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Subramonium Prasad said it was of the view that it was an undisputed fact that Periyar, in all his speeches and publications, from 1928, had declared that[8] “there is no God, God doesn’t exist, one who has created God is a fool”. “The propogation of the philosophy of self respect, social reform, ending caste system, equal rights and Periyar’s vision to establish a society of brotherhood can be deciphered, and according to him, the belief in God was the sole reason for the inequalities in society[9]. Speeches and expression, extracted supra, from 1928, makes it clear without an iota of hesitation that it was Periyar’s philosophy and ideology that became a self respect movement and later on, a party,” the bench said.

Atheism case, the so-called words

Periyar had declared that there is no god, God doesn’t exist, One who has created is a fool: Justice Manikumar, in his judgment, made many references to writing and speeches of Periyar and concluded that he had, in all his speeches, publications, from 1928, had declared that there is no god, God doesn’t exist, One who has created is a fool[10]. The court also observed that, people recognize Periyar as a non believer of God and the one who fought for social justice and self respect. The court said[11]: “Propagation of philosophy of self respect, social reform, ending caste system, equal rights, and Thanthai Periyar’s vision to establish a society of brotherhood could be deciphered, and according to Thanthai Periyar, belief of God, was the sole reason for the inequalities in the society. Speeches and expression, extracted supra, from 1928 and enclosed in the typed set of papers makes it clear, without any iota of hesitation, one can clearly come to the conclusion that it is Thanthai Periyar’s philosophy and ideology, which became a self respect movement and later on, a party”.

Ezra, Veeramani, Deivanayagam, Seeman together

Followers of Periyar Has Right To Propagate His Atheistic Views: The court further observed Dravidar Kazhagam Party, has every right under the Constitution of India, to fight for social justice in eradicating inequality, right for upliftment of women and downridden people, express views on religion and existence of God[12]. It further observed that divergent views on philosophy should be allowed to be expressed, and that there cannot be a prevention of freedom of expression, with permanent interest of human progress[13]. It said: “The petitioner has a constitutional right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, to express his views on religion and existence of God, in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalai Singh Yadav’s case, we are of the view that the 2nd respondent and the members of the party, or followers of Thanthai Periyar, in exercise of the rights under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, has a right to disagree with the same.”

How Cristians and theist dupe Hindua 04-09-2019 judgment

Who is Deivanayagam, the Petitioner of the case?: M. Deivanayagam has been a Christian, completed M. A. Tamil fom Madras Christian College, working as a lecturer in Loyola College, done a Ph.D from the chair created by the former Archbishop R. Arulappa, that was reportedly affiliated to the University of Madras. With the publication of his controversial book, “Viviliyam Tirukkural Saiva Siddhantam,” he go some publicity. However, Rajiv Malhothra of Infinity Foundation had given undue publicity through his book, “Breaking India.” Though he never saw and met Deivanayagam he engaged certain people to get information about Deivanayagam. That is why, the information the Rajiv Malhothra group got has been confused and given full credit to Deivanayagam and her daughter Devakala. Aravinda Neelakantan, evidently collaborated for such “Deivanayagam research” making him famous, popular rather than notorious hitherto. Some persons of Hindutva groups have worked as conduits for the information exchange between Deivanayagam and Hindutwa groups. Thus, in 2017, Deivanayagam got this fantastic idea of “Universal God” and filed a writ petition.

Deivanayagam claimed ER was not an atheist

What Deivanayagam claimed in his petition: Based on the petition filed, the following points are listed:

  1. The Parliament of World Religions was held between 15th and 19th of October 2015 at Salt lake city, USA. On behalf of our trust [“Trust for the Unification of World Religions through Soulology of the Tamils”], we rented two booths to establish the existence of the Universal God on the basis of the Soulology of the Tamils and all the questions raised by the religious scholars had been answered rationally.
  2. On the basis of the invitation of the Vice Chancellor of Madras University. We have established the existence of Universal God in a rational way on 2nd January 2016.
  3. The President of Dravidar Kazhagam have advertised that, those who prove the existence of God will get a reward of 1 crore rupees and those who prove Pilliyar eats Kozhukattai will get a reward of 2 crore rupees and specifically they have to prove in the premises of Periyar Thidal. Accepting his challenge, we wrote letters to K.Veeramani. We wrote articles explaining a reply to his challenge and published in our magazines. After reading this, due to the fear of losing his challenge, he has hidden himself in his own premises at the specified time. The complete details are published in our Tamizhar Samayam magazine. We are always ready to prove the above challenge at any time.”

WP 2017 f-what veeramani said about deivanayagam

What K. Veeramani frecorded about M. Deivanayagam in his counter: What K. Veeramani recorded abot M. Deivanayagam:

  1. It is the further contention of the 2nd respondent [Deivanayagam] that the petitioner used to spend time, in the premises of 2nd respondent’s party [K. Veeramani] under the guise of an atheist and non believer of God.
  2. It is their further contention that after some time, the petitioner has started preaching that in the world, that there are two religions, one is Saivait and the other is Vaishnavait and Gods are Shiva and Vishnu respectively.
  3. The second respondent has further stated that the petitioner is having an organization called “அனைத்து தன்மான தமிழர்களது கூட்டமைப்பு”. Using this organization, on one side, he preached about Periyar and on other side, tried to achieve his individual views, by using 2nd respondent’s party.
  4. As he refused to attend his meeting, he filed this petition as a revenge.

WP 2017 f-judment last parasThe judgment and its beneficiaries and of course the affected: It is not known as to where the Hindutwa lawyers, advocates and others have gone. Thus, it is very clear that both played dubious play and mischief, just to get publicity through the petition, because, hther it is head or tail, they are the winners and the opponents or the gullible attacked [who always do not know that they are attacked] and the Judges cleverly delivered the judgment giving much publicity to EVR with the English translation that occupies 60% of their judgments. Definitely, the DK, K. Veeramany and Deivanayagam have been the most benefited with the dismissed petition and the judgment.

© Vedaprakash

08—09-2019

Atheism case, the judges who delivered

[1] Authors of the book “Breaking India,” holding that these two were responsible for all the Christa activities carried on in India.

[2] More than half the book deals with a father-and-daughter duo, Devianayagam and Devakala; have you heard of them? They are Tamil evangelists, and while I hold no brief for either of them, I find it hard to believe, as Malhotra does, that they are Enemies Number One and Two in India.

Outlook, A study on Bible-thumping activism ignores titular faultlines, concocts plots couched in anti-imperialism, GITA RAMASWAMY, 23 MAY 2011

https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/yankee-hindutva-strikes/271815

[3] Livelaw, Right To Atheism: Madras HC Reject PIL To Remove Atheistic Inscriptions Under Periyar Statues [Read Judgment], BY: ASHOK KINI6 Sep 2019 6:31 PM

[4] https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/right-to-disagree-with-existence-of-god-147845

[5] He has been a Christian posing as a Sanyasi donnig ochre robes and writing against Hindu religion, scriptures and Gods. The Catholic chrch supports him, though, they pretend to oppose each other.

[6] The Hindu, Madras High Court dismisses plea to remove inscriptions on Periyar statues, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, CHENNAI, SEPTEMBER 06, 2019 00:45 IST; UPDATED: SEPTEMBER 06, 2019 11:11 IST.

[7] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/high-court-dismisses-plea-to-remove-inscriptions-on-periyar-statues-dravidar-kazhagam/article29345201.ece

[8] The Times of India, Madras high court upholds right to deny God’s existence, TNN | Updated: Sep 6, 2019, 13:19 IST

[9] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/periyar-e-v-ramaswamys-followers-have-right-to-question-existence-of-god-madras-hc/articleshow/71001704.cms

[10] TheNewsMinute, Constitution grants right to say ‘there is no god’, says Madras High Court, Megha Kaveri, Friday, September 06, 2019 – 17:41

[11] https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/constitution-grants-right-say-there-no-god-says-madras-high-court-108493

[12] Business Standard, HC throws out plea seeking removal of “no God” slogans from Periyar’s statues, Press Trust of India | Chennai , Last Updated at September 5, 2019 21:55 IST.

[13] https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/hc-throws-out-plea-seeking-removal-of-no-god-slogans-from-periyar-s-statues-119090501548_1.html