Posts Tagged ‘dravidian’

Nathuram Godse and Karunanidhi

June 3, 2019

Nathuram Godse and Karunanidhi

VEDAPRAKASH

Godse and Dravidian leaders: Very often the DK-protagonists[1], Communist and the like just blurt out that that RSS killed Gandhi[2]. We do not know why they remember very often or like Godse (1910-1949) like this.  Now, Karunananidhi cries that “the killers of Gandhi should not come to power” right inside the TN Legislative Assembly. “The sinners of Gandhi-killers should not come to power again. Again one Ayodhya, one Rama Ratha, journey of Advani and such things happen, the country would become a jungle[3]. “Another Ayodhya or Rathyatra by BJP’s L.K. Advani would turn the nation into a grave,” he said. UPA allies should ensure that the “followers of killers of Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation, should not rule the land,” he told the Tamil Nadu assembly[4]. This way he responds to the Communists and others who raised the issue of price rise! Why this crack-pot again and again target Rama?

DMK and BJP: We have to deal with all the points raised by the CM in the Assembly, as every citizen has a right to discuss about what C. M talks officially in the assembly. How he was hobnobbing with the Gandhi-killers for five years (1996-2001) without shame, disgrace or mortification? At that time what he was doing? Even T. R. Balu was hobnobbing with BJP-RSS volunteers for his Central Madras Constituency election.

His anti-BJP tirade could not have been made right inside the Assembly, as it is not Panagal Park or Mayilai Mangollai to talk in Tamil anything he likes.

When Murasoli Maran was proposed as Minister, nationalists raised questions, as he had been anti-nationalist and proven ideologist of Tamil separatist movement[5]. Was was writing in “Murasoli”, the DMLK mouth-piece arguing for “Dravidasthan”. He also recorded in his introduction that Karinanidhi encouraged him to write and accommodated in the paper. However, he assured BJP leaders that hereafter, he would not talk anything against nation, as he would become a “Central Minister”!

The same thing happened with PMK and MDMK. The PMK again surrendered and agreed to bury all its ideologies of separatism, self-determination and LTTE support. In fact, it had carefully withdrawn all its anti-Indian books, booklets and propaganda literature.

As for as MDMK was concerned, Vaiko never minced his words for his sympathy and ideological support to and for LTTE or trans-territorial Tamil movement[6]. So he decided to keep outside the ministry and support.

Dravidian leaders sand Mahathma Gandhi: The Dravidian leaders of all sorts had / have been totally against Mahathma Gandhi. They had scant regard for him and talked and wrote disrespecting him in their propagandist literature and papers[7]. EVR, Annadurai and Karunanidhi have been very much against Mahathma Gandhi and they always used to talk in a very scurrilous, derogatory and debasing manner with sarcasm and ridicule. The way in which they talk in Tamil could be understood the real inner meaning only by the Tamil-knowing people. Just remember how Karunanidhi asked about Rama with his arrogant sarcasm, malicious derision and blasphemous mock with his body language. Thousand times more derogatory attitude would be there when they talked during 1940s. They used to address him as “Gandhiyar”, “Parppana adigoli”, “Varnashrama vithagar” and such words and expressions in a scornful way.

Karunanidhi’s official involvements in murders and assassination, acquitted later: People generally forget the recent past. In how many murders and assassination, Karunanidhi was officially involved?

•     In fact, people, particularly, the non-Tanilnadu citizens know very well that he was one of the accused in the Indira Gandhi attempted murder along with 6 others in 1969. Indira Gandhi gave relief to him by withdrawing the case.

•     He has been also under the suspicion of assassination Rajiv Gandhi, as he was / is having links with LTTE. Even when Priyanka met Nalini one of the offenders and undergoing punishment in Vellore jail, she was asking as to any political parties were involved in the assassination plot of his father?

•     He was also involved in the cold-blooded murder of the Tiruchendur temple priest and people might have forgotten the Justice Paul Commission Report. The report itself was made disappeared ad the Judge made kept quite.

 

Karunanidhi and Commissions: Karunanidhi has always been a man of two faces, many tongues. He keeps harping publicly that he is willing to face any inquiry against him. But when an inquiry commission is instituted, he always runs away from it. He tried to run away from the Justice Sarkaria Commission constituted to inquire into corruption charges against him. Another example is the case where the Justice Paul Commission Report was stolen. A case was registered and in this connection in the Madras High Court his attitude of non-cooperation was heard by Justice Singaravelu. Karunanidhi, the fourth accused in the case, refused to cooperate. In fact, the learned Judge observed that “Even if the 4th accused is brought to Court through some coercive steps, it would be futile and the proposed remedy would only aggravate the malady…

How sins are different? But, now right inside the TN Assembly, he talks about the so-called killers of Gandhi. Nathuram Godse was already hanged for killing the Gandhi. But can he absolve from the above sins? Though, with his power and manipulations, he has covered up, how the facts could be erased from the minds of TN people or Indians?

Karunanidhi and Terrorism[8]: In 1976, Gandhi’s federal government dismissed Karunanidhi’s government on the charges of  corruption. A year later, MGR won local elections and sent Karunanidhi into political wilderness until MGR’s death in 1987.

After a year of direct rule by the federal government, the DMK party regained power in Tamil Nadu in 1989. Two years later the federal government dismissed Karunanidhi for a second time, accusing him of not doing enough to crack down on the Tamil Tigers in his state.

Further, the Jain Commission said, the LTTE was getting its supplies, including arms, ammunition, explosives, fuel and other essential items from Tamil Nadu to continue its fight against the IPKF that too with the support of the DMK Government, State Administration and connivance of the law enforcement agencies.

The report said that soon after the DMK Government took over the reins of power in Tamil Nadu, “the LTTE slowly began to consolidate itself in the State and their clandestine activities, heretofore dormant, became more and more pronounced. All the activities of the LTTE at this stage towards resource mobilisation, propaganda and treatment of their wounded cadres, had taken an anti-national dimension.”

The Commission noted the visit of the then DMK MP, Mr. V. Gopalaswamy, MP (DMK) to Northern Sri Lanka and his reported meeting with Prabhakaran between February 8, 1989, and March 3, 1989.

“This visit by Mr. V. Gopalaswamy, and the manner in which this entire episode was dealt with by the DMK party sent clear signals to the pro-LTTE anti-IPKF elements in the State as well as LTTE itself that the newly-elected Government would not resort to any drastic action against such elements; on the other hand, the impression that the entire episode created was that pro-LTTE gestures, even if they were illegal, would be tolerated by the Government.”

The Commission’s report said the then Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, was keen that “some satisfactory solution be arrived at with the LTTE so that the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord could be implemented in letter and spirit. He discussed this concern with Mr. Karunanidhi and sought his assistance.” After Mr. V. P. Singh became the Prime Minister on December 2, 1989, it was spelt out that if no solution came, India would no longer give any military or monetary help to any of the groups, nor allow its mainland to be used for militant activities. “The LTTE remained adamant during their parleys with Mr. Karunanidhi, and continued to demand the formation of Eelam,” the report noted.

The interim report said that credible reports existed of “active connivance of some DMK leaders with the LTTE. The LTTE was in continuous interaction with Mr. Karunanidhi, primarily to ensure that their activities continue unhindered even after the Padmanabha killing.” The ATR “noted” the observation of the Commission that there was a nexus between the LTTE and the ULFA and their combined endeavours in Tamil Nadu had also been confirmed.

The Commission’s report ponders over questions of aid to the LTTE in the killing of Rajiv Gandhi. “Were there other forces behind the LTTE involved in the conspiracy for the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi? These are questions requiring a deep and anxious probe,” the report said referring to conspiratorial aspects which were yet to be dealt with by the one-man probe panel.

Soon after the DMK Government took over the reins of power in Tamil Nadu, the LTTE slowly began to consolidate itself in the State. During 1990, a growing nexus between the LTTE and DMK and its repercussions on the local law enforcement machinery were discernible. The assassination of EPRLF leader K. Padmanabha and others at Madras on 19th June 1990 was a shocking reminder of the impunity with which the LTTE could operate in India.

The case assumes significance due to the fact that striking similarities were found in the Padmanabha assassination and the case relating to the assassination of Shri Rajiv Gandhi. It can, therefore, be safely concluded that the growing connivance of the DMK Government with the LTTE having been brought to the knowledge of the National Front Government, effective steps were not taken by the Central government to check it, whatever may be the reasons.

From the evaluation of the material, the conclusion is irresistible that there was tacit support to the LTTE by Shri M. Karunanidhi and his Government and law enforcement agencies.

The charges, put together as long quotations from the report, include: that the DMK provided a safe sanctuary for the LTTE cadres and activists, it gave advice, active assistance, finance and security cover to LTTE operations, and that the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi would not have been possible the way it happened without the nexus between the LTTE and the DMK, a nexus which started a chain of events which led to the survival and growth of the LTTE in Tamil Nadu long after the Government of India’s attitude had changed towards the LTTE and hostilities had broken out between the Indian Peace Keeping Force and the LTTE in Sri Lanka, and finally that the DMK leader and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, Mr. M. Karunanidhi, had “himself been instrumental in ensuring that things went smoothly for LTTE” and that the cadres of the LTTE had little fear of the security agencies in India “thanks to the patronage of the DMK Government”.

Mahathma Gandhi and Karunanidhi: Karunanidhi’s Tamil usage would very caustic, sarcastic and hurting with double-meaning. That too when he talks with vengeance, hatred and attacking mood, his Tamil would be very very sharp and killing. He has been capable of converting a good word into a bad or even vulgar word in Tamil connotation. He never cared for Gandhi or respected Gandhi. He even does not want to call his name “Mahathma Gandhi” and changed his name as “Uttamar Gandhi” when the name of Nungambakkam Road was changed to Mahathma Gandhi Road , he ordered that it should be ” Uttamar Gandhi Road “. Such has been his love, respect and what not for “the Father of Nation”, but now he talks about the killers of Gandhi!

Dr. Subramanian Swamy[9], President of the Janata Party has said: ?It is abominable for Priyaranjan Das Munshi to compare Karunanidhi with the Father of Our Nation. Karunanidhi is the anti-thesis?in letter and spirit?of Mahatma Gandhi. Karunanidhi was a primary accused in the murder case relating to the beastly attack on Smt. Indira Gandhi during her visit to Madurai in 1979. Moreover following the indictment by the Jain Commission, the Multi-disciplinary Investigation Team and the CBI initially viewed Karunanidhi as a prime suspect in the murder of Rajiv Gandhi?.

Killing of many Tamil leaders and the nexus: The LTTE assassinators have been the DK-sympathisers, they have been maintaining close relations with the DK-DMK-PMK-MDMK and other anti-Indian political parties (all TNLA, TNMK, and such other splinter groups). So we can always say like Karunanidhi, the killers of so-many Tamil leaders have been the DK-DMK-PMK-MDMK and other anti-Indian political parties. In fact, Tamils themselves know very well how the liberal, democratic and reasonable Tamil leaders were hunted and killed mercilessly.

VEDAPRAKASH

18-04-2008

[1] “Viduthalai” Rajendran, RSS – A danger, Dravida Kazhaga Publication, Madras, 1982.

[2] Nathigam P. Ramasamy, RSS – Hindu Fascism, Nathigam Press, Kodambakkam, Chennai, 1991.

[3] Reported in local vernaculars and broadcast in TV channels also on 17-04-2008 evening.

[4] http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080418/nation.htm#7

[5] Murasoli Maran, En Vendum Intha Inba Dravidam? (Why we want the ecstatic Tamizh State?), Muthuvel Pathippagam, Tiruchitrappalli, 1957.

[6] V. Kopalswamy has been very open in his Parliamentary debates also. The Communists used daunt him to come out with views on “nation” and “country” and so on. Thus, he got exposed about his anti-national ideology.

[7] Kazhanjur Selvaraji, The Meeting of Gandhi by Periyar EVR, S. Ramanathan M. A., B. L., and S. Neelavathi Amnmaiyar, Kuthusi Gursamy Pathippagam, Vellore, 1985.

The Meeting of S. Ramanathan, Kuthosi Gurusamy and K. M. Balasubramaniam with Gandhi on 21-12-1933, Purathchi, dated 14-01-1933.

The Meeting of S. Neelavathi ammaiyar with Gandhi on 10-02-1934, Puratchi, dated 18-02-1934.

[8] For more details, see:  http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DG06Df06.html

 

[9] V. Sundaram, Priyaranjan Das Munshi’s Mahatma Gandhi! http://newstodaynet.com/2007sud/oct07/021007.htm

 

Advertisements

EVR’s Hindutwa or Hindutwa of Periyar: RSS’s comparison of ideologies of Periyar and Hindutwa!

May 19, 2018

EVR’s Hindutwa or Hindutwa of Periyar: RSS’s comparison of ideologies of Periyar and Hindutwa!

RSS periyar, DC 17-05-2018
Much in common between Periyar’s Dravidian principles and the RSS ideology[1]: RSS joint general secretary Dr Manmohan Vaidya on 17-05-2018, Thursday expressed confidence that the Sangh would able to strengthen its base in Tamil Nadu, explaining that there is much in common between Periyar’s Dravidian principles and the RSS ideology, as both advocate equality in society without caste and communal differences and class distinctions. “Periyar had campaigned for a society where everyone, particularly the poor and the backward castes, have equal rights and could live in dignity. He had worked tirelessly towards creating a casteless society. RSS too advocates and practises the same ideology”, Dr Vaidya said at a select media interaction here. He admitted that the RSS work in Tamil Nadu could be a bit more divisions created by vested interests”. However, the Sangh would emerge successful in winning the Tamil hearts as the “great unifying factor is spirituality, that’s just the way of Indian living over centuries, marked by kindness, sharing, mutual respect and tolerance, and such other virtues”, Dr Vaidya said[2].

RSS periyar, DC cutting, 17-05-2018
Muslims and Christians in RSS[3]: Elaborating on the RSS ideology, he said the Sangh has several Muslim and Christian members attending the shakhas, which number over 57,000 spread across the country. There is neither religious preaching nor any political discourse at the RSS meetings and shakhas. “We have Dr C I Issac, a renowned history professor, as an important member in Kerala. He has written several well-researched articles on being Hindu”, he said. “A Dravidian leader, who presided over a RSS conference in Tamil Nadu a couple of years ago, had said in his speech that he had actually come to close down the shakhas because he was under the impression that extreme Hinduism was being preached there, but after seeing that the shakhas practiced no class/caste/religious distinctions, he was going back happy that his mind has changed and he now knew the truth about RSS”, Dr Vaidya said. Dr Vaidya is here to be part of the faculty at the RSS summer camp, being attended by over 300 members from all the southern states. There are 80 such camps happening across the country. “There are lectures on spiritualism, clean living, social issues and ways of bringing about positive change among the people, apart from physical training”, explained the RSS leader[4].

Jaya, Maya, Mamta

Mayawati and Jayalalita: Evidently, either he does know the “Dravidian ideology” or the TN BJP or Hindutwa ideologists have not briefed him properly about the Dravidian ideology and polity. It is definitely incorrect to compare or equate Periarist ideology with that of RSS ideology, as both would not match with each other on many accounts. Incidentally, BJP suffered heavily because of two Lady-politicians Mayawati and Jayalalita. During 1995, Mayawati and BJP experimented coalition rule in UP, but failed, because of the inherent fissures. Though, Periyar was an anti-Hindutwa voice, the Dravidian parties DMK, AIADMK, MDMK were trying to align and aligned with BJP for political compulsion, exploitation and profiteering. The BJP could not forget about the fall because of one vote and it was approaching cautiously with Jayalalita. Now, AIADMK has been with BJP and hence, BJP tries to get benefit out of political confusion prevailing in Tamilnadu, after the demise of Jayalalita.

Hindutwa Periyar book- propsed

“Periyar’s Hindutwa” as perceived in 2004: Ravikumar asked, “In such a context, intellectuals who write about Tamil society and polity in the English-language media continue to posit Periyar as an important anti-Hindutva voice. If that were to be true, how/ and why is it that we see Dravidian parties like the DMK, AIADMK and MDMK vying with each other to be seen in the company of BJP? Also, why is it that these Dravidian formations brazenly attempt to implement an agenda over which even states ruled by the BJP would hesitate?,” and then, went on to reply. In the context of “Paraiyar / SC / now mentioned as Dalits”, he pointed out[5], “Periyar was someone who was jealous of the constitutional safeguards that were given to the dalits. Having repeatedly spoken of dalits as a people who don’t have a history, who don’t have a political movement, who don’t have leaders, Periyar even made them believe this. Having used the dalits to serve his political ends, he asked them: ‘Asking the government for jobs, education, duties, huts and housing; and seeking from the Mirasdars two extra measures of paddy will not help in anyway…….Of what use are you to us?”. Periyar worked solely for the cause of the non-brahmin, non-religious minority, non-dalit backward and upper castes. He deployed the concept of ‘majority’ for this purpose. There’s only one difference between the majoritarianism that the hindutvawadis propound and that of Periyar’s: that is, over the exclusion of brahmins from this majority[6]. Then, he concluded[7], “Dravidian parties allying with the BJP even as they praise Periyar is no different from Mayawati’s praise for Periyar even as she rules in alliance with the BJP. There’s always a scope in Periyar’s ideas for such possibilities. This is Periyarism”.  Perhaps, “Hindutwa” expression used in 2004 shows the change taken place[8].

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

“Karnataka” would be repeated in Tamilnadu?: Whatever the nuances are appreciated, filtering out the differences, the anti-Hindu, anti-Sanskrit, anti-Brahmin, anti-dalit, pro-mohammedan, and above all anti-Indian ideology of EVR changed to Periyar could not be coped up with the RSS idelogists. In fact, the hard-core Periyarist, anti-Hindu Dravidian cadre and pro-Tamil ideologists would not accept such proposition, on any account. Therefore, the Hindutwavadis / RSS / BJPwalas should understand the Dravidian mindset. How Jayalalita was treated by them till death and even after hould bge an eye-opener, just because, she is a Brahmin, Pappathi, Aryan and so on. The Hindutava ideologists could get along with AIADMK but not with DMK and therefore, thinking about “Periarists” is redundant, futile and worthless. Though, BJP did not pose as “anti-dalit,” its inaffective campaign in Karnataka produced negative impact, where SC and ST constitute 19%. Even Hindutwa failed with Lingayats and Vokkaligas, as Congress played the “communal card” effectively, spending crores.  In Tamilnadu, the higher caste Mudaliyars, Chettiyar, Pillais and others vote for DMK traditionally, because of their affiliations since 1960s.  Muslims and Christians do not vote for BJP or BJP aligned AIADMK faithfully. In that manner, Congress plays a trick of “Karnataka” in Tamilnadu, by spitting the votes of AIADMK. The background of Kamal Hassan and Rajinikantha, though not clear, their politics affect only the interests of BJP alliance in Tamilnadu. They can better concentrate to analyze critically as to why RSS could not grow ideologically influencing others.

Periyar on Paraichi- jacket

How to counter Dravidian ideology?: Dravidian Ideology has been powerful, attractive and alive in the minds of crores of people of Tamil speaking people. Many times, majority of them could be brought together or influenced with emotional appeal or threat that “Tamils are targeted, Tamil is danger, Tamil is suppressed by Hindi, Hindi is imposed to deprive out cultural rights” and so on. Though, they have been becoming pious, religious and believing, not because of “Hindu binding,” but, their traditional Tamil rituals, rites and ceremonies. Their caste-politics has been so dominating to capture, keep and enjoy power with economic superiority.  Even, today, the TN-BJP has been divided on dravidian fault-lines which could not be cemented with “Hindutwa” as could be clearly observed in the followers, meetings held and social media. Their nuances of “inner-outer” dramatic twists, diplomatic duplicities and dogmatic digs are not learned. First of all, no effective speaker has been produced and the borrowed ones are always drifted to other parties or started their own splinter groups.

Periyar breaking vinayaka idols

  1. In TN-BJP, the leaders have been operating on caste based groupings and followers impacting others.
  2. The second rung leaders have been divided among themselves, depending upon the power, wealth and other factors.
  3. The third level leaders have been divided among themselves as usual division, zone, group, RSS-non-RSS, and such factors.
  4. These three divisions have been further divided based on egoist groups, envying enemies, caste and other factors.
  5. Most of them have been appearing and active only when NDA is in power.
  6. Besides, social media struggle and group rivalry exhibited, there have been flooding of anonymous letters written to Modi down to local office.
  7. Without understanding the nuances of “Secularism” and “communalism,” they go by blind faith of calling it as “Hindutwa”!
  8. Though negative suggestion, propaganda etc., are not advisable, they always indulge in such activities, exposing themselves.
  9. They advice with arrogance as if they are only next to Modi and Amit shah!
  10. Treating, commenting Dravidian leaders, parties etc., in a bad language.
  11. Without having any political base, dreaming for power.
  12. Do not understand and realize the nuances of Dravidian alliances.
  13. Getting votes in the range of 3,000 to 20,000, but, not planning any strategy to increase votes to 50%

©Vedaprakash

19-05-2018

brahmin-snake-periyar-analogy

[1] DECCAN CHRONICLE. RSS will strengthen roots in Dravidian turf: Dr Manmohan Vaidya, Published May 18, 2018, 6:13 am ISTUpdated May 18, 2018, 6:13 am IST

[2] https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/180518/rss-will-strengthen-roots-in-dravidian-turf-dr-manmohan-vaidya.html

[3] DECCAN CHRONICLE. RSS will strengthen roots in Dravidian turf: Dr Manmohan Vaidya, Published May 18, 2018, 6:13 am ISTUpdated May 18, 2018, 6:13 am IST

[4] https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/180518/rss-will-strengthen-roots-in-dravidian-turf-dr-manmohan-vaidya.html

[5] Ravikumar, Questioning Periyars legacy, Mar 12, 2003 at 0000 hrs IST

[6] http://archive.indianexpress.com/oldStory/20003/

[7] Ravikumar, Periyar’s Hindutva,10 SEPTEMBER 2004 Last Updated at 12:00

[8] https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/periyars-hindutva/225056

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.

Dravidian liars and anti-Hindu atheists

July 16, 2009
Dravidian liars and anti-Hindu atheists
Published on October 20th, 2007 In Uncategorized, Politics |  Views 734
Earlier, Nandi posted in WordPress.com, in which he has made several mistakes. After pointing out (see below), now, he is coning out here with corrections made without acknowledging.

I am posting the following as a reply to Nandi”s posting appearing here:

My attention is drawn to your posting in WordPress.com.

I offer my comments to your post:

“India was an island nation surrounded by seas hence it had the name நாவலந் தீவு.

Is to so? Kindly tell me, where the expression நாவலந் தீவு is found in the ancient Tamil literature or “Sangam” literature?

“In such a scenario to claim that a Land Bridge built 1,750.000 years ago when no human being had inhabited the Earth”

In haste, you are mentioning as 1,750 years (1,750.000 = 1750).

Paula Richman wrote a book titled “Many Ramayanas” Yes the question before us is to accept which Ramayana as true story?.

You claimed youself as a rationalist / atheist etc. Then, you have to be careful in quoting from secondary sources, because, non-Hindus or anti-Hindus can write anything and quoting such biased ideas make you unbecoming of a “rationalist / atheist”. You should have read H. D. Sankalia also before jumping into the so-called “debate”.

Your mention about Jain / Buddha Ramayanas: As Ramayana has become so popular, even Jains and Buddhists had to imitate Ramayana by changing the story, just like Kulandai. Therefore, there is nothing new in it. As a researcher or scholar or historian, you have to demythologize and find out the truth, instead of relying upon “such myth on myth”, straightaway.

[The biblical Adam and Eve’s story and its resemblance could also be taken note of] Sita becoming a monket after eating a fruit: This shows that either you have not read the story properly or misquoting or rather drawing wrong parallel with the biblical Adam and Eve (don’t try to escape by telling that I am a rationalist and all). I do not know as to whether Eve became monkey to have such forceful comparison!

You furthering the above story: Here, you are perhaps nearing the biblical fables, as Jesus also reportedly married to May Magdelene. Perhaps, you decided to not stretch it.

According to Thais, Hanuman had many affairs and children: Naturally, if the wishes are horses, even blind can fly. Why Thais, even Annba did it. As you are a rationalist and atheist, you quote all these things, so enjoy.

Anna’s inconclusive debate on Kamba Ramayanam: “Navalar Somasundara Bharathiar and சொல்லின் செல்வர் R.P.Sethu Pillai debated with Anna and openly admitted they have lost the debate. This debate in Tamil Book “Let Fire Spread” தீ பரவட்டும் wants to illuminate Tamil hearts by symbolically burning Kamba ramayanam. Pulavar Kuzhanthai wrote  இராவண காவியம் . Ravana Kavyam  can be considered as Dravidian version of Ramayanam”.No, they were ashamed of the perversity and vulgarity erupted in the name of literary flow and hanged their heads. Any Tamil knowing or reading person would hang his head after reading as it is just like “yellow journalism” circulated under the “Dravidian” banner, that too, coming from Anna, wjo became Chief Minister of Tamilnadu taking oath under the Indian Constitution, that has been written by Ambedkar. Anyway, the facts are as follows:

N     The so called debate was held in the auditorium ofLaw
College, Madras on 09-02-1943 under Ramachandra Chettiyar.

N     Anna started speaking and took more than one and half hours leaving no time to others.

N     Pointing out the falsehood in his speech, R. P. Sethu Pillai openly spoke about his weakness in the argument. In fact, re ridiculed Anna for quoting from “Northern Nehru”, being a “Nakkiran” (one who always finds fault with others). Regretting that he could not speak for long time, he wound up his speech within ten minutes. He dared him that he would even come to Kanchipuram for another debate on the subject matter, if he would invite him.

N     Ezattu Adigal, who followed him, was asked to cut short his speech within five minutes.

N     Then Srinivasan started speaking, but he was prevented from speaking, as the DK activists created a riot-like condition. He had to stop his speech, because of the pandemonium created by them.

N     But, Anna was given a chance to speak again!

N     So that was the debate conducted with “freedom of speech” and respect for speakers!

N     However, winding up, C. M. Ramachandra Chetti concluded that he could not give his opinion, as the debate had been inconclusive.

The main point discussed was as to whether Ravana was an Aryan or Dravidian. Thus, the first debate had been the most undemocratic conducted under controlled conditions with rioters.

The second debate was conducted on 14-03-1943 at Devanga Padasalai, Sevvaipettai,
Salem. Salem College A. Ramasamy presided over Anna and Somasundara Bharathi spoke.

N     Anna spoke as usual taking full time.

N     Somasundara Bharathi pointed out that Anna spoke as an orator with brimming emotion not as a debater. He then, however brought out his points refuting Anna;s talk.

N     He left, as his speech was over and moreover, he had to catch his train, as plannede by the organizers.

N     But, after his departure, Anna was given a chance and he stressed upon Ravana’s race and concluded with the demand of burning “scriptures of Aryans”.

N     A. Ramasamy, though did not gave any result about the debate, he pointed out that there was “vulgarity” in Kamba Ramayanam.

In any case, such diverted reference has nothing to do with the “Ramar’s Palam”.

The question before us which of these versions is based on true historical facts. These are not days where everyone will accept anything with blind faith. If you place new facts to reopen a settled issue in history, you should place facts and prove it”.

Yes, yes. Nowadays, everybody can get information easily and they decide about truth behind it.  Even in those days (when Anna debated), the other scholars were not allowed to speak or threatened with dire consequences. In other words, they used their own type of terrorism in those days. Now, let us see, how truth is faced.

“Let us examine the falsehoods one by one. We from the Dravidian Movement are atheists but not Ravana; all know that Ravana as per epics is a devotee of Lord Siva. The doubt which arises to me is why should a reincarnation of God perform superhuman deeds to impress demigods? Does it mean that Demigods are more powerful than the Original God on reincarnation?”

Interestingly, the answer is there in the so-called above debate, as they debated only about the race of Ravana as to whether he was an Aryan or Dravidian! Rationalist or atheist has to deny such myth. Having believed it as a myth, why one should worry about it as to whether it works or not? Without Ramayana myth, there is no Ravana. If Ramayana is myth, Ravana is also a myth. Then, why debate about his “racist credentials”?

“There are many books on Indian Ocean. All these books give us evidences on the continental drift, the submerged lands of the Lemuria, which Tamils prefer to call as the Kumari Kandam”.

Yes, but note again, the western scholars do not believe in such hypotheses. Why them, even Indian eminent historians not only do not accept, but also dub them as myth.

Mr. Nandi Varman, go to Endo-eurasian group and other forums, where Tamil literature is misinterpreted and disrespected. Steve Farmer openly accuses that your friend R. Mathivanan is a foregerer. They go on debate even without knowing the fundamentals of Tamil and Tamil literature. I feel it is better spend your energy there instead of politicizing the issue.

VEDAPRAKASH,

Researcher,

Chennai.

vedamvedaprakash@yahoo.com