Communalism Watch

 

 Clash Erupts In Nagpur Amid Aurangzeb Tomb Row, D Fadnavis Appeals For Calm

 

open threats from Suvendu Adhikari the top BJP leader from Bengal ... https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/will-throw-muslim-mlas-out-of-assembly-after-bjp-wins-bengal-suvendu/articleshow/118907832.cms

 https://youtu.be/5Qbv-Q8K-1o?si=JNI2u50SlBm3OltO

 

 

To whom does this land belong? Ram Puniyani Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Stalin; based on new research about the pre-modern history, stated that the archeologists have concluded that the Iron Age first began in Tamil Nadu. Melting iron was introduced in Tamil Nadu 5300 years ago. Precise dating indicates iron was first introduced in the region in 3345 BC. Stalin emphasized this finding to be pivotal to understanding the historical timeline of the Indian subcontinent and said proudly that “I’m constantly saying that the history of India will be written from Tamil Nadu,” highlighting the research’s potential to reshape historical narratives. Should it matter so much to present time? In a way proving that ‘we’ were the ‘first comers’ here many ‘nationalist’ ‘ethnic’ tendencies used it to dominate the society in various countries. One recalls that in Sinhala assault on Tamil (Hindus) in Sri Lanka had to suffer a lot at the hands of Sinhala ethnic nationalism, which claimed that Sinhala are the first comers in that Island so the nation belongs to them! Here in India Hindu nationalism is no different. It did raise the bogey of ‘foreign religions’ Islam and Christianity. It regarded Hindus as synonymous with Aryans and went on the claim that Aryans are the original inhabitants of this land. This claim was articulated by the second Sarsanghchalak of RSS, M.S. Golwalkar, who in his book, ‘We or Our Nationhood defined’ wrote that, “We—Hindus—have been in undisputed and undisturbed possession of this land for over 8 or even 10 thousand years before the land was invaded by any foreign race” and therefore, this land, came to be known as Hindustan, the land of the Hindus” (Golwalkar, 1939, page 6). This was in contrast to Lokmanya Gangadhar Tilak who had said that Aryans came from the Arctic region, ‘Arctic Home of Vedas’. Golwalakar Solved this dilemma without contradicting Tilak by saying that the Arctic area itself was here in Orissa Bihar Region, which later shifted to north, “...that then it moved north-east and then by a sometimes westerly, sometimes northward movement, it came to its present position. If this be so, did we leave the Arctic Zone and come to Hindustan or were we all along here and the Arctic Zone left us and moved away northwards in its zigzag march? This acrobatics had to be performed to prove that the Aryans are natives of this land. If this is not emphasized, the propaganda against Muslims that they came from outside falls to the ground and the whole purpose is defeated. Hindus are the natives. Many theories prevail about this. Many European scholars including Indophile MaxMuller believed that Aryans had invaded India. This theory is baseless as it was the era of pastoral society, where migrations were the norm and not invasion. Invasions came up later with the formation of Kingdoms. The other most logical one, based on linguistics and geological evidence, argued that Aryans came here in a series of waves of migration. Aryans being the natives of this land had a major obstacle to overcome, in the form of Indus Valley Civilization, which dates before Aryans arrival here. This civilization was distinctly different from the Aryan habitations and was there before Aryans came here. It had an urban setting unlike the Aryan habitations. By undertaking a lot of acrobatics; attempt was made to concoct a seal with Horse, to have been found in that Indus valley region. As per a Frontline article, the horned bull seal was modified to look like a horse, the symbol of Aryan culture. It was a computer distorted image of a Unicorn bull. The whole Race theory stands discredited today. It was an attempt by colonial powers to show their racial superiority giving them the right to rule. On similar lines Brahmanical ideology also claimed Brahmins and upper caste to be descendents of a superior race so entitled to have a superior position in society. Indus valley civilization preceded Aryans arrival here. A natural calamity wiped out this civilization and many of its inhabitants moved down South. So where do we stand today Vis a Vis Aryan debate and Indus valley civilization? The earlier archeological and linguistics studies has been supplanted by the impeccable DNS genetic studies. ‘Population genetics’ is the most foolproof method to understand the pre modern societies. Just a few years ago, Tony Joseph (book ‘Early Indians’) an Indian writer put together Population Genetics studies along with the prevalent linguistics and archeological findings. This book on one hand shows that we are all mixed up. The migration to India took place in various stages. He outlines that it was 65000 years ago that Homo sapiens made their way to India from South Africa. Citing DNA studies he shows that subsequent large migrations to India took place between 7000 and 3000 BCE and lastly between 2000 to 1000 year ago the pastoralists came from Central Asian Steppe. As such Aryan and Dravid stand for a group of languages rather than distinct races. The BJP led central Government has formed a committee to document the 12000 year old history of India. As things are so crystal clear from the DNA-Genetic studies about the fact which says we are all mixed up people; why such a committee? The idea is to prove that Hindus (Aryans) are the original inhabitants of this land. After the result of population genetics not much remains to dig into this issue except for claiming the ‘land’ and showing bigger rights here. Society has gone through many transformations over the centuries. The pastoral society, the boundaries of Kingdoms and now national boundaries are what is the reality. One can stand with Tagore to see the impact of National boundaries to dream of a world without boundaries, which seems ultra Utopian today. The assertions of ‘first comer’ are the hallmark of sectarian nationalism. Such tendencies are contrary to the values of Indian Constitution and United Nations Declaration of Human rights. Equality of all citizens irrespective of language and religion is what we need to aspire for the future. Digging into the past with warped ideology should have no place in today’s politics, they can best be left for academics and professionals of those disciplines rather than made the base of political ideology.

When did India Get Independence? Ram Puniyani Kangana Ranaut, the actor and MP was the first who spelt her understanding about India’s Independence when she stated that India became Independent in 2014; when Modi came to power. It was the first time that BJP got majority on its own strength. The hint was India was a slave country earlier; slave of ‘foreign rulers’ or was ruled by Governments which wanted to pursue the path of secular, democratic values. She meant that with Modi in power; full Hindu Nationalism will be unleashed. Not to be left behind recently another actor Vikrant Massey claimed that India got freedom in 2014, when ‘we’ got free expression of Hindu identity. To cap it all now the new date has been thrown up for the real freedom of the country by none other than RSS Sarsanghchalak, Mohan Bhagwat. While addressing in Indore he stated that 22 January 2024 was the day when we got Independence, “the date should be celebrated as "Pratishtha Dwadashi" as the true independence of India, which had faced "parachakra" (enemy attack) for several centuries, was established on this day. The ideals and life values presented by Lord Ram, Krishna, and Shiva are included in the "self of India" and it is not at all that these are the Gods of only those people who worship them, he said. Bhagwat further said that the invaders destroyed the temples of the country so that the "self" of India also perishes. Projecting Ram Temple Pran Pratishta (Life installation) as the panacea of all our social problems he further added, "I used to ask those people that despite talking about socialism after independence in 1947, giving slogans of 'Garibi Hatao' (eradicate poverty) and worrying about people's livelihood all the time, where did India stand in the 1980s and where have countries like Israel and Japan reached?" The RSS chief said he used to tell these people that "India's livelihood path goes through the entrance of Ram temple and they should keep this in mind." Bhagawat's constructs are taking the story further and he wants to legitimize the criminal act of demolishing the Babri Mosque. Overarching the diverse cultural and religious traditions he wants to present only Lord Rama as the sole cultural symbol of this country. Even in the broad spectrum of Hinduism there are Lord Shiva, Lord Shrikrishna, Goddess Kali among others. Then we have the glorious traditions of Lord Mahavir, Gautam Buddha, Nanak and Kabir as the part of the great canvass, which India is. While the population genetics studies clearly show that Aryans were also the migrants, before them there were other natives here. And diverse people coming here can either be seen merely as aggressors walking the path of ways of Kingdoms. Chola Kings ruled in Srilanka, or Alexander tried his best to win over India. Different dynasties and people like Shaka, Hun, Ghulams, Khalji and Mughal rules were ‘part’ of the subcontinent. This is seen by sectarians as an attack on ‘our’ civilization while those who struggled for Independence of India from the British saw it as an intermixing of historical process; leading to the foundational diversity of the country. Jawaharlal Nehru most aptly describes it as, “some ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed, and yet no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written previously.” As per RSS chief the aggressors wanted to demolish our soul by demolishing our temples. The temple destructions in Medieval and late early India were purely for the sake of power and wealth. The earlier attacks and conversions of Jain and Buddha places of worship were due to reaction from Brahminism. To demonize particularly the Muslim rulers, this formulation of temple destructions and many other myths have been propped up. Two examples will suffice while Aurangzeb destroyed nearly 12 temples; he also gave donations to nearly hundred Hindu temples. The eleventh century ruler of Kashmir, Raja Harshdev, appointed a special officer to uproot the idols of Gods and Goddesses, which were made of Gold and Silver or studded with diamonds and rubies. Bhagwat and his ilk see the country through a narrow Brahiminical prism. It was during the colonial period that Indian boundaries emerged. It was the Colonial period which was a period of slavery. The previous conquers who ruled settled here and became a part of our national and cultural life. The British ‘Policy of Divide and rule’ planted the notion of earlier rulers being the plunderers and temple destroyers. The previous rulers who ruled did not take away our wealth outside, while the British plunder project led to impoverishment of India. The slavery was imposed by the British and the struggle against them was the freedom movement which culminated in Independence on 15th August 1947, with our Constitution being implemented on 26 January 1950. Those deviating from this date are the followers of nationalism under the garb of religion, who are uncomfortable with the values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity of the Constitution which emerged from the freedom struggle. He needs to introspect what the countries like Japan and Israel achieved through demolishing old holy places and building the one’s of their religion. He also needs to know that after the Ram Temple movement has picked up India’s growth and unity has seen a downward trend. There is a consistent fall in the various indices related to health, nutrition, educational status with increase in poverty levels. The massive foundations for economic, educational, scientific and industrial prosperity were laid much before the divisive politics of Ram Temple got a boost in the decades of 1980 and 1990s. Bhagwat’s statement totally ignores the massive anti colonial movement. The reason for this is that those who stood for Hindu and Muslim nationalism were not the part of it. In a way his statement is a great insult to all those who sacrificed their live for the freedom of the country from the clutches of colonialism, the period of our slavery.