In a secular nation?

Hindus in Hindu Rashtra(2023)
Eighth-Class Citizens and Victims of State-Sanctioned Apartheid
Author: Anand Ranganathan

I felt as if I were listening to him debate on Indian internet television. For the uninformed, a debate in the Indian context differs from the BBC's 'Hard Talk' or a conventional debate in which one person is given the stage to speak while others listen.

On these Indian shows, what we see on our monitors are multiple smaller windows, reminiscent of those in 'Brady Bunch' or ‘Hollywood Squares’, with everyone yelling at the top of their lungs simultaneously to make their point. With the rapid-fire speed of speech, often seen in speed debates, and the caustic choice of words, it is quite a spectacle. Everything is drowned out in the cacophony of each speaker's voice. Amidst all this, the anchor begins to argue at a higher pitch without turning off the guests' microphones. Sometimes, I wonder why the guests bother to attend at all. 

Anand Ranganathan has attended numerous such debates. His strong command of English and fluent expression of thoughts make him a standout in right-wing media. 

After listening to so many of his arguments on X, the book evokes a sense of 'déjà vu'. His premise is that Hindus in India are receiving a raw deal. After being overrun by foreign invaders from the West before the Common Era, India finally attained independence 75 years ago. Despite the change in rulers, he argues that Hindus continue to be treated as the stepchildren of the nation. The British governed this vast country using their 'divide and rule' tactics, which, regrettably, persist to this day. 

Ranganathan presents eight points regarding why Hindus in a Hindu nation are receiving a raw deal. Although India's Constitution declares the country to be secular, the State deems it appropriate to oversee the management of Hindu temples. For thousands of years, the temple ecosystem has served as a centre for worship, education, community living, trade, economy, statecraft, and even defence. Every invader understood that to dismantle India, they had to dismantle the temples. The law allows for the appointment of non-Hindus to the boards managing temples. In contrast, mosques and churches govern their own affairs. Court cases seeking the independence of Hindu temples have been ongoing for years.

Back in the 1990s, 700,000 Kashmiri Hindus were systematically driven out of their homes. Thirty years after the massacre, the state finds it more profitable to have them return as tourists for foreign exchange, but not to their ancestral homes. In contrast, Rohingya Muslims are permitted to settle in Jammu and Kashmir. Is the abrogation of Article 370 the right path to rectify the status quo?

The Waqf is considered the third largest landowner in India, after Defence and Railways. What began during pre-Independence times by the British to appease the Muslims has since expanded. Many prominent landmarks around Delhi, as well as Ambaini's house, are now believed to be Waqf land. Any property adjudged arbitrarily by Muslim law irrevocably belongs to Allah for all time. It reached a point of absurdity when a 1,500-year-old Hindu temple in Tamil Nadu is claimed to be situated on Waqf land, despite Islam being only 1,300 years old. The archaeological and physical evidence of lingams at the Gyanwapi Mosque serves as proof that it was constructed atop the grand Kashi Vishwanath temple. Even Aurangzeb, in his verified biography, Masir-e-Alamgiri, conceded to demolishing the aforementioned temple to erect a mosque. The 1995 Waqf Act solidifies the authority of the Waqf Board; however, these days, Parliament is attempting to amend this.

The Right to Education Act (RTE) of 2009 is said to be leading Hindu-run schools towards extinction. The Act dictates financial control, as well as the choice and quota of students and teachers, selectively applying these rules to non-minority schools; failure to comply results in closure. These restrictions compel schools to raise their fees, forcing parents to seek alternatives in schools run by minorities. Even in states where Hindus are a minority, the Act continues to operate against their interests.

The author highlights legislation that appeases non-Hindus but targets Hindus. For instance, bigamy is illegal under Indian law, yet it is permitted under the Muslim Personal Law of 1937, illustrating the double standards. Feminists advocate for equal rights but remain silent when the court permits Muslims to marry upon puberty. The corridors of power are intent on reforming Hinduism and addressing the social ills that characterise Hindu society, while the Abrahamic religions remain untouched.

The author also has a bone to pick with India's fixation on glorifying the invaders of the land. He is particularly scathing about naming one of Delhi's main roads 'Aurangzeb Road,’ referring to a ruthless conqueror who found solace in destroying pagan religions, particularly Hinduism, upholding Islamic law over his territory, imposing jizya on non-believers, and forcibly converting Sikh spiritual leaders. The nearest train station to visit the remnants of Nalanda University is Baktiyapor, named after the invader who burned Nalanda, thus losing centuries of knowledge and wisdom. 

It appears that the actions of the courts show no hesitation in attempting to alter Hindu practices, such as in the Sabarimala case, where women of menstruating age are not permitted to enter the Swami Ayyappa temple. However, the courts chose to remain silent regarding other religions, as exemplified by the case of Nupur Sharma, who is blamed for the killing of an innocent tailor for commenting on the Quran. Ranganathan further illustrates the bias of the Indian courts against Hindus.

Even though the author is an engineer by training, he chose to dedicate most of his time to highlighting the plight of the second class of Hindus in a country where the majority are Hindu. He even states that there is a legislative, judicial, and constitutional apartheid against them. 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Missed the point!

Emergency (Hindi, 2025)

Story, Direction, Starring: Kangana Ranaut

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21279420/

The first thing my language teacher told me in essay writing class was to stay on topic. Therefore, with a title like 'Emergency,' I expected to learn about the events leading up to the 1975 black mark in Indian democracy. I wanted to understand how the Opposition and civil society responded to Indira Gandhi's iron-fisted rule. Instead, I received a mini biopic of Mother Indira, the so-called Mother of India. The Emergency was rushed through, I thought. It would have been better if the film had started with the events just before 1975 and given some credence to the audience to know a little bit of Indra's background.

I recall that in 1977, my classmates and I, the so-called Backbenchers of the Class, engaged in lengthy, recurring debates about India, Indira, dictatorship, and democracy. Our teenage minds, albeit somewhat precocious, concluded that for a vast and complex country like India, communism was the best solution.

It was euphoric following India's handling of the East Pakistan issue, as they emerged victorious, defeating their troublesome neighbour, Pakistan, in just 14 days. The Indira Wave propelled her to a significant majority, allowing her to outmanoeuvre her political opponents. She believed it was her time to modernise India. Although the 1971 War strained India's economy, the country sought to increase revenue through taxation and nationalisation of projects. She centralised power within the Prime Minister's office. She likely harboured dynastic intentions, as she encouraged her son, Sanjay Gandhi, to engage actively in running the party and government, even making critical decisions. The veteran members at the party were not particularly pleased. Sycophants were rewarded, while the economy experienced sluggishness. Railway workers were on strike, and the press revelled in the chaos. The successful detonation of India's first nuclear test occurred in 1974.

In 1975, the Allahabad High Court disqualified Indira's victory in the 1971 elections due to her misuse of government machinery during the campaign. She was also barred from holding the position of Prime Minister for six years.

JP Narayan

Massive demonstrations ensued, demanding her ousting. Jayaprakash Narayan, a Gandhian at heart, was vocal in his calls for Indira's resignation. Although this did not occur, the President, on Indira's advice, declared a state of Emergency on 25th June 1975 at the stroke of midnight. A widespread power failure was implemented to halt the printing of newspapers, which was then the sole means of news dissemination. Radio was also under control. Thousands of political opponents and activists were apprehended. The Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) was invoked, allowing dissidents to be detained without charge, effectively making them disappear. The Emergency period witnessed the banning of trade unionism and significantly curbing media freedom. The people of India received news about their country from foreign correspondents.

There was an ongoing conspiracy theory about Jaya Prakash Narayan's rapidly deteriorating health following his incarceration. Despite the official announcement that he had diabetes, his kidney function declined sharply, leading to speculation about possible foul play. After his release in March 1979, it was mistakenly reported that he had died, resulting in public mourning and the closure of schools, parliament, and radio broadcasts. He ultimately succumbed to his illness only seven months later.

Indira Gandhi continued to govern the country by decree, passing laws and attempting to appease the masses. Sanjay Gandhi, now active in the ruling elite, believed bulldozing squatters was a sure way to modernise Delhi. He was also instrumental in the brutal forced sterilisation of the poor to curb the population explosion. Twenty-two months after its declaration, the Emergency was lifted, and elections were called. Indira lost to the Janata Party, a new political party initiated by Jayaprakash Narayan.

The newly formed coalition government did not last long. It collapsed, prompting fresh elections in 1980, in which Indira Gandhi was re-elected. A few months after her victory, she tragically lost her son in an air crash. Soon afterwards, Indira Gandhi faced unrest in the state of Punjab. Her actions during Operation Blue Star to regain control of the terrorists in the Golden Temple in Amritsar proved to be her coup de grâce.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Riding the wave...

Chhava (Lion Cub, Hindi; 2025)

Director: Laxman Utekar

The debate centres on whether Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was simply a minor chieftain seizing small territories in the Deccan, an opportunist, or a Hindu nationalist. Additionally, the crucial question is whether Aurangzeb was a fair ruler or a religious bigot.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27922706/

Depending on who authors the history book, one will be portrayed as a saviour, while the other will be depicted as an opportunistic villain.

Shivaji's kingdom was once characterised as a vassal territory of the Mughal Empire, and he was even said to have undertaken military campaigns on behalf of the Mughals. In his later years, his father, Shahaji, reportedly had a somewhat complex relationship with him, having formed an alliance with the neighbouring Bijapuri Sultanate against Shivaji.

In the wake of numerous military clashes post-1657, Shivaji's once amicable relations with the Mughals soured. This shift coincided with Aurangzeb's rise to the throne as Emperor. Growing military expenditures and potential corruption drained the Mughal treasury. The Jizya tax was enforced on non-Muslims, resulting in widespread discontent. Shivaji's kingdom is renowned for its multi-ethnic and multi-religious composition. He maintained an army comprising 60,000 Muslim soldiers, many of whom occupied significant positions. His forces included several Muslim officers, and reports suggest that he advocated for gender equality.

 

It is probable that Aurangzeb's father, the illustrious Emperor Shah Jahan, expended considerable resources on Noor Jahan's mausoleum, the Taj Mahal, which subsequently severely depleted the treasury. Consequently, innovative taxation schemes became necessary. The jizya, which had been abolished during Akbar's reign, was reintroduced, inciting anger among Sikhs and Hindus. Jizya is the tax sanctioned by Islam as a protection fee imposed by Islamic rulers on their non-Muslim subjects.

The schism then emerged, with the Sikh gurus supporting his people and the Marathas under Shivaji of the Bhonsle Dynasty coming to the aid of the Hindus. Some scholars even contest the legitimacy of Shivaji's rise to the throne following his father's sudden death. His coronation by Brahmin priests from Kashi (rather than Maharashtra), along with the debate over his possible Shudra lineage, serves as points of contention.

Supporters of Aurangzeb argue that the Emperor was not a religious bigot. They claim he did not destroy temples; rather, he assisted in building and financing them. However, I find it difficult to take this stance seriously, given that it originates from a man who had no qualms about killing his brother, Dara Shikoh, to seize the throne and imprison his father, Shah Jahan, in a dungeon to admire his prized achievement, the Taj Mahal, from afar. Aurangzeb not only destroyed the Kashi-Visvanath temple in Varanasi, but he also constructed a mosque atop it, attempting to obliterate all traces of the temple until the Archaeological Department of India uncovered it.

For so long, the world has been presented with a different narrative of what transpired in the past. Over the last decade or so, Indian history has been re-examined and re-narrated from various perspectives. Meanwhile, leftist historians, who had discredited any Indian achievements, attributing all of India's development to Western colonisation and its failures to an archaic and self-defeating unscientific way of life, are now taken aback. They vehemently dismiss these new discoveries as Hindutva propaganda.

Bollywood has an unenviable reputation for glamorising foreign invaders through its films. In light of the general wave of Hindu consciousness that seems to have permeated the Indian psyche in the 21st century, the industry has begun to adopt a different approach. It is now embracing films that aim to convey the glory of Ancient India. This shift accounts for the surge in 'patriotic' movies such as Panipat (2019), Uri: The Surgical Strike (2019), Rocketry: The Nambi Effect (2022), Amaran (2024), and many more.

This movie starts at the time of Sivaji's demise. Aurangzeb, sitting down the knitting, is rejoicing with his henchmen. They thought that was the end of the Maratha empire. Surprise, surprise. Out of nowhere, quite unsuspectedly, his eldest son, Sambhaji, conquered Burhanpur. After that, it was one war after another, mixed with palace politics of betrayal and double-crossing. Bollywood has this warped notion that a story seems more convincing when the screen is filled with a sea of blood, decapitation and maiming scenes. It is quite off-putting, actually.

The filmmakers, political leaders, and Bollywood's elite appear to align with the prevailing majority. They capitalised on the film's launch for their own benefit. During the Maha Kumbh Mela season, many were seen among the Hindu pilgrims, reflecting the increasing sentiment of Hinduness among the people of India.

Some argue that Shivaji and Shambaji were not fighting for Hinduism but were merely defending their territories. Savarkar first proposed the notion of them as Hindu icons at the turn of the 20th century. The Shiv in the Shiv Sena, which plays a pivotal role in Maharashtra politics, refers to Chaturvedi Shivaji Maharaj, not Lord Shiva of the Hindu Trinity.

 

https://www.marathicultureandfestivals.com/sambhaji-mahar

Why do filmmakers choose to make a film about Shambaji rather than Shivaji, who is renowned as the defender of Sanathana Dharma? Consider this: Aurangzeb, who began his reign over the world's wealthiest empire, ultimately witnessed the great empire established by his forefathers diminish in size and riches, ending up interred in an unfinished grave. In contrast, earlier rulers had magnificent mausoleums constructed for them.

Aurangzeb, commanding perhaps the largest army in the world, was pushed to his limits and engaged in numerous fierce battles with Shivaji. Long before Mao Zedong wrote about guerrilla warfare, Shivaji employed guerrilla tactics and mobile strategies. Had it not been for this Maratha-Mughal animosity, the East India Company would not have been able to strengthen its position in the subcontinent.

Shambaji was also a capable ruler who focused his efforts on agricultural development and played a significant role in the expansion of Hindustani and Sanskrit literature. Unlike his father, Shivaji, who either died in a hunting accident or was poisoned by his queen, Shambaji was martyred at the hands of the Mughals after enduring torture, being blinded with hot iron, and ultimately decapitated. This act rendered him a hero among the masses. It is also noted that Shambaji never truly entered the history books, likely due to his stepmother (the same queen who poisoned Shivaji), who defamed him in her desire to position her own son as Shivaji's successor.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

It is a jungle in there

Sorgavaasal (Heaven's Gate, Tamil; 2024)

Director: Siddharth Vishwanath 

Youtube clip

The one thing that man is granted in this life is free will and the freedom to act at his discretion (within the confines of social mores and the boundaries of the law). Therefore, when someone commits a crime that is deemed an affront to society's wellbeing, he is stripped of this privilege. Confined in isolation, it is believed that he will reflect on his waywardness and be spurred to make amends. 

The reality, sadly, is not so clear-cut. We know of many innocent people incarcerated for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, doomed for life for crimes they did not commit. Then there are those who make jail their second home, moving in and out for petty crimes. I suppose imprisonment was no hindrance to the continuation of their daytime trades. Not to mention those who wear their jail sentences like badges of honour and the select few who still exert influence and control over activities outside the confines of their four walls. Who says they are missing the luxuries they left behind after their conviction? They continue receiving the salutations and the honours they were conferred as if they were wrongly convicted. It is as if the entire pillar of law and order is wrong. 

We all know how Charles Sobhraj, the Bikini Killer, wielded significant influence in Tihar Jail in Delhi that he could even hold his birthday party. He arranged for sedative-laced laddus to poison the guards and execute his escape. Closer to home, rumours abound regarding a certain ex-PM receiving special deliveries of Kajang Satay and full access to his Armani suits for his numerous court appearances. The jail sentence does not hinder the man from occasionally updating his Twitter handle. What could be more bizarre than a prisoner masterminding an assassination thousands of miles away, as in the case of Lawrence Bishnoi and the killing of Khalistani supporter Hardeep Singh Nijjar? Bishnoi, through his extensive international connections while sitting in Sabarmati Jail in Ahmedabad, is accused by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police of colluding with the Indian government to eliminate the Khalistani troublemaker. 

Let's not forget the innumerable small-time crooks who graduate to bigger crimes after receiving invaluable coaching from fellow inmates. Jails seem to be not correctional facilities but rather a conduit for producing more anarchy, like a bacteriophage injecting its wisdom into an empty shell to produce more young, lethal viruses. Taxpayers seem to be paying for all the crooks to be concentrated in one locale so that all the bigwig crooks can streamline their expertise into creating the mother of all mayhems.

The film is loosely based on the 1999 riots at Chennai Central Prison, one of India's oldest prisons, which was built by the British in 1837. The jail was closed in 2006, and its inmates were relocated to Puzhal Central Prison. Notable figures who were imprisoned here include Subhas Chandra Bose, Tamil Nadu Chief Ministers Anna Durai, Karunanidhi, Jayalalithaa, and LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran.

Boxer Vadivelu

The 1999 riot involved a criminal named Boxer Vadivelu, who had the support of the AAIDMK. He seemingly brought his thuggish behaviour into the prison and instigated a gangland showdown. The riot escalated to such a degree that the riot police were called in. They were forced to respond with violence and live ammunition, resulting in the deaths of ten people, including a prison official. The film begins after the riot, with a solitary member of the enquiry panel attempting to determine the causes that led to the confrontation. Through a series of interviews with various inmates and prison staff, we receive a comprehensive view of the prison dynamics and the events leading up to the riot. Similar to Rashomon's narrative style, we obtain slightly differing and contradictory accounts of what actually transpired from various witnesses. 

https://mywordsnthoughts.com/boxer-vadivelu-the-memorable-real-life-character-siga-in-sorgavaasal/

P.S. A memorable quote:

"There are only two paths in life: either kneel down in Heaven or be the King in Hell."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A Rallying Cry!

The War Against Indians(2025)

150 Years of Betrayal, Suppression and Injustice in Malaya & Malaysia.

Author: Suthan Mookaiah

At the outset, the author does not claim the book as a literary work. He professes to merely inking his lived experiences. The sales of his books are a legitimate revenue source for him, as he funds upliftment programmes in Tamil Schools through his movement, Maatram.

Sollayah grew up in Taman West Country, a former estate land in Kajang. He saw the estates in Malaysia flattened in the heady days of Mahathirism. In the rapaciousness to make Malaysia a developed nation by 2020 and produce mega-millionaires of a certain denomination, the country was in heat. There was a land rush. Apparently, nobody, including the Indian leaders who were meant to represent them, had the inkling to think of the millions of Indians who had at least two to generations of a family whose world only revolved around the rubber estates and their surroundings.

Nobody thought of having the ex-estate workers vocational training or structured living programmes. Most economic developmental ideas initiated by its leader went into disarray. The Tamil schools were left unfunded with their structures in deplorable states. Community leaders of other groups were smart enough to care for the down line whilst the Indians were busy fattening their own coffers and running down each other.

The author's father had the wisdom to send his son to be educated in a national school (as compared to a Tamil school, as most nostalgic ex-estate dwellers would) despite the financial restraints. The author's father was odd-jobbing as a grasscutter. Suthan's studies enabled him to secure him a comfortable remuneration overseas. He returned to his homeland around the turn of the last decade and decided to pay back to the society he grew up in.

Through his movement, he tries to expose the decades of systemic marginalisation of the community after the collapse of the plantation economy. He tries to give dignity to Tamil Schools and stop the indiscriminate destruction of Hindu temples. The criminalisation of Indian youth is worrisome.

The author suggests the community to use the power of social to learn and disseminate useful information to hurl up the community to sturdy grounds.

He sells his book through the TikTok shop.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The crossroad?

The Graduate
1963 novella by Charles Webb
1967 film directed by Mike Nichols

In the past, existential crises typically arose after a certain age of maturity. Following a prescribed path, an adolescent would transition into adulthood. One must work diligently, persevere, and slog through challenges to realise his true potential. As the Peter Principle states, "In time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duties," they may attain the highest position for which they are ill-suited, leading to subsequent brooding. Only then do they begin to question the meaning of it all. What is the purpose of existence? What is one good for? What is their contribution to humanity, and what will be their legacy? 

In the days when seeking knowledge was laborious, one had to be content with passive diffusion. Learning intimate biological know-how was peer-driven. Rightly or wrongly, that remained a go-to source for quick references. In the spring of youth, the doe-eyed youngster absorbs everything piecemeal. There was no time to contemplate abstract concepts such as mortality and the purpose of life. 

The first contemplation may arise at the birth of the firstborn. Awed by the little one's possession of the grandmother's eyes and the dimples from his wife’s side, he may be intrigued by the greater forces of nature; however, the buck stops there. He is too busy making hay while the sun shines, as long as his body permits. 

The children will become increasingly independent from their parents. Similarly, the other half will carve out time for essential reflection. Fears of helplessness, redundancy, and loneliness may begin to seep in. A personal crisis of existence will ensue. This unfolds after years of lessons taught by the unyielding School of Hard Knocks in Life. 

Fast forward to the modern era. Instant access to a wealth of information at one's fingertips creates a false sense of security, leading one to believe they know everything. Matters that should be contemplated in mid-life suddenly swirl in the mind far too early, long before one has even entered young adulthood. 

"What is the purpose of it all?" he asks. "What sort of legacy will he leave behind?" He develops a guilt complex from enjoying the good life that his parents worked hard for. He wishes to give it all up for the poor and live on little more than air and sunshine. He scorns the capitalist system world. 

The end result is considerable confusion regarding what is expected of the youngsters. They believe their elders are too detached from the currents of contemporary life. Unfortunately, they lack role models to emulate. Consequently, they fumble in the dark, grasping at straws and occasionally making misguided choices that lead directly to disaster. This may be a consequence of information overload and the absence of a clear path for the young to follow.

This story challenged the status quo upon its release in the 1960s. A high-achieving recent university graduate from an upper-middle-class family with a clear path laid out before him harbours doubts about his future. He does not wish to follow in his father's career footsteps. During his graduation party, his father's business partner's wife embarks on an affair with him. Matters become increasingly complicated when he is introduced to and falls for the partner's daughter. 

The classic book and film became literary powerhouses in their own right. The film later emerged as the 17th greatest American film of all time and is esteemed as one of the most significant and influential films ever made.

 There was also a sequel to the book, Home School, set ten years after 'The Graduate', which did not perform particularly well. The film likely succeeded because it was the 1960s—a time of anti-establishment sentiment, hippie culture, and empowerment. This ideal representation of a generation is not limited to the 1960s. The feeling of not wanting to toil away in a seemingly meaningless job under the 'Man' is still experienced by the current generation. The notion of answering to the boss without any personal space is repugnant. Perhaps it is the leftist idea at play here—that individuals should spend equal time working for sustenance as they do for leisure, recreation, and family. Karl Marx believed that the working class should work no longer than necessary. Gone are the days when one was defined by one's profession.

P.S. Thanks, MEV, for the recommendation.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.