Daddy's opinion .

You must have noticed the happenings during last month and weeks passed. The UPA is very much affected adversely. The have reacted to the happening in manner that is not fitting to the norms of democracy. The media went crazy with half digested reports from sourses not known. The future of the UPA is in danger of collapse with so many scams featuring DMK ministers. Some time I felt that the judiciary acts/make observations that are not exactly judicious. 2G spectrum looks like the verdict is already made up. When a bench is monitoring/directing the ED, IT & CBI the lower courts will be influenced by that. When the ED presented charges against Hassan Ali on the matter of money launderng the lower court presided by Justice Tahilramani threw those papers as having no value. It was the intervention from the highest that started the long name droping exercise. I am stoping here.

Poems of Love and War 17-4-2006

Title poems of Love and War, selections from Tamil "Ettuthogai and Pathu Paatu". Selected and translated by A.K. RAMANUJAM.

This is one of the two books by Ramanujam sent by Sarasvathy and received by Laxmi

a fortnight back. I have read about AKR in media articles as a famous scholar Tamil classicals and folk tales. I had a copy of his collection of Folk Tales which Bina used to read several times until the paper back got unhinged and torn. As expected this book is stellar in character and expositions. The poems are part of the famed sangam literature variously dated 100 BC - 200 AD. Compared to much of sanskrit literature, sangam works are more secular and earthly. No religion could be assigned to these authors other than just natural. I have very little idea of the location and society of sangam literature. Whatever I read in Malayalam did not elicit a full picture. There were some Keralite poets in the sangam. Some names of kings or heads seems to be Kerala origin. In those times there was no seperate Malayalam language. So Tamil is much older and matured. There is a big gap from sangam era to the time of later Tamil epics such as Kampa Ramayanam. The two known and popular epics are Chilappadikaram and Manimekhalai. They are the works when budhism was widespread in South. Jainism also was prevelant. Both Budhists and Jains must have written many works in Tamil as in the case of North where Pali and Prakrit works of both followers are in abundance. AKR mentions the Tamil Tatha U.V. Swaminatha Iyer not aware of the existence of Sangam and Jain Krities in Tamil. It seems that Sanskrit speaking Brahmins who came to south in the early common era overwhelmed the rulers and ruled with their vedic rites and practices occupied the cultural scene exterminating the indigenious one. Then it seems that we lost a good part of Tamil classics as it was with budhists texts in the north. But many of them were retreaved from their chinese and tibetan translations. No such luck to the Tamil.

With such historical back ground we should cherish what were left out from perishing and made known still some manuscripts might have been kept hidden. A concerted and dedicated efforts to find them is the need of times. Let us look at the newly found gospels from the dead sea scrolls to the latest Judas gospels. Unfortunately scholarship of such caliber nor the wherewithals are easily available in todays Tamil Nadu. A good lot of time, intellect and money wasted in futile and rediculous persuits petty and personal politics. So long this scene continues there is no hope for any cultural renewal except fundamentalism.

By,

K.N. KRISHNAN

Nana's e-mail to his younger grandson 'Ravi'.

Dear Ravikutty,

Your email set me thinking deep. I feel happy for your thoughts since, they are still in the process of evolving into set ideas. But I would say that one should avoid any set ideas. They enslave one’s mind and direct our behaviour. I would prefer my own ideas to be in flux, always ready to think differently. I fully agree with your favourite MURPHY LAW, something wrong somewhere imperceptible to many. It is also my view that thinking should be open not confined to self. In today’s technically advanced atmosphere, it is possible to convey thoughts to many others even unknown thru media. People have varied experiences they formulate their thoughts from different view points. Sometime our ill thought ideas get clarified in others thoughts. They might fill up the gaps that occur in the process. We also might think and act differently on getting fill up from these responses.

What you pointed as intentions of people that they either try to negotiate, reject, ignore or try to impose ideas. “How true”. Still there will be few who both receive and give. In the process they themselves change. It is possible to spot personal or self interest while mingling and interacting with like or unlike minded. We should leave them there to sense and realise their flaws.

Some of these thoughts came to me after ruminating on points brought out in your e-mail. They might have been in my subconcience , but they got words after you stimulated it. I am trying to fathom the full and complete meaning of your expressed thoughts. I very much appreciate your perseverance to find meaning in life. I won’t go too deep. Hundreads nay thousands got into a mire and established a cults that goes on increasing the mindless faithfuls. Take life as it is. Enjoy it without getting polluted. What I mean is that don’t get attached to any firmed ideology. Picasso’s Guernica might be ambiguous as you say but thousands got inspired thru this painting and they found solace in overcoming fascist scourge in the European Scene. Others realised the enormity of hate and violence perpetrated on common people. That is for the time being.

Yours very affectionately,

Nana.

Untouchables from Tehelka: 25.07.2005

Daddy’s article on Untouchables from Tehelka: 25.07.2005

TO AKHIL,
AFTER READING THE TAHELKA ARTICLE I TRIED TO REMEMBER. THERE IS NOTHING IN MY READING AND OR EXPERIENCE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE TOPIC IN TEHELKA. IN MY VILLAGE DAYS THERE USED TO COME A VANNAN(WASHERMAN) EVERY FORTNIGHT. THEY WERE UNTOUCHABLES BUT STILL THEY CAME TO OUR HOUSE TO COLLECT THE LAUNDRY. THEY WILL STAND OUTSIDE AND MOVE 10 TO 15 FEET FROM US. CLOTHS ARE COUNTED AND BUNDLED BY THEM AND TAKEN TO WASH. THE CLOTHS ARE WASHED IN HEATED LIME BHATTIES, STARCHED AND IRONED AND BROUGHT BACK IN 2 WEEKS. AGAIN THE CLOTHS ARE COUNTED AND KEPT IN A NICHE IN HOUSE. ONE HAS TO DO A WET WASH AND TAKE BATH BEFORE USING THE CLOTH FOR DAILY WEAR. THIS WAS TRUE IN KIZHAKHANCHERI AND NEMMARE. A CHANGE CAME IN BOMBAY. THE SERVICE OF A WASHERMAN WAS AVAILABLE FOR MANY YEARS AT CHEMBUR ALSO. I DON’T REMEMBER AS TO WHEN THE SERVICE WAS DISCONTINUED. MAY BE WE STARTED WEARING POLYSTER.
I AM NOT SURPRISED TO READ THE TAHELKA ARTICLE. THE MEDIA DID MENTION ABOUT SUCH PRACTICES ON TAMIL NADU AFTER THE TSUNAMI DISASTER. VIDEO CLIPS WERE IN THE CHANNELS. THE REPORT WAS SOMETHING SIMILAR. CERTAIN CASTES THOUGH VERY LOW IN THE LADDER DID OBJECT TO BE PUTUP IN THE SAME PLACE OF REFUGE WITH FAMILIES OF LOWER STATUS. THEY PUSHED THE LATTER FORCIBLY TO OPEN ROADS. THERE WERE ALSO REPORTS OF THE LOWESTS RATIONS CONFISCATED BY THE CASTE CONCIOUSE AND FORMER WERE ALLOWED TO SCAVENGE FROM THE WASTE.
I HAVE A BOOK TITLED “SANGATI” MEANING NEWS, INFORMATION OR OCCURANCES. THE NARRATIVE IS ABOUT THE MODES AND MOVES OF THE LOWEST CASTE PARAYAR IN TAMIL NADU. NEWS FROM LONDON IS NOT VERY ASSURING. PLEASE KEEP CONTACT WITH JAI AND RAVI ABOUT THEIR WELBEINGS. MORE IN NEXT.

Daddy

WEIGHT LOSS.

Weight Loss By Upamanyu Chatterjee. Novel. 10.4.2006

It is weird narrative without any message. May be a sample of literature with no aim of objective. Really it could not be reflecting any social reality. Is it nihilism? Not in my opinion. Chatterjee's prose is flowing and readable enough incidents and episodes undergone by the protogonist are beleavable but not that probable in real life. The hero Bhola views everything as sexual manifestation to which he has explanation from the millenieum old spiritual traditions bequitted from the time of Vedas. Bhola is not a flesh and blood person but amalgam of servession, unusual in one person. Though it seems that he acts a rebel the idea is far from his mind. He just rolls on from moment to moment. His pranks in the school is an assertion of his own individuality, that never gets acknowledged by others. His ties with parents are nebuleus.

No episode or encounter get connected to the development of the story. It is just fantasy that rules his mind in relation to his teachers and girl students. I find it unconvincing his dreamy encounter with the vegetable vendor and wife. He drools over their body contours both homo and hetero sexual terms. These two follow him throughout his life some times unexpected forms. Though he looks them down as low and despicable and dirty he also accepts and reveals in the dirt. I think psychologically Bhola is punishing himself for being from an upper caste but not rich. The details of what they do in bed are inviting only to himself. This is self delution. It is mostly oral sex and not some healthy one. With full knowledge that he might get infected Bhola upends all limits Dr. Borkar is a pervert and justifies his perversions with spiritual explanations. His married life did not elevate him. Still he gets mind with the same duo. Their criminality gets registered but instead of seperating oneself Bhola turns out to be an apologists. He continues to pick up relations with the duo after every break. Only with the relation with his elderly land lady is beleavable but not fully. For years he lived in her quarters but there was no clue as to their sexual attraction. Not that the hero had anything alternative, when the relation is mentioned for the first time the same is an old hat. No prelims or introduction. He freely parts her upper garments and handles her fleshy breasts without preparing the reader for it. Most of the sexual encounters are bizarre. One could not get convinced that the hero is a sex pot. He is not even though he unusual exploits might give a wrong idea. The end is self inflict without any reason for that end. On the contrary there is reason enough for him to try and retire are a life for Karuna.

B R Ambedkar

There was a report in “Asian Age” of 29.4.1999 that quoted Neelalohitadasan Nadar, a minister in Kerala government protesting against the depiction of Narayana Guru as a normal and regular Hindu Sanyasi in appropriating him to Hindutva and RSS Parivar. Even if it is admitted that the Guru through his writings and practices did uphold Hindu values, the concept and contention of the Guru was not of orthodox Hindus. He was a rebel using Hindu scriptures and teachings against all communal and high caste forces. The upper caste Hindus never accepted Narayana Guru as a revered swami nor did they accept the oneness of all religions as propounded by him. These historical facts are completely obliterated in transforming the Guru as a Hindu swami. The same transformation effected in case of Swami Vivekananda as well. The Swami was reduced to an agitator against Muslim and Christian religion and their work of conversion of people to their respective faiths. Almost similar fate awaits Dr. B.R.Ambedkar in the hands of Hindutva protagonists. The Sangha Parivar meticulously researched for quotes from Dr.Ambedkar to demonize the acts of conversions resorted by other religions. The Hindu right writings completely ignored the voluminous writings of Ambedkar against Hindu religion in all its phases. Major parts of Ambedkar’s writings are critiques of Hinduism as such. It was because of such writings the Hindu right led by the RSS in Maharashtra agitated to ban publishing of Ambedkar´s writings. However, there are several parties and groups both political and social practicing and defending him against absorption by Hindu right, while in case of Vivekananda and Narayana Guru there are none. The Ramakrishna Mission as well as the SNDP Yogam is steeped in their tradition and more and the founders intended more evolved into Hindu cults instead of spearheading social revolution for which there. The ruling BJP uses its religious card to take over all the revolutionary social formations advocated by Swami Vivekananda, Narayana Guru and Ambedkar and many more.

K.N.Krishnan.

30.4.1999.

Geethagovindam.

Geethagovindam also known as Astapadi is sung in temples like Guruvayoor and others on a daily basis. It is a Sanskrit work of medieval period composed of poems and songs.

The author is Jayadeva (12^th CE) an ardent devotee ofKrishna an avatar of Vishnu. The legend is that while Jayadeva sung those songs his wife Padmavathi used to dance to the tunes in the temple of Jagannath at Puri, Orissa. The poems are the narrative of the episodes or circumstances of the theme Radha Krishna Lila. The songs are the dialogues of Radha’s companion as well as Radha and Krishna. Before narrating, there is the invocation of god Vishnu in his ten avatars. However, there are two departures from the tradition. First, is omission of Krishnaas an avatar and second is including Budha as the ninth avatar inspite of the fact that Budha preached against the Vedic rituals and Brahmanism as such. He in fact instituted a completely separate religion not recognizing any god or gods. This is admitted in the invocation song. There is one about Vishnu as Vamana cheating Bali the grandson of Prahlada both devotees of Vishnu.

The narrative starts with thus: Nanda(gopa) the foster father of Krishna, tells Radha that the sky is full with rain clouds and the forest path is dark with Tamaala trees and he i.e. Krishna is scared of the night and therefore reach him home. Hearing these words both Radha and Krishnaleft and played love dalliance in each of the grooves of trees along the banks of river Yamuna. This indicates that Radha is much elder to Krishna a boy. There is a legend that says that Radha is a young sister of Nandgopa. Thus, the Radha – Krishna story justifies the love between older women and boys. The narrative might give the idea that the poet will be describing love plays of the couple but that is not so. He follows the conventional rules in portraying Vipralambha (separation in love) and Sambhoga (union in love) Sringara. There is no concept of love, as we understand it nowadays. At the start of his compositions, the author makes it clear that his work is about “Vasudeva’s love plays”. (Sarga 1. Verse 2) And again he mentions two ways to look at his compositions thus: If (you are) too interested in devotion to Hari i.e. God Krishna or enamored in pleasant arts (meaning love plays); then listen to the sweet, beautiful and attractive garland of Jayadeva’s musings. (Sarga 1. Verse 4) He reiterates the same idea at the end in Verse 72.

He starts with the description of the season Vasantha or spring. The season is supposed to induce different sentiments in different groups of people such as couples together and separated. There is pleasant nature facilitating such sentiments.

The poet introduces Raas-leela in Vrindavan where Krishnais in love play with a large number of young Gopies. From the description, it seems like one Krishna going around hugging, kissing and making love to each one of them. The Gopies are mature to be described having heavy milk bearing breasts in more than one place. The word used is “peena payodhara”. In Sanskrit, it could be explained that way. Jayadeva pictures Raas-leela with one Krishna and many Gopies whereas “Narayaneeyam” describes as many Krishnas as Gopies.

While the raas-leela was going on Radha feels neglected and moves out of the venue in anger and envy. The female companion of Radha describes what is going on and tries to induce her to go back to Krishna. She tells her: “You will be like the lightning in the clouds, when you are on top ofKrishna’s body performing Viparita Rati.” “Vigalitha vasanam, parihrita rasanam ghadaya jaghanam apidhanam.” Meaning thereby “discard the clothes and remove the jingling belt and join your wide open midriff” toKrishna’s body. There are more and more explicit descriptions of love making with different Gopies as well as Radha. One more example is there in Geetam 23, Verse 69. Krishna asks Radha to mount above him and play love. The verse 69 roughly means:

During the emergent love battle, she did something fantastic to be victorious over her lover and due to that performance; her midriff calmed down to rest, her hands loosened their tight grip. Her breasts were heaving and her eyes closed. Surprise; wherefrom women get such manly traits?

However, the text is mainly about Radha and Krishna with Radha’s friend intervening. Why Radha’s friend did not consort with Krishna like all other Gopies is not raised nor answered. There is praise for the God Krishna at every last line of Ashtapadi invoked by the author. There is an invocation at the end of Sarga 11, Verse, 16 in which the author says that Krishna remembered the large heavy breasts of Radha while hitting on the two head mounds on Kamsa’s elephant Kuvalayapida to make it dead. The simile looks a little out of place but the composer is the king in poetry. I found this verse omitted from one publication.

Most of the commentators and translators noted that Jayadeva’s composition is very much erotic in its essence inspite of his invocation to God at every step. But they caution the readers not to be carried away by the erotic descriptions and concentrate their attention on the devotional motive in them. The devotee author used his unfettered freedom in writing the love plays of the God.

Look at a different view. Omit the composition of all words referring to the God and also rename the words Gopies as well as Radha and Krishna. Make a translation of all remaining texts in any language and get branded as an obscene and pornographic writer. That is a reality.

By

K.N.Krishnan.

[

V.Panoli on Adi Sankara.

V.Panoli on Adi Sankara.

V.Panoli a multi language scholar and learned in Adi Sankara literatures is reported to have prepared a well researched work on Adi Sankara in English titled “Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality”. The Matrubhumi weekly carried an adv. for pre-publication orders for the book. Reading about the contents of the book self became curious and ordered one. 31^st March 1999 was the last date and now, it is the end of April 1999 and still there is no announcement as to the date of book publication.

According to the advt. Panoli questions so many long held views on Adi Sankara. He is said to contest the authorship of Bhaja Govindam, Soundarya Lahari and many more works attributed to Adi Sankara. He is also said to have maintained that both Bhakti and Yoga are not part of Adi Sankara’s teachings. V.Panoli is said to deny the widely held view that it was Adi Sankara who propagated a rigid caste society in Kerala making everyone Sudra other than Nambudri Brahmin. Un-touchability and pollution of lower castes were said to have been established by Adi Sankara in Kerala. These views are said to have questioned by Panoli. On the whole, Panoli is said to have advocated a fresh look from un-touchability, Dalits and women towards Adi Sankara’s real views in the light of his Vedanta philosophy. He also says that it will help the Dalits and others to understand that they also are the followers of Vedic religion. Does Panoli view that Vedic religion and today’s Hindutva are two separate entities?

The Matrubhumi publication”Adi Sankara’s Vision Reality” by the renown Sanskrit scholar V. Panoli was received in the afternoon of 1.6.1999. Self completed reading a large part of the book on the same day. In the next two days, I tried to complete it, by selected readings. However, I was unable to understand the real motive behind writing such a book by the scholar. The author in his preface to the book claimed that he wrote this book to dispel certain commonly held understandings on Sankara’s many published works. The author Panoli did not attempt any critical appraisal of the ideas and philosophy propagated in the name of Adi Sankara. Instead, he starts with saying that Adi Sankara is not a mortal man but an appearance of divine miracle that might happen in a Yuga. Adi Sankara is made out to be an avatar who appeared in the land of Bharata just to write correct commentaries for the Upanishads, Geetha and Brahma Sutra i.e. Prastana Trayee and also to subdue other contemporary philosophical views and systems likeMimamsa, Sankhya, Vaiseshika, Nyaya, Yoga etc. He is also said to have campaigned to expel Buddhist philosophy and practices from the land of Vedas. The author goes on repeating his homilies to Sankara in establishing the supremacy of Advaita philosophy. The claim for the supremacy is said to be Vedas and the divine revelations.

The learned author Panoli claims that his writings on Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality, were meant to dispel certain interpretations that were said to have entered or inflicted over the original writings of Sankara. The author says that beside the superstitious imaginations and myths about the Acharya, which too have marred the purity of his teachings. These were specifically pointed out in the book but it ended there.

The author has not tried to get into details as those given below:

Most of the philosophical systems and ideas dealt with in Adi Sankara’s ‘authentic works’ were that of northern Indian origin and they were predominant there only. Then why divine took birth in an obscure place in Kerala? Sankara went all the way to the banks of Narmada in Maharashtra to learn all the Vedas etc. from his Guru Govndacharya. The historical truthfulness of this happening is not clear. Does it mean that there were no institutions in Kerala itself to impart Vedic learning to the Brahmins? But there must be some in Tamil Nadu, Andhra or Karnataka. Leaving all these places Sankara traveled all the way to Narmada, at a young age of 12. Who guided him to go all the way in search of this particular Guru? Can it be assumed that at that point of historical time there were collections of Vedic and other literatures in the Ashram of Govindapada on the banks of Narmada? Sankara learned all the Vedic and others in a fast pace. He must be an extra ordinary student to complete not only his Vedic education, Upanishads and Brahma Sutra but also write commentaries i.e. Bhashyas on them within four years i.e. when attained the age of 16. According to this book, Sankara did not write anything there after but went on travelling the length and breath of India, except the present South India. Sankara entered into discussion and dispute with several scholars of the system current at that time. He established his mutts in East, South, West and North; i.e. at Puri in East, Sringeri in South, Dwaraka in West andKashmir in North respectively. There is not one in his birthplace in Kerala! There are little supporting evidences to all that were attributed to Sankara. It is popularly known that Sankara attained Samadhi at the age of 32, after completing his life mission. It is acclaimed by the author of this book that Advaita advocated by Sankara is a monument to Indian philosophy. At the same time the author deplored the fact Indiai.e. Bharat deviated from the teachings of the Acharya and continued to follow despicable ways and behavior in their life that are authentic in Vedas and smrities. He has not made any attempt in analyzing the historical context of these revelations. How is that then Adi Sankara is took samdhi so early in life? Did he not know that the people for whose elevation, he appeared in the land has failed to absorb his teachings, specifically his philosophy of Advaita Vedanta as truth? Can it be concluded that Sankara’s teachings were not intelligible not only to the mass of people but also to people who were supposed to teach and guide the masses? If they felt the divine origin and message of Sankara, it is inexplicable as to why they did not continue campaigning and propagating Sankara’s ideas. Just by establishing, the four mutts in four corners of Indiacannot be considered as revolution in social or even in philosophical sphere. Did any of his mutts tried to attract any one other than the born Brahmins? It will be useful to do some research on the functions of these mutts during their entire history of more than 1,200 years of existence. The author of “Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality’ himself admits and quotes others in support that theses mutts themselves created and propagated myths about interpolations and attributions to Sankara’s works. Many of them took the freedom to attribute authorship of their own works on Adi Sankara. But all such claims based on certain pre-conceived notions and ideas do not amount to de-mystification when the author is so firm and ready to peddle other myths about Sankara. At one place, the author makes out a case to deny any kind of writing on the part of Sankara where some kind of sex is mentioned. The reasoning and arguments resemble the catholic missionary ideas that he has absorbed as part of his education. One feels sorry for him that he has to explain away Sankara’s commentaries on Brihadaranyaka and Chandokya Upanishads where sexual activity is explicitly explained and sensuality is accepted as normal functions. (It will be good to know that the monumental Brihadaranyaka Bhashyam of scholar sanyasi Nitya Chaitanya Yati, who expired only a few days back omitted the text itself, from his published Bhashyam.) In another work of commentary on Chandokya Upanishad the texts of those mantras dealing sexual acts of pleasure though given but not commented saying that it is the tradition. It all shows a recent mindset conditioned with 18^th century teachings on morality to exclude any thing sexual. All these modern scholar know that in Rigveda there are mantras extolling explicit sexual acts. However, they seemed to feel ashamed to accept them and try to explain away them as allegorical and mystical means. What is that prevents Sankara from following Veda in this subject and why he should be deprived of authorship of such works of poetry? One cannot accept any such exclusion at least in context of ancient Indian thoughts. The anti-sexual and anti-female feelings of many of today’s scholars cannot find support in the ancient texts. Even if some of the works credited to Sankara are kept out, still there are innumerable passages in his works that portray females as obstructing men striving and attaining Jnana or knowledge of self; Atma and Brahma. As the author Panoli maintains; one should not expect contradictory extremes in Sankara and when such contradictions are found, they should be discounted as Sankara’s.

There is the claim that Sankara was expounding the Vedic philosophy of Advaita, but a serious readings of the Vedic texts will show that there are too few mantras dealing with oneness i.e. Advaita in those texts. It is all conjured up commentaries to sustain long preached positions of the Advaities. The most authentic commentary of Sayana did not give that much credence to these claims and followed a common sense method in interpreting Vedic Hymns. The chart provided by Panoli on the sources quoted in the “Prastana Traya” of Sankara is worth telling. While cross quotations from one Upanishad to another Upanishad Bhashyas and other two namely Geetha and Brahma Sutra abound, quotations from Rigveda Samhita are confined to 20 alone. That means that the Acharya mainly depended on cross quotations from Upanishads to develop and sustain his advaita philosophy, Yajur Veda had only 4 and nothing from Sama and Adharva Vedas. Manusmriti is quoted 23 times. Panoli says that there are no quotations from Ramayana, many more of the Puranas not even Kalidasa. Can it not be concluded that Sankara’s acquaintance with works Sanskrit then existing and available, is only limited? That will be a correct one, considering the length of his period of learning being only 4 years. He mastered only one part of the ocean ofSanskrit studies; a smart prodigy he was able to master that part well. He used his learning to win over most of the opposition. He debated and argued with the then scholars of other subjects on the basics of Advaita. V.Panoli cites that there are quotations from 54 earlier works in “Prastana Trayee” Bhashyas of the Acharya. Except for 17 from Jaimini’s Mimamsa, 2 from Nyaya, 2 from Yoga, one from Samkhya, one from Vaiseshika all other quotations are from kindred works supporting Advaita. Why Buddhist, Jaina, Lokayata and others are not mentioned though they were very prevalent at the time? Reason may be limitations of his learning, not the availability of those sources. If he was learned and powerful, the Bhakti and Yoga paths should have been sidelined in his works and only Advaita thoughts and practices to be established as relevant. The later day practitioners of Vedanta mixed up all Bhakti, Yoga and Vedic rituals along with preaching Karma and Jnana. The then rulers did not propagate any Advaita philosophy, but to cater to Bhakti movement and cement it in the minds of masses, constructed the monumental temples. One cannot assume that the movement to build temples was motivated to subdue advaita philosophy but it had that effect in the later years. The heads of Advaita Mutts while mouthing fidelity to advaita practiced and propagated idol worship and various pilgrimages for man’s salvation. . they never left out of dvaita philosophy in the long years of their existence. In fact, all the Hindu orthodoxy found refuge in them.

The author’s dislike of the Smrities in general except that of Manu, is the result of his blind faith in the ideas of Swami Dayananda Saraswati the founder of Arya Samaj in last centuary. Swami’s work “Satyartha Prakash” is not based on a verifiable historical inquiry but blind faith in performing Vedic rituals. Even his interpretation of Vedic literature is not universally accepted because not historical but also due to Christian influence.

While Panoli accepted the Swami’s contention that only Manusmriti is authentic worthwhile, he explained away the so-called interpolations as not desirable. He seems to think that the author of Manusmriti is the fore-father of all earthly creations. What a pathetic understanding of history? But his own idols like Adi Sankara and modern Vivekananda did not ascribe any interpolations as false. One might expect Panoli undertake to edit and publish an authentic text removing all interloping by imposters with a rigor as was done to Mahabharata by Bhandarkar Institute, Pune. The author mentions approvingly and uncritically a stanza from Balakanda of Ramayana as if there is no other opinion about this part of Ramayana. He also might have forgotten that ancients themselves considered Uthara Kanda as not belonging to original text. That was the reason for Bhoja to conclude his Champu Ramayanam with Yudhakandam. Today a good number of Sanskrit scholars but not the Pandita Siromanies accept the above.

On his own admission that “the cradle of human race” and “native land of the highest philosophy” i.e. India did not follow those precepts i.e. Advaita and thus down graded itself. He claims that through his writing “Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality” he is trying to lift up the national and real traditions and correct the perspectives. The claim is simple and silly. He has not come forward with any practical way to restore the past glory of Hinduism. He has not demarcated himself from the “protectors of Hindutva” represented by RSS, BJP, VHP, Bajarag Dal and so many other manifestations of the Parivar. What the author of “Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality” tried to bring out in the learned dissertation is of limited value. Some of the works attributed to Adi Sankara or those added to originals might be true. It will not make any difference to people recitingSoundarya Lahari and Bhaja Govindam or some other devotional poems whether Adi Sankara or some other Sankara in fact composed them. Panoli’s claim that the Acharya did not accept or approve of Bhakti will never persuade people from following their favorite god worship/ while according to Panoli, the divine avatar who came to establish basic worth of Vedic thoughts and philosophy; in his own admission no such restoration took place during the more than 1,200 years after the Samadhi of the avatar. On the other hand all kinds of myths and superstitions were inaugurated through many more smrities and Puranas. There is some similarity with Tantric and Yogic practices as well.

Then also according to Panoli, no one was as scholarly as Sankara until the appearance of Swami Dayananda Saraswati a Gujarati Brahmin by origin in the second half of 19^th century. We were supposed to believe such a claim even though there were good lots of writings in all faculties in Sanskrit were created and propagated in the land. This happened while the land was more or less under Muslim rule. Panoli’s claims belittle the contributions of Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallabha, Nimbarka, Sayana, Madhava and many others whose names are legends. In his book, Panoli did not mention works other than that of Dayananda Saraswati. May be, in his opinion they were less learned than the Swami. This kind of extreme positions taken by Panoli is negative.

Matrubhumi of 6.6.1999 carried an article by learned historian Dr. N.V.P.Unithiri in reply to an earlier article by Vasudeva Bhattathiri extolling the ancient Sruti/Smriti Puranas for advocating good only for men against women and Sudras. According to Bhattathiri, people of modern times did not understand the meanings of Sruti/Smriti Puranas and because of that, meanings of teachings of those ancients are not truthfully reported. He specifically dealt the subject of Sudras and women to learn Vedas. During the argument, Bhattathiri relied on selected quotations and half verses. He also attributed his own meaning to them. These included certain portions of Apasudradhikaranam from Brahma Sutra and its Sankara Bhashya.

The writer of Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality, V. Panoli on the other hand maintains that the portions of Apasudradhikaranam in Brahma Sutra as well as its Bhashya by Sankara, both are spurious interpolations. The historian Dr. Unithiri, questioned Bhattathiri quoting relevant verses from Smrities and Bhashyas including Apasudradhikaranam. The historian is of the view that whatever meaning Bhattathiri finds in those quotations the fact is that no woman is free in life, she has to always under some male protection. Similarly Sudra by his birth, a low caste and he cannot become a learned as with higher caste born.

It is ironical to find a learned scholar like Panoli, to write a small tome, at this end years of 20^th century, just to explain and establish that sacred works attributed to Adi Sankara are myths and interpolations and or complete fabrications. Ofcourse the Sanatani Hindu society evolved in the last two millennia, has accepted, absorbed and practiced certain rituals, rites and behaviors as god given, whether they actually had any scriptural base and support. Ironically, this includes the common understanding about Sankara. Unless motivated by efforts in bringing social and religious reforms, writing such long tracts has no point at all. Dayananda established Arya Samaj to meet the needs of modern times, as he understood. He tried to reform Hindu religion based on his interpretations of ancient texts, although those same texts were subjects of interpretations by so many of the scholars in historical times. Dayananda opened a new path in understanding the ancient texts. One may agree with him or may not, but his efforts resulted in forming one more group in the society. The other reformer was Vivekananda and his followers. They tried for a compromise between the ancient and modern while not making a fetish of ancients. They got more influence outside India than inside. The same fate fell upon Arabindo as well. Scholars and others not wanting in quoting sayings from Vivekananda when they want to impress and buttress their arguments. There are still less who quote Arabindo and still less who refer to Dayananda and his writings. However, none of their teachings, writings or practices did create any significant change in the rites, rituals and practices of the mass of people called Hindus.

A good lot of Keraleeya scholars had been writing about on the ancient literatures including philosophical mainly Advaita. They have never even thought of the Buddhist, Jaina literatures available in abundance. For instance, the writings of the earliest authors/scholars like Kodungallur Kunjikutan Thamburan, Vadakumkoor Rajaraja Varma Raja, Ulloor Parameswara Iyer, Vallathol Narayana Menon, Kuttikrishna Marar etc. in their writings dealing on Indian philosophical traditions did not go into any other than Hindu. They discussed and explained Vedas and Upanishads of Sankara’s Advaita philosophy, never venturing or even mentioning pre-Sankara developments in philosophies. May be the Buddhist and Jaina literatures were in languages other than Sanskrit. However, there are many Sanskrit works that of Nagarjuna, Dingnaga and more. Even these available literatures were kept out of their purview and making it seem that Sankara’s Advaita is something unique and original. It should fill the Keraleeya hearts with pride. Such scholarship on the part of Keraleeya pandits did create a halo and divinity on Sankara. That the tradition that he is the source all things in Kerala nay Hindu traditions of the whole of India, kept people and scholars of Kerala origin out of other traditions.

True to this historical background the author of Adi Sankara’s Vision of Reality, extols Sankara not as a human being but as a divine avatar. Avatar of which God? May be Shiva since his guru Govindacharya is recognised as such i.e. Sankara of Kailasa, on his first meeting with his pupil. But Sankara himself did not approve or recognise Shiva as the source of universe. At least Panoli argues for such a case in his book. Was Sankara is an avatar of Vishnu? Might be, since he composed a great Bhashya on Bhagavad Gita as being a saying of Krishna an avatar of Vishnu. This was not approved by Panoli. Still he maintained Sankara as divine avatar who appeared in this world to reclaim Vedic teaching and traditions. But what is the significance of his birth in Kerala about which he never mentioned anything n his writings? There is also no reasonable explanation for a Kerala Brahmin of 8^th century to go all the way to north upto Kashmir and Kedarnath to preach and propagate his philosophy but not in South India. Was it because in his time, Sankara found south India following the true Vedic tradition and the north forsaking the same? Or will it be correct to say that Buddhist and Jaina were strong in north thereby he worked there. But a number of Buddhist scholars belonged to south who wrote Buddhist treatises in Sanskrit, prior to Sankara. Except in Kashmir, there were very few Buddhist scholars in north. Most probably, the Vishnu, Krishna and such personalized cults were wide spread there such as in Punjab, Rajasthan, UP, Bengal and Orissa. But Sankara did not target these personalized cults in his works. His targets were those who proclaimed their affinity to Sankhya, Mimamsa, Nyaya, Vaiseshika like group of philosophers. Occasionally, the Vijnana Vadin and Sunya Vadin of Mahayana Buddhism. Contrary to claims, Sankara followed the ideas of Buddhism by making certain additions and alterations in the then Buddhist philosophies. Several scholars accused him of being ‘Prachhanna Budha’ in those times. V.Panoli did not go deep into these in asserting that Sankara never barrowed any idea from outside of Vedic. In proof of his contention, he depends on “Sankara Vijayam” a biography of Sankara by another divine Swami Vidyaranya. There are many more “Sankara Vijayams in vogue in this country, mystifying the birth, workings, writings and death of Sankara. None of those could be relied to tell the truth of Sankara’s life.

Two matters did not find full mention in Panoli’s book. One is about the so-called “Sankara Smriti” that is popularly claimed as codified rules of conduct to all castes in Kerala. I have not seen any published copy of this Smriti, but read in books and articles where the same is discussed. The report is that there are many versions of this work in circulation in Kerala and outside. It is said that matriarchy is imposed in Kerala to all castes except the Brahmins i.e. Nambudries.

The second is the claimed biography of Adi Sankara in circulation in several versions. No one so far proved the authenticity any one of them. They are full of stories of divine miracles performed by Sankara during his short life in this world. Panoli cited only one of them as stated earlier. According to my readings, some others claimed authenticity and sanctity to one “Sankara Dig Vijayam” certified by the Sringeri Sankaracharya as authentic. But this also propagates the same or similar myths and miracles as in other versions.

Some of them are downright absurd and farcical. Look at the following story cited by some ardent devotees of Sankara.
Adi Sankara was challenged to a debate by Mandana Misra, a learned and well-known Purva Mimamsa scholar. They agreed that Mandana’s wife, Ubhaya-Bharati, a renowned scholar in her own right, would be the referee and that the loser of the debate would become the disciple of the winner. After debating for many days, Mandana Misra lost and was about to become the disciple of Adi Sankara. However, Ubhaya-Bharati then challenged Adi Sankara to debate her, on the grounds that since she and her husband were one person upon being married, he would have to defeat both of them in order to win the debate.
Adi Sankara accepted her challenge. The debate went well for Adi Sankara until Ubhaya-Bharati began posing intricate questions on the science of erotica (well accepted, in the appropriate context, as a topic of sacred discourse and knowledge in Hinduism). If it was “considered unseemly” per traditional Hinduism for women to talk about sex. (Adi Sankara ended up satisfactorily answering the questions on eroticism and Ubhaya-Bharati accepted her defeat.) How?

Sankara took a few weeks leave to continue the debate. As a young sanyasi, he was not initiated anything in sexual mores. They were known only to the married. Therefore, Sankara performed a miracle. One of the kings in a kingdom died (no cause is given in the story). It meant that the soul left the body. Sankara knew about this and using his divine power moved his soul out of his own body and entered the body of the dead king.Queens and relatives rejoiced at the king coming alive. (We have no idea about the age of the dead king. Must be young.) Sankara with the king’s body indulged in all sorts of sexual acts and thus learned the essence of eroticism and sex.

There is more than one question rising out of this miracle episode in the life of Sankara. Although it was claimed that Sankara mastered all knowledge available at his time, was he not aware of the Kama sutra of Vatsayana much earlier to him?Kama sutra explained elaborately on all aspects of sexualities. Any one could have benefited from it without going through real experience in sexual activities. But that is what Sankara is said to have adopted. Before entering the dead body of the king, he had no knowledge as to what the king used to with his queens. How did he act with them? Since he had no idea of sex, as he was an ascetic, maintaining celibacy the behavior with the queens should have been strange. In turn, the queens would have sensed it and wondered about the dead king coming to life. Even today, faithful are scared of ghosts possessing people and then behaving strange. At those long past era not only the queens but also everyone else in the court would have taken the king as a ghost.

What is the moral sanctity on the part of Sankara to disguise as the king? Was it not cheating and appropriating other’s identity? His performance of sex with the queens might be considered as a kind of rape, even in those times. Devotees did not envisage their telling of miracle by Sankara kindle these quarries and they need to be answered.

K.N.Krishnan.

June/July 1999.

Parameswaran History

Matrubhumi Weekly (Malayalam) of 17-24 April 1999, carried an article said to be in response to an earlier article by writer Anand. This response is from a RSS “intellectual”. The article starts with saying that intellectuals (may be other than of RSS brand) get into a mess through their one sided thinking. Mr. P.Parameswaran is a well-known RSS scribe not known as a scholar in any branch of knowledge faculty. According to this scribe, the history of Indian National Struggle for Independence from British rule is that of Hindus alone. In his support, he wanted some of the extremists in the movement to be described, recognised and accepted as fore most fighters in behalf of Hindu. He makes a claim that the extremist past of the national movement to be taken back to the time of Pazhassi Raja and Veluthambi Dalawa. Here he conveniently omits to mention another contemporary Tipu Sultan who went down fighting the British domination. May be Tipu’s fight was not against British at all. This is a new reading of history that Pazhassi Raja and Veluthambi were fighting for Hindutva against British. Such reading of history is stock in trade with north Indian Hindutva historians. According to their reading both Swami Vivekananda and Maharshi Arabindo were Hindutva protagonists. They were advising and guiding the then extremists in Bengal. Today the Hindutva historian has appropriated all but few top national leaders for fighting for Hindutva. Really, there were few who spoke of Hindu past but never asked or worked for that. They all fought for a modern India. They have tried to appropriate the Mahatma himself to their side for his preaching Ram Rajya all his life. The Mahatma has clarified his position in every time that his Ram Rajya is not a Hindu Rajya but a regime of justice to all communities. The Hindu historian has done it in case of Dr. Ambedkar as well. Dr. Ambedkar in his days criticized and ridiculed Hinduism in his writings. While writing on the idea of Pakistan, Ambedkar raised a number of facts connected with Muslim rule in India from the past. It was part of his criticism of all kinds of fanatic ideologies being propagated in the name of nationalism. This Hindutva ideologue selected only those that are in tune with his own depiction of Muslim rule. The Hindutva vadi in him makes Parameswaran to claim that polytheism is a virtue in Hindu religion for every male god there is a female as well. This justifies the claim that in Hinduism there is sexual equality much the same way as in the present day feminist demand. He also claims that keeping in with the current socio-political developments and also to cultivate allies; Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and other smaller sects. He says that all these are not separate but branches of Hinduism itself. He will surely will not admit that at one point of time both Buddhism and Jainism were predominant in all over India. But both disappeared from such a position for convincing reasons still to be ascertained. Dr. Ambedkar re-asserted Buddhism as more progressive to Hinduism but not accepted by the communal forces. The Hindutva group organised violent protests against naming theNagpur University as Dr. Ambedkar University. Though the RSS itself may not be directly responsible, its associated outfits were leading the agitation.

When Parameswaran speaks of birth and fate of Arya Samajists and Hindu Mahasabhaists one might assume that the current RSS and its Parivar also may disappear from the main scene in a future date.

Parameswaran accepts with one condition that freedom of expression does not include freedom to convert from one religion to another. The arguments against conversion are that others i.e. the Semitics wanted to bring their uniformed thought and faith not allowing any dissent. He quotes from a Semitic source book. The logic is less convincing in the light of claims for superiority to Hinduism.

One would like to take note of and underline the explanations for Hindu gods keep more than one weapon in their hands, is to fight evil. Parameswaran says that there is no non-violent Hinduism. According to him, the Hindutva forces are for polytheism including all female gods, which he agrees to be paganism and pre-historic one. But let us look at the actual practice. The Hindus at least among the higher castes never accepted the SC/ST as part of Chaturvarna. They are branded as Panjama, the fifth caste not part of Hinduism. They are still kept as un-touchable in their homes and villages. Even the high castes do not allow any freedom for their women. Widows are not to be seen when one starts a journey from home. They are evil omen. Whoever fought against such practices were denounced as infidel. Polytheism itself is a sort of compromise on the part Brahmin authority; with different castes but not with Panjama. Otherwise, the authority of ones own god was the norm. Shiva for Shaivaites and Vishnu for Vaishnavas etc. it is only very late in history, rivalries between gods subsided and mutual admission was put in to practice. Even then, there were pagan gods not accepted in Hindu pantheon. Only recently the efforts at Hinduising pagan gods taken up by Sangha Parivar as part of Hinduising the Dalits and tribals.

Another point that the writer was making out is that the early freedom fighters were Hindus and they naturally adopted violence in their fight against imperialism. He cites Chaphekar brothers of Maharashtra to support his contention. The brothers wanted to establish a Hindu Rajya in India. He also maintained that by excluding Hindu extremists from the pantheon of freedom fighters, the post freedom governments were family forums, without explicitly naming Nehru family. He keeps hidden the fact the whole families of Nehru were eminent freedom fighters on their own and not depended on the family line. This includes Indira, Rajiv and today Sonia. All of them fought elections and got elected in spite of the denigrating propaganda against them. The communal elements did not get any representations for many years until the frenzy of Mandal commission verdict dividing people on different caste basis. The Vajapeyee government came to power in alliance with regional and caste based parties.

Parameswaran seems to think that while fight for freedom was that of Hindus the fruits of freedom i.e. political authority went to secularists, Christian and western minded. He has not yet made a charge that the Indian National Congress was not fighting for freedom but manipulating the fight for freedom carried by Hindutva.

According to him, nationalism in India is Hindu nationalism and is deferent from that of west. Such nonsense is talked about only to defend the RSS ideology. There are several studies that found and recognized the worst parts of Semitic religions that were adopted and internalized by the Hindu fundamentalists in their ideology and practice while mouthing spiritual thoughts of Vedantin.

One thing was clear from Parameswaran’s diatribe that given a chance, they will paint freedom struggle fought under the leadership of Indian National Congress, a combined force of all major and minor communities in India, with a saffron brush and make only Hindus as real heroes. In the process, Sardar Patel and many other original leaders of earliest struggles will be assimilated as Hindu fighters. As said earlier even Mahatma is being grafted to their side. Parameswaran is hinting at the possibility of Indira and Rajiv as well. The point made by him that there is an underlying Hindu nationalism based on oneness of Hindu society from pre-historic times; is not shared by other intelligent people. He claims that RSS like Hindu organisations are making efforts to recapture or revive that elusive Hindu nationalism, a solid rock designed in past history. The Muslim intelligentsia who at the beginning of Indian national movement demarcated themselves from Hindu in various ways finally culminated in the demand for separate country Pakistan for Muslims. Parameswaran is silent or hiding all other developments and asserts a one sided Hindu nationhood. This may in future make way for further division of the country based on region and caste majority.

It will be interesting to see any follow up of these arguments in the future issues of the magazine.

About a week earlier, Matrubhumi weekly carried another article by the same Parameswaran RSS ideologue. He critically viewed the works of non-Hindutva historians writing history of Kerala. He gleefully quoted some eminent historians saying further that Marxist approach in writing history of Kerala was a failure. Marxist method is not applicable to Kerala. The RSS man was advocating an alternative approach that is national and one with traditions. He identified that the current approach to history is the result of western influences in effect Christian one. According to this gentleman Marxism and secularism are the outgrowth of Christian and therefore not suitable to us in India and Kerala. But he failed to point out any tradition of keeping historical records in this land, much less about writing history of their own times. He in fact may be advocating concoction of a national Hindu history, as he understands the tradition. What is the national Hindu tradition in writing history? Can we formulate an accurate history from the available sources on our ancient literature, philosophy, Ayurveda etc.?

We have no records of any one of the Vedic heroes and composers except the legends. May be according to the BJP ideologue, we must learn history through Vedic and Upanishad stories, myths and Puranas and several Sankara Vijayams, Sthalapuranas connected with temples and pilgrim sites or pure hearsays. These will give our history unique and inimitable greatness as special Hindu race destined to lead the world in all aspects material and spiritual. The Hindutva super race is inventing history not just for us but also for the whole world.

(Somewhere I read that Ketumalam, one of the seven dvipas mentioned on Puranas, is the same Guatemala in Latin Americas. In another place, some revered Shastri is said to have advised the Brahmins residing inAmerica to specify in their Sankalpa, Crouncha Dvipa in place of Jambu Dvipa where India is situated. By the way, Crouncha Dvipa is supposed to be surrounded by milky ocean.)

Some of these like Parameswaran, maintained and continue to do so that all of mankind are originally Hindu, later converted to Judaism, Christianity and Islam etc. etc. Only in India, such mass conversions did not take place. The India or Bharat remains Hindu. Parameswaran did not voice his views on these. May be that he kept them in reserve for the real Hindu history to be prepared in due course of time. In his earlier article, he attributed to Christian, naming certain Hindu rites and traditions as pagan. He did not give his own view about what is really paganism and not forming part of Hindu tradition. There are groups called pagan in many places, in Africa, remote parts of other continents as well as in many islands in Pacific.

K.N.Krishnan.

June/July, 1999.

Arun Shourie & Co.

Arun Shourie and others of Hindu right quote chapter and verse from mughals sources in order to propagate the alleged atrocities perpetrated by its rulers on common Hindus, during their subjugating campaign and also on victory. The Hindu right ignores the atrocities committed the Rigvedic Indra and other gods on Asuras, Dasyus and Dasasas described the Vedic suktas. In the later case, the interpretation is something spiritual saying that those fights were between good and evil and has nothing in the way of physical extermination of people by Indra. There can be some kind of spiritual explanations to some mantras and suktas but not all mantras can be explained away. There are far too many mantras with only mundane and material meanings and explanations.

According to Hindutva spokespersons like Shourie in north and Parameswaran from Kerala, there is an unbroken tradition, which they claim to be Hindu times immemorial. Also according to them the Hindu civilization flowered from the time of creation and other known civilizations branched out later. The original is Hindu. In fact, they preach that it was Hindus who carried the civilization around the world at the first instant. The civilizations built up in the near east and Mediterranean basins prior to Judaism, Christianity are Hindu origin built with ideas and techniques barrowed from ancient Vedic India. One may go on propagating such fantastic histories and there will be people believing in those fantasies mostly in India and a few abroad as well. But there will be none among thinking minds who would accept them as history. If Hindu wants to propagate its own greatness, there will be other to emulate them in other countries denying the former.

Political scene in the country is lousy with the fact of the foreign origin of Sonia Gandhi being debated against her. The original source was Jayalalita the Amma of AIDMK at an earlier occasion. At that time, no one took note of it seriously. However, when the BJP and other Sangh Parivar took up the possibility of Sonia becoming India’s Prime Minister in the wake of the fall of BJP coalition at the centre, the matter was blown up. The idea that came through L.K.Advani has no meaning at all. Sonia is an Indian citizen under the provisions of the constitution of India elected to Parliament. She has a right to be in any position in our democracy. But it was not her Italian origin that was motive behind the campaign to denigrate Sonia. The BJP and the Parivar were whipping up a false national sentiment among sections of public out of fear of the Congress under Sonia will be able to assemble and perform better in the coming elections. They are projecting the fact of foreign birth by itself makes Sonia heading a government ipso-facto as foreign rule. If the question is that geographical factor of ones birth govern citizenship, and then a number of the members of the Parivar will be outsiders. L.K.Advani and many others in top leadership of BJP are not born in the present geographic borders of India. This might include the veteran CPM leader and Chief Minister of West Bengal who happened to be born in Bengla Desh. The Sangh Parivar never raised this question of geographical origin in any of their cases. They never questioned those holding high offices in governments. The only answer will be that they are members of the majority religion in undivided India. It all shows that for them the place of birth is not as important as the religion to which one is born. In fact the Sangh Parivar tried to project Christian origin of Sonia a little earlier and charged her as doing all things at the behest of Pope who would like to see India turned to Catholic. They also found a conspiracy in Sonia becoming the President of Indian National Congress. The anti-Christian violence is projected in the international media in her support. It was well understood fact that since BJP and other communal elements has no argument against a Congress upswing and hence irrelevant and fanatical issues were brought were brought forward. Also when it was found that there were some real chances of Congress taking over the government under the leadership of Sonia Gandhi the communal and other forces aligned, found it necessary to rake up an emotional and sentimental issues before the people and therefore took up the issue of foreign born against Sonia Gandhi. They also started saying that the constitution has to be amended, to prevent a citizen of India born in a foreign soil from holding seats of power. It is only a perverted mind to claim that people born in foreign land but citizens are to be barred from holding any office. It could more justifiable to bar all foreigners to become Indian citizen at any time of their life. There is only one more step to deny a position of authority to minorities. Such discriminations among Indian citizens are invitation to the ones who are trying to bring a Nazi type dictatorship based on religious nationalism. That day may not be far. The split in the Congress over Sonia Gandhi for her foreign origin or birth will buttress the BJP obscurantism in the coming elections. Sharad Pawar and his supporters in the congress will not only loss their battle but also their status as national party. The issue raised by Pawar & Co. was already articulated by BJP thus appropriating to their advantage. If patriotism is to be measured from the stand of cultural nationalism, then BJP is the one who will be in a position to succeed with it. Sangma and others has to be satisfied to be in the periphery. All the arguments advanced to assert the unique cultural heritage and prestige by Sharad Pawar, Sangma, Anwar and their supporters are nothing but those same basic tenets of the communalist forces represented by BJP and Parivar. The Parivar opposed and tried to scuttle the declaration of year 2000 as the year of Christ. They opposed and obstructed te celebration of 200 years of Tipu Sultan at Mysore. Upto yester years they were propagating against mother Theresa. At each and every locality of the country the Sangh Parivar raised local separatist identities between religious communities, where such issues are readily available. If not they start manufacturing such history to their liking as it happened a few years back in the name of Haji Malang a memorial for a Sufi saint at a hillock in Kalyan.

Two recent developments have gone to buttress the stand of the Parivar and therefore favoring BJP. The first was the religious cultural identity of citizenship as against the foreign-born one such as Sonia Gandhi. A significant section in the Congress Party just aped those arguments to further their own narrow political ends. The second is the incursion of Pakistani trained terrorists cross the line of control in Kashmir. To whip up patriotism in the name of security and danger from foreign invasion. Now Sonia a foreign origin one.

K.N.Krishnan.

May 1999.

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2011.

TO ALL OUR DEAR & NEAR ONES

WISH YOU A HAPPY NEW YEAR. LET PROSPERITY KNOCK AT YOUR HOMES.

Annam & Krishnan Family.