Posts Tagged ‘caste’

Dr B.R. Ambedkar International Conference 2017 – Quest for Equity  – Reclaiming Social Justice, Revisiting Ambedkar – Interpretation of case laws involving reservation to SCs under the Presidential Order 1950 – Can Christians and Muslims get SC status? (5)

August 4, 2017

 

Dr B.R. Ambedkar International Conference 2017 – Quest for Equity  – Reclaiming Social Justice, Revisiting Ambedkar – Interpretation of case laws involving reservation to SCs under the Presidential Order 1950 – Can Christians and Muslims get SC status? (5)

Soosai vs UOI

What Soosai vs UOI judgment says: Castes of Hindu religion identified on ‘untouchability’ related parameters were already scheduled under the 1936 Order. The validity of the order was considered by the Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 9596/83 in the case of Soosai Vs The Union of India and Others (AIR 1986 SC 733). In para 7 of the judgment the Court had observed that “Now it cannot be disputed that the Caste system is a feature of the Hindu social structure. It is a social phenomenon peculiar to Hindu society. The Apex Court in para 8 of the judgment thus, observed that, “it is therefore, not possible to say that President acted arbitrarily in the exercise of his judgment in enacting paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.” This is also sustained by the debate in Constituent Assembly which recognised “That the Scheduled Castes were a backward section of the society who were handicapped by the practice of untouchability” and that “This evil practice of untouchability was not recognised by any other religion” i.e. other than Hindu. It is apparent that the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 relates to castes of Hindu religion. It only relates to the Castes discriminated within the Hindu religious system. The Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 is thus not discriminatory or violative of Articles 14, 15, 16 & 25 of the Constitution nor is it ultra vires of the Constitution as it provides for a special category i.e. the Scheduled Castes who have been given a special status under the Constitution. The Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 is thus neither unconstitutional nor ultra-vires of the Constitution nor it is violative of any fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution. Here, the Christians never appealed or filed any revision petition against this order, but kept quite. At Vatican level, they had many issues and problems, as the Bishops and Cardinals have been following race or caste hierarchical structure. So far, no Black has been elected for the post of Pope, in spite of their claims.

The Bull of Pope Gregory XV, Bulla Romanae Sedis Antistitis, dated 31 January 1623

Christianity, caste and untouchability [1]: Christianity, caste and untouchability: In spite of the tall claims made by the Christians, the caste, racism, untouchability and other factors have been there in Christianity. The hundreds of denominations in different countries based on theology, practices, tribes etc., are the direct proof. Pope Gregory XV published a bull sanctioning caste regulations in the Christian Churches of India. Even the U. N. Commission of Inquiry (1953) into the racial situation in South Africa reported the Biblical background of inspiration for them to adopt “Apartheid” or “Christian caste system” with untouchability [Genesis. 9.25, Joshua. 9.21, 23 & 27]. Untouchability also finds its way to Bible [Joshua. 9.19]. In Ireland, there are separate streets for Roman Catholics and Protestants, as each group treatsothers “untouchables”. Slavery has been a divine approved system [Levi. 25: 44-46; Timothy. 6.11]. Prasadam offered to Jehovah should not be eaten by others [Exo.12:43]. They should not touch things holy to him or offer sacrifice [Levi. 22:25]. Bible should not be taught to others [Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 5, p.623; Exo.27:33]. They cannot offer incense [Numbers.16: 40]. They should not approach the holy tabernacle i.e, the “Garba Griha” / Sanctum Sanctorum [Numbers 1.51]. The dishonest Christians  suppress everything and try to fool the gullible SCs and STs projecting that their religion saves them. they could not save their own souls of SCs /STs with dubious methods. There are A to Z Churches with denominations (castes) running into more than 3000 depending upon the nation, language, ethnicity, culture, civilization and other factors. The matrimonial columns appearing in the newspapers and periodicals expose their hypocrisy, as the bride / groom are hunted only on the basis of “caste” and not on the “Christ”!  Crores of Rupees flow into India from abroad to convert India to Christianity. World Christian Organizations never hide this plan. After the Neogi Commission Report, they have only changed their tactics in routing the money. Political pressure at national and international levels is applied through different channels to pump money in. only 30-40% is actually spent under the guise of charity, service, and liberation etc., whereas, 60-70% is adjusted in their manipulated accounts duly certified. They have formed their own high castes and they do not want to share profits with the new converts. They treat them just as “natives” counting numbers and sending statistical figures to parent organizations.

the-constitution-scheduled-castes-order-1950

Theologies floated to suppress the facts: Thus, the discrimination persists and percolates to bottom reaching new complications and crating new social tensions. Therefore, to divert the issue, as decided by the World Council of Churches and other organizations, they set up different “research groups” to shift the blame to Hinduism and escape. After politicizing, they have tried to internationalize the issue. Whoever Indian writer, journalist or “scholar”, who supports this theory, is received aboard usually USA or Germany and taken care of.  “Dalit Theology” is the superior theology masqueraded in mere theoretical egalitarianism to fool “Dalits” projecting Jesus as the Super Star Saviour and Christianity to solve all their social problems, suppressing all cold facts, historical truths and the past tract record of Christianity. “Liberation Theology” is nothing but “Christian Communism” with God offered in different garb mainly advocating violence. It advocates violence, terrorism and anti-national activities in a country where it is preached. After the death of Communism and exposure of their deadly acts in Latin American countries, they have turned their attention to “Dalit Theology”.

Char with the speakers

Pope Gregory XV issued a Bull authorizing Caste[2]: The Pope and the Church have been playing dual roles  as for as India is concerned. Definitely, what the Pope said and what has been reported by Associated Press differs, as AP has tried to interpret the Pope, as if he has recommended that “Christians must reject divisions based on caste” (The Hindu Nov.18, p.12). The Pope Gregory XV (1621-23) has definitely accepted the caste. The Bull of Pope Gregory XV, “Bulla Romanae Sedis Antistitis”, dated 31 January 1623, accedes to the requests of the missionaries to accommodate themselves to certain caste practices and usages of the new converts. Why not then the present Pope annul the Papal Bull issued, instead of recollecting what he had said in 1986. In fact, after his visit, there had been so many “caste problems and issues” within the Indian Church. The “Dalit Christian problem” arose phenomenally. The Supreme Court itself pronounced that if the Church wants reservation based on untouchability and caste, such factors of existence in Christianity should be proven (Soosai vs UOI – AIR 1986). Then, started the >research of Athony Raj, SJ with funds to prove that untouchability and Caste system were there in Christianity and practiced even today.

Dalit Christians demand SC status Indian Express cutting

Whether Muslims can get SC status by converting back to Hindu religion?: A Muslim from audience asked, “I wanted to convert back to Hindu religion and whether I could get SC status, as the Supreme Court pronounced in some cases, that a converted SC-Christian could get back, SC-status, when their SC members accepted him back as his member again. In the same way, if a SC-Muslim wanted to convert back to Hindu religion, whether he could get back SC-status”. Actually, these cases pertain to election candidates, where Christians converts contested elections at reserved constituencies, claiming that they were SCs. When, this was challenged at the courts, the Christians got certificates to the effect that they were Hindu SCs. So the courts pronounced that, as candidate converted back to Hindu religion and got a certificate, documentary evidence to that effect, he was considered as “Hindu”. It is not known as to how the present-day Muslims, who want to claim back their SC-status by converting back, would prove their caste identity.  Ironically, most of them or some of them would also claim that they were not the converted categories from India, but, directly descended from the forefathers, who were of Arabic tribal origins [Ansaris, Mujahideen, and others]. If they were really interested in converting back, why then criticize “Gharwapasi”?

KVR with the speakers

Origin of Caste – the Chairman spoke and wound up the session: The second paper was presented by Bhup Singh Gaur on the approach of Harijans / SCs by Gandhi and Ambedkar. He interpreted that both leaders worked for the upliftment and welfare of the people in their own way. He pointed out that Amedkar was the only leader who attended all the three RTCs and consistently fighting for the rights of Depressed Castes. The third paper, “Dalit – A legal Perspective” was presented by S. Balakrishna Hedge.  His paper was almost answering the issue raised by Tanweer Fazal. Finally, the chair of Prof Chandrama Kanagali presented her paper about the origin of caste in India. She pointed out that the origins of the term ‘caste’ are attributed to the Spanish and Portuguese casta, which, according to the John Minsheu‘s Spanish dictionary (1599), means “race, lineage, or breed”. When the Spanish colonized the New World, they used the word to mean a “clan or lineage.” However, it was the Portuguese who employed casta in the primary modern sense when they applied it to the thousands of endogamous, hereditary Indian social groups they encountered upon their arrival in India in 1498. The use of the spelling “caste,” with this latter meaning, is first attested to in English in 1613.

dalit-word-is-unconstitutional-scheduled-caste-commission

The word “Dalit” is neither constitutional nor legal: The National Commission for Scheduled Castes has asked the state governments not to use the word ‘Dalit” in official documents, saying the term was “unconstitutional”. The commission has stated that sometimes the word ‘Dalit” is used as a substitute for Scheduled Caste in official documents, sources in State Tribal Department said in Raipur. After consultation with the legal department, the commission said the ‘Dalit” word is neither constitutional nor the word has been mentioned in the current laws. Rather ‘Scheduled Caste” is the appropriate and notified word as per the Article 341 of the Constitution, it said in a letter sent to all states. The writers and researchers do not care even about this and continue to mention the word for ulterior motive.

© Vedaprakash

04-08-2017

[1] This I wrote in 2007. https://groups.google.com/forum/ – !topic/talk.politics.misc/ZoUU1QBaBAI

[2] My letter to “The Hindu” wriiten in 2003. http://hindooraashtrcom.fatcow.com/pdf/Caste-in-Christianity-Papal-Bull.pdf

Advertisements

Dr B.R. Ambedkar International Conference 2017 – Quest for Equity  – Reclaiming Social Justice, Revisiting Ambedkar – Interpretation of case laws involving reservation to SCs under the Presidential Order 1950 – (4)

August 4, 2017

Dr B.R. Ambedkar International Conference 2017 – Quest for Equity  – Reclaiming Social Justice, Revisiting Ambedkar – Interpretation of case laws involving reservation to SCs under the Presidential Order 1950 – (4)

Prof Chandrama Kanagali

Tanweer Fazal presented a paper on “Caste and conversion Gharwapasi in the Indian Courts”: Tanweer Fazal[1] presented his paper in Room No.B1 on 23rd July [Sunday] morning session held between 9.30 to 11.00 am under the chair of Prof Chandrama Kanagali. The Co-speakers were Bhup Singh Gaur and Balakrishna Hegde. He started his presentation obviously with confusion of “SC” as he started his PPT, without specifically telling as to whether it was “Scheduled Caste” or “Supreme Court” and it was pointed out by K. V. Ramakrishna Rao[2], another speaker from the audience. He corrected himself and proceeded to mention the following cases:

  1. Michael vs Venkateswaran, 1951.
  2. Ganapat vs Returning Officer, 1974.
  3. Anbalagan vs B. Devarajan and Ors, 1983,

Without giving citation of the case laws and quoting from the judgments, he was arguing and interpreting that the courts have been following the “Gharvapasi” concept helping the Hindutwa forces for Christians converting back to Hindu religion to get SC-benefits back.  He could not explain properly about the case laws and the exigencies for the amendment of the Presidential Order in 1956 and 1990 include converted Skihs and Neo-Buddhists under SC category. He also referred to K. P. Manu case, but without giving the case law reference and relevant judgment details. He went on repeating the same point that the Court was acting at the behest of the government giving in such judgments helping the “Gharvapasi” programme. Of course, he was confusing this with Muslims also, as if they were also involved in such court cases.

Tanweer Fazal, JNU

Christians by converting back to Hindu religion can claim back SC status: Then, he pointed out as to how in the case of K. P. Manu, the Court held that he could be back to Ezhawa community, provided they accepted him their community-member[3]. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that one Shri S. Sreekumar Menon invoked the jurisdiction of the Scrutiny Committee under Section 11(3) of the Act challenging the grant of caste certificate, namely, Hindu Pulaya to the appellant on the ground that the said certificate had been obtained by him on misrepresentation, and that apart the concerned authority had issued the caste certificate in total transgression of law. The Committee conducted an enquiry and eventually by its order dated 4th February, 2006 had returned a finding that the appellant was erroneously issued a caste certificate inasmuch as he was not of Hindu origin and hence, could not have been conferred the benefit of the caste status. It is not in dispute that the great grandfather of the appellant belonged to Hindu Pulaya Community. His son Chothi embraced Christianity and accepted a new name, that is, Varghese who married Mariam who originally belonged to Hindu Ezhava community and later on converted to Christianity. In the wedlock three sons, namely, Varghese, Yohannan and Paulose were born. The father of the appellant, Paulose, got married to Kunjamma who was a Christian. The appellant who was born on 03.01.1960 sometime in the year 1984 at the age of 24 converted himself to Hindu religion and changed his name to that of K.P. Manu. On the basis of the conversion he applied for a caste certificate to Akhila Bharata Ayyappa Seva Sangham. Be it stated, the appellant after conversion had obtained a certificate from the concerned community on 5th February, 1984. Eventually, the Tehsildar who was authorised to issue the caste certificate had issued the necessary caste certificate. The Court had dealt with the three important questions.

  • whether on conversion and at what stage a person born to Christian parents can, after reconversion to the Hindu religion, be eligible to claim the benefit of his original caste;
  • whether after his eligibility is accepted and his original community on a collective basis takes him within its fold, he still can be denied the benefit; and
  • that who should be the authority to opine that he has been following the traditions and customs of a particular caste or not.

Tanweer Fazal, Bhup Sigh, Balakrishna Hegde - The paper presenters

As the Pulaya Community accepted him as their member, he is Hindu only: The Court decided as follows – “In the instant case, the appellant got married to a Christian lady and that has been held against him. It has also been opined that he could not produce any evidence to show that he has been accepted by the community for leading the life of a Hindu. As far as the marriage and leading of Hindu life are concerned, we are of the convinced opinion that, in the instant case, it really cannot be allowed to make any difference. The community which is a recognised organisation by the State Government, has granted the certificate in categorical terms in favour of the appellant. It is the community which has the final say as far as acceptance is concerned, for it accepts the person, on reconversion, and takes him within its fold. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that the appellant after reconversion had come within the fold of the community and thereby became a member of the scheduled caste. Had the community expelled him the matter would have been different. The acceptance is in continuum. Ergo, the reasonings ascribed by the Scrutiny Committee which have been concurred with by the High Court are wholly unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the High Court, findings of the Scrutiny Committee and the orders passed by the State Government and the second respondent are set aside. The appellant shall be reinstated in service forthwith with all the benefits relating to seniority and his caste, and shall also be paid backwages…..”

Tanweer Fazal, Bhup Sigh, Balakrishna Hegde - audience1

Why Tanweer Fazal was suppressing the “Soosai v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 733 judgment”?: During his presentation, there were many factual mistakes in interpreting the court cases. First, he was not mentioning the court case references, but, when K. V. Ramakrishna Rao insisted him to mention the case specifically in the context, he was evidently evading and started making general remarks. He coolly and purposely avoided mentioning “Soosai v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 733 judgment”, where, the Court held that SC under the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 means only Hindu. This has been practice of many writers and researchers not to mention this judgment, as it is not favourable to them. He was obviously mumbled and fumbled without giving any answer. The Chair person also  pointed out and advised him to be specific. Incidentally, a similar paper is already published in EPW and available in the internet[4]. Now, let us discuss the case laws for understanding.

Tanweer Fazal, Bhup Sigh, Balakrishna Hegde - The paper presenters.close view

Michael vs Venkateswaran, 1951 – AIR 1952 Mad 474, (1952) 1 MLJ 239: The first case[5], where a SC was converted to Christian, thus losing his Hindu status, he was barred from contesting reserved constituency, is as follows: “The petitioner alleges that he is a member of the Paraiyan caste which is item 64 in Part V of the Schedule to the Scheduled Castes Order. Admittedly, he is a convert to Christianity. He therefore would be a person professing a religion different from Hinduism and therefore under paragraph 3 of the Scheduled Castes Order would be deemed not to be a member of a scheduled caste. He desires to stand as a candidate for a seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes and he can do so only If he is deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. As the aforesaid provision prevents him from so standing, he has filed the above application for adequate relief from this Court.” But the Court held that “the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order is valid and within the powers of the President, the petition is therefore dismissed”.

Tanweer Fazal, Bhup Sigh, Balakrishna Hegde - audience

Ganpat vs Returning Officer & Ors on 4 December, 1974 – 1975 AIR 420: The second case[6] is about contesting for a seat in Nagpur by a SC candidate after converting to Buddhism, thus, losing their Hindu status. The Court held that, “We would, therefore, in agreement with the High Court hold that the respondents-2, 6 and 9 are not Buddhists but continue to be members of the Scheduled Castes”, but also pointing out, “The attempt of persons who have changed their religion from Hinduism to Buddhism, who still claim the concessions and facilities intended for Hindus only shows that otherwise these persons might get a vested interest in continuing to be members of the Scheduled Castes. In course of time vested interests are created in continuing to be members of Schduled Castes as in continuing to be members of Backward Classes. It is from the point of view of discouraging that tendency that the provision of the Scheduled Castes Order seems to be a proper one.”

Tanweer Fazal, Bhup Sigh, Balakrishna Hegde - with KVR

Anbalagan vs B. Devarajan & Ors on 5 December, 1983 – 1984 AIR 411: In the third case[7], one Devarajan was challenged that he was Christian and therefore, he could not claim SC status, but, it was proved that he “……………had long since reverted to Hinduism and to the Adi Dravida caste. There is not a scrap of acceptable evidence to show that he ever professed Christianity after he came of age. On the other hand, every bit of evidence in the case shows that from his childhood, he was always practising Hindism and was treated by everyone concerned as an Adi Dravidh. There is then the outstanding circumstance that the voters of the Rasipuram Parliamentary Constituency reserved for the Scheduled Castes accepted his candidature for the reserved seat and elected him to the Lok Sabha twice. We have no doubt whatsoever that at all relevant times, he was a Hindu Adi Dravida and professed no religion other than Hinduism. The case was rightly decided by the Election Tribunal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.”

© Vedaprakash

04-08-2017

Balakrishna Hegde presenting his paper

[1] Dr. Tanweer Fazal is Associate Professor at the Nelson Mandela Centre, JMI, New Delhi, Email: fazaltanweer@yahoo.co.in, Phone: 91-9968822925 (M); http://www.jnu.ac.in/sss/csss/images/Tanwer-Fazal/CV Tanweer Fazal.pdf

[2] He has been independent researcher and presented a paper, “Nation” as approached by Jinna, Periyar and Ambedkar during their historical meeting held in 1940,  in another session.

[3] Supreme Court of India – K.P. Manu,Malabar Cements Ltd vs Chairman,Scrutiny Commt … on 26 February, 2015 arising out of CIVIL APPEAL No. 7065 OF 2008; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/98912765/

[4]https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Padmanabh_Samarendra/publication/302899845_Religion_Caste_and_Conversion_Membership_of_a_Scheduled_Caste_and_Judicial_Deliberations%27_Economic_and_Political_Weekly_li4_2016_pp_38-48/links/5732d20f08ae9f741b2362c4/Religion-Caste-and-Conversion-Membership-of-a-Scheduled-Caste-and-Judicial-Deliberations-Economic-and-Political-Weekly-li4-2016-pp-38-48.pdf?origin=publication_detail

[5] Madras High Court – G. Michael vs Mr. S. Venkateswaran, Additional … on 6 November, 1951

Equivalent citations: AIR 1952 Mad 474, (1952) 1 MLJ 239; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/496218/

[6] Supreme Court of India – Ganpat vs Returning Officer & Ors on 4 December, 1974; Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 420, 1975 SCR (2) 923; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/83094/

[7]Supreme Court of India – S. Anbalagan vs B. Devarajan & Ors on 5 December, 1983; Equivalent citations: 1984 AIR 411, 1984 SCR (1) 973;   https://indiankanoon.org/doc/254650/

Dr B.R. Ambedkar International Conference 2017 – Quest for Equity  – Reclaiming Social Justice, Revisiting Ambedkar (3)

July 28, 2017

Dr B.R. Ambedkar International Conference 2017 – Quest for Equity  – Reclaiming Social Justice, Revisiting Ambedkar (3)

K Raju and Bhalachandra Mungekar

The second day [22-07-2017] proceedings: The security was tight as before and the delegates / speakers had pass through separate entrance. The first plenary session was chaired by K. Raju and there were three speakers – Lord Bhiku Parekh, S. K. Thorat and Samuel Myers between 9.30 to 11.00 am at the main auditorium.

Parik speaking 22-07-2017

What Lord Bhiku spoke: Parekh Like how Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the nation, was just not a Baniya, the mercantile caste into which he was born, B.R. Ambedkar was not just a Dalit, but a national leader and a nationalist, noted political scholar Bhikhu Parekh has said. “Like Mahatma Gandhi was not just a Baniya, Rabindranath Tagore was not just a Bengali, Dr. Ambedkar was not just a spokesperson of Dalits. He was an Indian and a nationalist,” said Parekh, while delivering a lecture on the second day of the three-day international conference on B.R. Ambedkar, sponsored by the Congress-ruled Karnataka government here on Saturday [22-07-2017][1]. Recently BJP president Amit Shah’s statement calling Mahatma Gandhi a “Chatur Baniya” drew flak from scholars across the country. Parekh, an acclaimed author of several books on politics and political theory, said that by calling Ambedkar a Dalit leader and a spokesperson, we were reducing the significance of his contribution to the nation[2].

How India became “Republic”, though Nehru opposed: “We have to revisit Ambedkar to reclaim justice” to the marginalised sections of society, he added. Noting that Ambedkar fought for social and economic democracy, he took on Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Vallabhai Patel to ensure social and economic justice to the downtrodden and marginalised sections of society. The father of the Indian Constitution fought for inclusion of the word “Republic” in the preamble of the Constitution. For Ambedkar, democracy confined only to political rights, while the “Republic” guaranteed political, economic, and social rights. He recollected about the condition of India soon after Independence. He said that at the time of framing the Constitution, Jawaharlal Nehru did not include the word ‘Republic’ in the first draft[3]. When asked, Nehru said that the word ‘Democracy had included Republic’. In the second draft, Republic was included while the word Democracy was not[4].

Ambedkar and Jewish people

What Ambedkar told about Jews: Dr Ambedkar was interviewed by Glora Becher, Council of Israel in Bombay. His views were published in “Praja bandhu” and then, included in his complete works[5]. “I believe that just as there was a land of promise for the Jews, so the Depressed Classes must be destined to have their land of promise. I trust that just as the Jews reached their land of promise, so will be the Depressed Classes in the end reach their land of promise.”….“I see in the present day condition of the Depressed Classes of India a parallel to the Jews in their captivity in Egypt. In Moses I see a leader whose infinite love for his people has given undaunted courage to face hardships and bear calumny.”…………“I confess that if any thing sustains me in my efforts to emancipate the Depressed Classes, it is the story of Moses undertaking the thankless but noble task of leading Jews out of their captivity.”……..It is only natural that the Jewish people have always looked at Dr. Ambedkar and his life’s work with absolute admiration. His struggle for the weakest sector of society has found an echo in the hearts of those who for many hundreds of years since their expulsion from their “Promised land”—Israel—were suffering from discrimination and persecution just becasue of being different from the majority around. We in Israel are till today proud of Dr. Ambedkar’s support in our struggle for rebuilding our national home in Israel. (Courtesy : News from Israel)[6].”

S K Thorat speaks

Separate settlements for SCs and they should migrate there – S. K. Thorat: Former UGC chairman and present ICSSR chairman S.K. Thorat noted that a large number of Dalit graduates remained unemployed owing to withdrawal of the State following liberal economic policies. He said privatisation of public sector enterprises and contracting out services to the private in the public and government sectors led to the erosion of reservation of jobs to the Scheduled Castes. Reservation had “eroded from the backdoor” by contracting out services. Unemployment was 13 to 14% among Dalits, he said. Under the guise of Liberalization-Privatization-Globalization, reservation is denied to SCs. Therefore, the reservation policy should be like that of Ireland. Though, the Untouchability Act was amended in 1950, 1985 and 2010, the violations are not booked, action taken and punished. To overcome such discrimination, separate settlements should be provided to them and they should migrate to such places.

Samuel Myers speaks

Samuel Myers’s comparison of the Dalits and the blacks: Samuel Myers tried to compare the discrimination acting against the Dallits and the blacks under market and non-market factors. The market factors are identified as  like earnings, employment, housing, education, opportunities, credit, lending and access to wealth. The non-market factors are – sexual assault, victims of hate crimes, …. Some of the audience questioned such comparison, as the controlling factors of the two groups have been totally different, operating at various levels.

Prof G Hargopal

Afternoon plenary session: The afternoon session 2 to 3.30 pm was chaired by the Social scientist G. Haragopal, professor at the National Law School of India University, and the speakers were –

  1. Dalit intellectual Anand Teltumbde[7].
  2. Bronislaw Czarnocha[8]
  3. Marxist economist Prof. Prabhat Patnaik
  4. Hargopal said 2019 would be a critical point in the country’s history, with the Constitution of India “at stake”[9]. “The Congress should look at the growing inequalities in income; it is a matter of concern. India’s richest 1% holds about 58% of the country’s wealth and this phenomenon has only increased under the Modi regime. The Congress should start talking about minimizing inequalities in income as wealth should sub-serve the common good.” Haragopal pointed out how the BJP government has become the favourite of global capitalists[10]. He said the spread of fascism was turning out to be a threat to the Indian Constitution. “The country will reach a critical point in 2019 (when parliamentary polls are scheduled) and we have to be cautious. The minorities are suffering from insecurity and the Congress has a responsibility to protect the Constitution.”

Ambedkar activist - Anand Teltumbde

Anand Teltumbde observed: What he noted…………that the country was living in “de facto fascism” and de jure fascism was just two or three years away. while wealth in the hands of the country’s richest 1% had grown from 53% to 58% after Modi took over and this development is a pointer to the fact that Dalits are at the receiving end. “The ruling classes have been fooling all and there is massive inequality in the country. The VVIP syndrome keeps mocking at the common man and social activists have no space as they are imprisoned or attacked. The concepts of equality, liberty and fraternity have remained mere rhetoric and the poor continue to suffer.” Teltumbde said the Congress has to transform itself with the focus on Ambedkar and fight the Hindutva juggernaut to stop de jure fascism from becoming a reality in the country.

Prof Prabhat Patnaik

Prabhat Patnaik – says openly in 2019 Modi should be defeated: Responding to a statement by former MP Balchandra Mungekar that progressive forces needed to unite with the Congress in 2019, Prabhat Patnaik said[11]: “We are ready to align with the Congress if the Congress also reforms itself.” “With neo-liberalism reaching a dead-end under the Modi regime, a counter-revolution is staring at us. A new vision of India is required and it is important to think of giving economic rights to the people along with political rights.” Patnaik outlined the economic rights as[12]: right to food, right to employment, right to free healthcare, right to quality education and right to free pension for elderly and the disabled. The total cost for providing these rights will be not more than 10% of the Gross Domestic Product, he said, adding: “Through this, we can carry forward the notion of development as envisioned by Ambedkar.”

© Vedaprakash

28-07-2017

Ambedkar conference - Bangalore- Blue

[1] The Hindu, Ambedkar not a Dali icon, but a national leader, Nagesh Prabhu, Bengaluru, July 22, 2017 23:39 IST; Updated: July 22, 2017 23:39 IST.

[2] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/ambedkar-not-just-a-dalit-icon-but-a-national-leader/article19333852.ece

[3] Indian Express, Dalits must reclaim their human dignity: Lord Parekh, By Express News Service  |   Published: 23rd July 2017 02:11 AM  |  Last Updated: 23rd July 2017 12:06 PM

[4] http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/bengaluru/2017/jul/23/dalits-must-reclaim-their-human-dignity-lord-parekh-1632387.html

[5]Dr Ambedkar,  Dr Ambedkar aand the Jewish People, Chapter.31, pp.342-344, Vol.17, 2003 edition.

[6] Praja bandhu, dated 30th December 1991.

[7] Anand Teltumbde is a management professional, writer, civil rights activist, and political analyst. He has authored many books (translated widely in most Indian languages) on various issues relating to Peoples’ movement with particular emphasis on Left and Dalits and is a noted scholar on the subject. He has extensively written in English and Marathi in popular newspapers and magazines commenting on contemporary issues. He is a regular contributor to magazines like Outlook India, Tehelka Mainstream, Seminar, Frontier, and Economic & Political Weekly in which he writes a regular column ‘Margin Speak’.

[8] Bronislaw Czarnocha interest in Bisociative Revolution started in 1982 while analyzing the process of Revolution of Solidarity, when the bisociativity of that revolution became apparent as the simultaneous class struggle of the workers and the national liberation movement spearheaded by the intellectuals of the movement.His interest in the Dalit struggles for annihilation of the cast arose through 8 years of collaboration with the Arunthathiyars of Tamil Nadu where he saw the divide between the Marxist left and the Dalits directly on the ground. The tragedy of the Rohith Vermula in 2016 and the results of American elections the same year motivated him to undertake full process of exploration and formulation of the principle of Bisociative revolution.

[9] The Hindu, Scholars call for unity against ‘Hindutva juggernaut’, STAFF REPORTER, BENGALURU, JULY 23, 2017 23:40 IST; UPDATED: JULY 23, 2017 23:40 ISTUPDATED: JULY 23, 2017 23:40 IST

[10] Times of India, Revisit Ambedkar to stop fascism from becoming reality: Analyst, Rakesh Prakash| Jul 24, 2017, 06:19 AM IST.

[11] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/scholars-call-for-unity-against-hindutva-juggernaut/article19337978.ece

[12] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/revisit-ambedkar-to-stop-fascism-from-becoming-reality-analyst/articleshow/59730783.cms

Ideological racism, linguistic fascism and negationism among the Indian politicians – Baahubali becomes touching stone overcoming caste interpretation also!

April 21, 2017

Ideological racism, linguistic fascism and negationism among the Indian politicians  – Baahubali becomes touching stone overcoming caste interpretation also!

Kannada activists against Sathyaraj

Business motive attributed to the controversy: Praveen Shetty, the president of the KRV, was quoted in The News Minute[1] as saying “Why are directors [sic] pleading with the film chamber and senior actors in Karnataka? He had called us dogs during the Cauvery issue. We want a public apology from Sathyaraj, only then will the film be allowed to release in Karnataka.”[2] A few months ago, Baahubali 2 became the hottest film in the Karnataka trade, and many tried to procure it. But the producers of the film could not get the price that they were asking[3]. This led to a lot of jealousy and rivalry in the local trade, which may have led to raking up a 10-year old issue, which nobody imagined. Whether, the opposition has linguistic chauvinism, financial intricacies and business rivalry or otherwise, the hidden truth cannot be brushed aside. Now the film is going to be directly marketed in Karnataka by Arka Media, the producers, via NM Entertainment Sudhir. Meanwhile hectic parleys are going on to sort out the issue over the ban, which has snowballed into a political row[4].

Kattappa kiiled Baahubali

The actor Sathyaraj and his political role: There has been a lot of furore over the release of “Baahubali: The Conclusion” in Karnataka (scheduled for April 28, 2017), based on certain statements made by Tamil actor Sathyaraj during the Cauvery water crisis[5]. Sathyaraj plays Kattappa, a pivotal character, in the two-part film[6]. Producer Prasad Devineni from Arka Media Works tells us, “We plan on coming to Bengaluru soon to interact with fans and thank them for the support. We also want to appeal to the protesting organizations to support us when we are in the city.” The involvement of actors in the social and political issues has turned into a new twist in this way, affecting the release of a film. Perhaps, the cine-world has to learn that their members should restrict their polemics within the studios and sets and they cannot go beyond such limits enter into other areas to give discourses. There have been actors, who want to become politicians have been playing sage diplomatically avoiding controversies, but, Sathyaraj has been of different kind. Baahubali might have made him national or even international actor known to many, but, once his background is known, the business partners may not be comfortable with his extreme views and ideology.

Satyuaraj speech - Kannadigas opposed

Sathyaraj, Nagaraj and Baaahubali: Director S S Rajamouli sought to distance himself and his Baahubali 2 team from comments allegedly made by actor Sathyaraj that have led to a protest against the film’s release in Karnataka[7]. Rajamouli said the filmmakers were in no way related to the remarks made by Sathyaraj. “The producer and I want to clarify on the issue… The comments must have pained some of you but we don’t have any relation to it. Those were (his) personal comments and were made some nine years ago,” the director said in a video message on his official Twitter page. The controversy broke out after a video in which Sathyaraj allegedly made “derogatory” comments against Kannada activists went viral[8]. What Sathyaraj spoke might be nine years ago, but, Nagaraj has made it current by responding point by point. However, his speech has no takers, as every one, who knows about Sathyaraja, knows very well, he has been a staunch Periyarist, atheist, pro-Tamil separatist and anti-Hindu ideologist. In fact, in his movies, he has always exhibited such ideologies from Vedam puthithu to others. In ine movie, he shoots an astrologer dead asking a question, “Tell me how long you will you live”, when replies that he would live more, he finishes him off, i.e, just to prove that astrology is bogus. He has even donned the role of EVR in “Periyar”. Very often, he used to speak in atheist forums against Hindus, Hindu religion and belief system. As for as Nagaraj is concerned, Tamil people knew nothing, but, only through Sathyaraj, as he himself talked about Katal Nagaraj.

Kattappa brings controversy - Baahubali

Rajamouli’s appeal to the opposing groups: In a statement, filmmaker SS Rajamouli had expressed his gratitude to the Kannada audience and said[9], “It’s known that actor Sathyaraj is playing a significant role in the film. It has come to my attention that a few of his earlier comments had hurt a large section of you. I feel it’s my responsibility to clarify the issue. Baahubali has no connection to Sathyaraj’s remarks. He has only acted in a role in the film. He took his remuneration for it. Sathyaraj’s comments are his personal opinion. Our view is that his personal opinion shouldn’t trouble the film that he acted in. Yet, as responsible people, we have spoken about the situation with Sathyaraj over the phone. We don’t have more power than this. Sathyaraj had made those remarks nine years ago. After that, several films of his have released. The films he acted and produced have been released in Karnataka. Baahubali: The Beginning had also released. We request you to receive Baahubali: The Conclusion as well as the earlier films. If Baahubali: The Conclusion is stopped, Sathyaraj won’t suffer any loss. The problem is for the technicians and producers who have worked hard for five years on the film and for Kannada distributors and movie audiences. I urge you to not show anger against Sathyaraj on Baahubali.”

Dr Sathyaraj - donning EVR atheist

The peculiar Tamilnadu politics with codified and well-scripted agenda: As for as Tamilnadu is concerned, the people connected with cine-field have been successful in becoming politicians, powerful politicians, chief ministers and Central ministers also. In turn, such political ascendancy has also helped their business prospective and hence, cinema and politics have become inseparable for the Dravidian ideologists. The strategy has to be inclusive Dravidian ideology, Tamil separatism, anti-north, anti-Hindi, anti-Sanskrit, anti-Brahmin principles incorporated wherever possible, even if not possible, they have to be included without fail. EVR, Anna, Karunanidhi, MGR, Jayalalita and others have risen to top only because of their political and cinema connections. Of course, the Karunanidhi family and now AIADMK feuds expose the lack of strong leadership and dilution of “dravidian ideology”. This has made others tempting join politics, but, Sivaji Ganesan, SSR, T. Rajendran have suffered a lot. Rajnikanth has been cautious without taking any final decision. Kamal Hassan has now showing his political intention, but, only exhibited through twitter postings. However, individual powerful leaders of whatever nature, their exclusiveness has proved the dangerous decline after their death.

Sc groups wanted to ban Baahubali in 2015

Caste interpretation appearing in 2017: The casteist interpretation has been given to Baahubali by some columnists[10]. The Quint has interpreted in a characteristic way, “SS Rajamouli’s blockbuster ‘Bahubali: The Beginning’ has won the national award for best flm. Congratulations to the team….Here’s a quick peep into our archives – an argument that the movie actually shows how to keep dalits, adivasis and women suppressed…… Remember Agent Orange and Napalm in the Vietnam war? Well, Baahubali has its own version of burning people alive, as long as they are dark adivasis… obviously named KALAkeyas. Katappa, a great soldier and leader even eats separately from his ‘masters’. Why? Because hum choti jaat ke hain.” Thus goes the comments[11]. Thus, in one stroke, it accused “Baahubali” for depicting all war crimes, social exploitation and nuclear to chemical weapon usage against the tribals and others for the survival of higher castes. Perhaps, none noticed such allegory, euphemism or joke!

Pagadaikku piranthavan - opposed by SCs in Tamilnadu 2015

Baahubali faced casteist wrath, but, susidised in JUly 2015 in Tamilnadu[12]: In July 2017, a movie theatre in Madurai playing the hugely popular South Indian hit Baahubali was attacked with petrol bombs by a Dalit group for featuring a line (Pagadaikku Pirandhavan) considered derogatory against a sub-caste of the Dalit community. Subsequently, writer Madan Karky apologised for any hurt caused. Baahubali may be in the news for featuring an anti-Dalit line in the climax, but Dalit activists, filmmakers and scholars point out caste-based slurs have always been a part of Tamil Cinema. “Caste-based slurs such as Chandala, which denotes a sub-caste of a Scheduled Caste community in Tamil Nadu, have been so casually used in comedy-sequences by Tamil comedians like Vadivelu and Vivek. In Ameer’s Paruthiveeran, a super hit song Yele Yelelo, the hero actually calls his girl friend Sandali – which means that she is a daughter of a prostitute. We live in a society where such songs are celebrated,” says Punitha Pandian, editor of Dalit Murasu, a magazine that writes critically about social issues. Pandian remarked that often ignorance is given as an excuse and urged the civil society – intellectuals, activists and media – to do more to sensitise the masses. “This is not a problem of Dalits alone. We have been constantly talking and writing about these things but we have reached a stage where only a petrol bomb can force the society to talk about it. Filmmakers must be sensitised about social issues,” he says. What does the film industry make of the accusation that caste-based slurs have always been a part of Tamil films? Film-maker S.P. Jhananathan says that most young and budding writers are seldom aware of social issues, and suggests that the writers’ union must be actively involved in raising consciousness. “Most film-makers and writers are not aware of social issues. Film-makers and writers are also cut from the same fabric of society; how can they be any different,” he asks. Asked if there is a tendency to smuggle in the idea of caste pride into the narrative to appeal to politically dominant communities, Jhananathan says it is very much possible. “If the film directly deals with the issue of caste rivalry between dominant castes and Dalits, one need not shy away from talking about caste. But I would urge film-makers to be open about it. The problem is when caste pride is inserted in a film which has nothing to do with it,” he says.  The interpretation continued[13].

© Vedaprakash

21-04-2017

Why Kattappa kiiled Baahubali

[1] Thenewsminite, ‘No Baahubali release without Sathyaraj apology’: Kannada groups refuse to budge, Wednesday, Aprul 19, 2017. 12:58.

[2] http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/no-baahubali-release-without-sathyaraj-apology-kannada-groups-refuse-budge-60602

[3] Firstpost, Baahubali 2’s Karnataka release in jeopardy; did trade disagreement snowball into political row?, Sreedhar Pillai, Apr, 20 2017 13:49:17 IST

[4] http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/baahubali-2s-karnataka-release-in-jeopardy-did-trade-disagreement-snowball-into-political-row-3394296.html

[5] The Times of India, Don’t show anger against Sathyaraj on Baahubali, Sunayana Suresh| TNN | Apr 21, 2017, 12.00 AM IST.

[6] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/kannada/movies/news/dont-show-anger-against-sathyaraj-on-baahubali-ss-rajamouli/articleshow/58277733.cms

[7] Hidusthan Times, Sathyaraj’s comments not related to Baahubali: SSRajamouli, Updated: Apr 20, 2017 17:20 IST

[8] http://www.hindustantimes.com/regional-movies/sathyaraj-s-comments-not-related-to-baahubali-ss-rajamouli/story-CFXA2to86YiOIssO3j2gFK.html

[9]

[10] TheQuint.com, National Awards-Winner ‘Baahubali’ an Upper-Caste Male Conspiracy?

The Quint, March 28, 2016, 12:23 pm

[11] https://www.thequint.com/videos/2015/12/29/baahubali-the-beginning-caste-class-gender-satire-cinemcism

[12] The Hindu, Caste references polarise Tamil film fans, CHENNAI: JULY 27, 2015 01:56 IST UPDATED: JULY 27, 2015 01:56 IST.

[13] Subagunarajan, Editor of the Tamil film journal Kaatchi Pizhai, says the fundamental problem lies in the way such casteist slurs have been embedded in the Tamil language. “Words such as chandala and kepmari, both of which denote the name of a caste, have been used as swear words. This is why Periyar called Tamil a barbaric language,” he says. However, Subagunarajan fears that society may be heading to a stage where film-makers and writers cannot discuss caste issues at all. “The courts must be proactive and not admit such cases unless it is very pressing. If the film uses a casteist slur to underscore oppression, then it is not an issue. It becomes an issue when it is used to elicit laughs,” he says hoping that the film industry will take measures to correct itself. D. Ravi Kumar, general secretary of Viduthalai Ciruthaigal Katchi, says that while the issue needs to be debated in society, he disagrees with the form of protest. “The swear words have a connection to the specific social history of oppressed people. In a democratic society, we cannot continue to use it and we need to debate it. However, the form of protest is unacceptable. Democratic issues cannot be communicated in an undemocratic way,” he says.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/baahubali-in-caste-issues/article7467345.ece

Ideological racism, linguistic fascism and negationism among the Indian politicians, politicians turned actors and actors turned politicians – Baahubali becomes touching stone!

April 21, 2017

Ideological racism, linguistic fascism and negationism among the Indian politicians, politicians turned actors and actors turned politicians – Baahubali becomes touching stone!

My name is khan

Bollywood, Kollywood – style of nurturing Ideological racism, linguistic fascism and negationism: In India and elsewhere, there have been racist, communal and casteist actors working consciously others and spreading venom through their acts and speeches that have not been recorded properly to expose their ulterior motives. Many talented actors, actresses, directors, musicians, singers and cine-experts side-lined, oppressed, suppressed and made to die unsung. Particularly, the actors with their imbibed religious fundamentalism and political ideology have been hiding them under their make-up and dress to pose as “secular”, “irreligious”, or even “atheist” and so on to fool the idiotic fans, followers and general public. Generally, these details have been suppressed, covered up and even buried as the involved wanted only money, fame and enjoyment in life till death. The Bollywood religious fundamentalists and the Kollywood Dravidian fanatics have been experts in such acts of ideology[1]. Through Dawood Ibrahim and Khans, they have got exposed in the bloodbath of Bombay blasts and other blasts. Even today, Saif Ali Khan asserts that he wanted a Muslim name for his son to reflect his culture[2]. And he justifies it, though, a historical person existed 900 years ago[3] (of different category). Of course, the Khans exploded different types of bombs.  This has been going on since 195os, many times exhibited on the political stages and platforms. While the expressions, speeches and rhetorics of the Bollywood have been played down, the Kollywood counterparts has become selling literature, as such verbose became symbol of Dravidian polity. Though, some writers claiming as historians and all, and have written on “dirty words” etc.[4], they also do not reveal, as they want awards, rewards etc. from the politicians, rulers and businessmen colluding with each other.

Dr Sathyaraj - donning kattappa - EVR atheist

The Negationism of Dravidian ideology of racism, fascism and radicalism: The Dravidian actors starting with EVR, Annadurai, Karunanidhi etc., the most hardcore fundamentalists with the strong belief in race, racism, and racialism; middle-path tread MGR like category and the worst rabble rousers like S. A. Asokan (yesteryears’ comedy turned villain actor, producer), Sathyaraj, Seeman, Mansur Ali Khan, Manivannan and others. Under the guise of Dravidian ideology, analytical wisdom, self-respect, atheism (read as anti-Hindu ideology) and such other bogies, the bandwagon gave out speech of hatred, loathing and extreme odium on and off the silver screen. With their “Dravidian” racist ideology, they got separated first with Andhra Pradesh and then with Karnataka and Kerala. Though, Caldwell under his hypothesis brought all south Indian languages under the “Dravidian” bogey, other than Tamil speaking started weary of such linguistic fanaticism turning into racism and hatred against people groups. Though, “Tamilnadu” was also created, it had border disputes with all the three states and they got settled down slowly. However, the Veerappan and Kaveri issues made them again keeping them at loggerheads. Though, in the case of “Veerappn issue”, the political, business, cine-world and other interested keeping quiet, the “Kavery issue” exposed their duplicity, dishonesty and betrayed. In between, the radical parties like PMK and KRV played the most hate-politics to divide people. Actors like Rajinikanth also played dual role. Thus, the hate-speech of Sathyaraj has not been surprising, shocking or something extraordinary of their rhetoric-calibre.

Sathya raj - Nagaraj

The hate-speeches of Sathyaraj and Nagaraj: The hate-speech of Sathyaraj has been of his own characteristic and it includes[5] – Tamilian has been a tree and the Kannadiga dog urinates on it raising its leg…..Bal Thackery already plucked the eyes of Tamils in Maharastra. ..Used vulgar words like “mayir”,………… “I am lying with my wife and not with your wife”……When Saikumar told that his favourite hero was Shivaji Ganesan, he was beaten up by the Kannadigas and insisted to say “Rajkumar” ……..“We do not speak separatism, but forced us to speak ”……..“Tamils do not require northern Rama, Karnataka’s Raghavendra, Kerala’s Iyyappan…….. ” And the counter hate-speech of Nagaraj has been[6], “I am warning you Sathyaraj…..you have no guts to speak against Kannadigas……You talked such nonsense in front of Superstar like Rajini…..remember, your Mother Amma, Rajinikanth and others have been from our state……Rajamouli also hails from our state, yes, he has given you the correct character of Kattappa, yes, the character of traitor and driving sword from the behind…….”. Here, Indians need not go into such rhetoric of hate-speeches, as they have been there since 1950s as pointed out. One would be taken aback, had they happened to listen to EVR, Anna, Karunanidhi and such others, yes, their speech would be full of vulgar words, double meaning slangs, and hate-speech against particular caste, religion, congress leader and so on. Even today, the DK categories speak in such a tone and tenor on the roads, the ladies have to pass the places quickly to avoid listening such vulgarities exceeding decency and decorum.

Why Baahubali should be released in Karnataka

The 2008 speech affects now in 2017[7]: Way back in 2008, the issues between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu resurfaced after the latter laid the foundation for the Hogenakkal Integrated Drinking Water Project. The Nadigar Sangam had organised a meet to condemn the Karnataka’s government’s opposition to the project. Various celebrities took to the stage and many had slammed the Karnataka government’s decision. In fact, Rajinikanth had slammed Kannada activists and he later apologised for one of his comments which had hurt the Kannadigas. Sathyaraj had apparently targeted Rajinikanth, which had upset his fans back then.  However, the actor, who is now popularly known as Kattappa, had blasted Kannadigas for the Kavery issue. Interestingly, Sathyaraj’s speech at the meet was largely ignored at that time as the heat was on Rajinikanth. The video of the speech took the internet by storm only in the recent times after Baahubali was released. It is interesting to note that the Kannada groups had not opposed the release of the first instalment of Baahubali, but they are protesting now because Sathyaraj has become a popular name with this franchise and it is the right time to target him for an apology, say Kannada groups.d called prominent Kannada activist Vatal Nagaraj, “a comedy character.”

Baahubali-2 banned

The opposition to Sathyaraj by Karnataka Rakshana Vedika: It is interesting to note that the linguistic separatism started raising its head in other states other than Tamilnadu like Karnataka. The members of Karnataka Rakhsha Vedika [KRV] held a protest on 20-04-2017 (Thursday) outside the office of Karnataka Film Chambers of Commerce in Bengaluru[8]. The pro-Kannada groups reasserted their demand that they will not allow the release of Baahubali: The Conclusion until actor Sathyaraj tenders an apology[9]. “Sathyaraj has just not hurt the feelings of six crore Kannadigas, he has disturbed the peace between two states. It won’t be wrong to call him a traitor. He is a Tamil actor and when he talks bad about Karnataka, the entire Kannada film fraternity should come together and condemn his remarks,” said a member of Karnataka Rakhsha Vedika. Sa. Ra. Govindu, President, Akhila Karnataka Dr. Rajkumar Fans’ Association, urged Mr. Sathyaraj to visit Bengaluru and apologise for his remark[10]. “Otherwise, the actor will be responsible for the inconvenience caused during the release,” he said[11]. Whether Sathyaraj would come to Bangalore and apologize, apologize from Chennai or does not apologize at all, it is all a game now. Ultimately, it becomes a question of money, business and profits and therefore, how, these are going to be settled down is to be watched till 28-04-2017.

© Vedaprakash

21-04-2017

Satyuaraj speech - Rahni fans opposed


[1] Of course, these expressions Bollywood, Kollywood etc., were not in vogue during those days of 1950s, but, the feeling well-known.

[2] The Express Tribune, Wanted a Muslim name for my son to reflect my culture: Saif Ali Khan, By Entertainment Desk, Published: April 20, 2017.

[3] “When I spoke to my wife about ‘Taimur,’ she loved the name, the meaning of the name and the sound of it. I am also aware that there is a historical person of the same name. But someone please explain to me why is it relevant today? Why is what happened 900 years ago relevant? Why are people still talking about that? How can that be connected to the name? I don’t understand it and if I can’t understand, I don’t care.”

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1388994/wanted-muslim-name-son-reflect-culture-saif-ali-khan/

[4] A. R. Venkatachalapathy, Vayile nalla varudhu (Coming from mouth conveniently), in Kalaccuvadu, September, 2013.http://www.kalachuvadu.com/archives/issue-165/%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B2-%E0%AE%A8%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%B2%E0%AE%BE-%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%81%E0%AE%A4%E0%AF%81

[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhzzmSnF18g

[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR_-hSzNYdY

[7] Ibtimes.com, This angry speech of Sathyaraj against Rajinikanth and Karnataka over Cauvery issue now creates trouble for Baahubali 2, April 14, 2017 16:27 IST.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/this-angry-speech-sathyaraj-against-rajinikanth-karnataka-over-cauvery-issue-now-creates-trouble-723141

[8] Indian Express, SS Rajamouli on Baahubali 2 ban: Sathyaraj is not going to face any loss if movie is stopped. Watch video, Updated: April 20, 2017 8:31 pm

[9] http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/telugu/ss-rajamouli-on-baahubali-2-ban-sathyaraj-is-not-going-to-face-any-loss-if-movie-is-stopped-4620943/

[10] The Hindu, Will Katappa’s remarks prove costly for Baahubali-The Conclusion?, APRIL 11, 2017 22:48 IST; UPDATED: APRIL 11, 2017 22:48 IST.

[11] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/will-katappas-remarks-prove-costly-for-baahubali-the-conclusion/article17932705.ece

“Religion, Tradition and Ideology: Pre-colonial South India” by Champakalakshmi: A Marxist interpretation!

April 7, 2011

“Religion, Tradition and Ideology: Pre-colonial South India” by Champakalakshmi: A Marxist interpretation!


South India‘s cultural past not confined to one religion: Prof. Champakalakshmi[1]: The Hindu reports, “The empirical pre-eminence in the study of history in inscription-rich Tamil Nadu and a modern outlook on historiography combine to provide a fresh understanding of the past in a book launched here on Tuesday (05-04-2011). Religion, Tradition and Ideology: Pre-colonial South India” (Oxford University Press) is a collection of essays by historian R. Champakalakshmi, discussing the origins and development of multiple religious traditions and their role in the evolution of a rich and complex socio-religious matrix in pre-colonial south India. Champakalakshmi, who retired as professor of the Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), has debunked the usual simplistic continuities between Vedic times and the present day that is the staple of the conventional historian’s approach, and attempted to show how conflicting, even irreconcilable beliefs and practices, were incorporated into the Sanskritic tradition”.

From “Indologist to historian and social scientist”: The report goes on to say, “As history is dying in schools and colleges, and he history teachers have been loosing their jobs, they have started crying wolf with changed roles. Thus, it is reported that “the work, which is the consummation of almost five decades of research during which the author “transformed from an Indologist to historian and social scientist,” sketches the emergence of Brahminism as a dominant tradition and the marginalisation of the “sramanic” religions — Jainism and Buddhism — in the socio-economic and political context”. N. Ram, Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu, launched the book by handing over the first copy to Iravatham Mahadevan, an expert on Indus and Tamil-Brahmi scripts. Describing the publication as “rich in its material and many-sided in its historical offerings,” Mr. Ram said one of the notable aspects was the nuanced treatment of the interaction between the Brahminical and “sramanic” religions. The author’s approach to caste and community was a breakthrough contribution in understanding caste and its changing dynamics with the community as was her bold treatment of the hegemony of one religion in an otherwise pluralistic tradition, Mr. Ram said”.

There existed no Vedic linkage to the term Hindu which first originated during the Vijayanagara period of the 14th century: The report goes on, “Mr. Mahadevan said the author in her role of historian was “a bridge between tradition and modernity,” a product of the University of Madras who held on to conservative values and yet blossomed to expand her perspective in the JNU milieu. Professor Champakalakshmi was someone who, while being rooted in tradition, brought to historiography the searchlight of modernity, he said. Professor. Champakalakshmi said her over 55 years of research and teaching had been “an eventful and fascinating journey” that took her through many untrodden avenues of India‘s historical past. Noting that south India’s cultural past was not confined to one religion — in fact, there existed no Vedic linkage to the term Hindu which first originated during the Vijayanagara period of the 14th century — Professor Champakalakshmi said she had studied counter-traditions (such as Jainism) to understand the historical processes that led to the dominance of Brahminism. Shashank Sinha, OUP senior commissioning manager, said the book was another illustration of south India‘s emergence as an important component of the publishing programme that ranges across performing arts, music and literature”.

Hinduism to become the dominant tradition and ideology after its development and reworking: Under “Description”, the publishers give the following[2]: “This book discusses the multiple facets, dominant characteristics, and historical trajectories of religious traditions in pre-colonial south India. It explores how Hinduism, primarily the Brahmanical tradition, developed and reworked itself in the context of challenges posed by Buddhism and Jainism to become the dominant tradition and ideology in south Indian society and polity. Examining the linkages between religion and politics, the volume also investigates alternative vernacular traditions, rituals and practices, temple architecture, iconography and other representational art forms that evolved as symbols of power. A detailed introduction weaves together the different aspects and introduces new questions for further research”.

Religion is for the believers, as the ideology is for the Marxist historians: 55 years journey cannot compel the 5500 years old believers with their established belief system, that has already been tested many-many times. The branding of “Bhrahmanical” religion is a myth, as such gabblers never talk about “Khastriya  religion”, “Vaisya religion”, and “Sudra religion”. In fact, they do not explain such “Varna system” existing in other religions. By interpreting the divisions of a society by caste, community by denomination, people by ethnos, or by any other expression the existing vertical or horizontal, social stratifications, or structural arrangements cannot be ignored or suppressed. Therefore, hegemonic interpretation alone cannot be used for such forced conclusion. Days, years, decades and even millenniums have been passing on and in such a milieu, the Hindu religion or the religion of Indians have been no doubt changing, but not ideologically. The question of ideological interpretation of Hindu religion, in the pre-colonial context, cannot take away the facts of underlying[3] the so-called “Shramanic religions”[4].  That Buddhism and Jainism to play crucial role during the Vijayanagara to Colonial period, they had to be resurrected and brought.

Conflicting, even irreconcilable beliefs and practices, were incorporated into the Sanskritic tradition: In religion, that too, followed by millions of people at time and place naturally exhibit differences. In performing rites, rituals, ceremonies, festivals, the regional variance would be there in physical forms depending upon the natural differences. Whenever, any material required for performing rites, rituals, ceremonies, festivals, etc., are not available, substitutes are taken. Such practices, might be opposed by the traditionalists and conservatives initially, but, slowly reconciled, understanding the practical difficulties. This is just like Siva having moustache and beard or without them, as depicted in pictures and sculptures. But, Parvati never claim any “immaculate conception” to have Subramanya / Karttikeya like Mary! Krishna might be in blacks and blues, but, devotees love and like him like Radha and Meera.  They would not preach ahimsa killing and eating animals like Buddhists. Even children or atheists know that “Ramarajya” is talked about by all ideologists and not about “Ravana rajya”! Even during the medieval and pre-colonial period, the other counter-traditions or anti-cultures had to thrive only on such “myths”, if at all, they disbelieve such “greater traditions and bigger heritages”.

Ideological historians never demythologize other religions to present facts: The ideological historians can very well demythologize non-Indian, non-Bharatiya, colonial, Semitic religions to present facts behind the fundamental tenets, as they interpret Hindu religion. Why the Mohamedans issued coins with “Rama” or the British incorporated “Ramrajya” would not be discussed by these historians.  Romila Thapar would not appear then and there and threaten with going on appeal against the Supreme Court judgments as in the case of Temple-mosque disputes.  That is why believers or common people remember Rama’s bridge without caring for the engineer or the college where such engineer studied. In other words, instead of Rama, the Mohammedan and colonial forces must have issued coins with Ravana. “Shramanic” unbelievers or anti-Vedic followers would not have incorporated Lakshmi and other Goddesses for their profits. However, they would discuss about Hindus believers to copy from the Mohammedans to learn Advaita; to adopt syncretism incorporating Mohammedan philosophy; and so on without any conflict, contradiction or reconcilable accommodation.

Vedaprakash

07-04-2011


[3] JG Jennings, The Vedantic Buddhism of the Buddha, A collection of historical texts translated from the original Pāli and edited by J. G. Jennings, Geoffrey Cumberlege,  Oxford University Press, 1947.

[4] Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Hinduism and Buddhism, Philosophical Library, New York, 1943. 2011 edition by Golden Eixir Press.