Truth may hurt, but it alone helps

nothing but truth…..

Gandhi's loyalty to British Crown

british-crownby Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari

The January 5, 2009 edition of the renowned daily The Times of India carried a press report titled Gandhi donned army uniform for the British”, that said, “It might seem surprising but it is that in the year 1899, Mahatma Gandhi donned a uniform. This uniform belonged to a voluntary ambulance unit, which he created” (article by J P Chaturvadi published in the Sainik Samachar edition of October 9, 1977). The article contained a rare picture of Gandhi sporting the British Army uniform during the Anglo-Boer war that broke out in South Africa in 1899. It should be mentioned here that the Dutch had their own colony in South Africa and in 1899, a clash of interest began between these two colonialists which turned into a military confrontation in December, 1899 and simply to please the British Government, Gandhi created the said 1,100 strong Indian volunteer and the stretcher bearer corps. During the war Gandhi was personally sympathetic to the Dutch. But, he later on confessed that, to please the British he sacrificed his conscience.

“The performance of his voluntary ambulance unit was appreciated by all when the Anglo-Boer war ended in 1902, after the capture of Transvaal. The commander-in-chief of the army mentioned the heroic deeds performed by this ambulance unit, whose workers walked 20 to 25 miles a day to carry out voluntary duties to help the injured”, says the article. After the victory in the war, British Government presented a medal and a citation to Gandhi which he preserved with great respect till his death. It should be mentioned here that Gandhi strongly believed that the British Empire was for the welfare of the entire world and he maintained this view till his death. Later, Gandhi proudly recalled how he loyally served the British during the Boer War and put his life in peril, particularly while his ambulance corps was working at the battle fields of Colenso, Spion Kop and Vaalkranz.

While in South Africa, Gandhi did not miss a single opportunity to please the British crown. Just after the Boer war, Gandhi expressed his loyalty by sending felicitation to Queen Victoria on her birthday. Queen Victoria died in January, 1901 and Gandhi sent a condolence message to the Colonial Secretary in London, laid a wreath on the pedestal of the Queen’s statue in Durban and distributed picture of the Queen among the school children. Later on, when George-V was coroneted as the king of England, Gandhi expressed his loyalty by sending congratulatory telegram to England that read, “The Indian residents of this country (i.e. South Africa) sent congratulatory cablegrams on the occasion, thus declaring their loyalty”.

To please the British colonialists, Gandhi used to sing National Anthem of England in public meetings though he could discover violence in the following two lines of the song

Scatter her enemies, and make them fall;

Confound their politics;

frustrate their knavish tricks”. Continue reading

March 11, 2009 Posted by | Gandhi | , , | 8 Comments

Gandhi and Muslim Appeasement – II

Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari

It should be mentioned at the very outset that Gandhi never fought for India’s freedom. The reader should recall that Gandhi was brought from South Africa by the British to sabotage India’s freedom movement and hence it was not possible for him to fight the British for freedom. On the contrary, his intention was to prolong British rule in this country and to hoodwink the Hindus, he used to say that he was fighting for Swaraj. But his concept Swaraj was entirely mystical and vague and he used equate Swaraj with Ramrajya (or the rule of Lord Ram). According to him, termination of British rule was not at all necessary to establish Swaraj and Swaraj could function well even under the British rule. So he always opposed any move for demanding complete independence from the British rule and reproached the leaders like Subhash Chandra Bose and others because they were in favour of demanding independence,

One of the basic preconditions of his Swaraj was the amity between the Hindus and the Muslims. It has been pointed out earlier that his idea of Hindu-Muslim amity was extremely biased and prejudiced – Hindus were supposed to make every sacrifice and silently endure all the oppressions and crimes of the Muslims for the sake of this unity. It is well known that, for the sake of this Hindu-Muslim unity, Gandhi supported the KHILAFAT MOVEMENT, and extremely communal agitation launched by the fanatic and orthodox Muslim leaders, the Ali brothers. In his personal capacity, Gandhi once wanted to translate Spirit of Islam by Syed Amir Ali and Muhammad’s biography Life of Mahomet by Sir W Muir, to win the hearts of the Muslims. To appease them, he used to overlook and ignore even heinous crimes committed by the Muslims and considered “Allahu Akbar” as a national slogan. He held the view that, Hindus should die but never should kill a Muslim. Many used to consider him a more devout Muslim than even Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

To many. it would appear unbelievable that Gandhi used to advise the Amir of Afghanistan not to make peace with India and, on the contrary, instigated him to launch jihad against India or invade India. Moreover, he advised the Muslims of this country that, at such a situation, they should join the Afghan army and fight against India. He used to say that “Muslims are bullies and the Hindus are cowards” and advise the Muslims to be more cruel and violent during their attack on the Hindus. On the other hand, he suggested the Hindus to remain non-violent and not to defend their attack. He used to maintain the view that Hindus must not strike a Muslim even to save their lives. In the wake of partition, when the Muslims started slaughtering the innocent Hindus of Punjab, Sardar Vallabbhai Patel asked the Hindus to defend their lives. But that displeased Gandhi and he reproached Patel for his advice.

In 1946, Gandhi did not go to Noakhali when the Hindus were being butchered there and he went there when the bloodshed was over. On the contrary, when the Hindus of Bihar started retaliating the Noakhali killings, he at once went to Bihar to save the Muslims.. Due to his extraordinary affection for the Muslims, many used to mention him as Mohammad Gandhi. To many, it would appear unbelievable that Gandhi used to advise the Hindus (for the sake of nonviolence) not to take part in any short of physical exercise and body-building activities as, in that case, it would have been difficult for the Muslims to oppress and massacre the physically strong Hindus. In fact, he closed most of the gymnasiums and other body-building centres in Gujarat. Continue reading

March 11, 2009 Posted by | Gandhi | , , | 5 Comments

Gandhi and Muslim Appeasement – I

By Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari

It is now well known that Muslim appeasement was an inseparable part of Gandhi’s quack doctrine of Non-violence. But many do not know why he, while he was in South Africa, adopted, or compelled to adopt this dirty policy in 1908. At that time the South African government imposed an unjust tax of £ 3 on every Indian living in South Africa and Gandhi initiated talks with South African government on this matter. But the Muslims did not support this move and were displeased with Gandhi. In addition to that Gandhi, in one occasion, made some critical comments on Islam while he was speaking at a gathering. Furthermore, he tried to make a comparative estimate of Hinduism, Islam and Christianity, which made the Muslims furious.

A few days later, on 10th February 1908, a group of Muslims under the leadership of a Pathan called Mir Alam entered Gandhi’s house and beat him mercilessly. When Gandhi fell on the ground the Muslim attackers kicked him right and left and beat him with sticks. They also threatened to kill him. From this incident onward, Gandhi stopped to make any critical comment on Muslims as well as on Islam. According to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, this incident was a milestone in Gandhi’s life and afterwards Gandhi began to over look even the most heinous crime committed by the Muslims.

An example would help the reader to understand the matter. On 23rd December 1926, a Muslim assassin called Abdul Rashid stabbed Swami Shraddhananda to death, when the swami was ill and lying on his bed. The reader may recall that Swami Shraddhananda was a pracharak (whole time worker) of Arya Samaj and he started a Suddhi Yajna to bring the converted Muslims of this country back to Hinduism. But his activity was detested by the Muslims. A couple of months earlier a Muslim woman came to the Swami and expressed her desire to return to Hinduism with her children. However her husband brought an allegation of abduction in the court of law against the Swami. But the court quashed the allegation and set the Swami free. The incident turned the Muslims extremely furious and within a few days Abdul Rashid assassinated him.

After a few days of this incident, Gandhi went to Gauhati to deliver his speech at the national conference of Indian National Congress. The atmosphere was depressed and gloomy due to unusual death of Shraddhananda. But Gandhi made everyone dumbfounded and began his speech by addressing the assassin Abdul Rashid as “Bhai Abdul Rashid”. Without caring for the reaction of the listeners, he continued, “Now you will perhaps understand why I have called Abdul Rashid a brother, and I repeat it. I do not even regard him as guilty of Swami’s murder. Guilty indeed are those who excited feeling of hatred against one another.” Thus he indirectly held Swami Shraddhananda responsible for his murder, as he was propagating hatred through his Suddhi Yajna. Moreover, he wrote in the obituary note, “He (the Swami) lived a hero. He died a hero.” In other words, if a Hindu falls victim to the knife of a Muslim’s assassin, Hindus should consider it a heroic death. Continue reading

March 11, 2009 Posted by | Gandhi | , | 11 Comments

Gandhi's experiments with celibacy

gandhi-wheelby Dr Radhasyam Brahmchari

It is well known that Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the most trusted and the most loyal stooge of the British crown, served the British interest through his Satyagraha or the nonviolent freedom struggle. But most of the people of this country, who take him to be a man of high moral, do not know what short vile lechery he indulged in in the name of keeping Brahmacharya or celibacy, or in experimenting with the same. In 1903, when he was only 34 years old ( alternatively in 1906, when he was 37), or in other words, when he was at the zenith of his youth, he took a vow that he will observe celibacy and will remain a brahmachari for the rest of his life (D Keer, Mahatma Gandhi, pp-73)..

But the question remains, what made Gandhi, an extremely sensual man, to take such a vow? Gandhi was so sensual that when his father Karamchand was dying, he preferred to make love and have sex with his wife Kasturba in another room of the same house. So, when such a sensual Gandhi took vow to keep celibacy, one becomes suspicious that there must have been an evil intention behind that vow. Many believe that at that time, he developed some form of aversion towards Kasturba, an illiterate mother of three children, or in other words, he disliked to share bed with her. So, his intention was to abandon Kasturba as a sleeping partner in the name of keeping celibacy.

In 1882, when Mohandas was married to Kasturba, he was 13 and Kasturba was 14. While he was in South Africa, he came in contact with several educated and well bred women through his profession and Gandhi liked their company very much. From their company, Gandhi used to obtain a special kind of intellectual pleasure, which was not possible from Kasturba. At that time, more than a dozen women came very close to him and six of them were of Western origin. They were Graham Polak, Nilla Cram Cook, Madelline Slade (aka Miraben), Margarate Spiegel, Sonja Schlesin and Esther Faering (M V Kamath, Mahatma and Celibacy, Organiser, 2.7.2006). His closest Indian women were Srimati Prabhavati Devi (wife of Jaiprakash Narain), Kanchan Shah, Prema Ben Kantak, Sushila Nair (sister of Pyarelal), Manu Gandhi (wife of his grand-nephew Joysukhlal Gandhi), Ava Gandhi and Saraladevi Chaudhurani. This Saraladevi was a niece of the poet Rabindranath Tagore and her mother was Srimati Swarnakumari Devi (M V Kamath, ibid).

To narrate the affair between Gandhi and Saraladevi, Sri Girija Kumar says, “Saraladevi Caowdhurani came very close to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Their whirl wind romance lasted for barely two years, but it upset the balance of the Gandhian establishment and shook its very roots. She is now a part of history and a footnote in contemporary Gandhian literature. She, however, left a scar in the minds of Gandhiji for the rest of his life.” (Brahmacharya: Gandhi and his Women Associates, as quoted by M V Kamath, ibid.). Gandhi used to admit that his relation with Saraladevi went up to sexuality (Girija Kumar (1997), The Book on Trial: Fundamentalism and Censorship in India, Har-Anand Publishers. pp. 73–107). Continue reading

March 11, 2009 Posted by | Featured, Gandhi | , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

False gods

falseguru_kFalse icons and myths should always be exposed and eliminated. One of the reason why we as a society fail to assert ourselves is the delimiting force of these false icons. The modus operandi of creation of such false icons is similar:
A person or sect with some outward Hindu appearance would be publicized by English press or western media or ruling class. Ignorant Hindus, being historically ignorant, would then fight to assert that these persons or sects symbolize their great culture. These ignorants start seeing these fraud icons as proofs of their ‘great culture’. However each of these icons, in reality, would represent such beliefs and practices which are totally opposite of the true essence of this culture. They are like the spies of the enemy.

And whenever someone would try to expose these frauds, they would find snub not from west or ruling class, but more from ignorant Hindus themselves. And the communists, Muslims and Christians would use these false icons to spread their agenda and attack the true culture that we all claim to represent and seed doubt over our glorious culture.

Ask anyone what the concrete contribution of these icons has been at ground level. And you would find their ignorant admirers panting for a satisfying answer. All you find is a long list of writings that was admired by English press. No one else has read them in detail. And if you indeed do, you will realise yourself why they are false icons. But then blind supporters would still argue saying that they were great people and above any scrutiny by lesser mortals.

This is no diferent from Muslims justifying child-sex and sex with daughter-in law of Prophet Muhammad on pretext that he was a Prophet! The philosphy of Vedas however assert that even God has to be believed after due analysis and examination.

These false icons become greatest blockages in reforming the society and reestablishing the core ideology of our great culture. They are our greatest speed and morale breakers.

A partial list of such false icons is as follows:

1. Mahatma Gandhi – Experimenter of truth through sleeping naked with young women in same blanket to test whether he gets aroused or not!!, killer of millions of Hindus, believed Ram to be a myth, Muslim sycophant. Read his articles of Young India for more. Or this site.

2. Jawaharlal Nehru – Rumored to have produced several illegitimate children (his birthday is termed Children’s day), propagated distorted history of India causing all the mess of education till date, characterless communist elitist who ruined the independent infant India in a way that till date we find the disabilities hurting us, father of Kashmir crisis. His progeny (legitimate) have siphoned greatest amount of public money in history of any nation.

3. Sufi saints and peers/gazis of dargahs – Hindus are fools to stoop to level of worshipping graves of those who were instrumental in killing millions of Hindus. Be it Ajmer Sharif where we worship a Gazi causing death of lakhs of Hindus, or Pratapgarh where the grave of Afzal Khan, whom great Shivaji killed, is being worshipped. The highest number of visitors to these graves are Hindus and that is among the greatest disgrace for our society.

4. Fraud indologists like Max Muller, Monier Williams etc – They were agents of Christian church who translated our scriptures in most demeaning manner and propagated them across the world as official right translations. And we were fools to accord them high status for promoting our culture! Till date, they are the ones whose crap is being taught in our universities.

5. Pervert criminals like Akbar, Shershah who are portrayed as icons of Hindu-Muslim unity.

6. All those babas, saints etc born during our years of slavery but did not take part in freedom movement or social reformation, and instead claimed divine/special gifts of God.

7. All those babas/saints etc who directly or indirectly praised Islam and Christianity or their founders. because if they had studied these religions and still believed so, they were illogical dumb-headed. If they did not study these religions, yet praised these religions which have caused Bharat the greatest damage, they were frauds – because without due analysis, any sane person has no rights to pass conclusion on any thing – especially when the person claims to be a baba or sanyasi and when the issues involved are so crucial.

The following are fundamental truths about our culture and any counterview on this implies that the icon propagating the same are false:
a. Ram, Krishna were great role models, symbols of perfection. They were neither drunkards, nor myths and those wanting us to believe the same are frauds.
b. Cow has since dawn of civilization been equivalent to mother in our culture. Vedas, our role models, Rishis, legends were known for their cow-love and those wanting us to believe the contrary are frauds.
c. Islam and Christianity represent anti-thesis of our culture. These religions as well as their founders, especially Islam, can be treated as no more than criminals as per ethics of our culture. Those wanting us to believe the opposite or want to prove that Quran or Bible are noble texts, are frauds.
d. The first precondition for being a role model in our culture is one’s personal character and concrete examples on ground, and not mere empty talks. Thus a sanyasi who smokes, a mahatma who needs to sleep with girls naked to test brahmcharya or a lover of truth who wants us to believe that Islam is great is a fraud.

We have innumerable alternate and noble role models whom we conveniently forget because the west or the ruling class did not create hype about them. Its time we revive them. But first create space for them by eliminating false ones.

March 11, 2009 Posted by | False Gods, Featured | , , | 1 Comment