| Vol 24 | March 16 - 31, 2005 | No. 6 |
| Article-2 | |
We find a reference to a battle between Devas (infidels/Brahminical forces) and Asuras (beef-eaters) in Brahminical literature. In this battle the Devas were defeated by the Asuras. After this battle, the Devas changed their political tactics. Instead of directly confronting the Asuras, they decided to deceive and confuse the Asuras and then use Asuras to defeat their enemies. Vibhishan and Sugreev were used to defeat
Ravan and Bali. Prahlad was used to defeat Hirankashyap. BABRI
MASJID DEMOLITION This is the beauty of Devas' changed political tactics that in all
clashes whether in the name of terrorism, naxalism, it is always
the Asuras who
should die. Devas seldom die. All Devas possess deadly weapons
like arrow, trishul, gada, chakra, vajra but none of them is called
a
terrorist. The Indian politics is totally different from the politics of other countries because there is no Brahminical Social Order of hate and graded inequality in those countries. CASTE ALONE KILLS CASTEISM 1. Over 95%
of the Muslims are ex-Budhists. To justify that the "Spirit of Islam" is not different from the "Spirit of Budhism", we have to examine the revolutionary contents of both the cultures. They are: 1. Fundamentals of Budhism
and Islam. (2) Foundation of Budhism and Islam. (3) Violence
in Budhism and Jehad in Islam. (4) Morality
in
Budhism and
Islam. (5) Brahminism and Shaitan. (6) Budhist monasteries and
madrasas. (7) Ideology in Budhism and Islam. (8) Muslims are
pro-Budhist and
hence anti-Hindu. (9) The Middle Path. The fundamentals of Budhism
are: CORNER STONE OF BRAHMINISM Budha by rejecting the concept of soul completely demolished the BSO. Budha said: "This is my last birth, I shall not be reborn again". Thus Budha killed the humbug of incarnation. By saying that "Muhammad is His last messenger", Islam also closed the doors so that the Satan may not succeed in his mission to reproduce another avtar of Prophet Mohammad to deceive the innocent people. Thus on this point also the "Spirit of Islam" does not differ from the "Spirit of Budhism". The vital point, Anitya (transitory/ impermanence) of Budhism and Allah of Islam needs elaboration. I want to make it very clear that there is no substitute for Allah. It cannot be equated with god (Brahma) which is the Brahminical element of supernaturalism. Budha believed in nature and natural laws. He also knew that "change" is the law of nature. So he used the word Anitya (everything is transitory). Nothing is permanent. Anitya in Budhism represents the nature. POSITION OF ALLAH UNDER ISLAM The universe we live in is an orderly one. There is a law and order among all units that comprise this universe. Everything is assigned a place in a grand scheme of things working in a magnificent and perfect way. The sun, the moon, the stars and in fact all heavenly bodies are knit together in a splendid system. In short, ours is a law-governed universe and everything in it follows the course that has been ordained. This is the powerful, all-pervasive law of Allah, the creator and ruler of the universe. As the entire creation obeys the law of Allah, the whole universe, therefore, follows the religion of Islam. The sun, the moon, the earth and all other heavenly bodies are thus Muslim. This clearly shows that Allah in Islam also represents the nature. By rejecting god, Islam also rejects supernaturalism. Man is a byproduct of nature. His entire personality from birth to death is governed by the nature and it laws. He is fully dependent on nature for everything for his survival. Therefore complete surrender to nature (Allah) becomes a reality. MUSLIM LEADERSHIP FAILURE Muslim intellectuals must examine why 95% Muslims are educationally backward despite the fact that "the first thing which Allah created was intellect". It is because the Muslim leadership in India has not understood the "Spirit of Islam". It suppressed this "Spirit of Islam" and made it a religion of rituals and ceremonies. BUDHISM
REJECTS NON-VIOLENCE " The Bhagvan preaches Ahimsa. Does the Bhagvan preach an offender to be given freedom from punishment? Does the Bhagvan preach that we should not go to war to save our wives, our children and our wealth? Should we suffer at the hands of criminals in the name of ahimsa?" " Does the Tathagata prohibit all war even when it is in the interest of Truth and Justice?" Buddha replied. You have wrongly understood what I have been preaching. An offender must be punished and an innocent man must be freed. It is not the fault of the Magistrate if he punishes an offender. The cause of punishment is the fault of the offender. The Magistrate who inflicts the punishment is only carrying out the law. He does not become stained with Ahimsa. A man who fights for justice and safety cannot be accused of Ahimsa. If all the means of maintaining peace have failed then the responsibility for himsa falls on him who starts the war. One must never surrender to evil powers. War there may be, but it must not be for selfish end...". (W&S, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Vol.3 p.450-451). Many non-Muslims have misunderstood the word Jehad. Jehad is not simply taking the sword and waging a war against the opponent. But Jehad has a righteous meaning and is a war against all kinds of oppression". (Curse of Allah, Prof. Rahmatullah, DSA-1997). Thus violence in Budhism and Jehad in Islam has the same spirit. Morality is the second main pillar of Budhism. Budha preached morality by way of Panch Sheel (five precepts). According to Babasaheb these five precepts are: (1) To be compassionate to all living beings. (2) I shall not steal, (3) I shall not tell lie, (4) I shall not commit any sexual misconduct, (5) I shall not consume liquor/intoxicant. Islam is
a religion of peace. It strictly follows these moral conduct. In Islam, a man cannot have sex out of marriage, compel him to have sex only after the marriage and that too with the woman he love, says Editor V.T. Rajshekar. (India's Muslim Problem, DSA-1997). SATAN
OF ISLAM REFERS TO BRAHMINISM Dalits have become
the worst victims of this hate and enmity. Budha launched his
revolution of prajna,
karuna
and samata
against Brahminism
and Islam
launched its revolution against the Satan. (i) He excites
enmity (5:9); (ii) he deceives (8:48), (iii) He believes in evil
spirit (3:36). Budhism condemns idolatry. There is no place for idol worship under Islam. In fact, Islam is more rigid on this aspect. It believes in breaking the idols. Thus on this point also "Spirit of Islam" does not differ from the "Spirit of Budhism". One of the charges of Hindu nazis against the Muslims is that they are anti-Hindu. But the same nazis suppress the fact that Hindus are also anti-Budhist. Budhism and Islam both preach prajna (wisdom), karuna (love), samata (equality). Over 95% Muslims are Dalit converts. They were all Budhists and sowrn enemies of Hindu. Budha preached "Middle
Path" which means: Islam does not approve of pomp and show, materialism, splendour and vanity. (Curse of Allah, DSA-1997, Naushad Ansari, p.19). Zakat is another provision which is a must
for all Muslims. In light of these facts, it is up to the Muslim intellectuals to decide if Prophet Muhammad's Islamic revolution is a continuity of Budhist revolution. BEEF-EATING UNITES DALITS & MUSLIMS Manu declares that the men who having in due form performed (mathuparka or other) ceremony failed to eat flesh will doomed to be born an animal for 20 generations. A guest is called Goghna cow- killer because cow used to be killed on arrival of a distinguished guest. (The Essence of Budhism, P. Laxmi Narasu, p.41). Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, a great humanist who revived Budhism, while investigating the origin of untouchability says it is only the "Broken Man" who became Untouchable. The Broken Men were Budhists who retained the habit of beef-eating. When the Brahmins
came to power after killing Budhism they made cow
as the sacred animal. Budhists, who were also beef-eaters, hated idol worship and refused to accept the supremacy of Brahmins. That is why they embraced Islam as the "Spirit of Islam" was fully consistent with the "Spirit of Budhism". This is yet another reason why Budhists and Muslims are the target of Hindu nazi counter-revolution. WHY
MUSLIM RULE DECLINED Our Editor has repeatedly said: Both Budha and Prophet Muhammad did not appoint any successor. But the religious leadership killed the "Spirit of Islam" and reduced it into a religion of rituals, ceremonies and superstitions. Despite its 80-year-long rule over India, Muslim rulers failed to establish the "Spirit of Islam" because in the name of Muslim politics the "Spirit of Islam" was twisted. MOOLNIVASIS CALLED HINDU & HENCE
ENEMY The Moolnivasis of India are the born enemies of Hinduism but the Muslims out of their ignorance included them also in the list of their enemies. Despite the fact that Prophet Muhammad did not appoint a successor, Muslim religious leaders (moulanas and maulvis) twisted Islam and manipulated the "Spirit of Islam" for their selfish end and reduced Islam into a religion of rituals and ceremonies. With due apologies to my honest Muslim
brothers and sisters, I would like to declare: It is the duty of every Muslim intellectual to re-examine the concept of Allah in the light of these observations in the interest of promoting Dalit-Muslim unity. I am not a Muslim. But I have examined the spirit of both the cultures with the best of my knowledge and ability. It is now up to Dalit and Muslim intellectuals to judge me. Brahminical organisations tried their level best to instigate Indian Budhists against the Muslims in the name of demolition of Bamiyan Budha in Afghanistan. But it is the "Spirit of Budhism", namely wisdom, that came in the way and Brahminism failed in its mission to bring about clashes between Budhists and Muslims. Muslim scholars must think: If Allah means supernaturalism, then what is the difference Islam and Brahminism? When Islam could not exterminate Brahminism during its 800-year-rule then how it can fight Brahminism when Brahmins are in power now and Muslims are reduced to slavery? V.T. Rajshekar: Muslims & Mustadafeen Ñ Failure
to Follow Dictates of Quran, DSA-2003. Million man Black march in Washington on Oct.15 The 10th anniversary of the "Million Man March", convened by Minister Louis Farrakhan, will be held in Washington DC on Oct.15, 2005. A million African men, women and children will participate. We are also trying to organize caravans of buses and cars to come to DC and a Day of Absence on Oct. 14. World's worst form of racism So happy to hear about the "Million Man March" under the leadership of America's famous Black leader Farrakhan. In 1986, we led a Black delegation from India to the African conference in Libya organised by Gadafi. There we met Brother Farrakhan and he embraced us after the entire audience gave us a standing ovation when we finished our speech. On the way back, our passport was seized and since then we are not allowed to go out of India for making that speech criticising India's apartheid system. Though India has a much larger Black population, a third of its 1,000 million total strength, and suffers the world's worst form of racism, we have not been able to organise such a March till now. We have many things to learn from you. Please request Brother Farrakhan to tour India as our guest and we will take him round the country so that he can see for himself the world's cruelest form of Apartheid ÑEDITOR. _______________________________________________________________________________ Marathas declare war on Brahminism Freedom is a pre-condition for the development of man. If a man is provided with all the luxuries of life but denied the freedom of thought and action, his life becomes meaningless. In this context the example of Ireland is worth noting. In 1914, the Protestant leader, Edward Karson, was asked by his fellow countryman, Catholic leader Redmond: Why don't you give your assent to the unification of Ireland? We can give you whatever concessions you ask for. Karson retorted: RELIGION OF SLAVERY We are going to use our brains hereafter. We are not going to be tools in our enemies hands. We are not going to bow before the aliens. In short, Shiv Dharma rejects the alien-led Hinduism and adopts the true religion of our forefathers. That Shiv Dharma is a movement of liberation of the Bahujan ÑÊreligiously, financially and intellectually Ñ has to be understood coolly by the Bahujans. Freedom, equality, brotherhood and justice are the main principles of Shiv Dharma. In this, man is the centre and whatever comes in its way ÑÊBrahminism Ñ has to be eliminated completely. We want a society based on scientific thought, a society which is self-reliant and free in all the matters of life. Shiva Dharma will eliminate all the rituals, customs, superstitions, gods, fatalism and all those instruments of exploitation of the Bahujans by the priestly class. Shiv Dharma will not be dogmatic but open to new thoughts and changes that the future would warrant. Shiv Dharma is for democracy and against dictatorship. Its goal would be equal opportunities to all and equal justices to all. It believes in self-emancipation i.e. non-reliance on any supernatural or external power for the progress and well being of the man. JIJABAI PREPARED SHIVAJI BAHUJAN IDENTITY ROLE OF DR. AMBEDKAR GANDHISM REJECTED The first three systems are designed to strengthen the Brahminical order. However, the Bahujanvad has always been of scientific temper and an instrument of uniting the masses. Bahujanvad comprises the teachings of Charvak, Budha, Mahavir, Kabir, Tukaram, Jotiba Fule, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, Periyar E.V. Ramaswami and a host of others. This stream of thoughts rejects Brahminism or exploitation and welcomes scientific social order. It rejects god, fatalism, ritualism, temples, superstitions, ved, smriti and puranas. MARATHAS WILL
NO LONGER PROTECT HINDUISM The Maratha Bahujan who was acting as an armour of Hinduism will no longer do it henceforth. The people, our brothers, of the other religions have to recognize this fact. Democracy is based upon freedom, fraternity, equality and justice. It is a political system i.e. a system of power sharing. On the contrary, Brahminism is a social order of inequality of castes and varnas. Shiv Dharma proposes to change this social structure and make it compatible with the ethos of democracy. Like democracy, Shiv Dharma also swears by freedom, fraternity, equality and justice. Shiv Dharma aims at a templeless, a casteless and a priestless society of egalitarian members. It will strengthen Indian democracy. It fully abides by the Indian Constitution. In other words, though named as religion Shiv Dharma is a democratic social order. Until such time as the commonest of the common man transcends the idea of god, the word religion has to be used. Brahminism has played havoc with the mind of the Bahujan Samaj over the centuries. Though Shiv Dharma is against ritualism, a few occasions of life like the birth and the death will have to be exempted from this strict canon. But all the things in this connection will be done by the Shiv Dharmee himself or by another Shiv Dharmee. No discrimination will be practiced by a Shiv Dharmee on the basis of caste, gender, province, language or religion. The Shiv Dharmee will be bound by oath to protect, practice and revere the constitution of the Indian republic. BRAHMIN NOT ADMITTED Having got rid of the Brahmins, the Bahujan Samaj will be the lord of their land and lives. Shiv Dharma will not be forced upon anybody. Yet excepting the Brahmins, everybody is welcome into the fold of the Shiv Dharma. The management and regulation of the Shiv Dharma will vest in the hands of the parliament of the Shiv Dharmees. (Translation by: P.S. Sadar, 71 -Kotwal Nagar, Nagpur - 440 022.) This is the second and the concluding part of the speech of the founder of the Maratha Sewa Sangh at the historic Sindhkheda conversion ceremony on Jan.12,2005 when lakhs of Marathas quit Hinduism and embraced the new religion of Shiv Dharma. In this speech he declared a war on Brahminism and said the people of India became enslaved only because they were duped by Brahmins to follow it though Hinduism was not their religion. The speech published in the Marathi daily Deshonnati (Nagpur) of Jan.25, 2005 is translated to English by Brother P.S. Sadar, a member of the Dalit Voice family. The first part of the speech was published in DV of March 1, 2005 p.18-20. The two parts will be reprinted as a booklet for wider circulation in and outside India ÑÊEDITOR.
This refers to Brother G.R. Chavan's article (DV Nov.1, 2004 p.24) seeking clarification regarding Dr. Ambedkar's stand on the Aryan invasion theory. In fact, after going through the forceful arguments advanced by Dr. Ambedkar against the theory of Aryan invasion in the Who Were Shudras? one tempts to believe that Aryans are the original inhabitants of India and not the invaders. However, we must remember that nothing is final or sanatan (never changing) like the Hindu dharma. Any theory ÑÊsocial, political or even historical Ñ is based on the available evidences. It is however, not an end in itself because research is going on. BANARAS SPEECH Subsequently
he changed his stand in the research thesis published in 1946
saying: RIG
VEDA SAYS ARYANS ARE FOREIGNERS Thou, Indra, art the destroyer of all the cities, the slayer of the Dasyus, the prosperer of man, the lord of the sky ÑÊRg V. VIII 87.6. The Rig Veda also goes on to use the word Black
in a number of instances to describe the Dasyu: Rg.V. I 130.8 tell
of how the
Black skin was
conquered: At the same time it praises the Indra who "destroyed
the Dasyans and protected the Aryan colour" ÑÊRg.
V. III 34.9. Brahmins love two-nation theory. They claim to be the representative of the Aryan race and regard rest of the Hindus as descendents of the non-Aryans. But the Brahmins are not simpletons like us. They have no permanent theory, just as they have no permanent friends or enemies. They only have permanent interests. Once we hold a particular thought, we stick on to it to the extent of leaving no room for accepting change and become dogmatic. BRAHMINS FEEL THREATENED They feared that Aryan invasion theory if allowed to disseminate among the native Bahujans would be a threat to their No.1 position in the society. This made them suddenly fall in love with Dr. Ambedkar as his previous theory though already disowned by him suited the Brahmins greatly. It was intended to pacify the growing discontent among Bahujans against the Brahmins as the foreigners or alien people asserting their arrogance on the native Bahujans. SINDHUS
HATE HINDUS The following incident would make us realise the significance Brahmins attach to the theory of Aryan invasion. Mr. Wamandada Kardak, a noted Ambedkarite poet for whom Dr. Ambedkar had great respect felt anguished at the demolition of Babri mosque, and composed the following song: Advani, Vajpai, Singhal, Togadia you are Farsi,
Ruswasi, This song infuriated the Brahmins for they
knew the potential of Kardak igniting the masses against the
Brahmins. Hence to
shut his
mouth they threatened to kill him and advised to stop singing
this song. It did not deter Kardak. He said: The Brahmins measures the success of their movement in terms of their ability to polarise Bahujans in the name of Hindu. In this endeavour, their real concern is to keep the issue of Brahmin's origin as a well guarded secret. They have to hide their identity and continue to wear the mask of Hindu for fooling the Bahujan. They feel threatened if somebody attempts to expose them on their foreign origin. FABRICATION
OF HISTORY They want to establish that since the horse was first domesticated by Aryans and is found on the Indus seal hence the Aryan were the builders of Indus civilisation. They are so desperate to prove it avoiding any direct clash with native Bahujans in the name of civilisation. Noted historian Romila Thapar says: "For those concerned with a Hindutva ideology, the invasion had to be denied. The definition of a Hindu as given by Savarkar was that India had to be his pitrubhumi (ancestral) and his punyabhumi (the land of his religion). A Hindu therefore could not be descended from alien invaders. Since Hindus sought lineal descent from the Aryans and a cultural heritage, the Aryans had to be indigenous". (Hindutva & History, Frontline vol.17, issue 20, Oct.13, 2000). The issue here, however, is neither to discuss the utility of the Mulnivasi theory in uniting the Dalit-Bahujans nor offer suggestion on whether this theory should be trumpeted by them but to establish the Aryan invasion theory in the light of Dr. Ambedkar's thesis. ARYANS
NOT NATIVES DV Edit March 16, 2004: "Why Jews & Brahmins complain they
alone are so much hated? Sociology of a unique paranoid".
|
|