Last updateFri, 23 Jun 2017 9am

Indian Culture & History: Whose Narrative Should It Be-1

Indian Culture  History

Like the story of the proverbial blind men and the elephant, India’s cultural history too has many narratives. Each is different and given to fierce debate. Most of us hold on to one point of view without having sufficient knowledge of the others.

Furthermore, India is perhaps the only major culture whose narrative is not in its own control. In the colonial period, the narrative was shaped by the Colonialists and later passed on to the Orientalists and Marxists. It is only recently that a band of committed scholars is challenging the Orientalist and Marxist narrative.

Understandably, I felt there was a need to bring all the differing narratives in one place. In doing so, I discovered that the sequence of these narratives tells one consolidated wholesome story about the elephant, and has the potential to inform the current debate and contribute to the shaping of a new Indian narrative.

The many views of our cultural historiography can be broadly classified as:

  1. Indigenous narrative
  2. Ambedkar’s narrative
  3. Colonialist narrative
  4. Orientalist narrative
  5. Marxist narrative
  6. Revivalist narrative


New textbooks aim to make Sanskrit a spoken language among students

New textbooks aim to make

Hoping to kindle encourage students to start conversing and writing in Sanskrit, beyond its use as a theoretical subject in schools, the Maharashtra State Bureau of Text Book Production and Curriculum Research, also known as Balbharati, has completely revised the Sanskrit language syllabus and textbooks for Class VIII and IX.

Offered to students of English, Hindi, Marathi and Gujarati media, the new Sanskrit textbooks are intended to be more engaging, with emphasis on pictorial content, activity-based learning, stories, songs and even small conversations, which now form the syllabus. The textbooks will be completely in Sanskrit language and even the teaching process will be in Sanskrit.

“If you see the earlier textbooks, even though the content was Sanskrit, often the head of questions such as Match the Following or Fill in Blanks was written in English or another language. Even some grammatical explanations were given in other languages. But in the new books, everything is in Sanskrit only as we want the students to take complete interest in this language. Earlier, students would view this language more like a bookish subject but the idea is to make them move to conversational Sanskrit. Hence, the new books have lots of pictures, small everyday conversations, diagrams,” said an official.


Can a Hindu be an atheist? – Devdutt Pattanaik

Can a Hindu be

When Hindus use the word God, it is not the God of Abraham. God in Hinduism can be masculine or feminine, singular or plural, and limitless or limited by space and time. … The Hindu idea of God does not speak so much about rejecting false gods as it does about understanding infinite forms of God. – Dr Devdutt Pattanaik

Since no one can actually define Hinduism, the simple answer is: yes. Politicians and supremacists who try to define, and homogenise, Hinduism, may disagree and insist Hinduism is theist. The problem is with how we define God.

When people around the world use words like religion, they refer mostly to Judaism, Christianity and Islam. When they use the word God (singular, capitalised, masculine), they are in all probability referring to the God of Abraham, that informs Judaism, Christianity and Islam. This is God who is outside humanity, and outside creation, who creates the world and humanity, loves humanity, and gives instructions through prophets on how humans should live. This God has cast down humanity to the world because they broke his rule in the perfect Eden. He gives humans one chance to live, to prove their love for him. In Judaic mythology, he punishes those who do not listen to him. In Christian mythology, he sacrifices his own son Jesus for the sins of humanity. In Islamic mythology, he appoints Prophet Muhammad as the last of his prophets. The most important aspect of these dominant religions is the idea of “covenant” or contract with God, expressed through the rite of baptism in Christianity, and circumcision in Judaism and Islam. These Abrahamic mythologies are strongly influenced by Zoroastrian mythology of ancient Persia, from where came ideas such as Devil, Heaven and Hell, and Archangels. In Abrahamic mythology, there is one God. So the concept of many gods is false.


Islam and the Bhagavad-Gita

Islam and the Bhagavad-Gita

In the last 30 years, I have spoken against Islam and Islamic fundamentalism numerous times in my books as well as in in my articles and conferences. Often thus, I have been often branded as an Islamophobe or a hard-line pro-Hindu…

Yet, when I came to India, I was innocent : I did not know the difference between a Muslim and a Hindu. And as a journalist I had the same prejudices and ideas about India as any other Western correspondent. In fact I embraced the same ideas: ‘secularism, the Congress is the only party that can unify India, Hindus too can be fundamentalists’, et cetera…

But then, I started covering Kashmir during the 90s, when separatism bloomed and violence set fire to the Valley. It is there that I saw the first Hindu leaders whom I had interviewed previously, assassinated in the most savage manner, such as doctors, lawyers, or All India radio broadcasters. And then, when Benazir Bhutto gave her famous speech of ‘Azad Kashmir’, every mosque in Srinagar and the Valley repeated that cry, telling Hindus: “Convert or die”. And in a few weeks, 350,000 Kashmiri Pandits left their ancestral houses and land, for no other crime than being Hindus – and that without firing a shot in self-defence – becoming refugees in their own country, a first in the world.

Thus my eyes were opened and I lost my innocence. Since then, covering many other countries, I witnessed the same phenomenon in Bangladesh, Pakistan or Afghanistan, of Hindus being the target of hatred, as Jews have been for centuries. This set me to study Indian history and I quickly realised that great Hindu heroes such as Shivaji Maharaj or Maha Rana Pratap, had been bypassed in Indian history books, to a single paragraph: Shivaji Maharaj who alone with his wits,


False history of India

False history of

Now that India has been free for a number of decades from British rule, researchers, historians, and archeologists can all begin to take a new look at the true history of India. We can have a more unbiased view of the numerous new findings that keep cropping up that give an increasingly accurate understanding of how ancient and how advanced was the Indian Vedic civilization. Now more than ever there is a serious lack of support and opposing evidence for the theories that were made popular by the British, such as the Aryan Invasion Theory,

or that it was the invading Muslims who gave India the great contributions to Indian art, music, or even architecture with the construction of such buildings as the Taj Mahal, Delhi’s Red Fort, Kutab Minar, and other buildings throughout India. With the newer and more accurate historical findings, many of these ideas are falling apart like a house of cards.

Let us remember that the Aryan Invasion Theory, which was developed only within the last 200 years by the British and GermanSanskritists and Indologists, presents the idea that the Vedic Aryans were not from India but invaded India from outside around 1500 BC or so. This, along with giving credit to other invaders for India’s distinguished achievements, such as its great buildings and other cultural developments, was a work of false history and propaganda to help justify the continued rule of the British over Indians, since the Indians themselves were supposed to have invaded India thousands of years earlier.


India’s Faux ‘Liberals’ Are Damaging Our Army’s Efforts To Douse J&K Fire

Indias Faux Liberals Are Damaging

We are not losing the real war with jihadi militants and their stone-throwing mobs.

The war we are losing is the one launched by so-called “liberals” who think the army is fair game in their fight against the BJP.

In order to win a war – any war – you need to have a realistic analysis of your enemy’s aims, his strengths and weaknesses, your real strengths and weaknesses, and clarity on your ultimate goals in prosecuting the war. The truth is neither the Indian state nor its detractors in the national media, has thought this through.

The war we are losing is the information war, as the outrage overthe video of a Kashmiri tied to an army jeepshows. If anything, the video shows that army officers are able to use innovative tactics to prevent violence and deaths, but the mainstream narrative is about the army using human shields when this is the perennial tactic used by stone-pelters in the Valley. What is the norm among stone-pelters is now shown as the army’s failure in one instance of a change of tactics.

We are not losing the real war withjihadimilitants and their stone-throwing mobs. The war we are losing is the one launched by so-called “liberals” who think the army is fair game in their fight against the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).


The Ambedkar They Don’t Want You To Know About

The Ambedkar They

Would liberals who speak in the name of Dr Ambedkar agree with these observations and ideas of his?

Maybe Baba Saheb’s ideas were first ignored and then misrepresented precisely because the intelligentsia knew that those ideas would not fit into the ‘left-liberal’ narrative. Being a prolific scholar and a patriot, Dr Ambedkar recorded his observations on a myriad of topics, events, problems and debates of his times. Here are seven aspects of those which the Old Media and the leftist academic cartel do not want Indians to know about.

1. Dr Ambedkar considered the mahavakyas of Upanishads the spiritual basis of democracy

In his famous speech to the Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal, Dr Ambedkar made the suggestion that Hindus need not look anywhere outside their scriptures to build a society based on the principles of liberty, fraternity and equality. They could look into the Upanishads for those values, he said.

Later in his scathing attack on Hinduism in the book Riddles of Hinduism, he not only revisited the idea but elaborated on it. He took the three mahavakyas—'Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma', 'Aham Brahmasmi', and 'Tatvamasi'—and named their combined purport. He wrote: